An Open Letter to Debbie Wasserman Schultz


Hi there, Mrs. Wasserman Schultz.

My name is Chad Hankins, and I run a website called Citizen Roots Press. I'm sure you haven't heard of us yet, but that puts you in the majority. A real majority. Not a falsely inflated one, so that's probably a nice change of pace for you and your DNC cohorts.

The reason for this letter is that I'm feeling a little insulted by the actions of you and your organization. It seems that you're operating under the assumption that voting Democrats are far too stupid to understand simple math. Or is it you who's struggling with arithmetic? If that's the case, then I'm here to help! I'll give you an easy word problem. Ready? If I have 56% of the apples on a cart, and you have 44% of the apples, should we both be given seven delegates for our apples, or should the higher percentage holder get more? Now, those of us with half a brain or more would say that 56 is more than 44, and they should be compensated differently. I guess you disagree with that concept.

I know that you're probably getting a lot of emails regarding the equal distribution of Wyoming delegates, despite the fact that Sanders severely outpaced your old friend, Hillary Clinton. I'm sure you're feeling the heat of an outraged electorate. I'm also completely positive that there's no shortage of influential people contacting you, all too eager to sell off their dying integrity for a chance to lick the scraps off of the floor next to your table after this is all said and done. I'm guessing that Clinton has a pretty attractive appointment set up for you in her cabinet as a thank you for all of your, um... 'hard work' during this tumultuous campaign. But you may wanna get in good with Trump as well. I'll explain.

You see, virtually every respectable poll over the last two months has shown your BFF dancing within the margin of error against Trump on a national level. Actually, let's be fair. She had an 11 point lead over that clementine-hued, babbling, lunatic's version of a horses ass in April. Of course, her lead fell to 3% in May. Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm not), but isn't 3% the margin of error for a lot of polls? And don't you need the bigger number to win an election? That's always been my understanding of the process, anyway.

But Sanders is just some fringe, Socialist, flash in the pan, right? It's not like those same pollsters (NBC News, WSJ, etc.) have him leading Trump by 15% at the mome-... Oh, crap! They totally do?! Maybe you can be Trump's chauffeur, since you're already driving him straight to The White House.

The reality is that in order for your girl to win against Trump, she needs to court Independent voters en masse. This would be a lot easier if she wasn't the most disliked presidential candidate in the history of the Democratic party. Trump, however, does terrifyingly well with Independent voters. This is nothing that any of us should be proud of, but it's the sad reality of our under-educated culture that treats the highest political race in the land like it's the season finale of The Voice. You're not helping, by the way.

Every time that the DNC pulls this high-level shell game of giving Clinton an even haul of delegates in states where she loses by double-digits, you re-enforce the notion that the fix is in, and that Bernie Sanders has been right all along. Anyone who fails to see that is disregarding the basic rules of addition, and should be quarantined on an island full of people who's shirts are covered in drool and mustard stains. Ooo! Maybe you could be the Administrative Executor of the Island of Flat Mathers, or whatever you decide to name it. You could take a vote on the name, ignore it completely, and then announce that whatever you and a board of friendly directors decided the name should be, was the one that actually won. It's a win/win. You get to play to your strengths and feel important, and we get to send all of the delusional people in the party off to a land where numbers can't hurt them by holding their faces up to the reflection of the overwhelming voices of people who are fed up with the kind of absolute bullshit that you specialize in.

In summation, if you really are against a Trump presidency, then you'll remind your buddy that a general election is a lot harder to fake your way through than a primary. While Donald Trump is undoubtedly a throbbing blister on the puckered aperture of the human race, he has things going for him that Clinton doesn't. He has no super-PAC. He has no hidden transcripts of speeches delivered to very unpopular Wall Street firms. He has no FBI investigation saddled across his back. All of these are things that Hillary simply can't boast. He can wave his tiny little hands in her face, and proclaim that he is not a politician! A racist asshole with a sociopath's ego, and a moral compass that points to nothing more than the dick that he defends on a televised debate stage, sure. But a politician, he is not.

So, please be so kind as to fuck off before Trump Foreclosures and Trump Bankruptcy Specialists become the newest programs of the US government. We have a candidate that would most likely beat Trump effortlessly in a general election, and it's not your old pal. It's still Bernie Sanders.

Thanks in advance.

Chad Hankins

  • Black Facebook Icon
  • Black Twitter Icon
Who We Are

Read more about our mission

and what drives us.

Support Our Staff
Support Our Cause

Please follow us on Facebook

and share our articles with your

friends and the like minded that

can enjoy a chuckle at all our

expenses.

Search by Tags

© 2015-16 Citizen Roots Press