President Biden’s Address to the Nation
[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]
In case you missed his remarks broadcast and streamed Wednesday evening, here is a video and a transcript.
(Caveat: the transcript at C-SPAN is awful)
Transcript:
My fellow Americans, I’m speaking to you tonight from behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office. In this sacred space, I’m surrounded by portraits of extraordinary American presidents. Thomas Jefferson wrote the immortal words that guide this nation. George Washington showed us presidents are not kings. Abraham Lincoln implored us to reject malice. Franklin Roosevelt inspired us to reject fear.
I revere this office, but I love my country more. It’s been the honor of my life to serve as your president. But in the defense of democracy, which is at stake, I think it’s more important than any title. I draw strength and find joy in working for the American people. But this sacred task of perfecting our union is not about me, it’s about you. Your families, your futures.
It’s about we the people. And we can never forget that. And I never have. I’ve made it clear that I believe America is at an inflection point. On those rare moments in history, when the decisions we make now determine our fate of our nation and the world for decades to come, America is going to have to choose between moving forward or backward, between hope and hate, between unity and division.
We have to decide: Do we still believe in honesty, decency, respect, freedom, justice and democracy. In this moment, we can see those we disagree with not as enemies but as, I mean, fellow Americans—can we do that? Does character in public life still matter? I believe you know the answer to these questions because I know you the American people, and I know this: We are a great nation because we are a good people. When you elected me to this office, I promised to always level with you, to tell you the truth. And the truth, the sacred cause of this country, is larger than any one of us. Those of us who cherish that cause cherish it so much, the cause of American democracy itself. We must unite to protect it.
In recent weeks, it has become clear to me that I need to unite my party in this critical endeavor. I believe my record as president, my leadership in the world, my vision for America’s future, all merited a second term. But nothing, nothing can come in the way of saving our democracy. That includes personal ambition.
So I’ve decided the best way forward is to pass the torch to a new generation. It’s the best way to unite our nation. I know there was a time and a place for long years of experience in public life. There’s also a time and a place for new voices, fresh voices, yes, younger voices. And that time and place is now.
Over the next six months, I will be focused on doing my job as president. That means I will continue to lower costs for hard-working families, grow our economy. I will keep defending our personal freedoms and civil rights, from the right to vote to the right to choose. I will keep calling out hate and extremism, making it clear there is no place, no place in America for political violence or any violence ever, period. I’m going to keep speaking out to protect our kids from gun violence, our planet from climate crisis as an existential threat.
I will keep fighting for my Cancer Moonshot, so we can end cancer as we know it because we can do it. I’m going to call for Supreme Court reform because this is critical to our democracy—Supreme Court reform. You know, I will keep working to ensure American remains strong, secure and the leader of the free world.
I’m the first president of this century to report to the American people that the United States is not at war anywhere in the world. We will keep rallying a coalition of proud nations to stop Putin from taking over Ukraine and doing more damage. We’ll keep NATO stronger, and I will make it more powerful and more united than any time in all of our history. I will keep doing the same for our allies in the Pacific. You know, when I came to the office, the conventional wisdom was that China would inevitably pass, surpass the United States.
That’s not the case anymore. And I’m going to keep working to end the war in Gaza, bring home all the hostages and bring peace and security to the Middle East and end this war. We are also working around the clock to bring home Americans being unjustly detained all around the world.
You know, we’ve come so far since my inauguration. On that day, I told you as I stood in that winter—we are stood in a winter of peril and winter of possibilities. Peril and possibilities. We are in the group of, we were in the group of the worse pandemic in the century. The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War. We came together as Americans. We got through it. We emerged stronger, more prosperous and more secure.
Today we have the strongest economy in the world, creating nearly 16 million new jobs—a record. Wages are up, inflation continues to come down, the racial wealth gap is the lowest it’s been in 20 years. We are literally rebuilding our entire nation—urban, suburban and rural and tribal communities. Manufacturing has come back to America. We are leading the world again in chips and science and innovation. We finally beat Big Pharma after all these years to lower the cost of prescription drugs for seniors.
And I’m going to keep fighting to make sure we lower the cost for everyone, not just seniors. More people have health care today in America than ever before. I signed one of the most significant laws helping millions of veterans and their families who were exposed to toxic materials. You know, most significant climate law ever, ever in the history of the world. The first major gun safety law in 30 years.
And today, the violent crime rate is at a 50-year low. We are also securing our border. Border crossings are lower today than when the previous administration left office. I’ve kept my commitment to appoint the first Black woman to the Supreme Court of the United States of America. I also kept my commitment to have an administration that looks like America and be a president for all Americans. That’s what I’ve done.
I ran for president four years ago because I believed and still do that the soul of America was at stake. The very nature of who we are was at stake. That is still the case. America is an idea. An idea stronger than any army, bigger than any ocean, more powerful than any dictator or tyrant. It’s the most powerful idea in the history of the world. That idea is that we hold these truths to be self-evident.
We are all created equal, endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. We’ve never fully lived up to it—to this sacred idea—but we’ve never walked away from it either. And I do not believe the American people will walk away from it now.
In just a few months, the American people will choose the course of America’s future. I made my choice. I’ve made my views known. I would like to thank our great vice president, Kamala Harris. She is experienced, she is tough, she is capable. She’s been an incredible partner to me and a leader for our country.
Now the choice is up to you, the American people. When you make that choice, remember the words of Benjamin Franklin hanging on my wall here in the Oval Office, alongside the busts of Dr. King and Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez.
When Ben Franklin was asked, as he emerged from the convention going on, whether the founders have given America a monarchy or a republic, Franklin’s response was: “A republic, if you can keep it.” A republic, if you can keep it. Whether we keep our republic is now in your hands. My fellow Americans, it’s been the privilege of my life to serve this nation for over 50 years.
Nowhere else on Earth could a kid with a stutter from modest beginnings in Scranton, Pennsylvania, and in Claymont, Delaware, one day sit behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office as the president of the United States, but here I am.
That’s what’s so special about America. We are a nation of promise and possibilities. Of dreamers and doers. Of ordinary Americans doing extraordinary things. I’ve given my heart and my soul to our nation, like so many others. And I’ve been blessed a million times in return with the love and support of the American people. I hope you have some idea how grateful I am to all of you.
The great thing about America is, here kings and dictators do not rule—the people do. History is in your hands. The power’s in your hands. The idea of America lies in your hands. You just have to keep faith—keep the faith—and remember who we are. We are the United States of America, and there are simply nothing, nothing beyond our capacity when we do it together. So let’s act together, preserve our democracy. God bless you all and may God protect our troops. Thank you.
