It’s maddening to see skepticism of ejecting Biden treated like cultish loyalty. Some of us have been out here saying Biden’s too old for years. The problem is that what is being proposed is a shocking, almost unheard-of remedy, and every historic precedent tells us it’ll end in catastrophe.
It’s very, very clear that the loudest voices calling most excitedly for this remedy are not especially politically sophisticated or even worried about Biden losing - that’s why they didn’t freak for the months of lagging polls and why they’re doing nonsense fantasy-draft replacement picks.
I guess I'm a weird case because I do think there's a strong case to make that Harris is the better car. But people who say their only concern is beating Donald Trump haven't made that case and have instead made arguments that would be *fatal.*
at this point I’m willing to believe Harris might be a better candidate but you do kinda have to add a grain of salt to account for the negative campaigning that right now is mostly not happening against her
Just chatting with friends here in Ohio (all Dems), I suspect that the bluesky/NYT discourse may be severely underpricing midwestern white resistance to Kamala Harris. The phrase "Even less likeable than Hillary" came up twice.
We're about to learn how badly ~55% of voters want to avoid Trump II.
yeah, I mean that the car is "Biden might resign", F=ma is "Harris is next up". You've been consistent on that, these jokers think she should interview for it with The Donors or some shit
A bunch of self important white writers decided that the president who won the primary with black voters support and his black VP need to step down so they can pick a new candidate.
Hi there, as someone who wants Biden to drop out I want to say that I have no problem with Harris, who's mostly the same as Biden but better on some things (and not worse on any that I'm aware of)
Oh, I'm not referring to the Internet. The Internet seems like a big fan of switching out for Harris! I'm referring to elites (donors and mainstream pundits) who have ignored her or even undermined her during this cycle.
Which is to say: the direction they point in isn't totally uncorrelated with where they should be but they have a tendency to dig, be at a weird angle, update slowly and then wildly overcorrect
It's not too weird. People wanting to try to walk down a certain path while simultaneously being incapable of understanding and/or refusing to acknowledge where that path is most likely to go isn't particularly uncommon.
