Anyway, I posted this because multiple rightoids tried to argue with me and claim I was wrong and Sinema was totally fine and popular among Arizona dems.
I claimed Sinema was in a lot of danger, because she isn;t Joe Manchin. The DNC is gaining ground in arizona and can't ignore the left-wing activist bloc or they risk sinking turnout in the state.
Surprise surprise, this is the exact reasoning the state party is now rejecting Sinema:
But she faces political dynamics unlike the other Senate moderate thwarting Democratic ambitions, Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Representing a state that former President Donald Trump carried by nearly 39 percentage points in 2020, Manchin is unlikely to face a progressive challenger who would gain traction.
In Arizona, however, Democrats are ascendant. Joe Biden was the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry the state since 1996, and the party is eager to build on that success. That makes it harder for a Democrat to simply ignore the left here, particularly in a primary election.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I read the whole thing. It was a while ago and im being hyperbolic a bit but it was pretty much saying that the democrats mobilized BLM among other things for the purpose of changing the election. What was ypur interpretation?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Literally not one thing you are saying here is in the article, in fact I am completely baffled as to where you even got this at.
Like, at most they got the activists to delay their protests until the votes were counted. BLM was never mentioned, the people in the article said these groups had no organization or connection to each other nor did the party have any control over them.
That article is literally about voter education drives, somehow rightoids have turned that into something nefarious, probably because almost nobody that cites the article has read the article.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context