Days after a CNN report about racist and sexual comments posted on a pornography forum, all but a few of Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson’s campaign team quit their jobs on Sunday.

A campaign news release said that four top staffers have left the campaign: Conrad Pogorzelski, general consultant and senior advisor who’s worked for Robinson since his initial 2020 lieutenant governor campaign; Chris Rodriguez, campaign manager; Heather Whillier, finance director; and Jason Rizk, deputy campaign manager.

But WUNC has confirmed that other staffers have quit as well, leaving Robinson with just three people working on his campaign — two campaign spokesmen and a bodyguard. The list of departures also include longtime director of operations Patrick Riley and political directors John Kontoulas and Jackson Lohrer.


🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
51 points
*

This is an example of why I think it’s wrong that getting rid of Trump would just mean someone else takes his place. If this happened to Trump–and it basically has several times already–it would play out in the media for a few days, and then he’d do something incredibly stupid and headlines would forget about it.

However, when this happens to any other Republican, they’re quickly abandoned. Like what used to happen to all Republicans or Democrats when they become politically radioactive.

Trump is a special case. He hit just the right resonance with just the right number of people to have a base of support, and then also have a bunch of other people who passively go along with it. He is not so easy to replace. Oh, someone will try, probably several someones. They’ll eat each other in the attempt and go nowhere.

permalink
report
reply
26 points

DeSantis took a good shot at being Trump 2.0. He had the media attention, truckloads of money, a bully pulpit he used to attack “Wokeism” 24/7 while implementing actual hard right policies. On paper, he should have attracted MAGA voters, at the very least as a possible successor to Trump. Instead, it just… didn’t work.

Trump captured lightning in a bottle in 2016. He was able to present himself as this John Galt-like figure while also leveraging his media savvy to control narratives and dominate coverage. Obviously, not everyone bought it, but enough did to win the election. No one on the right has those qualities now. It may not even be possible to duplicate. At this point, even the 2024 version of Trump is failing to live up to 2016 Trump.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Unless the other candidate satisfies Worthington’s Law: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Worthington’s_law

Not even kidding.

Donnie might not even have billions, but millions of people support him because they think he’s rich and they think he’s somehow worthy of that money. If some other racist loudmouth billionaire comes along, the qons will be lining up to give him a soft job, too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Diaper riles up the rubes.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

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.
  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

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 438K

    Comments