Will Biden Drop Out?

[Aseahawkfan]

We need to analyze some of the things in Trump's platform from an economic standpoint. First, his nationalism/isolationism might be great to attract votes from people who see China as an existential threat, but his plan to raise tariffs is going to bring back inflation. He keeps talking about the jobs that go overseas while not recognizing the fact that we have far many more job openings than we do unemployed. If China can make lawn chairs cheaper than we can here, let them sell them here. Besides, having a solid economic relationship with them will reduce the likelihood of a military conflict.

His anti-immigration rhetoric will do the same thing. Love them or hate them, immigrants, including illegal immigrants, are for the most part wage earners who contribute to our work force while not taking a whole lot in benefits as they tend to be younger than native born Americans. That, too, is going to be inflationary as it will further constrict the labor market and cause wages to rise.

Even if I sat aside his personality, I could not accept his politics.

You and I got no one to vote for worth a damn. So I'm not even thinking about that. I might vote for a Vance if he wasn't with Trump, but I got no interest in any ticket with Trump.

This is less of a discussion of support of his platform and a discussion of what his platform is and who he is trying to appeal to. It's very strange to me given I haven't spent much time actually listening to Trump. I mainly don't care for the man's narcissism or the way he views the voter as simps to be sold to because he can. I don't view him as a threat to America or Democracy or any of that trash the Democratic Party is selling or their lemmings are buying into. He's not a Russian plant or any of that trash. He's a rich, narcissistic man who decided he wanted to run for president because he can. He's doing this so he can brag about it and he loves the worship. He doesn't even believe the stuff coming out of his mouth. He's more the guy that says something to his friends like, "I bet I can sell this idiot the Brooklyn Bridge or I can get this hot blonde in my bed" and then does whatever he has to do to win the sale to show his friends he's the man. He doesn't give a flying crap about what he's saying, just that it's helping him win and get his goal. That's what I don't like about Trump.

I'm looking at his messaging and his political platform resonates with a huge number of working class people, which is not the normal Republican base. He is appealing to usual Democratic voters while maintaining his Republican base. I believe this messaging if he had Reagan's affability would lead to a Reagan like landslide win. But Trump doesn't have that affability and certainly not Reagan's cross party appeal.

The messaging is very different from the normal Republican messaging. It's an almost 60s style Democratic messaging. Anti-war, pro worker, pro-union, pro-America. That is exceptionally different from the free trade, we must maintain our place in the world, business first talking points of Reagan-Bush Era Republicans.

It's very strange to see a Republican president push this type of populist messaging. I guess I should have watched his speeches and platform sooner to understand why he is able to win the Rust Belt states as a Republican.

Regardless, it's strong platform messaging.

The Democrats are likely screwed. Pushing up some other candidate this late in the game and trying to build their national profile is an almost no win situation. They can't even run on any Biden successes as without Biden, no one will buy it. It's going to be a new candidate trying to convince voters they are better for the nation with their unknowns than Trump with his clearly knowns and his new, young VP candidate from the working class who served in the military who built himself up from nothing with a Yale Law degree. Vance is one of their own who made it big. Raised by his grandma and preaching to his people that he has risen up to become Trump's VP so he can help his fellow working class folks regain the American dream.

That was a damn smart pick. I want to see how the Democrats counter it. I'm curious how you counter a Republican ticket appealing to working class voters with anti-war messaging.

Who do they pull out? Someone from the Squad with their anti-Israel, socialist bias? Newsome from California where criminals go to prosper and even millionaires and billionaires are fleeing from the insane taxes? Try to push Kamala to tout Biden successes and see if her bland public speaking abilities can compete against Trump's salesmanship? Where do you go? What messaging do the Democrats have other than "Trump a bad man. We must stop him. Please don't try to assassinate him again as that just makes him look better." What's their messaging?

[River Dog]

I haven't had anyone to vote for that I felt really good about since Mitt Romney in 2012. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 in the hopes that a 3rd party might get some traction, hoping that he could get enough of the popular vote to inspire others to sign up. I'm not that enamored with the Libertarian party, but at least it would be another option. In 2020, I did vote for Biden but only because I despise Trump more than I do the Democrats.

I'm not sure yet who I'm voting for this cycle except that it won't be Trump. If Biden or Harris needed my vote, then I'd vote for them. But since this state is so heavily Democratic, my vote doesn't matter so I might find an independent or Libertarian to vote for.

I haven't looked that closely at the prospective Dems after Harris, but I do know that Gavin Newsom is an abortion. He and the Dems have horribly mismanaged California to the point where not just the ultra-rich are moving out and killing the goose that laid the golden egg, but also middle-class folks that can't afford the insane cost of living that he has helped create and that is only going to get worse.

I had to laugh about CA wanting to create an exit tax, which in my mind is against one of the very principles this nation was founded on, ie no taxation without representation, and is against federal law. They'd be taxing someone who no longer lives in their jurisdiction. It shows how desperate they are to halt the exodus.

[Aseahawkfan]

I haven't had anyone to vote for that I felt really good about since Mitt Romney in 2012. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 in the hopes that a 3rd party might get some traction, hoping that he could get enough of the popular vote to inspire others to sign up. I'm not that enamored with the Libertarian party, but at least it would be another option. In 2020, I did vote for Biden but only because I despise Trump more than I do the Democrats.

I'm not sure yet who I'm voting for this cycle except that it won't be Trump. If Biden or Harris needed my vote, then I'd vote for them. But since this state is so heavily Democratic, my vote doesn't matter so I might find an independent or Libertarian to vote for.

I haven't looked that closely at the prospective Dems after Harris, but I do know that Gavin Newsom is an abortion. He and the Dems have horribly mismanaged California to the point where not just the ultra-rich are moving out and killing the goose that laid the golden egg, but also middle-class folks that can't afford the insane cost of living that he has helped create and that is only going to get worse.

I had to laugh about CA wanting to create an exit tax, which in my mind is against one of the very principles this nation was founded on, ie no taxation without representation, and is against federal law. They'd be taxing someone who no longer lives in their jurisdiction. It shows how desperate they are to halt the exodus.

Not to mention the general immoral and truly evil act of punishing someone for leaving like we're some Communist nation.

Which is why it makes me laugh when Dems bring up the Constitution. The Constitution is toilet paper to Democratic voters who keep supporting scum like Newsome. Listening to Dems cry about State's Rights when they have done everything they can to erode State's Rights suddenly relying on them because an abortion ruling went against them.

And they claim Trump is the threat to Democracy? Seems they are doing their part to ruin this country too. Supporting people and policies that are also not good for this nation.

Americans really need to find a way to bypass the party politics and manipulation to talk to each other about things that should be getting done. This media driven division to maintain votes isn't working well for our country as a whole. It's working well for the top people who build their wealth off our backs with the Democrats wanting to fix it with handouts that keep us poor as well. You don't learn to do well by being on welfare or by taxing the wealth to hand it out to people who don't use it to improve their lives, just subsist. This nation's education system needs a major overhaul and our leaders need to speak the truth to the people which is you will not get anything from handouts. If you aren't working and managing your money intelligently, you are going to remain on the bottom tier your entire life barely subsisting. No amount of us taxing is going to change that without you working and managing your money intelligently. No one wants to hear this truth.

[River Dog]

Not to mention the general immoral and truly evil act of punishing someone for leaving like we're some Communist nation.

That exit tax California is or was going to impose struck me as childish, like making some little kid give up one of his marbles if he was going to leave the game. Or, for a more adult analogy, forcing a winner at the blackjack table to give up a chip if he wants to leave. "You keep playing until we win that money back!"

Which is why it makes me laugh when Dems bring up the Constitution. The Constitution is toilet paper to Democratic voters who keep supporting scum like Newsome. Listening to Dems cry about State's Rights when they have done everything they can to erode State's Rights suddenly relying on them because an abortion ruling went against them.

A month or so ago, I read an article about WA State AG Bob Ferguson, WA's top cop and a man who should know better. He's the likely Dem candidate for WA Governor.

Apparently, two people named Bob Ferguson filed to run for governor, an old trick that Joe Kennedy pulled off to help JFK win his first Congressional seat back in the 40's. AG Ferguson rightfully complained, and they quite reasonably made some changes on how they were listed on the ballot to avoid the voter confusion that the applications were designed to do. But that wasn't good enough for Ferguson. He tried to pressure an official to violate the law and list his name ahead of the others on the ballot when the law clearly states that the names have to be listed on the ballot at random:

On the last day at the eleventh-hour of filing week on May 10, two other men, sharing the name Bob Ferguson, filed for Governor as Democrats. AG Ferguson’s attorney, Zachery Pekelis of Pacifica Law Group, in a letter to Secretary of State Hobbs, “strongly” urging him, the chief election officer, that he “must” reorder the ballot to place AG Ferguson’s name above the other two Bobs who were in the second and third slots.

In a phone call with Secretary of State Hobbs on May 13, Attorney General Bob Ferguson learned that the occupations would be listed next to each of the three Bob Fergusons on the ballot so voters could differentiate between the candidates, but the ballot order would not be rearranged to list himself, AG Bob Ferguson, ahead of the other Bob Ferguson’s. AG Ferguson then applied verbal pressure on Secretary of State Steve Hobbs to violate RCW 29A.36.131 and rearrange the ballot order as the Ferguson campaign legal team had already demanded in their memo earlier that day.

“This verbal demand then became a violation of RCW 42.52.180 (this RCW falls under the jurisdiction of the Executive Ethics Board),” Mullet wrote in his official complaint to the Washington State Ethics Board. “AG Ferguson was putting verbal pressure on Secretary of State Steve Hobbs to rearrange the ballot order for his own personal political campaign benefit. This was also a violation of his public duties as the Attorney General is supposed to recuse themselves from a case if they have a conflict of interest, which there was during the events of May 13th, 2024.”

https://lynnwoodtimes.com/2024/05/29/ag-ferguson/

https://mynorthwest.com/3960148/rantz-b ... -governor/

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2024/ ... -candidat/

The other two "Bob Ferguson's" ultimately withdrew, one saying that he was threatened with legal action if he didn't withdraw when he had just as much of a right to file for office as anyone else.

Now tell me, how much different is that from Trump pressuring the Georgia state AG to 'find' votes? It's also interesting how that story hasn't hit the mainstream press. If it were a Republican, CNN and MSNBC would be on it like a chicken on a June bug. It's also a good demonstration of why I don't limit myself to sources that are on one side of the political spectrum.

[Stream Hawk]

Things are really heating up with the stepping down situation. Here’s a link to an article from NYT this morning. Apparently, Obama and Biden are butting heads. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/19/us/p ... ticleShare

[River Dog]

Things are really heating up with the stepping down situation. Here’s a link to an article from NYT this morning. Apparently, Obama and Biden are butting heads. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/19/us/p ... ticleShare

Sunday is a slow news day, and the financial markets are closed, so if he's going to step down, my guess is that it will come tomorrow.

Biden is being incredibly pig headed and selfish. If he's too blind to see what's going on around him, see all the replays of his gaffs, his slow walk up and down stairs, his losing his train of thought, the polls and opinion pieces, the shrinking donations, along with the counsel of some of his closest confidants, then that alone should disqualify him. Heck, he's putting himself right up there with Donald Trump in terms of selfishness.

[Aseahawkfan]

That exit tax California is or was going to impose struck me as childish, like making some little kid give up one of his marbles if he was going to leave the game. Or, for a more adult analogy, forcing a winner at the blackjack table to give up a chip if he wants to leave. "You keep playing until we win that money back!"

You are being kind in your assessment. I consider it abuse of power.

[River Dog]

That exit tax California is or was going to impose struck me as childish, like making some little kid give up one of his marbles if he was going to leave the game. Or, for a more adult analogy, forcing a winner at the blackjack table to give up a chip if he wants to leave. "You keep playing until we win that money back!"

You are being kind in your assessment. I consider it abuse of power.

I referred to it earlier as highly illegal, that there's no way that it would fly through the courts. They are taxing people outside their jurisdiction. It goes back to one of the basic principles by which this nation was founded: No taxation without representation. If they move out of state, the people they are paying those taxes to no longer represent them. California is grasping for straws.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

Pride is a helluva thing. Can’t say for sure Id be any different. Hopefully I live long enough to find out.

I also feel like Dr. Jill Biden isn't ready to give up the white house.

[River Dog]

Pride is a helluva thing. Can’t say for sure Id be any different. Hopefully I live long enough to find out.

I also feel like Dr. Jill Biden isn't ready to give up the white house.

Yeah, it's a tough subject. My best friend is 86 years old. His heart rate at rest is 41-42 bpm. They put in a pacemaker to speed it up, but he made them turn it off because it didn't make him feel any better. The man can't stay awake to save his ass, will fall asleep right while I'm talking to him. When we went on a whale watching tour, he fell asleep, rolled off the bench seat and onto the deck, causing the crew to go bonkers. He insists on driving, but no one can tell him that he's too old and a danger to others on the highway. Fortunately, he drives a late model Mercedes that is damn near autonomous. Nevertheless, I won't ride with him. Two years ago, he came over to pick me up to take me to the airport and backed his car into the ditch on the opposite side of the street.

But other people are very practical about it. My mother quit driving on the highways when she was 75, quit driving altogether when she was 81. I think that the male ego is one of the things that causes both my friend and Joe Biden to go into denial. You might as well tell a man that he needs to cut off his penis as you would tell him that he can't drive.

Agreed about "Dr." Biden. Of course, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors, but she gives me the impression that she's selfish, isn't giving her husband good advice. Same goes with the rest of his immediate family.

[Aseahawkfan]

Yeah, it's a tough subject. My best friend is 86 years old. His heart rate at rest is 41-42 bpm. They put in a pacemaker to speed it up, but he made them turn it off because it didn't make him feel any better. The man can't stay awake to save his ass, will fall asleep right while I'm talking to him. When we went on a whale watching tour, he fell asleep, rolled off the bench seat and onto the deck, causing the crew to go bonkers. He insists on driving, but no one can tell him that he's too old and a danger to others on the highway. Fortunately, he drives a late model Mercedes that is damn near autonomous. Nevertheless, I won't ride with him. Two years ago, he came over to pick me up to take me to the airport and backed his car into the ditch on the opposite side of the street.

But other people are very practical about it. My mother quit driving on the highways when she was 75, quit driving altogether when she was 81. I think that the male ego is one of the things that causes both my friend and Joe Biden to go into denial. You might as well tell a man that he needs to cut off his penis as you would tell him that he can't drive.

Agreed about "Dr." Biden. Of course, no one knows what goes on behind closed doors, but she gives me the impression that she's selfish, isn't giving her husband good advice. Same goes with the rest of his immediate family.

Men do not like being dependent. It kills them inside. Losing the ability to drive or take care of yourself as a male is emasculating. I might seek a medical end when I reach that point. Fortunately, I may reach it at a point where technology will obviate my need to do so as I can maintain independence using technology. Robots, self-driving cars, and other such things will extend independence which males rely on to feel male.

If I were Biden, I would be pissed as well. I come out of retirement to help deal with Trump. I win the election. I get the nation through a pandemic. Now my party wants to discard me. That would be a tough pill to swallow. Not like Biden wanted to run for president to start with and he probably wants to finish it out. A guy like Biden doesn't reach to where he's at unless he has a very strong drive and sense of duty. Probably feels betrayed.

Doubt anyone has a better chance anyway. Maybe Whitmer, but Kamala being pushed aside for Whitmer will piss off Kamala and drive her supporters not to vote or write her in taking votes from Whitmer. The whole sacrifice your career and everything else to beat Trump is not great motivation for everyone to step aside and throw all their ambitions away. Even the candidate they choose to try to stop Trump besides Biden if they lose will likely ruin their chances in the future as the Dems aren't as forgiving as the Republicans to failure which is why they aren't running Hilary again. Basically, whoever they push against Trump is in a "Win or you'll never get another shot" scenario late in the campaign process with about five months to build a national profile and unite the Democratic Party. It sounds like a no win scenario.

What are their good options? Kamala and Whitmer? Two women? Newsome? HIs California BS is already documented heavily by conservative news and Elon, Ackman, and other wealthy folk hate him and will campaign heavily against him. Josh Shapiro? The Jewish thing in this time as stated before. Buttgieg? With who? What are their good options?

[Aseahawkfan]

If Kamala tries to use the 25th Amendment, could the Republican House block this move if Biden refuses and Kamala can't get enough of the Cabinet to support her move? How much chaos would this lead to if Biden refuses to step down?

[River Dog]

If Kamala tries to use the 25th Amendment, could the Republican House block this move if Biden refuses and Kamala can't get enough of the Cabinet to support her move? How much chaos would this lead to if Biden refuses to step down?

As I understand it, the 25th Amendment can be invoked without Congress's approval if they get a majority of the cabinet. If that's true, then the answer is no, the R's wouldn't be able to block the 25th.

[Aseahawkfan]

As I understand it, the 25th Amendment can be invoked without Congress's approval if they get a majority of the cabinet. If that's true, then the answer is no, the R's wouldn't be able to block the 25th.

I was reading the 25th Amendment. It sounds like the president can fight, so a divided cabinet can cause issues that can lead to Congress having to decide.

Regardless, that would mean Kamala became president by backstabbing Biden. I wonder how that would sell to Democratic supporters? Good or bad? Kamala pushes Biden out, then forces the Democrats to choose her as the presumptive nominee or she won't do it.

Why would Kamala do it just to be pushed aside? I doubt she would. I guess we'll see.

[River Dog]

As I understand it, the 25th Amendment can be invoked without Congress's approval if they get a majority of the cabinet. If that's true, then the answer is no, the R's wouldn't be able to block the 25th.

I was reading the 25th Amendment. It sounds like the president can fight, so a divided cabinet can cause issues that can lead to Congress having to decide.

Regardless, that would mean Kamala became president by backstabbing Biden. I wonder how that would sell to Democratic supporters? Good or bad? Kamala pushes Biden out, then forces the Democrats to choose her as the presumptive nominee or she won't do it.

Why would Kamala do it just to be pushed aside? I doubt she would. I guess we'll see.

I can't see them invoking the 25th. It would split the party in half and kill any chance they may have of winning in November. If over half of Biden's cabinet felt so strongly that he doesn't have the mental or physical capacity to govern that they would vote to force him from office, IMO Biden would voluntarily step down. He's not going to fight his own cabinet.

The 25th has never been used, so if there were a big showdown, it almost certainly would end up in court. Some of the language in the amendment is pretty vague, such as it doesn't specify cabinet members, it says "principal officers of the executive department." Who is a "principal officer?" A cabinet secretary or does it extend to assistant secretaries? And which executive departments? The assumption is that it means cabinet level departments, but it doesn't say that.

The reason they came up with the 25th was to address something like what happened to Woodrow Wilson, who had a stroke while he was in office and was severely incapacitated. It gives the government a means to legally remove a president if another like situation arises. It wasn't put in to bypass the impeachment process.

[Aseahawkfan]

I can't see them invoking the 25th. It would split the party in half and kill any chance they may have of winning in November. If over half of Biden's cabinet felt so strongly that he doesn't have the mental or physical capacity to govern that they would vote to force him from office, IMO Biden would voluntarily step down. He's not going to fight his own cabinet.

The 25th has never been used, so if there were a big showdown, it almost certainly would end up in court. Some of the language in the amendment is pretty vague, such as it doesn't specify cabinet members, it says "principal officers of the executive department." Who is a "principal officer?" A cabinet secretary or does it extend to assistant secretaries? And which executive departments? The assumption is that it means cabinet level departments, but it doesn't say that.

The reason they came up with the 25th was to address something like what happened to Woodrow Wilson, who had a stroke while he was in office and was severely incapacitated. It gives the government a means to legally remove a president if another like situation arises. It wasn't put in to bypass the impeachment process.

As with many things in the Constitution, it requires a sufficient consensus to push through. That consensus is not clearly identified, but seems to mean most of the cabinet must be in agreement, meaning the president's hand picked people who are presumably loyal to him deciding the 25th Amendment must be invoked. They set a high bar for the 25th Amendment as with most things in that document.