A Rebooted Race
We're back to Square 1.
Regardless of whether the Democrats closing ranks around Vice President Harris as their replacement nominee is a good idea, they have done so. In addition to all the plausible contenders having already endorsed her, she has secured pledges from a sufficient number of the delegates to next month’s convention to secure the nomination.
The result is that we have a brand new race on our hands. Former President Trump and his supporters have devoted months to arguing that Joe Biden’s presidency has been terrible for the country and that he should be replaced. That argument is now moot.
The race that was finished roughly like this:
And, not shockingly, the new one looks much the same:
On the surface, then, not much has changed. But there’s a huge difference. I’ve been saying for months that there was very little room for movement in the Trump-Biden polling because the two candidates were so incredibly well known that public opinion was essentially fixed. (The RCP data looks artificially volatile because of the compressed scale; all of the variation is taking place between 42% and 48%.)
Despite having been on the national stage in some way since her announcement in January 2015 that she was running to replace Barbara Boxer in the Senate and, especially, since her January 2019 announcement that she was running for the Democratic nomination for President, Harris is a relative unknown. Even though (or because!) she’s been Vice President for three and a half years, most Americans couldn’t pick her out of a lineup. Or pronounce her first name.
Further, despite Biden’s rather extraordinary efforts from Day 1 to put the spotlight on her, branding every initiative with “Biden-Harris Administration,” the nature of the Vice Presidency is to play second fiddle. Even though I’m a political junkie who writes about politics on a near-daily basis, I have a only a vague sense of who she is and what she stands for. And, if I’ve heard her speak since the 2020 Vice Presidential debate, it clearly didn’t make much of an impression.
That’s a long way of saying that all of these numbers
are essentially meaningless. It might as well be Trump vs. Brand X.
Indeed, here’s a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll pitting Trump and various other people Americans don’t know much about:
Trump’s floor and ceiling are damn near the same. The others are really about name recognition. Despite the buzz around Gretchen Whitmer in certain circles, I doubt one in three Americans could tell you who she is, much less anything about her. (Hell, one in four probably couldn’t identify Michigan as a state.)
It’s also worth reminding ourselves that we do not elect Presidents based on a national popular vote. Rather, we have 50 state contests plus the 3 DC Electors that go automatically to the Democratic nominee.* There are, at most, seven states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) where the outcome is not certain. Likely five, as I don’t think Georgia or North Carolina are seriously in play; if they are, Harris will win in a landslide.
While picking Whitmer or Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro for the top of the ticket might have swung one of those states, there’s no guarantee of that. But it’ll be up to Harris to demonstrate that she’s come a long way from the candidate who couldn’t even make it to 2020 in the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination to persuade voters in the Rust Belt that she’s a better bet than Trump.
Let’s hope she’s up to it.
*That’s a joke, of course, but might as well be true.
And we didn’t have to all endure a blue screen of death. Oops, that happened last week.
James wrote- That’s a joke, of course, but might as well be true. George Bernard Shaw once said– “My way of joking is to tell the truth; it’s the funniest joke in the world.”
It’s disheartening to realize that this election will be decided by our least involved citizens…people who don’t know who is who, likely don’t care about politics, and don’t always bother to cast a vote. Just the possibility that Trump could return to the White House is an international embarrassment.
What a difference a few days make.
We went from MAGA/GOP gloating that a doddering Biden would be the candidate, with the media pushing the “Democrats in disarray” message. (Fitting, as we were.)
To MAGA/GOP crowing that Trump is ahead of Harris in battleground states.
Polls that were conducted when she was not yet the nominee… nor campaigning or spending money on ad spots.
Prosecutor vs felon. There may be a big blue wave.
We had two old men running for president. One was a seemingly nice old man who lost his voice and the other old man is a recently convicted felon who can’t stop yelling. With Biden’s departure, we now only have to deal with the old felonious yelling man in the race. I can’t wait to see Ol’ Bone Spurious’ reaction when Kamala Harris toes up on his lawn and kicks his grass!
And just like that—no one cares about old guys running for President and Joe Biden is universally hailed a great President/ American Hero within the Democratic Party.
Scott Adams has many cooky ideas—but the one that humans are easily programmed soft robots is not one of them
I’m going to repeat that Trump made a terrible mistake in picking Vance as his potential VP. When Harris picks a potential VP, Trump will be the doddering old guy constantly compared to three young energetic politicians. I don’t think he’s quite twigged to any of this.
Harris ran on Prosecutor versus Predator in 2020 and that message didn’t play well in the Democratic primaries where a return to normalcy was the appetite. Her brightest moment was in a debate when she blasted Biden for working with segregationists on busing early in his Senate tenure and hitting a fellow Democrat that way didn’t play well either. I thought Harris was savvy to exit the race before the end of 2020. She wasn’t the right candidate for the times, she knew it, and she got out before she could “lose” a primary vote.
Prosecutor versus Predator is a much better fit for 2024 in a general election against Trump and a party that has nominated a convicted felon.
I’d say “Let’s hope we’re up to it” because in this election it is still about the stakes and not the horse race. What kind of future does this country want? MAGA or not? The differences are stark.
@Charley in Cleveland:
In truth, all elections are decided by the least involved and informed citizens, it is simply the nature of democracy running up against human nature.
Well, at least it sounded like she stayed sober for when her troops occupied the Biden campaign headquarters. Biden on the other hand, sounded like AI.
It will be interesting to see if they are able to comply with habeas corpus for Biden. Or was this just the calculated move to consolidate Democrats behind Harris before telling the world Biden is in a coma or dead. It’s all very Kremlin-like.
But remember, the Biden-Harris administration’s policies are what people are against. Perhaps she can fire all the Democrats Biden installed to signal that new, improved Democrat inflation, foreign policy and immigration policies are on the way?
In any case, we likely need a couple weeks for the polls to tell anything of value.
@Scott F.:
The best summation of Harris’ campaign in 2020 is that as a candidate, she was a messenger looking for a message, something that would distinguish her from other Dem candidates. She doesn’t have that problem today, her message is the broad message that the Dem party has been delivering for decades. She goes into the campaign with a floor that is close to Felon trumps ceiling, I like that position.
Trump wants to be reimbursed for the money he spent running against Biden.
Harris is definitely a relative unknown at this point. Therefore, I think the polls actually show Trump vs generic Democrat more than anything and aren’t going to be really accurate until America sees how she campaigns, how she is different from Biden in terms of policy, how she handles herself, ect.
I think there are a lot of reasons that she’s probably underrated, but time will tell.
@CSK:
Let him sue to recover it.
Good rehash of this topic at the Atlantic:
“GiftAtlantic”
Tested gift kink working
@Scott F.: Her intangibles look improved in here few spoken comments since Sunday.
Prosecutor vs Predator is a terrible theme. Outside of gated and over 55 communities–people do not like the criminal justice system
The Marion Barry theory of politics (which DJT follows flawlessly) is king:
1. What are they saying on the Streets?
2. Repeat it back to them
Doubtful that in that 10% gettable community–a ‘prosecution’ of what’s been played out for 7 years in the media is the hot topic
At any rate–we’ll know what we have after they finish dusting off the Willie Horton playbook and launch the first salvos. If any of it sticks or lingers outside of MAGA /Blue bubble (where the 10% are) there is a problem.
Finally–I simply don’t believe the polls have correctly modeled turnout based out history and that “polling” was used as a tool to garner a particular outcome (which happened.) Does anyone think the splits for every 100 people to pull a lever will be 50R/40D/10I*? Because to get to the polling number you had before Sunday–that’s the turnout model you need. There is no way R’s turnout 10% than Ds for a National election–let alone the 3 Swing states.
*This is irrespective of how these people will actually vote and includes party registered and their party-leaning Independent.
@JKB: Biden dead or in a coma? This is the new mainstream Q-anon conspiracy.
My question to you, how gullible are you? Is there nothing you won’t fall for?
Geez.
@Jim Brown 32: I quite enjoyed this
@Scott F.: Agreed! Let’s hope we’re up to it is significantly more important wish than the damning with faint praise “let’s hope she’s up to it” tone of the post’s closing comment. (Does anyone remember people hoping Biden was “up to it” in 2020? I really don’t remember but don’t recall any such expressions.) The party coalesced around her* quickly and firmly, belying my fears and biases expressed days ago. Well done libs (and Lefty Left Pavlovian stooges in the throes of uni groupthink)!
*JKB, Jack, and the other trolls will certainly say that it was less of a coalescing and more of an ordering of the troops in line for the coronation. I suppose that advocates of “Let’s hope she’s up for it” can go that way, too, if they choose. There is a self-fulfilling prophecy available for those who would like to work for it.
@charontwo:
Color me disappointed to discover this was a typo.
@Kathy: He doesn’t have standing. It’s not actually his money. Still, that didn’t stop him from diverting campaign funds to his criminal defense, so maybe the Supremes will side with him on the standing issue if he sues. Who can he file against as the defendant would be the other problematic question? And can he sue for the money he wasted running against deSatanist and Haley? He’s got a lotta bills and is crying cash poor at the moment (to escape those debts not dischargeable in bankruptcy).
I wonder if the Convicted Felon’s best investment ever can be used by the Harris campaign.
I’ll make the cautious prediction that Dems will get a bump in the polls, due simply to a burst in enthusiasm from within the party after spending weeks crapping on their own nominee at the time. Whether this bump lasts is a different question, and ultimately I don’t think the polls will change in any massive way. Kamala is still in the position of having to sell an unpopular administration whose achievements are woefully underappreciated by the public. Obviously, she’s a more competent communicator and currently inspires greater confidence that she’s up to the job than was the case with Biden. That could be enough. But it’s entirely conceivable to me that in a couple of months Dems discover they aren’t in any better a position in the polls than they were with Biden, and we’ll start hearing people wonder whether they made a grave mistake in pushing Biden out.
Can we all agree that when Trump refuses to debate Harris it will mean he’s a weak, gutless coward?
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
Even better. That would give him something else to whine about.
The supremes will do what he wants.
But then discovery ought to be amazing.
@Kylopod:
Only if she’s stupid enough to let Trump define her. Biden would have had to defend, Harris can selectively defend. Hopeful future vs. rageoholic past. Prosecutor vs. rapist. Free women vs. Handmaid’s Tale.
Our message is hope and freedom.
@Andy:
Oh, I agree, Kamala has not faced anyone really exposing her deeds. You know, in those jobs James claims makes her more qualified.
But not anymore. Here’s a rundown of Kamala Harris’ Background: Authoritarianism for the Sake of Authoritarianism
And this is from the court records of arguments she made, through attorneys from her office, in court to keep men in prison so that the state could use their cheap labor. She shows here Democratic party roots by keeping the chain gangs of the Democrat controlled Jim Crow South going in sunny California.
This could get fun…
@Michael Reynolds: “Incompetent from the get go” always outweighed “weak gutless coward” for me, but if this floats your boat better, sure. Otay.
@Michael Reynolds:
It would just be confirmation of what we already know.
It’s been, what, less than 48 hours and JKB is already spiraling faster than a Trump bankruptcy. By the end of the week he’s going to be talking about adrenochrome and mole people, ending posts with #wwg1wga.
Your tears are delicious, my friend. Truly scrumptious.
My mom almost always votes R or third party. She loved Reagan and both Bushes, voted to McCain and Romney. She is also a big pro-lifr voter, but has always belonged to the subgroup that believes that medical abortions are a sacrosanct exception. She finds Trump disgusting.
Things she has said in the past 48 hours: “I don’t know much about her yet, but I really like her husband (the First Dude),” and “All she has to do is rally women. The Republicans still don’t understand that they went way too far after the Roe repeal. Medical decisions are medical decisions.”
@CSK: I’ll get right on it. Right after he repays all the contractors he’s stiffed over the years.
I don’t think Harris has to deal with her 2020 failures. Nobody cares about that. And all of the advice given to her by Democrats seems aimed at other Democrats. I see Chait is already saying she’s got to prove she’s not a liberal. Thanks, didn’t see that one coming.
Honestly, the coalition she has is held together by nothing. I.e. let’s have a nice productive talk about the IDF targeting children and torturing everyone they pick up. Her best bet is to somehow manage this state of affairs while hitting on things like Biden and the GOP Senate cutting a deal on immigration while Trump and Vance are busy insulting women who don’t have kids.
One concern in 2020, was that likely Biden voters were more enthusiastic to vote against the Convicted Felon than to vote for Biden. Whereas the Convicted Felon’s voters were more enthusiastic to vote for their creature.
This year there seems to have been even less enthusiasm for Biden. I wonder if Harris will be able to change that.
@Jim Brown 32: I think you have the right of it. People don’t like prosecutors that much. Harris seems to like to mix it up more than Biden does, and that could work in her favor here, as long as she stays a bit more “street”. I’m not sure there’s all that much street in her, though. But mixing it up, people get that. And frankly, it will reassure people that at least this woman will act to protect them.
With Biden out it is indeed moot.
The energy is back in the room.
However it still amazes me that about half of the voting public, knowing exactly what a Trump presidency was and would again be, still want to go for another swim in the Trump Cesspool.
@Jim Brown 32: “ Prosecutor vs Predator is a terrible theme. Outside of gated and over 55 communities–people do not like the criminal justice system.”
Respectfully I disagree. If that’s all she says, maybe you’re right. But she could and should present it as, “The system has long gone after low-level Black, Brown, and poor people for minor and/or victimless crimes. While people like Donald Trump have literally and figuratively raped others, assaulting their bodies, their livelihoods, and their bank accounts. I want him held accountable and know how to do that.”
If she wants to add “and, yes, including me… but I’ve learned from that and realize now where the real threat to society lies” to the system, all for it.
Downfall parody:
“Downfall“
@Just nutha ignint cracker:
I know Balloon Juice has their own dictionary of slang. Can LLePSTUGs be our first entry? It looks awkward but is actually pretty easy to pronounce. Rolls off the tongue.
@JKB:
Interesting… Let’s take a look at the two people who run the “Based Camp” youtube channel.
Huh… so graduates of graduate programs at two top tier notedly liberal schools–the type of institutions you tell us are destroying the US. It’s almost like… wait for it… so long as someone presents a position that meet’s your preexisting biases, then you can forgive all of the other “sins” they have committed in the past.
Additionally, I frankly don’t know how well “Kamala Harris is a cop/authoritarian” plays out, given that “Law and Order” and strengthening the police are significant planks of Trump’s 47-point campaign promises (not to mention Project 20225). Likewise, given Trump’s regular praise for authoritarians on the Campaign trail (see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWT7MBuJWy0), are we to see Authoritarians as bad suddenly?
Now, Jack, before you suggest that this is just a liberal group thing an ad hominem, I did in fact watch the channel (ok just the first 18 minutes at high speed because that’s where all of the critique is). And it touches on some really important issues around criminal justice reform (including the issue of using prison slave labor). After that they dive into the tired “she slept her way to the top… because the run out of real issues.”
AND the thing is that everything they are attacking her for are things that are part of what Trump is explicitly supporting in both campaign speeches and rhetoric. So I’m struggling to see how saying–her record is in keeping with my general policy direction–is the best line of attack.
Likewise, it’s hard to claim you are the champions of democracy when you did January 6th and then selected a VP specifically because he said the previous VP didn’t do enough to overthrow the will of the… *checks notes* ENTIRE US ELECTORATE.
But like I said, I’ve definitely been wrong in the past and will be again.
BTW, extra points for picking the two whitest of white folx to pontificate on what “Black twitter” thinks. Definitely in keeping with your style.
@JKB:
I am sure you will SHOCKED, SHOCKED I say to learn about all of the Republican sheriffs in the south who then have apparently decided to double down on those Democratic party roots and maintaining Jim Crow South prison labor camps across the South and South Western US. In Alabama for example the Republican government rolled back parole grants in order to keep more prisoners available to be rented out a labor.
Or is it only bad when Democrats do it?
see for example:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2024-05-11/us-prison-labor-powers-billions-in-corporate-government-revenue
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alabama-prison-labor-program-modern-day-slavery-lawsuit/
Likewise, should we talk about the Republican-leaning Circuit Courts (including a number of Trump appointees) that maintain pre-Jim Crow era disenfranchisement of felons as legal?
https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/19/mississippi-felons-voting-rights-ban/74468231007/
Again, considering how prevalent this is in most states, regardless of party, and the blind eye being turned to this by both parties, I don’t think this is a particularly winning item. Especially as a Trump appointed Judge has heard the Alabama prison labor case and we are waiting on a ruling for that.
BTW, if he, like past courts, has held the practice to be Constitutional, will you join me in asking both candidates to pledge to change that awful practice?
BTW, this is before we get to how Trump is essentially running against one of his (or rather Jared Kushner’s) biggest criminal legal system reform wins: the First Step Act.
@Modulo Myself: Wait… Jonathan Chait is complaining that she needs to prove she’s not a liberal? The Johnathan Chait that was the Sr. Editor at TNR? I must be misreading things again. (But no, I didn’t see that coming either. 😐 )
@Neil Hudelson: I think you’d have to ask Lounsbery about that. It is his original concept, not mine.
@charontwo:
Completely unrealistic.
The Convicted Felon would not have told anyone to leave, and he’d have made sure his tantrum was recorded and posted on social media. The better to denounce it later as fake news.
I think the big change is the last few days I’ve seen enthusiasm on the Left that’s been completely lacking up until now. Since I think this election depends on turnout more than persuasion, that’s really important.
@Franklin:
I think Trump owes a few cities for stiffing them on rallies, too.
@Matt Bernius: I admire you for spending a whole lot more time on JKB’s bullshit than anyone should have to.
@al Ameda: Trump supporters are the intellectual progeny of the William F. Buckle, Jr.* who believed that white Southerners had a moral obligation to thwart black voter registration and voting because they were too stupid to trust democracy to. I wouldn’t think there would be this many of them either–maybe a lot of them (maybe even Jack on this point) are along for the ride on the tax cut gravy/graft train.
*I think there’s only ever been one William F. Buckley, Jr. Others tell me that he found Jesus on the race issue. I’ll leave the question in the hands of God and stay out of this debate.
@Mikey:
Oh, come on, you know that sort of praise is, in actuality, proof that I’m just another biased lib group thinker trying to “suppress opinions that are not libtarded” by fact-checking and contextualizing people’s claims.
Yeah, and I have no illusions that JKB will directly respond to the criticism. And I expect that he’ll keep repeating those talking points in future posts.
On the plus side, I’m probably going to write something on the prison/labor issue as it is specifically my wheel house and it’s an evil practice.
I think that Biden should resign. Then we’ll have three months of President Harris before the election. Our minds will be used to seeing her as POTUS. She’ll get an incumbency advantage. The scary part of a female POC won’t be scary anymore.
@charontwo: That was really clever. He/she’s got a good feel for parody. Well done!
Harris has broken records with small dollar fundraising in the last 2 days, and the calls from people who want to volunteer has increased tenfold.
I’m sure some of that was people holding back their money and efforts while Democrats gleefully destroyed their own candidate and then releasing it all in one moment of relief, but a lot of people are very enthusiastic about her.
And young people are really swayed by statements such as: “You think you just fell out of a coconut tree? [loud laugh] You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you.”
It has been used in countless loving memes, and even fit to music, brutally twisting and autotuning the audio to wedge it into Mitski’s “Washing Machine Heart.”
And then there are the fine folks at CNN trying to understand how Kamala Harris is brat:
https://x.com/timjhogan/status/1815490474028732518
I think we will see some movement in the polls. Particularly as people learn more about her love of Venn diagrams.
@Matt Bernius: No contradiction on this point at all. “Law and Order” and “strengthening the police” means layin’ the smackdown on nKKKLAAAANNNNGGGGs and other browns in Trumpese, Heritage Foundationese, and Project 2025. A mixed-race bKKKLAAAANNNG has no business at all enforcing the “rule of law.” Everyone knows that, even ignint crackers.
ETA: But nice job on the research of the “scholars.” I was going to comment (though not a well as or in as much detail as you) but found my heart wasn’t in it. It felt too much like beating a kitten or puppy for peeing in the corner and I couldn’t bring myself to do it. And as I say, your comment was a lot better than mine would have been.
@Jim Brown 32: Overclocked chimpanzees with the fundamentals of chimpanzee bands, poorly scaled up. Yes, meat robots is not far from the truth.
@Slugger: That would be incredibly stupid. It merely would create a distraction for Harris from campaigning, do nothing to change the sentiments of the undecided, and create significant administrative and other headaches she would have to handle while also trying to campaign. “Incumbency advantage” you are erecting an abstraction as a real thing – a transparent brief window will not do anything in particular other than distract, draw away resources time and attention
@Just nutha ignint cracker: your construction mate, not mine.
@Slugger: There are a lot of Republicans who have been making a similar call for Biden to resign, including JD Vance.
I expect there is ratfuckery afoot if he does resign, including (but not limited to) the House not voting to confirm a VP.
How often have we needed Kamala’s* vote in the Senate? What shit do they want to stir up? Does it involve the counting of electoral votes?
There are upsides and downsides to Biden resigning, but when I see Vance supporting it, I start leaning against it. A few days ago I was in favor of it, but Vance, man, he’s on the wrong side of everything. If he’s for something, I’m not guaranteed to be opposed, but I rethink my support.
——
*: my natural inclination is to call her Harris rather than Kamala, but she’s been branding everything as Kamala, so… I’m sure Madonna and Cher have last names too.
@Michael Reynolds:
Why wait. He’s a weak, gutless, coward.
Also an old obese Machiavellian, narcissistic sociopath, with elevator shoes, makeup, and a bad combover, who cheats at golf.
@CSK: Sure, but that’s not all of them; it’s only the ones that didn’t demand payment up front. 😉
@Just nutha ignint cracker: I think Harris can possibly tread the line where she’s in favor of Law and Order for white collar crimes, and not shooting Black people in the face in traffic stops.
There is a line there to be tread. I think there’s a good chance she can do it.
@JKB: I was very much opposed to Kamala Harris in 2020, mainly because I thought her record as prosecutor and attorney general skewed way too far to the Order side of Law and Order. If we were writing on a blank slate, she would not be my preferred candidate today. But, of course, the slate is not blank, and the idea that she is unacceptable in a race against Donald Trump because she is too much of an authoritarian is risible. Sell crazy some place else. We’re all stocked up here.
@Neil Hudelson via @Lounsbury: Having heard from Lounsbery and hearing him distance himself from his own concept, I release the idea to Balloon Juice and appoint you as administrator.
Okay. That made laugh, kind of sounds like lipstick.
@Gustopher: In re Kamala as branding, it is a more memorable name than Harris, so this makes sense. While Ms Harris is nice, one has to admit Kamala as branding has a certain panache. I am quite in favour of panache.
@Neil Hudelson:
I endorse the Balloon Juice Lexicon. (“Lexicon” button at top of page.) I don’t think Cole’s updated it in years, but I still occasionally pull up random bits of it. A reminder of internet and politics days of yore and screamingly funny. Funny in the best sense, perfectly true.
But as to “LLePSTUGs”, nah, sounds too much like a half assed German tank.
@Gustopher: And I don’t disagree, I’m just noting that there’s a significant difference between what JKB and the Collinses are talking about and what the terms mean here on Earth One.
@Matt Bernius: I generally disapprove of feeding the troll. That said, great reply to Jake. Informative.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: Distance myself? Hardly. Your own phrasing is your work, not mine mate.
@Gustopher: My understanding is that the President pro tem of the Senate in absence of a Vice President is Chuck Grassley, so yeah stirring up shit about counting electoral votes is in play if that is the case.
@Slugger: @Lounsbury: @Gustopher:
Allan Lichtman has called for Biden to resign, to preserve the “incumbency key” on his keys-to-the-White-House model.
Indeed, if Kamala wins, she’ll be the first Democrat to win the presidency while a different Democrat was president since James Buchanan in 1856.
So I do think incumbency advantage is a real thing. But I know this scenario is very unlikely to happen. For one thing, it seems counterintuitive that she’d be better positioned to campaign while the job of presidency was suddenly heaped on top of her four months before the election.
For another, there really isn’t much of historical data to apply to the current situation. There have been 8 vps who succeeded to presidency due to the death of the president. Four (all in the 19th century) weren’t nominated by their party for the next election. The four in the 20th were all nominated, and they all won. The only vp to succeed to the office due to a resignation was Ford, and he lost the next election.
Obviously, Biden resigning wouldn’t be in the same category as Nixon resigning. But we just don’t have any real historical data to suggest what an incumbency advantage even means when it’s not due to a president’s death.
@Tony W: Voice inflection and facial expressions are MUCH proved. Arms are still a little dead with mismatched hand gestures. i.e explanatory hands vs forceful hands. These are minor but impactful points that can be coached and will help overcome the tenor of her voice which is not really commanding type.
Drudge headlined video of her dancing with children when I thought was magical. Hopefully the campaign saw what I saw and will get her more children-centric video/photo ops.
Kamala, lover of youth and the people will bury Trump. Kamala the zinger machine and prosecutor will be a photo finish race. As Reynolds says, humans live by narratives. The Jim Brown corollary to this says that Human connect via associative narratives
@Lounsbury: You give me too much credit; I’m only an ignint cracker and would never have come up with what I said without
Still, and my misreading of your intent notwithstanding–my apologies, I understand you wanting to distance yourself from a statement that prompted the observation of a reaction
Still in all, thanks for the release.
Amusing in regard to the Collins’ video. Attack everything with your confusion. I mostly posted it as an example of the type of thing that can cause Kamala trouble. And the unconstitutional retention of prisoners, mostly men of color, just so the state could have cheap labor, well, that seems like it would be less than endearing to at least black male voters.
As for the declining GOP, Inc. faction of the Republican party being hard core Law and Order. Hardly law and order to unconstitutionally hold someone in prison. But, yes, you’ll like find some in GOP, Inc. who will say stupid things, but they are not Trump, nor the MAGA coalition of working people, or the growing New Conservatives, like Elon Musk and other entrepreneurs coming to influence Republican brand.
I told you years ago when those here were celebrating the “decline of rural white” Republicans that if it happened other groups would migrate to Republican, not stay on the Democrat plantation. And now we see the transition.
Word now is that they will satisfy habeas corpus for Joe Biden Wednesday evening in some fashion.
@Kylopod: I don’t know what the right move strategically is–nor do I believe anyone else does–but I’m inclined to think that
is certainly true for Slugger and the mouse in his pocket (he is talking about “Our minds” after all) but remain skeptical that ~ 3 months does that for the public at large. Additionally, there is the problem of the House declining to approve a replacement VP and the accompanying difficulties of a (possible) Grassley as President pro tem of the Senate and difficulties with electoral votes in the wake of the change, but that’s strategy and I’ve already said I will concede on that type of question to better minds (or at least perceptions of having one).
@Kylopod:
I’m very wary of ever drawing too many comparisons to past elections since there have only been 60-70. Each is unique, and many in critical ways. And this would definitely be trying to fit the data to the model, rather than fitting the model to the data.
We can fix that. Kamala in the Oval Office with the Candlestick. Totally doable.
Well, we are in an odd numbered century, so I guess we can’t off Biden, or we would have to withdraw Harris’s nomination. Put down the candlestick, Kamala!
@Just nutha ignint cracker: I have zero desire to distance myself from my own actual statement which was merely the banal observation that the Lefty Left have a Pavlovian reaction to anti-elite messaging. It is a famously effective way to motivate the Lefty bases.
@Jim Brown 32:
I think it is too much to say she will bury him as ‘lover of youth etc.’ but I do think you are right that Dem party activist zinger machine & prosecutor of Trump is unlikely to have the big payoff – most importantly and critically for the swing state and that narrow fraction of “free float” in the votes. Bury him is going too far but otherwise rather agree.
The Lefty Left Bohemian Bourgeousie here of course think this is about motivating them, but they live and vote in the wrong geographies.
@Kylopod:
It is clearly a real effect for an actual sitting Executive who has been that executive during the prior term. The abstraction “incumbancy advantage” certainly is summarising as a mental construction something of reality.
It is most dubious (as the proponents of the concept are treating – not to mistake your post for that) to treat it as a magical effect that, if Biden were to foolishly resign now that somehow the abstraction of incumbency which is collecting sans doubt a number of intangible influencing factors arising from the sitting President, would magically touch the person taking the office in a transparent move to obtain the magical “incumbency advantage.”
This is classical human reasoning error to mistake an abstraction that is a mental construct and not itself really a single thing, to mistake it for a single thing and a real transferable asset, notably in a discrete form and having the same meaning and utility with mere three months….
Beyond counter-intuitive, it seems to me that it is purely magical thinking – abstracting away from the institutional cost (time, effort) that would be involved in the transfers of authorties, etc. – counting a supposed (and rather magical) full-term benefit is accured in a last minute transfer without any attention to the impact of the costs (in human hours needed and since she and her staff do have to sleep, inevitably taking away from effective campaigning time).
I find it impossible to credit that this disruption and distraction in real human time availability terms makes any sense at all.
@Grommit Gunn: Inchallah …. sincerely that.
I do think the abortion and the threat to contraception, and the decent likelihood that Trump is unable to restrain himself and really goes full-out disgusting in his discourse with Madame Harris aka Kamala, that there is enough margin in the Swing States that 5-10% free float, to see off Trump victory. And really nothing more important than closing the gate on the Orange Cretin.
@JKB: My own take is that the Collins’ video is nakedly enough partisan to only be persuasive for people who are not inclined to vote for Kamala in the first place–such as yourself (which explains why you see it as such a slam dunk while ignoring that your preferred candidate is the poster child for “every accusation is a confession” on this exact topic). I don’t know how many of you there are in the undecided pool though. It may be a strong motivator. It may be background noise. Mongo not know; Mongo mere pawn in chess game of life.
@Kylopod:
Biden shouldn’t resign, and Harris should stay VP for the rest of the term.
That way, if disaster strikes, they can together stage a coup like the one the Convicted Felon and his Kabal of Kraken Kounselors claimed it was so appropriate and legal to do back in 2020, but was executed with extreme stupidity.
@Gustopher:
You remind me of a related pet peeve. We constantly see stuff like “X has been true of prez elections for the last 20 years.” For that statement n = 4, not 20. A very small sample.
@Lounsbury:
I think this observation is on point, but your blinding bias toward needing to identify and castigate Lefty Leftists and BoBos makes you oblivious to the reality that most people in both parties believe that the campaign is about motivating them (and to a certain degree, that’s actually true) and that as a fault that damages the campaign the problem is more likely among the mainstream (and probably mostly white, though I may be working CRT too hard on this point) Democrats than among the more fringe part of the cohort (thinking of JB 32’s observation yesterday about how much the commentariat here is wanting the “zingers.”)
Of course, it’s also possible that you are going with the standard Righty Right notion that everyone that is not “me” is Lefty Left and Bohemian Bourgeoisie in a Pavlovian fashion jump of your own. I don’t know. I’m only a cracker.
@Tony W:
A nice “sick burn” as the kids say these days, but to me a more important aspect is her stage presence is markedly improved from her 2020 election appearances. A more confident demeanor, better posture and better voice. She has worked on that.
OTB definitions:
Reasoned: Leftist commenters who will change their views on a dime as the winds blow. aka: totally unprincipled except for the principle of just win.
Troll: anyone who disagrees with the group think.
Gutless: someone who doesn’t engage with wild eyed and unsupportable assertions.
Maybe someone can explain how the group of Obama, Pelosi and Schumer that back room back stabbed Joe Biden suddenly practically can’t contain themselves with praise for him. Hey. Let’s put him on Mt Rushmore! A few weeks ago he was “running circles” around his staff with his razor sharp acuity and command of the issues, only being undermined by conspiracy theories and fake videos. Now? A hero for recognizing his impairment and heroically stepping aside……”for the good of the country.”
Seriously, people?
@Jack:
In other words, you’ve got nothing…
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/secretservicesloperangers.jpg
@anjin-san:
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah, blah, blah
@JKB:
Talking about how other people amuse them is usually the province of teenage boys who’ve never been on a date, but hey, if the shoe fits…
@gVOR10:
Who doesn’t? There are a good number of PGA Tour players who flaunt the rules.
@jack:
Very thoughtful of you to provide a summary of your comments.
@anjin-san:
For two weeks I was saying the same things. That happens when you eat hospital food.
@Gustopher:
If they are Judith Durham or Barry Manilow ones I won’t be voting for Harris in November.
@Bill Jempty:
Yes, but having the witty, urbane and insightful commentary of JKB and Jack on hand must have made the time go by more quickly…
@JKB:
I’m going to regret this, but could you explain this:
@Just nutha ignint cracker: No, I think it is not at all reflexive, there are certainly commentators here who are not BoBo Left – Reynolds is a fine example (and it is not random he oft attracts the BoBo ire here). Andy of course is I think rather centre, but there is a quite significant dominance in commentariat here who are the very definition (as we have it in French terms) of the BoBo Lefty Left.
And it shows really. Including how bizarrely deranged some commentators are over my contrarian comments (which could well be wrong of course, I am of course an entire ocean removed from you all, and my USA exposure in residency was many decades ago)
But indeed, yes, it is a generally common error of party political partisans & activists to think a political effort is about motivating themselves – rather than working on general. The error, I think I saw quoted by Drum on someone else in US blogging comment, of the Activist rather than the Organiser (the recollection of reading was the argument the Left had been overly taken over by the Campus Activist focused on activism, and had let atrophy the spriit and aciton of the labour union Organiser, a different work of organising and converting labour to vote in trade unions – an analysis I think quite merited).
