The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

DNC Chair Election: Tom Perez Wins

2456716

Posts

  • AthenorAthenor Who needs lions when you have a battlecruiser? Registered User regular
    Oh wow.. that hashtag cuts. Hard.

    iLaXVZ7.png
    Steam & NNID - Athenor // 3DS: 3883-5283-0471
    "Brevity is the soul of getting your shit read." - Tube
    I'm blogging about my experiences purging my toy collection... read about it here!
    OptimusZedshrykeTetraRayIncenjucarArdoljdarksunLoisLaneDoodmannDedwrekkaHonkElldren
  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    Handgimp wrote: »

    Wasn't mentioned in this thread, but he was the only DNC Chair candidate who was at the womens' marches. Most of the others were at a fundraiser.

    South hostUnluckyMan in the MistsLoisLaneDedwrekkaCraigopogoElldrenRius
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    I wish I knew more about his organizing chops.

    Honestly, though, it sounds like he could do more damage climbing the ladder from where he is.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    Fakefaux
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Get him into elected office, not the DNC chair.

    OptimusZedmrondeauLabelSo It GoesMr KhanPolaritieMatevNobodyCptKemzikElendilTetraRayFakefauxkedinikFencingsaxArdolVegemyteNo-QuarterKayne Red RobeKing RiptorMan in the MistsMvrckknitdanjdarksunLoisLanelonelyahavaRedTideMegaMekMartini_PhilosopheriTunesIsEvilMrVyngaardElldren
  • HandgimpHandgimp R+L=J Family PhotoRegistered User regular
  • AthenorAthenor Who needs lions when you have a battlecruiser? Registered User regular
    I don't think fretting is the right term. I mean, I get where he's coming from.. fight rather than worry about the future. But.. it just has the wrong connotations.

    iLaXVZ7.png
    Steam & NNID - Athenor // 3DS: 3883-5283-0471
    "Brevity is the soul of getting your shit read." - Tube
    I'm blogging about my experiences purging my toy collection... read about it here!
  • MatevMatev Cero Miedo Registered User regular
    Nah, fret is the right word there. Don't be stunned over this blitz from the right and despair or clutch pearls. React, don't give them an inch of breathing room or a second to enjoy their victory.

    That's the kind of message I want from all the Democrats right now.

    "Go down, kick ass, and set yourselves up as gods, that's our Prime Directive!"
    Hail Hydra
    shrykeKamarRMS OceanicUnluckyMan in the MistslonelyahavaMegaMekTOGSolidGennenalyse RuebentynicElldren
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Though I've never met him personally, Pete Buttigieg is a very close friend to a number of my friends. (Like, "former roommate of" and "frequent dinner guest of" some of my friends.) He's got a politician's life story: born in South Bend, Indiana; magna cum laude from Harvard; Rhodes Scholar at Oxford; several D.C. consulting gigs, tour of duty in Afghanistan, first openly gay mayor in Indiana, etc.

    I don't know if he's ready to lead the national party yet, but he's definitely got one hell of an attractive personality. I don't know that I've encountered someone who didn't like Pete almost immediately. And he's somehow managed to give South Bend a bit of civic pride again, which is incredible given that that city had spent nearly fifty years in mourning over the demise of the Studebaker Corporation.

    What are his political stances and accomplishments?

    This is good stuff but I'm going to need more to tell if he's right for the job.
    Fakefaux wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    The whole DNC thing only has one ideological component: how far should we compromise ideals to find a winnable candidate? E.g. should we be dealing with any more Lundegran-Grimes types, Liebermans, or Manchins.

    Where *can* we flex acceptably? Can candidates be anti-Roe v. Wade, or merely personally pro-life but won't vote against reproductive rights, or do they have to be enthusiastically pro-choice? Can certain candidates stand up for the 2nd amendment and say guns are fine, we just need to be safe about them. Can candidates be pro-war?

    The rest is only strategy. Should we only focus on winnable races, how do we impact turnout, and how can we reconcile winnable races with the ideological requirements?

