There seems to be some upset in the press about this DCCC ad supporting Peter Meijer’s (R-MI-3) far-right primary opponent, John Gibbs. Meijer, as you might recall, is one of the few Republicans who voted for Trump’s second impeachment. The ad doesn’t really “support” Gibbs in a straightforward way – instead it argues that he’s “too conservative”, that he’s endorsed by Trump, that he’s anti-immigration, etc. In other words, the ad is made to appear that electing Gibbs will make the libs cry, and since it is a $425K buy, it will also probably raise Gibbs’ name awareness in the district. It’s made to inform and motivate hard-core Trumpers to vote against Meijer in the primary.
Apparently, Meijer’s district was redrawn and it is now D+3, so the DCCC is thinking that a nutcase beating Meijer sets up a more likely Democratic win. Maybe. There are a lot of issues here:
- Is this a clever ad? No. It reeks of 20 years ago. Now, maybe that’s what will motivate the Trumpers, who watch cable, but this ad is completely cookie-cutter, which is to say, ignorable. Also, why not go balls to the wall instead of being cute? Put together an ad showing Gibbs putting Mexicans in cages and burning down abortion clinics, while Peter Meijer cowers in the corner sucking his thumb. That would probably motivate the Trumpers far more than this weak tea. The reason that the DCCC won’t do that is they want to have it both ways: they want to elevate a Trumper, but they also want to say they didn’t tread on the underlying Democratic message.
- Is this a well-executed tactic that will help flip this district? I’m not sure. $425K is a huge lifeline to a Democratic campaign in a marginal district. The Democrat in the race is Hillary Scholten, who has raised $1.2 million to Meijer’s $2.7 million. She lost by 6 points in 2020, so she’s a credible candidate in what could be a winnable district. Could she perhaps spend the equivalent of 1/3 of her entire fundraising to date better than the DCCC? I’m guessing yes.
- Are Democrats doing bad by trying to prop up MAGAts in primary challenges? Fuck no. Peter Meijer voted the right way a couple of times, but he’s a vote for Kevin McCarthy otherwise. Spare me the pearl clutching about electing a “far right Republican” to a seat. I’m with Gallego on this one:
Finally, fuck Republicans like Peter Meijer. He’s a rich kid who seems to be human-adjacent — he served in Iraq, and has voted for a couple of good bills — but in the end his voting record is little different from MTG or Matt Gaetz. If he were really a good guy, he’d just switch parties. But he won’t, so, again, fuck him, and I hope the nutty Trumper beats him like a rented mule in the primary.
Still, I don’t know if the DCCC’s effort here will make a difference. It’s too cute by half, and the audience for this type of supposedly clever shit is in DC, not Grand Rapids.
matt
I gave up on the DCCC 20 years ago.
dlwchico
And is the plus on this enough to counter the negative of people reading about the DCCC paying for ads for Trump republicans and vowing to not give the DCCC any money ever again?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
my objection is it seems like a bad use of limited resources
if JB Pritzker, whom I’ve also seen criticized for this strategy, wants to use the three or four million of his personal funds that his upstairs housekeeper found while vacuuming under the bed, I’m less bothered, but he could probably spend that more effectively too
insert clever nickname here mistermix
@matt: Me, too. There’s more cleverness in one Fetterman campaign tweet than the entire execution of this strategy.
@dlwchico: Good question.
Also, if Republicans did this, it would be some superPAC financing the ads and not the NRCC.
Lapassionara
Don’t the Republicans do this sort of thing a lot, and doesn’t the press talk about how clever they are when they do it? I can see the problem with doing it in a presidential race. If the nut-job wins, and squeaks by (I know far fetched, but stick with me here), then we have a four year nightmare and come close to losing our global standing not to mention some fundamental rights and our democracy. But for a house seat, the Republicans sending Mark Sanford packing helped Democrat Joe Cunningham win in the Charleston, SC area.
The Moar You Know
This is idiocy.
That $425k should have gone straight to the Dem challenger. Who is running the show over at the DCCC, 20 year old shitposters? (don’t answer that)
lowtechcyclist
This. I keep waiting for evidence that the assorted party orgs (DNC, DSCC, DCCC, DGA, DLCC, did I miss any?) know what they’re doing, but I rarely see any.
Thank goodness it’s pretty easy to find out which Congressional races aren’t foregone conclusions, and give directly to the candidates’ campaigns via ActBlue.
Nicole
I just watched the ad, and I see what you’re saying. Also- it makes it very clear that Gibbs is black (because it shows him a gajillion times) and that’s not helpful for the Dems if the intent is to get him to win the primary over Meijer, who is white. The GOP is solidly the party of White Patriarchy, and why the Democrats don’t seem to fully grasp this I do not understand. Plenty of GOP primary voters will absolutely pick the white guy just because he’s the white guy. A better ad would have been what you suggested, mistermix, as it would have been more entertaining, and just shown Meijer. Most voters I think don’t really have a clear idea of what the other guy looks like and would have shown up to vote against Meijer, not for Gibbs. I will, of course, be overjoyed to be wrong about this.
That said, I don’t think the people screaming that they’ll never donate to the DCCC again actually ever donated in the first place, so I’m not that worried about the backlash. I think it’s a Twitter tempest.
Betty Cracker
@The Moar You Know: I know you said don’t answer that, but I will anyway: No, it’s not 20-year-old shitposters. It would be a lot more clever if so, like Fetterman’s so-far brilliant memefication of Oz.
Betty Cracker
FTR, I think 95% of the MSM concern that Dems are going to be responsible for far-right nutjobs winning seats in Congress because they helped elevate them over more moderate GOP candidates is another species of “only Dems have agency.”
Soprano2
@Nicole: You are not wrong about this.
Baud
@lowtechcyclist:
I’m curious what that evidence would look like, other than counting general election wins.
I can look at any campaign ad and say whether I enjoyed it or not, but I have no way of judging what is effective for voters who need to be convinced.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
This.
If the ad is problematic, what does that say about the Republican candidate? And why isn’t that the story?
Soprano2
I agree that if someone is going to do this it should be a PAC, not the DCCC.
Joe Falco
Are Democrats doing bad to help elevate a MAGAt? Yes. It’s a waste of resources that could be better spent elsewhere and shows a lack of confidence in your candidate to be able to win votes on the merits of their positions or the capability of their campaign in the general election. DCCC would do better by focusing on ways to increase voter registration that will turn out for your side rather than the opposition’s.
Baud
I wonder the DCCC consulted her on strategy. (Is there a contested primary on our side?)
Baud
OT. Newsweek, via reddit.
Betty Cracker
@Baud: The whining about the truly dangerous wingnut gubernatorial candidate Mastriano is PA is particularly egregious, IMO. He stomped the crap out of his opponents. This is who PA Republicans wanted. It’s not Dems’ fault they suck.
Now, if the DCCC tried to elevate pinwheel-eyed crazy person Laura Loomer in the GOP primary in Florida 11th over my terrible incumbent GOP congresscritter Daniel Webster, I’d join in the criticism because the winner of that primary will win the general. But that’s not what they’re doing.
narya
@Baud: Mearshimer? THAT seems weird, just from reading those few sentences (I know him).
Baud
@narya:
The list is here, but the explanations are in Ukrainian.
And apparently I’m on the list!
insert clever nickname here mistermix
@Betty Cracker:
And so much cheaper! They paid under $400 for that Snookie video, as an example.
Eljai
I think it’s funny that Sahil Kapur calls Gibbs the far-right candidate in this race, when Meijer just voted against a bill guaranteeing access to contraception. Or is anti-contraception the new moderate?
zhena gogolia
@narya:
@Baud: For Mearsheimer, they list his “pro-Russian narratives” as “NATO has been in Ukraine since 2014” and “NATO provoked Putin.”
Jesse
@Baud: Just chipped in some coin to Scholten.
Old School
@Baud:
And here I thought Baud was a pseudonym!
Baud
@zhena gogolia:
👍
That’s why they say this is a full service blog.
lowtechcyclist
@Baud: A few things.
For the DNC, it’s that in their public pronouncements, they’ve always struck me as being brain-dead in an inside-the-Beltway sort of manner. And AFAICT, besides raising money to help elect a Dem President, their other main job is to be the public face of the party when we don’t have the White House.
