How Many Whites & Men Did Biden Discriminate Against ?

OP
protectionist

protectionist

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
39,337
Reaction score
6,796
Points
1,130
Wouldn't that include you as well? Surely you're not expecting us to believe you're qualified to run let alone serve as Vice President of the United States?
I neither expect you to believe it nor disbelieve it. Whether any particular person is qualified or not, is irrelevant. The point is that by limiting his selection to a "woman of color", he has illegally violated the 1964 Civil rights Act, which bans discrimination in employment, based on race or sex.

So guess what. Kamala Harris was right about what she said about Biden. He IS a racist - but against whites, not against blacks.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,578
Reaction score
1,317
Points
245
Location
Virginia
It's no secret that Kamala Harris was picked for VP based on her race and color. Nothing unusual for a Democrat, when millions of people in that racist and sexist party support race and sex based Affirmative Action.

Well, this thread will probably diverge into a dozen different off topic directions, but the question of the OP is a clear one. It may be hard to answer, but here's a few guidelines. The answer would be every man and every white person, who is a US citizen over the age of 35, and I guess who has no criminal record.

For a general guess, it would be well over 100 million people.
Every presidential candidate chooses a VP that will help them win. If Biden thinks that a woman of color will help him win I'd say that is his call. Did he discriminate against white men? Nope, none were qualified in Biden's eyes.
 
OP
protectionist

protectionist

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
39,337
Reaction score
6,796
Points
1,130
Every presidential candidate chooses a VP that will help them win. If Biden thinks that a woman of color will help him win I'd say that is his call. Did he discriminate against white men? Nope, none were qualified in Biden's eyes.
He discriminated because he et al openly talked about picking a woman of color.

As far as no white men being qualified (but Kamala Harris is), HA HA HA HA HA.
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
11,578
Reaction score
1,317
Points
245
Location
Virginia
Every presidential candidate chooses a VP that will help them win. If Biden thinks that a woman of color will help him win I'd say that is his call. Did he discriminate against white men? Nope, none were qualified in Biden's eyes.
He discriminated because he et al openly talked about picking a woman of color.

As far as no white men being qualified (but Kamala Harris is), HA HA HA HA HA.
If he said he wanted a VP from a swing state would you complain that he is discriminating against Iowa? If he wanted a evangelical VP to help him with Christians (Pense?) would you complain that he is discriminating against Jews and Muslims? If he decided he needed a mother to help with women voters would you agree no white men would be qualified?
 

Kilroy2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
2,444
Reaction score
443
Points
140
You can make the same argument as to why Trump choose his VP. Was he picked because of his race, color or sex?
No you CANNOT make that same argument. Hundreds of people have been talking about Biden picking a woman of color. Nobody ever spoke about Trump picking anyone according to sex or race.
Trump pick was both a racist and sexist pick.

So they discussed it as it would make a statement . I can see in the repub camp that it is a foreign concept to be thinking about a woman of color as a running mate. The fact still is he had a list which were woman. Some were white and some were black. Now will the repubs ever consider a woman of color as a running mate? So why is it a racist problem and not a sexist problem?

The OP comment was white men were being discriminated against. Well Biden is white so how is it discrimination. Why was woman excluded?

I think repubs have a sexist problem on their hand and that they want to keep in the closet. So they will talk about race as they did with Obama but it really is a problem with woman with eyes on the top spot in politics.

well lets get to it

Trump - Trump: 'Some men are insulted' by Biden choosing female VP


Biden announced in May that he would select a woman as his No. 2 – marking the third time a woman would be a vice presidential nominee for a major party – and his list of candidates also includes several women of color.

So he had discussed it as early as May

“I would be inclined to go a different route than what he’s done,” Trump told Clay Travis, a sports commentator who hosts a national radio show based in Nashville, Tennessee. “First of all he roped himself into a certain group of people.”

Trump went on to say that “some people would say that men are insulted by that. And some people would say it’s fine. I don’t know.”

so we see where the topic came from. Men are insulted. Hmmmm

that is a pretty sexist comment.

 

Kilroy2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
2,444
Reaction score
443
Points
140
The assumption is that she was picked because of her race, color or sex.

He meet with many people and he chose one as he can only chose one person. There will be many other positions that will need to be filled. I am sure one of them will be a white man. Still how can a white man discriminate against another white man?

KM has a law degree and served as DA

Also her husband is white.

There is no discrimination. Who is harmed or denied any rights? Biden can choose who he wants. You can make the same argument as to why Trump choose his VP. Was he picked because of his race, color or sex?
If I'm not mistaken, the DNC picked Harris from a pool of four black female candidates.

Plenty of whites have also earned law degrees and served as DAs; that argument is moot.

your assumption that the DNC picked Harris is moot as you do not have any proof and it is what you believe for obvious reason. The decision is Biden's to make. He can listen to what others have to say but he makes the final decision.

Others may have it but they weren't picked to be on the ticket. This just shows that she has some credentials other than it was discrimination against white people. Yet she appears to be partially white.

When Sarah Palin was picked was this discrimination?

when biden stated that he was only considering women for the job, he was explicitly stating the he was discriminating against all men.


your inability to admit this, is only relevant in that it shows that you only oppose discrimination, when it is politically advantageous to you.

How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?

This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?

Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.

The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.

Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.

its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice . As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.

Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama

that is your argument.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,525
Reaction score
13,365
Points
2,220
...


How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?

i have explained it and will again.


This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.


Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.

if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.



The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is not the problem.

yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.



Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.





its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .

sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.


As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.

using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.

your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama

two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.


that is your argument.

no, it was not. it was your argument and i crushed it.
 

Kilroy2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
2,444
Reaction score
443
Points
140
...


How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?

i have explained it and will again.


This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.


Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.

if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.



The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is not the problem.

yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.



Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.





its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .

sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.


As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.

using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.

your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama

two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.


that is your argument.

no, it was not. it was your argument and i crushed it.
you - How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?
It is unjust because he is classifying as ALL white men. If you believe that all white men feel discriminated you are sadly mistaken. White men will vote for Biden




Me - This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.

me - wow we agree on something about your statement

So you admit that the argument is advantageous to you. Did not see that one coming.


me - Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.
you - if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.

me - Well discrimination against cherry ice cream in favor of banana ice cream is not discrimination. It is choice. Yes if men or woman have discriminating taste in choosing a mate then that is not a bad thing.

If your discrimination is based on race then I would say that is a bad thing. But it is expectable as your mate is a choice that should not be taken lightly.

You fail to understand racial discrimination as it applies to not just a few but the whole race.

A racist landlord will not rent to grey people and that applies to all grey people.

if he rents to a select few grey people then that is not racial discrimination. giving them the benefit of doubt.

Definition -
racial discrimination - discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race. racialism, racism. discrimination, favoritism, - unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice. The last part is important.

Prejudice - preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is the problem.

You - yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.

Unjust is important. It is not unjust if all the VP's were white men.

again that is not discrimination as it is not unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice.

A white guy refuses to rent to a white girl because he is prejudice against white men . That is your argument. It is not discrimination it is sexism.





discrimination
[dəˌskriməˈnāSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
    "victims of racial discrimination" ·
    [more]
    synonyms:
    prejudice · bias · bigotry · intolerance · narrow-mindedness · unfairness ·
    [more]
  2. recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.
    "discrimination between right and wrong" ·
    [more]
    synonyms:
    differentiation · distinction · telling the difference




Me - Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
you - correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

My point was that it is not discrimination

Yet he interviewed woman of all color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.

So you admit to making a racist argument ????

He interviewed multiple woman. He can only chose one that he feels is compatible with him.





me - its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .
you - sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.

me -that does not prove unjust when all the previous VP's were men.

that does not prove that they were unjustly treaded. Were you unjustly treated because you were not considered.

me
As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.
you
using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.
me
It still holds true as the assumption is that the best person was hired. It would fail only if the person did not get the job because of race or sex prejudice. IF one person for one position was picked then it is a stretch to say its discrimination . This can only be proven if it is a pattern of hiring only the same type of people and that you did it purposely




your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.

So now it is sexist to pick a woman. It probably racist discrimination. Well I can understand that Trump has been blowing hard on that same subject and you seem to buy it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama
two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.

I do not make the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination.

And yes there is no discrimination taking place

 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,525
Reaction score
13,365
Points
2,220
...


How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?

i have explained it and will again.


This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.


Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.

if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.



The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is not the problem.

yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.



Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.





its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .

sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.


As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.

using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.

your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama

two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.


that is your argument.

no, it was not. it was your argument and i crushed it.
you - How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?
It is unjust because he is classifying as ALL white men. If you believe that all white men feel discriminated you are sadly mistaken. White men will vote for Biden




Me - This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.

me - wow we agree on something about your statement

So you admit that the argument is advantageous to you. Did not see that one coming.


me - Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.
you - if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.

me - Well discrimination against cherry ice cream in favor of banana ice cream is not discrimination. It is choice. Yes if men or woman have discriminating taste in choosing a mate then that is not a bad thing.

If your discrimination is based on race then I would say that is a bad thing. But it is expectable as your mate is a choice that should not be taken lightly.

You fail to understand racial discrimination as it applies to not just a few but the whole race.

A racist landlord will not rent to grey people and that applies to all grey people.

if he rents to a select few grey people then that is not racial discrimination. giving them the benefit of doubt.

Definition -
racial discrimination - discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race. racialism, racism. discrimination, favoritism, - unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice. The last part is important.

Prejudice - preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is the problem.

You - yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.

Unjust is important. It is not unjust if all the VP's were white men.

again that is not discrimination as it is not unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice.

A white guy refuses to rent to a white girl because he is prejudice against white men . That is your argument. It is not discrimination it is sexism.





discrimination
[dəˌskriməˈnāSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
    "victims of racial discrimination" ·
    [more]
    synonyms:
    prejudice · bias · bigotry · intolerance · narrow-mindedness · unfairness ·
    [more]
  2. recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.
    "discrimination between right and wrong" ·
    [more]
    synonyms:
    differentiation · distinction· telling the difference




Me - Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
you - correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

My point was that it is not discrimination

Yet he interviewed woman of all color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.

So you admit to making a racist argument ????

He interviewed multiple woman. He can only chose one that he feels is compatible with him.





me - its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .
you - sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.

me -that does not prove unjust when all the previous VP's were men.

that does not prove that they were unjustly treaded. Were you unjustly treated because you were not considered.

me
As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.
you
using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.
me
It still holds true as the assumption is that the best person was hired. It would fail only if the person did not get the job because of race or sex prejudice. IF one person for one position was picked then it is a stretch to say its discrimination . This can only be proven if it is a pattern of hiring only the same type of people and that you did it purposely




your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.

So now it is sexist to pick a woman. It probably racist discrimination. Well I can understand that Trump has been blowing hard on that same subject and you seem to buy it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama
two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.

I do not make the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination.

And yes there is no discrimination taking place




wow. i can't make heads or tails of what your point(s) are.


1. my argument is advantageous to me. what point are you even making there?

2. past vp are irrelevant to biden's personal actions or judging them. he is a sexist and likely racist discriminator.

3. bide was clear. he intended to discriminate sexually and possibly racially.
 

Kilroy2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2018
Messages
2,444
Reaction score
443
Points
140
...


How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?

i have explained it and will again.


This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.


Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.

if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.



The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is not the problem.

yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.



Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.





its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .

sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.


As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.

using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.

your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama

two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.


that is your argument.

no, it was not. it was your argument and i crushed it.
you - How is the OP statement unjust or discrimination ?
It is unjust because he is classifying as ALL white men. If you believe that all white men feel discriminated you are sadly mistaken. White men will vote for Biden




Me - This is your argument and you can't see how advantageous it is to you?
you have not repeated my argument, and yes, my argument, is supposed to, among other goals, be advantageous to me and mine.

me - wow we agree on something about your statement

So you admit that the argument is advantageous to you. Did not see that one coming.


me - Choices which are not unjust and bias against a whole race is not discrimination used in a negative way. Another world would be choice.
you - if individuals or small groups are discriminated against, than it is still discrimination. that the whole race was not directly impacted, does not make it not discrimination.

me - Well discrimination against cherry ice cream in favor of banana ice cream is not discrimination. It is choice. Yes if men or woman have discriminating taste in choosing a mate then that is not a bad thing.

