Well that certainly is a lot of links you've got there. And you've used them so well - pointing out how they relate, etc etc.

I was expecting you to make an effort but hey I know finding and pasting links is a lot of work for some random fistfight over who's more better at fighting evil. So, okay, let's see what we have here.

So you open up with a quote from jacobin - pass. That's - that's not evidence of anything, that's opinion. "We contend that the candidates with the best chance of winning are the ones with an orientation similar to that of Sanders" Yeah yeah good luck in any red state which not sure if they're aware, there are a few of, and just to rig everything good and proper they gave those shitholes electoral votes. If I was in a shithole state, would I love to elect someone like Sanders? Absolutely. A few candidates like that run every so often. They always get killed. Running an unpopular candidate is not the DNC keeping third-parties from being active. They can do that all day long with all the money it takes for a goddamned filing fee. Do they? Nope. Because they're not serious. They're not. Serious.

Anyway, let's see what your mystery links are:

• #1 well that's the link of the OP we're commenting in. I'm going to ignore that as anyone would, because it's already been commented on. Adding it as a link is just weird or desperate.
• #2 Ah, DWS. Yes. Well linked. The most outlandish, most reported, and most backlashed "insider" rigging ever. Not sure what you want here, but - yes. Everyone thought that was bad. That's why it was a huge fucking blow up and is constantly talked about to this very day.
• #3 Another link about DWS, great. Good job repeating yourself there. "Marshall told The Intercept that he didn’t recall the sleazy e-mail. But then he claimed it wasn’t an attempted hit job on Sanders." lol
• #4 A THIRD link to the same thing - wow you sure do have a lot of evidence here - three stories about the same thing. Can there be four?
• #5 Google link requires a login - sorry, pass.
• #6 Oh hey look a fourth link about DWS. I'm pretty sure one link would have sufficed, but your desperation to make it look like a lot of evidence kinda backfired here.
• #7 Ah! Finally something different, thank goodness. More Intercept reporting, but that's fine. What does it say;

The "mass exodus" of party staffers following the progressive takeover of the Nevada Democratic Party leadership, as well as the establishment's funneling of hundreds of thousands of dollars out of party coffers in anticipation of the results, is detailed in new reporting by The Intercept, which described the election outcome as the culmination of a years-long "battle between the insurgent progressive wing of the party and what's known in Nevada as the Reid machine--a tightly run operation still guided by former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid."

Well that's interesting. As it was peak covid ,

As the coronavirus pandemic continues to limit in-person campaigning, Whitmer and Segerblom competed for the endorsement of Nevada’s various Democratic clubs in a series of Zoom meetings leading up to the election.

After all that exciting Zoom campaigning, tens of thousands of voters stormed the ballot boxes to demand socialist policie- wait, sorry not tens of thousands. Just a few tho. . wait . . a thousand? . . . less than a thousand? Five hundred. Less? Three hundred.

Whitmer received 248 votes to Segerblom’s 216 for the chair position.

Okay so 32. Still. That's a mandate baby.

So the Las Vegas Democratic Socialists primaried all the Democratic candidates as a result of a "years long battle" and the DNC said fine good luck? Gosh I wonder why they couldn't get along. Probably because the DNC was desperate to do the genocides and the hero LVDS party refused to play any role in such atrocities. Or - it's possible the LVDS were led by insufferable pricks who failed at all attempts to work together. Who can say?

This has some interesting takes on it though:

But elected Democrats have sharply criticized the party under Whitmer, including the removal of access to a key voter information database (a charge Whitmer has denied), her endorsement of a challenger to Sisolak’s appointed lieutenant governor in the 2022 primary, and six-figure party contracts she awarded to personal allies.

Monroe-Moreno told The Nevada Independent last month that the “vast majority” of on-the-ground efforts that led to Democratic victories “did not come from the state party.” 

Ahead of Saturday's election, Monroe-Moreno’s unity slate received a wave of endorsements from labor groups — including a rare direct endorsement from the powerful Culinary Workers Union — as well as a host of current and former elected Democrats. 

Though Whitmer did earn the support of the Stonewall Democrats and several county-party leaders in rural Nevada, she also lost the support of the Las Vegas Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which announced it would not endorse any candidate and called the party a “dead end.” [Edit: Ouch! Hoisted by her own petard eh] 

The weeks leading up to the election were otherwise fraught, as some Democrats accused Whitmer of improperly purging more than 200 members from the state central committee ahead of the election. Whitmer denied the claims, alleging instead that the removals came as routine clean up based on mandatory meeting attendance. However, the incident — in addition to another letter raising concerns over the vote process in January — was one of several factors that led to the involvement of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), which ran the online, email-based infrastructure for Saturday’s election.

So despite being "a true comrade"(.) the Democratic voters booted her first chance.

Well, that last one was at least interesting.