2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSooner or Later the DNC Will Have to Face Its Corruption Issues
Sooner or Later the DNC Will Have to Face Its Corruption Issues
By Michael Sainato • 04/20/16 3:00pm
The fear of retribution has been silencing Democrats for way too long
Although superdelegates in the Democratic Party don’t cast their votes until the Democratic National Convention, the majority of them flocked to line up behind Hillary Clinton before the Democratic primaries ever really began. As DNC Vice Chair Donna Brazile said in 2013, “If Hillary Clinton gets in the race, there will be a coronation of her.” The coronation was effectively halted by Sen. Bernie Sanders, whose more progressive agenda and rallying call against big money corrupting politics has resonated with millions of Democrats and Independents across the country. But his surge in support has been obstructed by the Democratic National Committee in every possible way.
DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz served as co-chair to Ms. Clinton’s 2008 campaign, so it was already highly unlikely she would be able to maintain impartiality in the race. Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s poor leadership has come under scrutiny throughout the Democratic primaries, from rigging the debate schedule, to inciting a lawsuit from the Sanders campaign over access to voter database files, to colluding with the Clinton campaign through a joint fundraising committee—the Hillary Victory Fund—which was recently accused of violating campaign finance laws. The fund has also been linked to essentially buying off the support of superdelegates as the Clinton campaign gets to decide where and how much money goes to state Democratic Parties.
Ms. Clinton and Mr. Sanders have remained close in terms of support from voters throughout the primaries, but the disproportionate number of superdelegates supporting Ms. Clinton in contrast to her support from voters—especially in states where Mr. Sanders won an overwhelming majority of the vote—signals the election is, in part, rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. Ms. Wasserman Schultz slipped up in a media interview and admitted, “Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists.”
One of the most telling signs the superdelegate system and the party is under the thumb of Ms. Clinton’s Democratic Machine is the silence from Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who has abstained from choosing to endorse either candidate for president. Supporters on both sides have argued her silence is a victory, but given her similarities to Mr. Sanders and considering her political career embodies much of his platform, the silence is arguably attributed to a fear of retribution from her own party....
Read more:
http://observer.com/2016/04/sooner-or-later-the-dnc-will-have-to-face-its-corruption-issues/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)couldn't grasp.
Trenzalore
(2,331 posts)beedle
(1,235 posts)Trenzalore
(2,331 posts)Saying that she is afraid of party officials is an attack on Elizabeth Warren.
beedle
(1,235 posts)Just because she can see right before her own eyes the consequences of going against Hillary does and will have for Bernie in terms of Democratic party politics, there's no reason at all why she should consider not stepping forward and supporting Bernie and go against the Royal Clinton regime? There's already been calls for Bernie to be tossed from the party and all committee positions he holds and will ever hold in the future.
Was it just a month ago that Hillary supporters were all out there protecting the 'delicate flower' Elizabeth Warren from the supposed scourge of the BernieBros for not explicitly supporting Sanders? Seems it "struck" an awful lot of Hillary supporters that she was indeed someone who was in danger of 'backing down' against the stones and arrows of an imaginary twitter attack ... but now you see her as someone who is not afraid of being drummed out of the Dems and the senate for going against the whole DNC establishment?
Personally I don't see her as backing down to anyone either, but I also don't see the need to pick a fight against the DNC establishment at this time when they are in the middle of exposing how corrupt they truly are ... save it for 2018/2020 when DNC corruption will have lost much of its corrupt infrastructure.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,350 posts)Otherwise, the corruption is a wise and valid tactic.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)That likely means that political corruption will remain an issue going into 2017 regardless of who is elected.
Yurovsky
(2,064 posts)unfortunately their candidate is a racist jackass. But people on the right are fed up too, especially poor rural folks who have grown tired of getting screwed by the GOP (and for religious, racial, or gun-law positions haven't consider voting Democrat). But even many GOP voters are waking up to the fact that the current system only benefits the 1%. I also believe those are the voters Bernie could attract. It might take some work, but if they decided to vote in their best economic interest, they would realize Bernie is the only candidate who is going to alter the economic playing field.
Hillary? They look at her sponsors, they look at $250k speeches, they look at her shady deals on behalf of the CGI, and they see exactly what they loathe.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)corruption. I hope that all of us hold it to the fire. I know that I refuse to continue to belong to this party if this is overlooked.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)If you're dissatisfied with that reality, change something.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)in the worst of ways.
Our supposed chairwoman has made some seriously poor judgment calls.