Clinton promises 50% women in Cabinet

[MJHolland 12,725]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

It's not a quota. It's promoting more women in politics.

Also this isn't affirmative action. It's not targeting a minority.: 

It also doesn't imply that it's going to be any women. These women will be qualified, and there are plenty of them that go ignored.

Really? Because Hillary herself was given a position in the Obama Administration and she proved to be radically incompetent. So incompetent that she said to stop a planning terror attack on a US embassy in the middle east on the anniversary of 9/11. We only have a handful on embassies in the middle east. That should have easily been prevent. 

Women are not disadvantaged in politics. When they run  they are just as likely (if not more likely) to win elections when compared to their male running mates. This has been proven dozens of times.

Continure voting for Hillary because she was born with female reproductive organs if you want. I don't care. She'll lose to Trump once he started campaigning against her.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

3 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

Really? Because Hillary herself was given a position in the Obama Administration and she proved to be radically incompetent. So incompetent that she said to stop a planning terror attack on a US embassy in the middle east on the anniversary of 9/11. We only have a handful on embassies in the middle east. That should have easily been prevent. 

Women are not disadvantaged in politics. When they run  they are just as likely (if not more likely) to win elections when compared to their male running mates. This has been proven dozens of times.

Continure voting for Hillary because she was born with female reproductive organs if you want. I don't care. She'll lose to Trump once he started campaigning against her.

Um... I'd be careful... You're making an implication that women are incompetent in politics based on your opinion regarding a particular one.

Cabinet members aren't elected either. I don't see why you are using that analogy.

Also, ignoring the retrospect you are fond of utilizing....friendly reminder that the USA has lost 120 personnel since WW2 due to international screwups. Hillary wasn't the first and won't be the last. If you're using that one particular criteria to judge her competence, then the USA has been incredibly incompetent for the last century.

[Lion Heart 15,041]

There are 16 positions in the US Cabinet, which include: Vice President, Secretary of State, Sec. of Defense, Sec. of Treasury, Attorney General, Secretary of Energy, etc. 4 of those positions are already filled with women, so really all she needs is 4 more qualified women and that'll be it. FOUR women. 

[SychosSoChic 9,995]

YES.

I want to see more of this

Developing countries will hopefully take inspiration from this if Hilary can make it happen

[Redstreak 6,653]

1 hour ago, LebaneseDude said:

Not the same people who get offended for not having black people in Hollywood be offended that Hillary wants more women in politics

The hypocrisy  

Like, how do expect women to show that they are qualified and gain the experience as a whole if you continuously skip them for these positions?

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

4 minutes ago, Redstreak said:

Like, how do expect women to show that they are qualified and gain the experience as a whole if you continuously skip them for these positions?

What do you mean?

[MJHolland 12,725]

5 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Um... I'd be careful... You're making an implication that women are incompetent in politics based on your opinion regarding a particular one.

Cabinet members aren't elected either. I don't see why you are using that analogy.

Also, ignoring the retrospect you are fond of utilizing....friendly reminder that the USA has lost 120 personnel since WW2 due to international screwups. Hillary wasn't the first and won't be the last. If you're using that one particular criteria to judge her competence, then the USA has been incredibly incompetent for the last century.

I'm making the implication that picking somebody to fulfill a cabinet position for any reason other than competence and experience is stupid. Obama picked Hillary because she was 2nd place in their primary and he couldn't give her VP so he gave her SoS. She had no foreign policy experience prior to that other than being married to a President. (inb4 you think a Senator has foreign policy experience because she voted for the Iraq War )

And I love your distain for what you call "retrospect" when the rest of us call it "job performance", which she's failed miserably in.

To think Hillary was a great SoS you have to be as delusional as Bernie supporters who think the rich don't already pay their fair share.

