Wow, almost 60,000 New Hampshire republican voters support rape, more than half of the voters. Wild.
this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
61 points (86.7% liked)
politics
19145 readers
2078 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is the greatest anti-climax since Trump got with Stormy Daniels.
Haley only lost by 10 points , that is a lot closer than it could have been.
But I'm more interested in if she drops out now, and then when they give Trump the nomination even though it appears he won't be on a bunch of states ballots (14th amendment ) in November, what does the GOP do?
With 87% in it's now +11.
Steve Kornacki on MSNBC tried to show every scenario for Haley to get to the nomination and he said there's zero chance.
He will be on ballots. All of them. The question is how sweeping the Supreme Court is going to be when getting him back on the ballots, not whether or not it will happen.
But if she drops out and he had a stroke or something, early enough, DeSantis can un-suspend his campaign and start back up (Haley could too), or in the convention Trumps delegates can vote for someone else... if it's after the convention the party probably just makes his VP the candidate.
To do that though the Supreme Court would be stating that it's ok for a President to lead an insurrection to stay in power, that basically the President is above the law. Very much in line with the immunity claim Trump has before them now. I don't see how they could state the law is both against a President having absolute immunity, and also that insurrection is fine for a President. He is either above the law (and the Supreme Court) or he isn't. And I don't see the Supreme Court wanting to defer power to anyone else, especially a dictator that will do away with the court as to prevent any oversight.
To do that though the Supreme Court would be stating that it's ok for a President to lead an insurrection to stay in power, that basically the President is above the law.
They don't HAVE to. They could say "for this to apply the person has to be convicted of the crime of insurrection, Trump hasn't been, until he is, he is back on the ballot."
There's all sorts of legal arguments against that interpretation but there are legal arguments for it too, and it doesn't say the president is above the law it just says this former president is not being removed from ballots yet...de facto not ever for this person because he hasn't even been charged for "insurrection" but it leaves open the possibility that someday a former president could be.
huh, it was pretty close.
Yeah, that surprised me too
Eh, he's starting to pile up votes.
Philip J Fry is shocked. SHOCKED!
Well, not that shocked…
Bears shit in the woods
Or anywhere he damn pleases in Grafton, New Hampshire.