Avenatti- "When you have a white male making the arguments, they carry more weight"

[Roland99]

Link to tweet

Buried in the Time article
http://time.com/5434317/michael-avenatti/

A run for President would thrust Avenatti into the middle of the party’s identity crisis. The Democrats have not been this powerless since the 1920s, and their members have responded by nominating a historic number of women and people of color for office. But when it comes to the party’s presidential nominee in 2020, Avenatti thinks in different terms. “I think it better be a white male,” he says. He hastens to add that he wishes it weren’t so, but it’s undeniable that people listen to white men more than they do others; it’s why he’s been successful representing Daniels and immigrant mothers, he says. “When you have a white male making the arguments, they carry more weight,” he says. “Should they carry more weight? Absolutely not. But do they? Yes.”

Oooof

Obama was a TWO-TERM President. Hillary was the Dem nominee and a damn fine senator and SoS

[cwydro]

1. Oh, ok.

[Yuorik57]

2. ?

I think President Obama managed to carry quite a bit of weight when he made his arguments. Martin Luther King's words also carry more weight than perhaps any figure in American history.

Avenatti on the other hand gave us the least credible accuser of Kavanaugh and in my opinion helped get him nominated. I sure hope this idiot goes back to the obscurity he so richly deserves. Sadly loudmouthed ignoramuses tend to be good at finding a microphone.

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

126. +1

Yo mike. We got this. Take off. You aren't helping.

[JHan]

3. lol.

[genxlib]

4. Like all bad arguments, there is a grain of truth

There are people out there who will only listen to a white man.

Those people are assholes and won't vote for a Democrat anyway.

Ergo, that is not a reason to fall into that trap.

I am open to all genders, colors etc. May the best candidate win.

[Demwolv]

6. This.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

17. Not true. Those assholes do vote for democrats

There are a lot of independents, people that are not solidly a dem or repub.

[Demwolv]

5. I mean...

He’s not wrong. Sadly. I think he said this because he feels we need all the fire power we’ve got to take down Trump....

Which brings me to say that I think he’s wrong thinking that a white male will be the one to bring down Trump when elections have proven that minorities are more excited to vote for a fellow minority. I don’t think a white male energizes the Dems the way he thinks.

[CrispyQ]

34. "I don't think a white male energizes the Dems the way he thinks."

I agree. It energizes the independents & moderate repubs who are disgusted with Trump. Do we want them in our party? I don't. Do we want their vote? Not if it means that we lose our appeal to the HUGE number of non-voters who couldn't be bothered to vote. This is the group we need to appeal to & go after with zeal. Not the wafflers who will go right back to being a repub if the party ever regains its sanity.



Also, we have plenty of white male candidates who are already vetted blue dems. We don't need Avanetti.

[EffieBlack]

72. Thank you

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Specifically, him?

That would be a No.

[Corvo Bianco]

8. He always irritated me. It was inevitable I'd hate him.

God grant wisdom to white men. For my sanity.

[inwiththenew]

9. I guess it's on us white men to save the day again

[JHan]

10. I can't even..

Link to tweet

[Wintryjade]

49. Besides being loud, I fail to see what if anything, he has accomplished.

[mr_lebowski]

53. Isn't it sort-of inevitable that a 'Left Trump' would be a caricature?

Given that Trump is a walking, talking caricature himself?

Just sayin' ...

[oberliner]

11. Sickening

[LanternWaste]

14. Enjoy the chum.

And when there's none available, you make some again...

[Kingofalldems]

15. Interesting--another OP popped up after this one.

[oberliner]

19. I would imagine there would be several after people see that Time Magazine piece

What are your thoughts on his remarks?

[Kingofalldems]

24. Your OP is a duplicate of this one.

If I find I posted the same thing as another DUer I delete it if the other poster was first.

[NurseJackie]

35. You strike me as someone who's well-mannered, courteous and polite...

... and I'll just leave it at that.

[oberliner]

18. I don't know what that means

[NurseJackie]

32. I do.

[oberliner]

33. Can you explain?

[NurseJackie]

36. Yes I can.

[oberliner]

44. OK - thanks

You can send a PM if that is better.

