Clinton says half her Cabinet will be women

[Lyin' Steve]

If it's going to look like America, is she going to make sure it has exactly 10 whites, 2 blacks, 2 latinos, and 1 asian?  Will pacific islanders and native americans be banned because there's not enough of them in America so they don't "look like America?"  What about religion?  Only 2% of America is Jewish, will jews be banned from her cabinet since they don't "look like America?"  Also only 2-4% of America is gay, so is she going to ban gay people since they don't look like America?

One nice thing about the Trudeau administration is that he's gone so far that he's finally made a lot of Canadians turn against identity politics PC bullsh*t.  Maybe Clinton will be the same for the Democratic party, take us to peak identity politics and political correctness and then Americans will get sick of decisions being made based on gender/race/sexual orientation rather than what's best for the country.

[Lyin' Steve]

In all fairness she's hardly just going to pick the first 10 women off the street...

Exactly. It's not like America doesn't have 5 very capable and experienced women for a presidential cabinet.

It's also not like the best possible choices for most of the cabinet positions aren't men.  It's not anything wrong with women as a group; there just aren't as many women at the very top levels of government, academia and industry.  Would you rather have the absolute most capable and experienced cabinet member or a reasonably capable and experienced member who's also a woman?

What I want is very simple, I want her to do the best job she can without taking gender into consideration in her decisions.  Is a woman the best possible pick for Attorney General?  Pick the woman.  Is a woman the best possible pick for Secretary of State?  Pick the woman.  But if a man is the best possible choice, pick the man.  I don't care.  Just don't pick the woman when the man is the best possible choice solely because you want your cabinet to be gender-balanced.

If we keep doing this, other countries that don't do it are going to end up with stronger cabinets and outperform us.

[Lyin' Steve]

There aren't many women at the very top levels of government, academia and industry... so lets not put women in positions at the very top levels of government, academia and industry. OK. Even though there's plenty of vastly over qualified women working at jobs below their level. Very good, very solid logic. Not circular at all.

I never said not to put them in the top levels of government, academia and industry.  If women deserve it, give them those promotions and put them there.  Being in the cabinet is a promotion ABOVE the upper echelons of government/academia/industry.  What it seems like you're saying is we should skip the cream of the crop and look deeper because there's a lot of women who are working at jobs below their level?  I find it hard to believe that, for instance, the absolute #1 pick for Secretary of Energy won't be found among the small, elite group of energy company CEOs, nobel-prize winning scientists, or governors/congressmen who've made dramatic progress on energy-related issues.  We have several such people in the United States.  Most of them are men.  Should we skip over them and go searching through Solyndra VPs or assistant professors at state universities or random congresswomen on the off chance that one of them has enormous talent that just hasn't been recognized or given the opportunity to blossom?  I'd rather she just pick one of the really really good people.