And so today is one more day, even here, when our nation does not focus upon why DJT should not be elected as president, why he is incompetent for the job, how Project 2025 stands to impact our nation and millions of people within it in profound and unprecedented ways, and other issues that should be the talking points in what may well b…
And so today is one more day, even here, when our nation does not focus upon why DJT should not be elected as president, why he is incompetent for the job, how Project 2025 stands to impact our nation and millions of people within it in profound and unprecedented ways, and other issues that should be the talking points in what may well become the most important election in American history. Instead we get wall-to-wall coverage of the Stay Joe or Go Joe Show.
Mommy, make it stop.
DJT is happy. The GOP is happy. MAGA is happy. Who had that on their Bingo card at the beginning of the year? Be ready for them to rub it in, gleefully, next week in Milwaukee. It might be a good time to turn off your devices and TV sets and go on that summer vacation trip that your family wants to take. Otherwise the discussion continues, along the lines of: have the Democrats hit rock bottom yet? And if so, have they procured a shovel and begun to dig?
The Trump campaign is holding its fire regarding the debate, waiting until we really are stuck with Biden as the nominee, until they unleash unrelenting, vicious, and irrefutable attacks on Biden's present fitness for another four years. No Democratic Biden supporter wants Biden to be the nominee more than Trump. Once we're really stuck, Biden will get destroyed by a nuclear ad campaign.
Yeah? I don’t think so. The Dems need to stop slitting their own throats over the media-/pundit-/paranoid congresscritter-created issue of Biden's competence and reassert their support for him. He’s running against fascism. If the choice in November is between Fascism and Democracy — and it is — then why does it matter whether Biden has dementia (he doesn’t) or can’t think straight (he can) or stumbles over words (he does, but so what) or can’t do the job (he can)?
The Tя☭mp machine is not run by geniuses; the beings they have available to attack Biden-Harris (Russians, oligarchs, friendly dictators/fascists, Republican legislators) are the same ones they’ve used in the past, and these people can’t distinguish shit from Apple butter. If the Dems can’t beat these cretins in November — even though their opponents are traitors and racists and fascists — because not enough voters prefer Democracy over Fascism, then we’re truly fucked. It’s time for the Dems to wake up and get their collective shit together.
I think you're too dismissive of the competence of those running Trump's campaign. As for the competence of those running Biden's? That debate was their idea, and we saw how that went.
I aspire to be able to present to the voters a choice better than senile or authoritarian. And considering the stakes, and the level of attention being paid by the unengaged voters who will decide the election, I think it may be wise to give them a better choice. It wouldn't be the first time voters somewhere voted democratically for an end to democracy.
Nonsense. They started the whole Joe is old and senile shit a long time ago and the media lapped it up. And why did they do that? To weaken the ONE candidate who beat him once and can do it again.
The "old and senile" is not shit. 74% of Americans believe Biden has lost his cognitive ability to be president. Not a media conspiracy, the evidence of Biden's frightful decline is plain.
So polls are what we are using to determine if the president has dementia. Again it’s all about perception—a “concerning” debate performance primed by months and months of handwringing and commentary from the media and pundits and snide commentary by the GOP (repeated by the same political press) over Biden’s age—driven by dislike of Kamala Harris and fear that if anything happens to Joe she would be president. That’s the bottom line.
People don't need to diagnose Biden as having any particular disease to notice he is struggling cognitively. The 74% of Americans who judge Biden to be impaired have not been fooled by snide handwringing and commentary. You are among the 26% who have decided he is good to go. You have your opinion, denigrating others is not a smart choice.
I'm not big on the Great Man Theory of history. Lots of people could beat Trump. Once you start thinking only Garland, I mean Mueller, I mean Jack Smith, I mean Liz Cheney, I mean Biden is the only person who can beat Trump, well, we've been down this road before.
And after the debate, which greatly reinforced that line of attack, nothing. Don't you wonder why? Maybe because they don't want to do anything that might clarify matters as to whether a new candidate is definitely needed?
The political right says that the media consistently are in the tank for Biden and the Democrats. The political left says that the media are overhyping and overcovering Joe's debate performance and fitness to serve as President, undermining his candidacy. Is there a middle ground to the issue of media perception? Maybe they should just say nothing about politics and let us figure out for ourselves what to do. And then whom to blame?
I don’t know, more than 100 stories on Biden’s age etc vs how many on either Epstein/Trump or Project 2025 or Trump’s lack of fitness for the presidency? Only one paper called him out in their editorial—the Philly Inquirer. The right has been working the refs (political journalists) for years with that old trope which is not true—along with the war on Christians, the war on Christmas, and every other cultural made-up “war” they have created from whole cloth. Not to mention the language that journos picked up—entitlements, death tax, death panels, etc.”
So no, the coverage isn’t the same and hasn’t been for years. Need I say once again “but her emails?” Or Howard Dean’s “the scream”? JVL kinda missed the boat with that mention yesterday, as well as Kerry’s “effete” wind sailing, and Gore’s “sighs and lies.” Of course they were so hard on W—the guy who gave them all nicknames and who they portrayed as the “kinda guy you’d like to have a beer with.” And let’s not forget Whitewater, once Foster, travelgate (and every other gate), Dukakis in the tank, the “scold” Jimmy Carter and his and the First Lady’s “tacky off the rack style.” The Beltway elite celebrated the return of glamour, money, and style when Reagan came to town.
I'm not claiming equivalency. I'm talking about perception -- that individual voters tend to see media coverage through the filter of their own preconceived notions and ideologies. There is no arguing with them because their mind is made up. It becomes a point where no matter what the media say or do, they will annoy someone (lots of someones) who see things differently, and no statistics and historical examples will penetrate that fog. And then there is the fact that, as businesses seeking profits in a free market economy, the media can report as they wish to, with no specific obligation to be "fair" or "balanced." So we appear to have two choices: turn them off and do our own thinking, or follow Harry Truman's example of taking seven different newspapers (TV shows, radio broadcasts, websites, ...) each day and consuming them all before making up one's own mind. Either way, complaining about media coverage is as useful as trying to shovel smoke with a pitchfork in the wind. It goes where it goes, and we can't change that.
I choose to remain optimistic that they will at some point have to change or they will die. Media is not doing well—which is what is driving the clickbait which is only making it worse. But I agree—I am very picky what I consume and no I do not only listen or read things I agree with. I also read a lot of books. I wish more people would educate themselves—about narrative, about media, journalists, pundits, and contributors. Unfortunately most Americans are not critical thinkers—which is part of my problem with the dump Biden movement. So if we do, then what happens? Who decides and how will it be decided who the nominee will be? How are they going to fundraise and barnstorm the country to gain name recognition? We now have an unknown vs a known, and not enough people understand the dangers of Trump 2.0 so it could make his victory that much more possible. We may all know these possible candidates but the average American does not. And if it is candidate A, who becomes the running mate? Is Biden old? Sure he is. Has he lost a step? Anyone under the age of forty has. Does he have dementia? Not from what I see and hear.
Four months seems like a long time, but it isn’t. And what happens when the media treats them like they do Biden? These are just a few of the questions to think about. But all I seem to see is wishful thinking—we dump Biden and everything will fall into place.
I'm in the so-called dump Biden movement. I read a lot of books and I'm a retired US History and Government teacher, so I bring a lot of background knowledge to my reading, something essential to thinking critically. And, I've been following this story since February when, seeing that Biden was losing, Ezra Klein first proposed an open convention.
Also, did you actually read all of today's Morning Shots? Bill said, "James Carville lays out in (yesterday's) New York Times a version of how an open competition for the Democratic nomination might work, along lines similar to helpful suggestions from Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks and venture capitalist Ted Dintersmith, and commentator Ezra Klein.
Talk about hubris. Carville himself is old and maybe he needs to retire. Something absolutely none of you are thinking about is the actual nuts and bolts process of replacing Biden on the ballot in all 50 states. That Carville calls on Obama and Clinton to hand pick the nominees—maybe with governors’ help—is the height of arrogance. He calls for town hall meetings in the four geographic regions and a mini primary. But there is no general primary that can be held across the country on one day; each state has its own laws and regs when it comes to candidates and elections. Just how is that going to happen in red states controlled by the GOP who would be beyond happy to legally challenge any changes to the ballot? And even in blue states? Do you think elections happen overnight? Because Carville, who should know better, certainly doesn’t seem to. Did you know that today is the deadline for registering the presidential candidates for the ballot in Georgia? And Ohio tried some ratf*#kery (sorry JVL) to try to keep the Dem candidate off the ballot because he will not officially be the nominee until the DNC—which is after the deadline.
But let’s go back to the town halls and mini primary. States would have to set up new Dem elections, and in PA and other states, potential candidates need to circulate petitions and gather signatures to qualify. Then new ballots would have to be printed. And again you don’t think this will all be legally challenged by the GOP? We have how many weeks until the convention? Just how does this all miraculously happen in five or so weeks?
Oh yes I saw Ezra’s column and rolled my eyes. The truth is, so many of the people who were and are calling for Biden’s ouster are the same people who didn’t want him in 2020 but held their noses to vote for him. I actually had the honor of meeting the man and talking to him two months ago. He was funny, sharp, and stayed on his feet for more than two hours talking and interacting with people. So I will go by my own in the flesh in real time experience with Joe Biden.
All I know on the "Joe is demented" issue is this:
1) I have a parent who has severe dementia, and while experiences can vary, I'm not seeing the key signs of it in Biden. But I am seeing them in DJT. Let's have that discussion too.
2) I have a job where I do a lot of talking, to an audience. I frequently trip over my own words, flub things in misspeaking, have awkward speech moments, lose my train of thought when trying to juggle and balance multiple approaches, and otherwise do not get a perfect score on my delivery. I wouldn't want to read a literal transcript of all my utterances. Yet no one is calling for me to step down from my job because of it. It is hard to speak spontaneously and get everything right. What is different with Joe is that now everyone is looking for every last mistaken utterance and waiting to pounce on it. Some things may be legitimate issues on his part, but others strike me as piling on because it is easy (for some) and convenient (for others). Some additional perspective is in order.
Rather than symptoms of dementia, I am seeing symptoms of Parkinson's in Joe: An abnormally weak voice due to lack of coordination of the speech muscles, forward flexed posture, a shuffling gait, his mouth agape, and irregular speech pattern (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/08/us/politics/parkinsons-expert-white-house.html). My 85-year-old brother has been showing these very symptoms for over a year. As far as I can tell, it hasn't affected his cognition, just his movement. It has slowed him down considerably.
These symptoms are what's contributing to the voters' perception that Biden is old.
So, Deutschmeister, I'm an admirer of good solid well thought out theses backed up by fluent prose, hence my high opinion of your posts (and please, no comments of "get a room" from other commenters here.) I haven't seen where you stand on the clash of Joe's "Should I Stay or Should I Go" dilemma (see what I did there?) Do you have an opinion, or did you already express one and I just missed it? For awhile I waffled back and forth, landed on the fence for a spell, and eventually sided with the ousters. I'm a gambling man, one who's had some success at the Hold'em table, and I think a new energetic candidate is our best bet. I'm all in on Harris.
Honestly, I don't have a position on staying or going, primarily because I don't feel I have enough information to make that judgment call with a reasonable assurance of accuracy. I keep feeling a nagging sensation that there is a lot more to it all than we've been made aware of -- significant things that those on the inside know but are not communicating, for obvious pragmatic reasons. So I'm trusting Joe and the DNC to get it right, aware as they are of how high the stakes are in this particular campaign. I suspect that's something of a weak response to some people, and I understand that. But it's the truth about how I feel. I just don't know, as there is no easy answer one way or the other.
