The racially charged photo compilation above appeared in the 1984 yearbook of the medical school Gov. Ralph Northam attended with his name on the page.
By Jim Ellis
Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam
Feb. 5, 2019 — Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam continues to reel, and many believe the increasing pressure upon him to resign will force him from office within the next 48 hours.
Northam defeated former Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie, 54-45 percent, in the 2017 statewide election. His term will expire at the beginning of 2022.
The number of Democrats publicly opposing Northam over the publication of a racially charged medical school year book picture increased substantially over the weekend, capped by a joint pro-resignation statement issued from Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, along with House Education & Labor Committee chairman Bobby Scott (D-Newport News).
Former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who Northam served as lieutenant governor, and Congressional Black Caucus member Donald McEachin (D-Richmond) also joined the chorus of detractors in addition to Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez, former Vice President Joe Biden, several other presidential candidates, and ex-Virginia Gov. Doug Wilder, the state’s first African American governor who was elected in 1989.
Aug. 30, 2018 — Just last weekend in Chicago, the Democratic National Committee, on a voice vote, changed the status of the so-called “Super Delegates” for the 2020 presidential nomination process. DNC chairman Tom Perez successfully convinced the executive committee to accept the changes earlier in the year. The full committee then ratified the chairman’s proposal on Saturday.
Simply put, those in the Super Delegate category, which is comprised of elected officials and party leaders, will no longer be able to vote on the first ballot at the presidential nominating convention. Should the voting proceed to multiple ballots, the Super Delegates would again be able to participate.
Controversy came to the national forefront in 2016 when the Super Delegates were perceived as being largely responsible for delivering Hillary Clinton the nomination even though Sen. Bernie Sanders (I/D-VT) had major support among the grassroots.
Ironically, the Democrats could still find themselves in a situation where the Super Delegates make the difference. With as many as 20 or more candidates likely competing for the 2020 nomination, and no winner-take-all states, the total proportional system could well produce a first place finisher who falls short of majority support. If so, at least one more floor vote would be required, and the Super Delegates would return as a major force.
By Jim Ellis
June 11, 2018 — According to an article published late last week by Politico, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez informed a group of US House members this week in a meeting that the party will be considering a move to change the status of what are now known as “Super Delegates” in preparation for the 2020 presidential election.
The Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws panel met Friday to consider two proposals about making the group virtually powerless before the next presidential campaign begins. The Super Delegates became controversial in the 2016 presidential contest because of Hillary Clinton’s dominance within this delegate sector, which is comprised of elected officials and party leaders.
Many believed the group unfairly tilted the playing field toward Clinton in the face of actual Democratic primary and caucus voters who preferred Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. In the end, Clinton still won the pledged delegate count — those earned in primaries and caucuses — but her strength with Super Delegates clinched the nomination long before all the delegates voted on the first ballot at the Democratic National Convention.
In short, each state is awarded a certain number of Super Delegates, officially labeled as “PLEO’s” (Party Leader/Elected Official). They are comprised of a defined number of the state’s elected officials, internally elected, and “distinguished” party leaders. Each state has different rules governing who is awarded Super Delegate status.
June 30, 2017 — As we all know, one of President Trump’s favorite gambits is to call out reporters for what he terms their “fake news” stories, and we see an example this week of where he may be right. The New York Times is one of the president’s favorite whipping posts, and Nate Cohn’s analysis in the publication’s Political Calculus section about the Democrats’ chances in the 2018 election cycle is at least dangerously close to fitting into that category. While Cohn’s analysis may not be “fake”, he certainly omits a great many facts that don’t conveniently fit his premise.
Cohn is right in the early part of his article when he states that for Democrats to win the net 24 seats they need to capture at least a one-seat House majority they must expand the political playing field. He goes so far as to say they need to challenge perhaps as many as 70 Republican incumbents or nominees in open Republican seats in order to obtain that number, and his statement may well be correct.
But the “fake” part of the analysis again surrounds the special elections just completed. The author reiterates the common narrative that the Republicans under-performed in these seats, which, therefore, lays the foundation for a Democratic sweep in next year’s House races.
The premise of Republican under-performance in these campaigns simply isn’t accurate in three of the four GOP-held seats. While true President Trump recorded big percentages in the four districts, and House Republican incumbents previously racked up large victory margins against weak opponents, an “apples to apples” comparison puts the results into better perspective. In past open seat or challenger contests in these same seats, the Republican special election victors came within at least similar range with previous winning GOP candidates in like situations. The current analyses isolate the Trump numbers, which in many cases aren’t like other Republican totals, while adding landslide incumbent wins that skew the underlying vote history.
Feb. 28, 2017 — Convention politics often produces interesting results, and the Democratic National Committee’s vote for chairman on Saturday proved no exception. Former Obama Administration Labor Secretary and Justice Department official Tom Perez was elected the new party chairman, in a race where the first and second place finishers ultimately secured the DNC’s top two internal positions.
Perez came within one tally of winning outright in the first round of voting, and then captured the chairmanship on the second ballot. Minnesota US Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minneapolis), who placed a very close second, was immediately appointed the organization’s Vice Chairman.
The national committee is comprised of 447 voting individuals, including members from overseas. The Democrats Abroad receive only half-votes for their contingency, however. Therefore, with 427 full votes being cast in the first round, the winner needed 214 to clinch the chairmanship, but Perez finished with 213. Therefore, a second round was required.
Feb. 27, 2017 — The Democratic National Committee convened in Atlanta beginning Thursday of last week, and before the meeting adjourned on Saturday evening the 447-member conclave elected a new party chairman. The person they elected was former Obama Administration Labor Secretary and Justice Department official Tom Perez.
Eight activists, including a former cabinet secretary and sitting Member of Congress, were vying for the position, and it was only those two who seemed to be within striking distance of claiming victory. Perez replaces interim chair Donna Brazile who is not running for the permanent position. Brazile was tabbed to replace elected chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the South Florida congresswoman, upon the latter’s forced resignation in controversy during the Democratic National Convention last July.
Perez claimed to have 205 committed votes for DNC chairman, just short of the 224 a candidate needs to score a first-ballot victory. And he almost captured the win on the first ballot. It took two ballots, however, to secure the win.