stevenkesslar

A good essay written by Nancy Pelosi's former Chief of Staff on why he supports Mark Kelly. The Case for Kelly Lawrence worked for Pelosi while Gabby Giffords was an MOC, became a close friend of hers, and is still close to both Giffords and her hubby.

Absolutely! I'm glad they seem to have already narrowed it down to a Tough White Guy Veep. The sooner she picks one and they get out there and define themselves, before the MAGA Machine is allowed to define them, the better. I went Veep shopping. If anyone is interested these are short recent videos of Secretary Pete, Andy Beshear, Josh Shapiro, and Roy Cooper, either talking about whether they'd be Veep or in some other political context. I think any of them would be great. Three of them are, like Harris, former Attorney Generals. I like the idea of building "the rule of law" into the heart of the campaign. What I like even more is that Beshear and Shapiro talk about bipartisanship, lowering the volume, working together to get important things done. All four of those guys are great on that point. Although not necessarily when they are in rally mode like Cooper is, or on MSNBC with Rachel Maddow, like Pete is. But I agree with what a lot of talking heads are saying. Which is that Mark Kelly could add some special sauce that would help nationally, as well as in his own state. (The speech starts at 4:00, and the policy part starts at 9:30 and lasts about five minutes.) Harris will be attacked as the extremely liberal DEI Queen of identity politics who cackles. That is her big personal vulnerability. Put a White guy who flies in space and isn't the most eloquent on the ticket. When I first listened to his speech I thought he is not loud mouthed and witty and quick like Buttigieg or Shapiro. But I think I like it that he talks like a normal guy. Immigration is Kamala's biggest liability. And in the minds of some the reason she should not even be the nominee. Kelly can own that issue for her. And talk about why we need to come together and compromise and do sensible things we can agree on. Oh, and we can do that on gun control, too. Harris can now brandish her own tough on crime record, and a 20 % cut in murder and violent crime in the last few years, in a way she could not in 2020. Mark Kelly grew up with a Mom and a Dad who were both cops. You can not get more "rule of law" than that. But the thing I think would add special sauce is the way he talks about finding common ground with Republicans to solve big problems. Because he has the receipts. Like on the immigration reform bill Trump killed. I hope this is not only how Harris campaigns. I hope it's how she wants to govern. It's unlikely Democrats can hold the Senate. And the only way Tester and Brown will win is if they pound this message home, and people in Montana and Ohio believe it. And if Democrats ever want to have more than 50 or so votes in the Senate, it's going to have to work in states like Indiana and Missouri and North Dakota again. Unlikely under Kamala Harris, probably. But if I wanted to get anything through a Senate with 51 or 52 Republicans, I'd want someone like Kelly on the team. I think it makes a lot of sense as how Democrats want to brand what we want to do. It is very different than what Trump is saying. And it goes well beyond "Orange Bad Man" and "Felon". I think identity politics is what got us to this point, in a good way. I remember in 2008 having excited conversations with liberal friends. Like, could we actually have the luxury of even being able to choose between a Black man and a woman for President? Now it took 24 hours for Democrats to get their minds around the idea of a Black woman POTUS, and unity. And less than that to think we probably want to have some Tough White Guy on the ballot next to her. That's a lot of growth. And sorry to rain on Trump's parade. But I think after Trump loses they will regret the choice of JD Vance, and the over the top testosterone level of their MAGA party. Kevin McCarthy was the one who said you can't have a Republican Party led by mostly White men. I'm glad Trump did not pick Tim Scott as his Veep. Since his message, that we need to have each other's back again, doesn't really belong in Trump's party. It may belong in the Republican Party of 2028 or 2032. Nikki Haley would have made a good first woman POTUS. But she's now been forced to lick Trump's ass. Trump is good at one thing: trying to divide us, and conquer. Which is why he and his MAGA candidates keep losing. And I think will lose again.

That may well be true. I keep saying things that are intended to tone it down, and stress where we agree. So let me spell that out. We both agreed that Biden was too old to serve another four year term. Turns out 70 % or so of voters, including most Democrats like us, agreed. So Biden is gone as nominee. That's good news, I think. So far, the early read is that the party is on fire! You may be right that at some future point Biden will be diagnosed with some cognitive impairment. In fact, tomorrow Trump may be shot dead. The day after, Kamala may be run over by a truck. Things do change. We actually have a recent historical precedent. For much or all of Reagan's two terms many people said he had dementia. But, as it turns out, he was tested for it in 1989, and he was found not to have dementia. And in 1990. And in 1991. And in 1992. And in 1993. So for five years after he was no longer POTUS, you could make a wonderful argument that Reagan has dementia. You just could not base it on a medical diagnosis. Then, in 1994, Reagan was diagnosed with Alzheimers. So we could speculate all we want about whether Biden may be diagnosed with any impairment you want to name at any future point in time. But it is only speculation. You can also speculate that the diagnosis has already been made, and there is a conspiracy to keep it from the public. It's still just speculation. The thing that was so emotionally gut wrenching about this, I suspect especially for the long term friends and close colleagues who Biden feels betrayed him, is that it does have a very big stench of ageism to it. Biden was picked on simply because he is an old man. Other than that, it's all just bullshit. One point Laurence O'Donnell made tonight is that Trump could not possibly have pulled off that one hour NATO press conference. I emphatically agree with him. As Biden himself argued, it is proof that he is not senile. Trump would have made a complete ass of himself, and said many ignorant things. More important, Trump's NATO policy strikes lots of people as stabbing America and our allies in the back, while he licks Putin's ass. So in my mind there is no doubt that I would rather have an old and weak looking Biden who gets the policy right, even if he coughs and mumbles, than Trump stabbing America in the back. To me it's a no brainer. Trump is the bat shit crazy one. Period. I'll say again I would love to see Biden stick around after Kamala wins as an elder statesman on a few foreign policy issues, like Ukraine and Israel. The only way I can rationalize what happened is that politics is both a team sport, and a blood sport. You have not been involved in politics much, either as a campaigner or as an activist or as a lobbyist. I have. I know many stories of politicians I knew at every level who had to make hard decisions, like to retire or not run for an office. Or who were simply cut loose for some political reason that didn't seem fair or right to them. That is what the whole world just saw happen to Joe Biden. It's really not about his health. It's about perceptions of his health, his age, and his strength. It's about politics. It won't surprise me if one outcome of this is we do whatever we have to do to put an age limit on the Presidency, just like after FDR we put term limits in place. As long as Biden and Trump are around, that's not viable. When Trump loses, lots of younger Democrats and Republicans would have a great reason to support it. But you disagree with me, which is fine. You believe Biden is hiding a medical diagnosis from the public, and eventually the conspiracy will be revealed. Let's leave it at that. Mostly, we should both be happy. The Democratic Party is happy again!

