Looking back, do you believe Democratic Primary election was rigged?

[enhanced_deficit]

Looking back, do you believe 2016 Democratic Primary election was rigged?

Did media collude to favor establishment candidate?

Vote in attached MCQ poll.

[adissa]

Everything Dems do is rigged.

[Schifference]

Hillary and or Bill wouldn't have it any other way.

[CPUd]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/inte...ll-aug-3-2016/

[ThePaleoLibertarian]

Hillary probably would have won either way, but when all the Bay Area counties went to her, I knew something was up. There's no way Alameda county would vote for anyone but Bernie.

[Zippyjuan]

Trump said the Republican primaries were rigged- and he was the one who won! (Isn't that something losers complain about? Things being rigged?)

He is already setting himself up for losing- calling the general election rigged before even a single vote has been cast. A winner? "I expect the elections to be rigged. I expect to lose. " Making excuses.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/01/politi...n-2016-rigged/

Trump: 'I'm afraid the election's going to be rigged'


Columbus, Ohio (CNN)Donald Trump on Monday took his complaints about the "rigged" political system one step further.

"I'm afraid the election's going to be rigged. I have to be honest," Trump told voters in Ohio, a crucial swing state.

Trump's comments Monday came as he decried Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for endorsing Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary, even as some Sanders supporters have continued to resist unifying behind the nominee. Trump has sought to siphon off Sanders supporters and draw them to his campaign.

Trump during the primary repeatedly slammed the "rigged system" he claimed was working against his campaign to capture the Republican nomination for president.

[CPUd]

Donald Trump May Be Violating RNC Consent Decree Aimed at Voter Intimidation


With Trump’s dangerous and irresponsible hyperventilating about voter fraud and cheating in Pennsylvania potentially costing him the election, it is probably no surprise, as reported by the Weekly Standard, that Trump is seeking “election observers” to stop “Crooked Hillary” from “rigging this election.”

However, there’s a longstanding consent decree that bars the RNC afrom engaging in such activities. Here’s Tal Kopan and Josh Gerstein, reporting in 2013 on the RNC’s unsuccessful attempt to get the Supreme Court to lift the decree:

The Supreme Court on Monday declined the Republican National Committee’s request to lift a three-decade-old court order that limits the national GOP’s ability to challenge voters’ eligibility at the polls.

The case, Republican National Committee vs. Democratic National Committee, dealt with a consent decree issued in 1982 that prevents the RNC from engaging in some voter fraud prevention efforts without prior court consent. It specifically said the RNC could not engage in ballot security efforts (later defined in 1987 as “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud,” according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit opinion), especially in areas where racial or ethnic makeup could be considered a reason for the activities.

A response to claims of voter intimidation in minority areas in the 1970s and early 1980s, the decree allowed the RNC to continue “normal poll watching” operations while barring activities that could be aimed at voter suppression, though the RNC complained to the courts that the distinction was unclear and difficult to follow. The decree effectively put the national party on the sidelines as concern about voter fraud became more and more pronounced in GOP ranks in recent years and as states passed a series of voter-identification measures.

In deciding the case, which stems from a 2008 lawsuit brought by the DNC, the district court clarified ballot security efforts as “any program aimed at combating voter fraud by preventing potential voters from registering to vote or casting a ballot,” and upheld the consent decree while adding a Dec. 1, 2017, expiration date.

In the consent decree, “The RNC agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, ‘whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.” Does Trump count as the RNC’s agent in these circumstances? They are certainly acting in concert, and it is plausible to argue that Trump and the RNC are agents of each other for purposes of this election. Also, the activity Trump is talking about engaging violate the consent decree? One thing the consent decree says is that they must:

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose…

If this activity violates the consent decree, the DNC can ask for it to be extended for up to another 8 years.

http://electionlawblog.org/?p=85289

[Suzanimal]

Two things I could vote for but I forgot my second vote. Should've known I could vote more than once....

[enhanced_deficit]

Thank you all for your views.

Two things I could vote for but I forgot my second vote. Should've known I could vote more than once....

No biggie, the main question about election rigging covers media collusion too in general, later two questions were added to further drill down on media role.

Trump...

Donald Trump...

Please be advised that this poll is public and your view on DNC election rigging would become public if you chose to express your view in this poll.


Poll: Looking back, do you believe Democratic Primary election was rigged?

[Zippyjuan]

If the media colludes on candidates- how does one explain Trump? If they were out to "get" him, Cruz or Rubio should have won.

It is just a year with really crappy candidates all around.

[Brian4Liberty]

Looking back, do you believe 2016 Democratic Primary election was rigged?

Did media collude to favor establishment candidate?

Vote in attached MCQ poll.

Public polls have less participation.

[enhanced_deficit]

If the media colludes on candidates- how does one explain Trump? If they were out to "get" him, Cruz or Rubio should have won.

It is just a year with really crappy candidates all around.

Media weapons are getting pretty stale and less effective gradually... though it can impact outcomes still specially in tight races.

Americans' trust in media at all-time low

By Dylan Byers
Americans' trust in the national news media remains at an all-time low.
A new Gallup poll shows that just 40% of Americans have "a great deal" or "a fair amount" of trust and confidence in the media to report the news fully, accurately and fairly.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/30/medi...ust-americans/

I take it from your response that you do not see Dem Primary Election rigging/media collusion.

[Zippyjuan]

I have not seen substantiated, proven claims of rigging- only vague claims. On the Republican or Democratic side (remember, Trump accused Republicans of fixing things too- you should run a poll on that as well).

If it is rigged- why bother voting? Why even bother trying to sway opinion by participating even in online forms like this?

(I recognize that your goal is to try to say a candidate is not legitimate to try to support your own choice).

[Zippyjuan]

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...ess-not-rigged

Bernie Sanders agrees: Democratic process not ‘rigged’



On Friday afternoon, Donald Trump’s campaign officially announced the presumptive Republican nominee will not debate Bernie Sanders, despite what Trump had said earlier, because it would be “inappropriate” for the GOP candidate to “debate the second place finisher.”

And if there’s one thing Donald Trump is concerned about, it’s avoiding anything that might be perceived as “inappropriate.”

But in issuing the candidate’s position on the matter, Trump also said what many of the Vermont senator’s most ardent supporters fervently believe: the Democratic nominating process is “totally rigged” against Sanders.

Does the senator himself believe this? CBS’s John Dickerson asked Sanders for his perspective on “Face the Nation” aired on Sunday, and the candidate’s answer seemed quite fair.

“What has upset me, and what I think is – I wouldn’t use the word rigged, because we knew what the words were – but what is really dumb is that you have closed primaries, like in New York state, where three million people who are Democrats or Republicans could not participate, where you have situation where over 400 superdelegates came on board Clinton’s campaign before anybody else was in the race, eight months before the first vote was cast.

“That’s not rigged. I think it’s just a dumb process which has certainly disadvantaged our campaign.”

I suspect the response might have disappointed some Sanders supporters who are heavily invested in the idea that the system has been manipulated, deliberately, by party officials for the express purpose of making it impossible for the senator to prevail, but Sanders’ response on Sunday made a fair amount of sense.

It may seem pointless, but it’s worth appreciating the difference between a process that’s “rigged” and one in which an underdog faces institutional challenges that are difficult to overcome.

“Rigged” implies some kind of nefarious scheme, tilting the playing field to ensure a predetermined outcome. In this sense, there’s nothing “rigged” about the race for the Democratic nomination: both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton were aware of the lay of the land in advance; both understood what it would take to succeed; both created game plans based on the existing rules, and both recognized that those rules, some of which were established years in advance, would remain unaltered once the process began in earnest.

In other words, as Sanders himself now acknowledges, the fix wasn’t in. The Sanders and Clinton campaigns played by the agreed upon rules, and one campaign appears to have come out on top by earning more pledged delegates, superdelegates, votes, and contests.

It’s precisely what made the senator’s comments on Sunday so noteworthy: Sanders doesn’t see a conspiracy or nefarious scheme, but he does see a “dumb” nominating process in need of reform. Is he right? Maybe! In Democratic politics, I suspect there are very few people who would look at the existing system and say it’s 100% flawless and any proposed changes must be rejected out of hand.

[enhanced_deficit]

Public polls have less participation.

Yea probably.
On flip side, some people short on time may prefer to express their view on an issue with a click than posting. Also, going beyond statistical sampling of a group's opinions, who said it can be just as important as what was said for the purpose of debating issues.

