• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats select Rep. Hakeem Jeffries as caucus chair

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,671
Reaction score
6,745
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/28/hakeem-jeffries-selected-caucus-chair-democrats/

Democrats select Rep. Hakeem Jeffries as caucus chair

By Seth McLaughlin and Tom Howell Jr. - The Washington Times - Wednesday, November 28, 2018

House Democrats on Wednesday selected Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, a rising party star, to be their caucus chair when they retake the majority in the new year.

Mr. Jeffries, a 48-year-old serving his third term, bested Rep. Barbara Lee of California, a 20-year veteran of the chamber, in a 123-to-113 vote.
Both are members of the Congressional Black Caucus, reflecting the diversity among Democrats who will seize the House gavels for the first time in eight years.

Mr. Jeffries said the caucus will be “member-driven” and focus “like a laser beam” on making sure they have a successful two years.
“We won the majority. Now, we have to keep the majority,” he said. “In order to do that, we have to get work done on behalf of the American people.”

I preferred Lee.

This makes me a bit angry, frankly.
 

DiAnna

Hooter Babe
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 19, 2008
Messages
48,351
Reaction score
26,191
Location
Northern California
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent

Parrish

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
12,658
Reaction score
5,340
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Both Lee and Jeffries were worthy of the post. While I admire Rep. Lee, Jeffries was the better choice due to age and ability to rally the new Representatives.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,671
Reaction score
6,745
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Both Lee and Jeffries were worthy of the post. While I admire Rep. Lee, Jeffries was the better choice due to age and ability to rally the new Representatives.
IMO Jeffries is nowhere near progressive enough for the future of the democratic party.

This is because he isn't progressive at all.


I watched a clip of his answer on some show when they asked if he'd push medicare for all. He won't.
Unacceptable.

Edit: I think it's in this video.
 
Last edited:

Xelor

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
10,257
Reaction score
4,161
Location
Washington, D.C.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Other than the Speaker of the House position, which is second in line of succession to the presidency, it's not at all clear to me why the general public, Democrats and others, should have anything to say about whom Congressional Democrats opt to emplace as their organizational and administrative managers, which is what these positions are, in the respective chambers. Basically, these roles are best held by individuals who are outstanding people and process managers and executors; thus there's no place for non-members of Congress to have a say in/about who holds them for the general public isn't keenly aware of the demonstrated managerial skills and performance of any member of Congress.

I mean really, AFAIK, none of those roles are even in the extant line of succession:
  1. The Vice President
  2. Speaker of the House
  3. President pro tempore of the Senate
  4. Secretary of State
  5. Secretary of the Treasury
  6. Secretary of Defense
  7. Attorney General
  8. Secretary of the Interior
  9. Secretary of Agriculture
  10. Secretary of Commerce
  11. Secretary of Labor
  12. Secretary of Health and Human Services
  13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
  14. Secretary of Transportation
  15. Secretary of Energy
  16. Secretary of Education
  17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs
  18. Secretary of Homeland Security
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,671
Reaction score
6,745
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Other than the Speaker of the House position, which is second in line of succession to the presidency, it's not at all clear to me why the general public, Democrats and others, should have anything to say about whom Congressional Democrats opt to emplace as their organizational and administrative managers, which is what these positions are, in the respective chambers. Basically, these roles are best held by individuals who are outstanding people and process managers and executors; thus there's no place for non-members of Congress to have a say in/about who holds them for the general public isn't keenly aware of the demonstrated managerial skills and performance of any member of Congress.

I mean really, AFAIK, none of those roles are even in the extant line of succession:
  1. The Vice President
  2. Speaker of the House
  3. President pro tempore of the Senate
  4. Secretary of State
  5. Secretary of the Treasury
  6. Secretary of Defense
  7. Attorney General
  8. Secretary of the Interior
  9. Secretary of Agriculture
  10. Secretary of Commerce
  11. Secretary of Labor
  12. Secretary of Health and Human Services
  13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
  14. Secretary of Transportation
  15. Secretary of Energy
  16. Secretary of Education
  17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs
  18. Secretary of Homeland Security
It's not so much that I should or do have a say, it's more that I'm concerned what this choice means about the direction of the democratic party in the next years.

IMO unless they move towards the people they will lose seats again soon, and avoiding medicare for all is the opposite of that.
 

Surrealistik

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
7,694
Reaction score
3,491
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

As well it should:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN2Y0NBkUE0&t=

Cenk spells it out perfectly; when the establishment/blue dog elements realized that conservative Dem Linda Sanchez had no chance in hell against Lee and was untenable, they seemed to pull what was effectively a swap of her candidacy with psuedoprogressive albeit far more electable (vis a vis Sanchez) and status quo friendly Jeffries.

Overall, Lee was hands down the better candidate by virtually every metric, and this feels like a robbery more than anything.

In the end, I'm not sure I'm particularly outraged by the outcome, much as I dislike it, but you're right: it doesn't bode well for the party and its direction.
 
Last edited:

Surrealistik

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
7,694
Reaction score
3,491
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Other than the Speaker of the House position, which is second in line of succession to the presidency, it's not at all clear to me why the general public, Democrats and others, should have anything to say about whom Congressional Democrats opt to emplace as their organizational and administrative managers, which is what these positions are, in the respective chambers. Basically, these roles are best held by individuals who are outstanding people and process managers and executors; thus there's no place for non-members of Congress to have a say in/about who holds them for the general public isn't keenly aware of the demonstrated managerial skills and performance of any member of Congress.

