you can listen to q and a on our free c-span now app. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these companies and more including mediacom. >> we powered a new reality. we are built to keep you ahead. >> mediacom supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy. a record number of women have been nominated and given a tory races this election cycle. this morning, we are going to

talk to kelly dittmar, the director of research at the center for american women and politics at rutgers university. we're going to talk about the number of women running for office this november. good morning, kelly. guest: good morning. host: thank you so much for joining us. guest: thank you for having me. host: we are seeing a record number of women running for governor. why has this office then an office that women perhaps in the past have been more reluctant or less successful at running for? guest: this is an office that has been part of that glass ceiling. we have not seen more than nine women serve as governor at the same time. we first set that record in 2004. that is significantly less than a presentation in the population, nine of 50. we certainly want to move closer to some sort of parity at that

level. this year, which is a gubernatorial election year, so the best comparable year would be, for example, 2018. we have certainly seen a jump in the number of women who ran in the primaries. now, we have a record number of women nominees, 25 across the country. there are also included five women versus women competitions. there will be a woman holding those seats in general. the reasons why we haven't had those women in offices. part of that is biases against women being in offices. that plays out at the presidential level, and i think they relate as well to challenges in people's perceptions of who is that executive leader, what are the traits we value, or the expertise we expect in that office, and how well does that align with our still persistent

stereotypes. i think the number of women running here and those will hopefully be successful will hopefully chip away at those biases. it is a really expensive race. there are lots of people lined up for these positions. women aren't always considered and supported to be in that line, to be supported and have the resources they need to run successfully at the statewide level. those are just two reasons why i think we have seen a lag. i think this year proves that women over the last two elections, and demonstrate their ability to win at the different levels. they have one in key contests. hopefully, that means that party leaders in the women's them -- and the women themselves see themselves as the best candidates to be successful at this level and important for them to be there, be engaged in

some of the most important policy debates that are going on right now at the state level. host: so, you mentioned that there are five women-on-women contest. we think that at the end, those five states will be represented by women. but can you tell me, what other states are there perhaps a woman nominee against a male nominee that you think the woman might prevail, and also overall, how many female governors do you think we will have after the election? guest: the latter question is the million-dollar question. i will tell you this, the two women who are the most likely and most favored to win the races against male candidates and good male incumbents, which would be switching from a man to a woman in that office, would be in massachusetts, with a democrat who is very likely to win. by the way, she is running on an all-woman ticket. it will be the first time in

u.s. history we would have a woman governor and lieutenant governor simultaneously. in arkansas, we have a woman who came from the trump administration running as a republican, a very strongly favored in that contest as well. she is very likely to be another pickup or women in this cycle. host: we have some charts. we have mentioned it is a record year for the gubernatorial race, but not a record here when it comes to female candidates for the u.s. house and u.s. senate. can you tell us, why are we not seeing a continuation of those trends in 2018 and 2020, which saw more women nominated by the major parties for those federal offices? guest: we did have, in general, slightly lower numbers this year. i want to be careful because, of

course, we had one fewer woman running for the house this year than 2020, for example. it is not that we are seeing any significant decline, but we are seeing women increase their nominations at the same pace we saw in record-breaking years, in 2018 and 2020. in 2018, democratic them in basically doubled their candidacy. it's not surprising we would see that continue year by year. but some factors that might be going into that are that this year was not expected to be great for democrats. remember, women democrats make up the majority of women running and winning nominations still, even though we have seen some closing of that party gap. it may be that some women and men on the democratic side decided to bow out and might run more in 2024. that could be a possibility. there were also persistent barriers that did not go away just because we had record-breaking years for women. things like being recruited, supported, getting initial

support you need to be successful, seeing it as worthwhile when you look at politics and you don't see things getting done. women in particular are motivated to do something and they may not see politics today as the place that they can get things done. we continually have to make a different case for women to run. i think that is still part of the challenge as we look at the numbers this year and as we think about future elections, to try to encourage, recruit, and truly support women so that women from all backgrounds, class, race, age can run for and win, especially at these highest levels of congress and statewide offices. host: and as we show those charts, this chart on the screen now is the number of women nominees for u.s. senate. as you note, it is down one from 21 to 20 overall. just a decrease of one. for the u.s. house, we are down a little bit more. it went from 298 women total in

2020 to 259 in 2022. we are going to get to some of your calls shortly. we want to know what questions or comments you have, where it comes to women running for office this november. your comments or questions for kelly dittmar. you can call us. for republicans, your line is (202) 748-8001. for democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can go ahead and start calling in now. kelly, i want to talk to you. with a record amount of women, particularly in some of these divinatory races, how are you seeing women lean into their experiences as women while campaigning, and d.c. much of a difference between republicans and democrats and how they approach that? guest: we have seen some real

evolution, i would say, and how women navigate gender on the campaign trail, especially, again, in recent elections. in 2018, we had this record year for women, particularly democratic women, running for office. he saw increased diversity among those women, and diversity of all types. race, ethnicity, age, class-based differences, and also professional backgrounds that were different, women coming into these campaigns. when they did so, they were also more likely to use their gender and their gender-based experiences and perspectives, most importantly, as an electoral asset, something they brought to the table, among the credentials they brought. instead of thinking about it as a hurdle they had to overcome. unfortunately, for a lot of history, that has been the case. strategists say don't talk that much about having kids, don't talk that much about eating a

woman, because it might set you apart and raise doubts about your capacity to be successful or do this job. when, in fact, after 2016, and in a lot of conversations we have been having about equity and inclusion, there is now this perception among candidates that they could talk about these identities as bringing perspective that is necessary for policymaking. so, we see women doing that more often in all sorts of ways, sometimes talking about being mothers, being mothers specifically of young children. i remember cori bush's ad, talking about being the mother of a black sun and what that meant, and the talks she had to have with her son and why it matters in policy making around gun reform and crime. you see evidence like that across the board that continued in 2020 and 2022. for partisan differences, we see republican women and democratic women leaning in in this way.

remember, they are also coming from different perspectives that shape their ideology. you see variance in how those identities are used. for example, i remember in 2018, we had a woman in texas running and saying, "i am a tough texas woman. one day, i am wearing heels, the next day i am shooting my hunts -- my guns." there is a bit more pressure on the republican side that you are both meeting the masculine credentials that are expected, especially in today's republican party, but also aligning with some of those stereotypically feminine ideals. host: and as we talk about how women are using their perspectives as female candidates, let's look now at this campaign ad from republican christine drazen, one of three women running for governor in oregon. she highlighted her role as a mother and a campaign promise to

give parents more control in schools. let's watch that at. [video clip] >> our schools need to get back to the basics and get politics out of the classroom, so our kids can learn how to think, not what to think. i am christine drazen, and i am running for governor. but more importantly, i am a mom. my parents bill of rights will give parents more say and more school choice. keep schools open and restore graduation requirements, so a diploma means something again. >> paid for by friends of christine drazen. host: let's watch one more add before i have you respond. this is katie darling, a democratic candidate in louisiana. the democratic candidate in louisiana running for congress against steve scalise. she is considered a longshot candidate but she had a viral campaign showing her giving birth and positioning motherhood at the forefront of her campaign

while also criticizing the state strict abortion law. >> i am katie darling and i live on a farm in st. tammany parish. our family compost collects rainwater and grows our own food. my husband and daughter help take care of the chickens. and there someone else will be joining us in helping to pitch in with farm life very soon. but these days i worry about storms that are stronger and more frequent because of climate change. about our kids underperforming public schools comment about louisiana's new abortion band, one of the strictest and most severe in the country. we should be putting pregnant women at ease, not putting their lives at risk. i have not spent my career in washington. i have worked my way up from bartender to ceo. now i help diverse is organize their complicated health records because nurses are not just

