|
Considering all the talk from him about caucusing with the Republicans if Clinton won they should just cut him loose altogether
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Anyone know how Warren's speech was received amongst the Democratic establishment? It doesn't matter terribly much who is the DNC chair as long as their sentiments match up to what she said
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
karthun posted:Warren, being the Senior Senator from the State of Massachusetts, is the Democratic establishment. She is part of one wing of it, but she's a first term senator. How much support does this have with the insiders who were backing Clinton all the way back in 2012 and 13? That will tell you which way the party is going to be steered.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:While there are long-time Clinton insiders in the DNC race (e.g. Greene), only Perez and Ellison are likely to win, and neither of them fit that description. The power in the party doesn't lie with the chair though, it lies in the hands of the various cliques who control state/county parties. If they're on board with the narrative Warren put up then it will be far easier to get progressive candidates in local elections to build the bench.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
Zikan posted:i'm the biggest keithomanic on the board and the fact that schumer has been able to hold together his caucus to do the mass no votes on trump nominees after the public pressure hit should give him some slack imo The only one so far has been DeVos though? There's like what one or two Democrats who haven't voted for a Trump cabinet candidate and over a dozen iirc who voted for every one up until DeVos.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
I hope to see something like an initiative to have a democrat candidate for every state level election in every state of country. If they want to take corporate money they need to at least use it in a way that is meaningful. It's like Wayne Gretzky says, you miss all the shots you don't take.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
The plan that Ellison and Perez put forward for the future of the party weren't very different in the debate they had so it's probably a good idea to see what they're actually gonna do before you throw your hands up and say gently caress it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:So how is this neoliberal dipshit going to get younger people who despise what Hillary did to run for office, huh? How was Keith Ellison gonna do it and how is that different from what Perez is going for do?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Condiv posted:problem #1, my local party is skeletal, and the dnc doesn't give a poo poo. If your local party is aligned well with your views, if you join it should be easy to get someone who represents your views in positions that determine which candidate gets party backing, if it's skeletal right now then helping to flesh out the party will make your opinion more valuable to other members of the party and you will help create a lefter democratic party Taking over existing power structures and bending them to your wishes is always easier than building your own from scratch, so you should always try to do that first if you can
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:Good ol' Chuck "We'll gain two suburban republicans for every working-class voter we lose" Schumer, that guy really knows what's up. You know he endorsed Ellison right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:Good for him. I'm still not going to piss on him if he's on fire. OK but if he is dumb and bad when it comes to electoral strategy then shouldn't it matter who he endorses for a position that is supposedly controlling the direction the party travels in?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 04:55 |
|
|
Rodatose posted:The tea party after 2008 did not follow this advice and republicans were rewarded with all three branches of federal government.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2017 00:00
|
|