• kandoh@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    33
    ·
    3 days ago

    If Bernie was so popular why couldn’t he beat Hillary Clinton or Biden in the Primaries?

    Or was that someone else’s fault?

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      Because the DNC put their thumbs on the scales and did everything they could to lock him out of the process while doing the opposite for Clinton.

      If the chosen, status quo DNC candidates are so popular, why do they keep losing or nearly losing all their elections?

      • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        The media HEAVILY favored Hilary for that whole cycle and basically made Bernie look like a joke. He had his “we will need to raise taxes” and that’s when everything shifted. DNC was never going to let him be the candidate

      • kandoh@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        3 days ago

        Did they take his name off the ballot?

        Did they change the vote totals?

        Did they forbid him from campaigning?

        They just ‘put their thumbs on the scales’? What does that even mean? They did ‘everything they could to lock him out of the process’ while letting him campaign and participate in the process? All your examples are vague as fuck, bro.

        • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          “I’ma be disrespectful to you, but I expect you to teach me!”

          This ain’t a debate. lol. If you want people to share their knowledge with you, come correct. Most people would be happy to share information. When you act all dishonest it makes no one want to even talk to you unless they agree with you

          • kandoh@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 days ago

            The man is out here talking shit and won’t show you evidence of why he’s right because it’s not his job to be a teacher and also you are disrespectful in your challenging of his assertions, am I following you correctly?

            The reason for no evidence is because there is no evidence, the reason for my disrespect is because i know he has no evidence. Don’t try to pretend like if i came at this from a different angle he’d suddenly be opening the library of Alexandria for us.

        • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          What does that even mean?

          Sigh… Go read about superdelegates. Then read about reporting. Then read about social engineering. Then look at the mob mentality of wanting to vote for the likely winner. Then apply all of that knowledge to the events as they happened during Bernie’s campaigns.

        • Ptsf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Did they change the vote totals?:

          Yes. Every running candidate next to Bernie pulled out, dedicating their votes to Clinton instead. It was blatant and out in the open. Hell, Bloomberg even “entered” the race late in caucusing and pulled out shortly after an insane ad spend dedicating his votes to Clinton as well. That’s “putting their 👍 on the scale”.

      • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        3 days ago

        Because the DNC put their thumbs on the scales and did everything they could to lock him out of the process while doing the opposite for Clinton.

        Source? The way I remember it Bernie didn’t get enough votes.

        If the chosen, status quo DNC candidates are so popular, why do they keep losing or nearly losing all their elections?

        Out of the last 5 elections they won 3.

        • jjagaimo@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          The DNC was out of money and severely in debt after Obamas 2012 campaign. They conspired with Hillary because she paid off 80% of the debt and was funding the DNC. She had control of their finances and decisions because the DNC would go under without her

            • jjagaimo@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774/

              Donna Brazile is the former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee

              The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt.

              “What?” I screamed. “I am an officer of the party and they’ve been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.”

              That wasn’t true, he said. Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt—$15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign—and had been paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC) had taken care of 80 percent of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million, and had placed the party on an allowance.

              “Wait,” I said. “That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?”

              Gary said the campaign had to do it or the party would collapse.

              “That was the deal that Robby struck with Debbie,” he explained, referring to campaign manager Robby Mook. “It was to sustain the DNC. We sent the party nearly $20 million from September until the convention, and more to prepare for the election.”

              • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                Interesting read. I was hoping for evidence though instead of anecdote. Also, I don’t see how it supports this claim:

                Because the DNC put their thumbs on the scales and did everything they could to lock him out of the process while doing the opposite for Clinton.

                • Ptsf@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  That would be every running primary candidate shifting their votes towards Hillary instead of distributing them evenly. In addition there was the Bloomberg run “out of nowhere” when Bernie was looking to be the headline candidate.

        • 0ops@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 days ago

          Lies and statistics. Out of the last 7 elections they also won 3. And out of the last 3 they only won 1. Really it’s a pretty even split so far this century, and counting this last election Republicans have had the edge. So sure the dnc isn’t losing all of their elections, but ffs sake they should be doing a lot better than this.

          • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            I would like for them to be doing better than this also but if the person I responded to based their argument on the false claim that democrats are losing all the elections then they have already lost their credibility and are arguing in bad faith. So it is reasonable to expect for a source for their other claims.