US Politics

[Maximus]

And what a massive success they were in showing that the GOP understands the needs and concerns of ethnic minority communities!

Support for Republican Presidential Nominee
African Americans: 2004 - 11%     2008 - 5%    2012 - 7%
Hispanic-Americans: 2004 - 40%   2008 - 31%  2012- 26%
Asian-Americans: 2004 - 44%      2008 - 37%   2012 - 28%

Shockingly enough, it turns out that promoting policies which no ethnic minorities support while openly tolerating outright racists as vocal forces within your party manages to outweigh occasionally appointing unrepresentative ethnic minorities.

Again, the fact that you think "But we appointed some!" is an argument here is exactly why your party loses so badly among these groups time and time again.

Well your party doesn't appoint as many minorities, nor do they have the diversity at the state leadership or senate levels as the GOP. Why can't you just admit as far as equal opportunity at the highest levels of government and party leadership the GOP is better than the dems

Maybe someday the minority voters will realize one party talks about diversity than doesn't do much about it (just vote for me and we will give you stuff--now that's a good lad) and one party is actually a meritocracy where if you work hard and are talented you will move up. The Dems just give lip service, the same as unions--why do you think they are losing the blue collar vote and the working white vote? they talk about equality, they talk about prosperity and do nothing (except line the pockets of the union leadership).

[The Unknown Caller]

Again, the fact that you think that this is why minorities vote Democrat shows your contempt for them and total failure to understand them - which is why you'll keep losing them.

I'm even old enough to remember when you claimed the House was WAY more representative and important than the Senate.... Like a month ago. But of course at doesn't fit your current argument, so you'll ignore it. But seriously, I'm really not sure that it's smart to claim that Republicans are better for equal opportunity at the highest levels of government. I have t check but I'm pretty damn sure that the highest ranking member of an ethnic minority in the government isn't quite a Republican.

[Maximus]

Again, the fact that you think that this is why minorities vote Democrat shows your contempt for them and total failure to understand them - which is why you'll keep losing them.

I'm even old enough to remember when you claimed the House was WAY more representative and important than the Senate.... Like a month ago. But of course at doesn't fit your current argument, so you'll ignore it. But seriously, I'm really not sure that it's smart to claim that Republicans are better for equal opportunity at the highest levels of government. I have t check but I'm pretty damn sure that the highest ranking member of an ethnic minority in the government isn't quite a Republican.

At the highest cabinet levels why hasn't Obama appointed more minorities? Mid levels yes, highest levels no.

Yes, he is half African American--But remember when Jesse Jackson said he wasn't black enough and he wanted to cut his nuts off?

WASHINGTON - In a vulgar tirade caught on tape, the Rev. Jesse Jackson said he wanted to "cut his [Barack Obama's] nuts out" and he accused the fellow Chicagoan of "talking down to black folks" by giving moral lectures to African-Americans

[Tumbling Dice]

Again, the fact that you think that this is why minorities vote Democrat shows your contempt for them and total failure to understand them - which is why you'll keep losing them.

I'm even old enough to remember when you claimed the House was WAY more representative and important than the Senate.... Like a month ago. But of course at doesn't fit your current argument, so you'll ignore it. But seriously, I'm really not sure that it's smart to claim that Republicans are better for equal opportunity at the highest levels of government. I have t check but I'm pretty damn sure that the highest ranking member of an ethnic minority in the government isn't quite a Republican.

At the highest cabinet levels why hasn't Obama appointed more minorities? Mid levels yes, highest levels no.

Is Obama's cabinet underrepresented by ethnic minorities?

[Tumbling Dice]

Personally, I’m far more interested in political parties’ policies than the socio-economic characteristics of the elected or appointed politicians.  For example, in the UK a clear majority of the cabinet ministers are from upper middle class backgrounds and attended Oxbridge universities, so they have little in common with me, but I’d rather have, say, a Conservative government implementing more of the policies I agree with than a Labour government, even if marginally more of Labour’s politicians come from a similar background to myself than Conservative politicians do.

So, while ethnic minorities might prefer more appointed ethnic minority members of the Obama administration, it’s not going to have much bearing on their voting preferences.

[ryanm]

At the highest cabinet levels why hasn't Obama appointed more minorities?

Um, what?

Eric Holder, Attorney General
Eric Shinseki, Sec. of Veterans Affairs
Steven Chu, Sec. of Energy
Hilda Solis, Sec. of Labor
Ron Kirk, US Trade Representative
Susan Rice, Ambassador to the United Nations

That's 30% of the cabinet.

[The Unknown Caller]

It is a little sad that Maximus' entire argument essentially comes down to the Republicans having more ethnic minority governors, which they have because, duh, they have way more governors in general, and to them having a single Senator, which is more than the Democrats only because the Democrats made their last African American senator President of the United States.

And then he completely ignores the House and state legislatures, which he previously assured us were the ONLY things that counted... and ignores who most people actually vote for.

[Maximus]

It is a little sad that Maximus' entire argument essentially comes down to the Republicans having more ethnic minority governors, which they have because, duh, they have way more governors in general, and to them having a single Senator, which is more than the Democrats only because the Democrats made their last African American senator President of the United States.

And then he completely ignores the House and state legislatures, which he previously assured us were the ONLY things that counted... and ignores who most people actually vote for.

Obama won because people were promised a bill of goods. The republican party is the actual party of equal opportunity, however not equal results ( a meritocracy)

[imaginary friend]

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/poll-republicans-fearful-of-2013-85454.html?hp=l9

fear is the mind killer.

[The Unknown Caller]

Obama won because people were promised a bill of goods. The republican party is the actual party of equal opportunity, however not equal results ( a meritocracy)

So basically, Obama won because ethnic minorities were stupid enough to believe Obama's 'bill of goods' while Republicans (IE: White people) were smart enough not to? Yeah, I can't see how your party is having problems winning minority support!

You can keep repeating that the Republicans are the party of equal opportunity all you want, it's funny how only old white men seem to believe you and actually vote for them.

[ryanm]

The republican party is the actual party of equal opportunity, however not equal results ( a meritocracy)

I guess this just depends on how we all view equality:

[imaginary friend]

The republican party is the actual party of equal opportunity, however not equal results ( a meritocracy)

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, are you serious?! They've been trying to kill the estate tax forever, so their heirs will always start life miles ahead of the people they try to sell the "meritocracy" myth to.

[Tumbling Dice]

I’m in favour of estate taxes on large estates, but I’m not in favour of estate taxes on more modest estates worth about one to two million dollars.  No estate tax at all just helps make a society even more plutocratic. 

Most parents want to help their children as best they can and two ways of doing that is to provide a great education and to gift money to help them make their way in life, such as helping them buy a home, while they’re still alive.  This would also reduce most middle class families’ estate tax liability.

[Tumbling Dice]

I guess this just depends on how we all view equality:

Does this indicate that you're in favour of so-called positive-discrimination and affirmative action polices?

[briscoetheque]

I thought it was just a new 'boxes for short people' campaign...