One of my younger friends says quite a number of his social circle wants to vote for Trump over the Palestine-Israel topic, but this confuses me a lot. I had the impression that Trump neither looked favorably on Islamic people nor had any interest in peace in any part of the middle-east. Is there somewhere people are getting the idea he will be more peaceable? Or is this more of a classic "anyone but the guy I currently disapprove of?"
I get Slow Boring in the Substack app, so I can't see the post timestamp, but I suspect this was published before the special counsel report dropped and Biden's shaky press conference where he mixed up Egypt and Mexico 😬 I wonder if that disastrous appearance would change Matt's mind on a "we need more direct Joe Biden in this campaign" strategy... It certainly seems as if his campaign staff has reasonably justified worries about his public appearances. Joe was always gaffe prone, but now he's 81, an official report calls him elderly with a bad memory, and all of that plays into the MAGA narrative about "Sleepy Joe" :/
(I say this as a lifelong Democrat, Biden 2020 voter and someone who will definitely vote Biden in 2024)
Connecting the doubts about Diamond Joe "playing President on TV" well enough to win reelection with the lack of a method to replace him, without convincing him to step down in favor of a replacement selected by unprecedented irregular process..........and a brief conversation I had with a young guy at our DC Slow Boring Happy Hour who was a Democracy Activist, I had a brainstorm:
The Democracy Activist shared some of the stuff he was working on - I brought up electoral & voting reform but he said, "yeah but there's other things, like talking to older liberal (progressive) judges about retiring now" while circumstances could be better for refilling them with judges of like mind/philosophy who are younger and can last longer than they might be later depending how electoral fortunes go.
Grassroots Democrats, including young people, members of all sorts liberal, progressive, center-left, and a bit more left groups should have letter writing campaigns thanking elderly judges and appointed officials thanking them for their service to the public and the cause(s) and ask them to think about the next chapter and if it is time to make way for somebody new to get in place this year. And pointedly ask, "are you sure you are ready, willing, able, and really feel like sticking it out all the way through 2029? Or 2033?"
Work with liberal and progressive foundation guys to find some of these retiring people sinecures and other gigs if they want to still get paychecks and feel publicly involved, but get them replaced, and have them talk publicly about why they are proud of their decision, and why they didn't want to Ginsburg or Feinstein their position.
Do that enough in the federal judicial bureaucracy, maybe ranks of some other extended term federal officials, and even Joe might get the picture. And if he doesn't, you've built some institutional insurance against the Orange Man or his Party.
The people around Biden seem mostly competent. And those competent people seem to have decided to keep Biden away from microphones and cameras as much as possible.
While MY is correct that it is good to take risks when your down in the polls, but that all depends on the risk/benefit calculation. And only the people on the inside know just how big a risk more face time creates.
And maybe they concluded more face time = near certain defeat.
I just wonder about what an alternative plan looks like.
I voted for Biden on the, possibly naïve, assumption that he would be president for one term and then usher in a new, younger progressive. I am still shocked that this plan hasn't been executed. If, instead of this constant sad media cycle about how old Biden is, how bad his memory is, how feeble he is, it could have been about, "I have full faith in (insert candidate name) and hers/his ability to take on Trump and continue the work we have done." And I still think this is possible. If Biden chooses his successor now, I still think that she or he has a shot at beating trump. The first options that come to mind are Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, and maybe a split ticket with either. While risky, and unprecedented, I believe that a new ticket has better shot of winning than the old ticket we have now.
Progressivism and all available progressive candidates were box-office poison in the 2020 campaign which is why Joe was appointed by James Clyburn to save the ticket in the first place. This is even more so now that Bernie is gone: there are no members of the progressive left who are not obnoxious to most of the Democratic primary electorate, much less the general electorate. As for the rest, remember that Biden is the hand-selected candidate of the Congressional Black Caucus, who are dominant in the affairs of the Democratic party and who never had any intention of risking their favored ticket in favor of anyone else. Just one of the crippling dysfunctions of the party that have led us to this ridiculous place where a major party is considering changing horses in midstream.
