Ladies and gentlemen your new incoming members of the 116th Congress. Notice anyting??

[HomerJS]

No we're not, your graphic is about this cycle but you made the claim that minorities / women were excluded from top groups for years which isn’t true. I provided who the GOP fielded as contenders for presidential candidate (and I even forgot one, an Indian who was a former governor) which was certainly more diverse than the Dems and more importantly race never came into play. Ben Carson and Marco Rubio who both were front runners at different times during the process didn’t make their candidacy about race and neither did the party, the Republican Party supported them based on their merit and positions not their skin color.

Remember the first intern class after Trump was elected vs Obama's last class? Same result.

Trump has hired a bunch of corrupt, incompetent direct reports. The only 2 black people Omorosa and Ben Carsen and one of them is gone. As President, Trump can hire who he wants but it seems hiring almost all white guys has not served him well. Just sayin'

 

[mect]

I’m suggesting the blacks vote overwhelmingly for Democrats so to expect the GOP to have the same percent in office as there are as a percent of the population as a whole is unrealistic.

For women I have no idea. I’d think there would be more than there are. But I have no idea about the numbers that run though either, if no women run then you can’t draw the conclusions that you’re wanting to draw that the GOP is anti women now can you. If tons of women ran but none elected the. Yeah you’d have a point. I don’t have any idea what the numbers are to even guess.

After doing some calculations, based on percentage of supporters, it isn't as bad as I would have guessed, although republicans still trail democrats. For the 115th congress, there are 83 minorities who are democrats compared to 12 that are republicans. There are around 245 total democrats compared to 287 republicans (depending on the exact snapshot). This equates to 33% for democrats compared to 4% for republicans. About 40% of the democratic party is composed of minorities, compared to 10% for republicans. So democrats have minorities represented at around 56% of the expected ratio compared to republicans at about 42% of the expected ratio.

Note that these numbers are prior to 2018's elections. Based on the picture in the OP, I imagine the numbers are going to improve much more significantly for democrats compared to republicans.

 

[ecogen]

After doing some calculations, based on percentage of supporters, it isn't as bad as I would have guessed, although republicans still trail democrats. For the 115th congress, there are 83 minorities who are democrats compared to 12 that are republicans. There are around 245 total democrats compared to 287 republicans (depending on the exact snapshot). This equates to 33% for democrats compared to 4% for republicans. About 40% of the democratic party is composed of minorities, compared to 10% for republicans. So democrats have minorities represented at around 56% of the expected ratio compared to republicans at about 42% of the expected ratio.

Note that these numbers are prior to 2018's elections. Based on the picture in the OP, I imagine the numbers are going to improve much more significantly for democrats compared to republicans.

Now do women.

 

[ivwshane]

Then you should start calling out yourself

Awe, how cute, I guess you needed me sooner rather than later.

 

[dawp]

There's nothing good about electing a group of incompetent people to office because they happen to visually represent the ethnic makeup of the country. There is much good about electing good and competent people regardless of their ethnic makeup. If we could elect 100 wise and capable Senators, skilled in legislating and negotiation, who were all black, the very stupidest complaint I could devise would be that they don't look like the rest of the country.

I guess fundamentally that's my issue here. I suppose it'd be ideal if we could get a perfectly proportioned legislature that perfectly represented the whole of American diversity. But if I have to choose between diversity and competence, diversity loses, and should lose, without a moment's thought. I think it's wrong to see racial diversity as a good to be pursued. It's good if it happens naturally. It's necessarily prejudicial and wrong if it's sought out, because it involves saying "we want more of Race A and less of Race B."

yet the party you seem to align yourself with elected the most incompetent president out those that were running, a white male.

 

[Bitek]

You don't think the purpose of the OP was to imply that democrats are better than republicans because they have less white men in their newly-elected members of congress?

The point is that one party is monochromatic in representation, experience and perspective.

The result is limited consideration of perspectives and experiences when crafting policy, which ultimately fails to serve the broadest populace.

If you don't think diversity in age, gender and cultural background doesn't make any difference, then I would highly question your work experiences.

 

[brycejones]

LOL at the concern trolls and @Atreus21.

What could possibly be wrong with a GOP that mainly elects white, evangelical, males to office. Maybe the GOP should work some on its candidate recruitment.

