|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Onlooker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:29 AM Original message |
Poll question: When does the exclusion of women and blacks from the presidency represent institutionalized racism? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:30 AM Response to Original message |
1. We won't be electing a fat or bald person in a while either. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Onlooker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:34 AM Response to Reply #1 |
2. But, we have had them, and not that long ago |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:40 AM Response to Reply #2 |
4. That was then. This is now. And we won't elect a short person either. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shenmue (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:39 AM Response to Original message |
3. Loaded question. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:42 AM Response to Reply #3 |
5. Yes, it is. It's not all about race and sex. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cloudbase (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 08:58 AM Response to Reply #5 |
6. Indeed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Onlooker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 09:02 AM Response to Reply #6 |
7. It's institutionalized racism and sexism, I think |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 12:43 PM Response to Reply #7 |
12. No, it's not "institutionalized." It's de facto more than de jure. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
H2O Man (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 09:29 AM Response to Reply #6 |
10. I respectfully disagree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robbedvoter (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 09:03 AM Response to Original message |
8. What a dishonest poll! On many levels. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Onlooker (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 09:23 AM Response to Reply #8 |
9. No it's not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sparkly (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 09:29 AM Response to Original message |
11. Wow - Interesting question!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Infinite Hope (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Jan-01-08 02:34 PM Response to Original message |
13. The first two options. Though the "something wrong" could be a lack of a viable candidate from... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 03:54 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC