United States | News & Politics

3112 readers

778 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

simsymbiote@midwest.social

Type1@midwest.social

592

DNC Moves to Oust David Hogg After He Says Party Isn’t Standing Up to Trump (truthout.org)

submitted 1 month ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/usa@midwest.social

294 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The DNC cited a procedural concern, but Hogg said it is “impossible to ignore the broader context” of his criticisms.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] floo@retrolemmy.com 164 points 1 month ago (39 children)

These shit bags will never learn

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago (14 children)

People will never learn if they can't make it to the second paragraph:

As a result of a challenge from Kalyn Free, a losing candidate in the election, the committee decided that the election was not conducted properly and that it violated the DNC’s gender parity rules. If the full body of the DNC rules the same way, it will force Hogg and fellow Vice Chair Malcolm Kenyatta to run for election again later this year.

The old DNC ran a ahitty vice election that broke its own rules.

The current DNC decided via comitte the best way to handle it was to redo the vote. Which is not a big deal for the DNC.

Like, what would you prefer the current DNC do in this scenario?

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 8 points 1 month ago

It's a matter of interpretation as to whether any rules were actually broken. The DNC has four VPs, two are women and two are men. Given the current controversy and the current crisis of confidence in Democratic leadership, the damage this will do to both the party and public opinion of DEI policies should be weighed against whatever "damage" this procedural issue allegedly did.

The fact that this issue started moving months ago is irrelevant. The decision is being made now, and nobody with a brain is going to believe that this isn't being done, at least in part, to protect useless incumbents that don't belong in the Democratic party.

load more comments (13 replies)

load more comments (37 replies)