We had a strong candidate in 2016 and the DNC literally committed fraud to deny him a nomination.
Yep. Thanks for mentioning it. Wasserman Schultz and her cronies gave old Sanders the shaft after HRC paid off the DNC debt.
"Democracy."
Plutocracy
I'd also like to add gerontocracy, oligarchy, and corptocrasy
Imagine if Bernie had broken with the party. There's a good chance he could've attracted a lot of otherwise disillusioned people and formed a real, viable third party candidate.
Nope. Would have been overall worse with 2 parties splitting dnc votes.
Yeah but then enlightened centrists would have blamed him for Clinton's loss, and used it to push the party further right.
Oh wait, they did that anyway.
Regretfully, our system is designed against us, and has been further corrupted over the years. So, no, there wouldn't have been any positive outcome from that type of action.
The strength of Bernie in the general election remains an unproven hypothesis. But I agree that the DNC behaved inappropriately. The nature of primaries as “private” elections controlled by the party makes this type of behavior fairly inevitable.
Though the RNC also tried to stop Trump, they just failed at it, so parties don’t necessarily have complete control over the outcome.
He was polling ahead of Trump, Clinton was polling behind. We don't know if that would've continued to the actual election but we do know that Clinton lost.
I largely agree with this. I think there are good reasons to think the race would tighten—Bernie was never subjected to republican attack ads, and I think he also benefited from Clinton’s unpopularity, an effect that might fade once she was out of the race. But you’re right that we’ll never know for sure what would have happened.
Idk, I feel like Republican attack ads on Bernie would have done what Democratic attack ads on Trump did: electrify his base. "HE WANTS EVERYONE TO HAVE EDUCATION FOR FREE!!!" damn, well, sign me up!
I know there would have been calls of "communist" ad nauseam, but idk that it has the horrible effect it once had - if anything it might have energized youth vote..
Idk
We had a strong candidate in 2016 and the DNC literally committed fraud to deny him a nomination.
No they didn't. You can complain about how they ran it, or that they showed a preference for Clinton, but she absolutely destroyed him and this "they committed fraud against him!" is equally as empty as the Trump supporters who claim the same. And, FTR, I voted for sanders in 2016.
We had a strong candidate in 2016 and the DNC literally committed fraud to deny him a nomination.
Yep. Thanks for mentioning it. Wasserman Schultz and her cronies gave old Sanders the shaft after HRC paid off the DNC debt.
"Democracy."
Plutocracy
I'd also like to add gerontocracy, oligarchy, and corptocrasy
Imagine if Bernie had broken with the party. There's a good chance he could've attracted a lot of otherwise disillusioned people and formed a real, viable third party candidate.
Nope. Would have been overall worse with 2 parties splitting dnc votes.
Yeah but then enlightened centrists would have blamed him for Clinton's loss, and used it to push the party further right.
Oh wait, they did that anyway.
Regretfully, our system is designed against us, and has been further corrupted over the years. So, no, there wouldn't have been any positive outcome from that type of action.
The strength of Bernie in the general election remains an unproven hypothesis. But I agree that the DNC behaved inappropriately. The nature of primaries as “private” elections controlled by the party makes this type of behavior fairly inevitable.
Though the RNC also tried to stop Trump, they just failed at it, so parties don’t necessarily have complete control over the outcome.
He was polling ahead of Trump, Clinton was polling behind. We don't know if that would've continued to the actual election but we do know that Clinton lost.
I largely agree with this. I think there are good reasons to think the race would tighten—Bernie was never subjected to republican attack ads, and I think he also benefited from Clinton’s unpopularity, an effect that might fade once she was out of the race. But you’re right that we’ll never know for sure what would have happened.
Idk, I feel like Republican attack ads on Bernie would have done what Democratic attack ads on Trump did: electrify his base. "HE WANTS EVERYONE TO HAVE EDUCATION FOR FREE!!!" damn, well, sign me up!
I know there would have been calls of "communist" ad nauseam, but idk that it has the horrible effect it once had - if anything it might have energized youth vote..
Idk
No they didn't. You can complain about how they ran it, or that they showed a preference for Clinton, but she absolutely destroyed him and this "they committed fraud against him!" is equally as empty as the Trump supporters who claim the same. And, FTR, I voted for sanders in 2016.