LOL!
The burden of proof lies with the side claiming irregularity, not with the side claiming things went properly.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 24 2021 02:43pm

low motivation is not the same as low information, idiot. also, i'm just explaining to you based on what the statement you replied to was made, since your poor reading comprehension didn't allow you to figure that out for yourself.

It literally only came out in 2016 because wikileaks got ahold of it, why would we assume they did everything by the book in 2020?
I think is more unlikely that the same people in the same positions made drastically different decisions 4 years later against the same candidate they were terrified of winning.

Like I said, there's no guarantee or even indication that Bernie would have won in 2016 without the DNC manipulation. The more likely outcome is a really tight primary race which would have split the party. Imho, the DNC intervened on Hillary's behalf because they wanted their candidate to emerge from the primary with as little damage as possible.

In 2020, Biden simply was a significantly better alternative to Bernie than Hillary had been 4 years before.




No, but the two will be highly correlated in practice. Do you seriously think that the contingent of people who put in the effort to stay highly informed on politics, but cant be bothered to vote, makes up a relevant share of the electorate?

High information high turnout, low information low turnout, low information high turnout - those combinations all make sense. High information low turnout doesnt.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 24 2021 04:01pm

citation needed

it's amazing how you started out by completely ignoring the premise of a post, and now follow up with wild claims for which you have zero evidence. if anything, american politics is a textbook example for how low info voters dominate elections, if you compare polling for specific issues like universal healthcare, minimum wage, taxation, gun control, environmental protection, affordable education, money in politics... with candidate and party preference.

I dont have the time or motivation to look for great sources, or to sift through secondary and tertiary references, so let's just take one random result I quickly found on google:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46430541_Political_Interest_Cognitive_Ability_and_Personality_Determinants_of_Voter_Turnout_in_Britain

Page 1:





This is d2jsp, not an academic forum. I'm not gonna search for scientific references for every benign common sense statement I make, like "people who are interested and informed on politics will be more likely to turn out than those who dont care about politics."


This is off topic and doesnt touch the argument I was making: that non-voters are disproportionately low information, so that mandatory voting would increase the electoral share of low info voters relative to high info ones.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Mar 24 2021 04:40pm

/edit

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Mar 24 2021 05:06pm

"off topic" as in directly contradicting your idiotic assumptions and simplistic narrative. sure...

Define rigged. Are well-timed endorsements an example of rigging?

The way I see it, people had a chance to vote on Bernie in 2016 and 2020 and the majority of them said "nope, he's not the one."