|
evilweasel posted:yeah these loving threads always pretend primaries dont exist and/or losing a primary means the evil centrists cheated you instead of that your ideas or candidates are not as popular as you thought I agree with you in principle, but it's really not this simple. It's hard as hell to primary an incumbent with any kind of real backing if you aren't fabulously wealthy and also willing to bet a huge amount of that wealth on your run. That's unfortunately true even at a relatively low level, and on top of that a well funded candidate can potentially run independently even if you win. I'm not saying this isn't the right thing to do, but it's real lovely to pretend that most primaries are any kind of true open market for ideas where a loss means that your candidate/policy/ideas are bad.
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 10:39 |
|
|
I'm not even saying don't be mad if you try and primary someone and it doesn't work, just that it's the best thing to do right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 03:21
|
|
|
Lightning Lord posted:I'm not even saying don't be mad if you try and primary someone and it doesn't work, just that it's the best thing to do right now. It is undoubtedly the best way to move the Democratic Party to the left, but I'm just pointing out that the success rate is always going be fairly low for reasons that have nothing to do with policy or candidate quality. What makes it especially frustrating is that it's the right thing to do even if you lose, since a close race can potentially force the winner to make some concessions. That's a tough pill to swallow when you're the person being asked to devote considerable time and resources to a lost cause, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
why did this question need its own thread
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2017 06:42
|
|
