Actually I started this thread asking an entirely different question. As frequently happens, it went off in a different direction. Collusion/interference has been the subject of many threads. As with every other issue, opinions are split down partisan lines. Each side believes their side is right and the other side is wrong, it’s the other sides candidates that have committed crimes and need to be constantly investigated. I thought my OP was pretty simple. So what? Does a candidate being under investigation likely change their support base? What crimes would a candidate have to commit, or be accused of to lose support or be investigated?
It seems to me that today accusations of wrong doing begin against candidates as soon as they announce. Scandals and conspiracies emerge especially as the candidates get closer to being elected. We don’t care about their affairs. Lying and cheating are considered normal. Accusations and counter accusations abound. I don’t think it much matters anymore who’s done what or who is accused of what. The voters will support their side regardless. We all know this happens but we play the game along with our side pretending to believe and be outraged by their corruption…
The Sixth Administrative Court of Appeals has canceled a court ruling that found that independent lawmaker Sergii Leshchenko and Artem Sytnyk, head of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, unlawfully interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
While B. Clinton did get a second term, they are certainly not rock stars anymore. Most of their support is from the baby boomers. Opinions of him are certainly colored by the younger generation in light of the #metoo era. H. Clinton’s lack of rockstar status was underlined by her loss to Trump… the support she had was really lukewarm and in general she is seen as a neo-liberal/centrist who have lost a lot of support as the Democratic party has moved more left.
She is fading, but it’s only been 3 years since her loss. But my point is that the country has become so polarized and partisan that it would take a hell of a lot more than an investigation by a foreign government, especially without specific, serious allegations for an otherwise Biden supporter (or Trump hater) to not vote for Biden.
Perhaps in a primary there are fence sitters, but even there it would be tough to find a candidate that didn’t have some dirt from their past that couldn’t come back and hurt them. Primary candidates usually turn on each other, especially during debates, to gain the nomination. By the time the general election comes, not much new comes out. As you said, the Democrat party has taken a sharp left turn, even since 2016. All of the candidates have taken that turn to gain votes. Whoever emerges will still be much farther left than Trump. Moderates are becoming a thing of the past. I don’t believe Biden would get the nomination, regardless of any investigation. His gaffes alone make people wonder if he’s going senile. He just told people at his rally that he should have a young running mate because he’s an old guy. That’s a stupid thing to tell people- “I may kick off before my term ends!” Nevertheless, should he actually get the nomination, it won’t be any investigation launched against him that will cause his defeat.
