Tom Perez Elected as New DNC Chairman

[PhDeac]

I think factions on the right mostly have the same pet issues. Abortion and taxes.

It's easy to look to the past or some imagined past and say "We want that."

It's much harder to look to the future and outline an ideal society.

 

[RJKarl]

Currently maybe, but the far right didn't have a major party to turn to 8 or 10 years ago and they were very vocal and then they just went ahead and took over the GOP. They organized independently first, the tea party, then the GOP embraced them and the party lost its mind. The real problem with the far left, I think, is that everyone has their own little core issue and they want it to be at the fore front of party identity and are unwilling to compromise. Black lives matter and green peace people have a hard time organizing together because they each want their issue to be the core of the movement's identity. The factions on the right seem to be better at putting their pet issues on the back burner and accepting candidates and leaders that don't align perfectly with them, i.e. Prolife people accepted Trump because Pence was the second in command. The left just aren't as good at getting on board. The only person I've seen that could potentially connect all the liberal dots was Nader. He understood the links between environmental issues, trade, poverty, social justice, education, racial justice, women's rights, etc.

Nader is a narcissist. Lots of people blame him for W's win, and they should. He had no business running and taking votes away from Gore. Nader never had a chance in any state other than to elect W. He was around long enough to know that. All Nader cared about was himself.

He's a definite and significant reason we are where we are and why his issues are in such trouble in America. Add to all that, Nader has to be at least 80. He's been around since the 60s.

Nader is also an easy target for the right. That will cause division in the ranks.

Sherrod Brown would be a good leader from the left. I think Ellison could be as well. But they need to build bridges.

 

[birdman]

I think factions on the right mostly have the same pet issues. Abortion and taxes.

It's easy to look to the past or some imagined past and say "We want that."

It's much harder to look to the future and outline an ideal society.

You're leaving out pet issues of States Rights, guns, immigration, anti-environmentalism, etc., all these groups lined up behind Trump and Pence.

 

[birdman]

Nader is a narcissist. Lots of people blame him for W's win, and they should. He had no business running and taking votes away from Gore. Nader never had a chance in any state other than to elect W. He was around long enough to know that. All Nader cared about was himself.

He's a definite and significant reason we are where we are and why his issues are in such trouble in America. Add to all that, Nader has to be at least 80. He's been around since the 60s.

Nader is also an easy target for the right. That will cause division in the ranks.

Sherrod Brown would be a good leader from the left. I think Ellison could be as well. But they need to build bridges.

I am not suggest Nader should be the leader of the Democratic Party. I am just suggesting that he is the one guy I've seen that tied all these liberal issues together into a coherent platform. Most of it was over-washed by his corporate political party stump speeches, but those are of course, a huge part of the problem. Nader was no more a narsissit than any of the of the other hundreds of people who have run for president in the last 200 years. He certainly deserves some blame for Gore's loss in 2000, but blaming our current political problems is a joke. Throwing light on a problem does not mean you caused the problem. Despite the old saying, he who smelled it did not actually deal it.

 

[PhDeac]

You're leaving out pet issues of States Rights, guns, immigration, anti-environmentalism, etc., all these groups lined up behind Trump and Pence.

Oh sure. They are united by regressive politics looking to the past.

 

[RJKarl]

I'm not saying some of his earlier works weren't excellent, necessary and foundational. They absolutely were. However, his actions 2000 are a direct and major factor in where we are today. If he had not run, Gore would have won. There would have been no Iraq War. With people enforcing banking laws, it's likely the 2007 meltdown would either not have happened or been much lighter.

There is no question that Gore should have used the Clintons more. But Nader did cost Gore FL.

Remember, when Perez was put up for the Cabinet, he was opposed as being too liberal. He seems to like working in the trenches and Ellison is a great speaker and organizer. They should could call Howard Dean back to help direct the ground game.

 

[birdman]

I'm not saying some of his earlier works weren't excellent, necessary and foundational. They absolutely were. However, his actions 2000 are a direct and major factor in where we are today. If he had not run, Gore would have won. There would have been no Iraq War. With people enforcing banking laws, it's likely the 2007 meltdown would either not have happened or been much lighter.

There is no question that Gore should have used the Clintons more. But Nader did cost Gore FL.

Remember, when Perez was put up for the Cabinet, he was opposed as being too liberal. He seems to like working in the trenches and Ellison is a great speaker and organizer. They should could call Howard Dean back to help direct the ground game.

I agree on the Perez/Ellison leadership team. I think it will be good.

 

[TheReff]

He should should have been on the ticket. Hillary fucked up putting another old. boring white guy with her. She let Trump get 33% of the Latino vote. How the fuck did she do that?

Hindsight is always 20-20. Dems should never have let Donna Brazile anywhere near the DNC so she could tell lies after the fact to Megyn Kelly about being a "godly" person and having nothing to do with feeding any debate questions to Hillary. Dems should never have let Debbie WaWa in as head of the DNC so she could then get caught screwing Bernie out of his nomination. Dems should never have let Dingy Harry Reid in as Senate Majority leader so he could change the Senate rules in Nov 2013 and get rid of the Super majority and put in the "nuclear option", a clear mistake that McConnell told him the Dems would live to regret! [Obama praised the action]. Dems should never have let then Senator Biden say in May 2005 that Dems should never use the nuclear option in breaking a filibuster on the Senate floor, always going to the 60 vote super-majority "we can't break the rules to change the rules! Watch what happens!" lol hahahaha Then Harry Reid did it.