General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I'm told "If you ever want a balanced SCOTUS, set your values aside and shut up and vote for HRC." [View all]merrily
(45,251 posts)I guess it depends on what you assume/think the priorities and goals of those currently controlling the Party are.
If you notice, Schumer said he had instituted the "avoid primaries" policy in 2005.
In 2006, Dems took Congress, but I believe that was because the nation was so utterly disgusted that Bush had lied us into war and not because Schumer or anyone else in the Party was seeking to avoid primaries.
In 2008, Dems strengthened their numbers, but, IMO, that was because the economy had just crashed under Bush, McCain was running a truly lousy campaign, not to mention Palin, and Obama was a great candidate.
In 2008, the party insisted that Hillary's extending the primary long after she had any possible chance of winning it had been great for the party. (I didn't think so. McCain was able to get a huge head start in running against Obama, while Hillary forced Obama to continue spending money, time and energy running against Hillary, but whatever. )
In 2010 and 2012, though, Republicans made historic and stunning gains. Yet, the word still is, a primary challenge would be bad for the party.
I don't assume people who wield power within the Party and within the nation are stupid. I do assume that their goals and priorities may not be what I once assumed.