DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION

JULY 25, 2016
MONDAY

This is another day when the news overwhelms me. It has been breaking all day long. The Emails have caused a turn in the DNC tide, I imagine, as “demonstrations” are succeeded by fury. An article yesterday said that over 20,000 people have sent incendiary emails into the DNC headquarters. I am one of those. The Party Central should replace Hillary’s declared choice -- though he is not personally obnoxious to me -- with Sanders for Vice President.

It would not only be “meet and right,” but sensible. The Trump followers won’t step back and let Hillary play through. Why in heaven’s name should they? One young woman is captured in a video today’s saying that she is “less afraid of Trump than she is of Hillary,” and is pledging to refuse a Democratic vote despite what Sanders, himself, has urged us to do. I will, however vote for Hillary no matter what, to try to stave off the Trump steamroller. I don’t agree fully with her statement, but I think it comes close to being the truth. The DNC has become a close cousin with the RNC as we stood by and watched. Their Uncles are the Koch Brothers and Wall Street. If this trend continues we will have no party that speaks for the People at all. Like the frog which, when placed in cold water until the water boils, we didn’t notice our danger and jump out. Well, it’s time to jump.

Read the articles as they come. I’m putting the newest and most important on top. There will be repetition within them, but nuggets of new information as well. I will use boldface and italics to emphasize items that impress me as being particularly well stated or important. Here we go!!



NOTE: THE VIDEOS ON THIS WP STORY ARE ESPECIALLY GOOD.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/25/bernie-sanders-started-a-political-revolution-now-he-cant-stop-it/

The Fix
Bernie Sanders started a political revolution. Now he can’t stop it.
By Chris Cillizza
July 25 at 2:46 PM

Play video 3:14 -- Sen. Bernie Sanders was booed and jeered by his own supporters after he said, "We have got to elect Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine," while speaking at the Democratic National Convention on July 25. (Video: Reuters/Photo: Ricky Carioti/TWP)
Play video -- 1:17 -- On day one of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, protesters opposing presumptive nominee Hillary Clinton echoed the "Lock her up" chant heard the week before at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. (Adriana Usero, Sarah Parnass/The Washington Post)
Play video -- 1:23 -- Some audience members booed and chanted Bernie Sanders's name when Hillary Clinton was mentioned during the opening invocation at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia July 25. (Video: The Washington Post/Photo: Michael Robinson-Chavez/TWP)


Bernie Sanders spoke to a large group of his supporters on Monday in Philadelphia. The crowd cheered as Sanders ran through all of the successes he and his self-professed "political revolution" had run up this year: the millions of votes he won, the reduction in superdelegates, the takeover of state parties by Sanders supporters.

Then came time for the pivot. Sanders tried to tell the crowd that now was the time to line up behind Hillary Clinton and her running mate, Timothy M. Kaine. Boos cascaded down. Shouts of "no!" And then a Sanders chant started up.

Sanders was at a loss. Here he was telling his most loyal supporters what needed to happen next in order to unify the party and beat Donald Trump. And they weren't listening. They wanted revolution. Now, not later.

What was clear for anyone watching Sanders's unsuccessful attempts to calm the churning among his supporters is that the revolution he started is no longer one he can totally control. Or maybe even control at all.

This is the nature of centering a presidential campaign — or any campaign, really — on the absolute necessity of radical political change. Sanders, who has been working within the political system — albeit it on the outskirts — for decades, gets that at the end of a losing campaign, you line up behind the person who won. That's just how things work.

But for many of his supporters who took the time to attend the Democratic convention in Philadelphia, that's not enough. They campaigned for him, voted for him, gave money to him and now have come to Philadelphia for him. They aren't ready to give up — and don't think they have to. "Bernie or Bust" T-shirts are everywhere. One woman interviewed by MSNBC insisted that the only way the problems surrounding the Democratic National Committee's email leak scandal could be solved is if Kaine was removed as VP and Sanders was installed. (Breaking news: That isn't going to happen!)

To be clear, not every Sanders supporter feels that way. In fact, the vast majority of them tell pollsters they plan to vote for Clinton this fall. But there is without doubt a vocal group here in Philadelphia unwilling to roll over and play nice with the presumptive nominee — no matter what Sanders says they should do.

That is an issue for Clinton — and for Sanders. A vocal minority in the context of, say, Sanders's speech to the convention tonight could be a major problem for party strategists doing everything they can to present a united front. Anything similar to what happened this afternoon — booing when Sanders mentions the need to support Clinton — would be a major embarrassment for the former secretary of state just days before she is set to formally take the reins of the national party.

The scariest thing if you are a member of the Democratic establishment? Not even Bernie Sanders seems to be able to control these people. The revolution is still happening for them, and no one can convince them otherwise.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/25/the-democratic-convention-is-chaotic-the-democratic-base-isnt/?tid=hybrid_collaborative_1_na

The Fix
90 percent of unwavering Sanders supporters plan to vote for Clinton in November
By Philip Bump
July 25 at 1:40 PM


Video -- Among the weird scenes from the first day of the Democratic convention in Philadelphia is this one. A truck sponsored by the conspiracy-theory site Infowars toting a billboard reading "Hillary for Prison 2016" rolled up to some pro-Bernie Sanders protesters. Infowars doesn't fit neatly onto the political spectrum, but it's by no means liberal. The Sanders supporters, though, liked what they saw.

