.
2 Likes
However, Sanders’ joint fundraising agreement with the DNC, signed in November, 2015, which was also obtained by NBC News, does not appear to include a supplemental deal.
And two of the Sanders campaign’s former top officials say they were never specifically offered one like Clinton’s and had no knowledge of their rival campaign’s arrangement.
“We had no addendum like this, no memorandum, no agreement like this,” said Mark Longabaugh, who was the campaign’s chief liaison to the DNC. “They basically came to us and said, here’s the agreement, take it or leave it.”
“I had no idea there was side memorandum with the Clinton campaign,” he added.
Meanwhile, Jeff Weaver, the campaign’s former campaign manager, dismissed the clause in Clinton’s agreement limiting engagement exclusively to general election activity as a fig leaf.
“Throwing this catchall at the end saying that this document doesn’t say what it says is a little disingenuous,” he said. “Anybody who suggests we were being treated the same way is playing semantic games.”
7 Likes
3 Likes
4 Likes
The point I’m making is this: does your 1/64th qualify you to speak on behalf or all tribal people, or to start your own tribal chapter, or in the case of various “pretendians” who masquerade as Natives in various scholarly venues, to seek jobs or positions based on the claim of native ancestry, thereby taking away resources and opportunities from Native people who are disadvantaged simply because of skin color or geographical location as members of a sovereign tribal nation? Most sensible people would say “nope”, but there are a great many who will do all of the above.
For example, I’ve worked for years trying to get professional, collegiate, and high school sports teams to dump their “indian” mascots, because it’s a shit thing to have to raise my kids in a world whose only understanding of natives is caricature. And again and again the pollsters will ask some mostly white person, someone who is not enrolled in a tribe, doesn’t speak the language, doesn’t know the culture, but whose great grandmother was an “Indian princess” (or some nonsense like that) who will come out and say “Oh, I have no problem with the name ‘Redskins’… it honors me…”
It’s aggravating.
(to clarify, I’m a white-presenting enrolled member of Six Nations Reserve, Ontario, Canada, and I married a Navajo/Sioux woman, so my kids are all over the map)
2 Likes
It is critically important to realize both, and it’s also important to be very skeptical that DWS and only DWS was aware and made unilateral decisions to accept the terms. That’s not how a chairman works.
2 Likes
No disagreement there; it ain’t just DWS.
I think the entirety of the establishment Democratic party needs to be turfed.
4 Likes
And they should have. They’re ostensibly there in the first place to ensure the party nominates the candidate with the best chance of winning the election.
Which was Bernie, FFS - the polls had him crushing fucken Trump by ten fucking points.
4 Likes
“Better candidate” or “candidate who better served the interests of their class”?
There’s a difference.
2 Likes
for me and you perhaps. but, not for them. there are people who act and vote solely in their own short term interests. or for their own ideas of “justice”.
3 Likes
What @willmore said, but I’d add:
These two parties have a complete monopoly as gatekeepers to our public office. There’s a couple independent or minor party governors or occasional senators, but realistically, you do not get to play the American political game unless you choose Faction A or Faction B.
This is despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans want a third (fourth, fifth) viable option. But the big parties use the full extent of their power to see that this doesn’t happen.
6 Likes
I would argue that point. Not in principle, per se, but there are a few specific things which I think offer exceptional leverage to do good.
One of my longstanding defenses of Sanders was that he was the only candidate I trusted to appoint an AG and SEC leadership who would actually prosecute Wall St crooks with more than token wrist slaps. That is entirely within executive authority, is WIDELY supported by voters of all political stripes, and would have a massive, immediate, and tangible effect on things.
There’s also the power of the presidential soapbox- I could see Bernie calling an emergency press conference, interrupting prime time TV, to say “In the wake of the flooding in Texas, I asked congress to provide relief- food, medicine, and supplies- for the effected area. This is what they gave me to sign: Section 12 prevents companies who improperly stored toxic waste from having to clean it up when the flooding recedes. Section 28 provides millions of dollars in subsidies to a handful of companies not even involved with relief efforts. Section 34 prevents any medical facility which allows abortion from receiving medical supplies to help injured survivors. This is what YOUR representatives gave me. They work for YOU. They are accountable to YOU…”
10 Likes
There’s gross simplifications, falsehoods, appeals to nihilism. It’s all there! A Russian trolley could not have written this any better.
1 Like
You’re wrong if you think he would have retained that ten-percent advantage as the actual Democratic candidate. For starters, Bernie would have energized the leftist voters, but almost certainly depressed the minority vote with his focus on economic inequality over everything else. (There’s a long and sordid history in American leftism of the black Americans and other minorities being left behind by efforts to fix economic inequality, so they’re understandably skeptic of anyone saying “Let’s fix class issues, and racism will go away on its own!”)
For another thing, he would have faced a lot of hostile media attention and negative campaigning. His ten-point lead in those polls is in no small part because he was generally unknown to America outside Vermont (and people following politics closely, who are a small minority). Once the focus would be on him, a lot of people would get scared of his “socialism”.
Now, I’m not saying Bernie couldn’t win the general election. But considering that he failed to win over the majority of Democratic primary voters, who are pretty much by definition more left-leaning than the average American voter, I’m not optimistic of his ability to win.
2 Likes
Well, if we’re going to quote the WaPo coverage, here is my favorite bit from that article:
Brazile writes that she was haunted by the still-unsolved murder of DNC data staffer Seth Rich and feared for her own life, shutting the blinds to her office window so snipers could not see her and installing surveillance cameras at her home. She wonders whether Russians had placed a listening device in plants in the DNC executive suite.
It is possible that the people questioning her stability are trying to undermine her narrative for political reasons of their own. Or, they could just be drawing natural conclusions from her actual words. (Or both, of course.)
1 Like
Yeah, they did the same to Jesus!
1 Like
Wise, considering he remains the most popular politician in the country.
1 Like
Keep ignoring it - Dems will keep losing.
6 Likes
It’s time to investigate the Putin-Brazile connection.
1 Like
We were shocked to learn the news that Donna Brazile actively considered overturning the will of the Democratic voters by attempting to replace Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine as the Democratic Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees.
But breaking DNC rules by coordinating efforts with the Clinton campaign to ensure Sanders would not gain the nomination, and then lying about it - - Not so shocked about that apparently…
What do you call it when politicians get to the point where they don’t even try to hide their corruption any more?
4 Likes