The irony is in the ancient days of this blog – when I first found it during the Bush ibn Bush Iraq war – I was oft labeled a Lefty (for being myself and unkind to the Righty Right armchair warriors who were then quite prevalent).
Should such persons – of a more JKB variety perhaps except it boring and tedious to respond to an actual proper troll (as I do think he is in fact) – reappear I am certain to be in disagreement with them, but as they are not, it’s really rather a peculiar redundancy to direct comment at the Right Right – you have rather enough such people singing those songs (for all that occasionally indeed it myself join, as like his idiotic DEI comment).
@Jack: While your Troll definition is accurate enough, the rest is strange bollocks.
It is of course more than evident that the Democratic party leadership did not backstab Mr Biden – they did panic and lose confidence, but then a wide range of Democrats did.
And frankly while I am of the personal opinion (one without any electoral value of course) that Mr Biden is more than competent to be both candidate and a perfectly acceptable 2nd term US president, vastly preferable to the Orange Cretin on all accounts, Biden’s interviews after that disastrous debate rather clearly indicated he was not in a position to change the narrative about him (a narrative of agedness from both opposition and general media, but admittedly rooted in a reality as Andy has rightfully pointed out), and the next three months would be a struggle against that and not against Trump.
It was in short, a losing position to be in, if one is down in polls.
It is a credit to Biden he overcame natural human ego to see the clear larger calculus – not again he need to considered not competent to continue as candidate as such – but rather he had found himself in a deficit that he did not have the time to recover from.
The surprise move to flip to Madame Harris – Kamala (for the panache) – is a praiseworthy move – a high-stakes bet to change the political calculus. It may not work, but it does rearrange the battlefield and that was badly needed for them.
@Jack:
Still waiting for you to explain why Vladimir Putin loves Trump.
Our enemies love Trump. What does that tell you, Drew?
@Jay L Gischer: @Jim Brown 32:
People may not like prosecutors who go after the little people, but they quite like prosecutors who go after billionaires. Also rapists. And billionaire rapists.
@anjin-san:
Size 13 extra wide here
But I don’t fit the dateless teenage boy profile but just barely. My only date back then was my senior prom and after my Mom and my date’s Mom arranged it. Pam, who I haven’t seen since our graduation night, and I had a good time.
@Michael Reynolds:
If “Jack” is really Drew, I am sure he has Zero Hedge on hand to tell him what he needs to know…
@Bill Jempty:
All these years later, I still occasionally give silent thanks that we survived the very, very twisty drive down to Stinson Beach for our after prom party, considering my altered condition. It’s filed under “Incredibly stupid shit I did when I was young, chapter six”.
Maybe Jack can clear up something for us. When Republican convicted felon private citizen Donald Trump does the fist pump is that the hand he uses to “grab ’em by the pussy”? Or is it the other one?
@Lounsbury:
The style and rhetorical content of your comments here doesn’t tend to reveal this view, but you should be you. Some people are on a mission from God (Like Jake and Elmo Blues) to police the internet making it safe from Lefty Left BoBos. If that’s you, go in peace.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: My mission is to enterain myself – it is a blog and mere blog comments. One is quite deluded if one thinks that anything comes of commenting on blogs than some mental entertainment (as like a café conversation of course).
It would be strangely delusional to think merely being a contarian disagreer with the Bobo Left fraction that prefers choir singing to be policing, having no power nor influence.
I look forward to seeing all the fake smears attempted against Kamala. Not only do Republicans have nothing on Kamala.. Republicans have no intellectual content other than “Biden old.”
It’s fun to see Trump running as fast as his unathletic, old legs can carry him away from his Project 2025. Republicans have for decades won elections because nobody believes their policies are as bad as they actually are.. because those policies haven’t been codified in black-and-white anywhere. Until now.
@JKB:
I’m not attacking it with my confusion. I know what the facts are. My confusion is why you think the “type of thing that can cause Kamala trouble” is that many of her past law enforcement policies are more center right is going to hurt her?
If you can tease out how those policies are different than the ones Trump is running on, that would be super helpful to me. Maybe you should ask them to do another video so you can share it.
Glad you think they are unconsitutional–note that ISN’T the platform of perspective of former President Trump (whom you support) and the Republican party. And I’ll be sure to let you know when the Trump appointed Judge in Alabama rules on their constitutionality. Personally, if he does what I expect and finds some way to uphold it as Consitutional, I personally think “Trump appointed and will continue to appoint judges who gave a rubberstamp to behaviors that even his own supporters think are unconsitutional” seems like a much more damaging line of attack.
So again, I don’t understand your suggesting that this is uniquely harmful to Harris. Again, see what the very Republican state of Alabama is doing. Ditto very Republican Texas. Those are also states that are deeply entrenched within the “unconstitutional prison labor” camp. Here’s a breakdown of a number of states (which I full acknowledge contains blue ones as well):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_States#Modern_prison_labor_systems
BTW, all the states that don’t pay for prison labor are Republican states:
Again, I don’t see them rushing to vote for her opponent who will be pushing even more draconian law and order policies.
Hey, this is the first time you have used the phrase Democrat plantation and NOT referenced Black voters. I think that’s progress!
@Jack:
Jack, can you explain (it like I’m five) how this was a backstab? Or are the obligated to support a failing campaign no matter what? Or let someone who isn’t physically capable of running for office run?
Moreover, if Biden ultimately did what he thought was best for himself and the party, why not praise that action?
It’s weird how you on the one hand constantly said that Biden isn’t up to this and then, when a bunch of people convince him he isn’t and to step aside, you suddenly thing they’ve done him a disservice. From my perspective it seems like you and others like you are like the dog who caught the car.
@Beth: I think it’s something along providing proof of a body, or something? Somehow Biden goes from mastermind overseeing the witch hunt and destroying America to an invalid on death’s door and then back again every few days.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: Wasn’t familiar with him, but I looked and found Elmo Blues… Elmo’s Sick Blues.
@JKB:
So, the issue here is that it was used to attack her already, in a nationally televised debate. I will give you that more people pay attention to the general election than an early primary debate, but it did trigger fact checks.
Most importantly, look at how you had to put it in order to link it to Harris:
So the AG of the state with the highest population of the union did not know what was argued in every single filing of every trial? Well, no shit.
Moreover, as @Matt Bernius points out, this is pretty common practice. I look forward to you showing some bipartisanship and calling for substantive criminal justice reform.
Oh, thanks for actually providing a timestamp.
On the the Collins duo:
I rewound a little bit and found out he used a chatbot for his research. Maybe a red flag, depending on one’s view and how it was used.
Of course, he treated an accusation as fact. Well, yes, those filings appeared to exist. But he made the same mistake you did. Now, show that Harris was aware of it and allowed it to continue. Her campaign answered this accusation when it was first raised in 2019. As soon Harris found out, she put a stop to it.
He then discusses what the betting markets say. He mentions that betting markets are more accurate than traditional polling. There are fatal flaws in how he presents it. I have no idea whether it is deliberate dishonesty, overestion of his own understanding, or cognitive bias(es).
First of all, betting lines are not percent chances of an outcome. Derivations from the line to odds are called implied odds for a reason.
The odds given by betting markets also take into account total money bet on a side and number of tickets. Moreover, the identity of individual bettors can move odds because of their long-term track record. This distorts the conversion between the money line and the actual chance, hence ‘implied odds’.
Ex: teams like the Dallas Cowboys often get a lot of money put on them by amateur bettors–books know this and have to adjust their lines accordingly. However, if professional bettors or syndicates place bets a certain way, the books will weigh that differently.
That’s one reason why odds move at certain times. In fact, professional bettors will sometimes place bets on opposing teams to win if the odds given by books change significantly from the time they are initially posted as the event becomes imminent. A good bet on Monday may very well be a terrible bet on Tuesday.
Second, unit sizes matter. If you follow sportsbetting at all, you will see that some recommended bets carry a half unit or a full unit. Why? Confidence. A statistical model will have varying degrees of confidence in an outcome.
Third, trends matter more than snapshots. And we are two days from Biden dropping out. Bettors who do not take trends into account (including polls) will not be winners long term. Treating the odds today as gospel is ignorant.
Lastly, time is a factor. At what point are betting markets more accurate than polling? The eve of an election? A few weeks before? Months? These sorts of arguments require qualifications. But YouTubers, like any media, trade in certainty and appearance. Nuance and careful examination do not sell well.
On the credibility of two Collins:
Warning: approach this with caution. I am giving my initial impression based on a few minutes of watching the linked video and minimal research. This is subject to personal bias on my part, and perhaps a misleading claim.
I read a little bit about them. I was a little surprised they had a dedicated wikipedia article, based on their follower count. Anyway, I followed one of the citations found in Wiki. They claimed to be atheists in a profile published by The Guardian. But they allegedly claimed in a video that they believe the Bible is “divinely inspired”. Huh?
I admit, maybe it’s an out of context quote. And quite frankly, I have little interest in sitting through their content. (His voice is annoying on its own, and his inflections and attitude reminds me of every overconfident, but relatively uninformed student I have ever met.
Again, the following is my impression. They seem to have worked hard on their physical appearance (look at those glasses) and the ability to sound confident. They don’t seem to have worked nearly as hard on sound argumentation and detailed knowledge.
Sorry, these people are performers. Nothing more. There is a reason I do not watch TV news. But do what you like to do.
@Matt Bernius:
Short: ‘Because. QED.’
Long: It is easy to reduce intelligence to knowing things. Plenty of people can engage with material and remember it.
The ability to compare, evaluate, and manipulate information is a different skill. I use the word manipulate in the positive sense–like arranging pieces of information.
The ability to evaluate credibility is also a different skill, and when confronted with a conflict, one retreats to their preferences and priors. And way too many people think those two things come from evaluation, and they usually don’t.
Aside: people expand “objective” to mean “impartial”. They are related in some sense, but distinct. Some of those same people narrow “objective” to mean data, when it also requires analysis of procedure.
Take these comments as you will.
@Beth:
Report was Biden was to speak on Wednesday. We’ve since seen Biden walk from car to plane. He looked frail, but then quite good on the stairs, before going back into frail at the top landing before going into the plane.
@Michael Reynolds:
Well…. I think we can agree that more, uh, “analysis” from M Reynolds identifies him as a vacuous, self important know nothing. Since, when asked, Trump said he would be delighted to debate her…..multiple times if she likes.
I wonder if M Reynolds is going to tell commenters just how silly his “analysis” and weird projection was. Or is he “gutless.”
Now that Biden is out, I think Democrats need to make the case that Trump is too damned old and feeble minded to be President. Take everything the Republicans have used as a narrative and use it against them.
And there’s one person who can make that case better than anyone else, without reopening wounds in the party about how Biden was forced out… Joe Biden himself.
@Jay L Gischer: Yes, a little inside Black baseball. There are 3 major Black sororities– the are: the wine&cheese girls, the girls next door, and nerd/misfit girls. Guess which sorority Kamala belongs too? But politics is performance now right? She’s going to have to find some everyday girl and make it come through the cameras.
@Kurtz:
Examine your assumptions. Your analysis is silly on its face. The delegates were elected. The process was complete. (Oh, my democracy!!). The only thing that happened here was the fraud being perpetrated on the country got exposed. So…Plan B.
Second. He did what was good for the country? Please, you are too smart for such BS. He was fighting tooth and nail to remain. He got forced out in a pure power play. Obama, Pelosi, Doners…. His motivations were not heroic. (And rumors are that he is feeling betrayed beyond belief, despite the political necessity to put on the happy face). Are you that gullible. Simple? He was forced out. Period.
It’s OK,Matt/Kurtz. The party screwed up; they got caught in a fraud. It’s politics; it happens – move on. The result is the right one. But why publicly humiliate yourselves with mindless rationale/denials?
What’s next? You are going to tell me Cheatle resigned for the good of the country?
@JKB:
That wasn’t really Biden. It was an AI deep fake. AI can’t do frail old man walking up stairs, that’s the tell.
@Kazzy: Well sure, but that’s not really a Prosecutor message, that’s a call for social justice, which is better.
I watched her performance in Wisconsin today and she never made that transition. And frankly, I have older relatives from the Bay Area that have a hard time forgiving her for all the low-level poor blacks she had locked up in the Crack era. So frankly, she’d have to tread lightly down that path as it could expose a weakness.
@Jack:
The process was explicitly NOT done until the convention. And the delegates were elected for a Biden/Harris ticket. We know this because it was at the heart of issues about whether or not (given the late date of the Democratic national convention) Biden would be allowed on the ticket in some states like Ohio. But hey, you can make up facts.
Again, considering you are fully backing the person who tried to overthrow the 2020 election results (disenfranchising the majority of voters across parties) for the whole nation and has explicitly selected a VP who said he would have honored the fake electors, maybe, just maybe, drop the pearl-clutching.
I love how your constant drum beat is people who don’t agree with you perspective are not being smart. Beyond that, what he ultimately did was good for the party. And if he didn’t want to do it at first, that actually makes the fact he ultimately decided to do it for whatever reason worth celebrating.
But then again, I’m not sure if you understand the idea of being magnanimous. Nothing in your posts suggests that something you value.
I can’t speak for Kurtz but I don’t think I’ve done anything here to embarrass myself. I stand by everything I wrote.
[Edited: removed a bit of snark at the end of this that I felt was a bit too much]
@Jack:
That’s not all he said:
So, debate me on my home field, with the homefield advantage, or I will back out.
@Jack:
You do realize that, by your logic, the biggest victims of this fraud would be the Democratic primary voters, right? So wouldn’t they be mighty pissed now, after seeing the elites overrule their choice?
Then why, may I ask, are we not seeing an immediate drop in Harris’s poll numbers relative to Biden’s? An Ipsos poll that just came out shows Harris with a 2-point lead nationally. In the firm’s last poll from a week ago, Trump was ahead of Biden by 2 points.
If the people you claim to be speaking on behalf of don’t consider themselves to have been defrauded, isn’t there a scintilla of a chance they weren’t actually defrauded?
Also, here’s what Trump’s campaign pollster is saying:
The invisible hand of the American public doesn’t appear to be reacting the way you’d expect to seeing a fraud exposed.
@Michael Reynolds: All Billionaire are not the same. Techbro millionaires– probably. Others? Just not resonating with my handful of everyman/women canaries that are pretty reliable indicators of the non-interested (until 1 week before election) voters sentiment. They are in cost-of-living and ‘smartphones have ruined children’ land.
Frankly, the opportunity is to bring a few extra people off the couch that are thinking about voting but it’s not their top priority. Kamala imagery with young people, Grannies, and at white churches could do that. These people vote on feels not words.
Also, ‘the elites persecuting me’ has crystallized in non interested voter. It just has. Trump’s smoke machine is smokier and more concentrated–there just isn’t a burning sense of satisfaction in this group to see Trump brought to justice.
@Jack:
First off, thank you for engagement. I choose to engage you, because I think the conversation can be worthwhile for everyone. I know my view is not necessarily shared by much or most of the regulars here. But I am willing to have a actual discussion if you are.
Was he officially the candidate based on party rules? No. Delegates do not vote until the convention.
From a practical perspective, given your preference for President, you should want there to be a major outcry from rank-and-file Democrats about changing the nominee. That doesn’t appear to be the case. Nor do I see a large number of rank-and-file Democrats complaining specifically about Harris. I think the only reason you are falling back on the fraud argument alone is because your observations match mine.
Additionally, caveats about single polls, polling in general, et cetera, aside, that AP-NORC poll that was the subject of a thread a couple days ago found that 70% of Dems would prefer another candidate.
Was he officially the candidate by law? From my understanding, no. But, I will concede that I am not an attorney nor am I familiar with the laws in all fifty states.
After I click post, I am going to read this:
State laws and party rules on replacing a presidential nominee, 2024, Ballotpedia.
@Jack:
Then added that he hadn’t agreed to anything and that he wouldn’t accept the already scheduled debate. Has it escaped your notice that Trump lies a lot?
@Jack:
People voted for delegates supporting Biden-Harris as a team, knowing full well that Biden is 50 billion years old, and it might be Harris finishing out that next term. And, it’s Harris. Ok, sooner than expected, but still ok. It’s only marginally different than if Biden died in 2025 after being sworn in.
No one is buying this right wing talking point. You need something better.
I’m sorry your party hasn’t figured out how to rid themselves of their ancient artifact of a candidate. Ours was just slow and sniffed hair, yours is senile and a rapist*. Ours was slightly older, yours wears depends, falls asleep at his own trial, and is the oldest person in history to get a major party nomination.
*: in the common parlance. In legal terms he has been found liable for sexual assault.
@Lounsbury: Based on what they write, “strange delusional” embraces a lot of what I’ve read both on comment threads and posts across the internet, including here at times (and our line up and commentariat are way above the median). Still knowing you’re in it just for the yuks helps me understand where your head is, so thanks.
