←back to thread

212 points DamienSF | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.204s | source
Show context
vannevar ◴[] No.12174358[source]
I think the most interesting (and perhaps hopeful) aspect here is that people now have an expectation of fairness in the selection of party candidates. That's a relatively new phenomenon. In the past, I think people widely assumed that the party was biased towards individual candidates. Even now, that's clearly the case when the sitting President is a candidate. I personally think that expecting an unbiased party structure is unrealistic, given the very nature of the organization. The party doesn't have a product, other than its opinion. The idea that an organization of partisans only arrives at that collective opinion through primaries and caucuses seems quite naive to me.
replies(7): >>12174618 #>>12174770 #>>12174773 #>>12175036 #>>12175412 #>>12175417 #>>12175973 #
DamienSF ◴[] No.12174770[source]
I am not sure how the findings of this report can reinforce the expectation of fairness in the selection process. The reports points out to evidences of various election fraud tactics (voter suppression, registration tampering, illegal voter purging and fraudulent voting machine tallies) which have been carried out to eventually influence the outcome of the election.

Also, I wonder how can the Democratic party can still be credible in denouncing Republicans efforts to suppress voters the right to vote when employing the exact same tactics during the primaries.

replies(4): >>12175078 #>>12175401 #>>12175485 #>>12181430 #
1. troyvit ◴[] No.12181430[source]
Yeah both these things are true. A lot of comments in this thread are about how an expectation of fairness at the party level is too much to ask for, and that's fine, but fraud and voter suppression are a whole different level. If it's happening here it's going to happen in the general election too.

Waxing political I wonder if Trump will be able to build an infrastructure to hack/disenfranchise as many people as Clinton will since he's not as firmly inserted into the political machine. In other words elections of the future won't be settled by how many votes a candidate wins but by how many votes a candidate steals. Gives a whole new meaning to "Candidate A has locked in the [insert demographic here] vote."