you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -11 points 8 months ago (19 children)

2024 was the only year recently we didn't have a primary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 8 months ago (10 children)

    neat. i have been voting for longer than that. there have been years where there was only one person on the primary, which efficiently means “primary votes are cancelled” - when the dnc say they want the incumbent.

    that is a de facto cancellation. telling the people who could vote that they are ignored.

    my point stands: the dem side needs to do a better job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 8 months ago* (9 children)

    I've been voting since I was 18 and I've never seen that in the past 16 years. 2024 was skipping because Biden was the incumbent at the time. Incumbent are almost always given the primary. The GOP does the same and is entirely different.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    yeah. see. i disagree that incumbents should be given anything. earn it. primary every time.

    i have been voting since 1997.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    I agree with you, but as devil's advocate, why would a political party vie against itself for a seat it already holds. At best, it would only slightly sully the incumbent's name. Take Biden for example: either he's doing a good job, or he needs to be replaced because he's not doing a good enough job.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    From what I've read the reason primaries aren't done on incumbents is because every single time it's been tried the incumbent lost the actual election and the seat went to the other party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    ? If incumbent wins the primary its the same as if they didn’t have one but at least the party members chose.

    primaries are separate by party.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    It's not a thing that happens often, but as far as I can find every single time the incumbent president has had someone try to primary them, the incumbent's entire party lost the seat.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_challenge

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    That's absolutely not true. I've been voting since 2012 and the only presidential primary I've voted in that had more than one candidate was the Hillary-Bernie primary. That's the only one. 

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 8 months ago* (1 child)

    It absolutely is true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries

    In 2012 Obama was the incumbent, which again as I mentioned, incumbents typically aren't primaried if they are doing a decent job and up for re-election.

    Since then there was 2016, 2020, where both years had a primary for the DNC. 2024 was just a fluke because Biden should have dropped out. Or even stuck with his original campaign promise of not running for re-election. You're young and your sample size is 4. My sample size is 5, but it's been consistent in years prior.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (4 children)

    Nope. Bernie should have won the primary but the dems decided it was “Hillary’s turn” so they fucked Bernie.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Bernie didn't have the votes. Period.

    I voted for Bernie, but most people I knew at the time voted for Hillary because of the name recognition.

    Argue all you want, but facts are facts.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago*

    On July 22, WikiLeaks published the Democratic National Committee email leak, in which DNC operatives seemed to deride Bernie Sanders' campaign[12] and discuss ways to advance Clinton's nomination,[13] leading to the resignation of DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and other implicated officials. The leak was allegedly part of an operation by the Russian government to undermine Hillary Clinton.[14][15] Although the ensuing controversy initially focused on emails that dated from relatively late in the primary, when Clinton was already close to securing the nomination,[13] the emails cast doubt on the DNC's neutrality and, according to Sanders operatives and multiple media commentators, showed that the DNC had favored Clinton since early on.

    The Dems fucked Bernie. From your own sources.

    All I was talking about was 2016.

  • source
  • parent