For such a prominent Senator to have gone public, there must be a torrent of activity in private.
Refusing to see Biden's flaws is incredibly delusional. I understand a bit, running a new candidate could help Trump win. However, running a candidate with dementia will definitely help Trump win. We deserve a candidate with basic debate skills.
There is a point of no return when public reception dictates further action and that preception will not reverse. I hate the idea, as I think history will look very kindly on Joe, and it's terrible what's happening. But, by my estimate we have reached that point.
I'm sorry, he's done some good, but he's also continued delivering weapons to Israel for their genocide in Gaza. If he's looked at especially fondly in the future it'll be through rose tinted glasses.
Still voting for him over Trump, but let's not be ridiculous.
Bawaaaaa..,he didn't do exactly what I want.
Bawaaaaa…,he didn’t do exactly what I want.
Did he not sell Netanyahu enough weapons for your liking?
If everyone did exactly what you want it would be perfect! Because, with all those years of foreign policy experience you know, right? First, learn some civics. CONGRESS allocates.
If everyone did exactly what you want it would be perfect! Because, with all those years of foreign policy experience you know, right?
Why are you talking about me? I was asking why you were so upset that Biden didn't do exactly what you want. And about the only problem I can imagine you having with Biden is that he didn't sell enough weapons to Netanyahu for genocide for your liking. Is there some other thing that Biden could have done?
First, learn some civics. CONGRESS allocates.
And somehow, Biden was able to CIRCUMVENT congress to SELL Netanyahu weapons for his genocide. Biden's hands are tied unless it's something he wants to do. Is that what they taught you in civics class? Because all that tells me is that the gym coach was teaching civics at your school.
Why are you talking about instance
Because you want something the majority of Congress doesn't want.
Biden was able to CIRCUMVENT congress to SELL Netanyaa....ny
That is untrue. By law, which Congress passed, Biden could do exactly what he did. The President has a bunch of attorneys that make sure he follows the law. Did you hear Omar, for instance, complaining? No, you did not. He didn't circumnavigate anything.
Because you want something the majority of Congress doesn’t want.
You were complaining about how Biden didn't do everything you want. Now you're talking about Congress.
That is untrue. By law, which Congress passed, Biden could do exactly what he did.
Biden was selling Netanyahu weapons before congress voted. But I guess if genocide isn't beyond the pale, there's no reason you would have qualms about lying to support it.
You were complaining about how Biden didn't do everything you want.apons
No, sure didn't
Biden was selling Netanyahu weapons before congress voted.
No, sure didn't. In some instances money had all ready been allocated from last year. In some instances, material was transfered following rules Congress gave the President.
No, sure didn’t
What's this, then?
Bawaaaaa…,he didn’t do exactly what I want.
Were you instead mocking someone for being upset about genocide? Do you suppose that's a good look?
No, sure didn’t. In some instances money had all ready been allocated from last year. In some instances, material was transfered following rules Congress gave the President.
Guess the AP are all a bunch of Russians out to get poor ol' Biden. Biden circumvented congress and since you support what he circumvented congress to do, you're lying about it.
What's this, then?
My imitation of you.
As I've said, Biden can do that. CONGRESS gave him the ability to do it. You can't call it circumnavigation when I tell you beforehand that it's OK to go around me.
Isn't he already top 10? But his past administration, vs. him now... I dunno what to think. If he were elected, then his administration could continue, but that's a big "if" at this juncture.
He is top 10? It's such a low bar.
Yeah, and it’s “Hillary’s Turn” 🤮
Scuttling your own incumbent because of his flaws is peak delusion.
Go touch grass.
And running a candidate who can't debate and is only coherent between 10 and 4 is just good politics?
There is a significant cohort of lemmings living in a gaslit fantasy where they've lost themselves in a gamblers fallacy around Biden as candidate. They'll come back around, much later, after he's replaced as candidate, and pretend they were never the person they were.
As far as the posturing and jockeying, game is on I suppose.
Any Democrats who can stand up and show leadership right now stand a very good chance of becoming the most powerful person in the world. Trump is a deeply unpopular candidate. It won't take much to expose his weakness for what it is, we just currently happen to have the weakest possible candidate. Swap the candidate, adopt the positions of the base, and whoever ends up being the nominee can coast into office.
My problem with the whole thing is there hasn't been anyone stepping up and saying how about me. I haven't seen any mention of any actual names whatsoever.
You gotta decide what else to make before you dump the water.
I could be wrong, idk.
My problem with the whole thing is there hasn’t been anyone stepping up and saying how about me. I haven’t seen any mention of any actual names whatsoever.
Anyone who has enough name recognition to get into and be a competitor to Biden isn't going to turn traitor against the party's incumbent unless he explicitly bows out. If they're seen as ousting Biden... it's going to be a shit show of epic proportions. look at the criticism that phillips took. (And philips is basically a younger version of Biden.) In the primary, the only candidate to get on the ballot in more than half the states was Biden. Most got on around half the states, give or take.
Most of the states only had a ballot because they were legally obligated to. the 2024 Primary for the DNC wasn't a real primary.
SO MAYBE IF DEM PARTY BIGWIGS ARENT WILLING TO TRASH OUR INCUMBENT WE SHOULDNT BE EITHER....
/THREAD
They will. We're "just on the other side" of a whole paradigm shift. Its only been a week and we're still a good bit out from the convention.
It should be telling that Newsom was on screen within 15 seconds of the debate, and Kamala about the same "surrogating" for Biden. Whats them applying for the job.
I mean, Trumps going to win if we stick with Biden.
There are two things I'm confident in, in this order:
Biden won't be the next president;
Biden won't be the nominee.
The idea that we should stick with a candidate who has effectively already lost this election because shifting candidates would cause "splintering" is ignoring the fact that the party is already splintered. If it wasn't, Biden wouldn't be losing like this.
Brace yourself, bc based on discussions here and what he's said, I think Biden will remain the nominee. Yes, that should chill you to the bone, if it causes Trump to win. However, everyone seems too afraid to buck the system right now - e.g. Harris is not well-liked already, by anyone it seems, and stands to gain the Presidency handed to her by Biden, so she's not going to risk that sweet deal by trying to remove him. If he did so willingly, which he's already said that he won't, then that would be one thing, but otherwise...
I mean he's going to say that until he isn't running any more. I'm not clutching my pearls.
If I do start clutching my pearls, head for the exits. I'll be very loud about it at that time.
I think we're not going to have Biden as the eventual nominee; I think whomever we end up with will do fine (as long as they are on the right side of the Israel/ Gaza issue).
What if there is no right side to that issue? "From the river to the sea" means that both sides want to genocide the other, except that one side is actively doing that now, but give them half a chance and the other will do it right back.
But if we withdraw our support, gas prices go up, and thereby Republicans win the House and Senate. We only have the almost-majority now bc they went down bc of the deals Biden made e.g. with the Saudis who killed Jamal Khashoggi.
Arguably Biden may somehow be grandfathered in, but any new nominee is going to have to take a stand on the issue with some kind of position or another. And thereby they are going to get eaten alive, no matter what position they take.
I suddenly see why Biden is taking the Presidency to his grave - it may well be literally the only option left open at this point.
Edit: otherwise, why would you have added that last bit, "(as long as they are on the right side of the Israel/ Gaza issue)" - with all that is going on, it's not enough to be a Democrat who can stay awake during a sentence, as we've all been saying, now suddenly they also have to have the perfect stance on the Gaza issue too? You know, the "correct" (leftist) one, which also somehow is the one that will convince people who might otherwise vote for Trump to pick this new nominee instead? (so thereby not leftist at all, or else they will stay with Trump)
remember that campaigns are weird. Even in the primary, you have to maintain momentum for as long as possible, and frequently if you look like you're about to fold, you're done. So he's going to be 'In It to Win It" right up to the end. Then he folds and every one is going to be like "well this was sudden." when really, it's not sudden at all.
Who though... Comments like this are useless unless there is a valid replacement. So again... Who, or STFU.
It doesn't matter the name. You will immediately dismiss it, because you intended to do so when you asked the question.
Harris. Newsom. Whitmer. Buttigieg. Franken.
No thats just wrong.
You are engaging in a form of lying when you say we need to have a decision already made to criticize Biden. You should stop lying. We haven't actually had a convention yet. He' isn't the nominee and doesn't have to be. We don't have to make that decision until the convention.
I have responded to so many of these "who tho" requests, but they all end up in silence without even a reply. At this point I'm thinking it's some kind of script that sea lions were told to follow.
Oh 100%. They are completely full of shit. There is no answer you could give them that would satisfy them and they were never asking the question in good faith to begin with. Its also not really an important question. Its something we can answer at the convention.
Literally almost all Democrats poll 10-20 points higher than Biden. So the answer is "any of them". Literally any Democrat could would be enough of an improvement to stop Trump in his tracks.
And there are some solid picks out there. I really think Kamala would be fine; she would invigorate the african-american vote, and guarantee us black-woman voters (which might be a big fucking problem if she isn't the nominee). Newsom is like, greased-up-deaf-guy slick, but he's got a machine behind him. I would want someone progressive like Witmer, but I just don't care at this point. Any one. I think the most strategic choice would be Andy Beshear (2x Democratic southern governor like Bill Clinton; steal Kentucky from the Republicans) would be a very smart strategic choice.
Kamala would sway any centrists towards Trump hands down. There is no brand recognition here besides maybe AOC and she'd fit a VP pick better. I fear a new candidate will only fracture us and ensure a Trump victory. There's so much at stake for such uncertainty. I can say I will vote for whoever is opposing Trump and Project 2025. I just hope more than half the country is seeing all this shit and thinking "Nah, I dont want a king."
It is a worthwhile fear. As is doing nothing. Both are very valid fears.
About the king though, that ship has sailed. It would take an act of Congress to fix that, hence there is basically no chance before the election and possibly not ever afterwards. Best we can do is a god-king emperor that chooses not to exercise their powers, or else does so really sneakily so that we can't tell the difference - since ofc we are unable to even ask. We will literally never know if it is not happening - though ofc when it becomes really obvious that it is being used, then we'll know. As such, Democracy is dead, long live our next king, whoever they may be.
You dont need name/ brand recognition at this level. Its the presidency and there will only be two options. Its the wrong rule-stick for this level of race. If this were a house race or even a senate seat, sure. But not for whomever will carry the Democratic nomination.
I fear a new candidate will only fracture us
This is a weird talking point that has suddenly become very consistent.
Bro. We're already fully fractured and its Biden thats done the fracturing. Don't fear the unknown: fear the known failure the commentators here have been telling you that you are pot-committed to. Thats a far far far bigger concern than not going to the convention with a candidate in hand.
Yeah I can't really agree with just about anything you said. We weren't fractured until people decided the debate meant the world and his actual work in office right now doesn't mean shit.
You are living in a delusional fantasy. Biden's polling was CATASTROPHIC before the debate. Why?
Because Biden split the party in how he has handled Gaza.
Its unbelievable the amount of delusion people around here try and persist with.
Definitely not, maybe for terminally online people. But for most of the actual democratic american populace Gaza didn't mean that much. Thats the sad truth, people mostly care about what's happening at home, centrists especially.
Sure but... WHO?!
Whitmer.
If thats an important condition for you to have before you move on from a lost cause, you should come up with an answer to that question on your own and suggest it.
You're the one saying Biden should be replaced. Why on earth would it be mortalic's responsibility to suggest the alternative?
Its a fundamental form of trolling that OP is engaging in, and that apparently, you think I should engage with.
Think about it as a metaphor. I come to you with the information that your house is on fire. OP is basically making a rhetorical argument that if I can't provide them with a house they'll find suitable, we shouldnt leave the burning house we're currently in.
The information about the state of the house (candidate in our case) is independent from there being another house that isn't on fire.
You should never, ever engage with people like them. They are not having this discussion in good faith. If its important to them they should suggest a candidate. There are plenty to suggest. But that is a fundamentally separate discussion.
One problem with this analogy is that if you’re in a burning house, you literally don’t have time to have a conversation while you’re in it. But in fact we could spend the entire weekend discussing viable candidates and it wouldn’t become too late to then decide to support the idea.
Another problem is that you’re presupposing that the course of action is obvious, as it is in a house fire. In a house fire, it doesn’t matter what can be done about the stuff or where you’re going to live if you lose your home, because if you don’t get out of the house ASAP then you will die, based on thousands upon thousands of previous house fires. In the case of this election, nothing like this has ever happened and staying with Biden does not actually mean guaranteed loss. Perhaps continuing the public call for Biden to step down is the thing that hurts us the most. In any case, the only thing that would mean a literal guaranteed loss would be withdrawing Biden and not replacing him with someone.
So, coming up with suitable people who could take the helm and do better (as well as figuring out a viable way to make this happen democratically) is necessary to this process actually succeeding. We actually do have the luxury of time to spend all day discussing it right now. And if good ideas for candidates can actually win over more people to the idea, then it might in some way be helpful to the success of it.
I would say I’m a person who both feels like things have reached a point where Biden should ideally be replaced, but I’m very worried by the fact that I haven’t yet heard someone else who we could theoretically rally behind, and haven’t heard how this could even be accomplished legally and politically at this late stage. I feel the worst thing we can do is to just repeatedly say it’s a fire and not actually figure out steps to fix it.
I just took a look at your post history. It's literally only anti-Biden. I hope you're getting paid...
Yeah I want a Democrat to win the election and Biden has a less than 1 in 20 shot of doing that.
The only path to stopping Trump is replacing Biden. Continuing to promote Biden as a candidate is you basically asking for project 2025 to become a reality. And as you can see, there are a lot of idiots to push back on who think a guy polling in the low thirties can make it happen.
Any Democrats who can stand up and show leadership right now stand a very good chance of becoming the most powerful person in the world. Trump is a deeply unpopular candidate. It won’t take much to expose his weakness for what it is, we just currently happen to have the weakest possible candidate. Swap the candidate, adopt the positions of the base, and whoever ends up being the nominee can coast into office.
I think this is rather obviously true. Many on the left have been pushing for a different, and presumably better, candidate from the beginning, so in a way, all that's changed since the debate is that many more have joined them. So really, all the Dems have to do is provide the people with that candidate, and it'll be a runaway.
BUT...
I'm starting to worry that the DNC is going to fuck it up yet again, and specifically because, just as was the case in 2016 and 2020, they're not only going to not adopt the positions of the base, but are going to instead manipulate the process in order to shove another establishment hack down our throats. And quite likely not even just any establishment hack, but the one that's already proven to be even less popular than Biden - Hillary Clinton.
This is a moment for the DNC to get out of the way and let the people come together and choose the candidate they want. That's the exact thing that will motivate the base, and in turn guarantee Trump's defeat.
I'm just afraid that the DNC won't be able to do that - that in their all-consuming self-centeredness and greed, they're going to fuck it up for all of us, yet again.
Your caution is well warranted.
The biggest mistake the DNC could make would be not taking the advantage that an open convention offers them. They desperately need to put out an air of at least 'presumed' democracy in the shocking un-democratic process which is Democratic elections. The delegates are all corporate, Biden/ Harris democrats. But at least put on a show of democracy. And build the theater a bit. Give the audience some action and some drama. Use the opportunity to build some headlines.
It is 100% going to be an establishment hack, I have no doubt in my mind about that, but I don't care. Biden is an establishment hack, but one who most importantly can't win the election. We're not getting worse moving to a different hack that can form thoughts on the fly.
We’re not getting worse moving to a different hack that can form thoughts on the fly.
Though I don't like it a bit, that's my position too, but with one glaring exception.
The thing that keeps haunting me is that I really think there's a good chance that they'll go back to Hillary, who's basically everything that's wrong with the current Democrats turned up to 11 - a plainly corrupt, transparently power-hungry and entirely self-serving opportunist who gives paid speeches on Wall Street, idolizes Kissinger and has all the charisma of a damp rag. As far as I can see, her only real qualifications for the office are that she wants it so desperately and she's so willing to sell herself to anyone who will contribute to getting her there. And she's the one possibility that I would say is far and away the least likely to win. But she brings in the corporate money, and that's obviously the DNC's main priority.
If it's pretty much anybody else, that's fine by me.
Nah, not a chance. She hasn't been mentioned in anything, feels old when we want someone who isn't, and is a proven failure. Some diehards can say it's "not her fault", but we're all traumatized due to her failure. Same way some people still post Notorious RGB style memes, but they just cause discomfort among the rank and file that now associate her with stubbornness resulting in massive Democratic backslide. Normies don't hate her, but they rightfully recognize that she's problematic and power brokers know when someone's dead-on-arrival. There are plenty of corporate Democrats that haven't been publicly tarnished for them to invest in.
He has gone public? Because he hasn't said anything about this.
All I see are secondhand reports from anonymous sources, which is kind of the opposite of going public.
"Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) is attempting to assemble a group of Democratic senators to ask Joe Biden to exit the presidential race,” the Washington Post reports.
“Warner is telling Democratic senators that Biden can no longer remain in the election in the wake of his faltering debate performance… The Virginia senator has told others that he is deeply concerned Biden is not able to run a campaign that could beat former president Donald Trump.”
... according to two people with direct knowledge of the effort
So, he hasn't gone public, at all.
The Senate isin recess until Monday. Senators tend not to make public pronouncements while in recess. Which makes this interesting to watch. If the Biden effort through the weekend enough for him to hold fire? Guess we'll find out.
Downvote the news, but it still remains news.
For such a prominent Senator to have gone public, there must be a torrent of activity in private.
Refusing to see Biden's flaws is incredibly delusional. I understand a bit, running a new candidate could help Trump win. However, running a candidate with dementia will definitely help Trump win. We deserve a candidate with basic debate skills.
There is a point of no return when public reception dictates further action and that preception will not reverse. I hate the idea, as I think history will look very kindly on Joe, and it's terrible what's happening. But, by my estimate we have reached that point.
I'm sorry, he's done some good, but he's also continued delivering weapons to Israel for their genocide in Gaza. If he's looked at especially fondly in the future it'll be through rose tinted glasses.
Still voting for him over Trump, but let's not be ridiculous.
Bawaaaaa..,he didn't do exactly what I want.
Did he not sell Netanyahu enough weapons for your liking?
If everyone did exactly what you want it would be perfect! Because, with all those years of foreign policy experience you know, right? First, learn some civics. CONGRESS allocates.
Why are you talking about me? I was asking why you were so upset that Biden didn't do exactly what you want. And about the only problem I can imagine you having with Biden is that he didn't sell enough weapons to Netanyahu for genocide for your liking. Is there some other thing that Biden could have done?
And somehow, Biden was able to CIRCUMVENT congress to SELL Netanyahu weapons for his genocide. Biden's hands are tied unless it's something he wants to do. Is that what they taught you in civics class? Because all that tells me is that the gym coach was teaching civics at your school.
Because you want something the majority of Congress doesn't want.
That is untrue. By law, which Congress passed, Biden could do exactly what he did. The President has a bunch of attorneys that make sure he follows the law. Did you hear Omar, for instance, complaining? No, you did not. He didn't circumnavigate anything.
You were complaining about how Biden didn't do everything you want. Now you're talking about Congress.
Biden was selling Netanyahu weapons before congress voted. But I guess if genocide isn't beyond the pale, there's no reason you would have qualms about lying to support it.
No, sure didn't
No, sure didn't. In some instances money had all ready been allocated from last year. In some instances, material was transfered following rules Congress gave the President.
What's this, then?
Were you instead mocking someone for being upset about genocide? Do you suppose that's a good look?
https://apnews.com/article/us-israel-gaza-arms-hamas-bypass-congress-1dc77f20aac4a797df6a2338b677da4f
Guess the AP are all a bunch of Russians out to get poor ol' Biden. Biden circumvented congress and since you support what he circumvented congress to do, you're lying about it.
My imitation of you.
As I've said, Biden can do that. CONGRESS gave him the ability to do it. You can't call it circumnavigation when I tell you beforehand that it's OK to go around me.
Isn't he already top 10? But his past administration, vs. him now... I dunno what to think. If he were elected, then his administration could continue, but that's a big "if" at this juncture.
He is top 10? It's such a low bar.
Yeah, and it’s “Hillary’s Turn” 🤮
Scuttling your own incumbent because of his flaws is peak delusion.
Go touch grass.
And running a candidate who can't debate and is only coherent between 10 and 4 is just good politics?
There is a significant cohort of lemmings living in a gaslit fantasy where they've lost themselves in a gamblers fallacy around Biden as candidate. They'll come back around, much later, after he's replaced as candidate, and pretend they were never the person they were.
As far as the posturing and jockeying, game is on I suppose.
Any Democrats who can stand up and show leadership right now stand a very good chance of becoming the most powerful person in the world. Trump is a deeply unpopular candidate. It won't take much to expose his weakness for what it is, we just currently happen to have the weakest possible candidate. Swap the candidate, adopt the positions of the base, and whoever ends up being the nominee can coast into office.
My problem with the whole thing is there hasn't been anyone stepping up and saying how about me. I haven't seen any mention of any actual names whatsoever.
You gotta decide what else to make before you dump the water.
I could be wrong, idk.