[Lion Heart 15,041]

I can easily see Elizabeth Warren being offered the spot of Secretary of the Treasury; and if Julian Castro will be her VP then that will free up his Cabinet position Sec. of Housing and Urban Development to (potentially) another woman. She's really just searching for 3 more qualified women (assuming she keeps the current women in the Cabinet & Warren accepts). 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

6 minutes ago, MJHolland said:

I'm making the implication that picking somebody to fulfill a cabinet position for any reason other than competence and experience is stupid. Obama picked Hillary because she was 2nd place in their primary and he couldn't give her VP so he gave her SoS. She had no foreign policy experience prior to that other than being married to a President. (inb4 you think a Senator has foreign policy experience because she voted for the Iraq War )

And I love your distain for what you call "retrospect" when the rest of us call it "job performance", which she's failed miserably in.

To think Hillary was a great SoS you have to be as delusional as Bernie supporters who think the rich don't already pay their fair share.

SoS isn't picked solely on foreign policy competence. Considering that she had experience from having worked in the field, as part of a Senate, and having been First Lady which entails a lot of discussions about foreign policies, I  don't see why you think she has none whatsoever.

Like...what criterion are you using? None of the other contenders have worked in foreign policy, so if you're trying to use this particular point, you're kinda falling flat. You have nothing to compare it to.

In fact, you're unintentionally making the implication that those with little foreign experience are going to inevitably mess up. So... why would you want someone who hasn't messed up and learned from their mistakes as opposed to someone green? You have that much hope in unproven people?

The reason I refer to retrospect is because you fail to realize that her mistakes were nothing short of just another day in a job, with those mistakes being a result of it just being another day at the job. We've already discussed this point so I don't see why you're bringing it up. The risks were there. They were evaluated. A decision was made. It turned out to be a bad one due to misinformation and lack of time. That was it. If the trial did not implicate her, then you continuing to do so speaks of your own bias and nitpick conspiracy mind. 

Even if you think she's a bad at foreign policy (while ignoring others'), you use that as the only metric while ignoring her efforts for human rights, social welfare, among other things.

I don't think anyone says Hillary was an amazing SoS. She's just not as bad as you are making it out to be. 

[Redstreak 6,653]

3 hours ago, LebaneseDude said:

What do you mean?

Things like this are a cycle: women get overlooked for these positions and lose the potential experience of these jobs, then that lack of experience is used to "justify" why women are incompetent for these positions. It's bullshit to claim it's a quota, women can fill these positions and we need to start showing that. I'm glad Clinton has pledged this position.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, Redstreak said:

Thing a like this are a cycle: women get overlooked for these positions and lose the potential experience of these jobs, then that lack of experience is used to "justify" why women are incompetent for these positions. It's bullshit to claim it's a quota, women can feel these positions and we need to start showing that. I'm glad Clinton has pledged this position.

Alright cause I was trying to figure it out if you were making a statement or a rhetorical question.

I agree.

[Goosey 3,017]

Just now, Redstreak said:

Thing a like this are a cycle: women get overlooked for these positions and lose the potential experience of these jobs, then that lack of experience is used to "justify" why women are incompetent for these positions. It's bullshit to claim it's a quota, women can feel these positions and we need to start showing that. I'm glad Clinton has pledged this position.

But it is a quota.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

7 minutes ago, Lion Heart said:

I can easily see Elizabeth Warren being offered the spot of Secretary of the Treasury; and if Julian Castro will be her VP then that will free up his Cabinet position Sec. of Housing and Urban Development to (potentially) another woman. She's really just searching for 3 more qualified women (assuming she keeps the current women in the Cabinet & Warren accepts). 

I'd love it if Hillary took the high ground and chose Warren despite the latter's recent statements.

[Whispering 18,865]

Great position and answer by Hillary! 

Her team also said they are considering women for VP,  just the same as men. I was happy to hear that, as well. 

[Himeros26 1,688]

Pandering more and more.

I'm surprised there isn't a thread about this woman's followers silencing Bernie supporter pages on facebook by reporting them as ****ographic.