All posts tagged "david hogg"

To hell with it all: Why I've had it with this pathetic farce

While I am typing this, members of the Democratic National Committee aren’t spending every second fighting the greatest threat to America in its history. They are wasting everybody’s time attacking themselves.

Instead of spending the gobs of money they have raised from countless hundreds of thousands of scared, hardworking Americans to form and communicate a viable alternative to the most dangerous political party on the planet, they are backhanding themselves in the backrooms of their pathetically out-of-touch, inside-the-Beltway country club to get a seat near the bottom of the top of the fading party they claim to lead.

And man, am I long past sick and tired of them — so sick and tired, in fact, I am making the case for them to just go away for good.

I’m not going to sit here and argue for a third party, because that would be another waste of the time the DNC seems to think is endless, even if America has never needed one more ...

I am arguing that the DNC itself has proven itself to be mostly a non-functioning arm of the party and a waste of time, that needs to be smashed for good into tiny bits.

Bare minimum 50 tiny bits, because I think the party would continue to be best served by micro-local leadership at the city and county level, that listens to and serves the needs of the people living in these places. Instead, we get what passes for leadership from this front-loaded group of out-of-touch political sharpies in D.C. who are climbing over each other to ignore us.

Look, most Americans aren’t registered Republicans or Democrats. For some, politics just turn their stomachs, and they have no faith in either party. Others believe the antiquated political system in this country has failed them. Others — too many — have stopped giving a damn together.

There’s no excuse for giving up, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t get the inclination to just wander off, and say the hell with it all.

Fact is, most Americans are independent people with independent ideas and independent feelings about what they are experiencing in their independent lives. No party has all the answers, so we vote with the one we think is best.

I am one of them.

And while I will never vote for one of these revolting, anti-American Republicans ever again, too many Democrats have made themselves almost impossible to like, much less love.

I am demanding better. We should demand better.

The dented party has a severe image problem, and is viewed by more than 70 percent of registered voters as out of touch and ineffective, because it turns out that is exactly what it is. As unpopular as the morbid Donald Trump is, and he’s as popular as a cloudy day, the Democrats are viewed in an even dimmer light.

In fact, since we started keeping track of such things 35 years ago, they have never been more unpopular. So how are they reacting to this?

By doing absolutely nothing to change the way they are going about their business, and in the DNC’s case, re-litigating insider elections in their fancy club and ignoring people like us who pay their bills.

In this week’s sordid episode of “Inside the DNC” a select team of crusaders voted to void the results of their own election in February that made David Hogg a party vice chair, and Malcolm Kenyatta a second vice chair. Why? Because apparently some members who form something called “the credentials committee” ruled that their earlier election had not followed proper parliamentary procedures.

I’d ask you to read that again, but you might get sick, and we need you more than ever. While the world burns, these pinky-outs are sipping tea and kicking each other in the shins under the table about their shoddy “parliamentary” conduct.

According to a story in The New York Times:

“The decision — which came after roughly three hours of internal debate and one tie vote — will put the issue before the full body of the Democratic National Committee. It must decide whether to force Mr. Hogg and a second vice chair, Malcolm Kenyatta, to run again in another election later this year.”

More from the Times:

“Mr. Hogg, 25, an outspoken survivor of the 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Fla., has prompted a fierce backlash over his plans to spend up to $20 million through another organization he heads, Leaders We Deserve, on primary campaigns against incumbent Democrats. Ken Martin, the party chairman, has said it is inappropriate for Mr. Hogg to intervene in primaries while serving as a party official, and has recommended changing the party’s bylaws to force him to sign a neutrality pledge.”

Oh no, he violated the sacred neutrality pledge! Horrors! I have heard that he has been forced to return his shiny decoder ring that all members in good standing in the club receive after bowing down in front of a statue of Hubert Humphrey and reciting three times: “Hail to the Parliament!”

Details are still sketchy and developing, but as of now, new DNC Chairman Martin wasted no time disassociating himself from the problem from a relatively safe distance:

“I am disappointed to learn that before I became chair, there was a procedural error in the February vice chair elections. The credentials committee has issued their recommendation, and I trust that the DNC members will carefully review the committee’s resolution and resolve this matter fairly.”

