-
Originally Posted by Daytr
In 235 years of the US presidency there has never been a woman elected.
In 235 years there has only been one President of colour and that took 219 years to happen.
We could be witnessing history, the first female US president and of both African and Asian ethnicity.
How many people in the US have never been represented by someone that resembles them, that has experienced what they have experienced.
Harris is not just going to smash barriers, she will create a legacy and example for woman of any race or creed to follow.
This is an historic moment.
Contrast that with a 78 year old man who inherited money, then used it to run various grifts and become a con-man.
-
Originally Posted by Daytr
In 235 years of the US presidency there has never been a woman elected.
In 235 years there has only been one President of colour and that took 219 years to happen.
We could be witnessing history, the first female US president and of both African and Asian ethnicity.
How many people in the US have never been represented by someone that resembles them, that has experienced what they have experienced.
Harris is not just going to smash barriers, she will create a legacy and example for woman of any race or creed to follow.
This is an historic moment.
BS.
Leader selection should be based on ability alone. Colour and gender should have nothing to do with it.
-
Originally Posted by ynot
BS.
Leader selection should be based on ability alone. Colour and gender should have nothing to do with it.
That's an unrealistric expectation.
-
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
That's an unrealistric expectation.
Not as unrealistic as selection based on colour and gender.
-
Originally Posted by ynot
BS.
Leader selection should be based on ability alone. Colour and gender should have nothing to do with it.
It seems like the US might be "unburdened by what has been"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f8h9dHXsUc
Last edited by blackcap; Today at 09:10 AM.
-
Originally Posted by ynot
Not as unrealistic as selection based on colour and gender.
Do you know what unrealistic means?
-
Originally Posted by blackcap
It seems like the US might be "unburdened by what has been"
Burble, cackle, burble cackle. Now let's see, what major global decision should I make this morning.
-
Originally Posted by ynot
BS.
Leader selection should be based on ability alone. Colour and gender should have nothing to do with it.
Well you just ruled out Trump then.
Get your Janola shots here!
I would say ability and experience. Trump had no political experience and boy did it show.
But beyond career experience is life experience, I.e growing up as a girl of mixed race in America and then having an incredibly successful career as a mixed race woman in America.
What are the odds for her success?
Tiny, and it shows in the fact that no woman, let alone a woman of colour has ever been nominated or been elected as President.
-
Originally Posted by blackcap
It seems like the US might be "unburdened by what has been"
"Maybe we can nuke this hurricane".
"Hmm dr, maybe there's something we can do to apply heat and light to the cure" (for corona).
-
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
That's an unrealistric expectation.
I agree. The ability needed is to appeal to Elephant or Donkey donors. So after the expectations of donors have selected the two Party candidates the US voters have a binary choice, based loosely on democracy.
Occasionally candidates of independently wealthy means can have a go. Ross Perot ran in 1992 on a moderate platform. He got about 19% of the popular vote, but NO electoral college votes.
Last edited by Bjauck; Today at 09:29 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks