If the left party actually re-nominates him, he doesn’t have to campaign. The legacy media will cover for him and the left machine(s) will inevitably find the votes necessary in the swing precincts, if needed.
When he meets with a head of state, all he has to do is *be*. Said heads of state know well that he’s in ever steeper decline, and serious (as opposed to photo-op) negotiations are carried on by diplomatic underlings anyway.
These heads of state know what’s up. I wonder how they feel about USA being as out of it as is its leader. Come to think of it, the decline of Biden is a metaphor for the decline of USA – or is it the other way around?
Trump was in many ways an embarrassment, but Biden’s public displays eclipse Trump’s. Trump was uncouth and bombastic, but Biden’s simply not there. (Trump haters and Biden/left apologists will differ, of course, but I don’t give a rat’s patootie about what they may think, to whatever extent they may think.)
Behold, one and all, The Leader Of The Free World: a world that’s not nearly as free as it once was (if it ever was), and a leader who’s not even very adept at being led, much less being adept at leading.
Woe is us.
For the past six weeks ot so, I’ve been utterly convinced Slo Joe will not be the Democrat nominee. Many many developments since then have only reinforced my belief. This one especially stands out.
It will almost certainly be Newsom. The switch will happen in late fall, after the off year elections. It will be quick and seemless; within a week or two after, the coordinated MSM gaslighting will have most Democrat faithful insisting Brandon always planned to serve only one term and singing his praises for being so restrained.
When someone writes the history of the fall of the American empire, the puppet masters behind the Magic Negro and Gropey Joe will get their own volume.
Two completely empty suits on the world stage and so many pretending all is well.
Ackler:
How do you think they’ll solve the Kamala problem?
Personally, I think it’s possible Joe won’t run, but I am by no means certain. There’s Kamala, and Joe himself is an ambitious, narcissistic, and nasty character who may not be so happy about being replaced.
And he will still beat Trump by about seven points.
Unless he’s dead then he will only beat him by four points.
He is trying to read his comments from the notes in his lap and failing.
I find it increasingly dificult to imagine Biden being the 2024 nominee. But then Trump is the greatest turnout machine that the Democrats have ever had. It may not matter.
Neo,
The short answer is: I don’t know. That’s one of the things they will be working on over the next three months (along with dissuading other hopefuls like Moore, Whitmer and Pritzker from running).
While it’s always important not to underestimate our opponents, it’s equally important not to overestimate them. Contrary to what many jaded conservatives think, the Democrat Party is not omnipotent and our elections are not fixed, as yet anyway. Yes, Democrats have a laundry list of institutional advantages, yes there’s plenty of fraud, but ultimately Democrats might lose in 2024. We are not at the point where Presidential elections are truly just for show. That may happen, but it’s at least 10-20 years away (depending, in part, on who wins in 2024).
Biden is a very, very risky gambit. It is just unfathomable to me that they would take that risk, despite all of the advantages they possess.
Griffin wins.
I wanted to laugh…but it’s too close to the truth.
Ackler:
They wouldn’t have nominated Biden in the first place if they had anyone better. They still don’t, which is their problem. Biden had a few things going for him, and he still has them as far as many people are concerned. The first is that fake avuncular personality. The second is a reputation for being a moderate (he’s not, but all those years in politics allow people to think of him that way). The third is that he was chosen by Obama for the VP spot and served him for 8 years. If not for that, he probably would be retired some time ago, or still serving in the Senate. Obama still has tons of admirers. That gives Joe reflected stature. His possible replacements have none of that. And people who watch the MSM don’t see his bloopers and senior moments.
In addition, the left is salivating at the thought of the GOP nominating Trump, who is still popular on the right but not elsewhere.
At the 1964 Worlds Fair they had a robot Abe Lincoln , I was in the 1st grade at the time and very impressed by it.
Forget Trump and Biden , someone should locate that old robot and reboot it with ChatGPT and let it run for President. It has my vote
They wouldn’t have nominated Biden in the first place if they had anyone better.
==
They had quite a scrum of better candidates. These included Andrew Yang, Michael Bloomberg, John Hickenlooper, Steven Bullock, and John Delaney. In truth, Biden was absolutely the worst of the bunch by any sensible set of measures.
==
The problem is that Democratic primary voters do not use sensible measures. He’s their idea of ‘the best’.
Biden was the ‘best’ for Obama and that was what carried the day.
Idiotic, senile and easily controllable were pluses in Biden’s favor in this case.
One thing the author misses. The Presidency of Israel is a largely ceremonial position. He’s not a policy-maker. A meeting with him is according to diplomatic protocol and any public remarks vetted courtesies. Biden cannot handle even that.
Idiotic, senile and easily controllable were pluses in Biden’s favor in this case.
==
Biden in 2008 was idiotic. He wasn’t yet senile or easily controllable. And, in fact, he was brazen and cunning. However, he’s a deeply mediocre man. The utility of Biden for a man like Obama is that Biden only embarrasses himself, not the boss.
==
Leaving aside positions set aside specifically for academicians (e.g. the Council of Economic Advisers), the only people Obama had in his vicinity who were not drawn from the Democratic Party nomenklatura were Janet Yellen, Steven Chu, Ernest Moniz, and Lawrence Summers. Obama hardly spoke with members of Congress, didn’t know how to negotiate, and made policy decisions by selected from prefabricated options on memos his staff sent him.
I wasn’t talking about 2008 I was talking about 2020 and Obama’s ‘third term’.
How does the Deep State control election outcomes?
According to Patricia Byrne, the FBI tasked him to bribe Hillary (with some $18 million? Or was it $30 mil?) so that the IC could blackmail her if she does something they’re opposed to.
Byrnes story is somewhere told on Youtube by interview (Reason magazine — Nick Gillespie, interviewer).
But who was running him? This time, as well as others including a Russian female spy? (ala Chuck Barris tall tale told in book and film form, “Confessions of a Dangerous Mint.”)
Last Autumn, Byrnes’ story came out in the marginalized Christian Right Wing tent circuit, headlined by the persecuted and maliciously persecuted Lt Gen Flynn.
He says he was an asset run by none other than Peter Stzrok, assistant to the FBI’s counter-terrorism unit.
You can listen to Patrick Byrnes’ talk athus web site, www deepcapture.com
Art Deco:
I think you misunderstand what I mean by “better.” I don’t mean better people, or smarter, or more competent. I mean better as Obama’s VP choice. He chose Biden because he would never outshine him, he would do what he said, and he also added the illusion of an alliance with an elder statesman of a more conventional and experienced type. Biden also was supposed to be a big foreign policy expect, which would supposedly compensate for Obama’s lack of foreign policy experience. That’s why he was chosen in 2008.
He was chosen in 2020 for the reasons I mentioned – he had Obama’s glow on him. He was also (falsely) perceived as genial and avuncular and could be presented (wrongly) as a moderate candidate and a nice break from the combative Trump.
Biden was the best candidate.
Neo:
I think the first two things you referenced are withering about as fast as he is. I certainly agree about the third, and it remains impactful, particularly among African American voters (ironic, given Brandon’s very questionable past regarding race issues). In addition to what I mentioned, another task for the Democrat establishment these next three months is winning over Jim Clyburn and his South Carolina machine. Now that South Carolina’s (heavily black) primary has been moved to first, they have to keep it that way. For sure. Winning over Clyburn will take a lot of finesse and concessions to be sure.
I agree with you that Brandon was useful in 2020, which is why he was selected in a ‘deus ex machina’ fashion. But he has deteriorated markedly since then. I’ve always said he will remain as long as he is useful. He no longer is; or, at least he no longer is as a nominee in 2024. Another ‘deus ex machina’ moment seems perfectly fitting
If I’m wrong, so be it. Feel free to call me out on it next year. But I’m pretty darn confident there will be a Newsom switcheroo between Veteran’s Day and Christmas.
Bauxite on July 18, 2023 at 7:06 pm said:
I find it increasingly dificult to imagine Biden being the 2024 nominee. But then Trump is the greatest turnout machine that the Democrats have ever had.
As Trump also is for Republicans. The GOPe regard him and his voters with disdain. Tucker Carlson was fired by the Murdoch people because he was thought to be a Trump ally. Fox News is pushing DeSantis but he is not doing very well. I like him but he is too obviously the donor’s candidate. His sudden backtrack on Ukraine was painful to watch. I don’t know if Trump can win the general election but I don’t know which other Republican could. We are headed into rough water.
Ackler:
Do you know anyone who voted for Biden in 2020 who’s now saying, “You know, I voted for him in 2020, but now I’m really worried about him”? I don’t know anyone like that. I don’t know anyone in particular who voted for him in 2020 and wouldn’t vote for him – wouldn’t crawl on broken glass to vote for him – if it was him or Trump.
Would they vote for Newsom if he was the candidate instead? Yes, but they’d vote for any Democrat who was nominated, and that includes Biden. The real question, I suppose, is who those elusive swing voters would vote for, and whether Biden really turns them off. I don’t think they are paying attention to how messed up he is, and I think they’d vote for him again.
