A conference I was scheduled to attend in Baltimore was canceled. I canceled my non-changeable, nonrefundable flight immediately online. When time permitted, I called Delta and stayed on the phone through an admittedly quite long list of options. I was then able to leave my number for a call back in several hours. A delightful agent named Linda returned my call nine hours later and set me up with a credit for the full amount I had paid for the flight — then made sure to inform me of the two pieces of info I could use to redeem the credit for a future flight within one year. Full credit, no fees, exactly as advertised.
Linda Olson, Minneapolis
ELIZABETH WARREN
If promoting plans was problem, consider why she needed to
My wife and I have been arguing about why U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who was such a promising female candidate, lost the presidential primaries to two old white guys. My wife argues it's all about gender bias. She's a computer professional who once worked as the only female engineer in a computer networking company, so she knows something about that. I'm a psychology Ph.D., so I argue there are personal factors, such as Warren's political strategy.
I felt vindicated when I read the March 8 commentary by Carlson School of Management Prof. Akshay Rao ("What did in Elizabeth Warren?") suggesting it was Warren's decision to sell herself with specific plans — "I have a plan for that!" — that did not resonate with the electorate, which for now is interested more in an abstract future unconcerned with implementation details. I took this argument to my wife.
"That's still evidence of gender bias," she said. "How so," I asked. She explained that to be taken seriously women have always had to be demonstrably more capable and better prepared than male peers. Warren was just exercising this life lesson at the political level. When she was challenged in the debates about how she would pay for her policies, she responded with detailed plans — not the stuff to excite voters, according to Rao, but certainly demonstrating competence. When Sanders was similarly challenged, he merely made unsubstantiated claims about an idealistic future — stuff that excites voters.
The woman felt the need to defend her candidacy with substantial but boring policy plans, while the man, feeling no such pressure, could continue selling an inspiring but abstract future. Warren's candidacy subsequently faded while Sanders' strengthened.
OK, wife, this round goes to you. We are left wondering just what a woman needs to do to become president. Oh, right — maybe it's not on her.
Andrew Kramer, Marine on St. Croix
PRIMARY ELECTION PRIVACY
Maybe there's an easy solution?
Lori Sturdevant's March 8 column "How it turned out to have a primary" brought up the new requirement of party registration for primary voters. As she also mentioned, the lack of privacy stopped a number of people — hundreds, if not thousands — from voting.
This can be seen as one more form of voter suppression. One solution would be to have a double-sided ballot, with Republican candidates listed on one side and Democrats on the other. Instructions would need to make it clear that you can only vote on one side of the ballot. Everyone would get the same ballot, and the requirement for party designation by the voter would be made irrelevant.