The Race For 2024

[Toni]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Spoken like a true authoritarian. Not an insult, by the way. Your attitudes towards the democratic process and unshakable belief in Dear Leader dovetail such an ideology perfectly.

You don't have democracy. Democracy implies free press.

Press is free. Unfortunately, not free from foreign interference.

 

[barbos]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Yer jes jealous

Not jealous, disappointed, very disappointed.

 

[Toni]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Yer jes jealous

Not jealous, disappointed, very disappointed.

I frequently am disappointed. Here's the thing: I get to freely express my disappointment, disagreement and ire with elected officials at all levels here.

 

[barbos]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Yer jes jealous

Not jealous, disappointed, very disappointed.

I frequently am disappointed. Here's the thing: I get to freely express my disappointment, disagreement and ire with elected officials at all levels here.

Yes, that's why Russia must be destroyed.
Are you disappointed it is not done yet?

 

[barbos]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Spoken like a true authoritarian. Not an insult, by the way. Your attitudes towards the democratic process and unshakable belief in Dear Leader dovetail such an ideology perfectly.

You don't have democracy. Democracy implies free press.

Press is free. Unfortunately, not free from foreign interference.

It's not free if government owns it. And yes, people who control government control the media as well.

 

[Derec]

Not being totally cognizant with the US political system why isn't Karmala Harris being put forward as possible replacement for Biden? Isn't that why she is the VP?

It's Kamala.
And she is being put forward. But she is very unpopular.
Note that she was only selected as running mate because of identity politics and our collective insanity secondary to the George Floyd insurrections. Had that junkie not tried to pass a fugazi $20 bill while half-dead already from all the fentanyl and meth he took, Kamala Harris would never have been offered the spot.
As I said, she is unpopular, and she showed preternaturally bad judgment and political instincts during the 2020 primary season, starting with that bogus attack on Biden over forced busing.

She is. Doofuses are talking about replacing Biden with a less popular person. Kamala Harris is the next most popular person who might replace him. And the others who get mentioned are behind Harris.

What? I'm afraid [citation needed] because I do not see that she would be more popular than, say, Gretchen "Heinrich, mir graut's vor dir" Whitmer.

We don't have a lot of hope but none at all if the Democrats do what they too often do and self-immolate. Republicans shrug and giggle when one of theirs fucks up. Democrats hang their heads and consider "maybe I should jump off a cliff". They need to stop doing that.

And going down with the sinking SV Joseph Robinette Biden is better?

 

[Swammerdami]

We as a whole nation don't trust our own government enough to hand it that kind of unchecked power over our lives, no matter who's in charge.

I always find this particular US trope amusing, because Americans genuinely believe that they haven't already handed to their various governments more power over their daily lives than Europeans would ever tolerate.

They just don't notice.

You can own a gun (though it's perfectly OK for a policeman to kill you on the spot, if he thinks you might have one); But if you cross a street in the city centre, you are risking a fine.

You can be fined for not mowing your lawn. But that's OK, because an HOA isn't a government body (it just has litterally all of the characteristics of a government body, but it's not called government, so it doesn't count). You can't even go for a stroll in many places without being stopped and questioned by police, because walking is 'suspicious behaviour' (as is 'being black', 'being young', or 'being scruffy').

Americans think of themselves as free, despite being subject to more petifogging rules, and a more intrusive and less friendly policing regime, and having a far larger part of their population in prison, than any EU nation. They achieve this feat of belief by constantly re-defining "freedom" to mean the ability to vote for the petty officials who are permitted to oppress them.

And they will defend this concept of "freedom", in which everyone is free to obey the rules or go to jail (or be shot dead), against any hint that it's not actual freedom. I am 100% certain that they don't think "doing whatever you feel like doing, without anyone hassling or questioning you as long as you are not actively hurting anyone" has any part in freedom at all.

You absolutely ignore what great freedoms Americans have.

(1) We have the freedom to carry a gun; and the freedom to shoot to kill anyone, whether armed or not, who has put us in reasonable fear of great bodily injury. The threshold for "reasonable fear" is placed on the side of freedom: A black thug who approaches us can certainly cause reasonable fear. In the communist paradise bilby touts, what? You must wait until your jugular is severed to defend yourself?

(2) We have the freedom to ban evil books from our schools, books with prejudiced left-wing words like "racism", "slavery" or "climate." In bilby's communist paradise, I suppose teachers get to decide about books, and then fill the school libraries with drivel about "history", "geology", "climatology", "the Age of Dinosaurs" and other left-wing concepts.

(3) We have the freedom of speech; the freedom to spend millions or even (literally) billions to fill the airwaves and internets with our political messages, whether true or false. We have the freedom to donate unlimited funds anonymously to special "committees" to amplify our voices without becoming targets. Contrary to left-wing propaganda this is NOT a special privilege of the rich: A homeless man living under a bridge has the same right to fund such a PAC as any billionaire.

(4) Some of your European "paradises" mandate that your children be "vaccinated" with God-only-know-what. My Gosh! Aren't you afraid of the nanobots, the hormones designed to force your children to switch genders? No fear that the vaccines are engineered to render specific ethnic groups -- e.g. Presbyterians -- infertile? In the U.S. we have the freedom to decide what goes in our children's bodies.

This just scratches the surface, but should help bilby understand why Americans are proud of their freedoms.

 

[Toni]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Spoken like a true authoritarian. Not an insult, by the way. Your attitudes towards the democratic process and unshakable belief in Dear Leader dovetail such an ideology perfectly.

You don't have democracy. Democracy implies free press.

Press is free. Unfortunately, not free from foreign interference.

It's not free if government owns it. And yes, people who control government control the media as well.

Where you live, yes. Not where I live.

 

[Toni]

Both parties need to do more/better to bring forward strong candidates for the highest offices.

Both parties need to die, along with their media.

Yer jes jealous

Not jealous, disappointed, very disappointed.

I frequently am disappointed. Here's the thing: I get to freely express my disappointment, disagreement and ire with elected officials at all levels here.

Yes, that's why Russia must be destroyed.
Are you disappointed it is not done yet?

Why would I want Russia destroyed?

 

[Elixir]

Why would I want Russia destroyed?

Your desire to see Russia destroyed, is a required element of babs’ fantasy.

 

[lpetrich]

Who could replace Joe Biden? Here are six possibilities | Joe Biden | The Guardian
Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, J B Pritzker, Gretchen Whitmer, Sherrod Brown, Dean Phillips

Biden meets with his family amid pressures to step down after debate | Joe Biden | The Guardian - "Officials dismiss reports family would discuss president quitting race and say summit was scheduled before debate"

Biden’s family reportedly tell him to stay in presidential race as blame shifts to advisers | Joe Biden | The Guardian - "The US president met with his family at Camp David, after a disastrous debate performance last week led to calls for him to drop out of the election"

 

[Person19960]

Oof, @Swammerdami isn't wrong at all, and, it hurts.

I don't like any of the names that LP mentioned, from The Guardian. Not that I have any personal opinions regarding those people's potential qualifications; I don't. But if the goal is to replace Biden with a person who will get more actual votes, then, Bernie Sanders is the obvious choice.

 

[Ford]

Oof, @Swammerdami isn't wrong at all, and, it hurts.

I don't like any of the names that LP mentioned, from The Guardian. Not that I have any personal opinions regarding those people's potential qualifications; I don't. But if the goal is to replace Biden with a person who will get more actual votes, then, Bernie Sanders is the obvious choice.

Bernie Sanders is older than Biden, so that's an obvious problem. Also, would he really get more? He couldn't even get enough votes to win the Democratic nomination.

As for the names that have been mentioned, from what I've seen Newsom has the charisma and media presence, and would shred Trump in the second debate. Whitmer has already said she's not interested, Sherrod Brown is kinda bland, and I don't know much about Phillips or Pritzker. If Biden decides to end his candidacy, he would get behind Harris, as would the party establishment. I don't particularly care for her and don't think she'd win over Trump, but that looks like it may be the cards we're dealt.

An additional problem is that if Biden does say he's not running, that will throw the Democratic party into chaos, since they're not very good at marching in lockstep (to put it mildly) and having an ugly convention fight over the replacement will not be good for the party. Meanwhile the GOP will be even more enthusiastic about Dear Leader, as now they see him as a king in waiting.

It might be better for Biden to stay in the race, spend the next few months campaigning hard and showing his "vigor," then - if he wins - step down sometime next year so that Harris can move into the Oval Office.

 

[Swammerdami]

Oof, Swammerdami isn't wrong at all, and, it hurts.

I don't like any of the names that LP mentioned, from The Guardian. Not that I have any personal opinions regarding those people's potential qualifications; I don't. But if the goal is to replace Biden with a person who will get more actual votes, then, Bernie Sanders is the obvious choice.

Sanders is even older than Biden. A major objection to Biden is his age; it would be absurd to replace him with someone even older.

Furthermore, I think Sanders' political strength has been continually over-estimated by his fans. He is a far-left candidate and whether that appeals to you or me is IRRELEVANT. The opinion that matters is that of the millions of "centrist" Americans so uninformed that they don't even know which Party to support.

Looking at lpetrich's list, I am also disappointed that the Ds lack a "strong bullpen." But Gretchen Whitmer is on the list; it was several months ago that I instructed my delegates to back her!

Gretchen Whitmer isn't even an option at Polymarket -- but Betfair shows her as having a 3½% chance to win the White House! In fact she's #6 in the list of likely November winners, behind only Trump, Biden, Harris, Newsom and Obama. The four (#3, #4, #5, #6) behind the frontrunners are all now almost neck-and-neck at Betfair, with the #7 (Clinton!) WAY behind. (RFK, Jr. has fallen to #8 with less than 1%.)


