• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do these glass ceilings count?

AlbqOwl said:
Wouldn't it be great to stop looking at race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, skin color, age, etc. as qualifications for the people who will be put in power positions? I wonder what would happen if we actually put people with vision, skill sets, and motivation to fix what's broken and make the government work economically, efficiently, and effectively? And we wouldn't even notice what race, gender, color, etc. they are?
Click to expand...

It would be great, but it's not likely. All things being equal, people have an innate preference for the familiar, and this extends to matters such as race, class, appearance and gender. And until people can overcome their unconcious bias, selection of people for power will never be based only on merit.
 
MaggieD said:
It's something to hope for. I can hear the cries for more diversity though...

...
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention "diversity" because for the Alt-Right, white nativists and supremacists the term "diversity" is code for "anti-white" or "white genocide". So is that it means to you, too?
 
Fruityfact said:
No, i'm saying part of blow back on obama was cause he's black.
I'm saying one of the factors of Hillary losing was being a women.
It's not about being right, it's about ****ing winning so Donald J Trump doesn't happen, and so that socially backward ****ers don't get on the supreme court.
Click to expand...
I hate to open-up a second line of discussion here, but I strongly disagree!

Your post is *exactly* why Hillary lost! :doh

It's not enough to make a negative case against the other guy; a successful candidate needs to make a positive case for themselves!

Obama did this. Even Trump did this. Hillary didn't.

Look, I can't stand Trump. He's a total bull**** artist, and ran the most nationalistic xenophobic fear & hate filled campaign in modern history. He's the most disliked incoming President in modern history. There's near rioting in the streets over him. But even while lying to his supporters, he gave them hope. He *filled* them with hope, most of which will never come to fruition, but still he did it! And they responded - they came out to vote in near fanatical fashion.

Hillary never did that to any substantive level. She spent her campaign declaring Trump unfit, while never giving her possible supporters any substantive reason to come-out for her. She never even looked like she wanted their votes, as much as she expected them "because Trump".

Boy, did she (and the country) get a rude awakening!
 
Chomsky said:
I hate to open-up a second line of discussion here, but I strongly disagree!

Your post is *exactly* why Hillary lost! :doh

It's not enough to make a negative case against the other guy; a successful candidate needs to make a positive case for themselves!

Obama did this. Even Trump did this. Hillary didn't.

Look, I can't stand Trump. He's a total bull**** artist, and ran the most nationalistic xenophobic fear & hate filled campaign in modern history. He's the most disliked incoming President in modern history. There's near rioting in the streets over him. But even while lying to his supporters, he gave them hope. He *filled* them with hope, most of which will never come to fruition, but still he did it! And they responded - they came out to vote in near fanatical fashion.

Hillary never did that to any substantive level. She spent her campaign declaring Trump unfit, while never giving her possible supporters any substantive reason to come-out for her. She never even looked like she wanted their votes, as much as she expected them "because Trump".

Boy, did she (and the country) get a rude awakening!
Click to expand...

Democraps playing checkers, Republicans playing the white male card. ****ing learn how to play, or keep losing.
 
TheGoverness said:
That's a world I'd like to live in.
Click to expand...

good thinking. say you are just hired for a job and someone said-hey have you met the new girl, she's a lesbian and what should happen would be the same thing if someone said "hey she's wearing Nike shoes rather than Adidas (assuming its not an Adidas distributor) or if someone said she has a pet cat instead of a dog. In other words-SO WHAT?

but in many cases, the people who talk the most about not judging someone on something that really shouldn't matter are actually basing their support of that person on the very characteristic they say shouldn't matter.
 
TurtleDude said:
good thinking. say you are just hired for a job and someone said-hey have you met the new girl, she's a lesbian and what should happen would be the same thing if someone said "hey she's wearing Nike shoes rather than Adidas (assuming its not an Adidas distributor) or if someone said she has a pet cat instead of a dog. In other words-SO WHAT?

but in many cases, the people who talk the most about not judging someone on something that really shouldn't matter are actually basing their support of that person on the very characteristic they say shouldn't matter.
Click to expand...

Which is why honesty is so important, to include honesty with self.

Too bad modern Americans tend to flunk that particular life skill.
 
