bUt HE stAnS foR bErnIe… 
I hate that dickwad.
15 Likes
Better than doing nothing and hoping for the better natures of Trumpophiles.
7 Likes
But they fairly clearly did; all the active DNC leadership, as well as their staff, are different people. The people who are in the leadership by virtue of offices held (like Pelosi and Schumer) are the same, but they have litte voice in this kind of operational decision.
Word has it that there are state DNC leaders who are trying to orchestrate a “stop Bernie” movement, and they will suddenly get quite a bit of power at the convention stage, but meanwhile they are just making noise, and if Bernie walks into the convention with a majority of the delegates they wont be able to do squat other than posture.
1 Like
But if he walks in with a plurality that falls short of a majority, they will still have a chance to use superdelegates to destroy the party.
3 Likes
13 Likes
13 Likes
The superdelegates can be used to select the nominee over the combined will of Sanders and Warren delegates, but the latter can still combine on setting party rules going forward. Even with a minority of delegates last time, the Sanders contingent got our way on a pretty wide set of rules. Ultimately this is more important for the existence of the party than the choice of nominee, especially since this year none of the viable candidates is outside of the mainstream of the party.
1 Like
Not eve sure what that means. Does “viable” mean “could beat Trump in the general” or “ could make it past the DNC’s corruption to get the nomination?”
The part That would destroy the party is not the nominee per se, but the fact that exposing the corruption and venality of the party elites and their utter contempt for their constituents in such a completely unambiguous way would drive a whole lot of people away from the party, probably permanently.
I could totally support Warren (or Yang, or Gabbard) if they got the most delegates, but if the DNC uses superdelegates to take the nomination away from the one with the most delegates, they can all fuck off and die in a fire as far as I’m concerned. The sooner the better.
I mean still seriously in the running. The change in the debate rules is disgusting, but it isn’t going to make a difference w/r to the nomination, and it doesn’t even mean that the current leadership, let alone the whole DNC, is corrupt.
Given the donation Bloomberg made to the DNC, it sure fucking looks like a bribe, and I don’t see anything in the background of the people who took it that would make me assume it isn’t.
5 Likes
9 Likes
I agree it looks bad, though I don’t see how Perez personally benefits. Since the donations were made before Bloomberg was in the race, it doesn’t seem like a qpq.
Right now all the candidates except Buttigieg (and Bloomberg of course) have attacked the rules change, and Biden is the candidate most likely to suffer from Bloomberg’s success, so if this is really some kind of nefarious attempt to manipulate the outcome by an elite cabal they are doing a pretty piss-poor job of it. The DNC looks more inept than corrupt.
1 Like
7 Likes
Where Bloomberg level money is really going to count is Super Tuesday- where candidates are going to need to play against him spending perhaps $100 million.
So keep your powder dry and be prepared to step up for your candidate of choice then. Though it’s likely who’s considered viable by then might shrink down so maybe those left in have a chance of raising enough to run across all that real estate competitively.
That’s when I’ll place my bet - money wise.
9 Likes
Remember four short years ago, when the DNC establishment was so terrified of a true progressive becoming the nominee that it ham-handedly did what it could to rig things in favour of its favoured Third Way candidate? Remember how that bumbling and brazen corruption ended up alienating a whole bunch of progressive voters?
The DNC establishment apparently doesn’t remember. Neither do its apologists, who continue tying themselves into knots deferring to its authority.
15 Likes
8 Likes
Honestly, some of the apologists are fully mercenary propagandists for the plutocrats, but a whole lot of them remind me of people who are stuck in an abusive relationship.
5 Likes
The Democratic Party is what it is. Since it tries to be a “big tent” party at any given time it will be full of people who disagree with one another, all of whom are vying for power within it. When office holders stretch their authority – as I think Perez is doing now – it is reasonable to object, and to try to understand why they’re doing what they’re doing, but falling back on the old plutocratic conspiracy stuff is just lame.
Those who find the party insufficiently responsive to their desires are welcome to join it and do what they can from the inside – membership is open to all voters – or join one of the parties with more democratic policies and procedures for choosing nominees…if they can find one. Politics is hard work, and however cathartic it might be to lob insults at the people doing it, it is about as effective as little boys lobbing snowballs at cars.
This particular rule-bending isn’t a calamity; if anything it should help the most progressive candidates. It does presage further rule-bending down the road, and that is the reason it needs the pushback that has been coming from most of the candidates.
1 Like
