WaPo’s Manufactured “Landslide”

[NB: check the byline, thanks. /~Rayne]

When a distinguished professor of journalism calls out the Washington Post on its bullshit, you’d hope WaPo would take note and make a correction in its direction:

One Democratic senator who is noted for being to the right end of the Democrats’ political spectrum apparently constitutes a landslide in Democratic Party opinion.

If Democrats stood on Sen. Michael Bennet’s side of the boat we’d be Republican Lite sinking the boat.

What’s truly disgusting about WaPo’s skewed priorities is that another event of far more import than Bennet’s lone opinion took place last evening and hasn’t received the scrutiny it should have.

Laffy wrote a thread summarizing Donald Trump’s campaign rally. I’m not going to post the entire thread, just posts 2 and 3 from a 10-post thread:

The entire thread begins at this link.

This synopsis spares you Trump’s droning whine as he reels out over an hour of white Christian nationalist/supremacist grievance using an absurd number of lies.

I listened to this nauseating dreck this morning and it’s awful. If this man is elected and allowed to act on his hatred relying on the Roberts’ court’s presidential immunity, no one who is a person of color or LGBTQ+ will be safe let alone other marginalized groups.

The rotting cherry on the top of this ugliness: this was a campaign rally held at Trump National Doral Golf Club in Miami.

In other words, Trump laundered campaign funds which paid for this event, transferring it to his Trump org-owned golf course and eventually into his own pocket.

The Secret Service was surely charged by the course for what resources it used to protect him at the course — this money went directly to the course and into Trump’s pocket.

GOP presumptive presidential nominee Trump was grifting right under the noses of his supporters and what little media was present, while airing so much hateful screed as a campaign speech.

But a “landslide” of one Democratic senator was more important and featured on WaPo’s front page.

151 replies
  1. Rayne says:

    Heads up, community members: please, PLEASE double check your entries in Name/Email/Website fields.

    Simple typos are causing an unusual amount of moderation work. Not all of you have received moderator’s notes advising you about typos; many have simply been fixed to save time and free your comments from moderation.

    Many comments have gone into moderation because an n instead of m was typed in .com, or an i was omitted in gmail, or a letter was transposed in username/email. A little more time checking Name/Email/Website fields would reduce the chance your comment will go into moderation.


    • Magbeth4 says:

      The front page of the Washington Post places the innuendo filled article about Biden and his “waning” support directly in the center of the page, with the photo, a long range shot, diminishing Biden to a tiny little figure on a stage, decorated with NATO imagery, flags, etc. (This makes Biden look insignificant.) This is sandwiched between articles about India’s embrace of Putin and the other about Ukraine. It’s no news that India has always played the game of being “independent” of American power, using its freedom to play Russia off against the U.S. To place such importance as noting Biden’s remarks to Modi during his visit, with Modi’s independence of what Biden thinks, shows the usual lack of education in history which I find, constantly, in news reporting.

      You are as outraged as I am, and I am grateful for your pointing out the hypocrisy and the jump on the bandwagon behavior of or elected officials in Washington. The habit of placing motivations or hidden meanings on statements by Pelosi is especially galling.

  2. boloboffin says:

    *facepalm* George Clooney added his name and star power to the “expel Biden” landslide.

    • Ginevra diBenci says:

      It seems Stephen Colbert did too. My husband won’t let us watch the show because he’s so depressed and angry.

      Colbert, much more than Clooney, prides himself on his humility. If he did make this move, it reveals the paradoxical hubris at the heart of such self-belief. I’m sure, having visited the White House a time or two, these guys feel like they know Biden. Like they are insiders. But they don’t know the byzantine complexities that would be involved in fulfilling their requests. The person who does is Joe Biden, and as the actual nominee it is his judgment (and judgment call) that controls.

      • JanAnderson says:

        Watched Colbert last night, he was barely funny. The audience didn’t laugh at all sometimes, which is unusual.

      • Bill Crowder says:

        I think what is going on is that people, large and small, are determining whether President Biden can defeat the main stream media and Trump. If not, then something else has to be done.

        I say this as a 78 year old who has financially supported President Biden to the extent of my means. And, I agree with all his policies with the exception of Gaza (which I view as a mistake, but not determinative).

      • Katherine Williams says:

        I remember watching Colbert simper and fawn over Elon Musk, act awed and impressed when Musk advocated nuking the polar caps of Mars, so he could colonize the planet. My respect for Colbert took a high dive. And hasn’t improved since.

  3. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Trump was an hour late, keeping both his fans in dangerous heat. Nobody at that rally thinks being indicted, “is a lot of fun.” Especially when you’re convicted on 34 felony counts.

    A “no holds barred” debate is not a debate. As you say, it would be a shouting match that would favor the guy who lies for a living. Donald is projecting when he says “Biden” doesn’t know what a synagogue is, notwithstanding how many were attacked by Trump’s Fascist zealots. Donald’s obsession with electricity – and windmills that produce it – should be covered as part of his dementia. And why would he hold a rally in heat-stroke alley Florida, the world’s leader for shark attacks?

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      He also had Barron go on stage before him; my gut says he’s going to try to use his son as a media shield. Apparently he saw the press react to shots at Barron when he was President.

  4. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Joe Biden should say he doesn’t play golf with guys who cheat on every hole and every wife. He wouldn’t desecrate a wife’s burial ground by hitting a ball a few feet in front of her buried coffin. Or enable Trump’s grift by holding a golf outing at one of Trump’s own clubs.

