Does a nominee Sanders fire the DNC infrastructure?

[Lexblues]

I'm thinking Perez would be gone. I think he would put in AOC as head of the DNC, or maybe Nina Turner. What say you?

[lapfog_1]

1. If either happens there would be a lot of very upset Dems

including me.

[DanTex]

2. Is that how it works?

It would be a good thing to have some more progressives within the party machinery, but I don't know what the process is for staffing the DNC.

[brooklynite]

15. What would "more progressives within the party machinery" accomplish?

The DNC does not set policy or endorse candidates.

[DanTex]

18. Doesn't the DNC put together the platform and the national convention?

But generally, in terms of setting rules, raising and spending funds, organizing, etc., if we want a progressive party, it's probably a good idea for it to be run more by progressives and less by corporate lobbyists.

Another answer is, for exactly the same reason that the anti-Bernie forces in the party want the DNC to be populated by centrists. I mean, it stands to reason that a progressive wouldn't want people on the DNC that talk about wanting to see progressive candidates "ground to a pulp."

[brooklynite]

19. The DNC organizes the structure of the Convention; the Platform Committee is formed from Delegates

However, the Platform itself is a meaningless feel-good exercise for the benefit of activists, which has no bearing on the nominee or any other candidates, and isn't read by any voters. The real "platform" is whatever the policy message of the nominee says it is.

As for "if we want a progressive party, it's probably a good idea for it to be run more by progressives"; you ignore a simple but serious truth; if you want a progressive party, find a way to elect more progressives. We are a center-left Party. We won back the House by electing moderates in swing Districts. You need look no further that UK Labour to see what happens when Party Leadership appeals only to the base voters.

[DanTex]

20. Like I said, having people talk about grinding progressives to a pulp can't help progressive causes.

I agree that we need to find ways to elect more progressives. Having more progressives in the machinery would help that, of course. For example, AOC is hugely popular, a massive fundraiser, and that's clear evidence that there's pent-up demand for more AOCs. But for her to even get to congress she basically had to climb Mount Everest, because the machinery doesn't favor candidates like her.

You're an insider, so you know as well as anyone that it makes a difference who runs the machinery (and I don't just mean the DNC). There are some big decisions like the superdelegate rules, or the debate schedules. But there are also things like which primary candidates get the thumbs up, and who gets pressured into supporting who, and which consultants get hired (or blacklisted) and thousands of little decisions here and there. All the wheeling and dealing and favor trading and introductions and deciding who the next up-and-comers are and all that. The same kind of stuff happens at any large organization, whether it's a business or government or university or whatever.

[Blue_true]

26. Then elect more of those people to office or to local committees.

AOC is not a massive fundraiser, Nancy Pelosi raises a ton of money for the party, AOC raises money mainly for herself.

You are throwing out a lot of stuff that you want to see, if you are serious, go out and get people elected from the 50 states and US territories, the people who do win those stations are the DNC that you seem to be so anxious to somehow replace.

[DanTex]

30. Yes, that's the idea. It's a process that builds on itself.

You elect an AOC, it's not just the one vote in congress, especially with her visibility, you then start getting the bureaucracy staffed with more progressives, and then when seats open up and the party goes recruiting a candidate, instead of a centrist who's shaken all the right hands, they pick someone more progressive.

Part of the value Bernie has already brought to the party is inspiring people like AOC to run, like you say, in all 50 states and at all levels of government.

[George II]

31. She campaigned for "progressives" up and down the Midwest in 2018, not a single red seat...

....was flipped, and her Justice Democrats went 7 for 79 in their endorsed candidates.

Clearly their ideology doesn't reflect the will of rank and file Democrats.

[DanTex]

35. Right, because the party machinery is still centrist.

But you don't see new centrists elected to congress getting the huge kind of support that AOC does all over the country. It takes time to shift a bureaucracy. Dem voters are obviously moving in the AOC direction. The party is resisting, for now, but it's a process.

[George II]

38. No, the MEMBERS of the party are "centrists"....

....shouldn't Representatives reflect their constituents? This business about the "party machinery" is bogus and in many parts of the country a myth.

As for her "support all over the country", what support is that? People going out to a rally out of curiosity? How do you assess the so-called "support" she's presumably getting all over the country?

As I pointed out, she campaigned for about a dozen primary candidates in 2018, just about all of them lost. And many of the "centrist" candidates they lost to wound up FLIPPING red seats. And just about all of the 40 flipped seats in 2018 were in "centrist" districts.

[DanTex]

41. Hardly. Look at polls. Look at AOCs popularity. Look at Bernie and Warren.

You don't think AOC is wildly popular with Dems? Are you kidding? She's a rock star. Yeah, rallies, and the money she can raise, media appearances, social media followers, the whole deal. I'd guess she has the highest name recognition of any Dem rep outside of the leadership. And most representatives have to pound phone lines for hours calling lists of wealthy donors. AOC sends out a couple tweets or texts or whatever, and raises millions.