One of the things I like about @EmmetK is that, since he has no interest in trying to be objective or balanced about facts, he challenges me to think about my facts before I post. So this thing about favorable ratings is quite interesting. And maybe significant given how divided we are, and how close the race is. Check out the difference in the disapproval ratings between Biden, Trump, and Harris. Trump's disapproval, as always, can't really get below 53 % disapproval consistently. Kamala's has been more fluid over the past four years, and since May has been closer to 50 %. That's got to be good news for Harris. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-approval-rating/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/ https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/approval/kamala-harris/ I think that chart on Kamala Harris's favorability was never up on 538 before, since she was not the nominee. But there is a very clear break in trends in 2024 between her and Biden. It would be clearest visually if I could overlay the three charts. But you can see it looking at each one individually. Until 2023, the Biden and Harris charts were mostly tracking together, in terms of what direction they were going in. Both had a relatively brief period of net approval before their approval ratings tanked in Summer 2021. Since then both have been underwater. In 2023, both saw their approval ratings decline further. Meanwhile, in 2023 Biden's disapproval rating went slightly up, while Harris's disapproval rating went sideways. In 2024, the two have diverged. Biden's disapproval ratings continued to increase, to a recent all time high of 57 %. Meanwhile, his approval rating also kept declining, to a recent new low of 37 %. Kamala's did the opposite in 2024. Her approval rating increased slightly, and for the last month or so was close to cracking 40 % again. Meanwhile, her disapproval rating has declined slightly, and a few times recently fell just below 50 %. That still means net disapproval. But the trend throughout 2024 is that her numbers are getting gradually better, whereas Biden's have been getting gradually worse. Meanwhile, Trump is now in between the two of them on disapproval. He's at 53.7 % disapproval right now, which is 2.3 % worse than Kamala. That said, his approval rating is slightly better than Kamala's. Trump's lowest disapproval was just around 52 % around February. That makes sense. It was right after he put DeSantis and the primary to bed. But before he became a convicted felon. At no point has his disapproval rating ever fallen below 50 %. So this floor of a 52-53 % disapproval rating, which never goes lower, matches pretty tightly with the fact that he can never get much above 47 % of the vote - either in poll averages, or in two national Presidential elections. My point is that this may be a measure of Biden's specific and unique problems with his age. Back in 2023 I kept thinking as inflation came down and unemployment was at 50 year lows and the stock market hit new highs, Biden's approval ratings would go up. They didn't. And now, with hindsight, it seems obvious that all that stuff people were saying about his age is probably the reason why. Meanwhile, Kamala's disapproval rating actually did go down. Maybe it's a reflection of overall feelings about the Administration. Or it could be that she really hit her stride as the leader on abortion and women's rights. Whatever the reason, even a small difference like 2.3 % in disapproval ratings could have a huge impact on who wins. As long as both candidates have disapproval over 50 %, by definition there have to be "double haters" who disapprove of both, but have to vote for one - if they vote at all. Once Kamala's disapproval rating is below 50 %, that's no longer true. She could get to 50 % of the vote based on people who do approve of her, and people who don't really feel one way or the other, but do disapprove of Trump. Favorability ratings are seen as much stickier than horserace polls. And also more impactful on how people actually vote. It does seem like Trump is stuck with the fact that something like 53 % of voters will always disapprove of him. It is good news that Kamala has been much closer to 50 % disapproval for much of 2024, and at least has the opportunity to further lower her disapproval rating in the next month. Especially now that it's a guarantee that the Chicago DNC will be a unified love fest for Kamala Harris.

