I sympathize with lifelong Republicans who hate Democrats and therefore remain unsure of whether to vote for Donald Trump. After all, I've long wondered how bad a Democrat would have to be to make me vote for a Republican. The problem is that I've never been able to come up with a plausible Democrat as bad as Trump.
But now we have a Democrat who isn't a horrible person but—just as bad—seems mentally unfit for the presidency. I'll still vote for him because the alternative is Trump, but what would I do if his opponent were a normie Republican like, say, Mitt Romney?
Just as I think decent Republicans should refuse to vote for Trump, I'd like to think I'd defect to Romney. But would I? I'm not quite being put to the test thanks to the unique horror of the Republican candidate, but it's getting too close for comfort.
How stupid.
The worse that can happen with Biden is that he is replaced by Harris.
With Trump you are destroying democracy in the US and replacing it by a dictatorship.
Completely differnt things.
apparently for some who post here, Harris is worse than Trump.
i haven't seen any evidence of that
There are plenty of examples from the past 4 or 5 days
i've seen comments saying she might not be the strongest possible candidate against trump, but i haven't seen any saying she'd be a worse president than trump
you got any quotes that say that?
He does not.
Justin, Atiicus, Leo...
Did you read the post?
Yup, completely idiotic. Let's put more corrupt yahoos on SCOTUS.
You can really feel the "rich straight white dude" vibes.
Bravo
and imo the scariest part is that 40++ % of Americans are okay with that! Yeah, Trump will be a dictator, but he'll be "their" dictator. If you want the simple answer (not accurate, moral, equitable or truthful, just simple) - you're gonna love this guy
MAGAs haven't considered the possibility they might someday want him or his successor to leave, but not to worry because in 4 or less years, that will no longer be an option. The GOP party will "refine" voter ID and counting protocols to where they will be impossible to vote out. We'll be somewhere between Malaysia and Turkey
One last thought- any takers on a GOP trifecta changing the constitution to allow Trump a third term?
Sorry Ben we just couldn't keep it
"We'll be somewhere between Malaysia and Turkey.."
That is an optimistic view.
Trump thinks that the highest achievement of a dictator is "being strong", that is suppressing the population. He will try to do that, and that will be much worse than Malaysia and Turkey.
You're right- How about NK and Iran without burqas. . . unless they want an abortion or equal pay
Jesus, Kevin, seriously? You really have bought the Republican and media propaganda wholesale, haven’t you? I’ve read you for a couple decades, but I think I may need to step away, because you really do seem to have gone around the bend.
He's obviously performing a thought exercise. He didn't say he'd actually vote for Romney. He said it made him wonder what it would take, given that when you turn the situation around, lots of people are asking sane Republicans to vote for a person of the other party because Trump is so unfit. You're attributing to Kevin something he didn't actually say.
“But now we have a Democrat who isn't a horrible person but—just as bad—seems mentally unfit for the presidency.”
Based off a bad performance in a ridiculously run, non fact-checked debate with a compulsive liar. That is the propaganda Kevin has internalized.
Don't gaslight yourself.
Biden was fine at the presser after the debate. Someone who's sundowning doesn't recover like that. Heck, the latter half of the debate was without error. He did get Bugs-Bunny'd into Trump claiming he's the adult in the room but you can't help a liar lying.
I have a similar stutter and going into two-minute sound bites without notes is bad enough, but with the other guy completely off his rocker? Ugh.
Don't gaslight yourself.
Fuck off, troll.
aagghh is right. Kevin even linked to Biden's speech the next day.
Liberals like Kevin would rather be "reasonable" than win. That's why SCOTUS is 6-3 corrupt
https://www.mattball.org/2024/06/this-isnt-about-biden.html
And not enough people have pointed out that, unlike someone who was actually sundowning during the debate, he wouldn't have sounded so much better at a later event later that evening, not just the next day. As much as I have hated to see his continued support for Netanyahu - not the same as Israel - I will still vote for the Biden-Harris ticket agsin.
No. It is a great disappointment, but it's clear that Joe simply can't perform the job for four years. If you want the trauma, chaos and spite that would ensue a Twenty-Fifth Amendment removal, fine, continue to advocate for his candidacy. But it won't be pretty.
But the clear implication is that Biden can be forced out now because reasons but that later it would be traumatic and chaotic to remove him under the 25th amendment. If Biden's willing to leave office now, why wouldn't he be willing to leave when his friends and advisors are telling him it's the right thing to do? Similarly, if it's so easy to force Biden out now, why would it be more difficult to force him out later?
The other point is that forcing Biden out now is an extremely high risk proposition. If you're worried about trauma and chaos, think about what an open convention with dozens of candidate clawing tooth and nail for the opportunity to be anointed as the candidate would look like. And think about all the voters who supported different candidates who are going to be walking away with hurt feeling and maybe some real anger about the eventual nominee. Frankly, the 25th amendment seems much cleaner and easier (if it's needed).
Yeah. We're voting for an administration. They have the tools to fix it.
You know what doesn't have the tools? The electoral system.
My thought is that the 25th is exactly the reason why it's safe to re-elect Biden. If he can't do the job, Kamala can 25th him, be the acting president for the whole term, and still be eligible to be elected for two full terms of her own (under the 25th, the VP assumes the powers and duties of president but not the title, so the 22nd doesn't kick in).
The correct thought exercise is "What if Trump were a Democrat, pushing mostly Democratic priorities, appointing liberal judges, but otherwise still 100% Trump."
How is that possible? "Democratic priorities" include a President who works for the benefit of all people. That is "constitutionally" impossible for Trump; he's only out for himself. [Different meaning of "constitution"]
There eally CAN'T BE a "Democratic Trump".
Whatever dude. It's a thought exercise. Assume he will mostly push dem legislation and judges but otherwise is a narcissistic monster and criminal and incompetent traitor. Then put him up against a younger version of Romney.
He will lose the primary.
You need to have a different world for this kind of person to be a candidate of the democratic party.
Well, put this in your thought exercise: The Republican Party is pretty much an openly authoritarian and anti-democratic political party. It's headed by a man who is a convicted criminal, an adjudicated rapist, and a fraudster who is also a narcissistic psychopath. And today, Mitt Romney is a member in good standing of the Republican Party.
You vote in Biden and then he resigns. Easy answers to easy questions.
so, if that made Harris Pres, she would then have to nominate a Veep who is then confirmed by vote of Congress no? What is the chance of a Rick Scott led Senate doing that?
to me, this is another reason to replace biden/harris on the ticket; if he resigns during a second term (increasingly plausible), the magas will never approve a vp to fill the vacancy
see: garland, merrick
or... harris dies in a plane crash (under mysterious circumstances) during biden's second term, R's refuse to install new VP, and biden dies of a stroke
if R's win the house, they get the presidency
For all intents and purposes this is not possible at this point. The money raised by the Biden Harris campaign can only legally be spent to elect Biden or Harris. So yeah you could get Gavin Newsome starting a campaign in August with no money. Good luck with that.
OR you could have J. B. Pritzker starting a campaign in August with six or eight billion and NO personal spending limits. Think, Michael Bloomberg (who is definitely a good guy) with much better political chops.
Now, is it "seemly" for a rich Democrat to "buy the Presidency"? No. But the R's would be hard-pressed to make that case, wouldn't they?
pretty sure biden/harris super pac money could be used for negative campaign ads
You can't have Newsom, he and Harris are from the same state.
FEC:
Unlimited transfers to the Dem Party. That seems straightforward enough, wonder why so many highly-placed pundit types are getting it wrong?
I don't watch everything. Who has been saying this?
There is no chance of the Rs keeping the House, and little chance of them capturing the Senate.
I would vote for my neighbor's Springer Spaniel before I'd vote for Trump.
