I mean, they have a point. DNC chairs shouldn’t be picking winners. Hogg is free to make his own path. If there is internal corruption he should start by exposing it.
Remember Debbie Wasserman Shultz and how everyone was pissed at her for pulling strings for Hilary?
We don’t need to recreate that.
I think there could be arguments that the DNC could set their agenda and eject anyone who opposes it but just trying to root people out through back door deals is not great.
Sorry, they’re too busy trying to stop David Hogg.
I mean, they have a point. DNC chairs shouldn’t be picking winners. Hogg is free to make his own path. If there is internal corruption he should start by exposing it.
So now we’re calling creating competition “picking winners”?
Funding opponents of incumbents you don’t like is tantamount to picking winners.
It’s fine to do it but not from the position he is in.
Is that not just how the DNC/political parties in general normally works anyways?
Remember Debbie Wasserman Shultz and how everyone was pissed at her for pulling strings for Hilary?
We don’t need to recreate that.
I think there could be arguments that the DNC could set their agenda and eject anyone who opposes it but just trying to root people out through back door deals is not great.
Sure is convenient that the party suddenly wants impartiality when centrists might get primaried.
They didn’t have primaries last cycle and just told us who we were expected to vote for and that wasn’t a problem. That was just 6 months ago.
Democrats care about neutrality like republicans care about fiscal responsibility.
So I remember a political party behaving like one? Yeah, I do.
The party spends money on candidates that’s how politics works (which sucks but whatever).
The second the shoe is on the other foot.