Debbie Wasserman Schultz 2015 = Katherine Harris 2000

[AgingAmerican]

...who back in 2000 would admit no conflicts between her role as chief state elections officer while also chair for George W. Bush's campaign.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz decision to breach the DNC contract, under which she is bound, in order to smear Sanders was opportunistic.

The contract required written notice of termination and a 10-day grace period to cure any alleged default. Clearly the DNC was in violation, not Sanders. Because the contract put the onus for securing data on the DNC, it was liable for the breach as well. But the issue was bigger than mere contract law or political dirty tricks. In suspending the vital operations of a presidential campaign, Schultz trespassed on the right of all citizens to free and fair elections. Democrats could ill afford to be seen condoning her actions. Nor could they afford to pay her bills. If she acted without authority she’d be liable for damages, but only if the party was as swift and honorable in dealing with her as Sanders was in dealing with Uretsky. The party also had to ponder the sworn depositions Sanders might now take regarding such delicate matters as who Schultz spoke to about her decision to impale him.

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/19/debbie_wasserman_schultz_must_go_and_the_case_bernie_sanders_must_make_tonight/


=

[Jarqui]

1. DWS isn't likely to go anywhere until Nov 2016

when, should Hillary prevail, she'll be entertaining a cabinet position.

Clearly, the Clinton campaign controls the DNC and DWS.

No one of note is holding DWS to account for her smear or double standard.

[pipoman]

2. No....2 seperate and completely different people and scenarios

[NurseJackie]

3. He knows. It's just more tantrum-throwing and attention-seeking.

[Tommy2Tone]

24. Straw Grasping

Because we all know it can't be because more people prefer Hillary to Bernie.

[AgingAmerican]

35. Then explain her unprecedented reaction to Sanders firing the aid, followed by belicose attacks?

The totality of her actions, beginning BEFORE he announced back in May, points to only one possible conclusion. DWS is in the bag for Hillary and she no longer tries to hide it!

[George II]

44. The "belicose attack" (which I don't think it was, but....) came AFTER the "belicose attack" by...

.....Sanders' Campaign Manager Weaver.

[AgingAmerican]

68. No explanation forthcoming

[George II]

69. We'll have to see the outcome of the independent, third party investigation.

[AgingAmerican]

72. Hillary now wants to 'move on' from it, but Bernie says no

He wants a FULL investigation! Of course DWS kneejerk attempt at ruining the Sanders campaign will be HEAVILY considered in the final prognosis!

[sabrina 1]

61. More people do not prefer Hillary. Bernie's crossover appeal is not yet being polled

by the old traditional pollsters who poll only older, longtime REGISTERED Dems who own landlines for the most part. And Hillary's campaign clearly knows she is losing this election.

Many of Bernie's supporters are not yet even registered in states that don't require it. But they will be when they go to the polls to elect their candidate. Every poll, other than those using the old methodology, shows Bernie as clearly the people's choice.

And even the traditional polls are now having to record the huge momentum behind his campaign. New CBS poll today eg, shows Bernie within 5 points of the front runner and still half the people don't know yet who he is.

That is why the DNC released info that violated their contract with candidates. It has backfired, but it does show that THEY know the people's choice is not the same as theirs.

[George II]

70. Why would pollsters conducting polls for the Democratic primaries poll anyone other than....

.....registered Democrats? These so-called "crossovers" can only occur in the few states that allow them, and their effect probably will be minimal.

The CBS/Yougov poll has consistently been several points higher for Sanders than other polls. What makes their methodology so much better than all of the other polls?

As for the "huge momentum" behind his campaign, does this look like "momentum"? Actually it does, but not for the Sanders campaign.

[AgingAmerican]

73. Because crossover appeal wins elections!

It's a no brainer really.

[George II]

74. But we're just in the primary season, not the general election yet. As I mentioned.....

......there are some, but very few, states that permit last minute changing of party affiliation in primaries, so the crossover factor is minimal at best.

Yes, a no brainer.

[AgingAmerican]

75. It's a factor in the general

Which makes the candidate who garners wide crossover appeal across all demographics more appealing.

[George II]

76. But you're losing sight of the fact that the crossover appeal means virtually nothing in primaries.

[AgingAmerican]

78. It is a factor with many Democrats

Because the candidate with wide appeal has a better chance in the general.

[sabrina 1]

81. Well, you just made my point by agreeing with me. They are only polling longtime

registered Dems and ignoring all the Bernie supporters who WILL be registered Dems by the time the Primaries begin.

Eg, here in NY people who wanted to vote for Bernie in the primary but were not registered as Dems had to change their reg by Oct 9, before the first debate. Nice way to try to suppress voters. However for people who are not registered with ANY party, they can register as Dems until the primaries. THAT is what WE are doing, helping people who have not voted in years, disgusted with the whole 'rigged' system, who are now supporting Bernie, to register as Dems.

Same thing is happening all over the country. Only most states have a later reg. date than NY. So these old fashioned polling orgs are not able to collect that data with their old methodology.

That is why there is such a vast difference in people polls and the old traditional polls. THEY have acknowledged it themselves, as they are getting more and more elections WRONG.

So I wouldn't be using those polls if I were you or like the UK eg, who depended on traditional polling, you are likely to be very disappointed. Greece too, got it so wrong there also with the same old methodology

[George II]

84. No, I didn't. How do you know they polled only "long time registered Dems"?

They're polling registered Democrats with an across the board demographic. And just because some states have later registration deadlines, those deadlines are not the ONLY day people can register, people most likely have been registering all summer and fall.

Do you honestly think that the people registering between now and February or March are going to make up 41% in South Carolina, 35% in Florida, 41% in New Jersey, etc.? I highly doubt it.

We've already seen here that the neophytes of the Sanders campaign weren't even setting up registration tables at many of his rallies, they were complaining that the DNC wasn't setting up tables (BTW, that NEVER happens, its incumbent upon the campaigns themselves to register voters at rallies and other events)

For some people here on DU it seems to be all about complaining "suppressing the vote" instead of working on encouraging voters. That's what "traditional" campaigns do.

[AlbertCat]

51. So much yawning from the Clinton lovers over the past few weeks

Do they think it's over?

Do they think she's already won?

Have they thought she deserves to win and it's "her turn" from the get go?

Maybe they should take a nap.

[AgingAmerican]

79. Perhaps her campaign is geared toward the sleepwalking sector of the electorate?

[blackspade]

4. Considering DWS' advocacy and endorsements of Rethugs

In Florida I think the comparison is apt.

She is a great example of the feckless leadership of establishment Democrats.

[Ferd Berfel]

5. DWS - You're Fired!

[sufrommich]

6. Debbie Wasserman Schultz 2015- official scapegoat of

losing campaigns.

[The Boss]

26. She should have been fired in 2014.

Her strategy was a massive failure for the 2014 elections.

[sufrommich]

29. I can't stand DWS,she's incompetent,but she's not

the source of the Sanders campaign inability to surpass Clinton in the polls.

[AgingAmerican]

36. She is part of it, yes

Her and the corporate SM.

[Loudestlib]

45. We had 17 debates by this time in 2008

I'm sure it's just a happy accident.

[treestar]

65. +1

Bernie has to get more supporters and more votes to win. That's his job, not the DNC's!

[blue neen]

7. Baloney.

Not even close.

[90-percent]

8. Who is DNC's master?

"voters" and "democracy" seem very low on their priority list to me? However, they are very supportive of Hillary, who holds high the MIC, Wall Street, and win/lose, more/less entitlement of the powerful and wealthy.

-90% Jimmy

[cantbeserious]

9. In The Humble Opinion Of This Citizen - An Apt Analogy

eom

[boston bean]

10. I find this post extremely offensive. Really the DNC Chairwoman is equal to Katherine Harris

who ushered in GWB??

My god, what has this place turned in to.

I've alerted both SOP and to a Jury. Not sure what good it will do. But this tripe doesn't belong here, imho. You've earned one of my very few alerts.

[AgingAmerican]

40. I find DWS extremely offensive

Her calculated, but kneejerk reaction backfired on her. She was so giddy and sure this would wipe out his càmpaign, she ended up self immolating and making a fool of herself. All she accomplished with her extreme, unprecedented, kneejerk 'judge, jury and executioner' action was expose herself as corrupt and working for the Hillary campaign.

[backscatter712]

62. SKINNER! SKINNER! SOMEONE ON THE BOARDS SAID SOMETHING I DON'T LIKE! MAKE IT STOP!

Would you like a binky?

