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.”
“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?
Given that you’ve got about 100 years to play with - who else besides HRC did they put their thumb on the scale for?
Please show your work.
I haven’t seen any evidence that Bernie should have won the 2016 primary. He was close by like 12% margin, but he still lost by millions of votes.
I still remember the DNC talking points, along with the media going along with the bullshit superdelegate fuckery to custom the story at the time, radically changing the race. Bernie was absolutely rat fucked by the DNC. I guess people can argue He Isn’T eVeN a ReAL DemoCrat, true, but that just plays into the fuckery.
I mean, to me that isn’t fuckery. They let an independent run on their primary tickets and he only lost by about 12% margin despite not being perfectly aligned with their platform. Hillary might have had a lot of advertisement money to play with but we also know that outside influences were promoting Bernie on social media to create a spoiler effect.
outside influences were promoting Bernie on social media to create a spoiler effect.
Inside influences were promoting Hillary on mainstream media to create a spoiler effect.
You say that like it’s worse lol. Was it unclear that by “outside” I meant “outside of the USA”?
Was it unclear that by “inside”, I meant “inside the DNC”.
Hillary might have had a lot of advertisement money to play with but we also know that outside influences were promoting Bernie on social media to create a spoiler effect.
What spoiler effect? He was running for the Democratic nomination, not as a third party candidate. And with a very small number of vocal exceptions, everyone who voted for Bernie in the primaries voted for Hillary in the general. It was her absolute failure to get independents in multiple flyover states that lost her the election. And a huge part of that is her attempt to appeal to republicans. A strategy that also failed spectacularly for Harris in 2024.
Bernie’s loss is seen as a direct result of DWS’s committee fuckery by most people on here. Which is not the same as it being true, it just gets a lot more attention.
It’s the case that he didn’t win enough votes. But I think it was the first time he got such good exposure for a national contest.
If you look at Alexandria Ocacia Cortez’s primary, when the DNC realized what was happening they tried desperately to undo her primary win. Going so far as to endorse the incumbent Democrat who stayed on the ballot due to a technicality.
These people are not trustworthy at all.
Another example would be Biden’s primary win in 2020. The DNC used the pandemic as an excuse to end the primary process early and just declare Biden the winner. And even before that they were heavily pushing Biden on everyone and doing their best to lock Bernie out of just about every poll they conducted, pretending like had no chance even though he was pulling numbers that were equalling, and even surpassing in places, Biden at the time.
Good examples. Both from ~six years ago and not the original claim of “decades” but good examples.
Love you casually ignoring the people/comments showing even older examples.
The DNC’s Rules & Bylaws committee is expected to vote on Martin’s proposal next month in a virtual meeting.
That’s what the lawyers are supposed to argue. That prevents Jill Stein from saying she’s a Democrat and then suing because they didn’t give her the presidential nomination.
It may be what lawyers do, but it is not what a democratic system is supposed to do.
If voters decide Jill Stein is what a democrat stands for, she is a Democrat. It’s not up to whoever controls the DNC to decide that she shouldn’t be a candidate.
I mean - no? But it’s kind of a moot point - if voters rally around Jill Stein at that level, they can just write her in.