waitwhat? said:
pagerman @ work said:
Smoochie-Wallace II said:
The Democratic Party, the party who has claimed "Donald Trump is a threat to democracy!!", just subverted the will of the people by deposing their democratically-chosen nominee. They deposed Biden not because he's done something unforgivable or unamerican, but because they're terrified he (and by extension, they) will lose the election to Trump.
Anyone who doubts the Democrats would steal an election to gain power, you've just been exposed to the truth.
We are watching a bloodless coup because the Democrats are terrified of losing power.
It's not the "will of the people".
At most it's the will of some percentage of democrats.
And it absolutely isn't a "coup".
At the very least, it's a problematic precedent that they've set. As far as I know, there's never been another time that one of the Parties forced their nominee to step aside because it didn't look like they would win the election. Usually, they would just accept that the other party's nominee will win that cycle and focus on other races.
Now, we have no reason to have confidence that the candidate chosen by the Party's voters will actually be the nominee on Election Day if they're polling poorly a few months out. The parties could start switching candidates multiple times leading up to elections.
It also shows, incontrovertibly, that it's the Parties and deep state that run the show, and not the nominee chosen by the voters.
It is quite the leap to go from the presumed nominee was forced to drop out of the race prior to actually getting the nomination to now the party will change nominees at the slightest indication the new nominee is down in the polls. After all, a big part of the push to do this now was to get it done before the convention, because one Biden was actually the candidate, removing him becomes orders of magnitude more difficult, if for no reason than state laws regarding dates by which candidates names must be on the ballots (some of which have apparently already passed).
You would be closer to correct if all this had gone down after the convention, but given that the convention has yet to take place, it's really not that big a deal other than the optics. At the end of the day, how the party nominates its candidate is up to the party, and in the last few presidential elections the DNC has very ham-fistedly selected the candidate of their choosing rather than what their members necessarily voted on in the primaries, or put their thumb on the scale during the primaries themselves.
It's not the Deep State, it's the DNC. And the DNC did what it did because all of those sacred votes in what amounts to a internal popularity poll amongst democrats were cast prior to Biden being shown incontrovertibly to be an enfeebled old man that wasn't fit to be president now much less for 4 more years. That's not the Biden people thought they were voting for. What if a candidate that becomes the presumptive nominee has a massive, incapacitating stroke after the primaries are over? Is whatever party just stuck with the presumptive nominee because the internal polling votes have been cast?
And you're right, the parties don't really care about the votes of their members so much as they care about winning elections. Particularly the DNC, which has shown itself to be much more heavy handed and top-down controlled than the RNC. But again, the nomination process is controlled by the rules set by each party respectively, not the law.
If you want to be upset by something, be upset about the fact that this president has been enfeebled since he was nominated 4 years ago, and we have had an unelected and unaccountable cabal of unknown people running the executive for some period of time and no one seems particularly upset by that. If you want to talk about subverting the will of the people, how about the fact that absolutely no one voted for anyone that is currently running things. Not a single vote was cast for "unknown cabal of people running a shadow government" by anyone at all in any location across the fruited plain. Yet, that is what we have and have had for some indeterminate period of time.
Why is no one asking "what did the president not know, and when did he not know it?" Why is the House not investigating this and demanding every email, communication and any other evidence to show what is going on in the running of the executive branch (which is now basically the government) and how long it has been going on? If you want to talk about a conspiracy to defraud the voters, this is it way more than the sham trial Trump went through.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of miseries." - Winston Churchill
