Is not being a "white guy" reason enough to vote for a candidate

[Perky]

Do we really need affirmative action when it comes to selecting our nomime for the Presidency of the United States/Leader of the Free World/Commander in chief?

[bunnies]

1. fuck no. nt

[noamnety]

2. flamebait

deliberately misrepresenting affirmative action as a decision to hire based solely on race/gender, rather than it being considered in addition to experience and ideas among qualified candidates.

[ThomCat]

3. Sorry, but this is a B.S. poll.

I haven't heard ANYONE say that they're voting for someone SOLELY because that candidate isn't a white man.

If two candidates are essentially equal, then someone might choose the one that isn't a white male, and I think that's as valid as any other way to decide between them.

But your poll implies that people are ignoring a qualified white man to choose an unqualified person who isn't a white man.

Is being a white man reason enough to vote for a candidate? You know damned well it is for some people. Racism and sexism are alive and well.

[Beaverhausen]

5. you must have missed this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3767320

but it's really only the OP who thinks this way.

[noamnety]

7. The options the OP laid out are disengenuous.

That's unaffected by the content of the link.

[Beaverhausen]

9. me?

I didn't start this thread. I'm confused.

[noamnety]

17. Oops, my bad

I edited my post to correct that. I didn't check user names, was multitasking here and thought the OP was responding to Thomcat. Sorry!

[ThomCat]

11. I didn't miss that thread.

He's not proposing that we elect some random black person or woman. He's suggesting that, of the qualified candidates, it's time that we break the monopoly that white men have on high office.

You're entirely ignoring the part about choosing from the qualified candidates.

I can tell you from a great deal of personal experience that white men often get preferencial treatment because we're white men, and the higher you go the more preference we get. Why does it bother you so much when someone suggests choosing someone who isn't a white man?

[Beaverhausen]

13. Hey, I'm female and think it's high time we have a female president

but again, like I said in that thread, I vote on issues, not gender or race.

and the fact that two of our top candidates are not white men should mean something, shouldn't it? Why bring this up when in fact one of these two may well be elected?

I guess I didn't read that thread correctly.

[racaulk]

26. I didn't get that at all.

I read the OP in that thread, and I didn't see a thing about "qualified candidates." The OP stated that he felt it was time to elect a woman or a black man to the post, and nothing more. He didn't mention anything about "choosing from the qualified candidates," which led me to believe that we should elect someone by the sole virtue of their gender or ethnicity. As long as the person elected is not a white male.

I also noticed that he didn't say anything about Richardson.

[ThomCat]

27. Given that the post only talked about Hillary or Obama

and both of them are qualified, I think it's pretty well implied.

That post certainly wasn't talking about electing some random black woman off the street.

[Perky]

10. Someone posted the question...

Isn't it time we gave someone other than a WHite Guy a chance. I think that question is insidious on its face. All thing being equal argument is an interesting alternative phrasing ans worth of its own poll. Pesonally I don't think race or gender should be a factor at all.

[ThomCat]

14. Of course race and gender should be a factor.

Let's not revive the myth of a colorblind and genderblind society. Race and Gender are often factored into a wide range of decisions, to the detriment of black people and women. But when that happens it's buried. It's ignored. It's invisible.

The myth that we can remove race and gender from the equation is ONLY raised when it looks like people might possibly favor someone other than the white man. OMG, we can't consider race or gender if it's not going to benefit some white guy! :wow:

The myth that we need to get rid of anything that resembles affirmative action in order to be fair just allows racism and sexism to thrive, because then the only biases that are allowed are the status-quo racism and sexism.

[noamnety]

18. My daughter is on a hiring committee at her college.

She said affirmative action came up in the hiring debate. They don't have a single person of color on their faculty. Not one.

Not surprisingly, they sometimes sit around wringing their hands, wondering why their student body is so white, why aren't they attracting a more diverse group of students?

When some people suggested that maybe an initial round of candidate selection to narrow down the field to the top 10% of applicants should be colorblind, and after that, they should be allowed to find out race/gender, there was a fair amount of opposition to the idea that perhaps they should give some weight to minority status.

This probably doesn't even need to be said, but while the women were divided on the issue, there was not a single white guy on the committee who thought there was any reason for affirmative action.

[ThomCat]

22. That is truly sad.

But not surprising.

I've seen the same thing here in the corporate world. Being a consultant for large corporations I see the inside of a lot of decisions. White men will consistantly argue the loudest that there is no need for AA, and insist that the all-white executives all got there entirely on merit. Race and gender didn't have anything to do with their success, of course. :eyes:

[rucky]

4. This is the political equivelant of asking your spouse if you look fat.

There's no safe answer.

[bunnies]

6. In my house we say "yes" if its true.

Honesty is expected.

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. Other.

Race or Gender can be one of a number of considerations that may be relevent.

[lojasmo]

12. Enough among this pathetic group. EOM

[bunnies]

15. WHO are these people

that think we should vote based solely on race and gender?! And WHAT is the reasoning behind that?! I dont get it!

[Spirit of 34]

16. Unbelievable

I'm really impressed with the high level of political discourse on the threads I'm reading in this subforum. :eyes:

[fascisthunter]

19. A Deliberate Mischaracterization of Affirmative Action

and pure flaimbaiting to boot

[Fresh_Start]

20. When did you like the results of the 'white guy' club?

Not Bush Jr
Not Clinton
Not Bush Sr
Not Reagan
Not Carter
Not Nixon
Not Johnson.....


Maybe not being part of the "WHITE GUY" club is a good thing.

[asdjrocky]

28. Um,

I liked Carter. Is that ok?

[Fresh_Start]

30. ok, so you give it a 1:6 rating

again, the odds are not in its favor

[theredpen]

21. It doesn't matter if they're white or male, just as long as they're gay. n/t

[ThomCat]

23. Openly gay,

not one of those closeted republicans, thank you very much. :)

[theredpen]

25. Oh those Republicans aren't gay! Sen. Craig said he's not gay! He has a wide stance! n/t

[racaulk]

24. Hell no.

For me, I'm more concerned with what the candidate will do once he or she is in office. I could care less what the color of their skin is or what their genitals look like.

Geez...

[geek tragedy]

29. Affirmative action? Rush, is that you? n/t