For the DCCC, a couple of things. One is their blackballing of outfits that helped out with primary challengers’ campaigns in the 2020 cycle.
I strongly believe in primaries: to take Markos Moulitsas’ old mantra of “more, better Democrats,” primary challenges are the main door to getting better Dems, given the small number of contestable seats most years. And the DCCC saying, ‘if you help a primary challenger, we’ll do our best to shut you down’ is very much antithetical to how I believe these things should work. Marie Newman is a big improvement over Dan Lipinski. AOC is a big improvement over that faceless guy she beat.
The other thing that’s been pointed out in the past (don’t know if it’s still true, but if it’s not, it hasn’t been that long) is that they seem to have a bit too much of an eye on their W/L record when it comes to helping out in a race. Which means if there’s one race where a Dem has an 80% chance of winning, and another where a Dem has a 20% chance (I’m making these numbers up, but this is the idea), they’d jump in to make sure the 80% candidate wins, but not be there for the 20% candidate, because the latter would be unlikely to help their winning percentage.
The DSCC, DGA, DLCC, I honestly can’t say anything about. Just that I’ve got no reason to believe they’re any better than the party orgs I can see. I’ve given nontrivial money to the DLCC in the past, because we need to compete in state legislative races (true now more than ever). But I have no idea how well or poorly they’ve spent the money they get.
insert clever nickname here mistermix
@Eljai:
Meijer is in his mid-30s and married with a couple of kids. Presumably someone in that relationship is using contraception. Perhaps Kapur can ask him. Seems like these anti-contraception Republicans are able to avoid having babies somehow.
Baud
@lowtechcyclist:
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question.
artem1s
There are times that rooting for injuries is appropriate. But it’s rare that spending DCCC money is appropriate. The Akin/McAskill race comes to mind. But frankly we are living in a world where there is no one who is awful enough for the GOP to consider not fit for office. And the people in that district are the ones that pay when the DCCC guesses wrong about whether one GOP candidate is more beatable than another. The stakes have gotten too high to be playing that game.
zhena gogolia
@Baud: In case you’re interested, Greenwald said the US should not provoke a nuclear war by helping Ukraine, and something about there being unguarded (I think, my Ukrainian is weak) biolaboratories in Ukraine. Tulsi says we’ve been provoking Russia for many years, and we have funded biolaboratories in Ukraine that can disseminate fatal pathogens.
Karen
Dems are playing with fire by counting on voters who think these nutso Rethugs are too nuts. What happens if not enough Dems turn out to vote and the Rethugs turnout to vote for those psychopths? We’re stuck with them. In Maryland they played that game and we ended up with Qanon Cox. What if he wins?
Baud
@zhena gogolia:
Thanks!
What was Jacques Baud’s transgression?
RaflW
The key to me is that the DCCC isn’t spending that $425K on Scholten. If they are going to eventually also spend that or more directly supporting her, then I’ll be less frustrated. This cutesy shit is why I mostly ignore/delete/unsub from national Dem stuff and donate directly to candidates that get recommended to me through connected folx or my own poking around. And I focus downballot more. We need a whole new team, from the ground up.
J R in WV
Thanks for the link to Hillary Scholten’s web site — I pitched in a little, maybe she can turn her district with more honest district maps. MI is a funny state. She seems like a great candidate for the district, former prosecutor.
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
@lowtechcyclist: I don’t often donate to these orgs, but I did give to the DLCC yesterday after President Obama sent me a personal email emphasizing the importance of elections for state legislatures.
Audrey
Do any of these ads actually say, ‘hey, vote for this rwnj over that (very slightly less)rwnj?’ or do they just point out that the extremist is really very extreme indeed? If the latter is seen as ‘promoting’ the more extreme candidate, that is an indictment of the republican primary voters and not the fault of the Democrats (still the only ones with agency I see) Even agreeing that it is a waste of resources better saved for the general, I don’t agree that it will be the Democrats fault if the more extreme version wins.
CaseyL
The main problem with promoting ratf*cking (and that’s what this is) is that the MAGAt is likely to win.
Also, this illustrates why I only give to ActBlue. The DNC committees seem to be run by the same consultants they’ve used forever. It’s mutual handwashing, not political strategy.
(I’ve come to feel the same way about many of the big old advocacy groups, like Greenpeace or even NARAL: They were fierce and effective once upon a time. But now their “lobbying” consists of having nice meetings with the same people they’ve “worked with” for upwards of 30 years. Or having conferences attended by the same people. Not much if any actual legislative action, and even fewer legislative results.)
Formerly disgruntled in Oregon
@Formerly disgruntled in Oregon: My political donations this year have been focused on winning open seats in-state.
Working to elect four fantastic female Democrats as Oregon’s new Governor (go Tina Kotek!) and new House Reps (go Val Hoyle, Jamie McLeod-Skinner, and Andrea Salinas!).
Now I need to track down a big Kotek 2022 sign (I live on a busy street). Might just have to make my own…
brantl
@insert clever nickname here mistermix: It can’t be the rhythm method, have you seen those people dance? It ain’t pretty.
twbrandt (formerly tom)
I am really skeptical of these sort of bank shots. As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for, you might get it. Weird shit happens in off-year, low-turnout elections, and I’d rather they’d be straight-up supporting the Democrat than trying to boost someone they hope is unelectable.
Gin & Tonic
@zhena gogolia: That word is “dangerous.”
Gin & Tonic
@narya: Mearsheimer has been pushing the “NATO provoked Russia into war” since February, if not earlier.
ian
@dlwchico:
Lets be honest with ourselves. The people saying this were not going to give money to the DCCC in the first place.
oatler
“That’s some catch, that catch-22!”
Kent
We have an interesting race unfolding here in the WA-3rd which covers the Portland suburb of Vancouver (which is bluish) and a lot of bright red rural towns ranging from small redneck logging towns in the mountains, mill towns north of here, and fishing towns on the coast.
The incumbent is Jaime Herrera Beutler who was one of the 7 GOPers who voted to impeach Trump the second time around. Other than that she is a pretty mainstream GOPer and definitely not liberal. She comes out of the evangelical homeschooling world and she has a VERY good media team who keep her name constantly in the news here in the district.
Because of her impeachment vote, MAGA world threw a temper tantrum and she has no less than four challengers from the right. All of them plausible. Joe Kent is a carpetbagger ex special forces who just moved here from OR and has Trump’s endorsement. There is also a local GOP state legislator running to move up from Olympia to DC and a right-wing evangelical candidate with a big local and national following. So they stand to all split the vote and I’m not sure which challenger is the strongest.
The twist is that we have a mail-in Jungle Primary so everyone in the district gets the same ballot. It isn’t a closed GOP primary. There are also two Democrats on the ballot. One is a throw-away candidate who has no presence and isn’t campaigning. The other looks to be a strong candidate who is getting lots of local traction. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez: https://marieforcongress.com/
The funny thing is that the GOP challenger with the most MAGA money is running attack ads against Marie that look exactly like her own campaign ads for the most part. She is pro-choice, she supports the Green New Deal and Obamacare. That’s all they got! It is like the out-of-state consultants who spent this money are coming from some sort of deep red part of the country where throwing around that sort of thing might sway people. But this is a purple district. I took photos of one mailer and put them on flikr for your amusement.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52242971661_f346f3f5bf_b.jpg
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52242981638_295c204601_b.jpg
I already voted but the official election day isn’t until August 2nd. I have no idea how this is going to come out but my guess is that Jaime will survive based on the apolitical soccer mom vote. She is more or less well liked here. And Marie will consolidate the Dem vote and advance as well. And the four MAGA challengers will split the MAGA vote and go nowhere. Unless the GOPers around here are more rabid than I guess and one of them upsets Jaime. But I don’t see her taking 3rd and I don’t see enough GOP votes to advance two candidates with no Dems advancing. This district was went Trump 51/47 in 2020 so it is red +4 and there are a lot of Dems around here. The blue parts are growing fast, the red parts not so much so it should trend blue over time.
Citizen Alan
@Karen: Is Cox’s voting record any worse than the more moderate Republican he beat would have been? There’s only 6 republicans at most who are seriously running for re election despite having voted in favor of contraception rights. The difference between a moderate Republican and a wingnut Republican at this point is simply how easily they can get independents to vote for them.
Gin & Tonic
@Gin & Tonic: Actually, probably better as “unsafe” than “dangerous.”
Fair Economist
This tactic got us McCaskill’s seat in 2012. It works.
Plus if you are talking about how clever Fetterman’s campaign vs Oz is – there too we were running the same kind of campaigns on Oz during the primary! And the primary was pretty close too.
ian
@Baud: Luttwak is a old school racist historian, and has taken some questionable stances regarding the war between Ukraine and Russia, but he has been arguing in favor of weapons and monetary support for Ukraine. Not sure he belongs there with the others.
I had to interview Luttwak for a college assignment on the Byzantine empire. He is an unpleasant person for sure. He is a Magyar-ethnic nationalist. This also makes him hate Russia.
zhena gogolia
@Baud: subject to correction by G & T, under Baud it says that his pro Russian narrative is, the US and Europe, unlike Russia, do not want peace in Ukraine and Ukraine did not observe the Minsk accords. You bad, bad boy.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@zhena gogolia: Is Tulsi still a fellow of the Sanders Institute? Do you think she, or anyone at the Sanders Institute– which I would not be surprised to learn is a Word document on Jane’s laptop– could answer that question?
jnfr
This organization argues that lots of donations are very poorly targeted, and they’re not wrong.
https://statesproject.org/get-involved/give-smart/
I don’t think the money as used in the OP is well-spent either.
PAM Dirac
@Karen:
In Maryland it is impossible for a R to win state wide office without a very significant number of D votes. Hogan won by getting through a kind of low key R primary and then at least acting like the bipartisany, sane, sensible white guy. That’s what he was looking for here; a R primary where Cox was dismissed as a nothing backbencher with delusions of grandeur and then Kelley goes to the general with the bipartisany act. It was sensible to make sure R voters knew who the whackjob was and even more sensible to start early to pound into D voters mind that Cox was no Hogan (not that Cox was ever going to try to go that route). In the end, you could say it was a waste because R voters are whackjobs and they want their whackjobs. In the Attorney General primary an even bigger QAnon nut than Cox won without any D commercials whatsoever, even did a bit better than Cox, so the notion that Cox was headed to defeat until the Ds intervened is not only unsupported by the facts, it is contrary to the facts.
Kent
Democrats sort of tried this in Texas back in I think 2012 when Ted Cruz was running against the relatively mainstream GOP Lt. Governor David Dewhurst. I actually crossed party lines to vote for Cruz under the notion that he would be easier to beat in the General. And look how that turned out. He was just as much of a horrid pail of flop sweat back then too.
Kent
Democrats sort of tried this in Texas back in I think 2012 when Ted Cruz was running against the relatively mainstream GOP Lt. Governor David Dewhurst. I actually crossed party lines to vote for Cruz under the notion that he would be easier to beat in the General. And look how that turned out. He was just as much of a horrid pail of flop sweat back then too.
PAM Dirac
@Citizen Alan:
In Maryland the difference is how easily they can get Democrats to vote for them. Historically, it has been fairly easy to get a decent chunk of Ds to vote for an R who acts sane, sensible and makes bipartisan noises, especially if the D candidate is Black or a woman, but there hasn’t been much success for blatant, out and proud extremists. Drump got 34% of the vote against Clinton. Cox is out and proud. He even introduced a resolution to impeach Hogan. Hogan has already said publicly Cox isn’t fit to be governor and he won’t vote for Cox. Cox has about as much chance of winning in Maryland as Drump did.
Baud
@zhena gogolia:
Jaques is the black sheep of the family.
James E Powell
I like the general strategy of running as a Democrat against all Republicans, with some local issues brought to the front of the line if they are hot ones. Every campaign should stress that Democrats are better than Republicans on the issues that matter
The only thing the D Pacs ads should say is that Republicans are horrible. There are enough facts to provide a cycle’s worth of ads, but you know, choose three.
Gin & Tonic
@zhena gogolia: That’s correct. Now I am embarrassed to have treated Baud with some respect here.
Tom Q
I’ll be a bit milquetoast and say I see nuances to this issue. Yeah, maybe in many cases the money would be better sent directly to the Dem candidate (as in the particular one cited).
