Will Perez force the dems left? This poll is closed. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
Yes | 33 | 6.38% | |
No | 343 | 66.34% | |
Keith Ellison | 54 | 10.44% | |
Pete Buttigieg | 71 | 13.73% | |
Jehmu Green | 16 | 3.09% | |
Total: | 416 votes |
|
All you dems may remember the contentious shitshow the 2016 primary was, especially when it came out that the DNC had not remained neutral during the contest in contravention of their own bylaws. Because of this incident, the new DNC chair Perez has promised a more transparent DNC going forward, however he may well be doing that.Jason Rae posted:Many of you have inquired regarding the ballot review process. Our office has begun to receive requests to view the ballots from the contested elections. I have received an email from Julie Greene that the vote tallies will be sent out on Monday to all that requested them, myself included. We'll see, but I'm hopeful that the DNC complies, showing Perez is at least interested in giving the impression of walking the walk. so, do people still think perez signals a change in direction for the dems, or is he the same as his predecessors? Condiv fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Mar 5, 2017 |
# ? Mar 5, 2017 14:27 |
|
|
# ? May 11, 2024 13:32 |
|
Jason Rae asked dems to contact him if we had any concerns about the DNC policy wrt to viewing the vote tally, but did not provide any contact information in said post. Here is his twitter, and the phone number and email address he used as a consultant should you feel the need to contact him: @JasonRRae rae@nationconsulting.com 715-790-4334
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 15:20 |
Maybe it is a very good idea to not represent their membership and instead represent the public at large.
|
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 15:25 |
|
jBrereton posted:Maybe it is a very good idea to not represent their membership and instead represent the public at large. maybe, but this is contrary to the party system and democratic party policy especially. if dems were interested in representing the public at large then we'd have more open primaries instead of ones closed to everone who's not a registered dem
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:17 |
|
they already represent the only membership they give a gently caress about op, wealthy capitalist donors. regular people cant invite obama to their private tropical island, or invite hillary to their martha's vineyard estate
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:25 |
|
No
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:28 |
|
Absolutely not. Representing their membership and american public would be a disaster for big business, the establishment, and the democratic party.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:35 |
|
Condiv posted:so the dems idea of transparency and not holding a secret ballot is to only let people in the DC area view it, only with an appointment, only for an hour, and only before the 6th of May. in my opinion, this doesn't meet the requirements of both the dem bylaws against secret ballots as well as Perez' claims of greater transparency. Basically dems think they can just keep bullshitting their membership again till they gain power. That's only for reviewing the actual physical ballots that were used in the election. You don't need an in-person appointment for the simple tally of who voted what, you only need it if you want to see the exact pieces of paper that the voters actually wrote their votes on during the election. This is what happens when you outrage first and read later - you end up looking like a fool because you got mad about something that wasn't even true.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:43 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:That's only for reviewing the actual physical ballots that were used in the election. You don't need an in-person appointment for the simple tally of who voted what, you only need it if you want to see the exact pieces of paper that the voters actually wrote their votes on during the election. This is what happens when you outrage first and read later - you end up looking like a fool because you got mad about something that wasn't even true. where's the tally of who voted for what then? I'll add that to the OP as well as a correction. quote:In the interest of transparency, as well as in compliance with the DNC Rules regarding no secret ballots, we have consulted with the Chair and a tally sheet of how each member voted in contested elections will be made available to interested parties upon request. This sheet will list each member and how his or her votes were cast. edit: jason rae's post seems to disagree with you double-edit: i have emailed the secretary's office of the DNC (secretaryoffice@dnc.org) as well as Julie Greene (greenej@dnc.org) requesting the vote tally for the 2017 DNC Chair election. Hopefully your interpretation is right and they will hand over the tally. Condiv fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Mar 5, 2017 |
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:49 |
|
The establishment has enough sway that they can keep at least one of the two parties. It's clear that the Republicans are the party for people who want to do things*; even the rank and file activists who supported Obama were jubilant that he would talk about including the DC establishment in policy-making. *
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 16:51 |
|
I've received an email from Julie Greene that vote tallies will be distributed on Monday to all who've requested them! I've updated the op accordingly
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:01 |
|
Democrats did nothing wrong
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:02 |
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:Democrats did nothing wrong Republicans delenda est
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:04 |
|
Perez was clearly selected in part because he was judged more acceptable to the Berniecrats but actually pushing the party left will require sustained grassroots pressure from below. The Sanders campaign started out as a cult of personality but it has been showing some signs of actually transforming itself into a movement within the party. The question is whether the Berniecrats can, 1) free themselves from dependence on a single politician and 2) actually prove willing and able to inflict pain on Democratic leaders and pols who refuse to get with the program.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:08 |
|
cant wait to inflict pain on liberal politicians myself
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:15 |
|
I agree with helsing that we should physically attack democratic politicians with intent of inflicting pain and bodily harm
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:16 |
|
Was the Bernie campaign really a cult of personality though? The people who espouse that line of thinking also usually point of that he was incredibly little known outside of some hardcore leftists circles before the campaign. Maybe a cult of personality got built around him because he was actually saying things that resonated with a core demographic in the Democratic Party?
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:33 |
|
idk why you are assuming that the "berniecrats" are a majority of the democratic party, op. sanders supporters might be a significant portion of democrats, but the success of moderates within the party has not been invented out of whole cloth.Shbobdb posted:Was the Bernie campaign really a cult of personality though? The people who espouse that line of thinking also usually point of that he was incredibly little known outside of some hardcore leftists circles before the campaign. mainly, the dig is the result of bernie supporters being very vocal both during and after the primary. it's also been reinforced by some scattered polling that suggests that sanders supporters were less driven by ideology than by a dislike of partisan politics. QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Mar 5, 2017 |
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:34 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:idk why you are assuming that the "berniecrats" are a majority of the democratic party, op. sanders supporters might be a significant portion of democrats, but the success of moderates within the party has not been invented out of whole cloth. cause the centrists have been hemorrhaging seats? cause very few people were actually excited for centrist supreme hillary as opposed to thought she was the safe choice/lesser evil? maybe i'm wrong and leftism is an extreme splinter of the party, but I'd like to see some hard evidence of that first, like a non-rigged primary
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:45 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:idk why you are assuming that the "berniecrats" are a majority of the democratic party, op. sanders supporters might be a significant portion of democrats, but the success of moderates within the party has not been invented out of whole cloth. And the establishment got their power by voodoo witchcraft, never once by getting involved decades ago. Condiv posted:cause the centrists have been hemorrhaging seats? As have the far leftists outside the safest seats. Wait, lemme guess, no TRUE leftist ever lost a race. And we had a non rigged primary. Because you don't like the results, you are screaming that it was rigged because that justifies your worldview and feeds your victim complex, even demanding thought policing on DNC members that they not even be allowed to have opinions on the candidates. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 21:54 on Mar 5, 2017 |
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:46 |
|
jBrereton posted:Maybe it is a very good idea to not represent their membership and instead represent the public at large.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:50 |
|
The Liebermans and the JeffersonClays of the Democratic party still have a pretty tight grip on it, and have made it absolutely clear they'll see the Democratic party vanish from national politics altogether before they admit they were wrong about anything or resign. It remains to be seen if the bastards can be replaced or if the party is doomed. The election of Perez to DNC chair shows that DNC members totally out of touch, but Perez himself might be an adequate chairperson. Then there are "Democrats" like Fulchrum who actively want the party to fail, just to spite the left wing. You're a loving idiot who took every opportunity to derail and troll his own thread over the course of a couple months. Shame you'll gently caress this one up, too.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:57 |
|
I bet at least a plurality of Democrats have vague, incoherent beliefs that don't match up precisely with any organised faction or interest group.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 21:58 |
|
Kilroy posted:everyone who disagrees with me clearly just wants to sabotage the utterly unstoppable political force of full communism now! Post the bills Trump has signed that directly assist his base you cowardly gently caress. If Republicans love and respect their base so very much and serve them tirelessly unlike the dems, show your proof.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:01 |
|
Condiv posted:cause the centrists have been hemorrhaging seats? cause very few people were actually excited for centrist supreme hillary as opposed to thought she was the safe choice/lesser evil? maybe i'm wrong and leftism is an extreme splinter of the party, but I'd like to see some hard evidence of that first, like a non-rigged primary i would probably blame the lack of attention on downballot seats, increased self-sorting, and the normal metronome of politics for the erosion of democratic support, not the party being insufficiently partisan. while democrats themselves have become somewhat more liberal, the number of people in the u.s. population self-identifying is only about 24%. some of the rhetoric i have seen from the far-left remind me a lot of the tea party and ted cruz, who believed that there was this mythical hidden majority that would embrace hardline conservatism if given the chance. so, i ask you: do you have any evidence to the contrary? what do you have to suggest that the democrats lost because of ideology and not lack of focus, changing districts, and 8 years as the incumbent party?
