• 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!

Joe Biden please make a choice soon... your campaign has made a game out of it = lets get on with it

trixare4kids said:
Just thinking out loud.
What if he decided to bump Pence and choose Condoleezza Rice? What would our liberal friends say then?
Click to expand...

:lamo We know exactly what they would say!

Roseann :)
 
Chomsky said:
This thread is literally bathed in political naivete' ...
Click to expand...

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis


Sinclair Lewis was quite perceptive .......
 
Last edited:
CharisRose said:
Biden never should have announced his V.P. would be a particular gender and a particular skin color.

He should have announced his V.P. pick after he decided who would be his V.P.

Presenting only the qualifications of the person as his reason for choosing that particular person to be his Vice President.

Make no mention that she is a woman of color since people will figure that out for themselves when she is introduced.

That would enhance her image of Vice President as being chosen for her qualifications alone.

Thus eliminate the political usage of gender and color of skin as being the most important reason for her being chosen and qualifications came in second.

That procedure would have been based on Respect for his chosen Vice President.

imho Roseann:)
Click to expand...


Really good points, friend.
 
Yakshi said:
I agree that he should make the pick soon. It's a complete non-issue.
Click to expand...
Veep announcements are usually made the week before the convention, to establish a PR wave into the convention and leaving it, hopefully to be maintained through the election. The convention acts as a sort of debutante ball for the Veep.

So yeah, this is the week (to announce). I'm betting by Wednesday or Thursday.

(convention starts Monday)
 
There is very little question Biden will nominate a black woman. He's said as much. As far as reasons, besides the current political issues, Biden knows black voters gave him the nomination, and a Lannister always pays his debt.
 
Chomsky said:
(convention starts Monday)
Click to expand...

I'd rather the Dems were going second. This election is about trump and opposing him, and Dems would be better being able to answer everything from the Republicans, instead of giving them fodder for their convention and not having one for responding. It's why Prosecutors get to go last, because they have the higher burden and it helps.
 
Craig234 said:
I'd rather the Dems were going second. This election is about trump and opposing him, and Dems would be better being able to answer everything from the Republicans, instead of giving them fodder for their convention and not having one for responding. It's why Prosecutors get to go last, because they have the higher burden and it helps.
Click to expand...
Yep, agreed!
 
Craig234 said:
I'd rather the Dems were going second. This election is about trump and opposing him, and Dems would be better being able to answer everything from the Republicans, instead of giving them fodder for their convention and not having one for responding. It's why Prosecutors get to go last, because they have the higher burden and it helps.
Click to expand...
Wait. Prosecutors go last? Not that I'm aware.
 
Chomsky said:
Wait. Prosecutors go last? Not that I'm aware.
Click to expand...

Yes. In the opening statements, it's considered best to go first, and prosecutors do that; at the end of the trial, going last in closing statements is considered best, and they get to do that.
 
Craig234 said:
Yes. In the opening statements, it's considered best to go first, and prosecutors do that; at the end of the trial, going last in closing statements is considered best, and they get to do that.
Click to expand...
This is different than the cases I've seen. It's always been my understanding that the prosecution presents their case first. It's their charge. They have to lay it out. How can the defendant defend, if they haven't seen the charges or evidence?
 
Last edited:
Kamala Harris is a smart choice based on her credentials ..........
 
Chomsky said:
This is different than the cases I've seen. It's always been my understanding that the prosecution presents their case first. It's their charge. They have to lay it out. How can the defendant defend, if they haven't seen the charges or evidence?
Click to expand...

As I said, they get the benefit of both in the opening statement going first, and in the closing statement of going last. That's what I was referring to - in the trial, the last side the jury hears from is the prosecution.
 
Fletch said:
No, selecting a person for a position based not upon her qualifications but upon the color of her skin is racist.
Click to expand...
Regarding your response here to Razoo's post when he said that a Caucasian women would have been a better Biden VP pick ..

.. I'm not sure if you were just being sarcastic here, so please forgive me if I misunderstood, but ..

.. Well, you could be correct in your response.

If no other qualification was considered, then yes, I could see where some might suspect it could be a racist decision.

Here's a quick Googled Dictionary definition of "racist":
a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.
Click to expand...

I bolded three words in the definition that I think are pivotal in determining whether a statement/decision is racist.

Back in the early 1970s Norman Lear needed a woman to play George Jefferson's wife, Louise Jefferson, in "All In The Family" and eventually in "The Jeffersons". To fit the comedic design for the entire show, they determined she had to be Black. So imagine if no other qualifications, acting ability, years in the business, talent, etc. were involved in the decision to select Isabel Sanford, and it was only about skin color, would that have made it a "racist" decision?

I say no, that wouldn't have been a racist decision. The circumstances of the situation called for a Black woman, and none of those circumstances involved Lear "feeling" discrimination or prejudice "against" people of other races or believing that the Black race was "superior" to another. The comedic design of the entire show determined the parameters for the search, that she had to be Black; the circumstances of the situation required a Black woman and nothing in those circumstances of the situation involved racism.

Likewise, Razoo's presentation does not appear to have any racism in it. He's simply analyzing the circumstances of the situation and saying that a Caucasian woman would be best and for the reasons given, with, of course, adding in other qualifications for the chosen candidate so that the sum total of all these qualifications would equal the chosen candidate.

I'm just say, that with all the BLM "cancel culture" witch hunt nonsense our there these days conjuring up truly false examples of supposed racism that's getting good people mob rioted out of their job and career, that we all need to be a little slow and deliberate to ascertain for sure whether something is racist.

This isn't to say that we should kowtow to ridiculous demands for racial quotas on work teams and employee payrolls, ridiculous demands that are based on errors of judgement about population percentages locally and at large and in the culture or are simply about circumstances of historic hiring coincidences, in which case, obviously, there's simply no racism period.

But recently there's just been a lot of absurd "racism" and "racist" being slung around by the BLM "cancel" culture, and though I know your political lean would mean you're not a part of that, I'm just concerned that we might want to be a little slow in using the "racist" term in assessing a situation.

Again, if you were simply being sarcastic, forget I even said anything here. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom