Kamala's main role

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2020, 02:35 AM)Benton Wrote: His statement was along the lines that he would appoint women to cabinet positions and that his vice president would be a woman as there were a number of qualified female veep candidates.

He never stated that his #1 requirement was being a woman, only that there were a number of women who met the requirements. 

Thanks for that. 

[*PhilHos*]

(11-09-2020, 01:05 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't compare a man and a woman with the exact same qualifications because it is harder for a woman to achieve the same qualifications. 

(11-09-2020, 01:24 AM)fredtoast Wrote: A man with the same achievements as Kamala would not be as impressive as Kamala because it is harder for a woman.

Wow. I'm surprised no one called out your sexist bullshit, fred. You're quick to call others sexist, yet here you are making a bullshit sexist claim.

[GMDino]

(11-09-2020, 11:02 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Wow. I'm surprised no one called out your sexist bullshit, fred. You're quick to call others sexist, yet here you are making a bullshit sexist claim.

Praising a women for achievements in a male dominated world is the opposite of sexism.  Sexism would be saying she got where she is only because she is a woman or because of whom she dated years ago.

[*PhilHos*]

(11-09-2020, 11:14 AM)GMDino Wrote: Praising a women for achievements in a male dominated world is the opposite of sexism.  

Except that's not what fred's doing. Fred is saying that ALL woman had it tougher than ALL men. He's saying that it's impossible for a man to have had more obstacles than a woman simply by virtue of his gender.

When I lived in CT, I would often go to this Walgreens near my house to get snacks. There were 2 main cashiers. 1 was a guy and 1 was a girl. Both had won Employee of the month. The guy was not quite a parapalegic (he was in a wheelchair and some major physical issues but could still do his job). According to fred, the girl (who was ablebodied) faced more adversity than the handicapped gentleman. 

[GMDino]

(11-09-2020, 11:34 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Except that's not what fred's doing. Fred is saying that ALL woman had it tougher than ALL men. He's saying that it's impossible for a man to have had more obstacles than a woman simply by virtue of his gender.

When I lived in CT, I would often go to this Walgreens near my house to get snacks. There were 2 main cashiers. 1 was a guy and 1 was a girl. Both had won Employee of the month. The guy was not quite a parapalegic (he was in a wheelchair and some major physical issues but could still do his job). According to fred, the girl (who was ablebodied) faced more adversity than the handicapped gentleman. 

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2020, 11:02 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Wow. I'm surprised no one called out your sexist bullshit, fred. You're quick to call others sexist, yet here you are making a bullshit sexist claim.

It will be amusing to watch over the next few years.

Fred has ignored every fact presented just so he can make his false claims that someone is being sexist. He has been presented with 2 simple questions but has refused to answer them because if he does it will shoot down his baseless claims.

Would Harris be VP elect if she were a male?

If a person is against women of power why would Amy klobachar be that person's #1 candidate for President in a field of 18-20 other Democrats.

It's a shame that those who are usually quick to balk on matters such as these allow (or worse yet support) his baseless accusations.

[GMDino]

(11-09-2020, 12:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It will be amusing to watch over the next few years.

Fred has ignored every fact presented just so he can make his false claims that someone is being sexist. He has been presented with 2 simple questions but has refused to answer them because if he does it will shoot down his baseless claims.

Would Harris be VP elect if she were a male?

If a person is against women of power why would Amy klobachar be that person's #1 candidate for President in a field of 18-20 other Democrats.

It's a shame that those who are usually quick to balk on matters such as these allow (or worse yet support) his baseless accusations.

I'm just glad she wasn't called a handmaiden.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2020, 01:35 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Then just tell me why you don't think Kamala is qualified to be Vice-President.

Since you are not sexist I understand her sex will have nothing to do with your reply, correct?

The only one saying there's any difference between the sexes in this thread is you.  Which would seem to make you the sexist one, not everyone else.

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2020, 12:34 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'm just glad she wasn't called a handmaiden.  

You may want to bring that up with the person that balked at the term.

As I recalled I simply balked because that same person called her a weird lady. But many had no issue with it

Are you really bringing up your hypocrisy to try and prove a point here? 

As I said: it's sad but we've come to expect it. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2020, 11:37 AM)GMDino Wrote:

Fred is doing exactly what Phil stated he is doing.  You can admit it when one of your buddies is wrong, you might actually get a little credit for being consistent.

[*PhilHos*]

(11-09-2020, 12:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Fred is doing exactly what Phil stated he is doing.  You can admit it when one of your buddies is wrong, you might actually get a little credit for being consistent.

Is it just me or when Dino posts a meme or gif it's usually because he has no rebuttal?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2020, 12:47 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Is it just me or when Dino posts a meme or gif it's usually because he has no rebuttal?

Yes.  It would be fine if his meme game was better. 

[GMDino]

(11-09-2020, 12:47 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Is it just me or when Dino posts a meme or gif it's usually because he has no rebuttal?

It's when Dino has stated his case clearly and the other person keeps arguing.  I can keep posting the same thing over and over and have it ignored or I can post a funny picture and be done.

You went for a big stretch and no amount of words was going to change your mind.



Also the art of the gif response is something I will cling to like my guns and bible.  

[*PhilHos*]

(11-09-2020, 01:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: It's when Dino has stated his case clearly and the other person keeps arguing.

So you clearly don't understand how debates work, got it. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-09-2020, 01:07 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So you clearly don't understand how debates work, got it. 

No, you don't get it.  GM is always right so continuing to question him after he makes his point is, well... pointless.

[*PhilHos*]

(11-09-2020, 01:10 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, you don't get it.  GM is always right so continuing to question him after he makes his point is, well... pointless.

Excuse me, SSF. I stated my case. I don't need you to state yours. 

[GMDino]

(11-09-2020, 01:07 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So you clearly don't understand how debates work, got it. 

No I fully understand.  But when it just repeating the same point over and over because the counterpoint is ignored it's not worth it.  If something new is brought that warrants a new response or a change in what I say or believe I will continue.  Not like I've never said I was wrong before.

But you don't have have to participate in every argument you are invited to.

Plus, and this important, sometimes things are way to serious around here for way to long.  The occasional light moment isn't hurting anything or anyone.

[BmorePat87]

So DOJ oversight and criminal justice reform were suggested back when this was a thread about her role in the administration. I see those as being goals for the first year or two (though it's hard to say what may happen with a McConnell control Senate).

In the final two years, I could see her taking the lead on foreign policy as Biden sets her up to take over in 2024. I said before that I think her running mate will be Buttigieg, but whoever it is could then be put into a position to help in that arena (Sec of State for example).

I can see this administration serving as a training ground for future party leaders.

[*PhilHos*]

(11-09-2020, 01:33 PM)GMDino Wrote: No I fully understand.  But when it just repeating the same point over and over because the counterpoint is ignored it's not worth it.

At least you admit to ignoring my counterpoint. 

[Belsnickel]

(11-09-2020, 01:43 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So DOJ oversight and criminal justice reform were suggested back when this was a thread about her role in the administration. I see those as being goals for the first year or two (though it's hard to say what may happen with a McConnell control Senate).

In the final two years, I could see her taking the lead on foreign policy as Biden sets her up to take over in 2024. I said before that I think her running mate will be Buttigieg, but whoever it is could then be put into a position to help in that arena (Sec of State for example).

I can see this administration serving as a training ground for future party leaders.

I sure hope so, because the Democrats have been failing hard at that.