Message from @zakattack04
Discord ID: 442485645785432074
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
It's not a runoff
it's technically a general election?
It's a "special election" but it's a sort of jungle type of deal
When they vote Democrats and Republicans will all be on one ballot?
And if someone gets 50% they win the seat?
If someone gets 50% they get the seat
So it's a general election.
If no one does, the top 2 candidates get to a runoff election
yes
by technicality
Thus my point being.
This across the board, is a bad idea, we shouldn't ram as many candidates into the general election as possible.
it resembles jungle primaries more than it resembles a general election
Why not 2 in this case?
this is the end of Dlimpfovich McPutin
It's not a jungle primary because someone wins a set if they get 50% of the vote
It has resemblance
I don't see why my notion is that far out there.
because of the fact that the history of this seat has had 2 Rs go to a runoff
If someone wins the primary we should get behind them even if we don't like them instead of having faithless candidates who stay on the ballet till the end.
but they haven't
This kind of action gives the democrats an advantage if they're more unified./
that's not how this election works
there's no primary
it's open season until a runoff happens
d!dab
Why can't we just avoid this type of stuff.
Splitting votes is bad period.
Sometimes it's a risk you take when there's not a chance of a democratic pickup?