I will never understand the mindset of somebody who says “this guy who has done the job for four years, but has lost a step scares me more than the guy who is a convicted felon, failed miserably at the job before, tried to overthrow the government, is indicted for being a national security threat , oopenly flirts with dictators, lies incessantly, is morally and ethically bankrupt, twice impeached, doesn’t value democracy, and has a 900 page plan to break the government. Oh, then also gut Social Security and Medicare’
While England and France rallied to protect democracy as their number one priority. America, who spent decades, believing their own hype about being the world leader in democracy is on the precipice of giving it away.
I think what most people are saying is, I will definitely vote for him, but I'm afraid low information voters, who sadly decide many elections, won't, so he can't win.
Which is why outlets like the Bulwark are so dangerous. Time and again Biden has proven he's up to the job of being POTUS yet this outlet is still cranking out article after article with the pipe dream that maybe, just maybe, somebody will force Biden out and they will get a different candidate with even less of a chance of defeating Trump. All of this based on a few bad moments in one debate.
If it's true that the only thing that matters is defeating Trump, this time and energy could be spent on educating those low information voters on what should be the very easy job of presenting the stakes of this election and the choice between the two. The choice is a glass of water vs a glass of Draino and half the country still thinks Draino might be the better option. The media needs to start doing its effing job.
Dangerous? The Bulwark isn't dangerous unless you believe it has the power to make YOU vote in a way counter to what you believe. It doesn't have that power over me. Bulwark has consistently explored all sides of Biden and Trump and decided--or most of its individual writers decided--that Biden cannot win and therefore needs to be replaced to save the Republic. Bulwark cites its evidence and shows its homework. What more do you want from an opinion publication?
"Replace Biden because he can't beat Trump" is a valid point of view, and intellectually honest. But it's not the only point of view, and nobody is required to believe it or vote accordingly.
That makes Bulwark not "dangerous," but refreshingly honest. Information is not Drano.
But, like Drano, information can occasionally clear a plug. I would add that the Bulwark staff has burned plenty enough bridge and eaten plenty enough crow to have an opinion regarding the question who can beat Trump. Tim Miller wrote a whole book of crow, for chrissakes... .
I read Tim's book. I have also listened to him tell Democrats to pursue the same GD strategies that drove the Republican party into the arms of nutcases.
I think he meant "dangerous" to Trump, which is what "refreshingly honest" is. I doubt Bulwark will change more than a handful of votes from Trump (or RFK Jr.) to the Democratic candidate (whoever he/she may be) but it might scare more than a few Never-Trump voters against staying home.
Yes, Max. The reality of politics in America is that strong and wrong beats weak and right every time. That's from Bill Clinton. He ought to know, yes?
It’s become unbearable to watch Biden. I was a big fan, and will vote for him. But no longer can he win. NY has become a battleground state? The Democratic Party is crumbling under Biden.
There's a distinction between having the skills to be an effective president and having the ability to be elected president. Unfortunately Joe's electability skills are eroding much faster than his presidenting skills.
Perfect. People don't understand it's two distinct jobs. 1) Running for President; 2) Serving as President. The former is more exhausting than the latter. I ran for state legislature in my early 30s. It was a competitive race (which I lost) and I tell you it was an extremely exhaustive appearance. I remember driving downtown for some event and then afterward sitting down trying to figure out where my car was. I was so tired I couldn't remember where I parked. It's got to be extremely exhausting being President and running for re-election.
Sadly, elected Democrats are doing even worse. I am kinda sick of the perfection level required of a Democrat while the fascist narcissist rapist racist thief fraud felon gets a pass to murder us all if he feels like it.
With respect, Greg, the evidence I have seen leads me to believe that Biden is no longer up to the job of being POTUS, and that is now based on the evidence or more than just one debate. Is a confused Biden preferable to a depraved Trump? Of course! Will the low-information swing voters who may still determine the election come to the same conclusion? I'm afraid they may not. Is there still time for the Dems to come up with a better nominee? . . . I hope so?
It's worth remembering that other countries run general election campaigns in weeks, not months. I think it's also worth remembering that many swing voters are "double haters" who have been clamoring for an alternative to both candidates.
It seems odd to me. The bar of being up to the job of being president is being held up differently for the person actually doing the job, than an unknown imaginary candidate who would replace him.
I think it is fair to say that he may not be the most effective campaign or. Or two question that he has the ability to leave for four more years, but you can’t say he can’t do the job when he is doing it.
There are two considerations here. 1. Is Biden up to the job for four more years and 2. Can he beat Trump? As to #1, if you know anything about people in their 80s (three of my sibs are), being able to do the job today, at 81 years old, does not prove they can do the job at 82 or 83 or 85, so even though he's doing the job now, you can't say he will.
I hear you. Your first paragraph, though, applies to every single Presidential election. We always have to wonder if a fresh face would do better than an incumbent.
Well said David! The other day Jon Stewart complained about how France conducts two elections in a month. Britain conducts one in two months while ours starts after each election.
In my personal experience, and in what I remember from reading history, people who label dissidents and critics as "dangerous" instead of welcoming free and open discussion (1) often turn out to be the bad guys and (2) lose in the long run. You just can't manage public debate in that way.
I wish people could stick to one topic at a time. If every time you don't like where a conversation is going you just pick something else to talk about, well we have an endless grab-bag of issues and nobody can spend all day here.
Also, I'm not going to debate with people who can't express themselves without insults. It is glaringly obvious that this is a very difficult challenge with two valid, decent sides. As far as I'm concerned, recognizing that is the price of entry.
The Bulwark has been shitting on Trump for something like five years. Much of the mainstream media has been doing the same for something like nine years. And Trump is still ahead of Biden in the polls. Everyone knows what it's like to live in American under both of these Presidents and, to my complete dismay, there appears to be a preference for Trump. I don't see an easy way to solve that problem if Biden is the nominee.
And Biden's support is capped. About 70% of the people say he's too old to run for a second term and lacks the mental acuity to serve again. Many of those people would vote for another Democrat in a heartbeat. But many, who will vote for another Democrat, will vote for Trump or stay home if Biden is the nominee.
Reports of people questioning Biden's competency are not dangerous. If Biden's people had been more honest over the last four years, we'd all be aware, and it would be baked into our political discourse. Instead, they kept him away from unscripted moments and tried to keep the fact that he is aging normally a secret.
People got a surprise at the debate. Justifying it with excuses that further eroded confidence was another bad choice.
That Biden's people made dumb mistakes is their own fault and not the fault of any media outlet that discusses them. "Democracy dies in darkness." We all make the best decisions when we have the best information. All this is 100% necessary.
It is REALLY important for the electorate to come to terms with this sooner rather than later. If this was the October Surprise, then it would be over. Voters deserve to make an informed decision on whether they are voting for four more years of Biden or one of Biden and three of Harris.
I agree that reporting on Biden's competency is completely fair, I just disagree that there is a competency crisis. One bad debate does not automatically mean one is cognitively declining. The Bulwark has been pushing Biden is old for years. It drove me crazy well before this debate. Then he has a solid SOTU address and they jump back on and say "all is well." Then the debate and the sky is falling again.
My belief is we need a lot more evidence that Biden is cognitively unable to be POTUS despite the reality that he's had one of the best presidencies of our lifetimes. I'm not willing to throw the man under the bus after 3 1/2 good years because of a few bad moments in a 90 minute debate. Many incumbent presidents have had bad debates and went on to recover and even thrash their opponent.
Obviously the man is old, has slowed down, and is not the most glamorous candidate. He has also proven himself to be a stabilizing force for good, has already defeated Trump by 7+ million votes, and has a very solid record to run on. He's far from a perfect candidate but I have yet to hear a single compelling argument for why Harris, or especially, some other candidate building a campaign from scratch would be more electable.
My frustration with outlets like The Bulwark is they have to know this but it's been nearly wall to wall pressure campaign against Biden for 2 weeks. If there was overwhelming evidence that Biden isn't the most electable candidate then I would hop onboard in a second, but that's not what we're seeing here. In the absence of such data, and with the stakes of this election, my feeling is it's time to stop this divisive pressure campaign and start uniting to stop the one thing that will destroy everything we all hold dear.
There's evidence but nothing is without risk. Having a candidate who can't speak is too risky given the stakes. Let's fight with all we have rather than with one arm tied behind our back.
The Bulwark dangerous? I have voted democratic my entire life and I can see with my eyes that Biden is struggling. I am tired of holding my breath.
My criticism of the dem party is they appear not to have had back up plans lined up, as evidenced by the fractions. No plans? NO PLANS. That is sheer stupidity and I am incredibly frustrated with them. This is their fault right now. I will continue to hope they get their stuff together.
The Bulwark remains my fave outlet for pragmatic, reasonable, informative discussions. Some sanity while we continue to live in 'The Stupid Times'.
I'm 57 years old and have never missed an opportunity to vote. Always blue. Never split a ticket. I can't in good conscience vote for Biden. I will. But I will not feel good about it. Like many folks my age, I also have a parent experiencing cognitive decline. I struggle with a deep sense of impending loss. I might lose my parent and my country. I am grateful for the truth tellers at the Bulwark.
Your post is exactly why I think the Bulwark's coverage has been dangerous. Do they have any actual proof that Biden is suffering from dementia? Letters from doctors? Something that contradicts the medical evaluation Biden had a few months ago? Not just some clips where he lost his train of thought or misspoke and had to correct himself? He's been a gaffe factory his entire public life but only now is that a sign of dementia to these people. Sadly now we have people who are adamant that he's a dementia patient and can't in good conscience vote for the man and that's 100% coming from the wall to wall coverage from outlets like the Bulwark who are spreading hearsay and innuendo.
My dad was recently diagnosed with dementia as well. Having seen his fast decline has made it more obvious to me that Biden is not suffering from dementia. My father doesn't just lose his train of thought from time to time, he loses it all the time and is completely detached from reality most of the time.
There's no way a person with dementia could hold a press conference and perform the way Biden did last night or maintain his grueling schedule or hold any of the other appearances he has made before or after that infamous debate.
As a neurologist, Major Neurocognitive Disorder (formerly dementia) comes in all shapes and sizes. Unfortunately, Biden’s performance and the particular types of gaffes he makes have been highly concerning to me (and essentially all of my colleagues) for some time. He likely has two separate forms of neurodegenerative decline: both dementia and Parkinsonism. It seems like there has been an acceleration of the latter component in the past few months. This is why he has the masked facial expression, the reduced blink freq, variable hoarseness, and slow/stiff movements.
At this point, I doubt he’d score a 27-28 out of 30 on the Montreal Cognitive Assesment (what you might consider passing). He might be able to get to 25…but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it. Biden struggles with semantic paraphasic errors and this is responsible for his odd word substitutions. He also has great difficulty with coding new memories or what we call anterograde memory formation. This is why he’s been constantly forgetting that people have died (a gaffe he’s been making for a few years). Because he hasn’t coded the memory of Helmut Kohls death. It’s a new piece of info he can’t code. But he can easily recall other info about his life as the remote memories in a demented patient stay intact for awhile.
I’ve seen multiple posters use his earlier physical as proof that his neurologic function is fine…read that report. At no point, is there any mention of a cognitive assessment being performed (not unusual for a routine physical, btw). The blanket statement that he shows no signs of Parkinson’s or “ascending lateral sclerosis” (an embarrassing typo) means nothing as it was not performed by a neurologist who would know the subtle signs of Parkinsonism. His aren’t even subtle.
It's not about Biden suffering from Alzheimer's or dementia, or some other neurological "disorder." It's about the general cognitive decline. I don't think writers at The Bulwark have been hammering the drum that Biden has a cognitive disorder, at least not in any of the articles I've read or podcasts I've listened to.
Many people not only decline physically as they age, e.g., sore joints, inability to physically do the same things they did when they were younger, but they also decline cognitively. You kind of know cognitive decline when you see it. Slower to recall events, tougher to keep things straight, more instances of a person being scrambled with their speech. It doesn't mean they're "not there," just that they're not as sharp as they used to be, and cognitive exercises take a lot more effort.
I don't think a person can watch Biden today VS Biden from 2020 and think, "He's cognitively operating at the same level today as he was back then!"
Four years is a long time - especially as you get older. Declines can be rapid.
I don't think the Bulwark's coverage has been dangerous - it's been honest. And this honesty is really hard, when we really want this to work out, because we can't imagine another Trump Presidency, and Biden's really don't great work in his first 4 years. But at this juncture, he does not inspire confidence that he can do this hard job for another 4 years.
I think almost all of us will vote for him if he's the nominee, but it's going to be much harder than it was in 2020, and many of us will have real questions about his general capacity to serve at 100%.
One bad moment in one debate? Biden has been running behind every well-known statewide Democrat for 2 years now. You don't need a PhD in data analytics or to be Spock to point out the logically consclusion: Biden is extremely weak candidate rather than the Democrats being an extremely weak party.
It's his age. He doesn't get credit when things go well (economy, lowered inflation) because he's viewed as old, which means that people don't see him having a hand in those things. He gets blamed for things he did poorly (Afghanastan) and hasn't recovered from, because, again, age (old and not fully with it).
Fair or not, it's the world we live in and this isn't going away. He isn't going to win and he'll take a lot of others down with him. The data doesn't lie; the ostrich strategy doesn't make problems magically disappear.
"time and energy could be spent on educating those low information voters "
I doubt there ARE any "low information voters". If there are they must be deaf, blind and living under a rock - the last nine years have given voters everything they need to know about both candidates.
There ARE however "misinformed voters" - those who choose to get all their news from Fox and Facebook. How do you suggest we educate THEM?
You seriously believe that of all the Democrats, Joe Biden has the best chance of defeating Trump? Outside of Joe and Jill Biden, you may be the only person on the planet who believes that. And, no, it's not just based on the debate. Surely you know that.
I am the only person who believes that? Historical data clearly points to all other options as being far worse at this point in time.
I think the difference between each side is people are looking at what they wish would've happened vs the reality of where we are. In an ideal world, the incumbent POTUS wouldn't be 81, or would've stepped aside and allowed for a healthy Democratic primary. All of these fantasies about a brokered convention or picking a candidate with little name recognition nationally, without a record to run on, who would need to build up their war chest from scratch is very much a losing proposition 4 months out from the most consequential election of our country's history. Harris is the only serious option and even the Bulwark staff has been seriously down on her for as long as I can remember. The other sad reality is this country's history of voting for women or minority candidates for POTUS.
So yes, I still think Biden has the best chance of defeating Trump.
Definitely not saying that. My view is definitely the minority view among nearly every MSM media outlet. I just expected better from the Bulwark. We've been down this road before and it doesn't end well for us.
R’s have won a ton of elections on fear. But instead of taking a page and having this be about fearing Trump, we are telling everybody why they should fear the successful incumbents age 🤦🏽♂️
Whatever happens next, I think it's a plus that Kamala Harris polled well head to head with Trump. It takes a bit of the edge off the worry about Joe making it another 4 years.
Bush II's case was his cover. 'Im the kind of guy you'd enjoy having a beer with!'. I probably would have too, but since I actually read, I didn't vote for him.
He did not “hand off his own party”, he was kicked out of it by the followers of a demagogic lunatic, and he doesn’t want the entire country to fall to that same fate.
He spent 30 years telling conservative voters that Democrats were socialists. He endorsed Thomas, Alito and Roberts. He deified Reagan.
He primed the voters of his party and courted them with implicit racism and sexism. He ignored immigration and the deficit when Republicans were in office and railed against them when Republicans were out.
His problem was he made a lovely mob mentality only to have it hijacked by a grifter.
He's not the only one but he was a big part of why we're here.
Up to that point he approved , endorsed, and facilitated his party into a position to be taken over by a con man. Do you think with the arrival of trump the GOP, with a snap of the fingers, became fascist? Their flirting with authoritarianism goes back to at least Reagan.
Linda, here's a question for you. Because it's been nagging at me for months.
Bill Kristol, the editors and owners of the WaPo, the NYT, they have been part of the political upper class for decades. Fundraisers, golf, cocktail parties.
And yet no one noticed that Clarence Thomas was taking multiple expensive vacations in 20 years? No one gossiped about how he could afford it?
No one asked a reporter to dig around? No one brought up ethics?
What other questions should we ask Bill Kristol and people like him?
Any place I've worked, people gossip. I want to know why I'm supposed to believe political Washington is different.
The "low-information voters" have likely been all-in for 45/34 for a long time and wouldn't be changing their minds regardless of who the Dem candidate would be. The only 45/34 voters that might change their vote to Blue would be those who are intelligent enough that the scales have fallen from their eyes with regard to what another 45/34 administration would actually mean.
That is apparently the thinking, which is a lot of psychological projection and little reasoning. The people who will vote Biden even if he has to be carried there are afraid for the low information folks. So now they bombard them with all the bad news that Biden is indeed 81 years old just in case they have missed that debate. Don’t underestimate the ability of the low information folks! And then finally give them something better than ageism. The candidate will not get younger, so lean in to what he brings with his age: decency, experience, wisdom, character. What else would be the winning argument here?
I can say that I will vote for a potted plant over Trump and still be angry when the dems take me up on it.
My assessment of Biden is that he is doing okay as president, but can’t possibly complete another term. Or run a convincing campaign. I hear everyone saying, it shouldn’t matter if he’s barely competent as long as he’s running against one of the worst people in the world. And yes, when it comes to the binary choice, I will cast my meaningless blue state vote for him. Probably.
BUT, it is so irresponsible to nominate a man who can’t do a four-year term. What kind of 25th amendment-watch grind are we getting into? Contrast that with how refreshing it would be to have candidates under 60. Gah!
I love your first sentence and agree totally. I share your angst but I'm getting over it. I'm Ridin' with Biden until Joe says No Go. Because that's the hand we are currently dealt and I don't think it's useful to continue to spit on it and worse. (There is always risk involved. But there is no CLEAR alternative other than Kamala and I'm not sure she is ready for the onslaught of the campaign -- and this is about who can win, not who can govern. I think we get behind Joe until he drops.)
What do you mean by run a successful campaign? Do you understand it is not just Joe alone? There is a whole staff, including thousands of organizers and volunteers nationwide working with state and local Dem parties. They have been working hard calling thousands of people and knocking thousands of doors, hosting events, etc. Joe has been on the stump more than a dozen times while you know, running the country since the debate. So this idea that he isn’t up to campaigning—where on earth is that coming from?
Three quarters of the country thinks he’s too old. We aren’t just looking at the number. We are looking at his public performances and the news about his private actions.
It’s not enough to say he’s better than the general election alternative, now I have to say he’s a strong campaigner?
And a younger candidate gives voters transparency: we would be voting for a person we are hearing consistently. Harris events are not getting the coverage needed to update public perception yet we all know in status quo either she is leader or shadow government...not different than Trump's Project 2025.
I had a similar one, just longer, several weeks ago: I'd rather vote for an old guy who is courteous and rational, than a slightly less old guy who is a bully and irrational.
Biden being too old has been the Bulwark's favorite story for the past two weeks. If this is what their coverage will look like until November, I'm not sure what the value there is to reading.
I love the community here and discussions, but I am tired of this drumbeat.
For the record: all the pundits would love a brokered Democratic Convention, but it will destroy the unity of the Democratic coalition.
I understand that during the process the differences in the coalition will be evident but afterwards how would it be different than today? For example there are rifts over Israel/Palestine today and likely would be same under new nominee.
That is a straw-man argument. Nobody is saying that.
Trump's awfulness does not *excuse* shortcomings in his opponent, it *makes them more critical*.
The more awful Trump is, the more important it is to put up the strongest possible candidate. And we can argue about who that would be and how that person should be chosen.
But it would be a good idea, when either side in this says "I will never understand," to stop and think "yeah. that is a problem. let's see what I can do about that. because it is kinda my job to understand."
If we can't even do that when we are arguing amongst ourselves, how are we going to do it with the country as a whole?
There are no easy answers.
There are good points on both sides.
Recognizing that should be the absolute minimum starting place for this discussion.
I guess my biggest issue how bill frames this discussion (and many others) is if you are going to say Joe must go than you need to prove to the readers that Kamala is more likely to win (if we go to a brokered convention I’m convinced we will lose). That’s why I find bill’s takes so galling. He wants to force Biden out…fine. But data says that Kamala is a better choice.
Biden campaign is polling on that now. At least they are thinking about the possibility of getting out. CBS is reporting that this weekend will be Brutal for Biden
These are professionals. They have been polling Kamala for YEARS. they know how she looks in the states we need to win. We have public polling that generally shows that Kamala polls a few points behind Biden.
But that is besides the point. Bill, is making the case for dropping out but not telling us why Kamala will win. That’s what he is doing. Calling for someone to dropout and then saying a brokered convention is a cop out. It’s literally a way to cover your own ass because you can’t be wrong because “Dems didn’t choose the right candidate.” This is what I find sooooo frustrating about bill. Tim and jvl don’t do this.
Here is the reason: bill doesn’t think that Kamala can win either and she is the MOST likely candidate to win. Then he usually creates this stupid fantasy where there is a “mini primary.” This is just another word for BROKERED CONVENTION. his hope is kamal loses but if she wins then she is stronger (makes zero sense and he provides no proof).
France rallied to protect democracy--actually, saved the French Republic--by:
(1) Political parties and candidates putting aside individual electoral ambition for the good of the country
(2) Quickly taking unprecedented decisions and actions to unite the anti-fascist, pro-democracy majority
It was unprecedented. No one previously thought anything like this was politically possible. It was possible, and it worked.
We can do it here. Yes we can. But only if someone other than Joe Biden is the Democratic nominee. No skeptical minds were reassured last night. No new votes were won. An interview with Lester Holt will change nothing, except maybe make a bad situation worse. It is past time for Biden to step aside. Leaders of the Democratic party: take this message to thecWhite House *now*.
Nobody's saying that Trump shouldn't scare people more than Biden. It's the founding creed of every part of the criticism.
However, there are a lot of voters who really freak out at the thought of a guy who isn't all there holding the wheel. Everyone, and I do mean, everyone, has had an old relative that they had to gently tell they aren't allowed to drive any more, for their own safety and everyone else on the road. When they see an 81 year old guy "have good days and bad days," that's not a good sign. It doesn't generally get better. It's a sad, but ironclad, part of aging.
And in this case, it's not driving a car, it's giving them the nuclear codes.
So the problem is, there are many voters who are worried that we have a choice between giving the codes to one guy who's actively dangerous due to actual malevolence, and another guy who could be passively dangerous due to age. They're likely to just not vote. Trump won the presidency once on "I don't like either person." This isn't a hypothetical, it's actually happened. So there are critics who believe that Biden should step aside on the chance that, however flawed the prospects of a four month campaign at the last minute, it'll still be better than Biden himself staying in. Many of them feel deceived and see the signs -- that Biden has had the fewest unscripted press conferences of any modern President, for instance -- that his aides likely knew he was starting to fade, even though his 65 mph fastball was still pretty good, and were hiding him from us so we wouldn't see it.
I am, personally, on the fence. I can't deny that the way he's been generally not shown to the public feels a bit sketch. I am very, very skeptical that changing horses this close to an election is going to end well, but I also don't know that keeping the one we've got will end well. I see lots of bad options. And, yes, the other old guy who's actively crazy and malevolent is coming at us like the boulder rolling towards Indiana Jones, and HIS followers are far less reflective about his flaws because he wants to hurt the right people for their tastes. Whether I like it or not, those guys aren't going to change horses.
So... what do we do? I am not convinced that Biden can win. I am not convinced that someone else can win on short notice, either. It IS important that we have a president who can answer the proverbial 3 AM phone call and not mentally look like we just destroyed another Horcrux. I DO have serious questions about whether Biden can make it to 2029.
This is just...a ridiculous distortion of legitimate concerns about Biden's age and capacity to serve. For the millionth time, there's a difference between Biden the POTUS and Biden the candidate. Biden the candidate is losing the race and the campaign has no apparent strategy to turn that around. I would vote for Biden's head in a jar before Trump, but, as the Bulwark has mentioned over and over again, there aren't enough people like that for Biden to win.
It's funny that you mention France since it's an example of a parties making drastic updates to their platforms to upset the far right. They did that in a week and all the people telling us to shut up about Biden's age are screaming how it's too late to replace him.
They do, but it doesn't mean Dems couldn't acknowledge reality, show some leadership, and make a change now. It's very possible, and it would blow up the Trump campaign.
And if President Biden is forced out, what then? Hoping that everything will go well is NOT a plan. As one Biden voter said, “If you’re going to rock the boat, you’d better have a plan to get me to shore.”
What is Biden’s plan now? Hope that enough voters who get their news from Tik Tok ignore an issue they’ve said over and over again they’re concerned about and pull the lever for him anyway? And hope all the polls are wrong? How is that better?
Who in the world is saying that? No one wants Trump to lose is saying Biden hasn't done a good job the last four years. We're saying he can't win running for another term. Biden is almost certain to lose. Why not put someone in the game who has a much better chance to win the election. I really think those "It Must Be Biden" Democrats don't truly think Trump represents an existential threat to American democracy. They just think Trump is a worse version of a typical Republican. They don't see Trump as the unique threat we Never Trumpers know him to be.
Donors are freezing $90 million until Biden is replaced. Democrats are seeing polling that indicates safe blue states could turn purple. This is country-wide. Why the resistance to seeing this? People do not believe Biden can do the job for 4 more years.
Biden has been an excellent President. He is not the best choice in our Country for the next 4 years. The World is rapidly changing. We have several wars on the horizon and we have not paid enough attention to Africa. The Chinese Road Project has changed the whole game there. Biden’s Administration is resisting a sudden upheaval that we understand. Have you thought carefully about the possibility of a major decline of Biden’s health 5-8 months from now with both our Nation and the World exploding? Shouldn’t we even consider a younger, more competent Leader now even though it is late? Maybe a journalist should pop the question to Joe, “How do you see Generative AI helping in your next 4 years? Or pose something about warming oceans destroying coastal land so quickly. How will this affect Federal Assistance to different States?
I agree, but we've already seen that isn't going to happen. We can fantasize about a better press all we want, but we have the corporate media recently bought by oligarchs, and that's the landscape we have to accept.
Who in the world is saying that? No one wants Trump to lose is saying Biden hasn't done a good job the last four years. We're saying he can't win running for another term. Biden is almost certain to lose. Why not put someone in the game who has a much better chance to win the election? I really think those "It Must Be Biden" Democrats don't truly think Trump represents an existential threat to American democracy. They just think Trump is a worse version of a typical Republican. They don't see Trump as the unique threat we Never Trumpers know him to be.
In evaluating Biden, it is travesty to bring up Trump. To beat Trump, Biden or anybody else must be evaluated separately. Evaluating a candidate is rational and dispositive. Throwing Trump in as an alarm factor is putting the cart before the horse.
It might have something to do with the fact that when voters say they want a new generation of leaders, they aren't referring to the Silent Generation.
It's not fair at all, but it's the reality. Obama and Pelosi are talking and realize what needs to happen. It's not the pundits. Can you imagine the negative ads that are going to come out once Biden formally accepts the nomination at the convention, if that were to happen. Brutal would be an understatement.
White America is not going to elect Kamala Harris over Trump. Dems need to quit being wishy-washy and get behind Biden as the candidate. Biden's weakest attribute is far better than Trump's strongest any day of the week. It's getting to be too silly, anymore.
America losing democracy because voting for a black woman was too much for some folks is entirely on brand for America. And in a poetic way the way the great American experiment should end.
American’s greatness was largely more aspirational than what was practiced. Ironically MLK was successful because he challenged white America to prove more of them were better than those who were oppressors.
You would think democracy on the line would garner the same energy to rally around. But I am sadly doubtful.
America elected Obama. To tell the truth, I think the campaign against Harris would be so sexist and racist, it would no longer be possible to deny the White supremacist part of the GOP platform. But as others have said, that's not a comfort if people vote for it.
Well said Kate, trump won't be able to stop himself from the personal attacks regarding race and gender. I'll never pretend to understand young voters, but from what i have read, they will harden when hearing the screeching by trump about a black woman. He hates losing, so imagine losing to a Black Female?
Trump under stress tends to be the Trump that messes up and starts saying even crazier things than calm Trump. He's not feeling the pressure at all now, that's why he's been relatively quiet lately. The last thing in the world he wants is for Biden to drop out.
Tim made the point yesterday that all the inevitable racist crap that will be spewed by the MAGA swamp against Harris might actually help her by reminding swing voters how awful the Trump coalition is.
Tim talked with David French yesterday. He said the Right will go after Kamala in the grossest of ways. In 2008 against Obama, it was dog whistles. With Kamala it's going to be out front and center. The way that right-wing discourse has devolved over the last nine years, there's going to be no shortage of wild, crazy, bigoted things said about her.
Then he asks: Does that actually undermine the Right in a way that their own bigotry would make them more vulnerable? It's just an intuition of mine, but I think the answer is yes.
I sent this to my one conservative friend whose information sources are right-wing talk radio, particularly Dennis Prager and Ben Shapiro. He really knows nothing about politics. He just clings to grifter hacks and takes what the say at face value which somehow makes him feel good. His response was that they won't because all they have to do is attack her job performance as VP. This must be what he's hearing from them.
I said criticisms of her peformance as VP are old. What's current is she is killing it on the stump and, as Sarah said on this week's TNL (https://www.thebulwark.com/p/blue-maga), perceptions of her are lightly held and can be improved. I agree with that because I was persuaded by this podcast that Kamala, who was once known as the law and order Dem and couldn't be that in the political moment of 2020, can now be who she is - this is a different political moment: "Is Kamala Harris Underrated?" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyvaxlKuOuE&list=PLdMrbgYfVl-szepgVpArP0obwYgbKdfvx&index=1).
Yes, 10 times. Of course she is underrated. She has *always* been underrated.
Do posters here expect slow-thinking voters to change their minds in a blink?
Harris will have to change their minds with her intelligence and strength. She can do it. She is the one in 2024 who can show up Trump for what he is: a corrupt fraud, a criminal convicted by a jury of his peers on 34 felony counts, a racist and misogynist, a charlatan who has created one of the most dangerous cults against democracy our country has ever known.
Yep but unfortunately I think she loses. Maybe she does better than Biden. I just don’t trust voters in this environment to vote for an aggressive smart black woman. Sad to say
I appreciate your candor, Migs, but "I just don't trust voters in this environment to vote for an aggressive smart black woman" = vibes.
You see, I agree with the basic premise of your statement, but my conclusion is the opposite: I do trust them. And yes, those are simply my "vibes."
In other words, we both need to see some hard data, some reliable poll numbers that can parse out the numbers for us and show us whose vibes are more in tune with the real American voters.
Yep. I understand that you draw a different conclusion than I do. To be fair, to be both of us we will never really know the answer.
The only thing I would add is that my pessimism of voters is based on this fact: they voted for Trump is 2016. Then more people voted for him in 2020. Now it looks like more will vote for him in 2024 after everything they have seen, heard and watched. Pretty good evidence they are idiots.
They are not idiots; well, rather, they are deluded members of a cult who have succumbed to the lies they wanted to hear by a lizard-brained conman. I'm not sure that makes them idiots.
I know so many people who have succumbed to religious cults because the conmen leading them, from rural Tennessee to Rome, offer their followers the wish-fulfillment to their greatest desires: Eternal life, anyone? Want to see your deceased loved ones again in heaven? Come this way!
Idiots cannot be made intelligent. But members of a cult can be "de-programmed." So far, Biden is not doing that. My bet is that Kamala Harris can de-program just enough of them and convince just enough of those not in the cult but wandering in uncertainty ("undecideds") to defeat Trump.
The people they hate can’t be expected to deprogram them. If people expected that then they were always going to be disappointed. Kamala won’t deprogram them. Oprah won’t deprogram. Obama won’t deprogram them. They need to deprogram themselves.
You think the "he's too old" attacks are ugly, wait until we move into racism and misogyny devised by Mr. Swift Vets for Truth! It's gonna be great!
Also -- if you -- obviously not you, Mike -- think a brokered convention or "flash primary" isn't going to completely break the Dem coalition apart, take a look at this comments section for the past two weeks and think again.
And if you think that politicians who want to be POTUS are going to pull their punches "for the greater good" I've got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in.
1. I think Biden is too old. I think he did shitty at the debate. However I think America would rather vote for an old white guy in a wheel chair than a smart aggressive black woman. I hope I’m wrong
2. The people imagining that a brokered convention will be some type of good look for dems. I’m honestly just shocked by such a myopic take. There is no chance it will be “good” for dems. It will be one big shit sando. It will be so awful with people attacking each other and debating Medicare for all.
We keep saying a smart aggressive black woman can't get elected but we forget it really depends on the candidate. Al Sharpton would never be elected president, but Barack Obama was. Hillary Clinton didn't get elected, but maybe Nikki Haley or Gretchen Whitmer could. It needs to be the right candidate. Michelle Obama could get elected if she wanted the job, if we're to believe the polls!
Michelle couldn’t get elected now. She popular precisely because she isn’t political. The moment she becomes political her fav/unfavs will look like every other politician.
Obama was a generational politician but even he couldn’t get elected today. Timing matters just as much as political talent. A black man couldn’t be elected in the 1950s and I don’t think he could be elected now. We are partially here because of a backlash to Obama (not his fault).
Yep, there was a backlash to Obama that certainly helped Trump, but these things go in cycles. At some point there will be a backlash against Trump and Trumpism, hopefully this year but it's not looking good at the moment.
Of course Michelle's numbers would go down if she actually decided to run, but as you say that's what happens to every politician. It doesn't mean her race would prevent her from being elected.
The only thing a brokered convention does is give the media another opportunity to feast on "Dems in Disarray!" while we are once again not focusing on the convicted felon/child rapist/Rule of Law destroyer who is the nominee of the GOP.
Granted, it is a possibility that it could be a shit show. As Linda Chavez suggested; it could also show which party is the democracy party, suck oxygen from Trump, create excitement and enthusiasm for a new candidate, regain donor money.You never know til it happens.
They've already voted for an old white guy in a wheelchair with a successful record once.
Biden is too old, and I love the guy and the results. Do I wish that he'd said he wasn't running for re-election after the midterms (particularly in hindsight)? Sure. But I think an open Dem primary combined with October 7 + losing incumbency would have been another roll of the dice, particularly against Trump and the GOP slime machine. I also wish that Nikki Haley had won the GOP primary so we wouldn't all be panicking and fearing for the end of America.
But this is the hand we've been dealt and the race we're running. Hate the GOP all you want, but they win 50% of elections even though we win 70% of the electorate with our ideas. They know how to fight and drive a narrative, while the Dems get bullied by the mainstream press. This Biden should drop out story has gone on longer than the coverage of Trump's 34 felony convictions.
If I had faith in voters to vote for Kamala I would be so down with switching Biden out.
I find people who think that a brokered convention as good for Dems living in a fantasy world. They create rules that can’t be endorsed, many times can’t happen, and create rules that just conflict with itself (we will have debates but they won’t be negative…come on. What’s the point of a debate if you don’t hammer out differences in policy)
I disagree, Holli. Why? Because the Dems united behind Biden after his SC win in 2020. Pete B won IA and Bernie NH & NV. They both did very poorly in SC. All the candidates dropped out and supported Biden because he was the best - the only - candidate to beat Trump.
My bet is the same thing happens in 2024 when Trump is even more of a threat. This comments section is a conversation, and it doesn't end until the third night of the convention. It might even end sooner than that.
I don't really worry about the WCNT (White Christian National Terrorist) voter not voting for Harris over CFT. No racist will, and, unfortunately, even some who could stomach Joe, will not go that way if they believe he is just a stalking horse to get her over the finish line.
A secondary problem in line with above: If Joe bows out before the Coronation, I mean Convention, who is going to be her No. 2?
I have no doubt that "They'll figure it out". My concern is more for the identity of the new #2 and what pros, and cons, (s)he brings to the ballot. Minority male from a swing state with a résumé and national name recognition? Pete B. certainly checks those boxes and would definitely complete the ticket as a contrast to CFT and Lackey. Democratic Diversity versus Republican Repression?
Why wouldn't they elect her? They elected Obama didn't they? If Harris proves herself to be a strong candidate who can inspire people she can win. We have to get over the narrative that "America will never elect [insert race/gender combination here]". It wasn't true in 2008 or 2012. It wasn't true in 2016 when the female candidate got the most votes but lost due to the EC.
Sure it might ber harder, but the right candidate can win, especially against someone as horrible as Trump who is disliked or downright hated by most of the country. It's looking more and more like Biden is no longer that candidate. Maybe Harris is, maybe she isn't, but I'm liking her odds better than Biden right now. I'll take a 50% chance over 10%.
Obama is a man. His demeanor, speaking style, and academic background made him almost white to some people and McCain seemed very old compared to him. A woman who "cackles", who has "done nothing as VP" is a woman and, a black woman is not going to garner much interest in low information swing voters. Plus she is smart and viscerally people react to that girl who thinks she is so smart when they are inclined to dislike her for all the other reasons.
Trump will seem very old next to Harris (and crazy too). In 2016 Hillary Clinton got more votes than Donald Trump when he was 8 years younger AND Clinton was older than Harris is now. Clinton was super smart and had an awful, hectoring voice and a phony laugh. In addition she had been demonized by the Right for decades as Bill Clinton's wife. She was a weak candidate following 8 years of a Democratic presidency, which would have made it hard for any Democratic candidate to win, and yet look how close she came to winning. Trump is not a strong candidate and never has been. The right Democratic candidate should be able to beat him easily. Biden is obviously not the right candidate, because if he was he would be leading handily in the polls by now. Getable voters (not MAGA nutcases) are sick to death of Trump.
Who is the "right" candidate? That's the sticking point for many people in a discussion of replacing Biden. Who is that "right" candidate that will move people to vote for instead of voting for Trump or sitting out the presidential slot on their ballots? Is it anybody but Biden? Can it be that simple?
We don’t know who the right candidate is, and that’s a huge risk. But if we think that Biden is not the right candidate than we should do something about it before it’s too late. I’m convinced that an average-or-better Dem candidate would do better against Trump than Biden at this point. Obviously a bad candidate would be a disaster, but it’s a huge risk staying with Biden too, because right now he is also a bad candidate (not a bad president, just a bad candidate). So there are no good options, but if we're convinced that Biden has no winning path than it makes no sense to stick with him and hope for the best.
The right candidate is the one who can beat Trump and that is not Biden. Trump is disliked by a majority of voters. They also think Biden is too old and weak. Yes, if the campaign is run well, it's that simple.
Okay, Linda. Considering everything -- EVERYTHING -- White people collectively have done to maintain their superiority nationally and globally, what would be your suggestion in these times of White supremacy resurgence? You'll have to put some thought into it, though, maybe even a little research. Because the things that WS has done to maintain itself are horrific.
Yes, American WS has spent the last two and a half centuries undermining every opportunity for Black Americans to succeed, from slavery to Jim Crow, from Reconstruction to Tulsa. Without the ERA and with the overturning of Roe v Wade, we are still trying to stop the opportunity for every woman in this country to succeed, too.
Let's put a stop to it. We showed the possibility of stopping it by electing Obama, by electing Wes Moore, by electing Cory Booker, hopefully, by electing Colin Allred later this year.
If we just say, "Electing a Black woman like Kamala Harris cannot be done because of WS," we are allowing the forces of WS to continue without a fight. We are succumbing to the racism, misogyny, and bigoty we are trying to end.
Be careful, Darryll. You might end up with a (white) woman on the ticket with Harris. You know, because, heaven knows a gay man (even if he is a veteran) is a bridge to far.
