themrguy posted:

Main Paineframe posted:

As DNC chair, their proposed strategies and their paths forward for the DNC are basically indistinguishable. As marketing entities for the Democratic Party, Perez is noticeably less charismatic and clearly was not ready to be quizzed on issues (which, to be fair, are not usually the concern of a DNC chair).

Cerebral Bore posted:

Perez is the pick of the wing of the party that seems determined to learn no lessons whatsoever from the worst overall defeat in decades, which ought to be a bit disconcerting.

Cease to Hope posted:

Jill Stein is not running for DNC chair, c'mon now.


Ellison has pledged to step down from his House seat if elected.

Frijolero posted:

How many Democrats are fired up about Perez?

Cease to Hope posted:

Mother Jones ran a profile of Ellison.

Evil Fluffy posted:

This time last year the left would've been dancing in the streets at the idea of Perez leading the party and now people are crying he's an establishment puppet. Trump has broken people's brains.

Cease to Hope posted:

In comedy news, Martin O'Malley endorsed Buttigieg.

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

It's a proxy war for Establishment Dems to remind lefties that they get absolutely nothing from the party and are held in contempt (see: Kaine, Tim) so no, actually, I don't.

NNick posted:

The DNC is not a policy position, but one of power.

Since Perez comes from the Clinton wing of the party, people outside of that wing are skeptical he can remain neutral.

Ellison represents a shift to the left in who has organizing power. The democrats need those people to organize.. centrists don't organize. Since the Clinton democrats blew the last election, when it was her turn, now it should be someone who represents the people routinely demonized and delegimized during the primary for being impractical. A claim that became an absurdity when Clinton lost.

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Youre suggesting Hillary had Beau Biden killed?

Cease to Hope posted:

He's also 60 and a cancer survivor. He's going to retire at some point.


Legislatures do this. (And it's close but not quite this close; several states are nominally Republican-majority but have bicameral legislatures with Dems in control of one house.) In any event, governors don't get a (direct) say in the matter.

Typo posted:

Support for free trade rise to new highs!

Grognan posted:

I am glad I am actually involved in the democratic party and seriously considering parallel organizations along side. Because if TB, Brainic Five, and stone cold are any indication of the hapless rage-junkie that needs to define anyone besides their specific clique on this forum as being monsters that cannot be reasoned with, actual people will be a breeze to work with.

Brainiac Five posted:

It is pretty funny how the three relevant candidates in the DNC race are all people on the left of the party, which sorta contradicts this idea that we're all doomed and the Democrats are solid like a rock on being the Devil Triangulator.

The Kingfish posted:

How many manufacturing jobs would you say Americans lost due to NAFTA?

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

Through a whole lot of factors better left to another thread, unionized manufacturing jobs switched places with service industry jobs that pay about 4/5ths as much. NAFTA (arguably) didn't really cost any jobs overall, but it absolutely devastated an entire class of relatively high wage earners.

Because this was largely seen as Clinton's fault, it also had the effect of driving the rust belt red as a beet

Raskolnikov38 posted:

HFCS

JeffersonClay posted:

Perez, as assistant attorney general over civil rights, could have used a statute that rarely results in jail time to blow up the settlement his superior at Justice was negotiating to ensure the victims received restitution. But instead he allowed the settlement and restitution to proceed, robbing the American people of the slim possibility of jailing a banker for less than a year!


Perez, as secretary of labor, did not force unions to find new banks to manage their pension funds, and instead allowed them to continue using banks that did some bad poo poo totally unrelated to their management of pensions!

Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

Great, I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Name one [Bernie endorser who was in bed with finance].

Ogmius815 posted:

And all of this is done in the service of making a leadership election between two candidates with very, very similar ideas (and who, by the way, both seem to be prepared to work with the other) into a rancorous and damaging factional grudge match simply because one candidate is perceived as coming from Team Bernie and the other Team Obama/Clinton (which is the same team now somehow). It's loving nuts.

Lightning Lord posted:

What's the thread's opinion on Greene?

Lightning Lord posted:

Based on hair, who's the best candidate? Like, we all agree that DWS' tragic perm is part of what led the Dems to disaster, right?


I imagine they give their token progressive targets a lot of scrilla.

Evil Fluffy posted:

In a sane world this would be a strike against Ellison if it's true and not just Schumer being Schumer.

Paracaidas posted:

Welcome to the republican party internal party political machinations.

I'm lying because I'm a plant of the establishment and want to keep you passionate people out. Real campaigns and party offices, even on the local level, are exactly like The West Wing and your local office is waiting for you to come in and be their Toby Ziegler. Definitely, Maybe is certainly not the most accurate representation of being a local campaign worker that Hollywood has ever produced

Given the makeup of the electorate (party functionaries), even going to Sunday is incredibly unlikely. In this case the progressiveness of each candidate is a virtue, since neither side's actual voters are likely to have a strong enough preference to turn it into a drawn out process. I think Buttigieg's main goal is to raise his profile, but with Dean supporting him he may emerge as a compromise candidate in the Adlai mold if hardliners do dig in and this poo poo gets brokered.

Raskolnikov38 posted:

I don't think buttigieg even really wants to win. his whole run smacks of him raising his national profile in preparation for a senate or governorship run

Confounding Factor posted:

So I'm convinced Perez is another lying corporate Democrat bullshitter but of course the donor class for the Democratic Party will give him the chair. Last night at the debate he was straight up asked if the primary was rigged but couldn't tell the loving truth and in that sleazy mealy mouth way dodged the question. He's like a used car salesman.

Go ahead and pick him I guess, obviously Democrats have done zero self analysis on why they loving lost last year (It's Comey's fault! It's Russia!) and we'll probably get another lovely centrist neoliberal Democrat candidate again.

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

Can we at least all agree that howard dean is a pretty cool/good dude?

Uncle Wemus posted:

Really tho i just don't want Perez so butt would be fine.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Remember when everyone wanted Perez to be Hillary's VP and usher in a golden-era of progressive change and union-friendly advocacy? 5 months ago before he became a corporatist Manchurian candidate.

gohmak posted:

If Perez is "so much like Ellison" why is he running?

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

A good sign

Maybe this Perez guy: not satan?

Chelb posted:

Congrats Perez! I think he'll do a good job and expect him to work with Ellison and others to help revitalize the Democratic party.

Confounding Factor posted:

So what's the silver lining with Perez as DNC chair?

Epic High Five posted:

The Bernie wing obsesses about the DNC and their goings on like nobody ever has before. I'm extremely hesitant to brush this off as minor news

Lord Lambeth posted:

The deputy chair position is a new position as far as I can tell. Maybe wait a week or so before you call it out as symbolic?

Epic High Five posted:

lol WikiLeaks already going hard against Perez

Condiv posted:

they're gonna lose harder in 2018, so then I guess. i mean, after 2018 we have republicans being able to call a constitutional convention on their own and then dems are extinct anyway.

JeffersonClay posted:

I'm pretty sure the people unable to handle the loss they were just handed are not hillary supporters.