One leading candidate for Democratic National Committee Chair recently said, "We heard loudly and clearly yesterday from Bernie supporters that the process was rigged and it was. And you've got to be honest about it. That's why we need a chair who is transparent."
Of course I am not actually surprised that this article about the DNC election doesn't even bother to mention the best candidate for the job, Sam Ronan. To do so would upset the DNC establishment that gave us Hillary Clinton as their nominee.
Here's Sam Ronan at the DNC chair debate:
The people who run the DNC are living in denial, and that is why they will most probably chose Perez and then wonder why the party keeps shrinking, as progressives put their energies into third party candidates. Berners are not interested in returning to the old abusive relationship with the DNC.
Frankly, I am sick of relitigating the primary. None of it matters now. Perez (read about him before yelling, the man has done great stuff), Ellison, and I'm sure plenty of the other candidates would be excellent. Pick one and let's get on with it. I'm walking in my district for a candidate anyway, not the DNC Chair.
If we actually lived in a functioning democracy, then who is elected leader of the DNC would be important. We actually live in an Oligarchy ruled by billionaire elite masters. They shipped our jobs to China while using robots to replace the remaining workers. They use war for profits. They use prisons for profits. They made us debt slaves. They are destroying our ecosystem for profits. They own the media. Time to wake up folks. Time to go into the streets. This is disruption time. Watch the Indians at Standing Rock...They are awake and aware.
We live in the country we create. If you don't vote this coming federal election, or choose to vote in a way that doesn't maximize your impact, you lose to the stronger coalition. That stronger coalition writes the laws and makes policy. That's how it works.
I'm not ready to lie down for losers arguments--I've done that too long. Me tea-turd Congressman was nearly knocked off a few years back, but I stood back and took potshots at the "ruling elite" instead. Sometimes we can't get everything we want, but I'll be walking the district this time around instead of accepting fate and crying about sellouts. That's what the other coalition, the Republican one, wants me (and us) to do.
The Dems scraped the bottom of the barrel to pick their weakest candidate to run in 2016. They rigged the primaries shamelessly against a progressive candidate who actually brought people together and connected with the lower and middle class. The ineptitude of the Democratic party corrupted by corporate donors runs very deep. All signs of leadership appointments at the House, Senate and now at the DNC indicate they haven't learnt a thing. I'd be surprised if they ever win an election again unless they change their ways and line of thinking.
I'm close enough to help with McClintock and know a few people up there. Issa also came close to defeat and his opponent is going to try again. There are a couple of others who are marginal.
Tiresome and utterly useless griping.
Awesome. I'm actually going to the next Democratic club meeting for Placer progressive Democrats on March 15th. Wanted to go this month but had a prior obligation. Frankly, I haven't really been super active for the last eight years and consider myself part of the problem. Just looking to learn--I figure I owe folks that have been working to make a difference while I bitch in forums like these. If progressives got out and voted in the numbers they march in, I think we could make some gains this election.
I should add, Issa is terrible, maybe the worst in our congressional delegation. His phony sanctimony knows no bounds.
A youthful car thief who made a fortune on auto security devices.
Can't stand the guy and don't see what voters see in him. I really really was hoping he'd be gone. He represents the difference between progressives and conservatives perfectly: they may not like him, but show up to vote anyway knowing he keeps them in the majority. Just a few more people on our side show up, and he'd be out.
Now, compare him to a Democrat without any of his ethical problems but one vote we don't like: we'll complain about him everywhere as the biggest sellout in the world, despite all his other votes, then either not show up or vote third party. Of course, then we'll follow that up by complaints about how corrupt the party is, ignoring our own fruitless and self-defeating efforts in the whole affair. Republicans laugh while they write laws and create policy.
"he says the DNC needs shaking up" No, he said (at least as far as your quote goes,) "we need a chair who is transparent. Big difference.
And who are these 224 who cast votes in this matter?
You mention the word transparency and the word vote in regards to the upcoming naming of a new DNC Chairman.
It's pretty clear over the last decades the rank-and-file's cast votes have little or no correlating tie to policy. Which makes transparency an inside joke for the delegates to chuckle at, over a private dinner, perhaps. But, it has no place when it comes to what the Democratic Caucus does in reality.
On the questions of foreign policy where is the difference, creating the distinction, regarding choosing an Establishment Republican or Democrat? Are we not still ensconced in a worldwide effort to meddle and push for regime change? And, in places where none was an organic plea for help from the affected citizens. Did we hear Libyan voices calling out " Help us, Uncle Sam "? Of course, Iraqis and folks in Yemen were demanding the U.S. come in and blow the crap out of their countries, right? And, 16 years into Afghanistan, and counting? When was the last time you saw an Afghan leader speak on the TeeVee about Good Ol' Uncle Sam and all his wonderful bombs?
Will it make a dimes worth of difference who is the figurehead here? Will it change the trajectory of ever more spending on the world web of the U.S.'s Police & Security State?
You can either be a war party or a peace party but when you choose the latter please tell the people what that entails. No healthcare if you're not wealthy, no good universal education if your not wealthy, no good retirement if you're not wealthy, no modernization of the infrastructure. ... and, on it will go.
I support Ellison but, anymore, I'm not sure I like the Democratic Party's current policymakers. The people in the party have been patiently saying, " Help Us, Uncle Sam " for a long time, to little avail. All this may be just more of much ado about nothing.
I'm wondering. Is there a line you wouldn't cross? I mean some Democrats are pretty much Republicans in the Democratic Party, the Blue Dog kind comes to mind.
I mean what if the DNC anointed candidate was ultra conservative due to DNC thinking only a conservative can win in that district, what if the chosen one is pro-life, pro-pipelines, pro-'entitlement reform,' pro-deportations, pro-Muslim registries, and anti-Obamacare. What if the candidate had been in the KKK once upon a time and campaigned for G. Wallace as a teen and never apologized for that? What if the candidate wanted to invade Mexico? What if the candidate preached a first strike policy regarding nuclear weapons? What f the candidate was endorsed by the NRA?
I am just trying to find out if there is a line. If there is, which I can't believe there wouldn't be, we then can discuss where is the line (for you and for me) and what do we do when the party is constantly offering us candidates on the wrong side.
Yes there's a line. In my red district I've said I will vote blue dog if I have to, but he can't be a vote for the Ryan budget and has to show environmental consciousness. I'm not stupid, just someone who recognizes giving hard right Republicans power is not going to achieve any of the ends I want. After all, the purity of my vote is pretty foggy if all it does is get someone diametrically opposed to my interests into power. The blue dog who almost won my district a few years back would've been eons better than the guy running it now. I wish I'd been more pragmatic then when he came within 1000 votes, but I let ideology blind me.
The DNC Chair isn't running in my district or yours. Ellison and Perez are great candidates that have committed to a 50-state strategy. That's what matters most in a Chair. It's getting candidates from my district into the House and Legislature that really matters. After all, winning elections is how you change policy and govern in this country.
Thanks for going local.
But it is worth repeating and it is a factual truth.