You would think that at this stage of your life, you would know that inherent in these conversations is the "not all" qualifier. At any rate, the majority of White voters vote Republican, so there's that. So there's no confusion, the White voting population doesn't equal the total adult, voting-eligible population but, really, it's the only stat that counts, isn't it?
I’m not sure I can keep reading and listening to you guys if your entire focus remains on forcing Biden out of the race. As you noted in your conclusion “What we do need is sustained efforts, both private and public, to persuade and, yes, to pressure Joe Biden to open the door wide—and to walk through it.”. Seriously? In other words, what we do need is to keep telling people how incompetent JB is while not focusing our energy on beating Trump. Don’t you see how counter intuitive this is? I don’t doubt your intention that you are doing this in order to beat Trump… but if that’s your main goal maybe you should focus directly on doing so instead of trying to force JB out of the race. At the end of the day, if he does what he says and stays in the race, all you have done by being so stubborn in your view that he should step down is all but guarantee a Trump victory.
Exactly. This is so frustrating. Until Joe says he’s done, he’s the nominee. And the public pressure campaign isn’t only hardening his resolve, it’s telling swing voters that both candidates are incapable so it doesn’t matter who wins. When it couldn’t matter more in 2024. The so called pro democracy “former” Republicans and wishy washy Dems will be responsible for fascism coming to America.
Beg to differ. Biden did more damage to his own electability with his debate performance than any of his nay sayers. He flat out proved their point and Trump's messaging in front of a national TV audience.
And nothing since—not his 20 plus appearances, not the NATO summit nor his speech, not the press conference or sit down with ABC can negate that one event. This is all about personal bias. The media has long disliked Joe and were thrilled when he did poorly in Iowa and NH. They were shocked when Clyburn endorsed him and flabbergasted when he won state after state, uniting the Dem party. A lot of voters who wanted Bernie or anyone else held their noses and voted for him and obviously still don’t like him.
Since the withdrawal from Afghanistan, it’s been open season on Joe for the media, which is why every bit of good news is followed by “why that’s bad for Biden” and why Americans believe we are living in the upside down where inflation is high, crime is up, and wages are down. It’s the same as more than 70 percent of Americans believing Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11 before the Iraq War. Obviously nothing will satisfy the press and pundits, so the best thing is to tune them out and work hard to get the Dems elected.
I have heard JVL say that running Biden wouldn't be as big a deal if the opponent was someone like Romney or Haley so I hear about the threat all the time on here. That is why the pro democracy side should not also run a declining old man. Mean demented crazy vs old experienced crazy is risky.
I don't actually believe is crazy; I was distilling the issue down to a sentence from perspective of casual voter
I believe Joe is old and he's been a rambling gaffe machine his whole career. Mixing up Harris and Trump is not very far outside his norm versus Trump talking about electric boats sinking due to heavy motors or injecting bleach to cure COVID. The post debate challenge is those gaffes are perceived differently and he cannot get back on track from his own tangents.
He can govern for another 6 months no problem but he can't campaign.
Option 1 is that the Bullwark writers just care so much about winning that they’re doing this incessant hit job out of loyalty to country. That’s the charitable option.
Option 2 is that they care more about being seen as right / smart political operatives than anything else. If Biden does bow out and Harris goes on to lose because America can’t stomach voting for a black woman to be in charge, they’ll still get to pat themselves on the back for getting the strategy part “right.” Most of these people aren’t hurting for money, so the fallout won’t hit them the way it will regular people.
Option 3 is that they are actively pulling punches against Trump because they expect him to win, and they plan on crawling back and kissing the ring when that happens. “Oh Dear Leader, we’re sorry about being so mean before, but look how we destroyed Joe Biden for you”.
I really, really hope it isn’t option 3. Then again, these are a bunch of current/former republicans who spent many years taking actions that got us to this point. Maybe when someone shows you who they are over and over again you should believe them.
I will come to the defense of the Bulwark crowd because even through this I don't doubt their intentions and motives. I respect them all and especially those who made large sacrifices by continuing down this path of "Never Trump-ism", especially Sarah who has been consequential in efforts to defeat DT. With that being said, that has made these past couple weeks all the more confusing. I do believe that it is option 1 with perhaps a sprinkle of option 2, but I just don't understand their logic. As I said, if they are so concerned with beating DT then they should focus on THAT instead of focusing on getting JB out of the race so that they can then turn their focus to beating Trump. I was hoping that after a couple days and especially after this press conference we would get back to regularly scheduled programming so I am disheartened to see them doubling down.
It is Option 1. I won't speak for everyone on the staff, but from what I've heard and read, most of them are convinced that there is no pathway for Biden to win, and they do not want Trump to win, therefore, the best way to defeat Trump is to convince Biden to step down. It's perfectly logical to me.
I definitely want to believe in Option 1, or at worst your theory of mostly Option 1 with a little from Option 2. But every day that this continues the little voice inside that talks about Option 3 gets a bit louder.
Hilary, I think their intentions are noble. I think their methods are "iffy" at best.
Most importantly to me, I feel their lack of humility in addressing how much theiy contributed to the current nightmare through their decades of defending and promoting the Republican Party is disqualifying.
Their expectation that 30-40 years of outright propagandist lying can be "turned around" in 5-8 years is belieiving in unicorns.
They created this monster and now they are trying to tame what they so meticulously built.......apparently not as easy as thought. I am tired of Democrats having to clean up the messes that Republicans make.
Trump has changed party affiliation 5 times. What if he decided to take over the Democratic Party instead of the Republican, and actually accomplished that? Would you feel that everyone who had ever been a Democrat was complicit?
Have you met the Democratic Party……their raison d’etre is to NOT fall in line. Historically speaking, the R party falls in line, the D party falls in love. I’m not saying it could never happen Linda, but as Will Rogers famously said, “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”
They weren't in 2020. They were clear about the threat to the country of a Trump win and united around Biden. Nancy Pelosi was a great Speaker and so is Leader Jeffries. Why should they not unite around the candidate who has the best chance to defeat Trump in 2024?
I don't believe the orange one would ever try to take over the Democratic party. It's too diverse (realtor years - no renting to Black people!), too much for the common good (bodily autonomy), social net expansion (he wants to trim Soc Sec.). Democrats want to expand the government to serve people Republicans (pRo-lIfE!) want to drown that baby.
It started with nixon, took off like a rocket with reagan. I'm old, I remember. We are softies, they want raw power - looking at you Mitch McConnell. Knowing what we know about his life, the Democratic party wasn't even a stop on his route.
He did try, along with a third party. He saw that the gopers were a bunch of obedient little sheep who will willingly vote against their own best interests and the rest they say is history.
Hilary: consider an Option 4. They are all people who have lost friends and livelihoods over opposition from the word go to the ascendancy of an authoritarian who is morally, democratically, and psychologically unfit to be President, and have pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to his defeat.
Yes, Linda. Add to this closing of the Declaration: At the signing, Franklin reportedly quipped "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately". If Trump wins, they will all surely be if not be hanged, investigated and harrased.
Really, Hilary? Would you be saying "Maybe when someone shows you who they are over and over again you should believe them" if they were urging Biden to stay in the race?
No, you wouldn't. You'd applaud them. It's only because they're not cheerleading for Biden that you accuse them of that ugly Option 3.
Let me present an option you forgot: Option 4: Bulwark writers came to the conclusion, after dispassionately examining all available evidence, that American voters might rather elect a lively, animated, and boasting tyrant/entertainer as president over a man highly regarded and effective but looks and acts old, enfeebled, and in early stages of dementia. (Whether he has that is irrelevant. Optics reign in politics.) Bulwark writers are so alarmed at Choice No. 1 that they wish to replace Choice No. 2 with someone younger, stronger, and far more vigorous on the campaign trail.
It's a fair conclusion for Bulwark to make. A lot of Americans worry after seeing Biden in the debate and, to a lesser extent, at the NATO press conference and the Stephanopoulos interview: with Biden, there's less THERE there than even a few months ago. So it's fair for Bulwark opinionists to pick "Joe Gotta Go" over "Joe Mo and Mo."
Now me, I'm Ridin' With Biden till his Corvette crashes into the Oval Office, because Trump must have a stake driven through his heart and Biden is still the best hammer. That said, a Biden win no sure thing because of the damage Biden caused himself in just the past two months, and because he's no longer up to demolishing the gish-galloping, lying, smirking, smarmy, racist, incurious, babbling, narcissistic, rapist Trump.
Yes, I prefer Biden stay in the race. Yes, I would vote for Ebola over Trump--Ebola is more likable and less willing to destroy our Republic. Ebola doesn't have Project 2025 nihilists hanging onto it like leeches. But "Joe's Gotta Go" is a valid opinion backed by evidence.
To suggest that Bulwark writers are engaged in Option 3--crawling back to Trump in hopes of the Great Man's Pity and Favour--is nauseating. I've read Bulwark writers for a long time and see no evidence they're setting themselves up to be players in Trump II: Orange Boogaloo.
I wouldn't take a position if they were merely "urging" one way or the other. That's all fair in political commentary. I also wouldn't take a position if I saw more humility from all of the Bulwark writers suggesting that they don't actually *know* the best path forward, but here's how we deal with the situation whatever way it works out.
Instead, what I've seen is two weeks of virtually uninterrupted screeching that they are absolutely certain that Biden needs to drop out now, now, now. When it's every article they write it starts to get a bit absurd.
JVL for one has been very humble. He's also been Biden's biggest cheerleader at the Bulwark for the past 4 years and up until the debate really thought he was the best option going forward. He's made clear time and again that every option is a risk, and nothing is certain.
Certainly JVL has acknowledged that he may be wrong. Not so much Tim and Sarah, but they have substantial experience in political communications. You sound like a conservative anti-vaxxer who feels expertise is plot to control you.
There is no actually knowing in politics, as you put it. There is no knowing the outcome until the voters vote. It's all risk assessment, based on reasoning and facts. Maybe uncertainty makes you uncomfortable.
Well said Shane. As i read the comments, i can see the democrats (yes i am one) rallying around the idea The Bulwark was all just a false flag operation. What a load of horseshit. I get it, you want Biden to stay in the race; irrespective of whether he can do the job...or more importantly (at this point) campaign well enough to win.
In the end, The Bulwark community will not, WILL NOT, be the deciding factor in Joe's decision. Sorry, none of us are that important. President Biden will make that decision in conjunction with the top democrats. It won't be an emotional, knee-jerk action because Bulwark authors forced him to go.
The one thing Joe said last night that was true was this; the campaign hasn't started yet. Everything we are seeing and hearing is just foreplay to the really juicy crap that will be hitting the fans come Sept and Oct.
Brace yourselves; because if you all are getting this excited over a bit of differences of opinion amongst this community, i cannot begin to fathom how you will take the 24/7 commercials showing Joe staring off into space and spewing nonsense.
Well-said yourself, Bill, and thanks. Thing is, most American voters do not pay the slightest bit of attention to politics--even presidential--until the kids are back in school from summer vacation. If even then. Most of the shouting we hear is by one group of laser focused political interests to another group of same. Maw and Paw America won't tune in until September, earliest.
It is not Option 3, you can disregard that one. These people risked their careers by turning against Trumpism and rejecting their political tribe, they aren't going back.
The Bulwark starts throwing around terms like "Blue MAGA" and then they're going to act surprised that garbage like "Blue QAnon" starts showing up here.
Fair enough, I apologize. I was not being snarky; I am sincerely curious as to how you arrive at the conspiracy in option 3. This community brings together different people and I want to understand how people think.
To start, I don't view it as a conspiracy. That's the wrong framing. I'm not suggesting that all of the Bulwark writers got together in a room, wearing hooded robes, and decided that this was going to be their strategy going forward.
What I am suggesting (and, I should emphasize, I offered it as one of three options because I am truly uncertain as to which of them is the truth) is that the writers here might be hedging their bets by pulling their punches.
I read an article somewhere recently that talked about why CEOs, who are aware that Trump is completely incompetent and potentially ruinous for the economy, are so silent on the election. The conclusion of the author was that the CEOs calculated that there was no benefit, only downside, to supporting Biden. If they stayed quiet and Biden won, well, it's status quo ante for their business, because Biden and the Democrats aren't going to take retribution. On the other hand, if they vocally support Biden and Trump wins, their company could end up targeted by the new administration. I think a similar calculus could be playing out in the back of the minds of the writers here.
For what its worth, I don't think that it's only the Bulwark writers that could be making this mental calculation. I think it's entirely applicable to the upper echelons of the NYT, WaPo, and CNN among others.
Hilary, I don't think they are making any kind of calculation. Why? Because after 8 years of Trumpism, I think I have a good grasp of what a persuasive argument is, and I trust my ability to recognize one. I've listened to and read them for years. They make persuasive arguments. I trust them and I trust my perception.
You are mistrustful in a lot of situations, I suspect.
Indeed. And, still, no one has produced a viable candidate to replace Biden on the ticket. Viable meaning someone that the majority will get behind. If they really want VP KH to be president, it's going to have to be his succession; otherwise, it ain't gonna happen.
I would love to see Harris as President. Hell, I wanted to see HRC as POTUS. But I know the country I served for 38 years. It's the worse dysfunctional family you could dream up. "The Hills Have Eyes" kind of family.
I agree. She would have a problem in a normal campaign with her at the top of the ticket, let alone a shortened race. Misogyny anyone? It is one of those idiotic issues people have in this country. I think her succession to POTUS after 2 or so years may help qualm the irrational fears that Americans have for women presidents. It will also solve today's question of who she will pick for VP. She'd have her own record to run on as a very strong incumbent in 2028.
Yep. This has been my biggest issue with bill’s analysis. It’s Biden drops out something something something…we win (btw, all something’s are somehow GREAT for dems).
Right? Once or twice, you've given your opinion and make your point. Move on. Three-plus times a day every day constitutes an agenda, the goal of which is implicit in the message. In this case, rat-fucking the Democratic Party.
Complaining that Bulwark writers are telling the truth is self-defeating. If Joe Biden is the nominee, I will vote for him (and so will the Bulwark writers). But there are voters out there who simply cannot vote for a guy who is noticeably deteriorating day by day. Any new candidate will have a better chance of picking up voters who don’t want Trump. And here’s one white woman who will definitely vote for Kamala Harris for president.
Donors are freezing $90 million until Biden is replaced. Democrats are seeing polling that indicate safe blue states could turn purple. This is country-wide. People do not think Joe Biden can do the job for 4 more years. This is not because of what the Bulwark is writing. Why the resistance to seeing this?
I'm beginning to feel that people have only been reading the Bulwark headlines until now. I mean, there is NOTHING inconsistent about their recent positions. How are any of you shocked that they are anti-Trump, not pro-Biden? They want to beat Trump, so they want us to run a winner. We should want that too. They are afraid - with cause - that 2024 Joe Biden cannot win. We should be too.
We should be honest with ourselves: while most of the Dem voters are blue-no-matter-who, that's just not enough to carry the election. If it was, HRC would be going into her second term. So, rather than become more intransigent and narrowing our circle to those we agree with, we should look for a path to win fence sitters and moderates - whatever that entails. Personally I doubt that "who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" is going to help in that regard.
It doesn't matter what Bulwark's intentions are, how afraid they are, or how much or how little they like Biden. The entire premise upon which their argument is based is moot. Biden is not stepping down. Their daily circle jerk is useless at best, and helping Trump at worst.
Julie, not too much argument with this. I just wish they could show a bit more humility in how decades of Republican crap led us to this. Those voters that can't see the existential threat that Trump represents are due in large part to the propaganda that Fox, Limbaugh, et al. promoted (to a public audience with the critical thinking skills of a stick) and which the never Trump folk widely participated in, are why we currently find ourselves in this mess.
I agree with most of what you said, except for the humility bit. I listen to a lot of their content and all of them have expressed their regret for contributing to this situation. Charlie Sykes wrote "how the right lost its mind" Tim wrote "Why we did it" - many of them have openly and frequently shared deep regrets over missing or misreading what was happening in the republican party. I mean, maybe they could don a hair shirt and self flagellate forever, but I don't think doing so would advance the goal of defeating Trump and Trumpism.
I don't need the hair shirt or excessive self flagellation. I am often reminded of that meme though........"Well, well, well, if it isn't the consequences of my own actions.'
My struggle is with how loudly, harshly, vitriolicly, and with gusto they pushed their agenda 24/7/365. That doesn't go away quietly.......
I struggle with this issue on an ongoing basis. On one hand I think everyone deserves a chance at redemption. We all make mistakes, and we should have the opportunity to atone for them and show that we have learned and changed. On the other hand some of us still live every day with the consequences of what they had a hand in creating, and while they may have moved on and even regret what grew into the toxic weed of MAGA and DJT, we still are stuck with the damage from the storm. And they don't necessarily disagree with all, or even most, of the conservative policy issues and decisions that were utilized as part of the GOP divide-and-conquer tactics.
I'm one of those in Wisconsin who still feels the pinch of what the Walker regime did, aided and abetted by a GOP legislative and Supreme Court majority (at that time), from hyperpartisan redistricting through Act 10 through vigorously defunding and handicapping the UW System through Judge Gableman and 2020 fake electors, and on and on. It is hard for me to turn the page when so there is so much discord and dysfunction in this state. It didn't have to be that way. As Charlie himself used to like to say in this space, they were warned. That sentiment certainly is a two-way street.
"[J]ust not enough to carry the election." Precisely said! Committed Democratic nominee voters attacking committed Democratic nominee voters… thank the gods for the good people of the Bulwark.
I don’t disagree but being pro-Biden is being anti-Trump. It’s a distinction without a difference (at least for now).
However, what I struggle with their analysis (not all of them) is that they aren’t coming out full throated showing us how Kamala can win. I believe they are hiding the bball because everyone has a different choice for who the “best” candidate is. If this goes to a brokered convention and Kamala loses I believe there is no chance we win. Just my opinion though
During the post-presser coverage I finally lost my temper and resorted to the time-honored tradition of yelling at the television set, when one too many talking heads said that Biden seriously risked doing irreparable harm to the nation by not standing down and thinking about the impact of his choices.
Wherever one stands on Go Joe versus Stay Joe, I'm not willing to forget that what actually risks doing irreparable harm to our nation is that tens of millions of voters on the right are willing to vote for a convicted felon, sexual abuser, serial liar, admitted wannabe dictator, and all-around Bad Man when they had other options for a conservative candidate and opted to side with him instead.
It's that simple, if one is willing to look at the situation with both eyes open. But you know that. Shame that so many among us can't do that or, worse, don't care enough to do so. That's the real story.
Indeed, D. The problem isn't so much whether Joe should stay or go, it's the inexplicable attraction to the demagoguery and blatant fascism that millions of our citizens display. Personally I'm sick to the teeth of America's rural and working class's grievances and open hostility towards the urban and college educated of us, as if siccing an authoritarian lunatic onto the country will fix all their problems. To me one of the most disappointing things about the Trump era is that not only has there been all along an invisible and enormously large swath of our citizenry who not only do not fear the rule of a strongman but actually actively desire it, and it was so very very easy to uncover and bring them out into the open. Sadly they will still be around regardless of what happens this November.
Fair point. One undesired side effect of all this discussion on Biden's competence is that it gives a permission structure to right leaning people who aren't excited to vote for Trump to vote for him anyways. They can say, even Democrats were saying Biden wasn't fit to serve, so I HAD to vote for Trump.
However, I'd be lying if I didn't say I have real concerns about Biden's ability to beat Trump. This needs to be resolved in the next week, and if Biden stays on, everyone needs to get behind him.
Disagree to the extent that there are people who have to decide between voting for Biden or not voting at all (and some are making the same decision between Trump or not voting), and they are a crucial group.
You're preaching to the choir on that one. I would vote for just about anyone to stop Trump, but I recognize that others don't see the world the way I do. They frustrate me, but they are the ones who have to be convinced.
