• dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    If these incumbents were actually effective, they should be able to win a primary challenge. It might even make them better, because they would have to explain their positions directly, and that can help them in the general election. Why are they afraid of it?

    This guy is gonna fund a bunch of challenges and some of them will lose. I have every confidence that he will back whoever wins the primary, even if his candidate loses. So the party ends up better in the end – as long as these new candidates are more likely to win the General Election.

    • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Any seat that doesn’t have a primary challenger is a mistake. Incumbent should have to justify their continuing role to their own party, not just an opposing party, just like a new comer has to justify why they would be better. Maybe stability is better, maybe the incumbent is doing a great job and should continue to do so, maybe new blood with perspectives are needed, maybe more drive and passion is a priority. You know who should get to decide those things? The party voters, not the establishment.