    I disagree. I believe we should not back down from our ideals, but we need broad consensus on what those ideals are. Republicans win in midterms and in this past election because they believe they have something to vote for, an ideological goal to pursue. Democrats, notoriously, do not. They lost this election not to some great rising of the Right but due to the apathy of the Left. It feels like "Trump is a monster" should have been sufficient, but it clearly wasn't.

    The demographic makeup that did not turn out was largely young, minority, or working class. Whoever the DNC chair is needs to put together a simple, straightforward, appealing message that speaks to those constituencies and fires them up in a way previous messaging did not. Only then will races be won.

    We should not be considering how to woo people who will almost certainly never vote democrat. We need to ignite the spirits of the people who would like to vote democratic, but see no compelling reason to.

    Hillary lost via EC strategic voting since Trump got the Rust Belt. She did not face a problem with enthusiasm, well not in any way a good politician doesn't that can't match Obama because Obama is Obama. Plus voter suppression.

    You're over reacting to the Dems not winning. I'm not saying the Dems couldn't do more on those fronts, though. Merely it isn't a big a problem as you think.

    Harry Dresden on
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Though I've never met him personally, Pete Buttigieg is a very close friend to a number of my friends. (Like, "former roommate of" and "frequent dinner guest of" some of my friends.) He's got a politician's life story: born in South Bend, Indiana; magna cum laude from Harvard; Rhodes Scholar at Oxford; several D.C. consulting gigs, tour of duty in Afghanistan, first openly gay mayor in Indiana, etc.

    I don't know if he's ready to lead the national party yet, but he's definitely got one hell of an attractive personality. I don't know that I've encountered someone who didn't like Pete almost immediately. And he's somehow managed to give South Bend a bit of civic pride again, which is incredible given that that city had spent nearly fifty years in mourning over the demise of the Studebaker Corporation.

    What are his political stances and accomplishments?

    This is good stuff but I'm going to need more to tell if he's right for the job.
    Fakefaux wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    The whole DNC thing only has one ideological component: how far should we compromise ideals to find a winnable candidate? E.g. should we be dealing with any more Lundegran-Grimes types, Liebermans, or Manchins.

    Where *can* we flex acceptably? Can candidates be anti-Roe v. Wade, or merely personally pro-life but won't vote against reproductive rights, or do they have to be enthusiastically pro-choice? Can certain candidates stand up for the 2nd amendment and say guns are fine, we just need to be safe about them. Can candidates be pro-war?

    The rest is only strategy. Should we only focus on winnable races, how do we impact turnout, and how can we reconcile winnable races with the ideological requirements?

    I disagree. I believe we should not back down from our ideals, but we need broad consensus on what those ideals are. Republicans win in midterms and in this past election because they believe they have something to vote for, an ideological goal to pursue. Democrats, notoriously, do not. They lost this election not to some great rising of the Right but due to the apathy of the Left. It feels like "Trump is a monster" should have been sufficient, but it clearly wasn't.

    The demographic makeup that did not turn out was largely young, minority, or working class. Whoever the DNC chair is needs to put together a simple, straightforward, appealing message that speaks to those constituencies and fires them up in a way previous messaging did not. Only then will races be won.

    We should not be considering how to woo people who will almost certainly never vote democrat. We need to ignite the spirits of the people who would like to vote democratic, but see no compelling reason to.

    Hillary lost via EC strategic voting since Trump got the Rust Belt. She did not face a problem with enthusiasm, well not in any way a good politician doesn't that can't match Obama because Obama is Obama. Plus voter suppression.

    You're over reacting to the Dems not winning. I'm not saying the Dems couldn't do more on those fronts, though. Merely it isn't a big a problem as you think.

    Democrats are getting beaten hard at the state and federal levels. What exactly is your definition of 'big'? Voter suppression is going to be even worse in 2018 and 2020, so efforts to boost enthusiasm and increase registration efforts (not to mention GOTV) are absolutely required if we're going to make any progress.

    LabelskyknytmrondeauFakefauxMan in the MistsLoisLane
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    Hedgethorn wrote: »
    Though I've never met him personally, Pete Buttigieg is a very close friend to a number of my friends. (Like, "former roommate of" and "frequent dinner guest of" some of my friends.) He's got a politician's life story: born in South Bend, Indiana; magna cum laude from Harvard; Rhodes Scholar at Oxford; several D.C. consulting gigs, tour of duty in Afghanistan, first openly gay mayor in Indiana, etc.

    I don't know if he's ready to lead the national party yet, but he's definitely got one hell of an attractive personality. I don't know that I've encountered someone who didn't like Pete almost immediately. And he's somehow managed to give South Bend a bit of civic pride again, which is incredible given that that city had spent nearly fifty years in mourning over the demise of the Studebaker Corporation.

    What are his political stances and accomplishments?

    This is good stuff but I'm going to need more to tell if he's right for the job.
    Fakefaux wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    The whole DNC thing only has one ideological component: how far should we compromise ideals to find a winnable candidate? E.g. should we be dealing with any more Lundegran-Grimes types, Liebermans, or Manchins.

    Where *can* we flex acceptably? Can candidates be anti-Roe v. Wade, or merely personally pro-life but won't vote against reproductive rights, or do they have to be enthusiastically pro-choice? Can certain candidates stand up for the 2nd amendment and say guns are fine, we just need to be safe about them. Can candidates be pro-war?

    The rest is only strategy. Should we only focus on winnable races, how do we impact turnout, and how can we reconcile winnable races with the ideological requirements?

    I disagree. I believe we should not back down from our ideals, but we need broad consensus on what those ideals are. Republicans win in midterms and in this past election because they believe they have something to vote for, an ideological goal to pursue. Democrats, notoriously, do not. They lost this election not to some great rising of the Right but due to the apathy of the Left. It feels like "Trump is a monster" should have been sufficient, but it clearly wasn't.

    The demographic makeup that did not turn out was largely young, minority, or working class. Whoever the DNC chair is needs to put together a simple, straightforward, appealing message that speaks to those constituencies and fires them up in a way previous messaging did not. Only then will races be won.

    We should not be considering how to woo people who will almost certainly never vote democrat. We need to ignite the spirits of the people who would like to vote democratic, but see no compelling reason to.

    Hillary lost via EC strategic voting since Trump got the Rust Belt. She did not face a problem with enthusiasm, well not in any way a good politician doesn't that can't match Obama because Obama is Obama. Plus voter suppression.

    You're over reacting to the Dems not winning. I'm not saying the Dems couldn't do more on those fronts, though. Merely it isn't a big a problem as you think.

    Democrats are getting beaten hard at the state and federal levels. What exactly is your definition of 'big'? Voter suppression is going to be even worse in 2018 and 2020, so efforts to boost enthusiasm and increase registration efforts (not to mention GOTV) are absolutely required if we're going to make any progress.

    I meant on the presidential level, compared to congress elections. There's a big difference on what was going on during both election cycles.

    Dems definitely need to absolutely improve on engaging voters front. And yeah, it's going to be twice as hard as it was in '16.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Buttigieg and Perez are already out with Dems should block the SCOTUS nomination by any means necessary statements.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    HandgimpskyknytRingoShadowfireMegafrostAstaerethArdollonelyahavaSo It GoesshrykeRedTideMegaMekQuidUnluckyOptimusZedFencingsaxiTunesIsEvilMrMisterGennenalyse RuebenDedwrekkaRozKnight_VegemyteElldrenRiusMatevKamar
  • LoisLaneLoisLane Registered User regular
    Buttigieg and Perez are already out with Dems should block the SCOTUS nomination by any means necessary statements.

    Yay!

    Ringorockrnger
  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User, Moderator mod
    Yaaaaaaaaas

    Ebum are you an Ellison for Chair, cause Perez should run for Gov kind of guy?

    Otherwise I'd lean Perez for the Chair but what are people's thoughts

    I didn't watch the stream the other night I need to do that

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Yeah, I think they're basically the same but we need a strong candidate to defeat a popular Republican Governor in Maryland. Minnesota has two D Senators and a D Governor, so Ellison is less useful elsewhere.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    lonelyahava
  • lonelyahavalonelyahava Mortius is correct Move to New ZealandRegistered User regular
    I'd like to see Perez add MD gov.

    I think that he'd be good, he's useful. And I like the symbology of Ellison as DNC head.

    Fencingsax
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Biden formally endorsed Perez, which made Bernie say stupid fucking this is a proxy Bernie/Hillary war stuff.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Get Swole Dream LandRegistered User regular
    Biden formally endorsed Perez, which made Bernie say stupid fucking this is a proxy Bernie/Hillary war stuff.

    Perez is up, as far as i've heard, by 66 votes according to who's endorsed so far (but not the formal vote yet). Hard for Ellison to catch up now, especially if the other candidates are siphoning.

    If Perez does win (which is fine, given what we know of him and his language so far) Ellison needs to get out there and sing his praises so that the Bernie-or-Busters (the saveable ones, at any rate) don't throw a hissy fit and take the wind out of our sails or join the Justice Democrats or something.

  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular
    I'd like to see a better record on labor from both of them but at least they're not actively corporatist. Aside from wanting to implement more Democratic policies why do you guys want to defeat Hogan so badly? I'm not arguing against it, but from Hogan's wiki article it seems like he's actually doing a pretty good job. Any skeletons in his closet?

    ISIS delenda est
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    1) He's a Republican
    2) Supports the EO (I know you disagree with us here)
    3) I really like Perez. But he needs a base from which to run for the big chair.

    Also: he was literally the Secretary of Labor who proposed and got the mandatory overtime rule through. That has now been cancelled by the guy you voted for. Who would sign a national right to work bill.

    Your views on labor are... weird.

    enlightenedbum on
    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    So It GoesMvrckMillAngelHedgieFencingsaxRozArdolLoisLaneshrykeMan in the MistslonelyahavaRedTideDaenrisElldrenMegaMekMatevQuidKamar
  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular
    edited February 2017
    1) He's a Republican
    2) Supports the EO (I know you disagree with us here)
    3) I really like Perez. But he needs a base from which to run for the big chair.

    Also: he was literally the Secretary of Labor who proposed and got the mandatory overtime rule through. That has now been cancelled by the guy you voted for. Who would sign a national right to work bill.

    Your views on labor are... weird.
    I didn't actually vote for Trump. Filled out the paperwork too late, unfortunately. And I'm all for labor laws but there's a point where more and more people are competing for fewer and fewer jobs, and all the overtime laws (while great to have) in the world won't change that. Trump, not Hillary, promised to reverse job loss which is why I support him (despite Trump doing a lot of other things I don't agree with) and I think he's been pretty good on jobs so far.

    What else did Perez do? It'd be great to finally have someone union-friendly as head of the DNC and would help you pull votes away from Trump for 2020.

    Captain Marcus on
    ISIS delenda est
    Unlucky
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    1) He's a Republican
    2) Supports the EO (I know you disagree with us here)
    3) I really like Perez. But he needs a base from which to run for the big chair.

    Also: he was literally the Secretary of Labor who proposed and got the mandatory overtime rule through. That has now been cancelled by the guy you voted for. Who would sign a national right to work bill.

    Your views on labor are... weird.
    I didn't actually vote for Trump. Filled out the paperwork too late, unfortunately. And I'm all for labor laws but there's a point where more and more people are competing for fewer and fewer jobs, and all the overtime laws (while great to have) in the world won't change that. Trump, not Hillary, promised to reverse job loss which is why I support him (despite Trump doing a lot of other things I don't agree with) and I think he's been pretty good on jobs so far.

    What else did Perez do? It'd be great to finally have someone union-friendly as head of the DNC and would help you pull votes away from Trump for 2020.

    Perez has been a labor lawyer for decades.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    So It GoesMrMisterCaptain MarcusLoisLaneshrykeFencingsaxHarry DresdenMvrckUnluckyElldrenMegaMekMatevKamar
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    1) He's a Republican
    2) Supports the EO (I know you disagree with us here)
    3) I really like Perez. But he needs a base from which to run for the big chair.

    Also: he was literally the Secretary of Labor who proposed and got the mandatory overtime rule through. That has now been cancelled by the guy you voted for. Who would sign a national right to work bill.

    Your views on labor are... weird.
    I didn't actually vote for Trump. Filled out the paperwork too late, unfortunately. And I'm all for labor laws but there's a point where more and more people are competing for fewer and fewer jobs, and all the overtime laws (while great to have) in the world won't change that. Trump, not Hillary, promised to reverse job loss which is why I support him (despite Trump doing a lot of other things I don't agree with) and I think he's been pretty good on jobs so far.

    What else did Perez do? It'd be great to finally have someone union-friendly as head of the DNC and would help you pull votes away from Trump for 2020.

    Perez has been a labor lawyer for decades.

    When he wasn't a civil rights lawyer.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    So It GoesOptimusZedMsAnthropyLoisLaneshrykeMan in the MistsFencingsaxUnluckyElldrenMegaMekMatev
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    Honestly, between the two big names I'm happy either way.

    The people looking to relitigate the primary need to put down the fucking fiddle already.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    enlightenedbumdispatch.oPreacheriTunesIsEvilPolaritieGennenalyse RuebenrockrngerkedinikMsAnthropyAstaerethArdolLoisLaneshrykeMan in the MistsCptKemziklonelyahavaNobodySo It GoesFencingsaxVishNubSithDrummerElldrenKayne Red RobeMatevQuidKamar
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    I'd prefer Ellison but that's mostly for the optics. I'm happy with both.

  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    Trace wrote: »
    I'd prefer Ellison but that's mostly for the optics. I'm happy with both.

    The optics of putting up a latino son of immigrants made good with deep ties to the working class as our battlefield commander ain't bad either. They're a little less on the nose, currently. But it's only Wednesday.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    shrykelonelyahavaRedTide
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited February 2017
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Honestly, between the two big names I'm happy either way.

    The people looking to relitigate the primary need to put down the fucking fiddle already.

    Everything I've heard about Perez has been good. I was pleased by 70% of his donations being less that $200, which isn't quite $27 but still feels relatively good.

    There's a weird self-referential social phenomenon here: if everyone believes this is re-litigating the primary, then I'll sigh and then go to the mat re-litigating the primary because once anything gets classed that way I therefore care about my side winning. Yet, at the same time, I don't actually really want to re-litigate the primary and would especially prefer not to do it against a candidate I basically like. So, I want to re-litigate the primary if we're re-litigating the primary but I really don't want us to be re-litigating the primary. Re-litigateception.

    MrMister on
  • iTunesIsEviliTunesIsEvil Registered User regular
    I think Sanders supports Ellison, and I believe Biden came out in favor of Perez today. (weeeeeeasel wording!)

    I like the idea of Perez running for MD Gov, and Ellison getting the chair, personally. How often is the DNC chair voted on? Annually or every 4 years or what?

    I'd like to avoid re-ligitating the primary because fuck me I'm exhausted, done with that shit, and focused on trying to get the Dem party to just show a united front to the GOP/Trump at the moment. I honestly don't really care who the chair is, as long as they're effective. I guess that's not "I don't care", and more "I care that they're good; just get someone good at what they'll be doing."

  • AstaerethAstaereth In the belly of the beastRegistered User regular
    On the one hand, DNC "corruption" was an effective propaganda narrative and will come up again, so we should elect someone the far left trusts. On the other hand, you can't count on the far left not to reject them anyway.

    So as long as we're fucked, I want the chair with the sharpest blade against the Republicans. Which I think is Perez.

