Karen Peterson or Claire Snyder-Hall or Mitch Crane for Dem Party Chair
John Daniello’s bulk mail form letter was the kind of move one would expect an 84 year old man to make. He may have been the winningest, most effective, most Republican-hating Chair in the world, but it is time to move on.
According to Mike Matthews (via FB) it has been time for him to move on for a long time:
Nearly ten years ago, my friend Dana Garrett and I were trolling Legislative Hall on the final night of the session. Both he and I were avid bloggers within the burgeoning Delaware political blogosphere. I had my digital camera in hand and we both approached Democratic Party Chair John Daniello to ask his thoughts on some piece of legislation. The camera was in my hand down by my side. I was not recording. Mr. Daniello was agitated to see both of us and immediately threatened to shove the camera down our throats if we didn’t get away from him.
This was John Daniello ten years ago. I wanted him to resign then. I have reread the letter Sen. Bryan Townsend posted at least 10 times. This is a shocking and disturbing and decidedly undemocratic letter coming from the chairman of the Democratic Party. The Party must take immediate action and both censure Mr. Daniello and remove him from his position of leadership.
This is not the party I support. The party that is trying to widen its tent from the appearance of dirty politics so they can include the thousands of Delawareans who voted for Bernie Sanders. Mr. Daniello’s letter is absolutely not inclusive and is a threat to much needed inter-party dissent and debate.
He must immediately resign or be removed from his position.
I’m not as outraged as Mike, but I am much more aware of our need for a change than I was yesterday.
Therefor, I propose, in his place, Karen Peterson or Claire Snyder-Hall. Both know how to knock down the GOP’s bullshit. I’ll also throw Mitch Crane’s name in the mix. Nobody works harder at trying to get Democrats elected than Mitch.
Karen Peterson would be GREAT! Honest and no nonsense leader.
Karen Peterson would be be perfect! She’d bring a strong ethical and publicly oriented perspective to the job. Excellent suggestion!
I think she’d be great. We have a lot of talent though.
He will just show up at the next meeting, hat in hand and act apologetic and promise to make changes.
You know, like he does every time he is up for election.
He will only leave if labor and other people that have more influence than they should tell him to leave.
Karen is great but since she just retired, becoming Chair sounds like the last thing she’d be interested in.
That said within party ranks there is a lot of strong passionate blood. I think there is at least one young and talented person that many who want to see the party progress are behind. That person just has to be convinced. I think the last thing we need is a chair who actively wants to be chair. I’m all for getting new blood and an innovative thinker, but the last thing you want is someone who doesn’t know how to work the mechanics of the party being the head mechanic.
Mitch would be great — he is doing in Sussex what should be getting done all over the state.
He knows the party machinery as well.
Not to rain on the parade, but any new party leader would most likely be the product of input from power (money) sources in the party. Or, if history is any guide, the next chair will be, like Daniello himself, the winner of a struggle between competing factions in the party.
I get that. And yet I think there is merit around framing “Daniello must go” with some plausible alternatives.
How come I don’t get my pic posted? Sure, Karen and Claire look better, but the sight of me hasn’t made children run away screaming
Mitch would be great, but please don’t make Sussex a model for success. We get killed down here every election cycle.
See how Mitch deflected this talk with a little humor? Just like a kick ass chairman.
but any new party leader would most likely be the product of input from power (money) sources in the party
This is probably true and since the money comes from Carney, Coons and Carper, we’re probably screwed here.
With all due respect, I’m sure all of these people would be great candidates. However, these guys and gals are older individuals. What about all these 20 and 30 something year old hippies running around Wilmington and Newark shaking stuff up? If we want younger candidates, maybe we need a younger chair. As much as we may like Karen Peterson and Mitch, they don’t strike me as the type to walk into a meeting in Bear or Wilmington and walk out with 20 new party members. Maybe Mitch could swing it, but even he would tell you that may be a difficult task. Speaking of Bear and Wilmington, where are your minority candidates for chair? You mean to tell me that even liberals in Delaware don’t have black friends. Where’s Mitt Romney; We need binders full of black and brown people.
