NYT and WaPo report Biden is close to stepping down

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is so unfair to Trump. His convention was geared to attack Biden and Biden is dropping out. No one is paying attention to his convention.

Oh dear. Poor, poor wee itsy bitsy baby Donnie. Bad Democrats made him cry. Boo hoo. Boo hoo. Boo hoo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m thinking that a huge part of the Trump's campaign strategy has been to project Biden as old and feeble. They’ve been focused on that game plan for quite a long time. Take that away and how does that game plan change? Will be interesting to see.

I wonder if they will attack Harris based on her gender and race?

Biden was floundering even before his disastrous debate because of the issues. Poll after poll shows that voters are focused on the economy, border and inflation. Kamala can’t escape that record because she was part of it, the border in particular. Her unfavorability ratings have been historically high - can’t blame race and sex when Michelle Obama’s are so high and she is shown in match up polls to beat Trump (unlike Harris).

[Anonymous]

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.

But Americans are brutal to female leaders.

Yes but times have changed and she is running against a sketchy guy.

[Anonymous]

Let's elect our first women president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's elect our first women president.

Agree! But not Harris.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m thinking that a huge part of the Trump's campaign strategy has been to project Biden as old and feeble. They’ve been focused on that game plan for quite a long time. Take that away and how does that game plan change? Will be interesting to see.

I wonder if they will attack Harris based on her gender and race?

Biden was floundering even before his disastrous debate because of the issues. Poll after poll shows that voters are focused on the economy, border and inflation. Kamala can’t escape that record because she was part of it, the border in particular. Her unfavorability ratings have been historically high - can’t blame race and sex when Michelle Obama’s are so high and she is shown in match up polls to beat Trump (unlike Harris).

I am a bit more focused on Trump and his right wing running mate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But Americans are brutal to female leaders.

Yes but times have changed and she is running against a sketchy guy.

She polls behind Trump now and hasn’t even been subject to an opposition campaign yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m thinking that a huge part of the Trump's campaign strategy has been to project Biden as old and feeble. They’ve been focused on that game plan for quite a long time. Take that away and how does that game plan change? Will be interesting to see.

I wonder if they will attack Harris based on her gender and race?

Biden was floundering even before his disastrous debate because of the issues. Poll after poll shows that voters are focused on the economy, border and inflation. Kamala can’t escape that record because she was part of it, the border in particular. Her unfavorability ratings have been historically high - can’t blame race and sex when Michelle Obama’s are so high and she is shown in match up polls to beat Trump (unlike Harris).

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But Americans are brutal to female leaders.

Yes but times have changed and she is running against a sketchy guy.

The last time we had a female nominee was against the same sketchy guy. And it wasn't very long ago.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m thinking that a huge part of the Trump's campaign strategy has been to project Biden as old and feeble. They’ve been focused on that game plan for quite a long time. Take that away and how does that game plan change? Will be interesting to see.

I wonder if they will attack Harris based on her gender and race?

Biden was floundering even before his disastrous debate because of the issues. Poll after poll shows that voters are focused on the economy, border and inflation. Kamala can’t escape that record because she was part of it, the border in particular. Her unfavorability ratings have been historically high - can’t blame race and sex when Michelle Obama’s are so high and she is shown in match up polls to beat Trump (unlike Harris).

I am a bit more focused on Trump and his right wing running mate.

That has nothing to do with my response or the PP’s assertion that Trump would struggle to campaign against Harris because he has been focusing on Biden’s age (I don’t agree with this, for example the slides he was presenting when he was shot was about the border).

[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.

Objectively, she most definitely is not.