Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Showing Original Post only (View all)

runaway hero

(835 posts)
Mon Jul 25, 2016, 11:03 AM Jul 2016

Hillary wanted DWS gone last year. [View all]

PHILADELPHIA — Hillary Clinton and her team aren’t thrilled that the head of the Democratic National Committee was forced out on the eve of the nominee’s coronation — but they aren’t exactly distraught to see Debbie Wasserman Schultz booted from the tent.
Several senior Democratic officials with ties to Hillary and Bill Clinton told POLITICO that campaign higher-ups have been trying to replace the oft-off-message Florida congresswoman from the start of Clinton’s campaign late last year.
Story Continued Below

John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman — and a former top adviser to Barack Obama — broached the idea of replacing Wasserman Schultz as early as last fall, only to be rebuffed by the president’s team, according to two people with direct knowledge of the conversation.
“It came down to the fact that the president didn’t want the hassle of getting rid of Debbie,” said a former top Obama adviser. “It’s been a huge problem for the Clintons, but the president just didn’t want the headache of Debbie bad-mouthing him. ... It was a huge pain in the ass.”
The Obama team — especially 2012 campaign manager Jim Messina — long viewed Wasserman Schultz as a major campaign liability, questioning her fundraising prowess and her tendency to appoint personal aides to positions of authority, prioritizing loyalty over competence and effectiveness as a spokesperson for Democrats. At the time, senior campaign officials leaked details of an internal survey, conducted by pollster David Binder, showing Wasserman Schultz was the least-liked Obama surrogate; she later dismissed the report as “National Enquirer” dross.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

BONUS: Still, Obama didn’t get involved at all as Wasserman Schultz was at the brink. Whenever the topic of replacing her came up, despite the fact that the president had lost patience with her years ago and generally avoided having to talk to her, he’d always felt that forcing her out wasn't worth the trouble it would bring.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-226100#ixzz4FR9XzxRG
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook


There you go.

64 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hillary wanted DWS gone last year. [View all] runaway hero Jul 2016 OP
the knives are out nt geek tragedy Jul 2016 #1
yup... runaway hero Jul 2016 #2
So we are to believe that Obama wouldn't let DWS go, because he didn't want her criticizing him? Avalux Jul 2016 #3
Plus last year was already one of Presidents last term! mylye2222 Jul 2016 #8
I don't believe this either yeoman6987 Jul 2016 #30
It can be tough to believe anything that doesn't gently stroke one's bias. LanternWaste Jul 2016 #64
Not mentioned in article was she was a co chair of HRC's 2008 campaign karynnj Jul 2016 #31
Come on LoverOfLiberty Jul 2016 #37
But the Clinton people want it both ways karynnj Jul 2016 #47
I personally don't think it is wise to throw her to the lions LoverOfLiberty Jul 2016 #54
I agree and thought that was the position the Clinton team had taken by giving her the position they karynnj Jul 2016 #57
I agree runaway hero Jul 2016 #58
Interesting read. NurseJackie Jul 2016 #4
DU wanted her gone long before that. TheCowsCameHome Jul 2016 #5
Gone as in to work on the Clinton campaign? Orsino Jul 2016 #6
My thoughts exactly. If this is true, why does she have any position in the campaign? Matt_in_STL Jul 2016 #7
Agree here mylye2222 Jul 2016 #9
Maybe Hillary is trying to appear grateful PatSeg Jul 2016 #12
Perhaps the appearance of rancor was judged more harmful... Orsino Jul 2016 #16
That makes sense too PatSeg Jul 2016 #21
I bet she knows a lot of things runaway hero Jul 2016 #22
Yes PatSeg Jul 2016 #29
Yup runaway hero Jul 2016 #38
Most definitely PatSeg Jul 2016 #43
However, if she uses anything that way ... it destroys her future more than anyone else's. nt karynnj Jul 2016 #34
For some strange reason PatSeg Jul 2016 #46
If she loses the primary runaway hero Jul 2016 #56
To allow her to move to something that might still be considered dignified Bad Thoughts Jul 2016 #23
This is entertaining. jalan48 Jul 2016 #10
Some Bonus runaway hero Jul 2016 #11
That is pretty much PatSeg Jul 2016 #17
Brutal runaway hero Jul 2016 #18
I know PatSeg Jul 2016 #25
Obama could have got something for her runaway hero Jul 2016 #26
I'll bet Pay Day Loans PatSeg Jul 2016 #36
Or healthcare company chairman runaway hero Jul 2016 #40
Or maybe Reince Priebus PatSeg Jul 2016 #49
Not bad runaway hero Jul 2016 #53
LOL okay... HerbChestnut Jul 2016 #13
Hillary wants peace. runaway hero Jul 2016 #19
Then I would love to play her in a game of chess HerbChestnut Jul 2016 #24
Of course runaway hero Jul 2016 #27
How could it possibly be worse? HerbChestnut Jul 2016 #41
I agree with you runaway hero Jul 2016 #52
I'm totally confused... jham123 Jul 2016 #33
Repeat after me LoverOfLiberty Jul 2016 #39
No.... jham123 Jul 2016 #45
peace as a strategy, interesting concept. Hiraeth Jul 2016 #48
I think so runaway hero Jul 2016 #59
I'll bet HRC had to promise her liberalmuse Jul 2016 #14
like, maybe ... a job ... Hiraeth Jul 2016 #44
About the only thing I believe in this piece is that part of the problem lies with the Obama team. Tatiana Jul 2016 #15
She has been one for a while... tallahasseedem Jul 2016 #32
What's astonishing is that she took positions completely opposite President Obama's... Tatiana Jul 2016 #60
Oh absolutely PatSeg Jul 2016 #35
Wow, interesting to see who is blaming whom karynnj Jul 2016 #20
Podesta is a nasty guy runaway hero Jul 2016 #51
The trouble? tallahasseedem Jul 2016 #28
yeah, right. Hiraeth Jul 2016 #42
Kick n/t lillypaddle Jul 2016 #50
DWS has become a liability. Third Doctor Jul 2016 #55
I believe the old Clinton favorite -- Hell Hath No Fury Jul 2016 #61
Maybe with Hillary at this point it's a case of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer, kestrel91316 Jul 2016 #62
That is absolute bullshit choie Jul 2016 #63
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Hillary wanted DWS gone l...»Reply #0