Sleepwalking Towards Another Trump Presidency

Luis A. Mendez

Boricua. Floridian. Theist. Writer. Podcaster. Film Critic. Oscars Predictor. Occasional Psephologist. Member Of The Critics Association Of Central Florida And The Puerto Rico Critics Association.

Related Post Roulette

79 Responses

  1. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    But what about Trump?

    The big thing that I’m seeing is a handful of fundamental approaches to this thing:

    1. “Holy cow. Biden is likely to lose against Trump… we need to replace Biden with someone else.”
    2. “Holy cow. If we replace Biden with Harris, she’s likely to lose against Trump… we need to not replace Biden.”
    3. “Holy cow. We have to replace Biden and Harris but we can’t do that. Not in the time period we have. We need to not replace Biden.”

    And it’s those three starting assumptions that I see mostly among the most passionate. If there’s a fourth, it involves taking what folks are saying at face value.

    “Biden had an off night, he’s otherwise fine” or “CNN deliberately sabotaged Biden in order to improve their ratings next year” or some crap like that. I mean… maybe that denial is genuine? It seems to be coupled with anger at people who disagree, though. It’s not something like “Hey, what I saw was two old men having a pissing contest, not one man peeing his pants”, it’s always something like “WHAT ABOUT TRUMP! WHY ARE YOU ATTACKING BIDEN? YOU HAVE HIDDEN MOTIVES!”

    The Dems seem to be painted into a corner.

    I don’t know what the best play actually is. Every single one has downsides that seem to exceed their upsides.
    If he goes there will be trouble. If he stays there will be double.

    The best plays are all back in 2022, 2021, or 2020.

    Why did he pick Harris, again? (Remembers 2020.) Oh. Yeah.Report

  2. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    1. If we are going to prattle on about Biden’s age, start prattling about Trump’s continued use of the Gish Gallop – which happens t present as dementia manifesting.

    2. Your 12 thing that point to a win contain numerous amounts of evidence that polling is in fact not serving Democrats well. That being the case, perhaps relying on polling – albeit a great data source to play with in Google Sheets – is not a good idea.

    3. You failed to mention Trump’s sentencing next week in New York, where even house arrest will mean he picks up a handicap in campaigning. To say nothing of the look of a convicted former president trying to appeal to SOCTUS to toss a state conviction based on official immunity claims – where said conviction is for acts take before becoming president.

    4. Let’s also be real – the Fourth Estate is a major part of the problem here. The NYT telling Biden to step aside because they are butt hurt about not getting an exclusive sit down interview is not going to cover Biden’s success objectively. Nether is Rupert Murdoch or the Sinclair Medeia empire. That’s a way larger deal then you are giving credit for.Report

  3. Chip Daniels
    Ignored
    says:

    Even if Biden wins, the next decade or so is going to be an all out brawl for democracy and the rule of law.

    The Republican Party, from Trump all the way down to the local school board, is deeply committed to enforcing their rule upon the citizens, whether they have their consent or not.

    And despair or surrender isn’t an option because fascists don’t simply want obedience, they demand approval. Notice how one of their biggest grievances is that they are not popular,.
    So they do all sorts of things that seem merely performative like posting the Ten Commandments or banning Pride flags, but the real purpose is to coerce approval from an unwilling citizenry.

    Under Republican rule, your most intimate act is subject to their review and approval.Report

    • Philip H in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      Far too many Americans – including a sizable number of OT’ers – sincerely believe the tactics the GOP is deploying will not be used against them. and if people like you or me are harmed, that may be an individual tragedy but it can’t be helped.

      Those same folks would be shocked at what history actually tells us.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
        Ignored
        says:

        Yes. We need to lean on Mendez and see if we can’t guilt him into shutting up about what he’s seeing.

        Maybe we should point out that his last name is kinda LatinX-flavored? Ask him which side he’s on? Maybe that’ll work.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Philip H
        Ignored
        says:

        One of the few things we have in our favor is that every time some reactionary centrist tries to soothe us with “Oh, maybe you’re overeacting” Trump immediately comes out with “I WANT TO PUT LIZ CHENEY IN A MILITARY TRIBUNAL!!”

        When they tell us “Oh, you see, we merely want to trim some of the excessive DEI practices” A GOP operatives screams “BURN ALL THE PRIDE FLAGS!!”

        And on and on.
        “Oh, you see, we’re merely concerned about late term abortions” is followed by “LETS USE THE COMSTOCK LAW TO BAN CONTRACEPTION!!”

        Every hysterical accusation made against the Trumpists has come true, and in fact, they brag about it.Report

        • Philip H in reply to Chip Daniels
          Ignored
          says:

          And yet that truth is STILL not moving many Americans in any meaningful way. Much less OT commenters. Those truths have Koz rooting for Trump’s reelection again and Jaybird bordering on Gish Galloping himself, while Pinky and Ken B tut tut around and look down their noses at us for over taking Trump seriously. These people want this Chip. And too many Americans have been brainwashed into thinking it doesn’t matter.Report

          • Pinky in reply to Philip H
            Ignored
            says:

            I remember four years of predictions where you got only three hours right.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
            Ignored
            says:

            What? My first comment wasn’t a “Gish Gallop”. It was an attempt to guess what the main play was going to be in response to a good essay that does a good job of breaking down the lay of the land.

            To be honest, I think that my best guess was not particularly bad.

            You should probably frame it as “poisoning the well” because any comment that goes out of its way to change the subject from the main essay will be painted in a negative light due to my first comment guessing at how Biden Partisans would respond to an essay breaking down the problems that need to be overcome.

            Would you like to get back to talking about how bad Trump is, though?

            I can certainly see why you’d want to, given how awful Biden is.Report

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels
      Ignored
      says:

      I never thought the leopards would eat my face…Report

  4. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    Let me say that I don’t know what’s going to happen in November. It’s only July, after all.

    That said: If Trump beats Biden in November and someone is curious about how Trump could have possibly defeated Biden, this essay will be an excellent way to explain to them why Trump beat Biden in 2024.

    “But surely the democratic rank-and-file would have seen this too?”, they might ask.
    At that point, we will be able to point to the comments.Report

  5. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Everyone is enjoying playing fantasy pundit but there are some hard facts that people are not considering:

    1. The Democratic Party had a Presidential primary in 2024. The voters in this primary picked Biden and often by large numbers. People ran against him. There was no special juju that caused big name Governors to sit out this time. They were being team players and thought that being against Biden would create division. I don’t get the galaxy brain conspiratorial thinking that makes people think the DNC or DLC put the kibosh on Josh “aka Johnny Unbeatable” Shapiro into not running this year.

    2. Only Harris has a legal claim to the 96 million dollar Biden-Harris campaign war chest;

    3. Biden dropping out will produce 4 months of never ending preening from Trump on how he caused Biden to step down with the media helping for the assist.

    4. Not everyone responding to the post-debate polls is a Democrat and/or responding in good faith.

    Could Biden lose in November? Yes. Could he also be the best chance to defeat Trump in November? Also yes. Will facts and analysis prevent wank fests of armchair consultants? No.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      1. This is true but uninteresting. There are many people calling for Biden to be replaced due to now having information that they didn’t have at the time of the primary. “You don’t get a do-over!” is an appeal to the process, not the underlying complaint.

      2. True, but that means that the primary choice for the new top of the ticket is Harris. And if Harris decides* that she’d rather be AG or something like that, you don’t need more than light shenanigans to transfer the money to someone else.

      3. There are plenty of ways to hand Trump a win. Some wins that you can hand him are worse than other wins you can hand him. Don’t lose a war because you hate the idea of him preening for a news cycle in freaking JULY.

      4. Sure. But some of them are people like Pelosi.Report

  6. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    A piece of information that bolsters the argument made by the original post:

    CNN Poll: Most voters think Democrats have a better chance of keeping White House if Biden isn’t the nominee

    Three-quarters of US voters say the Democratic Party would have a better shot at holding the presidency in 2024 with someone other than President Joe Biden at the top of the ticket, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. His approval rating also has hit a new low following a shaky performance in the first debate of this year’s presidential campaign.

    Report

    • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      None of the alternates polls better against TFG then Biden.

      Several other Democrats have been mentioned as potential Biden replacements in recent days, and each trails Trump among registered voters, with their levels of support similar to Biden’s, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom (48% Trump to 43% Newsom), Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg (47% Trump to 43% Buttigieg), and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (47% Trump to 42% Whitmer).

      So who exactly should Democrats replace him with?Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
        Ignored
        says:

        I’ll just copy and paste a paragraph from the CNN article:

        The poll also finds Vice President Kamala Harris within striking distance of Trump in a hypothetical matchup: 47% of registered voters support Trump, 45% Harris, a result within the margin of error that suggests there is no clear leader under such a scenario. Harris’ slightly stronger showing against Trump rests at least in part on broader support from women (50% of female voters back Harris over Trump vs. 44% for Biden against Trump) and independents (43% Harris vs. 34% Biden).

        Hey. That paragraph was right above the one that *YOU* quoted!

        Anyway, I don’t think that there are any good plays. I think that all of the good decision points are in the past and now we have a bunch of stinkers to choose from.

        Keep Biden on and make sure that he only gives interviews to folks like George Stephanopoulos until November? That’s a bad option.
        Switch to Harris and find a good middle-of-the-road attack dog to appeal to the suburbs (someone like Colorado’s Jared Polis)? Yeah, that might be a better option than Biden but it’s not a great one. Harris has charisma issues that aren’t great. Maybe they’re overcomeable but she dropped out early in 2020 for reasons and those reasons still exist.
        Dump Harris and run with something like Polis/Whitmer 2024? Hoo, boy. That’s going to be tough. It could work. But there’d be a *LOT* of turmoil along the way and the last time something like that happened (1968), the Republicans were able to capitalize on it fairly effectively (and there is *ZERO* evidence that a convention will give us something as reasonable as Polis/Whitmer).

        There aren’t any really good options. Just a bunch of bad ones.

        For what it’s worth, I don’t begrudge folks thinking “keep Biden!” as being worse than the other two options. I can totally see how they’d conclude that, given the last couple of weeks. I also see how “this is the best of three bad options” isn’t a fun argument to defend for those who think that this is the best of three bad options.

        But acknowledging that the options are bad at this point of time has the upside of not giving the impression that “I’m a sleazy salesman trying to sell you a lemon and calling it a peach”.Report

        • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          you and a great many other seem fixated on one public appearance and one set of subsequent polls as indicative of the need for significant change. That single data point tells you nothing. Again – as i have noted elsewhere – Biden is still a good to great speaker, he has a good track record of moving the needle since he was elected on issue that matter, he will protect democracy – and the polling trend is dead level or better for him with the other options including Harris. There is no reason for the democratic Party to dump him.

          Especially when the choice is a guy who has publicly vowed to detain folks like me for opposing him.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
            Ignored
            says:

            I suppose I could bring up the “cheap fakes” multiple public appearances… should I bother?

            You are not a fan of this set of public polls. Fair enough. I imagine that any poll I’d point to that came out around a week after the debate would be part of that set.

            Okay. When does the next set begin? I’d like to see whether your criticism becomes “two sets of bad polls”.Report

            • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
              Ignored
              says:

              How about we do our own poll right here?

              How many people here at OT are willing to go on record as saying they are more likely to turn out to vote if the nominee is Harris, versus Biden?

              I’ll go on record as saying it won’t matter, I’m turning out regardless.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                I hope that California follows your lead and that nominee Harris can count on winning the Sunshine State.

                I’m pretty much going to vote no matter what, no matter who the nominees are. I will want to tweet that little “I Voted” sticker to Twitter and get a post out of it.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                I am too – but I see no need to dump Biden over his debate performance.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                We can let others chime in, but I predict that no one here will say that the difference between Harris and Biden will change either their motivation to vote, or their vote itself.

                Which is why I find all the armchair punditry and horserace analysis absurd.

                It’s all premised on the assumption that the speaker has some interesting and insightful view on how other people are going to react.
                But no one here or any of the major pundits have demonstrated why we should accept their expertise- I might as well ask the guy who lives in a box outside the subway station for his thoughts.

                But worse, it is based on the idea that somehow this is all about the candidates- Its always phrased as “Joe Biden better do X or his candidacy is doomed”

                Aside from the fact that X is invariably the pundit’s personal pet desires, the assumption is that the impact of the election will be borne by Joe Biden.

                Joe Biden isn’t going to suffer any ill effects of losing the election other than a blow to his ego.

                Its the rest of us who will suffer. But you’d never know it reading the “They’re coming around the corner, and its neck and neck, ladies and gentleman!” nonsense.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Gee, Chip, maybe you could read Luis’s post. He wrote an entire essay about his take and why he thought what he thought with links to supporting evidence and everything.

                You don’t have to even click to go see it. Just scroll up.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Neither he, nor Nate Silver, or Ezra Klein or any of the other horserace touts can tell us why the polls are the way they are.

                What is happening with the American electorate that about 50% of them want a dictator?

                Telling me that 65.3% of the time a left handed batter has faced a red haired pitcher after two consecutive strikeouts he will hit a single isn’t telling me anything worth knowing.Report

              • Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                In 2008, the United States elected a black man as President and a good chunk of the country lost its mind and the right-wing press and meme empire has been chipping at them ever since.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Saul Degraw
                Ignored
                says:

                This has the most explanatory power for what has transpired since.Report

              • Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                What is more interesting and depressing for me is ostensibly which left leaning outlets seem to have it in the bag for Biden.

                1. The Times is obvious. They never liked him, I think the youngest Sulzberger is basically trust-fund plutocratic fash and Kahn (heir to Staples) is as well. But they know they have a Democratic leaning audience that they love to troll. They also know they are basically the best straight reporting out there.

                Biden denied them an exclusive interview and they have been filled with resentment since then and against him.

                2. Slate and Vox are more interesting and disturbing. Neither is close to pro-Trump but the younger reporters at both organizations seem to be the kind of furious leftist who thinks “Democrats and Republicans are just the same” and seethes with resentment when their older brothers or sisters (or worse their parents) telling them “if you support abortion rights, you need to vote Democratic/vote blue no matter who.” Or a bunch of them have decided that capitalism must be destroyed and are deeply upset that the Democratic Party is not even nominally making noises about “late stage Capitalism”

                I generally think this furious left is not consequential but they seem to have good bases of support at places like Slate and Vox.

                I was in college in 2000. I went to college where everyone debated Nader v. Gore. I thought “Democrats are just Republicans lite” was very stupid in 2000 and even more stupid now but it seems every generation needs to make this mistake.

                It is my crowd of early middle-aged types which seems to realize Biden is old but he is an old, dependable workhorse.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Neither he, nor Nate Silver, or Ezra Klein or any of the other horserace touts can tell us why the polls are the way they are.

                I’m not sure that he has to.

                It’s sufficient for him to say “If we run Biden, we lose. I don’t want to lose, therefore I do not want to run Biden.”

                And then he can go from there to talk about that.

                He doesn’t need to explain that the people who vote for Trump are racist.

                He just has to make the connection in his head that people who refuse to let Biden go are enabling racists because the people who refuse to let Biden go are enabling Trump and, by extension, Trump’s voters.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Nobody “has to” do anything.
                If someone wants to just throw out a bunch of data showing odds, well, OK fine.

                I just don’t think it has any sort of meaning or insight.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                It’s perfectly fine to deny that polling data is meaningful.

                If you do that, there are a lot fewer things weighing down what you see as the right thing to do.

                Please understand that there are people out there who do stuff like see polling as representative of likelihoods of things happening. This has them reach different conclusions than you for reasons that are, get this, reasonable.

                I seriously think that you’d benefit from reading the original essay, if only to get a take from someone who wants to replace Biden because they want Trump to lose.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I never said that polling data isn’t meaningful.

                I said that the data analysis you’re talking about (“likelihoods of things happening”) is meaningless because you can’t explain why they are happening, or the ramifications of them happening.

                Its all just “This horse is ahead by a nose!”Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                If there were polls that said that the “wrong track” numbers were high and I pointed to those polls as for why Biden was bad off, would that be sufficient?

                Or would that turn into “but *WHY* do these people think that it’s on the wrong track?”

                And then I could point to immigration and inflation and then you could ask “But *WHY* do they care about inflation?”

                And we could successfully change the subject away from stuff like Luis’s fine essay that way.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Sufficient for what?

                I mean, you yourself have gone to great lengths to tell us that you are largely indifferent and agnostic as to whether Biden or Trump wins.

                So what does any of your analysis and predictions matter? If the outcome doesn’t matter, then anything you have to say about the election is no more meaningful than a prediction of who is going to win a reality show.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Sufficient for you, Chip. Sufficient to get you to say “this means something”.

                If the outcome doesn’t matter, then anything you have to say about the election is no more meaningful than a prediction of who is going to win a reality show.

                Let’s say that it’s a sports game and you’re watching two different teams play.

                Arguing that the only way you can predict whether a team will win is if you’re a fan is not true.

                And it’s not true that I can only guess who is going to win if I care that Biden wins.

                I mean, if I cared that Trump lost, I could very well see arguing for Biden to be replaced (if I thought that Biden was a shoo-in for a loss).

                But that wouldn’t automatically make my predictions “meaningful”.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I’m just saying you don’t have anything insightful or important to say about the state of American politics.

                And this is your own claim. You keep telling us that you are indifferent and that this election isn’t really important, in fact, you use that statement as a sarcastic jibe.

                So really, you keep telling us that, unless we want a breathless up to the minute report on which horse’s nose is out in front, we have no reason to pay attention to your comments.

                Again…You are the one saying this.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Sure. I have nothing insightful of important to say about the state of American politics.

                *BUT*

                I can say stuff like “here’s an essay written by Luis Mendez that I think captures some pretty important stuff including a handful of troublesome poll results” and if someone else says “but the polls don’t talk about *WHY* they have the results they do!”, I can point to other polls that talk about stuff like “right track/wrong track”.

                “BUT YOUR OPINIONS DON’T MATTER! YOU’VE ADMITTED AS MUCH!”

                “I agree that they don’t matter. This is why I’m talking about Luis’s essay and the polls. What I don’t understand is why you prefer to talk about my opinions. We both agree that my opinions don’t matter.”Report

              • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                But it’s your opinion that Mendez’s essay and the poll numbers matter!Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                What’s the point of pointing at polls, if as you yourself say, you have no insights into them?

                We don’t need you to point to them, we are all bombarded with headlines about polls every day.

                Seriously, are you adding anything of value to this discussion?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                The fact that my opinions aren’t interesting does not mean that polls stop being interesting, Chip.

                I mean, good lord, if you’re using my opinions as a lodestone for what is not interesting, suddenly my opinions have stopped being uninteresting and they’re very interesting indeed.

                Seriously, are you adding anything of value to this discussion?

                At the very least, I’m providing you with something you’d rather talk about than the points made in the original post.

                “Uninteresting” beats “Unpleasant”, I guess.Report

              • DensityDuck in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                “We can let others chime in, but I predict that no one here will say that the difference between Harris and Biden will change either their motivation to vote, or their vote itself.”

                chip if there’s no difference between harris and biden then why not switch? at least then we’d have someone who can stay up past eight PM.Report

            • Pinky in reply to Jaybird
              Ignored
              says:

              I don’t know why it’s tough for some people to come to terms with Biden’s decline. It’s been visible for a few years. It’s been an openly-discussed phenomenon in the conservative and foreign press. Even the mainstream US press has mentioned it. It’s not simply a matter of reading, though. It’s been obvious.

              I know it’s hard to accept that one’s party has nominated an unfit candidate, but it’s freeing in one respect: it gives one no option other than to speak the truth. It offends one’s vanity to be pressured into saying things that are not only false, but obviously false and stupid. Biden didn’t develop a stutter in his 70’s, he didn’t have a cold during the debate, and this isn’t the first or tenth time his decline was on public display.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Eh. It’s easy. “If X, Then Y.”

                They don’t want Y.

                Therefore not X.

                Easy peasy.Report

              • KenB in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                There was a set of people who were worried but who wanted to believe, and Thursday night was the fatal blow to their hope — some are feeling quite angry at and betrayed by the party leadership, who they feel must have been lying to them all this time. And there are others who are determined to keep the faith and who are approaching the former group very much like a faith community treats (ex-)members who have lost the faith — too weak to hold on to their belief in the face of adversity, or perhaps never truly believers in the first place.Report

              • Pinky in reply to KenB
                Ignored
                says:

                That is a great insight.Report

              • LeeEsq in reply to KenB
                Ignored
                says:

                I consider this to be an all hands on deck scenario considering that Trump stated his intention to rule like a dictator and the Supreme Court gave him his tools. Even his state conviction in New York is now in question. The Heritage Foundation is gleefully looking forward to reversing the 20th century. This is time to rally around Biden. I have yet to hear a Biden step down scenario that is convincing.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to LeeEsq
                Ignored
                says:

                How about the one in the original post? You can read it if you scroll up.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to LeeEsq
                Ignored
                says:

                Its like that saying, that if you ever wanted to know what you would have done in the 1930s as fascism arose around the world, you’re doing it now.Report

              • KenB in reply to LeeEsq
                Ignored
                says:

                @LeeEsq — the people who are calling for Biden to step down are just as scared as you are about a Trump presidency. They just think that “rallying around Biden” is more likely to lead to Trump winning than finding a new candidate. There’s no point in calling all hands on deck if the ship is sinking fast and there’s no way to fix it, people need to be heading to the lifeboats at that point.

                People can obviously disagree on what the best course is, but talking about how bad Trump is in this context doesn’t make any rational sense at all. Everyone you’re thinking about agrees on that — the disagreement is about the best way to stop that from happening.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to KenB
                Ignored
                says:

                Part of the problem is that the stakes being as high as they are, you can’t acknowledge that people on your side who have different ideas of what is necessary to succeed have a point.

                I mean, the choice is:
                “Biden’s going to lose, we need to replace him”
                vs.
                “Biden’s the only one who can win, we need to *NOT* replace him”

                Neither one of those sides can acknowledge that the other side makes some good points… because to acknowledge that the other side makes good points is to bolster Team Evil by letting Team Undecided know that Team Good has lingering doubts.

                So the only play is “My side is right, my take is right, and anyone who disagrees is a plant who is harming Team Good.”

                You see this with the additional demands given to people who think that Biden will lose to Trump: “You have to put together a list of names that would be better! If you don’t have a list of names, I don’t have to entertain that Biden might lose!”

                Does it matter if a list is provided? Of course not.

                Because the ask is *NOT* for a list of names. It’s for how you have to do stuff and I don’t.

                Hell, look above. Who has engaged with the points made by Luis? He made a lot of them! You want to shift the burden of proof onto Team Replacement, well, I’ve got bad news: Luis shouldered that burden of proof and laid out his thoughts and linked to polls and told you exactly why he thinks that sticking with Biden is sleepwalking towards another Trump presidency.

                And who has engaged with the points that he’s raised?

                Seriously, look around.

                Kinda weird, huh?

                That’s because the stakes are too high to acknowledge that Team Replace has a point or even that they’re on your side too.

                You can’t budge.

                The stakes are just too high.Report

              • KenB in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Checking recent headlines, looks like the world will be budging them soon. Reminds me of the line from Sun Also Rises about how Mike went bankrupt — gradually, and then suddenly.Report

              • Dark Matter in reply to KenB
                Ignored
                says:

                I disagree.

                Realistically the only one who can replace Biden at this point is his VP. IF his VP could do a better job at beating Trump than Biden, then we’d have a different world. She’s not capable.

                I think most of the “replace Biden” folks aren’t going to vote for him anyway.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Dark Matter
                Ignored
                says:

                There are a couple of things that people might mean when they say “replace Biden” and it might be helpful to disambiguate.

                1. “Biden needs to RESIGN! NOW!!! And Kamala becomes President by default! And then the House and Senate has to confirm Kamala’s VP according to the Constitution!”

                2. Biden can ride it out until January but the convention will be devoted to figuring out who will be on the ballot come November. It doesn’t have to be Kamala! It can be Pritzker/Buttigeig! Two white guys! You like white guys, right?

                3. BOTH OF THEM!!!! BIDEN MUST RESIGN NOW AND THEN AT THE CONVENTION WE NEED TO PICK TWO WHITE GUYS TO RUN IN NOVEMBER!!!!!!

                If you think your opponent is talking about #3 but, really, they’re talking about #2, it’s probably going to result in people talking past each other.Report

              • KenB in reply to Dark Matter
                Ignored
                says:

                “I think most of the “replace Biden” folks aren’t going to vote for him anyway.”

                Following up on Jay’s comment, who exactly do you have in mind in this category and how do you arrive at your estimate of “most”?

                In a recent poll, about 80% of Democrats think Biden is too old to be president. The people I’ve read or talked to who are asking/begging for someone else to take his place are Democrats or Never-Trumpers who are terrified of a Trump presidency, who liked Biden’s first term, and who will absolutely vote for Biden if he doesn’t step down, but who are understandably afraid that at this point he’s quite likely to lose and would rather roll the dice with someone else. They think he’ll lose because of what they think the non-committed voters out there will do, not because of what they themselves will do.

                We each have our own experiences but I think you’re delusional if you think the push for replacement is coming primarily from people who won’t be ticking off the “D” box no matter what come November.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to KenB
                Ignored
                says:

                Yeah. There are three groups of voters.

                1. People who, if they vote, will be voting for your guy.
                2. People who, if they vote, will be voting for the other guy.
                3. People who, if they vote, could go either way.

                If you completely ignore group #3, you can console yourself with the thought that everybody in group #1 isn’t going to become a Trump voter.

                If they vote, they’ll vote for Biden.
                If Biden is replaced with Harris, if they vote, they’ll vote for Harris.
                If Biden is replaced with 15 ducks in a human suit, if they vote, they’ll vote for the 15 ducks in a human suit.

                I daresay that the problem is in two places with this:

                1. The whole “energized voter” thing contained in the phrase “if they vote”. Sometimes voting is a pain in the butt. You don’t want to put voters in a position where it’s easy to forget to vote, or to say “eh, my state is blue/red anyway”. “Oh, so you’re saying that every single person on Team Blue will ‘forget’ to vote?!?” “No, I’m not saying that. But to pretend that stuff that happens on the margins doesn’t matter because the core is unchanged is some weird denial stuff and you should look at how your brain is lying to you.”

                2. Group #3 does, in fact, exist.Report

              • InMD in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                It’s all a question of what those 3s in the 6-7 swing states are going to do. Any other conversation is a distraction.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                There are 6-7 swing states now?

                How many swing states were there the last couple of times?Report

              • InMD in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                6-7.

                (To clarify I am generally agreeing with you.)Report

              • Jaybird in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                I thought that there were only 3-4.

                Okay. I feel a hair better.

                (No, I totally dig what you’re saying. I was just thinking that if we went from 3-4 swings to 6-7, then that was a bad indicator. If it’s stayed the same, then we’re good!)Report

              • InMD in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I believe the official list of ‘could go either way’ are PA, MI, WI, NV, AZ, GA, and NC. From my occasional glancing at the polls I think GA and NC are very likely out of reach for Biden but probably were pre debate.

                So the question really is whether there is something about Biden in particular that even in his current condition keeps it close among those voters in those states, and keeps them willing to show up.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to InMD
                Ignored
                says:

                One argument that keeps coming up is something to the effect of “we’re not voting for *BIDEN*, we’re voting for a *BIDEN ADMINISTRATION*.”

                Part of that is the whole “capable of putting together a GOTV and a “Collect Mail-In Ballots” machine.

                So that’s going to keep it close among those voters, if I had to guess.Report

              • InMD in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I have no idea how that pitch will work. It sounds to my ears like some weak cope but I also think nothing is harder for us political junkies than getting in the heads of these types of voters.

                I could hear a kind of practical argument based purely on the fact that they will actually recognize Biden’s name on a ballot, whereas that may not be the case for name your dream candidate. Maybe the positive of name recognition is enough that it outweighs whatever association it may have with economic anxieties that top peoples reported concerns. It isn’t an easy call but I would have liked for the campaign to be out ahead of it. Were that the case I don’t think we’d have all these reports about conversations that may (or may not?) be happening.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Dark Matter
                Ignored
                says:

                She’s not likable, but she’s capable.Report

              • Slade the Leveller in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                I know it’s hard to accept that one’s party has nominated an unfit candidate…

                Right?Report

              • Pinky in reply to Slade the Leveller
                Ignored
                says:

                Right. Your point is?Report

              • Slade the Leveller in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                No one’s covering themselves with glory here.Report

              • Pinky in reply to Slade the Leveller
                Ignored
                says:

                Obviously not. I wasn’t bragging about being in a party that nominated an unfit candidate. I was trying to offer advice to people who find themselves in that position.Report

  7. Pinky
    Ignored
    says:

    Morning Mika just announced that Joe Scarborough is on a planned vacation, and that he had only said that it may be time for Biden to consider stepping aside.Report

  8. Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    Allan Lichtman, the historian who has correctly forecast the results of nine out of the 10 most recent presidential elections argued on Saturday that replacing President Joe Biden could cost Democrats the 2024 election.

    Lichtman, a professor at American University, rejected the growing chorus of political pundits and Democratic activists who have called on Biden, 81, to bow out of the presidential race after his disastrous debate performance last week against former President Donald Trump. The pivotal moment brought fresh questions about Biden’s age and ability to serve a second term.

    “It’s a huge mistake. They’re not doctors. They don’t know whether Biden is physically capable of carrying out a second term or not,” Lichtman said during an interview with CNN of calls to replace Biden. “This is all foolhardy nonsense.”

    Lichtman has correctly predicted the outcome of almost every election over the last half century, except for the race in 2000, using a series of 13 historical factors or “keys.”

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/06/30/lichtman-dems-replace-biden/74260967007/Report

  9. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Biden told his staff he is not going to drop out and he is in it to win it.

    It’s BidenReport

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *