Post New

Free link:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/28/opinion/biden-e...

Seems like they agree with about 80% of Democratic voters.

intercst

Seems like they agree with about 80% of Democratic voters.

Glad I’m among the 20%.

Cut and run was never my style. Joe has had my back for decades, now I will have his.

Heck, I’m old enough to remember Reagan’s first incumbent debate debacle. There was no way to recover from that.

Most Dems are hand wringers. Not me. Especially not after one bad night. Now, if he stole from a charity or paid to have sex with a porn star or was an adjudicated rapist or a 34 count felon, I’d reconsider.

A few months ago I mentioned to Ms. Wolf that I didn’t think we should do door-to-door campaigning this year. Changed my mind today.

Proud to be a Biden supporter.

To my fellow Dems, grow a spine.

{{ A few months ago I mentioned to Ms. Wolf that I didn’t think we should do door-to-door campaigning this year. Changed my mind today. }}

Don't you live in New York? As bad as things are, I don't think Biden is at risk there. Unless you're planning to travel to one of the 5 or 6 swing states to do the door-to-door work.

intercst

Don't you live in New York? As bad as things are, I don't think Biden is at risk there.

There are more people on the ballot than just Biden. 435 representatives come to mind. There are plenty of places in the State of New York where those races will be close. A bit of door-to-door work could certainly help in those close races.

--Peter

{{ There are more people on the ballot than just Biden. 435 representatives come to mind. There are plenty of places in the State of New York where those races will be close. A bit of door-to-door work could certainly help in those close races. }}

You still have to overcome the drag at the top of the ticket.

In the comments to the NYTimes Editorial, someone suggested July 4th would be a good day for Biden to step down for the good of the nation and be hailed a statesman. I don't think the Party can wait that long.

Biden promises to do the 2nd debate in September. What effect do you see with a similiar performance?

You can prop up Biden with the teleprompter and a scripted speech, but he falls way short when he has to think on his feet.

intercst

A few months ago I mentioned to Ms. Wolf that I didn’t think we should do door-to-door campaigning this year. Changed my mind today.

That's the spirit! This am I was reckoning with headlines, but recovered and moved on. If I was in CA I'd be out getting the vote out, but they don't do that here for some reason. Well, Florida is a red state, and I am in a more rural area. I've seen the Trump 2024 flags about. Here, you're registered to vote when you get your Driver's License. But I've gone down there and let them know I'll help with anything I can, and I do donate. Vote, donate, help, and don't run for office is the best I can do. :)

Don't you live in New York?

Correct.

We’ve traveled to PA and OH before. Will probably do so again.

Glad I’m among the 20%.
Cut and run was never my style. Joe has had my back for decades, now I will have his.

This is all ver nice, even admirable, but ultimately destructive.

Biden is already behind in 5 of the 7 swing states. With this debate performance there is no way to climb out of this hole. Democrats are, quite obviously, crestfallen and despondent, so “getting out the vote” will be even harder than usual. Oh, and Democratic donors are unlikely to come forward with their buckets of cash, so that back room organizing will suffer.

Major Democratic Donors Ask Themselves: What to Do About Biden?
Some floated interventions and wondered about how to reach Jill Biden. Others hoped the president would bow out of the race on his own.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/29/us/politics/bid...

Now we come to the so-called “undecided”. The Times, before the debate, identified 6. After the debate they asked what they thought. You should not be surprised to find that all 6 have moved, either a little or a lot, and it wasn’t in Biden’s direction.

There is an admirable quality in supporting your man, but this is politics, and “going down with the ship” is not a coherent strategy, especially with the prospect of what the other guy offers.

Seems like they agree with about 80% of Democratic voters.

Funny. About 5 out of 6 Democratic callers into the Washington Journal C-SPAN show this morning wanted Biden to remain the nominee.

Funny. About 5 out of 6 Democratic callers into the Washington Journal C-SPAN show this morning wanted Biden to remain the nominee.

Of course, because talk show callers are the most heavily partisan and heavily engaged. They are not the ones who win elections - that honor goes to the persuadables in the middle and to turnout. It’s clear that Trump supporters are zealots and will turn out, so having Democrats who are not excited is a recipe for disaster.

Of course it may be a disaster anyway, but there are times when a “Hail Mary” is appropriate, and this might be one of them.

https://wapo.st/3zvOEOA

well since the NYT is seeing what fantasy sticks to the wall, here is a scenario they should love :

its the 1970 NBA championship against the Lakers\GOP; mortal enemies of the Knicks\Dems.
walt (Joe Cool) frazier has been a cornerstone, carrying the team for years. it has worn him down.

as they trade wins, public opinions change after every game, but now its the finals' final, game 7.
the knicks need more than offense, they need someone to neutralize their biggest threat.

after disappearing from the bench and deemed unable to participate by all experts, out comes willis (obama) reed as MVP\VP, shutting down the opponents' leader.


don is unhappy about the loss, and unhappy he was not the one maybe violating the constitution.
the country survives and prospers 4 more years.

Of course it may be a disaster anyway, but there are times when a “Hail Mary” is appropriate, and this might be one of them.

Given what Albaby1 has said on the subject, which makes it sound extremely difficult to replace Biden, how would you see this working? Wouldn't Kamala be the likely replacement and would that be better in terms of getting persuadable's votes? Would the trauma of trying to switch now tear the Dem Party apart?

I just wish that Biden had had the wisdom to step down and not run for a second term.

but there are times when a “Hail Mary”

We should do the Hail Mary anyway, becuase we have no idea what the October surprise might be.

Biden is already behind in 5 of the 7 swing states. With this debate performance there is no way to climb out of this hole

I think it's more of a divot, than a hole, but time will tell, *AND*, we have no choice but to climb out which may be easy or it may be tough, so heave to Goofyhoofy. Are you donating? Are you helping? You're likely a great talker so try your had at some persuasion, eh? Can't hurt. :)

I think it's more of a divot, than a hole

It's not a divot, and probably not even a hole - it's a chams.

This wasn't just one bad night, because campaigns don't "restart" like baseball games after the 9 innings are over. The first fifteen minutes of the debate (and his closing statement, perhaps) will be on continuous playback for the rest of the campaign. The next four months will be filled with Trump PAC campaign ads showing Biden's all-but-incapacitated responses, a never-ceasing loop of "We beat Medicare." This was not a one-time thing that "only" 50 million people watched - this is a debacle that will affect the rest of the campaign.

There are numerous terrible consequences for Biden's chances. The first, most obvious, is that some persuadable voters will no longer vote for Biden. They'll conclude he's simply too mentally impaired to be President. And some will vote for Trump, which doubles the negative impact.

The second is that this creates a permission structure for Republicans and GOP-leaners who are worried about Trump's many flaws, and who might have voted for Biden, to go ahead and vote for him anyway. It's hard to vote for a convicted felon....but if the alternative is actually mentally unfit to some extent, it's much easier to get past that cognitive dissonance.