I think you make good points there, though I still wonder with the continued growing star power of dem. governors like Whitmer and Newsom and the importance of both of their states for the dem. coalition if they are viable options for the now or for the future. Your point regarding the Congressional Black Caucus is a good one, and certainly makes any election year switch more unlikely than it already is. But, if I am someone within the democratic establishment who is getting cold feet regarding Biden v. Trump, I would be looking to one of those two governors and working with the CBC to try and find a viable second part of the ticket. I would only push back that I don't think changing horses midstream is a bad idea. I think it would actually show the ability to change and adapt, something both parties struggle with.
Progressives and ‘activists’ cost the Democratic Party seats in 2020 with their enthusiasm for “Defund the Police” and BLM rioting. There was an anemic victory in Congress even with a massive turnout against Trump. Progressive and farther left messaging tends to piss off swing voters.
This year we don’t have Trump’s insane antics to balance out the revolting pro Hamas activism of the far left and the obsequious cooperation of their useful idiot progressives, and it’s going to cost the Democratic Party, again. I don’t know what universe people are living in where they think angry pro Hamas ‘ceasefire’ bullshit and anti Jewish sentiment is popular with anyone but a tiny group of the left.
I am not really buying this one. There needs to be some data to show that the Obama-Trump-Biden voters have swung back, and if there was, I missed it. Biden is behind in the polls right now, but those polls show Trump with exactly the same support he has always had and a large proportion of "undecideds". The election will likely come down to what happens with those undecideds. Do they hold their nose and vote for Biden, do they stay home, do they vote for Trump? There is a lot of uncertainty. This is not the time for complacency, but this is not the time for a hail mary.
Sizzling momentary hot-take, inspired in panic by this morning's media freakout.
The Biden Administration and Democratic Party Fix: Operation TEAM SPORT
Democratic Brokered Closed-Door Convention selects 2024 candidates - Gretchen Whitmer for POTUS, Hakeem Jeffries for VPOTUS, the party needs to find a replacement in the House leadership for Jeffries. Ticks the demographic boxes with vigorous people, top of ticket from a swing state, bottom of ticket a succinct speaker, comfortable with simple clear, repetition, good for attack politics.
President Biden resigns shortly, citing health concerns, particularly over time, and support for both brokered convention nominated ticket, and for VPOTUS Kamala Harris ascending to the Presidency for the balance of his term. Vows to continue to support transition and POTUS HArris to limits of his personal ability.
VP Kamala Harris gets inaugurated to the Presidency swiftly, while removing herself from contention for the 2024 election, to complete the balance of the current Presidential term. It is a brief term, under a year, but still historic, she is still a historic first-of-type POTUS, and that is the buy-out for her not to contest the nominee. If she is a capable Acting President/Interim President, she has an OK chance for a comeback later. Better than if a defeated VPOTUS or eclipsed 2nd term VPOTUS. Rationale - Plenty to do in transitioning and governing now and not campaigning at the same time. Endorses Party-backed candidate.
If he wants to and if Harris will have it, Biden can hang around and continue to do some roving foreign policy stuff for the remainder of the term, as an emeritus figure.
Look at the pictures of political leadership in Russia, China, and Iran. What do you see? MEN. all MEN, in charge of deeply misogynistic societies. Just like Khruschev did with Kennedy, they are going to look at our first female president and think "I bet I can muscle the girl."
Now, they would not mess with Hillary Clinton: they know her and they know what she would do to them if they tried on anything like that. But Harris? On a temporary gig? They will muscle her as soon as she steps into the Oval Office. Given her visible incompetence, and the visible hesitancy and reluctance with which we are dealing with the crises we have now, the temptation will be overwhelming for them. We may have World War III on our hands before she even has a chance to step down.
Two objective facts, apparent to anyone who thinks about them a millisecond:
1) Kamala Harris (or Gretchen Whitmer) could put either Joe Biden or Donald Trump on the ground in under 30 seconds flat in a fist-fight, hand-to-hand, foot-to-foot combat - no contest. Chicks beat old men.
2) This Prosecutor Bitch got all the same buttons Biden got, linked to all the same ballistics and bombers
Biden's biggest problem is that the country is full of people who know people in their 80s. If he weren't running against a sociopath he'd have no chance at all.
One silver lining for Democrats is that the thermostatic nature of politics practically guarantees that 4 years of Trump will shift the electorate to the left, which should put them in an excellent position to with in 2028. The problem will be what damage would 4 more years of Trump do in the meantime, and how easily can it be repaired later.