Anyone who has enough name recognition to get into and be a competitor to Biden isn't going to turn traitor against the party's incumbent unless he explicitly bows out. If they're seen as ousting Biden... it's going to be a shit show of epic proportions. look at the criticism that phillips took. (And philips is basically a younger version of Biden.) In the primary, the only candidate to get on the ballot in more than half the states was Biden. Most got on around half the states, give or take.
Most of the states only had a ballot because they were legally obligated to. the 2024 Primary for the DNC wasn't a real primary.
SO MAYBE IF DEM PARTY BIGWIGS ARENT WILLING TO TRASH OUR INCUMBENT WE SHOULDNT BE EITHER....
/THREAD
They will. We're "just on the other side" of a whole paradigm shift. Its only been a week and we're still a good bit out from the convention.
It should be telling that Newsom was on screen within 15 seconds of the debate, and Kamala about the same "surrogating" for Biden. Whats them applying for the job.
Or, its very late in the game and this chaos causes the dems to splinter, leaving trump ripe for victory.
You act like you know exactly what will happen, when in reality things can end up pear shaped whether we stick with biden or get a new candidate.
Polls and MSM are focusing on biden, allowing trump to gain ground. Whatever is gonna happen needs to happen NOW.
If he was merely sick, then one good press conference followed by a second debate might be able to turn things around, just enough, maybe?
But if not...
I mean, Trumps going to win if we stick with Biden.
There are two things I'm confident in, in this order:
Biden won't be the next president;
Biden won't be the nominee.
The idea that we should stick with a candidate who has effectively already lost this election because shifting candidates would cause "splintering" is ignoring the fact that the party is already splintered. If it wasn't, Biden wouldn't be losing like this.
Brace yourself, bc based on discussions here and what he's said, I think Biden will remain the nominee. Yes, that should chill you to the bone, if it causes Trump to win. However, everyone seems too afraid to buck the system right now - e.g. Harris is not well-liked already, by anyone it seems, and stands to gain the Presidency handed to her by Biden, so she's not going to risk that sweet deal by trying to remove him. If he did so willingly, which he's already said that he won't, then that would be one thing, but otherwise...
I mean he's going to say that until he isn't running any more. I'm not clutching my pearls.
If I do start clutching my pearls, head for the exits. I'll be very loud about it at that time.
I think we're not going to have Biden as the eventual nominee; I think whomever we end up with will do fine (as long as they are on the right side of the Israel/ Gaza issue).
What if there is no right side to that issue? "From the river to the sea" means that both sides want to genocide the other, except that one side is actively doing that now, but give them half a chance and the other will do it right back.
But if we withdraw our support, gas prices go up, and thereby Republicans win the House and Senate. We only have the almost-majority now bc they went down bc of the deals Biden made e.g. with the Saudis who killed Jamal Khashoggi.
Arguably Biden may somehow be grandfathered in, but any new nominee is going to have to take a stand on the issue with some kind of position or another. And thereby they are going to get eaten alive, no matter what position they take.
I suddenly see why Biden is taking the Presidency to his grave - it may well be literally the only option left open at this point.
Edit: otherwise, why would you have added that last bit, "(as long as they are on the right side of the Israel/ Gaza issue)" - with all that is going on, it's not enough to be a Democrat who can stay awake during a sentence, as we've all been saying, now suddenly they also have to have the perfect stance on the Gaza issue too? You know, the "correct" (leftist) one, which also somehow is the one that will convince people who might otherwise vote for Trump to pick this new nominee instead? (so thereby not leftist at all, or else they will stay with Trump)
remember that campaigns are weird. Even in the primary, you have to maintain momentum for as long as possible, and frequently if you look like you're about to fold, you're done. So he's going to be 'In It to Win It" right up to the end. Then he folds and every one is going to be like "well this was sudden." when really, it's not sudden at all.
Who though... Comments like this are useless unless there is a valid replacement. So again... Who, or STFU.
It doesn't matter the name. You will immediately dismiss it, because you intended to do so when you asked the question.
Harris. Newsom. Whitmer. Buttigieg. Franken.
No thats just wrong.
You are engaging in a form of lying when you say we need to have a decision already made to criticize Biden. You should stop lying. We haven't actually had a convention yet. He' isn't the nominee and doesn't have to be. We don't have to make that decision until the convention.
I have responded to so many of these "who tho" requests, but they all end up in silence without even a reply. At this point I'm thinking it's some kind of script that sea lions were told to follow.
