First presidential debate (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

Since we usually have a separate thread for these
=================

NEW YORK (AP) — President Joe Biden begins an intense period of private preparations Friday at Camp David for what may be the most consequential presidential debate in decades.

The 81-year-old Democrat’s team is aware that he cannot afford an underwhelming performance when he faces Republican rival Donald Trump for 90 minutes on live television Thursday night. Biden’s team is expecting aggressive attacks on his physical and mental strength, his record on the economy and immigration and even his family.

Trump, 78 and ever confident, will stay on the campaign trail before going to his Florida estate next week for two days of private meetings as part of an informal prep process.

The former president’s allies are pushing him to stay focused on his governing plans, but they’re expecting him to be tested by pointed questions about his unrelenting focus on election fraud, his role in the erosion of abortion rights and his unprecedented legal baggage.

Thursday’s debate on CNN will be full of firsts, with the potential to reshape the presidential race. Never before in the modern era have two presumptive nominees met on the debate stage so early in the general election season. Never before have two White House contenders faced off at such advanced ages, with widespread questions about their readiness.

And never before has a general election debate participant been saddled with a felony conviction. The debate-stage meeting comes just two weeks before Trump is scheduled to be sentenced on 34 felony counts in his New York hush money trial.

“You can argue this will be the most important debate, at least in my lifetime,” said Democratic strategist Jim Messina, 54, who managed former President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign.

PRESSURE ON BIDEN


The ground rules for Thursday’s debate, the first of two scheduled meetings, are unusual.

The candidates agreed to meet at a CNN studio in Atlanta with no audience. Each candidate’s microphone will be muted, except when it’s his turn to speak. No props or prewritten notes will be allowed onstage. The candidates will be given only a pen, a pad of paper and a bottle of water.

There will be no opening statements. A coin flip determined that Biden would stand at the podium to the viewer’s right, while Trump would deliver the final closing statement.


The next debate won’t be until September. Any stumbles Thursday will be hard to erase or replace quickly.………..

How Biden and Trump are taking very different approaches to preparing for next week's debate

President Joe Biden is beginning an intense period of private debate preparations at Camp David. His trip comes as officials in both parties scramble to set expectations for what may be the most consequential presidential debate in decades.

apnews.com

 

[samiam5211]

What do they all have in common?

To suggest it’s only white people that want him to drop out just denies reality.

The two most recent polls show that over 40% of black voters think he should be replaced.

 

[LA - L.A.]

And from that...

That's not from the article I linked to. Do you have a link or can you tell me the source. I'd like to read more than just the headline. Headlines aren't very informative.

Do you know if Jefferies asked Biden to step down? Did he say he wouldn't ever give Biden his endorsement? Did he say he wouldn't give it at this time?

 

[LA - L.A.]

Newsom doesn't surprise me. He's been pretty consistent in his support of Biden. I think he's sticking with Biden until he actually drops out.

I don't think he wants people to think he's trying to run for President.

He's making a press appearance to support Biden that will air a day or two before people are saying Biden will be forced to step down. The timing is odd.

 

[Lapaz]

I'm not really sure how it would affect down ballot. I think people who plan on voting at gonna vote regardless. I could be wrong tho.

Not only will it not directly affect down ballot, but people can write in the democratic candidate for president. What's more, if anyone has a right to sue the states, it'll be the democratic candidate. For goodness sakes, the Supreme court didn't allow states to keep Trump off of the ballot despite attempting a coup, which is against the law, not against rules.

 

[LA - L.A.]

To suggest it’s only white people that want him to drop out just denies reality.

The two most recent polls show that over 40% of black voters think he should be replaced.

He didn't suggest anything. He just posted photo and asked what they had in common. It's like a Rorschach Inkblot Test, people see the commonality that they see. You saw their commonality as all white people.

I saw entertainment nerds and geeks. Sure they were all white, but that's not the commonality that jumped out at me.