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:02 |
|
Kilroy posted:The Liebermans and the JeffersonClays of the Democratic party still have a pretty tight grip on it, and have made it absolutely clear they'll see the Democratic party vanish from national politics altogether before they admit they were wrong about anything or resign. It remains to be seen if the bastards can be replaced or if the party is doomed. The election of Perez to DNC chair shows that DNC members totally out of touch, but Perez himself might be an adequate chairperson. i'm hopeful the release of this tally shows perez is actually going to be a voice for change and unity in the party. if the center will actually work with the left, and not just demand 100% centrism 24/7 the party might just win in 2018. maybe i'm being a bad leftist and compromising too early, but i'd really like to believe the dems can change
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:02 |
|
Fulchrum posted:Deak Can't believe the amount of Waaahm in Deak's 8020th-ish Shitpost he called his Shitpost One.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:06 |
|
Shbobdb posted:Was the Bernie campaign really a cult of personality though? The people who espouse that line of thinking also usually point of that he was incredibly little known outside of some hardcore leftists circles before the campaign. A relative minority of the people who voted for Bernie were hardcore supporters. There's a distinct difference between people who decided to vote for Bernie over Hillary and people who built their entire political identity around Bernie.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:06 |
|
Fulchrum posted:Post the bills Trump has signed that directly assist his base you cowardly gently caress. If Republicans love and respect their base so very much and serve them tirelessly unlike the dems, show your proof. How the hell did you get that from his post?
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:07 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:i would probably blame the lack of attention on downballot seats, increased self-sorting, and the normal metronome of politics for the erosion of democratic support, not the party being insufficiently partisan. while democrats themselves have become somewhat more liberal, the number of people in the u.s. population self-identifying is only about 24%. some of the rhetoric i have seen from the far-left remind me a lot of the tea party and ted cruz, who believed that there was this mythical hidden majority that would embrace hardline conservatism if given the chance. the tea party has been wildly successful compared to us and just saw their candidate elected. also, dem party losses are so heinous that the repubs can drat near call a constitutional convention on their own. i'd say that falls outside of your metronome theory of politics (btw, what kind of idiot metronome only swings right and center?)
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:09 |
|
khwarezm posted:How the hell did you get that from his post? He's Deak. And far as I see it, if Perez was the best the Centrists could dig up as a convincing challenge, they're already having to compromise. Just keep the eyes on it, and get active. If poo poo really goes off the rails we'll know it's coming.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:09 |
|
khwarezm posted:How the hell did you get that from his post? It was something in the other thread he refused to ever answer. He said that Dems hate their base and never do anything for them, while Trump and Republicans help their base. I used facts to show that's full of poo poo, he refused to acknowledge it.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:09 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:some of the rhetoric i have seen from the far-left remind me a lot of the tea party and ted cruz, who believed that there was this mythical hidden majority that would embrace hardline conservatism if given the chance. The GOP in the age of the Tea Party and Ted Cruz have kicked the everloving poo poo out the Democrats on the national level, so maybe you should take some pointers from them?
