Power grabs don’t always happen in grand, theatrical takeovers. Sometimes, they come disguised as simple bureaucratic tweaks—like lowering the threshold to change bylaws in the Los Angeles County Democratic Party (LACDP) from two-thirds majority consent to 60 percent to quell “the obstructionists.”
If the largest local Democratic Party entity in the U.S. can rewrite the rules to silence dissent, what’s stopping every other Democratic organization from doing the same? If Democrats in LA are willing to borrow from Trump’s playbook—changing the rules, consolidating power, and steamrolling opposition—then let’s not pretend this won’t spread. Best believe others are watching, and if they can get away with it here, they’ll try it everywhere.
Why It Matters
Let’s be clear: “Obstructionists” is just a convenient label for people who refuse to rubber-stamp leadership’s agenda. More and more delegates are showing up informed, asking real questions, reading the fine print, and—heaven forbid—pushing back when things don’t sit right. Instead of engaging, instead of organizing, instead of actually making the case for their ideas, leadership wants to change the rules so they don’t have to.
This isn’t just about efficiency. It’s about control. And if they get away with it here, expect to see this playbook used across the state, and eventually, across the country. The fight for democracy doesn’t just happen at the ballot box in November—it starts in rooms like these, in party meetings where the rules of engagement are being rewritten in real-time.
If the status quo worked so well for Democrats, we wouldn’t be staring down another four years of Trump in the White House. Clinging to outdated strategies and leadership has cost us dearly. It’s time to face the music: doing the same old thing isn’t cutting it.
If we want different results in 2026, it starts right here. This is the battleground. This is where the fight for the future of the Democratic Party is happening. And if folks don’t start paying attention, they’ll wake up to a Party where their voices—and their votes—matter even less than they do now.
Democrats Can’t Fight the White House’s Power Grabs While Copying Them
In a functioning democracy, disagreement is not obstruction. It’s discourse. It’s debate. It’s the foundation of representative decision-making. But instead of doing the hard work of organizing, persuading, and building consensus, it feels like some in the Democratic Party want to change the rules so they don’t have to.
If this sounds familiar, it should. It’s the same strategy we’re seeing at the highest levels of government. Rules and norms are treated as inconvenient obstacles to unchecked power. When persuasion fails, the solution isn’t better arguments—it’s rigging the game.
The California Democratic Party (CDP) bylaws require a two-thirds threshold for amending the bylaws as do the Ventura County Democrats, the Riverside County Democrats, the Orange County Democrats, and the San Diego County Democrats. Most labor unions also require a two-thirds vote of members to change their rules.
We don’t need weaker rules for democracy—we need stronger organizing, better arguments, and a leadership willing to do the work of winning people over. Democracy was never meant to be easy, convenient, or a guarantee that the people in charge get their way every time. It requires debate, persuasion, and sometimes even the discomfort of compromise.
What we should not be doing is moving the goalposts after the game has already started just because leadership doesn’t like who’s playing. Changing the rules midstream to silence those who dare to question, challenge, or push for something different isn’t about efficiency—it’s about control. If leadership truly believes in their vision, they should be able to defend it on its merits, not rewrite the process to force it through. Because once we start making democracy more “manageable” by cutting out dissent, what we’re left with isn’t democracy at all—it’s just power protecting itself.
When Democrats start adopting the same playbook as President Trump—silencing dissent, changing rules to quash debate—how are we any different? It’s hypocritical to condemn such tactics in the White House while employing them within our own party. If we truly stand for democratic values, we must practice what we preach, even when it’s inconvenient.
We can’t claim to be the party of democracy while strong-arming internal rule changes to silence voices that don’t fall in line with the status quo.
If the Democratic Party truly believes in free speech, transparency, and accountability, that commitment has to start within our own ranks. Otherwise, it’s just hypocrisy wrapped in blue branding. We can’t fight authoritarianism with more authoritarianism. If Democrats don’t stop rigging the rules to suppress internal dissent, we’ll lose the moral high ground to call it out anywhere else and we’ll see a repeat of 2024 in 2026 and 2028.