Kelly: Are you actively trying to put a fascist in office? you do understand that by having a following and continually skeeting and tweeting “Biden dementia bad” (your too-cute-by-half ableist stuff is obvious) actually is heard and seen by other people?

Are you actively trying to put a fascist in office? you do understand that by having a following and continually skeeting and tweeting “Biden dementia bad” (your too-cute-by-half ableist stuff is obvious) actually is heard and seen by other people?

Carl Bernstein on CNN saying Biden has had "15-20" episodes in the last year like the one he had during the debate with a noted increase in the last six months

Idk I don’t like that abortion writers say this kind of stuff bsky.app/profile/gbbr... “damaged and declining”

February 2023. This is the moment they decided to ignore popular will and hold a coronation of a damaged and declining candidate. They depended on Trump being worse to manufacture consent for a historically unpopular candidate.

also the ever-popular "they" decided Biden was the candidate, rather than you know, an actual primary system.

really gonna need an explanation of what "defying popular will" means when Biden won all of the primaries. Sure, he didn't have serious competition, but you can't dragoon your idealized perfect candidate into the race against their will, because they also have agency?

People like Whitmer and AOC knew perfectly well that they could have run against Biden but chose not to. That's not nefarious, it's a recognition that primarying the head of the party is generally a bad idea that doesn't end well.

AOC is actually not old enough to run this time (she's only 34), but Pritzger, Newsome and others were all out there choosing not to run!

ok but the broader point still holds.

She’ll be 35 in October, before election day and well before the inauguration.

We should have somebody else as president! Literally “somebody else”! Not a specific person, just a vague amorphous non-Biden.

AI Clippy: I can help with that. How many fingers do you want your Blue Candidate to have?

Generic Democrat #6 will surely save the republic

more like Generic Democratic Socialist.

They think they’re not trying to put a fascist in office but they’re making arguments in hopes of replacing him that will persist once he is not replaced, and I wish they would have some fucking introspection about that.

I wish she cared that millions of people voted for him and still want him to run

Considering the state of abortion in this country right now I wouldn’t exactly look to activists in this field for political acumen, frankly

Shots fired

I saw one think tank liberal on the other site say they just want to prevent the toothpaste from going back in the tube because ossifying the narrative is the only way elite Democrats will agree go with a different candidate, and I wonder what it's like to not be aware of downside risks.

Like, you ossify the narrative, and then Biden refuses to step down. Now what?

Or you ossify the narrative, Biden steps down, and President Harris gets nothing but, "How long were you aware of President Biden's decline? Did you lie to the American people?" questions from the media from now until November.

This is the thing! Any other candidate would get skewered just as savagely by the press, without an incumbency advantage, and after a chaotic PR disaster basically all but admitting that the party is lost. Biden stepping down is a terrible idea that, fortunately, will not happen.

The counterargument is that the mainstream press is mostly read by people who are voting blue no matter who, anyway, and that truly low-info undecided voters aren't paying attention yet. The concern is that they'll start paying attention soon, and they won't like what they see with Biden 1/

This is why Biden stepping down isn’t going to work, this is already baked in

Right. Like now we’ve got the same candidate except you’ve spent a shitload of time trying to weaken him. It didn’t *work*, but it still worked, probably.

So the scandal is that Biden had a bunch of incidents where stuttering overwhelmed his speech, is that it?

basically.

What the fuck is an episode and how is Carl Fucking Bernstein qualified to assess that?

“Old Seeming” is the condition, Bernstein’s qualification is “also in his eighties”

I bet Carl never loses his train of thought or stumbles.

Carl Bernstein is a really interesting choice to lead the "too old to do an important job" charge. He's, what, 103?

Seriously …

Jesus Christ what is wrong with her

She wants to be right about her priors in front of people

Even though her priors are wrong

My view right now is simple and similar. Biden doesn’t exist and no one should focus a second on him from here on out. Trump is a threat and we do everything we can to stop him. That’s it period

I genuinely don’t care if he’s a veggie. The race has nothing to do with him anymore

If Biden remains on the ticket I'm definitely voting for him, but I do think we're owed the full truth. My father had Alzheimer's, and my mother had dementia from Parkinson's. I've witnessed this in person and it's awful.

Yeah man, he doesn’t have either of those things lol Owed WHAT full truth? He had a bad debate and is in his mid80s

I’d recommend actually watching him! Did you watch his performance after the debate? And the next morning?

Yeah, I did. He got better. And his speech last night. But I think he ought to sit down for an extended interview. If he does that in the September debate, it will be too late to do anything, and it will be over.

And Bernstein says people close to him say this is far from the first time.

"People close to him" appears to be donors who are agitating for a different candidate.

I'm sure many are, and I find that pretty despicable. I think they should come forward and speak publicly or STFU. But I also think Biden should take additional steps to help them STFU.

Some people seem to believe this is coming from staffers who work with Biden in the White House on a daily basis. That would be a different thing for me.

Maybe we shouldn't make medical diagnoses based on a debate?

I'm not saying we should. I'm saying I think he should sit down for an extended interview and let us see more. Pick the interviewer. Jon Stewart maybe. He'll be fair. A person who has all their wits about them should have no problem doing that.

But what is the benefit of doing that? So more armchair experts can diagnose him? Biden is live on TV multiple times each week. We have plenty of evidence aside from the debate. And even then we cannot reliably draw any sort of medical conclusion from those!

Also, what does "have all their wits about him" mean? See how this is a harmful conversation to have? We just end up dissecting things that ought not to be dissected. (I'm not trying to be an ass, just pointing out how troublesome this can be!)

Post