No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Seeing Hillary's ad today pissed me off.  On its face, the ad was very effective.  It struck the right chord and pushed all the right buttons and had the perfect tone for a just-out-of-the-gate ad.  Her voice was great and she looked wonderful in it.  Overall, an A+ ad...until.  Until you consider, which I later did, that it had NO diversity in it.  I liked the ad all day long and then watched it again and then it hit me.  The ad made the world in which Hillary campaigns look like no black, no Asian, nor Hispanic people live there.  Here we are in the year 2007 and we have the frontrunning candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination run her very very first ad and paid absolutely ZERO attention to diversity.  How ironic that the campaign named this ad, "Invisibles", because, as a Hispanic, I feel like I'm invisible in Hillary's world.
Here's the ad:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3xepwid_ sY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs%2Eusatoda y%2Ecom%2Fonpolitics%2F2007%2F08%2Fregis ter%2Dclinto%2Ehtml

I have been torn, lately, on whom I support for the Democratic nomination.  I live in Massachusetts and could spend a fair amount of time helping out who I think would be the best president on our side.  So far I have given financially to two candidates for president:  John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton.  In 2003-04, I gave money to Howard Dean, John Kerry, and John Edwards.  At the start of the 2008 cycle, I was firmly in HRC's camp.  I believed in her, mainly because, of all the candidates, I have the most confidence (by far) in Hillary to be able to counterpunch effectively and stand up to the Republican attack machine.  I took a lot of grief here and on other sites because of my always defending Hillary and supporting her.  

Then, some time ago, I saw the clip of her saying that she'd try and get universal health care done by "the end of her SECOND term." Ouch.  Since health care is by far my number one domestic issue, I was appalled.  I realize that the lion's share of changes that any president makes as part of their agenda happens in their FIRST term, when they still have some political capital.  Certainly UHC cannot be put off until a lameduck second term.  So, I looked at Edwards, liked his economic and domestic agenda better, and switched to him.  However, I still have a soft spot for Hillary, think she'd be a good president, and also feel that ANY of our candidates would pick good Supreme Court Justices (and, perhaps I spoke too soon, because, as a gay man, there's nothing more important than the Supreme Court).  And I still like HRC and have her as my second pick.  I have been torn ever since I switched to Edwards.  Torn between the two.  

Well, it appears that, in Hillary's world, no Asians, Hispanics, or African-Americans exist.  The first ad being so lacking in diversity is very disappointing.  It's a slap in the face, really.  In 2007, you would think that diversity would be considered in producing one's very first ad, even IF that ad is playing only in Iowa.  It appears that that is the case, considering the terrain in the background of the ad and the farmers in it.  I am very disappointed in the Hillary For President campaign's disregard for diversity.  And I would not be surprised to find out her Iowa team is lacking in diversity as well.  Because, I have eyes.  I have seen that almost all the major players on all these presidential campaigns (including the GOP's) are inevitably white male.  When IS politics going to finally reflect the great diversity of the country it's in?

Tags: 2008, African American, Asian, campaign, clinton, Diversity, Edwards, Hillary, Hispanic, HRC, invisible, invisibles, latin, latino, obama, presdiential, Presidential, race (all tags)

Comments

88 Comments

Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

calm down. Most of the cuts are from his Iowa stump speech. You don't put a couple of asians, black, hispanic actors & actresses in a state consisting of 95% of white. It's going to be a scandal if the campaign does this.

It's ridiculous. I'm not sure whether I can convince you, but if you want to nitpick everything, go ahead.

by areyouready 2007-08-13 05:45PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

It's even more disturbing to see some of Hillary's supporters defending her choice to make her first political ad an ALL white ad.  Hispanics, Asians and Blacks DO live in Iowa, ignoring and/or dismissing them is not going to win their votes.  

by allmiview 2007-08-13 06:07PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

One, this isn't her first ad. It's her first iowa ad. In this election Hillary has had a lot of video's and other ads that all feature diversity. If she was ignoring and/or dismissing them she wouldn't have made those ads.

