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

Omaha Steve

(99,069 posts)
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:18 AM Jun 2017

DNC allies incensed by Clinton criticism

Source: The Hill

BY CRISTINA MARCOS

Irritated Democrats say Hillary Clinton is wrong to cast blame on the national party for her loss to Donald Trump.

Allies of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in particular were incensed by Clinton’s criticism of the party apparatus, saying she mischaracterized the committee’s work while needlessly stoking internal divisions.

“This is all about the last campaign. And really, what Democrats should be focusing on, and what I think Hillary Clinton should be figuring out, is how do we empower the DNC to have the best data resources to win races this year, in 2018 and 2020,” a former DNC aide said.

“Having hard feelings about the data that you may or may not have received in 2016 ultimately is not the reason why we lost.”

FULL story at link below.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/336001-dnc-allies-incensed-by-clinton-criticism

130 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DNC allies incensed by Clinton criticism (Original Post) Omaha Steve Jun 2017 OP
aren't those the same allies that got her the nomination? mdbl Jun 2017 #1
Very. InAbLuEsTaTe Jun 2017 #12
Voters gave her the nomination...millions of them. Demsrule86 Jun 2017 #14
Exactly. zentrum Jun 2017 #16
Nope people gave it to her joeybee12 Jun 2017 #18
Well that and all the Superdelegates nm MichMan Jun 2017 #112
No, even counting the superdelegates... Steven Maurer Jun 2017 #116
Ugh! Doug the Dem Jun 2017 #2
Ahhhhh... The Hill and good old dissent-sowing BumRushDaShow Jun 2017 #3
But is it real dissent? Also, can people process more than one story at a time? yurbud Jun 2017 #86
The process of revitalization should not be trivialized into "he-said, she said". nt BumRushDaShow Jun 2017 #92
It should be based on accurate information though, which is relevant yurbud Jun 2017 #95
Correct. But the OP article author added emotional/subjective overtones, negating any added value BumRushDaShow Jun 2017 #98
The problem bucolic_frolic Jun 2017 #4
How did they target us? zentrum Jun 2017 #17
Wow. bucolic_frolic Jun 2017 #23
Because Twitter is a internet sewer of BS rumors. former9thward Jun 2017 #124
Just stop. Squinch Jun 2017 #5
Oh geesh :( mwooldri Jun 2017 #6
Just as people are entitled to defend themselves and their careers when she calls them out BeyondGeography Jun 2017 #21
And if she had won bucolic_frolic Jun 2017 #7
That is untrue. There are not enough votes in the Senate. Demsrule86 Jun 2017 #15
Anyone who said that clearly didn't listen to what Sec Clinton actuallly said in her interview.... Docreed2003 Jun 2017 #8
Agreed. delisen Jun 2017 #9
Exactly. nt SunSeeker Jun 2017 #26
Yup ismnotwasm Jun 2017 #63
Well said. People are determined to cultivate a narrative about HRC, using any opportunity they get. StevieM Jun 2017 #73
I have to agree with you and with HRC - the database had been neglected csziggy Jun 2017 #121
Wow...excellent post... Docreed2003 Jun 2017 #122
Agree needs to be OP! RockCreek Jun 2017 #126
#fakenews stonecutter357 Jun 2017 #10
CNN: Democrats to Clinton: The DNC's data was fine -- you just used it wrong Omaha Steve Jun 2017 #11
Just wow. InAbLuEsTaTe Jun 2017 #13
Too bad Andrew still doesn't have a job joeybee12 Jun 2017 #19
I would assume that if he were still working there, he would have used less inflammatory language karynnj Jun 2017 #25
very nice summary. scipan Jun 2017 #80
It wasn't just the DNC. zentrum Jun 2017 #20
I can tell you as a call banker into the swing states, the call lists and down times were less than still_one Jun 2017 #30
According to Sec Clinton tazkcmo Jun 2017 #22
Seeing as how the DNC was openly hostile to her for generations AngryAmish Jun 2017 #62
Not sure exactly what everyone is talking about but DURHAM D Jun 2017 #24
I think it was VERY important Hillary said what she said. She has now challenged the DNC to prove OnDoutside Jun 2017 #27
Who gives a f**k. Hillary has every right to speak out based on the bullshit she has had to put up still_one Jun 2017 #28
I agree about the call bank lists. REALLY out of date/inaccurate. SunSeeker Jun 2017 #34
It was quite frustrating. I agree with your analysis completely sun still_one Jun 2017 #38
Data she did not receive almost certainly contributed to the loss. LonePirate Jun 2017 #29
Hillary did not blame her loss on the DNC. She merely stated a fact. SunSeeker Jun 2017 #31
nothing is ever Hillary's fault, everyone else is always to blame geek tragedy Jun 2017 #32
It sounds like she's starting with the little stuff and getting to the big stuff. ucrdem Jun 2017 #33
so far her list of people to blame for her failed campaign geek tragedy Jun 2017 #37
She took the blame that night. I don't object to further analysis. ucrdem Jun 2017 #45
her side of the story is entirely self-serving. No "please avoid my mistakes" lessons to impart geek tragedy Jun 2017 #48
Still I'd like to know how it went down. ucrdem Jun 2017 #53
there is a lot she can tell us. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #55
There's an entire industry devoted to giving the other side, and then some. nt ucrdem Jun 2017 #57
Russia/Comey is also not lacking for voices. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #60
Will you also object to Comey giving testimony because its self-serving? ucrdem Jun 2017 #61
Comey is a fact witness to potential obstruction of justice. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #64
He could be equally factual in a closed session, but no. ucrdem Jun 2017 #67
She did take responsibility but we all know there were a lot of factors- she discussed them all. bettyellen Jun 2017 #46
What mistakes/errors did she admit? geek tragedy Jun 2017 #49
domyou have a quote saying her own mistakes didn't factor in? I didn't hear that. bettyellen Jun 2017 #51
"'I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that's not why I lost'." geek tragedy Jun 2017 #52
Weird because I actually agree with her on this. At one point she admits Americans wanted the lies.. bettyellen Jun 2017 #58
ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan was whose fault, exactly? geek tragedy Jun 2017 #59
The thing is, you can point to a dozen mistakes. Basically any one of them bettyellen Jun 2017 #66
except she explicitly denied that she did anything that caused her to lose the race. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #69
She said that they did fuck up and didn't realize their data was off- what's not true there? bettyellen Jun 2017 #71
Not campaigning in Wisconsin or Michigan is her fault, hers and her campaign strategists. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #72
Again, you're focusing on one of a dozen mistakes. If it makes you feel better, great. bettyellen Jun 2017 #74
what matters is how we win future elections. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #75
she already acknowledged that mistakes were made or is she always to bang on about .. JHan Jun 2017 #77
"Regrets, I've had a few. But then again, too few to mention." nt geek tragedy Jun 2017 #81
I think the collusion between Russia and the GOP is a huge issue- more important than any bettyellen Jun 2017 #78
Russia/Collusion is a huge issue. But Hillary Clinton is the very last person geek tragedy Jun 2017 #82
even though she was the victim of it? lol JHan Jun 2017 #83
We were all the victims of it. nt geek tragedy Jun 2017 #88
And "we" as Democrats had no means to counter the weaponization of data by Bannon and Co. JHan Jun 2017 #114
I disagree completely. To silence her is playing into their framing. bettyellen Jun 2017 #84
the last thing that will ever happen is someone silencing Hillary Clinton. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #87
People have been trying to silence her and that's part of how we got here. bettyellen Jun 2017 #90
free country, she can say whatever she wants, but she's not guaranteed geek tragedy Jun 2017 #91
I've actually had lots of productive discussions about the effect of misogyny last year... bettyellen Jun 2017 #93
discussions of misogyny should absolutely continue, geek tragedy Jun 2017 #94
That the most transparent candidate the field was smeared with false allegations of cronyism bettyellen Jun 2017 #96
Tr*mp figured out that most WWC voters really don't care about things like transparency, ethics, geek tragedy Jun 2017 #97
"Cultural anxiety" was their big excuse yet we shouldn't talk about it... bettyellen Jun 2017 #99
Same as that demographic has been since 1860--never on the right side of history nt geek tragedy Jun 2017 #100
Who is silencing her? karynnj Jun 2017 #115
She hasn't excused herself of any blame. But at some point, it's okay R B Garr Jun 2017 #125
She still loses the election if she had won MI & WI. She lost PA despite campaigning heavily there. LonePirate Jun 2017 #109
I wondered if she had used Obama enough but I don't think it would have helped with those voters. bettyellen Jun 2017 #111
"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest" emulatorloo Jun 2017 #85
Simple question: who would the GOP rather be the public face of the Democratic party geek tragedy Jun 2017 #89
Post removed Post removed Jun 2017 #101
in chart form geek tragedy Jun 2017 #102
If the goal is to protect Booker from being smeared by the GOP's and the BoB's then emulatorloo Jun 2017 #106
Goal is to protect our candidates in 2017 and 2018. nt geek tragedy Jun 2017 #117
Then HRC can keep the BoB's and the Breitbart's distracted this year and the next emulatorloo Jun 2017 #118
Did they poll people who regret not voting? Because the apathy bettyellen Jun 2017 #110
To be blunt, politicians are useful instruments to achieving geek tragedy Jun 2017 #119
Hillary did take responsibility for her mistakes, but that part is not shown in news clips. SunSeeker Jun 2017 #42
saying "I take responsibility" is not the same thing as actually taking responsibility. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #44
The Comey letter decapitated her campaign. SunSeeker Jun 2017 #47
Polls were tightening before the Comey letter. geek tragedy Jun 2017 #50
It would not have been close if Comey had reported he was investigating the Trump campaign. SunSeeker Jun 2017 #56
Correct...but those anemic favorability ratings are still all about misogyny and media bias BeyondGeography Jun 2017 #54
Agree with the poster above about GOTV . . FairWinds Jun 2017 #35
The DNC was a mess. it is not a sin to say that out loud. hrmjustin Jun 2017 #36
It was. And we had a chair who went to the NY times and insulted millennials for no good reason Warren DeMontague Jun 2017 #107
Who is the former DNC aide, Gabbard? obamanut2012 Jun 2017 #39
I was watching Morning Joe this morning and was really surprised when underthematrix Jun 2017 #40
Yes, that struck me too. nt SunSeeker Jun 2017 #43
I did a quick search newblewtoo Jun 2017 #68
OMG!!! THEY MUST BE RUSSIAN!!! QC Jun 2017 #41
Frankly, I think that's cherry picking out of a long interview. LisaM Jun 2017 #65
If only she had some kind of influence within the DNC... killbotfactory Jun 2017 #70
You know what? They both are responsible. Else You Are Mad Jun 2017 #76
Where was all this consternation when other individuals were attacking the DNC outright? JHan Jun 2017 #79
If anyone else used the exact same words as HRC, they'd be lauded for trying to advance the DNC. Bleacher Creature Jun 2017 #103
I agree with the DNC on this one. Bradical79 Jun 2017 #104
Everyone from Harry Reid on down seems to agree on, DWS was "Worthless" as DNC chair. His words. Warren DeMontague Jun 2017 #105
"I mean it (the DNC) was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency" That Guy 888 Jun 2017 #108
"DNC" allies? I"m sure The Hill could find some if they really wanted to. SharonClark Jun 2017 #113
Politico's Take..Dems must evaluate ourselves, or we will Alice11111 Jun 2017 #120
The criticism of the DNC is warranted. alarimer Jun 2017 #123
Omaha Steve incensed by Clinton's existence emulatorloo Jun 2017 #127
Last weeks news Omaha Steve Jun 2017 #128
I know you did. You would never toss emulatorloo Jun 2017 #129
Truth does hurt. but...proceed. nikibatts Jun 2017 #130
 

joeybee12

(56,177 posts)
18. Nope people gave it to her
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 08:31 AM
Jun 2017

Not some imaginary DNC conspirators which is what you clearly mean

Steven Maurer

(455 posts)
116. No, even counting the superdelegates...
Sat Jun 3, 2017, 12:40 AM
Jun 2017

...Hillary Clinton had a smaller margin of victory among the convention delegates than she did Democratic voters.