[demmiblue]

12. In terms he can understand: #Basta

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

13. I agree. We need a white male to run against Trump

because that will nullify his racist and sexist arguments. He's got nothing but racism and sexism. If he can't use that, he is toast. I also think we should go better than that. Make it a young, good looking white guy who is optimistic.... Trump's got nothing. We could get so many people just with the looks thing. I know it sounds shallow, but Democrats need to be realistic about where most Americans are at in their heads right now. What's the psychology that motivates them to vote certain ways? The race for presidency seems to be a masculinity contest for a lot of people, so we have to play that game to win. Trump is an old, out of shape dude, so it wouldn't be hard if we pick the right person.

It might be good to pick a woman for vp role though. Get people warmed up to women being in charge more. Still, it shouldn't be anyone that right has been vilifying for a long time. That was a problem we had with Hillary too. Too many years of bullshit being said about the Clintons. That was hard to work against.

I loved Hillary too. I'm a woman and I think woman make excellent leaders, but Democrats need to get back in control of this government and we should not take any risks in this next presidential election. Get a Democrat in there that can win and then start moving this country in the right direction.

[SWBTATTReg]

16. ZZZ, I agree w/ your remarks. Best candidates will be selected via the upcoming primary ...

season for the 2020 election cycle, and depending upon what happens in the transition period between 2018 after the midterm elections and the 2020 election cycle, many people will be put forth as being one to be the one to run for president. May the best candidate that suits all of us win. Our votes throughout this process will determine our future candidate who will wipe the earth clean of the filth of the rump era.

[oberliner]

20. Seriously?

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

26. Seriously

It's a matter of winning or not winning. I think we have far too much to lose here. Now is not the time to be idealistic.

[onenote]

25. If you think that argument will inspire women and minorities, you are sadly mistaken.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

27. Women and minorities will vote for a white guy who has their back.

Like they have for so many years before. Anyone can be inspirational if they speak about the issues that matter to you. Plus, there are lots of people already motivated just to vote against Trump (lots of women and minorities in this group). We still need to get some of those Trump voters though. We need to give them something that they'll be willing to vote for as opposed to Trump.

[kcr]

40. They certainly will

And Avenatti just showed he isn't that guy.

[kcr]

38. Running another white male in no way nulllifies his remarks.

First of all, only running white males further entrenches white male supremacy, which helps Trump. Second of all, it won't stop him from being a racist and a sexist because he still has the Dem base, who you're spitting on by insisting one of them can't be a candidate, as his targets. It's vile and reprehensible, and shame on Michael Avenatti. He's disqualified himself from consideration as a candidate.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

74. It won't stop Trump from being Trump

but he can't use racism or sexism against our candidate then.

[kcr]

108. How do you figure?

He won't magically stop being Trump, with all the racism and sexism that entails, just because we nominated another white male, because it's the racism and sexism that appeals to his base. The identity of the candidate won't matter one bit. Sexists and racists can get pretty damn creative, and Trump is good at it.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

45. "We need a white male to run against Trump bc that will nullify his racist and sexist argument."

"Nullifying his argument" does not necessarily lead to victory.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

75. It makes it easier to win

That's the idea. Do we want to win this time or not? I don't like that people in this country are racists and sexists, but they are.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

84. Except whenever there's a "this time" there's never a "next time." It's always "this time."

[EffieBlack]

86. Bingo!

And funny how it's always white people deciding for everyone else when the time is right.

They have no idea the mindset of white superiority they're revealing.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

89. Ha, I should have read further in the thread!

Telling people we all have to wait for the "right time" to do better is the epitome of white privilege and superiority.

[onenote]

92. Why? Do you think we're going to put up a candidate who hasn't had the backs of minorities and women

So what if he's a white male. The same racist, misogynistic folks who wouldn't vote for a minority or female candidate aren't going to vote for a white candidate who is sympathetic towards women and minorities.

[EffieBlack]

102. Yes, they do

Shhhh. No more if that PC talk after all, we can't engage in "identity politics" if we want white people to vote Democratic,party can?

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

117. No, that's not true

Think Bill Clinton.

[EffieBlack]

73. Just this once, let's default to a white guy so we can win.

And then, let's default to a white guy so we can Keep what we won.

And then let's default to a white guy so we can win again.

And then let's default to a white guy so we can keep winning.

And then let's default to the white guy because we don't want to lose this good thing we got.

Meanwhile, everyone else can just wait their turn until we get to a point where we can win without defaulting to the white guy ... which, of course will never happen if we keep assuming we've got to default to the white guy in order to win

See how that works?

It works great - at least for the white guys.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

76. Yeah, because this time is a bit more dire.

Doesn't mean that's the way we have to keep doing things.

[EffieBlack]

79. But that's ALWAYS the excuse.

We can't let you in the room this time because the stakes are too high, so leave it to the white men to handle, but next time we'll let you in - unless we decide then that the stakes are still too high to trust you to be in the room with us.

Not only is this bullshit, it's breathtakingly insulting and condescending and represents the very essence of what makes institutional racism effective.

[wryter2000]

83. Thank you

I'm amazed to see this crap here. I guess I shouldn't be.

[sheshe2]

104. Yet it is the way it is always done.

Next Time

Maybe Later

Next Time

Maybe Later

Next Time

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

115. OK, but have we ever had such a terrible president? Do you want to risk him getting re-elected? n/t

[sheshe2]

120. The election was stolen.

Hillary won the popular vote. A woman isn't the 'risk'.

[mcar]

88. +1000!

[peggysue2]

94. LOL!!

Really, it's time for Avenatti to go home if this is the sort of advice he's spouting. Which is, of course, the same advice that's been spouted throughout our history.

Same old, same old.

[smirkymonkey]

91. I am agreeing with you reluctantly. He has a point. It is a very charged atmosphere out

there and Trump is going to come out swinging against minorities and women. He is going stir up as much resentment and hatred as he can against them. It is what he does best. However, if he is confronted with a younger, media-savvy, quick-witted, white male, he is not going to have as much ammunition. It's that simple.

I don't like it at all, but I think if we are all honest with ourselves we have to admit there is a grain of truth in what he says. It's not impossible that a woman or a minority can win in this country, but going up against Trump is a different thing entirely. I wish it were not so, but I really think he has a good point.

[demmiblue]

21. Lol... and the Twitterverse is responding:

Link to tweet

[oberliner]

23. Lauren Duca is awesome

A great progressive woman who has no patience for white male BS.

[MineralMan]

22. Nah. He's making a mistake with that comment.

Frankly, I don't like him as a candidate anyhow. I'd much prefer a woman in the presidency at this point. Haven't we had enough men already? I think so.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

28. We already tried running a woman against Trump. n/t

[WhiskeyGrinder]

48. And more people voted for her.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

116. Sure, and she still isn't president because of the rural areas.

We aren't going to be able to change the system in 2 years. We need to work with in the system to get ahead right now. We could do the same thing again. Get more votes, but still not win. That doesn't put us in a better position as a country.

[EffieBlack]

124. The last three white GOP candidates lost to either a black man or a white woman

And white men have lost every presidential election in history, But, by all means, let's insist that only white men can win elections and should be the only people given a chance to run.

[Wintryjade]

50. HRC received at least 3 million more votes and they had to throw everything including the kitchen

sink at her to keep her at just 3 million more through suppression, Russia, Comey, and other.

[EffieBlack]

95. Men have lost every presidential election in history

Trump beat 17 men in 2016.

But no one has suggested that men should stand down and not run because men have list previous races.

The last two times a black man ran against a white man, the black man won. But no one is saying that we shouldn't run a white candidate because he might not be as strong a candidate as a black man.

So, why do you think women shouldn't run because a woman lost in 2016?

[kcr]

29. He can forget it now.

What an ass.

[dlk]

30. Unfortunately, Avenatti is Right

We still have far to go toward equality.

[Caliman73]

70. And so women and people of color should just step back and shut up?

He isn't right. He may be accurate in understanding that endemic racism and sexism still exist in the US, but he is completely wrong to say that in order to overcome it, the Democrats need to appease the racists and sexists that exist within the electorate, but within our own party as well.

You don't get equality by trying to make the oppressive party comfortable just like you don't get peace by giving an aggressor nation the land that they want in hopes they will stop.

[EffieBlack]

80. Exactly¡

But it sure is a convenient way for white folks to stay in charge while claiming to be oh so not racist ...

[Caliman73]

96. Unfortunately it fits in with some of the critique of liberal thought.

When leaders of women's rights or racial equality groups say that sometimes "White liberal allies" can be frustrating, this is what they are talking about. Expedience means that you "girls and darkies need to just hush up while us White Folk fix this" and they wonder why Michael Harriot writes about "wypipo" THIS, THIS is why.

[EffieBlack]

97. Yup

[Blue Owl]

31. I think Michelle Obama would wipe the floor with tRump's rancid ass

if she decided to run...

[tymorial]

131. I would love that.

Having the first female president be a black woman, too amazing for words to accurately describe

[jimmimac43]

37. Sadly he isn't far off

As a black man in Maryland I can tell you that history told me that Ben Jealous was not a good choice for Maryland statewide office. Maryland for whatever your opinion of it is has a history of not electing minorities to statewide office. I have no idea how Barbara Mikulski pulled it off.

Kathleen Kennedy, lost. Republicans loved Ehrlich and by extension Michael Steele. Popular governor term limited out with a black man running to succeed him. Shoe in, black Democrats will crossover. Didn't happen. Black Democrats didn't switch over and I suspect that Washington County, Garrett County, Allegheny County not to mention the eastern shore soft democrats came back home after a white man wasn't running against a woman. Donald Brown lost and Ben isn't looking too good.

I told anyone that would listen that it wasn't gonna happen for Jealous. It wouldn't have happened for Rushern Baker either. We cannot just chalk it up to uninspiring campaigns. Larry Hogan does not inspire! Do I like it? Nope! However I cannot act like it isn't the truth.

There are soft democrats in Maryland and across the country. It doesn't mean that we accept a dull white guy over a dynamic minority. All things being equal, a dynamic white guy or a dynamic minority, yeah, in 2020, I will take the white guy and run up the score. With a great white guy, the house and senate we can work on the things that ail us. With the crazy party in the White House and controlling the house and senate we aren't gonna fix a damn thing.

[Oneironaut]

39. Sorry, but Avenatti is a sleezeball.

My opinion of him has never changed - while Avenatti’s trolling of Trump is amusing, Avenatti is a morally bankrupt sleezebag who probably has a closet full of skeletons. He’s a lot like Trump in many ways.

[tman]

41. Fully agree.

Fighting Trump with Trump is foolish thinking and isn't going to work.

[brush]

42. Not a smart thing to say.

He'll have to stay useful as an abrasive antidote to combat repugs but he probably just eliminated himself as a candidate for 2020.

There's a kernel of truth to what he said, considering how white, male privilege works in out society but the Democratic Party has the potential to prevail against that as it has put forth formidable candidates who have proven repug white male privilege can be overcome with the right candidate. Hell, Hillary just did but the election was stolen from her by comey, repug cheating and traitors working with Putin.

And let's not forget Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States.

As for me, an AA male, I'd like to see a woman president. It's time.

Let me amend that—a Democratic woman president.

[oberliner]

52. Congrats on your 20,000th post!

Also - the fact that Obama beat both McCain and Romney and that Hillary got millions more votes than Trump speaks volumes.

[dlk]

43. Love Them or Hate Them, Successful Trial Lawyers Understand Human Behavior

[SaschaHM]

46. May this be the nail in his 2020 coffin.

We really don't need the primary debates turning into a circus. I appreciate Avenatti for what he's done on the Daniel's front, but he hasn't handled the whole "potential candidate" buzz well at all.

[brush]

54. He just eliminated himself from 2020 consideration.

That wasn't a smart thing to say even though white male privilege is a thing in our society.

For someone who has come off as a pretty intelligent guy, that was dumb.

He can still be useful as a pitbull against trump and the repugs though.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

47. Anyone who think this man should be a Democratic politician is mistaken.

[MadDAsHell]

51. Racist, sexist pig. nt

[bitterross]

55. Why is everyone so pissed he said the truth? STOP shooting the messenger.

Seriously. Read the statement. He says he wished it didn't make a difference. He didn't say it was right, proper, preferred, correct. He didn't say it was universal.

He simply said what we know to be true if we stop to think about it. How else do you explain the way the South block votes for anything with an "R" by it's name? How else do you explain why all those intelligent, white women voted for Trump?

Like it or not, he is correct. Don't shoot the messenger.

[oberliner]

56. Have you ever heard of Barack Obama?

[bitterross]

62. Why, yes, I have. He's called an anomaly.

If you haven't noticed by now, Obama seems to have been the anomaly and exception to the rule. We Democrats were lulled into a sense that this nation had actually progressed on things like race and gender.

Did you miss the election of 2016 and the ensuing months since then. It is very clear we were wrong. This nation has not only not progressed, but it has regressed.

[oberliner]

67. He defeated John McCain and then Mitt Romney (two white males)

Hillary Clinton, a woman, got millions more votes than the white man she just ran against.

[bitterross]

112. All perfectly valid facts. But they do not change current reality.

You have very valid and good facts. They do not alter what I believe is current reality though.

[EffieBlack]

113. He's only an "anomaly" if you think his victory did not represent progress but was instead just a

weird coincidence not likely to occur again - which doesn't really speak well of your historical knowledge or understanding of what it means to be the first minority or woman to break through a barrier. Being first does not make one an "anomaly" - it means they are forcing change even though some people insist they are just the "exception to the rule.""

[NeverTrumpDemocrat]

61. Except this particular messenger IS a white male running for President!

That's why it's a bone-headed gaffe.

[bitterross]

64. So only non-white, females can make that statement?

Sounds like you're being racist and sexist to me. You're discrediting his statement of truth because he fits the category.

Besides, I don't really think he's seriously considering running.

[NeverTrumpDemocrat]

66. No -- white male analysts, pundits, op-ed writers,

commenters on websites, like you and me (also a white male) CAN say it.

You're a white male running for president? You have others make that case for you. Bone-headed.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

118. I agree with you too.

I don't want it to be this way, but it is.

[JonLP24]

57. This definitely crosses a line

[NeverTrumpDemocrat]

58. Since HE'S a white male running for President, that was a STUPID thing for him to say --

although I think there is truth to it. It's something you'd expect an analyst or pundit to say, and in dispassionate terms, it makes some sense.

Avenatti's an energetic attorney and a great self-promoter. Self-promoters gonna self-promote though, even when it will backfire. He should never get anywhere near to being the nominee. No more publicity hounds for president!

[demmiblue]

59. He is trying to walk it back:

Link to tweet

Judging from the responses, women aren't having it.

[mcar]

60. Buh bye!

Done with this guy.

[cwydro]

85. Yup. nt

[grantcart]

87. wasn't a long ride but it had its moments.

[JCMach1]

63. Trying to make a statement about WM privilege, but fails

So no, not disgusting... However, does show he isn't ready for prime time.

[meow2u3]

65. His words actually reflect the sexist, racist reality we're living in

Many people won't vote for a woman or a POC while Terrorist Trump is still in power. It's sad that white men's words carry more weight that those of a woman or a POC, but many people would vote for Satan if he were a white guy running against the most sainted woman.

That's the misogynistic, bigoted reality. Unfortunate if you ask me.

On a side note, I think Avenatti would make a spendid attack dog for Democratic presidential candidates, especially given his talent for getting under Trump's skin and goading him and repukes to irrational behavior unbecoming of statesfolk. He ought to team up with Democratic ad makers to provide effective ads that will make rethugs squeal like stuck pigs.

[Caliman73]

68. So basically, women and people of color, you had your one chance...

now you should just sit back and wait util we're ready for you to speak again.

I even understand the underlying psychology of the statement but it is just wrong on every level. Avenatti is basically saying that White people should be appeased of their racial and sexual bigotry until some point in the nebulous future, White people fix the problem of racism and sexism and then LET women and people of color participate at the highest levels of leadership and service in the country.

That is twisted logic.

[HopeAgain]

69. And we see pervasiveness of white privilege

Michael just planted his privilege flag.

