Hacker News Reader

Comment by boneheadmed | Hacker News Reader

How about everything about Hillary Clinton and rigging the primary against Bernie via Podesta via Wikileaks?

Those weren't leaked by public servants acting on their conscience, they were stolen by hackers and delivered to Wikileaks, so it's not a relevant example.

Which Greenwald discussed extensively...

I'm glad that their shameless cheating at that debate with the help of Donna Brazile got exposed. But what are some other examples of "rigging the primary against Bernie"? While the DNC obviously didn't like him (in the same way that the RNC didn't want Trump), what concrete actions were taken to undermine him?

Primary rules that excluded independent voters who, no shock here, ended up voting for Trump as they couldn't get a decent candidate from the DNC.

And debate schedules purposely designed by DWS to keep them off of prime time TV.

I don't like Trump, but I'm glad he won; the DNC and Clinton needed a lesson taught.

> Primary rules that excluded independent voters

That's a bit like complaining that I only invite my friends to my birthday party.

If you're expecting independents to vote for your party, you should probably allow them to contribute to selecting your nominee. Otherwise, people like me who would've voted for Bernie Sanders voted for Donald Trump.

> Otherwise, people like me who would've voted for Bernie Sanders voted for Donald Trump.

You're doing a really, really good job of making my point for me. I suspect the Democrats aren't all that moved by the argument "Trump supporters should be allowed to help pick the Democratic nominee!"

It was a scary day when I realized this election could have easily been Trump (D) vs Cruz. Of course, we still got screwed.

Then the DNC can continue to lose future elections.

I'm not a Trump supporter; I voted against Clinton, and my vote was first to Sanders. I'm happy with my vote; Trump winning has galvanized progressive coalitions in a way that wouldn't have happened if Clinton had won.

Establishment Democrats who aren't progressive enough need to die off faster. Then the Demoractic party might run candidates worth voting for.

It's not the party's decision, is it? It's decided by the state's election laws.

The republican party in Colorado didn't even have a primary. They just chose the candidate they wanted. No one was allowed to vote.

Shouldn't the republicans be taught some lesson as well?

The republicans were taught a lesson. None of the party establishment wanted Trump to be the nominee; and here we are.

Actively fighting him provided them no purchase; the (republican) public still won.

Exit polls considerably off from what the primary election results were, specifically in states with electronic voting machines, has been well documented.

https://amp.twimg.com/v/03ede159-adc7-4eee-84f5-9caa28e1bda6

(video of "democracy" at the NV caucus)

Was it "rigging"? That depends on your interpretation, but it obviously wasn't a functioning democracy.

I think Greenwald disagrees with WikiLeaks firehose model of get it all out there, unfiltered. In the case of the diplomatic cables leak, that effectively exposed undercover agents.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com