NYT and WaPo report Biden is close to stepping down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC says that the political class (pundits, donors) turned on Biden because of the debate and if they had concerns about age, they should've stated it last year instead of supporting him
She's concerned about legal challenges if Biden is swapped out
states Democrats should not leak their displeasure to journalists, they should "say it with their chest" and go public if they have an opinion
The donors and elites that want Biden to step down, don't want Kamala either. They want a new ticket. Kamala supporters should not get their hopes up!
They have no plan on how to replace Biden and can't answer her questions
Biden does well with old people and unions, and thrives with crowds, struggled due to no audience in the debate
states she's poll skeptic, she has outperformed the polls before, her own private polling had her double digits down from what the result ended up being in the primary this year
says that the Dem members of Congress who want Biden to drop out only voice concern about their donors, not their voters


[youtube] https://youtu.be/mlzNvNFqtBE[/youtube]

The part about the legal challenges is especially worrisome.

And the DNC lawyers had no answers for her as to the legal risk! Insane to even publicly discuss replacing the candidate before identifying the risks and benefits of such a strategy.

They know the answers. They just don't want to share how it will be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that Biden’s own party is trying to cancel him?

Yes. This is what is so flabbergasting to so many rank & file Dems who are not part of the DC-LA-NYC bubble. Don’t tell swing state voters you’re “saving democracy” and then try to force out the sitting President despite him having the primary votes and delegates. It’s offensive that the DC-LA-NYC Bubble Dems believe voters are so stupid to accept this.

This is such a dumb argument. His primary was uncontested because no mainstream Dem who really wants the job would ever run against him. They would get no finding or support from the DNC and would kill any future choices, so it’s really a non-choice when an egomaniac decides he will not pass the baton. This hadn’t ever before means that democracy is working. I mean how many states didn’t have any other candidate on the Dem ballot in 2020 because we have an UNDEMOCRATIC primary system. I wanted to vote for Elizabeth Warren, but she wasn’t on my DC ballot.

Presidents have been selected at the convention before. Let the GOP challenge it, it’s legal.

It’s a fool’s errand to ignore the legal issues which are a function of the various state election laws.

What legal issues? The ones Heritage Foundation is trying to push? They are purposely trying to confuse you because they know Trump can beat Biden. It's pure disinformation.

But seriously, list the legal issues. So we can talk specifics.

My take is there's been no DNC Convention, no official candidate, and no ballot in any of the 50 states. Easy and perfectly legal to nominate someone other than Biden.

Nevada:

3.  If a vacancy occurs in a major political party nomination for a partisan office after the primary election and before 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held and:
(a) The vacancy occurs because the nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent, the vacancy may be filled by a candidate designated by the party central committee of the county or State, as the case may be, of the major political party.
(b) The vacancy occurs for a reason other than the reasons described in paragraph (a), the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.
4.  No change may be made on the ballot for the general election after 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held. If, after that time and date:
(a) A nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent; or
(b) A vacancy in the nomination is otherwise created, the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-293.html#NRS293Sec165

Now, I don’t know how this provision of Nevada law can be legal in the face of the fact that Presidential nominating conventions last until August. But this would clearly be something that gets mired in prolonged litigation, both at the state and eventually federal level.

The date of the convention has far less legal standing than a ballot date set by state law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone saying NeverBiden?
No one is willing to say that.
NeverTrump was making a point that you would not get their votes, so calculate accordingly.
Problem was their numbers were too small and Trump supporters were too high.
Full Biden supporters are small in number.
No one will be mad if Biden is replaced at the convention. In 2016, Roger Stone was threatening violence.
Will there be any numbers declaring NeverBiden that would force people to say we must have a new candidate.

Right now it is Biden down just five in polls, and all the people calling on him to drop out they know will vote for Biden.

That’s why this power struggle is happening - whomever gets the nomination is getting the anti-Trump “will crawl a mile over glass to vote against that Orange f#ck” votes. It is actually a pretty easy race at the end of the day because Trump has a “very unfavorable” rating pushing 50%. In other words, he’s already hit his ceiling for support and the inevitable Dem candidate has more avenues to build a coalition of even soft supporters (assuming people show up to vote….which I think they will).

Removing Biden is far too risky for some reasons - legally, reputation of the party, respect for the ballot, etc.

I'm not really even sure what it is that is "happening" - I had a message about Joe stepping down show up in my Facebook feed tonight, sponsored by "Pass The Torch, Joe" - whoever that is. Thing is, there were hundreds and hundreds of comments on it saying "stay the course, Joe" and "ridin with biden" and "I'm with Joe" and "Biden / Harris 2024" and I only saw ONE saying "Biden needs to step down." It really has me thinking there isn't actually all that much popular support and is instead being promoted and orchestrated by a handful of wealthy elites / big donors / lobbyists. Whoever it is hasn't done a good job of testing the waters or gathering data.

The AP poll said that 60% want Biden to step down. Those are real numbers, not trolls, since the trolls all want him to stay on and lose to Trump. This isn't an elite organized coup. It is everyone coming to the realization that Biden cannot be the candidate. He has declined. He cannot do it.

Oh, because of an AP poll? Give me a break. Do you recall the Gallup poll in the first week in September 2008 - after the R convention- that showed McCain and Palin leading Obama and Biden by 10 points? I do. The polls generally suck and are often pushing an agenda.

DP. Please these are over 70 internal polls that show Biden losing and losing the House and Senate. Trump has a similar set. Our allies have access to this information and it is a sh#t show.

Do you seriously think these well known Democrats are just breaking with Biden for no reason. It is time for the staffers and Democratic apparatchiks to sit down and shut up. You are making things worst.

This is an unprecedented thing, it has never happened before. We are in uncharted territory. But these Dems are not calling for Biden to step down on a whim. This is incredibly serious.

But despite how incredibly serious it is, they're not asking Biden to step down from the Presidency. They won't do that, because then Harris would be the incumbent and implied nominee, which they want to avoid at all cost. They're voicing concerns over the election, not the running of the nation, which will be a hard thing to explain to the wider population.

The wider population sees and understands the situation, doesn't need to be explained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC says that the political class (pundits, donors) turned on Biden because of the debate and if they had concerns about age, they should've stated it last year instead of supporting him
She's concerned about legal challenges if Biden is swapped out
states Democrats should not leak their displeasure to journalists, they should "say it with their chest" and go public if they have an opinion
The donors and elites that want Biden to step down, don't want Kamala either. They want a new ticket. Kamala supporters should not get their hopes up!
They have no plan on how to replace Biden and can't answer her questions
Biden does well with old people and unions, and thrives with crowds, struggled due to no audience in the debate
states she's poll skeptic, she has outperformed the polls before, her own private polling had her double digits down from what the result ended up being in the primary this year
says that the Dem members of Congress who want Biden to drop out only voice concern about their donors, not their voters


[youtube] https://youtu.be/mlzNvNFqtBE[/youtube]

The part about the legal challenges is especially worrisome.

And the DNC lawyers had no answers for her as to the legal risk! Insane to even publicly discuss replacing the candidate before identifying the risks and benefits of such a strategy.

They know the answers. They just don't want to share how it will be done.

IF that's true, it makes no sense and only increases distrust and lack of confidence in the process from voters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC says that the political class (pundits, donors) turned on Biden because of the debate and if they had concerns about age, they should've stated it last year instead of supporting him
She's concerned about legal challenges if Biden is swapped out
states Democrats should not leak their displeasure to journalists, they should "say it with their chest" and go public if they have an opinion
The donors and elites that want Biden to step down, don't want Kamala either. They want a new ticket. Kamala supporters should not get their hopes up!
They have no plan on how to replace Biden and can't answer her questions
Biden does well with old people and unions, and thrives with crowds, struggled due to no audience in the debate
states she's poll skeptic, she has outperformed the polls before, her own private polling had her double digits down from what the result ended up being in the primary this year
says that the Dem members of Congress who want Biden to drop out only voice concern about their donors, not their voters


[youtube] https://youtu.be/mlzNvNFqtBE[/youtube]

The part about the legal challenges is especially worrisome.

And the DNC lawyers had no answers for her as to the legal risk! Insane to even publicly discuss replacing the candidate before identifying the risks and benefits of such a strategy.

They know the answers. They just don't want to share how it will be done.

