NBC: Bernie Sanders Muddles Ally's Message in DNC Race

[bravenak]

"We need to unify, no matter who we supported in the primary," he said during the party's first official candidate forum in Phoenix.

Ellison has clearly concluded that that is the strategy that will help him win the votes he needs among the 447 members of the DNC, only some of whom are outspoken Sanders allies.

But where Ellison says the DNC needs to be fixed — "Even a good car needs a tune-up sometimes," he said last month — Sanders called for something closer to a trade-in. "I think we need a fundamental transformation of the Democratic Party," he said in December.

Some Democrats have chafed not just at Sanders' message, but the messenger, since the senator is still not technically a Democrat, but an independent, and many Clinton allies think he damaged her in the general election last year by undermining his supporters' faith in the process.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/bernie-sanders-muddles-ally-s-message-dnc-race-n715651

Interesting article discussing the DNC race this year. I lean towards Perez and support him, but Ellison makes good points too. Just prefer Perez.

[riversedge]

1. I have no real objections to either one. But I prefer Perez as I think he has been traveling

around the U.S. these last several years and has lots of connections to state party people, labor organizations and other groups. This is so important for Democrats.

[bravenak]

2. I like his plans for making a play for seats where we almost won

To me that makes more sense than completely reforming the party.

[Gothmog]

73. I also strongly like Tom Perez

[JNelson6563]

3. I wish everyone would just pause a moment

that we need to unify in the face of total reich wing control. It is sad to see anyone on the left being divisive.

In MI there's "Revolution" going on, a Bernie thing I think? Someone added me to the FB group and up pops a post about going to the upcoming state convention and taking over the party. Everyone needs to run for leadership positions!1! *sigh*

So I explained how it works, at least here in the north where the Congressional districts can be vast (ours is 31 counties big). Explained the convention, the CD caucus, the voting process, the whole bit. Advised them to reconsider the strategy of trying to take over because it wouldn't work and that failure right out of the gate could be pretty discouraging. They weren't interested in any of it. It's all Wooo-hooo!!11! Let's go to convention and kick some ass!!1

Oh dear. I am not encouraged.

[bravenak]

5. Oh Lord, that is not helpful.

I too, wish we could all pause and try to plan strategically. I tried to tell a few people that just coming in and taking over would not work. Even if they managed to get the positions, who would support them if they refused to try to build a coalition, and simply tried to force everyone to 'purify' themselves and follow the leader? That never works. Respect must be built up and people have to trust one to do the job right.

It's all about the instant gratification.

[JNelson6563]

10. Complete ignorance of how it all works isn't helpful either.

For all the excitement the state conventions where candidates are not being nominated are not terribly important. Where it matters is at the county level where the voters are. If everyone could focus like crazy on their own backyard, as it were, just think of where we'd be!

When I first jumped in after the 2000 5-4 "win" by Bush our county party was only just starting. Had a mailing list, a postage permit and little else. I put a membership mailing together, spent most of the treasury to mail it and hoped like hell my debut effort with the group wouldn't ruin them financially. I needn't have worried. We raised ten times what we spent on it in membership dues and donations, had hundreds of members, dozens of which offered to volunteer.

In 2004 we had over 800 dues paying members, 24 various events (some with important people even!), over 1000 volunteers and raised 60,000.00+. In a blood red mostly rural county in northern MI we raised more money than the Republicans that year.

That's what focusing on your own backyard can do.

[bravenak]

13. I appreciate what you do, it is very important

I live in a very red state, and I was at my caucus and saw that the younger millennials (I am an older one), they really had no idea how anything worked, and they were angry about everything. One was having such a tirade that she was in tears over delegate counts and how they were done, so the guy invited her to be a delegate at the state convention.

She said, " oh hell no, I don't have time.".

Well, I really felt that she passed up an opportunity not handed to many people, I mean, how often do you get offers at 20 or so years old to be a delegate? I almost tried to take her spot but, I did not want to deal with the unnecessary pissing matches over small issues.

