He was giving too much away for the wealthy donors to stomach.
So instead if two oldsters, we have a choice of two people who will persecute poor people, which is much more in line with wealthy donors to the the Bloomocrats.
If Kamala does become the new nominee, I wonder how hard Trump will fight to avoid debating her.
Shit would be funny as hell to watch. Trump would be balling by the end.
Why do you refer to the female candidate with her first name and the male candidate with his last name? The same thing regularly happens with Clinton. I assume the casual disrespect is not intentional but I’m very curious as to why this happens.
“Harris” is a more common name than “Kamala”, and “Donald” is a more common name than “Trump”. This is just my opinion, but I think Kamala is a more powerful sounding name than Harris, and that helps with her image as a stern prosecutor who wants to crush injustice towards women.
“Clinton” refers (in most people’s minds) to Hillary’s husband Bill moreso than Hillary herself. In her campaign, she leveraged her first initial for her slogan “I’m with Her” with the stylized right-pointing arrow in the H. For her, it seems to be her choice and more clear. For Harris, it just seems to be because “Kamala” sticks out in people’s minds more than her last name.
I think people tend to choose the more unique/recognizable name to call candidates by. For example, we also call Bernie Sanders by his first name more often than his last. “Harris” is a more common name than “Kamala”. “Clinton” could be confused for Bill, but “Hillary” isn’t going to be mistaken. I don’t think it has anything to do with the candidate’s gender.
Going to throw in a few other unique examples like how Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is almost always called by her first and last name or the initials AOC. Similarly Ilhan Omar is almost always referred to by her first and last name.
The right loved to call Obama, Barack Hussein Obama with emphasis on Hussein to highlight how non-white he was, pin him as Muslim, and draw associations to Sadam Hussein. This was done to rile up their xenophobic and racist base.
I’m sure this was a really hard decision, but it shows courage and strength that Biden put his own ego aside for the good of the country…
…is what I would have said if he’d done this two weeks ago. Now, I’m just glad he was able to take off his narcissism glasses long enough to see how badly he was going to lose, and I hope his prolonged tantrum hasn’t damaged Harris’ chances too badly.
I wouldn’t say this is bad timing in hindsight.
- The news media moves on from Trump’s pity party, the debate, the President Putin and Vice President Trump gaffes.
- Facing COVID, Biden has a legitimate reason to drop out without saying that he is weak to pressure
- Trump is now the old and doddering candidate, turning much of the past brainwashing of Republican media on its head.
- Trump will get bigly mad since the attention’s going to be off of him. Potential for a stupid outburst.
- The media will be hyperfocused on what’s to come from the Dem campaign, an excellent opportunity to highlight Biden’s achievements and articulate a bright future for the party and country.
- The pre-emptive smears from Republicans are on their way, but the Dems are a moving target until they officially announce the ticket.
It relies on Democrats getting the message right though they’d faltered before. They get one more chance to fix it in this soft reset.
Yeah, but none of these benefits are better than ending the uncertainty 2 weeks ago; at that point, the polling was clearly showing Biden was dropping in key swing states, and the party was starting to go into full panic mode, but he still let them twist in the win while he made up his mind. Hell, even if he made the announcement during the convention, he could have stolen some of Trump’s publicity this week and forced a whole lot if RNC speakers to rewrite their speeches. Instead, he left the party in chaos for a month, then gave Trump a victory lap convention before finally stepping aside.
There were a lot of rumors and speculation about this possibility last week that I think did take a lot of attention away from the Republican convention.
Anyone? We were saying this 3-4 weeks ago. You can check my post history, The Rest is Politics, or most commentators.
Here’s my post here with the BBC article referring to calls for him to step down.
Yeah, you don’t have to be a political genius to realize that almost four weeks of your own allies coming out and saying you need to step down is, ya know…bad. Like, maybe if your political implosion was creating a period of fear, uncertainty, and chaos, and there was you could do to end all that and restore order, you should do that quickly…like, as quickly as possible…as in, not nearly a month later.
You don’t have to be a genius to realize that just because an option is bad, that the alternative might still be worse. Waiting until after the RNC is far from stupid, for example.
So, now we get to see how many “blue no matter who”’s actually meant it.
Remember folks, it applies to anyone who might be the candidate.
That over…. Harris/AOC or Harris Whitmer !!
As much as I’d love to see it in my lifetime, no way she chooses a female VP. Way too risky.
If the ticket is something messed up like Harris/Bob Menendez, or Harris/Blagoyavich, I might have some reservations, but would quickly look past them considering the alternative.
Before I left home this morning, I pointed to the bottle of mustard on the table and told my girl that I would vote for the mustard. We were talking about the rumors of Biden dropping out.
At least the mustard is honest about its color. So are carrots, for that matter. I’d totally vote for a carrot.
Yup, I’ll vote for any garden vegetable except for cucumbers and their squash and watermelon relatives. Will make an exception for pickles, they’re one of the good ones.
