For those of us in Red and Purple states, the risks Dr Snyder thoughtfully considers are not theoretical. Many of our Red and Purple states are already living with single party legislatures, restrictive abortion bans, book bans, restrictions on teaching history, forced teaching of the Bible, deep restrictions on voting access, unaffordable housing. Some of these restrictive abortion states are talking about - at a state law level - forbidding women to travel out of state for necessary health care around pregnancy. We are the states where Trump tried to overturn our votes in 2020. We see he has been effective in slow walking his trials and undoing the rule of law. For us, the prospect of an authoritarian regime is not fantastical. I find a lot of (of course, not all of) this conversation about swapping out Biden, understanding that all the choices have risks, is taking place in the media and press and institutions grounded in very Blue or Blue-enough states like California New York, maybe even Connecticut and the like. For folks in those states, a Trump regime is unthinkable, but you all will be catching up to what the rest of us already live in should Trump win. I think understanding these electoral risks in states like Georgia, Arkansas, Arizona, Michigan, and so on is worth a more transparent comparative analysis. Any removal of or process to remove VP Harris in favor of a newcomer (who is maybe White, maybe male) will not be well received by the many Black women in marginal states who have brought Democrats over the line many times, especially in 2020.
''For folks in those states, a Trump regime is unthinkable, but you all will be catching up to what the rest of us already live in should Trump win.'' Yes! But as you know, it will be even worse this time around. I live in Austin, Texas--the capital. The overwhelming majority of us are liberal and the Republican state government has been interfering with us for well over a decade. They constantly harass us; they won't leave us be. For decades Republicans have been calling us ''The People's Republic of Austin.'' They really do believe we're communists. I told my sister 5 years ago that I wouldn't put it past a Republican governor and state legislature to allow right-wing paramilitary groups to round us up. Her response was the dead silence of someone who thought I'd lost my mind. With time, she changed her opinion. Austin is home to some of the most advanced medical research in the country. Many of our physicians teach at the Dell Medical School after practicing medicine for 8+ hours during the day, which means that physicians in Austin tend to be up on the latest research. These practicing/teaching MDs then mentor new MDs, bringing them into their own practices for internships. Our medical system is so advanced that when COVID came everyone in the medical community knew what to do because large-scale medical emergencies had been rehearsed for years. I was quite impressed with it: There was no confusion because each person in that community had a task to perform and just did it. They took great care to reduce the spread of COVID, going so far as to escort each patient to the door to the outside to see to it that they didn't stay in the building, even standing there for a few seconds to make sure patients started walking to their cars. I can't see Republicans being that careful about people's lives during a pandemic, or at any other time. This is one of the many things at stake for Austin--all because they're convinced we're communists.
Helen, I’m a proud “Coastal Democrat.” I’m proud of my family’s *choice* to leave what was for them, an excruciating South. Their lived experience is why this country celebrates Juneteenth.
Texas and Mississippi were two of the worst states for Enslaved Stolen Africans and their descendants. Once my mother’s family learned they were “free,” two years after Chattel Slavery legally ended, they left Texas for the West and never looked; back.
My father’s family took longer to head West. They were accumulating land, education, and wealth in Mississippi and Louisiana.
I’m of the lineage of this nation’s first Black U.S. Senator, Hiram Rhodes Revels (R-MS). After Lincoln’s assassination, and after VP Andrew Johnson sabotaged Reconstruction when former Senator and Rev. Dr. Revels became President of Alcorn State University, he encouraged his daughter Susie Sumner Revels Cayton and her husband to head West — the lynchings were in full swing, no pun intended.
My family came West, claimed their 40 acres began farming, served in government, teachers unions, as police officers and chiefs. I
Just found the Wikipedia page on Hiram Rhodes Revels. ''During the American Civil War, Revels had helped organize two regiments of the United States Colored Troops and served as a chaplain.'' What an interesting man. Thanks for this bit of history!
Thank you, Rose! As we fondly refer to him in my family, the right Rev. Dr. Senator was also a missionary. Before social media, traveling to “spread the ‘good news’ or the gospel” was how one went viral or became an “influencer.”
He was born a Tar Heel, but Mississippi became home after the Civil War. It’s one of the saddest parts of our history, along with the Trail of Tears, the Chinese Exclusion Act, and the Internment of Japanese Citizens.
These Black Enslaved men escaped the plantations to fight for the Union, leaving behind their families. But for them joining ranks with Union soldiers, the Union likely wouldn’t have defeated the Confederacy.
After the Civil War, these brave Black soldiers knew they weren’t wanted in the North. The Southern enslavers engaged in an insidious disinformation campaign that worked. They successfully caused East Coast Northerners to believe the Enslaved were lazy and ignorant, untrainable for industrial work in the North. Meanwhile, they bragged about being able to leave their plantations to fight because those same lazy, uneducated, and untrainable slaves could run the entire operation in their absence — the joys of free labor.
What a strange paradox. SMH.
Nonetheless, the Black soldiers, buoyed by the Union’s victory and Emancipation, jubilantly returned home for what they believed would be a New Day for the free Negro! They returned to start a new life until President Andrew Johnson decided to reverse Reconstruction.
A lesson we did not learn from history. Andrew Johnson received 11 impeachment counts, not one for sicking the Klan on formerly enslaved people.
Johnson’s actions and the Klan’s lynchings did not deter the freedmen and women. They moved further West and North. Hope for the promise of a brighter tomorrow spurred them on. It's why I’m here! I’m grateful and humble.
Hope is our country’s most remarkable capital, but it in and of itself is not an action verb. Hope requires us to organize, mobilize, and do the work, even when it is difficult. Even when we cannot see what the reward is for the risk-taking.
Rose, I will tell you a story that should leave us all with hope.
First, I know you’re the sign that I should share this story because my favorite Aunt, Aunt Rose, Ellen Rose, my mother’s sister...
Every year when my granddaughter was younger, I took her and her half-sister to Nordstrom, bought them Christmas outfits, and got their photos taken with Santa at Nordy’s.
One year, my daughter decided she’d heard enough about all this fun and joined us.
We were being silly with girls, probably loud and giddy. We LOVE Christmas!! We were seated at the Nordstrom Grill for lunch next to an elderly white couple who immediately looked uncomfortable and moved their shopping bags away from us.
We looked at one another and chuckled. We were heading skiing the next day, then to pick up my aunt in Yakima.
The lady pardoned herself for interrupting and asked if one of us had mentioned Yakima. I explained that my family was from Yakima and that we were going there.
The man began to cry. He got up from his table, came over to ours, and started praying with us, asking God to forgive him for pre-judging us. He shared that one of his best friends was my Uncle Henry, the former Yakima Mayor, City Councilman, and pastor.
His wife explained that her husband and my uncle had a ministry for the incarcerated: her husband was a Republican, my uncle was a Democrat, and they were inseparable friends.
Her husband said they’d been reading about all the crime in Seattle and almost didn’t make the trip. They came to Bellevue for the first time. I explained that we live 15 minutes from the Bellevue Mall and always go there.
We decided that my Uncle Henry, in his way of building people bridges, would put us there together.
We should always look for opportunities to build “people bridges.” It’s how we make hope actionable.
I’m blessed to be educated, live in an affluent area, and enjoy the love of a beautiful family and lifelong friends. The legacy I carry keeps me hopeful, as should all of us. I’m proud to walk this American walk with every one of you — wherever you are.
“Allow me to say in conclusion, notwithstanding the dark picture I have this day presented of the state of this nation, I do not despair of this country.” — Frederick Douglass, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July”
Frederick Douglass always remained hopeful that America could be her best self for all.
I am hopeful America will be her best self because we will continue to bend the arc of the moral universe toward freedom, democracy, and justice TOGETHER no matter what coast, ‘hood, holler, hill, hamlet, red clay road, country club, shelter, tiny house community, or part of flyover country we live.
Dear Michele, I remember Frederick Douglass's July 4th speech from my brief study of US history from about 2013-17. I concentrated mostly on the South, including colonial N. America. My father was from the infamous Neshoba County, Mississippi, but left Mississippi when he was in his twenties. Every summer when we visited his family for about 2 weeks, my siblings and I were subjected to a nearly endless bombardment of n*****, over and over from everyone around us. It wasn't until I was older that I started to wonder how my father managed to avoid being tainted by that culture, and I still can't figure it out. I never heard him use that word when we were growing up.
''The hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed'' (at 3:14 in the video). Those words are still true; too many white Americans to this day do not want to hear them. I spend part of my time on Twitter/X reading the posts of white Americans whose minds have been poisoned by propaganda as well as by habit who post obscenities about African-Americans. They say they can't wait for Trump to regain power so they can go into the cities with their guns and start killing people. Of course ''going into the cities with our guns'' is code for hunting down African-Americans. There are frequently many replies to these comments, and more often than not the majority agree with the poster, adding their own comments about how excited they would be to do this. Of course we don't know how many of them would put their words into action, but their words alone are dispiriting. Added to this are the memory laws that have been passed by Republican state legislatures across the country that keep white Americans infantilized. White Americans are not the only people in the world who can't face their own history. Memory laws can be found in Russia, Poland, and Serbia, to name just three other countries.
Thank you, Michele, for sharing your history. I appreciate you reminding me that making generalizations can silence individual experiences. Our histories are powerful and remind me/us we can survive this.
Helen, I remain steadfastly hopeful we can and will remember we are Americans.🇺🇸 Being American doesn’t make us elite; it makes us the descendants of immigrants — a melting pot, a gumbo, a menudo of goodness.
We can accomplish great things TOGETHER…it’s in our collective DNA.
I saw the reports of neo-Nazis and the so-called “Patriot Front” marching in Tennessee over the July 4th weekend. It was a travesty!!
I might forget the name of Laurie Jinkins (Speaker of the Washington State Legislature), but Tennessee’s Cameron Sexton has been etched in my memory by State Reps. Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, and Gloria Johnson.
In the household I grew up in, Ella Fitzgerald competed with Charley Pride for turntable time. Understandingly,
Michele, I live in Georgia, so I've kept up with the Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, Gloria Johnson story and many of the other undemocratic acts of their legislature. Like the lyrics of this song, that episode - their suspension and then their reelection - is an example of travesty followed by joy.
I join you in feeling steadfast that we can and must remain committed to working together for a better world, doing great things, regardless of where we are in the geography of America. Our communities, our children and our grandchildren require it.
I LOVED hearing "Tennessee Rise." It's now my summer anthem too! With credit to you, I am sharing it with my friends and family - "How you wanna ride this wave?" Have an amazing day, Michele!
Oh, Michele…Thank you for posting this!! So many wonderful voices contributing to this great song. I love Gloria Johnson, and the two Justins! I have contributed a little bit of money to all three. But Gloria just HAS to win her race.
Michele and Rose, your words really resonate with me. I was born and raised in little town USA of NC. Yes, I am only a Tarheel when I watch college basketball. I was born to parents who were Holocaust victims in a town that was dominated by white Baptists. We had a black maid who I adored but it pains me to even say that, however, it was the norm in the South. Through her, I learned compassion. Through my dad, I learned civility. Please indulge me as I tell you a story. After working in our family’s clothing store, each evening my dad took Maggie (that was her name), home to “colored town”. I often went with him to drop her off. Her place to sit was in the backseat and mine was up in the front. One day, I had told Maggie that she needed to sit in the front but she politely protested. I was insistent and told her she never ever gets to sit in the front. I was young and naive but to my dad’s credit, he too, told Maggie to sit in the front and off we went. None of us ever spoke about that again but later in life, I wanted so badly to tell how much she taught me and how I loved her. I want to believe she knew.
When I was around 15 year old, I was in the car with my parents. We had to go around a circle to get back home. It was nighttime and I could see a fire in the middle of the circle. As we slowly approached, I saw a burning cross and men dressed in white robes and hoods. My parents spoke Yiddish to each other but I knew that this was very worrisome to them. My eyes were as big as saucers as it was my first encounter of seeing the KKK and I was scared.
Our white history is abysmal and I am happy to see it exposed. Men, in particular, create wars, create chaos. Why? What space occupies their brain to commit these acts of violence against their fellow man, woman, or child? I honestly believe no matter what creed, color, or size, women should be leading our nation. We are one of the largest and yet, we are far behind. I realize Fredrick Douglass said he did not despair our country, but I sometimes do. We must defeat the monsters who reared their evil heads and defeat them we will. My very best to both of you. 💕💪🏻 💪🏾💪🏿
Excellent reply! with important points that need to be considered — too easy for “Blue or Blue-enough” to overlook, unless a concerted effort to understand or at least gain some exposure and a sense of “their reality” in Red and Purple States, and stop pontificating in an echo-chamber.
Helen, I'm curious about your thoughts on this: What about a process in which Biden withdraws, resigns, and endorses Harris? Harris then would still have to compete for the nomination both before and at the convention. If she faced some other contenders--Whitmer, Shapiro, Beshear, Moore, etc--in a spirit of friendly competition, it could test her and all of them in a good way.
She would have the advantage of serving as the acting President, with Biden's blessing. But the Party would allow some spirited, healthy competition so as not to look too oligarchic. If she wins the nomination, she's done so without merely steamrolling other options. At the same time, she's given an advantage in the process in recognition of her role as Vice-President.
