Why do so many here greatly overestimate the power of DNC Chairman?

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is not about the DNC Chair. It's never been about the DNC Chair.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is not about the DNC Chair. It's never been about the DNC Chair.

What?  That is literally the only thing this is about...well...that and the fact that some folks are having a temper-tantrum because Teh EVILstablishmentz is mean   Apparently being a "progressive" these days means believing Donald Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Perez

Symbols matter in politics. Denying that means being utterly deluded. If the hacks that control the Democratic party aren't even willing to make a concession on this, that means they have decided they're going keep f**king over the base in every way possible for the years to come. They haven't learned a thing from 2016. That's the problem.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is not about the DNC Chair. It's never been about the DNC Chair.

What?  That is literally the only thing this is about...well...that and the fact that some folks are having a temper-tantrum because Teh EVILstablishmentz is mean   Apparently being a "progressive" these days means believing Donald Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Perez

Symbols matter in politics. Denying that means being utterly deluded. If the hacks that control the Democratic party aren't even willing to make a concession on this, that means they have decided they're going keep f**king over the base in every way possible for the years to come. They haven't learned a thing from 2016. That's the problem.

Explain how because they've actually been pretty fervent in opposing Trump so far.

Posturing about T***p isn't what will make Democrats win in 2020. To do that, they'll need to actually show that they understand the angers and care about the needs of the growing majority of Americans who get nothing out of the current economic system. They seem completely uninterested in that because it's more convenient to be the part of the upper middle-class who don't like T***p because he's uncool or something.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This is not about the DNC Chair. It's never been about the DNC Chair.

What?  That is literally the only thing this is about...well...that and the fact that some folks are having a temper-tantrum because Teh EVILstablishmentz is mean   Apparently being a "progressive" these days means believing Donald Trump >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tom Perez

Symbols matter in politics. Denying that means being utterly deluded. If the hacks that control the Democratic party aren't even willing to make a concession on this, that means they have decided they're going keep f**king over the base in every way possible for the years to come. They haven't learned a thing from 2016. That's the problem.

Explain how because they've actually been pretty fervent in opposing Trump so far.

Posturing about T***p isn't what will make Democrats win in 2020. To do that, they'll need to actually show that they understand the angers and care about the needs of the growing majority of Americans who get nothing out of the current economic system. They seem completely uninterested in that because it's more convenient to be the part of the upper middle-class who don't like T***p because he's uncool or something.

And the DNC Chair has nothing to do with any of that! It's basically a position that simply organizes fundraisers and does quick interviews on news shows.

Dean's 50-State strategy allowed Democrats to win supermajorities in 2008. DWS' disaster of a leadership contributed to record losses at every every level. Clearly it matters at least a bit.

But again, the main point isn't the DNC chair itself, it's the SIGNAL it gives. Why nobody seems to understand that?

[Antonio the Sixth]

If you don't understand the importance of symbols you don't understand what politics is. Period.

[Antonio the Sixth]

And honestly if you do want to talk about "signals", how about the fact that Ellison was given a leadership role as well in an absolutely unprecedented move?

Gabbard and Rybak had leadership roles too, but couldn't stop DWS from rigging the primary.

It's hard to stop someone from doing something that they aren't doing.

Like stopping you from making a well-argued, articulate post?

[Antonio the Sixth]

No, it wasn't rigged per se, and contrary to other posters here (mostly Hillbots, actually) I'm not even minimally interested in relitigating the 2016 primary. But if you seriously think that DWS acted impartially during that primary, you are truly deluded.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm sorry, but anyone who ignores working people and claims that they aren't a part of the Democratic coalition is not a liberal and certainly isn't a progressive. Looking forward to the slow death of corporatism.

First of all, WWC =/= Working class. I find it tends to refer to a midwestern union worker from an industrial town, which isn't close to even a majority of white people in lower economic status, let alone the working class in general. Clinton won the poor overall, but got crushed among poor whites.

Secondly, who you identify as part of the democratic correlation doesn't decide ones politics, and it says something about yours that pointing out that the base of the democratic party isn't the white working class gets you actively angry(and you describe saying that white members of the working class aren't the democratic base and then listing minorities and big city whites, of which a significant chunk of both are working class, as ignoring the working class in general.)

In short, "f**k the poor if they're white".