Democrats Are Once Again Boosting MAGA Republicans
Even if successful, the strategy demonstrates how little interest politicians have in standing for something, rather than against something else.

When Ohioans go to the polls today, one item on their ballot will be to pick a candidate for Senate. Republicans will have three candidates to choose from: state Sen. Matt Dolan, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, and businessman Bernie Moreno.
On Monday, an Emerson College poll gave the advantage to Moreno with a nine-point lead. One unlikely benefactor: Democrats.
Last week, Michael Bender at The New York Times reported that a Democrat-aligned political action committee had spent $2.7 million to air an ad in the state. The 30-second spot tars "MAGA Republican Bernie Moreno" as "too conservative for Ohio." It touts his endorsement by former President Donald Trump and charges that Moreno "would do Donald Trump's bidding" if elected.
While this sounds like a straightforward attack ad, the intent is twofold, "describing him in terms that are likely to make him more appealing to conservative Ohio primary voters," as The New York Times' Lisa Lerer wrote on Monday. "Party strategists believe Moreno will be an easier opponent for the incumbent Democratic senator, Sherrod Brown, in the general election."
This strategy was used to great effect in the 2022 midterms, in which Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars running ads accusing Republican primary candidates of being too conservative and in lockstep with Trump; those candidates won their respective primaries before going on to lose to a Democrat in the general election.
The tactic was a bit awkward, given that Democrats spent millions of dollars to boost the most extreme right-wing candidates, while at the same time President Joe Biden spoke in apocalyptic terms about those very same "MAGA Republicans" who were "committed…to destroying American democracy."
In fact, the method is basically identical: The Moreno ad closes on an image of Moreno and Trump with the caption, "Bernie Moreno: Too Conservative for Ohio." A 2022 ad funded by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee charged that John Gibbs, a Republican candidate in Michigan's 3rd district running against incumbent Rep. Peter Meijer, was "too conservative" and "handpicked by Trump." The ad closed on a picture of Gibbs and Trump with the caption "John Gibbs and Donald Trump: Too Conservative for West Michigan." Gibbs would defeat Meijer in the primary before losing by 12 points in the general election, in a district that had been considered safely Republican.

Democrats are not the only ones to play this game: Last year, when Robert F. Kennedy Jr. challenged President Joe Biden by entering the Democratic primary, conservatives as variegated as Tucker Carlson and former George W. Bush speechwriter Matthew Scully praised Kennedy as a "truth teller" who possessed "a chronic inability to tolerate the intellectual dishonesty he finds in his antagonists." It would make sense if some of those plaudits were not meant to boost Kennedy as a presidential candidate so much as to create a headache for Biden.
But in the past two election cycles, it is overwhelmingly Democrats who have boosted their most extreme opponents in the hope that it will translate to electoral success.
Ultimately, the tactic worked across numerous elections in 2022, as far-right candidates trounced moderates in blue-state Republican primaries before going on to lose to Democrats by double digits in November. Kevin Robillard wrote at HuffPost that Democrats "played with fire and avoided any burns."
But that tactic is considerably riskier this time in a swing state like Ohio. Cook Political Report ranked the state six points more Republican than the nation as a whole in 2022; that same year, Republican J.D. Vance defeated Democrat Tim Ryan by that same margin to become the state's other U.S. Senator.
In that political climate, it's much easier to imagine Moreno squeaking by in November, especially if Trump surges to reelection—which is certainly possible, as he is currently running dead-even with President Joe Biden.
More to the point, though, the continued use of this strategy indicates how much the political parties have fallen prey to negative partisanship. Rather than campaigning on what they plan to do if elected—or, perhaps more attractive for libertarians, what they plan not to do—candidates are campaigning against the worst possible version of their opponents and using campaign cash to try to select for that outcome.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
“Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule—and both commonly succeed, and are right.”
― H. L. Mencken
Why would Democrats bother with playing games like this, trying to boost one Republican over another in their primary? Everyone knows Democrats are just going to steal the election in the end anyway, right? It doesn't matter who the Republicans nominate, Democrats will just 'fortify the election' and dump truckloads of ballots at midnight to steal the election. So why would they spend millions of dollars on these types of games?
Good point.
could it be that all that fraud that there was no evidence of really isn't there?
No evidence is proof that the fraud was covered up.
C'mon man. We all know Democrats commit fraud. It is just known. The only question that remains is how much fraud there is.
Yeah, no chance that the "everything is fair game" attitude could eventually lead to illegal election practices, right?
This is how you defend the Dem's bad faith election gamesmanship?
Declaring fraud before searching for evidence, and continuing to claim fraud sans evidence, is what you call "good faith"?
I did not say "fraud", just that it is a skeevy tactic that only a moral reprobate would engage in.
Then you missed his point, which was that it doesn’t matter what skeevy tactics Democrats are engaging in since it’s a forgone conclusion that if Republicans lose they will not accept the outcome. Might even be a "bloodbath."
The way the Democrats are talking it sounds like they will not accept defeat, and they have amply demonstrated already they are all too willing to engage in murderous political violence.
Oh right. The Floyd riots justify political violence by Republicans. And the disproportionate sentencing makes future political violence by Republicans even more justified. I had almost forgotten that. Whoops.
I would appreciate it if you stop putting words in my mouth. I said I fully expect violence from the Left if Biden loses, not advocating for GOP violence.
I would appreciate it if you stop putting words in my mouth.
Sorry.
I said I fully expect violence from the Left if Biden loses
Really? I don’t. Very few Democrats are personally invested in Biden the man. They just don’t want Trump. I don’t think that riots during the lockdowns over police treating blacks badly is an indication that the left will riot over the election.
not advocating for GOP violence.
That puts you in a minority in the comments from what I can tell. I don’t advocate for violence from either side, though I fully expect GOP violence if Trump loses. Big fucking time. Tens of millions of armed Trump supporters are very angry at what they believe to be a stolen election, believe J6 was just peaceful tourists milling about, are very angry about how J6 participants have been sentenced, are very angry at how Trump is being treated, are very angry over inflation, and believe their “leftist” neighbors are the cause.
I believe all that anger and hatred will to boil over into some real violence if Trump loses. Blood on the streets violence. People being dragged out of Priuses with Biden bumper stickers and beaten or shot. The kind of violence we see in third world countries. The era of peaceful transitions of power in this nation is over. All because of people buying the lies of a narcissistic crybaby.
I agree that Democrats are not invested in Biden as a person. They are invested in someone they control having the power of the presidency. If Trump wins they will regard as "democracy" failing them and hence being illegitimate, like they have turned on the Supreme Court since conservative justices have a 1+ majority.
Where did I defend what the Democrats were doing? Post a quote.
Oh wait, I didn't defend what the Democrats were doing. That was Mickey Rat stuffing words into my mouth, just as he whines about someone supposedly doing it to him.
Just another hypocritical self-absorbed Republican - he's okay to be a total POS to anyone else he likes, but how dare anyone treat him badly.
Your stupid distractions and whatabouts whenever the Ds are discussed are indeed a very reliable slavish defense
It's weird too because dems have big intrusive plans, not just a platform of "not that!"
They are trying to pick the easiest candidates for them to smear in dishonest attack ads and throughout friendly media. They want to energize their base and push candidates seen as blank slates who are framed positively. The biggest part of this play is to motivate the establishment RNC to sink their own popular candidates while sliding through their own DNC stalking horse candidates
Oh no, Jeff's two brain cells slammed together.
Jeff, why would Democrats do this? Since, it's been proven they do by everyone (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, etc). Why don't you answer the question?
Why don't the Democrats run for something instead of against?
Great question! Instead of trying to invert the question, why don't you try answering it?
>>Oh no, Jeff’s two brain cells slammed together.
I see it.
"MAGA Republican Bernie Moreno"
Denny Hastert conservative charges unproven.
"This strategy was used to great effect in the 2022 midterms"
And a lot less well (for them) in the 2016 Presidential election.
They were too busy in a Hillary circle jerk to pay attention to reality.
But 2016 did give them a "Never Again" attitude (and moral flexibility).
"Democrats Are Once Again Boosting MAGA Republicans"
And the fact that Republican voters are stupid enough to do what their opponents want them to do explains why I'm still confident that Dementia Joe and his 38% approval rating will win a second term.
#PiedPiper2ElectricBoogaloo
Dementia vs MAGA?
Hmmm. Tough call.
Trump is showing signs of dementia as well.
Not for you #RussiaGate fanatics though.
For you it's "Putin dethroned and executed" (Biden) vs. "Putin conquering Europe" (Trump).
So do what Bill Kristol commands. Do you patriotic duty. Vote Biden.
turd, the TDS-addled the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
at this point, i think it is still a coin flip. both of these old clowns are the best opponent the other could hope for.
I realize my opinion that Trump has virtually no chance (unless Americans are dying in Ukraine, or Biden's health declines dramatically) is not universally held.
Election Betting Odds gives Trump just under 50% chance of winning. And Biden just under 40%.
>>I realize my opinion ... is not universally held.
I want to pick your entire list apart below but I'd rather know whether you tried Pink Floyd.
Is this a reference to an offhand comment from months ago???
I listened to Dark Side of the Moon a couple times on Spotify.
Verdict? Too artsy. Too intellectual.
>>offhand comment from months ago???
ya several of us offered examples I never found out if you tried any of it. this works ^^^ thanks
(Animals > Dark Side)
I missed the previous conversation, but wanted to add my $.02. I'd put peak Floyd at The Wall if for no other reason the Comfortably Numb guitar solo (but there are lots of other reasons).
Amused to Death by Roger Waters is the best album after the Gimour Waters split. Song writing-wise it's as good as any P.F., but Jeff Beck doesn't quite do it for me like Gilmour on guitar.
Fair warning: I don't know anyone that shares this opinion.
>>Jeff Beck doesn’t quite do it for me like Gilmour on guitar.
I can see the arguments either way.
I only truly love the Syd Barrett era, and prefer his batshit solo stuff to the few Floyd albums put out just after he was canned. They just seem a pale imitation to me.
The rest of Pink Floyd I can take or leave or depending on mood.
Well Syd Era Floyd is really like a different band. I mean he was lead singer, lead guitar and main song writer. Amazing the band survived the loss of him. I gave Syd's solo stuff a try. Not for me, but Piper at the gates of dawn is a great album.
Sandra regardless of your feelings for Trump, who's their choice before the presumption nominations were done who they should have voted for? I'm curious which candidate that they didn't select they were too unbright to realize. While it's a known quantity your dislike, hoping folks would come around and choose someone else was always unfounded as without a candidate that at least made it look like they covered their bases. I think if you could humanize these voters more than consider them deplorables and democratic puppets walking into a trap we might see that side as an able winner maybe with another candidate.
Thanks for not simply screaming "TDS!!!!!!" at my Trump-critical posts like some others here.
There are several reasons I think nominating Trump is essentially forfeiting the election.
1. His one victory was against the weakest Democrat in decades, and he has been a gift to Dems ever since: 2018, 2020, and even 2022 when he wasn't in office.
2. He already faced Biden once. Couldn't even ride incumbency advantage to victory over a dementia patient.
3. Since losing to Biden, he's been whining about election fraud like a pathetic baby. A message that's absolutely radioactive to swing voters (see 2022 midterms).
4. He's almost as old as Biden and his BMI is visibly higher.
5. Although I admit the effort to throw him off the ballot was ridiculous and I'm glad the Supremes nuked it, his legal problems are still a net negative for his campaign.
6. *IF* 2020 was rigged like Trump and virtually all his supporters insist, why wouldn't the same shadowy forces also rig 2024?
In short, a competent political party would have nominated a candidate much younger than Biden. Someone who didn't already lose to Biden. Someone who won't whine about 2020 being stolen. Maybe, I don't know, a GOP governor with solid conservative credentials and a recent 20-point reelection victory.
In 2024 a party serious about policy victories would have nominated Ron DeSantis.
Because the GOP is not a serious party, though, they decided to "own the libs" by doing what "the libs" want them to do.
a competent political party
What if they're both incompetent?
turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.
"Thanks for not simply screaming “TDS!!!!!!” at my Trump-critical posts like some others here."
Ya know, if you don't like being called on your raging case of TDS, perhaps you should work on is, TDS-addled pile of shit.
This is a very interesting take, Sandra. You'd make a good lawyer, you laid out a good argument. 🙂
Nonsense.
Was suing the dude for half a billion dollars over shit that no one has ever been sued for part of the plan to boost MAGA? Cuz I think that might backfire. Talk about whining like a pathetic baby. Lol. The dems are rightfully in panic mode.
And, incumbency advantage? Oof. Have you seen their guy? This will work against sleepy joe.
To your last point, why wouldn’t they rig it again? Might not be so easy to do twice. Although I’ll grant you that the DNC kingmakers could not possibly have been counting on 8 years from Brandon, so maybe they have a plan. Maybe they thought kammy would catch on. Lol.
Nothing would surprise me, but I think you’re wrong.
That's right, Sandra. Dehumanizing people is only okay when Republicans do it. It is not okay when it is done to Republicans. Don't you understand how the double standard works?
"Illegals are scum and vermin and poison!"
"How dare you say bad things about me? I deserve respect and dignity!"
Lol. It’s gonna be a rough year for you Jeff.
Maybe take a break?
This is fine until the Republicans start doing it to Democrats, then it'll be a real problem. It's only bad when the initial offender gets a taste of their own tactics.
What are you talking about? Whatever Republicans do is ok because some Democrat somewhere did it first. Doesn't matter what it is.
I'm glad you understood I was mocking you.
At least you admit that you believe two wrongs make a right (winger).
If someone punches me in the face, I will punch back. Yes.
Bad analogy. More like if someone you don't like punches someone else in the face, then you go around punching people in the face claiming it's ok because someone you don't like did it first.
In 2008 and 12. Obama was praised for being extremely clever and innovative for using social media to boost his campaign efforts. In 2016 social media was excoriated for the Trump campaign successfully using it. This led to the Democrats corrupt jawboning of social media to censor non-progressive voices over the last seven years.
Successful strategies that lead to Democrats defeat get laws proposed to make them illegal, because the Dems cannot have that again.
So that means it's ok when Republicans do it.
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, yes.
You did get my point that Obama was praised for what he did?
Black Jesus got praised for taking a shit. What's your point?
It means being outraged at Trump for taking a shit in a similar fashion is not really believable.
Well, yeah. It was OK when Obama did it too. Free speech.
This led to the Democrats corrupt jawboning of social media to censor non-progressive voices over the last seven years.
I meant that part.
The Democrats being salty over 2016 has led them to unconstitutional behavior. Where did I say that Republicans should emulate that to suppress Left wing speech?
You didn't. But in these comments it seems that the only point of pointing out bad/unconstitutional/illegal behavior by Democrats is to use The Trump Defense and say "It's ok when we do it because they did it first."
Where in the world did you get the idea that I thought what Obama did was bad? My point in using that example was that it only became bad in the media when Democrats lost to similar tactics.
It's astonishing that is what you are taking away from Mickey, who is actually trying to engage with you.
When Republicans do something sketchy, it is only because they have good intentions because they are Real Patriots only trying to save the Republic, and should be given the benefit of the doubt.
When Democrats do something sketchy, it is because they are evil traitorous scum who have villainous intent, and should be thrown in jail.
Totally not a Democrat shill
Yes, except the Dems are the first and loudest to cry foul when the behaviour is turned against them. 'I can't believe they would stoop to the thing we did to them when we had the power.' Is an all too familiar refrain. Doesn't make it right but it sure does make it hypocritical.
That's because Democrats never pretended to take the moral high ground.
Being evil is fine as long you never claim to be good?
That’s all they’ve done for 40 years
As if any GOP money can go anywhere but to Trump - lest they offend him.
The RNC take over is likely to end very predictably...with the RNC donating to Trump to cover legal fees and judgments and giving all the down ballot GOP races crumbs.
Loyalty to Trump/MAGA ideas will be the only barometer for all GOP races it seems. Everybody else is RINO's. It will be a giant no true scotsman competition of who can out MAGA the others.
I am only being slightly sarcastic. If the GOP keeps going down this road it only leads to irrelevance. And it will be well earned.