The third is that this issue will dominate the campaign until at least the next debate, eating up valuable time where Biden will have to play defense ("It's a referendum on Biden") rather than offense ("It's a choice between Trump and Biden."). And it's a bad issue for them, especially since the Biden campaign has been so dismissive of concerns about his age, which is going to pose a lot of credibility problems for his surrogates.

* * * *

There are no good options for Democrats. They are now very likely to lose the Presidency, and there may not be anything they can do about it. If Biden were to step aside, that doesn't mean they're going to win - and it may be that they can't win even if he did step aside. Harris isn't especially popular, has her own faults as a campaigner, would still have to run on the Biden/Harris record, and would have to answer some pretty tough questions about how she didn't see that Biden was so incapacitated that he couldn't be the nominee (or why she didn't do anything about it). If it's someone other than Harris, the process of getting to them could end up splitting the party - and even then, no guarantees they fare any better on the national stage (with the handicap of going from zero to Presidential nominee with only three months to the election).

And again, it's still very unlikely Biden will step aside. He knows all of the above. He knows that regardless of whether a different nominee could have crushed Trump had Biden chosen not to run last summer, now any new nominee is very unlikely to win. He's not going to step aside even if he has an epiphany that he's not a great candidate (regardless of whether he's been a good President) unless he's also convinced that the party would likely land on a better candidate in a way that helped them win. It's hard to see him getting there.

Their best option might be to simply take the "L" at the top of the ticket and do what they can to save Brown and Tester and other down-ballot candidates.

Albaby, you've earned a lot of respect from me over the years at TMF and here. But this is just BSC doom and gloom talk. Very much unlike you.

Has your account been hacked?

Why is it that the NYT opinion editors asked Biden to drop out after a bad debate performance, but they didn't ask Trump to drop out after he was convicted of 34 felonies? They called him unfit for office, but never directly asked Trump to leave the race.

--Peter

Nor has anyone, including any federal or state Republican official, requested that Trump exit the race after AGAIN refusing to state he would honor and accept election results after any legitimate legal questions were resolved by courts. Dana Bash posed that question, he gave a 20 second answer that didn't answer the yes/no question, she reminded him he still had 80 seconds to answer the question, he talked for another 60 and still did not answer the question.

Okay, in 2020, it was was a hypothetical question.

Beginnning even BEFORE the 2020 election, Trump had begun planning a multi-state effort of legal obfuscation and interference to sow doubt about election results and carpet bomb courts with bogus legal filings to confuse the public and extort Republican officials to alter electoral vote submissions.

It's no longer a hypothetical question. It's an actual question about actual acts in the past and the present. And Trump refused to answer a simple yes/no question. Exactly as he refused to answer the same yes/no question in 2020.

Crickets.... from "Republicans" across the country.


WTH

Albaby, you've earned a lot of respect from me over the years at TMF and here. But this is just BSC doom and gloom talk. Very much unlike you.

Has your account been hacked?

Nope. It's me. Of course, that's just what someone who had hacked my account would say....

Anyway, I think it's almost impossible to overstate how catastrophic the debate was for Biden. This wasn't a "bad night," or just a "bad debate." It wasn't even just the worst debate performance in the history of televised debates, although it was that as well. It was a candidate who is an octogenarian, who has been dogged by concerns about his age, demonstrating a very lengthy period where he was acting as though he was enfeebled to the point of cognitive impairment. Not just stuttering, not just a misspoken word or flubbing a line - a good fifteen minutes or so where he acted literally incapable, mentally, of performing a basic part of both campaigning and being President: providing a response to explain, defend, or discuss policy issues.

There's almost no way for Biden to bounce back from this, because there's no way to explain this. Any candidate can have a night where they're off their game - no candidate can or should ever display the type of collapse on display in the debate. The campaign has yet to offer an explanation for how that could have happened unless Biden does, in fact, suffer from at least occasional period where he isn't all there. Because he wasn't all there, for a substantial amount of time, on Thursday. The campaign can't undo the damage by showing Biden in other settings being alert and energetic, because that doesn't solve the problem. People who are suffering diminished capacity due to aging often have good period and bad periods - and even having lots of good periods doesn't make the bad periods go away. And most of Biden's defenders won't have a lot of credibility now anyway, because what we all observed during the debate contradicts what they've been claiming about Biden's capacity.

Biden was trailing Trump when it was merely rumored - and heavily denied - that his faculties had diminished to the point where something like Thursday night was possible. Now every voter in the country has seen it - or will have seen it, over and over again, by the time the election comes around. The Trump campaign's message is going to be that Biden's no longer mentally capable of serving as President and we have the receipts. It's going to be nearly impossible to come back from that.

And we all have to confront the real bad possibility here - that Biden might indeed not be competent to be President any more. Any candidate can have a bad debate, but there's no possibility that a candidate can have this type of response:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q4AlIM2NxY

...without there being some significant factor that caused it. And not a "cold." Which means that there's a non-trivial chance that not only does Biden not have the time or the venue that would allow him to convince people that he doesn't really have mental acuity problems, but that he can't do that because he does have some mental acuity problems. It's hard enough to overcome a mistaken impression that Biden's not always mentally up to the job, but it would be impossible to do that if the impression is correct.

Why is it that the NYT opinion editors asked Biden to drop out after a bad debate performance

Assymetric media warfare. Mainstream media bends way over backwards to be unbiased and is much to shy of giving Trump the criticism he deserves. But they will turn around and tell Biden to quit.

OTOH, the right wing media never worry about being fair or doing honest, unbiased journalism...it's all propaganda all the time. Many of those in the RW media would happily take on the role of an American Josef Goebbels given the chance.

And we all have to confront the real bad possibility here - that Biden might indeed not be competent to be President any more.

More importantly, we have to confront the really awful probability that we will have Trump as POTUS and it is unlikely there is a hail mary that is going to save the day.

I'm afraid we will soon be living in 'very interesting times'.

That said, if Biden is on the ballot I will vote for him. And even with this serious setback, I still think Biden might win the popular vote, but we know that doesn't matter.

Because the Times is a partisan mouthpiece for your side, and as such they want the weakest Republican in the race.

I think it's more of a divot, than a hole

It's not a divot, and probably not even a hole - it's a chasm</i9>.

Yes, but if I think it's a chasm, it's harder to do all of the next steps. Who wants to donate to a losing campaign? Who wants to help at the losing campaign level? So I choose NOT to head that direction even though I very much respect your opinion here. Call me am optimist, but I still think we have enough of a chance that it's worth putting forth money and effort. :)

And in November we will know for certain.

Strange time I'm living in in my old age. Who'd a thunk it, eh? I just have to keep my head straight, fix my House, not allow myself to get sad and depressed, stay positive, etc. Maybe even if Trump is elected there will be enough curbs and guard rails to interfere with the plan to massively redo the Federal Government.

So everyone, keep your oars in the water, we're still rowing.

is a partisan mouthpiece for your side, and as such they want the weakest Republican in the race.

Don't think so. Trump was ahead and they know his chances weren't marred enough to make a difference with his base. They don't care.

