375
submitted 11 months ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ZeroCool@slrpnk.net 82 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Vivek Ramaswamy's campaign also stopped all TV ad spending with less than a month to go before Iowa and New Hampshire. So yeah, this is the only way he can get any attention right now before he drops out in February and tries to become a right wing media personality.

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

Genuine question: what do righty folks actually think of him? Like its painful to watch him act like he's part of the gang...

[-] Gruntyfish@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

Anecdotal, but my grandma who is very racist and conservative was confused why he was running because only natural born citizens can be president. Needless to say she was disappointed when I told her that he was born in Cincinnati.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They don't think, that's the problem isn't it?

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

K but all pithyness aside, how do they actually feel about him? It must be super weird to agree with someone who's parroting your nonsense but also that person's very existence and social worth is an object of your hatred

[-] ProdigiousFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I suspect that while most conservatives would prefer someone more 'close to home', there's two things that may appeal:

  1. They may reference him to stave off claims of racism. "See? I woulda voted for him if Trump weren't running, you can't call me racist!"
  2. He says the right things, and he's independently wealthy, which gives him that 'outsider' status that they also bestow upon Trump. With those two things, he might be deemed 'one of the good ones'.

Ultimately, few will opt for him over Trump, and their allegiance to him would likely be far more fickle, as they cannot identify with him as much.

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

What I found most plausible was the notion that he was running to soften Trump's image or something. Like he seemed even more over the top than even Trump and I don't know how any serious person pulls that off unless there's another orthogonal angle

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I have two cousins who are half-Thai (their mother was a Thai woman brought to America by my uncle) who are virulent anti-immigrant white supremacists. It's especially weird because not only have they been the frequent victims of anti-asian discrimination, they also happen to look central american and have been the frequent victims of discrimination against that as well. I think the only thing that explains it is that they are absolutely dirt stupid.

[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Louisiana rednecks loved themselves some Bobby Jindal (former Republican governor of LA of subcontinental extraction). It doesn't really surprise me when racists are illogical about their racism - since racism is a fundamentally illogical thing in the first place.

[-] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

I think people saw promise, he is clearly personally smart, but he has proven himself not up to the job at the debates. I think he'll get the Buttigieg treatment if Trump wins, set him up with some resume fodder and hope he runs in 12 years or something.

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

He comes across as beyond desperate. All of them do because they have very few facts on their side on most issues, I find. It would be torture to me to have to argue such absurd cases, they are basically paid actors.

this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
375 points (93.3% liked)

politics

19148 readers
1990 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS