I put up an announcement post about this yesterday.
Did anyone beside me watch this? If so, I would love to hear from you.
I was not (favorably) impressed, but I would welcome disagreement with that in the comments.
My take? Chorus fell on its collective face, right out of the gate, with their first ever creator-led DNC Chair Forum. If this is their opening move, and they were pleased with the result, then I’m definitely not buying what they’re selling.
Juvenile. Unprofessional. It was edifying alright, just not in the way that I imagined it would be.
This felt like a forum for the so-called moderators to share THEIR OWN VIEWS, with each one putting their respective giant thumbs on the scale for their preferred candidates, complete with the occasional GOTCHA question designed to drag down one candidate in the effort to pimp for another.
There was nothing even resembling equal time for candidates.
Now let’s talk about the running chat they had in the sidebar. oh. my. god.
What I expected: at least somewhat intelligent conversation about the candidates and their responses. Anyone who’s watching a DNC Chair forum has to be politically savvy, right? No.
What I got: a chat that was downright embarrassing. Grade school mentality. The only things missing were the pom poms for the cheerleaders. Mostly rah-rah for their candidate. Very little discussion of actual ideas shared by the candidates. The Williamson people were the absolute worst. “She’s so great, such an effective communicator.” As for the rest, there was “X was my state rep and he was really helpful when I had X problem.” WTF does that have to do with a leadership position for the DNC? There were also fanboys for the various “moderators”.
At the top of the show – and I use that word deliberately – was an announcement of the number of social media followers for each of the moderators. And the “moderators” all had their particular axe to grind. They shared their own opinions, asked leading questions. I’m sorry, but moderators don’t say “I completely agree with you on that!” and then share more of their own opinions.
Shorter WaterGirl: Ugh. ugh. ugh. Self-promotion. If we’re looking for leaders in alternative media, this wasn’t that.
Juju
I didn’t watch, I have too much everything to deal with lately, but I trust your judgement.
Professor Bigfoot
I don’t understand why Jaime Harrison is being replaced— is there a statute of limitations on the tenure of a DNC chair?
Or is it “you lost to Trump therefore we’re gonna find a white dude to replace you with?”
TBone
Sounds like it was modeled on today’s Senate Confirmation Hearing or vice versa. Or yesterday’s…
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Professor Bigfoot:
Harrison himself announced he wouldn’t be seeking a second term on 11/6, the day after the election, presumably because of the loss
Lee
Didn’t watch either but I’ve pretty much come to the conclusion that almost no one among the Dem leadership realizes or cares about the situation we’re in, unlike us great unwashed masses. We are the ones who have to live with the mess that is coming.
I think AOC gets it. And maybe Michelle Obama but she stays in the background (not blaming her at all). Everyone else, including Warren (which shocked the fuck out of me) has been massively disappointing.
Basically, I despair.
WaterGirl
@Professor Bigfoot: It’s a time-limited position, I believe. You are elected for a certain term.
Also, they ALWAYS change the person in that position after a loss.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Lee:
I wouldn’t say the entire Dem leadership, I think Jefferies has been pretty good.
Fetterman really pisses me off because I assumed he knew better. I guess he’s just fine with asskissing authoritarianism. If he’s afraid of Trump then he needs to find another line of work. If it’s pure naked careerism….then I have no words
Tenar Arha
I had other plans yesterday, but I’m glad you watched WaterGirl. And I really thank you and appreciate your write up of what you saw.
WaterGirl
@Lee:
I pretty much disagree with all of that in your assessment of Democratic leadership.
The Dem leadership absolutely knows the position we are in. What isn’t clear is what the best ways to respond are.
We all have to live with the mess that’s coming.
*I would not consider the moderators of this event or CHORUS Democratic leadership.
