Wednesday Reads

Say it to my face

Good Morning!!

Kamala Harris held a joyful, boisterous rally last night in Atlanta. What a contrast to old sad sack Grandpa Trump! The enthusiastic crowd filled a 10,000-seat auditorium, cheering as she directly challenged Trump.

CBS News: Harris dares Trump to debate her as she campaigns in Atlanta: “Say it to my face”

Vice President Kamala Harris taunted former President Donald Trump to meet her on a debate stage before the November election while she campaigned in Atlanta on Tuesday night. 

“He won’t debate, but he and his running mate sure seem to have a lot to say about me,” Harris said. “Well, Donald, I do hope you’ll reconsider to meet me on the debate stage because, as the saying goes, if you got something to say, say it to my face.” 

A debate between Trump and Mr. Biden was planned for Sept. 10 before the president dropped out of the race. On Monday, Trump told Fox News he wanted to debate but that he could also “make a case for not doing it.” 

Harris portrayed herself as the underdog in the race against Trump but said the “momentum in this race is shifting and there are signs that Donald Trump is feeling it.” 

It’s Harris’ first visit to Georgia since President Biden ended his reelection campaign. Her campaign is trying to keep the battleground state in play. Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominee, noted the importance of the state moments into her speech. 

“I am very clear: The path to the White House runs right through this state,” Harris said. “You all helped us win in 2020 and we are going to do it again in 2024.” [….]

Harris also laid out some priorities for her potential administration, including bringing back a bipartisan border bill that Trump lobbied Republican members of Congress to sink, taking on price gouging, and capping “unfair rent increases” and prescription drug costs….

More than 10,000 people attended the event, according to the campaign, which said it was her largest rally to date.

George Chidi at The Guardian: Atlanta rally: Harris tells Trump to ‘say it to my face’ and challenges him to debate.

Three weeks ago, the political commentariat was writing off Georgia and talking of narrow pathways for Joe Biden to hold the White House. Georgia was a desert. On Tuesday evening, an Atlanta crowd greeted Kamala Harris like she backed up a truck full of sweet tea to that desert.

It’s probably too early – nine days since the president’s withdrawal and the vice-president’s ascension – to know if sentiment in Georgia had shifted enough to justify jubilation. But the crowd in Atlanta treated the new presumptive presidential nominee as a reason to celebrate after months of her quieter campaigning in the city as the vice-presidential nominee.

“As many of you know, before I was elected vice-president … I was an elected attorney general and an elected district attorney,” Harris said after taking the stand. “Hear me when I say, I know Donald Trump’s type, and I have been dealing with people like him my entire career.” [….]

30election-live-header-update-kthf-square640Harris addressed a crowd of 10,000 who filled the Georgia State Convocation Center, with people waiting outside for a seat. She touted her prosecution record and referenced Trump’s criminal convictions and the findings of fraud in his businesses.

“As an attorney general, I held big Wall Street banks accountable for fraud. Donald Trump was found guilty of fraud,” Harris said. “In this campaign, I will proudly put my record against his any day, including on the issue of immigration.”

Harris spoke of walking underground tunnels at the California border and prosecuting traffickers, and pledged to bring back the border security bill that was tanked in Congress by Republicans to preserve the issue in the campaign.

Referencing a Migos song – popular as an Atlanta group – she said: “He does not walk it as he talks it.” [….]

Harris is expected back in the state next week, and will debut her running mate on a seven-stop swing state tour, according to details confirmed by her campaign. Politico reported Harris will hold the first rally in Philadelphia on Tuesday. Harris said she as of today had not picked the candidate.

For the last two years, Harris has been Joe Biden’s chief campaign surrogate in Georgia, making deliberate connections with campaign organizers and Black community leaders, a weapon in the Democratic arsenal that Republicans have not been able to match.

Harris is planning to announce her running mate soon, and they will appear together at a rally in Philadelphia on Tuesday. People are speculating that the location indicates her pick will be Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. We’ll find out soon.

Politico: Harris to hold first rally with running mate Tuesday in Philadelphia.

Vice President Kamala Harris is expected to announce her running mate by Tuesday, when she will hold her first rally with her pick in Philadelphia.

The two will barnstorm cities in seven swing states in four days. In addition to Philadelphia, they’ll hit western Wisconsin, Detroit, Raleigh, Savannah, Phoenix and Las Vegas.

The stops will mark the first major campaign swing the presumptive ticket will make since Harris became the all-but-certain Democratic presidential nominee following President Joe Biden’s sudden departure from the race. The tour also underscores that the campaign believes the electoral map has expanded since Biden passed the baton to Harris.

The details of Harris and her running mate’s schedule were first shared with POLITICO by the campaign.

Harris’ decision to kick off her tour in the biggest city in Pennsylvania is sure to set off speculation about her vice presidential pick. One of the top contenders being vetted by Harris’ team is Josh Shapiro, the governor of the swing state.

If Harris chooses Shapiro as her running mate, Philadelphia would make an obvious place to roll out the news, given that he hails from the area’s suburbs. But it’s also a diverse, vote-rich city that every presidential nominee must tend to thanks to the state’s 19 electoral votes, and it’s possible Harris’ plans don’t signal anything beyond that.

A Harris campaign aide cautioned against reading too much into the first city chosen for the tour.

Harris said a decision about her No. 2 spot on ticket has not been finalized. Asked by reporters on Tuesday if she has selected her running mate, she said “not yet.”

Harris is planning to interview potential vice presidential nominees in the upcoming days, said people familiar with the vetting process and granted anonymity to speak freely. Other names in the mix include Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

Personally, I like Tim Waltz, but Minnesota will be in the Democratic column either way. Pennsylvania may be more problematic. 

David M. Perry, who bills himself as a journalist and historian, advocates for Walz at MSNBC: I didn’t vote for Tim Walz originally. Now I’m completely Walz-pilled.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz thinks the leaders of the modern Republican Party — especially but not exclusively former President Donald Trump and Sen. JD Vance of Ohio — are extremely “weird.” He has been saying so for months, but ever since Vice President Kamala Harris emerged as the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, he has become one of her most effective messengers, doing the dirty work of attacking the Republicans so Harris can focus on a positive message — “Freedom.”

Harris4It has become easy to imagine Walz as the next Democratic nominee for vice president, one of a handful of politicians who have emerged as front-runners for the honor. If it happens, I’ll be thrilled. I’m a Minnesotan and have watched Walz since he started running for governor in the 2018 election. Before that, he was just a “downstate” congressman and not so much on my radar. 

But much to my surprise, I’ve become fully “Walz-pilled,” not so much because of the viral clips, but because when he has had the opportunity, he has done everything he can to make Minnesota a better place for everyone.

Frankly, I’m surprised at my own enthusiasm, because I wasn’t a Walz supporter when he ran for governor in 2018. This is inside baseball for Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor politics (not technically the Democratic Party), but Walz came into the race as the more electable, more conservative major candidate for governor. He seemed fine but boring, and it felt like in the coming blue wave anti-Trump election cycle, Minnesota could do better. 

Why has Walz captured his support?

Walz’s first term was fine, marked by generally solid health-related leadership during Covid and some questionable decisions during the 2020 George Floyd uprising, but it was last year that everything changed. 

In the 2022 elections, Democrats won a trifecta, taking full control of state government, but with a Senate majority of only one seat. DFL leaders never hesitated, taking advantage of a large budget surplus to quickly enact a wide range of progressive policies across the board that changed our state for the better. 

They made Minnesota a safe haven for the trans community. They affirmed abortion as a fundamental right and removed restrictions that limited access. They legalized recreational cannabis use and passed laws for driver’s licenses for all Minnesotans regardless of immigration status, automatic voter registration, paid family and medical leave, tax rebates for people making less than $75,000 and new climate goals, and they phased out parental fees for families with kids on Medicaid. This last one is perhaps narrower than the others, but my son has Down syndrome and is on Medicaid, so I sure paid close attention to this….

I’m less interested in the identity politics surrounding Walz, though I recognize that as a Midwestern white dad, a veteran, a former social studies teacher and football coach and a dad from a small rural town, he has a background very distinguishable from Harris’. 

But there’s an advantage to this. He can argue, as he did on MSNBC, that the genuine problems facing small-town white Americans are the fault of plutocrats — the Trumps of the world, venture capitalists like JD Vance and their backers. Because the problem isn’t just that they are weird creeps, but that they’re genuinely making lives worse for more people.

Walz believes Democratic policies make lives better. At the end of the 2023 legislative session, Walz gave the memorable quote “Minnesota is showing the country you don’t win elections to bank political capital — you win elections to burn political capital and improve lives.” 

As we’ve noted previously, Trump has been going around saying threatening things about voting. At rallies, he has told supporters he doesn’t need their votes, because he already has plenty of votes. He has also told “christians” they need to vote just this time, and after that they’ll never have to vote again. What does he mean? I think he means he’ll be a dictator and then he will abolish elections. Republicans claim he’s just “joking.” Yesterday, Fox News’s Laura Ingraham asked him to explain.

The Hill: Ingraham presses Trump on telling Christians ‘You won’t have to vote anymore’ in 4 years.

