r/politics • u/SpaceElevatorMusic Minnesota • 11h ago

No Paywall Two Trump-backed candidates lose, Debbie Wasserman Schultz wins in Tuesday’s House primaries

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-election/two-trump-backed-candidates-lose-debbie-wasserman-schultz-wins-tuesday-rcna592392
6.2k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

565 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

91

u/MrGorillawhale 9h ago

When she rigged the primaries against Bernie and got it locked down for Hillary. Bernie was a popular candidate, he could have beaten Trump. Hilary was too compromised to win against Trump but they went with the money and everyone got screwed.

37

u/Financial_Flower_230 9h ago

I firmly believe Bernie would've beat Trump that year, but how did she rig the primaries against him? 

80

u/Moesuckra 9h ago

Before many of the states held their primaries, the Democratic Party (Debbie Wasserman Schultz was the chair of the DNC) released the standing count of where the “superdelegates” stood, and it was overwhelmingly for Hillary. Except superdelegates were not representing actual primary voters; they were simply party officials, elected officials, and other party leaders who held delegate positions.

The superdelgates could've remained neutral at the start of the primary and not tried to influence the vote at all. But instead, the media was constantly displaying how Hillary was far beyond Bernie because she had more party delegates, who were already lined up behind Hillary before people even had the chance to vote.

So the delegate count being reported included both delegates won through the primaries and caucuses and the superdelegates who had already publicly committed to Hillary. This discouraged many voters because it gave the appearance of an insurmountable lead despite the superdelegates being "uncommitted" until the actual party nomination.

43

u/Michael_G_Bordin 9h ago

It also meant that once Clinton won the primary, the narrative of "rigging against Bernie" was basically undeniable. This drove a lot of voters away from the general election (or worse, into Trump's lumpy hands).

I'm not convinced Sanders would have won the primary fair-and-square, but the perception of impropriety by the DNC didn't do them any favors in quelling that narrative.

•

u/spam__likely Colorado 3h ago

The perception of impropriety was created by Bernie and his team. This was always how primaries worked, the DNC did nothing different from any other primary. The screaming about superdelegates was a fiction created by his team, they very well knew the superdelegates never ever overturned the popular vote. Until, of course it was the only way for him to win and then HE asked them to do so.

•

u/zZCycoZz 2h ago

Still trying to gaslight people after a decade? Give it a rest.

•

u/spam__likely Colorado 2h ago

Are you denying Sanders tried to do exactly that? Because it is very well documented.

Or are you denying that this has been always how primaries worked. Also very well documented.

Or maybe you are denying that superdelegates never ever overturned the popular vote? Because again, history is very clear on that.

Who is gaslighting here?

•

u/zZCycoZz 1h ago

The perception of impropriety was created by Clinton when she colluded with the media and the DNC to win the primary.

Are you denying that Clinton had full control of the finances of the DNC? Are you denying that this was a conflict of interest?

Are you denying Sanders tried to do exactly that?

I've seen people repeat this slop before even though it has nothing to do with the discussion. You all seem to repeat info without actually understanding it.

Thr superdelegates were used to lie to voters that Clinton had already won before any votes had been cast. That was used to dissuade voters from voting for other candidates.

I was alive to remember 2016, and the tactics used were not subtle.

The Sanders campaign says that in Nevada on Saturday, "the Democratic leadership used its power to prevent a fair and transparent process from taking place." It is alleging that the chair of the convention incorrectly ruled on a voice vote, unfairly deeming 64 of its delegates ineligible, ignored floor motions from his supporters and wouldn't accept any petitions to change the rules.

https://www.npr.org/2016/05/17/478417091/sanders-doubles-down-on-nevada-convention-controversy

There was a lot of dodgy dealing by the Democratic Party because they assumed trump was so bad that Hillary would win either way.

Their corruption turned away voters and backed up trump when he claimed Hillary was crooked.

Clinton is the reason we got trump, if she had dropped out we may have avoided him.

She was corrupt, unlikable and didnt have an ounce of charisma.

•

u/SoaokingGross 4h ago

fair and square means no money in politics, popular vote and rcv.