@Jack:
Oh, I feel compelled to I clarify something about my commentary.
I am not putting myself above any of it. I am not singling out you, or anyone else. I have changed my views in the past based on new arguments or just thinking more about it. But I cannot claim, in good conscience, to have zero cognitive biases, nor poor intellectual habits. I do.
@Jim Brown 32:
“no one is above the law” is one of the major issues these days, so Harris is going to have to walk down that path at least a little bit.
@Matt Bernius: I see them as against whatever you’re in favor of adjusted as required, including minute by minute, if necessary, but maybe I’m too cynical. 🙁
@Gustopher:
So far all they are serving up is marshmallows. There must be something akin to panic at the GOP campaign HQ, as the short time frame suddenly seems like it might favor Harris. So much effort put into attacking Biden and undermining Newsome, the presumed possible white knight. And the Vance pick, will that get them even a single vote that Trump could not already count on?
We all know Trump will not accept blame for any failings. I wonder if any senior campaign staffers are polishing up their resumes today.
@Eusebio: I may be messed up on the last name, but the reference is to the movie The Blues Brothers, staring Dan Ackroyd and the late John Belushi (from the original SNL cast).
@Jim Brown 32:
Even absent forgiveness, it’s not unreasonable to assume they will vote for her come November. I grew up in the Bay Area with a lot of black kids, and we all qualify as “older” now. They all seem to be over the moon about Harris moving to the top of the ticket.
@Kurtz:
Umm…
I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for this to happen. Just sayin’. 🙁
@Not the IT Dept.:
You’re assuming Harris won’t pick someone old and feeble as her VP. An elder statesman in the party to balance her perceived lack of experience. Someone who knows Washington, and knows how to get things done in Washington. Someone who would be ready to step in at an instant’s notice if anything happened to Harris. Someone known and trusted. A man who would be comfortable working with a younger Black President and being the second fiddle. Someone who was literally made to be Vice President.
I am talking, of course, of Joe Biden. A man so Vice Presidential that he seems almost destined to be his own Vice President’s Vice President.
MBVPA: Make Biden Vice President Again.
Some pundits claimed Vance was there to help Trump in the Rust Belt, but I think the real reason was that he didn’t think he needed any help from his vp selection; he thought he had the election in the bag and was free to choose the one he wanted, not the one he needed.
@Kurtz:
Generally speaking, I feel the same way. I have definitely changed views in the past. Heck, prior to the debate, I thought the idea of replacing Biden was a bad idea and ultimately would do more harm than good (and I believe I said as much in a few comment threads). Then facts changed and my position changed accordingly.
That said, I have to admit I’m far more likely to respond to when JKB or Jack post something I disagree with than, say, Michael (though he and I have definitely gone around on certain subjects in the past). I definitely get frustrated when I see folks who really appear to be not holding intellectually consistent positions or just in general decide they want to take an approach where they’re the only ones who see what’s really happening. Plus people who refuse to concede any ground definitely push a button for me.
That said, I never expect to get a serious response (that actually engages in what I wrote in a spirit of discussion)–but if/when that happens its always welcome.
@Jack:
You haven’t gotten any smarter.
I asked you a question. Answer it.
Your repeated failure even to attempt an answer is a confession. You know Trump is Putin’s boy, you just don’t care. You don’t care because you’ve never given a shit about anyone but yourself and your money. You’re as much for sale as your rapist cult leader. You are morally bankrupt. Intellectually as well, but that’s self-evident.
@Matt Bernius:
You and I have directly engaged each other on this subject a lot recently. I think we are both still working our thoughts out on the matter. I don’t think we have yet hit the point of repetition.
Re: @JKB:
Whatever the ratio, he has never been 100% talking points and slogans. He has indeed made good points. Sure, I concede that maybe they need to be fleshed out with better warrants, more evidence, or engagement of potential counterpoints. But none of us are always that rigorous. Some rarely are, but they still do add to discussions, even if it’s in the form of humor, wit, rhetorical flair, whatever.
Re: @Jack:
Basically the same as above. But if you notice, he has made an effort at meaningful exchange recently. The first, prompted by @Jay L Gischer, was a bit of a mess, clarity-wise. But it felt like he was caught off-guard, yet decided to engage his brain.
I think that encouraging that is good, and the regulars should probably make an effort to be more welcoming.
@Skookum made a good point about that the other day. They opined that it can be intimidating for non-regulars. Whether they would agree with all of the following, I don’t know, but their post made me think.
This is an intelligent group. There are wildly different age groups, different life paths, and a good bit of regional diversity. And quite frankly, very different ideologies and sharply distinct opinions on the practical side of things–both political and where we choose to take an ethical stand.
The thing is, because the discussions can get in-depth, that alone can intimidate people. If the rhetoric is also hostile, it just pushes people toward not commenting.
I think that’s probably not a great thing for the community. Think about what we would lose if @Andy threw up his hands and left for good. Remember, at one point, he did say he needed to take a break. I don’t fully remember the details, it may have also had to do with personal obligations, but I’m almost positive that he included a bit of criticism about attitudes and tones.
That isn’t to say I don’t understand @MarkedMan’s viewpoint on the matter.
But I also don’t see @JKB and @Jack as trolls–I’ve long thought that description didn’t quite fit. And to be honest, some (many?) of us do a bit of trolling around here, often to each other. ETA: But we have all become familiar with each other. Most of us have never met irl. But we are not strangers. So within the group, casual trollery is sort of expected. But engaging in that toward newcomers or non-regulars will be received much differently.
Even if it would be a tad dramatic for ideological foils to feel proud that they walked into the lion’s den and emerged unscathed, that does not mean that it is bereft of truth.
For me, it is easy to imagine that an outside observer would just see us as a douchey clique–even if most of the commenters do not behave that way. And that assessment would probably be fair. That bothers me.
@Jim Brown 32:
This is just an excellent comment on several levels. I took a screenshot, it’s so good.
@Kurtz:
Thanks for taking the time to write that. There is a lot in there I need to reflect on.
I appreciate the kind pushback.
@Matt Bernius:
I just saw this comment for the first time. Yeah, you’re right, you cannot speak for me one point. I have absolutely embarrassed myself here. Multiple times.
Try as I might, I cannot get myself to believe that old saying about embarrassment: once you have publicly embarrassed yourself, you can live freely.
I have learned to be okay with being wrong. Being wrong and being willing to say, “I don’t know” are both required to learn things.
I have never learned to deal with embarrassment. I fear I never will.
@Kurtz:
Such people take nameless, faceless, or anonymous internet strangers they’ll never meet too seriously. Yes, the commentary here does have utility, but it’s not that serious. This is not the UN, the European Parliament, a US government SCIF. No one is going to die or go broke over OTB discourse. Let’s get over ourselves a bit.
The Habit of Perspective is a good practice. Anyone whose psyche is negatively affected by online comments should, in the parlance of Gen Z, go out and touch grass.
Have some ice cream, go for a hike, play with a dog, snif a flower, be around human beings you could look in the eye. Reorient sight, smell, sound, and touch around real world stimuli. Reduce screen time and get a grip.
What was that famous book in the 90s? Don’t Sweat the Small Stuff? Re-up on that.
@Kurtz:
Oh, I wasn’t clear–I meant in what I specifically wrote in the comments on this page.
I have definitely embarrassed myself in posts and other comment threads. The one that sticks out the most in my mind was a post where my wrong analysis on a legal issue was correctly taken to the woodshed by multiple lawyers here.
It also was a good lesson about learning my limits and that I am not as immune to Dunning Kruger as I thought.
And I am not great with public embarrassment either. I have find that learning to acknowledge it quickly definitely helps.
Try as I might, I cannot find myself a a Lefty something Bougie Bobo costume online, and I really feel like I need one to wear to go vote for Kamala Harris/whatever white guy. 😉
To be precise, Biden wasn’t “forced” out, since nobody had that power unless they were going to use the 25th amendment.
If you can grasp his psychology and ego, it really was like getting grandpa to give up the car keys. You couldn’t make him, but you could convince him. And you could see that with Biden’s moving goalposts: “I’ll only quit if God tells me” became “I’ll only quit if the docs tell me” and “I’ll only quit if there’s no way I can win”.
And I think they convinced him of not only the last one, but that he’d also bring down all the Democrats in toss-up seats. Knowing how important it would be to stop Trump’s agenda, this may have been Biden’s deciding factor.
It can be both true that he was strong-armed into the decision and that he did what was best for the party and country.
