0

After Judith Whitmer, a Democratic Socialist, won her election to chair the Nevada Democratic Party, she received an email from Alana Mounce, the party's executive director congratulating her and which then went on to inform her that the entire staff, including consultants, were quitting.

Why?

13
  • 8
    Please add some sources. – Martin Schröder Mar 17 at 18:32
  • 10
    Yes, it is easy to check with google. Perhaps you should do so and add some sources. What I want to know is the articles that you have read, not the ones I can find. I can't google to find out what you have read! – James K Mar 17 at 18:50
  • 7
    @MoziburUllah it's useful to know what information you're aware of already and where the gap in your understanding is - in this example, the answer to your question is discussed in most articles on this event. Without knowing what you've already read, it's likely that an answer will just repeat that information, which presumably won't help you much. – CDJB Mar 17 at 19:27
  • 6
    @MoziburUllah the point of references and sources in answers is definitely to back up the accuracy of claims made, however in questions showing what research you've done already is encouraged network-wide. It helps users more precisely answer your question. Feel free to post a question on our meta site if you'd like a more detailed response. – CDJB Mar 17 at 19:40
  • 3
    @MoziburUllah Consider this: If you hadn't read anything which includes the reasoning quoted below, then that quote is a good answer. If you'd already read the The Hill article linked in the answer below and still had this question, then you'd be wondering about why the staff felt like quitting en masse rather than being selectively (or broadly) fired was a good idea, and the answer doesn't help you at all. – Bobson Mar 17 at 19:46
10

According to an anonymous source, Whitmer was planning to replace all the staff if she was elected. So they quit before they could be fired.

She said many times while running her campaign that it was her intention to clean house, to remove all the staff.

Source

Whitmer denies those claims, and says that the mass resignation is due to political differences: The Democratic Party staff in Nevada did not agree with her Democratic Socialist platform.

4
  • 2
    Why would they quit instead of being fired? If fired, they could collect unemployment, and might have options of suing for wrongful termination &c. – jamesqf Mar 17 at 23:33
  • 1
    @jamesqf: salaried white-collar employees rarely use the unemployment safety net. For one, they usually have ample savings to hold them over and ample connections for new salaried work; for another, it doesn’t look good on professional resumes. – Ted Wrigley Mar 18 at 2:33
  • @Ted Wrigley: Not necessarily true in my experience. Indeed, when one startup I worked for (in Nevada, FWIW) got shut down by the venture caps, they had people there that afternoon to get everyone signed up. Certainly didn't affect my future employability :-) – jamesqf Mar 18 at 6:04
  • @jamesqf A collective act of objection. I guess the staffs bid she won't be sat long on the post, so theirs chance to return, or even be promoted, is greatly enhanced if they chose to stay with the party leaders, and show loyalty. – r13 Mar 20 at 21:56
4

For decades, the Nevada Democratic Party was ruled by Harry Reid and his proteges, a bunch of tough centrists who waded through trade-union bureaucracy and greased a ton of palms to get every vote they could. When there was a better than fifty-fifty chance of the Democratic Socialists winning, the NDS transferred $450,000 from the NDS coffers to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, where Reid protégé Catherine Cortez Masto is running for Reid's old seat, and bailed.

While it can most certainly be seen as a case of sour grapes over being trounced, them fleeing the NDC is probably more about avoiding change. Grassroots fundraising and fundraising via knowing the right people and trading favors are two very different animals. So they scattered to other places within the larger DNC umbrella where they'd still be appreciated for their length of service and extensive contacts list, rather than having to change to being appreciated for how much fervor they can generate from common people.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .