this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
147 points (100.0% liked)

politics

23457 readers
2745 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A Democratic National Committee subcommittee on Monday recommended that the organization invalidate one of its February vice-chair votes over claims that it unfairly disadvantaged female candidates.

The move, which won't be official unless the entire DNC votes to approve it, could open up new races for the positions held by David Hogg, a Florida activist, and Malcolm Kenyatta, a Pennsylvania state legislator.

The challenge by Oklahoma Democratic Committeewoman Kalyn Free, who unsuccessfully ran against Hogg and Kenyatta in the February race for vice chair, is not related to the ongoing tension between Hogg and the national party over his push to support primary challenges against incumbent Democrats.

Instead, it was based off Free's claim that the handling of the vice-chair vote gave the two men an unfair advantage amid the national party's requirements that its executive committee achieve gender balance.

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

If the DNC doesn't like what David Hogg is doing, they should have real primaries and shouldn't be against term limits, the lack of which prevents younger people from learning how to succeed in politics.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 33 minutes ago

They'll never have an honest primary, anything but FPTP, and support term limits. They get in the way of being rich while feigning support of minorities.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 13 hours ago

Total bullsh!t.

He's doing what needs to be done: he is challenging the old guard because they are failing and that's what we need.

We need more David Hogg and less Chuck "write a strongly worded letter" Schumer. We need a dozen AOC's and Jasmine Crockett's.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 12 hours ago

Ha, the DNC thinks they're helping Hogg out by being associated with him instead of the other way around

[–] [email protected] 25 points 13 hours ago

Get rid of a solution so they can keep losing elections.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Compare how they're treating Hogg to how they treated Dick Cheney.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 32 minutes ago* (last edited 31 minutes ago)

Dick Chaney, the architect of the war on Tower helping to enable the fascism that Trump has started, welcomed with loving arms claiming that this will somehow magically, mythically enable anti-trump Republicans to for Democrats.

Person with a plan to stop Republicans? The DNC hates them.

I think at this point we have two fascist parties. One just pretends to put up a fight.

[–] [email protected] 79 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

"is not related to the ongoing tension between Hogg and the national party"

Yeah, imma call bullshit on that statement. I don't agree with Hogg although I totally get where he is coming from. But this is just a way to disenfranchise someone they aren't comfortable with.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

What don't you agree with Hogg about? Just curious.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 hours ago

Hogg is a single issue politician, for him it's all about guns and ONLY about guns, for understandable reasons.

I get it given his experience, but politics is bigger than that, and if you want to primary people, you can't limit yourself that way if you want to win a general election.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 16 hours ago

But this is just a way to disenfranchise someone they aren’t comfortable with.

Yes, this is the purpose of democratic party leadership.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

They have a story that the challenge started before the "tension", but there's no way both this vote and the revote (assuming it goes through) are not being driven by it. There're probably too clever by half strategists thinking they're being sneaky by using an "unrelated" vote to take him out, but no one except the shill types on Twitter is going to parse the process in that way.

People get that the vibe is hostile to Hogg and young activists in general and someone saying "technically the challenge started before the PAC announcement" doesn't mean jack shit when it's obvious a lot more is going on. Hell, even if it were all on the up and up, the vibe is still there and no one that matters cares about the minutiae of voting processes and challenges. Voters aren't robots.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 13 hours ago

technically the challenge started before the PAC announcement

[–] [email protected] 45 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Are they being paid for by Trump's funders to just keep any opposition unhappy and unorganized?

God damn, controlled opposition.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

No. Hogg is too left for the DNC, they don't want him anymore.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Reagan is too left for the DNC.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago

Old white swinger couple that consults psychics... Yeah not conservative enough. Definitely unelectable.

We need a milquetoast woman who thinks abortion is great but also that putting brown people in prison is a great idea.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Well, Sanders is suddenly too old (again) because we no longer have to pretend biden is lucid.

And AOC can't run because a woman suddenly can't win, which will be the case until we find some centrist corpodem woman to run again.

Their excuse for Hogg has been that they suddenly like school shootings now that a gun control advocate wants to primary the corpo/genocide wing.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 12 hours ago

Maybe removing the mask will help push more young people further left. 20 years ago if you'd told me the DNC was just a mouthpiece for weakly resisting whatever the Republicans wanted to do I would have called you crazy. Now, every day it's becoming more clear that the Dems actually DO want the corpo fascist state the Republicans are so desperately trying to build. They just have to pretend not to.

Maybe we have a house of Fettermens.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 17 hours ago

Establishment is terrified. Good.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Can I have serious third party I’ll vote for that kid and Bernie and aoc

The old parties suck

Can we start calling the dnc the LOP (little old party)

[–] [email protected] 37 points 18 hours ago (2 children)

If they do so, they'll cut off an entire generation from ever voting Democratic again

[–] [email protected] 32 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

That's not a problem for centrist democrats. They don't care if they win; they just want to shut out progressives.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 16 hours ago

If it prevents progressive ideas from ever being implemented, they'll think it's worth it.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

https://leaderswedeserve.com/ donate here to tell the Schumer boomer dems to go fuck themselves

[–] [email protected] 21 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

DNC is dead

Time for something new

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

How do you plan to succeed with a third party when the last 60+ years have.secured fewer than 1% of state and federal legislative seats and zero Electoral College votes (since 1968, and Perot even won just shy of 20% of the national popular vote)? Only 26 states have direct voter-initiated ballot initiatives (or forcing electoral reform to replace first past the post).

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

How do you plan to succeed with the DNC???

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Replacing them internally and in the primaries, like David Hogg is trying to do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

That's the thing-- they're fighting him tooth and nail. I hope he succeeds but we know this party is happy to subvert democratic processes whenever inconvenient to the leadership

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

How do you plan to succeed when the two current mainstream parties are no longer representational?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I think the only viable pathway is taking over the parties thru the primaries like the Tea Party movement. Just like Hogg is doing from inside the party. If you have the resources to work on/for a third party, those could be more effective embedding in your local/state Democratic party.

So, what's your plan for 3rd party success?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

Things become tainted and typecast in this country as a byproduct of everyone having the memory of a goldfish

I couldn't even call myself an independent without it being assumed that it meant I must be a Bernie supporter

Hogg taking control of the DNC will still come with unwanted baggage

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

How do you plan to succeed with a Democratic Party that polls lower than the least popular President ever?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 hours ago

Replacing them internally and in the primaries, like David Hogg is trying to do.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think the challenge is bullshit, but it's also not clear that the result was definitely impacted or in any way planned. Seems like a situation of "whoops, let's be more careful in the future" (the position held by Christine Pelosi of all people) rather than inviting a party schism by using this to try to eject Hogg. Because there will definitely be people lobbying voters to explicitly do that.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Let’s go ahead and call bullshit. I’m going to guess the vote “unfairly” disadvantaged female candidates in the same way anyone who disagrees with Israel killing 100,000 Palestinians is antisemitic.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 17 hours ago

There were two positions remaining, and one of them had to be male. From the description, I think everyone had 2 votes and one had to be for a man, so if votes were split evenly and no one voted for both men, the men would each get 50% and the three women would get 33%. A real vote isn't going to be perfectly split, but it puts the neutral expectation for the male candidates much higher than the women. If the men went head to head and then there was a separate vote with the second place and the women, there wouldn't be the same bias.