In other words, a combination of Operation Kamala, Operation Carnival, and Operation Convention. What do you think? Not that this matters, since it appears Biden is choosing Option 1.
Thank you for this question. Big caveat: I'm not a Constitutional nor political science nor history expert in these processes. I am a simple old person, retired PhD, mostly reading to my grandson in the evenings, and spending time during the day in the out of doors - or writing. And paying serious attention to all this stuff because it matters for the future of my children and grandchildren. With that all out of the way, I'm just answering you with my 2 cents, thus the worth of this opinion!
It looks like the scenario you propose is a) Biden withdraws from the election, b) resigns the Presidency, c) Harris is sworn in as President as per the Constitution, d) declares herself a nominee and/or accepts draft of herself in the convention as candidate for November, e) and Biden endorses her (big surprise if he didn't), with f) Harris campaigning before and during the convention depending on when Biden withdraws from the election and resigns the Presidency. With respect, as I think of this future, I'm already exhausted! At each of these steps, I imagine the media response, the howling GOP/Trump campaigns on the attack during moments of vulnerability (they are already demeaning a potential Harris candidacy as the "DEI candidate"), the hustling of the professional and elected candidates consulting their algorithms as to how this affects their own campaigns, the pundits opining with columns like "Why did Joe wait so long?" or "Who is Kamala Harris?" or all that distraction we read (I no longer) in The NY Times or elsewhere. It will be great for the news media and other outlets. There will be lots to talk and write about; it will be a field day for cable news.
I mean, maybe all this can happen and we manage to defeat Trump in the Fall. I don't know why there aren't equal energies being spent calling on Trump to withdraw from the race. For me, that's the goal - defeating Trump. Look, if Dems run a baked potato in November, I will vote for the Democrat. Period. With the damage of a corrupt SCOTUS, a more-than-dangerous President, a Republican-now-Trump party ready to implement a Federal government staffed by Trump loyalists, the future of Ukraine, the resolution of the Israel-Gaza war, the climate - all that is wavering in the air like dementors in unsupported flight hovering over the nation. That is my goal given limitations of time, mind, resources, and energies. It's a bit late for hand-wringing about Biden (my opinion); if folks wanted to run against him for the nomination, they should've had the courage to step up for the primaries. I'm old enough to remember LBJ withdrawing from re-election, and thus a 2nd term. He lost to Nixon.
Thanks, Helen. It's probably too much to ask of a dysfunctional oligarchy like the Democratic Party at this point. I'll say that I think actually many people would find this openness and democratic process exciting and energizing. Look at the Catholic Church--the previous Pope resigned when faced with his own decline, and it led to a burst of hope and excitement when a younger, charismatic man was elected. And it was precisely the contrast between the ailing Benedict and the energetic Francis that gave the latter such a burst of support in the early years of his papacy.
As for the voting of the public, yes, many people will vote for a baked potato instead of Trump. But the swing voters among the working classes in Pennsylvania and Michigan and Wisconsin are not of that mindset. They need someone positive and hopeful and energetic to vote FOR--they need "pull" energy, not just "push" energy. They don't think about the decision, sadly, in terms of the abstract but serious items you mention. They think purely in terms of which candidate--in his physical and vocal performance--makes them feel reassured and confident. That's what drove them away from Trump after the first debate in 2020. Now, it's driving too many of them away from Biden.
In terms of LBJ, I'd read this interesting piece from the Post a few days ago about what happened in 1968. When Johnson withdrew, it actually boosted the Democrats and energized their voters for a few weeks. It was subsequent events--the assassinations of MLK and RFK, riots, police brutality, Vietnam--that led to a souring of the national mood and created an opening for Nixon. And even then, Nixon barely won the first time around. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/30/biden-lyndon-johnson-1968-donald-trump-debate/
thanks, Nick. I really appreciate your time in reply. I am someone who lived through 1968 (and the assassination of JFK in 1963), so, yeah, the buoyancy about LBJ stepping down was indeed short-lived. RFK's assassination happened on the night of his Democratic primary victory in California - he gave a brief speech and then exited the stage only to be killed by Sirhan Sirhan. It's interesting for people who were "there" in the mid-1960s, the trauma still resonates. Well, I again say thank you for your time in reply and your very kind thoughts. I guess we'll find out soon enough how this will turn out!!
I fear we will. If you're the praying kind (as I am) now's the time to pray. Biden said only the Lord Almighty could take him from the race. It's a bit weird to pray for that, but maybe on balance it would be for the best! Eternal life for Joe, deliverance from Trump for us. (While He's at it, maybe the Lord can take Trump too!)
You're welcome! And thank you for your thoughtful engagement. Tried to answer some of your other comments. Let's all pray for healing of the President and our troubled nation. As an Episcopalian, I do think this is some kind of profound spiritual struggle we are going through.
Thanks, Nick. I think our struggle today is less spiritual than ethical, though perhaps that is a distinction without a difference. Adam Smith, who may or may not have been atheist, I believe held that in economic preferences, every one seeks his own best interests. I think that applies to political systems and policies as well -- it is up to each individual to determine where his ("or her") best interest lies, and then support a politician whose views align with their own. One could say that we are experiencing a national struggle to define the "spirit" of America, but to my non-Phi & Reli major mind, a spiritual struggle would be one of personal discernment rather than something in which the nation engages as a whole.
As I said, this may just be a semantic quibble - sorry if it comes across as pointless disputation.
LBJ, I am remembering, was very depressed, maybe especially about the war. Whatever there was some synergy happening with those events. Add the protests.
One tiny silver lining in this mess is that people have come up with some creative and humorous comparisons of who they would rather vote for than Trump. "A baked potato" is a new one. I've heard a ficus plant, a dead cat (both of those from Michael Moore), a dead dog, and my dead dog's scattered ashes.
The best thought of them all. Why complicate matters this late in the game? Biden says he is in. Why not drop everything and go full throttle to ensure he’s reelected? Keep it simple like the GOP. “We know Trump is horrible, but he’s our man! Go f*** yourselves!” the GOP clearly says. At this point too much intellectualizing is a bad thing, a very bad thing!!
LBJ's VP, Hubert H. Humphrey, had been a Civil Rights warrior in the 50's and early 60's. Nobody but major DC policy wonks knew what HHH's views were on VietNam (he wanted the war to be over, but the question was, "How?"). I helped set up the room for his campaign launch speech (watched on TV) and was unimpressed. The theme of his campaign, he said, was "The Politics of Joy." What an empty, thoughtless phrase, when our country was deeply divided and a major war going on (sound familiar??). Nixon's big campaign idea was his "secret plan to end the war". The "secret" was to violate international law and invade Cambodia and bomb the living mustard out of civilians in North Vietnam to "force" the North to the negotiating table. That's the way I remember it, anyway. Johnson's resignation was partly expiation for his 'guilt' in having listened to the Generals and the anti-communist Cold Warriors and "experts" from both parties, and his native determination "not to be the first American President to lose a war."
I believe it's been established that the other motivation -- maybe the main one -- was Lady Bird's urging him to quiet because of his poor health.
So perhaps the lesson in this -- that quitters don't "win" elections for their party -- may be misplaced. Let's ask ourselves, "What is the hardest, and thus the bravest, course of action for Joe Biden: to grit his teeth and summon all his strength to cross the finish line (i.e. re-election), or to "screw his courage to the sticking point" and announce that, for the good of the country and his party, he would withdraw his candidacy in favor of (insert your favorite Democrat's name here). I think Joe would pile up major style points if he chose the latter course.
I read too much fear of this and that in your reasoning which is a blockage leading to the status quo and this trajectory. I believe Biden will lose. We will lose. We have an opportunity now.. Every way is risky. The other side is being very bold. We have to be bold. I hate to put it as an us vs them, evil versus good: binary thing but it is.. I like to believe that people will understand their choice. Us or them. This is the time to take the better road, also risky, but hopeful and bright.. Biden cannot be allowed to make this choice because he believes he is our savior. He is in denial of his diminished abilities. He will not be able to do 4 more years from what we can see already. That matters to people voting now. He has a circle around him that is protecting him as well. This is the panic now. And it will grow.
I would like to believe, and I will earnestly hope, that the folks who are closest to Biden, and whose counsel he will trust and accept, are as clear thinking as Professor Snyder.
Based on the fact that he apparently listens only to his wife and Hunter--yes, Hunter--this hope is in vain. It's like a horrible combination of KING LEAR and THE GODFATHER.
It's based on extensive reporting and the widely-available remarks of everyone who knows how Biden operates. As for his advisers, those amount to 3 men who have served him for decades. They are likewise blinded by loyalty and love, not willing to tell him the truth. It is nothing personal against these people, but that is how patronage systems work--which is what our political system is. It's all about giving and rewarding absolute loyalty.
Option 5. Don’t make it a battle between 2 old men, make it a battle of policy. The Republicans now have 2 draconian documents that define who they are, the GOP platform released yesterday with lots of goals and objectives, but not an inkling of how they can accomplish their own conflicting plans; and Project 2025 (suggest we relabel it to just P25 for impact) which outlines the taking and overthrowing of our Democracy. The GOP has handed us the tools of their own defeat, let’s use them against them with an upbeat Reaganesque City on the Hill vision of the future reflecting on all the accomplishments of the first 4 years of Biden’s presidency.
I wish we could, John. Sadly, elections are popularity contests and the more charismatic, over-confident, and aggressive candidates win. That is why the debate was such a disaster. Remember, the tipping point toward Biden in 2020 was the first debate between him and Trump. In that event, it was Trump who seemed chaotic, unhinged, and out of his mind. This time it's the reverse. The post-debate polls all show a decline for Biden, especially in Pennsylvania--the keystone to the election.
Biden is certainly behind by any measure, but recall both Obama and Reagan had lousy 1st debates and went on to win. To your point, however, both of them had charisma. Thanks for the citizen’s assembly suggestion.
You're most welcome! I think democracy by lottery is the solution to so many of our problems.
As for prior bad debates, the Reagan example cuts against those defending Biden, because we know that Reagan had dementia at that point, too. And Biden is even older than he was. As for Obama, the analogy here is to an athlete. We all know that even at their peak, the best athletes have bad nights and even bad stretches. That's normal. We expect them to make the adjustments to recover. And they do. We see this all the time.
But we also know that once even the best athlete has passed his or her peak, the decline is irreversible. We see outliers like Tom Brady and Roger Federer, but even they pushed things beyond the bounds of sanity (Brady especially). As they reach their mid- to late-30s, those "bad nights" actually reflect a loss of their capacities. And we all know what's happening with Biden from dealing with elderly people in our own lives.
Moreover, it's not about what Biden's fitness is "really like." It's about what the American people believe and perceive. And they've been saying in poll after poll and focus group after focus group for months that they believe Biden is too old and declined to serve. And who can blame them? The generational optics are terrible. In his ancient physical person, Biden now symbolically represents a failed gerontocracy. How can we expect young voters to get at all enthused?
Think about this: I am 40 years old. When I was born, Joe Biden was soon to launch his first presidential race! When Gov. Josh Shapiro was born 51 years ago, Biden was in his first year as a Senator!! When today's youngest voters--18 year olds--were born, Biden was 63. Sixty-three!!! I mean, stepping back, we can all see how absurd this is. And yet the Boomer Democrats--like with Diane Feinstein and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and others--seem hellbent on dying in office.
“And we all know what's happening with Biden from dealing with elderly people in our own lives.”
Unless the elder in our own lives has had a long career in the public eye. Joe Biden has never been your average Joe. Average people are not elected Senator, Vice President, or President.
“We all know”. . .about “dealing with” the individual old people we have known.
Senators and Vice-Presidents and Presidents are some kind of super human? They're normal people just like us. But worse--the power they occupy for so long makes them neurologically anti-social and entitled. Many social scientists have documented this effect.
As for Biden, it is not just his physical age that's dragging him down. It's his "political" age. It's precisely because he has been around for SO SO long that he's a liability now. There's experience, and then there's clinging to power. He himself said in 2020 that he saw himself as a transitional figure. And the mood of the country has been anti-incumbent, anti-status quo for 15 years now.
By being so long in office Biden, is seen as part of that failed status quo. In a Biden vs. Trump rematch, Trump represents change--terrible change, but change nonetheless. If you put a younger candidate--one who still has experience--against Trump, you flip that whole dynamic.
I like Timothy Snyder’s idea of choices. I wish Biden would challenge Trump to a complete neurological and cognitive work-up by an independent team of doctors. Trump would never agree, of course. We would know if it was an episode or a condition, as Nancy Pelosi said.
We should in the meantime be talking about Project 2025. Relative in UK has a good understanding of Biden debate and efforts to push him out. Never heard of Project 2025. Like most Americans.
Thoughtful post, making the point that all options carry risk. Some comments (similar to those I have made elsewhere):
1. This WILL be criticized. And if it is Kamala, THAT will be criticized. And if it is someone else who hasn't run a campaign up till now, unless it is a fabulous success THAT will be criticized.
Also, while one can criticize the Biden campaign so far - apart from anything else, they had
no clue as to how to prep Biden for the debate - there is absolutely no guarantee that any of the other possibilities can run a good *national* campaign.
2. "Operation Carnival" really says it all, doesn't it? As you say, the media will be delighted. Meanwhile the jockeying will generate ill-will and give the Rs attack lines. It will generate a huge amount of effort use a large amount of money that is not focused on what is needed, to defeat Trump. "some Democrats will complain" about jumping over Kamala apparently means "a lot including a core constituency of the D party.
3. "Operation convention" is better named "convention carnival". By the way, you can bet the Rs are already developing their attack lines on multiple possible candidates.
I've already cast my primary vote. I'll vote for a mummy if it means defeating Trump, but I wouldn't be happy about voting for someone that didn't get primary votes.
I voted for Biden in the primary. I and millions of others. Why does our vote mean nothing to all those thinking they are the ones to choose? You know too that if Biden steps down we lose. Kamala will not be accepted enough at this time and who know what underhanded actions the GOP will take to somehow keep her off the ballot. After all the SCOTUS belongs to trump now.
so you're telling me my vote and that of millions that voted for Biden are useless because you say so? We VOTED FOR BIDEN NOT HARRIS FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL TICKET. You take our votes away how is that any different than an authoritarian society? You tell us to give up our vote because you all know better. I'm livid
I voted for Biden in the 'primary'. I will vote for Biden in the election if I must.
But this is an unprecedented situation. If Biden steps down and the delegates put into power by our primary votes select another ticket - then no one is taking away your vote. Those you delegated power to will have used it to good purpose.
Switching candidates is a tricky matter. In 1972 the Democrats switched VP candidates and although McGovern had by then a poor chance to win, that fiasco gave Nixon the election. Switching candidates now will lead to a similar result, in my opinion.
Brad, there's definitely a strong risk. But there is no risk-free decision at this point. The risk of it not working has to be weighed against the risk of sticking with Biden in a kind of "sunk-cost" thinking. This is the very judicious approach Prof. Snyder is doing in this post. I'd argue it was giving into that kind of path-dependent, go-along blindly, thinking that got us into an even worse situation.
This is a time for gambling. Sometimes gambles lose. Sometimes they succeed. The risk of picking a new candidate, to my mind, is probably the same risk of sticking with Biden--epic defeat in November. But the potential upside of it working--even if it improves the odds only by 10 or 20%--outweighs any potential upside of sticking with Biden. As a compromise, I'd take the Operation Kamala option. Removes the worst possibility--Biden--but prevents perhaps the unreasonable risk of an open convention.
As for 1972, it's a different situation, I think. First, it was the stigma against depression and the perception of some kind of cover-up. But in our scenario, 75% of voters are in AGREEMENT that Biden is too old and unfit. And people feel that it is precisely his decline that's been covered-up. So it would be responding to them positively to swap him out. That's the counter-argument.
In this scenario, Biden withdraws willingly and allows his delegates--whom you all actually voted for--to make a new decision. This is how nominees were chosen for decades and decades by the parties, incidentally.
And Gary is right. The primaries were manipulated in an anti-democratic manner to prevent any serious contenders. Only Dean Phillips had the courage to try, and no one supported him. Those elections were as farcical as the ones staged by Putin and Orban.
then you are alienating millions of us who you think will just do what you say because you say so. That is the harm you will do, I am livid. Regardless of what you say about the primaries WE VOTED FOR BIDEN Don't forget how many of us you will upset no matter how you try to tell us we are wrong. You are the ones handing this to trump
75% of Americans say Biden is too old and unfit to be President anymore--including half of Democrats. 60% of Americans want him to withdraw and a new nominee selected. And yet Biden and the party leadership refuse to listen, which is anti-democratic. Imagine how livid WE are. It is Biden and the Democrats now handing this to Trump, not those of us who can see reality.
We voted and we made our choice. I will do anything I can to make sure I keep my vote. We will win. No wonder we no longer trust the "elite" from the East Coast.
Just to clarify, this was not a thing the DNC did to protect Biden for any nefarious reason. It’s pretty typical for a party to try to discourage challenges to an incumbent president. Parties exist to win elections. That’s pretty much the job description. Incumbency carries advantages that mean incumbents usually win. To the extent that a competitive primary beats up the incumbent, it chips away at those advantages. It’s like throwing campaign funds or talented campaign organizers out the window. Why would a rational party do that?
The Democratic Party is probably due for a knock down, drag out primary battle about its future direction and its way past time to turn power over to some younger Dems. But those kinds of battles highlight deep divisions that can’t necessary be papered over in time for a general election and that can suppress party turnout. Brings to mind the PUMA movement among Clinton supporters who refused to vote for Obama after he beat her in 2008. (Party Unity My Ass)
I think many Democrats hoped that kind of divisive primary could be put off again in 2024 after it was clear that Trump intended to run again.
In retrospect was it an error? Who knows. But it wasn’t meant to be some delegitimizing power grab. Just parties doing what parties do.
Any thoughts on Alan Lichtman’s “Keys to the White House” model in which he states that it is about governance and not polls? He predicts a Biden victory.
Agree completely on governance vs polls — but considering 70+million voted for Trump a SECOND time… every GOP politicians who correctly called him out for what he is prior to his first term then obediently got in line to kiss the ring, and continue to do so… the apparent popularity of “slogans vs coherent policy”… the success of GOP in State governments… …I despair.
The dyed-in-the-wool Red/Blue are important as far as ensuring they actually vote! But the real battle is the the undecided — to hope they see governance as the issue, dismantling of the Republic as the risk, and continuity of moving in a positive direction (with inevitable faux pas) as critical to the survival of the Constitution and a democratic Republic.
Implicit but unmentioned in your conclusion is your knowledge of the modern progress of Eastern Europe, people close to what Americans are like but educated by years of autocratic rule. When given a choice they have always chosen freedom. The maga side is doing the things it can to foster belief that this is a close election. It's not, but it is an election in danger of being driven by skilled foreign anti-American propaganda domesticated by US traitors & their opportunistic fellow travelers. Certainly Biden's long political experience tells him the difference between normal US elections and what we've been getting since 2015. I trust Biden and his team to know how to fight this with trust in the electoral majority to continue to choose freedom while fighting the criminal effort to manipulate us with propaganda, crowd-manipulation science & cheating.
Richard, Biden's approval rating has been at 38% for months--the lowest of any incumbent to seek re-election. He is currently losing Pennsylvania by 4-5% and Georgia by even more. The gap has widened since the debate. If that pans out, that's the ballgame. Yet in his interview with Stephanopolous, he denied that his approval rating is that low!
It's one thing to deny polls forecasting a future event--the election. It is an act of epic self-deception to deny the present reality of his massive unpopularity. He also said he didn't even watch his debate performance afterwards--which Obama did after his poor showing in the first debate with Romney in 2012. What is the response to these empirical facts?
That's one assertion. If you looked at the poll of polls I included there are many 1% - 2% numbers not even including allowance for errors. The numbers vs Biden are in no way staggering nor abnormal 4 months out. Now you're showing your troll tail & I don't owe you an argument.
It’s fair to say that we still haven’t had enough time and polls to get a full sense of the effect of the debate. But based on your own link, the five most recent polls of Pennsylvania show Trump ahead by 4%; by 5%; by 5%; and by 7%. The average, in your own source, is Trump up by 4--48 to 44--in PA. That’s tending beyond the margin of error.
Accusing someone—who has a legitimate case with evidence and makes it respectfully—of being a troll is an ad hominem attack and not in keeping with the spirit of this newsletter, nor civil discourse.
Great commentary. I would add "Operation Washington's Farewell" which could be seen as a variant of any of the last three. There is the potential in this moment of an extraordinarily moving, honest, and heartfelt speech that Biden would the the perfect person to deliver and that, in my view, would be remembered far longer than whatever engrams from the debate. I imagine him speaking, not about ability/disability, but straight from the heart (where he is at his best) about generations, the mortal coil (not a Scranton phrase), what is poignantly universal about life and limits--no matter one's age. There are seasons. And times to invite others to pick up the responsibility. In other words, to put it back where it's always been--on us.
If well-crafted, such a speech would convey strength, compassion, and integrity, not weakness or defeat. I believe--or would like to believe--it would resonate with hearts, which is where most of us actually resonate.
I agree wholeheartedly, Hank. Sadly, this generation of leaders lacks Washington's virtue. Based on Biden's present behavior, he is taking the KING LEAR option--but without Shakespeare's eloquence.
Well, I'm a playwright so maybe.....perchance to dream.....
More seriously, I thought the immediate responses of Kristof, Friedman, NYT op editors were not helpful, much as they tried to be "polite" before yanking B off stage.
Helpful to whom? The country? Or Biden's ego? I think this whole new "media is out to get Biden" narrative gets things upside down. What has happened is that the media--along with party leaders--have known for about two years that Biden was in serious decline. Remember that his fitness came up even during a primary debate in 2020--Cory Booker asked Biden about his health directly on stage.
But instead of doing right by the American people, the liberal media entered into a kind of conspiracy of silence about it. They knew the truth, but didn't want to say the Emperor Has No Clothes because of fears of causing party chaos. But the debate blew apart that conspiracy. So the reactions of Kristof, Friedman, and the NYT Editors that we're seeing now--along with the other liberal outlets--is an attempt to pile on and make up for their mistake. They're trying to do what they should have done long ago.
What's not helpful, then, is their lack of truthfulness the past two years--not the present pile on. They're trying to get reality to break through the epistemic bubble that the Democrats and Biden are living in. So far, it's failing. And given the Party's delusions and group-think, I'm not sure that even electoral catastrophe in November will bring them to their senses. The lengths of self-deception that a tribal mind can go to knows no bounds.
I think it’s more complicated than that. Biden is old. The guy had trouble communicating clearly when he was young and it hasn’t improved. (I found John Hendrikson’s piece in the Atlantic 4 years ago about how the aging brain manages - or fails to manage - a stutter to be really helpful in understanding how he speaks.
The biggest problem is that Trump, projecting (as he always does) in the face of his own decline has painted Biden as incapacitated by age and the right wing media machine has followed suit. They have had an added assist from the foreign nations who would like to see democracy fail in the US — don’t kid yourself about their invasion of the social media space.
The result has been an onslaught of fake or edited material that makes Biden look decrepit but that is easy and essential to refute. Just look at the actual videos.
I don’t doubt that had Biden had anything like his debate moment in the past we’d be watching it nonstop in our feeds. He hasn’t. And while he’s not often available to the press, he’s in the public eye quite a bit. They would have found it just as reporters would have found more serious examples than they have been able to report to date.
My point is that in an environment where disinformation proliferates, it’s very hard to know what is true. So we go with other kinds of cues we find to be reliable — Trump lies, much of the media has a double standard for Biden and Trump. The country is doing really well. People I trust interact with him daily and they think he’s capable.
That doesn’t make those of us who have not been persuaded by the evidence stupid or blindly loyal or anything else.
The truth is, I’m still feeling skeptical that I know what the truth is and the fact that all the pro-democracy forces on social media and cable news and wherever are now positive he had dementia and Parkinson’s and is also a selfish sob putting ego over country doesn’t persuade me anymore than all the Republicans being positive.
Being skeptical means I’m skeptical. I have questions that I’d like the WH to answer about Biden’s health. And I think they should answer and I hope that they do. If they know the answer which they very well may not.
Christine, no doubt there has been lots of fake videos and manipulation of social media by nefarious actors. I was skeptical for a long time about the right-wing media's claims that Biden is senile. But the debate demolished that skepticism. We all saw it and cannot deny it.
And the facts that have come out since have only been more damning. Many people have admitted to credible reporters that he has been in decline for months. The White House says he is in reliable condition only between 10am and 4pm! He was incoherent at times with Stephanopolous. Most of his appearances are before a teleprompter. When he's not, he goes into incoherence. Obama did over 500 press conferences by this point in his presidency. Trump--Trump!--did some 400. Biden is in the 100s, and most of those happened in the first two years. Remember how badly he performed when he did a press conference a few months ago in response to the report from the special counsel that said he has a poor memory? When he called into Morning Joe yesterday, he clearly was reading from papers (you could hear them being shuffled) and rambled when he didn't have them to look at.
Even his defenders are saying, "Well, the White House is run by a council of advisers, not really Biden alone." Ok, that's not really encouraging to hear--at a basic level, the President himself or herself needs to be competent. What if a foreign adversary creates some kind of Cuban Missile Crisis? In the end, the President makes the final call. I'm all for having a plural Executive Council, like Switzerland--the Presidency has long been too imperial. But at the moment it is what it is.
And in terms of the election, it's just terrible optics. It makes it so much harder to strike a strong contrast to Trump's insanity when Biden is also incoherent and frail.
Just my personal opinion, Nick, but POTUS being on the job from 10 to 4 sounds okay for taking care of sit-reps, policy briefings, etc. What I am concerned about is not the schedule for staff to get face time with Joe, it is Biden's ability to focus, follow an argument and weigh the pros and cons of different decisions from all the relevant perspectives when there is a serious decision to be made.
Nick - Re your pointed comments about the media staying silent about Joe Biden's declining abilities, yeah, it does seem like piling on, and yeah, they knew (or should have suspected) his condition was more frail than Team Biden wanted the public to know. So to some extent these exhortations to Joe to drop out of the race are disingenuous.
But unless you've seen proof, it's pretty risky to come out with a downbeat assessment, in essence saying, 'POTUS is losing his marbles'. That's a good way to stir up a hornet's nest of denials by supporters and "Told ya's" by opponents. And lose a lost of loyal readers who are Biden fans.
That’s certainly a valid point. A couple of thoughts in response. First, the problem is that we can’t get the “proof” of Biden’s actual condition because the White House is stonewalling and preventing access to the kind of information that would give us answers. They stage-manage his appearances with teleprompters, pre-select questions for him, and have had him give the lowest number of press conferences or one-on-one interviews of any president in decades.
Biden refuses to submit to a cognitive test and even refused to watch his own debate performance. If we were in a “normal” context, not even in an election year, this would be a massive scandal and story. (In fact, it is literally the major scandal of the Bartlett Administration on The West Wing years ago!) It’s the covering up that raises this to such a crisis level. Even if he weren’t in danger of losing the election because of his fitness, it is a legitimate national security question. What if something like the Cuban Missile Crisis happens? Only the President can access order a nuclear strike. It is perfectly valid for people to harbor grave doubts given the uncertainty of his condition.
Secondly, the real point is that it doesn’t matter what his actual condition is. 75% of Americans say that they BELIEVE he is too old and unfit. We cannot convince them otherwise. Their numbers have grown for months. They’ve been saying so in polls and focus groups over and over. And now the debate has made even more of them—including me—believe this. And I was someone who’s resisted the “Biden is senile” narrative for a while, because I think he’s been a very good president on the domestic front.
In an electoral system, where the People are sovereign, you cannot ignore something so fundamental as 75% of the People believing you’re too old and unfit. Especially when they put more weight on that, sadly, than the threat of Trump. And this statistic and data point—the 75% number—has been verified in many polls, along with the lowest approval rating of any incumbent President seeking re-election. He has lost his legitimacy in the eyes of the public. That’s a fact, and facts are stubborn things.
Not a conspiracy theorist? I voted for Old Joe. I knew how old he was. His debate performance wasn’t great but not the firehose of lies I heard from Trump. His morality, empathy and experience are the compass of an administration doing a very fine job in a very scary world. We know the administration is working.
I would like to take this conversation further but can’t at present. I will just add that had I been polled at any time since Biden was elected, I would have said that he was too old to run for a second term . But I would still vote for him now, having seen him frail and having great difficulty getting his thoughts in order. I just don’t sleep so soundly, worrying that the proverbial 3 am call may come on his watch.
Thank you for the options to consider. I am 74, not 54, and have helped people for many years consider their long term care planning options. I have found that it is so difficult for most people to accept, or even acknowledge, their own mortality.
We are all aging, chronologically and biologically.
Biden is a man, God bless him, who would like to think that the rules of aging can be somehow overlooked. Set aside. Aging issues relate to morbidity, dying relates to mortality. He is ignoring the morbidity issues, to the peril of the rest of us. His family is enabling him. I get it, but this is creating the current crisis, post-debate. Neurological issues can be, in part, addressed, if there is not denial that there might be something going on that needs to be addressed.
Like you suggest Timothy, being President and running for President is a double whammy, damn tough job. Time for a reality check in the Biden family. Time to pass the torch in a graceful way and preserve Biden’s individual legacy and our Country, at the same time.
This is the stuff of tragedy. For Biden, the Democratic Party, and the nation. That a successful presidential administration cannot be translated into a successful presidential campaign. Especially against a Republican party long bent on repurposing our democratic republic as a clerical-corporate fascist state. Through the person of a Donald Trump - but more significantly through the Mitch McConnells, Mike Johnsons, John Roberts and their Charles Kochs, Leonard Leos, Steve Bannons et al. I have wondered 'why a unified executive' and, as with the Supreme Court - fewer people to buy off?
I think the allure of a unified executive in the mind of a right-winger is the increased power of POTUS to see that his/her policies can be executed without disturbance, delay or second-guessing by the so-called "deep state" -- the institutional memory and adherence to established norms that are characteristic of experienced civil servants.
Thanks. If every pundit/analyst led with this kind of analysis instead of the conviction that they know the one and only possible alternative that the party should follow, we’d be much further ahead right now.
Somehow, it’s almost exclusively the academics (there are a few thoughtful pundit/journalist exceptions and a handful of batshit academics who are just bonkers in their hubris) who lay out possibilities rather than certainties, with strategies for assessing risks. I can only assume it’s training. We are trained to wait on the evidence, consider all angles, be prepare to be surprised, not get attached to our conclusions, and to know that the obvious answer might bite you in the ass.
I’ve never seen a bigger case for critical thinking being taught in the womb. (Can we do that yet?)
Pundits/analysts lead “off the top of their head” and then analyze/defend their response which is inevitably at least somewhat superficial.
Hopefully there are some in advisory positions that will take the longer & deeper view of options with an unwavering eye as to what’s good for the Country in the long-term and not just the Party for the short-term.
It is touching faith in the American people to risk our democracy on the hope that they will vote for a Black woman (with a Jewish husband). Are we there yet?
Short answer: No, America is not (yet??) ready for a Black/Asian female President, and a Jewish First Gentleman. Absolutely not.
Good lord. Look how they vilified Hillary Clinton, just a short 8 years ago. (The hatred continues to this day.) 100% for being female and smart and having the gall to run for President.
I hope someday, in my short time left on earth, those qualities will not be disqualifying to voters. But we are not there yet. Nope.
MAGA is already hard at work with their usual toxic brew of racist/misogynist smear tactics on Harris:
A couple of things: First, they would have vilified anybody. Having no ideas of their own, no positive proposals to offer, that's all they can do. Watch any Trump/MAGAt speech, if you can stomach it, and you will see that nothing has changed.
Second, Hillary made a number of critical mistakes and errors of judgement that played into the hands of her opponents. She alienated climate activists like me by sabotaging the Copenhagen talks. She supported the war against Qaddafi, showing an utter lack of common decency by gloating about his death. (Is Libya yet better off? No.) She violated the law by hosting her State Department correspondence on her personal server. (Said correspondence is the property of the People, not the Secretary of State. But I agree, "lock her up" is going waaaaay too far.) She demonstrated her allegiance to Wall Street by accepting multiple, quarter million dollar speaker fees for discussions, during the campaign, that she refused to divulge to the public. She demonstrated an amazing lack of political acumen by referring to supporters of her opponent as "deplorables" (Some undoubtedly are, but it is stupid to say so). Finally, she made the grand strategic blunder of not visiting any of the swing states during the late phase of the campaign. As far as female politicians go, Hillary Clinton is second rate. Angela Merkel, she ain't.
Are you inferring that Kamala Harris would/could be elected by the American voters? If you think Hillary Clinton was "second rate," what's your opinion then of Kamala Harris as a politician?
You seem to be saying that Donald Trump deserved to be appointed president in 2016, because Hillary had committed so many sins in your ideological view. How has that worked out? We don't have the luxury of "purity." We didn't in 2016 or 2020 (sounds like Biden isn't pure enough for your liking, either), and we certainly don't have that luxury now.
No, I am not inferring anything about Kamala Harris. She was not my first choice in 2020, because she is not seen as being woke to the dangers of climate change and nuclear war. But to be honest, I know little about her.
And No, Donald Trump absolutely did not 'deserve' to be elected; he owes his win to Mercer, Putin and the folks at Cambridge Analytica. In 2016 I voted for the person I thought most qualified, Jill Stein. And yes, I know, we Greens are given the blame for Clinton's loss despite her awful performance. The Democrats like the Republicans don't appear to be very introspective.
I voted for Biden in 2020 because of the threat that Donald Trump poses and because Biden made promises to address climate change, promises that were largely thwarted by members of his own party. I will vote for Biden again in 2024 if he is the nominee but if he is not, I reserve judgement. If the Democrats continue on their course of self harm, I may decide to vote my conscience, i.e. for Cornell West. My willingness to be pragmatic has its limits.
There are no risk-free alternatives. This thoughtful review helps thinking about the problem, not solving it. For my money, the best idea is one of the more radical: a Harris-Witmer ticket. Two women! I am a man and not radically feminist (or anti-feminist)(my wife is in the same mode), and I think this is a risk worth taking. No other alternative presents as stark a contrast to the coming Trump-mini-Trump ticket on the other side. It's worth the risk.
Hmm, I thought of a Harris/Whitmer combination also. My concern is more about Harris's readiness for the top job than having two women on the ticket, but that's mainly because she got stuck with dealing with "the border crisis" early on.
The Biden team started the week with an artillery barrage aimed at legitimately concerned Democrats who have declined to shut their yaps, stuff their ears, put on blinders, erase their memories, and just move on. When the Biden campaign uses MAGA tactics against its own base--characterizing good-faith doubters as "pundits and elites"--we know the campaign is not only ineffective but bankrupt. The campaign is turning personalist, making itself the issue, and pitting Democrats and their allies against each another. This cannot continue. National Rally was defeated on Sunday because the opposition held together. France learned the lesson of 1933. We must, too.
Another important lesson from Round 2 of the French election was the tactical voting compromise between the left- wing party & Macron' centrist party, which asked 3rd place candidates who had qualified to run for Parliament in Round 2 to stand down, so as to not dilute the vote & to prevent Marine Le Pen's far right fascist party from winning.
And those patriotic French men & women agreed to do that, for the good of their country!
A thought provoking post. I have to say I voted for Biden in 2020 after voting Green in the three prior presidential elections. I am less than enthusiastic about voting for Biden in 2024 because of his willingness to make dangerous compromises on three of the four issues I care about the most: The climate, nuclear weapons, and Ukraine. But the overriding issue to me this year is rejection of Trump and his Project 2025 agenda.
It is especially disturbing to me that so many Americans can consider Biden's age to be more important than the threat posed by Trump. In 1944, Franklin Roosevelt was reelected to an unprecedented third term based on his record and despite his obvious failing health. One could say that circumstances were different, that we were at war. Circumstances were indeed different: we were well on the way to victory in November 2024, while now we face existential threats on four fronts. In 1944 the American electorate decided based on the character of the candidate and the record of his administration. Are we to think that as a people we have declined so much that character and record are no longer decisive?
Stephen, polls have led me to understand that huge percentages of Americans do not share our understanding of the threat posed by Trump. Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution report that 75% of respondents believe the future of the country's democracy is at risk in the 2024 election, with 23% supporting political violence to deal with that. Or another take on the same trend: https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa
Older data (2021) from Morning Consult showed, (most language here is theirs) 26% of the U.S. population qualified as highly right-wing authoritarian, twice the share of the No. 2 countries, Canada and Australia. The beliefs that voter fraud decided the 2020 election, that Capitol rioters were doing more to protect than undermine the government and that masks and vaccines are not pivotal to stopping COVID-19 were...prevalent among right-leaning Americans.
Of course there are degrees of these anti-democratic sentiments, but the authoritarian tendencies affect not only the most extreme right voters, but also low information and partially radicalized swing voters. These are the folks (like you) I would have assumed before Trump to be choosing democracy over authoritarianism. Now I get that many are not actually weighing Biden's age against a threat, because they don't mind (or actually like) a strongman, and are in favor of violence that they assume will be used against the "other" and not them.
For those of us in Red and Purple states, the risks Dr Snyder thoughtfully considers are not theoretical. Many of our Red and Purple states are already living with single party legislatures, restrictive abortion bans, book bans, restrictions on teaching history, forced teaching of the Bible, deep restrictions on voting access, unaffordable housing. Some of these restrictive abortion states are talking about - at a state law level - forbidding women to travel out of state for necessary health care around pregnancy. We are the states where Trump tried to overturn our votes in 2020. We see he has been effective in slow walking his trials and undoing the rule of law. For us, the prospect of an authoritarian regime is not fantastical. I find a lot of (of course, not all of) this conversation about swapping out Biden, understanding that all the choices have risks, is taking place in the media and press and institutions grounded in very Blue or Blue-enough states like California New York, maybe even Connecticut and the like. For folks in those states, a Trump regime is unthinkable, but you all will be catching up to what the rest of us already live in should Trump win. I think understanding these electoral risks in states like Georgia, Arkansas, Arizona, Michigan, and so on is worth a more transparent comparative analysis. Any removal of or process to remove VP Harris in favor of a newcomer (who is maybe White, maybe male) will not be well received by the many Black women in marginal states who have brought Democrats over the line many times, especially in 2020.
''For folks in those states, a Trump regime is unthinkable, but you all will be catching up to what the rest of us already live in should Trump win.'' Yes! But as you know, it will be even worse this time around. I live in Austin, Texas--the capital. The overwhelming majority of us are liberal and the Republican state government has been interfering with us for well over a decade. They constantly harass us; they won't leave us be. For decades Republicans have been calling us ''The People's Republic of Austin.'' They really do believe we're communists. I told my sister 5 years ago that I wouldn't put it past a Republican governor and state legislature to allow right-wing paramilitary groups to round us up. Her response was the dead silence of someone who thought I'd lost my mind. With time, she changed her opinion. Austin is home to some of the most advanced medical research in the country. Many of our physicians teach at the Dell Medical School after practicing medicine for 8+ hours during the day, which means that physicians in Austin tend to be up on the latest research. These practicing/teaching MDs then mentor new MDs, bringing them into their own practices for internships. Our medical system is so advanced that when COVID came everyone in the medical community knew what to do because large-scale medical emergencies had been rehearsed for years. I was quite impressed with it: There was no confusion because each person in that community had a task to perform and just did it. They took great care to reduce the spread of COVID, going so far as to escort each patient to the door to the outside to see to it that they didn't stay in the building, even standing there for a few seconds to make sure patients started walking to their cars. I can't see Republicans being that careful about people's lives during a pandemic, or at any other time. This is one of the many things at stake for Austin--all because they're convinced we're communists.
Tennessee 🙋♂️ Our red state faces an authoritarian regime 💔😳😤
Susan, I wish more of the coastal Dems checked in to what's going on in Tennessee.
Helen, I’m a proud “Coastal Democrat.” I’m proud of my family’s *choice* to leave what was for them, an excruciating South. Their lived experience is why this country celebrates Juneteenth.
Texas and Mississippi were two of the worst states for Enslaved Stolen Africans and their descendants. Once my mother’s family learned they were “free,” two years after Chattel Slavery legally ended, they left Texas for the West and never looked; back.
My father’s family took longer to head West. They were accumulating land, education, and wealth in Mississippi and Louisiana.
I’m of the lineage of this nation’s first Black U.S. Senator, Hiram Rhodes Revels (R-MS). After Lincoln’s assassination, and after VP Andrew Johnson sabotaged Reconstruction when former Senator and Rev. Dr. Revels became President of Alcorn State University, he encouraged his daughter Susie Sumner Revels Cayton and her husband to head West — the lynchings were in full swing, no pun intended.
My family came West, claimed their 40 acres began farming, served in government, teachers unions, as police officers and chiefs. I
Just found the Wikipedia page on Hiram Rhodes Revels. ''During the American Civil War, Revels had helped organize two regiments of the United States Colored Troops and served as a chaplain.'' What an interesting man. Thanks for this bit of history!
Thank you, Rose! As we fondly refer to him in my family, the right Rev. Dr. Senator was also a missionary. Before social media, traveling to “spread the ‘good news’ or the gospel” was how one went viral or became an “influencer.”
He was born a Tar Heel, but Mississippi became home after the Civil War. It’s one of the saddest parts of our history, along with the Trail of Tears, the Chinese Exclusion Act, and the Internment of Japanese Citizens.
These Black Enslaved men escaped the plantations to fight for the Union, leaving behind their families. But for them joining ranks with Union soldiers, the Union likely wouldn’t have defeated the Confederacy.
After the Civil War, these brave Black soldiers knew they weren’t wanted in the North. The Southern enslavers engaged in an insidious disinformation campaign that worked. They successfully caused East Coast Northerners to believe the Enslaved were lazy and ignorant, untrainable for industrial work in the North. Meanwhile, they bragged about being able to leave their plantations to fight because those same lazy, uneducated, and untrainable slaves could run the entire operation in their absence — the joys of free labor.
What a strange paradox. SMH.
Nonetheless, the Black soldiers, buoyed by the Union’s victory and Emancipation, jubilantly returned home for what they believed would be a New Day for the free Negro! They returned to start a new life until President Andrew Johnson decided to reverse Reconstruction.
A lesson we did not learn from history. Andrew Johnson received 11 impeachment counts, not one for sicking the Klan on formerly enslaved people.
Johnson’s actions and the Klan’s lynchings did not deter the freedmen and women. They moved further West and North. Hope for the promise of a brighter tomorrow spurred them on. It's why I’m here! I’m grateful and humble.
Hope is our country’s most remarkable capital, but it in and of itself is not an action verb. Hope requires us to organize, mobilize, and do the work, even when it is difficult. Even when we cannot see what the reward is for the risk-taking.
Rose, I will tell you a story that should leave us all with hope.
First, I know you’re the sign that I should share this story because my favorite Aunt, Aunt Rose, Ellen Rose, my mother’s sister...
Every year when my granddaughter was younger, I took her and her half-sister to Nordstrom, bought them Christmas outfits, and got their photos taken with Santa at Nordy’s.
One year, my daughter decided she’d heard enough about all this fun and joined us.
We were being silly with girls, probably loud and giddy. We LOVE Christmas!! We were seated at the Nordstrom Grill for lunch next to an elderly white couple who immediately looked uncomfortable and moved their shopping bags away from us.
We looked at one another and chuckled. We were heading skiing the next day, then to pick up my aunt in Yakima.
The lady pardoned herself for interrupting and asked if one of us had mentioned Yakima. I explained that my family was from Yakima and that we were going there.
The man began to cry. He got up from his table, came over to ours, and started praying with us, asking God to forgive him for pre-judging us. He shared that one of his best friends was my Uncle Henry, the former Yakima Mayor, City Councilman, and pastor.
His wife explained that her husband and my uncle had a ministry for the incarcerated: her husband was a Republican, my uncle was a Democrat, and they were inseparable friends.
Her husband said they’d been reading about all the crime in Seattle and almost didn’t make the trip. They came to Bellevue for the first time. I explained that we live 15 minutes from the Bellevue Mall and always go there.
We decided that my Uncle Henry, in his way of building people bridges, would put us there together.
We should always look for opportunities to build “people bridges.” It’s how we make hope actionable.
I’m blessed to be educated, live in an affluent area, and enjoy the love of a beautiful family and lifelong friends. The legacy I carry keeps me hopeful, as should all of us. I’m proud to walk this American walk with every one of you — wherever you are.
LET’S WORK!!
#INSPO:
https://youtu.be/NBe5qbnkqoM?si=XlrvUIWOrZX77L2T
HOPE:
“Allow me to say in conclusion, notwithstanding the dark picture I have this day presented of the state of this nation, I do not despair of this country.” — Frederick Douglass, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July”
Frederick Douglass always remained hopeful that America could be her best self for all.
I am hopeful America will be her best self because we will continue to bend the arc of the moral universe toward freedom, democracy, and justice TOGETHER no matter what coast, ‘hood, holler, hill, hamlet, red clay road, country club, shelter, tiny house community, or part of flyover country we live.
THIS IS AMERICA!! 🇺🇸💙🤍❤️
[out of many 🧵🧶🪡 — we are ONE 🪢🫱🏾🫲🏻🫱🏽🫲🏿🫱🏿🫲🏻]
Dear Michele, I remember Frederick Douglass's July 4th speech from my brief study of US history from about 2013-17. I concentrated mostly on the South, including colonial N. America. My father was from the infamous Neshoba County, Mississippi, but left Mississippi when he was in his twenties. Every summer when we visited his family for about 2 weeks, my siblings and I were subjected to a nearly endless bombardment of n*****, over and over from everyone around us. It wasn't until I was older that I started to wonder how my father managed to avoid being tainted by that culture, and I still can't figure it out. I never heard him use that word when we were growing up.
''The hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed'' (at 3:14 in the video). Those words are still true; too many white Americans to this day do not want to hear them. I spend part of my time on Twitter/X reading the posts of white Americans whose minds have been poisoned by propaganda as well as by habit who post obscenities about African-Americans. They say they can't wait for Trump to regain power so they can go into the cities with their guns and start killing people. Of course ''going into the cities with our guns'' is code for hunting down African-Americans. There are frequently many replies to these comments, and more often than not the majority agree with the poster, adding their own comments about how excited they would be to do this. Of course we don't know how many of them would put their words into action, but their words alone are dispiriting. Added to this are the memory laws that have been passed by Republican state legislatures across the country that keep white Americans infantilized. White Americans are not the only people in the world who can't face their own history. Memory laws can be found in Russia, Poland, and Serbia, to name just three other countries.
Thank you, Michele, for sharing your history. I appreciate you reminding me that making generalizations can silence individual experiences. Our histories are powerful and remind me/us we can survive this.
Helen, I remain steadfastly hopeful we can and will remember we are Americans.🇺🇸 Being American doesn’t make us elite; it makes us the descendants of immigrants — a melting pot, a gumbo, a menudo of goodness.
We can accomplish great things TOGETHER…it’s in our collective DNA.
I saw the reports of neo-Nazis and the so-called “Patriot Front” marching in Tennessee over the July 4th weekend. It was a travesty!!
I might forget the name of Laurie Jinkins (Speaker of the Washington State Legislature), but Tennessee’s Cameron Sexton has been etched in my memory by State Reps. Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, and Gloria Johnson.
In the household I grew up in, Ella Fitzgerald competed with Charley Pride for turntable time. Understandingly,
”Tennessee Rise” is my summer anthem: https://youtu.be/eEYb-48SUjM?si=H9tOWlwXYpZzs4pD
Michele, I live in Georgia, so I've kept up with the Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, Gloria Johnson story and many of the other undemocratic acts of their legislature. Like the lyrics of this song, that episode - their suspension and then their reelection - is an example of travesty followed by joy.
I join you in feeling steadfast that we can and must remain committed to working together for a better world, doing great things, regardless of where we are in the geography of America. Our communities, our children and our grandchildren require it.
I LOVED hearing "Tennessee Rise." It's now my summer anthem too! With credit to you, I am sharing it with my friends and family - "How you wanna ride this wave?" Have an amazing day, Michele!
Oh, Michele…Thank you for posting this!! So many wonderful voices contributing to this great song. I love Gloria Johnson, and the two Justins! I have contributed a little bit of money to all three. But Gloria just HAS to win her race.
Michele and Rose, your words really resonate with me. I was born and raised in little town USA of NC. Yes, I am only a Tarheel when I watch college basketball. I was born to parents who were Holocaust victims in a town that was dominated by white Baptists. We had a black maid who I adored but it pains me to even say that, however, it was the norm in the South. Through her, I learned compassion. Through my dad, I learned civility. Please indulge me as I tell you a story. After working in our family’s clothing store, each evening my dad took Maggie (that was her name), home to “colored town”. I often went with him to drop her off. Her place to sit was in the backseat and mine was up in the front. One day, I had told Maggie that she needed to sit in the front but she politely protested. I was insistent and told her she never ever gets to sit in the front. I was young and naive but to my dad’s credit, he too, told Maggie to sit in the front and off we went. None of us ever spoke about that again but later in life, I wanted so badly to tell how much she taught me and how I loved her. I want to believe she knew.
When I was around 15 year old, I was in the car with my parents. We had to go around a circle to get back home. It was nighttime and I could see a fire in the middle of the circle. As we slowly approached, I saw a burning cross and men dressed in white robes and hoods. My parents spoke Yiddish to each other but I knew that this was very worrisome to them. My eyes were as big as saucers as it was my first encounter of seeing the KKK and I was scared.
Our white history is abysmal and I am happy to see it exposed. Men, in particular, create wars, create chaos. Why? What space occupies their brain to commit these acts of violence against their fellow man, woman, or child? I honestly believe no matter what creed, color, or size, women should be leading our nation. We are one of the largest and yet, we are far behind. I realize Fredrick Douglass said he did not despair our country, but I sometimes do. We must defeat the monsters who reared their evil heads and defeat them we will. My very best to both of you. 💕💪🏻 💪🏾💪🏿
Excellent reply! with important points that need to be considered — too easy for “Blue or Blue-enough” to overlook, unless a concerted effort to understand or at least gain some exposure and a sense of “their reality” in Red and Purple States, and stop pontificating in an echo-chamber.
thank you!!
Helen, I'm curious about your thoughts on this: What about a process in which Biden withdraws, resigns, and endorses Harris? Harris then would still have to compete for the nomination both before and at the convention. If she faced some other contenders--Whitmer, Shapiro, Beshear, Moore, etc--in a spirit of friendly competition, it could test her and all of them in a good way.
She would have the advantage of serving as the acting President, with Biden's blessing. But the Party would allow some spirited, healthy competition so as not to look too oligarchic. If she wins the nomination, she's done so without merely steamrolling other options. At the same time, she's given an advantage in the process in recognition of her role as Vice-President.
In other words, a combination of Operation Kamala, Operation Carnival, and Operation Convention. What do you think? Not that this matters, since it appears Biden is choosing Option 1.
Hi Nick,
Thank you for this question. Big caveat: I'm not a Constitutional nor political science nor history expert in these processes. I am a simple old person, retired PhD, mostly reading to my grandson in the evenings, and spending time during the day in the out of doors - or writing. And paying serious attention to all this stuff because it matters for the future of my children and grandchildren. With that all out of the way, I'm just answering you with my 2 cents, thus the worth of this opinion!
