• TechAnon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t get why people are saying, “no” in here. Let her run, we will get to check out all the options and decide in primaries. I don’t see anything wrong with that.

    • cashsky@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Because the DNC will try to fuck over any potential progressives with her if she runs

      • TechAnon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Won’t they try and do that with any candidate of their choice? Maybe we should just, I don’t know, vote on it?

          • TechAnon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Nope. This is a good example of the DNC always pushing who they want and that’s my point. If it’s not Harris it will be someone else. People need to vote in the primaries.

            We’re also seeing a shift in who people vote for and voter turnout (see NY and TX).

      • Flocklesscrow@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is, unequivocally, the real answer.

        Ultimately the DNC is the arbiter of candidates and they’re never going to allow a candidate that rocks the status quo.

    • 𝄞 Inkstain (they/them)𓆩 𓆪@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m not from the US but I can see how her running would also end up hindering any other more progressive candidates by dividing the voter pool, due to the crappy FPTP system the US has in place