The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Let's Talk About The Debate
I wasn't planning on watching the presidential debate. Contrary to what readers may believe, I do not like politics. I much prefer the law. I'd rather read a transcript of oral argument than sit through a meaningless political debate. My agenda for last night was to finish a long post on Murthy and finish reading Jarkesy. I only managed the former task. I turned the debate on when a friend messaged me that the 25th Amendment should be invoked. It was hyperbole, to be sure, but not too far from the truth.
Here are a few reactions. First, we often talk about judges in a state of mental decline: Judge Posner, is an extreme example. To a lesser extent, we've discussed Justices Ginsburg and Stevens. But even at their worst, these jurists were orders of magnitude more coherent and confident than anything we saw last night. Perhaps the presidency takes a bigger toll on a person than a judgeship.
Second, I think back to Ron Hur's report:
"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him -- by then a former president well into his eighties -- of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."
Based on everything I saw, Hur's assessment seems accurate. He was being kind. My reaction last night was one of pity and sadness, not anger. And this was Biden after a lot of prep! Can you imagine how he appeared after hours of free-wheeling interviews. For good reason the Administration does not want to release the recording. If you were to just read the transcript of the debate, you would not get the full image. But the audio is very instructive.
Third, my grandfather suffered from senility. It was a slow, gradual process. In his 80s, there were good days and bad days. But over time there were more bad days than good days. And eventually, by the age of 92, there were only bad days. He died not because of poor health, but because he simply no longer knew how to feed himself, and later he no longer remembered how to swallow. His wishes were to not receive artificial sustenance, and we honored those wishes. I saw my grandfather on that stage last night--not grandpa who died, but grandpa several years earlier. He could still "fake it," and make you think he was following along by reciting things he remembered before. But he wasn't there. One of the hardest conversations we ever had concerned taking away grandpa's keys. He got into a car accident where he drove through an intersection and t-boned another car. We took his keys away. It was tough. But it had to be done. Those who love President Biden should have a similar conversation.
Fourth, does this affect anything at the Court? Perhaps the only thing that could knock down Trump today would be ruling against him on the immunity case. That waits till Monday. Last night I joked that Chief Justice Roberts may switch his vote to retain Chevron, given that there will almost certainly be a Republican presidency. But what about retirements? If Justice Sotomayor was even thinking about stepping down, seeing Biden's feebleness may give her some new consideration. She can still announce her retirement after the last session on Monday. Justice Kennedy did much the same. I think the Democrats could easily confirm a nominee before October. Maybe Justices Kagan and Sotomayor both offer to step down in exchange for Biden stepping down. Let's make a deal!
T-minus 27 minutes to opinons.
Update: For those interested, here is a video of my grandfather from March 2010, about three years before his death. This was during a Passover Seder, and was a good day. He was very critical of the Republican appointees to the Supreme Court--especially John Roberts, the young whippersnapper. He would have delegated the selection process to the American Bar Association. (My family's politics are nothing like my own.)
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The Democrats should dump Biden now.
That's not so easy unless Biden wants to quit. He wins on the first ballot with delegates pledged by law.
The D's preferred fooling themselves during the primary season.
What can be done is to dump Harris in favor of someone with proven governing credentials.
Its impossible. No incumbent president has been denied re-nomination since the 19th century.
So what? If the interest of the country (and, in this case, the party) require it, they should start.
Exactly.
If the Ds are convinced it is in their interests, it is not impossible. Norms are for sissies and Republicans. And particularly, for sissy Republicans.
If Biden insisted on running, your suggestion would poison this election even more than it already is
LBJ was effectively denied re-nomination in 1968.
Nah, his VP was nominated after all, if he stayed in, he was getting it. The anti-war movement was not strong enough.
The only thing they could do is bully Sodomayer into retiring, and then dump Harris onto SCOTUS, but I'm not sure she'd be confirmed. All she'd need is a couple Dem senators preferring her as likely POTUS -- and wouldn't she still be able to run foe VeeP? Senators do.
Harris has a powerbase, who could satisfy them?
I can't see them wanting to put Harris on the Supreme court. Maybe as one of several, if they were packing it, but if they're only going to have 3 votes, they want three people with enough intellectual heft to actually move some of the other votes occasionally.
Harris is very far from the class of legal intellect that one want on the Court. Even replacing Sotomayor, she'd lower the quality of the Court
But you’d have 1/1,024th Native Amurican on the bench!
That's one of those things that only works in situations where you have two parties acting in good faith. If Sotomayor stepped down and Harris were appointed to SCOTUS (confirmed 51-49, I guess), the GOP would never confirm any replacement veep, leaving us one adverse health event from President Mike Johnson. Dems aren't going to risk that.
I can't see her 1) wanting to be on the court
2) Confirmable in a 50-50 senate where she is her own tie breaker. Manchin or Sinema, would balk.
Its obvious that it would just be political expediency and she should be out of her depth, she is a political animal, not a.legal one.
That sort of political fix might have worked in the 50s or 60's it wouldn't fly now, and the voters would not reward them.
While being on the 3 side of a 6-3 court isn't the greatest situation, it's hard to believe she wouldn't want it.
The GOP decided to nominate Herschel Walker in 2022 Because Trump. As a result, the senate is 51-49, not 50-50. (Assuming all independents continue to caucus with Dems.)
Still lose Manchin and or Sinema, or one of the Senators like Brown who is up for re-election then its on the rocks.
But tell me why Harris would want it, no power, now with the ethics scrutiny, no perks. Unlikely to be any big wins, and she doesn't strike me as a hard worker. And she'd really have to be able to write a lot better than she speaks.
And even more to the point, she would obviously be being sidelined, when by rights the nomination should be hers.
That's the biggest hurdle, by accepting the SC gig she is admitting she wasn't up to being VP, and the Presidency is too big for her.
Life tenure. Never have to campaign for anything, ever again. And it's really prestigious. Shunting her aside by appointing her as ambassador to France or something would be an obvious demotion. SCOTUS is not one.
250k with no perks for a former VP?
Is she that hard up?
She can get that with a handful of board of director appointments, a lot less work, no scrutiny. If the market rate for Hunter on one board on a sketchy foreign oil company is 1m a year, or so I'm told, she would clean up.
And if she gets a gig as general counsel on a tech company she could get 2-3 million, and a few BOD gigs.
What happened to smoke filled rooms? I thought delegates could be ignored.
They just had to water down the superdelegates. They just had to do it to please Bernie supporters even though the superdelegates prevented Hillary from winning the nomination in 2008.
No, let’s not.
The reams of amateur punditry that are sure to ensue are not going to be insightful or helpful. The media is already awash with tales of Democratic angst. We don’t need to constantly repeat, over and over, “I’m concerned about how Biden’s performance will play with independent voters” and “Trump forcefully made his case to the American public, albeit via an uncontested stream of lies.”
I’m voting for Biden. I’m not happy about it. I acknowledge that he appears feeble and mumbling in his public appearances. But it remains the case that (1) he’s in the race because he cares about governing well and the future of the American republic, (2) he has several legislative achievements behind him and will be able to achieve more with another four years, and (3) his public appearances notwithstanding, he has a team behind him that seems to be doing good work.
Meanwhile, Trump is vigorously pursuing re-election in order to shield himself from criminal prosecution and to reward his corrupt cabal of close supporters. His first term was a constant barrage of chaos and bad policy, and he has promised only to give us twice as much chaos and bad policy in a second term. The fact that he might be more vigorous in being a bad president, than Biden would be as a good president, is hardly a factor in how I will vote.
Everything else is flimsy and empty punditry.
…his public appearances notwithstanding, he has a team behind him that seems to be doing good work.
This makes a big difference to me, as well. If Biden were to make a poor decision because he didn’t remember something important or misunderstood the problem, I have a reasonable confidence that his subordinates would recognize this and convince him to decide differently. Trump makes poor decisions because of his ignorance regularly, but he doesn’t like to be contradicted by subordinates. He tries to humiliate any that contradict him in public, and there is a long list of former Trump insiders that say that he does the same in private. The only people that last long in close proximity to him are those that won’t contradict him, even when he is clearly wrong.
Typical woke democrat believing their own propaganda
You could cut the irony of this statement with a knife.
Unlike Trump, Biden isn’t surrounded by worshipful yes-people. The prime example of that is Harris — he picked someone as V.P. who had recently attacked him onstage at a debate, and he did it without her first having to publicly debase herself, apologize, and kiss his ring.
The people around him are probably floating the idea of resignation and doing it to his face, and though he might not take their advice (I hope he does), we know he’ll listen.
No YES people? How do you think he's survived this long? He's been surrounded by suckups and sycophants since day 1. If there were any independent thinkers, they'd have sidelined him long before now and they wouldn't have let him debate anybody.
The only possible NO people are ones who scheduled this debate just to prove to the YES people how decrepit he is, hoping to provoke a substitution before the election.
This is just speculation. With Trump, we know it’s true, not the least because he brags about it.
Are you seriously denying how decrepit he's been the last several years -- falling down and up stairs, lost on a stage, reading teleprompter commands as if they were part of his speech, confusing Egypt and Mexico, talking to dead politicians ...
Hey capt: Hahahahahaha. Where is Trump today and where is Biden?
Biden will now take another week to recover.
For once we agree: Keep POTUS Biden as the nominee, please. 🙂
We also agree that Trump should remain the Republican nominee, as the only possible Republican candidate that Biden, weak and feeble though he is, could beat.
I'd hate to see Biden running against a Republican we, as a country, could be proud of.
"But it remains the case that (1) he’s in the race because he cares about governing well and the future of the American republic, (2) he has several legislative achievements behind him and will be able to achieve more with another four years, and (3) his public appearances notwithstanding, he has a team behind him that seems to be doing good work."
Assumes facts not in evidence.
Eat a dick.
Ironic homophobic comment alert!
You, Bobbie, may eat a feces-encrusted dick.
Typical response of a person whose candidate shit the bed.
It's not a team sport. Biden isn't "my" candidate. I voted against him in the 2020 primary and I did what could to register my discontent in the 2024 primary. He's just the guy I'm going to vote for in November, assuming he survives to the election. If he drops out or drops dead, I'll likely vote for the (D) that replaces him, too. Not because I'm gung-ho Democrat all the way, but because these Republican fucks can't put up a decent candidate.
Like - I live in New York. You think I like Hochul or Adams? Fuck no. I didn't want to vote for either of them. But the alternatives were, respectively, a MAGA-fied Trump fan and a crazy cat vigilante. If the Republicans could put up someone with a coherent philosophy on policy and a commitment to good governance, they could easily win my vote. I'm all for lower taxes and a leaner, more efficient federal government. But Trump will probably fuck over my taxes - the way he did in 2017 - and make the federal government a more efficient corruption engine - like he did with the PPP loans. Never mind waking every morning wondering whether he'd triggered a war.
All you chucklefucks gloating over Trump's performance are part of the problem. You're a bunch of MTG/Gaetz pedos who just love to imagine liberals crying tears over losing the right to force their kids to cut off their penises, but have no idea what these people actually have in store for you. Trump is not going to make your groceries more affordable and he's not going to lower your rent - or if he does, it'll only be by totally cratering the economy and eliminating a lot of your jobs. Maybe if he works hard enough, you'll be able to take those strawberry-picking jobs that will be available after he's deported millions of immigrants and loosened labor laws so that the minimum wage doesn't apply to "independent contractors" working the field.
So angry because Trump is going to be POTUS again. And the Trump Administration will be able to exercise all the same authority that the Biden Maladministration exercised. I am going to laugh my ass off watching you leftists squeal like stuck pigs when Trump does the exact same things as Biden did.
Yeah? And how is Biden mistreating you?
You are behaving like the spoiled brat that lost a game and tossing shit all overthe place. I am laughing at how pathetic you are acting. Laughing at you.
You get the government you deserve. Live with it.
You asshats just don't think it's going to affect you, too, huh?
Hope you've saved enough for your parents' assisted living facilities.
So Hochul can kill them like Cuomo? I'll helped keep mine in their home while the were still with us.
And yes it is affecting us which is why we dislike ass hats like you who keep voting for these losers.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
Assumes facts not in evidence.
A short retort can be satisfying...for the one minute it took to think of it and post it.
"A short retort can be satisfying…"
Like "Eat a dick."?
Schoolyard taunts get schoolyard retorts, fuckface.
Hey! I’m the one who calls people’s “Fuckface” on this blog, Fuckface
Frank
It's also true...
Meanwhile, Trump is vigorously pursuing re-election in order to shield himself from criminal prosecution and to reward his corrupt cabal of close supporters.
I remember a time when a President pardoning associates and political allies was controversial.
George H.W. Bush - former Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger - indicted for lying to Congress about Iran-Contra.
Bill Clinton - Mark Rich, who fled the U.S. rather than face federal tax evasion and wire fraud charges (prosecuted by then-U.S. Attorney Rudy Giuliani). Rich's ex-wife had donated $1 million to the Democratic Party and substantial amounts to Hillary Clinton's Senate campaign and the Clinton Library. Clinton said he regretted the damage to his reputation for it, but his defenders also pointed to pleas from Israeli officials. Rich was Jewish and had donated large sums to Israeli causes over his lifetime. Interestingly, Scooter Libby was a lawyer representing Rich for the pardon for a time.
Bill Clinton - Roger Clinton - Bill's half-brother, pardoned for drug charges.
George W. Bush - Scooter Libby - VP Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Convicted of perjury and obstructing justice after exposing Valerie Plame's role at the CIA.
George W. Bush - Isaac Toussie - convicted of mail fraud and other related charges. But the pardon was reversed the next day (first record of that happening) when it was revealed that Toussie's father had donated $30,800 to the Republican Party.
I didn't find any associates or Democratic Party figures pardoned by Obama, but I'd be happy to update this if he did.
Then, we get to Trump:
Roger Stone - Obstruction, false statements, witness tampering - long-time friend and adviser to Donald Trump. Charges related to the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Paul Manafort - Tax and bank fraud charges, witness tampering - former campaign manager of Donald Trump and prominent figure in the Mueller investigation.
Charles Kushner - Fraud and false statements, retaliating against a witness and victim - Father of Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner
Steve Bannon - Conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering, related to "We Build the Wall" project - Bannon is a once and present Trump advisor, 2016 campaign executive
Michael Flynn - False statements to federal investigators - Trump's short-lived National Security Advisor
Joe Biden has stated that he won't pardon his son, Hunter, for the gun violation he was recently convicted of committing.
You have neatly presented item 1 in the list of evidence that the DoJ is a Democratic Party law firm.
Right, most were prosecuted as substitutes for Trump. A general should not leave wounded on the field.
Trump did that for the January 6 people to his shame. Looks like he can remedy that though [fingers crossed].
With MSNBC openly speculating on how to remove POTUS Biden from the ticket, I'd say POTUS Biden lost the election last night. He cannot recover from that debate debacle. Many of us have elderly relatives; we know what we see. It doesn't get better, either. By Monday, the murmurs of 25A will be heard at MSNBC.
The problem is, do you want a POTUS Harris? You might get her. She is weak and vain, BfO. She will get many people killed because of those personal qualities.
I say keep POTUS Biden on the ticket. I'll pray for POTUS Biden's health.
Agreed. Trump's loyalty principle goes one way only.
If Trump had pardoned the J6 protestors, he would have been convicted in the Senate.
Prosecuting criminals makes DOJ a Democratic Party law firm?
Which of these guys do you claim is innocent?
Scooter Libby was prosecuted for outing plame even though plame was outted by a legacy media reporter
Flynn was innocent of the crime he was charged with . Considerable prosecution misconduct in that case
President Trump is being targeted for politically motivate prosecutions precisely because he is running, quite successfully, against the lying creep Biden. As for the rest of your “analysis,” what the !#$!? He has a good team behind him? It doesn’t fling matter to you that he is incompetent? Just fine to let some secret, unnamed group behind the scenes actually make presidential decisions. Yeah, democrats sure love and respect democracy.
I don't believe Biden is "incompetent," but his evident limitations certainly bother me. But not nearly as much as Trump's being an incompetent criminal sociopath who hates America and is one of the stupidest people on the planet bothers me. The question is: why doesn't the latter bother you?
Because I oppose the gross weaponization of law enforcement powers used to target political opponents. Celebrate this perversion of law and slide into a police state if you like. History shows that you're making a mistake. But jacobins will never learn.
Does it hurt your brain much to be delusional? It's pathetic that you didn't learn anything from Trump.1 because if people like you get your way, Trump.2 will be a continuation of the journey from populism to fascism that your hero initiated in 2016. What you seem to be saying is that you prefer an authoritarian strongman intent on on turning us into another Russia or China. Good luck with that.
The victim of the police state prosecution actually poses a threat, not the regime doing the prosecutions? They heard that a lot in the USSR back in the day too.
The only thing Trump is a victim of is his own immorality, unethical behavior, inability to tell the truth, and disregard for the law. If he ever prays, I'm sure he's thanking God that he has his delusional supporters to defend him.
Inability to tell the truth? Like the guy who hired the 51 intel backwashes to lie to the nation about his bagman crackhead son's laptop and who pathologically cannot stop from repeating the Charlottsville lie?
Nobody hired them, and they didn't lie. And there is no "Charlottesville lie." Trump called neo-Nazis very fine people. That's indisputable, because those were the only people there on that side.
Just some advice, since you’re bound and determined to be dishonest, when the old lies have been exposed better to move on to new lies rather than trying to defend the indefensible. President Trump’s Charlottesville comments quite plainly condemned, not praised neo-nazis. Even Snopes finally concedes that. As for the intel whores, give it up. Blinken, then with the Biden campaign, recruited Morell, a former CIA chief, who hooked in the other intel backwashes (now we know some were actual CIA contractors) to lie about the laptop. Morell even bragged in emails obtained by Congress “We think Trump will attack Biden on the issue at this week’s debate and we want to give the VP a talking point to use in response.”