In contrast I feel a great deal of hostility now toward the Democratic Party for not game planning for this possibility, even privately, and seeing the scenario coming when the signs have been visible for some time. If we're honest about it, we've all been quietly hoping fervently with fingers crossed that Joe would not have a (real or perceived) age-related incident in a very public setting, for all to see. But here we are. If asked to choose among the alternatives, I suppose I'm with Harris, but I am persuadable otherwise. The one good thing about Harris that not enough people are talking about is that she already has been fully vetted -- for the 2020 campaign -- so I do not expect that any unforeseen skeletons are lurking with her. Who knows about someone else who has not been held up to presidential-level scrutiny? If the Dems were to go with someone else who has something of substance to hide, and it were uncovered in the time between the nomination and the election, then we might as well not bother watching the election returns on November 5. We'd be viewing in real time as the last guardrail keeping democracy from going over the cliff is removed.
I appreciate the kind words from both you and Edward, and from others over time. But there are so many good, thoughtful, insightful posters in this forum. I truly am honored to be considered as one of them. I mean that in all sincerity. This group is very special.
They're not piling on. They could. Because they don't want to have any part of pushing him out. They want him there in November. And the attacks are coming.
And so today is one more day, even here, when our nation does not focus upon why DJT should not be elected as president, why he is incompetent for the job, how Project 2025 stands to impact our nation and millions of people within it in profound and unprecedented ways, and other issues that should be the talking points in what may well become the most important election in American history. Instead we get wall-to-wall coverage of the Stay Joe or Go Joe Show.
Mommy, make it stop.
DJT is happy. The GOP is happy. MAGA is happy. Who had that on their Bingo card at the beginning of the year? Be ready for them to rub it in, gleefully, next week in Milwaukee. It might be a good time to turn off your devices and TV sets and go on that summer vacation trip that your family wants to take. Otherwise the discussion continues, along the lines of: have the Democrats hit rock bottom yet? And if so, have they procured a shovel and begun to dig?
https://www.politicususa.com/2024/07/08/rep-maxine-waters-biden.html Maxine says nearly all of the House Ds stand behind Joe Biden. AOC is behind him. Also: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/7/8/2252512/-PA-Pastor-rips-Trump-and-sells-the-hell-out-of-Biden-Democratic-leaders-could-learn-something?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web
But this is of course buried by people with their own agendas: https://www.politicususa.com/2024/07/08/trump-sounds-deeply-crazed-in-low-energy-hannity-phone-interview.html
The Trump campaign is holding its fire regarding the debate, waiting until we really are stuck with Biden as the nominee, until they unleash unrelenting, vicious, and irrefutable attacks on Biden's present fitness for another four years. No Democratic Biden supporter wants Biden to be the nominee more than Trump. Once we're really stuck, Biden will get destroyed by a nuclear ad campaign.
Yeah? I don’t think so. The Dems need to stop slitting their own throats over the media-/pundit-/paranoid congresscritter-created issue of Biden's competence and reassert their support for him. He’s running against fascism. If the choice in November is between Fascism and Democracy — and it is — then why does it matter whether Biden has dementia (he doesn’t) or can’t think straight (he can) or stumbles over words (he does, but so what) or can’t do the job (he can)?
The Tя☭mp machine is not run by geniuses; the beings they have available to attack Biden-Harris (Russians, oligarchs, friendly dictators/fascists, Republican legislators) are the same ones they’ve used in the past, and these people can’t distinguish shit from Apple butter. If the Dems can’t beat these cretins in November — even though their opponents are traitors and racists and fascists — because not enough voters prefer Democracy over Fascism, then we’re truly fucked. It’s time for the Dems to wake up and get their collective shit together.
I think you're too dismissive of the competence of those running Trump's campaign. As for the competence of those running Biden's? That debate was their idea, and we saw how that went.
I aspire to be able to present to the voters a choice better than senile or authoritarian. And considering the stakes, and the level of attention being paid by the unengaged voters who will decide the election, I think it may be wise to give them a better choice. It wouldn't be the first time voters somewhere voted democratically for an end to democracy.
Nonsense. They started the whole Joe is old and senile shit a long time ago and the media lapped it up. And why did they do that? To weaken the ONE candidate who beat him once and can do it again.
The "old and senile" is not shit. 74% of Americans believe Biden has lost his cognitive ability to be president. Not a media conspiracy, the evidence of Biden's frightful decline is plain.
So polls are what we are using to determine if the president has dementia. Again it’s all about perception—a “concerning” debate performance primed by months and months of handwringing and commentary from the media and pundits and snide commentary by the GOP (repeated by the same political press) over Biden’s age—driven by dislike of Kamala Harris and fear that if anything happens to Joe she would be president. That’s the bottom line.
People don't need to diagnose Biden as having any particular disease to notice he is struggling cognitively. The 74% of Americans who judge Biden to be impaired have not been fooled by snide handwringing and commentary. You are among the 26% who have decided he is good to go. You have your opinion, denigrating others is not a smart choice.
I'm not big on the Great Man Theory of history. Lots of people could beat Trump. Once you start thinking only Garland, I mean Mueller, I mean Jack Smith, I mean Liz Cheney, I mean Biden is the only person who can beat Trump, well, we've been down this road before.
He also lied in that interview. He said he was distracted by Trump speaking when his mic was off. There's no evidence of that.
Clearly lying upsets me most of all. This one is like Trump's innumerable lies, easy to disprove.
This is not the Joe Biden I voted for in 2020 and have donated to every month since he announced.
No they did that because it one of the rare instances when a MAGA attack is true. We shouldn't have to chose between criminality and senility
And after the debate, which greatly reinforced that line of attack, nothing. Don't you wonder why? Maybe because they don't want to do anything that might clarify matters as to whether a new candidate is definitely needed?
They don’t have to do anything because the media and all the Joe haters are doing it for them.
Give it a rest
The political right says that the media consistently are in the tank for Biden and the Democrats. The political left says that the media are overhyping and overcovering Joe's debate performance and fitness to serve as President, undermining his candidacy. Is there a middle ground to the issue of media perception? Maybe they should just say nothing about politics and let us figure out for ourselves what to do. And then whom to blame?
I am stunned to see the-media-the-media defense in the pro-democracy coalition. These are Bidenists who believe in Bidenism.
I don’t know, more than 100 stories on Biden’s age etc vs how many on either Epstein/Trump or Project 2025 or Trump’s lack of fitness for the presidency? Only one paper called him out in their editorial—the Philly Inquirer. The right has been working the refs (political journalists) for years with that old trope which is not true—along with the war on Christians, the war on Christmas, and every other cultural made-up “war” they have created from whole cloth. Not to mention the language that journos picked up—entitlements, death tax, death panels, etc.”
So no, the coverage isn’t the same and hasn’t been for years. Need I say once again “but her emails?” Or Howard Dean’s “the scream”? JVL kinda missed the boat with that mention yesterday, as well as Kerry’s “effete” wind sailing, and Gore’s “sighs and lies.” Of course they were so hard on W—the guy who gave them all nicknames and who they portrayed as the “kinda guy you’d like to have a beer with.” And let’s not forget Whitewater, once Foster, travelgate (and every other gate), Dukakis in the tank, the “scold” Jimmy Carter and his and the First Lady’s “tacky off the rack style.” The Beltway elite celebrated the return of glamour, money, and style when Reagan came to town.
So I have to disagree about any equivalency here.
I'm not claiming equivalency. I'm talking about perception -- that individual voters tend to see media coverage through the filter of their own preconceived notions and ideologies. There is no arguing with them because their mind is made up. It becomes a point where no matter what the media say or do, they will annoy someone (lots of someones) who see things differently, and no statistics and historical examples will penetrate that fog. And then there is the fact that, as businesses seeking profits in a free market economy, the media can report as they wish to, with no specific obligation to be "fair" or "balanced." So we appear to have two choices: turn them off and do our own thinking, or follow Harry Truman's example of taking seven different newspapers (TV shows, radio broadcasts, websites, ...) each day and consuming them all before making up one's own mind. Either way, complaining about media coverage is as useful as trying to shovel smoke with a pitchfork in the wind. It goes where it goes, and we can't change that.
I choose to remain optimistic that they will at some point have to change or they will die. Media is not doing well—which is what is driving the clickbait which is only making it worse. But I agree—I am very picky what I consume and no I do not only listen or read things I agree with. I also read a lot of books. I wish more people would educate themselves—about narrative, about media, journalists, pundits, and contributors. Unfortunately most Americans are not critical thinkers—which is part of my problem with the dump Biden movement. So if we do, then what happens? Who decides and how will it be decided who the nominee will be? How are they going to fundraise and barnstorm the country to gain name recognition? We now have an unknown vs a known, and not enough people understand the dangers of Trump 2.0 so it could make his victory that much more possible. We may all know these possible candidates but the average American does not. And if it is candidate A, who becomes the running mate? Is Biden old? Sure he is. Has he lost a step? Anyone under the age of forty has. Does he have dementia? Not from what I see and hear.
Four months seems like a long time, but it isn’t. And what happens when the media treats them like they do Biden? These are just a few of the questions to think about. But all I seem to see is wishful thinking—we dump Biden and everything will fall into place.
I'm in the so-called dump Biden movement. I read a lot of books and I'm a retired US History and Government teacher, so I bring a lot of background knowledge to my reading, something essential to thinking critically. And, I've been following this story since February when, seeing that Biden was losing, Ezra Klein first proposed an open convention.
Have you not come across this in your extensive reading? See https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/16/opinion/ezra-klein-biden-audio-essay.html.
Also, did you actually read all of today's Morning Shots? Bill said, "James Carville lays out in (yesterday's) New York Times a version of how an open competition for the Democratic nomination might work, along lines similar to helpful suggestions from Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks and venture capitalist Ted Dintersmith, and commentator Ezra Klein.
Talk about hubris. Carville himself is old and maybe he needs to retire. Something absolutely none of you are thinking about is the actual nuts and bolts process of replacing Biden on the ballot in all 50 states. That Carville calls on Obama and Clinton to hand pick the nominees—maybe with governors’ help—is the height of arrogance. He calls for town hall meetings in the four geographic regions and a mini primary. But there is no general primary that can be held across the country on one day; each state has its own laws and regs when it comes to candidates and elections. Just how is that going to happen in red states controlled by the GOP who would be beyond happy to legally challenge any changes to the ballot? And even in blue states? Do you think elections happen overnight? Because Carville, who should know better, certainly doesn’t seem to. Did you know that today is the deadline for registering the presidential candidates for the ballot in Georgia? And Ohio tried some ratf*#kery (sorry JVL) to try to keep the Dem candidate off the ballot because he will not officially be the nominee until the DNC—which is after the deadline.
But let’s go back to the town halls and mini primary. States would have to set up new Dem elections, and in PA and other states, potential candidates need to circulate petitions and gather signatures to qualify. Then new ballots would have to be printed. And again you don’t think this will all be legally challenged by the GOP? We have how many weeks until the convention? Just how does this all miraculously happen in five or so weeks?
Oh yes I saw Ezra’s column and rolled my eyes. The truth is, so many of the people who were and are calling for Biden’s ouster are the same people who didn’t want him in 2020 but held their noses to vote for him. I actually had the honor of meeting the man and talking to him two months ago. He was funny, sharp, and stayed on his feet for more than two hours talking and interacting with people. So I will go by my own in the flesh in real time experience with Joe Biden.
All I know on the "Joe is demented" issue is this:
1) I have a parent who has severe dementia, and while experiences can vary, I'm not seeing the key signs of it in Biden. But I am seeing them in DJT. Let's have that discussion too.
2) I have a job where I do a lot of talking, to an audience. I frequently trip over my own words, flub things in misspeaking, have awkward speech moments, lose my train of thought when trying to juggle and balance multiple approaches, and otherwise do not get a perfect score on my delivery. I wouldn't want to read a literal transcript of all my utterances. Yet no one is calling for me to step down from my job because of it. It is hard to speak spontaneously and get everything right. What is different with Joe is that now everyone is looking for every last mistaken utterance and waiting to pounce on it. Some things may be legitimate issues on his part, but others strike me as piling on because it is easy (for some) and convenient (for others). Some additional perspective is in order.
Rather than symptoms of dementia, I am seeing symptoms of Parkinson's in Joe: An abnormally weak voice due to lack of coordination of the speech muscles, forward flexed posture, a shuffling gait, his mouth agape, and irregular speech pattern (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/08/us/politics/parkinsons-expert-white-house.html). My 85-year-old brother has been showing these very symptoms for over a year. As far as I can tell, it hasn't affected his cognition, just his movement. It has slowed him down considerably.
These symptoms are what's contributing to the voters' perception that Biden is old.
So, Deutschmeister, I'm an admirer of good solid well thought out theses backed up by fluent prose, hence my high opinion of your posts (and please, no comments of "get a room" from other commenters here.) I haven't seen where you stand on the clash of Joe's "Should I Stay or Should I Go" dilemma (see what I did there?) Do you have an opinion, or did you already express one and I just missed it? For awhile I waffled back and forth, landed on the fence for a spell, and eventually sided with the ousters. I'm a gambling man, one who's had some success at the Hold'em table, and I think a new energetic candidate is our best bet. I'm all in on Harris.
Honestly, I don't have a position on staying or going, primarily because I don't feel I have enough information to make that judgment call with a reasonable assurance of accuracy. I keep feeling a nagging sensation that there is a lot more to it all than we've been made aware of -- significant things that those on the inside know but are not communicating, for obvious pragmatic reasons. So I'm trusting Joe and the DNC to get it right, aware as they are of how high the stakes are in this particular campaign. I suspect that's something of a weak response to some people, and I understand that. But it's the truth about how I feel. I just don't know, as there is no easy answer one way or the other.
In contrast I feel a great deal of hostility now toward the Democratic Party for not game planning for this possibility, even privately, and seeing the scenario coming when the signs have been visible for some time. If we're honest about it, we've all been quietly hoping fervently with fingers crossed that Joe would not have a (real or perceived) age-related incident in a very public setting, for all to see. But here we are. If asked to choose among the alternatives, I suppose I'm with Harris, but I am persuadable otherwise. The one good thing about Harris that not enough people are talking about is that she already has been fully vetted -- for the 2020 campaign -- so I do not expect that any unforeseen skeletons are lurking with her. Who knows about someone else who has not been held up to presidential-level scrutiny? If the Dems were to go with someone else who has something of substance to hide, and it were uncovered in the time between the nomination and the election, then we might as well not bother watching the election returns on November 5. We'd be viewing in real time as the last guardrail keeping democracy from going over the cliff is removed.
Deutchmeister has a line outside the door to his room, so no such suggestion like that from me. ;)
On a more serious note, my journey has mirrored your own.
I appreciate the kind words from both you and Edward, and from others over time. But there are so many good, thoughtful, insightful posters in this forum. I truly am honored to be considered as one of them. I mean that in all sincerity. This group is very special.
They're not piling on. They could. Because they don't want to have any part of pushing him out. They want him there in November. And the attacks are coming.
The national news media is also very happy.
Not the media waiting, Americans from all walks of life are nervously awaiting Biden's next humiliating meltdown.