<< Why is it that the NYT opinion editors asked Biden to drop out after a bad debate performance, but they didn't ask Trump to drop out after he was convicted of 34 felonies? They called him unfit for office, but never directly asked Trump to leave the race. >>

Because all of Trump's felony convictions and falsehoods are a feature, not a bug. The 47% of the population that supports Trump are energized by it, not appalled.

Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership has been gaslighting the nation over the past several years on Biden's declining mental competence. Having the New York Times Editorial Board call this out is akin to Walter Cronkite separating himself from the Administration's lies about our success in Vietnam.

https://youtu.be/zCdXVWsTpSM

intercst

Yes, but if I think it's a chasm, it's harder to do all of the next steps. Who wants to donate to a losing campaign? Who wants to help at the losing campaign level? So I choose NOT to head that direction....

I can't help but be reminded of this cartoon when reading that:

https://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id...

There's something to be said for that. You (personally) can't change whether Joe Biden has mental acuity problems that will ultimately doom his campaign, and you want him to win in the event that he doesn't have mental acuity problems, so you might choose to ignore the possibility that he is in a losing campaign. There's lots of precedent for that (looking at all those folks "unskewing" the polls, back in the day).

But then again, there's a downside to choosing to believe in something that might not be true. The Presidential race doesn't take place in a vacuum. There's lots of very important downballot races, and they get affected by the topline race. If Biden can't do the job of being a Presidential candidate (which is a somewhat different job than being the President), then Democrats should take that into account in how they allocate their time and dollars and their internal "voice" over party strategy.

And as you point out, no one wants to get behind a losing campaign - which also informs the discussion of whether Biden ought to step aside for someone who's got a better chance of winning. Note: whether he ought to or not, I don't think he will, because I think he believes he's got the best chance of beating Trump than any alternative scenario.

Why is it that the NYT opinion editors asked Biden to drop out after a bad debate performance, but they didn't ask Trump to drop out after he was convicted of 34 felonies?

Because Trump's not going to listen to him or care what they say, and Biden might. The same reason why the U.S. is trying to influence the Israeli government more than they're trying to influence Hamas in order to get an end to hostilities.

So the NYT says that no one should vote for Trump because he shouldn't be President, but asks Biden to drop out because he can't effectively do the job of being a candidate any more.

Nope. It's me. Of course, that's just what someone who had hacked my account would say....

Ah, yes. The ol' Maxwell Smart double switcheroo. Pretend to be the hacker when you're really you. Just to be sure, perhaps we should continue this conversation under the cone of silence. ;-)

Let me try an alternate approach.

I've previously said I would vote for a half-eaten ham sandwich over Trump, because the sandwich would be a better President.

If the Democratic party can't get Biden elected over Trump, what makes you think they could get someone else elected? That's my issue. What it takes for Biden to win is exactly the same thing it would take for [fill in the blank] to win. Turn out the base and convince the currently undecided to vote for you. So go out and do it.

There are many ways to do that. Talk about Trump's felony convictions and pending criminal trials. Turn his avoidance of policy questions at the debate into a string of ads highlighting the Democratic policies. Point at his record as President and compare that to Biden's record (or the Democratic party). Go on offense, and make Trump look like the fool he is. Plenty of others - and probably better ones, since I'm bad at marketing.



My main complaint that caused me to leave the Republican party after the 2016 primary is that they lost their collective minds and nominated a complete fool and buffoon. And they've continued in that lunacy for almost a decade. Now the Democratic party seems to be losing their collective minds because they nominated an old guy who occasionally acts old. Is there no one left in this country who is capable of thinking rationally? Because neither party seems to be doing that at the moment.

--Peter

PS - Goofy, feel free to jump in here as well. I'm concerned that you might have been hacked, too. Perhaps I should as you to identify the musical instrument that made one Fool very happy not long before his passing.

Yes, but if I think it's a chasm, it's harder to do all of the next steps. Who wants to donate to a losing campaign? Who wants to help at the losing campaign level? So I choose NOT to head that direction....

I can't help but be reminded of this cartoon when reading that:

https://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id...

I've never been too bad. But I found out recently that one of my friends that died young hung himself. Another friend used my boat while I was gone for Xmas, broke up with his GF on my boat, and I got him to leave after 30 days. He would up institutionalized for 30 days - suicidal. I found out one lady I was interested in was getting married and had dark problems. She committed suicide just before marriage, about an hour after I last talked to her. My Army buddy housemates came home to find a buddy in his running car with a hose from the exhaust running into the car. m I've never been suicidal one bit.

I realize full well we can lose, I just don't dwell there - and I choose to talk about it in a better light than y'all. We'll just have to see. I see absolutely no profit in saying we've already lost the race, and everything from now on is just going through the motions. So let me be frank - that may be the way it is, but it's loser talk, you cannot pull around and win if everyone talks the race is already lost. Recognize it, but put it away.

Any candidate can have a bad debate, but there's no possibility that a candidate can have this type of response: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q4AlIM2NxY
...without there being some significant factor that caused it. And not a "cold."

Albaby, you're being hysterical. So, you think it's physically impossible that a confluence of lack of sleep, a cold, cold medicine, poor preparation from his advisors, and debate rules that ultimately favored Trump's Gish Galloping couldn't disorient an otherwise highly capable man?

As for "we finally beat Medicare", I took it as an uncompleted thought curtailed by the 2 minute time limit, and that Biden meant:

"HHS Announces Cost Savings for 64 Prescription Drugs Thanks to the Medicare Rebate Program Established by the Biden-Harris Administration’s Lower Cost Prescription Drug Law"

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2024/06/26/hhs-anno...

How many people thought Trump could win in 2016? But he did. Maybe this is the year the Dems get to balance that scale.

Given what Albaby1 has said on the subject, which makes it sound extremely difficult to replace Biden, how would you see this working? Wouldn't Kamala be the likely replacement and would that be better in terms of getting persuadable's votes? Would the trauma of trying to switch now tear the Dem Party apart?

I don’t view Kamala as the automatic successor. While Vice Presidents often run following their term(s), it isn’t always true, (and when they do they don’t always win) and all Biden would have to do is release his delegates without favor and many contenders could emerge, just as they do in the Primaries. That would free Newsom, Whitmer, Buttegeig, or others to try rounding up delegates - just as used to happen prior to McGovern’s “takeover” and the institution of Primaries happened in the first place. Conventions used to be the place where candidates were selected, I see no reason it couldn’t happen again.

As this guy says in the Washington Post, the idea of a Convention selecting an unknown delegate would electrify the country and give it the greatest summertime reality show in half a century:

https://wapo.st/3zvOEOA

Yes, it would a highly compressed time scale, but in some ways that could be an advantage, without all the mudslinging and overheated rhetoric that accompanies the long, drawn out primary season. It would also give the Republicans less time to foist yet another long negative campaign on the American people, something they so excel at.

so heave to Goofyhoofy. Are you donating? Are you helping? You're likely a great talker so try your had at some persuasion, eh?

We have donated to the party. We have donated more to individual candidates. We have also donated to local candidates (county) who happen to be Republicans, although they are not crazy Republicans.

I live in Tennessee, which is a lost cause so far as “helping”, but we have manned phone banks which work in nearby states where there is a chance of changing the outcome (notably North Carolina and Virginia). Going door to door in Tennessee is a waste of effort, sadly. It is solid, rock red Republican here. There is no amount of persuasion, except for Jesus Christ himself, that might help, but as we have seen around the country, even that has been perverted into the “get rich, stomp on immigrants” philosophy, so it’s doubtful if even He came back that we would get any traction here.

If the Democratic party can't get Biden elected over Trump, what makes you think they could get someone else elected? That's my issue.

Because Biden is now seen as a terribly flawed candidate. TERRIBLY FLAWED, as evidenced by what 50 million people saw with their own eyes and ears.

Gretchen Whitmer, by contrast, vis well regarded in a “labor” state, would poll extremely high with women (where Trump is weak), and has a track record of legislative success. Gavin Newsom less so because “California”, which while dynamic, large, and growing also has negatives in budget deficits, homeless, and immigration issues, but even those pale in comparison with Joe’s (public perception) problems.

Is there no one left in this country who is capable of thinking rationally?

Give the number of highly focused and experienced political writers at the Washington Post, New York Times (including the editorial staff writers of the newspaper in addition to more independent op-ed writers), websites like Politico, Cook, and even people like Jon Stewart and Rachael Maddow, not to mention Albaby1 and Goofyhoofy (me), I think the more relevant question is “Are you capable of letting go of a political candidate who is certain to lose, just because you like him?” Even Goldwater, a long time friend and supporter, faced reality and walked to the White House to tell Richard Nixon he had to resign for the good of the country. It happens. It’s politics, not a neighborhood house party.

Goofy, feel free to jump in here as well. I'm concerned that you might have been hacked, too. Perhaps I should as you to identify the musical instrument that made one Fool very happy not long before his passing.

I have jumped. I did so within minutes of seeing the first opening catastrophic remarks in the debate. It didn’t get better.

Harpsichord.

<i<The same reason why the U.S. is trying to influence the Israeli government more than they're trying to influence Hamas in order to get an end to hostilities.

Trump = Hamas. I think we all can agree with that one. Very astute observation Albaby. Albaby for President! Now that sound good for 2028, but Gavin Newsome might get in the way. :)

As this guy says in the Washington Post, the idea of a Convention selecting an unknown delegate would electrify the country and give it the greatest summertime reality show in half a century:

I'm not sure that would be a very good reality show for the Democrats. Let's compress a primary season worth of intramural mud slinging into a few days. It would probably make "Housewives" look tame.

Then who is the "miracle" candidate who will figuratively slay the Trump dragon?

I can quickly come up with a list of who it's not:

Hillary Clinton
Kamala Harris
Adam Schiff
Michelle Obama
Nancy Pelosi

Nothing against any of them - they'd all make (or would have made had age not caught up with them) good Presidents.

How about some out of the box candidates. I'll name two and you figure what box they're out of.

Adam Kinzinger
Liz Cheney

Would I be happy with all of their policies? Certainly not. Could they peel off enough votes from disgruntled Republicans to win? Absolutely. Will they energize voters to pick more traditional Democrats in down ballot races? Maybe.

If making sure Trump doesn't win is the goal, perhaps a genuine Hail Mary really IS called for.

--Peter

Gavin Newsome

Newsom. No "e".

It's my pet peeve. Sorry.

Harpsichord.

I don't fully agree with you, but you definitely earned the rec!

--Peter

Liz Cheney

Would I be happy with all of their policies? Certainly not. Could they peel off enough votes from disgruntled Republicans to win? Absolutely. Will they energize voters to pick more traditional Democrats in down ballot races? Maybe.

If making sure Trump doesn't win is the goal, perhaps a genuine Hail Mary really IS called for.

Now this piqued my curiosity and I think that would be fun. I would vote for her on a Dem ticket. :)

Gavin Newsome

Newsom. No "e".

It's my pet peeve. Sorry.

No problem, my eye clinic is Newsome, so it sneaks in. :)

Because Biden is now seen as a terribly flawed candidate. TERRIBLY FLAWED, as evidenced by what 50 million people saw with their own eyes and ears.

Well, my position is that we've Crossed the Rubicon, and we're talking about something that isn't gonna happen. Biden isn't stepping down and we are just going to have to proceed. We can talk and exchange views, but Biden isn't stepping down, and I believe Albaby that throwing open the convention would be disaster, so we're stuck, and Biden still gives a great speech, and does a good job.

So we have to hope that Trump gets too confident and screws up or that something goes in our favor.

So we have to hope that Trump gets too confident and screws up or that something goes in our favor.

Or gets more convictions. Oh, wait, they keep delaying the trials...

We have donated to the party. We have donated more to individual candidates. We have also donated to local candidates (county) who happen to be Republicans, although they are not crazy Republicans.

I live in Tennessee, which is a lost cause so far as “helping”, but we have manned phone banks which work in nearby states where there is a chance of changing the outcome (notably North Carolina and Virginia). Going door to door in Tennessee is a waste of effort, sadly. It is solid, rock red Republican here. There is no amount of persuasion, except for Jesus Christ himself, that might help, but as we have seen around the country, even that has been perverted into the “get rich, stomp on immigrants” philosophy, so it’s doubtful if even He came back that we would get any traction here.

I hear ya. My wife is Filipina and their culture is to stay away from divisive subjects. The women are the backbone of the societies there, with some parts of the societies being matrilineal. I did door to door in CA, but with maps of the Dems so I could help get out the vote. Here in Florida it's phone banks. But they're also asleep here. California was energetic and a varied in age group. All of the Dems I've seen here are old, like me. I think if Florida turns blue it will be in the cities, not here.

So Cal also has more courteous and better drivers. :)

Or gets more convictions. Oh, wait, they keep delaying the trials...

It's enough to make you lose faith in the system. When I was young the old folks thought the world was going to hell. Now that I'm old... why does it look like America is going to hell? :)

If the Democratic party can't get Biden elected over Trump, what makes you think they could get someone else elected?

The fact that the "someone else" wouldn't be 81 and have had that debate performance.

Look, one of Biden's biggest negatives going in to the debate was voter concern about his age. A large proportion of voters feared he was too old to do the job of President. He then went out and spent 15-20 minutes acting too enfeebled to do the job of President.

At this point, any "replacement level" Democrat would be a better candidate than Biden - because they wouldn't be saddled with that. Harris, Whitmer, Newsome, Buttigieg - whomever. They'd have their flaws and their negatives, but nothing as crippling as Biden's problems.

The fact that all the other Democrats have the same "to do" list as Biden doesn't change that. This was a catastrophic negative for Biden personally. He went out in front of 50 million viewers and acted as though everything that voters feared and that the GOP has been whispering about him for the last year or two was true.

Now the Democratic party seems to be losing their collective minds because they nominated an old guy who occasionally acts old.

This wasn't an old guy acting old. This was an old guy acting as though he lacked basic mental acuity. There is a difference, which is why nearly every political observer is acting differently than when Biden just walks stiff or has a gaffe or uses an old-timey anecdote wrong.

