The Next DNC Chair: TOM PEREZ WINS, makes Ellison deputy chair

[Chief Justice Keef]

I haven't read anything about Trump this week that's infuriated me as much as that paragraph.

[heatcharger]

I haven't read anything about Trump this week that's infuriated me as much as that paragraph.

Then you have your priorities seriously out of wack.

[Chief Justice Keef]

I haven't read anything about Trump this week that's infuriated me as much as that paragraph.

Then you have your priorities seriously out of wack.

Are you serious? These people are the only thing we have stopping us from all the terrible madness Trump is proposing, and their way of mobilizing people against the terrible sycophants in power is more math problems.

[publicunofficial]

I haven't read anything about Trump this week that's infuriated me as much as that paragraph.

Every critique of the Democratic establishment is made flesh in Sean Patrick Maloney.

[heatcharger]

I haven't read anything about Trump this week that's infuriated me as much as that paragraph.

Then you have your priorities seriously out of wack.

Are you serious? These people are the only thing we have stopping us from all the terrible madness Trump is proposing, and their way of mobilizing people against the terrible sycophants in power is more math problems.

The outrage you're expressing reminds me of the outrage about Pelosi saying this country is capitalist. Much to do about nothing.

Do you recall that Obama had an advanced data operation in his two presidential campaigns? It paid off in spades. I mean the way that guy said it was dumb, but you have to use some elements of data when targeting districts.

[publicunofficial]

I haven't read anything about Trump this week that's infuriated me as much as that paragraph.

Then you have your priorities seriously out of wack.

Are you serious? These people are the only thing we have stopping us from all the terrible madness Trump is proposing, and their way of mobilizing people against the terrible sycophants in power is more math problems.

The outrage you're expressing reminds me of the outrage about Pelosi saying this country is capitalist. Much to do about nothing.

Do you recall that Obama had an advanced data operation in his two presidential campaigns? It paid off in spades. I mean the way that guy said it was dumb, but you have to use some elements of data when targeting districts.

If Trump's policies make you mad, you should be equally outraged at Democrat messaging and strategy that allows Trump and his supporters to win.

[Blackacre]

That's my congressman! I love the guy, and he reps my district well, but his math problem mindset... isn't what the party needs right now

[Virginiá]

...

THEY'VE LEARNED NOTHING

THIS ISN'T A MATH PROBLEM YOU MINDLESS TECHNOCRATS

It still comes down to a question of where limited resources would be best used. I think it would be important to know which of these rural / working class districts that we have gone down hill in would be actually winnable with the right candidates & right amount of engagement/resources. There are some districts where we might be able to get our support up a little bit in, but are more or less out of reach in most elections, and we shouldn't be dumping as much money/time into those places as D+ / emerging suburban GOP-held districts that we have a much better shot.

If we decide to broaden our outreach significantly, which I think we should within means, we still need to prioritize certain districts above others.

[publicunofficial]

On the topic of how awful Dem leadership is, here's a choice quote from Pelosi today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"We stand for nothing and have no ideology, unlike those crazies who keep beating us in elections."

[Chief Justice Keef]

On the topic of how awful Dem leadership is, here's a choice quote from Pelosi today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"We stand for nothing and have no ideology, unlike those crazies who keep beating us in elections."

I saw that earlier, and it infuriated me. These people are supposed to be defending Americans from Trump's horror show, and they refuse to even be welcome to change in ideology.

You have vast SWATHS of people across this country who's lives have been ruined by Republican capitalism, and there's absolutely no motivation among these party elite to accommodate those disenfranchised voters, even if it meant winning more elections. They are absolutely terrible.

[Fusionmunster]

Just give the DNC chairmanship to Ellison. The only people who really seem to care about this are Bernie supporters anyway. I like Perez but not enough to deal with the anger from the left.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

THEY'VE LEARNED NOTHING

THIS ISN'T A MATH PROBLEM YOU MINDLESS TECHNOCRATS

It is a math problem. They just don't have the right variables for it. But if you're seriously eschewing big data as a campaign tool, you are seriously handicapping yourself.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Just give the DNC chairmanship to Ellison. The only people who really seem to care about this are Bernie supporters anyway. I like Perez but not enough to deal with the anger from the left.

The donors who want to keep control of the party care.  And so do the DNC members who are funded by those donors.

[Chief Justice Keef]

THEY'VE LEARNED NOTHING

THIS ISN'T A MATH PROBLEM YOU MINDLESS TECHNOCRATS

It is a math problem. They just don't have the right variables for it. But if you're seriously eschewing big data as a campaign tool, you are seriously handicapping yourself.

