House Democrats fume at David Hogg's plan to oust lawmakers

[RandySF]

Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg's plan to spend $20 million to primary older Democratic incumbents in Congress has sparked intense anger from some lawmakers.

Why it matters: House Democrats told Axios that, while Hogg is not targeting battleground-district members, they believe he will divert attention and resources away from their races and the fight to retake the House.

"What a disappointment from leadership. I can think of a million better things to do with twenty million dollars right now," swing-district Rep. Hillary Scholten (D-Mich.) told Axios.

"Fighting Democrats might get likes online, but it's not what restores majorities," she added.

Another vulnerable House Democrat, speaking on the condition of anonymity to offer candid thoughts about a top party official, called the plan "very counterproductive and counterintuitive" and said "it would sure be nice to have some of that financial support."



https://www.axios.com/2025/04/18/house-democrats-david-hogg-primary-dnc

[brush]

1. Hogg is off on the wrong foot. Replacing Dems with other Dems does not gain us a House majority.

Last edited Fri Apr 18, 2025, 08:12 AM - Edit history (1)

Not complicated math. Now investing that money in Dem candidates against vulnerable rethugs...now that's the ticket. Not hard to figure out.

[Renew Deal]

4. Dems need a new message

Last edited Fri Apr 18, 2025, 09:56 AM - Edit history (1)

And a few new messengers. “It gets likes online” because people that care about the country realize that just supporting anyone with a D next to their name isn’t enough. Dems that understand today’s problems and have a stake in the future matters more than incumbancy.

[brush]

7. Gaining the majority should be the priority or trump. and the rethugs will keep...

destroying the democracy. Again, not that hard to figure out. Gain the majority first, then work on the messaging.

Otherwise, we have more of the same rethug majority afraid of getting primaried by trump magats.

[atreides1]

9. Gaining the majority...

...means little if they continue to follow the same playbook! This isn't the "we can get along" club that it might have been in the past, this is blades out and guns blazing.

And it doesn't appear that the current people are willing to get blooded...

[brush]

11. What are you talking about. Dems don't govern by the magat rethug playbook.

Last edited Sat Apr 19, 2025, 01:53 AM - Edit history (2)

Haven't you heard, there is a difference between the two parties. That can't be more obvious than the first nearly three months of trump's disastrous second term and the productive four years of Biden's preceding term.

A nigh and day difference.

[JustAnotherGen]

66. Thank you

There is,an ocean between the Democratic Party and the Thugs

[DJ Synikus Makisimus]

39. Dems need A message.

Near as I can tell, what unites Democrats these days is their opposition to Trump. The stand against, they don't stand for, but many are all too willing to work together with their friends across the aisle to prevent anything progressive from even being heard in the House. That, if you remember, is how Biden's "Build Back Better" campaign "promises" died. I'm not sure Hogg is completely onto the notion yet, but he'll probably get there if he's as aware (woke) as I suspect; especially given the great opposition to his rather minor (in the great scheme of things) from the far right of the Democratic Party. Let's face it, AIPAC can probably beat him in fundraising exponentially, and they're hardly alone on the Democratc Party's right.

It's mostly a problem of only being allowed to have two viable parties in freedumbland that forces progressives and socialists to live under the command of accommodationists, usually called "moderates" in the corporate media, and that's unlikely to change before humans go extinct from climate change.

[Rebl2]

28. Agreed

[Mike 03]

2. I need to rethink my view on this. Think I've got it wrong.

When I saw a post here yesterday about this, without a whole lot of study or reflection, I said it seemed like a good idea because it incentivizes behavior we want in our leaders and discourages behavior we don't want.

But so many intelligent people who I respect here seem to oppose it that I'm almost certain I must have gotten this one wrong.

[GusBob]

8. In a reply yesterday another poster indicated rethinking too

This poster had signed up for monthly donations to Mr Hogg, they indicated, and now are questioning that

Given money to run against random Democrats doesn’t seem cool

[no_hypocrisy]

3. I'm sure that if my representative hadn't passed away last year (Bill Pascrell, Jr.),

he'd be on that list to be replaced. He was 86. And he was likely the most progressive member in the House.

This desire to replace "old" Democrats smacks of ageism. It's their positions that count, not their age.

[emulatorloo]

20. It also ignores voters - voters re-elect incumbents because they want the incumbent to continue

representing them.

[wnylib]

41. The claim that Hogg is going after Dems who are old just because they are old is bogus.

I heard Hogg interviewed on NPR. He is NOT targeting people based on age and he specifically said so. He is looking at people who are not actively defending Dems and the country.

[FoxNewsSucks]

59. Establishment types have no use for pesky facts like that.

[kelly1mm]

63. Name 1 Democratic House or Senate member who is not 'actively defending Dems and the country'? nt

[yorkster]

61. Pascrell was a real fighter.

[werdna]

5. Here's what David Hogg says he is trying to do -

- "“We’re not only focused on targeting Democratic incumbents when necessary,” Hogg told The Hill in a Wednesday interview. “We are here to elect young people who are running in open seats. We’re here to elect young people that are running open, competitive seats as well, and support them when they align with our values.”

Hogg noted that his group is not blindly seeking to elect young Democrats, but rather seeking to elect young Democrats “who are ready to meet the moment.”

“Earlier somebody said to me, ‘Oh, you’re here to replace the old with new.’ I would say we’re here to replace the ineffective with the new and effective,” he said."

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5252556-david-hogg-launches-20m-effort-to-primary-safe-house-democrats/

More at the link. I must say the idea of replacing old center-right representatives with younger, left leaning liberals I find most appealing.

[2naSalit]

10. Sounds like...

The headlines are a bit alarmist when you read what he actually said.

[emulatorloo]

22. Isn't it up to voters to decide whether their incumbent representative is "ineffective?"

Incumbents get re-elected when their constituents want them to continue representing them.

I don’t think it is up to David Hogg or anyone else to decide to override that. Especially when the money he is collecting could be better spent on flipping vulnerable Republican seats.

I’m sure Hogg’s heart is in the right place.

[Skittles]

34. gee, imagine that

lots of reactions to alarmists lately

[wnylib]

42. The headlines are alarmist and incorrect. I heard Hogg interviewed on NPR and there's nothing in his

plans that is ageist or alarming.

[Jit423]

12. First Bernie in 2016 and now Hogg in 2028...we will never be in power to right the Trump regime wrongs.

Hillary was correct: We are stronger together. Kamala was correct: we are stronger together.
The males always get it wrong: we must be pure progressives or nothing. So we get nothing!

[David__77]

15. Does "together" include "the males"?

Seems like a wild generalization based on sex.

[doc03]

13. If it results in replacing a Democrat that has been holding down a seat in Congress

for decades with a Democrat that will fight it may be a good idea. Congress was never intended to be a lifetime career.
I saw 91-year-old Chuck Grassley in a town hall a few days ago, he makes Biden look like a picture of health and fitness.
He is a Republican, but we have some of our own about as bad.

[Skittles]

36. it's gotten ridiculous

but if you bring it up you're accused of AGEISM

[betsuni]

14. I'd like to know where and who all these elderly conservative bad Democrats are.

Must be so many, yet why no Democratic votes for Trump tax cuts or repeal of the ACA and other right-wing policies? When there is a problem it's one, two, maybe a few more who don't vote with the majority of Democrats. A tiny minority, and yet the party is supposedly jam packed with ancient wealthy corrupt neoliberal Third Way corporatist establishment elites who must be purged.

[Fiendish Thingy]

18. The Dems in the Problem Solvers caucus sabotaged Biden's original BBB agenda

Numerous Dems voted for the awful anti-immigrant Laken Riley Act, and several Dems voted for the recent CR on the budget.

[betsuni]

23. I can't find any information about Problem Solvers sabotaging.

I'd suggest stop trying to make Problem Solvers happen. It's not going to happen.

A small minority doesn't represent the whole party. Cori Bush was still promoting Defund the Police on national TV in 2022 and the opposition of course made it seem she and The Squad had taken over and the party didn't care about law and order. This lost elections.

I wonder what the point of trying to make a few more moderate Democrats supposedly represent the whole party is. So what?

[Fiendish Thingy]

32. You've never heard of the Problem Solvers caucus?

The PS spearheaded the “deal” to pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill before the BBB, saying “trust us, pass this first, then we’ll move on to the BBB”.

Of course, what happened is, after passing the infrastructure bill which benefitted both red and blue districts with funding for numerous construction projects, there was minimal bipartisan interest or motivation in passing the original BBB bill as proposed by the Biden administration. BBB was stalled in congress, with the help of Sinema and Manchin, who succeeded in watering the bill down significantly, removing much of legislation regarding fossil fuels and pharmaceutical benefits, as well as the child tax credit extension and other progressive programs.

If the infrastructure bill hadn’t been passed first, there would have been more leverage to pass the original BBB together with the infrastructure bill.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/inside-congress/2024/12/05/the-problem-solvers-vs-their-own-problems-00192918

Josh Gottheimer is the ringleader of the PS for the Dem side.

[Wiz Imp]

44. There are 26 Democratic members of the Problem Solvers Caucus

Why not just target them? Is there any Democrat who is not part of this caucus who has a problematic voting record? It seems to me, every truly "bad Democrat" I can name off the top of my head is a member of this caucus.

Salud Carbajal of California
Ed Case of Hawaii (vice-chair)
Jim Costa of California
Angie Craig of Minnesota
Henry Cuellar of Texas
Don Davis of North Carolina
Debbie Dingell of Michigan
Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington
Jared Golden of Maine
Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey
Josh Harder of California
Steven Horsford of Nevada
Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania
Greg Landsman of Ohio (co-whip)
Susie Lee of Nevada (vice-chair)
Donald Norcross of New Jersey
Jimmy Panetta of California
Chris Pappas of New Hampshire
Scott Peters of California
Brittany Pettersen of Colorado
Brad Schneider of Illinois
Hillary Scholten of Michigan
Darren Soto of Florida
Haley Stevens of Michigan
Tom Suozzi of New York (co-chair)
Emilia Sykes of Ohio

[Skittles]

37. look at the results of the last election

SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE

[serbbral]

16. Honestly..... I have mixed feelings

While I do think that there are too many in the Democratic party (and in Congress overall) that I feel need to retire and give younger Democrats a chance, I do not know, given the current situation, if this is the right time to be trying to get rid of some Democrats. Honestly, I think there should be an age limit in Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President (no one over 75). It just seems like the Democrats always seem to mess things up due to their own divisiveness. When there are opportunities, democrats don't seem to know how to get out of their own way. One of their biggest weaknesses is that they can never work together. Maybe that is why the Republicans, whether we like the way they do things or not, seem to win a lot. I am not saying that I agree with their policies, but they work together moreso than dems. I think Democrats can learn something from them on that particular front.

[Fiendish Thingy]

17. Too bad, so sad

The rank and file Dems elevated Hogg to a leadership position in the DNC.

I’m sure AOC and Jasmine Crockett aren’t angry about Hogg’s move to elect better democrats.

We will retake the house in 2026, with more and better democrats who won’t sabotage the next Democratic president’s agenda come January 2029.

Problem Solvers caucus (who are almost all from safe blue districts), take note.

[Kid Berwyn]

19. The brand needs updating.

When we Democrats run against Republican ticket led by a convicted fraud and evident traitor with a basement bathroom filled with Top Secrets and phone logs inciting treason, along with a received of doing all possible to destroy 248 years of progress, and still lose the Executive and both Houses of Congress, there’s a problem somewhere.

We the People and our Democratic Party need leaders and representatives who understands how to beat Putin and his NRA troll army. This lifelong Democratic Party voter and member is very glad David Hogg is working on the answer.

Time may be already too late.

[Nanjeanne]

21. Oh please. Hogg isn't ousting anyone. Elections are to give people choices and the people vote. The

only people who can oust an incumbent are the voters. And if they prefer a different candidate that better represents what they want they have the right to- the duty - to vote for that person in the primary. If an incumbent is frightened, he/she needs to work harder so their constituents choose them.

[Vinca]

24. They should stop fuming and get themselves out there like AOC and Bernie.

My current representative isn't winning any points with me. She's a newbie and I expected a bit of meekness, but I'm starting to wonder if the woman is mute.

[Sky Jewels]

25. Maybe they should fume more at the fascist takeover of the USA

than at good young progressives trying to transform the party into something that punches back against Nazis.

[bucolic_frolic]

26. Survival-of-the-fittest is supposed to be the Republican spiel

I don't think we'll get stronger, more battle tested candidates out of this. I think we'll diminish the brand. We need boosting, not competition. A boot camp for political psychology and American political theory would be of more use.

[SSJVegeta]

27. If some of those swing district reps want help, perhaps they can get it from the 10s of millions accumulated in

The war chests of safe blue district dems. 🤔

[stillcool]

30. What war chests? And what Democrats in

what blue states? Why would any politician give up one damn dime to another state?

[SSJVegeta]

31. Blue districts** not states

Most in leadership have tons of money built up for years, but they keep it for themselves just in case of a primary challenge.

[stillcool]

45. I don't know where you get your info from

got a link?

[SSJVegeta]

46. Ya

http://www.opensecrets.org has detailed information for every politican based on FEC filings, money on hand, etc

[stillcool]

50. so you mean fundraising, political contributions

like every politician does? Some have PAC's that do raise money for Democrats and not for their own campaigns. If anyone is stashing cash, Open Secrets is not going to know about it. I don't get what you are trying to say and about who.

[SSJVegeta]

52. Opensecrets has the total contributions, on hand, and spent.

Take a look. This isn't a divisive issue. It is simply for informational purposes. The types of pacs, the amounts etc are all relevant. Many politicians don't take any corporate PAC money, a few don't take any PAC money at all. And many -mostly those in leadership roles regardless of party, take egregious sums.

