5 ms·
Given how much money goes into an election, this level of collusion should piss you off at least a little if you supported Bernie Sanders, right? It's not an o
by SmellTheGlove 10y ago
Given how much money goes into an election, this level of collusion should piss you off at least a little if you supported Bernie Sanders, right? It's not an outright fix, but if the deck was stacked, any donations to candidates other than Hillary Clinton were sort of like pissing into the ocean. Maybe a little less satisfying than that.
I agree that it was personally motivated. I just don't care. I want to know if our major media outlets are coordinating with specific campaigns, or if campaign finance laws are being broken in general. I'd love to see those Goldman Sachs speeches that Hillary is looking into for 6 months now.
- dmschulman 10y agoIt's not collusion, the decisions are all being made within the party. It's wrong and unfortunate the way Sanders was treated by the DNC (I supported and donate to Sanders), but it's the DNC's call to operate however they want to operate.
- Bartweiss 10y agoIt's not really, though. Or at least, what the DNC did wasn't just operating how they chose. The DNC portrayed itself as a candidate-agnostic intermediary that wanted to see a Democrat win the election. They fundraised, did press coverage, and organized events using that claim. They were repeatedly accused of being biased, and they denied the accusations then publicly mocked the accusers for spinning crazy conspiracies. So no, the DNC didn't 'rig' the primary, they didn't have the power. But everyone who donated to the DNC has a right to be angry. The DNC is free to operate as they choose, but they lied about how they operate, and took money under those false pretenses. We aren't expected to accept that behavior from companies or charities, and I don't want to accept it from political groups either.