Kamala Harris shouldn't have to answer to the abuse of a bunch of NEET deadbeats like the users who browse this site on the regular.
Kamala Harris shouldn't have to answer to the abuse of a bunch of NEET deadbeats like the users who browse this site on the regular.
The only reason the old white guys/gals in charge at the top of the DNC relented on letting black leadership into the top positions in the party was because they were forced to when the Tea Party ran roughshod over Pelosi's dithering centrism in 2008-2009.
Who did they nominate to those positions? All ghoulish neoliberals like Tom Perez and Donna Brazile. Once Keith Ellison got too close so they sandbagged him with a deputy position than showed him the door.
Eh, Ron Brown was DNC chair from 1989-1993. Between him and black politicians in state and federal offices, I don't think there's good evidence of a conscious plan (as "relenting" suggests) to exclude black people from Democratic leadership positions. Unconscious bias, absolutely.
That was before my time, so forgive my youth. I do know of how they treated Jesse Jackson in the 1988 primary and after, and that always seemed like the DNC establishment taking a stand against strident lefty voices among african americans.
His entire platform for the 1988 election was purposefully voted down by the DNC even though he won 2nd place.
Jackson was screwed in 88 (84 too, but that was more of a protest campaign), but after? He basically sold out and went all-in the DLC machine. Granted, it was not in good faith that the Democrats incorporated Jackson and his son into their machine — they were deathly afraid of him running against Clinton in 96 or Gore in 00 — but it happened. Jesse Jackson has done a lot of great things in his career, but he's always been corrupt.