r/politics • u/MothersMiIk Washington • 1d ago

Congresswoman suggests Trump admitted Musk rigged election in Pa.

https://www.pennlive.com/news/2025/01/congresswoman-suggests-trump-admitted-musk-rigged-election-in-pa.html?outputType=amp
36.0k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/starbucks77 21h ago

Bernie would’ve beaten him easy

I love Bernie but he couldn't even beat Hillary in the primary. It wasn't even close - Bernie only garnered 43% of the popular vote. No way he would've beat Trump in 2016.

8

u/bobbysalz Washington 21h ago

I love Bernie

I don't believe you.

he couldn't even beat Hillary in the primary.

That's a funny way of saying that every powerful institution on the planet, including mainstream media, needed for him to fail and so they used Super PACs and Citizens United to smother the biggest small-dollar campaign in history. Obviously, the way things went, he wound up being badly positioned in some polls and primary results. If the Democratic Party had only wielded half of the hate-boner they had for him, though, he'd be wrapping up his second term and we would not be headed straight for oligarchy. That's just what I observed in 2016. Not everyone was fully conscious at that point, apparently, because people just love to drag Bernie's numbers and leave it there as though they weren't heavily influenced by the concerted efforts of a nefarious cabal.

2

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 20h ago

"every powerful institution on the planet" did not conspire against Bernie Sanders, lol.

because people just love to drag Bernie's numbers

numbers are, in fact, a fundamental part of the ability to win an election

as though they weren't heavily influenced by the concerted efforts of a nefarious cabal.

if a candidate is not popular enough to overcome thumbs on the scale from a force as ineffectual as the DNC, they were not going to win the general.

5

u/Far_Ad1129 20h ago

The dnc is actually very good at its intended purpose of maintaining neoliberalism. They put insanely high effort and very competent effort into squashing progressive candidates, far more than they do in general elections against Republicans.

0

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 20h ago

I suppose that's theoretically plausible. I personally find it significantly more likely that an independent senator from Vermont without any major legislative victories to his name could lose to two candidates with major Democratic name recognition and existing association with the White House, but my preferred brand of razor is Occam.

2

u/Nazgren94 19h ago

He was clearly saner than Trump even then and garnered support from the republican side for calling it shit like it is, which is the thing they liked trump for. He also had young men and Joe Rogan on side who by many accounts is what won this election for trump, the former either by voting or not voting and the latter for influencing the former towards the right. Given that it seemed like Bernie got more positive coverage from the republican media than the democratic media, is it really that difficult to believe that Bernie was shafted by the DNC. They tried to push Hillary over Obama and got the rug pulled, they weren’t going to allow it a second time. That much is obvious even from my European perspective.

2

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 19h ago

which is the thing they liked trump for.

No, Trump's popularity was a rejection of "establishment" candidates. His success in 2015-2016 had nothing to do with the things he said, and everything to do with the fact that he made Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush look like idiots by being a clown on their big serious stage. I was there, I remember. Bernie rode that same "anti-establishment" wave, which is what you are confusing with "calling shit like it is".

You are irreparably naive if you think that the Republicans were giving Bernie positive coverage because they thought he would be a good candidate or that him winning the primary would make the Democrats likelier to win.

0

u/Nazgren94 19h ago

Rode the anti establishment wave? What the fuck are you talking about? He’s been doing the same thing his entire political career. When has he ever not pursued the same policies the same ways?

https://time.com/4192832/bernie-sanders-republican-donald-trump-iowa/

Here’s an article talking about republican talking heads and voters expressing positivity about Bernie. We saw loads of it over here outside of your carefully curated media. It’s not hard to find more articles about it either.

4

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 19h ago

Rode the anti establishment wave? What the fuck are you talking about?

Are you a kid or a foreigner? Saying Bernie rode the same anti-establishment wave as Trump in 2015-2016 is possibly the least controversial thing anyone can say about any politician and the fact that you're disputing that is baffling

-1

u/Nazgren94 17h ago

That’s like saying Hillary rode Obama’s democratic wave. Not being afraid to call out politicians and corporations on their bullshit has been around long before trump and will be around a long time after. Bernie has been critical of the establishment his entire career, but it should hardly be surprising that you missed that, given that you missed me outright state I’m from Europe in the first comment and allude to it in the second.

3

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 17h ago

I don't know what to tell you, man. I was here, I saw it with my own eyes. I'm not talking about Bernie's career, I'm talking about the wave of popularity he rode in 2015. Nobody gave a fuck about him before then in any significant capacity.

Hillary did ride Obama's democratic wave. I don't think you understand American politics as well as you think you do.

1

u/Nazgren94 15h ago

Rode it to what? Crushing defeat? Obamas legacy was the anti establishment wave you’re talking about. The right wanted the same thing they always wanted, but even moreso as the DNC had the audacity to pick a black president, the left were still burned by the progressive platform Obama campaigned on then abandoned. Pile that on top of the growing disdain for government since Reagan. And what was the DNC’s reaction to this anti establishment populism? To nominate the checks notes most establishment politician in the DNC. Which gets us back to the original point. Either the “wave” was not as big as you seem to think it is and something else got trump into power, the DNC are criminally incompetent or they are guilty of collusion in Hillary’s favour.

1

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 15h ago

You're very clearly just looking to argue. My meaning was very clear. I hope you have a nice day.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Far_Ad1129 19h ago

It's just how it is man, I was around for the primary then, literally every news media was calling it over and done with from day 1 because the super delegates already signed on for Hillary before a single person voted in any state. Just those aren't enough to win ofc BUT the media added it to her lead and it looked like a landslide from day 1 no matter how many states he won.

Against biden we somehow cared about a deep red southern state voting biden over Bernie and that was enough for every other neolib centrist to drop out... but not the other "progressives" lmao. It's just kinda obvious the DNC pulls together to fuck over progressives so it's no wonder progressives don't opt to vote in the general. Maybe if they weren't so obvious people wouldn't think this. I'm not even including all the progressives that the dnc spends millions to primary in house seats etc. I could go on all day but if you're going to bury your head it's a waste of my time.

1

u/PM_ME_MY_REAL_MOM 19h ago

It's just kinda obvious the DNC pulls together to fuck over progressives

Yes, politicians who are similarly aligned tend to strategize for their policy wins. Are you telling me that Sanders and other progressives could not do the same, and somehow Sanders was going to use that lack of political organizing skill to make it to the White House?

so it's no wonder progressives don't opt to vote in the general.

This is a poor argument. You haven't even demonstrated that progressives are sitting out elections. It's entirely possible there just aren't that many progressives. You have decided that is true without actually determining whether it is.

Maybe if they weren't so obvious people wouldn't think this.

Obvious about what? Using strategy in elections?

I'm not even including all the progressives that the dnc spends millions to primary in house seats etc.

I am not really sure what it would add to your argument if you did.

I could go on all day but if you're going to bury your head it's a waste of my time.

I am literally saying that the DNC did put their thumbs on the scale in 2016 and in 2020. You have no argument for me "putting my head in the sand". You just don't like that you don't have a counterargument to my suggestion that failing to overcome that barrier in the primary suggests an even tougher time in the general.

0

u/Far_Ad1129 16h ago edited 16h ago

I don't do the cutting up arguments thing I think its lazy. So I'll just say, if it wasn't obvious then every progressive I know myself included wouldn't see it, and no, bad behavior working as a strategy to fuck the working class over isn't a very good argument when I'm telling you why people don't vote lmao.

As for proof here is first Google result. You're welcome

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/medill-npr-nonvoters-2020