Lawyer here. No, they don't know the answers. This is uncharted territory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC says that the political class (pundits, donors) turned on Biden because of the debate and if they had concerns about age, they should've stated it last year instead of supporting him
She's concerned about legal challenges if Biden is swapped out
states Democrats should not leak their displeasure to journalists, they should "say it with their chest" and go public if they have an opinion
The donors and elites that want Biden to step down, don't want Kamala either. They want a new ticket. Kamala supporters should not get their hopes up!
They have no plan on how to replace Biden and can't answer her questions
Biden does well with old people and unions, and thrives with crowds, struggled due to no audience in the debate
states she's poll skeptic, she has outperformed the polls before, her own private polling had her double digits down from what the result ended up being in the primary this year
says that the Dem members of Congress who want Biden to drop out only voice concern about their donors, not their voters


[youtube] https://youtu.be/mlzNvNFqtBE[/youtube]

The part about the legal challenges is especially worrisome.

And the DNC lawyers had no answers for her as to the legal risk! Insane to even publicly discuss replacing the candidate before identifying the risks and benefits of such a strategy.

They know the answers. They just don't want to share how it will be done.

Good Lord. Has the DNC gone QAnon? Hired Sidney "Kraken" Powell as their attorney, and we're just supposed to "TrUSt tHE pLAn?"

Do better, DNC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC says that the political class (pundits, donors) turned on Biden because of the debate and if they had concerns about age, they should've stated it last year instead of supporting him
She's concerned about legal challenges if Biden is swapped out
states Democrats should not leak their displeasure to journalists, they should "say it with their chest" and go public if they have an opinion
The donors and elites that want Biden to step down, don't want Kamala either. They want a new ticket. Kamala supporters should not get their hopes up!
They have no plan on how to replace Biden and can't answer her questions
Biden does well with old people and unions, and thrives with crowds, struggled due to no audience in the debate
states she's poll skeptic, she has outperformed the polls before, her own private polling had her double digits down from what the result ended up being in the primary this year
says that the Dem members of Congress who want Biden to drop out only voice concern about their donors, not their voters


[youtube] https://youtu.be/mlzNvNFqtBE[/youtube]

The part about the legal challenges is especially worrisome.

And the DNC lawyers had no answers for her as to the legal risk! Insane to even publicly discuss replacing the candidate before identifying the risks and benefits of such a strategy.

They know the answers. They just don't want to share how it will be done.

Lawyer here. No, they don't know the answers. This is uncharted territory.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Obama was startled by how 'disoriented' Biden appeared during a June fundraising event, NYT reports

During a campaign fundraising event in June, President Joe Biden's disoriented state while onstage left former President Barack Obama "startled," The New York Times reported.

The event in question — a Los Angeles fundraiser hosted by Jimmy Kimmel — included a viral moment where it appeared Obama led a frozen Biden offstage. At the time, the White House dismissed the notion, saying Biden paused for applause.

According to an anonymous former Obama aide who spoke to the Times, the former president was surprised by how Biden had "aged and seemed disoriented."

https://www.businessinsider.com/disoriented-biden-startled-obama-campaign-event-2024-7?amp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone saying NeverBiden?
No one is willing to say that.
NeverTrump was making a point that you would not get their votes, so calculate accordingly.
Problem was their numbers were too small and Trump supporters were too high.
Full Biden supporters are small in number.
No one will be mad if Biden is replaced at the convention. In 2016, Roger Stone was threatening violence.
Will there be any numbers declaring NeverBiden that would force people to say we must have a new candidate.

Right now it is Biden down just five in polls, and all the people calling on him to drop out they know will vote for Biden.

That’s why this power struggle is happening - whomever gets the nomination is getting the anti-Trump “will crawl a mile over glass to vote against that Orange f#ck” votes. It is actually a pretty easy race at the end of the day because Trump has a “very unfavorable” rating pushing 50%. In other words, he’s already hit his ceiling for support and the inevitable Dem candidate has more avenues to build a coalition of even soft supporters (assuming people show up to vote….which I think they will).

Removing Biden is far too risky for some reasons - legally, reputation of the party, respect for the ballot, etc.

I'm not really even sure what it is that is "happening" - I had a message about Joe stepping down show up in my Facebook feed tonight, sponsored by "Pass The Torch, Joe" - whoever that is. Thing is, there were hundreds and hundreds of comments on it saying "stay the course, Joe" and "ridin with biden" and "I'm with Joe" and "Biden / Harris 2024" and I only saw ONE saying "Biden needs to step down." It really has me thinking there isn't actually all that much popular support and is instead being promoted and orchestrated by a handful of wealthy elites / big donors / lobbyists. Whoever it is hasn't done a good job of testing the waters or gathering data.

I think the point you’re missing is that while Biden has a ton of supporters, it won’t be enough. Margins in presidential races are incredibly thin and Biden is not going to be able to energize the youth and independents. Yes, the die-hards will vote for him, but it won’t be enough.

I think the point you're missing is that the "Biden must step aside" faction doesn't have as much support as they think either, are causing disunity and frustration, and don't have any solid data to show that what they are promoting has any better chance at beating Trump and at present may actually be causing far more damage to Democrats than Biden's bad debate performance did. The "Biden must step aside" people must do much much better than simply sitting around trashtalking Biden calling him a "vegetable" and trying to browbeat his supporters by wildly accusing them of "coverups" and "gaslighting" and everything else. That is only fomenting anger and resentment. They need to present viable alternatives with multiple sources of robust, credible polling, and state a solid case and robust platform for how this candidate can counter all of Trump's talking points about the border and other things that are driving voters toward Trump. And you need to get all that together starting yesterday and already be socializing it with voters BEFORE the upcoming DNC convention, which is just weeks away.

DP. You are talking about two different things. Pointing out that Biden is too old and is incapable of being president for another 4 years has nothing to do with who the candidate should be. It is only about who the candidate shouldn't be.

If the people asking Biden to step aside also named someone else, you would criticize that. Anyway, do you mean the first person (House? Senate? Any person?) or biggest name or who? Or are you thinking that this is all coordinated and everyone is acting according to some back room plan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that Biden’s own party is trying to cancel him?

Yes. This is what is so flabbergasting to so many rank & file Dems who are not part of the DC-LA-NYC bubble. Don’t tell swing state voters you’re “saving democracy” and then try to force out the sitting President despite him having the primary votes and delegates. It’s offensive that the DC-LA-NYC Bubble Dems believe voters are so stupid to accept this.

This is such a dumb argument. His primary was uncontested because no mainstream Dem who really wants the job would ever run against him. They would get no finding or support from the DNC and would kill any future choices, so it’s really a non-choice when an egomaniac decides he will not pass the baton. This hadn’t ever before means that democracy is working. I mean how many states didn’t have any other candidate on the Dem ballot in 2020 because we have an UNDEMOCRATIC primary system. I wanted to vote for Elizabeth Warren, but she wasn’t on my DC ballot.

Presidents have been selected at the convention before. Let the GOP challenge it, it’s legal.

It’s a fool’s errand to ignore the legal issues which are a function of the various state election laws.

What legal issues? The ones Heritage Foundation is trying to push? They are purposely trying to confuse you because they know Trump can beat Biden. It's pure disinformation.

But seriously, list the legal issues. So we can talk specifics.

My take is there's been no DNC Convention, no official candidate, and no ballot in any of the 50 states. Easy and perfectly legal to nominate someone other than Biden.

Nevada:

3.  If a vacancy occurs in a major political party nomination for a partisan office after the primary election and before 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held and:
(a) The vacancy occurs because the nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent, the vacancy may be filled by a candidate designated by the party central committee of the county or State, as the case may be, of the major political party.
(b) The vacancy occurs for a reason other than the reasons described in paragraph (a), the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.
4.  No change may be made on the ballot for the general election after 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held. If, after that time and date:
(a) A nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent; or
(b) A vacancy in the nomination is otherwise created, the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-293.html#NRS293Sec165

Now, I don’t know how this provision of Nevada law can be legal in the face of the fact that Presidential nominating conventions last until August. But this would clearly be something that gets mired in prolonged litigation, both at the state and eventually federal level.

The date of the convention has far less legal standing than a ballot date set by state law.

PP here: agreed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that Biden’s own party is trying to cancel him?

Yes. This is what is so flabbergasting to so many rank & file Dems who are not part of the DC-LA-NYC bubble. Don’t tell swing state voters you’re “saving democracy” and then try to force out the sitting President despite him having the primary votes and delegates. It’s offensive that the DC-LA-NYC Bubble Dems believe voters are so stupid to accept this.

This is such a dumb argument. His primary was uncontested because no mainstream Dem who really wants the job would ever run against him. They would get no finding or support from the DNC and would kill any future choices, so it’s really a non-choice when an egomaniac decides he will not pass the baton. This hadn’t ever before means that democracy is working. I mean how many states didn’t have any other candidate on the Dem ballot in 2020 because we have an UNDEMOCRATIC primary system. I wanted to vote for Elizabeth Warren, but she wasn’t on my DC ballot.

Presidents have been selected at the convention before. Let the GOP challenge it, it’s legal.

It’s a fool’s errand to ignore the legal issues which are a function of the various state election laws.

What legal issues? The ones Heritage Foundation is trying to push? They are purposely trying to confuse you because they know Trump can beat Biden. It's pure disinformation.

But seriously, list the legal issues. So we can talk specifics.

My take is there's been no DNC Convention, no official candidate, and no ballot in any of the 50 states. Easy and perfectly legal to nominate someone other than Biden.

Nevada:

3.  If a vacancy occurs in a major political party nomination for a partisan office after the primary election and before 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held and:
(a) The vacancy occurs because the nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent, the vacancy may be filled by a candidate designated by the party central committee of the county or State, as the case may be, of the major political party.
(b) The vacancy occurs for a reason other than the reasons described in paragraph (a), the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.
4.  No change may be made on the ballot for the general election after 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held. If, after that time and date:
(a) A nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent; or
(b) A vacancy in the nomination is otherwise created, the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-293.html#NRS293Sec165

Now, I don’t know how this provision of Nevada law can be legal in the face of the fact that Presidential nominating conventions last until August. But this would clearly be something that gets mired in prolonged litigation, both at the state and eventually federal level.

The date of the convention has far less legal standing than a ballot date set by state law.

PP here: agreed.

Didn't the Supreme Court already say that a state cannot keep a name off of a ballot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AOC says that the political class (pundits, donors) turned on Biden because of the debate and if they had concerns about age, they should've stated it last year instead of supporting him
She's concerned about legal challenges if Biden is swapped out
states Democrats should not leak their displeasure to journalists, they should "say it with their chest" and go public if they have an opinion
The donors and elites that want Biden to step down, don't want Kamala either. They want a new ticket. Kamala supporters should not get their hopes up!
They have no plan on how to replace Biden and can't answer her questions
Biden does well with old people and unions, and thrives with crowds, struggled due to no audience in the debate
states she's poll skeptic, she has outperformed the polls before, her own private polling had her double digits down from what the result ended up being in the primary this year
says that the Dem members of Congress who want Biden to drop out only voice concern about their donors, not their voters


[youtube] https://youtu.be/mlzNvNFqtBE[/youtube]

The part about the legal challenges is especially worrisome.

And the DNC lawyers had no answers for her as to the legal risk! Insane to even publicly discuss replacing the candidate before identifying the risks and benefits of such a strategy.

They know the answers. They just don't want to share how it will be done.

Lawyer here. No, they don't know the answers. This is uncharted territory.

Exactly.

Plus, if it ends up in the highest court of a republican state or the US Supreme Court, there is NO predicting what the partisan judges will do, regardless of what the law says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone saying NeverBiden?
No one is willing to say that.
NeverTrump was making a point that you would not get their votes, so calculate accordingly.
Problem was their numbers were too small and Trump supporters were too high.
Full Biden supporters are small in number.
No one will be mad if Biden is replaced at the convention. In 2016, Roger Stone was threatening violence.
Will there be any numbers declaring NeverBiden that would force people to say we must have a new candidate.

Right now it is Biden down just five in polls, and all the people calling on him to drop out they know will vote for Biden.

That’s why this power struggle is happening - whomever gets the nomination is getting the anti-Trump “will crawl a mile over glass to vote against that Orange f#ck” votes. It is actually a pretty easy race at the end of the day because Trump has a “very unfavorable” rating pushing 50%. In other words, he’s already hit his ceiling for support and the inevitable Dem candidate has more avenues to build a coalition of even soft supporters (assuming people show up to vote….which I think they will).

Removing Biden is far too risky for some reasons - legally, reputation of the party, respect for the ballot, etc.

I'm not really even sure what it is that is "happening" - I had a message about Joe stepping down show up in my Facebook feed tonight, sponsored by "Pass The Torch, Joe" - whoever that is. Thing is, there were hundreds and hundreds of comments on it saying "stay the course, Joe" and "ridin with biden" and "I'm with Joe" and "Biden / Harris 2024" and I only saw ONE saying "Biden needs to step down." It really has me thinking there isn't actually all that much popular support and is instead being promoted and orchestrated by a handful of wealthy elites / big donors / lobbyists. Whoever it is hasn't done a good job of testing the waters or gathering data.

I think the point you’re missing is that while Biden has a ton of supporters, it won’t be enough. Margins in presidential races are incredibly thin and Biden is not going to be able to energize the youth and independents. Yes, the die-hards will vote for him, but it won’t be enough.

I think the point you're missing is that the "Biden must step aside" faction doesn't have as much support as they think either, are causing disunity and frustration, and don't have any solid data to show that what they are promoting has any better chance at beating Trump and at present may actually be causing far more damage to Democrats than Biden's bad debate performance did. The "Biden must step aside" people must do much much better than simply sitting around trashtalking Biden calling him a "vegetable" and trying to browbeat his supporters by wildly accusing them of "coverups" and "gaslighting" and everything else. That is only fomenting anger and resentment. They need to present viable alternatives with multiple sources of robust, credible polling, and state a solid case and robust platform for how this candidate can counter all of Trump's talking points about the border and other things that are driving voters toward Trump. And you need to get all that together starting yesterday and already be socializing it with voters BEFORE the upcoming DNC convention, which is just weeks away.

DP. You are talking about two different things. Pointing out that Biden is too old and is incapable of being president for another 4 years has nothing to do with who the candidate should be. It is only about who the candidate shouldn't be.

If the people asking Biden to step aside also named someone else, you would criticize that. Anyway, do you mean the first person (House? Senate? Any person?) or biggest name or who? Or are you thinking that this is all coordinated and everyone is acting according to some back room plan?

If there isn't a plan and you don't have a solid alternative then you'd might as well just throw in the towel now. Trump will win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it ironic that Biden’s own party is trying to cancel him?

Yes. This is what is so flabbergasting to so many rank & file Dems who are not part of the DC-LA-NYC bubble. Don’t tell swing state voters you’re “saving democracy” and then try to force out the sitting President despite him having the primary votes and delegates. It’s offensive that the DC-LA-NYC Bubble Dems believe voters are so stupid to accept this.

This is such a dumb argument. His primary was uncontested because no mainstream Dem who really wants the job would ever run against him. They would get no finding or support from the DNC and would kill any future choices, so it’s really a non-choice when an egomaniac decides he will not pass the baton. This hadn’t ever before means that democracy is working. I mean how many states didn’t have any other candidate on the Dem ballot in 2020 because we have an UNDEMOCRATIC primary system. I wanted to vote for Elizabeth Warren, but she wasn’t on my DC ballot.

Presidents have been selected at the convention before. Let the GOP challenge it, it’s legal.

It’s a fool’s errand to ignore the legal issues which are a function of the various state election laws.

What legal issues? The ones Heritage Foundation is trying to push? They are purposely trying to confuse you because they know Trump can beat Biden. It's pure disinformation.

But seriously, list the legal issues. So we can talk specifics.

My take is there's been no DNC Convention, no official candidate, and no ballot in any of the 50 states. Easy and perfectly legal to nominate someone other than Biden.