You’ll also be disappointed to know, sir, that before you became chair, your party lost the presidency, the House and the Senate. Of course, I’m sure you had absolutely nothing to to do with that, either, but feel free to engage with the rest of America just as soon as you’ve cleaned up the terrible mess in your banquet hall.

In reporting from the Washington Post, Hogg said this:

“While this vote was based on how the DNC conducted its officers’ elections, which I had nothing to do with, it is also impossible to ignore the broader context of my work to reform the party which loomed large over this vote. I ran to be DNC Vice Chair to help make the Democratic Party better, not to defend an indefensible status quo that has caused voters in almost every demographic group to move away from us. The DNC has pledged to remove me, and this vote has provided an avenue to fast-track that effort.”

For his part, Kenyatta seems properly irritated by the whole damn thing, but mostly with Hogg, saying Monday night that framing the vote around Hogg is “nonsense” and that the story is not about Hogg “even though he clearly wants it to be.” He touted his own accomplishments as vice chair and said the committee’s decision was “a slap in my face.”

Meantime the country burns …

Maybe I should see the sliver of good in this. Maybe because the members of the DNC seem just as sick and tired of themselves as so many us do of them it will result in some much-needed supersonic change in the room.

No, I won’t be holding my breath …

So I’ll end with this gust: Unless there are some changes — I mean REAL RADICAL changes — the Democrats are going to get their asses handed to them again on a national level because they are not capable of showing themselves to be a viable alternative to the radical right-wing hell that is overrunning us.

Their leader in the Senate is Chuck Schumer, who sports a 17 percent approval rating and the charisma of a paper weight. The calculating House Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries, is also having trouble breaking through. It might be helpful if he let Americans know his blood pressure is capable of rising above 10 from time to time, and out of the “strongly worded letters” range.

On Wednesday, as I was putting this column to bed, The Associated Press moved this story: Democrats are deeply pessimistic about the future of their party.

From that story:

A new poll conducted earlier this month by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that only about one-third of Democrats are “very optimistic” or even “somewhat optimistic” about their party’s future. That’s down sharply from July 2024, when about 6 in 10 Democrats said they had a positive outlook.

I say again: This is a five-alarm fire.

From the story:

“I’m not real high on Democrats right now,” said poll respondent Damien Williams, a 48-year-old Democrat from Cahokia Heights, Illinois. “To me, they’re not doing enough to push back against Trump.”

Instead of addressing any of this with substantive change at the top, their clumsy, inept leadership is covering their eyes and their asses, and hoping it will all burn itself out.

I figure we all deserve a helluva lot better, but in the event they ever start taking themselves seriously, then maybe I will too.

For now, though, we are on our own.

(D. Earl Stephens is the author of “Toxic Tales: A Caustic Collection of Donald J. Trump’s Very Important Letters” and finished up a 30-year career in journalism as the Managing Editor of Stars and Stripes. You can find all his work here, and follow him on Bluesky here.)

This trust-buster is tearing apart the DNC. Bring it on.

Political activist David Hogg is facing a pretty clear conflict of interest. He’s part of a grassroots organization that will try primarying Democrats out of office in the coming congressional elections. He’s also the vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee. The DNC does many things, but unseating its own people isn’t one of them.

But I think this conflict is beside the point. What David Hogg brings is something that few others bring to the party, which is an unwavering demand for competition. If the DNC is a trust, Hogg is a trust-buster.

That’s such a big problem that DNC chairman Ken Martin is now proposing a rule change that would force Hogg to quit the DNC or quit Leaders We Deserve, the group that has pledged $20 million to challenging "out-of-touch, ineffective" Democratic incumbents.

It’s a microcosm of larger issues that Stephen Robinson has been writing about. He publishes a newsletter called The Play Typer Guy. In this interview, we talked about Hogg, the debate over “oligarchy,” coalition-building and how the Democrats, if they win the House next year, are going to be “expected to draw some form of political blood.”

JS: David Hogg wants to primary incumbent Democrats. He's also vice chair of the DNC. An apparent conflict. But the point is that he's generating energy inside the party. Given your critique of the Democrats, that would probably be a good thing in your view, right?