The bot is malfunctioning again. It's just repeating the same things over and over again that it got wrong before.
DMN, we all know what Trump said. So does Snopes. Lying like you do only makes you look like Gaslight0.
Ok, ignore my advice but I would have thought that the left was more than capable of making up some new lies. I guess you think these stinkers still have some life. I mean, sure, some blithering idiots in NY or DC, or other leftist enclave probably still believe it but don't really think any reasonably discerning voter elsewhere will buy it anymore. But your call.
Apparently you don't know what Trump said, since you think he didn't say that neo-nazis were very fine people.
I will repeat the challenge that no Trumpkin has yet been able to answer honestly: who do you think Trump was referring to when he used that phrase to describe people in Charlottesville that weekend who were attending a neo-Nazi rally?
David, you're giving gaslighting clowns a bad name. Multiple groups were present to protest that day. Some were just honestly opposed to the communistic frenzy to destroy historical statues. But the funny thing is you know all this and don't care. Democrats truly are repulsive.
Thanks for the chuckle: your inability to accept Trump's inability to tell the truth is mildly amusing. Now, care to address the immorality, unethical behavior, and disregard for the law? I know, it must be hard to come up with plausible defenses for a 34-time felon, adulterer, assaulter of women, fraud, and defamer. But we could use another chuckle, so give it a try.
Unethical behavior? Like the big guy’s influence peddling? or questionable shower habits involving his children?
But as for the lawfare, like I said above, if you want to celebrate the gross politization of law enforement powers targeting political opponents of the administration in power, feel free. It’s repulsive but I take it you’re a democrat so it suits you.
I mean, all of that is in your head, but it's also not responsive to my question. I asked you why Trump's deficiencies/malignancies don't seem to bother you. Not why you were mad at Biden.
No, you labeled President Trump, the victim of the abusive lawfare, as a “criminal sociopath.” A repulsive celebration of the gross weaponization of law enforcement targeting Biden's political opponent.
I've been calling him a criminal sociopath since 2015, so I don't think it has anything to do with Joe Biden.
That you've been deranged since at least 2015 reallly has nothing to do with anything.
But aside from your personal disorders, you just insulted President Trump in a comment 5 hours ago, not 2015.
Maybe you don't understand the unidirectional arrow of time. 2015 is before Trump was running against Biden, before he was justifiably prosecuted for his crimes. Therefore, if I was saying it in 2015, then it obviously wasn't "celebration of the gross weaponization of law enforcement targeting Biden’s political opponent." It was just a truthful and accurate assessment of Donald Trump.
The question is why you celebrate a criminal sociopath and condemn the righteous prosecution of him for his criminality.
Maybe you don't understand that you labeled President Trump, the victim of the sickening republic ending lawfare, as a "criminal sociopath" literally in this comment chain. Whatever your delusions in 2015, you made that comment here to celebrate Biden and the democrat's gross abuse of law. Repulsive and beneath contempt.
This complaint would be a lot more plausible if you weren't likely to just say, in some other thread, that the only way to put an end to it is for Trump to do the same, but worse.
The team behind biden is pretty much all that there is to vote for, especially in comparison to the characters that are reported to likely be on trump's team. Yet most voters don't know anything about either team, so it doesn't really matter.
Your analysis is rational. I'll be voting the same way for much the same reasons. But biden is toast. Whether he drops out or not, it is already over for him. Last night was one of those watershed moments that sealed his fate. His dishes are done. Trump is a lock now. I realize that my vote will at best be a symbolic protest vote. I'll be tuning out after the election. This trump spectacle has already stolen a decade of my life, it won't have any part of a second. The people seem to want this trump guy back, and it looks like they are going to get what they want, and they deserve whatever comes of it. God save the queen.
The team behind Biden is all there is to vote for? What ballot are they on? Who's destroying democracy again?
Sure, you and every other committed Democrat will vote for Biden.
Anybody in the middle making their decision based on who can best do the job will not.
The everybody hold hands, close your eyes, and jump at the same time strategy will get him 200 EV.
You will lose every swing state and a couple of light blue ones. And 2 or 3 Senate seats to boot.
"Anybody in the middle making their decision based on who can best do the job will not."
You don't get to speak for me. Stay in your fucking lane.
Sounds like your one of those that gets upset and tailgates when someone is going the speed limit in the left lane. And then flips him off when you pass.
That irritates me too, at least we agree on something. But life’s too short to blow a fuse over everything Jason.
But let me point out you aren't in the middle making your decision, you made your decision long ago, so I'm not trying to speak for you.
Anybody in the middle making their decision based on who can best do the job will not [vote for Biden].
But they sure as shit won’t switch their vote to Trump.
Trump did worse than expected as well. He certainly didn’t pick up any new voters. His only saving grace was that his performance was drowned out by all the teeth-sucking going on over the Biden catastrophe.
The winners were Kennedy, Harris, and Newsom.
The 538-Ipsos poll showed Trumps favorability rating went up .5, and Biden's down by the same, so you are right, almost no change.
But that's a huge problem for Biden, no change means he's still losing. And no prospect of improving.
"he’s in the race because he cares about governing well and the future of the American republic,"
ROFLMAO
My view is the same as it has been in recent open threads:
- Any ethical voter should vote for Biden over Trump even if Biden was dead. Never knowingly vote for a politician who wants to attack the rule of law or democracy.
- The Democrats should have started the process of finding a new nominee for 2024 on 1 January 2021. Parties are often tempted to pick a crown prince as quickly as possible, to avoid in-fighting. I think it's better for the country to let a couple of candidates fight it out a bit. Give them some campaign funding in 2021 and challenge them to build a national profile. Then run a primary in 2024 without Biden and choose a new nominee.
Woulda, shoulda, coulda but they didn't and now are stuck.
Still an easy choice in November. (See my point 1.)
I guess, in your analysis, an ethical voter shouldn’t care that Biden is an inveterate liar (Charlottesville, the intel letter, the “bloodbath”)?
But even more fundamental, you have the audacity to speak of what the ethical voter would do but at the same time advocate a grossly cynical undemocratic process to replace your flawed candidate with the preferred choice of party elites. Democrats are truly repulsive, if you don’t mind me saying so.
It's a European thing.
So you don't like a candidate that lies a lot?
What's not to like about a candidate that suffered imprisonment in S. Africa vising Nelson Mandela, who marched in the civil rights movment, and was the no. 1 graduate of his law school class, but still tough enough to go toe to toe with Corn-pop and drive a truck for a living? Stick with the Big Guy. He's a winner.
Yes, I don’t like how Sleepy Joe continues to claim Bo died in Iraq, he died in fucking Bethesda Maryland
Frank
Are they stuck? A few years back, this blog pointed out the parties own the slots on the ballot, not the candidate, so in the case of a completely horrible October surprise, they could replace him at the last second.
Or did I miss something?
Not the last second. There are state deadlines that must be met for a candidate to appear on the ballot. See controversy over Ohio deadline which came before the Dem convention (it was changed to accommodate the Dems).
I think Torricelli demonstrated that isn't a real barrier. If a major party candidate croaks after the deadline, or just drops out, the courts won't let the ballot line be empty.
That was the NJ Supreme Court with Bob 'The Torch' Torricelli. I remember that.
Because "(D)emocracy" you know.
You want the D's to prove that they will manipulate the rules for political advantage? That plays right into the R narrative
I don't think that would move the needle at all. Everybody already knows that the Democrats will manipulate the rules for political advantage, half the population approve of them doing it.
It's baked in already, proving what people already take as proven doesn't change minds.
The amazing blindness of Republicans on these matters never ceases to amaze me. "Only the Democrats manipulate the rules. Only Democrats approve of manipulating the rules." In any context other than politics and religion, this kind of blindness would be grounds for a competency hearing.
I'm curious; Where in my comment did you find that "only"?
Projection.
So you don't like a party that manipulates rules and voting?
No, I don’t like the DemoKKKrats who manipulate rules and voting
Frank
It all comes down to Biden's refusal to step aside, and to take Harris with him.
Absent that, absolutely every step along the way makes sense, from a Democrat's perspective. No one would support a concerted, insurgent campaign against an incumbent. There's no history that it would work. They wouldn't get campaign funds and they wouldn't get staff. Possible candidates like Newsom and Whitmer and Shapiro aren't going to risk their careers by taking a run at Biden.
The same has held true throughout the primary season and the ongoing media coverage. Every step along the way has been a comparison of risks. Running Biden was risky, to be sure. But even having Biden step aside and make way for another candidate carries greater risk. Who's going to have the national appeal? Who's going to be able to consolidate the winning coalition from 2020?
And now here we are. I expect that the political calculus will shift from "Could another Democratic candidate possibly step in and win at this point?" to "Are Democrats better served by making a real go at this, or by spending another four years on the outside, running against Trump's chaotic mismanagement of the country, for potential wins up and down the ballot?"
Like Macron, I expect that the party elders will decide it's better to face the deluge of shit than to try to hold a crumbling center. Fuck the rest of us, who will have to live with the consequences.
