DEI hire

[Hawk_82]

Everyone in this thread is shitting on you and laughing at your weak comments.

The fact you think this is winning, again, says a lot about you.

But hey, Northern - the most-hated poster in board history - agrees with you, so ya got that Going for you. 😂😂😂

You think its winning to call me racist while ignoring all the facts. You cant even comment on the fact that Biden himself called for more DEI hiring. You live in a fantasy world.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

You think its winning to call me racist while ignoring all the facts. You cant even comment on the fact that Biden himself called for more DEI hiring. You live in a fantasy world.

It's fascinating to watch.

They advocate for these policies.

They implement these policies.

And when attention is drawn to both, it's racist to do so in their view.

 

[Chishawk1425]

 

[Hawk_82]

It's fascinating to watch.

They advocate for these policies.

They implement these policies.

And when attention is drawn to both, it's racist to do so in their view.

Its all about the ideology. Don't question it, don't disagree with it, don't ever admit inconsistencies.

 

[RileyHawk]

It's fascinating to watch.

They advocate for these policies.

They implement these policies.

And when attention is drawn to both, it's racist to do so in their view.

When was Harris "hired"?

 

[torbee]

I don't think the OP understands that choosing a Vice Presidential candidate is a bit of a balancing act. Presidential candidates look for someone who complements their policy strengths—like picking a VP with expertise in areas where they might be weaker. They also consider how the VP can appeal to different voter groups, whether that's by geographic location, demographics, or political experiance.

Ultimately, the goal is to find someone who can help sway crucial swing states or unify the party if there were internal divisions. Personal chemistry between the presidential and vice-presidential candidates is also key, ensuring they can work well together and present a united front. I think media appeal and public perception play a significant role too. Picking the right person can boost the overall ticket, or it can tank it.

You are putting way too much thought into this.

OP can't say the N word, so he uses DEI instead.

That's it. That's the whole thing.

 

[AuroraHawk]

I think it's funny that you can't even embrace that she is a dei hire. Your only defense is to call me racist. That is soo liberal of you.🤣

Was Clarence Thomas' nomination to replace Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court influenced by the color of his skin?

If so, do you consider Clarence Thomas - using your terminology - "a DEI hire?"

 

[Chishawk1425]

Was Clarence Thomas' nomination to replace Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court influenced by the color of his skin?

If so, do you consider Clarence Thomas - using your terminology - "a DEI hire?"

 

[SalAunese]

The vast majority of you have no idea what a DEI hire is. Are people really this stupid?

 

[torbee]

You wear it well Torbee...

Own it!

It's funny because I don't hate you. I actually weirdly admire the fact you keep coming back to feed your goofy masochistic fetish. I also find it fascinating - is it like a diagnosed fetish to receive sexual gratification by being humiliated online and via text? I'd never heard of it before.

Maybe a tinge of pity?

Anyway, it is just simply a fact that no other poster is disliked anywhere near the level you are.

 

[SalAunese]

I think it's funny that you can't even embrace that she is a dei hire. Your only defense is to call me racist. That is soo liberal of you.🤣

How can you think dei is great when you're embarrassed to call kamala a dei hire. Let's hear your best gaslighting pitch

You’re an ignorant fool.

 

[torbee]

They so badly wanna get nuts with racism and sexism. They have nothing else.

View embedded media

Despicable human beings, all the way down.

 

[torbee]

Its all about the ideology. Don't question it, don't disagree with it, don't ever admit inconsistencies.

You two should get a room. Have a little circle jerk with your MAGA hats on.

 

[Hawk_82]

Was Clarence Thomas' nomination to replace Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court influenced by the color of his skin?

If so, do you consider Clarence Thomas - using your terminology - "a DEI hire?"

Thomas was appointed in 1991. I don't think DEI was even a thing then, so no I don't think he was a DEI hire. Race may or may not have had something to do with the hire, I don't know. I do think Ketanji Brown was a DEI hire though. Biden made it known that his goal was to increase diversity with his hires/appointments.

