Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin will call for DNC officials’ neutrality to be codified in the party’s official rules and bylaws, two Democratic sources tell CNN. Martin has already been telling DNC members of his plans and will explain more in a call with members Thursday afternoon.
. . . “No DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election, whether on behalf of an incumbent or a challenger,” Martin told reporters on a call Thursday. “Voters should decide who our primary nominees are, not DNC leadership.”
The DNC’s Rules & Bylaws committee is expected to vote on Martin’s proposal next month in a virtual meeting. If the committee approves the proposal it will advance to a full vote of the DNC membership in August.
The push for the new rule comes days after Hogg, who beat out a crowded field to become one of three DNC at-large vice chairs in February, announced his plan to help primary incumbent Democrats in safe districts through his group Leaders We Deserve. The organization plans to spend a total of $20 million in next year’s midterms supporting young people running for office.
Hogg stressed that his effort would not target Democrats in competitive districts or use any DNC resources, including voter files or donor lists. He told CNN in an interview last week that he would not endorse in the presidential primaries if he is still a DNC leader.
“I don’t take it personally,” Hogg said of the criticism of his primary challenge. “There’s a difference in strategy here, and the way that we think things need to be done.”
He’s going end up killed when he gets “robbed” while jogging some night soon
The DNC version of neutrality is blocking progressives. Sure they’ll happily codify a rule that Hogg cannot help young progressives primary incumbents election while pretending it’s about actually neutrality and letting the voters choose. But they’ll be just as happy to throw that rule out when they want to support some Republican in sheep’s clothing to kick out a progressive next time around.
That’s a lot of accusing there. And Hogg is going to help through his PAC anyway.
And Hogg is going to help through his PAC anyway.
And he’ll probably be stripped of his position in the DNC for it.
Martin told reporters on a call Thursday “Voters should decide who our primary nominees are, not DNC leadership.”
So they’re doing away with superdelegates? Ope wait, nope, Martin is just full of hot air.
Superdelegates don’t vote in the primaries. And it’s presidential only. And they only comprise 15% of the delegates.
Funny. The corporate press counted them at the start of 2016 when Clinton needed a boost.
This is the same DNC fucks that did this?
Fuck off with you request for ‘Neutrality Now’.
No DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election
Yeah, the DNC would never do that.
Looking at YOU 2016…
Don’t forget 2020
And 2022. They did ad buys for republican candidates in the primaries and then gleefully announced that they had no money for progressive candidates in the general.
uh huh.
if bernie actually did the work to attract me actual base of the party, which by the way are not college age kids but black people, specifically black women, he would not have lost the primary.
and since that election he had another 4 years to work on his extreme deficit with black voters, but had zero outreach with that cohort. instead he doubled down on the youth vote.
that’s not a strategy to win a primary. but it’s a perfect strategy to try to split off young voters into not supporting the democratic choice in the future. and not shutting down conspiracy theories about rigged primaries doesn’t help either. what it does is create distrust where there shouldn’t be, fracture the party to turn against itself instead of the real threat which is the republican party, and in fact increase the chances that republicans win in greater margins because the super bernie side refuses to be smart and do damage limitation by not voting for the viable non republican candidate.
and by the way a few additional things that need to be considered:
- if he wants the democratic nomination, why doesn’t he formally join the party? what he was asking for has been equal access to resources without a full commitment to the party. you all would rightfully object if I declared I’m running for president as a democrat even though I’m a registered non partisan. what makes him any different from me as far as the party is concerned?
- it really is rich how you are all upset about the democrats (allegedly) putting the thumb on the scale for a candidate so now there is a pledge that all people in dnc leadership have to agree to that formally states that leadership will be neutral in all party races from now on. so which is it, you don’t want the dnc influencing races or do you not want the voters in the districts to decide who their candidates should be without party influences?
- you also all think that the super progressive democratic candidate will play everywhere in the country. sure, it may work where I live. but I’m a blue® dot in a state trump won by 31 points. you have to run candidates that will win and super liberals in places like appalachia, oklahoma, or wyoming would consider it a good race if they lost by 50 points.
what it seems like to me is that what the vast majority of people here want is to destroy the democratic party from the ground up in the name of a stupid purity test the vast majority of the party does not agree with, and they want to do it while the most dangerous, insane person who is also the head of a violent cult is in the white house. you’re trying to make your own left wing cult with either bernie or aoc as the head and the rest of the party is not with that.
as I said above I’m not a registered democrat. I find myself politically closer to aoc and bernie. and I’M telling y’all that following and supporting hogg’s move will end the democratic party or any viable non republican party for generations.
Black women are not the base of the party, that’s a common misconception.
In 2023, just 14.4% of the US population identified as black. Women are just over 50% of that.
https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/fact-sheet/facts-about-the-us-black-population/
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045224#PST045224
So Just over 7% of the US population are black women. You don’t win elections catering to 7% of the population. Even if they all vote for you, which they won’t, a party can’t survive on 7%.
