by JanieM
As suggested by Pete, a thread for anyone who wants to talk about "the Biden thing."
I've been skimming BJ threads about it and picking up snippets of opinions and news articles from here and there, and I think my best course is to say nothing atm (as per this song), although I might chime in with a comment or two later on.
*****
The first picture is of the barn on the property where I live, at the time when my ex and I bought the place in 1987.
The second picture shows why the building was (and is) still standing despite how decrepit it looks in the first picture.
You can see a picture of how it looks now, more or less, in this old BJ/On the Road thread. The picture of the basketball court in that thread is out of date; the court now has a beautiful new hardwood floor, described by the carpenter who installed it in this reddit thread.
It's just possible that the pictures are a metaphor for my feelings about "the Biden thing"……
I asked for this, so…
I don’t see how it works without Joe. He’s the horse. Harris is good, but not great, per the numbers. Attack ads are already out.
Should it go differently, there’s a name I haven’t heard offered. Not to say it hasn’t been, but I’m mostly hearing Whitmer, Newsom,… So here goes:
Hakeem Jeffries.
I don’t know what that ticket looks like. But that dude is Presidential.
I asked for this, so…
I don’t see how it works without Joe. He’s the horse. Harris is good, but not great, per the numbers. Attack ads are already out.
Should it go differently, there’s a name I haven’t heard offered. Not to say it hasn’t been, but I’m mostly hearing Whitmer, Newsom,… So here goes:
Hakeem Jeffries.
I don’t know what that ticket looks like. But that dude is Presidential.
I am remiss. Thanks, Janie!
I am remiss. Thanks, Janie!
I don’t see how it works without Joe.
Briefly, it doesn’t. First off, there are real issues with deciding to simply ignore the wishes of all the primary voters. Second, there’s no way for anybody (except maybe Harris) to use the millions in Biden’s campaign fund. Third, there’s no way anybody can build a national campaign organization in the time available. Fourth, there’s no way an instant concensus is reached about who the alternate nominee should be.
Basically, everybody calling for Biden to step aside is pining for their (carefully unnamed) version of the One Magical Candidate who can step in and instantly save the day. Well, except for the ones who honestly don’t have an idea of who said Magical savior might be.
The other thing I notice is that the replace Biden folks uniformly ignore two little details. Yes, Biden had an off night. But he’s had a variety of campaign appearances, interviews, Presidental appearances, etc. since — in all of which he’s been just fine.
Also, it’s worth looking at the reactions of regular voters, especially undecided voters. Not being political junkies, they haven’t been paying close attention. And this is the first time in 3 years that they’ve seen Trump without careful editing. They express some concern about Biden. But are horrified and appalled by Trump. “Scary” seems to have been the description volunteered most.
What it appears to come down to, at least to my eyes, is the the chattering class, and editorial writers, ignored Trump and focused exclusively on Biden’s performance on that single occasion. Voters appear to have a quite different reaction. And don’t seem to be particularly persuaded by the anti-Biden hype.
I don’t see how it works without Joe.
Briefly, it doesn’t. First off, there are real issues with deciding to simply ignore the wishes of all the primary voters. Second, there’s no way for anybody (except maybe Harris) to use the millions in Biden’s campaign fund. Third, there’s no way anybody can build a national campaign organization in the time available. Fourth, there’s no way an instant concensus is reached about who the alternate nominee should be.
Basically, everybody calling for Biden to step aside is pining for their (carefully unnamed) version of the One Magical Candidate who can step in and instantly save the day. Well, except for the ones who honestly don’t have an idea of who said Magical savior might be.
The other thing I notice is that the replace Biden folks uniformly ignore two little details. Yes, Biden had an off night. But he’s had a variety of campaign appearances, interviews, Presidental appearances, etc. since — in all of which he’s been just fine.
Also, it’s worth looking at the reactions of regular voters, especially undecided voters. Not being political junkies, they haven’t been paying close attention. And this is the first time in 3 years that they’ve seen Trump without careful editing. They express some concern about Biden. But are horrified and appalled by Trump. “Scary” seems to have been the description volunteered most.
What it appears to come down to, at least to my eyes, is the the chattering class, and editorial writers, ignored Trump and focused exclusively on Biden’s performance on that single occasion. Voters appear to have a quite different reaction. And don’t seem to be particularly persuaded by the anti-Biden hype.
Oh yes. Forgot to mention that various (Republican) Attorney Generals have announced that they will bring suit to keep anybody not Biden off the ballot.
I think they’re just eager to muddy the waters. But they may also be hoping that Democrats will decide that, if the Republicans (appear to sincerely, because of course they are sincere) want to run against Biden, that’s another reason to replace him. And if you buy that bridge….
Oh yes. Forgot to mention that various (Republican) Attorney Generals have announced that they will bring suit to keep anybody not Biden off the ballot.
I think they’re just eager to muddy the waters. But they may also be hoping that Democrats will decide that, if the Republicans (appear to sincerely, because of course they are sincere) want to run against Biden, that’s another reason to replace him. And if you buy that bridge….
I guess some of those guys were those who until recently tried to keep Biden OFF the ballot on the pretense that the Dem national convention was too late thus missing their state deadlines.
I wonder how SCOTUS would have handled that.
I guess some mealy-mouthed ‘election rules are a state thing, we do not take this case.’ completely ignoring their own actions to keep states from striking His Orangeness off the ballot. Or they could claim that the latter case was a malicious one against a specific candidate while the former is not because it would apply to any (Dem) candidate not specifically Biden.
I guess some of those guys were those who until recently tried to keep Biden OFF the ballot on the pretense that the Dem national convention was too late thus missing their state deadlines.
I wonder how SCOTUS would have handled that.
I guess some mealy-mouthed ‘election rules are a state thing, we do not take this case.’ completely ignoring their own actions to keep states from striking His Orangeness off the ballot. Or they could claim that the latter case was a malicious one against a specific candidate while the former is not because it would apply to any (Dem) candidate not specifically Biden.
I am still uncharacteristically unsure of what I think should happen, but I am filled with anxiety about it. Contrary to what wj says, I thought the polls (sluggish immediately after the debate) have since moved significantly against Joe. I hope this is not so, or at least that it’s temporary…
I am still uncharacteristically unsure of what I think should happen, but I am filled with anxiety about it. Contrary to what wj says, I thought the polls (sluggish immediately after the debate) have since moved significantly against Joe. I hope this is not so, or at least that it’s temporary…
Ezra Klein touts Jim Clyburn’s “mini primary” concept in today’s Times. I don’t even know how such a “primary” could be set up and run in such short order. But you know Jim is 83 years old.
The panic is really starting to have a signficant effect….to the point of being self-reinforcing.
If a potted plant can beat Trump, then go with the potted plant you know….or whatever.
Ezra Klein touts Jim Clyburn’s “mini primary” concept in today’s Times. I don’t even know how such a “primary” could be set up and run in such short order. But you know Jim is 83 years old.
The panic is really starting to have a signficant effect….to the point of being self-reinforcing.
If a potted plant can beat Trump, then go with the potted plant you know….or whatever.
THe fucking MSM “pundits” and “top reporters” have decided to kneecap Biden because doing so feeds their narcissism.
I saw an interview with one such sociopathic “journalist” on CNN. She kept referring to Biden’s “impairment” as if it was an established fact and justified her participation in pushing that meme by saying that the Biden admin had “kept it secret” and therefore she had a duty to break the story.
And these “journalists” who pride themselves on covering the controversial “cutting edge story” are as dedicated to herd instinct as cows. Once one or two of them decide that Gore’s remark about the Internet is THE BIG STORY or CLINTON EMAIL SCANDAL then that’s all they can think about or write about because all the others are doing it.
They couldn’t cover a real story to save their lives. They can’t even tell when a story of importance is right in their faces.
Meanwhile, while they are trying to be the kool kidz, they aren’t covering the real substantive stories that matter. That stupid jerk on CNN had nothing to say about the 2025 project.
Power corrupts but power also attracts the already corrupted. One of the symptoms of the decadence and degeneracy of America in freefall toward fascism is the leadership of the media and their self-aggrandizing, selfish, egotistical misrepresentation of themselves as journalists when the reality is they create and promote stories when their precious feelings of entitlement aren’t sufficiently pandered to. The woman on CNN was in a snit because no one from the Biden admin had called her up and said, “He’s old and tired after working his butt off for the last four years so he might not be on top of his game for the debate.”
She actually justified her kneecapping of Biden by saying, “There are issues with both candidates.”
FUck them all. I have cancelled my Wapo and NYT subscriptions, will never read Politico again (actually rarely read it anyway), and would stop watching national TV “news” except I never watch it already. FWIW I wrote nasty responses in the comments to every “news” article that came up on my email “news” page.
They are electing Trump. And they are doing it because they believe that kneecapping Democrats makes them real true independent brave journalists who aren’t afraid to cover the controversial story when in fact they are afraid to cover real stories and they aren’t journalists at all.
THe fucking MSM “pundits” and “top reporters” have decided to kneecap Biden because doing so feeds their narcissism.
I saw an interview with one such sociopathic “journalist” on CNN. She kept referring to Biden’s “impairment” as if it was an established fact and justified her participation in pushing that meme by saying that the Biden admin had “kept it secret” and therefore she had a duty to break the story.
And these “journalists” who pride themselves on covering the controversial “cutting edge story” are as dedicated to herd instinct as cows. Once one or two of them decide that Gore’s remark about the Internet is THE BIG STORY or CLINTON EMAIL SCANDAL then that’s all they can think about or write about because all the others are doing it.
They couldn’t cover a real story to save their lives. They can’t even tell when a story of importance is right in their faces.
Meanwhile, while they are trying to be the kool kidz, they aren’t covering the real substantive stories that matter. That stupid jerk on CNN had nothing to say about the 2025 project.
Power corrupts but power also attracts the already corrupted. One of the symptoms of the decadence and degeneracy of America in freefall toward fascism is the leadership of the media and their self-aggrandizing, selfish, egotistical misrepresentation of themselves as journalists when the reality is they create and promote stories when their precious feelings of entitlement aren’t sufficiently pandered to. The woman on CNN was in a snit because no one from the Biden admin had called her up and said, “He’s old and tired after working his butt off for the last four years so he might not be on top of his game for the debate.”
She actually justified her kneecapping of Biden by saying, “There are issues with both candidates.”
FUck them all. I have cancelled my Wapo and NYT subscriptions, will never read Politico again (actually rarely read it anyway), and would stop watching national TV “news” except I never watch it already. FWIW I wrote nasty responses in the comments to every “news” article that came up on my email “news” page.
They are electing Trump. And they are doing it because they believe that kneecapping Democrats makes them real true independent brave journalists who aren’t afraid to cover the controversial story when in fact they are afraid to cover real stories and they aren’t journalists at all.
I thought the polls (sluggish immediately after the debate) have since moved significantly against Joe. I hope this is not so, or at least that it’s temporary…
Actually, post debate surveys have been moving towards Biden. See, for example, this from The Hill. (And note the The Hill, these days, leans right.)
I thought the polls (sluggish immediately after the debate) have since moved significantly against Joe. I hope this is not so, or at least that it’s temporary…
Actually, post debate surveys have been moving towards Biden. See, for example, this from The Hill. (And note the The Hill, these days, leans right.)
THe fucking MSM “pundits” and “top reporters” have decided to kneecap Biden because doing so feeds their narcissism.
And more importantly, their bottom line. Eyeballs = $$$
They should be talking about Project 2025 and, you know, every sociopathic thing that Trump and the Republican Party writ large effuses. But “Biden, – Old” is easy and easily digestible. And that’s where the eyeballs are right now. And to be blunt, he’s handing it to them.
(To her credit – and she is still not entirely excused – Nicole Wallace makes a point of saying “twice impeached, convicted felon” whenever she mentions TFG.)
The panic is really starting to have a significant effect….to the point of being self-reinforcing.
I think that’s right, unfortunately.
When I wrote my response to novakant, it was less than 12 hours after the debate. I gave an honest assessment. I hoped it wasn’t a popular opinion and looked forward to finding out I was wrong in the morning news cycle.
I wasn’t.
Democratic leadership is… “assessing”, as NYSEG likes to tell me when the power goes out. But everyone from David Axelrod to Michael Moore to Nate Silver have suggested that Joe needs to step down. Regardless of what I’d prefer, I don’t see that momentum abating without a some kind of “I got this!” moment. And it can’t be a one-off.
I’m torn. I don’t want to feed the flames. I probably should declare that the Emperor’s new duds are the snazziest of snazzy. But that’s hard to do after what I saw. After what I continue to see. Biden held serve with Stephanopoulos, but was that enough? Did anyone find that reassuring? (and good gravy, that fake tan. really?)
I try to picture the conversation if Romney or Pence or even McCarthy was on the debate stage. Even with an unhinged SCOTUS looming, what’s the temperature of the conversation? Is it this frantic?
Polls… A few weeks ago I remember seeing 2 articles from the same source (I think it was Reuters?) One said Biden was ahead. The other said Trump. They were posted an hour apart.
As for “The Biden Thing” title: Hey, man. My vocabulary is as good as, like, whatever.
THe fucking MSM “pundits” and “top reporters” have decided to kneecap Biden because doing so feeds their narcissism.
And more importantly, their bottom line. Eyeballs = $$$
They should be talking about Project 2025 and, you know, every sociopathic thing that Trump and the Republican Party writ large effuses. But “Biden, – Old” is easy and easily digestible. And that’s where the eyeballs are right now. And to be blunt, he’s handing it to them.
(To her credit – and she is still not entirely excused – Nicole Wallace makes a point of saying “twice impeached, convicted felon” whenever she mentions TFG.)
The panic is really starting to have a significant effect….to the point of being self-reinforcing.
I think that’s right, unfortunately.
When I wrote my response to novakant, it was less than 12 hours after the debate. I gave an honest assessment. I hoped it wasn’t a popular opinion and looked forward to finding out I was wrong in the morning news cycle.
I wasn’t.
Democratic leadership is… “assessing”, as NYSEG likes to tell me when the power goes out. But everyone from David Axelrod to Michael Moore to Nate Silver have suggested that Joe needs to step down. Regardless of what I’d prefer, I don’t see that momentum abating without a some kind of “I got this!” moment. And it can’t be a one-off.
I’m torn. I don’t want to feed the flames. I probably should declare that the Emperor’s new duds are the snazziest of snazzy. But that’s hard to do after what I saw. After what I continue to see. Biden held serve with Stephanopoulos, but was that enough? Did anyone find that reassuring? (and good gravy, that fake tan. really?)
I try to picture the conversation if Romney or Pence or even McCarthy was on the debate stage. Even with an unhinged SCOTUS looming, what’s the temperature of the conversation? Is it this frantic?
Polls… A few weeks ago I remember seeing 2 articles from the same source (I think it was Reuters?) One said Biden was ahead. The other said Trump. They were posted an hour apart.
As for “The Biden Thing” title: Hey, man. My vocabulary is as good as, like, whatever.
But everyone from David Axelrod to Michael Moore to Nate Silver have suggested that Joe needs to step down. Regardless of what I’d prefer, I don’t see that momentum abating without a some kind of “I got this!” moment.
If you define “everyone” as professional columnists, pundits, and editorial writers, then yeah. But is that really a significant voter demographic? Whether registered voters or likely voters.
Somehow, actual voters are shifting towards Biden. And the ones who watched the debate came away far more negative about Trump than about Biden. As long as that’s the case, the only way Biden steps down is a major health event. (And, given their general health, Trump seems more likely to experience one than Biden does,)
But everyone from David Axelrod to Michael Moore to Nate Silver have suggested that Joe needs to step down. Regardless of what I’d prefer, I don’t see that momentum abating without a some kind of “I got this!” moment.
If you define “everyone” as professional columnists, pundits, and editorial writers, then yeah. But is that really a significant voter demographic? Whether registered voters or likely voters.
Somehow, actual voters are shifting towards Biden. And the ones who watched the debate came away far more negative about Trump than about Biden. As long as that’s the case, the only way Biden steps down is a major health event. (And, given their general health, Trump seems more likely to experience one than Biden does,)
If you define “everyone” as professional columnists, pundits, and editorial writers, then yeah. But is that really a significant voter demographic? Whether registered voters or likely voters.
It’s an indication of the zeitgeist, yeah. And it’s optics. It’s teleVISION. When people turn on the tv, that’s where opinions are formed. A couple billion dollars will be spent on these campaigns – a lot of money to waste if it doesn’t move the needle.
We need “Bodily Autonomy!!!” to be front and center, not “Biden’s old”. The punditry can help, but he’s gotta lead on this.
23,000 votes in Wisconsin? 11,000 in Georgia? We are playing in the margins and it counts.
When people get their ballot and Sharpie and go to their privacy cubbies and hover over those circles, what’s the image they’re going to see? It ain’t the CHIPs Act.
That’s what I fear.
If there’s a silver lining to this, it’s that the Republicans have no idea who to attack either.
If you define “everyone” as professional columnists, pundits, and editorial writers, then yeah. But is that really a significant voter demographic? Whether registered voters or likely voters.
It’s an indication of the zeitgeist, yeah. And it’s optics. It’s teleVISION. When people turn on the tv, that’s where opinions are formed. A couple billion dollars will be spent on these campaigns – a lot of money to waste if it doesn’t move the needle.
We need “Bodily Autonomy!!!” to be front and center, not “Biden’s old”. The punditry can help, but he’s gotta lead on this.
23,000 votes in Wisconsin? 11,000 in Georgia? We are playing in the margins and it counts.
When people get their ballot and Sharpie and go to their privacy cubbies and hover over those circles, what’s the image they’re going to see? It ain’t the CHIPs Act.
That’s what I fear.
If there’s a silver lining to this, it’s that the Republicans have no idea who to attack either.
As wj points out, the problem isn’t that the entitled self-important “everyone” can vote. The problem is that they are opinion leaders (They strive to be opinion leaders, indeed revel in it) while taking no responsibility for where they lead. Instead, they go all hurt and innocent and say, “I had to cover the story.” The truth is they are the gatekeepers who decide what stories will predominate and their decisions should be based on how important the story is to our society–not on their need to feel important. The same shitty people who feel compelled to yammer on about Biden’s age are not telling the public about climate change or the very significant actions taken by the Biden admin. Nor are they talking about the 2025 Project. NOr are they talking about the effects of voter suppression. They screen out the issues that actually affect us for preening self-aggrandizement of pretending to be insightful and fair-minded.
As wj points out, the problem isn’t that the entitled self-important “everyone” can vote. The problem is that they are opinion leaders (They strive to be opinion leaders, indeed revel in it) while taking no responsibility for where they lead. Instead, they go all hurt and innocent and say, “I had to cover the story.” The truth is they are the gatekeepers who decide what stories will predominate and their decisions should be based on how important the story is to our society–not on their need to feel important. The same shitty people who feel compelled to yammer on about Biden’s age are not telling the public about climate change or the very significant actions taken by the Biden admin. Nor are they talking about the 2025 Project. NOr are they talking about the effects of voter suppression. They screen out the issues that actually affect us for preening self-aggrandizement of pretending to be insightful and fair-minded.
The truth is they are the gatekeepers who decide what stories will predominate and their decisions should be based on how important the story is to our society–not on their need to feel important.
Emphasis on “should”. (Let’s not bring up Judith Miller, or 3, 3! Pulitzers for Tom Friedman?!).
But they are maybe the most mutable. This is kinda my point. The tastemakers need to run with the traffic – they just need to sound provocative!. Biden has to give them something to latch onto which gives them permission to make the case. Jennifer Rubin (ugh) doesn’t want TFG anymore than I, but she’ll gladly take the low-hanging fruit. And right now that’s Biden’s age.
It just is.
Change it.
The truth is they are the gatekeepers who decide what stories will predominate and their decisions should be based on how important the story is to our society–not on their need to feel important.
Emphasis on “should”. (Let’s not bring up Judith Miller, or 3, 3! Pulitzers for Tom Friedman?!).
But they are maybe the most mutable. This is kinda my point. The tastemakers need to run with the traffic – they just need to sound provocative!. Biden has to give them something to latch onto which gives them permission to make the case. Jennifer Rubin (ugh) doesn’t want TFG anymore than I, but she’ll gladly take the low-hanging fruit. And right now that’s Biden’s age.
It just is.
Change it.
One of the things that stuck out to me as I read Jann Wenner’s (deeply narcissistic) autobiography a while back was the extent to which Rolling Stone’s journalism had always been compromised by Wenner’s urge to be a gossip. The magazine’s struggles in recent years with poorly sourced articles reflect how dysfunctional that urge has made RS.
I’m coming to the conclusion that this is essentially true of the entirety of the US press that is covering politics in this moment. It’s all gossip and rumor at the expense of information and analysis. They chase dirt, and mistake that dirt for useful information while ignoring the dire consequences for our larger shared context.
It’s, I believe, a cynical close relative of doomerism, and I’m not having it.
One of the things that stuck out to me as I read Jann Wenner’s (deeply narcissistic) autobiography a while back was the extent to which Rolling Stone’s journalism had always been compromised by Wenner’s urge to be a gossip. The magazine’s struggles in recent years with poorly sourced articles reflect how dysfunctional that urge has made RS.
I’m coming to the conclusion that this is essentially true of the entirety of the US press that is covering politics in this moment. It’s all gossip and rumor at the expense of information and analysis. They chase dirt, and mistake that dirt for useful information while ignoring the dire consequences for our larger shared context.
It’s, I believe, a cynical close relative of doomerism, and I’m not having it.
Rebecca Solnit making sense. A lonely voice amidst the shrieking.
Amidst all the magical thinking being thrown around, maybe the most nonsensical is the belief (or pretense) that if Biden is replaced (leaving aside all the financial, logistical, and political barriers to doing that) the same wolf pack won’t go after his replacement at the top of the ticket just as hard, and in just as much bad faith.
Rebecca Solnit making sense. A lonely voice amidst the shrieking.
Amidst all the magical thinking being thrown around, maybe the most nonsensical is the belief (or pretense) that if Biden is replaced (leaving aside all the financial, logistical, and political barriers to doing that) the same wolf pack won’t go after his replacement at the top of the ticket just as hard, and in just as much bad faith.
The inevitable nature of carping sniping from smug lazy pseudo-pundits will happen regardless of who the Dem candidate is, but to me that is not a reason to change candidates. There’s a real yearning, I think, for new faces and the right new face could be elected before the pseudos are able to devise a line of attack.
So, if Biden decided that he really isn’t up for it and freed his delegates and we came out of the convention with a Whitmer/Harris ticket, I think we’d be better off, sniping assholes or not.
However, I think we’d come out with Harris at the top of the ticket and I think there is enough racists misogyny in our culture, combine with the sneering of the pseudo-pundits, for her to lose.
The inevitable nature of carping sniping from smug lazy pseudo-pundits will happen regardless of who the Dem candidate is, but to me that is not a reason to change candidates. There’s a real yearning, I think, for new faces and the right new face could be elected before the pseudos are able to devise a line of attack.
So, if Biden decided that he really isn’t up for it and freed his delegates and we came out of the convention with a Whitmer/Harris ticket, I think we’d be better off, sniping assholes or not.
However, I think we’d come out with Harris at the top of the ticket and I think there is enough racists misogyny in our culture, combine with the sneering of the pseudo-pundits, for her to lose.
We need “Bodily Autonomy!!!” to be front and center, not “Biden’s old”.
And, as wonkie says, the 2025 Project. Every Dem everywhere leading with that might make more people (as I already do) think that Biden in a coma, or dead, would be a better President than Trump.
We need “Bodily Autonomy!!!” to be front and center, not “Biden’s old”.
And, as wonkie says, the 2025 Project. Every Dem everywhere leading with that might make more people (as I already do) think that Biden in a coma, or dead, would be a better President than Trump.
They chase dirt, and mistake that dirt for useful information while ignoring the dire consequences for our larger shared context.
If they were just chasing dirt, we’d be seeing a flood of Epstein/Trump stories. “Trump should step down!” columns everywhere. I mean, there’s far more to work with there.
But perhaps there are, and I’m just not seeing them…? Ha!
They chase dirt, and mistake that dirt for useful information while ignoring the dire consequences for our larger shared context.
If they were just chasing dirt, we’d be seeing a flood of Epstein/Trump stories. “Trump should step down!” columns everywhere. I mean, there’s far more to work with there.
But perhaps there are, and I’m just not seeing them…? Ha!
From Janie’s link: cluttering, which is not an intellectual deficiency but a sometimes hectic and disorderly translation of thoughts into words.
That was, and is, my sense of it. But again, to do the job you have to GET the job. Yeah, it’s optics. It’s theatre. That’s how we roll. We can bitch about how stupid that is, but this is where we are.
I mean, as long as we’re complaining about how unfair the dollar-driven media is, how the fuck does half the participating electorate in this country want to vote for TFG??? I’d like to blame the FTFNT, but I don’t think that explains it.
there is enough racists misogyny in our culture
This might.
From Janie’s link: cluttering, which is not an intellectual deficiency but a sometimes hectic and disorderly translation of thoughts into words.
That was, and is, my sense of it. But again, to do the job you have to GET the job. Yeah, it’s optics. It’s theatre. That’s how we roll. We can bitch about how stupid that is, but this is where we are.
I mean, as long as we’re complaining about how unfair the dollar-driven media is, how the fuck does half the participating electorate in this country want to vote for TFG??? I’d like to blame the FTFNT, but I don’t think that explains it.
there is enough racists misogyny in our culture
This might.
Umm… I apologize for taking up a lot of oxygen here, but I’m trying to reply cuz this was kinda my stupid idea.
If you want me to STFU, I will be neither offended nor surprised.
Otherwise, I’m just gonna continue on as if this was going well.
Umm… I apologize for taking up a lot of oxygen here, but I’m trying to reply cuz this was kinda my stupid idea.
If you want me to STFU, I will be neither offended nor surprised.
Otherwise, I’m just gonna continue on as if this was going well.
So, if Biden decided that he really isn’t up for it and freed his delegates and we came out of the convention with a Whitmer/Harris ticket, I think we’d be better off, sniping assholes or not.
However, I think we’d come out with Harris at the top of the ticket and I think there is enough racists misogyny in our culture, combine with the sneering of the pseudo-pundits, for her to lose.
I’m not sure but what there’s a typo or the equivalent in there somewhere, but I don’t think (to put it mildly) that we would be better off replacing Biden at the top of the ticket with another woman instead of Harris. How do you suppose the Black constituency would react to that? How do you suppose a lot of misogynist Ds would react to a ticket made of of two women, regardless of color? SRSLY?
Never mind the logistical problems wj has mentioned in relation to who can and can’t use Biden’s campaign funds, setting up campaign infrastructure, etc. I agree with wj that any one of these combinations of fantasy replacements is magical thinking. It would be a shitshow from start to finish.
So, if Biden decided that he really isn’t up for it and freed his delegates and we came out of the convention with a Whitmer/Harris ticket, I think we’d be better off, sniping assholes or not.
However, I think we’d come out with Harris at the top of the ticket and I think there is enough racists misogyny in our culture, combine with the sneering of the pseudo-pundits, for her to lose.
I’m not sure but what there’s a typo or the equivalent in there somewhere, but I don’t think (to put it mildly) that we would be better off replacing Biden at the top of the ticket with another woman instead of Harris. How do you suppose the Black constituency would react to that? How do you suppose a lot of misogynist Ds would react to a ticket made of of two women, regardless of color? SRSLY?
