Legacy media won't write about this, so I figure I'd take the Internet beating & say what needs to be said—the Democratic primary system is broken and unsustainable, and it's hurting our democracy.
If we want to stop fascism—here's what needs to change: https://www.qasimrashid.com/p/the-democrat-primary-system-is-broken
@QasimRashid I think the primaries should have groups of states running their primaries at the same time - like 4 or 5 states at once - and change which group goes 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. in a rotating sequence each Presidential election year.
With the current arrangement of South Carolina going first, it kind of filters down to conservative candidates. NH and Iowa going first filtered down to white candidates.
@QasimRashid interesting take. I think perhaps more what needs to be said is if the primary candidate says “I'll do one term" then the party must hold them to that no matter what, just like “one election” if they don't win in that november, then they sit out the next 1-2 elections.
Like, Bernie v Biden, Bernie dropped out, despite popularity, and then this time didn't even run in the potential primary.
So making campaign promises around re-election being binding is really the best you can have
@QasimRashid you say the primary process is broken, I say that voters holding candidates responsible for breaking promises they never made is what is broken.
The Democratic primary process is an irrelevant factor in turnout. To the degree that it matters at all, the important thing is the narrative that our mainstream newspapers go with.
In 2016, Clinton fought like hell to get the nomination. And the press put their thumb on the scale against her, first for Bernie, then for Trump.
@QasimRashid By your lights that tightly contested democratic primary should have driven turnout to the moon.
But the narrative (which you perpetuate) was that Bernie was somehow cheated. That Clinton's 3.7M vote lead in the primary was invalidated because Clinton knew there would be a question about abortion in one of the debates?
It's nonsense, but it worked. As you say, they only needed to convince enough of the people who voted for Bernie to sit on their hands.
@QasimRashid Your post says that Biden broke his promise to only serve one term.
That's simply a lie. Biden *never* made such a promise.
Funny thing, facts.
@QasimRashid Your blog links to a Politico article that is explicitly about how Biden did *not* make that promise.
Biden never promised to be a one term president.
@tob It's clear you're not a serious person https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129
You can go now. Thanks.
@QasimRashid look at the date on the article I linked. It's the same day, 8 hours later. It has several *attributed* quotes from Biden and his to advisors saying that the Politico article you linked to is bogus.
It. Is. A. Lie.
Here's an actual quote from Biden on the day that Poltico piece was published, "I don’t have any plans on one term."
Go ahead and block me.
I'm not hearing a proposed new system.
We can agree that we would have preferred a different 2024 primary. But I can't blame people who are risk-averse in the face of a close election against a fascist. And a lot of individual choices that came from that risk-aversion, choices that seemed correct at the time, led some candidates to stand down, and led primary voters to nominate Biden (with our eyes open). I can't imagine a primary system where those choices are disallowed.
1/
@QasimRashid If we need more candidates, more open discussion of what COULD be, maybe it would be in the interest of the Democratic Party to push for #RankedChoiceVoting at all levels of government, and for a diverse ecosystem of minor political parties. With ranked choice in place, minor parties wouldn't be spoilers. They could be a nursery for innovative ideas that we need in the political conversation. And they could be a training ground for young activists.
2/
The Democratic Party has a history of co-opting minor party ideas to its benefit. See the 1932 platform of the Socialist Party, almost all of which is law today because Democrats took what they could use.
3/
@QasimRashid Good job pointing out a problem that is endemic to both parties AND referring to the Democratic Party using a common Republican slur.
Getting facts wrong, making up context that doesn't exist, adding nothing to the conversation, AND showing your bias all at the same time. Who exactly are you trying to convince here?
@QasimRashid 😂 so many people in the comments straight up excusing incursions on democracy because it suits them
The DNC has always used an “ends justify the means” approach and they’re so bold about it bc they know exactly how to play to their base. It’s too bad their base isn’t big enough to win by itself. The rest of us actually want debates and open discussion, which dem voters are CLEARLY allergic to
Qasim Rashid, Esq.
Misuse Case
Emelia 👸🏻
Tom Bellin 
unworker
FreediverX
BlueDot🇺🇦
DressToKILT
sean, with words