Democratic (Party) Direction

great relitigating everyone

tbh I'm more interested in what it means that figures like Brazile and Warren now feel comfortable stating the game was rigged

still missing how his failure in judgment is an indictment of the primary system, the Democratic Party or even the DNC.

still missing things I didn't talk about at all?

"Dirt", "stinks" etc imply unethical or possibly illegal - at the v least scandalous - behavior.

tbh I'm more interested in what it means that figures like Brazile and Warren now feel comfortable stating the game was rigged

was waiting for someone to point this out. seems like future of the party is disowning the clintons.

Yep

the DNC can be all-powerful, or it can be incompetent. can't be both. and I think we know which one it leans toward

― bodak horseman (voodoo chili), Thursday, November 2, 2017 6:36 PM (thirty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is an empty rhetorical device btw, would you say the same about facebook? the trump administration?

also, did....anyone read the brazile piece?

the DNC can be all-powerful, or it can be incompetent. can't be both. and I think we know which one it leans toward

― bodak horseman (voodoo chili), Thursday, November 2, 2017 6:36 PM (thirty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is an empty rhetorical device btw, would you say the same about facebook? the trump administration?

― k3vin k., Thursday, November 2, 2017 7:20 PM (ten minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

those are organizations with far more power than the DNC, so no I would not say that.

k i’m sure that line is drawn very scientifically

It's almost as if ppl don't understand how parties, power and politics work in this country. LBJ was also told when it wasn't his time, for ex.

― Οὖτις

it's too bad literally nothing has changed about party politics since 1960

Is there another element to this story than both campaigns being asked to share money and Bernie saying “no”?

I think so, if I'm understanding this right?

The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias—specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

And this: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670

A Twitter thread:

Okay, I am at home, I got a bunch of links open and I am ready to start explaining in mindnumbing detail the HVF.

— Elizabeth Rogers (@ahumorlessfem) November 3, 2017

wow checkmate berners!!!

we're going to be re-litigating this until 2020 i was just thinking we should probably just be cool w/ that

i quit reading that twitter thread after "that user and abuser sanders"

But wait! The Berners screech in that annoying voice of theirs

at last, the abigail adams to eric garner's james madison

haha i had a very similar thought

Donna Brazile is lying about numerous aspects of the Democratic primary race, to try to make herself relevant to Bernie Sanders fans. Now Elizabeth Warren has fallen for Brazile's lies. What a shit show. All because Bernie & his fans can't handle that he lost by MILLIONS of votes

— Palmer Report (@PalmerReport) November 2, 2017

this is hard-hitting stuff

haha the fuckin palmer report

opened that tweet and immediately discovered that barack obama follows them, yeesh

Obama follows a lot of people.

A Twitter thread:

Okay, I am at home, I got a bunch of links open and I am ready to start explaining in mindnumbing detail the HVF.
— Elizabeth Rogers (@ahumorlessfem) November 3, 2017
― grawlix (unperson), Friday, 3 November 2017 02:37 (twelve hours ago) Permalink

I though the point of the story was that the Clinton campaign was given de facto control of the DNC in exchange, not that the HVC is some kind of corrupt slush fund.

*HVF

"re-litigating": use other words, doinks

It's about the future, not about two people who aren't going to be president

future of the party in 2001 was disowning the clintons.

Gore even tried it the year before, but didn't have much else

charlie pierce weighs in:

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a13148225/donna-brazile-dnc/

"seems like nothing, but Senator Professor Warren*, who i actually respect and probably knows a lot more about this than i do, seems to disagree, so maybe i'm wrong, idk". great take charlie

lol I don't have enough time to cover all the db shit but hoo boy is the asterisk thing annoying

*dumb

I need to poll Pierce's monikers, but "Senator Professor Warren" is his worst.

what's with the asterisk? is it just a more clever way of saying SCROTUS?

not MY president

the unfounded—and, generally, pretty stupid—claim that the primary process was “rigged” against Bernie Sanders. That the DNC at least had half-a-thumb on the scale was common knowledge almost from jump

lol

I always translate "The party can't get out of its own way" as SURRENDER, LEFTIES

This seems like a pretty good summation, better than Pierce's piece: http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/11/dnc-clinton-separating-signal-noise . It tries to examine the whole thing seriously, and avoid snark except for a Lincoln Chaffee joke.

yes, very good piece. it is beyond me why it is so difficult for some people to accept (or admit) that mistakes were made by lots of different parties to this process

In politics, many mistakes are made by almost everyone, usually tracing back to their decision to enter politics.

xpost good link, thanks

"The memo made clear it pertained only to the general election." So we just had an outrage cycle over primary "rigging" for nothing, huh. https://t.co/Awrn3blTvv

— (((Yair Rosenberg))) (@Yair_Rosenberg) November 3, 2017

Oh for fucks sake

Donna Brazile just wants to sell some books yall

would be cool if the democratic party could get its act together or if there were more parties. either would be fine.

Andrew Sullivan has another typically fraught piece on nymag about how the dems are completely fucking up the Northam vs. Gillespie race that's happening in VA next week. I can't believe I actually tried to read it. Northam seems like a schmuck but I'm withholding my verdict until the votes are in, I just don't have the energy.

I feel like I have a long post about the Brazile / Clinton / Obama machine meltdown but it might be better suited for the "barack obama's flaws" thread than here.

The good thing about the Brazile bombshell was that it was related to a specific piece of paper meaning it could easily be fact checked. It has been fact checked, it's bullshit. And the story goes on and on.

16 more years of trump

The bigger picture seems to be that none of the democratic party campaigning, fundraising or messaging machinery is functional at this point. There appears to be no managerial competence remaining. While it's a hell of a lot of fun watching the GOP eat itself, Bernie didn't exactly run a shit hot campaign, and you cannot win tight state and local races on personality alone.

you cannot win tight state and local races on personality alone.

― El Tomboto

proof please

lol

The good thing about the Brazile bombshell was that it was related to a specific piece of paper meaning it could easily be fact checked. It has been fact checked, it's bullshit. And the story goes on and on.

Wait, is Rosenberg right that the agreement pertained only to the general? The memo is reprinted here: http://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/561976645/clinton-campaign-had-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015 and includes:

With respect to the hiring of a DNC Communications Director, the DNC agrees that no later than September 11, 2015 [i.e. a year before the general] it will hire one of two candidates previously identified as acceptable to HFA.

and

The DNC will provide HFA advance opportunity to review on-line or mass email, communications that features a particular Democratic primary candidate. This does not include any communications related to primary debates – which will be exclusively controlled by the DNC. The DNC will alert HFA in advance of mailing any direct mail communications that features a particular Democratic primary candidate or his or her signature.

At this point, I'm not even sure what all this adds up to but idk if what Rosenberg says is accurate either.

Contrary Twitter thread:

how does anybody believe the DNC-HFA memo only applied to the general? Clinton controlled every communication mentioning a primary candidate pic.twitter.com/aofrEjkrUe

— Brendan Fischer (@brendan_fischer) November 4, 2017

They really have those misdirects down to a Science.