Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Terry_M

(793 posts)
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 06:37 PM 23 hrs ago

Giving money to primary challangers is just evening the playing field and giving them a chance

The incumbent already has a network of donors and volunteers, is already recognized and has a large advantage going into a primary and will win that primary even if they are not actually the strongest candidate for that position. Giving challengers some money to get SOME visibility just makes things a little more competitive (the incumbent still has an edge, the incumbent will still probably win, even if they are ultimately the worse candidate).

Am I wrong?

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Giving money to primary challangers is just evening the playing field and giving them a chance (Original Post) Terry_M 23 hrs ago OP
The DNC should NOT be a part of this process LetMyPeopleVote 23 hrs ago #1
This is pointing to the nonexistant horse in the barn Sympthsical 21 hrs ago #4
I call hogwash on this narrative of what happened "8 years ago" FakeNoose 21 hrs ago #10
I really see no reason why I should 'primary' stopdiggin 22 hrs ago #2
General competition and revitalization Terry_M 21 hrs ago #6
seen very little REAL evidence stopdiggin 7 hrs ago #12
Primary an incumbent and they both lose jcboon 21 hrs ago #3
Given the funding imbalance between the D and R parties, spending even more money on the primary LauraInLA 21 hrs ago #5
Which is counterbalanced by stronger candidates getting in Terry_M 21 hrs ago #7
Yes, you are wrong. William769 21 hrs ago #8
None of them are Terry_M 21 hrs ago #9
I am going to assume you are not of a older generation. William769 21 hrs ago #11

LetMyPeopleVote

(162,000 posts)
1. The DNC should NOT be a part of this process
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 06:40 PM
23 hrs ago

I have been active in state and county party politics for a long time. I have worked hard in the party and was elected as a Clinton Delegate to the 2016 National Convention. I agree with Ken Martin on his suggestions. Party leaders are supposed to be neutral and not take sides in primary contests. I am also in favor of changing the role of super delegates.

Again, the efforts of David Hogg to violate the role of the party are wrong.
https://bsky.app/profile/realtuckfrumper.bsky.social/post/3lnleihbvuu24



https://time.com/7280045/voters-should-pick-their-candidates-not-party-bosses/

There’s been a lot of talk lately about the role of the Democratic Party, and what role the national party should play in picking our general election candidates. Recently, a DNC vice chair announced an initiative to put their thumb on the scale in democratic primaries. Let me explain why this is a mistake.

Truth be told, I'm a reformer, too. That's why I've spent the past decade making sure our party cannot ever again be perceived as having a thumb on the scale for one candidate. And also why, as DNC Chair, I am determined to make sure we don’t repeat the same errors of the past.

Let me explain.

Eight years ago, the Democratic Party was at one of the lowest points in its history. Not only did we fail to stop Donald Trump’s election, but we had lost the faith of Democratic voters. The DNC was besieged by accusations that it had favored one candidate over another during the presidential primary process. The controversy alienated even our party’s most loyal supporters who felt that party bosses, not Democratic primary voters, were deciding which candidate would emerge in the general election as the Democratic nominee. They threatened to leave the party for good. .....

First, the 2016 primary had brought new attention to the role of “superdelegates” in our process. At a contested convention like the one in 2016, they could potentially cast the deciding votes in a close race. I put forward a solution that dramatically changed, and reduced, the role of superdelegates, ensuring that the will of the voters, and not party insiders, would prevail in choosing the party’s nominee in the general election.

Second, along with my fellow Minnesotan, then-Rep. Keith Ellison, I advocated for a wide-reaching neutrality policy that would eliminate even the appearance of favoritism towards one candidate or another in the day-to-day work of the DNC. In my new position as Chair, I believe it is time this is cemented in our bylaws......

In the coming days, I’ll introduce a new slate of structural reforms that codify these principles of neutrality and fairness into our official party rules, requiring all party officers—myself included—to remain neutral in all Democratic primaries. A clear neutrality policy protects against the misuse or abuse of power by those in official positions.

The Democratic Party’s Charter puts it best: “a party which asks for the people's trust must prove that it trusts the people.”

Sympthsical

(10,494 posts)
4. This is pointing to the nonexistant horse in the barn
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 08:47 PM
21 hrs ago

It’s gone. It’s over the horizon. It’s vacationing in Tahiti at this point.

No one believes this argument because it is so laughably disingenuous.

“No thumbs on the scale . . . uh . . . starting now . . . when we think it might work against power . . . serious, you guys . . . starting right . . . now.”

No one believes this nonsense. Certainly no one Millenial and younger.

FakeNoose

(37,214 posts)
10. I call hogwash on this narrative of what happened "8 years ago"
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 09:32 PM
21 hrs ago

Bernie Sanders was never a Democratic candidate. The Democratic Party did favor their candidate - namely Hillary Clinton - because she was the only candidate who was a Democrat. Our Party had no interest in helping Bernie or anyone else who's NOT A DEMOCRAT. Whenever Bernie decides to join our Party, then we can talk again.

stopdiggin

(13,613 posts)
2. I really see no reason why I should 'primary'
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 08:33 PM
22 hrs ago

an incumbent (alongside a handful of reasons why I probably shouldn't ) - unless I am SERIOUSLY dissatisfied with their performance.

(and - of course you have always been entitled to spend your political dollar where you see fit.)

Terry_M

(793 posts)
6. General competition and revitalization
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 09:24 PM
21 hrs ago

If you have low turnover rate, you have a low volume of new perspectives and you stop keeping up. If the party isn't keeping up and that's apparent to people, then some people lose interest in showing up and voting for the party.

There's a reason why term limits are a popular idea that keeps cropping up. If you don't like term limits, there are many voters that do. If you do like term limits then you also have some discomfort with politicians sticking around for decades.

stopdiggin

(13,613 posts)
12. seen very little REAL evidence
Fri Apr 25, 2025, 11:29 AM
7 hrs ago

of the 'competition - revitalization' thing actually producing the kind of benefits that are always hawked along with that tag-line. ( and anyone that has ever worked in an organization characterized by high turnover - is laughing out loud right now. )
And - as you might have guessed - never been a big fan of the 'term limits' thing. (similar reasoning) And have found myself mostly unimpressed with the people/minds behind the voices advocating. Those that I don't suspect of having an ulterior motive/agenda - I mostly label as the type attracted to shiny baubles ... And, once again - never having any kind of real evidence ....
What I and others have observed (mostly to our regret) is the aftermath of a bunch of shiny new faces on our city/county council, or school board. Yippee!!

jcboon

(325 posts)
3. Primary an incumbent and they both lose
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 08:41 PM
21 hrs ago

I gonna post this on every thread that discusses this. It's fact.

LauraInLA

(1,805 posts)
5. Given the funding imbalance between the D and R parties, spending even more money on the primary
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 09:13 PM
21 hrs ago

leaves us with much less to spend on the general race. Am I wrong?

Terry_M

(793 posts)
9. None of them are
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 09:28 PM
21 hrs ago

No election is the time to play around with this.
Incumbents with old ideas forever and ever dragging the party down!

William769

(58,767 posts)
11. I am going to assume you are not of a older generation.
Thu Apr 24, 2025, 09:34 PM
21 hrs ago

You want MAGAS to stay in charge, well that's on you. Me, I prefer to see the adults in charge again to try to put our Country back in order again after being torn apart.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Giving money to primary c...