Why is it the responsibility of Democrats to help Republicans lie to their primary voters? The ad against Gibbs isn't "couched as an attack ad," it *is* an attack ad. It's exactly how the Democrats will run against him if he wins the primary. And, it's all fact and defensible opinion. It's not the fault of Democrats that a plurality of R…
Why is it the responsibility of Democrats to help Republicans lie to their primary voters? The ad against Gibbs isn't "couched as an attack ad," it *is* an attack ad. It's exactly how the Democrats will run against him if he wins the primary. And, it's all fact and defensible opinion. It's not the fault of Democrats that a plurality of Republican voters are insane, nor is it their responsibility to try and protect someone who will be voting for Kevin McCarthy to be Speaker next year. It's recognition that "having him in Congress" and "not spending the next two years living through a groundless Biden impeachment" are mutually exclusive results.
They are insane. It's called collective narcissism:
"It describes situations when groups of people hold a collective belief that their group or organization is superior to others....Collective narcissism implies that the group feels elevated above other groups." The narcissistic group is characterized by self-seeking validation, sensitivity to criticism and perceived threats, and sanctioned threats of harm to others outside the group.
In the future, there will probably be a Republican Party that can practice some moderation, and people like Peter Meijer might be part of that. But I agree that the Republicans are not that party in 2022, and Meijer, however his conscience might influence him, can't change that. Michigan Democrats should go after that seat and try to get themselves a majority-D delegation in the House.
I am so sick of republicans complaining about a democratic attack ad as “helping” the crazies.
I’ll say it one more time: Personal responsibility. Put the blame where it should be placed. Republican voters.
I’m still waiting for the bulwark team to show me all these good republicans who will stand up to the big lie and refuse to vote for McCarthy. If they are willing to do this loud and often then maybe we have a “good” republican like Adam and Liz but we all know that those politicians don’t exist anymore in this Republican Party.
Ha, I’m not expecting a miracle. I just think it is a bare minimum to ask that they support free and fair elections. It seems that might be asking too much of the Republican Party.
Sarah Longwell constantly talks about how Republicans attack Democrats early and often to define them by their craziest members. And that Democrats' weakness is lack of similar attacks to define Republicans by their craziest members. But when Democrats actually do what Sarah recommends there's a flood of pundits saying "no, don't do that."
We're still wishcasting about a theoretically salvageable/sane Republican base that will somehow miraculously support the good nominees in the Primary if it weren't for those dastardly Democrats. Unfortunately, reality shows that this is not true - the base just doesn't want these normal, sane nominees.
It's why JVL is "always" right and Sarah/Charlie are wrong: the latter are unwilling to see it as fundamentally a voter problem and instead want it to be a leadership problem. There are potentially a host of pyschological/self-interest reasons for why one would think this, but the long story short is that if you aren't willing to see it as an issue of what the voters want, and thus what the party actually is, then any remedy isn't going to address the actual cause.
They are supposedly"boosting" these extreme candidates by telling voters how terrible they are. Meanwhile what are the republican primary opponents saying in their ads? "Don’t listen to those Democratic run ads about my opponent- I can also give you what you want--wink, "wink"
Which is why the Virginia GOP had to pull some backroom tricks and deals to get Youngkin as their candidate because even they know that they can't trust their own voters not to side with the craziest and most dangerous motherfucker out there.
Because the GOP is letting their primary voters pick the candidates for the general election is why I am very optimistic about the Dems keeping the House and expanding their lead in the Senate.
As the Bible says, dogs return to their own vomit.
I agree with you on lots of this except I am not optimistic. There is risk to this strategy and perhaps they didn't conduct a robust risk assessment, but I think they probably did and decided that this strategy is their best bet. Democrats know how much Democracy is at stake--the polling bears that out.
Let's be clear what the strategy is that is being complained about: Democrats are airing ads showing certain R candidates are pro-insurrection, pro-school shooting, pro-forced birth, pro-white nationalist Trump cultists.
And that ^^ up there is being described as boosting the R candidate. Dems don't say one nice thing about the R candidate. It is all negative and it should scare the hell out of anyone that has not sold their soul to Trump yet.
It's a great strategy and it's getting a strong reaction because it is working.
People aren't actually freaked out that it will cause more MAGA to be voted in. They are freaking out because they still have this rosy picture in their mind about saving the Republican party by keeping squishes like Meijer in Congress.
Fuck that, get them all out. None of them except for Liz and Adam deserve to ever grace the halls of Congress again.
Yes, I am with you, just afraid that there is a lot more appetite for the insurrectionists and authoritarian ( or too many people who still will vote for the republican to stick it to the libs) that it does have a risk. I am not a political strategist, but surely, there is a robust risk assessment/modeling process that goes into the plans
I’ll chime in and say it’s nice to also be around like minded folks on the topic of November. I too am a little weary about the immediate results in my district, GA-14. It has been gerrymandered to hell and back (MTG represents TWELVE COUNTIES). Anyway, I am doing my best and encouraging everyone I know around me to actually vote with integrity and not fall for the crazy christo-fascist candidates this fall.
Exactly! If an attack ad that says "Gibbs is dangerous and too conservative for this State. He is a crazy MAGA person and can't be put into power" makes the base rally around him more it seems like it's a "base" problem rather than a "Dem ads" problem.
I can't wait for all the breathless stories about how the Democratic candidate is helping the crazy MAGA in the general election just by running attack ads against the MAGA.
