More Coalescing Around Harris [Updated]
More endorsement and support for Harris.
Governor Newsom has endorsed:
Via Reuters: Exclusive: All 50 Democratic party US state chairs back Harris -sources.
Via Time: Here’s Who Has Endorsed Kamala Harris for President So Far.
Via the Miami Herald: These Florida Democrats have already lined up behind Kamala Harris.
Also:
The bottom line is that you can’t have a fight if there are no competitors. If enough people rally around Harris in the next day or so, any would-be challenger would have to decide how much of the party it wants to fight with to get a job which would require uniting the party.
Side note: I think this Politico headline is misleading: Obama endorses open nominating process while Clintons endorse Harris. What Obama said was, “I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges.” Now, I think one could argue that times such as these dictate that Obama probably ought to be a little less diplomatic and a bit more direct, and soon. This is the time for a neutral, “above it all” stance. If the Democrats (and Never Trump Republicans and independents) want to defeat Trump, they are going to need to be all in and quickly.
Updates:
I agree and at the same time this would be a major shift in Obama’s track record (up to and including the 2020 Democratic primary).
AND MY AXE!!
@mattbernius:
Ouchies! Accurate but still, ouchies!
Honestly, I feel better. Now let’s get out the vote.
I’m not too worried about Pelosi’s endorsement. This has her fingerprints all over it given the prep work that was done before Biden’s announcement. Hers, and Jeffries, Schumer, AOC, Schiff, and the list goes on. But definitely hers too.
AND MY VENMO!
But but but–there has to be a process for voters to hear from other candidates and make a decision
@Michael Reynolds:
And that
@Michael Reynolds:
AND MY PAYPAL!
@Stormy Dragon:
Lord of the Rings or Armies of Darkness?
I’ve been waiting and hoping for Biden to do this since the debate, and had pretty much shut myself out of the news cycle until the past couple of days when I caught glimmers this might happen. It’s early days, but it looks like Party Leadership had a plan and executed it with lightening speed and is making it extremely difficult for anyone to challenge Harris. If that can stick, I have real hope. And I also hope they got the donor class behind this too, although the Dem donor class doesn’t have the sway the Republican one does, where every billionaire has their toy poodle yipping at perceived enemies.
On top of that, Biden didn’t resign and Harris is not President. Why is that a good thing? She isn’t desperately trying to assume all consuming duties and get out campaigning at the same time.
@Jim Brown 32:
I recognize the sarcasm but it’s still worth pointing out that the pendulum has swung way, way too far in favor of voters picking a candidate. That’s what got us President Trump, when even the corrupted and depraved Republic leadership wanted anyone but him.
But we have to be realistic. Those delegates can vote for anyone they choose now, and party leaders may not have vetted them as strongly as they did in the era of brokered conventions. I’m just glad the convention is just around the corner, leaving little time for snake in the grass shenanigans.
The system of electoral votes allocation is just off. It ignores population for land, which is a huge problem in US politics generally.
An R voter in Massachusetts has a much vote value as a D voter in Alabama – zero. You should never have a system where a single vote value equals zero and that is universally known and acknowledged before the election.
Allocation of electoral votes at a state level is a bad system design. I understand why it got baked into the original constitution, but it is decidedly undemocratic now. If you are a voter in a state that reflexively, routinely votes for the different party in a federal election your vote did not count. Sorry, loser! Second place is last place!
Any system that is winner takes all for a geographic area is anti-democratic. It disincentives voting if you know you are voting for the minority party for your state, county, precinct.
Winner take all per geographic area is a bad system that encourages voter disengagement. If you know your vote is going to be counted as zero / nulled out as if zero, why fucking bother?
Elections should be true up to population, not area. The US Senate allocates power by square miles which is incredibly fucked up. It’s not remotely democratic and yet the Senate and Senators are looked upon as the “senior” more wise component of US government. It’s daft. I’m smarter than most US Senators, and I’m demonstrably dumb and ignorant.
@mb******@gm***.com:
@de stijl: Welcome back!! We’ve missed you!
@de stijl: Hey, good to see you.
@Stormy Dragon:
Thanks for censoring my email!
I post under my own name and it’s unique enough that it’s pretty easy to track down.
Just like their buddy Putin runs his “elections”. One candidate is all that is approved.
But RFKjr is still out there for Democrats who feel disgust.
And Trump just ran a welcoming convention for those feeling for perhaps a change from voting blindly Democrat. Voters stopping and thinking.
Fun times, at least for those not pining their hopes on the Democrat candidate de jure.
@de stijl: Well, what a pleasant surprise! Where ya been? Were you waiting for an exciting Democratic candidate for President to appear?
(Although most of us can agree with your comment, it seems a little peripheral to the topic?)
@MarkedMan: So you think Dem voter preferring Biden is the same as Repub voters desiring Trump? Lol
Let me be clear–the primary reason American politics is in the shitter is because Voters prioritize entertainment and performance over attributes that actually translate to the job of governing. THAT is why we have Trump. I do not care about POTUS being good spokesman for their Party. Frankly, I think it’s a conflict of interest.
At best, POTUS should prioritize their duties as Party Head LAST.
Biden was boring, stayed out of news, and coached his leadership team. As a lifelong Democrat, I understand why he didn’t want to play hardball with his Party. I am not a Democrat and don’t give a damn about them beyond their ability to stymie Republican goals.
They increased the risk of their ability to do that over the past few weeks culminating today. Validating why I disdain them only slightly less than Republicans…
@mattbernius:
Thank Dr. Joyner. The site apparently does that automatically if someone puts an e-mail in the text of a comment…
@Franklin:
Y’all were missing me?
What’d I miss?
Apparently, Biden’s out.
@Jim Brown 32:
Not sure how that was your takeaway from what I said
@JKB: Hey, remember when state GOP committees barred anyone from running against Trump? I do.
@de stijl: Man, you had us worried! Glad to see you commenting!
@mb******@gm***.com:
Army of Darkness. Always.
Klaatu Barada … Necktie!!
@JKB:
This is dumb on two counts.
1. Only one candidate (spoiler: yours) has publically cozied up to Putin.
2. There will be an election in November. A real one. (and most candidates worldwide are not chosen via primaries–they aren’t Magical Democracy Machines)
@JKB:
Wait… I thought the current conservative perspective is that Putin is a strong leader and someone that Republicans would prefer to work with. Trump continues to speak highly of him in campaign speeches and interviews. That seems far more “buddy” than Biden and the Democrats take on him.
Also, given your lack of concern about what happened on January 6th and your flirting with election denalism in 2020 and 2021… maybe, just maybe you should sit this one out.
@de stijl: You were certainly asked about over the last few months or whatever it’s been!
As for what you’ve missed, where do we start?