1077
Hilary isn't playing
(slrpnk.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 May 2025
1077 points (100.0% liked)
Bluesky
1444 readers
191 users here now
People skeeting stuff.
Bluesky Social is a microblogging social platform being developed in conjunction with the decentralized AT Protocol. Previously invite-only, the flagship Beta app went public in February 2024. All are welcome!
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
Are you serious? You're doubling down on superdelegates having no influence on the primaries?
No, it fucking isn't. Your dismissal is unfounded. My claim is the same argument that the Sanders campaign used to get the DNC to reform the superdelegate process after 2016.
Lmfao, "show me the proof" of the thing that was so egregious it forced a reform?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
Your memories of that campaign don't jibe with mine. The fucking superdelegates were a huge part of the campaign and coverage and, in my opinion, did a fuck ton of damage with idiot voters.
I've been voting for over 3 decades. My first vote, in a presidential election, was Dukakis. I have walked precincts to get the vote out before my joints made that impossible. I'm not whatever the fuck you're trying to make me out to be. I think the results of the primaries prove unquestionably that the voters, specifically the geriatrics who show up in the primaries, are dipshit voters. I don't know how you could think otherwise, unless you love the current state of things. It does consistently piss me off that most of the people who bitch about the "2 shitty choices" at general election time do seem to be the same apathetic shits who can't be bothered to show up for primaries.
Bud, I don't know why you feel the need to be an obtuse, pedantic, confrontational butthead. To clarify as simply as possible, my memory of the early stages of the primary, while Sanders was doing really well, remembers the coverage of the election sided very strongly with Hillary due to the DNC's fascist superdelegates being in the party's pocket. As is their right, nothing illegal there, but pretty fucked up.
I use the term "fascist" within a context limited to the authoritarianism of the DNC and their superdelegates. Which they changed, because it was so bad.
You're asking for sources supporting my opinion. OK, here's a couple:
Who knows. Maybe you'll come back with sources saying,"No, the corrupt, biased process was completely fair!" and here we are. Now, weren't you trying to discredit my opinions, my experience, using ageism or something? Or are you going to point out my sources aren't great, and you'll want me to do another search for you? That won't happen.
Most people won't ever see this comment, at least you figured it out eventually.
They'll have forgotten it by next time.
I read through the thread. You were vocal, and angry. You were lashing out.
I'm not saying screw you.
I'm taking issue with what you're saying, and how you acknowledged part of the problem - then reversed your position back to attacking others about the same topic. The other commenter seems to be echoing a similar sentiment.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.html https://www.vox.com/2020/3/4/21148906/bernie-sanders-2020-superdelegates-explained https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41850798
You're a bad internet user, and you've displayed a lot of dishonesty in this thread.
Being arrogantly incorrect is a bad look for any of us.
Apologies for calling you a bad internet user.
I felt it more apropos to address the behavior and provide facts instead of posting a 'let me google that for you'.
You are. And wrong, to boot.