• Lanthanae@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 month ago

    He would have won in the general. The primary is not reflective of the general electorate. This is the whole point.

    • SaltySalamander@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      Maybe so, but Democrats didn’t turn out to vote for him in the primary, even though they had every opportunity to do so, in every single state. Kinda makes your whole point moot.

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        this is exactly the kind of attitude that lets trump win repeatedly.

        ‘yeah yeah, we know you don’t want the candidate we’re pushing but you don’t get a choice.’

        then 20 million people stay home.

        great fucking job. Meanwhile Sanders would have won, EITHER ELECTION. great. fucking. work.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          … But people DID have a choice. They could have voted for Sanders or Clinton or Biden or… fucking Yang (look… he was advocating for nuclear power and UBI).

          So how would we “get a choice” if the primaries were skipped in favor of Sanders because people chose not to vote?

          And before you say “Well, how was that fair with Kamala”: That is actually a common refrain. And I genuinely don’t know what we could have done (I mused on it elsewhere in the thread) considering how fast everything had to come together. And a Biden who dropped out earlier in the year would have just fueled countless “Even the Democrats know they failed” messages

          And before you say “Well, the fucking super delegates meant that Bernie never had a chance”: And how would we have been overriding the will of the Democratic party? It wouldn’t be the ordinary delegates…