No. of Recommendations: 3
trump, report from cnn so we know it’s true. Reminder, in 2016 all the msm political experts assured us “ there is no path, trump can not win”. One guy Van Jones kept warning cnn viewers, Trump can win, we shouldn’t underestimate the possibility. Of course the experts laughed at him told him he was nuts. Now, if you share opinions from Carville, Axelrod , Van Jones etc, loyal members of the church of Joe threaten to cancel you, excommunicate you from the free speech community, how embarrassing, how pathetic. Carry on clown, who doesn’t enjoy a great circus act?
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/01/12/politics/nathan...
No. of Recommendations: 3
Since that article from cnn might be a bit long for , the usual suspects
, I cherry picked a paragraph. “” That’s ridiculous’
One line item stood out to multiple lawyers who reviewed Wade’s billing document included in the motion filed by Roman: On November 5, 2021, Wade billed the Fulton County DA for 24 hours in a day at $250 per hour.
“That’s ridiculous,” Fulton County criminal defense attorney Suri Chada Jimenez told CNN. “He could have billed 12 hours at $500 and that’s more credible and along with the rate of other lawyers.” Have a grand day all☮️
No. of Recommendations: 7
One guy Van Jones kept warning cnn viewers, Trump can win, we shouldn’t underestimate the possibility. Of course the experts laughed at him told him he was nuts. Now, if you share opinions from Carville, Axelrod , Van Jones etc, loyal members of the church of Joe threaten to cancel you, excommunicate you from the free speech community, how embarrassing, how pathetic
HCLV, I'm not entirely sure why you keep posting this kind of argument here - because I don't think there's anyone on here who would disagree with these points.
Of course Trump can win. Of course Biden might lose. Biden might not even have been the best candidate for Democrats to take into this election. The Democrats might have had a better chance at winning the election if Biden had announced last March that he wasn't going to seek a second term. Etc.
Where people disagree is the suggestion that any of the above might result in someone other than Biden keeping Biden from being the nominee. That won't happen, for two reasons:
1) Even if the Democrats would have had a better chance at winning the election if Biden had declined to run a year ago, that doesn't mean they have a better chance if he were to get bounced from the ticket now. The first primary/caucus is tomorrow. The primary filing deadlines have passed in around a dozen states. The time has passed for any of the 'better' candidates to be able to win the nomination through 'ordinary' channels. There are no extraordinary channels that can work to replace Biden if he doesn't choose to drop out. There's no way to push a button and substitute candidate "X" for Biden, for any candidate "X."
2) Any candidate that is likely to replace Biden against his will is going to have worse chances of winning the election. They'll start with little money and no organization. None of them (save Harris) has been doing anything in this national election cycle to build the groundwork, endorsement, field operations, and other necessary aspects of a national campaign to mount a credible contest against Trump. Again, only Harris (by dint of her present position) has been on the national stage in any meaningful way - and she's probably a step down in terms of electability. To say nothing of the fact that any Democrat is still going to have to run on Biden's record, since the Democrats currently hold the Presidency.
So, yes - Biden will be the nominee unless he withdraws. It doesn't matter how valid the assessments of his liabilities. It doesn't matter that he might possibly lose to Trump, or even if he likely would lose to Trump. Even if there were a candidate that could be more likely to win than Biden if there was a magic button to switch them in, that candidate will be less likely to win because there's no process for them to gain the legitimacy and resources as a successful nominee.
