Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
So, DEI is great until it’s politically inconvenient?
So, DEI is great until it’s politically inconvenient?
By MR-7
24 Sep 2025 7:03 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
6 posts • Page 1 of 1
24 Sep 2025 7:03 am
This sounds like identity politics only when it polls well.
Kamala Harris made waves with that revelation in her new memoir 107 Days. She wrote that Pete Buttigieg was her top choice for running mate during her 2024 presidential campaign, but ultimately decided it was “too big of a risk” to have a Black woman and a gay man on the same ticket
Imagine preaching inclusion and then saying two marginalized identities on one ticket is ‘too risky.’ That’s not strategy—that’s surrender. Kamala’s memoir just confirmed what critics have said for years: DEI is a branding tool, not a governing principle. If you believe representation matters, then why treat it like a liability? This undermines every speech she’s given about breaking barriers. Rejecting Buttigieg for being gay while claiming to champion diversity is peak hypocrisy. Either you lead with values, or you don’t. This is the quiet part out loud: DEI is fine for cabinet posts and photo ops, but not when real power is on the line. She said it was ‘too much to ask of America.’ Translation: we don’t trust voters to live up to the ideals we claim to promote.
Kamala Harris confirmed the political handicap everybody thought she had: Democratic strategist | Watch
You would have to be a Slack Jawed MoFo to have voted for this ****.
Kamala Harris made waves with that revelation in her new memoir 107 Days. She wrote that Pete Buttigieg was her top choice for running mate during her 2024 presidential campaign, but ultimately decided it was “too big of a risk” to have a Black woman and a gay man on the same ticket
Imagine preaching inclusion and then saying two marginalized identities on one ticket is ‘too risky.’ That’s not strategy—that’s surrender. Kamala’s memoir just confirmed what critics have said for years: DEI is a branding tool, not a governing principle. If you believe representation matters, then why treat it like a liability? This undermines every speech she’s given about breaking barriers. Rejecting Buttigieg for being gay while claiming to champion diversity is peak hypocrisy. Either you lead with values, or you don’t. This is the quiet part out loud: DEI is fine for cabinet posts and photo ops, but not when real power is on the line. She said it was ‘too much to ask of America.’ Translation: we don’t trust voters to live up to the ideals we claim to promote.
Kamala Harris confirmed the political handicap everybody thought she had: Democratic strategist | Watch
You would have to be a Slack Jawed MoFo to have voted for this ****.
So, let's recap the Ignorance here...shall we.
BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........
Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.
BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........
Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.
24 Sep 2025 7:37 am
Kamaleesha screwed old men....it was her ladder to sucksess...."passed around" wouldn't even begin to cover it.
It's why she can put a rational thought into words....she's stupid, but she can whip up a batch of man gravy standing on her head
It's why she can put a rational thought into words....she's stupid, but she can whip up a batch of man gravy standing on her head
24 Sep 2025 7:58 am
Surely......you can't be thinking of BV, JOHNNY, and RKELLY?MR-7 » 24 Sep 2025, 7:03 am » wrote: ↑
You would have to be a Slack Jawed MoFo to have voted for this ****.
24 Sep 2025 8:05 am
Yes...the Three Sucketeers.RebelGator » 24 Sep 2025, 7:58 am » wrote: ↑ Surely......you can't be thinking of BV, JOHNNY, and RKELLY?
So, let's recap the Ignorance here...shall we.
BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........
Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.
BV posted...Only the zealously stupid, like zeet and a few other local dim lights, believe that 1.87 has any meaning beyond the symbolic. Supply/Demand stooges who believe POTUS can control oil prices.........
Then he posted....Grifty was the entire reason gas went to 4.50 this year.
24 Sep 2025 8:10 am
I wonder who sucked more weiner....Kameltoe or Mayor Pete?nefarious101 » 24 Sep 2025, 7:37 am » wrote: ↑ Kamaleesha screwed old men....it was her ladder to sucksess...."passed around" wouldn't even begin to cover it.
It's why she can put a rational thought into words....she's stupid, but she can whip up a batch of man gravy standing on her head
24 Sep 2025 8:41 am
RebelGator » 24 Sep 2025, 8:10 am » wrote: ↑ I wonder who sucked more weiner....Kameltoe or Mayor Pete?
Sounds like a good thread to me.....but to be fair you should include Obama too
6 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
In total there are 4406 users online :: 14 registered, 17 bots, and 4375 guests
Registered users: Johnny You, Blackvegetable, Buck Naked, ROG62, RebelGator, FOS, ConservativeWave, Beekeeper, jerra b, Cannonpointer, nefarious101, sole, Huey, Fuelman
Bots: Adsbot, Bolt, DuckDuckGo, GPTBot, NING, DuckDuckBot, TTD-Content, ADmantX, YandexBot, facebookexternalhit, CriteoBot, proximic, curl/7, Applebot, Googlebot, Mediapartners-Google, bingbot