Wow. No one understands . Donna wanted to help the Democrats get elected. They would not allow her to do her job.
That's all it was about. She is a good democrat ,she is still working , and she does not get paid for her work, but she works to get Democrats elected , and in case you missed it zthey all just did. So calm down.
Meh - I wouldn't put so much weight on individual people having a thumb on the scale at the DNC. Donna has already drastically walked back many of her most damning criticisms and that's because they simply don't add up when put under the microscope.
She also certainly gets paid for her work. She earned over $100,000/year heading the DNC. She is a lecturer at University of Maryland, Professor at Georgetown, and a fellow at Harvard. Harvard alone pays an average of $50,418/year to their fellows. And she's a paid contributor on CNN, NPR, and ABC.
I'd hardly call any of that "not getting paid for her work."
I'm actually a fan of Donna Brazile, but she appears to be more focused on selling her book than anything else.
Maindawg Wrote: And Bernie always caucuses with Democrats . He is more liberal than the party , he is a counter weight to the right. We need him. It would not be a bad thing to have a independent president. Might be the best thing.
In theory everyone wants an Independent President, but the reality is that it's basically impossible and would simply split one of the two major political parties and guarantee the other major party victory.
Even if an Independent magically wins the Presidency, how will he or she build a coalition to get things passed in Congress? Unless you have a huge sea change and we start electing dozens of Independent Senators and hundreds of Independent Congresspeople then an Independent President won't accomplish a damn thing.
As you correctly pointed out - Bernie is an Independent yet he caucuses with the Democrats. That's because there's no Independent caucus and he would literally be talking to a room of one person (himself) if he didn't caucus with a major political party.
I just don't see a sea change happening where we elect hundreds of "Independent" candidates all of a sudden. I also hate the word independent in the context of politics because there's no such thing as a political independent. The vast majority of "Independents" aren't actually independent and their voting habits prove it. Anti-abortion "independents" vote with Republicans and pro choice "independents" vote with Democrats. Both call themselves "independent," but neither of them are after you peel back the first layer of the onion.
People vote with their tribes. That's what Republicans did in 2016 and Democrats did after the bitter primary of 2008. Fear of the "other" overrides everything else.
The only thing a left of center Independent candidate would do is split the Democratic Party and guarantee a Republican President.