Yes, I can see it worse in 2024. But like to think 2022 was the bottom ... we are (supposedly) at the end of the Fed tightening now. If we are in the depths of a recession during election year, Trump's odds increases significantly.

If we have a recession, better to have a recession this year so Biden will have some time to recover.

Fed is going all out to make it happen.

That is really what it looks like to me. They have timed this out for the worst of everything to hit and exact time it will destroy Biden's chances.

I don't know if they're timing it to hurt Biden per say, I just think when wages started increasing for the common folk, they got terrified and had to shut that shit down.

In their case, I'm not saying it was a plot. Just how it has happened.

This is my belief as well. They know the GOP and Dems both will help siphon money from the poor to the rich. But the poors were starting to get some wage relief for the first time since the 90s so they had to nip that in the bud.



SI

I think you give the Fed too much credit here.

I'm pretty sure the Fed is having a pretty hard affect on the economy right now.

I think we are 6-8 months out from when it begins to make sense to even *start* worrying about polls.

Now this is the Grandpa Joe I expect. Nice heartwarming story, essentially Biden inviting WH reporters to attend personally relevant events.

West Wing Playbook - POLITICO

No surprise there wasn't any movement. Game of chicken continues on Fri.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/09/debt...mcconnell.html
Hoping this is still a Plan D to keep in the backpocket.

I think in the end there will be some kind of extension, because the last thing the GOP wants is for the White House to claim the 14th amendment means the cap is moot and they lose this threat every few months.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Just incredibly cruel what they are doing to her.




Another interesting option for the debt ceiling fight.

Former Biden adviser Tribe: Just use the 14th Amendment now - POLITICO
His argument below seems logical to me but would be worried about unintended consequences. My guess is they'll try a Plan D ... prioritizing payments before doing the 14th amendment (but plan for it as a Plan E).

But if I was an impartial 3rd party observer, would love to see how this plays out in courts.

I didn't know where to put this, but it is an interesting case decision from the Supreme Court. Interesting in it one of the few that there were liberal and conservatives on both sides. Basically it allows California to set restrictions on what pork can be sold in the state, and it is a pretty clear indicator that the court is allowing states to set their own restrictions even if it affects other producer states. Mostly, just fascinated by the strange bedfellows on both sides.

The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to a California animal cruelty law that affects the pork industry, ruling that the case was properly dismissed by lower courts. https://t.co/bITqCS3qXC

— The Associated Press (@AP) May 11, 2023

Reports are that there is good progress on the behind the scenes negotiations concerning the debt ceiling. Remember, these are the negotiations that President Biden swore would never happen.

Now, he took that position when he expected the GOP to infight so much that it would not have a coherent plan. And he expected outside groups (business leaders, etc) to put pressure on the GOP. But that never materialized.

So I think he was smart to see that the game was playing out very differently than he had hoped and to change strategies. But (assuming that a deal is reached) it will be very interesting to see how the GOP plays this. Because they got what they wanted from him. But the thing that they want it from him was reasonable negotiations, so it is hard to criticize him for agreeing with you to be reasonable.

She's 89 and has served in the Senate for over 30 years. Barbara Boxer, who is "only" 82, was also elected to the Senate in 1992 (Feinstein's election in 1992 was a special election to finish Wilson's term), but retired in 2017, at age 76, after 25 years in the Senate, which is still way too old and way too long but is still a whole lot better than the ego trip Feinstein has been on (and RBG before her and Ted Kennedy before her, etc...).

It may be cruel, but hopefully it serves as a kick in the ass to some of those geriatrics to plan a reasonable succession timeline and stop fucking things up for their party because they're too fucking old.

The list of Senators 72 & over contains 6 Republicans, 16 Democrats, and both Independents.

Or what about the 95 year old federal judge whose court is seeking to remove her because of concerns about her ability--and she is suing them, arguing that only Congress can remove a judge via impeachment, and that any attempt to de facto remove her is thus unconstitutional:

Judge Newman Sues Fed. Circ. To Halt Probe Of Her Fitness - Law360 Pulse

FWIW, I think that she is right. I could easily see "fitness" being weaponized by partisan court to get around life tenure.

But, come on, you are 95 years old and have your salary for life. Just retire.

What's in Lebanon that justifies the $1B embassy? I'd think maybe Jordan, at least they've shown they can be friendly to US interests.

I'm sure there's a reason, I hope its a really good one. Just seems we are a sitting duck whenever Syria wants to apply some pressure.

A massive new US embassy in a tiny Middle East nation is raising eyebrows | CNN


Yeah, old enough to remember this one vividly.

Well, maybe not in Lebanon, but all those construction and ancillary companies that bid on government contracts but mainly live below the poverty line need work so they can feed their kids.

I don't think this is on her. She has dementia and doesn't know what's going on. This isn't something that just sprung up either. Sure she shouldn't have run again, but I don't know if she even knew she was.

This is on her staff for continuing the Weekend and Bernie's act and other Democrats who haven't spoken up about her health. Like I said, it's just cruel to do this to someone with dementia.

She’s been diagnosed with dementia

Or

Is that just rhetoric?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She was introducing herself to reporters as Mayor a few months ago. One of her staffers resigned and said that she is no longer mentally there and that her Chief of Staff is essentially acting as the Senator. There are videos of people bringing her in for votes, her being confused as to where she is, and them telling her what to vote.


I'm not knocking her in any way. This is just flat out elder abuse.

It's on her much the same was it was on RBG: retire before you become cripplingly old and lose your agency (and, in RBG's case, the legacy of everything you fought for).

She could have retired ~15 years ago at the age of ~74 after having served for ~15 years and would still have left a good legacy.

The Democrats are making the same mistake they did with Hillary if they think Biden is the right choice in '24. They have a great chance to change the narrative and routine if he walks away. There's no way whoever it loses the party momentum if the incumbent. It'll be seen as the right choice and the Republicans will scramble to deal with the change. They couldn't see the importance of 16 when it canev to the SC and they are missing the real life importance of what happens should they lose. They already know Congress is stacked against them and trump or someone like him will have 2 years minimum fee reign to burn at the speed similar to Florida. It'll set back causes and all the progress the left has spent 50 years fighting for, and it'll be fine in 2.

Where is our Zalensky?

Jon Stewart may be the best hope, but the old men politicians can't think that way. Strategically, they are fighting the battle they think they can win and they are missing the why they'll lose if they stick with tired tactics of another ancient white man.

I think it's totally different than Hillary. Hillary wasn't the incumbent president.

I agree that it's the right thing to pick someone else in a utopia, but politics is the art of the practical/possible, etc. Part of choosing Biden to run in 2020 was choosing him to run again in 2024 if he won and wanted to run again. They are the same decision, and you take the good with the bad on those things.

Biden does well with old white moderates in the Midwest.

And that's who you need to win elections right now.

As a follow-up to albion....

In 2020, the 10 closest states were:

1. Georgia
2. Arizona
3. Wisconsin
4. Pennsylvania
5. North Carolina
6. Nevada
7. Michigan
8. Florida
9. Texas
10. Minnesota

Show me a potential Democratic candidate with a better shot in most of those states than Biden. Serious proposal - I'm interested in seeing ideas.

Too early to tell but I'm grasping for any good news, and Yellen's comment is somewhat positive.

This will be a huge test for McCarthy. It sounds like he and Biden will come to a deal. If McCarthy can get the MAGA caucus to agree to it, then he's a more powerful/better Speaker than we all assumed coming out of his clown show of an election.

As someone who does not want a global recession that will forever diminish the United States, I hope that (1) they come to a deal, and (2) the MAGAs go along with it.

Then we can lurch to the next crisis.

Well, you are obviously wrong about a global recession.

Just a moment...

It's good there hasn't been a upswell of support for Trump's position. Article has some GOP publicly disagreeing.

So yeah, if it was between DeSantis or Trump, I'd take DeSantis any day. Much less dangerous to the country (and world).

Another headache for Joe.

I'm sure additional funding will get approved (not all GOP are against it) but Joe may have to compromise on something.

The end of Ukraine aid is rapidly approaching. Reupping it won’t be easy - POLITICO

At this point, I'm fine with a default. Seems silly to go through this song and dance ever year and maybe the fuck around crowd should find out what happens.

It's one of the dumbest parts of our government. Congress can pass bills to spend money, and the president is constitutionally required to make sure that money is spent correctly, but we have an arbitrary debt ceiling that prevents him from doing his constitutional duty unless congress agrees to let him spend the money they allocated.

Either the 14th ammendment or the duties of the presidency should make a debt ceiling unnecessary.

Eh....
some of the stuff DeSantis is doing n Florida would destroy us as a nation. Trump is an idiot, but I'm not sure the ling term damage would be as bad a what DeSantis would do.

I think it is safe to say we really can't afford as a nation for either of them to win.

They are both dangerous. Trump would turn the entire government into a Trump state. DeSantis would do a lot of damage in a more or less "within norms" way (using the legislature and executive branches kinda like he's done in Florida). They are both bad but DeSantis actually worries me more because, outside of court challenges to the constitutionality of any of it, it will be done within the system.

RFK Jr. is so desperate to be Trump's "unity" running mate. Dems aren't looking for a candidate that endlessly praises Trump.

I was wrong. Feinstein didn't miss any time at all according to her.

Dianne Feinstein's health: The senator seems not to remember being absent from the Capitol.

By the way, I'm not knocking her at all. This is flat-out elder abuse and everyone carrying on this charade should be ashamed of themselves.

Thank you Turbo Tax (and like) for paving the way, but think it's a no-brainer for the IRS to do this.

I chatted with someone from Australia that said his tax information was preloaded into the tax system for him. So all he had to do was review and maybe do some exceptions to complete his taxes. This is where we should be, everything from employers, banks, investments etc. pre-loaded.

It won't get everything but 80-20 is good enough.

The IRS is working on software to allow taxpayers to file online : NPR

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CsTn5...c4MTIwNjQ2YQ==


VERY NSFW

Surely the republicans would be against making it easier to take care of taxes considering they’d like to completely make it harder to impossible to pay your taxes… let alone those you couldn’t avoid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TurboTax has been actively trying to demolish that road & lobbying to keep taxes complicated, since the last millennium fwiw.

Inside TurboTax’s 20-Year Fight to Stop Americans From Filing Their Taxes for Free — ProPublica

The GOP saw Covid and decided they are anti-vax now.

This is astonishing. Between 2019 and 2023, the % of Republicans who said parents should be able to put their kids in public school without the MMR vaccine (even if it creates health risks for others), more than doubled, from 20% to 42%.https://t.co/LFxoEvzCHj pic.twitter.com/DVKunxrrRo

— Samuel Perry (@profsamperry) May 16, 2023

but God made measles for a reason

(bring on polio! their kids won't ever get it only commies like FDR)

I'm impressed we've gotten to a (initial) kumbaya moment with 2 weeks before Jun 1. Good sign there's not heated rhetoric right now between Joe & McCarthy.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/17/debt...-progress.html

I would hate doing negotiations for a living.

Going in, everyone knows that there will end up being a deal that falls within a pretty narrow band of possibilities. You may know that months ahead of time.

But, under game theory, it makes no sense for either side to start to move toward that deal until there is real deadline pressure.

So you end up with tense last-minute negotiations to end up where you knew you were going to end up a month ago.

It would annoy my sense of efficiency.

dola:

That said, in this case, I do think that the delay had some effect--the GOP House was able to pass a bill, the GOP senators stood behind the House, and the public didn't buy the "GOP must pass a clean bill" take--none of which were known at the beginning of the process.

Basically, McCarthy has been getting a run of pretty good breaks here. It will be fascinating to see if his MAGA rump ends up fucking this up for him.

To get Biden from "We won't negotiate, period." to "We are open to some SNAP work requirements" without the Senate and with a narrow House majority is a legislative butt kicking.

Agree completely, except for the 14th amendment part.

I can't get on board with 'just default and let them learn what it means' because that's not what will actually happen. People will blame those not on their political team for the consequences, not their own actions.

I'm not saying default, I'm saying the 14th ammendment states we cannot default on our debts so the debt ceiling isn't necessary and is actually unconstitutional itself. Between the 14th ammendment and the constitutional requirements of the presidency it doesn't make sense that we fight this battle at all.

Dola

The right is arguing that the 14th ammendment is outdated and doesn't apply to today's debts while at the same time arguing that the 2nd ammendment applies today the same way it did in the 1700s. I'm sure the Supreme Court would see it the same way with no fucks given to the hypocrisy.

I know you weren't saying default, I just didn't bother quoting the other person in the thread who did say that.

It would be an interesting experiment (?) to see how a default would play out. But yeah, what idiot would purposely want a default.

It would be a horrible experiment to see how a default would play out.

