“Electability” is an establishment term intended to keep out candidates who will actually keep their oath of office. It is a self-fulfilling thing when the same establishment attacks candidates chosen by the base.
Did you vote for Hillary? Lots of your buds did.
Could you perhaps explain the benefits of nominating a candidate who is then destined to lose the general election?
BTW, accusing of voting for The Hildabeast? You must be kidding. In addition to voting for President Trump, both Mrs. Strac and I maxed out in both the primary and and the general.
But, I digress. Please explain the benefits of nominating losing candidates.
By the way, the concept of ensuring we nominate the most conservative candidate, disregarding their electability, is why Christine O’Donnell, Sharon Angle, of course, Judge Roy “The Groper” Moore are today serving as Republicans in the Senate, from states that should be Republican.
…. Or, remind me, were they defeated by weak Dems in the general elections we should have won easily had we gone with the electable Republican candidates O’Donnell, Angle and Moore defeated in the primary?
Don’t remember O’Donnell and Angle?
No one else does either.