Never mind the logistical problems wj has mentioned in relation to who can and can’t use Biden’s campaign funds, setting up campaign infrastructure, etc. I agree with wj that any one of these combinations of fantasy replacements is magical thinking. It would be a shitshow from start to finish.
Pete — The title of the post wasn’t meant snarkily. And you’re fine. Obviously people have things to say about this, even me, against my better judgment.
Carry on!
Pete — The title of the post wasn’t meant snarkily. And you’re fine. Obviously people have things to say about this, even me, against my better judgment.
Carry on!
So, if Biden decided that he really isn’t up for it and freed his delegates and we came out of the convention with a Whitmer/Harris ticket, I think we’d be better off, sniping assholes or not.
However, I think we’d come out with Harris at the top of the ticket and I think there is enough racists misogyny in our culture, combine with the sneering of the pseudo-pundits, for her to lose.
A couple of questions.
So, if Biden decided that he really isn’t up for it and freed his delegates and we came out of the convention with a Whitmer/Harris ticket, I think we’d be better off, sniping assholes or not.
However, I think we’d come out with Harris at the top of the ticket and I think there is enough racists misogyny in our culture, combine with the sneering of the pseudo-pundits, for her to lose.
A couple of questions.
JanieM, Solnit is just about always good. Thanks for the link!
Pete: “This might”. Then we are doomed, regardless.
Pete, “Otherwise, I’m just gonna continue on…..”. Please do.
For some real vitriol, see the LGM commentariat’s revolt against Campos. So no, this is not going well.
JanieM, Solnit is just about always good. Thanks for the link!
Pete: “This might”. Then we are doomed, regardless.
Pete, “Otherwise, I’m just gonna continue on…..”. Please do.
For some real vitriol, see the LGM commentariat’s revolt against Campos. So no, this is not going well.
First, why do you think the misogynists wouldn’t come after Whitmer just as hard against Harris? Because that seems to be implicit in your proposed ticket.
She’s white.
I like her because she speaks clearly and plainly, she stood up to the Mich. fascists, she led for all kinds of legislation that benefited workers, and she is leader of a blue collar swing state.
Will she get the nomination? Of course not.
First, why do you think the misogynists wouldn’t come after Whitmer just as hard against Harris? Because that seems to be implicit in your proposed ticket.
She’s white.
I like her because she speaks clearly and plainly, she stood up to the Mich. fascists, she led for all kinds of legislation that benefited workers, and she is leader of a blue collar swing state.
Will she get the nomination? Of course not.
If they were just chasing dirt, we’d be seeing a flood of Epstein/Trump stories. “Trump should step down!” columns everywhere. I mean, there’s far more to work with there.
But perhaps there are, and I’m just not seeing them…? Ha!
The thing is, dirt on Trump just doesn’t count in the same way. Dirt on Trump is a dog-bites-man story. There’s no margin for changing a narrative or exciting anyone. Everyone already expects the worst from him, so the worst doesn’t move the needle.
In a sense they treat Trump AS media.
If they were just chasing dirt, we’d be seeing a flood of Epstein/Trump stories. “Trump should step down!” columns everywhere. I mean, there’s far more to work with there.
But perhaps there are, and I’m just not seeing them…? Ha!
The thing is, dirt on Trump just doesn’t count in the same way. Dirt on Trump is a dog-bites-man story. There’s no margin for changing a narrative or exciting anyone. Everyone already expects the worst from him, so the worst doesn’t move the needle.
In a sense they treat Trump AS media.
If they were just chasing dirt, we’d be seeing a flood of Epstein/Trump stories. “Trump should step down!” columns everywhere. I mean, there’s far more to work with there.
Yes!
So why not? If what I’ve seen is true, it’s… well that’s it, isn’t it? It’s so unconscionable it’s hard to process. Even for slime like TFG. Plus “fake news” and a vengeful potential President in charge of a complicit DoJ…
“The Democrats don’t matter,” Bannon told Lewis. “The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.”
***************
I’m gonna shut up for a bit, at least. Chicago race is about to start. Yeah, I watch NASCAR. Don’t judge me. 🙂
If they were just chasing dirt, we’d be seeing a flood of Epstein/Trump stories. “Trump should step down!” columns everywhere. I mean, there’s far more to work with there.
Yes!
So why not? If what I’ve seen is true, it’s… well that’s it, isn’t it? It’s so unconscionable it’s hard to process. Even for slime like TFG. Plus “fake news” and a vengeful potential President in charge of a complicit DoJ…
“The Democrats don’t matter,” Bannon told Lewis. “The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.”
***************
I’m gonna shut up for a bit, at least. Chicago race is about to start. Yeah, I watch NASCAR. Don’t judge me. 🙂
She’s white.
Just like Hillary.
She’s white.
Just like Hillary.
Bobbyp: For some real vitriol, see the LGM commentariat’s revolt against Campos. So no, this is not going well.
I don’t read LGM except occasionally when someone links to it. But there’s generally so much vitriol and arrogance that I never stay long. Plus, it can be hard to make heads or tails of an longstanding, ongoing conversation, which is what a blog like that (or even this) is.
So — Campos is suggesting that there’s a strong possibility that Biden is being watched for Parkinson’s? And the WH is lying about it? I couldn’t stomach enough comments to find anything but snark — i.e. I probably didn’t persist long enough to find the vitriol. Plus, I detest threaded comments.
Shorter me, done whining for now: if you have time, can you provide an explanatory headline or two?
Bobbyp: For some real vitriol, see the LGM commentariat’s revolt against Campos. So no, this is not going well.
I don’t read LGM except occasionally when someone links to it. But there’s generally so much vitriol and arrogance that I never stay long. Plus, it can be hard to make heads or tails of an longstanding, ongoing conversation, which is what a blog like that (or even this) is.
So — Campos is suggesting that there’s a strong possibility that Biden is being watched for Parkinson’s? And the WH is lying about it? I couldn’t stomach enough comments to find anything but snark — i.e. I probably didn’t persist long enough to find the vitriol. Plus, I detest threaded comments.
Shorter me, done whining for now: if you have time, can you provide an explanatory headline or two?
Plus, I detest threaded comments.
Me too. The comments are reduced to endless trash talk when a site switches to threaded comments.
Plus, I detest threaded comments.
Me too. The comments are reduced to endless trash talk when a site switches to threaded comments.
Well, at least France has been saved tonight:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/07/exit-poll-shows-surprise-win-for-left-wing-alliance-in-french-election
I hope something similar happens on November 5, but it all looks very worrying at this point in time:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/
Well, at least France has been saved tonight:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/07/exit-poll-shows-surprise-win-for-left-wing-alliance-in-french-election
I hope something similar happens on November 5, but it all looks very worrying at this point in time:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/
For some real vitriol, see the LGM commentariat’s revolt against Campos. So no, this is not going well.
It has been an interesting week at LGM. In terms of posting, Cheryl Rofer on a completely different tack from the rest of the regular front-pagers. (Campos is not the only doomster.) I’m on Cheryl’s side of the argument. If you give up — ie, keeping Biden means the Dems lose, replacing Biden with anyone means the Dems lose — then why bother voting? The Biden administration has been very good on policy. Trump himself is incoherent, and Project 2025 is so regressive it out to be a disaster for the whole Republican party.
It’s the same position I take on climate change. If your starting position is we’re past the tipping point, we’re going to get not just +2 °C but +4 °C, why bother doing anything?
For some real vitriol, see the LGM commentariat’s revolt against Campos. So no, this is not going well.
It has been an interesting week at LGM. In terms of posting, Cheryl Rofer on a completely different tack from the rest of the regular front-pagers. (Campos is not the only doomster.) I’m on Cheryl’s side of the argument. If you give up — ie, keeping Biden means the Dems lose, replacing Biden with anyone means the Dems lose — then why bother voting? The Biden administration has been very good on policy. Trump himself is incoherent, and Project 2025 is so regressive it out to be a disaster for the whole Republican party.
It’s the same position I take on climate change. If your starting position is we’re past the tipping point, we’re going to get not just +2 °C but +4 °C, why bother doing anything?
As I see it we have the following scenarios:
1. Biden stays in. He either loses a close election or wins a close election. Toss up.
2. Biden resigns and turns over the job to Harris. Might be a close race, might not, but the press will be brutal. I don’t believe she could win against Trump (misogeny, race), but who knows?
3. Biden takes himself out of the race and annoits Harris. Similar to #2 above, except the talk about Biden’s mental state would not cease. Harris’ campaign could wilt in this shadow.
4. Biden resigns or dies. An “open convention” is magically arranged to select a replacement. This is pure fantasy land stuff, but if it happened, I would wager it would be an utter political disaster for the Democrats.
Conclusion: We are panicing too soonly.
As I see it we have the following scenarios:
1. Biden stays in. He either loses a close election or wins a close election. Toss up.
2. Biden resigns and turns over the job to Harris. Might be a close race, might not, but the press will be brutal. I don’t believe she could win against Trump (misogeny, race), but who knows?
3. Biden takes himself out of the race and annoits Harris. Similar to #2 above, except the talk about Biden’s mental state would not cease. Harris’ campaign could wilt in this shadow.
4. Biden resigns or dies. An “open convention” is magically arranged to select a replacement. This is pure fantasy land stuff, but if it happened, I would wager it would be an utter political disaster for the Democrats.
Conclusion: We are panicing too soonly.
Yeah, I watch NASCAR. Don’t judge me. 🙂
That’s nothing. I watch golf. 🙂
Yeah, I watch NASCAR. Don’t judge me. 🙂
That’s nothing. I watch golf. 🙂
Raining in Chicago.
That’s nothing. I watch golf. 🙂
Mark my words: Rickie Fowler is gonna win a Major.
Raining in Chicago.
That’s nothing. I watch golf. 🙂
Mark my words: Rickie Fowler is gonna win a Major.
Plus, I detest threaded comments… Me too. The comments are reduced to endless trash talk when a site switches to threaded comments.
There is no single answer. At LGM, a new post may get 500 comments the first hour it’s up. 25 of those may be the retired geek community there* bickering over something that happened 20 years ago. It’s not possible to deal with it without some sort of threading. Of course, there’s also the peculiar thread ordering imposed by the way the Disqus commenting system handles threads**.
* Nominally politics/culture blog communities seem to invariably include a number of (mostly) retired commenters whose background is tech, engineering, or applied mathematics. Each of those used broadly.
** The correct question is not “Is Disqus broken?” but rather “How is Disqus broken today?” From time to time at LGM I threaten to get volunteers from the retirees in (*) and write an alternative to Disqus that actually works.
Plus, I detest threaded comments… Me too. The comments are reduced to endless trash talk when a site switches to threaded comments.
There is no single answer. At LGM, a new post may get 500 comments the first hour it’s up. 25 of those may be the retired geek community there* bickering over something that happened 20 years ago. It’s not possible to deal with it without some sort of threading. Of course, there’s also the peculiar thread ordering imposed by the way the Disqus commenting system handles threads**.
* Nominally politics/culture blog communities seem to invariably include a number of (mostly) retired commenters whose background is tech, engineering, or applied mathematics. Each of those used broadly.
** The correct question is not “Is Disqus broken?” but rather “How is Disqus broken today?” From time to time at LGM I threaten to get volunteers from the retirees in (*) and write an alternative to Disqus that actually works.
I understand why people fear that misogyny and racism would undercut Harris’s chances, but I also think that Harris’s would seriously get under Trump’s skin were he to have to deal with her as his direct competitor, and his usual modes of attack would hit very differently with women and POC than they do when he’s aiming them at an older white dude.
I think Harris might make Trump absolutely lose his shit. Don’t know how well he would deal with a black woman having none of his bullshit and going after his breezy and vacuous gish gallop like a prosecutor.
I don’t think we’ve ever seen that happen before, and that has the potential to flip the script.
And I don’t know that the media could flip the script back if that were to go viral.
Not a prediction, just exploring what I think is a latent dynamic that a lot of pundits seem not to have considered.
I understand why people fear that misogyny and racism would undercut Harris’s chances, but I also think that Harris’s would seriously get under Trump’s skin were he to have to deal with her as his direct competitor, and his usual modes of attack would hit very differently with women and POC than they do when he’s aiming them at an older white dude.
I think Harris might make Trump absolutely lose his shit. Don’t know how well he would deal with a black woman having none of his bullshit and going after his breezy and vacuous gish gallop like a prosecutor.
I don’t think we’ve ever seen that happen before, and that has the potential to flip the script.
And I don’t know that the media could flip the script back if that were to go viral.
Not a prediction, just exploring what I think is a latent dynamic that a lot of pundits seem not to have considered.
I have often linked to LGM in the front page because I obviously agree with their take on a lot of things, though I never look in the comments. so this comment should be taken with a grain of salt but I do think the discussion about Biden laid bare the oppositional dynamic between the front pagers and the LGM commentariat. I don’t think it is helped by threaded comments and the disqus system, though I do think that it tends to hide it from view.
I’m rather agnostic on the question of Biden, for couple of reasons
-an administration is not one person
-the press has a laser like focus on Biden and has left the various whateverthehell you call what the orange pustule does to be handled by late nite TV
-physical capability and mental acuity are two different things, though you can impact the latter by stressing the former
So I appreciate Pete’s call, as I would not have stuck my head up to post this.
I have often linked to LGM in the front page because I obviously agree with their take on a lot of things, though I never look in the comments. so this comment should be taken with a grain of salt but I do think the discussion about Biden laid bare the oppositional dynamic between the front pagers and the LGM commentariat. I don’t think it is helped by threaded comments and the disqus system, though I do think that it tends to hide it from view.
I’m rather agnostic on the question of Biden, for couple of reasons
-an administration is not one person
-the press has a laser like focus on Biden and has left the various whateverthehell you call what the orange pustule does to be handled by late nite TV
-physical capability and mental acuity are two different things, though you can impact the latter by stressing the former
So I appreciate Pete’s call, as I would not have stuck my head up to post this.
Just read that excellent Solnit piece, I don’t know how I missed it in yesterday’s Guardian.
Just read that excellent Solnit piece, I don’t know how I missed it in yesterday’s Guardian.
A bit off topic, but maybe that’s just as well…
Design matters. Maybe it’s the old (very not talented) graphic artist in me, but I very much appreciate how clean ObWi is. The well-considered comments as opposed to twitteresque snark is an important part of that. But BJ, LGM… it’s so busy. My old eyes can barely manage the posts, let alone the comments. And they’re impossible on mobile.
A bit off topic, but maybe that’s just as well…
Design matters. Maybe it’s the old (very not talented) graphic artist in me, but I very much appreciate how clean ObWi is. The well-considered comments as opposed to twitteresque snark is an important part of that. But BJ, LGM… it’s so busy. My old eyes can barely manage the posts, let alone the comments. And they’re impossible on mobile.
The greater time/effort cost of unthreaded comments instills some discipline in the commenting. Trash comments are often just not worth the effort. Threaded comments allow commenting as fast as you can type and click post.
The greater time/effort cost of unthreaded comments instills some discipline in the commenting. Trash comments are often just not worth the effort. Threaded comments allow commenting as fast as you can type and click post.
Janie, thanks for the Solnit link. The Guardian is pretty much the only periodical I read these days for editorial content and analysis. Haven’t read the NYT since Bill Keller days, and recently cut the Post loose as well.
Biden is obviously old, and he had a remarkably poor showing in the debate. That’s not great.
He’s also been a remarkably effective POTUS, all while being the oldest person ever to take office. He was older when he took office than any previous POTUS was upon leaving office.
So in terms of his ability to do the job, there would have to be good reason to believe he has declined a lot. Which isn’t obvious to me, even given his debate performance.
Were he to step down, the alternatives would be Harris, or someone other than Harris. Harris is the obvious default choice, not least because (a) folks have actually voted for her in primaries, albeit as VPOTUS, and (b) she’s the only one who can use the existing campaign $$$.
Anyone – including Harris – who stepped in for Biden would have a pretty heavy lift in front of them. Anyone other than Harris would *also* have to raise an incredible crap-ton of $$$ from a standing start, and would *also* have to either have or establish strong name recognition and lay out a strong policy portfolio.
I have a lot of concerns about a Biden second term. The man would be, what, 85 years old when he left office. That’s getting way up there, and it’s a brutal job, for anyone at any age.
But I would also have concerns about a Harris presidency. I have great respect for her, but it’s not clear to me that she has the political chops that Biden brings to the table. Basically, IMO Biden in his 80’s will probably be a more effective POTUS than Harris would be. I mean no disrespect to Harris, I just think BIden’s unusually good at hands-on politics.
And I have even more concerns about a second Trump presidency. The man is an authoritarian son of a bitch, and his pals are all fascists.
Bottom line, I think Biden has a better shot at beating Trump than any other likely candidate, including Harris. Especially given the pragmatic reality that we are less than four months out at this point.
It’s not ideal. It’s far from ideal, actually. But it’s the reality.
Tell me who is more likely to beat Trump in November.
If your answer is Harris, I’m not sure you appreciate the headwind that a mixed race woman will face with four months to get it done. Again, absolutely no disrespect to Harris, I have a great regard for her. It’s just reality.
If your answer is anyone else, however notable and accomplished, as a practical matter I think it’s a non-starter.
If Biden decides to step down, so be it. He will leave the position with my respect and profound gratitude.
If he doesn’t then folks need to get his back. It’s him or Trump.
Janie, thanks for the Solnit link. The Guardian is pretty much the only periodical I read these days for editorial content and analysis. Haven’t read the NYT since Bill Keller days, and recently cut the Post loose as well.
Biden is obviously old, and he had a remarkably poor showing in the debate. That’s not great.
He’s also been a remarkably effective POTUS, all while being the oldest person ever to take office. He was older when he took office than any previous POTUS was upon leaving office.
So in terms of his ability to do the job, there would have to be good reason to believe he has declined a lot. Which isn’t obvious to me, even given his debate performance.
Were he to step down, the alternatives would be Harris, or someone other than Harris. Harris is the obvious default choice, not least because (a) folks have actually voted for her in primaries, albeit as VPOTUS, and (b) she’s the only one who can use the existing campaign $$$.
Anyone – including Harris – who stepped in for Biden would have a pretty heavy lift in front of them. Anyone other than Harris would *also* have to raise an incredible crap-ton of $$$ from a standing start, and would *also* have to either have or establish strong name recognition and lay out a strong policy portfolio.
I have a lot of concerns about a Biden second term. The man would be, what, 85 years old when he left office. That’s getting way up there, and it’s a brutal job, for anyone at any age.
But I would also have concerns about a Harris presidency. I have great respect for her, but it’s not clear to me that she has the political chops that Biden brings to the table. Basically, IMO Biden in his 80’s will probably be a more effective POTUS than Harris would be. I mean no disrespect to Harris, I just think BIden’s unusually good at hands-on politics.
And I have even more concerns about a second Trump presidency. The man is an authoritarian son of a bitch, and his pals are all fascists.
Bottom line, I think Biden has a better shot at beating Trump than any other likely candidate, including Harris. Especially given the pragmatic reality that we are less than four months out at this point.
It’s not ideal. It’s far from ideal, actually. But it’s the reality.
Tell me who is more likely to beat Trump in November.
If your answer is Harris, I’m not sure you appreciate the headwind that a mixed race woman will face with four months to get it done. Again, absolutely no disrespect to Harris, I have a great regard for her. It’s just reality.
If your answer is anyone else, however notable and accomplished, as a practical matter I think it’s a non-starter.
If Biden decides to step down, so be it. He will leave the position with my respect and profound gratitude.
If he doesn’t then folks need to get his back. It’s him or Trump.
I have great respect for her, but it’s not clear to me that she has the political chops that Biden brings to the table. Basically, IMO Biden in his 80’s will probably be a more effective POTUS than Harris would be.
I don’t pay detailed attention to politics in such a way that I know much about Newsom, Whitmer, Pritzker, and all the others. But my headline-level impression is that there isn’t one of them who brings the political chops that Biden does.
Maybe Jeffries? Trained (?) and anointed (?) by Pelosi, whose political chops are unrivaled?
But I’m thinking here of getting things done while in office, not of electoral political chops, which is a different thing.
*****
It’s not possible to deal with it without some sort of threading.
Do you consider BJ’s method of allowing a comment to refer back to a specific previous comment to be a “sort of threading”? Because I think it threads that needle pretty well. 😉
I have great respect for her, but it’s not clear to me that she has the political chops that Biden brings to the table. Basically, IMO Biden in his 80’s will probably be a more effective POTUS than Harris would be.
I don’t pay detailed attention to politics in such a way that I know much about Newsom, Whitmer, Pritzker, and all the others. But my headline-level impression is that there isn’t one of them who brings the political chops that Biden does.
Maybe Jeffries? Trained (?) and anointed (?) by Pelosi, whose political chops are unrivaled?
But I’m thinking here of getting things done while in office, not of electoral political chops, which is a different thing.
*****
It’s not possible to deal with it without some sort of threading.
Do you consider BJ’s method of allowing a comment to refer back to a specific previous comment to be a “sort of threading”? Because I think it threads that needle pretty well. 😉
Pete, “Otherwise, I’m just gonna continue on…..”. Please do.
Thanks, bobby. But I think you left out the salient part. 😉
-an administration is not one person
Yes, but also, no. Ideally, any administration is constructed in a way that operates successfully even when a part fails. Even when really important parts fail.
I’m not a fan of a system constructed of “acting” parts. Makes me think of something “acting” like a door on the ground, but that fails miserably mid-flight*. How many positions were left vacant under Dolt 45?
But it’s the vision of the person in charge. It’s the “Biden Administration”, not just “the Administration”. I think people need a certain assurance about that.
-the press has a laser like focus on Biden and has left the various whateverthehell you call what the orange pustule does to be handled by late nite TV
Yes. But as discussed, the Biden campaign can change that narrative. They have to. They need to assuage fears and put the focus back where it belongs. That’s on them.
-physical capability and mental acuity are two different things, though you can impact the latter by stressing the former
Again, yes. I had not heard of the Parkinson’s thing until Janie mentioned it, but that shouldn’t be disqualifying. Get Michael J Fox out there. He’d be an excellent spokesman and is a great example of more engagement not less.
*Ok, that was a bit of a cheap analogy, but you get it.
Pete, “Otherwise, I’m just gonna continue on…..”. Please do.
Thanks, bobby. But I think you left out the salient part. 😉
-an administration is not one person
Yes, but also, no. Ideally, any administration is constructed in a way that operates successfully even when a part fails. Even when really important parts fail.
I’m not a fan of a system constructed of “acting” parts. Makes me think of something “acting” like a door on the ground, but that fails miserably mid-flight*. How many positions were left vacant under Dolt 45?
But it’s the vision of the person in charge. It’s the “Biden Administration”, not just “the Administration”. I think people need a certain assurance about that.
-the press has a laser like focus on Biden and has left the various whateverthehell you call what the orange pustule does to be handled by late nite TV
Yes. But as discussed, the Biden campaign can change that narrative. They have to. They need to assuage fears and put the focus back where it belongs. That’s on them.
-physical capability and mental acuity are two different things, though you can impact the latter by stressing the former
Again, yes. I had not heard of the Parkinson’s thing until Janie mentioned it, but that shouldn’t be disqualifying. Get Michael J Fox out there. He’d be an excellent spokesman and is a great example of more engagement not less.
*Ok, that was a bit of a cheap analogy, but you get it.
Tell me who is more likely to beat Trump in November.
That’s the $64,000 question.
Tell me who is more likely to beat Trump in November.
That’s the $64,000 question.
I have great respect for her, but it’s not clear to me that she has the political chops that Biden brings to the table.
The fact is, nobody alive, but nobody, has Biden’s political chops. All those years in the Senate, plus 8 years as VP. It’s just not something anyone else comes close to.
Another 4 years as his VP, and Harris may be as close as anyone else gets. Nothing like OJT at the elbow of a master.
I have great respect for her, but it’s not clear to me that she has the political chops that Biden brings to the table.
The fact is, nobody alive, but nobody, has Biden’s political chops. All those years in the Senate, plus 8 years as VP. It’s just not something anyone else comes close to.
Another 4 years as his VP, and Harris may be as close as anyone else gets. Nothing like OJT at the elbow of a master.
Tell me who is more likely to beat Trump in November.
For that, I’d have to know the level of magical thinking you’ll accept. (If the answer is to stick to reality, there simply isn’t anybody with a better shot.)
Do I get a magical candidate who everybody, politicians, convention delegates, and voters, instantly agrees on? Do I get to magically create a nationwide campaign organization instantly? Do I get a magic waiver of campaign finance laws, to transfer Biden’s campaign funds to whoever? Do I get to magically have the media and punditry do a 180 and support the new candidate? Inquiring minds want to know.
Tell me who is more likely to beat Trump in November.
For that, I’d have to know the level of magical thinking you’ll accept. (If the answer is to stick to reality, there simply isn’t anybody with a better shot.)
Do I get a magical candidate who everybody, politicians, convention delegates, and voters, instantly agrees on? Do I get to magically create a nationwide campaign organization instantly? Do I get a magic waiver of campaign finance laws, to transfer Biden’s campaign funds to whoever? Do I get to magically have the media and punditry do a 180 and support the new candidate? Inquiring minds want to know.
Long but worth it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2acbmSjSvvI
“Dear Media and Democratic Party”
There is absolutely no doubt the MSM wants Biden out, and absolutely no doubt they will keep pushing to have him drop out.
There is no reason for him to do so. The goalposts keep moving. He has done public events with no problems since the debate; he had a full medical workup back in January and released it to the public at the time; he has done interviews.
Nothing will satisfy the MSM who are “only asking questions” because “the issue is out there.” Nothing CAN satisfy them, short of Biden stepping down, Harris being dumped in favor of a White Male Savior, and Trump winning in November.
It is exactly what they did to Hillary, and I am going crazy because too many people refuse to see that.
Long but worth it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2acbmSjSvvI
“Dear Media and Democratic Party”
There is absolutely no doubt the MSM wants Biden out, and absolutely no doubt they will keep pushing to have him drop out.
There is no reason for him to do so. The goalposts keep moving. He has done public events with no problems since the debate; he had a full medical workup back in January and released it to the public at the time; he has done interviews.
Nothing will satisfy the MSM who are “only asking questions” because “the issue is out there.” Nothing CAN satisfy them, short of Biden stepping down, Harris being dumped in favor of a White Male Savior, and Trump winning in November.
It is exactly what they did to Hillary, and I am going crazy because too many people refuse to see that.
But I’m thinking here of getting things done while in office, not of electoral political chops, which is a different thing.
An important distinction, and one worth calling out.
That’s the $64,000 question.
Ain’t it, though!
But I’m thinking here of getting things done while in office, not of electoral political chops, which is a different thing.
An important distinction, and one worth calling out.
That’s the $64,000 question.
Ain’t it, though!
While I can’t decide what I think (“should he stay or should he go”), I do think that attributing nothing but negative qualities and motives to the people (mainly journalists) who are writing the pieces (that they are motivated purely by self-interest, are sneering, are narcissistic etc) without considering that they too may be desperately concerned, and fearful of a Trump presidency, but that their opinion and diagnosis of what should be done is different from yours (for any value of “you”) is very unfair.
We have disagreements about it here, and clearly the fact that nobody on ObWi holds their view out of arrogance or narcissism strongly suggests to me that although both possible courses of action are terribly risky, it is not a character flaw or unreasonable to hold either one of the possible views.
