If you have two potential opponents, a slightly crazy one and a really crazy one, and you think you’re more likely to be able to beat the really crazy one then it’s a calculated risk to try and help the really crazy one beat the slightly crazy one for you. Your gamble doesn’t pay off if suddenly the really crazy one beats you though.
Not only that, the article states that they’ve only succeeded 4 out of 13 times getting the really crazy one nominated. So they’re playing with fire and wasting millions.
Which one is the slightly crazy one, would that be the one that’s conducting a literal genocide right now?
They’ve always been pretty open about supporting extremist nutjobs in swing districts, because extremist nutjobs do terribly in general elections in swing districts.
deleted by creator
This is some next-level fucked up man-behind-the-man-behind-the-curtain conspiracy bullshit.
It’s literally a documented fact.
Has anyone reported on it aside from a self-proclaimed conservative news outlet?
Edit: Just found NPR reporting on it
That doesn’t change that this planet can’t burn up soon enough.
Yay context!
a number of Democrats tried to boost far-right Republican candidates whom they deemed easier to beat in November.
The strategy seems to have paid off: In high-profile races where Democratic candidates or groups successfully used the strategy during the primaries, all of the Republicans they helped have either lost or are trailing, two days after Election Day.
A perfect example of short term thinking that plagues US politics. Democrats boosted popularity of the far right to win a primary. This directly contributed to the republicans party sliding further into MAGA territory. Now, dems are looking at a wipe out by Trump in the coming election. This continues the great tradition of liberals ushering in fascism.
This is so stupid. Essentially 50 million into the money pit.
Nice to see you truthful once in awhile. Many don’t believe that the US/Russia/China are backing far right around the world despite the fact
