The 2024 Presidential Nomination Thread

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I really would like to meet one of these unicorn GOPers who would vote for anyone other than Trump.

If I could vote for a Kasich, Haley, etc. I probably would; there are factors that could make me go back to third party also but I'd lean that way. As long as it's somebody like Trump - I wouldn't vote for DeSantis either for similar reasons as Trump - as long as it's somebody like that, I don't see a reasonable choice other than voting Biden. I don't support a lot of his policies, but on some issues he constrains himself by respecting the form of government of the country he's the President of. Right now, that's where the bar basically is; are you in favor of voting or against it, for or against civil war/anarchy/despotism.

[Flasch186]

I used isidewith.com and ended up with the governor of N Dakota 1st and then the senator from W Virginia, I think he’s independent now as number 2… then Biden. Therefore it looks like none of the current class of candidates outside of Biden match what I believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Glad to see Ramaswamy drop out. He is an unlikable guy with, hope he takes a significant financial hit in his businesses because he was such an ass.

Disappointed in Haley's 3rd place showing but NH is where she's planning on the breakout. Trump will still win but she needs a strong showing for momentum.

[albionmoonlight]

As someone who considers Trump uniquely dangerous and who believes that this country really needs an honorable intellectual conservative party in order to thrive, I was very saddened by these results. A Trump blowout with DeSantis in second place is about as bad as it can get from my point of view.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Glad to see Ramaswamy drop out. He is an unlikable guy with, hope he takes a significant financial hit in his businesses because he was such an ass.

Disappointed in Haley's 3rd place showing but NH is where she's planning on the breakout. Trump will still win but she needs a strong showing for momentum.

I find it hilarious that Ramaswamy spent a year of his life trying to win votes from people who, in the end, didn't vote for him because they thought he was Arab/Muslim and from Saudi Arabia instead of an Indian/Hindu born in Cincinnati. Sometimes, you get what you deserve.

[GrantDawg]

A good thread by Steve Korancki on how Trump's nomination didn't start as a forgone conclusion and where it started to break away. Indict him needed to be done, but the slow drag in the investigation and waiting till it was this close to the election basically handed him this nomination.

The shift came abruptly: A clear rally-around-Trump effect among GOP voters when news of the first indictment (Manhattan DA) broke in March '23. Look how the polling averaged diverged at that moment and never looked back: pic.twitter.com/uwCToHzx1P

— Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) January 16, 2024

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

... instead of an Indian/Hindu born in Cincinnati. Sometimes, you get what you deserve.

I didn't think much about his religion until you mentioned it. I always assumed he was one of the Christian denominations.

But googled and you're right! Electing a Hindu is a bridge too far (at least right now) if you're going after the GOP base or general electorate.

Karma = get what you deserve.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz

If I could vote for a Kasich, Haley, etc. I probably would; there are factors that could make me go back to third party also but I'd lean that way. As long as it's somebody like Trump - I wouldn't vote for DeSantis either for similar reasons as Trump - as long as it's somebody like that, I don't see a reasonable choice other than voting Biden. I don't support a lot of his policies, but on some issues he constrains himself by respecting the form of government of the country he's the President of. Right now, that's where the bar basically is; are you in favor of voting or against it, for or against civil war/anarchy/despotism.

Sincere question. Do you see yourself as a member of the GOP?

That is the piece I can't wrap my head around. GOPers could vote for Haley because they agree with her policies. They could vote for Haley because they don't like Trump/DeSantis. They could vote for Haley because they believe she is the best chance to defeat Biden. But yet here we are.

To be clear, the same could be said on the Democratic side as well when it comes to actual votes cast. I just see more people expressing their choice in one of those three terms. I personally think Haley (or someone else) would have had a better chance running as a conservative Democratic against Biden as opposed to what she has done. I'm not saying she would have won the nomination but her pushes to the far right so far come off as disingenuous to me. She seems better suited to chase the support of the more conservative members of the Democratic Party.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

She seems better suited to chase the support of the more conservative members of the Democratic Party.

That's because she's not a conservative, so it makes sense.

No actual conservative would have done what that treacherous hellspawn did in South Carolina.

[JPhillips]

Or was this just the inevitable outcome of a race where nobody had the courage to go after Trump directly?

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I find it hilarious that Ramaswamy spent a year of his life trying to win votes from people who, in the end, didn't vote for him because they thought he was Arab/Muslim and from Saudi Arabia instead of an Indian/Hindu born in Cincinnati. Sometimes, you get what you deserve.

I found myself oddly impressed by both Apoorva Ramaswamy and the Fowlers from the video clips that I saw regarding this. I think we all have been in the position the Fowlers were in sitting at the table. The silent conversation of a wife basically seeking reassurance from her husband because she wants to/is going to say the thing. Her husband responding like yeah go ahead and say the thing. The wife actually saying the thing. Finally Apoorva Ramaswamy deserves immense credit for giving them the space and grace to say what was obviously a difficult thing for them, not try to minimize what was said even if minimizing it might have played well later. The little quip of “Not much we can do about that one.” was a perfect way to lift the tension while not dismissing what was said. Good job by all.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

A good thread by Steve Korancki on how Trump's nomination didn't start as a forgone conclusion and where it started to break away. Indict him needed to be done, but the slow drag in the investigation and waiting till it was this close to the election basically handed him this nomination.

The shift came abruptly: A clear rally-around-Trump effect among GOP voters when news of the first indictment (Manhattan DA) broke in March '23. Look how the polling averaged diverged at that moment and never looked back: pic.twitter.com/uwCToHzx1P

— Steve Kornacki (@SteveKornacki) January 16, 2024

The two people who really fucked us were Garland And Bragg. The Stormy Daniels case being the first one really made it look like they were out to get him as opposed to something Garland should have brought which would have had teeth. No excuse for Garland taking so long and now Trump will likely be reelected and it all goes away.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Sincere question. Do you see yourself as a member of the GOP?

That is the piece I can't wrap my head around. GOPers could vote for Haley because they agree with her policies. They could vote for Haley because they don't like Trump/DeSantis. They could vote for Haley because they believe she is the best chance to defeat Biden. But yet here we are.

To be clear, the same could be said on the Democratic side as well when it comes to actual votes cast. I just see more people expressing their choice in one of those three terms. I personally think Haley (or someone else) would have had a better chance running as a conservative Democratic against Biden as opposed to what she has done. I'm not saying she would have won the nomination but her pushes to the far right so far come off as disingenuous to me. She seems better suited to chase the support of the more conservative members of the Democratic Party.

yes she might have the conservative part down but she also has the far-right down very well. She can't seem to make her up her mind on any one topic and stay with it. She was very anti-trump until he became the nominee and then she kissed the ring and got UN Ambassador where she was very far right. She was pro Confederate flag here In SC until events caused her to change course. And then just last week she even couldn't agree that slavery was a/the cause for the Civil war until forced to. She will never work with Democrats, so how exactly is she any different than Trump but younger?

[cuervo72]

That's what I'd like to know. Where exactly (other than the flag) does Haley agree with Dems/disagree with Reps on much of anything? Abortion, LGBTQ issues, immigration, the environment, school loans, school "choice", etc. Maybe she's not ivermectin crazy, but what else does she give Dems? Oh, she's not quite as overtly racist, great (though as we've seen, disqualifies her to some on the right).

[Ksyrup]

She's the classic example of a 2015 normie GOPer who is trying to play both sides of the fence. She knew how she should have answered the Civil War question, but she couldn't answer that way because the voters she was courting don't want to hear it.

[JPhillips]

Haley today, "we've never been a racist country."

lol Too late, dearie. You won't be the nominee and Trump will never pick you as his VP.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Haley today, "we've never been a racist country."

lol Too late, dearie. You won't be the nominee and Trump will never pick you as his VP.

well at least she waited until after martin luther king day to say that, yes we should all vote for her now.

[cuervo72]

Dana Bash: "How do you feel about your party’s frontrunner being held liable for sexual abuse?"

Nikki Haley: "I haven't paid attention to his cases, and I'm not a lawyer…You got investigations on Trump and Biden.” pic.twitter.com/M7pVXt1SbA

— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) January 16, 2024

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I didn't think much about his religion until you mentioned it. I always assumed he was one of the Christian denominations.

But googled and you're right! Electing a Hindu is a bridge too far (at least right now) if you're going after the GOP base or general electorate.

Karma = get what you deserve.

And the first thing he wanted to do when he got in office is not to allow people like him, children born in America of immigrant parents, have birthright citizenship. I mean that is just a special level of douche.