Why is it the responsibility of Democrats to help Republicans lie to their primary voters? The ad against Gibbs isn't "couched as an attack ad," it *is* an attack ad. It's exactly how the Democrats will run against him if he wins the primary. And, it's all fact and defensible opinion. It's not the fault of Democrats that a plurality of Republican voters are insane, nor is it their responsibility to try and protect someone who will be voting for Kevin McCarthy to be Speaker next year. It's recognition that "having him in Congress" and "not spending the next two years living through a groundless Biden impeachment" are mutually exclusive results.
They are insane. It's called collective narcissism:
"It describes situations when groups of people hold a collective belief that their group or organization is superior to others....Collective narcissism implies that the group feels elevated above other groups." The narcissistic group is characterized by self-seeking validation, sensitivity to criticism and perceived threats, and sanctioned threats of harm to others outside the group.
https://psychcentral.com/health/collective-narcissism#definition
There you have it: the GQP. Nut jobs, the willingly stupid, and the criminally violent all in one giant, sweaty rubber room, e.g., MAGA nation.
In the future, there will probably be a Republican Party that can practice some moderation, and people like Peter Meijer might be part of that. But I agree that the Republicans are not that party in 2022, and Meijer, however his conscience might influence him, can't change that. Michigan Democrats should go after that seat and try to get themselves a majority-D delegation in the House.
This. Right. Here.
I am so sick of republicans complaining about a democratic attack ad as “helping” the crazies.
I’ll say it one more time: Personal responsibility. Put the blame where it should be placed. Republican voters.
I’m still waiting for the bulwark team to show me all these good republicans who will stand up to the big lie and refuse to vote for McCarthy. If they are willing to do this loud and often then maybe we have a “good” republican like Adam and Liz but we all know that those politicians don’t exist anymore in this Republican Party.
Ha, I’m not expecting a miracle. I just think it is a bare minimum to ask that they support free and fair elections. It seems that might be asking too much of the Republican Party.
Exactly!
Sarah Longwell constantly talks about how Republicans attack Democrats early and often to define them by their craziest members. And that Democrats' weakness is lack of similar attacks to define Republicans by their craziest members. But when Democrats actually do what Sarah recommends there's a flood of pundits saying "no, don't do that."
We're still wishcasting about a theoretically salvageable/sane Republican base that will somehow miraculously support the good nominees in the Primary if it weren't for those dastardly Democrats. Unfortunately, reality shows that this is not true - the base just doesn't want these normal, sane nominees.
It's why JVL is "always" right and Sarah/Charlie are wrong: the latter are unwilling to see it as fundamentally a voter problem and instead want it to be a leadership problem. There are potentially a host of pyschological/self-interest reasons for why one would think this, but the long story short is that if you aren't willing to see it as an issue of what the voters want, and thus what the party actually is, then any remedy isn't going to address the actual cause.
They are supposedly"boosting" these extreme candidates by telling voters how terrible they are. Meanwhile what are the republican primary opponents saying in their ads? "Don’t listen to those Democratic run ads about my opponent- I can also give you what you want--wink, "wink"
Which is why the Virginia GOP had to pull some backroom tricks and deals to get Youngkin as their candidate because even they know that they can't trust their own voters not to side with the craziest and most dangerous motherfucker out there.
Because the GOP is letting their primary voters pick the candidates for the general election is why I am very optimistic about the Dems keeping the House and expanding their lead in the Senate.
As the Bible says, dogs return to their own vomit.
I agree with you on lots of this except I am not optimistic. There is risk to this strategy and perhaps they didn't conduct a robust risk assessment, but I think they probably did and decided that this strategy is their best bet. Democrats know how much Democracy is at stake--the polling bears that out.
Let's be clear what the strategy is that is being complained about: Democrats are airing ads showing certain R candidates are pro-insurrection, pro-school shooting, pro-forced birth, pro-white nationalist Trump cultists.
And that ^^ up there is being described as boosting the R candidate. Dems don't say one nice thing about the R candidate. It is all negative and it should scare the hell out of anyone that has not sold their soul to Trump yet.
It's a great strategy and it's getting a strong reaction because it is working.
People aren't actually freaked out that it will cause more MAGA to be voted in. They are freaking out because they still have this rosy picture in their mind about saving the Republican party by keeping squishes like Meijer in Congress.
Fuck that, get them all out. None of them except for Liz and Adam deserve to ever grace the halls of Congress again.
Yes, I am with you, just afraid that there is a lot more appetite for the insurrectionists and authoritarian ( or too many people who still will vote for the republican to stick it to the libs) that it does have a risk. I am not a political strategist, but surely, there is a robust risk assessment/modeling process that goes into the plans
💯
I’ll chime in and say it’s nice to also be around like minded folks on the topic of November. I too am a little weary about the immediate results in my district, GA-14. It has been gerrymandered to hell and back (MTG represents TWELVE COUNTIES). Anyway, I am doing my best and encouraging everyone I know around me to actually vote with integrity and not fall for the crazy christo-fascist candidates this fall.
If the sane base existed, those Democratic ads would *help* against Gibbs, not hurt.
Exactly! If an attack ad that says "Gibbs is dangerous and too conservative for this State. He is a crazy MAGA person and can't be put into power" makes the base rally around him more it seems like it's a "base" problem rather than a "Dem ads" problem.
I can't wait for all the breathless stories about how the Democratic candidate is helping the crazy MAGA in the general election just by running attack ads against the MAGA.