SR: The DNC should arguably exist to provide accountability for Democrats, not simply protect the weakest and sometimes outright antagonist members. I think back to Kyrsten Sinema, and how she took an immediately hostile approach to the party. She was building a brand as a "maverick" while distancing herself from the party.

That's only possible in a scenario where the party accepts this treatment. Worse, in Sinema's case, no matter how bad she got, the party never took a position against her. Even when she was no longer a Democrat, the party was hesitant to support [now US Senator] Ruben Gallego over her. She had to literally drop out. That just seems sadly passive-aggressive. Democrats need to change the system.

JS: So even if it's correct to say that Hogg is conflicted, he's still bringing competition to the internal functioning of a party that is very much not interested in competition. Is that fair?

SR: Yes, as I mentioned in my own piece, safe districts need competition the most, because otherwise, there is no actual "election." They can stay in office forever without ever engaging with the voters or adapting to new conditions, which is even more critical today.

JS: Where do you stand on the debate over using the word "oligarchy"? Some say normal people get it. Others say it's too academic.

SR: I'm writing something about this as well! A point I make is that Trump frequently called Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and Democrats "Marxists," which is hardly a third-grade reading level concept.

I recall [US Senator] Marco Rubio back in 2021 saying, “‘social justice’ and ‘wokeness’ are just nice names for cultural Marxism, which teaches our children to hate our American history and sow division.” Notice what Rubio does: He acknowledges that “social justice” and “wokeness” sound like good things! So he directly associates it with something bad. He then clearly defines cultural Marxism on his terms. Three years later, your Fox News-watching grandmother who never attended college was reflexively calling Harris a “Marxist.”

Elissa Slotkin definitely stepped on a rake when she said that people didn't understand what “oligarchy” means. In a reality where people are "doing their own research" about diseases on Google, it's obviously not wise to suggest that the average voter doesn't understand a concept that you do. I think it's fine and reasonable to say that a term is silly and even offensive, like Ruben Gallego has remarked about "Latinx." But it's never a good idea to suggest that voters are idiots.

JS: A concern I have heard from Black liberals is that the oligarchy angle writes their interests and history out of the story. Think Bernie Sanders, who says the Democrats should ditch "identity politics" in favor of attacking billionaires. What do you think?

SR: I think Black liberals aren't a monolith. The danger is that the most vocal Black liberals within the Democratic Party are – like myself! – college-educated mainstream middle-aged and older liberals who have reliably voted Democratic for decades. The party's obvious problem is with younger voters of all ages, but specifically Black and Latino men.

I don't think "identity politics" is a winning issue. I think mainstream Democrats perhaps wrongly elevated it in 2016 to distinguish themselves from Sanders' more class-based appeals. That was a mistake. And I'm not even sure how the "oligarchy angle" writes out the interests and history of Black people, considering that rich people screwing over the poor is the backbone of slavery and segregation.

But viewing minority interests as different from working-class people regardless of race is perhaps another mistake. I don't see why you wouldn't want the angle that impacts the greatest number of people. Black voters are 12 percent of the electorate. Voters without a college degree are the majority of the electorate. Elon Musk screwing the poor and working class, regardless of race, is a unifying issue. I disagree with any liberal who argues for dividing a potential winning coalition.

JS: There are stirrings of impeachment. Some say the last two backfired and made Trump stronger. I'm guessing you have an opinion about that.

SR: That argument reflects a core weakness within the Democratic Party. Speaking from my arts background, it's like saying 20 years ago that previous attempts at making Marvel-related movies had failed. Why bother trying again? Execution is everything. Democrats didn't necessarily have a strategy for holding Republicans accountable for supporting Trump. They didn't strike while the iron was truly hot during the second impeachment in deference to Republicans and let him rebuild while in exile -- an issue directly linked to [former US Attorney General] Merrick Garland's delay in prosecuting Trump.

The past is somewhat irrelevant, also, because if Democrats regain the House in 2026, it won't be like 2018. They will be expected to draw some form of political blood.

