• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 day ago

    The Democratic president with the largest margin of victory in recent times was a black man and you’re still out here saying we need to court voters that won’t vote for a person of color in order to win. Maybe your read on the inherent unelectability of women is similarly flawed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      120 hours ago

      You again. There have been 2 women on the ballot and both failed, this latest with drastic consequences. So I’d say my read was 100% correct, unfortunately. I wish I was wrong.

      • Cethin
        link
        fedilink
        English
        45 hours ago

        More men have been on the ticket and failed than woman. The fact that both women failed is because of what they were running with, not because they were women. They were incredibly milquetoast candidates who ran basically on maintaining the status quo.

        Obama won so handily because he ran on changing the status quo. Whether he actually did or not is a matter for historians, but that’s what he ran on.

        Voters want someone who will fight for them. That’s what Trump, Obama, and Bernie are. They don’t want someone who sits back and talks about how grateful they should be.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        718 hours ago

        Oh, well then let’s run a black man. They not only have 100% success rate, but massively outperformed all the white men. That must mean black skin (as long as it’s not on a woman) is an electoral benefit! Why take a risk with a white person? That’s the heart of your argument, right?

          • Cethin
            link
            fedilink
            English
            35 hours ago

            With a sample size of 2 you claim it’s because they were women. I agree with you it was faulty logic, which was their fucking point and the fact you missed that is incredible. Slow down and think.