News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army by CydeWeys on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @03:18PM (#22369604)
"The Democratic party is really not required to have any sort of fair process for deciding their candidate for president. It can be as transparently crooked and disgusting as this and really that's just how he chose to operate within the legal frameworks established by folks like him."

So what though? What point is this rebutting? If a process is crooked and disgusting then damn straight you're gonna have people complaining about it and demanding they do better, as you see here.

Re:Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army by AndrewUnmuted on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @03:25PM (#22369676)
My point is rebutting the point made by the poster before me, who said there was a real story here.

I disagree. This is somewhat par for the course. For many people, this could be the first time they experience the disappointment of how corrupt folks like Bloomberg operate within the political sphere. However, these people would be incorrect to chalk this up as historically or even politically noteworthy, for many of us this is rather unsurprising and the story has already been told many times. Why rehash these tired tropes when Bloomberg presents so many new, unique, and significant issues that we now must address?

Re:Bloomberg bankrolls a social-media army by CydeWeys on Thursday February 20, 2020 @07:32PM (#22379962)
That the process is crooked and disgusting is absolutely the realest story that there is here. Again, I don't understand your point. You're just being dismissive and accepting of a bad status quo for no reason other than that you (but not others!) are resigned to it.

In other words, just because you don't care doesn't mean that others don't. And the news isn't writing stories catering to solely your interests; there's millions of other readers to consider.