But I also think there are races where all the GOP candidates would govern in basically the same fashion, but some have a better facade of reasonableness that the press would go all in on in the general. See Glenn Youngkin: he was touted as a middle-way Republican; once elected, he might as well have been Abbott or DeSantis. A friend who lives in PA tells me the other candidates for both Governor and Senator would have been just as bad; Mastriano and Oz have the virtue of being more easily mockable, and thus easier to beat in a swing state.
Yes, the awful candidate could win. That’s always the risk. But if there’s no significant difference in how that candidate would govern vs. the more palatable GOPer, I say helping the more in-your-face jerk is better for establishing the parameters of the race.
And, to sort of echo what Betty says above, the media emphasis on this is just more example of how they think Dems deserve blame for everything and are terrible strategists.
VOR
I hate this particular bit of disinformation. Snopes debunked it:
Paul in KY
@Nicole: Good point on the optics of the ad.
Geminid
@Tom Q: While none of the Republican candidates for Pennsylvania Governor were good, Mastriano is horrible. There are a growing number of “Republicans for Shapiro” because of this. They’d have gotten behind the more traditional Republicans in the race.
And with all respect, I must differ with you on Glenn Youngkin. I can’t really judge media portrayals of him because I did not pay attention to them. But I thought Youngkin campaigned as a moderate conservative and I think he has governed like one. By Abbott and DeSantis standards, Youngkin is a squish.
This may not be from conviction, though. Trump carried Abbott’s state by 5.5% and he carried DeSantis’s by 2 or 3%. Youngkin ran in a state that Trump lost by 10%. He also has to deal with a state Senate with a Democratic majority. Youngkin is a facile politician who adapts to his environment. He’s kind of like a chameleon this way, and he’s good at talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Youngkin also is ambitious, and Virginia’s one term limit for Governors works to his advantage. Just about anything Youngkin does or says from now on will be with an eye towards a Presidential run in 2028.
Miss Bianca
@Baud: eh?!
zhena gogolia
@Gin & Tonic:
@Baud: It wasn’t until I typed “baud” that I realized why he was interested in a Swiss intelligence man.
zhena gogolia
@Miss Bianca: There’s someone named Jacques Baud on the list.
Ken
@Miss Bianca: He means Jacques Baud. Three entries above Rand Paul. Clearly the Ukrainians are targeting people with four-letter names having an “A” in the second position.
Tom Q.
@Geminid: I don’t live in VA and of course rely on out-of-state reports, but my comment was based on articles like this:
https://wset.com/news/local/governor-glenn-youngkin-makes-big-changes-on-first-day-in-office-richmond-virginia-mask-mandate-critical-race-theory
If he’s since governed more like a squish, I’d question whether that’s because of his own temperament/judgment or simply the fact of being restrained by the strong Dem representation in the legislature that you reference. But I’ll concede the point that maybe I overstate the case in analogizing him to DeSantis/Abbott based on those initial reports.
I’d like to hear more people address that first point you make: if Mastriano alone was capable of moving certain GOPers into the Shapiro column, were Dems wrong to try and help him to nomination? The political press is pretty unanimous in thinking they were; I think this makes it a debatable point.
Barbara
@Tom Q.: Youngkin would like to govern like DeSantis or Abbott but he can’t. For instance, he has tried multiple times to make life harder for women on Medicaid if they have an abortion and has been unable to get any traction.
Miss Bianca
@zhena gogolia:
@Ken: Ah. Thanks. On my phone right now and it’s more awkward looking up links and such than on my laptop.
Geminid
@Tom Q.: I’m not sure Democrats had any effect on Mastriano’s nomination. In fact, I had not heard they tried. That was a very conservative primary electorate, and Mastriano stood out as most conservative. Except- there was a Christian Radio host who was equally extreme and had a fraudulent resume. Maybe Democrats tried to help her.
Mastriano got Trump’s endorsement late, when he already had a good lead. Oz, on the other hand, barely won with a little under 33%, and likely would not have without Trump’s endorsement. That I think was a gift by trump to the Democrats. Fetterman would have beeen tough to beat, but McCormick would have had a chance. He’s an Army veteran and that can be made an asset. Most importantly he had very little public record. Like Youngkin, McCormick had an empty canvas and the money to fill it in to good effect. But Oz is a known quantity, with many past positions that conservatives find troubling. Trump pissed off a lot of Pennsylvania Republicans when he endorsed Oz.
