I was stargazing last night and mostly out of cell phone reach, so I didn't see the big interview with Joe Biden until I got home this morning. Now I have, and it seems like a big meh.
Biden was OK. He had plenty of facts and figures at his command. He denied he was in big trouble and denied Trump was ahead, but that had nothing to do with him being in denial. That's how all politicians act when they're behind in the polls.
But I doubt the interview did much to change any minds. Biden said six times that he just had a "bad night" during the debate, but that's not enough. It was way more than just a bad night, and the almost unanimous claim of the insiders who have commented about Biden over the past few days is that his performance is highly variable and getting worse. So one acceptable-ish interview won't set any minds at ease. He needs to do this over and over to prove the insiders wrong.
I don't get the impression he plans to do that.
Doing your part to keep the oceans warm I see.
Anything an American does in any part of the country built after approximately WWII is going to contribute to global warming in some way, because the built environment since then is all car dependent. So get off your moral high horse on this. Nobody stays 100% on zero-emissions foot or bike only for 100% of their discretionary travel. Kevin driving out to the middle of nowhere at night is not much worse or better than the avowed environmentalist driving to go hiking in the woods or lay out by the beach or get more supplies at the gardening store at every opportunity.
I'd be surprised if Trump'd agree to another debate. He lied, he blustered, etc etc, and everyone expected nothing less but he caught Biden at a bad moment and I doubt Biden would be as bad in a second debate. Trump's handlers will want him to quit while he's ahead.
It doesn't take much to draw Trump into battle. His thin skin, combative nature and a few well-placed taunts are enough.
"Battle" for Trump usually means all-CAPS tweets and a lot of smack talk at a rally. A second debate could happen, I just don't think it's likely.
Would rather see him as president, or Donald Trump?
That's the only question, and it's the only question you can ask, and any other answer that comes up with someone else raises the odds of Donald Trump.
It doesn't matter if Biden is dead, in a coma or on a long cruise to Alpha Centauri. Any form of Biden will end up out performing anyone else on election day.
What about Biden in the next debate??
I've never thought anyone should have debated Trump at any time in the past for any reason. Any outcome it could have will only result in more fuel for the Nazis.
But, that aside, you can't debate a guy in jail.
Your point seems particularly apt in light of many pundits like Jonathan Chair calling for Harris to be stepped over, which I think would be disastrous. She’s the person whom most Americans (and particularly most Democrats) voted to be essentially the understudy for president Biden. To simply dump her or even to make her participate in some kind of beauty pageant with a bunch of other Democrats would cost an immense number of black and women votes in November.
And basically if the Democrats and the media expend enough energy to force Biden out, there won’t be enough time and money to defeat Trump. Kevin really needs to explain why Biden has to go and how that can be accomplished without weakening the Democrats to such an extent that Trump wins.
I agree with you about her precedence, and her capability as an office holder, but then my worry becomes how much does she motivate the George Wallace voters in swing states in a time when every smallest edge is needed?
But then we're really in deep poop. All of the energy is going into forcing Biden to withdraw. Realistically, I think he's got to endorse Harris and she's got to be the candidate for a wide variety of reasons, not the least of which is that she's the sitting vice-president.
I agree that every bigot in the country will be crawling out from under his rock to vote against her and that Harris will have a much tougher road to travel than pre-debate Biden. But, at this point, I don't see any hope for a Democratic victory if Harris is stepped over and, frankly, I think it's now extremely unlikely that Biden wins, either.
I think the tougher road to travel may be an impassable chasm.
If over the next couple of years she were to be seen as a de facto, successful, acting president, or actually to assume the office in some circumstance, that would create a precedence that could override the percentage who wouldn't vote except to vote against her, but at this point, in July, she hasn't really the time to establish that.
But if she were to campaign like she's running for president people could assume they're voting for her, or for Joe, or both.
????????????????????
+1
"But, at this point, I don't see any hope for a Democratic victory if Harris is stepped over and, frankly, I think it's now extremely unlikely that Biden wins, either."
Mitch-
What about Michelle Obama? She polls MUCH higher than Trump and any other Dem or Rep candidate
She's a lawyer, been a First Lady and according to Barack she was a trusted advisor to him!
The thought that a VP is automatically assumed to be a good candidate for President is clearly wrong. Dick Cheney, Dan Quayle, Hubert Humphrey prove my point.
Harris is a known quantity as VP. The question is - is that good enough? Does her experience as an AG, and US Senator from California play well with the East coast Dem voters?
Joe Biden can withdraw if he likes. I am younger than Joe Biden but not by much, AND I had a stroke last year. My short term memory isn't what is used to be - but I still work - physically I am capable. But I damned sure don't want to have my finger on the nuclear trigger and I don't care if I screw up Sham Hannity's name - but I'm NOT in politics. I want better than me as my President
If a better DEM candidate emerges, then go for it.
That could only work is Biden and Harris both agree to it and actively support it, and if Michele Obama agrees to it, which she has said she would not.
But I don't disagree that she would be a great candidate.
cld-
I think that Joe has ALREADY done enough for our country after all these years. He could decide to leave the race tomorrow and I would be proud to say I supported him.
We have become to used to "certainty" in our politics. Brokered conventions, with 2 to 3 rounds of convention votes seemed to have happened quite a bit if memory serves me. So why not now? I see no harm in Joe withdrawing. That would throw the onus on Trump to prove his ability to handle the job against a younger opponent, which would be a disaster imho.
But it has to be his own idea.
The only examples of an incumbent being rejected by his own party at a convention have ended in disaster for the party that tried it.
Though, I admit, I can imagine in this case, where the alternative is a known psychotic, criminal catastrophe, may be an exception that proves the rule.
It seems to me to be more risk than we need when we don't need to take it.
If you want to vote for Kamala, voting for Biden now would be effectively voting for her, if you feel he won't be able to fill out his term.
"If you want to vote for Kamala, voting for Biden now would be effectively voting for her, if you feel he won't be able to fill out his term"
cld
I prefer to bury EX presidents not current presidents and I firmly believe that both Biden and Trump will be dead prior to 2028.
So, lets assume Biden decides to retire. At that point do the DEMs take the chance with Kamala Harris who's numbers are iffy against Trump? Just to play it safe? OR do they go and draft Michele Obama who CRUSHES Trump currently in the polls?
Her Kids are grown - she's known on the world stage - she's got a built in experienced coach and she would build an effective Administration.
Her coat tails stretch further than Harris' I believe so she could possibly prevent a Senate takeover by Republicans and the GOP would lose the house.
I do wonder why we insist upon taking the same old road when there's a possible opportunity to really hurt the Right ala France and the UK?
But I make the same point again, if it isn't Kamala Harris' idea it can't happen in any good way, in a way that won't cause an offense to somebody that all but offsets the benefit. Like when Fox goes on a marathon about how we've panicked and abandoned the entire Biden legacy.
And Michele Obama herself has ruled out running, so it would require a profound change of heart on her part.
Not that I wouldn't love an opportunity to vote for her for something.
We're in the circumstance we have, not the circumstance we'd like to have.
Agree it needs to be Harris. Chait does not advocate dumping Harris.
"Kevin really needs to explain why Biden has to go and how that can be accomplished without weakening the Democrats to such an extent that Trump wins."
Yes. And who he thinks actually, maybe with charts and all, prevent Trump from winning. (Doubt he will since he's already said that as a matter of national security or something, Biden should immediately resign. Guess that means he's become a Kmala-bro, so proof he doesn't care what it costs in re Trump winning. He's sort of over the rainbow here.)
Well, he does and he doesn't. What he seems to be saying is that there should be some kind of beauty pageant and that Harris would be allowed to participate but my impression (reading between the lines) is that he thinks and hopes it will be somebody else.
So, he seems to want to step over Harris but doesn't want to come right out and say it.
you mean the gawkeratti refugees at new york magazine's best neocon friend johnathan alter favors a black neoliberal socialist for the democrat nomination?
that's straight cap.
It strikes me as a white person's take to say stepping over Kamala would cost an immense number of black votes in November. Assuming the person she was stepped over for was more popular and inspiring and simply a better candidate, the above take seems to say black voters can't figure that out for themselves and only vote on race like robots.
I think black people prefer and respect if white people are just real and don't try to adjust things for what they think the perceptions of black's may or may not be.
The point is that I think it would be very hard to take if a black vice-president were replaced by a centrist white politician. There's a certain amount of solidarity that's natural for both African-Americans and also for women.Plus, there's a lot of people who voted for her on the assumption that would naturally make her the next in line. To step over her would, in my opinion, be simply unforgivable.
+1
never thought i'd see day that mitch guthman & crissa ate making the most sense -- after davis ex machina, of course -- in kevin drum's comments.
but kudos to you.
"Any form of Biden will end up out performing anyone else on election day."
Maybe, but i just don't understand why people have such a high degree of confidence this is true and obvious.
Yes, you're right, you don't understand.
Because it's July, because most of the rest of the mooted candidates have little national exposure, because none of them at all have been subjected to the same focused smear campaigns Biden has been subjected to for four years, because dropping him will always be an issue for the wingnuts as much as not dropping him would be.
This is absolutely correct. And Biden was not just "OK," either. His affect was normal, but he said a couple of disturbing things, like blaming his performance on a claim that even with his mike turned off, trump was "shouting" at him and distracting him. Besides that excuse being really lame, it did not happen even once, at least during the first 20 minutes that I watched. Trump just stared at him. Was Biden hearing voices? Or was he confusing his memory of last Thursday with his memory of the 2020 debates? Or did he just make this up?
In any case, even though this was just one small comment, it's pretty bad.
And please don't ask "Would you rather have trump?" Of course not, but that's irrelevant. I'm just one voter in a blue state.
Read the transcript. You may have misheard one or two things.
+1
It was longer than 20 minutes.
Really? You think that? Why? Please tell me why someone by whom young people have been serially disappointed, who far too many Black men disdain and can only fight between 10 and 4 is going to do better than someone younger.
No, it's not Biden's fault that the student loan program was overturned. But he made big promises to forgive debt -- not to try to forgive debt -- in 2020, and he failed, even with the Tri-fecta.
If Wes Moore were better known, I think he could do it and be an even better version of Obama: one with bigger cojones and genuine "national security" wisdom to boot. Alas, two years of "governoring" isn't enough to build a national profile.
So it's down to Harris, Newsom, Whitmer, Shapiro and Pritzker. Which of them do you think would do worse than Biden? Harris is circumlocative to madness sometimes and has that perennial disadvantage of having two "X" chromosomes which handicaps even superlatively talented women over and over. But she's HELL if you're in her cross-hairs. Newsom is too "pretty", but he is a genuinely well-informed human being with a decent moral compass. Both he and Harris are of course tarred with the "Libtard California" brush.
Whitmer is a SuperNova and brings Michigan solidly into the Blue column but she does have the "Double X Hex" too. Shapiro would almost certainly keep Pennsylvania Blue, but might actually make Michigan harder because he's Jewish. That leaves J. B. who is definitely not "pretty", is from Machine Illinois (but emphatically not a member of the Machine), and is a bit taciturn like Biden. But he could fund the whole campaign himself without making his kids TOO resentful.
So, which would you rather have? A guy that 70% of Americans think shouldn't be President or one of five others, each of whom has their quota of "baggage" but any of which will certainly excite the Democratic "base" (except possibly African-American women) much more than Biden? Three of the five have strong "centrist" credentials which might attract the actual undecided "Independents", a group of about three to five percent who care about both national solvency and genuine equal opportunity.
Let me be clear. I understand the logistic problems with changing candidates at this point. I'm just questioning the assertion that Biden is going to do better at getting votes in November than any other prominent Democrat.
And also to be clear, I have a $200 / month "continuing contribution" going to the Biden - Harris campaign. I want them to win, but it's a huge hill to convince 20% of the public who thinks that Biden should not be President to vote for him because Trump is worse. WE think Trump is worse, sure. But not every or even most "Independent" of "Swing Voter" does or even cares.
by whom young people have been serially disappointed
Whoever these young people may be they're idiots who have little sense of context or history. There will never be a president more liberal or progressive than Joe Biden in their lifetime if they live to the end of the century.
I don't disagree with the rest of your analysis at all.
The problem with most of the other prominent Democrats is they aren't that prominent. None have been subjected to the focused wingnut smear campaigns and swiftboatings that they will never have time or resources to counter, but we've already seen all they have against Biden and everything has failed before this. Does Donald Trump deserve a victory?
My view is that the best outcome any of them could have is that they wouldn't do worse, and that's the best outcome, so why take such a risk at a critical juncture? Do you often play the slots?
If it were six months ago, or nine months ago I might agree with you but there is no space here to maneuver, and that's exactly why it is being pressed so hard by the corporate media.
If Biden is the most progressive President that the younger voters will see in their lifetime, then the likelihood is that those younger voters will outlive the political entity that is currently the US.
That is really the risk we are confronted with.
I actually don't know what "circumlocative" means, but the only thing that makes sense to me is to put Harris at the top and let her pick one of the male governors for VP. I don't think the XX is that important. Clinton beat trump in the popular vote 7 years ago, and she had the disadvantage of Russian FB/Twitter propaganda microtargeting Black voters in swing states. If Macho Mexico could elect a XX president, I think the U.S. can too.
macho catholic mexico elected ( ( ( ella ) ) ).
70% of Americans are stupid. It's axiomatic. It's the subtext to most of Kevin's posts here (perhaps even including these most recent more disturbing ones). Most of them, perhaps thankfully, don't vote. They don't even know what it means to have a vote. So, quibble polls if you like.
When Biden won last time, 65% thought he shouldn't be president, too. Thankfully, most of them didn't vote. They don't even know what it means to vote. Polls.
I'd rather stick with a president that's been true to the platform of the Democratic Party. He won't be the last one to be true to Democratic Party principles and practices, but for now he's the one with the proven track record and I expect it permeates his administration. I'd rather stick with that.
Nobody cares about national solvency. I mean literally nobody, not if it means “achieving it will impact me in any way through higher taxes, reduced services, higher prices or future job prospects.”
Would rather see him as president, or Donald Trump? That's the only question...
That's not any question at all for people who value decency and competence. Well-meaning people would crawl over glass to vote for Biden over Trump, even if the former isn't quite up to the job (the latter certainly isn't).
The only question is: can Joe Biden beat Trump, and how likely is he do to so compared to the alternatives?
The trajectory of the race at this point pretty clearly indicates Biden is, tragically, headed for defeat.
This thing is over. The quicker Jill and Hunter realize this, the more dignity Joe can maintain when he steps down.
You're helping to create a self-fulfilling prophecy out of sheer faddishness.
In the best possible scenario, with every lucky break, a different nominee would do as well as Biden; and that's very unlikely to ever happen.
The only real issue is the contrast between Biden and a psychotic criminal. If anyone else is the nominee they're the issue, because they're unfamiliar, untested, and all the shit thrown at them will be new, even if it's Kamala Harris.
The only reason this has come up is because none of the rest of the wingnut shit they've thrown at Biden has worked and the whisper campaigns have gone thermonuclear.
In the best possible scenario, with every lucky break, a different nominee would do as well as Biden
A Harris-Beshear, Harris-Shapiro, Harris-Kelly, Harris Brown etc ticket will all outperform Biden-Harris. It's patently obvious that the Trump campaign is very nervous Democrats will be able to pull off assembling a new ticket. They don't want change. The like the way things have been going. As well they should. They're on course to win, your cherrypicked poll notwithstanding.
Oh, and Biden's polls are going up in the swing states,
https://x.com/SnarkyLibruhl/status/1809739337913024975/photo/1
To the mystification of the media! They've been trying so hard!
"Biden's polls" are doing no such thing. Rather, a single poll cherrypicked by you purports to show that. I'm going with David Axelrod's judgment over yours.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4757455-biden-age-health-axelrod/
But it's worth noting that all of the "unanimous insiders" have spoken to reporters off the record and have all been granted anonymity. So, as a practical matter, we don't know that any of these people are actually insiders or even Democrats.
And also, it's clear that Biden isn't going to leave. Now, maybe he can be forced out but it seems to me that the harder the pundits and everyone else pushes just make it increasingly more difficult for any Democrat to win in November. That's okay with the New York Times and Fox News but I'm sure it's not okay with me or good for the country.
So how do you resolve this impasse without guarantying Trump will be elected in November?
So when WaPo or the NYT quote an anonymous "senior administration official" it's actually some Fox News producer or rando on the street? I'll grant that the NYT in particular does a lot of shit in bad faith when it comes to covering the WH, but I don't think we've reached a point where the reporter gets a quote from a Republican operative and then passes it off as coming from a Biden aide. No more than they did when it was reported that Trump had dissed fallen soldiers at Normandy. Or were they just quoting anonymous Democratic operatives or liberal Deep State ratfuckers then? Because that's what Trump's people were saying.
'Senior administration official' could easily be the guy who has to pick up after the dog.
Can we call you a senior administration official?
Well, AARP has been trying to get me to join since I turned 39, so sure.
Really? You must have missed all those man in the street interviews with supposedly randomly chosen people. 'Randomly chosen people' who turned out to be Republican operatives after the fact.
We’ve always had a pretty good idea of where the anonymous quotes about Trump originated and that they were legitimate. People like Gen. Kelly were fairly open about what they were saying anonymously but they just weren’t willing to admit it in public and put their names to it. But the validity of what they were saying was never in question.
By contrast, the two main anti-Biden news organizations (Fox News and the New York Times) have very questionable reputations for reporting and, the NYT in particular has a terrible reputation for abusing anonymity (examples being the Iraq War and the jihad against the Clintons).
You would think that these insiders would be inclined to circle the wagons around Biden (which they’ve supposedly been doing for years) rather than trash him to the press and thereby lose the benefits of being an insider with access to the president.
What they are supposedly doing simply makes no sense and given the questionable reputation for truthfulness and fair reporting of the two principal news organizations who are promoting this stampede I have to ask why there’s so few organizations carrying original reporting and none with direct quotes from named sources.
A bad case was the "anonymous" op-ed by a "senior official in the Trump administration". It was Miles Taylor, chief of staff in the Department of Homeland Security.
NYT got a lot of criticism for that, rightly. But Miles Taylor was no rando, he was highish.
It was essentially a pro-Republican oped in which Miles Taylor tried to reassure America that the conservatives around Trump wouldn't let him do anything really terrible. But there was also no reason to allow Taylor to remain anonymous. He was a mid-level guy who wanted to be sure of being on the winning side (he just wasn't sure which side it would be) so he talked about how terrible Trump was but refused to actually say how he knew and who he was because he didn't want to either lose his job or die.
the same paper that let salena zito & elaina plottz claim county level republican officials in pennsylvania & georgia were undecided voters isn't going to let its staff mislead on who an unnamed source is?
How do people forget so quickly? Or is this just yet another case of selective amnesia?
they might have oatmeal brain like they say biden does.
The MSM is doing to Biden exactly what they did to Clinton.
And you're helping them.
Sit down and rethink this.
Biden got through that grueling, taped, twenty-two minute interview with flying colors.
In other news, Biden is relaunching the campaign and the new slogan, after consultation with Jill Macbeth, is
I'M WITH HIM
with a red arrow for the crossbar on the H of HIM
He doesn't plan to do it, because he can't do it.
It's awful having to watch 2 old fools careen towards the presidency and the worst one is probably gonna win it.
I may be wrong, but I am waiting for many more dem leaders to publically suggest he drop out. Once that happens and polls drop more he will have no choice but to step aside. My Minnesota congresswoman joined the group calling for this today.
I think a lot are waiting for internal polling showing that he's lost all his coattails or will even be a drag on downticket Dems. Remember losing the WH would be bad enough, but if Republicans seize the House and Senate too, it's 100% game over for America.
Biden WILL be a drag on downticket Democrats. That they may not be willing to endure this sacrifice is the best reason to think that Biden will be forced out.
Also, it seems that Republicans are more than OK with Biden remaining on the ticket.
Biden is facing pressure to drop out. Trump isn't joining in.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/biden-pressure-drop-out-trump-2024-rcna159541
Not in Wisconsin, I don't think. Pretty sure we're going to gain seats in both of our state houses. May not pick up a seat in the House, but Baldwin is 13 pts ahead for the Senate right now. We're the easy one maybe, but we'll deliver for Biden.
macho donkeywrestling businessman eric hovde can't gull wisconsin into electing a senator who looks like a 1970s gay porn actor?
inshallah.
I’m extremely interested in keeping the Republican Party from taking over the congress. Partly because it’s hard to see the Democrats are as effective opposition party. But also because they’ve made absolutely no use out of their senate majority. They haven’t investigated anything—not even Kushner’s $2 billion payoff from the Saudis. Neither have they made Republicans take a single hard vote, especially on issues like abortion and voting rights.
I honestly don’t see how it’s possible to be a nonpartisan political party but the Democrats seem to be trying.
Yes, that is my hope also. This Minnesota congresswoman is evidently from a swing district. The fact that she called for Biden to step aside means that she thinks that her re-election might depend on Biden not heading the ticket.
Must be in Angie Craig’s district. McCollum and Omar always win in a walk.
I live in her district and sent her a donation today. As I feel a need to do something, I am going to contact dem leaders and ask them to call for Biden to drop out . I am anxious to get a candidate that I can support.
I am waiting for many more dem leaders to publically suggest he drop out.
That number is growing. I suspect we're on the verge of a tsunami of calls for him to drop out. I only hope that, when that call is finally heeded, Biden resigns the presidency, and not just steps down from the election.The fact that Joe isn't the nominee won't prevent Trump from continuing to effectively campaign against the incumbent president. It'll be 24/7 "The Biden-Harris administration is in chaos yada yada."
A clean break is much better.
The brevity of the interview showed his handlers don't trust him to hold up longer than 22 minutes under pressure and without prompts. Other non-verbal cues - according to psychologists more important than verbal ones - were also off to not say wooden, and people pick that up. The subtlety almost any adult can have in a conversation or speech, he hasn't, neither in his voice nor in his facial expressions. When he's "forceful" he sounds forced more than full. (I already thought that during SOTU, now it's worse.)
But even the words were alarming. He'll feel all right about losing to Trump if he did his "goodest"? It's not about you, Joe. It's about the world. And btw, you don't "run" it. Nor are you the "only one" who knows a lot about foreign policy, nor does that matter all that much as long as the incoming president learns fast.
There's a lot of talk about the media piling on him like it did on Hillary. I think the opposite is true. He was overly sheltered by the MSM, the Dems made sure he'd run virtually unopposed in the primaries, and only now that it's out in the open and undeniable is everyone saying "I knew it". Yes, they did. And they didn't do anything when there was still time.
yeah, the length of the interview was far too short and took far too long to take place. and it wasn't good. it seemed ok because in comparison to the debate anything seems ok, but it reality it was a weak performance.
I thought it was a strong performance. Prove me wrong.
Before the debate the curated Joe Biden experience was just barely functional.
After the debate the only way back is to get out there. A lot. He hasn't done that, he probably can't.
After the debate the only way back is to get out there. A lot. He hasn't done that, he probably can't.
Agreed.
Another good point you make. Saying that he is the "only one" that can lead the country is a clear slap in the face to his Vice President.
Really?
It's not like Stephanopoulos had more than one question to ask. How many times was Biden required to say the debate performance wasn't good, I don't care, I'm the president and I'm going to win again?
Why am I not surprised? Biden does an interview wherein he demonstrates he's perfectly lucid and has a grasp both of the factual details pertinent to his administration and of the world around him. So what do the usual suspects demanding he do this do? Say he didn't jump high enough. Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em all the way with a red-hot poker. There will never be anything Biden cand do or say that will drive them off and away from their demonstrably afactual narrative.
"factual details pertinent to his administration and of the world around him"? He dismisses all polls, saying like Karl Rove he has better ones. He said, though not in this interview, he saw non-existing videos of beheaded babies. He didn't expand NATO as he boasted, that was mostly decades ago, and Finland and Sweden wanted to join more recently because of Putin. He muddled through a claim about containing China, I suppose because they didn't invade Taiwan which they probably had no intention of doing anyway. But they're pushing hard toward dedollarization with Russia, and even countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt are joining BRICS. China and Russia are everything but contained; they're rising powers. I saw no lucidity at all in his words, only denial.
From which I can only conclude that you're neither statistically literate (I'm as dismissive of polling as he is) nor as well-informed as I am.
What? You didn't expect me to try to persuade you otherwise, did you 😉
To be fair, I think Biden's state department and the DOD did a lot of work to bring Hungary and Turkey into line on accepting Finland and Sweden into NATO. That was a big lift and they got it done.
China is certainly our biggest foreign policy issue, but I would hardly call Russia a rising power. They're a third-rate power with nukes being barely held together with duct tape and bailing wire as the Ukraine war grinds on.
He’s not quitting. Mr. Drum can go back to telling us everything is fine. Nothing to worry about. Life is good.
Apparently Biden needs a message from his Catholic god telling him to quit. He really is batshit crazy.
I told him not to run. He said: "fuck you." Gotta respect that. He's a fighter.
Once negative perception are baked in they are tough to undo. The ABC interview would have been ok if we were not looking at it through the debate lens but with that in place he looked pretty bad to me and the answers concerning the debate were frankly an insult to my intelligence. It is obvious that he mentally diminished and there no shame in that for an 81 year old man who had the most difficult job in the world (cleaning up Trump’s detritus)- but like RGB he risks all his accomplishments for ego. Now, the polls surprisingly have not been an unmitigated disaster, yet, probably because his perceived incapacity was having an impact before the debate. But there is no way he can recover with the negative daily stories unless he was out there showing his capabilities. The fact that he isn’t is telling (and sorry scripted radio shows don’t count). I believe Kamala would be a breath of fresh air, she is obviously competent and qualified. The media would probably give her a honeymoon period of soft coverage and more importantly would swing back to cover Trump’s all out insanity which is more deranged than ever. I think a Kamala candidacy would put Republicans in a bad spot.
This is about where I am as well. The conventional wisdom is that Harris has all this baggage, is a terrible candidate, and will get absolutely shellacked in the general if she replaced Biden. I think Harris's biggest challenge would be the fact that she has focused almost entirely on outreach to women and minority Dem constituencies the past three years and nobody else has really seen much of her. This has allowed Republicans to define her to the rest of the electorate as an lightweight California liberal. I don't think it would take a lot for her to tear through a lot of that nonsense, but she'd have a major uphill climb esp. with the white Dem/indie electorates in places like PA or MI. That said, she'd also come out swinging on reproductive rights and I think a lot of women would be really excited about seeing her on the ticket. If she were to run with someone like J.B. Pritzker or Sherrod Brown, she would pick up cred with white male voters. There would be no shortage of sexist media bullshit around her, but all of a sudden, Trump would be the old, deranged guy trying to get the Nazi band back together and she and her running mate are the hard-charging young 'uns out to save democracy and the world.
Don't you remember how we rallied around our President for getting a blow job in the closet of the Oval Office? Come on. All this concern because he's old. He's not your grandpa--he's Joe Biden. It's his lifelong destiny to be president right now. Get on board and enjoy the ride.
“The media would probably give her a honeymoon period…”
Hahahahahahahaha! This literally LOLed me in the middle of breakfast.
Same here. Also, the second claim “The media would … more importantly would swing back to cover Trump’s all out insanity”. Nah. Old news. We take him seriously, but not literally. We’ll run lots of chin-stroking pieces about how sharks and batteries raise a serious issue about … something.
President Biden had a cognitive exam just four months ago.
https://x.com/ArtCandee/status/1809624986929561662
Trump also supposedly passed some type of medical test. So what, he is insane, and Biden is physically diminished.
Trump's exam was done by Ronny Jackson.
Bidfen's was done by a real doctor.
That wasn't specifically a cognitive exam; it was a neurological exam for signs of neuropathy.
What is a "cognitive exam?"
Like the MoCA, or a different type would be an IQ test.
The reason the debate debacle was a watershed event, and why stuff like the Stephanopolos's interview probably won't change the narrative much is that a majority of independents and even stalwart Democratic voters were not enthusiastic about Biden running in the first place and concerned about his physical and mental fitness, but gave him the benefit of the doubt in the primary anyway because he had a strong record of progressive accomplishments and had beaten Trump once before. It was a small benefit, as it turned out.
I was wrong about how he'd do in the debate ("just fine" were my words, iirc), so I may be off base here, too, but my bet now is that we're going to see some brutal polling come out in the next two weeks, major donors will start bailing, and the chorus of Reps and Senators begging him to step aside will grow substantially. I think he steps down before the convention and passes the torch to Harris.
..whereupon the MSM/GOP campaign against Harris will commence.
And that one will work, too.
Because humans are too stupid to live.
Politics ain't beanbag. Harris is perfectly aware of that.
The simple truth is that they're going to run against Harris whether she's the top of the ticket or the number 2. They already started that a while ago -- pushing that Joe isn't going to make it more than a year or two into his next term anyhow, so you're already just voting for Harris.
At least if she were in the front of the ticket, she'd have a chance to defend herself more forcefully. It's tough to sell the message, "It's OK if Joe dies, I'd still be a better President than Trump."
I wish that Biden decided a year ago not to run. And I get why he didn't -- he had done a great job, and he was probably feeling like he still had the stamina to do it. But things can change quickly when your 80, especially if you're doing the toughest job in the world, and (unlike Trump, who has "merely" aged as I would expect a 78 year old with poor diet and exercise habits would) you actually take the job seriously and put the requisite effort into it.