~ ~ ~
This is an open thread.
Once again NYT is dickish about Biden.
This, from Peter fucking-conspiracy-theorist Baker:
HE WASN’T THE ONE WITH THE PROBLEM ABOUT HIS AGE OR CAPACITY, BAKER.
And of course, one of the right-wing morons in the Opinion section, Bret Stephens, had to take a public dump:
Stephens knows dick-all about the Democratic Party’s inner machinery especially its base, relying instead on several handfuls of mostly cis-het white men in the party who needed attention and couldn’t manage to act with discipline inside the party. Some were definitely worried about Kamala Harris getting a crack at the job if Biden was incapacitated — hello, Lloyd Doggett? We see you.
Funny how neither of these assholes has had anything to say about the other oldsters in the Democratic Party.
Or anything negative about the oldest POTUS nominee and their obvious unfitness for office.
“the deception about his deterioration. #press”
This is the core of a conspiracist case against the “legitimacy” of Kamala Harris’s candidacy, her good faith and trustworthiness.
Treating “the deception” as an established fact, and as a product of a shadowy cabal of Dems determination to cling on to power undemocratically is rather desperate and despicable.
But it is being heavily leant into by a wide variety of republican talking heads, and it is being pushed by the media as an issue of concern to swing voters in swing states.
MSNBC had a segment recently on Wisconsin focus groups, which they chose to broadcast as indicative of concerns about Harris’s involvement in the “cover up”
https://youtu.be/erjhZxwf7cc [from 05:00]
“Cover up”.
Meanwhile Trump is busy dealing with the Saudis, surrounding himself with convicted and indicted criminals, leaning on an illegitimate SCOTUS decision to torpedo the many legal cases against him, certain members of the Supreme Court are accepting millions in “gratuities” from Republican donors and flying treason flags, and Trump is busy trying to distance himself from Project 2025 aka the Authoritarian Handbook. But sure, NYT, tell me more about how the Democrats conspired to hide that Biden is old.
It feels like the NYT and other news media have been deliberately engaged in redirection. “Look over there at the (nonexistent) coverup! No, not there, over there!”
When they aren’t engaged in the coverup itself, that is, ex. NYT: Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia.
At this point, I think it is safe to say that the major news organizations ARE engaging in redirection.
On the bright side it’s not as if anyone takes ol’ Bedbug Bret that seriously given he’s made a career of showing off how ignorant he is several times a week.
I found these WSJ headlines pretty illustrative, from the same writer (Jason Riley):
July 9: Kamala Harris Would Be the Best Democratic Choice
She’d rally black voters who are souring on Democrats and she’s close to Trump in the polls.
July 23: Kamala Harris Isn’t the Change Democrats Need
On issues from crime to immigration to inflation, she offers more of the same failed left-wing policies.
I wonder what could possibly have happened in those two weeks…
I’d seen the same flip flop noted in my social media timeline. Jason L. Riley must either be brain dead or undermining his own work was his assignment and adequately compensated.
I can appreciate why the NY Times is important to you, like it is to many who comment here, and to our fearless leader. And it does seem to have a feud going with Biden.
AND, it’s worth remembering that the NY Times has about 10 million subscribers, and Mr. Beast (the leading YouTuber) has 300 million subscribers.
My point is that there are a lot of people out there who don’t read the NY Times. Really a lot. Many of them vote. Yes it is influential, but maybe not as influential as it once was.
As the paper of record, the New York Times influences coverage by other news organizations, plus responses on social media. So it’s reach goes far beyond those who actually read the paper.
It and the Washington Post are still the opinion leaders across US news media. Many smaller news outlets either syndicate their reporting or refer to them in their own reporting.
Until other major papers have equal footing shaping public opinion, both NYT and WaPo need to be scrutinized and critiqued thoroughly.
The mark of these two papers on US history through which they expect to mold the collective public consciousness can’t be forgotten. YouTube is today’s alternative to broadcast TV – views may mean little depending on who is consuming and how it’s consumed.
The NYT and WaPo are, in effect, America’s top two national newspapers. That’s why it’s important what they say and how they say it.
“The Beginning of Biden’s Long Goodbye?” Baker should apologize to Raymond Chandler for that, and to Biden for the thrust of his piece that Biden is not only a lame duck, he’s en route to becoming Peking Duck. What an ass hole.
In case Peter Baker missed it – obsessed as he and his editors are over superficial horse race coverage – Joe Biden has a day job. He’s done it well for three and a half years, and has another six months to keep doing it. A lot of shit can happen on any one of those days. I’m glad Biden’s behind the Resolute Desk and not a 78-year-old rapacious, vindictive geezer like Donald Trump.
“We are all created equal, endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. We’ve never fully lived up to it—to this sacred idea—but we’ve never walked away from it either. And I do not believe the American people will walk away from it now.”
That’s a strong piece of rhetoric in a fine speech. He hammered the important points for the upcoming election without mentioning names, and likewise mentioned the need to reform the Supreme Court without naming names. Aside from the overall shape of the speech, leaving out those names would also have made it easier to avoid slipping into the use of profanities because some people need to be called exactly what they are. : )
Had he used names the speech would have been seen solely as a final campaign speech which shouldn’t have been made from the White House as it would violate the Hatch Act.
What he spoke about transcended campaigning, though:
That — the American people need to be reminded we are not a monarchy and we should vote to preserve this Republic this fall.
The President and Vice President are excluded from the Hatch Act. Remember when Trump hosted the RNC at the White House?
Also, the Hatch Act is basically a dead letter after its widespread and consequence-free violations during the Trump Administration.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/probe-finds-trump-officials-repeatedly-violated-hatch-act
You know damned well *Democratic* presidents and VPs will never be immune from the Hatch Act. I’m still waiting to read a GOP complaint about last night’s speech claiming it was campaigning, it’s just a matter of time.
@Rayne
I understand your political point, but I didn’t say that the President and VP are immune. They are specifically not covered by the text of the Hatch Act and are outside of its scope.
And I’m saying the GOP will still have a hizzy about campaigning from the White House.
Rayne is absolutely right.
And moreover Biden’s speech was all the better for being Presidential.
Even, perhaps especially, in those passages outlining that democracy itself is at stake in the coming election, he made it about the choice of the American people to defend their democracy.
Since many in MAGATLand think having a strong man, aka dictator or monarch, is a dandy idea, i think Biden and Harris need to remind the country why our founders didn’t choose that route and why that route is less wise today than it would have been then. Prof. Jeff Sonnenfeld phrased the choice as “rule of law vs law by rulers”. Sprinkling in a few “arbitrary and capricious” here and there might be a good start.
The oligarchs understand what they are getting with Trump and feel that they can control him. But the rest do not understand that Trump’s pandering to them has nothing to do with loyalty to them. He will betray them if he deems it in his best interest as he did with Covid.
Slightly off-topic, but I guess this is the best spot for it.
An observations from Europe: Kamala Harris is on the old side for being president. Where I’m from we prefer elecing leaders around 50, which seems to be the good mix between having experience while still being relevant for a decade. Going back to the 90s, our Prime Minsters have been as young as 41 and as old as 61 when first taking office, with around 50 being “normal”.
It’s also extremely weird to see that one of the “best ways” into politics is being a prosecutor; here that’s 100% an administrative career. We elect the leadership which then sets the strategic goals that the bureucracy makes happen, but I know that the US has elected officials all around.
I understand the case you make, but I think perhaps you understate the extent to which legal careers have historically been the background of very substantial numbers of MPs in Parliament. Very large numbers of whom were barristers, who often continued their legal practice alongside being an MP (or indeed as members of the HoL)
As for a career in prosecution being a basis for political advancement, the issue is somewhat disguised in the U.K. by virtue of the organisation of the legal profession – barristers are independent practitioners, bound by the cab rank rule, thus the criminal barrister’s practice theoretically straddles both prosecuting and defending, though in reality there has always been a tendency to specialise as one or the other.
Your suggestion that prosecution is 100% administrative is only true if one confines attention to the CPS, but that is not the whole story.
But you are correct that the elective nature of important legal/executive and judicial positions throughout the counties and States which make up the USA necessarily politicises roles and creates a much greater cross over between politics and law.
Yeah, every system is different, and as I understand it the UK system has it’s own set of peculiarities. I’m not from there though, and as I udnerstand here in Norway the prosecutors are career lawyers employed by the police.
Honestly, what I find weirdest is that medical examiners are elected, and a fair amount of them have no actual medical experience.
What?! No medical experience?!
That must make for entertaining prosecutions.
*searching frantically for Norwegian police procedural series or murder-mystery movies to stream*
Rayne, what I meant is that I’ve read that about a third of US medical examiners have no medical experience. Ours do, but there’s a shortage of them.
As for crime/police procedurals, those are extremely popular here, but we tend to prefer the ones imported from Sweden or the UK. I remember liking several of the movies/episodes in Beck, and then there’s always Broen/The Bridge. Norwegian series tend to be more focused on loners working against the system, and while I can’t really recommend any of them, you could do worse than take a look at Varg Veum.
Oops sorry for my unwarranted assumption you’re British. Please forgive the slight
Forgive me for jumping to a conclusion, but is a “medical examiner” what we would call a “coroner”?
I responded below at end of threads re: the differences in the US re: coroners/ME’s and their training or lack thereof. FYI. I am neither but in end-of-life trainings so topic comes up.
@ Rayne
July 25, 2024 at 7:25 am
try Annika (PBS) – it’s a Scottish maritime police procedural with a Scandinavian (and literary-themed) connection. Nicola Walker plays the lead, quirky and brilliant.
To sum up, Europe is better? Well, gee, like, no duh.
She may be 59, but she presents as much younger, especially in contrast to Trump. I think 50-60 is the ideal age range for a President – experienced but not past her prime.
An argument for nominating a VP younger than she is, especially given that a VP is often a party’s next nominee for the presidency. That also tends to allow them to appeal to different demographics, to complement their president electoral attractions.
Shapiro, for example, is 51. But I like having a VP who’s more progressive than their president.
I was liking Shapiro, but then I read this TNR article and it made a lot of sense. But that’s probably because I’m sick of all the pols who are kowtowing to Netanyahu and would like to cut off aid to Israel completely.
https://newrepublic.com/article/184151/one-vice-president-ruin-democratic-unity-josh-shapiro
Well, okay, Aristotle said 49 was the ideal age for a leader: still energetic but past the rashness of youth, with wisdom but not the timorous quality of the aged. He was wrong about a lot of stuff (vitalistic biology, meteorology, geology) but I guess this made sense. Though with changes in health status (e.g., we carry a lighter parasite load these days) you might want to bump that age up a bit. Anyway, Ms. Harris strikes me as a youthful enough sort!
20-30 was the average life expectancy in Ari’s day, so if your claim is true, he apparently favored a gerontocracy.
Aristotle, unusually for his age, lived until 62. But how old was he when he made that statement, 49?
59 is old for a man. 59 is still young for a woman.
Life expectancy at age 59
Norway : M 83.85 F 86.27
U.K. : M 84 F 87
US. : M 80.21 F 83.49
At 59 US females have lower life expectancy than U.K. or Norwegian men
A source for that data would be nice, especially since life expectancy in the U.S. has changed considerably over the last decade thanks to opioid overdoses and the GOP’s attack on prenatal maternal and infant health.
Another thing about life expectancy is that it changes as you grow older. The one most often used for comparison is at birth, but it will (not surprisingly) increase as you get older, especially as you pass the “big die-offs”: first year, twenties and sixties.
Reply to Rayne July 25, 2024 at 12:16 pm
A US source: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
Rayne
July 25, 2024 at 12:16 pm
Norway
https://www.ssb.no/en/statbank/table/05375/ Data inc 2023
U.K. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandlifeexpectancies/articles/lifeexpectancycalculator/2019-06-07 last update Jan 2024
US I used this
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-american-life-expectancy-trends-2023/ Published Nov 2023 using life tables from 2020
This link https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html published 2024 OSS TR report uses 2021 life tables
Which gives these results
At age 59 LE M 80.13 F 83.46
Thanks much.
Rayne
July 25, 2024 at 4:34 pm
No problem. I should have included the references originally.
The choice not to, because the point I was making was a slightly snarky one, wasn’t a good decision.
One of the critical differences between the US and pretty much everyone else is that in the US, the parties have no control of their membership or labels. Anyone can run with an (R) or (D) behind their names. Candidates are chosen by primary (a reform that really got rolling in 1972 in response to the chaos of the 1968 Dem convention), not by party membership.
This changes so much.
Balance, counter balance,and on with the show. 💦💕💥
[Heads up — this is the second time within a week you’ve reverted to your old username. I fixed the last one without comment to save time but I can’t let this go a second time. Please also avoid using emojis as they’re not searchable. Emoticons are acceptable. /~Rayne]
It was a marvelous speech. 100% absent the selfish, petty, adolescent destructiveness that’s been “normalized” in recent years. I think it will be talked about by historians in the future up there with the defining speeches by JFK, FDR (and fireside chats) Lincoln and founding fathers. Inspirational. Just wonderful.
From Biden’s speech, I took away: compassion; kindness; self-sacrifice; humanity. And a vision of the future which is hopeful rather than the destruction that Trump is obsessed with.
Let’s be hopeful :-)
Yes, all that.
My favorite part of Biden’s wonderful address:
Heather Cox Richardson: Letters from an American; July 24, 2024
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/july-24-2024
[links to the two tweets referenced here are at the end]
https://x.com/PeterAlexander/status/1816276209854210519
8:56 PM · Jul 24, 2024
https://x.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/1816271516973293634
8:37 PM · Jul 24, 2024
He was forced out because of his infirmities of age. I know how that feels and so do a lot of older Americans.
But he also made the ultimate rational decision of age and recognized that he cannot do what a younger and fitter person can do. He knew he couldn’t unify the party if he stayed in the race. Jeffries and Schumer probably promised to support VP Harris quicky and several other Democratic leaders may have promised the same thing. Joe Biden is used to working with other Senators and Joe knows that in an effective compromise everyone shares the pain.
What’s missing? Take a look at Kamala Harris. She can switch from being the sassy Oakland lady to being the accomplished courtroom prosecutor, US Senator and experienced VP. She’s younger and more entertaining than Hillary was by the time it became Ms. Clinton’s turn to run.
Obama made Hillary wait. And it had some ugly consequences. Biden is setting up Harris to win.
“He was forced out because of his infirmities of age.” It’s not about Biden’s infirmities. It’s about perceptions of infirmities that may have no real basis. It is a perception that has been magnified by repetition (as you have just done) and then exaggerated for propaganda.
In the TV era, perception prevails. The eye is easily deceived. In a pre TV era, this would not have happened. Thanks for the reply.
Haven’t seen anyone else mention this,, so…
During his SOTU address, I don’t recall the exact words. Dobbs had been fresh in the news for a while. He paused, looked straight at the SCOTUS justices near the front and said (from memory) I think he bluntly criticized Dobbs, then said:
He was talking to the Justices, directly.
After this incredible week, transformational, when he spoke last night that SOTU moment kept ringing for me. And I had distinct, almost certain notion that in his private dealings with Kamala, maybe his wife and others in his intimate circle, that something like what has transpired this week was what he was talking about. That overcoming everything wrong about Dobbs… not just the decision itself but the institutionalized bigotry of SCOTUS and other powerful conservative groups, was not going to be accepted sitting down.
There was going to be a fight, and a fight to win.
The confidence Kamala has displayed, hitting the ground running and, to me anyway when she said at her tally yesterday “we’re not playing around”, and the day before “we’re not going back”…
Joe’s SOTU line I mentioned was much more grounded, discussed and prepared for than any of us knew.
Interesting thought. At the time I noted his (almost throw-away) admonition to that front-of-house cabal of unfaithful servants as being significant, but took it simply to imply electoral come-uppance. But whether or not he was already thinking about his succession, he has – to his credit – now realised that his VP has become the key to putting a stop to their reactionary soft coup.
At the time, Biden said that with conviction. It really got my attention. Presidents rarely (that I’ve seen in my 68 yrs) speak that way, directly, to SCOTUS justices. It was for me one of those moments where I think a speaker I respect says something important, with a basis that he doesn’t explain. It kind’a happens all the time. Usually I just accept it as that, and move on.
I’m giving myself a couple extra days to go through this moment’s details, making sure I thoroughly “get” what and why Biden did. I don’t ever want to forget it.
Joe Biden disproves the axiom I heard many, many years ago, likely in reference to Strom Thurman. “The only antidote for political ambition is embalming fluid.”
I did a short TL at Marcy’s post about BIDEN’S TIMING: UNDERCUTTING BIBI
https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/07/22/bidens-timing-undercutting-bibi/#comment-1062647
Here’s the remaining part of that:
7/25/24 [Thursday]
1] BIDEN meets with NETANYAHU at White House
3] HARRIS meets with NETANYAHU in Washington
7/26/24 [Friday] TRUMP meets with NETANYAHU at Mar-a-Lago
I’m glad these meetings today come after Biden’s address.
Now I’m wondering if JOHNSON [and more]
will accompany NETANYAHU to Mar-a-Lago tomorrow.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/25/us/harris-trump-biden-election/217491a0-3aff-56a1-b053-1f912a70690b
Links to:
https:[space]//app.[space]frame.io/presentations/9349ce87-2eba-4a7e-957f-b804a32d8f1b
Here’s a direct YouTube link:
We Choose Freedom | Harris 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHky_Xopyrw
Powerful.
Thank you, harpie.
Oh, that gave me goosebumps!
And I immediately noticed all the happy, laughing people in the ad. Good for her for leaning into that.
And get a load of this crap from Maggie and Swan:
Trump and his allies adapt to a new role: Fighting for attention.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/25/us/harris-trump-biden-election#trump-gop-kamala-harris [4 hours ago]
LOL! As if THEY have nothing to do with it.
You know, they’re going to miss “…and that’s a problem for Joe Biden” added to every headline NYT publishes.
Might actually sell their crap if they reverted to the joke tag line, “…in bed.“
Reminds me of the classic “. . . and this is good news for John McCain”
Isn’t it ironic that they are with this article giving him the attention he craves. It’s another slight of hand trick.
A quote from T.S. Eliot comes to mind, re: the Times…
“…Distracted from distraction by distraction…”
circular distraction squad.
Taking advantage of this open thread to say, GODDAMNITALL, I KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN.
https://youtu.be/rLgF8ThFrFM?feature=shared&t=341
The foot dragging to endorse Harris has literally become a joke. At least Colbert framed it on Schumer’s behavior and didn’t go there about the motivation(s).
The only possible justification for former President Obama not immediately endorsing VP Harris, AFAIK, is that he will be an Illinois delegate at the Democratic National Convention.
This has not, however, stopped other Illinois delegates from voicing their support.
The Guardian (and NBC News) has a teaser from two hours ago:“Obama to endorse Harris nomination soon – report”.
For what it’s worth, I remain unimpressed.
In my work, there was a rubrick “multiple working hypotheses”. In that spirit, may I offer:
Obama was really affected by the way Trump used racial animosity towards Obama to energize the MAGA base. Perhaps he felt an immediate expression of support for Harris would conflate his support of her with that racism. In other words, he chose not to increase the attack surface. BTW- Have any of the rw media used Obama’s missing support in propaganda or is it primarily a concern of Democrats?
Yes, your point about Trump’s racist rage against Obama, hence the MAGA knuckleheads same rage against Obama is spot-on.
Obama has always been strategically patient when it comes to announcing political support for anyone or anything. And that’s a good attribute.
I’m betting he’d prefer to make one endorsement instead of two endorsements, meaning he’ll make an endorsement of Harris and the VP ticket during the DNC convention.
While I do not wish to dwell in “rw media”, a cursory search comes up with the NYPost claiming:
“Obama’s very upset because he knows she can’t win,” a Biden family source told The New York Post”
And an Indian fake news site claiming:
“Obama knows she’s just incompetent — the border czar who never visited the border, saying that all migrants should have health insurance. She cannot navigate the landmines that are ahead of her.”
So, the answer is yes.
It seems like an argument among friends. Obama probably has some valid concerns, but Harris and Biden have some answers for him. One endorsement instead of two, as mentioned below, makes sense.
Reply to Clare Kelly
July 25, 2024 at 11:16 am
Have we seen any respectable media claiming Obama is upset with this turn of events? Or just RW trash like the NY Post?
Reply to Clare Kelly-
It’s my understanding that Obama didn’t endorse Biden till the convention and the same is expected with Harris.
Obama’s reasons for this are never explained but it makes sense to me that he will endorse Harris at the convention the same as he did Biden.
Maybe it’s seen as a “kingmaker” moment at the convention meant to be an exciting moment.
Excellent speech!
The difference between a decent human being, Biden, who has empathy and can sympathize with others, and Trump, a racist, malignant narcissist and pathological liar incapable of having empathy and sympathy for others is strikingly easy to see.
Malignant Donald, the spoiled brat capricious heir who squandered his billion dollar inheritance from his racist, knucklehead father, is desperately trying to steal the 2024 Presidential election so he can sell more of the US family jewels to MSB, Putin and Xi and put the proceeds of those sales into his pocket.
If Trump and his nincompoop minions can be prevented from stealing this year’s election, he’ll lose the election convincingly.
Trump is a boring, dirty old man surrounded by boring, one-dimensional sycophants who are always ready, willing and able to sit for him, roll over for him, or bark for him upon request.
https://bsky.app/profile/drewharwell.com/post/3ky43wjlhgd2m
Jul 25, 2024 at 7:12 AM
Links to WaPo:
An online army rises, this time on Kamala Harris’s side A grassroots network of TikTok creators, energized by the new likely Democratic nominee, are using their skill at playful video collages to build Harris a viral political powerhouse from scratch.
July 25, 2024 at 7:00 a.m. EDT
And here’s a link to Sarah Posner’s THREAD about this article:
https://bsky.app/profile/sarahposner.bsky.social/post/3ky44jf473z2w
Jul 25, 2024 at 7:23 AM
‘That will be one network. But there will be another based on phone calls, book clubs, coffee chats, and yoga classes. And don’t forget the bedroom. Women can be very persuasive.
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. I’ve reverted what looked like your RL name to your established username. Please check your browser’s cache and autofill. /~Rayne]
I was thinking about that a lot last night. I ran Obama’s office in Albuquerque after some other more “experienced pros” mucked it up. I liked him and all that, but was nervous about his lack of experience. Also about his travels with GWB not talking about it. His experience not much more than JD Vance has now.
I have much more confidence in Kamala at this early stage. I think she can win this election, and I think she can get more done than Obama, just with the force of her personality and determination.
(And the news on all this is already getting stale, I’m sorry to say)
Excellent speech that provided little ammunition for the GQP to say “hE wAs CamPaiGNiNG fRoM tHe OvaL oFFicE!!!”. Not that it will matter to the feckless sycophants in the media though, who I’m sure are eager to get back to tickling DonOLD’s taint.
I’m in a solid blue state, but I’ll be doing everything I can to ensure that everyone I know gets out and votes. We need a resounding defeat of Fascism disguised as xtian nationalism.
One thing that irked me today was the BLM leader complaining that there was no ‘democracy’ in this updated process and that a snap primary was called for. He’s also saying this isn’t intended to be an attack on Harris, per se but the hypocrisy (his term) that the DNC is doing this to protect democracy.
If he really thinks that the RWNM won’t cherry-pick and parse out his statement to slam the Ds he’s more of an idiot than I thought. He’s also ignoring the fundraising data showing the voter approval via their checkbooks. He’s not alone, Axelrod dismisses it as well.
However, primaries are used to select delegates in accordance with the DNC bylaws and Joe Biden released his and supported Harris. Note that the delegates are not bound. I also note that there is an opportunity (however small) for others to jump in and file their paperwork but since Biden ran mostly unopposed in the primary season combined with the lack of any declared viable candidate (sorry Dean and Marianne) someone would have to withdraw their endorsement of Harris to run.
I have to wonder how much he was paid off to say this.
It is not logistically feasible to run a 50-state primary starting from zero in the four weeks before the convention. It’s just not. Anyone who thought that was going to happen didn’t stop for three seconds to think it through.
It also reduces the delegates to the convention as mere robots. Yes, the convention rules typically bind them to the candidate on whose slate they appeared in whatever the process was used in their states to select them. But if there is no first ballot winner, the rules state that they are free to vote for whomever they wish.
Well, Biden cut his thousands of delegates loose, and the delegates appear to have quickly decided to shift their votes to Harris. Nothing is official until the actual vote is taken, but they have made their feelings known through the announcements made by the state party caucuses.
There’s nothing undemocratic about that. It’s simply the way the rules of the Democratic party convention are written.
The campaign staff held a virtual meeting with all the State party chairs. From the looks of it, they got unanimous support. The state party chairs then each held a virtual meeting with their delegates and held a vote on who/how they would pledge the votes, that’s why you had all those announcements from different states with results of support. Quite a number were unanimous.
BTW the Electoral College is not a democratic instrument, we only have a say because the states (who vote for the President and Vice President) allow it.
No kidding. Apparently they have no idea what work the state and local Board of Elections do to make an election possible, and what kind of lead time and extra labor is necessary for an actual primary.
Not to mention getting absentee ballots out to the voters (with enough time to get them back), some states have closed primaries (like mine), some use a caucus, and this is all spelled out in each state election law for the sole purpose of appointing the state’s Presidential Electors.
Link? Also BLM is a decentralized movement by design.
“I have to wonder how much he was paid off to say this.”
Respectfully, I have to wonder why you are willing to make such a brazen statement about someone you don’t name, without any citation to what you’re commenting about.
Here https://blacklivesmatter.com/black-lives-matter-statement-on-kamala-harris-securing-enough-delegates-to-become-democratic-nominee/
Statement 23 July 2024 which is being interpreted as a complaint about process quotes 2 people identified as “leaders” one of whom “Shalomyah Bowers, a Black Lives Matter leader, said:” [in part]
“…Those of us who care about the principles of democracy cannot be serious about installing Kamala Harris and an unknown vice president as the Democratic nominee without any semblance of a people-powered process. Not delegates and party elites, but actually asking communities across the country if they believe this should be the democratic ticket. Anything less is unserious in the quest for democracy“
I used the quote from Shalomyah because I believe from his profile he is male, and mutatis mudandis I believe the other leader quoted in the release is female.
FYI — that’s the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter_Global_Network_Foundation
There is considerable controversy regarding the foundation, not exclusive to RWNM, which you can read about.
If the RWNM is going to use that statement as some kind of standard or cudgel, the same RWNM might have to explain why they’re backing the words of a member of the same foundation they’ve taken quite often to task.
However, insinuating that the statement only exists due to a payoff shy of any evidence is pretty low, no matter what anyone might think otherwise of the foundation.
Though it was the other leader D’Zhane Parker who was quoted in the release as saying
“…Installing Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee and an unknown vice president without any public voting process would make the modern Democratic Party a party of hypocrites.”
Uh-huh. Except for the part where Democratic Party delegates — elected by the party’s base for the purpose of delegated authority — voted for Harris
Example:
Biden’s Michigan delegates vote ‘overwhelmingly’ to endorse VP Harris
Detroit Free Press – July 24, 2024
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/24/biden-michigan-delegates-vote-kamala-harris/74524536007/
Just Some Guy
July 25, 2024 at 12:37 pm
I don’t dispute anything you say in that post
My purpose was simply to move the discussion on by trying to identify the origin of the supposed quotes.
Like you I am not a fan of attributing corrupt motives without adequate foundation.
To clarify, I now realize that it was Rugger_9 who made the remark about a payoff, not SteveBev.
However again I must say it is quite disingenuous to conflate the foundation with BLM as a whole, especially as many BLM chapters have broken from the foundation.
Nobody in the Dem fold needs to be paid-off. If there isn’t some quibble about process from somebody or other it would be anormal. “The perfect being the enemy of the good” is the original sin of the left, and the more left, all the greater.
Thankfully, despite that and whatever behind-the-scenes machinations there may or may not have been, the Dem faithful have rallied quickly and solidly behind Kamala. That is a magnificent start.
BLM is a confusing acronym, at least here in New Mexico and the Southwest.
Since 1946, BLM has meant, “Bureau of Land Management.”
https://www.blm.gov
Just Some Guy
July 25, 2024 at 1:21 pm
Again I don’t disagree
And this is where there is evidence of improper motivation/behaviour by the Foundation and the 2 quoted because they claim to speak on behalf of the movement as a whole by describing themselves as leaders of the movement in the statements they issue.
Misogyny and chauvinism exist in the expected and least expected people. You can pretty much count on most men and women to be guided, however prominent, subtle, large or tiny, by misogyny and/or chauvinism. Based on my experience and observation.
It could also be money or goodies or attention. But the internal thing that says to oneself ‘yeah I wanna say that now’ is a sprinkle of internal misogyny and/or chauvinism. (I know Axelrod worked with HRC and the “leader of BLM” is a woman but it is the least expect people that blow your mind until you get hip to it.)
It seems to me that any random black person could style themselves a “BLM leader” and get out the megaphone.
It may surprise you to hear this, but there is more than one opinion held by black people, and it seems likely that some black person out there is unhappy. Of course there is. I know and have seen a bunch more who are not unhappy.
The only people with any right at all to complain about something ‘undemocratic” are people who voted in the Democratic primary this year. They seem pretty happy with this. I know I am. One will get one’s chance to vote, to exercise “democracy” (not republic) this November.
Replying to dopefish
July 25, 2024 at 11:32 am
Reply to Clare Kelly
July 25, 2024 at 11:16 am
“Have we seen any respectable media claiming Obama is upset with this turn of events? Or just RW trash like the NY Post?”
I’ve not seen any.
I was answering a question regarding the occurrence of said in “rw media”.
LOL at the Harris Campaign’s “Statement on a 78-Year-Old Criminal’s Fox News Appearance”: https://bsky.app/profile/murshedz.bsky.social/post/3ky4hhpfvnj2j
Right?
It got some traction, too.
Several news outlets brought attention to it.
to David Brooks says: July 25, 2024 at 9:25 am
I am involved with several end of life planning courses and training venues. There are regional differences (states, counties etc) as to whether they have coroners or ME’s and the training criteria varies as well.
For those who may not know, a medical professional (pathologist etc) conducts the autopsy (if needed or requested) as in the case when a person dies alone, or seemingly under unusual or suspicious circumstances. I say that since some people are alarmed that a person without medical training can come in to declare someone dead. The medical investigation comes later if needed.
In old England the coroner was a judicial officer who would conduct an inquest, not unlike a grand jury, to investigate an untimely death. After hearing evidence, the coroner’s jury would render a verdict as to the manner of death: natural, accidental, homicide, or suicide.
Yes, and largely true today in the UK, outside of Scotland, which has a separate legal system. The coroner – as opposed to a medical examiner or forensic pathologist – is a judicial officer who presides over a coroner’s court. It’s an appointed judgeship, requiring five or more years as a barrister, solicitor, or legal administrator. They are prohibited from also being medically qualified.
Their job is to determine the legal cause of death in the small minority of deaths over which they preside. They determine whether an autopsy is necessary, and what other evidence to consider, such as police reports, witness statements, specialist testimony, and the like.
A pathologist might determine that a victim died of blunt force trauma to the head, for example, but other evidence would determine whether that was from inadvertently hitting a bedpost, falling out a window, or being struck by a cricket bat-wielding intruder.