[EffieBlack]

71. Here's the problem with that argument (beside it being stupid)

That's ALWAYS the excuse for supposedly well-meaning white people to perpetuate the racist status quo.

"I'M not racist, but some of my friends are, so I'd better not invite Malik to my party."

"I'M not racist, but some of my customers are, so I'd better not hire a black employee because I could lose business."

"I'M not racist, but some of my neighbors are, so I better not sell my house to that black family."

And now we have "I'M not racist, but some voters are so we better not run a candidate who isn't white."

See how that works? The very fact that the fundamental concern is about catering to the sensibilities of white racists - and not on finding ways to educate them and, if that doesn't work, to marginalize, minimize, and overcome them - tells you all you need to know about that mindset.

In short, it's pure racist-enabling bullshit.

[Caliman73]

100. Correct. Statements like that really force us to ask the questions...

Exactly what is the percentage of racists and sexists in the electorate (including the Democratic Party) that would preclude another woman or person of color from running as our Democratic candidate?

Does gender and skin color REALLY get in the way of an intelligently delivered message?

If so, then how would pushing women and people of color back into the shadows ever really alleviate that problem?

[EffieBlack]

101. Excellent questions!

[cilla4progress]

77. Unfortunate.

This might be one of those times when it's OK to think it, but not say it....

I take his point. I think it's called white male privilege. Mansplaining. But he's losing me, with this.

[dameatball]

78. I always liked Avenatti because he was a thorn in Trump's side. But that statement was dumb.

I hope he sticks with what he does best. Represent his clients and speaks his mind. Probably very little future in politics unless he gets some kind of appointment on down the line.

[violetpastille]

81. He's just a dude. One guy.

Last edited Thu Oct 25, 2018, 04:57 PM - Edit history (1)

He's not our savior and he's not our undoing.

but as he would say, he is certainly enjoying the free rent in our collective heads.

[wryter2000]

82. Okay, ladies

Back in the kitchen where you belong

[JenniferJuniper]

90. Not really what he is saying

This country is sickeningly sexist and racist. And we can't lose 2020.

[wryter2000]

99. So, tell me

When can a non-white or a woman run for office? The next century? The next millennium?

Should it only apply to the presidency, or should women and POC forget about the Senate, too?

Maybe liberal columnists should only be white males because their opinions will carry more weight.

Just how much are you willing to give up to placate sexists and racists, who aren't likely to vote for Dems, anyway?

[EffieBlack]

103. Not much longer. We just need to win THIS one, then we'll be allowed to be in the room

Of course, it's ALWAYS "just this one time."

Sickening to see Democrats buy into and repeat this racist crap, isn't it?

[wryter2000]

109. It is sickening

And I think some people here need to listen to what they're saying.

[Wintryjade]

114. Of course, it's ALWAYS "just this one time."

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

119. Well, then you must be ok with 4 more years of Trump.

You act like there isn't much to lose. Right now is different than it has been.

[EffieBlack]

121. Don't even think of trying that bullshit argument on me.

You really should be embarrassed to even suggest that only a white man can beat Donald Trump. You have fallen for the most fundamental myth that perpetuates and endorses white male supremacy - that we must cater to racists and marginalize women and minorities ("just until we get past THIS rough spot&quot in order to build up the strength we need to eventually overcome racism and sexism.

And if you truly believe that ONLY a white man can "save" us and that we have too "much to lose" to trust a woman or person of color with our future, you need to either educate yourself and/or do some serious rethinking of your principles.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

122. I'm not embarrassed at all. I'm being realistic about our fellow Americans.

I want a Dem to win so we can turn this around and make the future better for everyone rather than continuing to go further in this bad direction that Trump is taking us. I haven't fallen for any myth. I am not racist or sexist. I have wanted a woman president my whole life, but I'm just being realistic. The climate is not right. Sure, maybe they could win, but the point is to run someone who has the best chances of winning.

[EffieBlack]

123. You may not be racist or sexist, but you enable racism and sexism - and your attitude is just as

dangerous.

"I'm not racist BUT ... I'm not going to hire this woman because my customers might not like it, I'll lose business and I won't ever be able to hire any women in the future if I don't have a business."

"I'm not antisemitic, BUT ... I'm not going to sell my house to this Jewish family because my neighbors won't like it and they might not be comfortable here.""

"I'm not racist, BUT ... some of my friends are, so I'd better not invite my black friends to my dinner party because they won't be accepted."

If you study discrimination and civil rights, you'll learn that there are two kinds of discrimination - intentional discrimination and disparate impact. Both are just as dangerous and wrong, but the latter is often perpetrated by supposedly well-meaning people who hide behind the "I'm not racist BUT" arguments while engaging in acts that result in blatant discrimination just as insidious as the "I just don't like women and nIg*rs" variety.

And your "the climate's not right" argument is bullshit - the climate is NEVER right until someone disrupts it. And you don't disrupt it by going along with it until the climate is better. Attitudes like yours does nothing to improve anything - it only ensures that it stays just the same.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

132. Whatever, you are being ridiculous.

I'm talking about strategy to win. We cannot win too. Sure. It just would be nice to not have an irresponsible, despicable person as president. If you want to risk running a woman again against Trump, just be prepared for the heart break again. I don't think it is going to turn out well. We haven't been making progress in the last 4 years. We have been going backwards.

[Catherine Vincent]

93. Hmmm...

[Solly Mack]

98. That simply isn't true in my house.

In a sexist and racist society that comment holds a lot of truth, however.

Sort of like the missing white woman/girl gets the headline while the missing and murdered black woman/girl might make page 10.

I'll never forget "Girl X".

Most will have to look her up now.

But people know the name JonBenet Ramsey who was dominating all the headlines at the time.

Not saying one was more tragic than the other - am saying the white girl got the headlines because her family was white and wealthy.

It was a reflection of what society values. White over black. Wealth over poverty.

A sexist society values men over women.

A racist and sexist society values white men over all women and people of color. There is a hierarchy of hate.

A racist and sexist society that equates being wealthy with good and poverty with bad will value a wealthy white man the most.

Think of all the bad things some people attribute to the poor - the subtext being such things aren't true about those not poor.



Sure, there are exceptions to the sexism and racism that infects society - but exceptions are exceptions for a reason - they aren't the norm.


The thing is, you can't give in to racist and sexist thinking and saying we need a white man to lead is giving in to racism and sexism. That without a white man we can't win or advance our ideas is propping up the myth that (some) white men have created - that without them, it all falls apart. Same shit republicans pushed when Obama was in office - the whole "take our country back". They meant take it back to where a black man wasn't president. They want white male leaders only.

Saying the nominee needs to be a white male is pandering to the racists and sexists. That's what they might need but it's not what America needs.

America needs the best qualified Democrat - and that person doesn't have to be a white or male.

A country does not move forward by embracing backward thinking.

[doc03]

105. It may be hard to hear but I think he is right. nt

[EffieBlack]

106. It's not hard to hear at all.

We can hear it loud and clear.

[nini]

111. A black man and a white woman both got more votes ..,.

Last edited Thu Oct 25, 2018, 11:28 PM - Edit history (1)

..than their opponents in the last 3 presidential elections.

So.. nah. He is not right. He's more of the same.

[Raine]

107. Saying that is a sure fire trip under the bus

for him.

[nini]

110. Big surprise

How so many couldn't see through him is beyond me. He's out of touch with the non white Democrats obviously.

[EffieBlack]

125. Really?

Okay ... Whatever.

[FiveGoodMen]

127. "he hastens to add that he wishes it weren't so"

So he's not asserting a valid privilege, he's just pointing out a sad fact.

The responses in this thread remind me of the coastal states that banned any talk of climate change.

Or the influenza teen who couldn't be expected to face up to the truth of what he did.

[EffieBlack]

129. "He wishes it weren't so" but since it is, he'll step up to be the white guy who runs

Not only isn't it "so" - as evidenced by the last three elections and the country's changing demographics - but we don't need a Great White Hope.

Thanks, anyway, Michael.

[Mike Nelson]

128. I see his point, but...

… I don't agree. The last three Presidential elections had the White men lose the national vote.

[tymorial]

130. She also won the popular vote.