If your discrimination is based on race then I would say that is a bad thing. But it is expectable as your mate is a choice that should not be taken lightly.

You fail to understand racial discrimination as it applies to not just a few but the whole race.

A racist landlord will not rent to grey people and that applies to all grey people.

if he rents to a select few grey people then that is not racial discrimination. giving them the benefit of doubt.

Definition -
racial discrimination - discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of another race. racialism, racism. discrimination, favoritism, - unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice. The last part is important.

Prejudice - preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience.
The problem with discrimination if it is unjust and singles out a race or sex of people in a category. The problem is she is a woman. IF she was a white woman then would you say that white men were discriminated.
the problem with discrimination is that it is unjust. that harris is a woman, is the problem.

You - yes, if harris was a white woman i would say that white men were discriminated against. because biden was clear that he was not open to hiring any men for the job.

Unjust is important. It is not unjust if all the VP's were white men.

again that is not discrimination as it is not unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice.

A white guy refuses to rent to a white girl because he is prejudice against white men . That is your argument. It is not discrimination it is sexism.





discrimination
[dəˌskriməˈnāSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
    "victims of racial discrimination" ·
    [more]
    synonyms:
    prejudice · bias · bigotry · intolerance · narrow-mindedness · unfairness ·
    [more]
  2. recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.
    "discrimination between right and wrong" ·
    [more]
    synonyms:
    differentiation · distinction· telling the difference




Me - Why is it discrimination against white men? Is it not discrimination against Indian men, black men , oriental men, Hispanic men, etc. Yet you specifically chose white.
you - correct. biden was very clear that he was picking a woman. it is less clear but i still suspect that he was also biased to find a woman of color.

My point was that it is not discrimination

Yet he interviewed woman of all color.

i am open to being shown that he seriously considered women, who were not, women of color, and i would drop the racist argument, in this case.

So you admit to making a racist argument ????

He interviewed multiple woman. He can only chose one that he feels is compatible with him.





me - its a false argument because you cannot prove that anyone was unjustly treated by a choice .
you - sure i can. biden demonstrated it, by barring all men from consideration for the job.

me -that does not prove unjust when all the previous VP's were men.

that does not prove that they were unjustly treaded. Were you unjustly treated because you were not considered.

me
As the VP choice can only be one person. It alone cannot be unjust to the rest of the people.
you
using that logic, there can be no job discrimination, because for each job, only one person can be hired.
me
It still holds true as the assumption is that the best person was hired. It would fail only if the person did not get the job because of race or sex prejudice. IF one person for one position was picked then it is a stretch to say its discrimination . This can only be proven if it is a pattern of hiring only the same type of people and that you did it purposely




your brain is twisting itself into pretzel shapes, to avoid admitting that your candidate is openly practicing sexist and probably racist discrimination and your entire side of the political divide is fine with it.

So now it is sexist to pick a woman. It probably racist discrimination. Well I can understand that Trump has been blowing hard on that same subject and you seem to buy it.


Tell us how white men were discriminated against when every President except one was white. Every VP as far as I know were also white. Where is the discrimination? Were every other race of men discriminated against in the history prior to Obama
two points.

1. you have to choose. you can either deny that the discrimination took place, or you can argue that it is justified to balance out past discrimination. you don't get to do both.

2. an interesting question. one i would be happy to explore, but unless you are making the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination, it is completely moot. and currently your position is that there is no discrimination taking place.

I do not make the argument that past discrimination justifies current discrimination.

And yes there is no discrimination taking place




wow. i can't make heads or tails of what your point(s) are.


1. my argument is advantageous to me. what point are you even making there?

2. past vp are irrelevant to biden's personal actions or judging them. he is a sexist and likely racist discriminator.

3. bide was clear. he intended to discriminate sexually and possibly racially.
How Many Whites & Men Did Biden Discriminate Against ?

Discrimination is a negative connotation when used with whites and men. It purpose is to illicit an emotion. It's meaning is clear that it is using racial discrimination and linking it to an event. Using it against biden is trying to link discrimination with one action. It is not that he picked a woman but he did it to unjustly hurt white men as a whole. That is the meaning of the comment. To link a negative to something positive.

I have posted the meaning of racial or sex discrimination. It is well defined.

Biden's action does not fall under discrimination. It is not unjust or hurt the entire race as he can choose who he wants to be his VP. Stating that he was going to choose a woman does not effect its meaning. It does not hurt white men as many will still vote for him. He will pick white men to his cabinet as well as other of different races and sex. He himself is a white man.

He is being fair and opening doors.

Its a choice on which America was founded. The right to freedom of expression.

You refuse to acknowledge that former VP's were all white men. Not picking one once is not discrimination. If he picks white men to join his cabinet it is not discrimination. It is choice and some will not agree.

President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that some men may feel “insulted” by his Democratic rival Joe Biden’s commitment to choose a woman as his Vice-Presidential candidate.

Questionable racial or sex discrimination can only be judge by multiple actions that support it.

Your argument can be applied to when Trump picked a white man. Did he discriminate against other races of man and woman? That is how weak it is.

Yet the history of Trump racist remarks is listed all over the web
and he being doing it for years starting in his apartment rental policies in the early 60's.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,525
Reaction score
13,365
Points
2,220
...


How Many Whites & Men Did Biden Discriminate Against ?

Discrimination is a negative connotation when used with whites and men.

discrimination pretty much always has a negative connotation.


It purpose is to illicit an emotion.
it;'s purpose is to accurately describe joe biden's actions.


It's meaning is clear that it is using racial discrimination and linking it to an event. Using it against biden is trying to link discrimination with one action. It is not that he picked a woman but he did it to unjustly hurt white men as a whole. That is the meaning of the comment. To link a negative to something positive.

discrimination does not have to hurt any group as a whole, in order to be discrimination. that is utter nonsense.


biden's discrimination hurt the whites and the men who might have gotten the job, is they were given real consideration.


that was unjust, for them to not even be considered, because of their sex or their skin color.





I have posted the meaning of racial or sex discrimination. It is well defined.

it is discrimination on the basis of race or sex. like when you start out stating something like, "no men will be hired for this job".

the only people pretending to be confused about this, are you liberals.



Biden's action does not fall under discrimination.
of course it does.

It is not unjust
of course it is.


or hurt the entire race as he can choose who he wants to be his VP.
that makes absolutely no sense. 1. discrimination does not have to hurt the whole group to be unjust and 2. that he can choose does not mean his choice is still not discrimination.

Stating that he was going to choose a woman does not effect its meaning.
agreed. biden's words do not change the meaning of words.


It does not hurt white men as many will still vote for him.
it did hurt some white men, who might have gotten a well paying and very easy job. that many white men will still vote for him, is not evidence that his behavior was not discrimination. you are not rational.


He will pick white men to his cabinet as well as other of different races and sex. He himself is a white man.

neither point is relevant, and neither point changes the fact that biden is clearly discriminating by sex and probably by race.

He is being fair and opening doors.
he might be opening a door, but he is doing it, by being unfair. he admitted that he was being unfair, when he stated that he was not even considering any men.




Its a choice on which America was founded. The right to freedom of expression.
nothing here changes the fact that biden was clear in his intent to discriminate against men.


You refuse to acknowledge that former VP's were all white men.
i clearly and explicitly acknowledge that all former vp were white men.



Not picking one once is not discrimination.

correct. unless, of course the person doing the picking, clearly and explicitly stated that he was going to discriminate against all men in his consideration. then it would be discrimination.


If he picks white men to join his cabinet it is not discrimination.
if he clearly states before hand, that he is only going to consider white men, then it would be discrimination.




It is choice and some will not agree.
meaningless filler.





President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that some men may feel “insulted” by his Democratic rival Joe Biden’s commitment to choose a woman as his Vice-Presidential candidate.
personally i would not say i feel insulted. but i do find the blatant sexism and racism of the dem party disgusting.


Questionable racial or sex discrimination can only be judge by multiple actions that support it.
first i heard that claim. i don't agree. especially as biden clearly and explicitly stated his intent to discriminate by sex.


Your argument can be applied to when Trump picked a white man. Did he discriminate against other races of man and woman? That is how weak it is.
you show me trump before hand clearly stating that he was only going to consider white men for the job, and you would be right. otherwise, you are being senseless.



Yet the history of Trump racist remarks is listed all over the web
and he being doing it for years starting in his apartment rental policies in the early 60's.


you are not making a lo to sense. i'm seriously considering that you might be high.
 

harmonica

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
31,898
Reaction score
8,271
Points
1,340
It's no secret that Kamala Harris was picked for VP based on her race and color. Nothing unusual for a Democrat, when millions of people in that racist and sexist party support race and sex based Affirmative Action.

Well, this thread will probably diverge into a dozen different off topic directions, but the question of the OP is a clear one. It may be hard to answer, but here's a few guidelines. The answer would be every man and every white person, who is a US citizen over the age of 35, and I guess who has no criminal record.

For a general guess, it would be well over 100 million people.
.......Obama also discriminated against whites by picking TWO blacks in a row for AG..there is no way 2 blacks are more qualified
---blacks graduate high school at lower levels [ not even counting the mostly white private schools which graduate at higher levels ] = less qualified for college = and they graduate college at lower levels
AND blacks only make up 13% of the population
AND like the OP says, a high percentage of blacks are in jail
= there are MANY many more whites qualified
 

bottlecap

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
550
Reaction score
727
Points
493
Wouldn't that include you as well? Surely you're not expecting us to believe you're qualified to run let alone serve as Vice President of the United States?
I neither expect you to believe it nor disbelieve it. Whether any particular person is qualified or not, is irrelevant. The point is that by limiting his selection to a "woman of color", he has illegally violated the 1964 Civil rights Act, which bans discrimination in employment, based on race or sex.

So guess what. Kamala Harris was right about what she said about Biden. He IS a racist - but against whites, not against blacks.
BRILLIANT Observation. Racist Joe did violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act!!

He disqualified all men, Caucasian, Asian, Hispanic, African American and Native American.

And he disqualified White, Hispanic and Native American Women!!
 

Turtlesoup

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
1,938
Reaction score
2,256
Points
1,893
The assumption is that she was picked because of her race, color or sex.

He meet with many people and he chose one as he can only chose one person. There will be many other positions that will need to be filled. I am sure one of them will be a white man. Still how can a white man discriminate against another white man?

KM has a law degree and served as DA

Also her husband is white.

There is no discrimination. Who is harmed or denied any rights? Biden can choose who he wants. You can make the same argument as to why Trump choose his VP. Was he picked because of his race, color or sex?
there was discrimination..........biden flat out said that he was choosing a black woman----------and his choice of 5 were black women with no major accomplishments. Biden was pandering for the black and female vote only--------------as he sees americans as very shallow apparently.
 
OP
protectionist

protectionist

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
39,337
Reaction score
6,796
Points
1,130
Discrimination is a negative connotation when used with whites and men. It purpose is to illicit an emotion. It's meaning is clear that it is using racial discrimination and linking it to an event. Using it against biden is trying to link discrimination with one action. It is not that he picked a woman but he did it to unjustly hurt white men as a whole. That is the meaning of the comment. To link a negative to something positive.

I have posted the meaning of racial or sex discrimination. It is well defined.

Biden's action does not fall under discrimination. It is not unjust or hurt the entire race as he can choose who he wants to be his VP. Stating that he was going to choose a woman does not effect its meaning. It does not hurt white men as many will still vote for him. He will pick white men to his cabinet as well as other of different races and sex. He himself is a white man.