Thanks DC and EoH above. I trusted others here would have more info than I do.
I’m learning as I and others in my circle are mapping out our future demise…hopefully
off a ways. Want to make it easier for those who are still above ground.
“They are prohibited from also being medically qualified”
Slight quibble to
The judicial eligibility qualification must be satisfied for new appointments
But coroners appointed before 2013, who had only a medical qualification are still able to sit.
Provided the judicial eligibility qualifications are satisfied, there is no bar as far as I am aware on the person also having medical qualifications.
I was once peripherally involved in a Coroner’s Inquest where the coroner was only medically qualified. It was a travesty. The subject was an air crash in which seven people, including a friend and colleague who was the pilot, died. The coroner had no idea of air law or procedure so misunderstood the whole thing and, naturally, guided by the coroner, the jury blamed the dead pilot.
You’re correct. A candidate for coroner since 2013 may have medical or other non-legal qualifications, but they must also have a minimum of five years legal experience. Joint medical and legal qualifications are rarer in the UK than in the US, where they are also rare.
Coroners in office before 2013, who were primarily medically and not legally trained, were allowed to remain in office. I assume that number is declining, but to the extent they have been coroners since then, they would seem to meet the five-year rule anyway.
Since this is an open thread…
I wonder if there is enough interest and/or time to have another open post on journalism with a focus on where the community here primarily goes for news.
I’ve been a long time subscriber to physical newspapers until two years ago. I prefer reading paper, however, have adjusted to more on screen in recent years, especially here on EW. I’m interested to hear from this community as to where else to put my money – whether that is news org’s or individuals.
I can heartily recommend Byline Times:
https://bylinetimes.com
It’s UK-based but thoroughly journalistically sound and does carry US-related content (as the current main page attests). Online, though has started a print edition but that isn’t even widespread in the UK let alone anywhere else. Free to access but they do take contributions!
I’m in Philly suburbs. My only source for local news is online Patch, virtually worthless. Only bigger news (mostly crime) makes Philly tv news or Inquirer newspaper. It’s a problem. A guy does a local news blog but it’s pretty useless.
Not sure my comment matters since neither I or my neutered cat have offspring.
Hand-over-mouth giggling.
Same here—my wife & I are also childless cat-people—not that there’s anything wrong with that…
Why did I get vaccinated when I have no skin in the game? Just who in the hell do I think I am?
If you are a sperm donor? Or egg donor? And know your contribution resulted in at least one child. Does that make you worthy?
Nor to worry, Jennifer Aniston replied on behalf of the childless cat ladies.
“Tho’ much is taken, much abides; and tho’
We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.” –Tennyson
Thanks, Joe.
There was some discussion of this in a prior post, but I don’t remember which one. FBI Director Wray, testifying yesterday: “I think with respect to former President Trump, there’s some question about whether or not it’s a bullet or shrapnel that hit his ear.”
https://www.c-span.org/video/?537151-2/fbi-director-testifies-oversight-house-judiciary-committee-part-3 — the testimony is at ~1:00:55
Guessing shrapnel. Reported 4 motorcycle police officers hit with shrapnel at the rally.
https://www.wpxi.com/news/investigates/11-investigates-exclusive-pittsburgh-motorcycle-officers-transferred-after-working-trump-rally/4V43BKBXYBAN3PPHJTLK4FR4ZM/
A lot of initial pushback about their claims, but it’s not clear whether they were inaccurate or politically inconvenient.
Marcy’s got a post up about this now:
https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/07/25/ronny-jackson-memory-holes-his-nephews-injury/
Thanks harpie!
The other day “Russell Fry Asks FBI’s Wray: Why Might Recordings Of Trump Rally Not Exist?” and he didn’t have an answer. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YigrqPYmwl4.
Any idea where inquiry as to why, how and whatever else stands re-deletion of SS texts of J6 and is there any recent news? Latest I can find is Apr 2023 on inquiry being expanded.
Do we know if Secret Service communications are always, sometimes, or never recorded? Wray himself said that possibly they weren’t recording that day.
I’m more interested in the J6 loss of data. I don’t understand how backups are deleted without criminality and where the investigation is going.
Biden said: “I believe my record as president, my leadership in the world, my vision for America’s future, all merited a second term.”
He should have added that several weeks ago he had admitted that “I don’t walk as easy as I used to, I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to, I don’t debate as well as I used to” and then he should have said, When you’re as old as former President Trump and I are; even a great record doesn’t entitle you to run for a second term. Instead of listening to my closest advisors, I should have listened more carefully to the American people, a majority of whom have long said in polls that both former President Trump and I are both too old to run for President again.
Reagan was 74, when he began a second term during which he failed to realize that he had authorized his NSC to trade weapons for hostages. At 78, he was personally negotiating a possible end of all nuclear weapons with Gorbachev at a high-stakes summit. Biden was 78 when he began his term and dealt with the consequences of 73-year-old Trump’s unconditional surrender of Afghanistan to the Taliban. Robert Mueller was 75 when he was awkwardly forced to testify to Congress about the Trump-Russia investigation. Don’t inaugurate anyone over about 70.
You might try aiming that at members of Congress because POTUS only signs bills and treaties Congress approves and ratifies.
IMO, we need an upper age limit for a President at inauguration of about 70 to ensure we don’t have a President in the dangerous range I defined with examples above. In 2020, 70 would have ruled out HRC, Trump, Joe, Bloomberg, Saunders and probably Warren (who would have been 71), leaving Pete, Amy and Kamala. 22/100 senators would be too old but only four governors. Dreaming, further, I’d like to see SC Justices limited to 75 with staggered 18 -year terms. I’m not so picky about Congress, since they are highly redundant and there is room for “institutional wisdom”.
“ Reagan was 74, when he began a second term during which he failed to realize that he had authorized his NSC to trade weapons for hostages.”
At the beginning of his second term they decided to have him make press announcements, one time Nancy (who was standing right next to him) got caught whispering what was on the teleprompter. Now, the Reagan White House never explained what happened, they simply stopped having Reagan make future announcements.
I’ve seen a lot saying that because Biden was reading off the teleprompter so it doesn’t count. A lot of things happen in the brain when you are reading and then saying what you read. The brain has to decipher those words and then have it come out in a way that sounds natural.
Yet more disgusting comments from Vance:
Sorry, forgot the link: https://www.mediamatters.org/breitbart-news/resurfaced-audio-jd-vance-appeared-breitbart-claim-kamala-harrises-want-take-our
HAHAHAHA! Whiny ass crybaby TRUMP’s not going to like this:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/25/us/harris-trump-biden-election/4f06d4f1-1963-59b3-a086-a98a9e9cbcb4 [34 minutes ago]
What’s the methodology? We both watched Biden’s speech, but we were streaming with David Pakman’s feed.
I’m 73. Do I still know math? 3 into 29 is about 10 times. 3 into 25 is about 8 times. So 10 over 8 is 5 over 4 so about 1 fifth more people watched Biden but WE do get the “slight” from the NYT.
https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/justice-elena-kagan-calls-for-enforceable-supreme-court-ethics-rules-e750ae7d?st=gsbw8vemv7gcfsu [gift link]
Colbert on couch carnality:
https://youtu.be/NL1yGqQ3pnA?t=465
Wow…look what Marcy just posted at BlueSky:
https://bsky.app/profile/emptywheel.bsky.social/post/3ky6keaweog2z
Jul 26, 2024 at 6:36 AM
Links to [further down in the THREAD she links an archived version, THANKS Marcy!]:
‘An extremely bad man’: News of Kamala Harris’s Irish slave-owning ancestor raises opprobrium and intrigue in Co Antrim One woman with links to Co Antrim-born slaver Hamilton Brown says it will be a difficult history to package
Seanín Graham Fri Jul 26 2024 – 11:14
Via Cheryl Rofer:
https://bsky.app/profile/bobmorris.bsky.social/post/3ky5kwe53gd2p
Jul 25, 2024 at 9:13 PM
Andrea Grimes live-tweeted this call!
[Some people on BlueSky are re-taking the word “Tweet” since Musk abandoned it.]
https://bsky.app/profile/andreagrimes.bsky.social/post/3ky5j3ovigd2z
https://bsky.app/profile/kwcollins.bsky.social/post/3ky6tjs3w6i2g
Jul 26, 2024 at 9:20 AM
https://bsky.app/profile/leahmcelrath.bsky.social/post/3ky52g4x6532x
Jul 25, 2024 at 4:18 PM
Thanks Harpie. Yep, a tsunami of women energized!!!
Stay tuned for this defiant and unprecedented move: DLP has allied with CCL to endorse Kamala Harris 2024!*
[Dog Loving Parents and Childless Cat Ladies]
*sponsored by chewy.com
“In the U.S, over 180 million people, or 63% of households have at least one pet”
https://apnews.com/article/extreme-heat-summer-pets-dogs-protection-5cd56811cc4538cfd3d0ff0bac73a774
Megyn Kelly pointed out to JD Vance that Jesus was childless but he just laughed it off the way MAGAs do when cornered.
I’m offended that JD Vance ignored godless childless vaccinated cat men like me.
MAGAs love to show off for orange jesus by competing with each other to show who can be the most deplorable a$$hole.
I had not seen Lisa Rubin on MSNBC since Joe’s announcement last Sunday. She was on briefly this morning. Her entire countenance has changed, even her face. More upright, her voice more penetrating, more confident. I take it as some liberation from the, at times, seeming hopelessness of the court proceedings she’s been covering for a living.
Or to put it another way, the difference between being at the effect of MAGA to rising above it.
Democrats’ new line of attack on Republicans? ‘You’re being weird’ “I think it’s really elegant in its simplicity,” one Democratic strategist said. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrats-new-line-attack-republicans-youre-weird/story?id=112281846 Julia Reinstein July 25, 2024, 6:17 PM
I am SO here for this departure from the “usual”!
We’re calling
Project 2025the Weirdo Manifesto…and ALSO “creepy.”
And, can I just say that Minnesota Governor Tim Waltz is really good at all of this.
Agree. A few short videos with his views:
(https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TvWMuLgOdC8)
(https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DElmP2lqYoo)
And
‘It is clear we are going to win.’ Gov. Tim Walz talks potential VP slot
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2NgcTgHLTM)
NOTE: At 6:53 what he says about cat people. Spot on.
MARCH FOR OUR LIVES
In a First-Ever Endorsement, March For Our Lives Endorses Kamala Harris for President https://marchforourlives.org/in-a-first-ever-endorsement-march-for-our-lives-endorses-kamala-harris-for-president/ July 24, 2024
The Seneca Project Ads
We Must Win
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCAKYPQZv1w)
SENECA FALLS
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k-90hN6pl0)
And
The Mash Report (BBC 2) a message from women everywy
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdHVNmHfZ84)
I’m feeling the energy of Kamala Harris. I thought Biden should stay in, but now that he hasn’t, I’m seeing her surge in fundraising and overall positive coverage. Biden looked very tired in his address and, in hindsight, this is probably best for him as well. While we could use his international expertise, the stress of the campaign and trying to stay in the saddle after he won would’ve shortened his life. Kamala will grow into that international statesperson role.
The only issue I have with Biden’s decision is with the timing – I had just sent in a contribution to the Biden campaign less than 24 hrs before his announcement. Now the GOP is filing suit to block transfer of Biden campaign funds to Harris. Bastards.
I wouldn’t worry about your donation, Alan. Your heart was in the right place and Harris was a beneficiary already being on Biden’s ticket.
The GOP’s lawfare was anticipated and it’s an obvious sign of desperation. The funds raised this week after Biden stepped aside are likely freaking them out as they more than compensate for the Biden-Harris campaign fund if it is held up temporarily.
I know it’ll be worked out, but it’s annoying. They are definitely in a state of panic. They based their campaign strategy for the last three plus years on “Joe Biden is old”. They have no plan B.
Their incompetence reminds me of Mark Penn dismissing early losses by Hillary Clinton when she ran against Obama. He said “it’ll all be over after California”, not realizing that Calif was winner-take-all for the republicans, but the democrats apportioned delegates. They paid him $10 million yet I knew how the elections worked and he didn’t. Now LaCivita and Wiles, election wizards that they are, couldn’t even think of the possibility that Biden would drop out. I guess anybody can be a political consultant!
p.s. JD Vance is a major problem for him and swapping him out will not help. The Lincoln project did an ad interspersing Trump reading “the Snake” with clips of Vance saying he doesn’t like Trump. It’s brutal (and fun).
not sure what really happened in the back rooms but one thing became clear: the MSM outed themselves as depraved lackies and arrogant crooks who worked with and on behalf of a convicted Felon and his army of imbeciles