Fox News host Laura Ingraham repeatedly prodded former President Trump on Monday over his comments at a conservative Christian summit, where he told attendees they won’t have to vote anymore after November.

Trump did little to push back on the backlash over his remarks, as some Democrats have suggested the former president was saying there would be no more elections if he won. Instead, Trump repeatedly argued his comments were because Christians do not vote in large numbers, and he offhandedly questioned Jewish voters who support Democrats.

“That statement is very simple. I said, ‘Vote for me, you’re not going to have to do it ever again.’ It’s true, because we have to get the vote out. Christians are not known as a big voting group,” Trump said.

“This time, vote. I’ll straighten out the country, you won’t have to vote anymore. I won’t need your vote. You can go back to not voting,” he added.

“You meant you won’t have to vote for you because you have four years in office. Is that what you meant?” Ingraham asked.

When Trump did not directly answer, Ingraham pointed out that some liberals were interpreting Trump’s original remarks to mean there would not be another election. Trump said he had not heard that criticism previously, and he repeated his argument that Christians tend not to vote in large numbers….

“’Don’t worry about the future,’” he continued. “’You have to vote on Nov. 5. After that, you don’t have to worry about voting anymore. I don’t care, because we’re going to fix it. The country will be fixed … We won’t even need your vote anymore because, frankly, we will have such love.’”

Harris1Moustafa Bayoumi at The Guardian: Donald Trump sure makes a lot of ‘jokes’ about ruling as a dictator, doesn’t he?

Last Friday, Donald Trump told an audience of Christian conservatives to “get out and vote, just this time. You won’t have to do it any more. Four more years, you know what? It’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote any more, my beautiful Christians.”

Selling the idea to US citizens that their next vote will be their last one just doesn’t seem like a winning proposition to me, but what do I know? I’m not running to be elected dictator on day one of my second presidency.

That campaign pledge is of course what the former president told Sean Hannity last December. Hannity posed a question to Trump, who weeks earlier had called his political opponents “vermin”. “You are promising America tonight, you would never abuse power as retribution against anybody?” Hannity asked.

“Except for day one,” Trump responded. “I want to close the border, and I want to drill, drill, drill.”

Democrats rang all the alarm bells then, as they are ringing them now, responsibly warning us of our impending authoritarian future under Trump. And Trump’s supporters? They just thought he was kidding. “Of course he’s joking,” one attendee who’s been to more than a dozen Trump events told the Washington Post last December. “You can’t be a dictator with a constitutional republic.”

Whether this attendee is right isn’t the point. The issue is how one side hears jackboots marching just over the hill, ready to trample on our democracy. And the other side hears only guffaws.

And this disconnect continues, day by day, week by week, month by month. After Trump’s comments on Friday, the prominent Democrat and California representative Adam Schiff stated: “Democracy is on the ballot, and if we are to save it, we must vote against authoritarianism.” Meanwhile, on CNN’s State of the Union, Senator Tom Cotton dismissed any worry about Trump’s call to end voting by 2028 by saying that Trump was “obviously making a joke”.

I don’t find Trump’s jokes funny, but what’s really missing from this conversation is how much Trump’s so-called sense of humor draws from the information strategies of the contemporary far right, and how much the Democrats end up playing right into his hands.

Bayoumi’s reasoning is interesting, considering the Democrats’ attacks on Trump and Vance for being weird. 

Today’s right wing… “weaponizes irony to attract and radicalize potential supporters”, according to media studies scholar Viveca Greene. She argues that today’s far right uses irony and humor “to challenge progressive ideologies and institutions”, and in so doing, the right is able “to create a toxic counter public”.

Greene is mostly concerned with the alt-right – that is to say, the more extreme elements of the right wing – but Trump’s signature contribution to this discourse is to mainstream alt-right communication strategies on to a national stage. And a kind of plausible deniability plays an enormous role in this rhetorical ecosystem.

Did Trump just call for democracy to end in the next election cycle? Oh, come on. He’s just being funny! (But yes, he did.) Did Trump guarantee to root out the “radical left thugs” that “live like vermin” in our country? That’s hilarious! (He said he will.) Did Trump promise that he will be president for three terms? Stop! My sides are aching! (You bet he did.) Will Trump “terminate” the US constitution if he’s elected? So funny! It’s like he’s saying: “You’re fired!” to a piece of paper! (It’s on the record.)

Bayoumi suggests that making fun of Trump and his threats might work better.

Wouldn’t it be smarter to draw attention to Trump’s ridiculousness rather than his threats? Isn’t there some cliche out there about choosing honey over vinegar? Can the Democrats rediscover the extraordinary political power of satire before it’s too late? The demands on humor on a national stage have never been greater, and that’s no laughing matter.

And that is just what Tim Walz started by calling Republican ideas weird. This week, the Harris campaign and many other Democrats took up that argument and it’s working! Let’s hope they keep coming up with more ways to make fun of Trump. He hates being laughed at, especially by women.

The attacks on Project 2025 are working too. Trump has tried very hard to distance himself from the Heritage Foundation project, but it’s not working because so many former Trump administration people are working on it. Not only that, JD Vance wrote the introduction to the Project 2025 book! 

Rolling Stone: Trump Flipped Out That ‘Lunatic’ Project 2025 Could Tank His Campaign.

As he entered the final stretch of the 2024 presidential raceDonald Trump spent much of this month trying to disown the highly Trumpy, Heritage Foundation-led Project 2025 — to the point that he even got his fans to boo the initiative during a recent campaign rally. His protracted freakout over the conservative project — to which he has multiple direct ties, and which is only as extreme as it is largely because of his influence — is driven almost entirely by Trump’s fear over one thing.

Harris2When the twice-impeached ex-president and convicted felon took to social media in early July to make the (patently absurd) claim that “I know nothing about Project 2025 [and] I have no idea who is behind it,” he added, “I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal.” He did not specify what “things” he meant.

But according to two sources with direct knowledge of the matter, shortly before he posted that brief message, Trump had been privately — and very bitterly — complaining about the abortion policies laid out in the lengthy Project 2025 manifesto, and trashing the Project 2025-linked “lunatics” who keep demanding unpopular abortion bans and restrictions. Among the policy proposals in Project 2025’s policy roadmap are plans to end federal approval for abortion pills, use federal agencies for expanded “abortion surveillance,” restrict access to emergency contraception, end the federal requirement that hospitals provide medically necessary emergency abortion care, and revive a 150-year-old law that could serve as a de facto national abortion ban. 

For what it’s worth, some of the people who helped author Project 2025’s abortion provisions were appointed under Trump to influential federal posts during his first stint in the White House — including Roger Severino, who headed the HHS’ Office of Civil Rights under Trump, and Gene Hamilton, who worked in Trump’s Justice Department and Homeland Security Department. 

Trump, now the 2024 GOP presidential nominee, vented that the abortion policies could badly damage his chances at retaking the White House, even at a point in the election cycle when Trump was riding high on strong polling numbers against President Joe Biden. (In the time since, Biden has dropped out of the 2024 contest, with Vice President Kamala Harris now the presumptive Democratic nominee.)

Of course, it was Trump himself who made the hard-right, ambiently unpopular abortion policies embedded in Project 2025 possible at all, as it was Trump’s Supreme Court nominees who were necessary to destroy Roe v. Wade in the first place. 

The Daily Beast: Trump Forces Out Project 2025 Mastermind.

The Trump campaign forced the architect of the ultraconservative Project 2025 manifesto out of his job on Tuesday as it sought political cover from a controversy dogging Republicans, the Daily Beast can report exclusively.

Trump campaign manager Chris LaCivita “put the screws” to mastermind Paul Dans in an effort to force him out and shut down the right-wing shop behind Proejct 2025, a sprawling blueprint that sought to overhaul the federal government and implement an array of far-right policies for a potential second Trump administration, a well-placed source told the Daily Beast.

The president of Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that employed Dans and conceived of the controversial handbook, fired back on X, formerly Twitter, that Project 2025 is going nowhere.

“Project 2025 will continue our efforts to build a personnel apparatus for policymakers of all levels—federal, state, and local,” Heritage President Kevin Roberts said, adding that he was “extremely grateful” for Dans’ work on the policy platform and his “dedication to saving America.” [….]

His departure hinted that Heritage was shutting down its work on the initiative more than a year after Project 2025 produced its cornerstone 900-page policy mandate that came to define the MAGA movement. The manifesto attracted widespread criticism in recent weeks over its extremist proposals that would demand fealty from federal workers, promote Christian nationalism and overhaul policies from abortion to civil liberties and climate and restructure the departments of Justice and Defense, among other agencies.

As the project backfired politically, Trump sought to distance himself from the group despite its naked ties to his first administration, with Project leadership boasting a number of senior Trump aides and close advisers.

e1e3f2060613a7e12bb04b6173a7a082Of course everyone with half a brain knows that Project 2025 is still the plan for a second Trump administration.

Trump’s campaign staff are worried about his expected sexist and racist attacks on Kamala Harris.

The New Republic: Team Trump Panics About His Attacks on Kamala Harris Backfiring.

As Republicans begin developing lines of attack against Vice President Kamala Harris, many on Team Trump worry that those on their side—including Trump himself—will make disparaging comments about Harris’s identity, alienating key voters.

On Tuesday, The Washington Post reported that Trump’s allies believe attacks on Harris’s political record are more effective than personal insults, but “they also worry that Trump and some of his more extreme supporters will be unable to refrain from deploying sexist and racially fraught language, which they fear will hurt him with crucial voting blocs.”

A source “familiar with the Trump campaign’s thinking” who spoke with the Post “on the condition of anonymity to share candid views,” seemed to think that it’s all but inevitable that Trump will make problematic comments toward Harris. “We hope he doesn’t act like a crazy racist and sexist person, but we can’t control him,” the source said. “There are probably dog whistles and racist and sexist tropes he’ll stumble into. His campaign is going to try to keep him out of that rhetoric, but it’s going to be difficult.”

This isn’t the first time that Republicans have fretted about the bigotry in their own ranks affecting their electoral prospects. Last week, Politico reported that leading House Republicans had to tell “lawmakers to focus on criticizing [Harris’s] record without reference to her race and gender,” following “a series of comments by their members that focused on Harris’ race as well as claims she is a ‘DEI’ pick.”

Over the weekend, several Republican lawmakers and Black Trump supporters told Reuters they worried about “demeaning racist and sexist attacks” and “whether the onslaught could harm Republicans at the ballot box.”

Good luck trying to control him. He can’t control himself.

One more on Trump’s weird VP pick.

The Daily Beast: Michael Ian Black: J.D. Vance’s Obsessions Are Way Creepier Than Being Childless.

[W]hether somebody has children or doesn’t have children isn’t a reflection of their values, their patriotism, or their commitment to the nation.

So why won’t J.D. Vance shut up about children? The man is child-obsessedCNN published an article Tuesday, “It’s not just ‘cat ladies’: J.D. Vance has a history of disparaging people without kids.” The piece highlights Vance’s obsession with the childless dating as far back as 2020.

One series of fundraising emails that authors Andrew Kaczynski and Em Steck uncovered include lines like, “We’ve allowed ourselves to be dominated by childless sociopaths—they’re invested in NOTHING because they’re not invested in this country’s children.”

What?!?

Those without children are sociopathsDolly Parton is a sociopath? Lindsey Graham isn’t invested in the country? Elon Musk, father of God knows how many, is somehow preferable as a person to Taylor Swift? Why? Who the hell is J.D. Vance to make these kinds of broad, grotesque statements? [….]

The childless are people without children. That’s it. Why must any other inference be drawn, unless you’re just a creepy fuck who wears too much eyeliner at all the wrong events?

And it’s not as if the childless are somehow an aberration. A Pew Research Study published just a few days ago reveals that 47 percent of Americans under the age of 50 do not have children. If almost half of the country is sociopathic, as Vance believes, we’ve got bigger problems than the current election cycle.

But, of course, the narrative that childless people are somehow sinister is absurd on its face. Jesus didn’t have any kids. Neither does the Pope. I don’t know if either of them had/have cats, which is J.D. Vance’s one-two whammy of degeneracy, but I’d be hard-pressed to make the argument that Jesus F. Christ didn’t care about the future.

As stupid as the argument may be, I think it speaks to something more subtle about the Republican Party. Under the leadership of Donald Trump (and before, but I’ll confine this piece to the current Republican Party), the GOP has become a shell company for investors attempting to strip-mine the nation of its value, and grab as much as they possibly can for themselves. Why do you think Trump supports Putin so much? Because Putin has already implemented this model in Russia to great success—for Putin….

In this Hobbesian model of America, the contest between the political parties is a blood sport in which to the victors go all the spoils. The “spoils” can be financial and/or cultural, but it’s a fundamentally anti-democratic and anti-American view of political power. And it very much involves children because children give them the moral license to conduct their snatch-and-grab.

Reducing expenditures on social programs, which Republicans support, will certainly hurt other people’s children but will lower public expenditures for themselves and their children. It is for the children that they wreak havoc on the American experiment and call it pro-family. Book bans, school vouchers, anti-LGBTQ legislation, anti-abortion legislation. All of it “for the children.”

No. Fuck you.

Read the rest at The Daily Beast.

That’s it for me today. What’s on your mind?


Lazy Caturday Reads

 

453012054_10160543489018512_3901842972208006730_n

Happy Caturday!!

Yesterday Trump gave a speech in Florida to Turning Point Action, a right wing christian group. During the speech, Trump gave this rant

Trump’s plea to voters last night: “Get out and vote just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, it will be fixed. It’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore … In four years, you don’t have to vote again. We’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.”

In that quote from MSNBC’s Kyle Griffin, there is an ellipsis to skip over Trump saying what sounds like “I’m not a christian.” Some are claiming he said “I’m a christian.” That’s not what I heard. You can watch the clip from @Acyn here.

I took this to mean that if Trump is elected, there won’t be any more elections. Some people on Twitter tried to twist it to mean something else or claimed it was a “joke.” After all we have experienced with Trump, those claims just don’t pass muster. Here are some reactions from Twitter.

Ruth Ben-Ghiat @ruthbenghiat: Media: this should be *the* A1 story. I have studied dictatorship for decades and this is it-“you won’t have to vote anymore.” Trump will never leave office if he wins in November.
 
 
Pramila Jayapal @PramilaJayapal: This. Is. Terrifying. We cannot let this be the case.
 
Armando @ArmandoNDK: I don’t know what Trump was trying to say with his no more voting line. He is a moronic inarticulate narcissist. I do know what he’s done. And based on that, if he can get away with it- he would become a dictator. Anyone who doubts Trump is capable of trying is just stupid.
 
Simon Rosenberg @SimonWDC: There is a reason the Trump campaign has been keeping Trump from the trail – every time he speaks it gets harder for them to win. This promise, in very clear language, to end American democracy for all time is now a major part of the 2024 campaign.


Wednesday Reads: Kamala for President

Good Morning!!

I feel like I’m pretty much over my cold, but I’m still very tired and keep dozing off in the daytime. Then I realized that my mother died a year ago yesterday, so maybe that partially explains why I’m feeling sad and tired. At least I’m no longer going through box after box of Kleenex. Despite everything, I’m very excited about Kamala Harris and I really believe we have a shot at beating Grandpa Trump.

500823ea0e484604b9a4ec58b929c7fcReuters: Exclusive: Harris leads Trump 44% to 42% in US presidential race, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds.

Vice President Kamala Harris opened up a marginal two-percentage-point lead over Republican Donald Trump after President Joe Biden ended his re-election campaign and passed the torch to her, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found.

That compares with a marginal two-point deficit Biden faced against Trump in last week’s poll before his Sunday exit from the race.

The new poll, conducted on Monday and Tuesday, followed both the Republican National Convention where Trump on Thursday formally accepted the nomination and Biden’s announcement on Sunday he was leaving the race and endorsing Harris.

Harris, whose campaign says she has secured the Democratic nomination, led Trump 44% to 42% in the national poll, a difference within the 3-percentage-point margin of error.

Harris and Trump were tied at 44% in a July 15-16 poll, and Trump led by one percentage point in a July 1-2 poll, both within the same margin of error.

Ali Vitali at NBC News: Democrats are cautiously optimistic that they finally have the first female president.

In Vice President Kamala Harris’ quick, if unorthodox, rise to the top of the Democratic ticket, elected officials, activists and operatives see in her a new chance to beat Donald Trump and make history in one swoop.

Eight years after Trump beat Hillary Clinton, Harris could be the first female president and the first Black woman to hold the nation’s top job, as well.

Democrats are somewhat optimistic, now set in a landscape they didn’t have in 2016: a messenger in Harris who is uniquely positioned to energize voters following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn national abortion rights, more proof from the ballot box that women can win in battleground areas and the knowledge that Trump himself is beatable — if still politically dangerous.

“The lessons that still apply [from 2016] are that people need to take Trump and his supporters seriously,” Shaunna Thomas, who co-founded and runs the pro-women group Ultraviolet, told NBC News. “That’s even more of a top-line message than whether or not a woman can win the presidency.” [….]

Now, many of the party operatives and groups who pushed for Clinton to be the first female president are working, to borrow a phrase from President Joe Biden, to “finish the job.”

“‘Let’s finish the job’ is actually for us, too, from 2016,” said Mini Timmaraju, who leads the pro-abortion-rights group Reproductive Freedom for All and was the women’s vote director on Clinton’s 2016 campaign. “We ran and lost against Donald Trump and we suffered an incredible, horrific loss nationwide overturning Roe and so much damage to our country that this is sort of the ultimate fight back for us.”

A Harris victory in November would mean finishing the job that many of those operatives started with Clinton, one that extends further back to Shirley Chisholm, of New York, the first Black woman in Congress, who ran her own historic long-shot presidential bid in 1972.

“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice,” Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., who once worked to elect Chisholm and now backs Harris, told NBC News.

05530c17e95c66c76a6eb8e17e664616Hillary Clinton speaks for herself at The New York Times this morning: How Kamala Harris Can Win and Make History.

History has its eye on us. President Biden’s decision to end his campaign was as pure an act of patriotism as I have seen in my lifetime. It should also be a call to action to the rest of us to continue his fight for the soul of our nation. The next 15 weeks will be like nothing this country has ever experienced politically, but have no doubt: This is a race Democrats can and must win.

Mr. Biden has done a hard and rare thing. Serving as president was a lifelong dream. And when he finally got there, he was exceptionally good at it. To give that up, to accept that finishing the job meant passing the baton, took real moral clarity. The country mattered more. As one who shared that dream and has had to make peace with letting it go, I know this wasn’t easy. But it was the right thing to do.

Elections are about the future. That’s why I am excited about Vice President Kamala Harris. She represents a fresh start for American politics. She can offer a hopeful, unifying vision. She is talented, experienced and ready to be president. And I know she can defeat Donald Trump.

There is now an even sharper, clearer choice in this election. On one side is a convicted criminal who cares only about himself and is trying to turn back the clock on our rights and our country. On the other is a savvy former prosecutor and successful vice president who embodies our faith that America’s best days are still ahead. It’s old grievances versus new solutions.

On the attacks Harris will face:

Ms. Harris’s record and character will be distorted and disparaged by a flood of disinformation and the kind of ugly prejudice we’re already hearing from MAGA mouthpieces. She and the campaign will have to cut through the noise, and all of us as voters must be thoughtful about what we read, believe and share.

I know a thing or two about how hard it can be for strong women candidates to fight through the sexism and double standards of American politics. I’ve been called a witch, a “nasty woman” and much worse. I was even burned in effigy. As a candidate, I sometimes shied away from talking about making history. I wasn’t sure voters were ready for that. And I wasn’t running to break a barrier; I was running because I thought I was the most qualified to do the job. While it still pains me that I couldn’t break that highest, hardest glass ceiling, I’m proud that my two presidential campaigns made it seem normal to have a woman at the top of the ticket.

Ms. Harris will face unique additional challenges as the first Black and South Asian woman to be at the top of a major party’s ticket. That’s real, but we shouldn’t be afraid. It is a trap to believe that progress is impossible. After all, I won the national popular vote by nearly three million in 2016, and it’s not so long ago that Americans overwhelmingly elected our first Black president. As we saw in the 2022 midterms, abortion bans and attacks on democracy are galvanizing women voters like never before. With Ms. Harris at the top of the ticket leading the way, this movement may become an unstoppable wave.

Time is short to organize the campaign on her behalf, but the Labour Party in Britain and a broad left-wing coalition in France recently won big victories with even less time. Ms. Harris will have to reach out to voters who have been skeptical of Democrats and mobilize young voters who need convincing. But she can run on a strong record and ambitious plans to further reduce costs for families, enact common-sense gun safety laws and restore and protect our rights and freedoms.

Read more at the link. I got past the paywall by using the link at memorandum.com.

f1dabd03911d460d740760b2d736e117Noah Berlatsky at Public Notice: The Kamala Harris hype is real.

Just three days after President Joe Biden dropped out of the presidential race and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris, Harris has already secured enough delegates to be the presumptive Democratic nominee. The speed with which the party came together around her is inspiring.

Harris has been endorsed by almost everyone who matters in Democratic politics — senators, governors, key organizations, unions. She’s also raised some $100 million and counting from more than 880,000 small donors, more than 60 percent of whom hadn’t contributed before this cycle. If anyone was on the fence about whether Biden stepping aside was the right move, they probably aren’t now.

The past three days have been a remarkable display of Democratic consensus and unity after a bitter intra-party argument over whether Biden should be the nominee. The rush to support Harris also indicates that the party believes she can beat the Republican candidate — giant orange fascist blight Donald Trump.

New Harris-Trump polling started trickling out yesterday, and it contained good news for Democrats. A Reuters/Ipsos poll taken entirely after Biden announced his decision to step aside showed Harris up two points nationally (and up four points when RFK Jr. is included). Another poll showed Harris and Trump tied.

Given that Harris just had her first rally as the presumptive candidate yesterday, we’ll need more time to figure out exactly how the race has changed. But there are already a number of reasons to be hopeful about her prospects of winning this November.

Of course there are risks.

Unifying looked easy. It’s not.

The first indication of Harris’s strength is … well, pretty much everything that’s happened since Sunday.

Harris has been pilloried over the last four years as a middling politician, largely on the grounds that she suspended her 2020 presidential campaign before Iowa. The reliably confused Pamela Paul at the New York Times, for example, argued this week that “Harris is a fundamentally weak candidate” who “fizzled out” in the presidential race.

As political scientist Jonathan Bernstein points out, though, Harris’s candidacy didn’t fizzle out. She had solid endorsements and decent polling — but she figured out that Biden was too far ahead to beat in a very crowded field and dropped out early. That allowed her to stay on good terms with party actors and put her in a position to get the vice presidency. That’s not losing. It’s winning.

We have even better recent evidence that Harris is a skillful politician, though. Namely, she just nailed down the presidential nomination in around 48 hours and raised $100 million.

The rush to endorse Harris and the flood of donations was so speedy and so uniform that it looked easy. But there was no guarantee it would go so well. AOC warned last week before Biden stepped down that many donors “do not want to see the VP be the nominee.” Some leading Democrats, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, were calling for an open process or some kind of mini primary.

Harris certainly benefited from the fact that Democrats are sick of division and eager to move on to uniting against Trump. But her strength also indicates that she has used her vice presidency to solidify her standing with most party actors and interest groups — not least with Joe Biden himself. Harris engineered an unprecedented victory immediately following an unprecedented moment of uncertainty for the party. That’s the work of a talented politician.

Read more specifics at Public Notice.

Jill Filipovic from her Substack: It’s Fun When Politics Are Fun.

Going with Harris also more or less splits the difference in risk aversion within the party. The core of the debate over whether Biden should drop out hinged on one’s perception of where the biggest risks sat: Were they primarily vested in the candidate himself? Or were they in the potential for chaos?

Harris buttonThe Democrats who thought the risks sat with the candidate got their way when Biden dropped out. Those who feared chaos are getting their way now, as the party rallies around Harris and avoids an open primary. It’s not how I would have chosen to do things, but there’s nevertheless a lot to recommend it.

Also: This is fun, isn’t it?

The Biden-Trump debate and the attempted Trump assassination and the days after were very much not fun; they were dreadful, scary, and divisive, and I was ultimately feeling pretty resigned to four more years of a Trump presidency. It frankly didn’t seem like Republicans were having much fun either. And not that politics need to be entertainment or a party — I frankly wish more people would elect boring highly competent technocrats — but also, people like parties because parties are fun.

For the first time this cycle, the election feels fun. The memes are not dark. The soundtrack is good. Harris is inspiring people not because she promises to stick it to Trump, but because she promises something better. Republicans are mocking her laugh, but god, how good does it feel to have a candidate who really laughs? Her dorky mom-isms feel sweet and endearing. The girls and the gays love her, and the youngs are talking about her in ways I frankly don’t understand, and isn’t that great. Sure, we danced in the streets when Biden won in 2020 because it was such a relief to see four years of Trump come to an end and also we had been so cooped up inside thanks to Covid. But no one was dancing at a Biden rally. Harris, on the other hand, is the chief executive of Brat Summer.

No, fun alone doesn’t win elections. But it sure doesn’t hurt. And Trump knows this as well as anyone.

Max Burns at The Hill: It’s time to talk about Donald Trump’s age.

At 78, former President Donald Trump is now the oldest presidential nominee in American history. If he wins re-election in November, Trump will end his term just a few months shy of his 83rd birthday, making him two years older than President Joe Biden is now. 

In short, Donald Trump has a serious age problem.  

The media and Republican political leaders should treat concerns about Trump’s advanced age every bit as seriously as they did in Biden’s case. Trump can put those concerns to rest by making good on his promise to take a public cognitive test. Is he still willing to “do it for the good of the country,” as he said back on July 12

After all, comparing footage from Trump’s 2015 presidential announcement to footage from earlier this year shows that Trump isn’t quite the man he used to be. The former president now routinely confuses names when speaking off the cuff — including the name of his own doctor — and struggled to finish his sentences during a Nashville rally earlier this year. How can the American people be sure Trump’s stumbles aren’t part of a sustained pattern of cognitive decline?  

Trump has repeatedly said he believes all presidential candidates should be “mandated to take a cognitive test” regardless of age. There’s no time like the present, because the concerning evidence of Trump’s mental decline has been mounting for years.  

His memory problems are well-documented; the former president doesn’t seem able to recall what he was doing or who he spoke to for most of the day on Jan. 6, 2021. He also regularly forgets who the sitting president is, often confusing Joe Biden and Barack Obama during unscripted remarks. That seems pretty important. 

Concerns about how Trump’s age could weigh on the Republican ticket aren’t exclusive to Democrats like me. Sixty percent of voters now believe Trump is too old to serve, according to a post-debate ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll. That’s up from 44 percent a little over a year ago. Of voters who watched Trump’s rambling debate performance last month, fully 50 percent believe the former president should withdraw from the race and focus on his mental health. 

