The right side seems to be fairly easy to line up. There’s the young turk, Ron DeSantis, or the old, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus. But on the other side, the incumbent isn’t getting any younger, a point not missed by many Democratic voters.
Mr. Biden has said repeatedly that he intends to run for re-election in 2024. At 79, he is already the oldest president in American history, and concerns about his age ranked at the top of the list for Democratic voters who want the party to find an alternative.
Mind you, they don’t think he’s doing a great job as president either.
In a sign of deep vulnerability and of unease among what is supposed to be his political base, only 26 percent of Democratic voters said the party should renominate him in 2024.
Ironically, the only person against whom Biden would win is Trump,** who also lost in polls where the alternative was a smallish rock, a turnip or dog poop. But I digress.
The backlash against Mr. Biden and desire to move in a new direction were particularly acute among younger voters. In the survey, 94 percent of Democrats under the age of 30 said they would prefer a different presidential nominee.
As was argued at the time, the nomination of Biden as the Democratic candidate wasn’t so much an embrace of Biden, who the Dems blew off on his earlier tries when he was still a bit more, eh, youthful, but a rejection of Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders, the candidates reflecting the hard left of the party. Yet, the young Dems are even more certain today that Biden’s biggest failure was his not being progressive enough, not using his pen and phone to unilaterally ram woke down a nation’s throat.
This is what gives rise to a very serious question. Will the wayward children of the left finally get their way and compel the party to nominate a candidate who is seriously dedicated to radical change?
The Dems don’t want Biden, who completely missed his mandate of a return to normality and instead listened to the loudest idiots in the Oval who told him he could be FDR but for two overarching problems. He didn’t have the support and their social justice programs and profligate spending were wildly unpopular and foolish.
But if not Biden, who? There’s the heir apparent, Kamala Harris, who has managed to do the impossible and be even more despised than Biden or Trump. Is there a candidate on the Dem side whom people might want to vote for? Or at least wouldn’t have to hold their nose while voting? Who?
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.
**Oh my. Whatever could this mean for Darth Cheeto?
One glimmer of good news for Mr. Biden is that the survey showed him with a narrow edge in a hypothetical rematch in 2024 with former President Donald J. Trump: 44 percent to 41 percent.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xaw–HWHecg
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Al Gore is only 74.
I don’t think there’s a plausible option for the radical left – Sanders is too old and AOC too young. I could see Democrats getting excited about JB Pritzker. As Illinois governor, he has expanded abortion rights in Illinois and balanced the budget while cutting taxes and raising education spending. There’s the potential juvenile pleasure of backing a ‘real billionaire’ with a much bigger hotel chain against Trump, it Trump’s the nominee. Finally, he managed one of the more balanced and competent state responses to COVID which would be a positive contrast to potential rival Gavin Newsom.
I’ve lived in both TX and IL and Prtizker is this year’s Beto for media fanbois. Remember all the hype around Beto O’Rourke? He would be a formidible candidate for POTUS? Texans knew this was bogus but there must always be a savior even if he is obese and has love handles on his face, so go with Pritzker who was able to ram thru extremist policies in IL because Democrats control all levers of power, including the courts.
Who you ask? The obvious answer: Senator Christopher Murphy.
Yes…CT’s Christopher Murphy is attractive…good-looking….youngish…somewhat Kennedyesque…plus he got good press with respect to Democratic voters in being associated with the minimalist and largely redundant “reforms” in gun regulation following recent mass shootings. However, the larger profile Murphy gets, the more the deep, chronic problems of the state of Connecticut he is inevitably associated with and in ways responsible for will become an issue. In short, Connecticut’s Murphy is a prime representative of the administrative-security state. Most residents of CT lap this up. But as we see with Democratic troubles predicted in the coming November mid terms, most voters across the country seem to be shunning such politics. Nonetheless, because of the above-mentioned qualities, Murphy will be one of the most interesting and most reported-on and followed politicians when the time for presidential handicapping comes around. I’m from Connecticut. I recognized Murphy’s potential appeal some time ago, and am not surprised at all that he gets attention as a possible presidential candidate and is starting to be seen. Murphy’s inevitable association with fellow senator Richard Blumenthal will not hurt him with Democratic voters.
If you follow Senator Murphy on Twitter and see how he travels the state and the country and the world like the Energizer Bunny, you’d get an idea of how much he would hate being stuck in the White House. I doubt you could get him to run.
I don’t follow Senator Murphy closely. I do however note when he appears in the media since I am from Connecticut, and generally interested in what is being said and reported about him as a prominent CT politicians. In media reports I see,I recognize when someone is grooming himself to be considered a presidential candidate and when others are grooming him. I don’t know if you’re being facetious, but all the running around he is doing is a primary way one is so groomed. I would expect residency in the White House would offer ample room for whatever desired roaming Murphy might want to do.
I think Tulsi Gabbard would do well with actual voters, but the ruling class won’t tolerate her as the candidate any more than they tolerated Trump.
She repeated verbatim Russian talking points on multiple topics. I love the idea of someone with actual military service in leadership positions, but she ain’t it. I supported her for a while and realizing she was so profoundly wrong gave me some bad feelz, man.
Could you be more specific? This could apply to a great many politicians. “the old, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus”. Roughly a third of the senate, by my estimate.
TIA
I take it the next third are the “the middle-aged, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus”, and the last third are the “the young, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus”?
Hey! Have we got a job for you!
…a…well…yeah, it hit an iceberg, but you get to be CAPTAIN!!…come on, man!
Tulsi Gabbard
Presuming that the old, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus whose name shall not be mentioned is the opposing nominee, one would do well to remember why the old, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus whose name shall not be mentioned was so popular to begin with, and to consider nominees with superior, but similar, characteristics. The old, vulgar, amoral, deceitful, ignoramus rose to popularity on TV, where he played an SOB whose catchphrase was, “You’re fired!” Who on the left has such a background?
I don’t know of any Democratic candidates who were TV stars, but I can think of quite a few SOBs. The biggest I can think of is Illinois’ J.B. Pritzker, who was genuinely born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but is only a recent convert to social justice. His rotundity lacks the humor of Adlai Stevenson, but would still provide entertaining commercials, having never let a functioning toilet stand in the way of him getting a property tax break.
We may be facing a food shortage by 2024, which makes Kamala the obvious choice. Hungry Americans will line up for generous helpings of word salad:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/JUoGbS4ttUuj/
The Dems are a hot mess right now. I guess Bernie could run again if Biden doesn’t for any reason, but that’s kind of lame, not new and fresh and cool like the young Dems want. The numbers pitting Biden against Trump are horrifying. Someone more likely to beat him better emerge and soon.
I’ll confess to being one of those who wants to push the country left. Beyond wokeness is the promised land. That being said, I’m open to negotiation. If the mainstream Dems can’t get their shit together, then might as well throw a hail mary of some sort and push a fully uncompromising leftist agenda. At least Bernie is brave enough to cop to being a socialist, mostly.
I don’t give a damn about wokeness. I want private property. I want redistribution. I want collective action. Vulgar individualism is toxic. It might sound crazy, but there’s more to leftism than petty battles over culture. Workers of the world unite kind of stuff. Now if only anyone would agree with me.
The Republicans are dead to me. There’s no one they can put up that I would consider voting for. With the Dems being incompetent, I’m left with nothing. Which is how it’s always been since I’ve been alive and maybe before. A complete fucking shitshow of politics. I’m used to it by now.
I forgot about Sherrod Brown, senator out of Ohio. Runs on a sort of populist generally left platform. Depending on how far he’s willing to go, I’d suggest him. More moderate than I would like, but I think he would be capable and might stand a fair chance against whoever the Reps put up.
Republicans are dead to many of us, which is what the progressives are counting on, Comrade. And as much as the Republicans are dead to me too, the progressives are even more dead. Push too hard left and the Republicans may end up being zombies.
Where is the candidate in opposition who has not been decried as progressive by his opponents in power?
I take your point, though. It’s true that the backlash might not make any push worth it in the long-run. However, I see a hot iron in the fire ready to be struck, a crisis that shouldn’t be left to waste. The impulse to strike and capitalize is there, even if it gets moderated when I step out from behind the nym.
Sadly, my comrades are few and far between. It’s still just me and Jake in the book club, despite me opening up more bean bags. We now allow fellow travelers to join. Care to submit an application?
You want private property. But you also want redistribution and collective action. The first one is not synonymous with the second two. In order to redistribute, you first have to take from someone who has and give it to someone who doesn’t.
Are you going to be in the group that goes up to someone’s home and tell them they have to give up half their property to some lazy asshole who doesn’t have the gumption to go out and earn it himself? Good luck with that.
As far as collectivism, it’s been tried over and over and over. Every time, its been a failure.
You misunderstood. I was immaturely calling for the seizure of private property. I don’t want it, it’s not mine. You can keep your personal property. It’s the means of production socialists are supposed to be after. Adam Smith says some interesting things in Wealth of Nations about all this. The ideas aren’t new.
I’d love to continue with Socialism 101, but I’d rather you come to the bookclub for that sort of thing rather than take up more of Pops’s bandwidth on the particularities of something which will not take hold here in my lifetime.
It’s still Tuesday, and I can’t tell this with a limerick.
The socialist campaigner was explaining how socialism works to a peasant.
“So, if you had two houses, we would take one of them and give it to someone who had no house. Is that OK with you?”
“Yes, that would be fine.”
“If you had two cows, we would take one of them and give it to someone who had no cows. Is that OK?”
“Yes, that would be fine.”
If you had two chickens we would take one of them and give it to someone who had no chickens. Is that OK?”
“No! I HAVE two chickens!”
I’ve heard that Hillary is being considered for a run again.
The GOP would win in a landslide.
Remember, Trump won because of the “ Anybody but Hillary” vote.
In my lifetime, more presidents have come from statehouses than anywhere else. Voters like a proven leader when they can find one, and though no one looks like presidential material until they are actually elected, governors have an edge on that score.
North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper would make a stolid candidate, in both a good and a bad way.
Polis from Colorado. A gay liberal but not nutso libertarianish seemingly practical Democrat. Would attract a lot of swing voters, including possibly me and I consider Biden and the progressives to be a bigger threat to our liberty than Trump.
Gavin Newsom seems to be a good candidate: statuesque visage, tall, lots of executive experience as governor of the largest state in the country, lieutenant governor, mayor of San Francisco, bona fide progressive credentials. He does have some strikes against him, like a confirmed marital affair (although not as big a deal as this would have been 20 or 30 years ago), faced a recall recently, got caught at the height of the pandemic pre-vax going to a no-mask, no-social-distancing party at an extremely expensive restaurant to meet donors at a time that his office had shut down most small businesses with coronavirus restrictions.
But maybe the biggest strike against him are simply the words “Governor of California”: it’s a significant turn-off, including amongst some working-class registered Democrat voters, in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic states (Michigan, NC, Wisconsin) that the party absolutely has to win if they want any shot at winning the EC.
“bona fide progressive credentials”
And this is a good thing? Is there anything that suggests to you that the majority of this nation wants to go woke?
“got caught at the height of the pandemic pre-vax going to a no-mask, no-social-distancing party at an extremely expensive restaurant to meet donors at a time that his office had shut down most small businesses with coronavirus restrictions.”
Do you really think anyone who would otherwise vote for him cares in the least about this?
They should nominate Biden with Harris as running mate again, of course. Fully behind him as the Democrat candidate in 2024.
The majority of the nation doesn’t determine who is President. Electoral votes do. A candidate should be chosen to win swing states.
Perhaps we can agree that, on both sides of the political divide, we will once again be choosing between bad and worse. Given that our political process seems to bring forward only those who can thrive in a “wretched hive of scum and villainy” how can we realistically expect better?
And no, I am not feeling particularly upbeat today.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth.
A very interesting pick. All other reasons aside, I would pay to see her absolutely wreck Darth Cheetoh in the debates.
Pete Buttigieg, but he is unelectable. And Hillary again? Buy a clue. She got beat by a black man in 2008.
Klobuchar