Glenn Youngkin campaigned against school mask mandates and Critical Race theory, so he certainly did not pull a bait and switch when he entered office. I thought the bullshit about CRT was a clever way to motivate the radicals in his party without hollering about abortion and gun rights. Keeping those two issues in the background was key to Youngkin’s success.
Another key was his well organized and tightly focused campaign operation. Youngkin would not have won without it, and I don’t think he would have won had McAuliffe run nearly as good a campaign. I think McAuliffe was a good enough candidate, but there was something missing in his campaign. I thought he was overconfident and a couple of my friends agree.
rikyrah
We need every seat. Anything to keep Democrats in the majority is what needs to happen. Unless you tell me that this guy voted for Voting Rights, and other good stuff, he doesn’t get brownie points for believing in his oath of office. I know that’s the low bar for Republicans, but, not for me. They don’t get points for ‘doing what they’re supposed to do.’
rikyrah
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
We got right-wing Bailey in Illinois. As stark an opponent that Pritzker could get. Ain’t no squishy middle in this contest. You know who you’re voting for.
J R in WV
@Gin & Tonic:
Yass, that’s why Russia attacked NATO — oh wait, they didn’t attack NATO, they attacked a non-aligned neutral nation that they have multiple serious treaties with requiring Russia to support Ukraine, NOT attack them.
Ukraine had a serious number of thermo-nuclear weapons when the Soviet Union fell, and has provided the Soviets with high-end research and development… but agreed to give ALL THOSE NUKES BACK to RUSSIA in exchange for a promise to never, ever attack Ukraine.
Of course we know well what Putinski’s word is worth — a tiny fraction of a ruble. A drop of piss falling onto a red hot steel rail. Less than that, but I’m out of allusions.
Ascap_scab
If I were the DCCC, I’d spend the money raising Scholten’s name recognition in contrast ads against Gibbs. Leave Meijer completely out of it. This accomplishes both purposes.
I’m Hillary Scholten. I’m running against John Gibbs because he is pro-rape and pro forced-birth. He wants to take away your right to vote. He wants to kill the Social Security you are counting on, that you have paid into your entire working career. He wants to take away your health insurance and let you die a horrible death. He takes money from Chinese oligarchs and wants to send your jobs overseas.
Tell Gibbs he is too extreme for Michigan, vote Scholten.
Spend it all on Facebook, radio, mailers, social platforms, no TV.
Kosh III
I read that nationwide Dem groups have given 44 million to these efforts.
I am po’d big time.
Here in Tennessee, we have a theocrat governor who is now vulnerable and could be defeated. But nooooooo. The national D organizations ignore deep red states even when a seat might be flipped.
Herr Lee has doubled down on the comments by the Pres of Hillside College who called teachers dumb, said you didn’t need qualifications to teach and that education departments are the dumbest part of the dumbest colleges/universities. Lee listened and nodded in agreement and refuses to rebuke these comments.
Will the D candidates get any money or help from the party–don’t hold your breath. I wonder if the DCCC or whatever even knows who will oppose Lee and sure won’t help defeat him.
FWIW, even Gore, a Tennesssean, did not campaign here, that’s how little the national party cares about some states.
Rant over.
J R in WV
@ian:
Sounds like being a Greater Fenwickian nationalist, or perhaps an Andorran or Lichtenstein nationalist…? I mean, the last time the Magyars were a potent international power it was because of their horse-back cavalry, right? I get the hate Russia part, who doesn’t?
J R in WV
@zhena gogolia:
In something called The Peninsula.org.in Jaques Baud goes to town thus:
In this excellent analysis, Jacques Baud brings out how the US and NATO have created conditions for the war and are using Ukraine as the sacrificial pawn in their proxy war against Russia. Jacques Baud demolishes the West’s propaganda about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb 24th and traces the start of the war to Feb 16th by the US and NATO. Contrary to the American propaganda, he sees Putin as the master strategist. The end of this conflict will usher in a new multi-polar world order, in which the West may cease to be the rule maker.
This is supposed to be a non-political think tank in India!