Message from @zakattack04
Discord ID: 442484620647202837
no
Oh my gosh FLanon
It is nothing like that now, but we need to consider the possibility that it can.
There is not a chance in hell, read my words, that a democrat will get over 50% in this district
YES
The is true!
but in OTHER districts it is possible.
What precedent is there to set exactly?
And if Republican candidates see this as a fine behavior.
This is a spot that shows it would vote for 2 Rs over 1R and 1D
nvm, you have your opinion set.
It is absolutely harmless
And aren't listening.
I doubt this will be reviewed as precedent. This is not a high profile race.
It's a low profile race in an extremely red area that no one expects to flip.
Obviously the strategists in California would take a much higher priority than running 40 different R candidates
It's a sense of consistency, my argument is it is generally, a bad idea to split your votes
Across the board,. this stupid and lets avoid it in the future if possible.
It is dependent
It's not always bad, only in the spots where it's a risk
It's always a bad idea to split votes.
Here???
no
It just doesn't pose a risk here.
it is still a stupid idea.
Do you see my point?
How, they both get sent to the general and no one on the left gets the seat
In this scenario that is the case, but there are many scenarios in which the democrat gets the seat at the start.
This is actually how we're gonna win Issa's old seat if that happens
All I am saying!
2 Rs, and a bunch of dems, that's a difference
Is let's not do this
That only works because it's in the primary.
We shouldn't just run purely 1 R everywhere
that wasn't my point.
And this is a primary, with a runoff election should no one hit 50% (which they won't)
I don't think it's a primary, I think it's a full blown runoff election.
And we're just trying to treat it as a primary
right?
No, because there's a bunch of candidates