For years, Democrats have proclaimed themselves the “party of diversity.” They constantly preach that they’re the ones in touch with women and minorities, that their platform better advances the marginalized, and that their politicians reflect actual variety.
When it comes to the makeup of Congress, Democrats are clearly winning in the superficial department. They have more females, people of color, and religious affiliations among their party members than Republicans. This is just a fact. As we’ve seen time and again, this diversity is used to make pitches on the campaign trail: “Democrats care about and include everyone. Republicans? They don’t.” But so often, those who tout tolerance are the last ones to practice it. And when it comes to actual intellectual diversity, the Left has a very difficult time showing acceptance.
As the field of Democratic candidates grows larger, diversity is being used a selling point. The current group of hopefuls includes old, young, white, black, male, female, and even gay. The obsession with identity leads to some outlandish statements like one made by 2020 candidate Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., in a recent appearance on MSNBC. Not only did he claim that his policies would be so powerful that “inherent bias that exists or discrimination that exists in communities would be eliminated,” but he patronized women, too.
Swalwell is not the only 2020 candidate to cling to identity politics. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., has made a similar claim.
“I will have a woman running mate,” @CoryBooker says at @_shethepeople
— Caitlin Huey-Burns (@CHueyBurns) April 24, 2019
There is nothing wrong with having a female running mate, but this forced show of “wokeness” is nauseating. Is the Democratic view of women such that some candidates want one on their ticket for the body parts they bring to the table and not first and foremost their skills and abilities? Why is the latter not the first consideration? In 2019, appearance, not acumen, seems to rule the day. By pledging to include a woman, just because, both Swalwell and Booker have managed to verbally pat every American female on the head with “We’ll allow you to join us.” And we’re supposed to praise this empty gesture.
Ironically enough, the race for the most socially aware and gender-conscious candidate may not do as much good as previously thought. According to a recent poll, Democratic voters may not prize diversity all that much.
With so many options before them, Democratic voters seem to be less concerned about identity politics and more focused on one thing: defeating President Trump. To achieve this, those running to capture their support will not only have to set aside “being woke” in favor of common-sense courtesy toward all, but will also have to focus more on actual, achievable policies that can help people of all races, creeds, and backgrounds.
So far, it’s not looking good.
In early 2016, Hillary Clinton was considered inevitable. Finally, the United States would elect a female to the highest office in the land. By the end of the year, the gender issue meant next to nothing, and Donald Trump emerged victorious. Somehow, Democrats believe now is the time to focus on identity among their presidential and vice-presidential candidates.
But as history shows, this focus is off-putting and unwise. I doubt they’ll ever learn their lesson.
Kimberly Ross (@SouthernKeeks) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog and a columnist at Arc Digital.
