Alex_Krycek Posted July 21 Author Posted July 21 Alright, here we go. Biden finally made the announcement to step down. We have a good chance of beating Trump now. Hooray.
TheVat Posted July 21 Posted July 21 (edited) Delegates are now free agents, by party rules, but likely it will be seen a better chance of winning if they accept Joe's endorsement of Harris (especially given her sterling resume) rather than waste time on all the horsetrading and pyrotechnics of an open convention. If they still do the early pre-convention nomination balloting, they can give Kamala and Veep a couple extra weeks. I'm hearing all kinds of weird buzz. One is a Unity ticket, e.g. Harris-Cheney or Harris-Kinzinger. While such a hypothetical fistful of bipartisanship could be interesting and motivating to some Log Cabin Republicans and Indies, I doubt it would happen. More likely, a strong governor as a VP, like Beshear, Newsom, Shapiro or Whitmer. Or a Mindbending Number of Firsts ticket, Harris-Buttigieg. I want to be the first to point out that a Harris Beshear pairing could be called (cough) the Barber Ticket. 🙄 Edited July 21 by TheVat add 1
swansont Posted July 21 Posted July 21 13 minutes ago, TheVat said: I'm hearing all kinds of weird buzz From whom? The same anonymous sources that started this clusterf* or was it the donors who didn’t like the support that labor was getting? Quote Delegates are now free agents, by party rules Always were, apparently. A “conscience clause” meant that they could vote for another candidate if they wanted to, but being pledged to Biden probably meant they wouldn’t have wanted to. 1 hour ago, MigL said: I didn't really think he could win this time around and in this political climate, but I felt his slide in the polls wasn't so much gains for D Trump, rather losses for J Biden amid Republican, and Democrat, criticism of his mental health. We won’t know what would have happened if there had been no infighting, and instead there was a full-court press on all of Trump's failings, Dobbs, and the myriad other unpopular positions in project 2025. That’s where all the time and energy should go (and should have gone)
exchemist Posted July 21 Posted July 21 I’d like to see Buttigieg. That guy could wipe the floor with Trump and would be a real breath of fresh air. CV is fantastic and great communicator.
StringJunky Posted July 21 Posted July 21 (edited) 2 hours ago, TheVat said: Holy backflipping Jesus on a trampoline! Well I can now definitely assert that Biden cannot win the election! 😀 Just read the BBC site. Holy smoking mackeral! I could hug him, even If I didn't agree with all his agenda. He can now leave with his legacy intact. What happens henceforth won't be down to him. Edited July 21 by StringJunky
iNow Posted July 21 Posted July 21 36 minutes ago, TheVat said: Delegates are now free agents California has the most delegates and they’re being pressured to come out strongly and immediately in support of Harris (esp since it’s her home state) They want momentum today to avoid the chaos of a brokered convention ahead.
StringJunky Posted July 21 Posted July 21 9 minutes ago, iNow said: California has the most delegates and they’re being pressured to come out strongly and immediately in support of Harris (esp since it’s her home state) They want momentum today to avoid the chaos of a brokered convention ahead. It makes sense, she already has the exposure and is pretty solid. If she wins, it would be historic as well, and I think that's probably a plus. We said that earlier, didn't we?
Alex_Krycek Posted July 21 Author Posted July 21 1 hour ago, StringJunky said: Just read the BBC site. Holy smoking mackeral! I could hug him, even If I didn't agree with all his agenda. He can now leave with his legacy intact. What happens henceforth won't be down to him. This was the only logical outcome after that disastrous debate performance, as I deduced weeks ago. It was only a mater of time.
TheVat Posted July 21 Posted July 21 1 hour ago, swansont said: From whom? The same anonymous sources that started this clusterf* or was it the donors who didn’t like the support that labor was getting? People writing in to the Post. A couple political forums I browse. It wasn't meant as a statistically rock solid sample, just me noting the weirdness. As the rest of my paragraph says, I don't find it a plausible match. The last unity ticket to win was Abe Lincoln and Andrew Johnson - and the longterm result wasn't that great. 1 hour ago, exchemist said: I’d like to see Buttigieg. That guy could wipe the floor with Trump and would be a real breath of fresh air. CV is fantastic and great communicator. I don't know who CV is. 😏
swansont Posted July 21 Posted July 21 1 hour ago, Alex_Krycek said: This was the only logical outcome after that disastrous debate performance, as I deduced weeks ago. It was only a mater of time. Oh, bullshit. None of this was inevitable. It was because of everybody dogpiling after the debate. If the press didn’t wet themselves at the thought of holding the GOP to the same standard and reported news instead of chasing clicks, and certain dems having a backbone instead of caving to megadonors (who freaked out because of the “news” stories) the path could have been quite different. 2 hours ago, exchemist said: I’d like to see Buttigieg. That guy could wipe the floor with Trump and would be a real breath of fresh air. CV is fantastic and great communicator. I think the US is too homophobic and that would cost votes. I think Pete’s great and should be campaigning but that and his inexperience would be negatives.
iNow Posted July 21 Posted July 21 44 minutes ago, swansont said: I think the US is too homophobic and that would cost votes. I think Pete’s great and should be campaigning but that and his inexperience would be negatives. Not the US, per se, but in the critical 3 electoral votes of Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania it would be a problem for sure. I am anxious for the same reasons in those same states for Kamala’s chances. Female AND nonwhite = Trump sweet spot for opposition. I liked Pete when I met him in the primaries, though. He has a good future ahead and may be a good counter to JD Vance even if not selected this round.
CharonY Posted July 22 Posted July 22 35 minutes ago, iNow said: Not the US, per se, but in the critical 3 electoral votes of Wisconsin, Ohio, and Pennsylvania it would be a problem for sure. I am anxious for the same reasons in those same states for Kamala’s chances. Female AND nonwhite = Trump sweet spot for opposition. I liked Pete when I met him in the primaries, though. He has a good future ahead and may be a good counter to JD Vance even if not selected this round. Agreed, there are well-established trajectories to attack her (e.g. the stupid diversity hire line).
iNow Posted July 22 Posted July 22 Democrats have raised $30M already online today in the few short (6-ish) hours since Biden’s announcement. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/21/us/politics/bidens-exit-democratic-donations.html
Externet Posted July 22 Posted July 22 Would a swap in positions be beneficial to their party and elections ? Biden for vicepresident ? 🤔
Phi for All Posted July 22 Posted July 22 12 minutes ago, Externet said: Would a swap in positions be beneficial to their party and elections ? Biden for vicepresident ? 🤔 No. He's been jettisoned. He won't make anyone feel better about Harris in that position, and he'd remain as fodder for the MAGA crowd. Remember, the GOP voters aren't impressed with Biden's ethical call in the slightest. Only those voting to save the democracy care about "doing the right thing" or "the greater good".
swansont Posted July 22 Posted July 22 1 hour ago, iNow said: I am anxious for the same reasons in those same states for Kamala’s chances. Female AND nonwhite = Trump sweet spot for opposition. A nonwhite person won twice, and a woman got more votes than Trump in 2016. A lot of Trump voters have died since then (some thanks to Trump). The question is whether the GOP has been able to suppress more votes than that. But Dobbs is the big difference since then. People don’t like having rights/freedoms taken away. AndTrump being a felon.
iNow Posted July 22 Posted July 22 (edited) 8 minutes ago, swansont said: A nonwhite person won twice, and a woman got more votes than Trump in 2016. Past performance isn’t a guarantee of future results. Trump changed things in meaningful ways among those electorates. More Importantly, Hilary lost all three of those states in 2016. Also, I meant Michigan not Ohio Edited July 22 by iNow
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 22 Posted July 22 The type of voter that won’t vote for her because she’s a women or of colour would probably tend to vote for Trump anyway. She just needs to avoid the mistakes she made in 2020, stick to accurate accusations against Trump, get a good running mate that compliments her…and she’ll be fine. She is certainly more capable of defending her/Biden’s administration than Biden could have, and more than capable of attacking Trump…there’s certainly plenty of ammo for her to do it honestly. 1 hour ago, CharonY said: Agreed, there are well-established trajectories to attack her (e.g. the stupid diversity hire line). As I said at the time, she should have been announced as the best available running mate. She’ll need a good deflection for that and keep it about Trump. She’s by far the better alternative.
TheVat Posted July 22 Posted July 22 1 hour ago, CharonY said: Agreed, there are well-established trajectories to attack her (e.g. the stupid diversity hire line). The DEI Hire crap gets regular workouts. Justice Jackson weathered this a couple years ago. Should be challenging to try and smear that on someone whose been Attorney General, US Senator and VP, but I'm sure they will try. Cogitating wildly on her possible VP choices, I wonder if there might be serious consideration of someone like Gen. James Mattis, who radiates probity, instead of the usual calculus of finding a strong swing state governor. They can't really pick Newsom (unless causing Middle America to cringe from an All California ticket is a goal). I like Buttigieg but he's not ready (for reasons already mentioned) and Transport Secretary to VP would be some anomalous form of political quantum tunneling. Also, I wonder if the swing state governor gambit could backfire in some way. Twill be fascinating to watch all the gears turning.
iNow Posted July 22 Posted July 22 4 minutes ago, TheVat said: The DEI Hire crap gets regular workouts. Justice Jackson weathered this a couple years ago. Should be challenging to try and smear that on someone whose been Attorney General, US Senator and VP, but I'm sure they will try. As early as 2-3 weeks ago, Kelly Ann Conway from her relatively elevated and respected perch was already calling Harris lazy and often unprepared for meetings. It informed me that the trope had clearly already taken hold among those in the darker 4chan style corners. 7 minutes ago, TheVat said: Transport Secretary to VP would be some anomalous form of political quantum tunneling. Gina Raimando (Secretary of Commerce) would be a good pick tho
Peterkin Posted July 22 Posted July 22 She needs a running mate with a high profile, preferably white, male and with some experience in government - to lay to rest any notions of a feminist or minority agenda. Then the Dems have to pull together like they've never done before, and keep hammering on the message: This is what we have done - this is what they have done. No frills, no personalities, no history; just the facts.
iNow Posted July 22 Posted July 22 19 minutes ago, Peterkin said: She needs a running mate with a high profile, preferably white, male and with some experience in government - to lay to rest any notions of a feminist or minority agenda. She could pick DJT himself and those notions still would never rest
Peterkin Posted July 22 Posted July 22 3 minutes ago, iNow said: She could pick DJT himself and those notions still would never rest Maybe. So, it's hopeless, because too Americans are stupid?
iNow Posted July 22 Posted July 22 Time will tell, but really the electoral college system is far more stupid than most Americans. She could win 8M more votes and still lose.
Alex_Krycek Posted July 22 Author Posted July 22 (edited) 9 hours ago, swansont said: Oh, bullshit. None of this was inevitable. It was because of everybody dogpiling after the debate. If the press didn’t wet themselves at the thought of holding the GOP to the same standard and reported news instead of chasing clicks, and certain dems having a backbone instead of caving to megadonors (who freaked out because of the “news” stories) the path could have been quite different. My prediction was based on the polling data. The American people knew what they saw and they didn't like it. 5 hours ago, Peterkin said: She needs a running mate with a high profile, preferably white, male and with some experience in government - to lay to rest any notions of a feminist or minority agenda. Then the Dems have to pull together like they've never done before, and keep hammering on the message: This is what we have done - this is what they have done. No frills, no personalities, no history; just the facts. What's interesting is I think we'll see an open convention. Everyone throwing their hat into the ring. What's this, actual democracy happening again? Spectacular. Edited July 22 by Alex_Krycek
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now