General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDebbie Wasserman Schultz WINS!!!!!!
Patrick Murphy WINS TOO!!!!!!!!!
WOOOOHOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/30/politics/john-mccain-debbie-wasserman-schultz-marco-rubio-primary/index.html?adkey=bn
Response to MohRokTah (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #1)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #1)
Post removed
Dawson Leery
(19,358 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)ismnotwasm
(42,378 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)isn't quite the popular position it used to be.
One hopes.
nikto
(3,284 posts)I'm sure we can count on that.
George II
(67,782 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Medical marijuana patient from Maine, no prior criminal record, facing 10 YEARS in Florida Prison for growing her own marijuana. Followed home by cops from a hydroponics store, because apparently the taxpayers dollars in Florida have nothing better to do than sit outside grow shops and follow random 50 year old women home. Then the search warrant, etc.
Yeah, one could argue the theory that she moved from Maine with her MMJ card and her host of medical issues (because older people NEVER move to Florida for just medical reasons, now, do they?) knowing no one in FL, because she had the great plan to become the 50 year old pablo escobar of weed under cover of being a medical marijuana patient.
Or, she's telling the truth, and she grows her own weed because she doesn't know anyone and doesn't want to try and score on the black market.
Anyway, how does this relate to DWS? Well, Ms. Kirouac was arrested in 2014, the same year DWS worked with Sheldon Adelson's anti-drug org to kill Medical Marijuana reform in Florida. Reform which would have prevented Ms. Kirouac's arrest, or made the case against her moot.
So is DWS sitting there slamming the cell door shut personally? No. But her advocacy and voting record is putting medical marijuana patients away as we speak. Just ask Brigit Kirouac.
MADem
(135,425 posts)She was rather vociferously "anti-legalization" and "anti-medical MJ" until very very recently. She's--to use a Trump word -- "softening" a bit on the issue mainly because her constituency is out in front on this score.
So, is she on the shit list, too?
Or, because she "Speaks truth to power" does she get a pass on this matter?
This is an issue where people are moving--albeit slowly--towards sanity. Lots of politicians we otherwise "like" are on the wrong side of this and looking for a way to jump the fence without freaking out their stodgy long-term supporters.
From here:
https://blog.mpp.org/prohibition/elizabeth-warren-flunks-marijuana-question/
To here:
http://www.theweedblog.com/senator-elizabeth-warren-is-open-to-marijuana-legalization/
And most of HER constituents aren't "set in their ways" senior citizens who have been raised on Reefer Madness propaganda....
George II
(67,782 posts)....carry a gun openly to one where it once can't expecting to be able to do so - "I have a note".
Last I heard, a sitting Congresswoman doesn't write or vote for state legislation.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Great. Must feel good to cluck about how awful she is, to have plants in her basement. And it's not like Ms. Kirouac wasn't asking for it, you know, driving home from a hydroponics store and all. Clearly a menace to public safety.
As for the "sitting congressowman...." thing, I seem to address this every. damn. time. we have these conversations, but I'll do it again: SHE ADVOCATED AGAINST MEASURE 2 -IN FLORIDA- IN 2014. So she was using her prominent public position to work (again, along with Sheldon Adelson's drug-free Florida org, which was the primary source of money for the no on 2 effort) against state legislation.
So the next time someone- not you, of course- tries to act like I'm an idiot for bringing it up, please remember, yes, it's relevant even though she's in the House (where she also has cast VOTES to send medical marijuana patients to prison) because of her direct advocacy in the state. Don't take my word for it, ask the local press.
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/on-medical-marijuana-debbie-wasserman-schultz-sounds-like-a-republican-6544176
(emphasis added)
Scott and Republican Attorney General Pam Bondi have used similar language to state their opposition to the amendment. In fact, Bondi unsuccessfully tried to have the amendment taken off the ballot by claiming that it was worded too broadly.
sheshe2
(86,096 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)Response to gabeana (Reply #9)
Post removed
emulatorloo
(45,470 posts)Pretty smart on her part, BOB.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)give credit to HRC who ran a very strong disciplined campaign not DWS
emulatorloo
(45,470 posts)But Weaver failed to broaden Bernie's coalition, just hurled red meat and CT to GD: P types. Bernie deserved better but that's water under the bridge. About to sign up to knock doors for HRC
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Response to MohRokTah (Reply #11)
Post removed
nikto
(3,284 posts)You know, what we used to call, back in the 80s,
Republicans.
As the GOP struggles, the Democratic Party yearns to be the New Republican Party.
There's so much $$$$ in it, ya' know?
gabeana
(3,166 posts)we got an OP celebrating a GOP agenda
nikto
(3,284 posts)Pathetic beyond words,
because of where the Party may be led in the years after this election,
with full-support from The Faithful.
Response to nikto (Reply #26)
jack_krass This message was self-deleted by its author.
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)because they honestly don't know what they're talking about.
MADem
(135,425 posts)starters.
How you can insult Democrats by tossing out that bitter false equivalency, just because your candidate was rejected, is beyond me.
Ya know?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Might want to read the TOS.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)need to support her, I don't know anything about the district assume it is a safe D
but I am not going to be jumping for joy for someone I see as an extension of corporate greed
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)At least, no Democrat east of the Mississippi, and that's all that matters, right?
MADem
(135,425 posts)She didn't catch any shit for it, though.
She's "rethinking" right now--not there yet, though.
Still not catching any shit.
She's avoided the "Lord of the Flies" treatment, lucky her. She got a taste of it when she withheld her endorsement, though....
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)The East Coast can catch up sooner, or later. Won't matter much to us out here.
One difference between DWS and Senator Warren, however, is in terms of direct activism and voting record.
if DWS evolves, great. If not, it will go on without her.
zappaman
(20,607 posts)but that's assuming people show up and actually vote!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I am optimistic that it will pass.
zappaman
(20,607 posts)The last time it came up, there were some issues with how it was presented.
This time, it looks good!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)2010 there was a more sketchy, weaker attempt that failed.
2014 was much better put together.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Most people I know support it--I hope they'll turn out.
Politicians do tend to evolve based on the way their CONSTITUENTS regard an issue--this is why EW has been moving forward on it. But five short years ago EW was a flat, aggressive NO on the legalization issue and was no fan of medical, either. She ran for office OPPOSED to it. Most of the people who voted for her thought she had her head up her ass on that one issue, but we're not the type to throw the baby out with the bathwater if the baby cuts one rude fart. You just get over it and try to clear the air.
DWS has been in Congress for fifteen years, and in the FL House for seven or eight years before that. SHE has a voting record and one that like anyone with that long a time in public life, evolves over time. EW is still a newbie. She's only been serving since Jan 2013--so a three year voting record in a Senate that would rather OBSTRUCT than bring bills to the floor is hardly a record at all. Her jobs before that didn't require her to "vote" on anything and her portfolio of action was prescribed by her boss--the POTUS.
Your comparison is total apples and oranges.
And terribly, terribly unfair, too.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)As of now, she won her primary, so she's not my problem.
I hope MA will pass it, but I won't be terribly surprised if you guys don't, at least not this time around. My impression having spent much time roaming across this great land, the further East you get the more uptight (or, if you prefer, conservative) people are about that particular issue.
Doesn't mean it won't ever change, but I wasn't surprised when CO and WA went first and we went second. I think it's got pretty good odds in CA, other states more of a toss-up or even likely loss.
Response to MohRokTah (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
murielm99
(31,215 posts)and all loyal Democrats.
nikto
(3,284 posts)But hey, it's not about the content of a person's character, or what they actually stand for.
It's about the party label.
Sorry, but this is not good news for anyone but neoliberals and supply-side Democrats.
As a New Deal FDR-Democrat, I feel nauseous.
I predict, if the party refuses to turn left in its policies towards working people,
a great crisis for the Democratic Party may be coming in the years 2016-2020.
I hope not.
But it may be inevitable, if the Democratic Party does not start working harder for the interests of
America's working and middle class, than its bankers, investors and corporate people.
emulatorloo
(45,470 posts)There's apparently not a "great crisis" in her district.
I will say, I don't believe jargon will impress real world voters. Isn't there a more meaningful way to express ourselves than name calling folks "neo-liberals"?
nikto
(3,284 posts)Last edited Wed Aug 31, 2016, 12:28 AM - Edit history (1)
As a retired teacher, I say vocabulary is a good thing.
I rarely see the word Neoliberal applied incorrectly.
I only use it where it applies, and every time I do, I can explain at length and in detail how it is accurately used.
If it hurts someone's feelings, then it means the person feeling the pain still has a soul left, and may not
want to see themselves as a Neoliberal, even if they actually do lean that way on policy.
But admittedly, Neoliberal and "guilt" do not often go together.
emulatorloo
(45,470 posts)And simply use it as a way to name call people who don't agree with them.
If you want to knock doors and talk to voters, try to find a plain language equivalent. I have advanced degrees in English as well and have taught too.
Sometimes common sense and plain language and understanding your audience is far more important and effective than showing off your erudition and extensive vocabulary.
It is about being an effective communicator, and spouting specialized political jargon isn't effective communication IMHO.
Of course ymmv. Have a great night.
nikto
(3,284 posts)I try to use it responsibly, myself.
As in,
DWS has strong neoliberal leanings in a number of policy areas such as support for for-profit prisons,
payday-lenders, and trade deals such as TPP. Also, she is a member of the strongly pro-corporate (aka "pro-growth" New Dem Caucus. These are clearly Neoliberal positions.
See?
No insults.
Just facts.
Good evening to you.
Eko
(8,172 posts)As a "New Deal FDR-Democrat" should we order the internment of 100,000 Japanese American civilians, keep on being the Arsenal of Democracy, out gay soldiers? Of course not. There was so much good done at that time that we overlook these things to a certain point when we call ourselves New Deal FDR-Democrats. Of course payday lending, for profit prisons and trade deals far outweigh any of that stuff. Pffft.
nikto
(3,284 posts)The Democratic Party's real crisis is ahead of us.
After the election.
And it's going to be a doozie.
synergie
(1,901 posts)try to divide and attack the party really lack both follow through and a clue. After the election, the whiny ones will not bother with a party that was never really theirs and those that seek to attack the party and the president will be outed for what they actually have been all this time, not progressive, not liberal and certainly not Dems.
Whats interesting here is you opened yourself up to a line of inquiry that wasn't even necessary. If you had just stated you were a democrat and against those things then I would have been like, cool, no problem with that. But no, you are a FDR New Deal democrat and "neoliberals" are the problem, at least according to you. We have done a lot of good, but yeah I know there are a lot of things we could have done better. More people have health care than ever, but yeah, that's not that good. Gay people can serve in the military without having to hide themselves and they can finally get married in every state, but that's not that good. We stopped the torturing of detainees that the previous administration was doing, just ok, we kicked banks out of the federal student loan program, we created a deal with Iran in regards to nukes, s'ok. We started the long road of combating global warming, we got a new Start treaty, improved school nutrition, expanded hate crimes protections, but yeah we suck. But hey, at least we didn't create concentration camps for a race and we didnt nuke 220,000 people, at least we have that going for us. Just a side note, how were African Americans treated back then? By the New Deal FDR Democratic party?
Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable the art of the next best
― Otto von Bismarck
Hekate
(93,581 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)So there's no reason to pay any attention to them.
When the terms "Neo-liberal" and "supply-side Democrats" are hurled as insults, the positions of those hurling them can be promptly ignored as irrelevant because those who hurl these insults rarely ever show up to vote for our nominees.
It's a simple matter of dancing with those that brung ya.
So WOOHOO!!!!!! Debbie Wasserman Schultz WON!!!!!!!!!!!!
nikto
(3,284 posts)If some folks use it as a perjorative, then that's on them.
I don't.
But it can be accurate in its use, as it is when used to describe many of the policy positions of DWS, Rahm Emanuel, etc.
