Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I'd love to get money out of politics. Make political advertising illegal. Give candidates a web site to post their resume. That's it. No more tv, radio, magazine, web, or newspaper campaign ads.
This shit is obscene.
A two month campaign season would help. Political donations may only occur between Labor Day and Election Day. No donations, fundraisers, or campaigning may occur before or after those dates.
As long as we're making a wishlist, I'll also take a spending max for the main campaign combined with any supporting PAC (i.e. no shell PACs pretending to be regular citizens supporting a candidate on their own dime). No more billionaire bankrolling to simply outspend the average person.
The trouble with a time-limted campaign is that it's a big country, and politics are local. You'd basically hamstring every candidate who does not have a national profile.
Nationally funded campaigns are the best path to getting money out of politics. Money isn't speech, and donations to candidates should be entirely illegal. If anyone wants to run issue ads, that's fine, make your case to the American public and disclose the source of the funds. But endorsing a specific candidate is quid pro quo bribery.
Each state funds its own events, and qualifying candidates get a stipend for travel and lodging. No staff, no speech writers, just the candidates and their ideas. Show up, make your case, move on to the next state. 50 debates would cost a tiny fraction of what we spend now, and it would be our money buying it.
There are a thousand kinks in our electoral process, from balloting to gerrymandering to disenfranchisement, but none of it gets fixed while the process is inherently corrupted by legal bribery.
Campaigns for public office should be limited to evenly distributed funds to all candidates with routine audits and disbursement windows to start the campaign season at the right time and prevent electoral burnout. This would also remove corporate backers like oil and military weapons for paying to win an election by burying their opponents through outspending.
Anytime a democracy let's money decide who speaks, it let's the richest say what they want while everyone else has to listen. A democracy which treats each candidate the same is the one which elects the best leaders.
The issue I could see with this is that political groups would have a very strong incentive to get around this and would try to push the limits of it. For example, if advertising about specific candidates is made illegal, groups might make ads promoting or attacking certain political positions instead, as a proxy for the candidates. If you make political advertising for anything illegal, even if not mentioning a specific candidate, then it would get even more thorny, because almost anything can be a political issue. For example, some right-wing political group might try to claim that gay marriage is a political issue and that any depiction of it in media is therefore advertising a stance on it, and sue anyone showing such on those grounds to try to silence people they don't like.
Finally, political groups might just buy ads using organizations based outside the country, or use the advertising money instead on hiring people to go on social media and shill for their preferred candidates or positions, having the same effect as advertising without actually running ads.
A lot of money to finish in second place.
They're chasing the VP position.
Stop trying to make Nikki Haley happen. She's not gonna happen.
She's better than the other chucklefucks on the Republican debate stages.
Would you really rather Trump or DeSantis if it was inevitable that a Republican wins the presidency?
Plus, if she gets the Republican nomination, it's very likely Biden becomes a shoe-in because Trump would either be disqualified or running as an independent (which would really split Republican voters).
If it's inevitable, sure. But it's by far not inevitable. I'd rather take my chances against Trump, because Biden has already shown able to beat him and Trump would rally the democratic base to vote more than if Haley were running. If republicans have realized this, they're smart to swap their focus to a new nominee.
She will be the VP or front runner depending on if Trump goes to jail.
Repubs won't vote a woman in to the White House. Especially if she's currently trailing DeSantis who has become a joke candidate.
They do not have a legitimate contender outside of Trump. Which is ridiculous considering who the opponent will be.
Trump wants a loyal disruptor who is willing to go on the attack with nonsense. Haley has demonstrated all of those qualities, and she can mollify conservative women who feel icky voting for Trump. She is the best choice for VP out of the candidates still in the race. He's not going to pick Meatball or anyone who has directly criticized him. Every critism she's leveled at the former president has been wrapped in compliments, so he'll smugly claim victory when she joins him at the podium.
And if Trump bows out, is ruled out by the courts, or is otherwise unavailable, his supporters aren't going to back DeSantis or Christie. She wins the bigotry ladder competition with Ramaswamy, and she'll say whatever she needs to say to convince conservatives that she will be their woman in the White House. Trumpers will slide over to her camp and say "see, we're not the misogynists, you are!"
Yeah I think it’s between her, ramaswamy, and trump making the decision that running in the primaries against him was a show of bad faith that disqualifies you.
I think Vivek would need to change his name before most of the Republican base would be willing to pull a lever next to his name. Like "Nikki" did.
I actually don’t. The Ramaswamy next to it is still gonna say it. There’s gonna be the people who think America is only for white people, they know who they’re voting for. The name change is more effective for the low information voter and with someone who could pass for white in certain circumstances.
What you’ve got with him is an Indian businessman who is very loudly Hindu in ways that sound just like Christianity (very clearly playing the same game that Shapiro et Al do with their Judaism). And the Hinduism is what I think might be what stops him. He’ll get some of the Christian right, but not enough.
What I think he really has going for him though is everyone else is trying to be trump but with control and follow through or trump but without the baggage or something similar. Vivek, Vivek is trying to out crazy trump. “Y’all loved the wall idea, so fuck you two walls. I’m going to build a second wall to keep the Canadians out too.” That’s fucking insane, but so is trump. If he can make them feel like he understands them and can rile them up right then it might go as well as a rich New Yorker yelling about coastal elites and pretending to shovel coal.
In the race to be the next person 40 points behind Trump? 🤔
The GOP base is way too racist AND sexist to ever make her the nominee.
Nimarata Nikki Randhawa isn't going anywhere. A woman, one off from an immigrant won't even have solid MAGA support, assuming the lead insurrectionist is doing time.
Imagine using that $10 million to idk, help people?
🤷♂️
Nope, lemme stroke my ego and plaster my face on TV and Pop-up ads
I think a lot of people lack imagination about what can happen between now and the primaries/general. Trump could be found guilty for numerous crimes. He could go to jail. He could lose his money and properties in that civil trial. He is also an old man that could get dementia, be diagnosed with cancer, or suddenly die of natural causes. If he is suddenly out of the running, being second is very valuable.
“But for most of those events, people will support him anyways!” Maybe. This is all unprecedented. I don’t know where people get their level of certainty from.
lol. Trump’s her daddy. She just can’t accept it.
That's a lot to pay to try and pick up Tim Scott's 15 supporters and Pence's seven.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Nikki Haley’s presidential campaign will reserve $10m in television, radio and digital advertising across Iowa and New Hampshire beginning in the first week of December, a massive investment designed to give the former UN ambassador an advantage over the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, at a critical moment in the GOP nomination fight.
DeSantis stands as Haley’s strongest competition for her party’s second-place slot, although the Florida governor’s campaign has shown signs of financial strain after a tumultuous summer.
Rival campaigns are betting that if they can emerge as the main alternative to Trump, they can consolidate enough support to mount a strong challenge against him or replace him if he falters.
Trump faces four criminal indictments, including a case focusing on his efforts to overturn his 2020 general election defeat in Georgia and another on felony charges for working to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the violent January 6 2021 riot by his supporters at the US Capitol.
The South Carolina senator Tim Scott, whose allied Super Pac had booked $7.5m in ads through Iowa’s 15 January caucuses, dropped out of the race late on Sunday.
“The same can’t be said for Ron DeSantis, who, even with a decent showing in Iowa, can’t afford a cup of coffee at the Red Arrow diner in New Hampshire and is a mere tourist in South Carolina.”
The original article contains 467 words, the summary contains 230 words. Saved 51%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
She's the honest to God candidate that could beat Biden.
I don't like her, but she's rational and proven that she's capable.
Do you really think any of them would vote for a woman, even if they have to write-in for trump, he's their guy.
As long as there is a big ole R next to the name come election day they'll vote for it.
I think they are hoping Trump goes to jail and try to push a "moderate". I bet Scott's exit is probably a deal to make him VP if Haley gets the nom.
Eh, likely not vp. Two people from the same state would do nothing to help the ticket Perhaps some cabinet level position
Capable as a campaigner, but I wouldn't go so far as to call her rational.
Eh her take on the logistics of abortion law, while I disgree with her, is spot on. Anything else is delusional. You can't get a bill through the senate without 60 votes.
I will never vote for her, but the polling agrees with you. She is the strongest in a match up against Biden.
edit: The polls have been pretty consistent that Haley is strongest against Biden. Here is one example. If that still makes you want to push the downvote button, then you have no right to accuse rightwingers of mindless tribalism.
Lol we are getting down voting for speaking the truth.
Fucking people only want to hear/read what they want the narrative to be. Fuck reality.
The degree of group think and lack of nuance on Lemmy is starting to get to me. My politics are firmly progressive, but that shouldn't even matter for what I'm saying, which is an objective empirical claim.
If you don't think that every Republican is evil, unconditionally, then your opinion is invalid.