This is true too. I'd use globally catastrophic.

I get what you are saying. There's a "morbid curiosity."

FWIW, I was considering how Biden might be thinking about this.

He was willing to take the heat of withdrawing from Afghanistan that neither Obama nor Trump was willing to take. He seems able to do what he considers to be the right thing at some political cost.

So I wonder if the thinking might go like this--pretty much cave to the GOP to get an extension past the 2024 election (which isn't quite as bad as it seems b/c it is mostly stuff that would be on the table in September anyway).

Then, if he gets re-elected, pre-emptively declare the 14th Amendment renders the debt ceiling unconstitutional and let those chips fall where they may.

He'd take a political hit for that, but he's not running for reelection at that point, and it's hard to imagine that the GOP would get much milage running in 2028 against a Dem with the message of "4 years ago, another person got rid of the debt ceiling"

Not sure I support below idea. But I've not thought of it before and it's kinda appealing.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/26/how-...ebt-limit.html

Okay, is it about time for a 2024 Election thread?

DeSantis vs Trump should be very entertaining.

Ron DeSantis expected to enter 2024 presidential race next week | CNN Politics

Entertaining isn't the word I'd use, but I suppose a dedicated place for speculating early is reasonable since we're starting to get more candidates in.

According to this report, he just kept getting the benefit of the doubt.

Accused Pentagon leaker was warned repeatedly about his mishandling of classified documents, prosecutors say | CNN Politics


If this reporting turns out to be true, it looks like he received at maximum two letters of counseling for the three incidents. A letter of counseling is basically the lowest level of formal discipline. Think of a soccer ref making a mental note that a player has made multiple fouls and the next foul will result in a yellow card. I think Rainmaker worked intel so maybe he can give his opinion. I contacted a few current and former military colleagues and asked what they thought the punishment would be if someone did the first one alone. The consensus which I agree with was an Article 15(think court-martial without the court) and more than likely a reduction in rank. The combo of all three incidents may result in possible jail time being added.

The idea that his superiors just told him to cease and desist but still were sending him to classified briefings is insulting. They also need to be named and face jail time.

The first would have been an investigation and likely loss of clearance, or at the very least a suspension of clearance where I was stationed and worked (at a NSA site). A field or company grade article 15 would be a given. it would really come down to the command, but I'd say most likely a field grade which is the more severe of the two.

If he somehow survived the first with his clearance then the 2nd would 100% be another article 15, suspension of clearance, and separation from service (he would be kicked out).

This is pretty unfathomable to me. As I mentioned above, I worked at a NSA site for a few years but I also worked at a non-NSA military job handling classified materials on a daily basis so I've seen both a more civilian based environment for handling classified materials along with a 100% military environment. Both places took these things incredibly seriously. I can't even imagine standing in front of our commander or 1SG trying to explain this happening once.

DeSantis will get trounced by Trump. The shit he is doing in Florida is fucking draconian to the point even Trump will use it against him. People went nuts on the DeSantis train after his landslide win but that had way more to do with his opponent. Look what just happened in Jacksonville. DeSantis IMO has peaked, or maybe has a shot at a senate seat but that is it. Zero chance at the presidency.

I get his problem in terms of timing, he's soon done as Governor and the two GOP Senators are young in terms of the Senate. In that sense, it probably is close to now or never, but he's risking his future going after Trump, IMO. He's shown no willingness to really go at Trump nor an ability to defend Trump's attacks. Add to that his personal quirks, I mean look at him laugh, and I think there's a very high likelihood that Trump will end his ambitions the same way he did Little Marco.

Wasn't he Air Force? They were always the weirdest and had a certain target demo they propped up (white Christian nationalists). Guessing that's why he got more leeway than anyone else would.

Most of the military folks I came across in Bahrain were cool but the Air Force people were really fucking weird and acted like they were in a cult.

Arguably the biggest strength the US has, even more than its military, is being the reserve currency of the world. Middle East wars have been started over keeping this the case and Russia and China are trying to unravel some of it now because of how the sanctions are hitting the former and to give strength to the latter. It will eventually not be the case. The Euro kindof gained some traction but some of that got walked back during their defaults (Greece, Spain, etc). I suspect a US default would hasten people moving away from the dollar. I don't mean like it would happen the next day. It would just significantly accelerate a change that's already taking place.



SI

It would, but it might be wake up call to be cognizant of who you vote for. At some point the debt ceiling has to stop being used as an extortion attempt. You have to say "no, we aren't giving in to these insane demands and if we default, it's on you".

This isn't a tiny demographic. Over half the country voted for these people. Fuck around and find out.

Here's who owns U.S. debt:



The "Fed and gov't accounts" section is mostly social security trusts.

So, as a thought exercise, imagine the government decides to default on tranches of debt. Which of those groups are you OK with defaulting on, and imagine the knock-on effects.

Like, maybe you're OK with defaulting on foreign debt. Fine. But now lots of other countries start to plunge into default. Congrats, you've kicked off a global recession.

Or maybe you hate insurance companies. Fine, a whole bunch go bankrupt, then a lot of claims don't get paid out, then a lot of people and other companies go bankrupt. Congrats, you've caused a recession.

And so on and so on.

Not the point, I know, but I wonder who "other" is.

Not the same article as the graphic but below hints at the "other". Individuals, estates, businesses etc.

China & Japan are the countries that own the most.

Good to see Britney Gringer standing up for the national anthem this year.

It would have been interesting to see the back-and-forth arguments, recriminations etc. If she hadn't, it'd only up tensions which I don't think we needed, so good for her in compromising.

https://sports.yahoo.com/brittney-gr...032531066.html

Wondering whatever happened to arms merchant Viktor Blout?

Other than for telling Trump to "seek refuge" in Russia, he's been busy painting. So on the surface, doesn't seem to have been a bad trade.

Viktor Blout is showing his artwork in Moscow | Fortune'

IMO It is the most interesting if there is no back and forth arguments, recriminations, if there are no tension built up or if the discussions are limited to just her standing for the anthem especially when you read her reasons for why she is actually standing now.

I'm sure we see things differently, but little doubt to me that if she wasn't "rescued" by the US government, she would be continuing with her not standing, staying in locker room silent protest.

The press release is carefully worded and is like a "sorry but not really sorry" or more accurately "not really sorry but have to say something". But good enough.

It's been a while now and I've not read anything about her publicly denying the MJ. I'm assuming this means she really wasn't framed by the Russians.

I am pretty sure she had the vape cartridge and knew she had it, but to your point, Griner has always come across to me as a very sincere person, so I don't think she has a hidden message. I think she is very appreciative and this is her way to express that.

Obviously it would be a complete PR nightmare had see gone back to not standing, but I still take her at her word.

I agree with the first part and the press release being good enough is the point for me. It is obvious to anyone who reads that statement that she has not changed her position from when she was kneeling to now that she is standing. In fact she has doubled down on her position. If she can hold the same exact position including supporting those that choose not to stand for the anthem, but stands for the anthem herself, that tells me that the value of standing for the anthem is not nearly as important as people were making it out to be. So what exactly was everyone mad about?

The other thing that is interesting is now that I know the reason BG is standing for the anthem, I would like to know why the other players are standing for the anthem to see if their reasons are as thoughtful and nuanced as her, whether I agree with them or not. I would hate to think everyone else is doing it just to not cause any waves or follow along like sheep.

So a verified blue check account on Twitter, Bloomberg Feed, posted that an explosion occurred at the Pentagon this morning, complete with picture. This is FALSE and apparantly likely was created by AI:


https://twitter.com/AndyBCampbell/st...54574644887558

Sportsdigs had that 2 weeks ago.

Sportsdigs was always ahead of its time :)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/clima...n-deal-states/

Quiet competency was one of the things I missed during Trump.

No one knows more about the Colorado River than Donald Trump.

He would have given nonsensical soundbites about water. And then the whole thing would have been derailed because three different grifters in his orbit were using the negotiations to try to score huge government payouts. And then the MAGA line would have been to blame it all on California liberals, which everyone would have bought hook line and sinker.

This is so depressingly accurate.

I know zip about Tim Scott but glad he's getting some serious $ for his campaign. Have to read more about his policies.

Currently still at "anyone but Trump" phase.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/22/larr...-campaign.html

Found something they can cut from the budget. Also some work for the DOJ if they can be bothered.




Well until he can admit America is a racist country I can't take him seriously.

Seems like if the goal is to beat Trump, Republicans should get behind one candidate. Every person like Scott who enters the race just makes it easier for Trump. It almost makes me wonder if the people putting money behind these candidates are Trump supporters. The whole "Third Way" group is basically setup to elect Trump.

Anyway, I don't know a ton about Scott outside of the fact it's always funny to me that both Senators from South Carolina are deeply in the closet. Like what are the odds?

or why can't like a ton of people enter the race and actually have a platform

so he's running a "Hillary" campaign then?

They can. But I think Republicans are in the Trump or no-Trump camp. If the no-Trump camp is split between 6 candidates, they'll never beat him. This is sort of what happened in 2016.

Scott entering the race is mostly nothing. Makes me think he's just looking for some national attention to angle for that VP spot. He's more or less Black Mike Pence. Or it's some money laundering operation because there is no one sane who thinks he stands a chance against Trump in a primary.

i guess my question is rhetorical....because there really is no answer other than people are dumb coorupt stupid ignorant greedy horrible ....stares blankly...

There is truth to this. There were a lot of people against Trump but they couldn't coalesce around any particular candidate. It's almost if the Republican anti-trumpers need their own primary before the general Republican primary.

I think Scott is mostly trying to get his name in the news in order to build some national gravitas in anticipation of a 2028 run. Or maybe he'll catch a lucky break such as Trump getting a criminal conviction.

Maybe it is the algorithm but I am really seeing a lot of variations from GOP accounts on Twitter, actual accounts, not dopes like Charile Kirk, all claiming some version of "if we default it is Joe Bidens fault." I am 100% sure the plan is default and blame it on him. This is the same "stolen /election" playbook they used by saying for months leading up to the election if Trump loses it is because of fraud, then when it happened the idea was already seeded, watered, and grown.

That already exists. It's called the Demonrat Primary.

Hell, I'm ready to be all-in on DeSantis and hope Trump steps aside/stands down but it doesn't take much to figure out what the worse than useless sacks of shit under the "never Trump" banner are. They're fucking (D)s.

The only meaningful difference in the bulk of them versus actual Ds is the willingness to publicly declare moral, intellectual, and economical bankruptcy, interested in nothing so much as destroying a once great nation as quickly & thorougly as possible.

And for as little regard as I have for Ds -- I still rate the party below Al-Qaida -- at least they're willing to just admit who & what they are, if not in words than by deed and association. That's more than can be said for that pack of rabble.

what the hell

There he is


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Eh, I would just say that it's tough to expect the average person to make these kinds of calls and thread the needle between being principled and being practical. That's assuming they are conscientious and well-informed, which of course isn't going to be the case for most anyway.

It's not all that different from how Democrats coalesced around Biden when it looked like Bernie might win the nomination, or how a lot of Democrats don't want Biden to run again but at the same time won't accept the y current alternatives such as RFK Jr. I just think at a certain point you either accept the front-runner/presumptive nominee or you don't, but also we're really early in the process and it's way too soon to require that kind of narrowing.

One point I would differ on in 2016; I don't think the problem was that the anti-Trump republicans wouldn't support a single candidate. I think it was that the majority of republicans wanted Trump. As hilarious as it is to hear Jon calling life-long, dedicated Republicans like John Kasich Democrats, the voters told their party leadership they didn't like what they were selling and liked Trump better. If that's still the case, they'll nominate him again regardless of who the other candidates are.

Are we pretending RFK Jr. is a viable "alternative?" I don't think saying democrats won't accept him as an alternative is a valid point anymore than it would be to call your kid a picky eater and then citing his refusal to eat his own excrement as your example.

Yeah, RFK Jr. isn't serious.

It is understood that if your incumbent president wants to run for reelection, you don't oppose that. You'll always get your cranks who try. But all the serious candidates are going to wait four years. (Or jump in if Biden has a health scare and decides not to run again).

Ok, but that's really kind of the point, isn't it? I agree with albion that the incumbent running again is expected, but about half of Democrats say they don't want him to. So if you're going to say that, then you have to say who would be a reasonable alternative.

You can say the same thing about alternatives to Trump in 2016 or this year, none of them are acceptable and so on. I mean, I don't see it that way and I'm sure you likely don't, but I think it's also obvious that at least in '16 that is the way a lot of republican primary voters saw it. And if you want to throw out the RFK example be my guest, but the Sanders-Biden situation I think is fairly squarely on point.

My only point here is RFK Jr. is not a serious alternative. He's a literal joke.