Which makes me feel awful for him. I think one can hold a lot of ideas in one's head that aren't contradictory. The media is treating him unfairly. They are piling on. They are letting Trump skate by. I think it's bullshit that they think this secretly has been going on for 4 years -- the man has a stutter, and never has been a great extemporaneous speaker, and that's probably 90% of why he's avoided press for 90% of this time in office.
But I can't unsee what I saw. (Well, I actually didn't see much. Mostly my eyes were averted from the screen, since it was that bad for the first 45 minutes or so.) And it all directly feeds into what the swing voters, who are going to decide this election, were already thinking -- he's too old to believe that he's going to make it through his next term. I believe he can make it to January, and do fine at the job. But I don't think he can make it to even the next midterm.
So, yeah, he's being screwed. He deserves way more thanks and credit for his first two and a half years, and no blame for anything for the past year. If it were just about his past record, no question he deserves another term. But as the line from "Unforgiven" goes, deservin's got nothing to with it.
I'm going to vote for the corpse of Biden over Trump without a moment's hesitation. I just don't think there are enough of us to pull off a win like that. I have no idea if Harris could do better, but I doubt she'd do worse, and I think she's got better upside potential. Again, they're going to be running hard against her if she's in the top spot or second spot, might as well give her more control of the narrative.
Did not read the rest of your post but...
"It's OK if Joe dies, I'd still be a better President than Trump."
...is exactly what she should say if anyone asks.
Going piece by piece here, like the old days.
"But things can change quickly when your 80...."
Context required: how old are you? (maybe I didn't read far enough ahead)
Last potshot: "I have no idea if Harris could do better...."
Clearly.
The simple truth is this 'Biden is out of it' smear is running against Harris. They hope to counter 'Anybody but Trump' voters with 'Anybody but the black woman' voters. Dog whistling, pure and simple.
I do not believe that Biden can win, and the erosion in the polls will continue to worsen, especially in the battleground states. The GOP will be running the proverbial 3:00 AM call ad, with the worst parts of the debate as a backdrop, and the takeaway that Biden is incapable of handing such a crisis.
But for another Access Hollywood tape, or some racially derogatory video outtakes from the Apprentice, I don't see anything that would change the trajectory of this race. I would rather roll the dice with Harris, but of course its not up to me.
Harris will not be the nominee. Biden will. Vote for Biden.
Testing. Just posted a comment here, then did a one-word edit. Now it's gone. Did I suddenly lose my First Amendment rights, or were they stolen by a software glitch?
My comment (in brief):
"I dissent."
(edited)
That one worked. The edit worked too.
I tried to cancel and that did not work.
Odd.
from Joseph Harbin,
(It's lodged in my Feedbro feed)
Hey, thanks, cld! I owe you one.
Looking at the debate, I’d be concerned about buying a used car from one guy because he’d sell you a known lemon without a second’s thought and tout it as the best car on the lot. And for the other I’d forget the car and be concerned whether he was all there. It was the worst performance by a candidate ever in a presidential debate, I don’t look forward to debates in September with these two.
And I anticipate Trump ads through the campaign showing Biden’s missteps, loss of thought annd unfinished thoughts. Not pretty.
In any case I will vote against Trump.
I've entered my "f*ck Joe Biden" phase. He said he didn't think he reviewed his debate performance? Really? Hard to believe. But if he had, and was any kind of sober, thoughtful leader, he would have said to himself "that person cannot be the President of the United States", and would have immediately organized the process of stepping down. He tells us that only the Almighty can tell him to step down, suggesting that God him/her/itself approves of what he's doing right now. Can we please leave God out of it, for chrissakes! Some of the recent polls show a pretty strong floor of Democratic support for any other marquee name. Please, President Biden, you've earned your laurels, now get out and help elect someone with the vigor and political chops to carry on your legacy.
"unanimous" is doing a lot of work in this post
Per the oddsmakers in Vegas, the likeliest person to be our next President is Trump (3/5), followed by Harris (4/1), followed by Biden (7/1).
Converting the odds to percentages, this doesn't make sense. What am I missing?
They also give odds for Newsome and several others whom I omitted because they are rounding errors in the total.
AND, the odds at a bookmaker will never sum to 100%, because the book tilts things just a bit in their favor. That's how they make money.
Okay, a 5% rounding error I can accept: 5/8 + 1/5 + 1/8 is 95%.
If at the end of the day a pat on the back and an assurance that "you did your best" suffices, then I'm afraid we're not seeing the stakes of this election in the same way. It points ominously to the intransigence of Biden's inner circle to admit that this is a race against the end of liberal democracy, not just a race against Trump.
I'm constantly emphasizing that this cannot be prosecuted as a choice of policies. Trump is always going to lie and he has no principles, so he'll flip on a dime to suit himself. If this becomes about policy choices, you cannot expect people to vote against their party affiliation then yell at them for voting to end liberal democracy -- you were the ones who framed their choice in policy.
Not once did Biden bring up the end of liberal democracy.
