282
Biden reportedly regrets ending re-election campaign and says he’d have defeated Trump
(www.theguardian.com)
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 28 Dec 2024
282 points (90.8% liked)
News
23738 readers
2968 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm having problems rationalizing what you're trying to get to. You admit "the DNC stacked the deck" but you don't think that effected his outcome? You ran on the campaigns but have completely forgotten about the Nevada scandals involving unions and the caucus or what happened in SC when the DNC pressured high profile representatives to back Biden instead of Bernie (of which historically Biden has been horrible for minority communities). These are just off the top of my head, articles and references if you need them and I'll make sure to find you some more to help with the analysis.
Seems like you're splitting hairs trying to form some type of narrative. Democratic primaries have nothing to do with the two-party system? You'd have to completely wretch out decades of political knowledge from my head to even consider that nothing is connected. If there's a real, viable point you're trying to make besides "nuh uh", would love to be exposed to it.
Stacked the deck on messaging and support but that doesn’t impact votes directly. Even trying to hurt his funding didn’t work: he out raised and outspent Clinton. So I’m curious what they mean “they haven’t held a fair primary in a long time.” If it’s “the party leans in to their favorites“ then I don’t really see the revelation here because that has been the case of all parties forever. Do you think the libertarian party has a fair primary? The problem is this discussion is almost always imply there was some sort of actual thumb on the scale or potentially even cheating of some sort, invariably super delegates come up even though superdelegates have never shifted the course of the primary for the Democrats ever (and the rules were changed after people freaked out about it in 2016).
All of this is to say “the Democrats have not held a fair primary in a long time“ is a pretty big statement that implies a lot of things, and for some reason I’m getting all kinds of responses that don’t even relate to the primary, definitely not a straight answer. I’ve got people talking about how don’t like first past the post, the two party system, etc. but no assessment of that initial claim I raised my eyebrow at. It feels like it shouldn’t be this difficult to zero in on.
Once again I would like somebody to explain to me what meant by “they have not held a fair primary in a long time”? It’s too broad and sinister sounding currently to just be “they have a favorite and message in their favor.”
This is all sounding a little delusional and honestly blind. Several factors have been pointed out to you, you're aware of some of it and supposedly followed along. The very statement of "they have a favorite and message in their favor" is a direct conflict to having a "fair primary".
The implication was the vote was not fair. This conversation was days ago. Move on.