Joe Biden's decision to drop out of the Presidential race seemed inevitable after his disastrous debate performance, post-debate posturing notwithstanding.
"We can't yet know what a Harris presidency would bring. Would she continue Biden-era policies? Would she be just another figurehead atop a hidden political machine, as Biden clearly has been?"
Don't see how Harris can be anything but a continuation of *Biden stuff*. She is a nothing. There is nothing one can say about her that makes for quality presidential material.
If anything, the anglers in charge will simply figure ways to contrive their speech and policies angled a little differently.
Right. The Clintons endorsed her before the ink was dry on Biden’s digital signature - but Obama didn’t. Obama expressed confidence that an outstanding candidate would emerge during the convention. Something’s in the works, someone’s in the wings.
The party is telling voters to blindly support a woman they soundly rejected four years ago. This is after the party told voters to blindly support a corrupt old man before turning on that old man without a second thought.
Dems corrupted their own primary process by ensuring Joe had no meaningful competition. They now further corrupt it after an assassination attempt failed. This is the point when we stop listening to anyone on the left talk about "our democracy."
It still boggles the mind that the absolute worst D candidate to run in 2020 ended up getting VP bid. She was first one out of the race. Didn't even make it to Iowa if I remember correctly. And then calling Biden a racist in a debate! When asked about that later (on late night TV I think) she immediately cackled and said it was a debate. So she told the world that she doesn't tell the truth (or her true opinion) in a debate. Shouldn't checking the boxes also include competency?
My theory at the time was that Biden needed some "law and order" bona fides on his ticket to counteract the pushback to the hands-off response to the BLM protests. That and intersectionality.
A short-sighted selection that has jammed the Dems up something good.
Since Biden is out, the delegates are free to move to whomever they want.
So then there's Hillary - and please don't cite anything she's SAID. You know how that works. The Clintons need a cash infusion as The Foundation is drying up - and the Clintons have a lifestyle to maintain. That's their motive. Running for president would boost the brand and cash would pour in.
What's in it for the DNC? It comes down to this: she beat Trump before in the Popular Vote and would have won the Electoral College if Covid rules were in place back then. She'd stand a very good chance of beating him in the PV this time- thus tainting him as illegitimate. Plus she only has to run for ten weeks. She can do that. And maybe limit the damage in the House and Senate.
Why not Hillary? Obama hates the Clintons and it is mutual. This is why Joe got the nod last time - he was the lesser of two evils (to Obama). He knew he could control Biden - mostly - but not Hillary. If it weren't for Obama, Hillary would be running for her second term - and the country and world would likely be in less serious condition. And most everybody knows that. The Deep State especially. Could Obama hold his nose and endorse Hillary? We will see.
So don't count Hillary out. Not until the Super Delegates have had their chance to play games. Because with Kamala, they see a loss of the PV, EV and a likely wreck in the House and Senate. Clinton would limit the damage.
I think Hillary's got a huge albatross - the Steele Dossier. I don't see her invigorating the base, and I do see her invigorating Trump leaners more. Plus, there's the humiliation factor. Losing twice to Trump would be an utter disaster.
When it comes to the Democrats we are in uncharted water. Kamala Harris has not had time to campaign as a presidential elect. A smart politician would cleverly exploit the next three months in order to use the media and every other resource at their disposal to make themselves and their policies known in no uncertain terms. Lord knows in the history of the United States there have been many cases where the poles favored one party candidate only for circumstances to pull a last hour reversal toward the benefit of their opponent. Remember the 1988 presidential election? Personally, I don't give Harris that sort of due but as the song by Ronnie Milsap goes "Stranger Things Have Happened". In the end it always falls to the people. They have to decide whether they want to give Trump another chance in the White House or go for the first woman in the oval office and hope to be pleasantly surprised. Of course, there are the independents but, the last time we were impressed by one of them was in the 1992 elections.
P.S. I voted for Al Gore in the 1988 democratic primaries. I'm glad I did.
Agreed. I figured Biden was going to drop out between roughly mid September - early October, but I wasn’t factoring in the abysmal early debate performance.
I think the early debate was scheduled by TPTB as the opening move to get him off the ticket sooner rather than later.
"We can't yet know what a Harris presidency would bring. Would she continue Biden-era policies? Would she be just another figurehead atop a hidden political machine, as Biden clearly has been?"
Don't see how Harris can be anything but a continuation of *Biden stuff*. She is a nothing. There is nothing one can say about her that makes for quality presidential material.
If anything, the anglers in charge will simply figure ways to contrive their speech and policies angled a little differently.
Never know. Biden wasn't a continuation of Obama-era policies, it was a marked shift leftward.
My guess is there is another plan in place, one that's been there for awhile, and it does not include Harris as the presidential nominee.
Then again, I don't know diddle-squat, as what would be easier than having Harris there to play patsy.
Right. The Clintons endorsed her before the ink was dry on Biden’s digital signature - but Obama didn’t. Obama expressed confidence that an outstanding candidate would emerge during the convention. Something’s in the works, someone’s in the wings.
The party is telling voters to blindly support a woman they soundly rejected four years ago. This is after the party told voters to blindly support a corrupt old man before turning on that old man without a second thought.
Dems corrupted their own primary process by ensuring Joe had no meaningful competition. They now further corrupt it after an assassination attempt failed. This is the point when we stop listening to anyone on the left talk about "our democracy."
It still boggles the mind that the absolute worst D candidate to run in 2020 ended up getting VP bid. She was first one out of the race. Didn't even make it to Iowa if I remember correctly. And then calling Biden a racist in a debate! When asked about that later (on late night TV I think) she immediately cackled and said it was a debate. So she told the world that she doesn't tell the truth (or her true opinion) in a debate. Shouldn't checking the boxes also include competency?
My theory at the time was that Biden needed some "law and order" bona fides on his ticket to counteract the pushback to the hands-off response to the BLM protests. That and intersectionality.
A short-sighted selection that has jammed the Dems up something good.
Since Biden is out, the delegates are free to move to whomever they want.
So then there's Hillary - and please don't cite anything she's SAID. You know how that works. The Clintons need a cash infusion as The Foundation is drying up - and the Clintons have a lifestyle to maintain. That's their motive. Running for president would boost the brand and cash would pour in.
What's in it for the DNC? It comes down to this: she beat Trump before in the Popular Vote and would have won the Electoral College if Covid rules were in place back then. She'd stand a very good chance of beating him in the PV this time- thus tainting him as illegitimate. Plus she only has to run for ten weeks. She can do that. And maybe limit the damage in the House and Senate.
Why not Hillary? Obama hates the Clintons and it is mutual. This is why Joe got the nod last time - he was the lesser of two evils (to Obama). He knew he could control Biden - mostly - but not Hillary. If it weren't for Obama, Hillary would be running for her second term - and the country and world would likely be in less serious condition. And most everybody knows that. The Deep State especially. Could Obama hold his nose and endorse Hillary? We will see.
So don't count Hillary out. Not until the Super Delegates have had their chance to play games. Because with Kamala, they see a loss of the PV, EV and a likely wreck in the House and Senate. Clinton would limit the damage.
I think Hillary's got a huge albatross - the Steele Dossier. I don't see her invigorating the base, and I do see her invigorating Trump leaners more. Plus, there's the humiliation factor. Losing twice to Trump would be an utter disaster.
But, yeah, it's possible. So is Michelle.
When it comes to the Democrats we are in uncharted water. Kamala Harris has not had time to campaign as a presidential elect. A smart politician would cleverly exploit the next three months in order to use the media and every other resource at their disposal to make themselves and their policies known in no uncertain terms. Lord knows in the history of the United States there have been many cases where the poles favored one party candidate only for circumstances to pull a last hour reversal toward the benefit of their opponent. Remember the 1988 presidential election? Personally, I don't give Harris that sort of due but as the song by Ronnie Milsap goes "Stranger Things Have Happened". In the end it always falls to the people. They have to decide whether they want to give Trump another chance in the White House or go for the first woman in the oval office and hope to be pleasantly surprised. Of course, there are the independents but, the last time we were impressed by one of them was in the 1992 elections.
P.S. I voted for Al Gore in the 1988 democratic primaries. I'm glad I did.
I think that "pleasantly surprised" is a tall order for Harris, but we are indeed in uncharted waters.
The last equivalent was LBJ's withdrawal in 1968, and the differences are big enough to undermine any utility of comparison.
Agreed. I figured Biden was going to drop out between roughly mid September - early October, but I wasn’t factoring in the abysmal early debate performance.
I think the early debate was scheduled by TPTB as the opening move to get him off the ticket sooner rather than later.