Oh 100%. They are completely full of shit. There is no answer you could give them that would satisfy them and they were never asking the question in good faith to begin with. Its also not really an important question. Its something we can answer at the convention.
Literally almost all Democrats poll 10-20 points higher than Biden. So the answer is "any of them". Literally any Democrat could would be enough of an improvement to stop Trump in his tracks.
And there are some solid picks out there. I really think Kamala would be fine; she would invigorate the african-american vote, and guarantee us black-woman voters (which might be a big fucking problem if she isn't the nominee). Newsom is like, greased-up-deaf-guy slick, but he's got a machine behind him. I would want someone progressive like Witmer, but I just don't care at this point. Any one. I think the most strategic choice would be Andy Beshear (2x Democratic southern governor like Bill Clinton; steal Kentucky from the Republicans) would be a very smart strategic choice.
Kamala would sway any centrists towards Trump hands down. There is no brand recognition here besides maybe AOC and she'd fit a VP pick better. I fear a new candidate will only fracture us and ensure a Trump victory. There's so much at stake for such uncertainty. I can say I will vote for whoever is opposing Trump and Project 2025. I just hope more than half the country is seeing all this shit and thinking "Nah, I dont want a king."
It is a worthwhile fear. As is doing nothing. Both are very valid fears.
About the king though, that ship has sailed. It would take an act of Congress to fix that, hence there is basically no chance before the election and possibly not ever afterwards. Best we can do is a god-king emperor that chooses not to exercise their powers, or else does so really sneakily so that we can't tell the difference - since ofc we are unable to even ask. We will literally never know if it is not happening - though ofc when it becomes really obvious that it is being used, then we'll know. As such, Democracy is dead, long live our next king, whoever they may be.
You dont need name/ brand recognition at this level. Its the presidency and there will only be two options. Its the wrong rule-stick for this level of race. If this were a house race or even a senate seat, sure. But not for whomever will carry the Democratic nomination.
This is a weird talking point that has suddenly become very consistent.
Bro. We're already fully fractured and its Biden thats done the fracturing. Don't fear the unknown: fear the known failure the commentators here have been telling you that you are pot-committed to. Thats a far far far bigger concern than not going to the convention with a candidate in hand.
Yeah I can't really agree with just about anything you said. We weren't fractured until people decided the debate meant the world and his actual work in office right now doesn't mean shit.
You are living in a delusional fantasy. Biden's polling was CATASTROPHIC before the debate. Why?
Because Biden split the party in how he has handled Gaza.
Its unbelievable the amount of delusion people around here try and persist with.
Definitely not, maybe for terminally online people. But for most of the actual democratic american populace Gaza didn't mean that much. Thats the sad truth, people mostly care about what's happening at home, centrists especially.
Sure but... WHO?!
Whitmer.
If thats an important condition for you to have before you move on from a lost cause, you should come up with an answer to that question on your own and suggest it.
You're the one saying Biden should be replaced. Why on earth would it be mortalic's responsibility to suggest the alternative?
Do you know what sea lioning is?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
Its a fundamental form of trolling that OP is engaging in, and that apparently, you think I should engage with.
Think about it as a metaphor. I come to you with the information that your house is on fire. OP is basically making a rhetorical argument that if I can't provide them with a house they'll find suitable, we shouldnt leave the burning house we're currently in.
The information about the state of the house (candidate in our case) is independent from there being another house that isn't on fire.
You should never, ever engage with people like them. They are not having this discussion in good faith. If its important to them they should suggest a candidate. There are plenty to suggest. But that is a fundamentally separate discussion.
One problem with this analogy is that if you’re in a burning house, you literally don’t have time to have a conversation while you’re in it. But in fact we could spend the entire weekend discussing viable candidates and it wouldn’t become too late to then decide to support the idea.
Another problem is that you’re presupposing that the course of action is obvious, as it is in a house fire. In a house fire, it doesn’t matter what can be done about the stuff or where you’re going to live if you lose your home, because if you don’t get out of the house ASAP then you will die, based on thousands upon thousands of previous house fires. In the case of this election, nothing like this has ever happened and staying with Biden does not actually mean guaranteed loss. Perhaps continuing the public call for Biden to step down is the thing that hurts us the most. In any case, the only thing that would mean a literal guaranteed loss would be withdrawing Biden and not replacing him with someone.
So, coming up with suitable people who could take the helm and do better (as well as figuring out a viable way to make this happen democratically) is necessary to this process actually succeeding. We actually do have the luxury of time to spend all day discussing it right now. And if good ideas for candidates can actually win over more people to the idea, then it might in some way be helpful to the success of it.
I would say I’m a person who both feels like things have reached a point where Biden should ideally be replaced, but I’m very worried by the fact that I haven’t yet heard someone else who we could theoretically rally behind, and haven’t heard how this could even be accomplished legally and politically at this late stage. I feel the worst thing we can do is to just repeatedly say it’s a fire and not actually figure out steps to fix it.
I just took a look at your post history. It's literally only anti-Biden. I hope you're getting paid...
Yeah I want a Democrat to win the election and Biden has a less than 1 in 20 shot of doing that.
The only path to stopping Trump is replacing Biden. Continuing to promote Biden as a candidate is you basically asking for project 2025 to become a reality. And as you can see, there are a lot of idiots to push back on who think a guy polling in the low thirties can make it happen.
I think this is rather obviously true. Many on the left have been pushing for a different, and presumably better, candidate from the beginning, so in a way, all that's changed since the debate is that many more have joined them. So really, all the Dems have to do is provide the people with that candidate, and it'll be a runaway.
BUT...
I'm starting to worry that the DNC is going to fuck it up yet again, and specifically because, just as was the case in 2016 and 2020, they're not only going to not adopt the positions of the base, but are going to instead manipulate the process in order to shove another establishment hack down our throats. And quite likely not even just any establishment hack, but the one that's already proven to be even less popular than Biden - Hillary Clinton.
This is a moment for the DNC to get out of the way and let the people come together and choose the candidate they want. That's the exact thing that will motivate the base, and in turn guarantee Trump's defeat.
I'm just afraid that the DNC won't be able to do that - that in their all-consuming self-centeredness and greed, they're going to fuck it up for all of us, yet again.
Your caution is well warranted.
The biggest mistake the DNC could make would be not taking the advantage that an open convention offers them. They desperately need to put out an air of at least 'presumed' democracy in the shocking un-democratic process which is Democratic elections. The delegates are all corporate, Biden/ Harris democrats. But at least put on a show of democracy. And build the theater a bit. Give the audience some action and some drama. Use the opportunity to build some headlines.
It is 100% going to be an establishment hack, I have no doubt in my mind about that, but I don't care. Biden is an establishment hack, but one who most importantly can't win the election. We're not getting worse moving to a different hack that can form thoughts on the fly.
Though I don't like it a bit, that's my position too, but with one glaring exception.
The thing that keeps haunting me is that I really think there's a good chance that they'll go back to Hillary, who's basically everything that's wrong with the current Democrats turned up to 11 - a plainly corrupt, transparently power-hungry and entirely self-serving opportunist who gives paid speeches on Wall Street, idolizes Kissinger and has all the charisma of a damp rag. As far as I can see, her only real qualifications for the office are that she wants it so desperately and she's so willing to sell herself to anyone who will contribute to getting her there. And she's the one possibility that I would say is far and away the least likely to win. But she brings in the corporate money, and that's obviously the DNC's main priority.
If it's pretty much anybody else, that's fine by me.
Nah, not a chance. She hasn't been mentioned in anything, feels old when we want someone who isn't, and is a proven failure. Some diehards can say it's "not her fault", but we're all traumatized due to her failure. Same way some people still post Notorious RGB style memes, but they just cause discomfort among the rank and file that now associate her with stubbornness resulting in massive Democratic backslide. Normies don't hate her, but they rightfully recognize that she's problematic and power brokers know when someone's dead-on-arrival. There are plenty of corporate Democrats that haven't been publicly tarnished for them to invest in.
He has gone public? Because he hasn't said anything about this.
All I see are secondhand reports from anonymous sources, which is kind of the opposite of going public.
"Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) is attempting to assemble a group of Democratic senators to ask Joe Biden to exit the presidential race,” the Washington Post reports.
“Warner is telling Democratic senators that Biden can no longer remain in the election in the wake of his faltering debate performance… The Virginia senator has told others that he is deeply concerned Biden is not able to run a campaign that could beat former president Donald Trump.”
So, he hasn't gone public, at all.
The Senate isin recess until Monday. Senators tend not to make public pronouncements while in recess. Which makes this interesting to watch. If the Biden effort through the weekend enough for him to hold fire? Guess we'll find out.