Female Governors: Republicans 4 (AZ, NM, OK, SC) Democrats 2 (NC and WA) Minority Governors Republicans 4 (LA [Asian], NM [Hispanic], NV [Hispanic], SC [Asian]) Democrats 1 (MA [black])We have 30 Governors (counting RI's independent as one of ours), and they have 20. So, we have greater advantages in female and minoriy Governors (2:1 and 4:1) than we have in Govenors (3:2). So, it's not simply that we have more Governors. Second, let's look at Senators
Female Senators Republicans 5 (AK, ME , NH, TX) Democrats 12 (CA , LA, MD, MI, MO, MN, NC, NH, NY, WA ) Minority Senators Republicans 1 (FL [H ispanic]) Democrats 3 (HI  [Asian}, NJ [Hispanic])So, with regard to Senators, the tables are turned. They have more female and minority Senators, even taking into account that they have more Senators (53, counting a couple indepndents who caucus with hem) than we have (47). Indeed, we were to add Senators and Governors together, and ignore double-count the female minorities, we have 15 out of 77, and they have 18 out of 73, giveng them a slight higher percentage than us, but not a substantially higher percentage than us. So, the correct answer to the question is that the Republicans may have an advantage, just now, in female and minorty Governors, but Democrats have an advantage in U.S. Senators, and taking both of these important top-of-the-ticket satewide offices into account, neither party should be said to have a real advantage over the other. Next, let's look at members of Congress and, for a reason that will become clear in a moment, let's look at ethnicity.