What happens if people at Polymarket want to bet on Whitmer? Right now "Other Democrat" is shown at about 3%. It would be hugely unfair to the "Other" bettors to remove Whitmer from the "Other" clump. So presumably that won't happen.

This is an advantage of a Rangoon-style auction, as I proposed in the Lounge to zero enthusiasm. The Rangoon auction has a mechanism to split "Other" ("Field") bets into parts.

 

[Person19960]

Hm, yeah, @Ford , I see what you're saying.

I think "candidate age" and "old white man" arguments are DOA in this election. We have 2 old white men; so, *if* Biden were to step aside - and I do not think he will, nor am I convinced that he should even think of it or do it - but, if that if were more than an if, then, I think that Bernie Sanders *might* be the best choice.

Being a former NJ Dem (ugh, not on purpose; it was for survival) I can say that Dems are bad on supporting women candidates. Barack Obama refused to endorse Barbara Buono, the Dem who ran against Republican Chris Christie's 2nd term as Governor of New Jersey. Barack was asked, and he said "I thought about it and decided naaaaaaaaaah."

They got in one little BridgeGate and then they got scared; they said "We're moving in with Christie and putting Jeff Van Drew down there."

Christie handily defeated the unsupported and unendorsed Barbara Buono; just as Jeff Van Drew, handpicked by The Norcross Brothers as were most of South Jersey's politicians, later defeated public school teacher Tanzie Youngblood for Rep of the horribly gerrymandered CD-2 district.

Van Drew thanked the Norcross Brothers and voters of CD-2 by instantly becoming the Republican we knew he was.

blah blah - this is an example of how Democrats fail to support women candidates.

Kamala Harris wouldn't get the same support that Joe Biden is getting. Gretchen Whitmer (who has declined, as you said) would not get that support. Michelle Obama has always said she is NOT interested in the White House or a Presidential run, but I think she'd win. I don't think any other woman (not AOC, not Rep Jasmine Crockett) would get as many votes, much less as much support from the Democratic Party.

That's why Bernie is my final answer. I mean, in regards to "who could truly beat Trump on the off chance that Biden retired" question goes.

 

[thebeave]

AOC is not even old enough to run for POTUS, is she?

 

[Politesse]

AOC is not even old enough to run for POTUS, is she?

Actually she would just squeak by, as you only have to be 35 at the time you take office, not when you begin your run.

But she's also an actual Progressive, highly articulate, beautiful, popular with young voters, y fluida en español, so that's kind of beside the point. Doors shut as she walks down the hall. Even I wouldn't think it wise for her to run, and I like her. But President is a job for Washington insiders who owe a lot of people a lot of money, not for "radical" reformers.

 

[Ford]

Furthermore, I think Sanders' political strength has been continually over-estimated by his fans. He is a far-left candidate and whether that appeals to you or me is IRRELEVANT. The opinion that matters is that of the millions of "centrist" Americans so uninformed that they don't even know which Party to support.

He has his fans, but they're not enough. Furthermore, having a candidate who proudly claims to be a (democratic) socialist would not just inflame the MAGA crowd, but would likely peel away some of the "never Trump" traditional conservatives who still remember the Cold War with fondness.

One person I've not seen mentioned yet is Buttigieg. If his appearances on talk shows or testifying in front of a hostile GOP house are any indication, he'd absolutely wreck Trump in a debate. He's intelligent, articulate, young, a veteran, and his only real liabilities are his height (he'd look tiny compared to Fatty McFatterson) and the whole gay thing...though I think that's much less of an issue. He comes across much better than Harris, and he's proven himself to be a competent leader.

 

[Politesse]

One person I've not seen mentioned yet is Buttigieg. If his appearances on talk shows or testifying in front of a hostile GOP house are any indication, he'd absolutely wreck Trump in a debate. He's intelligent, articulate, young, a veteran, and his only real liabilities are his height (he'd look tiny compared to Fatty McFatterson) and the whole gay thing...though I think that's much less of an issue. He comes across much better than Harris, and he's proven himself to be a competent leader.

Easily the best Transportation Secretary we've had in decades. But a large proportion of Americans have an unconscious sensation of disgust and fear whenever they see two gay men together. Not helpful on the campaign trail, that.

 

[Harry Bosch]

AOC is not even old enough to run for POTUS, is she?

Actually she would just squeak by, as you only have to be 35 at the time you take office, not when you begin your run.

But she's also an actual Progressive, highly articulate, beautiful, popular with young voters, y fluida en español, so that's kind of beside the point. Doors shut as she walks down the hall. Even I wouldn't think it wise for her to run, and I like her. But President is a job for Washington insiders who owe a lot of people a lot of money, not for "radical" reformers.

I'm a strong moderate, but I like AOC also. Bernie is too old. While both AOC and Bernie are to my left; AOC is just more appealable to me. I think that eventually she'll get more popular votes. She needs more years of experience IMO. However, if Biden drops out, the nominee will be Harris. She isn't my favorite pick. But the optics would be very bad to have a white politician leapfrogging a black VP.