-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Final Democratic National Committee Chair Debate on CNN tonight at 10 PM
- Thread starter thefro
- Start date
- Status
whyamihere
Banned
Right. You should reread the post I responded to.
Psst... DNC, not general election
Of course he didn't.
Caucuses are bullshit. And entire state can be decided by a few hundred people who have an entire work day to spend arguing.
But caucuses helped a specific candidate, so...
Spiral Insanity
Banned
I did read election, sorry about that. But the DNC was manipulated from outside too. Are we forgetting that the DNC was hacked and all the emails leaked?
whyamihere
Banned
That was at the very end of the primary when Bernie had no mathematical way to win.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
The primary wasn't "rigged" against Bernie or designed to specifically railroad him out, but it was set up so that Clinton would be the only option by blocking off any serious challengers. Bernie did reasonably well by circumventing that because there's no institutional controls (he wasn't gunning for favor with who would almost certainly be the next Democratic leader) and he managed to fundraise on his own without the party backers
that Clinton took early before any serious challengers could begin mount campaigns. The fact that Bernie aside her challengers were O'Malley (guy whose career is otherwise done and has nothing to lose), Chafee (weird time capsule of Rockefeller Republicanism who became a Democrat in 2014) and Webb (lol) shows that the primary was supposed to prevent any serious challenge to Clinton without the surprise appeal Bernie ended up having.
You can say the primary was "rigged" without going into conspiracy territory, it's obvious that the leaders and behind-the-scenes members
wanted Hillary.
establishment
You can say the primary was "rigged" without going into conspiracy territory, it's obvious that the leaders and behind-the-scenes members
establishment
dehydratedbabies
Member
Perez doesn't deserve what?
It's going to be either him or Ellison. Here are two articles from Matt Stoller that inform a significant part of my dissatisfaction with Obama's (unofficial) preferred candidate, Perez:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...gnize-how-bad-obamas-financial-policies-were/
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/22...ly-record-could-kneecap-the-democratic-party/
His response to the "was the 2016 primary rigged" question was such horseshit, as was Pete's. The factional struggle is real whether you want it to be or not, and the Bernie faction and their demands are not going to disappear. The party can either embrace them or push them away. The Hillary/Obama faction failed, very badly (look at the state of the party and President Trump), and thus I think it's time for the Bernie faction, which Ellison represents, to take over the party.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
I'll make a thread about it later. Don't worry, I'll keep your word ban in mind when making it.
This is true.
But what people need to realize is that this would have happened if ANY candidate with Hillary's resume entered the race.
Imagine a 2016 where Hillary didn't run, but Biden did. He would have consolidated establishment support in the same exact way.
The primary was NOT rigged against Bernie. It's intentionally set up to favor the establishment candidate who has worked with and built up favor within the party. People can have a problem with that, people can lobby to change that, but that does NOT mean the primary was rigged. Bernie was an outsider, and there's good AND bad that comes with that.
In my opinion, Ellison is the only choice. I don't care who's running the DNC, I just don't want the Bernie Bros to stay home (again).
All that matters is that democrats are energized and show up to vote in 2018 and 2020. If Perez wins, disgruntled progressives will sit out or vote Green. If Ellison wins, everybody votes democratic and more people turn out.
Stupid easy decision. The progressive wing has a gun to the head of the party and they proved in the 2016 election that they're not afraid to pull it (by not turning out)
All that matters is that democrats are energized and show up to vote in 2018 and 2020. If Perez wins, disgruntled progressives will sit out or vote Green. If Ellison wins, everybody votes democratic and more people turn out.
Stupid easy decision. The progressive wing has a gun to the head of the party and they proved in the 2016 election that they're not afraid to pull it (by not turning out)
dehydratedbabies
Member
That's what people mean by "rigged".
That rigged system totally worked against Obama though.
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
I'm only half asking sarcastically btw, I don't particularly have a favorite at the moment.
We need someone who is:
1.) Willing to run moderate Dems in certain contests again. Moderate Dems are better than ANY republican at this point. Running 'perfect' (to some) Dems across the board will result in significant problems.
2.) Has the ability to fund-raise enough to implement the strategy they want. Their past connections are a double edged sword in that they may help fundraising, but appear bad to purists. Much like Wheeler, i'm less concerned about their past then what they plan to do. The DNC Chair is not a very public position to the average citizen, perhaps we want to make it one this time?
3.) Has a strategy that capitalizes on Trump being a damn child. Based on recent polling, people still want adults to 'compromise' so we need someone who can put up that facade while still having lines that won't be crossed to compromise.
whyamihere
Banned
I find this pretty hilarious:
"Yeah well sure Perez did do some fantastic stuff at Labor BUT none of it counts because Hillary lost because banks!"
I want Ellison to win. I think Perez is a great guy, and it's sort of ridiculous to see him dragged through the mud by the left because he's not their candidate. It's even more ridiculous than when it happened to Hillary, who at least had more legitimate criticisms to levy at her from the left than Perez.
Then people don't understand what that term means!
GAF A60-Rim A
Banned
Perez ... sounds exactly like a male Hillary Clinton? Same style of answering questions, and rambling responses.
Or is it just me?
Or is it just me?
Well, I was raised to believe that words matter.
It's not rigged for a political party to have a process set up to favor, surprise surprise, its party. Bernie was given fair treatment within the process itself, but that did not mean superdelegates had to support him. That did not mean Hillary's connections that she earned by being a party player for decades suddenly no longer mattered.
Nobody made Bernie be an Independent. He made that choice.
JesseEwiak
Member
If liberals sit out 2018 and 2020 because their preferred DNC Chair didn't get elected, they deserve Donald Trump being allowed to replace RBG and Breyer on the Court and Paul Ryan ripping apart the welfare state.
But, it shouldn't matter that Hillary Clinton has actually worked to help the Democratic Party for nearly 30 years!
Also, Matt Stoller's been a whiny purist since the freakin' 2004 primaries.
AgentCooper25
Neo Member
Perez dodging trade questions hard.
"Ummm it technically was not rigged if you go by this specific definition of the word that I adhere to and it is wrong of you, both morally and um grammatically, to continue to insist that the process was rigged in anyway and further--" says the simpering centrist democrat as they're pushed into a locker while Trump is sworn into his second term and the GOP gain the ability to mold the Constitution however they wish
Tranqueris
Banned
This is how I feel about Ellison versus Perez. It'll probably be much easier to unite the party after a Perez loss than an Ellison loss.
And the choice not to campaign in the south
whyamihere
Banned
Who are you talking to.
Ellison's turn.
Aaronology
Member
Rigged implies the primary was fraudulent, a farce. It was not.
I am not sure why this is even a discussion.
GAF A60-Rim A
Banned
Ugh, terrible answer by Ellison here.
That isn't why Hillary lost.
That's a pretty fucked way to run something and that's exactly why so many Americans believed the DNC was corrupt and the election was rigged.
AgentCooper25
Neo Member
Gotta give CNN credit here. they're really pushing the candidates.
JesseEwiak
Member
Why is it corrupt to want somebody who is actually a member of an organization to lead that organization instead of somebody who has spent 30 years attacking it for not being good enough?
I'm sorry Networking offends your delicate sensibilities. It is a thing that exists, and will exist in the future no matter who the person is. Not engaging in it isn't something worth celebrating.
GAF A60-Rim A
Banned
I just hope some of Perez's support gets bled away to Pete, and there's a run-off between Keith and Pete.
This sounds like a 5yo child throwing a temper tantrum, and the fact that something like the DNC chair being a Bernie fan is the only way to ensure people may turn out to vote for Democrats totally equates to a healthy party.
JesseEwiak
Member
Perez is in 1st in all whip counts - it's far more likely support bleeds away to Pete from Ellison.
That's anything, a person that has relationships and been there a while will always have an advantage over someone that opts in when they want something and out when it no longer suits them. Bernie could have totally ran as an independent
benicillin
Banned
Ellison, Mayor Pete and Perez are all great candidates who agree on all of the major issues. I still think Ellison is the best choice because he's more or less maxed out on where his career can go and it's a good look for the DNC to go with an outspoken progressive. They're all qualified anyway.
theignoramus
Member
They werent the only ones who stayed home, many Black voters in the Detroit metro region were totally apathetic about the November 8th election.
It's unfair? The point is to give everyone a chance, not favor who we like.
If you're so confident that your Hillary was better than Bernie then why does this system need to exist? Let the best candidate win.
Yeah, me too. My Aunt lives in South Bend and loves the guy.
Exactly.
GoldenEye 007
Member
So many Americans don't understand how the world works? If you're a member of an organization and have put in tons of work to support the organization, don't you think you're going to get connections and other advantages over someone who is an outsider and joined the organization mostly for convenience?
Did they miss how parties select candidates as of late? How the RNC does it? How almost anything in life works?
It just speaks to this naive notion that for the most part, people putting in the work and making connections aren't going to have an advantage over others when it comes to making decisions.
Aaronology
Member
The problem we have here, I think, is that a lot of people don't understand the purpose behind a primary, or the history of how parties have chosen their candidates. Bernie has unfortunately tainted the process in the minds of a lot of millennials so I don't see this changing any time soon.
whyamihere
Banned
The Democratic Primary, as its own thing, was not rigged (though Donna Brazille did do something shitty, shame on her). But the shadow primary that happened before the primary itself -- jockeying to see who runs, who doesn't, yeah. Because of her extensive connections within the party, Hillary and Clintonland were able to successfully push out enough challengers and get superdelegates on board early. That's also one of the reasons why Bernie resonated so much -- if it was a 17 person primary, maybe he wouldn't have caught on.
Jeb! tried to do this before the Republican party, but obviously is not as good of a politician as Hillary was.
Well, considering how Bernie decided the South didn't exist, you wouldn't really need any superdelegates. She won without them. If there were more candidates in the field, yeah, that's a different scenario.
LegendofJoe
Member
Himself, too many people have this delusion that social democrats have a chance of winning in purple or red districts. They don't, I want more of them in Congress but they need to come from solid blue areas. Like it or not centrists are necessary for the Democratic party to take back the House of Representatives.
Mayor Pete and Green are having the best showing. They're staying on message while being above this primary bullshit.
I'm a fan of Perez, but he's bombing hard.
JesseEwiak
Member
Hillary did win by miles, even if you do take away every superdelegate, because she's done silly things in the past 25 years like actually talk to black voters in the South, something Bernie probably last did in 1968.
Unless you want something silly, like each candidate only being allowed to spend the same amount of money and not to actually talk to other politicians to seek their endorsement.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked