Quote:

---

It's certainly easiest for Kamala to take over because passing her over might trigger a civil war within the party, but Kamala will lose. She's personally unpopular to begin with and as Biden's VP she will be saddled with the public's negative view of both the direction of the country generally and the state of the economy in particular.

No matter how promising some experts say economic indicators are (and some are suspiciously promising, like inflation numbers), the public is very sour on the state of the economy and it's very hard for the incumbent party to not be burdened by that in an election. Their only chance to escape this perception is to run a credible change candidate.

Trump is probably unbeatable no matter who the Dems run but if they want their best chance of winning, they should nominate Bernie. He has the national profile, he remains popular nationally, he polled very well against Trump in 2016, and unlike establishment Democrats he can credibly counter Trump's populism with far more authentic populism. Independents will believe Bernie when he says he will fight against control of our society by corporations and ultra wealthy individuals.

Age is a concern for Bernie since he's also an octogenarian but unlike Biden, Bernie obviously still has it cognitively. Trump is no spring chicken either so age won't be a significant campaign issue. Bernie can also promise to be a one-term president, a promise that will have credibility.

Running Bernie would mean for the Democratic Party embracing the core of Bernie's legislative platform, at least publicly. Free public health care, free education at public colleges, strong campaign finance reform, strong regulation of the finance industry. Problem is the Democratic Party doesn't want these things so they will be reluctant to publicly back them even faithlessly.

Even if Bernie won, his agenda would have a snowball's chance in hell of being implemented. Republicans will obstruct it from Congress and SCOTUS, but Democrats don't want to give these policies popular momentum. They really might prefer Trump win and expect to just get the White House back in 2028 when Trump terms out. But if they're really not full of s*** when they regard Trump as an imminent threat to democracy, they should be willing to run any politician of at least passable integrity to beat Trump.

---

Bernie also won the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary back in 2020. Biden amazingly came in 4th and 5th place respectively while Kamala dropped out of the race since she was polling less than 1% among Democrats. Let's not forget there were "counting issues" back then as we didn't know who the winner was until days later.

kal kommie said:

---

sycasey said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Big C said:

---

CNN threw Biden even further under the bus this evening.

Over on PBS' RNC coverage, Jonathan Capehart went from full Biden support only last night to "well, if he is off the ticket, they need to promote Kamala Harris" tonight.

Near total disarray in less than three weeks. Pretty incredible. Never seen anything like it.

---

My feeling is that the "Good candidates" likely might run away from this run (Newsome, Mich Gov, PA Gov) because having only 100 days to win the presidency is not ideal and Trumps assassination attempt is a difficult hurdle to overcome. Plus I think those names above wouldn't mind throwing Kamala Harris under the bus to clear the field in 28. The Dems also I don't think would risk splitting the black vote even more by skipping Kamala.

---

It makes the most sense to have Kamala Harris take over. She was already on the ticket and should have easier access to campaign funds. It makes more sense for Biden to endorse her upon dropping out. Maybe she consolidates the disaffected Biden voters and wins. If she doesn't, then you have an answer to the question of whether or not she should be nominated again and the field is clear for the up-and-comers in the next cycle.

---

It's certainly easiest for Kamala to take over because passing her over might trigger a civil war within the party, but Kamala will lose. She's personally unpopular to begin with and as Biden's VP she will be saddled with the public's negative view of both the direction of the country generally and the state of the economy in particular.

No matter how promising some experts say economic indicators are (and some are suspiciously promising, like inflation numbers), the public is very sour on the state of the economy and it's very hard for the incumbent party to not be burdened by that in an election. Their only chance to escape this perception is to run a credible change candidate.

Trump is probably unbeatable no matter who the Dems run but if they want their best chance of winning, they should nominate Bernie. He has the national profile, he remains popular nationally, he polled very well against Trump in 2016, and unlike establishment Democrats he can credibly counter Trump's populism with far more authentic populism. Independents will believe Bernie when he says he will fight against control of our society by corporations and ultra wealthy individuals.

Age is a concern for Bernie since he's also an octogenarian but unlike Biden, Bernie obviously still has it cognitively. Trump is no spring chicken either so age won't be a significant campaign issue. Bernie can also promise to be a one-term president, a promise that will have credibility.

Running Bernie would mean for the Democratic Party embracing the core of Bernie's legislative platform, at least publicly. Free public health care, free education at public colleges, strong campaign finance reform, strong regulation of the finance industry. Problem is the Democratic Party doesn't want these things so they will be reluctant to publicly back them even faithlessly.

Even if Bernie won, his agenda would have a snowball's chance in hell of being implemented. Republicans will obstruct it from Congress and SCOTUS, but Democrats don't want to give these policies popular momentum. They really might prefer Trump win and expect to just get the White House back in 2028 when Trump terms out. But if they're really not full of s*** when they regard Trump as an imminent threat to democracy, they should be willing to run any politician of at least passable integrity to beat Trump.

---

Kamala Harris would not be the best choice IMO if you are just picking any Democrat out of a lineup, for sure. It's just that in this particular scenario I find it hard to see how you don't go with her.

I also think Bernie's time is past, though. I like the guy, but he's also too old. You can't have the incumbent drop out due to age/health concerns and then nominate another 80-year-old.

For comparison, Pete Buttigieg came in a close second to Bernie in both Iowa and New Hampshire back in 2020 and he's only 42 years old.

bear2034 said:

---

Quote:

---

It's certainly easiest for Kamala to take over because passing her over might trigger a civil war within the party, but Kamala will lose. She's personally unpopular to begin with and as Biden's VP she will be saddled with the public's negative view of both the direction of the country generally and the state of the economy in particular.

No matter how promising some experts say economic indicators are (and some are suspiciously promising, like inflation numbers), the public is very sour on the state of the economy and it's very hard for the incumbent party to not be burdened by that in an election. Their only chance to escape this perception is to run a credible change candidate.

Trump is probably unbeatable no matter who the Dems run but if they want their best chance of winning, they should nominate Bernie. He has the national profile, he remains popular nationally, he polled very well against Trump in 2016, and unlike establishment Democrats he can credibly counter Trump's populism with far more authentic populism. Independents will believe Bernie when he says he will fight against control of our society by corporations and ultra wealthy individuals.

Age is a concern for Bernie since he's also an octogenarian but unlike Biden, Bernie obviously still has it cognitively. Trump is no spring chicken either so age won't be a significant campaign issue. Bernie can also promise to be a one-term president, a promise that will have credibility.

Running Bernie would mean for the Democratic Party embracing the core of Bernie's legislative platform, at least publicly. Free public health care, free education at public colleges, strong campaign finance reform, strong regulation of the finance industry. Problem is the Democratic Party doesn't want these things so they will be reluctant to publicly back them even faithlessly.

Even if Bernie won, his agenda would have a snowball's chance in hell of being implemented. Republicans will obstruct it from Congress and SCOTUS, but Democrats don't want to give these policies popular momentum. They really might prefer Trump win and expect to just get the White House back in 2028 when Trump terms out. But if they're really not full of s*** when they regard Trump as an imminent threat to democracy, they should be willing to run any politician of at least passable integrity to beat Trump.

---

Bernie also won the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary back in 2020. Biden amazingly came in 4th and 5th place respectively while Kamala dropped out of the race since she was polling less than 1% among Democrats. Let's not forget there were "counting issues" back then as we didn't know who the winner was until days later.

---

Running Bernie is the single worst idea ever. The winning play is to pick someone who wins the center. The progressive left has nowhere to go; they'll vote no matter what because they despise Trump. I suggested Manchin. If not exactly him, someone like him. Red state. Not a darling of The Left.

D's can still win this if they quit thinking like Dems with identity politics and Squad mentality stuff. They've already got those votes locked up. Win the middle, win the election.

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Quote:

---

It's certainly easiest for Kamala to take over because passing her over might trigger a civil war within the party, but Kamala will lose. She's personally unpopular to begin with and as Biden's VP she will be saddled with the public's negative view of both the direction of the country generally and the state of the economy in particular.

No matter how promising some experts say economic indicators are (and some are suspiciously promising, like inflation numbers), the public is very sour on the state of the economy and it's very hard for the incumbent party to not be burdened by that in an election. Their only chance to escape this perception is to run a credible change candidate.

Trump is probably unbeatable no matter who the Dems run but if they want their best chance of winning, they should nominate Bernie. He has the national profile, he remains popular nationally, he polled very well against Trump in 2016, and unlike establishment Democrats he can credibly counter Trump's populism with far more authentic populism. Independents will believe Bernie when he says he will fight against control of our society by corporations and ultra wealthy individuals.

Age is a concern for Bernie since he's also an octogenarian but unlike Biden, Bernie obviously still has it cognitively. Trump is no spring chicken either so age won't be a significant campaign issue. Bernie can also promise to be a one-term president, a promise that will have credibility.

Running Bernie would mean for the Democratic Party embracing the core of Bernie's legislative platform, at least publicly. Free public health care, free education at public colleges, strong campaign finance reform, strong regulation of the finance industry. Problem is the Democratic Party doesn't want these things so they will be reluctant to publicly back them even faithlessly.

Even if Bernie won, his agenda would have a snowball's chance in hell of being implemented. Republicans will obstruct it from Congress and SCOTUS, but Democrats don't want to give these policies popular momentum. They really might prefer Trump win and expect to just get the White House back in 2028 when Trump terms out. But if they're really not full of s*** when they regard Trump as an imminent threat to democracy, they should be willing to run any politician of at least passable integrity to beat Trump.

---

Bernie also won the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary back in 2020. Biden amazingly came in 4th and 5th place respectively while Kamala dropped out of the race since she was polling less than 1% among Democrats. Let's not forget there were "counting issues" back then as we didn't know who the winner was until days later.

---

Running Bernie is the single worst idea ever. The winning play is to pick someone who wins the center. The progressive left has nowhere to go; they'll vote no matter what because they despise Trump. I suggested Manchin. If not exactly him, someone like him. Red state. Not a darling of The Left.

D's can still win this if they quit thinking like Dems with identity politics and Squad mentality stuff. They've already got those votes locked up. Win the middle, win the election.

---

Win the middle, win the election. This seems obvious but the left leaning political establishment needs to have someone onboard with whom they share some basic priorities with and I don't think Manchin meets that requirement. Besides, Manchin ditched the Democratic Party and filed as an independent a few months ago. Is there someone else like him around? If there is, we would have known by now because he or she would have been attacked by the media and their own party.

I still think the Democrats have a good chance to win with Biden based on the spectacular record number of "votes" he received in in the previous election and the large influx of illegal immigrants that may have a say in the upcoming one.

BREAKING NEWS: Multiples sources outline the apparent state of play on Biden at this time:

* plans to announce withdrawal from nomination as early as this weekend, with Sunday most likely

* Jon Meacham polishing up remarks

* Biden with NOT resign the presidency

* Biden will… https://t.co/l0LrfDTvOL

— Mark Halperin (@MarkHalperin) July 18, 2024

Things are going to get interesting if this is true.

tequila4kapp said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

Quote:

---

It's certainly easiest for Kamala to take over because passing her over might trigger a civil war within the party, but Kamala will lose. She's personally unpopular to begin with and as Biden's VP she will be saddled with the public's negative view of both the direction of the country generally and the state of the economy in particular.

No matter how promising some experts say economic indicators are (and some are suspiciously promising, like inflation numbers), the public is very sour on the state of the economy and it's very hard for the incumbent party to not be burdened by that in an election. Their only chance to escape this perception is to run a credible change candidate.

Trump is probably unbeatable no matter who the Dems run but if they want their best chance of winning, they should nominate Bernie. He has the national profile, he remains popular nationally, he polled very well against Trump in 2016, and unlike establishment Democrats he can credibly counter Trump's populism with far more authentic populism. Independents will believe Bernie when he says he will fight against control of our society by corporations and ultra wealthy individuals.

Age is a concern for Bernie since he's also an octogenarian but unlike Biden, Bernie obviously still has it cognitively. Trump is no spring chicken either so age won't be a significant campaign issue. Bernie can also promise to be a one-term president, a promise that will have credibility.

Running Bernie would mean for the Democratic Party embracing the core of Bernie's legislative platform, at least publicly. Free public health care, free education at public colleges, strong campaign finance reform, strong regulation of the finance industry. Problem is the Democratic Party doesn't want these things so they will be reluctant to publicly back them even faithlessly.

Even if Bernie won, his agenda would have a snowball's chance in hell of being implemented. Republicans will obstruct it from Congress and SCOTUS, but Democrats don't want to give these policies popular momentum. They really might prefer Trump win and expect to just get the White House back in 2028 when Trump terms out. But if they're really not full of s*** when they regard Trump as an imminent threat to democracy, they should be willing to run any politician of at least passable integrity to beat Trump.

---

Bernie also won the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary back in 2020. Biden amazingly came in 4th and 5th place respectively while Kamala dropped out of the race since she was polling less than 1% among Democrats. Let's not forget there were "counting issues" back then as we didn't know who the winner was until days later.

---

Running Bernie is the single worst idea ever. The winning play is to pick someone who wins the center. The progressive left has nowhere to go; they'll vote no matter what because they despise Trump. I suggested Manchin. If not exactly him, someone like him. Red state. Not a darling of The Left.

D's can still win this if they quit thinking like Dems with identity politics and Squad mentality stuff. They've already got those votes locked up. Win the middle, win the election.

---

I mean, Biden basically WAS the "win the middle, win the election" guy. He just got old.

bear2034 said:

---

BREAKING NEWS: Multiples sources outline the apparent state of play on Biden at this time:

* plans to announce withdrawal from nomination as early as this weekend, with Sunday most likely

* Jon Meacham polishing up remarks

* Biden with NOT resign the presidency

* Biden will… https://t.co/l0LrfDTvOL

— Mark Halperin (@MarkHalperin) July 18, 2024

Things are going to get interesting if this is true.

---

I have always been interested in Presidential elections and Presidential politics in general. This is going back to when I was in elementary school (Note to the young'uns out there: During the conventions and on election day, it was the only thing you could watch on a screen unless you went to the movies... long story.).

Never, ever seen anything like this. Pundits reference LBJ in '68 (again, young'uns, not talking about LeBron James here), but he bowed out in (?) March. July, that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

I think Gavin Newsom's strategy right now is, if he appears like he wants it -- even in the slightest -- that will blow it for him, what with his "slick" reputation, so he's gonna wait until 2028, unless the-powers-that-be come and draft him as our best hope.

Big C said:

---

Yeah, no. Our great country has a long, proud history of choosing its Presidential candidates in smoke-filled rooms. It's one of our strengths as a nation! And where there's smoke, there's... fire!

BTW, I love all the tweet comments by non-Democrats, all of a sudden very concerned about how the-party-that's-not-theirs picks its candidate. Gotta hand it to you people, though: the talking points get disseminated very quickly!

---

I've seen some people who should know better (David Sacks) claiming that pushing Biden out despite the primary vote would be unconstitutional, which, no. If that were true it means almost every President elected before the 1970s was unconstitutional. The Constitution doesn't say s*** about party primaries.

sycasey said:

---

Big C said:

---

Yeah, no. Our great country has a long, proud history of choosing its Presidential candidates in smoke-filled rooms. It's one of our strengths as a nation! And where there's smoke, there's... fire!

BTW, I love all the tweet comments by non-Democrats, all of a sudden very concerned about how the-party-that's-not-theirs picks its candidate. Gotta hand it to you people, though: the talking points get disseminated very quickly!

---

I've seen some people who should know better (David Sacks) claiming that pushing Biden out despite the primary vote would be unconstitutional, which, no. If that were true it means almost every President elected before the 1970s was unconstitutional. The Constitution doesn't say s*** about party primaries.

---

Not just party primaries, political parties themselves are not mentioned in the Constitution. They started in the 1790s, with the differences between John Adams / Alexander Hamilton (the "Federalists"). and the "Anti-Federalists" (think Thomas Jefferson). Then, the Anti-Federalists became known as the Democratic Republicans and later, simply, the Democratic party.

Report is if Kamala manages to boot Biden outta office, some dems don't want to be her running mate lol. They said Newsome and Whitmer turned it down.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Report is if Kamala manages to boot Biden outta office, some dems don't want to be her running mate lol. They said Newsome and Whitmer turned it down.

---

What's a better choice:

A) transgendered somebody
B) illegal immigrant ('migrant')
C) Sam Brinton - LGBTQ activist
D) Silicon Valley vulture capitalist Billionaire
E) Jeff Bezos / Mark Zuckerberg

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Report is if Kamala manages to boot Biden outta office, some dems don't want to be her running mate lol. They said Newsome and Whitmer turned it down.

---

Why would Newsom or Whitmer agree to be on the ticket under Kamala Harris? If they win, she is in the driver's seat in 2028; if they don't win, they have the stench of a loser.

If it's Kamala Harris, she should pick an older white guy from a swing state to run under her. Seems like it would take a miracle (as of tonight), but maybe they could win.

According to some reports, Biden is angry with Obama and ("Crazy") Nancy Pelosi. Doesn't feel respected. Get a clue, Mr. President: You did a good job for four years, you will go down in history as a good President...but now you're 81 and frail. You don't automatically get handed another four years as the most powerful person on earth. It's a tough world. Put on your big boy Depends pants. You're a year late, but you can still pull 'em on.

Lady Macbeth Doctor Biden, you you're not doing anybody any favors... except Trump and his ilk.

107 Days Til No Joe said:

---

AOC says behind closed doors no one supports Kamala.

😬 pic.twitter.com/1jvdizUQSy

— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) July 19, 2024

---

That's a lie

tequila4kapp said:

---

Big C said:

---

According to some reports, Biden is angry with Obama and ("Crazy") Nancy Pelosi. Doesn't feel respected. Get a clue, Mr. President: You did a good job for four years, you will go down in history as a good President...but now you're 81 and frail. You don't automatically get handed another four years as the most powerful person on earth. It's a tough world. Put on your big boy Depends pants. You're a year late, but you can still pull 'em on.

Lady Macbeth Doctor Biden, you you're not doing anybody any favors... except Trump and his ilk.

---

But he wasn't automatically handed another 4 years. He won the nomination fair and square.

---

He didn't win the nomination, which has not occurred yet. He did get by far the most votes in the primaries. However, the primaries were then and this is now. Two possibilities about what happened

1. 12-18 mos. ago, when he should've announced he would stick to one term, maybe his decline was already noticeable, or maybe those around him were in a state of denial. At any rate, the primaries were held under false pretenses. Solid opposition was discouraged, because Biden was supposedly still competent and he was the sitting President (that is when he got the respect he deserved). The choice was an aging-but-still-competent Biden, the sitting President, versus two token nobodies. Of course he was going to win.

2. The other possibility is that he actually seemed pretty good 12-18 mos. ago when he decided to run again, but that most of his decline has come in the last 6-9 mos. And that is even more scary.


It's in the best interests of the country to have the two parties' BEST CANDIDATES face each other in the general election. I'm not going to speak for the Republicans; they can decide for themselves, but the Democrats need to nominate somebody that is better than 2024 Biden. That we already held the primaries doesn't matter to me, in this case.

Big C said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

Big C said:

---

According to some reports, Biden is angry with Obama and ("Crazy") Nancy Pelosi. Doesn't feel respected. Get a clue, Mr. President: You did a good job for four years, you will go down in history as a good President...but now you're 81 and frail. You don't automatically get handed another four years as the most powerful person on earth. It's a tough world. Put on your big boy Depends pants. You're a year late, but you can still pull 'em on.

Lady Macbeth Doctor Biden, you you're not doing anybody any favors... except Trump and his ilk.

---

But he wasn't automatically handed another 4 years. He won the nomination fair and square.

---

He didn't win the nomination, which has not occurred yet. He did get by far the most votes in the primaries. However, the primaries were then and this is now. Two possibilities about what happened

1. 12-18 mos. ago, when he should've announced he would stick to one term, maybe his decline was already noticeable, or maybe those around him were in a state of denial. At any rate, the primaries were held under false pretenses. Solid opposition was discouraged, because Biden was supposedly still competent and he was the sitting President (that is when he got the respect he deserved). The choice was an aging-but-still-competent Biden, the sitting President, versus two token nobodies. Of course he was going to win.

2. The other possibility is that he actually seemed pretty good 12-18 mos. ago when he decided to run again, but that most of his decline has come in the last 6-9 mos. And that is even more scary.


It's in the best interests of the country to have the two parties' BEST CANDIDATES face each other in the general election. I'm not going to speak for the Republicans; they can decide for themselves, but the Democrats need to nominate somebody that is better than 2024 Biden. That we already held the primaries doesn't matter to me, in this case.

---

I think most reasonable people can look at that nomination contest and see that Biden did not win against realistic competition. As you note, that's pretty standard when there is a sitting President running for re-election. Since then voters have seen pretty clear evidence that Biden will not be able to competently complete another term, and polling (even among Democrats) has turned against him running for reelection.

There's no time to run a new primary, so it's reasonable for a political party to seek other options in this circumstance. There's no legal reason they can't.