Reuters: Breaking with tradition, Republican orgs. to go after Democratic AGs

[Virginiá]

Exclusive: As Democratic attorneys general target Trump, Republican AGs target them

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-republican-ags-exclusive-idUSKBN16Z1A5

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I had to guess, this is because of 3 reasons:

1. Republicans can dish it out but not take it, choosing to abandon tradition after Democratic AGs start treating the Republican president like Republican AGs treated Obama.

2. The Republican Party probably feels it has so much power now that any agreements that limit that power even slightly should no longer be honored, as in their eyes, it only hinders complete control.

3. Pressure from business interests to unseat Democrats who hurt their bottom lines. After all, in the party of business, whenever possible, business comes first.

[Virginiá]

Good. Such an agreement is silly anyway. We need attorney generals in every state that enforce laws like federal drug laws and immigration law.

Voting & civil rights too.

[Virginiá]

Good.  None of these agreements should exist.  I should have a meaningful choice in every election, whether it be in a D+30 Congressional seat, Attorney General, or the most local of local elections.   All these agreements do is stop me from having a choice in elections, forcing me to vote for a Democrat, write someone in, or not vote in that all.  

The cross-endorsing of judicial candidates in New York is the worst example of it.

Personally, I didn't even know such an agreement existed. My problem with this was the timing/possible logic of such a move, of which I outlined in my first post.