Although they won’t, there are three questions the media should ask the two combatants for the Democrat crown. After Elizabeth Warren exited the stage, her diminishing minions took to social media and the airwaves and claimed that sexism is what did her in. Do either of them believe that sexism caused Elizabeth Warren’s campaign to implode? Most likely, they would answer with platitudes directed at Warren abut what a great candidate she was, how she fought for her beliefs, how many of her beliefs mirrored their beliefs, etc. It would be a lot of words without answering the question directly.
If, perchance, they answered that sexism was responsible or was even partially responsible, then there must be a follow-up question. A CBS exit poll in the Massachusetts primary found that 60% of the female vote went to both Sanders and Biden while Warren received only 24% of the female vote in her home state. Are they then suggesting that 60% of Massachusetts female voters, or some subsection of that demographic, is sexist?
Everyone knows by now that the South Carolina primary gave Joe Biden new life. It was his self-declared firewall and it depended upon the African-American vote since they make up a huge slice of the South Carolina Democrat electorate. On Super Tuesday, Biden cleaned up in the South from Virginia to Arkansas and even though Sanders came in a close second in Texas- a state where blacks make up 20% of the Democrat electorate- considering that sexism may have played a role in Warren’s weak performance, is it possible that anti-Semitism played a role in the poor performance of Sanders in the South, particularly among blacks?
The interrogator can give examples of African-American animus towards Jews. You can start with any utterance that could be understood from Al Sharpton, the “Hymietown” comment from Jesse Jackson all those years ago, or the anti-Semitic remarks and comments by the Squad that, ironically, lends its support to Sanders. They can even show a video of black youths accosting and hitting a Jew on the streets of New York.
As a follow-up, they could ask whether the well-documented phenomena of African-American homophobia played a role in Pete Buttigieg’s departure from the campaign? Obviously, whenever the subject actually has come up, the media has shied away from it. One can cite the role of black churches in California that pushed a referendum banning gay marriage over the finish line before federal judges overturned the will of voters in that state. They will naturally say that is all old news, that times and attitudes have changed, etc. But have they really? Did Pete Buttigieg, the only gay candidate in the race who (we think) won the most delegates in Iowa and played it close in New Hampshire, exit because he knew that black Democrat voters in the South, starting in South Carolina, would never vote for a gay man? Was he trying to avoid the embarrassment while hiding the dirty little secret of black homophobia?
Finally, this would be a straightforward question that would require a single word answer. Any answer other than a single word would disqualify them and they would have to wear duct tape over their mouths and a hood over their head the rest of an interview. That question is: How many genders are there? There is one ground rule to follow: they must give a number. If they say anything other than an emphatic “two,” a huge hook grabs them by the neck.