We cannot teach them if they refuse to learn

[JNelson6563]

17. Back atcha!

[Gothmog]

75. Agreed this is not helpful

[Uponthegears]

4. Ellison makes good points

But, what the heck, I'll just start another 200 kick string where Ellison haters can try to use "Bernie" to gin up opposition to a DNC chair candidate backed by people they CAN'T attack like John Lewis by going after Bernie for saying nothing more "offensive" than that Ellison represents a new (perhaps a "fourth?&quot way.

[bravenak]

7. What does this MEAN?

People had no problem attacking John Lewis last year, so what gives? I see nobody attacking him for his support of Ellison. I really don't see anybody attacking Ellison.

Discretion is the better part of valor. Sometimes people are less helpful than they think they are when they get on defense for someone else. Ellison would have gotten my support if not for some of his more outspoken supporters. I do not join groups that make me uncomfortable.

[Uponthegears]

18. You play that so well!

John Lewis, the Teamsters, practically all of Ellison's supporters have said exactly the same thing as is in Bernie's full statement . . . that, while we honor party stalwarts like Biden, Ellison represents a change in direction for the Democratic Party. Not one of the people screaming now (or in the mega-kick OP from yesterday) dared call that statement "offensive" when these other Ellison supporters said it because these non-Bernie Ellison supporters can't be smeared without serious and permanent consequences (especially Ellison supporters like John Lewis).

Having (1) failed to make a (non-disgusting) case for opposing Ellison (and I am talking about the posts attacking Ellison, NOT the ones supporting the other fine candidates for DNC Chair, including Perez); and, (2) been unable to attack any of Ellison's other supporters (the same way they used Bernie's supporters to attack him during the primary) for saying the same thing Bernie just said, Ellison's opponents are now trying to tie him to the one person they can attack without any consequences whatsoever (particularly here on DU).

This isn't fooling anyone, no matter how many times it is applauded (i.e., K&R'd), so why not come out and say it . . . for some on DU no leftist, and for sure no one who backed Bernie in the primaries, will ever get one ounce of their support.

It's ironic, I have yet to see one DU Ellison supporter say that, should Perez win, they are done with the Democratic Party, while at least one of the biggest proponents of this DU latest assault on Ellison has said that they will do exactly that should Ellison win.

So WHO is "being divisive as always?"

[bravenak]

20. They did not say the 'same exact things'

John Lewis never attacked Perez as 'status quo' or anything like that. See there? That's the problem. We live with different facts. Show me JL saying that. You cannot.

Now, the only group I remember smearing John Lewis was certainly not the group supporting Perez. I know why John Lewis supports Ellison and I RESPECT that. Why am I not allowed to have a preference. Honestly, I would have supported Ellison.. But not now. I feel positively status quo at this point.

My reason for opposing Ellison has everything to do with his own actions, his own words, and his own defense of certain people who were obviously not people who needed to be defended. He spent too long in that ideology, it took him too long to realize he was wrong and many of the Jewish members of our coalition are not comfortable with him. I am willing to listen to their concerns and support them in this. Now, everyone makes mistakes, myself included, but I refuse to tell my allies that I do not care about them, and I would hope they would do the same for me if someone with a history of defending racism against blacks were running. I'm not selfish. A segment of our coalition is very uncomfortable with him. It is what it is, he took too long to apologize or recognize what he was doing. He is very intelligent. Took too long.

Now, i have no idea why this is so angering to you, but i do me and you do you.

[Uponthegears]

25. What angers me

Is that Ellison's detractors are using Bernie hatred as a substitute for what you had the courage to say right out loud.

Let's have a debate about whether Ellison is anti-Semitic. He isn't. Let's have a discussion about why what you classify as "Jewish members of our coalition" (although I believe it is a far smaller portion of Jewish Democratic voters than you suspect) categorically oppose Ellison and/or what policies of his they oppose. Those are important subjects because you are 100% correct. We are the big tent. IF we are going to lose significant numbers of Jewish voters (NOT, btw, just significant amounts of campaign contributions from a handful of donors), that is a problem for me too. I've got other people on the list I can support if you're right about that, Perez among them.

