“Voters should decide who our primary nominees are, not DNC leadership.” Since when has the DNC not put it's thumb on the scales in the past few decades, or ignored the voters entirely?
this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2025
129 points (96.4% liked)
politics
23115 readers
3103 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
DNC: "Fuck Bernie, it's her turn."
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 affirmations 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.
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.
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.
This is the same DNC fucks that did this?
Fuck off with you request for 'Neutrality Now'.
See? They can push back on something.
No DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election
Yeah, the DNC would never do that.
Debbie NEVER Could’ve
Looking at YOU 2016...
Yeah I would second the view, if it weren't for decades of the opposite of the DNC bending over backwards for it's incumbants. If they had a history of staying neutral and not regularly backing the incumbents. But as they do... then the opposite needs to happen.
Yeah I would second the view, if it weren’t for decades of the opposite of the DNC bending over backwards for it’s incumbants.
For centrist incumbents. Henry Cuellar gets protection. Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman do not.
I wouldn't mind then backing the incumbents, if the incumbents had any fucking spine to stand up to the Republicans.
well yeah... backing should be merit based not seniority based. You've been there 30 years, and no one knows what the hell you are doing, you've not fought for anything we want. Get lost... if you're still backing good policies, standing up for what's right and making people happy, stick around as long as you want.
A bit of why I fear the general concept of term limits. Bernie sanders is still far and away one of the best in congress. He's old as fuck, been there forever... but easilly in the top 5 most active senators...
*No tag-backs
Pretty sure they got the memo
They did not get the memo; they saw a credible effort to threaten their chokehold on national politics and want to shut it down on a technicality. There's literally no reason to believe this is an act of good faith; if it was they wouldn't have elected Hoggs to the position of DNC vice chair in the first place.
Primary EVERYONE!
This is the perfect cover for them. They don't have to advocate for the incumbents, that's what corporate media will do for them. They get the bonus of looking like they want to be neutral while neutering Hoggs ability to rally people against the feckless dinosaur moderates in the party.
For the incumbents and DNC leadership it's a win. :/
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.
Yep! As an American who has been active in local Dem party activity, they need to be rooted out and replaced. It’s really our best hope.
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.
Things will get progressively worse for more Americans soon enough. Those who are hip to the scene already probably can’t accelerate the process of awakening that will come. We are all Cassandra here. It hella sucks.
Economic doldrums if not depression, pandemics and a fragmented response in the coming autumn if not sooner.
Accelerating assaults on due process.
New public enemy groups generated at will.
All them that know can do is build capacity to organize as the general realization emerges. It won’t happen soon enough for my taste. We are trying to redirect a high mass object and even in politics, the physics here is clear.
My plan is to be as social as I know how to be this summer. It’s not escapism. I’m building my network.
Hopefully also getting laid.
The first rule of the rebellion is to be sure that at least the sex is good.
I hope this kid haunts their fucking nightmares. Cunts.
“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.”... “Let me be clear, this is not about shielding incumbents or boosting challengers,” Martin said. “It’s about voters’ trust in the party, and when we uphold a clear policy of neutrality, we guard against the perception or reality of bias.”
The trust they lost when they argued in court the party has no obligation to keep promises made to constituents? The trust lost when HRC decided propping up djt as the opposition candidate because he's easy to beat? The trust lost when Joe said, "Nothing will fundamentally change?” The trust lost when Kamala not only shut out Palestinian voices but also backtracked on campaign promises?
Zero. Irony.
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.
Jill Stein should be nowhere near even the idea of a reform coalition.
100% agree. So what's the plan?
"Neutrality" is just (very thin) cover for supporting the status quo, when what we need is a complete change.
Neutrality is the opposite of what they always get accused of by the people who love to shit on the Dems. So it's not the status quo. Or it is. But it can't be both.
People need to make up their minds why they're mad about it.
Neutrality for thee but not for me. They want neutrality from Hogg, but were delighted with partiality in the opposite direction for decades.
But it can't be both.
Have you considered: People, and especially groups of people, can do more than one thing at once?
Stuff like this is why I left the dem party, they're only strong opponents to progressives, not conservatives. The best summary I ever saw of them was: GOP: "fascism" DNC: "fascism ✨🏳️🌈"
Heres' the one that I saw:
So the party you went to was what? Is it better?
I just went with independent, which removes me from the "primaries", but also removed me from all the non-stop text messages and phone calls begging for money to support a party that does little more than shrug non-committaly.
So, no? I'm from the US, I don't really get a choice in ISP, phone network, or political representative, but boy I sure do get to pick from a number of different cereals.
I am more active at the very local level, though, which seems to be the only place an individual can have impact.
Fair enough then. Probably not a good national strategy but personally it sounds ok.
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.
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.
Have you considered why they're doing this now rather than eight years ago? They're trying to give you the worst of both worlds here, and that aside Hoggs explicitly said he wouldn't use DNC resources for his project. The party has no business deciding what he does with his other organizations.
Yes, it's what everyone has been bitching about since HRC got the nomination. But in reality they wanted their preferred candidates to get a leg up, apparently.
I think it’s a lot of hooray-lets-shit-on-the-Dems from the same people that have no idea how to get elected to national office.
The idea of neutrality is exactly what they want; and now they don’t like it, or they think it’s a lie, or it’s exactly what they want and they still can’t bring themselves to say something supportive.
At least the Democratic party is out there planning. Whatever socialist/anarchist/whatever-it-is-people-think-we-need party isn’t doing much and there’s only sixteen months until midterms.
I like how they think of codifying shit when something happens around them or to them.
But don't ever think to codify things everyone else needed to be codified.
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 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?