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:11 |
|
If we are importing drama from that other bad thread, i would still like to know who the pedophile is (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:11 |
|
Cerebral Bore posted:The GOP in the age of the Tea Party and Ted Cruz have kicked the everloving poo poo out the Democrats on the national level, so maybe you should take some pointers from them? Stop trusting partisan media that is only trying to weaken you? Yes, I keep explaining to Condiv and Kilroy we should do that, but they'd prefer to share every last divisive conspiracy theory Breitbart serves up.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:13 |
|
Condiv posted:(btw, what kind of idiot metronome only swings right and center?) One you're looking at from the wrong angle where you insist that the whole world must be oriented around you. Hintedy loving hint hint.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:16 |
|
Calibanibal posted:If we are importing drama from that other bad thread, i would still like to know who the pedophile is who's importing drama? don't do that in this thread
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:18 |
|
Condiv posted:the tea party has been wildly successful compared to us and just saw their candidate elected. idk if i would classify donald trump as tea party. he certainly took some themes from the movement, but i don't associate him with the movement in the same way as someone like ted cruz. that said, only 32% of tea party backed candidates won in the 2010 general election and only a handful of gop incumbents lost their seats to tea party-supported candidates. many of those radicals ended up being so far outside the mainstream that they allowed the opposition to win what should have been easy races or became national embarrassments several years later. the tea party was most successful when it just riled up support for existing politicians who were able to rebrand themselves and, even then, the success is difficult to separate from the Koch Brothers' Red Map project. even if i accept your conception, you are going to need to explain how an outpouring of support for hard-right candidates proves the success of a far-left agenda. or why the democrats should embrace a strategy that, if successful, will leave them as rudderless and divided as the gop currently is QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Mar 5, 2017 |
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:24 |
|
QuoProQuid posted:idk if i would classify donald trump as tea party. he certainly took some themes from the movement, but i don't associate him with the movement in the same way as someone like ted cruz. the tea party would. http://time.com/4688825/donald-trump-rallies-tea-party-spirit-america/ quote:that said, only 32% of tea party backed candidates won in the 2010 general election and only a handful of gop incumbents lost their seats to tea party-supported candidates. many of those radicals ended up being so far outside the mainstream that they allowed the opposition to win what should have been easy races or became national embarrassments several years later. so the GOP gained seats with tea party candidates there was very little self-consumption, and the GOP grew stronger from the tea party? quote:the tea party was most successful when it just riled up support for existing politicians who were able to rebrand themselves and, even then, the success is difficult to separate from the Koch Brothers' Red Map project. don't really see that, since tea partiers are basically running the country now... quote:even if i accept your conception, you are going to need to explain how an outpouring of support for hard-right candidates proves the success of a far-left agenda. or why the democrats should embrace a strategy that, if successful, will leave them as rudderless and divided as the gop currently is i think the outpouring of support for a leftist candidate, bernie sanders, who is still extremely popular (obama or greater levels of popular) is indication that the leftist agenda is able to bring us electoral success. bernie started late in the primaries and he wasn't considered an actual possible candidate for president for a good while in the primaries. i think the amount of success his run had despite how last-minute and unprepared it was indicates that there's a hunger not specifically for leftism, but for the ideas that are linked to it. Things like much cheaper or free university, healthcare for all, and protecting and raising the wages of low-income workers. and no, i don't think bernie should run in 2020, but I think if we can find a younger person capable of claiming bernie's mantle, we'd do real well in the 2020 elections
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:41 |
|
|
# ? May 11, 2024 13:32 |
|
Condiv posted:don't really see that, since tea partiers are basically running the country now... Horseshit. The tea party at least claimed initially to want more accountability, less money in politics, harsher restrictions on banks and more representative systems. All of those things are way further away now than they were 8 years ago. The Tea party now just wants Republican victoru at all costs. The GOP lobotomized the Tea party and made their interests its. GOP big money interests are running things and the tea party is just a white outrage machine to hand it to them quote:and no, i don't think bernie should run in 2020, but I think if we can find a younger person capable of claiming bernie's mantle, we'd do real well in the 2020 elections Yeah, just as well as those Bernie backed non-incumbents like Zephyr Rain did in 2016.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2017 22:57 |