Republicans: Party of Old White Males; Democrats: Party of Diversity

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Bill Huffman, Apr 28, 2019.

  1. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    U.S. Senate
    25 women total 17 Democrat women and only 8 Republican women, 25% of 100 seats are women

    U.S. House
    102 women total 89 Democrat and a pitifully low only 13 Republican women, 23.4% of 435 seats are women

    Racial diversity

    The contrast is even greater for racial diversity. Democrats have nearly six times more minority members than the Republicans.

    African-American 48 Democrats and 3 Republicans

    Hispanic/Latino 30 Democrats and 13 Republicans

    Asian/Indian/Pacific Islander 16 Democrats and 0 Republicans

    Total 94 Democrats and 16 Republicans are minorities

    Diversity in Congress: Democrats have women and minorities, Republicans have white men over 55?

    So right now, Republicans in congress are the party of over 55 white male and Democrats are the party of the young, women, and minorities. (The young and old thing I just kind of threw that in as a bonus bit of a troll.)

    Full disclosure here: I'm a Democrat that is a 67 year old white male and proud of the diversity in the party. It can and will get better but not to bad for now. Exciting times!
  2. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    The Dems might be more diverse than the Republicans but their top 2 presidential candidates are re-treads - old white males.
  3. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member Staff Member

    And who are the Democrats' top two presidential candidates?
  4. Steve Levicoff

    Steve Levicoff Well-Known Member

    Bernie Biden and Joe Sanders.
  5. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member Staff Member

    I think that's Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders.
  6. Steve Levicoff

    Steve Levicoff Well-Known Member

    Nahhhhh . . . Really??? Wow, the things you learn on this forum . . . :rolleyes:
  7. Garp

    Garp Active Member

  8. Garp

    Garp Active Member

  9. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I think Bernie Biden and Joe Sanders should best retire and live happily ever after. I can personally vouch for retirement being a very nice place to be. I personally like Kamala Harris at this point but would be happy with anyone that beats the man that accuses Democrats of wanting to swaddle babies in a blanket and then being able to legally execute said baby with the help of a doctor.
  10. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member Staff Member

    And I am a Democrat that is a 57 year old white male and proud of the diversity the party.
    Last edited: May 4, 2019
  11. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Any new President will do. As long as she's a Democrat.

    P. S. For purely egotistical reasons, Biden would suit me the best. Simply because he's most familiar with Ukraine. Personally though, I like Kamala, followed by "anyone but Bernie".
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  12. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    What do you like about Harris?
  13. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    She's a Democrat. In this climate, this is enough.

    Seriously, she seems to have a decent head on her, and is a daughter of immigrants. She has a reasonable take on issues she talked about, and is informed. She's not Bernie Sanders :). She shares a (non-Western) name with a Marvel superhero, so here's the nerd-cool factor.

    But again, I'd settle for any plausible candidate not named "Bernie Sanders".
  14. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Kamala was interviewed in a podcast "2020: Kamala Harris on American identiy and secret recipes" that I thought presented a very decent human that is very smart. On the lighter side, I love her laugh and smile. I'll go with Stanislav's line. Any new President will do. As long as she's a Democrat.
  15. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I expect that would be enough for you in any climate. ;) But I asked because you mentioned her specifically even though there's no shortage of candidates seeking the Democratic nomination.

    Funny that you should juxtapose those:

    Along with Sanders and Warren, Harris is in my bottom tier because she's duplicitous even for a politician and because she couldn't have cared less about the lives she destroyed as a prosecutor fighting the drug war. With Democrats like that, who needs Republicans?
  16. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Yeah well, Professor Harris should lighten up (even though I get the general point). She's clearly not raised to be culturally Jamaican (daughter of an Indian academic; I knew many of these); sloppy stereotypes of this nature are way too common to be disqualifying. I'm also not impressed by "duplicitous" generic slur nor by the accusation that says basically she did her job. If this is the worst people for whom she is "the bottom tier", I can live with that. On the other hand, growing up in an environment that values knowledge appeals to me quite a bit. I'm a fan of Hermione archetype; married one of these.

    In general, this article sums up why I'm biased towards plausible female candidates. My hero Stacey Abrams is not running, so Harris will do. Or Warren. People don't notice behavior described as "unlikable" or "duplicitious" (in other words, politician-like) in pols of the default gender.
  17. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Well, "she was just following orders" may be good enough for you, but it's not for a lot of people. A friend, one who's further to the left than you are, started an anti-police brutality organization while he was in law school and he and a lot of people like him can't stand her.

    Uh-huh, if someone doesn't like your preferred woman candidate then they must be sexist. That never gets old.

    Look, if you really think sitting down to pee is a qualification, fine, then Gabbard, Abrams, Klobuchar, or even Gillibrand would be far better than Harris or Warren.
  18. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    "People just can't stand her" is a distinct pattern. Other than a prosecutor putting people to jail (which is kind of the point), what else you got? And oh, being "further to the left" is not a qualification. I can't stand many people further to the left than me, St. Bernie Sanders and Red Jill Stein included.

    Gabbard, uh no thanks. Stacey Abrams isn't running, otherwise she's an absolute dream (would beat Harris in the poll of me). Klobuchar and Kirsten "even" Gillibrand get the same angry press as Harris does and Clinton did, making my point for me. And yes, I would not mind President Klobuchar or President Gillibrand.

    Just to make it fair: who's your preferred candidate?
  19. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    When you used to send people to jail for possession of marijuana, and now you pander to changed popular opinion by joking about how you smoked it yourself, then you're a tyrannical hypocrite who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near political power, genitalia notwithstanding.

    If that were making your point, then I wouldn't have listed them.

    Weld. (Yes, I know that's hopeless, but you didn't ask me who I thought would win.)

    But if you mean on the Democrats' side, then in order of least to most objectionable, Gravel (another quixotic campaign, but it would be interesting to see him on the debate stage), Gabbard, Buttigieg, Hickenlooper, Booker, Klobuchar, a bunch of ones in the middle who I don't know much about, then Biden (neocon drug warrior), and finally Sanders/Warren/Harris tying for last place.

    (All of the declared candidates seeking the Libertarian Party nomination are lunatics, even by LP standards. If Justin Amash jumps in, that would be different.)
    Helpful2013 likes this.
  20. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Or in other words, a prosecutor turned politician. Former is duty-bound to send people to jail; it's job for other people to try and keep them out. Latter pander to voters.
    There seem to be a worldview disconnect between us here, which is completely fine. Let's agree to disagree.

    Oh c'mon, Klobuchar and Gillibrand actually get worse press than Kamala does, and equally as unfair. Which shows that women have to work twice or ten times as hard as men in politics. Only to be labelled "tryhards" and destroyed.

    Fair enough.

    That's almost in the reverse order of viability :). And reverse of my list, except Bernie is dead last in mine. Thanks though.

Share This Page