People really need to get better at seeing below the surface of these type people. He’s another self serving narcissist who I never trusted. Just like fetterman , he sets off my bad vibe radar.

and I certainly sympathize with what he's been through - and thoroughly respect how he's taken that trauma and turned it into activism.

But, this move is not smart, IMO. We need all hands on deck to take back our democracy. Now is not the time to get into purity politics.

I don't GAF if an incumbent is 80 or moderate, or even conservative. If they have a D after their name, I support them.

Email him: info@leaderswedeserve.com

Also, write to him through the DNC:

https://democrats.org/contact-us/

…all the DUers (and there are quite a handful) who want to overthrow the disappointing Democratic Party in one fell swoop by primarying every incumbent because that’ll show ‘em.

When I read what he was going to do.. I thought Divisive.

Mahalo~

I absolutely believe young people must be involved. I also believe your point about purity politics and have no patience for anyone who would rather go after are own at this point.

🥹

Now he is in a position to do more harm than if he were not vice chair.

…in great piles in the public square, in case you hadn’t noticed. I have lived in districts coveted by the GOP and have been sickened by the amount of money they can bring in to try to unseat a Democrat.

I can see the snide comments of the punditocracy already: “Democrats in Disarray!” Which is their absolute favorite slur against us.

I still admire his energy, fervor, idealism, and youth. But like AOC when she started out — he needs to learn the lay of the land.

get us to where we (and the nation) are now.

I also have to call out rank hypocrisy on the part of some who, here on DU, (not at all limited to this thread, and I am NOT saying you are doing this) have no issues at all with going after progressives in safe Blue seats (some of these types have been openly hostile and absolutely all in to run out the progs in those primaries, just look at multiple AOC primaries, especially 2020) YET turn around and scream bloody murder when/if a Dem House Rep or Senator they happen to approve of, and one in a similarly safe Blue seat or State, is also challenged at Dem primary level. It is absolutely 'have your cake and eat it too' posturing.

They are also some of the first to bring up (and often misuse the terms in attempts to weaponise it against anyone who takes issue with their anti-progressive stances) 'purity tests' and/or 'purity policing' on so many fronts, yet they are the ones who have a big, overarching 'purity test', that being run out as many progressives as is electorally possible (in terms of the make-up of our entire membership in Congress) from our elected Democratic caucuses, in the Senate and especially in the House.

We’re doomed

So I can guess a significant portion are ok with it. Not fun watching your party self destruct. All we can do is support the candidates he may try to primary and hope the damage done is minimal.

2 big names in the party endorsed him, without a proven track record, and then dnc members voted him in. I can't find a tally of the votes for the vice chairs.Then they allowed him not to sign the neutrality agreement.

I was looking at who was elected for 2025 and it seems unbalanced also, almost all men in the chair and vice chair positions. They also have high salaries, the chair, I'm not sure about the vice chairs. Most seem to be from 2-3 areas of the country, I would have to research more to completely confirm this. Some had long term careers in similar d party positions in their own states.

seats, and he is NOT going after any Democrats based off of their age alone.

There is a LOT of misinformation being pushed out there (including by the Rethugs) as to the primary challenges he will try and help facilitate.

I think he is great, a breath of fresh air.

We need more of that in the Democratic Party. I think James Carville is far more harmful https://www.mediaite.com/podcasts/james-carville-tells-progressive-democrats-to-split-from-party-you-go-your-way-and-we-go-our-way/

We were beaten by a cult of personality.

He IS going after Democratic incumbents who he finds unacceptable. That is inappropriate for a DNC vice-chair. He is out of his league.

leaders have gotten involved in primary contests in the past.

2016 for instance.

I fully support Hogg's initiative.

The DNC's job is recruit Democrats to run if needed to ensure a Democrat is running and then to help Democrats win general elections.

Hogg is an inspiring activist but a political novice. It is dangerous to leave to him the decision of which seats are vulnerable. It is unwise for the DNC to antagonize Democratic incumbents and their supporters.

action (ie a Democratic (big D) primary in a safe Blue seat).

