• Cryophilia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    You have another vote coming up.

    In any case, no they didn’t. The Democratic National Convention didn’t cancel any state primaries. Your state party did. Your local Democrats decided to not have a primary.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s not how it happened. Yeah, sure, it’s technically up to the state party, but it was at the request of the DNC. There is authority, and then there is soft power.

      Getting to pick between two candidates chosen for me by oligarchs doesn’t seem like Democracy to me.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        And now we’re into conspiracy theory territory.

        That’s usually a clue that you’re wrong about something.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Public information bro. Conspiracies actually do happen BTW. We have a former president being charged with involvement in several of you haven’t been keeping up with the news

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            They do happen but they’re rare. That’s why they’re in the news.

            Generally speaking, you should think “maybe I’m wrong” before you think “there’s a conspiracy”.

            • Tinidril@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              “National party exerts pressure on state party” is hardly a great plot for an X-files episode. And that’s assuming it took more than a polite phone call

              It would honestly be harder to believe that a state party would exclude someone from the ballot without at least discussing it with the national party.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                7 months ago

                Still their decision. And the reasoning for their decision was not arbitrary. Some no-name candidate didn’t qualify in time. That’s not a conspiracy.

                • Tinidril@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  If the national party didn’t stand up in favor of basic democracy then that alone is enough to damn them. What the fuck is a no-name candidate? They had fucking names. If you don’t know them then maybe you should be asking yourself how you could be so ill-informed.

                  And they met all the requirements set out by the party for ballot inclusion BTW. It wasn’t easy for them to get the signatures for ballot inclusion without access to the Democratic database of registered voters. The bylaws make that data available to all candidates for a hefty fee. The fee was paid, the data was withheld, and the party wouldn’t even refund the money. They pulled the same shit on the Sanders campaign in 2016.

                  Remember when Bloomberg wanted to enter the 2020 race late? He didn’t meet the requirements and had almost no popular support, so they changed the requirements. Of course they didn’t let the eliminated candidates back in based on the lower thresholds. How much more evidence of corruption do you need?

                  Back to the “nameless” candidates. Mainstream news media lives or dies based on their access to power. They also depend on the advertising revenue from running all those political adds. TV adds aren’t very impactful compared to similar spending on Internet adds, yet TV adds continue to get most of the money. That gives the DNC (and RNC) a whole lot of clout over what names the public hears. This isn’t a “conspiracy theory” BTW, it’s conspiracy fact. It’s been talked about incessantly by former anchors and executives, and was also a big part of what was revealed from the leaked (or hacked) DNC emails.

                  • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    What the fuck is a no-name candidate?

                    The fact that you don’t know what this very common phrase means suggests you’re either a foreign actor or you’re so politically uninformed that you shouldn’t be having opinions on things.

                    The fee was paid, the data was withheld, and the party wouldn’t even refund the money.

                    Gonna need a source for that one my friend. That’s a pretty extreme claim.

                    Remember when Bloomberg wanted to enter the 2020 race late? He didn’t meet the requirements and had almost no popular support, so they changed the requirements.

                    Ditto. Source please. Not a word of this is mentioned on Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg_2020_presidential_campaign

                    Bloomberg’s name didn’t even appear on the New Hampshire ballot. He intentionally skipped those primaries. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/us/politics/michael-bloomberg-president.html

                    leaked (or hacked) DNC emails

                    Again suggesting you’re a troll or agent. Only Republicans and Putin agents get so hung up on buttery males.

                    You’re making a bunch of outrageous claims about DNC corruption, but I’m not seeing any of it substantiated by a quick google search…except for things Trump has said.

                    Curious.