BumRushDaShow

(127,302 posts)
3. Ahhhhh... The Hill and good old dissent-sowing
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:34 AM
Jun 2017

just in time for the Russia-Drumpf probe ramp-up next week.

Good job!!!

bucolic_frolic

(42,672 posts)
4. The problem
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:35 AM
Jun 2017

seems not to have been the data Democrats had and shared with the DNC
or the Clinton campaign, the problem was that data was stolen by Russians
and shared with GOP operatives to target our voters minds and email accounts.

zentrum

(9,865 posts)
17. How did they target us?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 08:31 AM
Jun 2017

You mean about all her "email" and Benghazi stuff? That was all over the evening news every day because the Repugs made sure to get a headline about it. So it was already everywhere

What did they do or say when they targeted us? And was it through emails or direct mailings or calls or what? How *do* you target a voter?



bucolic_frolic

(42,672 posts)
23. Wow.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 09:01 AM
Jun 2017

Seen the news on using Facebook for disinformation lately?

Or the Florida GOP operative who had access to the hacked data
and knew our voters' voting patterns?

Some of these stories move faster on Twitter than the MSM.

former9thward

(31,802 posts)
124. Because Twitter is a internet sewer of BS rumors.
Sun Jun 4, 2017, 08:19 PM
Jun 2017

There is no evidence of anything you posted. But I am sure you will back it up with more tweets.

mwooldri

(10,291 posts)
6. Oh geesh :(
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:10 AM
Jun 2017

Hillary may have a point. It may or may not be valid. But the fact is, Hillary isn't at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the DNC had a part to play too. Hillary lost. The DNC lost. Lots of Democrats lost. It's part of the soul searching process. Sure, vote rigging, Russia etc didn't help.

Besides, I think Hillary is perfectly entitled to express her opinions on why she didn't get the job.

BeyondGeography

(39,283 posts)
21. Just as people are entitled to defend themselves and their careers when she calls them out
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 08:41 AM
Jun 2017

You could say at this point they have more at stake than she does.

bucolic_frolic

(42,672 posts)
7. And if she had won
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:28 AM
Jun 2017

with the current GOP Congress, she would already have been impeached,
tried, and convicted for having an email account in her home, with Donnie
sniping from the sidelines.

Legitimacy and sanity are not in power right now, but they are intact on
the sidelines, and their day will come.

Demsrule86

(68,348 posts)
15. That is untrue. There are not enough votes in the Senate.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 08:11 AM
Jun 2017

We would be under the gun, but not nearly in as much trouble as we are with Drump...the courts alone.

Docreed2003

(16,817 posts)
8. Anyone who said that clearly didn't listen to what Sec Clinton actuallly said in her interview....
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:31 AM
Jun 2017

In her interview at the tech summit, Sec Clinton clearly laid out the deficiencies in the party's tech apparatus compared to the RNC and the Mercer family. It was in no way a jab at the DNC and it would be hard to characterize it as such.

The interview itself was one of the most real interviews of any politician I've ever seen, particularly Sec Clinton. From the way that she responded to questions to the persona she exudes it was clear that she was showing her real self and for anyone on our side to criticize her for that, with no evidence to support their position, it reeks of axe grinding and personal gripes.

I've certainly had my own complaints about Sec Clinton, but that interview will never be one of them. In fact, I think she did more to highlight her genuineness, and her compassion and empathy for people at large during that interview than she ever showed on the campaign trail. She was funny, self deprecating, and clearly has studied the tech issues at play during the election and discussed them in a way that average people could understand.

StevieM

(10,499 posts)
73. Well said. People are determined to cultivate a narrative about HRC, using any opportunity they get.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:23 PM
Jun 2017

She wasn't blaming the DNC for her loss, she was discussing a success she had in improving the situation for future Democrats.

csziggy

(34,120 posts)
121. I have to agree with you and with HRC - the database had been neglected
Sun Jun 4, 2017, 02:54 PM
Jun 2017

I did a lot of work with the VAN database during the 2008 campaign. After the campaign I offered to volunteer to help keep the database up to date - I knew there were still sections of our area where calls had not been made, voters had not been verified, information still needed to be updated, and tools to improve the database needed to be added. The last was beyond my capabilities, but as a power user I could work with programmers to help them decide what was needed and to beta test them.

I was unable to do much during the 2012 campaign so I am not sure how much had been done in those four years. When I hosted phone banking events at my house in 2016 and made calls myself, I was appalled at how out of date the database was. MOST of the time we spent calling was to verify phone numbers and mark disconnected or wrong numbers. A good third to half of the calls I made ended up being disconnected or incorrect numbers. When we did contact registered Democratic voters all we did was try to get them to volunteer. We did absolutely no campaigning, no discussion of issues, just recruitment.

When I tried to volunteer in 2008 I thought it would be good to keep voter databases up to date and while doing that we could push voter registration - but the Democratic Party does not seem to care about either of those between elections. If we had volunteers working on those two items ALL THE TIME we could contact every unregistered eligible voter. We could work with felons to regain their right to vote. We could keep volunteers trained and engaged and not have to rebuild our teams for every single election. And lastly we could have the teams and enthusiasm for interim elections and not lose those every time.

The VAN database only includes registered voters - we need to expand it to include people who are not registered to vote so we can try to engage them. That is a major failing. With such a poor percentage of eligible citizens not registered, and with such an abysmal percentage of registered voters turning out, we are losing our democracy. The Democratic Party should be the leaders in pushing voter registration and voter rights, and fighting voter suppression. We make token efforts every four years but in between presidential campaigns it gets ignored.

Docreed2003

(16,817 posts)
122. Wow...excellent post...
Sun Jun 4, 2017, 03:32 PM
Jun 2017

I think you would do well to turn this into an OP because it needs to be shared far and wide.

Omaha Steve

(99,069 posts)
11. CNN: Democrats to Clinton: The DNC's data was fine -- you just used it wrong
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:58 AM
Jun 2017

FULL story: http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/02/politics/hillary-clinton-dnc-data-pushback/

By Eric Bradner, CNN
Updated 6:08 AM ET, Fri June 2, 2017

Washington (CNN)Democratic data gurus are lashing out at Hillary Clinton after she complained publicly that her campaign was hamstrung by a party that had out-of-date information on individual voters.

Clinton said Wednesday in an interview with Recode's Kara Swisher that once she became the Democratic nominee, she inherited "nothing." The Democratic National Committee's data, she said, "was mediocre to poor, nonexistent, wrong. I had to inject money into it."
Her comments drew swift rebuttals from some Democratic operatives who built, or worked with, that data.

Andrew Therriault, the former DNC director of data science, lashed out in two since-deleted tweets, calling Clinton's comments "f---ing bull----."

"I hope you understand the good you did despite that nonsense," he said in a message directed to DNC data staffers.

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
25. I would assume that if he were still working there, he would have used less inflammatory language
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 11:47 AM
Jun 2017

but defended their work. I would imagine that his boss, who is not HRC, would not be happy with his posting an opinion on twitter, but he may very well agree with it.

I think it might be time to reread a Bill Bradley op-ed from 2005 ( http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/30/opinion/a-party-inverted.html?_r=0 ). He speaks of how the Republicans with their foundations and echo chamber have a pyramid, where each election only the top of the pyramid changes - and that nominee's campaign has all of these resources. In contrast, he argued that we have an inverted pyramid - all balanced on the nominee. I would suggest that Trump inheriting that echo chamber in addition to the media he got for free almost because he was a train wreck - rather than data or GOTV superiority - was his advantage. I remember a fair number of articles suggesting Trump would underperform because he had few local offices and was weak on traditional GOTV.

In addition, EVERY Democratic nominee has had to essentially create what is a fairly big "corporation" from the point they win the nomination to when the general election starts. Consider that in the primaries, they can move people from state to state after a primary concludes. In the general election, they need local people in every state they opt to contest. I suspect that this could be part of what HRC might be alluding to. (I also think that she may have actually started ahead of most other non incumbent Democrats because her primary organization was closer in size to a general election team.)

Still, given that she herself is obviously sensitive to spoken and unspoken criticism that she bears some responsibility for losing, you would think that she would get that the DNC would be similarly sensitive. I was surprised that she would make a statement that hurts people who long supported her . DWS, was a 2008 Clinton chair in FL. At the time she was announced, the CW was that Obama appointed a Clinton person. The previous chair was Tim Kaine - who replaced Howard Dean, who was very good as DNC head, working hard to fix state parties so that they could develop candidates everywhere who could run when unexpected events mean we could win a race previously thought unwinnable.

Dean was reacting to the fact that the state parties were in a terrible state in late 2004 when he took over. In many states, they even had to outsource GOTV to groups that could not advocate for anyone on the ballot due to their tax code. He took over from MCAuliffe who had done a great job raising money, but had not used it to make the local parties better for 2004.

An interesting question is whether the PACs, including both hers and Obama's as well as ones like American Bridge, that competed for donations might have accounted for the poor state of the DNC. It would be interesting to know how much money the DNC had going into 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016. I think now may be as good a time as any to look at Democratic organizations and seriously look at how they are run and whether there should be better integration of DCCC, the DSC, and the DNC. In Presidential years, there is an additional question of how to connect with the Presidential campaign. (ie how did HRC or the Obama (OFA?) interact with the DNC?)

I was taken back by how Clinton spoke of the DNC, but I think that we need to look at our infrastructure.

scipan

(2,296 posts)
80. very nice summary.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:51 PM
Jun 2017

I seem to remember that Obama wanted to get rid of DWS at one time but she fought back with her allies and threatened to/did accuse him of antisemitism. I think Dean was the best one and I hope Perez walks in his shoes.

zentrum

(9,865 posts)
20. It wasn't just the DNC.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 08:36 AM
Jun 2017

….whose data wasn't helping her. Ground organizers in the key states that gave electoral college margins to Trump were begging her to send resources to them to GOTV. They were giving her great "data". But her campaign ignored their pleas, which I hear were desperate, and instead poured money into old tactics of expensive TV ads in other areas.

Bill kept warning her to help those troops.

still_one

(91,951 posts)
30. I can tell you as a call banker into the swing states, the call lists and down times were less than
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:00 PM
Jun 2017

adequate

DURHAM D

(32,595 posts)
24. Not sure exactly what everyone is talking about but
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 09:40 AM
Jun 2017

the Dems were/are stuck with VAN Votebuilder and it is totally last century.

OnDoutside

(19,906 posts)
27. I think it was VERY important Hillary said what she said. She has now challenged the DNC to prove
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 11:58 AM
Jun 2017

her wrong. It's a vital debate to get the DNC house in order.

still_one

(91,951 posts)
28. Who gives a f**k. Hillary has every right to speak out based on the bullshit she has had to put up
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 11:58 AM
Jun 2017

with from the left, the right, and media

Whose brilliant idea was it to put Cornell West on the DNC rules committee, so he could grandstand afterwards and encourage folks not to vote for Hillary?

When I was a call banker into the swing states, the call lists were inadequate, old or similar ncomplete data, and the system went down more than it should have





SunSeeker

(51,368 posts)
34. I agree about the call bank lists. REALLY out of date/inaccurate.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:14 PM
Jun 2017

I did swing state call banking too. At least half of the numbers weren't good. The rest of the folks weren't home. I was lucky if I reached someone every 10th number called. Most of the time it was 1 in 20.

Our phone banking did improve those lists, since we reported whether we reached anyone and when numbers no longer worked. The DNC (and the next Dem candidate) can thank Hillary for that. One person they won't thank is Bernie, who refused to turn over his fresh list of numbers to Hillary in the general election, even after saying he would do everything to help Hillary win.

LonePirate

(13,386 posts)
29. Data she did not receive almost certainly contributed to the loss.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:00 PM
Jun 2017

Interesting how the DNCer uses this wording: "data that you [Hillary] may or may not have received in 2016." It should be pretty obvious if she did or did not receive the necessary data so this "may or may not" weasel wording is very suspicious. Either this aide knows nothing and should never have been used as a source or this aide is uttering some CYA language and Hillary was correct with her assessment of the DNC's data problems.

SunSeeker

(51,368 posts)
31. Hillary did not blame her loss on the DNC. She merely stated a fact.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:01 PM
Jun 2017

The DNC was not the data powerhouse that Hillary's opponents claimed...and apparently continue to incorrectly claim.

This is is a bullshit, shit-stirring article.

But hey, it's been a slow news day, so let's dig up opinion pieces for LBN, amiright?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
32. nothing is ever Hillary's fault, everyone else is always to blame
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:08 PM
Jun 2017

still waiting on that "taking responsibility" thing from her.

Did the DNC data team physically block her from campaigning in Michigan and Wisconsin? Did they force her to condemn 45% of the country as "Deplorable?"

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
33. It sounds like she's starting with the little stuff and getting to the big stuff.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:14 PM
Jun 2017

I don't think you're going to like it when you hear it.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
37. so far her list of people to blame for her failed campaign
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:18 PM
Jun 2017

includes just about everyone but Hillary Clinton and her campaign team

Really, really not interested in hearing her complain about the election while merely pretending to take responsibility. She is not the future, or even the present, of the party.

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
45. She took the blame that night. I don't object to further analysis.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:31 PM
Jun 2017

Kerry couldn't really say much as he was still in office, but Hillary can speak candidly so why not give let her give her side of the story? I doubt if any of the books in the pipeline will bother to.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
48. her side of the story is entirely self-serving. No "please avoid my mistakes" lessons to impart
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:35 PM
Jun 2017

Rather, it's an exercise in self-excusal.


Why do you think Fox News and Republicans click their heels together with glee every time she makes headlines?

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
53. Still I'd like to know how it went down.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:46 PM
Jun 2017

There's a lot she can tell us and what we make of it is up to us.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
55. there is a lot she can tell us.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:50 PM
Jun 2017

she's choosing not to tell us any of the parts that might reflect poorly on her judgment

we don't need her to tell us that Comey, Russia, etc may have played a role. No shit.

But, pretending that any criticism of buckraking with Goldman Sachs, Deutschebank, etc in the wake of the subprime meltdown and Wall Street bailout is motivated by misogyny, come on.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
60. Russia/Comey is also not lacking for voices.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:03 PM
Jun 2017

More to the point, Clinton talking about Russia actually undercuts it because then it does sound like an excuse.

If she's going to offer a post mortem analysis, it can't be self-serving and also be worth anything.



ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
61. Will you also object to Comey giving testimony because its self-serving?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:18 PM
Jun 2017

Comey and Putin take every opportunity to give their version of events and have much bigger megaphones so why object to Hillary giving hers?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
64. Comey is a fact witness to potential obstruction of justice.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:29 PM
Jun 2017

The main reason for objecting to Clinton's re-litigation of the election is that it does not seem aimed at benefitting anyone other than Hillary Clinton.

It certainly doesn't help the party's goals of winning over swing voters.

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
67. He could be equally factual in a closed session, but no.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:36 PM
Jun 2017

How would he publicly blame Hillary and Huma for his own unprincipled behavior in a closed session? As for swing voters how many are Googling Recode to catch Hillary's interview?

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
46. She did take responsibility but we all know there were a lot of factors- she discussed them all.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:32 PM
Jun 2017

It's weird how people are claiming she never talked about that, or still say she never talked about policies or wasn't that same woman who spoke at Wellesley. It really astounds me because none of it is true. She's like a rosharch test, everyone seems to see what they want to.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
49. What mistakes/errors did she admit?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:36 PM
Jun 2017

She explicitly said her own mistakes were not to blame for her loss. That's self-excusal, not taking responsibility.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
52. "'I take responsibility for every decision I made, but that's not why I lost'."
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:45 PM
Jun 2017

When people talk about Clintonian rhetoric, this one's a classic.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/31/hillary-clinton-speaks-at-code-conference-on-the-information-war.html

In one clause pretending to take responsibility, in the next clause denying anything is her fault.



 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
58. Weird because I actually agree with her on this. At one point she admits Americans wanted the lies..
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:54 PM
Jun 2017

And kind of wavers when asked if she should have lied to people like her detractors did. It's a shame but I think her analysis was spot on.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
59. ignoring Wisconsin and Michigan was whose fault, exactly?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:00 PM
Jun 2017

Did someone point a gun to her head to force her to give the "Deplorables" speech?

lack of central theme/candidacy rationale was the DNC's fault?

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
66. The thing is, you can point to a dozen mistakes. Basically any one of them
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:35 PM
Jun 2017

Could have tipped the scales. I think a lot of people are looking to point to their pet reason and they're all right in a sense, but basically it's unfair to ignore the other reasons. I thought she covered a multitude of problems and it was very honest.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
69. except she explicitly denied that she did anything that caused her to lose the race.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:40 PM
Jun 2017

Losing Wisconsin (where she never bothered to campaign)? Not her fault.

Losing Michigan (which she also ignored)? Not her fault.

Deplorables comments? Not why she lost.

According to Hillary Clinton, the only things that caused Hillary Clinton to lose were things done by people who are not Hillary Clinton.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
71. She said that they did fuck up and didn't realize their data was off- what's not true there?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:46 PM
Jun 2017

Is it because she didn't own creating the data? She owned relying on it, and it was a mistake. Hindsight sucks but that's what it was. Anyway, this appears to be very personal about her, and I don't get it. I thought it was a very informative and honest interview- it's obvious anything less than falling on her sword and begging forgiveness wouldn't be enough for some people. I don't get it.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
72. Not campaigning in Wisconsin or Michigan is her fault, hers and her campaign strategists.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:21 PM
Jun 2017

Similarly the decision to sacrifice persuasion for turnout in their digital strategy.

She's blaming her bad decisions on the DNC data team. That's the opposite of taking responsibility.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
74. Again, you're focusing on one of a dozen mistakes. If it makes you feel better, great.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:25 PM
Jun 2017

If I had to focus on one issue that I think mattered more than anything else, it would be misogyny and how it led everyone to grade DT on a steep curve. But I think it's good to examine all the mistakes in a forum like that. The point was to talk about the use- and misuse- of media, and it was enlightening for many I think.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
75. what matters is how we win future elections.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:33 PM
Jun 2017

When Clinton starts offering insight into that (and the best insight would be a frank discussion of what she did that worked as well as what she did that failed) then I'll be all ears.

But when it's still "why I lost has nothing to do with what I did" zzzzzzz.

She's starting to sound like the "RIGGED!!!!" cries from Bernie die-hards in the primary.



JHan

(10,173 posts)
77. she already acknowledged that mistakes were made or is she always to bang on about ..
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:39 PM
Jun 2017

"I should I should have" Yes, the Clinton campaign relied too easily on the meme that the Obama coalition was still strong ( when it started to get shaky even in 2012)

She acknowledged mistakes were made. It sounds like people do not want her acknowledging or speaking of other factors.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
78. I think the collusion between Russia and the GOP is a huge issue- more important than any
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:41 PM
Jun 2017

Other factor and it blows my mind when people down play it. I think she did a perfect job explaining how it worked too, which was helpful.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
82. Russia/Collusion is a huge issue. But Hillary Clinton is the very last person
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:54 PM
Jun 2017

we need in public pushing that story.

JHan

(10,173 posts)
114. And "we" as Democrats had no means to counter the weaponization of data by Bannon and Co.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 09:27 PM
Jun 2017

The woman keeps saying to take her out of the equation : when you do you understand what *we* need to do to advance the party from here on:

Was the problem our policies ? no it was not.

was the problem our messaging? Maybe, but how did our messaging not reach out to voters: It's not as if Trump had superior GOTV efforts, he did not. So How do WE mount operations of the sort Cambridge Analytica did because it is not going to stop. Do we understand the terrain we're fighting on. As Lone Pirate said below, Clinton campaigned heavily in PA, so what happened there?

Take the individual out of the equation and you understand the impact of gerrymandering and republican state legislatures implementing voter suppression. It worked and it was funded in the way Clinton described "Citizens United came to fruition" - another System Problem that needs to be fixed at the Supreme Court Level.Again, We have to talk about Systems, not constantly calling for Hillary to say a bunch of magic words.

We have to get our data together, we have to be able to counter weaponized AI, we have to unite, and we have to fight voter suppression by pushing for voters to get their IDs and through grassroots activism.

Everything I said above Clinton mentioned in the interview, but the conventional take away apparently is "when is she going to take accountability".

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
84. I disagree completely. To silence her is playing into their framing.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:58 PM
Jun 2017

And it would be deeply dishonest not to discuss- especially at a tech communications meeting it would be a glaring lie or omission. Why would that be better?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
87. the last thing that will ever happen is someone silencing Hillary Clinton.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 03:44 PM
Jun 2017

But it is fair game to query whether her maintaining a high profile while simultaneously relitigating the 2016 election she blew (while excusing herself of any blame) is helpful for our efforts going forward.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
90. People have been trying to silence her and that's part of how we got here.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 04:06 PM
Jun 2017

So I really can't go along with the criticism. I think she is -and was- held up to ridiculous double standards, and that sucks.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
91. free country, she can say whatever she wants, but she's not guaranteed
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 04:25 PM
Jun 2017

that it will be received well.

litigating "the country was unfair to Hillary" is not a productive use of the party's energy

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
93. I've actually had lots of productive discussions about the effect of misogyny last year...
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 04:57 PM
Jun 2017

While it was going on, so it's actually been productive for me.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
94. discussions of misogyny should absolutely continue,
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 05:26 PM
Jun 2017

but trying to argue that criticism of buckraking speeches to Goldman Sachs is misogynist does not serve the cause well

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
96. That the most transparent candidate the field was smeared with false allegations of cronyism
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 05:35 PM
Jun 2017

By people hiding their tax returns never made any sense to me, still doesn't add up. Literally reeks of double standards.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
97. Tr*mp figured out that most WWC voters really don't care about things like transparency, ethics,
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 05:39 PM
Jun 2017

gender equality, civil liberties, etc.

That's the kind of stuff generally that only college-educated elitists care about.

They'll take indulged resentments over transparency and good government any day.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
99. "Cultural anxiety" was their big excuse yet we shouldn't talk about it...
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 05:41 PM
Jun 2017

Makes no sense, but whatever floats your boat.

karynnj

(59,475 posts)
115. Who is silencing her?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 10:07 PM
Jun 2017

Do you honestly think she could not get the entire time of any Sunday talk show if she offered to do it?

There was enormous coverage of her commencement speech and this entire thread is based on her speaking to a conference.

Not only is she not silenced, when she speaks, it is covered.

R B Garr

(16,920 posts)
125. She hasn't excused herself of any blame. But at some point, it's okay
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 12:24 PM
Jun 2017

to talk about something else like what actually happened outside of her many detractors trying to smear her.

She is very specific and uniquely qualified to prod and goad Donald and add her knowledge about the Russian hacks. She was receiving intelligence briefings, so she knows where some bones are buried. Why shut her out.

LonePirate

(13,386 posts)
109. She still loses the election if she had won MI & WI. She lost PA despite campaigning heavily there.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:09 PM
Jun 2017

She closed out her campaign in Philadelphia. A lack of visits to Rust Belt states is not what lost the election.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
111. I wondered if she had used Obama enough but I don't think it would have helped with those voters.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:17 PM
Jun 2017

May have helped with liberal turnout, but we have no way of knowing.

emulatorloo

(43,979 posts)
85. "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 03:21 PM
Jun 2017

Did Jeff Weaver and Sean Hannity hijack yr account today?

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
89. Simple question: who would the GOP rather be the public face of the Democratic party
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 03:48 PM
Jun 2017

and political resistance to Tr*mp?

1) Corey Booker/Kirsten Gillibrand/Kamala Harris

2) Hillary Clinton/Bernie Sanders?

Response to geek tragedy (Reply #89)

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
102. in chart form
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 05:59 PM
Jun 2017
https://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating

or, if you prefer text,

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/23/politics/donald-trump-approval-poll/

"Despite Trump's low approval numbers, the poll showed him retaining support among his base, with 96% of people who said they voted for him saying they would do so again. The poll showed only 85% of those who voted for Hillary Clinton would do so again, with most of those who would not saying they would either go with a third-party candidate or not vote at all.


That difference in remaining support for the two candidates would mean Trump would best Clinton 43 to 40% in a hypothetical rematch today."

*********
The Democratic Party needs to rebrand, and the first step to rebranding is ending the perception that this is the party of the Clintons.

emulatorloo

(43,979 posts)
106. If the goal is to protect Booker from being smeared by the GOP's and the BoB's then
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:45 PM
Jun 2017

Then Hillary Clinton is doing you a favor. Taking the target off Booker's back for the time being.

There's not going to be a rematch. So I don't think we need to worry about that.

Do you remember that HRC had favorables in the upper 60's when she left State?

You're a smart guy, wonder what caused that drop? Could Booker's favorables drop too?

Take care and carry on.


emulatorloo

(43,979 posts)
118. Then HRC can keep the BoB's and the Breitbart's distracted this year and the next
Sat Jun 3, 2017, 09:29 AM
Jun 2017

Hillary-hate is a strong drug, it is difficult for those folks to resist. HRC is the perfect shiny object.



 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
110. Did they poll people who regret not voting? Because the apathy
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:15 PM
Jun 2017

caused by the "both sides are corrupt" crap is a huge factor that those polls don't address at all. We lost because too many liberal voters stayed home.

I have no clue what you mean by the Clinton party, I've never known anyone intelligent to think or say that one person is the be all or end all. She is one voice among many. She isn't running again. It's bizarre to think she should completely disappear or represent what happened dishonestly.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
119. To be blunt, politicians are useful instruments to achieving
Sat Jun 3, 2017, 10:05 AM
Jun 2017

larger goals.

Her casting blame onto others is not helpful for any meaningful goal.

SunSeeker

(51,368 posts)
42. Hillary did take responsibility for her mistakes, but that part is not shown in news clips.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:22 PM
Jun 2017

Regardless of her mistskes, and EVERY candidate makes mistakes, she did not lose because of her mistakes. She was on her way to winning commandingly before Comey sent out that ourageous letter on October 8. That tanked her numbers and pushed undecideds to Trump.




 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
44. saying "I take responsibility" is not the same thing as actually taking responsibility.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:29 PM
Jun 2017

What mistakes has she admitted?

Also, that race was always a lot closer than it appeared. Trump's numbers went up every time he kept his mouth shut for 24 hours.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
50. Polls were tightening before the Comey letter.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:37 PM
Jun 2017

NY Times poll of Florida showed Tr*mp +4--and that was entirely before the Comey letter.

Is it possible it tipped the balance? Sure.

But it was a razor close race before the Comey letter, and she needs to own the fact that she couldn't put daylight between herself and Tr*mp.

SunSeeker

(51,368 posts)
56. It would not have been close if Comey had reported he was investigating the Trump campaign.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:52 PM
Jun 2017

She had an unprecedented fake news operation aimed at her, involving collusion between Russians and her opponent's campaign. The FBI spy hunters were investigating this collusion, yet voters were not informed of that invesigation. We had the media treating the nothingburger about her emails like it was a federal crime, while normalizing Donald Trump. That she managed to be 6 points up (as the above graph shows) despite all that right before the Comey letter demonstrates her strength as a candidate. That letter demonstrably cost her the election.

 

FairWinds

(1,717 posts)
35. Agree with the poster above about GOTV . .
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:16 PM
Jun 2017

Here in Ohio we have hosted campaign field workers in our home
for each of the past presidential elections, and spoke to them daily.

So we had a good idea of what the campaign was doing, or not doing.

Compared to the two Obama campaigns, in 2016 there was not a lot of GOTV.

I really don't care whose fault that was, but it needs to be FIXED.

And as I have written elsewhere, the Dems continue to ignore Right Wing
hate radio at their peril - it has poisoned the minds of at least two
generations of Americans, especially out here in the hustings.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
107. It was. And we had a chair who went to the NY times and insulted millennials for no good reason
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:48 PM
Jun 2017

while she simultaneously went on a "reefer madness" tirade defending putting pot smokers in prison, in an election year when 7 out of the 8 states that had cannabis questions on the ballot voted in favor of fixing those types of stupid fucking laws.

That's called putting your finger up to which way the wind is blowing, and flipping it off.

Derp derp derp.

underthematrix

(5,811 posts)
40. I was watching Morning Joe this morning and was really surprised when
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 12:20 PM
Jun 2017

they played part of HRC's interview in which she said the DNC was bankrupt. Her word not mine and she got nothing from them. Again her words not mine. Then Keith Ellison was interviewed about her comments and it just went from bad to worse. He didn't criticize HRC but his demeanor was weird.

A couple of takeaways. I never heard or read anything about the DNC being bankrupt. And I still don't like Keith Ellison.

newblewtoo

(667 posts)
68. I did a quick search
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:40 PM
Jun 2017

and here you go with one such article:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/205977/dnc-goes-broke-arnold-ahlert


I am not sure what exactly went on with the DNC database but I found myself wondering if it was the same on President Obama used and made available in July according to this AP article.


https://apnews.com/1e0cd64b940f49fa99ecd3db11b86d3e/obama-campaign-machine-revving-elect-Clinton


LisaM

(27,759 posts)
65. Frankly, I think that's cherry picking out of a long interview.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 01:31 PM
Jun 2017

Besides, I don't think the DNC does keep that great a database, from the stories I'm hearing here, and they also let a non Democrat drive a lot of the narrative during the election season.

I've donated to both the DNC and Democratic candidates over the years, and I barely hear from them. I didn't get phonebanked at all this year. The last call I got was in 2008 from an Obama volunteer. And I have been a registered Democrat for decades (and I'm still at the same phone number I had in 2008).

Else You Are Mad

(3,040 posts)
76. You know what? They both are responsible.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:37 PM
Jun 2017

Along with the Russian interference, misogynists, the Comey letter, voter apathy, and Trump's racism.

Nothing happens in a vacuum and to just say one or two things were the REAL reason why Hillary lose is just ignoring evidence and common sense.

We just need to accept that there were multiple outside and inside influences and work to correct those problems in 2020.

JHan

(10,173 posts)
79. Where was all this consternation when other individuals were attacking the DNC outright?
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 02:42 PM
Jun 2017

As corrupt? And beholden to corporate interests? Etc etc etc?

Bleacher Creature

(11,235 posts)
103. If anyone else used the exact same words as HRC, they'd be lauded for trying to advance the DNC.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:10 PM
Jun 2017

But when it comes from Hillary, everyone's head explodes at the nerve of her to speak out about anything, much less an election loss that will scar the nation for years and years to come.

The Hillary hate is quite a powerful drug.

 

Bradical79

(4,490 posts)
104. I agree with the DNC on this one.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:33 PM
Jun 2017

Hillary Clinton is a very smart politician, but not a data science expert. The data was good, it was how the data was used that is the problem. The Russians, and Republicans who the Russians provided the stolen DNC data to, were able to effectively use the data to microtarget voters in these states that the campaign didn't recognize as being close enough to steal. Data collection seems fine.

 

That Guy 888

(1,214 posts)
108. "I mean it (the DNC) was bankrupt, it was on the verge of insolvency"
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 06:49 PM
Jun 2017
"Clinton fundraising leaves little for state parties

The Democratic front-runner says she's raising big checks to help state committees, but they've gotten to keep only 1 percent of the $60 million raised.


In the days before Hillary Clinton launched an unprecedented big-money fundraising vehicle with state parties last summer, she vowed “to rebuild our party from the ground up,” proclaiming “when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen."

But less than 1 percent of the $61 million raised by that effort has stayed in the state parties’ coffers, according to a POLITICO analysis of the latest Federal Election Commission filings.

The venture, the Hillary Victory Fund, is a so-called joint fundraising committee comprised of Clinton’s presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee and 32 state party committees. The setup allows Clinton to solicit checks of $350,000 or more from her super-rich supporters at extravagant fundraisers including a dinner at George Clooney’s house and a concert at Radio City Music Hall featuring Katy Perry and Elton John.

The victory fund has transferred $3.8 million to the state parties, but almost all of that cash ($3.3 million, or 88 percent) was quickly transferred to the DNC, usually within a day or two, by the Clinton staffer who controls the committee, POLITICO’s analysis of the FEC records found."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670

SharonClark

(10,005 posts)
113. "DNC" allies? I"m sure The Hill could find some if they really wanted to.
Fri Jun 2, 2017, 07:39 PM
Jun 2017

The Hill loves to print articles with the intent of dividing the Dems.

Alice11111

(5,730 posts)
120. Politico's Take..Dems must evaluate ourselves, or we will
Sun Jun 4, 2017, 02:12 PM
Jun 2017

Have DT again, if all we do is scream about how bad the Repubs are for cheating, the Russians, etc. His base loves it. All of the "fuck the Repubs" & "fuck DT" get us nowhere.

http://politi.co/2rpCyBj

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
123. The criticism of the DNC is warranted.
Sun Jun 4, 2017, 07:14 PM
Jun 2017

Run by the incompetent Wasserman-Schultz, they managed to lose 900+ statehouse seats, have abandoned entire states. It's no wonder they were kind of useless this time around.

emulatorloo

(43,979 posts)
127. Omaha Steve incensed by Clinton's existence
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 12:56 PM
Jun 2017

I find it amusing that folks who told us the DNC-is-the-root-of-all-evil-in-the-universe are now falling all over themselves to defend it.

Because Hillary.

Let me know when you're ready to start calling out Republicans again.

emulatorloo

(43,979 posts)
129. I know you did. You would never toss
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 01:04 PM
Jun 2017

the most vulnerable people in our country to the GOP wolves and a predatory capitalist like Trump.

One of the reasons I admire you.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»DNC allies incensed by Cl...