While reading https://crypto.stackexchange.com/a/88732/87450 I noticed that it suggests encrypt-then-HMAC as a defense for partition attacks. However as far as I know unlike poly1305, HMAC does not make use of nonces and in the poly1305 paper DJB says:
There are several reasons that Poly1305-AES uses nonces. First, comparable protocols without nonces have security bounds that look like $C(C+D)L/2^{106}$ rather than $DL/2^{106}$ -- here $C$ is the number of messages authenticated by the sender, $D$ is the number of forgery attempts, and $L$ is the maximum message length -- and thus cannot be used with confidence for large $C$. Second, nonces allow the invocation of AES to be carried out in parallel with most of the other operations in Poly1305-AES, reducing latency in many contexts. Third, most protocols have nonces anyway, for a variety of reasons: nonces are required for secure encryption, for example, and nonces allow trivial rejection of replayed messages.
Doesn't that mean that HMAC is an inferior choice compared to poly1305 if we consider all threats except partition attacks?