this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
453 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19239 readers
2208 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Stand for America Fund Inc, a super PAC that supports Nikki Haley, reported on Thursday that it has raised $50.1 million in the second half of 2023 — millions more than Trump-aligned super PAC MAGA Inc., which reported over $46 million.

There are no details from these numbers yet, which were reported by the New York Times, as the Federal Election Commission filing deadline is only Jan. 31.

When it comes to MAGA Inc.'s funds, the super PAC ended the year with over $23 million in cash on hand, according to reports — and counted with over a dozen donors who contributed with $1 million or more.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 27 points 11 months ago (5 children)

I think there are a great many Republicans who won't vote for a woman for president. Haley would be great for Dems, IMO.

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 23 points 11 months ago (1 children)

She's GOP so that's a given. If she becomes the R presidential candidate they just gave the race to Biden though, IMO.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

No, I don't think so. She's a good debater, there's a reason why Trump was afraid to go on a debate stage with her. She would emasculate him on the debate stage.

And I have a generally high opinion on Biden, but he has visibly aged since the last election in 2020. I'm confident he could put forward his views well in a hypothetical debate with Haley, but his age would be out on full display, much more so than if he were debating someone his age. The story from those debates wouldn't be about what they said, but about the age difference.

I also think Biden only cares about beating Trump. If we find out that Haley is getting the nomination, then Biden will conveniently find out about some health issue that makes him unable to go on, and Harris would take over the ticket. (Too late to have a primary cycle, oh darn!) A Harris/Whitmer ticket stands a much better chance of beating Haley than Biden/Harris.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 months ago

I admit you might have a point there. That's a good rebuttal to my thinking.

[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

I highly doubt Biden would ever stop running for president, especially now that it's basically too late. Throwing kamela would be bad because it's such a huge curve ball, especially considering the good odds incumbents have at winning reelection.

Biden has a good chance against Haley mainly because she's not Trump and I bet he would split the Republican vote. If Trump were dead, I don't think Haley would appeal well to the hard trumpers, especially the sexist ones.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

Honestly I'm surprised the whole "Leave the record player on at night so black kids hear more words!" didn't sink Biden

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I think you underestimate the "team" aspect. I think even the folks who hate women hate losing more.

[–] zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think this is true of traditional Republican voters - their ability to fall in line and unify, both as a voter base and legislative block, has been a strength for decades (notably less so more recently). But I'm not so sure this applies to Trump's core voters. They seem much more of a "my way or the highway" crowd.

That said, I don't think the reason they wouldn't vote for Haley is because she's a woman, more just because she's not Trump, and is pretty openly hostile to him.

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

I don't see Trump admitting defeat, even in the primary. And if even a small percentage of Republicans in swing states insist on voting Trump instead of Haley it could very easily cost them the election.

[–] neptune@dmv.social 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Many many Republicans will not vote for anyone but Trump. Look at Mitt Romney. He didn't excite the crazies.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago

Totally agree, so all the better if Haley gets the nomination somehow.

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Who knows. Fucking themselves is what GOP voters are best at so you could be right.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

No joke, I don't think it was "The Pyramids were for storing grain so Dinosaurs wouldn't eat them!" thank sunk Dr. Ben Carson, I legitimately believe that many people who only read about the man abandoned him when the debates started solely because they realized he was black