Biden's New Hampshire votes matter, even though he's not on the ballot ( www.msn.com )

The Democratic National Committee ruled that the New Hampshire election effectively won’t count and the winner won't amass New Hampshire's 23 delegates in the march to the party's nomination.

Some New Hampshire Democrats are definitely upset.

In 2020, Biden finished a disappointing fifth in a crowded Democratic primary that saw some 300,000 votes cast. State officials expect less than 100,000 votes this year.

Evilcoleslaw ,

I mean, when the party straight up tells you not to do something and that they won't count your delegates if you do it, maybe you shouldn't fucking do it?

FuglyDuck ,
@FuglyDuck@lemmy.world avatar

“Do what you’re told. Don’t ask questions. Obey.”

Evilcoleslaw ,

Slightly ironic. The government of New Hampshire is the one that mandated that a primary election for a political party must occur on a date the party doesn't want it to be on.

GentlemanLoser ,

Take your nuance back to Reddit, pal. This is Lemmy, ain't no use for that. Now call him Genocide Joe and get out of here before there's trouble.

Count042 , (edited )

Maybe hold a fucking primary with debates.

Biden is the least popular president running for reelection since we've had polling.

And he's helping commit a genocide that looks like it made it impossible to win the Midwest swing States.

If this is the most important election in our lifetimes to win, then run a fucking primary!

Evilcoleslaw ,

And not a bit of that has anything to do with why New Hampshire's delegates won't count or why he didn't register there. It's solely about the date of the fucking primary.

Count042 ,

"The civil war was about States rights..."

Uh huh. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that Biden historically performs horribly in New Hampshire.

It also has nothing to do with the momentum of unlikely campaign wins in New Hampshire allowing them to become likely.

If New Hampshire hadn't been first, we would never had Obama, we'd have had Clinton in 2008.

Why did the other five States remove all other Democratic candidates from the Democratic primary ballots again?

Evilcoleslaw ,

"The civil war was about States rights..."

And it's the party's right to choose a state that isn't 93% white to hold their first primary. That's the reason they wanted to change it, so maybe a state that's more representative of the party and of POC go first.

You're also really reading a lot into my comment which is just about NH creating this clusterfuck. They could have gone second, and okay maybe Biden would've done poorly there and the delegates would actually matter. Instead the state government chose this.

Which is honestly a shame, because I'm not itching for another 4 years of aiding, abetting, or at least acquiescing to a genocide.

Theprogressivist ,
@Theprogressivist@lemmy.world avatar

Who do you suggest then?

Count042 , (edited )

A Democratic primary so that the Democratic voters can choose who they want to run. That's what I suggest. You know, an actual democratic process to determine who the Democratic voters would like to field.

You do realize how fucking authoritarian and undemocratic the Democratic party is being, right?

All to nominate basically the only person who wouldn't win against Trump.

"The most important election of our lifetime" rheoteric does not match with how the Democratic party leaders are treating this election.

distantsounds ,

A straw man that that is well versed in the Appeal to Authority Fallacy

LilB0kChoy ,

Aren’t they holding the primary in NH still?

The article seems a little confusing but my takeaway was that Biden opted not to be put on the ballot but it’s expected he’ll still win through a write-in campaign.

I don’t think there’s another Democratic candidate who has a more likely chance of winning the general election.

Mostly_Harmless ,

That's likely what will happen and the DNC would be stupid not to accept the will of NH's voters. The interesting part is that NH independents can vote in either primary. So many (myself included) are considering voting in the republican primary to take votes away from trump.

mercano ,
@mercano@lemmy.world avatar

There’s a state law that requires the Secretary of State to schedule the primaries before any other state’s primaries. The state law is in conflict with the national party committee’s policy, but ultimately the party who gets to decide who to seat at the convention. It doesn’t matter too much this year with an incumbent president, but things will come to a head next election cycle.

LilB0kChoy ,

So the national party committee wants the NH primary to be scheduled later, which is in conflict with the state law, am I understanding that correctly?

Because of the above the national committee is stating they won’t consider their voting results and because of this the NH primary effectively doesn’t matter?

If that’s the case then that is some bullshit.

mercano ,
@mercano@lemmy.world avatar

Yeah, that’s it in a nutshell, it’s another states rights vs national primacy debate, it’s just the DNC instead of the federal government this time.

Mostly_Harmless ,

Independents in NH are the ones who move the needle. Not respecting the will of NH's voters would be a stupid, stupid, STUPID move on the part of the DNC.

"The DNC doesn't give a fuck about you!" would be a great talking point for the GOP.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • politics@lemmy.world
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •