2024 US Presidential Elections Megathread

[Tamas]

Can Michelle Obama come to the rescue?

If civilised people are to lose, at least lose laughing at the fascists foaming at the mouth of a black woman trying to be President.

Yeah I know Harris is VP but let's be honest she'd never win.

[jimmy olsen]

Maybe we should do like a 19th century DNC. Release all the delegates and have like 38 ballots and pull some rando out of obscurity to be President.

"America, we present you Franklin Pierce!"

"Who?"

It would be Gavin Newsom or JB Pritzker.

[garbon]

I don't know where that groupthink existed, but nowhere in the leftist circles I was in.

Some people here really didn't like that I was raising his age months ago.

As one of the people who made that complaint to you, I think you took that in the wrong way. My thought it was a mistake to constantly go on about his age when his opponent was only 3 years younger. No need to amplify the right wing talking points. It wasn't like there was any serious challenger to him so no alternative to pivot to.

It also is the case that he has long been stumbly on words and gaffe prone and is one of the things I disliked about him during Obama campaigns.

Now it appears he is doubly fucked as he still has his normally flubs and the infirmities of old age are getting to him.

None of this though is like what DGuller is talking about as I don't know anyone personally who thought Biden was the best candidate but just the one we had.

[FunkMonk]

Dguller's bizarre comment aside, the point is that Democrats have been derelict in their duty to their party and the country in not realizing Biden is washed, and they haven't done anything to lay the ground work for another candidate.

I suspect that is changing, uh, right fucking now.

[Sheilbh]

So again _ I did not watch the debate.

But then most people don't.  The perception of who won seems to matter more then the actual performance itself.  Which is why in most years both parties flood the zone with spin doctors trying to convince everyone their guy "won".

Yeah but also spin is limited.

I think debates don't change anyone's mind and probably have relatively limited impact. I think this one might have shifted elite opinion in a way that might make it matter.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Dguller's bizarre comment aside, the point is that Democrats have been derelict in their duty to their party and the country in not realizing Biden is washed, and they haven't done anything to lay the ground work for another candidate.

I suspect that is changing, uh, right fucking now.

I have tried to correct this narrative a number of times. There isn't really any such thing as "Democrats" or the "Democratic party" when it comes to selecting Presidential candidates (or really candidates for any office.) The party has County and State committees, the party has a national convention, the party has campaign committees etc. However, the way the American political parties are operated, none of these "bodies" have much power over the nominating process.

They once did, and I think in the popular consciousness, people still think they do. They think there is a smoke filled room etc. But there isn't. Whoever can win a primary gets to be the nominee.

For lesser known races, like House / Senate, where there is an incumbent backed by the campaign arms of the party, and where other prominent Democrats will always endorse the incumbent, the party has some "leverage" and does protect incumbents. But even then it is a "soft power", Elliot Engel and Joe Crowley would still have their seats right now if that soft power was absolute--but they don't, having lost insurgency primaries to Jamal Bowman and AOC respectively.

At the Presidential level, when you are talking about "big personality" candidates who have national prominence, the party has even less control. When you are talking about the sitting President, then there's a whole other wrinkle--both parties intrinsically treat a sitting President as the leader of their party. Which means the sitting President gets to appoint some of the highest members of the governing committees and their allies largely take over most of the State / County committees during their term.

The only way to force a sitting President out would have been to have someone beat them for the nomination with Democratic voters, and you could never leverage party resources to do it because an incumbent President also runs the party itself through proxies and allies.

There was quite simply never any way to "dump Biden." The only way was a super longshot primary battle wins, or Biden chose not to run. Those are the two options. There are no others.

[Gups]

I think it's pretty clear that the only hope is for Biden to pull out and release his delegates. 

[Sheilbh]

Although if you wanted to hit home to Biden and people close to him that he needs to step down, and to avoid it just being Harris you could do a lot worse than a very early pre-convention debate.

Edit: Also some absolutely incredible examples from senior Dems of people being loyally disloyal.

[Valmy]

I can't see the Trump regime doing anything for those decaying towns in the flyover states that provide him with so much of his support. I suppose there will be some entertainment watching him kick down    ?

No, in fact he will empower forces doing the decaying.

But wedge issues and culture war keep them onside.

[Josquius]

No, in fact he will empower forces doing the decaying.

But wedge issues and culture war keep them onside.

Yeah, this is what really gets me about this kind of shit. Its not just a difference of opinion, right vs. left. Its people who want the same things... but who vote against them.

Although if you wanted to hit home to Biden and people close to him that he needs to step down, and to avoid it just being Harris you could do a lot worse than a very early pre-convention debate.

Edit: Also some absolutely incredible examples from senior Dems of people being loyally disloyal.

Rest is politics had an episode today where they suggested maybe thats why they had the early debate. A dem schemer plot to give Biden a chance and open the door to someone else

[DGuller]

None of this though is like what DGuller is talking about as I don't know anyone personally who thought Biden was the best candidate but just the one we had.

  I was not even in the same zip code of saying that anyone thought Biden was the best candidate.  Maybe I should just write placeholder posts, people seem to read what they want to read anyway and not feel too constrained by what I write.

What I was talking about is not having a candid discussion among the non-detractors about Biden's basic fitness for being a candidate, best or otherwise.  The talking points I'm familiar with were all of the "misleading editing" or "yeah, he's bad in public, but he's lucid most days in private" variety. 

I get the desire to not play into the image of Biden as dementia-riddled vegetable that the right created, but it seems like the shock at yesterday's performance indicates that many of the left didn't want to truly contemplate the possibility that there was something to it other than stupid memes.  I myself didn't entertain that possibility until the Mitterrand gaffe.

[grumbler]

I don't know where that groupthink existed, but nowhere in the leftist circles I was in.

Some people here really didn't like that I was raising his age months ago.

Who were those "some people?"  Biden's age has been a concern expressed here many times, without any dissenting voices that I recall. 

The reluctance of the Democrats to dump Biden in favor of a younger candidate (and, indeed, the reason I think Biden himself decided to run again) boils down to:
1.  The lack of a suitable alternative (mostly due, IMO, to the geriatric Democratic leadership suppressing challengers), and
2. The acknowledged, and significant, advantages that incumbency confers.

I think that the idea that it is, instead, the result of "groupthink on the left about this issue" is laughable.

[DGuller]

I don't know where that groupthink existed, but nowhere in the leftist circles I was in.

Some people here really didn't like that I was raising his age months ago.

Who were those "some people?"  Biden's age has been a concern expressed here many times, without any dissenting voices that I recall. 

The reluctance of the Democrats to dump Biden in favor of a younger candidate (and, indeed, the reason I think Biden himself decided to run again) boils down to:
1.  The lack of a suitable alternative (mostly due, IMO, to the geriatric Democratic leadership suppressing challengers), and
2. The acknowledged, and significant, advantages that incumbency confers.

I think that the idea that it is, instead, the result of "groupthink on the left about this issue" is laughable.

All the comparisons of Biden to other candidates are only relevant if you consider Biden to be fit to run for office again.  The question of the perception of Biden's fitness on the left was what my post was about.  I think a lot less people would be making the arguments above if Biden's performance last night was in line with their perception of Biden's fitness to run again.

[crazy canuck]

So again _ I did not watch the debate.

But then most people don't.  The perception of who won seems to matter more then the actual performance itself.  Which is why in most years both parties flood the zone with spin doctors trying to convince everyone their guy "won".

Yeah but also spin is limited.

I think debates don't change anyone's mind and probably have relatively limited impact. I think this one might have shifted elite opinion in a way that might make it matter.

I also don't think it matters who won the debate.  What mattered last night is Biden didn't meet the low bar of showing he is mentally competent.  That is what is going to penetrate through to the general public.

[Josquius]

I'm seeing some suggesting blinken as the substitute?