Agreed. But those who are turned off by Biden yet also repulsed by Trump (and aren't moved by other candidates from other parties) do have an option at their disposal that next to nobody is talking about: leave that portion of the ballot blank. There is no requirement to vote for either one of them. "Vote for no more than one" can include zero. That might be the strongest statement that people collectively could make, that millions of those who cared enough to vote are not willing to support either option and demand better choices.
I have no idea how many of those conservative voters who will leave the president race blank are out there. Enough to swing an election to another candidate? The R is strong in many people and the desire to provoke the "other side" is great.
There are still some moderate Republicans, repulsed by DJT, who are open to ideas. Our goal is to persuade them that they do not have to vote for him if they do not want to. The blank presidential option is the "addition by subtraction" that we need to pursue if we know they will not vote for Biden anyway -- better neither than DJT by default.
This is from Heather Cox Richardson Letters from an American:
"Raw Story reported that Ivan Raiklin, Trump’s self-declared “Secretary of Retribution” has compiled a “Deep State target list” of 350 people he wants to see arrested and punished for “treason” if Trump is reelected. The list includes Democratic and Republican elected officials, journalists he considers to be Trump’s enemies, U.S. Capitol Police officers, and witnesses against Trump in his impeachment trials and the hearings concerning the events of January 6, 2021."
The irresponsible behavior of our media - on any TV channel - only demeans and humiliates the great accomplishments of President Biden. He saved our nation from the deadly spread of COVID, while Trump was recommending ingesting bleach. He passed the American Rescue Plan and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law early in his presidency. The last quarter of 2020, our economy dropped 32.9% - the largest drop in our history. Due to Biden, we now have the fastest growing economy in the world. Under Trump, violence, murder, and hate crimes radically increased by 30%. (FBI Records) Biden has cut this number in half by securing historic investments in crime prevention. (Third Way, May, 2024) (FBI Reports for 2023) While Trump screamed about immigration, it is Biden who has secured our borders. More people are working than at any time in American history. Unemployment has been at 4% or lower for several years, including 3.4% in February of 2023. With Trump, the unemployment rate was 6.3% (FactCheck.org)
CNN failed to moderate the presidential debate. I would grade them a D- on this undertaking There was no effort to regulate the political discussion and refrain Trump from his disgusting and offensive fictional attack aimed at President Biden. When faced with a bullying assault, Biden did what any smart person would - shut up and shut down. He didn't take the bait to fight.
I don't know if CNN started this cycle of attacks on President Biden's reaction to their failed moderation or to deflect attention from their own failure, but my recommendation would be to contact The Federal Communications Commission (FCC). They regulate all "national and international communications through cable, radio, television, satellite and wire." (USA.gov) Write them a letter and recommend an investigation.
For our freedom, our system of justice and laws, and our democracy to survive, we need President Joe Biden in the White House another four years.
You have made a factual case for Biden, but right now perception not facts is driving the bus. Responsible news organizations should call out t***p every time he lies about crime, the border, the economy, the 2020 election. They need to site the facts and devote as much time to that as they devote to trashing Biden.
U.S. media are bad. For instance, when they report on space and climate and only use miles and degrees Fahrenheit and do not also include kilometers and degrees Celsius (science imperial numbers are junk numbers). But they're not to blame for all this.
I hope all of this Biden replacement stuff ends after Monday. Biden is obviously back to what he was a month ago. He gave very detailed answers to difficult questions. He rambled and misspoke a couple of names. Your kids are afraid of old people, but they can be awakened to to reality that if the don’t vote they will have their rights limited and their lives oppressed.
Biden knows how to run a government. He has a vision for a free, safe, diverse and prosperous America and he is making ti happen. Should he let Harris run? She’s there anyway if he topples over. I don’t think she would have an easier time overcoming the anti-woman, anti- POC underbelly of America. But none of this is really about the Democratic candidate. The Republicans are giving the Dems the biggest gift of the election. They are open about their goals of burning the Constitution and installing an oppressive, vengeful, white supremacist, fundamentalist Christian government. NO rights for anyone outside of the oligarchy. Destroy democracy, destroy the government, destroy the environment, destroy the economy for the great benefit of a very few.
Finally, the press is realizing how crazy, cruel and dangerous the Republicans are. They are calling for Trump, who is a deranged embarrassment to our country to step down. It won’t happen but he can be defeated, and he has to be defeated badly. The Democratic candidate doesn’t really matter. Biden knows what he’s doing and how to dot it. Let’s get on with the battle.
"Biden is obviously back to what he was a month ago."
As someone who has dealt with an aging senior losing her mental acuity, I can tell you it doesn't work like that. Declining mental state due to age is not something you get over. You will have good days and bad days, but the direction is always getting worse. Eventually the bad days will be more than the good days and then one day the good days will disappear completely.
Yes. I am young yet, eight months from being 80. I have a lot of trouble bring up names immediately. But, with naps, I would be a better president than Trump and I don't have the experience, staff, and respect that Biden has. Having Harris take over in two years could be the best thing that could happen to America. People will see how having a smart, aggressive, sharp woman in charge is what America needs. She would have great difficulty getting elected on her own. I don't see any danger. We have to get united and drive MAGA out of politics and into jail where they belong.
The newest polls are showing that things are tied, and Trump has not been critically examined yet. Everyone who is not a rich, white, straight, male psychopath should be afraid of another Trump administration.
The campaigning is really just beginning. Until now, the people who are paying the most attention are political junkies like us. If the media tells the truth about the Republican convention things should swing to the Dems by 10 points. The Republicans will put on a show about cruelty, greed, racism, and oppression wrapped in the flag and the Bible. It should scare the sh*t our of everyone. If it is simply covered as entertainment we could be in trouble.
So I don't really watch commercial TV, except for a few sporting events. But last week I started streaming the Bear on Hulu, with ads. I estimate I watched 25 political ads. 5 were pro-Tammy Baldwin, highlighting her bringing drug prices down, etc. 20 were warning that Trump wants to become a dictator and suspend the Constitution. The number of ads that mentioned inflation, unemployment, or immigration was zero. I think Tammy Baldwin is in a fine position. I would like to know WTF the Biden campaign thinks it is doing.
Yes. Folks who say the polls are usually wrong are incorrect. The opposite is true. For instance, the polls were largely right in 2022. We disregarded them and believed the hype about the red wave. Bill Kristol in particular is often right, including in 2022. We need to be humble and acknowledge that some people are experts in politics and polling. They know more than we do and it is wise to take heed.
The Republican Party has decided that they’re going to go after the Fed now that inflation appears to have cooled and prices are finally beginning to drop. Since this news isn’t being covered anywhere outside of the business pages, I figured this would be a fun place to drop this, especially because I’m totally sick of arguing about Joe, Donald and the media. They’re gonna do what they’re gonna do and there isn’t anything you or I can say that will change that.
From this morning’s edition of “The Fucking News”
Here’s where things get fun/treasonous.
Inflation has been cooling. Yesterday we learned that in June, prices fell by one-tenth of one percent. Prices are still up year over year, but as of now, inflation is technically gone (although prices are still rising on some shit that we buy).
The entire endgame for those high interest rates has been that the Fed would lower them once inflation was heading toward its benchmark level of a 2% annual rate. Which is where it’s now headed.
So the Fed has signaled that a rate cut might be coming to lower that 5.25% interest rate, which would make it cheaper to borrow money, thereby spurring people to buy shit, thereby injecting even more money into the economy, thereby boosting Wall Street and the economy overall.
Right before the election. Which Republicans don’t want because patriotism.
So now Republicans are warning Powell not to make it cheaper for you to get a home loan or car loan until after you leave your vote in a paper bag under a bench in the zoo. In return for voting Trump back into the White House, then you can have your precious low interest rates back.
Think I’m exaggerating?
Maybe a little. But less than 5.25%!
Here’s Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), of the Banking Committee, after grilling Powell at a hearing earlier this week, telling Politico the Fed shouldn’t lower your interest rates: “[A]nything they do before November would be rightfully — would raise the question of their own independence.”
Too vague? How’s Cramer warning Powell not to help you out, as he quoted himself in his own press release:
“[A]ny move to lower interest rates or move interest rates either direction before November 5 could certainly be a bad perception. Even if there's a strong push to do that. I know you understand that. But I just want you to know that. As long as you remain independent, I'll be on your side.”
But, but, surely Cramer’s an aberration? Right?!? Well, in some ways, hell yeah. But not on this.
Here’s Rep. Mike Lawlor (R-NY), when he had Powell testifying before his committee this week, making Powell an offer he couldn’t refuse:
“[D]o you acknowledge, or do members of the [Fed] acknowledge that a rate cut in September could be viewed as political just 30 to 60 days before an election?"
Here’s Financial Services Chair Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) on Wednesday: “I think a September rate cut will not be perceived as apolitical.”
But, but surely no one’s actually seeing these as threats? Right?!?
Here’s a note to clients yesterday from Renaissance Macro Research: If Fed members “proceed with an interest rate cut in September, expect Trump and Republican lawmakers to seek vengeance.”
But, but, surely that’s just Renaissance Macro Research’s guess? Right?!?
The guy who wrote that client note was Renaissance Macro Research Policy Research Director Steve Pavlick, a former Trump Treasury official.
But, but, surely there’s no evidence Trump feels this way. Right?!?
Trump said as early as February that any rate cut from the Fed would be political. He told Fox he expected Powell “to do something to probably help the Democrats, you know, I think if he lowers interest rates."
The Fed got the first warning note wrapped around a brick through their window back in February.
And the warnings are ramping up now even though the Fed isn’t expected to make this call until September. And everything could change depending on what happens with inflation and jobs between now and then.
Sounds like the infamous MCConnell move that no SCOTUS appointments 'close to an election.' If it's D's doing the appointing. In other words just MAGA-infected R's doing their usual dirty, lying, foul, underhanded shit.
I read that article as well and I believe Powell (a Trump nominee) responded that not lowering interest could also be considered political. I believe he leaned into previously stated goals and following the data.
They never cease to amaze, do they? I guess WE have to move the conversation from the 24/7 *Biden Campaign Death Watch*™️ that the media seems all too self satisfied than to move away from right now.
We can’t change any of this and to continue to drive ourselves mad trying to figure out the best path forward when we are not nor ever will be involved in determining said path is making us all angrier. In other words, none of this is helping to move the conversation forward.
Wow. “Don’t you dare make the changes to improve the border that we asked for, or make home-buying or inflation less burdensome for the little guy like we say we want to. That can only be done legitimately by us Republicans! If WE do it, it isn’t political.”.
Remember when Donald badgered the Fed to lower interest rates relentlessly and they said nothing? Or that Donald wants to basically take control of the Fed in a 2nd term? Obviously none of that is political because … idk I’m struggling here.
lol. Well, yeah. It’s more the lack of reaction from any of them when Donald says that shit and projecting the whole *omfg! it is AlL jUSt POLiTIcS* if the Fed lowers rates before the election.
The pundits love this so they can create the news. Yeah, Biden is old, so is Trump. One is a decent human who accomplished more that I imagined when I voted for him. The other is a despicable Authoritarian hell bent on plunging the US into years of chaos. Stop CREATING news so you stay relevant.
I was happy to see the press conference go fairly well yesterday and still proud to have a president who values our allies and articulates a rational, rules-based foreign policy. But I still believe the narrative has been set about Joe Biden and his odds of victory are minimal. And unfortunately, the «Biden is too old» narrative was already dominant well BEFORE the debate; the debate just made it incontrovertible to too many -especially to low-information swing voters.
I promise I will shut up about this if/when he's officially the nominee, but I feel we ignore this to our peril.
The Bulwark and others in the media are trying to get Biden to self coup (to borrow from Mitt Romney's self deport). If they are so convinced that Biden is in mental decline why don't they get his cabinet to declare him mentally incapacitated? And if they are so convinced that majority of Democrats / delegates don't want Biden at the top of the ticket why don't they challenge him at the convention? They aren't doing any of that because they know they would lose those battles so, instead, as the Bulwark has admitted they are just going to keep pressuring Biden to self coup. Don't go Joe!
This relentless pressure campaign in the media and behind the scene is how Bill Kristol helped to lead the charge that got us into those disastrous and expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so he's just running the same playbook, except this time he's doing it at home and on Joe Biden - a leopard never changes its spots!
Yes, exactly the same playbook with many of the same players and the same key word of democracy - remember one of the main justifications they offered for invading Iraq was to bring democracy to the Middle East. And now many of the same people and the same media leader (NYT) are using our fear of losing our democracy to try to pressure Joe Biden to leave the ticket
Biden still has it and you do the country no service by pushing for him to quit. I’ve watched his speeches and follow his punishing schedule. The Republicans are ready to unleash horrors on us and he is putting himself in between us and them. Trump and Putin would like nothing better than for Biden to give up at the last minute. Don’t fall for their ploy! I am riding with Biden and have total confidence in Harris should he step back during his second term.
So, you don't think that Trump is an existential threat to the survival of American democracy? I'm guessing not, because if you did you would want more than anything a candidate who has the best chance of defeating Trump.
There is no one in the wings who is ready and vetted. Kamala is already on the ticket and will likely succeed him during the term. Don’t give up because of polls, help him (them) get reelected plus downballot democrats.
"Biden still has it." Quick memo to Joe on Friday morning: Zelensky and Putin are not interchangeable and no, you did not name Trump as your vice-president. Little gaffe's are one thing, mistakes like this scream from the mountain top.
As someone who spent 43 years in health care(retired RN), I believe President Biden is cognitively good. I think he has some issues with aging, as we all do when we forget a person’s name,etc. I believe he has definitely slowed down physically which makes him appear not as vibrant as before. I have confidence in his ability to lead our country!!! He is an honest, caring person who is interested in taking care of the average person! I am riding with Biden! The media needs to bring up djt’s felony convictions and his cognitive decline every day!!!
I've been forgetting people's names since I was born. I once tried to introduce my sister, standing next to me, to a friend and couldn't remember her name. I was maybe 25? Tell me your name, and I will guarantee I will forget it by the end of our conversation- and I tell you that. I also can't remember faces very well.
A good thing to remind ourselves that the media loves this controversy over Biden's fitness. They have seriously tried to become part of the story, reporting unnamed sources and keeping score of defectors. CNN was especially disappointing as they nitpicked Biden to death. The small missteps were amplified ; Biden has always had this tendency. His answer on China was close to brilliant and polished. Meanwhile in Florida, the malevolent demagogue demonstrating the worldwide havoc he will bring if elected. If Biden can remain upright and stable for next six months , whatever comes later is just the beginning of a new chapter and there is good leadership that exists in this administration. Anyone think Trump can win 24% of non-white vote in November? I don't. If Fed lowers interest rates in September I think Biden can cruise.
I will never understand the mindset of somebody who says “this guy who has done the job for four years, but has lost a step scares me more than the guy who is a convicted felon, failed miserably at the job before, tried to overthrow the government, is indicted for being a national security threat , oopenly flirts with dictators, lies incessantly, is morally and ethically bankrupt, twice impeached, doesn’t value democracy, and has a 900 page plan to break the government. Oh, then also gut Social Security and Medicare’
While England and France rallied to protect democracy as their number one priority. America, who spent decades, believing their own hype about being the world leader in democracy is on the precipice of giving it away.
I don't think very many people are saying that.
I think what most people are saying is, I will definitely vote for him, but I'm afraid low information voters, who sadly decide many elections, won't, so he can't win.
Which is why outlets like the Bulwark are so dangerous. Time and again Biden has proven he's up to the job of being POTUS yet this outlet is still cranking out article after article with the pipe dream that maybe, just maybe, somebody will force Biden out and they will get a different candidate with even less of a chance of defeating Trump. All of this based on a few bad moments in one debate.
If it's true that the only thing that matters is defeating Trump, this time and energy could be spent on educating those low information voters on what should be the very easy job of presenting the stakes of this election and the choice between the two. The choice is a glass of water vs a glass of Draino and half the country still thinks Draino might be the better option. The media needs to start doing its effing job.
Dangerous? The Bulwark isn't dangerous unless you believe it has the power to make YOU vote in a way counter to what you believe. It doesn't have that power over me. Bulwark has consistently explored all sides of Biden and Trump and decided--or most of its individual writers decided--that Biden cannot win and therefore needs to be replaced to save the Republic. Bulwark cites its evidence and shows its homework. What more do you want from an opinion publication?
"Replace Biden because he can't beat Trump" is a valid point of view, and intellectually honest. But it's not the only point of view, and nobody is required to believe it or vote accordingly.
That makes Bulwark not "dangerous," but refreshingly honest. Information is not Drano.
But, like Drano, information can occasionally clear a plug. I would add that the Bulwark staff has burned plenty enough bridge and eaten plenty enough crow to have an opinion regarding the question who can beat Trump. Tim Miller wrote a whole book of crow, for chrissakes... .
I read Tim's book. I have also listened to him tell Democrats to pursue the same GD strategies that drove the Republican party into the arms of nutcases.
Which strategies are you thinking about?
You're spot-on, TomD.
Great comment. Thank yoy.
Much appreciate that, KMD!
Agreed!
Thanks, Dave!
You 're welcome!
thank you
I think he meant "dangerous" to Trump, which is what "refreshingly honest" is. I doubt Bulwark will change more than a handful of votes from Trump (or RFK Jr.) to the Democratic candidate (whoever he/she may be) but it might scare more than a few Never-Trump voters against staying home.
if there;s trashing, it's of his chance to win, period. No one blames him for aging.
Well put!
Yes, Max. The reality of politics in America is that strong and wrong beats weak and right every time. That's from Bill Clinton. He ought to know, yes?
I hope you can see that this is so.
So Joe Biden who went to the beaches of Normandy, went back to the Belleau Woods cemetery, took several campaign events is weak?
Compared to the guy who slept during his trial and needs a golf cart to get around?
It’s become unbearable to watch Biden. I was a big fan, and will vote for him. But no longer can he win. NY has become a battleground state? The Democratic Party is crumbling under Biden.
There's a distinction between having the skills to be an effective president and having the ability to be elected president. Unfortunately Joe's electability skills are eroding much faster than his presidenting skills.
Perfect. People don't understand it's two distinct jobs. 1) Running for President; 2) Serving as President. The former is more exhausting than the latter. I ran for state legislature in my early 30s. It was a competitive race (which I lost) and I tell you it was an extremely exhaustive appearance. I remember driving downtown for some event and then afterward sitting down trying to figure out where my car was. I was so tired I couldn't remember where I parked. It's got to be extremely exhausting being President and running for re-election.
This is another reason why incumbent Presidents should not be allowed to run for re-election. They might need to sit out for awhile to recharge.
The difference between 2020 and 2024 are startling
And to say it's a question reasonable minds can disagree about is an understatement.
Good analysis, doc.
Agree with this.
And of course his formidable opponent.
This is a great way to crystalize the problem.
Sadly, elected Democrats are doing even worse. I am kinda sick of the perfection level required of a Democrat while the fascist narcissist rapist racist thief fraud felon gets a pass to murder us all if he feels like it.
"...dishonest, corrupt, incompetent, and cruel."
--Today's NYT.
That is the asymmetry JVL often speaks of.
Amen!
With respect, Greg, the evidence I have seen leads me to believe that Biden is no longer up to the job of being POTUS, and that is now based on the evidence or more than just one debate. Is a confused Biden preferable to a depraved Trump? Of course! Will the low-information swing voters who may still determine the election come to the same conclusion? I'm afraid they may not. Is there still time for the Dems to come up with a better nominee? . . . I hope so?
It's worth remembering that other countries run general election campaigns in weeks, not months. I think it's also worth remembering that many swing voters are "double haters" who have been clamoring for an alternative to both candidates.
It seems odd to me. The bar of being up to the job of being president is being held up differently for the person actually doing the job, than an unknown imaginary candidate who would replace him.
I think it is fair to say that he may not be the most effective campaign or. Or two question that he has the ability to leave for four more years, but you can’t say he can’t do the job when he is doing it.
There are two considerations here. 1. Is Biden up to the job for four more years and 2. Can he beat Trump? As to #1, if you know anything about people in their 80s (three of my sibs are), being able to do the job today, at 81 years old, does not prove they can do the job at 82 or 83 or 85, so even though he's doing the job now, you can't say he will.
#2 is the only one that matters.
I hear you. Your first paragraph, though, applies to every single Presidential election. We always have to wonder if a fresh face would do better than an incumbent.
Doesn't history show us that a fresh face never does better than an incumbent?
Well said David! The other day Jon Stewart complained about how France conducts two elections in a month. Britain conducts one in two months while ours starts after each election.
European elections are about courting voters, US elections are about courting donors.
Someone out there is making a LOT of money from US elections. . .
In my personal experience, and in what I remember from reading history, people who label dissidents and critics as "dangerous" instead of welcoming free and open discussion (1) often turn out to be the bad guys and (2) lose in the long run. You just can't manage public debate in that way.
You say dissident.
Great!
What's your solution?
Because people who cause trouble for the sake of trouble aren't dissidents -- they provocateurs.
Or people stuck in junior high school mode.
Bill Kristol throws out too old, needs to be replaced FOUR MONTHS from the election, after the bulk of the primaries have been recorded.
He's definitely in junior high school.
I wish people could stick to one topic at a time. If every time you don't like where a conversation is going you just pick something else to talk about, well we have an endless grab-bag of issues and nobody can spend all day here.
Also, I'm not going to debate with people who can't express themselves without insults. It is glaringly obvious that this is a very difficult challenge with two valid, decent sides. As far as I'm concerned, recognizing that is the price of entry.
The topic is you think we should be having "free and open discussions" about what exactly?
Joe Biden is too old.
But not about what you want to offer instead of Joe Biden? But not about how we throw out all of the primaries?
Please explain how much you want to limit this topic.
Bill’s been saying it for two years—and he was right.
Interesting that you believe low information voters are coming here AND not understanding the Never Trump mission. Not impossible but improbable.
The Bulwark has been shitting on Trump for something like five years. Much of the mainstream media has been doing the same for something like nine years. And Trump is still ahead of Biden in the polls. Everyone knows what it's like to live in American under both of these Presidents and, to my complete dismay, there appears to be a preference for Trump. I don't see an easy way to solve that problem if Biden is the nominee.
And Biden's support is capped. About 70% of the people say he's too old to run for a second term and lacks the mental acuity to serve again. Many of those people would vote for another Democrat in a heartbeat. But many, who will vote for another Democrat, will vote for Trump or stay home if Biden is the nominee.
You may be right - but WHY? In the name of heaven, isn't a bar of laundry soap preferable to trump?
Voila!
Reports of people questioning Biden's competency are not dangerous. If Biden's people had been more honest over the last four years, we'd all be aware, and it would be baked into our political discourse. Instead, they kept him away from unscripted moments and tried to keep the fact that he is aging normally a secret.
People got a surprise at the debate. Justifying it with excuses that further eroded confidence was another bad choice.
That Biden's people made dumb mistakes is their own fault and not the fault of any media outlet that discusses them. "Democracy dies in darkness." We all make the best decisions when we have the best information. All this is 100% necessary.
It is REALLY important for the electorate to come to terms with this sooner rather than later. If this was the October Surprise, then it would be over. Voters deserve to make an informed decision on whether they are voting for four more years of Biden or one of Biden and three of Harris.
I agree that reporting on Biden's competency is completely fair, I just disagree that there is a competency crisis. One bad debate does not automatically mean one is cognitively declining. The Bulwark has been pushing Biden is old for years. It drove me crazy well before this debate. Then he has a solid SOTU address and they jump back on and say "all is well." Then the debate and the sky is falling again.
My belief is we need a lot more evidence that Biden is cognitively unable to be POTUS despite the reality that he's had one of the best presidencies of our lifetimes. I'm not willing to throw the man under the bus after 3 1/2 good years because of a few bad moments in a 90 minute debate. Many incumbent presidents have had bad debates and went on to recover and even thrash their opponent.
Obviously the man is old, has slowed down, and is not the most glamorous candidate. He has also proven himself to be a stabilizing force for good, has already defeated Trump by 7+ million votes, and has a very solid record to run on. He's far from a perfect candidate but I have yet to hear a single compelling argument for why Harris, or especially, some other candidate building a campaign from scratch would be more electable.
My frustration with outlets like The Bulwark is they have to know this but it's been nearly wall to wall pressure campaign against Biden for 2 weeks. If there was overwhelming evidence that Biden isn't the most electable candidate then I would hop onboard in a second, but that's not what we're seeing here. In the absence of such data, and with the stakes of this election, my feeling is it's time to stop this divisive pressure campaign and start uniting to stop the one thing that will destroy everything we all hold dear.
There's evidence but nothing is without risk. Having a candidate who can't speak is too risky given the stakes. Let's fight with all we have rather than with one arm tied behind our back.
The Bulwark dangerous? I have voted democratic my entire life and I can see with my eyes that Biden is struggling. I am tired of holding my breath.
My criticism of the dem party is they appear not to have had back up plans lined up, as evidenced by the fractions. No plans? NO PLANS. That is sheer stupidity and I am incredibly frustrated with them. This is their fault right now. I will continue to hope they get their stuff together.
The Bulwark remains my fave outlet for pragmatic, reasonable, informative discussions. Some sanity while we continue to live in 'The Stupid Times'.
I'm 57 years old and have never missed an opportunity to vote. Always blue. Never split a ticket. I can't in good conscience vote for Biden. I will. But I will not feel good about it. Like many folks my age, I also have a parent experiencing cognitive decline. I struggle with a deep sense of impending loss. I might lose my parent and my country. I am grateful for the truth tellers at the Bulwark.
Your post is exactly why I think the Bulwark's coverage has been dangerous. Do they have any actual proof that Biden is suffering from dementia? Letters from doctors? Something that contradicts the medical evaluation Biden had a few months ago? Not just some clips where he lost his train of thought or misspoke and had to correct himself? He's been a gaffe factory his entire public life but only now is that a sign of dementia to these people. Sadly now we have people who are adamant that he's a dementia patient and can't in good conscience vote for the man and that's 100% coming from the wall to wall coverage from outlets like the Bulwark who are spreading hearsay and innuendo.
My dad was recently diagnosed with dementia as well. Having seen his fast decline has made it more obvious to me that Biden is not suffering from dementia. My father doesn't just lose his train of thought from time to time, he loses it all the time and is completely detached from reality most of the time.
There's no way a person with dementia could hold a press conference and perform the way Biden did last night or maintain his grueling schedule or hold any of the other appearances he has made before or after that infamous debate.
As a neurologist, Major Neurocognitive Disorder (formerly dementia) comes in all shapes and sizes. Unfortunately, Biden’s performance and the particular types of gaffes he makes have been highly concerning to me (and essentially all of my colleagues) for some time. He likely has two separate forms of neurodegenerative decline: both dementia and Parkinsonism. It seems like there has been an acceleration of the latter component in the past few months. This is why he has the masked facial expression, the reduced blink freq, variable hoarseness, and slow/stiff movements.
At this point, I doubt he’d score a 27-28 out of 30 on the Montreal Cognitive Assesment (what you might consider passing). He might be able to get to 25…but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it. Biden struggles with semantic paraphasic errors and this is responsible for his odd word substitutions. He also has great difficulty with coding new memories or what we call anterograde memory formation. This is why he’s been constantly forgetting that people have died (a gaffe he’s been making for a few years). Because he hasn’t coded the memory of Helmut Kohls death. It’s a new piece of info he can’t code. But he can easily recall other info about his life as the remote memories in a demented patient stay intact for awhile.
I’ve seen multiple posters use his earlier physical as proof that his neurologic function is fine…read that report. At no point, is there any mention of a cognitive assessment being performed (not unusual for a routine physical, btw). The blanket statement that he shows no signs of Parkinson’s or “ascending lateral sclerosis” (an embarrassing typo) means nothing as it was not performed by a neurologist who would know the subtle signs of Parkinsonism. His aren’t even subtle.
It's not about Biden suffering from Alzheimer's or dementia, or some other neurological "disorder." It's about the general cognitive decline. I don't think writers at The Bulwark have been hammering the drum that Biden has a cognitive disorder, at least not in any of the articles I've read or podcasts I've listened to.
Many people not only decline physically as they age, e.g., sore joints, inability to physically do the same things they did when they were younger, but they also decline cognitively. You kind of know cognitive decline when you see it. Slower to recall events, tougher to keep things straight, more instances of a person being scrambled with their speech. It doesn't mean they're "not there," just that they're not as sharp as they used to be, and cognitive exercises take a lot more effort.
I don't think a person can watch Biden today VS Biden from 2020 and think, "He's cognitively operating at the same level today as he was back then!"
Four years is a long time - especially as you get older. Declines can be rapid.
I don't think the Bulwark's coverage has been dangerous - it's been honest. And this honesty is really hard, when we really want this to work out, because we can't imagine another Trump Presidency, and Biden's really don't great work in his first 4 years. But at this juncture, he does not inspire confidence that he can do this hard job for another 4 years.
I think almost all of us will vote for him if he's the nominee, but it's going to be much harder than it was in 2020, and many of us will have real questions about his general capacity to serve at 100%.
One bad moment in one debate? Biden has been running behind every well-known statewide Democrat for 2 years now. You don't need a PhD in data analytics or to be Spock to point out the logically consclusion: Biden is extremely weak candidate rather than the Democrats being an extremely weak party.
It's his age. He doesn't get credit when things go well (economy, lowered inflation) because he's viewed as old, which means that people don't see him having a hand in those things. He gets blamed for things he did poorly (Afghanastan) and hasn't recovered from, because, again, age (old and not fully with it).
Fair or not, it's the world we live in and this isn't going away. He isn't going to win and he'll take a lot of others down with him. The data doesn't lie; the ostrich strategy doesn't make problems magically disappear.
"time and energy could be spent on educating those low information voters "
I doubt there ARE any "low information voters". If there are they must be deaf, blind and living under a rock - the last nine years have given voters everything they need to know about both candidates.
There ARE however "misinformed voters" - those who choose to get all their news from Fox and Facebook. How do you suggest we educate THEM?
You seriously believe that of all the Democrats, Joe Biden has the best chance of defeating Trump? Outside of Joe and Jill Biden, you may be the only person on the planet who believes that. And, no, it's not just based on the debate. Surely you know that.
I am the only person who believes that? Historical data clearly points to all other options as being far worse at this point in time.
I think the difference between each side is people are looking at what they wish would've happened vs the reality of where we are. In an ideal world, the incumbent POTUS wouldn't be 81, or would've stepped aside and allowed for a healthy Democratic primary. All of these fantasies about a brokered convention or picking a candidate with little name recognition nationally, without a record to run on, who would need to build up their war chest from scratch is very much a losing proposition 4 months out from the most consequential election of our country's history. Harris is the only serious option and even the Bulwark staff has been seriously down on her for as long as I can remember. The other sad reality is this country's history of voting for women or minority candidates for POTUS.
So yes, I still think Biden has the best chance of defeating Trump.
Yeah, yeah dissent is dangerous and must be stopped. Who does that sound like?
As if the Bulwark is the only place where Joe's facilities have been questioned.
Definitely not saying that. My view is definitely the minority view among nearly every MSM media outlet. I just expected better from the Bulwark. We've been down this road before and it doesn't end well for us.
I wish I could like this comment a million times. I agree wholeheartedly with your thoughts.
two million times
R’s have won a ton of elections on fear. But instead of taking a page and having this be about fearing Trump, we are telling everybody why they should fear the successful incumbents age 🤦🏽♂️
Then we just have to turn out the vote like never before!!
Whatever happens next, I think it's a plus that Kamala Harris polled well head to head with Trump. It takes a bit of the edge off the worry about Joe making it another 4 years.
Imagine the energy at the Democratic convention if she's the nominee. Crackling.
The energy in 2016 seemed high as well.
Lot of good that did us.
Yes, too many judge a president's ability by the cover, not what's inside the cover. Joe is losing the cover competition.
A cover's got to make a case.
Bush II's case was his cover. 'Im the kind of guy you'd enjoy having a beer with!'. I probably would have too, but since I actually read, I didn't vote for him.
Bill Kristol says nothing else.
Because having handed his own party off to whack jobs, he seems intent on screwing up everyone else.
He did not “hand off his own party”, he was kicked out of it by the followers of a demagogic lunatic, and he doesn’t want the entire country to fall to that same fate.
He spent 30 years telling conservative voters that Democrats were socialists. He endorsed Thomas, Alito and Roberts. He deified Reagan.
He primed the voters of his party and courted them with implicit racism and sexism. He ignored immigration and the deficit when Republicans were in office and railed against them when Republicans were out.
His problem was he made a lovely mob mentality only to have it hijacked by a grifter.
He's not the only one but he was a big part of why we're here.
You left out his approval of Palin, the prototype for Trump.
I've always said Palin was Trump before Trump.
Great point! It was like she was the GOP's way of testing the water on how much idiocy the GOP voter would accept and embrace.
Thank you! You put it much better than I did.
Up to that point he approved , endorsed, and facilitated his party into a position to be taken over by a con man. Do you think with the arrival of trump the GOP, with a snap of the fingers, became fascist? Their flirting with authoritarianism goes back to at least Reagan.
Linda, here's a question for you. Because it's been nagging at me for months.
Bill Kristol, the editors and owners of the WaPo, the NYT, they have been part of the political upper class for decades. Fundraisers, golf, cocktail parties.
And yet no one noticed that Clarence Thomas was taking multiple expensive vacations in 20 years? No one gossiped about how he could afford it?
No one asked a reporter to dig around? No one brought up ethics?
What other questions should we ask Bill Kristol and people like him?
Any place I've worked, people gossip. I want to know why I'm supposed to believe political Washington is different.
I'm a middle-aged Dem who has long admired Mr. Kristol. Please don't tell me now this is his fault.
He wants Trump to lose just like the rest of us.
So say we all.
That's it, right there.
Exactly.
Maybe they will just vote for the incumbent as lazy, uninformed voters frequently do. (I am grasping at straws here.)
The "low-information voters" have likely been all-in for 45/34 for a long time and wouldn't be changing their minds regardless of who the Dem candidate would be. The only 45/34 voters that might change their vote to Blue would be those who are intelligent enough that the scales have fallen from their eyes with regard to what another 45/34 administration would actually mean.
That is apparently the thinking, which is a lot of psychological projection and little reasoning. The people who will vote Biden even if he has to be carried there are afraid for the low information folks. So now they bombard them with all the bad news that Biden is indeed 81 years old just in case they have missed that debate. Don’t underestimate the ability of the low information folks! And then finally give them something better than ageism. The candidate will not get younger, so lean in to what he brings with his age: decency, experience, wisdom, character. What else would be the winning argument here?
I can say that I will vote for a potted plant over Trump and still be angry when the dems take me up on it.
My assessment of Biden is that he is doing okay as president, but can’t possibly complete another term. Or run a convincing campaign. I hear everyone saying, it shouldn’t matter if he’s barely competent as long as he’s running against one of the worst people in the world. And yes, when it comes to the binary choice, I will cast my meaningless blue state vote for him. Probably.
BUT, it is so irresponsible to nominate a man who can’t do a four-year term. What kind of 25th amendment-watch grind are we getting into? Contrast that with how refreshing it would be to have candidates under 60. Gah!
I love your first sentence and agree totally. I share your angst but I'm getting over it. I'm Ridin' with Biden until Joe says No Go. Because that's the hand we are currently dealt and I don't think it's useful to continue to spit on it and worse. (There is always risk involved. But there is no CLEAR alternative other than Kamala and I'm not sure she is ready for the onslaught of the campaign -- and this is about who can win, not who can govern. I think we get behind Joe until he drops.)
SHE IS READY
What do you mean by run a successful campaign? Do you understand it is not just Joe alone? There is a whole staff, including thousands of organizers and volunteers nationwide working with state and local Dem parties. They have been working hard calling thousands of people and knocking thousands of doors, hosting events, etc. Joe has been on the stump more than a dozen times while you know, running the country since the debate. So this idea that he isn’t up to campaigning—where on earth is that coming from?
Three quarters of the country thinks he’s too old. We aren’t just looking at the number. We are looking at his public performances and the news about his private actions.
It’s not enough to say he’s better than the general election alternative, now I have to say he’s a strong campaigner?
Three quarters of the chattering class is looking for something to drive traffic.
Biden raised more money in June than Trump with a lot of that coming at the end of the month. After the debate.
His mother was active into her 90s.
He travelled to Europe multiple times in June. He flies over the country for events in June.
His debate against other Democrats in 2020 went badly as well. (Do you remember how he looked when Kamala went after him?)
But here we are after a very successful first term discovering he doesn't debate well.
The youngest president we had in the 20th century was dead before his re-election campaign had even started. The oldest one got re-elected.
Here's a question. If you get a chance to invest with Warren Buffett, do you say no, he's too old?
Not the same
Warren Buffett is 93. And still running one of the most successful investment companies in the world.
So why is that not an apt comparison?
Because one has neurodegenerative disease affecting his hippocampus and basal ganglia and the other doesn’t.
Do you have any proof for that claim?
I mean besides "your brother-in-law knows someone whose neighbor is a doctor and he says. . ."
And a younger candidate gives voters transparency: we would be voting for a person we are hearing consistently. Harris events are not getting the coverage needed to update public perception yet we all know in status quo either she is leader or shadow government...not different than Trump's Project 2025.
THIS!!!! old guy versus felon - the decision is easy.
Grampa Democracy vs Grampa Dictator!
I'll vote a dead Biden over a live Trump every day! (And I'm fine that he can't make it to 86; he just has to make it to December.)
Suzc, Great slogan! May I use it on a sign?
Absolutely! (I think I swiped it from somewhere too. Or something close.)
I had a similar one, just longer, several weeks ago: I'd rather vote for an old guy who is courteous and rational, than a slightly less old guy who is a bully and irrational.
I have said I would vote for a pumpkin, a rusty nail, a tin can at over Trumpster at various times
I just have to think a third of the country agrees with us, ultimately. And that's enough.
Weekend at Bernies, ah, I mean Bidens. :)
Biden being too old has been the Bulwark's favorite story for the past two weeks. If this is what their coverage will look like until November, I'm not sure what the value there is to reading.
I love the community here and discussions, but I am tired of this drumbeat.
For the record: all the pundits would love a brokered Democratic Convention, but it will destroy the unity of the Democratic coalition.
Can you explain how?
I understand that during the process the differences in the coalition will be evident but afterwards how would it be different than today? For example there are rifts over Israel/Palestine today and likely would be same under new nominee.
The drumbeat is everywhere.
That is a straw-man argument. Nobody is saying that.
Trump's awfulness does not *excuse* shortcomings in his opponent, it *makes them more critical*.
The more awful Trump is, the more important it is to put up the strongest possible candidate. And we can argue about who that would be and how that person should be chosen.
But it would be a good idea, when either side in this says "I will never understand," to stop and think "yeah. that is a problem. let's see what I can do about that. because it is kinda my job to understand."
If we can't even do that when we are arguing amongst ourselves, how are we going to do it with the country as a whole?
There are no easy answers.
There are good points on both sides.
Recognizing that should be the absolute minimum starting place for this discussion.
If we can't get to there, we are going to fail.
Yep. No good choices. Just one big shitshow.
I guess my biggest issue how bill frames this discussion (and many others) is if you are going to say Joe must go than you need to prove to the readers that Kamala is more likely to win (if we go to a brokered convention I’m convinced we will lose). That’s why I find bill’s takes so galling. He wants to force Biden out…fine. But data says that Kamala is a better choice.
Biden campaign is polling on that now. At least they are thinking about the possibility of getting out. CBS is reporting that this weekend will be Brutal for Biden
These are professionals. They have been polling Kamala for YEARS. they know how she looks in the states we need to win. We have public polling that generally shows that Kamala polls a few points behind Biden.
But that is besides the point. Bill, is making the case for dropping out but not telling us why Kamala will win. That’s what he is doing. Calling for someone to dropout and then saying a brokered convention is a cop out. It’s literally a way to cover your own ass because you can’t be wrong because “Dems didn’t choose the right candidate.” This is what I find sooooo frustrating about bill. Tim and jvl don’t do this.
Here is the reason: bill doesn’t think that Kamala can win either and she is the MOST likely candidate to win. Then he usually creates this stupid fantasy where there is a “mini primary.” This is just another word for BROKERED CONVENTION. his hope is kamal loses but if she wins then she is stronger (makes zero sense and he provides no proof).
France rallied to protect democracy--actually, saved the French Republic--by:
(1) Political parties and candidates putting aside individual electoral ambition for the good of the country
(2) Quickly taking unprecedented decisions and actions to unite the anti-fascist, pro-democracy majority
It was unprecedented. No one previously thought anything like this was politically possible. It was possible, and it worked.
We can do it here. Yes we can. But only if someone other than Joe Biden is the Democratic nominee. No skeptical minds were reassured last night. No new votes were won. An interview with Lester Holt will change nothing, except maybe make a bad situation worse. It is past time for Biden to step aside. Leaders of the Democratic party: take this message to thecWhite House *now*.
Will the US follow France's and GB's lead?
Nobody's saying that Trump shouldn't scare people more than Biden. It's the founding creed of every part of the criticism.
However, there are a lot of voters who really freak out at the thought of a guy who isn't all there holding the wheel. Everyone, and I do mean, everyone, has had an old relative that they had to gently tell they aren't allowed to drive any more, for their own safety and everyone else on the road. When they see an 81 year old guy "have good days and bad days," that's not a good sign. It doesn't generally get better. It's a sad, but ironclad, part of aging.
And in this case, it's not driving a car, it's giving them the nuclear codes.
So the problem is, there are many voters who are worried that we have a choice between giving the codes to one guy who's actively dangerous due to actual malevolence, and another guy who could be passively dangerous due to age. They're likely to just not vote. Trump won the presidency once on "I don't like either person." This isn't a hypothetical, it's actually happened. So there are critics who believe that Biden should step aside on the chance that, however flawed the prospects of a four month campaign at the last minute, it'll still be better than Biden himself staying in. Many of them feel deceived and see the signs -- that Biden has had the fewest unscripted press conferences of any modern President, for instance -- that his aides likely knew he was starting to fade, even though his 65 mph fastball was still pretty good, and were hiding him from us so we wouldn't see it.
I am, personally, on the fence. I can't deny that the way he's been generally not shown to the public feels a bit sketch. I am very, very skeptical that changing horses this close to an election is going to end well, but I also don't know that keeping the one we've got will end well. I see lots of bad options. And, yes, the other old guy who's actively crazy and malevolent is coming at us like the boulder rolling towards Indiana Jones, and HIS followers are far less reflective about his flaws because he wants to hurt the right people for their tastes. Whether I like it or not, those guys aren't going to change horses.
So... what do we do? I am not convinced that Biden can win. I am not convinced that someone else can win on short notice, either. It IS important that we have a president who can answer the proverbial 3 AM phone call and not mentally look like we just destroyed another Horcrux. I DO have serious questions about whether Biden can make it to 2029.
That's the dilemma.
This is just...a ridiculous distortion of legitimate concerns about Biden's age and capacity to serve. For the millionth time, there's a difference between Biden the POTUS and Biden the candidate. Biden the candidate is losing the race and the campaign has no apparent strategy to turn that around. I would vote for Biden's head in a jar before Trump, but, as the Bulwark has mentioned over and over again, there aren't enough people like that for Biden to win.
It's funny that you mention France since it's an example of a parties making drastic updates to their platforms to upset the far right. They did that in a week and all the people telling us to shut up about Biden's age are screaming how it's too late to replace him.
France has a much different election process that enables them to do that.
They do, but it doesn't mean Dems couldn't acknowledge reality, show some leadership, and make a change now. It's very possible, and it would blow up the Trump campaign.
And if President Biden is forced out, what then? Hoping that everything will go well is NOT a plan. As one Biden voter said, “If you’re going to rock the boat, you’d better have a plan to get me to shore.”
What is Biden’s plan now? Hope that enough voters who get their news from Tik Tok ignore an issue they’ve said over and over again they’re concerned about and pull the lever for him anyway? And hope all the polls are wrong? How is that better?
They have a parliamentary system (I believe). As does much of Europe.
Very well put, Ed. That should be on billboards, tv, and news ads all over the country. Word for word.
TV and news ads, yep. Three Billboards Outside.... are another story: Too much text.
Who in the world is saying that? No one wants Trump to lose is saying Biden hasn't done a good job the last four years. We're saying he can't win running for another term. Biden is almost certain to lose. Why not put someone in the game who has a much better chance to win the election. I really think those "It Must Be Biden" Democrats don't truly think Trump represents an existential threat to American democracy. They just think Trump is a worse version of a typical Republican. They don't see Trump as the unique threat we Never Trumpers know him to be.
Donors are freezing $90 million until Biden is replaced. Democrats are seeing polling that indicates safe blue states could turn purple. This is country-wide. Why the resistance to seeing this? People do not believe Biden can do the job for 4 more years.
Biden has been an excellent President. He is not the best choice in our Country for the next 4 years. The World is rapidly changing. We have several wars on the horizon and we have not paid enough attention to Africa. The Chinese Road Project has changed the whole game there. Biden’s Administration is resisting a sudden upheaval that we understand. Have you thought carefully about the possibility of a major decline of Biden’s health 5-8 months from now with both our Nation and the World exploding? Shouldn’t we even consider a younger, more competent Leader now even though it is late? Maybe a journalist should pop the question to Joe, “How do you see Generative AI helping in your next 4 years? Or pose something about warming oceans destroying coastal land so quickly. How will this affect Federal Assistance to different States?
I agree, but we've already seen that isn't going to happen. We can fantasize about a better press all we want, but we have the corporate media recently bought by oligarchs, and that's the landscape we have to accept.
Who in the world is saying that? No one wants Trump to lose is saying Biden hasn't done a good job the last four years. We're saying he can't win running for another term. Biden is almost certain to lose. Why not put someone in the game who has a much better chance to win the election? I really think those "It Must Be Biden" Democrats don't truly think Trump represents an existential threat to American democracy. They just think Trump is a worse version of a typical Republican. They don't see Trump as the unique threat we Never Trumpers know him to be.
In evaluating Biden, it is travesty to bring up Trump. To beat Trump, Biden or anybody else must be evaluated separately. Evaluating a candidate is rational and dispositive. Throwing Trump in as an alarm factor is putting the cart before the horse.
It might have something to do with the fact that when voters say they want a new generation of leaders, they aren't referring to the Silent Generation.
That's a false dichotomy. Of course, if it HAS to come down to Trump vs. Biden, any sane voter would pick Biden.
But maybe some go for Trump because of Biden's current weaknesses. Many voters will just stay home.
The whole point of raising the discussion in the first place is to question whether Biden is still the best candidate to beat Trump. Full stop.
It's not fair at all, but it's the reality. Obama and Pelosi are talking and realize what needs to happen. It's not the pundits. Can you imagine the negative ads that are going to come out once Biden formally accepts the nomination at the convention, if that were to happen. Brutal would be an understatement.
White America is not going to elect Kamala Harris over Trump. Dems need to quit being wishy-washy and get behind Biden as the candidate. Biden's weakest attribute is far better than Trump's strongest any day of the week. It's getting to be too silly, anymore.
America losing democracy because voting for a black woman was too much for some folks is entirely on brand for America. And in a poetic way the way the great American experiment should end.
American’s greatness was largely more aspirational than what was practiced. Ironically MLK was successful because he challenged white America to prove more of them were better than those who were oppressors.
You would think democracy on the line would garner the same energy to rally around. But I am sadly doubtful.
America elected Obama. To tell the truth, I think the campaign against Harris would be so sexist and racist, it would no longer be possible to deny the White supremacist part of the GOP platform. But as others have said, that's not a comfort if people vote for it.
Well said Kate, trump won't be able to stop himself from the personal attacks regarding race and gender. I'll never pretend to understand young voters, but from what i have read, they will harden when hearing the screeching by trump about a black woman. He hates losing, so imagine losing to a Black Female?
His freaking head would explode.
Trump under stress tends to be the Trump that messes up and starts saying even crazier things than calm Trump. He's not feeling the pressure at all now, that's why he's been relatively quiet lately. The last thing in the world he wants is for Biden to drop out.
Tim made the point yesterday that all the inevitable racist crap that will be spewed by the MAGA swamp against Harris might actually help her by reminding swing voters how awful the Trump coalition is.
And on the Fox News and Substack sites, the Right love to accuse her of sleeping her way to the top. Another thing that women just love to hear.
Tim talked with David French yesterday. He said the Right will go after Kamala in the grossest of ways. In 2008 against Obama, it was dog whistles. With Kamala it's going to be out front and center. The way that right-wing discourse has devolved over the last nine years, there's going to be no shortage of wild, crazy, bigoted things said about her.
Then he asks: Does that actually undermine the Right in a way that their own bigotry would make them more vulnerable? It's just an intuition of mine, but I think the answer is yes.
I think the answer is yes, too.
I sent this to my one conservative friend whose information sources are right-wing talk radio, particularly Dennis Prager and Ben Shapiro. He really knows nothing about politics. He just clings to grifter hacks and takes what the say at face value which somehow makes him feel good. His response was that they won't because all they have to do is attack her job performance as VP. This must be what he's hearing from them.
I said criticisms of her peformance as VP are old. What's current is she is killing it on the stump and, as Sarah said on this week's TNL (https://www.thebulwark.com/p/blue-maga), perceptions of her are lightly held and can be improved. I agree with that because I was persuaded by this podcast that Kamala, who was once known as the law and order Dem and couldn't be that in the political moment of 2020, can now be who she is - this is a different political moment: "Is Kamala Harris Underrated?" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyvaxlKuOuE&list=PLdMrbgYfVl-szepgVpArP0obwYgbKdfvx&index=1).
Yes, 10 times. Of course she is underrated. She has *always* been underrated.
Do posters here expect slow-thinking voters to change their minds in a blink?
Harris will have to change their minds with her intelligence and strength. She can do it. She is the one in 2024 who can show up Trump for what he is: a corrupt fraud, a criminal convicted by a jury of his peers on 34 felony counts, a racist and misogynist, a charlatan who has created one of the most dangerous cults against democracy our country has ever known.
Yep but unfortunately I think she loses. Maybe she does better than Biden. I just don’t trust voters in this environment to vote for an aggressive smart black woman. Sad to say
I appreciate your candor, Migs, but "I just don't trust voters in this environment to vote for an aggressive smart black woman" = vibes.
You see, I agree with the basic premise of your statement, but my conclusion is the opposite: I do trust them. And yes, those are simply my "vibes."
In other words, we both need to see some hard data, some reliable poll numbers that can parse out the numbers for us and show us whose vibes are more in tune with the real American voters.
Yep. I understand that you draw a different conclusion than I do. To be fair, to be both of us we will never really know the answer.
The only thing I would add is that my pessimism of voters is based on this fact: they voted for Trump is 2016. Then more people voted for him in 2020. Now it looks like more will vote for him in 2024 after everything they have seen, heard and watched. Pretty good evidence they are idiots.
They are not idiots; well, rather, they are deluded members of a cult who have succumbed to the lies they wanted to hear by a lizard-brained conman. I'm not sure that makes them idiots.
I know so many people who have succumbed to religious cults because the conmen leading them, from rural Tennessee to Rome, offer their followers the wish-fulfillment to their greatest desires: Eternal life, anyone? Want to see your deceased loved ones again in heaven? Come this way!
Idiots cannot be made intelligent. But members of a cult can be "de-programmed." So far, Biden is not doing that. My bet is that Kamala Harris can de-program just enough of them and convince just enough of those not in the cult but wandering in uncertainty ("undecideds") to defeat Trump.
The people they hate can’t be expected to deprogram them. If people expected that then they were always going to be disappointed. Kamala won’t deprogram them. Oprah won’t deprogram. Obama won’t deprogram them. They need to deprogram themselves.
We can agree to disagree
Racism is a huge problem, and adding misogyny makes it even worse!
You think the "he's too old" attacks are ugly, wait until we move into racism and misogyny devised by Mr. Swift Vets for Truth! It's gonna be great!
Also -- if you -- obviously not you, Mike -- think a brokered convention or "flash primary" isn't going to completely break the Dem coalition apart, take a look at this comments section for the past two weeks and think again.
I still remember the Hillary Barak fights in 2008. A mini-primary will leave some factions feeling left out.
And if you think that politicians who want to be POTUS are going to pull their punches "for the greater good" I've got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in.
I know. God I know. It’s like these people want an outcome so bad that they just completely ignore what will happen and create some fantasy world.
They did so in 2020. Why is 2024 different?
How about the London bridge in Arizona? :)
Honestly I’m at a loss for the 2 things:
1. I think Biden is too old. I think he did shitty at the debate. However I think America would rather vote for an old white guy in a wheel chair than a smart aggressive black woman. I hope I’m wrong
2. The people imagining that a brokered convention will be some type of good look for dems. I’m honestly just shocked by such a myopic take. There is no chance it will be “good” for dems. It will be one big shit sando. It will be so awful with people attacking each other and debating Medicare for all.
We keep saying a smart aggressive black woman can't get elected but we forget it really depends on the candidate. Al Sharpton would never be elected president, but Barack Obama was. Hillary Clinton didn't get elected, but maybe Nikki Haley or Gretchen Whitmer could. It needs to be the right candidate. Michelle Obama could get elected if she wanted the job, if we're to believe the polls!
Michelle couldn’t get elected now. She popular precisely because she isn’t political. The moment she becomes political her fav/unfavs will look like every other politician.
Obama was a generational politician but even he couldn’t get elected today. Timing matters just as much as political talent. A black man couldn’t be elected in the 1950s and I don’t think he could be elected now. We are partially here because of a backlash to Obama (not his fault).
Just July opinion though
Yep, there was a backlash to Obama that certainly helped Trump, but these things go in cycles. At some point there will be a backlash against Trump and Trumpism, hopefully this year but it's not looking good at the moment.
Of course Michelle's numbers would go down if she actually decided to run, but as you say that's what happens to every politician. It doesn't mean her race would prevent her from being elected.
The only thing a brokered convention does is give the media another opportunity to feast on "Dems in Disarray!" while we are once again not focusing on the convicted felon/child rapist/Rule of Law destroyer who is the nominee of the GOP.
Granted, it is a possibility that it could be a shit show. As Linda Chavez suggested; it could also show which party is the democracy party, suck oxygen from Trump, create excitement and enthusiasm for a new candidate, regain donor money.You never know til it happens.
Yep. Absolutely.
We use to have brokered conventions all the time. Do you know why we don’t anymore? BECAUSE THEY WERE COMPLETE SHITSHOWS!!!
I can’t understand why people can’t see that the reason we went to primaries is because brokered conventions hurt the dems.
They've already voted for an old white guy in a wheelchair with a successful record once.
Biden is too old, and I love the guy and the results. Do I wish that he'd said he wasn't running for re-election after the midterms (particularly in hindsight)? Sure. But I think an open Dem primary combined with October 7 + losing incumbency would have been another roll of the dice, particularly against Trump and the GOP slime machine. I also wish that Nikki Haley had won the GOP primary so we wouldn't all be panicking and fearing for the end of America.
But this is the hand we've been dealt and the race we're running. Hate the GOP all you want, but they win 50% of elections even though we win 70% of the electorate with our ideas. They know how to fight and drive a narrative, while the Dems get bullied by the mainstream press. This Biden should drop out story has gone on longer than the coverage of Trump's 34 felony convictions.
Migs, you sound like Rick Wilson (via Mike Steele's podcast)
If I had faith in voters to vote for Kamala I would be so down with switching Biden out.
I find people who think that a brokered convention as good for Dems living in a fantasy world. They create rules that can’t be endorsed, many times can’t happen, and create rules that just conflict with itself (we will have debates but they won’t be negative…come on. What’s the point of a debate if you don’t hammer out differences in policy)
There is a line in a song by America, "You never know til you try" *Lonely People
I disagree, Holli. Why? Because the Dems united behind Biden after his SC win in 2020. Pete B won IA and Bernie NH & NV. They both did very poorly in SC. All the candidates dropped out and supported Biden because he was the best - the only - candidate to beat Trump.
My bet is the same thing happens in 2024 when Trump is even more of a threat. This comments section is a conversation, and it doesn't end until the third night of the convention. It might even end sooner than that.
The racists aren't going to vote for Biden anyway.
They'd vote for Biden over Harris. You don't think there's closet racists and misogynists in the Democratic coalition?
There aren't enough of them. If Obama and HRC could get their votes, Harris can too. IF she is a strong candidate (that's a big if).
I don't really worry about the WCNT (White Christian National Terrorist) voter not voting for Harris over CFT. No racist will, and, unfortunately, even some who could stomach Joe, will not go that way if they believe he is just a stalking horse to get her over the finish line.
A secondary problem in line with above: If Joe bows out before the Coronation, I mean Convention, who is going to be her No. 2?
It's not a problem. It's part of the process every time there's a new nominee. They'll figure it out.
I have no doubt that "They'll figure it out". My concern is more for the identity of the new #2 and what pros, and cons, (s)he brings to the ballot. Minority male from a swing state with a résumé and national name recognition? Pete B. certainly checks those boxes and would definitely complete the ticket as a contrast to CFT and Lackey. Democratic Diversity versus Republican Repression?
Why wouldn't they elect her? They elected Obama didn't they? If Harris proves herself to be a strong candidate who can inspire people she can win. We have to get over the narrative that "America will never elect [insert race/gender combination here]". It wasn't true in 2008 or 2012. It wasn't true in 2016 when the female candidate got the most votes but lost due to the EC.
Sure it might ber harder, but the right candidate can win, especially against someone as horrible as Trump who is disliked or downright hated by most of the country. It's looking more and more like Biden is no longer that candidate. Maybe Harris is, maybe she isn't, but I'm liking her odds better than Biden right now. I'll take a 50% chance over 10%.
Obama is a man. His demeanor, speaking style, and academic background made him almost white to some people and McCain seemed very old compared to him. A woman who "cackles", who has "done nothing as VP" is a woman and, a black woman is not going to garner much interest in low information swing voters. Plus she is smart and viscerally people react to that girl who thinks she is so smart when they are inclined to dislike her for all the other reasons.
Trump will seem very old next to Harris (and crazy too). In 2016 Hillary Clinton got more votes than Donald Trump when he was 8 years younger AND Clinton was older than Harris is now. Clinton was super smart and had an awful, hectoring voice and a phony laugh. In addition she had been demonized by the Right for decades as Bill Clinton's wife. She was a weak candidate following 8 years of a Democratic presidency, which would have made it hard for any Democratic candidate to win, and yet look how close she came to winning. Trump is not a strong candidate and never has been. The right Democratic candidate should be able to beat him easily. Biden is obviously not the right candidate, because if he was he would be leading handily in the polls by now. Getable voters (not MAGA nutcases) are sick to death of Trump.
Who is the "right" candidate? That's the sticking point for many people in a discussion of replacing Biden. Who is that "right" candidate that will move people to vote for instead of voting for Trump or sitting out the presidential slot on their ballots? Is it anybody but Biden? Can it be that simple?
We don’t know who the right candidate is, and that’s a huge risk. But if we think that Biden is not the right candidate than we should do something about it before it’s too late. I’m convinced that an average-or-better Dem candidate would do better against Trump than Biden at this point. Obviously a bad candidate would be a disaster, but it’s a huge risk staying with Biden too, because right now he is also a bad candidate (not a bad president, just a bad candidate). So there are no good options, but if we're convinced that Biden has no winning path than it makes no sense to stick with him and hope for the best.
Agree with this!
The right candidate is the one who can beat Trump and that is not Biden. Trump is disliked by a majority of voters. They also think Biden is too old and weak. Yes, if the campaign is run well, it's that simple.
Uh GREE!!!
Some will say going along with Biden unquestionably is wishy-washy.
Do we always have to fear white America? Is that an endless proposition maybe it’s time to stop doing that.
Okay, Linda. Considering everything -- EVERYTHING -- White people collectively have done to maintain their superiority nationally and globally, what would be your suggestion in these times of White supremacy resurgence? You'll have to put some thought into it, though, maybe even a little research. Because the things that WS has done to maintain itself are horrific.
Yes, American WS has spent the last two and a half centuries undermining every opportunity for Black Americans to succeed, from slavery to Jim Crow, from Reconstruction to Tulsa. Without the ERA and with the overturning of Roe v Wade, we are still trying to stop the opportunity for every woman in this country to succeed, too.
Let's put a stop to it. We showed the possibility of stopping it by electing Obama, by electing Wes Moore, by electing Cory Booker, hopefully, by electing Colin Allred later this year.
If we just say, "Electing a Black woman like Kamala Harris cannot be done because of WS," we are allowing the forces of WS to continue without a fight. We are succumbing to the racism, misogyny, and bigoty we are trying to end.
Be careful, Darryll. You might end up with a (white) woman on the ticket with Harris. You know, because, heaven knows a gay man (even if he is a veteran) is a bridge to far.
And you know this how, Darryl? Have you talked to all of us in white America???
You would think that at this stage of your life, you would know that inherent in these conversations is the "not all" qualifier. At any rate, the majority of White voters vote Republican, so there's that. So there's no confusion, the White voting population doesn't equal the total adult, voting-eligible population but, really, it's the only stat that counts, isn't it?
OK, how many of us in white America have you talked to?
I’m not sure I can keep reading and listening to you guys if your entire focus remains on forcing Biden out of the race. As you noted in your conclusion “What we do need is sustained efforts, both private and public, to persuade and, yes, to pressure Joe Biden to open the door wide—and to walk through it.”. Seriously? In other words, what we do need is to keep telling people how incompetent JB is while not focusing our energy on beating Trump. Don’t you see how counter intuitive this is? I don’t doubt your intention that you are doing this in order to beat Trump… but if that’s your main goal maybe you should focus directly on doing so instead of trying to force JB out of the race. At the end of the day, if he does what he says and stays in the race, all you have done by being so stubborn in your view that he should step down is all but guarantee a Trump victory.
Exactly. This is so frustrating. Until Joe says he’s done, he’s the nominee. And the public pressure campaign isn’t only hardening his resolve, it’s telling swing voters that both candidates are incapable so it doesn’t matter who wins. When it couldn’t matter more in 2024. The so called pro democracy “former” Republicans and wishy washy Dems will be responsible for fascism coming to America.
Beg to differ. Biden did more damage to his own electability with his debate performance than any of his nay sayers. He flat out proved their point and Trump's messaging in front of a national TV audience.
And nothing since—not his 20 plus appearances, not the NATO summit nor his speech, not the press conference or sit down with ABC can negate that one event. This is all about personal bias. The media has long disliked Joe and were thrilled when he did poorly in Iowa and NH. They were shocked when Clyburn endorsed him and flabbergasted when he won state after state, uniting the Dem party. A lot of voters who wanted Bernie or anyone else held their noses and voted for him and obviously still don’t like him.
Since the withdrawal from Afghanistan, it’s been open season on Joe for the media, which is why every bit of good news is followed by “why that’s bad for Biden” and why Americans believe we are living in the upside down where inflation is high, crime is up, and wages are down. It’s the same as more than 70 percent of Americans believing Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11 before the Iraq War. Obviously nothing will satisfy the press and pundits, so the best thing is to tune them out and work hard to get the Dems elected.
I have heard JVL say that running Biden wouldn't be as big a deal if the opponent was someone like Romney or Haley so I hear about the threat all the time on here. That is why the pro democracy side should not also run a declining old man. Mean demented crazy vs old experienced crazy is risky.
I don’t see evidence that Biden is crazy. What do you think suggests that conclusion?
I don't actually believe is crazy; I was distilling the issue down to a sentence from perspective of casual voter
I believe Joe is old and he's been a rambling gaffe machine his whole career. Mixing up Harris and Trump is not very far outside his norm versus Trump talking about electric boats sinking due to heavy motors or injecting bleach to cure COVID. The post debate challenge is those gaffes are perceived differently and he cannot get back on track from his own tangents.
He can govern for another 6 months no problem but he can't campaign.
Agree.
"Until Joe says he's done" chills me frankly. The U.S. President is only and always elected to a term.
Too much deference is being given to his incumbency.
Option 1 is that the Bullwark writers just care so much about winning that they’re doing this incessant hit job out of loyalty to country. That’s the charitable option.
Option 2 is that they care more about being seen as right / smart political operatives than anything else. If Biden does bow out and Harris goes on to lose because America can’t stomach voting for a black woman to be in charge, they’ll still get to pat themselves on the back for getting the strategy part “right.” Most of these people aren’t hurting for money, so the fallout won’t hit them the way it will regular people.
Option 3 is that they are actively pulling punches against Trump because they expect him to win, and they plan on crawling back and kissing the ring when that happens. “Oh Dear Leader, we’re sorry about being so mean before, but look how we destroyed Joe Biden for you”.
I really, really hope it isn’t option 3. Then again, these are a bunch of current/former republicans who spent many years taking actions that got us to this point. Maybe when someone shows you who they are over and over again you should believe them.
I will come to the defense of the Bulwark crowd because even through this I don't doubt their intentions and motives. I respect them all and especially those who made large sacrifices by continuing down this path of "Never Trump-ism", especially Sarah who has been consequential in efforts to defeat DT. With that being said, that has made these past couple weeks all the more confusing. I do believe that it is option 1 with perhaps a sprinkle of option 2, but I just don't understand their logic. As I said, if they are so concerned with beating DT then they should focus on THAT instead of focusing on getting JB out of the race so that they can then turn their focus to beating Trump. I was hoping that after a couple days and especially after this press conference we would get back to regularly scheduled programming so I am disheartened to see them doubling down.
It is Option 1. I won't speak for everyone on the staff, but from what I've heard and read, most of them are convinced that there is no pathway for Biden to win, and they do not want Trump to win, therefore, the best way to defeat Trump is to convince Biden to step down. It's perfectly logical to me.
I definitely want to believe in Option 1, or at worst your theory of mostly Option 1 with a little from Option 2. But every day that this continues the little voice inside that talks about Option 3 gets a bit louder.
That's your cynical devil on your shoulder voice. Don't listen to it. Listen to reasons and facts.
Hilary, I think their intentions are noble. I think their methods are "iffy" at best.
Most importantly to me, I feel their lack of humility in addressing how much theiy contributed to the current nightmare through their decades of defending and promoting the Republican Party is disqualifying.
Their expectation that 30-40 years of outright propagandist lying can be "turned around" in 5-8 years is belieiving in unicorns.
They created this monster and now they are trying to tame what they so meticulously built.......apparently not as easy as thought. I am tired of Democrats having to clean up the messes that Republicans make.
Millennia-old divide and conquer has become divide and blame (or shame) on the socials. So many harmful things are potent.
Trump has changed party affiliation 5 times. What if he decided to take over the Democratic Party instead of the Republican, and actually accomplished that? Would you feel that everyone who had ever been a Democrat was complicit?
Have you met the Democratic Party……their raison d’etre is to NOT fall in line. Historically speaking, the R party falls in line, the D party falls in love. I’m not saying it could never happen Linda, but as Will Rogers famously said, “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”
Will Rogers was right. For the Dems, sometimes it's a blessing, sometimes it's a curse. Too many times the Dems have been their own worst enemy.
They weren't in 2020. They were clear about the threat to the country of a Trump win and united around Biden. Nancy Pelosi was a great Speaker and so is Leader Jeffries. Why should they not unite around the candidate who has the best chance to defeat Trump in 2024?
I don't believe the orange one would ever try to take over the Democratic party. It's too diverse (realtor years - no renting to Black people!), too much for the common good (bodily autonomy), social net expansion (he wants to trim Soc Sec.). Democrats want to expand the government to serve people Republicans (pRo-lIfE!) want to drown that baby.
It started with nixon, took off like a rocket with reagan. I'm old, I remember. We are softies, they want raw power - looking at you Mitch McConnell. Knowing what we know about his life, the Democratic party wasn't even a stop on his route.
He did try, along with a third party. He saw that the gopers were a bunch of obedient little sheep who will willingly vote against their own best interests and the rest they say is history.
Great question, Linda.
Hilary: consider an Option 4. They are all people who have lost friends and livelihoods over opposition from the word go to the ascendancy of an authoritarian who is morally, democratically, and psychologically unfit to be President, and have pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to his defeat.
"But her emails" part deux coming to a campaign near you.
Yes, Linda. Add to this closing of the Declaration: At the signing, Franklin reportedly quipped "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately". If Trump wins, they will all surely be if not be hanged, investigated and harrased.
Really, Hilary? Would you be saying "Maybe when someone shows you who they are over and over again you should believe them" if they were urging Biden to stay in the race?
No, you wouldn't. You'd applaud them. It's only because they're not cheerleading for Biden that you accuse them of that ugly Option 3.
Let me present an option you forgot: Option 4: Bulwark writers came to the conclusion, after dispassionately examining all available evidence, that American voters might rather elect a lively, animated, and boasting tyrant/entertainer as president over a man highly regarded and effective but looks and acts old, enfeebled, and in early stages of dementia. (Whether he has that is irrelevant. Optics reign in politics.) Bulwark writers are so alarmed at Choice No. 1 that they wish to replace Choice No. 2 with someone younger, stronger, and far more vigorous on the campaign trail.
It's a fair conclusion for Bulwark to make. A lot of Americans worry after seeing Biden in the debate and, to a lesser extent, at the NATO press conference and the Stephanopoulos interview: with Biden, there's less THERE there than even a few months ago. So it's fair for Bulwark opinionists to pick "Joe Gotta Go" over "Joe Mo and Mo."
Now me, I'm Ridin' With Biden till his Corvette crashes into the Oval Office, because Trump must have a stake driven through his heart and Biden is still the best hammer. That said, a Biden win no sure thing because of the damage Biden caused himself in just the past two months, and because he's no longer up to demolishing the gish-galloping, lying, smirking, smarmy, racist, incurious, babbling, narcissistic, rapist Trump.
Yes, I prefer Biden stay in the race. Yes, I would vote for Ebola over Trump--Ebola is more likable and less willing to destroy our Republic. Ebola doesn't have Project 2025 nihilists hanging onto it like leeches. But "Joe's Gotta Go" is a valid opinion backed by evidence.
To suggest that Bulwark writers are engaged in Option 3--crawling back to Trump in hopes of the Great Man's Pity and Favour--is nauseating. I've read Bulwark writers for a long time and see no evidence they're setting themselves up to be players in Trump II: Orange Boogaloo.
I wouldn't take a position if they were merely "urging" one way or the other. That's all fair in political commentary. I also wouldn't take a position if I saw more humility from all of the Bulwark writers suggesting that they don't actually *know* the best path forward, but here's how we deal with the situation whatever way it works out.
Instead, what I've seen is two weeks of virtually uninterrupted screeching that they are absolutely certain that Biden needs to drop out now, now, now. When it's every article they write it starts to get a bit absurd.
JVL for one has been very humble. He's also been Biden's biggest cheerleader at the Bulwark for the past 4 years and up until the debate really thought he was the best option going forward. He's made clear time and again that every option is a risk, and nothing is certain.
Certainly JVL has acknowledged that he may be wrong. Not so much Tim and Sarah, but they have substantial experience in political communications. You sound like a conservative anti-vaxxer who feels expertise is plot to control you.
There is no actually knowing in politics, as you put it. There is no knowing the outcome until the voters vote. It's all risk assessment, based on reasoning and facts. Maybe uncertainty makes you uncomfortable.
Well said Shane. As i read the comments, i can see the democrats (yes i am one) rallying around the idea The Bulwark was all just a false flag operation. What a load of horseshit. I get it, you want Biden to stay in the race; irrespective of whether he can do the job...or more importantly (at this point) campaign well enough to win.
In the end, The Bulwark community will not, WILL NOT, be the deciding factor in Joe's decision. Sorry, none of us are that important. President Biden will make that decision in conjunction with the top democrats. It won't be an emotional, knee-jerk action because Bulwark authors forced him to go.
The one thing Joe said last night that was true was this; the campaign hasn't started yet. Everything we are seeing and hearing is just foreplay to the really juicy crap that will be hitting the fans come Sept and Oct.
Brace yourselves; because if you all are getting this excited over a bit of differences of opinion amongst this community, i cannot begin to fathom how you will take the 24/7 commercials showing Joe staring off into space and spewing nonsense.
Well-said yourself, Bill, and thanks. Thing is, most American voters do not pay the slightest bit of attention to politics--even presidential--until the kids are back in school from summer vacation. If even then. Most of the shouting we hear is by one group of laser focused political interests to another group of same. Maw and Paw America won't tune in until September, earliest.
Agree, it is truly nauseating. I don't understand such thinking.
It is not Option 3, you can disregard that one. These people risked their careers by turning against Trumpism and rejecting their political tribe, they aren't going back.
I disagree with Hilary and particularly with her Option 3. But Blue Qanon she's not.
"Blue Qanon" is way out of line. To quote JVL, "we don't do that here." You owe an apology.
Blue Qanon? oooookay.
Yeah, no, that's so offensive I'm not even going to bother answering your question.
The Bulwark starts throwing around terms like "Blue MAGA" and then they're going to act surprised that garbage like "Blue QAnon" starts showing up here.
Actually, it was Tim yesterday on his pod with David French who said "Blue QAnon" instead of "Blue MAGA". That's why it's showing up here.
Fair enough, I apologize. I was not being snarky; I am sincerely curious as to how you arrive at the conspiracy in option 3. This community brings together different people and I want to understand how people think.
To start, I don't view it as a conspiracy. That's the wrong framing. I'm not suggesting that all of the Bulwark writers got together in a room, wearing hooded robes, and decided that this was going to be their strategy going forward.
What I am suggesting (and, I should emphasize, I offered it as one of three options because I am truly uncertain as to which of them is the truth) is that the writers here might be hedging their bets by pulling their punches.
I read an article somewhere recently that talked about why CEOs, who are aware that Trump is completely incompetent and potentially ruinous for the economy, are so silent on the election. The conclusion of the author was that the CEOs calculated that there was no benefit, only downside, to supporting Biden. If they stayed quiet and Biden won, well, it's status quo ante for their business, because Biden and the Democrats aren't going to take retribution. On the other hand, if they vocally support Biden and Trump wins, their company could end up targeted by the new administration. I think a similar calculus could be playing out in the back of the minds of the writers here.
For what its worth, I don't think that it's only the Bulwark writers that could be making this mental calculation. I think it's entirely applicable to the upper echelons of the NYT, WaPo, and CNN among others.
Hilary, I don't think they are making any kind of calculation. Why? Because after 8 years of Trumpism, I think I have a good grasp of what a persuasive argument is, and I trust my ability to recognize one. I've listened to and read them for years. They make persuasive arguments. I trust them and I trust my perception.
You are mistrustful in a lot of situations, I suspect.
Thank you for sharing, Hilary.
I recall the CEO article you are referencing.
Indeed. And, still, no one has produced a viable candidate to replace Biden on the ticket. Viable meaning someone that the majority will get behind. If they really want VP KH to be president, it's going to have to be his succession; otherwise, it ain't gonna happen.
I would love to see Harris as President. Hell, I wanted to see HRC as POTUS. But I know the country I served for 38 years. It's the worse dysfunctional family you could dream up. "The Hills Have Eyes" kind of family.
I agree. She would have a problem in a normal campaign with her at the top of the ticket, let alone a shortened race. Misogyny anyone? It is one of those idiotic issues people have in this country. I think her succession to POTUS after 2 or so years may help qualm the irrational fears that Americans have for women presidents. It will also solve today's question of who she will pick for VP. She'd have her own record to run on as a very strong incumbent in 2028.
Yep. This has been my biggest issue with bill’s analysis. It’s Biden drops out something something something…we win (btw, all something’s are somehow GREAT for dems).
*via succession. Trust no one. Especially autocorrect.
As my TI told me in Basic Training, stainless steel isn't, permanent press isn't. I guess a new one could be, autocorrect doesn't.
I just find the same old article being written everyday for 2 weeks. It’s like once or twice was enough but everyday
Right? Once or twice, you've given your opinion and make your point. Move on. Three-plus times a day every day constitutes an agenda, the goal of which is implicit in the message. In this case, rat-fucking the Democratic Party.
Yeah I wouldn’t even mind if everyday they had small blurb updating us but then moved onto a few other issues. It’s just the same article recycled
*made your point
Complaining that Bulwark writers are telling the truth is self-defeating. If Joe Biden is the nominee, I will vote for him (and so will the Bulwark writers). But there are voters out there who simply cannot vote for a guy who is noticeably deteriorating day by day. Any new candidate will have a better chance of picking up voters who don’t want Trump. And here’s one white woman who will definitely vote for Kamala Harris for president.
1,000,000 likes!
Donors are freezing $90 million until Biden is replaced. Democrats are seeing polling that indicate safe blue states could turn purple. This is country-wide. People do not think Joe Biden can do the job for 4 more years. This is not because of what the Bulwark is writing. Why the resistance to seeing this?
BUH BYE
I'm beginning to feel that people have only been reading the Bulwark headlines until now. I mean, there is NOTHING inconsistent about their recent positions. How are any of you shocked that they are anti-Trump, not pro-Biden? They want to beat Trump, so they want us to run a winner. We should want that too. They are afraid - with cause - that 2024 Joe Biden cannot win. We should be too.
We should be honest with ourselves: while most of the Dem voters are blue-no-matter-who, that's just not enough to carry the election. If it was, HRC would be going into her second term. So, rather than become more intransigent and narrowing our circle to those we agree with, we should look for a path to win fence sitters and moderates - whatever that entails. Personally I doubt that "who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" is going to help in that regard.
It doesn't matter what Bulwark's intentions are, how afraid they are, or how much or how little they like Biden. The entire premise upon which their argument is based is moot. Biden is not stepping down. Their daily circle jerk is useless at best, and helping Trump at worst.
I don’t see how it’s helping Trump. None of us is voting for him. They’re not trying to talk us into doing so.
I still feel like Bill is disappointed Nikki hasn't switched parties and run as a D.
Julie, not too much argument with this. I just wish they could show a bit more humility in how decades of Republican crap led us to this. Those voters that can't see the existential threat that Trump represents are due in large part to the propaganda that Fox, Limbaugh, et al. promoted (to a public audience with the critical thinking skills of a stick) and which the never Trump folk widely participated in, are why we currently find ourselves in this mess.
I agree with most of what you said, except for the humility bit. I listen to a lot of their content and all of them have expressed their regret for contributing to this situation. Charlie Sykes wrote "how the right lost its mind" Tim wrote "Why we did it" - many of them have openly and frequently shared deep regrets over missing or misreading what was happening in the republican party. I mean, maybe they could don a hair shirt and self flagellate forever, but I don't think doing so would advance the goal of defeating Trump and Trumpism.
I don't need the hair shirt or excessive self flagellation. I am often reminded of that meme though........"Well, well, well, if it isn't the consequences of my own actions.'
My struggle is with how loudly, harshly, vitriolicly, and with gusto they pushed their agenda 24/7/365. That doesn't go away quietly.......
