A DIRECT / FRONTAL-ASSAULT ON THE U.S. / WHITE / ANGLO PATRIARCHY!!!!!

Choosing a black female or transexual candidate candidate for appearance purposes totally disallows the older tradition of choosing a candidate on merit.


How do you know why people voted for who they voted?

You are jumping to conclusions you make up in your own mind.

Without even knowing their background and experience you believe women and people of color aren't qualified to be on a city counsel.

I'm so glad you and people like you are the minority in our nation.
 
Werbung:
Choosing a black female or transexual candidate candidate for appearance purposes totally disallows the older tradition of choosing a candidate on merit.
Yeah, racists always say this. Because the idea of a female or brown person being qualified does not compute with them.
 
How do you know why people voted for who they voted?

You are jumping to conclusions you make up in your own mind.

Without even knowing their background and experience you believe women and people of color aren't qualified to be on a city counsel.

I'm so glad you and people like you are the minority in our nation.
I am talking about qualifications and requirements for public service, not voting preferences according to favored political parties.
 
Choosing a black female or transexual candidate candidate for appearance purposes totally disallows the older tradition of choosing a candidate on merit.


How do you know they voted for them because of the way they look?

You have no idea why people voted for them.

Stop making things up.

Meanwhile you believe just because they are women and of color you believe they can't do the job.

What does that say about you?
 
How do you know they voted for them because of the way they look?

You have no idea why people voted for them.

Stop making things up.

Meanwhile you believe just because they are women and of color you believe they can't do the job.

What does that say about you?
I'm not talking about voting preferences of voters. I am talking about racial and gender preferences in hiring instead of prerequisites like capabilities and character.
 
I'm not talking about voting preferences of voters. I am talking about racial and gender preferences in hiring instead of prerequisites like capabilities and character.


You keep ignoring my question.

You have no idea why someone voted for them. You are making up things that you don't know are true.

Just because they are women and of color you believe they aren't qualified. Do you even know their names much less whether they are qualified or not?

Or do you just know their skin color and their sex and made those statements out of bigotry and misogyny?

You show your bigotry and misogyny with your posts and it's very offensive.
 
What is your proof that women aren't qualified for the job on a city counsel?

Why do you believe that just because they are women they aren't qualified?
If a company or organization feels compelled to hire someone on race or gender requirements rather than on the basis of competency or character, then those companies or organizations will be sacrificing expertise and quality for political correctness.
 
How do you know why people voted for who they voted?

You are jumping to conclusions you make up in your own mind.

Without even knowing their background and experience you believe women and people of color aren't qualified to be on a city counsel.

I'm so glad you and people like you are the minority in our nation.
Race based quotas established by the institution or organization mandating them do not depend on outside voters but on inside policy makers.
 
We'll, youve completely forgotten about Trump. He was not qualified not experienced. That worked well.
Obama had experience as a leftist black Democrat community organizer for voter fraud operation ACORN. Trump had business experience. I am not sure what qualifications you are focusing on.
 
Obama had experience as a leftist black Democrat community organizer for voter fraud operation ACORN. Trump had business experience. I am not sure what qualifications you are focusing on.
Both Obama and his wife are lawyers and he was a senator.
Trump having business "experience" is not quite correct. We are now being told he had many fraudulent charlatan running his show like weisleman.
Business does mean he is qualified to run a country and his appalling record regarding the economy while he was there proves that.

Btw. Obama was not responsible for anything that happened at acorn regardless of how you try to link him personally to it.
It's just your hate of him that makes you blurt that rubbish.
 
Werbung:
Both Obama and his wife are lawyers and he was a senator.

Obama got all his opponents removed from the ballot in his 1996 senate run. What he did was not illegal but extremely immoral, but Democrats are not known for morality. He ran for the Illinois Senate on his experience as a community organizing leader of Ayers' and pals' ACORN voting fraud organization. ACORN and its 'community organizing' officials were instrumental in getting Bill Clinton to sign the 2000 Commodities Futures Modernization Act that led to the 2008 banking collapse.
Trump having business "experience" is not quite correct. We are now being told he had many fraudulent charlatan running his show like weisleman.
Business does mean he is qualified to run a country and his appalling record regarding the economy while he was there proves that.

No banks were defrauded in spite of lying leftist Trump-hating Democrat claims to the contrary.
Btw. Obama was not responsible for anything that happened at acorn regardless of how you try to link him personally to it.
It's just your hate of him that makes you blurt that rubbish.
I suppose you have personal reasons for trying to distance Obama from his time as an ACORN official.
 
Back
Top