Kayla Epstein ✔ @KaylaEpstein
Sanders supporters at Philly protest run over and cheer a "Hillary for prison" van sponsored by InfoWars.
12:17 PM - 25 Jul 2016

This was shortly after the Florida delegation to the convention enthusiastically booed Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the outgoing head of the Democratic National Committee — and a member of the House representing the state.

[Complete coverage of the Democratic National Convention]

The picture that develops is of a party split by support for and opposition to Hillary Clinton. But it serves as a good demonstration of the importance of keeping anecdotal evidence in context.

Pew Research has been polling on the 2016 campaign for months, allowing it to track attitudes among voters over time. Nearly half of the Democratic electorate, 44 percent, changed their preference over the course of the three surveys Pew conducted. About 3 in 10 supported Clinton, wire-to-wire; about 20 percent Sanders.

Pew asked those consistent Sanders supporters whom they support in the general election. Ninety percent said they back Hillary Clinton.

PP_16.07.24_demNomination_report_types
That's lower than the percentage of consistent Clinton supporters who back Clinton, which isn't a surprise. It's higher than the percentage of those who'd switched who now back Clinton, though only barely.

Last week, as the Republican convention was going on, Pew offered similar research about the Republicans. Of the 44 percent of the party that never supported Donald Trump, 79 percent were planning on backing him in the general election — lower than the percentage of Sanders supporters backing Clinton, but still nearly 8 in 10.

So why so much outrage in Philadelphia? Delegates to party conventions are not normal members of political parties. Part of the objection to Hillary Clinton stems from a sense that she doesn't adhere to principles important to more-liberal Democrats.

[The continuing political decline of Hillary Clinton]

DNC protester: Nothing could make me vote for Clinton Play Video1:17
When Gallup asked people about the importance of compromise vs. adhering to key principles in 2010, Democrats were much more likely to say that compromise was important than were Republicans. Forty percent of Democrats at that point said compromise was important; half as many Republicans did. This was shortly after the fight over Obamacare and at the height of the Tea Party, though. In June, Pew asked a similar question, and members of each party were about as likely to think that winning on principle was more important than finding middle ground.

But notice how that changes depending on how fervent a person's opposition to the other party is. Those who are neutral to the other party are less likely to say that their own party should get most or all of its demands in a negotiation. And those who attend a political convention, it seems safe to assume, are toward the edges of partisanship.


We're stretching a bit, admittedly. "Coldness" is a specific metric used by Pew that doesn't translate easily to ideology in other polling. There's clearly some correlation to partisanship; whether or not that extends to orthodoxy between members of the same party isn't clear. We're assuming that it does.

[Graphic: Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton on the issues]

Pew did find that more-liberal Democrats — like those who backed Sanders in the primaries — felt more coldly to Republicans than more moderate ones. This makes sense: Those Democrats would then be more inclined against compromise between the parties. While we saw a clear shift toward more-liberal voters in the Democratic primaries this year, the Democratic Party still has a greater population of moderates than the Republican Party, according to Gallup.


5-Minute Fix newsletter
Keeping up with politics is easy now.
Sign up

We noted in March that this move to the left by Democrats varies by race. Whites who identify themselves as strong Democrats are much more likely to identify as liberal than they were 20 years ago. Blacks who identify as strong Democrats haven't seen the same shift. Black Democrats were also much more likely to support Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

Follow
daveweigel ✔ @daveweigel
Sanders gets booed when he calls for delegates to back Clinton. "This is the world we live in."
1:29 PM - 25 Jul 2016
123 123 Retweets 120 120 likes

There are plenty of Bernie Sanders supporters who are frustrated at Hillary Clinton, and some chunk of those voters will back Donald Trump in November. Most Democrats — even those who consistently supported Bernie Sanders in the primary — plan to back Hillary Clinton. Those Democrats are more likely to be moderate and, Pew's data suggests, more willing to accept compromise.

That, it seems clear, isn't the sort of person who would applaud a "Hillary Clinton for Prison" billboard.


Bernie Sanders supporters gather at City Hall in Philadelphia as they prepare to march through downtown on the first day of the Democratic National Convention on July 25. The convention is expected to attract thousands of protesters, members of the media and Democratic delegates to the City of Brotherly Love. (Jeff J. Mitchell/Getty Images)
275 Comments
Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via Email

Philip Bump writes about politics for The Fix. He is based in New York City. Follow @pbump



MUST SEE -- GREAT POLITICAL CARTOONS

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comic-riffs/wp/2016/06/23/how-doonesbury-predicted-donald-trumps-presidential-run-29-years-ago/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_3_na

Comic Riffs
How ‘Doonesbury’ predicted Donald Trump’s presidential run 29 years ago
By Michael Cavna
June 23, 2016

Cartoon: Comic Riffs – For all cartoons, go to website.
Read more:
‘The Simpsons’ predicted a Trump presidency 16 years ago. The writer explains why.
Trump v. Clinton: A tale of high unfavorability, as told through cartoons
How Hillary Clinton’s email history serves up the satire


IT’S EASY to forget that many of the headlines surrounding Donald Trump’s current campaign were strikingly foreshadowed. But a stroll down the past three decades of “Doonesbury” can read like a road map to the billionaire’s 2016 candidacy.

A Trump run for president? Check. “Doonesbury” first had that covered nearly 30 years ago.

Campaign references to Trump as sexual being? Double-check. The comic strip was dishing that satire back in the last millennium.

Trump University shenanigans? You betcha. Cartoonist Garry Trudeau was on the case more than a decade ago.

And Trudeau’s new book, “Yuge! 30 Years of Doonesbury on Trump” (Andrews McMeel), which arrives in early July, shows the degree to which The Donald himself has been telling us for decades what was on his long horizon.

[Q&A: ‘Doonesbury’ creator explains why he sees Donald Trump as a true, proven [expletive]]

In some cases, the Pulitzer-winning “Doonesbury” was responding through humor to the headlines of that time. In other cases, the left-leaning Trudeau was plying sardonic hyperbole that doesn’t feel quite so exaggerated now, as reality outpaces cartoon fiction. And in all cases, the main takeaway seems to be: Love it or hate it, embrace it or berate it, we all should have seen this coming.

[Draw your best Donald Trump and share it with us via #PostMyTrump]

In that vein, here are 15 “Doonesbury” comic strips from the past 29 years that can ring as either uncannily prescient or perfectly timed.

A TRUMP CANDIDACY

It was 1987 when Trump took out an ad — more precisely, a full-page “open letter from Donald J. Trump” — in several newspapers, including The Washington Post. The letter, for which he spent nearly six figures, said that “the world is laughing at American politicians.” Trump threw around words like “catastrophe” and “disaster” to describe what awaited the United States if the nation did not right its political course.

Trump was already floating political trial balloons. “I believe that if I did run for president, I’d win,” he told the New York Times that November, even as he denied a run.

By September of that year, Trudeau — who self-identifies as a member of “the ridicule industry” — was already satirizing Trump’s political journey.

DIVINE COMEDY

The Donald has joked that “Trump: The Art of the Deal” is his second favorite book, after the Bible. And upon announcing his candidacy last June, he said, “I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created.”

Trudeau views such utterances as “big, honking hubris” — which is why, in March 1989, he unspooled a storyline in which Trump hires a painter to render him as God-like. The result draws inspiration from the Sistine Chapel, but Trump wants his selfie masterpieces to hang instead over the toilets on his golden yacht.

REALITY SHOW-TIME

In 1989, 15 years before “The Apprentice” debuted, “Doonesbury” had the real-estate mogul entering the world of reality TV and game shows. After this strip appeared, Trump would go on to work with beauty pageants in the ’90s and own the Miss Universe pageant by the middle of that decade.

THE NAME GAME

Just who is calling on Donald Trump’s behalf? The Washington Post reported last month that Trump used to masquerade as his own publicist, making calls on his own behalf using several pseudonyms. This 1990 “Doonesbury” strip has fun with the notion that it may or may not be The Donald at the other end of the line.

EYES ON THE SIZE

Trump’s rhetoric — be it about towers or fingers or poll numbers — is rather obsessed with measurement and proportion. That’s no “yuge” revelation. But it’s interesting to see that fact stated so directly back in 1997, and then again from the presidential stump just two years later.

OEDIPUS SEX

Looking back, it seems inevitable now that Trump’s self-descriptions as a sexually dynamic being would make for much-repeated sound bites in the current campaign. Some things, we just can’t unhear.

BILK U.?

“Never licensed as a school, Trump University was in reality a series of real estate workshops in hotel ballrooms around the country, not unlike many other for-profit self-help or motivational seminars,” The Washington Post wrote last September, as criticism of Trump University began to rear its capped head again. “Though short-lived, it remains a thorn in Trump’s side nearly five years after its operations ceased.”

Back in 2005, “Doonesbury” was already having fun at Trump U’s expense — making Trudeau one of the lucky ones who actually came out on the plus side of that educational transaction.

THE EGO HAS LANDED

The Washington Post reported this week that the Reagan White House dealt with Trump and his “large ego” rather warily. In 2007, “Doonesbury” imagined how Trump might try to engage another wary Republican White House for his own benefit.

POLLS VS. PAULS

Several months into his candidacy last summer, Trump was already knocking fellow GOP candidate Rand Paul about everything from his looks to his coffers to his golf game. Just four years earlier, in “Doonesbury,” Trump took a similar belittling tone toward papa Ron Paul.

SARAH SMILE

This year, we’ve seen what it looks and sounds like to have former governor Sarah Palin stumping for Trump. Five years ago, “Doonesbury” offered a different take on the stagecraft of that same teaming.

THROWING HIS CAP IN THE RING

A year ago this month, Trump announced his presidential bid. About 10 weeks prior to that, a Sunday “Doonesbury” coyly teased that very Trump announcement.

So where will “Doonesbury” go next with Trump? We won’t have to wait long to find out: Check out how Trudeau spoofs Trump’s true and effective gift for politically sticky nicknames in this Sunday’s strip.



http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-conventions/pro-sanders-protests-take-striking-anti-clinton-tone-n616351


POLITICS 2016 CONVENTIONS
Pro-Sanders Protests Take Striking Anti-Clinton Tone
by ANDREW RAFFERTY
JUL 25 2016, 4:09 PM ET

3 Photographs -- Signs protesting Hillary Clinton were common at Monday's pro-Sanders demonstrations. Andrew Rafferty / NBC News
Photograph -- Play -- Sanders supporters says she won't vote for Clinton 1:58
Video -- Sanders supporters says she won't vote for Clinton 1:58


PHILADELPHIA — Demonstrators in support of Bernie Sanders took a strikingly anti-Hillary Clinton tone here Monday just hours before the Vermont senator was set to address the Democratic National Convention.

Sanders loyalists descended on City Hall armed with signs fit for last week's Republican convention, taking aim at Clinton and the DNC for, they believe, rigging the election against him. Hundreds made their way in punishing heat to a park near the convention where they will hold a candlelight vigil for "the death of Democracy."

The protests put on display the complexities of where the movement goes after its champion ended his White House bid and endorsed Clinton.

Many said they plan to support a third-party candidate like the Green Party's Jill Stein. And when confronted with the reality that not backing Clinton could benefit Republican rival Donald Trump, a common refrain emerged: It's not my problem.

"That's not going to be on my shoulders. That's going to be on the shoulders of the DNC for rigging the election, working against Bernie Sanders. They did this, not us," said Sanders supporter Tracy Graunstdt. The 33-year-old from Michigan held a sign reading, "You can't make me vote for Hillary."

Others continue to cling to the hope that Sanders can somehow leave Philadelphia with the nomination - a highly unlikely event that would be an upset of historical proportions.

"Even if Bernie Sanders has given up on the nomination, that doesn't mean we have to," an event organizer yelled to the crowd. "That's why we came here, to get Bernie the nomination."

And sentiment of some of Sanders' most fervent supporters even bled into anger from those dismayed that he ended his run. One protester delivered a speech questioning why the Vermont senator did not fight harder to pursue allegations of voter fraud during what she called a "coup de'etat."

"You can't fight a political revolution and only fight half the revolution," she said.

Others were simply struggling to come to grips with what they view as unenviable choices come November.

Forty-seven-year-old Sanders supporter David Iacono said he was "disappointed, but not angry" about the Clinton endorsement.

"If he didn't endorse her, then I don't think he would have had a shot to speak here today," the New Jersey resident said while holding a "She didn't win, she stole it" sign.

It's why Nina Turner, one of Sanders' most high-profile surrogates, rallied the crowd not to turn on the man they once fought so hard for.

"We cannot turn against him. We must listen to what he has to say," she said. "But everyone here is grown and you have your own mind, ultimately, in terms of what you are going to do. But we cannot turn on the man who had the courage to step into this arena and take it to the establishment."



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-is-investigating-the-dnc-emails-hack/

FBI is investigating the DNC email hack
CBS/AP
July 25, 2016, 11:53 AM

Play VIDEO -- Was Russia behind DNC email hacking?
Play VIDEO -- DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz booed at delegates' event


WASHINGTON -- The FBI confirmed Monday that it's investigating the hack involving Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails.

"The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter. A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace," the agency said in a statement.

A cache of more than 19,000 emails from Democratic party officials, were leaked Friday in advance of Hillary Clinton's nomination at the party's convention this week in Philadelphia, and they detail the acrimonious split between the Democratic National Committee and Clinton's former rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vermont.

Several emails posted by Wikileaks show DNC officials scoffing at Sanders and his supporters and in one instance, questioning his commitment to his Jewish religion. Some emails also show DNC and White House officials mulling whether to invite guests with controversial backgrounds to Democratic party events.

Although Wikileaks' posting of the emails Friday did not disclose the identity of who provided the private material, those knowledgeable about the breach said last month that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC computer system. At the time, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the breach was a "serious incident" and a private contractor hired to sweep the organization's network had "moved as quickly as possible to kick out the intruders and secure our network."

On Sunday, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook told CNN's "State of the Union" that he believes Russian hackers are behind the disclosure, and they did it to benefit Donald Trump.

In the wake of the leaked emails, Wasserman Schultz announced Sunday afternoon that she plans to step down from her leadership role at the end of the convention. She was booed Monday morning by members of her own delegation at a breakfast in Philadelphia.



http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-conventions/democratic-national-committee-chief-stepping-aside-after-convention-n615826

DNC Chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz Stepping Aside in Wake of Scandal
POLITICS 2016 CONVENTIONS
by ALEX SEITZ-WALD
JUL 25 2016, 7:37 AM ET

Video -- DNC email leak: Party chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz stepping down 3:10
Video -- Cory Booker on DNC email leak: Debbie Wasserman Schultz 'did the right thing' 3:41
Play -- Cory Booker on DNC email leak: Debbie Wasserman Schultz 'did the right thing' 3:41
Image: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz Richard Drew / AP
Play -- 1936: When Cleveland and Philadelphia Last Hosted Political Conventions 3:52
Play -- A 'tortured' day for Democrats 3:10
Play -- Meet the Artists Painting Donkeys for the DNC 2:57


PHILADELPHIA — Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been ousted as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee on the eve of the party's convention. It's an abrupt end to a chairmanship marked by controversy, which came to a head this weekend following revelations from leaked internal emails.

