Yeah, you got me. I'm a fraud, a troll. What is with you people? No one can ask a sincere question of someone they think has more knowledge than they do, whose opinion they respect, without being called a troll?
Just because I fear you're actually this stupid, these are not *technically* questions, but they are requests for information that you then melted down and didn't answer.
I didn't melt down at all. You might not know what melt down means. But since I'm getting attacked for no reason by the Sincerity Police, I said elsewhere that I'd love someone like Michael Bennet
People might be inclined to get upset when they've been accused multiple times of being something they aren't. Not everyone is an online warrior. Normies catch strays on here.
Anyone talking about replacing Biden on the ticket in June 2024, is either coming from a place of incredible political naivete, or is acting in bad faith. Idk which Jerry is.
Do you think Biden is going to be an incoherent mess in the debate? That's the scenario Jerome was floating, along with concerns over frailty that probably came from watching 10 second clips generated by right wingers.
No, not necessarily. I think he could have a bad debate if he forgets a name or misspeaks at a critical moment, though, which will (sadly) get much more emphasis in the media than Trump's ramblings. If support craters after the debate, he should at least consider stepping aside as an option.
I think it's very unlikely. The question remains. What is the strategy if the first debate performance goes very poorly for Biden. Is there an actual plan you'd support if his support craters after the first debate?
“What is the strategy if the first debate performance goes very poorly for Biden”
It’s “don’t have a poor debate”. Then it’s “spin the poor debate as being good actually”. The its “hope the next debate is better”.
Same as literally every Presidential election since TV debates began
I don’t understand this level of pants-wetting. It was like this in the run up to the SOTU too. “What if Biden can’t get through the SOTU?”
All candidates can have a bad debate. That’s how politics goes.
So, the one thing I’ll say is step 2 “spin the debate as being good actually” and “asking how to get rid of the candidate” are polar opposites, and if you asked me on the best strategy to lose the election I’d say “ask loudly how to replace the candidate”
Which is not to scold someone for asking, but I can understand where the tendency comes from.
Asking the question loudly and repeatedly damages Biden and makes Trump more likely to be President, so, I’d strongly encourage people to, like, not do it
If it could lead to a candidate change, then I’d be more receptive to it. But it can’t. There’s just no mechanism for it. We’re in the dance with the candidate we’ve got.
So, in my mind asking the question cannot lead to a productive outcome, and damages Biden.
It really depends on what the media latches onto. You don't want another Mexico/Egypt gaffe. But Trump also doesn't want a shark/electric battery moment. Which one can avoid gaffes best will win, but it's hard to say what will go viral on social media ahead of time.
I personally don't. I have to accept that many people in my everyday life do. I know you're going to call it "anecdata." Still, I definitely knew some teachers I work with (liberals! voted for Biden!) who totally bought the headlines that Biden thought Mexico bordered Gaza, and I had to debunk that.
And so if you know the media environment is more hostile to Biden than Trump, then he has to perform that much better. And I don't know if he can perform *so well* that he can overcome the handicap the media is giving him.
Asking people to take seriously a hypothetical that is extremely unlikely to happen is very dumb, and you should be embarrassed to be doing it. But the answer to the question is that you still ride with Biden because it doesn't actually matter very much how he performs at a debate.
"You should be embarrassed." No, I shouldn't be. If we were talking in person, would you say that to me? And if not, why not? Why is this heated rhetoric acceptable online when we'd never talk like this in real life?
We went through this hand wringing with the 2020 debates & it went fine. Unless someone has a stroke on stage, it's unlikely to get much attention outside political nerds like us & won't be a major factor in how voting goes in November.
Well obviously you don't see why your question is embarrassing, because you asked it. But for anyone who follows the candidates you may has well have asked "what if Biden dies on stage." Or "what if Trump gets on stage and admits to being an alien from Mars." It is both stupid *and also* boring.
Like, sitting in a bar with your buddies and someone goes "ok, but what if Biden does suck?" Is fine, whatever. But then when someone says "but he doesn't suck in any of his appearances now?" that should be the end of the discussion. You shouldn't keep pushing it. It's a silly exercise.
You must not talk to many people about politics in real life if you aren't hearing folks voice concerns about Biden’s age. And if you call them stupid in person, I can't imagine you're terribly persuasive at ameliorating their concerns.
"concerns about Bidens age" are absolutely nothing like "what if he tanks the debate?" And conflating the two is ridiculous. These are not even close to the same conversation.
Are people concerned Biden may be on the downward slope? Absolutely. That's not what we're talking about though.
Yeah, because I followed the conversation from the start and think you are basically polarizing a normie *away* from you instead of actually persuading one.