It isnt okay. I mean if you are hypothetically okay with your congressperson taking hundreds of thousands in the course of 20 years from Lockheed Martin(no clue if they do, just an example), you should also be okay with the undue influence that company has had at contract bids as a result. But if you aren't, you might want to consider supporting somebody who isn't taking all that money from LM.

[betsuni]

64. The plot is that Mike Johnson receives contributions of $10,000 from Lockheed Martin

and therefore the Democratic Party is bribed and corrupted by PACs. I don't know, I think this story needs some work.

[SSJVegeta]

49. Also

When looming at opensecrets, make sure to differentiate between PAC and individual contributions for different companies or industries. Obviously it is the PAC money that is a concern from the specific corporations, not individuals who happen to work for a company that contribute to campaigns.

[stillcool]

51. 10's of millions accumulated in war chests

I am so sorry. This is such a waste of time.

[SSJVegeta]

55. What are you talking about.

[stillcool]

29. I don't know why Hogg didn't just try

to elect Democrats. Anywhere, everywhere. No reason to send out a firing shot, which purpose must be put elected officials on edge. Sounds like he's got a lot of ego going on and is power hungry. Although I don't suppose it much matters who runs in red states. Why even bother? Democrats are blamed way more than Republicans. Guess that's why he's targeting blue states.

[mcar]

33. Hogg - run against Republicans

It’s that simple.

[kxs]

35. I'd like ineffective Dems to be scared.

Those who are actually working for us wouldn’t be scared by anything Hogg says, at all, ever, so if a Dem is scared, I say good, get rid of them.

[Passages]

40. Lost the House, the Senate and the White House.

Hogg understands that, thank goodness.

[jaymac]

43. go David

if the DNC bureaucracy weren't so hidebound they might back the candidate getting the most excitement on the hustings rather than a safe centrist. I have always liked and admired Hillary, but in 2015 all the energy and all the excitement was in Bernie's race. perhaps if the establishment had gone with the more electable candidate instead of the one whose "turn" it was, we might not have ever had to endure the trump debacle. I'm 79 but I say...GO David! speak truth to power........proud of you.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

47. A Member of the DNC should NOT be taking sides in primaries

I know that county and state parties are generally prohibited from getting involved in primary contests and that all of the members of the DNC other than Mr. Hogg have signed a pledge not to get involved in primaries. If Mr. Hogg wants to do this, he should resign from the DNC

Link to tweet

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/15/dnc-leader-democrats-primary/

DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a statement that “Hogg is a passionate advocate and we are grateful for his service to the Democratic Party, whether it be in his role as a DNC Vice Chair or in an outside capacity.”

“In order to ensure we are as effective as possible at electing Democrats to office, it is the DNC’s longstanding position that primary voters — not the national party — determine their Democratic candidates for the general election,” Martin continued.

All DNC officers have been asked to avoid activities in their party or personal capacity that would raise questions about their impartiality, but Hogg was the one DNC leader who did not sign the “neutrality policy.”

Link to tweet

[William769]

48. As so they should.

[FarPoint]

54. David Hogg is the new active progressive Democrat...

I donated to him several times now.... this is how we build a new, strong Democratic base.

[Aepps22]

56. Very Proud of Him

I’m very proud of Hogg and agree with this effort.

[Srkdqltr]

57. Of course they fuming. They had better get off their hands. After what is going on now we need more active people.

Maybe it will put some life in them.

[valleyrogue]

58. This guy is only 25 years old and shouldn't be in a position to have any real clout in the Democratic Party.

Sorry. I am aware of his background, but he needs a lot more maturity before he throws his weight around and tries to tell experienced people what to do and how to do it.

AOC was the same way the first day she came to Congress. This is why I am not a fan of hers and never will be.

[FoxNewsSucks]

60. That seems like a very foolish and close-minded attitude.

Look at what she's done since that first day, and the support she and Sanders are getting, and you don't think you'll ever support her? I don't see how that's possible, she's EXACTLY the type of Democrat we desperately need more of.

[PurgedVoter]

62. I suspect David Hogg has good reasons.

There have always been snakes. Kyrsten Sinema, Jill Stein, Joe Lieberman, and Joe Manchin all come to mind as people we should have been campaigning against.

I vote ethics. That makes me a democrat. I don't vote team, I have read George Washington's final address, I know where that leads. Hogg is in a position to see ethics and so far he appears to be strongly ethics based. Carville is DLC and is the first one to jump on the bandwagon to get rid of ethical democratic representatives.

If a democrat got in trouble for saying they were against fascism, Carville would be right there calling for them to apologize and resign.

[Celerity]

65. Staus quo advocates often fume when challenged to 'do better or be ready to have your places attempted to be claimed

by change agents with fresh perspectives and more fire in the belly'.