It’s Time For Biden To Be A Statesman

David Thornton

David Thornton is a freelance writer and professional pilot who has also lived in Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. He is a graduate of the University of Georgia and Emmanuel College. He is Christian conservative/libertarian who was fortunate enough to have seen Ronald Reagan in person during his formative years. A former contributor to The Resurgent, David now writes for the Racket News with fellow Resurgent alum, Steve Berman, and his personal blog, CaptainKudzu. He currently lives with his wife and daughter near Columbus, Georgia. His son is serving in the US Air Force. You can find him on Twitter @CaptainKudzu and Facebook.

Related Post Roulette

71 Responses

  1. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    This is getting tedious. Biden has said he is not dropping out and that should put an end to the story. There are basically four possible outcomes:

    1. Biden stays in the race and wins, great!!!

    2. Biden drops out and his replacement (presumably Harris) wins, great!!!!

    3. Biden stays in the race and loses, major recriminations.

    4. Biden drops out and his replacement (presumably Harris) loses, major recriminations. Biden becomes a replacement for Quisling possibly.

    All of these are probably roughly equally likely.

    Biden held a campaign really in Wisconsin yesterday. I thought it was very good and at the end he discussed the character needed to be President and the very clear fact that Trump has none.

    Everyone who is opposed to Trump needs to snap out of it and do something productive like write GOTV postcards to swing state voters: https://www.postcardsforamerica.com/gotv-postcards.htmlReport

  2. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    The Pundit class is campaigning hard for a Republican victory: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/06/biden-trump-race-rebecca-solnit

    “Although the Biden administration seems to have run extremely well for three and a half years, with a strong cabinet, few scandals and little turnover, a thriving economy and some major legislative accomplishments, the narrative the punditocracy has created suggested we should ignore this record and decide on the basis of the ninety-minute debate and reference to newly surfaced swarms of anonymous sources that Biden is incompetent. Quite a lot of them have been running magical-realism fantasy-football scenarios in which is fun and easy to swap in your favorite substitute candidate. The reality is that it is hard and quite likely to be a terrible mess. Nevertheless this pretense is supposed to mean that telling a presidential candidate in mid-campaign to get lost is fine.

    The main argument against Biden is not that he can’t govern – that would be hard to make given that he seems to have done so for the past years – but that he can’t win the election. But candidates do not win elections by themselves. Elections are won, to state the obvious, by how the electorate turns out and votes. The electorate votes based on how they understand the situation and evaluate the candidates. That is, of course, in large part shaped by the media, as Hannah-Jones points out, and the media is right now campaigning hard for a Democratic party loss. The other term for that is a Republican victory. Few things have terrified and horrified me the way this does.”Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      “Journalists should take a side!”
      “Okay.”
      “WAIT NOT LIKE THAT”Report

      • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        D minus.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
          Ignored
          says:

          When you see journalists doing what you describe them as doing above, do you find yourself wishing that they’d just report on what is going on? Not spinning, not injecting their personal views into the story, not having hidden agendas that they’re pushing?

          Golly, *I* sure do.Report

          • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            “How dare journalists be biased in favor of democracy and the rule of law!”Report

            • Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels
              Ignored
              says:

              How dare we make JB care about something more than trolling!!!Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Saul Degraw
                Ignored
                says:

                You should view it as a sign of weakness.

                In the 1930s, misogyny, racism, and fascism were powerful ideas that were expressed openly, and many people viewed them positively because at that time they hadn’t been sufficiently refuted by history.

                Trumpism today relies on those same things, but they can’t express them openly because normal people still recoil.

                So they can only troll and speak in code. Notice how absolutely no one here except for Koz is willing to openly declare support for Trump?

                Notice how after 2016 the most concerted trolling was “You made people vote for Trump because otherwise they wouldn’t have”?

                Its an admission that there is no case to be made for Trump being a better choice than Biden. So instead, what we get is snarking about Biden’s age, or sarcasm about liberal pieties with the occasional moral panic about gay people grooming children.

                Which is also why the Republicans are so adamant about using the courts now, because in a straight up free election their ideas fail.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                “Can you believe that guy mocking the people still praising the emperor’s outfit?”

                “He’s jealous that he can’t see it.”Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                I should start numbering these.
                1. “But Biden’s age!”
                2. “Liberals are hypocrites!”
                3. “Who can really say, if democracy is good or not?”

                Note that nowhere in the list will exist any argument for why Trump is better or even not-worse.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                “Here’s a criticism of Biden.”
                “Why aren’t you talking about Trump?”
                “Here’s a criticism of journalists.”
                “Why aren’t you talking about Trump?”
                “Here’s a look at the polls.”
                “WHY AREN’T YOU TALKING ABOUT TRUMP?!?”

                Probably because it’s looking like we’ll have four years to talk about Trump.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Your points can easily be defeated by simply stipulating every single criticism of Biden, journalists, liberals and wine moms.

                He is still the best choice in November.

                You’ve as much as admitted this.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Hey. There are a lot of reasons to think that Biden will win the election. He’s doing *GREAT* among the 70+ crowd and many of those folks are actively ticked off by the agism being displayed by a lot of Biden’s critics.

                That said, there are a lot of reasons that Biden might not win come November and I’m not sure that demanding that the subject be changed to how much better Biden is than Trump will dismiss the reasons that Biden might not win come November.

                But good luck trying to control the narrative.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                So stipulated.

                And Biden is still the better choice, and no one here is even trying to say otherwise.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Yeah, instead of trying to say otherwise, they’re discussing why Biden might (or is likely to) lose.

                I know, I know… “Whatabout Trump?”Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                MmHmm.
                Trump World ‘panicking’ as Project 2025 gets on the radar of voters
                https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp-video/mmvo214312005740

                What makes this so important is what I referred to elsewhere, that even if Trump dies tomorrow, the entire GOP is full tilt in a drive to return to the Jim Crow/ Gilded Age.

                And it looks like voter category #3 is starting to pay attention.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Well, Trump World “panicking” indicates bad stuff for Trump World.

                When a campaign is panicking, that’s usually a bad sign, don’t you agree?Report

  3. Hoosegow Flask
    Ignored
    says:

    There are some major hurdles that would need to be overcome:

    1. Ohio Republicans have already tried to keep Biden off the ballot. What are the odds that some Republican Secretaries of State object to a non-standard change of candidates? I would bet money on multiple legal challenges in the future.

    2. Early voting starts mid-September in some areas. That’s less than two and a half months.

    3. The new campaign would start with $0, unless Harris is on top of the ticket. If Harris remained VP or wasn’t on the ticket at all, it’s likely they would not be able to use the money for the campaign.

    4. The new candidate will not be chosen by Democratic voters, there’s no time. It will be a deal made by the DNC. Some faction will be *pissed*. You think the Bernie wing was mad at the DNC having their thumb on the scale before?Report

    • Pinky in reply to Hoosegow Flask
      Ignored
      says:

      Harris heading the ticket would address most if not all of those objections.Report

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Hoosegow Flask
      Ignored
      says:

      The Ohio GOP folded on this I think but it always remains a possibilityReport

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Hoosegow Flask
      Ignored
      says:

      Republicans want Biden to go and for that reason, he should remainReport

    • Jaybird in reply to Hoosegow Flask
      Ignored
      says:

      Re: #3, surely there are shenanigans available that can address that. “We took a vote at the convention and it was unanimous and now Pritzker/Franken have the money.”Report

      • KenB in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        I read someplace that there’s some crypto billionaire who’s spearheading some big fundraising effort for a Biden replacement, with a goal of $100 million.Report

        • Saul Degraw in reply to KenB
          Ignored
          says:

          That sounds trustworthy. Wait a minute, it doesn’t sound trustworthy at allReport

        • Saul Degraw in reply to KenB
          Ignored
          says:

          This is basically inadmissible hearsay and if true, he should be forced to put the money in cash in escrow for it to be viable as an offer.Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
            Ignored
            says:

            Speaking of inadmissable hearsay:

            After watching Mr. Biden in private, in public and while traveling with him, the official said they no longer believed the president had what it took to campaign in a vigorous way and defeat Donald J. Trump. The official, who insisted on anonymity in order to continue serving, said Mr. Biden had steadily showed more signs of his age in recent months, including speaking more slowly, haltingly and quietly, as well as appearing more fatigued in private.

            Report

        • KenB in reply to KenB
          Ignored
          says:

          Oh here it is in the NYT:

          But of all the efforts by wealthy Democrats, perhaps none is as ambitious as the Next Generation PAC, which plans to create a holding account to support a successor to Mr. Biden atop the Democratic ticket. ….

          The new PAC effort is spearheaded by Mike Novogratz, the cryptocurrency billionaire who backed Dean Phillips in the Democratic primary; his aides; and the Hollywood filmmaker Andrew Jarecki, according to three people briefed on the plan, with likely support from the Movement Voter Project. Next Generation PAC, which had not filed federal paperwork as of Thursday afternoon, has told donors it is seeking to raise between $50 million and $100 million but is not planning to officially start until some money is in.

          This anybody-but-Biden group intends to hold on to the money until either Mr. Biden steps down as the nominee or the Democratic National Convention concludes, according to materials distributed to donors and reviewed by The New York Times. If Mr. Biden were to leave, the PAC would spend money on ads for the new nominee and against Mr. Trump. If Mr. Biden remains the nominee, the group says, it will spend the cash by helping other Democrats.

          Report

          • Pinky in reply to KenB
            Ignored
            says:

            A tenuous plan to get someone with low name recognition a fraction of their needed money in an effort to boot a black female off the ticket.Report

  4. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Biden refuses to cross the picket line: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/06/business/nea-staff-strike-convention-biden-speech.html

    That’s being a statesmanReport

  5. Brandon Berg
    Ignored
    says:

    Why would he start now?Report

  6. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Biden spoke at a Black Church in Philadelphia today and the NY Times reported this: “Stacia Parker, 57, a longtime member of the Mount Airy congregation, said she thanked Biden after his speech for forgiving $117,000 worth of student loans and found him cogent and compelling. “We don’t kick you when you’re down,” she said, showing off the selfie Biden snapped on her phone with her seven-year-old granddaughter.”

    Stacia Parker is the real base of the Democratic Party. Not the terminally online, not people here, even me, etc.Report

  7. Burt Likko
    Ignored
    says:

    Where is the evidence that a substitute candidate — Harris or anyone else — would do better than Biden? Polling numbers I’ve seen show that very few people do any better than Biden. In the Ipsos poll I linked to, only Michelle Obama outpolls Trump, and as we’ve noted elsewhere, she doesn’t want to do it.

    I can look back in history to 1968 and see LBJ stepping down as handing Nixon a powerful advantage. This suggests that Biden stepping down would hurt, in ways that are easily foreseeable: a chaotic, divisive convention; an admission of partisan weakness; a concession that Trump won the debate so hard it knocked Biden out of the race. It’s very questionable that Democrats would gain more than they’d lose by switching horses at this point. Doubtful, in my opinion.

    Democrats need to pitch that Joe Biden has been a good President and good things have happened because he’s been President. Democrats need to remind people that Donald Trump was a bad President and that bad things happened because Donald Trump used to be President. Such as Roe v. Wade being overturned.

    There’s nothing wrong with saying “The other candidate is worse than me.” Repeatedly, forcefully. That is a winning strategy. Just ask Donald Trump, who made that his strategy in the only election he’s ever won.Report

    • LeeEsq in reply to Burt Likko
      Ignored
      says:

      Narrator: There is no evidence that any substitute candidate would better.