ALSO READ: ‘Pain. Grief. Anger’: Families heartbroken as Trump backlash smashes adoption dreams

This Dem shows how to take a GOP smear and hit back — and it damn well works

A word about David Hogg, Reince Priebus and how to combat Republican smears. But first, here’s a video. It’s short. Watch it.

As you may know, Priebus is the former chairman of the Republican National Committee. ABC News’ Jonathan Karl’s question to him is about the apparent conflict of interest Hogg has. Hogg is the vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, but he’s also involved in a progressive outfit that’s pledged to raise $20 million to primary out incumbent Democrats that it sees as too comfortable to stay.

The question is a serious one. Priebus could have landed a punch Hogg couldn’t recover from. Instead, Priebus just couldn’t help himself. He decided to smear the Democrats by way of smearing Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose deportation case has dominated headlines for weeks.

“The Democrats are a complete mess,” Priebus said. “They’ve got no message. They’ve got no movement. They’ve got no leader. It doesn’t get any worse than that. You’re defending Harvard. You’re traveling to El Salvador for MS-13 gang members” (meaning Kilmar Abrego Garcia).

Another Democrat – another older Democrat – would have done a couple things. One, ignore the lie about Abrego Garcia being a gang member. Two, accept the lie as valid in order to demonstrate some kind of bona fides. This is what U.S. Sen. Chris Van Hollen did when he said: “I am not defending the man. I’m defending the rights of this man to due process. And the Trump administration has admitted in court that he was wrongfully detained and wrongfully deported.”

Hogg does neither. He takes the smear head on.

“This was not an MS-13 gang member and you damn well know that,” Hogg said. “The administration admitted that it was wrong. In America, we have due process and we are a land of law and order. This administration keeps showing time and time again that they do not care what the Supreme Court says, they do not care about the rule of law and you cannot defend sending people to another country.”

There is risk in this. After all, this is America. It’s a plain reality that a lot of white people are going to look at a brown Spanish-speaking immigrant of Central American extraction as a gang member simply because they are terrible people. To them, men like Kilmar Abrego Garcia are already guilty of something on account of who they are.

But I think the tradeoff is worth it. By centering the smear, Hogg put ownership of it back on Reince Priebus’ shoulders, thus calling into question the character of a man who would stoop so low. “Oh, come on” was Priebus’ feeble retort to Hogg’s “and you damn well know that.”

The other benefit is robbing the Republicans of validation and the appearance of a consensus. It robs them of more chances to keep pushing and pushing with greater lies and smears and bad faith, until it’s impossible for the Democrats to take their own side in the fight.

Another thing that an older Democrat would have done that Hogg does not do is dismiss the lie as distraction. That word doesn’t get enough scrutiny. What it means is this: “I’m not going to bother debating racism with racists. Instead, I’m going to try appealing to their wallets.”

This thinking was evident in comments made to The Hill recently by an unnamed Democratic operative. “People can’t afford eggs, and … you’re flying to sit with someone who’s accused of being in a gang,” they said.

“Republicans have given us such an opportunity with DOGE and … with Trump tanking the economy. Obviously, you can walk and chew gum at the same time, but I don’t think we can take our eyes off the prize in terms of talking about real world impacts and how people are being hurt in their everyday lives by some of these policies.

“Democrats want to think that everyone has the same morals and values that we do, and we want to think that everyone’s outraged by the same things that we are and we want to be the ones to help people and stand up for the moral injustices. That doesn’t necessarily win elections though, and last cycle was proof positive of that. We need to step back and wait for someone to be deported who has a really compelling story that’s devastating that Average Joe’s upset about.”

Translation: when the Trump regime deports a white person, then we can talk. As long the subject is a brown Spanish-speaking immigrant of Central American extraction, all this is wasted effort and a distraction.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Abrego Garcia Family/Handout via REUTERS

I posted this to Bluesky last week and said it was a textbook example of Democrat conceding to white power. A shrewd reader demurred. “That's not conceding to white power. It is agreeing with white power.”

It’s also misreading the moment. More polls are showing majorities disapproving of the president’s handling of immigration (and virtually every other major issue). I don’t think that’s because voters have suddenly rediscovered their love for the rule of law. (They elected Donald Trump, after all.) What’s happening is the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia is generating a kind of “media ambience” that people can feel without actually understanding the details of his case. A similar ambience about prices (ie, eggs) informed the last election.

There’s already “a really compelling story that’s devastating that Average Joe’s upset about.” And Democrats like Hogg are refusing to accept Republican bad faith that might dilute that story’s impact.

Also read: 'Never so scared': Furious pastor berates cops after witnessing tasing of MTG constituent

Democrats in danger of losing Gen Z voters over latest controversy: analyst

The Democratic National Committee's recent dustup with vice chair David Hogg could be off-putting to the younger generation of voters if they don't tread lightly, according to analysis by CNN.

Anchor Wolf Blitzer introduced a clip of DNC chair Ken Martin Thursday by saying the committee was issuing an ultimatum to Hogg to give up his purported "threat to primary Democrats he deems ineffective, or give up his leadership position."

On the clip, Martin said, "No DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election, whether on behalf of an incumbent or a challenger. I have great respect for David Hogg. I think he's an amazing young leader who's done so much already to help move our movement forward. And while...certainly you know, I understand what he's trying to do, as I've said to him, if you want to challenge incumbents, you're more than free to do that, but just not as an officer of the DNC."

ALSO READ: 'Promoted our tormenter': MAGA fans vent disgust at Trump official's latest move

Hogg is an outspoken gun control activist who survived the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL, that killed 17 students and staff.

CNN Senior Political Analyst Mark Preston said on Thursday's Situation Room said that Hogg was trying to "infiltrate the Party from the inside and try to enact change that he wants to see. Now, I will say he is going to be very unlucky, I would suspect, in his efforts to do so. But this is going to cause the Democratic National Committee a lot of headache, a lot of heartache, over the next four-and-a half months."

Co-anchor Pamela Brown asked that since Hogg represents this new young generation of Democratic leaders, "is there any risk, concern about pushing him out and hurting the Party's outreach to those younger voters that we know Trump surprisingly did well with in 2024?"

Preston said Martin was obviously being very careful when talking about the situation.

"[Martin] was very effusive about him," Preston said. "The DNC wants to make sure that they put this out there as something that is not about David Hogg — that it is just simply about incumbency. And, as he said, if you want to take on an...incumbent Democrat, then do it from outside the party."

Watch the clip below via CNN or click here.

Parkland’s Hogg shares top Harris pick and says only MTG could hurt her with young voters

Vice President Kamala Harris faces a wave of pressure over her choice of running mate — but she shouldn't worry about losing the support of young people no matter which shortlister she chooses.

That's according to political youth influencer and Parkland school shooting survivor David Hogg, who talked with MSNBC's Joy Reid on Friday.

In fact, Hogg said facetiously, she'd have to pick someone like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) to lose support with young people.

"Young folks are really engaged," said Reid. "Do you have a favorite among the potential VPs, and is there a candidate that Vice President Harris could pick that could hurt her momentum? Let's put up the list. So we have Andy Beshear of Kentucky, the governor of Kentucky; we have Pete Buttigieg, Transportation Secretary; we have Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. Those are said to be the finalists. Is there someone you or your friends like, and is there someone that would turn you all off?"

ALSO READ: We asked 10 Republican senators: ‘Is Kamala Harris Black?’ Things got weird fast

"I will say this much: I am obsessed and I love Governor Tim Walz," said Hogg.

"He is by far one of the most experienced people up there," Hogg explained. "He has not only won over five times one of the hardest congressional districts in the country that he won in rural Minnesota over and over and over again, even in 2010, he has also been an excellent governor. One of the most successful so far this century in terms of Democratic governors. Ultimately, you know, if you want the blue wall, he is a football coach that made his high school state champions. He was a unionized agricultural worker, a teacher, and a veteran. Tim Walz is the blue wall. And he knows how to communicate and he has the experience on the Hill to advance legislation. And that's why I would love to see him there."

"But let me be clear," he added. "No matter who [Harris] picks, I will be supportive. But I do think — the only person I could think of that would really hurt [her] a lot in my opinion is someone like Marjorie Taylor Greene. But frankly, honestly, that's not going to happen."

Watch the video below or at the link here.

David Hogg on Kamala Harris' VP selectionwww.youtube.com