There are 13 female Republican members of the House. The same as in 1989

[lucas80]

While the number of female Democrats in the House keeps gradually rising, the Republicans cannot attract and retain elected women. Interesting comments by Mia Love in the article. For the Northern's of the board, even Love admits that Republicans are behind the times when it comes to contraceptives and women's issues.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/04/6782...-number-of-women-in-the-house-of-representati

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

So wait, the DCCC backs individual members in primaries and was presumably out there handing money out to female candidates in an effort to ensure more of them made it to congress??

If you got DCCC money in the primary my respect for you has officially gone down.

 

[JohnBasedow]

In their defense, the amount of women who are Republicans is decreasing dramatically so the pool is much smaller to choose from now.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

In their defense, the amount of women who are Republicans is decreasing dramatically so the pool is much smaller to choose from now.

I'm curious to what extent this is but based on what was written in the article it sounds like the DCCC went around handing money to women's campaigns to help them win their primaries so that it would in the end create more women in congress.

Sounds like this is an artificial creation of the DCCC in part and not based upon these women's own merits.

 

[Menace Sockeyes]

I'm curious to what extent this is but based on what was written in the article it sounds like the DCCC went around handing money to women's campaigns to help them win their primaries so that it would in the end create more women in congress.

Sounds like this is an artificial creation of the DCCC in part and not based upon these women's own merits.

Agreed, UNLESS they were looking at data that showed female challengers were in a better position to WIN (which turned out to be true across party lines). I have a hard time believing they weren't looking to help those who they believed could win the House, and turn over the seat of power.

 

[Rudolph]

Hurry up with your sweet take, @gonegolfing.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Agreed, UNLESS they were looking at data that showed female challengers were in a better position to WIN (which turned out to be true across party lines). I have a hard time believing they weren't looking to help those who they believed could win the House, and turn over the seat of power.

My guess is they where funding some women in primaries in districts that where safe districts. Certainly some of those women flipped a district, we know that for certain. But I'm guessing they inflated their numbers by helping women win primaries for open seats in a safe D district.

 

[markfromj]

Yeah. The GOP prefers to look at people as individuals...you know, “content of their character” and such?

 

[Huey Grey]

Hard to find well qualified grabbed pussies to take the job.

 

[HallofFame]

Sounds like 13 too many.

 

[ICWestfan]

I'm guessing most women that belong to the GOP have meaningful, high paying jobs and thus don't have the time it takes to serve the USA in Congress.

 

[Huey Grey]

I'm guessing most women that belong to the GOP have meaningful, high paying jobs and thus don't have the time it takes to serve the USA in Congress.

Following this logic, this must mean that most men that belong to the GOP are unemployable losers so that's why they run for office.

 

[NDallasRuss]

Yeah. The GOP prefers to look at people as individuals...

Specifically, older white male individuals...

 

[hawksnc10]

They belong in the kitchen

 

[Huey Grey]

A picture is worth a thousand words in this link:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/28/us/politics/congress-freshman-class.html