this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2026
735 points (98.7% liked)
NonCredibleDiplomacy
588 readers
52 users here now
Shitposting about geopolitics, diplomacy, and current events for shits and giggles
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He lost because he wasn't a Democrat, why would Democrats vote for someone not in their party? If you wanted Bernie y'all should have registered and voted in the primary. There was no rigging, the lawsuits were dismissed, Bernie just overwhelmingly lost to Hillary because registered democratic party members voted overwhelmingly for Hillary. Bernie never stood a chance and the process was pretty well the same as it always was but idiots like you have a child's understanding of political processes. Did you even know the DNC is straight up a private non public organization? Because that's how political parties work.
There was no rigging as long as you ignore the rigging that I already discussed. Just because you say these things doesn't make them true.
It's rigging in the same way that you're a genius, which is to say it isn't.
The difference is, nobody has ever claimed I'm a genius because there isn't evidence for it. Meanwhile there is evidence of the rigging.
What evidence? You can call it a ham sandwich but that won't make it fucking so. It wasn't rigging, it was standard dnc operating procedure. Lawsuits alleging rigging were dismissed as without cause because, and stay with me here, there wasn't rigging.
I think this is coming down to a difference in how we would define rigging. I've already said how it was rigged. You're either going to continue to ignore it, or you just don't think that's rigging. Obviously you're never going to be convinced even with the evidence right in front of you. Enjoy living your life like that.
Enjoy your ham sandwich.