I'd suggest that's a reason to accept a VP offer, not an incentive to drop out of the race.

In this context I'm using incentive as a thing the Party can do to change behavior even in the event Biden loses the general, or worse, doesn't even get the nomination.

As the venue was filling up and near capacity... they should have thrown broken glass in front of the entrance and told the crowd of 10,000 that last 500 open seats were available to those who would crawl to them.

Just to test an hypothesis.

I don't think so... but mostly I wanted to use the new OT tagline in context. :-)

"The Dems don’t have quite the same gap between their party apparatus and their rank and file as the GOP suffers. Democratic leadership and elites generally want the same things as their various voting constituencies"

Oh dear, this one's gonna leave a mark...

Just wanna say that your OT community will be here for you... not to console you... but to say WTF.

Dude... so was I... but then I practically live in Winchester.

My favorite Ace is in Stevens City... they doubled the gun section and tripled (at least) the AR-15 offerings. Was there for some timber equipment on a Saturday... and man was it hopping.

Though the legislature probably did them a favor... they just tabled the bill for a year... so a WHOLE YEAR more to advertise.

Next time you're in Winchester, should come on down to the property... I'll get you a MAGA day-pass to cover your MD plates.

Virginia Governor's Bill To Ban Assault Weapons Fails, With Help From His Own Party.

"Virginia's Democratic governor seemed poised to make broad changes to his state's gun control laws, but was dealt a stinging blow by his own party Monday when a state Senate committee blocked a bill that would have, among other things, banned sales of assault weapons. Four Democrats on Virginia's Senate Judiciary Committee broke ranks with their party handing the Republican minority a victory"

Vanishingly small in CA is slightly opaque in VA.

I think this illustrates the structural issues we're facing.

What incentives (costs or benefits) are there for any of those folks to take the Junior position? It's precisely the weakness of the Parties that makes this consolidation impossible. There's no loss for losing, nor win for stepping aside.

Increasingly I'm seeing the parties as empty vessels that we squabble over because we only allow these, on only these two vessels to participate in the Presidential Election. They aren't parties... and increasingly not even meaningful brands... just vehicles on election rails. If your band of pirates captures the ship, you win the ship.

"Buttigieg and Klobuchar bickered with each other over trivia so arcane that it seemed as if they were really trying to settle which one Mom loved best."

kinda my cringey feeling at the time too.

But by Mom, we finally realized it meant Bloomberg (or a peer).

Well, I'm easily titillated, so maybe not the best measure... :-)

I don't see that as either "authoritarian" or "never apologize" that's baseline objection handling.

I don't recall Obama talking about Japanese Internment or A-Bomb... but if he did, it was stupid because those aren't *his* policies. So if he was "eviscerated" for that, it was an own goal.

Dude, he isn't socially conservative... own your own creeps - we've got plenty to work with.

Good points... that's a very solid approach to dealing with that objection. Might not win universal approval, but its a position he could defend and acknowledge that given what he knows now, he wouldn't(?) advocate for such an approach in 2020... plus, he's not running for mayor.

Here I'll wonder whether the current make-up of the "Democratic base" would allow for such an answer...

1. Agree, I'd be astounded if he does.
2. Yes and no... they don't vote on Policy in the way Warren thinks people do, but they do vote on policy the way Sanders thinks they do.
2a. I too would like to see Trump gone; don't fish it up. Of course, I'll likely want whomever you replace Trump with gone... but baby steps.

I hear you... but then I drop down to my contrarian point: its like Bloomberg is saying all the "Moderate" things you're not supposed to say out loud... and in such a way that even moderates start to think... is that really what we're trying to say? That's the crisis of the establishment writ large. And, once the establishment goes... well, anything can happen.

"one gear and three answers" ... is how one wins a presidential election.

I am not a Democrat, but watching Bloomberg's answers to meat-and-potatoes economic questions gave me two consistent thoughts:

1. A single vote would be one too many for him.
2. If this is really a significant faction in the Democratic party... the Democratic party is untenable.

The pure dismissiveness of economic issues (which are, at this point, grievances) - rather than grappling with them in "alternative" ways - the hand-wavy Neo-Liberalism is awesome you people are just too stupid to see how it benefits me, er, us. That will lose sooo hard in a general election that I can't even.

My contrarian add-on, is that Bloomberg actually makes Klobuchar/Biden/Buttigiege look bad, becuase their "moderate" lane now looks like enablers for Bloomberg.

I'm not saying y'all should nominate Sanders, or that he would win... but man, even the suburbs have meat and potato concerns.