America, Democrats’ Cunning But Dangerous Election Strategy

Often criticized for not using Machiavellianism as much as their Republican opponents, the Democrats in America have recently introduced a very clever trick into their election strategy.

For Joe Biden’s party, the idea is simple: It weighs in on the Republican camp’s primary process, by boosting more radical candidates, and then the Democratic nominee finds himself in a stronger position. Against a competitor who is hard to pick or who isn’t very good looking.

In other words, on Election Day in November, voters will turn away from the Republican candidate.

– dishonest –

Looking ahead to midterm elections, funding efforts are concentrated in a few key states, such as Arizona or Michigan, that could tip Washington’s majority in Congress.

Democrats especially hope that Republican candidates who are outspoken against abortion will increase their chances of garnering women’s votes in the polls.

Many voters on the left hailed the dishonest new strategy as a way to circumvent some Senate rules or accommodate Republican political maneuvering to confirm conservative justices on the Supreme Court.

But others warned that the calculation to support the extremes was like playing with fire.

“By burning villages under the guise of saving them, we leave only ashes,” said Peter Lodge, an expert at George Washington University.

“It would be strategically wise to interfere in rival party primaries by raising political issues,” he told AFP. “But it’s wrong to magnify lies about elections, promote baseless conspiracy theories and open the microphone to attacks on democratic institutions.”

– «Manipulation» –

During the Republican primary in Michigan, Trumpist candidate John Gibbs, who is promising that Joe Biden won’t win the 2020 election, defeated Peter Meier, one of ten candidates for the position. Impeachment of President Trump after the attack on the Capitol.

Mr. once referred to satanic rituals. Gibbs can thank the Democratic Party for spending half a million dollars on his campaign. In a deliberately misleading TV spot, Mr. Gibbs said he was “too” conservative, and was more likely to be perceived as compliments by right-wing voters in the wrong critical way.

Democrats have also spent heavily on presidential candidates in Pennsylvania, Maryland and Arizona.

A tactic denied by various Democratic congressmen or political consultant David Axelrod, the chief architect of Barack Obama’s two presidential campaigns.

Don McMillan, who runs Save Democracy in America, also deplores the situation, which he says illustrates the pernicious role of “big money” at the top of politics. “Instead of listening to the voters, they are manipulating them. It’s disgusting,” he laments.

Other voices, on the contrary, believe that it is legitimate to toughen one’s game in a landscape that is difficult and polarized.

“In this two-party system, there’s already a party that excels at ruthless politics,” Aaron Solomon, a lawyer at Esquire digital agency, notes about the Republican Party. “It may seem honorable to place yourself above the fray, but the best way to put yourself out of power today is not for an election, but for a generation.”