Hillary is actively campaigning for votes from Hispanics, Asians and Blacks, to claim that she is ignoring them is false and disturbing.

by Ernst 2007-08-14 03:51AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

There are BLACK and HISPANICS that live in Iowa.  On Obama's site was a picture of a black family, in Iowa that had a fundraiser, so they DO EXIST.  I understand what the diarist is referring to, but this state is predominately WHITE, so I would think she is trying to relate to them.  Whatever.

by iamready 2007-08-13 07:59PM | 0 recs
Consult some facts and get back ot us

Question to you - should Hillary have faked her ad?  Should she have imported minorities or people of color to Iowa to film?   Or shold she have shot in NYC and used the footage in an Iowa commercial?   Would you have attacked her if she did?

The fact is Iowa is about the least diverse state in the Union.  It is to pardon the expression, "lilly white."

The ad for made in Iowa, for Iowa, to target Iowans.

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-13 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

That's ridiculous.  So in this argument, it'd be okay if she had an ad in New York that didn't have any white people?

If she runs an ad, gives media releases all over the country touting the ad, having it on YouTube, etc., that ad soon becomes a general campaign message.  

How many of those people were real?  C'mon, that guy in the straw hat that she's walking with?  They just happened to film all those people that perfectly?  Right.

She's running to be the president of a diverse country.  All her ads should be diverse.  All of them.  In today's campaigns, when an ad that runs in one state is all over YouTube and your candidate's campaign team releases it and gives it to media outlets all over the country, that ad becomes a general campaign message.  I don't care if that ad was shown in the north pole, it should have some diversity.

And I know about her campaign staff.  If you add up all her advisers, media people, etc, it's still not that diverse.  However, it's certainly more diverse than her opponents', including Obama, but especially Edwards.

by jgarcia 2007-08-13 06:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

Geez, I really have nothing more to add ...

by areyouready 2007-08-13 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

Yes. All of the video clips in Hillary's Iowa ad were from Iowa campaign appearances IN IOWA over the last three months.

You can get an idea of the kind of footage the campaigns shoot by browsing their online videos:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/

by hwc 2007-08-13 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

I suspect this guy is playing some sort of prank. He 'suddently' started to lean towards Hillary this aftern, then made a 180 degree turn and launched this bizarre tirade.

It's all his race-baiting plan. Sad, but really no point to debate this sort of human trash.

by areyouready 2007-08-13 06:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

BTW, I don't believe for a minute this guy is a hispanic.

by areyouready 2007-08-13 06:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

I've been here for years.  How long have YOU been here?  Oh, yeah, just about two months.  You only got here lately...to drum up online support for your employer.  

Don't come on here and impugn me, buddy.  Got it?  Btw, I am disappearing you comment above that called me a race-baiter and "trash."

by jgarcia 2007-08-13 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

This individual has been posting longer than you and me.

by iamready 2007-08-13 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Consult some facts and get back ot us

He's also mentioned his heritage way before this discussion. You really have zero to add.

by bruh21 2007-08-14 07:05AM | 0 recs
BTW

BTW, actions speak louder than speech. Clinton's campaign manager is a hispanic female. Her inner circle is full of minorities. It's ridiculous to suggest she's not paying attention to diversity. I'm just too lazy to dig out that article. It is actually pretty astonishing that how many minorities, female are running her show on a daily basis.

If she get elected, these people will have some significant roles to play in her white house. You can take it to the bank.

by areyouready 2007-08-13 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: BTW

AMEN

As someone who's been the token minority I think its a stupid requirement

by world dictator 2007-08-13 05:55PM | 0 recs
by markjay 2007-08-13 06:08PM | 0 recs
Are you surprised?

For the record I am white man working as a community organizer with African Americans.

Hillary Clinton called Obama, a Black man, "naive and irresponsible" which is actually a very racist and segregationist code word. She is not stupid and knows exactly what she said. It is very humiliating knowing that Obama has a wife and children. Listen, I know the history of our country.

And some "closet racists" hidding in the democratic party actually like that insult. Think.

by win 2007-08-13 06:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you surprised?

That kind of politics might backfire this time.  It didnt work in Virginia when George Allen appealed for the same vote by calling a college student a "Macaca"(monkey).

by allmiview 2007-08-13 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you surprised?

You tried spinning this "Hillary is a racist" argument before. No one beleved you then no one believes you now.

by world dictator 2007-08-13 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you surprised?

OK, he is a "Black Man" and Hillary Clinton is far from a racist.

by iamready 2007-08-13 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you surprised?

That is completely bullshit. They are extremely normal charges in the political debate. Epecially when used against somebody who's percieved as less experienced then you. I've never heard them used as racist and segregationist code words. You are race baiting.

Hillary has spend her life working for equality for everybody. to try to paint her as racist is trollish beyond belief.

by Ernst 2007-08-14 03:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Are you surprised?

I am going to hold my tongue here because otherwise I am likely to type something that will indeed get me kicked off this site. Just think of the most reprehensible statement someone could make about another so-called human being and I would just be warming up.

As I wrote to someone earlier. You are trying to start a racial fight and we are not going to allow you to do that.

by DoIT 2007-08-14 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Are you surprised?

"Just think of the most reprehensible statement someone could make about another so-called human being and I would just be warming up."

LOL.  That is the way to do it.  Bravo.  

by georgep 2007-08-14 06:10AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Stop and read some responses to the first three times you posted this nonsense.

You couldn't be more off base. Do you even know who is part of Hillary's inner circle? It is, by far, the most diverse staff you'll find and most of them go way back with Hillary Clinton to the early days in the White House.

Here's a photo and article on "Hillaryland"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002567. html

Here's the wiki entry with clickable links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillaryland

Here's a DailyKOS diary with a run-down of the diversity on Clinton's inner-circle.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/6/1 55827/3340

by hwc 2007-08-13 06:01PM | 0 recs
by hwc 2007-08-13 06:03PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

see my comment to dAndrews above.

by jgarcia 2007-08-13 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Arn't these scenes from her Iowa speeches?  I agree with you that usually there would be people from diverse backgrounds in these types of ad's, however this one, I believe is moments in Iowa.  Isn't it possible that they were not thinking of excluding anyone given Iowa's ethnically monolithic composition?

by bookgrl 2007-08-13 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I think the point is that they could have found people of color if they had thought of it. Ad production value gives a lot away about how thought out it was.

by bruh21 2007-08-14 07:08AM | 0 recs
The invisible 6.1%

According to the US Census Bureau, 6.1% of the population of Iowa is a race other than white, including the following populations:

Black or African American: 61,853 (2.1%)
Asian: 36,635 (1.3%)
American Indian and Alaska Native: 8,989 (0.3%)
Some other race: 37,420 (1.3%)

Hispanic or Latino of any race: 82,473 (2.8%)

Why does it appear none of these Iowans are in Senator Clinton's ad?

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-13 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

She is secretly appealing for the "Robert Byrd" vote.

by allmiview 2007-08-13 06:15PM | 0 recs
No,

I don't buy that explanation.

I'm more thinking the poor planning angle.  Where's Penn's brilliant message work?

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-13 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: No,

it's pretty sad that when people are making such serious claims, which you agree are obviously ludacris, that you have to take this time to bash Mark Penn.

by world dictator 2007-08-13 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: No,

I think the messaging could be better and I blame one of the message shapers, the one I am told is so good that it is worth it to associate with him and his firm.  Seems reasonable to me.  I make no apologies for not liking Mark Penn's work.

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-13 08:41PM | 0 recs
Re: No,

I assume you know that media people and pollsters are seperate aspects of the campaign

by world dictator 2007-08-14 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: No,

Most press accounts indicate Penn is no mere pollster, but a key aide who helps with issue selection and framing.  You know this.

Others have claimed Penn's role is limited to polling but that is not true.  His influence extends much more broadly to messaging, issue framing, strategy, and assuredly he will play a major role in ad design and perhaps media buys.  The New York Times describes Penn as her "main political adviser".  Another NYT article call's him Clinton's "chief strategist" who carries "considerable influence within the campaign".

Some time ago another poster asserted that in his capacity as pollster, Penn's objectivity would be required to perform, implicitly insulating his Clinton association from taint.  Before making such an assertion, I would have to know what sort of inside knowledge this poster has about Penn.  I would also want to know how this knowledge counters the account reported in The Nation (and don't start with `disgruntled former employee' unless you actually have some information, please):

Half a dozen former PSB staffers say Penn has stretched to get the answers he wanted, including manipulating data, phrasing misleading questions and shifting the demographics of those polled, whether it was for the Clinton campaign in 1996 or a corporate client like Procter & Gamble. For example, Penn was insistent that Clinton's poll numbers in '96 match his poll numbers in '92, say two staffers who worked at PSB during the campaign. If Clinton was underperforming, Penn would artificially add more Democratic-aligned groups to the survey sample to make Bill look better. "He was a great showman, and he'd paint you a nice picture," says one former staffer who worked with Penn in the late '90s. "But the way he got you the data--it was cooked." Staffers who left started a PSB survivors message board documenting what they perceived as personally abusive and unethical behavior in the workplace.

Berman, "Hillary Inc.", The Nation, 4 June 2007

In one sense this is OK if you are a consultant and your job is to help elect your candidate.  But it does damage, if true, to the specific assertion that his limited role as pollster (itself false) answers concerns expressed about the association.  If he is willing to cook the numbers, what else is he willing to do?

The Nation article puts the scale and direction of Penn's influence in perspective:

Yet despite his outsized role in the corporate world, his company's close ties to GOP operatives and questions about his polling techniques, Penn remains a leading figure in Hillary's campaign, pitching the inevitability of her nomination to donors and party bigwigs. According to the New York Times, `[Hillary] Clinton responds to Penn's points with exclamations like, Oh, Mark, what a smart thing to say!' His presence means that triangulation is alive and well inside the campaign and that despite her populist forays, Hillary won't stray far from the center or think too big. `Penn has a lot of influence on her, no doubt about it,' says New York political consultant Hank Sheinkopf, who worked with Penn in '96. `He's not going to let her drift too far left'.

Berman, "Hillary Inc.", The Nation, 4 June 2007

In the context of this discussion I assume we can all decipher the code `too far left'?  And forget the silliness of quoting the Senator there and focus on the depth of influence the passage reveals.  It is fine to hold the opinion that Senator Clinton's association with Penn is not a big problem.  I can accept that we disagree.  Just don't pretend he is just another numbers guy.

If he is just a numbers guy, shouldn't she get another calculator, given his associations?

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-14 06:19PM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

That was completely uncalled for. You and apparently a few here are trying to start a racial fight. And just so you know, we aren't going to let that happen. Your comment about Byrd has to do with his past, a frickin very long time ago. It was a mistake that he admitted to and he changed his ways. Apparently people like you will never change yours.

by DoIT 2007-08-14 05:50AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

calling for diversity is uncalled for? no one is claiming she is racist. they are saying this was a bad oversight.

by bruh21 2007-08-14 07:09AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

I was commenting on the Robert Byrd comment. So my comment is directly relevant. Sometimes I get the feeling you just want to argue for the sake of arguing. Life is too short.

by DoIT 2007-08-14 08:06AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

you and others are attacking the diarist over his concern over the diversity of the video. one word out of bounds isn't the basis for most of what is being said here. i am responding to the general tenure of the critque, not chery picked words

by bruh21 2007-08-14 08:44AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

I figured it out you weren't responding to tro

by bruh21 2007-08-14 08:46AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

your three sentences here summarize why I wrote this diary.  I actually like all our candidates.  But, in 2007, her huge oft-played kick-off ad was not diverse and it was called, "Invisibles."  Found that ironic.

And I really don't care where the ad is targeted.  Any serious Democratic candidate should have diversity in ALL of their ads.  And for some people to suggest that there are no latinos or blacks in Iowa who would want to work for her campaign is ludacrious.

by jgarcia 2007-08-14 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

Only 6.1% of Iowa is non-white? I wonder if you feel the same way about candidates not having obviously disabled people in their ads, or gay people -- two other kinds of diversity that approach 6.1%. Not having seen the ads, I can't say for sure that these groups weren't included -- but I suspect they weren't, and indeed they usually aren't.

I guess my view on the matter is that diversity in media of any kind is a good thing if it emerges, but not if it's contrived. I don't think it's the candidate's responsibility to pretend the diversity is there if it isn't. But maybe I'm outside the tent on this one.

by Pender 2007-08-15 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

Thanks for getting that info.  And if you think about it, minorities are WAY over-represented in the Democratic Party when you compare it to the Republican party.  Thus, that 6.1% is perhaps over ten percent when you consider JUST the Democrats.

Either way, in the year 2007, that ad is unacceptable.  If I wanted that sort of treatment, I'd be in the all-white party, the Republicans.

by jgarcia 2007-08-13 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

If you base your political affilation on the diversity of campaign ads please switch parties.

by world dictator 2007-08-13 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

Usually you present facts to back up your arguments. Here you haven't. You are citing a fact and then trying to make it seem as if somehow Hillary and/or her ad people disregarded those facts and intentionally left people out.

