A Democrat super PAC, Rocky Mountain Values PAC, has been injecting cash into a Republican congressional primary in Colorado, received over $500K from the left-wing dark money nonprofit Sixteen Thirty Fund. They have been supporting former Republican state Rep. Ron Hanks by attacking him as too conservative and linking him to former President Trump. The funding was presumably aimed at weakening Hanks, making him less likely to defeat Democrat Adam Frisch compared to the front-runner, Republican Jeff Hurd. Frisch had previously lost to a Republican in a district that is popular among Trump supporters.
The Republican Congressional Leadership Fund has responded to this interference by spending around $400,000 on ads criticizing Hanks’ record on issues like gun control and alleging he is not aligned with Trump’s policies. Frisch has also launched attacks against Hurd ahead of the primary. The Hurd campaign expressed that the Democrats were targeting him because he is considered the only Republican who could defeat Frisch and retain the seat for the GOP. This kind of meddling in primaries by left-wing groups has become more common over the years, with Democrats aiming to elevate weaker candidates in the hope of facing an easier opponent in the general election.
In the past, Democrats have spent millions of dollars boosting pro-Trump candidates in Republican primaries only for those candidates to ultimately lose in the general election. While this strategy may have worked in some instances, it is seen as risky by many political experts. The Chair of the DCCC, Rep. Suzan DelBene, has stated that her group no longer supports the strategy of supporting “far-right” candidates in swing districts. This highlights the unpredictability of meddling in primaries and the potential backlash that could arise from promoting candidates perceived as too conservative.
The interference in the Colorado Republican primary has drawn criticism from Republican-aligned groups, with the CLF Communications Director questioning why Democrat donors are so invested in propelling Hanks’ campaign. The focus on attacking Hanks, who is seen as a strong conservative candidate, underscores the Democrats’ strategy of trying to weaken potentially formidable opponents by branding them as too extreme. The lack of response from the Hurd campaign, Hanks campaign, and Sixteen Thirty Fund indicates the sensitive nature of such interference and the potential implications it could have on the outcome of the primary.
Despite the ongoing meddling in Republican primaries by left-wing groups, including funding from dark money nonprofits, the backlash and criticism from Republican-aligned organizations suggest that this strategy is not without its risks. The debate over whether propping up certain candidates in primaries is a viable strategy remains ongoing, with some viewing it as a way to secure easier victories in the general election, while others see it as potentially damaging to the party. As the Colorado primary unfolds, the impact of this meddling on the candidate selection process and the overall outcome of the election will be closely monitored.