Nevada:

3.  If a vacancy occurs in a major political party nomination for a partisan office after the primary election and before 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held and:
(a) The vacancy occurs because the nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent, the vacancy may be filled by a candidate designated by the party central committee of the county or State, as the case may be, of the major political party.
(b) The vacancy occurs for a reason other than the reasons described in paragraph (a), the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.
4.  No change may be made on the ballot for the general election after 5 p.m. on the fourth Friday in July of the year in which the general election is held. If, after that time and date:
(a) A nominee dies or is adjudicated insane or mentally incompetent; or
(b) A vacancy in the nomination is otherwise created, the nominee’s name must remain on the ballot for the general election and, if elected, a vacancy exists.

https://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-293.html#NRS293Sec165

Now, I don’t know how this provision of Nevada law can be legal in the face of the fact that Presidential nominating conventions last until August. But this would clearly be something that gets mired in prolonged litigation, both at the state and eventually federal level.

The date of the convention has far less legal standing than a ballot date set by state law.

PP here: agreed.

Didn't the Supreme Court already say that a state cannot keep a name off of a ballot?

Ehhh only if that name is Trump. I'm sure this corrupt AF SCOTUS would find some way to twist it if it's a Democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone saying NeverBiden?
No one is willing to say that.
NeverTrump was making a point that you would not get their votes, so calculate accordingly.
Problem was their numbers were too small and Trump supporters were too high.
Full Biden supporters are small in number.
No one will be mad if Biden is replaced at the convention. In 2016, Roger Stone was threatening violence.
Will there be any numbers declaring NeverBiden that would force people to say we must have a new candidate.

Right now it is Biden down just five in polls, and all the people calling on him to drop out they know will vote for Biden.

That’s why this power struggle is happening - whomever gets the nomination is getting the anti-Trump “will crawl a mile over glass to vote against that Orange f#ck” votes. It is actually a pretty easy race at the end of the day because Trump has a “very unfavorable” rating pushing 50%. In other words, he’s already hit his ceiling for support and the inevitable Dem candidate has more avenues to build a coalition of even soft supporters (assuming people show up to vote….which I think they will).

Removing Biden is far too risky for some reasons - legally, reputation of the party, respect for the ballot, etc.

I'm not really even sure what it is that is "happening" - I had a message about Joe stepping down show up in my Facebook feed tonight, sponsored by "Pass The Torch, Joe" - whoever that is. Thing is, there were hundreds and hundreds of comments on it saying "stay the course, Joe" and "ridin with biden" and "I'm with Joe" and "Biden / Harris 2024" and I only saw ONE saying "Biden needs to step down." It really has me thinking there isn't actually all that much popular support and is instead being promoted and orchestrated by a handful of wealthy elites / big donors / lobbyists. Whoever it is hasn't done a good job of testing the waters or gathering data.

I think the point you’re missing is that while Biden has a ton of supporters, it won’t be enough. Margins in presidential races are incredibly thin and Biden is not going to be able to energize the youth and independents. Yes, the die-hards will vote for him, but it won’t be enough.

I think the point you're missing is that the "Biden must step aside" faction doesn't have as much support as they think either, are causing disunity and frustration, and don't have any solid data to show that what they are promoting has any better chance at beating Trump and at present may actually be causing far more damage to Democrats than Biden's bad debate performance did. The "Biden must step aside" people must do much much better than simply sitting around trashtalking Biden calling him a "vegetable" and trying to browbeat his supporters by wildly accusing them of "coverups" and "gaslighting" and everything else. That is only fomenting anger and resentment. They need to present viable alternatives with multiple sources of robust, credible polling, and state a solid case and robust platform for how this candidate can counter all of Trump's talking points about the border and other things that are driving voters toward Trump. And you need to get all that together starting yesterday and already be socializing it with voters BEFORE the upcoming DNC convention, which is just weeks away.

DP. You are talking about two different things. Pointing out that Biden is too old and is incapable of being president for another 4 years has nothing to do with who the candidate should be. It is only about who the candidate shouldn't be.

If the people asking Biden to step aside also named someone else, you would criticize that. Anyway, do you mean the first person (House? Senate? Any person?) or biggest name or who? Or are you thinking that this is all coordinated and everyone is acting according to some back room plan?

If there isn't a plan and you don't have a solid alternative then you'd might as well just throw in the towel now. Trump will win.

Yes, Trump will win against Biden - and Trump is disqualified due to the Fourteenth Amendment and the insurrection and at that point, we will have a real problem. So let's just avoid that and have a candidate run against him who is not incapacitated.