A subtle post about inclusion and those who are 'mousy, introverted' [View All]

Anyone else here "mousy, introverted?"

I took the phraseology from a thread over in GD about women that hate Hillary Clinton. The reference was to someone in East Texas who raised Cain when Hillary's name gets mentioned. She was described as "mousy, introverted," AND the rest of the phrase is "ultra-conservate, bible-thumping" which I gather describes no-one here except freeper lurkers. :-)

I've always been introverted. I'm short - 5 ft. and a little bit. Not really overweight, maybe 5% over what I could be. I dunno about 'mousy,' but it's not like I have a head of Swedish-type blonde hair. Mine's kinda brown, not black and not blonde.

I'm trying to make a subtle point about inclusion here. If Dems like 'bold fashion plate-attractive-assertive women' in preference to those of us who are 'mousy, introverted,' they are taking a huge risk politically. I am already aware that a lot of the 'beautiful people' in Hollywood are tight-in with the Dems.

I'm not a member of a visible minority group, i.e. I'm a white female between 18 and 55. I have had experiences in the North, New England in particular, with very 'liberal' individuals that call themselves 'Democrats' who have rejected me very quickly based on things like seeing a southern-state licence plate, solely on the basis that I am a 'white southerner.'

I'm making a rather subtle point with this post about inclusion. Like probably 85% of the population, I am one of those individuals who was never endowed with beauty pageant looks, nor with the boldness of a Hillary in rapport.

I'm not particularly liberal on social issues, i.e. I'm liberal on some and conservative on others. I believe that there is such a thing as ethics and moral standards. For example, I believe in testing and having high academic standards in education. I also believe schools need to be adequately funded. One indicator that I am not extremely liberal socially is that when I post here, I attempt to make my posts comfortable for a parent, and a 12-year old studying history or elections to read. In other words, I don't believe in using bad language here. Sure, I'll sometimes cuss like a sailor at home, especially if I've stubbed my toe or the whole pile of dreck in the workshop that I have taken considerable effort to arrange in a neat and orderly fashion falls down again in chaos. However, I don't believe in using potty-mouth in a place where a 10-year old could read it.

I am a staunch supporter of the right of American workers to a just, living wage. I am a staunch supporter of protecting our American standard of living through protecting the jobs held by our middle class and creating better jobs for those who are falling through the cracks. I am adamantly against corporate welfare. I believe something pretty drastic needs to be done both about the deficit and about the crazy state of the health care system.

Do Dem's want to include 'me'?, or are they looking for any of:

1) Hollywood looks for spokespeople and visible donors
2) Strident verbal audacity to the point of creating 'litmus tests' on certain social issues that are very divisive
3) Folks that aren't 'white southerners' with a preference for puritanical New Englanders. I have noticed less attention paid to the African American southern vote in the last few campaigns.

This is a question to ponder. I probably won't reply to the responses, since I want to throw this question out in a sort of 'theoretical' fashion and invite the board members to explore issues rather than personal facts. To sum up, the issues are about whether Dems are willing to drop factionalism and admit people who are not as liberal on some of the social issues nor as strident as the Hollywood glitterati.

Are the Dems willing to return to working-class roots and populism?