Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Democratic Party Chair to Resign Over Wikileaks Emails

posted by cmn32480 on Monday July 25 2016, @06:14AM   Printer-friendly
from the another-election-season-trainwreck dept.

butthurt writes:

Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz has announced she will resign as chair of the Democratic National Committee. The resignation is to become effective after the party's convention. The organisation's e-mail system was hacked; leaked e-mails appear to confirm accusations that Wasserman-Schultz had taken action favouring Hillary Clinton in her contest against Bernie Sanders to become the Democratic Party's presidential nominee. Sanders had previously called for Wasserman-Schultz to resign, a request he reiterated in light of the leak.

Wasserman-Schultz said in a statement:

I know that electing Hillary Clinton as our next president is critical for America's future. I look forward to serving as a surrogate for her campaign in Florida and across the country to ensure her victory.

coverage:

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Democratic Party Chair to Resign Over Wikileaks Emails | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 114 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Monday July 25 2016, @08:21AM

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Monday July 25 2016, @08:21AM (#379703) Journal

    It's insane that Gary Johnson will have to get 15% support from polls to get onto the debate stage. 5% should be acceptable given that not many could even do that, and it seems like Johnson or Jill Stein could clear 5-10% if their names were actually consistent poll choices.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   3  

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday July 25 2016, @10:06AM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Monday July 25 2016, @10:06AM (#379730) Journal

    It's only insane if you aren't a D/RNC-bot. Ross Perot's success was the catalyst for what we see now. Not saying you are wrong -- I agree with you -- but then I'm not D/RNC-bot.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by Ellis D. Tripp on Monday July 25 2016, @10:36AM

      by Ellis D. Tripp (3416) on Monday July 25 2016, @10:36AM (#379736)

      The threshold was raised from 5% to 15% because of Ralph Nader, not Ross Perot.

      in 2000, as soon as Nader broke 5% and would have been included in debates between Bush and Gore, the decision was made to raise the requirement to stop 3rd parties and independents from getting in.

      --
      "Society is like stew. If you don't keep it stirred up, you end up with a lot of scum on the top!"--Edward Abbey

      • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday July 25 2016, @05:25PM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Monday July 25 2016, @05:25PM (#379920) Journal

        Right. Because people had the lesson of Ross Perot getting Bill Clinton elected.

        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 25 2016, @07:59PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 25 2016, @07:59PM (#380009)

          Ross Perot didn't get Bill Clinton elected. People simply decided they would rather vote for Ross Perot. Maybe if the mainstream candidates don't like the so-called "spoiler effect", they should put forth non-evil candidates.