Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gothmog

(154,595 posts)
52. Again, you are wrong
Wed Dec 14, 2016, 03:14 PM
Dec 2016

I would strongly urge you to actually go out into the real world and work on a campaign or a party. Here are some facts for you to ignore Pushing the crazy claim that the DNC fixed the nomination process hurt the Clinton campaign. That claim was false http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

Easily the most ridiculous argument this year was that the DNC was some sort of monolith that orchestrated the nomination of Hillary Clinton against the will of “the people.” This was immensely popular with the Bernie-or-Busters, those who declared themselves unwilling to vote for Clinton under any circumstances because the Democratic primary had been rigged (and how many of these people laughed when Trump started moaning about election rigging?). The notion that the fix was in was stupid, as were the people who believed it.

Start with this: The DNC, just like the Republican National Committee, is an impotent organization with very little power. It is composed of the chair and vice chair of the Democratic parties of each state, along with over 200 members elected by Democrats. What it does is fundraise, organize the Democratic National Convention and put together the party platform. It handles some organizational activity but tries to hold down its expenditures during the primaries; it has no authority to coordinate spending with any candidate until the party’s nominee is selected. This was why then-President Richard Nixon reacted with incredulity when he heard that some of his people had ordered a break-in at the DNC offices at the Watergate; he couldn’t figure out what information anyone would want out of such a toothless organization.....

According to a Western European intelligence source, Russian hackers, using a series of go-betweens, transmitted the DNC emails to WikiLeaks with the intent of having them released on the verge of the Democratic Convention in hopes of sowing chaos. And that’s what happened—just a couple of days before Democrats gathered in Philadelphia, the emails came out, and suddenly the media was loaded with stories about trauma in the party. Crews of Russian propagandists—working through an array of Twitter accounts and websites, started spreading the story that the DNC had stolen the election from Sanders. (An analysis provided to Newsweek by independent internet and computer specialists using a series of algorithms show that this kind of propaganda, using the same words, went from Russian disinformation sources to comment sections on more than 200 sites catering to liberals, conservatives, white supremacists, nutritionists and an amazing assortment of other interest groups.) The fact that the dates of the most controversial emails—May 3, May 4, May 5, May 9, May 16, May 17, May 18, May 21—were after it was impossible for Sanders to win was almost never mentioned, and was certainly ignored by the propagandists trying to sell the “primaries were rigged” narrative. (Yes, one of them said something inappropriate about his religious beliefs. So a guy inside the DNC was a jerk; that didn’t change the outcome.) Two other emails—one from April 24 and May 1—were statements of fact. In the first, responding to Sanders saying he would push for a contested convention (even though he would not have the delegates to do so), a DNC official wrote, “So much for a traditional presumptive nominee.” Yeah, no kidding. The second stated that Sanders didn’t know what the DNC’s job actually was—which he didn’t, apparently because he had not ever been a Democrat before his run.

Bottom line: The “scandalous” DNC emails were hacked by people working with the Kremlin, then misrepresented online by Russian propagandists to gullible fools who never checked the dates of the documents. And the media, which in the flurry of breathless stories about the emails would occasionally mention that they were all dated after any rational person knew the nomination was Clinton’s, fed into the misinformation.

In the real world, here is what happened: Clinton got 16.9 million votes in the primaries, compared with 13.2 million for Sanders. The rules were never changed to stop him, even though Sanders supporters started calling for them to be changed as his losses piled up.

