re: #93 darthstar

Well, if Hillary wins, DWS will be in her cabinet, so the DNC gets a new chair either way.

I know the popular thinking is Debbie Wasserman Schultz is all in on Clinton and fudging procedures, etc. to favor Clinton. But do we know if Clinton likes her so much as to put her in a cabinet position?

I think sometimes the hatred for Debbie Wasserman Schultz is more than the reality of her situation. Maybe Debbie Wasserman Schultz thought all along Hillary was the best choice and a rather obvious one at that…and so she went to work to make that happen.

I think many at first saw Bernie as a weak candidate brought into the primaries as someone for Hillary to run against. Someone that had some economic ideas but not really a threat overall.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz wasn’t the only one. Many so-called experts thought the same.

But Bernie done good…his message resonated and the dynamics all changed.

Is that Debbie Wasserman Schultz’ fault? Should she have changed course and done more for Bernie or does she and many in the party still see Clinton as the best bet? And all that sticking with Hillary did was piss off Bernie…a reaction I don’t think anyone thought would happen up until maybe a month and a half ago.

Summation: Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a very easy target. But she isn’t everyone in the DNC. She doesn’t operate a fiefdom.

And no…I am not a huge fan of Debbie Wasserman Schultz. But I am also not her biggest critic. It seems to be a thankless job no matter what you do.

Look at the Republicans. Ol’ Reince Priebus doesn’t seem to have any control whatsoever. Does being a party chairman give you any control…and can a party like the Democrats ever be controlled anyway? (Thinking on the old herding cats image of controlling Democrats)