Election interference question

It definitely could be seen that way. However, they aren't interfering with the election itself - just the rules for who can qualify as the Democratic candidate. Ultimately, the DNC could just say that Joe Biden is their nominee, and there's not anything that could be done about it besides leaving the party.

To be clear, I don't like that they're doing this. But they can - just like the GOP can cancel its primaries entirely.

How the DNC runs its nomination procedure is entirely its own business.

hislegacy said:

They are not interfering with the election, just the rules for the election? Doesn't make sense to me. If Democratic voters want Bernie, and the DNC is changing the rules to eliminate the person the voters want - that is by definition interference.

Democratic voters: We want Bernie

DNC: No you don't

Click to expand...

In a way, sure. But as I said, there are no laws that state that the DNC has to choose the most popular candidate as their nominee. They get to set their own rules on who can run, and they can change them at any time. They could run the primaries, Bernie could win 100% of the vote, and they could pick Steve from Nebraska as their nominee. People would riot and the party would be finished, but there's nothing at all that says that they can't do that.

Again, you'll get no argument from me that this is the right thing to do. But it's not illegal.

hislegacy said:

Bernie Sanders has the money, the votes and the momentum in many ways.

Yet the DNC is changing rules, and very much looks like a repeat of 2016 when they very openly sabotaged Bernie for someone they wanted instead.

Is this not election interference? It sure seems that the Elites are making the decisions over what the voters want.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, while I don't agree with what they're doing, what the DNC is doing is legal. They make the rules regarding their party's nomination; they can change them as they see fit.

The bigger question therefore becomes: is it moral to change the rules in order to exclude a certain person or persons?

Clearly it is not. Unfortunately, such behavior is pretty much universal not only on both sides of the political aisle, but in most of human history.

The Sanhedrin pretty much tossed their rule book out the window when they tried Jesus and brought him to Pilate.

When blacks were given the right to vote, the Jim Crow South found all sorts of "legal" means to disqualify them.

The GOP gets in hot water on a regular basis when they decide the gerrymander -- ahem, "re-draw" political districts to their advantage.

Now it's the DNC's turn...

Some day, the elites just might go one step too far over the line, and the people will kick in their doors and drag them to ye olde guillotine...

...today is not that day.

hislegacy said:

How do the Democratic voters feel about having their voices silenced?

Click to expand...

You asked whether it was election interference. This is a different question.

hislegacy said:

Please note the definition of interference:

in•ter•fer•ence ĭn″tər-fîr′ənsn.

• The act or an instance of hindering, obstructing, or impeding.
• n.
  Something that hinders, obstructs, or impedes.

Changing the rules to stop a popular candidate from receiving the votes of your own party members is "the act of hindering" the voters from exercising their rights.

Click to expand...

What rights? We're talking about a political party, not a government entity.

hislegacy said:

Some references:

DNC panel adopts rule requiring candidates to run, serve as a Democrat

A new rule adopted by the DNC may block Bernie Sanders from running as a Democrat in 2020

DNC members discuss rules change to stop Sanders at convention

Click to expand...

The DNC is not known for fairness, but they are allowed to make their own rules.

Just as, many could claim, the senate not allowing witnesses interfered with finding the truth. But, the senate also gets to make their own trial rules.

I do think that the DNC should prevent Bernie from entering into the party primaries to begin with if they don't believe he should run for president as a democratic party nominee..

There's a lot of money and time going into the primary races and if they don't think he should get the nomination based on political differences with official party stances then they should refuse the entry into the primary itself and tell him to run 3rd party.

That would be the right thing.

I have to wonder if even Bernie wants Bernie to be the nominee.

Speedwell said:

How the DNC runs its nomination procedure is entirely its own business.

Click to expand...

Wrong. The Iowa Democratic Party is not the same as the DNC and must abide by state laws. For the IDP and DNC to agree on Iowa's caucus date, they need the state to change its stupid law regarding that.

hislegacy said:

Is this not election interference?

Click to expand...

No. The Democratic part gets to make the rules for who gets their nomination.

So are the Republican's guilty of election interference? My recollection is that the RNC has had a similar rule for decades. More to the point, is it election interference for the RNC (in most states) to require that you be a Republican in order to vote for a Republican candidate? If a candidate is not required to be a member of the party, why should voters have to be a member of the party to vote for that candidate?

I don't think it is unreasonable for a party to claim that you must be a member of the party to be the nominee of that party for president. Nor, from what I can see, does it block Sanders (since he is running for the Democratic nomination) -- just that Sanders has had to affirm that he is a Democrat and will serve as a Democrat if elected President.

hislegacy said:

They are not interfering with the election, just the rules for the election? Doesn't make sense to me. If Democratic voters want Bernie, and the DNC is changing the rules to eliminate the person the voters want - that is by definition interference.

Democratic voters: We want Bernie

DNC: No you don't

Click to expand...

Picking a party candidate is not part of the election. It is part of party politics. The courts validated this when they said that the DNC was allowed to pick their candidate in 2016 after it was shown that they had given Hillary the debate questions ahead of time.

Bernie is free to run as an independent separate from the Democratic Party. I think he should be running as a Socialist since that is what he claims to want. The DNC is right to be concern that Bernie's beliefs really don't represent the Democratic Party and he won't forward their political agenda.

Bernie can run for President even if he is not selected by the DNC. That is why it is not an election interference issue. This is a party politics issue.

SimplyMe said:

So are the Republican's guilty of election interference? My recollection is that the RNC has had a similar rule for decades. More to the point, is it election interference for the RNC (in most states) to require that you be a Republican in order to vote for a Republican candidate? If a candidate is not required to be a member of the party, why should voters have to be a member of the party to vote for that candidate?

I don't think it is unreasonable for a party to claim that you must be a member of the party to be the nominee of that party for president. Nor, from what I can see, does it block Sanders (since he is running for the Democratic nomination) -- just that Sanders has had to affirm that he is a Democrat and will serve as a Democrat if elected President.

Click to expand...

nvm ... misread post that I was responding to

hislegacy said:

Bernie Sanders has the money, the votes and the momentum in many ways.

Yet the DNC is changing rules, and very much looks like a repeat of 2016 when they very openly sabotaged Bernie for someone they wanted instead.

Is this not election interference? It sure seems that the Elites are making the decisions over what the voters want.

Click to expand...

Uh... No. You do understand that the parties and their own internal rules are not controlled by election rules and regulations?