Those are just facts.
And I am sincerely sorry to see the rise of neoliberalism in my beloved Democratic Party---The Party whose New Deal made my life and careerso much better than it would have been without it.
If the Democratic Party continues to turn-away from New Deal-type thinking (albeit up-dated, for our era),
I consider that a tragedy.
FDR's Democratic Party was the Party of the common working person.
I fear the "new" Democratic Party is becoming the party of bankers.
If that ain't neoliberal, then nothing is.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)In fact, every post you have made in this thread demonstrates you have no understanding of the definition of the term.
1939
(1,683 posts)said while we were trying to parse our way through a very turgid piece of governmental directive,
"Words mean what I choose them to mean".
It sounded very arrogant at the time, but it seems to be the prevailing attitude where we or groups of we choose new meanings for a word.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)another would be grabbed from the virtual water balloon dictionary.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Don't be afraid.
synergie
(1,901 posts)since it would seem that you don't know and are actually using it as a pejorative to attack Democrats you don't like.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Also, people have explained why "new deal type thinking" is not exactly the most appropriate thing, and what the "new deal" was about.
FDR was one of those 1%ers and the "oligarchs" that so many have been ranting and raving about.
I fear that you really, really do need to learn what neoliberal is, lest you continue misusing the term as a pejorative to attack Democrats.
Response to synergie (Reply #110)
Post removed
synergie
(1,901 posts)You seem to think your false beliefs are backed up by facts, they are not. You don't seem to understand the word or the party you apply it to. I'm sorry, but developed coherent level of correspondence requires that one is capable of understanding and engaging at that level, and from your rant here, that does not seem to be the case.
I'm sorry that you are so very deluded about our party and that you believe any and all untruths fed to you, but the shame is yours, the shallowness is yours, long posts don't substitute for facts, truth or an actual understanding of the words you claim to understand but fail to demonstrate that you grasp.
IMO, you don't seem to understand what you're exposing here about your bias, your failure to understand and the difference between reality and the things you fervently believe because the talking points have been repeated so often.
You have not done anything close, sorry but that is also the truth. The wiki page does not nail your frequent misuse of the term, your constant and consistent use of in the pejorative to attack a party that you don't seem to respect very much or are terribly informed about. Screeching "corporatist" is not the high level argument you seem to wish to believe it is.
Sorry, but embracing truth requires to you embrace that what you're saying isn't "truth" nor have you been honest or truthful about your use of a term you don't quite get.
Hekate
(93,581 posts)Edit post and delete every "sorry" but one, or maybe all of them. Write from strength, and don't apologize to the invincibly self-righteous.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)Who could have guessed that modern "New Deal Democrats" would care more about their money than other people?
Such a shock.
It's annoying to see you try to call others "Reaganites" while you're actually acting like one.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Reagan Dems out there? Evidently they never changed or had to grow with the party. Some did and obviously others never will.
Big tent etc..
Cha
(302,810 posts)Mahalo Moh~
In_The_Wind
(72,300 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)riversedge
(72,029 posts)fantase56
(460 posts)Bernardo de La Paz
(50,296 posts)Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)FFS.
The ones who got the most votes--by a wide margin--won.
mcar
(43,194 posts)Speak for yourself.
George II
(67,782 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... and not even trying to pretend to fit-in. It's disappointing, but I'm hopeful that things will calm down soon.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)I thought possible.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I hope things calm down soon, too. We have some great candidates, and an election to win.
We've all gotta lead, follow or just get out of the way!
Raine
(30,587 posts)Response to MohRokTah (Original post)
Post removed
immoderate
(20,885 posts)I voted for Tim.
--imm
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)heavy sigh heavy sigh
Response to MohRokTah (Original post)
Post removed
Response to MohRokTah (Original post)
Post removed
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)and it serves all her bullies right.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)Congrats Debbie, you beat the haters.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)District 23 constituents for having your say and picking your representative in spite of attempts to impose the will of outsiders.
Maru Kitteh
(28,723 posts)that silly little dingbat Rubio.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Those results mean we're guaranteed to lose the Senate race(and also Grayson's old House seat, where the "Democrats" nominated a guy who is ok with the idea of ultimately getting rid of Social Security and who has no progressive stands on anything).
This also puts HRC at risk...since it is impossible to generate any enthusiasm with nothing but conservatives on the down ticket (we already know from this that any hope of beating Rubio is gone, since no one is stoked about Murphy, whose positions on the issues are basically the same as George Smathers), it's going to be impossible to get a high voter turnout in Florida.
That also means we've just lost any chance at all of making any gains in the Florida legislature, which means the state is doomedf to be gerrymandered now 'til at least 2030.
That's what has to happen when conservatives win Democratic primaries-it kills all the excitement and passion. Nothing matters in Florida in November now. No one there has any reason to care anymore.
Why does any of that make you happy?
Why do you want the Florida Democratic party to be the second party of the right?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)I suggest you read the TOS.
G_j
(40,420 posts)all these TOS references? Some kind of Holy crusade?
George II
(67,782 posts)....and any other site I've been on.
G_j
(40,420 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Democrats are supposed to be left of center.
G_j
(40,420 posts)if just a single alerter is responsible for all the removed posts...
alittlelark
(18,900 posts).... ?
KMOD
(7,906 posts)- Harry Reid
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/harry-reid-alan-grayson_us_573a27fae4b060aa781af541
He added in reference to Grayson: What we DONT need is a disgraceful hedge fund manager masquerading as a progressive.'
https://www.murphyforflorida.com/news/2016/tampa-bay-times-email-blast-harry-reid-campaigns-patrick-murphy/
Who are you calling right wingers, Ken?
MADem
(135,425 posts)change in the legislature. He threw red meat to hungry lions, pacing around looking for a fight, but he did nothing to improve the lives of everyday people.
And he blatantly violated House ethics by touting his position as a REASON to invest with him...he flat out said that he got the skinny ahead of the schmucks, so he was better prepared with sound strategies.
The man is an ugly, nasty grifter and the worst example of a Democrat we've seen in decades--rich as Roosevelt, with none of his character. Reid was right on the mark with him. His chief of staff, loyal to him for YEARS, expected (because he promised) his help with her campaign for his vacant seat. What did he do instead? Tout his new bride who thought she could grab the seat with her "enterpreneur" money--and his staffer was completely BLINDSIDED by this. She was told by a reporter that his (at the time) girlfriend was running with his backing, and it was obvious that she was nonplussed and HUMILIATED by the news.
In the end, even the staffer got rejected; his district was sick of the "Grayson touch" apparently. A state senator won the primary. All politics IS local, apparently.
How nice that Bride Dena came in THIRD--even though she changed her name to Grayson on the ballot, the constituents weren't fooled. They know a big pharma profiteer when they see one! Who's taking bets on how long THAT marriage will last? It seems to me that the only thing they had in common was her enthusiasm as a political groupie (she donates a LOT and goes to all the "best" fundraisers) and his connections, now severed, to the political scene.
Funtatlaguy
(11,525 posts)I'm just asking those that like DWS to tell me if they think she did a good job as DNC chair in the midterms in helping to attract candidates to run, promote them, and elect them.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)Gothmog
(152,036 posts)Hugin
(34,303 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)she helped divide our party, and that's just my personal opinion about her.
synergie
(1,901 posts)divisiveness in the party to make themselves feel more pure, but if the division is what bothers you, your contempt should be for those who did the dividing, not those who used her to do so.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)and I'm in a good mood now so I'll give you a few links.
Democrats turn on Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Politico
*Wasserman Schultz Reportedly Wanted to Paint Obama as Anti-Woman, Anti-Semitic If Ousted
Mediaite
Debbie Wasserman Schultz Must Go
The DNC desperately needs a chairperson who isn't completely in the tank for Hillary Clinton
Observer
AFL-CIO Says 'No' To Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Sunshine State
And of course, I was a Bernie Sanders supporter and a union member So she does rub me wrong even now...but I will vote Blue.
* When she first pissed me off.
synergie
(1,901 posts)to divide the party this primary season. So blaming her for divisiveness is simply unfair, since she was literally used as a wedge by those seeking to divide.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)she is what she appears to be in my book...and those are, as you say, my issues.
synergie
(1,901 posts)she was made into a "yuuuuge" issue. Kind of the problem with judging by appearances alone and not doing one's homework.
Stellar
(5,644 posts)KMOD
(7,906 posts)[img][/img]
Her fundraising and organizing skills were matched only by her passion, her commitment and her warmth. And no one works harder for her constituents in Congress than Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Obama said.
Michelle and I are grateful for her efforts, we know she will continue to serve our country as a member of Congress from Florida and she will always be our dear friend.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/24/president-obama-debbie-wasserman-schultz-leadership.html
Stellar
(5,644 posts)eta: most of us Sanders supporters did.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)Stellar
(5,644 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)instead of the ax. She was attacked by people proudly hostile to the party establishment as a means of dividing and weakening the party itself, and we all know that.
DWS isn't perfect. Surely you can blame her for something real. There are some things in this good article from Newseek, although if you read it I think you'll realize if you choose to have no reason at all except that she exists you'll have plenty of company.
Btw, as DNC chair she was a prime target for attacks long before the primary, exactly the same kind of vitriol as Hillary Clinton, just to a much smaller degree.
Many current and former members of Team DWS describe a different Wasserman Schultz. They use words like smart, warm, tough, compassionate and hardworking. "I'm super 'Type A' and thought I was a really hardworking person, and then I met her and couldn't keep up," a former staffer says. "She just never, ever stops. She's not someone who needs to sit and recharge and watch a mindless TV show. She's just gung ho all the time. "Gridlock is synonymous with Congress these days. And yet she got things done by just working, working, working, working," says another longtimer."
...
But Wasserman Schultz is used to dealing with pissed off progressives. "She's the firewall between activists in the party and elected leaders," says Donna Brazile, a longtime Democratic strategist who was interim chair before Wasserman Schultz. "And when you're the firewall, you're a target." Or as Rosen puts it, "You're basically the dog everyone likes to kick."
The job's a meatgrinder: Wasserman Schultz's predecessor, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, stayed only two years. Before him, former Vermont Governor Howard Dean spent four years polishing his name after losing a nomination fight to John Kerry. The last DNC chair to serve as long as Wasserman Schultz was Robert Strauss, who led the party from 1972 to 1977 in the wake of George McGovern's crushing defeat at the hands of Richard Nixon.The Democratic Party Wasserman Schultz inherited in 2011 was reeling from a similar defeat. A year earlier, the party lost 63 seats in the House and seven in the Senate, losing its filibuster-proof supermajority in the bargain. It also lost 726 seats in state legislatures and six governorships. It was the biggest loss of seats in either party since the Great Depression.
Wasserman Schultz's task was to stanch the bleeding and reverse the trend. To that end, she became the party's loudest advocate. "She understands that visibility is viability," says Brazile. But her high profile has drawn critics. Part of that comes down to sexism, says Kathryn DePalo, a professor of political science at Florida International University: "When a woman exerts authority in that particular sense, people are ready to knock you down whatever way they can.""People in your own party are constantly unhappy with you," says Rosen, "and people on the other side view you as the vehicle with which to attack Democrats because it's easier to trash Debbie Wasserman Schultz than the president
http://www.newsweek.com/2016/06/10/why-dont-people-debbie-wasserman-schultz-462819.html."
Stellar
(5,644 posts)I wasn't a great big fan of Bill or Hillary's since 2008, and I thank you for trying, I'm done.
But I will be voting Blue. (and thank you for not being angry with me, or making me feel stupid like some have).
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)of what counts at our level. See ya there.
Raine
(30,587 posts)thru payday lending wins.
Bettie
(16,757 posts)of the payday lending and private prison industries.
This party has changed a lot. Used to be they were more about people than corporations.
People over profit has changed to profit over people.
And we're all supposed to cheer about this.
bullwinkle428
(20,639 posts)amongst the loan shark and "reefer madness" community!
betsuni
(27,088 posts)Debbie Wasserman Schultz is so terrible? I don't know anything about her. Just calling her "neoliberal" or "corporatist" or "DINO" or "same as a Republican" doesn't tell me anything. I've heard her blamed for Democrats not being elected. Why?
think
(11,641 posts)candidates in her area that were running for the House due to her friendships with members of the GOP in the House:
By Lesley Clark - McClatchy Newspapers - MARCH 9, 2008 2:23 PM
Democratic party leaders have tapped Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz to raise money and coach candidates in a high-stakes, aggressive bid to expand the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives.
But as three Miami Democrats look to unseat three of her South Florida Republican colleagues, Wasserman Schultz is staying on the sidelines. So is Rep. Kendrick Meek, a Miami Democrat and loyal ally to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
That wasn't the case just two years ago when the pair flouted a long-standing Florida delegation agreement to not campaign against colleagues and vigorously backed Ron Klein in his winning bid to oust veteran Republican Rep. Clay Shaw.
This time around, Wasserman Schultz and Meek say their relationships with the Republican incumbents, Reps. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and his brother Mario, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, leave them little choice but to sit out the three races...
Read more:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24478039.html
BY JERRY IANNELLI - MONDAY, AUGUST 8, 2016 AT 1:21 P.M.
~snip~
Last month, New Times broke news that Canova's name turned up repeatedly in the DNC's email leak. WikiLeaks' email database showed that DNC staffers, who were not part of Wasserman Schultz's campaign team, routinely kept tabs on Canova's campaign, shared articles about him, and helped the congresswoman coordinate her fight against him.
~Snip~
In another email chain, DNC spokesperson Luis Miranda asked staffers to "do some digging" for information about a May rally at which Canova planned to speak in Alaska. The rally had been scheduled to compete with one of Wassserman Schultz's speeches.
"When is he [Canova] speaking compared to when she [Wasserman Schultz] is speaking?" DNC staffer Kate Houghton wrote May 12. "Adding a few more people. We need as much intel as you can provide."
If the FEC chooses to enforce Canova's complaint, the commission could levy fines against Wasserman Schultz.
~Snip~
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/tim-canova-files-formal-election-complaint-against-debbie-wasserman-schultz-8667388
George II
(67,782 posts)....not many "democrats" around here support the election process.
She ran, she won, she'll win in November. That is and will be the will of the people.
Isn't that the way it's supposed to work?
Funny thing, I suspect that most of the negative comments expressed on the primary result last night in Florida and her district, not many if any actually live in that district or state.
supporting the election process doesn't require one to be happy with the results.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Response to MohRokTah (Original post)
Post removed
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Calling her a "DINO" is unacceptable.
George II
(67,782 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)DinahMoeHum
(22,297 posts). . .actually serving her district instead of trying to serve 2 masters.
That she was a complete fucking failure as DNC head underscores my opinion that the DNC job should go to an actual political strategist - NOT an actively serving elected legislator.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)That is No Fing Failure considering Fl's shade of redness.
Happy as ever to have DWS win in spite of the spite & b.s. she undeservingly received from the sour grapes crowd.
DWS has done her job well.
Much Respect for her strength & loyalty to the DEM Party in Fl and in the US House.
Proud to support another strong woman for a Madam President Hillary.
She is no wishy washy whiner!! Thats for sure!
Congrats to DWS & her unsinkable resiliant fighting spirit.
Btw. Her tenure at DNC ends this fall. She Lost nothing.
She Wins again & again.
DinahMoeHum
(22,297 posts)Midterms.
"You're only as good as your last performance" - fortunately she has been given another chance.
I stand by my previous statement.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)That is hardly DWS's fault at all.
When voters don't bother to vote they have no one to blame but themselves.
That is the real truth of 2014.
Blamers gotta blame .
Sorry for your loss.