    PwH4Ipj.jpg
    PreacherLoisLaneshrykeSo It GoesHarry DresdenElldrenMegaMekOrca
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    I think that the Sanders supporters that are currently taking some kind of "Not Victory" lap are being stupid and missing the point completely.

    I also think that the Clinton supporters that are trying to prop up the old guard after their avatar summoned President Trump from the depths are being stupid and missing the point completely.

    This is not the time for that shit.

    Either Ellison or Perez will be great in that position. And the one luxury we've got right now is that our position as the opposition party makes the way forward very clear. We speak with one voice, and we say NO. We can get back to infighting when we're not facing a fascist coup within our own government.

    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
    mrondeaurockrngerFakefauxlonelyahavaSo It GoesFencingsaxjdarksunRozburboElldren
  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    I also think that the Clinton supporters that are trying to prop up the old guard after their avatar summoned President Trump from the depths are being stupid and missing the point completely.
    That's a thing? I thought both Ellison and Perez were the new, non-DWS hotness. Who's the old guard candidate?

    ISIS delenda est
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    There isn't one, but dumb people are trying to make Perez one.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    Harry DresdenAstaerethOptimusZedSo It GoesPantsBArdollonelyahavakedinikElldrenKamar
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Trace wrote: »
    I'd prefer Ellison but that's mostly for the optics. I'm happy with both.

    The optics of putting up a latino son of immigrants made good with deep ties to the working class as our battlefield commander ain't bad either. They're a little less on the nose, currently. But it's only Wednesday.

    It's more that Ellison was the first Muslim elected to Congress and with the Muslim Ban being an actual real thing that could be pretty important optics wise.

    But they're both great and I'm comfortable with both.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    I'd rather see Perez as the DNC chair, because Hogan is extremely popular in this state and I'd hate to Perez waste his shot at the governorship.

    LxX6eco.jpg
    PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
  • SithDrummerSithDrummer Registered User regular
    MrMister wrote: »
    Re-litigateception.
    Nice. We would also have accepted "Reliti-gate."

    I'd like to chime in by saying that I'd be happy with either Ellison or Perez. They both seem like they have a strong, confident message and some teeth to sink into the Trump Admin.

    It's an easy game to hate
  • FakefauxFakefaux Humbaba My friend, we have reduced the forest to a wasteland, how shall we answer Enlil in Nippur?Registered User regular
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Teamsters endorse Ellison. The coalitions here are kind of hilariously muddled.

    Herbert Hoover got 40% of the vote in 1932. Friendly reminder.
    OptimusZedjdarksun
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited February 2017
    Teamsters endorse Ellison. The coalitions here are kind of hilariously muddled.

    I think it's mostly because both major candidates would be good for the DNC.

    Fencingsax on
    torchlight-sig-80.jpg
    enlightenedbumHarry DresdenLabelshrykeSo It GoesPolaritieMvrckCptKemzikOptimusZediTunesIsEvilKetarRozBertezBertezMegafrostElldrenArdolDoctorArchMatevKamarLoisLane
  • Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    I like both of these guys and I really hope the party unites behind whoever wins and refrains from more intraparty squabbling.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
    Harry DresdenFencingsaxPhoenix-D
  • rockrngerrockrnger Registered User regular
    Knight_ wrote: »
    I like both of these guys and I really hope the party unites behind whoever wins and refrains from more intraparty squabbling.
    First time for everything, I suppose.

    kedinikjdarksuncB557Captain MarcustynicCaptain CarrotHefflinglonelyahavaMegaMekKamarLoisLane
  • Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    rockrnger wrote: »
    Knight_ wrote: »
    I like both of these guys and I really hope the party unites behind whoever wins and refrains from more intraparty squabbling.
    First time for everything, I suppose.

    it's not going to happen if perez wins because the bob folks are going to pitch their usual fit. probably will happen if ellison wins.

    so it's not going to happen, looks like.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
This discussion has been closed.