NEW YORK — Democrats awoke Wednesday facing something they had
worked hard to convince themselves was a problem exclusively of
the right: a party in crisis.
Swept dramatically from power as Republicans assumed control of
the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives and stood
poised to make Supreme Court appointments that will dictate the
direction of the Judiciary for a generation, the Democratic
Party is only beginning to grapple with enormous questions –
everything from who will lead to what the party will stand for.
“The party is in a period of chaos,” declared a veteran
Democratic strategist who worked near the top of Bernie Sanders’
primary campaign before supporting Clinton.
"The establishment approach to do politics, whether at the
Senate level or the national presidential level, came up short.
We need to take a long look at how we run our races and the
candidates we put forward. What else can you say about it?"
The potentially devastating uncertainties are starting to pile
up, spurring big-picture panic and minutiae-laden nitpicking for
a party that was convinced until the final moment that the
United States would never elect Donald Trump. Indeed, they were
sure for three years that Hillary Clinton's lead would persist
and Democrats would be the party credited with electing not only
the first black man to the White House but the first woman.
Perhaps they still will, but not yet.
“Everybody’s in shock,” said former Vermont governor and DNC
chairman Howard Dean, who ran for president in 2004.
“We thought this would happen in 2018, not 2016,” added a senior
Democratic aide who woke up on Wednesday unsure of his party’s
shape for the first time in years, especially given the
forbidding map two years down the line. “It could get worse
before it gets better."
No party leader calls have been set to map out a plan ahead, and
no signal has come from the White House or from Clinton’s team
about what comes next. The phone lines were silent, only slowly
picking up, and escalating to a fever pitch as the defeated
nominee prepared her morning speech and interim DNC chairwoman
Donna Brazile sat on the silent 9:00 Acela from New York to
Washington.
“I don’t know who’s in charge. Who would email me?” said one
state party chairman when asked if he’d heard from other party
leaders.
“As you can imagine, I’m taking the simple view that the party
will re-litigate 2016, find gems in the debris, and begin a long
and arduous task of rebuilding,” Brazile told POLITICO. “We are
a forward-looking party."
There are decisions to be made, and soon: on Capitol Hill,
Democrats are actively wondering whether a minority leader Chuck
Schumer would welcome Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders to the
leadership ranks.
"We don’t know what’s going to happen in House Dem leadership,”
added another state party chairman. "I don’t anticipate that
Nancy Pelosi would want to stay on."
At the DNC, Brazile’s term is set to expire.
“I don’t think Donna will stay, but there will be a chairman who
will be elected by the members who understands politics, from
outside of Washington,” said Dean, echoing a sentiment expressed
by a handful of party members who were casting about for names
of potential next chairs from the ranks of operatives and
elected officials on Wednesday morning.
A leadership election there will almost certainly be seen as a
struggle for control of the party, and officials are already
considering how to avoid a full-scale civil war like the one the
political class long expected to see just blocks away at the
Republican National Committee.
And in the states, the remaining Democratic elected officials,
both current and former, are wondering just how the party failed
to heed former President Bill Clinton’s warnings about
disaffected white voters. The 2017 race for Virginia’s
governorship just took on new weight.
Those questions are just the beginning. Is Obama's coalition of
millennials, minorities, and women not enough, party operatives
are now asking, even if it's enough to win a popular vote? Are
working class white men out of the party's grasp forever? Why
did Clinton spend so much time in North Carolina, so little in
Wisconsin?
Is it Clinton's party? Obama's? Warren's?
But for now, there’s simply disbelief on the part of Clinton
donors and close allies who were told all was well until the
final hours, and unrestrained frustration with the party’s
inability to win despite its apparent demographic advantages.
"Democrats won more votes and picked up seats in the House and
Senate. And we are the only democracy in the developed world
where if you win more votes you don’t control the government and
the legislature,” said Simon Rosenberg, a veteran Democratic
strategist and the president of the NDN think tank. "There is
not a wholesale rejection of the Democratic party and the
Democratic brand, that’s not what happened last night despite
the fact we now have less power than we’ve had since 1928."
“The question of why can’t we replicate this sense that the
majority of the American people are with us — why we can’t
translate that to power — has to be the big question,” he added.
“And it will be.”
And then, inevitably, there’s the question of what happens
before 2020, the party already expecting a furious fight to oust
Trump, but the fury not yet overtaking the despair. No senators
or governors have been laying any groundwork for a run, though
Tim Kaine has an obvious step ahead. There haven’t been any
trips to Iowa or New Hampshire. No recruiting of national
finance teams.
“We’re going to obviously have a very spirited [presidential]
primary next time, and I hope no one over 65 will be in the
race,” said Dean. "The torch needs to be passed to the next
generation, and it needs to stay passed."
Eat a bullet you cocksucker.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/democratic-party-in-crisis-
trump-president-231134