159
this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
159 points (98.2% liked)
politics
19170 readers
4559 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean, I go back to my previous point. There was quite literally a PAC called "Vets against Trump".
Interestingly, I dug into this a bit. Haley may have something here.
https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/registering-pac/naming-nonconnected-pac/
You may use names, but only in the case that its explicitly "against" a thing. I'm still not sure Haley has grounds in the direction she's taken though. But that begs the question of the previous convention, and it not being an FEC issue. Again, this just feels like Haley wanting to have it both ways.
So they could rename to "Haley voters against Trump"?
They should just change the name to “Haley voters against not voting for Harris”
Maybe if they modified it to 'Former Haley voters', that could arguably solve the perceived defamation problem, by making it more obvious that they do not reflect opinions or stances of Haley, as they are former supporters of hers, also thus kind of? implying they are against Haley?
Just adding in that they are against someone else does not rectify the possible defamatory nature of using Haley's name, but maybe modifying their relationship to Haley does?
Former friends of bob support Hitler?
God this is almost as pedantic as copyright disputes.
The FEC rule says it has to be negative?
Something like..
"Voters not voting for Haley but most definitely not voting for Trump."
Former, now Anti-Haley voters for not voting for not voting against Trump.
There we go, perfectly succinct rofl.
IANAL but.. maybe?
First, I just want to thank you for a reasonable conversation with some sources thrown in!
I still think Haley would win this if it came to a lawsuit, but I'm not a lawyer, maybe there is some kind of successful legal defense or recourse.
...Or maybe it would go all the way to the Supremely Corrupt Court, who is apparently playing by Whose Line Is It Anyway rules (the rules are made up and the ~~points~~ precedent doesn't matter!), blargh.