Voting Day in the United States

[Anon1787]

Ilhan Omar, a Somali-American, has come down at least as hard, if not harder, on various Arabic groups, countries, and governments for human rights violations and atrocities, as on Israeli policies and actions--including some with which not even all Israelis are comfortable.

I don't think that can be constituted as "anti-Semitic" in general.

M.

We are to believe that her saying that "it's all about the Benjamins baby" isn't an anti-Semitic trope?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/241/text

I really expect any evidence to pierce your own ideological blinders.

Right out of the conservative playbook for avoidance.  I just said "no one is pristine."  That didn't touch your blinders, huh?  The Dems will misbehave, as all human beings will.  But they have a long way to go before they begin threatening the peaceful transference of power of pretending microorganisms are a political ploy.

Keep the buck passing!  It is wearing thin.

P.S.-----Did not find it in the archive.

I granted that it is a threat to a democracy, so I'm not avoiding anything. Helping those people win primaries is also a threat, which you seem to ignore or trivialize.

P.S. Seriously? That's the sort of excuse I'd expect from a student.

[Wahoo Redux]

I granted that it is a threat to a democracy, so I'm not avoiding anything. Helping those people win primaries is also a threat, which you seem to ignore or trivialize.

P.S. Seriously? That's the sort of excuse I'd expect from a student.

Now, now.  Let's not let this get childish.  I tried the advanced search but did not find it.  I'd like to read it, in part to cross-check what I can, so I will try again.  I'm glad to know that database is out there.

Okay.  I'm glad to know you are not trivializing or ignoring anything.  But you were doing what so many conservatives do these days and immediately pivoted to some allegation against the Dems rather than discussing what is happening within your own party.   

[Wahoo Redux]

Found it on your database.  Paywall popped up.

Copy'n'paste it here?

[Wahoo Redux]

Okay, well I found a news stub which I suspect is a reduction of the WaPo article:

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/10/democrats-decision-interfere-gop-primaries-pays/

And a conservative rag which I suspect plagiarized a deal of the WaPo info:

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/campaigns/democratic-meddling-republican-primaries-effective

not far from the Kentucky state line. Pritzker's campaign and the Democratic Governors Association dropped $35 million on ads attacking a more centrist GOP gubernatorial primary rival to Bailey, the more centrist Aurora Mayor Richard Irvin.

So the theory is that dems targeted the stronger, more broadly appealing opponents with "attack ads" (which are the only kind of ads politicians run these days) in order to force a weaker repub candidate to run.  Right?

And then the dems ran ads that supported a GOP candidate who would energize the conservative, hardcore fringe in Maryland yet who would also be less appealing to the more liberal population of that state.

Seeing Cox as an easy mark in the general election against the winner of a crowded Democratic gubernatorial primary fight, Democrats sought to boost him over Gov. Hogan's preferred Republican candidate, former state Commerce and Labor secretary Kelly Schulz. The Democratic Governors Association's DGA Action super PAC spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on airtime in July targeting the Baltimore TV market to air ads on Cox.

The ad called Cox "Trump's hand-picked candidate" and stated that Cox would "protect the 2nd Amendment at all costs." The idea was to energize Republican primary voters who agreed with Cox's stances, even though they did not align with the views of Maryland's general electorate. Maryland is one of the nation's most Democratic states, having supported Biden over Trump in 2020 65% to 32%.

In other words, the dems duped Maryland Republicans into voting for a dead duck rather than a candidate who might have had a better although still slim chance of winning.

And then the dems did the same thing in Pennsylvania.

Attorney General Josh Shapiro had the Democratic nomination to himself, while Republican gubernatorial hopefuls fought it out in a crowded field. But Shapiro and Democratic allies knew who they wanted to run against in November — state Sen. Doug Mastriano, a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist who had helped bus Trump supporters to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6. Mastriano was later subpoenaed by the House Jan. 6 committee.

Shapiro's campaign dropped $840,000 on TV ads highlighting Mastriano's — more than double what the GOP candidate spent on his own ad buys. Shapiro's ads called Mastriano one of "Trump's strongest supporters" and highlighted his belief that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

Mastriano won his primary with 43.8% of the vote, beating out an otherwise staunch conservative, former Rep. Lou Barletta by more than 23 percentage points.

Is this the substance of the WaPo article?

It is interesting that only the WaPo and a couple of conservative mouthpieces have run with this.

Well, whatever.  This sounds firstly like our broken system of campaigning to me, and secondly like the Trumpees are a pretty vulnerable, easily-manipulatable bunch.

Perhaps there should be regulations against this, but it does sound like 1st Amendment stuff to get rational campaign ads on television.

I personally would not support this practice in a political party (I am an independent) but it is simply more dirty politics.  I would be surprised if the Republicans did not do the same thing (seems like they got a little help from the Rooskies in 2020).  If not, the Republicans will use this tactic next election cycle.

But again, this is not insanity, it is simply our bad way of choosing our leaders, and ultimately the fault falls on the heads of those people who think the government is coming for their guns.  We need to be smarter than this.

On Edit: I do find this story in other places.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.

[mahagonny]

Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.

You can believe that. I find another explanation more plausible. They do not believe they are playing with fire, because they understand the threat to 'democracy' posed by the Jan 6 antics and Trump's antics have been greatly, intentionally exaggerated. What they are interested in in is power, pure and simple, and they accept the risks that come with their tactics.

[Kron3007]

Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.

It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy.  This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing  the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.

From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party. 

The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.

[mahagonny]

Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.

It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy.  This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing  the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.

From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party. 

The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.

In order to show that democrats are worried about losing their democracy, you need to show that they want a democracy. They do not. They want a woke religion-state.

ETA:
What the democrats on this thread, (or anywhere, in private) say they support or say they do not support is really not one of the dynamics that is getting us to where we are today. The noisy ones in the democratic party, the squad, et al, the woke mob, abetted by the legacy media, are intimidating the fewer sane democrats who remain into shutting up for fear of being canceled as bigots xenophobes, transphobia, etc. They rule.

Legacy media are a big problem today. They use their venerable status, earned by journalists decades ago of far better quality than the ones present today, to cast themselves as the political center (least biased) with the help of left biased fact checkers. Whereas people like Ben Shapiro honestly announce that they are conservative.

https://www.poynter.org/ethics-trust/2021/us-ranks-last-among-46-countries-in-trust-in-media-reuters-institute-report-finds/

[Kron3007]

Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.

It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy.  This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing  the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.

From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party. 

The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.

In order to show that democrats are worried about losing their democracy, you need to show that they want a democracy. They do not. They want a woke religion-state.

ETA:
What the democrats on this thread, (or anywhere, in private) say they support or say they do not support is really not one of the dynamics that is getting us to where we are today. The noisy ones in the democratic party, the squad, et al, the woke mob, abetted by the legacy media, are intimidating the fewer sane democrats who remain into shutting up for fear of being canceled as bigots xenophobes, transphobia, etc. They rule.

Legacy media are a big problem today. They use their venerable status, earned by journalists decades ago of far better quality than the ones present today, to cast themselves as the political center (least biased) with the help of left biased fact checkers. Whereas people like Ben Shapiro honestly announce that they are conservative.

https://www.poynter.org/ethics-trust/2021/us-ranks-last-among-46-countries-in-trust-in-media-reuters-institute-report-finds/

They are not the ones denying the outcome of elections.They were not happy when Trump won, but I don't remember them trying to overturn the results.  They also are not the ones happy to accept Russian help to win.

As for party members being silenced by the extreme elements of their party, you should look in the mirror.  Anyone who opposed Trump early on in the repub party were sidelined.  Biden his hardly what I would call extreme, the Dems ended up running a pretty moderate candidate.

[mahagonny]

I believe I mentioned this already. Perhaps you missed it. I've seen the video. Hillary Clinton: 'Republicans are already planning how to literally steal the 2024 election.'

Stacey Abrams.

Biden his hardly what I would call extreme, the Dems ended up running a pretty moderate candidate.

They ran a moderate candidate and elected an extreme one. Saying 'democracy is on the ballot' was another one of his many bombastic stunts. Using the DOJ and FBI the way he has is anything but moderate.

Kron, why do you think Americans distrust the media so much?

[Kron3007]

I believe I mentioned this already. Perhaps you missed it. I've seen the video. Hillary Clinton: 'Republicans are already planning how to literally steal the 2024 election.'

Stacey Abrams.

Biden his hardly what I would call extreme, the Dems ended up running a pretty moderate candidate.

They ran a moderate candidate and elected an extreme one. Saying 'democracy is on the ballot' was another one of his many bombastic stunts. Using the DOJ and FBI the way he has is anything but moderate.

Kron, why do you think Americans distrust the media so much?

To the first part.  The Republicans literally did try to deny/steal the 2020 election, so maybe she is just stating fact?  Trump has demo started he will deny results, so it is likely this will continue and he would try to steal the next one, learning from his first failed attempt. 

As for why Americans distrust media so much, I would hope the answer is Fox, but alas...

[mahagonny]

'He [Trump] knows he shouldn't be the president.' - Nancy Pelosi, circa 2018 [tears up State Of Union Address on National TV]

Maybe if DeSantis is elected in 2024 we'll get treated to some more 'mostly peaceful demonstrations' featuring arson, looting, assault and homicide. Go, democrats. Riots are your thing.

As for why Americans distrust media so much, I would hope the answer is Fox, but alas...

And you'd be mostly wrong, and I'm sure you know that, because conservative, even middle- conservative media is in the minority.

Trump has demo started he will deny results, so it is likely this will continue and he would try to steal the next one, learning from his first failed attempt. 

Perhaps the 2024 elections will be run differently, and better, than the 2020 ones were. Is that an acceptable thing to wonder about, democrats? How about if Donald Trump is the one wondering about it?

[mahagonny]

con't

In spite of her considerable IQ and energy, Stacey Abrams is the only democrat I know of who was clumsy enough to tank her campaign while advocating for the right to abortion. 'No fetal heartbeat at six weeks -- it's a hoax.' Nice going.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Anon is right that DCCC spent $millions advertising on behalf of extreme Rs during the primary, in hopes that primary voters would nominate lunatics (which they did) and that these lunatics would struggle to win in general elections (which they did). This was playing with fire, to be sure.

It is playing with fire, but their actual intent is to give the Republicans a worse chance of winning, not destroy democracy.  This is completely different than supporting or even dismissing  the Jan 6 gang and related events, which was the original whataboutism this was about.

From this thread, it seems the liberal leaning members are willing to accept this is bad practice by the Dems and do not support it, while the Repubs simply deflect rather than simply admitting there is a rotten core (or segment) in their party. 

The Democrats are not perfect, but modern Republicans are on a while different level.

I'm not putting it in the same ballpark (even in the same stadium) as attacks on democracy from Trump and the Republicans. January 6th and the lies/conspiracies designed to undermine faith in the democratic process are traitorous as far as I'm concerned. But Democrats were playing with fire in a dangerous way with that strategy, especially in a midterm year when Republicans had every fundamental advantage.

[mahagonny]

Maybe y'all should thank the Supreme Court for keeping the 'red wave' down to a ripple...https://www.salon.com/2022/11/09/are-still-angry-over-the-roe-overturn--abortion-rights-win-big-across-the-us/