Is the lack of leadership democracy?
The Democratic party seems divided. No one talks about today's debate; the candidates revolted against the party leadership of setting the criteria for participating in the debate.
It is not that the partisan die-hard loyalty is not there; with the zeal of the school bully, the party is attacking what the establishment takes as a dissident. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard voted 'present' and abstained herself in Trump impeachment vote. This nation is divided on Trump's impeachment. Should the Representative go with the party line? Then what is this abuse of power? The party HQ go as far as accusing her of not siding with the Dem hawks on air-bombing, claiming that could harm the national interests (she is a member of the Hawaii Army National Guard).
All the while, what about the debate? Canceling it on a labor dispute? The unhappy Presidential candidates and the party HQ forcing the policies exhibit the lack of leadership. The party leadership should convince each candidate for giving the candidacy up; remember how courteous Obama has been dealing with his rivals (and the political price he paid for it?) The open execution of the Representative on her decision is ugly; it is making the divide look worse while showing the HQ inability of dealing with the Presidential candidate.
Is this democratic? Democratic perhaps? Is this not showing the lack of leadership (or what)?
The Democratic party seems divided. No one talks about today's debate; the candidates revolted against the party leadership of setting the criteria for participating in the debate.
It is not that the partisan die-hard loyalty is not there; with the zeal of the school bully, the party is attacking what the establishment takes as a dissident. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard voted 'present' and abstained herself in Trump impeachment vote. This nation is divided on Trump's impeachment. Should the Representative go with the party line? Then what is this abuse of power? The party HQ go as far as accusing her of not siding with the Dem hawks on air-bombing, claiming that could harm the national interests (she is a member of the Hawaii Army National Guard).
All the while, what about the debate? Canceling it on a labor dispute? The unhappy Presidential candidates and the party HQ forcing the policies exhibit the lack of leadership. The party leadership should convince each candidate for giving the candidacy up; remember how courteous Obama has been dealing with his rivals (and the political price he paid for it?) The open execution of the Representative on her decision is ugly; it is making the divide look worse while showing the HQ inability of dealing with the Presidential candidate.
Is this democratic? Democratic perhaps? Is this not showing the lack of leadership (or what)?