• Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    invented a claim and rolled it back

    I corrected a detail. I rolled back nothing. The DNC bent rules to favor Bloomberg.

    The DNC is undemocratic. The primaries are just for show.

    significantly reducing the power of the superdelegates.

    Still 16% of the delegates, and they still get added to the DNC choice candidate when reporting caucus results, unfairly swaying opinion.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      So again, then how did a no-name junior Senator beat a heavily favored Clinton in the primary, even before they changed the rules (rules everyone knows)?

      Admit it, you just don’t like the rules because your guy lost.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        The rules were ignored bent and broken. That’s what I don’t like. And that’s why the primary is not a legitimate method of getting your choice of candidate elected.

        Which no-name senator are you talking about? It can’t be Sanders because he raised a record breaking 2.3 million individual donations.

        Sanders didn’t beat Clinton in the primaries. This was because the DNC were biased. The courts confirmed this and the DNC lawyers had to admit the primaries are rigged. Here’s some examples:-

        • Wikileaks showing supposedly neutral senior party officials tried to undermine Mr Sanders’s insurgent left-wing campaign by publicly portraying him as an atheist.

        • Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic Party, was found to have sent an email during the primary election saying Mr Sanders “would not be president”

        • Bernie Sanders said there was “no question” the party establishment had undermined his campaign and clandestinely supported Mrs Clinton for the nomination.

        • the Sanders campaign claimed the fund "appears to operate in a way that skirts legal limits on federal campaign donations and primarily benefits the Clinton presidential campaign

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          This is just embarrassing.

          Two opportunities and you whiffed both of them.

          I am talking about Barack fucking Obama. You clearly have no context or are an outright troll. Either way, stop spreading right wing agitprop.

          • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            I am talking about Barack fucking Obama.

            Oh, I didn’t realise there was campaign of dirty tricks against him too. Do we know that Hillary got the debate questions in advance there too? Or is this yet another strawman argument.

            You clearly have no context or are an outright troll. Either way, stop spreading right wing agitprop.

            You are the troll, dude. Putting up strawmen everywhere. I can’t believe you are trying to claim the primary process is fair and just, where the DNC have no influence.

            Oh, and the GOP is worse. Their primaries were even more pointless.