• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Bernie & Hillary Pander For Votes Via Racism

Ontologuy

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
6,583
Reaction score
1,866
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
This article illustrates the worst in American politics: pandering for votes via racism: https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-democrats-clinton-sanders-promise-latinos-cabinet-130827571.html.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders vowed to nominate Latinos into key cabinet posts in their administrations if elected, according to their answers to a questionnaire organized by the nation’s largest Latino coalition.

When we suffer so many economic problems that need to be addressed by those best able to address them, the two Democratic Party candidates, true to their liberal form, continue to attempt to get votes, not by presenting how they would correctly solve the economic problems that currently cause scores of millions of Americans to suffer, but by pandering with the social issue of race that is meaningless to solving those highest priority problems.

Their racist presentation is simply that, and, though it will seduce votes, it is done via an egregious ethical violation .. that most will be too seduced to recognize.

The link I presented in this OP (http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/246193-dont-let-politicians-fear-monger-us-into-economic-ruin.html) explains how politicians (and all of them are doing it, not just Bernie and Hillary) attempt to manipulate our votes via social issue rhetoric, to our detriment economically, and at our psychological-emotional expense.
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Leftists are THE racists..
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,990
Reaction score
51,926
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Racial is not the same thing as racist. Words seem to be confusing you today.
 

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
51,299
Reaction score
18,338
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
This article illustrates the worst in American politics: pandering for votes via racism: https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-democrats-clinton-sanders-promise-latinos-cabinet-130827571.html.



When we suffer so many economic problems that need to be addressed by those best able to address them, the two Democratic Party candidates, true to their liberal form, continue to attempt to get votes, not by presenting how they would correctly solve the economic problems that currently cause scores of millions of Americans to suffer, but by pandering with the social issue of race that is meaningless to solving those highest priority problems.

Their racist presentation is simply that, and, though it will seduce votes, it is done via an egregious ethical violation .. that most will be too seduced to recognize.

The link I presented in this OP (http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/246193-dont-let-politicians-fear-monger-us-into-economic-ruin.html) explains how politicians (and all of them are doing it, not just Bernie and Hillary) attempt to manipulate our votes via social issue rhetoric, to our detriment economically, and at our psychological-emotional expense.

LOL The real racial pandering is being done by Trump and in a hateful and dividing way too. Is that more to you taste?
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Racial is not the same thing as racist. Words seem to be confusing you today.

Cherry picking people because of their race is racist..

I know you libs like to slippery slime paths around your double standards but you are not fooling as many of us as you think you are..
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
LOL The real racial pandering is being done by Trump and in a hateful and dividing way too. Is that more to you taste?

I'm sure that is what you want everyone to think but it simply is not the case..
 

Ontologuy

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
6,583
Reaction score
1,866
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
LOL The real racial pandering is being done by Trump and in a hateful and dividing way too. Is that more to you taste?
When I said in the OP that "all of them are doing it", all would indeed include all.

Whoever does it, it is egregiously wrong.

It's just as bad no matter what it is if it's done by Trump or Hillary. It simply doesn't matter.

Today's article is about Bernie's and Hillary's egregious pander.

Yesterday's or tomorrow's could be about Trump .. or any politician's.

It will always be wrong.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,990
Reaction score
51,926
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Cherry picking people because of their race is racist..

I know you libs like to slippery slime paths around your double standards but you are not fooling as many of us as you think you are..

Actually it is not. It is racial. Racism requires a belief in the superiority or inferiority of a race.

See, this is how people argue when they cannot actually argue issues. Democrats say something. It must be bad. It involves race. So just call it racist and it is automatically bad, cuz racism is bad. Then you do not have to actually argue substantive things, like explaining why saying that among those hired some will be hispanic is somehow a bad thing. That is hard, just call it racist.
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Racism requires a belief in the superiority or inferiority of a race.

No.. It can be simply favoritism for any reason..
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,990
Reaction score
51,926
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
No.. It can be simply favoritism for any reason..

Saying they will be included is not favoritism. Nor is it racism.
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Saying they will be included is not favoritism. Nor is it racism.

"vowed to nominate Latinos into key cabinet posts "

That means they will specifically pick people BECAUSE they are latino.. Favoritism..
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,990
Reaction score
51,926
Location
Bradenton Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
"vowed to nominate Latinos into key cabinet posts "

That means they will specifically pick people BECAUSE they are latino.. Favoritism..

No, it simply means they will be included. Nor does it mean they will only be picked because they are latino.
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
You say that like it's a surprise. The left routinely uses racism and sexism to push their message.
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, it simply means they will be included. Nor does it mean they will only be picked because they are latino.

Then what was the reason for announcing it other than to pander to latinos?
 

Cephus

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 15, 2007
Messages
31,034
Reaction score
11,932
Location
CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
No, it simply means they will be included. Nor does it mean they will only be picked because they are latino.

They will be picked because they are latino, that is exactly what the quote said. People should be nominated solely because of their skills, not because of their skin color or gender or sexual orientation. Anyone using any of those criteria is a racist or a sexist.
 

Thrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
20,295
Reaction score
9,801
Location
Texas, Vegas, Colombia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
well, at least we can lay to rest the myth that the color of a persons skin doesn't or shouldn't' matter... it most obviously matters a great deal.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
This article illustrates the worst in American politics: pandering for votes via racism: https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-democrats-clinton-sanders-promise-latinos-cabinet-130827571.html.



When we suffer so many economic problems that need to be addressed by those best able to address them, the two Democratic Party candidates, true to their liberal form, continue to attempt to get votes, not by presenting how they would correctly solve the economic problems that currently cause scores of millions of Americans to suffer, but by pandering with the social issue of race that is meaningless to solving those highest priority problems.

Their racist presentation is simply that, and, though it will seduce votes, it is done via an egregious ethical violation .. that most will be too seduced to recognize.

The link I presented in this OP (http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/246193-dont-let-politicians-fear-monger-us-into-economic-ruin.html) explains how politicians (and all of them are doing it, not just Bernie and Hillary) attempt to manipulate our votes via social issue rhetoric, to our detriment economically, and at our psychological-emotional expense.

That's always the anti-Affirmative-Action argument: it's racist to include others based on their race or ethnicity. And that would be absolutely true - IF we were living in a world where all races and ethnicities had the same level of opportunity, and faced the same level of prejudice in their efforts to succeed.

But the various races and ethncities do NOT have the same level of opportunity, and they do NOT face the same level of prejudice - anyone who claims otherwise is either incredibly naive or has less-than-savory motives in making that claim.

And what happens when there's no efforts to bring in minorities to leadership positions? You get leaders who do not understand the minority community, who do not understand the challenges and pressures that they face that are quite different from what those in the white community normally face. This is how we wind up with majority-black schools getting significantly less funding than majority white schools, and blacks with similar (or even less) criminal records than whites being given longer prison sentences than whites for the same offense.

It boils down to this: in any given nation, the ethnicity or race that is socioeconomically dominant, if it wants to improve social order and diminish unrest and violence, MUST make allowances for increased opportunity for the members of less-influential races or ethnicities...for failure to do so will only result in deep resentment and hatred and will result not only in violence, but will create a drag on that nation's economy as a whole.
 

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
They will be picked because they are latino, that is exactly what the quote said. People should be nominated solely because of their skills, not because of their skin color or gender or sexual orientation. Anyone using any of those criteria is a racist or a sexist.

Are there no Latinos who are well-and-truly qualified for the positions?
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That's always the anti-Affirmative-Action argument: it's racist to include others based on their race or ethnicity. And that would be absolutely true - IF we were living in a world where all races and ethnicities had the same level of opportunity, and faced the same level of prejudice in their efforts to succeed.

But the various races and ethncities do NOT have the same level of opportunity, and they do NOT face the same level of prejudice - anyone who claims otherwise is either incredibly naive or has less-than-savory motives in making that claim.

And what happens when there's no efforts to bring in minorities to leadership positions? You get leaders who do not understand the minority community, who do not understand the challenges and pressures that they face that are quite different from what those in the white community normally face. This is how we wind up with majority-black schools getting significantly less funding than majority white schools, and blacks with similar (or even less) criminal records than whites being given longer prison sentences than whites for the same offense.

It boils down to this: in any given nation, the ethnicity or race that is socioeconomically dominant, if it wants to improve social order and diminish unrest and violence, MUST make allowances for increased opportunity for the members of less-influential races or ethnicities...for failure to do so will only result in deep resentment and hatred and will result not only in violence, but will create a drag on that nation's economy as a whole.

I wrecked this position not too long ago... Lemme see if I can't find it...
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That's always the anti-Affirmative-Action argument: it's racist to include others based on their race or ethnicity. And that would be absolutely true - IF we were living in a world where all races and ethnicities had the same level of opportunity, and faced the same level of prejudice in their efforts to succeed.

But the various races and ethncities do NOT have the same level of opportunity, and they do NOT face the same level of prejudice - anyone who claims otherwise is either incredibly naive or has less-than-savory motives in making that claim.

And what happens when there's no efforts to bring in minorities to leadership positions? You get leaders who do not understand the minority community, who do not understand the challenges and pressures that they face that are quite different from what those in the white community normally face. This is how we wind up with majority-black schools getting significantly less funding than majority white schools, and blacks with similar (or even less) criminal records than whites being given longer prison sentences than whites for the same offense.

