"I don't think anyone should pick a candidate for any office based solely on gender. That would be, I believe, a mistake"
About this Quote
There is a careful double move here: a nod to gender as politically salient, followed by a firm attempt to make it politically illegitimate. Nussle’s “I don’t think anyone should” isn’t just advice; it’s a pre-emptive scolding that frames gender-based voting as irrational before anyone makes the case for it. The softening phrases - “I don’t think,” “I believe” - give the line a reasonable, almost pastoral tone, but they also function as armor: it’s harder to accuse someone of hostility when they’ve wrapped the claim in personal modesty.
The subtext is less about voters’ ethics than about controlling the terms of competition. By singling out “solely on gender,” the statement concedes that gender exists as a motivator while narrowing the acceptable conversation to a straw version of identity politics: the caricatured voter who picks a candidate like they’re picking a jersey color. That framing conveniently sidelines the more uncomfortable argument - that representation can be a rational proxy for lived experience, policy priorities, and trust in institutions historically dominated by men.
In the context of American electoral rhetoric, this kind of line often surfaces when gender becomes a liability for the speaker’s side: during races featuring prominent women candidates, debates over “first woman” milestones, or backlash against feminist organizing. It’s a bid to claim the moral high ground of “merit” while leaving unspoken whose merit has traditionally been presumed. The sentence works because it sounds fair, even as it quietly polices what counts as a legitimate reason to vote.
The subtext is less about voters’ ethics than about controlling the terms of competition. By singling out “solely on gender,” the statement concedes that gender exists as a motivator while narrowing the acceptable conversation to a straw version of identity politics: the caricatured voter who picks a candidate like they’re picking a jersey color. That framing conveniently sidelines the more uncomfortable argument - that representation can be a rational proxy for lived experience, policy priorities, and trust in institutions historically dominated by men.
In the context of American electoral rhetoric, this kind of line often surfaces when gender becomes a liability for the speaker’s side: during races featuring prominent women candidates, debates over “first woman” milestones, or backlash against feminist organizing. It’s a bid to claim the moral high ground of “merit” while leaving unspoken whose merit has traditionally been presumed. The sentence works because it sounds fair, even as it quietly polices what counts as a legitimate reason to vote.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|
More Quotes by Jim
Add to List
