2024 Democratic Presidential Nominee

[W. Niederhut]

On 7/22/2024 at 7:16 PM, Cliff Varnell said:

I've read that Cooper is a "personal favorite" of Harris.  Purely on a level of optics, he looks straight out of central casting.

A Harris-Shapiro ticket would be the first in history with no white Christian male.  That would drive the Christian fascists even more insane -- one reason I'm pulling for the pick.

Cliff,

     Two footnotes here.

      These MAGA Evangelicals should be called "pseudo-Christian fascists."

      "Christian fascist" is an oxymoron-- as Pope Pius XI declared in his March 1937 encyclical denouncing Hitler and Naziism as antithetical to Christianity.  Fascism exalts race, nation, and state-- in opposition to love and compassion for all human beings.

Mit brennender Sorge - Wikipedia

      Secondly, Trump's Nietzschean "theology" is antithetical to true Christianity, as Peter Wehner famously pointed out in his 2016 essay about the "Theology of Donald Trump."

Opinion | The Theology of Donald Trump - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

       Now, that said, I understand where you're coming from, because many right wing pseudo-Christians, unfortunately, aligned themselves with fascist movements in Europe in the 1930s, and in the contemporary U.S.

 

[Denny Zartman]

103 days out from the election.

From what I've read, Kentucky Governor Beshear IS among those submitting background check information to Harris's team for consideration. But pundits seem to be saying Harris is unlikely to select a running mate for at least two weeks or more.

I agree with Jim that it's probably still too early to put much meaning into polls. From what I see many of them are still within the margin of error. It's slightly possible a significant polling gap could happen soon, but I believe the polls that will be taken two weeks after the Democratic convention will give us a better picture. (Of course, the only poll that counts is the one in November.)

Debates between Trump and Harris seem to be up in the air right now. Trump appears to be giving some mixed messages, but last I read he had agreed to multiple debates.

Secret Service is reportedly urging Trump to hold rallies indoors from now on.

I watched the speech Vice President Harris gave yesterday. Right now I'm feeling very good about her and the campaign. But I'm on edge about pretty much everything about the election, since Democrats are historically good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm a bit of an Eeyore. So, I'll try to enjoy the moment, but I fully expect to be back in the doldrums this time next week!

That said, Harris's speech was inspiring. She hit the right notes, stayed on message and best of all she didn't go on too long. Her energy and focus was a relief compared to Biden and Trump. (I watch Trump's speeches. They're painful.)

It's been a good first two days for the Harris campaign. Democrats seem to be lining up to support her. Fundraising was as good as anyone could want it to be, and it appears that the enthusiasm for Harris is considerable and sizeable at the moment. It may be a honeymoon, or it could be just the beginning, since (as I see it) it's so early in her campaign there's a possibility that her support could grow further.

Hopefully Harris can maintain momentum into the convention a little over three weeks from now. Infused with the energy of a younger, newer candidate, it has the potential to be a good convention if they play their cards right.

[Denny Zartman]

Kamala Harris campaign maps out 'path to victory,' raises $126 million in three days

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/24/kamala-harris-campaign-charts-path-to-victory-over-trump/74521667007/

 

[Tom Gram]

1 hour ago, Denny Zartman said:

I watched the speech Vice President Harris gave yesterday. Right now I'm feeling very good about her and the campaign. But I'm on edge about pretty much everything about the election, since Democrats are historically good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm a bit of an Eeyore. So, I'll try to enjoy the moment, but I fully expect to be back in the doldrums this time next week!

That said, Harris's speech was inspiring. She hit the right notes, stayed on message and best of all she didn't go on too long. Her energy and focus was a relief compared to Biden and Trump. (I watch Trump's speeches. They're painful.)

I watched it too and thought she sounded quite good. Her delivery was on point and she came across as a competent leader. I agree that compared to Biden and especially Trump it was refreshing to hear. 

However, I thought the content of the speech was pretty uninspiring. It was generic as hell. It sounded like every mainstream Democratic candidate speech I’ve heard since Clinton.  

I know this was her first big speech so she was playing it safe, but to beat Trump she’s gonna need to show some personality and demonstrate to voters that she’s not just another Democratic Party automaton. 

[W. Niederhut]

58 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I watched it too and thought she sounded quite good. Her delivery was on point and she came across as a competent leader. I agree that compared to Biden and especially Trump it was refreshing to hear. 

However, I thought the content of the speech was pretty uninspiring. It was generic as hell. It sounded like every mainstream Democratic candidate speech I’ve heard since Clinton.  

