Democratic leaders spoke on the steps of the Capitol and dialed up their rhetoric against Republicans for nominating a conservative firebrand to be the next House speaker.
This is one of those having-their-cake-and-eating-it-too moments, because the Democrats are taking the high road, by using nothing but the truth, yet doing it in a way that is guaranteed to fuck with (and piss off) the Republicans.
Ignoring all the reasons why the opposition is objectively awful is….not the moral high road. It’s intellectually dishonest and part of why we’re in this moment.
Like with Santos. They either didn’t do oppose research or didn’t use it. Things that would have maybe changed the election. But noooo “we don’t do that! Because that would be not nice!”
Guess what. pubies are bullies and are okay with people dying to put them in power. Being nice is not important,
His Democrat opponent did release research about Santos but basically most news orgs, esp the major ones, ignored it at the time. I’m in NYC and Republican candidates tend to be ignored by news orgs unless it is for President, Governor, or Mayor.
Local news organizations did raise questions in their coverage of Santos. One column in The North Shore Leader noted the eye-popping increase in Santos’s net worth from less than $5,000 to more than $11 million over a period of two short years. The piece even quoted an anonymous Republican leader as saying, “Are we being played as extras in ‘The Talented Mr. Santos’?” And the DCCC’s research memo on Santos outlined many of the allegations made in the Times report. It noted the IRS’s lack of knowledge of the congressman-elect’s animal-rescue charity and raised questions about his financial status. The document does, however, list Santos’s educational and professional claims without question. The bulk of the 87-page research document leans into Santos’s ties to Trump and his antiabortion stance.
Zimmerman says his campaign “was unrelenting in getting people’s attention” but that, ultimately, “I think part of the problem, quite frankly, was everyone saw this as not a competitive seat. They didn’t see the Republican tidal wave coming in New York, and so they didn’t focus on the race.” Jacobs, too, echoed this sentiment. “Santos didn’t win the race based on his campaign or who he is,” he said. “Like many other Republicans, particularly on Long Island, [Santos] won because of the view that this was an issue-driven election and the issue this year was crime.” Indeed, a red wave did run through New York on November 8, where even Sean Patrick Maloney—the person tasked with steering Democrats to another majority—lost his own race.
This is one of those having-their-cake-and-eating-it-too moments, because the Democrats are taking the high road, by using nothing but the truth, yet doing it in a way that is guaranteed to fuck with (and piss off) the Republicans.
Exactly. That’s why I put “high road” in quotes.
Ignoring all the reasons why the opposition is objectively awful is….not the moral high road. It’s intellectually dishonest and part of why we’re in this moment.
Like with Santos. They either didn’t do oppose research or didn’t use it. Things that would have maybe changed the election. But noooo “we don’t do that! Because that would be not nice!”
Guess what. pubies are bullies and are okay with people dying to put them in power. Being nice is not important,
His Democrat opponent did release research about Santos but basically most news orgs, esp the major ones, ignored it at the time. I’m in NYC and Republican candidates tend to be ignored by news orgs unless it is for President, Governor, or Mayor.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/12/house-republicans-george-santos-democrats-ethics