Racism And Kamala Harris

[Emily Lake]

Diversity isn't a danger; the prioritization of diversity above competency and acument is a danger.

I believe that danger is intentionally overblown (not necessarily that it doesn’t exist). What makes you think it’s not?
What’s the worst case scenario?
Incompetent government officials?
More incompetent than Trump’s last crew of criminals?
IS THAT EVEN FUCKING POSSIBLE?

Dude, seriously?

It's the exact same danger that existed in the 50s. It's the danger that an incompetent person without the necessary decision making skills and business/political acumen will be chosen for a leadership position solely because they have the "right" skin color, and that by doing so a better candidate is discarded because they have the "wrong" skin color.

If you think the risk is overblown now... do you also think it was overblown when the focus was on trying to ensure that black people had equal consideration for leadership roles? Or were black people being denied jobs they were clearly capable of doing just being whiney babies about it?

 

[Emily Lake]

Diversity isn't a danger; the prioritization of diversity above competency and acument is a danger.

And yet, they attack people like Kamala Harris, whose credentials and record are both well known and above reproach, accusing them of only having been elected for their "vagina and skin color" even though that is obviously not the case.

Some people are idiots. Are you under the impression that I dispute that?

On the other hand... there are a great many people who do NOT think that her record is above reproach - including some within the democratic party. That you think her record is fantastic is fine - her views align with your own priorities. But that doesn't make it universally so.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And you don't understand that this is actually a matter of playing with the definition of "qualified".

Except you are taking the word "qualified" and trying to make it an idol. You need electricity work done on your home? Let's grab 100 random people and find out what they do for a living. Looks like 3 are electricians. Tough to choose. I mean, we've got 97 people that don't know how to do electrical work and 3 that do. How are we going to select from this group of 100? How do you pick one?

You are wanting us to believe that we are just randomly grabbing people off the street and tossing them into positions.

I am not saying that at all.

The reality is that instead of choosing 100 random people, we are selecting 10 random electrical contractors. And then choosing from their qualifications, reviews, etc... Of course, picking "the right one" isn't exactly black and white.

When you have 10 it probably doesn't make sense to apply hard filters anymore. But what if you had 10,000? (By the time you're looking at a VP or SCOTUS pick that's not an unreasonable number.) Do you compare them? Or do you filter the pool by some means?

DEI is by stopping filtering at the point where filtering more would exclude all of those with your desired attribute(s), then claiming everyone still left is equally qualified. And, realistically, VP picks normally are. They aren't being selected as the most qualified, but as the most qualified that appeals to certain segments.

 

[Politesse]

Diversity isn't a danger; the prioritization of diversity above competency and acument is a danger.

And yet, they attack people like Kamala Harris, whose credentials and record are both well known and above reproach, accusing them of only having been elected for their "vagina and skin color" even though that is obviously not the case.

Some people are idiots. Are you under the impression that I dispute that?

On the other hand... there are a great many people who do NOT think that her record is above reproach - including some within the democratic party. That you think her record is fantastic is fine - her views align with your own priorities. But that doesn't make it universally so.

I am not objecting to conversations about Harris' actual record or qualifications. Racist and sexist attacks on her identity as a woman are not relevant to the question of her record and qualifications.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

P2025 makes it clear that they want to impose it at the federal level

Project 2025 makes it clear that The Heritage Foundation wants to impose it at a federal level.

The Heritage Foundation has been wanting that for pretty much as long as it has existed, along with several other things that aren't widely supported by americans as a whole, or even by right-leaning people.

Look at how closely a lot of the GOP is tied to The Heritage Foundation. And how much overlap there is between what the political figures say and P2025.

 

[Patooka]

P2025 makes it clear that they want to impose it at the federal level

Project 2025 makes it clear that The Heritage Foundation wants to impose it at a federal level.

The Heritage Foundation has been wanting that for pretty much as long as it has existed, along with several other things that aren't widely supported by americans as a whole, or even by right-leaning people.

Look at how closely a lot of the GOP is tied to The Heritage Foundation. And how much overlap there is between what the political figures say and P2025.

I'd also point out the vast number of contributors to Project 2025 who literally worked in the Trump administration in key roles.

 

[Elixir]

Diversity isn't a danger; the prioritization of diversity above competency and acument is a danger.

I believe that danger is intentionally overblown (not necessarily that it doesn’t exist). What makes you think it’s not?
What’s the worst case scenario?
Incompetent government officials?
More incompetent than Trump’s last crew of criminals?
IS THAT EVEN FUCKING POSSIBLE?

Dude, seriously?

It's the exact same danger that existed in the 50s.

During that disastrous Eisenhower administration?
Guess I’m the ignorant one now. You’d have to give me a clue at least. Maybe Joe McCarthy’s risks? All I remember was the Soviet Threat.

It's the danger that an incompetent person without the necessary decision making skills and business/political acumen will be chosen for a leadership position solely because they have the "right" skin color, and that by doing so a better candidate is discarded because they have the "wrong" skin color.

Oh. Like what happened in 2016. Got it.
Yeah, that would be bad.

If you think the risk is overblown now... do you also think it was overblown when the focus was on trying to ensure that black people had equal consideration for leadership roles?

What was the risk then? That qualified minority people were being passed over because of their color? That was a reality, not a risk. Viewing it as a risk, it would have paled in the face of a real existential threat like the fascist takeover Trump is planning.
You can go all “GMAFB” about me saying that, just like our resident conservatives did in 2020 when I told them that Trump would never concede. I have yet to misread that self serving greedy dumbbell, and im not misreading him now.

 

[laughing dog]

And there's the difference. I don't think that Trump (or almost any other feasible republican candidate) is any more of an existential threat to our republic than Harris (or almost any other feasible democratic candidate). Both far-right conservatives and far-left progressives hold views that I think are material threats to liberty and our nation's stability; both of those cohorts have far more influence over the parties than I would like. And whether you want to admit it or not, both of those cohorts also hold views that I think are beneficial to the country.

Mr Trump helped organize and lead an insurrection which ought to suggest to any disinterested observer that he is a threat to democracy. His constant bluster and posturing about using the military to go after political rivals, protesters and alleged undocumented aliens is further evidence of his threat to democracy.
There is no one in the “far left” who can reasonably be expected to cone clise to becoming POTUS.

I find your observation not unconvincing but a denial of reality.

 

[Elixir]

Mr Trump helped organize and lead an insurrection

… but Harris is gonna do that too!!
In your fevered dreams, @Emily Lake.
Nor will she fill her cabinet with criminals or need to pardon all her friends to keep them out of jail.
Those should be telltales to anyone other than the blind.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

And there's the difference. I don't think that Trump (or almost any other feasible republican candidate) is any more of an existential threat to our republic than Harris (or almost any other feasible democratic candidate). Both far-right conservatives and far-left progressives hold views that I think are material threats to liberty and our nation's stability; both of those cohorts have far more influence over the parties than I would like. And whether you want to admit it or not, both of those cohorts also hold views that I think are beneficial to the country.

Mr Trump helped organize and lead an insurrection which ought to suggest to any disinterested observer that he is a threat to democracy. His constant bluster and posturing about using the military to go after political rivals, protesters and alleged undocumented aliens is further evidence of his threat to democracy.
There is no one in the “far left” who can reasonably be expected to cone clise to becoming POTUS.

I find your observation not unconvincing but a denial of reality.

I mean, yeah, he tried to overthrow the results of an election... once. Are you telling me the Democrat party in the last 100 years hasn't tried to overthrow the results of an election. Puhlease! When are you going to drop January 6th? Get over it!

 

[Toni]

Whose “implicit assumption” is Emily talking about?

Well, damned near everyone in this thread who seems to think that Harris is absolutely key to getting black votes, because she is black. It's all wrapped up in all of the assumptions that are being made - including by you - that race and sex are the single most important things that black and female voters care about. On the other hand... white dems and male dems are assumed to care about policy issues and to NOT care about race or sex.

You might see it differently, but I see it as insulting. The idea that I, as a female, only care about whether or not a candidate is the same sex as I am and that I don't care about other policy issues as my priority is offensive. And that's the implicit assumption being made by the entire approach. My dad is similarly irritated by the assumption that because Harris has brown skin, he will be more inclined to vote for her, simply because she shares a similar melanin content.

The underlying premise throughout is that 1) white males who lean right will vote for white people because they're all racist and only care about skin color; 2) black and brown males will vote for black or brown candidates because they only care about skin color; 3) females will vote for female candidates because they only care about sex; 4) white males who lean left care about policies and principles and will vote on that basis regardless of the color or sex of candidates.

All in all, it ends up painting white male left-leaning people as being multi-dimensional, well-rounded people with complex views not materially impacted by superficial tribalism... but that everyone else is a shallow, one-dimensional caricature who only cares about a single shallow aspect of their elected officials.

I don’t expect her to answer but if anyone can say, I’m all ears.

I have a life, I have a job, I'm not going to answer every single fucking post made by every single fucking person who feels like being a dick to me is a fun pastime.

I don't think Harris is absolutely key to black votes because she's black. I DO think the fact that she's black, and S. Asian, and female will help. What helps a great deal more is the FACT that she's served as VP for 4 years and has been an active VP. Sh.e has a tough on crime history as a prosecutor (which will hurt her with some lefties including my public defender son)

As a woman, gender/sex and color and religion are not determining factors for me. I could not abide Palin for example or Sarah Huckabee or a number of right wing women. I will not shy away from nor be ashamed of saying that I would very much like to see the right woman as POTUS.

Absolutely some people will vote for whichever candidate has an R or a D by their names, or vote against both or either. Some people will be deterred by color or gender; some will be drawn to color or gender or religion or region. It is known that most of the time candidates carry their home states. Not always. But it is often a boost.

In a more perfect world, we would care about none of that because everyone really would be equal under the law. We know that's not true. We won't get there until we see women and persons of color in high positions of power, including POTUS.

 

[Elixir]

When are you going to drop January 6th? Get over it!

Right?
One has to swallow considerable RW Kool Ade to fail to recognize either the unique nature of 1/6 in American history, or the fact that Trump will certainly try to do it again if he loses the election. He has said as much.
So, let’s weigh the risks.

Harris represents a risk, or so Emily implies, of becoming a President who is incompetent, having been selected for her “color”. One might even predict that she could lose in 2028 if she wins in November. That’s a real risk, if she’s as incompetent as RW pundits guarantee any and all DEI picks to be.

Trump represents the risk of converting the entire Country to a dictatorship

I think I’ll chance it with Harris the “black” DEI pick prosecutor.
YMMV; perhaps you prefer the felonious mobster and having your offspring grow up in a shithole dictatorship. That’s why we have elections. I only hope people know what/who they’re voting for, which anyone glossing over 1/6 obviously does not.

 

[Angry Floof]

https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.364M6FF

Disinformation about Harris's race, presidential eligibility recirculates after Biden withdraws

Immediately following President Joe Biden's decision to end his 2024 re-election bid and endorse Kamala Harris, a wave of disinformation targeted the vice president's race and eligibility for office. Born in the US state of California to immigrants from Jamaica and India, Harris meets the constitutional requirements for the presidency, contrary to the claims circulating online.

I thought she was born in Kenya.

She was, but Dems are covering it up!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I find the insinuation that there are only 3 randos who have racist thoughts to be disingenuous since finding a particularly small subset of 3 influencers is representative of many, many orders of magnitude more followers. Not to mention those followers' beliefs are at an extreme point along a continuum of racist ideology that increasingly becomes more common as the point moves slightly toward less extremism but still racist ideology.

Do you hold the same assumption when it comes to far left progressives who want to literally eliminate all police forces, and make the US a communist country? Or is your assumption of vast hordes of secret supporters only applied to people you see as right wing?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I read through Wikipedia's summary of Agenda 47. Whether you consider Wikipedia to be an unbiased source is your own opinion, I think it largely suffices.

Some of it is absurd and ridiculous, some of it is more extreme than I would like, but there's some that I think is worthwhile. Mostly focused around policies toward China. At some point I expect to see policy positions from Harris, so I can compare and contrast.

It doesn't spell out the details, but it's damning enough.

And think of what it really means.

Proposition of ending "Joe Biden's war on American energy" and recovering energy independence by eliminating "every unnecessary regulation in the federal registry that hampers domestic production," getting out of the Paris Agreement, and issuing fast approvals to every oil infrastructure project presented to his administration.

Have you not noticed that they consider basically any environmental or safety regulation to be unnecessary? This is basically promising to rubber stamp everything.

Proposition of not bailing out failing banks, but "unleash energy production, slash regulations," and repealing "Biden's tax hikes," to reduce inflation.

First, how are they even related?

Second, the first part is asking for a major bank run.

Slash regulations? I got a little peek into the situation locally when my wife's licensing board tried to respond to the governor's mandate on reducing regulations. Nobody found anything more than some stuff that could use a bit of polishing and we ended up with trivialities. (For example, it used to say continuing education had to be completed in the last 12 months, now it's the last calendar year. License renewals are done at the end of January, that's a pretty small change.)

Proposition to return jobs and wealth to the United States, launching an economic boom and eliminating dependence on China and other countries, by passing the "Trump Reciprocal Trade Act." If any country applies a certain percent tariff on American-made goods, the same tariff will be applied on theirs; the other countries "will have two choices—they’ll get rid of their tariffs on us, or they will pay us hundreds of billions of dollars, and the United States will make an absolute FORTUNE." This is meant to help the agricultural states and manufacturers.

And how much are there in the way of tariffs in either direction with our major trading partners???

Proposition to "bring Americans the lowest-cost energy and electricity on Earth," by developing American oil and natural gas, nuclear power, clean coal, hydroelectricity, "and every other form of affordable energy."

Note "clean coal". No such thing. And note that there's nothing in this about safety. Standard Republican approach--ignore the victims.

Creating a new way to certify teachers based on their patriotism,

Hey, first of all I want a teacher who can teach. Not one that's going to be indoctrinating people into MAGA.

school districts that abolish teacher tenure for grades K through 12 and adopt Merit Pay

In other words, inner city schools won't have any teachers. While there are bad teachers you're not going to find them with a merit pay system. That's a huge reward to those who have good students, a major burden to those who have poor students.

Proposition of "reclaim[ing] our once great educational institutions from the radical Left," by using the college accreditation system.

The system works fine already. Shitty colleges do not get accredited. What this really is is about basing accreditation on conformance to MAGA goals.

offering accelerated and low-cost degrees

Sounds very much like the garbage for-profit schools that churn out worthless degrees.

Great Principals and Great Teachers, i.e. empowering parents and local school boards to hire and fire principals and teachers.

In other words, fire any teacher that hands out poor grades.

Safe, Secure, and Drug-Free, by "immediate expulsion for any student who harms a teacher or another student."

In other words, keep the victims from fighting back against the bullies. They have to just take the abuse or they're going to be expelled. The bullies are skilled at not getting caught, the victims not so much.

Universal School Choice. This includes, "that parents can send their children to the public, private, or religious school that best suits" them.

In other words, big subsidies for private religious schools, while the public schools are left to wither. We've already seen what happens with "school choice". It's a huge handout to the upper middle/upper class.

Proposition of "dismantl[ing] the deep state and reclaim[ing] our democracy from Washington corruption," by firing government employees, reissuing Executive Order 13957 (Schedule F), "restoring the president’s authority to fire rogue bureaucrats."

Make everyone a political appointee and the whole system of balances fails. Doesn't matter how many kids you diddle if you're connected enough because you're a good person, the allegations must be false. Stop the witch hunt!

Proposition of stopping unnecessary government spending by restoring impoundment,

Making the President have an absolute veto over any spending which helps his enemies. Your state voted blue? All federal employees in your state are out of a job.

Proposition of keeping Medicare and Social Security intact, by cutting federal expenses, help to foreign countries, and eliminating "mass-releases of illegal aliens (...), left-wing gender programs from our military [and] climate extremism."

Another insane combination.

Proposition of addressing the rise in chronic illnesses and health problems, especially in children ("autism, auto-immune disorders, obesity, infertility, serious allergies, and respiratory challenges"), looking for their primary cause, by establishing "a special Presidential Commission of independent minds who are not bought and paid for by Big Pharma, and I will charge them with investigating what is causing the decades-long increase in chronic illnesses."

What is causing? Two big candidates come to mind:

1) Our healthcare system. People that previously would have died now live. If they would just go off and die they wouldn't have a chronic illness!

Trump suggested people with disabilities ‘should just die,’ nephew reveals in memoir

Fred Trump III writes that his uncle, Donald Trump, made the shocking suggestion during an Oval Office meeting in May 2020

www.independent.co.uk

2) The drug war.

And some of it is misunderstanding.
Yes, autism diagnoses have exploded--but they're a shift, not new. They were troubled before, it's just they were thought mentally deficient rather than mentally disconnected from the world.

Proposition to reducing drug costs, by signing an Executive Order telling "Big Pharma that we will only pay the best price they offer to foreign nations (...) this will force Big Pharma to RAISE prices on foreign countries and REDUCE prices very substantially for American Patients,"

Here's the stopped clock bit. He actually got one right.

Proposition of signing an executive order "making clear to federal agencies that under the correct interpretation of the law, going forward, the future children of illegal aliens will not receive automatic U.S. citizenship."

In other words, shit on the Constitution.

Proposition of holding a contest to charter up to 10 new cities ("Freedom Cities") in undeveloped federal lands.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_47#cite_note-:4-70">[68]</a> Revolutionizing transportation, by promoting the development of "vertical takeoff-and-landing vehicles."

I really do not want to see flying cars until we have full computer control of aircraft. What happens when your typical fender bender becomes fatal??

Proposition of "shatter[ing] the left-wing censorship regime," i.e. labeling information as misinformation or disinformation, in the media or social networks, about subjects like the 2020 elections, Covid, and the "Biden Family’s criminality."

In other words, publish only MAGA-approved stuff.

Proposition of building a state-of-the-art, next generation missile defense shield, similar to Israel's Iron Dome, as a deterrent of and protection from foreign missile attacks, in order to prevent World War Three.

This is simply bonkers. Iron Dome is quite good at what it's meant to do--short range terminal phase intercept of dumb ballistic inbounds. The defense zone of an Iron Dome launcher is quite small. You need a lot of them to cover any big city. And they don't have the ability to select the real target from the decoys. And if you're shooting at a nuke you have the huge problem of salvage fusing. It won't be at the optimum height but you'll still be looking at a mushroom cloud--and have no chance at all of shooting down the next warhead coming in behind.

I'm not listing all the evil by any means, just the stuff I could easily spot.

 

[ZiprHead]

They notice that one party picks Sarah fucking Palin to try to buy their vote

At the risk of digging up old material why do say Sarah Palin was only chosen by John McCain as a vote buyer/getter?

Female.

