Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
"His announcement Tuesday, pledging to spend $20 million on its efforts, triggered a wave of criticism and concern from some Democrats, including members of Congress, DNC members and Democratic strategists, many of whom expressed frustration over Hogg’s dual roles as an activist and party representative"
I'm sorry, are they openly saying they don't want Democrat leadership to be... Active?
Fucking hell, this is why I never became one
Well, the Dems can use a bit of a shakeup from their current coma. The US needs a functioning opposition, and currently the Dems don't cut it.
If there were any trust in the DNC to preserve, this would be a different discussion. They look after the interests of Democratic incumbents, not Democratic voters. Hogg is doing the right thing and I hope he succeeds.
They look after the interests of some incumbents.
Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman weren't protected from primary challengers.
I think it's more accurate to say they protect corporate dems.
Some Democrats fear that a DNC official weighing in on primaries erodes the committee’s credibility as a neutral arbiter
The DNC? A neutral arbiter? What a crock of shit. They've had their thumb on every primary where a progressive was involved.
Still others stressed that prolonged primaries could drag the party further to the left
Yes, dear gods, the DNC could end up back in the middle if that happened. 🙄
Can an establishment democrat explain to me why they don’t run progressives in safe seats?
An establishment dem would say it's because their policies aren't popular, the part they keep in their head is them thinking it's communism and having a flashback to their country beating the Red Scare into them.
Didn't hold your breath here.
Oh, well if the Axel-Springer-owned POLITICO is upset about this, it must be a good thing.
When newly elected Democratic National Committee officers gathered in late March at a Washington hotel, the agenda included a brief but robust discussion of a pledge not to intervene in party primaries, according to two people who attended the meeting and a third who was briefed on it.
Pretty fucking rich when you have this:
On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated. This assumption of a plaintiff’s allegation is the general legal standard in the motion to dismiss stage of any lawsuit. The allegations contained in the complaint must be taken as true unless they are merely conclusory allegations or are invalid on their face.
This right here is why the democrats have been getting their shit kicked in.
Am I misreading it that the assumption the allegations are true is used to deliberate whether the lawsuit is nonetheless inappropriate on other grounds?
None of this means that the judge believed or found them to be true. It means they don't matter.
Edit: On reflection, I had the right interpretation. Embarrassing for the others....
I’m all for getting rid of a bunch of old ineffective people,” the member said, “but not by running a bunch of lefty campaigns against them.
--An old ineffective person
To hell with him then
Hell yeah! Most of those greybeards in safe seats are just as bought and paid for as magas. Clean both sides up.
Fuck the DNC
Good
Pew, pew, fuckers.
Here’s the plan.
We split the Democratic Party, resign the GOP to Whig-status and restore humanity?