Only in spirit!

That too! :)

are you real-life related?

re·lat·ed
adjective
belonging to the same family, group, or type; connected

*
So, yes. :)

@kick/myvoice

are you real-life related?

Only in spirit!

are you real-life related?

[73]
I knew absolutely you knew what I was referencing. Makes me laugh whenever I see it.

Basic twin communication.

Do carry on, please.

I am never not here, either. ;)

I figured as much. So you can see I have the self-appointed board monitor digging a hole into my backside over my use of certain selected phrasing, and I hope you don't for a scintilla of a second believe that I forgot from whence it came:

This comments section's ass chewing is on you!

If you understand me, and I'm certain you do, then you know I'm just kidding and take full responsibility for having an opinion containing such a "scandalous" meme, and full disclosure: No one reading this blog should put it past me to ever use it again because we twins know a good turn of phrase when we see it.

Don't be a stranger. We miss your voice. :)

My problem is not that I live in an echo chamber, not by a long shot. In fact, I enjoy commenting on pieces that I disagree with and I always do it with civility, in the spirit of lively discussion and debate.

In addition, your problem also seems to include your ignorance of the actual meaning of the words "always" and "civility" as well as that constant delusion that it's somehow your calling to monitor the entire forum.

How many years will it take to get through to you that my opinions here are my own? You have absolutely zero control over the content of my posts. You are obviously free to disagree with them, but you should allow yourself to cease and desist in your incessant crusade to control their content. Seriously... get over yourself already.

tangential but still relevant; kick was slightly incorrect when she said you "cherry-picked" your source on ukraine. in order to cherry-pick, one must first access enough differing opinions and their evidentiary support to make an informed choice.

You're right! Just because I have been carefully considering the opinions of fellow commenters here for years in addition to sources who literally have boots on the ground on two continents, why assume anyone else is doing that, particularly in the midst of a myriad of evidence to the contrary!? For instance:

Biden and his ever-present SOS Blinkin have done NOTHING to prevent civilian suffering. They have only acted to ensure more civilian suffering. ~ Elizabeth Miller

*
This type of sweeping generalization [in all caps] is not simply an outright fabrication, it displays stunning ignorance regarding actual events in addition to rube-like gullibility and blind regurgitation of absolute rubbish journalism/propaganda.

like so much of today's electorate, i believe you've remained ignorant by consuming media within an echo-chamber of sources that don't directly challenge your views.

Exactly... coupled with the seeming absence of any evidence whatsoever of a person possessing an ounce of any common sense regarding the facts. Who with an ounce of knowledge regarding any of these issues would keep prattling on incessantly about "Biden's wars"? Anyone who buys into that absolute asinine drivel cannot possibly be paying attention... and might as well be blaming Canada.

I am never not here, either. ;)

Our little group here won't solve the Israeli-Palestine conflict. But, we can engage in discussion and debate about the actions taken by the powers that be and whether those actions are the best way forward to achieve desired goals.

the only direct mention of victim blaming in that article was the title. the rest of it was about how so much of the supposedly empathetic world has decided to jump on the anti-israel hand-wringing bandwagon when the reality of the situation is so much more complicated. and no, i don't think you lack empathy, just information and perspective. a lot.

Hamas’s indifference to human life must never be an excuse for us to become indifferent. It’s too late to save those massacred on Oct. 7, but we can still try to reduce the toll in Gaza this month and this year.

my first instinct is to refer to this response as "short-sighted," but let's be more objective and just call it focused on the now. there's an argument to be made that allowing so much collateral damage will hurt israeli interests in the long run as well. the trouble for israelis is that they can't afford to think primarily about the extreme short-term or the extreme long-term. when someone has done the things that hamas did in october, has built up the organization and infrastructure to repeat the process, and has clearly stated that october 7th was for them just the beginning, half-measures won't prevent the same or worse from recurring soon.

netanyahu and his right-wing cabal notwithstanding, most israelis are anything but indifferent to the suffering that their response has inflicted; they're profoundly sad about it. however, they don't see it as avoidable the way kristof or other outsiders might.

