Looks like we've entered a new era where less is more

[whatchamacallit]

Fewer debates is better because, apparently, you can have too much information about a candidate for President of the United States.

Refusing to state your position and avoid taking a committed stand on controversial issues is wise and helpful to the electorate.

Fewer (zero) voices challenging the party orthodoxy is desirable because, these days, winning is all that's important and we only need to be a little better than the republicans.

Yay democrats!

[4139]

1. If only 6 debates in 2008 Hillary would have won the nomination.. But...

[artislife]

2. The system is rigged.

If people can't see that one candidate loves the system, then what can you do?

[whatchamacallit]

3. They can see it

but they don't want to acknowledge it.

[artislife]

4. What are they actually going to win?

So disgruntled with this.

[whatchamacallit]

6. The battle

The spoils are secondary to the victory. The party faithful view the party, like the religious faithful view God: righteous and infallible. For them, beating the republican Devils is the reward.

[jeff47]

8. All that matters is that the winner is wearing the correct team's jersey.

Doesn't matter if the winner actually believes anything.

[Cheese Sandwich]

5. Ignorance is strength...

Not only that but, war is peace. Also freedom is slavery.

Get used to it.

[Maedhros]

9. Add "Hillary is Progressive" to that list. [n/t]

[winter is coming]

7. Hillary can't take the heat, so the DWS is rigging the game for her.

There's no way rank and file Dems benefit from this manuever.