Here's the question: what dangers does Biden's particular mental "unfitness" pose as opposed to Trump's? Does he not understand foreign or domestic political dynamics any longer? Can he not assess or respond to security threats? Would he not understand a piece of legislation or executive order he's signing? Biden's problem is that he can no longer really speak off-the-cuff well or think very fast on his feet in a setting like a televised debate. That is a huge political liability to be sure, and that's why I don't think it's absolutely out of bounds to talk about whether he should step down. But it's not necessarily a threat to the country or the Constitution.
Trump is, both because he's a profound idiot who doesn't have all his marbles *and* he's a wannabe dictator who -- thanks SCOTUS! -- talks openly of wanting to shit all over the Constitution. Biden may be a bit slow, but he's not threatening to put Ted Cruz up in front of a military tribunal.
This post has led to a lot of people commenting who do not seem to have actually read the post.
Why do you say that? Kevin's saying that Biden is unfit to be president and he's previously said that Biden should step down as president. So the comparison between Biden (at his worst) and Trump (at his best) seems particularly in keeping with the sprit of Kevin's post.
Because he's not talking about a choice between Biden and Trump, he's talking about a choice between Biden and Romney.
I believe that there is a fundamental difference between the intentions that liberals have and that conservatives have.
Conservatives want to take all the pie for themselves, and liberals want to make a bigger pie so that everyone can have a share.
Now, you might prefer a competent person like Romney, who plundered companies' pension funds to enrich himself, over a mentally weakened Biden, who fought for equal rights all his life, but that would not be my choice.
Precisely - the elitist who insulted 47% of other Americans as "takers" after the nature of his career & exploiting of his Olympics position isn't my idea of a good candidate for the presidency. I prefer public servants whose only claim to fame isn't primarily their business experience.and/or father's political career.
Hey, I insult 47% of Americans as "Deplorables" proudly.
And you sell Willard Mitt short; he was a popular governor of Massachusetts for two terms. Now, yes, Mass is full of Yuppie Libs, not the Green Blooded West Coast kind, but WM had to be pretty gracious about lots of liberal priorities to get re-elected. He's got political smarts, just like his Dad.
Wait wut? "But now we have a Democrat who isn't a horrible person but—just as bad—seems mentally unfit for the presidency" ??
You're supposed to be a numbers guy, right? So why are you changing your mind after a single debate? It would seem like, if you're being rational about it, you'd employ (roughly speaking) Bayesian reasoning.
1. On the one hand, you have a history of fitness (3.5yr, right up to the present-day) for the Presidency.
2. On the other hand, you have a single bad debate performance. and sure, a few slips here and there.
And of course, 3: debates are not indicative of Presidential performance, as I'm sure you are aware. Especially this sort of debate where there's no fact-checking. They're indicative of ability to lie and gaslight, and not much else. I mean, there's Brandolini's Law FFS.
Even if you believe that this bad debate performance is an indicator, I'd think that you'd simply update your Bayesian priors a bit, moving from "he's obviously far and away the best choice" to "maybe he's a little weak, we need to pay more attention".
Not "obviously unfit".
I mean, c'mon man! [as the greatest President in my lifetime has said on at least one occasion]
I do strongly agree with the idea that competence to debate is only marginally related to competence to execute the duties of being president, which is not a trivial point.
It's not a trivial point to people who follow politics and who are usually, therefore, partisans. It IS as trivial point to the sizable cohort of people who "vote for the candidate (usually based on looks and charm), not the party" and don't have an understanding of the complexities of government.
And that's a WHOLE LOT of people.
I agree with you completely. I think that Kevin's approach is subconsciously colored by the constant barrage of propaganda about Biden's mental fitness from Fox News and the Trump campaign. Since Kevin seems himself as a "reasonable" person and tends to give conservatives the benefit of the doubt, it makes sense that one bad night would make a huge impression on Kevin and many others.
To me that premise seems silly. Biden could be a complete vegetable but the people around him would push Democratic policies, which are more aligned with my values. As much as I respect Romney for at least minimally breaking with Trump (and I'm from Utah), he would surround himself with conservative policy makers who would push an agenda I don't agree with. He would nominate conservative judges. He would be much more likely to sign any conservative legislation that made it through Congress.
I guess the one thing that gives me pause is bona fide emergencies. If Russia were to drop a nuke on Kiev, what then? Then you want one competent person in charge, and not a committee. But how likely is that?
The comments in this thread are giving me hope that even though Kevin has gone 'round the bend, his readers (generally) are real-world based.
+10
This,
We aren’t voting for a single person, we’re voting for their respective party infrastructure, the people they appoint, Biden has shown us the kind of people he picks, they been successfully running the country for 3 years.
With Trump in the first admin there were at least a couple serious people that kept the ship afloat, in another term it will be all lunatics and sycophants.
With a Romney you’d get bog standard Republicans, basically another W admin, which remember was so bad the country actually overwhelmingly voted for a black man.
Yes, of course. But "we" are a distinct minority in the United States. The partisan Republicans are just about the same size as our group, and oppose everything we believe in as we do what they espouse.
It's the third of the voting public "in the middle", who "vote for the candidate not the party" who are the problem. They are worried about Biden's competence and, at least at this time, seem less worried about Trump's dangers. They don't "follow" the drama like we do and have forgotten what a pompous ahole -- with a cruel streak a mile wide -- he is in office. Their votes determine the outcome, and right now they're more worried about Biden's infirmity than Trump's dangers.
This has potential consequences that the Supreme Court just magnified yesterday.
It's the APPOINTMENTS, stupid!
I sing that mantra every time. We have to stop focusing on individual candidates. What matters is which party controls the appointments throughout the executive and judicial branches.
The other side understands this, which is why so many sane Republicans are supporting the clearly insane Trump. They know that what matters is which party controls appointments.
you know who's not showing signs of dementia &/or an anger (whitecentered) populist, as are biden, bloomberg, trump, & bernie?
hillary clinton. but of course that's because she's been dead over 7 years since March 2017, from parkinson complications.
You vote for Biden and everything is fine. He needs to take a nap from time to time. Who gives a shit?
Instead you'd vote for some Republican and hand the Supreme Court over to the Republicans for that much longer? Let them destroy the ACA? A hundred other things, all because you've never seen normal aging and it scares you? This centrist pundit bullshit really is insane.
Any "normie Republican" in the past 40 years is STILL worse than Biden. What planet have you been living on? I mean I know Orange County gave us Nixon and Reagan and a whole bunch of other insane bullshit, but c'mon man. Have you been paying ANY attention to what Republicans have been all about for what, 2/3 of your life (and nearly all of your adult life)?
Fuck off with this nonsense. Really getting to the point where I'm not sure I need to be reading your posts anymore.
More and more I feel like I've wandered into the Federalist or some other billionaire-funded right-wing site cranking out hack pieces.
The last Republican admin that didn’t leave a mess for the Democrats to fix was Eisenhower
If I'm being generous, I'd say that the last sane Republican president was Ford or even Nixon. And that's saying something.
There are two mental declines on display in this blog post and Biden's isn't the worse of the two. Biden's is certainly less sad.
You're voting for an administration as a whole, and a point of view about what's important and what's not. Biden, despite what Republicans are portraying, is not a drooling idiot sitting in the corner with his finger on the nuclear button. You'll still get a better outcome with Biden only working 10-4, or whatever his actual hours are or will be, than any Republican President or nominee that I've seen in my lifetime.
Let's stipulate that Biden is old, and he's aged a lot in the last 4 years. But let's also recognize he did age a lot, like all Presidents do (aside from Trump, who merely aged as expected for someone who eats poorly and gets no exercise), because it's a fucking hard job, and he *did the job* and did it *well*. I think he's the only one who could have beat Trump in 2020, and given that he was handed a horrible economic situation and a once in a century health crisis, and had only a 50-50 Congress, and the courts stacked against him, he did a damn fine job. And he's paid the price for that by aging more in 4 years than he would have in comfortable retirement. God bless him.
The only thing I care about for 2024 is what Democratic ticket has the best chance of winning. There is no such thing anymore as a "normie Republican" that has any chance of being nominated nationally in today's Republican party. I lived under Charlie Baker in MA, and I could handle him over a senescent Biden, but face facts, Baker is far too sane and rational to have a hope in Hell to ever make it on a National ticket as a Republican. Any vote for any Republican Presidential candidate would *at least* be a rubber stamp on continuing to turn the US Judiciary as a whole into the 5th circuit. It would be abandoning Ukraine wholesale and appeasing Putin. It would be a continuing scaling back of reproductive rights. It would be getting rid of gay marriage, if Alito and Thomas had their ways. It would be continued assault on the environment.
So yeah, at this point I would vote for Biden's reanimated corpse over any Republican that could possibly win their nomination, without hesitation.
Can I be convinced that the Democrats have a better chance of winning by convincing Biden to gracefully stand down? Yes, I can. But let's not denigrate him for what he's done these past four years. He tried to stem the tide. Ultimately it's the voters in this country letting me down by even contemplating a Trump return.
just WTF? Maybe your brain is addled causing you to write idiotic things...Yes, Biden was bad in the debate, but Trump lied on every answer and refused to answer a single question posed to him...so dump Biden and then what? lose like when LBJ quit? please actually read and think about what you're saying before committing.
if it was an actual capital-c Communist vs a mainstream republican, i'd go R
but i get the feeling that R's might vote in an actual fascist or theocrat over a mainstream democrat
not talking about swing voters, but the R base
That's absolutely true; almost all would. The three or four percent who would switch already did in 2020.
The "base" would LIKE "an actual fascist" and LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE a "theocrat".
Trump victory == existential crisis? With the new Supreme Court decisions, it is more clearly so.
People use hyperbole all the time. They say "existential crisis to Democracy", but they obviously don't mean it. If they did, they would have demanded Biden step down before the debate. It is like depending on a first grader to pack your parachute for skydiving. It just might work! "No, no, no," others say. "Let's get a third grader instead." It is an improvement, but the plane better not go higher than 15 feet.
If it is really existential crisis, then we should be willing to hold our collective noses and do something like putting money to, and promises to vote for, someone like Liz Cheney. Someone who could actually take votes away from Trump, even if we disagree with every one of her domestic policies. This would be a tough dose of medicine, but the silver linings are: support for democracy and NATO. Not trivial. If Mitt Romney were 5 years younger, I might have designated him for his tough dose of medicine.
A ticket of Liz Cheney and say Pete Meijer or Adam Kinzinger might help restore the Republican dependence of MAGA (though I am skeptical). Those on the left who are proud of the Supreme Court that Ralph Nader and Jill Stein have built will no doubt prefer a kindergartener to pack our parachute. It would be ideal if the Democratic party came to its senses and officially support this conservative/libertarian candidates. I can dream.
LMFAO, this has to be trolling! Let’s put a REPUBLICAN onto the DEMOCRATIC ticket? Can I have some of what you’re smoking?
What percent chance of having Trump win are you comfortable with? Let's say he is at 73% now after the debate (I am being conservative). He gets to appoint Sotomayor's successor, probably. He signs a pact with Putin and leaves NATO. He puts 400% tariffs on China. He pardons himself for documents case. He encarcerates enemies and makes sure his successor is installed as replacement after a sham election. So if you get him down to 55% chance of winning, will you be happy? If something is really existential, you have to think outside the box. If not, then don't say it is an existential crisis. I think it is. I could be overreacting, of course.
It would be ideal if the Democratic party came to its senses
so republicans go off the fucking deep end and it's democrats who need to come to their senses?
Upvoted!
Seconded
cleeks law.
To begin with, what makes you think that Liz Cheney could beat Trump? She wouldn't draw a single Republican voter and probably fewer independents than Biden even in his apparently weakened condition. There's no indication that there's some great mass of conservative voters who would prefer a different right-winger than Trump but will vote for him in the absence of a right wing alternative.
Why?
You keep doubling and tripling down on this point, without being aware that it reveals you as a clownish, unserious person.
We have three and a half years of Biden's track record in office, during which he has been entirely competent and effective. You look at one bad night, and pronounce "not only does this prove he is unfit for office, but it is SO bad that he should be replaced by a Republican."
You advocated that Democrats should put a fascist on their ticket yesterday, someone who, after Trump did his autogolpe on January 6th, looked the American people dead in the eye during his impeachment trial and said "This man is innocent; he should be President." You think the Democrats should install such a man or his "type" into the Vice-Presidency.
This is a naked admission that your political calculus is conducted on the lines of "completely ignoring his actual record in-office, if a Democratic candidate has a sufficiently bad debate night, regardless of how they do before or after, I will transfer my vote to someone who will govern as a modern Republican will; who will nominate additional hacks to sit on the Supreme Court, who will continue to gut the regulatory state, who will run the economy as a loot box for the wealthy. I would a hundred percent defect to such a man."
This is shameful.
Whew. Sorry Kevin. Bad take. You may vote for a person, but you're actually voting for the Administration.
There's nothing that indications Biden has a problem engaging with individuals, making sound decisions, and enabling quality people. The only complaint is that he seems feeble in public appearances.
If Romney was running, I'd still vote against cause his Admin would be toxic....just less so than Trump.
This one is easy. If the (D) were a raving authoritarian and the alternative Romney, I'd vote for Romney in a heartbeat.
We can survive 8 years of a old-school corporate shitbag.
old-school corporate shitbag is what america does best
--tigger
Yeez Kevin, not doing well at a debate or even doing terribly, does not equal being mentally unfit. Biden is President right now and he is doing the job well. It seems that any person who has a speech impediment is mentally unfit in your mind, since they would do about as well or worse than Biden.
In my case if the Dems were likely to control both Houses of Congress, I'd be more comfortable voting for a Romney.If the Reps were to control Congress, I'd be more likely to vote for a Biden.
It isn’t Biden’s Past that’s the problem, it’s the future. ….
Joe Biden’s Lapses Have Become More Common: NYT Report
People who spend time with Biden told The New York Times that the president has “increasingly appeared confused or listless, or would lose the thread of conversations” in recent weeks and months.
“In interviews, people in the room with him more recently said that the lapses seemed to be growing more frequent, more pronounced and more worrisome,” the Times reported.
……….
He is not going to get any better. And more reports like this will be coming out in the next few weeks.
On the subject of Biden the NYT has lost all credibility.
That’s funny. So has Biden.
People really don't get the spirit of the question. It would be a tough call for me as I'd prefer Romney in a crisis. I am in the camp that is a little angry with Biden's staff and dem leadership that we have gotten to this place, where there are so many questioning Biden's fitness to serve.
Good fuck man, if Joe Biden died he'd still be a better candidate.
Do Presidents not have Vice Presidents in your universe?
Kevin, put away the Conventional Wisdom pipe. It's not good for you.
Given that even a competent Biden would be in a tight race with trump, what policy changes do you think would be required to get people to switch to Biden for the landslide? I’m not sure there are any. So that’s the problem any generic democrat replacing Biden will face. They will still have this implacable enemy on the right.
“I'll still vote for him because the alternative is Trump, but what would I do if his opponent were a normie Republican like, say, Mitt Romney?”
This simply has to be a joke. Why would Kevin reference Romney as a normie? Has the craziness of Trump altered our perceptions to such an extent that Romney, in contrast, now looks like a normie?
