politics
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
view the rest of the comments
That is missing my point about their spending changes. Districts and states are hardly isolated from each other. The movments within one tends to correlate well with others. If there's slipage for republicans in fairly red ME-2, it bodes well for other states
Republicans are more resource limited right now compared to dems. If think they need to allocate money away from those swing states into ME-2 (which running up the score in doesn't particularly matter), what does that say about how they view the race?
Not to say they couldn't be just allocating poorly and making poor choices, but in that case then this whole discussion is moot about reading into their decisions as to not to debate
So a couple things. First I think that the Trump campaign in particular and unique among campaigns doesn't share when ti comes to funds. Most campaigns support other campaigns.
Second, the ME-2 spending I think your're referencing is this: https://mainemorningstar.com/2024/09/23/billionaire-backed-midwest-super-pac-spending-millions-on-maines-cd2-race/, which is a specific outside pac spending on that race. But to be clear, this isn't the RNC or the Trump campaign doing the spending, so it bears little relevance to your point. So I think you are wrong to read anything about the microscopic ME-2 race into literally anything else. Far far far more telling are the polls in big states like PA, GA, AZ, NC, etc.. where Harris's polling went from stagnant to declining.
Generally, the person losing an election is the one that wants a debate and the one winning wants to avoid exposure to any kinds of potential mishaps. Its a strategically good decision for Trump to sandbag and not give Harris an opportunity to get some more sound bytes (not like it really matters).
ME-02 was just a small example. The ME-02 I believe was on the presidential race (Maine like Nebraska splits their electoral votes). The link was about the congressional race. To be fair, I mostly just remember it because they ran an ad that accidentally stated with "Dear Virginia" in Maine. Trump has also been relying more on PACs for his campaign to be fair as he's been outsourcing a lot more. Regardless, they've also done things like as another example pull money out of New Hampshire which they thought they, while probably not winning, could at least narrow margins on earlier with Biden in
Normally, I'd agree with that about debating. However, even other republicans were earlier urging trump to debate again and he still declined