ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

[NorthernHawkeye]

"It's hypocritical because Democrats have been saying that election deniers threaten our very democracy. So you're going to go out and in effect campaign for an election denier because you made a political calculation that it might serve your interest. I think it means Democrats cede the high ground on this."

ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

An ABC panel criticized Democratic efforts to meddle in Republican primaries by boosting candidates they deem to be too extreme, arguing the strategy is "hypocritical."

www.foxnews.com

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Agreed. Many have said this.

 

[Bank of Hawk]

Politics is a dirty ass business.

 

[Ol' Dirty Bastard]

So the Democrats are making election deniers run for office?

 

[goldmom]

What if these nuts win?

 

[eb05]

hopefully this publicity makes the madness stop. it’s deplorable behavior.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

All is fair in politics.
This type thing has been going on since the inception of voting.
If dems screw themselves over because of doing this they deserve what they get.

 

[bhawk24bob]

I appreciated the Illinois Governors' race becoming the most expensive ever as the land monster used his own money to prop up an R candidate that's too stupid to tie his own shoes while a now out of state billionaire wrote a blank check for an R candidate that lost the primary because he ran on nothing.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

So the Democrats are making election deniers run for office?

Sorry, but not one of those asshats should be supported for any reason. To support a Trump acolyte is the worst kind of hypocrisy and they should be ashamed - there's no justification that can excuse it.

 

[BioHawk]

They are probably right, but this is the field the GOP has orchestrated so don't cry when Democrats play on it.

 

[MeetTheFerentz]

GOPers accusing Dems of dirty politics and doing whatever it takes to win an election is just adorable.

 

[ConvenientParking]

This would irritate me if I donated to DCCC to help candidates nationwide that would protect abortion rights, voting rights, etc. Fortunately I did not donate to DCCC. Still not a fan of it.

 

[CLUB215]

All is fair in politics.
This type thing has been going on since the inception of voting.
If dems screw themselves over because of doing this they deserve what they get.

Well it screws us over too, see.

 

[ThorneStockton]

I understand the strategy, don't like it at all.

 

[pjhawk]

The people running the Democratic party these days irritate the hell out of me. If just one of these nuts slips through it's bad enough, but if it turns into a wave election, cripes.

 

[Chishawk1425]

 

[tarheelbybirth]

View embedded media

This isn't about who the GOP has running. - that's on them. It's about providing material support to someone who wants to destroy the country. That can't be defended under any circumstances.

 

[artradley]

Sorry, but not one of those asshats should be supported for any reason. To support a Trump acolyte is the worst kind of hypocrisy and they should be ashamed - there's no justification that can excuse it.

It’s not merely hypocritical, it’s dangerous. Some of the crazies can and will win.

 

[Chishawk1425]

This isn't about who the GOP has running. - that's on them. It's about providing material support to someone who wants to destroy the country. That can't be defended under any circumstances.

But it most certainly is. THAT is their platform and candidate pool. Some are MAGA ****s light best case they are all loyal to the Fascist in Chief besides a handful. Yes the guy in Michigan voted to Impeach I don't like what happened to him but the midterm forecast flipped from toss up to lean Democrat now. The GOP is all in on destroying us so this strategy makes sense but I hope it is discontinued going forward. I get what you are saying though, believe me.

 

[HawkNester]

"It's hypocritical because Democrats have been saying that election deniers threaten our very democracy. So you're going to go out and in effect campaign for an election denier because you made a political calculation that it might serve your interest. I think it means Democrats cede the high ground on this."

ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

An ABC panel criticized Democratic efforts to meddle in Republican primaries by boosting candidates they deem to be too extreme, arguing the strategy is "hypocritical."

www.foxnews.com

Thanks for admitting your side is running crazy nut jobs.

 

[Chishawk1425]

Thanks for admitting your side is running crazy nut jobs.

That is the takeaway

 

[The Governator]

This isn't about who the GOP has running. - that's on them. It's about providing material support to someone who wants to destroy the country. That can't be defended under any circumstances.

You can't claim MAGA is the biggest threat to democracy and then spend millions of dollars promoting them to beat more moderate candidates in their primaries.

We need to do everything we can to minimize their messaging and campaigns... not put it on a loud speaker.

 

[Chishawk1425]

 

[tarheelbybirth]

View embedded media

Then run against him on his record. You simply do NOT give money to an even more extreme candidate - especially a Trump-backed extremist - because you think that person would be easier to beat.

 

[Uniformed_ReRe]

Well it screws us over too, see.

^^^This.

In a hyperpolarized climate, right-leaning voters may still vote for the "extremist" candidate.

 

[The Governator]

Then run against him on his record. You simply do NOT give money to an even more extreme candidate - especially a Trump-backed extremist - because you think that person would be easier to beat.

That is actually a prime example of what this thread is about. Meijer voted to impeach Trump, but his MAGA opponent is receiving funding from the DCCC.

But I guess he voted against VRA, so he's gotta go in favor of his MAGA counterpart.

 

[Chishawk1425]

Ohhhh

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

They are probably right, but this is the field the GOP has orchestrated so don't cry when Democrats play on it.

Then Democrats should stop saying they're a "threat to democracy" when they support them. Hypocrites...party before country.

 

[Kinnick.At.Night]

Both sides of the aisle do everything unethical and “wrong” they accuse the other side of doing. They’re all crooks. When are people going to learn that?

 

[TylerJ76]

Both sides of the aisle do everything unethical and “wrong” they accuse the other side of doing. They’re all crooks. When are people going to learn that?

This.

When people realize politicians don't give a shit about the people, and it's all about power and money, the better off we will be.

 

[BioHawk]

Then Democrats should stop saying they're a "threat to democracy" when they support them. Hypocrites...party before country.

No, that's not how it works. Just because you hate the DH doesn't mean you are going to give up clear tactical advantages when the game is played. This is what completely unregulated campaign finance causes. It's not hypocritical to play by the rules others have made. You can hate the rules, but understand you have to play by them in order to be competitive and want to change the rules if you ever get in power.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

No, that's not how it works. Just because you hate the DH doesn't mean you are going to give up clear tactical advantages when the game is played. This is what completely unregulated campaign finance causes. It's not hypocritical to play by the rules others have made. You can hate the rules, but understand you have to play by them in order to be competitive and want to change the rules if you ever get in power.

Sorry...no excuse for supporting "threats to democracy".

If they think they aren't actually "threats to democracy" then your point is valid.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

No, that's not how it works. Just because you hate the DH doesn't mean you are going to give up clear tactical advantages when the game is played. This is what completely unregulated campaign finance causes. It's not hypocritical to play by the rules others have made. You can hate the rules, but understand you have to play by them in order to be competitive and want to change the rules if you ever get in power.

Sorry...no excuse for supporting "threats to democracy".

If they think they aren't actually "threats to democracy" then your point is valid.

 

[goldmom]

I’m thinking that voters of both parties (or at least a lot more of us) need to view all the candidates with more of a jaundiced eye and pay closer attention to who the candidates are - where they’ve come from and what they’ve done. If your opponents accuse you of being a plant, find out why they’re saying that.
Got a flyer in your mailbox? Look at the fine print on the bottom for the name of the “committee” who paid for it and Google them. Dig a bit.
Educated voters scare politicians. That’s for a good reason. 😈

 

[mooresville hawk]

I’m thinking that voters of both parties (or at least a lot more of us) need to view all the candidates with more of a jaundiced eye and pay closer attention to who the candidates are - where they’ve come from and what they’ve done. If your opponents accuse you of being a plant, find out why they’re saying that.
Got a flyer in your mailbox? Look at the fine print on the bottom for the name of the “committee” who paid for it and Google them. Dig a bit.
Educated voters scare politicians. That’s for a good reason. 😈

Too many people just vote party line. It is hard to really get to know the candidates and what they truly believe, but that does not mean we should not try.

 

[BioHawk]

Sorry...no excuse for supporting "threats to democracy".

If they think they aren't actually "threats to democracy" then your point is valid.

That's a related, but separate issue. Lack of campaign finance regulation certainly is a threat to democracy, but those rules have already been disregarded. So, it's the world we live in now. The question you should be asking is, "Which party is more likely to fix this?" If you answered with, "Republicans", you would be wrong.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

That's a related, but separate issue. Lack of campaign finance regulation certainly is a threat to democracy, but those rules have already been disregarded. So, it's the world we live in now. The question you should be asking is, "Which party is more likely to fix this?" If you answered with, "Republicans", you would be wrong.

Neither party will "fix" this. They both want one thing...power.

 

[joelbc1]

"It's hypocritical because Democrats have been saying that election deniers threaten our very democracy. So you're going to go out and in effect campaign for an election denier because you made a political calculation that it might serve your interest. I think it means Democrats cede the high ground on this."

ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

ABC panel criticizes Democrats meddling in GOP primaries: 'Embarrassingly hypocritical'

An ABC panel criticized Democratic efforts to meddle in Republican primaries by boosting candidates they deem to be too extreme, arguing the strategy is "hypocritical."

www.foxnews.com

What about the few states that feature “open primaries”? Should they not have primaries at all? What about the state’s that run the Top2 primary find sheds against each other, regardless of the candidates political party? Should they be banned also?

 

[BioHawk]

Neither party will "fix" this. They both want one thing...power.

They will if you make them. But you have to elect the right people and for something like this, which really requires a constitutional amendment to make sure it isn't dismantled within a decade, you need to get 2/3 of the states with the right people in charge as well. But what won't do it is saying "Both sides are dumb" and then just shrugging your shoulders and then yelling at anyone who suggests that using the system that actually exists as an agent for change is a stupid idea. I didn't say it would be easy, but that's because we have waited too long to react to it.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

They will if you make them. But you have to elect the right people and for something like this, which really requires a constitutional amendment to make sure it isn't dismantled within a decade, you need to get 2/3 of the states with the right people in charge as well. But what won't do it is saying "Both sides are dumb" and then just shrugging your shoulders and then yelling at anyone who suggests that using the system that actually exists as an agent for change is a stupid idea. I didn't say it would be easy, but that's because we have waited too long to react to it.

I agree but I think you're whistling in the wind buddy.