General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So Sanders is going back to running as an Indy for his senate seat. [View all]BainsBane
(53,032 posts)none of the oppo research was released, he never had to face Trump in a debate, or face an actual GE campaign.. . or if he didn't face the Kremlin propaganda assault.
That you claim polls from months before the election constitute "undeniable proof" is absurd. It is not proof of anything except an early poll.
There are many aspects of electoral politics that clearly escape you. One of them is voter turnout. How do you suppose a candidate who couldn't manage to get enough supporters to the polls in a primary could win a general election against someone whose supporters were motivated to vote? Sanders lost by 4 million out of total of 26 million primary votes. Yet you site a poll from May as a "undeniable fact" that he would have won. It's not a fact. It's not even logical.
As I said to the other poster, there is one basis for the claim: Self entitlement. You claim it to be a fact because YOU believe it. That 4 million more Americans chose his opponent is meaningless: their votes, their rights, and their lives. You invoke the same corporate media polls used then to try to justify nullifying the votes, and with them the voting rights, of the majority of the Democratic electorate, who tend to be less white, less male, and less affluent. It highlights perfectly the value system of those who made and now continue to make that argument.
And of course we now see Nomiki Konst leading the cause to disenfrachise the Democratic majority by seeking to replace primaries with caucuses and thereby ensure that nominees are chosen largely by the white and properited, and that people of color, the elderly, disabled, shift workers (the actual working class), and women with childcare obstacles can't vote. That goes beyond trying to pick an electorate for one candidate to something more nefarious--the explicitly articulated goal of restoring America to the 1930s-1950s.