The Biden administration itself has repeatedly answered the question of what Israel should do. It sent military leaders to Jerusalem to offer advice and it regularly counseled using greater efforts to spare civilians — instead of Israel’s pattern of what President Biden termed “indiscriminate bombing.”

you once astutely observed that i didn't refute your assertion that netanyahu hasn't chosen the wisest course of military action. that may well be true, and biden has been wise to counsel greater caution and restraint. but that's a tougher challenge than it seems.

like drug cartels and other gangs, hamas regularly uses unarmed women and children, embedded within larger groups of unarmed women and children, generally located in schools, hospitals and other places where there's a greater concentration of innocents, to observe and report tactical information back to heavily armed guerrillas below-ground, who in turn use that information to kill. protecting even the lives of those who hate us has always been a source of pride for the israeli military, so there's always a delicate balance between protecting the innocent and defending oneself. i happen to think the operations in gaza do need to be conducted more patiently, but that's easy to say when you're not being regularly shot at, and when so many who appear innocent are the ones telling others where you are so you can be killed, daring you to stop them because they that know if you do it means good press for their organization.

israelis use the term "human shield," but that doesn't really get at the levels of cynicism with which the deaths of children are incited and exploited by hamas, islamic jihad and other terrorist groups in gaza. so, around 80% of israelis support continued military action (if not the precise military action currently being taken), and criticism mainly of israel coming from kristof and his ilk generally result in dejected stares and head-shaking.

JL

I always read the links you provide. And, I read articles from a wide variety of news and analytical sources, including ones that have a bent different from my own. My problem is not that I live in an echo chamber, not by a long shot. In fact, I enjoy commenting on pieces that I disagree with and I always do it with civility, in the spirit of lively discussion and debate.

Upon reading the entire Howard Jacobson article, I assumed - correctly, I believe - that you provided that link because you believe I am engaged in victim-blaming and, worse, have no empathy for human suffering. I never expected, in all of our years of conversing here, to be on the receiving end of those sentiments from you. It made me want to leave this place, permanently.

tangential but still relevant; kick was slightly incorrect when she said you "cherry-picked" your source on ukraine. in order to cherry-pick, one must first access enough differing opinions and their evidentiary support to make an informed choice. like so much of today's electorate, i believe you've remained ignorant by consuming media within an echo-chamber of sources that don't directly challenge your views. i take neither joy nor satisfaction in pointing it out, but i'm dead serious and i hope you'll take it to heart.

JL

i love the spirit with which you attempt to engage here. but we all have our blind spots, and among my pet peeves about you is that you rarely seem to read beyond the title of any article you disagree with, if you click the link at all. this pattern was most especially evident to me in your response to the howard jacobson article i carefully chose for you, from october 15th.

in an attempt to practice what i preach, i have read closely the kristof article you linked to, and will attempt a gentle riposte regarding the criticisms which he addresses. perhaps not all at a time, but i'll get to them.

JL

Conventional wisdom is that foreign affairs do not sway the average American voter.

Absolutely, positively, unequivocally.

As 2016 should have taught us, low voter turnout is what will sink Biden and the Democrats. And nothing keeps a voter at home on election day more than disgust with BOTH parties, especially your own.

Agreed, wholeheartedly!

I think America is hanging on by a thread, domestic policy-wise AND internationally. The re-election of Trump will very likely push it over the edge.

Certainly, there is disgust with both parties and with the current standard bearers of those parties. Which doesn't bode well for voter turnout. On the other hand, if the situation that currently exists within the Republican party is not enough to override that widespread general disgust with both parties, then all I can do is wish America and the rest of us a lot of luck because we're going to need it!

As I said, Israel has not learned from America's mistakes in the response to 9/11. So, yes, bloodlust and the notion that 'something must be done!' is a long way from addressing root causes.

But, you still aren't saying what SHOULD be done. In other words, how do you solve a problem like the Middle East? How does America lead?

One of my favourite Biden quotes has lost quite a lot of its significance for me, lately but, it's still worth repeating ... America leads best when it leads by the power of its example and not just by the example of its power.

In the current Congress alone, I can recall weeks of commentary on an 'imminent government shutdown'. IMO at this point, TP should be proposed when the shutdown ACTUALLY happens.

So you're saying you wish to avoid talking about the great white shark until it swims up and bites you in the ass? [there's a movie misquote in there].

In the current Congress, there's been an imminent government shutdown for weeks because that is what a subset of right-wing politicians beholden to Trump are demanding along with impeachment of the current POTUS, and they fired the first speaker in history who didn't deliver it. If you don't already understand how that galvanizes and moves voters, then I can't understand it for you.

If you explained the purpose of these 'talking points' before, I'm sincerely sorry that I missed that.

No apologies necessary, sincerely or otherwise; however, a good political talking point isn't something I could likely even come near to successfully defining in print... political posturing that's not generally easily refuted that appeals more to the emotional side of a targeted audience and isn't generally geared toward preaching or teaching complex issues but articulating ideas/political positions in no uncertain terms, simple, concise, compelling, and never boring.

If that's the case, this week's TP's fail.

Agree to disagree. You do not appear to understand what an effective political talking point actually is. :)

When you're in a hole, it's always best to just stop digging. Heh.

That is hysterical because you've displayed no evidence whatsoever you can control yourself, and it will be a cold day in hell when you can control me.

But, fortunately for me, there is only one of you. :)

It's a fact, I'm unique, definitely one of a kind; when God made me, he broke the mold... but not before he made me a twin.

Second rule of holes: When you stop digging, you're still in a hole... and if you're one of those totally typical dime-a-dozen smothering aspiring board mothering wannabe blog dictators, don't be surprised if you find yourself burrowed down deep in your hole without a single soul willing to help you out. :)

Re: foreign policy and American elections

Conventional wisdom is that foreign affairs do not sway the average American voter.

But from everything that I've read, the current conflict between Israel and Gaza is very much in the news daily AND is tearing apart the Democratic Party and dividing their base.

IMO the real threat in 2024 is NOT the Republican base voter, nor the so-called 'swing voter'. As 2016 should have taught us, low voter turnout is what will sink Biden and the Democrats. And nothing keeps a voter at home on election day more than disgust with BOTH parties, especially your own.

These bombs are to protect petroleum transport, plain and simple.

Re: "Should the Houthis be allowed, unimpeded, to attack ships in the Red Sea?"

I have two responses to this comment, both long.
1) In the weeks after the September 11 attack on the twin towers, my elderly neighbor expressed the opinion that we should bomb Afghanistan immediately. I disagreed with her vehemently. She then opined that we "must do SOMETHING!".

Because of the pleadings of millions of other Americans just like her, we blew trillions in treasure and ruined the lives of millions, both at home and abroad.

And we certainly didn't change any 'hearts and minds' in satisfying their bloodlust.

In the current Congress alone, I can recall weeks of commentary on an 'imminent government shutdown'. IMO at this point, TP should be proposed when the shutdown ACTUALLY happens.

If you explained the purpose of these 'talking points' before, I'm sincerely sorry that I missed that.

I would hope that the TPs are either:
* subjects that Democratic candidates should use in their speeches, appearances, and advertisements during this period, when theses subjects are 'hot' in the minds of voters; or,
* things that WE should tell our friends and neighbors to convince them to vote Democratic in the upcoming elections.

If that's the case, this week's TP's fail.

But, fortunately for me, there is only one of you. :)

And, you sure do seem to enjoy belittling people and dismissing their opinions, even when they are not a participating member of this blog.

OMG! So you're saying you're under the mistaken impression that it's your aim to police the comments section of the blog for those who are and are not participants of it!? Wow, you are going to be really busy since there is no one (living or deceased) who does not fall into one of those categories.

As far as I'm concerned, you have some options:

* Allow yourself to stop obsessing over my opinions.
* Keep your smelling salts nearby.
* Strap yourself in.

Are you freaking serious!? I can't stop laughing.

You really weren't kidding when you said you didn't understand. You seriously think I'm "belittling" Mountain Caddy!? Oh, dear, no... and quite the contrary, in point of fact. It wasn't me who cherry picked a so-called Ukrainian friend as a single data point while totally discounting the very well-known opinions of someone who actually participates on this blog simply because those opinions didn't fit your worldview... that was obviously you.

That is referred to as an "anecdotal fallacy" because it ignores a multitude of evidence to the contrary in favor of a single cherry-picked data point.

And, you sure do seem to enjoy belittling people and dismissing their opinions, even when they are not a participating member of this blog.

:(

"my ukranian/israeli/gay/black friend" = anecdotal fallacy.

I'd be lying if I said I did not see that coming.

As for me personally, I know this mountain man by way of Ukraine whose name rhymes with Cadillac, so people call him Moutain Caddy, and unless somebody here is dumb and blind, he too has a well-known opinion about that.

The call word is (still) "panda," but you're right we might need a replacement. I am never not here. ;)

In response to italyrusty, you wrote,

"I see you still don't understand what a political "talking point" actually is. Well, I can explain it to you (again), but I (still) can't make you understand it."