I certainly wouldn’t be shocked if they replaced Biden. I just think the logistics of it are hard, and Kamala is in the way, so they may decide to stick with him, especially if Trump is the GOP nominee.
Mike K:
DeSantis did not backtrack on Ukraine. I wrote about that several times, with details.
We really do live in maximum-absurdity times. Watching Joe simultaneously nodding off and spouting gibberish is really something. All that’s missing here is a long thread of drool hanging from the corner of his mouth, and a loud, wet, messy-sounding fart, while he’s doing it.
Say what you will about Trump, when he was occupying the office there was no doubt who was creating the policy he was speaking (coherently) about, no doubt about whose intellect was shaping and guiding the business of the USA from the Oval Office, no doubt about who was in charge in the wheelhouse.
How can any citizen, anyone that genuinely feels concern for their country, watch Joe Biden shuffle through his day-to-day routine, and not be wondering who it is that is doing the work of the Chief Executive? What un-elected, faceless White House staffer is creating our policy ideas and putting them into motion? Who is really in charge, and most importantly – how were they vetted, and who controls them?
I am simply amazed that this question remains unasked, that the status quo remains unchallenged. It is logical to assume that Joe Biden can disappear from the campaign trail like he did last time, that the votes can be cooked up behind the panel-up windows like last time, and the election secured. Where are the Democrat voters, do they really think this is OK?
Neo:
No I don’t. Like you, most of my social circle is made up of hard-core liberals (and a fair amount of leftists) who will unquestionably vote Democrat next year no matter who the nominee is.
I agree, it’s about the swing voters in the purple states (living in a deep blue city in a deep blue state, I’m not regularly around them). I also agree they’re not likely paying much attention and few saw the clip with Herzog. But…plenty of Democrat heavy hitters did, and have seen the events of the last few months. They’re worried and they should be. Brandon isn’t going to get better. At best, he stays at baseline (which ain’t good). And that’s the best case scenario, which, quite frankly, isn’t all that likely.
The sad fact is that none of this with Biden matters as long as Trump is the nominee. I’m not saying DeSantis would be a sure fire winner at all but he is far more likely to win over those middle people where as there is no chance of anyone changing from Biden or Newsom to Trump.
This is all so disheartening. Like watching a car wreck developing.
Mike K – Trump is not a turnout machine for Republicans. He has run behind Republican congressional and statewide candidates consistently in every election he has been on the ballot. He has also talked to win more than 47% of the vote.
Trump cannot win. Nominate him and watch Democrats control the whole of the federal government in 2025.
@ Neo > “so they may decide to stick with him, especially if Trump is the GOP nominee.”
Which may be one of the rationales for the new J6 indictment, in addition to just general hatred of Trump.
None of the various charges, probes, investigations et al. are hurting Trump in the polls, however—his numbers have actually risen since the 37-count classified documents indictment dropped in June. Currently, a RealClearPolitics average of polls shows Trump at 54 percent in the race for the GOP nomination, with DeSantis at 20 and no one else even close.
I’ve seen speculations that all of the legal argle-bargle is intended to do exactly this: make Trump the GOP nominee, because then Biden (or any other Democrat) would be a certain winner (are they not all that sure of the fraud-quotient this year?), but they might miscalculate — again.
President Joe Biden welcomed President Isaac Herzog of Israel to the White House on Tuesday, but attention quickly shifted from the importance of the allies’ meeting to whether Biden would make it through the photo opportunity with members of the press intact.
As cameras rolled, Biden told the president of Israel that he doesn’t remember “two-thirds” of the past 75 years since Israel was established. Most of those, of course, Biden served in the United States Senate.
Technically speaking, though, this could actually be a true statement (what a shock).
The immediate inference is that he meant he had forgotten 2/3 of each year for 75 years (not hard to do actually, even for non-senile octogenarians).
BUT
He was born in 1943 and would have only been 5 when Israel was founded in 1948.
He was elected to the Senate in 1973, at the age of 31 (good grief; did this man ever have a real job?).
Dividing 75 years by three, the first third is 1948-1973, the second to 1998, and the third to 2023.
So, assuming he didn’t know much worth remembering before 1973 (check his Wiki article), and he then forgot everything from 1973 to 1998, that would also be 2/3rds.
But does he actually remember anything from the most recent 25 years?
The perennial political conundrum: Knaves or fools?
Solway says “both.”
Neo, et al,
I think you are overestimating how big an obstacle Kamala is to a Newsome nomination (in the event that Biden “decides” to not run).
She was such a loser in 2020 that she dropped out practically in the same speech she announced her candidacy. She’s gotten no better. Plus there is already at least one viable, if odious to many, opponent declared. The party also finds that other candidate odious but fears he could easily defeat Harris. So Newsome is “invited to run and Kamala is off the stage by the second debate.
Yes, there will be some half-hearted grumbling about another white men only primary but that will fade quickly with a few public and private consolation prizes.
I should add a question: is Tulsi Gabbard still a Democrat? She seems to be rather alone among big league politicians in not farting in church, so to speak.
I think she declared that she’s had it…and is no longer a Democratic.
(At least I think so…)
I don’t know anyone who says they voted for Biden who won’t vote for him again. They LIKE him and think it is mean of the evil Republicans to call him out for being old.
As long as he keeps mostly upright and signs the legislation of which they approve they will vote for him. They don’t care that Kamala is a moron either. She is a loyal soldier in the fight against Republicans and that is enough.
They will never vote for any Fascist Republican no matter who it is. And while the media has been particularly successful in tarring Trump and those associated with him, they will tar absolutely anyone who runs as a Republican with the same brush.
Many of these people were vaguely alarmed by the Democrats sidelining of Bernie! and Tulsi and the rest of the field but, at the end of the day, will still vote for whomever the party chooses because voting Republican would be a vote for evil.
Nailed it, J.L.
I know that there were “Yellow dog Democrats”, Democrats who would vote for a yellow dog before a Republican. Now there seems to be “Slime mold Democrats”.
It still seems impossible to me that people cannot see the damage that is being done to the country. And those who espouse socialism! Are those people so blind not to realize that the people who will be in power will twist the government to their benefit?
I am and will always be an Independent in my politics. My metric is which candidate will reduce my freedom the most, and meddle with my life the most. That’s who I vote against.
Jerry:
I disagree. I don’t think the grumbling will be half-hearted. Of course, some Democrats would be relieved to see her go, but for others she has too many intersectional pluses: female and black. Pushing her aside will be a trigger for rage for quite a few Democrats, I believe, either female or black or both (and that’s a sizable proportion of the Democrat constituency).
But most importantly, she is already VP. She shouldn’t have to be in a presidential debate against other candidates for the presidency. She should be the obvious choice, and if she’s booted out, I think a lot of people on the left will be quite angry.
They have to figure out a way around that, and I don’t think it’s all that easy.
as with fetterman, they show deep contempt for their audience, now if they have the mail vote in key districts it doesn’t really matter,
They have to figure out a way around that, and I don’t think it’s all that easy.
–neo
It’s a bird, it’s a plane, … it’s SuperMichelle!
I do see articles nibbling on that possibility and it would be the ideal solution.
If MO runs for Prez, our only conservative hope is that she reveals her true nature by devouring a guinea pig whole on live television.
Yeah, yeah, I know MO says she doesn’t want to run, but did you ever do something you didn’t want to do, but you did do When The Price Was Right?
Biden and Democrats generally are treating our middle class the same way as Stalin treated the Kulaks. The middle class has been the backbone of the USA, but are being squelched beyond recovery by the billionaire elites, all Democrats, and Democratic policies such as bloating the money supply and giving us persistent inflation.. We have lost the country we live in. The young, <40, have no clue about the constitution; some 40+% favor socialism, and socialism we have since Woodrow, and every subsequent prez since, so will be more so. I am not sorry to be of advanced age, as check-out time approaches, because I love the old USA, not this leftist farce run for and by the Biden crime family.
In politics, as in entertainment, you need a “hook” of some kind. Colorless, uncharismatic, and competent doesn’t get you very far. The party base doesn’t like competent, colorless administrators. They want ideological warriors (or candidates who portray themselves that way). That’s why Warren and Buttigieg did better than Hickenlooper or Bullock in the primaries. The donors and party bigwigs don’t want outsiders or reformers. They want politicians they can count on to deliver the things they want, not unreliable wild cards. That’s why Yang or Bloomberg weren’t going to get the nomination.
The one thing I concluded from the first Democratic debate in 2023 was that Joe Biden was finished. He was terrible. A lot of other people must have thought so too. But he was the candidate most likely to win. He was familiar to voters and didn’t appear threatening to the uninformed. He was also somebody the donors and bigwigs trusted to deliver the goods, and they were able to convince the other candidates to drop out.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
If the left party actually re-nominates him, he doesn’t have to campaign. The legacy media will cover for him and the left machine(s) will inevitably find the votes necessary in the swing precincts, if needed.
When he meets with a head of state, all he has to do is *be*. Said heads of state know well that he’s in ever steeper decline, and serious (as opposed to photo-op) negotiations are carried on by diplomatic underlings anyway.
These heads of state know what’s up. I wonder how they feel about USA being as out of it as is its leader. Come to think of it, the decline of Biden is a metaphor for the decline of USA – or is it the other way around?
Trump was in many ways an embarrassment, but Biden’s public displays eclipse Trump’s. Trump was uncouth and bombastic, but Biden’s simply not there. (Trump haters and Biden/left apologists will differ, of course, but I don’t give a rat’s patootie about what they may think, to whatever extent they may think.)
Behold, one and all, The Leader Of The Free World: a world that’s not nearly as free as it once was (if it ever was), and a leader who’s not even very adept at being led, much less being adept at leading.
Woe is us.
For the past six weeks ot so, I’ve been utterly convinced Slo Joe will not be the Democrat nominee. Many many developments since then have only reinforced my belief. This one especially stands out.
It will almost certainly be Newsom. The switch will happen in late fall, after the off year elections. It will be quick and seemless; within a week or two after, the coordinated MSM gaslighting will have most Democrat faithful insisting Brandon always planned to serve only one term and singing his praises for being so restrained.
When someone writes the history of the fall of the American empire, the puppet masters behind the Magic Negro and Gropey Joe will get their own volume.
Two completely empty suits on the world stage and so many pretending all is well.
Ackler:
How do you think they’ll solve the Kamala problem?
Personally, I think it’s possible Joe won’t run, but I am by no means certain. There’s Kamala, and Joe himself is an ambitious, narcissistic, and nasty character who may not be so happy about being replaced.
And he will still beat Trump by about seven points.
Unless he’s dead then he will only beat him by four points.
He is trying to read his comments from the notes in his lap and failing.
I find it increasingly dificult to imagine Biden being the 2024 nominee. But then Trump is the greatest turnout machine that the Democrats have ever had. It may not matter.
Neo,
The short answer is: I don’t know. That’s one of the things they will be working on over the next three months (along with dissuading other hopefuls like Moore, Whitmer and Pritzker from running).
While it’s always important not to underestimate our opponents, it’s equally important not to overestimate them. Contrary to what many jaded conservatives think, the Democrat Party is not omnipotent and our elections are not fixed, as yet anyway. Yes, Democrats have a laundry list of institutional advantages, yes there’s plenty of fraud, but ultimately Democrats might lose in 2024. We are not at the point where Presidential elections are truly just for show. That may happen, but it’s at least 10-20 years away (depending, in part, on who wins in 2024).
Biden is a very, very risky gambit. It is just unfathomable to me that they would take that risk, despite all of the advantages they possess.
Griffin wins.
I wanted to laugh…but it’s too close to the truth.
Ackler:
They wouldn’t have nominated Biden in the first place if they had anyone better. They still don’t, which is their problem. Biden had a few things going for him, and he still has them as far as many people are concerned. The first is that fake avuncular personality. The second is a reputation for being a moderate (he’s not, but all those years in politics allow people to think of him that way). The third is that he was chosen by Obama for the VP spot and served him for 8 years. If not for that, he probably would be retired some time ago, or still serving in the Senate. Obama still has tons of admirers. That gives Joe reflected stature. His possible replacements have none of that. And people who watch the MSM don’t see his bloopers and senior moments.
In addition, the left is salivating at the thought of the GOP nominating Trump, who is still popular on the right but not elsewhere.
At the 1964 Worlds Fair they had a robot Abe Lincoln , I was in the 1st grade at the time and very impressed by it.
Forget Trump and Biden , someone should locate that old robot and reboot it with ChatGPT and let it run for President. It has my vote
They wouldn’t have nominated Biden in the first place if they had anyone better.
==
They had quite a scrum of better candidates. These included Andrew Yang, Michael Bloomberg, John Hickenlooper, Steven Bullock, and John Delaney. In truth, Biden was absolutely the worst of the bunch by any sensible set of measures.
==
The problem is that Democratic primary voters do not use sensible measures. He’s their idea of ‘the best’.
Biden was the ‘best’ for Obama and that was what carried the day.
Idiotic, senile and easily controllable were pluses in Biden’s favor in this case.
