NYT and WaPo report Biden is close to stepping down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems very unfair. He's no more feeble or senile than Trump, and he at least has sane, smart advisors. I understand why this is necessary, but it feels like the the bad guys are winning.

No, and even if that were the case, just because the other guy is feeble or senile, doesn't mean you should be OK with your candidate being feeble or senile. The reality is that Biden is much more physically diminished than Trump. Mentally, they're both in decline, but in different ways. And from a moral perspective, Biden is well and Trump has always been pathological.

Biden's time is over. Harris will do a great job.

Harris is less qualified to lead than Biden right now. And she's less likely to win.

She’s more qualified than Trump.

So was Hilary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Couldn’t the official candidate have to be the one who won the primary in the state, though?


In 2016, was John Kasich on the general election ballot in Ohio?

[Anonymous]

Biden has been ill served by his wife, his family, his advisors, and the Democratic leadership that should have known better. Biden did his job and what he was elected to do - to serve as a one term bridge to a post-Trump era. There is no base in America for a rapidly declining geriatric with increasingly severe cognitive and physical issues. Absolutely no one in the US thinks it's a good idea for an 86 year old to be president. It was never rocket science. It was always basic common sense.

And now here we are.

Removing Biden from the ticket doesn't magically solve the problem, however. Now, the DNC will have no choice but to appoint Kamala Harris as heir-apparent. There is no alternative at this point. We can't turn back the clock and have a real primary with legitimate contenders. And Harris is doomed to lose in November. She will be regarded as illegitimate, someone imposed upon America by the liberal coastal elite. That campaign is not going anywhere. The Biden people have effectively gifted the presidency, the Senate, and the House to Trump and the Republican Party. And there is nothing anyone can do about it now.

[Anonymous]

Genuine question:

If he very soon drops out of the race due to medical issues, how then can he still be fit to remain president for the next six months?

This is so irregular. What happens now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ahhh. I think it is the right thing and I am mad they ever said he would go for a second term.

But I feel bad for him.

+1 most definitely. it's just been handled so poorly.

I'm going to disagree here. Biden never should have run for a second term. He was basically drafted to stop Trump. And he did. He should have stepped aside and preserved that as his legacy. Instead, he decided to debate. The Dianne Feinstein debacle should have been the final alarm bell.

Then there should have been a robust primary - Kamala should have been told she'd have to compete too. Give people something to actually get excited about.

At this point, there's still time to build momentum but I'm not convinced Kamala is the one to do it.

+1 PP here. I agree with you. I just meant I feel bad for him to have to leave under pressure and that his close advisors and family encouraged him to continue. I don't like all his policies but think he's a good person who's been through a lot with the deaths of his first wife snd two of his kids, plus Hunter's issues.

[Anonymous]

They will need to do a new primary

[Anonymous]

If Biden is going to step aside, it makes no sense to go with Harris. She's even less likely to beat Trump than he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems very unfair. He's no more feeble or senile than Trump, and he at least has sane, smart advisors. I understand why this is necessary, but it feels like the the bad guys are winning.

No, and even if that were the case, just because the other guy is feeble or senile, doesn't mean you should be OK with your candidate being feeble or senile. The reality is that Biden is much more physically diminished than Trump. Mentally, they're both in decline, but in different ways. And from a moral perspective, Biden is well and Trump has always been pathological.

Biden's time is over. Harris will do a great job.

Harris is less qualified to lead than Biden right now. And she's less likely to win.

She’s more qualified than Trump.

So was Hilary.

There's more to getting elected than just being brainy. You need to be able to connect with people, and most people don't vote for someone who openly looks down on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems very unfair. He's no more feeble or senile than Trump, and he at least has sane, smart advisors. I understand why this is necessary, but it feels like the the bad guys are winning.

No, and even if that were the case, just because the other guy is feeble or senile, doesn't mean you should be OK with your candidate being feeble or senile. The reality is that Biden is much more physically diminished than Trump. Mentally, they're both in decline, but in different ways. And from a moral perspective, Biden is well and Trump has always been pathological.

Biden's time is over. Harris will do a great job.

Harris is less qualified to lead than Biden right now. And she's less likely to win.

She’s more qualified than Trump.

So was Hilary.

There's more to getting elected than just being brainy. You need to be able to connect with people, and most people don't vote for someone who openly looks down on them.

I'm aware, but Harris doesn't connect with people either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If Biden is going to step aside, it makes no sense to go with Harris. She's even less likely to beat Trump than he is.

That’s who it would be though, right? Or does there have to be new candidates and a new primary? Do the Republicans get a new primary, too? Since people may have voted differently if the Democratic candidates had been different?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems very unfair. He's no more feeble or senile than Trump, and he at least has sane, smart advisors. I understand why this is necessary, but it feels like the the bad guys are winning.

No, and even if that were the case, just because the other guy is feeble or senile, doesn't mean you should be OK with your candidate being feeble or senile. The reality is that Biden is much more physically diminished than Trump. Mentally, they're both in decline, but in different ways. And from a moral perspective, Biden is well and Trump has always been pathological.

Biden's time is over. Harris will do a great job.

Harris is less qualified to lead than Biden right now. And she's less likely to win.

She’s more qualified than Trump.

So was Hilary.

There's more to getting elected than just being brainy. You need to be able to connect with people, and most people don't vote for someone who openly looks down on them.

I'm aware, but Harris doesn't connect with people either.

Maybe even less so.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Of equal importance, if not more so, is what will happen with the Biden/Harris campaign funds. They have something like $90 million. My understanding is that only Harris can access it if Biden drops out. If that is true, she is really the only option to replace him.

Do you really think she can win?

Yes, and fairly easily.

Jeff, normally I agree with your take and find you very reasonable. But this response baffles me. Why do you think Kamala can easily win? She did poorly in the primary and dropped out early. The unfair misogyny that plagued Hilary hasn’t disappeared. Polls show her faring not much better than Biden. To be fair, they don’t show any Democrat with much of an edge, but lack of name recognition is a factor for the less known Dems. Everyone knows who Kamala is.

My theory is that Biden actually has a great legislative record. My single complaint is his handling of the Israel-Gaza war. The economy is in pretty good shape with high employment, the stock market hitting record highs, and inflation under control. If Biden were 20 years younger, this election wouldn't even be close. But, Biden is not 20 years younger. However, Kamala Harris is. She can take credit for many of Biden's achievements because she was part of the team and she can promise to keep the same course. She will be a very credible messenger on women's health issues and I think she will inspire young people.

I don't believe Hillary Clinton lost because of misogyny, She lost because she ran a poor campaign and because of James Comey's attempting to act politically and screwing it up royally.

In short, Harris just has to campaign on a message to continue the path that has dug the U.S. out of the hole Trump put us in, the path that has made our economy the envy of the world, and promise to protect reproductive rights. And then show energy. She will out hustle Trump and can campaign everywhere. Her historic candidacy will be inspiring and create a lot of excitement.

[Anonymous]

This is on the DNC and their bullshit plan. I’ve been voting for 30 years, and this is the first presidential election I don’t want to vote.

I went back and listened to the Howard Stern (barf!) and Smartless episodes with Biden. His decline is undeniable. The DNC knew damn well he isn’t up for the job, but pressed on without holding any debates and not even primaries in some states. He can’t do the job, and I am supposed to vote for him? GMAFB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This seems very unfair. He's no more feeble or senile than Trump, and he at least has sane, smart advisors. I understand why this is necessary, but it feels like the the bad guys are winning.

No, and even if that were the case, just because the other guy is feeble or senile, doesn't mean you should be OK with your candidate being feeble or senile. The reality is that Biden is much more physically diminished than Trump. Mentally, they're both in decline, but in different ways. And from a moral perspective, Biden is well and Trump has always been pathological.

Biden's time is over. Harris will do a great job.

Harris is less qualified to lead than Biden right now. And she's less likely to win.

She’s more qualified than Trump.

So was Hilary.

There's more to getting elected than just being brainy. You need to be able to connect with people, and most people don't vote for someone who openly looks down on them.

Kamala isn't great but she is nothing like Hilary. She may be cringe but she isn't condescending. She isn't inauthentic, either. She's wysiwig.

Over time, I admit, Klobuchar grew on me. Maybe Harris will too.

[Anonymous]