Thank you for that stroll down Memory Lane; however, you're wasting your time since I don't suffer the affliction of having memory issues.

What I don't understand is why you find it necessary to belittle your fellow Weigantians with mean-spirited responses as you did (again) above ...

Whereas anyone who regularly reads this blog could not fail to fully comprehend your self-admitted inability to understand things and how that (unbeknownst to you) applies to a myriad of issues whether you're cognizant of that penchant or not (spoiler alert: apparently not), and they'd have to be dumb and blind not to have taken notice of that constant display of your obvious belief that you're the official board mother for the entire blog.

In conclusion, I reiterate something I saw a very wise man say not long ago:

If you're searching for delusion, go find a mirror and take a better look. ~ nypoet22

*
No need to thank me. :)

My frustration at the way Israel is responding to the horrific attacks by Hamas on 10/7 is coming from a place of caring about the future of the Jewish state.

I just don't believe that Israel is acting in a way that will enhance its security and safety of its people. And, by being complicit in how this war is being waged in Gaza, the US is very likely endangering its own national security and safety of its people. Not by fighting back against terrorists and their despicable agenda. But by not fighting back in a smart way that actually will enhance the safety and security of Israel and indeed the entire region.

I really enjoy reading Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times and here is his latest piece.

I know what you mean. There is a lot of that going around, these days. :(

I learned that from you.

But, since I can't resist sharing a good tune, here is one just for you today!

Laughing

Shocking. Positively shocking. I was just wondering how long it would take.

My Ukrainian friend is also a colleague. She brought her mother and father to Canada after the war began. She has property herself in Kharkiv, their hometown. They all wish to return/visit Ukraine as soon as that is feasible.

They understand what is happening in Ukraine and why far better than any news coverage could hope to describe.

Oh, it's not wrong for Israel to fight against its adversaries. But, it is not very smart not to learn the lessons that America itself should have learned in fighting the wrong way.

Biden and his ever-present SOS Blinkin have done NOTHING to prevent civilian suffering. They have only acted to ensure more civilian suffering. And, there will be a heavy price to pay, all around, for that action and inaction.

I support that goal, as well.

Well, that is certainly not what I am hearing from my Ukrainian friend.

It is despicable behavior for a superpower and global. leader.

https://www.dw.com/en/ukrainians-war-weary-but-determined-to-fight-russia/a-67962297

JL

in december, between 75 and 85 percent of israelis, across all demographics, support their military's goal of permanently ending hamas rule in gaza, including nearly 80% of self-identified leftists and even around a third of israel's ARAB population.

https://www.inss.org.il/publication/israel-war-support/

but sure, keep going on about how wrong it is to continue to fight. biden's stance of fully supporting israel, while advising additional care to prevent civilian suffering, is about as close to perfect a US policy as could be imagined.

JL

THAT, my friend, is precisely what Biden/NATO have done!

And, Biden/NATO/Ukraine/Israel will need a helluva lot more than luck to prevail on all fronts.

Seriously, though ... with the US engaged in two hot wars and a crisis in the Red Sea international shipping lanes, one might imagine that the president would be talking with his Secretary of Defense at least once a day, no?

And, yet, Biden didn't know Austin was in the hospital for four days (or that he had been diagnosed with cancer). Which means the secretary wasn't missed or, perhaps, even cared about.

Maybe Austin wasn't on board with the way the two hot wars have been unfolding. In other words, what we may have here is the curious sidelining of a SecDef. Yet another thing I would never even have dreamed would happen in a Biden administration.

Secretary Lloyd Austin is 70 yrs old. What possible reason could a 70 yr-old have for being embarrassed about people knowing he has prostate cancer? Could he possibly be trying to avoid jeopardizing his reputation as "General Studly", assuming he has such a rep? Can't think of any other possibility.

as president, biden has defied all expectations and far exceeded the mediocrity that characterized the early career of which you've so long been enamored. he's trusting our allies (ukraine and israel) to deal with our adversaries (putin and hamas), and being a strong leader when the world needs one. some leaders are born great, some become great, and biden seems to have had greatness thrust upon him.

Biden may well have defied the (exceedingly low) expectations of those who bought - hook, line and sinker - the asinine media storyline on him for his entire senate career. But, for those of us who have followed Biden for a half century, more or less, expectations for him and his administration were sky high and, in some respects, still are.

Biden is doing far more than merely "trusting" allies to deal with American adversaries. He is training and/or equipping them with much of what is required to fight wars, seemingly with little apparent regard to how misguided and ultimately ineffective those efforts may be.

So, far from just trusting allies to deal with the adversaries, the US is engaged in two all-out wars and, apparently, itching to start a third.

Is it so delusional to inquire, at this juncture, what the endgames are?

In response to italyrusty, you wrote,

"I see you still don't understand what a political "talking point" actually is. Well, I can explain it to you (again), but I (still) can't make you understand it."

What I don't understand is why you find it necessary to belittle your fellow Weigantians with mean-spirited responses as you did (again) above ...

Unfortunately, for those of us who are outsiders and view the US primarily from an international perspective, Chris's blog is most decided NOT a US foreign policy blog or even a blog that focuses on the existential challenges of our time.

CW dot com is a US domestic policy-oriented blog. And, that's that.

And, since Biden became president, I have reverted back to what my main focus has always been - how the US operates on the world stage from the perspective of a casual observer, wanting to learn more. So, of course, I would also love for Chris to write more about US foreign policy and global issues but that isn't the purpose of this blog. :(

It seems that this week's talking points are the definition of "inside the beltway" speak.

Heh. When I first started coming here, I didn't like the whole idea of "talking points". Indeed, one of the reasons for my early following of Biden's senate career was due to his penchant for straight-talk. He called it they way he saw it, in other words, and never really followed the "talking points" of his own party. He always liked to say that the good news is that he says what he means and the bad news is that he means what he says! :)

To me, talking points simply meant 'spin', regardless of how truthful or accurate they were or were not.

However, over many years, I have come to love Chris's FTP columns, actual talking points and all. I now equate them with all that Democratic messaging should be. Dems have notoriously missed the boat on communicating what it is they are doing and trying to do in a way that resonates with voters. Chris's talking points, generally speaking, seek to rectify this sad situation.

Should the Houthis be allowed, unimpeded, to attack ships in the Red Sea?

as president, biden has defied all expectations and far exceeded the mediocrity that characterized the early career of which you've so long been enamored. he's trusting our allies (ukraine and israel) to deal with our adversaries (putin and hamas), and being a strong leader when the world needs one. some leaders are born great, some become great, and biden seems to have had greatness thrust upon him.

however, if you're searching for delusion, go find a mirror and take a better look.

JL

While it can be entertaining to write about the theatrics and chaos of the GOP, American voters will be casting their votes on much less esoteric issues.

You think (another) imminent government shutdown by way of the so-called "chaos of the GOP" is an "esoteric issue"? You must not realize exactly what that entails and how it could directly affect Americans.

It seems that this week's talking points are the definition of "inside the beltway" speak.

I see you still don't understand what a political "talking point" actually is. Well, I can explain it to you (again), but I (still) can't make you understand it.

Chris has nothing to offer about:

Why do I think you are going to follow this with a list of issues that do not meet the general definition of "talking points"?

We know how the right-wing media would pummel the Democrats if the shoe were on the other foot.
'The U.S. had no funds left to replace weapons sent to Ukraine, Pentagon press secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said during a Thursday press briefing.

“We’re out of money,” he told reporters.

There exists $4.2 billion left in authority to send such aid, Ryder explained, but the lack of replenishment funds will likely lead to a pause in support, as the Pentagon doesn’t want to risk the readiness of U.S. forces.'
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2024/01/04/were-out-of-money-us-exhausts-security-funds-for-ukraine/

The announcement comes as the IRS braces for a more severe round of funding cuts.'
https://apnews.com/article/irs-tax-biden-inflation-reduction-act-ceacc306233f1a41e0e41e81e89a60a5

Set to begin this summer, the new program will provide low-income families with $120 for each eligible child, which can be used to purchase food at grocery stores, farmers’ markets or other approved retailers when such assistance is not available in schools.'
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/12/us/school-lunches-assistance-republicans.html

Chris has nothing to offer about:

Schiff just released a letter he sent to Donald Trump. This is a follow-up to the report he and his fellow Democrats on the House Oversight Committee last week, where he itemized how much he could prove that Trump had received from foreign governments while he was president.

It's a great letter and the first time (as far as I know) where a POTUS has been asked to return millions of dollars to the American people in direct violation of the Constitution (complete with evidence enclosed). However, it's the handiwork of Jamie Raskin and the House Oversight Committee.

Remember what McCarthy did to Schiff (and Swalwell) for their brilliant impeachment work of Defendant Donald?

Poor "not a quitter" Kevin McCarthy, the first ever Speaker of the House of Representatives to be booted out of his speakership. Proving you really do reap what you sow.

Meanwhile, I have seen ZERO commentators suggesting that if a) Iowa's were a primary instead of a caucus (hold your horse for part 'b') please; and b) Iowa conducted its voting entirely by mail; then,
c) the talking heads would have to pull out their hair about some other nonsense.

I guess I don't understand the requirements; writing a letter counts as impressive?!?!

The real impressive Democrat was in 'fly-over country'.
'It’s the first time there’s been a Black speaker in the House’s 400-year-plus history. Scott was unanimously voted for speaker after Democrats won control of the Virginia legislature in 2023.'
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/don-scott-first-black-speaker-virginia-house_n_659da19fe4b0bfe5ff64fc23

This is where I disagree with political pundits/prognosticators; I believe Trump (obviously) cares about delay but also very much cares absolute immunity. Why? Because cases against Trump aren't just playing out in criminal courts across America, he is also being sued in multiple courts for millions of dollars in civil damages for harm he has caused to multiple people including many, many DC lawmakers, a suit filed by one police officer, a second suit filed by two police officers, a third suit filed by two police officers, a fourth suit filed by seven police officers, two suits filed by E. Jean Carroll (one he lost, another next week).

In a case of extreme whiplash, after years of claiming the election wasn't over, Trump is now lately stating that the election was long over and it was his duty to investigate fraud. Although, it is definitely long past overdue that Trump admitted the election was over, claiming you were investigating fraud when you were obviously putting together slates of fake electors in multiple states and attempting to cajole your Vice President into unilaterally using illegal documents to keep you in power illegally is actually committing fraud... not investigating it.

So, yeah, I believe he actually thinks he could be let "off the hook" for all the civil damages he's likely to owe to a plethora of police officers, lawmakers, and American citizens if he could get the Supreme Court (he believes owes him) to rule he has "absolute immunity" for just "doing his duty" for America "long after" the election was over. *laughs*

Trump already has a case he lost in New York to E. Jean Carroll, he's got another one next week he's already lost based on collateral estoppel, he's lost his case with AG James in New York to the tune of millions and probably/likely his ability to do business in the state, and he's just watched on while two American citizens disparaged by his long-time lawyer were awarded $148,000,000, and Giuliani is now claiming bankruptcy.

Can you imagine the amount of damages it will take to punish a man who's spent decades telling the whole world he's worth tens of billions of dollars? E. Jean Carroll's lawyer definitely sure can.

I think Trump is beginning to realize his mouth has painted himself in a corner; however, he hasn't stopped painting/talking/digging and he doesn't seem intelligent enough to shut it. For a tiny little whiney ass perpetual victim like Poor Donald, whose measure of himself is his overinflated financials and hyperinflated ego, can you imagine having to file bankruptcy? Although, even bankruptcy won't discharge liability damages if a creditor can prove a debtor acted willfully/maliciously.

I think Trump is beginning to see the proverbial "handwriting on the wall" with lots of numbers and zeroes and is therefore desperate to get the Supreme Court to grant him absolute immunity he believes will absolve him of both criminal and civil liability.

Another wacky war, anyone!?

Do you suppose Biden's endgame in Ukraine is the elimination of Russia from the world stage? Ahem.

And, what about Biden's endgame for his Gaza war?

Funny, I never really thought of Biden as being delusional. Of course, I've never thought he was too old to be president, either.

Will Nikki Haley beat Ron DeSantis?

I don't think she will beat him, but I think it might be close among the 2nd and 3rd place losers... them two.

If she does so, will DeSantis drop out before the New Hampshire primary?

Even if she does (which I don't think she will), I think it'll be close between 2nd and 3rd place... so he won't, and obviously she won't.

If DeSantis, on the other hand, beats Haley, then he will doubtlessly stay in the race for another round -- which will completely torpedo any chance of Haley building enough momentum to score an upset in the Granite State.

Wannabe Trump (Deeee Santis) is fairly close to a nonfactor in New Hampshire already. If Wannabe Trump drops out, his voters are more likely to go to Actual Trump anyway. I think.

I don't think she can win her home state so I don't think any of (all of) that matters. :)

Russia delenda est.