The State of the Democratic Party Post-2016

[Farnhamia]

After the infamous downfall of DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and during the brief but controversial tenure of Acting Chair Donna Brazile, the race for the new chair of the Democratic National Committee has begun.

The current likely contenders:

Howard Dean: After his candidacy for the Presidency was doomed by something as trivial as a poorly pitched shout during a rally, Governor Dean led an enormously successful 50 state strategy for the 2008 elections during his previous tenure as DNC Chair, so he definitely has the experience and history of success for the job. A good chance of taking it, but not a great one, as he could be seen as representing the "old" party at a time when there's a general sentiment that a major change is in order.

Keith Ellison: The first Muslim member of Congress, progressive, and backed by the triple threat of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Democratic Senate Leader-to-be Chuck Schumer, Ellison seems to be the one to beat. Charismatic, generally well-liked by his colleagues, and enormously intelligent, the only drawback that I can think of is his inexperience, though recent events have caused Democrats to realize that this isn't always seen as a bad thing. Also, while it may be a superficial statement in some ways, electing a Muslim would send a message to President-Elect Trump.

Martin O'Malley: Fine Governor, well-respected, and experienced, with a decent progressive stance. The problem is the same one that he faced in the 2016 Democratic nomination race, which is that while he's experienced, people who are impressed by that will likely fall into Dean's camp, and while he's progressive, those who are impressed by that will likely favor Ellison. He may be able to thread the needle between Dean's Hillary (odd, since the last time, he was the outsider) and Ellison's Bernie, but it's going to be a difficult task.

Me? I'm thinking that Ellison has it, and I'm good with that. I'd also be good with Dean, though. O'Malley I don't know about, but I'm not firmly opposed.

Thoughts?

Mod Edit to change the title

[The Romulan Republic]

Ellison is appealing given his progressivism and support from Warren and Sanders, and selecting a Muslim American would send a strong message against Trump's bigotry.

Likewise, I like O'Malley, and as the only Presidential candidate I can recall ever actually calling Trump a fascist, his selection would send a strong message.

Dean, however, does have the proven track record of electoral success, which is a powerful selling point.

I would accept any of the three.

I would say that if Ellison has the backing of Bernie (who has a strong support base in the party and has been somewhat vindicated by Clinton's defeat), Warren (a prominent progressive Senator and possible future Presidential candidate), and Schumer (the likely future party leader in the Senate), he probably has a good chance of winning.

[Trollgaard]

I didn't mind O'Malley from the bit of the speeches I saw, and the bit of research I did on him. Liked him a lot more than Bernie or Hillary, that's for sure.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Ellison is appealing given his progressivism and support from Warren and Sanders, and selecting a Muslim American would send a strong message against Trump's bigotry.

Likewise, I like O'Malley, and as the only Presidential candidate I can recall ever actually calling Trump a fascist, his selection would send a strong message.

Dean, however, does have the proven track record of electoral success, which is a powerful selling point.

I would accept any of the three.

It's kind of an embarrassment of riches, in a way. The DNC is due for a break.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I didn't mind O'Malley from the bit of the speeches I saw, and the bit of research I did on him. Liked him a lot more than Bernie or Hillary, that's for sure.

What are your opinions of Dean and Ellison?

[Trollgaard]

I didn't mind O'Malley from the bit of the speeches I saw, and the bit of research I did on him. Liked him a lot more than Bernie or Hillary, that's for sure.

What are your opinions of Dean and Ellison?

I would have to do more research on them. I do remember Dean's yell, which I though was hilarious, but which to me showed passion, which is always a plus.

[ChicagoBoys]

Anyone but Ellison. Constantly giving the chair to minorities just shows the inate racism in the party.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

What are your opinions of Dean and Ellison?

I would have to do more research on them. I do remember Dean's yell, which I though was hilarious, but which to me showed passion, which is always a plus.

Always fun to find areas where we agree. I wasn't following it as closely as I usually do, since I figured a wartime President was likely unbeatable, but I never got the sense that his scream sounded at all deranged, and I certainly didn't see how it was disqualifying.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Anyone but Ellison. Constantly giving the chair to minorities just shows the inate racism in the party.

Just how many minorities do you believe have served as DNC chair?

[The Romulan Republic]

Anyone but Ellison. Constantly giving the chair to minorities just shows the inate racism in the party.

So giving a position to a minority is automatically racism, but denying it to them because of their race (or religion, in this case) isn't bigoted?

Yeah, looks like we've got an insecure Alt. Rightist.

And much as I normally loath demographic politics, their is a particular reason to pick Ellison in this case: almost half the electorate just sent a message that they are fine with a viciously anti-Muslim candidate. Choosing a Muslim American would send a powerful message that Muslims are still welcome in America, and that we stand for the opposite of Trump's bigotry.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Anyone but Ellison. Constantly giving the chair to minorities just shows the inate racism in the party.

So giving a position to a minority is automatically racism, but denying it to them because of their race (or religion, in this case) isn't bigoted?

Yeah, looks like we've got an insecure Alt. Rightist.

And much as I normally loath demographic politics, their is a particular reason to pick Ellison in this case: almost half the electorate just sent a message that they are fine with a viciously anti-Muslim candidate. Choosing a Muslim American would send a powerful message that Muslims are still welcome in America, and that we stand for the opposite of Trump's bigotry.

I can't warn, since this is a thread that I'm participating in, but don't do that.

[The Romulan Republic]

Anyone but Ellison. Constantly giving the chair to minorities just shows the inate racism in the party.