"Going forward, the best way for me to accomplish those goals is to step down as Party Chair at the end of this convention," Wasserman Schultz said in a lengthy statement Sunday announcing her resignation, referring to her desire to unify the party.

Wasserman Schultz said she plans to step down at the end of the convention, though some Democrats are already saying she may not last that long. "As Party Chair, this week I will open and close the Convention and I will address our delegates about the stakes involved in this election not only for Democrats, but for all Americans," Wasserman Schultz added.

Ohio Rep. Marcia Fudge has been selected to serve as chair of the Democratic National Convention, which kicks off Monday. Democratic National Committee Vice Chair Donna Brazile will serve as Interim Chair through the election, a DNC spokesperson said on Twitter.


Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
The highly neurotic Debbie Wasserman Schultz is angry that, after stealing and cheating her way to a Crooked Hillary victory, she's out!
6:33 PM - 24 Jul 2016
8,612 8,612 Retweets 26,342 26,342 likes


As recently as Friday, there was no sign of trouble and Wasserman Schultz was set to lead the convention, according to sources.

Wasserman Schultz spoke at two Hillary Clinton rallies in Florida Friday and Saturday, including the one where presumptive vice presidential nominee Tim Kaine appeared publicly for the first time.

But opposition to Wasserman Schultz, both public and private, had been gaining steam following the publication late last week of leaked emails which seemed to show a plot by DNC officials to damage Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primary.

The revelations created doubts from various sectors of the party about how Wasserman Schultz could oversee a convention meant to showcase party unity.

By late Saturday, opposition inside the party "spread like wildfire," according to a Democratic source close to the matter. It resulted in a tense confrontation Sunday when officials told Wasserman Schultz she had to go.

Wasserman Schultz had become toxic to supporters of Sanders, who accused her of rigging the Democratic presidential nominating process in favor of Clinton.

In a statement, Sanders said that Wasserman Schultz had made "the right decision" but repeated his criticism of the party for what he describes as the DNC putting its thumb on the scale during the primary contest.

"Debbie Wasserman Schultz has made the right decision for the future of the Democratic Party," he said. "While she deserves thanks for her years of service, the party now needs new leadership that will open the doors of the party and welcome in working people and young people. The party leadership must also always remain impartial in the presidential nominating process, something which did not occur in the 2016 race."

But starting even before that, many Democrats had privately lost confidence in her leadership.

"She's essentially a pariah in every corner of the party," said one veteran Democratic strategist, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal politics. "This has needed to happen for a long time."

For instance in late May, after a news report that Democrats were considering ousting Wasserman Schultz, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid called her to say he would not put out a statement defending her.

Wasserman Schultz also overrode the White House and the Clinton campaign in her choice of communications director for the DNC last fall. The key role went vacant for five months as the various parties tried to find a candidate acceptable to her, with some allies criticizing the process and outcome.

Even Clinton allies questioned the DNC's heavy-handed approach to dealing with the Sanders campaign during a data breach incident in December, worrying that it would undermine the credibility of a nominating process they hoped to win.

Wasserman Schultz had already effectively lost control of the DNC after Clinton's campaign inserted operative Brandon Davis to run operations on a day-to-day basis.

The Clinton campaign also recently sent a second staffer, Adam Parkhomenko, from its Brooklyn headquarters to serve in a senior role on the committee.

But internal DNC emails posted online by Wikileaks late last week became the catalyst for her official removal.

One email showed the party's finance chairman suggesting the DNC use what they assumed to be Sanders' atheism against him in Kentucky and West Virginia, religious states where it might not play well.

Others showed Wasserman Schultz criticizing Sanders for not being a member of the party and saying he would never be president.

The emails were apparently stolen by hackers working for the Russian government, and Clinton officials have said their posting is an attempt to sway the election for Donald Trump.

The emails implicate other DNC officials, including CEO Amy Dacey, a close Wasserman Schultz ally who is well respected by other Democrats, and communications department officials.

Meanwhile, Wasserman Schultz is facing a surprisingly tough congressional reelection campaign back home in Florida against a primary candidate backed by Sanders.

Wasserman Schultz, who began her tenure as chair in 2011, proved herself to be a prodigious fundraiser for fellow Delegates and an effective party surrogate and attack dog.

"I want to thank my longtime friend Debbie Wasserman Schultz for her leadership of the Democratic National Committee over the past five years," Clinton said a statement accepting the chairwoman's resignation.

Wasserman Schultz served as a co-chair of Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign and Clinton said Sunday that the Floridian will serve as "honorary chair" of her campaign's 50-state program and continue to serve as a surrogate for her campaign nationally and in Florida.

Her detractors inside the party had resigned themselves to Wasserman Schultz's leadership through November, comforted by the fact that she had been marginalized by Clinton aides.

Even some critics in the Clinton campaign and White House thought it would be better to keep Wasserman Schultz than to risk presenting an image of disunity by forcing her out.

