In the latest CBS/YouGov poll, Republicans were asked: If Trump wins, do you want him to take revenge against his enemies? No shilly shallying, no euphemisms. Do you want him to take revenge? Nearly half said yes:
On the other hand, a mere 24% of Republicans want Trump to shut down media that's critical of him. I guess we can put that in the "count your blessings" file. Another question drilled down to Republicans' most primal fear: will Joe Biden sell out white people? An astonishing 61% said yes:
White fear of Black advances has overwhelmed the conservative movement. It's recently become distressingly common on the right to blame any sort of inefficiency or problem on "DEI hires" or a "diversity workforce." This didn't come out of nowhere. It came from Republican leaders complaining about DEI in corporations, affirmative action in universities, and wokeness sapping the strength of the US military. Claudine Gay was a diversity hire who never deserved to be president of Harvard. Trans-tolerant policies are ruining military preparedness. Airport delays are due not to the weather, but to a diverse—i.e., too Black—workforce.
Racial progress in America has never been steady. White backlash lurks around every corner, and we're going through a phase of that now. But it's certainly dispiriting that this time around it's being led so explicitly from above.
“If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.” - President Lyndon B. Johnson
bingo
None of this is new tho- complaining about affirmative action goes back 40 years at this point. Trump is just a catalyst for it.
Yeah, I'm old enough to remember the infamous Jesse Helms ad with the pair of white hands crumpling up a letter with a rescinded job offer with the ominous voice-over: "You really needed that job, but they had to give it to a minority because of racial quotas..."
Very subtle.
Why do republicans want to destroy america and capitalism? Diversity improves profits. Higher productivity lets us buy a bigger stick with which to bully the world.
But Jamie Dimon said we need to be nicer to those who want to have revenge. He also said that right wingers are not wrong about critical issues- what does that even mean? It is apparent for a long while now that our corporate overloads are not that sharp, maybe they should just stick to business. I would like to know his views on E-verify but I I will guess he has never taken a position so he can continue with his words salads.
I made the mistake of watching the Dimon interview on CNBC. I know it's rude to ask hard questions of the titans of finance on CNBC, but really, Jamie Dimon's comments deserved at least a little pushback. I'm curious, when Trump's tax cuts went through did he warn about the deficits increasing as a result ? Has he ever suggested holding more of his Wall Street brethren to account for their colossal bad judgment (I'm being kind) leading up to the financial debacle 2007-2009 ? When he criticizes Democrats for their harsh language about "MAGA" has it crossed his mind that trying to overthrow the results of a Presidential electiion and then excuse it merits that criticism ?
In short, Jamie Dimon is f.o.s
I am a Democrat. I work in finance and several of the folks around me are Republicans.
Recently, when I went to fill an open position. I was told, by my superior, to 'only interview people of color during the first week of the job posting.' While I was not told who to hire, I felt a lot of pressure to hire a person of color.
I was not born in the US and, I guess depending on one's definition, I am a person of color. To me, DEI means finding qualified candidates of all backgrounds, then making them welcome and successful in the workplace.
DEI should still allow for hiring the best person for a job, versus forcing me to limit my applicant pool based on race. So yes, I can understand why some resent DEI programs...
Thankfully you are capable of exercising your own judgment and are not required to follow questionable suggestions from your boss.
This is why the best hiring practices are those that remove personally identifying information from job application materials - something as simple as someone's name can inject all kinds of biases into the selection process.
Define "best." Highest GREs? Best GPA? Highest salary at current job? Highest position at current job? Ticks off the most boxes? (or ticks off the fewest company executives, heh!)?
Background, which can include socioeconomics, upbringing, color, religion, etc are all reasonable criteria in determining the optimal "best."
Or did you think it was simple, cut and dried?
I also work in a field where we try to diversify our workforce as much as possible, but nobody ever tells us, or even implies, that we have to restrict our interviews only to POC or something. That's basically admitting that you can't find qualified minority candidates and need to put your thumb on the scale and that's *not* the purpose of DEI. (And also could be illegal) It's, as you said, finding qualified candidates of all backgrounds -- because they *are* out there if you look! -- and creating a culture where everyone can succeed.
that certainly explains why there are almost no white guys in finance
some places deny employment if interviewees admit having ever smoked marijuana while for alcohol the question is not whether they've ever driven while drunk, it's have you ever been convicted of dui
both of these things are illegal, but it's such a nice clean way of putting your thumb on the scale in favor of christian conservatives who prefer alcohol over marijuana
Normally I would not ask for personal information on a blog, but part of the psychological impact of your comments was bolstered when you said :
"depending on one's definition, I am a person of color" .
Ok, which definition ?
does black irish count?
If you come across someone that looks like they check all the boxes, you basically check out of the interview process even if you still need to go through more people. Looking at people that do not look like they're from central casting for the part lets you consider what you truly need for that position. Later on, when you come across a central casting guy (yes, it's probably a guy) you're more likely to still be engaged in the interview process--but maybe it would be better for the company to have someone different.
Sure. Everyone believes that you’re telling the truth here.
