Clinton says half her Cabinet will be women

[136or142]

I updated my Cabinet selections to 8 men and 7 women after Justin Trudeau appointed a cabinet with gender parity.  There are several other cabinet ranking positions but I'm less familiar with them.  This would make her cabinet gender equal because if I were here I would choose Elizabeth Warren to be my Vice Presidential nominee.

While I don't really have an issue with mandated gender parity one way or the other, I do find it bizarre and laughable that in the United States where something like 90% of the CEOs of Fortune 500 Companies and at least over 80% of the members of the Boards of Directors of those companies are men, that it's only when women are hired for these positions that questions are raised on 'did they get hired due to merit?"

There already is enormous gender bias, but it's men (and almost always white men) who are the direct beneficiaries of this bias.  I personally regard much of the 'we must hire the best person' nonsense as nothing more than push-back from white males against the loss of this undeserved privilege.  

Anyway, this is my latest cabinet prediction, please tell me which one of these, regardless of their gender, you regard as not being competent:

1.Treasury, Deval Patrick
2.Commerce, Jill Docking
3.Labor, Alyson Schwartz
4.Interior, Raul Grijalva
5.Agriculture, Bill Haslam (depending on what he does with the Anti LGBTQ legislation)
6.Energy, Rush Holt
7.Transportation, Julian Castro
8.Housing and Urban Development, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake
9.Education, Judy Chu
10.Housing and Urban Development, Michelle Nunn
11.Veterans Affairs, Robert MacDonald
12.Defense, Ash Carter
13.State, Tom Daschle
14.Homeland Security, Jennifer Granholm
15.Attorney General, Loretta Lynch

[136or142]

I updated my Cabinet selections to 8 men and 7 women after Justin Trudeau appointed a cabinet with gender parity.  There are several other cabinet ranking positions but I'm less familiar with them.  This would make her cabinet gender equal because if I were here I would choose Elizabeth Warren to be my Vice Presidential nominee.

While I don't really have an issue with mandated gender parity one way or the other, I do find it bizarre and laughable that in the United States where something like 90% of the CEOs of Fortune 500 Companies and at least over 80% of the members of the Boards of Directors of those companies are men, that it's only when women are hired for these positions that questions are raised on 'did they get hired due to merit?"

There already is enormous gender bias, but it's men (and almost always white men) who are the direct beneficiaries of this bias.  I personally regard much of the 'we must hire the best person' nonsense as nothing more than push-back from white males against the loss of this undeserved privilege.  

Anyway, this is my latest cabinet prediction, please tell me which one of these, regardless of their gender, you regard as not being competent:

1.Treasury, Deval Patrick
2.Commerce, Jill Docking
3.Labor, Alyson Schwartz
4.Interior, Raul Grijalva
5.Agriculture, Bill Haslam (depending on what he does with the Anti LGBTQ legislation)
6.Energy, Rush Holt
7.Transportation, Julian Castro
8.Housing and Urban Development, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake
9.Education, Judy Chu
10.Housing and Urban Development, Michelle Nunn
11.Veterans Affairs, Robert MacDonald
12.Defense, Ash Carter
13.State, Tom Daschle
14.Homeland Security, Jennifer Granholm
15.Attorney General, Loretta Lynch

This just shows how few competent people of either gender we have if this is the sort of list you come up with.

Everyone of them is far more qualified to be even President than most of the gang of idiots than ran for the Republican Presidential nomination.

[136or142]

Adam, there's too many politicians on your list. She'd want a few technocrats, especially ones she knows and trusts.

I know.  I'm not familiar with all that many non elected policy experts.

[136or142]

Judy Chu? Yeah, it appears she was on a school board in the 1980s, but what else has she done in relation to education? She's not even on an education-related committee in the house.

She was a psychology professor prior to getting elected to political office.  Beyond that, the Federal Department of Education is not supposed to have any say in the running of schools or in education curriculum.

[136or142]

Very egalitarian of her.   She's going to win the women's vote, so she feels it important for Trump to win the males.

The men who are going to be outraged by half of cabinet positions going to women were not going to be voting for Clinton anyway.

Yes, she's made sure of that.   drip drip drip.   But she can still help with turnout.

Please describe for me the voter who wouldn't turn out to vote against Clinton because she's a woman, but will turn out to vote against her because she might appoint a female Secretary of the Interior.

It's not about her appointing a female Sec of Interior.  It's her making a deal about promoting people for being female, and how Joe Blow has had it too easy all his life because females aren't getting enough appointments int eh halls of power and female CEO billionaires only make $790 million.

Maybe Hillary Clinton feels that the majority of the 'best people' for cabinet jobs are women.  So, this is also about promoting people for being male.

[136or142]

I updated my Cabinet selections to 8 men and 7 women after Justin Trudeau appointed a cabinet with gender parity.  There are several other cabinet ranking positions but I'm less familiar with them.  This would make her cabinet gender equal because if I were here I would choose Elizabeth Warren to be my Vice Presidential nominee.

While I don't really have an issue with mandated gender parity one way or the other, I do find it bizarre and laughable that in the United States where something like 90% of the CEOs of Fortune 500 Companies and at least over 80% of the members of the Boards of Directors of those companies are men, that it's only when women are hired for these positions that questions are raised on 'did they get hired due to merit?"

There already is enormous gender bias, but it's men (and almost always white men) who are the direct beneficiaries of this bias.  I personally regard much of the 'we must hire the best person' nonsense as nothing more than push-back from white males against the loss of this undeserved privilege.  

Anyway, this is my latest cabinet prediction, please tell me which one of these, regardless of their gender, you regard as not being competent:

1.Treasury, Deval Patrick
2.Commerce, Jill Docking
3.Labor, Alyson Schwartz
4.Interior, Raul Grijalva
5.Agriculture, Bill Haslam (depending on what he does with the Anti LGBTQ legislation)
6.Energy, Rush Holt
7.Transportation, Julian Castro
8.Housing and Urban Development, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake
9.Education, Judy Chu
10.Housing and Urban Development, Michelle Nunn
11.Veterans Affairs, Robert MacDonald
12.Defense, Ash Carter
13.State, Tom Daschle
14.Homeland Security, Jennifer Granholm
15.Attorney General, Loretta Lynch

This just shows how few competent people of either gender we have if this is the sort of list you come up with.

Everyone of them is far more qualified to be even President than most of the gang of idiots than ran for the Republican Presidential nomination.

That only proves my point.

That's one way of looking at it.