It seems like if I think about this too much it just means spending the next 10 months being really anxious and depressed. Pretty unappealing if I then have to spend the following 4 years feeling that way once Trump wins.
Getting Biden in front of the cameras in any unscripted way is not a good idea. A friend of mine who is a lifelong Democrat gasped and said “oh my god, he’s so old!” when she saw him at the New Year’s Eve celebration on television. He really does look old. Decrepit even.
As with those determining Israel policy, I am not inclined to substitute my judgment for the political campaign professionals making these strategic judgments. I just imagine them saying “don’t you think we thought of that”?
Of course they are wrong sometimes (although not always clear in what ways), but I would generally say that there is little or no certitude in this area - as you note with no “particular solution follows in an obvious way”.
My bottom line - this subject matter area has become a minimal insight zone and I am not looking forward to the next 9 months of such content.
Your proposal for Biden and company to get active is spot on. The problem I see is that the President isn't simply prone to gaffes; he is clearly failing. Which raises the question of Harris, whose performance as VP has gained neither accolades nor popularity. With Trump his near certain opponent, I think our country is in for a rough ride post 2024.
I think most of the comments have hit the nail on the head. Matt hinted at it, but it deserves mentioning a little more that abortion was a big win for Democrats in 2022. I can't help but think that because it is no longer new, it will be less of a lightning rod. In addition, Trump has repeatedly tried to moderate himself on the issue. He isn't going to run on a platform of abortion restrictions. He can still be nailed on the issue, but he can't be hit with it like a Ron DeSantis could.
Does Biden think the eco-terrorists and such are going to vote for Trump? He really needs to distance himself from those people.
I worry a super bowl interview might do more harm than good if it revealed any major cognitive issues. Lots of us feel he is being hidden from the public. That is very bad. It should be easy enough to orchestrate a very well scripted interview with some softball questions, but his handlers don't think he could make a positive impact even there. Can they hide him from a debate?
One of my younger friends says quite a number of his social circle wants to vote for Trump over the Palestine-Israel topic, but this confuses me a lot. I had the impression that Trump neither looked favorably on Islamic people nor had any interest in peace in any part of the middle-east. Is there somewhere people are getting the idea he will be more peaceable? Or is this more of a classic "anyone but the guy I currently disapprove of?"
I get Slow Boring in the Substack app, so I can't see the post timestamp, but I suspect this was published before the special counsel report dropped and Biden's shaky press conference where he mixed up Egypt and Mexico 😬 I wonder if that disastrous appearance would change Matt's mind on a "we need more direct Joe Biden in this campaign" strategy... It certainly seems as if his campaign staff has reasonably justified worries about his public appearances. Joe was always gaffe prone, but now he's 81, an official report calls him elderly with a bad memory, and all of that plays into the MAGA narrative about "Sleepy Joe" :/
(I say this as a lifelong Democrat, Biden 2020 voter and someone who will definitely vote Biden in 2024)
Still in post-Hur report panic mode -
Connecting the doubts about Diamond Joe "playing President on TV" well enough to win reelection with the lack of a method to replace him, without convincing him to step down in favor of a replacement selected by unprecedented irregular process..........and a brief conversation I had with a young guy at our DC Slow Boring Happy Hour who was a Democracy Activist, I had a brainstorm:
The Democracy Activist shared some of the stuff he was working on - I brought up electoral & voting reform but he said, "yeah but there's other things, like talking to older liberal (progressive) judges about retiring now" while circumstances could be better for refilling them with judges of like mind/philosophy who are younger and can last longer than they might be later depending how electoral fortunes go.
Grassroots Democrats, including young people, members of all sorts liberal, progressive, center-left, and a bit more left groups should have letter writing campaigns thanking elderly judges and appointed officials thanking them for their service to the public and the cause(s) and ask them to think about the next chapter and if it is time to make way for somebody new to get in place this year. And pointedly ask, "are you sure you are ready, willing, able, and really feel like sticking it out all the way through 2029? Or 2033?"
Work with liberal and progressive foundation guys to find some of these retiring people sinecures and other gigs if they want to still get paychecks and feel publicly involved, but get them replaced, and have them talk publicly about why they are proud of their decision, and why they didn't want to Ginsburg or Feinstein their position.
Do that enough in the federal judicial bureaucracy, maybe ranks of some other extended term federal officials, and even Joe might get the picture. And if he doesn't, you've built some institutional insurance against the Orange Man or his Party.
The people around Biden seem mostly competent. And those competent people seem to have decided to keep Biden away from microphones and cameras as much as possible.
While MY is correct that it is good to take risks when your down in the polls, but that all depends on the risk/benefit calculation. And only the people on the inside know just how big a risk more face time creates.
And maybe they concluded more face time = near certain defeat.
I just wonder about what an alternative plan looks like.
I voted for Biden on the, possibly naïve, assumption that he would be president for one term and then usher in a new, younger progressive. I am still shocked that this plan hasn't been executed. If, instead of this constant sad media cycle about how old Biden is, how bad his memory is, how feeble he is, it could have been about, "I have full faith in (insert candidate name) and hers/his ability to take on Trump and continue the work we have done." And I still think this is possible. If Biden chooses his successor now, I still think that she or he has a shot at beating trump. The first options that come to mind are Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, and maybe a split ticket with either. While risky, and unprecedented, I believe that a new ticket has better shot of winning than the old ticket we have now.
Progressivism and all available progressive candidates were box-office poison in the 2020 campaign which is why Joe was appointed by James Clyburn to save the ticket in the first place. This is even more so now that Bernie is gone: there are no members of the progressive left who are not obnoxious to most of the Democratic primary electorate, much less the general electorate. As for the rest, remember that Biden is the hand-selected candidate of the Congressional Black Caucus, who are dominant in the affairs of the Democratic party and who never had any intention of risking their favored ticket in favor of anyone else. Just one of the crippling dysfunctions of the party that have led us to this ridiculous place where a major party is considering changing horses in midstream.
I think you make good points there, though I still wonder with the continued growing star power of dem. governors like Whitmer and Newsom and the importance of both of their states for the dem. coalition if they are viable options for the now or for the future. Your point regarding the Congressional Black Caucus is a good one, and certainly makes any election year switch more unlikely than it already is. But, if I am someone within the democratic establishment who is getting cold feet regarding Biden v. Trump, I would be looking to one of those two governors and working with the CBC to try and find a viable second part of the ticket. I would only push back that I don't think changing horses midstream is a bad idea. I think it would actually show the ability to change and adapt, something both parties struggle with.
Progressives and ‘activists’ cost the Democratic Party seats in 2020 with their enthusiasm for “Defund the Police” and BLM rioting. There was an anemic victory in Congress even with a massive turnout against Trump. Progressive and farther left messaging tends to piss off swing voters.
This year we don’t have Trump’s insane antics to balance out the revolting pro Hamas activism of the far left and the obsequious cooperation of their useful idiot progressives, and it’s going to cost the Democratic Party, again. I don’t know what universe people are living in where they think angry pro Hamas ‘ceasefire’ bullshit and anti Jewish sentiment is popular with anyone but a tiny group of the left.
I am not really buying this one. There needs to be some data to show that the Obama-Trump-Biden voters have swung back, and if there was, I missed it. Biden is behind in the polls right now, but those polls show Trump with exactly the same support he has always had and a large proportion of "undecideds". The election will likely come down to what happens with those undecideds. Do they hold their nose and vote for Biden, do they stay home, do they vote for Trump? There is a lot of uncertainty. This is not the time for complacency, but this is not the time for a hail mary.
Sizzling momentary hot-take, inspired in panic by this morning's media freakout.
The Biden Administration and Democratic Party Fix: Operation TEAM SPORT
Democratic Brokered Closed-Door Convention selects 2024 candidates - Gretchen Whitmer for POTUS, Hakeem Jeffries for VPOTUS, the party needs to find a replacement in the House leadership for Jeffries. Ticks the demographic boxes with vigorous people, top of ticket from a swing state, bottom of ticket a succinct speaker, comfortable with simple clear, repetition, good for attack politics.
President Biden resigns shortly, citing health concerns, particularly over time, and support for both brokered convention nominated ticket, and for VPOTUS Kamala Harris ascending to the Presidency for the balance of his term. Vows to continue to support transition and POTUS HArris to limits of his personal ability.
