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

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Heard that Schumer is throwing his support behind Ellison too.

Schumer's just trying to follow the direction of the wind. He knows his time is coming soon too if he doesn't reform himself as well. Better to join the future earlier rather than later.

Personally, I've been a supporter of Keith Ellison for a while now. He's one of the best Democrats we have and, while I think something like a Presidential run would (unfortunately) be too controversial, he could do enormously good work as head of the DNC.

Schumer: "I'd better not have anyone looking too closely at what I stand for. If I support Ellison, they won't bother to go after me now."

We need someone like Rahm Emmanuel  

Rahm should be good at uniting diverse groups like white progressives and BLM. Against him.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://mobile.twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/798300756591906816

A leaked audio of Ellison claiming that the Jews benefited from 9/11 probably won't hurt him too much

Jews weren't mentioned. Obviously PNAC, which said that we needed a "new Pearl Harbor" to change opinions, benefited.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I think the most important thing is to have Democrats challenging Republicans in every race nationwide.  No race should go unopposed.  And if it means running conservative Democrats in conservative districts... well, we can hash that out when we win congress and assign committee seats and leadership.

Are conservative Democrats even that better at winning? No Democrat got elected Senator in a Trump state this year. Bayh was supposed to be some god of Indiana politics and went down. Two Trump states have pretty liberal senators: Brown and Baldwin. And just for fun, check out the ideology of the last 2 Democratic Senators from Idaho. They were two of the most liberal Senators ever.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Great, encouraging sign for Jews, the single group that trended most Democratic in the 2016 election. It would be truly shameful if Ellison won this, turning the Democratic Party into the next UK Labour where anti-Jewish sentiments are actively being promoted by the leadership. Just what we need in these times of uncertainty. Of course, an anti-Jewish turn in the Democratic Party was to be expected given the developments on college campuses, but if Hillary Clinton had been elected, the process could at least have been slowed down.

Both are deplorable, but I'd prefer Bannon over Ellison and it's not even close.

The party of Senator Minority Leader Chuck Schumer isn't pro Israel enough for you? LOL!!!!!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The "they of all people" argument followed by a comparison of Israeli Jews to Nazi Germany. I think I just hit bingo.

There are some unfortunate parallels between Zionist claims to the West Bank and the German policy of lebensraum.  Fortunately, the parallels with Nazi ideology are far from complete, and I hope they never come close.  The parallels with South African apartheid however are stronger, especially among those Zionists seeking to limit Palestinians to bantustans that remain dependent upon Israel, but have no real power or independence.  I can see why bantustans would be appealing to some Zionists, as a one-state solution means that Israel cannot be both Jewish and democratic. That said, a two-state solution isn't viable right now either. The best I can see is that the Israeli/Palestinian mess continues to muddle through for another generation or two until such time as the conditions occur for the existence of two viable and independent states of Israel and Palestine.  It strikes even me as a utopian fantasy, but it is the only way I see for anything other than a dystopian future for the region.

No need to bring in the Nazis, it's really quite similar to apartheid.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That isn't. Not what Dean did when he was Chair - That is not the job in non-Democrat presidency years. And certainly very different from what the website says about the role of DNC about fighting for progress & creating an economy for everyone & helping elect Democrats up & down the ticket including state & local levels.

People have to go beyond this obsessions that fundraising is the ultimate objective

Part of what you keep saying there (for the description) is boilerplate stuff for people who feel the need to actually read a description on the party website. For instance, the DNC isn't really "fighting for progress & creating an economy for everyone" - they help elect the people who do that.

You're right that the DNC Chair shouldn't be spending so much time fundraising, but someone needs to raise money for the party. Small-donor networks can't raise the kind of constant money a party needs. They've tried it for committees before and it doesn't work. People like Bernie during an election year give the people someone to rally around and the desire to donate to. No one gets fired up by national or state committees. Until Democrats manage to get campaign finance reform in a big way, there are compromises that will need to be made. The party shouldn't be like they are now, but the purists need to back off a little bit and get it through their heads that major legal reform is needed before a donor purge is even remotely acceptable.

Hillary did waste a lot of money, but money is always much more easily wasted in presidential races. Aside from her poor strategy, presidential candidates are usually already very well-known, but particularly Hillary/Trump. All that money can't change opinions people have formed over many, many years. Compare to downballot politicians - state legislators, gubernatorial candidates, House Reps - money can make a big difference when no one knows who you are. This much has been known for a while now. This is where party cash is needed, and even Ellison understands that.

Lots of non-profits have a head of fundraising who isn't the head of the organization.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Watch this, and if you still support Perez after watching it, you're no progressive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ByXdb_E6FM

What a pathetic, stupid, little man.

He serves at the pleasure of the President. And the President supports TPP. Get over it

And thanks to the current President's support of TPP, the next President will be an opponent of TPP. If Democrats continue to tie themselves to TPP, they can enjoy 8 years of President Trump.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm a little late to this party I see.

Anyways, I now think that it is within the Democrats' best interests to vote for Ellison as the next chair.

I think many of you would like this article from Vox: Democrats would be smart to embrace Ellison

Democrats need to build on to the party and not lose core coalitions like Millennials and it sends a bold message to send a Black Muslim like Ellison to be a leader during Trump's tenure as president.

The country is already polarized. Dems, don't polarize your own party.

Anyways, are there any new news on Keith Ellison endorsements?

The problem is that Ellison is anti-Semite.

Yeah, keep that cynical use of identity politics going. Despite the fact Ellison wrote a paper on Farrakhan twenty years ago, let's dump an actual chance at rebuilding the Democratic Party and go with "safe choice" Tom "progressive who gets things done" Perez.

So your idea is to tell Jews that we shouldn't worry about anti-Semitism and that if we do then it's just "identity politics?"  Pathetic.

Perez told the Hillary campaign to demonize Bernie supporters for all being supposedly racist and sexist white males. So he's the king of this horrid identity politics. And the idea that an anti-semite endorsed Bernie and got endorsed by Bernie and Schumer is beyond stupid.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There will also be a debate on January 18.

I'll look out for that.

I wonder if Donna Brazile will be leaking questions to her favorable candidate.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Yeah, keep that cynical use of identity politics going. Despite the fact Ellison wrote a paper on Farrakhan twenty years ago, let's dump an actual chance at rebuilding the Democratic Party and go with "safe choice" Tom "progressive who gets things done" Perez.

So your idea is to tell Jews that we shouldn't worry about anti-Semitism and that if we do then it's just "identity politics?"  Pathetic.

You are in a setting in which most of us care about opposing antisemitism but also don't believe that there is any credible evidence that Keith Ellison is an antisemite. There's an easy way to resolve this: Show us that Keith Ellison has done antisemitic things.

Instead, you are taking a claim that ought to be treated seriously and treating it as the equivalent of a playground taunt. It is  wrong, it disgusts me, and I know that you can do better than that.

You know, I have to say, I read some more about this and it looks like most of the stuff Ellison said was in 1989 or 1990.  I still think that Perez is a better pick, but I'm much less invested in this race now.  Mea Culpa

Weren't you a #NeverHillary Democrat in the campaign? I can't imagine why anyone who isn't a Hillary hack would think Perez is a genuinely good choice (as opposed to the lesser evil).

I came around a week or two before the RNC, actually.  I really don't like Hillary, but she was far better than Trump.  And that's exactly how I see Perez: the lesser of two evils.  Neither would be a good Chairman IMO, but I think Perez is at least a better choice from the fundraising perspective which is a key part of the job (DNC chairs have little influence over party policy positions).  I'd rather Ellison stay in the House and try to move up in leadership, it seems like a much better fit.

Why do you think Perez is a better choice for fundraising? As far as I can tell, he's only raised $200,000 in his entire political career.

Well, $200,000 is a lot to raise for an office that you aren't eligible for.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Democrats Being Trained on "How to Talk to Real People" by David Brock


Geez - Seriously!

There's no hope...

Step 1. Be a white man who says that black woman Anita Hill is "a little bit nutty and a little bit slutty".
Step 2. Be a white man who says that black woman Michelle Obama said "whitey" on tape
Step 3. Claim that Bernie supporters are all sexist and racist white males.

David Brock is the worst.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm hoping that Ellison wins, not because I feel particularly strongly about him, but because I fear a progressive revolt if they feel like the establishment pulls the rug out from under them again. So long as Ellison is competent for the job, I couldn't care less, I just hope the party leaders don't try and pick fights where they don't need to.

Pretty much my feelings. I like Perez, but he'd do nothing to ease tensions between the factions of the Democratic Party. Unless it's Ellison or Buttigieg, people are going to claim the DNC hasn't learned anything.

Buttigieg isn't really that good, but at least he's not an epic HP like Perez.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I'm hoping that Ellison wins, not because I feel particularly strongly about him, but because I fear a progressive revolt if they feel like the establishment pulls the rug out from under them again. So long as Ellison is competent for the job, I couldn't care less, I just hope the party leaders don't try and pick fights where they don't need to.

Pretty much my feelings. I like Perez, but he'd do nothing to ease tensions between the factions of the Democratic Party. Unless it's Ellison or Buttigieg, people are going to claim the DNC hasn't learned anything.

Buttigieg isn't really that good, but at least he's not an epic HP like Perez.

He'll please enough people to smooth things over, that's good enough.

I doubt it.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Who care. The DNC chair isn't the leader of the party and their power is greatly exaggerated by the Bernie people.

Obviously not you. It's not just about leading it's being transparent about where funds are going. Perez has been the only candidate that has refused to be interviewed.

This isnt a public election. Why would he need to get interviewed?

You don't want another DWS do you?

I don't think DWS is a racist, so he wouldn't be another DWS.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Tom Perez finally accepted an interview from TYT Politics and he pretty much failed and showed his true colors. Especially at the end.

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=g81xG3e0oYI

The witchhunt against Tom Perez is quite disgusting. "Who in the Bernie Sanders world is supporting you?" Who f**king cares? The party does not revolve around a guy who's not even in said party.

Tom Perez told the Hillary campaign to use ugly identity politics to claim that Bernie supporters were all racist and sexist white males. That's what's actually quite disgusting, not people going after this vile trash.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Are you f**king kidding me?! Literally all the tops of the party from Chuck, Bernie, Nancy want Keith

I don't trust Pelosi or Schumer, and Obama, Biden, and the Clintons want Perez.

x-posting: Turning a contest between two fairly mainstream liberal progressives into some kind of proxy war still seems like one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.

Its moronic, Perez and Ellison are almost identical on paper.

Just like Bernie and Hillary supposedly were? Yeah, we're sick of being told how progressive terrible 3rd wayers are.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Are you f**king kidding me?! Literally all the tops of the party from Chuck, Bernie, Nancy want Keith

I don't trust Pelosi or Schumer, and Obama, Biden, and the Clintons want Perez.

x-posting: Turning a contest between two fairly mainstream liberal progressives into some kind of proxy war still seems like one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.

Its moronic, Perez and Ellison are almost identical on paper.

Just like Bernie and Hillary supposedly were? Yeah, we're sick of being told how progressive terrible 3rd wayers are.

When your candiate wins a majority of the vote in the primaries, it wont be an issue, will it?

When your candidate doesn't have the party rig things for her, it won't be an issue, will it?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Are you f**king kidding me?! Literally all the tops of the party from Chuck, Bernie, Nancy want Keith

I don't trust Pelosi or Schumer, and Obama, Biden, and the Clintons want Perez.

x-posting: Turning a contest between two fairly mainstream liberal progressives into some kind of proxy war still seems like one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.

Its moronic, Perez and Ellison are almost identical on paper.

Just like Bernie and Hillary supposedly were? Yeah, we're sick of being told how progressive terrible 3rd wayers are.

When your candiate wins a majority of the vote in the primaries, it wont be an issue, will it?

When your candidate doesn't have the party rig things for her, it won't be an issue, will it?

There was no actual "rigging". People voted overwhelmingly for Hillary in the primary, no matter how much you want to ignore it.  

The first debate was held after the deadline to change parties in NY. There was that whole baloney "datagate" scandal. And the e-mails prove that the DNC was all in the tank for Hillary.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Look, I have nothing against Perez but its just annoying as f to see forces in our party just aligned behind one person just because a small group of people said so. We need new influences in the party and just relying on the same old playbook is gonna cost us, its already costing big time.  

Will they for sure though? I see wide acknowledgement that the party needs to focus more on building up support in rural areas along with more of a focus on organizing and connecting with voters, so I think it's disingenuous to say there will be no change in strategy.

From what I can tell the assumption is that because certain actors from the wing of the party we want to move past are backing Perez, then the thinking is by default that he will make sure nothing changes, which I think is bogus, but ok. Perez isn't some neoliberal hack - at least give him a chance if he wins.

Perez supports TPP, so of course he's a neoliberal hack.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Perez and Ellison literally agree on everything, why the doom and gloom?

Because one endorsed Sanders and the other endorsed Clinton.

Since Perez endorsed Clinton, he is a moral black hole of a human being with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

He's a pro TPP hack who never got elected to anything and told the Hillary campaign to use divisive identity politics against the Bernie people.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Why the DNC is terrible and needs reform example 1423:

i am very confused by what im reading

A quote from the same guy:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

LOL

What does William Owen think of the DNC telling the media to cover Trump more to boost his campaign?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

8 of the 10 Senators to endorse Ellison endorsed Hillary in the primary.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Most of the Senators who supported Hillary in the primary who have endorsed someone in this race have endorsed Keith Ellison. Clearly the other candidates don't have enough support from Senators who endorsed Hillary in the primary.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Most of the Senators who supported Hillary in the primary who have endorsed someone in this race have endorsed Keith Ellison. Clearly the other candidates don't have enough support from Senators who endorsed Hillary in the primary.

Based on endorsements, it really appears that Ellison's base is Congress/DC establishment, while Perez's base seems to be more of the nationwide establishment, particularly Governors.

Ellison has a lot of support from state officials and unions.