Look at Reagan in 1976 or Kennedy in 1980.
I doubt anyone will make a run at Biden, he has to be talked to by a party of elders.
If its an insurgency or coup then and then they likely lose anyway.
The biggest barrier for Newsome, Whitmire, Hillary, Raimondo, is a clear story about how they gain 4 points in AZ, NV, GA, and get the race in reach with the same policies. I don't see it. Its not just Biden, its the policies.
The only candidate I saw floated yesterday, by Bill Ackman, that would change the race is Jaime Dimon, I might vote for him myself if I heard more about his non economic policies. But the left would revolt, they'd rather lose than win with the wrong candidate and lose their grip on the party.
How can you possibly know how much of the deficits in the battleground states (which include PA, MI and WI by smaller margins) are due to policy and how much to Biden's mental capacity?
PA, MI, and WI are all in play, but without one of AZ, NV, GA, then he probably still loses, because that gives Trump 268, all he needs then is NE cd2, or just one of PA, MI, WI, VA, ME, MN, all of which are within 3.
And 538 shows a new poll out today where Trump is leading by 1 in NJ.
Is that a needle that can be threaded? Maybe, but its definitely a longshot.
That's why to be viable a Biden replacement needs to make a case for how they can move the needle 4-5 points in AZ, GA, and NV.
If the replacement moves the national needle by 2-3 points, it is likely they carry the states needed to win without AZ, GA and NV. But even if it requires moving the national needle by 4-5 points, what data supports your conclusion that can't be done based solely on having a young and fit candidate?
Democrats were claiming Biden was a fit candidate until the debate.
But the main reason is that the two biggest issues for the voters is the economy and immigration. Is the new young and fit candidate going to credibly change the Democrats policy on the economy and immigration?
No they are going to roll with “Everything Joe Did But Better” strategy, and get the same votes Joe would have.
Even assuming the biggest reason Biden is behind is because of the issues, you still have not provided any data to counter the claim that another reason is Biden's age, and that reason could account for 2-3%-points of the deficit.
"Any ethical voter"
Defining "ethical" as "agreeing with me", that is all your comment is.
Exactly this.
What is the objective argument that an "ethical voter" could vote for either candidate, or would vote for Trump?
Trump is running for himself. Everyone understands this. His supporters don't mind, because they (wrongly) view their interests as aligned with his. That is an "ethos," I suppose, but it wouldn't be described as ethical in conventional terms.
No. In most previous presidential elections an ethical voter could have voted for either of the major party candidates, including the one that I did not support. But not if one of the major parties nominates a candidate who wants to attack the rule of law and US democracy.
I don't expect people to just agree with me without argument. But we have been discussing the ethics surrounding Trump's candidacy in 2024 for years here. There is no information or argument that Martinned or any of us that oppose Trump could say now that you haven't already heard us say. The basis for Martinned's opinion is well known territory.
" Give them some campaign funding in 2021 and challenge them to build a national profile. Then run a primary in 2024 without Biden and choose a new nominee."
The D's failed to do that. We all live with the consequences
The issue with the "crown prince" theory is that it would give the right wing media sphere 4+ years to tar their reputation and load them up with so much bad vibe baggage that they enter the race severely hobbled. (See: Clinton.)
I think Newsom is on the short list--he's certainly doing everything he can to be--but I also think the stealth "prince" is Buttigieg. The right wing hasn't been spending much time on him because they likely discount his candidacy as impossible due to his sexuality. That gives him an edge over Newsom who, like Harris, has to bear the weight of decades of anti-California memes pushed by right-wing fearmongers. And Buttigieg is a veteran.
"The right wing hasn’t been spending much time on him because they likely discount his candidacy as impossible due to his sexuality."
I think his manifest incompetence has more to do with it. For a lot of Democrats, his sexuality just distracts their attention from that, in the same way Brinton managed to hang on to his position for much longer than a guy who wasn't some weird sex deviant could have.
The modern Democratic party, at least at the upper levels, loves kink so much that it blinds them to incompetence and criminality.
The right wing hasn't been spending time on him because he disappeared into a cloud of mediocrity at Transportation.
What's he going to run on? 7 EV charging stations built?
"...They likely discount his candidacy as impossible due to his sexuality."
That's the least of his shortcomings and I doubt his military service will count for much with anyone.
TDS much?
Same goes for Josh B.
"Never knowingly vote for a politician who wants to attack the rule of law or democracy."
Which is what Biden has been doing since before Jan 21, 2021.
I actually relate to much of this. I hate politics, and especially political debates. I usually look at debate transcripts just to amuse myself with how incoherent and ridiculous what they say looks in the cold light of day. I watched this one, and felt sad.
I think Biden has been the best president since Carter. But I think he is declining, and also is now unelectable. With the right people beside him he can handle most of the job, but he will not have the public's confidence.
Mind you, I'd rather vote for a dead opossum than Trump.
"I think Biden has been the best president since Carter. "
FFS Show some dignity.
From you, this is validation.
There's not a Biden voter, alive or dead, that is capable of dignity.
"I think Biden has been the best president since Carter." The soldiers who died during Biden's orderly retreat from Afghanistan might disagree.
Biden is an evil POS for so many reasons. I'll pick one--remember Trump offed Soleimani. Biden criticized it. This was a guy who violated the laws of warfare to kill and murder American servicemen in Iraq. A patriot would have supported the decision even though it is not one he would have made.
"The soldiers who died during Biden’s orderly retreat from Afghanistan might disagree."
Biden lied about that at the start of the debate. Nothing he won't lie about.
You're an idiot.
Soleimani wasn't some random terrorist leader. He was a high-ranking official in the Iranian government, and Trump's targeted assassination of him risked escalating into open conflict with Iran, strengthened Iranian hawks in their domestic politics, incentivized Iran to double down on developing nuclear weapons, and probably played a role in the events that have since led to Hamas's attack on Israel.
All of this. Trump is a moron when it comes to foreign policy, just like everything else. The big problem is that foreign policy is the area where Presidents have the least restraint from other branches of government. In all matters of domestic policy, Congress is equal. The federal courts can also check executive actions performed through federal agencies. Especially when it comes to military action, there is very little the other branches can do to prevent a huge mistake.
Was this the same guy CNN ran sob stories of people crying over his death?
JasonT20 6 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
All of this. Trump is a moron when it comes to foreign policy.
Not nearly as much of a moron as Biden - "lets restart Iran's nuclear program (wink wink) by freeing up a bunch of money along with funding Irans terrorist operations.
If zero new foreign wars, Russia not further invading Ukraine, PRC military staying away from Taiwan, the Abraham accords, etc. are the foreign policy results of a “moron”, we could stand to replace a lot of the State Department with "morons".
Michael P -
Its the standard defense of the woke - believe the woke's propaganda that appeasement creates long term peace.
Belief that the JCPOA will slow Irans nuclear program
Belief that freeing up cash (along with the pallets of money) would be used to facilitate more terrorism.
The "morons " of the Trump administration somehow kept Iran, north korea, Russia, hamas at bay
" In all matters of domestic policy, Congress is equal."
Tell that to Biden, who wants to 'forgive' student load debt with no enabling legislation.
I don't pretend to be an expert on geopolitics or natsec, but if there's one thing I do know it's that there isn't a regular commenter who is. I do think suggesting Trump is more patriotic than Biden is pretty silly.
Suggesting that Trump cares about anything other than Trump — and by that last "Trump," I mean Donald Trump, not Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Ivanka Trump, Melania Trump, Tiffany Trump, Barron Trump, etc. — is beyond frivolous. The man would feed his own children into a woodchipper if it got him one bit of praise on Newsmax.
"I do think suggesting Trump is more patriotic than Biden is pretty silly."
10% for the Big Guy. Super patriotic!
That's a rather low bar for "evil," and Biden did not, in fact, do what you claim. Here's what his statement was:
That's far less harsh than Trump's criticisms of Biden's support for Ukraine.
POTUS Biden is 'sharp as a tack' and a great golfer, too! Who knew? ROTFLMAO. By all means, tell me how POTUS Biden won the debate. And a 6 handicap? NFW.
This is what is happening at DNC HQ today. It fits, perfectly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UerhqPf3JBA
It was cheap fakes!
You mean clean fakes, right?
"White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre pushed back on a series of recent videos of President Joe Biden as she called them "cheap fakes," sparking Republican outrage across social media on Monday." Newsweek
But Crooked Joe and his handlers are insisting he’s sharper than ever, and they say the videos of Crooked Joe shuffling around are clean fakes. You know what a clean fake is? They’re deceptively edited.
-- Donald J. Trump, Ace of Two! Dementia Tests
They're both senile old grandpas, although only one is a bitter old man to boot.
...and one grandpa refuses to acknowledge one of his grandchildren. Whata guy.
He's still waiting on the child to give him his 10%.
Trump doesnt show signs of dementia or alzheimer’s
Biden has been showing signs of moderate levels of cognitive decline for the last couple of years. The debate showed he now in the advanced stages of dementia or alzheimers.
He doesn’t know the difference between Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi. He thinks he ran for office against Obama. He thinks that there were non-nazis at a nazi rally. He rambles about magnets getting wet and batteries and sharks.
Those are not signs of dementia nor signs of Alzheimers. Though you already knew that -
So what is your point of a non - relevant response
Repeatedly not knowing who people are isn't a sign of dementia, at least as a colloquial term if not a diagnosis? Ok, you go with that.
"Cheap Fakes" is from the same PAID (Politicians Are Ignorant Dictionary) as "The Internet is a series of tubes".
NFW?
I think he said he once had a 6 handicap, not that he has one now.
But speaking of golf, Trump loudly proclaims, including last night, that he recently won championships - regular, not senior - at two of his clubs.
You think that happened? What Trump demonstrated last night was that he can lie forcefully, in between forcefully advocating for terrible policies.
Doesn't concern you, though.
That was hillarious, two old geezers swinging their dicks over golfing prowess. I'll golf with you, if we walk and caddy our own clubs!
I have no idea how well Biden would have done, but throwing down the gauntlet like that was, what's a good word, exceptionally amusing. Use it in a movie, someone!
Yeah, and Biden used to drive an 18 wheeler, and was full professor and Penn, got arrested trying to see Nelson Mandela, and was first in his class at law school.
According to you he was even lying about getting Shockin fired, but I believe that one.
But those are our choices, they are both serial liars.
fwiw - virtually all presidents in the 20th and 21st centuries have been serial liars
...because too amny Americans can't handle the truth.
Uncle Bosie sends his regards, bernard11. 🙂
I didn't watch the debate because I have more than three brain cells, but I think the best evidence from past elections would suggest that poor debate performance typically has a 3-5 point impact on a race in the short term that converges to zero within a month or so -- which is actually true of most campaign effects.
It makes more sense to think of American elections as basically very big picture referenda on the economy and major issues. The vast majority of voters prefer one party over the other, and the results of the election come down to a small number of persuadable moderates and turnout decisions by weakly attached partisans. So when you claim any particular part of a campaign -- a speech, a debate, an ad, some particular news issue -- is decisive, I think that requires some baseline skepticism.
All of this is completely apart from whether or not Biden is a bad nominee (probably!), whether or not Trump has a good shot of winning (yes, sure!), etc.
Assuming a 3-5%-point drop, can the Democrats wait one month to see if the polls bounce back?
Josh R, POTUS Biden lost the election last evening. There is no 'bounce back' from that debate performance.
We are in 25A territory now.
I don’t know, Sleepy did pretty well for a Corpse
Frank
the reality is been 25A territory since Jan 2021
Debate performances that reinforce preexisting concerns are much more serious than ones out of nowhere. It's not necessarily that it will cost Biden significant support, but it will lock in the already existing doubts about him.
Perhaps. Or perhaps Commenter_XY is right (setting aside the 25A comment). I will wait for new poll numbers before passing judgment (and yes, Commenter_XY, these upcoming pollnumbrs will be very important).
I would not set aside the 25A comment. You'll hear a lot about 25A from now on (in the media).
No serious person who didn't already oppose Biden will be talking 25A. And that includes the hoard of NeverTrumps, me among them, who are hand-wringing today because we believe Biden lost the election last night, and would like to see him step down from running. Capability to campaign bears only the loosest and most tangential relationship to capability to govern.
PDSH, the difference here is the effect of the debate performance on
(a) the segments of the media that were supporting Biden. Their narrative turned in a period of a couple hours. They are openly saying it was a disaster rather than trying to spin it. The taboo has been broken and their coverage is going to look different going forward.
(b) the Democrat strategists, fundraisers, and talking heads. Many of them were panicking last night. Prior to last night, if Kamala Harris had tried to pull a 25, her own party would have labeled her a traitor, and would not confirm the 25’ing when it got to a Congressional vote. Now a good segment would openly support her and that in turn would give cover for other Democrats to jump ship.
It makes more sense to think of American elections as basically very big picture referenda on the economy and major issues.
This does play into our elections significantly. But it is important to note that it is the present economy that is the main factor, and "major issues" can vary a lot from one election cycle to the next and are also dominated by present concerns. The sad part of this is how little most voters seem to look farther into the future than the next year or two when deciding who to vote for.
At this point, the Democrats' only hope is that people didn't watch the debate and aren't looking at any of the hundreds of clips and memes.
Unlikely.
I think Elon Musk's tongue-in-cheek quip has it about right: the big winner of that debate are the memes.
Any ethical voter should vote for Biden over Trump even if Biden was dead.
For practical purposes, he is dead. He's a cardboard cutout, behind which the real Presidency (the Interagency of Democratic operatives) does the governing.
The question is - why did they put him up for a debate ? It's not conceivable that they thought Trump would turn down a debate, even on CNN, on the Ds terms, with two Trump hatin' moderators.
Nor is it conceivable that they thought it was anything other than a mega gamble. When you're suffering from dementia, you have good days and bad days. There's no drug that you can pump in that guarantees a good day. So we're left with the conclusion that they were willing to risk what happened happening, because it allows them the opportunity to swap him out. So that's what's going to happen next. Presumaby Gavin or Michelle, since they're not dumb enough to try to sell us Hillary again.
My advice to the Rs is to shout "25th Amendment !" loudly from the rooftops. It's not just about who should be President on 20 January next, it's also about who's President now. If he's too demented to govern in 7 months time then he's too demented now.
Raising 25A would require the Ds to swallow hard and accept President Kamala, or try to explain why Biden is unfit for January 2025, but just peachy for now. And President Kamala won't be sitting still for Candidate Gavin or Candidate Michelle.
Assuming this was a bady day, Biden is still qualified to be president. He knows the issues. He just can’t express himself quickly in a sharp and coherent manner.
I can’t say that he will remain qualified four years from now.
Let's go, Brandon.
So a day by day President with access to the nuclear launch codes. What could go wrong.
Approximately 15 minutes. That's approximately how long the President has to decide whether to retaliate is response to a nuclear attack. Our defense is based entirely on the notion of MAD and that we will respond and do so quickly. I'm highly skeptical the principle of MAD can actually work with a day-to-day President.
Our defense is based entirely on the notion of MAD and that we will respond and do so quickly.
Well, mostly US defence is based on the assumption that only a psychopath would fire a nuclear weapon, and that even Putin isn't that much of a psychopath.
We just passed the one year anniversary of the Wagner mutiny. Imagine if Prigozhin had won.
Putin, like all dictators, is a kleptocrat. Starting a nuclear war with the US puts an end to the gravy train. That is not part of the kleptocrat's business model.
As Martinned said, MAD is premised on leaders of both sides being at least somewhat rational and not wanting to destroy themselves. That was the always the calculus during the height of the Cold War. If either side got such an advantage that it could strike first in a way that prevented a large-scale response, then that would be the trigger for WWIII.
I have to believe that there are still ways for the U.S. to respond if the President was incapacitated and the VP couldn't be reached quickly enough. Or, that they've ensured that the VP could always be reached quickly enough. Really, I think that insisting on the formal procedures of the 25th Amendment in that kind of time sensitive scenario would be almost asking for an enemy to try and create exactly such a scenario.
In a nuclear war you do come out better, relatively speaking, with an effective launch on warning policy. Launch on warning is no longer necessary for MAD. Our defense has long been based on the triad including submarines that will survive a first strike.
Assuming this was a bady day
Let's hope so. I dread to think that it was a good one. The folk who run Russia, China, Iran, North Korea etc have TVs too. It's not like it's only American registered voters watching.
As for "knowing the issues" well maybe once upon a time he "knew" something about some of them. But "knowing the issues" is not at all the same thing as making decisions in real time, and reacting to new issues.
The guy is toast and we're being governed by the marmalade. And our enemies know it.
You are confusing the inability to react in seconds with sharp, coherent statements with the ability to make informed decisions in minutes.
Something Biden has never been able to do.
As demonstrated by his horribly botched Afghanistan withdrawal debacle.
Robert Gates who was Bush2, and Obama's SecDef said Biden was on the wrong side of every major foreign policy decision over the last 20 years, and he said that 10 years ago, so make it 30.
Now look at what he said about Trump.
That conclusion has nothing to do with Biden's mental capacity. Plus, I suppose Gates is pleased with how Biden has handled Ukraine.
Josh R, I do not know what you think you saw Thursday night. Millions of likely American voters saw a man with greatly diminished cognitive capacity. And that man is who you want as CINC, in case of a war. AYFKM?
Pay attention to the Philippines, and the grey zone activities of China. They are escalating, and so is their rhetoric.
UKR is a disaster. The Middle East is a mess. POTUS Biden has not impressed me with his foreign policy or military deployment.
Millions ? It was on CNN. Hundreds more like.
Plus thousands of bemused foreigners stuck in airport terminals.
I saw a man in decline, but one who can still do the job (the presidency does not require the ability to articulate your views in real time). However, he might not be up to the job four years from now.
Which is why our enemies are eagerly hoping that Trump wins the election, right?
