***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[h1]Democratic National Committeewoman says her party is 'clearing a path' for Hillary because 'the women in charge' want it that way[/h1]
  • Female member of the Democratic Party's controlling body spoke to Daily Mail Online in Las Vegas following Tuesday's primary debate
  • She rattled off a list of women at the top of the party hierarchy and said two vice chairs helped craft a decision this summer to favor Clinton
  • The committeewoman warned her party could promote Hillary 'because she's a woman, and risk having her implode after she's nominated'
  • The Democratic National Committee insisted that it 'runs an impartial primary process, period'
  • But it has sanctioned just six debates this time around; Democratic presidential candidates had to survive 27 of them in 2007-08
  • DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz campaigned for Hillary in 2008 when she last ran for the presidency
  •  
By David Martosko, Us Political Editor For Dailymail.com In Las Vegas, Nevada

Published: 11:20 EST, 15 October 2015 | Updated: 09:57 EST, 16 October 2015

The Democratic National Committee is 'clearing a path' for Hillary Clinton to be its presidential nominee because its upper power echelons are populated with women, according to a female committee member who was in Las Vegas for Tuesday's primary debate.

Speaking on the condition that she isn't identified, she told Daily Mail Online that the party is in the tank for Clinton, and the women who run the organization decided it 'early on.'

The committeewoman is supporting one of Hillary's rivals for the Democratic nomination, and said she spoke freely because she believes the former Secretary of State is benefiting from unfair favoritism inside the party.

Clinton aims to be the first female to occupy the Oval Office, and 'the party's female leaders really want to make a woman the next president,' the committeewoman said, rattling off a list of the women who she said are the 'real power' in the organization.

'I haven't heard anyone say we should make Hillary undergo a trial by fire,' she added. 'To the contrary, the women in charge seem eager, more and more, to have her skate into the general [election].'

'I have nothing against women in politics,' she underscored. 'But it's not healthy for the party if we get behind a woman because she's a woman, and risk having her implode after she's nominated because she isn't tested enough now.'

Five of the nine elected leaders of the DNC are women, including chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz – a Florida congresswoman – and a majority of the vice chairs.

Before Wasserman Schultz assumed her post at the DNC, she eagerly campaigned for Clinton during the then-New York senator's 2008 presidential run.

[h3]ALL THE WOULD-BE PRESIDENT'S WOMEN [/h3]
The Democratic National Committee's party hierarchy has more women than men in elected positions, and females hold the party's top executive roles.

The organization's chair, three of its five vice chairs, several top communicators and both the CEO and COO are all women:

DNC national press secretary Holly Shulman told Daily Mail Online flatly: 'The DNC runs an impartial primary process, period.'

In 2007 and 2008 the Democratic Party's presidential primary candidates endured a grueling schedule of 27 debates. Hillary Clinton was the only candidate to participate in all of them, and lost the nomination to then-Illinois senator Barack Obama.

This time around, the DNC has sanctioned just six such events. Offering more might have the effect of giving an indecisive Vice President Joe Biden a broader opportunity to jump into the race, saddling Clinton with a formidable challenger. 

Shulman pointed out that in addition to the six sanctioned Democratic presidential debates, there will be four 'outside' forums where the entire field is expected to deliver remarks – individually, as opposed to head-to-head.

Those include two in Iowa, and one each in New Hampshire and South Carolina. 

'Our debate in Nevada and our upcoming debates and forums will showcase all of our candidates' visions to move America forward,' Shulman maintained.

'There’s a lot at stake. The last time a Republican left office our economy was losing 750,000 jobs a month, countless homes were being foreclosed and too many families were being devastated.

'These debates and forums are an opportunity for our candidates to introduce themselves and their vision to build on where we are now after 67 straight months of job growth.'

The Democratic National Committee itself includes 448 members, 75 of whom are nominated by the chairwoman. State party committee chairs and vice-chairs are automatically members; Democrats in all 50 states and every U.S. territory elect 200 more.

Clinton campaign spokesman Nick Merrill declined comment during a post-debate campaign swing in Las Vegas.

She participated in a conversation on the margins of the party's summer meeting in Minneapolis, she said, during which a 'consensus' was reached that Clinton should be given the kid-glove treatment.

'Is this a secret?' she asked. 'I mean, all the energy is around Hillary right now, and we're paring back the number of debates. That's going to give her a lot fewer opportunities to screw up.'

Two of the organization's vice chairs took part in the conversation, she recalled, but she declined to identify them or their genders.

During public portions of the Minneapolis meeting, Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, both Clinton rivals, made their cases that Clinton's support could ultimately wane as rank-and-file liberals tire of the retread candidate.

'We do not need more establishment politics or establishment economics,' Sanders said during a speech, hinting that a Clinton nomination could lead to the sort of voter apathy that sank Democrats during the 2014 midterm congressional election.

Enthusiasm and 'voter turnout was abysmal, embarrassingly low,' Sanders said, as millions of young, African-American, Hispanic and working-class voters 'gave up on politics as usual, and they stayed home.'

The female committeewoman said, though, that most of the party apparatus sees things differently.

At least one powerful woman at the DNC disagrees.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a Hawaii congresswoman and one of the DNC's vice chairs, raised a stink last week by arguing that there should be more debates.

She claimed that the national party disinvited her from attending Tuesday's debate in Las Vegas as punishment for falling out of line – an accusation that Wasserman Schultz bitterly disputed in television interviews.

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an insurgent socialist who has been Clinton's only serious competition in national polls, would likely be the main beneficiary of a broader list of debates.

He passed up a chance to hammer Hillary Tuesday night on her classified email scandal, though, by insisting that 'the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails!'

She declined, saying she didn't want the dustup to become a 'political conversation.'

Wasserman Schultz has put her foot down and declared that Democratic presidential candidates will debate just six times before their nominating convention next year in Philadelphia.

The post-debate analysis on Tuesday night was nearly uniform in its positive assessment of Clinton's performance, underscoring the likelihood of a cakewalk coronation unless she commits a serious unforced error or finds herself indicted by the Obama administration's Justice Department in connection with the email scandal.
 
Bill Maher fairly grilled him about his Dem socialism plan last night. Bernie has to quit the Denmark talk and start getting into detail and explaining his Dem Socialism plan because most of America either don't know what it is or thinks it's worse than Communism :lol:

I'll still vote for him though because I refuse to vote for Shillary. :smh:

Hillary Clinton is a much better option than any of the GOP choices

And her and Bernie argee on most issues.

I really hope all the Bernie Sanders supporters don't pull the "Bernie didn't win, Clinton is just like the GOP" and don't show up to vote

Because that might cause the worst case scenario to play out. Giving the GOP the entire national government.

Look at what happen when liberals weren't excited about Gore as the candidate.

-CRC with a drive by Clinton hate post. Famb must be related to Newt Ginrich :lol:
 
Last edited:
Hillary and Bernie don't agree on too much in all actuality. Certainly I'd take her over any GOP candidate and will if/when she wins the primary.

But they may agree on maybe foundations of things but not how severe they are or the best course of action.

I.e. She won't get tough on banks. She's full of it. I went to them and said "you stop that right now." :lol:

Hillary wins she's going toward the right and then starting the argument. A lot of this is a dog and pony show, she's at best a center democrat, at worst she's center right. Still, good enough to be way better than the Republicans . Bernie wins, he's going to stay where he is and then start the argument.

So rather than getting center right proposals all day, we may finally get center left bills passed.
 
Last edited:
 
Bill Maher fairly grilled him about his Dem socialism plan last night. Bernie has to quit the Denmark talk and start getting into detail and explaining his Dem Socialism plan because most of America either don't know what it is or thinks it's worse than Communism
laugh.gif


I'll still vote for him though because I refuse to vote for Shillary.
mean.gif
Hillary Clinton is a much better option than any of the GOP choices

And her and Bernie argee on most issues.

I really hope all the Bernie Sanders supporters don't pull the "Bernie didn't win, Clinton is just like the GOP" and don't show up to vote

Because that might cause the worst case scenario to play out. Giving the GOP the entire national government.

Look at what happen when liberals weren't excited about Gore as the candidate.

-CRC with a drive by Clinton hate post. Famb must be related to Newt Ginrich
laugh.gif
Been busy and haven't been able to drop by much lately.

Out of curiosity, what does Hillary actually believe? She's been like a political windsock from my observations.
 
Debbie Wasserman Shultz didn't even want to allow Bernie to debate Hillary 
mean.gif
,we all know who the Democratic establishment has already crowned...

Word to their unanimous declaration that Hillary "swept" the debate when their very own viewer polls were overwhelmingly in favor of Bern.

Happy to see that Maher finally got on board after what I felt was his willful ignoring of Bern on his show 
laugh.gif
 

This bit was hilariously on point 
roll.gif
roll.gif


 
Last edited:
Hillary and Bernie don't agree on too much in all actuality. Certainly I'd take her over any GOP candidate and will if/when she wins the primary.

But they may agree on maybe foundations of things but not how severe they are or the best course of action.

I.e. She won't get tough on banks. She's full of it. I went to them and said "you stop that right now." :lol:

Hillary wins she's going toward the right and then starting the argument. A lot of this is a dog and pony show, she's at best a center democrat, at worst she's center right. Still, good enough to be way better than the Republicans . Bernie wins, he's going to stay where he is and then start the argument.

So rather than getting center right proposals all day, we may finally get center left bills passed.

We are not gonna get center left bills if the Congress remains how it is. Dems have an outside chance at the Senate at best.

Last time we got center left governing was during Obama's first two years of office, and Bernie won't have that kind of Congress. Bernie is knows this too, just look at the "we need a revolution talk"


----------I guess I didn't pick the best words but I agree with what you said they agree what is wrong with the country, and what should be fixed (this I why I said they most thing), and they agree on the fundamentals but to me:

a) they disagree about what the solutions should be.

b) They disagree on how bad the problem is

c) The things they disagree about are MASSIVE, especially solving income inequality

Basically what is fundamentally wrong with the system. Clinton seems to believe that if you allow banks and big businesses to grow the pie, and spank them a lil when they misbehave you can keep them in line like that.

Where as Bernie is no where as naive as her and realizes that they fundamentally can't be trusted to do so.

Hillary way would work if the government regulated them more and were more responsive, but with the GOP's antics that is almost impossible.

America is like an athlete with a bum knee and Bernie is the doctor that recommends complete reconstructive surgery, Hillary is the doctor that wants to try rest, rehab and hoping for the best.

Sooner or later America gonna be getting its Derrick Rose on and clutching its economy in pain if we go Clinton's route :lol:
-------
On other issues, I'm not inclined to punish Hillary because she is a very pragmatic person. She knows the revolution is not coming so why not to the best with what you have. But of course, you have to worry about the collateral damage these pragmatic policies will cause. I mean look no further than her husband :smh:

But it makes me wonder if 4 years on Bernie Sanders complaining about Congress and setting himself up to lose in 2020 is a better option that Hillary skillfully surviving for two terms.

In the end I agree. Hillary has my support in the general because I know she will be wayyyyyyyyyy better than anything the GOP has to offer, even though she falls well short of Sanders, and IMO will even be a step back from Obama

But I just want the SCOTUS to flip progressive sooo bad brah, it got me in my feels worst than seeing Kobe grabbing one of his legs in pain |I
 
 
Bill Maher fairly grilled him about his Dem socialism plan last night. Bernie has to quit the Denmark talk and start getting into detail and explaining his Dem Socialism plan because most of America either don't know what it is or thinks it's worse than Communism :lol:


I'll still vote for him though because I refuse to vote for Shillary. :smh:


Hillary Clinton is a much better option than any of the GOP choices


And her and Bernie argee on most issues.


I really hope all the Bernie Sanders supporters don't pull the "Bernie didn't win, Clinton is just like the GOP" and don't show up to vote


Because that might cause the worst case scenario to play out. Giving the GOP the entire national government.


Look at what happen when liberals weren't excited about Gore as the candidate.


-CRC with a drive by Clinton hate post. Famb must be related to Newt Ginrich :lol:

Been busy and haven't been able to drop by much lately.

Out of curiosity, what does Hillary actually believe? She's been like a political windsock from my observations.

See for yourself famb

She is a left liberal, who has is being criticized by people (Sanders supporters and the GOP a like) because she has gotten even more liberal has time gone on.

In a perfect world I would take the personal that was always been the liberal progressive, Sanders :smokin

But the person who has evolved and transitioned over time is still a better option that the politician who screams "I was a conservative in the 80s, and I still believe the same **** now"

And definitely a WAYYYYYY better choice than the current GOP message of "I was conservative in the 80s, and I'm relatively even more conservative now" :lol:

Like who in there right mind should commend that way of thinking
 
The main reason why Hillary has shifted a little further left is because Sanders is now in the race imo. She now has to pander to those progressives that have always been skeptical as hell about her. 
 
Last edited:
The main reason why Hillary has shifted left is because Sanders is in the race imo. She now has to pander to those progressives that have always been skeptical as hell about her

Don't really agree famb

That has always been her thing.

From being regard and a centrist in the 90s, to being of the more liberal Dems in the Senate, to her going even more left because of Edwards

Bern is pushing her left true, but she been walking in that direction for a while.
 
No way would she have embraced all the talk of income inequality in this campaign without Bern making it a keystone of his platform 
laugh.gif
. Same with her reversal on TPP and her relatively recent tough talk on the same 1% she's always been friendly with. She's never been a lib firebrand but she's been forced to be more vocal in favor of progressive positions on key issues due to the shifting of the debate towards the left. I'm ceratin we'd have a much different tone to the debate without him in the race.
 
Last edited:
 
No way would she have embraced all the talk of income inequality in this campaign without Bern making it a keystone of his platform 
laugh.gif
. Same with her reversal on TPP and her relatively recent tough talk on the same 1% she's always been friendly with. She's never been a lib firebrand but she's been forced to be more vocal in favor of progressive positions on key issues due to the shifting of the debate towards the left. I'm ceratin we'd have a much different tone to the debate without him in the race.
Correct, it'd be much less interesting. Hilldawg still has this though.
 
Not saying anything about her chances since it's been safe to assume that the nomination has been hers since before she even announced 
laugh.gif
,just wondering how different the race would be without the Bern.

Just hope that some of Hillary's new positions aren't just for show...
 
Last edited:
No way would she have embraced all the talk of income inequality in this campaign without Bern making it a keystone of his platform :lol: . Same with her reversal on TPP and her relatively recent tough talk on the same 1% she's always been friendly with. She's never been a lib firebrand but she's been forced to be more vocal in favor of progressive positions on key issues due to the shifting of the debate towards the left. I'm ceratin we'd have a much different tone to the debate without him in the race.

Income inequality is a major issue in America, and it was being talked about before Bernie even entered the race, hell it was being talked about for years now.

And we are talking about the woman that was trying to force universal health insurance to happen in 1993.

Say what you will about Hillary Clinton, she has been about helping regular folk too.

-And btw, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being pro big business as Conservative, liberal, progressive, no one.

It is when you cross the line and you indulge them in their rent seeking behavior then we got a problem. Saying Clinton's "big business/ 1% friends" is not a valid shot at her in and of itself.
 
Last edited:
It wasn't being talked on a mass mainstream scale like it is now. Progressives have been pushing for it to be a bigger part of the Dem platform for years to not much avail.

I didn't say there was anything wrong with being pro business,just some of her dealings in the past have been shady. That 1% friends shot was a reference at her getting paid big bucks for going on speech tours at big banks/firms and corporations after she finished at the State Department...
 
Last edited:
It wasn't being talked on a mass mainstream scale like it is now. Progressives have been pushing for it to be in the Dem platform for years to not much avail...

I didn't say there was anything wrong with being pro business,just some of her dealings in the past have been shady. That 1% friends shot was a reference at her getting paid big bucks for going on speech tours at Big banks and corporations after she finished at the State Department.

-Nearly all major politicians do that.

-And secondly, income inequality was a mainstream issue in 2012, I don't see how it suddenly wasn't going to be one in 2016 without Bernie Sanders

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-deba...ity-is-more-relevant-than-ever-this-election/

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45782904

Hell, it was a mainstream issue in 2008 too because John Edwards platform was the "Two Americas thing", and he was a major player/candidate.

Even more hell, Edwards and Dean were talking about it in 2004 also brah.
 
Last edited:
 
It wasn't being talked on a mass mainstream scale like it is now. Progressives have been pushing for it to be in the Dem platform for years to not much avail...

I didn't say there was anything wrong with being pro business,just some of her dealings in the past have been shady. That 1% friends shot was a reference at her getting paid big bucks for going on speech tours at Big banks and corporations after she finished at the State Department.
-Nearly all major politicians do that.

-And secondly, income inequality was a mainstream issue in 2012, I don't see how it suddenly wasn't going to be one in 2016 without Bernie Sanders

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-deba...ity-is-more-relevant-than-ever-this-election/

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45782904

Hell, it was a mainstream issue in 2008 too because John Edwards platform was the "Two Americas thing", and he was a major player/candidate.

Even more hell, Edwards and Dean were talking about it in 2004 also brah.
That's one of the biggest problems people have with politicians though 
laugh.gif
,that's not a plus for me...

You can't tell me that you haven't noticed a conscious shift in momentum in the income inequality conversation from most people recently. Hell even Romney was talking about it earlier in the year. No way was income inequality even near the top of the list during 2012,it was the economy,health care,taxes,foreign policy etc. The only time people focused on that for a bit was when Romney made that stupid *** comment in private and it didn't end up being a main issue after a few weeks.