But this using UNFOUNDED (he did not cost Hillary the election) Bernie resentment as a tool to attack Ellison or to cleve off some of Ellison's supporters is completely bogus.

(Btw, your alternate facts are just that. Saying Bernie should be supported over other candidates because he represents a new direction IS saying that the other candidates do not represent a new direction. That is the definition of "status quo." Do you want me to post the quotes from these supporters where they say that Keith represents a new direction?)

[bravenak]

31. Do not call my facts alternate without supporting your claim, that is unfounded

I have not done any type of that stuff with you and am being respectful in disagreement. It is not the fact that I think he cost Hillary anything, I'm done with the rehashing. It is the fact of what he has been saying since Trump has taken office that gives me pause.

Perhaps we are not all willing to go in the direction he wants us to go in. Perhaps our consent is needed to make major changes if they want to continue getting our votes. Perhaps members are letting them know that they need to fight republicans and stop fighting each other. Maybe I am damn tired of the acrimony and infighting and see him as a source of frustration and am unwilling to put myself through a term of constant infighting and intraparty warfare when we only need a few more counties to win. We are not broken. We did not do so terrible that it is necessary to piss off millions of democrats by installing someone who wants major changes that they are not interested in.

It would be better to build support by finding ways to draw people in rather than just using fire and brimstone, dark proclamations of doom, and wearing hairshirts and flaggelating ourselves. I am further to the left than Bernie or any dem in congress. Do you see me glooming and dooming? No. Because I know that 90 percent of the nation is to my right and it would be weird to get my way.

[Uponthegears]

52. Wow, that's a great post

The ONLY thing I can add is that I do not want just a few more counties (I suspect you were just making the point that is all we need to take back the presidency, but I thought I'd mention it anyway). I want it all.

As just one example, I want the party on the ground going door to door among our natural constituencies and taking people down to get whatever bullshit form of ID the repukes want and, when they get rid of early voting, coming back on election day and hauling them to the polls on their lunch hour. I want us standing up in communities of tens of thousands and calling the murder of young black males what it is, even if it means losing the vote of a hundred cops and the white suburbanites who won't vote for us anyway because they are still scared of Willie Horton. I want us pointing to places like Chicago and Memphis and saying more than "we need capital for black businessmen" (which we do, btw), saying "Republicans made this. THEY ran off to the suburbs. THEY put our men in prison. THEY took away our right to vote. THEY drained the capital and replaced it subsistence. THEY destroyed our families through incarceration. THEY f'd our public schools with their "Waiting for Superman" high-achiever-only nonsense"

Next election, I don't just want Illinois. I want friggin' Tennessee.

I am betting you do too.

Btw, I am not a Bernophile. I supported him and I campaigned for him until he lost the primary, because he was the most liberal candidate out there. I was on the ground for Hillary during the GE (but failing miserably, I have to confess). I happen to agree that he is, and always has been, focused on only half of the people I feel we started to leave behind about 30 years ago (with the respite of the last eight years of the greatest president in history). I may not buy the "indignation" over things like his stupid "delighted" language, but the working class above all approach is no more realistic than what we have been doing.

We have to get by this shit. We aren't just a 4 million vote majority in California. We are a majority everywhere outside of the sparsely-populated Mountain West. The elections should reflect that.

[bravenak]

56. I'm with you

I honestly think that we as a party have no failed so much as technology has left us looking for a way to turn policy into soundbites and that the nation actually does not want to hear about policy. They want soundbites. They got them.

I may be crazy, but I do think that this crisis is an opportunity for us to figure out what is more important electorally, how to gain at the margins to win. I'm ready to lie, cheat and steal to get rid of that disaster in the Whitehouse.

What we have here is a failure over decades in ourselves to realize just how much shit aint changed in the last fifty years. We thought that colorblind theories would help us become less racist and we thought women working would cure sexism. We are wrong. We keep trying to us logic and reason when folks want an emotional response to elected officials. We thought Obama had changed the game. No. He was just to damn goid at making it impossible to not like him.

I see Trump as an opportunity to destroy republicans and drive them into the wilderness for decades. Three weeks in and even republicans are missing obama.

[Uponthegears]

62. Exactly n't

[WhiteTara]

57. I live in the blood red south and I can tell you upfront

that Ellison will never be accepted in these states. He will not have any backing from state parties and his tremendous efforts will be for naught. I don't dislike Ellison, but I do know that Perez will be more effective and that is ALL I care about.

[Uponthegears]

59. As do I and have for over four decades

And I will tell you that he will be accepted with open arms in minority communities.

Why is it that our impressions are so different?

I am with you though . . . I want someone who will be effective. I do not care who they are.

[WhiteTara]

60. In Arkansas, he will not be accepted with open arms.

He will be rejected on the spot as a Muslim. Arkansas is still very white and cruel.

[Uponthegears]

61. Ah ha

We see different faces.

Taking that into account, I have no doubt that you have hit the nail on the head.

Fair point!

On edit:

We know that Southern white folks, most shockingly Southern white women, rejected Hillary. How do we get them back with Tom, or for that matter, anyone else?

[WhiteTara]

64. We have an enormous Hispanic population in Arkansas

so that Perez has a fighting chance to make inroads. Our state lege is working to bring white women around because of their enormous cruelty...latest law allow a rapist to refuse to allow a woman an abortion...of course, no corresponding law to make him pay for child support...but southern ladies are fairly dense, so we may not win a single vote here.

[Uponthegears]

65. At least there is someone!

[mcar]

6. They all seem to be good candidates

I lean Perez too; I think we need Ellison's voice in Congress.

Bernie should not be making this a battle, it's time for unity against the evil that has befallen us.

[bravenak]

8. I agree so much

There is no need for every vote to be a battle. We are Dems and can have a DNC chair race without ripping each other apart. Perez is being recognized more and more as a great advocate for the disadvantaged.

[mcar]

9. I've been following him on Twitter

He really is an advocate.

[PatsFan87]

11. I agree that the DNC needs an overhaul. If you watch the forums, all of the DNC chair

candidates bitch about the way the DNC has been run lately (how they scrapped the 50 state strategy, how no one even knows where the DNC spent their money, how the DNC only goes around every 4 years, etc.). To say it needs a transformation is a no-brainer and the party seems fairly unified in that direction.

I prefer Ellison but I also like Buckley and Buttigieg (he's going to be a star in the party). My problem with Perez is that he doesn't have much experience with elections, GOTV, fundraising, messaging. Now is not the time for on the job training. His policy experience would be better utilized if he ran for governor of Maryland. They have a 2018 race and a Republican incumbent.

[bravenak]

14. I will pretty much be fine with whomever we choose

Our party is not in need of a complete overhaul. Those who show up at party meetings know that. Those who except the party to reflect them and only them are the ones who want everything changed. This may just be because they do not understand the concept of big tent politics.

[PatsFan87]

19. Perhaps some are in denial of just how big that tent is when

the party has lost over a thousand state and federal seats since Obama was elected. Republicans control the White House, House of Reps, Senate, 33 governorships. Democrats only have total control of 6 states. This big tent seems to have collapsed. And those who aren't showing up at party meetings are precisely the people we need to be reaching out to.

[bravenak]

21. And we won the white hous twice under obama and took back the house and senate in 08

I think we can get it together without causing disgust among our long term members who do not want a complete overhaul and are the majority of the party

[PatsFan87]

24. We haven't had the House since 2010 (and haven't made any substantial gains since losing it),

Senate since 2014 (and the 2018 map looks horrible for us and will put us even further behind). You're underestimating the number of people who want a change in direction. Looking at all of the senators and representatives, who usually favor the status quo, who have endorsed Ellison should show you that.

[bravenak]

26. That's because we had the whitehouse

The party with the whitehouse loses in the midterms since way before my time. It was not Democrats screwing up. It is simply the way things are. I think this energy would be better spent fighting republicans than trashing democrats. I think all the candidates are goid. Ellison has a history than many are still not comfortable with. I side with them.

[PatsFan87]

41. Republicans now have more control than they have had since Herbert Hoover. To dismiss that as part

of a normal ebb and flow pattern is a mistake. Of course we lose and gain seats, but at this magnitude? The party has failed at minimizing losses and maximizing gains. Abandoning the 50 state strategy is partly to blame. Transparency would work wonders as well. Vice chairs having no clue where money is being spent is not indicative of an efficient system.

And if you think all candidates are good, I don't see the purpose of this post. Perhaps take your own advice of "spending time fighting Republicans" instead of making controversial posts that only continue the 2016 infighting.

[bravenak]

44. So what are you doing to beat the republicans?

Because sitting here blaming democrats for Republicans gerrymandering and hacking elections does not seem very helpful to democrats. I have heard all of your complaints a thousand times on the internet. Know where I don't see them? At my local office because all of the 'change agents' do not really feel like putting in wirk on the state or local level; they mostly like to give orders from outside and them complain when they don't get anywhere with it.

[PatsFan87]

49. You're the one who created this thread. I was merely responding.

Your problem is you try to make provocative, controversial posts and then try to blame people who respond and offer constructive criticism of the party for "trashing Democrats". You seem to love chastising people for "infighting" yet you're the first to make a thread with a title criticizing Sanders or his voters. You know what reaction you're going to get with what you choose to post and the routine has gotten quite stale. If you wanted to have a DNC chair discussion thread you simply could have titled it "DNC chair race 2017" and gotten a lot of responses and a nice, respectful discussion.

Onto what I do, I put in a lot of time volunteering for Carol-Shea Porter who took her NH house seat back. I also volunteered for Maggie Hassan who is now in the Senate. And I plan to work on Angus King's re-election campaign and see what I can do for Maine's 2018 governor race since we've had that blowhard Lepage for the last 8 years. You're not the only one who can contribute offline while participating in discussions online.

[bravenak]

50. Thank you for the diagnosis

I posted the article title verbatim with the publication before the punctuation, as you can see.

[JI7]

30. Chuck Schumer endorsed Ellison

And you don't say specifically how ellison would be different from perez.

[JI7]

35. amd we didn't have the white house for years before and had huge losses

In popular and electoral before that.

The split is mostly along race.

[stevenleser]

45. Buttigieg is outstanding. My preferences in order are...

Tied for
1st: Jehmu/Perez
2nd: Buttigieg
3rd: Ellison

Everyone else is an also-ran IMHO.

[SidDithers]

12. DU rec...nt

Sid

[randome]

15. He thinks his shield of 'independence' gives him leave to tell everyone else what to do.

Sanders lost his way a long time ago. If he wants to sit on the sidelines and criticize, he needs to go to a high school soccer match or something.

Join or get out of the way, Sanders.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[bravenak]

16. Yep. That's how I feel.

People want to rule, but refuse to join a large coalition. That really is the main thing I scratch my head over. I do wish that fire would be used on Republicans instead

[aikoaiko]

38. Or maybe he's speaking up because he's on the Democratic Leadership team.

Sanders didn't lose his way -- he's showing us a different way that doesn't involve us patting each other on the back saying,
"we're fine."

[randome]

55. He should not be trying to inject himself into DNC decisions, though.

Especially without the slightest bit of explanation for why he prefers one candidate over another. It's like he thinks his word is all that's needed.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[aikoaiko]

66. Sure, he could have provided more details, but Biden was equally as vague based on news reports

Last edited Sat Feb 4, 2017, 02:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Both endorsements were general statement about Perez being more mainstream "He knows what it means to be a Democrat" and Ellison being more divergent "Not status-quo".

Endorsements can be detailed or more vision oriented.

