A number of party leaders are frustrated that Hogg, who has a leadership position in the party, is pushing primaries against some incumbents in deep-blue seats.
Democratic party leaders Thursday morning admonished officers to not take sides in primaries, addressing a situation involving activist and Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg.
"Let me be unequivocal. No DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election, whether on behalf of an incumbent or a challenger," DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a press call. "Voters should decide who our primary nominees are, not DNC leadership. Our role is to serve as stewards of a fair, open and trusted process, not to tilt the scales."'
As of now, however, the DNC does not have the power to remove Hogg if he refuses to stand down on funding primary challenges through a separate PAC — unless the body changes its rules, a senior DNC official told NBC News.
“Under the present bylaws, there is no action that can be taken against David Hogg without changing to the bylaws to extend that policy of neutrality to all primaries," DNC Finance Chair Chris Korge told NBC News. "There is no codified, legal way to remove an officer for doing what David Hogg has done because it only extends to the presidential race. "
Korge said that, as of now, the situation is to be addressed at a future meeting, likely in August.
Korge said he believed it was imperative for the body to formally change its bylaws because the party division the Hogg situation has caused harkens to an old ghost Democrats don't want to revisit.
“It smells like 2016, when progressives said the DNC had it in the bag for Hillary Clinton," Korge said, referencing angst in the party that the DNC had its thumb on the scale to block Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., from the presidential nomination. "No party official, no officer of the DNC, should do anything that would result in the division that was created by the perception that existed back in 2016."
On Thursday, Martin went on to say he had spoken to Hogg about what he perceived as a conflict but he did not expound on whether he gave him an ultimatum.
"I understand what he's trying to do," Martin continued in the press call. "As I've said to him, 'If you want to challenge incumbents, you're more than free to do that. But just not as an officer of the DNC, because our job is to be a neutral arbiter. We can't be both the referee and also the player at the same time. You have to make a decision.'"
In pushing back on Thursday, Hogg cited Trump's power clashes with institutions in saying the party needed to take more aggressive actions. He added that he had not violated any DNC bylaws.
"They’re trying to change the rules because I'm not currently breaking them. As we’re seeing law firms, tech companies, and so many others bowing to Trump, we all must use whatever position of power we have to fight back. And that’s exactly what I'm doing," Hogg said in a statement.
Or we could just take it over, like what Hogg is actually trying to do. Parties shift focus much more easily than they die.
Indeed. It feels like a lot of historical context is missing in Lemmy political discussions. The Democratic party was the party of FDR, JFK, and LBJ. The Democratic Leadership Council took over the party after the left candidates failed to deliver election successes, but even then, the DLC had to do the work to take the party leadership positions, build a funding network, and win elections. Before that FDR had to wrestle party control from the the Dixiecrats.
Hopefully Hogg and allies will be successful in reforming the party once again.
Not just that, but even if you're looking for a major realignment, the Republicans were at one point the party of civil rights and the Dems were the bastion of white supremacy. You have to go past all these major party changes to actually get to the death of a party.
It's so much easier to force a realignment than to, during a time of active fascism, destroy the opposition party in hope that in a decade a completely fresh party can emerge from the ashes.
The question is: Will the DNC let you do that or will they sink with the whole damn ship? Because they have the tools (mostly money and connections, but also control of the party, immense social pressure and gaslighting) to stop you, dilute your final program or at the very least make your life hell every step of the way and significantly delay your planned takeover. Crucially, this is all happening and will keep happening during a time of active fascism when prompt and decisive action is needed, not compromise with Wall Street.
I mean, obviously I don't know how the internals of how the party works from first hand experience. That said I seriously don't think we should build them up into a bete noir. Every party is in the business of winning. The party went to the center because Nixon walloped McGovern, and Reagan crushed both his elections. Also, the DLC found a way to fund the party after labor support waned for a variety of reasons.
Did the party impede Sanders' primary campaign against Hillary? It's been acknowledged that they did. Of course he's been a career independent, and not a party member for one thing. Probably more importantly, party leadership still doesn't think going to the left will win nationally. Of course we choose our candidates through a primary process, but like it or not, the party's job is to win elections, and it's not outside the party's mandate to support candidates who they think will win.
But party leadership isn't a monolith, and it isn't a conspiracy. It is a group of people trying to make sense of things and find a way to succeed. Of course the old guard is resisting change because they still think they've got the recipe for success. Time will tell how it plays out. It's going to be hard work, and as party voters our ability to influence change in the party has been diluted by a bunch of consultants that are telling the old guard what they want to hear, and only face a reckoning every two years. I imagine, in the face of fascistic tendencies in the rightwing party, moderation and compromise will be even less attractive, even to a center left party. We've got to make our voice heard, and when we get a crack, we've got to deliver wins.
You've somehow managed to say all this without actually responding to any of my points. And just for the record, I don't give a shit why they wrecked Bernie's presidential runs or why they keep suppressing the left; it only matters that they do and they're not gonna stop doing it. I mean you said it; the old guard still thinks they have the recipe for success in the face of all evidence to the contrary.