Don’t know much about carrot varieties other than Queen Anne’s lace is a wild carrot. Know more about taters and tomatoes.
Figure any real carrot would do. I’d totally vote for a beefsteak or better boy tomato over a carrot, however.
“I Know you don’t like MY candidate, but you know… Blue No Matter WHO!!! You don’t want a fascist to win, do you?”
people are absolutely lying about it. the question is… how many.
You’ve not convinced me. I don’t know why anyone would use that argument if it completely betrayed their feelings. Plenty others you could use which make more sense
Kamala all the way! It won’t be AOC or Whitmer though. Most likely Kelly or Newsom. AOC is the future, though.
Newsome cannot and will not be the VP. Harris is also from California, which would cause issues in the electoral college. Electors cannot cast both the Presidential and vice-presidential ballot for someone from the same state as themselves. Because both Harris and Newsome are form California, it could cause issues, and they might not get the electoral votes from California.
If the blue pick is a broken toaster oven, I’m still voting for it rather than tump
I think AOC isn’t old enough to be VP. I don’t say that as a matter of opinion. I think you have to be at least 40
Edit: it’s actually 35, but AOC is 34 so I was partially correct
However I think the relevant language is:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
So maybe it’s okay for VP
She’ll be old enough to be POTUS by inauguration.
So, she’s probably old enough to be VPOTUS…
Irrelevant. The Democrats would never put a progressive in a position where they could be president. They’ll probably go for a centrist like Shapiro or a corporate Dem like Newsom. I’m hoping that they’ll go with Whitmer but they’ll probably shy away from a two woman ticket.
Assuming the new candidate(probably Harris) avoid any major disasters as does Trump, we’ll be returning to the May 2024 status quo of things. Harris is more popular than post-debate Biden, was slightly behind pre-debate Biden, and will probably need a month to get back there(winning the nomination and undoing all the damage from 4 weeks of infighting.)
On the plus side, that’ll drop the hemorrhaging, New Mexico and New Jersey safe, Virginia and Minnesota probably safe. On the downside at this point Georgia and North Carolina are lost, there just isn’t time and the Republicans spent 4 years pouring resources into them.
This is back to the main 5. Arizona, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. The important factor is that if they lose Pennsylvania, they lose. They can win the other 4 here, but it’s 268-270. Unless they snag something extra like Georgia(unlikely in this scenario), that’s it.
If they win Pennsylvania, they need at least two others in ideal circumstances(Michigan needs to be one of the two and Nevada can’t be one of the two, second one would have to be Wisconsin or Arizona), 3 others in unideal circumstances if Michigan isn’t there and they get Nevada. I should also note several of these scenarios are razor thin (270-268 with Pensylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin and 271-267 with Arizona instead) and thus vulnerable to faithless electors. Or worse, if Maine’s statewide went red(which is more likely than Georgia going blue or Virginia going red at this point) the former would be a win and the latter would be a tie. In the tie scenario the House picks the president(so Trump) and the Senate picks the Vice President(so Vance would be ousted) which would be an absolute nightmare and gambling on Trump dying in that situation isn’t worth it.
I note this because even in the base line May scenario Pennsylvania was one of the worse polling one for democrats(Arizona and Wisconsin were the blue edging ones), and Pennsylvania is not a state where the stars are aligning. It was Biden’s home state, Scranton boy, him being off the ticket hurts things there probably more than they help. AND, while it’s true nationwide the post-shooting bump for Trump was relatively minor, Pennsylvania is where the shooting happened and has gotten the largest bump in the polls since, 3 or 4 points. Biden leaving demotivates the base there harder than anywhere else in the county and the Trump shooting re-motivated the base there harder than most.
My call? If they don’t pick Shapiro or Whitmer, it’s over 100%, and even with it’s iffy. Pennsylvania is perhaps the one state where any replacement is going to do worse than Biden even post-debate, and the one state the Trump shooting caused a notable bump. What are the odds it’s also the single most crucial state in this election?
I disagree. Harris is basically polling within the margin of error of Biden, that’s true, but she’s also been the incredible invisible woman basically forever. It’s to the point that really the best the republicans can do against her atm is ads that amount to “LOOK AT HER LAUGHING >:{”. There’s good and bad there, but the positives outweigh the negatives in that she’s something of a known quantity at the national level, she’s got experience in the executive branch, and she really doesn’t have much baggage to speak of while still being able to claim Biden’s wins. If the democrats lean in behind Harris, get her polished up and just re-tool the Biden campaign for her, and she goes swinging out of the gate, I think she’ll make for a strong contender.
I’m going off the week 1 polls. She was weaker than everyone else when adjusted for name recognition and was the only one within the margins of Biden. I also don’t disagree on the base point, but there’s 3 months, the war machine needs time to spool up and the Republicans have had a 2 week headstart. It’s gonna be tight and Pensyllvania is not going well