We'll just have to see. I see absolutely no profit in saying we've already lost the race, and everything from now on is just going through the motions.

But there can be profit in that.

If Biden has now already lost the race, then there's potential benefits in trying to get him to step aside. If he doesn't, there's benefits to reallocating resources and reorienting campaign strategy to try to get down-ballot wins. Or in letting downballot candidates be seen trying to get Biden to move aside, so they can separate from him. Or even letting a potential 2028 candidate start building up national recognition, even in a failing effort. Or insulating the Democratic party as a whole from criticism of possibly being complicit in pushing forward an impaired candidate.

Without contributing to the current speculation, here's a handicapping of the current generation of Democrats who clearly have what it takes not only to BE President but overcome biases in the voter base to WIN the Presidency at this point.

Gavin Newsom -- This is a no-brainer. He has been active for four years at the national level, always playing the "team player" role while demonstrating consistently appearance after appearance he can do well in public appearances and debates.

J.B. Pritzker -- His name doesn't get mentioned but he inherited a financial disaster in Illinois, especially with its government employee pension system, and has run a clean Governor's Mansion and put the state on a much better financial footing and has also consistently played "team player" nationally.

Jamie Raskin -- One of the sharpest minds in government and capable of eloquently pitching complex policy to the public.

Here are two bright minds that nonetheless could probably NOT help, for different reasons, none reflecting flaws with the person or their abilities.

Adam Schiff -- Like Jamie Raskin, he's one of the sharpest minds in government at any level but he has multiple critical handicaps. First, he's from California so as a national player, he has that baggage ("another flake from California imposing their hippy dippy BS on us 'Muricans") that Jamie Raskin does not. Second, he is needed in the Senate to avoid having the Senate captured by Republicans. Third, his speaking voice sounds like a mix of Al Gore and Kevin Spacey making him SOUND very condescending. He's NOT condescending, but I can clearly see how he would have difficulty converting independents with that starting point.

Gretchen Whitmer -- I would rank her the same as J.B Pritzker, meaning she has allowed Democrats to retain control of an industrial state whose local industries have imposed great challenges on the state through their decades of mismanagement yet she seems to have reversed the sense of decline across the state. She has also worked well with other key figures in government. Her only drawback is that she's a woman and at THIS point, regardless of what voters SAY, I don't think the sliver of voters needing to be won over in each election to produce a Democratic win will vote for a woman for President. HOWEVER, this could be THE most important wildcard in politics in future elections, if we have any... How many women are grasping the reality of the Handmaid's Tale world that is taking over their lives already and will get WORSE if Republicans control the House, Senate and White House and have a 6-3 majority in the USSC? If women TRULY understood the ramifications, a Democratic landslide would be assured even if the candidate at the top was an empty box. If a woman candidate for President made abortion rights and contraception a top priority and it was clear how threatened those rights ARE, a woman could win at the top.


WTH

At this point, any "replacement level" Democrat would be a better candidate than Biden - because they wouldn't be saddled with that. Harris, Whitmer, Newsome, Buttigieg - whomever. They'd have their flaws and their negatives, but nothing as crippling as Biden's problems.

Nut Biden you've also said Biden isn't going to give up the Presidential run. Is there a possibility that talks are going on trying to convince him not to run and these are ongoing? I'm not sure how anyone would approach a President on that. It seems to me that Biden show no signs of stepping down, but if he did, I would back the new play, but previously you've stated with virtual certainty that Biden wouldn't step down.

Albaby, you're being hysterical. So, you think it's physically impossible that a confluence of lack of sleep, a cold, cold medicine, poor preparation from his advisors, and debate rules that ultimately favored Trump's Gish Galloping couldn't disorient an otherwise highly capable man?

Exceedingly unlikely, yes. Go back and look at the video. That's not a person of ordinary competence dealing with some poor debate prep or a cold (which was never mentioned before the event, and which didn't show up in his performance the next day). It wasn't a person having trouble responding to a Gish Gallop. It's a person who's deeply struggling to meet the moment.

It's not hysteria. There's a reason that virtually every political observer is acting as though his performance was catastrophic, well beyond the ordinary range of a bad debate. This was a crippling display.

<< If Biden has now already lost the race, then there's potential benefits in trying to get him to step aside. If he doesn't, there's benefits to reallocating resources and reorienting campaign strategy to try to get down-ballot wins. Or in letting downballot candidates be seen trying to get Biden to move aside, so they can separate from him. Or even letting a potential 2028 candidate start building up national recognition, even in a failing effort. Or insulating the Democratic party as a whole from criticism of possibly being complicit in pushing forward an impaired candidate. >>

This analysis is outstanding.

intercst

Ok. So we've gone from Biden isn't stepping down, if he does he throws his weight to Harris, and if he allows an open convention it's a disaster so the race is lost now and any potential new one starts in disaster,

to-

Anything is better than Biden (not that you endorsed him before), so we can put money into down ballot candidates, let them try to openly convince him not to run, to insulate themselves and the party, not be seen as trying to force a feeble candidate on the populace, etc. So we could get a benefit even though Trump is in office for 4 years or more.

I'd like to not see Trump in the White House. At this point, you see Trump as getting elected. He'll try for 8 years, even if he's feeble and MAGA won't care.

Totally unrelated to the debate, but luv your example,lol. I was a young boy in 1970, that was the 1st NBA championship I had ever seen. Luv'd the Knicks, hated the Lakers, even though I had huge respect for Jerry West. Still remember the 3/4 length buzzer beater that West hit that would have won the game had the 3 point shot existed! Instead, it went to OT, and Knicks survived and had that most epic win.

( not a Knicks fan, grew up a Pistons fan, so obviously I have had no interest in the NBA the last 20 years or so, lol, they have sucked )

How about some out of the box candidates. I'll name two and you figure what box they're out of.

Adam Kinzinger
Liz Cheney

You are not going to get Democrats to vote for Republicans, and I will take it a step further and say you are not going to get Republicans to vote for *these* Republicans. The base is voting for Trump, the person. It wouldn’t matter if he was on the People from Mars ticket, they would vote for him.

The Democratic Party has a sufficient supply of decent candidates almost ny of whom would be better than Joe at this point. Even if they don’t win, which I acknowledge is a real possibility, at least it tees up some people for the next go round, assuming there is a next go round after 4 years with the Felon. Clearly Joe isn’t going to be around 4 years from now (I am completely sure he’s not going to be around after January of next year.)

Biden isn't stepping down and we are just going to have to proceed. We can talk and exchange views, but Biden isn't stepping down,

You don’t know that. You didn’t know Bin Laden was being shot until they came forward and said “It happened.” You didn’t know Nixon was resigning until he went on TV and said “I’m resigning”, even though there had been months of speculation and denials that he would resign. Lyndon Johnson stunned the world when he announced he would not seek, and would not serve as President late into the Primary Season.

This is not the kind of thing you talk about ahead of time. It IS the kind of thing which is talked about in private conversations, quietly, behind closed doors among friends and supporters. Then it happens.

There are a a bunch of heavyweights lining up on this side of the fence - more than I have seen before, at least publicly, No significant Republican party elders were calling for Nixon’s resignation in the headlines of newspapers. Democrats were still supporting Johnson, even as McCarthy made inroads in the Primaries.

I have a hunch it’s going to happen. Buckle up.

Gavin Newsom -- This is a no-brainer. He has been active for four years at the national level, always playing the "team player" role while demonstrating consistently appearance after appearance he can do well in public appearances and debates.

I always think of Newsom when it comes to this. The convention is close, so Biden has just a short period of time to show the debate was just an off, and I respect Albaby's opinion enough that I will find the debate and watch it again. Anyone have a link?

Biden isn't stepping down and we are just going to have to proceed. We can talk and exchange views, but Biden isn't stepping down,

You don’t know that.

Well, I thought that and then Albaby stated the same, which reinforced my opinion. But my thinking does evolve, and I've expressed and privately imagined how you could approach Biden on that. Kill the messenger and all that. If it does happen, I'll back whoever the new person is and hope it;s Newsom.

At this point, any "replacement level" Democrat would be a better candidate than Biden - because they wouldn't be saddled with that.

Instead they'd be saddled with legitimacy questions.

"The Democrats voted for Biden in the primaries. Why is this person replacing Biden after he was elected? Besides, I liked "Uncle Joe". He was as honest as politicians get. I trusted him."

I'm not sure that's any better.

Harris, Whitmer, Newsome, Buttigieg

You get Buttigieg right, but not Newsom. No "e". It's my personal quest - my tilting at windmills - to get people to spell that name correctly.

--Peter

I have a hunch it’s going to happen. Buckle up.

I used to tell you people how nonexistent your bench is. Now you're going to see it for yourselves.

The democrats have exactly *2* and two choices alone to replace Biden. Here they are:

Kamala Harris
Michelle Obama

Why only those two? Simple.

If the dems *don't* put Kamala Harris on the top of the ticket, they can kiss another 10-15% of the black vote goodbye. That's enough to put Georgia and North Carolina far out of reach, throw Virginia to Trump and make it nearly impossible for the d's to sweep W, MI and PA.

And that's assuming Harris can overcome her general incompetence and high negatives. Very unlikely given how badly her campaign went last time.

So that leaves you with the one person who is popular enough that she could reunite the party and stop the bleeding. Michelle Obama. She'd return the black vote to the d side and would take Georgia back at a minimum. The question is, does she want to? And how would the Bidens react to her being named? Axios reported on a rift between the families.

At any rate you have to make a decision quickly, way before the convention.

Biden isn't stepping down and we are just going to have to proceed. We can talk and exchange views, but Biden isn't stepping down,

You don’t know that.

I thought that and then Albaby came out and said he isn't stepping down too, so that reinforced it. I think we have until the convention. Krugman saying he should gets my attention, along with others. If Albaby were to say he should that would help and he's making solid arguments for it, but we still lose and have Trump for 4 or more years. I still don't think Biden's race is dead, but I mostly listened to it and didn't watch. Wasn't happy, but didn't think the race was over.

You are not going to get Democrats to vote for Republicans, and I will take it a step further and say you are not going to get Republicans to vote for *these* Republicans.

Of course, they'd have to switch to being Independents, which I'm guessing wouldn't be a problem for them. They're already former Republicans, as they are so far from the current Republican party as to be outside of it. So make it official.

As to Democrats voting for them - they're going to vote for Trump instead? Or the worm-head guy? No. Sell it right, and you'll get Democrats to vote just to keep Trump out of office. And they'll certainly appeal to the disaffected Republicans who don't like Trump. Those folks would likely vote for Trump in a Trump v. Biden race, but a Trump v. Cheney (or Kinzinger) contest would get them to switch. They'd have a fighting chance against Trump, and lord knows they'd spend the entire campaign ripping Trump to shreds. They've already demonstrated that skill in spades.

From a Democrat's point of view, there'd be policy problems for the next 4 years, but that's way better than losing Democracy altogether.

The Democratic Party has a sufficient supply of decent candidates

Who would likely be damaged for future races simply by being the one who booted Joe out of the race. Why waste a good future candidate on that? And as you said, they're not great. They're just decent.

But let's get real. Biden is highly unlikely to voluntarily step aside. And forcing him out will cause sufficient damage to make sure Trump wins. So how about another alternative - still thinking outside the box.

Harris isn't nearly as popular as Biden. What if Biden dropped her and put, say, Kinzinger in the VP spot? The first words out of his mouth would need to be something like:
My main job as VP is to make sure Biden is fit for the job. At the first hint he is no longer mentally or physically capable of being President, I'll start 25th amendment proceedings.

Then turn him loose on the campaign trail to be the designated attack dog on Trump. That will be his job at every appearance. He's way better at that than Harris could ever hope to be.

Desperate times call for desperate measures.

--Peter

But let's get real. Biden is highly unlikely to voluntarily step aside. And forcing him out will cause sufficient damage to make sure Trump wins. So how about another alternative - still thinking outside the box.

Harris isn't nearly as popular as Biden. What if Biden dropped her and put, say, Kinzinger in the VP spot? The first words out of his mouth would need to be something like:
My main job as VP is to make sure Biden is fit for the job. At the first hint he is no longer mentally or physically capable of being President, I'll start 25th amendment proceedings.

What a spectacle. I don't see a chance of it. but I'd back that.

I live in Tennessee, which is a lost cause so far as “helping”, but we have manned phone banks which work in nearby states where there is a chance of changing the outcome (notably North Carolina and Virginia). Going door to door in Tennessee is a waste of effort, sadly. It is solid, rock red Republican here.

Same story here in Utah.

When I first came to Utah in 1970s the state had a Democratic senator, a Democratic representative and a bit later in 1976 a Democratic governor. Now the state is a deep red and very Trumpy. The Republicans have done a stellar job of gerrymandering districts and the Mormon Church has a great deal of influence in steering its adherents to the right. The gerrymandering is the most egregious way that the right maintains its stranglehold.

There is some comfort in the fact that some of the worst Republicans lost their primary races this year.

Right now the state senate has 23 Republicans and 6 Democrats. The state house has 60 Republicans and 14 Democrats. You can imagine the kind of bills that get passed by this legislature every year.

It's enough to make you lose faith in the system. When I was young the old folks thought the world was going to hell. Now that I'm old... why does it look like America is going to hell? :)

Coming of age in the turbulent 60s with all the anti-war protests, race riots, politically motivated violence (remember all the bombings?)...these times with Trump seem much crazier and more perilous. Through all that strife back then we still had a mostly sensible government that functioned as intended by the framers of the Constitution. Now we seem to be prepared to jettison all that and go with a dictator. THAT I did not expect.

In viewing the debate, it seemed to me that Biden evidenced symptoms of Parkinson's disease. His shuffling gait, masked face, and paucity of gesture and expression are hallmarks. Mental impairment is not part of that syndrome until late in the disease, but no comment on other processes that could be present.

Still, I would vote for a turnip before Trump.

True - although there's not really any change between those positions.

It remains true that the party has no mechanism to force Biden not to be the nominee, that there are political costs to switching Harris for Biden, and there are catastrophic political costs to switching someone other than Harris for Biden. So as long as Biden was a "replacement level" candidate - not any better or worse than a typical Democratic presidential candidate - there would be no gain to trying to switch. Something Biden knew, so he wasn't going to step aside.

Now we know that Biden is a worse than replacement level candidate. His debate performance end up having a catastrophic impact on his candidacy even if it was an aberration caused by some other factor than his age and cognitive abilities. That doesn't change even if the immediate post debate polls don't show a big change - the real damage lies in handing the GOP and their PAC's the equivalent of an h-bomb for their attack ads in September and October. And given how unlikely it is that this was wholly unrelated to his age and cognitive abilities, there's a non-zero chance that he just doesn't have the tools to be a good candidate any more.

That is actionable information. It shifts the analysis in the first paragraph by a lot. Now that Biden's a worse-than-replacement level candidate, switching to Harris is not necessarily a no-gain scenario. Harris probably won't win - she's not a great candidate and even a great candidate would find it nigh-impossible to win in this circumstance. But there's a good chance she'd perform better than Biden would, which might make the difference in some down-ballot races. And Democrats can probably allocate resources a little more with an eye towards downballot races - you might put a little more money into California House races and the OH/MT Senate races, even though they'll have no impact on the Presidential races, rather than aiming for a top-of-the-ticket win.

Yes, I see Trump getting elected. Biden destroyed his candidacy on Thursday. He basically confirmed, on national TV, that voter doubts about his mental acuity are justified and that his political opponents weren't manufacturing those concerns out of whole cloth. "Only" about 50 million people watched the debates, and many (most?) of those are political junkies whose opinions won't be changed much, so the immediate impact on polling won't fully reflect the damage he's done. But once there's a hundred million worth of attack ads showing voters that Biden "finally beat Medicare" - in that voice with that visage in that affect - he's going to have lost any chance of convincing on-the-fence voters he's up for the job.

But once there's a hundred million worth of attack ads showing voters that Biden "finally beat Medicare" - in that voice with that visage in that affect - he's going to have lost any chance of convincing on-the-fence voters he's up for the job.

Wow, coming from the very judicious Albaby, this is truly alarming.

But how in world can you get a possibly senile Biden to realize he needs to step down? How?

He still seems to have enough support to give him the feeling that he can carry the election, something so many others now do not believe.

Sheesh, what a mess.

and there are catastrophic political costs to switching someone other than Harris for Biden.

On this we disagree. Having an open convention would be messy, and at the same time galvanizing television. The Dems do have a bench, and there would be ample opportunity for the obvious contenders (Newsom, Wittmer, Buttegeig, Harris) and perhaps others to make their case and to go through one round, perhaps multiple rounds of voting - as used to happen in the pre-McGovern era.

There is also the possibility that Harris could win, or throw her support to one of the others in return for being assured the #2 slot. Again. If it went past a round or two, I would advocate a floor resolution to move to “ranked choice” voting, which would clear it up relatively quickly.

I don’t know why it would be “catastrophic”. Other countries have election season that last barely weeks; there is no reason ours has to go on for years.

But once there's a hundred million worth of attack ads

You’ve given me a little hope right there. I don’t believe Trump will be able to muster a huge war chest for ads.

Before anything else, Trump is a kleptocrat. He could certainly raise that kind of money, but he will find a way to siphon that off for himself and a few selected cronies. Don’t forget that he installed his daughter in law at the top of the GOP. I’m certain he did that to make it easier to bend the party to his will, which would include getting at the money.

—Peter

Coming of age in the turbulent 60s with all the anti-war protests, race riots, politically motivated violence (remember all the bombings?)...these times with Trump seem much crazier and more perilous. Through all that strife back then we still had a mostly sensible government that functioned as intended by the framers of the Constitution. Now we seem to be prepared to jettison all that and go with a dictator. THAT I did not expect.

Yes! These plans made by Project 2025 and Trump's own statements lead me to believed we are headed into what the Chinese call "interesting times" and I would like to live out my old age in peace. So if you look at Project 2025 it espouses the Unitary Theory of the Executive which gives almost unlimited Power to the Executive. All guardrails will be tested up to the Supreme court which takes time. Trump will pardon himself and I question how the Supremes will view that. Someone cursed us as we are headed into interesting times. I believe Albaby and Goofyhoofy, so it just looks to me like we're screwed at this point. Maybe tomorrow will look up, eh? :)

Before anything else, Trump is a kleptocrat.

I agree. Bannon got convicted and Trump pardoned him too. Trump org got convicted in the charity.

I don’t know why it would be “catastrophic”. Other countries have election season that last barely weeks; there is no reason ours has to go on for years.

It would be catastrophic because a large portion of the base would be enraged that Harris was passed over for someone else.

The problem is that none of the nominees (other than Biden) will have been picked by a primary. If it's not Biden, it's someone who won't be picked by voters. It's someone that will be picked by party leaders and poobahs. Smoke-filled rooms, etc.

That candidate won't have the legitimacy that gets conferred by winning a primary election. They won't have faced the voters. Harris supporters will be outraged that party leaders adjudged her lacking, and there's nothing for the party leaders to point to that's beyond their control. Worse, it's been half a century since either major party picked a candidate at a convention, rather than a primary - so there's no institutional practices or norms that can confer legitimacy onto that choice either. The modern rules were drafted in anticipation of a rubber stamp of the voters' choice, not to be a process that losing candidates can feel resulted in a legitimate contest.

Other countries don't pick their nominees for head of government this way. Nearly all of them are Parliamentary systems, where head of government is chosen by party processes that have a lot of both formal and informal rules to resolve conflicts between different factions in the party. Our parties don't have those things - our methods for resolving conflicts between factions is a contested primary election. The convention can't replace that.

You’ve given me a little hope right there. I don’t believe Trump will be able to muster a huge war chest for ads.

He raised $141 million last month, erasing the Biden campaign's lead on financing. He's going to have more than enough money to blanket the swing states with as much advertising as he needs. And the independent PAC's will be there as well. This type of video is even more valuable for the independent PAC's, actually, because it's a straight up attack on the opponent - which is in the wheelhouse of PAC spending.

Winning the election keeps Trump out of jail, and I expect that will be sufficient motivation for him to adequately fund his campaign spending.

The problem is that none of the nominees (other than Biden) will have been picked by a primary. If it's not Biden, it's someone who won't be picked by voters.

Neither was Harris. Heck, she never ran in a single primary, having folded her tent before they even started. (I realize this is a debate point, surely there will be *some* who are offended that she is passed over (particularly minorities, I would suspect), even if she is not passed over and has the same shot as anyone else in a brokered convention.)

Worse, it’s been a half century since either major party picked a candidate at a convention

True, but not persuasive. This is an extraordinary case. Should Biden opt not to continue, the option isn’t to automatically award it to Harris any more than it is to award it to Bernie Sanders. There is a process in place. Yes, it’s unusual since it hasn’t been used lately, but then it was used for around 200 years, so it’s not as though it’s just been made up on the spot.