On Sunday, critics passed around a tweet Wasserman Schultz sent last week to her counterpart at the Republican National Committee, Reince Preibus. "Hey @Reince — I'm in Cleveland if you need another chair to help keep your convention in order," she wrote.

Priebus, who faced his own challenges managing a fractured party at the GOP's convention in Cleveland last week, told reporters Sunday that Wasserman Schultz's resignation was "inevitable," adding "it shows what an uphill climb the Democrats are facing this week in unifying the party."



http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-conventions/wasserman-schultz-gets-booed-florida-convention-breakfast-n616161

POLITICS 2016 CONVENTIONS Wasserman Schultz Gets Booed at Florida Convention Breakfast
by DANNY FREEMAN
JUL 25 2016, 11:12 AM ET

Video -- Watch Crowd Boo Debbie Wasserman Schultz In Philadelphia 0:52
Play -- 'Wrong for her': Why Schultz shouldn't speak 6:47


PHILADELPHIA, Pa. — There was little evidence of unity on the first morning of the Democratic National Convention as controversial Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Shultz was greeted by boos and jeers at her home state's breakfast meeting.

Dozens of people sporting shirts and pins in support of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders booed, yelled and waved signs as Wasserman Schultz attempted to speak to the Florida Delegation at Philadelphia's Downtown Marriott hotel.

"Tim Canova!" some chanted, referring to the chairwoman's congressional Democratic primary challenger in her Florida district.

The outcry came just one day after Wasserman Schultz said she would step down from her chairmanship at the end of the convention after a massive email leak showed DNC officials giving preference to presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the prolonged primary contest against Sanders.

Protesters held up signs that simply read "E-MAILS" while others read sarcastically "Thanks for the 'Help' Debbie! :)."

Some Wasserman Schultz supporters tried to quiet the protesters so they could hear the chairwoman's speech, which touched on the recent shootings in Fort Myers, Florida.

The protesters would not stand down and caused a commotion throughout the entire speech.

"That's how angry we are," one woman wearing a "Thank You Bernie" shirt argued pointedly at a Clinton supporter.

"We'll accept [Clinton's] nomination if that's what we have to do…but we're never going to accept her!" the Sanders supporter said gesturing at the chairwoman speaking on stage.

Miguel Valdez, a 32 year old Sanders delegate from Florida who protested loudly, told NBC News he could not be sure if Sanders supporters would protest as vigorously on the floor of the Wells Fargo Arena, where the Democratic National Convention will take place.

"I do think that right now Mrs. Schultz is a lightening rod, and she'll probably draw a couple of boos to say the least from Sanders supporters," Valdez said with a grin.



http://conventions.cps.neu.edu/nominations-conventions/past-practices/democratic-party-reform-in-the-wake-of-1968/

NOMINATIONS & CONVENTIONS
PAST PRACTICES

Primaries and Conventions

RELATED VIDEO -- Tad Devine on national conventions.


Presidential primaries, where voters choose their nominees from various potential candidates, emerged quite recently. For most of the 20th century in the era of “party bosses,” local party leaders controlled delegates, whom they chose in private party meetings or state conventions. Delegates are people chosen to represent their states at national party conventions. They are often the earliest supporters of a presidential candidate and often include local leaders and active members of each party. Until the 1960s, presidential candidates sought party nominations at the national party convention. Those in attendance, including party leaders, arrived at the convention without knowing who would receive the nomination. They only learned the nominee after a roll call vote of state delegations, a process that often occurred multiple times to select a candidate with a majority of the delegations’ support.

By 1960, John F. Kennedy began to compete in primaries, something candidates had rarely done before. The 1968 Democratic Convention represented a huge turning point. The battle on the streets, and excessive police force, spilled into the convention. Fistfights broke out on the floor, organizers excluded rebellious delegates, and the convention spiraled out of control.


Democratic Party Reform in the Wake of 1968

Video -- Jim King on reform efforts after the 1968 DNC in Chicago.

In the wake of 1968, Democrats opened up their nominating process to ordinary voters. In 1972, the first election with the new rules, Democrats nominated George McGovern. In the general election, Nixon defeated McGovern in a landslide. By 1980, voter participation in primaries was the new norm (Democrats held 37 primary contests). In the wake of Jimmy Carter’s defeat after an intraparty primary challenge from Ted Kennedy, party leaders reformed their rules again.


Post-1980 Reform: The Hunt Commission and Super Delegates

Video -- Joan Menard on superdelegates.
Video -- Susan Brophy on the emergence of Superdelegates.

In the wake of Carter’s defeat, Democrats created a new category of delegates officially known as “party leader and elected official delegates,” more commonly known as “super delegates.”

Super delegates automatically attended conventions based on their status in the party, avoiding the awkward prospect of running against their constituents to attend the convention. Party leaders also wanted to ensure that party elites could pick a nominee if a clear one did not emerge from the primaries. This helped Walter Mondale in 1984, when super delegates rallied behind him against Gary Hart, ensuring him the Democratic Party nomination.


Reform after 1988: “Super Tuesday” and Front-Loading

Video -- Michael Dukakis on the emergence of Super Tuesday in 1988.
Video -- Susan Brophy on Super Tuesday.

After Ronald Reagan’s landslide victory over Walter Mondale in 1984, once again Democrats sought to improve their ability to win the presidency. They created a primary election vote across the South, designed to help nominate a southern candidate. Party leaders worried that “liberal” candidates from the Northeast and Midwest could not win the Presidency. It took place on the second Tuesday in March, known as “Super Tuesday.” Ironically, in the first election with Super Tuesday, a candidate from the northeast, Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis, secured the nomination.


CURRENT PRACTICES

Front-Loading, Caucuses and Primaries

Video -- Susan Brophy on party strategy.
Video -- Michael Goldman on the role of primaries in the nomination process.
Video -- Jack Corrigan on the role of primaries in the nomination process.

Since the 1970s, states have held their primaries earlier and earlier to increase their influence over the nomination process. In turn, it is difficult for poorly funded and lesser-known candidates to secure the nomination. Following George W. Bush’s defeat of John Kerry in 2004, Democrats created the Commission on Presidential Nomination Timing and Scheduling. Any states that violated these guidelines could lose all or half of their delegates at the convention. In 2008, Florida and Michigan scheduled primaries in January and lost half of their delegates at the convention. The new rules did not prevent states from holding early primaries to increase their influence. On Super Tuesday (February 5), 16 states held primaries.

As Republicans won four out of five presidential contests between 1968 and 1988, they were slower to change their processes. However, when Bill Clinton won back-to-back victories in the 1990s, Republicans began questioning the increasingly early primary calendar and the candidates it produced. In 2004, Republicans, like Democrats, chose to punish certain states that held primaries before February 5th. When five states moved their primaries ahead of that date, the Republican National Committee stripped them of half of their delegates.


Iowa and New Hampshire

While both parties, especially Democrats, have altered their primary process and calendar often since the late 1960s, one trend remains constant: campaigns start with the Iowa caucuses, followed by the New Hampshire primaries. Iowa caucuses became important in 1972, when Democrats held them in January. The highest number of votes went to front-runner Edmund Muskie and insurgent candidate George McGovern. McGovern’s better than expected showing in Iowa boosted his candidacy, and his second place showing in New Hampshire provided more momentum.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter won the most votes of any Democratic candidate in Iowa and used this to boost his campaign as he headed to New Hampshire. Carter won New Hampshire before capturing the Democratic Party nomination and, ultimately, the presidency. The New Hampshire primary has played a key role in American politics since 1952. New Hampshire has protected its first primary in the nation status by passing a law that gives its secretary of state the power to change the date in order to precede any other primary by one week. In 2012, the New Hampshire primary took place on January 10th. The Democratic and Republican Parties have cemented New Hampshire’s role by limiting other states from holding any contests and punishing them for holding any elections before Iowa and New Hampshire. Instead of holding contests before Iowa and New Hampshire, for which they could lose delegates at the convention, several states have scheduled their contests to occur immediately after Iowa and New Hampshire. Each state highlights one of the two main ways voters choose delegates.

Caucuses are local, in-person meetings of party members, usually at the precinct level. Often, fewer than 10% of Republicans or Democrats participate in caucuses, so many observers question their effectiveness. They seem to only attract the most passionate and dedicated members of political parties. Critics of the caucus system question how representative they are. In Iowa, Democrats also point out the lack of ethnic minorities in the state. However, caucus defenders argue that the system tests candidates in a way no other state can and that it can unite the party. They also emphasize the level of civic engagement in Iowa.

In Iowa, candidates must interact on a face-to-face, personalized basis, engaging in ‘retail politics.’ In the modern era, it is important for candidates to win or place in the top three of either Iowa or New Hampshire. The current process generally leads to quick decisions on candidates before voters can completely assess them. The process also favors well-known and well-financed candidates. Some critics complain that the early primary season creates a “rush to judgment.” Those who defend early primaries note that a quick decision on the nominee allows the candidate to start working on their general election campaign. The current system is less than 50 years old, and despite its drawbacks, supporters note that presidential candidates are chosen in a much more open, democratic way than before.”

For more, go to website.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cory-booker-democrats-must-show-contrast-from-gops-dark-convention/

Cory Booker: Democrats must show contrast with GOP's "dark convention"
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS
July 25, 2016, 8:58 AM

CBS News – By the Booker


Sen. Cory Booker says that Democrats must show a "contrast" with Republicans this week as they hold their party's convention in Philadelphia.

"I think that number one, we've got to show a contrast. They had a very dark convention. They showed a very negative view of America," the New Jersey Democrat said in an interview Monday with "CBS This Morning."

The United States, Booker said, is on the rise despite the nation having its "challenges" and "difficulties." But he said that Donald Trump has been tearing down and insulting Americans such as those with disabilities and people of Latino ancestry.

"We need to be a nation that doesn't degrade or demean our folks, but elevates our nation and brings us together," said Booker, who is scheduled to address the convention Monday evening.

Booker, who was vetted a possible vice presidential running mate for Hillary Clinton, said that the convention must be about bringing Democrats together and unifying behind the presumptive Democratic nominee.

He said that Debbie Wasserman Schultz "did the right thing" Sunday when she announced that she would be stepping down as chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee at the end of the convention.

"I think that's a step in the right direction," Booker said. "This has got to be a convention where we need to come together though."

Booker praised his colleague Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, who Clinton chose as her running mate. He said that elected officials from both sides of the aisle admire him and when he speaks to his caucus on Capitol Hill, everyone looks up and pays attention.



https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-vs-clinton-2017-peaceful-122334398.html?post_id=1605282889713411_1770008323240866#_=_

Trump vs. Clinton: Is a 2017 'peaceful transfer' possible?
BILL BARROW, Associated Press
July 24, 2016

Photograph -- FILE - In this Sept. 22, 2014, file photo, the White House is photographed from Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington. Hillary Clinton should be in jail. Donald Trump threatens America’s very existence. These are not fringe opinions. They are widespread views across the nation’s bitter political divide. That means that on Nov. 9, the morning after Election Day tens of millions of Americans will awaken to the realization that someone they loathe will be the 45th president of the United States. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)


ATLANTA (AP) — Hillary Clinton should be in jail. Donald Trump threatens America's very existence.

These are not fringe opinions. They are widespread views across the nation's bitter political divide. That means that on Nov. 9, the morning after Election Day, tens of millions of Americans will awaken to the realization that someone they loathe will be the 45th president of the United States.

The dynamics of the race, more ominous than the usual rough-and-tumble of politics, leave many Republicans and Democrats worried that many voters will be unwilling to accept the outcome. That could weaken the new president from the very first day in office. Intense, sustained opposition diminishes a president's political capital and emboldens opposition lawmakers who have to answer to their own supporters.

"Politics has never been genteel ... but generally both parties and their leaders have recognized the legitimacy of the process, and that seems to be fraying," said Republican Steve Schmidt, top strategist for Arizona Sen. John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.

The GOP mood was on display at their national convention, where delegates in Cleveland erupted daily into chants of "Lock her up! Lock her up!" — a reference to Clinton's use of a private email server while secretary of state. Clinton was investigated, but not charged.

Clinton's campaign answered with fundraising pitches, telling would-be donors: "We have to stop him." There promises to be plenty of Trump bashing when Democrats convene their convention Monday in Philadelphia.

It's not that the United States hasn't had divisive elections before.

The 2000 race between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore resulted in a prolonged recount of Florida's votes and ended with a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling that put Bush in the White House.

Chris Lehane, who managed Gore's bid, said as bitter as that was, "it's even more partisan now."

Lehane recalled being on Capitol Hill, preparing for a news conference, when the court issued its ruling that ended Gore's presidential hopes. "I remember I had one of the first Blackberries, and the first message I got (after the decision) was from Gore: 'Do not trash the Supreme Court,'" Lehane said. "He knew how he reacted mattered" for Bush.

Trump has shown a willingness to question election results. He warred with national GOP leaders during his own primary season, and he asserted anew Thursday that Clinton's Democratic victory came only as the result of a "rigged system." As a private citizen, he questioned the legitimacy of Barack Obama's presidency, falsely charging that Obama was not a natural-born citizen and thus ineligible to serve.

Each candidate has declared the other unqualified for the presidency. Trump talks of "crooked Hillary" and says she's a "puppet" of special interests. Clinton calls Trump "temperamentally unfit" for the Oval Office.

Schmidt, the former McCain strategist, noted "half the country is going to be unhappy" after any presidential election. This year, he said, all signs suggest "a very unhealthy number of that half that's unhappy will also not regard the legitimately elected president of the United State as legitimate."

Neither campaign responded to an Associated Press inquiry asking whether the candidates would commit now to an unequivocal concession upon defeat. And there's no guarantee voters would follow their chosen candidate's lead.

"I could never accept Hillary Clinton as president," said Terry Hardaman, a 38-year-old Republican in Roswell, Georgia. Hardaman got emotional as he noted Clinton's email controversy. "I'm a Marine. Two tours in Iraq. I lost friends there. If any of us had done what she did," he said, his voice trailing off. "And now she wants to be commander in chief?"

Yet in Atlanta, 91-year-old Democrat Howard King compared the national mood and Trump's candidacy, which he described as racially divisive, to the twilight of the Roman Empire. "You read that history, Rome wasn't conquered from the outside," King said. "It fell from within." Asked to contemplate a Trump administration, King laughed. "Donald Trump is a fool," he said. "I can't see him as 'our president.'"

The next president could run into trouble from an unlikely source — the winning party, adding one more impediment to a governing mandate.

Trump has yet to secure the endorsement of his closest primary rival, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, and establishment Republicans remain uneasy about their nominee.

Clinton has earned the support of challenger Bernie Sanders, but many of his liberal backers aren't following along. One of them, activist and professor Cornel West, described a nation "in deep crisis" because of social, economic and political discord that a "thoroughly narcissistic Republican like Donald Trump" and a "thoroughly opportunistic politician like Hillary Clinton" cannot assuage.

Nonetheless, Schmidt and Lehane both said the tension of the campaign makes it that much harder, but also more important for the loser to concede graciously. They said that's the first step in the "peaceful transfer of power" seen on Inauguration Day.

"The first person to call Barack Obama 'Mr. President-elect wasn't staff," recalled Schmidt. "It was Sen. McCain."

Follow Bill Barrow on Twitter at https://twitter.com/BillBarrowAP