Just how many minorities do you believe have served as DNC chair?

That current one is, but she's only acting chair.

Before her was Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is white (women are not a minority), although I suppose Jewish is a minority.

Before her (I think) was Howard Dean, a white man.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Just how many minorities do you believe have served as DNC chair?

That current one is, but she's only acting chair.

Before her was Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who is white (women are not a minority), although I suppose Jewish is a minority.

Before her (I think) was Howard Dean, a white man.

Well, no, before her was Donna Brazile, who did actually serve in the role.

Before Brazile was Terry McAuliffe, a white man.

Before him was Tim Kaine, another white man (Almost painfully so, as we've seen).

Before HIM was Howard Dean.

Then I think it's white guys for a while.

[Trollgaard]

I would have to do more research on them. I do remember Dean's yell, which I though was hilarious, but which to me showed passion, which is always a plus.

Always fun to find areas where we agree. I wasn't following it as closely as I usually do, since I figured a wartime President was likely unbeatable, but I never got the sense that his scream sounded at all deranged, and I certainly didn't see how it was disqualifying.

I didn't either, personally.

[Arachaea]

Ellison. He must be good to gain the endorsement of Sanders and Warren.

[The Romulan Republic]

Ellison. He must be good to gain the endorsement of Sanders and Warren.

That he has Schumer's is also interesting, as it suggests that he appeals to both progressives and a more "establishment" Democratic leader.

[USS Monitor]

I'd prefer Dean or Ellison.

[USS Monitor]

I would have to do more research on them. I do remember Dean's yell, which I though was hilarious, but which to me showed passion, which is always a plus.

Always fun to find areas where we agree. I wasn't following it as closely as I usually do, since I figured a wartime President was likely unbeatable, but I never got the sense that his scream sounded at all deranged, and I certainly didn't see how it was disqualifying.

To be fair, he did lose Iowa BEFORE the scream. But I still don't know why the media flipped out about that. What's the big deal if he gets a little fired up?

[Ostroeuropa]

None of these are particularly good tbh. They represent the continuation of two losing strategies for the democrats, or a really bad losing strategy of trying to do both at once.

[GreatestBanks]

Despite Dean's campaign having been ended by a trivial shout, I still think he can't be the chair. He's too image scarred from that moment, and Democrats probably would do better if they take a fresh candidate without a bad past.

[Ostroeuropa]

Despite Dean's campaign having been ended by a trivial shout, I still think he can't be the chair. He's too image scarred from that moment, and Democrats probably would do better if they take a fresh candidate without a bad past.

The only fresh candidate is going to inflame tensions along identity politics lines, which is one of the things the dems are losing ground on.

At this point the right wing doesn't even need to say shit, they can just report things and people will draw their own conclusions.

"New DNC chair has never visited a western country, except Norway, only Islamic states."

"New DNC chair also leads an organization to get Imams politically active in US politics."

etc.

With the alt-rightists and dissident liberals taking over a lot of the right wings grassroots, it's extremely trivially simple to explode his credibility by just polling the Imams on his organization on gay marriage and then pointing out he's actively involved in organizing these people toward having their views influence policy.

This would, once again, wedge social liberals from multiculturalists. The right wing are driving this wedge as far as they can, because they know it's working.

It would be a gift to these people. You've seen how little they can work with.
A muslim.
You want to put a muslim in charge, now, in 2016.
Good luck with that.

"Republicans protest concentration camps by electing Japanese-american to the republican chair."

Mmmhm. It's a statement alright.

[GreatestBanks]

Despite Dean's campaign having been ended by a trivial shout, I still think he can't be the chair. He's too image scarred from that moment, and Democrats probably would do better if they take a fresh candidate without a bad past.

The only fresh candidate is going to inflame tensions along identity politics lines, which is one of the things the dems are losing ground on.

At this point the right wing doesn't even need to say shit, they can just report things and people will draw their own conclusions.

"New DNC chair has never visited a western country, except Norway, only Islamic states."

"New DNC chair also leads an organization to get Imams politically active in US politics."

etc.

So that means that Ellison would be too divisive and Dean still has too much history.

So O'Malley?

[Angleter]

Despite Dean's campaign having been ended by a trivial shout, I still think he can't be the chair. He's too image scarred from that moment, and Democrats probably would do better if they take a fresh candidate without a bad past.

Dean's first term as DNC chair came after the scream.

[Ostroeuropa]

The only fresh candidate is going to inflame tensions along identity politics lines, which is one of the things the dems are losing ground on.

At this point the right wing doesn't even need to say shit, they can just report things and people will draw their own conclusions.

"New DNC chair has never visited a western country, except Norway, only Islamic states."

"New DNC chair also leads an organization to get Imams politically active in US politics."

etc.

So that means that Ellison would be too divisive and Dean still has too much history.

So O'Malley?

O'Malley is probably the best choice for DNC chair as he can competently claim to be neutral and unbiased toward the two factions, but in terms of effecting the rest of the electorate two are duds (Dean/O'malley) and one is toxic.
Given the shitstorm surrounding the claims of bias this time around, i'd say the democrats best choice is Omalley, since he is most likely to prevent claims or perceptions of the DNC establishment being biased in favor of either faction in the democrats.

[Tyrassueb]

If I personally had a say, I'd say have Ellison on as head but to also get Dean in there for one purpose only - Reinstate the 50 state plan. Besides him, get most everyone else out of there, they screwed up way to much to warrant remain (the Dems have less power than pretty much ever before. The last time the Reps had this much power was, if memory serves, 1928 or something and we know what happened then...).