Or it’s hyperbole. I know, I know – that’s unheard of during political campaigns, what a cray-cray notion! No one in the GOP has ever attacked a person they previously supported, nor ever declared that the opposing party’s candidate was just as bad as their own party’s competitor. I’m certain I could find examples of politicians supporting former political opponents; I just have to move on to more productive things.
Why is it that so many liberal voters are perfectly fine with voting for Clinton over Trump even when they’d much rather have Sanders but aren’t down with the idea that someone might vote for Trump over Clinton because their preferred GOP candidate didn’t get the nomination?
It’s really exciting* to argue about the final choice for the One True Position that will decide The Fate Of The Free World. It’s certainly way more exciting and universal a discussion than debating the fate of a Senate, or worse yet, House seat. Not only do most people not care about your state’s represenatives, but in the case of the House, you still have to split your attention between two people! Ain’t nobody got time for that!
However, coming from a country where we don’t directly elect a pretend dictator at all, I would now like to remind you that the US president doesn’t matter as much as you might think he/she does. So yes, I have no trouble at all with the notion that politicians might prioritize their party over the presidential candidate. Please stop conflating presidential candidate, and even president, with the fate of the country as a whole.
*I totally got swept up in the excitement, mea culpa. I had to re-remind myself that ultimately, Trump would be shitty but not as shitty as Trump with a GOP congress majority, nor even as shitty as a GOP congress majority without Trump.