The letter was from Biden's doctor. And, yes, I really believe all the stupid shit Biden's doctor says. But I guess I am stupid to trust a doctor. You of all people would know that one should not trust what a doctor says just because he says it. 😉

The Faux Populism of Conservatives for Higher Corporate Tax This is at least somewhat serious. Especially if you buy the idea that Senators like JD Vance, and Josh Hawley, and Tom Cotton, among others, are at the leading edge of this new conservative workers' populism. In theory, that actually does involve embracing labor unions and raising taxes on corporations. Trump sure wants to wear JD Vance as a badge of honor, since he is a liar and cynic and rapist. In this instance, he is perfectly happy to rape some ideas from "pro-worker" policy wonks like Oren Cass. That said, I think JD will be licking Trump's ass when it comes to those lower corporate tax rates. Cass was involved in Project 2025, which is an intellectual blueprint for Trump 2.0. And Project 2025 proposes further lowering corporate taxes from 21 % to 18 %, because corporate tax is "the most damaging tax in the US tax system". Trump himself has said he wants to lower it to 20 %. Yet somehow Cass does think that he's helping to steer the Republican ship to some future of conservative workers' populism. I think Democrats somehow have to figure out how to get at least 50 votes in the US Senate if they don't want this future. And 52 Senators if you figure that you'll have a few Democrats like Manchin and Sinema who are fully paid for by corporate America. Then again, and I'm serious, there could be a future in which a President Harris gets a few Republicans like Josh Hawley to go along with higher corporate taxes in a deal for something else, like spending cuts. For now, she needs to, and will, hammer the shit out of Trump for wanting to extend and further lower his corporate tax cuts. Trump is one of the few Presidents who left office with fewer factory jobs than he started with. Even before COVID, from January 2019 to January 2020, the US LOST about 40,000 factory jobs in one year. So much for how those corporate tax cuts were supposed to help workers by creating a renaissance of manufacturing.

It's interesting, and perhaps not a coincidence. Whitmer already took herself out, and will remain as a campaign co-Chair. So I would say there is already a short list of Tough White Guys. And three of them - Shapiro, Cooper, and Beshear - have all been Attorney Generals. So they are all "rule of law" guys. A fourth, Mark Kelly, was a slacker. He was only a Captain in the Navy and an astronaut 😉 Pete was in the military, too. So he qualifies as a tough White guy. (Chasten says he's a sweetheart in private, of course.) Again, it feels like the dam has broken and the words and the passion are now flowing freely. In 19 minutes Kamala said way more than Trump in 93 minutes about things that people actually care about. She just needs to brush that up and she has a much better, and shorter, and more inspiring acceptance speech already. There is a riff in there about "I know Donald Trump's type" that aces the "Felon versus Prosecutor" theme. But the part that means the most, if Democrats get it right, is this part: Going back to what W.'s 2004 campaign manager said, that you have to start with the theory of the case, I think that's it right there. Harris has it already. W's guy used the phrase "strength and stability". I think "rule of law versus chaos" gets to the same thing. So whether it is a former AG like Shapiro or Cooper or Beshear, or a GI Joe like Kelly or Buttigieg, I think they are going to be very grounded in this whole riff about the rule of law, and stability, versus the chaos of Trump. Kamala is right. When we fight, we win.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Letter7.8.24.pdf Again, you are factually incorrect. I'm really trying to end this. It is boring, and repetitive. But when you keep saying things that are wrong, I think it is appropriate to keep saying you have now, yet again, said more false things. You obviously think that the letter from Biden's doctor can't be trusted. You have stated, or implied in your condescending tone, that I am a fool to think that what Biden, or his doctor, or his press secretary say, actually can be trusted. And yet, there is a letter from a doctor that spells it all out. One might think a medical professional might consider what an actual doctor treating Biden says. Just like one might think a medical professional like you might consider what Reagan's doctors actually said before you stated Reagan had dementia while he was POTUS. But no. You just love to speculate. So speculate away. But please be aware that the actual doctor treating Biden did not diagnose him earlier this year with any of the things you stated above. You can ignore all that, if you wish. Call me a fool. But I would rather take Biden's doctor for his word than take your uninformed speculation as fact. This does matter because right now other uninformed political hacks, like Speaker Johnson and Sen. Vance, are pushing "baloney" about how Biden should resign immediately based on some undiagnosed medical condition his doctor says he doesn't have.

