The title is not supported by the article at all. Here’s the entirety of its quote from Jeffries:
“Here’s the thing,” Jeffries told Jonathan Karl on ABC’s “This Week.” “I’m gonna really focus on trying to defeat Republican incumbents so we can take back control of the House of Representatives and begin the process of ending this national nightmare that’s being visited upon us by far-right extremism.”
It’s at best dodging the question. I assume Jeffries will support his incumbents and isn’t a friend to progressives in general, but this statement isn’t making clear anything.
He just opposed a plan to put money behind progressive candidates.
Progressive candidates in safe seats would allow them a platform to spread progressive messaging, showing americans that the Dems can offer a platform to get excited about, without sacrificing their ability to tack right in specific electorates where that’s tactically sound.
There are seats where the realistic choice is a fascist or a conservative dem. Focusing funds to those battles ensures the democratic party stays conservative, fails to offer a meaningful alternative, and fails to avert fascism.
“He opposed” as in subtly redirecting the conversation to the preferred narrative of the opposition. He didn’t even say that money shouldn’t be spent, just that he was focused on the battleground seats. Which is barely a bullet point in a daily political activity summary, but became a whole story with a clickbait headline because news is about clicks, not importance.
The title is not supported by the article at all. Here’s the entirety of its quote from Jeffries:
It’s at best dodging the question. I assume Jeffries will support his incumbents and isn’t a friend to progressives in general, but this statement isn’t making clear anything.
He just opposed a plan to put money behind progressive candidates.
Progressive candidates in safe seats would allow them a platform to spread progressive messaging, showing americans that the Dems can offer a platform to get excited about, without sacrificing their ability to tack right in specific electorates where that’s tactically sound.
There are seats where the realistic choice is a fascist or a conservative dem. Focusing funds to those battles ensures the democratic party stays conservative, fails to offer a meaningful alternative, and fails to avert fascism.
To hear centrists talk about it, this is all seats.
“He opposed” as in subtly redirecting the conversation to the preferred narrative of the opposition. He didn’t even say that money shouldn’t be spent, just that he was focused on the battleground seats. Which is barely a bullet point in a daily political activity summary, but became a whole story with a clickbait headline because news is about clicks, not importance.