The DNC Contenders Are Not Interested In Your Populist Moment (Huffpo)

[PatrickforO]

Rank and file voters are angry, but nobody told the candidates. Candidates couldn’t even acknowledge the DNC had botched the 2016 process. When asked whether the DNC “put its thumb on the scale” in favor of Hillary Clinton, no candidate would agree. “That’s a gotcha question,” Idaho Democratic Party Executive Director Sally Boynton Brown said. “I’m not going to answer.” The contentious 2016 primary between Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) exposed major fissures in the party. But the candidates studiously avoided emphasizing those divisions. Pete Buttigieg, mayor of South Bend, Indiana, called the idea of the DNC race as a proxy battle between the Sanders and Clinton wings of the party a “false choice.”



The candidates almost universally agreed that lobbyists should be allowed to keep giving money to the DNC. President Barack Obama banned lobbyist contributions to the party in 2008, a ban then-DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz quietly lifted in the 2016 election.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dnc-debate-courage-opposition_us_58803552e4b02c1837e9bf7f

sigh...

[QC]

1. Hey, everything's going great, so why change anything? n/t

[m-lekktor]

5. Everything is fine, it was the Russians!111

seriously WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH

[QC]

8. Exactly! n/t

[Gothmog]

2. I am going to the DNC forum in Houston

[PatrickforO]

3. I hope that when you go, you will take some of these ideas -

not just from this article, but from other things I and others have written about the utter tone-deafness of our party this time around. I don't think anybody really knows what to do. We have Sanders and Warren, both aging, thundering from their Senate seats in the face of accelerated Republican attacks on everything Obama did during his term and more.

But I'll be honest - many times on this very site, I have found myself discouraged because so many on here (and I know there are some party bigwigs who post on here) just don't seem to understand the profound anger of the [populist, New Deal socialist, democratic socialist, worker's wing, whatever you want to call us] wing of the party. This anger amongst Democratic rank and file voters will continue to grow, too, as the GOP rides roughshod over many of the things we fought for over long decades of struggle when our party is powerless to stop most of it.

The New Deal, for instance. It worked. It really did. It saved capitalism. I have said often to those in power, "Hey, just be like FDR and throw the middle class a few bones - single payer healthcare and strong, guaranteed Social Security, and you can go on screwing us for decades to come..." but no one really believed me. Of course, that 'decades to come' may be moot because of global warming...

I'm not gonna say anything about Hillary. She's a good person but the wrong person at the wrong time. I can remember how very, very angry I was at some of her tactics during the primary season. Oh, social justice is more important than economic justice, they said, which implies that Sanders is a racist, they said...geez. And then this November we got what we got. And it's a shitty gift that's gonna keep on giving and giving and giving...or perhaps I should say 'taking.' Because these people want to do away with the concept of 'public good' and make everything private, for profit without any of those pesky regulations to affect cash register operation.

I'm furious. I get 20 emails a day from various Dems, all insisting I give money so they can 'continue the fight against (you fill in the blank). You know, when Americans generally realize how deeply they are going to be screwed by these bozos now in power, they might resort to pitchforks.

I hope not because I'm too old for that shit.

By the way, you'll be happy to note that my friends and I here in my state are trying to form groups to pressure our state legislature and governor into enacting 'national popular vote' legislation. That's a little thing, but it is something.

Sorry for the rant. Good luck in Houston.

[Gothmog]

7. I have met and like Keith Ellison but I do not support his bid for DNC chair

I disagree with much of your analysis and I am currently support Tom Perez strongly.

[Cha]

29. I LIKE Tom Perez, too! Have a productive interesting time @

the DNC forum in Houston, Goth.

I appreciate all you do for us out in the real world.

[Gothmog]

44. The real world is not always fair but you to work to change it

[Gothmog]

45. Even Ellison has backed off his opposition to lobbying money

Ellison is backing off his hard line promise http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dnc-debate-courage-opposition_us_58803552e4b02c1837e9bf7f?section=us_politics

Even Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the most outspoken progressive in this DNC race, downplayed his prior commitment to reinstate the ban.

“If I do become DNC chair, I am not going to impose a policy on anybody. We’re going to have a democratic process on how we arrive at funding the Democratic Party,” he said. Ellison, who co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said he would make sure the ban came up for debate but said he would leave the ultimate decision up to the broader DNC body ― a deference that neither Obama nor Wasserman Schultz showed.

“I think it’s incredibly important that we have the conversation,” he concluded. “We’ve got to at least talk about it because people do have this sense that in D.C. it’s just the puppet masters making all the calls.”

Ellison is going to piss off some bernie supporters but this is the correct position

[NCTraveler]

6. "a ban then-DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz quietly lifted in the 2016 election."

These writers don't even try to hide it. They are working hard to create division. This was heavily discussed.

"quietly lifted" except for the fact everyone knew. I won't even click the link as it's clear from your excerpt alone that the piece is deceptive. This is an editorialist coming up with what he really wants to say and then trying to make it true.