LOL. You keep forgetting Biden and Harris won in 2020. Are you ever going to accept that Trump is a rapist, a felon, and a loser? Oh. And you keep forgetting you lost in 2018. And 2020. And 2022. And 2023. And you will lose in 2024. Poor thing. The one thing I would call a victory on the GOP side is that Kevin McCarthy, who comes from a diverse district in California, said we need to integrate the Republican Party. His approach was very different than Donald Trump publicly disgracing a Black female Republican House member, Mia Love. Who lost in 2018, because she did not "give me love", in Trump's gross old raping lying words. This is why most Americans can't wait to vote against the raping lying felon. Anyway, what did McCarthy do? He found Black and Hispanic conservatives and got them elected. What did the GOP do? They fired McCarthy. And now you are going back to attacking a Black woman because she cackles. You really have no clue, do you, clown? So Harris (the poll, not the next POTUS) is the most pro-GOP of polls. And this poll is very useful because it gives us a baseline. Penn says that the country is +5 Republican now, in his new poll. The 538 average says the country is actually dead even right now, 44.5 to 44.5, on the generic Congressional vote. They include Harris being R + 5 in that average. So it suggests that Harris leans about +5 to Trump, compared to other polls. If true, which I think it is, that means Harris and Trump are actually tied in favorability right now. CNN did an average of polls (pre-Sunday) and found Trump/Harris is too close to call, since Harris does slightly better than Biden. In this Harris poll, including leaners, Trump beats both Biden and Harris by 6 (53/47). That would sound about right, for a poll that is consistently skewed about +5 Republican compared to the average of polls. So it again suggests the race is very close, with Trump having a narrow lead that is not statistically significant. This poll was done BEFORE Sunday, when the race changed. Interestingly, since Harris separates out the field results from Friday and Saturday, Trump was beating Harris +8 (including leaners) on Friday, but only +4 on Saturday. Probably just statistical noise. But, again, this is a poll that consistently skews pretty far to the right. And it was taken the day before everything changed. So in my mind it simply confirms that it is a close and wide open race. A few other things. This poll was taken at the worst possible time for Democrats. Until Sunday, the party was in turmoil and near despair. Meanwhile, Susie and Chris did a hell of a job pulling off a fantastic RNC. With the sad exception that they could not get the lying raping felon to keep his mouth shut or stay on message. Sad! So whatever these numbers are, this is the best possible result for Trump, with a pollster that consistently shows him doing better than most polls. And you can even measure this comparing Harris poll to Harris poll. The prior Harris poll, on July 13-15 (pre-RNC) showed Trump beating Harris by 4, not 6. It showed Trump with 43 % approval and Harris with 40 % approval, a 3 point spread. That compares to the post-RNC 6 point spread (45/39) in approval ratings you cackled about. You like to cackle, don't you? This was all predictable. In 2016 Trump actually got a big but temporary convention bump in the second half of July after the RNC. It was actually the only time in 2016 he led Clinton in the national poll average, by about 1 %. In 2020 he got a very small little bump. Kind of makes sense, since people didn't really learn anything new about why they wanted to fire his ass. Which they did. Here's an interesting question: why did Trump get such a small bump from the 2024 RNC? I'm guessing because the lying raping felon could not keep his mouth shut, or stay on message. What do you think? Speaking of conventions, I think in 24 hours we have settled the question of whether Democrats will unify at their convention, or have a food fight. It is Kamala Harris's party now. Her stepdaughter, who raised money for innocent children being slaughtered in Gaza, will not be outside the convention leading protests against "Genocide Joe". I think that means Lichtman will NOT take the party contest or social unrest key away from Democrats. So in Lichtman terms, that means Democrats now have 3 keys against them, with only 3 more undecided (third party, foreign policy success, foreign policy failure). All three would have to turn against Harris for her to be predicted to lose. Possible. But probably unlikely, since Lichtman says only 2 are leaning against her now. I know you dismiss the fact that he's been right, in advance, every time since 1984. But you never liked facts much, anyway, did you? I'm sorry, poor thing. It's gonna hurt bad when your lying raping felon loses to Queen Cackle, isn't it?

Yes! And, it ties directly to things like minimum wage. The old Republican thing was "We like immigration because we can get cheap labor (often not White) in the US. And we like outsourcing because we can get cheap labor by shipping factories overseas." So we now know that didn't work out well for many Americans. At core, it's about people who want to work being able to get a decent wage and move up the ladder. That's the American Dream everyone wants. (Truth in advertising. I think global capitalism got rid of poverty and hunger for something like 1 billion people, especially in Asia. So let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.) The political malpractice to me is that Trump somehow got away with blaming what were mostly Republican policies, that really took root when W. was President from 2001 to 2009, on Hillary Clinton and Democrats. We went from over 17 million factory jobs in America in January 2001 to 12.5 million in January 2009. We have 13 million today. How do you blame that on Bill or Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama or Joe Biden? That was what Republicans did on their watch. But the concern is real, and broadly shared. Whether it's some Black guy whose ancestors were slaves or some Hispanic guy whose parents came from Mexico, they don't like the idea of chaos and low wages. And they are for higher minimum wages and for higher taxes on corporations and rich people. The line that resonates really well from what I read is, "Yes. My parents were immigrants. But they got in line. They did it the legal way." Whether that is actually true or not is irrelevant. It is how people feel. And the polls say these moderate swing voters are NOT against immigration, and think some extreme program to deport up to 825,000 innocent undocumented children is going too far. If Democrats want to win they have to meet these voters where they are at.

A few contradictory things. One, a lot of people are saying that it is stupid for Democrats to focus on process. People don't give a shit. What they should instead focus on is defining Kamala Harris more clearly, before Republicans define her the way they do above. I think that's true. That said, I think a certain amount of what Republicans are doing above is very helpful to Kamala. It's the don't throw me in the briar patch principle. Meaning, "Please. Don't make racist and sexist attacks on Kamala Harris. Please don't do that. Please, please, please!" It really does amazes me how stupid and - yes, racist - so many Republicans can be. And they just have no fucking clue. They attacked Rev. Warnock as being an illegitimate pastor preaching illegitimate or dangerous messages. As far as I can tell, it did three things. It offended Blacks and rallied them to make getting Warnock elected a crusade. It made White swing voters who don't want to feel they are racist uncomfortable. And it opened this huge door for Warnock to say, "See. I like puppies. I'm not a demon." So I think they are are giving Kamala the same gift. What they want America to know about Kamala is that she is a stupid Black woman who has low brain function, kind of like an ape. And she iterates by cackling. It is similar to an ape, really. Cackle. Cackle. Cackle. Stupid Black ape! Now, of course, as soon as you compare a Black woman to an ape you are a racist. So they are not saying it that bluntly. But they really are going right up to the line, even moreso than they did with Rev. Warnock. And it will have the same consequences. Tens of thousands of Black women across the country joined a virtual call last night to fundraise and strategize. So it's the same thing. They are doing a good job organizing their opposition. The flow of love and support to Kamala is organic, and would have happened anyway. But these attacks will just electrify it more. And by presenting Kamala as a Black ape who has low brain function and just cackles a lot and is too stupid to learn, they have set a low bar that she will clear very easily. When she starts talking about how she threw rapists and criminals in jail, and defended home owners from predatory lenders, and stood up for children, America will see that she does more than cackle. As a White man who doesn't know much about the Black community, this is going to be fascinating. And healing, I think. One of my tenants is a Black pastor, with a lovely wife and three beautiful children. He's told me stories about how he is STILL discriminated against in liberal California, whether it is buying a car or getting a job, because of his race. So if Kamala comes out tough on crime and talks about how she will throw your ass in jail if you rape or murder, whether your ass is Black or White, I am going to guess it will go down well with Black pastors. And White moderates. We'll see. If she talks about how some women and especially kids are vulnerable and need someone tough to stand up for them, I'm going to guess that will go down well with Black pastors and White moderates, too. This is not just energizing. It is electrifying.

I posted this on the thread on Biden in the general beer garden, but I will post it here too. This is Mark Halperin's 30 minute daily morning meeting. It's like cat nip for political whores. Halperin put his ass on the line on Friday going public about how Biden would resign as early as Sunday. Immediately he was accused of pushing "fake news". He now looks like the guy who is either the smartest in the room, or at least has the best sources. And he puts some of these people on camera and lets them speak their wisdom and experience. In that video there's a Republican described as very anti-Democrat who would love to see Kamala mocked, according to Halperin. The guy's point is that if all Kamala does is rehash "Orange Man Bad" and "sexist", it is a tired drone that people heard and rejected in 2016. I think he is right. That said, what has changed since 2016 is Trump is a convicted felon and rapist. 2 in 3 Americans think he has committed serious crimes like trying to overthrow a fair and free election. So we are about to learn how good a prosecutor is, I guess. But I think a lot of this is better left unsaid. The attacks on Biden worked mainly because voters could see him age with their own eyes. So I think it's the same here. It's probably true that when Trump is on a stage with her, he's losing. Even before he opens his mouth.

Correct. I went back and read this entire exchange. I said nothing that was factually incorrect. If I did, please quote me. You said multiple things that were factually incorrect. I quoted those. You were wrong. I'm not going to apologize for you being wrong. By the way, since you want to have at it, the idea that Michelle Obama was going to replace Biden was equally silly. It reflected the fact that you just had no idea what you were talking about. If you were even mildly aware of what is happening one inch below the surface, the way the entire Democratic Party has unified around Kamala Harris was completely predictable. And also very good for our chances of beating Trump. Keep speculating about whatever it is you want to speculate about. But please try to realize it is speculation, not fact.

I get it. What's hurting both Biden and Harris now, and will keep hurting them, is that people have had a rough time the last four years. And it is about gas prices, grocery prices, the cost of homes. I think especially for voters who are younger, and lower income, and not White, those have been issues. Mostly because the less White you are and the less old you are the more likely you are lower income and therefore more vulnerable. That explains a lot of why Biden has been hurting with Hispanics, Blacks, and young voters. I'm hoping Kamala can pull them back. On economic stuff a relatively progressive message works. Raise taxes on corporations and billionaires. Use it to lower the cost of insulin and health care. That works. The other thing that is the most bitter pill for progressives like me is a lot of working class voters are fairly culturally conservative. Which does not mean they oppose same sex marriage. It means they are worried about immigration, crime, and chaos. For those of you who are political whores like me, Mark Halperin has this group chat show daily where he brings in this amazingly bipartisan group of political hacks. Halperin co-wrote Game Change and was the first one out publicly last Friday on saying Biden would resign, as early as Sunday. He was right. His sources are amazing. So that's his 30 minute group chat today, that includes some of the top political consultants past and present in America. It is a gold mine. I'll summarize some comments, particularly leaning to what the guy who ran W.'s 2004 campaign says. Kamala has to moderate, and the left has to let her do it. I like the main idea being "strength and stability". You get the first with Trump, which is why he was winning. Biden was seen as weak, which is why he was losing. Kamala needs to balance both. Just visually, Harris and Mark Kelly standing next to each other would do the trick. Probably more than a loud mouthed (Jew, Gay, or woman, even though I love hearing Pete and Josh and Gretchen go after Trump). And Kamala should take on her party a little and surprise everyone. She has the receipts for being tough on crime. We had a 30 % murder spike in 2020 under Trump. We had a 13 % drop in murder and violent crime in 2023 thanks to Biden/Harris. She needs to talk about that. With Trump you get strength and chaos and threats to democracy. With me you get strength and the rule of law. I'll be tough on crime. Kelly has the receipts for being tough - and bipartisan - on the border. That's how they win, I think.

Actually, it's a fact Biden did NOT. I'm honestly not sure why you can't get that. This doctor is at The White House a lot, and has been since 2012. You might just as well argue that he's been seeing Biden every time he is at The White House since 2012. Since it makes just as much sense as saying he obviously must have been going to The White House eight times to see Biden. The basic idea is simple. You want to just speculate about things you don't know about, and then call them facts. I won't bother posting them, but you can easily go find attack pieces on Biden saying he has dementia in 2019, or 2020, or 2021, or 2022, or 2023, or 2024. Somehow he managed to have an effective Presidency despite the fact that he always had dementia, according to the fact free right wingers attacking him. I'm sure if I looked hard enough I could find attacks on Biden for having dementia when he was Veep. At some point it just becomes the longest diagnosis in history that has never actually been given. Anyway, I hope we can let it die. To quote Joe, it's baloney. Happily, the problem of his old age has been solved. You wanted him to quit the race. I wanted him to quit the race. And he has. Here's an interesting but irrelevant fun fact from history, regarding Konrad Adenauer: Elizabeth Warren was my choice in 2020. I will go the grave thinking, had Democrats nominated her, she would have won and been a good POTUS. And we would not have had an old Joe problem. That said, I think Biden has been a good POTUS. And I think Kamala will be a good POTUS. So I ain't complaining. When it was clear Biden would be the 2020 nominee, I read about Adenauer because I thought that might be a model. And it has been. Including how it ended. Like Biden, Adenauer was brought down as a result of a political deal, not a medical condition. As Wikipedia describes, Adenauer was brought down by other politicians on his team because he was seen as weak. And that had consequences in an election. He resigned in 1963, two years into his fourth term. He lived until 1967, into his early 90's. I'm very glad this was settled now. Apart from the issue of whether Biden could have won in November, it would have become increasingly awkward for Biden as POTUS in 2025 and beyond. And regardless of his actual health, there would have been constant political attacks about his age. That said, if Harris wins I could see Biden playing a role as elder statesman, either formally or informally. As Chris Coons just said, Biden is probably the American alive today with the most foreign policy experience, and the longest and best relationships with many foreign leaders. I think Biden is absolutely right that only he could have rebuilt and expanded NATO. Although Putin sure helped. But there I go, talking about Genocide Man again. My bad. 😉

You must be pretty slow. Have you checked yourself for cognitive decline? Because most people figured out that Biden was old on their own. Maybe you need glasses or a hearing aid? When is the lying raping felon going to step aside? 71 % of Americans wanted Biden to step aside because he is too old to serve another four years. He has. 57 % of Americans wanted Trump to step aside because he is too crooked to serve another four years. He has not. When is Trump going to step aside? That is what the majority of Americans want. Or are you saying Kamala will have to prosecute his lying raping criminal ass? Majority of Americans think both Biden and Trump are too old to serve second terms There are polls that say BOTH that Trump is too old to serve four more years, and too crooked to serve for more years. You can't cover THAT up. When is Trump going to listen to voters and step aside for the good of the nation?

You're welcome. I'm glad @unicorn and I were able to get to the facts, too. I forgot to mention. When Joe and I talked this morning, I did ask him if he had Parkinsons or was engaged in a conspiracy with his doctor to lie to the world about any medical diagnosis or cognitive condition. Here's what he said. ‘Shameful baloney’: Biden, allies dismiss calls for resignation The president’s aides and supporters insist that he is both able and determined to serve out the final months of his presidency.

Yes. Every morning, after Biden and I discuss our plans for today's genocide, I browse over his medical record. 😲 As our local representative for Genocide Man, I guess your inference is that if Biden says he has no diagnosed cognitive impairment, which he has said, it should not be believed. If Biden's doctor says Biden has no cognitive impairment, which he has, it should not be believed. If Biden's press secretary says it, it should not be believed. Or maybe that is not your inference. Regardless, Biden and his doctor have said he does NOT have a diagnosed cognitive condition. And I don't think they are lying. They have said as of this February he does not have Parkinsons. I do not believe they are lying. Nor did I think Reagan or his doctors were lying when he was checked for dementia in 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 and was found not to have symptoms of dementia. Without pretending to read your mind, it is very clear that Genocide Man invests lots of money into sowing up conflict in democracies, and doubts about democracy, including on the internet. Which is why it is a shame that ignorant gadflys like our doctor spread false statements about Biden. I think mostly due to his intellectual laziness. Genocide Man, to his credit, is not intellectually lazy about anything. Including genocide.

I'll take that as a retraction of your totally false statement. Even though your ego as a doctor does not allow you to admit you were wrong. You stated, with zero facts to back you up, that Biden has Parkinsons. And you think you know this because he's seen a neurologist 8 times in the last several months. Your words, not mine. That's just totally wrong. You made it up. Thank you for your non-retraction retraction of a false statement. Again, completely false. This is just not true. You do understand that the way to retract false statements is NOT to make more false statements, right? You still may not actually understand that Cannard is the neurological consultant that has served at The White House since 2012. So you really don't have a clue that he has been there MANY times before November 2022, do you? Some right wing news outlet shit out one narrow fact, about the number of visits made by Cannard during a certain period of time. And you just took that right wing turd and ingested it fully, without bothering to understand the context. Either you did not read the letter from Biden's doctor I posted, or you failed to comprehend what it meant. I'm guessing the former, since you seem to just get fired up and type without bothering to understand facts. I know you are a Democrat. It's kind of a shame. Since as a fellow Democrat I don't feel like it helps for people like you to just make up shit about Biden. And you are just making it up, as you have now admitted. Not only do you just make shit up. Then you want to defend completely inaccurate statements and press the point. This is what far right cranks are doing right now. Welcome to the club! And it's not JUST far right cranks. Mike Johnson and JD Vance have widely read posts up on X right now saying Biden MUST resign because he is not fit to serve. Even though they have zero evidence of that. Just like you. Having confused people like you posting dumb and inaccurate things that you then have to retract, without admitting you were wrong, just makes it easier for Johnson and Vance to sow confusion. The issue is that a majority of Americans have been very clear and consistent in polls, which you don't bother to read or understand. They don't want either Biden or Trump to be nominees. They don't think Biden is fit to serve four more years because of his age. Just that. His age. There is no diagnosed medical condition. Even though you think there is and Biden and his doctor and press secretary are lying about it. Americans also don't think Trump is fit to serve four more years because he is a crook. And they have receipts for that. He's a felon and rapist, according to juries of his peers. You just want to confuse it all with your uninformed and unprofessional guesses.

The Emerging GOP Plan To Beat Kamala Harris I argued in one of my long-winded rants that Biden resigning would completely fuck up Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita and their cynical plan to enable Trump's authoritarianism. The two dictator enablers are now on record. And if this is the core of their plan, Biden and Team Pelosi have fucked them up good. They are in big trouble. The beauty of the campaign Wiles and LaCivita built was one simple and obvious idea: Biden is old, weak, and feeble. Arguably, they did it so well that they forced Biden to resign. Although mostly they just poked US voters to feel what they felt anyway, but a little more intensely. My moderate sister-in-law texted me today to let me know how relieved she is Biden is out, and Harris is in. She didn't need Susie Wiles or Chris LaCivita to feel that way. But if we want to give Wiles and LaCivita credit for being geniuses, they were so genius that they just completely fucked over Trump and fucked up his campaign. Donald Trump is now the oldest candidate running for President in US history. He is also a rapist. He is also a felon. He is running against a prosecutor. And he is nominee of a party that wants to talk about "coverups" and "coups". Great. Let's talk about how Republicans and their extremist SCOTUS justices want to cover up Trump's crimes against democracy. Let's talk about coups. Mike Pence knows a lot about that! The first part of their new plan that makes the most sense is based on the other thing that is simple and obvious: lots of working class people who don't own homes or stocks were hurt by the Biden/Harris economy. They can tie Harris to that and hope just saying "inflation" wins them an election. Even though inflation is now down to 3 %, and wages are raising more than inflation. Even on this part, I think Harris can slaughter Trump. He wants to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires. Most Americans want Democrats to tax millionaires and billionaires more. Those child tax credits that cut child poverty in half for one year helped 50 million or so working class parents, grandparents, and kids deal with the costs of things. Until Republicans refused to extend them. Tax cuts for billionaires and taking away things that help working class families. Including Obamacare. How is this helping the working class? I think Harris can prosecute that case well. The second part of their plan, that Kamala engaged in a cover up about Biden's health, shows how desperate they are. How can Biden being old be a cover up, when Americans saw it with their own eyes? It's actually insulting. They said the same thing in 2020, when America fired Trump. They've been saying the same thing for years, with noting to pin it on. Other than the fact that Kamala's eyes and ears are as good as everyone else's. Meanwhile, they want to cover up the fact that Trump is an old rapist and a old felon who only lies when his lips are moving. He is so old that he is the oldest nominee for President in US history. Susie and Chris will wish they could cover that up. But they can't, any more than Biden could cover up his age. It's too soon to tell, but I think there is going to be a groundswell of support for Biden stepping aside as nominee that is broad and deep. Including among Independents. So the idea that we should pick on Joe Biden for being old, or that Kamala should have been cruel to Joe for being old, is a hard sell. And compared to what? Picking on Trump for being a rapist? Being a crook? Being a liar? Trying to overturn an election? Presiding over a 30 % spike in murder? Killing more factory jobs than he started with? Cutting taxes for billionaires? If Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita want Trump to go off about how Kamala covered up things everyone knows, great. Let's talk about what Trump wants to cover up. Starting with his criminal behavior and attacks on cops and democracy. The third part of their plan, going after Democrats for staging a coup, is almost laughable. The best part about it is that having two old rich White cynical political hacks tell Blacks and women that it is somehow undemocratic that a Black female Vice President is now the Democratic nominee is as tone deaf as Biden saying "you ain't Black" if you vote Republican. But Wiles and LaCivita will not be uttering the words. Trump will. And Trump is the rapist who hand picked the radical justices who took womens' rights away, and gave Trump immunity to do whatever rape or crime he wants. So this rapist and felon is going to lecture a prosecutor on how SHE somehow came to power in violation of some democratic principle? GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK. I can't wait for that debate. Trump should be asked to resign, every fucking day. Granted, we have not had a national referendum on Biden's age and Trump's crookedness. But we do have polls. And big majorities of American have said for years that neither Biden not Trump are fit to serve four more years. So if Trump wants to say it is undemocratic for Biden to listen to what voters wanted and step aside, and empower his #2 rather than threaten to hang him, let Trump do it. But the only place that leads is that 57 % of voters want Trump to step aside as nominee, too. Because he is a crook. 2 in 3 voters think it is a serious crime that Trump tried to interfere in a democratic election. So if Trump wants to talk about coups and democracy, that's a winning debate for Kamala. I hope she actually asks him to step aside so she can run against someone that Americans don't view as a crook and rapist. There's some great line some speechwriter there can come up with. "America wanted two old men to step aside as nominees - one for being too old, and one for being too crooked. Joe Biden listened, and did step aside. Americans respect that. When will you, ex-President Trump? Because America fired you once, and they really don't want you back." If this is the best Trump's hatchet man and woman have, they are in big trouble.

