I would comment but I have no idea what this word salad even means.
If I were a cynic, I would think someone in the establishment suggested to her she do this after one of the winners threatened to go whole hog in the primaries against anyone who isn’t young enough and woke enough to meet his standards.
I hate to say it, but this has been how to get ahead or bully the higher-ups in the DNC - off and on - since 1969. And it carries over into how they attempt to win elections - anything negative said about any person of color, not the male gender, not a straight person is, by definition, oppression and used as leverage. Well, just so long as the one it's being said about is NOT a conservative or a Republican and then it's okay.
I'm only being slightly facetious. Every once in awhile they manage to navigate it a little better, but this has gone on ever since they put themselves on the record for quota representation at the Reform Commission, it has been the style of argument from someone wanting their way. They took a good idea - prohibit the exclusion of blacks as was practiced by Mississippi (most notably but others, too) in 1964 - and reversed it to "certain groups MUST BE INCLUDED" as if those are the same, and they're not. And once a Wisconsin professor (Austin Ranney) and then Senator Birch Bayh went on the record with the contradictory promise of "no quotas but guaranteed representation by percentage" (summarizing) and the Commission voted it into the rules, they then added youth and women. There was a government professor from Harvard (his name? Samuel Beer) who warned them that "it would be a grave mistake and would never work" - and he was right.
Of course, that was long ago and the DNC - like the RNC (well, sometimes)- changes their rules every five minutes to address the grievance of the last loser. But the arguments used to "get my way" in that scenario are pretty much all the same. Jesse Jackson used to whine about how "I got X percent of the vote but only 1/3X of the delegates", and rather than tell him to get a life, they'd change the rules for him - even though that very subject had been bandied about as far back as 1960 and the Kennedy-Humphrey competition.
I read a variant of the same "racial" argument in 1980 and a weakened Carter having to go along up to a point. So she's probably not saying it because she even believes it;
she's probably saying it because it has worked many times in the past.
I mean, look no further than
Cory Booker's comments as we entered 2020:
“more billionaires than black people”
Yes, but neither Booker nor Kamala Harris made the cut with the VOTERS or the polling. Harris got as
high as 2nd in the polls when she bloodied Biden in the debate, but the fact is the more people saw of Harris in 2019, the more they didn't like her, plain and simple. It wasn't a racist thing, it wasn't a sexist thing; if it had been, she never would have been so high in the polls in the first place.
They were given a fair chance, and they lost. The same thing happened to Howard Dean and Ed Muskie (among others). Muskie didn't lose because people were telling Polish jokes.
