Great discussion, as ever. I wish I understood (I’m English, so forgive me…) what the DNC chairman’s role actually is. Whilst there is not yet a presidential nominee, is the DNC chairman the Democratic leader? That’s what I assume, but is that right? It’s hard to tell, when that person seems not to be in any way visible, at least to the …
Great discussion, as ever. I wish I understood (I’m English, so forgive me…) what the DNC chairman’s role actually is. Whilst there is not yet a presidential nominee, is the DNC chairman the Democratic leader? That’s what I assume, but is that right? It’s hard to tell, when that person seems not to be in any way visible, at least to the outside world, as a leader. If Ken Martin is NOT the leader, how on earth does a party function without one until the presidential nominee is chosen? And if indeed he IS the leader, why isn’t he visibly leading on any kind of global stage? I realise that this is an entirely naive question, but I just don’t understand why the Democrats seem, at least to me, to be without someone leading a concerted effort to be a concerted opposition.
The DNC chairman is not a politician that leads the party in a "public facing" sense, their job is more management with duties like coordinating all the state party's activities, e.g. setting goals, organizing (meetings, the conventions, etc), finding candidates to run, and raising money from donors.
There is no official leader of the party when the party doesn't hold the presidency, someone may be acknowledged as the unofficial leader if they are dominant in intra-party politics (like Trump was the last 4 years for the Republicans). When there's no clear leader, often after a presidential defeat, the party will regroup and make general plans until a leader emerges.
So we're in the worst position to combat Trumpism, no clear leader nationally with and no unified plan. The Democratic congressional leaders aren't accomplishing much (IMO) and any blocking of Trumpism is slowly happening in the courts. Meanwhile every day has a new set of disasters, Trump's dropping in the polls is the only good news I can see.
That’s so helpful, E.K. Hornbeck, thanks for taking the time to explain. It’s still a mystery to me how you can have an effective opposition party that has no leader; I guess I’m used to a UK system where even in opposition, a party votes for and elects someone to be in charge. Kemi Badenoch is the leader of the Conservative opposition party in the UK although Keir Starmer is prime minister. I can’t see how an opposition party can cohere and act effectively without someone to lead them, although I guess it must work if that’s always been so in the US. Perhaps Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have roles for which we have no UK equivalent?
Also, as I recall (no guarantees, like the secret pod!) today's systems evolved from the old 'smoke filled rooms' where all decisions were made by "political machines" run by the rich and/or powerful and they picked which candidates to back. Different parts of the country even down to city level had their own political machines so until it was time to field presidential candidates they were only a loose confederacy. Having a national, individual party leader just didn't happen in that world. Since the parties opened up and became more democratic around the 1960's the situation nationally hasn't changed much
As far a Schumer and Jeffries I don't know of any official party roles for the Senator and House Democratic leaders outside of their own bodies.
Beyond all that, you may have seen this quotation from Will Rogers:
"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat"
Great discussion, as ever. I wish I understood (I’m English, so forgive me…) what the DNC chairman’s role actually is. Whilst there is not yet a presidential nominee, is the DNC chairman the Democratic leader? That’s what I assume, but is that right? It’s hard to tell, when that person seems not to be in any way visible, at least to the outside world, as a leader. If Ken Martin is NOT the leader, how on earth does a party function without one until the presidential nominee is chosen? And if indeed he IS the leader, why isn’t he visibly leading on any kind of global stage? I realise that this is an entirely naive question, but I just don’t understand why the Democrats seem, at least to me, to be without someone leading a concerted effort to be a concerted opposition.
I'll take a whack at it for you!
The DNC chairman is not a politician that leads the party in a "public facing" sense, their job is more management with duties like coordinating all the state party's activities, e.g. setting goals, organizing (meetings, the conventions, etc), finding candidates to run, and raising money from donors.
There is no official leader of the party when the party doesn't hold the presidency, someone may be acknowledged as the unofficial leader if they are dominant in intra-party politics (like Trump was the last 4 years for the Republicans). When there's no clear leader, often after a presidential defeat, the party will regroup and make general plans until a leader emerges.
So we're in the worst position to combat Trumpism, no clear leader nationally with and no unified plan. The Democratic congressional leaders aren't accomplishing much (IMO) and any blocking of Trumpism is slowly happening in the courts. Meanwhile every day has a new set of disasters, Trump's dropping in the polls is the only good news I can see.
That’s so helpful, E.K. Hornbeck, thanks for taking the time to explain. It’s still a mystery to me how you can have an effective opposition party that has no leader; I guess I’m used to a UK system where even in opposition, a party votes for and elects someone to be in charge. Kemi Badenoch is the leader of the Conservative opposition party in the UK although Keir Starmer is prime minister. I can’t see how an opposition party can cohere and act effectively without someone to lead them, although I guess it must work if that’s always been so in the US. Perhaps Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries have roles for which we have no UK equivalent?
Also, as I recall (no guarantees, like the secret pod!) today's systems evolved from the old 'smoke filled rooms' where all decisions were made by "political machines" run by the rich and/or powerful and they picked which candidates to back. Different parts of the country even down to city level had their own political machines so until it was time to field presidential candidates they were only a loose confederacy. Having a national, individual party leader just didn't happen in that world. Since the parties opened up and became more democratic around the 1960's the situation nationally hasn't changed much
As far a Schumer and Jeffries I don't know of any official party roles for the Senator and House Democratic leaders outside of their own bodies.
Beyond all that, you may have seen this quotation from Will Rogers:
"I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat"