• 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!

CNN thinks race and sex are qualifications for governor

Race and sex carry perspective which is legitimately a qualification.
 
tres borrachos said:
I don't think you read your own link.
Click to expand...

I should have been more specific. The bias comes in when CNN is showcasing a particular race/sex combination as being a good thing. This infers that other race/sex combinations are not a good thing, and even goes to far as to be openly hostile towards them:

"that streak of losses racked up by those middle-aged, white male... "

They also appear to be biased against those of middle age, inferring that the candidates youth, along with her race and sex, make her more qualified.
 

CNN wrote an article on a candidate. Nowhere in the article did they say "Her race and sex qualify her for the governor's job". Nowhere. They also mentioned the fact she's 6 feet tall. How come you didn't say "CNN thinks height is a qualification for governor"?
 
tres borrachos said:
CNN wrote an article on a candidate. Nowhere in the article did they say "Her race and sex qualify her for the governor's job". Nowhere.
Click to expand...

It certainly noted it with distinction, as what she considers her own chief assets:

 
ecofarm said:
Race and sex carry perspective which is legitimately a qualification.
Click to expand...

They carry their own possible biased perspective... like any individual. So it isn't a qualification.
 

When they mention 6ft, it is a descriptive term mentioned once and nowhere in the article do they contrast that with shorter candidates. Here are a list of other descriptive terms and how many times they occur:

Indian/native: 6
woman/women: 16
youth/young/youngest: 3

For contrast to the above genetic identifiers, the terms white, male and middle-aged are used in the article in the context of mentioning a "streak of losses".

If the article mentioned her height 25 times, and had a statement that those of a different stature had a streak of losses, then I would say CNN is building up the 6ft candidate as a winning alternative to the shorter candidates.
 

The article never once, anywhere, said that her sex and her race qualify her for the governor role - does it? if it does, point it out. Copy the part where they said that.
 
Harshaw said:
It certainly noted it with distinction, as what she considers her own chief assets:
Click to expand...

Well, hey, if she is actually a Native American then she is at least a stark difference from Elizabeth Warren!
 
celticwar17 said:
They carry their own possible biased perspective... like any individual. So it isn't a qualification.
Click to expand...

All perspectives are biased (more accurately, limited), that's what makes them perspectives. Perspectives are what make up democracy. The more perspectives the better.
 
jmotivator said:
Well, hey, if she is actually a Native American then she is at least a stark difference from Elizabeth Warren!
Click to expand...

I see no reason to think she's not.
 
Thread: CNN thinks race and sex are qualifications for governor

Rickaroo thinks explaining sex and race define qualifications that go against middle aged white men.
 
ecofarm said:
Race and sex carry perspective which is legitimately a qualification.
Click to expand...

So there's value in electing white males over black females because of the unique perspective that white males have that black females lack. See how stupid that sounds....
 
Nap said:
What happened to race and sex being social constructs?
Click to expand...

Perspectives on the constructs, if you prefer.
 
ecofarm said:
All perspectives are biased (more accurately, limited), that's what makes them perspectives. Perspectives are what make up democracy. The more perspectives the better.
Click to expand...

No, as an individual you try to transcend your bias.... and you look for people who transcend their biases.
 
jmotivator said:
Well, hey, if she is actually a Native American then she is at least a stark difference from Elizabeth Warren!
Click to expand...

Ouch. Low blow, kind sir.

If she wins, I cannot wait for Mrs. Warren to issue warm congratulations in welcoming her as a sister Native American into the Halls of Government.
 

Do you know anything about politics? Talking about specific subgroups of people isn't racist.
 
Harshaw said:
It certainly noted it with distinction, as what she considers her own chief assets:
Click to expand...
Yes, what she considers assets. CNN is just quoting the candidates statements, not making any assertions of their own. Do you think they should refuse to report about her because she says something you disagree with?
 
tres borrachos said:
The article never once, anywhere, said that her sex and her race qualify her for the governor role - does it? if it does, point it out. Copy the part where they said that.
Click to expand...

Admittedly, they do come short of coming out and saying that Idaho should vote for this candidate. However there are somewhat glowing remarks in the article, either directly or in republished tweets:

" entertainment icon Cher tweeted her all-caps admiration"

" Idaho needs a sensible Dem instead of clueless GOP governors"

"The PPL Of IDAHO Would Be WELL SERVED With Paulette Jordan As Their Governor"

"The two-woman ticket, in and of itself, is history-making in the state."
 
HonestJoe said:
Yes, what she considers assets. CNN is just quoting the candidates statements, not making any assertions of their own.
Click to expand...

Yes, she, that's what I said. And then they followed it up with their own sympathetic assessment, not just what she believes.

Do you think they should refuse to report about her because she says something you disagree with?
Click to expand...

First, I never said I disagreed with it.

Second, I never said anything even slightly like this even if I did disagree with it.
 
Harshaw said:
Yes, she, that's what I said. And then they followed it up with their own sympathetic assessment, not just what she believes.
Click to expand...
I think you’re viewing this the wrong way around. I don’t think the article was especially sympathetic, it was just neutral, as such reporting should be. The problem isn’t here, it’s with the majority of other articles (including CNNs) which are much more rabidly pro or anti politicians they’re reporting about.
 
HonestJoe said:
I think you’re viewing this the wrong way around. I don’t think the article was especially sympathetic, it was just neutral, as such reporting should be.
Click to expand...

It is not at all written in neutral language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…