Arguing passionately against a course of action which one feels certain is doomed to lead to disaster is very understandable, but I do think it conceivable that people who hold the contrary opinion just as passionately, and who have a public platform to broadcast it, could be acting in good faith. It seems to me morally dangerous to assume the worst of people just because they disagree with one.
While I can’t decide what I think (“should he stay or should he go”), I do think that attributing nothing but negative qualities and motives to the people (mainly journalists) who are writing the pieces (that they are motivated purely by self-interest, are sneering, are narcissistic etc) without considering that they too may be desperately concerned, and fearful of a Trump presidency, but that their opinion and diagnosis of what should be done is different from yours (for any value of “you”) is very unfair.
We have disagreements about it here, and clearly the fact that nobody on ObWi holds their view out of arrogance or narcissism strongly suggests to me that although both possible courses of action are terribly risky, it is not a character flaw or unreasonable to hold either one of the possible views.
Arguing passionately against a course of action which one feels certain is doomed to lead to disaster is very understandable, but I do think it conceivable that people who hold the contrary opinion just as passionately, and who have a public platform to broadcast it, could be acting in good faith. It seems to me morally dangerous to assume the worst of people just because they disagree with one.
GFtNC – I’d be more inclined to a charitable view if Aaron Fritscher (legislative aide to Rep. Beyer) hadn’t put out a long Twitter thread about how reporters are only pursuing one narrative and ignoring any information that contradicts it.
They are pursuing one narrative to the point of creatively editing what people are telling them to make it seem like the opposite of what was actually said. Or ignoring altogether what people are telling them.
The reporters are saying – are telling the House aides they speak to – that their editors are pressuring them to do so.
I’d be more inclined to a charitable view if any of this was being done in honest good faith. But it is not.
GFtNC – I’d be more inclined to a charitable view if Aaron Fritscher (legislative aide to Rep. Beyer) hadn’t put out a long Twitter thread about how reporters are only pursuing one narrative and ignoring any information that contradicts it.
They are pursuing one narrative to the point of creatively editing what people are telling them to make it seem like the opposite of what was actually said. Or ignoring altogether what people are telling them.
The reporters are saying – are telling the House aides they speak to – that their editors are pressuring them to do so.
I’d be more inclined to a charitable view if any of this was being done in honest good faith. But it is not.
Opinions do differ, I’ll give you that.
From a BJ comment, and I haven’t fact-checked it:
The media’s Anti-Biden noise isn’t an accident:
— CNN: CEO Trump donor
— ABC: CEO Trump donor
— CBS: CEO Trump donor
— MSNBC: CEO Trump donor
— Washington Post: owner Jeff Bezo
— Wall Street Journal: owner Rupert Murdoch
— New York Times: CEO Trump donor
— New York Post: owner Rupert Murdoch
Opinions do differ, I’ll give you that.
From a BJ comment, and I haven’t fact-checked it:
The media’s Anti-Biden noise isn’t an accident:
— CNN: CEO Trump donor
— ABC: CEO Trump donor
— CBS: CEO Trump donor
— MSNBC: CEO Trump donor
— Washington Post: owner Jeff Bezo
— Wall Street Journal: owner Rupert Murdoch
— New York Times: CEO Trump donor
— New York Post: owner Rupert Murdoch
JanieM – The list is not entirely accurate: MSNBC’s CEO is not a Trump donor, and I was unable to confirm whether the NYT CEO is.
Sulzberger, the NYT publisher, may be a Trump supporter; I don’t know. What I do know, because this has been reported, is that he’s also told his newsroom that he’s using the age issue as revenge for Biden not giving the NYT an exclusive one-on-one interview. “Only *we* can determine his fitness for office!” Interviews with anyone else, public appearances, somehow don’t count.
CNN’s CEO is definitely a Trump supporter, if not donor.
WaPo’s new CEO worked for Murdoch in the UK (and was caught up in the phone hacking scandal), then reconfigured the WSJ after Murdoch bought it, and was brought into WaPo for the explicit purpose of making WaPo more popular on the Right. He also caused a stir when he tried to bribe a non-WaPo reporter to not do a story on his past with Murdoch – this is, apparently, SOP in UK journalism.
They have an agenda, and it isn’t an honest one.
JanieM – The list is not entirely accurate: MSNBC’s CEO is not a Trump donor, and I was unable to confirm whether the NYT CEO is.
Sulzberger, the NYT publisher, may be a Trump supporter; I don’t know. What I do know, because this has been reported, is that he’s also told his newsroom that he’s using the age issue as revenge for Biden not giving the NYT an exclusive one-on-one interview. “Only *we* can determine his fitness for office!” Interviews with anyone else, public appearances, somehow don’t count.
CNN’s CEO is definitely a Trump supporter, if not donor.
WaPo’s new CEO worked for Murdoch in the UK (and was caught up in the phone hacking scandal), then reconfigured the WSJ after Murdoch bought it, and was brought into WaPo for the explicit purpose of making WaPo more popular on the Right. He also caused a stir when he tried to bribe a non-WaPo reporter to not do a story on his past with Murdoch – this is, apparently, SOP in UK journalism.
They have an agenda, and it isn’t an honest one.
Arguing passionately against a course of action which one feels certain is doomed to lead to disaster is very understandable, but I do think it conceivable that people who hold the contrary opinion just as passionately, and who have a public platform to broadcast it, could be acting in good faith.
I’m willing to assume good faith on the part of someone I disagree with. IF they provide a plausible scenario for the course of action they espouse.
Suppose, for example, someone calls for Biden to step aside. Do they provide a specific alternate candidate (rather than just an unnamed magic better candidate)? Some do. Then, do they have a plausible plan to get their alternative into place? Other than those arguing for Harris, they don’t. Ditto for plans to maintain access to the Biden-Harris campaign funds, and to set up a national campaign organization.
In short, unless they are arguing for Harris as a replacement, good faith isn’t apparent. And somehow, those are thin on the ground.
Finally, a good faith argument for Harris to step in now really ought to provide some reason to think that Harris wouldn’t get attacked every bit as enthusiastically as Biden. With racism and misogyny added on. Not necessarily a convincing reason. But at least some kind of reason that acknowledges the problem.
Arguing passionately against a course of action which one feels certain is doomed to lead to disaster is very understandable, but I do think it conceivable that people who hold the contrary opinion just as passionately, and who have a public platform to broadcast it, could be acting in good faith.
I’m willing to assume good faith on the part of someone I disagree with. IF they provide a plausible scenario for the course of action they espouse.
Suppose, for example, someone calls for Biden to step aside. Do they provide a specific alternate candidate (rather than just an unnamed magic better candidate)? Some do. Then, do they have a plausible plan to get their alternative into place? Other than those arguing for Harris, they don’t. Ditto for plans to maintain access to the Biden-Harris campaign funds, and to set up a national campaign organization.
In short, unless they are arguing for Harris as a replacement, good faith isn’t apparent. And somehow, those are thin on the ground.
Finally, a good faith argument for Harris to step in now really ought to provide some reason to think that Harris wouldn’t get attacked every bit as enthusiastically as Biden. With racism and misogyny added on. Not necessarily a convincing reason. But at least some kind of reason that acknowledges the problem.
motives to the people (mainly journalists) who are writing the pieces (that they are motivated purely by self-interest, are sneering, are narcissistic etc)
Setting aside people commenting on blogs, I’d suggest that journalists actually DO have a motivation that is driven by self interest, though I don’t think they would be willing to admit it. The whole media ecosystem is driven by views and clicks, so if their story gets more of that, they are more than willing to provide it. Perhaps they can’t admit to themselves what is happening and can’t see that they may have a higher ‘truth’ to chase, but I would still say it is self interest, mediated thru the algorithm’s we have now that have gotten us into this mess.
motives to the people (mainly journalists) who are writing the pieces (that they are motivated purely by self-interest, are sneering, are narcissistic etc)
Setting aside people commenting on blogs, I’d suggest that journalists actually DO have a motivation that is driven by self interest, though I don’t think they would be willing to admit it. The whole media ecosystem is driven by views and clicks, so if their story gets more of that, they are more than willing to provide it. Perhaps they can’t admit to themselves what is happening and can’t see that they may have a higher ‘truth’ to chase, but I would still say it is self interest, mediated thru the algorithm’s we have now that have gotten us into this mess.
— CNN: CEO Trump donor
— ABC: CEO Trump donor
— CBS: CEO Trump donor
— MSNBC: CEO Trump donor
— New York Times: CEO Trump donor
Sorry, but do you have any sources for that? (And Murdoch’s relationship to Trump has been a bit ambivalent lately, to put it mildly.)
Also, why does every Democratic leaning outlet from the NYRB to Vox, from the New Yorker to Mother Jones etc. run this story as well?
Well, because it is a good story and that’s what journalists do.
I agree with lj, that clicks and profit play a role, but that wouldn’t matter if there wasn’t any there there. And the president losing his mental capabilities is definitely something remarkable.
Conclusion: We are panicing too soonly.
I think we should have panicked about a year ago and we wouldn’t be in this mess right now.
— CNN: CEO Trump donor
— ABC: CEO Trump donor
— CBS: CEO Trump donor
— MSNBC: CEO Trump donor
— New York Times: CEO Trump donor
Sorry, but do you have any sources for that? (And Murdoch’s relationship to Trump has been a bit ambivalent lately, to put it mildly.)
Also, why does every Democratic leaning outlet from the NYRB to Vox, from the New Yorker to Mother Jones etc. run this story as well?
Well, because it is a good story and that’s what journalists do.
I agree with lj, that clicks and profit play a role, but that wouldn’t matter if there wasn’t any there there. And the president losing his mental capabilities is definitely something remarkable.
Conclusion: We are panicing too soonly.
I think we should have panicked about a year ago and we wouldn’t be in this mess right now.
novakant: Sorry, but do you have any sources for that?
Can you read? I prefaced the list with this:
From a BJ comment, and I haven’t fact-checked it. (Emphasis added.)
I’ll add now because apparently I didn’t make it obvious enough the first time: “And I’m not going to.”
I’m grateful that CaseyL corrected some of it and gave the rest some nuance. I don’t think she was making it all up.
this story
There’s a difference between a “story” and an opinion piece. At this point a lot of what’s being written is a “story” based on assumptions about other people’s opinions. “People aren’t going to vote for the old guy. Well I will, but other people won’t.”
It seems to me morally dangerous to assume the worst of people just because they disagree with one.
Well then.
novakant: Sorry, but do you have any sources for that?
Can you read? I prefaced the list with this:
From a BJ comment, and I haven’t fact-checked it. (Emphasis added.)
I’ll add now because apparently I didn’t make it obvious enough the first time: “And I’m not going to.”
I’m grateful that CaseyL corrected some of it and gave the rest some nuance. I don’t think she was making it all up.
this story
There’s a difference between a “story” and an opinion piece. At this point a lot of what’s being written is a “story” based on assumptions about other people’s opinions. “People aren’t going to vote for the old guy. Well I will, but other people won’t.”
It seems to me morally dangerous to assume the worst of people just because they disagree with one.
Well then.
Dana Houle breaks it down. H/t Annie Laurie over at BJ.
As novakant notes, the time to have this discussion was about a year ago. And in fact the issue of Biden’s age was raised, and has been on a regular basis going back to the 2020 race.
And if there was a Johny or Jenny Unbeatable in the (D) bench – someone who would be a clearly stronger candidate than Biden – the time for that person to step forward and make their case was a year ago.
We are where we are. It’s Biden or Harris, and it’s not clear that Harris would have a better shot.
It sucks that Biden did so poorly in the debate. It’s concerning that he’s as old as he is.
But it’s him or Trump, and all the calls for him to step down are IMO not helpful.
Dana Houle breaks it down. H/t Annie Laurie over at BJ.
As novakant notes, the time to have this discussion was about a year ago. And in fact the issue of Biden’s age was raised, and has been on a regular basis going back to the 2020 race.
And if there was a Johny or Jenny Unbeatable in the (D) bench – someone who would be a clearly stronger candidate than Biden – the time for that person to step forward and make their case was a year ago.
We are where we are. It’s Biden or Harris, and it’s not clear that Harris would have a better shot.
It sucks that Biden did so poorly in the debate. It’s concerning that he’s as old as he is.
But it’s him or Trump, and all the calls for him to step down are IMO not helpful.
novakant: sorry for the snark. But I thought I had already said clearly that I didn’t have any sources.
GftNC: Who here is “assuming the worst of people” etc.? Also, extrapolating from the ObWi water cooler crowd to draw conclusions about the famous pundit/politician crowd is pretty shaky logic, ISTM.
*****
Heather Cox Richardson yesterday.
Also, the Dana Houle twitter thread that Anne Laurie quotes in this post reinforces the points that wj has been making about the utter impracticality of replacing Biden at this point.
novakant: sorry for the snark. But I thought I had already said clearly that I didn’t have any sources.
GftNC: Who here is “assuming the worst of people” etc.? Also, extrapolating from the ObWi water cooler crowd to draw conclusions about the famous pundit/politician crowd is pretty shaky logic, ISTM.
*****
Heather Cox Richardson yesterday.
Also, the Dana Houle twitter thread that Anne Laurie quotes in this post reinforces the points that wj has been making about the utter impracticality of replacing Biden at this point.
X-posted with russell. Glad to see we agree about the Dana Houle piece, among other things. 🙂
X-posted with russell. Glad to see we agree about the Dana Houle piece, among other things. 🙂
And finally, before I go off to play with little people for a couple of days —-
For the past few days BJ has been infested by clearly obvious trolls, and some not quite so obvious. The usual phenomena ensue: some people pie-ing them, others engaging them, others pleading with everyone NOT to engage them, nasty insults about body parts being thrown back and forth, etc. It has been almost possible to see some of the trolls laughing their asses off at their success in bending threads toward themselves.
But just now, in the comments to Anne Laurie’s post that includes the Dana Houle thread, there appeared this. The previous trolls have mostly been quite succinct, whereas this one rambles on. I’m not suggesting anyone waste time on it, but if you’re curious about the phenomenon Heather Cox Richardson writes about, and/or about AI, here’s a sample:
I say to myself: Ten years ago I would have said it’s someone in China who doesn’t yet know what they don’t know about English. Now I’m guessing it’s gotta be an AI.
And finally, before I go off to play with little people for a couple of days —-
For the past few days BJ has been infested by clearly obvious trolls, and some not quite so obvious. The usual phenomena ensue: some people pie-ing them, others engaging them, others pleading with everyone NOT to engage them, nasty insults about body parts being thrown back and forth, etc. It has been almost possible to see some of the trolls laughing their asses off at their success in bending threads toward themselves.
But just now, in the comments to Anne Laurie’s post that includes the Dana Houle thread, there appeared this. The previous trolls have mostly been quite succinct, whereas this one rambles on. I’m not suggesting anyone waste time on it, but if you’re curious about the phenomenon Heather Cox Richardson writes about, and/or about AI, here’s a sample:
I say to myself: Ten years ago I would have said it’s someone in China who doesn’t yet know what they don’t know about English. Now I’m guessing it’s gotta be an AI.
I’m persuaded enough by the arguments here, made by e.g. Janie, wj and russell, that I have no idea what the right thing to do is. And I have never doubted (and don’t doubt now) that there is, in HRC’s immortal phrase, a vast right wing conspiracy acting against Dem (and democratic) interests. My point is that it is not unlikely, that it is in fact likely, that the opposite argument can be made by perfectly reasonable people (even including some journalists and pundits,let alone Dem politicians) acting out of concern and fear of a Trump victory. Demonising anybody who disagrees (does anybody seriously think I need to go back to name names) is not only morally dangerous, it weakens the argument of anybody who does it. The argument is important enough to be conducted on its own merits.
I’m persuaded enough by the arguments here, made by e.g. Janie, wj and russell, that I have no idea what the right thing to do is. And I have never doubted (and don’t doubt now) that there is, in HRC’s immortal phrase, a vast right wing conspiracy acting against Dem (and democratic) interests. My point is that it is not unlikely, that it is in fact likely, that the opposite argument can be made by perfectly reasonable people (even including some journalists and pundits,let alone Dem politicians) acting out of concern and fear of a Trump victory. Demonising anybody who disagrees (does anybody seriously think I need to go back to name names) is not only morally dangerous, it weakens the argument of anybody who does it. The argument is important enough to be conducted on its own merits.
I’m at a loss to suggest anything about the best approach to this election. The situation feels like Euripides and Shakespeare teamed up to write it – maybe with a little help from Monty Python and The Simpsons to make it more absurd. It’s a 60-year-old political pimple that’s finally ready to pop. (A gross metaphor for a disgusting reality.)
*sigh*
I’m at a loss to suggest anything about the best approach to this election. The situation feels like Euripides and Shakespeare teamed up to write it – maybe with a little help from Monty Python and The Simpsons to make it more absurd. It’s a 60-year-old political pimple that’s finally ready to pop. (A gross metaphor for a disgusting reality.)
*sigh*
Oh, but there is one thing I want to mention. I’ve been seeing references to Project 2025 in various places, all grass roots – here, social media, texts from friends. It’s simmering, I think, and I’m hoping it becomes more prominent as something for people (voters!) to fear.
Oh, but there is one thing I want to mention. I’ve been seeing references to Project 2025 in various places, all grass roots – here, social media, texts from friends. It’s simmering, I think, and I’m hoping it becomes more prominent as something for people (voters!) to fear.
Concerning my 7:58, I checked a bit and the handle on that comment I quoted — that commenter (or at least that handle) has been around, if very sporadically, for a while. Needs an editor. I would say “don’t we all,” but he (male name in the handle) gets first dibs.
Concerning my 7:58, I checked a bit and the handle on that comment I quoted — that commenter (or at least that handle) has been around, if very sporadically, for a while. Needs an editor. I would say “don’t we all,” but he (male name in the handle) gets first dibs.
The argument is important enough to be conducted on its own merits.
Good luck with that.
The argument is important enough to be conducted on its own merits.
Good luck with that.
GFtNC – I don’t doubt the sincerity of people who are scared to death of another Trump Presidency. I’m scared to death, too. To be brutally honest, if that vomit puddle gets back into the WH, with all his misfit toys looking to turn the US into Russia, I’ll be balanced on the edge between suicidal and homicidal.
But people who are scared can make very bad decisions. “Fear is the mind-killer” and all that.
Also, I look at who’s doing the scaring. I look at their record, and their motives.
It doesn’t lessen the fear much, but it does clarify decisions of where to stand.
GFtNC – I don’t doubt the sincerity of people who are scared to death of another Trump Presidency. I’m scared to death, too. To be brutally honest, if that vomit puddle gets back into the WH, with all his misfit toys looking to turn the US into Russia, I’ll be balanced on the edge between suicidal and homicidal.
But people who are scared can make very bad decisions. “Fear is the mind-killer” and all that.
Also, I look at who’s doing the scaring. I look at their record, and their motives.
It doesn’t lessen the fear much, but it does clarify decisions of where to stand.
To me, the fundamental issue for this election year is that about half the country looks at Donald J Trump and says “yeah, that works for me”.
Something is deeply broken here. There is something wrong in our national character.
I don’t know what will fix it, or even if it can be fixed.
It’s basically Biden’s call to step down or not. He’s a savvy guy, I hope he can somehow wade through all of the bullshit and make the best decision. There is a lot on his shoulders right now, I do not envy him his position.
But Biden or no Biden, we have become a profoundly dysfunctional country. Not just divided, but unable to reconcile or just basically negotiate our way around our differences.
That’s the problem.
I wish all of the pundits currently focused on what an old man Joe Biden is would put some of their attention on understanding WTF is going on with us.
That’s pretty much all I got. Good luck to us, and to the world.
To me, the fundamental issue for this election year is that about half the country looks at Donald J Trump and says “yeah, that works for me”.
Something is deeply broken here. There is something wrong in our national character.
I don’t know what will fix it, or even if it can be fixed.
It’s basically Biden’s call to step down or not. He’s a savvy guy, I hope he can somehow wade through all of the bullshit and make the best decision. There is a lot on his shoulders right now, I do not envy him his position.
But Biden or no Biden, we have become a profoundly dysfunctional country. Not just divided, but unable to reconcile or just basically negotiate our way around our differences.
That’s the problem.
I wish all of the pundits currently focused on what an old man Joe Biden is would put some of their attention on understanding WTF is going on with us.
That’s pretty much all I got. Good luck to us, and to the world.
The whole public conversation is fraught. As russell says, the root cause of all of this is the right’s unwillingness to let go of Trump as their candidate. If they could have course corrected, we’d have a very different dynamic, and I suspect that our conversations around Biden’s candidacy would have a lot more nuance. Their insistence on forcing the Orange Menace on everyone else really forecloses a lot of room for discussion.
I’m not going to forgive any of that any time soon.
I understand where the Biden supporters are coming from, trying to steer the conversation towards his accomplishments and away from questions about his age and mental acuity. We don’t have much in the way of practical alternatives given our electoral institutions and electoral rules. And Biden has accomplished a lot in office. There is much to be said for his presidency.
I do, however, think that older voters need to really consider how very sick the younger voters (and at this point that means anyone under the age of 60) are getting with waiting for any meaningful power to address their own concerns for the future while the seniors try to refight the culture war.
If there were no Trump, and if the Democrats could have had a more open primary season, I’d be 100% on board with moving Joe along and getting someone younger in his place. Part of it is concerns with aging, but there’s also a healthy dose of the feeling that the future will have been entirely swallowed by the time that all these very old politicians and judges finally decide to retire.
Demographics are a bitch.
Don’t tell us that the Biden age conversation should have been had sooner. We’ve been trying to have that conversation for a while now. We tried with Feinstein. We tried with RBG. We tried with Biden. But the most privileged generation in American history just doesn’t want to step aside and let anyone else have their place before they have squeezed every last drop out of that position.
So, yeah, there’s some real frustration with the perpetual junior status and the patronizing attitude.
I think that the media believes it is giving voice to that frustration for younger voters, or at least it believes that the existence of that frustration gives them license to stir the pot, but I think the media is serving its own venal and narcissistic interests in this, and really doesn’t care.
So basically, I completely see why we might have no choice but Biden, and I see why we need to put the best face on it that we can, given our circumstances. I’m on board for that. But the Biden supporters also have to realize what they are asking of those who are frustrated and stop gaslighting everyone with their legitimate concerns.
The whole public conversation is fraught. As russell says, the root cause of all of this is the right’s unwillingness to let go of Trump as their candidate. If they could have course corrected, we’d have a very different dynamic, and I suspect that our conversations around Biden’s candidacy would have a lot more nuance. Their insistence on forcing the Orange Menace on everyone else really forecloses a lot of room for discussion.
I’m not going to forgive any of that any time soon.
I understand where the Biden supporters are coming from, trying to steer the conversation towards his accomplishments and away from questions about his age and mental acuity. We don’t have much in the way of practical alternatives given our electoral institutions and electoral rules. And Biden has accomplished a lot in office. There is much to be said for his presidency.
I do, however, think that older voters need to really consider how very sick the younger voters (and at this point that means anyone under the age of 60) are getting with waiting for any meaningful power to address their own concerns for the future while the seniors try to refight the culture war.
If there were no Trump, and if the Democrats could have had a more open primary season, I’d be 100% on board with moving Joe along and getting someone younger in his place. Part of it is concerns with aging, but there’s also a healthy dose of the feeling that the future will have been entirely swallowed by the time that all these very old politicians and judges finally decide to retire.
Demographics are a bitch.
Don’t tell us that the Biden age conversation should have been had sooner. We’ve been trying to have that conversation for a while now. We tried with Feinstein. We tried with RBG. We tried with Biden. But the most privileged generation in American history just doesn’t want to step aside and let anyone else have their place before they have squeezed every last drop out of that position.
So, yeah, there’s some real frustration with the perpetual junior status and the patronizing attitude.
I think that the media believes it is giving voice to that frustration for younger voters, or at least it believes that the existence of that frustration gives them license to stir the pot, but I think the media is serving its own venal and narcissistic interests in this, and really doesn’t care.
So basically, I completely see why we might have no choice but Biden, and I see why we need to put the best face on it that we can, given our circumstances. I’m on board for that. But the Biden supporters also have to realize what they are asking of those who are frustrated and stop gaslighting everyone with their legitimate concerns.
Something is deeply broken here. There is something wrong in our national character.
Cheap analysis on my part, but I think we started with something wrong about the national character: enshrining slavery in our revered founding document. We fought one hot war over it already, and I think the faultlines this time are very similar. As an old fart who is still trying to understand the world, I am increasingly thinking that it can’t be fixed, only managed, like a chronic incurable disease. (AKA human nature, perhaps.) We are in a phase of virulent flare-up right now.
Something is deeply broken here. There is something wrong in our national character.
Cheap analysis on my part, but I think we started with something wrong about the national character: enshrining slavery in our revered founding document. We fought one hot war over it already, and I think the faultlines this time are very similar. As an old fart who is still trying to understand the world, I am increasingly thinking that it can’t be fixed, only managed, like a chronic incurable disease. (AKA human nature, perhaps.) We are in a phase of virulent flare-up right now.
As an old fart who is still trying to understand the world, I am increasingly thinking that it can’t be fixed, only managed, like a chronic incurable disease. (AKA human nature, perhaps.)
That’s where I am as well. It will be a constant struggle between people who more or less want everyone to be reasonably nice to each other and people who are too selfish or power-seeking not to f**k it up for everyone else.
As an old fart who is still trying to understand the world, I am increasingly thinking that it can’t be fixed, only managed, like a chronic incurable disease. (AKA human nature, perhaps.)
That’s where I am as well. It will be a constant struggle between people who more or less want everyone to be reasonably nice to each other and people who are too selfish or power-seeking not to f**k it up for everyone else.
To nous’ point about generational demographics, IMO a mandatory retirement age would make sense (to me, anyway). For all federal positions – POTUS, VPOTUS, SCOTUS and all federal judiciary, Senator, House Rep. Civil service, military. What have you.
Make it generous enough not to be counter-productive – 75?
Get your gold watch, your pension, and a grateful nation’s thanks and go play with the grandkids.
It will be a constant struggle
That’s what it’s always been, although IMO the January 6 antics raised the bar considerably.
I really have no idea how this is all going to turn out. None. It’s a weird feeling.
To nous’ point about generational demographics, IMO a mandatory retirement age would make sense (to me, anyway). For all federal positions – POTUS, VPOTUS, SCOTUS and all federal judiciary, Senator, House Rep. Civil service, military. What have you.
Make it generous enough not to be counter-productive – 75?
Get your gold watch, your pension, and a grateful nation’s thanks and go play with the grandkids.
It will be a constant struggle
That’s what it’s always been, although IMO the January 6 antics raised the bar considerably.
I really have no idea how this is all going to turn out. None. It’s a weird feeling.
I think I’d rather that they institute a limit on how long any one person can serve on a particular committee or in the SC – something like 18 years (three senate terms). Give ’em a term to learn the important details, a term to use that expertise, and a term to pass that expertise on to their replacement.
Also would give our congresspeople more breadth of knowledge if they were forced to move around and learn new things.
Would take away the current tendency to squat in a lucrative and powerful fiefdom.
The Supremes would be the tricky part.
I think I’d rather that they institute a limit on how long any one person can serve on a particular committee or in the SC – something like 18 years (three senate terms). Give ’em a term to learn the important details, a term to use that expertise, and a term to pass that expertise on to their replacement.
Also would give our congresspeople more breadth of knowledge if they were forced to move around and learn new things.
Would take away the current tendency to squat in a lucrative and powerful fiefdom.
The Supremes would be the tricky part.
But what about* the revolving door? Several presidents (all Dem iirc) tried to put an end to that but to no avail (even in their own administrations).
*not intended as whataboutism but as a serious question about how to deal with that specific byproduct of the system.
But what about* the revolving door? Several presidents (all Dem iirc) tried to put an end to that but to no avail (even in their own administrations).
*not intended as whataboutism but as a serious question about how to deal with that specific byproduct of the system.
But the Biden supporters also have to realize what they are asking of those who are frustrated and stop gaslighting everyone with their legitimate concerns.
I would disagree somewhat (what!? bobbyp disagree? what effrontery!). I share a good deal of those unstated “concerns” expressed by the youngsters. However, I am one of those old people currently disposed to stay with Biden, and I don’t feel I am gaslighting anybody. The problem is a right wing cult of personality and an often ineffectual Dem center (blue slips anyone?). Tee this up with the cranky Constitutional machinery we have (along with some stupid institutional roadblocks-Senate filibuster, anyone?), and here we are.
If those youngsters want to make their concerns a reality, they need to roll up their sleeves, get their noses off social media, and get involved. When I see stories about youth apathy, it breaks my heart.
But the Biden supporters also have to realize what they are asking of those who are frustrated and stop gaslighting everyone with their legitimate concerns.
I would disagree somewhat (what!? bobbyp disagree? what effrontery!). I share a good deal of those unstated “concerns” expressed by the youngsters. However, I am one of those old people currently disposed to stay with Biden, and I don’t feel I am gaslighting anybody. The problem is a right wing cult of personality and an often ineffectual Dem center (blue slips anyone?). Tee this up with the cranky Constitutional machinery we have (along with some stupid institutional roadblocks-Senate filibuster, anyone?), and here we are.
If those youngsters want to make their concerns a reality, they need to roll up their sleeves, get their noses off social media, and get involved. When I see stories about youth apathy, it breaks my heart.
I really have no idea how this is all going to turn out. None. It’s a weird feeling.
Yup.
I thought I had it all figured out in my wild eyed idealism back in the late 60’s, but the ensuing 50 years watching the radical conservative project unfold has disabused me of that notion.
It’s a real shit show.
I really have no idea how this is all going to turn out. None. It’s a weird feeling.
Yup.
I thought I had it all figured out in my wild eyed idealism back in the late 60’s, but the ensuing 50 years watching the radical conservative project unfold has disabused me of that notion.
It’s a real shit show.
What bobbyp said.
Also, provided Biden/Harris wins this year, there will absolutely be a demographic shift. Besides the ones that have already happened; e.g., Hakeem Jeffries as leader of the House Democrats.
Kamala Harris will be the “next in line” to run for President. She is 60 – which, so I hear, is the New 40.
Pete Buttigieg, who would be an excellent President, or Senator, is 42.
Biden has made sure to hire a lot of younger people in his Administration – not to mention elevating a whole raft of young, demographically diverse people to Federal judgeships.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more people like Joe and Nancy have already done, and are already doing, to make sure young people are in the leadership pipeline.
What bobbyp said.
Also, provided Biden/Harris wins this year, there will absolutely be a demographic shift. Besides the ones that have already happened; e.g., Hakeem Jeffries as leader of the House Democrats.
Kamala Harris will be the “next in line” to run for President. She is 60 – which, so I hear, is the New 40.
Pete Buttigieg, who would be an excellent President, or Senator, is 42.
Biden has made sure to hire a lot of younger people in his Administration – not to mention elevating a whole raft of young, demographically diverse people to Federal judgeships.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more people like Joe and Nancy have already done, and are already doing, to make sure young people are in the leadership pipeline.
In 1964 the rallying cry was, “Don’t trust anybody over 30”. I look back on this with a good deal of wryness.
In 1964 the rallying cry was, “Don’t trust anybody over 30”. I look back on this with a good deal of wryness.
However, I am one of those old people currently disposed to stay with Biden, and I don’t feel I am gaslighting anybody
Look, when people say that Biden is fine, and that everyone in daily contact with him says he’s fine, and not to worry about one bad night of debate (which wasn’t even that bad really, I mean he won the second part, etc.), it’s an attempt to overwrite what a lot of people saw in the early stages of that debate.
I don’t doubt that Biden is up to the job most of the time, and that his experience is an asset. But no one who looks at him on the campaign trail can actually be thinking that he is performing at the same level he did even four years ago.
It’s not too much to ask that he address this and talk about what he intends to do if he does lose more effectiveness. He should be talking about Harris’s qualifications and how he is listening to those around him whom he trusts to let him know when it does come time for him to step down – be that at the end of his term or before (should things change).
Acting as if anyone who says these things out loud is trying to monkey wrench the elections comes off as denialism, and saying that there has been no cause for concern – that it’s all made up – is gaslighting.
He’s old, and he can’t keep doing this forever. He’s not as capable as he once was. We need him to win this election, but we need assurances that the next four years are going to be covered and that he’s not going to stubborn them out if he has more moments of exhaustion.
Or do y’all truly believe that Biden is 100% as capable as he once was, and that his presidential successes are his alone, and not a team effort?
However, I am one of those old people currently disposed to stay with Biden, and I don’t feel I am gaslighting anybody
Look, when people say that Biden is fine, and that everyone in daily contact with him says he’s fine, and not to worry about one bad night of debate (which wasn’t even that bad really, I mean he won the second part, etc.), it’s an attempt to overwrite what a lot of people saw in the early stages of that debate.
I don’t doubt that Biden is up to the job most of the time, and that his experience is an asset. But no one who looks at him on the campaign trail can actually be thinking that he is performing at the same level he did even four years ago.
It’s not too much to ask that he address this and talk about what he intends to do if he does lose more effectiveness. He should be talking about Harris’s qualifications and how he is listening to those around him whom he trusts to let him know when it does come time for him to step down – be that at the end of his term or before (should things change).
Acting as if anyone who says these things out loud is trying to monkey wrench the elections comes off as denialism, and saying that there has been no cause for concern – that it’s all made up – is gaslighting.
He’s old, and he can’t keep doing this forever. He’s not as capable as he once was. We need him to win this election, but we need assurances that the next four years are going to be covered and that he’s not going to stubborn them out if he has more moments of exhaustion.
Or do y’all truly believe that Biden is 100% as capable as he once was, and that his presidential successes are his alone, and not a team effort?
Here’s some more thoughts on the subject that ring true for me as well, from Timothy Snyder.
https://snyder.substack.com/p/fascist-froth
It should seem odd that media calls to step down were not first directed to Trump. If we are calling for Biden to step aside because someone must stop Trump from bringing down the republic, then surely it would have made more sense to first call for Trump to step aside? (The Philadelphia Inquirer did). I know the counter-arguments: his people wouldn’t have cared, and he wouldn’t have listened. The first misses an important point. There are quite a few Americans who have not made up their minds. The second amounts to obeying in advance. If you accept that a fascist is beyond your reach, you have normalized your submission.
When media folks describe discussions among Democrats as chaos and disarray, they are implicitly suggesting that it is better for a leader of a party to never be questioned. (Why, after all, is being part of an array a good thing?) An obvious point goes missed: Democrats can say what they want, because none of them is afraid. And that is good! Governor Maura Healey can express her dissent and Joe Biden can express his frustration with her — but no one is worried about her physical safety.
…etc.
I don’t follow Snyder, so I cannot vouch for anything else he says, but this seems like a productive assessment of the situation.
Here’s some more thoughts on the subject that ring true for me as well, from Timothy Snyder.
https://snyder.substack.com/p/fascist-froth
It should seem odd that media calls to step down were not first directed to Trump. If we are calling for Biden to step aside because someone must stop Trump from bringing down the republic, then surely it would have made more sense to first call for Trump to step aside? (The Philadelphia Inquirer did). I know the counter-arguments: his people wouldn’t have cared, and he wouldn’t have listened. The first misses an important point. There are quite a few Americans who have not made up their minds. The second amounts to obeying in advance. If you accept that a fascist is beyond your reach, you have normalized your submission.
When media folks describe discussions among Democrats as chaos and disarray, they are implicitly suggesting that it is better for a leader of a party to never be questioned. (Why, after all, is being part of an array a good thing?) An obvious point goes missed: Democrats can say what they want, because none of them is afraid. And that is good! Governor Maura Healey can express her dissent and Joe Biden can express his frustration with her — but no one is worried about her physical safety.
…etc.
I don’t follow Snyder, so I cannot vouch for anything else he says, but this seems like a productive assessment of the situation.
Or do y’all truly believe that Biden is 100% as capable as he once was, and that his presidential successes are his alone, and not a team effort?
We all get old. Geez, to have the ability to soak up new mathematics the way I could at 25. I’m going to take on another project putting together a tool mostly from other people’s work, but I have to get the details right and possibly invent my way across a gap or three. Last time I started one like this was a dozen years ago. Ask me in six months how much I’ve lost.
I try to be careful to say that over the last 3.5 years Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, and Jeffries have done an amazing job of finessing things. I don’t believe they could have done it if all four didn’t know that they were a team, and when to let each of them take the lead.
Among the things I read as my wife’s dementia progressed were papers (with data) that showed really smart people with dementia seem to go along and then “fall off a cliff” in losing their cognitive abilities. At least as I understand the reasoning, the medical people don’t believe it’s an abrupt physical change. It’s that smart people realize they’re losing some abilities and figure out crutches to help them (eg, more and more detailed lists of what needs doing). When the crutches are suddenly not enough, it looks like a cliff.
After we put my wife in memory care, I started cleaning out the townhouse. I looked at every piece of paper that had accumulated before I tossed it. It was clear that my wife had been writing lists of name/date/events, and checking them, to see if she was remembering correctly. There was an obvious point where she suddenly lost the ability to subtract one several-digit number from another. Many of the papers were hidden away in places I would not normally look.
Or do y’all truly believe that Biden is 100% as capable as he once was, and that his presidential successes are his alone, and not a team effort?
We all get old. Geez, to have the ability to soak up new mathematics the way I could at 25. I’m going to take on another project putting together a tool mostly from other people’s work, but I have to get the details right and possibly invent my way across a gap or three. Last time I started one like this was a dozen years ago. Ask me in six months how much I’ve lost.
I try to be careful to say that over the last 3.5 years Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, and Jeffries have done an amazing job of finessing things. I don’t believe they could have done it if all four didn’t know that they were a team, and when to let each of them take the lead.
Among the things I read as my wife’s dementia progressed were papers (with data) that showed really smart people with dementia seem to go along and then “fall off a cliff” in losing their cognitive abilities. At least as I understand the reasoning, the medical people don’t believe it’s an abrupt physical change. It’s that smart people realize they’re losing some abilities and figure out crutches to help them (eg, more and more detailed lists of what needs doing). When the crutches are suddenly not enough, it looks like a cliff.
After we put my wife in memory care, I started cleaning out the townhouse. I looked at every piece of paper that had accumulated before I tossed it. It was clear that my wife had been writing lists of name/date/events, and checking them, to see if she was remembering correctly. There was an obvious point where she suddenly lost the ability to subtract one several-digit number from another. Many of the papers were hidden away in places I would not normally look.
nous – I’m not sure what your basis for concern is here. Biden can do the job of Presidenting until he can’t.
If there comes a day when he can’t,then VP Kamala Harris takes over.
I realize the Constitution is treated as a bit of a joke by the Right, but at least until January 2025 it *is* still the law of the land, and the Presidential succession is clearly spelled out.
Does that help?
nous – I’m not sure what your basis for concern is here. Biden can do the job of Presidenting until he can’t.
If there comes a day when he can’t,then VP Kamala Harris takes over.
I realize the Constitution is treated as a bit of a joke by the Right, but at least until January 2025 it *is* still the law of the land, and the Presidential succession is clearly spelled out.
Does that help?
If we are calling for Biden to step aside because someone must stop Trump from bringing down the republic, then surely it would have made more sense to first call for Trump to step aside?
Murc’s Law: “Only Democrats have agency.” Murc is a long-time commenter at LGM. Murc’s Law is an axiom for almost all of the media.
If we are calling for Biden to step aside because someone must stop Trump from bringing down the republic, then surely it would have made more sense to first call for Trump to step aside?
Murc’s Law: “Only Democrats have agency.” Murc is a long-time commenter at LGM. Murc’s Law is an axiom for almost all of the media.
It’s not too much to ask that he address this and talk about what he intends to do if he does lose more effectiveness.
This seems more than fair to me.
FWIW, I don’t have a problem with people who were upset with Biden’s performance during the debate, and/or are concerned about his fitness to do a very hard job for another four years.
I was upset with Biden’s performance during the debate, and am concerned about his fitness to do a very hard job for another four years.
I just don’t see how anyone else, with the possible exception of Harris, can step in at this point. And it’s not clear to me that Harris would have a better shot at beating Trump, which in my own opinion is the single most critical thing right now.
It’s all extraordinary, and extraordinarily concerning.
If Biden had been as strong in the debate as he was during the State of the Union, this conversation would not be happening. I can’t explain the difference in his performance.
All of that said, the realistic choices – the choices that are actually achievable in a four month window – are (a) Biden standing down and Harris running, or (b) folks get Biden’s back.
If Biden chooses to step down, I’ll be happy to support Harris. If Biden does not choose to step down, I’ll support Biden.
I don’t see other options that are, remotely, realistic, for all of the reasons that have been called out in this thread and elsewhere.
Biden appears to be doubling down on staying in the race. It is, as the presumptive nominee, his call to make.
I hope it works out. I’m not sure what else there is to say about it.
Fingers crossed, and let’s all get ready for a really weird few months.
It’s not too much to ask that he address this and talk about what he intends to do if he does lose more effectiveness.
This seems more than fair to me.
FWIW, I don’t have a problem with people who were upset with Biden’s performance during the debate, and/or are concerned about his fitness to do a very hard job for another four years.
I was upset with Biden’s performance during the debate, and am concerned about his fitness to do a very hard job for another four years.
I just don’t see how anyone else, with the possible exception of Harris, can step in at this point. And it’s not clear to me that Harris would have a better shot at beating Trump, which in my own opinion is the single most critical thing right now.
It’s all extraordinary, and extraordinarily concerning.
If Biden had been as strong in the debate as he was during the State of the Union, this conversation would not be happening. I can’t explain the difference in his performance.
All of that said, the realistic choices – the choices that are actually achievable in a four month window – are (a) Biden standing down and Harris running, or (b) folks get Biden’s back.
If Biden chooses to step down, I’ll be happy to support Harris. If Biden does not choose to step down, I’ll support Biden.
I don’t see other options that are, remotely, realistic, for all of the reasons that have been called out in this thread and elsewhere.
Biden appears to be doubling down on staying in the race. It is, as the presumptive nominee, his call to make.
I hope it works out. I’m not sure what else there is to say about it.
Fingers crossed, and let’s all get ready for a really weird few months.
but we need assurances that the next four years are going to be covered and that he’s not going to stubborn them out if he has more moments of exhaustion.
I cannot fathom the form that any such “assurances” would take that would satisfy the current feeding frenzy.
Is Biden old? Duh.
Did he f*ck up that debate, a debate he seemed to desire quite badly? Yes, indeed.
Has he maybe lost a step or two? Perhaps.
Is there any concrete evidence that he is not experiencing the onset of a debilitating medical condition? Not that I have seen any concrete evidence of…so holding on that one.
Does plumping for an “open convention” do any good? Absolutely not. It is a fantasy.
Your suggestions seem fair and reasonable, but I find them to be unpolitic. (For some reason, all those so attuned to “vibes” are blithely overlooking the downsides to their well meaning advise….such as a last minute open primary.)
He could do all those things and the avalanche of criticism and second guessing would not stop.
It would get worse, because it would still be the central topic of discussion! Hey look, the President himself keeps bringing it up!
Dems in disarray is an endearing truism. I can live with it.
The decision is President Biden’s. Give him some credit to think it through, or events will force him out. My main point is there is still time. We shall see.
Another take here
https://www.publicnotice.co/p/biden-debate-punditry-drop-out-2024-campaign
PS: Snyder is a great historian.
but we need assurances that the next four years are going to be covered and that he’s not going to stubborn them out if he has more moments of exhaustion.
I cannot fathom the form that any such “assurances” would take that would satisfy the current feeding frenzy.
Is Biden old? Duh.
Did he f*ck up that debate, a debate he seemed to desire quite badly? Yes, indeed.
Has he maybe lost a step or two? Perhaps.
Is there any concrete evidence that he is not experiencing the onset of a debilitating medical condition? Not that I have seen any concrete evidence of…so holding on that one.
Does plumping for an “open convention” do any good? Absolutely not. It is a fantasy.
Your suggestions seem fair and reasonable, but I find them to be unpolitic. (For some reason, all those so attuned to “vibes” are blithely overlooking the downsides to their well meaning advise….such as a last minute open primary.)
He could do all those things and the avalanche of criticism and second guessing would not stop.
It would get worse, because it would still be the central topic of discussion! Hey look, the President himself keeps bringing it up!
Dems in disarray is an endearing truism. I can live with it.
The decision is President Biden’s. Give him some credit to think it through, or events will force him out. My main point is there is still time. We shall see.
Another take here
https://www.publicnotice.co/p/biden-debate-punditry-drop-out-2024-campaign
PS: Snyder is a great historian.
CaseyL – that should be a given. And given that, it should be something that Biden can say out loud. Saying it might reassure some people.
I’ve talked to a lot of people who have agreed with me that Biden staying in is probably the best course of action for all the reasons we have discussed here. But there is very much an undercurrent of concern for his capabilities, and the official narrative coming from him and his campaign and press office has a real Emperor’s New Clothes quality to it.
If the Dems want to counter the narrative of division, they need to say that it is okay to have concerns, but that Biden has the best chance of keeping the unhinged authoritarian running against him out of power, and that he and his cabinet will preserve the constitution and keep things moving forward. And if anything should change, Harris is ready to step in and take over.
I don’t think there’s any downside to saying that out loud.
CaseyL – that should be a given. And given that, it should be something that Biden can say out loud. Saying it might reassure some people.
I’ve talked to a lot of people who have agreed with me that Biden staying in is probably the best course of action for all the reasons we have discussed here. But there is very much an undercurrent of concern for his capabilities, and the official narrative coming from him and his campaign and press office has a real Emperor’s New Clothes quality to it.
If the Dems want to counter the narrative of division, they need to say that it is okay to have concerns, but that Biden has the best chance of keeping the unhinged authoritarian running against him out of power, and that he and his cabinet will preserve the constitution and keep things moving forward. And if anything should change, Harris is ready to step in and take over.
I don’t think there’s any downside to saying that out loud.
Nothing is going to change what the media is putting out there. They will spin what they will spin. But I think that people who are afraid of a Fascist takeover and concerned for Biden would feel reassured if they were told that their concerns were acknowledged, and that those concerns were being taken into account, so all of the media handwringing is just sensationalism.
Nothing is going to change what the media is putting out there. They will spin what they will spin. But I think that people who are afraid of a Fascist takeover and concerned for Biden would feel reassured if they were told that their concerns were acknowledged, and that those concerns were being taken into account, so all of the media handwringing is just sensationalism.
I do, however, think that older voters need to really consider how very sick the younger voters (and at this point that means anyone under the age of 60) are getting with waiting for any meaningful power to address their own concerns for the future while the seniors try to refight the culture war.
And if the Republicans had nominated someone under, say, 65, that would be a different matter. But at this point, their frustration with waiting doesn’t mean a problem for Biden. Trump is damn near as old. So it’s about who will be worse on the issues they are about. You know, things like Dobbs.
And, as hsh mentioned above, Project 2025 is getting increasing notice. The first notable result of that being Trump rushing to distance himself from it. (Roughly, “I don’t know anything about it. And besides, it’s not that bad.”) It’s just that toxic. It will be interesting to see what the Republican platform, currently being written by a lot of the same people, says on the same topics.
I do, however, think that older voters need to really consider how very sick the younger voters (and at this point that means anyone under the age of 60) are getting with waiting for any meaningful power to address their own concerns for the future while the seniors try to refight the culture war.
And if the Republicans had nominated someone under, say, 65, that would be a different matter. But at this point, their frustration with waiting doesn’t mean a problem for Biden. Trump is damn near as old. So it’s about who will be worse on the issues they are about. You know, things like Dobbs.
And, as hsh mentioned above, Project 2025 is getting increasing notice. The first notable result of that being Trump rushing to distance himself from it. (Roughly, “I don’t know anything about it. And besides, it’s not that bad.”) It’s just that toxic. It will be interesting to see what the Republican platform, currently being written by a lot of the same people, says on the same topics.
nous – That’s a little weird, because surely people do know that if a President becomes seriously incapacitated, or dies, while in office then the VP takes over.
I mean: Do people really not know that?
Reagan had to hand over control to Bush I when he was shot. There were frequent discussions about the 25th Amendment during Trump’s term.
What would be the point of Biden announcing this?
Perhaps the advent of Trumpism and the corrupt SCOTUS has led to an overall sense that Constitutionally Law no longer applies to, well, anything.
Do you think that’s what Biden needs to do?
Make a point of stating he will abide by the Constitution?
I’m kind of gobsmacked at the idea that people really don’t know what happens if the President can’t do the job anymore.
I knew we weren’t teaching civics anymore, but… Wow.
nous – That’s a little weird, because surely people do know that if a President becomes seriously incapacitated, or dies, while in office then the VP takes over.
I mean: Do people really not know that?
Reagan had to hand over control to Bush I when he was shot. There were frequent discussions about the 25th Amendment during Trump’s term.
What would be the point of Biden announcing this?
Perhaps the advent of Trumpism and the corrupt SCOTUS has led to an overall sense that Constitutionally Law no longer applies to, well, anything.
Do you think that’s what Biden needs to do?
Make a point of stating he will abide by the Constitution?
I’m kind of gobsmacked at the idea that people really don’t know what happens if the President can’t do the job anymore.
I knew we weren’t teaching civics anymore, but… Wow.
Snyder gets a lot of favorable references in the libertarian press. He is considered an expert on fascism. But Snyder characterizing Trump as a fascist is a bit of a stretch for me. I think he is a bit short on material to fill his fascist mold.
Like the just completed UK election, many of the votes Trump gets in the election won’t be for Trump but against the incumbents. I wouldn’t be surprised if the third-party candidates get over 10% of the vote as protest votes against the lousy choices the two parties have given us.
Snyder gets a lot of favorable references in the libertarian press. He is considered an expert on fascism. But Snyder characterizing Trump as a fascist is a bit of a stretch for me. I think he is a bit short on material to fill his fascist mold.
Like the just completed UK election, many of the votes Trump gets in the election won’t be for Trump but against the incumbents. I wouldn’t be surprised if the third-party candidates get over 10% of the vote as protest votes against the lousy choices the two parties have given us.
Look, when people say that Biden is fine, and that everyone in daily contact with him says he’s fine, and not to worry about one bad night of debate (which wasn’t even that bad really, I mean he won the second part, etc.), it’s an attempt to overwrite what a lot of people saw in the early stages of that debate.
Since the debate, Biden’s done unscripted interviews. He’s done speeches off teleprompter. He’s interacted with actual voters at rope-lines. But somehow, it’s never enough. Frankly, I doubt there’s anything he could do or say which would be acknowledged as sufficient.
Look, when people say that Biden is fine, and that everyone in daily contact with him says he’s fine, and not to worry about one bad night of debate (which wasn’t even that bad really, I mean he won the second part, etc.), it’s an attempt to overwrite what a lot of people saw in the early stages of that debate.
Since the debate, Biden’s done unscripted interviews. He’s done speeches off teleprompter. He’s interacted with actual voters at rope-lines. But somehow, it’s never enough. Frankly, I doubt there’s anything he could do or say which would be acknowledged as sufficient.
What wj said.
I’m entirely sick of this, and will stop contributing to what is looking more and more like an argument for its own sake.
What wj said.
I’m entirely sick of this, and will stop contributing to what is looking more and more like an argument for its own sake.
We all get old.
Yeah, but Biden is at least four years older than anyone commenting here. 🙂
We all get old.
Yeah, but Biden is at least four years older than anyone commenting here. 🙂
FWIW, the view from over here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/08/the-guardian-view-on-joe-bidens-re-election-bid-democrats-cant-go-on-like-this
FWIW, the view from over here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/08/the-guardian-view-on-joe-bidens-re-election-bid-democrats-cant-go-on-like-this
FWIW, the view from over here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/08/the-guardian-view-on-joe-bidens-re-election-bid-democrats-cant-go-on-like-this
FWIW, the view from over here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/08/the-guardian-view-on-joe-bidens-re-election-bid-democrats-cant-go-on-like-this
This has nothing to do with people not knowing that the VP takes over. This has nothing to do with Biden having done things since that showed him in good shape. And getting upset with people who are concerned only makes those people feel like they are being railroaded.
It’s not as if any of the people I have spoken to have said that they wouldn’t vote for Biden to keep Trump out.
As a Gen Xer, I know a lot of people whose parents are Biden’s age, and a lot of those of us who still have living parents are currently doing a lot of helping out for the very reasons that they are concerned about Biden. A lot of them are also dealing with parents who do not want anyone butting in or telling them what to do. Many of the Millennials I know also have older parents and are starting to deal with this as well.
It’s hard to see Biden in these interviews and not hear echoes of those conversations. It’s a worry.
Hearing mom or dad say that they are fine and don’t need any help is not reassuring. They want to know that mom or dad is aware of their limitations and willing to listen and accept help.
And like I said, all of them are already scared as hell of another Trump term, so Trump’s age is not really any concern. We’d all be relieved if he were to drop off the age cliff before getting back into office.
I can see from a lot of the defensive reactions here that the older members of the commentariat see Biden as a contemporary. I’m asking you all to understand those who see him as someone of their parents’ generation and understand why they are responding the way that they do.
This has nothing to do with people not knowing that the VP takes over. This has nothing to do with Biden having done things since that showed him in good shape. And getting upset with people who are concerned only makes those people feel like they are being railroaded.
It’s not as if any of the people I have spoken to have said that they wouldn’t vote for Biden to keep Trump out.
As a Gen Xer, I know a lot of people whose parents are Biden’s age, and a lot of those of us who still have living parents are currently doing a lot of helping out for the very reasons that they are concerned about Biden. A lot of them are also dealing with parents who do not want anyone butting in or telling them what to do. Many of the Millennials I know also have older parents and are starting to deal with this as well.
It’s hard to see Biden in these interviews and not hear echoes of those conversations. It’s a worry.
Hearing mom or dad say that they are fine and don’t need any help is not reassuring. They want to know that mom or dad is aware of their limitations and willing to listen and accept help.
And like I said, all of them are already scared as hell of another Trump term, so Trump’s age is not really any concern. We’d all be relieved if he were to drop off the age cliff before getting back into office.
I can see from a lot of the defensive reactions here that the older members of the commentariat see Biden as a contemporary. I’m asking you all to understand those who see him as someone of their parents’ generation and understand why they are responding the way that they do.
Hearing mom or dad say that they are fine and don’t need any help is not reassuring. They want to know that mom or dad is aware of their limitations and willing to listen and accept help.
