USA Election 2024

[Roller]

Now he is getting fired up (over guns).

Biden is best when he gets angry. Like The Hulk.

I think he did quite well tonight, though it probably won’t quell the calls for him to step aside. His most obvious gaffe was saying Trump when he meant Harris. One reporter asked him about that and he laughed it off. It’s something he’s done for many years, but it means more now.

One thing that’s clear is that Biden has a deep understanding of foreign policy that is so the opposite of Trump’s ignorance.

He also said that if he was convinced that he can’t win, he’d bow out. But the only way that’ll happen is if the polls fall even further before the convention, and I don’t expect that.

 

[Herdfan]

He also said that if he was convinced that he can’t win, he’d bow out. But the only way that’ll happen is if the polls fall even further before the convention, and I don’t expect that.

He seemed to make it very clear he wasn’t going anywhere.

 

[Roller]

He seemed to make it very clear he wasn’t going anywhere.

I disagree. He left the door open to not running if he doesn’t believe he can beat Trump. Whether that will happen is another matter.

 

[Citysnaps]

I feel a *little* better. Maybe give him an overall C+ or B-. Giving him a lot of credit for his foreign policy and world affairs experience (assuming he is able to effectively tap into that when needed).

 

[Eric]

He seemed to make it very clear he wasn’t going anywhere.

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and they’ll be able to reason with him, he’s under enormous pressure right now.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

A progressive take for what it's worth.

 

[rdrr]

I feel a *little* better. Maybe give him an overall C+ or B-. Giving him a lot of credit for his foreign policy and world affairs experience (assuming he is able to effectively tap into that when needed).

I’d gladly take that grade over a Trump grade. Is there anything worse than an F?

 

[Citysnaps]

I’d gladly take that grade over a Trump grade. Is there anything worse than an F?

Agree 1,000%. Though I'll never understand how a convicted criminal (facing additional criminal trials), who fomented an insurrection on the US Capitol, assaulted women and brags about it, lies as effortlessly as people breathe, admires world dictators, and wants to trash the tenets of the US Constitution, etc, etc, is even in the game and being ADMIRED and mesmerized by roughly half of US voters enamored by his phony bravado.

That's quite a feat, and imo, says more than what meets the eye. Could it be...

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

So I guess we are setting the bar at "not as horrendous as I expected." American exceptionalism!

 

[Roller]

So I guess we are setting the bar at "not as horrendous as I expected." American exceptionalism!

I hope most of us can agree that Trump's bar is at ground level, if not below. I'd argue that by winning in 2020, Biden delayed a second Trump presidency by four years and accomplished much during his term.

Biden's main task is to beat Trump again, and that's not going well. Anyone who cares about the rule of law, combating climate change, reproductive rights, countering authoritarian dictators, and more, should and probably will vote for Biden. But he needs to convince the people in swing states who are on the fence and are blind to the stark differences between the candidates. Unfortunately, he's under such scrutiny that even minor slip-ups are viewed as catastrophic and are amplified by a press that refuses to acknowledge similar or worse behavior from Trump. And Biden's ability to persuade is hampered by his sometimes rambling speaking style.

I suspect Harris, who I think is the only viable alternative, could sway the fence-sitters who are looking for an alternative to Biden and Trump, but as things stand, I don't see Biden stepping aside.

 

[Citysnaps]

I suspect Harris, who I think is the only viable alternative, could sway the fence-sitters who are looking for an alternative to Biden and Trump, but as things stand, I don't see Biden stepping aside.

That was the conclusion from an NPR story this morning, saying (paraphrased from memory when I was waking up) Harris would be the only candidate with an in-place ready-to-go on a moments notice infrastructure should Biden decide to bow out.

 

[rdrr]

That was the conclusion from an NPR story this morning, saying (paraphrased from memory when I was waking up) Harris would be the only candidate with an in-place ready-to-go on a moments notice infrastructure should Biden decide to bow out.

But who would be the best running mate? Newsom, or would he rather wait until 2028?

 

[Citysnaps]

But who would be the best running mate? Newsom, or would he rather wait until 2028?

That could make sense from a getting more visibility perspective. OTOH, in 2028 he would likely be campaigning against Harris (while being Harris' VP). Could be awkward.

Seems he could better use the next four years building up some infrastructure on his own for a 2028 presidential run and avoiding that awkwardness.

 

[Herdfan]

But who would be the best running mate? Newsom, or would he rather wait until 2028?

Then you have the President and VP candidates from the same state. Which means CA electors to the EC will only be able to vote for one of the candidates. So you could end up with a situation where in a close election, Harris may win the Presidency, but Trump or his running mate could win the VP slot.

While the 12A fixed the problem of the person with the second most EV's become the VP, they didn't change Article II which has the prohibition of an elector to not vote for 2 from the same state.

 

[fooferdoggie]

 

[Nycturne]

I gotta ask, what the heck is going on with this image? The emblems look like what happen when you ask AI to try to generate them.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

That was the conclusion from an NPR story this morning, saying (paraphrased from memory when I was waking up) Harris would be the only candidate with an in-place ready-to-go on a moments notice infrastructure should Biden decide to bow out.

Heard an interview with a journalist who spent a lot of time with Harris and there was some interesting insight.

When asked why Biden chose Harris the journalist didn’t candy coat it. She was a DEI pick. Biden quite publicly announced his pick will be a woman and behind closed doors he was told it should be a woman of color. That doesn’t mean she wasn’t qualified in any other way but it was a factor in the pick. But if people think Democrats are the only ones who do this shit I give you former Republican VP pick Sarah Palin. But instead of a woman of color they went with a woman of attractiveness. On the field of qualified I don’t think it would be hard to predict how a Harris vs Palin debate would go.

Even though Biden chose her as his VP, he still held a grudge against her early on for her attacks on him in the primaries.

She was told explicitly by advisors that her history as a prosecutor wouldn’t go over well with Democrats in the current (back then) environment and she shouldn’t talk about it. So she didn’t/doesn’t. That’s also part of the reason people say “I don’t really know much about her.”

Due to her personality and career background she is ill equipped to answer broad questions like “talk about the current state of Democracy” but those are the kind of questions voters (read: the media) expect a leader to answer.

After her early disastrous VP interview where she answered broad questions with incoherent word salads she retreated and the Biden administration kind of gave up on her too.

On a general VP note, Eisenhower was one of the few Presidents who felt it was his duty to prepare his VP for the possibility of becoming President based on being alarmed at how unprepared Truman was to be President when FDR died. He couldn’t stand Nixen but still felt it was his duty to help him to shine and prepare him to be President. Most Presidents don’t give their VPs that much respect and just send them on side quests to get them out of the house.

 

[Roller]

Heard an interview with a journalist who spent a lot of time with Harris and there was some interesting insight.

When asked why Biden chose Harris the journalist didn’t candy coat it. She was a DEI pick. Biden quite publicly announced his pick will be a woman and behind closed doors he was told it should be a woman of color. That doesn’t mean she wasn’t qualified in any other way but it was a factor in the pick. But if people think Democrats are the only ones who do this shit I give you former Republican VP pick Sarah Palin. But instead of a woman of color they went with a woman of attractiveness. On the field of qualified I don’t think it would be hard to predict how a Harris vs Palin debate would go.

Even though Biden chose her as his VP, he still held a grudge against her early on for her attacks on him in the primaries.

She was told explicitly by advisors that her history as a prosecutor wouldn’t go over well with Democrats in the current (back then) environment and she shouldn’t talk about it. So she didn’t/doesn’t. That’s also part of the reason people say “I don’t really know much about her.”

Due to her personality and career background she is ill equipped to answer broad questions like “talk about the current state of Democracy” but those are the kind of questions voters (read: the media) expect a leader to answer.

After her early disastrous VP interview where she answered broad questions with incoherent word salads she retreated and the Biden administration kind of gave up on her too.

On a general VP note, Eisenhower was one of the few Presidents who felt it was his duty to prepare his VP for the possibility of becoming President based on being alarmed at how unprepared Truman was to be President when FDR died. He couldn’t stand Nixen but still felt it was his duty to help him to shine and prepare him to be President. Most Presidents don’t give their VPs that much respect and just send them on side quests to get them out of the house.

I don't think it would be hard to predict how a Harris-Trump would go either. Sure, Biden promised to pick a woman of color, but there's nothing wrong with that if he thought she was qualified and that it would help the campaign. She started off poorly, but if you listen to her speak now, especially about hot-button topics like reproductive rights, she's excellent. Calling Harris a DEI pick, as people like Chip Roy have done, is disgusting.

Republicans also choose running mates based on political considerations, but going back to the 1960s, their choices have included more who were unqualified (Dan Quayle) or crooked (Spiro Agnew).

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

I don't think it would be hard to predict how a Harris-Trump would go either. Sure, Biden promised to pick a woman of color, but there's nothing wrong with that if he thought she was qualified and that it would help the campaign. She started off poorly, but if you listen to her speak now, especially about hot-button topics like reproductive rights, she's excellent. Calling Harris a DEI pick, as people like Chip Roy have done, is disgusting.

Republicans also choose running mates based on political considerations, but going back to the 1960s, their choices have included more who were unqualified (Dan Quayle) or crooked (Spiro Agnew).

Although a little blunt, “DEI pick” was a direct quote from the journalist who was female and overall supportive of Harris. As many others have said, she said her best moments often don’t get covered as much by the media. I agree people who aren’t white men need more opportunity, equality and elevation when there is merit. But I’ve said before these considerations that have nothing to do with direct qualifications shouldn’t be preannounced to the world. Just make the pick or the hire. Preannouncing “it won’t be a white man” serves no purpose. Do they think people won’t figure that out after the fact?

And nobody can make me believe that Harris being “a woman of color” isn’t a big reason some are insisting she has to be the nominee if Biden drops out. If the VP was a white guy with the same low approval ratings he’d be shoved aside just as quickly as Mike Pence. Like you mentioned, Dan Quayle. You think in a similar situation anybody would be insisting he absolutely has to be the front runner?

 

[Roller]

Although a little blunt, “DEI pick” was a direct quote from the journalist who was female and overall supportive of Harris. As many others have said, she said her best moments often don’t get covered as much by the media. I agree people who aren’t white men need more opportunity, equality and elevation when there is merit. But I’ve said before these considerations that have nothing to do with direct qualifications shouldn’t be preannounced to the world. Just make the pick or the hire. Preannouncing “it won’t be a white man” serves no purpose. Do they think people won’t figure that out after the fact?

And nobody can make me believe that Harris being “a woman of color” isn’t a big reason some are insisting she has to be the nominee if Biden drops out. If the VP was a white guy with the same low approval ratings he’d be shoved aside just as quickly as Mike Pence. Like you mentioned, Dan Quayle. You think in a similar situation anybody would be insisting he absolutely has to be the front runner?

I certainly don't believe you or the journalist are racist or sexist, but "DEI pick" has been adopted by people to denigrate Harris and other black women without being explicit. Had I repeated what the journalist said or wrote, I would have put the term in quotes.

Regarding what the Democrats should do if Biden bows out, which I doubt he'll do, it's a tough call. But, yeah, it would look bad if Harris were dropped in favor of a white man. And I think she's more qualified than Dan Quayle was.