Barbara
I watched the first hour. I was not as unfavorably impressed as you were. I actually thought that two of the three moderators I saw tried to stay on topic and to get on-topic responses from the candidates. But the candidates are who they are — and two of them, at least, were basically there to go on at length about their own personal views, in my view, made it clear that they had no real interest in running the DNC except insofar as it provided a platform for delivering their own views. This would be Williamson and Hathaway, who was basically given a 10 minute uninterrupted soapbox by the second moderator. I wouldn’t invite that moderator back especially after she gave an intro that specified she wanted 90-second answers that responded directly to her questions. And then didn’t do that AT ALL.
A third candidate made valid points about the onslaught of negatively oriented fund raising and how much trust has been broken by such organizations, including those that are officially connected to the Democratic Party. But he came across as a one-trick pony — maybe someone to hire to make progress on that single issue.
So I think the goal was to expose us to the candidates on an unfiltered basis, and the biggest bummer for me was the second moderator who basically went way off script.
The conversation bar was kind of silly. It was unmoderated and when you don’t moderate you get cranks
So my reaction after all that was that at least three of the candidates were spot on in diagnosing the messaging problems and had thought about how to address it, a fourth, Ben Wikler, was oriented more towards organizational repair at the state and local levels, and Williamson and Hathaway were more interested in explaining their personal political frustrations than offering a plan for fixing organizational issues. One of the guys, as said above, was all about altering the fund raising landscape.
I definitely know more than I did before I watched.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
Thanks for the review WG. It’s a shame it was a shitshow apparently
Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony
Most online content creators are amateurs and attention getters. We need more mature (emotionally, not necessarily in years) professionals in that space. Unfortunately, that requires recruiting and financing. People who are compelling, talented, and professional have jobs already
WaterGirl
@Barbara:
Could not agree more!
I guess I didn’t talk about all about the candidates themselves – it was the approach that I thought was juvenile and unhelpful.
Lacuna-Synecdoche
Watergirl @ Top:
So … basically it felt like a network TV debate?
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@WaterGirl:
Did any of the candidates particuarly impress you?
Barbara
@Lacuna-Synecdoche: In fairness, at least based on what I saw, only the second moderator did that but it was so obvious and so disruptive to the format that it probably did affect the overall perception of the whole production. I don’t know what she was thinking.
ETA: In all the meandering soapboxing of Hathaway, she made a really valid point about how the Democratic Party has essentially ceded the South. But another candidate also made that point — the one from Minnesota, and started by quoting Wayne Gretzky about how it doesn’t matter nearly as much that you know where the puck is as it does whether you know where it is going to be in two seconds — and how he would go about starting to address the “come from behind” position the party now finds itself in.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
@Barbara:
Somebody should’ve stopped her
WaterGirl
@Lacuna-Synecdoche: Yes, only worse because these “moderators” shared their views out loud.
With the mainstream media they don’t say it out loud – but it’s apparent from their gotcha questions and the framing of all their questions.
Barbara
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): It felt staged. Like they had planned it in advance.
WaterGirl
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka):
Nah. That was built into the design of their awful forum.
@Barbara:
Absolutely!
Lyrebird
@Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony: Not disagreeing with your general comment. I wish we could gather a different forum with some top nominees from Anne Laurie, mistermix, rikyrah, as far as social-media opinion providers who are TOP NOTCH.
CandidlyTiff, MangyJay, Charlotte Clymer? They leave all the Welkers and Tappers and Blitzers in the dust.
I don’t know. I don’t imagine all the candidates would want to make a top-ten-thousand blog or whatever the tagline says, but Schiff did come once. Hey @WaterGirl: I am pipe dreaming here big time, want to make a forum where we invite some of those folks and maybe some of the boots-on-the-ground orgs too to talk about DNC candidates or steps forward in general?
Barbara
@WaterGirl: I don’t know what your expectations were. As I said above, I feel a whole lot more knowledgeable now than I did before this forum. How long did you stay on? I left when Marianne Williamson started spouting about the Rust Belt. Proving herself to be (as Kay might say) at least one generation removed from the reality of the place. Being from the Rust Belt I can’t stand listening to people go on about it like that.
