Because it's used to slander and not to speak in favor of other races. A new term for racists to speak in public yet pretend they're not racist. Because they're not in favor of hiring "other" races.
Meanwhile everyone knows Kamala is only looking at white men for her VP. Any other choice would be career suicide. Will her pick be a DEI hire?
Presidents and Vice Presidents have been picked based on gender, race and religion forever.
Country of birth and age is even written into the constitution.
It’s been anti “best for the job” since the beginning
How many Jewish Presidents have we had (even though they are all over the administration)?
How many Italian Presidents have we had?
The new “trend” is to elect women and people from the minorities. Making it more difficult to get the best from a statistical point of view of course (the word minority gives that away).
GW Bush was considered kinda of a buffoon so he selected Dick Cheney the hard core conservative. Dick Cheney was an absolute nightmare but he got the job because he was "diverse" compared to Bush.
Obama chose Biden cuz he's an old white man and America is racist so Obama needed a white guy on his ticket to make people feel more comfortable voting for him.
McCain chose Palin who was a complete babbling idiot but he chose her because he was viewed as kind of old and boring and McCain was already becoming too "moderate" for the extremist Republican base while Palin was a straight up idiot lunatic who fit in more with the ever-rising stupidity and extremism of republican voters and the party.
Trump chose Pence because Trump is an amoral unreligious asshat and so he needed a hardcore right wing religious loon to make extremist right wing christians more comfortable voting for someone who they would normally revile (though they sure sold their christians souls to the devil quickly to get behind Trump).
Biden chose Harris because it was two old white men running against each other and the country wants to start seeing something besides old white men in the oval office, so a woman of color made a lot of sense. This is no different than any of those other picks, a VP to have diversity from the presidential candidate on the ticket.
Note that Harris was very qualified for VP, and is very qualified for President. Far more than either people on the Republican ticket. Yes she was chosen as VP for purely political reasons to have someone who is viewed as "diverse" from the presidential candidate on the ticket, but that is how VPs are usually picked.
Racist/sexist republicans who say she is a DEI hire will say that literally about anyone who isn't a straight white man. It's how they can be racist and/or sexist but then pat themselves on the back for thinking they weren't too obvious about it, even though they are being obvious - which is what people are pointing out. Republican world view is simply white men are superior and should be the only ones in power, and anyone who isn't a white man didn't earn. And of course the very few times republicans do promote someone who isn't a white man it is indeed a DEI hire because they are the people who think only white men can do the job. Liberals want diversity because it is good and brings new viewpoints to the table. The rare time Republicans want anyone but a white man in a position of power it is because they think it'll make them look good. It's quite ironic that it's republicans who do the DEI hires, not the liberals.
Note the Leftist only ever talks about credentialism, never results (also note that even with credentialism, the DEI builds upon itself, i.e. AG because was a DEI DA, DA because was DEI law student, etc.).
That's kind of the point of affirmative action. If a particular class of people is denied the first rung of the ladder they aren't going to be able to climb the rest of it on merit.
can someone explain to me how "DEI hire" fits when (a) you ran for the president job on your own (b) you are vice president of the whole country (c) you were a city DA and a state AG and (d) importantly, you are getting the gig because the default white dude is senile.
also, being a howard graduate is the opposite of DEI. a black person is not getting into howard on affirmative action. people are stupid.
a) you failed miserably when you ran for president on your own, getting publicly eviscerated by one of your own party and gender at one of the debates
b) you are vp of the whole country only because an inept president chose you over a very thin field of contenders mostly for two characteristics - you know which
c) tenure as a DA and AG is widely panned as disastrous
Calling someone a DEI hire is the same as calling someone a legacy admission to USC and any Ivy League. You’re telling them they aren’t good enough and they only got the offer because of diversity in the case of DEI and their parent’s money in the case of legacy admissions. You’re essentially saying, “you don’t belong here.”
Ah, now I get it, it's like the brojos. Damn, I hope Kamala is more competent than that!
can someone explain to me how "DEI hire" fits when (a) you ran for the president job on your own (b) you are vice president of the whole country (c) you were a city DA and a state AG and (d) importantly, you are getting the gig because the default white dude is senile.
also, being a howard graduate is the opposite of DEI. a black person is not getting into howard on affirmative action. people are stupid.
You can pretend all you want this is the case to make yourself feel better, but its transparently a ridiculous argument when Joe Biden said he is picking a black woman VP and would rule out any other candidates
DEI is used as a perjorative, just like calling someone a liberal or woke.
Anti-woke conservatives successfully hijacked and weaponized adjectives that libs use to describe themselves. DEI, woke and liberal are now sh!tbombs we lob around as insults.
Calling someone a DEI hire is the same as calling someone a legacy admission to USC and any Ivy League. You’re telling them they aren’t good enough and they only got the offer because of diversity in the case of DEI and their parent’s money in the case of legacy admissions. You’re essentially saying, “you don’t belong here.”
Because people who support DEI and those who critique it have fundamentally opposed worldviews.
1. Those who criticize DEI believe that we live in a meritocracy, that racism is an aberration rather than a systemic force threaded through all institutions, and that people should be hired based on their skills/talents regardless of race, identity, etc. According to this perspective, hiring based on identity or immutable traits is a violation of the principle of meritocracy. Since this perspective believes that meritocracy is the usual state of affairs and that racism is a relatively rare one-off thing, the only logical conclusion to make is that somebody hired based on DEI is underqualified for the job.
2. Proponents of DEI believe that American social institutions are not meritocratic because they are systemically racist. The only way to resolve this systemic racism is to implement what Kendi would refer to as "anti-racist" policies. This means specifically hiring black people, women, LGBTQ people, etc. This perspective includes the idea that the main reason why there aren't more minorities in power is systemic racism; therefore, those hired via DEI are qualified but were discriminated against in the allegedly (but not actually) meritocratic system.
Because people who support DEI and those who critique it have fundamentally opposed worldviews.
1. Those who criticize DEI believe that we live in a meritocracy, that racism is an aberration rather than a systemic force threaded through all institutions, and that people should be hired based on their skills/talents regardless of race, identity, etc. According to this perspective, hiring based on identity or immutable traits is a violation of the principle of meritocracy. Since this perspective believes that meritocracy is the usual state of affairs and that racism is a relatively rare one-off thing, the only logical conclusion to make is that somebody hired based on DEI is underqualified for the job.
2. Proponents of DEI believe that American social institutions are not meritocratic because they are systemically racist. The only way to resolve this systemic racism is to implement what Kendi would refer to as "anti-racist" policies. This means specifically hiring black people, women, LGBTQ people, etc. This perspective includes the idea that the main reason why there aren't more minorities in power is systemic racism; therefore, those hired via DEI are qualified but were discriminated against in the allegedly (but not actually) meritocratic system.
Can we all agree that "DEI" is just another term for another type of racism?
And we are all supposed to be OK with THIS type of racism, celebrate it support it, and never question it, lest we be labeled racists?
It's exhausting trying to keep up with all of this bs.
I can't stand to see any qualified person passed over in favor of a lesser qualified person, no matter what they look like, or what bathroom they use. These things don't matter when a job needs to get done. I don't want to get stuck doing everyone's work because my colleagues are all incompetent and my a$$ will be the one to get in trouble if projects fall apart.
can someone explain to me how "DEI hire" fits when (a) you ran for the president job on your own (b) you are vice president of the whole country (c) you were a city DA and a state AG and (d) importantly, you are getting the gig because the default white dude is senile.
also, being a howard graduate is the opposite of DEI. a black person is not getting into howard on affirmative action. people are stupid.
She was extremely unsuccessful in her presidential run, and that is why she is considered a DEI hire. She would have faded in the mists of time had Biden not committed to a female POC for his VP pick.
She is not a DEI pick for president, but she would never have had the opportunity in the first place had she not been a DEI pick for VP. She's our first DEI presidential candidate - Hillary and Obama achieved their status based on merit.
Given that she failed to pass the far the first time, her upwards trajectory to becoming attorney general is also highly suspect and very aided by DEI. The first-time bar pass rate in California is around 65%, so she is intellectually at least among the lower third of law school graduates in that state. This again is in contrast to Obama and Hillary who were extremely intelligent.
That says a lot more about our nation than Kamala. Of course she’ll pick someone she believes will get her more votes. This is common sense.
And a white man will get her more votes. It doesn’t matter how qualified another black or woman may be….white AmeriKKKa would never vote for two blacks or two women. Therefore she knows her only chance of winning is to diversify(white man) the ticket. DEI hire…………but you won’t hear any complaints. An all white ticket is never a problem. Yet, right wingers will look you in the eye and say we are playing on a level playing field and racism is a thing of the past.
Racism is not a thing of the past. Whites in the 21st century are the most discriminated against race in world history, both violently and otherwise. Any claims otherwise are either historical ignorance or emotional appeals
Not a wonderful thing. It’s a terrible thing for American competitiveness and competency. How many people want a DEI hire doing the maintenance on the airplane you’re about to get on, or the open heart surgery on your child, or virtually anything important?
Image DEI applied to pro sports or the Olympics. “Sorry Jingy, too many white men on the Norwegian team this year. You’re going to have to sit this one out.”
4
2
We have enough Youth, What we need is a Fountain of Smart.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.