Comment on Controversial question
conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 days agoSee, there’s serious doubt in both cases that Biden and Clinton were really the people’s choice because the party either overtly or quietly kept their thumb on the scale. I can’t find the article anymore, but whoever took over after Debbie Schultz basically found that the HRC campaign was effectively in charge of the DNC during the 2016 primary. I don’t know about you, but I don’t consider that a level playing field at all. Then, in '20, I found it really, really sketchy how Biden won what, two, three states? And all the other candidates with one or two wins suddenly pulled out and pledged all of their delegates for Biden basically at the same time. Could’ve been that Biden was really that cool, but I’ve always had doubts about that.
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It wasn’t exactly a close race. You’d be accusing the DNC of fabricating Millions of ballots.
conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 days ago
Well, no, not of fabricating ballots. I said I think they had a thumb on the scales, that neither race was fair, not that the votes were fake. So, it’s more like I’m accusing them of giving their candidate of choice significant advantages over the others, which is not something you could call a fair race.
finitebanjo@lemmy.world 2 days ago
TBH they didn’t even need to include third parties on their ballots from the start. They had all the power in the world to Exclude Bernie. If they were that opposed then why would they even risk it?
conditional_soup@lemm.ee 2 days ago
Nah, miss me with that shit. The way super delegates were set up in the ‘16 primary was total crap, I remember that the media had basically called it for Hillary on almost day 1 of the primary season because every superdelegate announced (before their state primary!) that they were going for Hillary. I think that the HRC campaign really thought they were going to fold in all of the Bernie voters’ votes, money, and energy.