Jeff's election was absolutely far more about partisanship/factional loyalty along internal party lines than aptitude, competency or experience.
 

AliHajiSheik

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
10,866
Reaction score
3,620
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Other than the Speaker of the House position, which is second in line of succession to the presidency, it's not at all clear to me why the general public, Democrats and others, should have anything to say about whom Congressional Democrats opt to emplace as their organizational and administrative managers, which is what these positions are, in the respective chambers. Basically, these roles are best held by individuals who are outstanding people and process managers and executors; thus there's no place for non-members of Congress to have a say in/about who holds them for the general public isn't keenly aware of the demonstrated managerial skills and performance of any member of Congress.

I mean really, AFAIK, none of those roles are even in the extant line of succession:
  1. The Vice President
  2. Speaker of the House
  3. President pro tempore of the Senate
  4. Secretary of State
  5. Secretary of the Treasury
  6. Secretary of Defense
  7. Attorney General
  8. Secretary of the Interior
  9. Secretary of Agriculture
  10. Secretary of Commerce
  11. Secretary of Labor
  12. Secretary of Health and Human Services
  13. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
  14. Secretary of Transportation
  15. Secretary of Energy
  16. Secretary of Education
  17. Secretary of Veterans Affairs
  18. Secretary of Homeland Security

You clearly don't understand team politics. When one becomes so invested in their team, they want to have their opinion intrude on who is on the "game". Put 2 NFL team doctors on the field and one side would cheer/boo one physician and the other side would boo/cheer the other.
 

ElChupacabra

Me cago en las cabras!
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
17,001
Reaction score
9,068
Location
The Garden State
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I like Rep. Lee too; politically, however, California democrats have dominated the ranking House seats for decades, and I suspect they wanted to put someone other than another Californian in a Democratic Power position. Makes sense, and Pelosi is a genius in behind-the-scenes shuffling/deal-making.

Yep. It was the smarter move to not only shift the power from California democrats, but also let some younger blood in since there's been a lot of criticism regarding the established party ranks.
 

tres borrachos

HoHoHo
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 20, 2012
Messages
84,747
Reaction score
59,343
Location
Biden's 'Murica
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I know I'm old when I look at someone's age of 48 and say "Wow, he's so young".
 

Surrealistik

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
7,694
Reaction score
3,491
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Yep. It was the smarter move to not only shift the power from California democrats, but also let some younger blood in since there's been a lot of criticism regarding the established party ranks.

The criticism leveled against 'established party ranks' has far more to do with ideology, than age (which is generally but not absolutely correlated with establishment thinking) or geography (which I literally have never heard come up as an issue regarding these leadership positions), and this actually flies in the face of it. Anyone who thinks for example, that Pelosi was disliked for being too old, and that people wanted her replaced predominantly for this reason clearly hasn't been paying attention whatsoever. As a related aside, I also find it curious that Pelosi's supporters who were openly throwing around accusations of ageism are suddenly nowhere to be found regarding Lee's pass over, for reasons I can only assume relate to intra-party divides as Jeff is more conservative and ideologically aligned with the Speaker and her faction. Also, if these change ups were a good thing on the basis of age and new blood where are the laments concerning Steny Hoyer? Why are Steny and Pelosi's supporters some of the strongest advocates of Jeffries?

Bottom line, Jeffries was taken up not because he's young for a Rep or because he's not from California, but because he is more of an establishment disciple than Lee, and tows more of their lines. The idea that he somehow represents change or a break from the old guard is sophistic at best, and absolute nonsense at worst given his positions are more in line with the powers that be among the Dem party than Lee's ever were; some of which are at fundamental odds with the new progressive wave that actually does represent substantive change and new ideas.
 
Last edited:

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,671
Reaction score
6,745
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
You clearly don't understand team politics. When one becomes so invested in their team, they want to have their opinion intrude on who is on the "game". Put 2 NFL team doctors on the field and one side would cheer/boo one physician and the other side would boo/cheer the other.

I see it a matter of who has influence in various leadership positions, within the "team" known as the democratic party.

And thus far it's mainly not any progressives.

IMO if the democrats want to maintain power they have to include progressives more.

Thus my dislike of this choice, who claims to be a progressive but does not support their core goals.
 

AliHajiSheik

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
10,866
Reaction score
3,620
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I see it a matter of who has influence in various leadership positions, within the "team" known as the democratic party.

And thus far it's mainly not any progressives.

IMO if the democrats want to maintain power they have to include progressives more.

Thus my dislike of this choice, who claims to be a progressive but does not support their core goals.

Seems like that should be a function of the voters back home, not their peers in Washington. You describe it basically as it is: Who gets to be the sheep dog to herd the sheep.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,671
Reaction score
6,745
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Seems like that should be a function of the voters back home, not their peers in Washington. You describe it basically as it is: Who gets to be the sheep dog to herd the sheep.
I don't think it's that simple.

I'm saying that the voters back home are doing their part, but the establishment is resisting.
 
Top Bottom