• realitista@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Well let’s put it this way, if 400-450 superdelegates had pledged for Sanders before any votes were cast as they did for Clinton, he would have won too. No one can really say the outcome without the ballot box being stuffed prior to the election. It was close enough that these kind of things are enough to sway it.

    At any rate, my hopes lie with AOC. No one will be able to accuse her followers of being only “bros” and try to divide the vote by sex. She will probably lose the general election but getting her through the primaries will be a win.

    • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      No he wouldn’t have, and we can generally assume that’s true because, again, historically progressives don’t vote, especially not in primaries. Democrats vote. Democrats voted for the Democrat, surprising absolutely nobody that wasn’t terminally online. He never stood a chance because he was never that popular with democrats in the first place.

      The Bernie bros thing was entirely propaganda though, very nearly every Bernie primary voter voted for Clinton in the general. More Russian republican disinformation.

        • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          It wasn’t even close man. Clinton got nearly 4 million more votes, like 30 percent more votes than Bernie. It wasn’t close and Bernie never had a chance. Also why would it be a level playing field? Bernie wasn’t a Democratic party member, obviously the party is going to support the Democratic candidate. There was no cheating, there was no conspiracy, it was simply that too few progressives voted in the primary.