Pandering is bi-partisan.
Spill over.
Jezcoe: zantax: Jezcoe: zantax:You don’t end up with a legislature of only women of color by accident.
No… they run for office and are elected by a majority of the votes. They are there because they Represent the population of where they live.
How is that a “War on White Men’”
zantax:I mean, you can pretend democrats aren’t always disparaging “old white men” in power all you like but you are being willfully obtuse when you do.
Disparagement isn’t a war. Also… that is a weird thing to claim when the top two contenders for the Presidential nominee for the Democrats this time around came down to between two old white men.
So in this “War against White Men”… what specific policies… What laws are enacted that are targeted directly at “White Men”?
Even Trump got in on the act, see platinum plan.
A plan put forward by the Republican President is proof of a Democrat “War on White Men”
Okaaaaayy
Spill over.
From what Democrat policy? What are the Democrats doing that forces President Trump to engage on a “War on White Men”?
Affirmative action.
How does affirmative action hurt white men? Do you have any data on that.
Also given that AA benefits white women the most and white women typically marry white men… seems like they get the benefit of that too
What does it tell you?
If a minority or female is elected to a political position, does that automatically translate into white men being harmed?
WuWei:What does it tell you?
If a minority or female is elected to a political position, does that automatically translate into white men being harmed?
Yes.
…
Also given that AA benefits white women the most and white women typically marry white men… seems like they get the benefit of that too
Intersectionality shot fired!
Because a minority/female cannot adequately represent the needs of white men?
Yes.
…
Oh gosh
This assumes white men are entitled to all positions and thus a white man not getting the position is an attack
Because a minority/female cannot adequately represent the needs of white men?
Yes. At all.
Intersectionality shot fired!
Cool.
Do you have any data that shows AA adversely impacted white men?
Yes. At all.
So just to be clear - you were harmed by the nomination of Palin? By the seating of Justice Barrett?
WuWei:Yes.
…Oh gosh
This assumes white men are entitled to all positions and this a white man not getting the position is an attack
Not all. Proportionate to the share of the population.
Quotas.
WuWei:Yes. At all.
So just to be clear - you were harmed by the nomination of Palin? By the seating of Justice Barrett?
Yes.
…
WuWei:Yes.
…Oh gosh
This assumes white men are entitled to all positions and this a white man not getting the position is an attack
No, it assumes a color blind and gender blind electorate would elect a legislature that reflects the make up of the electorate. At least broadly. When you see a large segment with no representation something more than coincidence is going on.
WuWei:Intersectionality shot fired!
Cool.
Do you have any data that shows AA adversely impacted white men?
Yes…
How would you rectify that?
How would you rectify that?
Vote for people who will nominate people who represent me. Who look like me.
Not all. Proportionate to the share of the population.
Quotas.
Cool, so where is the data that shows that white men have been adversely impacted by AA?
How would you rectify that?
For starters by forcing the government not to even see race or gender. No asking people what race or gender they are let alone making laws or regulations or handing out money based on it.