Writing this sentence constitutes yet more professional malpractice on Kevin’s part:
“It was way more than just a bad night, and the almost unanimous claim of the insiders who have commented about Biden over the past few days is that his performance is highly variable and getting worse.”
Without any links provided to whatever sources he’s referencing, that statement is the very definition of narrative (as opposed to actual news).
Have any of those “insiders” provided their names?
I would also ask what constitutes “almost unanimous.” Throwing that phrase out there without any explicit quantification, from the guy who provides charts, graphs, percentages, and numbers for everything, is irresponsible.
Also there’s this from Axios:
“President Biden won the public support of several Democratic governors who attended a meeting with him at the White House on Wednesday following his poorly received debate performance last week.”
So why do people like Kevin ignore any actual news that contradicts their narrative?
At this point in time, I think the real nature of the situation is growing at least a bit more clear. A lot of “very smart people,” including the NYT editors and Kevin Drum, obviously jumped the gun after the first debate. Professional pundits have now put their reputations on the line by declaring some combination of “Biden must drop out” and/or “Biden can’t win.”
But that bandwagon is already starting to look more than a bit shaky, not least because Biden could not possibly have made it more clear that he’s staying in the race.
So, first of all, the professional chattering class does not like it when its underlings (including POTUS) ignore its dictates.
But even more importantly, there must be a growing awareness among these nitwit nihilists not just that Biden is staying in but also that there’s a very real chance that as an incumbent President (with a booming economy) he could make them all look like fools by winning reelection.
And the pundits will not be made fools of! They will NOT have their narrative rejected. Hence, the NYT editors have made what is to most observers a very noticeable decision to dedicate the bulk of their reporting to the destruction of Joe Biden.
But they’re not acting out of conviction, at least not entirely. As they increasingly realize how foolish they may look in a few months, they’re acting more and more out fear. And the outcome may ultimately be that they wind up discrediting themselves more than they discredit Biden.
Then Kevin comes along like the dope he increasingly appears to be and parrots the Fox News/NYT narrative. What a rube! And a few days ago he actually published a blog post referring to Mitt 47% Romney as a “normie” that he would consider voting for!
If Kevin maintains his cooperation with the very anti-democratic coup attempt to oust Biden (who already won the 2024 Dem primaries) and destroy the Democratic Party, he might as well just make it official and follow the NYT into the ranks of the Republican Party!
Okay fine, you people who are going on about how Biden has little chance of winning in November have had your say. Now, since Biden is not dropping out of the race, how about you quit your bellyaching and work harder at getting him re-elected? What do you dd that's you're all high and mighty you may ask and I will reply that between us my partner and I are donating over $500/mth (which will probably increase the closer the election gets.) Since we live in Chicago, there's not much point in going door-to-door, so instead we hand-write postcards for out-of-state candidates. Write now we only do a couple hundred a week. But we're going to up our game considerably in the coming months.
@ ScentOfViolets:
This is the first time that I have ever agreed with you 110%
Love you. I'm rejoining the game. Re-elect Biden!
"Never give up! Never Surrender!"
"This is badly written!"
+1
Name someone to replace him, with data to demonstrate they are more likely to beat Trump.
If you can’t do that, then whining about it does nothing but help Trump.
Repeating my comment above:
"Per the oddsmakers in Vegas, the likeliest person to be our next President is Trump (3/5), followed by Harris (4/1), followed by Biden (7/1)."
Ergo, I name Harris.
We'll be out full force until this nonsense about replacing Biden stops. Meanwhile, let's "get on board," shall we?
Count on the New York Post to keep it classy.
"America may soon be subjected to the country’s first DEI president: Kamala Harris"
https://nypost.com/2024/07/06/business/america-may-soon-be-subjected-to-the-countrys-first-dei-president-kamala-harris/
What's your beef? They're only saying the quiet part out loud :-/
"I take a cognitive test every day" was a terrible line.
He's the elected leader of the free world. It's not a question.
In which case, you've just failed a cognitive test. Hey, you want to play obtuse? I can be just as obtuse.
Jesus there is a whole lot of stupid on this thread. We're fucking doomed.
"Biden said six times that he just had a 'bad night' during the debate, but that's not enough."
Let's not talk about what's enough and what's not enough because then we'll end up talking about the real problem, which is that too many people treat politics like a spectator sport, or the media organizations all too happy to monetize that delusion. Instead, let's put the whole blame on a guy who dedicated his entire life to public service and had the most successful POTUS term in recent American history.
Better yet, let's blame the Mexicans. We know from experience they don't give a shit, and that way everybody's happy.
Just saw this story in the Guardian.
Biden’s doctor reportedly met with top neurologist at White House
......
Parkinson’s expert at Walter Reed medical center has visited White House eight times since August 2023 – report
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/06/joe-biden-neurologist-doctor-meeting
People with Parkinsons often develop a stutter. This doctor may be consulting on the latest methods in controlling the stutter.
from,
GOP strategist explains how Biden is 'in a commanding position politically' against Trump,
https://www.rawstory.com/gop-strategist-biden-commanding-position/