Debbie Wasserman Schultz facing serious primary challenge

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz owes her position as chair of the Democratic National Committee to her ability to raise money for the party.  Notorious for saying stupid things ("Photo I.D. laws, we think, are very similar to a poll tax"), she uses inept leftist rhetoric while cozying up to the big money sources of political funding.

In the current fight for the Democrats’ presidential nomination, her thumb has been on the scale, heavily favoring Hillary Clinton, another big money candidate who feigns left wing positions to anesthetize the base while accepting Wall Street and corporate money by the millions. 

Now she is being called out from the left wing of her own party.  Mike Lillis reports on The Hill:

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) chief has infuriated many Democrats with her handling of the party’s presidential primary debates. She drew further howls from liberals for deeming a whole generation of young women "complacent" about their abortion freedoms. 

And now she's facing a primary challenge from a liberal Wall Street reformer who says she's a corporate shill detached from her district. (snip)

Timothy Canova, a professor at the Shepard Broad College of Law in Florida's Nova Southeastern University, says Wasserman Schultz's positions on trade, criminal justice, consumer protection and drug policy reform — among others — are evidence that she's sold out to corporate interests at the expense of her constituents.

DWS might want to get Eric Cantor on the phone to discuss the vulnerability an establishment pol can have in the face of an insurgent primary challenge.  Canova’s rhetoric would sound familiar to the lobbyist:

People here on the ground — I hear left and right, you name it — are just dissatisfied that she's not responsive, she takes people for granted, and it's becoming evident in the way she votes on an awful lot of issues," Canova said Friday by phone. 

She takes a lot of corporate money, and she votes for corporate interests contrary to the interest of her own constituents.

As Hillary Clinton’s campaign troubles mount, one of her most reliable allies rigging the nomination process in her favor has new problems close to home.

Twenty-sixteen promises to be the most amusing political year ever.

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz owes her position as chair of the Democratic National Committee to her ability to raise money for the party.  Notorious for saying stupid things ("Photo I.D. laws, we think, are very similar to a poll tax"), she uses inept leftist rhetoric while cozying up to the big money sources of political funding.

In the current fight for the Democrats’ presidential nomination, her thumb has been on the scale, heavily favoring Hillary Clinton, another big money candidate who feigns left wing positions to anesthetize the base while accepting Wall Street and corporate money by the millions. 

Now she is being called out from the left wing of her own party.  Mike Lillis reports on The Hill:

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) chief has infuriated many Democrats with her handling of the party’s presidential primary debates. She drew further howls from liberals for deeming a whole generation of young women "complacent" about their abortion freedoms. 

And now she's facing a primary challenge from a liberal Wall Street reformer who says she's a corporate shill detached from her district. (snip)

Timothy Canova, a professor at the Shepard Broad College of Law in Florida's Nova Southeastern University, says Wasserman Schultz's positions on trade, criminal justice, consumer protection and drug policy reform — among others — are evidence that she's sold out to corporate interests at the expense of her constituents.

DWS might want to get Eric Cantor on the phone to discuss the vulnerability an establishment pol can have in the face of an insurgent primary challenge.  Canova’s rhetoric would sound familiar to the lobbyist:

People here on the ground — I hear left and right, you name it — are just dissatisfied that she's not responsive, she takes people for granted, and it's becoming evident in the way she votes on an awful lot of issues," Canova said Friday by phone. 

She takes a lot of corporate money, and she votes for corporate interests contrary to the interest of her own constituents.

As Hillary Clinton’s campaign troubles mount, one of her most reliable allies rigging the nomination process in her favor has new problems close to home.

Twenty-sixteen promises to be the most amusing political year ever.