Why criticism of Democrats for boosting radical Trumpists is wrong

When moderate Republican Rep. Peter Meijer of Michigan was defeated in Tuesday’s primary, condemnation came swiftly. Not for John Gibbs, the far-right election conspiracist who narrowly beat Meijer, but for Democratic Party officials who boosted Gibbs’s campaign in an attempt to face a general election opponent who would be easier to beat in a district that leans slightly Democratic.

Gibbs is one of a number of such candidates Democrats have tried to help, and the response has been widespread outrage. Outside of the Democratic officials who made the decision to deploy this tactic, there seems to be a nearly universal consensus that what they have done is reckless and hypocritical.

But while I wouldn’t unequivocally endorse parties trying to get their opponents to nominate the looniest candidates possible, there are a number of reasons why the criticism is overblown and even misguided. In fact, we might look back and say that Democrats made a strategic judgment that struck a reasonable balance between risk and reward.