After DNC leaks, will any of the countless pundits who chastised Sanders supporters for calling the process "rigged" go back and recant?
-
-
One of those factors was the institutional bias toward Hillary among the party apparatus, which we now have incontrovertible proof of.
-
There was always a bad faith, strawman-type misreading by pro-Hillary pundits about what Sanders supporters meant when they said "rigged!"
-
So are those scolding pundits going to modify their positions in the face of new evidence? Or stay as recalcitrant as ever? YOU DECIDE...
-
Getting the support of the entire institutional party, along with state party affiliates, is a *massive* structural advantage in primaries.
-
You can call that "rigged" or something else; point is, it was collusion in favor of one candidate by powerful, ostensibly neutral bodies.
-
"Rigged" is a shorthand descriptor for structural problems. That's what Warren did last night. And that's what Sanders supporters always did
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
.
@2sy_Juunee@mtracey yes. it is. look closely at the timeline. and ask if Bernie had run 3rd party, would he have had same impact? - 3 more replies
-
-
-
YES it's the systemic/structural factors that ppl can ONLY defend by saying 'well, it's ALWAYS been this way'! That's NO defense!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.