PHILADELPHIA — The 2016 Democratic National Convention is in chaos over the Wikileaks revelation that Hillary Clinton was aided by her national party, which simultaneously worked against and disparaged her rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
The leaks, which showed the Democratic National Committee and its top officials working to thwart Sanders’ campaign, forced the resignation of DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla.
This is just the latest disaster for Wasserman Schultz. Her tenure at the DNC has been marked by one embarrassment after another, even though she oversaw the re-election of President Obama in 2012. Let’s take a look at the other big mistakes that should have lead to Wasserman Schultz’ resignation.
After the 2014 midterm elections
While the 2010 midterm elections saw Republicans take back the House with a historic victory, the Democrats’ loss did not seem to be a millstone around former DNC Chair Tim Kaine’s neck (he is now Clinton’s running mate). But the 2014 midterm election, which gave the Senate back to Republicans for the first time since 2006 and expanded their House majority, was in part blamed on the poor leadership of Wasserman Schultz.
Democrats lost nine senate seats and an additional 13 house seats that year. Wasserman Schultz should probably have quit after that, but she stayed on.
When she planned to accuse Obama of anti-semitism
Even before the party’s 2014 disaster, some Democrats wanted Wasserman Schultz out. Including President Obama. This was especially true in 2013, after the 2012 election but before the 2014 drubbing. Wasserman Schultz was beginning to “line up supporters” after she “sensed” Obama was working to replace her.
Obama had apparently not been a fan of Wasserman Schultz for two years prior to 2013, because of a moment when she complained to him that she couldn’t hire a donor’s daughter to work for her at the DNC. Obama allegedly said to his staff afterward: “Really?”
Wasserman Schultz worked out a game plan if Obama did indeed call for her resignation: She was going to accuse him of anti-semitism, and probably call him anti-woman as well. Democrats at that time were heavily involved in calling the Republican Party anti-woman, so for her to accuse the head of her own party (and a president very popular among Democrats) of waging a “war on women” would have shown just how hollow the phrase actually was.
Every time she put her foot in her mouth
Party chairmen are supposed to serve as the voices of their party — especially on the attack. Wasserman Schultz hasn’t been especially effective in this role.
There was the time she accused Republicans of wanting to “end Medicare as we know it” and kicking those under 55 to the curb. Multiple fact checkers rated her claim as “false.” There was the time she accused Republicans of wanting to keep people from the polls like in the Jim Crow era. She was forced to apologize for the analogy. There was the time she said “dozens” of countries stood with the U.S. on Syria, but couldn’t name a single one when pressed repeatedly. There was the time she claimed Obama was campaigning for Senate Democrats in 2014, but couldn’t name a single race in which he was actively involved. The list goes on and on and on.
Wasserman Schultz was a walking gaffe machine for the Democratic Party throughout her tenure. She’s just been given an honorary position on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. It’s the biggest, most obvious “thank you” reward she could have gotten given her involvement in rigging the primary process in favor of the former secretary of state. It’s the most obvious conclusion to the years of embarrassment she brought the DNC.
