Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"In a party as diverse as ours, does it worry you to see the top three being white guys?" Jones asked Gillibrand, in a moment highlighted by The Hill. "Yes," said Gillibrand.
Asked to elaborate on her one-word answer, she responded by suggesting that Democrats choosing three white men over the women and minorities in the long list of presidential hopefuls is more evidence that this country doesn't fully embrace diversity, though she did celebrate that Barack Obama was elected twice.
"I aspire for our country to recognize the beauty of our diversity at some point in the future and I hope someday we have a woman president," she said. "I love the fact that Barack Obama was our president for eight years, I hope more people of color not only aspire [but] win the presidency, because that’s what makes America so extraordinary, that we are all of that, we are everything, and I think a more inclusive America is a stronger America
The Democrats are Putting all their eggs on this “diversity” and “intersectionality” thing to appeal to the farthest left of their base. I think it will backfire on them
What I don't understand is how people do not see this as racism or sexism.
Lets face it, if the reverse were said (i.e. three top candidates are all black women), then cries of racism, sexism, etc. would be going out.
White people may be in the majority, but that does not mean it is open season on them as something being wrong with them.
The same is true of men, yet the liberal media constantly pushes a narrative (that the Democrats have latched on to ) that having white men as leaders is something bad.
This despite the fact that is all we have ever had except once.
I hope they don't hold Obama up as what you get with a black president, otherwise there wont be another for some time.
The Democrats are Putting all their eggs on this “diversity” and “intersectionality” thing to appeal to the farthest left of their base. I think it will backfire on them
They will eat themselves, and not even realize what they are doing to themselves.
It has to be one of the privileged classes or no one. White male is TOXIC to our party.
It is going to come to the point where we just put a sign on the DNC. "National Insane Asylum"
The unintended consequences of closing them down. They flocked to destroy a political party from within.
The Democrats are Putting all their eggs on this “diversity” and “intersectionality” thing to appeal to the farthest left of their base. I think it will backfire on them
The dems are obsessed with race, gender, ethnicity, etc... When they look across a room, they do not see people, they see groups of "those people," and "them." They see blacks, whites, Mexicans, Chinese, etc... Then they further break them down and make judgments on them for being poor, wealthy, new money or old, blue collar or donor class, or simply one of the lowly masses, everyone's a victim or a predator. Someone who does not vote for them, or dares disagree with them, is a "horrible."
They will eat themselves, and not even realize what they are doing to themselves.
It has to be one of the privileged classes or no one. White male is TOXIC to our party.
It is going to come to the point where we just put a sign on the DNC. "National Insane Asylum"
The unintended consequences of closing them down. They flocked to destroy a political party from within.
I remember when Obama threw his hat in the ring for president in 2007, we had black journalists and talking heads on TV, claiming he "was not black enough," he was "too white," grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth and was not a part of "the struggle."
The dems never look at the merits of the person, they only ever see gender, skin color, economic and social class, etc...
The Dems are completely focused on being the party of image and identity politics. To them, a qualified candidate is just someone who checks off a list of boxes about their gender, race, religion etc. They are completely void of ideas--or good ideas anyway.
In their eyes, they think that just nominating a woman and a person of color for high office is good enough and that most people will vote in their favor based on that alone.
The NYTs did a piece a month ago about the record number of women who won seats in the House for the Democratic Party--and it seemed to be exclusively focused on the number of women who ran and won, but not one thing was mentioned about what policies they supported, or what ideas or bills they planned to introduce. IT was like once these women were elected--the job was over. There's now "representation" and that was it.
Democrats are HYPER FOCUSED on Race, and Gender. Yes, it is both racist and sexist as they base just about everything on these two factors. Merit, experience, character, intelligence, etc has no bearing on who, or what they do, or whom they select as candidates.
It only works to divide us by race, and gender, and creates animosity that otherwise would not be there. Their ultimate goal is to keep us divided, and actually further divide us purely for DISTRACTION.
The Dems are completely focused on being the party of image and identity politics. To them, a qualified candidate is just someone who checks off a list of boxes about their gender, race, religion etc. They are completely void of ideas--or good ideas anyway.
In their eyes, they think that just nominating a woman and a person of color for high office is good enough and that most people will vote in their favor based on that alone.
The NYTs did a piece a month ago about the record number of women who won seats in the House for the Democratic Party--and it seemed to be exclusively focused on the number of women who ran and won, but not one thing was mentioned about what policies they supported, or what ideas or bills they planned to introduce. IT was like once these women were elected--the job was over. There's now "representation" and that was it.
In my area, all the Democrat women won office, and they were all first time candidates. If you looked at their literature, or listened to their TV commercials, they ALL used the same exact Talking Points. In addition, the only experience they had was as social justice activist for whatever pet, progressive cause they championed. I am not saying they are less qualified than men, nor am I saying they shouldn't have an opportunity to be elected. However, it did seem like a very well coordinated plan by the Democrats to install female candidates solely because of their gender.
Last edited by Pilot1; 12-17-2018 at 10:35 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