He is being fair and opening doors.

Its a choice on which America was founded. The right to freedom of expression.

You refuse to acknowledge that former VP's were all white men. Not picking one once is not discrimination. If he picks white men to join his cabinet it is not discrimination. It is choice and some will not agree.

President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that some men may feel “insulted” by his Democratic rival Joe Biden’s commitment to choose a woman as his Vice-Presidential candidate.

Questionable racial or sex discrimination can only be judge by multiple actions that support it.

Your argument can be applied to when Trump picked a white man. Did he discriminate against other races of man and woman? That is how weak it is.

Yet the history of Trump racist remarks is listed all over the web
and he being doing it for years starting in his apartment rental policies in the early 60's.
Since this pile of ludicroulsy, biased jibberish has already been demolished sufficiently by Correll in Post # 51, I won't bother to re-trounce it, but I will just say that heretofore, you will never be regarded as an objective, truthful poster in this forum.
 
OP
protectionist

protectionist

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
39,337
Reaction score
6,796
Points
1,130
I would love to see some white person(s) or men of any race, file a court action with the EEOC, against Biden and the Democrat Party, for violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act having to do with racial and sex discrimination in employment.

Actually, ANY 35 or older, US citizen white person or men could legitimately file this action, but it would be interesting as hell to see it filed by someone who was actively trying to run for president - Are you listening ? >> Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg, Marianne Williamson, Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, etc :biggrin:
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,525
Reaction score
13,365
Points
2,220
I would love to see some white person(s) or men of any race, file a court action with the EEOC, against Biden and the Democrat Party, for violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act having to do with racial and sex discrimination in employment.

Actually, ANY 35 or older, US citizen white person or men could legitimately file this action, but it would be interesting as hell to see it filed by someone who was actively trying to run for president - Are you listening ? >> Bernie Sanders, Andrew Yang, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg, Marianne Williamson, Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, etc :biggrin:

that would be just, but, any dem would know that any such action, would ruin them. their political careers and/or legacy would be destroyed.


hell, they would be placing themselves in physical danger, what with murderous marxist thugs ruling the streets.
 
OP
protectionist

protectionist

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
39,337
Reaction score
6,796
Points
1,130
that would be just, but, any dem would know that any such action, would ruin them. their political careers and/or legacy would be destroyed.


hell, they would be placing themselves in physical danger, what with murderous marxist thugs ruling the streets.
Marxist murderous thugs only rule the streets in Democrat cities, and even there only temporarily, as in the case of Settle and Portland.

And nobody is more murderous than the Clintons. But Trump went up against them and defeated them. Tulsi Gabbard went up against them without fear. Both have the US military on their side.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
69,525
Reaction score
13,365
Points
2,220
that would be just, but, any dem would know that any such action, would ruin them. their political careers and/or legacy would be destroyed.


hell, they would be placing themselves in physical danger, what with murderous marxist thugs ruling the streets.
Marxist murderous thugs only rule the streets in Democrat cities, and even there only temporarily, as in the case of Settle and Portland.

And nobody is more murderous than the Clintons. But Trump went up against them and defeated them. Tulsi Gabbard went up against them without fear. Both have the US military on their side.
true, but antifa style mob attacks are not limited to those cities.
 

Slade3200

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
34,883
Reaction score
4,345
Points
1,140
It's no secret that Kamala Harris was picked for VP based on her race and color. Nothing unusual for a Democrat, when millions of people in that racist and sexist party support race and sex based Affirmative Action.

Well, this thread will probably diverge into a dozen different off topic directions, but the question of the OP is a clear one. It may be hard to answer, but here's a few guidelines. The answer would be every man and every white person, who is a US citizen over the age of 35, and I guess who has no criminal record.

For a general guess, it would be well over 100 million people.
Is it time for you to start a similar thread about Trumps SCOTUS pick being sexist against men? He did after all proclaim that he would be picking a women

“I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman,” Trump said at a campaign rally in Fayetteville, North Carolina. “I think it should be a woman because I actually like women much more than men.” Correll
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top