Harris hadn’t been in the spotlight enough.
In the July/August Rolling Stone, they have a Rolling Stone Interview with her.
A good thing. I skimmed it and it makes her more relatable and you get more of a sense of who she is.
I would vote for her.
How I foresee the Dems nominating a non-Biden ticket before the convention
- Biden buys in.
This is a given. If he doesn’t accept stepping down and bowing out of the race, it’s not happening. Period. If the Dems attempt to force him off the ticket, the party splinters into a dozen pieces and the Dems get DE-STROYED in the general election.
But I think he can be persuaded to accept being a one-term President. Consideration A in this acceptance is his legacy. “Mr. President, we need a vigorous candidate to run on your achievements and to build on them. If we can play this correctly, we nominate someone who can continue what you’ve started for at least the next TWO terms of office. This is your moment to withdraw your candidacy and elect that person, while continuing to serve as POTUS for the next seven months, with no conflicting duties as candidate.”
-
Biden then agrees to form a nominating committee, consisting of the top ten or twenty candidates for the job. He calls them into the white house to discuss and ultimately to nominate their choice for POTUS and VPOTUS. They agree to endorse and to support vigorously whomever they end up choosing—anyone who can’t agree to do this is asked to leave the group.
-
The committee is free to nominate anyone they want as POTUS and VPOTUS other than themselves, whether they’re in the meeting or out of it. They (Harris, Newsom, Whitmer, Beshear, Brown, Shapiro, Buttigieg, and maybe a dozen or so others, maybe fewer, certainly not much more) can withdraw their names if they are nominated, and they can make the case for particular candidates, or tickets, or anything else that seems essential, but the committee’s job is to come up with a short list of, say, 4 candidates’ names, after which they can again discuss the virtues and vices of each one.
-
Choosing from the top 4 vote-getters, the committee then votes for a final pick, and that candidate gets to select his or her own VP.
-
They then (early August?) announce their choice, and spend the next two and a half months selling this ticket to the public.
This is (very roughly) how the process went for years, with brokered conventions, dark horses selected on the 144th ballot, and so on. I don’t get all the folks claiming that 2 months is far too few to introduce a candidate to the voting public. If anything, people are sick of Biden (and of Trump), even those who like Biden’s policies. A fresh face would be its own sort of selling point.
I think he would pretty much only accept his Vice President as his heir apparent. He steps down, she becomes president, she becomes the nominee. Then the only thing to decide is who is going to be her vice president/running mate. Then turn the DNC a celebration of his storied career and of Kamala carrying on the fight. This isn’t the time for complex nominating processes, imo.
And, not surprising:
The White House dismissed as “absolutely false” a New York Times report on Wednesday that said U.S. President Joe Biden had told an ally he was weighing whether to continue his bid for reelection in November.
The report was based on a conversation the Times said Biden had with an unnamed “key ally,” who was quoted as saying the president knew he needs to quickly reassure the public he can still do the job.
Yes, but he potentially could do it with the right spin. Not “I’m not healthy enough to be elected,” but rather,
“I’ve done my duty to right the ship after the disaster of Trump. The American people deserve a new generation of leadership to lead us forward as a nation as we face the profound challenges of this century: global climate change; the resurgence of racism fostered by my opponent; the rise of authoritarianism and efforts to reduce democracy through reducing voter access; the backlash against social justice efforts to further civil rights; the rise of global tensions and an aggressive expansionist war in Europe. These challenges deserve the best voices of the current generation. And I see no better way to show the Democratic Party is up to the challenges than to back a leader with the knowledge, experience, and intelligence to stand up to the would- be dictators abroad and at home. Someone who not only has the heart to lead America into the future, but who reflects the expansion of diverse voices to political power. I therefore am withdrawing my candidacy for President in November elections, and put forward the best prepared candidate to go forward, my own Vice President, Kamala Harris.”
I’m sure there’s some more eloquent phrases that could be devised that would simultaneously graciously step down without ceding inability to finish his term, and to bolster Harris as his heir apparent. Recognizing most Americans don’t want a rehash of 2020, so give them the chance to make that break with someone new.
Assuming Biden resigns, why would Harris need to promise not to run? Why would the Dems want her not to run? She would just be getting her feet under her when Jan 20 rolls around. Why go through getting a new Pres from your own party and immediately announce she’s good enough to finish Biden’s term, but we don’t actually want her? How does that make any sense?
If Biden were to resign - and I see no reason he should even if he drops out of the campaign - to select anyone but Harris for 2024 election would be sabotaging the credibility of your own side. There’s no way that comes off as anything but a critique of Harris’s ability. Why would Joe have had her as his VP if she’s not up to carrying on for more than a couple months?
Plus, there’s no way this Republican Party would put the good of the country above petty politics. They have shown they won’t. They would just use every moment to blast the Dems for having chosen a Pres who couldn’t even make it one term - “We told you he was too old.”
No, Pres Biden should finish his term regardless. There might be a way to salvage the election not just for Pres but down ballot of handled right.
Of course that’s a tough haul to expect from the Dems.
