USA Politics

It is very narrow, but I've been looking at the 538 presidential primary polls and I'm starting to see a very small path to Nikki Haley pulling off the nomination. I really want to emphasize that this is a granular possibility and I would still put my money on Trump, but there is at least a path and that is more than I can say for any point of the GOP race up until now.

I think it all hinges on her knocking off DeSantis for the second place finish in Iowa. She's already running reasonably ahead of DeSantis in NH and SC, which is not too surprising, and she is coming pretty close in Iowa. If Christie and DeSantis get out of the race and the entire anti-Trump vote coalesces around Haley, it opens up the door for her to beat Trump in NH and SC. I think Christie will get out if he thinks Haley has a shot, DeSantis is more of a question mark but I also think that if a 3rd place finish in Iowa starts to become a strong possibility he's going to get out to avoid an embarrassing result (think Kamala 2020). The DeSantis thing in general is the biggest wrench in this theory, especially when the governor of Iowa recently came out with a DeSantis endorsement. That just seems like such a head-scratcher, why endorse DeSantis now when he is clearly not going to win Iowa, let alone the nomination? But it keeps him in the race longer and makes it less possible for Haley to pull off an upset there. We'll see though, the next month is going to be critical for her.

Again, it's a long shot. But it does solve the up until now unanswered question of who is the Trump alternative, which has been the biggest thing standing in the way of the Trump alternative movement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yax
I think Nikki Haley's actual plan is to come second in the primaries and hope Trump is ruled ineligible due to the whole insurrection thing, which is making its way through the courts right now.
 
LooseCannon said:
Didn't this happen after Trump shat on her a bunch? Just smacked of retaliation iirc.
Click to expand...
Definitely. I get the reasoning of why she endorsed somebody, just not sure why she would hitch her wagon to DeSantis when he's had a disastrous campaign so far.
 
Could be a simple case of "He's not Trump," and that was good enough? Like, sure, so is everyone else, but he's the first that came to mind and why not?
 
Jer said:
www.nbcnews.com

Chuck Todd: When words lose meaning in politics

Analysis: New polling suggests voters have grown anesthetized to attacks painting the other side as “extreme.”
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
I thought this was interesting and pretty even-handed.
Click to expand...
Interesting article. Considering how new the quoted pollster seems to be it feels a bit more like an extended ad or an excuse to write about them, rather than concerning the topic itself. At least in the first third of the article.

That said, the Blueprint results don't appear particular outlandish or unreasonable considering the political climate. Though it is kinda funny that the overall point starts out with "we use word like extremist too much" (which isn't incorrect) but then goes on to say that the Dems are guilty of this, but the GOP uses such tactics far more.
 
I largely agree with a lot of the article but think it's a bit more nuanced than that. We've seen practical examples of painting the other side as extreme not working. For example back in 2020, republicans tried to paint Raphael Warnock, a pretty middle of the road Democrat, as a "radical leftist" and it never stuck. On the other hand, his opponent was actually a crazy Trumpist and lost handily as a result. On the opposite side of the spectrum, Glenn Youngkin was painted as a crazy right winger in 2021 when he was more of an old school "normal" Republican. It didn't work and he won a race where the left was largely perceived as extreme on COVID and education issues.

I think the takeaway is more that accusations of the other side being extreme don't really land because it has become the default setting. But it's not a meaningless term and independent/swing voters do vote against candidates and policies that they consider extreme. Republicans are largely seen as extreme on abortion policies right now and it has continued to cost them winnable elections. It's just that swing voters don't need to hear that message from partisan operators because they won't always buy it (and a lot of those messages are really only going to be heard by extremely partisan voters anyway).

I also think painting Trump as an extremist doesn't really work, particularly for many of the reasons outlined in that article. Trump irreverently voices a lot of things that people actually agree with. His downfall is when he is painted as incompetent, incapable of delivering on his promises, or just plain dishonest about doing what he says he's going to do (the border wall sometimes seems to be the most effective sticking point against him).
 
Imagine the criticism if Biden would have said no. That was as soft a way as calling somebody a dictator as possible. Chinese media just censored it anyway, as expected.
 
Yax said:
Imagine the criticism if Biden would have said no.
Click to expand...

That's why Blinker was scared before even listen to the question. He probably knew the journalist and what will arrive.

Yax said:
That was as soft a way as calling somebody a dictator as possible.
Click to expand...

Not as soft as possible, actually quite a fuck up, my impression is that it was a slip and then he tried to repair it. Blinken's reaction clearly indicates a fuck up and look other faces too.
He could have started from the second part if he wanted it softer that China has a different system from us blah blah.

Yax said:
Chinese media just censored it anyway, as expected.
Click to expand...

This was a huge loss of face, I'm sure they did.

Vaenyr said:
I mean, is it really controversial to call Xi a dictator?
Click to expand...

Under these circumstances*? You tell me.

*US was trying to reach Xi for about a year with Chinese constantly refusing. This was their first meeting trying to repair the relationships and build some back channels. Remember it's US that's proxy battling on many fronts not China and it's Joe who's facing elections not Xi.
In addition they are the hosts and this was minutes after they meet.
 
____no5 said:
Not as soft as possible, actually quite a fuck up, my impression is that it was a slip and then he tried to repair it. Blinken's reaction clearly indicates a fuck up and look other faces too.
He could have started from the second part if he wanted it softer that China has a different system from us blah blah.
Click to expand...
If you want to tip-toe around it then I agree, it would be better to do it that way. Had I been in his shoes I would have worded it like that and perhaps landed in "yes, under these provisions" towards the end. But the dance where every dictatorship (or semi-dictatorship) wants to pretend to be a democracy is fundamentally ridiculous. That's also, I guess, the reason why the Chinese media censored it. They wouldn't want people on the street calling Xi a dictator for the exact same reason, so the dance continues.
 
Yax said:
But the dance where every dictatorship (or semi-dictatorship) wants to pretend to be a democracy is fundamentally ridiculous. That's also, I guess, the reason why the Chinese media censored it. They wouldn't want people on the street calling Xi a dictator for the exact same reason, so the dance continues.
Click to expand...

Chinese are practical people they don't care having these kind of illusions. If they have censored it, it's because they are extremely sensitive on loose face issues.

This incident confirms once more what I have concluded already: Biden is not fit to lead US and not because of his age.

____no5 said:
It's wrong to say Joe Biden is not fit to govern due to his age. The man is not fit to govern period.
Click to expand...
 
____no5 said:
Under these circumstances*? You tell me.

*US was trying to reach Xi for about a year with Chinese constantly refusing. This was their first meeting trying to repair the relationships and build some back channels. Remember it's US that's proxy battling on many fronts not China and it's Joe who's facing elections not Xi.
In addition they are the hosts and this was minutes after they meet.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but one can make very convincing arguments for why Xi is a dictator. I see no value in downplaying that. We can't expect for relationships to be repaired by the US touching Xi's fragile ego with kiddie gloves and coddling up to a dictator. Things like that are a two way street. If a dictator doesn't want to be called that maybe they should do fewer dictator-things?
 
Vaenyr said:
I'm sorry, but one can make very convincing arguments for why Xi is a dictator. I see no value in downplaying that. We can't expect for relationships to be repaired by the US touching Xi's fragile ego with kiddie gloves and coddling up to a dictator. Things like that are a two way street. If a dictator doesn't want to be called that maybe they should do fewer dictator-things?
Click to expand...

Except this is international relations of highest level, not two guys like me and you arguing in a Forum. I find hard to believe that we are even arguing about that.
And the fragile ego is rather Biden's I find. Actually worse. He doesn't have the control to restrain his words, his instinct for confrontation is stronger than his logic. And it's not his dementia, he was always like this.

Yax said:
That's one way of putting it. Peasants and burghers under 17th century kings were "practical" too.
Click to expand...

Before being too critical, just reflect for a moment what you have ever done in your political life other than going to vote once in 4 years?
 
____no5 said:
Remember it's US that's proxy battling on many fronts not China
Click to expand...
That Kool-Aid must taste delicious.

Vaenyr said:
We can't expect for relationships to be repaired by the US touching Xi's fragile ego with kiddie gloves and coddling up to a dictator. Things like that are a two way street. If a dictator doesn't want to be called that maybe they should do fewer dictator-things?
Click to expand...
QFT. We tried engagement with China for decades in the hope that raising their standard of living would bring liberalization to their society, which had worked in other places. Obviously that effort has failed, and continuing to coddle Winnie The Pooh only serves to undermine our own values as a country.
 
____no5 said:
Before being too critical, just reflect for a moment what you have ever done in your political life other than going to vote once in 4 years?
Click to expand...
So this is your way of saying "I can't argue against that" without actually saying it. You talk about voting as if it's nothing. Voting is the fundamental principle behind democracy and all that comes with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top