I don’t think people should pick blindly, though. Colorblindness, genderblindness, they’re myths. They don’t exist. I have no doubt she will have a diverse pool of qualified choices for her cabinet. I hope (I believe) she intentionally picks women and people of color (including women of color), because that intent has…

I just mentioned in another comment how there will be a group of equally qualified candidates for each cabinet role. Women will be among these candidates. Statistically you can choose all men or all women to fill each of these roles, and according to their resumes and past accomplishments, they will all be likely to…

Why do you think we aren’t? As has been mentioned here a few times, you will never have only one “best qualified” candidate. Among the pool of qualified candidates, there will be women. If the women among each role’s pool are just as qualified, why would you be upset if 50% of the final selections are women?

You know, every so often, I engage in a little debate with someone who holds views diametrically opposed to mine. I keep thinking that as long as the debate is respectful and thoughtful, we will both learn something from each other and walk away, if not changed, at least informed.

I promise, there are 7-8 women in the country capable and qualified to serve on the cabinet. Promise.

That's a disingenuous concern because at that level, literally every person that Hillary considers will be eminently qualified. She will not be hiring any Sarah Palins, and you know it. So your concern about her not hiring "the most qualified person" basically amounts to a concern that men will not be occupying…

That there are many qualified candidates for each role, and you seem pretty confident that women can’t possibly comprise 50% of them. As a woman who has worked in professional environments for almost 20 years, I can confirm that my female peers are just as qualified, even if some men don’t want to acknowledge that…

Pretending you’re right and unconscious bias totally isn’t a thing for you, why are you only concerned about qualifications when women being hired is brought up? Why don’t you get upset about positions being full of men when there are female candidates getting passed over disproportionate to their numbers? All those…

Since you’re in the black, anyway, I’ll try to explain it: you say you don’t care, and so do the majority of people, yet white men get picked over and over again. Studies show that people in general - ones who aren’t particularly sexist - consider women to be less capable than men. When women are announced to make 50%…

There’s 15 unelected positions in a president’s cabinet. Are you really trying to say that, in all of America, there aren’t 7-8 women who are qualified to hold a position in the cabinet?

What you don’t seem to realize is that there is no single “most qualified” person for cabinet positions. There are many people with very similar backgrounds and qualifications. We aren’t going to sacrifice qualifications and experience in the cabinet in favor of diversity. We’re going to have both.

Aw, the “you don’t know me” defense. I can read your words. They’re pretty clear. No one ever brings up “qualifications” unless someone is promising to hire women or people of color. Open your eyes, push back against what you’ve been socially conditioned to think, and improve. There’s nothing wrong with recognizing…

Right. I mean, it’s super neutral. It’s kinda like ordering the chicken, you know? Like the article definitely isn’t against it (the way, say, Jez was outraged that a woman who once gave Hillary’s campaign $150 now likes Trump, or that Hillary’s LLC incorporated in Delaware like everyone else’s) BUT, come on. The…

But you know as well as I do that when people disregard “race, sex, or any other consideration” they hire white men. That’s what that language means. That’s what you’ve absorbed, whether you want to admit it or not. That’s how you fully justify all white male cabinets, boards, workplaces. That’s how you justify sexism…

I think you Americans should do a better job at getting more women into Congress. Studies show that congresswomen (yes, both Democrats and Republicans) are more likely to push for bills that help women that than their male counterparts

There was a study that men think 30% of women in a group or if 30% of time used speaking by women means it is gender equal. Anything over that and it is perceived as “female biased”

I’m open to arguments about the unfairness of closed primaries, but it’s interesting that the same people never seem terribly concerned about the injustice of caucuses, which are at least as restrictive and sometimes more.

Really? You’re going all Tea Party?

Actually, yes, at least for a woman. As one of those “elderly” over 45 voters, the conventional wisdom for years and years and years was that if a woman ever wanted to be US President, she’d need to be, if not a Republican, at least a conservative (Thatcher would be brought up), especially when nearly every past…

Did anyone watch Bernie’s campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, on MSNBC tonight? He basically said even if Clinton wins both the pledged delegates and the voters, they are going to take the fight to the convention. If they succeed I will still vote for him, because what are my other choices, but they are still openly…