Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:47 PM Jan 2012

Does anyone else think Debbie Wasserman Schultz has to go?

I'm nervous as heck signing onto this new form of the forum. I was about to wade into GD for the first time, leaving it at saying a switch-up seemed necessary. So I don't know if I'll get hit with "you're a concern troll" posts in this new land.

Here is my feeling - she is just (imo) not the face the party needs to present to country.

To my eyes and ears, she is unappealing, unsympathetic (despite her actual backstory - this is about how she *appears*), ineloquent, comes across as a hacky dispenser of canned rebuttals, and I think accidentally suggested that New Hampshire was of no importance the other night.

Whoever is getting the DNC talking head appearances cannot be someone who many sections of the American public will instinctively find "unlikeable." I'm of no opinion on her actual chair-ship - perhaps she could be eased to the side in terms of who takes the public appearances?

Does anyone else feel this way? Being a New York Jew, I hope my feeling that her accent is not pleasing to the average American ear is taken as a purely pragmatic feeling.

But I was dubious about her fit for the job initially, and so far, anticipating a close election, I am growing more and more concerned that she will not buoy our prospects. Interested in others' thoughts.

114 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does anyone else think Debbie Wasserman Schultz has to go? (Original Post) jsmirman Jan 2012 OP
She called Romney a "Job Creamator" the other day ... JoePhilly Jan 2012 #1
Her hair needs its own Agent. Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2012 #2
I don't understand. It's Monday afternoon. jsmirman Jan 2012 #43
lol..edited. Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2012 #46
Ha jsmirman Jan 2012 #48
Her hair is lovely! FrenchieCat Jan 2012 #55
I think she is great. n/t countingbluecars Jan 2012 #3
So do I. Watched her in Congress' Thirty-Something Working Group... YvonneCa Jan 2012 #68
My one and only issue with Debbie is... Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2012 #4
I like her. n/t Ineeda Jan 2012 #5
she is easy on the eyes quinnox Jan 2012 #6
Definitely not. She's a fighter, talks back and has spunk. I love spunk!!.n/t monmouth Jan 2012 #7
;-) nt Dreamer Tatum Jan 2012 #24
Agreed. Compare her to the alternative, Tim Kaine. flpoljunkie Jan 2012 #110
YES - No substitute for GOOD Policy FreakinDJ Jan 2012 #8
No. tridim Jan 2012 #9
I was pretty pissed at her when she tossed Rep Weiner to the dogs tularetom Jan 2012 #10
I was a lot more pissed that Weiner did something so juvenile and idiotic. phleshdef Jan 2012 #19
Believe me I'm not defending Weiner's actions at all tularetom Jan 2012 #59
We do not know if they did quietly go to Weiner when the issue started karynnj Jan 2012 #78
Bingo JerseygirlCT Jan 2012 #90
Her hair is epic graywarrior Jan 2012 #11
I LOVE her hair....BUT SoCalDem Jan 2012 #26
Um, Debbie Wasserman Schultz ISN'T the "Face of the Party"...President Obama is brooklynite Jan 2012 #12
I happen to think she is perfect for the job. She is an attack dog and is just what southernyankeebelle Jan 2012 #13
Actually, she's from New York jsmirman Jan 2012 #25
Embrace her. She is a pit bull in a skirt. We need her fighting out there. Be damn with the rest southernyankeebelle Jan 2012 #42
I prefer her to the wuss McAuliffe jsmirman Jan 2012 #47
Well I agree with you on that one. McAuliffe was sooooo ADD. LOL Lordy Lordy where is your NY southernyankeebelle Jan 2012 #51
That's exactly right - that's what jsmirman Jan 2012 #57
You just keep remembering your more than just 9-11. The history goes way back long ago. NYers are southernyankeebelle Jan 2012 #71
I am a fervently proud New Yorker jsmirman Jan 2012 #81
Thanks, I mean what I said. I love history. But my problem is I have a hard time retaining it. I southernyankeebelle Jan 2012 #84
As a former jsmirman Jan 2012 #85
They love rewriting history. Funny thing is once I asked a young lady that was just out of high southernyankeebelle Jan 2012 #92
then explain the popularity of conservative NYC native Michael Savage on the radio. alp227 Jan 2012 #112
Yeah... no jsmirman Jan 2012 #114
I think a centrist Dem makes sense as the DNC chair justiceischeap Jan 2012 #14
Question for you: What do you believe is the main component of her job? FSogol Jan 2012 #15
I am only referring to the TV portion of her job jsmirman Jan 2012 #23
Maybe she wants Romney to win. With the material piling up that the Democrats Liberal_Stalwart71 Jan 2012 #34
I do think you might be right about that jsmirman Jan 2012 #49
Her Main Job Is Retaking The House... KharmaTrain Jan 2012 #73
Well, if she can get that done jsmirman Jan 2012 #77
That Problem Was Is Senate... KharmaTrain Jan 2012 #79
I have to be honest jsmirman Jan 2012 #101
The Senate Is The "Deliberative Body"... KharmaTrain Jan 2012 #107
Thank you for the reply jsmirman Jan 2012 #108
Her job is to help Democrats win. Her main activity is raising money. FSogol Jan 2012 #52
I don't think it's pointless, but I should have been clear jsmirman Jan 2012 #60
"What people are seeing?" Most people turn the channel when politics comes on. FSogol Jan 2012 #67
I guess CNN doesn't get Fox's ratings jsmirman Jan 2012 #72
Are you talking about as head of the DNC or as a congressperson? notadmblnd Jan 2012 #16
Go where? jberryhill Jan 2012 #17
In 4 years she could go on as VP grantcart Jan 2012 #99
Yep jberryhill Jan 2012 #100
"So I don't know if I'll get hit with "you're a concern troll" posts in this new land." stevenleser Jan 2012 #18
I like her. n/t DesertRat Jan 2012 #20
I love her blogslut Jan 2012 #21
I always enjoy watching and listening to what she has to say. Auntie Bush Jan 2012 #32
Did you mean to direct your question to the OP? blogslut Jan 2012 #35
I disagree with her on some issues but I think she's the one we need. dawg Jan 2012 #22
i think she's good. I'm sure she often reflects the views given to her by the wiggs Jan 2012 #27
Debbie is just fine....better than her counter part on the GOPers side opihimoimoi Jan 2012 #28
I think she is doing a excellent job. polmaven Jan 2012 #29
I think she is a great spokesperson for the Dems cally Jan 2012 #30
I'm nuts about her. cliffordu Jan 2012 #31
Gevalt frazzled Jan 2012 #33
I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous jsmirman Jan 2012 #37
No, I think the question is ... frazzled Jan 2012 #44
I'm uncomfortable with your jsmirman Jan 2012 #61
Did you like Dean? ecstatic Jan 2012 #50
much better than McAuliffe jsmirman Jan 2012 #63
CNN Sucks - I found the clip that stirred this post jsmirman Jan 2012 #36
"didn't seem like the best message to a state that is already annoyed at being overlooked for Iowa" MilesColtrane Jan 2012 #66
Not correct jsmirman Jan 2012 #74
Upon watching it a second time, you're right. MilesColtrane Jan 2012 #96
No, I get what you're saying jsmirman Jan 2012 #102
Bring back UNREC. A-Schwarzenegger Jan 2012 #38
I love her - and I'm an Okie! OKNancy Jan 2012 #39
I think she's a wonderful representative of the party. AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #40
Personally I have never liked her. She's the opposite of Howard Dean. PassingFair Jan 2012 #41
After she leaves...? kentuck Jan 2012 #45
You know how Sarah said she was a pit-bull in lipstick? EC Jan 2012 #53
As girl to girl, She needs to wash and comb her hair. Marnie Jan 2012 #54
I disagree. senseandsensibility Jan 2012 #56
Oh, please.... tosh Jan 2012 #87
Please stop posting. Son of Gob Jan 2012 #98
She's no Howard Dean. nt HelenWheels Jan 2012 #58
many sections of the American public will instinctively find "unlikeable." Bluenorthwest Jan 2012 #62
Nice. Complete mischaracterization of my post. jsmirman Jan 2012 #69
I think shes wrong for the job because in the past she has protected her Republican "colleagues" Rowdyboy Jan 2012 #64
I love Debbie !!! With Weiner and Grayson now gone - she's the best attack dog now! Tx4obama Jan 2012 #65
The Cons hate her guts. But I think she's great. ErikJ Jan 2012 #70
She seems very competent to me karynnj Jan 2012 #75
calling for this and that dem to go... you'll fit in on DU just fine kid... dionysus Jan 2012 #76
Not new, so not trying to fit in on DU jsmirman Jan 2012 #80
I like her just fine madokie Jan 2012 #82
We should have a full time Chair like Dr. Dean was. former9thward Jan 2012 #83
This sounds like a sensible concern jsmirman Jan 2012 #103
I cannot provide an impartial opinion nt TomClash Jan 2012 #86
I don't think she has to go Mira Jan 2012 #88
No, I don't agree at all JerseygirlCT Jan 2012 #89
Goodness no. BootinUp Jan 2012 #91
This is what clued me in and pissed me off about her KeepItReal Jan 2012 #93
National Treasure - Debbie Wasserman Schultz DemoTex Jan 2012 #94
I never understood putting her in. She has a job. I'm sure DNC chair isnt her main focus. GusFring Jan 2012 #95
Are you casting asparagus at Debbie Wasserman Schultz? Major Hogwash Jan 2012 #97
lol jsmirman Jan 2012 #104
She pissed me off a couple of times, but she's doing ok. Leave her alone. lonestarnot Jan 2012 #105
She is not the worst...but DonCoquixote Jan 2012 #106
We're in lockstep on that one jsmirman Jan 2012 #109
No. SemperEadem Jan 2012 #111
I like her. We need more women like her in our party, not less. nt Liquorice Jan 2012 #113

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
1. She called Romney a "Job Creamator" the other day ...
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:49 PM
Jan 2012

I say keep her.

And ... who do you plan to replace her with ... Hillary? Dennis? Who?

YvonneCa

(10,117 posts)
68. So do I. Watched her in Congress' Thirty-Something Working Group...
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:32 PM
Jan 2012

...on C-Span during GWB's administration and she was a pitbull on the issues. Really smart and determined. I think she is doing a fantastic job!

What's with all this stuff about her HAIR??? Geesh...

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
4. My one and only issue with Debbie is...
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:50 PM
Jan 2012

Getting the Democrats out to these media outlets to tout the successes of this administration. I know that Nancy Pelosi has been everywhere, and Steny Hoyer makes the rounds sometimes. Harry Reid isn't a great spokesman, but there are plenty of Democratic party surrogates that need to be out and front, and they aren't.

The president has no Democratic friends in the media like Clinton had. There are no Paul Begalas and James Carvilles on Obama's side, unfortunately.

That means that Debbie needs to be out there more and hitting home. (To be fair, she has been trying and does do well against these Repuke shills.)

 

quinnox

(20,600 posts)
6. she is easy on the eyes
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:51 PM
Jan 2012

And articulate and personable. I don't see it the way you do at all.

Do you want her replaced with some conserva-dem or something? Name someone you would like to replace her. Not sure where you are coming from in this.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
10. I was pretty pissed at her when she tossed Rep Weiner to the dogs
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:52 PM
Jan 2012

But really, who would you propose take her place?

She's no worse than Michael Steele or the dork that took his place.

 

phleshdef

(11,936 posts)
19. I was a lot more pissed that Weiner did something so juvenile and idiotic.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:02 PM
Jan 2012

I wasn't pissed at WHAT he did so much that I was pissed that he thought he would actually get away with it. His sex life is his business and his wife's business. I don't care about that stuff. But what I do care about is when someone I thought better of does something so blatantly, self destructive in the political sense.

He did something that any responsible Congress critter should have enough common sense to know now to do because of what the consequences would be when it came out. He did something that any responsible Democrat should have known had a high chance of becoming a party embarassment. Anyone in her position should have been rightfully pissed. Anthony Weiner not only caused a lot of embarassment and put party leaders in an unnecessarily defensive spot, but he also robbed the rest of us of his voice and his fighting spirit as a consequence of his actions. And thats the part that pissed me off the most.

If I did something as stupid as what Anthony Weiner did, I would not expect anyone to jump to my defense. He should have known better.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
59. Believe me I'm not defending Weiner's actions at all
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:08 PM
Jan 2012

But Pelosi and W-S both threw him under the bus in an extremely public fashion before the whole sordid affair even became public.

This is where we could learn something from the republicans. They generally don't deal with these type situations in front of god and everybody. IMO the leadership should have quietly gone to Weiner and told him he needed to resign, not hang him before a trial took place.

The way it was handled made them look panicky, like they were scared that the press was going to blame them personally if they took no action. It was definitely a low point in Wasserman Schultz's tenure as DNC chair.

That having been said, I have no other beef with W-S as DNC chair.

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
78. We do not know if they did quietly go to Weiner when the issue started
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:59 PM
Jan 2012

and either he lied to them, as he did to the public, so they did not know it was all true. We also do not know if they advised him to resign and he opted not to. The fact is that he was not making really good decisions then - from sending it out in the first place - to saying "he didn't know" if it was him etc.

Weiner unfortunately gave Breitbart a story which the left called a lie - that proved to be true. Given that every other Breitbart story was proven to have been distorted, this is a real break for him.

JerseygirlCT

(17,384 posts)
90. Bingo
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:39 PM
Jan 2012

This isn't DWS's problem. He screwed up, big time. And shouldn't have been supported in spite of it. Accountability is a good thing.

brooklynite

(93,873 posts)
12. Um, Debbie Wasserman Schultz ISN'T the "Face of the Party"...President Obama is
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:52 PM
Jan 2012

The only people who hear snippets from DWS are the politially engaged people watching cable news, who've already made up their minds. The average person has no idea what she looks like (or for that matter what Reis Priebus look like). Her job is to help raise money among other politically engaged people and to deal with internal Party organizational issues.

 

southernyankeebelle

(11,304 posts)
13. I happen to think she is perfect for the job. She is an attack dog and is just what
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:53 PM
Jan 2012

the DNC needs. As far as her voice I don't see anything wrong with it. I don't know what her back story is. She is still a congresswoman from FL. I just think its you. Maybe because your a New Yorker I don't know. But I have been to NY and love it but you have to admit some of the accents there are pretty different. Give her a chance. She is a Jewish lady from FL since you mentioned Jewish.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
25. Actually, she's from New York
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:16 PM
Jan 2012

born in Queens and raised in Queens/Long Island.

I don't think the rest of the country is crazy about Northeasterners, in general, and New Yorkers or people who retain our accent, more specifically.

I'm speaking to my fears here, but I don't think the accent of the New York boroughs is particularly welcome outside of my home town.

 

southernyankeebelle

(11,304 posts)
42. Embrace her. She is a pit bull in a skirt. We need her fighting out there. Be damn with the rest
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:17 PM
Jan 2012

of the country. I love the NY accent. I love accents from all over the states. I'm from Maryland and now I live in TN talk about sounding different. I tease them and they tease me. I don't take offense to it and neither do they. My little granddaughter has a heavy accent living in the south. When she talks with my family they love to hear her. I have one sister that says to her to say "Life is a box of choclates" she does and we all laugh. We laugh out of love and not hate. She'll ask me to say it and I put the southern accent on it and she laughs.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
47. I prefer her to the wuss McAuliffe
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:27 PM
Jan 2012

he was a disaster, imo.

I enjoy your perspective, but while we up North often find the Southern accent charming, I'm not so confident that the New York accents play quite the same way to foreign ears. And it is the rest of the country I'm always worried about, for the same reason that I will never, ever in my lifetime have someone drive me to my polling place (never a hot contest).

 

southernyankeebelle

(11,304 posts)
51. Well I agree with you on that one. McAuliffe was sooooo ADD. LOL Lordy Lordy where is your NY
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:40 PM
Jan 2012

attitude? NYers are go getters. I am telling I have lived across the united states there is no place like NY. It is truly a melting pot of america. I have lived in MT,VA, NC and Tn and PA and settled in Maryland where I call home. Then moved to TN. I have been to many more states across this country. People are people. Lets put it this way people in NY know how to survive. That is saying something. I also think people in NY get a very bad rap. They are wonderful people who when they see someone is lost they are willing to help. Yes that is a NYer.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
57. That's exactly right - that's what
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:05 PM
Jan 2012

us "real" New Yorkers are like.

But believe me, ten years of people doing a whole bunch of crap waving OUR bloody flag (I get that September 11th happened to the country, but it damn sure happened in a different way to my city) all the while deriding us as elitist crapweasels, it gets to you.

So, we're a symbol to rally behind/over, but you dislike us and try to pretend that we're everything that's wrong with the country (not that our predatory class down on Wall Street hasn't helped advance one part of this notion).

I've been known to tear someone up something fierce who sneeringly claims to be patriotic and then doesn't know a damn thing about our history, like, say the Revolutionary War. Sometimes I feel like it's a shock to people when I tell them, yes, we learned about America in middle school and high school, no, we weren't being taught a curriculum that focused exclusively on the fashion houses, France, and Eskimo culture.

 

southernyankeebelle

(11,304 posts)
71. You just keep remembering your more than just 9-11. The history goes way back long ago. NYers are
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:42 PM
Jan 2012

what makes this country great. Never forget that. Hey by the way when I watch GMA or the Today show you always see many people from around the country and yes even the world visiting NY. When my Italian family comes to the united states the first place they want to see is NY. They want to see the Rockettes and the Empire State Bldg, the Statue of Liberty. Those are the facts. Big cities all over the world have good and bad. NY is no different.

BE PROUD NYER. Good luck.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
81. I am a fervently proud New Yorker
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:07 PM
Jan 2012

but there are people who love to visit and then, "gasp, couldn't imagine living amongst such heathens!"

Thank you for the kind words, though - although I will confess there is a shameful chapter or two in New York's history, like the flirtation with secession to stay out of the Civil War (because we had such a thriving business with the Cotton South).

 

southernyankeebelle

(11,304 posts)
84. Thanks, I mean what I said. I love history. But my problem is I have a hard time retaining it. I
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:21 PM
Jan 2012

didn't realize that part in Civil War history with the south over cotton. I just never remember reading that. I find that very interesting. Thanks for sharing that nugget of history.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
85. As a former
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:27 PM
Jan 2012

History major, I have a leg up in knowing about this country's history. But red, red, red, 'murricans who don't know 1/1000th of what I know about the Revolutionary War or the Civil War absolutely infuriate me when they claim to be more of a patriot than I am just because in some unbelievably fucked up form of politicization, global warming is a freaking political issue for them.

 

southernyankeebelle

(11,304 posts)
92. They love rewriting history. Funny thing is once I asked a young lady that was just out of high
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 10:04 PM
Jan 2012

school did she like history and she responded yes. I told her I did also. I asked her what part did she like. I was think the Renaissance period or the Edwardian period or Revolutionary war. No none of that she said Civil War. I looked at her I guess I shouldn't have been surprised. Heck even the medival period was interesting. She said they didn't study those period. I found that very very sad. How do young people learn from mistake that have taken place in history? You don't know where your going unless you know where you came from, if you know what I mean. America seems to repeat the same mistakes like fighting wars in VN and Iraq without a really good exit. This country will be in bad trouble if we elect a republican president.

alp227

(31,962 posts)
112. then explain the popularity of conservative NYC native Michael Savage on the radio.
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 03:16 AM
Jan 2012

that's an empty argument right there saying that a new york accent turns off other americans.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
114. Yeah... no
Fri Jan 13, 2012, 06:33 AM
Jan 2012

you really think this proves any sort of point?

Michael Savage provides meat for the meat eaters. They don't care where he's from. You don't think it's possible for them to believe there's Michael Savage (hasn't been here for years) and then the NYC of their imagination, where everyone takes their limos down to Zuccotti Park to talk about how much they hate America?

Savage has proven his hate-laden bona fides to an audience that wants to hear all that. It wouldn't even be surprising if his audience had learned to separate "Good New York" and "Godless Lefty Wacko Elite Liberal New York," in the same way Palin separated "Real America" from the rest of us with college educations and a IQ above 80.

And as these things go, as sad as it to say, his regular listeners constitute one portion of the informed and already decided electorate, at least in terms of being informed exactly as much as they want to be or are willing to be.

His audience does not represent the independent or even wavering democrat living far from New York City who has *the inclination* to not respond warmly to our accent. Your post is full of "logical" fallacy. Just because they've warmed to him (*now*) and love that he tells them exactly what they want to hear, who are you to say what their initial reaction was to his accent/persona???

I think you've got the empty argument here. Anyway, this thread was dying and people seem to have thoroughly voiced their opinions about Debbie. Not sure why you felt the need to poke a non-existent hole; it was informative to read all the people's thoughts who really like her, and to read the thoughts of people who find her less than ideal. Your attempt to find some inherent flaw in the premise, though, doesn't really amount to any kind of salient point or add anything but a false equivalence to the conversation. Imo, of course.

justiceischeap

(14,040 posts)
14. I think a centrist Dem makes sense as the DNC chair
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:54 PM
Jan 2012

she appeals to more people than just progressives and I think that's good. I don't find her unlikeable at all and I like her spunk, she doesn't take a beating from anyone, that's for sure.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
23. I am only referring to the TV portion of her job
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:12 PM
Jan 2012

If she's going to be the go-to for the Democratic response after those morons are done holding their ridiculous "what is the first thing you would do on the moon if you were an astronaut" debates.

Many of you seem to like her, which is a fine response to a question I was posing.

I mentioned the concern troll thing because I'm not a fucking concern troll and find that line of troll hunting to be stupid and counterproductive.

I can't recall exactly what she said (it was around a week ago), but she was trying to downplay anything good that happened for Romney, and said something like, "Romney's going to win in New Hampshire, but he was always expected to, so New Hampshire's not important."

I can try to find the direct quote. The point was that it wasn't the first time that she has come across as petty and - more importantly - canned to my ear. Maybe I've caught her less personable appearances. It was an appearance that because of its timing/set up seemed likely to have a lot of eyeballs on it.

Attack dog stuff is fine. But attack dog stuff that I feel is also appearing on campaign literature, I can't stand. That is not the stuff of personable public speaking - imo - and runs the risk of the point being swallowed by the appearance of insincerity.

Anyway, I was just asking a question. So responses of "No" are certainly within the realm of what I'm looking for. I just wonder if people feel confident that they have feedback as to how she reads on an audience not composed entirely of members of DU.

 

Liberal_Stalwart71

(20,450 posts)
34. Maybe she wants Romney to win. With the material piling up that the Democrats
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:54 PM
Jan 2012

have on Mitt, thanks to his Republican rivals and his own flip-flops and record, I think it is clear strategy for her to accept Mitt as the Republican nominee.

I don't see what the problem here is.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
49. I do think you might be right about that
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:31 PM
Jan 2012

I'm starting to think it might be a pretty good thing.

I've been wondering for some time now if Huntsman is really the only one to fear.

I do think that having his party-mates bash him for a few more months, though, can't be a bad thing. That, and it will give him the opportunity to say a bunch of things that he will transparently tack back on once he has the nomination.

KharmaTrain

(31,706 posts)
73. Her Main Job Is Retaking The House...
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:48 PM
Jan 2012

The Presidential campaign is up and running in downtown Chicago and I'll bet Plouffe, Axelrod and others are loving how these rushpublicans are eating themselves. As the old saying goes, "when your enemies are beating up on each other, enjoy the show". These campaigns are doing the oppo research that we're sure to see come raining down next September and October. Mittens remains the best financed candidate and that's what wins nominations. Thus the focus has long been on him...just right now is not the time for Democrats to unload on him...let the rushpublicans do it instead.

As far as DWS, retaking the House is a priority if we're to move forward to really hand the rushpublicans a repudiating loss. Many of the teabaggers won by small margins and a combination of rushpublican apathy (especially if Mittens is the candidate) and a more energized Democratic base could reserve many of the losses of 2010. What she says matters little as opposed to what she does in finding candidates, making sure their campaigns are properly funded and the Democrats make big gains next November. That's what I judge her on...

Cheers...

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
77. Well, if she can get that done
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:57 PM
Jan 2012

I'll surely like her - seems like a tall order.

I will say, though, that if this party gets the trifecta again and doesn't do a damn thing for the environment and for this country's animals, I will probably be done for good.

KharmaTrain

(31,706 posts)
79. That Problem Was Is Senate...
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:02 PM
Jan 2012

If you look at Nancy Pelosi's record as Speaker, it was both very impressive and very progressive but much of the legislation never made it to the Senate for a vote and whatever did got watered down (healthcare).

The root of the problem was agreements Harry Reid made with McConnell that enabled him to fillibuster everything and anything. Reid's been a weak leader and things don't look very promising. There are 23 Democratic seats up for grabs in November and several are in deep red states. The prospects of losing control of the Senate are very big and thus retaking the House and holding onto the Executive is very important.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
101. I have to be honest
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 02:03 AM
Jan 2012

I don't know enough to know for sure that one is harder to control, but isn't the Senate harder to control? Doesn't the Senate tend to have the arcane and momentum-obliterating procedures available to stall-sports? Or do they both have ample repertoires?

It has been my impression that Nancy was much better at knuckling up and getting people to ultimately knuckle under.

KharmaTrain

(31,706 posts)
107. The Senate Is The "Deliberative Body"...
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 09:14 AM
Jan 2012

...or so was the intention. Where the House represented the "common folk" (remember only those with property were allowed to vote) like the British House of Commons, the Senate was to represent the "landed"...similar to the House of Lords. Bicameral but each with different constituents and agendas. This was especially the case when Senators were appointed rather than elected (a practice many rushpublican "strict constructionists" want to return to). Thus the checks and balance in the legislative were supposed to prevent the House from getting too powerful...and as we've seen with the teabaggers in charge that's not such a bad thing.

The problem in the Senate was Reid agreeing to 60 votes on almost every bill. He could pull the "nuclear option" and eliminate the fillibuster but the fear is they may need that weapon in their pocket in the future...and he and/or the Democrats may just need to. With that 60 vote threshold it makes almost any legislation impossible to move without "bipartisan" agreement...which the rushpublicans have leveraged to tie Reid's inept hands and control the agenda. Many bills passed in the House never saw the light of day as Reid knew there weren't the votes.

History will show Speaker Pelosi among the best...especially in light of the loser whose in that position now who can't even get his own caucus on the same page most days.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
108. Thank you for the reply
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 08:07 AM
Jan 2012

as an American History major, I'm aware of a lot of what you're covering, but I really should know more of the ins and outs of all of the arcane Senate procedures and move-counter-move-counter-move games that can be played.

I do know that I was all for going nuclear.

FSogol

(45,360 posts)
52. Her job is to help Democrats win. Her main activity is raising money.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:58 PM
Jan 2012

Her appearance on tv is secondary and pretty pointless in the large scheme of things. Politics is done mostly behind the scenes. The idea that anything of substance is occurring by people bickering on tv is sophomoric.

For what it is worth, I think she's doing a great job. Aside from Howard Dean, I think she's the best choice for the job.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
60. I don't think it's pointless, but I should have been clear
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:08 PM
Jan 2012

as to which aspect of her job I was referring to.

That bickering may produce no substance, but that is kind of my point - it's what the people are "seeing" and "perceiving" that I think is pretty damn important. They may not remember what the two talking heads said, but they may well remember which one they liked better.

FSogol

(45,360 posts)
67. "What people are seeing?" Most people turn the channel when politics comes on.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:31 PM
Jan 2012

Most people watch sitcoms, amateur signing/dancing shows, and forensic dramas. Most voters don't have a clue who Debbie Wasserman Schultz is.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
72. I guess CNN doesn't get Fox's ratings
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:44 PM
Jan 2012

but we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I think plenty of people tune into CNN; I take it you don't think that.

Please do recall, though, that nowhere in anything I have said here do I suggest that it is important that people remember her name.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
16. Are you talking about as head of the DNC or as a congressperson?
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 05:57 PM
Jan 2012

Personally, I think she is too conservative/ but does she need to go? She hasn't done anything that sticks in my mind as a reason for leaving either position.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
17. Go where?
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:01 PM
Jan 2012

I liker her. YMMV.

"someone who many sections of the American public will instinctively find "unlikeable.""

It is probably best to leave that up to polling and market research, rather than gut feeling.

I'm sure some find her disagreeable, but that's true of anyone. I have no idea what "many sections of the American public" think about much.
 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
18. "So I don't know if I'll get hit with "you're a concern troll" posts in this new land."
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:01 PM
Jan 2012

If you had that inkling, why did you post an OP which sounds exactly like that about the DNC chair with little to no substance to back up your dislike of her?

blogslut

(37,955 posts)
21. I love her
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:03 PM
Jan 2012

She's feisty and clever. Tim Kaine was a huge, boring yawn with no gumption and no imagination.

I'm Team Debbie all the way. Bobble heads, HO!

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
32. I always enjoy watching and listening to what she has to say.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:50 PM
Jan 2012

She's great as far as I'm concerned. Who would you suggest could do a better job?

dawg

(10,610 posts)
22. I disagree with her on some issues but I think she's the one we need.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:04 PM
Jan 2012

She's a fighter. She's quick-witted.

I like her accent.

wiggs

(7,788 posts)
27. i think she's good. I'm sure she often reflects the views given to her by the
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:18 PM
Jan 2012

DNC majority, some of which may not exactly be her own...so she sometimes might be more cautious than if she were a free agent.

I don't find her unappealing either.

cally

(21,589 posts)
30. I think she is a great spokesperson for the Dems
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:38 PM
Jan 2012

She's smart, quick, and a fighter. I think she's much better on TV than many of the other Dems.

cliffordu

(30,994 posts)
31. I'm nuts about her.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:42 PM
Jan 2012

I LOVE hardheaded, smart, quickwitted women.

She don't suffer fools, and we need that, 'specially in the Meeedia.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
33. Gevalt
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:53 PM
Jan 2012

I pretty much can't believe you wrote this. You think she has to go because she has an unlikeable appearance and unpleasing accent?

I personally love articulate (yes, that is what she is), ballsy, Jewish women.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
37. I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:06 PM
Jan 2012

yes, I think the fact that you love ballsy Jewish women will sail us straight through to victory in November.

It's just ca-razy to think that if someone has an unlikeable appearance and an unpleasing accent, particularly one that might reinforce the stereotype of our party as being dominated by Northeastern eggheads (yes, this worked spectacularly in 2008) - that if that person is presenting our most public response to the Republican period of dominating the news cycle it might hurt our chances in the election.

Yes, that would be totally crazy.

What planet do YOU live on?

If those things above were true, it damn well would hurt in November. Fortunately, this view of mine seems not to be widely-held (to put it mildly).

But to question the connection between the appearance/likability of the people we put in front of the public and how the broader public might respond to the party? That seems nuts.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
44. No, I think the question is ...
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:21 PM
Jan 2012

why do you find her appearance and/or accent so unlikeable? Most Democrats don't. If you are truly a New York Jew, is it self-hatred or what? And she's hardly a Northeastern egghead: she's lived in Florida since going to the University of Florida at Gainesville (hardly an Ivy) in the mid-1980s.

Look, I think the woman is the opposite of what you have portrayed: intelligent, effective, well-spoken, and hard-working as anyone I've ever seen in this position. Howard Dean looked like a chubby chipmunk and wasn't the world's most articulate speaker, but he was effective and people didn't complain about his looks or Northeast egghead background (son of a wealthy stockbroker, prep school and Yale education). There's something else going on here, and it makes me, frankly, uncomfortable.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
61. I'm uncomfortable with your
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:15 PM
Jan 2012

"oh, the vapors, this all makes me uncomfortable!"

I think maybe you need to get over frank discussions of what plays and what doesn't play and stop searching for freaking boogeymen.

Howard Dean rolled up his sleeves and came across as likable and authentic - all the way up to his famous scream. I can only hope that this is how we will state Wasserman-Schultz performed looking back at the election.

"there's something else going on here..." "ooooh" "dangerous subtext..."

They've got dogwhistling, but heck, the stuff you're getting all mysterious about should practically be called cat-whistling. And I say that as the damn proudest caretaker of one cat, so if you start in with some self-hating cat-owner bullshit know that you are pushing closer into fighting words territory.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
63. much better than McAuliffe
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:20 PM
Jan 2012

and see my response elsewhere in this thread on this.

Look, it's not a one = one equation here.

It's not like one Northeasterner can be pegged and typed and destroyed by that process while another one can't.

John Kerry (yes, this happened) =/= Howard Dean (this was not happening until he did himself in as a candidate, and as a chair, I did think he brought a laudable *authenticity* to the position that was a freaking dream compared to the transparently weaselly, grasping, and disingenuous McAuliffe).

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
36. CNN Sucks - I found the clip that stirred this post
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 06:56 PM
Jan 2012

but dag namnit do they make it hard to find anything. What an awful website.

She was on Piers Morgan, which I think a lot of non-political people watch.

http://mag.ma/cnn/3701641

"New Hampshire - stammers - I would say that New Hampshire really probably won't even mean much because most polls show that he's (Romney) going to win, and so that's not much of a victory there either - because they do what's expected..."

She then went on to mention that her home state &quot is) always pivotal."

Just didn't seem like the best message to a state that is already annoyed at being overlooked for Iowa and South Carolina.

It also seemed less than genuine to utterly dismiss wins in the first two contests.

I did like her a lot better when I just watched her clip with that awful Gretchen lady from Fox who so proudly stands behind her made up facts that support Romney. I guess she seems more natural when she's getting to attack in a contentious setting than she might seem in a more neutral setting like Piers Morgan's show?

Anyway, as I said, I'm glad that my concern does not seem to be shared by any(?) - and would be even more glad if that sentiment had been also heard in less adamantly democratic circles outside of the DU-verse.

MilesColtrane

(18,678 posts)
66. "didn't seem like the best message to a state that is already annoyed at being overlooked for Iowa"
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:26 PM
Jan 2012

She was specifically asked about what a Romney win in New Hampshire meant in the Republican race.

Since he's leading there by 18 points, she's right. An expected Romney win in New Hampshire indicates no shift in voter sentiment, no change from the status quo in the GOP primary.

She didn't say that the state of New Hampshire, or its voters, don't matter to the President or the Democratic party.

I just don't understand how you divined that meaning from her statements.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
74. Not correct
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:51 PM
Jan 2012

She was asked how she reacted to his "win" in Iowa.

She brought up New Hampshire on her own.

MilesColtrane

(18,678 posts)
96. Upon watching it a second time, you're right.
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 12:03 AM
Jan 2012

But, my point remains that her statement, "New Hampshire doesn't matter" pertains to the complexion of the Republican primary and Romney's chance at winning it.

She's not denigrating the state or the people in it, like you assume.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
102. No, I get what you're saying
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 02:07 AM
Jan 2012

I just know how things can get twisted and things seem to be very touchy right now in NH, so I thought it wasn't the best way to put it. I don't think you even want that sound bite out there.

OKNancy

(41,832 posts)
39. I love her - and I'm an Okie!
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:10 PM
Jan 2012

I love her appearance. She is smart and I don't even notice her accent.
Don't worry about it. If someone is so stupid as to not vote for Democrats because of DWS, then we don't have their vote anyway.

 

AtomicKitten

(46,585 posts)
40. I think she's a wonderful representative of the party.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:12 PM
Jan 2012

Against Rinse Pubis or whatever his name is she's the knowledgeable classy adult; he always comes off as a pissy little bitch. Also, I admire the way Debs pivoted from Hillary to Obama without missing a beat. She's got class in spades. I'm very happy to have her as DNC chair.

PassingFair

(22,434 posts)
41. Personally I have never liked her. She's the opposite of Howard Dean.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:15 PM
Jan 2012

She is everything you say, PLUS a slavish
lapdog to the corporate wing of the party.

THAT is why she says the things she does.
She will SELL ANYTHING (or attempt to) that the party wants.


She's better than Terry McAuliffe was though.

EC

(12,287 posts)
53. You know how Sarah said she was a pit-bull in lipstick?
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 07:59 PM
Jan 2012

Debbie is the bulldog...she doesn't need to keep lock-jawed hold, snarling side to side, to finish an arguement. All she does is deliver one big bite that has the needed punch to finish it off.

Debbie is articulate, precise and knock-out in her rebuttles. She's up to date and a quick thinker. She also keeps with the Democratic ideas, so she doesn't need to think when it comes to defending the rights of others.

 

Marnie

(844 posts)
54. As girl to girl, She needs to wash and comb her hair.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:00 PM
Jan 2012

Yeah I know, her hair is naturally wavey, but that does not alter the fact that it looks dirty and unkempt and trimed.

Yeah I know. It is unfair to have a different standard for professional women's looks than men's, but the fact is, that there is.

senseandsensibility

(16,713 posts)
56. I disagree.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:04 PM
Jan 2012

Her hair looks great. It looks casually elegant and natural.
Edited to add that I only chimed in about the hair because it has been mentioned numerous times on this thread, and I don't want all the comments to be negative. Sure, it's superficial, and I wouldn't bring it up on my own, but I feel compelled to defend her. It doesn't look at all dirty to me, either.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
62. many sections of the American public will instinctively find "unlikeable."
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:15 PM
Jan 2012

That line just amazes me. You, OP, seem to dislike her. Then you assume 'many sections' hold this 'instinct'.
I'm not crazy for her politics all the time, nor her work as Chair. As a 'talking head' for the Party, she rocks the house unrelentingly. She should hold workshops for other Democrats on how it is done, she should school them, for she is madame skill in the media.
That camera, it likes her. People like her. And just so you know, she'd not hold that position if this instinct to dislike her existed. The Party could tell you how she tests to all 'sections' or demographics. If some 'segment' held instant dislike for her, she'd not win elections nor hold the position she now holds. She did not win these things in a raffle.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
69. Nice. Complete mischaracterization of my post.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:34 PM
Jan 2012

That "line amazes (you)" because I never actually said it, and you know, fabulism and amazement go hand in hand.

You would think that if you were going to imagine yourself to be wielding a skewer you might actually be accurate in dissecting the target.

I made it clear that I was expressing a temporary reaction that *I* have had to a few of her recent appearances.

If you're going to accuse someone of assuming something, you probably want to be extra sure that said assumption was actually in what you are criticizing. It wasn't.

"Then you assume 'many sections' hold this 'instinct'."

What utter hogswallop.

I assumed no such thing.

I merely said that it would be problematic if we had someone in that position who invited that reaction. I am glad if we do not.

And as to the rest of your ridiculous post, I enjoyed " you know, she'd not hold that position if this instinct to dislike her existed." Oh, do teach me about the politics, sir!!!

Yes, our party has NEVER elevated anyone unsuitable to a prominent public/political (politically prominent and, thus, publicly prominent) position. The Democrats have been a party of sheer wizardry. And people never rise to prominent positions through inner-party dealmaking. Right.

And TO BE CLEAR: I am not saying that this is why she is the DNC Chair, only that this part of your post is stupid.

Rowdyboy

(22,057 posts)
64. I think shes wrong for the job because in the past she has protected her Republican "colleagues"
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:20 PM
Jan 2012

in Florida, refusing to support Democrats running against them. She's a part of the good-ole-boy buddy system and not the person for the job IMHO.

 

ErikJ

(6,335 posts)
70. The Cons hate her guts. But I think she's great.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 08:40 PM
Jan 2012

Of course they despise Pelosi, Reed and Obama too. 24/7 hate radio will do that.

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
80. Not new, so not trying to fit in on DU
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:04 PM
Jan 2012

ay yi yi.

It's a new board - I hadn't seen the new board until today.

Tomorrow is my five year DU anniversary, was here throughout all the primaries, not much during the period I served as an Obama fellow, and then here regularly through the election.

People didn't like my recent temerity to be un fucking believably pissed off about the removal of Horse Slaughter defunding from the farm bill.

former9thward

(31,805 posts)
83. We should have a full time Chair like Dr. Dean was.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:09 PM
Jan 2012

Especially in an election year. W-S is a full time congresswoman and she is involved with other organizations also. Too much on the plate.

Mira

(22,378 posts)
88. I don't think she has to go
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:35 PM
Jan 2012

as a matter of fact, I'll go on my knees in a minute and pray for a few hundred more like her to represent us immediately.

JerseygirlCT

(17,384 posts)
89. No, I don't agree at all
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:37 PM
Jan 2012

I think she's young, savvy, fast on her feet and very committed.

I love that a woman is out front in this.

And no, her accent doesn't bother me.

BootinUp

(46,928 posts)
91. Goodness no.
Mon Jan 9, 2012, 09:43 PM
Jan 2012

She is perfect, as we need a fighter there. Plus I think she is appealing (to middle aged white males anyways). I haven't heard or read any complaints/concerns of this type with regards to her before.

Major Hogwash

(17,656 posts)
97. Are you casting asparagus at Debbie Wasserman Schultz?
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 12:13 AM
Jan 2012

I have developed a crush on her as she gets more face time every time she goes on tv.

She's fantastic!

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
104. lol
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 02:11 AM
Jan 2012

but I would have enjoyed it more if you had continued with the food-based pun and somehow worked "pamplemousse" in there.

DonCoquixote

(13,615 posts)
106. She is not the worst...but
Tue Jan 10, 2012, 04:45 AM
Jan 2012

She is very typical of Florida's pathetic Democratic party that refuses to take on the hardline right wing because they have the money. I would rather have her than McAuliffe though.

SemperEadem

(8,053 posts)
111. No.
Wed Jan 11, 2012, 08:42 AM
Jan 2012

I believe she was chosen for the job because she's got what it takes to move the party forward into winning more elections. I hope that she is unsympathetic to the thugs--we need someone who isn't eager to play footsies with them.

And where is the link that supports your statement that "many sections" of the American public will instinctively find 'unlikeable'? We can expect for the thug segments not to like her, but this rhetoric sounds like the mess they were saying about Hillary Clinton when she was running in the primary.

And I hardly care about what her hair is doing. How shallow to be distracted by that.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does anyone else think De...