One thing the author misses. The Presidency of Israel is a largely ceremonial position. He’s not a policy-maker. A meeting with him is according to diplomatic protocol and any public remarks vetted courtesies. Biden cannot handle even that.
Idiotic, senile and easily controllable were pluses in Biden’s favor in this case.
==
Biden in 2008 was idiotic. He wasn’t yet senile or easily controllable. And, in fact, he was brazen and cunning. However, he’s a deeply mediocre man. The utility of Biden for a man like Obama is that Biden only embarrasses himself, not the boss.
==
Leaving aside positions set aside specifically for academicians (e.g. the Council of Economic Advisers), the only people Obama had in his vicinity who were not drawn from the Democratic Party nomenklatura were Janet Yellen, Steven Chu, Ernest Moniz, and Lawrence Summers. Obama hardly spoke with members of Congress, didn’t know how to negotiate, and made policy decisions by selected from prefabricated options on memos his staff sent him.
I wasn’t talking about 2008 I was talking about 2020 and Obama’s ‘third term’.
How does the Deep State control election outcomes?
According to Patricia Byrne, the FBI tasked him to bribe Hillary (with some $18 million? Or was it $30 mil?) so that the IC could blackmail her if she does something they’re opposed to.
Byrnes story is somewhere told on Youtube by interview (Reason magazine — Nick Gillespie, interviewer).
But who was running him? This time, as well as others including a Russian female spy? (ala Chuck Barris tall tale told in book and film form, “Confessions of a Dangerous Mint.”)
Last Autumn, Byrnes’ story came out in the marginalized Christian Right Wing tent circuit, headlined by the persecuted and maliciously persecuted Lt Gen Flynn.
He says he was an asset run by none other than Peter Stzrok, assistant to the FBI’s counter-terrorism unit.
You can listen to Patrick Byrnes’ talk athus web site, www deepcapture.com
Art Deco:
I think you misunderstand what I mean by “better.” I don’t mean better people, or smarter, or more competent. I mean better as Obama’s VP choice. He chose Biden because he would never outshine him, he would do what he said, and he also added the illusion of an alliance with an elder statesman of a more conventional and experienced type. Biden also was supposed to be a big foreign policy expect, which would supposedly compensate for Obama’s lack of foreign policy experience. That’s why he was chosen in 2008.
He was chosen in 2020 for the reasons I mentioned – he had Obama’s glow on him. He was also (falsely) perceived as genial and avuncular and could be presented (wrongly) as a moderate candidate and a nice break from the combative Trump.
Biden was the best candidate.
Neo:
I think the first two things you referenced are withering about as fast as he is. I certainly agree about the third, and it remains impactful, particularly among African American voters (ironic, given Brandon’s very questionable past regarding race issues). In addition to what I mentioned, another task for the Democrat establishment these next three months is winning over Jim Clyburn and his South Carolina machine. Now that South Carolina’s (heavily black) primary has been moved to first, they have to keep it that way. For sure. Winning over Clyburn will take a lot of finesse and concessions to be sure.
I agree with you that Brandon was useful in 2020, which is why he was selected in a ‘deus ex machina’ fashion. But he has deteriorated markedly since then. I’ve always said he will remain as long as he is useful. He no longer is; or, at least he no longer is as a nominee in 2024. Another ‘deus ex machina’ moment seems perfectly fitting
If I’m wrong, so be it. Feel free to call me out on it next year. But I’m pretty darn confident there will be a Newsom switcheroo between Veteran’s Day and Christmas.
Bauxite on July 18, 2023 at 7:06 pm said:
I find it increasingly dificult to imagine Biden being the 2024 nominee. But then Trump is the greatest turnout machine that the Democrats have ever had.
As Trump also is for Republicans. The GOPe regard him and his voters with disdain. Tucker Carlson was fired by the Murdoch people because he was thought to be a Trump ally. Fox News is pushing DeSantis but he is not doing very well. I like him but he is too obviously the donor’s candidate. His sudden backtrack on Ukraine was painful to watch. I don’t know if Trump can win the general election but I don’t know which other Republican could. We are headed into rough water.
Ackler:
Do you know anyone who voted for Biden in 2020 who’s now saying, “You know, I voted for him in 2020, but now I’m really worried about him”? I don’t know anyone like that. I don’t know anyone in particular who voted for him in 2020 and wouldn’t vote for him – wouldn’t crawl on broken glass to vote for him – if it was him or Trump.
Would they vote for Newsom if he was the candidate instead? Yes, but they’d vote for any Democrat who was nominated, and that includes Biden. The real question, I suppose, is who those elusive swing voters would vote for, and whether Biden really turns them off. I don’t think they are paying attention to how messed up he is, and I think they’d vote for him again.
I certainly wouldn’t be shocked if they replaced Biden. I just think the logistics of it are hard, and Kamala is in the way, so they may decide to stick with him, especially if Trump is the GOP nominee.
Mike K:
DeSantis did not backtrack on Ukraine. I wrote about that several times, with details.
We really do live in maximum-absurdity times. Watching Joe simultaneously nodding off and spouting gibberish is really something. All that’s missing here is a long thread of drool hanging from the corner of his mouth, and a loud, wet, messy-sounding fart, while he’s doing it.
Say what you will about Trump, when he was occupying the office there was no doubt who was creating the policy he was speaking (coherently) about, no doubt about whose intellect was shaping and guiding the business of the USA from the Oval Office, no doubt about who was in charge in the wheelhouse.
How can any citizen, anyone that genuinely feels concern for their country, watch Joe Biden shuffle through his day-to-day routine, and not be wondering who it is that is doing the work of the Chief Executive? What un-elected, faceless White House staffer is creating our policy ideas and putting them into motion? Who is really in charge, and most importantly – how were they vetted, and who controls them?
I am simply amazed that this question remains unasked, that the status quo remains unchallenged. It is logical to assume that Joe Biden can disappear from the campaign trail like he did last time, that the votes can be cooked up behind the panel-up windows like last time, and the election secured. Where are the Democrat voters, do they really think this is OK?
Neo:
No I don’t. Like you, most of my social circle is made up of hard-core liberals (and a fair amount of leftists) who will unquestionably vote Democrat next year no matter who the nominee is.
I agree, it’s about the swing voters in the purple states (living in a deep blue city in a deep blue state, I’m not regularly around them). I also agree they’re not likely paying much attention and few saw the clip with Herzog. But…plenty of Democrat heavy hitters did, and have seen the events of the last few months. They’re worried and they should be. Brandon isn’t going to get better. At best, he stays at baseline (which ain’t good). And that’s the best case scenario, which, quite frankly, isn’t all that likely.
The sad fact is that none of this with Biden matters as long as Trump is the nominee. I’m not saying DeSantis would be a sure fire winner at all but he is far more likely to win over those middle people where as there is no chance of anyone changing from Biden or Newsom to Trump.
This is all so disheartening. Like watching a car wreck developing.
Mike K – Trump is not a turnout machine for Republicans. He has run behind Republican congressional and statewide candidates consistently in every election he has been on the ballot. He has also talked to win more than 47% of the vote.
Trump cannot win. Nominate him and watch Democrats control the whole of the federal government in 2025.
@ Neo > “so they may decide to stick with him, especially if Trump is the GOP nominee.”
Which may be one of the rationales for the new J6 indictment, in addition to just general hatred of Trump.
https://www.thenewneo.com/2023/07/18/two-tiers-of-justice-more-on-the-hunter-biden-protection-squad-plus-a-new-trump-indictment/#comment-2689584
AesopFan on July 18, 2023 at 11:54 pm said:
More on the story of Trump’s indictment:
https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2023/07/18/source-trump-target-letter-does-not-mention-sedition-or-insurrection-ex-prez-only-person-named-n778629
I’ve seen speculations that all of the legal argle-bargle is intended to do exactly this: make Trump the GOP nominee, because then Biden (or any other Democrat) would be a certain winner (are they not all that sure of the fraud-quotient this year?), but they might miscalculate — again.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2023/07/18/joe-biden-falls-apart-on-camera-during-meeting-with-israels-president-n2625890
Technically speaking, though, this could actually be a true statement (what a shock).
The immediate inference is that he meant he had forgotten 2/3 of each year for 75 years (not hard to do actually, even for non-senile octogenarians).
BUT
He was born in 1943 and would have only been 5 when Israel was founded in 1948.
He was elected to the Senate in 1973, at the age of 31 (good grief; did this man ever have a real job?).
Dividing 75 years by three, the first third is 1948-1973, the second to 1998, and the third to 2023.
So, assuming he didn’t know much worth remembering before 1973 (check his Wiki article), and he then forgot everything from 1973 to 1998, that would also be 2/3rds.
But does he actually remember anything from the most recent 25 years?
The perennial political conundrum: Knaves or fools?
Solway says “both.”
https://pjmedia.com/columns/david-solway-2/2023/07/18/on-politics-evil-and-stupidity-n1711597
Neo, et al,
I think you are overestimating how big an obstacle Kamala is to a Newsome nomination (in the event that Biden “decides” to not run).
