Greed hits people in all sorts of ways.
Gotta push that book out, all publicity is good publicity for stuff like this.
Whenever Brazile got frustrated with Clinton's aides, she writes, she would remind them that the DNC charter empowered her to initiate the replacement of the nominee. If a nominee became disabled, she explains, the party chair would oversee a complicated process of filling the vacancy that would include a meeting of the full DNC.
Greed hits people in all sorts of ways.
Gotta push that book out, all publicity is good publicity for stuff like this.
I really think it's because Clinton didn't call to thank her fast enough and when she did it wasn't good enough for her....
Goddamnit this article is so full of weird shit, stuff gets missed....
Donna was literally threatening to replace Clinton every time one of Clinton's aides annoyed her.... who the fuck does that...
And then she wonders why Clinton was "slow" to call her and thank her for her work.
Does Donna not think her aides might have gone to Hillary and you know said "Hey Hilary Donna keeps threatening to try and replace you just thought you might want to know what the head of the DNC is doing"
She literally admits she was threatening to try and "fire" Clinton repeatedly in the middle of the General Election....
It's so interesting to see someone committing career suicide in slow motion.
Almost reminding me of how stupid Holland was with the Media.
Honestly at this point she might as well try to register as a Republican. She is that stupid.
? Can you elaborate on this...? Unless what you meant to say is "isn't affected by this"? Otherwise, considering this has nothing to do with either Northam or Gillespie whatsoever and doesn't affect whether either of them is or is not deserving of the governorship of the state, I'm rather confused by this...
If a nominee became disabled, she explains, the party chair would oversee a complicated process of filling the vacancy that would include a meeting of the full DNC.
Pretty much. Complains about "rigging" despite finding no actual evidence of the primary being rigged whatsoever by her own admission. Admits to threatening to act in an undemocratic fashion and undermine a candidate because of grudges not just with the candidate herself, but her aides at that. If anyone was trying to "rig" anything and violate the norms of democracy here, sounds like it was Brazille herself. Just what the hell...I'm screaming here.... how is that not the real headline.
Donna Brazile is so fucked that she kept threatening Clinton's aides that she'd try fire their boss in the middle of a General fucking Election! WTF
Pretty much. Complains about "rigging" despite finding no actual evidence of the primary being rigged whatsoever by her own admission. Admits to threatening to act in an undemocratic fashion and undermine a candidate because of grudges not just with the candidate herself, but her aides at that. If anyone was trying to "rig" anything and violate the norms of democracy here, sounds like it was Brazille herself. Just what the hell...
Brazile describes the 10th floor of Clinton's Brooklyn headquarters, where senior staff worked: "Calm and antiseptic, like a hospital. It had that techno-hush, as if someone had died. I felt like I should whisper. Everybody's fingers were on their keyboards, and no one was looking at anyone else. You half-expected to see someone in a lab coat walk by."
During one visit, she writes, she thought of a question former Democratic congressman Tony Coelho used to ask her about campaigns: "Are the kids having sex? Are they having fun? If not, let's create something to get that going, or otherwise we're not going to win."
"I didn't sense much fun or [having sex] in Brooklyn," she deadpans.
She lost all credibility.I don't understand what donna is doing. surely there are other ways to sell books rather than going scorched earth on everyone that's not her
Greed is the cardinal sin of this country. It is and will continue to be the primary cause of our decline.
I read on Twitter, the actual book said she contemplated initiating the process to remove, not that she believed she could unilaterally remove Clinton.
more @ the linkWe were shocked to learn the news that Donna Brazile actively considered overturning the will of the Democratic voters by attempting to replace Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine as the Democratic Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees. It is particularly troubling and puzzling that she would seemingly buy into false Russian-fueled propaganda, spread by both the Russians and our opponent, about our candidate's health.
Donna came in to take over the DNC at a very difficult time. We were grateful to her for doing so. She is a longtime friend and colleague of many of us and has been an important leader in our party. But we do not recognize the campaign she portrays in the book.
Ok wtf, definitely off her rocker. What the heck was that?
The quick dismissal of Donna Brazile when what she's saying doesn't fit a desired narrative is pretty easy to link to both racism and sexism. "Believe women" I'd like to imagine has a larger reach than just sexual assault. Just because she's saying something you don't want to hear doesn't mean you shouldn't believe her.
This is a really weird statement. Brazille having legitimate fears about Clinton's health is not a Russian conspiracy.
This is a really weird statement. Brazille having legitimate fears about Clinton's health is not a Russian conspiracy.
I don't know if Brazille is being honest, but every criticism against Clinton, the candidate, wasn't sourced from Russian Propaganda or Donald Trump.
There also legitimate criticisms of the primary process and how it favors insiders over all else.
At this point it seems everyone is trying to push blame off themselves for allowing Trump becoming President.
I'm not saying that. It would have lost them the election. I'm saying it's a weird thing to bring up Russia and the GOP in reaction to basically anyone calling them out as a means of deligitimizing the person.Are you trying to say that replacing the Democratic candidate for President in September because she got pneumomia was a logical and appporiate idea?
And scares about her health did not originate from the right wing? And the Russian supporting them?
THAT BIDEN BOOKER TICKET would have been lit. but then christie would have picked a republican senator for jersey right?
This is a really weird statement. Brazille having legitimate fears about Clinton's health is not a Russian conspiracy.
I don't know if Brazille is being honest, but every criticism against Clinton, the candidate, wasn't sourced from Russian Propaganda or Donald Trump.
There also legitimate criticisms of the primary process and how it favors insiders over all else.
At this point it seems everyone is trying to push blame off themselves for allowing Trump becoming President.
This is a really weird statement. Brazille having legitimate fears about Clinton's health is not a Russian conspiracy.
I don't know if Brazille is being honest, but every criticism against Clinton, the candidate, wasn't sourced from Russian Propaganda or Donald Trump.
There also legitimate criticisms of the primary process and how it favors insiders over all else.
At this point it seems everyone is trying to push blame off themselves for allowing Trump becoming President.
Well I talked with kristoffer privately and he gave me the go ahead so here goes:
My take away from this news is that we should not be averse to admitting the implications of the Donna Brazzile Book stuff when even Elizabeth Warren is outright saying she thinks the primary was "rigged in Hillary's favor".
I get WHY some people are so turned off by it, because to many people by admitting to that phrase, "rigged", you feel like you are therefor admitting to all the more ridiculous shit that the Bernie-or-Bust crew claimed and still claims such as:
- Dems purging so many Bernie votes that Bernie secretly got more votes
- That without the Superdelegates Hillary would have had less delegates than Bernie
- DNC/Hillary secretly killing Seth Rich
- That Hillary is secretly controlling the entire Democratic Party
- All the dumb shit wikileaks claims
- All the other dumb shit fake progressives like to claim.
But maybe we should instead try to retake the narrative by saying that it was "rigged" and then being specific to DEFINE what "rigged" actually means. Explain that it SPECIFICALLY means:
- EDIT: removed this one cause it turned out to be wrong.
- Way too many superdelegates endorsed Hillary early on when they should maybe waited. Yes it is their right, but it just doesn't look good for them to endorse too early.
- Media Outlets didn't necessarily love hillary (hell they loved to attack her and bring up nothing burger scandals about her too), but they definitely didn't take any of her primary challengers seriously AT FIRST
- That regardless of why the DNC was deciding to not hold as many debates and to not hold them at more viewable times, they should have been more open to listen to those who wanted the debates to be a more prominent aspect of the Democratic Primaries
- That many people who were otherwise considering running in the 2016 primaries probably chose not to run at least partly because they didn't think they could beat Hillary (that DOESN'T mean they were pressured by Hillary/DNC people to not run) and many of these same people would instead choose to later endorse Hillary
(- That in spite of the above stuff about the "would-have-been" 2016 candidates, Hillary's influence within the democratic party post-2016 is HIGHLY exaggerated and that in truth if anyone still has a lot of influence in the DNC it's probably Barack Obama based on his approval ratings)
- That in spite of all these factors, Bernie still lost the primaries at least in part due to his own campaign's failures to win over certain demographics and advocacy groups, such as southern black democrats and social justice groups.
I think what has happened in the past is that is you had three groups:
1) The people claiming that absolutely ZERO "rigging" went on
2) The people claiming that there was "rigging" and they mean it in the most ridiculous unproven ways (stuff I laid out in the first list)
3) The people claiming that there was "rigging", but they mean it in the ways that have basically been proven (stuff I laid out in the second list)
And I think what happens is that Group 1 ends up assuming that Groups 2 and 3 are the same when in fact Group 3 is a Group that should be acknowledged while it is perfectly fine to completely dismiss Group 2 because they are off their rocker. And because of that Group 3 ends up feeling like Group 1 is dismissing their concerns. And because at the same time Group 2 is still peddling their straight up bullshit, Group 1 keeps seeing both at once and just dismisses both as the same conspiracy nonsense. And round and round it goes.....
So hopefully most people can agree to the second, more level-headed list being an honest assessment and also admit that the first, more crazy conspiratorial list to being crazy nonsense.