Bro you are the one who literally just invented a claim and rolled it back when you got called out.
As far as the DNC rewriting its rules, surely you know that they significantly reworked the rules from 2016 to 2020 based on feedback from the Sanders campaign, significantly reducing the power of the superdelegates.
So again, then how did a no-name junior Senator beat a heavily favored Clinton in the primary, even before they changed the rules (rules everyone knows)?
Admit it, you just don’t like the rules because your guy lost.
The rules were ignored bent and broken. That’s what I don’t like. And that’s why the primary is not a legitimate method of getting your choice of candidate elected.
Which no-name senator are you talking about? It can’t be Sanders because he raised a record breaking 2.3 million individual donations.
Sanders didn’t beat Clinton in the primaries. This was because the DNC were biased. The courts confirmed this and the DNC lawyers had to admit the primaries are rigged. Here’s some examples:-
Wikileaks showing supposedly neutral senior party officials tried to undermine Mr Sanders’s insurgent left-wing campaign by publicly portraying him as an atheist.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic Party, was found to have sent an email during the primary election saying Mr Sanders “would not be president”
Bernie Sanders said there was “no question” the party establishment had undermined his campaign and clandestinely supported Mrs Clinton for the nomination.
the Sanders campaign claimed the fund "appears to operate in a way that skirts legal limits on federal campaign donations and primarily benefits the Clinton presidential campaign
Excellent example of several meritless conspiracy theories and sour grapes.
Which state ballot do you believe Bloomberg did not qualify for?
Sorry, debate not ballot.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/31/dnc-shifts-debate-requirements-opening-door-for-bloomberg-110017
Fascinating. And Bernie Sanders, he was excluded from the debate by these malevolent forces?
Trying to erect another straw man by inventing a claim?
The point was that the DNC again rewrote it’s rules for it’s own purposes.
Bro you are the one who literally just invented a claim and rolled it back when you got called out.
As far as the DNC rewriting its rules, surely you know that they significantly reworked the rules from 2016 to 2020 based on feedback from the Sanders campaign, significantly reducing the power of the superdelegates.
I corrected a detail. I rolled back nothing. The DNC bent rules to favor Bloomberg.
The DNC is undemocratic. The primaries are just for show.
Still 16% of the delegates, and they still get added to the DNC choice candidate when reporting caucus results, unfairly swaying opinion.
So again, then how did a no-name junior Senator beat a heavily favored Clinton in the primary, even before they changed the rules (rules everyone knows)?
Admit it, you just don’t like the rules because your guy lost.
The rules were ignored bent and broken. That’s what I don’t like. And that’s why the primary is not a legitimate method of getting your choice of candidate elected.
Which no-name senator are you talking about? It can’t be Sanders because he raised a record breaking 2.3 million individual donations.
Sanders didn’t beat Clinton in the primaries. This was because the DNC were biased. The courts confirmed this and the DNC lawyers had to admit the primaries are rigged. Here’s some examples:-
Wikileaks showing supposedly neutral senior party officials tried to undermine Mr Sanders’s insurgent left-wing campaign by publicly portraying him as an atheist.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the Democratic Party, was found to have sent an email during the primary election saying Mr Sanders “would not be president”
Bernie Sanders said there was “no question” the party establishment had undermined his campaign and clandestinely supported Mrs Clinton for the nomination.
the Sanders campaign claimed the fund "appears to operate in a way that skirts legal limits on federal campaign donations and primarily benefits the Clinton presidential campaign
This is just embarrassing.
Two opportunities and you whiffed both of them.
I am talking about Barack fucking Obama. You clearly have no context or are an outright troll. Either way, stop spreading right wing agitprop.