This post has been de-listed
It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.
But I think a younger candidate running on Sanders's platform would've won, yes.
Her name is Kamala, she voted to the left of Bernie when they were in the Senate together.
She was running on $15 minimum wage... but the problem was that she announced it just a few weeks before the election, and not 6 months. She wasn't even running 3-4 months before the election. If she had a year to repeat it over and over (like Bernie had) I think it would have gotten through and she'd have had a strong showing.
He lost the primary
It clearly wasn't "fair"
Also, name one other Democratic primary where the superdelegate vote totals were announced / shown extensively in the media before voting was closed in the state. Bernie won states with us peons but the superdelegate votes turned it to a Clinton win.
The 2016 primary was much closer (55 to 43%) than the 2000 (75 to 20) and 2004 (61 to 19) primaries. Continuing to pretend Bernie's stances/ideas aren't popular will cost Democrats elections for the foreseeable future.
Bernie went on FoxNews Town Halls and won people over.
He went on Rogan and won over young males. The DNC made a strategic decision to shit on them, calling them 'Bros'. Nothing says 'we know what we are doing' like trying to drive away large blocks of voters.
Well that settles it then. Case closed. Good job!
Subreddit
Post Details
- Posted
- 3 months ago
- Reddit URL
- View post on reddit.com
- External URL
- nytimes.com/2024/11/26/o...
it's DNC conspiracy nonsense that Hillary loaned the DNC $10M in exchange for final say over senior hiring decisions and party planks? No,
notno it is not.https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774/