Realistically you knew there were problems when the Biden campaign was "calling caps" early in the day. I never heard of a candidate doing such a thing before Biden! That by itself would have set off alarms if the media hadn't already been in the tank.
Are you still making this shit up? (The term is "lid," not "cap," by the way.) It's routine.
Yeah, they routinely call a "lid" at ten AM?
Look, I'm perfectly willing to believe that this was a technical term journalists were routinely familiar with. But how often did the public hear it, before Biden?
Politico seemed to think not very often.
Um, did you bother to check the date on that article? Hint: it was in the middle of a pandemic. No, Biden didn’t think making lots of public appearances was particularly important at that time. He doesn’t confuse his job with that of being a game show host like Trump did.
Whether the public heard the term has nothing to do with anything.
You say that as though it actually meant something. Like the pandemic kept him from even doing zoom interviews.
He was using Covid as an excuse to hide, because the longer he remained a generic Democrat in the voters' minds, and not Joe Biden, gaffe machine with anger issues, the more early votes he could accumulate.
His problem now is that it's too late for him to garner votes as a generic Democrat. And at this point hiding will just reenforce the dementia narrative.
He could go out and take a damned cognitive test, to prove the narrative wrong. But that kind of requires that the narrative be wrong, doesn't it?
Would you buy a used Corvette from him?
If I could afford it, sure. Though I really prefer the late 60's models.
No. I wouldn't want the FBI showing up at my door at 5am demanding all the classifief documents he left in the trunk.
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN27C254/
Reuters would like to clarify that Biden called a lid before 9:30 AM the day before, and waited until 11:30 AM to call a lid on the day in question. So it's not precisely true to claim he stopped working at 9 AM on October 25.
Josh R 1 day ago
Flag Comment
Mute User" Biden is still qualified to be president. He knows the issues. He just can’t express himself quickly in a sharp and coherent manner."
Josh - Tell us again how he "knows the issues" with the level of cognitive decline he exhibited during the debate. He is showing signs of advanced stages of alzheimer's or dementia.
He is showing signs of dementia that may adavnce. But, he is not in an advanced stage right now. Again, not being able to quickly articulate your thoughts does not mean you don't have coherent thoughts.
Josh - Just like most of the woke commenting here - Believing your own democrat party's propaganda.
He is well past the early stages of dementia or Alzheimers.
He was in the early stages during the summer of 2020.
Biden’s cognitive decline is a “national security threat of the highest order.”
Lee Moore — My guess is that even with your generous help, Ds will not be trying to figure out how to put themselves into an avoidable pickle.
I was offering advice to the Rs.
RTQ
It's time for Kamela to fall on her sword.
And I see they have taken my advice :
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/06/28/congress/johnson-on-the-debate-house-gop-biden-trump-00165777
The schadenfreude from reading all the media and pundit comments today is overwhelming.
Sarcastr0, Arthur and their fellow travelers will be along shortly to tell us not to believe our lying eyes. I just want to know who the fuck is running the country, because it sure isn't POTUS Biden.
Watch the Philippines.
S_0 is going on vacation today and so won't be able to tell us that the State of the Union is the true Biden
Unless he's going to Green Bank WV I doubt that we won't hear from him.
Josh, why do you feel pity? Biden is a horrendous human being.
" Biden is a horrendous human being."
+1000
Liar, braggart, draft dodger, won't even see one of his grandchildren.
Yes, Trump is a liar, braggart, draft dodger too.
Biden is a horrendous human being.
I'll take a cue from DJK above.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
"Let's talk about the debate."
Well, the dinner on the Titanic was really well prepared.
Overprepared, if we are to believe what we hear.
Time to talk about the Biden Presidential Library.
I can't say I'm enthusiastic about Trump, but I would be VERY enthusiastic about getting rid of the presence of "moderators" at Presidential debates. Just put the two of them in a room with their microphones turned on and off by timers. We don't need the damn moderators debating the candidates. Let's just let the candidates speak.
Thought they did a decent job this time, actually. Sure, if your bias detector was cranked to high sensitivity, there was some pro-Biden leaning in the questions. But those moderator suggestions that maybe Biden could use the rest of his time to actually try and answer the question, and the tone of the “Thank You” when he failed to do so, were telling.
What I wanted to see was a demonstration of how bad these candidates are, and they delivered.
I've seen worse performances by the moderators, but if there's a debate between candidates, I want to know what the candidates want to say, not what some idiot moderator wants them to talk about.
I don't want to know just what the candidates want to say. I could watch their stump speeches, watch them get softball questions from friendly interviewers, or read their campaign websites if I want that. In a debate, I want them to be challenged, and not just by each other. They should both be challenged by people that will ask both of them hard questions. If nothing else, there could be topics that both candidates want to avoid that are important to me.
It is really hard to see your view here as meaning that you don't want your preferred candidate to be challenged by someone that can't be so easily dismissed as biased like his opponent is.
On the one hand, we have a guy that attempted a coup and surrounds himself with inexperienced yesmen stooges. On the other we have a career stateman with a good record who is declining as he ages. Since the vast majority of the work handled by the president’s office is not by the president themselves but the cadre of professionals hired around them, I’m confident in saying I’d vote for Biden if all he did was drool on stage simply because the alternative is another 4 years of chaos and erosion of democratic norms. Do I wish we had a better candidate? Yes. But there is nothing Biden was likely to do on the stage that would change my vote. Four years after Biden’s second term, I’m confident we’d have another set of elections and the country would continue as it has for hundreds of years. Four years after Trump’s second term, I’m far less sure I’d even retain the civil rights I’ve gained in the past 30 years or that we’d have anything resembling a fair election given Trump’s admiration of Putin, Orban, and similar.
Well, sure. Fantasy Biden beats fantasy Trump on any day of the week, if you're talking Democratic fantasies, anyway.
Republican Fantasy Trump is the one that will implement the policies they want without screwing up our diplomatic relations, the one that will appoint competent people to run agencies, will "drain the swamp" instead of adding to it, and just about everything else they say that they want.
"a career stateman with a good record"
LMFAO
I thought they did reasonably well, considering all the anticipation of them going rogue against Trump.
It was relatively neutral and sedate. I was satisfied with their behavior and conduct.
For a modern moderated debate it wasn't horrific, but I don't like modern moderated debates, they're really just simultaneous press conferences.
I go the other way. I would like to see empowered moderators. The very best power would be to divide moderation between question-asking moderators, and question-answering moderators. Let the former do as they will. Let the latter kill the microphone of any debate participant who is dodging a question, changing the subject, or engaging in whataboutery.
I wish Cornel West could have been there.
Of course, Biden and Trump wouldn't go to a debate with him in it.
Why would a presidential debate include someone with no chance of ever becoming president?
…and who is utterly unqualified to be president? Say what you will about Trump and/or Biden (and I've said plenty, as have others), but West has never run anything at all unless he had a lemonade stand when he was a kid or something. He has no knowledge of foreign policy, the military, economics, law, or… well, anything a president would need to deal with. One might as well write in Donald Duck as voting for Cornel West.
They don't want West in particular because he would talk circles around them and make some voters think there is a better choice.
He probably doesn't win anyway because he splits the left and doesn't get any of the hard MAGA vote.
"He probably doesn’t win anyway because he splits the left and doesn’t get any of the hard MAGA vote."
But a traditional conservative would totally vote for him! Big time!
The amount of stupidity in some of these comments...
West would talk up a storm, sure, but he's so far out of the mainstream in terms of policy that debate level public exposure would doom him; Sure, people want a smart President, but they want a sane smart President, not a smart lunatic.
Define "smart" and tell us who you think the last smart president was.
I voting for RR.
They're all generally smart, in terms of IQ relative to 100. Dumb people don't reach that level in politics.
Forget the trash talk, none of them are actually dumb.
Lunatic is the wrong word. Extreme? Radical? I don't want President West, I want candidate West to show people there is more for America than a mind made of applesauce and a grown man with the self-control of a child.
Heard of Lincoln and Douglas having debated?
Douglas came in fourth; 1 state out of 33, and 12 electoral votes. Two other third party candidates scored much better.
DEMENTIA DOESN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT
Like many others, I was shocked by just how terribly our President handled himself at the debate last night. A debate which he himself insisted on, set the rules for, chose the venue of, and prepared for, offsite, for an entire week in advance.
He is suffering from dementia. Clearly. Obviously. Sadly.
As painful as that was to watch, I felt only pity for him. But I was also very angry. Dementia like that doesn't happen overnight. He has likely been several YEARS down that path now. Who has been abusing him all this time, and in essence lying to us about his health?
Where is his physician? Where is his wife? His family members?
If I EVER get to that stage of confusion, I hope I'm safely under the care of someone else who is making sure I'm not being asked to make important, potentially fatal decisions.
I am so sad and so angry right now.
I fully expect a DC or NYC jury to indict Pres Trump for elder abuse of POTUS Biden. It was a shameful display of our national decline.