Hahaha! Trump looks really old compared to Kamala, who is extremely energetic and enthusiastic. 

97c594d951f947411fb352923f1e38c0You probably heard about the Fortune scoop yesterday about Elon Musk donating to Trump. The story is behind a paywall, but here’s the gist from The Guardian: Elon Musk denies report he will donate $45m a month to Trump Super Pac.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has denied reports that emerged last week that he was planning to donate $45m a month to a Super Pac focused on getting Trump elected.

On Tuesday, Musk appeared on Jordan Peterson’s show, where he said the claim was “simply not true”. “I am not donating $45m a month to Trump,” he said.

“Now what I have done is that I have created a Pac or Super Pac or whatever you want to call it,” he said. It is called the America Pac.”

Super Pacs, short for Political Action Committees, are independent political organisations to which donors can give unlimited amounts of money, while donations to individuals or non-Super Pacs are capped.

After the Peterson interview, Musk replied on X to a clip from the interview saying, “Yeah”, and to another tweet referencing the reports saying, “Yeah, it’s ridiculous. I am making some donations to America PAC, but at a much lower level and the key values of the Pac are supporting a meritocracy & individual freedom. Republicans are mostly, but not entirely, on the side of merit & freedom”.

The denial comes days after Joe Biden withdrew from the presidential race, endorsing his vice-president Kamala Harris, who now has enough delegates to claim the Democratic nomination in August.

Also on Tuesday, the New York Times reported that the Super Pac was being staffed by former aides to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s presidential campaign. “The Super Pac has acquired an air of mystery in the Trump orbit, with other outside groups largely in the dark about its plans,” the Times reported….

“The intent is to promote the principles that made America great in the first place,” Musk said on Peterson’s show. “I wouldn’t say that I’m for example Maga,” he added, referring to the Trump catchphrase. “I think America is great. I’m more M-A-G, make America greater.”

It sounds like Trump probably couldn’t use this money for legal expenses.

Amanda Marcotte at Salon: Kamala Harris makes Donald Trump do the one thing he fears most: Get up and get out.

The joyful reception that Vice President Kamala Harris received from Democrats when President Joe Biden dropped out of the race and endorsed her was rooted largely in the contrast between the relatively youthful 59-year-old woman and the increasingly frail 81-year-old president. She gives good speeches! She’s fun and energetic! And she can campaign aggressively, especially with Biden remaining president, allowing Harris to make campaigning her full-time job. People in focus groups frequently say they haven’t seen much of Harris these past four years. Well, that’s about to change, since she is well-positioned to give endless interviews, attend frequent events, and give oh-so-many speeches. The contrast with Biden, who struggled to find the energy to campaign on top of running a country, will be notable. 

Kamala1The contrast stands not only with her boss but with her new opponent. It isn’t just Biden who has to limit public appearances, lest he get tired and cranky. Donald Trump, at age 78, has also been mostly absent from the traditional campaign rigamarole. He goes to occasional rallies, where his fans swoon over him, but which get relatively little press. There’s no incentive to cover his usual incoherent stump speech because he doesn’t break any news. He gives interviews to right-wing outlets, which mostly ask him how he got to be so darn perfect while avoiding topics that might draw interest from the larger public. He unloads his far-right venom on Truth Social, but since most journalists ignore that, he might as well be blogging into the void. He golfs a lot and, of course, had to sit in the untelevised trial in May, which resulted in 34 felony convictions. But to average Americans, especially swing voters who will decide the race, Trump is mostly out of sight and out of mind. 

This appears very much by design. While they are being graded on a steep curve, Trump’s campaign managers are, as reported, more professional and competent than his previous hires. They’re no doubt aware that the biggest obstacle to persuading skeptical voters to back Trump is the candidate himself. His overt racism, sociopathic impulsivity, and off-the-charts narcissism turn off everyone who isn’t deeply in the MAGA cult. Every time Trump talks, it confirms the Biden campaign’s narrative that the former president is a self-centered jerk who will sell out the country for his own interests. 

Trump has so far been able to stay out of the spotlight because of Biden. The president had a lightweight campaign presence. He barely did any interviews or press conferences, which only fueled speculation that the Biden team was hiding their candidate’s condition from public view. This enabled Trump to hang back, as well. Trump’s campaign created the illusion that he was campaigning more vigorously than Biden, by putting him out there in situations noticed by the press but not by ordinary voters. The rallies looked campaign-like while keeping Trump out of the news. Trump gave a lengthy interview to Time, in which he hinted at election violence and supported abortion bans. These views hurt him with swing voters, but almost no one heard about it, because it was a print interview in a publication few people outside of the Beltway read.

I have to admit, I was wrong. I’m still sad that Biden was forced to step down in such a humiliating way. But he handled it very well by waiting until the Republican Convention was over. Now they have to complete retune their arguments and attacks. No more Hunter Biden to kick around, no more old age insults, no more “Let’s go, Brandon.” Back to Marcotte:

Astute readers will remember that the reason Biden wanted a June debate was to remind voters what a vile person Trump is since so many memories had faded. If Biden had been coherent, the plan would have worked. As Heather “Digby” Parton wrote, Trump “couldn’t control himself and behaved once again like the undisciplined, lying, vulgarian who half the country already hates.” He told laughable lies, such as denying sex with Stormy Daniels. The post-debate fact-checker spoke as fast as he could to debunk Trump’s lies and finally had to quit from exhaustion after three minutes. 

But once again, Biden’s age worked to cover up Trump’s myriad deficiencies. It was too troubling, watching the president stumble, to even pay that much attention to Trump’s same old lie-and-hate routine. Not just for journalists, either. Voters who watched the debate were too worried about Biden to pay much mind to Trump. 

With Harris as the Democratic nominee, however, Trump is caught in a no-win situation. If he continues to hang back from the campaign trail while she’s out there hustling, he’ll start inviting the questions about whether he’s too old and weak, the exact questions that plagued Biden. But if he starts doing more media and events that are outside the MAGA bubble, he will draw negative attention and remind voters why they hate him. In the face of this paradox, Trump’s first impulse was to keep pretending Biden is his opponent. As reality sets in, Trump’s freaking out. 

There more at the Salon link.

That’s all I have for you today. I’m very anxious to see what happens next in this reinvigorated campaign. 


Lazy Caturday Reads

Happy Caturday!!

6dd8865a65e734244fcd1348f7599736I’m not sure how much I can post today. I’m down with a bad cold and I’m barely functioning. I did test for Covid and the result was negative. I’m not coughing, so I think it’s just a head cold.

I’m also really depressed about the way Democrats are publicly tearing down President Biden. It’s really shameful how they are treating him.

Before I get to that and other news, yesterday we lost a true Democratic shero. CNN: Sheila Jackson Lee, long-serving Democratic congresswoman and advocate for Black Americans, dies at 74.

Sheila Jackson Lee, a longtime Democratic congresswoman from Texas who was an outspoken advocate for Black Americans for decades, has died. She was 74.

“Today, with incredible grief for our loss yet deep gratitude for the life she shared with us, we announce the passing of United States Representative Sheila Jackson Lee of the 18th Congressional District of Texas,” her family said in a statement Friday.

Jackson Lee announced in June that she had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. At the time, she acknowledged that “the road ahead will not be easy” and said she had “faith that God will strengthen me.”

Her family remembered her as “a fierce champion of the people,” saying that “she was affectionately and simply known as ‘Congresswoman’ by her constituents in recognition of her near-ubiquitous presence and service to their daily lives for more than 30 years.”

Born on January 12, 1950, in Queens, New York, Jackson Lee was among the first women to graduate from Yale University and served as a Houston municipal judge and a city councilwoman before she was first elected to represent Texas’ 18th Congressional District in 1994, unseating a Democratic incumbent in the primary for the Houston-area seat.

During her congressional tenure, Jackson Lee was an outspoken advocate for progressive interests and Black Americans. She was one of the sponsors of legislation to establish Juneteenth as a national holiday, frequently spoke out against police brutality and advocated federal legislation to prosecute police misconduct.

She was widely admired among progressives for her opposition to the Iraq War and was a fierce critic of former President Donald Trump. She opposed the tallying of electoral votes certifying Trump as the winner of the 2016 election, citing an unfounded claim about “massive voter suppression,” and occasionally used her position on the House Judiciary Committee to excoriate members of Trump’s circle.

Although she was unsuccessful in some of her most ambitious aims, Jackson Lee remained an advocate for racial justice, particularly in the wake of George Floyd’s killing at the hands of police in 2020.

“We will not stop until the nation knows Black lives matter, and reparations are passed as the most significant civil rights legislation of the 21st century,” Jackson Lee said at a march in Washington in 2020.

At the time of her death, she was a chief deputy whip for House Democrats and a vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. She formerly served as whip of the Congressional Black Caucus.

Read the rest at CNN.

dca6c2457f1a9f6e983dfd64d9d25c0aOn the controversy over the Democratic nomination: The latest effort by anti-Biden Democrats is to force Biden out and then open up the convention to a “mini-primary,” because, as Rep. Zoe Lofgen claims, there shouldn’t be a “coronation” of Vice President Harris. This is insane, IMHO, but supposedly Nancy Pelosi supports this idea.

