Why is Bernie Sanders so goddamn selfish about the DNC in his Face the Nation interview?
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
NZA
LOL
this rich man looks like he has a learning disability, and he is telling corporate democrats what to do
Berniewood Hogan
IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
I’m amazed this dude always seems to advocate for a less democratic system. Look I’m sure we can get into a deeper political discussion about democracy and even some founders had a elitist view of the general population like Nap which is why no one but white male property owners were allowed to vote for a time.They have open Primaries in NC. It works fine. If you're dem you vote for dems. If you're republican you vote for republicans. If you're independent you get to pick one. It works just like the general election.
However the bottom line is that the basics of the system is simple. Present a candidate and let people decide who they want. If you don’t get who you want in that system then tough shyt. Take your L, find out what went wrong, and try again. We know who Nap stans for an abnormal amount even though most people here probably voted for the same candidate. But all the data shows that the democratic choice was bad from a popularity point of view and many other candidates would have resulted in a different outcome. But when you only have two people running and it seems to have been preordained to some degree and it wasn’t a one person race simply because as Nap said there was a “spoiler” candidate, we ended up with someone extremely unpopular and with our current occupant in the White House.
At least the republicans had a choice out of 16 initially. We only had a choice of realistically 2.
No one is saying that no one can be wealthy but we have a system where these people have unequal influence simply because they have more money.
fukk. his dude.
intra vires
Glory to Michigan
The spoiler candidate bit was funny considering that's what Obama was in 2008.
Crypto-conservatives?
This party already has Joe Manchin, Tulsi Gabbard, and a host of others in it.
I'm a little surprised you'd have a problem with crypto-conservatives, given your foreign and immigration policy positions.
Do you have any data driven fears or is it all conjecture?
Nobody is saying open primaries is a cure-all, but it better fits with the facts about the electorate.
superunknown23
Superstar
Why doesn’t he just run as an independent instead of piggybacking on the DNC?
Grow your own party and stop acting like an opportunistic parasite
Grow your own party and stop acting like an opportunistic parasite
1. Joe Manchin is needed...because you know...politics is local. WV would have elected their Bernie Sanders, if WV wanted a Bernie Sanders. This is what you kids don't get.
2. Gabbard can't be gone soon enough.
the cac mamba
Veteran
because the democrats and republicans have a monopoly on politics, and you can't win without running as one of the twoWhy doesn’t he just run as an independent instead of piggybacking on the DNC?
Grow your own party and stop acting like an opportunistic parasite
tbh, I think the tensions would be even more strained between the "bernie wing" and "normal democratic" wing if he ran as an independent. Many would be democratic voters would be siphoned off by an independent run by Bernie. At least if he loses the primary, there is a high chance he would stay out of the general as an independent like he did in 2016.Why doesn’t he just run as an independent instead of piggybacking on the DNC?
Grow your own party and stop acting like an opportunistic parasite
Is this what you really want?
I think if this was the result in 2020, Trump would be a guaranteed win. Just from the Democratic Party perspective, this is strategically bad.
the cac mamba
Veteran
honestly nothing, it's never gonna change. this country is full of sheep who can't think for themselves, and both parties would do everything in their power to cockblock a third party from becoming relevant
I remember reading about the presidential debates a while back and I didn't know that before the mid-80's all presidential debates were organized and held by the League of Women Voters. What this means is that they were very non-partisan and usually hosted all types of candidates. Then afterwards, the Democratic and Republican parties got more involved directly and took over ownership of them from the League of Women Voters. In the process of doing so they had a "gentlemen's agreement" that they would treat each other equally but what it also meant is that they debates were effectively further cemented as only consisting of two parties taking up all the oxygen and shutting out others in the process. Sure they allow independents on stage, but its sporadic and under Democrat's and Republican's terms.
So one idea is, remove party control of presidential debates. It should be a public institution, funded through a tax pool and organized by a non-partisan committee.
intra vires
Glory to Michigan
See folks this is why reading comprehension is important.
You're the one crying about crypto-conservatives, not me. My point about Manchin and Gabbard is that we already have conservative democrats that most left wing people would likely call crypto-conservatives.... is this really that hard to follow?
If you don't have an adequate rebuttal, then don't respond... otherwise it'll look like you can't read.
And you want more?See folks this is why reading comprehension is important.
You're the one crying about crypto-conservatives, not me. My point about Manchin and Gabbard is that we already have conservative democrats that most left wing people would likely call crypto-conservatives.... is this really that hard to follow?
If you don't have an adequate rebuttal, then don't respond... otherwise it'll look like you can't read.
My point is that this forum consistently underestimates conservatives.
intra vires
Glory to Michigan
More what? I'm still waiting for you to type something of value regarding this exchange.
Your point is a non-sequitir that has no data backing it up.
You obviously don't know how the open primary system works. I'm sure @Call Me James would be more than happy to fill in the gaps... or, you know, you could take the time to do some research. Maybe then you could present data driven concerns about open primaries and not some deflection.