I have not seen substantiated, proven claims of rigging- only vague claims. On the Republican or Democratic side (remember, Trump accused Republicans of fixing things too- you should run a poll on that as well).

If it is rigged- why bother voting? Why even bother trying to sway opinion by participating even in online forms like this?

Are suggesting DNC CEO resigned based on unsubstantiated allegations?

#Demexit: Rigged Dem election fallout continues as DNC CEO resigns

[RandallFan]

No they didn't take it. Clinton clearly won huge supermajorities of black voters, enough liberal whites & other majorities.


A lot of conservative Democrats who gave him narrow victories in West Virginia, Michigan and elsewhere; were protesting against the left leaning/globalist nature of the national Democrat party; but are totally out of the mainstream of Democrat primary voters in Florida or New York or California or IL.

The actual large primaries were won by clinton.

These voters in West Virginia who cast votes for Bernie half of them weren't serious Democrats; they were protesting against the leader of the Dem Party: Clinton.

https://www.reddit.com/r/opieandanth...hb&sh=06ac5aae


[–]DontDoxMeJoe 8 points 19 days ago
Bernie is a socialist, atheist, and a Jew. He got as far as he did because he got votes from people that just hate Clinton. Those counties in rural Pa weren't thinking, "finally, a Godless Communist to vote for!". Also he made himself the ultimate bitch when he tucked his chin into his chest and let those two fat black bitches run roughshod on him. Clinton cheated but he wasn't going to win anyway, and I say this with deep hatred of Clinton. Even look at Sanders actual invigorated voting base, the youth. They barely showed up to vote. If you think that old pussy had a shot you're deluded.

[Suzanimal]

“That’s not rigged. I think it’s just a dumb process which has certainly disadvantaged our campaign.”

So the process is rigged?

[Danke]

So the process is rigged?

Pretty much...unless you are a Hillary defender.

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

It was hugely rigged to favor Hillary, and the media helped, of course.

I would even go so far as to wonder if Sanders had a roll in the charade all along. He sure rolled over easily after getting beaten by dirty tricks. Bernie was a longshot, but if it wasn't for him, Hillary basically would've been unopposed. I wonder if his half-serious campaign was an easy target to beat up on for practice and make it appear as though she won her nomination in something other than a cakewalk.

[CPUd]

It was hugely rigged to favor Hillary, and the media helped, of course.

I would even go so far as to wonder if Sanders had a roll in the charade all along. He sure rolled over easily after getting beaten by dirty tricks. Bernie was a longshot, but if it wasn't for him, Hillary basically would've been unopposed. I wonder if his half-serious campaign was an easy target to beat up on for practice and make it appear as though she won her nomination in something other than a cakewalk.

Yes, he was put there to make it look like a contest, she had the nomination the day she endorsed Obama in 2008.

[Danke]

[Danke]

[Danke]

[enhanced_deficit]

Interesting video.

[69360]

Of course it was rigged. DNC was proven by leaked emails to be in the bag for the Clintons. Plus the whole concept of superdelegates is corrupt.

[Zippyjuan]

Of course it was rigged. DNC was proven by leaked emails to be in the bag for the Clintons. Plus the whole concept of superdelegates is corrupt.

In this election, Republicans wished they had more of those themselves.

[phill4paul]

I'm gonna have to get a clearer definition of "rigged."

Do you mean a DNS conspiracy against Bernie? No.

Do you mean a planned operation that Bernie played his role, got his half-million Vay-Cay home, and the Dems t-rumped the 2012 RNC convention? Yes.

[69360]

I'm gonna have to get a clearer definition of "rigged."

Do you mean a DNS conspiracy against Bernie? No.

Do you mean a planned operation that Bernie played his role, got his half-million Vay-Cay home, and the Dems t-rumped the 2012 RNC convention? Yes.

If that was true it would have come out in the emails. The democrats weren't careful about covering their tracks.

[Mordan]

I read a few media articles about Bernie and Hillary. It was biased just like during Ron Paul times.

Yes elections are rigged by those in power. They are rigged in a smart way.

there is no hope to fix the system until blockchain based voting system are used.

[jbauer]

If the media colludes on candidates- how does one explain Trump? If they were out to "get" him, Cruz or Rubio should have won.

It is just a year with really crappy candidates all around.

Either that or they got him through knowing he'd lose to the hildabeast