In the context of familial relationships this is all well and good, (but be advised mom and dad telling the kids they are “just fine” is more or less SOP until the kids take away the car keys) and I find this to be salutary.
In the context of the struggle for political power, I would wager – not so much.
Look (to coin a phrase), Biden has already copped a plea wrt to these issues:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-addresses-lackluster-debate-performance-age-debate-skills/
The Dem candidate is going to be either Biden or Harris. Let’s give them a little time to assess and adjust.
Hearing mom or dad say that they are fine and don’t need any help is not reassuring. They want to know that mom or dad is aware of their limitations and willing to listen and accept help.
In the context of familial relationships this is all well and good, (but be advised mom and dad telling the kids they are “just fine” is more or less SOP until the kids take away the car keys) and I find this to be salutary.
In the context of the struggle for political power, I would wager – not so much.
Look (to coin a phrase), Biden has already copped a plea wrt to these issues:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-addresses-lackluster-debate-performance-age-debate-skills/
The Dem candidate is going to be either Biden or Harris. Let’s give them a little time to assess and adjust.
I’d like to think that I’m younger than the median age of the commentariat here, but in truth, I’m probably not. I’ve written a bit about dealing with my dad’s boxing induced alzheimer’s, and I’m sure that is added to the mix here. The thing is, as bobby p notes, when you have a family member who suffers like that, at least in my case, the family pulls together and fills in the gaps, covers the holes, tries to make things whole. So when I hear a lot of this, it sounds to me like kick him out, he’s in the way. Again, as bobbyp notes, in the context of political power, this might not be so true. But it does seem that a lot of the talk (and it is hard to separate it into individual voices) goes pretty hard at the get rid of him, he’s a drag. Which is probably why you get the pushback.
My dad never admitted he lost a step, never admitted his hearing was shite. The car keys weren’t taken away, they ‘couldn’t be found’. Perhaps it’s dangerous to try and project this sort of compensatory behavior onto a larger canvas, but it seems that there must be people who know that the Republican alternative has the same issues and that people who are propping up him are doing it so they can enact their preferred preferences. So I’m not going to get in a fight with nous or anyone else who makes strong arguments against Biden running, but I hope that they can see that it is not simply Biden running, it is how we structure the way we pass on power as a society.
I’d like to think that I’m younger than the median age of the commentariat here, but in truth, I’m probably not. I’ve written a bit about dealing with my dad’s boxing induced alzheimer’s, and I’m sure that is added to the mix here. The thing is, as bobby p notes, when you have a family member who suffers like that, at least in my case, the family pulls together and fills in the gaps, covers the holes, tries to make things whole. So when I hear a lot of this, it sounds to me like kick him out, he’s in the way. Again, as bobbyp notes, in the context of political power, this might not be so true. But it does seem that a lot of the talk (and it is hard to separate it into individual voices) goes pretty hard at the get rid of him, he’s a drag. Which is probably why you get the pushback.
My dad never admitted he lost a step, never admitted his hearing was shite. The car keys weren’t taken away, they ‘couldn’t be found’. Perhaps it’s dangerous to try and project this sort of compensatory behavior onto a larger canvas, but it seems that there must be people who know that the Republican alternative has the same issues and that people who are propping up him are doing it so they can enact their preferred preferences. So I’m not going to get in a fight with nous or anyone else who makes strong arguments against Biden running, but I hope that they can see that it is not simply Biden running, it is how we structure the way we pass on power as a society.
The median age is about 68, the average is about 67.
The median age is about 68, the average is about 67.
The median age is about 68, the average is about 67.
Was there a thread where we all told our ages?
The median age is about 68, the average is about 67.
Was there a thread where we all told our ages?
But Snyder characterizing Trump as a fascist is a bit of a stretch for me.
I doubt Trump has either the intellectual chops or.the interest required to understand what fascism is as a political and social movement.
What he has, in spades, and apparently as a baked-in aspect of his character, is a will to power and an instinct for domination. Which makes fascism a perfectly good fit.
He’s also just a nasty, vindictive piece of work. By his own admission, and not just admission, but boast.
And if we want to judge by the company he keeps, IMO Snyder is pretty much on the money.
YMMV, as always.
But Snyder characterizing Trump as a fascist is a bit of a stretch for me.
I doubt Trump has either the intellectual chops or.the interest required to understand what fascism is as a political and social movement.
What he has, in spades, and apparently as a baked-in aspect of his character, is a will to power and an instinct for domination. Which makes fascism a perfectly good fit.
He’s also just a nasty, vindictive piece of work. By his own admission, and not just admission, but boast.
And if we want to judge by the company he keeps, IMO Snyder is pretty much on the money.
YMMV, as always.
Over the years almost everyone has revealed or implied their age, birth year, or birthday.
Over the years almost everyone has revealed or implied their age, birth year, or birthday.
But Snyder characterizing Trump as a fascist is a bit of a stretch for me. I think he is a bit short on material to fill his fascist mold.
What sort of material do you think is lacking?
But Snyder characterizing Trump as a fascist is a bit of a stretch for me. I think he is a bit short on material to fill his fascist mold.
What sort of material do you think is lacking?
What sort of material do you think is lacking?
To quote russell: I doubt Trump has either the intellectual chops or.the interest required to understand what fascism is as a political and social movement.
If Trump is elected the country will likely muddle along until he’s no longer a concern in 4 years or less. Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
Trump has no ideological or political motivation to consolidate power and pass it on to a successor. Being president is all about him and little else is of any interest to him. There’s nothing there for a fascist movement to form on.
In four years voters may again vote for the craziest candidate on the ballot. Which may be a Democrat.
What sort of material do you think is lacking?
To quote russell: I doubt Trump has either the intellectual chops or.the interest required to understand what fascism is as a political and social movement.
If Trump is elected the country will likely muddle along until he’s no longer a concern in 4 years or less. Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
Trump has no ideological or political motivation to consolidate power and pass it on to a successor. Being president is all about him and little else is of any interest to him. There’s nothing there for a fascist movement to form on.
In four years voters may again vote for the craziest candidate on the ballot. Which may be a Democrat.
If Trump is elected the country will likely muddle along until he’s no longer a concern in 4 years or less. Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
Muddling along would be vastly preferable to what’s coming if he’s elected. In fact, speaking as a gay person and a woman, with Dobbs (and other recent SCOTUS decisions) we’re already far beyond muddling along. YM as an older, straight white male MV.
Because it’s not just Clickbait, it’s the people he will allow to have their way. See Project 25. See January 6. Etc. etc.
(PS: do you keep your estimates of our ages in a spreadsheet, or what? That’s what I would do… I keep EVERYTHING in Excel. Although not my estimates of ObWi denizens’ ages. 😉 )
If Trump is elected the country will likely muddle along until he’s no longer a concern in 4 years or less. Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
Muddling along would be vastly preferable to what’s coming if he’s elected. In fact, speaking as a gay person and a woman, with Dobbs (and other recent SCOTUS decisions) we’re already far beyond muddling along. YM as an older, straight white male MV.
Because it’s not just Clickbait, it’s the people he will allow to have their way. See Project 25. See January 6. Etc. etc.
(PS: do you keep your estimates of our ages in a spreadsheet, or what? That’s what I would do… I keep EVERYTHING in Excel. Although not my estimates of ObWi denizens’ ages. 😉 )
I’ve just noted people’s birthdays or approximate birthdays over the years. When lj speculated about his age relation to the median age, I copied the 14 recent and regular commenters’ birthdates into a spreadsheet and calculated ages and average age. Sorted the ages and picked out the median age.
I’ve just noted people’s birthdays or approximate birthdays over the years. When lj speculated about his age relation to the median age, I copied the 14 recent and regular commenters’ birthdates into a spreadsheet and calculated ages and average age. Sorted the ages and picked out the median age.
You have way too much time on your hands, Charles.
You have way too much time on your hands, Charles.
If Trump is elected the country will likely muddle along until he’s no longer a concern in 4 years or less. Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
Trump has no ideological or political motivation to consolidate power and pass it on to a successor. Being president is all about him and little else is of any interest to him. There’s nothing there for a fascist movement to form on.
The fascist movement has already formed. They found out last time that Trump would sign pretty much whatever they put in front of him.** The main thing that held them back (besides general massive incompetence, of course) was ignorance of how the Federal government works. This time, they’ve learned.
Trump doesn’t have to have a clue about fascism. They can use him to implement it. And when he kicks off, they’ll already be locked in.
** He has a few obsessions of his own, which he will go off on spontaneously. But those mostly align with what they want anyway, or at least aren’t antithetical. Their only worry is that whatever Central Casting type he chooses as VP might not be as easily controlled.
If Trump is elected the country will likely muddle along until he’s no longer a concern in 4 years or less. Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
Trump has no ideological or political motivation to consolidate power and pass it on to a successor. Being president is all about him and little else is of any interest to him. There’s nothing there for a fascist movement to form on.
The fascist movement has already formed. They found out last time that Trump would sign pretty much whatever they put in front of him.** The main thing that held them back (besides general massive incompetence, of course) was ignorance of how the Federal government works. This time, they’ve learned.
Trump doesn’t have to have a clue about fascism. They can use him to implement it. And when he kicks off, they’ll already be locked in.
** He has a few obsessions of his own, which he will go off on spontaneously. But those mostly align with what they want anyway, or at least aren’t antithetical. Their only worry is that whatever Central Casting type he chooses as VP might not be as easily controlled.
Also, Snyder specifically tells us what he means by fascism in this particular case:
By fascism I just have in mind (1) the cult of personality of a Leader: (2) the party that becomes a single party; (3) the threat and use of violence; and (4) the big lie that must be accepted and used to reshape reality: in this case, that Trump can never lose an election.
So, really, he’s referring more to the propaganda and aesthetics of fascism, the narrative appeals, than to the political specifics.
Also, Snyder specifically tells us what he means by fascism in this particular case:
By fascism I just have in mind (1) the cult of personality of a Leader: (2) the party that becomes a single party; (3) the threat and use of violence; and (4) the big lie that must be accepted and used to reshape reality: in this case, that Trump can never lose an election.
So, really, he’s referring more to the propaganda and aesthetics of fascism, the narrative appeals, than to the political specifics.
How could the average citizen/voter know what the VP is when – well-known fact – The Founders(TM) didn’t either and it took Dick Cheney to find out that it is the 4th branch of government not accountable to anyone and (found out even later but not by the VP) that the VP’s most important job is to decide who really won the election and to act as a corrective, if the voters made the wrong decision (something foolishly presumed before to be the job of the Electoral College)?
How could the average citizen/voter know what the VP is when – well-known fact – The Founders(TM) didn’t either and it took Dick Cheney to find out that it is the 4th branch of government not accountable to anyone and (found out even later but not by the VP) that the VP’s most important job is to decide who really won the election and to act as a corrective, if the voters made the wrong decision (something foolishly presumed before to be the job of the Electoral College)?
well-known fact – The Founders(TM) didn’t either
The Founders didn’t understand (or, at least, didn’t understand correctly) a great deal of the Constitution that they wrote. It took over two hundred years for us to finally get a Supreme Court which would enlighten us all on that score. One can only wait, with bated breath, to see what other bits of plain language will turn out to have meanings far different from what they seem to say.
well-known fact – The Founders(TM) didn’t either
The Founders didn’t understand (or, at least, didn’t understand correctly) a great deal of the Constitution that they wrote. It took over two hundred years for us to finally get a Supreme Court which would enlighten us all on that score. One can only wait, with bated breath, to see what other bits of plain language will turn out to have meanings far different from what they seem to say.
The main thing that held them back (besides general massive incompetence, of course) was ignorance of how the Federal government works. This time, they’ve learned.
And tRump, himself, has learned a few things. The first time around he brought people into his administration who had some direct or indirect experience with government. They tended to be very conservative, but in many cases more traditionally conservative. That is, they may have favored policies that I and most people here would oppose (vigorously!), but they at least had some respect for our system of government and the rule of law. He could only push them so far before they pushed back. Full compliance with whatever Dear Leader wants will be the order of the day this time around (FSM forbid).
The main thing that held them back (besides general massive incompetence, of course) was ignorance of how the Federal government works. This time, they’ve learned.
And tRump, himself, has learned a few things. The first time around he brought people into his administration who had some direct or indirect experience with government. They tended to be very conservative, but in many cases more traditionally conservative. That is, they may have favored policies that I and most people here would oppose (vigorously!), but they at least had some respect for our system of government and the rule of law. He could only push them so far before they pushed back. Full compliance with whatever Dear Leader wants will be the order of the day this time around (FSM forbid).
He has a few obsessions of his own, which he will go off on spontaneously.
A prediction: should Trump be re-elected, the Coast Guard will be re-purposed as a shark elimination force.
The man has a really odd shark fixation. Game knows game, one might say.
And what Janie and wj said about the fascism thing. “Muddling through” covers a lot of ground. We “muddled through” (among a long list of other things) a civil war and 100 years of Jim Crow, but it wasn’t a lot of fun for a hell of a lot of people.
Yeah, we’ll get through it, at least many or most of us. But some real harm will be done.
He has a few obsessions of his own, which he will go off on spontaneously.
A prediction: should Trump be re-elected, the Coast Guard will be re-purposed as a shark elimination force.
The man has a really odd shark fixation. Game knows game, one might say.
And what Janie and wj said about the fascism thing. “Muddling through” covers a lot of ground. We “muddled through” (among a long list of other things) a civil war and 100 years of Jim Crow, but it wasn’t a lot of fun for a hell of a lot of people.
Yeah, we’ll get through it, at least many or most of us. But some real harm will be done.
“Muddling through” covers a lot of ground.
Anything short of extinction is my guess.
“Muddling through” covers a lot of ground.
Anything short of extinction is my guess.
Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
russell’s 10:21 reminded me to go back to this other framing of CharleswT’s. (Besides the “muddled through” bit, which I and others have already commented on.)
It’s a pretty dismissive way to frame concerns about, for example, the gutting and in some states criminalization of women’s health care. Or the reconstruction of the closet for gay people. Never mind the effect on people of color, or existing or potential immigrants. Unnecessary death, for example, fueled by religious and ideological greed for power over other people, is worth getting worked up about.
Clickbait wants to deport 11 million people. How much of a workforce would (will) be needed to carry out that appalling bit of vicious idiocy?
I ask because the workforce is already depleted; it’s almost impossible to get a plumber (etc.) around here (or elsewhere where I have contacts). Stores, banks, and doctor’s offices are understaffed. Wait times are longer for everything. It will be just wonderful to take millions out of the workforce to deport millions more, some of whom are also working (if possibly illegally, which is a topic in its own right).
I wonder who will pick the crops???
*****
Will try to get back to some of what has been written here, especially nous’s comments about the generations, but attention is finite and mine has been commandeered for the moment.
Then everyone will find other things to be in a panic about.
russell’s 10:21 reminded me to go back to this other framing of CharleswT’s. (Besides the “muddled through” bit, which I and others have already commented on.)
It’s a pretty dismissive way to frame concerns about, for example, the gutting and in some states criminalization of women’s health care. Or the reconstruction of the closet for gay people. Never mind the effect on people of color, or existing or potential immigrants. Unnecessary death, for example, fueled by religious and ideological greed for power over other people, is worth getting worked up about.
Clickbait wants to deport 11 million people. How much of a workforce would (will) be needed to carry out that appalling bit of vicious idiocy?
I ask because the workforce is already depleted; it’s almost impossible to get a plumber (etc.) around here (or elsewhere where I have contacts). Stores, banks, and doctor’s offices are understaffed. Wait times are longer for everything. It will be just wonderful to take millions out of the workforce to deport millions more, some of whom are also working (if possibly illegally, which is a topic in its own right).
I wonder who will pick the crops???
*****
Will try to get back to some of what has been written here, especially nous’s comments about the generations, but attention is finite and mine has been commandeered for the moment.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andyjsemotiuk/2024/05/02/trumps-plan-to-deport-11-million-undocumented-immigrants–impossible/
One of many such articles. Just for the record.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andyjsemotiuk/2024/05/02/trumps-plan-to-deport-11-million-undocumented-immigrants–impossible/
One of many such articles. Just for the record.
I ask because the workforce is already depleted; it’s almost impossible to get a plumber (etc.) around here (or elsewhere where I have contacts).
This is one of the structural problems that’s likely to get worse. People our age are nearing or at the end of their productive years. The birthrate is below replacement.
Illegal immigrants who have been here awhile and stayed out of trouble should be given a green card and a path to becoming citizens. That would allow them to have legal, more productive jobs. Legal immigration should be increased. Trump’s idea of allowing foreign students to stay in the country after graduation would help. Of course, he was over the top in saying all without exception should get to stay.
We should hope machine learning and robotics give a big boost to productivity. Otherwise, there may not be enough younger people to keep us in the style we’ve grown accustomed to until they see us off.
I ask because the workforce is already depleted; it’s almost impossible to get a plumber (etc.) around here (or elsewhere where I have contacts).
This is one of the structural problems that’s likely to get worse. People our age are nearing or at the end of their productive years. The birthrate is below replacement.
Illegal immigrants who have been here awhile and stayed out of trouble should be given a green card and a path to becoming citizens. That would allow them to have legal, more productive jobs. Legal immigration should be increased. Trump’s idea of allowing foreign students to stay in the country after graduation would help. Of course, he was over the top in saying all without exception should get to stay.
We should hope machine learning and robotics give a big boost to productivity. Otherwise, there may not be enough younger people to keep us in the style we’ve grown accustomed to until they see us off.
Immigration has long been the secret of American economic health. So far (i.e. historically) xenophobia has cut it back from time to time. But never really stopped it.
What we need to do with our current immigration system is well known. At least to anyone with a grip on reality. For openers, there was a bipartisan immigration reform bill negotiated a year or so ago. TCFG ordered it killed, so it didn’t happen. But if he loses again, it might get passed by the next Congress. It’s far from perfect. But it would still be a huge step forward.
Immigration has long been the secret of American economic health. So far (i.e. historically) xenophobia has cut it back from time to time. But never really stopped it.
What we need to do with our current immigration system is well known. At least to anyone with a grip on reality. For openers, there was a bipartisan immigration reform bill negotiated a year or so ago. TCFG ordered it killed, so it didn’t happen. But if he loses again, it might get passed by the next Congress. It’s far from perfect. But it would still be a huge step forward.
Now we are edging right up on the Great Replacement freakout that the right is having.
The US should not have too much difficulty with population replacement in our climate change future because the parts of the US that will remain habitable are going to be flooded with climate migrants – internal and external. (All the plumbers forced out of Houston are going to end up going to one of the more habitable cities farther north, and so forth.)
We will have no shortage of workers in the places that remain habitable. What we will have a problem with is the loss of production from all the places rendered non-habitable (or marginally habitable).
The current way of thinking about the economy and productivity is not sustainable. Our current model is, in fact, doing all the damage and killing us slowly.
Now we are edging right up on the Great Replacement freakout that the right is having.
The US should not have too much difficulty with population replacement in our climate change future because the parts of the US that will remain habitable are going to be flooded with climate migrants – internal and external. (All the plumbers forced out of Houston are going to end up going to one of the more habitable cities farther north, and so forth.)
We will have no shortage of workers in the places that remain habitable. What we will have a problem with is the loss of production from all the places rendered non-habitable (or marginally habitable).
The current way of thinking about the economy and productivity is not sustainable. Our current model is, in fact, doing all the damage and killing us slowly.
A tangent inspired by nous’ mention of climate:
A local meteorologist put up a graphic regarding the northward shift in climate in the first half of 2024 on the East Coast. Averages so far this year have Boston looking like NYC, NYC like DC, Philly like Richmond, DC Raleigh, Richmond Charlotte, and Raleigh Augusta.
We’re more or less getting weather that historically has been typical 200 miles to the south.
A tangent inspired by nous’ mention of climate:
A local meteorologist put up a graphic regarding the northward shift in climate in the first half of 2024 on the East Coast. Averages so far this year have Boston looking like NYC, NYC like DC, Philly like Richmond, DC Raleigh, Richmond Charlotte, and Raleigh Augusta.
We’re more or less getting weather that historically has been typical 200 miles to the south.
Now we are edging right up on the Great Replacement freakout that the right is having.
The thing is, “real Americans” have already been replaced, repeatedly. There aren’t that many “Anglo-Americans” anymore, and “Anglo-American” culture now incorporates elements of traditional German, Irish, Italian, Eastern European (especially Jewish), African, Mexican, Caribbean, Central and South American, French, Chinese, and (increasingly) South Asian societies. And I’m sure I’m leaving several groups out.
Somebody needs to tell the “Anglo-Saxon” purists that the horse is out of the barn.
Now we are edging right up on the Great Replacement freakout that the right is having.
The thing is, “real Americans” have already been replaced, repeatedly. There aren’t that many “Anglo-Americans” anymore, and “Anglo-American” culture now incorporates elements of traditional German, Irish, Italian, Eastern European (especially Jewish), African, Mexican, Caribbean, Central and South American, French, Chinese, and (increasingly) South Asian societies. And I’m sure I’m leaving several groups out.
Somebody needs to tell the “Anglo-Saxon” purists that the horse is out of the barn.
Somebody needs to tell the “Anglo-Saxon” purists that the horse is out of the barn.
The horse long since left the county, and even the state. All that’s left are some faded black and white photos.
Somebody needs to tell the “Anglo-Saxon” purists that the horse is out of the barn.
The horse long since left the county, and even the state. All that’s left are some faded black and white photos.
And I’m sure I’m leaving several groups out.
A few more.
And I’m sure I’m leaving several groups out.
A few more.
2 things not mentioned here that should be included.
1) this controversy is based on perception of perception. The argument is Biden appears weak and confused, so voters will abandon him and Trump woll win. This is based on nothing beyond his performance in the debate. What “the voters” think so far is opaque, since polls show no change in support.
2]) there is an alternate explanation for Biden’s performance. He is an 81 year old President on the schedule of a 76 year old man who was not President. If you think there’s no difference between 76 and 81 you’re not in your 70s. Add in the stress of watching his only living son convicted of a felony for being his stupid son.
2 things not mentioned here that should be included.
1) this controversy is based on perception of perception. The argument is Biden appears weak and confused, so voters will abandon him and Trump woll win. This is based on nothing beyond his performance in the debate. What “the voters” think so far is opaque, since polls show no change in support.
2]) there is an alternate explanation for Biden’s performance. He is an 81 year old President on the schedule of a 76 year old man who was not President. If you think there’s no difference between 76 and 81 you’re not in your 70s. Add in the stress of watching his only living son convicted of a felony for being his stupid son.
I disagree with the general trend here but have deleted several long posts because getting into huge arguments, especially about supposedly pragmatic political choices, doesn’t appeal to me much. Short version—
I think the press and pundits mostly covered for Biden’s decline before the debate . They were hoping he would have a good day. He was horrible, so they did a 180. The press often has a narrative and being mostly herd animals they tend to make their stories fit the narrative, but it is rare to see the narrative shift so drastically so quickly. They are also letting Trump have a pass for now because of this shiny new story. The shiny new story is important but they shouldn’t be letting Trump have a pass.
I think all the options are terrible, including keeping Biden. This is because of the Iron Law of Institutions. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_institutions
I disagree with the general trend here but have deleted several long posts because getting into huge arguments, especially about supposedly pragmatic political choices, doesn’t appeal to me much. Short version—
I think the press and pundits mostly covered for Biden’s decline before the debate . They were hoping he would have a good day. He was horrible, so they did a 180. The press often has a narrative and being mostly herd animals they tend to make their stories fit the narrative, but it is rare to see the narrative shift so drastically so quickly. They are also letting Trump have a pass for now because of this shiny new story. The shiny new story is important but they shouldn’t be letting Trump have a pass.
I think all the options are terrible, including keeping Biden. This is because of the Iron Law of Institutions. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_institutions
I think the press and pundits mostly covered for Biden’s decline before the debate.
It’s almost like you are in a different universe.
What I was seeing was a press which certainly had herd behavior. But that herd behavior was NOT about covering up anything about Biden.**. Rather what I saw was the press enthusiastically pushing the view that “Biden is old! (And, strongly implied, is no longer capable of doing the job.)”. Then, when he had a bad debate performance, enthusiastically seizing on that as proving their previous narrative.
** Now if you want to talk about them covering up Trump’s mental decline, there’s evidence for that.
I think the press and pundits mostly covered for Biden’s decline before the debate.
It’s almost like you are in a different universe.
What I was seeing was a press which certainly had herd behavior. But that herd behavior was NOT about covering up anything about Biden.**. Rather what I saw was the press enthusiastically pushing the view that “Biden is old! (And, strongly implied, is no longer capable of doing the job.)”. Then, when he had a bad debate performance, enthusiastically seizing on that as proving their previous narrative.
** Now if you want to talk about them covering up Trump’s mental decline, there’s evidence for that.
Whoever is in the right of it (wj or Donald) I am feeling more and more torn. Nancy Pelosi evading is only the most recent blow. Everybody else I know (of my political leaning) seems to think it is obvious that Joe should step down, and clearly many Dem inclined people (journalists, commentators etc) in the US think so as well. This is the only place I have found where the majority (and people I respect) thinks the opposite. I don’t check in often at BJ or LGM, or with hilzoy’s feed, but I’d better do so, because I need more more sources.
Whoever is in the right of it (wj or Donald) I am feeling more and more torn. Nancy Pelosi evading is only the most recent blow. Everybody else I know (of my political leaning) seems to think it is obvious that Joe should step down, and clearly many Dem inclined people (journalists, commentators etc) in the US think so as well. This is the only place I have found where the majority (and people I respect) thinks the opposite. I don’t check in often at BJ or LGM, or with hilzoy’s feed, but I’d better do so, because I need more more sources.
Perhaps he should step down but doing so is almost certainly conceding the election. Neither Biden nor Trump would have a chance of winning if they were running against almost anyone other than who they’re running against.
Perhaps he should step down but doing so is almost certainly conceding the election. Neither Biden nor Trump would have a chance of winning if they were running against almost anyone other than who they’re running against.
OK, from hilzoy at bskyb:
hilzoy
@hilzoy.bsky.social
I have tried not to get into the business of having an opinion about whether Biden should withdraw. I am about to swear off the topic forever, so this is just to get a few points off my chest.
1) We have no need for fanfic. No one should underestimate how hard it will be to replace a candidate.
Jul 10, 2024 at 17:40
2 reposts
21 likes
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
This goes double for replacing him against his will. It will be awful. The only possible reason to do it is that you think the alternative is worse.
2) We also have no need for bars Biden has to clear, things he haw to do to prove he can continue, etc.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We are talking about dementia. People who are falling into dementia, or even just losing some significant bit of their fastball, have better days (hours) and worse days. Seeing Biden have a better day proves nothing. Maybe a monthlong 24/7 video feed of Biden would do it, but that will not happen.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
3) When considering this, I also put aside talk of ‘rebounding’, ‘coming back from adversity’, etc. One does not recover from old age.
It’s also important to consider the fact that this is a progressive condition. If I were a MoC, I’d ask: what if ALL the debates are like the last one?
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
What if things get progressively worse? Are we prepared for that? If so, how? — Because that is the normal trajectory.