 

[cytg111]

There was a time when this picture was all white males, but identiry distinctions could be made along different fault lines: Catholic vs Protestant, Immigrant vs Established roots, northern vs southern European. Identity is a powerful political force, only the demographics change.

Your image speaks to the dangerous geographic Balkanization of America. Neither alt-right America nor periodic table of identity versions of America are very appealing, and if anything, Trump exploited this to claim the White House, reshape the judiciary and hold the Senate.

The bolded part is only present in your imagination. Stop watching FOX damnit.

Plus given the choice between tiki torch marching mobs and gender identity discussions, you really dont have a preference? You sure?

 

[VRAMdemon]

Hey...whats good for Leavenworth KS Reps. is probably good for today's Republicans...

Leavenworth, KS county commissioner, appointed by the local Republican Party and not elected to the board, tells a black woman appearing before the commission that he is a part of the master race.

https://www.newsweek.com/kansas-off...RbtokThGY62O1pYAOF0_xdWUetT_nJhg_rmvP1gxntFzg

 

[sactoking]

Elected Republicans are almost exclusively white and by a large margin male. As I called back in post 3 or whatever, pointing out the apparent racism of this is itself racist because those who elect almost exclusively white males don't see race and you're the racist for noticing.

Nevermind that unelected interns for that party are also almost exclusively white and by a large margin male.

Nevermind that unelected appointees for that party are also almost exclusively white and by a large margin male.

Gosh, you REALLY don't think there's a racial aspect here?

Nevermind that the party with all of these white people, mostly males, is also the party supported by (and some would say supporting) white nationalists.

Are you POSITIVE there's no racial thing going on here?

Oh, that's right, it's not racist, they're just electing the most qualified candidates. This is purely a meritocracy, so it's OK.

Except all of the "most qualified" candidates are white and mostly male. So that's actually racist too.

 

[1sikbITCH]

Skin color and appearance is 100% superficial.

Just spewing lies like Trump. JEWS CANNOT REPLACE US. Remember that? I certainly take full advantage of being white and not Jewish. If I were black and done HALF the shit I'd done growing up they'd have killed me by now lol. Ask a black person if they think their skin color doesn't matter to white people. Ask any brown person trying to board an airplane. You are not even trying anymore.

 

[WelshBloke]

What if 90%+ of Jews voted Republican by default, would you expect Dems to have the same percent of Jews in office as their percentage in the population as a whole?

I'd wonder what was off putting about the democrats to 90% of Jewish people and if the was a problem tbh.

 

[Jhhnn]

I think that the GOP message has been tailored to prey on the hopes & fears of White people for a long time, particularly those whose circumstances leave them feeling left behind. It's basic divide & conquer driven by disinformation campaigns following the Russian model. They've altered a lot of basic attitudes & beliefs, and not in a good way. And it's worked for them, but it's getting more difficult simply because of shifting reality & demographics. Just turning up the volume won't hold that back forever but it's all they've really got. For now, it just causes them to become more strident & their voters feeling more embattled.

 

[HomerJS]

Skin color and appearance is 100% superficial. You're making assumptions based on superficial qualities. You're black, therefore you must have viewpoint A. You're white, therefore you must have viewpoint B. What a confusing problem bi-racial people must represent to democrats.



Right. What matters isn't a person's character or competence. What matters is superficial similarities.

Really? Does that apply to all the black people who have had the police called on them just for existing?? Check out the thread.

Are you being intentionally ignorant?

 

[SMOGZINN]

It's childish and a waste of time to give such rapt attention to whether or not our group closely correlates in physical appearance with the larger population.

Let us do a quick thought experiment. I put 20 red balls in a bag and 20 blue balls in a bag. I then shake the bag up and pour out 10 balls and get the result 9 red balls and 1 blue ball. I think to myself, 'well the color of the ball is just superficialities, so it was just random chance.' If I then put the balls back in the bad and do it 115 more times and get really similar results I can be fairly certain that it is not a superficiality.

 

[Jhhnn]

Skin color and appearance is 100% superficial. You're making assumptions based on superficial qualities. You're black, therefore you must have viewpoint A. You're white, therefore you must have viewpoint B. What a confusing problem bi-racial people must represent to democrats.



Right. What matters isn't a person's character or competence. What matters is superficial similarities.

I'm confident your expressed beliefs about race are completely sincere. OTOH, that's apparently not true for GOP voters in general or things would be different.

Yeh, sure, there are districts in this country that are overwhelmingly White so one would expect their representatives to be White. OTOH, there are few if any districts that are overwhelmingly male.

 

[TXHokie]

They can be green or purple for all I care. How about just getting good things done for the people.

 

[interchange]

Diversity is only a strength when the differences can be integrated. I think the white maleness here is partially a symptom of the divisiveness Trump is bringing causing consolidation within the party that had been making some progress previously. Clearly, the entire nation has problems with diversity in representation, although it is obvious Democrats have been far more successful integrating difference than Republicans, but I don't agree that it makes all Republican supporters inherently racist.

 

[zinfamous]

Or by the same token democrats, who seem to go out of their way to avoid them, and celebrate having done so.

Except of course when the minority candidate is a Republican. Then by all means go white male.

Anyone who celebrates having elected candidate A over B because A is the color we like is a complete idiot.

Then stop voting republican...unless you like being a complete idiot?

 

[SMOGZINN]

I think the white maleness here is partially a symptom of the divisiveness Trump is bringing causing consolidation within the party that had been making some progress previously.

The party had not really made much in the way of progress before Trump. Look at the congress before Trump, it was not much more diverse.

Clearly, the entire nation has problems with diversity in representation, although it is obvious Democrats have been far more successful integrating difference than Republicans

Since a little more than half the nation is Democrats it is clearly not really the whole nation, just a certain Republican part of it.

but I don't agree that it makes all Republican supporters inherently racist.

Care to elaborate on why? It seems to me that if you contribute to the problem you are part of the problem. I don't know if there is much difference between saying you are a racist and you just support them.

 

[pmv]

The point is that one party is monochromatic in representation, experience and perspective.

The result is limited consideration of perspectives and experiences when crafting policy, which ultimately fails to serve the broadest populace.

But which way does the causation go?

Could it not be that it's "monochromatic in representation, experience and perspective" _because_ it has "a limited consideration of perspectives and experiences when crafting policy, which ultimately fails to serve the broadest populace". Perhaps the purpose of the party is to serve the interests of the wealthy, the white and the male (albiet those three priorities are not invariably perfectly aligned)? Maybe the Republicans don't _want_ to "serve the broadest populace"?

I hesitate to suggest that, as not being black or American, maybe there's a trap I'm falling into in thinking that, a flaw with that way of seeing it that I haven't considered. But that's, at first thought, the interpretation I'd put on that photo.

It's like when people complain about the Tory party having too many Old Etonians or too many land-owners- surely that's the whole _point_ of that party? The problem is when the wealthy start taking over all the other parties as well.

 

[interchange]

The party had not really made much in the way of progress before Trump. Look at the congress before Trump, it was not much more diverse.

So you agree they were doing better before Trump but still not well overall.

Since a little more than half the nation is Democrats it is clearly not really the whole nation, just a certain Republican part of it.

Democrats representation is still not demographically up to par with the demographics of their constituents.

Care to elaborate on why? It seems to me that if you contribute to the problem you are part of the problem. I don't know if there is much difference between saying you are a racist and you just support them.

Politicians represent far more than racial/gender attitudes.

 

[Starbuck1975]

The bolded part is only present in your imagination. Stop watching FOX damnit.

Plus given the choice between tiki torch marching mobs and gender identity discussions, you really dont have a preference? You sure?

I don’t watch Fox News, I like the NYT, WAPO and the Atlantic.

Also, who said anything about gender identity? I recognize it as the identity du jour, but the periodic table of identities is the tendency of liberals to place everyone in a little box. I recently read a left leaning article declaring Kamela Harris as the Democrat front runner, yet the article fixated on her identity more so than her credentials.

As for the tiki torch bearers, they are a small but vocal minority only recently consolidated through social media and empowered by an irresponsible President. Once social media decides to put democracy ahead of profits, the alt-right will lose its bully pulpit. What is most worrisome about the tiki torch rally photos is just how young the men are in those photos. We’ve learned nothing from history.

 

[Paladin3]

But the R's have a pirate!

 

[mect]

Now do women.

There's a similar trend. Republicans have 31 women in Congress compared to 81 for Democrats, yielding 33% in the democratic party compared to 11% in the republican. If we go with the Democrat party being composed of 55% women and the Republican party being composed of 45% women, that would put democrats at about 60% representation compared to the ratio and the republicans being at about 25% representation compared to the ratio.