Elections RINO - "Why are the Democrats Are Funding My Far-Right Opponent?" (UPDATED)

Honestly I think a key factor in Trumps rise was that the Dem media focused so much on him because they wanted to potentially face him in 2016 thinking it would be an easy win and one in which a candiate like Hilary who offered so little would have the best chance.
 
why are the democrats pretending to support somebody by donating money to their campaigns? why not just photoshop a bunch of their hats or something?

AAJSlJAADg95.jpg

AAJSlJAADg96.jpg


or maybe try to claim that vanilla ice is giving them his full endorsement?

 
MicroBrew said:
Cause the Dems (in this particular case) do NOT believe the MAGA candidate will win.
Click to expand...
What if he does? What would that say or imply about the dems and their win at any cost attitude?
 
Khabib Khanate said:
I like how you guys refer to anyone who isn't a Trump sycophant as a RINO when that's what Trump himself was from the beginning, a RINO. Trump truly has taken over the Republican party, the base eats out of his hand unquestioningly like pigs at a trough.
Click to expand...

Huh it’s almost like it’s big dumb fuck personality cult or something
 
dreden1982 said:
How and why would the DNC fund a Republican? No mention of the mechanics in the OP.
Click to expand...

Based on the thread title the DNC (it’s actually the DCCC) are funding his republican opponent.
 
Last edited:
Honestly it's not a bad strategy funding opposition you don't think can win a general election. Maybe a little sketchy but smart, well as long as it doesn't backfire and that person wins. Then you just gave your constituents what you view as the worst possible option as a representative.
 
Morning Star said:
Honestly it's not a bad strategy funding opposition you don't think can win a general election. Maybe a little sketchy but smart, well as long as it doesn't backfire and that person wins. Then you just gave your constituents what you view as the worst possible option as a representative.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it worked perfect well with giving billions of dollars worth of media coverage to Trump for 16 months in 2015 & 2016.

Brilliant strategy. Really worked out for 'em.
 
So Fresh said:
Trump lost get over it
Click to expand...

You can be a thoughtful commentator. I'd be interested in hearing your actual thoughts on this.

What do you think about people who fund these sorts of "big lie" candidates? Do you feel differently about Democrats who fund them in the primaries than you would feel about Republicans funding them?

I do understand that the motivations are different, but the funds still work in the same way.
 
MicroBrew said:
Pretty obvious they funded the MAGA candidate because they perceive he would be easier to beat.
Click to expand...

Well sure, but funds are funds. I don't understand how you could look down on a Republican or Republican organization who funded a big lie candidate but be okay with a Democrat or Democrat organization that funded a big lie candidate.

What about a KKK member or a Neo Nazi. Someone like that would have a tough time in the general as well. Would that be a good enough reason to fund their candidacy?
 
jeremyemilio said:
You can be a thoughtful commentator. I'd be interested in hearing your actual thoughts on this.

What do you think about people who fund these sorts of "big lie" candidates? Do you feel differently about Democrats who fund them in the primaries than you would feel about Republicans funding them?

I do understand that the motivations are different, but the funds still work in the same way.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think it’s a disingenuous way of working politics. No matter what party does is. You should never fund the opposite party (especially when it’s a big lie candidate). But the reality is these kind of games are part of American politics for quite some time now and as they say it’s a dirty game.

But imo I wouldn’t support this, in any way possible.
 
So Fresh said:
Yeah I think it’s a disingenuous way of working politics. No matter what party does is. You should never fund the opposite party (especially when it’s a big lie candidate). But the reality is these kind of games are part of American politics for quite some time now and as they say it’s a dirty game.

But imo I wouldn’t support this, in any way possible.
Click to expand...

If I'm honest, the game itself doesn't bother me that much (it's dirty politics, but as a strategy used under more typical circumstances it's not anything stepping over legal lines, as far as I know).

It's in this particular scenario (funding people who are actual election deniers) that I, personally, feel it goes beyond the pale. I've taken a lot of heat on here for suggesting that the majority of the people who stormed the capital weren't "insurgents" in any true sense, but were mostly just typical rioters who believed a lot of bullshit... and should probably be treated as such.

I stand by that, regardless of the heat it brings, because I genuinely believe it to be true.

But I also believe that the drum beat of "election fraud" coming from politicians and other thought leaders is dangerous anti-democratic rhetoric that threatens the stability of your nation. And that's what played out on Jan 6th, because the irony is that if the election had been stolen, as most of the rioters believed, then there's a good argument that their actions would have been appropriate.

So as I see it, regardless of who Democrats might best beat in the general election, they're out here putting people in jail for actions grounded in a belief in a dangerous lie that some Democrat groups are now actively funding.

That's not just a bad look to me. It's active support for enemies of the state and active participation in destabilizing and false propaganda that does real damage to the country.
 
They did the same with Reagan and Trump because they were crazy and easy wins.
 
ElKarlo said:
What if he does? What would that say or imply about the dems and their win at any cost attitude?
Click to expand...
"win-at-any-cost" is more aptly applied to Trump and GOP, because of how they tried to invalidate Biden's win. And the GOP trying their best to decrease Democrat voter turnout.

The MAGA candidates like MTG ,
jeremyemilio said:
Well sure, but funds are funds. I don't understand how you could look down on a Republican or Republican organization who funded a big lie candidate but be okay with a Democrat or Democrat organization that funded a big lie candidate.

What about a KKK member or a Neo Nazi. Someone like that would have a tough time in the general as well. Would that be a good enough reason to fund their candidacy?
Click to expand...
How is it any different to Republicans telling their voters to vote for the weakest Dem candidate in Dem primaries in States that have open primaries. Or Trump and Co. funding Kanye West's campaign.
 
MicroBrew said:
"win-at-any-cost" is more aptly applied to Trump and GOP, because of how they tried to invalidate Biden's win. And the GOP trying their best to decrease Democrat voter turnout.

The MAGA candidates like MTG ,

How is it any different to Republicans telling their voters to vote for the weakest Dem candidate in Dem primaries in States that have open primaries. Or Trump and Co. funding Kanye West's campaign.
Click to expand...
So trump did it and it’s ok for them to fund trump’s guys? Sounds like a really dumb way to justify this. Especially when you’re unarguably empowering the person you’re saying is the threat.
 
ElKarlo said:
So trump did it and it’s ok for them to fund trump’s guys? Sounds like a really dumb way to justify this. Especially when you’re unarguably empowering the person you’re saying is the threat.
Click to expand...
The Democrats supported the Maga candidate precisely because they perceived him to be less of a threat than his GOP competitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,717
Messages
55,436,970
Members
174,774
Latest member
Ruckus245

Share this page

Back
Top