[boston bean]

11. Well, looks like you got the go ahead to spout this nonsense.

On Sun Dec 20, 2015, 07:59 AM you sent an alert on the following post:

Debbie Wasserman Schultz 2015 = Katherine Harris 2000
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251927826

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

Debbie Wasserman Schulte= Katherine Harris. DU is becoming irrelevant with this type of posting. Please help to keep this place sane. This doesn't belong here, a site for democrats.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Sun Dec 20, 2015, 08:05 AM, and voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't see it ,either, but the poster tries to present evidence to support the assertion. It's wrong. but all sorts of arguments are wrong. I do agree the argument appears a little insane, but that's true of many.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The article is pointing out the conflict of interest similarities between the two people. Like it or not, DWS is behaving is such a way that that gives the appearance of favor toward the Clinton campaign - and this article makes that point.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: It's dead wrong but Salon is just showing its ignorance. Don't have to read it do we? Leave it alone.

[AgingAmerican]

15. Both abusing their position of power to alter the election in favor of their chosen candidate

Electorate and party be damned. Neither seem to care about ruining their reputation either. Juicy perks await?

[boston bean]

16. There isn't one iota of proof that is the case. Provide evidence, absolute proof

that what you just said is true.

You will not be able to.

[AgingAmerican]

20. It's all in the article

[Kentonio]

58. Please explain..

How DWS saying in a TV interview that the Sanders campaign has 'nothing but bluster' is not 'abusing their position of power to alter the election in favor of their chosen candidate'? I'd love to hear your explanation of how this shows the required neutrality for her position.

[boston bean]

59. They attacked her with false information. What is she suppose to do, sit idly by and let

them lie their buttocks off?

[Kentonio]

60. They accused her of misusing her position to help another candidate and sabotage their campaign.

It turns out that she had done something that was not permissible by the terms of the contract the DNC had with the Sanders campaign, which was why she was forced to concede and restore access in the face of a lawsuit. Her actions were extremely damaging to the Sanders campaign, and she had no legal right to take that action in the first place.

The response that a professional would have given would have been along the lines of 'It is unfortunate that these issues have arisen which unnecessarily distract from our positive primary campaign with a set of candidates who all provide a strong counter-balance to the out of control Republican field'. Absolutely the last thing that a high up party figure in a position that demands neutrality should have done is to get involved in slinging mud at one of her parties own candidates, no matter how much her feelings might have been hurt. That's the response of a petulant teenager, not a professional politician.

Of course a real professional would have dealt with the entire mess internally rather than running off to leak it to the media in the first place.

[marble falls]

23. That jury is dead on. SidDithers is Flagged for review. I'm curious about the...

about the outcome of his review.

Read his five hidden posts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=111821

About SidDithers
If I ever do choose to leave DU, this is where I will say my goodbye.

Statistics and Information
Account status: Flagged for review
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 38,389
Number of posts, last 90 days: 1036
Favorite forum: General Discussion: Primaries, 545 posts in the last 90 days (53% of total posts)
Favorite group: Sports, 7 posts in the last 90 days (1% of total posts)
Last post: Sat Dec 19, 2015, 03:16 PM

Jury
Willing to serve on Juries: Yes
Eligible to serve on Juries: Yes
Chance of serving on Juries: 0% (explain)

[sufrommich]

31. None of his hides is even remotely hidable in my opinion. nt

[treestar]

66. +1

all three that were on the same day are nothing.

[Loudestlib]

47. Hillary supporters abusing the system

I'm not surprised.

[marble falls]

56. I'm not either. The rules don't seem evenly applied.

[randome]

12. I think I found her secrets!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[TIME TO PANIC]

13. Two peas in a pod.

Same product different brand.

[boston bean]

19. That is just ridiculous.

[TIME TO PANIC]

21. Is it?

[boston bean]

25. yes, it is.

[TIME TO PANIC]

30. C'mon; look at them.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes,

YES! They were both in the positions they were/are in for SPECIFIC REASONS. To get the "CHOSEN ONES" elected/nominated by any means necessary.

TPTB think we're stupid and don't know their modus operandi.

They've got a rude awakening coming.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[CharlotteVale]

17. I knew she reminded me of somebody.

[restorefreedom]

18. yes the fact that the dnc and hrc actually share offices

in some places is no conflict, no conflict at all.

and being in that close proximity, i am SURE dws did not allow clinton's team access to data when the firewall was down

[DhhD]

41. How did the Hillary campaign supporter get my private email address on the day that

the firewall went down when I did not give permission? I ask this question in the Hillary Group and got banned there. A copy is in an OP on the Bernie group. I was expecting replies of lets wait and see what happens with the investigation of the DNC allowing the firewall to drop several times since October. They all chose to stomp with alerts instead of discussion.

I thought DU was about discussion of real events like the one I explained in the OP in H C Group. Seems like the DU of late, can be written of, as a tragedy, in literature.

[grasswire]

54. good side point there

DWS did the same kind of thing. She "alerted" to the media instead of working inside the system, as Bernie did.