Hillary has a very long history of being an inclusionalist. She respects people for who they are, not what their race is. How dare you or anyone else suggest otherwise.

by DoIT 2007-08-14 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: The invisible 6.1%

I did present facts to support my argument.  The problem here is that you are either not seeing my argument or I am not explaining it very well.  Please allow me to try again.

I do not think Senator Clinton is racist and have never thought she is racist.  I do think some of her husband's policies had negative impacts on minority populations, but he is not a racist either and she is not responsible for everything he did.

Senator Clinton is a progressive and one of the reasons is that she believes in racial equality.

Now let's talk about the design of an introductory ad in Iowa.

I provided evidence from the Census Bureau indicating the changing racial and ethnic composition of Iowa.  Fourteen counties now have >10 % minority populations, including Polk and Scott county.  Among Democratic-inclined residents, this proportion is obviously likely much higher.  And I want Democrats to make it higher still by earning greater levels of support.

Minority groups are the dynamic population group in Iowa, as white populations inch toward absolute decline, though obviously they will remain overwhelmingly dominant in the Hawkeye state for generations. So while it is true that Iowa remains very, very white, I think it is fair to say the recent demographic evidence actually indicates greater diversity than often assumed in facile comments that reflect received wisdom.

What is more, these small changes in Iowa are a microcosm of the much larger demographic changes around the country. I want the Democratic party to be the party identified with these changes even more than now.  I think the candidates and the party should work even harder to make that association, to appeal to the population growth sectors.  Design elements of the platform to meet the needs of those leading demographic changes in every community.  The permanent party of change.

There was an opportunity in that ad to accomplish some of that.  Iowa will likely be less swingy in 2008 than in 2000 or 2004, but the fact we split it those two elections and both times by razor thin margins, suggests we should position to capture the dynamic population groups.  

Obviously there will be many ads and this one might have had a specific demo in mind, perhaps women.  But with a theme of "invisible" it seems perfect to express directly or indirectly in a kickoff ad:

"As our communities change and grow, there's some people who are often invisible.  I see them. I like them.  I want everyone to know I support them."

Even if only enthymematically: this our community; minorities are visible in our community; minorities are a part of our community.

That's sappy, but I am not a copy writer.  I hope you get my drift.

I apologize if you took my remarks as race baiting.  I hope it is clear that was not my argument.  I hope you weren't lumping me in with people making different arguments.

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-14 06:50PM | 0 recs
Maybe none showed up at the rallies filmed?

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-14 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Another hit piece starting to attract race baiters such as 'win' and 'allmiview'.

What a race-baiting-fest. Basically throw everything you have to Hillary, just to see whether it can stick.

Disgusting race baiters.

by areyouready 2007-08-13 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Pointing out that Hillarys first ad is ALL white is not race baiting.  It's disturbing.

by allmiview 2007-08-13 06:20PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Give me a fucking break. Your commenting history has clearly shown you're one of the worst race baiters on this blog.

Simply disgusting. You really do not reflect well on your candidate. I long predicted he' would do this sort of thing in the end.

by areyouready 2007-08-13 06:22PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

losing the black, asian and hispanic votes are something the democrats cannot afford.  

by allmiview 2007-08-13 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.
And they will do that with Hillary Clinton???
She has the most diverse staff in Washington.
by bookgrl 2007-08-13 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

What a crock.  CLINTON of all people would be losing the black, hispanic and asian votes?  She leads every other candidate in all 3 demogroups.

by georgep 2007-08-13 11:05PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Give me a fucking break.

What language! Not your usual LOL stuff.

;-} ;-} ;-}

by DoIT 2007-08-14 05:47AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Her first Iowa ad. Her other video's and ads from this cycle are far from all white. To claim that the single ad not showing diversity out of many is disturbing is cherry picking for race baiting. You're not fooling anybody.

by Ernst 2007-08-14 03:42AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

thats a fine point. but if you notice he was referring to the ad saw. if there are other iowa ads out there- fine. but the defense above could have been cut down if they had simply said there are other iowa ads.

by bruh21 2007-08-14 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

jgarcia,, with all due respect, look at Edwards ad for Iowa:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SuQRbUHy SU&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnedwards%2Ec om%2Fwethepeople%2F

Of all people shown, not a single minority.  And that is not an ad showing mostly campaign appearances but carefully selected people to represent Iowans.  

I personally don't see much wrong with that.  Iowa has almost no minorities, so it would seem stilted to put "tokens."   Given that Edwards ad was a bam-bam-bam parade of people, how is the minority omission not worse than Clinton's ad, which was mostly random shots from the campaign stump?  

by georgep 2007-08-13 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I get your point.  And thanks for the link.  I am not suprised regarding Edwards, as I have never been impressed by his campaign and wouldn't expect them to be on-the-ball.  However, I guess I expected more from Hillary and that's why I got so upset.  Her ad made me think of the term, "invisible", and then when I saw all-white, I got annoyed.

Iowa is 91% white now.  There are way more latinos there than people think.  Afterall, who works on all those pig farms?  Latest estimates are that IA has 6.1% ethic minorities.  And, when you consider that most minorities are Democrats, then perhaps any ad up there in Iowa should include some non-white faces.  That's all.

Btw, I have seen Edwards' campaign team in NH and they are as white as any Republican campaign team.  Ironic, considering he is the one running most to the Left.  But I have never had any faith in Edwards' campaign or even HIS campaigning abilities.  But I would expect more from Hillary Rodham Clinton.

by jgarcia 2007-08-13 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

You have yet to make the argument for why an ad's is obligated to having a racial breakdown that is proportionate to the racial breakdown of the state.

Also 6.1% ethnic minorities is still 93.9% white. There's about 6% native Americans in the US. Does that mean all national ads should have at least one native America? If the ethnic population of Iowa was 24% should an ad have two minorities? More?

How many minorities should there be on an Iowa staff? Should they go out and find  a minoritiy if none applies?

Considering that Clinton's national staff is filled with minorities does that mean she needs to fire some of them and hire more whites to balance out the national ratio?

by world dictator 2007-08-13 08:32PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Seriously, jgarcia, I am not buying any of this.

And, how can you state that you expect MORE from Clinton than your chosen candidate, John Edwards, in that regard?  Not that I even feel there is anything to this whole thing in either ad, but why would your chosen candidate not get higher expectations (and a greater level of disappointment when he does not fulfill those) than the candidate you won't be voting for in the primary?

by georgep 2007-08-13 10:06PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

The true measure of helping minorities is what you do in office and throughout your life, not who you put in your ad.

The implication that every ad should have a minority is actually more damaging than excluding minorities. When people like you make these arguments they miss the point. Encouraging PCism where you make sure you have a minority token whether it be in an ad,tv show,commercial,etc just encourages people to pay lip service to racial issues instead of dealing with the course elements of racial inequality.

Does making sure theres a minority in every ad deal with racial economic disparity? No. Does it deal with disenfranchised political minorities? No. Does it improve education among predominetely minority inner cities? No.

Worse yet, you KNOW Hillary Clinton isn't a racist yet you're throwing around this race baiting because you don't like the Hillary. To me that is a very bannable offense.

If you're going to call Hillary Clinton a racist, don't speak in code. Start a diary and make your case. Or hell just flat out say so. I'm guessing neither of you will because you know you'll be mocked endlessly and provided with mounds of emperical counter arguments.

And Iamready/icebergslim/whatever. You should really be ashamed of yourself. You know Clinton isn't racist. The only reason you're jumping in this argument is in order to try and bash Clinton. You have sunken to an all time low and you ought to be ashamed of yourself

by world dictator 2007-08-13 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Sorry...typo...I meant Jgarcia not iamready

by world dictator 2007-08-13 08:36PM | 0 recs
Consider another angle

I get your anger here but I think there is another angle you should consider again.

The non-white population is 6.1% and probably slightly higher given who is under-counted and some estimates range as high as 9% (see short article linked below).

The proportion is surely far higher among Democratic voting and Democratic-leaning voters.

It is higher still in several counties and large cities, presumably rich targets, though obviously there will be other ads.  

There is no growth in Iowa's white population while the minority population continues to increase rapidly, according to new US Census data released last week:

Henning [coordinator of the State of Iowa's data center] says in Iowa the percentages are nowhere near the national level, but she says for the first time, one Iowa county has a minority population over 25-percent. Henning says Buena Vista County has a minority population of 25.1% of the county's total population. Henning says Crawford County has the second highest minority population at 20.9% [these are rural counties with small populations, to be sure].

