Which would you prefer?

[PeachyKeane]

Are you asking if there’s a reason that I’d want a candidate that I don’t support to appeal to White Nationalists?

Sure.

 

[Hammster]

Sure.

Then, yes, I’d want the candidate to woo the White Nationalists with legislation. That would hopefully expose him and cause him to not get re-elected.

 

[Rion]

I really do not know. I just now read the opening post, so I understand the question a little more. Still, to appeal to White Nationalists is not something that is helpful to the overall welfare of the country.

Is the names of those who voted visible? Seems entirely possible that if you're a die-hard Democrat you'd want the Republican to appeal to White Nationalists so they'd lose.

 

[PeachyKeane]

I rather doubt it. Some things should be more important than winning an election. Namely, how about doing things in accord with God's will?

Yeah, but if you are a White-Nationalist you probably believe you're in accord with God's will.

 

[PeachyKeane]

Is the names of those who voted visible? Seems entirely possible that if you're a die-hard Democrat you'd want the Republican to appeal to White Nationalists so they'd lose.

They are. One could check them out.

 

[PeachyKeane]

Then, yes, I’d want the candidate to woo the White Nationalists with legislation. That would hopefully expose him and cause him to not get re-elected.

Then why would you not want him to woo Democrats?

 

[PeachyKeane]

Double Double.

 

[Rion]

They are. One could check them out.

When someone asks me if I'm still beating my wife, I generally ignore said person's question.

 

[Hammster]

Then why would you not want him to woo Democrats?

Because he might succeed in getting re-elected.

 

[PeachyKeane]

Because he might succeed in getting re-elected.

He might get elected either way.

 

[Hammster]

He might get elected either way.

Really? I didn’t know that’s how it worked.

Thanks for the civics lesson

 

[Redac]

Not a thing in this hypothetical.

It's almost like it's not a very good hypothetical.

It's neither. The politician is exposing his true beliefs.

This is not what the hypothetical in your OP suggested. It was about an already-elected Republican congressman running for reelection -- which indicates that he's within the acceptable window of political thought for the GOP, as otherwise he wouldn't have been elected -- and he's decided to propose policy targeted at one of two groups in an attempt to garner enough votes to win an election.

Now he was secretly something else all along, and this is about publicly revealing his true thoughts on things?

Either you won't stand by the hypothetical as it was written and presented in the OP for some reason, or you were obfuscating what you intended in the first place.

Not really.

Then why would that be the case for someone else?

It's more the issues directly involving the supremacy of one race over another, or that involve racist policy that I have issue with morally.

Uhh, okay.

You just assume I'm a liberal, huh? What makes me seem all liberally?

Past interactions with you gave me that impression, whatever its accuracy. Interactions on here don't happen in a vacuum.

Mostly, I'm not so anti-Democrat that I'd entertain allying with White-Nationalists and such.

The poll question you started this thread with, and the hypothetical scenario you presented, was about a GOP congressman attempting to appeal to one group or another with some specific piece of legislation in order to garner enough votes to win reelection. Leaving aside for a moment the issues I brought up in my first post (appealing to Democrats to beat a Democrat, etc.), I imagined the "gotcha" you appeared to be going for to be one of two things: Republicans/conservatives being so partisan and anti-Democrat that they'd rather appeal to white nationalists; the supposed problem in one's political stances being much closer to the far right than liberals in some case; or some combination of the two.

A couple posts later, I tried to clarify exactly what the congressman or conservative in general was actually doing here -- throwing that group a bone to get votes, or actively allying with that group and their political interests. You did use the phrase "ally yourself with Nazis", after all. You then responded that it was in fact neither of those things that was going on, but rather that a secret racist power level was being revealed. As I stated above, this was not spelled out or implied in any part of the OP, but okay, it's not about mere appeals to get votes or strategic alliances with someone who might be closer to one's own views, it's about showing your true colors and outing oneself as having been a crypto-nazi all along... or something.

And yet here we are, back to "allying with White-Nationalists" on the basis of being way too vehemently anti-Democrat, even though you literally just said that this wasn't about alliances, but about "exposing true beliefs". And yet in conversations with other posters here, you're asking other questions while still flipping to and fro between "ally" and "appeal", even though those are different things.

So at this point, yes, I am having trouble answering your question because I don't even know what your question is.

Mostly why you have trouble answering the question.

You can't even seem to decide exactly what hypothetical situation we're supposed to be using to answer whatever vague question it is you're asking.