It boils down to this: in any given nation, the ethnicity or race that is socioeconomically dominant, if it wants to improve social order and diminish unrest and violence, MUST make allowances for increased opportunity for the members of less-influential races or ethnicities...for failure to do so will only result in deep resentment and hatred and will result not only in violence, but will create a drag on that nation's economy as a whole.

Holy crap it was even you!!!!

Riiiiiiiiight. Which is why when blacks and whites have very similar rap sheets, and when they are arrested and convicted of the same crime, blacks are NORMALLY given longer or more severe sentences.
That could have everything to do with which jurisdiction the people are sentenced in. Likely blakcs are more often sentenced in jurisdictions where the judge sees a LOT of the same crime committed over and over predominately by blacks and the judged therefore become more strict due to their experiences in the area.

White crime is likely more spread out over many/all jurisdictions where judges are not infuriated by the amount of crime in the area and therefore may be more lenient..


And that's why schools in black neighborhoods are chronically underfunded per student when compared to schools in white neighborhoods. Whites have better access to health care and better access to quality K-12 education than blacks. This is not seriously debatable.

Well... Blacks tend to congregate in certain areas, self segregating, and these ares tend to be very poor, high poverty, high unemployment. It makes a lot of sense to me that poor areas are going to have poorer schools and poorer healthcare..

BLAME IT ON THE WHITE MAN..
Nope.. Black areas are poorer because there are more blacks there and blacks are in general poorer because they have lower IQs on average and therefore lower incomes on average..

Just because backs tend to not be able to be as successful as whites is not the white mans fault. It is genetic effect on IQ.. FACTS!!


And that's why studies show that yeah, white privilege is quite real.

But don't feel bad for claiming that there's no such thing as white privilege - you're not the only one that feels that way...and there's a scientific study showing precisely why you deny white privilege in spite of the overwhelming evidence of how pervasive it is in our society.

I don't have a care in the world what colleges bent of brainwashing the youth of the nation to there liberal agendas think or what "studies" they put forth to push their agenda..


NO SUCH THING AS WHITE PRIVILEGE
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
MUST make allowances for increased opportunity for the members of less-influential races or ethnicities...

It boils down to... There is a reason that some races are generally less-influential than others, and it is stupid to do so artificially.. All it is is pandering..
 

Orly?

Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2016
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
862
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Are there no Latinos who are well-and-truly qualified for the positions?

Yes but are they the MOST qualified? Or are we going to pick them because they are qualified enough and also latino?

Pick the MOST qualified, if that happens to be a latino great.. If not, oh well..
 

Gaugingcatenate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,331
Reaction score
1,939
Location
Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in t
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You get leaders who do not understand the minority community, who do not understand the challenges and pressures that they face that are quite different from what those in the white community normally face.
Just what is the seemingly monolithic "white community" you so freely speak of? White people represent the dominant population on our welfare rolls all the way up to some of the richest people on the planet. Same with the other races, welfare all the way up to the Oprahs, Michael Jordan's, the Obamas... My kids will never have the advantages of those of the higher level economic stations.

What is truly necessary is to banish liberal ideas from education, make education solid and sound again without all the warm fuzzies, students getting ahead based on merit and hard work... Keep it free up until, say, 9th grade, all basic and necessary learning has been done by that grade, reading, writing and arithmetic...then have students compete for academic and trade school positions proving they actually want it, are willing to work and achieve it.

Then from there on out all positions are determined by those hiring. Smart companies/businesses will want the top people, no matter skin color, a diverse staff that brings them access to more markets/more moola.

Truly free enterprise.


It boils down to this: in any given nation, the ethnicity or race that is socioeconomically dominant, if it wants to improve social order and diminish unrest and violence, MUST make allowances for increased opportunity for the members of less-influential races or ethnicities...for failure to do so will only result in deep resentment and hatred and will result not only in violence, but will create a drag on that nation's economy as a whole.
We have done so, we have a black guy at the very pinnacle, we could very well choose a Cuban immigrant's son...or a our first female, or our first billionaire, but not based on that, based on if they is the best person for the job. That is how it should be from here on out... we are hurting too bad to do otherwise.
 

Gaugingcatenate

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
12,331
Reaction score
1,939
Location
Formerly of the Southern USA, now permanently in t
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
No, it simply means they will be included. Nor does it mean they will only be picked because they are latino.
"vowed to nominate Latinos into key cabinet posts"

That most assuredly is favoritism. What's more, its a promise, its not the same thing as simply including Latino names on potential lists... this is a vow to nominate them to key cabinet posts... unequivocally. Is not the same thing as simple inclusion.

Words seem to be confusing you today.
 
Top Bottom