Ron DeSantis ends presidential campaign before New Hampshire primary : usa

[–] Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 14 points 1 year ago

Thank god. If Trump is forced out of the race from being in jail, DeSantis was the next leader, and at this point I really don't know which one of them is worse.

[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago (4 children)

So what serious contenders are there still for the primaries?

And is Trump still considered a serious contender when there are entire states who definitely won’t have him on the final ballot?

[–] superduperenigma@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's basically Nikki Haley vs Trump at this point. New Hampshire may be Haley's best bet when it comes to beating Trump in any one state at this point. Polls had shown Trump being anywhere between 10-20 points ahead, although that was before desantis dropped out. If she can win there it'll help her in other states down the line as people will see her as a more viable primary candidate.

If Haley can't build up some momentum and win a few states, it may not matter if Trump is disqualified from being on a few state ballots. He wouldn't need them to win the primary and most of those states are almost certainly going to Biden either way, so it wouldn't have much impact on the general.

[–] survivalmachine@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

Donald Trump and Nicki Haley. And Trump is not harmed in the least bit as long as he's only left off blue state ballots. That has zero effect on his ability to win electoral votes.

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Yes because Colorado was never going to go to Trump anyway. Maine splits their electoral votes but 1 or 2 electoral votes are very very unlikely to make a difference in the election. And that probably won't matter anyway because SCOTUS will almost certainly rule to keep him on the ballot.

[–] Dio@lemy.lol -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those states, and counting, are forced to keep him on the ballot by the Supreme Court.

[–] Auzy@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I thought the supreme court case hasn't been finished yet?

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is beyond bizarre to me that we are discussing another election with Trump in it.

[+] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Why? Is there some law that he has broken and been convicted of breaking and thus officially disqualified from holding federal office? Are the democrats some kind of Amazing Pax Americana party that consistently and measurably increases the quality of life for the vast majority of Americans while also shunning foreign adventurism?

Cause unless those things are true, then it seems quite expected that Trump would run again and have a similar amount of support as he did in 2020.

[–] HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The 14th amendment doesn't require someone to be convicted

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -5 points 1 year ago

Oh, well then I guess I can just declare someone invalid to run for office under the 14th amendment and now it's true?

[–] Auzy@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh God. I thought I recognized your username. You were the guy defending Nazis here in Australia I responded to on another thread.

Even sitting here in Australia it was obvious he was planning to overthrow the election months before it happened (I worked that out within 5 mins of seeing sky news at a customers house).

The guy has broken many laws (he's a rapist, tax cheat, etc).

The fact he has any support and has managed to create a cult should be a reason why nobody supports him

But sure, let's hope he has similar support to 2020 because if he can't get elected in the upcoming election, he's going straight to jail. And when he gets prosecuted for being a traitor and breaching confidential information, hopefully he gets life imprisonment and isn't eligible to run (he already shouldn't be technically)

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yea I wasn't defending nazis, but glad to see you are using the intent of that law correctly. That is to classify any criticism of the government as "defending nazis."
If Trump has "similar support" as in 2020 it's going to be a landslide victory for him.

[–] Auzy@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

There are laws which technically make him ineligible to run: https://apnews.com/article/trump-insurrection-14th-amendment-2024-colorado-79373b5043976588b599fc00ede049e8

And, based on everything I've seen, the arguments are basically just Trump claiming he's immune whilst president. So yeah.. There was a law he broke, and he already got disqualified by 2 states. Don't be surprised if he's disqualified nationally.

And yeah, you WERE defending nazi's. You basically say I, as an aussie don't "understand" the purpose of the legislation. Well, I understood it. There were literal Neo-Nazi's congregating at rally's. You're literally the only one on the planet other than the neo nazi's who interpreted it as anything other than stopping nazi rally's. Shutting down Nazi salutes only silences nazi's, unless you think there's a valid usecase for a bunch of people doing nazi salutes? Fuck them, silence them I'd say. It was actually everyone else demanding they get banned honestly.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You conveniently overlooked the part of legislation where they banned "terrorists groups" and group them in with Nazis. Where Terrorists groups are free to be designated at will. So now in Australia, if you say "Palestine will be free from the river to the sea.", or if you call for the boycot of a genocidal country, the government gets to silence you as if you are a Nazi.

[–] Auzy@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean banning these guys: https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/what-australia-is-doing/terrorist-organisations/listed-terrorist-organisations . Oh No. They are such friendly supportive groups. Also, you can't just pick them randomly, they need to follow a legal process. I mean sure, it's critical for free speech to have gangs brainwash others and teach them how to make bombs to injure other people. All

Tomorrow, you'll be arguing criminal gangs should be let out of prison.

And no.. None of that nonsense will happen. You've clearly never been here. Sounds like you're prioritising extremist groups instead of the victims of them.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/what-australia-is-doing/terrorist-organisations/listed-terrorist-organisations/kurdistan-workers-party-pkk Man sure glad the Marxist Leninist Party that is defending the themselves from genocide on that list.

[–] Auzy@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah.. And I'm sure you know so much about them.. They're branded as a terrorist organisation in a lot of countries. https://www.dni.gov/nctc/ftos/pkk_fto.html Yeah, those notable attacks make them sound like the people we want here in Australia. I can see how a soccer stadium would be considered a strong military target.

If you're not defending terrorists and Nazi's, what exactly are you doing? How should we deal with Nazi's and Terrorist organisations? Just let people involved in guerrila warfare and Terrorist parties internationally walk into our country and monitor them?

If you're not Australian, you have no right to speak on behalf of us. Because if you did, you'd know this Nazi bill was in response to everyone complaining the government wasn't doing enough. But thanks for speaking on behalf of us and Turkish Citizens too. I'm sure our Turkish citizens absolutely cherish the thought of getting attacked during any turkish festivals

I'm not going to respond anymore, because it seems you haven't offered any other alternatives, than to simply allow Nazi and Terrorist Organisations to embed themselves further in the country. Also, you're acting like they can simply just ban groups (but they need to be justified, and publicised). They can't just target random people for no reason or justification. AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE SUPPORT BANNING NAZI'S AND TERRORIST ORGANISATIONS. OR ANY ORGANISATION THAT ENGAGES IN CRIMES AGAINST AUSSIE CITIZENS !!!!!!. And yes, we aren't too pleased with some of our military either

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

And yet the IDF isn't on the list of terrorist organizations, so apparently there is some problematic subjectivity with the law as written today, which was exactly my point to begin with. I'd also suggest you ask Turkish Kurds what they think about the Turkish Government.

[–] SomeGuyNamedPaul@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Definitely Back Down

United States | News & Politics