Everything's complicated and my hesitation about replacing Biden up to now has been informed by polls showing other candidates not doing much better. But a lot of people seem remarkably certain that Harris specifically could not win a general election for reasons I think they should say out loud.
There's a very specific personal vulnerability there that I'm surprised hasn't come up much on the right, but my sense is that doubt here is more about, uh, demographic concerns that haven't really been fleshed out or justified explicitly. Could be wrong.
This is very valid and true, but if the choice is between her a guy who cannot reliably complete sentences without a teleprompter...I dunno, man.
bsky.app/profile/lewm...
To be fair, the last time she was in a national election, everyone thought she would be a formidable candidate but she did terribly, and was widely considered a surprisingly poor campaigner. So there is a data point.
Anyway, if Biden stays in, which seems likely, I don't think telling people "no, he's fine, actually" for the next several months is tenable. I don't know what you say instead. But openly lying to voters over and over again about something they know to be untrue probably hurts Dems long-term. So.
"He's fine but even if he's not he's surrounded by competent people dedicated to carrying out his vision," the president dying or being incapacitated in office isn't even a big deal.
They all feed off each other to say the same thing. The debate night preening by on-air personalities about how their phones were 'blowing up' from Dem insiders (and various brags about how highly placed or senior, etc.) was nauseating on both sides of that nonsense.
They did because the NYT ran half a dozen Chicken Little op-eds the next day, building and pushing out the bandwagon that everybody else decided to jump on.
