The Republicans have labeled her a “DIE” hire. But aren’t they kind of correct? Biden said he was going to pick an African-American woman as his VP to help pull in those votes. She made it onto the short list for her accomplishments. But she wouldn’t have been on the list or chosen without being African-American.
I don’t like Republicans and have always been a Democrat. But I feel like I’m missing why they’re wrong about calling her a “DEI hire” and how to explain it to others.
A DEI hire, ISTM, is someone who is selected soley for DEI without any accomplishments or qualifications. The veep is an accomplished individual, so, no, they are not kind of correct, IMHO.
Did he ever say that about the Veep? He said it about the Supreme Court.
Did he really never say that? I know there was a lot of pressure to choose a an African-American woman as VP, so my mind could very well have conflated the two. If so, I apologize.
Even if he had said it, you said it yourself - “ She made it onto the short list for her accomplishments.” The GOP wants you to believe DEI hires aren’t qualified to even be in the discussion, and are there solely on their characteristics, not their qualifications.
What you may be thinking of is after RBG died, Trump said he’d “definitely be appointing a woman” to replace her.
When Republicans say “DEI”, what they mean is “n_____”.
If someone makes the short list, what is the harm from selecting the one who increases diversity?
I don’t remember the timeline, but did he say he was going to choose an African American woman and then go and find an African American woman, or did he choose Harris (and possibly one or two other African American Women) and then make the statement.
IOW, was the position already going to go to an AA woman before he made the statement?
But even if he did, there’s nothing wrong with a “DEI hire” . She brings to the table an experience and an outlook on life that’s not possible for a white male to have.
No, as long as the person can do the job, obviously. Which I believe Harris can.
“DEI hire” is a bullshit right-wing fantasy term. They won’t even define it clearly. We should ignore this kind of right wing bullshit.
I think there was a period near the end of the search where there was an unspoken assumption that it would be a black woman (I remember Susan Rice and Val Demings being talked about a lot more than the other non-Harris possibilities), but all he ever explicitly said was that it would be a woman.
So Biden was Obama’s DEI hire, as will, most likely, be Harris’ VP. Who is most likely from the male minority in the country.
Harris is an extremely intelligent and capable person. She has a lot of energy and has already shown that she isn’t going to be a quiet mouse like Biden. There was a big Michele Obama push for a while, but I think Harris is every bit as good as Michele Obama and, if Darwin was right, about a million years ahead of Trump on the evolutionary scale.
That’s a pretty low bar, to be fair.
Well, Trump has masterfully brainwashed and manipulated millions of people so, to be fair, he is apparently higher than all of them.
Presidential candidates often choose their VP candidate to appeal to a particular group of the electorate.
Trump has chosen Vance to appeal to a particular group of white male conservative voters.
Guess that makes Vance a DEI hire.
No, it makes him a stupid choice becasue Trump already has that demographic in the bag.
As for Kamala, its impossible for an MAGA type to not think of anyone black or of mixed race as a DIE hire, no matter how great their qualifications are. If they want to complain about a DIE hire, they should complain about Justice Thomas.
Not necessarily. Some articles are starting to come out that Trump is losing white male voters, in numbers significant enough to be a concern, and that Vance was not a victory lap pick, as originally depicted, but an attempt to plug that gap:
Politico article: “‘It’s a big, big swing’: Trump loses ground with white voters: The president is running well behind his 2016 pace with the demographic that sent him to the White House.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/21/trump-white-voters-support-418420
Also a New Republic article, for what it’s worth:
There is an implication that with a DEI hire, there’s a straight white male out there that could do the job better. With the VP nomination, there are many political implications taken into account, so there aren’t any straight white males that could actually fill those requirements, so, no, she is not a DEI hire. Could she have been a DEI hire early in her career? Possibly, but she excelled in those positions, which is the ENTIRE POINT of DEI hires - give someone a chance who isn’t a straight white male.
I think it’s a mistake to label certain hires as “DEI hires,” implying others are not. If your organization has a DEI program, EVERYONE that is hired is a “DEI hire.”