Current Events > The Democratic Party is not democratic

(+) Yeah! (+)

JoCrazy posted...

Criticized Dems means support MAGA, right.

This mindset is why I use the term ''Blue MAGA '', cult like mindset against people outside the dem established

You said to not support the dems

JoCrazy posted...

Anyone who supports them over progressives is part of the problem

So if no progressive what to do?

JoCrazy posted...

DNC heavily rigged in the 2016 & 2020 primaries against Bernie in favor of Hillary & Biden.

I am so tired of this line

Anyone who thinks Sanders would beat Trump is out of their minds.

It's like saying Ned Stark would win the Game of Thrones because he's the nicest guy with power.

and it's all more bullshit blaming the dems for the evil Republicans do.

Also wtf blue MAGA

There it is

WingsOfGood posted...

You said to not support the dems

So if no progressive what to do?

What are you talking about? There is always progressives

MaxEffingBemis posted...

What are you talking about? There is always progressives

And if they aren't the candidate what do?

WingsOfGood posted...

You said to not support the dems

So if no progressive what to do?

During the primary. If an establishment person wins, vote them over the GOP in the general.

However, you have to recognize the establishments actions is basically why we have Trump. Biden stepping aside earlier and giving us a primary last year, we may not have Trump in office rn

So now spend the next 4 years blaming Biden for Trump?

Sigh...

WingsOfGood posted...

Also wtf blue MAGA

There it is

Ignoring facts, blindly saying their or MSM's talking points.

People still talking about 2016 and 2020 primaries.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL-VX3WbA9U

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Vote for the dem. I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Harris.

We get it, there are some super bitter Bernies Bros. here who think he should have won.

JoCrazy posted...

Vote for the dem. I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Harris.

@JoCrazy

Why do you lie so much?

Humble_Novice posted...

We get it, there are some super bitter Bernies Bros. here who think he should have won.

My point is to make 2028 more fair

JoCrazy posted...

My point is to make 2028 more fair

What do you propose is more fair than the person with the most votes winning the primary?

jefffan posted...

Please explain to me how Bernie was more popular in 2016 when he literally did not win a single major primary election?

Please explain how Joe Biden wasn't the popular choice in 2020 when he won every primary election after South Carolina?

https://youtu.be/NHS-K7OuLAc?si=E47zVD9zPltQ29BG

Tmaster148 posted...

What do you propose is more fair than the person with the most votes winning the primary?

Basically, it's their way of saying that super progressives should win the primary. If you ask me, more people should have voted for them. Why is it that a lot of young voters refuse to pay attention to primary races?

Tmaster148 posted...

What do you propose is more fair than the person with the most votes winning the primary?

No super delegates, no tipping the scales during primary ....

JoCrazy posted...

No super delegates, no tipping the scales during primary ....

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/democrats-strip-super-delegates-power-reform-caucuses-historic-move-n903866

The Democrats stripped Superdelegates of power seven fucking years ago

LightSnake posted...

This is literally just a ruling based on standing. As a private org, the DNC can do what it likes and thus the court doesn't have an authority to intervene on it.

This is sad

What's sad is that makes them rulers, not representatives of the people.

JoCrazy posted...

Vote for the dem. I voted for Hillary, Biden, and Harris.

so you want to call people blue MAGA but you do the same thing

have fun wasting your energy doing interference for the next 4 years blaming Biden for Turmp

it is not worth it

JoCrazy posted...

My point is to make 2028 more fair

2028 will be more pivotal than 2024 is assuming dictatorship hasn't been already installed

going on rants about the opposition to dictatorship as being un-democratic is foolishness and cutting off your nose to spite your face

GeraldDarko posted...

What's sad is that makes them rulers, not representatives of the people.

Political parties are private entities by definition.

Harris gets less votes than Trump it's because she ran a bad campaign. Sanders gets less votes than Clinton & Biden it's because everything is rigged!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7b4r1FIG-A

Basic politicking, coalition-building, and securing endorsements are all par for the course in elections. Just because Bernie wasn't good at that didn't mean it was rigged against him any more so than it isn't rigged against minor also-rans that didn't clinch nominations.

It doesn't matter what you run for, you're going to need support from other elected officials and special interest groups even at the most local of levels. Just because Bernie's strategies of being the "not Hillary" candidate in 2016 and assuming he could somehow win a brokered convention in 2020 didn't work doesn't mean that the process was rigged. His strategies were just flawed.

He lost by 4 and 9 million votes respectively. Dem primary voters rejected him twice, that's why he lost.

WingsOfGood posted...

so you want to call people blue MAGA but you do the same thing

have fun wasting your energy doing interference for the next 4 years blaming Biden for Turmp

it is not worth it

Expecting critical thinking from someone who unironically uses the term "blue MAGA" may be a big ask

LightSnake posted...

Political parties are private entities by definition.

Those private entities exert their will over the voters, meaning they don't represent the will of the people. Not sure what your point is.

JoCrazy posted...

This mindset is why I use the term ''Blue MAGA '',

And this is one of the many reasons you get dunked on every time you make a topic.

WingsOfGood posted...

And if they aren't the candidate what do?

Im still gonna vote for them since its better than the other choice but ideally during primary time if we want real, meaningful progress we should be voting for the progressive choice. Or at least the leftest liberal choice. In the latter choice, Id support someone like Whitmer or Pritzker

JoCrazy posted...

Ignoring facts, blindly saying their or MSM's talking points.

Cool, so you're... Bernie MAGA or do you have a specific color you want to be associated with?

Heineken14 posted...

Cool, so you're... Bernie MAGA or do you have a specific color you want to be associated with?

I'd say red, even if it's redundant.

It covers his actual political beliefs, all the flags he's shown, and his big honkin' clown nose.