I was a delegate to the national convention and I saw much of this silliness first hand. This election was winnable but the sanders campaign did a great deal of damage that is the subject of valid commentary
I think people should read the party platform and formulate their message. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #1
A number of people seem to confuse positions or message BainsBane Dec 2016 #2
Message is derived from positions. NCTraveler Dec 2016 #3
Unfortunately for many BainsBane Dec 2016 #6
Amen. nt brer cat Dec 2016 #39
Obviously we need as many good candidates as possible Uponthegears Dec 2016 #4
Hillary Clinton won voters earning under $50k BainsBane Dec 2016 #5
What utter tripe Uponthegears Dec 2016 #8
I didn't mention Sanders or his supporters BainsBane Dec 2016 #13
And yet, we could not agree more on some things Uponthegears Dec 2016 #31
please make this it's own op DonCoquixote Dec 2016 #28
+1000 PotatoChip Dec 2016 #51
"Clearly you don't sit down with those you disagree with." Are you referencing the poster? Eleanors38 Dec 2016 #9
Yes, I was BainsBane Dec 2016 #14
On a more concilatory note Uponthegears Dec 2016 #11
BB. +10000 Hekate Dec 2016 #12
Same here Gothmog Dec 2016 #33
Unfortunately some want to control the Democratic Party message from the outside. George II Dec 2016 #7
That is not an accurate gauge of whether a message can resonate with people. Just running and tyring JCanete Dec 2016 #10
But that's the thing, isn't it? bravenak Dec 2016 #17
Winning with our current party is fan-fiction that our leaders keep regurgitating and fawning over. JCanete Dec 2016 #23
I disagree with your analysis Gothmog Dec 2016 #18
How can you disagree with my analysis and then say if your campaign resonates, donors will JCanete Dec 2016 #21
Have you worked on a campaign? Gothmog Dec 2016 #32
who are those key groups? Who are the people usually engaged at this level? JCanete Dec 2016 #35
Again, you are not answering my question Gothmog Dec 2016 #37
So, the premise I was responding to was basically "if your ideas are so hot prove it JCanete Dec 2016 #40
Again, go work with a county party or on a real campaign Gothmog Dec 2016 #42
sad and wrong... your words are the things I was saying were reinforcing my argument. Not that I JCanete Dec 2016 #46
In the real world the concern is electability and being competitive Gothmog Dec 2016 #53
now you're basically saying that in the "real world" donors don't give a shit about policy, just JCanete Dec 2016 #55
I understand there are all kinds of obstacles to running BainsBane Dec 2016 #22
Where I agree with you is that refighting the primary is pointless, and that energy spent JCanete Dec 2016 #27
my problem with your analsysis BainsBane Dec 2016 #38
That recurring theme about rhetoric versus policy--excuse me for being cute--is rhetoric. JCanete Dec 2016 #41
You do know that Sanders outspent Clinton in most primaries? Gothmog Dec 2016 #43
but that is nothing compared to the megaphone that went out over the corporate media from JCanete Dec 2016 #47
Again, you are wrong Gothmog Dec 2016 #52
okay, I see, you're not responding to what I'm posting, just to a preconceived notion you already JCanete Dec 2016 #54
Rhetoric is meaningless BainsBane Dec 2016 #45
Except that I didn't say populist rhetoric was good just cuz it feels good to hear it. JCanete Dec 2016 #48
You relied on his claim BainsBane Dec 2016 #49
Well that's not exactly fair. He's a Presidential Candidate. He could have said "this is the only JCanete Dec 2016 #50
DU does not reflect the Democratic Party or the real world Gothmog Dec 2016 #15
Interesting ticket split in your county BainsBane Dec 2016 #16
Yep Gothmog Dec 2016 #19
Another way is for everyone to call their Democratic congressmen, lots of them, and OFTEN mtnsnake Dec 2016 #20
Would you actually call based on rhetoric you want them to use? BainsBane Dec 2016 #24
Do you honestly think that tons of people here are going to follow your advice mtnsnake Dec 2016 #30
No, but you're advocating calling representatives BainsBane Dec 2016 #34
I would encourage those that aren't the type to run to still get involved and proactively seek good think Dec 2016 #25
I agree local politics are key BainsBane Dec 2016 #26
A grad student I talked with today told me my generation was at fault. redstatebluegirl Dec 2016 #29
Great idea, BB. Too bad Zephyr Teachout's message didn't Cha Dec 2016 #36
And the Sanders supported candidate running against DWS also lost Gothmog Dec 2016 #44
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»A word of advice about co...»Reply #52