      The more rational of the Replace Biden people realize that the only person that can replace Biden realistically is Kamala Harris. As Biden’s VP, anything that people don’t like about Biden beyond the fact that he is an old white man can and will be imputed on Harris. The Further Left will get out the Kamala is a Kop memes as a reason not to vote for her.

      For every other replacement candidate, you have issues of pluses and minuses. Is Gavin Newsom a liberal lion attack dog who successfully governed the largest state in the Union or is he an empty suit and a Democratic DeSantis. I’ve seen people argue both and lot of people will not like him because California. Gretchen Whitmer is not exactly a national name yet but has the advantage of being from the Mid-West.

      Republicans are itching for Biden to go. Therefore, Biden shouldn’t go. I’m just surprised that so many Democratic voters are walking into such an obvious trap.Report

    • Jaybird in reply to Burt Likko
      Ignored
      says:

      Glancing at RCP Polls, I’d guess that, were the election held today, the map would give Trump 270 (based on nothing but RCP polls page as of less than a minute ago).

      On a purely utilitarian level, I can see the argument that if Biden runs and loses, it ruins one career (and only at the very, very end).

      If Biden is replaced by (insert candidate here), it has a shot at ruining (insert candidate here)’s career if (insert candidate here) fails. What does (insert candidate here) get out of this? They get to be the answer to a politics question in the 2034 edition of Trivial Pursuit.

      On top of that, if Biden loses, Harris gets a “HARRIS WOULD HAVE WON!” boost for a few years and maybe a cushy sinecure somewhere. If Harris loses? Pffft. Kiss *THAT* goodbye. Additionally, Harris’s VP choice will get a disproportionate amount of blame as well. (Seriously, who would sign up for that?)

      Just on a purely utilitarian level… it makes the most sense for Biden to stay in. The upsides are better and the downsides are already baked in.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Jaybird
        Ignored
        says:

        RCP has some interesting results – like Emerson saying Trump wins Michigan and Morning Consult saying Biden does. If you look at 538, it looks like Biden is at least even if not ahead in lots of places, and is inside the margin of error on the general election polling.

        https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          Glancing at that, I’d also give Trump 270. So I’ll cheerfully amend my comment to say “Glancing at RCP and 538’s polls page, I’d guess that, were the election held today, the map would give Trump 270 (based on nothing but RCP and 538’s pages as of less than a minute ago).”

          Everything after that doesn’t need mutandis mutatising.Report

    • Saul Degraw in reply to Burt Likko
      Ignored
      says:

      There isn’t anything. I would also add that a lot of people who are stating Biden must go were generally down on him before the debate. Ezra Klein and Eric Levitz have been down on Biden for months. Sulzy doesn’t like him, Kahn doesn’t like him. The media is in a meth-binge frenzy over this. Luckily most Democrats seem to not be falling for it.

      What is interesting and revealing is who is falling for it. Lots of NeverTrumpers and also lots of concern trolls.Report

      • LeeEsq in reply to Saul Degraw
        Ignored
        says:

        The entirety of the front page staff of the other blog.Report

      • Chip Daniels in reply to Saul Degraw
        Ignored
        says:

        You come at Dark Brandon, you best not miss:

        Biden dares Democrats to ‘run against me,’ challenge him at convention
        President Biden, in a surprise phone interview on MSNBC on Monday morning, said he’s frustrated by the discussion about his fitness and the calls for him to step aside. “Any of these guys that don’t think I should run, run against me. Announce for president, challenge me at the convention,” he said. Biden also sent a letter to his party’s lawmakers in Congress on Monday, insisting that he would stay in the race and saying “Fcuk you Jack I’ll beat your ass like lil Pauly Ryan”. Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
          Ignored
          says:

          He should challenge Trump to a debate!Report

          • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            It is literally impossible for you to do anything in good faithReport

          • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird
            Ignored
            says:

            Again, the reason I think of you as basically operating in bad faith is because everything seems like a game or a joke to you and the basic aspect of your personality is middle-school class clown with a substitute teacher.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
              Ignored
              says:

              Keep in mind: I see myself not as mocking a substitute teacher, but a moral scold who is telling me how fine the emperor’s outfit is.

              If you’d like me to write a short essay explaining how the democrats have found themselves in an unenviable position, I could do that (heck, I have!). I could talk about how the polls aren’t necessarily correct but if we assume that they’re in the ballpark of correct then we are in a bad place, I could talk about how few reasonable options the democrats have, and I could stick to an unemotional appraisal of the situation and discuss nothing but what’s likely to win and what’s likely to lose without wandering off into what I personally like or dislike.

              But then I see a comment talking, triumphantly, about Biden bragging about how he’ll defeat anybody he goes up against and I will immediately find myself remembering the debate from JUST LAST FREAKING WEEK.

              The emperor is unclothed, Saul.

              And it’s in this context that I read your comments complaining about me seeing this as a joke. I don’t see you as taking this seriously. I see you as being in denial and thinking that if you are just enough of a scold that you can get everybody else in line with talking about how great Biden’s clothing is again.

              And… yeah. I’m going to give that a big horse laugh.

              Which is not to say that Biden will lose. Which is not to say that Trump will win. Which is not to say that California’s recent ballot initiative to further regulate kidney dialysis machines ought to have passed.

              I’m just mocking some light public nudity.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                No, your comment about resisting moral scolds and mockery of people unable to see the plain truth, flatly contradicts your inability to find fault with the Christian Nationalist manifesto that is Project 2025.

                I don’t know what tic you have that causes you to try and fool everyone into thinking you are somehow nonpartisan and detached, but I don’t think anyone here is actually fooled.

                You are very conservative, highly partisan, and well, heck, why not just embrace it instead of trying to bullsh!t eveyone especially since no one seems to be buying it?Report

              • Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Even if he is not partisan in the pro-Republican way. He is partisan in an anti-anti-Trump and also anti-Wine Mom way. He is OT’s example of the nihilistic Trump voter. Not necessarily a reactionary but someone who loves the chaos Trump brings because they have inchoate views on the corruption of it all.

                But I agree he will never admit it.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                I’m *NOT* nonpartisan.

                But I’m also not of the opinion that being partisan (or nonpartisan, for that matter) has any relationship to virtue.

                Seeing something with your own eyes?
                Being able to describe it?

                Now *THAT* is worth exploring.

                Policing acceptable descriptions?

                Nah.

                This isn’t a classroom.
                You’re not my substitute teacher.

                But I don’t mind making fun of the person pretending that we’re in one and they are one.

                (And I’m pretty sure that I’ve said that I’m one of the most conservative people on the site. Do you want a link to me saying such a thing? Does that even matter? Of course not.)

                I don’t see embracing partisanship as virtuous.

                I see embracing telling the truth about what one is seeing as virtuous.

                And, get this, active denial as being vicious.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                OK that’s cool, we can just all agree you are a conservative and you see the world through the lens of your own biases and priors just like the rest of us.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                Can we also discuss stuff like “here’s what I see”?

                Or are we just going to jump straight to “what you are and what your biases and priors are are more important than what you see through them”?Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Sure.
                We all see things, and what we report seeing needs to be assessed in light of our biases and priors. Because what we see may not be the same as what others see.

                Like, if I see Project 2025 as a manifesto of Christian Nationalism, I would fully expect people to assess that claim in light of my biases and priors.

                This is why I provide handy links and page numbers, to show what its an objective fact versus just me saying something.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                You got questioned on your links and page numbers and asked how your statements lined up with what you were pointing to, Chip.

                With quotations and everything.Report

              • Saul Degraw in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                Who made you the final decider on who is and who is not a moral scold?Report

              • CJColucci in reply to Saul Degraw
                Ignored
                says:

                Ever since Pinky cut his hall monitoring way back? You’re welcome.Report

              • Chip Daniels in reply to Saul Degraw
                Ignored
                says:

                Moral Scolds: People who say we should accept queer and trans people as full equals;

                Not Moral Scolds: People who say queer people are pervert groomers;Report

              • Saul Degraw in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                I would have also accepted:

                Moral Scolds: People who wonder whether there is sexism in video games

                Not Moral Scolds: The producers of Questionably Consensual Tentacle Orgy 27Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
                Ignored
                says:

                “You shouldn’t have *THOSE* opinions! You should have *THESE* opinions!”

                You’re not the boss of what opinions I have.

                Though I appreciate that you feel you ought to be.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Saul Degraw
                Ignored
                says:

                Generally, I do a quick check and ask “who is acting like a substitute teacher?”

                I remember an interaction from a few years back where someone here was complaining about libertarian types. The criticism was this: “It’s like libertarians are constantly yelling ‘YOU’RE NOT MY DAD!'”

                And there’s a really good rejoinder to this:

                “Am I your son?”

                If I’m not… guess what?Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird
                Ignored
                says:

                In short:

                If you are telling me what you see from your perspective?

                That’s not acting like a moral scold.

                If you’re policing me talking about what I’m seeing from mine, or me talking about other people talking about what they’re seeing from theirs?

                That’s acting like a moral scold.

                If you don’t like that definition, please offer me a better one that I should use instead.Report

        • KenB in reply to Chip Daniels
          Ignored
          says:

          That last gloss on his letter is funny – he does sound quite MAGA-y these days. He’s losing a lot of the media elites, will be interesting to see how he fares appealing to the less-sophisticated masses. That’s not been the typical path to success in the Democratic Party.Report

    • Michael Cain in reply to Burt Likko
      Ignored
      says:

      Polling numbers be damned. If anyone but Harris replaces Biden, they start from scratch. Suppose a ton of people get together and arrange to nominate a Whitmer/Newsom ticket at the end of August. As of today, neither of those two are registered with the FEC as running for President. They can’t collect money for a presidential campaign. They don’t have a 50-state campaign organization. There are severe limits on how much the Biden/Harris campaign can donate to them in the form of leases, phone lines, reserved advertising slots, etc.

      Running for President is big business. Logistics matter. Which means long-term planning and organization matter. A lot.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Michael Cain
        Ignored
        says:

        I still think that shenanigans could overcome the logistics problem. Have a vote at the convention. Tell everyone the vote was unanimous. Tell the people complaining about the contracts that have already been signed that you’ve brought a new version of the contract that is identical to the old contract except this one has a small rider.Report

        • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird
          Ignored
          says:

          “I still think that shenanigans could overcome the logistics problem. Have a vote at the convention. Tell everyone the vote was unanimous. ”

          I mean, that’s what Biden said on the news the other day, that everyone voted and they voted for him and therefore talking about anyone else is stupid.Report

  8. Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    According to Axios, the dam held. The insurrection is over.

    Democrats will stop talking about this.
    Conspiracy Theorists theorize that the media will stop talking about it too.Report

    • Kenb in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      Ok, glad that’s all done and dusted. So at what point does the Biden team feel sure Harris is no longer an immediate threat and start playing her up more to try to provide some reassurance?

      I had an idea for a new slogan for the campaign but of course someone already beat me to it – “Vote for the corpse, it’s important.”Report

      • Philip H in reply to Kenb
        Ignored
        says:

        Harris has never been a threat. All of her public appearances since the debate have focused to some extent on delivering a defense of Biden as a candidate, along with defending the Administration’s record. None of us have any insight on her private opinions of course.Report

Leave a Reply

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