Fruityfact said:
Put in Male WAMFS or democrats will lose. People aren't intelligent, and ideas don't ****ing matter.
A day will come when progressives can play games, that day is not today.
Click to expand...

this is based on the idiotic assumption that Hillary had great ideas and a great resume and it was only because she was female she lost. The fact is-she was a crappy secretary of state, she lied constantly, she has a 25+ year history of engaging in ruthless scorched earth power hungry machinations and she had an arrogant sense of entitlement that was the worst of any candidate I have ever seen in the last fifty years.
 
spud_meister said:
It would be great, but it's not likely. All things being equal, people have an innate preference for the familiar, and this extends to matters such as race, class, appearance and gender. And until people can overcome their unconcious bias, selection of people for power will never be based only on merit.
Click to expand...
I think you have a point, here.

When I first started out at a young age doing street-level ward politics in the big city, the old time precinct captains had the following criteria to determine if a candidate chosen by the politicos would be embraced by them and sold to the voters in the precincts:

1] Is he one of us?

2] Is he O.K.?

They were always the same two questions!
 
TurtleDude said:
this is based on the idiotic assumption that Hillary had great ideas and a great resume and it was only because she was female she lost. The fact is-she was a crappy secretary of state, she lied constantly, she has a 25+ year history of engaging in ruthless scorched earth power hungry machinations and she had an arrogant sense of entitlement that was the worst of any candidate I have ever seen in the last fifty years.
Click to expand...

Turn Hillary into Billary, and he wins. This transcends Hillary(who I completely agree is a loser), democraps need to play to win. Be real genuine progressives, yes, but also be a male WAMF.
 
AlbqOwl said:
Wouldn't it be great to stop looking at race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, skin color, age, etc. as qualifications for the people who will be put in power positions? I wonder what would happen if we actually put people with vision, skill sets, and motivation to fix what's broken and make the government work economically, efficiently, and effectively? And we wouldn't even notice what race, gender, color, etc. they are?
Click to expand...
Blame the DNC. They're the ones running identity politics. Hillary's message throughout the entire primary was "...because I'm a woman, it's my turn."
 
Hawkeye10 said:
There has long been chatter about the reason we dont see women doing well at the top of corporations and the art world has something to do with them being women. If we see the top crop of women in the world of politics consistently crapping out that would be something to take notice of. Then it would be time to get to the bottom of what is going on.

Said as if it was not time a long time ago.

It was.
Click to expand...

Elizabeth Warren would have won. Klobouchard would have won. Heck, Even Michelle Obama would have won. But you have to have the right woman just like you have to have the right man. That the DNC force fed the American populace perhaps the only person who would have lost to Trump is the fault of the DNC.
 
Fruityfact said:
No, i'm saying part of blow back on obama was cause he's black.
I'm saying one of the factors of Hillary losing was being a women.
It's not about being right, it's about ****ing winning so Donald J Trump doesn't happen, and so that socially backward ****ers don't get on the supreme court.
Click to expand...

Obama is leaving office with SKY HIGH approval ratings. There wasn't some "white-lash" blowback against Obama. Why are there all these excuses for the fact that Hillary was just a plain old flat out terrible candidate. Go on, you can say it, nothing bad will happen if you call her a bad candidate.
 
reinoe said:
Elizabeth Warren would have won. Klobouchard would have won. Heck, Even Michelle Obama would have won. But you have to have the right woman just like you have to have the right man. That the DNC force fed the American populace perhaps the only person who would have lost to Trump is the fault of the DNC.
Click to expand...

Which was a branch of Clinton Corp.
 
reinoe said:
Obama is leaving office with SKY HIGH approval ratings. There wasn't some "white-lash" blowback against Obama. Why are there all these excuses for the fact that Hillary was just a plain old flat out terrible candidate. Go on, you can say it, nothing bad will happen if you call her a bad candidate.
Click to expand...

Already called her a loser because she is. See that's the thing, Obama has sky high approval, yet at the same time you have republitards crying from the roof that he's the worst thing since...ever. The disconnect is directly linked to Obama derangement syndrome-- and guess what, its definitely racial in nature(birther for example).
 
reinoe said:
Elizabeth Warren would have won. Klobouchard would have won. Heck, Even Michelle Obama would have won. But you have to have the right woman just like you have to have the right man. That the DNC force fed the American populace perhaps the only person who would have lost to Trump is the fault of the DNC.
Click to expand...

Amy Klobuchar was a year behind me in College. What was funny is that unlike say Federalist society members Keisler, McIntosh (former Indiana Congressman and losing candidate for Governor) or Liberman (Spencer Abrahams chief of staff) or Steve Calabresi, and some other Political union activists (one guy ended up being the Mayor of Yonkers and was one of Cuomo's inner circle-Chuck Lesnick) Amy was never openly active in college politics though she was a member of the Yale college democrats. I was the Libertarian Party campaign chairman and I was often at forums with those supporting Carter and I don't recall her attendance at any of them. Neither was Mass. Governor candidate Shannon O'Brien (also a classmate) who lost to Romney. those two women are attractive, personable and bright and I think when they returned to their home states, their personalities and their intelligence (Shannon was/is well liked by her classmates and was captain of the soccer team-in four years I never heard a bad word about her), caused activists in the Democratic Party to groom them for political office. Shannon's husband was a active political operative.

both of these women wouldn't be seen as spending their entire lives running for president. Shannon-losing to a Mormon in Massachusetts though could haunt her
 
TurtleDude said:
I think one of the things that doomed Hillary's campaign was the fact that lots of Americans realized-after 8 years of proof-what happens when someone is elected because of what they are rather than their actual abilities. Lots of people voted for Obama over more experienced candidates-both in state and federal elections because he is black. and lots of people told us we should vote for Hillary because she would be the first female president.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And I hate that the historic first black President was not somebody who would go down in history as a truly great and accomplished public servant as well as head of state. And I want our first female President to be a truly great accomplished public servant and head of state too. THAT is how we break down the stereotypes and lingering racist beliefs. Not by putting a Barack Obama or a Hillary Clinton in that positioin because the person is black or female.
 
Velvet Elvis said:
Sorry. Democrats thrive on these things. Without racism, sexism, or any other "ism," they'd cease to exist.


Case in point.
Click to expand...

Democrats haven't always been that way though. And I have every hope that we will again see Truman and Kennedy Democrats instead of what we most often see these days.
 
spud_meister said:
It would be great, but it's not likely. All things being equal, people have an innate preference for the familiar, and this extends to matters such as race, class, appearance and gender. And until people can overcome their unconcious bias, selection of people for power will never be based only on merit.
Click to expand...

That is because the Democrats/leftists/statists/liberals/progressives keep throwing it constantly in our faces. You can't escape it. We are not allowed to be non-racist, color blind, or accept people as simply people not branded by their race or ethnicity or gender or sexual orientation, etc. I simply refuse to accept that it has to be that way. We have a President-elect who refuses to be politically correct and he got elected anyway. There is hope.
 
reinoe said:
Blame the DNC. They're the ones running identity politics. Hillary's message throughout the entire primary was "...because I'm a woman, it's my turn."
Click to expand...

As I just posted, the Democrats/statists/leftists/progressives/liberals by whatever name will not allow us to NOT be racist or sexist or just accept people as they are without some kind of racial, ethnic, sexual-orientation, gender etc. brand. It is their stock in trade to maintain control and power.

I want to break that syndrome though. And think we just might have a new day coming in America in which that will begin to happen. I hope. I hope.
 
Yes, women being guilty of stuff while in positions of power represents something new and exciting for gender equality. You clearly understand the concept.
 
Meanwhile the UK has its second woman Head of Government and no one much notices her sex. Except of course for some women hacks who do tend to on at tedious length about her clothes.

Oh - and in Britain the novelty of having a female Head of State wore off about 170 years ago.
 
Fruityfact said:
It's time for democraps to win. If that means giving up diversity, so be it. I want to see some old male WAMF's run for the dems just the like republitards have been running. This country has proven itself too ****ing backwards to handle anything else.
Click to expand...
What ARE you talking about?

DNC White Privilege 10.12.15.jpg
 
Fruityfact said:
Already called her a loser because she is. See that's the thing, Obama has sky high approval, yet at the same time you have republitards crying from the roof that he's the worst thing since...ever. The disconnect is directly linked to Obama derangement syndrome-- and guess what, its definitely racial in nature(birther for example).
Click to expand...

Except Obama doesn't have anything close to a sky high approval rating. He's at 65%. In grade school terms, that's still failing. Let us know when he reaches over 90% approval, that might be sky high.
 
AlbqOwl said:
As I just posted, the Democrats/statists/leftists/progressives/liberals by whatever name will not allow us to NOT be racist or sexist or just accept people as they are without some kind of racial, ethnic, sexual-orientation, gender etc. brand. It is their stock in trade to maintain control and power.

I want to break that syndrome though. And think we just might have a new day coming in America in which that will begin to happen. I hope. I hope.
Click to expand...

Oh yes. When I drive out to the country to get a good breakfast, it's those pesky democrats that are making those obvious conservative people out there to not serve us and to make snide comments about speaking English. I wish conservatives could stand up and act on their own accord! :roll:

Hint hint it's your own damn self. Color/sex blind my ass. Let me ask you if it's dark outside and you see a young man in a hoodie coning towards you, would you think the same if it's a young women in a sweater?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom