County Party Election Reveals Democratic Shortcomings
On Monday November 17, I sat next to a Pakistani-American healthcare worker as he contemplated his ballot for the Democratic Party of Milwaukee County (DPMC) election. He had his phone open to a screenshot of Gwen Moore’s endorsement of the establishment slate, and his pen in hand. “How can I vote against these people if no one else is running?,” he asked the table.
He has good reason to see Gwen Moore’s statement as an anti-endorsement. Moore has refused to sign on to the “Block the Bombs Act” (HR3565). This bill would have stopped the US government from sending many of the weapons used to kill people in Gaza. Moore has told constituents there is not enough support in the party for the law, even though a resolution calling on her to join the bill passed with an overwhelming majority at the last WISDEMS convention.
Others at the table had the same question, and I explained that, at some point there might be floor nominations. Candidates who didn’t announce before the deadline to get on the ballot could be written in. “I need to get back to my patients,” the healthcare worker beside me said, “I can’t stay and wait.” So, he left, submitting a ballot with only the two contested races marked. In the end, my ballot was the same as his, as were many others.
There would have been a third contested race, but Deisy España, an immigrant activist with Comite Sin Fronteras, who had announced intention to run for Corresponding Secretary was disqualified because her party membership had lapsed. First, the fact that people aren’t notified when their membership is due to expire probably contributes to the county party’s embarrassingly low membership numbers. Second, the state bylaws say you have to be a member five days prior to the election to vote, but not to run. España should have been allowed to renew her membership, rather than being kicked off the ballot.
When the time came for floor nominations on the first position, none came. Outgoing treasurer Dawn Martin said something quiet and incomprehensible, someone seconded her, and the facilitator moved on. This process repeated for all four uncontested seats. Regretfully, no one asked what Martin was saying, or what was going on. Later that night, Brady Couthard, the outgoing Corresponding Secretary and new Treasurer, celebrated his and his slate’s “unanimous” victory.
Unanimous? I didn’t vote for them, and neither did many others. Some wrote in names in protest. It wasn’t until we got the meeting minutes that we realized Martin had been mumbling out motions to elect the uncontested candidates by unanimous consent. This process didn’t substantively change the results, but it did erase everyone who left lines blank or wrote in protest votes. Why was that necessary? Even the contested races were not close (Amy Donahue lost 66 to 252), but “unanimous” is a special number that creates a false image of consensus within the party. This is just one example of a pattern of the silencing and erasure of opposition in this election process.
It has been nearly a decade since DPMC had a contested election at all, and it really seems the establishment was not happy to finally have one. They stifled all the people that the Democratic establishment traditionally ignores. First, Deadria Queary, an African-American organizer and veteran, was publicly scolded by outgoing chair Chris Sinicki because she announced her candidacy for chair at the August meeting. She later withdrew from the race. Then, Sinicki locked down the September meeting to prevent anyone from speaking, let alone announcing their candidacy. Queer Palestine solidarity activist Amy Donahue had to wait another month before announcing at the October meeting, leaving only a few weeks for the party’s most active members to get to know them. The slate refused to have a forum or debate that many members proposed. On the night of voting, Stacy Smiter, a Black, formerly incarcerated community organizer who managed to survive the gauntlet and get on the ballot didn’t pre-plan his nominator or seconder because the party failed their responsibility to explain how these things work to everyone. The most tone deaf example, though, is how Deisy España, an immigrant organizer, was told her papers aren’t in order when actually, they were.
Two years ago, around 70 people showed up to vote. This year more than four times as many came out, and it seems many were recruited by establishment fear-mongering. On election night, some visibly frightened party members asked Donahue “is this a take-over?” If someone wanted to take over the party, they would have stayed quiet until the night of the election and then surprised the slate by showing up with piles of supporters. In contrast, Donahue announced at a party meeting as soon as Sinicki allowed them to, and ran their race very openly. This race was not about hostile takeover, it was about substantive disagreements in how the party should operate, which is clear from the candidate speeches. Unfortunately, establishment figures in the party treated Donahue like a shady interlocutor, and now the winners are trying to paper over and erase these disagreements, treating dissenting votes like we do not exist.
Except Chris Sinicki.
Unlike the winners, outgoing chair Sinicki spent election night completely unable to ignore or tolerate dissent. She was up late, making bitter, embattled posts on social media, including a threat that Donahue’s (amazing, fired-up) nominators “stay out of [her] line of fire”. This feels like the southeastern Wisconsin version of Game of Thrones. Donahue didn’t ask permission or kiss the ring, so now her allies have to watch their back or bend the knee.
Her guy won, so what’s Sinicki’s problem?
Well… the problem is: Chris Sinicki is pro-genocide and lies about having “friends in Gaza” to cover for it.
Palestinian American and former Democratic Party staff member, Heba Mohammad reminded Sinicki of her failure to publicly oppose genocide by holding up a protest sign during her speech. Multiple attendees came to scold Mohammad for daring to protest. Sinicki called her a bitch from the speaker’s podium. That night Sinicki said her hurt feelings might lead her to change her vote and side with fascist Republicans on the IHRA law. Mohammad kept her composure throughout, calmly asking Sinicki the names of her imaginary friends who don’t mind being bombed.
We contacted Sinicki and the DPMC to ask them for comment for this article, but haven’t heard back. We’re all for a big tent. We recognize that coalitions are necessary to win elections. But, you cannot build a tent big enough for genocide deniers and the family members of the people they insist on continuing to bomb to death. Voters in Wisconsin need an anti-genocide option, and unless things change, the Democratic Party will not make the cut.
If only they would fight this hard against MAGA
This drama at the DPMC is a microcosm of similar dynamics going on across the country. There is a war over the direction, future, and heart of the Democratic Party. The old guard seems rabidly motivated by Trump and the rise of MAGA authoritarianism, but their reactionary fear leads them to clamp down on dissent within the party. They embrace power, over-value wealth, and desperately fight to prevent change. They not only push away, but seem to actively hate necessary coalition partners, especially those who are actually the primary targets of Trump’s fascism: immigrants, Muslims, trans and non-binary people, young people, protesters, and socialists.
In the US, the Democratic Party is the only political vehicle situated to challenge Trump in the midterms, but it is also controlled by the only people inept, sycophantic, heartless, and unpopular enough to lose against him. This is a very stupid situation. Changing it seems to require a mix of cooperation and exclusion.
We need to recognize the line between moderates who are imperfect, but open-minded and flexible, and those hard-liner control freaks who would rather lose to Trump than share power with the left. Cooperation with the former might be difficult, but is viable, and likely necessary. The latter have no place in the Democratic Party. They will make us lose again. It is past time to push them out of the tent, ruthlessly, if necessary. Or even better, we can move the tent, and leave them out in the cold.