@DK:
Don’t sweat the petty things, and don’t pet the sweaty things.
It appears to me Kamala can run on a strong record and still distance herself from some of the negatives- in fact usually any VP can unless weighed down by scandals. And talking of which, hasn’t this being a remarkable clean administration? I give Biden a lot of credit for running the best administration in my lifetime, picking an incredible VP (what foresight) and stepping down. Big league stuff. The Republicans on the other hand squandered tens of millions if not hundreds of millions, they flubbed the VP picked and now don’t know how to run the campaign (“Look, she is black and she is a woman”). They don’t even know how to defend the oldest nominee in history with his ongoing deterioration. Are we sure we want these Bozos running the country? I think it is an easy prediction that Kamala will get more than 50% of the vote.
@Franklin:
Given how smoothly the transition is taking place so far (a lot better than I expected), I’m increasingly convinced Biden didn’t suddenly make the decision on Sunday. This was coordinated behind the scenes so that by the time he made the announcement, they had a concrete plan in place.
@DK:
Sure, you’re correct. I don’t mean to give the impression that this is serious business, as the classic meme goes. But at the same time, I can easily throw it back at you, right?
You are incredibly aggressive at times. I like you, well, what I know about you. We grew up in the same region–if I’m not mistaken not all that far from each other. We likely have a lot in common, politically and beyond. It’s clear you are intelligent. I find your perspective valuable. But you do, pardon the idiom, go mau-mau*. ETA: what I mean is, then why the acid posts for something that is meaningless?
If it’s actually highly stylized prose, okay. But I get the impression that it is closer to being somewhat close to your personality, if magnified a bit by an interlocutory screen.
Anyway, if my impression is correct, then well it doesn’t quite square with your reply. Of course, you have a point worth considering. But I cannot help but wonder if your reply is reflective of an ideal or not. Because if what you say is true, then why comment at all? If you’re just blowing off steam, I see the utility.
On the other hand, one GWB line, I think in the public selling of the invasion of Iraq, “we should not become a debating society.”** What is democracy, if not a system that requires engagement and debate?
The last point I would make is one I’ve made a few times. I don’t recall if you were around at the time. I was having a discussion with someone who always voted Republican. Months later, we weren’t even really discussing politics, he told me I had said something that caused him to think a lot differently. From what I can tell, he started seeing the world differently.
It wasn’t anything overly profound or witty. I wasn’t even trying to persuade him. It was just a simple observation. IIRC, he even answered it in the moment. But apparently, it stuck somewhere in the back of his mind.
To me, that’s instructive. It may feel–shit, it may pretty much be–sisyphean. Andy you may never know even if you did change someone’s view just a little bit. Or if they became a little more understanding. At the very least, if the discussion is well done, individuals can provoke thought in another.
In the end, what is the downside in trying? For me, none. But for others, maybe I could see how it can be unhealthy. Sure, we probably shouldn’t take this too seriously. And we shouldn’t cross the line into excessive self-regard or grandeur. But I also can’t agree to @Lounsbury’s perspective of it being meaningless either.
Otherwise, the only people who have it right are trolls.
*This one feels like it may be a no-go given the etymology. At the same time, it seems fitting. And I’m pretty sure my politics and worldview are clear enough that it won’t be taken as a derogation.
Then again, I have been known to be a bit of a habitual line-stepper.
**paraphrased, some words may be off.
@mattbernius:
It was kind of a joke. I knew what you meant. And a bit of a self-reveal I guess.
Here’s another: shame is slowly eating my soul. I’ve learned to live with it as best I can. I’m fortunate that, for whatever reason, I have just enough self-control that I didn’t become addicted to hard drugs. Well, that and drugs are truly expensive or of such poor/unknown quality that it ain’t worth it. 😉
It starts. The Convicted Felon is going after Harris’ money.
This is a most serious matter that deserves the utmost consideration of all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Therefore, it should be heard by the FEC sometime in October, and a ruling should be made no later than February 1st.
@Just nutha ignint cracker: What else can internet comment on a blog be than ‘yuks’ pray tell? We are not changing anything nor achieving anything. It is self-entertainment. Perhaps self-entertainment with an aspect of interesting thoughts but still self-entertainment, not far from a bar or café conversation with effective strangers.
Now of course Pr. Taylor, I have in fact learned quite a lot from reading him, in respect to the US system. And certain commentators here I find have interesting insights (not to say which as that is adolesent cliquishness which this place already suffers from rather too much) – although my contrarianesss is such that I remain silent on what I agree with in general, and react to what I do not.
And lest there be a misunderstanding, while you lot evidently don’t care for my views, I don’t engage in baiting for the sake of getting a rise out of you.
@Kurtz: I do believe your comments on JKB & Jake are worth reflection, although it is my own judgment JKB is oft in troll mode, by which I mean making comments that are not necessarily sincere in wording in relation to what he normally might say, intended to bait you all. Jake does not seem that to me (although I can not say I pay deep attention). The exaggeration for baiting that I suspect is what leads me to ignore JKB myself , as insincere posturing to get rises is boringly tedious – on other hand he probably generally does have the broad views that come through so that is disagreement, not trolling.
@Lounsbury:
It’s interesting. When I was writing those posts last night. One thought kept popping into my head, especially when I was responding to @DK. Why do any of us do this?
I know why a few people do, because we have discussed it. Now I know why you do. But when I started to really think about why @JKB and @Jack come here, I realized that whatever their reasons, I do not think it’s trolling. Sure, I never thought that label really fit, but I had not thought much about it.
By trolling, I mean, they aren’t trying to derail the conversation. Nor do I think their goal is to insult, or to make themselves feel smart. I don’t know what reasons they tell themselves nor if they even have a conscious goal. It’s possible they can’t help themselves. But I do think they are trying to understand something, even if they appear to not comprehend our responses.
I do not have a picture of what political dialog is like in other countries. But the majority of Americans discuss politics very much like those two do. And there are plenty of fora to just exchange the same shit over and over. Maybe they do want to be challenged after all. And, I have to credit @Jay L Gischer for it, because he was the one that kind of got @Jack to say more than he normally does. Will it stick? I don’t know.
And I have long said, as corny, naive, and idealistic as it sounds, shitty discussion creates an avenue to exploit for those who seek power for its own sake, or fame, or money, or because they couldn’t hack it as a VC. And I realized that regardless of whether it matters at in the smallest scheme of things, why engage in a way I believe to be a detriment? If it is a positive feedback loop, why feed it with more negativity?
Years ago, I was chilling with a friend. And I said, “Ya know, the thing I’m most interested in when I discuss things with people is how they come about their beliefs and how they sustain them.” His response was, “That’s probably the most accurate thing you hsve every told me about yourself.” And that’s another reason for my evolution recently on how to engage with the out-group here, I realized I’m missing an opportunity by ignoring them or going tit for tat.
As far as you go. You know I have criticized your communication sometimes. And I’ve pointed out, whether I am right or not, potential biases on your part. But where else am I going to learn some of the technical limitations of turbines in various renewable technologies? Sure, I could read something about it. Look up an article or two. Maybe check out a white paper. But it’s a unidirectional situation–I can’t ask questions. I can’t clarify anything.
I guess in the end, fuck it, if I’m going to spend time and effort on something, maybe I should do what I can to get the most out of it. And shallow bickering ain’t the way to do that.
If I can drag a few people along with me, all the better.
@Kurtz: Your comments re JKB have quite some merit.
And I shall say while I do not credit any commenting here with anything than entertainment and distraction value – of an intellectual variety – your critiques I have not ignored (although I am what I am in the end, my contrarianess as I said led me to be seen as a Lefty [quite bizarrely really] in the Bush ibn Bush years by Americans).
@Lounsbury:
Atilla the Hun was a little liberal for a nonzero percentage of Americans.
No shame in being who you are. And regardless of what anyone else thinks, you provide a lot of insight and knowledge. And entertainment, even if it catches some of us, and include I include myself here, in an oversensitive mode.
I figured you read everything when you’re around and probably when you don’t comment as well.
You’re on fire with the lines so far today.
@Kurtz:
First thank you for sharing that. I see you and deeply empathize with this. If you are interested in something that might help, I highly recommend Brene Brown’s first book “I thought it was just me.” It’s a deep dive into the topic of shame as it manifests specifically in middle class white women. I also think there’s a lot of cross-over into similarly situated men. It’s also written in a bit more of an academic fashion than the books that followed (i.e. the Gifts of Imperfection). I found that more helpful. YMMV.