heroes, they are saints. i am katie darling and i am running for congress because i want that better path for you, for her, and for him. host: those were two very different campaign ads but both of them invoked motherhood as how to explain their political thinking. can you talk about how women are navigating controversial issues and appealing to voters, critically by invoking motherhood? guest: those are two great examples. we see that most often on three issues, abortion, education, and parental rights in education. related to that, especially in the primary there were also questions around transgender

rights in schools and sports where women were invoking motherhood as a protection mechanism for girls on the more conservative side of thing. here you see motherhood being used as a road to authenticity. as a mother i can speak directly to this experience. as a mother i am particularly motivated. you can trust i will fight hard for these policies because i come to that motivated by protecting my kids or fighting for my kids, making the world better for my kids. i think there is a type of empathy that happens. we are appealing to the electorate, a lot of mothers. women outnumber and outvote men, and are the most reliable voters, mothers among them. candidates are using that connection. on abortion, you see the katie darling at, in one way what it does is pushes back against some

of the narrative about pro-choice people or pro-choice positions, as if it is only women who do not want children who would have to make the hard choice to have an abortion. in reality there are a lot of women who desperately want to have children who might be in a situation in which for the health of themselves or the fetus have to make them hard decision. you see her leveraging that in the at. as a pregnant person i clearly want to be a mother, i want to be sure people have the right to be mothers. i also recognize the reality that women also need the right to their own bodies. there is a way that women are especially authentic and trusted messengers on an issue that directly affects them. host: we are talking to kelly diller, center of research for the women in politics at rutgers

university. republicans, your number is (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents, call us at (202) 748-8002. we are going to the phone lines now. first caller is gwen from birmingham, alabama. what is your question or comment? caller: good morning. my comment is, what i'm concerned about is my democracy. i am a black woman and democracy mean so much to me as a black person because i know what my ancestors had to go through in to have the rights to vote, for us to have the rights for so many things. black people have withstood so much in this country. host: did we lose you?

i think we lost you. give us a call back. dee is in florida on the republican line. what is your question. caller: women in politics, i've been around for many years, i have children and grandchildren. ever since women got into politics this country has been run on emotions. we have a constitution. we get these women in office and we have these three women in the supreme court, they run in their emotion, how they feel as a woman instead of going by the constitution. we are inbred with this. we run on emotion. however we feel per on a particular day that is what will happen to the world. this women getting into politics has totally ruined our country. totally ruined our country. like the abortion thing.

they are talking about abortion. that has no business on who will be president but women are up in arms because they cannot have an abortion. that depends on which state they live in. fight their governor. does nothing to do with running this country. ok? i am going to fight for my children because they're too many women in office running this country into the ground because i am feeling good today today i will be good for the people. host: can you give me an example of what woman has been a governor or any leadership position that you believe has acted off of the motion and made wrong decisions? caller: they all do. right here in florida. in the supreme court. the supreme court. listen when they're having their little meetings when sonya sotomayor gets on television.

we are talking about women's bodies and women's rights. ok so you have a body, you have rights whether you want an abortion or not. it has nothing to do with running this country. ok? we have women all of this country including our politicians who are running on emotions. host: point taken. let's let kelly respond to that comment. caller: i would make the clear point that women do not run this country. women are underrepresented on every level. the folks are leading the majority of states, the majority of state legislatures, the presidency, the supreme court, those are all majority men and in most cases majority white men. if the concern is this country is being led by emotion we should look to those are actually making the decisions most often. remember that women are not in majority of those positions.

i would add is really easy-to-follow into gender stereotypes and paint all women with the same brush. to say all women are acting only on emotion is very consistent with the tropes and biases that have kept women out of political power. it has been used as an excuse not to put women in positions of power that they "cannot handle it." these arguments have been made since the fight against giving women the right to vote, that because they cannot handle the power of being in politics, where we see men act on emotion a lot of the time. donald trump is a great example of somebody, when he was upset or mad or felt like he was being attacked, he would act out immediately, and often in ways that were dangerous to our democracy. if we are going to point to emotion guiding behavior, we should look across the board at men and women and not assume this is a gendered characteristic.

i would add there is also a piece of this and which may be they should consider that emotion can be a valuable thing in our leaders. do we want our leaders to not have any emotion, to not have compassion or empathy that might inform their policymaking? i would push back. we are going to disagree on the importance of having women and increased representation of those in office, but there are a lot of reasons to suggest that is too broad of a stroke the collar was painting on all women in office or on the role of emotion in policymaking. host: let's talk to catherine in cedar, minnesota, on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: i appreciated the last caller's comments. whether we are men or women, we are all represented and have a right to be represented by people who are of our gender, by

people who are not of our gender. we want people to represent us and represent us well. it has been heartbreaking, some of the people who have been bad representatives. a lot of those people arguably have vindman. it -- have been men. it is time for us to see women are capable of being strong leaders. we see a lot of the ones mentioned by the past caller even, sonya sotomayor and others are paving ways. whether you agree with their decisions are not. we will not agree with everything that happens in politics. i guess i'm very appreciative of what the last caller had to say and agree that as women, the caller that really bashed women was just being honest from an age where they did not invite women to politics.

at a point maybe she was not invited enough to recognize that as being invited now is a positive and there are emotional men. across the aisle there are mistakes people will make on both sides. i would argue being emotional is not a bad state as long as those emotions flow positively and do things to help people. i guess i appreciated the past caller reminding that. it is not about us being women, but it is about us being women. it is about us finally having a voice. that is where this abortion debate is getting complicated because a lot of us are very pro-life but pro-life does not mean that we want someone to die and their child to die and nobody to live because they have a health abnormality that they have to attend to.

i think people are getting very shortsighted about the abortion debate, and it is frightening. i would like to see a support -- laws that support women doing the best they can for their families. host: all right, catherine. what are your thoughts, kelly? caller: i appreciate the caller catherine's points -- guest: i appreciate the caller catherine's points. when we talk about women's representation too often people feel what we are talking about is go to the ballot box and pick any women and she will represent you best. what we often argue is we just want the playing field to be level enough so that women can run and win in equal numbers if they are selected by voters who get to decide who they want in office. when we think about representation it is easy to say

i do not vote on gender, gender does not matter, i am gender-neutral. we know gender shapes how people navigate policymaking. it shapes how we come to a conversation. our lived experiences and perspectives are shaped by gender. if you could look at every statistic around economic security, educational access, violence, all of these things, you could say there are no gender differences. women experience life in the same way as men, then maybe you can make this case there should be that neutrality in who is elected and who serves. we know that is not true. we note women live different lives and have different experience. some of that is based on them being the bearer of children. there are other things. it is based on societal norms and biases that exist. that is why it matters to have

their voices at the table and that is why it matters to have a range of diverse voices among women. women are far from monolithic and we need to make sure women can come to be -- can come to these political spaces and be represented from a host of intersectional spaces so we make the best policy decisions and do not leave out entirely parts of our population and perspectives from that population and making policy that will not only affect women, it will affect the broader population. we know every study the more inclusive a decision-making table, the better the outcomes for the broadest amount of people, that is true in politics as well and that is true for gender in the gender diversity of those at the table. host: on the line now is margie in newark, delaware, on the democrat line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i do not understand where anybody in this country gets as

far as politics. let's take the hypocrisy of the republicans. therefore abortion, they are going along with the evangelicals, but nobody, not on any channel, and i watch them all to see what is going on in politics, has ever said one word -- women to -- about men getting vasectomies. they talk about women getting abortions. what about men? they are preventing life and they are talking about women? buck up and open your eyes. this is america. let's talk about the men getting vasectomies. that is preventing birth. thank you so much. host: your thoughts. guest: give credit to our legislatures. women across the country in