It looks like the scenario you propose is a) Biden withdraws from the election, b) resigns the Presidency, c) Harris is sworn in as President as per the Constitution, d) declares herself a nominee and/or accepts draft of herself in the convention as candidate for November, e) and Biden endorses her (big surprise if he didn't), with f) Harris campaigning before and during the convention depending on when Biden withdraws from the election and resigns the Presidency. With respect, as I think of this future, I'm already exhausted! At each of these steps, I imagine the media response, the howling GOP/Trump campaigns on the attack during moments of vulnerability (they are already demeaning a potential Harris candidacy as the "DEI candidate"), the hustling of the professional and elected candidates consulting their algorithms as to how this affects their own campaigns, the pundits opining with columns like "Why did Joe wait so long?" or "Who is Kamala Harris?" or all that distraction we read (I no longer) in The NY Times or elsewhere. It will be great for the news media and other outlets. There will be lots to talk and write about; it will be a field day for cable news.
I mean, maybe all this can happen and we manage to defeat Trump in the Fall. I don't know why there aren't equal energies being spent calling on Trump to withdraw from the race. For me, that's the goal - defeating Trump. Look, if Dems run a baked potato in November, I will vote for the Democrat. Period. With the damage of a corrupt SCOTUS, a more-than-dangerous President, a Republican-now-Trump party ready to implement a Federal government staffed by Trump loyalists, the future of Ukraine, the resolution of the Israel-Gaza war, the climate - all that is wavering in the air like dementors in unsupported flight hovering over the nation. That is my goal given limitations of time, mind, resources, and energies. It's a bit late for hand-wringing about Biden (my opinion); if folks wanted to run against him for the nomination, they should've had the courage to step up for the primaries. I'm old enough to remember LBJ withdrawing from re-election, and thus a 2nd term. He lost to Nixon.
I mean, LBJ withdrew, they ran Hubert Humphrey, his VP, and he lost to Nixon. Sorry!
Thanks, Helen. It's probably too much to ask of a dysfunctional oligarchy like the Democratic Party at this point. I'll say that I think actually many people would find this openness and democratic process exciting and energizing. Look at the Catholic Church--the previous Pope resigned when faced with his own decline, and it led to a burst of hope and excitement when a younger, charismatic man was elected. And it was precisely the contrast between the ailing Benedict and the energetic Francis that gave the latter such a burst of support in the early years of his papacy.
As for the voting of the public, yes, many people will vote for a baked potato instead of Trump. But the swing voters among the working classes in Pennsylvania and Michigan and Wisconsin are not of that mindset. They need someone positive and hopeful and energetic to vote FOR--they need "pull" energy, not just "push" energy. They don't think about the decision, sadly, in terms of the abstract but serious items you mention. They think purely in terms of which candidate--in his physical and vocal performance--makes them feel reassured and confident. That's what drove them away from Trump after the first debate in 2020. Now, it's driving too many of them away from Biden.
In terms of LBJ, I'd read this interesting piece from the Post a few days ago about what happened in 1968. When Johnson withdrew, it actually boosted the Democrats and energized their voters for a few weeks. It was subsequent events--the assassinations of MLK and RFK, riots, police brutality, Vietnam--that led to a souring of the national mood and created an opening for Nixon. And even then, Nixon barely won the first time around. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/30/biden-lyndon-johnson-1968-donald-trump-debate/
thanks, Nick. I really appreciate your time in reply. I am someone who lived through 1968 (and the assassination of JFK in 1963), so, yeah, the buoyancy about LBJ stepping down was indeed short-lived. RFK's assassination happened on the night of his Democratic primary victory in California - he gave a brief speech and then exited the stage only to be killed by Sirhan Sirhan. It's interesting for people who were "there" in the mid-1960s, the trauma still resonates. Well, I again say thank you for your time in reply and your very kind thoughts. I guess we'll find out soon enough how this will turn out!!
I fear we will. If you're the praying kind (as I am) now's the time to pray. Biden said only the Lord Almighty could take him from the race. It's a bit weird to pray for that, but maybe on balance it would be for the best! Eternal life for Joe, deliverance from Trump for us. (While He's at it, maybe the Lord can take Trump too!)
Maybe the almighty has spoken but Biden is not listening?
I enjoyed your insights, Nick. Thanks.
You're welcome! And thank you for your thoughtful engagement. Tried to answer some of your other comments. Let's all pray for healing of the President and our troubled nation. As an Episcopalian, I do think this is some kind of profound spiritual struggle we are going through.
Thanks, Nick. I think our struggle today is less spiritual than ethical, though perhaps that is a distinction without a difference. Adam Smith, who may or may not have been atheist, I believe held that in economic preferences, every one seeks his own best interests. I think that applies to political systems and policies as well -- it is up to each individual to determine where his ("or her") best interest lies, and then support a politician whose views align with their own. One could say that we are experiencing a national struggle to define the "spirit" of America, but to my non-Phi & Reli major mind, a spiritual struggle would be one of personal discernment rather than something in which the nation engages as a whole.
As I said, this may just be a semantic quibble - sorry if it comes across as pointless disputation.
LBJ, I am remembering, was very depressed, maybe especially about the war. Whatever there was some synergy happening with those events. Add the protests.
One tiny silver lining in this mess is that people have come up with some creative and humorous comparisons of who they would rather vote for than Trump. "A baked potato" is a new one. I've heard a ficus plant, a dead cat (both of those from Michael Moore), a dead dog, and my dead dog's scattered ashes.
Wad of gum on the bottom of my shoe is a perennial favorite.
In the UK, they measured Liz Truss's longevity against a head of cabbage!
When the UK Conservatives voted for Liz Truss, Rishi came in 2nd. Not much depth on that bench.
:-)
It was a lettuce, in fact. The lettuce won.
I had the same reaction to "a baked potato". Hadn't heard the others.
The best thought of them all. Why complicate matters this late in the game? Biden says he is in. Why not drop everything and go full throttle to ensure he’s reelected? Keep it simple like the GOP. “We know Trump is horrible, but he’s our man! Go f*** yourselves!” the GOP clearly says. At this point too much intellectualizing is a bad thing, a very bad thing!!
LBJ's VP, Hubert H. Humphrey, had been a Civil Rights warrior in the 50's and early 60's. Nobody but major DC policy wonks knew what HHH's views were on VietNam (he wanted the war to be over, but the question was, "How?"). I helped set up the room for his campaign launch speech (watched on TV) and was unimpressed. The theme of his campaign, he said, was "The Politics of Joy." What an empty, thoughtless phrase, when our country was deeply divided and a major war going on (sound familiar??). Nixon's big campaign idea was his "secret plan to end the war". The "secret" was to violate international law and invade Cambodia and bomb the living mustard out of civilians in North Vietnam to "force" the North to the negotiating table. That's the way I remember it, anyway. Johnson's resignation was partly expiation for his 'guilt' in having listened to the Generals and the anti-communist Cold Warriors and "experts" from both parties, and his native determination "not to be the first American President to lose a war."
I believe it's been established that the other motivation -- maybe the main one -- was Lady Bird's urging him to quiet because of his poor health.
So perhaps the lesson in this -- that quitters don't "win" elections for their party -- may be misplaced. Let's ask ourselves, "What is the hardest, and thus the bravest, course of action for Joe Biden: to grit his teeth and summon all his strength to cross the finish line (i.e. re-election), or to "screw his courage to the sticking point" and announce that, for the good of the country and his party, he would withdraw his candidacy in favor of (insert your favorite Democrat's name here). I think Joe would pile up major style points if he chose the latter course.
I read too much fear of this and that in your reasoning which is a blockage leading to the status quo and this trajectory. I believe Biden will lose. We will lose. We have an opportunity now.. Every way is risky. The other side is being very bold. We have to be bold. I hate to put it as an us vs them, evil versus good: binary thing but it is.. I like to believe that people will understand their choice. Us or them. This is the time to take the better road, also risky, but hopeful and bright.. Biden cannot be allowed to make this choice because he believes he is our savior. He is in denial of his diminished abilities. He will not be able to do 4 more years from what we can see already. That matters to people voting now. He has a circle around him that is protecting him as well. This is the panic now. And it will grow.
I would like to believe, and I will earnestly hope, that the folks who are closest to Biden, and whose counsel he will trust and accept, are as clear thinking as Professor Snyder.
Same here! This is one of the most fresh ingredients things I've heard in recent days..Amen-may it be so!!
Thank you, Professor Synder!!!
I look at all Biden has accomplished as a sure sign of competent trustworthy advisors.
Based on the fact that he apparently listens only to his wife and Hunter--yes, Hunter--this hope is in vain. It's like a horrible combination of KING LEAR and THE GODFATHER.
That's a completely unwarranted assumption. Biden has at least three longtime outside advisers & a larger team chosen by him & them.
It's based on extensive reporting and the widely-available remarks of everyone who knows how Biden operates. As for his advisers, those amount to 3 men who have served him for decades. They are likewise blinded by loyalty and love, not willing to tell him the truth. It is nothing personal against these people, but that is how patronage systems work--which is what our political system is. It's all about giving and rewarding absolute loyalty.
Option 5. Don’t make it a battle between 2 old men, make it a battle of policy. The Republicans now have 2 draconian documents that define who they are, the GOP platform released yesterday with lots of goals and objectives, but not an inkling of how they can accomplish their own conflicting plans; and Project 2025 (suggest we relabel it to just P25 for impact) which outlines the taking and overthrowing of our Democracy. The GOP has handed us the tools of their own defeat, let’s use them against them with an upbeat Reaganesque City on the Hill vision of the future reflecting on all the accomplishments of the first 4 years of Biden’s presidency.
I wish we could, John. Sadly, elections are popularity contests and the more charismatic, over-confident, and aggressive candidates win. That is why the debate was such a disaster. Remember, the tipping point toward Biden in 2020 was the first debate between him and Trump. In that event, it was Trump who seemed chaotic, unhinged, and out of his mind. This time it's the reverse. The post-debate polls all show a decline for Biden, especially in Pennsylvania--the keystone to the election.
There is a way to have a more sane, rational, policy-based way of making decisions. It's called a citizens' assembly. Check it out: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/the-case-for-abolishing-elections/
Biden is certainly behind by any measure, but recall both Obama and Reagan had lousy 1st debates and went on to win. To your point, however, both of them had charisma. Thanks for the citizen’s assembly suggestion.
You're most welcome! I think democracy by lottery is the solution to so many of our problems.
As for prior bad debates, the Reagan example cuts against those defending Biden, because we know that Reagan had dementia at that point, too. And Biden is even older than he was. As for Obama, the analogy here is to an athlete. We all know that even at their peak, the best athletes have bad nights and even bad stretches. That's normal. We expect them to make the adjustments to recover. And they do. We see this all the time.
But we also know that once even the best athlete has passed his or her peak, the decline is irreversible. We see outliers like Tom Brady and Roger Federer, but even they pushed things beyond the bounds of sanity (Brady especially). As they reach their mid- to late-30s, those "bad nights" actually reflect a loss of their capacities. And we all know what's happening with Biden from dealing with elderly people in our own lives.
Moreover, it's not about what Biden's fitness is "really like." It's about what the American people believe and perceive. And they've been saying in poll after poll and focus group after focus group for months that they believe Biden is too old and declined to serve. And who can blame them? The generational optics are terrible. In his ancient physical person, Biden now symbolically represents a failed gerontocracy. How can we expect young voters to get at all enthused?
Think about this: I am 40 years old. When I was born, Joe Biden was soon to launch his first presidential race! When Gov. Josh Shapiro was born 51 years ago, Biden was in his first year as a Senator!! When today's youngest voters--18 year olds--were born, Biden was 63. Sixty-three!!! I mean, stepping back, we can all see how absurd this is. And yet the Boomer Democrats--like with Diane Feinstein and Ruth Bader Ginsburg and others--seem hellbent on dying in office.
“And we all know what's happening with Biden from dealing with elderly people in our own lives.”
Unless the elder in our own lives has had a long career in the public eye. Joe Biden has never been your average Joe. Average people are not elected Senator, Vice President, or President.
“We all know”. . .about “dealing with” the individual old people we have known.
Senators and Vice-Presidents and Presidents are some kind of super human? They're normal people just like us. But worse--the power they occupy for so long makes them neurologically anti-social and entitled. Many social scientists have documented this effect.
As for Biden, it is not just his physical age that's dragging him down. It's his "political" age. It's precisely because he has been around for SO SO long that he's a liability now. There's experience, and then there's clinging to power. He himself said in 2020 that he saw himself as a transitional figure. And the mood of the country has been anti-incumbent, anti-status quo for 15 years now.
By being so long in office Biden, is seen as part of that failed status quo. In a Biden vs. Trump rematch, Trump represents change--terrible change, but change nonetheless. If you put a younger candidate--one who still has experience--against Trump, you flip that whole dynamic.
I like Timothy Snyder’s idea of choices. I wish Biden would challenge Trump to a complete neurological and cognitive work-up by an independent team of doctors. Trump would never agree, of course. We would know if it was an episode or a condition, as Nancy Pelosi said.
We should in the meantime be talking about Project 2025. Relative in UK has a good understanding of Biden debate and efforts to push him out. Never heard of Project 2025. Like most Americans.
Thoughtful post, making the point that all options carry risk. Some comments (similar to those I have made elsewhere):
1. This WILL be criticized. And if it is Kamala, THAT will be criticized. And if it is someone else who hasn't run a campaign up till now, unless it is a fabulous success THAT will be criticized.
