What we are seeing in the aftermath of the CNN event with Biden is a sophisticated attempt to rebrand a genocidal administration as merely incompetent. Recall what happened in 2020 and 2016.
I see it a bit differently. There were two potential outcomes of last night's debate. One is that the majority of Democrats will distance themselves from Biden, a candidate they may now realize as too feeble physically and mentally to handle the job of the Presidency. That doesn't necessarily mean they'll vote for Trump but they may just not vote for anyone or go for a third party candidate. If that's what the polling data suggests, the Democratic party elites will replace Biden, either with Harris, or with Clinton. I believe that was the plan all along; why else have this debate before either Convention confirms the nomination of either candidate? It was a 'test the waters' affair. If Biden did well enough to muddle through, he'd stay on; if not, he'd be replaced.
That's possible, but I'd think they would have a way to determine mental capacity other than something potentially explosive. I suspect that the purpose of this debate was to make the issue Biden's competency, which is better than his criminality for the entire establishment. These are not mutually exclusive. They may want to ditch him, and this debate does it in a way that avoided the primary process which might have injected a bit of democracy.
Am I right in saying that Jill Stein will be on the ballot and has called for "an open convention", Sam? Is "an open convention" possible with the DNC in charge? Seems doubtful at best. What would it look like?
I see it a bit differently. There were two potential outcomes of last night's debate. One is that the majority of Democrats will distance themselves from Biden, a candidate they may now realize as too feeble physically and mentally to handle the job of the Presidency. That doesn't necessarily mean they'll vote for Trump but they may just not vote for anyone or go for a third party candidate. If that's what the polling data suggests, the Democratic party elites will replace Biden, either with Harris, or with Clinton. I believe that was the plan all along; why else have this debate before either Convention confirms the nomination of either candidate? It was a 'test the waters' affair. If Biden did well enough to muddle through, he'd stay on; if not, he'd be replaced.
That's possible, but I'd think they would have a way to determine mental capacity other than something potentially explosive. I suspect that the purpose of this debate was to make the issue Biden's competency, which is better than his criminality for the entire establishment. These are not mutually exclusive. They may want to ditch him, and this debate does it in a way that avoided the primary process which might have injected a bit of democracy.
See Seymour H Substacks earlier today!!
Am I right in saying that Jill Stein will be on the ballot and has called for "an open convention", Sam? Is "an open convention" possible with the DNC in charge? Seems doubtful at best. What would it look like?
Stein called for an open convention for the Dems? Why?
I assume any attempts at openness would be perfunctory.
As a matter of law the DNC can do whatever it wants.
https://husseini.substack.com/p/the-silencing-of-kennedys-most-notable
II'm not saying it wouldn't make sense for some people to do what they could, I just wouldn't put much stock in that beyond a night of optics.