The Alaska Current recently published an opinion piece by several Anchorage women contrasting Anchorage mayoral candidate Chris Tuck and one of his opponents, Suzanne LaFrance. Tuck, the only Democrat in the race, and LaFrance, an independent, are both vying to unseat Mayor Dave Bronson, a Republican.
Laura Norton-Cruz, Itzel Zagal, Melissa Mayer, Tyonna Bounds, Polly Carr, Kate Constenstein, Tasha Boyer, and Barbara Norton were quick to criticize Tuck for being “another white man” and admonished his decision to enter the race “despite many progressives asking him not to.”
Identity politics, like criticizing a white male candidate primarily because the color of his skin and gender, is nothing new to progressives. Often these targeted type of attacks get convoluted because they aren’t based on principles or morals, but rather what best suits a given situation.
Two of the more politically active authors of the piece are Laura Norton-Cruz and Polly Carr. Norton-Cruz has written publicly how important it is to her to elect female candidates. Yet, based on past endorsements and social media photos of her filled out ballot, Norton-Cruz has supported a white man over women candidates several times in recent local elections. Both Norton-Cruz and Carr supported now-Senator Forrest Dunbar (D – Anchorage) (a white man) last year when he ran against then-Representative Geran Tarr (a Democrat and woman). Ironically, Tuck supported the female candidate: Tarr.
If voting more women into office is the primary objective of the authors, several of them have failed their own litmus test as recently as the last election cycle. The women standing for LaFrance also contrast her consistently pro-choice views against Tuck, who is a pro-life Democrat. When voting for governor last year, independent candidate Bill Walker appeared at the top of lead author Norton-Cruz’s ranked ballot, above Democrat Les Gara, a staunch supporter of reproductive rights. As an aside, Walker effectively has the same position as Tuck: personally pro-life but supports a woman’s right to choose.
Upon examination of their actions, it appears Norton-Cruz and Carr’s voting habits have less to do with gender and race than a candidate’s values, position on the issues, and perceived chances to win. In the case of Walker, Norton-Cruz ranked the pro-life candidate first after writing he had the best chance defeat Governor Mike Dunleavy (R – Alaska). The women who stand for LaFrance feel she is the most qualified candidate that best reflects their values and is well positioned to challenge incumbent Mayor Bronson. Those are well reasoned arguments that are important for potential Tuck or LaFrance voters to consider. But to say Tuck’s race, gender, and pro-life views are reason enough for him to step aside is hypocritical.
The Anchorage mayoral election is eight months away, and many more candidates are likely to enter the race. Instead of deciding who should or should not run based on their body parts, skin color, or which progressive gatekeepers permit them to enter the race, voters would be better served if political operatives and partisans focus on the ideas of the candidates.
The piece opens with the authors referencing Greta Gerwig’s Barbie movie as a reason Tuck should step aside: “We also find it tiresome that in the summer when the most popular blockbuster is inviting audiences to critique patriarchy and imagine alternatives to male domination in politics and society, some Democrats are unable to imagine a different future for Anchorage.”
To many, Gerwig’s film seems like the ultimate celebration of female empowerment, however the entire movie is about how damaging it is to elevate one gender over the other. The majority of Anchorage voters are much less concerned with whether the contenders for mayor are a Barbie or a Ken than they are about each candidate’s vision for the future of our city. And that’s a good thing.