Some interesting factoids. Way too early to tell what polls will say about Trump v. Harris once they poll her as the prospective POTUS candidate. But RCP now has aggregated all the horse race polls up to today. And Trump is leading Harris by 1.7 points, compared to 3 points ahead of Biden. That is certainly not bad news for Harris. I can't recall any other Presidential election where we knew in July a candidate would win because they were 1.7 points ahead. And we may know by the end of August whether Kamala will win. Here's the short version of Lichtman's take on this: If you want the longer version here is a one hour special podcast by Lichtman from tonight on YouTube. Now that it is a fait accompli, Lichtman has toned down his rhetoric about how forcing Biden out would be a self-inflicted disaster. What he is focusing on now is that Democrats can avoid defeat by quickly unifying around Harris. Which, I think, is a fait accompli as well. I think there are now something like like 3 or maybe 4 state delegations that have already pledged all their delegates to Kamala at the DNC. What I love about Lichtman is that his rules not only work. They also make common sense, if you want to have a flattering view of democracy. It makes common sense that swing voters will be more attracted to unity and purpose than to chaos and division. I think Democrats know this is not 1968. And the war is not in our party. The war is to beat Trump. As far as the keys go, as Lichtman says in his video Democrats move from being down 2 keys to being down 3. The incumbency key is lost. Assuming Democrats can unify around Harris, and avoid chaos, that means 3 of his 4 undetermined keys would need to fall to predict Democratic defeat after the DNC. Because he does plan to make a prediction after the DNC in August. It sounds like he leans toward two more keys falling (the foreign policy keys) and the other two not falling (third party, social disorder). So if that's 5 keys against Kamala, she wins. It does underscore how important it is that Democrats now have to unify and get this right. The main thing about Lichtman's system is it's very simple: 5 or fewer keys against you, incumbent wins. 6 or more against you, the incumbent party loses. It doesn't matter which keys. That said, I was curious. If I counted it right, there have been 5 elections since The Civil War where the incumbent party ran a candidate who was NOT the incumbent, and who only emerged after a big party food fight. 4 of those 5 lost. There were three examples where the incumbent party ran a candidate who was NOT the incumbent, and who never went through a party food fight. 2 of those 3 won. The three times an incumbent party ran someone who was not an incumbent but was from the same party and who the party was unified around were Bush in 1988 (after Reagan), Hoover in 1928 (after Coolidge) and Gore in 2000 (after Clinton). So that was 2 out of 3 wins. And Lichtman would argue that Gore won, but the election was stolen from him. So this hardly looks like a death sentence for Kamala. The five examples where a party in power ran a non-incumbent after a big party fight were Clinton in 2016, Humphrey in 1968, Stevenson in 1952, Blaine in 1884, and Hayes in 1876. Hayes actually won. So that is 4 out of 5 losers. Or 4 out of 4 losers since 1900, as Lichtman said in the video above. So this idea of welcoming chaos at the DNC that a lot of media talking heads invite, because it would be fun for them, is not a good idea if the goal is to beat Trump. Biden staying on as POTUS raises some interesting possibilities. The thing Lichtman keeps mentioning as a game changer that could turn one or both of his foreign policy keys in Democrats' favor is something like a ceasefire in Gaza with the release of hostages. In theory, Biden is now useless, because he is a lame duck. No one has any reason to listen to him. But if Harris were suddenly tied with Trump in the polls, that would make a difference.. Like if Bibi thought he can't just wait for Trump to save his ass. And if Harris does win, I actually like the idea of Joe sticking around in 2025 as a sort of war ambassador on Ukraine and Israel. He has expertise and relationships on foreign policy that are really unmatched with any living American. And it addresses the fact that he is not demented. He's just old. Biden's role still may not be completely done when Harris wins. I would love to stick a bomb up Bibi's ass and Putin's ass by forcing them to still have to deal with Biden as an elder statesman in 2025, under President Harris.

This is like an abundance of riches all of a sudden. I'm used to two things. First, feeling zero excitement about Biden, even though I feel like I should feel excited. Second, feeling like I am suffering from Democratic autism. Maybe this is cruel to Joe Biden, who I voted for and love. But I have watched so many interviews lately where I feel like, "Can't ............ you ...................... please ............................ just ............................. finish .................................... the .....................................fucking ......................................sentence." So the idea of Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg running around and dropping clever and witty shit bombs all over the Felon And His Ass Licker is thrilling. Like I want a month of THAT just to catch up from this drought that we have been in, where I had to listen to 90 minutes of Trump's lying ass and then watch JD Vance go lick it!. I had never actually heard Josh Shapiro, so I went to YouTube to find Josh. And this felt just the same. Please put him on a stage and just let this man go off on Trump. He actually kind of reminds me of Kamala. He's got this sense of joy and exuberance. And he winds it up but you know this sharp verbal shit bomb is coming. And it does. This is such a relief. Any of these White guy Guvs, or Kelly, or Whitmer, would be good. By all accounts I've heard Mark Kelly is the boring national hero type. GI Joe without the hair, and someone people deeply respect. So maybe he looks good just standing strong and silent next to Kamala. Rather than the loud mouthed Gay from DC or the loud mouthed Jew from Pennsylvania of the loud mouthed woman from Michigan. I am just happy to be able to hear what needs to be said. Please, speak! Every .................... fucking ................. day!

Pop quiz two, for bonus points. Kamala actually ran this ad in her 2020 campaign. Can you spot which one is the prosecutor, and which one if the felon?

Congratulations! You win. I'm proud of you. You win the prayers of Mike Pence. God bless you!