this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
144 points (81.6% liked)
Memes
45657 readers
775 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
ITT tankies pretend they don't know that legal arguments are meant for court and are made to argue from every angle.
No, this isn't an admission that the primaries were rigged. They weren't. It's a hypothetical argument meant to progress a legal case to summary judgment, where the lawyer argued that even if everything the plaintiff said was correct, the DNC would still win the case.
Essentially, what the lawyers for the Democrats were doing was "if I grant everything you claim for the sake of argument, you would still lose, and here's why." That doesn't admit anything. OP knows it, but since he's a literal Stalin-humping fascist who just wants to see anyone who wishes for a better world fail, he doesn't care.
whats itt mean
In This Thread
comment from lemm.ee opinion discarded
It may not have been an admission that the primaries were rigged, and I know nothing about the OP, but nevertheless, the primaries were rigged.
Which means you got actual evidence right? And this isn't some sort of assumption based on the stats not choosing the candidate of your choice, right?
Unless you mean gerrymandering, but everyone knows that is rigged.
The primaries weren't gerrymandered, that only applies to the US house general election.
Did you not watch the Iowa primary? It was all out in the opem. They didn't expect Sanders to make a strong showing so they dragged the vote count out for days. There were videos of districts choosing candidates with a coin flip, and visibly turning the coin over if Sanders was chosen. Their cronies at MSNBC and CNN were announcing a landslide against Sanders to sway public opinion even though it hadn't happened. They set up the districts so that even though Sanders had the overall vote count, Buttigieg still won the delegate count.
And this isn't even getting into the super rigged element of superdelegates.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OI1ubnuB_Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pqbf1J3CDw
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/watch?v=8OI1ubnuB_Y
https://piped.video/watch?v=-pqbf1J3CDw
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.
ITT people still salty that Pete won Iowa 🤣🤣🤣
I'm not really a fan of Sanders, so I watched it objectively, and he was clearly shafted.
But go on with the attitude of treating important elections like highschool insult contests.
He clearly wasn't. The Buttigieg campaign focuses on turnout in areas the Sanders campaign ignored and won the contest because of the rules of the Iowa caucus, which allocate delegates to each individual precinct not based on their turnout but on their overall population. Sanders did well in highly attended precincts, Buttigieg beat him by outperforming him in less well attended precincts.
It's the way the rules were. Bernie could have employed the same strategy, but he didn't.
So you've nothing to say about the strange extended vote count and the switched coin tosses.
"switched"
Watch the videos. It's right there.
I just watched both videos and they were just normal coin tosses. What was I supposed to see there? If either person had faked the coin toss, why didn't anyone on the ground complain? The Sanders people were RIGHT THERE and accepted the result.