The DNC needs to send a strong message that they won't be hijacked by a small minority and rebuff Ellison. We need someone full time and highly qualified.

"Candidates couldn’t even acknowledge the DNC had botched the 2016 process."

Why should they? Everyone got a chance. They didn't sue the living shit out of the Sanders campaign after his campaign took part in egregious data theft. Built him up and treated him with kid gloves.

The rewriting of history is just amazing. I hope the HA Goodman like writing leaves along with this forum.

Why would people be upset that the DNC accepts money from PACs when Sanders and Clinton were both more than comfortable taking PAC money? This is all just getting a little strange.

[senz]

19. Hmm, very interesting.

[emulatorloo]

28. Exciting. Always nice to hear from a pro-Trump person.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512681394#post23

[hollowdweller]

9. I see a realignment of both parties going forward

In many ways if he actually makes good on what he's saying Trump will be the Bill Clinton of the GOP. He will bring the party to the left on economic issues where the people are.

So I think what we will end up with is a sort of "back to the future" on both parties.

The dems will become the party of big business and wall street like the old republican party was. Except most big business is not racist or prejudiced so we will keep our minority rights platform and we will stick with free trade. So we will be a lot like the old GOP "party of Lincoln" We will keep the gun control since violence is bad for business and guns can be used in labor disputes. We will also remain pro choice.

The republicans will keep their fear and racist leanings, but they will embrace protectionism, worker rights, min wage. Neither party will embrace the environment.
Dems because it hurts business and the GOP because of the jobs aspect. So the GOP will become sort of like the old "dixiecrat" party, populist but with racist leanings.

The question is how that will shake out. I think we would see a lot of republicans become democrats like after the dems embraced equal rights that the dems became republicans. Most wealthy people and highly educated with good jobs will be democrats

Most working class which could eventually include people of color will be republicans.

[BainsBane]

24. What about tearing down corporate regulation

reducing taxes on the rich and a staffing a cabinet filled with billionaires from corporate America says anti-business to you?

[LexVegas]

10. Berniebros operate from the ridiculous perception that it was a close primary.

All subsequent analysis is bullshit.

[JTFrog]

13. +1 nt

[dionysus]

15. Lol. You guys are sad.

[revmclaren]

26. I can think of someone(s)

who are sadder!

[uponit7771]

38. Reality is not sad

[Blue_Tires]

11. Nothing to see here, just some no-name from huffpo

whoring for mouseclicks by shamelessly dredging up the primaries and hoping to poke the hornets' nest...

And don't get me started on the whole bullshit "populism" myth that he is clearly bought into...

[lou ky dem]

12. Why we lose

Look how we argue between ourselves. This is what the Republicans count on us doing. Reality is for us to win more elections is coming together, getting involved,staying informed and holding the elected accountable. United we stand divided we fall!

[PatrickforO]

16. LOL, yes it appears that I touched a nerve.

Yes, I was a strong Sanders supporter, and yes, I'm still part of the Sanders/Warren wing of the party. And yes, there are millions of us just waiting for some leadership towards positions that actually benefit us, as opposed to big business.

It is easy to see how badly this party is split.

But you know, the Dem leaders will go ahead with group think. Working people will continue without the strong Dem support they SHOULD have, and Americans will continue having that feeling of emptiness.

Oh well.

But, hey! The postmortem's almost OVER!

[BainsBane]

18. And your comment in the OP indicates

That you object to efforts to get past divisions based on political personalities from a long ago established primary, and that candidates for DNC chair should be given a hearing based on what they bring to the position rather than tribal alliances. How long can people pretend allegiances to members of the political elite suffice as ideology? If we are to disagree, can it not be about issues or policy? How can the party be expected to stand for principles when Democrats are fixated entirely on alliances around personalities?

As for corporate donations to the DNC, it would be great to do without them, but even Ellison won't dismiss them outright as a possibility. The convention and party building needs to be funded somehow, and the vitriol directed toward the DNC last year certainly didn't help fundraising. Part of the problem is critics have so little understanding of what the DNC actually does, and they seem committed to keeping it that way.

[PatrickforO]

43. Cute. Except that it is Bernie's and Warren's positions I support, not them per se.

Nice try though, but if you dig through my posts you'll see quite a bit of weighty stuff around issues NOT personalities.

But see, by your accusation, you are suggesting that it is I, not the Dem party, who is tone deaf, but this isn't the case. The Donald is being sworn in this very day and sane people in this nation will weep as we face the horrible shit storm his presidency is sure to be.

How is the Dem party came through for us, again? I"m not criticizing the party, mind you, just its leadership for lack of vision and a stunning failure to read the mood of the American people, including myself. Because I'm pretty angry. Oh, I did vote for Clinton, and would have been OK under her presidency, but little if anything would have changed. I'd still have shitty, rationed healthcare with financially crippling copays.

Of course the Repubs are gonna try and repeal O-care which will prove a disaster for them, so that's good, and Ryan and his neolib 'rape the treasury and give our taxes as profits to big corporations' cronies are already readying legislation to voucherize Medicare, massively cut Medicaid and privatize Social Security or at the very least massively cut benefits so they can continue dipping into that till as will on behalf of their corporate masters.