[randome]

85. Fair enough. But the word of an esteemed Democrat beats that of an outsider always.

Who knows more about what it means to be a Democrat? Certainly not someone who has never been one.

[NurseJackie]

47. Yes. Thank you for saying that. I have a similar thought, but from a different approach ...

... as I believe one's "independence" (in my opinion) gives me pause and causes me to question the motives of such self-described politicians (no matter who they may be).

Speaking strictly for myself, I am suspicious of people who cannot commit to the party to which I belong and the party that most closely matches my beliefs and aspirations. I want strong candidates who aren't afraid of commitment. I view those who are afraid of commitment as being wishy-washy and lacking courage.

---
Hello Alerter! These are my opinions about any and all politicians who can be so-described. My opinions are not against the rules. No person has been smeared or attacked.

[randome]

54. There better not be an alert on that.

Sanders is proud that he's no Democrat so you're not dissing the party.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[delisen]

53. Sanders seems like a Public Scold-mainly scolding Democrats nt

[NurseJackie]

63. I question not only his methods, but his motives as well. It's unclear to me ...

... exactly what it is he expects to accomplish, if anything. In my personal opinion, he seems to be causing more harm than benefit. Is he unaware of what he's doing? Or is he actually aware, yet cares little because he (possibly) perceives it to be a price worth paying for some unknown future goal... whatever it may be.

I've read criticisms elsewhere that accuse him of still being "bitter" and that he's continuing a "told-you-so tour". Those were sharp and stinging words, but I'd hope that the person who wrote them is mistaken. I don't necessarily agree with those critics and pundits, and therefore I think there are other explanations.

Nevertheless, I keep seeing people on this website (and in this thread, in fact) continue to call for "unity" and reciting a litany of dire consequences should such unity not be achieved. And I do agree that such pleadings are indeed a good thing for which to strive. Yet it puzzling to me when I observe that the same ones who call for unity are often among the strongest defenders of those politicians who continue to say things that polarize the party and reinforce the divisions. Why is that? What's their actual goal?


-----
Hello Alerter: These are my opinions and conclusions and descriptions of things and behavior that I have personally observed or read. I've also expressed my confusion (and regret) at the apparent disconnect between that which people claim to want, and what they do (or fail to do) in order to achieve that which they've previously indicated has the greatest importance.

[delisen]

68. Sanders maybe is having his "Last Hurrah." I like his energy; find his world view out-of date.nt

[NurseJackie]

79. That's an interesting way to describe it ... you may be correct.

Sanders maybe is having his "Last Hurrah."

I very much hope that this is the case. It could be that he's aware of his own mortality and he's trying to add some extra flourishes and exclamatory punctuation marks for his chapter in our nation's history book.

I have read elsewhere on the internet (ie: pundits and bloggers) where people have been commenting that he's not looking too well recently. As a result, they're speculating that he won't actually run for office again. (And the comment sections people are saying he may resign ... but I get the feeling that those comments are based more on their projected 'hope' rather than anything based in reality, or for which they have hard evidence.)

Are they imagining things? I guess he looks "okay" for his age (in my opinion) but on the other hand, I must admit that I haven't seen any recent photos or video footage of him. Maybe I'm overlooking something. It might just be a flu, or he could still be recovering from a grueling campaign.

-----
Hello Alerter: These are my opinions which may not be the same as yours, but that's okay. It's not against the rules to have different opinions. Sometimes I comment on the opinions and analysis of others and of things I've read, with whom (or with which) I may or may not agree, and that's not against the rules either.

[joshcryer]

22. Pete Buttigieg is the best candidate for unity, expansion of Democrats in office, and...

...winning back Congress and the Presidency.

[bravenak]

23. Where is he from? I wish I knew more, I'll look him up

[Blue_true]

69. From New Hampshire, I think. I favor someone

Like him who can rearrange his life to devote 100% to the job. I don't see Ellison doing that. There are so many State and Local Committes to work with that going to them during congressional breaks and weekends won't work.

[bravenak]

71. Yeah, I looked him up. I like him

[Chitown Kev]

83. Mayor of South Bend, ID

Familiar with all factions of the party, gay man, quite young...gets us out of the Bernie/Hillary phase that we still seem to be going through with Perez/Ellison...I'm sick of this shit.

[JHan]

27. I like him as well.+++++

[Eyeball_Kid]

28. Come on, folks! Grow up, for Christ's sake!

We are on the precipice of devolution. The Constitution is hanging by a thread. Trumpy is a decision away from declaring himself Dictator of the US. Giving one second away to this petty arguing is a second lost. Screw this crap. Unite or LOSE. That's the choice.

[Justice]

80. Totally agree!!!!!!!

[JI7]

29. problem with Sanders is he can't point to specifics. how is Ellison different and better

than perez ? He doesn't say. What makes Perez all the wrong he sees ?

I see people bringing up how we lost congress. How is that perez fault ? What would ellison do that would help win that perez won't or what well perez do that will hurt that ellison won't.

[bravenak]

33. It's crazy. I see people saying we have been losing for decades and new a whole new party

I guess we never had Obama or Bill

[JI7]

39. the loss is mostly over race. people don't like to face that reality

Based on that we should get Jim Webb to get those white votes.

Neither perez or ellison will appeal to them.

These people are cheering on trumps muslim ban.

And when we did win congress it was because of conservative democrats.

[bravenak]

40. Yep. Like Mark Begich, who was a good democrat

It's just such a red state. I remember all those posts telling us Trump voters were just 'in pain' and 'financially stressed'. Glad that ended, it was total bullshit. I have seen more racist shit in the past few months than ever in my life.

[MineralMan]

32. I like Ellison a great deal. I don't really know Perez very well.

However, who becomes the DNC chair is going to depend on who the DNC decides to give that chair to. The members of that committee are all Democratic Party leaders, elected by the party, itself, at state party conventions. Who will they choose? Whoever they think will be the most effective going forward, that's who.

I'm sure they'll listen to what Bernie Sanders says about that, but he's not part of the party leadership. They'd listen more closely if he were. Ellison? Perez? I don't know. I don't get to vote on it. I'm not high enough in party leadership. I'm just a convention delegate and precinct chair. We'll find out soon enough, I suppose.

[bravenak]

34. I agree with this

I want who will be the most effective at getting Democrats elected. Now, that may not always be the loudest person or the one with the most pizazz, or even the one who is supported by the most well known democrats. I will be fine with, and support whoever is chosen. Plenty of work for me to try to do right here.

[MineralMan]

36. Being DNC chair is a genuine, functional job.

Or it should be. I hope the choice they make is a good one.

[bravenak]

37. I Just want someone who knows how things work and will be a benefit.

Someone who will help us in these red states to get ourselves a Democrat, even a bluedog would be a godsend right now.

[MineralMan]

42. I work locally. What the DNC does isn't really something

I think about a lot. If we all work very hard, locally, we can win.

[Uponthegears]

58. I actually agree with this

And the other post 32 replies.

I know Perez pretty well (maybe it would be more accurate to say I "kind of" know him?) because we worked together on some specific local minority issues a number of years back (not because I am anyone as far as the party structure goes) and he is a good guy. Largely due to geography (I don't spend much time outside the Old South because there has been enough racial oppression here in between capital punishment and blue on black violence to keep this old lawyer busy for a career and then some), I don't know Ellison other than to say that I shook his hand once. I disagree with Perez on trade and some other issues so I did not switch over to him when he jumped in the race. That doesn't mean I wouldn't get behind him 100% if he ends up party chair. He would be a great leader.

Like most of us, I want this party together.

[NurseJackie]

43. You can learn a lot about someone by the company they keep ... the saying goes.

Along those same lines, this is why I find political endorsements (whether from newspaper/magazine editorial boards, or from other politicians, or from celebs) to be useful. They're not the be-all/end-all ... but they do help to put the finishing touches on the mental picture one tries to create when formulating their decision. And in some cases, with all other things being relatively equal or indistinct ... these recommendations (or the company one keeps) can tilt the decision making process in one direction or the other.

---
Hello Alerter: This post just expounds on my decision-making process and the things that help to influence my decisions.

[bravenak]

46. That is very true

References are important. It's just like any job interview where candidates have similar experience or at least relatively equal experience in areas of importance. The references are most helpful. I worked HR for a while, and sometimes that is what it came down to; one would have good references and the other would have a boss who would refuse to answer anything for fear of a lawsuit. Or they would use a fake reference who was clearly a friend or clearly not all there.

I have found with certain people that I should never use them for any type of reference. More harmful than helpful, it can make one lose out on a good job.

[flamingdem]

48. Have them share the job

Ellison has so much work already, they are friends too.

[bravenak]

51. They can form a triumverate for all I care at this point.

I checked out this guy and now I might perfer him
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Buttigieg

[Blue_true]

67. I prefer a DNC Chair that can devote full time

To the job. We been the National DNC working with State and local committees on a full time basis. We need the Dean 50 State strategy plus a local committe strategy. The National DNC Chair must be able to meet and work with small town Committes all over the country, in THEIR towns. I don't think that Ellison can serve in Congress and DNC Chair, we tried that with Wasserman Schultz, to disastrous effect.

[bravenak]

70. You make a very good point.

Having to run for ones own seat might not be helpful when trying to help thers run for seats.

[PatsFan87]

84. Luckily, Ellison says he'll give up his seat if he's elected chair.

And he lives in a reliably blue district, so no loss for us.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/ellison-vows-to-give-up-seat-if-elected-dnc-chair

[Gothmog]

72. I am supporting Tom Perez and so I love the way that Sanders is hurting Ellison

Sanders remarks will hurt Ellison

[bravenak]

74. He might need to step back if he really wants to help

[Gothmog]

76. I doubt that this will happen

Sanders will not back off and his efforts will hurt Ellison

[bravenak]

77. Me too, I'm not sure he is even one bit concerned about that

[Chasstev365]

78. Almost a week without "a complaining about Bernie Post!"

Good for you! Progress!

[Rex]

81. LOL!

[bravenak]

82. I only complain when he does

[Gothmog]

86. Biden endorsement wakes up DNC chair race

I agree with Joe http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/detroit-dnc-forum-234625

He's no longer in office, but former Vice President Joe Biden still managed to put a jolt into the race for Democratic National Committee chair this week.

After a few static weeks, the race suddenly came alive again after Biden formally endorsed fellow Obama administration alumna and former Labor Secretary Tom Perez on Wednesday, publicly confirming the tacit support top Obama administration officials had given to Perez.

Biden's move, in turn, generated a burst of activity by Perez's rivals, designed to counter the impression that Perez was gaining momentum. Sen. Bernie Sanders, one of Rep. Keith Ellison's top backers in the DNC race, released a statement stressing the importance of supporting the Minnesota congressman. On Thursday, South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg rolled out a big name of his own: he unveiled the support of former DNC Chairman Steve Grossman. A day later, Ellison's team released their own former vice president endorsement: Walter Mondale.

"It certainly ratcheted up. Suddenly the emails started again. It ratcheted up the focus and I think the energy on both sides perhaps," said Maine Democratic Party Chairman Phil Bartlett, who is undecided in the DNC race.

That was on display Saturday afternoon during the third of four regional forums, this one in Detroit at Wayne State University, sponsored by the DNC. Nine candidates were on stage: Perez, Ellison, Buttigieg, South Carolina Democratic Party chairman Jaime Harrison, Idaho Democratic Party executive director Sally Boynton Brown, New Hampshire Democratic Party chairman Ray Buckley, Democratic strategist Jehmu Greene and Democrats Sam Ronan and Peter Peckarsky. Peckarsky and Ronan are two recent additions to the DNC chair candidate field.

No candidate mentioned the Biden endorsement directly but each one put an emphasis on their qualifications and endorsements.