The party machinery still makes it difficult for progressive candidates in primaries. With party backing, consultants, funding, all that. But that's understandable. It's a huge bureaucracy, it doesn't turn on a dime. And people have entrenched interests. Centrists consultants don't want to lose their jobs and paychecks, etc. All bureaucracies are resistant to change. I don't think there's anything sinister about it, it's just the nature of large organizations.

[Blue_true]

39. You forgot that some of the 7 that won their primary got endorsed by the DNC.

This stuff about AOC being massively popular is strange, it doesn't play much past her own district and she could even be defeated by a democrat there if one person who is considering running runs.

[Blue_true]

25. The committees are staffed by state level party activists and elected officials.

If you want more "progressives"???? go to that level and serve on committees or win political races. The makeup of delegates is plenty progressive right now, it is bullshit that corporate lobbyists make up those people, just lazy imagineering. In Florida, our excellent AG Commisioner worked as a lobbyist, but she was also a very committed party activist. So a person's day job is no issue as long as they put party principles first.

[Blue_true]

23. That fine point is lost on people that want to parachute in and just take over the party.

They know nothing about state level democrats that make up the committes of the DNC and have spent years working their way up. They know nothing about the state level elected officials that give some of their time to the DNC.

If they want more progressives, which is an insulting claim in itself given how many already exists, then they should join local democratic committees and work their way up, or run for office and win.

[Blue_true]

21. People work their way up through state democratic parties.

The permanent staff are there to keep the organization running, they aren't backing one democrat over another.

[The Valley Below]

3. Cornel West.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

6. No, he's Vice President.

[The Valley Below]

11. Would not surprise me.

[StevieM]

4. Putting Nina Turner, who didn't even support our candidate in 2016, in charge of the DNC would be

a truly loathsome thing to do.

[George II]

7. Not a chance, considering this, campaigning against a Democrat (who won with 60+%):

Link to tweet

[squirecam]

16. Wait

Did she actually campaign against the democratic nominee and in favor of a Green Party candidate?

[George II]

17. Yes, she campaigned for Jabari Brisport, Green Party candidate running against Democrat Laurie Cumbo

That was in the fall of 2017, even AFTER she registered with the FEC to run as a Democrat in the 14th District!!

[squirecam]

22. Thank you

I’ll support her primary opponent

[David__77]

24. The heterosexist one?

...

[Blue_true]

29. There are one or two others beside that guy and AOC.

Someone said that her constituent services have been abysmal. That opens her up to being defeated in her primary.

Update: there are four others declared to run against AOC and potentially a fifth.

They are:
Fernando Cabrera (the one you mentioned)
James Dillon
Badrun Khan (an activist)
Jose Velazquez
Elizabeth Crowley (not declared)

Crowley has held elected office before and is running for borough president. She is 42 years old. She likely would be the most dangerous to AOC since she comes from a very big family and is well connected in the district. Crowley could bring a lot of voters in that sit out primaries. Khan can also prove to be a problem since he is a very progressive activist and could drain away a lot of AOC's vote.

[David__77]

32. I know one is heterosexist.

I don’t know about the others.

[Blue_true]

36. You are talking about Cabrera, a jackass.

I updated my post. The most dangerous to AOC likely would be Crowley and Khan. I believe that Elizabeth Crowley could unseat her if Crowley enters the race.

[Blue_true]

27. Is Lauri Cumbo in AOC's district? Maybe Laurie can return the favor, but canvass for actual

democrats.

[George II]

28. No, she represents a neighborhood (coincidentally where I was born and first lived) in Brooklyn....

The 14th District is in Queens and the Bronx. Seems she does more politicking anywhere but her own district.

[Blue_true]

40. There is a woman named Elizabeth Crowley that is thinking about running against

AOC in the democratic primary. She would likely be a tough matchup for AOC, IMO. I was one that thought that AOC had a lot of potential when she first won, but her show of going after good democrats is getting old. I wouldn't be surprised to find that people in New York are calling Crowley daily about entering the race.

[Wabbajack_]

8. I

Don't think mere nominees are given that authority.

Once he's President though (assuming he's nominated and elected) I would figure he would appoint a Party Chair other than Tom Perez. Perhaps Keith Ellison. I don't think AOC is experienced enough for such a post.

[billpolonsky]

9. Oh great. Speculation.

[Lexblues]

13. It's a very likely thing that would happen if he were nominated

Sanders loathes the DNC. Why wouldn't he put in his own people? Also, there is precedence for a sitting representative to be the DNC chair as Wasserman Schultz was selected as one under Obama.

[msongs]

37. the radicals have been worse than the establishment once they take over nt

[Buzz cook]

10. Putting in a first term rep.

Would not be a wise move no matter how popular she is. This sounds like fear mongering.

[DownriverDem]

12. Nice way

to alienate the majority of the party.

[brooklynite]

14. A President Sanders can restructure the DNC; a nominee Sanders cannot.

[AlexSFCA]

33. Tulsi

he is obsessed with her. His likely running mate. AOC would be secretary of labor.

[David__77]

34. I guess that may depend on the DNC's administrative rules.

...

[Historic NY]

42. So who will do the fundraising?

There are lots of other Democrats. Your thinking about one guy every 4 yrs says he's a Democrat.