Didn't happen last year when Kamila was selected by the leaders.

But in normal years candidates are successful because of the amount of money they can raise. The more they can raise the more brainwashing ads they can buy. The non so secret cabal is the donor class.

Anyone can run? You must meet requirements on age and how long you have lived in the US. You must pay fees and provide signatures for each state. If doing it through a party you have to meet their rules.

Cost to get on most states ballots at a basic level is a million. You could do it for free if you dont want to appear on any ballots.

The Kamala thing was unfortunate, but I'm not sure what else they could do. Biden bowed out too late to rerun the primaries, and the whole purpose of the vice president is to take over when the president can't perform any more.

The ideal is that anyone can run, but it's not that easy to just start an independent campaign that has a decent chance of winning. Local races are the most realistic "anyone can run" arena, but once you need a lot of travel and logistics in a large region, you either need a lot of your own resources or the support of an existing large political organization.

You do know the former head of the DNC was forced to retire after the leaked emails outed her, and basically all of the top of the DNC, extensively conspiring against Sanders in favor of Clinton? [1] You're right the cabal isn't secret - it's literally the DNC, and who they want to win is who will win, one way or the other. Just reading over that source - it's insane how blatant these people can be:

"In May 2016, MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski accused the DNC of bias against the Sanders campaign and called on Wasserman Schultz to step down. Wasserman Schultz was upset at the negative media coverage of her actions, and she emailed the political director of NBC News, Chuck Todd, that such coverage of her "must stop". Describing the coverage as the "LAST straw", she ordered the DNC's communications director to call MSNBC president Phil Griffin to demand an apology from Brzezinski."

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Commi...

I mean, why wouldn't they? Bernie is not a Democrat, he's independent. Winning elections for their own party is the whole reason DNC exists.

If somebody runs as a Democrat then they're running as a Democrat. At that point the entire point of democracy is that it should be up to the people to decide if he is true to the ideals of the party - and the preferred candidate, not the apparatchiks. In practice that is not what happens which makes the entire notion of democracy just farcical. On top of this the apparatchiks are often living in a bubble disconnected from society, which can lead to them regularly making self destructive decisions.

So for instance Sanders would almost certainly have beaten Trump in 2016 - the polls showed him ahead by double digit margins, whereas they had Clinton in for a very close election. Had the DNC listened to their own voters, the country would likely look very different today, and in a way far more favorable to DNC interests, at least if they even believe in their own platform.

A primary role of political parties has traditionally been to filter candidates. It's literally their raison d'etre

Sanders wasn't even a Democrat. He switched solely to run in the primary. It's neither scandalous nor surprising that the DNC would try to put up barriers between him and the nomination.

If the RNC had done it's job, Trump would never have been allowed into the primary in the first place.

> A primary role of political parties has traditionally been to filter candidates. It's literally their raison d'etre

Yes, that's exactly why they shouldn't exist.

I don't know about that, but if they exist, they need to be stronger institutions that take more of an active role in picking/filtering candidates.

The introduction of the partisan primary has been an unmitigated disaster for our politics, by massively empowering the most zealous fringes within parties