Also, while one can criticize the Biden campaign so far - apart from anything else, they had
no clue as to how to prep Biden for the debate - there is absolutely no guarantee that any of the other possibilities can run a good *national* campaign.
2. "Operation Carnival" really says it all, doesn't it? As you say, the media will be delighted. Meanwhile the jockeying will generate ill-will and give the Rs attack lines. It will generate a huge amount of effort use a large amount of money that is not focused on what is needed, to defeat Trump. "some Democrats will complain" about jumping over Kamala apparently means "a lot including a core constituency of the D party.
3. "Operation convention" is better named "convention carnival". By the way, you can bet the Rs are already developing their attack lines on multiple possible candidates.
I've already cast my primary vote. I'll vote for a mummy if it means defeating Trump, but I wouldn't be happy about voting for someone that didn't get primary votes.
I voted for Biden in the primary. I and millions of others. Why does our vote mean nothing to all those thinking they are the ones to choose? You know too that if Biden steps down we lose. Kamala will not be accepted enough at this time and who know what underhanded actions the GOP will take to somehow keep her off the ballot. After all the SCOTUS belongs to trump now.
The primaries were a sham. The DNC did everything in its power to suppress legitimate opposition. Now we are reaping what was sown.
so you're telling me my vote and that of millions that voted for Biden are useless because you say so? We VOTED FOR BIDEN NOT HARRIS FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL TICKET. You take our votes away how is that any different than an authoritarian society? You tell us to give up our vote because you all know better. I'm livid
I voted for Biden in the 'primary'. I will vote for Biden in the election if I must.
But this is an unprecedented situation. If Biden steps down and the delegates put into power by our primary votes select another ticket - then no one is taking away your vote. Those you delegated power to will have used it to good purpose.
Switching candidates is a tricky matter. In 1972 the Democrats switched VP candidates and although McGovern had by then a poor chance to win, that fiasco gave Nixon the election. Switching candidates now will lead to a similar result, in my opinion.
Brad, there's definitely a strong risk. But there is no risk-free decision at this point. The risk of it not working has to be weighed against the risk of sticking with Biden in a kind of "sunk-cost" thinking. This is the very judicious approach Prof. Snyder is doing in this post. I'd argue it was giving into that kind of path-dependent, go-along blindly, thinking that got us into an even worse situation.
This is a time for gambling. Sometimes gambles lose. Sometimes they succeed. The risk of picking a new candidate, to my mind, is probably the same risk of sticking with Biden--epic defeat in November. But the potential upside of it working--even if it improves the odds only by 10 or 20%--outweighs any potential upside of sticking with Biden. As a compromise, I'd take the Operation Kamala option. Removes the worst possibility--Biden--but prevents perhaps the unreasonable risk of an open convention.
As for 1972, it's a different situation, I think. First, it was the stigma against depression and the perception of some kind of cover-up. But in our scenario, 75% of voters are in AGREEMENT that Biden is too old and unfit. And people feel that it is precisely his decline that's been covered-up. So it would be responding to them positively to swap him out. That's the counter-argument.
In this scenario, Biden withdraws willingly and allows his delegates--whom you all actually voted for--to make a new decision. This is how nominees were chosen for decades and decades by the parties, incidentally.
And Gary is right. The primaries were manipulated in an anti-democratic manner to prevent any serious contenders. Only Dean Phillips had the courage to try, and no one supported him. Those elections were as farcical as the ones staged by Putin and Orban.
then you are alienating millions of us who you think will just do what you say because you say so. That is the harm you will do, I am livid. Regardless of what you say about the primaries WE VOTED FOR BIDEN Don't forget how many of us you will upset no matter how you try to tell us we are wrong. You are the ones handing this to trump
75% of Americans say Biden is too old and unfit to be President anymore--including half of Democrats. 60% of Americans want him to withdraw and a new nominee selected. And yet Biden and the party leadership refuse to listen, which is anti-democratic. Imagine how livid WE are. It is Biden and the Democrats now handing this to Trump, not those of us who can see reality.
We voted and we made our choice. I will do anything I can to make sure I keep my vote. We will win. No wonder we no longer trust the "elite" from the East Coast.
Funny these polls never asked me or my buddies 😎
Just to clarify, this was not a thing the DNC did to protect Biden for any nefarious reason. It’s pretty typical for a party to try to discourage challenges to an incumbent president. Parties exist to win elections. That’s pretty much the job description. Incumbency carries advantages that mean incumbents usually win. To the extent that a competitive primary beats up the incumbent, it chips away at those advantages. It’s like throwing campaign funds or talented campaign organizers out the window. Why would a rational party do that?
The Democratic Party is probably due for a knock down, drag out primary battle about its future direction and its way past time to turn power over to some younger Dems. But those kinds of battles highlight deep divisions that can’t necessary be papered over in time for a general election and that can suppress party turnout. Brings to mind the PUMA movement among Clinton supporters who refused to vote for Obama after he beat her in 2008. (Party Unity My Ass)
I think many Democrats hoped that kind of divisive primary could be put off again in 2024 after it was clear that Trump intended to run again.
In retrospect was it an error? Who knows. But it wasn’t meant to be some delegitimizing power grab. Just parties doing what parties do.
Of course it was nefarious. Depriving voters of a real choice is always nefarious. This is not communist China, yet.
Ok. You cannot change things by wishing. There are people
Out there who agree. Politicians too. But you have to persuade enough people to agree to effectuate change. Very hard given stranglehold
Of money but not impossible. At least not so long as the democrat wins. Maybe virtually impossible
If Trump wins.
Heck. Name one system where voters get “a real choice” unmediated by any institutional, social, cultural factors. I can’t think of any.
BRD
President Biden has a third job in addition to being the president and running for president which is dealing with another insurrection.
Any thoughts on Alan Lichtman’s “Keys to the White House” model in which he states that it is about governance and not polls? He predicts a Biden victory.
Agree completely on governance vs polls — but considering 70+million voted for Trump a SECOND time… every GOP politicians who correctly called him out for what he is prior to his first term then obediently got in line to kiss the ring, and continue to do so… the apparent popularity of “slogans vs coherent policy”… the success of GOP in State governments… …I despair.
The dyed-in-the-wool Red/Blue are important as far as ensuring they actually vote! But the real battle is the the undecided — to hope they see governance as the issue, dismantling of the Republic as the risk, and continuity of moving in a positive direction (with inevitable faux pas) as critical to the survival of the Constitution and a democratic Republic.
Implicit but unmentioned in your conclusion is your knowledge of the modern progress of Eastern Europe, people close to what Americans are like but educated by years of autocratic rule. When given a choice they have always chosen freedom. The maga side is doing the things it can to foster belief that this is a close election. It's not, but it is an election in danger of being driven by skilled foreign anti-American propaganda domesticated by US traitors & their opportunistic fellow travelers. Certainly Biden's long political experience tells him the difference between normal US elections and what we've been getting since 2015. I trust Biden and his team to know how to fight this with trust in the electoral majority to continue to choose freedom while fighting the criminal effort to manipulate us with propaganda, crowd-manipulation science & cheating.
Richard, Biden's approval rating has been at 38% for months--the lowest of any incumbent to seek re-election. He is currently losing Pennsylvania by 4-5% and Georgia by even more. The gap has widened since the debate. If that pans out, that's the ballgame. Yet in his interview with Stephanopolous, he denied that his approval rating is that low!
It's one thing to deny polls forecasting a future event--the election. It is an act of epic self-deception to deny the present reality of his massive unpopularity. He also said he didn't even watch his debate performance afterwards--which Obama did after his poor showing in the first debate with Romney in 2012. What is the response to these empirical facts?
I deny their character as genuine empirical facts on multiple grounds including margins of error in the big 'poll of polls' just out. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/us/elections/polls-president-pennsylvania.html
As an aside, I have no trust in NY Times, it has been an anti-Biden spin machine this year. Same with WaPo.
You deny that Biden has as 38% approval rating? And the media are "fake news?" Thought this was the party of facts and truth over lies and cults.
That's one assertion. If you looked at the poll of polls I included there are many 1% - 2% numbers not even including allowance for errors. The numbers vs Biden are in no way staggering nor abnormal 4 months out. Now you're showing your troll tail & I don't owe you an argument.
It’s fair to say that we still haven’t had enough time and polls to get a full sense of the effect of the debate. But based on your own link, the five most recent polls of Pennsylvania show Trump ahead by 4%; by 5%; by 5%; and by 7%. The average, in your own source, is Trump up by 4--48 to 44--in PA. That’s tending beyond the margin of error.
Accusing someone—who has a legitimate case with evidence and makes it respectfully—of being a troll is an ad hominem attack and not in keeping with the spirit of this newsletter, nor civil discourse.
Great commentary. I would add "Operation Washington's Farewell" which could be seen as a variant of any of the last three. There is the potential in this moment of an extraordinarily moving, honest, and heartfelt speech that Biden would the the perfect person to deliver and that, in my view, would be remembered far longer than whatever engrams from the debate. I imagine him speaking, not about ability/disability, but straight from the heart (where he is at his best) about generations, the mortal coil (not a Scranton phrase), what is poignantly universal about life and limits--no matter one's age. There are seasons. And times to invite others to pick up the responsibility. In other words, to put it back where it's always been--on us.
If well-crafted, such a speech would convey strength, compassion, and integrity, not weakness or defeat. I believe--or would like to believe--it would resonate with hearts, which is where most of us actually resonate.
I agree wholeheartedly, Hank. Sadly, this generation of leaders lacks Washington's virtue. Based on Biden's present behavior, he is taking the KING LEAR option--but without Shakespeare's eloquence.
Well, I'm a playwright so maybe.....perchance to dream.....
More seriously, I thought the immediate responses of Kristof, Friedman, NYT op editors were not helpful, much as they tried to be "polite" before yanking B off stage.
Helpful to whom? The country? Or Biden's ego? I think this whole new "media is out to get Biden" narrative gets things upside down. What has happened is that the media--along with party leaders--have known for about two years that Biden was in serious decline. Remember that his fitness came up even during a primary debate in 2020--Cory Booker asked Biden about his health directly on stage.
But instead of doing right by the American people, the liberal media entered into a kind of conspiracy of silence about it. They knew the truth, but didn't want to say the Emperor Has No Clothes because of fears of causing party chaos. But the debate blew apart that conspiracy. So the reactions of Kristof, Friedman, and the NYT Editors that we're seeing now--along with the other liberal outlets--is an attempt to pile on and make up for their mistake. They're trying to do what they should have done long ago.
What's not helpful, then, is their lack of truthfulness the past two years--not the present pile on. They're trying to get reality to break through the epistemic bubble that the Democrats and Biden are living in. So far, it's failing. And given the Party's delusions and group-think, I'm not sure that even electoral catastrophe in November will bring them to their senses. The lengths of self-deception that a tribal mind can go to knows no bounds.
I think it’s more complicated than that. Biden is old. The guy had trouble communicating clearly when he was young and it hasn’t improved. (I found John Hendrikson’s piece in the Atlantic 4 years ago about how the aging brain manages - or fails to manage - a stutter to be really helpful in understanding how he speaks.
The biggest problem is that Trump, projecting (as he always does) in the face of his own decline has painted Biden as incapacitated by age and the right wing media machine has followed suit. They have had an added assist from the foreign nations who would like to see democracy fail in the US — don’t kid yourself about their invasion of the social media space.
The result has been an onslaught of fake or edited material that makes Biden look decrepit but that is easy and essential to refute. Just look at the actual videos.
I don’t doubt that had Biden had anything like his debate moment in the past we’d be watching it nonstop in our feeds. He hasn’t. And while he’s not often available to the press, he’s in the public eye quite a bit. They would have found it just as reporters would have found more serious examples than they have been able to report to date.
My point is that in an environment where disinformation proliferates, it’s very hard to know what is true. So we go with other kinds of cues we find to be reliable — Trump lies, much of the media has a double standard for Biden and Trump. The country is doing really well. People I trust interact with him daily and they think he’s capable.
That doesn’t make those of us who have not been persuaded by the evidence stupid or blindly loyal or anything else.
The truth is, I’m still feeling skeptical that I know what the truth is and the fact that all the pro-democracy forces on social media and cable news and wherever are now positive he had dementia and Parkinson’s and is also a selfish sob putting ego over country doesn’t persuade me anymore than all the Republicans being positive.
Being skeptical means I’m skeptical. I have questions that I’d like the WH to answer about Biden’s health. And I think they should answer and I hope that they do. If they know the answer which they very well may not.
Christine, no doubt there has been lots of fake videos and manipulation of social media by nefarious actors. I was skeptical for a long time about the right-wing media's claims that Biden is senile. But the debate demolished that skepticism. We all saw it and cannot deny it.
And the facts that have come out since have only been more damning. Many people have admitted to credible reporters that he has been in decline for months. The White House says he is in reliable condition only between 10am and 4pm! He was incoherent at times with Stephanopolous. Most of his appearances are before a teleprompter. When he's not, he goes into incoherence. Obama did over 500 press conferences by this point in his presidency. Trump--Trump!--did some 400. Biden is in the 100s, and most of those happened in the first two years. Remember how badly he performed when he did a press conference a few months ago in response to the report from the special counsel that said he has a poor memory? When he called into Morning Joe yesterday, he clearly was reading from papers (you could hear them being shuffled) and rambled when he didn't have them to look at.
