Well that and between this and the Crowdstrike thing, everyone's completely forgotten about the RNC convention. Trump must be fuming.

So if he had a debilitating stroke you would feel the same way? Primary voters chose the ticket knowing Harris was the backup to a very frail old man and they process is playing out.

Based off social media the entire party is losing their collective shit. I feel bad for any ketchup bottles.

I think the simplest explanation is that Trump had been harping on the idea of debates and suggesting that Joe was too infirm to debate and would never agree, and they assumed he would ride that for months unless they nipped it in the budr ASAP and possibly reversed the narrative with a strong showing.

I also think it's possible/likely that all the different teams involved might not have had the same level of knowledge about Joe's condition & weren't necessarily strategizing with those considerations.

You have a shitty candidate if you fear someone thrown into the race 2 months before early voting starts.

They know they have a shitty candidate.

Question for the collective FOFC. What percentage of the gop establishment actually buys into the maga bullshit? I’m not talking about Cletus from middle Alabama. I’m talking about lawmakers, media, etc.

Depends on how you see buying in. If you mean parroting the the bullshit, they'll all fall in line. If you mean actually believing the bullshit then very few from the establishment. Most know Trump is full of shit and toxic but they fall in line because they believe he gets results and they like job security.

The secret service director resigning was a given after yesterday's disaster of a hearing.

Biden giving a speech Wednesday night. If his people and the DNC are smart, it will be self deprecating, along the lines of not realizing himself he was slipping, that he is doing what's best for the country, and mention the rigors of the job for someone in their 80s with strong hints about Trump's age without directly saying it. Something about how his own temperament when he came into office and how that's changed, subtly comparing it to Trump being a mental disaster. And obviously talk up Kamala.

I mean actually believing. Not using him as their useful idiot.

They will buy in and continue to buy in as long as there is power in it. Once the power is weakened, it will wither away and the collective lawmaker support for it. To answer your question, as long as it's convenient. Only 10% are true believers.

Thought about Roy Cooper as VP choice.

He's 67.

So if Harris chooses him, that's more acceptable to all of the Dems who see themselves as possible next-in-line. If she picks, say, Whitmer, then that puts Whitmer in the drivers seat in 2028 or 2032. If she picks Cooper, then he assumedly won't run for pres, which makes it open for the rest of them

I suspect ratings will be through the roof. A real chance for Biden to materially affect the race.

If Not Like Us is not Kamala Harris's campaign song, then they need to fire whoever runs her campaign.

Looks like it's going to be Beyonce's 'Freedom'.

I was surprised to look up that the Secret Service directory when Kennedy was shot stayed in power for another 10 years!

He has to toe the line between "I can do this job" and "but also campaigning full time between now and November and thinking ahead 4 years, it was time to step aside." If he talks about how hard it is to be president when he's slipping mentally, he's begging for a 25th Amendment petition.

I hope Joe Biden has given Lee Corso the courage to do the right thing.

This sounds right. I have seen some polls today where Harris has jumped over Trump, but I don't know the quality. If she doesn't have a lead by mid-late August, she probably never will....

August will probably be a bad month for the Trump trade in markets — the DNC is August 19-22 and I’d assume there’s some sort of Dem polling peak in that August 25-28 window.

— Conor Sen (@conorsen) July 23, 2024

Itll be interesting. There is now the potential to actually capatalize on anything health related or cognitive with Trump that happens prior to the election. That was a nom issue before when youre own candidate is even older witj their own issues there.

I mean it's simple. Biden is not good at campaigning and doesn't seem to want to. Even four years ago he didn't seem to "get it". However he has shown he was a good president and good at getting things done. They should give him a diplomatic position in france or something to retire in.

silly boy, republicans don't care about anything bad their candidates do.

It sure would be wild if the the GOP changed candidates too hahaha. It won't happen because they're cultists who like doing what a bully tells them to do. BUt it'd be fun
And then the Labor party swoops in!

This sure has changed.

Kelly .42
Shapiro .28
Cooper .17
Beshear .10
Walz .06
Buttigieg .03
Pritzker .02
Whitmer .02

That was the perfect first campaign speech earlier from Harris.

Trump had his chance to drop out pre-conviction.

Though since he's spending all of his time shitposting and playing golf anyway, it isn't like running for President is putting any sort of burden on him.

The more I think about it, the more I think anyone but Mark Kelly would be a mistake. He not only puts Arizona back in play, but he quite possibly helps the Dems win the Senate race there. He just seems like the perfect pairing with Harris.

Biden should throw Trump in jail right now for violating the Logan act. After all he’s immune anyway.

He'll be seen as a bad President and his foreign policy as a disaster over time. I think the quicker the Dems can separate him and his policies from the party, the better off they are.


It was very good. It helps a lot when you have a candidate who can speak clearly and attack their opponent's weakness.

These are apparently the names that Kamala has requested be vetted for the VP spot. Pritzker camp said they received no request so maybe that's wrong.

Harris' campaign has requested vetting materials from potential VPs, including Cooper (NC), Kelly (AZ), Shapiro (PA), Whitmer (MI), Walz (MN) + Pritzker (IL), according to a person familiar. Beshear told CNN he hasn't been asked to submit info at this point.

— Ken Thomas (@KThomasDC) July 23, 2024

Kelly feels like the strongest but giving up that Arizona Senate seat hurts. They'd have to see numbers that show he would increase their chances considerably to be chosen in my opinion. I can't see Whitmer taking the spot, although maybe that's changed.

Out of this list, I'd probably go with Walz. Least amount of risk and a really good politician.

Damn that speech was rousing

The opposite of what Joe could do and the republicans now have to be backpedaling trying to figure out what to do now

This could literally be a blue wave now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think a lot will ride on this election. If Kamala wins, I dont think he will be remembered for all that much of his actual presidency good or bad but in beating trump and then stepping aside to help beat him again.

The best nickname Trump could invent for Harrison was Lyin' Kamala. Sad. Low energy.

I also love that the GOP rank and file has to be explicitly told not to focus on Kamala's race. Good luck getting that herd of cats back into the bag.

Go easy on the man. He’s old.

Polls starting to show a much more competitive race now. The one's released yesterday after Biden dropped out showed Harris polling 4 points better in swing states than Biden. This has the race tied.

BREAKING: New Yahoo/YouGov poll has Trump and Harris tied at 46% pic.twitter.com/11vpvR53fO

— The Spectator Index (@spectatorindex) July 23, 2024

Walz is such a boring Tim Kaine-style pick. I think you ride the momentum and go with Kelly, Shapiro, or Whitmer. I'd prefer Beshear the most for reasons you've stated earlier, but I guess he's not being considered.

He would only have to resign if they won, and even then it would be a Democrat in the seat until a special election in 2026. If Governor Hobbs picks the right replacement, it wouldn't necessarily cost the Democrats the seat even then. Plus, having him on the ticket might help elect the Democrat that is running against Kari Lake this election. Gallego is leading right now, but it is a close race. Having Kelly on the ticket might make the difference. I think Kelly is a win-win.

Time for a thread title change.

Paging Dr. Edward. Surgery on the thread title, stat.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

I think he will be remembered for Gaza. Not right now, but in 5-10 years after a younger generation comes up and investigations have been done.

And Vance's wife goes full DEI hire on Kamala.

I'm just thinking long term. Arizona is a state that is swinging red and a guy like Kelly could keep that seat safe for the next 20 years. If Kelly makes it easier to win, you do it. But if you can get the same results with Walz or Cooper, I think that's a more strategic move.

Guessing they are running the numbers now and doing polls to see how much Kelly would move the needle.

I think the GOP has some political reaction when they are able to argue that an action discriminates against whites, but they get nowhere arguing that people of color are inherently inferior to whites.

But they just can't help themselves.

dola

On the one hand an old man like Trump getting an eagle is pretty impressive.

But on the other hand, how is a 210 yd hole a par 4?

It was reported locally that Beshear stated he was asked to submit vetting information.

It's probably the biggest strength she has right now. They just can't help saying off-putting shit that doesn't sway a single voter. It comes across racist, misogynistic, and weird to suburban folks who ultimately decide these elections.

Beyond the race stuff, I saw people trying to call her out for not being a Mother. She is a stepmom, but that's not enough apparently. Just seems like a weird way to alienate every step parent in this country by insinuating they're bad.

They even threw out a line about how she's been collecting paychecks from the government for 20 years. Normally that's a good attack but one of those jobs was like the most popular job you can have in government (district attorney).

The best way to attack her would be to call out her being a toadie for big business and banks. But they can't really do that because that's sort of Trump's thing.

Walz is actually good at politics unlike Tim Kaine. Look at what he's accomplished with a tiny majority in Minnesota.

Shapiro has been a successful Governor too but he has way more risk (although maybe more upside too). I guess with VP I side with they probably won't help but could hurt.

Shouldn’t we wait until it’s official official? Seems disrespectful to Joe who made a great, selfless (albeit, somewhat late) decision?

Yep, he's fully the correct choice here. He fits a lot if needs and he's a national icon. Fully on board.

There's also a pretty sharp contrast between a Navy Captain who went on to become an astronaut and a dork like JD Vance.

Well we see the GOP's strategy, they are trying to impeach Harris. Obviously they are very afraid.

Do the betting markets have any odds on Trump backing out from his VP pick?

JD Vance is making history as the least liked VP nominee (non-incumbent) since 1980 following his/her party's convention. He's the first to have a net negative favorable rating.

Not surprising given how weak he ran in Ohio in 2022. Far worse than the average Ohio Republican. pic.twitter.com/hlZziePkKe

— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) July 24, 2024

Trump will never drop Vance, that would mean admitting he was wrong and that is not in his DNA

That's hilarious. I thought Vance would be the pick since he had his head so far up Trump's ass for the last couple months, but I really had no idea how little charisma he had until he thrust himself onto the stage. A la DeSantis.

Someone must have told Elon that Tesla sales are down since he started pushing Trump.

Let's be real, it would be political suicide to go up against Harris once Biden withdrew and gave her his support. At best, you'd be off the list for any future democrat post/position if she won. At worst, you'd be branded a racist the second you campaigned against a black woman that was given all this support. All for something that has virtually no chance of happening (you getting more delegates than Harris).

The idea that Harris had to "compete for delegates" is pretty laughable. The way I would frame it is "voters knew they had Harris on the ticket and Biden was old and frail. In essence, a vote for him was a vote for Harris potentially being president down the line. We just removed the "potentially"."

Do you think it's racist to refer to Harris as a DEI candidate?

I think the stroke scenario is different.

In terms of what they voted for, no they didn't vote for the 'ticket'. Nobody votes for VPs until the general, they aren't on any primary ballot. The presidential candidate is the only thing that's selected there.

There were lots of other options here after Biden dropped out than the 'just let the delegates decide'. A full nationwide primary is likely not possible logistically, but there could have been polling done to decide who people want, in the same way that which candidates make the debates in a large primary is chosen. They could have had, for example, democrats in state legislatures vote for who that state would support. At least those people are elected, unlike delegates. They could have done any number of other things in the limited time available. I'm sure much smarter people than me could come up with better ones.

What did they do? Eh, let the delegates pick. The people get no say in who their candidate is. I am not buying that for one second.

You have 2 months until early voting starts and you have to give your candidate a chance. There isn't a great choice here since Biden waited so long. Every day that draws the process out lowers your chances of winning. It's not ideal, but 99% of complaints right now seem to be from non-democrats.

Did he push out some post or something?

and people would have been just as critical of the process.

That's how primaries work for both parties. Neither party has ever had a direct vote for their candidate to my knowledge.

Said he won't be dontating to Trump's campaign and that he doesn't support a "cult of personality". Which is record etting levels of irony.

As discussed previously, no it isn't how they work. Delegates and electors in the electoral college vote for who the voters in the state selected. Not whoever they feel like.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

WOW!

That is......telling

But you realize that guy has now backed out......

So what exactly should they do other than the logical choice of choosing his running mate.

I'm not in any way upset at the delegates for choosing Harris. What bothers me is the choice being given to them in the first place.


Some of the options I mentioned could be done in less than a week. I agree with not dragging it out, but I would say the fact that Democrats not complaining about it is one of the most ... I want to say something like 'damning' but not really that as I don't like the connotations. It's just like what was mentioned before about them not wanting Biden to run and then not giving a crap when he did and primaries were cancelled and similar. They were perfectly fine dragging out the whole drama for weeks after the debate, so I don't buy the 'give the candidate a chance angle' a bit.

It tells me they don't really care about democracy.

It is precisely how it works. It's undemocratic but your vote never really mattered in the first place.

No it isn't. That's just false.

Give me one example of delegates voting contrary to the way the people in their state voted.

And every option you've put forward would have been pushed to the 5th circuit and held up indefinitely because none of those options have ever been part of the political process of choosing a Presidential candidate. Delegates have been.

Delegates choosing someone their state didn't choose also has never been part of the process. There is no answer that ever has been part of the process. Since this is historical territory, there are two choices:

- Find a way to do it democratically
- Find a way to do it undemocratically

Option B was chosen.

By having delegates choose a candidate and moving forward the GOP can't weaponize the 5th circuit to shut things down. They can, and likely will, sue to stop it but it's already in motion and they can't put that cat back in the bag. Getting a halt put to what you're doing before anyone is selected because they went judge shopping probably seals things for Trump. The courts selecting a President isn't democratic either.

Just to add, there is zero doubt in my mind what the general reaction of the board here would be if this kind of thing were happening on the Republican side. There's tons of history to back that up. It's absolutely mindboggling to me that this isn't an obvious, huge issue to people here. I think if it were any other situation other than 'we must beat Trump by any means necessary' then it would be.

I guess I'm the one who's out of touch. Not the first time.

People are biased and want Trump to lose. News at 11.

Why? How would that be any different? Again, people have absolutely gone ape in recent cycles about even the possibility of 'faithless electors'. This is exactly that thing. If you can sue over any of those other ideas, you can sue over this one.

People have the same democratic ability to call for Kamala to step down as they did for Joe. You honestly think if Kamala was getting the same feedback from the party that Joe was getting that we wouldn’t have a change? March in the streets about it. You have options.

They can sue, but since someone is chosen they can't stop Kamala from campaigning and dems moving forward with her as the candidate. Mike Johnson has said they're going to sue. If dems were trying to find a way to vote for a candidate the 5th circuit would certainly shut it down which now means you have no candidate and no way of choosing one.

We moved away from party caucuses choosing Presidential candidates for good reason. It had nothing to do with the will of the people and more about fulfilling promises and giving in to blackmail. We had blind, speechless William Crawford nominated at one point which is what eventually led to John Quincy Adams being President.

1952 and 1968

That doesn't make any sense. If they can just choose Kamala via delegates, they can just choose someone any other way. If the courts can shut down those alternative methods then they can also shut down the nominating process on the 'faithless delegates' grounds.

Are you confusing the party nomination process (delegates) with the selection of electors for casting a vote in the Electoral College. Delegates have always been able to switch at the conventions in order to select the party's nominated though there has not been a brokered convention in a long time. Though, every year candidates back out, endorse a rival, and pledge their delegates to that rival.

2012

Gingrich and Santorum released their delegates before the convention.

Santorum earned 245, received 9 at the convention.
Gingrich earned 138, received 0 at the convention.

2008. Obama did not win enough delegates to secure the nomination. Clinton released her delegates, or Obama would have been selected by super-delegates.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

In honor of reports that the GOP has already tried to file for impeaching Harris...

I give you the:

GOP BOT2.024 Code upgrade

He can’t impeach himself for not realizing she was black until now. And someone does have to pay so this all seems legit.

She competed for delegates in the same way that Alabama competes for points against Coastal Carolina.

Just because she won quickly and handedly does not mean that she didn't compete.

dola:

I think that we are all (and I certainly include myself in this) just having trouble processing that the Dems seemed to handle a delicate situation in a politically smart way. Like, where's the two-week process that divides the party, depresses the base, turns off swing voters, and leads to 500 NYT articles?

For those wondering, this seems to be the process they are going to use:

I find it comical the gop is telling the dems how to pick their nominee. Imaging if the script was flipped. The right would be losing their minds. As it is you can tell they are desperate and scared shitless.

Or technically, earlier this month?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rnc-rol...f-states-2024/

Bet you a million dollars that the GOP eventually starts putting out ads about Kamala's emails

Coastal Carolina would win of course...

Wrong thread, I think you're looking for EA College Football 25

This is incorrect. There is no law forcing the delegates and electors to vote for a particular person. They can in fact vote for who ever they would like at the convention or electoral college, and it does happen. The guard against this is that the candidate that won the vote to pick the delegates or electors vet the people they pick to represent them.

I don't understand the complaint. Are the delegates supposed to vote for Biden even though he has withdrawn? Or are you saying they should be free to vote for whomever they choose? That's what is happening, just most of them are choosing to support Harris.

How else should things work?

Thanks :)

There's a funny thing--not sure if it is just American or if it is more universal--where no one (on either side) likes to just admit that they want a certain policy outcome.

Arguments are almost always fashioned along the lines of "I believe in [abstract procedural principle] that [would just so happen to result in my preferred policy outcome]."

We see it in everything from barroom discussions to Supreme Court opinions.

One of the things I find refreshing about Jon on this board is that he's one of the few people who just argues for the result he wants without adding this extra layer of "actually, I'm more concerned about . . . " to it.

POTUS 2024 - Biden vs Trump - General Election Discussion
 

There was that one time in fofc where someone stated and defended to the death that if something wasn’t explicitly stated then you couldn’t surmise it, like say the underlying intention of a policy, legislation or even code word/statement.

Good times


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder what it could be that has some unity party supporters claiming Kamala isn't eligible for the presidency.

The difference between party and country is one of membership. It's the responsibility of "the party" to decide on the candidate, and the people vote on the candidates available. It doesn't mean people would vote on the party at all, it means the party needs to find a candidate who will win. Moreover, the process for determining who gets to call each party "their" party is flawed, and there's no good way to improve it. I've voted Democrat in every election but one, when I voted Libertarian, but I've never voted in a Democratic primary. Meanwhile, people who have split their vote much more down the middle, or even people who vote straight Republican, vote in them. I admit to some bias, in that I honestly don't care who wins the Democratic primary, since I know I'll prefer them over the Republican. But, even if I voted Democrat every election, it's not "my" party -- it's just the party I happen to prefer. I think the idea that "the people" should choose a party's candidate is a mentality created by a two-party system. If there were five or more parties, the idea of a primary for each of them would feel ridiculous.


This feels extremely disingenuous. He wasn't selected "twice", I think the other time you're referring to was for the 2020 election - that was a different thing. As for the time he was selected in 2024, are you seriously saying that choosing a different nominee from an election where he was virtually unopposed is "subverting democracy" to you?