I struggle with this issue on an ongoing basis. On one hand I think everyone deserves a chance at redemption. We all make mistakes, and we should have the opportunity to atone for them and show that we have learned and changed. On the other hand some of us still live every day with the consequences of what they had a hand in creating, and while they may have moved on and even regret what grew into the toxic weed of MAGA and DJT, we still are stuck with the damage from the storm. And they don't necessarily disagree with all, or even most, of the conservative policy issues and decisions that were utilized as part of the GOP divide-and-conquer tactics.
I'm one of those in Wisconsin who still feels the pinch of what the Walker regime did, aided and abetted by a GOP legislative and Supreme Court majority (at that time), from hyperpartisan redistricting through Act 10 through vigorously defunding and handicapping the UW System through Judge Gableman and 2020 fake electors, and on and on. It is hard for me to turn the page when so there is so much discord and dysfunction in this state. It didn't have to be that way. As Charlie himself used to like to say in this space, they were warned. That sentiment certainly is a two-way street.
Like 1000x.
"[J]ust not enough to carry the election." Precisely said! Committed Democratic nominee voters attacking committed Democratic nominee voters… thank the gods for the good people of the Bulwark.
I don’t disagree but being pro-Biden is being anti-Trump. It’s a distinction without a difference (at least for now).
However, what I struggle with their analysis (not all of them) is that they aren’t coming out full throated showing us how Kamala can win. I believe they are hiding the bball because everyone has a different choice for who the “best” candidate is. If this goes to a brokered convention and Kamala loses I believe there is no chance we win. Just my opinion though
During the post-presser coverage I finally lost my temper and resorted to the time-honored tradition of yelling at the television set, when one too many talking heads said that Biden seriously risked doing irreparable harm to the nation by not standing down and thinking about the impact of his choices.
Wherever one stands on Go Joe versus Stay Joe, I'm not willing to forget that what actually risks doing irreparable harm to our nation is that tens of millions of voters on the right are willing to vote for a convicted felon, sexual abuser, serial liar, admitted wannabe dictator, and all-around Bad Man when they had other options for a conservative candidate and opted to side with him instead.
It's that simple, if one is willing to look at the situation with both eyes open. But you know that. Shame that so many among us can't do that or, worse, don't care enough to do so. That's the real story.
Indeed, D. The problem isn't so much whether Joe should stay or go, it's the inexplicable attraction to the demagoguery and blatant fascism that millions of our citizens display. Personally I'm sick to the teeth of America's rural and working class's grievances and open hostility towards the urban and college educated of us, as if siccing an authoritarian lunatic onto the country will fix all their problems. To me one of the most disappointing things about the Trump era is that not only has there been all along an invisible and enormously large swath of our citizenry who not only do not fear the rule of a strongman but actually actively desire it, and it was so very very easy to uncover and bring them out into the open. Sadly they will still be around regardless of what happens this November.
Fair point. One undesired side effect of all this discussion on Biden's competence is that it gives a permission structure to right leaning people who aren't excited to vote for Trump to vote for him anyways. They can say, even Democrats were saying Biden wasn't fit to serve, so I HAD to vote for Trump.
However, I'd be lying if I didn't say I have real concerns about Biden's ability to beat Trump. This needs to be resolved in the next week, and if Biden stays on, everyone needs to get behind him.
The more people know about Project 2025, the more they hate it. We need to focus on making sure every voter understands.
There is no such thing as 'undecided' no matter what Sarah says.
Disagree to the extent that there are people who have to decide between voting for Biden or not voting at all (and some are making the same decision between Trump or not voting), and they are a crucial group.
It's actually between voting for democracy and voting against democracy
You're preaching to the choir on that one. I would vote for just about anyone to stop Trump, but I recognize that others don't see the world the way I do. They frustrate me, but they are the ones who have to be convinced.
Sadly this statement holds true, "Never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter".
Agreed. But those who are turned off by Biden yet also repulsed by Trump (and aren't moved by other candidates from other parties) do have an option at their disposal that next to nobody is talking about: leave that portion of the ballot blank. There is no requirement to vote for either one of them. "Vote for no more than one" can include zero. That might be the strongest statement that people collectively could make, that millions of those who cared enough to vote are not willing to support either option and demand better choices.
A blank vote is a vote for trump.
Not if it's a conservative voter who generally pulls the R lever. That is the target audience.
I have no idea how many of those conservative voters who will leave the president race blank are out there. Enough to swing an election to another candidate? The R is strong in many people and the desire to provoke the "other side" is great.
There are still some moderate Republicans, repulsed by DJT, who are open to ideas. Our goal is to persuade them that they do not have to vote for him if they do not want to. The blank presidential option is the "addition by subtraction" that we need to pursue if we know they will not vote for Biden anyway -- better neither than DJT by default.
So I understand, what you’re telling me is that 92.1% of House Dems do NOT want POTUS to step aside?
Good, because he isn’t, no matter how you kvetch Every. Freaking. Morning.
The same argument has been recycled now for 2 weeks by bill. Getting old
This is from Heather Cox Richardson Letters from an American:
"Raw Story reported that Ivan Raiklin, Trump’s self-declared “Secretary of Retribution” has compiled a “Deep State target list” of 350 people he wants to see arrested and punished for “treason” if Trump is reelected. The list includes Democratic and Republican elected officials, journalists he considers to be Trump’s enemies, U.S. Capitol Police officers, and witnesses against Trump in his impeachment trials and the hearings concerning the events of January 6, 2021."
BTW the cheap shot is priceless.
And it's buried under "Biden forgot a name!"
HCR is always worth taking the time to read.
The irresponsible behavior of our media - on any TV channel - only demeans and humiliates the great accomplishments of President Biden. He saved our nation from the deadly spread of COVID, while Trump was recommending ingesting bleach. He passed the American Rescue Plan and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law early in his presidency. The last quarter of 2020, our economy dropped 32.9% - the largest drop in our history. Due to Biden, we now have the fastest growing economy in the world. Under Trump, violence, murder, and hate crimes radically increased by 30%. (FBI Records) Biden has cut this number in half by securing historic investments in crime prevention. (Third Way, May, 2024) (FBI Reports for 2023) While Trump screamed about immigration, it is Biden who has secured our borders. More people are working than at any time in American history. Unemployment has been at 4% or lower for several years, including 3.4% in February of 2023. With Trump, the unemployment rate was 6.3% (FactCheck.org)
CNN failed to moderate the presidential debate. I would grade them a D- on this undertaking There was no effort to regulate the political discussion and refrain Trump from his disgusting and offensive fictional attack aimed at President Biden. When faced with a bullying assault, Biden did what any smart person would - shut up and shut down. He didn't take the bait to fight.
I don't know if CNN started this cycle of attacks on President Biden's reaction to their failed moderation or to deflect attention from their own failure, but my recommendation would be to contact The Federal Communications Commission (FCC). They regulate all "national and international communications through cable, radio, television, satellite and wire." (USA.gov) Write them a letter and recommend an investigation.
For our freedom, our system of justice and laws, and our democracy to survive, we need President Joe Biden in the White House another four years.
Elizabeth, From Democracy to Democrazy
Well, we need President Joe Biden to win in November.
I can't honestly say I think he'll make it four years. But I no longer care. I just want him re elected!
None of us are guaranteed tomorrow.
Exactly. There is risk in every choice.
You have made a factual case for Biden, but right now perception not facts is driving the bus. Responsible news organizations should call out t***p every time he lies about crime, the border, the economy, the 2020 election. They need to site the facts and devote as much time to that as they devote to trashing Biden.
U.S. media are bad. For instance, when they report on space and climate and only use miles and degrees Fahrenheit and do not also include kilometers and degrees Celsius (science imperial numbers are junk numbers). But they're not to blame for all this.
I hope all of this Biden replacement stuff ends after Monday. Biden is obviously back to what he was a month ago. He gave very detailed answers to difficult questions. He rambled and misspoke a couple of names. Your kids are afraid of old people, but they can be awakened to to reality that if the don’t vote they will have their rights limited and their lives oppressed.
Biden knows how to run a government. He has a vision for a free, safe, diverse and prosperous America and he is making ti happen. Should he let Harris run? She’s there anyway if he topples over. I don’t think she would have an easier time overcoming the anti-woman, anti- POC underbelly of America. But none of this is really about the Democratic candidate. The Republicans are giving the Dems the biggest gift of the election. They are open about their goals of burning the Constitution and installing an oppressive, vengeful, white supremacist, fundamentalist Christian government. NO rights for anyone outside of the oligarchy. Destroy democracy, destroy the government, destroy the environment, destroy the economy for the great benefit of a very few.
Finally, the press is realizing how crazy, cruel and dangerous the Republicans are. They are calling for Trump, who is a deranged embarrassment to our country to step down. It won’t happen but he can be defeated, and he has to be defeated badly. The Democratic candidate doesn’t really matter. Biden knows what he’s doing and how to dot it. Let’s get on with the battle.
"Biden is obviously back to what he was a month ago."
As someone who has dealt with an aging senior losing her mental acuity, I can tell you it doesn't work like that. Declining mental state due to age is not something you get over. You will have good days and bad days, but the direction is always getting worse. Eventually the bad days will be more than the good days and then one day the good days will disappear completely.
Yes. I am young yet, eight months from being 80. I have a lot of trouble bring up names immediately. But, with naps, I would be a better president than Trump and I don't have the experience, staff, and respect that Biden has. Having Harris take over in two years could be the best thing that could happen to America. People will see how having a smart, aggressive, sharp woman in charge is what America needs. She would have great difficulty getting elected on her own. I don't see any danger. We have to get united and drive MAGA out of politics and into jail where they belong.
Quick question: Do you think the polls are accurate or not?
The newest polls are showing that things are tied, and Trump has not been critically examined yet. Everyone who is not a rich, white, straight, male psychopath should be afraid of another Trump administration.
Trump has not been critically examined yet? I find that incredible. Were it true, sure, Biden would have an easier go being reelected.
Should I take that as a yes?
The campaigning is really just beginning. Until now, the people who are paying the most attention are political junkies like us. If the media tells the truth about the Republican convention things should swing to the Dems by 10 points. The Republicans will put on a show about cruelty, greed, racism, and oppression wrapped in the flag and the Bible. It should scare the sh*t our of everyone. If it is simply covered as entertainment we could be in trouble.
I don't find that believable. Trump is a known quantity to most people. No revelation is going to swing a significant percentage of voters.
So I don't really watch commercial TV, except for a few sporting events. But last week I started streaming the Bear on Hulu, with ads. I estimate I watched 25 political ads. 5 were pro-Tammy Baldwin, highlighting her bringing drug prices down, etc. 20 were warning that Trump wants to become a dictator and suspend the Constitution. The number of ads that mentioned inflation, unemployment, or immigration was zero. I think Tammy Baldwin is in a fine position. I would like to know WTF the Biden campaign thinks it is doing.
Yes. Folks who say the polls are usually wrong are incorrect. The opposite is true. For instance, the polls were largely right in 2022. We disregarded them and believed the hype about the red wave. Bill Kristol in particular is often right, including in 2022. We need to be humble and acknowledge that some people are experts in politics and polling. They know more than we do and it is wise to take heed.
The Republican Party has decided that they’re going to go after the Fed now that inflation appears to have cooled and prices are finally beginning to drop. Since this news isn’t being covered anywhere outside of the business pages, I figured this would be a fun place to drop this, especially because I’m totally sick of arguing about Joe, Donald and the media. They’re gonna do what they’re gonna do and there isn’t anything you or I can say that will change that.
From this morning’s edition of “The Fucking News”
Here’s where things get fun/treasonous.
Inflation has been cooling. Yesterday we learned that in June, prices fell by one-tenth of one percent. Prices are still up year over year, but as of now, inflation is technically gone (although prices are still rising on some shit that we buy).
The entire endgame for those high interest rates has been that the Fed would lower them once inflation was heading toward its benchmark level of a 2% annual rate. Which is where it’s now headed.
So the Fed has signaled that a rate cut might be coming to lower that 5.25% interest rate, which would make it cheaper to borrow money, thereby spurring people to buy shit, thereby injecting even more money into the economy, thereby boosting Wall Street and the economy overall.
Right before the election. Which Republicans don’t want because patriotism.
So now Republicans are warning Powell not to make it cheaper for you to get a home loan or car loan until after you leave your vote in a paper bag under a bench in the zoo. In return for voting Trump back into the White House, then you can have your precious low interest rates back.
Think I’m exaggerating?
Maybe a little. But less than 5.25%!
Here’s Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), of the Banking Committee, after grilling Powell at a hearing earlier this week, telling Politico the Fed shouldn’t lower your interest rates: “[A]nything they do before November would be rightfully — would raise the question of their own independence.”
Too vague? How’s Cramer warning Powell not to help you out, as he quoted himself in his own press release:
“[A]ny move to lower interest rates or move interest rates either direction before November 5 could certainly be a bad perception. Even if there's a strong push to do that. I know you understand that. But I just want you to know that. As long as you remain independent, I'll be on your side.”
But, but, surely Cramer’s an aberration? Right?!? Well, in some ways, hell yeah. But not on this.
Here’s Rep. Mike Lawlor (R-NY), when he had Powell testifying before his committee this week, making Powell an offer he couldn’t refuse:
“[D]o you acknowledge, or do members of the [Fed] acknowledge that a rate cut in September could be viewed as political just 30 to 60 days before an election?"
Here’s Financial Services Chair Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) on Wednesday: “I think a September rate cut will not be perceived as apolitical.”
But, but surely no one’s actually seeing these as threats? Right?!?
Here’s a note to clients yesterday from Renaissance Macro Research: If Fed members “proceed with an interest rate cut in September, expect Trump and Republican lawmakers to seek vengeance.”
But, but, surely that’s just Renaissance Macro Research’s guess? Right?!?
The guy who wrote that client note was Renaissance Macro Research Policy Research Director Steve Pavlick, a former Trump Treasury official.
But, but, surely there’s no evidence Trump feels this way. Right?!?
Trump said as early as February that any rate cut from the Fed would be political. He told Fox he expected Powell “to do something to probably help the Democrats, you know, I think if he lowers interest rates."
The Fed got the first warning note wrapped around a brick through their window back in February.
And the warnings are ramping up now even though the Fed isn’t expected to make this call until September. And everything could change depending on what happens with inflation and jobs between now and then.
Sounds like the infamous MCConnell move that no SCOTUS appointments 'close to an election.' If it's D's doing the appointing. In other words just MAGA-infected R's doing their usual dirty, lying, foul, underhanded shit.
I read that article as well and I believe Powell (a Trump nominee) responded that not lowering interest could also be considered political. I believe he leaned into previously stated goals and following the data.
That's a good response because it points out what Republicans are really saying to Powell.
You are obligated to use your position to help us politically.
Just more evidence that the Republican party is a fully fascist party, though we're not supposed to say it.
They never cease to amaze, do they? I guess WE have to move the conversation from the 24/7 *Biden Campaign Death Watch*™️ that the media seems all too self satisfied than to move away from right now.
We can’t change any of this and to continue to drive ourselves mad trying to figure out the best path forward when we are not nor ever will be involved in determining said path is making us all angrier. In other words, none of this is helping to move the conversation forward.
Wow. “Don’t you dare make the changes to improve the border that we asked for, or make home-buying or inflation less burdensome for the little guy like we say we want to. That can only be done legitimately by us Republicans! If WE do it, it isn’t political.”.
Remember when Donald badgered the Fed to lower interest rates relentlessly and they said nothing? Or that Donald wants to basically take control of the Fed in a 2nd term? Obviously none of that is political because … idk I’m struggling here.
Powell is a badass. I don't think he gives a crap about these threats.
lol. Well, yeah. It’s more the lack of reaction from any of them when Donald says that shit and projecting the whole *omfg! it is AlL jUSt POLiTIcS* if the Fed lowers rates before the election.
The pundits love this so they can create the news. Yeah, Biden is old, so is Trump. One is a decent human who accomplished more that I imagined when I voted for him. The other is a despicable Authoritarian hell bent on plunging the US into years of chaos. Stop CREATING news so you stay relevant.
I was happy to see the press conference go fairly well yesterday and still proud to have a president who values our allies and articulates a rational, rules-based foreign policy. But I still believe the narrative has been set about Joe Biden and his odds of victory are minimal. And unfortunately, the «Biden is too old» narrative was already dominant well BEFORE the debate; the debate just made it incontrovertible to too many -especially to low-information swing voters.
I promise I will shut up about this if/when he's officially the nominee, but I feel we ignore this to our peril.
The Bulwark and others in the media are trying to get Biden to self coup (to borrow from Mitt Romney's self deport). If they are so convinced that Biden is in mental decline why don't they get his cabinet to declare him mentally incapacitated? And if they are so convinced that majority of Democrats / delegates don't want Biden at the top of the ticket why don't they challenge him at the convention? They aren't doing any of that because they know they would lose those battles so, instead, as the Bulwark has admitted they are just going to keep pressuring Biden to self coup. Don't go Joe!
This relentless pressure campaign in the media and behind the scene is how Bill Kristol helped to lead the charge that got us into those disastrous and expensive wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so he's just running the same playbook, except this time he's doing it at home and on Joe Biden - a leopard never changes its spots!
100%. This whole thing reminded me of the Iraq manipulation -- complete with an assist from the NYT.
Yes, exactly the same playbook with many of the same players and the same key word of democracy - remember one of the main justifications they offered for invading Iraq was to bring democracy to the Middle East. And now many of the same people and the same media leader (NYT) are using our fear of losing our democracy to try to pressure Joe Biden to leave the ticket
Biden still has it and you do the country no service by pushing for him to quit. I’ve watched his speeches and follow his punishing schedule. The Republicans are ready to unleash horrors on us and he is putting himself in between us and them. Trump and Putin would like nothing better than for Biden to give up at the last minute. Don’t fall for their ploy! I am riding with Biden and have total confidence in Harris should he step back during his second term.
So, you don't think that Trump is an existential threat to the survival of American democracy? I'm guessing not, because if you did you would want more than anything a candidate who has the best chance of defeating Trump.
There is no one in the wings who is ready and vetted. Kamala is already on the ticket and will likely succeed him during the term. Don’t give up because of polls, help him (them) get reelected plus downballot democrats.
Further, I completely understand how catastrophic another Trump presidency would be to the world.
"Biden still has it." Quick memo to Joe on Friday morning: Zelensky and Putin are not interchangeable and no, you did not name Trump as your vice-president. Little gaffe's are one thing, mistakes like this scream from the mountain top.
As someone who spent 43 years in health care(retired RN), I believe President Biden is cognitively good. I think he has some issues with aging, as we all do when we forget a person’s name,etc. I believe he has definitely slowed down physically which makes him appear not as vibrant as before. I have confidence in his ability to lead our country!!! He is an honest, caring person who is interested in taking care of the average person! I am riding with Biden! The media needs to bring up djt’s felony convictions and his cognitive decline every day!!!
I've been forgetting people's names since I was born. I once tried to introduce my sister, standing next to me, to a friend and couldn't remember her name. I was maybe 25? Tell me your name, and I will guarantee I will forget it by the end of our conversation- and I tell you that. I also can't remember faces very well.
A good thing to remind ourselves that the media loves this controversy over Biden's fitness. They have seriously tried to become part of the story, reporting unnamed sources and keeping score of defectors. CNN was especially disappointing as they nitpicked Biden to death. The small missteps were amplified ; Biden has always had this tendency. His answer on China was close to brilliant and polished. Meanwhile in Florida, the malevolent demagogue demonstrating the worldwide havoc he will bring if elected. If Biden can remain upright and stable for next six months , whatever comes later is just the beginning of a new chapter and there is good leadership that exists in this administration. Anyone think Trump can win 24% of non-white vote in November? I don't. If Fed lowers interest rates in September I think Biden can cruise.