• Veraticus@lib.lgbt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        The article is literally about the opposite happening though, so your comment reads both as a total non-sequitur and like you didn’t read even the headline.

        • Banzai51
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m sorry you didn’t understand the point I was making at all.

        • coolin@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          The comment is trying to point out, albeit obtusely, that democrats have also funded crazy people on opposite end of the political spectrum. In 2022 the democrats funded far right candidates in hopes they would win the primary and be an easy victory royale for the dem candidate. The comment is trying to analogize these two things, which is fair because it is a similar political strategy.

          • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, but this is an example of funding a far-right candidate in a Democratic primary, where they stand essentially no chance of winning it. There’s some other goal here, such as landing trolls inside the Democratic convention to disrupt the ability to negotiate a party platform.