She was such a loser in 2020 that she dropped out practically in the same speech she announced her candidacy. She’s gotten no better. Plus there is already at least one viable, if odious to many, opponent declared. The party also finds that other candidate odious but fears he could easily defeat Harris. So Newsome is “invited to run and Kamala is off the stage by the second debate.
Yes, there will be some half-hearted grumbling about another white men only primary but that will fade quickly with a few public and private consolation prizes.
I should add a question: is Tulsi Gabbard still a Democrat? She seems to be rather alone among big league politicians in not farting in church, so to speak.
I think she declared that she’s had it…and is no longer a Democratic.
(At least I think so…)
I don’t know anyone who says they voted for Biden who won’t vote for him again. They LIKE him and think it is mean of the evil Republicans to call him out for being old.
As long as he keeps mostly upright and signs the legislation of which they approve they will vote for him. They don’t care that Kamala is a moron either. She is a loyal soldier in the fight against Republicans and that is enough.
They will never vote for any Fascist Republican no matter who it is. And while the media has been particularly successful in tarring Trump and those associated with him, they will tar absolutely anyone who runs as a Republican with the same brush.
Many of these people were vaguely alarmed by the Democrats sidelining of Bernie! and Tulsi and the rest of the field but, at the end of the day, will still vote for whomever the party chooses because voting Republican would be a vote for evil.
Nailed it, J.L.
I know that there were “Yellow dog Democrats”, Democrats who would vote for a yellow dog before a Republican. Now there seems to be “Slime mold Democrats”.
It still seems impossible to me that people cannot see the damage that is being done to the country. And those who espouse socialism! Are those people so blind not to realize that the people who will be in power will twist the government to their benefit?
I am and will always be an Independent in my politics. My metric is which candidate will reduce my freedom the most, and meddle with my life the most. That’s who I vote against.
Jerry:
I disagree. I don’t think the grumbling will be half-hearted. Of course, some Democrats would be relieved to see her go, but for others she has too many intersectional pluses: female and black. Pushing her aside will be a trigger for rage for quite a few Democrats, I believe, either female or black or both (and that’s a sizable proportion of the Democrat constituency).
But most importantly, she is already VP. She shouldn’t have to be in a presidential debate against other candidates for the presidency. She should be the obvious choice, and if she’s booted out, I think a lot of people on the left will be quite angry.
They have to figure out a way around that, and I don’t think it’s all that easy.
as with fetterman, they show deep contempt for their audience, now if they have the mail vote in key districts it doesn’t really matter,
They have to figure out a way around that, and I don’t think it’s all that easy.
–neo
It’s a bird, it’s a plane, … it’s SuperMichelle!
I do see articles nibbling on that possibility and it would be the ideal solution.
If MO runs for Prez, our only conservative hope is that she reveals her true nature by devouring a guinea pig whole on live television.
–“V”, “Diana Eats a Guinea Pig” (1983)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhkRYVpxNrQ
Yeah, yeah, I know MO says she doesn’t want to run, but did you ever do something you didn’t want to do, but you did do When The Price Was Right?
Biden and Democrats generally are treating our middle class the same way as Stalin treated the Kulaks. The middle class has been the backbone of the USA, but are being squelched beyond recovery by the billionaire elites, all Democrats, and Democratic policies such as bloating the money supply and giving us persistent inflation.. We have lost the country we live in. The young, <40, have no clue about the constitution; some 40+% favor socialism, and socialism we have since Woodrow, and every subsequent prez since, so will be more so. I am not sorry to be of advanced age, as check-out time approaches, because I love the old USA, not this leftist farce run for and by the Biden crime family.
In politics, as in entertainment, you need a “hook” of some kind. Colorless, uncharismatic, and competent doesn’t get you very far. The party base doesn’t like competent, colorless administrators. They want ideological warriors (or candidates who portray themselves that way). That’s why Warren and Buttigieg did better than Hickenlooper or Bullock in the primaries. The donors and party bigwigs don’t want outsiders or reformers. They want politicians they can count on to deliver the things they want, not unreliable wild cards. That’s why Yang or Bloomberg weren’t going to get the nomination.
The one thing I concluded from the first Democratic debate in 2023 was that Joe Biden was finished. He was terrible. A lot of other people must have thought so too. But he was the candidate most likely to win. He was familiar to voters and didn’t appear threatening to the uninformed. He was also somebody the donors and bigwigs trusted to deliver the goods, and they were able to convince the other candidates to drop out.