Last time I looked so were Harris and H Clinton. Yet you do not consider them as unqualified.
Of ourse I forgot. It seems to you that any woman the Republicans choose would be a) chosen because of their gender and/or b) unqualified

Where do you get that idea? I think there are many smart and capable Republican women. They tend to get marginalized by the MAGA Republican party nowadays.

You tend to paint with quite a broad brush. I suppose it's easier than thinking.

Here is Steve Schmidt, another member of McCain's campaign, on Palin:

The rise of online misinformation, shared on social media and designed to stoke fear and inflame divisions, gained major national attention in connection with the 2016 presidential election. Continued blurring of the line between fact and fiction has helped to define the political era that has followed.

But a new FRONTLINE documentary traces the use of online misinformation at high levels of the American political conversation back years further: to Sarah Palin, a former Alaska mayor and the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate.

“She is the first of a generation of politicians who live in a post-truth environment. She was, and there’s no polite way to say it, but a serial liar,” Steve Schmidt, who helped lead John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign and pushed him to choose Palin as his running mate, tells FRONTLINE in the documentary America’s Great Divide: From Obama to Trump.

“She would say things that are simply not true, or things that were picked up from the Internet,” the former GOP operative, who had also worked as a campaign adviser to President George W. Bush, continues. “And this obliteration of fact from fiction, of truth from lie, has become now endemic in American politics. But it started then.”

and the other one picks qualified woman after qualified woman after qualified woman for the spot.

You then say that the other one (presumably the Democrats) chooses only qualified women (presumably you mean Clinton & Harris).
Why was Palin unqualified in YHO? She was a state governor, mayor, city councillor, chair of the Alaskan Oil and Gas Conservation Commission after all. Why does that make her unqualified?

Even her own staff thought she was a moron. Two of them wrote a book about the experience that became a movie.

Game Change (film) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Found this K Harris and her people skills. I do hope she has improved for all of your sakes. (I no longer have a subscription to the WaPo)

Whataboutism.

 

[pood]

Whose “implicit assumption” is Emily talking about?

Well, damned near everyone in this thread who seems to think that Harris is absolutely key to getting black votes, because she is black. It's all wrapped up in all of the assumptions that are being made - including by you - that race and sex are the single most important things that black and female voters care about.

I don’t see anyone here assuming any such things, so the rest of your spew is moot.

 

[Elixir]

I don't think that Trump (or almost any other feasible republican candidate) is any more of an existential threat to our republic than Harris

Yeah that’s where we diverge all right.
You’re totally ignorant of/blind to Trump’s intent. I’ve been aware of his rotten corrupt, criminal character since the 1980s.
I wish there was one - JUST ONE - credible political pundit who doesn’t recognize the existential threat posed by giving Trump another shot at an insurrection. That might give me something to wish for.
How someone who NEEDS to become president to stay out of jail can possibly NOT be corrupted, is beyond me.
As is the fact that some Americans can see what he has already done, and still fail to recognize the threat that a fascist literally fighting to stay out of jail for the rest of his life, represents.

 

[ZiprHead]

Why was Palin unqualified in YHO? She was a state governor, mayor, city councillor, chair of the Alaskan Oil and Gas Conservation Commission after all. Why does that make her unqualified?

In her first major television interview she got stumped by the question “what magazines do you read?”

And instead of being honest about herself she said she reads them all.

It was like watching Trump get asked about the Bible and his favorite verses.

Yes interviews/debates can really trip people up.

I have also watched some of Harris' press conferences. Does not inspire much confidence

I highly doubt anyone not in the Trump camp would "inspire confidence" in you. You've clearly drunk the Flavor Ade.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

the Faux stuff tends to be so disconnected from reality that it's not of too much use.

True, and that makes it very weak sauce indeed. And my inability to ingest much of it makes it hard. But following some of their fantastic creations right down the rabbit holes from which they emerged can give insight, and is occasionally fascinating.

It's just with Faux that it can be so hard to figure out what the rabbit is to follow.