After the events of recent days, Democrats can be pardoned if their groans about Debbie Wasserman Schultz leading the DNC in a presidential election year grow louder.
Wasserman Schultz was already under fire from all sides. While she led the DNC during Barack Obama’s successful 2012 reelection effort, Wasserman Schultz has presided over some debacles since then, including the GOP’s big win in the 2014 election cycle.
Having been one of Hillary Clinton’s biggest cheerleaders against Obama in 2008, Wasserman Schultz has drawn the suspicions and ires of the Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley teams. When Wasserman Schultz announced there would only be six debates between the Democratic presidential candidates, the Sanders and O’Malley camps went into overdrive, accusing the Florida congresswoman of trying to help her old ally Clinton. Liberal groups began petitioning the DNC demanding Wasserman Schultz’s ouster.
Things only got worse on Monday night after Clinton and Sanders ran close in Iowa in the first caucus.
“Tonight was a huge success for Democrats, who gathered with their neighbors all across Iowa for a competitive race defined by voters’ enthusiasm and energy to send a strong message: we must keep America moving forward,” Wasserman Schultz insisted after the votes came in, even as her old ally Clinton underwhelmed in the Hawkeye State and can now expect a long slog to the Democratic nomination.
As she has so often done during her time at the DNC, Wasserman Schultz focused her fire on the GOP instead of the problems on her side of the aisle.
“Primary season is officially underway, and based on tonight’s caucuses, it’s clear heading into New Hampshire that the Republican Party lost tonight,” she said. “The top three Republican finishers in Iowa represent the far right - entirely out of touch with the vast majority of the American people. Whether it’s because of Ted Cruz’s history as a government-shutdown ideologue, Marco Rubio’s rise on the back of the tea party, or Donald Trump’s deep dive into the mud of offensive rhetoric, the Republican Party of Lincoln and Reagan is unrecognizable.
“Tonight’s caucus results have set the stage for a general election with a clear choice: a Democrat who will energize voters with a substantive message for growing the middle class and expanding opportunity so everyone has a fair shot, or a Republican doom-and-gloom candidate who promises to drag the country backward,” Wasserman Schultz concluded.
Regardless of who the GOP selects as its nominee, Wasserman Schultz can’t be happy that the Democratic primaries--which looked like a slam dunk for Clinton a few months ago--are now surprisingly competitive.
Even worse for Wasserman Schultz, at the end of last week, Clinton and Sanders agreed to hold more debates and didn’t bother to get the DNC’s blessing. Once the additional four debates were agreed on, Wasserman Schultz had to scramble to give them the DNC’s sanction even though she had been sidelined in the process. The additional debates are a clear slap at the limited number already set up by the DNC chairwoman and undermine her standing as a party leader.
“Our Democratic candidates have agreed in principle to having the DNC sanction and manage additional debates in our primary schedule, inclusive of New Hampshire this week,” Wasserman Schultz said on Sunday after the fait accompli. “However, absent agreement on the details, we will give our campaigns the space to focus on the important work of engaging caucus goers in Iowa. We will reconvene negotiations and finalize the schedule with the agreement of our campaigns on Tuesday morning.
“Any additional debates will be held on top of our existing February 11th debate with PBS News Hour and our March 9th debate with Univision and the Washington Post,” she added. “We have consistently worked with our campaigns to ensure a schedule that is both robust and allows our candidates to engage with voters in a variety of ways, whether through debates, forums, or town halls, while also leaving them the flexibility to attend county fairs and living room conversations for the direct voter contact that matters so much in the early states. Those principles will continue to guide these negotiations.”
By going around her, both Clinton and Sanders showed no faith in Wasserman Schultz’s leadership. As Clinton and Sanders head to New Hampshire with more contests in the weeks ahead, Wasserman Schultz’s headaches will only get worse.
Reach Kevin Derby at kderby@sunshinestatenews.com or follow him on Twitter: @KevinDerbySSN
