The Race For 2024

[Derec]

I believe you are conflating the two when you call it a “double standard”. It must mean something different to you I guess because I don’t use that term when two different groups use two different standards. To me, it means when the same group uses two different standards; I.e., a form of hypocrisy.

That's how I use it too.

That’s not necessarily true. For example, men don’t “sleep their way to the top”,

I am sure some men do. But I'll not challenge for the purposes of this discussion that it is more common in women.
Also, nobody here is claiming she slept her way to the top. But given her sexual relationship with Willie Brown (quid) and her putting her on state boards (quo), it is very likely that there was "quid pro quo" here.

so using a pejorative like “heels up Harris” to imply she would not have achieved her success without sleeping with a man is actually sexist. Calling her “dopey” is not, despite being lame.

Just because something is more common in women does not mean that suggesting a particular woman is guilty of it is "sexist".
More men than women are rapists, but that does not mean jokes about Trump raping somebody are sexist against men.

 

[pood]

I believe you are conflating the two when you call it a “double standard”. It must mean something different to you I guess because I don’t use that term when two different groups use two different standards. To me, it means when the same group uses two different standards; I.e., a form of hypocrisy.

That's how I use it too.

That’s not necessarily true. For example, men don’t “sleep their way to the top”,

I am sure some men do. But I'll stipulate that it is more common in women.

Even if that were true, and evidence is wanting, could you imagine a reason why that might be? Just, you know, think about it.

 

[starwater]

I have been a professional for 40 years working for several different companies, large and small. I have NEVER once seen a woman "sleep her way to the top".

I believe you are conflating the two when you call it a “double standard”. It must mean something different to you I guess because I don’t use that term when two different groups use two different standards. To me, it means when the same group uses two different standards; I.e., a form of hypocrisy.

That's how I use it too.

That’s not necessarily true. For example, men don’t “sleep their way to the top”,

I am sure some men do. But I'll stipulate that it is more common in women.
Also, nobody here is claiming she slept her way to the top. But given her sexual relationship with Willie Brown (quid) and her putting her on state boards (quo), it is very likely that there was "quid pro quo" here.

so using a pejorative like “heels up Harris” to imply she would not have achieved her success without sleeping with a man is actually sexist. Calling her “dopey” is not, despite being lame.

Just because something is more common in women does not mean that suggesting a particular woman is guilty of it is "sexist".
More men than women are rapists, but that does not mean jokes about Trump raping somebody are sexist against men.

Please provide proof.

 

[Derec]

So she is like Dr. Hibbert? This is what people are talking about?

I never made that connection before, but I think you're on to something:

Does that make Trump Dr. Nick?

 

[Derec]

But this is the whole problem with her approach to her campaign. She’s making policy proposals. Who gives a shit?

She started now, but it took her a while to even put an "Issues" tab on her website. For a long time, she and Walz cruised on "memes and vibes". I guess they had the "who gives a shit" attitude too.

They’ll always be shot down. All this does is make her a target for critics who will dissect her plans ad nauseam. She needs to simply keep attacking Trump.

That by itself will likely not do it in swing states.

Now, you are of course right that when you settle for an actual position on an issue, you will have people agreeing with you and some who will disagree and challenge you on it. Which is why she was trying to keep it vague for as long as possible. But you can only retort with variations of "Orange Man bad, mkay" to questions about taxes or economy or foreign policy.

 

[Derec]

Even if that were true, and evidence is wanting, could you imagine a reason why that might be? Just, you know, think about it.

If I had to guess: male bosses are more susceptible to this kind of thing than female bosses.


For example, Willie Brown is more likely to put some 29 year old woman on boards in exchange for sex than say Diane Feinstein would have been at the same age with some 29 year old man.

 

[Derec]

Please provide proof.

I edited my post to clarify that I was not making a positive claim but just agreeing with Politesse for the purposes of discussion.

 

[ZiprHead]

Such a weird flex to make fun of someone who laughs and shows joy.

I think it's because her laugh sounds weird and also that she has a penchant for laughing at her own jokes.

No, it doesn't. And if you think emulating Seinfeld is a bad thing I imagine your tastes run more towards Andrew Dice Clay.

 

[ZiprHead]

IMO, focusing criticism of a person because their laugh because it “sound weird” goes way beyond petty. It is a desperate attempt to find fault.

