This didn't seem worth mentioning a couple of days ago, but last week's YouGov poll happened to ask about voting intentions for both Trump vs. Biden and Trump vs. Kamala Harris. The results were interesting.
Biden has two points more support than Harris, but that's due entirely to responses from Democratic voters. They were 88% in favor of Biden but only 82% in favor of Harris, with the balance going to RFK Jr. and Not Sure.
This is almost certain to change once Harris becomes the presumptive nominee. At that point she'll start polling at least as well as Biden among Democrats and possibly better depending on how things go. This will still leave Trump with a small lead, but far from an insurmountable one.
Prediction:
House - Democratic (b/c Biden withdrawal)
Senate - Republican (brutal map)
President - Trump
I don't like it, but that's what's going to happen. An identity-politics candidate is not going to win in a country that's trending majority-minority, but isn't there yet.
Nope. I'm dismal about the Senate but no way does Trump win with a Generation Jones candidate to contrast against Trump and a woman of color no less.
I’m currently generating over $35,100 a month thanks to one small internet job, therefore I really like your work! I am aware that with a beginning cdx05 capital of $28,800, you are cdx02 presently making a sizeable quantity of money online....
.
.
Just open the link————->>> https://shorturl.at/tcDHa
Kevin, do something about this.
First pass agree, but then I look at the results of ACTUAL ELECTIONS over the past, jeez, 4 years anyway, and ... they just don't turn out the way either the "obvious numbers" OR the polls say.
Harris has to thread a fine needle. On the one hand, she needs to energize woman, non-White, and (especially!) young voters, but OTOH she can't come off as "shrill" or "bitchy" or whatever adjectives the reflexive misogynists will apply (very much including those in the media). See under Clinton, H., Election of 2016.
On the third hand, the Felon is about as repulsive a bigoted, privileged asshole of a White man as has ever been produced in the Ugly American factory. And his Nazi mini-Me is no better. They are eminently beatable. (I mean, seriously, is THAT what you want the world to see as President? Or your children or grandchildren? Really?!?)
I wouldn't take bets right now. We'll see what happens over the next few weeks to a month. And a LOT will depend on the ground game, which right now the Dems are totally dominating.
Hillary did not lose because she is a woman. She lost because she is a terrible person and a worse candidate. She got as far as she did cause the party intervened and kneecapped anyone who disagreed, just like it was planning to do now if Biden stayed in.
Hillary lost because she took her polling too much for granted and didn’t campaign where she needed it most. The election was lost in the Rust Belt, and she basically did zero campaigning there. It’s really a tiring thing to have to explain this to Bernie Bros over and over again, but Bernie lost because more people voted for Hillary in the primaries. The party had internal discussions that were leaked that weren’t favorable to Bernie, sure, and they weren’t happy about his candidacy. But, he lost long before superdelegates would have even played a role. Actual people voted in primaries that overwhelmingly chose Hillary especially in the South where Bernie thought his getting arrested protesting during the civil rights movement would help him get support among the black population. I know it’s hard to accept, but continuing to claim it was rigged when it wasn’t sounds quite like Emperor Orange Julius.
You're both wrong.
Hillary lost because of the Comey letter. Before that, she was well on her way to a large victory, which made campaigning in potentially flippable states (instead of the swing states) entirely justified.
^^^^^^^^^^^^ this
And anyway, Hillary *won* the popular vote. Trump was appointed by the electoral college *against* the will of the majority of voters.
The Comey letter, coming on top of months-long rants by the media over e-mails, and a mail server; which did a terrible job at actually presenting and interpreting the actual facts and implications of the situation.
Also, public polling showed that Clinton’s campaigning in person in Wisconsin actually was followed by lower numbers. Apparently she fired up the Trumpies more than Democrats. The campaign instead relied on surrogates and the ground game. Candidates go where they can make the most positive difference, based on their internal polling, which isn’t made public.
yup.
bill & chelsea both hit wisconsin. so did michelle obama.
A month before the 2016 election, Democrats were criticizing Hillary for visiting PA, MI and WI, and urging her to "expand the map" and try to win states like Missouri and Texas. Then she lost those three states by about 40,000 votes. She got several million more votes than Donald Trump, and was way more effective than any of his GOP primary opponents. And all of a sudden she was a bad candidate.
Yeah, sure.
hillary lost because she's a terrible person? remind again, who did she run against?
donald trump has never killed a man, unlike hillary.
Why is this sort of thing even allowed here? Garbage comments are not good for intelligent commenter conversation, Kevin.
Unless that was a rather flat footed attempt at satire or something.
the pre-media matters david brock piece.
Citations never offered.
I'm curious, tell me, why is Harris an 'identity politics candidate' to use your forumulation. As always, remember to be specific and be precise.
"if i don't say 'black', i'm going to pass out".
Because the newspapers keep saying that the Democrats can't afford to drop a woman of color. I wish people would ignore her race and gender so we could have an honest discussion about her.
Why else was she chosen? She's the Sarah Palin of the Democratic Party. Have you listened to any of her word salads about "what might have been"? Lots of words, no meaning. I was originally turned off to her because of the video from when she was in California saying that she was going to arrest parents of truants because she could, *cackle* cackle*cackle*. Not a very progressive/liberal approach, was it? The laughing on that video was particularly disturbing because it was nothing to laugh over.
Okay, why should we drop the person who is already the VP and can use the donations given to the Presidential campaign in the Primary?
White Christians aren’t an “identity” I suppose to the Dana Fucktards of the world, but they’ve certainly had a lock on the presidency for all but 8 years in the last 248.
hell, we've had fewer years of popery in the oval than blackness.
+1
I'm glad you don't see Trump winning. If anyone defines identity-politics candidate it is he. The candidate of aggrieved white males.
… and their trad wives.
"siri, play 'of minor prophets & their prostitute wives' by pedro the lion".
+1
House - Democratic (b/c Biden withdrawal)
Senate - Republican (brutal map)
President - Trump...I don't like it, but that's what's going to happen.
That scenario is plausible, and is frankly a lot more promising than where we were headed 24 hours ago: keeping one chamber of Congress in the wake of a Trump victory would be huge.
Also, I'm seeing some criticism of Biden's "passing the torch" to Harris instead of a full-blown, competitive mini primary. The thing is, if Democrats don't to some extent "pass the torch," they'd effectively lose a month of campaigning against Trump. That's just reality. I don't want a coronation as such, but if Harris has to vigorously fight off other Democratic contenders, the general election campaign will get off to a VERY late start. That seems dangerous. (Although, if Harris falls flat on her face over the next few weeks, Democrats thankfully don't have to make the nomination choice official for another four weeks).
For the record, my guess is the polls in ten days will show the race effectively tied, with a very slight lead for Trump-Vance. But I think this is a very winnable race for the Democratic nominee. Obviously Trump could win, sure, but I'm not sure where you get your confidence that Trump "will" win. We're a very evenly divided nation, and, while there are always problems, national conditions right now seem objectively very good. That's bound to help the Democratic brand.
Good analysis. I put a lot of stock in how worried Trump seems by the Biden withdrawal. His political instincts are quite good, and he now knows (by instinct) that he has a serious fight on his hands.
national conditions right now seem objectively very good.
I think Kamala can make that case much more effectively than Biden could or would. She will be a better salesperson for Biden's success than Biden ever could be.
Finally, recent special elections for various statewide offices in the past year have resulted in some surprising wins for Dems. Biden's age and unpopularity likely put a damper on that trend. Now that Biden is out, there is a good chance that that trend will re-assert itself.
That's funny because I predict Harris will sweep the floor with Trump. He's already backing out of the debate. He's scared shitless!
Ummn, Trump is definitely an identity politics candidate. It's just that the "identity" isn't a non-white racial minority. Hell, have you SEEN some of his rallies?!
This.
Harris is at 38.6% approval, 50.4% disapproval. Slightly worse than Trump. It would be great if the Dems pick an alternative but it looks like we're stuck with Harris. Maybe a dynamite VP choice can improve the odds.
Who exactly in the Democratic Party polls at better than 38.6% approval/50.4% disapproval? Besides Johnny Unbeatable of course. Because the Dems do have to nominate a real live person that actually exists in this timeline, you know.
Harris numbers have been tied to Biden’s. I predict she will trend up. Record number of small-donor donations in less than 24 hours.
+1
Who exactly in the Democratic Party polls at better than 38.6% approval/50.4% disapproval? Besides Johnny Unbeatable of course.
Bingo. There's no knight in shining armor who can rescue Democrats, at least assuming Michelle Obama is firm in her decision not to enter politics.
All the usual suspects (Whitmer, Beshear, Shapiro, etc) poll about the same against Trump as Harris does, and they're all (1) less well-vetted and (2) less well known (name recognition is a thing).
Harris-Whitmer, Harris-Beshear, Harris-Cooper, Harris-Newsom, Harris-Buttigieg etc should be competitive. I think they might well win. Trump is a dirt bag with high unfavorabilities, and he's chosen a running mate who doesn't expand his appeal at all (he should've chosen Rubio: Trump had the opportunity to make history by putting the first Hispanic on a major party ticket. He passed on that opportunity in favor of a white male toadie shape-shifter with social views to the right of Torquemada).
james bowman is tamponmada, the period tracker.
(i'm going to deadname the shit out of the gop vp nominee. after all, it's the name on the birfcertificate that's the only truth.)
You saying 'Michelle Obama' tells me you probably haven't seen how the right-wing treats her to transphobic misogyny.
big mike!
The right will viciously attack any Democratic nominee We don't know how effective GOP attacks on Michelle Obama would be, but I'd suggest "maybe not very" because her approval numbers are easily the strongest of any major national Democratic figure.
But as it happens, this side-discussion is decidely moot because Obama doesn't want to run. (And Harris is already effectively our nominee).
Can't be Harris/Newsom--they are both from California. Whitmer, Beshear, Cooper or Shapiro seem likely. I think we will see a significant polling bump in the next couple of weeks. The Trump campaign is treading water and confused while the energy and enthusiasm coming out of the Democrats is impossible to ignore.
Can't be Harris/Newsom
That won't be the ticket, but for reasons of politics, not the constitution. Google "Bush-Cheney."
That's largely because most people see Harris only when she is working on one of the impossible jobs she's been assigned -- the Border and International Women's Rights.
Her circumlocutivity has lessened -- the famous "word salads" have more quinoa and less Red Sails -- and she's notably more relaxed and enjoying life. She needs to pick a Swing State governor --Roy Cooper? -- and say she's going promote Mayor Pete to Chief of Staff, but she has a very good chance to appoint an implacable Attorney General much like herself and make it clear that Royalist misbehavior will not go unpunished.
One should expect a lawyer to be wordy.
Most people know little or nothing about Harris (I'll admit I don't know all that much about her myself).
Now that she has had greatness thrust upon her, we will see whether she can rise to the occasion. If she can, we could sweep this thing. I'm cautiously optimistic.
I worry about Hispanic men. Josh Shapiro would help in PA, but I worry about AZ and NV.
Maybe white women will not go for TFG this time. 😛
Funny you should mention Hispanic men. I recently read something, I think in mother jones, about local southwest groups who have made progress with Hispanic (and other) men, who are conservative on social issues because of religion, by framing anti-abortion laws as government intruding on something that should be a family decision. “Family decision” includes the men.
I worry about Hispanic men. Josh Shapiro would help in PA, but I worry about AZ and NV.
Trump dropped the ball in not going with Rubio as running mate, among other reasons because of the factor you cite. He had an opportunity to make history, but (thinking he had the election sewn up) he went with a defensive choice. Bad move on Donnie's part.
TFG will definitely lose some white women over Dobbs.
"just the slots, like that piece of ass renate".
-- brett kavanaugh
Mexico just elected it's first female president, and in a landslide to boot. I didn't see any reporting about Mexican men being hesitant to vote for her. In fact, another woman candidate came in second. A third-party male candidate barely broke through about 10%.
claudia sheinbaum is also jewish.
I think ya’ll are underestimating the disdain many republicans have for Harris. I’m very doubtful she’s going to beat to Trump.
Just out of curiosity, who do you think would evade that disdain?
I think Gretchen Whitmer would avoid many of Kamala's negatives...
the altright plotted to kidnap & murder whitmer.
Who the fuck cares what Republicans think about Harris? What the fuck does that have to do with beating Trump? What the fuck are you smoking?
Are you seriously claiming that a registered Republican would vote for a Democrat? Let's see your numbers; you made a quantitative claim, now back it up.
I'm a registered republican and I'll be voting for a democrat. I'm sure there are many more like me.
Sigh. "You're sure there are many more " is not a number.
Right. So? Why do yo think you're entitled to some information from me?
"Without data you're just another person with an opinion." — W. Edwards Deming
Or, as a former co-worker used to say, “Opinions are like assholes, everybody’s got one, and most of them stink.”
Poll your Republican friends. We’ll wait.
No thanks. I'm busy. Poll yours
Too busy? Take a break from commenting here. We won’t be heartbroken.
When?
You were on the wrong side of 'it's wrong to threaten people with a car'.
Fuck off atticus with your constant “concerns”
Don’t need republican votes.
What a dumb comment.
And why would Republican disdain affect her chances to win? Republicans are going to vote Republican. We need the Democratic and swing vote.
I doubt there is much of a swing vote, but yes, we need as much of it as we can. But we must have an overwhelming Democratic and Democratic-leaning turnout. Get right to the issues of women’s rights, voting rights, and climate change, the things that will impact citizens directly.
I disagree. I'm a republican and will be voting for the dem candidate. I'm sure there will be others. The more palatable the candidate is to non-Maga republicans the more votes he/she will get form the registered republicans.
Funny how you didn't mention that the more palatable the candidate is to Republicans the fewer votes they will get from registered Democrats. Or compare the size of the two.
You think there are many dems that won't vote for the dem nominee?
If they had your views? They wouldn't be a Democrat.
the democrats should atone for their vile decision to defeat mitt romney in 2012 by nominating romney & paul ryan as their 2024 ticket.
To win, she doesn't need the Republicans, she needs the Democrats and the undecided.
Ok. Good to know. I'm a republican and was planning on voting for the dem candidate. But if you don't need my vote I guess I'll leave it blank.
And with one stroke you show us yet again just how unserious you are: You were going to vote for the Democratic candidate but now you're not because of some comment made by someone on blog. Need I comment on the complete lack of responsibility your little hissy fit shows?
That is dumb.
Atticus is clearly making the point that heere Republicans that may vote for Harris, and the Democrats should think how to convince. He clearly wasn't indicating his actual plans.
ScentOfViolets just comes here to make personal attacks. She usually doesn't have anything rational to say.
It is more of insults, rather than attacks.
And you show up with unsupported assertions, in comments on a blog known for data and factual evidence.
The point of this forum is to express opinions. Why don’t you take an inventory of the percent of comments that include data. Don’t think it’s many, including your comment to which I am replying. Yet you feel the need to assert my comments are not valid unless they include some kind of statistics or data instead of feeling free to express my opinion. I wonder why that is?
Because you made a quantitative assertion (‘many’), dummy, and I didn’t. Readers can easily verify that claim by inspection.
he also shows up to whiteknight for daniel perry.
".. known for data and factual evidence."
That is just bulshit.
People here very often make claims for which they don't have any evidence at all.
Oh, snap!
As always, the party needs to get democrats out to vote not try to court the fictional swing voters. In my small corner of the world I am seeing a renewed sense of hope.
You say they are fictional yet I am one.
lifelong republican since bush quayle 88 (at the latest) who is putoff by a nyc liberal cat's paw of bill clinton, donald trump, does not a swing voter make.
She needs to do better than that… or you might as well declare that she’s won Florida…
She needs to do better than that three months from now.
Just a start.
"Kamala Harris will poll as well as Biden by next week,"
She is already polling as well or better. MSNBC right now is going through its poll-of-polls average, with Biden trailing Trump by 2 and Harris trailing Trump by 1.
This comes at the end of 3+ weeks of the worst campaign coverage for any party in memory. Likely this is a pivot point with Dems getting a burst of enthusiasm and an opportunity to string weeks of unpaid news coverage through the convention in August.
It's now the best news cycle for Dems since who knows when. Donald Trump is going to need a new box of Depends.
In the AP-NORC poll last week, 3/4 of Republicans wanted Joe to stay in the race while Harris had lower unfavorable / higher favorable numbers than either Biden or Trump.
Also about a week ago, an Ipsos poll showed Biden tied with Trump, 39-39 while Harris was up 42-40.
Republicans wanted Biden because they were confident Trump would beat Biden, and they don't want Harris because they're concerned Harris will beat Trump.
She's going to poll better than Biden did.
Yeah, she has to come out of the gate like a lion - sharp, energetic, focused and ready to take on Project 2025.
That's really what we're fighting, Project 2025. Trump is just the narcissistic reality TV host who's going to deliver it for them.
It will become Project 2029, and 2033, ad infinitum until they're defeated. I'm not super optimistic that it will ever get any better but I guess it's not out of the question.
This. project 2025 should be called Project 1882 because it would neuter The Pendleton Act which was the first step toward a professional and competent Federal bureaucracy.
Hate the word if you want, but it is the main reason why our safety and quality of life are so hugh.
guiteau tf out of here.
Dems have finally figured out how to generate "free" TV coverage. Beating Trump at his own game.
Alas no. This is a one time deal. Trump's trick is being able to do it over and over and over and over ...
Trump has never had an insurmountable lead.
And in actual elections, he has shown a ceiling, and it’s lower than a majority.
The only majority that matters is in the EC.
Agree, but it’s easier to get to an EC majority if you win the majority (or at least, plurality) of the popular vote. Yes, the Republicans have turned the trick twice, but it’s not the way to bet.
It is fascinating how a few hours pass and we've gone from despair and defeat to being back in the game and energized. Let's hope Kamala has spent the last 4 years training like a SOB to get ready for this.
Also, the merchandise grifting for TFG is hilarious. I passed no less than 3 sidewalk stands in my Orange County neighborhood today. I know the city cops have run them off of every privately owned land, now they're taking over the sidewalks. I bet if anyone else set up tends and stands on sidewalks they'd be shut down right away.
the supremes just said as much in their grants pass homeless encampment decision.
I got several to move by demanding to see their permits and calling the cops when they diddled around.
Should we now expect Comer to announce that in order to focus on helping the Trump campaign the House will for the time being pause the investigations into Hunter Biden. Or will the next hearing will just never be announced anymore while they look for some crime they can pin on Harris?
ella emhoff traded on her ties to the vp to get her fashion deal.
That Republicans have, to some degree, been whining about the prospect of facing Harris instead of Biden provides at least a sliver of comfort.
I note Republicans are making the asinine argument that if you're not going to run for re-election, you should resign immediately.
I also note that only a couple of the dozens of Republicans who are not seeking re-election have followed their own advice.
+100
I note Republicans are making the asinine argument that if you're not going to run for re-election, you should resign immediately.
Sadly it's not an asinine argument in the current context, and it is likely to have an impact with at least some voters. Indeed, the GOP would be crazy not to employ such an attack. Why isn't Biden running? The obvious answer is: his brain health is declining. So, he's too frail to be the nominee but not too frail to control the launch codes?
I'm just suggesting this—and to what degree Harris is complacent in this situation—will be one such line attack by MAGA. It may well be a potent one. Also, Biden's continuing presence in the Oval Office will realistically hamper Harris's efforts to attack Trump on the issue of his age and lack of fitness for office: Trump merely has to say: you guys are criticizing me when you've got an 81-year old who wears Depends in the Oval Office?
Ugly, yes, but that's the way MAGA rolls.
I don't think Biden needs to resign the presidency immediately—and it's probably not going to happen in any event—but I think there's a strong case for Joe's retiring from public life shortly after the convention, at least assuming Harris is the nominee.
It will be interesting to see how many of the Democrats who always adopt GOP messaging will take up this banner and spread the GOP message as a 'concerned Democrat'.
I predict....many.
It will be interesting to see how many of the Democrats
It will be even more interesting to see how many Democrats continue to refuse to play hard ball by relying on sentiment instead of reason. I hope not many.
(Given that something like 80% of Democrats wanted Joe to step down, I think my hopes are warranted).
By the way: I have no idea why you think it's a good idea not to consider what MAGA talking points are going to be. I can assure you Kamala Harris's team aren't so delicate about such matters.
I wasn't disagreeing, just adding a thought.
But your new comment on 'hard ball!' and 'reason' is lolz.
Edit - I see below that you are now, once again, repeating GOP messaging as 'advice from a concerned democrat'. Lol. That took no time at all.
I see below that you are now, once again, repeating GOP messaging as 'advice from a concerned democrat'.
I see once again you conflate "genuine interest in what strategy the GOP is likely to employ" with..uh...something? Your fever dreams maybe?
LOL indeed.
LOL! The reason Republicans want Biden to resign now is that it creates a vacancy in the VPOTUS office. The replacement must be approved by Congress and the House won't approve any Democrat. Who is next in line? The House speaker? Who certifies the final vote in January?
LOL! The reason Republicans want Biden to resign now is that it creates a vacancy in the VPOTUS office.
Please just say "no" to such inanity.
1) The Republic can survive a few months with the Vice Presidency vacant.
2) If (God forbid) something were to happen to Harris, the country could survive a few months with Mike Johnson as president.
3) But #2 is sheer fantasy, because Kamala Harris is a 60 year old in good health!
4) Moreover, it's possible Democrats could make Republicans pay a political price for shunning their constitutional duty to help fill the VP vacancy.
Democrats should do whatever maximizes their odds of beating Trump. They cannot let ultra low probability scenarios prevent them from taking decisive action. Mind you, none of this is the hill I'd want to die on: Maybe Harris the nominee benefits from being able to devote 100% of her time to the campaign trail. Maybe! But Joe Biden's continual presence in the White House will cast a shadow over this race. It's probably a surmountable shadow. But Republicans will use him as a line of attack. That's not a low probability event.
4) When have Republicans been forced to pay a political price for failing to carry out the duties of their offices?
Bingo!
When have Republicans been forced to pay a political price for failing to carry out the duties of their offices?
I mean, it's hard to parse all the factors that affect electoral outcomes? But one duty for an officeholder is: peaceful transfer of power. But Republican had pretty bad elections in 2018, and 2020, and 2022, and in an number of special elections during that era. I've seen pretty strong evidence suggesting voter anger at GOP elections results denialism played a role in those defeats. I'd guess if a VP vacancy is created, Democrats may simply try not to fill it. But who knows? And yes, I think it's possible an unreasonable obstruction of this process by the Republicans could be punished by some voters (which in a close election could make a difference).
It's ok to be cynical about US politics. It's hard not to be sometimes. But we shouldn't allow ourselves to be overly cynical. Doing so simply prevents us from getting an accurate picture. The MAGA movement is evil. But it's not omnipotent, nor immune to the normal ebb and flow of politics.
+ 100
Plus, I will not see that prissy little man. who claims to have been annointed by GOD as president.
Plus, I will not see that prissy little man. who claims to have been annointed by GOD as president.
Nor will any of us. Kamala Harris is overwhelmingly likely to be alive and well in January of 2025!
It is an asinine argument. Debates aren’t a duty of a President, nor is speaking off the cuff. I see no evidence whatsoever that Biden is unable to consult his staff, Cabinet, and advisors, weigh their information and opinions, and make reasonable decisions. Focusing on his job without the additional burden of campaigning will work out fine.
You see no evidence, Ken. But you're not the kind of low-information, non college voter in the exurbs of Green Bay or Tucson who will decide the election. Also, you were among the (sadly, quite common 'round these parts) Biden hold outs who couldn't bring themselves to admit the obvious. Which is fine. I liked the guy a lot, too, and couldn't bring myself to face facts until a day or two after the debate. And the "good-bye" is definitely tinged with sadness for me. He's been a great president. But with respect, I'd say this means you're not much of any expert on the best path ahead for Democrats.
Also, a political argument is only asinine if it doesn't work. Republicans are already trying out the "Biden isn't fit to be in office" line. Maybe it won't work. Maybe! But they're trying it. Which suggests their internal polling says it's worth attempting.
And we suffer their argument precisely because Democrats failed to make the case that trump has long been lacking in cognitive capability, is a ranting, raving, usually incoherent person demonstrating his lunacy during all hours, but keeping amazingly ludicrous tweets going through the night into early-morning hours. He could not have managed the presidential duties these past four years.
> Democrats failed to make the case that trump has long been lacking in cognitive capability,
Hopefully now they will.
+1
And we suffer their argument precisely because Democrats failed to make the case that trump has long been lacking in cognitive capability,
Gee, I wonder why that might be? Do you suppose the failure could have something to do with the fact that our nominee was showing increasing signs of brain decline and had a terrifying lapse of coherence on national TV?
I look forward to Kamala's attacking Trump relentlessly on the "fitness for office" issue now that we have a healthy, articulate, sharp and in-her-prime nominee. But, yes, this vulnerability of Trump's would likely an easier target if Republicans couldn't turn around and point to the health issues of the Democrat in the White House.
"Which suggests their internal polling says it's worth attempting."
Not necessarily. They also do things because they go well with the MAGA, rather than with the un-decided voters.
Not necessarily.
Sure. Which is why I used the word "suggest." But there is an election going on, so they're definitely testing stuff, and doing internal polling...
Dude, you've been touting Republican talking points for weeks, Jasper.
Get off it.
probably a condition of not getting his vpn shutoff.
Dude, you've been touting Republican talking points for weeks, Jasper.
Dude: Feel free to not engage with me if you find my comments bothersome. I'll live, I promise!
But as it happens, I'm not "touting" anything. I'm trying to calmly discuss the political situation, and one interesting factor (to me, anyway, but apparently not to you) is the probable line of attack from MAGA, and potential strategies to counter those attacks and get to 270 Electoral Votes. Seems kinda important.
I did not consider myself a Biden holdout; if you look back over my comments, my consistent argument was against 1) hysteria, and 2) irregular procedures to remove the President against his will (the 25th Amendment lays out regular procedures). I am enthused to support Vice President Harris, given that President Biden has withdrawn his candidacy, an orderly, legal, Constitutional act.
I’m happy to see that other prominent Democrats are quickly endorsing VP Harris, the only potential nominee who has been on a Presidential primary ballot this year.
I certainly never claimed to be any kind of political expert; I speak only as an engaged citizen.
I did not consider myself a Biden holdout; if you look back over my comments, my consistent argument was against 1) hysteria, and 2) irregular procedures to remove the President against his will...
Sure, dude. And there was nothing "hysterical" about the increasingly untenable situation Democrats found themselves in only a few days ago. Also, no rational person thought the 25th Amendment was real soulution given the need for GOP votes to sustain it.
I was a Biden holdout. I love the guy. Reminds me of my uncle. He's been an awesome president. The difference betwen us is: A) I admit it and you don't; and B) I came to my senses about 20 days before you. Which is not really a big deal in the scheme of things. Dean Phillips and Ezra Klein may have bragging rights, but 20 days doesn't entitle me to them.
I will stick my neck out to predict that the Republicans will drop this argument quite soon, when it occurs to them that they aren’t running against Joe Biden anymore.
"Why isn't Biden running? The obvious answer is: his brain health is declining. So, he's too frail to be the nominee but not too frail to control the launch codes?"
Good point! This MAGA argument laundered through Jasper_in_Boston has fully convinced me: I will not be voting for Biden this November.
Zing!
Good point! This MAGA argument laundered through Jasper_in_Boston has fully convinced me: I will not be voting for Biden this November.
Please don't subject me to such withering sarcasm again, I beg you. It really smarts! LOL.
I trust you're aware I am (1) trying to advance the argument that it may be in the party's interest if Biden resigns the White House and elevates Harris to the presidency; and (2) one of the reasons is Joe Biden's serious cognitive decline will be (and is being) used as an attack by them. It's early days yet: it remains to be seen whether this attack will prove effective. But the reality is Joe Biden is actually suffering from cognitive decline. I personally don't think the nation is at risk—he's got a good team around him. But the notion that the national interest would be served by his retirement from public life isn't, despite the stubborn epistemic closure on display here, self-evidently nuts. June 27 wasn't a bad dream! It actually happened. And it seems pretty likely the situation will blunt the ability of Harris to exploit Trump's own vulnerabilities on this issue. I just want to win.
If you think this is a bad idea feel free to offer counterarguments. As I've said before, the desirability of Biden's stepping down from the White House isn't the hill I'd want to die on. It's early days yet, and maybe it will all be fine. But "GOP TALKING POINTS!" isn't an argument. It's a squirrel.
all part of their theory that democrat presidents have a shorter lameduck period than republicans.
just an expansion of the mc connell rule, by which obama stopped being president in november 2015.
I would love to see brains over money and charisma, for an election change, as Kamala’s pick. Pete Buttigieg would be a dynamite choice.
Has his time at Transportation actually been that impressive?
His time on the TV has been and that’s pretty much all that matters to a growing plurality of Americans. Depressing as hell but the future is nothing but celebrities controlling everything as far as the eye can see. Infrastructure, services, the economy… all of it can go down the toilet, as long as the elected give great sound bites and spin to fill up the 24/7 news cycles.
One of the better Secretaries Transportation. It's been a stiff turn into actually getting things fixed instead of letting bits molder.
I would love to see brains over money and charisma, for an election change, as Kamala’s pick. Pete Buttigieg would be a dynamite choice.
Maybe. I'm inclined to think Harris should not play it overly safe with her running mate pick. Fortune favors the bold. Underline the contradictions between her ticket and the MAGA ticket. So, Buttigieg would be one way to go. And he's great. I personally think a sounder choice along these is Gretchen Whitmer. I'd maybe even consider going with Gavin Newsom (yes, yes, I realize they'd have to finesse the California residency issue).
Andy Beshear. Twice-elected governor in a red state. Solid on reproductive choice. And as a governor, he has executive experience that Buttigieg and Senators lack.
I need to learn more about Beshear; the little I know now is very positive, though.
I'm still onboard with Shapiro as VP, antisemitism notwithstanding
Gretchen took herself off the list; I think Newsom would be perfect at the job but his drive to lead may not.
polls will likely be very misleading for quite a long time. Pollsters will struggle to guesstimate turnout and enthusiasm.
Trump is already bellyaching about all the time and money he spent criticizing Biden, who is no longer the Democratic candidate. For a self proclaimed genius, Donald is sure stupid.
he called it election fraud.
She'll poll better now that the spotlight's on her by the sheer feat of being able to talk normally. When was there last a presidential nominee capable of that? If Trump debates her, which I think he won't, she might not wipe the floor with him like Klobuchar or Obama could but she'll still be the human being in the room.
I'm no fan of Harris (except as regards her and her husband's personal ethics) but the bar is low this year, as in 2020, and all the things pundits worry about won't matter one bit. Yes she'll lose some votes because of her color but she'll also win a lot because of her stance on reproductive freedom. Yes she'll be vague on Israel but Michigan Muslims and the young will prefer her to Trump. But most of all people will just be relieved. This will be the year of the generic Democrat, I think. Down-ballot too.
She should immediately challenge Trump to 5 debates and call him afraid if he doesn't do it.
Go Kamala!
Trump just bowed out of the scheduled debate, claiming bias!
Of course he did. His people know that the more Americans other than the 'true believers' hear him that his chances drop.
The democrats need to make Trump's fear of Kamala a consistent message. Heck, buy a billboard in front of Mar Lago. Make this the media narrative. Rile Trump up so that he overrules the people around him to show everyone what a tough guy he is.
I have a theory, and it is only a theory, that Kamala will poll and perfom much better than Biden.
In asking Dems if they supported Harris even last week, the question carried with it an implied rebuke of Biden which a lot of Dems like me weren't comfortable with. A bit like asking a women sitting by her husbands deathbed who she wanted to marry next. The question was hopelessly polluted by the pain of dealing with the furor over Biden's debate performance.
But the moment he stepped aside and graciously endorsed her, I saw a tsunami of enthusiasm and support for Kamala, where the entire party en masse was cheered.
This enthusiasm has got to move some polling numbers, I believe.
Let's see how the handles the invevitable "what did she know and when did she know it" questions about Biden't mental acuity. Because she's on record making fanciful claims about his boundless energy.
Her performance in senate hearings was impressive. Her performance in interviews and the primary campaign were not. So I have no idea.
I'm not sure it matters what she knew and when. People understand loyalty and usually appreciate it. If she had spoken out against Biden, she'd have been seen as a backstabber. I'm sure George W. Bush knew a lot about Reagan he didn't say. No one expected him to.
The Republicans will make it matter. "She lied to you" etc. etc
anyone have any evidence whatsoever that republicans care about lies?
i mean, other than the obvious fact that they love the biggest lying sack of shit to ever run for office
Yeah, let's see how more dishonest questions are raised.
nytimes:
Former Vice President Mike Pence thanked President Biden for “putting the interests of our nation ahead of his own” in a statement posted on social media. “Now is a time for leaders in both parties to project calm and send a message of strength and resolve to America’s friends and enemies,” wrote Pence, who is not endorsing his former boss, Donald J. Trump.
Kamala Harris has crossed the threshold, a majority of delegates, at state-level meetings, have committed to vote for her as the nominee. This has clearly been in the works for some time, with the President’s approval. I would assume that Biden must have made some of the calls to bring people on board.