I'm sure it's been on the platform of certain candidates in the past but it's never been held near the forefront like it has now.
 
Last edited:
 
It wasn't being talked on a mass mainstream scale like it is now. Progressives have been pushing for it to be in the Dem platform for years to not much avail...


I didn't say there was anything wrong with being pro business,just some of her dealings in the past have been shady. That 1% friends shot was a reference at her getting paid big bucks for going on speech tours at Big banks and corporations after she finished at the State Department.


-Nearly all major politicians do that.


-And secondly, income inequality was a mainstream issue in 2012, I don't see how it suddenly wasn't going to be one in 2016 without Bernie Sanders

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-deba...ity-is-more-relevant-than-ever-this-election/

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45782904


Hell, it was a mainstream issue in 2008 too because John Edwards platform was the "Two Americas thing", and he was a major player/candidate.


Even more hell, Edwards and Dean were talking about it in 2004 also brah.

That's one of the biggest problems people have with politicians though :lol: ,that's not a plus for me...

You can't tell me that you haven't noticed a conscious shift in momentum in the income inequality conversation from most people recently. Hell even Romney was talking about it earlier in the year. No way was income inequality even near the top of the list during 2012,it was the economy,health care,taxes,foreign policy etc. The only time people focused on that for a bit was when Romney made that stupid *** comment in private and it didn't end up being a main issue after a few weeks.

I'm sure it's been on the platform of certain candidates in the past but it's never been held near the forefront like it has now.

John Edwards entire campaign was based on talking about it though

Yes I give Bernie credit for pushing it so much because besides criminal justice reform it is probably the most important issue facing America.

But it would have been front and center regardless. Maybe the tone of would have been different, but it would have been there

And did you notice that one of the articles is before Romney even said those words, so I disagree on the notion that the fundraiser video was the only time people cared. People been caring a ton about it on the left since the recession.

Plus famb, Obama been harping about this for years now too.

I give Bernie a credit for a lot of things, but making income inequity a mainstream issue is definitely not one of them. But bravo to him on changing how it is discussed
 
Last edited:
There was no urgency in talking about it or getting anything done to reverse it though until now. Not gonna say he's responsible for it being an important issue,just for this newfound coverage/awareness on the issue.

Shame Berns not the best "politician" :smh:.
 
Last edited:
There was no urgency in talking about it or getting anything done to reverse it though until now. Not gonna say he's responsible for it being an important issue,just for this newfound coverage/awareness on the issue.

Shame Berns not the best "politician" :smh:.

If you put Bernie in Martin O'Malley's body this would be a completely different discussion. Ageism is real in this country and unfortunately Bernie comes off as a crazy old Grandpa.

And saying Hillary is far left? :lol: Hillary is whatever the popular political opinion is at the time. She's Mrs. Me Too.
 
There was no urgency in talking about it or getting anything done to reverse it though until now. Not gonna say he's responsible for it being an important issue,just for this newfound coverage/awareness on the issue.

Shame Berns not the best "politician" :smh:.

If you put Bernie in Martin O'Malley's body this would be a completely different discussion. Ageism is real in this country and unfortunately Bernie comes off as a crazy old Grandpa.

And saying Hillary is far left? :lol: Hillary is whatever the popular political opinion is at the time. She's Mrs. Me Too.

I legit believe folk just confuse Hillary with Bill, or that Bill's sins against the left instantly becomes Hillary's.

A snapshot of Bernie's voting record

A snapshot of Hillary's voting record

Scroll to the bottom for the punchline

Hillary as always been a liberal relatively speaking, not center right, not center left, on the left. LINK LINK

When she has moved even more left it usually follows that public opinion within the country, especially liberals.

But you brahs expect me to knock the woman because she has been willing update her opinions as country progresses. Nah, I'm good on that. I'll focus on the legit beefs I have with her, in many ways I like that about her.

The reason that Bernie Sanders has gone from an extremist to the model progressive is because the party floated in that direction. But it took a while to get there.
 
Last edited:
 
Not saying anything about her chances since it's been safe to assume that the nomination has been hers since before she even announced 
laugh.gif
,just wondering how different the race would be without the Bern.

Just hope that some of Hillary's new positions aren't just for show...
You misunderstood me.

I meant, Hilldawg is the next POTUS.
 
Back
Top Bottom