DNC trying to rig primary against Bernie?

[Harris Walz 2024 1,451]

This is going to be a super nasty primary. Multiple candidates are going to fracture the Democratic party even worse than 2016. smh. These kinds of headlines only make matters worse. People never learn.

[FATCAT 60,888]

1 hour ago, Buddy said:

Tired of the "vote blue no matter who" "vote for anyone who isn't Trump!" tactics. If they rig then I don't want a Bloomberg, I want a revolution.

Well sorry, but all you're going to get is Trump.

[Buddy 5,686]

1 minute ago, FATCAT said:

Well sorry, but all you're going to get is Trump.

We'll see about that.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

6 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

Well sorry, but all you're going to get is Trump.

The solution to "not getting Trump" isn't shaming non voters, most of whom could give less ****s about Trump compared to things like how expensive their healthcare is monthly, paying off their debt, getting their social security, despairing over their pensions, etc. than the idea that he might nominate a Supreme Court Justice who is a conservative. You're not going to convince them that Trump is the devil, because every election the opposition is the Devil per messaging, and their lives haven't changed drastically under any of them, Democrat or Republican.

The solution is to make sure that they turn out by any means necessary, and that requires giving them incentive to do so. "X person isn't Trump" is not a rallying cry for the majority of people in this country, only politically involved liberals who tend to already vote. 

So far the only candidates who have any kind of message and energy behind them that is sincere are Bernie Sanders and  Elizabeth Warren (And of those choices, only 1 of those candidates has a multi-racial and diverse coalition of voters excited about him)

 

[Gov Hooka 8,008]

46 minutes ago, thehanyo said:

If Republicans had superdelegates, they would have prevented Trump from winning the nomination in 2016.

I would prefer we keep superdelegates to prevent dangerous candidates like Bernie winning the Dem nomination on our side.

If you’re seriously equating Bernie with Trump here, then I don’t know if I can take anything you say seriously...  

You all are in for a real shocker if Biden gets the nomination and loses to Trump. That being said I’m going to keep donating to Bernie Sanders, a dangerous candidate who raises $34.5 million from millions of working class people to ensure the out of touch Democrats finally realize who they should be serving. 

[Economy 52,861]

2 hours ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

For real for real, the people nominated to the platform committee are some corporate funded ghouls and wealthy, highly connected elites who have no damn business deciding the future of this party, but also serve as absolute proof that the idea that the Democratic party has become the party of corporate and monied interests in the last few decades.

I dare anyone to look up the records of some of those people and tell me that *this* is what you think the Democratic party should be about.

And in case anyone tries to be cute and acts forgetful, the DNC essentially admitted to rigging the primary in 2016 after a lawsuit exposed them and was resolved (dismissed) in 2017 - they basically argued that voting is a formality, and that if they wanted to, they could legally pick the nominee in a dark room with a few people who they like deciding instead of the people. That's who we're up against.

Well at least u have a shot

 

In many Countries (including Canada where I'm from) we do not get to choose the leader of the party, the party chooses their leader... When elections time come we already know who the party leader was

 

If Bernie was Canadian he wouldn't even have had a shot at all because the party would never select him as a party leader (maybe the Greens might who knows)

 

At least the US system gives him a chance

[FATCAT 60,888]

10 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

The solution to "not getting Trump" isn't shaming non voters, most of whom could give less ****s about Trump compared to things like how expensive their healthcare is monthly, paying off their debt, getting their social security, despairing over their pensions, etc. than the idea that he might nominate a Supreme Court Justice who is a conservative. You're not going to convince them that Trump is the devil, because every election the opposition is the Devil per messaging, and their lives haven't changed drastically under any of them, Democrat or Republican.

The solution is to make sure that they turn out by any means necessary, and that requires giving them incentive to do so. "X person isn't Trump" is not a rallying cry for the majority of people in this country, only politically involved liberals who tend to already vote. 

So far the only candidates who have any kind of message and energy behind them that is sincere are Bernie Sanders and  Elizabeth Warren (And of those choices, only 1 of those candidates has a multi-racial and diverse coalition of voters excited about him)

 

I'm not saying that I disagree that Bernie is the best candidate, or that going more to the left than center is a bad idea, I'm just saying that if the majority of the voters say that's not the way to go, we need to uniformly support whomever they pick.

None of the candidate left are bad, they're all good, and they're 1000x more competent than Trump.

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

4 minutes ago, Economy said:

Well at least u have a shot

 

In many Countries (including Canada where I'm from) we do not get to choose the leader of the party, the party chooses their leader... When elections time come we already know who the party leader was

 

If Bernie was Canadian he wouldn't even have had a shot at all because the party would never select him as a party leader (maybe the Greens might who knows)

 

At least the US system gives him a chance

That's what i'm saying, it might not be a real chance in the first place  

If Bernie wins IA/NH/NV (or even just 2 of those), wins California, does okay in SC, and just continues to do okay and pick up a few wins based on his expanding momentum, while Bloomberg grows in the polls (along with Steyer, but less so) it's possible that no candidate reaches the threshold and we have a brokered convention. It's possible that Sanders could end up with more delegates, or more of a popular vote, but that they would still hand the nomination to Joe.

... and the backlash to that would guarantee Trump the election  We're playing with fire here.

[Economy 52,861]

Just now, FATCAT said:

I'm not saying that I disagree that Bernie is the best candidate, or that going more to the left than center is a bad idea, I'm just saying that if the majority of the voters say that's not the way to go, we need to uniformly support whomever they pick.

None of the candidate left are bad, they're all good, and they're 1000x more competent than Trump.

I still think this is a matter of turnout vs general support

 

Ppl always use the argument that Bernie Sanders energizes supporters and would likely have a bigger voter turnout (I even agree)

 

But u also have to factor in that he'd also loose many centrist votes to Trump as well would would also offset at least some of the higher voter turnout among his supporters

 

I don't claim to know which would be the bigger impact... But I do think both sides (Biden and Bernie supporters alike) like to point out the factor that favours them and exclude the other which is a completely biased and unbalanced way to look at it.

 

U gotta consider everything not just the arguments in favour your candidate and then dismiss the rest

 

No one can truly know how Bernie vs Biden would play out against Trump. It's highly opinionative and theoretical

 

 

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

2 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

I'm not saying that I disagree that Bernie is the best candidate, or that going more to the left than center is a bad idea, I'm just saying that if the majority of the voters say that's not the way to go, we need to uniformly support whomever they pick.

None of the candidate left are bad, they're all good, and they're 1000x more competent than Trump.

I'm saying that trying to artificially deflate the candidate who has the best chance of beating Trump (while calling for "unity"  )  is playing with fire and is much more about the will of a few people dictating what the will of the many should be. It's them saying "It's okay if Trump wins again, as long as its not Bernie"

If they would like to make a sincere case based on any evidence that suggests Bernie wouldn't do well against Trump, in swing states, etc. (beyond just trying to force that statement into reality and ignoring all polling suggesting otherwise from 2016-now...) I would love to hear it.

If our #1 goal as Democrats is to beat Trump, it should be concerning that party officials don't want to hear any valid criticism of their chosen candidate that could cause him to lose the election. It's going to be brought up eventually. We shouldn't have pollsters who are also superdelegates who are also being nominated to the DNC, who are also running attack ads against a candidate that they might have to nominate. That's a major conflict of interest, and a clear prioritization of the needs of the people who make up the party's national committee over the people who they represent. "Bernie threatens us" =/= "Bernie threatens you" and that is the conflation they are trying to make.

[FATCAT 60,888]

Just now, Economy said:

I still think this is a matter of turnout vs general support

 

Ppl always use the argument that Bernie Sanders energizes supporters and would likely have a bigger voter turnout (I even agree)

 

But u also have to factor in that he'd also loose many centrist votes to Trump as well would would also offset at least some of the higher voter turnout among his supporters

 

I don't claim to know which would be the bigger impact... But I do think both sides (Biden and Bernie supporters alike) like to point out the factor that favours them and exclude the other which is a completely biased and unbalanced way to look at it.

 

U gotta consider everything not just the arguments in favour your candidate and then dismiss the rest

 

No one can truly know how Bernie vs Biden would play out against Trump. It's highly opinionative and theoretical

 

 

I'm of the opinion that we already have a centrist a chance, and Hillary lost to Trump.

If we have any shot, it's not going to be repeating 2016.

[Economy 52,861]

4 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

That's what i'm saying, it might not be a real chance in the first place  

If Bernie wins IA/NH/NV (or even just 2 of those), wins California, does okay in SC, and just continues to do okay and pick up a few wins based on his expanding momentum, while Bloomberg grows in the polls (along with Steyer, but less so) it's possible that no candidate reaches the threshold and we have a brokered convention. It's possible that Sanders could end up with more delegates, or more of a popular vote, but that they would still hand the nomination to Joe.

... and the backlash to that would guarantee Trump the election  We're playing with fire here.

The complexity of US politics

 

In my Country elections last 8-10 weeks typically, each party also already selected their leader and which ever party wins the most seats and is in power, their leader is automatically the Prime Minister

 

We vote for the seat and representative of our region that's it.

 

I think the US tried to add more democracy than it can handle. It just ends up getting overly complicated and subject to possible manipulation

 

Here there's no way to mislead. The party chooses their leader and has to be upfront about that cuz that's just the way it works...

 

Elections are also government funded so no one can get an unfairly higher budget based on donations. It's supposed to be level playing field

[Whispering 18,865]

42 minutes ago, Halsey said:

Bern about to win through something much more corrupt: The Caucus System. 

 

Never forget Hillary won my primary vote contests while Bernie’s delegate count was massively due to the caucus system

I wonder what would happen if we got rid of the Caucus system? There are many voters who can’t spend hours on a week night casting a vote in a primary. They are the elderly, grandparents with care of their grandchildren, single moms (or dads), second shift workers...

What type of people typically show up to Caucuses?

[Economy 52,861]

3 minutes ago, FATCAT said:

I'm of the opinion that we already have a centrist a chance, and Hillary lost to Trump.

If we have any shot, it's not going to be repeating 2016.

I don't think that necessarily means anything...

 

Many centrists have won historically... And historically after 2 terms it's pretty typical for the other party to come into power

 

There was also an element of luck with how the votes were split by region as Hillary got so much more popular vote

 

There's no reason to assume that if a more left Candidate like Bernie had been the nominee that the result would have been any different. It could of been but we don't know that

 

The result of 1 election (AK 2016 that everyone wants to constantly use as some kind of proof) does not necessarily mean anything

[HorusRa2 5,005]

5 minutes ago, Economy said:

I still think this is a matter of turnout vs general support

 

Ppl always use the argument that Bernie Sanders energizes supporters and would likely have a bigger voter turnout (I even agree)

 

But u also have to factor in that he'd also loose many centrist votes to Trump as well would would also offset at least some of the higher voter turnout among his supporters

 

I don't claim to know which would be the bigger impact... But I do think both sides (Biden and Bernie supporters alike) like to point out the factor that favours them and exclude the other which is a completely biased and unbalanced way to look at it.

 

U gotta consider everything not just the arguments in favour your candidate and then dismiss the rest

 

No one can truly know how Bernie vs Biden would play out against Trump. It's highly opinionative and theoretical

 

 

It's often pointed out that he would lose centrists; however, when we say centrists, we should clarify what we mean. Bernie would lose the more white and affluent members of the democratic party, who (I'm pretty sure) are disproportionately located in democratic strongholds that Bernie isn't going to lose. 

 

Bernie does poll better with independents than Trump. It's not like Left = Democrat, Independents  = Center & Republicans = Right. Independents aren't ideologically in the middle. What Bernie brings and he does this less now than he did in 2016 but he focuses primarily on economic and domestic issues rather than social and cultural issues (i.e. abortion, immigration [this has changed a lot since 2016], guns, etc). Bernie has the pulse on independents. The majority of our country are economically progressive and closer to the center on social issues. I mean, the country was founded by puritans and such. A Sanders campaign focused on the issues that will make the difference in real people's lives is not a campaign that is suspect to lose in a general election. Not to mention that almost every head to head poll done since 2015 has Bernie beating Trump, albeit he wins by smaller margins now than back then.