So, yeah, there's not much good about this, is there? Plus, the fuck Trump now has the nuclear codes and he's been signaling a nuclear arms race.

How is is that our party didn't screw up horribly this time around? And now I am genuinely afraid its leaders will bury their heads in the sand and FAIL to recognize and reconcile the split in the party. Because hey, I've been called a unicorn, and up a few posts Cha remarked dryly that someone she agreed with is in 'the real world,' implying that I'm not.

Problem is that I AM in the real world and it is a shithole because we've allowed it to become so. It's time to have some genuine change that benefits the people, not corporations. We need to organize around human need rather than human greed, and I fail to see why the hefty amount of taxes I pay into my government, that is supposedly 'of, by and for' the people, including me, cannot be used to make Americans' lives better instead of padding the coffers of the MIC, big pharma, for profit healthcare and Wall Street.

I have correctly concluded, Bain, and all who read this, that my vote would be wasted in the Green party because they'll never have any power, and I will never even consider voting libertarian because that philosophy sounds very seductive until you're the one in need and you get no help. No, I'm a Democrat, and YOU ARE STUCK WITH ME AND MILLIONS MORE LIKE ME.

[dionysus]

14. ..as DUers cheer them on... sad...

[BainsBane]

17. Putin agrees the DNC put its fingers on the scale

That was a keep component of the Kremlin's campaign to get Trump elected. So why do people still circulate it? And how is it that the votes of the great majority of Democrats, including a disproportionate number of voters from historically marginalized groups, mean so little to people who claim to care about progressive values?

[StevieM]

21. ITA. Black and Latino voters put their fingers on the scale for Hillary Clinton.

Last edited Fri Jan 20, 2017, 11:48 AM - Edit history (1)

And Cenk Uygar is so pissed about it that he continues to claim that Latinos and Blacks didn't turn out in the GE.

Latino voter turnout was up and there was never even any faulty information to contradict that.

HRC did better than Obama did among Latinos in 2012, faulty exit polling not withstanding.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-92304395/

Black turnout was down from 2008 and 2012 but it was up from what John Kerry got in 2004, even though overall voter turnout was down from 2004.

[BainsBane]

22. voter disenfranchisement

directed at people of color voters kept millions from voting. For Unger to blame them is truly awful.

[uponit7771]

39. +1, I have no doubt that after the VRA is gutted that black turnout would be down after KGOP

... operatives directly went after blacks in NC and other states.

Fuckin traitorous bastards

[JustAnotherGen]

36. That's what Cenk does

Blames those who don't watch or tune into his drivel. Just uses us when it's convenient.

Ain't no takesy backsey.

I'll remember his words.

[Cha]

30. Yeah, putin propaganda.. spread far and wide. So members of the Democraric

National Committee liked Hillary better. No wonder.. she was there for them.

As Symone Sanders said.. the primary wasn't rigged.

[senz]

20. Some things never change.

Good OP, Patrick. Thanks!

[BainsBane]

23. Back to celebrate the inauguration?

And your billionaire president with his cabinet of billionaires standing up to oligarchy?
http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/the-establishment-is-trying-to-steal-the-presidency-from-trump/#post-464320

http://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/the-establishment-is-trying-to-steal-the-presidency-from-trump/#post-464331

You must be very excited after working so hard to put him in office. What are the "progressive" "issues" that most excite you about him? The Muslim registry? Ending corporate regulation? Cutting taxes on the rich? Increasing the nuclear arsenal? Or just plain kleptocracy?

[betsuni]

25. Trump "is not into killing -- unlike Obama and Hillary"

[Cha]

31. Oh Jesus.. talk about delusional!

[betsuni]

34. it never ends.

A few hours ago on DU I saw the claim that Hillary tried to rehabilitate Henry Kissinger, Dick Cheney endorsed Hillary, Trump and the Clinton's are best friends, Chelsea Clinton and Ivanka are best friends: Kissinger, Cheney, Trump and all the bad oligarchs are best friends with the Clintons. WAKE UP!111 Hillary worked for Walmart at some point so CORPORATIST. Plus something about "shouting down people" by saying "I'm tired of all the lies" -- that one I hadn't heard. Will have to look it up and see what nutty fake news that is.

[Cha]

35. Ridiculous propaganda..

[George II]

42. Yeah, even in today's climate that one would have lasted 15 seconds here on DU.

[emulatorloo]

27. Thank you

[Cha]

32. Thank you for those enlightening links, B

[Tarheel_Dem]

33. Well that explains a great deal. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

[George II]

41. "Some things never change" - I have to agree with you on that one.

[RBInMaine]

37. This was a WEAK article. I watched much of that forum, and MANY populist things were said.

[Oneironaut]

40. DNC - "Let's run Hillary again in 2020!"

The Democratic Party collectively groans.

How hard can it be to get a new face with new ideas?

[Gothmog]

46. I would support Clinton in 2020