Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Furniture removal: party chairs and presidential nominees
Ballotpedia's scope changes periodically, and this article type is no longer actively created or maintained. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
Democratic National Committee
This article covering the 2016 presidential election was written outside the scope of Ballotpedia's encyclopedic coverage and does not fall under our neutrality policy or style guidelines. It is preserved as it was originally written. For our encyclopedic coverage of the 2016 election, click here.
 Date: November 8, 2016 |
Winner: Donald Trump (R) Hillary Clinton (D) • Jill Stein (G) • Gary Johnson (L) • Vice presidential candidates |
Important dates • Nominating process • Ballotpedia's 2016 Battleground Poll • Polls • Debates • Presidential election by state • Ratings and scorecards |
2028 • 2024 • 2020 • 2016 Have you subscribed yet?
Join the hundreds of thousands of readers trusting Ballotpedia to keep them up to date with the latest political news. Sign up for the Daily Brew.
|
May 27, 2016
A recent CNN report that Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz is on “thin ice” reminds us that party chairs can be tossed to the curb like a beat-up old sofa when it comes to the needs of presidential nominees. But a couple of examples of such maneuvers around previous Democratic conventions offer a cautionary tale to the party’s presumptive 2016 standard-bearer, Hillary Clinton—it’s a messy business that can backfire.
Wasserman Schultz, who is also a Florida congresswoman, has become a symbol to the supporters of Clinton’s dogged rival Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for what they perceive as shabby treatment of their candidate by the Democratic Party establishment. An overwhelming number of DNC members are backing Clinton, contributing to her commanding convention delegate lead over Sanders. Wasserman Schultz is also blamed for scheduling some of the Democratic presidential debates over the weekends when they were more likely to garner lower viewership. And last week she rebuked Sanders for the contentious atmosphere at the Nevada Democratic Party state convention that some of his supporters stoked.
Being a lightning rod is seldom a safe place for a politician and Wasserman Schultz’s occasional peremptory manner has not endeared her to all Clinton loyalists. If sacrificing Wasserman Schultz would help promote party unity when Democrats gather at their national convention in Philadelphia this July, well, ‘So long, Debbie!’ As Clinton-backer Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill told CNN: "The role of the DNC chair is always a supportive role, not a starring role, and I think that, because of what has occurred, it's hard for her to avoid a starring role."
Whatever shortcomings Wasserman Schultz has, moving her out of her DNC post could be problematic. For starters, while many DNC Members recognize that their presidential nominee should have a lot to say about the party’s chairmanship, they also resent being dictated to by the nominee, and especially the nominee’s staff. And Wasserman Schultz still has some prominent supporters like Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi.
In 1984, when Walter Mondale won the Democratic presidential nomination, he selected then Rep. Geraldine Ferraro of New York as his vice presidential nominee. Having opted for a northern running mate, Mondale and his senior advisers felt they needed to do something to show southern Democrats that he was not writing off their region in the general election. So the Mondale team coaxed Georgia Democratic Party state chairman Bert Lance—an ally and friend from Lance’s days as Office of Management and Budget Director in Jimmy Carter’s administration—to head the DNC.
The only hang-up was, to make room for Lance, the Mondale folks had to push aside the sitting DNC chairman, Chuck Manatt who was from California. Manatt, had worked hard to get San Francisco to host the convention that year and as Democratic delegates were arriving in town for the party confab word leaked out that Manatt was going to be replaced by Lance. While Manatt was hardly a beloved party figure, many Democrats thought it was thoughtless for Mondale to toss him overboard on the eve of the convention in his home state.
But perhaps more importantly, Lance had been forced to resign as OMB Director in September 1977 after he became ensnarled in probes of his personal finances and questionable practices as a banker in Georgia. Lance was ultimately indicted on bank fraud but acquitted on several counts leading the Department of Justice to drop remaining charges. Still, many Democrats felt the scandal hung over Lance and that he would be a liability in the fall campaign. Powerful Democrats like AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland let Mondale know they disapproved to the Lance-for-Manatt switch. And some Democratic delegates indicated they might abandon Mondale, possibly endangering his nomination. Ultimately, Mondale backed down, but the episode embarrassed both Manatt and Lance and raised questions about the nominee’s acumen. As veteran political reporters Jack W. Germond and Jules Witcover recounted in their book, Wake Us When It’s Over: Presidential Politics of 1984, Mondale “came into San Francisco bloodied by his own poor political judgment and evidence that he was a pushover, to boot. He couldn’t even depose the party chairman.”
In 1972, at his convention in Miami, Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern had a similar slip-up. The DNC chairman at the time was Larry O’Brien, a veteran Democratic pol from Massachusetts who had been a key political adviser to President John F. Kennedy. The Miami convention was a chaotic affair: 1972 was the first Democratic presidential contest governed by reformed nominating rules and the gathering in Miami marked a transition of power from the Democratic regulars and New Deal era political machines to youthful liberal insurgents propelled by the Vietnam anti-war movement.
At a Friday lunch with O’Brien after McGovern had delivered his acceptance speech starting at 2:48 that morning, the Democratic nominee beseeched an ambivalent O’Brien to stay on the job. O’Brien agreed. Shortly thereafter, McGovern informed his staff of his decision and they balked claiming O’Brien was a symbol of the party’s old guard. McGovern backtracked and agreed to push campaign adviser Jean Westwood to become the first woman to chair the party. At a meeting of the DNC hours later, McGovern praised O’Brien’s tenure and said he respected, regretfully, O’Brien’s decision to step down. That explanation, wrote Theodore White, the great chronicler of presidential politics, “raised for the first time, publicly, the root matter of McGovern’s credibility.” Of course, that credibility would suffer a bigger blow in the ensuing weeks when McGovern kicked his running mate Missouri Sen. Tom Eagleton off the ticket after reports that he had received psychiatric care, including electro-shock therapy.
Newly minted presidential nominees and their staffs often feel like their every wish should be treated like a papal edict. But they should beware such hubris and carefully consider all the consequences before inserting themselves in party mechanics.
James A. Barnes is a senior writer at Ballotpedia who has covered every Democratic and Republican national convention since 1984. He will be in Cleveland and Philadelphia for Ballotpedia in July.
See also
- Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016
- Presidential candidates, 2016
- Presidential debates (2015-2016)
- Presidential election, 2016/Polls
- 2016 presidential candidate ratings and scorecards
- Presidential election, 2016/Straw polls
