The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    acanuck's picture

    Democrats dodge their Ted Cruz moment

    It's official: Debbie Wasserman Schultz will not speak at the Democratic convention. She's still nominally chairwoman of the DNC, though Hillary was forced to strip her of all actual power as down payment toward winning Bernie's endorsement. The issue for the convention was not whether Debbie would be booed by Sanders delegates if she took the podium, it was whether she would be booed off the stage a la Ted Cruz. The question became pretty much moot Friday, after Wikileaks released 20,000 hacked DNC emails, some of which detailed how she and her staffers basically colluded with the Clinton campaign to sabotage Bernie's run. Then yesterday, Robert Reich called for her to be fired immediately, rather than just demoted out of the way.

    I suspect she may have seen the writing on the wall, and offered to take one for Team Hillary/Kaine. A wise move, whoever's idea it was. Next week's Democratic agenda calls for a joyous, upbeat display of party unity, healing of wounds, and dedication to defeating Donald Trump. I'm pretty sure Bernie could wrangle his Busters into playing nice, but only if they weren't tossed red meat in the form of a speech by Wasserman Schultz.

    Bernie may have established a modus vivendi with Hillary, but there'll be no quarter for Debbie. He has endorsed progressive Tim Canova's challenge to her Florida congressional seat, and helped him raise a $2 million warchest. It looks like a rather quixotic effort, but so did Sanders' candidacy at the outset. No released polls yet. The primary is on August 30.


    Strange - from what I know the DNC power shifts to the presidential nominee at this point (like with Obama), so DWS is largely irrelevant anyway. And the hacked DNC emails were embarrassingly uneventful with no smoking gun for what was a felony violation with a rather scandalous violation of privacy. Too many philosophical fights with no practical effect and a serious lack of violations.. Don't folks have a life?

    Because DWS would be gone anyway, the folks who sent emails will be replaced by the new DNC chair instead of being fired outright. The names of email senders like Brad Marshall are known, making employment prospects in national Democratic politics harder.

    Edit to add:

    Brad Marshall apologized for sending an email suggesting that Sanders should be attacked by questioning his faith. It should be noted that the issue of religion was never an issue in the debate between Clinton and Sanders.

    He sent a note saying "can we look into this?" They didnt even follow through. Lots of people say stupid stuff during a heated campaign, even possibly Bernie's fans.

    Was all this worse than using Hillary's campaign database when there was a glitch? How do we expect typical DNC staff to react to a non-Democrat suing them and then after months saying their chairman should be fired supporting her opponent through fundraising for him? Yep, those guys should stay unbiased...

    Nice to see Guccifer 2 got his news cycle with his illegal hack (sad that few believed he actually hacked Hillary's email server). Great to have Russian hackers on your side - just screams ethics and transparency.

    Was Marshall proposing to Debbie Wasserman Schultz  that she use Sanders' Jewish religion as a weapon against him ? Strange.

    Anyway I like Wasserman Schultz and if Marshall is  being criticized for his proposal  doesn't it follow that

    she should be commended for rejecting it?

    It was about his atheism - America hates atheists overall. Bernie being Jewish gives him a pass - religious whether he is or not -  everyone else has to show church pictures when they'd rather be sleeping late or playing golf. Poor Obama even had to deal w Rev Wright when he'd rather play hoops - couldnt very well admit he slept through the sermons...

    No smoking gun but many stinking dirty tricks and a window into the cesspool mind of the DNC. 'A rather scandalous violation of privacy' sorry shoot the messenger won't work to deflect this news and i'm surprised you haven't taken up Hillary's 'The Russians Are Coming' brilliant maneuver, another window into the workings of this experienced but diseased mind.

    The DNC were wrong so the appropriate people should be punished, distinguishing  appropriately   between suggestions and actions. And calibrating that for normal practice-stealing from a blind man's cup is different from parking by a hydrant.

    It's not an excuse that similar things had been done before or are being done now by the Republicans. But neither is it irrelevant.

    "Diseased mind" seems over  the top.

    Next week's Democratic agenda calls for a joyous, upbeat display of party unity

    This seems a good opportunity to link to Dave Barry's column:

    The only time I find Barry's analysis true is when he's engaged in self analysis, " I’ll just be spewing the usual random gibberish. "

    Might have been funny a month ago. Timing is everything in comedy. Speaking of old farts, old fart writes a column, finds he's not the wit he once was. But the Clint Eastwood honorary curmudgeon seat is probably still open.

    I was offline all day, but dreading a build-up of dagblogger ridicule as the deal I reported last night (Debbie Wasserman Schultz going gentle into that good night) slowly unraveled. Today, she announced her formal resignation as DNC chair -- but only at the end of the convention, and only after saying a few words of goodbye to the party she has served and loved. OK, Debbie, that's not serving the party and that's not serving your pal Hillary; that's serving your own wounded ego. Despite phone calls from Democratic heavy hitters, including President Obama and presumptive president Hillary, DWS appears set on defending her record on the convention floor, even if the leaked emails show it to be indefensible.

    The Clinton campaign quickly named her "honorary" chair of Hillary's 50-state strategy, which sounds to me like a last-minute bribe to "Please, Debbie, shut the fuck up and get out of town."  Donna Brazile, who's been named to succeed DWS on an interim basis, has already made an effort to mollify Sanders supporters, apologizing to them for the DNC's clear bias during the primaries.

    And what has DWS's DNC done? Yesterday (Sunday), the rules committee met to vote on proposals to either abolish superdelegates or require them to follow the expressed wishes of their states' primary or caucus voters. Pro-Clinton delegates packed the room, then locked the doors on Sanders delegates, and voted down both motions. After Bernie supporters went public, they reconvened, actually negotiated, and agreed that roughly two-thirds of superdelegates would be required (in future) to reflect the actual choices of primary voters. A small victory, but proof that the rot in the DNC has not yet been rooted out.

    As of this morning, I have no clue whether DWS will actually gravel the convention open at 4 p.m. My hope is that instead we'll see the benign, smiling face of the sane, rational Donna Brazile, and she'll be welcomed with rapturous applause. If not, it will take a masterful speech by Sanders to get his loyalist delegates to stifle their outrage. He can do it; I hope he doesn't have to.

    One last thing: I'm truly surprised by the overall vibe of "Move along, folks; nothing to see here," that I'm getting from this thread. Has nobody noticed that, both on the left and right, voters have lost trust in political establishments that think they are uniquely qualified to engineer the electoral process? I won't argue that the average American voter isn't (apparently by choice) dumb as a brick. Maybe it's time for a major political party to engage in serious civic outreach. The schools can't do it. The media don't see any profit in it. Religions have other fish to fry. Why is it so hard to persuade people that whom they elect to represent them is a crucial ethical choice? I don't know, but it causes me to worry. 

    I'd suggest a few gulps from the O2 canister. The hype about DNC bias is overdone, the need to humiliate DWS is all about someone else's ego, and Trump is the example supreme why getting rid of superdelagates to have no safety valve is simply dumb. If Sanders had really been a contender, they would have lined up behind him. 

    You're just flat-out wrong, Peracles. And even if you were right that the hanky-panky at DNC was minor and Sanders backers are just sore losers, you have to grasp that there are a lot of them, they are on the convention floor -- and they are royally pissed off. They are in no mood to be lectured (especially by DWS) on how they should just suck it up. Clinton needs to just her in her dressing room until the convention is over.

    No, they should get a fucking  life and priorities. 1 year of whiny babyism because their insurgency isnt treated as part of the mainstream. Do they care about DWS or do they care about Wall Street, the environment, Palestine, Trump, gun control, police abuse, terrorist attacks, trade, wage equality, etc. Only so much outrage to spread around and they'll waste it on a personal vendetta. And yeah, if Sanders sues the DNC over his team unethically/illegally? using his opponent's database, can you really see the DNC being happy with them? They added more debates and still the bitching goes on? Glad I'm not Hillary - I'd tell them to go fuck themselves, bunch of children.

    They want a scapegoat and a scalp. Most revolutions eventually devolve into bloodletting. If they continue to sow discord they make it more and more likely they'll get a Trump presidency as a reward. That's the bad news. But when I consider that using the self centered values these dolts are exhibiting. The good news is that a Trump presidency will have absolutely no effect on my life.

    The protesters make the point that they cannot be appeased. The image that will come out is a group of rabid so-called Leftists trying and failing to take over the Democratic Party. Hillary and Kaine will be the adults. 

    Hey, hey, hey, don't worry, be happy, remember? Calling the protesters "whiny babies" and telling them to go fuck themselves is not likely to help Clinton win the favor of Bernie supporters, is it? If you don't think their votes matter, then why so angry? And if you do think their votes matter, why go out of your way to alienate them?

    PS Insofar as many of us here are sympathetic to the protests, let's cool off the whiny baby stuff please.

    We can be angry at these hardcore supporters just like we can be angry at Trump supporters. Neither group is going to vote for Hillary.

    I don't believe you know who will vote for Hillary. But if you're willing to write off everyone who is upset with the DNC, then I don't know how you can expect Hillary to win in November.

    PS - insofar as you're largely sympathetic to the Sanders cause running this blog and the different reactions from different quarters, it might give you insight into how different factions view the DNC including internally. Everyone has a complaint one way or other.

    Michael, perhaps I'm just an insurgent, yay. Just like BernieBros have no obligation to observe niceties and situational norms, I don't have to soothe their whiny baby feelings even if Hillary may have to kiss ass. Since I don't think you or other dagbloggers will be at the convention booing the people who actually campaigned well and won, I don't think you need to take it personally, and AFAIK the majority of Bernie fans are dealing with loss responsibly and still pushing for positive influence, not just vengeance and chaos. As I said, Hillary has a big tent, but the Klown Kar should stay outside. And yeah, the over-the-top Wikileaks hack, dump and propaganda spin pisses me off too - just anothr version of traipsing through Benghazi emails looking for a soundbite to flog.

    ""And if you do think their votes matter, why go out of your way to alienate them?"- get real, I've been supportive of moves to let them paricipate in the platform, possible Warren VP, and otherwise have a strong place at the table. Them dropping a turd on the centerpiece and me noting it stinks doesn't count as me going out of my way to alienate them. They're acting like fucktards, and I'll describe them that way. I wasnt that critical of OWS despite them not getting a unified leader or message, as their actions seemed fairly productive. BLM had crap actions despite having a good cause, and it hurt them.

    As I said above, Bernie supporters are -- quite rightly -- in no mood to be lectured on how they should just suck it up. I have never been eligible to vote in a U.S. election, but I have followed your politics in depth since before the Kennedy-Nixon debate. And I've consistently backed (even if just vocally) every Democratic presidential candidate since then (yeah, I'm really old). That's the perspective I'm writing from: I want desperately for Hillary/Kaine to win -- and for them to drag along both houses of Congress by their coattails.

    That's why it was essential that Debbie remove herself as a distraction from this convention; she seems to have finally gotten that message when she was booed by her own state delegation. Fact is, and you may disagree, she has been a very bad DNC chair, simultaneously ineffective, abrasive and authoritarian, and there have been Democrats calling for her dismissal for years -- long before Sanders emerged on the scene. Her closeness to Hillary was probably the only thing that saved her job.

    Anyway, Bernie and Elizabeth Warren will speak tonight, and both want what I want (and you want): for Hillary to become president of the United States. I know they'll both point out how much the progressive wing has already gained in terms of policy platform and party structure. Both of which were long overdue. Bernie's impact on the party has been a positive, necessary one, and it won't end with this convention and this election.

    Democrats get about 40% of white voters. Democrats need to work to make sure there are active GOTV efforts in Black, Latino, and Asian communities. The BernieBros are not a dependable group of voters.

    How exactly do you define "BernieBro"?

    Hardcore Bernie Sanders supporters like those who booed when Sanders mentioned electing Hillary today.



    I won't pretend. We all know what Bernie Bro is. Bernie Bro is an insulting dismissive term used to lash out at some Sanders supporters. It's not helpful. I've tried to avoid using it but at times, justifiably or not, I've lashed out in anger. We're all emotional human beings and very few of us have remained pure.

    At some point, we have to ask what is the responsibility that hard core Sanders supporters have to the rest of us. If they are willing to let a bigot and racist get elected, what does that say about them?

    I'm not a politician and no matter what I say it will have little effect on the election. So I'm quite comfortable in saying "fuck em" to the hard core Sanders supporters. Fortunately for the party Hillary isn't quite so dismissive.

    We are in agreement. I have talked to Bernie supporters who have converted to Hillary. BernieBros are still in the burn it all down and start over mode.

    Wel they booed Elijah Cummings today Mike.. WTF? Disrespectful, rude, out of line and embarrassing to Sen. Sanders who doesn't deserve to be represented like that.

    Let's be clear here and reflect reality. The majority of Sanders supporters quite easily moved to Hillary when Sanders lost. For some it was a hard decision but still they moved to Hillary. A small group of hard core Sanders supporters will not let go. If you feel that description is unduly dismissive please suggest what you feel is a fair description for this minority of Sanders supporters. Because "Bernie supporters" is not accurate. The views of the most recalcitrant Sanders supporters is not indicative of the whole.