Vivek is part of the trump campaign and there is no way he is there to meet a DEI quota, he is there because he is damn good at what he does. There are a lot of black people who are not dei hires, there are a lot of black people who are dei hires and still were the best candidate for the job, and there are a lot of black people who were dei hires and were under qualified and also under performed. (this can be applied to any dei minority)

The fallacy about DEI is that not all people who are DEI hires are going to be good or bad hires. Some will be qualified, some will not. The downside of DEI hiring is that sometimes it is assumed that all minority hires are due to DEI and therefore people may assume they are unqualified.

DEI becomes a problem when you try to force a certain number of people into a specific position just to meet a quota. If you try to get more minorities into a position than there are qualified applicants, then you are forced to accept unqualified applicants just to meet the quota. This is not helpful for anyone involved.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

You two should get a room. Have a little circle jerk with your MAGA hats on.

Torbee,

You have a propensity to sexualize random subjects of discussion.

That's not normal behavior.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Anyway, it is just simply a fact that no other poster is disliked anywhere near the level you are.

You'd better check your ignore list, brother.

 

[torbee]

Torbee,

You have a propensity to sexualize random subjects of discussion.

That's not normal behavior.

You and your MAGA pal aren't "random subjects of discussion."

We can all feel the sexual tension of your back-and-forth, mutual admiration society.

Go on and knock yourselves out boys!

 

[alaskanseminole]

...you keep coming back to feed your goofy masochistic fetish. I also find it fascinating - is it like a diagnosed fetish to receive sexual gratification by being humiliated online and via text? I'd never heard of it before.

Yes, there are various fetishes and kinks related to humiliation, embarrassment, and online interactions. These can include:

1. Humiliation Fetishes: Some people have a specific interest in scenarios where they are humiliated or embarrassed. This can occur in various contexts, including online interactions.
2. Online Fetishes: In the digital age, some individuals are interested in exploring their kinks through online platforms, which can include role-playing scenarios that involve embarrassment or humiliation.
3. Submissive Dynamics: In some BDSM contexts, individuals may derive pleasure from feeling submissive or degraded, and this can be facilitated through online interactions.
4. Embarrassment Play: This involves activities that deliberately cause someone to feel embarrassed or awkward, which can be part of a consensual role-playing scenario.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

You and your MAGA pal aren't "random subjects of discussion."

We can all feel the sexual tension of your back-and-forth, mutual admiration society.

Go on and knock yourselves out boys!

You might want to get some help.

 

[lucas80]

The people like @NorthernHawkeye and @Hawk_82 are so easily triggered because the playing field has been leveled a little. Rather than focus on making themselves more valuable to their employers they whine and pout about how they can't get ahead in life.

 

[lucas80]

She failed the bar exam.

And somehow she was a county prosecutor and the AG of California?
Why do smart, successful women make you so angry?

 

[Phenomenally Frantastic]

Harris was 100% DEI VP pick.

That is simply not debatable.

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Thomas was appointed in 1991. I don't think DEI was even a thing then, so no I don't think he was a DEI hire. Race may or may not have had something to do with the hire, I don't know. I do think Ketanji Brown was a DEI hire though. Biden made it known that his goal was to increase diversity with his hires/appointments.

Vivek is part of the trump campaign and there is no way he is there to meet a DEI quota, he is there because he is damn good at what he does. There are a lot of black people who are not dei hires, there are a lot of black people who are dei hires and still were the best candidate for the job, and there are a lot of black people who were dei hires and were under qualified and also under performed. (this can be applied to any dei minority)

The fallacy about DEI is that not all people who are DEI hires are going to be good or bad hires. Some will be qualified, some will not. The downside of DEI hiring is that sometimes it is assumed that all minority hires are due to DEI and therefore people may assume they are unqualified.

DEI becomes a problem when you try to force a certain number of people into a specific position just to meet a quota. If you try to get more minorities into a position than there are qualified applicants, then you are forced to accept unqualified applicants just to meet the quota. This is not helpful for anyone involved.

This DEI conversation is tiresome, but I couldn’t let this pass.

What is it that Vivek is so good at, exactly?

 

[bunsen82]

Harris was 100% DEI VP pick.

That is simply not debatable.

LOL, she may have been picked to be VP but I guess the nation all decided her and Biden were qualified enough in the election. If America was too worried about they could have voted for Trump . . . Oh wait, looks like repeat of the last election.