Even his defenders are saying, "Well, the White House is run by a council of advisers, not really Biden alone." Ok, that's not really encouraging to hear--at a basic level, the President himself or herself needs to be competent. What if a foreign adversary creates some kind of Cuban Missile Crisis? In the end, the President makes the final call. I'm all for having a plural Executive Council, like Switzerland--the Presidency has long been too imperial. But at the moment it is what it is.
And in terms of the election, it's just terrible optics. It makes it so much harder to strike a strong contrast to Trump's insanity when Biden is also incoherent and frail.
Just my personal opinion, Nick, but POTUS being on the job from 10 to 4 sounds okay for taking care of sit-reps, policy briefings, etc. What I am concerned about is not the schedule for staff to get face time with Joe, it is Biden's ability to focus, follow an argument and weigh the pros and cons of different decisions from all the relevant perspectives when there is a serious decision to be made.
Nick - Re your pointed comments about the media staying silent about Joe Biden's declining abilities, yeah, it does seem like piling on, and yeah, they knew (or should have suspected) his condition was more frail than Team Biden wanted the public to know. So to some extent these exhortations to Joe to drop out of the race are disingenuous.
But unless you've seen proof, it's pretty risky to come out with a downbeat assessment, in essence saying, 'POTUS is losing his marbles'. That's a good way to stir up a hornet's nest of denials by supporters and "Told ya's" by opponents. And lose a lost of loyal readers who are Biden fans.
That’s certainly a valid point. A couple of thoughts in response. First, the problem is that we can’t get the “proof” of Biden’s actual condition because the White House is stonewalling and preventing access to the kind of information that would give us answers. They stage-manage his appearances with teleprompters, pre-select questions for him, and have had him give the lowest number of press conferences or one-on-one interviews of any president in decades.
Biden refuses to submit to a cognitive test and even refused to watch his own debate performance. If we were in a “normal” context, not even in an election year, this would be a massive scandal and story. (In fact, it is literally the major scandal of the Bartlett Administration on The West Wing years ago!) It’s the covering up that raises this to such a crisis level. Even if he weren’t in danger of losing the election because of his fitness, it is a legitimate national security question. What if something like the Cuban Missile Crisis happens? Only the President can access order a nuclear strike. It is perfectly valid for people to harbor grave doubts given the uncertainty of his condition.
Secondly, the real point is that it doesn’t matter what his actual condition is. 75% of Americans say that they BELIEVE he is too old and unfit. We cannot convince them otherwise. Their numbers have grown for months. They’ve been saying so in polls and focus groups over and over. And now the debate has made even more of them—including me—believe this. And I was someone who’s resisted the “Biden is senile” narrative for a while, because I think he’s been a very good president on the domestic front.
In an electoral system, where the People are sovereign, you cannot ignore something so fundamental as 75% of the People believing you’re too old and unfit. Especially when they put more weight on that, sadly, than the threat of Trump. And this statistic and data point—the 75% number—has been verified in many polls, along with the lowest approval rating of any incumbent President seeking re-election. He has lost his legitimacy in the eyes of the public. That’s a fact, and facts are stubborn things.
And how are you
Not a conspiracy theorist? I voted for Old Joe. I knew how old he was. His debate performance wasn’t great but not the firehose of lies I heard from Trump. His morality, empathy and experience are the compass of an administration doing a very fine job in a very scary world. We know the administration is working.
I would like to take this conversation further but can’t at present. I will just add that had I been polled at any time since Biden was elected, I would have said that he was too old to run for a second term . But I would still vote for him now, having seen him frail and having great difficulty getting his thoughts in order. I just don’t sleep so soundly, worrying that the proverbial 3 am call may come on his watch.
Great comment. Agree completely!
Thank you for the options to consider. I am 74, not 54, and have helped people for many years consider their long term care planning options. I have found that it is so difficult for most people to accept, or even acknowledge, their own mortality.
We are all aging, chronologically and biologically.
Biden is a man, God bless him, who would like to think that the rules of aging can be somehow overlooked. Set aside. Aging issues relate to morbidity, dying relates to mortality. He is ignoring the morbidity issues, to the peril of the rest of us. His family is enabling him. I get it, but this is creating the current crisis, post-debate. Neurological issues can be, in part, addressed, if there is not denial that there might be something going on that needs to be addressed.
Like you suggest Timothy, being President and running for President is a double whammy, damn tough job. Time for a reality check in the Biden family. Time to pass the torch in a graceful way and preserve Biden’s individual legacy and our Country, at the same time.
This is the stuff of tragedy. For Biden, the Democratic Party, and the nation. That a successful presidential administration cannot be translated into a successful presidential campaign. Especially against a Republican party long bent on repurposing our democratic republic as a clerical-corporate fascist state. Through the person of a Donald Trump - but more significantly through the Mitch McConnells, Mike Johnsons, John Roberts and their Charles Kochs, Leonard Leos, Steve Bannons et al. I have wondered 'why a unified executive' and, as with the Supreme Court - fewer people to buy off?
Yes, indeed, Why? Why a unified executive? As Lin suggests, it could mean fewer people to buy off.
I think the allure of a unified executive in the mind of a right-winger is the increased power of POTUS to see that his/her policies can be executed without disturbance, delay or second-guessing by the so-called "deep state" -- the institutional memory and adherence to established norms that are characteristic of experienced civil servants.
(Edited to save a mangled sentence.)
Thanks. If every pundit/analyst led with this kind of analysis instead of the conviction that they know the one and only possible alternative that the party should follow, we’d be much further ahead right now.
Somehow, it’s almost exclusively the academics (there are a few thoughtful pundit/journalist exceptions and a handful of batshit academics who are just bonkers in their hubris) who lay out possibilities rather than certainties, with strategies for assessing risks. I can only assume it’s training. We are trained to wait on the evidence, consider all angles, be prepare to be surprised, not get attached to our conclusions, and to know that the obvious answer might bite you in the ass.
I’ve never seen a bigger case for critical thinking being taught in the womb. (Can we do that yet?)
I think so! "Fetal personhood"!! 🙃
Pundits/analysts lead “off the top of their head” and then analyze/defend their response which is inevitably at least somewhat superficial.
Hopefully there are some in advisory positions that will take the longer & deeper view of options with an unwavering eye as to what’s good for the Country in the long-term and not just the Party for the short-term.
It is touching faith in the American people to risk our democracy on the hope that they will vote for a Black woman (with a Jewish husband). Are we there yet?
Short answer: No, America is not (yet??) ready for a Black/Asian female President, and a Jewish First Gentleman. Absolutely not.
Good lord. Look how they vilified Hillary Clinton, just a short 8 years ago. (The hatred continues to this day.) 100% for being female and smart and having the gall to run for President.
I hope someday, in my short time left on earth, those qualities will not be disqualifying to voters. But we are not there yet. Nope.
MAGA is already hard at work with their usual toxic brew of racist/misogynist smear tactics on Harris:
https://www.wired.com/story/far-right-attack-kamala-harris/
A couple of things: First, they would have vilified anybody. Having no ideas of their own, no positive proposals to offer, that's all they can do. Watch any Trump/MAGAt speech, if you can stomach it, and you will see that nothing has changed.
Second, Hillary made a number of critical mistakes and errors of judgement that played into the hands of her opponents. She alienated climate activists like me by sabotaging the Copenhagen talks. She supported the war against Qaddafi, showing an utter lack of common decency by gloating about his death. (Is Libya yet better off? No.) She violated the law by hosting her State Department correspondence on her personal server. (Said correspondence is the property of the People, not the Secretary of State. But I agree, "lock her up" is going waaaaay too far.) She demonstrated her allegiance to Wall Street by accepting multiple, quarter million dollar speaker fees for discussions, during the campaign, that she refused to divulge to the public. She demonstrated an amazing lack of political acumen by referring to supporters of her opponent as "deplorables" (Some undoubtedly are, but it is stupid to say so). Finally, she made the grand strategic blunder of not visiting any of the swing states during the late phase of the campaign. As far as female politicians go, Hillary Clinton is second rate. Angela Merkel, she ain't.
Are you inferring that Kamala Harris would/could be elected by the American voters? If you think Hillary Clinton was "second rate," what's your opinion then of Kamala Harris as a politician?
You seem to be saying that Donald Trump deserved to be appointed president in 2016, because Hillary had committed so many sins in your ideological view. How has that worked out? We don't have the luxury of "purity." We didn't in 2016 or 2020 (sounds like Biden isn't pure enough for your liking, either), and we certainly don't have that luxury now.
No, I am not inferring anything about Kamala Harris. She was not my first choice in 2020, because she is not seen as being woke to the dangers of climate change and nuclear war. But to be honest, I know little about her.
And No, Donald Trump absolutely did not 'deserve' to be elected; he owes his win to Mercer, Putin and the folks at Cambridge Analytica. In 2016 I voted for the person I thought most qualified, Jill Stein. And yes, I know, we Greens are given the blame for Clinton's loss despite her awful performance. The Democrats like the Republicans don't appear to be very introspective.
I voted for Biden in 2020 because of the threat that Donald Trump poses and because Biden made promises to address climate change, promises that were largely thwarted by members of his own party. I will vote for Biden again in 2024 if he is the nominee but if he is not, I reserve judgement. If the Democrats continue on their course of self harm, I may decide to vote my conscience, i.e. for Cornell West. My willingness to be pragmatic has its limits.
Exactly. But you left our another of Harris' features: Coastal elite (to use a MAGA expression).
Truth told, it is not touching but downright delusional.
The dreaded CALIFORNIA DEMOCRAT! The horror!
There are no risk-free alternatives. This thoughtful review helps thinking about the problem, not solving it. For my money, the best idea is one of the more radical: a Harris-Witmer ticket. Two women! I am a man and not radically feminist (or anti-feminist)(my wife is in the same mode), and I think this is a risk worth taking. No other alternative presents as stark a contrast to the coming Trump-mini-Trump ticket on the other side. It's worth the risk.
Hmm, I thought of a Harris/Whitmer combination also. My concern is more about Harris's readiness for the top job than having two women on the ticket, but that's mainly because she got stuck with dealing with "the border crisis" early on.
The Biden team started the week with an artillery barrage aimed at legitimately concerned Democrats who have declined to shut their yaps, stuff their ears, put on blinders, erase their memories, and just move on. When the Biden campaign uses MAGA tactics against its own base--characterizing good-faith doubters as "pundits and elites"--we know the campaign is not only ineffective but bankrupt. The campaign is turning personalist, making itself the issue, and pitting Democrats and their allies against each another. This cannot continue. National Rally was defeated on Sunday because the opposition held together. France learned the lesson of 1933. We must, too.
Another important lesson from Round 2 of the French election was the tactical voting compromise between the left- wing party & Macron' centrist party, which asked 3rd place candidates who had qualified to run for Parliament in Round 2 to stand down, so as to not dilute the vote & to prevent Marine Le Pen's far right fascist party from winning.
And those patriotic French men & women agreed to do that, for the good of their country!
So, is RFKJr going to drop out now?
[Joke. ]
A thought provoking post. I have to say I voted for Biden in 2020 after voting Green in the three prior presidential elections. I am less than enthusiastic about voting for Biden in 2024 because of his willingness to make dangerous compromises on three of the four issues I care about the most: The climate, nuclear weapons, and Ukraine. But the overriding issue to me this year is rejection of Trump and his Project 2025 agenda.
It is especially disturbing to me that so many Americans can consider Biden's age to be more important than the threat posed by Trump. In 1944, Franklin Roosevelt was reelected to an unprecedented third term based on his record and despite his obvious failing health. One could say that circumstances were different, that we were at war. Circumstances were indeed different: we were well on the way to victory in November 2024, while now we face existential threats on four fronts. In 1944 the American electorate decided based on the character of the candidate and the record of his administration. Are we to think that as a people we have declined so much that character and record are no longer decisive?
Stephen, polls have led me to understand that huge percentages of Americans do not share our understanding of the threat posed by Trump. Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution report that 75% of respondents believe the future of the country's democracy is at risk in the 2024 election, with 23% supporting political violence to deal with that. Or another take on the same trend: https://www.npr.org/2021/02/11/966498544/a-scary-survey-finding-4-in-10-republicans-say-political-violence-may-be-necessa
Older data (2021) from Morning Consult showed, (most language here is theirs) 26% of the U.S. population qualified as highly right-wing authoritarian, twice the share of the No. 2 countries, Canada and Australia. The beliefs that voter fraud decided the 2020 election, that Capitol rioters were doing more to protect than undermine the government and that masks and vaccines are not pivotal to stopping COVID-19 were...prevalent among right-leaning Americans.
Of course there are degrees of these anti-democratic sentiments, but the authoritarian tendencies affect not only the most extreme right voters, but also low information and partially radicalized swing voters. These are the folks (like you) I would have assumed before Trump to be choosing democracy over authoritarianism. Now I get that many are not actually weighing Biden's age against a threat, because they don't mind (or actually like) a strongman, and are in favor of violence that they assume will be used against the "other" and not them.