Henning says some of the larger counties, Polk has a minority population just over 15% and Scott county just under 15%. Henning says a total of 14 of Iowa counties with more than 10 percent of their population being minorities. Henning says from 200 to 2006 the minority population has led the growth in Iowa. She says the total population changed by just under two-percent but the Latino population increased by 39.1%, and the black population 18.2%. Henning says the white non-hispanic population grew by only zero-point-one percent.

Darwin Danielson, Iowa's minority population increases, still behind rest of country, RadioIowa, August 9, 2007

Given these facts, why would the campaign's first ad not represent at least some of the diversity in the state, particularly given that minorities are the only growing populations in the state?

It strikes me as an omission in one of two ways. Either members of these minority groups were not in attendance in the campaign stops in the ad or footage of them was not included in the ad.

Why would the campaign not want to include the whole of Iowa in their kickoff ad?

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-13 09:12PM | 0 recs
by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-13 09:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Consider another angle

You're still assuming that showing a token minority in an ad means anything/has any signficance to representation/helping the disenfranchised.

AND

there is a minority girl in the video fyi

by world dictator 2007-08-14 05:40AM | 0 recs
Hysterically funny....

The true measure of helping minorities is what you do in office and throughout your life, not who you put in your ad.

While "in office" the Clintons sold out black & hispanic people to wannabe slavers under mandatory minimum laws some of which Clinton signed into law. While he was going through his glorious days as "the first Black President" blacks and hispanics were filling up the prisons under Clinton. RAPIDLY. He knew too. And when did he choose to feel bad about it? On his last day in office, he pardoned around 36 of them, saying it was "unconscionable" and talked about the injustice of the laws, some of which he helped become law. Hey, but at least, "he felt their pain."

Hillary can color her "inner cirle" the colors of all the rainbow, they too will discover that they'll always be expendable for more money and power.

by cosbo 2007-08-13 10:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Hysterically funny....

If you're not even going to make an intelligent don't bother posting

I disagree with mandatory minimum sentences very strongly. But you can't cherry pick an issue and say that it well that hurt African Americans therefore he sold them out.

How many minority children are helped under SCHIP?
How many minorities have higher wages and more jobs because of the robust economy
How many minorities had their salary raised by the first minimum wage increase in years?

Also you quickly overlook the fact that Clinton was the first president that had a cabinet that looked truly represented the racial diversity of America.

by world dictator 2007-08-14 05:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Hysterically funny....

Well, I'm sure all those who're suffering under the draconian mandatory minimum laws will feel better once they understand all that.

by cosbo 2007-08-14 10:27AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Looks like the Clinton campaign found the Latino in Iowa. Here's the video from the DVD the Clinton campaign mailed in Iowa:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/42.a spx

by hwc 2007-08-13 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

You do realize there is more than one Latino in Iowa?  Some may take offense to your snide comment.

by Trond Jacobsen 2007-08-13 09:15PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

What was the percentage? 2.1%?

The first two states, Iowa and New Hampshire, are lily-white by any definition.

by hwc 2007-08-13 10:17PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I agree that the comment was ill suited. But so is the accusation by the diary's author.

by DoIT 2007-08-14 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

This is really, really weak.

You certainly need more than one ad to start lobbing these kind of charges.  Are we trying to make ourselves look like every absurd liberal caricature ever drawn?

The idea of a bunch of consultants - or even Hillary herself - sitting around a production room, saying "wait, this rally footage is too white, make sure we get a black face in there" just makes me cringe.  Absolutely cringe.

Or do you think it's intentional?  Do you seriously think some consultant said "wait, get the black guy out of that shot, we don't want to throw away the racist vote"?

Whichever scenario you believe in, I'm really not sure what to say to you.  I really regret that people have to spread these destructive memes.

by Steve M 2007-08-13 09:36PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Once again, a good post, Steve M.  I usually like jgarcia's posts, but I think he went overboard here.  I showed Edwards' ALL-WHITE ad, and that gets a ho-hum "well, I expect that stuff from Edwards. His campaign is horrible."  This should not be an issue.  It is indeed silly.  You simply CAN'T plan campaign stops with minority placements.  How dumb would that be to script a campaign stop film with "product placement" in mind?  This is not Hollywood, nor would I want a racially planned ad.  The whole notion is silly.  Notice how the freshly signed on posters "win" and "allmiview" act like the self-anointed race policemen?   Of course, we have also been treated to the exact opposite spectacle here, namely that Clinton is a RACE PANDERER who is too concerned about appearing chummy with blacks.  

