I don't know about fraudulent, but an org that primarily focuses on national US politics is not being particularly strategic.

There's this idea you see a lot with the Democrats, and it has leaked into some left wing spaces too. Liberals think that: 1) You rally your base. 2) You grow your support, convincing people with messaging and Good Arguments. 3) Electoral victory.

But that's not how this game is really played. Here's the real order of operations: 1) You rally your base. 2) You try to convince people where and when it is strategic to do so because... 3) if you win, that is where you actually grow your support; by enacting policies that improve people's lives.

Democrats and Republicans have to swap control of national chambers every few cycles because their policies don't improve people's lives, they just grease the gears of capital. But that's okay, 'cus it's not like there's any chance of someone breaking through into national politics. Federal elections are over-determined -- there's too much capital and too much private media for any sort of grassroots movement to establish itself, let alone win and secure policy victories.

State and local elections offer a far better stage for growth. Yes, the steaks are much smaller. But they are also achievable. Local politics is predominantly dominated by the funding of small-holding, regional capitalists. Much more manageable for a grassroots organization to analyze and strategize against. It's easier to coordinate working class people when you aren't juggling the variety of material conditions that exist across a broad geography; when you all live in the same timezone, when you have a shared sense of place to build from.

And if you do win, you now have a clearer understanding of the local conditions, and some knowledge for what policies you need to improve them. It's far far easier to grow political support when you can tie yourself to genuine concrete improvements in people's lives.