Here is Romney in 2012: “All right, there are 47% who are with [Obama], who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them.”
Kevin cannot possibly be indicating that he would vote for that nitwit over Biden under any circumstances. Kevin would completely discredit himself through such an utterly outlandish assertion.
So, let’s step away from media hyperventilating and back to reality for a moment:
In just 3 and a 1/2 years, Biden has become the most consequential President of the 21st century. He and his admin led the single most effective post-pandemic recovery anywhere in the world. Biden and his admin helped build what is now the world’s most successful national economy. And they did it through, among other things, investments in domestic manufacturing and green technologies. But perhaps most impressive is that many of the benefits of our current economic boom have gone to the less fortunate who needed them most.
And Kevin is writing a post publicly musing if he would instead vote for Mitt 47% Romney. This simply cannot be a serious blog post.
I am assuming that the chattering class of nitwit nihilists, and that now apparently includes Kevin, are at odds with the populace at large. Because, as best as I am aware, there is no precedent in modern American history where unemployment stays under 4% for years at a time, wage growth outpaces inflation, and GDP growth outpaces the rest of the developed world, and then voters turn on the incumbent president after a bad debate performance. It simply doesn’t happen.
My own reaction to the debate: could not possibly care less.
My reaction to hysterical bloviators who lose their minds to such an extent that they start referring to Romney as “normal”: what the F*#k is wrong with these morons?
The situation is incredibly simple and remains completely unchanged after the first debate: as the incumbent president with a booming economy, Biden is favored to win. But if he withdraws, we lose. So he should stay in. Simple!
Then, after winning, Biden can resign later if he needs to. See? Not complicated!
Both Democrats and Republicans usually depend upon their members being caught up in a double bind to choose candidates based on how they feel about civil rights, identity politics, or the polarity between supporting women's reproductive rights or the immorality of purposely ending a pregnancy. For the few voters who reject the capitalist dominance of both major parties there is no dilemma but they do have to accept their minority position of having very little impact on presidential elections. The demagoguery of Trump has upset this system, providing a candidate who also represents a portion of the working class who resent the material inequality of liberal capitalism, a minority which wants a civil war, a racist one, so the dominate class or race can assume complete authority, and typical Republicans who support their party regardless of who the candidate is or what the platform contains. Democrats typically assume their party members and the left minority will have to reflexively support their candidate in order to prevent a Republican, and in this case the demagogue Trump, from winning the executive. Somehow Democrats have allowed a geriatric who suffers obvious senescence to be the choice between business as usual or chaos. A degenerate choice the plutocracy wanted.
I never vote for Republicans for any office, ever, no matter what. The last time I did so was 2002, but the events of the next couple years made me decide I could never do it again. Everything I have seen of Rs since then has convinced me that my resolution is sound.
What about a reasonable R, like Romney? I might vote for him, but only if he ran as an independent. The R Party has far too much malignant baggage to even consider voting for someone who aligns themselves with it.
This take from the Atlantic (written by Stuart Stevens, a Republican never-Trumper) is spot on.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/antidemocratic-uprising-against-joe-biden/678865/
Probably paywalled. Here's a good excerpt:
"Trump is the candidate of chaos, uncertainty, and erratic behavior. Democrats can win a race against him by offering Americans the opposite: steady, calm, and confident leadership. Joe Biden has provided that. His record is arguably the most impressive of any first-term president since World War II. My advice to Democrats: Run on that record; don’t run from one bad debate. Show a little swagger, not timidity. Forget all this Dump Biden nonsense and seize the day. Now is the worst time to flinch. Your country needs strength. You can crush Donald Trump, but only if you fight."
woodrow wilson was incapacitated but his wife took over
i suggested a couple days ago that biden could bring in obama as vp to form a shadow government
if biden dies or becomes incapacitated it looks like succession doesn't restrict obama taking office:
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
Mentally unfit? How? What policies or decscions has he made which demonstrate or support your claim?