Disgusting, to say the least.  

by georgep 2007-08-13 10:03PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I accept that he's posting in good faith, that this is his honest reaction.  I'm just disappointed, and I wonder if he'll reflect on it and realize that he might have jumped to conclusions a little.

I'm a big believer in diversity but not every 60-second snapshot needs to look like a Benetton ad.  Really, the standard that's being set here is impossible to meet.

by Steve M 2007-08-13 10:35PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

please see my 4:06pm reply to "bruh21" above.

by jgarcia 2007-08-14 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Dude, it's IOWA!

by zt155 2007-08-13 09:42PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Seriously.

I've posted links to Clinton's campaign video from other states, like South Carolina, that is extremely diverse. I've posted links to her incredibly diverse campaign organization. But, the detractors seem to be studiously ignoring these links.

They are obviously more interested in rhetoric than being educated.

by hwc 2007-08-13 10:15PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Actually you are wrong, if you check at the 25 sec mark you'll see that minorities aren't completely left out. It isn't much, but she's got plenty of ads that are more representative.

I must say that I'm disappointed in this diary, You readily admit that she does far better then most candidates, including your own candidate yet you only attack Hillary on this subject. Í would've been more impressed if you had made this a general discussion diary about this subject instead of an attack on a candidate. It's a serious subject, and by making this about a candidate who you think is better then most on this issue you devaluate the issue.

by Ernst 2007-08-14 04:08AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

please see my 4:06pm reply to "bruh21" above.

by jgarcia 2007-08-14 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

Perhaps I was a little hasty.  But just look at it from my (or other people of color's) point of view.

My intention was not to impugn HRC's character or anything.  Just that her campaign must consider people's sensibilities.  ALL the candidates' campaign staffs should.

by jgarcia 2007-08-14 12:12PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I agree completely, That's why I found the way you addressed it a bit disappointing. Especially as this is something every candidate should take into account. But I do see where you come from, seeing what the message of the video is and that minorities are under represented in this ad (but not entirely absent) it is understandable you felt as you did.

by Ernst 2007-08-14 03:29PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I think that it is unfair for you to make the accusation you do in your title and what you imply in your diary. Of course candidates should not make sure their ads show diversity. Are you suggesting that they should manufacture a scene that doesn't exist? If you take a look at the people closest to Hillary you will find diversity everywhere. Just because Iowa is 95% white doesn't reflect on Hillary. Not in the least.

I normally respect your posts but this racial implication crosses a line for me. Hillary is not a racist or a segregationalist which you seem to imply. She is the exact opposite of that.

by DoIT 2007-08-14 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

please see my 4:06pm reply to "bruh21" above.

by jgarcia 2007-08-14 12:09PM | 0 recs
Whether its Women of Color, or La Raza

Hillary seems to be doing fine with minorities.   You are wasting time trying to drive a wedge that nobody is going to buy into.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/multimedia photos

Furthermore, as others have pointed out, look at her inner circle.  Plenty of diversity.  Look at her endorsements.  Look at Bill Clinton's past Cabinets and advisors for a clue as to what Hillary will do when in the White House.

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-14 06:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Whether its Women of Color, or La Raza

please see my 4:06pm reply to "bruh21" above.

by jgarcia 2007-08-14 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I've been backing Hillary, too.  But as a member of the Hispanic community, I'm hurt by her carelessness.  In all reality, she probably didn't even know it would end up like this until she saw that final product, but what does that say about the people working for her?  I hope she does something to apologize to us and everyone else she has offended with this mistake.  Talk about feeling invisible...

by DJ Gee 2007-08-15 09:43AM | 0 recs
Re: No diversity in Hillary's world, apparently.

I'm glad that you "get it", my friend.  I guess it IS true that if one isn't a minority, it's hard for them to understand.

I still like Hillary Clinton.  But, like you, I feel a little hurt and disappointed.  And if and when I ever see her face to face, I will tell her exactly that.  They need to hear it from people like us, so they can change their behavior for the better.

by jgarcia 2007-08-17 11:32AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads