Dr. Strangelove
New member
While fair, he left the party to salvage whatever he has in mind for his political career.
I incorrectly assumed the OP was referring to how Manchin voted as a Senator, where he was invaluable to the Democratic party.
Democrats "Break Glass in Case of Emergency" Plan - Picking an alternate candidate.
- Thread starter Dr. Strangelove
- Start date
I incorrectly assumed the OP was referring to how Manchin voted as a Senator, where he was invaluable to the Democratic party.
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
If You Can’t Communicate, You Can’t Run for President
Sifting through last night's wreckage
JEFF MAURER
JUN 28, 2024
The funniest attempt at spin was “Biden has a cold.” Oh? A cold? What are the symptoms of this cold — being incoherent and lost and generally seeming like a man in his 80s who needs to have his responsibilities dramatically dialed back? Is the cold why Biden spent half the debate gawking at Trump with a blank stare, as if he was a specter trying to make contact with the corporeal world? Did the cold force Biden to shuffle onto the stage with itty-bitty steps like he was wearing socks on a newly polished floor? I imagined the Biden flak who sent the “Biden has a cold” text feeding new excuses to their media contacts throughout the debate: “Biden also has Typhoid.” “The President is on heroin.” “Joe was struck by lightning shortly before he took the stage.” “Biden accidentally ate a uranium fuel rod and got on the bad side of a Voodoo priest who seems to be enacting his revenge.” Though even those explanations might not justify what we saw.
Many partisans decided that the most viable line of defense was: “Biden spoke softly and mixed up his words but Trump was a relentless gusher of ignorance and lies.” This, of course, is true. In a sane world, we’d be making more of the fact that the guy who “won” was a tornado of mendacity and bulls#!t, as per usual. Some outlets dutifully performed fact checks that did — for a brief moment — focus the conversation on the fact that saying things like “my opponents murder babies after they’re born” is a bats#!t bananas thing for a presidential candidate to say. Biden’s defenders have a point when they argue that what was said should matter more than the manner of delivery.
So, allow me to assess Biden’s performance entirely on the substance of what was said. I’m going to ignore the mumbling and the stumbling, ignore the tenor and volume of Biden’s speech, and ignore the fact that any time he wasn’t speaking, Biden stared at Trump with his mouth open like a dog watching someone prep steaks. I’m going to focus solely on the meaning and impact of Biden’s words. And on that metric alone, my grade for Biden is: F-minus. Because you shouldn’t run for president if you can’t convey your message.
Here’s Biden’s closing statement. This is the one part of the night that can be 100 percent rehearsed — Biden should know the words to this speech better than Wayne Newton knows the words to “Danke Schoën”. But this is what Biden said:
I’m thinking back to my speechwriter days and wondering what would have happened to me if I had turned in a draft with this passage:
“What I did — well, for example. He wants to get away with, get rid of the ability of Medicare, to…for the ability…for the us to negotiate drug prices with big pharma companies. Well guess what? We got it down to 15 — excuse me 35 dollars for insulin instead of 400 dollars, no more than 2,000 dollars for every senior no matter what they, how much prescription they need.”
If I had written that, I wouldn’t have been fired — I would have been catapulted into an active volcano. And rightly so: There are barely thoughts expressed in the English language in that passage, much less an impactful message. Campaigns spend obscene sums of money on consultant witchcraft to answer a single question: What is our message? Once you pick a message, that message becomes the focal point of your closing remarks, and those remarks are a big deal because they’re the last thing you say. If voters remember one thing about the debate — and research shows that the average voter remembers between zero and one things about a debate — you want that thing to be your message. Biden whizzed down his leg in that moment, and I really, really hope that I’m speaking metaphorically.
Here’s the passage that has already come to be known as The Moment Everyone Realized It Was Over.
That disaster was in response to a question about why Trump wants to give tax breaks to corporations and the wealthy. Taxes on corporations and the wealthy always poll as one of the Democrats’ strongest issues. Even Trump voters don’t like the fact that despite Trump’s populist noises, his tax policy hasn’t evolved much from the George W. Bush/Grover Norquist era. This should have been a point-scoring exchange for Biden; if the debate was boxing, Trump had somehow gotten his watch tangled in his shoelaces and was vulnerable to a haymaker. But instead of delivering a powerful punch, Biden gave us the “we beat Medicare” moment that will be referenced in political science classes 50 years from now. Let’s call that “suboptimal”.
Trump, as always, spouted nonsense and lies at an astounding rate. Biden didn’t effectively counter any of it. He knew that he was supposed to, and his aides had clearly stuffed his pockets full of zingers for exactly that purpose, but Biden dribbled all of those zingers down the front of his shirt. Did anyone notice that Biden tried to get Trump to denounce the far-right groups that stormed the capital on January 6? That was clearly a set piece for Biden: Make Trump choose between the far-right freaks who are a a big part of his coalition and people who are horrified by the aforementioned freaks. But this is what came out:
Trump didn’t respond. He didn’t have to.
I’m being hard on Biden, because this is largely his fault. By failing to step aside, Biden drastically limited Democrats’ options; a campaign to unseat a sitting president is overwhelmingly likely to fail even if you’re not Dean Phillips, and that’s why nobody except for the guy who’s name I’ve already forgotten even though it appears in the first part of this very sentence (Dave Philborn?) even tried. Possibly motivated by ego, Biden thought that he’d have a better shot than whatever nominee was spit out by whatever process would follow Biden dropping out. We now know that was wrong: Biden’s chances of being re-elected are zero. I’m tempted to put an “effectively” before “zero”, because, of course, no future event in the universe is literally impossible. Except for this one: I feel comfortable saying that Biden’s performance last night was so bad that it broke the rules of spacetime.
Which is a sad way for a good man’s story to end. I like Joe Biden; I’ve liked him for a long time. As I said 18 months ago, I was hoping that Biden would decide that this should be his narrative: A grizzled political veteran gets coaxed out of semi-retirement during a time of crisis. The country needs him to do one last big thing, and despite his advanced age, he does it. And then — much like Cincinnatus and George Washington — he selflessly rides off into the sunset. Except that Biden does it on Amtrak, and with a badass David Caruso-putting-on-shades-at-the-beginning-of-CSI-Miami moment just before boarding the train.
Biden didn’t opt for that narrative. That’s tragic; he historically blew it. Even if Biden bows out now — which he definitely should, because all of the most viable paths to someone beating Trump start with Biden bowing out — he’s being forced out. And he’s being forced out for a good reason: He can’t convey the Democrats’ message. That’s a required skill in politics — it’s what hammering is to carpentry or what sublimating your dignity is to temping. The issue here isn’t affect, or “vibe”, or even the fundamental ability to do the job of president — I’m still comfortable with Biden being president through January. The issue is that Biden can’t paint a compelling picture of what the next four years would look like if he’s re-elected. And if you can’t do that, then you can’t run for president.
Sifting through last night's wreckage
JEFF MAURER
JUN 28, 2024
The spectacle after the spectacle last night was watching Democratic operatives — who are professionals with a job to do — try to spin Biden’s performance. Imagine executives from the Graf Zeppelinworks watching the fiery wreckage of the Hindenburg crash to earth, and then turning to their PR person and saying: “Go out there and tell everyone that the blimp is fine.” That was the task for professional hacks last night. An extra layer of surrealism was added by the fact that some of the people arguing the unarguable were people who might replace Biden on the ticket — Gavin Newsom had to go on TV and pretend that his phone wasn’t melting with texts saying “YO BRA IT’S GONNA BE YOU!!!” In a nihilistic era of politics in which nothing ever seems to matter, everyone instinctively knew: Last night mattered.
The funniest attempt at spin was “Biden has a cold.” Oh? A cold? What are the symptoms of this cold — being incoherent and lost and generally seeming like a man in his 80s who needs to have his responsibilities dramatically dialed back? Is the cold why Biden spent half the debate gawking at Trump with a blank stare, as if he was a specter trying to make contact with the corporeal world? Did the cold force Biden to shuffle onto the stage with itty-bitty steps like he was wearing socks on a newly polished floor? I imagined the Biden flak who sent the “Biden has a cold” text feeding new excuses to their media contacts throughout the debate: “Biden also has Typhoid.” “The President is on heroin.” “Joe was struck by lightning shortly before he took the stage.” “Biden accidentally ate a uranium fuel rod and got on the bad side of a Voodoo priest who seems to be enacting his revenge.” Though even those explanations might not justify what we saw.
Many partisans decided that the most viable line of defense was: “Biden spoke softly and mixed up his words but Trump was a relentless gusher of ignorance and lies.” This, of course, is true. In a sane world, we’d be making more of the fact that the guy who “won” was a tornado of mendacity and bulls#!t, as per usual. Some outlets dutifully performed fact checks that did — for a brief moment — focus the conversation on the fact that saying things like “my opponents murder babies after they’re born” is a bats#!t bananas thing for a presidential candidate to say. Biden’s defenders have a point when they argue that what was said should matter more than the manner of delivery.
So, allow me to assess Biden’s performance entirely on the substance of what was said. I’m going to ignore the mumbling and the stumbling, ignore the tenor and volume of Biden’s speech, and ignore the fact that any time he wasn’t speaking, Biden stared at Trump with his mouth open like a dog watching someone prep steaks. I’m going to focus solely on the meaning and impact of Biden’s words. And on that metric alone, my grade for Biden is: F-minus. Because you shouldn’t run for president if you can’t convey your message.
Here’s Biden’s closing statement. This is the one part of the night that can be 100 percent rehearsed — Biden should know the words to this speech better than Wayne Newton knows the words to “Danke Schoën”. But this is what Biden said:
I’m thinking back to my speechwriter days and wondering what would have happened to me if I had turned in a draft with this passage:
“What I did — well, for example. He wants to get away with, get rid of the ability of Medicare, to…for the ability…for the us to negotiate drug prices with big pharma companies. Well guess what? We got it down to 15 — excuse me 35 dollars for insulin instead of 400 dollars, no more than 2,000 dollars for every senior no matter what they, how much prescription they need.”
If I had written that, I wouldn’t have been fired — I would have been catapulted into an active volcano. And rightly so: There are barely thoughts expressed in the English language in that passage, much less an impactful message. Campaigns spend obscene sums of money on consultant witchcraft to answer a single question: What is our message? Once you pick a message, that message becomes the focal point of your closing remarks, and those remarks are a big deal because they’re the last thing you say. If voters remember one thing about the debate — and research shows that the average voter remembers between zero and one things about a debate — you want that thing to be your message. Biden whizzed down his leg in that moment, and I really, really hope that I’m speaking metaphorically.
Here’s the passage that has already come to be known as The Moment Everyone Realized It Was Over.
That disaster was in response to a question about why Trump wants to give tax breaks to corporations and the wealthy. Taxes on corporations and the wealthy always poll as one of the Democrats’ strongest issues. Even Trump voters don’t like the fact that despite Trump’s populist noises, his tax policy hasn’t evolved much from the George W. Bush/Grover Norquist era. This should have been a point-scoring exchange for Biden; if the debate was boxing, Trump had somehow gotten his watch tangled in his shoelaces and was vulnerable to a haymaker. But instead of delivering a powerful punch, Biden gave us the “we beat Medicare” moment that will be referenced in political science classes 50 years from now. Let’s call that “suboptimal”.
Trump, as always, spouted nonsense and lies at an astounding rate. Biden didn’t effectively counter any of it. He knew that he was supposed to, and his aides had clearly stuffed his pockets full of zingers for exactly that purpose, but Biden dribbled all of those zingers down the front of his shirt. Did anyone notice that Biden tried to get Trump to denounce the far-right groups that stormed the capital on January 6? That was clearly a set piece for Biden: Make Trump choose between the far-right freaks who are a a big part of his coalition and people who are horrified by the aforementioned freaks. But this is what came out:
Trump didn’t respond. He didn’t have to.
I’m being hard on Biden, because this is largely his fault. By failing to step aside, Biden drastically limited Democrats’ options; a campaign to unseat a sitting president is overwhelmingly likely to fail even if you’re not Dean Phillips, and that’s why nobody except for the guy who’s name I’ve already forgotten even though it appears in the first part of this very sentence (Dave Philborn?) even tried. Possibly motivated by ego, Biden thought that he’d have a better shot than whatever nominee was spit out by whatever process would follow Biden dropping out. We now know that was wrong: Biden’s chances of being re-elected are zero. I’m tempted to put an “effectively” before “zero”, because, of course, no future event in the universe is literally impossible. Except for this one: I feel comfortable saying that Biden’s performance last night was so bad that it broke the rules of spacetime.
Which is a sad way for a good man’s story to end. I like Joe Biden; I’ve liked him for a long time. As I said 18 months ago, I was hoping that Biden would decide that this should be his narrative: A grizzled political veteran gets coaxed out of semi-retirement during a time of crisis. The country needs him to do one last big thing, and despite his advanced age, he does it. And then — much like Cincinnatus and George Washington — he selflessly rides off into the sunset. Except that Biden does it on Amtrak, and with a badass David Caruso-putting-on-shades-at-the-beginning-of-CSI-Miami moment just before boarding the train.
Biden didn’t opt for that narrative. That’s tragic; he historically blew it. Even if Biden bows out now — which he definitely should, because all of the most viable paths to someone beating Trump start with Biden bowing out — he’s being forced out. And he’s being forced out for a good reason: He can’t convey the Democrats’ message. That’s a required skill in politics — it’s what hammering is to carpentry or what sublimating your dignity is to temping. The issue here isn’t affect, or “vibe”, or even the fundamental ability to do the job of president — I’m still comfortable with Biden being president through January. The issue is that Biden can’t paint a compelling picture of what the next four years would look like if he’s re-elected. And if you can’t do that, then you can’t run for president.
TGHusker
New member
Agreed 100% with the article. So many in the media are speaking the obvious but the 'family' and others are not facing the same reality we are seeing. The Drudge Report headlines notes everything from Jill holding on to power to a poll stating 72% want him out. Drudge is no fan of Trump either. Biden, himself, said in 2020 that he would be a 'transitional' president. Well, I think the taste of power got in the way of transition. At this particular time in history, the Dems have several qualified governors who could step in and forcefully take on Trump. But Biden(s) has gotten in their way. I also fault Obama and Clinton for not speaking the truth to him. They know, those near to Uncle Joe know and they have hidden Biden's real condition from the public -- until this debate exposed it all. Time for some truth talkers to take control otherwise I have no doubt Trump will win in November - not because so many more will turn out to vote for him but because so many more will sit on their hands and not vote for Biden.
Drudge
POLL: 72% WANT HIM OUT!
STAFF HID DECLINE FROM PUBLIC
FIRST LADY DESPERATELY CLINGS TO POWER
DEM PATH FOR 'DIGNIFIED' EXIT
REMNICK: IT'S OVER
Last edited by a moderator:
teachercd
Active member
Dr. Strangelove
New member
A semi-moderate Republican candidate would probably win extremely easily against any Democrat. If Romney/McCain/traditional Republican ran today, I would dare say the electoral college is so favorable, Rs would've controlled the Presidency from 2016-2028 or even 2032. The electoral college bias is that strong.
The saving grace for Democrats is that the far right makes it impressive for decent Republican candidates to emerge. Instead of EASILY winning the Presidency, they nominate Trump. The same is true when they nominated Kari Lake in Arizona or Herschel Walker in Georgia, Republicans nominate bad candidates, shooting themselves in the foot.
I think it's accurate. I've long said that replacing Biden is a bad idea, because it is. But Biden needed to use the debate to gain ground on Trump, and instead his numbers will stagnate or he'll lose a point or two. His opportunities to gain ground will rapidly deteriorate.
Democrats need to rally around a candidate like Roy Cooper and prepare a supermassive ad campaign and media blitz to increase his name recognition.
Last edited by a moderator:
teachercd
Active member
https://www.latimes.com/politics/newsletter/2023-07-14/democrats-despise-the-electoral-college-perhaps-they-should-get-over-that-essential-politics
That’s a rarity. As Kyle Kondik and J. Miles Coleman recently documented on the Crystal Ball election site, the system is pretty unbiased most of the time: In the 19 presidential elections since the end of World War II, the results of the electoral college and the popular vote matched closely.
Usually, but not always.
In 1948, for example, the electoral college had a pronounced Republican tilt. Democratic President Harry Truman won anyway, but his margin in the electoral college was famously thin despite his healthy victory in the popular vote. In 2000, the Democratic nominee, Vice President Al Gore, was less lucky. A slight Republican tilt in the electoral college was enough to give Bush the White House after the Supreme Court declared him the winner in Florida. And, of course, in 2016, a fairly large Republican tilt in the electoral college handed the White House to Trump even though Hillary Clinton got more votes.
In 2020, President Biden overcame an even bigger electoral college bias to win: He took the popular vote by 4.5 percentage points but garnered only a 0.6% edge in electoral votes.
The reason the electoral college and the popular vote don’t always track is that election results are much closer in some states than others. In recent years, that’s had a lot to do with California.
In 2020, for example, Biden won the state by 29 points, garnering about 5 million more votes than he needed to capture its electoral votes. That swelled his national popular vote margin but didn’t gain him anything in the electoral college. The Democrat racked up a similarly disproportionate margin in New York, padding his popular vote margin by another couple million.
Because most people pay attention to the electoral college only when something goes awry, and both of the anomalies in living memory favored the GOP, a lot of people assume the electoral vote always leans Republican. Not so.
In both of President Obama‘s victories, for example, the electoral vote had a Democratic bias although no one paid much attention. Since World War II, the electoral college has had a Democratic tilt nine times and a Republican one 10.
It could easily flip again. Just look at the results of the 2022 midterm elections, as Coleman and Kondik noted.
RedDenver
New member
I think you're overestimating how many people care about politics beyond the name of the candidate and the letter by their name. If the Dems replace Biden with someone the vast majority of the country doesn't know (which is the definition of a "fresh face"), it'll likely cost them at the polls. There is of course no way for us to know for sure either way, but incumbent advantage is a real thing.
Overreacting to a debate is classic politics to drive up the drama and the ratings. It happens every election on every debate. No one will even remember this debate come November.
GOP voters like Trump, he drives up the number that come out to vote. While many of us that follow politics like to imagine that another candidate would do better, the primaries suggest otherwise.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Strangelove
New member
I certainly don't disagree.
My point was that Republican's enjoy a much higher than normal Electoral College bias starting in 2016 that would've lasted until 2028 or 2032. This is because by then, Texas will become a blue state where Democrats will once again enjoy an electoral college bias for a period until more demographic shifts cause that bias to revert back to Republicans.
My other point is that, Republicans are squandering their current electoral friendly environment by nominating bad candidates. IF Trump manages to lose again in 2024, Democrats will have effectively taken 8 years of the Presidency during a time when it was the Republicans turn to dominate politics. Republicans need to figure out how to keep the crazies from taking over the party when it's their turn to dominate politics.
This EC “bias” isn’t nearly as large as you think it is. Republicans have basically given up on CA and NY which account for the entirety of the popular vote victory Dem’s have enjoyed. Why have R’a done this???? Because they decided they can’t win and spend hardly any resources, ie., money in the state beyond some congressional races. Republican voters in those states have zero incentive to vote for the Presidential race.
Democrats have done a great job in trying to make Texas competitive by spending resources, taking a long game view of trying their best to have open borders and birthing a new generation of Democrat voters in the state, and nominating some moderate candidates to counter some of the extreme R candidates.
Each political party has basically the same amount of “guaranteed” EC votes. Roughly 180. The Democrats are usually favored in more of the non guaranteed states (toss ups can change from election to election) than Republicans are which means Republicans have to run more of the table than Dems do.
Dr. Strangelove
New member
It's large in the sense that the popular vote is heavily tilted towards Democrats, and they have to win a large share in order to win the Presidency. From there, small, rural states have slightly inflated Electoral College representation compared to larger states. Republicans now dominate rural America, Democrats in heavily populated states. This demographic split wasn't always this severe. Thus, Republicans have enjoy a robust EC bias that'll last until Democrats can reliably turn a state - probably Texas, but possibly North Carolina blue. Once they do, they'll be at an advantage.
My hope during that time is that Democrats do a better job of finding candidates that appeal to their entire coalition and they don't' squander their opportunity like Republicans have over the last few years.
BigRedBuster
Active member
I think that's a hell of a lot easier than getting Trump to quit on his self made political party cult.