From commenter Sid:
The problem with barring white men from leadership roles is that you've cut yourself off from the biggest pool of leadership talent in the country. Imagine if there were an NFL team that barred black men from joining their team: they might be able to find good players here and there, and maybe even win a few games, but barring black talent from your team would be disastrous in the long run.And:
The Democrats have thus handicapped themselves for ideological reasons. There are far more men than women suited for leadership. Black men have masculine charisma, but the number ready to lead on national issues is quite small. Hispanic and Asian men are rarely charismatic and seldom appeal to people outside of their racial bloc. Is Julian Castro really the best we can find? Apparently so.An excerpt from Steve Sailer's running commentary about the wicked witch's inept campaign:
Politico spoke to a dozen officials working on or with Clinton’s Michigan campaign, and more than a dozen scattered among other battleground states, her Brooklyn headquarters and in Washington who describe an ongoing fight about campaign tactics, an inability to get top leadership to change course.Obama's campaign headquarters:
|Lots of men--well, biological males, anyway|
|Termagants on trendy MacBooks|
I overestimated the competence of our opposition. This is another reason we should cheer the elevations of the Keith Ellisons and the Donna Brazilles of the Democrat party--not just because they accentuate the Core-v-Fringe division between the two major parties but also because they're less intelligent and less knowledgeable than the David Axelrods and the Howard Deans are.