• @Tinidril@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Sure buddy, call that a primary if you want. I’m not trying to convince you of anything. Believe what you want, and don’t worry that you’re not respected for it.

      • @Tinidril@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        48 days 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
            37 days 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
              link
              fedilink
              07 days 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
                37 days 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.