state legislatures have raised this point and some have proposed legislation as message-based legislation to say if we will regulate women's bodies, how would you like it if we regulate men's bodies and it goes to the same fact we were just talking about that representation matters. to have women in these policymaking spaces saying hold on, what you are doing, especially as men pushing for restrictions on women's bodies, here is what the equivalent would look like if we did the same for you and how does that feel when we talk about bodily autonomy and freedom. i think the caller has a good point and it is a point that has been made but it is true it has much national attention. part of the reason that point has been made is because women were in the room. host: let's hear from wanda in california on the republican line. caller: hello. i have a question that the

democrats do not seem to know the answer to and the supreme court does not know the answer to. that question is what is a woman? host: kelly, did you want to respond? guest: i will tell you for the purposes of our research we include in our data, we measure the experiences of women based on women who self identify in that way. that can mean a lot of things. some folks may include folks who were only born biologically female. that is not how we view it. we guide our work by those who identify and live their lives as self identified women. host: let's hear from emma in washington, d.c. on the independent line. caller: i am a pro-life woman

and i believe abortion is the taking of a life. when people talk about how the female perspective is important in advocating for abortion they are ignoring the millions of pro-life women in this country like myself. i see that feminists love to celebrate liberal women who win, but when a conservative woman wins suddenly the girl power narrative disappears. host: what are your thoughts? guest: i think that is a fair point. i am coming from the perspective of a nonpartisan center where we know to get to gender parity in politics it cannot only happen on one side of the aisle. there continues to be a partisan gap in that the majority of women in office at most levels are democratic women. we need to see, if we want to get to that parity number, we need to see more republican women come and we need to recognize that having more women in office does not mean x policy

gets past or x goes forward. one of the values of having more women in office on abortion is that they can have a debate, women can debate on what policies they see is most important, where they might stand on the issue, and how you move forward. they will, that from their own direct lived experiences. those may be very different. another example beyond abortion is it is hard for us to think about abortion in ways that are without these party biases. to give you another example of an issue would be violence against women specifically, or sexual violence and harassment in the military. this is an issue that was not brought up in a significant way in the congress until he finally had a significant number of women on the armed services committee who came to this who

had already cared about this issue in general terms. they saw as an issue to address and the armed services. not only for women in the armed services but for men who had been subject to sexual assault or harassment. it took a lot of the women, democrats and republicans coming together, to say we need to address this issue. they continue to have different perspectives on how to do that but they brought that issue to the table. i would say to the caller we need to be attentive to the diversity of viewpoints among women, not only on abortion, that is a process host of issues and having more women at the table should lead to more representative outcomes of the broader population. host: here are some charts about that party divide among women nominees. this chart is showing -- when

you go to the senate, it is a little bit more of a balance. 65% are democrats, 35% are republicans. in nominees for governor, it is a little over one third, 36% are republicans, 64% of those nominees, of those female nominees are democrats. most women who are nominated for u.s. senate and u.s. governor are democrats. about one third tend to be republicans. let's go, we will take a few more calls. our next caller is darrell calling from frederick, maryland, on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: good morning, kelly. i wanted to say there is a fear in the united states of women in power. i am a registered democrat but i

do look at fox news and things like that because i like to know both sides. there is a fear in the u.s., i think within the next eight years there will be a woman president. if i had to pick two republican women off the top of my head, nikki haley would be one, condoleezza rice, i would like to see her run. if i had to pick two african-american women, i would pick the lady who is running against marco rubio in florida -- host: val demings. caller: and the lady in north carolina running for senate. beasley. it is just a matter of time before the ceiling is cracked. i think that when the lady talked about emotions -- god

created man and woman. donald trump acts on impulse, emotion. when you put it in perspective, you knocked it out of the park. he acts on emotion. i do know -- the candidates in the indiana senate race are meeting for the only debate in the midterm elections. incumbent republican senator, todd young, thomas mcdermott and, james sce. -span. [no audio]