[restorefreedom]

57. i hope bernies campaign is collecting these accounts

i have heard a number of people say this. there is no one who can convince me that dws didn't give access while the wall was down. i hope the independent audit shows this, but i am sure they are destroying evidence as we speak.

[Uncle Joe]

22. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, AgingAmerican.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

27. Someone is reading my stuff.

[Babel_17]

28. DWS chose to "violate the contract" just before the debate

IANAL but if that is truly in violation then I see it as clear that this violation caused harm to the Sanders campaign. And afaik that's what judges want to see if you bring a suit.

[ViseGrip]

38. ^^^this^^^

[Chicago1980]

32. These two are actually being compared.

People need to get their shit together and stop the back and forth banter.

I swear we're our own worst enemies.

[randome]

37. No shit. This is juvenalia at its worst.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[AzDar]

33. K & R

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

39. She acted this way in 2008 when she tried to

Rewrite the primary rules to give HRC Florida and Michigan...after it was clear that HRC was losing after Super Tuesday. How can HRC cheerleaders look themselves in the mirror and call themselves dignified people?

[whereisjustice]

42. Debbie and Hillary because clearly the Democratic Party is too far left!

Like being against insurance company designed health care policy, or being against sending millions of good US jobs to slave labor in Asia, or being against violent destructive war policy killing 100s of thousands and alienating a billion people.

But don't get me wrong, Democratic Leadership is still different from Republican leadership. And, thanks to Republican extremists and Democratic Party carpetbaggers, it's now easier than ever to advance conservative policies while exploiting the lesser of two evils.

You'll see. The goodness of Wall Street conservative henchmen like Hillary, Debbie, Rahm, Larry (Moe and Curly) will come shining through in the next election! Thankfully, they'll change nothing. And make things slightly less worse than a Republican. Not like that other guy. What's his name. He'll actually make things better.

Who wants that?

(c) 2015 Democratic National Committee campaign for Hillary. All rights reserved.

[UglyGreed]

43. K/R

[WillyT]

46. What Is It About Florida ???

Just kidding all my Florida friends...

Although... "Florida Man" does get a lot of press...

[MisterP]

53. FL's a boom state so its residents come from other states: both parties have to fill their seats

and offices--DWS is from Queens, Crist PA (as a kid), Scott MO, Jeb TX: only Harris was native-born (though again Crist was there since he was a wee sprog)

so while other states have pols from other states, FL's political class is dominated by them, so every pol has to carve a niche--and of course cater to boom-and-bust billionaires

[beltanefauve]

63. Thanks for that explanation

[MisterP]

64. that's more of a guess, though: I'm not in FL

[Botany]

48. DWS helped to put into power for the Florida Democrartic Party a women who worked for DBT in 2000

DWS put a person* who worked for DBT (remember Florida 2000 and the purge of black
voters) as chair of the Florida Democratic Party.

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/no-14-allison-tant-where-buck-never-stopped

And "the democratic party chair in Florida*" husband worked for Bush/Cheney in stopping
the recount of the Florida vote in 2000.

I really think DWS is way dirty.


* Allison Tant

[Fuddnik]

52. And Katherine Harris is another of her Republican "friends" in Florida.

Her title back then should have been Red to Blue Dog, because she's never supported a liberal.

[Generic Brad]

49. I need a picture of DWS with an opossum before I concur

That would be the definitive point of comparison for me.

[awake]

50. For those who missed this "Fire Debbie Wasserman Schultz"

here is the link to a good read that was posted yesterday
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016139892

[LovingA2andMI]

55. K/R!!!

However speaking one mind something can be a dangerous action as seen in the thread above - Independent Underground News & Talk

[MrMickeysMom]

67. RESIGN, PLEASE!

I've had my fill of Tools for every job


I've had my fill of every DNC official who is no more than a turd way tool.

[Attorney in Texas]

71. BINGO!

[Dawson Leery]

77. Bernie will fully support Hillary next fall.

DWS is a good person. No need to post this nonsense.

[rjsquirrel]

80. Nasty misogynist post

The sheer sexism with which Sanders supporters attack DWS and HRC is hideous.

It will be the downfall of the campaign of a nice old white man.

[AgingAmerican]

83. Exactly how is this, 'sexist'?

Becàuse both happen to be female?

[emsimon33]

82. DWS is worse because she oversees national elections

She lost us 2014 and will lose us 2016 if we do not get rid of her. Howard Dean is pro HRC but I feel he can be non-partisan if placed as head of the DNC again.