As for me, I believe the best way to advance democracy it to support Democrats.

for a safe Blue seat. That is one fundamental aspect of how the US democratic (small d) electoral process works.

I also hope that no incumbent Democrats, or their supporters, withdraw support from the DNC.

Democratic competition keeps strength growing. Nobody says Dems have to attack eachother. Focus on issues and solutions.

After all, that is what Vice-Chair Hogg is suggesting.

But we shall see, who will cooperate to win our Democracy back and who does not.

I think we can win, if the focus is on solutions and issues.

into “not good enough” and the whole gambit of purity politics. Weakening any Democrat only helps Republicans, and only idiots would do that after the war on America and the world this disaster administration is pushing. I’m so effing tired of these phony pretenses about “new perspectives.”

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20245100

I thought DU was a discussion forum for Democrats. I apologize for criticizing Mr. Hogg setting his sights on Democratic leaders.

If you can discuss here, you can make the same effort to discuss it with David Hogg, right? Give him a try. Being a DNC Vice Chair, he'll appreciate your effort.

Mr. Hogg was dismissive of the opinions of Democratic leaders that disagreed with him. I have little hope he would be persuaded by an old guy about whom he has never heard. I am hopeful that with time his youthful exuberance will be tempered by experience.

I support those who help him to keep learning and develop party building and GOTV skills; when it comes to new blood in party leadership, that's always a good thing. AOC and Maxwell Frost say that leadership gives them lots of great new skills and strategies to apply to their ideas.

a sitting Dem wins, we have just swapped one Dem for another Dem, and no closer to narrowing the rethugs majority in the House.

I say go after vulnerable rethugs in purple districts or ones in districts Biden won in '24.

I remember when AOC first got elected she made the same mistake by challenging sitting Dems. She's learned since then and has stopped doing that and has become quite an effective rep.

Which do people want?

Taking out a Democrat that votes with the party 90% of the time and replacing them with a Democrat that votes with the party 95%?

Or taking out a FUCKING REPUBLICAN and replacing them with a Democrat?

Time and resources are finite and perfectly purifying the party is a waste of both when we could instead be going after Republicans.

in a safe Blue seat is one of the main mechanisms for that.

CELERITY was a crossword puzzle clue I was doing today. It turned out to be haste. You are famous.

I lived in NYC and you have to understand that in a solid blue area, you just either have to run against blue or stay out of politics entirely. A lot of politicians have alpha personalities and want to prove they are the best to represent their area.

The only people taking the high road are the ones who are entrenched or who aren't playing the game.

It's not pretty but you can take solace that repukes have to deal with the same issue in areas they control. It's hard to flip opposing territory.

And where is it written the incumbent has a better chance in the general than a candidate who defeats them in the primary?

If people are in safe seats they should act like it and not run a protection racket for their biggest donors.

What’s the point of having safe districts and states if we are going to elect conservadems that block progress?

went all in (with some predicting AOC would be crushed) for the anti-progressive, centrist Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, who was a long time Republican before switching parties, lived in a likely $18-20K per month (its was $15K per month in 2011) flat in the Trump International Hotel and Tower on Columbus Circle in Manhattan before she moved into the 14th district (to Sunnyside, Queens) in 2019, was backed by the RW US Chamber of Commerce, and was heavily supported by major Wall Street donors.

Caruso-Cabrera also (at least as late as October 2018) was still flogging her RW book You Know I'm Right: More Prosperity, Less Government, in which she was calling for eliminating the Departments of Labor, Commerce, Education, and also was calling for privatising Social Security.

receipts:

CNBC's Caruso-Cabrera: Eliminate Departments Of Labor, Commerce, Education And Privatize Social Security

https://crooksandliars.com/heather/cnbcs-caruso-cabrera-eliminate-departments

CNBC anchor Michelle Caruso-Cabrera visited the set of Morning Joe to push her new book You Know I'm Right and apparently we've got another Ayn Rand fan working for CNBC. After saying that the auto companies should have been allowed to fail, presumably to get rid of those pesky over paid union workers, Mike Barnicle asks her if she thinks we're going to have to raise taxes to pay our deficit. Cabrera of course doesn't think we should raise taxes and says that instead we should cut spending. Leslie Stahl asks her where. She replies:




snip





Wall Street takes aim at Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in party primary

https://www.ft.com/content/580b5830-7f7e-4092-a6f7-7b451e075e10

snip

Ms Caruso-Cabrera, 53, has raised just over $2m, a substantial figure for a challenger, as dozens of chief executives, investors, bankers and lawyers have given the maximum allowable donation of $2,800 each to her primary campaign. Some have given another $2,800 for the general election.

