Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gothmog

(166,210 posts)
36. The Myth of the All-Powerful Democratic National Committee
Tue Dec 6, 2016, 08:04 PM
Dec 2016

Pushing the crazy claim that the DNC fixed the nomination process hurt the Clinton campaign. That claim was false http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

Easily the most ridiculous argument this year was that the DNC was some sort of monolith that orchestrated the nomination of Hillary Clinton against the will of “the people.” This was immensely popular with the Bernie-or-Busters, those who declared themselves unwilling to vote for Clinton under any circumstances because the Democratic primary had been rigged (and how many of these people laughed when Trump started moaning about election rigging?). The notion that the fix was in was stupid, as were the people who believed it.

Start with this: The DNC, just like the Republican National Committee, is an impotent organization with very little power. It is composed of the chair and vice chair of the Democratic parties of each state, along with over 200 members elected by Democrats. What it does is fundraise, organize the Democratic National Convention and put together the party platform. It handles some organizational activity but tries to hold down its expenditures during the primaries; it has no authority to coordinate spending with any candidate until the party’s nominee is selected. This was why then-President Richard Nixon reacted with incredulity when he heard that some of his people had ordered a break-in at the DNC offices at the Watergate; he couldn’t figure out what information anyone would want out of such a toothless organization.....

According to a Western European intelligence source, Russian hackers, using a series of go-betweens, transmitted the DNC emails to WikiLeaks with the intent of having them released on the verge of the Democratic Convention in hopes of sowing chaos. And that’s what happened—just a couple of days before Democrats gathered in Philadelphia, the emails came out, and suddenly the media was loaded with stories about trauma in the party. Crews of Russian propagandists—working through an array of Twitter accounts and websites, started spreading the story that the DNC had stolen the election from Sanders. (An analysis provided to Newsweek by independent internet and computer specialists using a series of algorithms show that this kind of propaganda, using the same words, went from Russian disinformation sources to comment sections on more than 200 sites catering to liberals, conservatives, white supremacists, nutritionists and an amazing assortment of other interest groups.) The fact that the dates of the most controversial emails—May 3, May 4, May 5, May 9, May 16, May 17, May 18, May 21—were after it was impossible for Sanders to win was almost never mentioned, and was certainly ignored by the propagandists trying to sell the “primaries were rigged” narrative. (Yes, one of them said something inappropriate about his religious beliefs. So a guy inside the DNC was a jerk; that didn’t change the outcome.) Two other emails—one from April 24 and May 1—were statements of fact. In the first, responding to Sanders saying he would push for a contested convention (even though he would not have the delegates to do so), a DNC official wrote, “So much for a traditional presumptive nominee.” Yeah, no kidding. The second stated that Sanders didn’t know what the DNC’s job actually was—which he didn’t, apparently because he had not ever been a Democrat before his run.

Bottom line: The “scandalous” DNC emails were hacked by people working with the Kremlin, then misrepresented online by Russian propagandists to gullible fools who never checked the dates of the documents. And the media, which in the flurry of breathless stories about the emails would occasionally mention that they were all dated after any rational person knew the nomination was Clinton’s, fed into the misinformation.

In the real world, here is what happened: Clinton got 16.9 million votes in the primaries, compared with 13.2 million for Sanders. The rules were never changed to stop him, even though Sanders supporters started calling for them to be changed as his losses piled up.

I was a delegate to the national convention and I saw much of this silliness first hand. This election was winnable but the sanders campaign did a great deal of damage that is the subject of valid commentary

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

A Response: My Election Blame List [View all] portlander23 Dec 2016 OP
Nah! I dreamed big with Hillary! Madam45for2923 Dec 2016 #1
Me too. I voted for a magnificant version of a Hortensis Dec 2016 #22
Me, three. hamsterjill Dec 2016 #35
Bull. So those workers were able to believe billionaire businessman Trump cared about their issues. Hoyt Dec 2016 #2
I guess to Chris Weigant equal pay for equal work isn't an economic priority of his. Starry Messenger Dec 2016 #3
"Her campaigns choice to not visit states like Wisconsin " TwilightZone Dec 2016 #4
Slap on the wrist for big banks coupled with her perceived coziness with them was huge. TRump JudyM Dec 2016 #5
How did her policy amount to a slap on the wrist? BainsBane Dec 2016 #6
What was her message? Exilednight Dec 2016 #7
I asked about policy BainsBane Dec 2016 #10
Hillary would have been one of the best Presidents of all time hueymahl Dec 2016 #16
Worst candidates? BainsBane Dec 2016 #18
It can't be boiled down to three or five words but her plans aren't gibberish: JHan Dec 2016 #24
Then she shouldn't have run if she can't. Exilednight Dec 2016 #29
It wasn't too complicated for me to understand.. JHan Dec 2016 #30
Voters aren't that dumb, they just want it abbreviated. Exilednight Dec 2016 #32
It's not her fault that the media couldn't be bothered to devote time to policy this year.. JHan Dec 2016 #34
A lot of voters have heavy obligations so they rely on what is quickly accessible. TRump knows this. JudyM Dec 2016 #37
Her platform to deal with Wall St excesses is hardly a slap on the wrist.. JHan Dec 2016 #25
"Slap on the wrist" that's the kind of bullshit that kept people at home on Election Day... bettyellen Dec 2016 #27
You're entitled to your opinion, too, of course. JudyM Dec 2016 #31
How are superdelegates to blame? NobodyHere Dec 2016 #8
This isn't about the GE BainsBane Dec 2016 #11
Even in the primaries the superdelegates had no effect NobodyHere Dec 2016 #12
Of course BainsBane Dec 2016 #13
Exactly .. JHan Dec 2016 #26
My list: Demsrule86 Dec 2016 #9
Mine is a bit different BainsBane Dec 2016 #14
What is your point in posting this? George II Dec 2016 #15
Hillary bashing IMHO. The OP did a hit and run job. Been over an hour and no responses. riversedge Dec 2016 #17
Yeah, this guy is known for his "drive by" anti-Democratic OPs. George II Dec 2016 #23
Bullshit. ismnotwasm Dec 2016 #19
Dream Small! lol Dems to Win Dec 2016 #20
Isn't Weigant a self-proclaimed "libertarian"? George II Dec 2016 #21
It is really time to form a united front against Trump RelativelyJones Dec 2016 #28
But this view depends on seeing Clinton's ideas as a ceiling rather than a floor. guillaumeb Dec 2016 #33
The Myth of the All-Powerful Democratic National Committee Gothmog Dec 2016 #36
It shouldn't have even been close, and yes.. mvd Dec 2016 #38
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»A Response: My Election B...»Reply #36