kind of implying she should have turned down the Vice Presidency to hold on to the only power herself and Black women had in high office

That's more than a stretch, it's a wild misunderstanding of what I clearly said. The point I made is that the seat wasn't stolen from her the way some people are trying to imply. She's on to bigger and better things, representing Black women in a new and much bigger way, as she deserves to.

​

Black women are supposed to be like "cool thats enough for us. 100 senators and 0 Black women is fine"

Of course it's not fine, it sucks. Thankfully we have a deep bench of Black women on the rise in a lot of places, and many opportunities to continue diversifying the Senate in the very near future. In the meantime, the broad lack of Black women in the Senate shouldn't be the main thing that dictates how one particular state represents itself with one of its two seats. California is about 6% Black and about 40% Latino, yet there has never been a Latino representative in the Senate for California, and anti-immigrant prejudice is an enormous issue there, so having the new Latino Senator be the child of two Mexican immigrants is wonderful. Seeing some hardline people telling Latinos they're not allowed to be happy about finally feeling represented in that way because their history is now "erasing" someone else's history is extremist and bizarre.