ewsieg

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/21/harris-potential-vp-picks-biden-dropout-00170204 Little write up on who they think Harris will be discussing. Shapiro is about the only one that I think will be a hard no as I think that would anger the progressives (Jewish). Newsom doesn't check any strategic boxes, but he's great in front of the camera. Whitmer, Cooper, Kelly, and Bashear seem to make the most strategic sense.

I never waivered on voting for him myself, but I was deeply troubled about voting for him. You can say he'll have good people around him and for day to day stuff, there is some truth to it, but middle of the night emergency and he's just gotten back from a European visit, it's not like you can just decide to let the VP or chief of staff make some of those decisions, that's not how it works. I was never a Harris fan, but I do feel much more relieved at the idea of voting for her come November.

Going to die on that hill, huh?

There is probably some study that gives some more information on this, but my own personal experience tends to agree with you, although one of them definitely played favorites, luckily I was one of the favorites as I always cleaned up the mess of her actual favorites. My current boss is female and is fantastic. All that said, Harris has been known to have trouble managing her staff, although her office has been pretty quiet for the last year. Rather she's bad at it or just had a few bad hires that caused trouble, I can't say. I was ready to vote for Kloubachar last time around and she's had some similar complaints.

Fixed that second sentence for you, otherwise your post was pretty much spot on.

I plan on listening tonight after HOTD again, i'll try and focus on it. (Weird thing, for most music I really need to pay attention to hear the lyrics, otherwise I just catch portions of it. Sort of like trying to carry on a conversation at a bar where there is a live band playing, I hear just bits and pieces.) There are no song names, not sure if they have released those yet.

I've been somewhat off the grid the last few days, but did see some stuff about riots in England and just learned with this post that it wasn't what I assumed it was about, a soccer game.

Solid first impression of Jack White's new album. Neat reading how he released it as well.

You'll love it

It's been a given for a week now, just taking some time for him to realize it. Yes, they know Biden's numbers suck yet they are too afraid to share with him, add in the fact that traditionally an incumbent wouldn't be challenged, despite the fact that he even said he would be a one time president to bridge to another person outside of Trump. I still don't understand how so many of you have fallen into this belief that he was a terrible speaker. He was a good speaker, borderline great speaker, who knew how to keep folks engaged. He's nothing now when it comes to speaking, he can't even campaign, but i'm told that's not important, so there is that.

They are, that's the problem.

What? Just because of his repeated back peddling on anything against Trump or a position that Trump would later come out against?

I think it came from the side, handful of folks look that way.

No problem touting anonymous sources when it suits you, huh?

I know you're conditioned to turn everything into Biden is awesome and unless it clearly promotes Biden it's probably Russia propaganda turning allies against each other....but..... Watch that clip again. It's not really funny, although she does a pretty good job with the voice and inflection, but watch it again and then look at Jon's response. It's not the W you seem to think it is.

Jesus, Nixon likely didn't win his election over JFK because he didn't put make up on. Appearance matters. Articulating why someone should vote for you has mattered to every candidate with the exception of Trump. Now, with democracy on the line, the plan is to put Trump who has proved he can win without articulating why against Biden who sometimes can kind of articulate why, especially if you already plan on voting for him and wouldn't vote for Trump if hell froze over. And I'm the asshole for questioning this? Also, despite what MB is telling you, after the debate debacle numerous sources went to legitimate reporters and claimed they were shocked at what they saw but stated that maybe they should have seen it coming as they were kept away from Biden more and more. People that work directly for the president are, albeit not on the record, claiming that he is faltering. This isn't some right wing nut saying this on twitter, legitimate reporters are hearing these stories. Could it be just smoke and no fire, possibly, but this isn't spaghetti thrown up against the wall.

I never suggested dementia, only Parkinson's and I understand the difference. That said, you need to acknowledge the public perception of this man's ability and what appears to be a failure to reliably make his case to the American people why he should be the next president. Seriously, you can't remember the CNN interview with the guy complaining about the price of milk and every Biden supporter mocked him about his issue was how much milk he was buying, not that it was more expensive. Quick look and I found an article about it, crap it was from 2021 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/people-are-having-a-cow-over-cnns-12-gallons-of-milk-a-week-segment-heres-why-11636051263 For the last year folks on this board have talked about inflation going down and refusing to acknowledge or give excuses on why it's 'still going down'. So yeah, this news about inflation is awesome and should be great news for Biden, but again, it may not land that well when you've been saying inflation really isn't an issue for so long already.

