and be done with it, unless it is at the utmost urgency that the person put through the primary is a problem.

it's honestly stupider to run 1 R in that district than 2

my point is it sets a bad precedent.

That republicans can just run if they don't win the nomination.

Imgaine if they did this with a Senate or a US House seat.

Or even a state house seat.

dude it's a state legislature

It's a problem that should be condoned

shoudln't*

In this district, we should

Even if a dem got higher in the polling, a runoff would destroy the dem

alright

A runoff generally does very much harm the Democrat in these solid red races. It increases turnout and can drain voters from the Democrat.

I'm just saying like in GA-06

Hi just saying like in GA-06, I'm Dad!

What if Ossoff got 50% of the vote

It's not anything like that

This bot is a rat.

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

Tell me a time when it is good to split votes

It's always a bad idea to split votes.

Here???