VP Kamala Harris gets inaugurated to the Presidency swiftly, while removing herself from contention for the 2024 election, to complete the balance of the current Presidential term. It is a brief term, under a year, but still historic, she is still a historic first-of-type POTUS, and that is the buy-out for her not to contest the nominee. If she is a capable Acting President/Interim President, she has an OK chance for a comeback later. Better than if a defeated VPOTUS or eclipsed 2nd term VPOTUS. Rationale - Plenty to do in transitioning and governing now and not campaigning at the same time. Endorses Party-backed candidate.
If he wants to and if Harris will have it, Biden can hang around and continue to do some roving foreign policy stuff for the remainder of the term, as an emeritus figure.
----Okay, freak-out panic plan over-----
Look at the pictures of political leadership in Russia, China, and Iran. What do you see? MEN. all MEN, in charge of deeply misogynistic societies. Just like Khruschev did with Kennedy, they are going to look at our first female president and think "I bet I can muscle the girl."
Now, they would not mess with Hillary Clinton: they know her and they know what she would do to them if they tried on anything like that. But Harris? On a temporary gig? They will muscle her as soon as she steps into the Oval Office. Given her visible incompetence, and the visible hesitancy and reluctance with which we are dealing with the crises we have now, the temptation will be overwhelming for them. We may have World War III on our hands before she even has a chance to step down.
As if the comments section isn't sausage party enough, geez
Two objective facts, apparent to anyone who thinks about them a millisecond:
1) Kamala Harris (or Gretchen Whitmer) could put either Joe Biden or Donald Trump on the ground in under 30 seconds flat in a fist-fight, hand-to-hand, foot-to-foot combat - no contest. Chicks beat old men.
2) This Prosecutor Bitch got all the same buttons Biden got, linked to all the same ballistics and bombers
Biden's biggest problem is that the country is full of people who know people in their 80s. If he weren't running against a sociopath he'd have no chance at all.
One silver lining for Democrats is that the thermostatic nature of politics practically guarantees that 4 years of Trump will shift the electorate to the left, which should put them in an excellent position to with in 2028. The problem will be what damage would 4 more years of Trump do in the meantime, and how easily can it be repaired later.
It seems like if I think about this too much it just means spending the next 10 months being really anxious and depressed. Pretty unappealing if I then have to spend the following 4 years feeling that way once Trump wins.
>Democrats’ political strategy continues to overwhelmingly emphasize intra-coalition peace
Yeah welcome to all of Democratic politics after Obama's reelection.
Getting Biden in front of the cameras in any unscripted way is not a good idea. A friend of mine who is a lifelong Democrat gasped and said “oh my god, he’s so old!” when she saw him at the New Year’s Eve celebration on television. He really does look old. Decrepit even.
As with those determining Israel policy, I am not inclined to substitute my judgment for the political campaign professionals making these strategic judgments. I just imagine them saying “don’t you think we thought of that”?
Of course they are wrong sometimes (although not always clear in what ways), but I would generally say that there is little or no certitude in this area - as you note with no “particular solution follows in an obvious way”.
My bottom line - this subject matter area has become a minimal insight zone and I am not looking forward to the next 9 months of such content.
Your proposal for Biden and company to get active is spot on. The problem I see is that the President isn't simply prone to gaffes; he is clearly failing. Which raises the question of Harris, whose performance as VP has gained neither accolades nor popularity. With Trump his near certain opponent, I think our country is in for a rough ride post 2024.
I think most of the comments have hit the nail on the head. Matt hinted at it, but it deserves mentioning a little more that abortion was a big win for Democrats in 2022. I can't help but think that because it is no longer new, it will be less of a lightning rod. In addition, Trump has repeatedly tried to moderate himself on the issue. He isn't going to run on a platform of abortion restrictions. He can still be nailed on the issue, but he can't be hit with it like a Ron DeSantis could.
Does Biden think the eco-terrorists and such are going to vote for Trump? He really needs to distance himself from those people.
I worry a super bowl interview might do more harm than good if it revealed any major cognitive issues. Lots of us feel he is being hidden from the public. That is very bad. It should be easy enough to orchestrate a very well scripted interview with some softball questions, but his handlers don't think he could make a positive impact even there. Can they hide him from a debate?
I really wish I had another option.