Also, the list is really one dimenstional as they are all members of the LGBT activist community, which is great, but the democratic party is suppose to be much larger than that.
Bane, A fair point, but what my list lacks in diversity it makes up for in the casualness of its gayness. I didn’t even think of that when I put it up. Similar to the old Colbert, I’m gayblind.
So Bane, are you saying a member of the LGBT community should not be the chair, even if none have ever been, because the three people Jason comes up with all happen to be? (And I also didn’t think about what Karen, Claire and I have in common, other than being photogenic Democrats)
The Party’s executive director is usually a “young” person, currently a millennial, and most chairs are either wealthy ( the other Party) or older. You know why? Executive Directors are paid. Party committee people, RD chairs, subdivision chairs and state officers are all non-paid positions. And that is why I have no interest in replacing my unrewarding county chair position for another, but more frustrating state chair position……when the state party in convention elects new officers in the Spring of 2017….let alone in the middle of a campaign.
Karen said “No thanks”. 🙂
lol. I don’t blame her.
God no Mitch! I am not saying that at all. Please let me know if something I wrote led you to believe that. I just think a LIST of potential party chairs should be more diverse. I’m just saying that the list of candidates should not ONLY be members of the LGBT community, and that our party is much larger than that. If there is a diverse list of candidates and a member of the LGBT community gets the job, thats great.
Also, to your point about wealthy people and retirees running the party… Maybe thats our problem. The fact that the only way you can lead as chair is if you are retired or wealthy, should not be your best argument in defense of the current system. Also, I don’t know who this young ED of the party is, but I highly doubt he/she is one of the people that I mentioned like, Eugene Young, who is shaking up Wilmington. He’s probably a Daniello hand picked man/woman that nobody knows. The issue isn’t just age, its influence. Gay, Straight, White, or black, we need younger people with influence.
The barriers to younger people taking leadership roles are high. Employers in Delaware don’t always see the value of this kind of political participation…most young people who are ambitious in their jobs would never be able to get the flexibility to do something like being party chair, though I agree there are awesome people in their 30s who would be great state chairs. Sadly for many they’d be forced to chose between their employment and being Chair.
And you could say the same thing about running for elected office. Lots of barriers. If you want to run as a younger person, you need to own your own business or marry rich. Or work in a field that values political participation….but often times those are the same fields that create conflicts of interest or the “evvvviillllllll” (scare quotes imply monster/spooky voice) double dipping.
If only there was a wealthy business owner who was politically liberal and unafraid of speaking their opinions with ties to Kent or Sussex. That person should run!
The Delaware Democratic Party needs someone young with the energy to tackle issues facing the party and Delaware.
I don’t think there has been enough attention paid to the mechanics of electing a new Chair. By that, I mean who it is that actually elects the Chair. The Convention elects that person and the RD’s send the delegates to the Convention. The next Chair must be someone respected by the folks in the room at that time.
Perhaps Chairman Daniello is ready to step down. I believe he has earned the right to leave under his own steam. You may not like any particular action of his, but we should be respectful of what we have here in Delaware and what he helped achieve; An all D delegation to Congress, domination in the state government; a diverse coalition of groups that believe that government is part of the solution. That’s been the bulk of the status quo for most of the last 15 years. Say what you please, but that’s no accident.
The Democratic party is more receptive to Progressive policies, but it would be a profound error to call the Democratic party “progressive” in all matters. The party holds together a coalition that includes unions and entrepreneurs, urban centers and family farmers. Keeping it all together is a party Chair that everyone believes will, when needed, be a fair arbiter between those competing interests (Don’t get me started on the personalities and egos).
So, the brickbats thrown at Deniello may or may not be deserved, Party work is dull and thankless. But the people doing that thankless work are the ones who will elect the next Chair. And the one thing I know about the Democratic Party is that process matters, but mostly, it requires showing up. While diversity is a lodestar in the party, what the job requires is someone who is trusted across the coalitions that make up the Democratic Party.
The names suggested here would fit that bill. But there are other interests in the Party that also have a voice. I have no idea what candidates they might consider appropriate.
My hope is that the next State Chair continues the work of electing Democrats to office. I’ll take my chances with anyone who calls themselves a Democrat every day, and twice on Sunday before any elected official with “R” behind his or her name.
Well said. Daniello has been an excellent chair, IMHO. He started out as a reformer. I remember when he first ran for NCC Levy Court (yes, there once was such a thing) and he campaigned on the premise that he was running to eliminate his job. Which he did. As chair, his one concern has been with winning. He did a great job of marshaling the resources back when the DNC provided them and when the 50 State Strategy meant something. Some of those people are still around and active in the party.
I was surprised that Markell didn’t anoint a successor since the party had backed Carney in the gubernatorial primary.
The letter, however, was a big mistake. Not necessarily in its intent, which I think was to put candidates on notice that, if they withdrew after the filing deadline, they would not get their filing fees back. But the letter was condescending, talking down to pretty much everyone who had filed (which, to date, STILL does not include John Carney, what’s up with that?).
I think it’s time for a new chair, and I don’t necessarily think that John would disagree. I know who I’d like, but I don’t know whether that person would even accept the job. But, on balance, I’m not sure that we could have done better than Daniello.
Well said, El Som and Point of Order. While the letter may have come across as condescending to some, I also believe the intent was genuinely based in preserving the party he is tasked with leading. He is a good man, with the best of intentions, and he loves the party. Anyone who knows him recognizes that he is not only a strong advocate for candidates, but also a strong liberal voice who believes that the majority should decide. He is a strong proponent of the local RD’s having a greater say over the party leadership.
I know this letter came from the frustration that he, and many others, feel over a crowded field of candidates, many of whom are running because they can, not because they feel the call to do so. Everyone has the right to run for office. That is unquestionable. But, if your job is to look after the health and well-being of the Democratic Party, you want to make sure that you have the best and most qualified candidates for that position. Some may disagree with his methods and tactics, but keep in mind that it is his job to do so. He was elected over and over to do that job. I know many of the candidates were upset, however, all of them (at least all outside the city) pursued the party endorsement. I know the days of the un-endorsed candidates dropping our are long gone, but I do believe that if you are a participant in the process and seek the endorsement, you should follow the rules. If you don’t like the rules, help to change them, don’t just bark at the moon about how unfair they are while seeking that support.
I agree, the endorsement process is flawed and broken and holds no weight, other than VoteBuilder access. It needs to be revamped and updated. That only happens if people show up, participate, and help change it from within. However, I don’t blame Daniello for doing what he was elected to do, and that is protect the party and make sure the best candidates represent it.
I also think its kinda silly for Townsend to act like he isn’t the establishment candidate in his race. If anyone in that race should get upset that letter its probably Lisa Rochester.
Townsend may once have been the outsider. But now I think its hard to claim that you are the outside underdog being pushed out the race when your campaign chair is the Vice Chair of the Party and is on the short list for party chair. Your campaign manager is the former executive director of the party. You received the NCC endorsement and you are a sitting state senator with endorsements from Organized Labor and Patti Blevins. I mean, not saying it isn’t deserved, but his outsider days are over.
When did he claim that he was the outside underdog?
“I know many of the candidates were upset, however, all of them (at least all outside the city) pursued the party endorsement.”
I know there are several candidates politicking to win the party endorsement ahead of the primary election. But, I’ve heard at least one candidate ask RD members only for their individual support and votes, but not their endorsement. In an open race with good options, the voters should decide, said the candidate.