 

[samiam5211]

He didn't suggest anything. He just posted photo and asked what they had in common. It's like a Rorschach Inkblot Test, people see the commonality that they see. You saw their commonality as all white people.

I saw entertainment nerds and geeks. Sure they were all white, but that's not the commonality that jumped out at me.

Sure buddy.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Not only will it not directly affect down ballot, but people can write in the democratic candidate for president. What's more, if anyone has a right to sue the states, it'll be the democratic candidate. For goodness sakes, the Supreme court didn't allow states to keep Trump off of the ballot despite attempting a coup, which is against the law, not against rules.

Election laws are not just "rules" they're laws and lawsuits will be filed in state courts. The lawsuits might end up in front of the Supreme Court and if they do, 6 of the current justices on the Supreme Court have shown they will contradict themselves to get the outcome they desire.

Trump's campaign has been preparing to launch lawsuits challenging replacement candidates in several states. It's going to happen. Trump doesn't even have to win the cases to suppress voter turnout by getting people to doubt their votes will count because of the legal challenges.

The lawsuits are going to cause problems, what impact those suits may or may not have remains to be seen.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Sure buddy.

Sure as shooting, buddy.

 

[Incumbent]

Not only will it not directly affect down ballot, but people can write in the democratic candidate for president. What's more, if anyone has a right to sue the states, it'll be the democratic candidate. For goodness sakes, the Supreme court didn't allow states to keep Trump off of the ballot despite attempting a coup, which is against the law, not against rules.

Turnout in Texas for the 2020 presidential election was 66%. Turnout for state races, including governor, lt governor, and AG, in 2022 was about 46%.

I strongly suspect if people can’t vote for the Democratic nominee, we’d see lower turnout. There’s a reason that pundits emphasize down ballot considerations in a presidential election year, because voting for president tends to turn out the most people.

 

[Lapaz]

This is exactly how I'm feeling, thanks for posting this. I've largely stayed out of this thread since the debate because it's become such a circular firing squad with pro/anti-Biden sides drawn and an inability to see the other sides point. To be honest I don't really know what is best course for defeating Trump in the election at this point. Biden has been mostly a good president that has lead our country through some very difficult and turbulent times. Not only has he had to deal with once in a lifetime crisis like COVID (which I currently have), inflation, Russia's war on Ukraine and Hamas attack on Israel and subsequent war, but he's also had to deal with constant obstruction for Trump and the Republicans. I haven't agreed with all of his policies (manly how he dealt with the Israel/Hamas conflict), but all things considered he really has accomplished a lot. I shudder to think were we would be today if Trump had won in 2020. It seems like the anti-Biden crowd have largely forgotten all of that and grown resentful of Biden because of either how he's dealt with the Israel/Hamas conflict or because of fear of him losing the election because of his age and lapses.

On the other side of the coin, the pro-Biden side has become almost obstinate in their defense of Biden and their belief that Biden is the only Democrat candidate that can win the election. They continue to cast aside valid concerns about his age, any age related mental decline and his ability to serve another 4 years as president. As well as whether or not he can convince those middle of the road voters to vote for him. Even as most of those concerns have come from people who have been loyal Biden supporters for 4 years and have had recent interactions with him.

Then there's the media at large who have turned all of their attention and coverage of Biden and his eminent demise, as if almost hoping for it. We've long known that coverage of Trump/Biden has been asymmetric, but it has kicked into overdrive since the debate. I was reading this article on CNN yesterday about the new conference and they're even now making justifications for Trump's non-existent campaigning, even as Biden has done just about every form of public campaigning in the last 2 weeks.

Takeaways from Biden’s critical NATO news conference | CNN Politics

President Joe Biden on Thursday participated in the most high-stakes news conference of his political career on the sidelines of the NATO summit, aiming to convince his detractors and supporters that is he able to serve another four years in office.

edition.cnn.com

I realize that this is somewhat typical media behavior of pushing controversy for clicks and profit, but you'd think given the stakes of this election and their duty the media would be a little more balanced in its coverage.

I myself do not know what the best course of action is for the Democrats, but I know that Biden is the only one who can make the decision to step aside. I like many others, have real concerns about Biden's ability to serve another 4-year term given what we've seen recently and his continued lapses. While I realize that the election of a president isn't just about the one person but about the entire administration and his policies, going into an election with the rationalization that "even if you think Biden is too old, his administration and policies are better", isn't a very strong hand to be playing. Voters have a right to expect that the person whom they elect as president is going serve his entire term and be able to work late and handle crisis at 2 am in the morning if required. Then on the flip side of that I have no confidence that the Democrats would be able to pull of a switch at the this late stage. We've already had runaway speculation of who should replace Biden, many of them ignoring realities of what it takes to run an election. The last time Democrats did this, it was a mess and they lost the election. Why would this time be different, especially when you consider Biden is without a doubt the most qualified candidate?

Here are a few things that I do believe:
1.) Biden is the only one that can make the decision to step aside, he's earned that much. I think it's reasonable for voters and supporters to express their concerns and even frustrations with is candidacy, but that shouldn't turn into resentment of Biden. If he stays in the race, he will need our support to defeat Trump. Ultimately that is the most important thing.

2.) If Biden does step aside, I don't believe having a mini-primary is the best course of action. This sounds good in theory with the potential to drive excitement, but I think it also has the potential to drive division and discontent with people siloing into camps for their perspective candidates. It doesn't leave the request amount of time for people to leave behind their discontent to rally around the chosen candidate. Thus it has the potential to fracture the Democratic coalition even further.

3.) The second point leaves me to believe that Harris is really the only logical and realistic candidate to replace Biden as the presidential candidate. This would require a coming together from all sides to support her, will that happen?

4.) I think Biden may still be able to beat Trump, but I am not convinced of that. Harris has less negatives than Trump or Biden and has the national name recognition as well. I think she can beat Trump, but it would really require unity among the Democrats to support her and that is not their strong suit.

5.) A wet paper bag is more qualified than Trump to be president.

I liked your post, but I have a few disagreements with you. First, I don't think most of us are anti-Biden, and we haven't forgotten the good job that he has done. The concern is about winning and the future. We think his seeming infirmity is hurting his chances of being re-elected, so that's causing us to lose voters, and we don't think his past performance is a good indication of his future performance. Normally it is, but normally people have comparable faculties for both terms.

My other main disagreement is with your comment that we should not have a mini-primary because of dissension, and concerns that we won't have time to smooth-over those dissensions. I think a mini-primary would be a net plus. There would still be 3 months from the convention to the election. That's enough time. Also, I think almost everyone that is planning to vote against Trump, will still do so. There may be a few who will sit out, but I think far more will be motivated to come out and vote for the democrat that are currently either not going to vote, or are voting for another candidate due to concerns about Biden's health. Lastly, I've come to the belief that Harris should lead the ticket, and I only want the mini-primary for the VP.

 

[Lapaz]

Turnout in Texas for the 2020 presidential election was 66%. Turnout for state races, including governor, lt governor, and AG, in 2022 was about 46%.

I strongly suspect if people can’t vote for the Democratic nominee, we’d see lower turnout. There’s a reason that pundits emphasize down ballot considerations in a presidential election year, because voting for president tends to turn out the most people.

Those who don't come out to vote aren't being disenfranchised.

 

[Incumbent]

Those who don't come out to vote aren't being disenfranchised.

And that’s not actually what I said.

I said if a state could successfully keep the Democratic nominee off the ballot (hypothetically) that would be disenfranchising voters in that race. And, no, write-in isn’t just as good.

 

[LA - L.A.]

And that’s not actually what I said.

I said if a state could successfully keep the Democratic nominee off the ballot (hypothetically) that would be disenfranchising voters in that race. And, no, write-in isn’t just as good.

The lack of reading comprehension is surprising.

 

[Lapaz]

Election laws are not just "rules" they're laws and lawsuits will be filed in state courts. The lawsuits might end up in front of the Supreme Court and if they do, 6 of the current justices on the Supreme Court have shown they will contradict themselves to get the outcome they desire.

Trump's campaign has been preparing to launch lawsuits challenging replacement candidates in several states. It's going to happen. Trump doesn't even have to win the cases to suppress voter turnout by getting people to doubt their votes will count because of the legal challenges.

The lawsuits are going to cause problems, what impact those suits may or may not have remains to be seen.

I say let the lawsuits come. I doubt any blue nor purple state would sue. If a red state sues, then let them. They can answer to their voters that feel wronged. A party should not be hamstrung from putting forth its best if it learns new information, and I'm willing to bet the court will agree. Would they make Republicans run Trump if he were jailed? Here is what Ballotpedia says about it:​

"Replacing a presumptive nominee before the national convention​

The Democratic and Republican parties do not formally nominate candidates until delegates vote at the party's national convention. The Democratic National Convention will take place from August 19-22, 2024, and the Republican National Convention will take place from July 15-18, 2024.

A party's presumptive nominee, meaning the candidate who receives an estimated majority of delegates after state nominating events, could be replaced at the convention. Delegates could elect a candidate who they were not initially bound to at the time of their state's election. Both state law and party rules govern how a delegate must vote at the national convention, including whether a delegate remains bound to a withdrawn candidate and for how many rounds a delegate remains bound to a candidate.[6]

Both parties also have delegates who are not bound to a particular candidate at the convention. The Republican Party has a total of 104 unbound delegates, and the Democratic Party has a total of 739 unbound delegates. Democratic unbound delegates can only vote if a convention proceeds past the first round of voting.

Replacing a nominee between the national convention and the election​

Both the Democratic and Republican parties have rules governing how to replace a presidential or vice presidential nominee between the party's nominating convention and the November 5, 2024, general election. The section below provides each party's rules on that subject.

It is important to note, however, that states require political parties to submit names of presidential and vice presidential nominees and presidential electors before election day in order to certify them for the general election ballot. Deadlines vary by state and depend on the election calendar, including early voting, voting by mail, and absentee voting considerations."

State laws and party rules on replacing a presidential nominee, 2024

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

 

[Lapaz]

And that’s not actually what I said.

I said if a state could successfully keep the Democratic nominee off the ballot (hypothetically) that would be disenfranchising voters in that race. And, no, write-in isn’t just as good.

A write in counts just the same. In a red state, its all just a vote on your principle.

 

[Incumbent]

From the L.A. Times editorial board:

Editorial: One candidate is patently unfit for the White House. It's not Biden

As Democrats weigh Biden's future, let's remember that Trump already failed the presidential fitness test. If Republicans cared about democracy, they'd be scheming to push him aside.

www.latimes.com

 

[LA - L.A.]

I doubt any blue nor purple state would sue.​

Trump's campaign will be filing lawsuits. They will be filing lawsuits in several states. They have already made preparations in those states to sue. It's not the states that will be suing, it won't be the states.

Trump doesn't need to win the lawsuits he will be filing to create problems and sow doubts in the voters minds.

 

[Lapaz]

From the L.A. Times editorial board:

Editorial: One candidate is patently unfit for the White House. It's not Biden

As Democrats weigh Biden's future, let's remember that Trump already failed the presidential fitness test. If Republicans cared about democracy, they'd be scheming to push him aside.

www.latimes.com

It would be great if it mattered, but this isn't going to matter to low information voters. And telling people that keep up what they already know about Trump's fitness, isn't going to convince people that haven't already decided to vote for Biden to do so. There is an entrenched group of voters that will only vote for a fit candidate. At best, you may get them to vote for another candidate, but I think there will be few of those.