“His announcement Tuesday, pledging to spend $20 million on its efforts, triggered a wave of criticism and concern from some Democrats, including members of Congress, DNC members and Democratic strategists, many of whom expressed frustration over Hogg’s dual roles as an activist and party representative”
I’m sorry, are they openly saying they don’t want Democrat leadership to be… Active?
Fucking hell, this is why I never became one
Well, the Dems can use a bit of a shakeup from their current coma. The US needs a functioning opposition, and currently the Dems don’t cut it.
Can an establishment democrat explain to me why they don’t run progressives in safe seats?
An establishment dem would say it’s because their policies aren’t popular, the part they keep in their head is them thinking it’s communism and having a flashback to their country beating the Red Scare into them.
Didn’t hold your breath here.
If there were any trust in the DNC to preserve, this would be a different discussion. They look after the interests of Democratic incumbents, not Democratic voters. Hogg is doing the right thing and I hope he succeeds.
They look after the interests of some incumbents.
Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman weren’t protected from primary challengers.
I think it’s more accurate to say they protect corporate dems.
Oh, well if the Axel-Springer-owned POLITICO is upset about this, it must be a good thing.
Some Democrats fear that a DNC official weighing in on primaries erodes the committee’s credibility as a neutral arbiter
The DNC? A neutral arbiter? What a crock of shit. They’ve had their thumb on every primary where a progressive was involved.
Still others stressed that prolonged primaries could drag the party further to the left
Yes, dear gods, the DNC could end up back in the middle if that happened. 🙄
Fuck the DNC
Hell yeah! Most of those greybeards in safe seats are just as bought and paid for as magas. Clean both sides up.
When newly elected Democratic National Committee officers gathered in late March at a Washington hotel, the agenda included a brief but robust discussion of a pledge not to intervene in party primaries, according to two people who attended the meeting and a third who was briefed on it.
Pretty fucking rich when you have this:
On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to select their own candidate. “In evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are true—that the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent,” the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated. This assumption of a plaintiff’s allegation is the general legal standard in the motion to dismiss stage of any lawsuit. The allegations contained in the complaint must be taken as true unless they are merely conclusory allegations or are invalid on their face.
This right here is why the democrats have been getting their shit kicked in.
Am I misreading it that the assumption the allegations are true is used to deliberate whether the lawsuit is nonetheless inappropriate on other grounds?
None of this means that the judge believed or found them to be true. It means they don’t matter.
Good
I’m all for getting rid of a bunch of old ineffective people,” the member said, “but not by running a bunch of lefty campaigns against them.
–An old ineffective person
To hell with him then
Pew, pew, fuckers.
Here’s the plan.
We split the Democratic Party, resign the GOP to Whig-status and restore humanity?
Leaders We Deserve https://leaderswedeserve.com/
