You couldn’t make this shit up.

  • Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    For the record, it doesn’t seem like he was actually ousted yet? Still a super fucked up move, but it doesn’t sound like it’s over.

    Per Hoggs:

    Today, the DNC took its first steps to remove me from my position as Vice Chair At-Large. While this vote was based on how the DNC conducted its officers’ elections, which I had nothing to do with, it is also impossible to ignore the broader context of my work to reform the party which loomed large over this vote.

    Our country is in crisis, and too many leaders in the Democratic Party are asleep at the wheel. Trump is on a mission to crash our economy, disappear people without due process, and participate in flagrant public corruption - and voters still trust him more than Democrats. That is a massive indictment of our party.

    (More quote spoiler-tagged to limit the wall of text)

    Last month, my organization announced that it would primary ineffective members of Congress who are not meeting the moment. In response, the DNC made it clear they were going to remove me, due to the necessity of “neutrality” for the party. This is despite the fact that the DCCC, DSCC, and other party committees regularly get involved in primaries. Just this month, the Democratic Lt. Governor’s Association pledged a 7 figure ad spend to elect a candidate in a primary in Illinois. Past DNC Vice Chairs have endorsed candidates in primaries as well, without any issue.

    I ran to be DNC Vice Chair to help make the Democratic Party better, not to defend an indefensible status quo that has caused voters in almost every demographic group to move away from us.

    https://mailchi.mp/3ea437a5c84c/news-lwd-to-primary-sitting-house-democrats-in-solid-blue-seats-as-part-of-20-million-2026-initiative-4751058

    • Unruffled [they/them]@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yes I know, for trying to unseat a few of the old guard democrats and replace them with progressive candidates. Apparently it’s fine when the DNC does the same thing to incumbent progressives though.

    • m4xie@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Couldn’t make a better example of weaponized “neutrality” to benefit the status quo.

  • shawn1122@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    This is what happens when you don’t understand the ‘why’ behind being more inclusive and instead apply it opportunistically to concentrate power.

    The Democratic party has a hollow husk of virtue signallers at its core. Let’s hope a new generation, one that truly means what they say, can rise above their failures.

    • mriswith@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Have you not paid attention to politics?

      The new generation is all hopeful and bright eyed. If you give them a few years they’ll be sleeping on piles of lobby money and talk big about helping the people, while voting the opposite.

      • quetzaldilla@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        13 hours ago

        No. Sincerely, that is a reflection of who you are as a person.

        Just because you can be bought with money does not mean everyone else is the same.

        I assure you that my hatred of capitalism is so immense, there is no amount of money I would accept to look the other way as our planet continues to be raped and our future pilfered.

        Shame on you.

    • Let’s hope a new generation, one that truly means what they say, can rise above their failures.

      How CAN a new generation rise when the party’s failures have lead to a loss of all public trust in the party? Any democrats currently trying to get elected have it harder than ever as the party’s reputation is literally in the shitter amongst their voters.

      I’m not saying that picking them as the lesser of two evils is wrong, but having that should NOT be anyone’s goal

        • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Right he was using resources to improve the DNC and make sure the ones that HAVE BEEN FAILING to maybe get primaried. Maybe answer for their mistakes. I don’t know these are all things that the DNC need to do to improve. Unless better representation isn’t the point. 🤔

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            16 hours ago

            No, that’s right. I’m 100% behind him. That wasn’t criticism, it was clarification. He didn’t suggest not running incumbents. That’s not a choice the DNC can make.

        • neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          Those are just made up rules you’re enforcing. They’re not grounded in logic or reason in any way.

          And it’s cost us two absolutely fucking devastating losses, the last of which has ended American Democracy as we know it and given rise to a dictatorship in the longest running democracy on earth (previously).

          So maybe, just maybe, those rules are bullshit, and the people like you trying to virtue signal need to pick a fucking lane here and decide if you want to fight fascism, or just virtue signal your way into a concentration camp.

          Edit: I mischaracterized the poster above me here, they were just relaying information, I’ve apologized further below. :) Keeping my comment up for context, but I was wrong to attack OP the way I did.

        • ThorrJo@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 day ago

          Incumbents always stay on the ballot unless they choose not to run.

          Hmm, well that’s stupid.

        • Omega@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          17 hours ago

          No, by not recognising the genocide for what it is, being openly pro Israel and instead opting for only blocking export of weapons and letting Israel do whatever-the-fuck after

          it’s not the guns from USA that allows Israel to murder people, it’s the security and guarantee that USA provides, and Bernie is making no promises on backing down

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        1 day ago

        At this point I think they’d run a republican before they ran anyone with an iota of progressive backbone.

        • Ledericas@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          most of the DNC are just DINOS, anyways. and rich dems are the same as the rich gop, they get the same donors, and t hey benefit from someone like trump in power.

          • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            23 hours ago

            I’m not American, but I wonder if it isn’t only a matter of “in name only” but that if the DNC only puts forward neoliberal candidates, maybe that’s who they actually are as an organization.

            Acknowledging that there are progressive members – probably many, but if the

            power structures of the org itself won’t ever allow them to run a candidate…

      • BuelldozerA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        1 day ago

        Hogg isn’t a Progressive, he’s just a dick riding opportunist.

        • Michael@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          How can one not be motivated to challenge the status quo and current administration? It’s not working.

          I don’t really know this guy or his politics too well, but I think it’s unfair to label him as an “opportunist”.

          Criticizing the Democratic Party for being complicit is seeming less like an accusation and more like fact.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            14 hours ago

            He wants to replace the current group of old, complicit, corrupt neoliberals with young, maybe(?) less complicit and corrupt neoliberals. He does not want to replace them with progressives.

            Edit: based on my browser history, I believe I formed the impression reading something in a Lemmy thread about a month ago probably related to this article, but I can’t find it again so I’m just gonna say I must be wrong.

            • Michael@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              21 hours ago

              I guess every media outlet that I’ve looked at is reporting this wrong for saying he was backing young progressives. Even his website claims that. But I know Democrats love to tease at being progressives to appeal to voters, and then shift back to the right.

              • grue@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                14 hours ago

                Hmm, maybe I’ve fallen for misinformation.

                Edit: I can’t find the thing that initially gave me the impression that David Hogg wasn’t progressive, so I’m removing the “maybe.”