The article doesn’t really provide the needed context. Each district elects two reps. The Democratic Party here routinely fields only one candidate for swing districts to fracture the GOP/Indie vote as districts begin to trend D.
It’s been a proven method to get a foothold — a district will go 2 R, then 1 D 1 R, and then the state party will let two Ds run to capture both seats. Who knows if 2 Ds would have won in 1 D 1 R years, but they like to see some momentum first, and some indies like to split their votes in these races.
With redistricting, it looks like they went back to hedging their bets in the new competitive districts, like LD 2, 4, etc. I’m in one of them and will be voting for 1 D and not two candidates like I’m allowed to.
Regardless, the Ds were not winning the legislature here this year.
Interesting, and this provides needed context. Thank you for explaining.
Yeah, it's probably nice that someone who lives in AZ and actually understands the complexities of that state's politics comments before the rest of us rush to criticize the AZ Democrats (who are, by the way, very competant - they have a 5-4 majority in the House delegation and both senate seats, in a Biden+0.4 state).
On the other hand, though, I do wonder - they didn't even field 30 candidates, apparently? That doesn't feel like a winning strategy considering they currently hold 29 seats. Still, not like the AZ House is flipping this year anyway. Better to focus on the national Senate race and try to win the House in 2024.