I'm stating there is a concern by some that his staff/wife may be making decisions on his behalf and not by his direction. And if not now, they doubt he'll be in a position to be making the decisions come the end of his second term. Think Dianne Feinstein towards the end of her run. California for at least a year were represented by an elected Senators chief of staff. The people of California did not elect that Chief of Staff, they didn't elect her colleagues in the Senate that had to quietly tell her to vote yay or nay. Yes, another bit of great news in which history would show a president in this position would easily skate to a 2nd term. Also, if every Dem partisan didn't spend the last two years first claiming there was no inflation and then claiming inflation was decreasing (when it was only the rate of increase that was decreasing), it might be easier to spread the good news.

You need to stop talking about preserving democracy when you're asking people to ignore the fact that Biden may not be fit for office, but his unelected staff is still better then the alternative.

I know i'm beating a dead horse, but I still feel like way to many people just accept this 100%. Biden has claimed that he 'had' a stutter. Yes, initially he claimed he 'had' a stutter when he was younger and got past it. It wasn't until 4 years ago that all of a sudden, he's always had a stutter and that's the reason for his gaffe's. My wife had a stutter and there is still one situation that forces her to pause and in her situation, restart a sentence that she got briefly interrupted in, instead of just continuing from the point of the interruption. It was a technique taught to her and that's the only time it presents itself. So certainly Biden may have continued to struggle with it, but again, he was never like he is now. Here are a couple of past speeches of his, one a bit off of the cuff, i'm sure part of it was planned, and then a teleprompter speech. The difference is stark and I challenge anyone to watch these and make the claim again that Biden was never an effective speaker.

The delegates pick the parties nominee, not the individual states, they do that at the convention. The only thing I heard is some law on Ohio's books which could affect a non-Biden candidate, but they aren't winning Ohio anyway. The delegates may be pledged to someone, but that's it. For decades one of the few things that each party was more than happy to do with each other is to wrap laws around to protect the two party system and that protects the parties, not the individuals in them. This isn't like an independent trying to get on the ballot in each state. As for funding, a party isn't going to find a way to transfer funding to another candidate? They are better at moving money than the Mob and like I said before, both sides protect each other when it comes to that. That money will absolutely get to a new candidate, no doubt about it.

Biden did alright yesterday. If there is no definitive force looking to remove him, he did good enough to quell the party. If there was a group that had already decided, I don't think he did well enough to stop that. MB, you're not wrong on most of the "Pro's" you tout about Biden, but a quote I heard from last night summed it up well. 'Biden proved tonight he can still run the country, but I don't think he can win the election'

Exactly, it is what it is. We let Biden give it the 'ole college try and hope he's gotten better since his college days (since he sucked at that). In the end, if Trump wins, we can all feel good about the fact that he tried his best. In fact you forced me to take the L on this so bad that I'm rethinking my entire political thoughts over the last 8-9 years. It's been extensively reported that so many top republicans made a ton of attempts to stop Trump initially and even from running again. Most never publicly did it, but they really tried behind the scenes and that's all that should really count. Guess I shouldn't hold that against them and consider voting for republicans again.

Or, just go with me here, maybe if you 1) Believe the DNC narrative that this may be our last election if Trump wins and 2) Think you can't beat Trump with Biden, maybe you should be vocal about it instead of worrying about your standing in the party? Is this not the same forum that praises Cheney and Kinzinger for speaking out against their party and mocks the rest for 'knowing Trump sucks' but just going with it? Yesterday's Bulwark had Ezra Klein on it and he stated that off the record, every major democrat he's talked to about this has told him they don't think Biden can beat Trump, but would prefer not to disrupt the apple cart and are resigned to the fact that they'll lose and just to get ready to win it back in 2028.

I didn't realize that the WH came out and 'clarified' he was seen by the Neuro doc on 1/17, previously they stated it was done when he got his annual exam, which was 2/28. (Another words the lazy NYT reporter was correct and the Biden administration was lazy in their response) In the back of my mind I'm thinking that I was told POTUS always goes to Walter Reed, so if that's the rule/tradition, why? Not a big deal though, to be honest this is what i'd expect for POTUS, although no one is selling me that everyone else that works in the WH gets to see their specialist there too. But getting back on point, his annual was done on 2/28 and that day the WH released a statement that said no signs of trouble were discovered. Again, maybe i'm wrong, but i'm assuming most healthy people with no concerns don't go and see specialists prior to an annual check up. So maybe a questioning person might ask why see a Neuro doctor if there are no concerns and he was scheduled for his yearly checkup just a month later which would determine if there was any need to see any type of specialists.