4 ms·

Rigging the primary against Bernie Sanders: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-r

by kome 4y ago

Rigging the primary against Bernie Sanders: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-rigged https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/...

shadowgovt 4y ago
From the text of that article: "The 2016 Democratic primary wasn’t rigged by the DNC, and it certainly wasn’t rigged against Sanders."
- kome 4y ago
  "But Democratic elites did try to make Clinton’s nomination as inevitable, as preordained, as possible." so, i guess it was rigged
  - shadowgovt 4y ago
    Reasonable people can disagree on what "Rigged" means. For example, the 45th President of the United States never won the popular vote, yet was elected. Was the election "rigged?" Well, no; the laws of the US do not guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the post popular votes and they never have. Or, yes, because the laws of the US are stacked against the demonstrated will of the people via the vote. It's the same with the DNC. The DNC leadership did some things that can be considered subjectively unsavory. But they broke no laws, nor party rules. The rules themselves do not favor a candidate like Sanders (the Democratic party tilts heavily towards something like seniority, especially relative to their peer major party; Sanders was an outlier who ran an outlier campaign).
ianhawes 4y ago
Rigging a primary would, by definition, involve the alteration or removal of votes cast. There is no evidence of this in the stolen emails nor outside the stolen emails. The above article mentions leaked emails that bashed Sen. Sanders. That is not an example of corruption.
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  >Rigging a primary would, by definition, involve the alteration or removal of votes cast There are many ways to rig an election without altering any of the votes cast. The clearest example is elections in one party states, where your only choice is to vote for the approved candidate. But there are much less overt ways too

by kome 4y ago

shadowgovt 4y ago

From the text of that article: "The 2016 Democratic primary wasn’t rigged by the DNC, and it certainly wasn’t rigged against Sanders."

kome 4y ago
"But Democratic elites did try to make Clinton’s nomination as inevitable, as preordained, as possible." so, i guess it was rigged
- shadowgovt 4y ago
  Reasonable people can disagree on what "Rigged" means. For example, the 45th President of the United States never won the popular vote, yet was elected. Was the election "rigged?" Well, no; the laws of the US do not guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the post popular votes and they never have. Or, yes, because the laws of the US are stacked against the demonstrated will of the people via the vote. It's the same with the DNC. The DNC leadership did some things that can be considered subjectively unsavory. But they broke no laws, nor party rules. The rules themselves do not favor a candidate like Sanders (the Democratic party tilts heavily towards something like seniority, especially relative to their peer major party; Sanders was an outlier who ran an outlier campaign).

ianhawes 4y ago

Rigging a primary would, by definition, involve the alteration or removal of votes cast. There is no evidence of this in the stolen emails nor outside the stolen emails. The above article mentions leaked emails that bashed Sen. Sanders. That is not an example of corruption.

boomboomsubban 4y ago
>Rigging a primary would, by definition, involve the alteration or removal of votes cast There are many ways to rig an election without altering any of the votes cast. The clearest example is elections in one party states, where your only choice is to vote for the approved candidate. But there are much less overt ways too