Also, I feel that there is a bit of a disconnect — sort of following up on the puck analogy — of course you can’t take your current committed membership for granted, but when it isn’t enough to win, you have to cultivate and expand that membership. In a lot of ways, the second moderator was all about recognizing the commitment of Black women — 92%, etc. — but had no apparent view about how to reach an additional minimum of 2% or 3% more.
scav
“creator led” alone would have sent me running. Random people at a water-cooler prone to spouting pop psychology, intro econ and snippits of motivational posters as filtered through advertising theories do that to me. But then, I had a double major in hermit and curmudgeon and just don’t get any of this some days.
WaterGirl
@Goku (aka Amerikan Baka):
It affirmed my opinion of the guy from NY.
And worsened my opinion of Hathaway, who came off as very soapbox-heavy even in the previous DNC forum.
It clarified my thoughts on the heavyset guy whose name I don’t know. I wasn’t that familiar with him, but after last night he’s a nope for me.
It affirmed my thinking on Martin O’Malley, good guy, not the right person for the job, in spite of the slobbering from one of the moderators.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: I only felt that way about the second moderator and Hathaway. I didn’t feel that way about anyone else.
WaterGirl
@Barbara: I stayed until the bitter end.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: How long did it go on for?
And regarding Hathaway, lest I give the wrong impression, it’s not that I disagree with her views, but she should be writing articles not running an organization. She’s all about making sure we know what’s in her head. I don’t think that’s going to help us move forward.
Almost Retired
@Lyrebird: There’s a zoom coming up on Jan. 25th with a boots on the ground organizer – Brendan Walsh from Worker Power – so maybe we can ask him about his thoughts on the candidates and the direction of the DNC.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: The guy from Boston — the heavyset guy — came across as being personally aggrieved about the state of his text messaging. Oh yes, we all get that there should be a better way, but his message was basically, once I fix that then we’ll be able to do a bunch of really great but unspecified things. Yeah, no.
WaterGirl
@Barbara:
Were you there for the gotcha question when asking Ken Martin about the criticism of him from Ben Wikler. (I think that was Ken Martin, I might have to try to find out – whoever that was gets crossed off my “would be Okay” list because of his total victim-y answer to that question.)
Politics ain’t beanbag, and he repeated no less than 6 times that he was committed to running a positive campaign, not-so-subtly slamming Wikler for having dared to say that what this guy has been doing hasn’t worked and it’s time for something new.
Anyway
Sorry to hear this. Based on jackal comments since the elections I despair of Ds ever winning anything…
WaterGirl
@Barbara: Agree on the Boston heavyset guy.
KatKapCC
Ugh, I’m sorry it was such a crapshow and that you had to suffer through it, Water Girl. It’s so maddening that things like this — political debates of any kind — are actually not that difficult to do well, but no one who ever runs one seems to care about doing it well.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: Yes, I was there. I didn’t mind his responses. They didn’t come across as being overly aggressive. Maybe I have not been sufficiently down in the weeds.
WaterGirl
THE CONTENDERS
Quintessa Hathaway: Education Consultant, 2022 Democratic Nominee For Congress (AR-02)
SOAPBOX, NO
Ken Martin: Minnesota Democratic Farm Labor Party Chair, DNC Vice Chair, President of the Association of State Democratic Chairs (ASDC)
THE FELLOW CRITICIZED BY WIKLER WHO PLAYED THE VICTIM OVER AND OVER IN RESPONSE, SO #2 CHOICE WENT TO NO LAST NIGHT
Martin O’Malley: Former Biden Administration Social Security Administration Commissioner, former two-term Governor of Maryland, Chair of the Democratic Governors Association (DGA)
NO
Jason Paul: Attorney, Newton, Massachusetts Democratic City Committee Executive Member
BOSTON HEAVYSET GUY, NO
James Skoufis: New York State Senator
LIGHTWEIGHT, NO
Nate Snyder: Former US Department of Homeland Security official in the Biden and Obama administrations
HE MADE NO IMPRESSION ON ME, WHICH IS INTERESTING
Ben Wikler: Wisconsin Democratic Party (WDP) Chair
YES
Marianne Williamson: Best-selling author, candidate for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination
HARDEST OF NOs
WaterGirl
@Barbara: He came off as a total victim and whiner in response to that question – I was totally turned off. Until then he was my #2 choice.
KatKapCC
@WaterGirl:
LOL agree!
WaterGirl
@KatKapCC: Pretty sure that a high school political nerd would have done a better job moderating.
scav
@Anyway: Even here is but a smidgeon of the reality of the whole and a picky, argumentative bit. Can do more collectively than as individuals. But not a representative sample, nope, nohow.
WaterGirl
@Barbara:
Yes to all of that!
Another Scott
@Barbara: I didn’t see this thing, but I saw the first (“southern”) one. Your point about Hathaway is a good one. I was impressed with her comments on the importance of the south, but (IIRC) she didn’t talk much about the nitty-gritty on what the DNC as an organization needs to do to improve itself. You may be right that her doing advocacy pieces or being on some sort of advisory committee may be a good use of her talents.
On the broader race, I was uncomfortable with all the beating up of the DNC (by several of the candidates) in the earlier forum. It seems to me that Harrison did a good job and walked the talk. I don’t think he was somehow captive to some evil cabal of consultants and contractors or something (but who knows). He kept amazing composure at the end where he thanked everyone, it seems to me. It’s a thankless job, and I hope that if Wikler wins he isn’t burnt out by the experience – we need him well beyond 2028…
Thanks.
Best wishes,
Scott.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: All consultants are about telling other people what they should be doing, frequently without accountability when the advice is wrong. As a group they tend to overlook their own limitations.
WaterGirl
@Barbara:
I don’t recall the time. I would guess maybe 2 hours?
KatKapCC
@WaterGirl: Balloon Juice front-pagers! Now that would be a good debate. You and Anne Laurie bring all the fact-checks and data and John shows up to tell the candidates to shut the fuck up when they talk over each other.
no comment
@WaterGirl:
Watching it now. About 1.5 hrs.
JML
@WaterGirl: It’s interesting that Wikler’s attack on Martin is that what he’s been doing doesn’t work, because Martin does have a track record of success in MN…a better one that Wikler, who is relatively thin on the track record aspect. (there’s been some success in WI, but also some fail)
not surprised that Ken got whiny, though. I’m not sure he’s who I want to be the public face of the party for the next 2-3 years. (year 4 will be the presidential candidates and eventual nominee rather than the DNC Chair) But under his leadership, the MN DFL has fundraised well, organized pretty well, and won a lot more than they’ve lost. which wasn’t always the case under his predecessors, who were mostly nice mediocrities. Ken’s more of an asshole, but also more effective.
WaterGirl
@Lyrebird:
As long as we are talking about dreaming…
I am all in for Ben Wikler because he’s the one who is all about organizing.
So my hope /dream is that if he gets this position, I can talk to him about facilitating donations that would be designated for boots on the ground .
Kind of like the arrangement I was able to make with the field organizer for the NE senate seat.
I see that Jon Ossoff has started fundraising for 2026 – Balloon Juice supported him with a bazillion dollars when he ran before but now I want to find a way to get a commitment that our Jon Ossoff dollars would only be used for organizing and GOTV.
That’s what started me thinking about this.
If anyone has any connections to Jon Ossoff or anyone in GA that I could start with, let me know.
Baud
If no one talked about their dick size, then what are we even doing?
WaterGirl
@Baud: There was definitely a dick size conversation in the forum last night, and the one who came of as a whiner certainly lost that one.
Barbara
@JML: What really struck me — and several candidates made this point — is that the organization is structured so that presidents can basically redirect its mission and take it off track. I love Barack Obama, but his diagnosis about where we were headed was wrong, and throttling back on the 24/7/365 campaigning platform put us way behind. I get that he wanted to govern and not campaign but on this, his instincts were wrong — I don’t like it any more than he did, but we don’t get to govern unless we are, literally, campaigning all the time.
Baud
@WaterGirl:
Seriously?
I’m glad you watch so I don’t have to.
WaterGirl
@JML:
I probably phrased that badly.
It wasn’t an attack saying that Ken Martin hasn’t been successful in what’s he’s been doing in MN. Wikler was criticizing something related to his role as vice-chair of the DNC, but I don’t recall the details. I’m afraid my visceral reaction to the whiny jerk response allowed the details of the criticism to fall out of my head.
Barbara
@WaterGirl: I am a member of Simon Rosenberg’s paid community, and he has persuaded me that organizing alone is just not enough. That is my doubt about Wikler. Several other candidates were much more obviously perceptive in my view about why Democratic messaging has been ineffective and what to do about it. Yes, it’s a balance.
I mean, to be really dourly specific, our organizing and registering voters probably helped Trump win because we focused on an age demographic that trended more in his favor this time (young men) but we didn’t match that organizing with a message that resonated for them, or if we did, it wasn’t in a forum that they pay attention to.
WaterGirl
@Baud: Well, I’m being snide about that. I cannot stand whining and people who see themselves as victims.
So I thought that guy came off very badly – I felt like he came off as smarmy as he repeated 6-10 times that he is running a positive campaign and the other guy isn’t, while pretending to praise Wikler and saying he would be happy if Wikler won. The guy was carrying a huge grudge and he came off as whiny and disingenuous. To me, anyway.
When Wikler was given a chance to respond, Wikler came off as honest and didn’t back away from the criticism he had made – he explained why he had that concern. He’s a fighter and that’s what we need.
Harrison Wesley
I’m not interested in watching or listening to people who refer to themselves as ‘creators.’ Perhaps I’m reading more inflated self-regard into this than is actually present, but I’ll live with it.
WaterGirl
@Barbara:
I’m pretty sure that I signed up for the paid version of Simon Rosenberg just after the new year, but I haven’t had much time for reading lately.
I would argue that messaging is part of organizing. I would also argue that part of why Wisconsin has done so well is that the focus s on messaging and relationships and GOTV. To me, that’s all organizing.
Organizing is not paid consultants, TV advertising and mailers.
WaterGirl
@Harrison Wesley: Really? You’ll dismiss a whole bunch of people because you don’t like the wording? For real?
Subcommandante Yakbreath
Seconded!
WaterGirl
@no comment: Maybe it just felt like 2 hours. :-)
I’ll be interested in hearing your thoughts after you watch it.
Do you have a link? Is it up on YouTube?
WaterGirl
@KatKapCC: hahaha
Barbara
@WaterGirl: I am not arguing, but Wisconsin went for Trump. It did re-elect Tammy Baldwin, thank goodness, but I am unclear what else he would bring to the table nationally that would change the national dynamic that so obviously played out in Wisconsin this year. He didn’t change that dynamic in Wisconsin.
Lyrebird
Heck, maybe you should reach out to him now, or after we get to (thanks @Almost Retired: ) ask Brendan and the NC folks and Four Directions for their top questions for any incoming DNC chair. Maybe Wikler would be willing to do a typed interview, maybe even follow up with a live QA session.
ETA: I don’t claim to know who would be best, but WG is the Organizing Ninja here, and organizing is important
KatKapCC
@Harrison Wesley: You are reading into it, at least with regard to some. There are plenty of people online who fall under the creator label who are actually creating content…so I’m not sure what other term you would use? Personally I prefer creator over “influencer”.
Ruckus
@WaterGirl:
A lot of humans do not mature well. Some have no road signs of growing up. Some have a pathway written in stone. Thou shall be this person for all eternity! – when it is nothing like them and how their brain functions. Which also obviously was not in any way a reflection of them – this actual, individual human being, with an actual mind. Some are given a path not anywhere near who they are, and zero choice. Some are not given guidance, but demands.
It’s humanity, in all it’s ins and outs and all it’s good and all it’s crap. That we grow up to be actual, living, adult human beings is not always a given.