That is not focus of my criticism of her. I have elucidated substantive criticism of her and her positions before. This is specifically about the double standard of how nicknames for politicians are treated on here. I.e. nicknames for Republicans, no matter how nasty, are ok, but anything unflattering about Kamala Harris is deemed "sexist' and "racist".

This board does not speak with a single voice. I am not convinced that it necessarily the same folks who are using nicknames against republicans who are calling out the racist, sexist attacks against Harris. You’re setting up a strawman.

This.

Is calling him mango musillini based on his sex in anyway?

 

[Shadowy Man]

IMO, focusing criticism of a person because their laugh because it “sound weird” goes way beyond petty. It is a desperate attempt to find fault.

That is not focus of my criticism of her. I have elucidated substantive criticism of her and her positions before. This is specifically about the double standard of how nicknames for politicians are treated on here. I.e. nicknames for Republicans, no matter how nasty, are ok, but anything unflattering about Kamala Harris is deemed "sexist' and "racist".

This board does not speak with a single voice. I am not convinced that it necessarily the same folks who are using nicknames against republicans who are calling out the racist, sexist attacks against Harris. You’re setting up a strawman.

This.

Is calling him mango musillini based on his sex in anyway?

It certainly is more witty and accurate than calling Biden “Brandon”.

We may as well call Trump “Trent” or something to be on par with the lame nickname that “Brandon” is.

 

[ZiprHead]

Also, nobody here is claiming she slept her way to the top. But given her sexual relationship with Willie Brown (quid) and her putting her on state boards (quo), it is very likely that there was "quid pro quo" here.

The vast majority of people on those boards got there because of friendly connections. Kamala wasn't special in this in any way.

I suppose you also object to LinkedIn and other such sites.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Also, nobody here is claiming she slept her way to the top. But given her sexual relationship with Willie Brown (quid) and her putting her on state boards (quo), it is very likely that there was "quid pro quo" here.

The vast majority of people on those boards got there because of friendly connections. Kamala wasn't special in this in any way.

I suppose you also object to LinkedIn and other such sites.

If people are using those sites to trade sex for appointments (what he is alleging happened for Harris) then presumably he would object to them.

 

[jonatha]

Nobody else is annoyed by the sound of Cheato’s incessant croaking complaints?

I’d rather listen to the worst laugh in the universe than hear that malevolent crybaby’s toddler threats.

FTFY

(I thought W was bad, but...)

 

[Elixir]

I think Derec is channeling the apricot with his “you guys are so mean” whining.
I am thankful that I don’t have to hear it like I have to hear the apricot.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I think Derec is channeling the apricot with his “you guys are so mean” whining.
I am thankful that I don’t have to hear it like I have to hear the apricot.

He is upset at the blatant hypocrisy of people calling a person who name calls all the time... names, while having reservations over some of the name calling by conservatives against a guy and gal that doesn't call anyone names.

I mean referring to Trump based on his daily face painting is just as bad as remarking a woman is where she is because she fucked her way to the top.

I think their obsession with sex makes it harder for them to actually understand the difference.

 

[Elixir]

I mean referring to Trump based on his daily face painting is just as bad as remarking a woman is where she is because she fucked her way to the top.

Hey - she’s at the top now and has apparently stopped fucking her way there. Whereas the daily face painting persists, to the chagrin or amusement of millions.

It’s one thing to wring your hands about how someone got where the are, but quite another when the ridiculous behavior or appearance is in your face every day.

 

[southernhybrid]

She's a witch. She's a witch. Seriously. Some religious extremist asshole is going to campaign with Vance and claim that Harris is a witch because she has emasculated the orange menace. She good witch or bad witch? I'm going with good witch if she can take that evil demon down.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/vance-pre-debate-prep-platforming-173334235.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

You can't make this shit up!

 

[Politesse]

I wish!

 

[Elixir]

Harris is a witch because she has emasculated the orange menace.

While I don’t quite get the causal relationship being asserted there, it’s hard to argue with the fact of what she did.

 

[ZiprHead]

I just heard this morning that the Saudis will be increasing oil production, giving up their goal of $100 per bbl oil price. No reason why given.

It should be interesting to see what happens next.