• mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    4 days ago

    Poor soul thinks said corporate media somehow exists completely outside of the scope of the DNC as if the DNC itself isn’t just a convention for corporate donors to show up and throw in their demands in exchange for campaign funds and lobbying money.

    I mean I’m sure the headline NYT article about Clinton having a 91% chance of winning was totally some next level corporate funded psyop and not a one of the many thousands of advertisements paid for by the DNC. /s

    No, it’s totally the corporate media that’s after her and has absolutely nothing to do with the candidate that dropped the entire uncommitted movement worth of constituents for $100 mil in corporate AIPAC money. /s

      • mlg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        In presidential elections, it supervises the national convention and, both independently and in coordination with the presidential candidate, raises funds, commissions polls, and coordinates campaign strategy.

        Again there is just no possible way the DNC is financially related to the very candidate it is promoting. Obviously, the Wikipedia editors are wrong /s

        • btaf45@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Again there is just no possible way the DNC is financially related to the very candidate it is promoting.

          Actually the Harris campaign gave money to the DNC (or some other fund) to help fund other candidates, not the other way around. That didn’t give the DNC the slightest bit of leverage over Harris. If anything it was the opposite. The suggestion that someone at the DNC ran the Harris campaign instead of Harris is ludicrous.

        • Restaldt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          4 days ago

          Mostly the anger at having to pick a slightly less lethal poison election after election

          The DNC went full mask off this year by not holding primaries. By campaining with the cheneys and pushing 10 year old GOP policies/talking points.

          All they will learn from this is losing elections still lets you amass a “warchest” of one billion dollars

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            The last president – Obama – that the DNC really wasn’t at all involved with was still somehow not very progressive.

            • btaf45@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              The DNC has equal “involvement” in every election, which is to hold primary elections so voters can choose a nominee. The nominees chosen by the voters all run their own campaigns.

          • btaf45@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Harris is not the DNC. The DNC is not a person. The DNC did not “campaign with they Cheneys”. The DNC did not “push 10 year old GOP politicies.” Nor did Harris, to my knowledge.

            The only job of the DNC was to hold primaries. And they did that. Biden dropped out after the primaries were over.

            All they will learn from this is losing elections still lets you amass a “warchest” of one billion dollars

            The DNC’s only main job is to hold primaries. It’s not up to them to “learn” anything. They always go with the choice of the voters. The only people who can learn anything from this is the voters. The DNC is not a person. It is an fluid organization controlled by the primary voters.