GeraldDarko posted...

Those private entities exert their will over the voters, meaning they don't represent the will of the people. Not sure what your point is.

Those private entities are represented by whom the voters want at the end.

If a lawsuit comes on, a lawyer is duty bound to get it dismissed at first opportunity and arguing standing is basic.

We're partially in this situation because Democrats stupidly thought, "Win every election forever and hope the fascists eventually just give up" was a strategy.

bfslick50 posted...

Harris gets less votes than Trump it's because she ran a bad campaign. Sanders gets less votes than Clinton & Biden it's because everything is rigged!

Your conflation of a closed primary with a general election has been noted.

is TC nomad?

LightSnake posted...

Those private entities are represented by whom the voters want at the end.

They aren't truly when they manipulate and shape narrative to influence what people think and pull strings. Yes, they're a private entity and they can do that, doesn't mean they should. At the end of the day, that's not true representation, and it's not beneficial to the populace.

GeraldDarko posted...

They aren't truly when they manipulate and shape narrative to influence what people think and pull strings. Yes, they're a private entity and they can do that, doesn't mean they should. At the end of the day, that's not true representation, and it's not beneficial to the populace.

Please name a primary where this happened and how they do this

LightSnake posted...

Please name a primary where this happened and how they do this

Weren't you just saying they are allowed to exert their control through super delegates because they're private entities?

The emails include communication with journalists and discussions about the news media and incentives provided to party donors who'll be attending next week's Democratic convention, as well as details about their backgrounds, including, in some cases, criminal histories.
Many of the emails discussed how to undermine Clinton's rival Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and overall revealed some negativity toward him. There were also emails about when the Sanders campaign improperly accessed Clinton campaign's proprietary voter information that was housed at the DNC.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/07/23/487179496/leaked-democratic-party-emails-show-members-tried-to-undercut-sanders

Having the legal capacity to do something =/= the capacity to do it.

Literally all that came out of emailgate was some people in the DNC didn't like Sanders with absolutely no sign anyone acted against him. Almost all taken from after it was mathematically impossible for Sander to him.

Also, interesting to note that last sentence. When the Sanders campaign....did improperly access that information. The predominant media narrative was Sanders was the victim in this for reasons. The guy got fawning media coverage through 2016

LightSnake posted...

Literally all that came out of emailgate was some people in the DNC didn't like Sanders with absolutely no sign anyone acted against him. Almost all taken from after it was mathematically impossible for Sander to him.

Just intent, no smoking gun. You got me there.

LightSnake posted...

Also, interesting to note that last sentence. When the Sanders campaign....did improperly access that information.

So they should have disregard the true information because it was from wikileaks?

LightSnake posted...

The predominant media narrative was Sanders was the victim in this for reasons. The guy got fawning media coverage through 2016

Until the end when the narrative shifted. Kinda lines up with the story.

GeraldDarko posted...

Just intent, no smoking gun. You got me there.

There was literally more evidence of Sanders' campaign's misconduct than the DNC. Several employees not liking the guy isn't evidence of anyone doing anything untoward

So they should have disregard the true information because it was from wikileaks?

I mean, maybe there's an issue with how Wikileaks released selectively out of context documents to paint a narrative. How did the media treat those leaks, exactly? Anodyne nonsense like Podesta's risotto recipe were taken as evidence of corruption.

Until the end when the narrative shifted. Kinda lines up with the story.

You mean when he lost and refused to quit? nd then the media still lavished praise on him anyway? And how does that change that before Wikileaks, Sanders' campaign improperly accessed data they knew they weren't supposed to have? And then claimed they were being treated unfairly when they got consequences for it?

GeraldDarko posted...

So they should have disregard the true information because it was from wikileaks?

Have you actually gone through any of the information from WikiLeaks?

Unknown5uspect posted...

Have you actually gone through any of the information from WikiLeaks?

Remember when there was a big scandal the media hyped up because big donors to the CLinton foundation asked for favors and didn't get them? But sure, the DNC were the ones pushing that, I guess.

You asked for evidence and I showed you emails of the DNC working with reporters to smear Bernie and builld up Hillary, but that evidence wasn't good enough.
Then you attack how they got the factual information.
Then you suggest wikileaks may be manipuling narrative. Got proof of that or is that only me that has to back up my claims?

LightSnake posted...

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/democrats-strip-super-delegates-power-reform-caucuses-historic-move-n903866

The Democrats stripped Superdelegates of power seven fucking years ago

Notice how super serious TC just fucking ignored this. I mean this entire thread is like if Jesse Watters decided to post on gamefaqs. Our Democracy is literally being stripped from us by Trump and Elon and clownshoes is going back 9 years to cause strife. Fucking hell...maybe the most pathetic thread I have ever read on here and that is saying something.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


This is not what happened, but it proves the point of how bad the DNC actually is at influencing the media: it was so badly reported on that people think this is what happened. There wasn't any concerted effort to boost Trump, there was an early trategy that didn't go anywhere.
GeraldDarko posted...

You asked for evidence and I showed you emails of the DNC working with reporters to smear Bernie and builld up Hillary, but that evidence wasn't good enough.

You're correct, because the emails don't actually show that.

Then you attack how they got the factual information.

You are literally posting out of context hacked emails selectively released to build a narrative. Hasn't Wikileaks' behavior ssince given you some pause? Like how Assange was literally DMing Sean Hannity and openly admitting he was withholding Republican emails?

Then you suggest wikileaks may be manipuling narrative. Got proof of that or is that only me that has to back up my claims?

https://www.vox.com/world/2016/11/8/13563750/wikileaks-2016-election-statement

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/

It's 2025!! We know Wikileaks was doing shady shit by now