On Wed, 04 Dec 2019 15:20:51 -0600, BTR1701 <no_e...@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
>Apparently among the leftist intelligentsia now, race (and to a lesser
>extent, other minority status like gay, female, etc.) is the only criterion
>upon which a voter can reasonably and morally decide who to support.
>
>Nowhere in any of the nonsense below do any of these race-obsessed leftists
>bother to note that black voters themselves overwhelmingly prefer Biden.
>Kamala Harris had minuscule support from black voters. Same with Booker.
>Blacks are apparently not voting based on skin-color, which is heresy
>according to the leftist chattering class.
Except for those that don't think that way. I can't remember who it
was but I ran into a couple of guests on one of those shows that made
a point that blacks in general aren't going to vote for a Dem just
because they are a Democratic candidate. It's all about the message of
the candidates. If they have a message that addresses issues that
concern the general African American populace such as jobs then they
will listen.
>Besides, I don't know what they're even worried about. They'll still have a
>woman of color on that stage: Geronimao and her high cheekbones will be
>right there, front and center.
>
>-------------------------
>
>The skin color of Democratic presidential frontrunners moved to the
>forefront of discussion among left-of-center pundits after Democratic
>California Sen. Kamala Harris dropped out of the race Tuesday.
This seems more like people looking for something to talk about
concerning the campaigns. Right now there's not much to talk about as
the positions of the candidates are known and not much will change
until a candidate does something noteworthy or we get to the start of
the elections.
>Harris's announcement means the only candidates who have qualified for the
>next Democratic debate are white, a fact that caused chagrin among media
>figures and liberal activists.
>
>"Obviously I'm no centrist but it's downright effed-up that smart,
>compelling, *very* experienced, centrist Democratic candidates of color are
>floundering while a smart but wildly inexperienced, centrist white mayor of
>teeny tiny city is surging," liberal writer Sally Kohn wrote in a tweet.
>"Bad look, Democrats."
>
>Left-wing commentator Lauren Duca implied that Democrats have a racism
>problem, as evidenced by Harris's failed campaign. "White supremacy is not
>just a Fox News problem, folks," she charged.
>
>"It's really fucked-up that straight, white, male billionaires (plural) are
>going to qualify for the next debate while Kamala Harris is leaving the
>race. Like, immensely," wrote Adam Peck, a staffer at the left-wing Center
>for American Progress.
So why don't you get some of the black millionaires/billionaires to
run for President. While I think she's not qualified there's no doubt
that an Oprah campaign would garner a tremendous amount of interest.
>"Harris dropping out leaves the Democrats with an all-white debate stage
>for December-- Biden, Sanders, Warren, Steyer, Buttigieg, Klobuchar,"
>commented left-wing writer Judd Legum, who complained that "The Democratic
>Party has created a process with [sic] includes Steyer but excludes Cory
>Booker."
>
>"Kamala may not have been my number one candidate, but she belongs in the
>race," added Imani Gandy, an analyst at left-wing outlet Rewire News. "Now
>we've got rich white dudes papering the airwaves with their bullshit,"
>Gandy wrote, adding: "I'm not voting for Biden or Buttigieg."
If all of the black voters had given her just a dollar it's likely she
would still be in the running, but they didn't find her campaign
compelling enough to provide her with enough funding to keep it going.
That's not racism when people of color didn't find her message worth
providing her with financial support. Perhaps, should she choose to
run again, she will do better at forming a message that reaches voters
and motivates them to get behind her campaign and provide real
support.
>"Moderate white guys are performing so well in the polls in large part
>because of how they are being propped up by the media," wrote left-wing
>activist Adam Best.
>
>Jezebel's Esther Wang wrote that "it's hard not to notice that with
>[Harris's] departure, and with the struggles of both Cory Booker and Julián
>Castro to fundraise and qualify for the upcoming debates, the top tier of
>candidates remaining are all white."
So what, the media is preventing the black/Hispanic populace from
supporting Booker/Castro? How do they think they are doing that? Even
if the media provided zero coverage of Booker/Castro that still
wouldn't prevent people from providing them with support if they
believed it was important to have a person of color in the race, just
because they are a person of color.
(That is what they are asking for, right? Not a concern about the
message or policies but just that there needs to be at least one
person of color in the race. Representation over quality. Sounds like
some of the demands I've heard about female representation in film. I
guess the idea is that if they get enough representation someone of
quality will eventually show up.)