I know this was her first big speech so she was playing it safe, but to beat Trump she’s gonna need to show some personality and demonstrate to voters that she’s not just another Democratic Party automaton. 

"Democratic Party automaton," Tom?

That's almost as oxymoronic as "Republican Party intellectual."

I'm reminded of Will Rogers old quip, "I'm not a member of any organized political party.  I'm a Democrat."

Meanwhile, Douglas Caddy just posted a very different impression of Harris's speech.

Michael Moore on Kamala giving the best political speech he has ever heard:

https://www.michaelmoore.com/p/episode-iv-a-new-hope?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=320974&post_id=146936137&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=5pqyc&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

[Denny Zartman]

Should we have a general 2024 election discussion thread pinned instead? @Ron Bulman @W. Niederhut

President Joe Biden just addressed the nation regarding his decision to step aside as the 2024 Democratic Nominee.

I thought it was a good speech, and immediate reactions seem to be positive. I'm sure he's going to get much praise and tribute at the Democratic convention.

It's a bit surreal how the Democrats have made lemonade from their lemons. 'cause those were some bitter lemons, let me tell ya.

 

[Denny Zartman]

CNN now reporting that Harris will pick her VP in two weeks or less.

[Denny Zartman]

7 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

I watched it too and thought she sounded quite good. Her delivery was on point and she came across as a competent leader. I agree that compared to Biden and especially Trump it was refreshing to hear. 

However, I thought the content of the speech was pretty uninspiring. It was generic as hell. It sounded like every mainstream Democratic candidate speech I’ve heard since Clinton.  

I know this was her first big speech so she was playing it safe, but to beat Trump she’s gonna need to show some personality and demonstrate to voters that she’s not just another Democratic Party automaton. 

Well, one could say it's just a rally and not a policy speech. Punchy lines and sound bites are effective in that setting. The last thing anyone wants to hear is her drone on about legislation at her first rally as the presumptive presidential nominee. But I understand your desire for more substance. Hopefully there will be a few new specific policy proposals soon and she'll be able to shift to speaking to them.

And I have to disagree a bit. I thought she showed plenty of personality in her speech yesterday and the one today in Indianapolis.

 

 

 

[Tom Gram]

14 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

Well, one could say it's just a rally and not a policy speech. Punchy lines and sound bites are effective in that setting. The last thing anyone wants to hear is her drone on about legislation at her first rally as the presumptive presidential nominee. But I understand your desire for more substance. Hopefully there will be a few new specific policy proposals soon and she'll be able to shift to speaking to them.

And I have to disagree a bit. I thought she showed plenty of personality in her speech yesterday and the one today in Indianapolis.

 

 

 

The only reason I’m being so critical is because of what happened in 2016. Hillary demolished Trump in the debates and sounded great on the campaign trail but it didn’t matter. Hillary was also endlessly hyped by the media but it didn’t matter. 

Trump’s biggest asset is his personality, as ridiculous as it is. He knows how to appeal to the average American. That’s why I think Harris will need to set herself apart somehow. Her comments about being a prosecutor and be “used to his type” were on the right track, but that sort of thing will only really appeal to people who were going to vote for her anyway. 

Trump has his hardcore base, but not everyone who votes for him is a diehard MAGAmaniac. They might have just liked the way he talked, or thought he was entertaining, or something like that. A lot of those voters don’t care at all about politics. They just pick whoever they like the best, and Trump is unfortunately very likable. 

Maybe this is my optimistic side showing, but I think Harris has a legitimate chance to steal some of those votes and/or get the apathetic types to the polls. She just needs to make herself appear genuinely unique, and find a way to connect with average, politically clueless Americans. 

Edited July 25 by Tom Gram

[Kirk Gallaway]

22 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

but to beat Trump she’s gonna need to show some personality and demonstrate to voters that she’s not just another Democratic Party automaton. 

Can't agree with you there Tom, i think there's a lot of personality, particularly after Biden. The question is, is there too much personality?, and is it a personality that can stick with people, or will they get tired of the optimistic smiles.

 

22 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

However, I thought the content of the speech was pretty uninspiring. It was generic as hell. It sounded like every mainstream Democratic candidate speech I’ve heard since Clinton.  

I think it's different in that the Democrats now have a opponent they genuinely fear more than say Mitt Romney. 

 

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

Her comments about being a prosecutor and be “used to his type” were on the right track, but that sort of thing will only really appeal to people who were going to vote for her anyway. 

Yes that's the issue. But what she's doing now first is shoring up her base. She was talking to a women's group that's ecstatic that they now have a women candidate.

i just saw her today and It's a very  direct and substantive policy criticism of Trump. She's addressing the teacher's union who also have a lot of women.

I suspect this will mostly continue as sort of a coronation to the convention where she'll pick a more centrist VP, and go after the unaligned after the convention. In the meantime, she'll be able to gauge in polls what advantage she has gained by being new, novel and younger than Biden or Trump.  

 

IMO, When Biden endorsed her, any other potential candidates probably felt that they'd be seen as ambitious troublemakers if they immediately put their hat in the ring.

Harris first said she's going to earn it, and then she went out to the delegates, and in one day got the nomination.

So I guess she did!?

Not at all the process I wanted but I think the  unique personality you mention that she has to develop has to be as a hard nosed prosecutor of Trump.

[W. Niederhut]

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

The only reason I’m being so critical is because of what happened in 2016. Hillary demolished Trump in the debates and sounded great on the campaign trail but it didn’t matter. Hillary was also endlessly hyped by the media but it didn’t matter. 

 

Tom,

     This is off by 180 degrees.  High-quality analyses showed that Hillary was aggressively sabotaged by the U.S. corporate media in 2016-- even by the NYT, as I observed at the time.

     Two of the best analyses of the media sabotage were done by; 1) Harvard's Berkman Klein Center, and 2) the prestigious Columbia Journalism Review.

Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election | Berkman Klein Center (harvard.edu)

Don’t blame the election on fake news. Blame it on the media. - Columbia Journalism Review (cjr.org)

[Tom Gram]

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

The question is, is there too much personality?, and is it a personality that can stick with people, or will they get tired of the optimistic smiles.

I agree 100%. That is the question. That’s basically what I was trying to say - the part about it sticking with people. 
 

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Yes that's the issue. But what she's doing now first is shoring up her base. She was talking to a women's group that's ecstatic that they now have a women candidate.

i just saw her today and It's a very  direct and substantive policy criticism of Trump. She's addressing the teacher's union who also have a lot of women.

I suspect this will mostly continue as sort of a coronation to the convention where she'll pick a more centrist VP, and go after the unaligned after the convention. In the meantime, she'll be able to gauge in polls what advantage she has gained by being new, novel and younger than Biden or Trump.  

That all makes sense. I haven’t been able to keep up on her latest speeches but I will try to check them out this weekend. I think you’re right that she’ll step up her efforts to attract unaligned voters after the convention. I’m just concerned that those people will write her off as more of the same, or an extension of Biden, etc. unless she starts separating herself now. 
 

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Not at all the process I wanted but I think the  unique personality you mention that she has to develop has to be as a hard nosed prosecutor of Trump.

Agreed, and I think she’ll excel in that role, but I’m not sure that’ll be enough. It’s the whole charisma-factor, popularity contest thing. People need to really like her and be able to relate to her. I think she can get there, but she’ll need to run a very smart campaign and make zero mistakes. 

Edited July 25 by Tom Gram

[Tom Gram]

11 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Tom,

     This is off by 180 degrees.  High-quality analyses showed that Hillary was aggressively sabotaged by the U.S. corporate media in 2016-- even by the NYT, as I observed at the time.

     Two of the best analyses of the media sabotage were done by; 1) Harvard's Berkman Klein Center, and 2) the prestigious Columbia Journalism Review.

Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election | Berkman Klein Center (harvard.edu)

Don’t blame the election on fake news. Blame it on the media. - Columbia Journalism Review (cjr.org)

You are right. I admittedly forgot about the email fiasco when I wrote that comment. Prior to that though the hype was definitely real. Let’s hope that Harris doesn’t make any mistakes and give the media an opportunity to torpedo her campaign. She’s going to need all the help she can get. 

[James DiEugenio]

What about Russia Gate and Access Hollywood?

[W. Niederhut]

4 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

What about Russia Gate and Access Hollywood?

Jim,

    You probably know the story about Dean Baquet and NYT in 2016.

     As we learned later, in 2017, Baquet put the kibosh on any NYT stories about Trump and Russia, while running frequent headline stories about Emailgate prior to the election-- based on anonymous FBI "leaks."

     As a long time NYT reader, I was puzzled to see the Hillary sabotage, which was later verified by the Harvard and CJR studies.  My hypothesis was that Sulzberger wanted the Trump tax cuts.