ITT tankies pretend they don’t know that legal arguments are meant for court and are made to argue from every angle.
No, this isn’t an admission that the primaries were rigged. They weren’t. It’s a hypothetical argument meant to progress a legal case to summary judgment, where the lawyer argued that even if everything the plaintiff said was correct, the DNC would still win the case.
Essentially, what the lawyers for the Democrats were doing was “if I grant everything you claim for the sake of argument, you would still lose, and here’s why.” That doesn’t admit anything. OP knows it, but since he’s a literal Stalin-humping fascist who just wants to see anyone who wishes for a better world fail, he doesn’t care.
whats itt mean
In This Thread
comment from lemm.ee opinion discarded
It may not have been an admission that the primaries were rigged, and I know nothing about the OP, but nevertheless, the primaries were rigged.
Which means you got actual evidence right? And this isn’t some sort of assumption based on the stats not choosing the candidate of your choice, right?
Unless you mean gerrymandering, but everyone knows that is rigged.
The primaries weren’t gerrymandered, that only applies to the US house general election.
Did you not watch the Iowa primary? It was all out in the opem. They didn’t expect Sanders to make a strong showing so they dragged the vote count out for days. There were videos of districts choosing candidates with a coin flip, and visibly turning the coin over if Sanders was chosen. Their cronies at MSNBC and CNN were announcing a landslide against Sanders to sway public opinion even though it hadn’t happened. They set up the districts so that even though Sanders had the overall vote count, Buttigieg still won the delegate count.
And this isn’t even getting into the super rigged element of superdelegates.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/watch?v=8OI1ubnuB_Y
https://piped.video/watch?v=-pqbf1J3CDw
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
ITT people still salty that Pete won Iowa 🤣🤣🤣
I’m not really a fan of Sanders, so I watched it objectively, and he was clearly shafted.
But go on with the attitude of treating important elections like highschool insult contests.
He clearly wasn’t. The Buttigieg campaign focuses on turnout in areas the Sanders campaign ignored and won the contest because of the rules of the Iowa caucus, which allocate delegates to each individual precinct not based on their turnout but on their overall population. Sanders did well in highly attended precincts, Buttigieg beat him by outperforming him in less well attended precincts.
It’s the way the rules were. Bernie could have employed the same strategy, but he didn’t.
So you’ve nothing to say about the strange extended vote count and the switched coin tosses.
Sing it with me now, folks: 🎶… o’er the laaaaaaand of the freeeee🎶
This is why I’m a leftist not a lib. I vote Democrat bc no choice but I want more progressives in office…
As someone else posted on this site
“there are two types of democratic voters, centrist conservatives and hostages”
I mean yea sounds about right. The moderates are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Esp when they randomly flip parties and screw us over on rights and encourage the gerrymandering to get worse 🙃
There’s progressives, as well as a good breakdown of demsocs. You can be pleasantly surprised about some parts of Biden’s presidency without being a centrist conservative who would have had him near the top of your list
Oh shit guess I’ll just vote third party, then.
lol no
Our First Past the Post Winner Take All voting system is demonstrably the worst voting system. Any form of preference polling like Ranked Choice Voting (fairvote.org) is significantly better. No voting system is perfect, but the current one used in most of the US is the shittiest one on the market today.
Any system like RCV opens the door to more parties and candidates who don’t 100% toe a party line. It also filters extreme position candidates out of primaries.
We can do better.
Bernie is an independent, though he has been invited to join the Democratic Party. He has refused. Why would the DNC spend its resources on Bernie when people spend considerable time, effort and money that are actually party members? By rule, an independent cannot run for nomination for the Republican party.
This is why. The DNC is trash.
Sure. You’ve got to agree with a person with such great logic.
This is the real reason. Bernie refused to meaningfully cooperative with the party who basically have a policy of allowing members across the widest political spectrum of any party, and then was shocked that they did completely legal and defensible things that might have affected his odds of winning the Primary, a Primary that was still ultimately decided by vote counts that he lost by a landslide. Nobody alienated Bernie (just look at Warren who writes half the bills he supports), he alienated himself.
Do people know why Bernie caucused with the Democrats? Because only about 9% of Americans identify as far left as progressive, and we only win something if we can compromise it with the only political party that works in good faith.
Ok Hillary sit the fuck down.
Unfortunately in the two party duopoly, they’re the best we’ve got.
Well, yeah. If I started the Dickweed Party and decided I’d be the candidate, I wouldn’t have to let someone else take the nomination if I didn’t want to.
You’re all just better off blocking this user. He’s been trolling hard lately.
Ok, I get this, but let’s take a closer look:
Have you ever seen such a high resolution Pikachu meme? Such a shame it’s been wasted on more political rhetoric that no one asked for. More pixels in the damn quotes text, how wild!
