• Tinidril@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    20 hours ago

    The whole reason we are discussing primaries is that you (incorrectly) believe they indicate electability in the general. How exactly does a primary where the citizens didn’t get to vote for the “winning” candidate do that? Not very well apparently.

      • Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Is this supposed to somehow further the discussion? Are you even trying to be coherent, or are you just grasping at whatever snark you can come up with?

        • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Well it’s hard to have a conversation about primaries when your definition doesn’t match the DNC’s.

          But you’re right this has definitely reached the end of anything productive.

          • Tinidril@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Gosh, I ignorantly thought the primary was where the delegates get chosen (based on a candidate they agree to choose at the convention), not the process of delegates selecting the candidate. I honestly had no idea that there was a published definition that would set me straight. Can you point me in that direction?

            Still, I don’t see the relevance since a primary that doesn’t give citizens the opportunity to express support for a candidate can’t tell us anything about support for that candidate. How we define “primary” really doesn’t come into it.