4) Most of all, I would think REALLY SERIOUSLY about all of this. Members of Congress and the administration have more information than I do. They should use it.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
I am NOT well-informed. I would vote for a sea cucumber for President if that sea cucumber were running against Trump. I do not have to decide what I think. But they do, AND THEY SHOULD. Because Trump is a threat to our republic.
slate.com
Democrats Sure Aren’t Acting as if Trump Beating Biden Is an Existential Threat to Democracy
Democrats’ rhetoric against Trump has been apocalyptic and existential since Jan. 6.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We should not end up with Biden because Democrats are unable to solve the collective action problem of figuring out what to do and who will suggest it. Democrats should think hard, consider their information and all the possibilities, and act. Moreover, they should do it FAST.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
Look how well that has worked out for Republicans, after all.
/Fin.
OK, from hilzoy at bskyb:
hilzoy
@hilzoy.bsky.social
I have tried not to get into the business of having an opinion about whether Biden should withdraw. I am about to swear off the topic forever, so this is just to get a few points off my chest.
1) We have no need for fanfic. No one should underestimate how hard it will be to replace a candidate.
Jul 10, 2024 at 17:40
2 reposts
21 likes
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
This goes double for replacing him against his will. It will be awful. The only possible reason to do it is that you think the alternative is worse.
2) We also have no need for bars Biden has to clear, things he haw to do to prove he can continue, etc.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We are talking about dementia. People who are falling into dementia, or even just losing some significant bit of their fastball, have better days (hours) and worse days. Seeing Biden have a better day proves nothing. Maybe a monthlong 24/7 video feed of Biden would do it, but that will not happen.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
3) When considering this, I also put aside talk of ‘rebounding’, ‘coming back from adversity’, etc. One does not recover from old age.
It’s also important to consider the fact that this is a progressive condition. If I were a MoC, I’d ask: what if ALL the debates are like the last one?
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
What if things get progressively worse? Are we prepared for that? If so, how? — Because that is the normal trajectory.
4) Most of all, I would think REALLY SERIOUSLY about all of this. Members of Congress and the administration have more information than I do. They should use it.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
I am NOT well-informed. I would vote for a sea cucumber for President if that sea cucumber were running against Trump. I do not have to decide what I think. But they do, AND THEY SHOULD. Because Trump is a threat to our republic.
slate.com
Democrats Sure Aren’t Acting as if Trump Beating Biden Is an Existential Threat to Democracy
Democrats’ rhetoric against Trump has been apocalyptic and existential since Jan. 6.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We should not end up with Biden because Democrats are unable to solve the collective action problem of figuring out what to do and who will suggest it. Democrats should think hard, consider their information and all the possibilities, and act. Moreover, they should do it FAST.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
Look how well that has worked out for Republicans, after all.
/Fin.
OK, from hilzoy at bskyb:
hilzoy
@hilzoy.bsky.social
I have tried not to get into the business of having an opinion about whether Biden should withdraw. I am about to swear off the topic forever, so this is just to get a few points off my chest.
1) We have no need for fanfic. No one should underestimate how hard it will be to replace a candidate.
Jul 10, 2024 at 17:40
2 reposts
21 likes
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
This goes double for replacing him against his will. It will be awful. The only possible reason to do it is that you think the alternative is worse.
2) We also have no need for bars Biden has to clear, things he haw to do to prove he can continue, etc.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We are talking about dementia. People who are falling into dementia, or even just losing some significant bit of their fastball, have better days (hours) and worse days. Seeing Biden have a better day proves nothing. Maybe a monthlong 24/7 video feed of Biden would do it, but that will not happen.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
3) When considering this, I also put aside talk of ‘rebounding’, ‘coming back from adversity’, etc. One does not recover from old age.
It’s also important to consider the fact that this is a progressive condition. If I were a MoC, I’d ask: what if ALL the debates are like the last one?
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
What if things get progressively worse? Are we prepared for that? If so, how? — Because that is the normal trajectory.
4) Most of all, I would think REALLY SERIOUSLY about all of this. Members of Congress and the administration have more information than I do. They should use it.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
I am NOT well-informed. I would vote for a sea cucumber for President if that sea cucumber were running against Trump. I do not have to decide what I think. But they do, AND THEY SHOULD. Because Trump is a threat to our republic.
slate.com
Democrats Sure Aren’t Acting as if Trump Beating Biden Is an Existential Threat to Democracy
Democrats’ rhetoric against Trump has been apocalyptic and existential since Jan. 6.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We should not end up with Biden because Democrats are unable to solve the collective action problem of figuring out what to do and who will suggest it. Democrats should think hard, consider their information and all the possibilities, and act. Moreover, they should do it FAST.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
Look how well that has worked out for Republicans, after all.
/Fin.
OK, from hilzoy at bskyb:
hilzoy
@hilzoy.bsky.social
I have tried not to get into the business of having an opinion about whether Biden should withdraw. I am about to swear off the topic forever, so this is just to get a few points off my chest.
1) We have no need for fanfic. No one should underestimate how hard it will be to replace a candidate.
Jul 10, 2024 at 17:40
2 reposts
21 likes
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
This goes double for replacing him against his will. It will be awful. The only possible reason to do it is that you think the alternative is worse.
2) We also have no need for bars Biden has to clear, things he haw to do to prove he can continue, etc.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We are talking about dementia. People who are falling into dementia, or even just losing some significant bit of their fastball, have better days (hours) and worse days. Seeing Biden have a better day proves nothing. Maybe a monthlong 24/7 video feed of Biden would do it, but that will not happen.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
3) When considering this, I also put aside talk of ‘rebounding’, ‘coming back from adversity’, etc. One does not recover from old age.
It’s also important to consider the fact that this is a progressive condition. If I were a MoC, I’d ask: what if ALL the debates are like the last one?
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
What if things get progressively worse? Are we prepared for that? If so, how? — Because that is the normal trajectory.
4) Most of all, I would think REALLY SERIOUSLY about all of this. Members of Congress and the administration have more information than I do. They should use it.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
I am NOT well-informed. I would vote for a sea cucumber for President if that sea cucumber were running against Trump. I do not have to decide what I think. But they do, AND THEY SHOULD. Because Trump is a threat to our republic.
slate.com
Democrats Sure Aren’t Acting as if Trump Beating Biden Is an Existential Threat to Democracy
Democrats’ rhetoric against Trump has been apocalyptic and existential since Jan. 6.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
We should not end up with Biden because Democrats are unable to solve the collective action problem of figuring out what to do and who will suggest it. Democrats should think hard, consider their information and all the possibilities, and act. Moreover, they should do it FAST.
hilzoy @hilzoy.bsky.social
·
5h
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
Look how well that has worked out for Republicans, after all.
/Fin.
I tried to copy and paste a hilzoy at bsky thread for you all, and with both my full handle and my acronym (which works when I post links) it didn’t make it in to comments. If it’s in the spam folder, perhaps one of you could rescue it. If not, look at @hilzoy.bsky.social
I tried to copy and paste a hilzoy at bsky thread for you all, and with both my full handle and my acronym (which works when I post links) it didn’t make it in to comments. If it’s in the spam folder, perhaps one of you could rescue it. If not, look at @hilzoy.bsky.social
BJ’s regulars are in full on defensive mode with people calling anyone who questions Biden’s fitness a traitor and saying that there is no way that swing voters vote for Harris because she is a black woman.
My gut read on things, gathered from amongst the many I know who reliably vote D as a tactical matter despite frustration with the DNC, is that the No Trump coalition holds regardless of who the D’s cough up, so it’s just a matter of where the idiot swing voters choose to land, and no one can predict that because there is no real method to it other then them waiting to see which candidate they think is going to impress their friends the most once they finally “do their own research.”
So it really is down to guessing what the irrational will do.
BJ’s regulars are in full on defensive mode with people calling anyone who questions Biden’s fitness a traitor and saying that there is no way that swing voters vote for Harris because she is a black woman.
My gut read on things, gathered from amongst the many I know who reliably vote D as a tactical matter despite frustration with the DNC, is that the No Trump coalition holds regardless of who the D’s cough up, so it’s just a matter of where the idiot swing voters choose to land, and no one can predict that because there is no real method to it other then them waiting to see which candidate they think is going to impress their friends the most once they finally “do their own research.”
So it really is down to guessing what the irrational will do.
Thank you, nous, that BJ info is helpful – it means I don’t have to check in there. As for where the swing voters go, I agree, if you’re still one after exposure to Trump you’re capable of anything.
Thank you, nous, that BJ info is helpful – it means I don’t have to check in there. As for where the swing voters go, I agree, if you’re still one after exposure to Trump you’re capable of anything.
Biden on his worst day is still MANY times better than Trump on his *best* day.
Biden on his worst day is still MANY times better than Trump on his *best* day.
Just pulled GftNC comment with Hilzoy’s bsky post. I also saw that another GftNC comment and a comment by wonkie was in there, sorry, I’ll try to check a bit more.
Just pulled GftNC comment with Hilzoy’s bsky post. I also saw that another GftNC comment and a comment by wonkie was in there, sorry, I’ll try to check a bit more.
Consider how often accusations from Trump and his people turn out to be confessions. One has to wonder if Trump is deteriorating faster and more visibly than we know.
Which leads to a fun question: if it becomes clear that Trump is no longer viable (comatose, dead, raving more blatantly, whatever), who do the Republicans replace him with? I mean, without Dear Leader, how do
his cult membersthe convention delegates know who to choose? Is a puzzlement!Consider how often accusations from Trump and his people turn out to be confessions. One has to wonder if Trump is deteriorating faster and more visibly than we know.
Which leads to a fun question: if it becomes clear that Trump is no longer viable (comatose, dead, raving more blatantly, whatever), who do the Republicans replace him with? I mean, without Dear Leader, how do
his cult membersthe convention delegates know who to choose? Is a puzzlement!Which leads to a fun question: if it becomes clear that Trump is no longer viable (comatose, dead, raving more blatantly, whatever), who do the Republicans replace him with? I mean, without Dear Leader, how do his cult members the convention delegates know who to choose? Is a puzzlement!
“Welcome! Welcome, welcome. Happy Hunger Games, and may the odds be ever in your favor. Now, before we begin, we have a very special film brought to you all the way from the Capitol.”
Which leads to a fun question: if it becomes clear that Trump is no longer viable (comatose, dead, raving more blatantly, whatever), who do the Republicans replace him with? I mean, without Dear Leader, how do his cult members the convention delegates know who to choose? Is a puzzlement!
“Welcome! Welcome, welcome. Happy Hunger Games, and may the odds be ever in your favor. Now, before we begin, we have a very special film brought to you all the way from the Capitol.”
“who do the Republicans replace him with?”
Yet another reason that the GOP nominating convention should be “open carry”.
“who do the Republicans replace him with?”
Yet another reason that the GOP nominating convention should be “open carry”.
I pretty much give up on the “should Biden drop out” thing at this point. I really don’t know what he should do.
Will the (D)’s have a better shot at defeating Trump if he stays in? I have no idea.
Will the (D)’s have a better shot at defeating Trump if he steps down? I have no idea.
It’s kind of a reading-the-tea-leaves thing, and I don’t have that skill set.
I will vote for whoever the (D)’s nominate. I will vote for my mailman before I’ll vote for Trump.
Beyond that, I have no clue.
It’s a mess, one among many messes we’re in the middle of, and I have no idea how we get out of it.
I shake my head and hope for the best.
I pretty much give up on the “should Biden drop out” thing at this point. I really don’t know what he should do.
Will the (D)’s have a better shot at defeating Trump if he stays in? I have no idea.
Will the (D)’s have a better shot at defeating Trump if he steps down? I have no idea.
It’s kind of a reading-the-tea-leaves thing, and I don’t have that skill set.
I will vote for whoever the (D)’s nominate. I will vote for my mailman before I’ll vote for Trump.
Beyond that, I have no clue.
It’s a mess, one among many messes we’re in the middle of, and I have no idea how we get out of it.
I shake my head and hope for the best.
“ It’s almost like you are in a different universe.”
It’s called the New York Times.
“ It’s almost like you are in a different universe.”
It’s called the New York Times.
I know what you mean, russell. I have rarely if ever felt so flummoxed by a political situation. Given my comparative ignorance of the actual processes which would be involved if Biden went, and the timeline, I have been giving a tremendous amount of weight to the opinions of people here, and (for example) not taking the opinion of the NYT and its columnists all that seriously when so many of you despise it so thoroughly. But then I see the hilzoy thread above, and even she (the exemplar of sensible, humane, rational thought) seems not completely sure what she thinks about the decision (although she sure as hell is not dismissing or minimising the problem, which she lays out coolly and grimly). But one thing we can all agree on (except, it seems, Charles), whether a sea cucumber, a comatose Biden, or a pol not yet named, the opponent to Trump must win, and must be backed to the hilt with all means at our/your disposal. I suppose that’s all we need to know. But by God it is terrifying.
I know what you mean, russell. I have rarely if ever felt so flummoxed by a political situation. Given my comparative ignorance of the actual processes which would be involved if Biden went, and the timeline, I have been giving a tremendous amount of weight to the opinions of people here, and (for example) not taking the opinion of the NYT and its columnists all that seriously when so many of you despise it so thoroughly. But then I see the hilzoy thread above, and even she (the exemplar of sensible, humane, rational thought) seems not completely sure what she thinks about the decision (although she sure as hell is not dismissing or minimising the problem, which she lays out coolly and grimly). But one thing we can all agree on (except, it seems, Charles), whether a sea cucumber, a comatose Biden, or a pol not yet named, the opponent to Trump must win, and must be backed to the hilt with all means at our/your disposal. I suppose that’s all we need to know. But by God it is terrifying.
I think the press and pundits mostly covered for Biden’s decline before the debate.
Someone who agrees with you with a list of examples.
“Biden’s disastrous debate performance brought to a screeching halt a multi-year campaign from the media to present the president as mentally fit.
Do you really remember how hard the press pushed you not to trust your lyin’ eyes on Biden’s decline?”
Drew Holden
I think the press and pundits mostly covered for Biden’s decline before the debate.
Someone who agrees with you with a list of examples.
“Biden’s disastrous debate performance brought to a screeching halt a multi-year campaign from the media to present the president as mentally fit.
Do you really remember how hard the press pushed you not to trust your lyin’ eyes on Biden’s decline?”
Drew Holden
On the other hand…
“Was the coverage good enough? Obviously not, as many journalists now acknowledge. But the reasons are many and complicated, from the Biden staff’s aggressive access-policing (notwithstanding Bill Ackman’s overwrought fantasies, news organizations like the New York Times complained vociferously about lack of access) to fear of reader backlash to, yes, fear of helping elect Trump, as former Times executive editor Jill Abramson suggested to Semafor. And to claim that the coverage was nonexistent or barely existent simply doesn’t correspond with the facts.”
Did ‘The Media’ Hide Biden’s Aging?: Don’t buy that bogus narrative—reporting on Biden’s mental acuity wasn’t hard to find.
On the other hand…
“Was the coverage good enough? Obviously not, as many journalists now acknowledge. But the reasons are many and complicated, from the Biden staff’s aggressive access-policing (notwithstanding Bill Ackman’s overwrought fantasies, news organizations like the New York Times complained vociferously about lack of access) to fear of reader backlash to, yes, fear of helping elect Trump, as former Times executive editor Jill Abramson suggested to Semafor. And to claim that the coverage was nonexistent or barely existent simply doesn’t correspond with the facts.”
Did ‘The Media’ Hide Biden’s Aging?: Don’t buy that bogus narrative—reporting on Biden’s mental acuity wasn’t hard to find.
This is my theory, and it is mine: This feels like we’re talking about what the media think about how the media are covering this and what all the people think all the people people think about this. And probably what the media think the people think the people think and what the people think about the media coverage of the media coverage.
Then again, it’s politics, so perception is reality, blah, blah, blah….
I’m with GftNC, particularly on the Pelosi statement. Nancy knows how all this works.
This is my theory, and it is mine: This feels like we’re talking about what the media think about how the media are covering this and what all the people think all the people people think about this. And probably what the media think the people think the people think and what the people think about the media coverage of the media coverage.
Then again, it’s politics, so perception is reality, blah, blah, blah….
I’m with GftNC, particularly on the Pelosi statement. Nancy knows how all this works.
Do not ever assume good faith or honesty on the part of the national political media.
What’s going on is very simple and straightforward: They are doing to Biden what they did to Hillary.
Reasons, there are many: oligarchs in charge (WaPo, CNN), nepo babies with hurt fee fees (NYT), and columnists who know the only way to stand out from the crowd and get book contracts is to destroy Democrats.
Do not ever assume good faith or honesty on the part of the national political media.
What’s going on is very simple and straightforward: They are doing to Biden what they did to Hillary.
Reasons, there are many: oligarchs in charge (WaPo, CNN), nepo babies with hurt fee fees (NYT), and columnists who know the only way to stand out from the crowd and get book contracts is to destroy Democrats.
It ought to have been obvious (and I said so) that Biden should not run for re-election. No one is irreplaceable if you look for a replacement in time.
What to do now, I don’t know.
fwiw, Trump is also too old for the job. But people who vote for him don’t seem to care that he makes no sense, so long as he does it vilely enough.
It ought to have been obvious (and I said so) that Biden should not run for re-election. No one is irreplaceable if you look for a replacement in time.
What to do now, I don’t know.
fwiw, Trump is also too old for the job. But people who vote for him don’t seem to care that he makes no sense, so long as he does it vilely enough.
It ought to have been obvious (and I said so) that Biden should not run for re-election. No one is irreplaceable if you look for a replacement in time.
What to do now, I don’t know.
fwiw, Trump is also too old for the job. But people who vote for him don’t seem to care that he makes no sense, so long as he does it vilely enough.
It ought to have been obvious (and I said so) that Biden should not run for re-election. No one is irreplaceable if you look for a replacement in time.
What to do now, I don’t know.
fwiw, Trump is also too old for the job. But people who vote for him don’t seem to care that he makes no sense, so long as he does it vilely enough.
The MSM head may have decided to bay after a different hound. The NYT has a big editorial up about Trump’s unfitness (possibly related to people cancelling over their Biden knee-capping but more likely realization that their love of kneecapping Democrats is not as important as protecting the US from Trump). Also the drought/heat/hurricane/ flooding nationwide disaster is being discussed as the clearly result of climate change instead of the usual downplaying of causation. And Project 2025 is getting A LOT of MSM bad press.
That said, if Biden stepped down, Kamela stepped up, and a new face was chosen for VP, I think we could have a winning ticket. There is a real yearning for new faces. A new face would not be pre-slimed by the Republicans, would likely get positive treatment from the MSM, and would attract the undecideds, the independents, and the marginal voters who vote less on policy and more on their emotional reaction to candidates. I think the conventional wisdom about electability is wrong this year and I think a two-woman ticket would be exciting and would draw voters. I’m thinking of Whitmer and Harris. Team of strong women who speak clearly and forcefully but not stridently and express normal, sensible, practical solutions to real problems might just hit the spot with a lot of voters in contrast with Trump’s ranting nonsense and the I’m-even-more-Trump-than-Trump hatefulness that will be required of his running mate–who is likely to be male.
The MSM head may have decided to bay after a different hound. The NYT has a big editorial up about Trump’s unfitness (possibly related to people cancelling over their Biden knee-capping but more likely realization that their love of kneecapping Democrats is not as important as protecting the US from Trump). Also the drought/heat/hurricane/ flooding nationwide disaster is being discussed as the clearly result of climate change instead of the usual downplaying of causation. And Project 2025 is getting A LOT of MSM bad press.
That said, if Biden stepped down, Kamela stepped up, and a new face was chosen for VP, I think we could have a winning ticket. There is a real yearning for new faces. A new face would not be pre-slimed by the Republicans, would likely get positive treatment from the MSM, and would attract the undecideds, the independents, and the marginal voters who vote less on policy and more on their emotional reaction to candidates. I think the conventional wisdom about electability is wrong this year and I think a two-woman ticket would be exciting and would draw voters. I’m thinking of Whitmer and Harris. Team of strong women who speak clearly and forcefully but not stridently and express normal, sensible, practical solutions to real problems might just hit the spot with a lot of voters in contrast with Trump’s ranting nonsense and the I’m-even-more-Trump-than-Trump hatefulness that will be required of his running mate–who is likely to be male.
…the I’m-even-more-Trump-than-Trump hatefulness that will be required of his running mate–who is likely to be male.
The first time he ran Pence was a moderating element – the calm, measured persona needed to bring in the mushy middle that otherwise might have been fearful of tRump’s chaotic bombast.
This time it looks to be more like tRump & tRumper. It would be a goofball comedy if it weren’t so dangerous.
…the I’m-even-more-Trump-than-Trump hatefulness that will be required of his running mate–who is likely to be male.
The first time he ran Pence was a moderating element – the calm, measured persona needed to bring in the mushy middle that otherwise might have been fearful of tRump’s chaotic bombast.
This time it looks to be more like tRump & tRumper. It would be a goofball comedy if it weren’t so dangerous.
I’m thinking of Whitmer and Harris.
You seem to be saying** we should just skip over Harris, inserting Whitmer for Biden and leaving Harris as VP. That seems . . . odd. (Not to mention disrespectful, and likely to seriously irritate black voters.)
** Because otherwise you would have said “Harris and Whitmer”
I’m thinking of Whitmer and Harris.
You seem to be saying** we should just skip over Harris, inserting Whitmer for Biden and leaving Harris as VP. That seems . . . odd. (Not to mention disrespectful, and likely to seriously irritate black voters.)
** Because otherwise you would have said “Harris and Whitmer”
What’s going on is very simple and straightforward: They [the national political media] are doing to Biden what they did to Hillary.
This is not right. The Rs and their henchmen in the press tried to say that HRC was dying, had had a stroke etc. But the public could hear and see HRC being completely lucid and competent. As hilzoy says upthread @06.27:
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
What’s going on is very simple and straightforward: They [the national political media] are doing to Biden what they did to Hillary.
This is not right. The Rs and their henchmen in the press tried to say that HRC was dying, had had a stroke etc. But the public could hear and see HRC being completely lucid and competent. As hilzoy says upthread @06.27:
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past, I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
“I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past, I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
I’m thinking of Whitmer and Harris.
You seem to be saying** we should just skip over Harris, inserting Whitmer for Biden and leaving Harris as VP. That seems . . . odd. (Not to mention disrespectful, and likely to seriously irritate black voters.)
** Because otherwise you would have said “Harris and Whitmer”
My comment also specifically says “if Kamela steps up and a new face was chosen for VP”
I’m thinking of Whitmer and Harris.
You seem to be saying** we should just skip over Harris, inserting Whitmer for Biden and leaving Harris as VP. That seems . . . odd. (Not to mention disrespectful, and likely to seriously irritate black voters.)
** Because otherwise you would have said “Harris and Whitmer”
My comment also specifically says “if Kamela steps up and a new face was chosen for VP”
I’ve heard a lot of DNC faithful saying that anything other than Biden at the top of the ticket is an affront to the will of the primary voters. These, of course, are the same people who repeatedly complain about the privilege of the progressives and the need to get on board with the thing that ensures a win. They appear to be having a hard time with the notion that they might be the ones who are out of step with the voting public, and that they might be the ones who have to give up their passionate support for a candidate and compromise for the sake of electoral reality.
I’m not saying that this is where we are. I’ll say again, I don’t know that there is a sure fire answer to how to get through this election with a D win, and whoever is the D running against the R will have my vote.
But I am saying that the Biden supporters had best be ready to do the same whatever happens. That’s what every other part of the D coalition has been doing since at least the 90s.
And if there is one group that I look at and say must be respected in the electoral calculus, it’s women of color. And that means that if it is not Biden, then it had best be Harris, or else you have just put a knife in the heart of the group that has done more for D victories than any other in the last 25 years.
That’s not me saying that as a one-time Harris supporter, that’s me seeing that repeated across story after story whenever a woman of color has been asked for comment.
So here I am, reciting the litany against fear, and hoping that if Biden does step aside, people rally behind Harris. And if he doesn’t, I recommend that people rally behind Harris anyway, as the person who will be taking on a lot for Biden, and for our public fears.
I’ve heard a lot of DNC faithful saying that anything other than Biden at the top of the ticket is an affront to the will of the primary voters. These, of course, are the same people who repeatedly complain about the privilege of the progressives and the need to get on board with the thing that ensures a win. They appear to be having a hard time with the notion that they might be the ones who are out of step with the voting public, and that they might be the ones who have to give up their passionate support for a candidate and compromise for the sake of electoral reality.
I’m not saying that this is where we are. I’ll say again, I don’t know that there is a sure fire answer to how to get through this election with a D win, and whoever is the D running against the R will have my vote.
But I am saying that the Biden supporters had best be ready to do the same whatever happens. That’s what every other part of the D coalition has been doing since at least the 90s.
And if there is one group that I look at and say must be respected in the electoral calculus, it’s women of color. And that means that if it is not Biden, then it had best be Harris, or else you have just put a knife in the heart of the group that has done more for D victories than any other in the last 25 years.
That’s not me saying that as a one-time Harris supporter, that’s me seeing that repeated across story after story whenever a woman of color has been asked for comment.
So here I am, reciting the litany against fear, and hoping that if Biden does step aside, people rally behind Harris. And if he doesn’t, I recommend that people rally behind Harris anyway, as the person who will be taking on a lot for Biden, and for our public fears.
Very well said, nous. And may the force be with Joe, and with all of us.
Very well said, nous. And may the force be with Joe, and with all of us.
And someone just rang me to tell me that Biden, introducing Zelensky, called him Putin before correcting himself. This is absolutely agonising.
And someone just rang me to tell me that Biden, introducing Zelensky, called him Putin before correcting himself. This is absolutely agonising.
Macron says it was a slip of the tongue, and that Joe is in charge and with it. I just watched it, and it looked clear that it was the kind of slip you make when you are under pressure to really watch what you say, and NOT to say something wrong.
(Trigger warning for very bad language. There is a story here about a local dignitary in the 50s, introducing in her home town a glamorous blonde actress called Diana Dors, whose real name was Diana Fluck. He was apparently so fixated on not calling her Diana Fuck, that when he did the introduction he introduced her as Diana Clunt.)
But if that was what was going on with Biden, then I can only see it getting worse. The scrutiny, and the pressure, are not going away. I repeat, this is absolutely agonising.
Macron says it was a slip of the tongue, and that Joe is in charge and with it. I just watched it, and it looked clear that it was the kind of slip you make when you are under pressure to really watch what you say, and NOT to say something wrong.
(Trigger warning for very bad language. There is a story here about a local dignitary in the 50s, introducing in her home town a glamorous blonde actress called Diana Dors, whose real name was Diana Fluck. He was apparently so fixated on not calling her Diana Fuck, that when he did the introduction he introduced her as Diana Clunt.)
But if that was what was going on with Biden, then I can only see it getting worse. The scrutiny, and the pressure, are not going away. I repeat, this is absolutely agonising.
if there is one group that I look at and say must be respected in the electoral calculus, it’s women of color. And that means that if it is not Biden, then it had best be Harris, or else you have just put a knife in the heart of the group that has done more for D victories than any other in the last 25 years.
Nailed it.
Anybody, and I do mean anybody who thinks the Democrats win after (hypothetically) replacing Biden with someone other than Harris — all one can say is that they should stick to fantasy football. Because they simply aren’t living in the real world when it comes to politics.
if there is one group that I look at and say must be respected in the electoral calculus, it’s women of color. And that means that if it is not Biden, then it had best be Harris, or else you have just put a knife in the heart of the group that has done more for D victories than any other in the last 25 years.
Nailed it.
Anybody, and I do mean anybody who thinks the Democrats win after (hypothetically) replacing Biden with someone other than Harris — all one can say is that they should stick to fantasy football. Because they simply aren’t living in the real world when it comes to politics.
We had an internal Global Town Hall at work yesterday, led by the CEO, elaborating and answering questions about the organizational changes (and job cuts) that had been laid out in emails sent out yesterday morning. When talking about the renaming of the editorial review committee previously called The Row, he had a slip of the tongue and said “BBC FactCheck”, rather than our three-letter abbreviation. To much laughter from the live audience in NY (he was head of BBC for a number of years).
We had an internal Global Town Hall at work yesterday, led by the CEO, elaborating and answering questions about the organizational changes (and job cuts) that had been laid out in emails sent out yesterday morning. When talking about the renaming of the editorial review committee previously called The Row, he had a slip of the tongue and said “BBC FactCheck”, rather than our three-letter abbreviation. To much laughter from the live audience in NY (he was head of BBC for a number of years).
Just ran across these comments from former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, in conversation with Kim Stanley Robinson:
https://www.climatealmanac.org/pub/jjyxxear/release/5
What you have tried to suggest in your literature is a sort of rekindling of the Thor Heyerdahl idea [editors’ note: Heyerdahl was a Norwegian ethnographer and adventurer who led the Kon-Tiki expedition, aiming to demonstrate that lengthy sea voyages would have been possible for ancient peoples]: you’re on a raft, and no matter where you come from, if you believe you are in peril, you will find a way of working together even if you’re under stress, because if the raft overturns then everyone suffers. There’s a sort of primal instinct within us that will force cooperation at some stage, and I think what you’re urging everyone is to say, Look, we have to be serious about this now, and if we are, we can actually turn the corner. It’s difficult to know the exact sequence, all the little steps in between, how we get from here to there. But we need the willingness to give it a strong go, and not to give up.
I think this works well with the Litany Against Fear.
We really need to find a way to marginalize the nihilist voices that are dominating our conversations about the world because I think we are beginning to realize that we are all on that raft right now with the climate, and we do have to find ways to ignore the stress and the fear and work with each other to keep the raft from sinking.
We need to find ways to shift that perspective away from the personal to the collective. If we can do that, we can achieve progress again, and make things better.
I know that framing of personal and collective is going to send a lot of people straight into thinking about individualism vs socialism, but there are so many possible ways of working out fair collective rules for cooperation. Insisting on framing it as individualism vs socialism is a tragic failure of imagination.
Just ran across these comments from former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, in conversation with Kim Stanley Robinson:
https://www.climatealmanac.org/pub/jjyxxear/release/5
What you have tried to suggest in your literature is a sort of rekindling of the Thor Heyerdahl idea [editors’ note: Heyerdahl was a Norwegian ethnographer and adventurer who led the Kon-Tiki expedition, aiming to demonstrate that lengthy sea voyages would have been possible for ancient peoples]: you’re on a raft, and no matter where you come from, if you believe you are in peril, you will find a way of working together even if you’re under stress, because if the raft overturns then everyone suffers. There’s a sort of primal instinct within us that will force cooperation at some stage, and I think what you’re urging everyone is to say, Look, we have to be serious about this now, and if we are, we can actually turn the corner. It’s difficult to know the exact sequence, all the little steps in between, how we get from here to there. But we need the willingness to give it a strong go, and not to give up.
I think this works well with the Litany Against Fear.
We really need to find a way to marginalize the nihilist voices that are dominating our conversations about the world because I think we are beginning to realize that we are all on that raft right now with the climate, and we do have to find ways to ignore the stress and the fear and work with each other to keep the raft from sinking.
We need to find ways to shift that perspective away from the personal to the collective. If we can do that, we can achieve progress again, and make things better.
I know that framing of personal and collective is going to send a lot of people straight into thinking about individualism vs socialism, but there are so many possible ways of working out fair collective rules for cooperation. Insisting on framing it as individualism vs socialism is a tragic failure of imagination.
Last thought for a bit – I don’t want Biden to leave (if indeed he does leave) until after the Republican National Convention: after all the attacks on him, and the choice of VP has been made public. Make Trump commit to a line of attack, and theme, and a sidekick, and then use that against them. They are already worried that Biden dropping would force them to have to retool. Keep them guessing.
Last thought for a bit – I don’t want Biden to leave (if indeed he does leave) until after the Republican National Convention: after all the attacks on him, and the choice of VP has been made public. Make Trump commit to a line of attack, and theme, and a sidekick, and then use that against them. They are already worried that Biden dropping would force them to have to retool. Keep them guessing.
I’ve watched part of the press conference and he is coherent tonight. His answer to the Gaza question was absolute BS, just moronic, hypocritical and nauseating, reinforcing why I think he is despicable, but in an entirely normal DC kind of way.
I gather he made some dumb mistakes earlier, but this is nothing like the debate.
I’ve watched part of the press conference and he is coherent tonight. His answer to the Gaza question was absolute BS, just moronic, hypocritical and nauseating, reinforcing why I think he is despicable, but in an entirely normal DC kind of way.
I gather he made some dumb mistakes earlier, but this is nothing like the debate.
I didn’t see most of the press conference but from what people on Twitter were saying, that was the only question on Gaza and it was a softball— basically, did he have any regrets?
I would like to see how he would respond to tougher, more pointed questioning on that subject.
I didn’t see most of the press conference but from what people on Twitter were saying, that was the only question on Gaza and it was a softball— basically, did he have any regrets?
I would like to see how he would respond to tougher, more pointed questioning on that subject.
Well, the fucking press corpse is doing their thing: continuing the kneecapping but in passive/aggressive mode.
“Biden Fails to Stop the Bleeding” This headline was probably written before the conference was over and went out within twelve hours. Of course he can’t stop the bleeding because the bleeding, if it exists, is generated by the press and only they can stop it.
“Two Gaffes and Substantive Discussion” That article discussed how “Democrats” were responding–though the author didn’t quote any that were responding to the presser and the Democrats they referred to who were responding to the debate were not leaders. Clooney is not a leader. SOme representative from NY I never heard of is not a leader. Bennet isn’t a leader. ONce again it is the press that is creating and promoting a story.
There are Dems panicking and assisting the press in creating the story now that the press got the ball rolling–but for the rest of the campaign the press will highlight every wrong word and concern troll with questions designed to push the press agenda and they degenerate fuckers will elect Trump. And take no responsibility for their actions whatsoever.
Well, the fucking press corpse is doing their thing: continuing the kneecapping but in passive/aggressive mode.
“Biden Fails to Stop the Bleeding” This headline was probably written before the conference was over and went out within twelve hours. Of course he can’t stop the bleeding because the bleeding, if it exists, is generated by the press and only they can stop it.
“Two Gaffes and Substantive Discussion” That article discussed how “Democrats” were responding–though the author didn’t quote any that were responding to the presser and the Democrats they referred to who were responding to the debate were not leaders. Clooney is not a leader. SOme representative from NY I never heard of is not a leader. Bennet isn’t a leader. ONce again it is the press that is creating and promoting a story.
There are Dems panicking and assisting the press in creating the story now that the press got the ball rolling–but for the rest of the campaign the press will highlight every wrong word and concern troll with questions designed to push the press agenda and they degenerate fuckers will elect Trump. And take no responsibility for their actions whatsoever.
AP “BIden’s Challenge: WIll he ever satisfy the media’s appetite?”
How can he? The media has the appetite. Only the media can decide if they are going to stop taking the lazy, juvenile, passive/aggressive narcissism route and start doing substantive journalism. The phrasing of AP’s headline shows the problem: refusal to take responsibility. It should say, “Will the Press allow themselves to be satisfied? Or will they continue to ask the same questions over and over while promoting the message that Biden is mentally incompetent because to change their coverage would be to admit that they are responsible for their choices about coverage and their whole schtick is to pretend that they aren’t gatekeepers and don’t manufacture issues.
AP “BIden’s Challenge: WIll he ever satisfy the media’s appetite?”
How can he? The media has the appetite. Only the media can decide if they are going to stop taking the lazy, juvenile, passive/aggressive narcissism route and start doing substantive journalism. The phrasing of AP’s headline shows the problem: refusal to take responsibility. It should say, “Will the Press allow themselves to be satisfied? Or will they continue to ask the same questions over and over while promoting the message that Biden is mentally incompetent because to change their coverage would be to admit that they are responsible for their choices about coverage and their whole schtick is to pretend that they aren’t gatekeepers and don’t manufacture issues.
I’m going to quote this again from Hilzoy via GftNC.
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
As venal as the press may be, it doesn’t mean that Biden isn’t actually failing because of his age. I tend to think so. I wish I didn’t.
I’m going to quote this again from Hilzoy via GftNC.
Last point: this is a mdeia narrative, of course. But it does no one any good to assume that because it’s a media narrative, it is ONLY a media narrative.
As venal as the press may be, it doesn’t mean that Biden isn’t actually failing because of his age. I tend to think so. I wish I didn’t.
Biden spent the entire day at meetings and then engaged in substantive conversations with the press jackels at the media event. Also this week he released millions to restart car factories, participated in NATO meetings, and had fun embarrassing Texas officials. He is in excellent condition for his age and not failing mentally at all.
It’s a fucking media narrative. Genuine journalists would have responded to the debate either by waiting for the polling and then reported on public response instead of creating public response by telling us what they think we saw.
Either that or they could have fact checked both candidates.
Or they could have said Biden seemed tired and had an off day and Trump lied and blathered.
They did not have to decide that Biden was mentally declining and decide to abuse their power by kneecapping him. It was a choice for which they are responsible.
Biden spent the entire day at meetings and then engaged in substantive conversations with the press jackels at the media event. Also this week he released millions to restart car factories, participated in NATO meetings, and had fun embarrassing Texas officials. He is in excellent condition for his age and not failing mentally at all.
It’s a fucking media narrative. Genuine journalists would have responded to the debate either by waiting for the polling and then reported on public response instead of creating public response by telling us what they think we saw.
Either that or they could have fact checked both candidates.
Or they could have said Biden seemed tired and had an off day and Trump lied and blathered.
They did not have to decide that Biden was mentally declining and decide to abuse their power by kneecapping him. It was a choice for which they are responsible.
He is in excellent condition for his age and not failing mentally at all.
I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you can know this.
He is in excellent condition for his age and not failing mentally at all.
I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you can know this.
I think that there is a lot of ground between concerns about Biden’s “window of effectiveness” and concerns that Biden is already past that window. I think the current media narrative is conflating those two, and that the Hollywood Donors are treating this like Biden is a film they are producing that can be pulled and replaced before the holidays with something that focus tests better in screenings.
I really don’t have any time for the latter, and I think the answer to the former lies with Harris as the bridge.
Which is why I think that all this freak out is really about people’s fears about Harris, based on them not understanding the shallowness of the grounds for her approval ratings, and the way that Dobbs flipped the narrative for her. Anyone who has watched her in action since Dobbs could tell you that her performance has snapped into focus. And it’s the right focus from which to come at Trump.
And in a post-Dobbs world, I think the racist. sexist attacks that would be aimed at Harris have a much greater chance of turning in the hands of the right wing than they did before the Supreme Court decided to lay the groundwork for Christian nationalism.
Whatever the case, I’m voting D. There isn’t really any alternative.
I think that there is a lot of ground between concerns about Biden’s “window of effectiveness” and concerns that Biden is already past that window. I think the current media narrative is conflating those two, and that the Hollywood Donors are treating this like Biden is a film they are producing that can be pulled and replaced before the holidays with something that focus tests better in screenings.
I really don’t have any time for the latter, and I think the answer to the former lies with Harris as the bridge.
Which is why I think that all this freak out is really about people’s fears about Harris, based on them not understanding the shallowness of the grounds for her approval ratings, and the way that Dobbs flipped the narrative for her. Anyone who has watched her in action since Dobbs could tell you that her performance has snapped into focus. And it’s the right focus from which to come at Trump.
And in a post-Dobbs world, I think the racist. sexist attacks that would be aimed at Harris have a much greater chance of turning in the hands of the right wing than they did before the Supreme Court decided to lay the groundwork for Christian nationalism.
Whatever the case, I’m voting D. There isn’t really any alternative.
“I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you can know this.”
Well the fucking media sure as shit can’t know he’s failing.
And if is acceptable for the media to create and promote a narrative based on…their interpretations without facts, why aren’t they hounded the pussygrabber with questions about Epstein’s tape? A witness says Epstein taped Trump having sexual relations with a teenager.
“I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you can know this.”
Well the fucking media sure as shit can’t know he’s failing.
And if is acceptable for the media to create and promote a narrative based on…their interpretations without facts, why aren’t they hounded the pussygrabber with questions about Epstein’s tape? A witness says Epstein taped Trump having sexual relations with a teenager.
In case Trump wins, let’s hope he picks someone at least halfway reasonable for VP. The odds are pretty good for physical, mental, legal, and political reasons he won’t last four years either.
In case Trump wins, let’s hope he picks someone at least halfway reasonable for VP. The odds are pretty good for physical, mental, legal, and political reasons he won’t last four years either.
You’ll get no argument from me that they aren’t hard enough on tRump. But I’m not sure they’re making all of this up out of whole cloth. I don’t see why, for example, Nancy Pelosi isn’t fully behind Biden. Maybe the media got to her.
I’m not saying I’m not going to vote for Biden if he’s on the ticket in November (not that my state is up for grabs, anyway). I also have no control over what happens. My opinion on the possibility of his decline has no consequence, so I’m probably done talking about it.
You’ll get no argument from me that they aren’t hard enough on tRump. But I’m not sure they’re making all of this up out of whole cloth. I don’t see why, for example, Nancy Pelosi isn’t fully behind Biden. Maybe the media got to her.
I’m not saying I’m not going to vote for Biden if he’s on the ticket in November (not that my state is up for grabs, anyway). I also have no control over what happens. My opinion on the possibility of his decline has no consequence, so I’m probably done talking about it.
I think many Dems are thinking that the media has successfully kneecapped Biden the way they did HRC and Gore and Howard Dean and are afraid that the media will keep on kneecapping him until he loses the election. This kneecapping is entirely independent from any actual issue. It’s as stupid as the promotion of the email “scandal” and Gore’s comment about the Internet, and Dean’s howl about “On to New Hampshire!”. The point being that people like Pelosi don’t think Biden is losing competency, but they do think the media has successfully destroyed his election chances.
BTW I am not accusing the MSM of kneecapping Biden deliberately as some kind of plot against him or against Democrats. I think it comes from incompetence, a failure to know what journalism actually is. They probably believe that the story is there, and they have an obligation to cover it. IN the real world it isn’t a story–it’s just speculation and they aren’t obligated to cover it. Their obligation as gatekeepers over what gets covered and what doesn’t is to focus on what is factual and significant–like the massive destruction of climate change, or polling figures, or policy positions. They are no more obligated to print stories about Biden’s possible age-related issues than to print speculation about Trump’s possible sexual assault of a teenager on Epstein’s island. But that story they aren’t covering as not proven.
Double standard much?
I think many Dems are thinking that the media has successfully kneecapped Biden the way they did HRC and Gore and Howard Dean and are afraid that the media will keep on kneecapping him until he loses the election. This kneecapping is entirely independent from any actual issue. It’s as stupid as the promotion of the email “scandal” and Gore’s comment about the Internet, and Dean’s howl about “On to New Hampshire!”. The point being that people like Pelosi don’t think Biden is losing competency, but they do think the media has successfully destroyed his election chances.
BTW I am not accusing the MSM of kneecapping Biden deliberately as some kind of plot against him or against Democrats. I think it comes from incompetence, a failure to know what journalism actually is. They probably believe that the story is there, and they have an obligation to cover it. IN the real world it isn’t a story–it’s just speculation and they aren’t obligated to cover it. Their obligation as gatekeepers over what gets covered and what doesn’t is to focus on what is factual and significant–like the massive destruction of climate change, or polling figures, or policy positions. They are no more obligated to print stories about Biden’s possible age-related issues than to print speculation about Trump’s possible sexual assault of a teenager on Epstein’s island. But that story they aren’t covering as not proven.
Double standard much?
hsh: I don’t see why, for example, Nancy Pelosi isn’t fully behind Biden. Maybe the media got to her.
hsh, do you have a direct quote from Pelosi, preferably video in context, that justifies this interpretation of her position? Or are you taking the word of articles like this one, from CNN yesterday:
Here’s the Morning Joe appearance.
At about 4 minutes, the guy says Biden has said he’s going to run, and asks Pelosi, “What do you want him to do?” She says, “I want him to do whatever he decides to do. Whatever he decides, we go with.”
Mika has been prodding her about it from about :45 in, but that bit at 4 minutes is the core.
Maybe there’s more somewhere else and I missed it; certainly I spend as little time as possible directly interacting with our major news outlets.
But if there isn’t something more direct that I’ve missed that justifies the notion that Pelosi isn’t fully behind Biden, the twisted innuendo of how the CNN article frames the exchange on Morning Joe is ample evidence to me that the press isn’t worth the paper it isn’t printed on.
I too have been trying to leave this alone, because I might as well have an opinion about what path a hurricane should take. Going to go back to trying now.
hsh: I don’t see why, for example, Nancy Pelosi isn’t fully behind Biden. Maybe the media got to her.
hsh, do you have a direct quote from Pelosi, preferably video in context, that justifies this interpretation of her position? Or are you taking the word of articles like this one, from CNN yesterday:
Here’s the Morning Joe appearance.
At about 4 minutes, the guy says Biden has said he’s going to run, and asks Pelosi, “What do you want him to do?” She says, “I want him to do whatever he decides to do. Whatever he decides, we go with.”
Mika has been prodding her about it from about :45 in, but that bit at 4 minutes is the core.
Maybe there’s more somewhere else and I missed it; certainly I spend as little time as possible directly interacting with our major news outlets.
But if there isn’t something more direct that I’ve missed that justifies the notion that Pelosi isn’t fully behind Biden, the twisted innuendo of how the CNN article frames the exchange on Morning Joe is ample evidence to me that the press isn’t worth the paper it isn’t printed on.
I too have been trying to leave this alone, because I might as well have an opinion about what path a hurricane should take. Going to go back to trying now.
My own reading of the Pelosi comments is that she, like Obama, is trying to circumvent any party infighting by sidestepping the question. It is less than the statement of loyalty that Biden supporters want, but I also don’t think that she is passively aggressively trying to reopen the door that Biden keeps trying to close on his withdrawal from the race. It’s the answer of an institutionalist trying to add as little additional turbulence into the situation as possible.
My own reading of the Pelosi comments is that she, like Obama, is trying to circumvent any party infighting by sidestepping the question. It is less than the statement of loyalty that Biden supporters want, but I also don’t think that she is passively aggressively trying to reopen the door that Biden keeps trying to close on his withdrawal from the race. It’s the answer of an institutionalist trying to add as little additional turbulence into the situation as possible.
In case Trump wins, let’s hope he picks someone at least halfway reasonable for VP.
If the journalists are doing their job, next week’s stories ought to be about Trump’s VP pick rather than Biden’s age.
In case Trump wins, let’s hope he picks someone at least halfway reasonable for VP.
If the journalists are doing their job, next week’s stories ought to be about Trump’s VP pick rather than Biden’s age.
I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you can know this.
“Know” this? I’d say I can know it as much as we know anything about any candidate. If you caught yesterday’s press conference, you saw a man spend an hour successfully fielding questions off the top of his head. (Questions, be it noted, that the reporters invariably read off their tablets or phones.). I’d call that pretty solid evidence that there are no cognitive issues. And since the results of his physicals are all posted online, there’s pretty solid evidence that he’s doing OK on that front as well.
Sure, it’s not perfect knowledge. But then, do any of us have perfect knowledge of our own health a year from now?
I hope you’re right, but I don’t think you can know this.
“Know” this? I’d say I can know it as much as we know anything about any candidate. If you caught yesterday’s press conference, you saw a man spend an hour successfully fielding questions off the top of his head. (Questions, be it noted, that the reporters invariably read off their tablets or phones.). I’d call that pretty solid evidence that there are no cognitive issues. And since the results of his physicals are all posted online, there’s pretty solid evidence that he’s doing OK on that front as well.
Sure, it’s not perfect knowledge. But then, do any of us have perfect knowledge of our own health a year from now?
let’s hope he picks someone at least halfway reasonable for VP.
No question we all hope this. But given his track record? Definitely not the smart money bet.
More likely somewhere between horrible and far worse than we could ever have imagined. Leaning towards the latter.
let’s hope he picks someone at least halfway reasonable for VP.
No question we all hope this. But given his track record? Definitely not the smart money bet.
More likely somewhere between horrible and far worse than we could ever have imagined. Leaning towards the latter.
Whoever Trump picks is going to be onboard with the Project 2025 thing.
And in the land of impossible wish fulfillment, why can’t we be living in the timeline in which Pence invoked the 25th Amendment after Jan. 6?
Someone should pitch that idea to Jeffrey Katzenberg for a movie. He can cast Clooney as Pence. They both seem to have time on their hands.
Whoever Trump picks is going to be onboard with the Project 2025 thing.
And in the land of impossible wish fulfillment, why can’t we be living in the timeline in which Pence invoked the 25th Amendment after Jan. 6?
Someone should pitch that idea to Jeffrey Katzenberg for a movie. He can cast Clooney as Pence. They both seem to have time on their hands.
It strikes me all of us need something more productive to pass the time. I suggest one of our better “pamphleteers” write up a pledge along the following lines:
“The authoritarian candidate of the Republican Party presents a clear and present danger to our democracy. I ______ do hereby solemnly swear that I shall cast my vote in the 2024 Presidential Election for whomever is named on my ballot as the candidate of the Democratic Party.”
Post it on all those social media accounts I hear so much about (but never visit). Tricking it up with links & such is beyond my pay grade, but that and wide circulation sure wouldn’t hurt. The support needs to be expressed as going to the cause, not the person.
Maybe it will get some traction. Who can tell?
It strikes me all of us need something more productive to pass the time. I suggest one of our better “pamphleteers” write up a pledge along the following lines:
“The authoritarian candidate of the Republican Party presents a clear and present danger to our democracy. I ______ do hereby solemnly swear that I shall cast my vote in the 2024 Presidential Election for whomever is named on my ballot as the candidate of the Democratic Party.”
Post it on all those social media accounts I hear so much about (but never visit). Tricking it up with links & such is beyond my pay grade, but that and wide circulation sure wouldn’t hurt. The support needs to be expressed as going to the cause, not the person.
Maybe it will get some traction. Who can tell?
You’re not the only one here who doesn’t do social media. I have a LinkedIn entry for professional reasons. But otherwise, nothing.
You’re not the only one here who doesn’t do social media. I have a LinkedIn entry for professional reasons. But otherwise, nothing.
I got banned from Twitface back in 2003 by some reprobate that goes by the handle ‘snarki’.
In retrospect, I’m thankful.
I got banned from Twitface back in 2003 by some reprobate that goes by the handle ‘snarki’.
In retrospect, I’m thankful.
“Know” this? I’d say I can know it as much as we know anything about any candidate.
Not really. Saying he has no mental decline is a very specific claim, and there’s reason to consider at least the possibility that he does, including the debate, even if it was a bad night (because the question is “why?”).
We do know he’s 81 years old and has been doing a very stressful and demanding job for the last few years and is under consideration to continue doing it until he’s 86.
I don’t claim to know that he has declined appreciably in the last few years. And even if he has, I’d still rather he be president than the former guy. I’m simply not unwilling to consider the possibility, regardless of the state of the media.
I’m not trying to make some specific diagnosis of his condition. I do tend to think that he’s suffering from an age-related decline of some sort. I thought it in real time before the media frenzy started.
Everyone is free to disagree. What I think doesn’t f**king matter, anyway.
“Know” this? I’d say I can know it as much as we know anything about any candidate.
Not really. Saying he has no mental decline is a very specific claim, and there’s reason to consider at least the possibility that he does, including the debate, even if it was a bad night (because the question is “why?”).
We do know he’s 81 years old and has been doing a very stressful and demanding job for the last few years and is under consideration to continue doing it until he’s 86.
I don’t claim to know that he has declined appreciably in the last few years. And even if he has, I’d still rather he be president than the former guy. I’m simply not unwilling to consider the possibility, regardless of the state of the media.
I’m not trying to make some specific diagnosis of his condition. I do tend to think that he’s suffering from an age-related decline of some sort. I thought it in real time before the media frenzy started.
Everyone is free to disagree. What I think doesn’t f**king matter, anyway.
I have nothing useful to say about Biden’s mental health. But I wouldn’t hire an 81-year-old to run my whelk stall, if I had a whelk stall. It’s beyond obvious that the president should be old enough to be wise, but young enough to be vigorous.
To be clear, I wouldn’t hire Trump to weed my allotment. If I had a vote, I’d vote for whoever was most likely to beat Trump.
I have nothing useful to say about Biden’s mental health. But I wouldn’t hire an 81-year-old to run my whelk stall, if I had a whelk stall. It’s beyond obvious that the president should be old enough to be wise, but young enough to be vigorous.
To be clear, I wouldn’t hire Trump to weed my allotment. If I had a vote, I’d vote for whoever was most likely to beat Trump.
I look at Twitter ( or X these days) a lot and I think for issues like Gaza you make a big mistake if you rely too much on the mainstream press. You will see links to articles in the MSM, and these include links to pieces you might not have seen on your own. Israeli papers carry articles on things you just won’t see here and I don’t mean trivial details either.
And you will see firsthand videos from Gaza, including some really disgraceful ones from Israeli soldiers, some who take great pleasure in pawing through the women’s underwear they find in abandoned homes. Some gleefully destroy homes and blow up neighborhoods or fire off dozens of rounds at random into destroyed neighborhoods. They are having a great time.
It isn’t the somewhat cleaned up war I read about in the NYT. The NYT has carried some very good pieces, but they often bury the lead and I think people relying on it don’t realize what they are missing.
I see NYT readers in comment threads sneering at the consumers of social media and they do not hold the epistemological high ground they think they do,
I look at Twitter ( or X these days) a lot and I think for issues like Gaza you make a big mistake if you rely too much on the mainstream press. You will see links to articles in the MSM, and these include links to pieces you might not have seen on your own. Israeli papers carry articles on things you just won’t see here and I don’t mean trivial details either.
And you will see firsthand videos from Gaza, including some really disgraceful ones from Israeli soldiers, some who take great pleasure in pawing through the women’s underwear they find in abandoned homes. Some gleefully destroy homes and blow up neighborhoods or fire off dozens of rounds at random into destroyed neighborhoods. They are having a great time.
It isn’t the somewhat cleaned up war I read about in the NYT. The NYT has carried some very good pieces, but they often bury the lead and I think people relying on it don’t realize what they are missing.
I see NYT readers in comment threads sneering at the consumers of social media and they do not hold the epistemological high ground they think they do,
The thing is, we aren’t gonna get to pick who’s running.
It’s gonna be Trump, and whoever ends up being the last person standing in the current (D) circular firing squad.
My sense in general is that Biden thinks he’s the only person who can beat Trump. I’m sure there’s a generous helping of self-importance in that, but I think that kind of comes with the gig. And he might be right.
Maybe Harris could do it. I really can’t see anyone else doing it from a standing start half-way through July in an election year. Aside from the whole name-recognition thing, there are likely about a million techincal and legal impediments to overcome and hoops to jump through, and I’m fairly sure the announcement of anyone other than Harris as the nominee would be met with a tsunami of lawsuits about who can be on the ballot in what state, who can spend what money, etc etc etc.
All the talk about who might replace Biden strikes me as kind of the political version of fantasy football. It’s Biden unless he chooses to step down, and if he does step down, it will most likely be Harris. All the other options just seem like an invitation to chaos.
Is all of that good? No, it’s not. It would be better if Biden was 10 or 15 years younger, it would be better if he had brought his best game to the debate, it would be better if he wasn’t a clumsy public speaker on his best day.
None of those things are true.
The thing is, we aren’t gonna get to pick who’s running.
It’s gonna be Trump, and whoever ends up being the last person standing in the current (D) circular firing squad.
My sense in general is that Biden thinks he’s the only person who can beat Trump. I’m sure there’s a generous helping of self-importance in that, but I think that kind of comes with the gig. And he might be right.
Maybe Harris could do it. I really can’t see anyone else doing it from a standing start half-way through July in an election year. Aside from the whole name-recognition thing, there are likely about a million techincal and legal impediments to overcome and hoops to jump through, and I’m fairly sure the announcement of anyone other than Harris as the nominee would be met with a tsunami of lawsuits about who can be on the ballot in what state, who can spend what money, etc etc etc.
All the talk about who might replace Biden strikes me as kind of the political version of fantasy football. It’s Biden unless he chooses to step down, and if he does step down, it will most likely be Harris. All the other options just seem like an invitation to chaos.
Is all of that good? No, it’s not. It would be better if Biden was 10 or 15 years younger, it would be better if he had brought his best game to the debate, it would be better if he wasn’t a clumsy public speaker on his best day.
None of those things are true.
The thing is, we aren’t gonna get to pick who’s running.
I should amend this.
There is a process by which candidates for office are selected. That process is open to all of us. That process played out in good order, and resulted in Joe Biden being the (D) candidate for POTUS.
Everyone who participated in that process, including everyone who voted for Biden as the (D) candidate, knew Biden was old, knew he was gaffe-prone, knew he was at times a halting public speaker.
And they voted for him anyway.
That doesn’t rule out his standing down, nor does it rule out folks asking questions about whether he is physically and mentally ready for another four years in one of the most stressful jobs on the planet.
But realistically it’s unlikely that pressuring him out of the race and swapping in somebody else at this point will give the (D)’s any better shot in November. The only possible exception I see is if he stands down and Harris steps up, but that’s up to Biden.
It’s not clear to me that anyone has a better shot than Biden, even with all of his limitations. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t think I am.
It’s not the best situation, or even a great situation. But that’s what we have to work with.
I’ll also say that the apparent inability of the US press and public commentariat to recognize the glaring differences between Biden and Trump, and between today’s (R) party and the (D) party in general, is startling. They appear to be so afraid to “take sides” that they’ve rendered themselves worse than useless.
The thing is, we aren’t gonna get to pick who’s running.
I should amend this.
There is a process by which candidates for office are selected. That process is open to all of us. That process played out in good order, and resulted in Joe Biden being the (D) candidate for POTUS.
Everyone who participated in that process, including everyone who voted for Biden as the (D) candidate, knew Biden was old, knew he was gaffe-prone, knew he was at times a halting public speaker.
And they voted for him anyway.
That doesn’t rule out his standing down, nor does it rule out folks asking questions about whether he is physically and mentally ready for another four years in one of the most stressful jobs on the planet.
But realistically it’s unlikely that pressuring him out of the race and swapping in somebody else at this point will give the (D)’s any better shot in November. The only possible exception I see is if he stands down and Harris steps up, but that’s up to Biden.
It’s not clear to me that anyone has a better shot than Biden, even with all of his limitations. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t think I am.
It’s not the best situation, or even a great situation. But that’s what we have to work with.
I’ll also say that the apparent inability of the US press and public commentariat to recognize the glaring differences between Biden and Trump, and between today’s (R) party and the (D) party in general, is startling. They appear to be so afraid to “take sides” that they’ve rendered themselves worse than useless.
I would mention two phrases almost completely absent in mainstream coverage of Gaza and a few other things as well.
The Hannibal directive.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-07-07/ty-article-magazine/.premium/idf-ordered-hannibal-directive-on-october-7-to-prevent-hamas-taking-soldiers-captive/00000190-89a2-d776-a3b1-fdbe45520000
That’s been discussed from the beginning on social media. It isn’t just about Oct 7– it shows a mindset. Why would anyone believe their assurances that they care about Palestinian civilians? In November Regev said they had misidentified 200 badly burnt bodies as civilian when they were actually Hamas. The lowering of the Oct 7 death toll was widely reported but I never saw a Western mainstream newspaper ask the obvious questions. How did these bodies come to be badly burned? Was it Israeli bombs or rockets? Presumably so. Then why did you think they were Israeli bodies?
Some people on the far left try and claim that Israel killed most of their own civilians, which is stupid BS, but it is not BS to point out that a government which utilizes the Hannibal directive is hardly likely to care about Palestinian civilians.
The Dahiya doctrine— You can Google that. It is journalistic malpractice that they commonly pass on the human shield excuse without discussing Israel’s targeting procedures as outlined in the Israeli magazine 972 or mentioning the Dahiya doctrine, which ought to be common knowledge if you follow the war.
Human shields in general— If you think this is just Hamas, think again. You could write a book about how that phrase is used and when it isn’t used.
Treatment of innocent civilian prisoners. Rape, torture, murder— that isn’t just Hamas.
How is it that phrases like the Hannibal directive and the Dahiya doctrine are not well known and that “ human shields “ is well known but always with only one implication?
And every time someone says Biden is a decent man I want people to watch clips of his spokespeople Kirby, Patel and Miller ( aka Count Smirkula on Twitter) defending his policies. Those clips deserve a much wider distribution.
People are very glib in arguing for lesser evil voting. People need to do it, vote for the lesser evil, but they need to own up to and really feel in their bones what that “ lesser” evil is.
And this has nothing to do with Biden’s decline, which I suspect is mostly about his clumsiness in public speaking and has little or no influence on his policies. On foreign policy for better or worse his mindset is from the Cold War era ( democracies vs authoritarians even as he lines up with the Saudis) and on Israel from an era when it was largely romanticized, but this is not related to his public speaking inadequacies.
I would mention two phrases almost completely absent in mainstream coverage of Gaza and a few other things as well.
The Hannibal directive.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-07-07/ty-article-magazine/.premium/idf-ordered-hannibal-directive-on-october-7-to-prevent-hamas-taking-soldiers-captive/00000190-89a2-d776-a3b1-fdbe45520000
That’s been discussed from the beginning on social media. It isn’t just about Oct 7– it shows a mindset. Why would anyone believe their assurances that they care about Palestinian civilians? In November Regev said they had misidentified 200 badly burnt bodies as civilian when they were actually Hamas. The lowering of the Oct 7 death toll was widely reported but I never saw a Western mainstream newspaper ask the obvious questions. How did these bodies come to be badly burned? Was it Israeli bombs or rockets? Presumably so. Then why did you think they were Israeli bodies?
Some people on the far left try and claim that Israel killed most of their own civilians, which is stupid BS, but it is not BS to point out that a government which utilizes the Hannibal directive is hardly likely to care about Palestinian civilians.
The Dahiya doctrine— You can Google that. It is journalistic malpractice that they commonly pass on the human shield excuse without discussing Israel’s targeting procedures as outlined in the Israeli magazine 972 or mentioning the Dahiya doctrine, which ought to be common knowledge if you follow the war.
Human shields in general— If you think this is just Hamas, think again. You could write a book about how that phrase is used and when it isn’t used.
Treatment of innocent civilian prisoners. Rape, torture, murder— that isn’t just Hamas.
How is it that phrases like the Hannibal directive and the Dahiya doctrine are not well known and that “ human shields “ is well known but always with only one implication?
And every time someone says Biden is a decent man I want people to watch clips of his spokespeople Kirby, Patel and Miller ( aka Count Smirkula on Twitter) defending his policies. Those clips deserve a much wider distribution.
People are very glib in arguing for lesser evil voting. People need to do it, vote for the lesser evil, but they need to own up to and really feel in their bones what that “ lesser” evil is.
And this has nothing to do with Biden’s decline, which I suspect is mostly about his clumsiness in public speaking and has little or no influence on his policies. On foreign policy for better or worse his mindset is from the Cold War era ( democracies vs authoritarians even as he lines up with the Saudis) and on Israel from an era when it was largely romanticized, but this is not related to his public speaking inadequacies.
On Biden himself, it is his fault for choosing to run again. He should have been a transitional candidate, as I think he once said.
But since here we are, there are no good choices given that Biden’s ego won’t let him step down as candidate. But if he did step down then Harris is the logical choice. There is a darn good chance that in voting for Biden- Harris you are voting for Harris sometime in the next four years.
And yes, she will be attacked. She has had gaffes but every politician has gaffes or embarrassing moments. They only matter to people who hate the candidate for other reasons. ( Biden’s problems are deeper than gaffes.) It ought to be easy for people to unite behind Harris, at least as easy as it is to unite behind Biden. People who are loyal to Biden shouldn’t have a problem if he stepped aside and endorsed his own VP. Clyburn seems to be hinting at that.
Anyone else and then you have a lot of moronic squabbling between advocates of various centrist liberal politicians who agree on practically everything except whose lust for power deserves to be fulfilled. Or you have squabbling over which politician has the best chance of appealing to low information “ independent” voters who might have picked Trump over Biden because they think Trump is more mentally fit. ( Comment is superfluous.)
On Biden himself, it is his fault for choosing to run again. He should have been a transitional candidate, as I think he once said.
But since here we are, there are no good choices given that Biden’s ego won’t let him step down as candidate. But if he did step down then Harris is the logical choice. There is a darn good chance that in voting for Biden- Harris you are voting for Harris sometime in the next four years.
And yes, she will be attacked. She has had gaffes but every politician has gaffes or embarrassing moments. They only matter to people who hate the candidate for other reasons. ( Biden’s problems are deeper than gaffes.) It ought to be easy for people to unite behind Harris, at least as easy as it is to unite behind Biden. People who are loyal to Biden shouldn’t have a problem if he stepped aside and endorsed his own VP. Clyburn seems to be hinting at that.
Anyone else and then you have a lot of moronic squabbling between advocates of various centrist liberal politicians who agree on practically everything except whose lust for power deserves to be fulfilled. Or you have squabbling over which politician has the best chance of appealing to low information “ independent” voters who might have picked Trump over Biden because they think Trump is more mentally fit. ( Comment is superfluous.)
In fairness, here is Bernie defending Biden. It is pretty good. If Biden doesn’t step down I will be using it.
This is a gift link so everyone can read it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/13/opinion/joe-biden-president.html?unlocked_article_code=1.600.SPSC.QguqEYJi66DT&smid=url-share
In fairness, here is Bernie defending Biden. It is pretty good. If Biden doesn’t step down I will be using it.
This is a gift link so everyone can read it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/13/opinion/joe-biden-president.html?unlocked_article_code=1.600.SPSC.QguqEYJi66DT&smid=url-share
Last link, this one about Democrats connected with Clinton and Obama trying to get Biden out.
https://www.axios.com/2024/07/12/biden-news-old-democrats-president
They don’t want Harris either. They presumably want Whitmer, to win the upper Midwest swing states. Not sure if political pragmatism is always that pragmatic.
I will go back to my earlier decision and stop posting about it after this one. The whole situation is such a muddle.
Last link, this one about Democrats connected with Clinton and Obama trying to get Biden out.
https://www.axios.com/2024/07/12/biden-news-old-democrats-president
They don’t want Harris either. They presumably want Whitmer, to win the upper Midwest swing states. Not sure if political pragmatism is always that pragmatic.
I will go back to my earlier decision and stop posting about it after this one. The whole situation is such a muddle.
Looks like the first lists of attacks and talking points to be used against Kamala Harris are sent out to the troll farms for beta-testing.
[No idea whether there are indeed official lists but you know what I mean].
Any bets when the first GOP official will accuse her in public of having achieved nothing in life except by “spreading her legs”?
Oh, and I notice a new swell-up of claims that Biden serially sexually abused his daughter Ashley (with Hunter possibly involved).
And for some reason there are renewed calls for Dr. Fauci to be jailed. Are they hoping that a new pandemic will arrive in time to help them win in November?
Looks like the first lists of attacks and talking points to be used against Kamala Harris are sent out to the troll farms for beta-testing.
[No idea whether there are indeed official lists but you know what I mean].
Any bets when the first GOP official will accuse her in public of having achieved nothing in life except by “spreading her legs”?
Oh, and I notice a new swell-up of claims that Biden serially sexually abused his daughter Ashley (with Hunter possibly involved).
And for some reason there are renewed calls for Dr. Fauci to be jailed. Are they hoping that a new pandemic will arrive in time to help them win in November?
The Axios piece really bugs me in that it is typical of the short-sighted, focus group mentality of the beltway operatives. It leads to a completely fragmented approach to electoral politics.
And trying to insert Whitmer in at the top based on the single principle that they think she could carry WI and MI completely ignores the way a decision like that would dishearten the Detroit/Milwaukee voters that they need to carry the state, who have overcome terrible structural obstacles for the last several elections to give the Dems a fair shot at those states in the first place.
This is what I hate most about the Democrats as an institution. They treat the map like it’s the territory.
The Axios piece really bugs me in that it is typical of the short-sighted, focus group mentality of the beltway operatives. It leads to a completely fragmented approach to electoral politics.
And trying to insert Whitmer in at the top based on the single principle that they think she could carry WI and MI completely ignores the way a decision like that would dishearten the Detroit/Milwaukee voters that they need to carry the state, who have overcome terrible structural obstacles for the last several elections to give the Dems a fair shot at those states in the first place.
This is what I hate most about the Democrats as an institution. They treat the map like it’s the territory.
Gorka said that Kamela was an affirmative action hire.
Gorka said that Kamela was an affirmative action hire.
Nothing like a little assassination attempt to liven things up.
Nothing like a little assassination attempt to liven things up.
That is and has been their standard talking point.
She’s female and of color so by definition she must have been unqualified. She’s not the only target there, there is an all-out attack in the courts by ‘conservatives’ against female and black law professors right now on the basis of alleged anti-white and anti-male discrimination and given the courts (and court shopping) we can expect that those attacks will yield significant successes.
But the claim that Harris has whored herself up the ladder all the way seems to be a new one and imo still a test balloon (does it work?). That Biden is targeted at the same time for alleged incestuous pedophilia does not look like a coincidence to me. His Orangeness lusted after his daughter, so his opponent must be accused of in essence raping his own when she was still a child. He has been convicted in the context of sexual assault and there is at least talk about dirty secrets in connection with Epstein, so one has to go back to ‘it’s natural for men and they were victims of shameless sluts anyway – sluts like the current VPOTUS’. Same with drugs, personal corruption and shady business deals in the family.
Let’s see whether the balloon pops quickly, otherwise we’ll have a happy return to the traditional 19th century campaigns with insinuation of carnal relationships with farm animals and chronic alcohol abuse (with expensive foreign spirits not available to the common man-)
That is and has been their standard talking point.
She’s female and of color so by definition she must have been unqualified. She’s not the only target there, there is an all-out attack in the courts by ‘conservatives’ against female and black law professors right now on the basis of alleged anti-white and anti-male discrimination and given the courts (and court shopping) we can expect that those attacks will yield significant successes.
But the claim that Harris has whored herself up the ladder all the way seems to be a new one and imo still a test balloon (does it work?). That Biden is targeted at the same time for alleged incestuous pedophilia does not look like a coincidence to me. His Orangeness lusted after his daughter, so his opponent must be accused of in essence raping his own when she was still a child. He has been convicted in the context of sexual assault and there is at least talk about dirty secrets in connection with Epstein, so one has to go back to ‘it’s natural for men and they were victims of shameless sluts anyway – sluts like the current VPOTUS’. Same with drugs, personal corruption and shady business deals in the family.
Let’s see whether the balloon pops quickly, otherwise we’ll have a happy return to the traditional 19th century campaigns with insinuation of carnal relationships with farm animals and chronic alcohol abuse (with expensive foreign spirits not available to the common man-)
But the claim that Harris has whored herself up the ladder all the way seems to be a new one and imo still a test balloon (does it work?)
Actually, it’s not new. Although it may be more high profile now.
Early in her career, she dated Willie Brown, who was then Speaker of the Assembly in California. No evidence (that I’ve seen) that they ever went further than dinner and a show. But in all of her statewide campaigns (for Attorney General, and then for Senator) the “slept her was to the top” charges were circulated. (Never explained was how a state legislator, even a powerful one, was supposed to have influenced a city DAs office, which is where she worked at the time. By the time she go into state politics, he was long retired.)
But the claim that Harris has whored herself up the ladder all the way seems to be a new one and imo still a test balloon (does it work?)
Actually, it’s not new. Although it may be more high profile now.
Early in her career, she dated Willie Brown, who was then Speaker of the Assembly in California. No evidence (that I’ve seen) that they ever went further than dinner and a show. But in all of her statewide campaigns (for Attorney General, and then for Senator) the “slept her was to the top” charges were circulated. (Never explained was how a state legislator, even a powerful one, was supposed to have influenced a city DAs office, which is where she worked at the time. By the time she go into state politics, he was long retired.)
Nothing like a little assassination attempt to liven things up.
And speculations and wild claims are of course rampant instantly. From both sides: Trump staged it; The Secret Service tried to murder Trump but were too incompetent; The crowd was in on it, therefore no panic; The crowd were no liberal pansies, therefore no panic etc. etc. And of course claims that this is just the Democrat way of doing politics, political murder being in their DNA.
No actual surprises there.
Nothing like a little assassination attempt to liven things up.
And speculations and wild claims are of course rampant instantly. From both sides: Trump staged it; The Secret Service tried to murder Trump but were too incompetent; The crowd was in on it, therefore no panic; The crowd were no liberal pansies, therefore no panic etc. etc. And of course claims that this is just the Democrat way of doing politics, political murder being in their DNA.
No actual surprises there.
According to the (German) radio news the shooter has been identified as a registered Republican.
Easy prediction: This will not matter in the least.
[The radical leftist FBI is OF COURSE in on it, the Secret Service proabably too…, you know the drill]
According to the (German) radio news the shooter has been identified as a registered Republican.
Easy prediction: This will not matter in the least.
[The radical leftist FBI is OF COURSE in on it, the Secret Service proabably too…, you know the drill]
“ showed that Mr. Crooks was registered as a Republican, although federal campaign-finance records indicated that he donated $15 to the Progressive Turnout Project, a liberal voter turnout group, in January 2021.”
Not likely to be a Trump supporter, given his actions.
Some people have trouble holding more than two thoughts in their head at the same time when it comes to politics. And in a very big country with a lot of guns, there are going to be people who decide to use them. They can be on any part of the political spectrum and unless they are part of a conspiracy it means nothing except that we have too many guns — I am not going to stop calling Biden and Trump and Obama and Bush war criminals, for example, because there are too many guns in the US. They are war criminals. Trump has fascist leanings. Political assassinations are bad. And there are too many guns in the US.
“ showed that Mr. Crooks was registered as a Republican, although federal campaign-finance records indicated that he donated $15 to the Progressive Turnout Project, a liberal voter turnout group, in January 2021.”
Not likely to be a Trump supporter, given his actions.
Some people have trouble holding more than two thoughts in their head at the same time when it comes to politics. And in a very big country with a lot of guns, there are going to be people who decide to use them. They can be on any part of the political spectrum and unless they are part of a conspiracy it means nothing except that we have too many guns — I am not going to stop calling Biden and Trump and Obama and Bush war criminals, for example, because there are too many guns in the US. They are war criminals. Trump has fascist leanings. Political assassinations are bad. And there are too many guns in the US.
He is probably just another nut with a gun.
He is probably just another nut with a gun.
Welp. If you’d asked me Friday morning what the dominant story on the Sunday talkies would be, I woulda bet real money on the Biden thing. This sweet summer child thought we had already approached the nadir of the campaign season.
I’m surprised they were able to ID via DNA so quickly. No criminal record I’m aware of or any other reason to be in the system. I assume proximal hits through ancestry-type DBs and educated guesses/investigation? Relatively fast work, however it was done.
Welp. If you’d asked me Friday morning what the dominant story on the Sunday talkies would be, I woulda bet real money on the Biden thing. This sweet summer child thought we had already approached the nadir of the campaign season.
I’m surprised they were able to ID via DNA so quickly. No criminal record I’m aware of or any other reason to be in the system. I assume proximal hits through ancestry-type DBs and educated guesses/investigation? Relatively fast work, however it was done.
He is probably just another nut with a gun.
Quite likely – or a desperate never-|rumper.
[Still nutty to go at it so incompetently without regard for consequences, so definitely an idiot].
But we all know how this is going to go.
The Right will lie its head off (unfortunately only figuratively) about him being a radical leftist who was either sent in as a sacrificial wolf by the Demonrats or that the totally unprecedented* vicious hatred of the MSM radicalized him and they have to be punished for that both in money and blood. Forget the either..or, it will be both.
But as I said in a post above, the reactions were Pawlowian** on both sides. In comment threads on MSNBC youtube videos the ‘false flag’ and ‘fake news’ posts were almost equal in number*** to those of the kind I described for the Right. And both sides called each other names for not seeing the obvious truth.
*It’s libelous/slanderous/vile to even insinuate that something like this could ever occur on the Right even with domestic terrorists (another slander) writing manifestos and love letters to RW media figures calling them their inspiration with the ‘baby killer’ or ‘worse than Hitler and Stalin combined’ or ‘pedophilia ring run from a DC pizzeria’s basement’ rhethorics.
**yes, Pawlowian reflexes are actually something quite different, I know.
***a rather rare thing in my experience. 9/11 truther qualities and qantities.
He is probably just another nut with a gun.
Quite likely – or a desperate never-|rumper.
[Still nutty to go at it so incompetently without regard for consequences, so definitely an idiot].
But we all know how this is going to go.
The Right will lie its head off (unfortunately only figuratively) about him being a radical leftist who was either sent in as a sacrificial wolf by the Demonrats or that the totally unprecedented* vicious hatred of the MSM radicalized him and they have to be punished for that both in money and blood. Forget the either..or, it will be both.
But as I said in a post above, the reactions were Pawlowian** on both sides. In comment threads on MSNBC youtube videos the ‘false flag’ and ‘fake news’ posts were almost equal in number*** to those of the kind I described for the Right. And both sides called each other names for not seeing the obvious truth.
*It’s libelous/slanderous/vile to even insinuate that something like this could ever occur on the Right even with domestic terrorists (another slander) writing manifestos and love letters to RW media figures calling them their inspiration with the ‘baby killer’ or ‘worse than Hitler and Stalin combined’ or ‘pedophilia ring run from a DC pizzeria’s basement’ rhethorics.
**yes, Pawlowian reflexes are actually something quite different, I know.
***a rather rare thing in my experience. 9/11 truther qualities and qantities.
I’m surprised they were able to ID via DNA so quickly.
Which will of course be presented as proof that it was all a setup and that the FBI and the Deep State were in on it.
I’m surprised they were able to ID via DNA so quickly.
Which will of course be presented as proof that it was all a setup and that the FBI and the Deep State were in on it.
I’m surprised they were able to ID via DNA so quickly.
My suspicion is that verify is more likely than identify. If asked to guess, I’d guess the alleged shooter was carrying a wallet and/or smartphone. Given name, address, and a search warrant samples from that address should be easy to get. And matching two samples is much easier than running tests between a sample and a database.
I’m surprised they were able to ID via DNA so quickly.
My suspicion is that verify is more likely than identify. If asked to guess, I’d guess the alleged shooter was carrying a wallet and/or smartphone. Given name, address, and a search warrant samples from that address should be easy to get. And matching two samples is much easier than running tests between a sample and a database.
The reports say “not carrying ID”. Which doesn’t preclude the onmipresent cell phone. Which, in turn, can quickly give the (billing) address of the owner. Plus (unless he thought to, and knew how to, turn off the GPS) the phone would show where he had spent time the last few days — e.g. when home sleeping.
The reports say “not carrying ID”. Which doesn’t preclude the onmipresent cell phone. Which, in turn, can quickly give the (billing) address of the owner. Plus (unless he thought to, and knew how to, turn off the GPS) the phone would show where he had spent time the last few days — e.g. when home sleeping.
I was going off of reports that the shooter was not carrying any ID. I assumed that included a mobile phone as that would also be relatively easy to trace. It’s still early days, so I don’t know how reliable that info is.
I’m just now seeing that they’ve isolated a vehicle, so you’re probably right.
I was going off of reports that the shooter was not carrying any ID. I assumed that included a mobile phone as that would also be relatively easy to trace. It’s still early days, so I don’t know how reliable that info is.
I’m just now seeing that they’ve isolated a vehicle, so you’re probably right.
I’ve just come back from a few days relatively incommunicado in the North Country (no ObWi, NYT or WaPo for example). When I left I thought the worst we had to deal with was going to be a continuing story of Biden calling Zelensky Putin, and calling Harris Vice President Trump. God knows that was bad enough. But when I watched Sky news last night I saw not only the assassination attempt, but some fucking idiot talking head claiming that the Biden regime has blood on its hands. Given a) which party fetishises the availability of guns, and b) which party leader incites violence, it’s hard to hold on to the view that this is the real world and not a sick virtual reality. God help us all, and the world
I’ve just come back from a few days relatively incommunicado in the North Country (no ObWi, NYT or WaPo for example). When I left I thought the worst we had to deal with was going to be a continuing story of Biden calling Zelensky Putin, and calling Harris Vice President Trump. God knows that was bad enough. But when I watched Sky news last night I saw not only the assassination attempt, but some fucking idiot talking head claiming that the Biden regime has blood on its hands. Given a) which party fetishises the availability of guns, and b) which party leader incites violence, it’s hard to hold on to the view that this is the real world and not a sick virtual reality. God help us all, and the world
I’m pretty sure it wasn’t an inside job, but this:
Shares in Donald Trump’s media company have surged by 50% in pre-market trading after the attempted assassination of the former US president, potentially adding nearly $3bn (£2.3bn) to the valuation of the business behind the X rival Truth Social.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/15/shares-trump-media-group-assassination-attempt-shooting-bitcoin-election
sounds like something taken straight from “Network”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film)
I’m pretty sure it wasn’t an inside job, but this:
Shares in Donald Trump’s media company have surged by 50% in pre-market trading after the attempted assassination of the former US president, potentially adding nearly $3bn (£2.3bn) to the valuation of the business behind the X rival Truth Social.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/15/shares-trump-media-group-assassination-attempt-shooting-bitcoin-election
sounds like something taken straight from “Network”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film)
Btw, what happens with his media company if, god forbid, he’s going to become president?
Btw, what happens with his media company if, god forbid, he’s going to become president?
Well, it will be his official mouthpiece, so it’s immune from such pesky restrictions the quaint piece of parchment used to impose.
While we are at law. This gem from Sen. Mike Lee:
Well, it will be his official mouthpiece, so it’s immune from such pesky restrictions the quaint piece of parchment used to impose.
While we are at law. This gem from Sen. Mike Lee: