# Wasserman Schultz: Toast or not toast? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 25, 2016, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704 "2016-05-25T23:10:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/41 "2016-05-26T16:58:46Z")
There is little question in my mind that Sanders actions and antics increase the risk of losing the general not increase it. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Ace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/6bbea6/32.png) [@Johnny\_Ace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Ace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/42 "2016-05-26T18:10:00Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > In 2008 how many committee seats did Hillary get for coming in second? I don’t remember that happening. If it did, fine. But if not then an exception was made in an effort to appease Bernie and his followers. To me that looks like someone caved. > Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk If you have a cite for that, feel free. I can’t find anything. But I don’t see a breakdown based on delegate totals as anything but equitable. How, specifically, do you find otherwise? What is Bernie getting that he shouldn’t be, or that any other legitimate candidate wouldn’t get anyway? ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/43 "2016-05-26T18:26:46Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > If you have a cite for that, feel free. I can’t find anything. But I don’t see a breakdown based on delegate totals as anything but equitable. > > How, specifically, do you find otherwise? What is Bernie getting that he shouldn’t be, or that any other legitimate candidate wouldn’t get anyway? [From the Washington Post:](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-scores-platform-concessions-from-democratic-national-committee/2016/05/23/e9ee8330-20fc-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html) > [@](#): > > DNC rules allow the chairman to pick the entire slate of 15 people who govern the platform that will be presented at the party convention in July. Past chairmen have done just that, in consultation with the White House or the winning Democratic candidate. As the first sentence of the linked article says, Bernie is being given unprecedented influence over the party platform. There are multiple sources available that say exactly what I quoted above from the WaPo therefore I stand by my assertion that they caved to Bernie’s demands in order to make nice and keep his people in the party. Caved, gave in, agreed to, it’s all the same. And it is NOT the normal way this is done. This has nothing to do with Bernie getting anything he shouldn’t. The point is that the loser in the primaries simply doesn’t normally get this type of influence over what happens at the convention. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/44 "2016-05-26T18:29:07Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > If she did that from the beginning then his complaints would have sounded hollow. If there was anything that took hold she would have been in a position to call for reason. Even if every decision she made was purely objective it still looks bad because she made them. It never sounds good when someone with a clear bias says they will call it down the middle. Right, but in post 33 you said: > [@TriPolar](#): > > She doesn’t actually have to give up the position, one of the complaints about her from a variety of Democrats is her failure to delegate decisions to others who wouldn’t be perceived as biased. She’d have to do that wholesale now, if she had the sense to do that previously she wouldn’t be in this position now. And I asked if you thought that would actually be enough to stop accusations of DNC bias from the Sanders camp. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/45 "2016-05-26T18:48:16Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > If you have a cite for that, feel free. I can’t find anything. But I don’t see a breakdown based on delegate totals as anything but equitable. > > How, specifically, do you find otherwise? What is Bernie getting that he shouldn’t be, or that any other legitimate candidate wouldn’t get anyway? Well, three weeks ago Sanders issued a public letter to Wasserman complaining that was not what was happening: > [@](#): > > “I believe the composition of the standing committees must reflect the relative support that has been received by both campaigns,” Sanders wrote in the letter dated May 6. “That was why I was so disappointed to learn that of the over forty people our campaign submitted at your request you chose to select only three of my recommendations for the three standing committees. Moreover, you did not assign even one of the people submitted by our campaign to the very important Rules Committee of the Democratic National Convention.” [Sanders accuses DNC of tipping convention toward Clinton](http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/bernie-sanders-democratic-national-committee-222895) And now we are having this super fair, always done it this way split. Smells like a change of heart happened to me. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/46 "2016-05-26T18:56:54Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Right, but in post 33 you said: > And I asked if you thought that would actually be enough to stop accusations of DNC bias from the Sanders camp. I can’t say. I think they might be railing against the general unfairness of the Democratic primary process anyway, but she could have avoided being the symbol for that. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/47 "2016-05-26T18:57:56Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > There is little question in my mind that Sanders actions and antics increase the risk of losing the general not increase it. Spoken like a true victim. If she loses the general it has to be someone else’s fault. Just couldn’t be hers. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/48 "2016-05-26T19:23:02Z")
It would be a vast left wing conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2016, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/49 "2016-05-26T22:39:05Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > …I don’t think the Democratic leadership care much about or for Sanders himself. But they do care about his supporters and don’t want to alienate them and want to convert them into enthusiastic Clinton supporters for the general election. (I believe the post preceding yours - by Sherrerd - may have been making a similar point.)… Yes, you’ve correctly picked up on my intended meaning. My guess that DWS may end up stepping down (‘taking one for the team’) is that she’d do so in an attempt to tell Sanders-supporters something like: “_we do care about your concerns and your goals, and we want to make them part of the Democratic effort to retain the White House_.” I’m not pretending to be an expert on what Wasserman Schultz has or hasn’t done during her tenure; I suspect she’s worked very hard on behalf of the Democratic party, and I hate to see that rewarded with The Boot. But the fact remains that the perception of bias exists, and it would be foolish to ignore it. As to whether an exit by DWS would embolden Sanders’ fans to become even more unreasonably demanding–well, maybe. My sense of it is that if the Hillary wing is seen to be working hard to bring the Sanders fans into the tent, then the Sanders people lose whatever moral-high-ground they might otherwise have had. They lose any legitimacy as Aggrieved Righteous Victims. > [@DSeid](#): > > There is little question in my mind that Sanders actions and antics increase the risk of losing the general not increase it. I’m pretty sure you meant that second ‘increase’ to be a ‘decrease’ (but missed the editing window). If so, it’s a sentiment with which I agree. > [@TriPolar](#): > > I can’t say. I think they might be railing against the general unfairness of the Democratic primary process anyway, but she could have avoided being the symbol for that. Yes. Pity the poor human who becomes a living symbol; but it does happen, and may have happened in this case. It’s unfortunate. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/50 "2016-05-27T05:12:07Z")
Yes, did mean that. **TP** - if she loses the general it is the fault _of America_ for electing Trump. Many will have played various roles. Team Clinton certainly no question … with 20-20 hindsight she was way too gentle with Sanders as she assumed he was rational and would not do things that had potential to seriously harm the chances for Democratic victory in November. A ding on her for not recognizing early that he is not a rational player and that he would have so little concern for the good of the country and the world. (Admittedly I did not see that coming either.) Right now Sanders’ actions are the exact actions that someone intending to harm complete Democratic ticket from top to bottom would hope for. It _is_ upon Clinton to decide how to respond to that. I think she does best by standing her ground on the issues in contention and refusing to do anything that she would not already be doing. Fortunately the things that she is already committed to are pretty consistent with most progressive positions. But she must explicitly reject any demands and reject accepting positions she does not currently endorse that will push away centrist and GOP crossover voters that she needs in the November. A response that evinces weakness and pandering to Sanders hardest core will hurt her and the responsibility for that will be on her own head as much as on Sanders’. If some usual non-voters again do not vote as a result, fine. That’s for them to decide. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/51 "2016-05-27T05:25:15Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Yes, did mean that. > > **TP** - if she loses the general it is the fault _of America_ for electing Trump. Many will have played various roles. Team Clinton certainly no question … with 20-20 hindsight she was way too gentle with Sanders as she assumed he was rational and would not do things that had potential to seriously harm the chances for Democratic victory in November. A ding on her for not recognizing early that he is not a rational player and that he would have so little concern for the good of the country and the world. (Admittedly I did not see that coming either.) > > Right now Sanders’ actions are the exact actions that someone intending to harm complete Democratic ticket from top to bottom would hope for. It _is_ upon Clinton to decide how to respond to that. I think she does best by standing her ground on the issues in contention and refusing to do anything that she would not already be doing. Fortunately the things that she is already committed to are pretty consistent with most progressive positions. But she must explicitly reject any demands and reject accepting positions she does not currently endorse that will push away centrist and GOP crossover voters that she needs in the November. A response that evinces weakness and pandering to Sanders hardest core will hurt her and the responsibility for that will be on her own head as much as on Sanders’. > > If some usual non-voters again do not vote as a result, fine. That’s for them to decide. Bernie Sanders is running for the Democratic nomination to be President of the United States. That does not harm the party. Period. His actions have no other purpose than to win the nomination, exactly the same motivations and results as Hillary’s campaign. Neither side is harming the party. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/52 "2016-05-27T16:11:58Z")
You keep saying that to yourself. Remember if you say “Period” it makes it magically true!! ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/53 "2016-05-27T18:02:08Z")
Probably toast. DWS was pretty clearly in the tank for Hillary in the terrible scheduling of the very few DNC-sanctioned debates early in the primary process. She’s irritated a lot of people, and has never been the most articulate or appealing spokesperson for the DNC. FWIW, I don’t think the DNC (or RNC) chair should hold any other job than that, but should instead focus entirely on party matters. Serving as a Congresswoman at the same time as you’re heading up the DNC is bound to be distracting. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/54 "2016-05-27T18:25:04Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > (post shortened) > > Debbie “Shut Up and Vote For Hillary” Wasserman Schultz has become a symbol of what some people think is wrong with the Democrat party. Bernie supporters aren’t mad at Hillary, they’re mad at the party that hasn’t treated Bernie, or his campaign, fairly. Bernie supporters may not chose to support a party that has no respect for the candidate that they believe represents them. Treating Bernie Democrats as if they are Republicans will only lead to Bernie Democrats ignoring the future ramblings of the Democrat Party. Just as Republicans and conservatives currently do. The DNC has treated Bernie more than fair. > **[11 reasons why Bernie Sanders lost this thing fair and square](https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/23/1529938/-11-reasons-why-Bernie-Sanders-lost-this-thing-fair-and-square)** > > Bernie Sanders exceeded all primary season expectations and was en route to building something of a real movement. But rather than locking in those gains and settling in for a long-haul effort, he’s opted for a legacy-busting temper tantrum... > **[The System Isn’t ‘Rigged’ Against Sanders](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-system-isnt-rigged-against-sanders/)** > > A week ago, New York Daily News columnist and Bernie Sanders supporter Shaun King tweeted the following about the Democratic caucuses in Washington, which took … Now, SWS’s support of predatory payday lenders is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2016, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/55 "2016-05-27T19:26:23Z")
I wouldn’t be sorry to see her go. Not at all because she favored Clinton in the primaries, but mostly because she’s way too cozy with south Florida Republican neighbors of her district. She should have been ousted way back when she refused to help Democratic opponents of the Diaz-Balarts and Ros-Lehtinen to win those districts because those Republican representatives were her friends. ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2016, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/56 "2016-07-24T20:02:49Z")
Annnnnd breaking news that Wasserman-Schultz will be resigning as DNC chair. MSNBC is reporting it but I’m having trouble finding a link at the moment. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2016, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/57 "2016-07-24T20:10:24Z")
> **[Wasserman Schultz steps down as DNC chair](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/wasserman-schultz-wont-preside-over-dnc-convention-226088)** > > Her resignation is a bitter and ironic twist for the Florida congresswoman. Twitter is your friend for late-breaking stories. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2016, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/58 "2016-07-24T20:26:59Z")
I always check with [the Associated Press](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/fronts/HOME?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME). ---
**Author:** ![Onomatopoeia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/onomatopoeia/32/4145_2.png) [@Onomatopoeia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Onomatopoeia)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2016, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/59 "2016-07-24T20:29:47Z")
Thank goodness. She was a cancer in the party. Not sad to see her go at all. [Story](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/debbie-wasserman-schultz-resigns_us_5795044ae4b0d3568f8397f7) ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2016, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704/60 "2016-07-25T13:20:59Z")
I think there needs to be a really quick rethinking about letting DWS speak at the convention. I’m watching her attempt to speak at a breakfast meeting of the Florida delegation right now on television. While she is getting mostly cheers and applause there are also a substantial number of boos and jeers. On the convention floor there will undoubtedly be much more noise and unruly behavior if she speaks. This is exactly what the Democrats need to avoid from the convention floor. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wasserman-schultz-toast-or-not-toast/755704.md?page=4)