DNC chair nominates lobbyists to DNC Convention Committees

[HorusRa2 5,005]

It’s a really long thread but the DNC chair has assembled the most anti Bernie Sanders & corporate lobbyists possible to be those who sit on the committee that determines the Democratic Platform at the Convention. I really encourage you to read the whole Twitter thread detailing out each individual and their connections to Big Pharma, Super PACs, AIPAC and Insurance companies. 

[Guest]

I thought the new rules they promised Bernie would not allow them to vote for who they personally want?

[Gagaloo911 12,959]

Not surprising. The DNC and Democratic leadership as a whole have long been in bed with corporate interests and lobbyists.

They're essentially a different side of the same coin as the Republican party except that they are more socially liberal and pay lip service to social issues. 

When it comes down to it though they sell out their supposed care for minority rights, social issues, etc. if it means they can get their tax cuts and deals for their corporate donors through (see: NDAA in which Dem leadership completely caved on their own demands like getting rid of the trans ban and gave Trump everything he wanted; Dem's weak sauce prescription drug negotiating bill, etc.) 

The Democratic party has some great people and real fighters, but as a party overall especially with regard to its leadership, it's just as corrupt and complicit with the status quo as the Republican party and its leadership.

The only difference is they pretend to care about people and minority rights, and don't have outright bigots and deranged lunatics spouting nonsense in their ranks. 

[Maleficent 6]

Well looks like it's gonna be a two-termer for Trump 

Remember: we dont just need dems to unite against trump, we need to win back the swing states and rust belt lost in 2016 

[HorusRa2 5,005]

39 minutes ago, Faysalaaa said:

I thought the new rules they promised Bernie would not allow them to vote for who they personally want?

That’s a different issue. This is the committees who come together to draft up what the Democratic Party platform should be. I think it gets voted on at the convention. But at the end of the day, you got people with strong ties to Israel, who will want to support the atrocity going on at Gaza. You’ve got a whole bunch of former Clinton people. Some of the people on these committees are the superdelegates who get to vote on the second ballot if no candidate gets a majority of pledged delegates to win the nomination. Some of them work for insurance companies and others are union leaders who supported people and organizations that don’t even support raising the minimum wage. The Tl:dr is that the DNC has made it as hard as possible for a progressive agenda to be passed even if Bernie is the nominee. 

[Gov Hooka 8,008]

they clearly want to hold the party back and alienate their base even more. 

[Whispering 18,865]

4 hours ago, Faysalaaa said:

I thought the new rules they promised Bernie would not allow them to vote for who they personally want?

Superdelegates have not tipped a primary race in favor of a candidate in modern history.

The Democratic National Committee took steps ahead of the 2020 presidential election to eliminate the potential for superdelegates to decide the nomination. The committee stripped voting power from the party elite and now allows only the delegates elected in primaries and caucuses to choose the presidential nominees unless there's a need for a tie-breaker.

[Melech 9,900]

5 hours ago, HorusRa2 said:

AIPAC

We decided to stan 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, HorusRa2 said:

That’s a different issue. This is the committees who come together to draft up what the Democratic Party platform should be. I think it gets voted on at the convention. But at the end of the day, you got people with strong ties to Israel, who will want to support the atrocity going on at Gaza. You’ve got a whole bunch of former Clinton people. Some of the people on these committees are the superdelegates who get to vote on the second ballot if no candidate gets a majority of pledged delegates to win the nomination. Some of them work for insurance companies and others are union leaders who supported people and organizations that don’t even support raising the minimum wage. The Tl:dr is that the DNC has made it as hard as possible for a progressive agenda to be passed even if Bernie is the nominee. 

So if Bernie wins as president, he would have to convince these people to vote in his policies? Its like the congress?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Whispering said:

Superdelegates have not tipped a primary race in favor of a candidate in modern history.

The Democratic National Committee took steps ahead of the 2020 presidential election to eliminate the potential for superdelegates to decide the nomination. The committee stripped voting power from the party elite and now allows only the delegates elected in primaries and caucuses to choose the presidential nominees unless there's a need for a tie-breaker.

I did not say they topped a primary in favor of a candidate, but have they ever gone against what the people voted for? example, what if people in a super delegate area all wanted Bernie to win, can they go against peoples vote and choose whoever they want?

[HorusRa2 5,005]

3 hours ago, Faysalaaa said:

So if Bernie wins as president, he would have to convince these people to vote in his policies? Its like the congress?

In other words, if Bernie get the nomination, the DNC is going to use these committees to prevent Sander’s core policy proposals from being part of the official Democratic Party platform. 

Excerpt from article: Sanders could secure enough pledged delegates to win on the first ballot and still find his agenda thwarted by the standing committees. For example, members of the DNC’s Platform Committee beholden to corporate interests could vote against measures including Medicare For All or a ban on natural fracking in the agenda of policies they plan to fight for in 2020.

https://thegrayzone.com/2020/01/27/dnc-perez-regime-change-agents-israel-lobbyists-wall-street-rig-game-bernie/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

 

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/10/tom-perez-dnc-chair/600862/

It looks like if Bernie wins the nomination and then the general, he gets to replace the DNC chair by appointment. I don’t know where that leaves Bernie in the general. They make everything so complicated that it takes research and I still have more to look into. And I also am not sure of what sway he will have at the convention if any with the committees. 

[Bt1 5,213]

The drama continues. People are really afraid that populist Bernie wont get the votes, even with Biden, Pete, Bloomberg splitting the moderate vote, so they have to do a big deal about this.

Yea people. If Bernie doesnt get the votes, it wont get the nomination from the party.  That's what will happen with any other candidate. 

 

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

59 minutes ago, Florin said:

The drama continues. People are really afraid that populist Bernie wont get the votes, even with Biden, Pete, Bloomberg splitting the moderate vote, so they have to do a big deal about this.

Yea people. If Bernie doesnt get the votes, it wont get the nomination from the party.  That's what will happen with any other candidate. 

 

 

Are all conclusions justified by the fact that they concluded, regardless of the circumstances surrounding them?  

(E.g. Hillary lost, media smears had a big part to play in dampening her overall favorability and likeability to average voters, to the point that they saw her as being about the same or just marginally better than DONALD TRUMP. )

Should our response be "Oh shucks,  I guess there's nothing we can do about smears! They're gonna happen and we'll always be defenseless to them!"

Or should it be "let's run a candidate who is the most likely to be able to get ahead of potential smears and bad faith arguments by vetting them all aggressively beforehand"

I think its the latter, and so far the latter shows us that... "he's a socialist?!?!!?" which has been in the media for 5 years now, is less likely to lose than "He's corrupt, has a bad record on trade, crime, bankruptcy, social security, and a slew of other issues that voters find VERY important. He also has a bad temper with reporters and prospective voters, has issues regarding his behavior with younger women in public, AND he's showing signs of senility in the way he tries to speak to people"

On one hand, we have evidence that "he's a socialist" hasn't tanked him, in fact he has only become more popular, and his ideas ranging from Universal Healthcare to a Wealth Tax are overwhelmingly popular, often with a majority of people, including Republicans and especially Independents supporting them... and on the other hand we don't need to look further than 2016 to know that Trump was able to run to Hillary Clinton's left on economic issues because of her own messy voting record and public history of cozying up to corporate donors and big banks, issues that Joe Biden is ALSO liable to be attacked on, arguably even more harshly. We also absolutely dont need to pretend that "Ukraine" isn't going to be Trump's general election strategy for pinning Joe down as corrupt. He won't even admit that it should be illegal for family members of prominent statespeople to be barred from seeking influence in multinational corporations for financial gain. At the very least, it should be extremely discouraged, but if you ask him about it he gets up in your face and gets mad at you and says he did nothing wrong  That's gonna win against Trump?

[Bt1 5,213]

@ItsTommyBitch u like to talk a lot about things that are off topic, so I'll stop here.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

Normally, I do have a tendency to do that in response to other people, though I'm always the first to note when I feel something has gone too off topic, and I frequently ask people to message me privately if they are so inclined to continue  But I don't actually think talking about the implications of the DNC nominating lobbyists who are working in overdrive to try to attack one of the candidates they may have to nominate later is really off topic.

But hell, let's say it is:

I still maintain my position; lobbyists and corporate executives with conflicts of interest, and war apologists should have no place in any Democratic National Committees. Not only does it completely come off as corrupt and biased against some candidates, but I don't think they represent the morals and values of the party, nor should they be deciding on any sort of platform that could very easily just be one of their own self interests and not what the people want.

The people want universal health care, they want college debt eliminated, they want a $15/hr minimum wage, they want an appropriate response to climate change. Their job should be how to find ways to make that politically possible, and to adopt a platform that the party can generally agree on, and work on the best ways to make it happen. This does not mean "tweaking" it in a way that puts the interests of large corporations and individuals ahead of regular citizens either  They don't have to 1:1 copy the platform of Bernie Sanders (though it is quite telling that this entire primary season has been a referendum on his platform, and has barely branched out beyond that other than the ideas of Andrew Yang, who is also ignored by the establishment) but still.