...(not just his safe district), I'll support him. Otherwise, who do you have?

Go away traitor.

(and rightfully so) as the thorn in the side of the Democratic party, and "worst current politician".

Oh, wait. You think Hillary Clinton is a master of political debate.

I hope she runs. I hope she runs from the DNC position far, fast, and forever.

the A$$hole, Rubio water-guy.

We don't need the AIPAC supporting corporatist in the Sentate.

And one of the few Dems in Florida who has high name recognition, besides Nelson--who's already a Senator--or Crist, who's a failed candidate at this point.

but there are many many more Floridians who also fall in that category. I do not think she has served her party well as head of the DNC and we have lost two house elections during her chairmanship. While we can never know for sure, I do not believe this would have happened under Howard Dean.

I'm all for more women in the Senate but not one who is a straight up neo/Wall Street Democrat.

She'd be less likely to fuck things up in the senate.

Of course I'd prefer that she just go away.

And whatever happened to full time DNC chairs?

It's like they want to lose.

and didn't announce he was running until 4/5/2011, well after the 2010 midterms.

they were both part-time DNC chairpeople, he wasn't.

are familiar with the term New Democrats? And he was a part time chair his first year as DNC chair, and she has always been part time.

VA Democrat does. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrat_Coalition

Classy.



Amazing. Yesterday, you didn't even know about New Democrats, now you are an expert. (Not.)

FYI, "New Democrat" is a political ideology, like neoliberal or liberal or conservative, not simply a group within Congress..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrats

Specifically, it is a DLC-type centrist ideology, as distinguished from the ideology that predominated within the Democratic Party between FDR and formation of the DLC in 1985.

After being elected the first time, Obama told members of the New Democrat coalition that he was a New Democrat.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19862.html


Amazingly not a single member of the New Democrat coalition said, "How can you be a New Democrat? You are not a member of this group." Do you think President Obama lied to the Congressional New Democrat Coalition about being a New Democrat himself, when he was not even in Congress, let alone a member of the group?

After being elected the first time, Obama told members of the New Democrat coalition that he was a New Democrat.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19862.html


Amazingly not a single member of the New Democrat Coalition said, "How can you be a New Democrat? You are not a member of Congress, let alone a member of the Congressional New Democrat coalition."

Do you think President Obama lied to the Congressional New Democrat Coalition about being a New Democrat himself? Yet, he was not a member of the Congressional New Democrat Coalition, even when he was in the Senate.

Centrism is either your political ideology or it is not. Not being an official member of some group that has New Democrat in its title does not mean you are not a New Democrat. For example the Senate has no Progressive Caucus and no Liberal Caucus. Does that mean that no Senator is progressive or liberal?

Not everyone in Congress wants to associate with an ideological group. There are good reasons for doing so; there are also good reasons for not doing so. It's a personal/political choice for each member of Congress.

If you want to argue that Kaine's politics are not New Democrat, fine. You'll have a hard time convincing anyone he is not a centrist. However, at least you will be in the correct ballpark. On the other hand, your comment that he can't be a New Democrat because he didn't sign up for a group with New Democrat in the title shows (for the second time during this one exchange) that you will challenge me, even mock me, repeatedly about a two line post, although you yourself are woefully uninformed about everything I said in that two line post.


Next time, please educate yourself first. Also, you might consider admitting a mistake after you've been corrected, instead of simply moving from one incorrect challenge to the next.

Virginia, my home State (I know it is a Commonwealth, so don't jump up on your high horse yet) is a purple state. It doesn't have a lot of far left liberals or progressives so we have to make do with left leaning moderates like Don Beyer, Mark Warner, Chap Peterson, Gerry Connolly, Creigh Deeds, and Dick Saslaw. While none of them are Bernie Sanders, all of them have voting records that we in VA can be proud of.

The next time you want to bash a fairly decent Senator, get your facts straight. I did make a mistake yesterday, I claimed Kaine ran the DNC without having another job. That wasn't true in 2009, but was true the rest of his three year term. I do make another mistake on DU from time to time and that is to engage with the fools, trolls, and malcontents who are only here to bash Democrats and to puff themselves up. Ciao.

you also claimed that Kaine could not be a New Democrat because he was on wiki's list of members of the Congressional New Democrat Coalition. Clearly, you were clueless and now you are trying to pretend you were not clueless. However it's obvious.

That wasn't true in 2009, but was true the rest of his three year term.

The next time you want to bash a fairly decent Senator, get your facts straight.

She presided over the loss of house and Senate in her leadership position...that should give her fund raising ability and get the right wing votes...she is an up and comer for sure.

We lost the House in 2010. Schultz didn't become DNC chair until 2011. Then she helped win the 2012 Presidential election and helped us INCREASE the number of Senate seats we held. But I guess that didn't fit in with your stereotyping.

... last two runs. DWS failed us both times. It seems neither her center-right policy positions nor her cute dogs were enough to win the House. She needs to go.

... for that too?

And that's one of your "hard to regain" examples.

I have no problem with replacing DWS if you have a better choice, but her DNC tenure says almost nothing about her capabilities as a Senator, and I have yet to see an actually policy she supports that her opponents don't like.

Me either. That's the problem.

....around here - Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Just about everyone else gets bashed from the get go.

Additionally, that is not my perception of what goes on here, but that is a different issue

....have criticized Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

I was taught in college almost 50 years ago that when I go out into the world, its perfectly fine to criticize something, but if I do I'd better have an alternative ready to present after that criticism.

We've seen a whole lot of criticism of the current Chair, has anyone presented a viable alternative or do we just see moaning, groaning, and gnashing of teeth?

You did not criticize DWS. You criticized her critics. Moreover, your suggestion was not serious at all, since you yourself negated it immediately.

Besides, presenting alternatives in real life, as you were taught in college (counter-productively, IMO) is a whole different thing from presenting them on a message board.

The idea that you should never criticize something, unless you know the solution, is fairly self centered and ignores the good that can be done by more than one person.

However, as I said, I am not buying that anything you were taught in college or your prior post explains why you suggested Sanders for head of the DNC, then acted as though it was a stupid suggestion because he is not a Democrat.

We've seen a whole lot of criticism of the current Chair, has anyone presented a viable alternative or do we just see moaning, groaning, and gnashing of teeth?

....unless that person has a viable ALTERNATIVE, big difference.

I don't understand your last sentence.

How is what I was taught in college (and saw practiced for more than 45 years in my working career by people other than me) "counter-productive"?

And it is nobody's fault...just bad luck I guess...caused by low voter turnout which makes it our fault because we wanted ponies.
The right thing to do is to take responsibility when you are a leader that fails...and the right thing for us to do is put someone new to see if we can change things...but we are counseled to keep doing the same thing and the results will be diferent...time to find some new council too.

And don't even get me started on state and local.

Adam Putnam, Ron DeSantis, Tom Rooney, Vern Buchanan, John Mica, and Jeff Miller, and Will Weatherford.

How does she stack up against her Democratic rivals; Gwen Graham, Patrick Murphy, Buddy Dyer, Bob Buckhorn, Alvin Brown, Ted Deutch, Alex Sink, or Pam Keith

To do that, we need to control the Agenda in Congress.
To control the Agenda is Congress we need, at minimum, a majority in the House and Senate.
Schultz, will be better than any Republican. Is she better candidate than other Democrats running for the Senate nomination? I don't know. But if she is, and if she gets elected, she will be better than the alternative. Any of those Democrats will be better than any of the Republicans.

I think the argument over core beliefs between Democrats hinders our ability to gain control and to do some good for the people. Without control of the agenda we do nothing.

I would prefer to have all Democrats like Franken or Warren, but that is not going to happen. So we elect who we can and get control, then we can start solving some of the problems we face as a nation.

I wish I had a nickel for every DUer who claims to prefer someone other than Hillary, yet never advocates for any one but Hillary.

use of character assassination and guilt by association.

If the primary were held today, with the list of probable canddates, I'd vote for O'Malley.

If we want to make changes for the good, we need to support the Democratic Candidates because Republicans will not do those things. People who want an ideologically perfect candidate that isn't running, and won't settle for less, do not want change.

In our system, we need to have control of congress to make changes. Peope will either do what it takes to get control or will complain and allow Republicans to make the changes.

It's almost as though they're all going off the same script.

I am happy talking about whose policies are better. I am happy talking about who I support on the issues. I sick to hell fo the word "Hater." I am sick of the the misuse of he world Evil.

I wish people would actually declare so we can have relevant coherant conersations instead of aruging whose candidate is more progressive or more liberal or more beloved or less a corporate hack or who is really a DINO or a whichever insult is in vogue today.

The only thing I am sure of now is that Republicans will suck at everything.

And anyone who says anything is anti-woman.

My entire post consisted of "LOL." I was replying to the news that Warren and Hillary had a "secret" meeting or some such. Supposedly, I was laughing at the idea of a woman President.

It's political message board domestic terrorism.

Helping elect more Democrats to political office at all levels of American government

during election season, as to the Democrats who are running during that election cycle. The board's terms of service are clear about those points.

If you don't care for the TOS or for how US Democrats discuss politics, you could always post to the board owner in the Administrators' forum. Or alert.

Meanwhile: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/willrogers122697.html

... she will get clobbered.

Isn't that pretty obvious from the 2014 election results?

If you really need the sarcasm button to understand this you know where to look for it.

Bear Stearns rising from the grave...

Blah or Meh. Sounds like a good way to give the Republican an advantage.

Majority Leader O'Connell.



Pragmatic, my ass.

This will hand them the election on a platter.

Would she even run a campaign against them?

Nice framing.

There is now someone else who is lower on the list of people I wouldn't vote for president.

j/k

If that's who they select - then that is who they select.

I no longer give to the national organizations (only direct to candidate funds and PACs of my choosing) so I won't/can't have an impact on the Florida Senate race(s) of the future.

"...But not even the prospect of Rubio's abandoning a safe Senate seat in favor of a quixotic presidential run can get me excited about Debbie Wasserman Schultz running for anything except the far horizon.

For the life of me, I don't see any substantive accomplishment she has achieved as chair of the Democratic National Committee. In fact, there was a time when she actively campaigned against Democratic candidates back home. And on behalf of some fairly dodgy characters.

As one of the leaders of her party, in 2010, she helped preside over an electoral disaster. That debacle got her promoted. In 2014, as chairman of the entire DNC, she presided over a positive cataclysm.

The problem is that, if she runs, she sucks up an awful lot of money from an awful lot of people who ought not to have fk-all to do with a Democratic party that seeks to rebrand itself back to its populist roots. That puts other possible candidates -- like Congressman Patrick Murphy -- behind at the start. However, there is one scenario within which I wouldn't mind if she ran for the Senate, and that's if the DNC brought back Howard Dean as its chairman. Then, he could endorse Pat Murphy and all would be well."

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a33184/things-in-politico-that-make-me-want-to-guzzle-antifreeze-part-the-infinity/

but at least she could free up a strategy chair...

run, please.