'Grow Up!': DNC Chair Candidate Says Democrats Focused Too Much on Trump's Insults

[DonViejo]

Source: Mediaite



by Josh Feldman | 12:21 pm, February 12th, 2017

One of the candidates for DNC chair said at a Democratic forum in Baltimore last night that the party needs to “grow up” and have a strong message beyond calling President Trump “offensive.”

Raymond Buckley, the chair of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, said at the DNC Future Forum that a lot of Americans are worried about their own economic futures and don’t really “give a crap about if the president is an insult dog.”

And that wasn’t the end of it:

“We did not offer a positive message to anyone that I’m related to. We did not offer a message to my neighbors… What we did is say ‘How offensive.’ Grow up. That’s not reality for most of America.”

###



Read more: http://www.mediaite.com/online/grow-up-dnc-chair-candidate-says-democrats-focused-too-much-on-trumps-insults/

---

video @ link, above

[elleng]

1. Thanks. I like Buckley. Seems to have good experience

getting the message out voter by voter, and 'no nonsense.'

'“We did not offer a positive message to anyone that I’m related to. We did not offer a message to my neighbors.'

[pnwmom]

45. He wasn't listening. Hillary supported the $15 minimum, protecting Social Security

Medicare, and Medicaid; and the Affordable Care Act. She supported protecting the environment and free tuition for public colleges.

She had a positive message, and the majority of NH voters heard it, even if he didn't.

[elleng]

47. Fine to explain why you disagree with him, but it is

NOT helpful to our broad goals to call a Democratic state chair an idiot, or other negatives. There is MUCH too much of that among Democrats, and it only plays into repugs' game.

Buckley is also President of the Association of State Democratic Chairs, and a Vice Chair of the Democratic National Committee.

[pnwmom]

48. It is not helpful for him to disparage Hillary by saying that she had no positive message. nt

[JI7]

50. because trump voters wanted someone to ban muslims. hillary needed to show she would be better

than trump ay that in order to get those trump voters.

[reggaehead]

57. This clown has no business running for DNC chair

U can like him all u want. But his message is go along get along. Not gonna happen.

[Laurian]

2. I beg to differ.

The message was there, the media just reported the petty crap.

Work on delivery and dissemination of the message are what's needed. We cannot rely on corporate media to do this.

[nikibatts]

9. EXACTLY!!

I have played and re-played HRC town hall meetings, the debates, her pressers and when available some of her speaking engagements since 2014-15. The message was there. The media and her opponents ignored it. THEY focused on fake scandals, e-mails, Goldman Sachs speeches, fake charges against the Clinton Foundation etc. And still her detractors stick to the same BS. Webb is a perfect example.

And i will say this...sexism is still rampant in this country even among some progressive men.

[NewJeffCT]

12. Hillary's first big speech where she hammered Trump

and also conveyed a strong message got a ton of coverage and almost all of it positive, and then it was like there was a media blackout on her until the DNC. It was very frustrating to me as a Democrat, and I was not a big Clinton supporter.

[former9thward]

40. No there was not a media blackout.

Let's not re-write history. Clinton stopped campaigning in that period. She had no townhalls, nothing. She just had high class fundraisers.

[pnwmom]

46. Not true. There were multiple times when they both were having rallies

and the media only covered DT's.

[former9thward]

53. Why I am not surprised you would make that post -- without evidence.

[Percy Cholmondeley]

55. The so-called president's rallies

They were better TV - threatened violence, very short words, "good" vs. "evil", very simple, black&white. Hers were so complicated. His were "professional wrestling" to her "PBS". You had to think!!! Too Hard!!! Too much like work!!!

[still_one]

30. She sure did. Everything form Healthcare, education, jobs, the economy, civil rights, women's

rights, etc.

As you said the media was focused on the fake scandals and at the same time normalizing racism, sexism, and xenophobia

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

16. Not quite. The platform was there but the message delivery was not.

First, as disgusting as Trump is...he is a charismatic/engaging/powerful speaker. Hillary is not. When she talked about policy and tried to deliver a positive message it was ignored because she is not the type of speaker that can draw people in and hold their attention well enough. The only times she had glimmers of that ability was when she was calling out Trump because she really, really felt it. That's what was covered because it was her best speaking examples.

Democrats always have the far better message. Sometimes they just truly suck at delivery because they overlook some things that really, really matter...like choosing someone who can draw people in and hold their attention when they speak and deliver the message.

[rurallib]

27. I would never think of Trump as "a charismatic/engaging/powerful speaker"

but when you get 24X7 free media publicity, well that is hard to beat.

Talking about yourself until the cows come home is hardly engaging.

[leftofcool]

32. Oh for fuck's sake!

Please don't come to DU and tell us how engaging and charismatic Trump is. There are other forums for that.

[crazycatlady]

33. Charisma runs across the aisle

I don't think there's anything wrong with giving credit where it is due. I can recognize a charismatic candidate when I see him/her no matter what side of the aisle they're on. I don't agree with anything Sarah Palin stands for, but she's very charismatic.

[hatrack]

39. Charismatic? WTF?

Neither of them have the charisma of a slice of burned toast.

[crazycatlady]

41. There's also Democrats that don't have charisma either

Andrew Cuomo is a good example of it (and I'm generally a fan of his).

Getting out there and firing up a crowd is not something that everyone has the ability to do. You may not like the crowd, but people like Donald Trump can fire one up.

[former9thward]

42. If that were true he would not have had a top-rated tv show for years.

Get real, if that is possible.

[JI7]

54. it wasn't top rated for years. and he lost the popular vote by millions

only ignorant fucks continue to defend him.

[Percy Cholmondeley]

56. He actually lost the popular vote

by more than it shows, continuing a string of that stuff that started with Nixon. I'm becoming fatigued about hearing why she lost -- it was just another stolen election, and deep down, I think pretty much everybody knows it. And, yes, the democrats should have run to the left more, but risk-taking? Too risky.

[moonscape]

43. I'm lost when it comes to applying the

charismatic adjective to T, but have to accept the reality others see it. I can't, never did, even in his younger years in NYC.

That has made his rise particularly baffling to me.

[Red Mountain]

44. Not charisma......Demagoguery

Demagogue
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A demagogue /ˈdɛməɡɒɡ/ (from Greek ???????ό?, a popular leader, a leader of a mob, from ?ῆ???, people, populace, the commons + ἀ???ό? leading, leader)[1] or rabble-rouser is a leader in a democracy who gains popularity by exploiting prejudice and ignorance among the common people, whipping up the passions of the crowd and shutting down reasoned deliberation.[1][2][3][4] Demagogues have usually advocated immediate, violent action to address a national crisis while accusing moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness or disloyalty. Demagogues overturn established customs of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so. Most who were elected to high office changed their democracy into some form of managed democracy.[citation needed]

Demagogues have appeared in democracies since ancient Athens. They exploit a fundamental weakness in democracy: because ultimate power is held by the people, nothing stops the people from giving that power to someone who appeals to the lowest common denominator of a large segment of the population.

[marylandblue]

3. He's right

Sure, the message was there but the emphasis was not. The emphasis was on how bad Trump was, not what Democratically would do for America. This just played into his hands.

[JI7]

10. no he isn't. trump voters voted for him because they agreed with his bigotry

[Bernardo de La Paz]

15. He's right. tRump says anything and everything. Watch & Resist WHAT HE DOES. Persist.

Just because many tRump voters are bigots doesn't mean we should put most of our attention on his tweets and insults.

What he says is important, yes, but what he is DOING is more important than anything he could possibly say.

[Hortensis]

4. Big NO to rhis jerk and to everyone who chose not to hear

two years of exhaustively repeated positive, hopeful, inspiring messages. And, even better, extensive plans meant to lift the entire nation.

Right now we should be discussing

* How high the minimum wage is being raised and how much it needs to be adjusted in various areas.
* How classes in state colleges are being made affordable and comparing them to each other.
* How many solar panels our houses will have, and how much power sharing agreements will lower our utility bills. And that Congress is overruling red state laws giving rights to all power generated by solar on private property to power companies.
* How many good jobs dozens of large public works projects are expected to create.
* The return of guaranteed annual vacation time to all workers.

And so, so much else that makes me want to cry right now.

Some people are just wired to attack and fire into the center of the left, so dysfunctionally focused that they can't care as much about the huge dangers from the right--and can't change. Jerks like this represent just one of the groups whose terrible judgement helped elect Trump, keep Congress and state houses in Republican hands, and provide enormous assistance to extremist plutocrats who won huge through their tragic foolishness.

70K votes over 3 states, Buckley. We need you like we need Trump.

[George II]

7. Precisely, the message was there but many weren't interested in it, just the "dirt" and....

.....negativity.

[Hortensis]

14. * The U.S. WOULD HAVE HELD THE LINE for western liberal democracy

against the planetwide surges of fascism and other ultra-right-wing movements. And in so doing we would have helped strengthen liberal democracies around the planet that depend on our stability.

This one should have been at the top of the list.

Our DNC needs people like Buckley in the top leadership the way it needs a suicide pact.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

17. Buckley's right re insults. You're right re positive messaging.

tRump-Bannon are sowing confusion with insults and baffle-gab.

It's a big part of their strategy. Well, Bannon's strategy. tRump is just doing his thing and Bannon-Priebus-Pence are manipulating him. In the meantime they are all hoping you don't pull back the curtain to see what the wizard(s) is doing.

Trump has taken positions on all sides of important issues. Said NATO is obsolete then said he is "100%" for it. And back and forth. Said he will protect LGBTQ and drafts horrific executive orders (not yet signed) and wants to free the tax-free churches to get into politics.

Don't be fooled into spending too much time on his insults. That simply what Buckley said.

It's a time-honored tactic. Look at the legislation the Republicans have been passing and introducing while so many people have been so focused on tRump. Look how most of tRump's key nominees have been already approved. That's stuff he is doing. Look at the raid that killed the 8 year old American citizen girl. That's Trump in action.

[Hortensis]

18. Buckley's criticizing Democrats, not Republicans, Bernardo.

That's what people like him do, mostly all they do because that's where their passions lie--a great and eternal resistance against the evils of the mainstream left.

There are huge reasons why people like that don't normally lead parties and why those parties they form or do do get control of never survive for long. And this is just one of them.

I repeat: If this man and others like him had committed after the primary to supporting the Democratic candidates up and down the ticket, we would have won the presidency, taken control of the Senate and won a lot more seats at all other levels. Right now we would be filling well over 100 important judgeships around the nation.

Instead, they spoke out against the Democrats with the Republicans, with the wannabee kleptocrats, with the Russians, with the fake-news generators, and with Comey against, often using the very same messages--and their effect alone was enough to lose us the election.

We lost by 70K votes among 3 states. If 1 in 100 on the left who stayed home believed in what the Democratic candidates promised enough to stop by their polling places on the way home from work WE WOUDL HAVE WON.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

21. Yes, ... as if Democrats are above reproach? As if Democrats can't be more effective and improve?

Buckley is right about too much focus on tRump insults.

You are right that Democrats (not least of which Hillary) have a positive message and that is a winning message in the long run. Buckley seems a bit blind to how much positivism the Democratic Party and Democrats expressed in the 2016 election.

Buckley's point about insults is constructive. Constructive criticism is useful and must be considered.

His point about positivism misses the boat and is not helpful, in fact less than helpful.

[Hortensis]

22. I rest my case.

Btw, conservatives won a "major" victory the other day: 8 years in prison for one woman to prove their case that "massive voter fraud" was committed. She was brought to the U.S. as a baby, raised American and voted Republican, but that's beside the point--across the nation conservatives are chortling and cheering this "proof" and what they see as only just punishment.

And construction of additional detention centers that can hold many thousands in the southwestern deserts continues. In 8 years she's likely to join some people who've there almost as long, as other nations refuse to take all of them. A nice plus, though, will be the boon to the "detention center" industry. Job creation! Almost all minimum wage in miserable, soul-destroying conditions, but...jobs!

Democrats are SO bad, though. First step to saving America: Go get us!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

23. Cartoon from 2012

[Hortensis]

24. So true. But to the right, only the first illustration for both captions.

Btw, I do know we're really on the same side.

[obamanut2012]

19. this

[Squinch]

36. I agree with you, but I have come to see the need for a message made up of small

words that we can beat people over the head with.

And I think before we talk about what you are saying we should talk about, we should be having ads and billboards and buttons and talking heads who never miss a chance to tell everyone that the Republicans want to gut Medicare and SS and they want to take away the average Joe's health insurance, and that everyone should join the Democrats who are fighting to not let that happen.

[Hortensis]

37. I agree that the illiberal left should take on the right with

Last edited Sun Feb 12, 2017, 08:18 PM - Edit history (1)

all its considerable passion. THAT would have been something. We lost last fall by only somewhat more than the flutter of a butterfly's wing. If they had been what was needed, WE would now have our people in control of both the presidency and Congress, with our judicial appointments moving into well over 100 vacant seats.

My accusation, and the reality has been, that they won't. Instead, they attack the Democratic Party--our largest, best hope for stopping the anti-democratic, anti-liberal, anti-equality of all men, anti-freedom of religion forces on the right. But the Buckleys can't/won't be what is needed. It's a basic dysfunction that no compelling current leader has shown up to move them beyond.

This thread is about Buckley, and I'm saying he's not only not the right stuff, he's the wrong stuff. We have critical duties to fulfill to not just ourselves but the entire planet. No time to stand around trying to avoid being shot in the foot by our own. We need people who believe in us, what we stand for, and what we intend to achieve.

[Squinch]

38. I agree. He's not the guy.

[sarcasmo]

5. You have to bully a bully. Playing nice with 45 will not work.

[JI7]

6. fuck him.

[George II]

8. What campaign was he watching?

[delisen]

11. Well Let's Just Repeat Trump's Positive Message !..and see how that works for us nt

[Solly Mack]

13. As a woman, it is my reality when a president-to-be brags about sexually assaulting women.

As a decent human being who cares about human rights, it is also my reality when a president-to-be attacks people based on their skin hue and ethnicity, and when, as president, he attacks people based on their religion or the rights of transgender people.

Neither my reality, nor the reality of others deemed not the majority will take a backseat to anyone.

Not.going.back.

Get used to it.

[MFM008]

20. maybe, but we

don't have to take his shit.
Especially when he calls a sitting Senator "Pocahontas".
Then not one male senator who read Coretta Scott Kings letter didn't get rule 19nd?
My maternal grandfather was half Native American.
Personally I don't like it.

[EarthFirst]

25. Sounds to me like Buckley is alienating the base, rather than unifying it...

There wasn't a single minority demographic that wasn't brutally attacked by candidate Trump, and judging by his actions during these past few weeks, he intends to act on his words.

We've thankfully received a few major setbacks to Trump's aggressive agenda of discrimination.

Now is not the time to wield an iota of weakness coming off these decisions.

Fast and furious, do not relent! Focus on a quick succession of events that blindside their agenda and follow up in the media in an aggressive and firm way.

Playing the moral high ground used to be worth something in politics, now it only gets you so far.

A no holds, gloves off approach is what is needed here for a good long while as the hits to our country keep coming.

Afterward, we can re-assess toning it down.

For now: Look the fuck out!

[samnsara]

26. so hes calling us ' children'?....

...seems that was already done by a Republican.

[6000eliot]

28. Um, no, Raymond Buckley.

And also, fuck off!

[LuvLoogie]

29. In politics, when someone tells you to grow up in the context of your accepting abuse...

tell them to fuck off.

[democrank]

31. Sorry, but this isn't the time to pull up a lounge chair and fend off negative thoughts about Trump.

Trump is far worse than an "insult dog", he's a dangerous authoritarian hell-bent on destroying our country as we know it. If you're not outraged, you have no business in a leadership role.

The situation is dire, the response must be fierce....non-violent, but fierce.

[marylandblue]

35. Of course he is outraged, that isn't the point

The point is that authoritarian populists win by stoking outrage. While their opponents are distracted by moving from outrage to outrage, they destroy the country. It's a well worn script. The only way to fight an authoritarian populist that works is to focus on what you would do better, not why he is so bad.

[JI7]

49. the Trump voters wanted someone to get rid of muslims mexicans and other non whites

[JHan]

51. Considering Trump EO's and intent, this is a strange comment at this time from a Democrat.

Oh well.

i'm tired drawing roadmaps.

[HoneyBadger]

52. Which matters more, the message or the messenger?

Been a discussion topic for thousands of years......

Any salesperson would say the messenger (you don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle), but in this age of electronic communication that poorly conveys emotion, it looks like the message might start becoming important.

[Justice]

58. Comical replies here arguing with other Dems

Responding to OP about whether offered positive proposals or based Trump. Sick of these. Do nothing to move us from this dark place. Focus on moving forward.

[Blue_Tires]

59. Mr. Buckley hasn't been keeping up with current affairs, has he?

Nevermind the fact that his talking points were debunked two months ago...

[LiberalLovinLug]

60. He's a little harsh but there is truth in what he's saying

He doesn't acknowledge that they were facing a hostile media that was hell-bent on creating a horse race with the presumption that Hillary was so far ahead that they had to disproportionately focus on whatever "scandal" against her that was floating out there by Republicans, mostly the emails, and ignore Democrats positive platforms.
Add to that the monopoly of RW hate radio dominating middle America that pounded out fake news against Democrats (and still do) 24/7.
Add to that the money disadvantage of billions more in dark money.
Add to that Russia's meddling.

That said...

They needed a more simple message. Bernie proved this works in his rapid rise because he pounded out minimal talking points, ad nauseum to some, about the 1%, and his main platform policies like $15 hr min. wage and free college. Yes they did have a plan, a much better plan, but it was too convoluted for mass TV audience that grew up on shows like The Apprentice. Trump bragged. They should have bragged louder..how Obama and Democrats brought the country back from near depression. They should have targeted the GOP more instead of Trump, because that is who would sweep in on his coattails. Remind people how disastrous they are with the economy based on previous admins. There was so much there to attack. Let the media, and the decent majority react on their own to Trumps asinine behaviour. That takes care of itself.