What are they giving up? Are the MAGA Republican candidates noticeably weaker?
Let's see. Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Green, Loren Boebert, Dan Crenshaw, etc... seem to be the trend as of late.
Assuming these somewhat younger than avg Congressman stick around long enough to be party leadership, yes I think the MAGA candidates are 'noticeably' weaker. Weaker intellectually, weaker politically, uncompromising, boorish, products of potential incest (for MTG and her weird sloth toes)...weaker morally, ethically, I could go on.
They will eventually have to keep upping the ante on crazy to be relevant which will lead to them infighting with each other over who is crazier. These are not serious people. They are bomb throwers. And if they ever reach the upper echelons of power, their bombs will only blow up America and in so doing, they will ensure their own political graveyards. F em.
I see the windy city pile of TDS-addled shit has returned. Fuck off and die.
'This strategy was used to great effect in the 2022 midterms, in which Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars running ads accusing Republican primary candidates of being too conservative and in lockstep with Trump; those candidates won their respective primaries before going on to lose to a Democrat in the general election.'
In my state (Colorado) the DNC went as far as to encourage their party members to cross the line in the primary, and vote for the MAGA-est candidates.
'The tactic was a bit awkward, given that Democrats spent millions of dollars to boost the most extreme right-wing candidates, while at the same time President Joe Biden spoke in apocalyptic terms about those very same "MAGA Republicans" who were "committed…to destroying American democracy."'
Really? That tactic would be awkward only for people who have some personal ethics, and a lack of cognitive dissonance skills.
oh ya sentiment is exactly the same in Ohio as in '22 this Moreno guy will lose to Brown by 50
Cry harder, TDS addled lying pile of shit.
What exactly is extreme about Bernie Moreno?
He's not a RINO that will capitulate to the D's after a few days of tough talk, telling his consituents that the GOP 'had' to compromise - said compromise giving the Democrats everything they wanted while getting nothing back.
Some one like that is basically Orange-Hitler!
This magazine helped boost two presidential candidates who's sole platform was, literally, 'I'm not my predecessor'.
And its hard to run as *not* 'against something when you think your opposition is making massive mistakes (and they are - no matter which side of the aisle you prefer).
Sometimes you have to stop them digging the hole deeper under you before you can work on how to get out of it.
Maybe politicians should 'stand for' the US Constitution which is against nanny-government..... Not as-if it wasn't their sworn oath of office or anything./s
It would be sweet if this completely backfires on these idiots. Meddling in the election process is underhanded and disenfranchises the voters.
It make me despise the Democrat party and their lack of ethics. While I have a distaste of Trump and his narcissistic politics, I despise the actions of the anti-trump crowd much more.
I will not cast a vote for Trump, neither will I vote for Biden and very suspicious of down ballot Democrat party candidates.
I hate that the unethical behavior of the Democrat party and anti-trump crowd has made Trump into a sympathetic character due to the sheer vileness of their actions
If this weird 'Br-er Rabbit tactic was working one would expect Trump to have an abysmal record in those he endorses winning.
So what is it?
Around 85%.
Hmmmm..........
A Trump endorsement is worth a nearly 9 in10 chance of winning?
I don't think the Democrats-- or the Liberaltarians-- are doing it right.
Where are the numbers coming from? It used to be the case that an endorsement from DJT was worth more than anything (and in a GOP primary would be almost sure to secure a victory). But those days are long gone. Then Trump lost to Biden. Then Jan 6 happened. Then all the lawsuits started piling up & criminal charges. Now... moderates and independents are sick of it. And you might need some of them to win a general election in swing states. I am sure a DJT endorsement carries the day in very rural small population states. But beyond that, not so much. At least not in the last couple elections. We will see this election how much weight it carries. If DJT ship goes down, all those on deck with him or because of him sink with the ship.
“Then all the lawsuits started piling up & criminal charges….”
Well, there hasn’t been an election since that all started, has there?
You might not like the results of that strategy. Haha.
85%
How much better do you want?
If it was some lefty ass the media would be screeching 'kingmaker' like a bunch of excited monkeys.
Does anybody think its weird that people love to have something to hate that they can vote against ... rather than have something they believe in that they can vote for ?