However, Ms Ocasio-Cortez has taken in even more: $10.5m, reflecting the ability of figures on the party’s leftwing — such as Bernie Sanders, her preferred presidential candidate — to attract hundreds of thousands of small donations from contributors nationwide. The median size of her donations is $10, according to an Financial Times analysis of Federal Election Commission filings and the online fundraising platform ActBlue.





snip

AOC Attacked by Super PAC Funded by Primary Opponent's Husband

Mailers and digital media opposing Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are being distributed by a super PAC that has received the majority of its funding from Stephen Dizard, the husband of her primary opponent, Michelle Caruso-Cabrera.

https://readsludge.com/2020/06/17/aoc-attacked-by-super-pac-funded-by-primary-opponents-husband/

Congressional candidates and the PACs that donate to them can only legally take a few thousand dollars from individual donors. But PACs that tell the Federal Election Commission that they won’t donate to or coordinate with candidates are allowed to take unlimited amounts of money from donors.

Since the contribution limits for outside spending groups were eliminated by a 2010 D.C. Circuit court ruling that came in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, many PACs have tested the limits of how closely they can affiliate with candidates without being considered to be acting in coordination and, thus, no longer allowed to raise unlimited sums from donors. Now, the latest attempt to push the limits has emerged in the race between Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and her Democratic primary challenger, former CNBC correspondent Michelle Caruso-Cabrera.

An organization called Fight for Our Communities PAC reported its first expenditure to the FEC on Tuesday—$28,000 paid to a Pittsburgh video production company called Phenomenon Post for digital media and mailers opposing Ocasio-Cortez. The mailers and digital media were publicly distributed on Tuesday, according to the FEC filing. As of its most recent disclosure covering receipts made prior to April 30, Fight for Our Communities PAC is funded primarily by Caruso-Cabrera’s husband, Stephen Dizard, who donated $30,000 to it in April. Dizard’s donations make up more than 70% of the PAC’s total funding, according to FEC records, and it is more than ten times the amount he would be allowed to give to the Caruso-Cabrera campaign. Fight for Our Communities is required to file an updated donor disclosure on June 20.

Next to nothing is known about who is behind Fight for Our Communities PAC. The organization was formed in Delaware on March 18, less than a month after Caruso-Cabrera entered the race. Its treasurer, an unknown individual named John Gorman, does not appear to have ever worked with other political committees. The group has no public profile and no internet presence, and it has not made expenditures in any other races. Sludge asked the Caruso-Cabrera campaign if it knew how her husband was aware of the group to make his donation, but was told by a spokesperson that it had “no information” on the matter. The Caruso-Cabrera has sent multiple mailers attacking Ocasio-Cortez and is currently running attack ads in New York City.

Link to tweet

snip

AOC has a coherent ideology, i haven't seen that in Hogg, he just seems to be for vague change. And here he's talking about the age of the politicians. I don't care about that at all, i think the democrats should focus on being more progressive and be clear about it.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20245100

When people are actually running people don't actually support them.

I guess it's easier to complain and criticize than to actually support someone.

Hogg was also one of those calling for Harris to pick Tim Walz when there were younger people in considrration like Shapiro and Beshear.

I have no problem with Walz and don't think it would make a difference. But it would have elevated the attention to someone younger . And Beshear and Shapiro are both more "mean" and outwardly tough types compared to Walz who is a nice guy. None of this is a criticism of Walz as I don't think there would have been any difference.

But more towards Hogg and others like him. When there are these younger people you do not support them.

He was very willing to play the #2 role and leave the spotlight to her. He did great overall and was especially good as an attack dog. I think he elevated the ticket in many ways.

Beshear and Shapiro both clearly see themselves as POTUS material and it probably wouldn't have made for a productive team.

Seems to me a lot of DUers have hammered Schumer and would like a better candidate to occupy the seat come the next election. Recently Gerry Connolly has been criticized here as well. Could it be that we need better candidates ( not saying better Democrats) who can get out the vote ? Remember the earlier post here about why some voters stayed home rather than vote in 2024? I don’t get it either, but facts are facts.

It's not like if he wasn't promoting primaries we wouldn't have those nuisance no shots running that Pierce is saying will happen. And the safe districts are the places to do this. AOC wouldn't have been able win in a more conservative district most likely. And then she wouldn't be on the public stage pushing the Overton window to the left.

As a bludgeon in the NJ-7th District against our candidates.

see a focus on the future, and somehow passing some laws to free up government from the 1%. I think Elizabeth Warren would be a great humanoid to take on Tax laws, Monopolies. We're all getting older but wisdom has value. How government works used to have value, but that's all gone out the window. Some frigging Civics education for the American population might help with that along with a huge dose of reality in American history. Hard to believe it is possible to fix a federal government so destabilized, with an American populace so....

So, if Mr. Hogg has some ideas on getting better Dems in office - more power to him.

There are a few Dems who need replacing - like those who do not support Medicare for All or affordable drug pricing.

I am a Dem who wants Medicare for All and lower drug pricing so I am totally in favor of what Hogg is doing...

who undercut our messaging and tried to reverse some of Biden's and most of the rest of our Party's good work. They worked with Rethugs to do Big Pharma's bidding.

Thanks for the new word - scupper. Had to look it up!

These are the Dems I was thinking about when I wrote my post.

I appreciate your contribution!

along with swashbuckling...

...we still would not have Medicare for All or affordable drug pricing because REPUBLICANS ARE IN POWER AND THE ONLY WAY TO CHANGE THAT IS BY VOTING THEM OUT.

Because the first commandment is to blame Democrats.

Some D never seem to lose an opportunity to shoot themselves in the head, not even the foot.

This whole "let's primary Democrats" idiocy is a waste of valuable time and resources that should be spent on running against Republicans.

We don't have the luxury of purity. We need to beat Republicans, not fight amongst ourselves.

and for Hogg to be pushed out of the DNC by the folks he's going after.


We don't need activists in leadership, we need pragmatists

We can't be playing favorites with candidates, it won't work for us the way it did for MAGA.

We won't win with purity tests. We need a super majority in congress, the likes of the 1930's FDR congresses. We will never get there with divisive politics. Strong party unity is necessary.

corrupt status quo begins.

Authentic shiny new candidates "receive" nice grassroots happy-pure money but the greedy old establishment incumbent "takes" enormous amounts of immoral corrupting dirty cash and stuffs it into their pockets, cackling diabolically as The Donor Class orders them to change all their policies and be just like Republicans in return.

Of course the base of the Democratic Party and the American people must be wildly misunderstood as yearning for a socialist revolution, that everything bad is caused by economic inequality (fault of Democrats) and will disappear with economic equality (which the Democrats will stop at nothing to thwart).

Sigh.

The Committee's job is to get Dems elected in the GE. A smart committee member will never put their finger on the scale in terms of "Who" is allowed to run. Unless they've done something egregious you support your incumbents.

Bob Menendez had my support until his conviction. The Republicans in NJ can always smell blood in the water. You hold the damn line.

They should put his focus on Florida so he can learn the electoral process. He's not prepared to up against Scott Presler - who has set up shop in PA and NJ this year. He was two blocks away from my house in March. Stay in FL - hands of NJ and PA. These are are too serious this year for divisive shenanigans.

Also - he's not going to play the games our young dems are already engaging in this year. Like going to said meeting Presler was at. . . . They've seen rat fucking in NJ and are preparing to go full court press.

Presler is registering people at gun shows - that's where are young Dems need to be.

We NEED Democrats to get loud, creative, and aggressive.
That's what they should ALL be doing right now since they don't have any legislative power.
And then we need to elect people who will not budge on deeply-held values that will actually dismantle the iron-grip that oligarchs have on our government.

They need to learn as we did.
Perhaps they are onto what we are missing with our staid wisdom.
New ideas challenge. Mutations make us better or kill us. But mutations are going to happen.
We are not in charge.
But we should vote for those who represent our best interests. Probably a Democrat. Regardless.

They have been learning differently than we did, because the times of "move-fast-break-things" is here.

Am I gauging the sentiment in the replies here correctly? Yeah, that'll work about as well as it did in the 2024 election, assuming there are elections ever again. Can you say 3rd party?

Not that youth is any guarantee of innovation (or progressivism), but somewhere IS better than nowhere. And nowhere (Knowhere?) seems to be where the majority of the Democrats seem to reside.

Dinosaurs belong in museums.

The older generation need to teach the younger generation, and the younger generation can grow and breath life into a party, that is willing to listen to the needs and wants of the future.

Cooperation builds smarter.

The old ways must change to fight fascism.

the old way of doing things,spearheaded by people that have been around for decades no longer works. Hogg is a fighter. its time for a new generation.
i support hogg

the "big tent." A place for many points of view. We need unity right now, not purity politics.

But that’s not what the vice chair job requires. The job requires the ability to find and fund democrats to run against republicans not run against democrats.

This does not help.

hes the type of young blood the dems need.

they like what the incumbents are doing and want them to continue representing them. So let’s find seats where Republicans are vulnerable and let’s flip those seats to Democratic.

I’m not saying bad incumbents can’t be primaried but DNC should focus on electing more Democrats rather than defeating Democrats.

That used to be a popular phrase.

I don't see a problem with running the bluest democrats we can find in the bluest districts we have.

....has been that the congress needs to look like America in order to do what is best for America. It may not always benefit me, but if congress actually represents all Americans--race, age, gender, etc.--then it will be what is best for ALL Americans. Does the current Democratic party fit that description? No. We need more AOCs and David Hoggs to have a voice in congress which on average is older, whiter, more male, and richer than the average American. We can do better and gain more support by shedding the old guard.

Congress will ALWAYS be richer than the average American. Older, whiter, and more male all may eventually change (though probably not entirely), but politicians in general are always wealthier than average people. Even in local politics this usually is the case. My hometown of around 80K elected likely the only millionaire in town to be Mayor when I was a kid 30+ years ago.

As long as we continue to roll over and don't even try to counter things like the Citizens United decision that has allowed all kinds of dark and even foreign money to pour into our political system; as long as we do not push for publicly funded only elections; as long as we do nothing to change the current system then yes--we will always be governed by and beholden to the wealthiest among us, and--to my point--that will lead only to more policies and actions that do not benefit Americans as a whole.

That people who are wealthier also just tend to be well connected. It's not like there was a lot of the advertising in my hometown - there didn't have to be. The mayor in question was in every sort of Kiwanis club civic minded organization in town and gave to all the school groups that were trying to raise money to get new uniforms, or trips for band competitions, and all that kinda local stuff. His circle of friends and admirers was as big as it could be.

...by doing good things for it and deserve to be trusted with some amount of power in it. But when hundreds of years of making sure only certain people retain enough wealth and power to be well-connected and do these things we should be looking for ways to ensure everyone with good ideas can participate in the process. It is doable.

for many reasons.

...we'll take care of it for them.

Are you against the Democratic leadership?

We don't need leadership like David Hogg decreeing who is corrupt and who is not -- our voters are plenty capable of doing that ourselves, thank you very much.

Now, answer my question: what Democrat(s) are you calling corrupt?

This party needs new blood! Power to him!!!

MI-12 will elect the Dem in the general election. It would be nice to find someone who might support the Dem candidate for president, and not encourage her constituents to vote for "other" or for Jill Stein.

We need many more like him. Time for the younger guard to take over. They know how to stand up to fascists.

Let's LOCK IN!

"Safe incumbent" reminds me too much of the saying, "He knows the price of everything and the value of nothing".

The numbers make no sense to me, but the current polling indicates 2026 isn’t going to be good. It may in fact be the death of the republic. Business as usual is a bad idea. I have no answers.