[Thomkal]

Yeah until its only her and trump left then it will be 'yes we can't have someone convicted of sexual abuse as the leader of our country' or some such nonsense. not paid attention to the cases for the guy who you worked for, yeah right.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

And the first thing he wanted to do when he got in office is not to allow people like him, children born in America of immigrant parents, have birthright citizenship. I mean that is just a special level of douche.

That's not quite accurate. The important distinction is legal vs illegal.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Haley today, "we've never been a racist country."

lol Too late, dearie. You won't be the nominee and Trump will never pick you as his VP.

Trump obliterating her on the slavery answer was pretty funny.




[Ksyrup]

Spoken like a man not afraid of losing any votes for saying the obvious.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Edward64

That's not quite accurate. The important distinction is legal vs illegal.

The immigration crisis is so bad that the Speaker of the House says it can wait until next year when a Republican is in office. Why negotiate at least some semblance of a solution now for the benefit of the country when Biden can then claim a hand in the solution? No, the best thing to do is, like the economy, hope everything goes to hell in a hand basket because winning the election is so much more important than, you know, doing things to improve the lives of Americans.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

yes she might have the conservative part down but she also has the far-right down very well. She can't seem to make her up her mind on any one topic and stay with it. She was very anti-trump until he became the nominee and then she kissed the ring and got UN Ambassador where she was very far right. She was pro Confederate flag here In SC until events caused her to change course. And then just last week she even couldn't agree that slavery was a/the cause for the Civil war until forced to. She will never work with Democrats, so how exactly is she any different than Trump but younger?

That is the point. She has tried to be a version of Trump IMO much like other GOP candidates in the last few years. If this is who she really is, I feel like we would have heard about the female version of Donald Trump way back in 2005 when she first ran for office. This current version of Nikki Haley would not be getting endorsements and potential vice president nominee consideration from Mitt Romney. Hell, she turned down a far right layup when she did not support one of those anti trans bathroom bills back in 2016. Why create an easy stick like that for your opponents to hit you with if you actually believed that the bathroom scare was a problem. Much like you have documented, the current version is doing what she has to do to get elected IMO.

When I talk about her running as a Democrat, I mean a specific version of Haley. That version would still be right leaning and would still have problematic positions on certain things as far as I am concerned. That version would also be closer to what Joe Biden than many Democrats would like to believe and would allow for those right leaning Democrats that I know exist to have a more genuine voice within the party (No I don't think Joe Manchin as a genuine conservative Democrat. I think he is a DINO). I know that it is terrifying for some Democrats to consider that there is a right leaning faction of the party but they know that it exists. I would say that she would be better off trying to get support from the left leaning wing of the Republican party but I honestly don't think that exist which was the reason for my original post.

Originally Posted by cuervo72

That's what I'd like to know. Where exactly (other than the flag) does Haley agree with Dems/disagree with Reps on much of anything? Abortion, LGBTQ issues, immigration, the environment, school loans, school "choice", etc. Maybe she's not ivermectin crazy, but what else does she give Dems? Oh, she's not quite as overtly racist, great (though as we've seen, disqualifies her to some on the right).

Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema both are sitting in the U.S. Senate with D's next to their name. I live in a state where Charlie Bleepin' Crist won a congressional election and was the Democratic candidate for Governor. If the first two can still be sitting in the Senate right now and that last one could be still campaigning for Dems, is it that far fetched to think a version of Haley would have had a better chance at the current Democratic nomination than she does at the Republican one? As far as what positions she would agree with Dems, it all depends on when you asked her. Catch her on the right day you might find she is in lock step with the Dems.

Here is Nikki Haley said in Iowa in August 2023.

Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley told a question-asker at the Des Moines Register Political Soapbox Saturday they were misinformed by Google for believing she was against gay marriage.

“Get your news from somewhere else,” Haley said. “This is what I’ll tell you: People should live the way they want to live. I believe in freedom. I believe in making sure that people can live the way they want to live, and I believe the government needs to stay out of the way.”

A regular old AOC if I ever so one.

Now one could forgive the questioner for thinking she was against gay marriage because here is what she said in 2013.

Gov. Nikki Haley said she is doing "my job to uphold the constitution" by opposing a federal lawsuit that seeks to overturn the state's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. "The citizens of South Carolina spoke ... they spoke something that I, too, believe, which is marriage should between a man and a woman," Haley told reporters after speaking at an event sponsored by the S.C. Chamber of Commerce in the Isle of Palms. "I’m going to stand by the people of this state, stand by the constitution, I’m going to support it and fight for it every step of the way."

I think that first position would get rounding applause in democratic debate provided she can claimed to have learned some things in the years since that second one.

One more

Here is Nikki Haley discussing trans women in women's locker rooms in 2023.

he said she does not support transgender women student athletes competing in women’s sports, and does not support transgender women using women’s locker rooms.

She said that “our daughters” should not have to “figure out how to deal with” transgender women in women’s locker rooms.

No chance of her siding with the Dems on this issue except back in 2016 when discussing why she opposed anti trans bathroom bills for her state with the press, she said.

“Y’all haven’t reported on anything. I haven’t heard anything that’s come to my office. So when I look at South Carolina, we look at our situations, we’re not hearing of anybody’s religious liberties that are being violated, and we’re, again, not hearing any citizens that feel like they are being violated in terms of freedoms.”

Finally, guess who her inspiration was to get into politics in the first place? That noted Republican...Hilary Clinton?

"The reason I actually ran for office is because of Hillary Clinton," she said. "She said that when it comes to women running for office, there will be everybody that tells you why you shouldn’t, but that’s all the reasons why we need you to do it, and I walked out of there thinking, 'That’s it. I’m running for office.'”

I am not saying she would win. In fact, I am definitely saying she would not win. I agree with Ksyrup she is trying to play both sides. I just think she would have a better chance with the Dems because she might get the right leaning faction of that party.

[Atocep]

I think the anti-Trump dems, republicans, and independents are so desperate for a non-MAGA Republican that they've overlooked the fact that Haley has run an awful campaign and would be considered batshit crazy prior to Trump raising that bar.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

The immigration crisis is so bad that the Speaker of the House says it can wait until next year when a Republican is in office. Why negotiate at least some semblance of a solution now for the benefit of the country when Biden can then claim a hand in the solution? No, the best thing to do is, like the economy, hope everything goes to hell in a hand basket because winning the election is so much more important than, you know, doing things to improve the lives of Americans.

I've said this before and will restate.

Both parties share blame in the immigration mess we are in. Some here will say it's all the GOP fault, they never want to negotiate etc. I'll agree that the GOP shares more blame in this current time (let's say 60-40, 70-30) but both parties had opportunities and (1) didn't want to negotiate or (2) wanted to propose something during election year vs the first 2 years when they owned the Presidency & Congress or (3) wanted to insert it into a non-related bill or (4) ad nauseum.

Specific to your point about GOP not wanting to negotiate because it'll help Joe? It's come up before recently and I'll refer you to my response at below link, see starting #9055 through #9061.

The Biden Presidency - 2020 - Page 182 - Front Office Football Central


I'm going to move this to below Immigration thread. Let's continue to discuss there? and if not, np.

Biden's Immigration Reform - Page 3 - Front Office Football Central

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I am not saying she would win. In fact, I am definitely saying she would not win. I agree with Ksyrup she is trying to play both sides. I just think she would have a better chance with the Dems because she might get the right leaning faction of that party.

your arguments are well thought out here but i think haley has as good a chance of running as a dem, as the dems welcolming tulsi gabbard back into the party. i just cannot think that a haley/DINO like manchin or Sinema ticket could make it in today's political environment.

[GrantDawg]

No more debates. ABC canceled the last one since Haley refused to attend without Trump.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[albionmoonlight]

DeSantis had been saying that he's happy to show up and debate two empty podiums.

Guess not.

Ron is going to be so humiliated by the time it is all said and done.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Or was this just the inevitable outcome of a race where nobody had the courage to go after Trump directly?

Pretty much. I still don't understand why DeSantis didn't go hard on Trump after the midterms. He was at his weakest and that was the time to come out and say "I win elections, he doesn't".

And even if he lost the primary, he'd be in a great spot to say "I told you so" if Trump lost the general and immediately be the frontrunner in 2028.

One of the most bizarre campaigns I've ever seen run by a major candidate who actually had money. I get the strategy of Vivek who is just angling for a cabinet position or something, but how are you going to beat a guy you won't say a negative thing about?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

That's what I'd like to know. Where exactly (other than the flag) does Haley agree with Dems/disagree with Reps on much of anything? Abortion, LGBTQ issues, immigration, the environment, school loans, school "choice", etc. Maybe she's not ivermectin crazy, but what else does she give Dems? Oh, she's not quite as overtly racist, great (though as we've seen, disqualifies her to some on the right).

She'd be pretty similar to Biden on foreign policy and economic matters. The difference would be on social issues, but that mostly comes down to the courts. The biggest difference for me would be the judges they'd nominate. I think they'd be fairly similar outside of that.

[RainMaker]

Looking at some of the polls and trends, it feels like the next election might come down to the state of Michigan. Feels like Trump is in a very good position to take Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia back. Biden likely wins Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

That would also make the one electoral college vote from Nebraska incredibly important.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Sincere question. Do you see yourself as a member of the GOP?

That is the piece I can't wrap my head around. GOPers could vote for Haley because they agree with her policies. They could vote for Haley because they don't like Trump/DeSantis. They could vote for Haley because they believe she is the best chance to defeat Biden. But yet here we are.

I can't really give that the straight answer you are probably looking for. I would call myself an independent with GOP sympathies. I agree with both parties on some issues but disagree on others; if you go back to pre-Trump, I would say at that time I was with Democrats economically and Republicans more often than not socially, but most crucially with the Republicans on what I consider to be the foundational matter of constitutional law.

The GOP isn't what it was, so I don't vote for them anymore. They're doing more to undermine the Republic than Democrats are, which from my perspective is actually a pretty impressive accomplishment. If there were a sensible alternative on the Republican side, I would vote for them; Biden is the first Democratic presidential candidate I've ever voted for. He's disappointed me, but I don't regret the vote. Some things are intolerable and must be stopped.

I think the answer to your issue in the second paragraph is one that is hard to accept, which is why I commonly see it dismissed; Trump is largely post-policy. His support has a lot to do with his leadership style. He's not perceived as being as 'weak' and 'woke' as other politicians, and so forth. I think all of that is dumb and very misplaced, but a much higher amount of his support than we'd like to admit comes from people who have seen presidents for decades largely governing by poll/focus group. Trump appeals to them on a primal level and opposes a general sense in their minds of the country getting 'soft', 'going the wrong way', and all of that. Any alternative they view as opposing 'wokeness' is superior to one seen as weak or fake, which I suspect is where some of Jon's antipathy to Haley comes from as an example. Trump's 'wrong' views on issues of policy comes in a very distant backdrop after that.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I personally think Haley (or someone else) would have had a better chance running as a conservative Democratic against Biden as opposed to what she has done. I'm not saying she would have won the nomination but her pushes to the far right so far come off as disingenuous to me. She seems better suited to chase the support of the more conservative members of the Democratic Party.

I suspect there's a number of GOP politicians who have been left behind by the MAGA-shift who, with a little moderation of positions on social issues, could have run for the Democrats.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

No actual conservative would have done what that treacherous hellspawn did in South Carolina.

I'm curious, which incident are you citing?

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

DeSantis had been saying that he's happy to show up and debate two empty podiums.

Probably his best chance to win a debate.

[GrantDawg]

Brian's post is a pretty spot on summary.

[GrantDawg]

"Probably his best chance to win a debate."
I still think the empty podiums would win.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

I had a customer just tell me that she and all her friends were Vivek Ramaswamy supporters, and they angry because they feel he was done wrong by the Republican party. She said she is mad enough that she is likely to vote for Biden just for spite, or more likely Robert Kennedy. She sounded like she was very anti-Trump, but I'm not sure why. I try not get into politics at work and so a just let her rant without asking follow-ups.

[Atocep]

After seeing videos how people vote in the Iowa Caucus I'm starting to think the cries about election security are insincere.

[RainMaker]

There seem to be a lot of people upset about Iowa but no one pointing out how undemocratic a caucus is and especially when you're letting a handful of people in one state dictate who gets to run for President.

[JPhillips]

Sununu said that coming in second in NH would be a good result for Haley. I don't understand why she even bothered to get into the race.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Sununu said that coming in second in NH would be a good result for Haley. I don't understand why she even bothered to get into the race.

Any of them. The hope was Trump would have to drop out because of legal trouble which was never happening. But just to play devils advocate, there have been times in the past when you had a candidate progressively get better and come back and beat a front-runner. She is showing a strong second in New Hampshire. The last polling I saw had her at 38% versus only 8% for Desantis. The problem is that Trump has 53%. A 15% margin is much narrower than in Iowa, but still a huge margin. The other factor is usually that strong showing in New Hampshire that propels a candidate is a surprise, but this has been expected for while. Short of her getting that margin on Trump down to the single digits, I don't see this result being a catapult for her campaign.
She needs something that can give her some momentum so that she could win South Carolina. If she could do that then there could be a real race.There is likely nothing that could do that. Trump is going to win the state that she had been governor of with above 50% of the vote, and that will be the end of the primary season in all practicality.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

There seem to be a lot of people upset about Iowa but no one pointing out how undemocratic a caucus is and especially when you're letting a handful of people in one state dictate who gets to run for President.

Our electoral process for picking POTUS, especially, is pants-on-head stupid in all of its facets.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

There seem to be a lot of people upset about Iowa but no one pointing out how undemocratic a caucus is and especially when you're letting a handful of people in one state dictate who gets to run for President.

I agree caucuses are stupid and would like Iowa to go to a primary. But..

Pretty much everything is dumb with how we select a president. Question #1, does the person with the most votes win?

Is your comment about a "handful of people" applying to Iowa because it's first, at least on the R side? Or all states that caucus? I see 5 other states do caucus. I certainly haven't researched these states in any way so will ask you, have caucus states been shown to have a disproportionate influence on the eventual nominees?

If you're worried Iowa is setting the tone keep in mind "we've" (embarrassed to be from here since 2016 when commons sense went out the window ) been right on picking the eventual R nominee three out of the last eight times. And we've missed on the last three, including Cruz over Trump in 2016. I don't think any candidate with a realistic chance of winning the nomination has ever dropped out after the Iowa caucus. They move onto primary states that many times quickly kill whatever momentum the Iowa winner had.

Democrats since 1972? Iowa is seven of ten picking the nominee with only Carter and Obama winning the presidency.

[cuervo72]

So how's the Jamie Dimon love going these days?

[Brian Swartz]

I'd just add to the other comments that if people were letting Iowa voters determine how they vote ... I mean, you get the government you deserve.

[Edward64]

Getting spicey now. Damage control team ramping up ...

Home | Daily Mail Online

Dailymail.com was asked to leave Nikki Haley's meet-and-greet with voters in New Hampshire on Friday morning and was told it is banned from covering her future campaign events. The ban came after the DailyMail.com published a story Friday morning exclusively reporting that Haley falsely denied cheating on her husband when she was accused of engaging in two extramarital affairs during her 2010 South Carolina gubernatorial campaign. The Haley campaign didn't respond to requests for comment on the story even though DailyMail.com gave them 24 hours to do so.

[Ghost Econ]

Will Folks runs a sleazy website about SC politics and has always been very critical of Nikki Haley. He also takes the holier than though opinion whenever there's a SC politician sex scandal (all of them) that it doesn't matter and shouldn't be reported on... while endlessly reporting on it.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Yeah until its only her and trump left then it will be 'yes we can't have someone convicted of sexual abuse as the leader of our country' or some such nonsense. not paid attention to the cases for the guy who you worked for, yeah right.

Yeah it's not sexual abuse but she found something else to go on here after trump multiple times confused her with nancy pelosi in a statement about jan 6 he's said many times. Though with Trump, I'm not sure he didn't do this on purpose given how Haley is his main threat to the nomination right now:


meidastouch.com

[Schmidty]

Been reading through all of this today, and I’m impressed and still sad by it.

Most of you guys are way smarter than me, and I’m not going to pretend otherwise. The thing that I don’t understand is how smart people can still play party versus party stuff. Obviously, you all know every politician is still bought and paid for. There are no Mr. Smiths Going to Washington anymore. So how do people still Jedi Mind-trick themselves into thinking one party is intrinsically any better than the other? Cognitive dissonance gets thrown around by everyone now, but isn’t that the definition? Surely, like me, most people vote based on one or two issues that they agree with and suck it up and vote for that politician. Because they don’t agree with every single thing another human stands for, right? I truly can’t wrap my head around voting at all otherwise.

And if that was all poorly worded, I apologize.