Yes, big data is an important part of campaigning. But this is exactly why people feel disenfranchised with the system, because grassroots support comes secondary to these algorithms run by Washington insiders.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

THEY'VE LEARNED NOTHING

THIS ISN'T A MATH PROBLEM YOU MINDLESS TECHNOCRATS

It is a math problem. They just don't have the right variables for it. But if you're seriously eschewing big data as a campaign tool, you are seriously handicapping yourself.

Yes, big data is an important part of campaigning. But this is exactly why people feel disenfranchised with the system, because grassroots support comes secondary to these algorithms run by Washington insiders.

I don't see why you can't focus on both as priorities. I study computer science and have been an organizer. It really isn't that difficult. But organizers are less cost-effective than algorithms so I can see  why they might be inclined on the former. But a successful campaign needs to be multifaceted.

[Blue3]

If Perez wins, then the DNC will have the same cloud of doubt around it as it did in 2016.

Throw Bernie folks a bone to shut them up, give them Ellison or Buttigieg.

Getting Bernie folks to "shut up" really shouldn't be the goal of any Democrat. Ellison is the best choice because both Clinton and Bernie folk can support him without reservations outside of religion.

If Perez does win, then expect a ton of party takeovers at the local level.

Bernie supporters complaining about the DNC, thinking they rigged it, is one of the key reasons why Hillary lost. The DNC become a liability, instead of an invisible support, in 2016.

Seems like your still deluded to how she actually lost.

I didn't say it's the only reason. But it was a big factor.

Trump successfully painted her and Democrats as elitists, in a populist versus elitist narrative. While Hillary lost her educated humanitarian progressive versus ignorant selfish traditionalist narrative.
She also didn't campaign as much in the Midwest, taking it for granted.
They stopped trying to be appealing and persuasive to all people in general.
They took for granted that all the stuff Trump said and did made him unelectable.
The Comey stuff didn't help.
And neither did all the WikiLeaks... which focused on the DNC issue.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Perez accidentally let the truth out that the DNC rigged the primary, but then had to retract it. Sad!

[Confused Democrat]

If Perez wins, then the DNC will have the same cloud of doubt around it as it did in 2016.

Throw Bernie folks a bone to shut them up, give them Ellison or Buttigieg.

Getting Bernie folks to "shut up" really shouldn't be the goal of any Democrat. Ellison is the best choice because both Clinton and Bernie folk can support him without reservations outside of religion.

If Perez does win, then expect a ton of party takeovers at the local level.

Bernie supporters complaining about the DNC, thinking they rigged it, is one of the key reasons why Hillary lost. The DNC become a liability, instead of an invisible support, in 2016.

Seems like your still deluded to how she actually lost.

I didn't say it's the only reason. But it was a big factor.

Trump successfully painted her and Democrats as elitists, in a populist versus elitist narrative. While Hillary lost her educated humanitarian progressive versus ignorant selfish traditionalist narrative.
She also didn't campaign as much in the Midwest, taking it for granted.
They stopped trying to be appealing and persuasive to all people in general.
They took for granted that all the stuff Trump said and did made him unelectable.
The Comey stuff didn't help.
And neither did all the WikiLeaks... which focused on the DNC issue.

You must have been living in an alternate reality, because the picture you just painted is extremely warped.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Trump didn't have to do much painting because Hillary was already perceived as an elitist before Trump even announced.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

She never lost it because that was never the narrative. Only Democrats who were living in a bubble thought this was the narrative.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is true, but also undersells how incompetent her campaign was on this front. Democrats throughout the midwest were sounding alarm bells early on and pleaded with the Clinton campaign to take Trump more seriously, but they didn't listen. They practically shrugged off Sanders staffers when they voiced concerns about Clintons appeal in the midwest and laughed in their faces when they tried to help.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True, but I'm not sure if that was ever their strategy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They only reinforced an opinion that many Americans already had about her.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As someone with some experience with statistical modeling, let me point out that a model that predicting 435 outcomes with 350 variables is beyond worthless. And really, you don't need to have gone to grad school to know that. This is unbelievable.

[The Other Castro]

I know it's probably a longshot, but I really hope Pete Buttigieg wins at the end of the day.

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

As someone with some experience with statistical modeling, let me point out that a model that predicting 435 outcomes with 350 variables is beyond worthless. And really, you don't need to have gone to grad school to know that. This is unbelievable.

I agree insofar that the model itself seems amateurish. But to believe that a model isn't possible is another thing -- it would have to take a much smarter people than these to construct one.

[heatcharger]

I know it's probably a longshot, but I really hope Pete Buttigieg wins at the end of the day.

[Trapsy]

I hope we choose Pete.

1. He's a solid choice and straightforward.
2. He would put an end to the proxy primary fight.

[Blue3]

So who is it that's actually voting? How many people?

[The Other Castro]

So who is it that's actually voting? How many people?

The 447 members of the DNC.