Thursday September 1st, in his speech in Philadelphia, President Biden declared that,
"Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our Republic."
"Now, I want to be very clear, very clear up front. Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans. Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology. I know, because I’ve been able to work with these mainstream Republicans."
"But there’s no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans. And that is a threat to this country."
The previous was a continuous section of the speech. Later in it, he added,
"MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards, backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love. They promote authoritarian leaders, and they fanned the flames of political violence that are a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, to the rule of law, to the very soul of this country."
Does he actually believe these statements? Are Great Grandpa Joe and his Party truthfully concerned that MAGA Republicans pose a significant threat to the continued existence of our government? Because if so, how can you possible justify the fact that Democrats across this country are marshaling support for these very MAGA Republicans when they find themselves in primaries or runoff elections against those mainstream Republicans Biden mentions? If these candidates are that dangerous to the nation, why support them and risk they gain office? On the other hand, if they will be so much easier for Democrats to defeat than their mainstream opponents, then isn't the premise of the speech complete and utter bullshit? MAGA is no threat at all. Hell, the DNC apparently welcomes running against them.
Which one is it, Biden's speechwriters?
After all I am allowed to not like the Democratic leadership, and the for profit industrial complex of advisors, think tanks, technically non profits etc, 
But one can square the circle of highlighting these specific Maga Rs are nuts in the primary, and if the primary voters vote for them, repeat the same messages in the general.
It is a strategy of not being two faced, and not even seeing yourself advocating for these Maga Rs that will cause a crisis in 2 years. It is consistent messaging, a form of negative partisanship, and negative campaigning instead of being “for something.”
=====
I am against this for half a dozen reasons, for it may lead to disaster, you can not ride this tiger, and you are going to regret it in 2 months, 2 years, and in 20 years.
Likewise I believe one should be for something and not just be against this other guy. That affirmative beliefs that are positive tribal are necessary to create social bonds and to resist alienation for we do love in societies, even if I want to be left the fuck alone and to chill.
Lastly (I did not list all the reasons, I skipped over many) one of the reasons I hate what is happening is I know it is done to maximise fundraising numbers. Literally having MTG, just like Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin before her gooses both sides fundraising in a bad dialectic that reinforces one another. And the people who spend the money love higher fundraising numbers, for they skim the cream off it, like a parasite. Paying for nice homes for them, fancy cars, sometimes private jets. Private schools for their kids, fancy vacations abroad, and maybe a wing in a college or hospital.
=====
Happy Mookie? It is not one thing (“which is it”) it is many!
And even when they are saying they are not being two faced, they are being two faced in a different way. 
