Trump doing a great job with diversity

[calfzilla]

Now added Seema Verma to the cabinet. Also some Asian chick. 3 non white women, where are the liberals congratulating Trump on his inclusiveness?

[doison]

I hope you're joking.  He said something mean about Rosie O'donnell, or don't you remember?

[Al Doggity]

Now added Seema Verma to the cabinet. Also some Asian chick. 3 non white women, where are the liberals congratulating Trump on his inclusiveness?

We didn't bother because we knew what was coming. Only Reagan had fewer non-whites and women.

Trump’s Cabinet So Far Is More White and Male Than Any First Cabinet Since Reagan’s
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/13/us/politics/trump-cabinet-women-minorities.html

[Yamcha]

We didn't bother because we knew what was coming. Only Reagan had fewer non-whites and women.

Trump’s Cabinet So Far Is More White and Male Than Any First Cabinet Since Reagan’s
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/13/us/politics/trump-cabinet-women-minorities.html

Is there a specific quota of coloreds you'd like to see?

[Al Doggity]

Is there a specific quota of coloreds you'd like to see?

Not the least amount in the last three decades. I'm not the one who started this thread claiming Trump is doing a great job with diversity.

[GigantorX]

Is there a specific quota of coloreds you'd like to see?

To some shallow ignorant people it seems that "diversity" begins and ends with the color of someone's skin.

Sad. We haven't really come all that far after all these years.

[Straw Man]

In a year to two, maybe sooner, the lack of diversity in his cabinet will be the least of the criticisms against the Jack Ass in Chief

[Al Doggity]

To some shallow ignorant people it seems that "diversity" begins and ends with the color of someone's skin.

Sad. We haven't really come all that far after all these years.

That's right. The next president's cabinet is less diverse, so we're actually going backwards.

[Kazan]

That's right. The next president's cabinet is less diverse, so we're actually going backwards.

Really? And all this time I thought you should bring in the best person for the job, guess that is going backwards 

[Al Doggity]

Really? And all this time I thought you should bring in the best person for the job, guess that is going backwards 

He's not hiring the best people for the job. Most of his cabinet have no experience with the departments they'll be running, and some of them don't even know what those departments do. He has appointed more campaign donors than any prez in history. You can't even make a semi-coherent argument for this being merit based.

[Coach is Back!]

He's not hiring the best people for the job. Most of his cabinet have no experience with the departments they'll be running, and some of them don't even know what those departments do. He has appointed more campaign donors than any prez in history. You can't even make a semi-coherent argument for this being merit based.

Really? Did Obama make the right appointments and hires for his open positions? No, every one were in the tank for him and his plans to purposely destroy this country and if Clinton would have been put in (as opposed to elected) this country would have fucked even more than it is now. Obama is just as corrupt as Clinton.

[Kazan]

He's not hiring the best people for the job. Most of his cabinet have no experience with the departments they'll be running, and some of them don't even know what those departments do. He has appointed more campaign donors than any prez in history. You can't even make a semi-coherent argument for this being merit based.

Yes because the people that have been running things thus far have been doing such a bang up job. Lets just stay status quo 

[Al Doggity]

Yes because the people that have been running things thus far have been doing such a bang up job. Lets just stay status quo 

So, what point are you trying to make? Choose the worst so long as they're all white men?

[Kazan]

So, what point are you trying to make? Choose the worst so long as they're all white men?

Yeah that's it  , you must be a product of the public education system.

[Erik C]

Not having enough diversity, to satisfy the cry baby leftists, is the best way to go. I was hoping he'd appoint even more straight white males, for the sake of America. No need pretending that negroes are really "equal," and as capable as superior whites.

[Al Doggity]

Yeah that's it  , you must be a product of the public education system.

Yes, I can't comprehend your intellectual superiority.   In one post you claim that the best and brightest are being chosen, then when i point out that it's not even possible to make that argument, you  backflip and say  the status quo doesn't work anyway so it's fine to pick people who have no idea what they're doing. You will find any excuse to say this is the most qualified group even though it's not by any standard. It's not flat out good and it's not an example of draining the swamp.

[GigantorX]

That's right. The next president's cabinet is less diverse, so we're actually going backwards.

So, to you, "diversity" is simply about someones skin color? Because that's what you're saying in this thread.

So, if a couple of dark skinned people got thrown into the cabinet it would automatically be "diverse" regardless of their actual mindset, thoughts, background and plans etc concerning government and their positions?

That's pretty sad. I thought we've moved on from judging  solely on the color of ones skin.

[Pray_4_War]

I thought we've moved on from judging  solely on the color of ones skin.

We tried for a while, and then Obama got elected.  Now skin color is all people think about...along with sexual preference and gender identity.

[Al Doggity]

So, to you, "diversity" is simply about someones skin color? Because that's what you're saying in this thread.

So, if a couple of dark skinned people got thrown into the cabinet it would automatically be "diverse" regardless of their actual mindset, thoughts, background and plans etc concerning government and their positions?

That's pretty sad. I thought we've moved on from judging  solely on the color of ones skin.

Firstly, I didn't start this thread. I was responding to someone who claimed Trump deserved to be applauded because he was doing a great job with diversity.


But let's unpack what you just said. Please answer this honestly. I asked this question of someone in a thread last year and, even though we'd been having a back&forth that spanned several pages, he declined to answer and dropped out of thread:

Last year, there was a lot of talk about the Academy Awards because there were were no ethnic minorities nominated in the largest categories and no female led, written or directed films for the second year in a row. The Academy's voting body was something like 85% white men at that time. If the voting body was made up of all black men or all asian women, do you think there would have been a difference in the nominated films?

[Soul Crusher]

Diversity for diversity sake is pure FNG garbage

[GigantorX]

Firstly, I didn't start this thread. I was responding to someone who claimed Trump deserved to be applauded because he was doing a great job with diversity.


But let's unpack what you just said. Please answer this honestly. I asked this question of someone in a thread last year and, even though we'd been having a back&forth that spanned several pages, he declined to answer and dropped out of thread:

Last year, there was a lot of talk about the Academy Awards because there were were no ethnic minorities nominated in the largest categories and no female led, written or directed films for the second year in a row. The Academy's voting body was something like 85% white men at that time. If the voting body was made up of all black men or all asian women, do you think there would have been a difference in the nominated films?

Not really, no.

[Howard]

Now added Seema Verma to the cabinet. Also some Asian chick. 3 non white women, where are the liberals congratulating Trump on his inclusiveness?

They won't!
 Trump voters won't say anything positive about the good things under Obama's 8 years.

That form of blind loyal partisanship is childish and silly on BOTH sides.

[Al Doggity]

Not really, no.

So, you're saying you think that an all black Academy would be just as likely to nominate only white films as as a mostly white Oscar voting pool? Interesting.


In keeping with this theme let me ask you this: Do you think radio stations that play mostly black artists have more black listeners than stations that play mostly white artists? Or do you think that a rap station and a rock station in a diverse city are both just as likely to have majority black audiences?

[Howard]

Yes, I can't comprehend your intellectual superiority.   In one post you claim that the best and brightest are being chosen, then when i point out that it's not even possible to make that argument, you  backflip and say  the status quo doesn't work anyway so it's fine to pick people who have no idea what they're doing. You will find any excuse to say this is the most qualified group even though it's not by any standard. It's not flat out good and it's not an example of draining the swamp.

No President picks his team based only on merit.
Our new Pres. Trump tends to pick a few  based on political bias.
USMC Gen Mattis, was a great pick for sec of def.
His choice for Sec of Education was a disaster along with Rick Perry for sec of energy.

Politics is not an objective science and politicians are rarely free from bias or agenda.
I didn't vote for Trump, but, I'm mindful , the winner gets to run the show.

Obama had his shot, and I think he did a decent job overall.
Now the pendulum has swung back and we have new President.
It's likely some people won't support too many of his actions.

One quick skim of the Politics board will show not many here, will say anything good about Obama.

[GigantorX]

So, you're saying you think that an all black Academy would be just as likely to nominate only white films as as a mostly white Oscar voting pool? Interesting.


In keeping with this theme let me ask you this: Do you think radio stations that play mostly black artists have more black listeners than stations that play mostly white artists? Or do you think that a rap station and a rock station in a diverse city are both just as likely to have majority black audiences?

So, what are you trying to prove with this? Blacks will choose more blacks for the Oscars awards? What does that prove? Tribalism? No shit. Still doesn't make anything truly diverse besides the "skin deep" stuff. Diversity would be in the roles that are played and the movies made and the screen plays etc. For example: A black guy winning an Oscar for Best Actor for his role in a typical thriller movie isn't really all that "diverse." But that same black guy winning the Best Actor Award for a truly unique role (could be a black-centric)in a unique movie (could be a black-centric) movie would be more "diverse." At least in my eyes.

I think we are on two different islands here, my man. Just because something is non white doesn't necessarily make it "diverse." A stereotypical "Rap Station" probably has a good mix of white and black listeners while a "Rock Station" is mostly likely "non-black" unless they specialize in Living Colour which would actually be pretty awesome.