The Democratic party represents 45.1 million people out of 186.5 million people registered to vote. 24.18% of the voting population.
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-voters-have-a-party-affiliation/
Debbie NEVER Could’ve
*No tag-backs
Pretty sure they got the memo
Americans haven’t had an honest vote on the shape or priorities of our economy in half a century.
Just the social issue wedges that economy either causes or in some way informs in order to keep us at each other’s throats and not at our shared enemy in their towers and guard gated compounds.
Would you like your crony market capitalism with affirmation ribbons or scapegoats? Freedom!
Example: you know what would cause a lot fewer abortions almost immediately with absolutely no bans from getting one when the woman deems it necessary? A living wage that can support a family. But that’s a non starter, as it would cost our rulers capital, and lower their quarterly ego score estimates.
The situation will continue to decline until collapse or the elevation of an actual leftwing government, and both parties conspire to prevent that from happening.
I hope this kid haunts their fucking nightmares. Cunts.
Fascinating stuff.
I am not American (have previously lived in North America for a decade and travelled extensively in the region), but based on my experiences this is a very good example of how the US centre-right opposition is completely unqualified for any kind of real action. They clearly lack the risk tolerance and gumption to deal with current internal challenges in their country.
They clearly lack the risk tolerance and gumption to deal with current internal challenges in their country.
I didn’t get that from the article. I thought the article was showcasing some real gumption to change things, something the RNC would never dream of in a million years (or need to).
Respect to David Hogg. I meant this in a more broader perspective.
I am comparing to global examples. One would be Hong Kong. They failed, but they actually were able to shut down the local airport for a short period.
Or say the initial phase of the Syrian revolution. The population openly protested against a brutal regime that was in power for many decades and there were many examples of their brutality.
I specifically chose failed or highly controversial situations (to highlight how a fight for freedom involves scary and painful choices, this is not a movie). From my experience living in the US, I thought local risk tolerance was low. On a certain level, the US is too well off to have the motivation for resistance (be it mass scale ptotest, 10% of pop or more, weekly protest or violent rebellion).
I don’t know how to say it diplomatically, but true fight for freedom doesn’t seem like the American way.
See? They can push back on something.
Primary EVERYONE!
I’m in agreement, honestly, we need to be reducing Republican seats as the singular most important goal. Challenging incumbents isn’t going to do that.
I’m in agreement, honestly, we need to be reducing Republican seats as the singular most important goal. Challenging incumbents isn’t going to do that.
Where were you when AIPAC was buying candidates against Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman? I didn’t see your desire to protect incumbents then.
Oh look. The Dems rolling out the same shit since 2015 thinking it’ll work. They are corporate controlled opposition and nothing more. We need a new party ideally, but Hogg needs support from other members who also are tired of the party being The Washington Generals of well, Washington.
I think the article is saying they’re not doing the same shit. Not doing it in two different ways, even.
And I’m all for electing the best people to get what we want, but Deez Nutz and Jill Stein ain’t gonna get it. Reforming the DNC is our best shot.
Reforming the DNC is our best shot.
Primarying all the useless centrists is the best way to do that. Which is why democrats are losing their shit over this, but were happy to vote for trump’s continuing resolution a few weeks back.
centrists oppose the left and work with the right.
Jill Stein should be nowhere near even the idea of a reform coalition.
100% agree. So what’s the plan?
Despite the naysaying, isn’t this a good thing? Seems the new chair wants impartiality and if codified then should be a wide open contest.
It’s exactly what the Democratic party should want. Just not necessarily the Democrat politicians who may have overstayed their welcome.
Despite the naysaying, isn’t this a good thing? Seems the new chair wants impartiality
Centrists benefited for decades from partiality. Now that someone else is playing their game the same way they’ve been playing it, they decide that they want to be impartial. I have no faith whatsoever in the party’s interpretation of neutrality. It just means partiality in favor of centrists.
Lol they want to lose so badly if we have an honest election.
Please Bernie and AOC start your own party with this young fellow, he is showing what people have been saying.
Hogg has always had that option. Instead he wants the party to endorse replacements of their own at the risk of splitting votes and losing even more seats to Republicans.
Instead he wants the party to endorse replacements of their own
Oh, if any of Hogg’s people win their primaries, the party will do everything it can to sabotage them in the general. centrists prefer republicans to progressives under all circumstances.
Literally none of this is based off what voters want.
How would the DNC know to put into elections if they aren’t available during the primary?? Do they operate off of vibes and random phone polls?
If voters want to risk losing even more seats to Republicans then you deserve the hell you’re building.
If there’s a single issue the left can get behind this its school shootings, and apparently we can’t.
I think we’re all there on “school shootings bad” so what’s the specifics you’d like to see? That’s where the hot takes die because something concrete has to be supported.
Banning all guns from school property? Stronger gun buying restrictions? What?
I find it fascinating (as well as frustrating, frightening, and depressing) that even during the rise of a literal dictatorship, most of the left clings to a misguided phobia of arms, as well as their continual push to tighten restrictions of on legal arms.