As I see it, there is only one way to do things if Biden drops out. There has to be a consensus that Harris is the choice. Then Biden has to make a big speech to the nation saying that while he is still fit to govern, he acknowleges that he is slowing down and that four years is a long time. He wants to give America the best chance to continue with his plans and the best way to do this is for Harris to take over. She has been at his side the entire time, they agree on policy decisions and she is ready to get things done. He asks his delegates to switch their vote to Harris and all the other players come out to say that they respect Biden and support his decision and they also throw all of their weight behind Harris. There can’t be a brokered convention or any kind of jockeying to be the candidate. It has to be the attitude that of course Harris is the only reasonable choice. Then Biden continues to campaign as a Harris surrogate. She gets out there in the swing states and campaigns like crazy. They run ads about how we need to continue the Biden/Harris presidency by supporting Harris. At the convention, Biden makes another big speech thanking everyone for their support and again throwing all his weight behind Harris.
I agree that if Biden is to be replaced, this would give us the best chance.
That’s the million dollar question.
It looks like she’s already doing that.
The press seems unified in the idea the First Lady has a significant amount of political sway over the issue. I’m not sure why but I think she would insist he finish his term and go out in a dignified manner.
I’m someone who hates politicians of any kind and he impresses me. I hope he can get more national attention for the future but that time is not now. On paper he’s a freshman congressman who got gerrymandered out of being able to win a second term and is running for a state office (AG) where there is a very good chance he will lose.
I didn’t take that as the question. My take away is who do you think could win and that is my choice.
The suggestions that Biden should resign his presidency are beyond bizarre to me.
The idea that he is dangerous or incompetent as a sitting president and needs to stop right now before he does something demented is wildly unfounded.
The idea that giving Harris a summer vacation’s worth of presidency while she’d be campaigning her ass off would imbue her with Incumbent Superpowers is gold-fringe-flag lunacy.
The convention hasn’t happened. We’re in unprecedented times. We may yet have a non-Biden nominee. But Biden stepping down from the presidency is an edge-lordy suggestion that openly asks for maximum chaos and uncertainty while promising the most predictable path to victory.
As to the what-if about the race…
A Harris (or whomever) nominee who is running after Biden withdraws for “health reasons” would be in a tough spot, along with the rest of the party.
A Harris (or whomever) nominee who is running after Biden withdrawas after “hearing that the people are looking for younger blood, and I’d be proud to advocate for Harris as the next president,” can maybe turn the mid-game shift into a choice of strength.
And him using his vibrancy on the trail campaigning for her would prove that point.
what I’m trying to describe is a simplified version of the nominating process–an informal blue-ribbon committee making the call on the future of the party. In this version, Harris would be IN the room, having an equal vote with the other committee members and she would have a fair shot at the nomination but would not own it going in. With every member of the committee coming out of it forcefully endorsing the committee’s selection, she wouldn’t have a complaint if she weren’t chosen (which should go a ways towards placating black women Dem voters who feel she is entitled to it) and no one else would have a valid complaint if she were chosen. Keeping black women on board is the single variable in choosing/not choosing Harris, and I think this would help placate them, especially if she comes out, not having won it, insisting that this decision is one she endorses heart and soul.
Have you heard of Sarah Palin?
I can guarantee you that, when she was chosen for VP, she had zero name recognition. Today, she has lots of it. She went from being a no one to being a household name in about 5 days, when John McCain chose her as his running mate.
And within that 5 days, she went from being a no one, to being a household name, to being a campaign-destroying disaster. 16 years later, she’s still famous despite never doing much of note.
Name recognition is easy. If Biden chose some trash collector from a tiny village of 500 in West Virginia, that guy would have name recognition within moments of the announcement because he’d just been selected as a potential President-to-be. This really just isn’t a problem that you need to worry about.
What’s hard is avoiding the Palin problem. Vetting a person as hard as the media can is impossible. Vetting them enough to avoid disaster is do-able but it’s not a matter of a snap-of-the-fingers like McCain tried.
In politics, you can’t get less of a résumé than being a rookie congressman who can’t get elected for a second term. At least Palin was governor of a state.
I was commenting on the general idea, not the specific person being discussed.
It is not. For one thing not nominating her repudiates the Biden campaign (“she’s good enough to be president if Biden dies, but not good enough to run herself”). Just as importantly legally she is the only one other than Biden that has essentially full access to the use of the ~$240 million campaign war chest. It can be finagled to the party or a super-PAC (with the Biden/Harris campaign’s permission), but it then becomes constrained in its usage and associated costs increase, decreasing its value.
Biden dropping out would be bad enough. Harris not then getting the nomination would be disastrous. It can’t go to anyone else. Unfortunately, as I’m not sold on Harris, but it is what it is. Financially/politically she is the only viable alternative. Period. To choose otherwise would essentially be trading shooting yourself in the foot, for shooting yourself in the torso (if not the head).
For decades, black voters have been 90% Democratic. Black women, probably 95%. This was the case even without Kamala having ever been on the ticket. Getting rid of Kamala won’t make them stop voting D.
Maybe, it’s hard to say.
I’d, personally, lean more towards the model that the war chest demonstrates your ability to build a coalition, which is a reasonable proxy for your ability to get votes from a large audience.
I don’t know, on the other hand, that it does much in terms of campaigning - especially not at the level of the president. Nothing that I’ve ever seen in life - including research papers - has ever shown differently.
The important thing is getting people to talk about you. If you can do that then you’ll tap into the tens of billions of dollars worth of news coverage, late night coverage, comedian coverage, etc. that actually gets you the votes.
You could win a race never having collected a single dollar if you could figure out a way to stay relevant.
Now, maybe at the lower levels - local politics - where the only exposure that anyone will ever have to you is your TV ads, then campaign money comes into play. But a few measly ads just ain’t going to move the needle a millimeter when it comes to the presidential race. There’s too much free content flying around.
CNN did more to elect Trump than his PAC did.