The article is literally about the opposite happening though, so your comment reads both as a total non-sequitur and like you didn’t read even the headline.
The comment is trying to point out, albeit obtusely, that democrats have also funded crazy people on opposite end of the political spectrum. In 2022 the democrats funded far right candidates in hopes they would win the primary and be an easy victory royale for the dem candidate. The comment is trying to analogize these two things, which is fair because it is a similar political strategy.
Trump actually was one of those candidates. However, I don’t think it is directly analogous. Trump won and it was bad for Democrats. If RFK wins on the other hand, it would certainly be good for Republicans.
We’ve been doing it too.
The article is literally about the opposite happening though, so your comment reads both as a total non-sequitur and like you didn’t read even the headline.
I’m sorry you didn’t understand the point I was making at all.
The comment is trying to point out, albeit obtusely, that democrats have also funded crazy people on opposite end of the political spectrum. In 2022 the democrats funded far right candidates in hopes they would win the primary and be an easy victory royale for the dem candidate. The comment is trying to analogize these two things, which is fair because it is a similar political strategy.
Trump actually was one of those candidates. However, I don’t think it is directly analogous. Trump won and it was bad for Democrats. If RFK wins on the other hand, it would certainly be good for Republicans.