Presidential candidates: minority and special interest groups
We all know that Hillary Clinton is the first female frontrunner candidate of a major party. At least, she’s long been the frontrunner, and remains the frontrunner, although who knows how long that will continue.
Personally, I believe that the only thing that will stop Clinton would be an indictment, or the entry of Elizabeth Warren into the race. That’s how shallow the Democratic bench is and how much the public (especially Democrats) seems to thirst for another “first” such as Obama. The first woman president is the next logical step for them, and Hillary seems (or seemed) to fit the bill.
That’s one of the reasons Carly Fiorina is an especially good foil for her. I don’t doubt, however, that if Carly were to rise in the polls, the attacks on her as “not a real woman,” or some sort of traitor woman because she’s a conservative, would become the opposition’s drumbeat.
Isn’t it interesting that this year we also have two—count ’em, two—major presidential candidates who are Hispanic? I don’t recall even one major candidate who was Hispanic in previous years, although it’s possible I’m forgetting someone. But do we hear any paeans of praise for Cruz’s or Rubio’s minority status in the MSM or from liberals? Of course not; don’t be silly. They are Republicans. Cruz in particular is an arch conservative, and Rubio only somewhat less so. In the eyes of the MSM that de-Hispanicizes them. And Cruz, of course, is only half-Hispanic—just as Obama is only half-black, which you don’t hear much about from the left, unless it’s the left that thinks he’s not leftist enough.
Cruz and Rubio don’t appear to be emphasizing their Hispanic origins all that much (Jeb Bush seems to be going further with his status as an honorary Hispanic). But just imagine for a moment if either Cruz or Rubio were liberals. You know what a wonderful thing their candidacies would be.
Same for Bobby Jindal, first person of Indian extraction to be a viable candidate for the presidency. And Romney, who was the first Mormon nominee for president, was not lauded for that fact, either (he wasn’t the first Mormon major candidate; I believe that honor may have belonged to his father George). Mormons, of course, are most definitely not a liberal special interest group, although they certainly are a minority group in terms of numbers.
Interestingly enough, you also hear very little from liberals about the fact that Bernie Sanders is Jewish, because being Jewish is not considered by the left to be a selling point and Jews are not considered to be oppressed; au contraire. Nor is Sanders the first major candidate who’s Jewish. We even had a previous Jewish vice-presidential nominee, back in 2000 (what now seems like centuries ago), when Joe Lieberman was the VP nominee of the Democratic Party. Not long after that he became a party pariah when the Scoop Jackson wing was banished and foreign policy hawks were disallowed.
One other note—back in 1960, John Kennedy became the first Catholic president. It was a big, big deal at the time, almost as big a deal as Obama years later. That seems hard to believe, but I was there and I remember. What’s more (although this seems hard to believe as well), 55 years later he remains the only Catholic president.
Sarah Palin Likes Donald Trump
Ruth Marcus of WaPo already a hit piece on Carly.
The latest was the NYT.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/18/business/carly-fiorinas-record-not-so-sterling.html?_r=0
My email to Andrew Ross Sorkin asked him to compare the NYT to HPQ. The Times bought The Boston Globe. It is now worthless.
Cornhead:
There actually have been quite a few hit pieces on Carly’s time at HP, which is considered to be her vulnerability. But in this post I’m talking about pieces that somehow discredit her as a female because she’s a Republican (as was done a lot to Palin). So far I haven’t seen too many of them like that on Fiorina.
That’s how shallow the Democratic bench is…
Shallow bench, even shallower voters.
The end of WASPdom:
Antonin Scalia, Roman Catholic
Anthony M. Kennedy, Roman Catholic
Clarence Thomas, Roman Catholic
John G. Roberts, Roman Catholic
Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Roman Catholic
Sonia Sotomayor N.Y. Roman Catholic
Elena Kagan Jewish
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Jewish
Stephen G. Breyer, Jewish
There was a time such numbers would have spurred at least a baker’s dozen conspiracy tales and perhaps a subsidiary pogrom of minor notes. What the hell happened to the Masons?
Neo
More hit pieces coming on Carly, for sure.
But the women I see in Iowa could care less about the hit pieces. Only about 120,000 people will vote at the Iowa caucus and half will be women.
With Hillary so vulnerable, I can’t believe no one has come out of the woodwork. Aren’t there close to twenty Democrat governors? Aren’t there over forty Democrat senators?
@ George Pal, to be accurate I believe Anthony Kennedy is not Catholic, he is Episcopalian.
The lone Protestant among them.
Molly NH,
Wikipedia:
Kennedy is one of thirteen Catholic justices — of whom six sit on the Court as of the 2013—2014 term — out of 112 justices in total in the history of the Supreme Court.
OTOH…
“At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life …”
Justice Kennedy
…sounds like a very, very lapsed Catholic.
OTOH, it’s hard to tell what’s what or who’s who, what’s up and…
I was brought up a Chicago area Catholic not ever knowing what that really meant outside of being dragged to church by my mom and her mom to do calisthenics: (Sit, stand, kneel, Sit, stand, kneel,). At my grandparents downtown 22nd floor apartment, there was obligatory portraits of (in order of importance), The Honorable Richard J. Daley; Jesus; whomever the Chicago Archbishop was at the time; and The O’Neil family patriarch who remains unidentified to this day.
Atop the television sat baby Jesus in all his royal finery beneath a cylindrical plastic dome, scepter in one hand, the Holy Hand grenade of Antioch in the other. The almost magical curative powers of the baby Jesus to rectify television reception was well known and would bring miracle seekers from other apartments to witness its powers in action…mostly when the soaps or the Bears were playing. However, its powers never extended itself to the programming which seemed to be immune to exorcism.
My mother once told her mother when we were on the way to the grocery store that “we Catholics were ‘persecuted’”. I wasn’t sure what that meant but by then I had watched enough television to guess what the word meant. Were we “persecuted”? That might have explained the amount of homework I was given at school but I had thought there were harsher connotations attached to the word.
I could never understand what the big deal was about Kennedy being Catholic was back then, nor did I notice any great change in the lives of Catholics due to his presidency. The whole thing made no sense to me whatsoever, which is why Im an atheist today.
JFK was the single worst example of a Catholic that I can think of, so was the entire family, with
the exception of Rose, who seemed to have a sincere Faith. The rest of the clan are an embarrassment to sincere Catholics. The boomer generation & younger are continuing the family tradition of philandering, & thumbing their noses at the Catholic respect for sacramental marriage.
So they are the worst type of unreligious wealthy people wrapping themselves in a mantle of religion, while they mock it continually & brag that their political goals are to improve the *lot* of the poor, which they are eager to do with OUR MONEY, never ever their money.
The Kennedys bequeathed the Hyannnis Compound to the town when the last of them dies
in exchange for them NOT PAYING TAXES on the place now. Always paying their fair share. At least there is satisfaction to know they are in a more than warm location right now !
Along with Chavez, no oil heat needed !
As a Catholic, I have to say I would have a very difficult time voting for another Catholic, if the Kennedys represent what would be offered. Then again, I’m not sure it matters anymore at this point. They are all cuckservatives. The ones who talk the most are foreigners, regardless of how it might seem. And those don’t interest me. *cough* Cruz *cough* I have never seen a foreigner who was raised in just a generation or even three, or maybe five, to become actual Americans. I’m not sure, fully, that it is totally possible.
Not just a racial thing, per se. Look how long it took Italians and Irish to mainstream. And every other large group from various “white” parts of the world. Pols, Cheks, Russians… all of them went through hard times. Some still aren’t, and may never be, American.
As to Catholic? Even as a Catholic, I have some doubts about the church and a democratic republic. The upper levels of the church prefer governments that are counter to freedom. I don’t think that is necessarily required, it just seems to often be the case. Then again Jewish, and many other faiths, have the same trouble with their upper echelons.
Urhm… something like that. Hey, I whack moles of all colors, origins, stripes, and religions equally, as I see things.
So they are the worst type of unreligious wealthy people wrapping themselves in a mantle of religion, while they mock it continually & brag that their political goals are to improve the *lot* of the poor, which they are eager to do with OUR MONEY,
It’s like a heresy. Which is why people fought against heretics so much so long ago. Heresies are bad. Even if the new principles are good, it’s bad for social conformity or hierarchical stability. The Cathars are a good example. Ahead of their time by our estimate, but back then, they were quite a disrupting force.