Other countries don’t pick their nominees for head of government this way

I’m not sure why that’s important at all. First, 99% of Americans have no idea how leaders are picked by other countries, and likely don’t care. Second, anyone who has sat through a droning history class in school knows “conventions” were used. I’m confident that 99% of those are hazy on any details, but it’s not as though a genie appears and said “try this!”

The convention can’t replace that

And yet it did for the great majority of our history as a Republic. If Biden should withdraw, what would be novel is automatically awarding the nomination to someone who never entered a single primary in her life.

Neither was Harris.

True, but she’s the Vice President. The core function of that role is to be the successor to the President if he can’t fulfill his duties. On top of that, their main role is to support the President and be a partner in his Administration - to stand behind the President. A big reason for Biden’s strength among Black voters was that he stood behind Obama for all those years, so they stood behind Biden when he chose to run.

Her supporters will believe that her role as Biden’s running mate and VP should put her above other contenders for the spot. It’s something that makes her different from all the other names that are out there - she’s the Veep, she’s been on the national ticket, and her job is to step in for the President.

The idea is that if Biden anoints her as his successor, it will have a logic and legitimacy that the other hopefuls can’t claim. The only way the Democrats have any chance with a replacement is if the disappointed losing candidates and their supporters are willing to accept that they didn’t get the nod. Because Harris is unique among the hopefuls, by dint of her position, the hope is that Biden directing his delegates to her will forestall a fracture that goes beyond the convention floor.

That might be a naive hope. It may be that things will be just as bad picking Harris as if they picked Newsom or Whitmer or Warren or Clinton. But it’s perhaps the lowest risk of that happening, because it gives the disappointed hopefuls a logical reason why their guy/gal was passed over - one that doesn’t exist for anyone other than Harris.

First, 99% of Americans have no idea how leaders are picked by other countries, and likely don’t care.

I think it's mind boggling and a little scary how they pick sometimes. Ya get a vote of no confidence and suddenly they're out picking a new leader. Others there appear to be two leaders, but only one of consequence and your representative votes for that. And you can't keep track of who does what in parliamentary procedure.

It's much simpler under authoritarian rule. Also, vote buying is in the open in many countries.

He raised $141 million last month, erasing the Biden campaign's lead on financing.

Yes, I admitted as much. But that was mainly to the GOP and the Trump campaign, wasn't it? The two places easiest for him to spend on things other than campaign ads. While it is more than enough to do a metric crap ton of advertising, Trump lacks the discipline to spend it properly. He also has a lot of cash going out right now. Four different criminal cases chewing up big legal fees. A sizeable outstanding judgement against him, on which he's also spending a bunch in legal fees to to appeal that judgement. The judgement alone is about 3 times that month of fundraising, as I recall. And that fundraising was a significant bump in response to the criminal convictions, wasn't it? I don't see another case going to trial any time soon. Unfortunately.

How much are those independent PACs raising? My guess is no where near as much. So while the PACs could certainly make some hay with advertising, do they have the funds to do so? And won't they also have some pressure to spend on down-ballot races, too?

Winning the election keeps Trump out of jail, and I expect that will be sufficient motivation for him to adequately fund his campaign spending.

We may have to disagree on this one. It SHOULD be sufficient motivation, but I don't think it will. The siren call of money to divert for personal use is too strong.

--Peter

Agree with Goofy - this country NEEDS a political shakeup and a real convention where leadership-selected contenders had to get in the ring and "fight" for delegate support would be incredibly healthy and riveting ratings & buzz. Throw Klobuchar in that mix above and wow the Dems might come out with a viable choice people would be psyched about!

The Repugs could use one too. Let Liz Cheney and Nikki Haley at Trump's political throat.

FC

A big reason for Biden’s strength among Black voters was that he stood behind Obama for all those years, so they stood behind Biden when he chose to run.

Could Hakeem Jeffries tap into that appeal? He's more charismatic than Harris, and has a decent amount of political cred as Minority Leader in the House. He has managed to keep the House Democrats pretty well in line. Not an easy job, by any means. He has stood out as a solid leader, in sharp contrast to the GOP house leadership.

It may be that things will be just as bad picking Harris...

Probably. She's got that nervous laugh that many find offputting. And she doesn't have the bulldog image that will be needed to go on the offense against Trump. While I suspect that she has been a good VP, she doesn't strike me as quite ready for the big chair. Another 4 years in the second chair (or some time away working in a different role - Congress, perhaps?), a good vocal coach, and a better speechwriter could make a big difference in her image. Every time I see her, she lacks something that Pelosi and Hillary Clinton and Feinstein had. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's absence is notable.

--Peter

But that was mainly to the GOP and the Trump campaign, wasn't it? The two places easiest for him to spend on things other than campaign ads. While it is more than enough to do a metric crap ton of advertising, Trump lacks the discipline to spend it properly. He also has a lot of cash going out right now. Four different criminal cases chewing up big legal fees. A sizeable outstanding judgement against him, on which he's also spending a bunch in legal fees to to appeal that judgement. The judgement alone is about 3 times that month of fundraising, as I recall. And that fundraising was a significant bump in response to the criminal convictions, wasn't it? I don't see another case going to trial any time soon. Unfortunately.

All true, but not nearly enough to spare Biden from an onslaught of attack ads. Again, Trump is venal and greedy and eager to line his own pockets - but he also needs to win the election, and he knows it. So his campaign attack machine will not starve for funds. At the margins, Trump might not be able to help himself from diverting some money to himself or family members or what have you...but he's not going to deprive the campaign utterly.

And of course, all the PACs that aren't under Trump's control will be raking in donations and feeding Biden attack ads throughout the swing states as well.

Still, I would vote for a turnip before Trump.

"Kinging" the POTUS, approving gifts to judges and officials after "a deed" is done, instituting one religion in publicly funded schools; approving the flooding of the USA with machine guns, we are one more step down the path to the end of the US 'the founders' created.

Like the Bible, the US Constitution is now a meaningless bludgeon, misrepresented for partisan purposes only.

This is the 1930s in the USA.

As the next POTUS will likely be making more SCOTUS appointments, in light of the decisions by the current SCOTUS's majority of corrupt and theocratic ideologues, I would vote for whoever is running against an RNC candidate.

All guardrails will be tested up to the Supreme court which takes time.


An impartial SCOTUS was a guardrail, but the GOP learned how to remove the guardrails that was the SCOTUS, installing a combination of corrupt and/or theocratic ideologues.

The GOP's defeating the installation of a Justice during the last year of Obama; very clever, but it defeated the intent of an impartial system of justice.

Every time I see her, she lacks something that Pelosi and Hillary Clinton and Feinstein had. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it's absence is notable.

1)I'm close to some people who went to law school and worked with her in Bay Area DA's offices. They feel she is not 'quick on her feet' and lacks the charisma that seems to be so necessary in the age of TikTok.

2) She'll bear the California label. That alone is a political negative in much of flyover America.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.