this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
177 points (94.5% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3947 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Disappointed in you, Michigan.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rosymind@leminal.space 13 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Has anyone considered that Biden might have an easier time beating trump than he would Nikki Haley? Yes, the trumpers want their orange-over-lord, but if given no other choice they'll vote for anothwr GOP candidate. Some republicans only voted for Biden because they also hated trump. Given someone who aligns more with their belief they'd chose them instead. A woman might also ease their abortion fears because some GOP women might be hoping that Haley secretly supports abortion (because they, too, secretly support it)

Banishing trump from the ballot will only backfire

[–] Gargantu8@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Didn't the Hillary campaign follow this logic? Even helping trump win the primary? I don't have a source admittedly but remember reading something like this.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I can see where you're coming from, but I'm not talking about actively promoting him over other candidates. Rather, prosecute him to the full extent of the law but don't try to take him off the ballot. Let his own actions tank him

Plus he has already lost to Biden before. Hilary wasn't an ideal candidate, given everything tacked onto her by the GOP

ETA: There are few things that'd be funnier than watching him try to run a campaign from inside a jail cell (though I doubt it would come to that)

[–] Gargantu8@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Gotta agree with you completely thanks for sharing your thoughts

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If anyone other than Trump wins the Republican primary, Trump will run as an independent candidate. This will split the stupid bigot vote and make things easier for Biden.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 4 points 10 months ago

Definitely a possibility

[–] StarsWebWine@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Personally, I feel Trump's actions put democracy at it's core at risk, or at least the greatest risk we've had for a long time. He's done major damage to the faith in elections based on zero evidence, and he incited his supporters to attempt to overthrow an election. I honestly don't get why there isn't a bigger deal made out of it. But for those reasons, I would not want to see Trump even have a chance at election again. Also, about the abortion thing; I used to think maybe a part of their supporters were rational and were only wanting an adjustment on the allowed abortion in regards to amount of weeks of pregnancy...but then republicans just outright banned it completely where they could. They already exposed themselves on this point, anyone still thinking republicans have any reason here is giving them too much credit. They need to earn that credit back. It will come when the Millennials and the next generations overwhelming vote again them.

[–] AquaTofana@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nikki Haley scares the ever loving shit out of me for this reason. Right now she's saying all the right things about "finding a consensus" on topics like abortion.

Meanwhile while a legislator in S.C., she backed quite a few very strict abortion ban bills. One of them was even a "no exception" policy.

But, right now she "appears moderate" to "moderates", and the Republican party gets to point at her and be like "Of course we don't hate women! We voted for one!"

Ugh....her name gives me a nasty feeling in the pit of my stomach.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 4 points 10 months ago

Yeah, she makes me nervous. She has a brain

[–] Redfugee@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's not about going against a candidate that has better chances or trying to prevent a backfire. It's about following the rule of law and upholding the constitution. DJT is not eligible because he swore and oath and later engaged in insurrection, full stop.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 2 points 10 months ago

Sure, I'm not disagreeing that he should be ineligible, but it isn't for the states to make that decision individually. That action can create more problems than it solves. We need him taken down federally, through the courts, and put in prison where he belongs

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's how we ended up with President Trump in the first place.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 2 points 10 months ago

Circumstances were different at that time than they are now. I've already written in another comment about it, but briefly: Biden has already beat him once, Hilary wasn't the ideal candidate, Trump now has charges and lawsuits against him. Most of the people who were complacent in the 2016 election realized their mistake and voted for Biden, and if trump is running again they'll likely do the same

[–] DrMango@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

It also sets a dangerous precedent for states to disallow presidential candidates from the ballot. Sure, it's easy to swallow with Trump and all of the investigations swirling around Jan 6 (and everything else) but in 50 years will it be easy to swallow when the State Supreme Courts want to guide a candidate that's promised to fund their own initiatives into office?

As an aside, has anyone asked about whether the electoral college can vote for a guy that's not on their state's ballot but who is still running?