Nikki Haley - What are the chances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ouch

I wish Christie wasn’t dropping out. He’s the only one who can go toe to toe with DJT. Don’t agree with him on a lot of policies, but it really should be him consolidating the anti-Trump vote.

Do you not get it yet? The GOP is dead and gone. There is no “anti-Trump” vote amongst Republicans because all the Republicans who have finally understood the toxicity and corruption in their old party have decided to vote for the Democrats until there’s a new party for them to support. You can’t keep hoping and wishing for one of these chumps to fix it because none of them wants to. Haley ane Desantis have both said they would pardon Trump. I haven’t heard any of them disavow Project 2025. None of them supports abortion rights. Each is as bad as the last.

FWIW the latest NH poll has Trump at 39%. That means 61% want someone else.

In one tiny state that is the least Trump friendly of any state. He’s going to win there anyway, and mop the floor with them in places like Iowa, SC (her home state), etc.

Fine, perhaps, probably. But it's great do see (and a dagger to Trump's ego) that he's not getting 100% in New Hampshire. That means a lot of voters aren't simply drinking the Trump koolaid. Right now, Trump is at 39%, Haley is 32%, and Christine 12%. Where do you think those 12% are going to go? Not all Trump's way. If it's a close result, that's an indictment of Trump's candidacy.

Trump is basically running as the Republican incumbent, so 39% for an incumbent president with 100% name recognition in a contested primary seems pretty weak.

Yes, and the RNC had years to adjust the way delegates are awarded so someone else would have a chance to oust this guy but they stuck with winner take all so here we are in the same boat as 2016.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

After Obama and Trump, people want to be excited and entertained by the politicians. This is exactly part of the problem plaguing us.

If voters really cared about "reasonably fit" and "presidential resumes" and "viable candidates" they would not have elected Trump in 2016. The man who never did a day of public service in his life.

Americans don't care about anything in your post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

After Obama and Trump, people want to be excited and entertained by the politicians. This is exactly part of the problem plaguing us.

If voters really cared about "reasonably fit" and "presidential resumes" and "viable candidates" they would not have elected Trump in 2016. The man who never did a day of public service in his life.

Americans don't care about anything in your post.

If this were the case, we would have Trump-like presidents long before 2016. We went from a 2012 election with two very respectable major party candidates to having Trump win one and possibly two out of three elections. Nothing is normal about this. The American people didn't create this mess. An absence of leadership and functionality within our two major political parties created the opportunity for this to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And a physically unstable geriatric on the other.

Cite your sources. And no, "old man mannerisms" and his lifelong gaffe habit don't count.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

.

Have to disagree. These are the chosen nominees.. one was selected to stick it to the libs. And one was specifically chosen to beat trump in the swing states and so he did. Most voters don't even participate in the primaries and can't then whine about the nominee.

[Anonymous]

Bird Brain has literally no policy arguments with JoeTard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ouch

I wish Christie wasn’t dropping out. He’s the only one who can go toe to toe with DJT. Don’t agree with him on a lot of policies, but it really should be him consolidating the anti-Trump vote.

Do you not get it yet? The GOP is dead and gone. There is no “anti-Trump” vote amongst Republicans because all the Republicans who have finally understood the toxicity and corruption in their old party have decided to vote for the Democrats until there’s a new party for them to support. You can’t keep hoping and wishing for one of these chumps to fix it because none of them wants to. Haley ane Desantis have both said they would pardon Trump. I haven’t heard any of them disavow Project 2025. None of them supports abortion rights. Each is as bad as the last.

FWIW the latest NH poll has Trump at 39%. That means 61% want someone else.

In one tiny state that is the least Trump friendly of any state. He’s going to win there anyway, and mop the floor with them in places like Iowa, SC (her home state), etc.

Fine, perhaps, probably. But it's great do see (and a dagger to Trump's ego) that he's not getting 100% in New Hampshire. That means a lot of voters aren't simply drinking the Trump koolaid. Right now, Trump is at 39%, Haley is 32%, and Christine 12%. Where do you think those 12% are going to go? Not all Trump's way. If it's a close result, that's an indictment of Trump's candidacy.

They are ALL drinking the Trump Kool-Aid! Is he their first choice? No. Will they vote for him if he’s the nominee? Absolutely. Will they then claim they *wpuld* have voted for a D but NOT BIDEN, because he’s [insert stupid excuse here].

Sorry, GOP DO NOT want Hayley (say she’s RINO) or even DeSantis (weirdo trump light). They want Trump. They want to chaos, they want to cruelty, they want the corruption. Because this election is a binary choice.

MAGA wants Trump. There is a big/important population of moderates/independents who won't want to cast their vote for a candidate who led an insurrection, or who is a convicted rapist, or who jeopardized national security for his own enrichment, or who has no platform other than revenge, and on and on. Trump will get a chunk of these voters, but some of them are going to Biden or will sit out entirely to not cast a morally-problematic vote for Trump.

I agree with this. I don't know that Haley has a shot at the nomination, but I think she will garner enough support to make Trump worried. And his antics may end up turning off people in the end. I definitely believe there's been an exodus from the GOP, and Trump runs the risk of turning a lot more people off by attacking Haley. But he'll probably have her as his running mate so it won't matter. And she'll get a great book out of it.

[Anonymous]

Now second in Iowa ahead of DeSantis
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/01/11/iowa-poll-nikki-haley-ron-desantis/

[Anonymous]

From the Emerson poll:
https://emersoncollegepolling.com/new-hampshire-2024-poll-haley-gains-trump-loses-support-but-maintains-lead/

“Haley’s base is among older voters, independent voters, and those with postgraduate degrees. Haley leads Trump 38% to 35% among those over 70, leads among voters with postgraduate degrees, 40% to 31%, and among independent voters, 37% to 31%.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

After Obama and Trump, people want to be excited and entertained by the politicians. This is exactly part of the problem plaguing us.

If voters really cared about "reasonably fit" and "presidential resumes" and "viable candidates" they would not have elected Trump in 2016. The man who never did a day of public service in his life.

Americans don't care about anything in your post.

If this were the case, we would have Trump-like presidents long before 2016. We went from a 2012 election with two very respectable major party candidates to having Trump win one and possibly two out of three elections. Nothing is normal about this. The American people didn't create this mess. An absence of leadership and functionality within our two major political parties created the opportunity for this to happen.

The Electoral College and gerrymandering created this mess. The majority of Americans did not vote for Trump and never have and never will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the Emerson poll:
https://emersoncollegepolling.com/new-hampshire-2024-poll-haley-gains-trump-loses-support-but-maintains-lead/

“Haley’s base is among older voters, independent voters, and those with postgraduate degrees. Haley leads Trump 38% to 35% among those over 70, leads among voters with postgraduate degrees, 40% to 31%, and among independent voters, 37% to 31%.”

That’s in NH, which allows independents to vote in the primary. NH also is not a winner take all state. There are only 19 delegates at stake and they will be allocated proportionally to the candidates with at least 10 percent of the vote. The main function of the NH primary will be to end the Desantis campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

After Obama and Trump, people want to be excited and entertained by the politicians. This is exactly part of the problem plaguing us.

If voters really cared about "reasonably fit" and "presidential resumes" and "viable candidates" they would not have elected Trump in 2016. The man who never did a day of public service in his life.

Americans don't care about anything in your post.

If this were the case, we would have Trump-like presidents long before 2016. We went from a 2012 election with two very respectable major party candidates to having Trump win one and possibly two out of three elections. Nothing is normal about this. The American people didn't create this mess. An absence of leadership and functionality within our two major political parties created the opportunity for this to happen.

The Electoral College and gerrymandering created this mess. The majority of Americans did not vote for Trump and never have and never will.

A potential change to the process of how we determine the winner of our presidential elections is a debate to be had. As it is, Trump won fairly and squarely in 2016 and he has a good chance of winning in 2024. Regardless of what the electoral process is and has been, we've never had a successful presidential candidate as clearly unfit as Trump. Weaknesses in the GOP allowed Trump to be nominated and weaknesses in the Dem party allowed for one Trump victory and possibly a second.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

After Obama and Trump, people want to be excited and entertained by the politicians. This is exactly part of the problem plaguing us.

If voters really cared about "reasonably fit" and "presidential resumes" and "viable candidates" they would not have elected Trump in 2016. The man who never did a day of public service in his life.

Americans don't care about anything in your post.

If this were the case, we would have Trump-like presidents long before 2016. We went from a 2012 election with two very respectable major party candidates to having Trump win one and possibly two out of three elections. Nothing is normal about this. The American people didn't create this mess. An absence of leadership and functionality within our two major political parties created the opportunity for this to happen.

BoThSiDeS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for Biden. If Haley is on the ticket, I will vote for her.

I, like most normal people, am in the anyone but Trump or Biden camp but Haley won't get my vote. She would obviously be a better choice overall as a leader than one of the senile old men but I can't quite go there for policy difference reasons. I also think DeSantis has joined my anyone but list. He is almost as unlikable as Trump.

Elections are about keeping out the lessor of the two evils. They always have been and always will be with few exceptions. You look for who will do less damage. If you are looking to be excited about your candidate, you are going to be disappointed.

I think if you take a closer look at presidential elections in the 20th and early 21st century you'd find that there was at least one candidate and in many cases both candidates nominated by the two major parties that most people would think are reasonably fit for office and had presidential resumes. This includes candidates that a high majority of Americans would feel comfortable with as leaders of the country even if they were of the opposite party. There will always been a small percentage of far right or left wing people that aren't satisfied with anyone but we typical have had options to choose from that were viable presidential candidates at the time they were nominated. We're currently faced with an upcoming election with a likelihood of two very unpopular nominees that are clearly not among the best available POTUS options. This is not okay and we shouldn't accept it as the norm.

After Obama and Trump, people want to be excited and entertained by the politicians. This is exactly part of the problem plaguing us.

If voters really cared about "reasonably fit" and "presidential resumes" and "viable candidates" they would not have elected Trump in 2016. The man who never did a day of public service in his life.

Americans don't care about anything in your post.

If this were the case, we would have Trump-like presidents long before 2016. We went from a 2012 election with two very respectable major party candidates to having Trump win one and possibly two out of three elections. Nothing is normal about this. The American people didn't create this mess. An absence of leadership and functionality within our two major political parties created the opportunity for this to happen.

The Electoral College and gerrymandering created this mess. The majority of Americans did not vote for Trump and never have and never will.

A potential change to the process of how we determine the winner of our presidential elections is a debate to be had. As it is, Trump won fairly and squarely in 2016 and he has a good chance of winning in 2024. Regardless of what the electoral process is and has been, we've never had a successful presidential candidate as clearly unfit as Trump. Weaknesses in the GOP allowed Trump to be nominated and weaknesses in the Dem party allowed for one Trump victory and possibly a second.

“Fairly and squarely” if you ignore all the boosting from Russia, the media and Facebook.