@jessesingal @radicalbytes the idea is to restrict access to "the right kind of people". Not based on race in this case, but still not ok
-
-
-
@KevinMurphyDJ
@jessesingal Both parties benefit from strict rules in diff places for diff reasons. Always benefits establishment candidates
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@MayankSeksaria@radicalbytes@jessesingal that's the way it *is*, but I don't think that's the way it *should be*Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@MayankSeksaria@radicalbytes@jessesingal there's a difference b/w describing that and defending it though -
@MayankSeksaria@radicalbytes@jessesingal yes, they want to prevent insurgent candidates, that doesn't mean it's good that they do
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@MayankSeksaria@radicalbytes@jessesingal not necessarily. Only the case if you assume party elites are in alignment with voters -
@KevinMurphyDJ
@MayankSeksaria@jessesingal …which they aren’t. Polls find both parties are to the right of the population on key issues.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@MayankSeksaria@radicalbytes@jessesingal unclear, since caucus votes aren't reported, but probably -
@MayankSeksaria@radicalbytes@jessesingal still, there's a very large minority of the party that is clearly far to the left of party elites
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@MayankSeksaria @KevinMurphyDJ@jessesingal Democrats can’t win a national election without independents, leftists and swing voters. -
@radicalbytes@MayankSeksaria this is a key point. Dems need indies to win general, but are saying "we don't want your input" in primary
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.