• 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!

Gillibrand says she's worried about top options in Dem 2020 poll being white men

trixare4kids

Trix has reentered the building.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
68,167
Reaction score
63,039
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Gillibrand says she's worried about top options in Dem 2020 poll being white men

What's wrong with "three top white guys" atop the presidential list????
Gillibrand's response to Van Jones, perhaps unintentional, appears as sexist and racist as Jone's question... When will some ever learn to get over themselves and realize that skin color and gender have nothing to do with the overall picture? If people even notice gender or sex instead of concentrating only on their political belief when voting, I really have to wonder about them.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said during a televised interview on Friday night that she was worried about a lack of diversity among top potential 2020 Democratic presidential candidates.

Gillibrand was asked by CNN’s Van Jones about a poll from the network released this week that found that the top three candidates for the Democratic nomination were white men.

The poll showed former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) as the top three potential 2020 Democratic candidates.

"In a party as diverse as ours, does it worry you to see the top three being white guys?" Jones asked Gillibrand, herself a potential presidential candidate, in front of the live audience.

"Yes," Gillibrand responded.

“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 continued, when asked to elaborate.
"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."
 
Nothing if you are a typical white misogynistic male...the rest of do see a problem.

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk
 
I see no issue with it, and those that do take issue with it are the reason we have DJT as BLOTUS.
 
“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 continued, when asked to elaborate.
"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."

How...... dare she? Or...?

What exactly is it that we're supposed to be outraged about?
 
Nothing if you are a typical white misogynistic male...the rest of do see a problem.

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk

So you admit race and sex is a requirement for you before casting your presidential vote?

Charming...:doh
 
Gillibrand says she's worried about top options in Dem 2020 poll being white men

What's wrong with "three top white guys" atop the presidential list????
Gillibrand's response to Van Jones, perhaps unintentional, appears as sexist and racist as Jone's question... When will some ever learn to get over themselves and realize that skin color and gender have nothing to do with the overall picture? If people even notice gender or sex instead of concentrating only on their political belief when voting, I really have to wonder about them.

"...a more inclusive America is a stronger America" ???????

except if you are male and white.
I have heard this old song being played before.
...and they wonder why were are always so angry?

It is because everyone under the sun thinks it is OK to attack white males.
 
So you admit race and sex is a requirement for you before casting your presidential vote?

Charming...:doh

You have to remember that PeteEU is a Euroweenie and everything BUT qualification is part and parcel to the narrative. Having said that, Trump actually fulfilled the Founders' vision of "Citizen Servant" which means no career politicians.
 
Oh well, that's different. :lol:

Yep, there is an extreme shortage of qualified women in Denmark. Although, I must note that Denmark once had a female prime minister and the US has not yet had a female POTUS.
 
Yep, there is an extreme shortage of qualified women in Denmark. Although, I must note that Denmark once had a female prime minister and the US has not yet had a female POTUS.

We'd have one too if we had the right woman running for the office.
I look forward to that day.
 
"...a more inclusive America is a stronger America" ???????

except if you are male and white.
I have heard this old song being played before.
...and they wonder why were are always so angry?

It is because everyone under the sun thinks it is OK to attack white males.

You know why the Democrats do not qualify their candidates based on their merit? Because they are too damn busy stereotyping and quantifying based on race and gender to build their voting blocs and keep them in power.
 
You know why the Democrats do not qualify their candidates based on their merit? Because they are too damn busy stereotyping and quantifying based on race and gender to build their voting blocs and keep them in power.

that's why Kamala Harris is popular with some-the Dems can pander to several different ethnic-interest groups with her
 

Yes and no. We have a female head of state... We have had a female Prime Minister. We have had many female heads of parties over the years .. oh and our current "speaker of the house".. is female.. a racist bitch but still a female. Also almost 40% of our parliamentarians are female.. we can do better!.. the US.. under 20% last I looked.

Point is, she does have a point. The Dems should do better in picking non old white males like the GOP.. but both parties need to be more inclusive. Ever look at the new congressmen/women pictures of the 2 parties... it clearly shows the problem in the GOP but shows promise for the Dems... but as with my own country... it can be better.
 