This story sounds like total bullshit. If it were true, middleoftheroadkill could sue his employer. (EEOC applies to you being pressured by your employer to only hire people of a certain race.) On no interview panel I’ve ever been on have we ever been told by HR or anybody else to only interview or hire people of a certain race. We were told nothing of their race until they were sitting right there in front of us. I call shenanigans on this entire tale of DEI Made Me Racist.
There are definitely some weird folk in management and big business. Maybe it’s better that we don’t know them personally.
"It has become distressingly common on the right to blame any sort of inefficiency or problem on "DEI hires"
Like some of the commenters here.
Remember what I wrote two days ago on your post about how Republicans view the economy? Let me refresh your memory.
And here we are. White Republicans openly saying that they fear their jobs are under threat because they can no longer block those people from competing for their jobs. The level playing field is a problem for White Republicans. It is, and always has been, a zero-sum game to them.
Taking away people's privilege feels like oppression to them.
Ok, from Goodreads (so I don't get accused of plagiarism):
“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.”
― Franklin Leonard
White privilege is largely invisible to whites, till it goes away.
I wish Biden would take revenge on republicans.
trump's lawyers think having a Q clearance allowed him to retain classified documents; here's a little refresher on how that works for most people
~~~
Nghia Hoang Pho, 68, of Ellicott City, Maryland, and a naturalized U.S. citizen originally of Vietnam, was sentenced today to 66 months in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, for willful retention of classified national defense information. According to court documents, Pho removed massive troves of highly classified national defense information without authorization and kept it at his home.
~~~
BOSTON – A former Raytheon systems engineer was sentenced today for illegally retaining national defense information. The defendant retained 31,000 pages of information that was marked as classified, some of which pertained to U.S. missile defense and was classified at the SECRET level, and altered or obliterated the classification markings on documents.
Ahmedelhadi Yassin Serageldin, 67, of Sharon, was sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Patti B. Saris to 18 months in prison, one year of supervised release and ordered to pay a fine of $10,000. In December 2019, Serageldin pleaded guilty to one count of willfully retaining national defense information.
Serageldin was a systems engineer at Raytheon Technologies in Massachusetts from August 1997 until he was terminated in May 2017. Serageldin had a SECRET level security clearance in order to complete his assignments on several defense contracts for the U.S. government involving military radar technology.
~~~
wapo - trump Q clearance
As of 12:00pm on Jan 20, 2020, Trump was permitted to have precisely *zero* classified material in his possession. He was a fucking civilian -- and an exceptionally stupid, disgraced one at that -- with shit-all for clearance and no authority to do anything whatsoever with any government documents. Every single second those documents were in his possession after that technically constituted a crime, and then when he refused to surrender them to NARA per a grand jury order, shit got even more real. The only reason his stupid, fat orange ass isn't in a jail now is that the case landed in front of the most egregiously unqualified federal judge and blatant right-wing hack to ever warm a district bench.
The asshat judge in west Texas who wants to invalidate the entire 21st Century is a strong contender for “most egregiously unqualified federal judge and blatant right-wing hack to ever warm a district bench.”
The modern Left is the smartest group of dumb people that I have ever encountered in my life. My head simply explodes when an otherwise intelligent lefty like Kevin writes and publishes such an inaccurate statement:
"Another question drilled down to Republicans' most primal fears: will Joe Biden sell out white people? An astonishing 61% said yes ... It has become distressingly common on the right to blame any sort of inefficiency or problem on 'DEI hires' or a 'diversity workforce.' This didn't come out of nowhere. It came from Republican leaders complaining about DEI in corporations, affirmative action in universities, and wokeness sapping the strength of the US military. Claudine Gay was a diversity hire who never deserved to be president of Harvard. Trans-tolerant policies are ruining military preparedness. Airport delays are due not to the weather, but to a diverse—i.e., too Black—workforce."
I believe, in fact, that there are elements of truth to be found in this analysis (if you look hard enough). Sure, there are always going to be some retrograde elements in a huge and diverse society. And certainly some of those troglodytes can be racist.
My problem with Kevin's assessment, however, lies mainly with its inexcusably narrow and insultingly parochial perspective. Kevin is now the exact type of elite who not only pisses off normal and entirely decent people, but does so in such a self-righteous manner that his obvious lack of insight into his own glaring blind spots is positively comical.
Here's the thing: it is not in any way "astonishing" that 61% of Republicans fear that Biden will sell out white people. Nor can this phenomenon be blamed entirely, as Kevin attempts to do, on right wing propaganda. To anyone making such assertions I have to ask: what world do you live in? What kind of people do you interact with? How can you possibly be so closed off from reality? Tone deafness simply does not get any more tonally deaf than what Kevin has written above.
Because in addition to the right-wing propaganda that may indeed contribute to the phenomenon noted above, another obvious contributing factor is the LEFT-wing propaganda that contributes to the phenomenon noted above.
Leftists and, unfortunately, the Democratic party itself are screaming from the rooftops about Diversity. Diversity. Diversity. It is the Left that broadcasts its intentions as loudly as it can to emphasize diversity above and beyond every other consideration. So what exactly do the Dems expect people to think other than that the Dem party is likely to pursue its race-conscious agenda to potentially dubious ends?
Instead of re-running Hilary Clinton's epically boneheaded 2016 assertion that Diversity is our strength, the Dems should instead campaign on the idea that talent, perseverance, and hard work are our strengths.
Rather than trying to gaslight the public and assert against all evidence that a public figure such as Claudine Gay was unfairly maligned in some way, why not just admit what any common yokel can easily conclude from the available reporting: she WAS a diversity hire, and she WASN'T qualified to be President of Harvard.
Rather than putting his press secretary (Karine Jean-Pierre) forward to assert that he has made "equity" (equal outcomes) the focus of his every single policy, President Biden should instead be out there championing merit and equality of opportunity.
And if the Dems are too tunnel-visioned to change course, if they are too captured by a militant and extreme ideology that puts race front and center and squashes (or cancels) dissenters like bugs, then frankly they deserve to lose.
The Dems ultimately have themselves to blame for the poll results cited by Kevin, and if they cannot accept as much and quickly make the necessary course corrections, then I believe there is a very real chance that Donald Trump will be the next president.
So, how do you feel about abortions?
@Bardi:
I think you're being sarcastic. But I'll answer seriously anyway. I am not a professional pollster, but the polls that I have read about, and the elections that have taken place since the infamous Dobbs decision was handed down by the Supreme Court, indicate that the abortion issue is one of the few legitimate life rafts that the modern Dem party can cling to.
It's an important issue, and I personally would like to see the Dems stay in power in order to help safeguard abortion rights. But that makes it all the more tragic to see the Dems epically sabotaging themselves with an obsession on race that is obviously excessive, alienating, and ultimately self-destructive in a national election.
Can you point to a specific statement by Biden, or any prominent Democrat for that matter, where they said employers should hire non white people even if they aren't well qualified?
@NotCynicalEnough:
I'm afraid you're still not cynical enough, at least not when it comes to the self-destructive direction of the modern Dems.
I don't think I can improve on the commentary found in this Reason article: "Kamala Harris Says Equal Outcomes Should Be the Goal of Public Policy"
From that article: "A government should be obligated to treat all citizens equally, giving them the same access to civil rights and liberties like voting, marriage, religious freedom, and gun ownership. The government cannot deny rights to certain people because they are black, female, Muslim, etc.—this would be unequal treatment ...
"A mandate to foster equity, though, would give the government power to violate these rights in order to achieve identical social results for all people. In accordance with this thinking, the authorities might be justified in giving some people more rights than others. Indeed, this would arguably be strictly necessary, in order to create a society where everyone ends up in the exact same situation."
This article appeared just before election day, 2020; but, unfortunately, the misguided emphasis on equity was not abandoned thanks to any sort of political pivot. Indeed, as President, Biden went ahead and signed an executive order on equity.
And if you cannot see how the pursuit of equity leads to the type of scenario you describe, all I can say is that there are an awful lot of voters out there who seem to have a much firmer grasp of the situation than you do. And they quite understandably don't appreciate the inevitable mob calling them racist because they still believe in equal opportunity rather than a mandate for equal results.
Except that they *don't* believe in equal opportunity as they ignore the fact that opportunity is largely dependent on choosing you parents wisely.
That's a quote from "Reason", but it isn't a Biden official saying anything. It's a libertarian hack saying it.
Bill Ackman, is that you? Fck off.
Nah but it might be Leonard Leo?
“…. President Biden should instead be out there championing merit and equality of opportunity.”
Make it equality of opportunity from birth and you’ve got a deal. ..,, I’ll bet you know, and I can personally attest to the fact, that people like you mean “equality of opportunity” only after certain people, not completely but overwhelmingly white, have been afforded opportunities from birth denied to other certain people, not completely but mostly “people of color.”
Make it “ equality of opportunity” from birth, and you’ve got a deal.
Leo's here for long winded apologia for racism. Who knew?
Right? This guy just lives for blaming DEI for every ill in long, tedious walls of text that are quickly boiled down to: White people are more meritorious than others. And it's the democrats fault that they believe this.
Republican answers to these poll questions aren't a reflection of their actual opinions, but simply what they think will piss off liberals and send the media into a tizzy. They talk about this openly in all sorts of venues -- fucking with pollsters is a form of recreation for them nowadays. Not that their actual opinions are necessarily any worse; it's just that it will change day to day and week to week depending on what they think will sound more outrageous.
Nope they really believe this crap, it's a foundational identity for the 21st century MAGA type.
10% of Democrats want Trump to get revenge?
I have said for decades that the post 1965 mass immigration policies were too many, too fast, and bound to result in a backlash so strong that it imperils the nation's stability.
And here we are. Take a bow, all those who said immigration strengthens the nation - and never, never, considered limiting the numbers so that only gradual change took place.
p.s. it isn't Blacks that are discomfiting (racist) whites. It's non-European people changing the demographics.
Pingback: Bohrleute 66 - Der missverstandene Kandidat - das Phänomen Trump, mit Marcel Schütz - Deliberation Daily