I caucased for Bernie in Washington for the primary, what a miserable experience. It took all day, the entire event was run by old white ladies in Hillary shirts, they lost the vote count and had to recount several times, etc. I have no confidence that my vote for a Bernie was even counted, and that’s just one location.
I also caucused for Bernie in Washington. He won the district level elections, but lost at the county level elections. Basically my district and the surrounding districts were pretty strongly in favor of him, but the surrounding areas were not.
See now that seems fishy to me. I know Washington gets pretty red outside the city and the counties with the major metro areas swing pretty far east to incorporate those areas, BUT back before the spectacle of Trump I knew and worked with a bunch of Republicans who actually genuinely liked Bernie. Now of course Republicans probably aren’t participating in the Democratic primary caucuses, but I still find it kind of hard to believe Dems in the city wanted Bernie but country Dems wanted Hillary? No matter how much time passes I’m not buying it.
it’s also completely possible that your Republican friends “liked” Bernie in the same way that they “like” Carter: they recognize that he’s a good guy personally, but dislike his politics enough to not vote for him.
No they liked that he was an honest politician who wasn’t afraid to speak his mind. Then Trump kind of ran away with that and that’s what they like about Trump now even though it’s all BS.
I don’t understand the whole “he speaks his mind” appeal with trump. Drunk people speak their minds too, but most of what they say is pointless, just like with trump. I prefer someone who puts their thoughts together into intelligible messages, rather than babbling their entire stream of consciousness.
The same lawyer also argued that there is “no contractual obligation” to prevent advantage or disadvantage between candidates, and that the evenhandedness and impartiality language in the DNC charter is not “self-defining.”
And
We could have—and we could have voluntarily decided that, Look, we’re gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way. That’s not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right.
Important to point out that the DNC’s lawyers just flat out admitted there that it’s a thing that has happened before.
The entire purpose of the superdelegate is to give the DNC overarching influence over the primary process. They are not in favor of the people electing their candidates uninfluenced. They will do whatever is necessary to keep their party as it is.
What you’ve cited here is a legal argument the DNC used in court as a defendant in a lawsuit. That doesn’t change the fact that Hillary Clinton got more votes than Sanders in 2016, which literally happened. I voted for Sanders and thought he had a better shot at beating Trump, and thought Clinton was a terrible candidate. That doesn’t change the fact that a ton of Democratic voters preferred Clinton. Women in particular were very excited about the possibility of a woman president. I knew a ton of people who voted for her over Sanders and who were excited to do so.
Either way, the superdelegate system that locked in Clinton’s nomination was changed after 2016, yet even after Biden beat Sanders fair and square in 2020 you’d still rather think there’s some grand DNC conspiracy instead of the reality that there just aren’t enough voters supporting your preferred candidate.
That doesn’t change the fact that Hillary Clinton got more votes than Sanders in 2016, which literally happened.
No one said it wasn’t what happened…
That’s not what the lawsuit alleged even…
It said the DNC influenced the primary
And the DNC said “so what, primaries don’t even matter, even if Bernie won we could have just not nominated them”.
It’s not complicated.
When accused of rigging the primary, their response was it’s legal for them to rig it or even just ignore the results.
That’s what “blue no matter who” gets you.
To spell it out perfectly clear (because I’m not replying again):
Not having any standards besides the letter by someone’s name, get you candidates people won’t vote for, which depresses turnout and allows Republicans to become president.
When the DNC acts like this, it makes the pool of democratic voters smaller.
Says the one stuck repeating bullshit arguments disproven back in 2016. You’re adding random claims onto the facts. Me cutting to the actual events isn’t removing context. Idk how anyone still thinks Bernie had a chance or that it was stolen from him, unless they live in an isolated bubble with other Bernie bros.
What are you even talking about about? I never once ever heard someone say (what I can only assume you’re saying since you haven’t clarified anything) that if Sanders won the primary “they” would “still run their own guy.”
Biden, whose campaign fortunes had suffered from losses in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, made a comeback by overwhelmingly winning the South Carolina primary, motivated by strong support from African American voters, an endorsement from South Carolina U.S. Representative Jim Clyburn, as well as Democratic establishment concerns about nominating Sanders.[8] After Biden won South Carolina, and one day before the Super Tuesday primaries, several candidates dropped out of the race and endorsed Biden in what was viewed as a consolidation of the party’s moderate wing. Prior to the announcement, polling saw Sanders leading with a plurality in most Super Tuesday states.[9] Biden then won 10 out of 15 contests on Super Tuesday, beating back challenges from Sanders, Warren, and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, solidifying his lead.[9]
Most of those “moderates” who dropped out the day before Super Tuesday and endorsed Biden went on to be rewarded with cabinet positions…
If you were running a campaign, and you wanted to win, would you pick 24 hrs before a bunch of states voted to drop out?
Or would you wait another day to see how you did?
Like, this is literally the primary after the DNC said they could interfere in any primary, and you think that was organic that they all dropped at once and endorsed the party favorite right before Super Tuesday?
It went from Sanders being projected to win the most, to Biden getting 10/15.
Do you think Biden and the DNC were ignorant it was going to happen?
You think they told Bernie it was going to happen?
How could anyone expect him to react in 15 states within 24 hrs?
Bernie could have still won if enough people showed up to vote.
We need to take some responsibility for that
I caucased for Bernie in Washington for the primary, what a miserable experience. It took all day, the entire event was run by old white ladies in Hillary shirts, they lost the vote count and had to recount several times, etc. I have no confidence that my vote for a Bernie was even counted, and that’s just one location.
I also caucused for Bernie in Washington. He won the district level elections, but lost at the county level elections. Basically my district and the surrounding districts were pretty strongly in favor of him, but the surrounding areas were not.
See now that seems fishy to me. I know Washington gets pretty red outside the city and the counties with the major metro areas swing pretty far east to incorporate those areas, BUT back before the spectacle of Trump I knew and worked with a bunch of Republicans who actually genuinely liked Bernie. Now of course Republicans probably aren’t participating in the Democratic primary caucuses, but I still find it kind of hard to believe Dems in the city wanted Bernie but country Dems wanted Hillary? No matter how much time passes I’m not buying it.
it’s also completely possible that your Republican friends “liked” Bernie in the same way that they “like” Carter: they recognize that he’s a good guy personally, but dislike his politics enough to not vote for him.
Apt name.
No they liked that he was an honest politician who wasn’t afraid to speak his mind. Then Trump kind of ran away with that and that’s what they like about Trump now even though it’s all BS.
Also I never said they were my friends.
I don’t understand the whole “he speaks his mind” appeal with trump. Drunk people speak their minds too, but most of what they say is pointless, just like with trump. I prefer someone who puts their thoughts together into intelligible messages, rather than babbling their entire stream of consciousness.
They’re idiots, he’s an unapologetic idiot who acts smart. He makes them feel smart. He makes them feel better about their shitty opinions.
No he couldn’t.
At least according to what a DNC lawyer told a judge when people tried to sue the DNC for rigging the 2016 primary.
Their official defense was essentially “so what if we did? We can do that because primaries are nonbinding and more of a survey”
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/dnc-lawyer-reportedly-said-they-could-have-chosen-between-clinton-sanders-over-cigars-in-back-rooms/
And
Important to point out that the DNC’s lawyers just flat out admitted there that it’s a thing that has happened before.
Lots of people don’t get that for some reason.
The entire purpose of the superdelegate is to give the DNC overarching influence over the primary process. They are not in favor of the people electing their candidates uninfluenced. They will do whatever is necessary to keep their party as it is.
What you’ve cited here is a legal argument the DNC used in court as a defendant in a lawsuit. That doesn’t change the fact that Hillary Clinton got more votes than Sanders in 2016, which literally happened. I voted for Sanders and thought he had a better shot at beating Trump, and thought Clinton was a terrible candidate. That doesn’t change the fact that a ton of Democratic voters preferred Clinton. Women in particular were very excited about the possibility of a woman president. I knew a ton of people who voted for her over Sanders and who were excited to do so.
Either way, the superdelegate system that locked in Clinton’s nomination was changed after 2016, yet even after Biden beat Sanders fair and square in 2020 you’d still rather think there’s some grand DNC conspiracy instead of the reality that there just aren’t enough voters supporting your preferred candidate.
No one said it wasn’t what happened…
That’s not what the lawsuit alleged even…
It said the DNC influenced the primary
And the DNC said “so what, primaries don’t even matter, even if Bernie won we could have just not nominated them”.
It’s not complicated.
When accused of rigging the primary, their response was it’s legal for them to rig it or even just ignore the results.
That’s what “blue no matter who” gets you.
To spell it out perfectly clear (because I’m not replying again):
Not having any standards besides the letter by someone’s name, get you candidates people won’t vote for, which depresses turnout and allows Republicans to become president.
When the DNC acts like this, it makes the pool of democratic voters smaller.
Lol How did they rig it if Hillary got more votes? Get out of your bubble, dude.
Did you just pick a random comment and start reading?
That explains why you’re so confused, everything is difficult to understand when you strip away all context.
So you go try and re-read this thread, and see it that’ll help you figure this out
Says the one stuck repeating bullshit arguments disproven back in 2016. You’re adding random claims onto the facts. Me cutting to the actual events isn’t removing context. Idk how anyone still thinks Bernie had a chance or that it was stolen from him, unless they live in an isolated bubble with other Bernie bros.
They still said “even if he did win, we would run our own guy anyway. Voters and donors be damned.”
Which is still fascist behavior even if you agree with it.
Who is “they” and what did “they” say again?
You’ve read it and you know precisely what they said and what they meant (not that it wasn’t straight forward in the first place.)
Blocking because I don’t owe my time to MAGA types whether blue or red. Take your disingenuous bullshit elsewhere.
What are you even talking about about? I never once ever heard someone say (what I can only assume you’re saying since you haven’t clarified anything) that if Sanders won the primary “they” would “still run their own guy.”
I was talking about 2020 where he lost due to poor turnout but okay.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries
Most of those “moderates” who dropped out the day before Super Tuesday and endorsed Biden went on to be rewarded with cabinet positions…
If you were running a campaign, and you wanted to win, would you pick 24 hrs before a bunch of states voted to drop out?
Or would you wait another day to see how you did?
Like, this is literally the primary after the DNC said they could interfere in any primary, and you think that was organic that they all dropped at once and endorsed the party favorite right before Super Tuesday?
It went from Sanders being projected to win the most, to Biden getting 10/15.
Do you think Biden and the DNC were ignorant it was going to happen?
You think they told Bernie it was going to happen?
How could anyone expect him to react in 15 states within 24 hrs?