So you admit race and sex is a requirement for you before casting your presidential vote?

Charming...:doh

No to me race or sex does not matter. However it does matter to A LOT of people even in my own country.... but especially in certain parts of the US. Dont even try to deny this.
 
You know why the Democrats do not qualify their candidates based on their merit? Because they are too damn busy stereotyping and quantifying based on race and gender to build their voting blocs and keep them in power.

We could say the GOP qualifies based on race and gender - just look at a photo of the GOP in Congress. Virtually all white and nearly all male.

And I don't think it's fair to say that the Democrats 'quantify' based on race and gender - plenty of white men are Democrats in office - it's just that Democrats see a value in diversity, recognize that it's possible women, or minorities, bring a different perspective and that is in and of itself a good thing.

Here's a good example - this is the GOP panel in 2017 discussing healthcare, including things like maternity care, contraception, abortion. Notice what's missing?

_95295430_pence_976.jpg

It might be that an all white, all male panel will properly consider the needs of women and the poor and minorities, but don't you think it might be good to have a representative in the room who is a woman while discussing subjects most important to...you know....women? If not, OK, but surely you understand why others might have a different view. Think about why you might not like it if 100% of the GOP were minority women from big cities, if you are a white farmer in the country. Maybe they have a different perspective on what the big problems are in this country than you do.
 
that's why Kamala Harris is popular with some-the Dems can pander to several different ethnic-interest groups with her

Yes, also why Trump is popular with the GOP - he's a rich, white, Christian male and he panders to the only ethnic group that matters in the GOP, which is rich white people.

That stereotype works both ways.... :roll:
 
Yes, also why Trump is popular with the GOP - he's a rich, white, Christian male and he panders to the only ethnic group that matters in the GOP, which is rich white people.

That stereotype works both ways.... :roll:


I don't recall seeing those voting for Trump saying any of those things are why they would vote for them
 
I don't recall seeing those voting for Trump saying any of those things are why they would vote for them

They don't have to - just look at who the GOP vote for - in Congress about 99% or so whites, 90% of them white males. Here's your GOP, discussing healthcare. Looks like being white and male is a near prerequisite for actual power in the GOP to me!! :roll:

_95295430_pence_976.jpg
 
I don't recall seeing those voting for Trump saying any of those things are why they would vote for them

Here's the newly elected GOP Congressmen. I can't quite figure out what they all have in common..... Oh wait, 1 of 31 is a white WOMAN!! Affirmative action for white males? :roll:

repubs.png
 
You know why the Democrats do not qualify their candidates based on their merit? Because they are too damn busy stereotyping and quantifying based on race and gender to build their voting blocs and keep them in power.

Merit has been replaced with the misguided notion of "intersectionality". MLK's words about the content of character, ring hollow, it would appear.
 
Merit has been replaced with the misguided notion of "intersectionality". MLK's words about the content of character, ring hollow, it would appear.

Hmmm....

So, if you live in the country, do you not believe that a Congress made up entirely of inner city minorities might have a different perspective on life and the pressing problems in the country than you do? Seems reasonable to me they would because they simply HAVE a different perspective - they can't really know our perspective, because they've lived something entirely different. And my guess is if someone more like you, someone at least from the rural areas who understood the people, that you'd, all else equal, far prefer them to another inner city person.

That's rational IMO. What I don't understand is why you find it irrational or illegitimate for others to value 'diversity' for its own sake as well. It's not better or worse, because those are subjective, just different.
 
Gillibrand says she's worried about top options in Dem 2020 poll being white men

What's wrong with "three top white guys" atop the presidential list????
Gillibrand's response to Van Jones, perhaps unintentional, appears as sexist and racist as Jone's question... When will some ever learn to get over themselves and realize that skin color and gender have nothing to do with the overall picture? If people even notice gender or sex instead of concentrating only on their political belief when voting, I really have to wonder about them.


I'd love to see a woman president. That doesn't mean I'll vote for a woman just because she's a woman.
 
Back
Top Bottom