From The Hill: Senior Democrat suggests Obama, Clinton host ‘mini primary’ vetting.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) joined the growing list of Democrats calling on President Biden to withdraw from the 2024 race Friday, suggesting in an interview that former President’s Obama and Clinton should help vet new candidates for a “mini primary.”

Lofgren joined MSNBC Friday to discuss what would happen if Biden were to decide to step aside — which he has thus far said he would not do — and what she hopes to see happen if someone new were added to the mix.

“Should he make that decision, there will have to be quick steps,” Lofgren said.

“Maybe a vetting hosted by former presidents including Obama and Clinton would be helpful and help focus the attention,” she added later. “And whoever emerges, including Kamala Harris, would be a stronger candidate than if we tried to exclude a transparent public process.”

As the pressure for Biden to drop grows, speculation over whether Vice President Harris would be the nominee if Biden chose to pass the torch and her ability to beat former President Trump in November has as well.

Lofgren, a close ally of former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said she doesn’t think Harris should immediately be named as the nominee, should Biden leave the race. Though, she acknowledged that the vice president would likely have the best shot.

“I don’t think we can do a coronation,” she said. “But obviously, the vice president would be the leading candidate.”

If they pass over Harris, the Democrats had better prepare for large numbers of Black and women voters to be outraged.

Politico: Pelosi voiced support for an open nomination process if Biden drops out.

In a meeting with fellow California Democrats last week, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi stressed the need for an open process to choose the party’s next nominee if President Joe Biden steps aside, in an effort to avoid the appearance of a Kamala Harris coronation.

c8d2e789d0d12938912c23a87587a854The discussion in that meeting of the California delegation, which includes 40 members, took place in the Capitol on July 10, at least partly focused on the complicated next steps for the Democratic Party if Biden left the ticket. And they specifically talked about the potential political downsides of party elites quickly crowning the vice president as the next nominee, according to four people familiar with the discussion, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Pelosi was one of several California Democrats who stressed that an uncompetitive process would turn off voters, according to those four people.

The concern wasn’t about Harris’ strengths as a candidate — and in fact, several people made clear Harris needed to be the party’s next pick — but instead centered on worries that party bosses were choosing the president, rather than the party’s base.

“Nancy was leading that charge that it needed to be an open process,” according to a person briefed on the meeting, who was granted anonymity to avoid blowback from House leadership.

The debate about how to move forward should Biden step aside is unfolding across every level of the Democratic Party, but it’s particularly notable coming from a group effectively led by Pelosi, who has helped spearhead the public and private discussion about Biden’s condition since his disastrous June 27 debate.

Just hours before this California delegation meeting, for instance, Pelosi went on MSNBC for her now-famous remarks suggesting Biden hadn’t made up his mind on reelection and giving cover to fellow Democrats to speak out publicly. And several of Pelosi’s allies from California, led by Rep. Adam Schiff, who will likely soon be a senator for the state, are loudly urging Biden to exit.

The California Democrats are probably the most dependent on Hollywood money and we know that Hollywood donors have rejected Biden.

Interestingly, the Bernie Sanders crowd are supporting Biden.

The New Republic: AOC Issues Dire Warning on Threats to Come if Biden Drops Out.

On Instagram Live early Friday morning, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez discussed the ongoing debate over whether President Biden is fit to run for reelection.

Speaking for close to an hour, the New York progressive explained her support of Biden and why she thought replacing him was a bad idea.

“If you think that there is consensus among the people who want Joe Biden to leave … that they will support Vice President Harris, you would be mistaken,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

cat1Ocasio-Cortez attacked her fellow Democrats who have spoken anonymously to the press about Biden, particularly those resigned to defeat in November.

“My community does not have the option to lose,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “If they’re going to come out and say all their little things on background, off the record, but they’re not going to be fully honest, I’m going to be honest for them. I’m in these rooms. I see what they say in conversations.”

“A lot of them are not just interested in removing the president. They are interested in removing the whole ticket,” Ocasio-Cortez added.

As far as a plan for replacing Biden, Ocasio-Cortez said that whenever she has asked, she hasn’t gotten an answer.

“I have stood up in rooms with all of these people and I have said, ‘Game out your actual plan for me.’ What are the risks of this going to the Supreme Court? And no one had an answer for me.… I’m talking about the lawyers. I’m talking about the legislators,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

She noted that the convention is in less than a month, and that Michigan has to finalize their ballot two days after the convention, which could result in a legal crisis. Ocasio-Cortez said she was concerned that these factors aren’t being considered by Democrats in the replacement camp.

Recent reports say Biden dropping out of the race is increasingly likely, and could happen in a matter of days. The president appears to be strongly considering the idea after meeting with Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, and reportedly even former president Barack Obama thinks Biden needs to reconsider running. A major West Coast donor has already drafted a withdrawal speech.

Watch AOC’s complete statement at TNR.

From ABC News short takes: Donors furious on call with Harris and voter outreach organizers: Sources.

Vice President Kamala Harris tried to calm the panic during a call Friday afternoon with major Democratic donors, and told them, “We are going to win this election,” one attendee on the call told ABC News.

Harris made the call with a person representing a Latino-focused organization and another representing a Black-focused organization, according to a source with knowledge of the call.

Their message was to “plead” to the donors who have been calling on Biden to drop out to stop and resume funding, according to the source.

“We know which candidate in this election puts the American people first: Our President, Joe Biden,” Harris said during the call, according to the attendee.

“With every decision he makes in the Oval Office, he thinks about how it will impact working Americans. And I witness it every day. Now contrast that with what we heard last night.”

The representative of the Latino-focused organization said they have spoken to thousands of people in swing states and out of those thousands of conversations, the debate came up only two times; these average voters were most worried about inflation and the economy.

Harris did not take questions, according to the attendee.

Some donors were furious, with some expecting the call to be about replacing Biden and they did not want to be lectured, the attendee said. As the call was wrapping up, one furious donor started going on a rant and the call ended in the middle of it.

The Guardian: Biden continues to resist Democratic calls to end re-election campaign.

Democrats were caught in an apparent stalemate on Saturday as a dug-in Joe Biden continued to endure high-profile calls to end his re-election campaign after a week of astonishing party moves to unseat the president in favor of a candidate many hope will be more likely to beat Donald Trump.

In the weeks since his disastrous debate performance against Trump, the 81-year-old Biden has attempted to fight off calls for him to step down from the top of the ticket amid concerns that his age and mental acuity are no longer up to the job. But a series of interviews, a press conference and speeches have done little to quell party nerves….

b110c4095021843cb28925aca9e93a90Frustration within the Democratic party establishment at what they see as Biden’s intransigence comes as the outlet also reported on Saturday that the president in private is complaining that former aides to presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton would be lecturing him on election strategy after Democratic 1994 and 2010 midterm election losses that he had avoided in 2022.

Those pressuring Biden – who also has Covid – to abandon his re-election bid, the Times reported, “risk getting his back up and prompting him to remain after all”.

Some advisers are said to believe that Biden is holding out at least until the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, visits Washington on Wednesday. But some donors say that that this is the ideal moment for Biden to step aside now that Republicans have had their convention, and Democrats have a month until their own convention in Chicago to tell a new story about a new candidate.

The vivid picture of a Covid-sick, abandoned and resentful veteran politician, sitting out the pressure in a Delaware beach house, comes as most senior Democrats, including the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, former house speaker Nancy Pelosi and the current speaker, Hakeem Jeffries, are calling for Biden – at a minimum – to reconsider his position.

“We have to cauterize this wound right now and the sooner we can do it the better,” Virginia representative Gerald E Connolly, a Democrat, told the Times. Connolly, who has not publicly called for Biden to step aside, said the ongoing drama “shows the cold calculus of politics”.

The past week has seen waves of Democrat elected officials make public statements of their appreciation of Biden’s record in office but dire warnings that the US will see a second Trump presidency should he remain the party’s candidate for November’s presidential election.

The latest high-profile name to join the chorus was Sherrod Brown, when the embattled Ohio senator broke cover on Friday evening to call for an end to Biden’s re-election campaign.

“I’ve heard from Ohioans on important issues, such as how to continue to grow jobs in our state, give law enforcement the resources to crack down on fentanyl, protect social security and Medicare from cuts, and prevent the ongoing efforts to impose a national abortion ban,” Brown said in a statement.

The biggest problem I see with all this infighting and back-stabbing is that no one is explaining how all this work work. The other problem is that they are trying to disenfranchise the 14,000,000 Americans who voted for Biden in the primaries. I just want to beat Trump, and I don’t see how that can happen if Democrats dump Biden and Harris for a new candidate who will have to raise money, build a campaing infrastructure, introduce him/herself to the country, and fight the lawsuits Republicans are threatening if Biden is removed.

I’m really wiped out, so I’m going give you the rest of the stories I have as links only:

The Hill: Democrats’ stalemate over Biden candidacy escalates.

HuffPost: Near The End Of His Vice Presidency, Joe Biden Suggested How Long He’d Stay In Office.

Tom Nichols at The Atlantic: A Searing Reminder That Trump Is Unwell.

Raw Story: George Conway launches ‘Anti-Psychopath PAC’ focusing on Trump’s mental health.

Media Matters: Trump’s RNC speech was divisive, but front pages of mainstream media claimed it was “unifying” and “healing.”

Amanda Marcotte at Salon: Trump’s GOP is no country for MAGA women.

ABC News: JD Vance’s wife faces racist online backlash from far-right social media posts.

Scientific American: What to Know about Project 2025’s Dangers to Science.

CNN: Dr. Sanjay Gupta: There are still key questions about Trump’s injuries after attempted assassination.

MSNBC: Trump shooter flew drone over venue hours before attempted assassination, source says.

Take care and have a good weekend, everyone!


Wednesday Reads

Good Day!!

I’m trying very hard not to panic this morning. Ever since the shooting at the Trump rally on Saturday,  cable news outlets MSNBC and CNN have completely surrendered to Trump and the Republicans. Both channels are hosting wall-to-wall coverage of the Republican National Convention.

On Monday, MSNBC even took Morning Joe off the air and replaced it with anodyne Today Show-like programming, because they were afraid a host or guest might say something derogatory about Trump. Joe and Mika threatened to quit if it happens again.

From Oliver Darcy at CNN: ‘Morning Joe’ pulled from air Monday because of Trump shooting.

MSNBC will not air “Morning Joe,” its celebrated politics roundtable program, on Monday, opting to instead air continued breaking news coverage of the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump.

The progressive news network confirmed the decision to preempt its influential and top-rated morning show after a CNN inquiry Sunday evening. The network said the show will resume airing Tuesday.

The decision by MSNBC to leave one of its most recognizable programs on the sidelines amid a seismic politics-driven news cycle, with the Republican National Convention getting underway in the wake of the Saturday shooting at Trump’s campaign rally, is certain to raise eyebrows.

A person familiar with the matter told CNN that the decision was made to avoid a scenario in which one of the show’s stable of two dozen-plus guests might make an inappropriate comment on live television that could be used to assail the program and network as a whole. Given the breaking news nature of the story, the person said, it made more sense to continue airing rolling breaking news coverage in the fraught political moment.

Morning Joe hosts Mika Br

Morning Joe hosts Mika (formerly Brzezinski) and Joe Scarboro

“Given the gravity and complexity of this unfolding story, NBC News, NBC News NOW and MSNBC have remained in rolling breaking news coverage since Saturday evening,” a spokesperson for NBCUniversal News Group said in a statement to CNN. “As we continue to cover this story into the week, the networks will continue to cross simulcast, alternating between NBC News, NBC News NOW and ‘MSNBC Reports,’ so there is one news feed covering this developing situation.”

In the wake of the attempt on Trump’s life, some of the former president’s supporters have vehemently criticized the press and liberal media commentators for their hard-knuckled reporting, which has sounded the alarm on what four more years under the former president would look like.

Cesar Conde, the chairman of NBCUniversal News Group, made the decision in conjunction with Rashida Jones, the president of MSNBC, and hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, the person familiar with the matter told CNN.

From Politico: Scarborough blasts NBC for pulling ‘Morning Joe’ after Trump shooting, threatens to quit if it happens again.

MSNBC “Morning Joe” host Joe Scarborough slammed his own network for pulling his show on Monday in favor of news coverage of the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, saying he and co-host Mika Brzezinski were “surprised” and “disappointed” by the call and threatening to leave if it happens again.

“Next time we are told there will be a news feed replacing us, we will be in our chairs,” Scarborough said live on air Tuesday morning. “And the news feed will be us, or they can get somebody else to host the show.”

Scarborough said the network told the “Morning Joe” team that there would be one NBC News feed “in breaking news mode” across all NBC channels all day Monday. But the “Today” show aired on Monday morning on NBC, and MSNBC hosts Andrea Mitchell and Chris Jansing appeared for their regularly scheduled shows in the afternoon.

“If we had known that there wasn’t going to be the one news feed from NBC News across all NBC News channels … we obviously would have been in yesterday morning,” Scarborough said, later adding: “Our team was not given a good answer as to why that didn’t happen, but it didn’t happen.”

Trump with his massive bandage.

Despite the heavy coverage, no one seems to be asking questions about what actually happened on Saturday. What kind of injury did Trump have? If he was actually grazed by an AR-15 bullet, it seems as if it would have done more damage than is apparent in photographs. Originally, local police said he was hit by fragments of the teleprompter. Trump went to the golf course on Sunday; he wasn’t wearing a bandage and his ear looked normal. Now he’s wearing a large “maxi-pad” at the convention. Here are a few Twitter comments on the subject:

From former RNC chair Michael Steele:

@MichaelSteel

You would think someone would inquire about Trump’s medical report if for no other reason than Trump has not provided any medical updates or information, neither has the hospital that treated him. Outside of Trump telling us he’s “fine”, how severe was the wound? Did he loose part of his ear (bullets do terrible things to flesh)? How long for recovery? Will the wound require cosmetic surgery? What about reports that it may not have been a bullet which wounded him but glass from the shattered teleprompter? If I missed such reports from his campaign or the hospital please post. Thank you.

From The Hoarse Whisperer

@TheRealHoarse
Feel free to point me to the magic trajectory that would allow for a through-and-through of a person’s ear from a location lateral to them. Show me your expertise in… basic geometry.
Hi. A round from an AR wouldn’t poke a little hole in an ear. Trump didn’t get shot. He was injured by shrapnel or shattered glass or something.
Josh Marshall
@joshtpm
We shouldn’t have to speculate abt any of this. It is the most basic thing for law enforcement and or the medical team that examined Trump to say what they found. It’s such a basic thing. It’s a huge story. How can it be that there’s zero official abt this part of it?

AR-15 bullets

AR-15 bullets

This man is running for president. Shouldn’t we get more details about what happened? And why aren’t we getting more information about the shooter? Ever since it came out that he was a Republican, no one seems to want to talk about him. Maybe if the FBI can break into his phone, we will learn something.

Today we got at update on the injury from Eric Trump. CBS News: Donald Trump doesn’t have stitches after assassination attempt, but a “nice flesh wound,” Eric Trump says.

Former President Donald Trump’s son, Eric Trump, said his father doesn’t have stitches after he was shot in an assassination attempt at a rally in Pennsylvania over the weekend, but that he has a “nice flesh wound” from the shooting.

The former president could be seen touching his ear as the attack unfolded, before he was shielded by Secret Service and whisked off the rally stage with blood on his face. When he appeared at the Republican National Convention on Monday and Tuesday, he wore a large bandage over his injury.

Speaking to “CBS Mornings” co-host Tony Dokoupil from the convention in Milwaukee Wednesday morning, Eric Trump said his father has referred to the injury as “the greatest earache he’s ever had.”

“You know, he was millimeters away from having his life expunged … I’m sure the ear doesn’t feel well,” Eric Trump said.

Eric Trump also told “CBS Evening News” anchor and managing editor Norah O’Donnell on Tuesday that his father’s hearing is fine and that he is “in great spirits.

Okay. Take that for what you think it’s worth.

The Homeland Security IG is investigating the Secret Service security failures at the rally. AP: Homeland Security inspector general investigates Secret Service handling of security at Trump rally.

The Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general said Wednesday it has opened an investigation into the Secret Service’s handling of security for former President Donald Trump on the day a gunman tried to assassinate him at a Pennsylvania rally.

In a brief notice posted to the inspector general’s website, the agency said the objective of the probe is to “Evaluate the United States Secret Service’s (Secret Service) process for securing former President Trump’s July 13, 2024 campaign event.”

There was no date given for when the investigation was launched. The notice was among a long list of ongoing cases that the inspector general’s office is pursuing.

President Joe Biden already had directed an independent review of the security at the rally.

The shooting has raised questions about how the gunman was able to climb onto a roof with a clear line of sight to the former president, who said he was shot in the ear.

The 20-year-old shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, was able to get within 135 meters (157 yards) of the stage where the Republican former president was speaking when he opened fire. That’s despite a threat on Trump’s life from Iran leading to additional security for the former president in the days before the Saturday rally.

We may get more information about Crooks from local media. Here’s a story from Pittsburgh’s ABC news station WTAE: Video appears to show would-be Trump assassin at rally hour before shooting.

We’re learning more about the movements of Thomas Matthew Crooks before Saturday’s shooting at the rally for former President Donald Trump.

New video obtained exclusively by Pittsburgh’s Action News 4 appears to show 20-year-old Thomas Crooks lurking in the area an hour before he opened fire.

The man, who didn’t want to show his face on camera, captured the video at 5:06 p.m. on Saturday evening. He says it was a seemingly simply moment as he was trying to capture the size of the crowd, but ended up capturing much more.

“I wanted to pan the crowd because it was a massive crowd, so I was just taking in the moment. So this was before the shooting. Obviously had no idea how that day, how that day would end,” said the man who attended the rally with his teenaged son.

The video appears to show Crooks, 20, lurking in the area near a building just past the secured perimeter of the event itself. As it pans to the crowd, it shows multiple law enforcement vehicles in the area facing the building itself. As the video moves back toward the building, Crooks appears to be seen again. This means that Crooks was likely in the area for more than an hour before the shots were fired….

Pittsburgh’s Action News 4 has learned from multiple sources that Crooks was spotted at the rally, photographed as suspicious and officers were actively looking for him when he made his way onto the roof.

Law enforcement sources say Crooks was able to access the roof by climbing over an air conditioning unit adjacent to the building.

Dakinikat wrote in detail about the many questions that remain about what happened at the rally on Saturday, so check that out if you haven’t read it.

0711 Joe Biden REUTERS TT 01DC Democrats are still fighting each other over whether Biden should be their nominee. This has been going on for 3 weeks now. No one ever explains how replacing him would work. All of the suggested replacements are polling worse than Biden, and are unknown to the average voter who doesn’t follow politics closely. Many of these “insiders” who want to replace Biden also want to dump Kamala Harris. That would guarantee losing black and women voters who are the base of the party.

NBC News says that Biden is getting “combative.” I don’t blame him.  and  write: Determined to push forward, Biden tightens his circle and grows combative.

President Joe Biden spent more than a week in meetings and on phone calls addressing Democrats’ concerns about his candidacy with a positive, conciliatory message about his path forward. At times, he even sounded contrite about his uneven debate performance, which prompted calls for him to suspend his re-election campaign.

He took blunt questions about his mental acuity in stride. He smiled through suggestions from allies that he take a cognitive test or consider allowing someone younger to take his place on the Democratic ticket. He agreed that his supporters have legitimate concerns and promised to show them he’s up for the rigor of a presidential campaign and another four years in the White House.

Then he’d had enough.

In the past few days, Biden has started to privately convey a new message to Democrats: The conversation about my future is over, and I’m getting irritated that you’re not realizing that. Biden has called several prominent allies individually to tell them to spread the word.

“We think we’ve got a good plan to fight through this,” a senior Biden aide said.

Nearly three weeks since his rocky debate performance that shook his party, Biden is intent on shutting down dissent among Democrats in order to move forward and focus on defeating Donald Trump. And after hearing out his critics, he’s tightening his circle to those he‘s relied on the longest — and who support his path ahead.

Biden’s thinning patience for questions about his candidacy were on display as he campaigned Friday in Detroit telling a large, effusive crowd: “You made me the nominee. No one else. Not the press, not the pundits, not the insiders, not donors.”

“And I’m not going anywhere,” Biden added.

Read more DC gossip at the NBC link.

Biden did make some news this morning. He is working on changes to the Supreme Court.

David Kurtz at Talking Points Memo: Biden Relents And Elevates Supreme Court Reform To His Re-Election Agenda.

It’s hard to know the precise combination of developments that changed President Biden’s mind about Supreme Court reforms and prompted him to place them more centrally in the framework of the 2024 election.

Was it the ethics scandals of Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito and the Supreme Court’s own ineptitude in dealing with them? Was it the series of controversial decisions across a whole host of issues and areas of civic life in which the court wrested power away from the executive and legislative branches and placed it firmly in the judicial branch? Was it the six-justice conservative majority aggressively uprooting the court’s own precedents in pursuit of its own preferred legal and policy outcomes? Was it the fact that he’s trailing in the polls with his own re-election more at risk that at any previous point in his presidency?

All of the above are in play, of course. A tipping point was reached, and it’s unlikely any one development was the difference-maker.

The shift, first reported by the Washington Post, was revealed over the weekend in a call Biden had with the Congressional Progressive Caucus:

“I’m going to need your help on the Supreme Court, because I’m about to come out — I don’t want to prematurely announce it — but I’m about to come out with a major initiative on limiting the court. … I’ve been working with constitutional scholars for the last three months, and I need some help,” Biden said, according to a transcript of the call obtained by The Washington Post.

The NYT separately confirmed that Biden’s “proposals to overhaul the court … could be unveiled in the coming weeks.”

Among the menu of choices Biden is reported to be considering:

  • term limits for the justices;
  • imposing an enforceable ethics code; and
  • Relatedly, backing a constitutional amendment to reverse the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity.

Late addition: I meant to note that enlarging the court beyond its current nine-justice setup does not appear to be among Biden’s proposals.

None of these measures will pass the GOP-controlled House, though they could serve as messaging vehicles on the Hill between now and the election. More importantly, they elevate Supreme Court reforms to his second term agenda, creating the opportunity for the November election to be a referendum on the high court and create legislative momentum if Biden wins. Even then, it’ll be a very heavy lift.

This is a long-game move, that also offers a few short-term political advantages.

Trump and his running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, applaud on Tuesday.

Trump and his running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, applaud on Tuesday.

Yesterday’s big news was that Trump has chosen JD Vance as his running mate. It appears this is going to be a controversial choice. We will be writing more about him in the days to come, but here are a few relevant articles:

Andrew Roth at The Guardian: Trump’s choice of Vance ‘terrible news’ for Ukraine, Europe experts warn.

Donald Trump’s choice of JD Vance as his vice-presidential pick has reignited fears in Europe that he would pursue a transactional “America first” foreign policy that could culminate in the US pushing for Ukraine to acquiesce to Vladimir Putin and sue for peace with Russia.

“It’s bad for us but it’s terrible news for [Ukraine],” said one senior European diplomat in Washington. “[Vance] is not our ally.”

Foreign diplomats and observers have frequently called Trump’s actual policies a “black box,” saying that was impossible to know for certain what the unpredictable leader would do when in power.

Some have soothed themselves by suggesting that names tipped for top positions, such as former national security adviser Robert O’Brien, would maintain a foreign policy status quo while Trump focuses on domestic affairs.

Jonathan Martin at Politico: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Security Hawks Slam Vance Selection.

Former President Donald Trump didn’t just select a running mate here – he doused political kerosene on the raging Republican fire over foreign policy.

By tapping the 39-year-old Sen. J.D. Vance, one of the party’s leading national security doves, Trump strengthened the hand of the isolationist forces eager to undo the hawkish GOP consensus that has endured since the Reagan era.

Should Trump prevail in November, the non-interventionists will have one of their most articulate advocates at Trump’s side. What worries the hawks is that Vance may also be the last adviser in the former president’s ear.

While toeing the party line and praising Vance in their public comments, in private the interventionists ranged from horrified to merely alarmed that one of the loudest critics of aiding Ukraine could soon be first in line for the presidency. The grimaces, sighs and whispered frustrations from the old guard as they made their way through the convention reception circuit were easy to find in the day after the selection.

Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who oversees military spending as the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee chair, told one associate,according to a person familiar with the exchange: “The Ukrainians better hurry up and win.”

Another influential congressional Republican simply told me about the Vance selection: “I’m scared to death.”

While he had it on before Trump announced his running mate, the Ukrainian flag pin on the lapel of Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee, neatly illustrated without the necessity of words the gulf between so much of the GOP and Vance on the war in Europe.

Read the rest at Politico.

USHA-Top-B-facebookJumbo

JD Vance with his wife Usha during his Senate campaign.

Some racist Republicans are unhappy with the Vance choice, because he is married to a woman of color.

Newsweek: MAGA Makes Racist Attacks Against JD Vance’s Wife.

Extremist figures and members of the Make America Great Again movement have criticized the wife of Ohio Senator JD Vance after former President Donald Trump named him as his running mate in the 2024 election.

Usha Vance, the daughter of Indian immigrants, was raised in San Diego before meeting her husband at Yale Law School. They were married in 2014 and later blessed by a Hindu pundit in a separate ceremony, The New York Times reported.

In the wake of Trump’s vice presidential announcement on Monday, numerous conservative and far-right figures have taken to social media to launch racist attacks against Usha Vance because of her Indian heritage and the assumption that her influence on her husband’s political career means the Republican Party will be softer on immigration.

“I’m sure this guy is going to be great on immigration,” Jaden McNeil, a far-right activist and the founder of America First Students, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, while sharing a picture of the Vances with their newborn baby.

Nick Fuentes, a white supremacist who visited Trump at his Mar-a-Lago home along with rapper Kanye West in November 2022, suggested that Vance would not be a “defender of white identity” because of his wife’s Indian heritage.

“Who is this guy, really?” Fuentes said on his podcast. “Do we really expect that the guy who has an Indian wife and named their kid Vivek is going to support white identity?”

Vincent James Foxx, who was present at the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, wrote on X: “JD Vance gets tapped as VP and immediately there’s a Hindu prayer at the RNC. Next we’ll see Sen. Mike Lee and JD Vance team up to convince Trump to let in 10 million Indian immigrants. Green cards on diplomas!”

More racist comments from MAGA world at the link.

More Vance reads to check out:

The Guardian: Who is Usha Vance, the Indian American lawyer married to JD Vance?

Noah Berlatsky at Public Notice: The phony populism of JD Vance.

Talking Points Memo: JD Vance, Menstrual Surveillance Hawk.

The Guardian: A Trump-Vance administration would be ‘the most dangerous’ for abortion rights, say advocates.

Financial Times: How Peter Thiel and Silicon Valley funded the sudden rise of JD Vance.

Those are my recommended reads for today. Have courage, Sky Dancers!