    It's not a binary distinction. There are Bernie supporters who will never vote for Hillary, there are Bernie supporters who will certainly vote for Hillary, and there are Bernie might vote for Hillary. That last group is the key. If you tar everyone is upset with the DNC or critical of Hillary as a "whiny baby" or a "BernieBro," you will lose any chance of winning over this group.

    I don't know how big this group is, nor do you. But in an election of such high stakes that could be frighteningly close, it is a really bad idea to alienate this group of voters.

    I think I just said the same thing. How is it you seem to misunderstand. I agree that we should not alienate this group with insults. Lashing out in anger isn't an answer. I'm just saying that using "Bernie supporters" when referring to the views of a minority of his supporters is inaccurate.

    The appropriate term is "Bernie or Busters".

    O-k, I apologize for misunderstanding the point of your comment. Yes, we are largely on the same page, but I do think you left out the middle folks--those who have not yet decided to vote for HRC but are not beyond hope. Those are really the ones who need persuading.

    I agree with this too. I meet a lot of young people, activists working on border issues. I give them a free pass to the ghost town I caretake to swim in the lake after getting hot, sweaty, and dirty hiking the trails leaving food and water for migrants. Most are Sander supporters. I don't say the same things to them and not as bluntly as I say things here. There's a difference between debating and persuading.

    Thanks, that's a lot more than I knew. 

    Screw these behind the scene negotiations. Clinton should publicly call for Wasserman-Schultz to step down immediately. That would make a strong statement, appeal to Sanders people, and basically force DWS to comply.

    With three hours and change till the opening gavel, I see no indication that DWS is wavering in her decision to preside, even with Clinton and Obama urging her to accept a free airline ticket home. Totally tone-deaf. Brazile has already apologized on behalf of the DNC, adding ominously that the emails released so far aren't the whole cache -- and implying there are worse revelations to come. Debbie spoke earlier to the Florida delegation (mostly Clinton supporters) and was reportedly booed there. Latest national poll already shows Trump leading. The Clintons are said to be loyal to a fault, so Hillary won't publicly humiliate DWS. In this case, humoring her wounded ego could be a fatal fault. 

    That would only encourage assholes to hold up the DNC again and again with a litany of unnecessary demands, thinking they have firing power over every staff member. Hell, Cornel West is supporting Jill Stein for president but he's still on the Democratic platform committee? Wankers.

    If they want more sway, they can show up for normal boring party meetings and even *gasp* join the party - it's not like the entrance requirements are tough.

    Sanders supporters are chanting 'lock her up' and they don't mean Deb. And yes, the Bernie Bro in a rant on Hillary used the personal pronoun 4 times in one sentence:

    “I feel like I’ve been cheated, I feel like my brothers and sisters have been cheated, and I feel like it’s all her fault,” Minter said.

    I feel like I am sick of the cult of Bernie and I blame it all on Bernie and my feelings are I think they deserve President Trump, but not me, I don't. (that's 7 pp!)

    OK, it's now being reported that Debbie Wasserman Schultz will not gavel the convention to order. So that's one very big bullet dodged. Still, a lot of damage done.

    Rep. Marcia Fudge is the new DNC chair and will gavel in the convention

    Donna Brazile will be aiding Fudge.

    DNC= 2016 convention chair

    Edit to add:

    Brazile is the interim Democratic National Committee chir

    Now what?

    Are the Bernie Backers gonna march around the convention floor like this?




    No. Here is the Bernie Bros indisputable proof Hillary stole the ballot box:

    The arc of that first day was astonishing. A very tentative start, with early speakers figuratively walking on eggshells before a tension-filled hall with battle lines drawn. By the end, TV commentators were rightly concluding, "A very good day for the Democrats." Bernie did what he had to do: placate his supporters by pointing out how far they'd come, and assuring them the revolution would continue, then pivoting to why Hillary must be the next president of the United States. It was a cool, policy-based endorsement ("Hillary understands ... Hillary will repeal/enact etc.") but it was unequivocal. He is going to be a big asset to the Clinton/Kaine campaign. As are many of the others who spoke: Booker, Warren etc. And of course, Michelle Obama knocked it out of the park with her very warm, humanizing praise for Hillary. So yes, a surprisingly positive first day. Let's hope it gets even better.

    I understand from news commentators today that Bernie will be actively campaigning for Hillary.  Good for him.

    Just to bring this thread full circle, let me repeat what I said above: the Debbie Wasserman Schultz problem has been known for years, long before Sanders came on the scene. Bernie has pushed the party platform in a more progressive direction, but his most concrete achievement for the Democrats so far may have been precipitating her fall. To quote one DNC staffer, "Good fucking riddance."

    Latest Comments