Channeling the Bee?
https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-indicted-for-murdering-elderly-man-on-cnn
DEMENTIA DOESN’T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT
It also needs to be a medical diagnosis based on close observation, experience, and testing in person, not something people without any medical training come up with based on what they see on TV.
If Biden seems like age has affected him, that he's "slowed down" or isn't "sharp" in a way that is unacceptable to you, fine. That is a reasonable lay opinion. But we should save the medical terms for medical professionals.
So Joe Biden will be releasing the results of his cognitive acuity test, right?
Right?
I moved my "severely impaired" aunt into a memory care place this morning, and she's way more fluent and oriented than Joe Biden is.
No, the mental decline is obvious. I stand by my original description.
Would a “medical diagnosis based on close observation, experience, and testing in person” be useful to a physician in order to determine a specific treatment plan? Sounds reasonable, but don’t ask me, I’m not a doctor.
This is not what we’re talking about. We’re talking about obviously confused and impaired statements such as “we defeated Medicare”. It was sad and painful to watch.
He knows he defeated overpriced Medicare prescription drug costs. He just couldn’t say it in real time. It’s a marked decline that could end up with him having demenitia. But, he hasn’t arrived there yet.
Oh, come on now, it's not like there's a bright line, this side of it you don't have dementia, that side you do. It's a matter of degree.
But this ad Trump put together from the debate is pretty brutal. And none of is deep fakes.
Everybody glitches out once in a while, but the number of times it happened during this debate was way, way above the normal baseline.
Of course it is a matter of degree. Some believe it has reached 25A degrees. I don't.
It has reached 25th amendment degree when a majority of the cabinet think it has.
That is correct. It is akin to impeachment, in that sense.
The term I have been using in discussing this debate with other people is 'feeble.' Biden looked feeble last night. But he did not look senile or demented; there was no point where he seemed confused about reality. (Other than Trump's misdescription of reality, I mean.)
Unlike megalomania.
lol that's a huge load of cope
"But we should save the medical terms for medical professionals."
Indeed. So many medical terms that were once used with scientific precision have migrated to the coarse lexicon of the masses. Bring back the cunt, moron, idiot, imbecile, cretin...
Recognizing dementia or alzheimers can be difficult if you havent been exposed to someone suffering from either of the two.
However, its easy to recognize if you have dealt with someone who is suffering from dementia or alzheimers, especially if exposed to someone who has gone through the advanced stages of the deceases. I have dealt with 6 or 7 clients, 3 of which have gone competency / capacity hearings.
Biden's dementia or alzheimers is in the range of stage 4 and starting to enter stage 5 of alzheimers (or the equivalent stages of dementia.
No matter what one calls Biden's decline, we witnessed 90 minutes of direct evidence of the fraud that has been foisted on Americans by the Biden family and the White House staff. No wonder that Biden has been thoroughly cocooned while his staff and handlers peddle the story that he is vigorous and mentally and physically healthy. His enablers should be punished.
"not something people without any medical training come up with based on what they see on TV"
And yet the D influencers, politicians and D-leaning pundits came out with calls for him to step down the very next day.
"Who has been abusing him all this time, and in essence lying to us about his health?"
Everybody around him, AND the media.
Look, it was doubtless fun laughing at Trump bragging about how well he'd done on his cognitive test, but the fact that Biden refused to even take one was a big red flag the media shouldn't have been so eager to ignore, if they weren't desperate to push him over the finish line one more time.
You don't seem to know what dementia is or how it manifests.
Double degree? JD and MD?
I stand by my original statement. The mental decline is obvious.
Well, that wasn't your original statement. As a reminder, your original statement was:
DEMENTIA DOESN’T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT
He is suffering from dementia.
Nice crayons.
The Election Law Issues Surrounding a Potential Biden Withdrawal from the Presidential Race
Hasen is about as devoted a left-wing Democrat as it gets. If he's saying this, it's not my imagination that Biden did badly.
Yup. The majority of Americans didn’t see the debate and it won’t directly impact their opinion. But the people that did see it matter:
– The left-of-center media. Their narrative on Biden flipped in less than 120 minutes, now the taboo is broken. It’s now OK for MSNBC, Daily Kos, and CNN pundits to openly question Biden’s qualification to be president. Don’t know how long it’ll last but it’s hard to put that cat back in the bag.
– Democratic leadership. Apparently there was a good amount of panic, and I’d bet what they said to each other was way stronger than what they said in interviews. The important thing here is that if someone is thinking of challenging the nomination, or invoking the 25th amendment, they’ve now got some cover.
I didn't watch the debate but I just saw Jon Stewart joked, "Not great. But a lot of people have resting-25th-amendment-face."
"Those who love President Biden should have a similar conversation."
That's precisely the problem.
There are lots of people who love President Biden (or VP Biden or Senator Biden), but no one who loves Joe Biden
I expect Hunter loves his father, but he needs his father to be President, at least a few months longer.
Wow. There's an asshole comment for sure.
How the fuck do you pretend to know any of that? Jackass.
Jill Biden made it abundantly clear when she gaslighted Joe after helping him hobble down the stairs at the debate.
I don't think anything was surprising about Biden's performance really. This has been on display for a long time. I guess there was just a lot of denial and coverup about it.
Again, he did pretty well for a Corpse, pretty bad when Jimmie Cartuh looks healthier
538 thinks Biden lost the debate, too.
They pretty desperately want to believe he was just having a bad day, of course, but they admit Trump won.
The standard process for decades is:
1. Have the debate.
2. Have talking head debate experts from universities declare the Democrat the winner.
It has been ever thus since I was a kid. He must have done pretty badly indeed.
Sleepy are you OK?are you OK Sleepy? Sleepy are you OK? Are you OK Sleepy?
Frank
The Hill has an commentary that says if we go to the transcript then Biden actually had a good debate.
OK:
“BIDEN: It’s been a terrible thing, what you’ve done.
The fact is that the vast majority of constitutional scholars supported Roe when it was decided, supported Roe. And that was – that’s – this idea that they were all against it is just ridiculous.
And this is the guy who says the states should be able to have it. We’re (ph) in a state where in six weeks, you don’t even know whether you’re pregnant or not, but you cannot see the doctor or have your – and have him decide on what your circumstances are, whether you need help.
The idea that states are able to do this is a little like saying, we’re going to turn civil rights back to the states. Let each state have a different rule.Look, there’s so many young women who have been – including a young woman who just was murdered and he – he went to the funeral. The idea that she was murdered by a – by –by an immigrant coming in, and they talk about that. But here’s the deal, there’s a lot of young women who are being raped by their – by their in-laws, by their – by their spouses, brothers and sisters, by – just – it’s just – it’s just ridiculous. And they can do nothing about it.
And they tried to arrest them when they cross state lines.
BASH: Thank you.”
And that just underscores why people are right to want the recording of the Hur interview, not just the transcript. Transcripts are frequently manipulated to make the people in them sound better than they really were. I might even say routinely.
Funny how the one topic that sort of woke Sleepy up was Incest
Frank
Last night was an "Emperor Has No Clothes" moment.
The moral of that fable is that whole groups of society can engage in mass self-deception, and then use social pressure to dissuade naysayers. That's what happened here -- most of the Democratic establishment and the mainstream media colluded to convince us that a man with declining mental abilities still had them. Whatever the clinical diagnosis, after last night's performance, no one would hire Biden to do anything requiring any responsibility. I wouldn't hire him to draft a simple will or do a house closing. And yet a whole group of people have persisted for over two years insisting that he was up to one of the most challenging jobs on earth.
Even if he is replaced, I am not voting for a group engaged in such mass deception.
And spare me the "but Trump" arguments. Trump is a huckster who would give PT Barnum a run for his money. The "but Trump" argument is the same as arguing "everyone does it."
You can me (or more to the point, Churchill or FDR) how bad Stalin is. "But Hitler" is a rebuttal, not an "everyone does it."
I see you missed the point of my post. Hitler and Stalin were both very, very bad men. Sometimes circumstances require one to choose between the lesser of two evils, or, more precisely, the more strategically beneficial of two evils. Churchill was under no illusion that that was what he was doing. FDR, not so much.
But prior to WWII, there was a great deal of deception to try to convince people in the West of how great Stalin and his regime were. One need only invoke Walter Duranty to make the point.
It's one thing to say that both Biden and Trump are deeply flawed men, but it makes more strategic sense to pick one over the other. (Third option: stay home in disgust. Which is where I am leaning now.)
But my point is, we have been the subject of a great deal of deception and obfuscation about Biden for some time. For at least two years, he has not been up to the task, and it has been pretty obvious. (I notice you did not comment on my statement that I would not hire him to do a house closing or simple will.) That level of deception, gaslighting and obfuscation needs to be called out and punished.
" That level of deception, gaslighting and obfuscation needs to be called out and punished."
...or at least voted against.
That's what I meant. No one is going to jail for this deception.
Should we have punished those who talked up Stalin by letting Hitler win?
Maybe we should have done what Patton advised, instead, and just finished the job when Stalin was worn down and utterly dependent on our supplying him munitions.
Concur -
Though that would have been difficult considering that the US continued to supply arms and materials to Russia through late July of 1945. Granted there was not a good choice between Stalin or Hitler, though both Harry Hopkins & Roosevelt should not have continued suppling Stalin after 1943 or very early 1944.
Stalins War by McKeekin is an excellent book on the subject.
Or you can vote for Kennedy, like I will.
Will Kennedy win? No. But a solid showing by a third party will help a third party in the future. And that's something America very much needs.
Before we need a third party candidate for president a true third party needs to coalesce. A third party president without a strong presence in Congress is a Jimmy Carter or Trump first term presidency.
The way Congress currently works, 3rd parties as small regional parties or singleton independents don't work.
You need national support. And there's only 1 national election...President.
Third parties are utterly futile now. That was most of the point of the 'campaign finance reform' effort in Congress; They claimed it was about corruption, but it was actually about the major parties getting scared at how 3rd parties were becoming more popular, and setting out to handicap them so they'd stop being a threat.
And it worked, which is why the major parties are becoming so dysfunctional now: They don't have to be good anymore, they just need half the population to think they're less awful than the only permissible alternative.
No, it wasn't, because no, they weren't.
I also plan to vote for Kennedy
Brainworms; that fits.
My only alternative is not voting. Neither of the two on stage are fit to run the country.
But no one will note the people who stay home; if RFK were to get 20% of the vote that might open folk's eyes.
Pipe dream. I think the best any third party got was Perot at just under 19% which gave us Slick Willy.
Also, why does everyone discount Congress and the courts? Lots of allusions to Hitler but no US President has ever had the complete control he did.
Voting for “45” in other words, great!
Wow, Bored Lawyer. Pretty definitive statements on where you have landed. I don't think you are alone.
Stay engaged, do not stay home. I offer this personal anecdote for your thought. Decades ago, my father was getting his history degree, and talked to me about elections. One thing he said that I always remembered, "Only in America can you have 50,000 people vote for Mickey Mouse and it is legit. It is our right to do that. If you don't like the candidates, then vote for Mickey. But vote." And it is true, in every presidential election, Mickey gets thousands of votes.
Besides, the local races and ballot questions are far more important. Especially here in Jersey. We have ourselves quite a Senate race. 🙂
How do you hold those people who created and executed the deception to account?
He gets a lot fewer these days, since the Supreme court ruled that it was constitutional for a state to not permit write in votes.
"How do you hold those people who created and executed the deception to account?"
We hear lots about Trump's lies. BUT what is clear id the BIG LIE and deception that Biden's enablers have promulgated for at least the past two years. Biden did not have a "bad days." Biden has not failed rapidly and dramatically in the past three months. He has been semi-competent for quite a while. His disability has been covered up by those around him who care more about their own personal power than the well being of the country.
fwiw - it was reasonably obvious to most every observer that Biden had the early stages of dementia or alzheimers during the summer of 2020 (granted it was the early stages). Now four year later, numerous commentators here continue to opine that he mind is still sharp in spite of obvious signs of going past the moderate stages of cognitive decline and starting to enter the advanced stages.
What is the "but Trump" argument you are referring to?
The piling of the NYT, liberal commentators, and even Democratic politicians on to the “Biden must withdraw” bandwagon less than 24 hours after the debate can only indicate that many of them have known for many months if not years that Biden has not been competent to serve as President.
The news clips showing a failing Joe Biden have not been deep fakes but glimpses into Biden true state of health and mind. If you disapprove of performance enhancing drugs is athletics, apply that standard to the White House.
They and Biden’s White House staff have been deceiving the public for too long. But now faced with what they perceived as highly probable defeat the scales fall from their eyes. Regardless of whether Biden runs or Harris or whomever, expect the same dishonest reporting.
It's the mark of a healthy political party that Democrats are asking their leader to step aside.
You didn't see that from the Republican Party, which has become a personality cult. No one dared speak against Trump, not after the "Access Hollywood" tape, not after his saying that soldiers who died for their country were "suckers" and "losers", not after he made fun of disabled people and stutterers, not after he was convicted of 34 felonies . . .
Republicans aren’t asking their presidential nominee to step aside because Trump wasn’t the one who broadcast senility for the whole country to see. Democrats weren't taking about their candidate stepping aside before the debate, either, even though those of us with brains were telling you about Biden's mental shortcomings. “But Trump!” is an old and stale diversionary tactic.
I’ll take your examples Seriatim, Access Hollyweird? Who gives a fuck, it was locker room talk? What real dude hasn’t joked about picking a Bee-otch up like a 6-pack? He didn’t say that bullshit about suckers, look at the source, a fuck up political general, and that disabled guy he imitated is pretty funny looking, 34 Bullshit felonies that everyone knows are bullshit, what happened to that Bald Fuck Gold Star father? Lousy Paki Immigration Shyster
Frank
You believe all of that crap? Ha, ha. You are the sucker!
Yeah, I believe it, I’ve said it myself, “why did J-hey put Bee-otches Pussy and Asshole so close together?” “so you can pick them up like a 6-pack” Umm, yeah, like anyone’s gonna say “Wow, what a bunch of suckers, go to You-Crane to die for $400/week” (OK, that’s actually something I would say) Sorry, the image of “45” pretending to have a seizure and stuttering “I didn’t know, I didn’t know!” still makes me laugh, and hopefully that Bald Fuck Paki Immigration Lawyer is turning up petunias in a shallow grave, prick. And the "34 Felonies"? (How many will Sleepy Joe be convicted of next year if he doesn't die in the mean time?) Even Larry "Member of the " Tribe and Alan Dershowitz are on record that the charges are Bullshit.
Frank
The GOP had a full primary slate with about 10 candidates.
I myself voted for Haley.
I supported DeSantis (although did not vote for him, since by the time my state had primaries, he had dropped out). Had he run, I would have enthusiastically supported him.
"mark of a healthy political party "
I'd agree with you if there had been a constant undercurrent in urging the party to find a new leader. But there wasn't. That change happened literally overnight. That fast switch can only be explained by there being an undercurrent of suspicion that Biden was quickly losing the ability to lead a complex country.
When I see Biden I remember the original Star Trek series episode called Patterns of Force. Where the leader is merely a drugged up puppet of those actually running the office
Not among the best episodes from TOS (almost none were all that good), but gotta love that they had Nazis all over the Alpha quadrant.
Belushi: "I hate space Nazis"
Dammit Jim!
So, now that Biden has announced that he's not stepping down, watch as the media, which had finally admitted that he's got problems, turn on a dime and go back to pretending he's fine.
They will probably have completed the reversal by Monday...
Well he was right about beating Medicare to death, and women getting raped by relatives, ask Ashley Biden, seems he’s got an Abby Gate neglect syndrome though, pretty sure some Amuricans were killed in that SNAFU
Frank
Unless your grandfather consented to have this video of him posted online, I would take it down. If he didn’t consent, posting the video is contrary to the spirit of the libertarianism that Reason apparently is trying to advance.
The idea that one cannot attend a private event with family without thinking in the back of one’s mind that one's private antics could one day appear online is one of the underrated evils of our age.
Discussion of the President’s capacity have led to me pondering several theoretical questions:
1. Do the interests of a private citizen, as such, confer standing to be heard on a petition to an appropriate court to adjudicate a sitting president mentally deficient and appoint a guardian?
2. What de jure impact, if any, would an adjudication of legal incapacity and appointment of a guardian have on a sitting president’s authority? (Are there federal preemption reasons it wouldn’t matter?)
1. No.
2. None. The 25th amendment specifies the process if a president lacks capacity.
There is only one legal way to move a sitting aside, namely, the 25th amendment.
But you raise a good question. If Biden is not fit to serve after next January 20, why is he fit to serve now for 7 months with two active wars going on involving nuclear powers, and an ever-increasing level of international confrontation in the South China Sea.
Constitutional law is not my area of focus, so I may err here, but what in Section 4 of the 25A specifies it is not only a sufficient condition for finding a living president incapable of serving but also a necessary one? I grasp the basic principles of federal preemption, but don’t think the 25A evinces a clear and manifest intent to supersede states’ historic power to adjudicate individuals’ legal capacity. Provided that’s the case, a sitting President should be disqualified from acting once found incompetent in guardianship proceedings if and only if constitutional officers in general are disqualified from acting in their official capacities once found incompetent in guardianship proceedings (and I’m not sure what the general rule is).
Ulixes
You do present the dilema (catch 22?) – if he lacks capacity to perform tasks as an adult under the guardianship provisions of state law, can any of his actions be valid as a legal matter.
Granted as others have noted 25A is the only constitutional method to remove Biden (absent impeachment which is presently not on the table), However, if he lacks capacity, do any of his actions have legal binding authority?
He does show signs of borderline lack of capacity, though most likely not nearly far enough along to meet most states required threshold. fwiw, it is extremely difficult to get some one declared incompetent / lacking capacity under most state laws (I am familiar with Texas). I have had 7-8 clients with advanced stages of alzheimers , 3 of which well beyond capacity with subsequent legal proceedings with no success getting guardianship.