Current Events > The Democratic Party is not democratic

(+) Yeah! (+)

2028 needs to be the change. For the first time in nearly 20 years, theres no clear person to be the next Dem candidate. Lets have a real primary without the DNC rigging the thing in favor of their establishment pick.

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?

I like how you avoid the DNC rigging things and being super bias

I like how you avoid the DNC rigging things and being super bias

I like how you avoid the DNC rigging things and being super bias

It's so stupid. It's past time people move on.

Well, if we don't recognize the problem publicly like Jon Stewart did, we may be doomed to repeat it.

Kinda weird thing to worry about while Trump rips the country apart.
Seems suspicious to me

But part of it was the way elected officials, donors, and interest groups coalesced behind Clinton early, making it clear that alternative candidates would struggle to find money and staff and endorsements and media coverage. Clinton had the explicit support of the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party and the implicit support of the Obama wing. She had spent decades building relationships in the party, and she leveraged them all in 2016. Hillary had a lot of friends, and so did Bill, says Elaine Kamarck, author of Primary Politics. This, in reality, is why Biden didnt run: President Obama and his top staffers made quietly clear that they supported Clintons candidacy, and so she entered the field with the imprimatur that usually only accords to vice presidents.

Russian trolls just continuing to sow discourse. It's really tiring people are continuing to fall for it.

You're really bad at answering the questions people actually asked you.

for supporting Bernie. Pathetic

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

I was looking for articles, didn't feel like typing it out

I like how you avoid the DNC rigging things and being super bias

Um ok. None of this changes the fact that more people ( myself included) stood in line and voted for Hillary way more than Bernie.

If Bernie was a popular as you say he would've overcome this ( much in the same Trump did in 2015/2016). He failed spectacularly.

Social media is not real life. Move on.

If you don't feel like actually supporting your own opinions and viewpoints and want to push that responsibility on others, do you think you could at least try and find articles that have anything to do with the questions being asked?

all this fantasy talk about "Bernie would have beat him!" is just that, complete fantasy.

The DNC is bought and paid for just like Republicans. Anyone who supports them over progressives is part of the problem and making life worse for the rest of us. Look where supporting them has gotten you.

He may have won if not for Super delegates. Don't act like it was simple ''Hillary was more popular''

So Trump 2028?
Since you won't support the democrats

Asked if DNC system was rigged in Clintons favor, Warren says yes
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/02/politics/elizabeth-warren-dnc-rigged/index.html

Court Concedes DNC Had the Right to Rig Primaries Against Sanders

In June 2016, a class action lawsuit was filed against the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz for violating the DNC Charter by rigging the Democratic presidential primaries for Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders. Even former Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid admitted in July 2016, I kneweverybody knewthat this was not a fair deal. He added that Debbie Wasserman Schultz should have resigned much sooner than she did. The lawsuit was filed to push the DNC to admit their wrongdoing and provide Bernie Sanders supporters, who supported him financially with millions of dollars in campaign contributions, with restitution for being cheated.

On August 25, 2017, Federal Judge William Zloch, dismissed the lawsuit after several months of litigation during which DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to select their own candidate. In evaluating Plaintiffs claims at this stage, the Court assumes their allegations are truethat the DNC and Wasserman Schultz held a palpable bias in favor Clinton and sought to propel her ahead of her Democratic opponent, the court order dismissing the lawsuit stated. This assumption of a plaintiffs allegation is the general legal standard in the motion to dismiss stage of any lawsuit. The allegations contained in the complaint must be taken as true unless they are merely conclusory allegations or are invalid on their face.

The order then explained why the lawsuit would be dismissed. The Court must now decide whether Plaintiffs have suffered a concrete injury particularized to them, or one certainly impending, that is traceable to the DNC and its former chairs conductthe keys to entering federal court. The Court holds that they have not. The Court added that it did not consider this within its jurisdiction. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.'

The Court continued, For their part, the DNC and Wasserman Schultz have characterized the DNC charters promise of impartiality and evenhandedness as a mere political promisepolitical rhetoric that is not enforceable in federal courts. The Court does not accept this trivialization of the DNCs governing principles. While it may be true in the abstract that the DNC has the right to have its delegates go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way, the DNC, through its charter, has committed itself to a higher principle.

The order reaffirmed that regardless of whether the primaries were tipped in Hilary Clintons favor, the Courts authority to intervene based on the allegations of the kind set forth in the plaintiffs complaint is limited at best.

This Order therefore concerns only technical matters of pleading and subject-matter jurisdiction.

Jared Beck, one of the leading attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit told The Observer, The standard governing the motion to dismiss requires the Court to accept all well-pled allegations as true for purposes of deciding the motion. Thus, the Court recited the allegations of the Complaint that it was required to accept as true, and in so doing, acknowledged that the allegations were well pled. Indeed, if you look at the if you look at the Complaint, you will see that all of these allegations accepted by the Court specifically rely on cite materials that are readily available in the public record, and they support the inference that the DNC and the DWS rigged the primaries.
https://observer.com/2017/08/court-admits-dnc-and-debbie-wasserman-schulz-rigged-primaries-against-sanders/

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

C'mon LightSnake. You act like you're new to JoCrazy topics.

So Trump 2028?
Since you won't support the democrats

Good to see we're witnessing the destruction of the country right in front of our faces and Jon Stewart is focusing on the real issues: The 2016 Democratic primary.

He's wanting the dems to be better