Over the past few election cycles, we’ve seen political parties try a up-to-date strategy – spending money on ads that facilitate extreme members of the opposing party win their primaries.
The strategy is plain: If you facilitate the extreme candidate on the other side win the primary, you can improve your chances in the general election. This is because in general elections it is generally easier to defeat an extreme candidate than a moderate one.
This appears to be happening in 2026 in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District. Brian Fitzpatrick’s For All campaign appears to be fully in line with the strategy.
Recently, in the mailboxes of Democratic voters with a high tendency to vote against the Democratic candidate PA-01 Bob Harvie. The company pays for postage Pennsylvania Republican Federal Committee at 115 State Street in Harrisburg. He is the treasurer of the organization Demarco herselfformer Allegheny County GOP chairman and current PA Southwest Regional Director Senator Dave McCormick.
Fitzpatrick For All of Us made payments to the Republican Federal Committee on two different dates, once on February 13 for $180,000 and again on March 6 for $170,000. That brings the total to $350,000.
Other joint committees with the Pennsylvania Republican Federal Committee include Team Fitz (affiliated with Brian Fitzpatrick For All of Us), Smucker Victory Committee, Team Perry Victory, Team GT, Team McCormick, and Team Rob, to name a few.
Plus Facebook users in the district were treated to video ads from “Fire Bob Harvie.” Are sponsored posts amounting to $8,508 from Brian Fitzpatrick for All of Us and began airing on April 6. Two different versions of the ad were viewed on screen between 600,000 and 700,000 times, many of them by the same people.
Harvie, chairman of the Bucks County commissioners, is one of two candidates, along with scientist Lucia Simonellirunning for the Democratic nomination on May 19 in hopes of challenging Fitzpatrick in the fall.
Fitzpatrick is a five-term congressman who won by double digits in the last two elections. His closest bid for re-election was in 2018, when he lost Scott Wallace by 2.5 percentage points.
So what gives? Is this a sign that Fitzpatrick may not want to face Harvie?
Not necessarily.
“Our campaign against FBI corruption actor Bob Harvie is currently seeking to elect target voters from ALL parties, including Republicans, Democrats and Independents (NOT just Democrats), and will continue to do so until he is removed from office,” campaign spokesman Fitzpatrick said Heather Roberts in an email to PoliticsPA.
“We reveal that he voted for a raise while raising taxes on struggling working families, an FBI investigation into his corruption, his royal arrogance, his misappropriation of county tax dollars and his illegal efforts to overturn the 2024 election, where the Washington Post editorial board called him “corrosive to democracy.” “After 25 years of documented political corruption, it is long past time to fire Bob Harvie.”
One more question may be asked: is this a good idea? Do these types of mailings and advertisements have the desired effect?
Professor Mohamed Hussein at Columbia Business School calls this practice “indirect advertising” and says the strategy often backfires.
“Our study examined how people react when they learn that a candidate from their party uses indirect advertising,” he wrote in 2024. “Research of more than 7,000 respondents shows that people are overwhelmingly reluctant to operate indirect advertising. When they learn that a candidate has used indirect advertising, they tend to say negative things about him, report more negative opinions, donate less to the campaign, and are less likely to vote for him in hypothetical elections.
“It didn’t matter whether we compared candidates using indirect advertising to candidates whose strategy was unknown or to candidates using traditional advertising focusing on issues such as the economy or abortion. People consistently reacted negatively to indirect advertising and punished candidates who used it.”
However, such “meddling” can be effective and even effective.
“They could work. The primary race is one place where persuasive political advertising can have an impact,” he says Travis Ridoutprofessor of politics at Washington State University and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project, who tracks political ads.
Pennsylvania saw it an example of this during the 2022 gubernatorial campaign When Josh Shapiro and the Pennsylvania Democratic Party funded television and mailer advertisements that emphasized connections between the states Senator Doug Mastriano and then-were President Donald Trump.
Advertisements warned that Mastriano wanted to ban abortion, “led the fight to audit the 2020 election.” and was closely associated with Trump. “If Mastriano wins, it will be a victory for what Donald Trump represents. Is this what we want in Pennsylvania?” stated one ad.
Shapiro spent about $840,000 in the Republican primary to call Mastriano “one of Donald Trump’s strongest supporters.” Despite having a 14-point lead on the field, this spending may have helped the Adams/Fulton County Senators to a 24-point victory.
“For weeks, both public and private polls showed that Doug Mastriano was poised to win the Republican primary, and our campaign was prepared to make sure Pennsylvanians learned his true record early.” Manuel Bonder– the voivode’s spokesman informed then. “Mastriano’s entire campaign was focused on banning abortion without exception, restricting voting rights, and overturning the 2020 election just to appease Donald Trump – and we did not allow him to cover up these facts for even a second.”
In general elections, party affiliation is a factor influencing the choice of many voters. In primary school, without a Red vs. Blue choice, signs of ideology or positioning on the party’s political spectrum can matter, says Professor Ridout.
In primary schools, voters’ knowledge about the candidates and their policies is quite low. Basics like name recognition are crucial. Advertisements shouting out your opponent’s name can change the nature of the race.
“There’s a rule in politics: you won’t vote for someone you’ve never heard of before,” says Professor Ridout.
