• Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 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
          ·
          6 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
            ·
            6 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
              ·
              4 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.