ADVERTISEMENT

Place to put my Nonsense Thread.

And the first 30 or 40 presidents made their decision based on race and gender.

What’s you beef, again? There isn’t any credible argument Kamala isn’t qualified for the job, based on the credentials of her predecessors. There were probably marginally more qualified VP candidates but being the most qualified has rarely been the primary determinant for the job; people just cared less when a less qualified white guy beat a more qualified white guy.
Biden choose exclusively on skin color and gender. And said as much. He excluded qualified candidates.
 
Not sure that’s accurate. I’d put a good deal of money down that no non-white people were considered for VP by the first 30 or so presidents, at least. Likewise, I doubt many/any non-white Supreme Court justices were considered prior to like the 1950’s. I’m not a historian so maybe there was an exception here and there.

You could argue they were picking the most qualified whites (so, not solely based on whiteness) but that’s not much of an argument. Disingenuous.
Solid----I mean using two completely different era's, and all..... ;)
 
Solid----I mean using two completely different era's, and all..... ;)

Hey, whatever mental gymnastics you guys need to do to convince yourselves that racism was okay for 200 years but giving an opportunity the race most disadvantaged during our history is actually the real racist move.
 
Hey, whatever mental gymnastics you guys need to do to convince yourselves that racism was okay for 200 years but giving an opportunity the race most disadvantaged during our history is actually the real racist move.
You're the only one playing mental gymnastics here. The way people viewed black people back in those days was terrible and close minded. It was definitely a factor in who was disqualified in appointed positions, there's no denying that. But that is completely irrelevant to the point made here. Qualifications should be the first and most important factors in deciding justices. If the Qualifications are at or near equal and you make the decision based on wanting a person of a certain demographic to break a long history of that demographic never being considered, then great. But to eliminate an entire demographic based on ethnicity, gender or creed is unethical and not what is in the best interests for democracy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hailtoyourvictor
Qualifications should be the first and most important factors in deciding justices. If the Qualifications are at or near equal and you make the decision based on wanting a person of a certain demographic to break a long history of that demographic never being considered, then great. But to eliminate an entire demographic based on ethnicity, gender or creed is unethical and not what is in the best interests for democracy.
Are qualifications the most important when it comes to justices only?
 
Are qualifications the most important when it comes to justices only?
No, dipshit. But we are talking about justices in THIS case, aren't we? I guess Camela was brought up. She is living proof that it is a shit idea to choose your running mate based off of gender and race.
 
No, dipshit. But we are talking about justices in THIS case, aren't we? I guess Camela was brought up. She is living proof that it is a shit idea to choose your running mate based off of gender and race.
Trump chose Mike Pence because he appealed to the religious right and he needed that base.

You can be upset when it happens for the ‘other team’, but it’s pretty hypocritical that it doesn’t bug you that Republicans do the exact same thing.

Your shit doesn’t stink tho, right?
 
Trump chose Mike Pence because he appealed to the religious right and he needed that base.

You can be upset when it happens for the ‘other team’, but it’s pretty hypocritical that it doesn’t bug you that Republicans do the exact same thing.

Your shit doesn’t stink tho, right?
Never agreed with the Pence pick. Wasn't sure what qualified him. So now that we have covered that, what exactly is it that you are arguing?

And what about the Justices that Trump appointed? Outside of them being right leaning, what was the pandering in their appointments?
 
Never agreed with the Pence pick. Wasn't sure what qualified him. So now that we have covered that, what exactly is it that you are arguing?

And what about the Justices that Trump appointed? Outside of them being right leaning, what was the pandering in their appointments?
The point is that it happens on both sides of the aisle.

You can choose to ignore it or you can be angry at both sides.

I will chose to ignore it, and call it out when people pretend it’s only a Democrat thing (I will make the same argument towards far left loonies, but that won’t happen on this board)
 
The point is that it happens on both sides of the aisle.

You can choose to ignore it or you can be angry at both sides.

I will chose to ignore it, and call it out when people pretend it’s only a Democrat thing (I will make the same argument towards far left loonies, but that won’t happen on this board)
So you're not arguing anything. You're just being a pain in the ass. Justices are a lifetime appointment. Qualifications should be the first and most important factor in who is appointed. You don't agree. That's all you had to say. Instead, per usual, you add nothing and you deflect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cdbearde
So you're not arguing anything. You're just being a pain in the ass. Justices are a lifetime appointment. Qualifications should be the first and most important factor in who is appointed. You don't agree. That's all you had to say. Instead, per usual, you add nothing and you deflect.
Qualifications mean nothing to me, when as a whole we pick and choose and when it’s important.

It’s either important or it’s not. This isn’t a difficult concept.

The guy who appointed these lifetime appointments had zero qualifications for the position he was in.

So again do qualifications matter or not?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT