Are Hillary and the DLC purposely trying to destroy the DNC?

[nichomachus]

One thought that has crossed my mind, when thinking about the FL/MI debacle, is that the DNC was led into a trap.

Long story short, it made a threat it can't really keep -- something that is a disaster, as any parent knows. If you tell your kid you're going to ground him if he does something, you'd better be willing to ground him, no matter what, or you'll have no authority in the future.

The DNC now finds itself -- with the able assistance of Hillary -- on the horns of a dilemma.

If it keeps to its threat and refuses to seat MI and FL, then Hillary will be beating her "disenfranchisement" drum until our ears bleed, despite the fact that she and her team approved the idea when it was proposed.

If it rolls over and seats the delegates, then DNC rules become just meaningless scratch marks on paper and will have no effect in the future, because people will know they can break the rules and then blackmail the DNC into caving.

In either case, Hillary's DLC will emerge stronger, as the DNC grows weaker. The common wisdom is that Hillary miscalculated and thought that FL and MI would be unnecessary. Maybe so, but, when dealing with the Clintons, never discount the possibility of more convoluted political machinations.

Did she and her followers lead the DNC into a trap by approving the threat. After all, even if MI and FL weren't in play at this stage, she could still have scored points by holding a gun to the head of the DNC demanding that they be seated. Even though it wouldn't have made any difference, it would still have emasculated the DNC.


We all know that the Clintons want to be the emperor and emperess of the party with the DLC as their courtiers, and what better way to do that than to cut the balls off the DNC.

Discuss.

[slinkerwink]

1. Yes, they hate Howard Dean

[slinkerwink]

2. Yes, they hate Howard Dean

[DogPoundPup]

3. Of the [DNC rules] committee’s 30 members, a near-majority of 12 were Clinton supporters.

All of them—most notably strategist Harold Ickes—voted for Florida’s full disenfranchisement.

[Individualist]

4. Absolutely!

This is why the DLC is dangerous. For all their claims of supposedly wanting to help Democrats, they employ people like Marshall Wittman who specifically try to undermine the Democratic Party, even if it means he has to publicly defecate out the most rank and easily-debunkable lies. They reguarly give credence to the right wing's agenda and its worst, most unsupportable lies. They are the real force that tries to make sure this country is a one party state and that Democrats never really challenge the Republicans in a serious way. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/why-the-dlc-is-so-dangero_b_13640.html


"The Democratic Leadership Council's agenda is indistinguishable from the Republican Neoconservative agenda," Dennis Kucinich

[Ravy]

5. The DNC shot themselves in the foot (not the first time).

They went after additional penalties against Florida for holding their primary a week "too soon", plus they allowed a 5 month window for primary voting yet many of them wanted it to be closed down by the supers 3 months in.

The system did not serve us very well this year.

[billyoc]

6. Clinton's recorded words approving the original plan are enough to stop them. nt

[WA98296]

7. Yes.