Dems spent millions to boost far-right candidates like MI's John Gibbs -- and the tactic paid off

[marmar]

(Detroit Metro Times) Democrats drew criticism earlier this year when they decided to meddle in GOP primaries to promote election-denying, Trump-endorsed Republicans.

The idea was to increase Democrats’ odds in the general election under the assumption that the extremists would be easier to defeat.

The controversial scheme paid off on Election Day in Michigan and other states.

John Gibbs, a far-right election denier endorsed by former President Donald Trump, was handily defeated by Hillary Scholten, the Democratic nominee, for a U.S. House seat representing the Grand Rapids area. Scholten, who won with nearly 55% of the vote, became the first Democrat to represent the Grand Rapids area since the 1970s.

Ahead of the August primary election, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent at least $425,000 on TV ads to promote Gibbs, who was facing incumbent U.S. Rep. Peter Meijer, a more moderate Republican who voted to impeach Trump for inciting violence during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. ..............(more)

https://www.metrotimes.com/news/democrats-spent-millions-to-boost-far-right-candidates-like-michigans-john-gibbs-and-the-tactic-paid-off-31558473

[Better Days Ahoy]

1. Straight from Sun Tzu's playbook

"The opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself." ― Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

All we had to do was execute, so to speak.

[mucifer]

2. In Illinois we play a bit dirty to keep up with the repubs. Dems gerrymandered the state legislature

and Governor Pritzker gave a ton of money in the primary to bailey because he knew he was too extreme. Repubs spent tons of money in Illinois with lots of sleazy lies. But, we won big here, too.

So glad for you guys in Michigan. And so sad for my family in Florida.

[murielm99]

4. We play as dirty as we can get away with in Illinois.

And I don't care! It does not even begin to make up for the Roves, Trumps, Bannons and others.

Sometimes our guys go too far and go to jail. It seems to be the price Illinois politicians pay.

A lot of people who practice politics are not very nice people. That is true at the local level too. Watch your back and always know where the bodies are buried.

[crud]

3. Dems may have spent money to promote the crazies

but but it took a lot of republican votes to put them on the ballot. They own this, not the dems. They picked the crazies, we just said yeah, go ahead, you do that.

[Johnny2X2X]

5. Boost is a little misleading

This is my district. So happy Hillary Scholten won, truly an amazing human being with a servant's disposition.

But the ads that Dems paid for in the primaries weren't promoting Gibbs, they were cleverly designed to appeal to Republicans, but make him less electable to other voters. They tied him directly to Trump and he couldn't wash that stink off him in the general election. But Republicans love Trump, so it helped him win the primary. Gibbs didn't mention Trump in a single ad he ran, but before he was even campaigning against Hillary, the entire area knew he was Trump's hand picked stooge.

It was a brilliant strategy. And this district was redrawn and went from R+9 in a jerrymandered to heck district to a D+3 one. So this wasn't all that risky of a strategy in this instance. Scholten won by 13 points, it wasn't close. And Peter Meijer was Gibbs's opponent in the primary, he was the incumbent who had voted to impeach Trump. Meijer is a moderate and from a very well respected family here, even in a D+3 district, he was going to be hard to beat. This was an obvious choice for Dems, run against a popular incumbent or run against a Trump tied to extremist.

Whitmer was winning reelection no matter who she faced. But Dixon was also a great opponent. Her extremism and quotes verifying her extremism made incredibly effective ads. Kevin Rinke would have done much better vs Whitmer than Dixon did, still would have lost though.