Your feelings on Perez as DNC Chair, Ellison as Deputy Chair?

[Frodo]

Option 2 -like any loyal Democrat I will give Tom Perez the benefit of the doubt even though I would have preferred Keith Ellison as DNC Chair.  

[Frodo]

Is it too much to ask neoliberal Democratic hacks to actually learn anything from their embarrassing defeat 3 months ago?

I'm not asking them to change their minds (it's not like Ellison was a socialist, after all) but just to stop thinking the party is their property.

But I ask you this- what do you want?
Do you just want people you consider allies to win, no matter what? That's not how democracy works. In a democracy, you need to get the most votes. If you want to win, you need to win. Win primaries, win conventions, win elections. In 2016, you didn't win. Because Hillary got more votes. As simple as that. In the Party Chair elections, you lost narrowly. Because Perez got more votes. What the hell is wrong with that? It's democracy.

A vast majority of Democrats outside of the Betlway bubble supported Ellison. If the vote was actually put up to the membership (as it is in any decent party) he would have won easily. But the Establishment doesn't give a sh*t about that because it holds the base in utter contempt. Spare me your lectures about democracy.

But that's the process in both parties for many years. You knew it's the process. So yeah, you lost in that process. You have a right to be sour, but threatening to burn everything is just immature and counter-productive.

Who cares? The "process" is illegitimate.

If so, then why be so emotionally invested in it? 

[Frodo]

Is it too much to ask neoliberal Democratic hacks to actually learn anything from their embarrassing defeat 3 months ago?

I'm not asking them to change their minds (it's not like Ellison was a socialist, after all) but just to stop thinking the party is their property.

But I ask you this- what do you want?
Do you just want people you consider allies to win, no matter what? That's not how democracy works. In a democracy, you need to get the most votes. If you want to win, you need to win. Win primaries, win conventions, win elections. In 2016, you didn't win. Because Hillary got more votes. As simple as that. In the Party Chair elections, you lost narrowly. Because Perez got more votes. What the hell is wrong with that? It's democracy.

A vast majority of Democrats outside of the Betlway bubble supported Ellison. If the vote was actually put up to the membership (as it is in any decent party) he would have won easily. But the Establishment doesn't give a sh*t about that because it holds the base in utter contempt. Spare me your lectures about democracy.

But that's the process in both parties for many years. You knew it's the process. So yeah, you lost in that process. You have a right to be sour, but threatening to burn everything is just immature and counter-productive.

Who cares? The "process" is illegitimate.

If so, then why be so emotionally invested in it? 

Because I want the Democratic party to actually start representing the needs and concerns of normal, working-class American, and not just consulting firms and hip, shallow suburbanites.

If you knew the process of electing the DNC chair to be 'illegitimate' (and therefore rigged and foreordained), then why expect a different result?  

[Frodo]

Is it too much to ask neoliberal Democratic hacks to actually learn anything from their embarrassing defeat 3 months ago?

I'm not asking them to change their minds (it's not like Ellison was a socialist, after all) but just to stop thinking the party is their property.

But I ask you this- what do you want?
Do you just want people you consider allies to win, no matter what? That's not how democracy works. In a democracy, you need to get the most votes. If you want to win, you need to win. Win primaries, win conventions, win elections. In 2016, you didn't win. Because Hillary got more votes. As simple as that. In the Party Chair elections, you lost narrowly. Because Perez got more votes. What the hell is wrong with that? It's democracy.

A vast majority of Democrats outside of the Betlway bubble supported Ellison. If the vote was actually put up to the membership (as it is in any decent party) he would have won easily. But the Establishment doesn't give a sh*t about that because it holds the base in utter contempt. Spare me your lectures about democracy.

But that's the process in both parties for many years. You knew it's the process. So yeah, you lost in that process. You have a right to be sour, but threatening to burn everything is just immature and counter-productive.

Who cares? The "process" is illegitimate.

If so, then why be so emotionally invested in it?  

Because I want the Democratic party to actually start representing the needs and concerns of normal, working-class American, and not just consulting firms and hip, shallow suburbanites.

If you knew the process of electing the DNC chair to be 'illegitimate' (and therefore rigged and foreordained), then why expect a different result?  

Because I hoped that the Establishment that controls the process was at least willing to compromise with the base on this (relatively inconsequential) choice. The fact that they didn't signals that they don't give a sh*t what the base want, and will always throw their full might against it.

Antonio, is there anything about Tom Perez' record as Labor Secretary (or, for that matter, his entire public career) that you think leaves something to be desired?  If not, then I suggest you give him the benefit of the doubt before condemning him before he even begins his chairmanship.  

[Frodo]

How many people in real life (outside Atlas and the internet) give a sh**t about the DNC election results?

[Frodo]

How many people in real life (outside Atlas and the internet) give a sh**t about the DNC election results?

A lot of the Democratic activists and professionals that represent the Prog wing in the political firmament, let me tell ya.

The "progressive wing" is happy that a progressive who has spent his life fighting for civil rights and workers' rights is the new DNC chair.

The Bernie Cult is a different thing.

Haha get the f outta here with that crap

If Tom Perez really was a strong progressive why did he run against Leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Keith Ellison?

Perhaps he was concerned that Keith Ellison being a Muslim might adversely impact the party's ability to reach out to voters.  Not everything needs to be seen through the context of a conspiracy.