Your feelings on Perez as DNC Chair, Ellison as Deputy Chair?

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

For s sake dude give it a rest.  Damn you are being a child right now.  Throwing a fit.

Projecting much?

Yes, but he's not wrong.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Can't y'all save the outrage for things that actually matter instead of seeing insults in which far-left candidate was chosen for DNC chair?

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Can't y'all save the outrage for things that actually matter instead of seeing insults in which far-left candidate was chosen for DNC chair?

Factional struggle within the party matters. Full stop. And you only think it doesn't because you identify with the faction in power, and want to tamp down conflict.

You seem more interested in fighting democrats you don't like then fighting donald. Ellison was made vice-chair purely as a gesture towards your people. A minority faction within the party is not entitled to everything. You were the ones who tried to turn this random party position into a proxy war. Not us. The party is made up of many groups that aren't you that don't have enough of a voice. Some of these groups I identify with. Those of us who really care about issues of racial and gender inequality enough to identify with the feminist movement, Black Lives Matter, etc aren't whining about not getting the DNC chair go to our special candidate, (we'd be fine with Ellison) and we didn't get the slightest hint of any pandering. We got a hell of a lot less then you, and we're happily marching along. It would be cool to be the faction in control, but we aren't going to start acting like babies when the establishment assigns one of its own to a strategizing and fundraising position.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Can't y'all save the outrage for things that actually matter instead of seeing insults in which far-left candidate was chosen for DNC chair?

Factional struggle within the party matters. Full stop. And you only think it doesn't because you identify with the faction in power, and want to tamp down conflict.

You seem more interested in fighting democrats you don't like then fighting donald. Ellison was made vice-chair purely as a gesture towards your people. A minority faction within the party is not entitled to everything. You were the ones who tried to turn this random party position into a proxy war. Not us. The party is made up of many groups that aren't you that don't have enough of a voice. Some of these groups I identify with. Those of us who really care about issues of racial and gender inequality enough to identify with the feminist movement, Black Lives Matter, etc aren't whining about not getting the DNC chair go to our special candidate, (we'd be fine with Ellison) and we didn't get the slightest hint of any pandering. We got a hell of a lot less then you, and we're happily marching along. It would be cool to be the faction in control, but we aren't going to start acting like babies when the establishment assigns one of its own to a strategizing and fundraising position.

why do you assume that the Prog wing is distinct from BLM and feminism?

Probably because white male David Brock successfully projected his racism and sexism onto Bernie supporters.

More because of all the whining about muh identity politics.

Aaand they just struck down a ban on corporate lobbyists. Where was the DNC saviour Perez? Ellison was one of its storngest supporters. Were was The Great Saviour Perez?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/dnc-pac-contributions-ban_us_58b1ac9ee4b0a8a9b782bb00

Bu-but omegascarlet said Ellison and Perez were both far-left!

To be absolutely clear, Perez was not a big cheerleader for the ban. I'll give him credit here; mostly he seems lukewarm on lobbyists, at least a lot less cozy with them than some, but he even neglected to say that.

Certainly doesn't help the optics of the situation, particularly when the favourite among the Sanders wing was the ban's biggest supporter.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/weekinreview/24kirkpatrick.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't think opposing corporate donations that don't actually buy any votes is a good litmus test for leftism. And refusing to take any donations puts you at a strong disadvantage compared to the republicans, esp considering that if donalds white house romp goes badly enough, democrats will probably get a flood of free "not trump" money.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Too early to say, but I definitely think we are far better off with Perez than we would've been with Ellison as the official Chairman. 

Perez has done nothing to impress, granted not much time has passed - but I am less convinced that Ellison could have made as much of a difference as I had thought that he might when the contest took place.

The Democratic Party's problems are too deeply rooted for a change of leadership to make much of a difference, and the first several months of the Trump administration have shown how many of the party's problems originate with its voter base. All that they have going for them are the savage politics of the Republican Party of 2017.

Unless something drastic happens between now and November 2018, the cultural politics of middle class urban professionals will figure heavily into that campaign. Those politics are rigid and polarizing enough that Democrats running in poor, rural and, less educated districts - even some with large non-white populations - will suffer for it.

The role of urban professionals in the Democratic coalition is becoming something like the role of the religious right in the Republican Party over the past several decades - i.e. loyal and reliable voters, who are an essential source of organizational support, but who are so culturally repellent to the rest of the country that they will scare other voters away if they are not kept in check.

The voters repelled by that kind of thing who are interested in economic leftist aren't that common(the last Democrat to do well among the WWC was Bill "end welfare as we know it" Clinton), and having these "urban professionals" be democrats helps make them left-wing economically, partially due to them having the mentality of a leftist, and partially partisanship.