Harrison Wesley
@WaterGirl: Yep. I really am that shallow. Not sure when I became that way, but it predates the last election.
Captain C
@Baud: Marianne Williamson: “My astral plane dick is bigger than everyone’s!”
Kay
I’m using “low quality hires” in my comments about the Trump cabinet on MAGA accounts on TikTok. Enrages them
I’m out of new material. I’m going to start stealing from AL and Betty Cracker.
Barbara
@Kay: Donald Trump hires people no one else would hire for any reason at all. Not even just to fulfill quotas. It’s part of the strategy — it guarantees loyalty and gives him a fail proof target to blame for bad performance when it inevitably happens.
UncleEbeneezer
I’m not surprised the chat was horrible. Anything related to DNC brings out the worst. Oftentimes, even here.
Kay
@Barbara:
Agree. This country is now run by an organized crime syndicate. I’m trying to adjust but mostly failing.
wenchacha
Late to the party (shit show) but how did Marianne Williamson even get a seat at the table? That she would even be considered for consideration really bothers me.
They may as well have John Edwards, not the disgraced, prevaricating Senator, but the one who speaks to dead relatives.
Barbara
@UncleEbeneezer: I didn’t think it was horrible at all. I though many of the candidates made good and valid points that resonated with me. The second moderator basically sabotaged the format by allowing the candidate she identified with to get a block of uninterrupted time to go on and on about her views on all kinds of things, but especially education because, as it happens, she is an educational consultant. Even that is illuminating for letting you see that she really has no ideas about what she would do if she were in charge of the DNC.
And the second moderator (sorry, I forget names) made a big deal about answering questions in 90 seconds and staying on topic. It was weird.
Kay
@Barbara:
I don’t respond to the comments of MAGAs who scream at me in response to my comment but I comment as Kay and the female name means they all attribute my dislike of MAGAs to their belief that I don’t “have a man” , “need a man”, “no man wants you” etc.
Ewww. MAGA men are icky.
Baud
@Kay:
“Worse than DEI hires”
Barbara
@Baud: “Affirmative action for incompetent Caucasians that no one else would hire.”
Barbara
@Kay: So charming. If I said that I had been married for 35 years with three kids they would probably retort that my husband is cheating on me. They really, really hate women.
no comment
Chorus DNC Chair Forum (YouTube)
I pay less attention to politics than most of the people on this blog, but more than the average voter. Watched almost an hour. Can’t tell you who is for what – I think the candidates are blending together for me.
Baud
@Harrison Wesley:
I’m more interested in a destroyers forum.
Barbara
People might get a kick out of this (I can’t link — it’s paywalled to death):
Law360 (January 14, 2025, 6:08 PM EST) — An attorney helping defend Meta Platforms in copyright litigation brought by artists who claim their content was used to train the large language model Llama has dropped the tech company as his client, citing Facebook and founder Mark Zuckerberg’s “descent into toxic masculinity and Neo-Nazi madness” in a LinkedIn post.
Mark Lemley of Lex Lumina PLLC said in a post Monday that he “fired Meta as a client” in a proposed class action whose plaintiffs include comedian Sarah Silverman and authors Ta-Nehisi Coates and Junot Diaz.
“I have struggled with how to respond to Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook’s descent into toxic masculinity and Neo-Nazi madness,” Lemley began his post. “While I have thought about quitting Facebook, I find great value in the connections and friends I have here, and it doesn’t seem fair that I should lose that because Zuckerberg is having a midlife crisis.”
Lemley’s departure comes as Meta and its CEO have drawn criticism this month after announcing the end of a fact-checking program for Facebook and Instagram in the U.S. — an initiative the company launched after Russia used the platforms to spread misinformation in an attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election. In addition, Zuckerberg has drawn backlash for a recent appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast for comments he made about “masculine energy” being good. Meta also joined Amazon and other companies this month in announcing that it would scale back diversity programs ahead of President-elect Donald Trump’s return to the White House.
“Mark Zuckerberg has taken a series of steps in the past week to encourage disinformation and hate speech on the platform, to target LGBTQ members on the site and at the company, and to encourage a culture of toxic masculinity,” Lemley said in a statement Tuesday to Law360. “I decided that I could not in good conscience be associated with a company that made those decisions, so I decided to withdraw. Meta remains represented by outstanding counsel in this case, and I believe they should and will prevail in the case. But they will have to do it without me.”
* * *
“Bluesky is an outstanding alternative to Twitter, and the last thing I need is to support a Twitter-like site run by [an Elon] Musk wannabe,” Lemley said, presumably referring to Zuckerberg.
* * *
In addition to being a partner at Lex Lumina, Lemley is a professor at Stanford Law School and the director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, according to the firm’s website.
scav
@Baud: Round robin discussion of all the different ways of unravelling crochet amigurumi, deflating sourdough and planting weeds?
EarthWindFire
@Kay: Why do you need new material? If we’ve learned anything from 2024, it’s that repetition works.
Chris
@Lee:
I see very little evidence that most of us great unwashed masses have a firmer grasp of the situation than the people in the Democratic leadership, even if we limit “great unwashed masses” to just the Democratic half/third of them.
KatKapCC
@wenchacha: I think the supposed medium dude is John Edward, no s on the end. Though I’m hard-pressed to figure out which man would be more insulted to be confused for the other.
dc
@Chris:
The great unwashed masses believe that Republicans are better with the economy and crime. They are better at committing crimes and getting away with it, but that’s it.
wenchacha
@KatKapCC: Thanks for the correction. I don’t really care for either, but I agree with your assessment. Fine by me if I never hear from either of them ever again.
no comment
Gotta do some errands. Not finished watching.
So far, most of the candidates have made good points, but I’m not sure who has an actual plan or the skills to put their vision in place. That might be my fault for not paying close enough attention, though. Williamson was a no from the start. I’m not impressed with Hathaway.
WaterGirl
@wenchacha: Anyone who was able to get X number of endorsements from DNC members got a seat at the table. Seems like it was 40 or 50, but I don’t recall the exact number for sure.
In my opinion, there’s something wrong with the DNC membership if she can get that many endorsements within their ranks.
Ruckus
@Harrison Wesley:
In politics, here and now, in this country we have 2 choices. At this time money seems to win. Not the people with money but the concept of money itself. shitforbrains supposedly has money, his opposition was not a traditional money haver. But this isn’t 1850, humanity has changed from then. Not necessarily better mind you but it has changed. (Not necessarily worse either) .And many, many people do not like change, and some HATE change. They want the world they think they see, rather than the reality around them. Because reality is not always the headliner in life. It is what we actually have – but it isn’t always welcome. We as humans have created an entire segment of our lives with a concept of reality – that isn’t real. It’s called entertainment, movies, TV. It’s not day to day living, sleep, wake up – go to work, come home relax (or not) sleep, repeat for 40-50 years. Now this isn’t new of course, but what is, is that we get to see far more of life and it’s reality and far more of that which isn’t. And I’d bet that a lot of people don’t know the difference. Or likely care. So much is displayed as real life. Some of it actually reflected something close to reality, but most of it doesn’t reflect the reality of normal humans, which is something that makes it entertaining to many.
A sample might be that we are seeing lists of “important” people that have lost a lot in the 2 huge fires in SoCal. And yes that sucks but it’s presented in a manner that reflects the homage to money and how great are these people and how horrible are their loses. Many, many people have suffered that weren’t honored with the spot light of fame and fortune and how horrible it is that these people lost so much. They had the money to spend that many have never seen the likes of. Or ever will. They lost a lot, but they had a lot to lose. I’m not mad that they had money or what they got paid to provide what they did, I’m mad that we are supposed to feel sorry that they lost so much when others lost a lot and aren’t being given the spotlight of how much they spent on their homes, and the rest of us are just peons – that in the end paid them all that money. So they had it to lose.
And yes a couple that I’ve known for decades had to leave because they were very near one of the fires, like less than 1/8 mile. They aren’t wealthy, they both worked for decades in regular jobs and aren’t getting the “Oh poor me” concept spread over the news and web. And this isn’t the first time they’ve had to leave.
I also have a friend who lives in the middle of one of the really big fires. We talked yesterday and he – and his home came out unscathed. I had called him earlier and he didn’t answer – he was a bit busy… but home – and him, still intact.
JML
@WaterGirl: That’s probably fairer…but I honestly don’t believe that vice-chair of the DNC means all that much, especially when there’s a president from your party. There’s 4 of them (Whitmer, Duckworth, Munoz, and Martin) and Martin’s role was probably mostly to represent the state party chairs. It’s just not going to be a position you’re likely to be all that impactful in when your party controls the presidency.
I’ve known Ken for a long time. Not sure how I feel about him as DNC Chair, which says something. but while Wikler has done some good work in WI, it’s unclear to me how much of this was him and how much credit he’s taking for everyone else’s work, and he didn’t exactly drive it home in 2024.
O’Malley would be a backwards thinking choice, though.
wonkie
There are stupid people on our side. I think the shift toward MAGA is stupid Dems shifting to R stupidity.
I’m on Bluesky quite a bit and encounter left stupidity fairly often in the form of “Dems need to represent the working class! Dems are elitist who have done nothing for the working class!” I take time to educate these people primarily to give other people ammo for the discussion.
I think we need to recognize that Republicans are effective communicators because they give simple, clear messages that resonate emotionally, appeal to selfishness, and give voters the opportunity to engage in Othering. Basic message: WHose side are you on? Us, the real true Americans, or those weak losers who represent weird people like trans and the coastal elite?”
We counter with policy and OBVIOUSLY THAT DOESN’T WORK. The problem with many progressives is they believe that Medicare for all will magically get working class white males to vote D. Well, it might help with some. However, working class white males have been voting for the party that screws them over for decades and shitting on the party that did, in substantial ways, meet their needs so clearly there is no magic to policy.
So I want a D leader who understands that STYLE of message matters more than content in terms of getting votes. Keep up the good policies, yes. But start fucking othering the Republican party leaders, show strength, appeal to people’s emotional need to see leadership, stop all the self-abuse and navel gazing and attack, attack, attack. I think the message that Rs are weird was great. Fascist is true but doesn’t work because most people think it means an antisemitic German. So weird. Add to that corrupt, elitist, pro-corporate power and we may have a message that resonates emotionally and gets votes outside our base.
Matt McIrvin
@wonkie: A winning coalition requires the votes of stupid people. I have some background as a teacher, but not a politician. I can’t teach anything to someone who isn’t willing to learn, which to my mind is the true definition of stupidity (nothing actually to do with cognitive capacity–people with very high IQs can be brick stupid).
Since I don’t know how to appeal to stupid people I often pull back from these sorts of messaging-strategy meta-discussions. I think all sides participating in them tend to assume too much that what personally appeals to them will appeal to the masses.
sab
@Barbara: She was with Spectrum News, That upset me because Spectrum News locally is pretty good, and a vast improvement over Time Warner that was its predecessor in this market. Time Warber was nore Republican than Fox.
WaterGirl
@UncleEbeneezer: My complaint was with the “moderators” who were really participants.
It had nothing to do with the subject matter.
Miss Bianca
@Kay: I’m hoping it proves to be more of a *dis*organized crime syndicate, personally.
TurnItOffAndOnAgain
@Barbara: Obama did came into power during an imminent and calamitous economic collapse. Governing was kind of the main priority so the country could climb out of that hole while they still had the opportunity to do so.
Barbara
@TurnItOffAndOnAgain: He made a very intentional decision not to continue the activities and work of OFA. He really thought that the craziness of the Republican party had cratered — much like many of us thought that the case against Trump’s reelection had been made by Trump. I don’t blame Obama for not having been sufficiently prescient or cynical, but it’s our own fault if we assume that we don’t actually have to work to make our own case.