    How droll for a multimillionaire to lament, while speaking at his own golf club, at an event paid for by the others, including indirectly the USG, that America is becoming a Communist country.

    As for Donny not being old or demented, he “read his teleprompter cue to speak quickly out loud,” as if it were part of his speech. To add another rotten cherry onto the signs of his dementia, he claimed that he would rather take money from small dollar donors than the wealthy. It’s either one of his more obvious lies or his decision not to accept help from Marco Rubio’s $37 billion dollar donor.

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      Trump yesterday: “I don’t want to take money from millionaires.”
      Trump a month ago: “MILLIONAIRES, I NEED MONEY! If you give it to me, I’ll give you whatever you want as President!”

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        To oil industry CEOs, every one of them a multimillionaire, in effect, “Give me a billion dollars for my campaign [and, sotto voce, my legal bills], and as president, I’ll give you whatever policies you want.”

        Donny doesn’t sound hesitant to take money from millionaires – or anybody else. In fact, he’s been doing it his whole life.

        • gmokegmoke says:

          I’ve been promoting the idea that a climate billionaire – Bloomberg, Gates, Steyer, even Elmo – should offer $2 billion to get Trmp to change his position on climate and the environment. It would call his bluff.

          Not that Trmp would keep to any such agreement.

        • dopefish says:

          Reply to gmokegmoke
          July 10, 2024 at 3:22 pm

          Surely there are better ways to spend $2 billion? Endow the Special Counsel’s Office with enough money to keep hounding Trump for decades even if R’s win and decide to defund it.

          Form a super-PAC and run Youtube ads mocking Trump’s mental infirmity, obsession with Taylor Swift and his tiny orange hands.

          Or even hire an army of protestors to camp all around Mar-a-Lago for a week displaying for the TV cameras, banners with all of the dumbest and most fascistic Trump quotes on them.

    • N.E. Brigand says:

      The problem, at least in the eyes of those calling for President Biden to withdraw from the race, is that he isn’t making the kind of statements you (and they, and I) think he should make. Or to the limited degree when he does, he’s not very clear about it.

      • P J Evans says:

        He’s making those statements, but they aren’t getting coverage from major media outlets..

        • Dark Phoenix says:

          Yep, Joe’s done a number of events over the last two weeks trying to show the debate was a one-off due to illness; the media’s just not talking about any of them (except to slant them) because their predetermined story is “Joe Biden is too old to campaign and must step aside” and if something appears to counter that, they have to either downplay it or ignore it.

  5. Clare Kelly says:

    Excellent piece, thank you.

    Re: “I listened to this nauseating dreck this morning and it’s awful.”

    I wish you ‘mind buds’, a conceptual equivalent to ear buds.

    Listening to this stuff, not unlike moderating, can take its toll.

  6. Dark Phoenix says:

    I’m sorry to do this to everyone, but if there’s a single statement that shows how far GONE Donald Trump is a this point, it’s this one:

    “He said someone told him that he looks “great in a bathing suit.” Barf.”

    • ExRacerX says:

      Beauty—and veracity—are in the eye of the beholder, but I’d probably go with “like an uncooked turducken.”

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      When Donald Trump uses “someone said,” he means Donald Trump said. As for how he looks in a bathing suit, even one from 1910, Trump didn’t say when “someone” said that. Fifty years ago, it might have been true.

    • ToldainDarkwater says:

      You know, I am inclined to believe that someone told him that. I mean, I have learned, via this very blog, that he has a person on staff to follow him around and print out news articles praising him, which he reads.

      Of course there are people who tell him he looks great in a bathing suit.

      And let me stipulate that nobody my age or older looks great in a bathing suit. Some look “ok”. You know, “not bad for his age”. Nobody looks “great”.

      • Dark Phoenix says:

        Well, I’m in my 40’s, but I am overweight, and I would NEVER wear a bathing suit. Hell, I never wear shorts!

        Fat guys NEVER look good in shorts.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        LOL. That Trump has a paid courtier, making little more than minimum wage, tell him what he wants to hear, that’s not an opinion, it’s a script written by Trump.

        • Dark Phoenix says:

          I believe ToldainDarkwater is referring to something that came out during the trial; reporters noticed a woman in court who would keep coming up and handing Trump slips of paper, so, assuming she was a defense lawyer or an advisor or something, they went to figure out who she was. And what they found it is that she’s an ex-Russia Today reporter Trump hired for a single job; to surf the Internet, find stories about how awesome he is, and hand them to him on an hourly basis so he has a constant stream of “YOU ARE THE GREATEST!” stories coming every day.

        • Tracy Lynn says:

          It’s my understanding that she makes a small 6 figures following him around with her internet printer. So, not minimum wage.

    • jdmckay8 says:

      With his build, if Trump wore a swimsuit he’d need suspenders. I’m guessing, more likely somebody didn’t know the difference between a swimsuit and a diaper.

      Sharpton referred to him last weekend as: The Dunkin Donuts Dough Boy.

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      Yep, and the NYT is already using this as “proof” the Dem leadership is trying to force Joe out. Proof?
      “Nancy said they’re talking about it!”
      A full misquote of what she actually said, but based on the last week, it appears misquotes and lies aren’t a problem fo the Times anymore. And Pelosi’s already ripping them on social media for it.

      • Rayne says:

        Also observed by Prof. Jeff Jarvis.

        Jeff Jarvis @[email protected]

        I, too, watched Morning Joe, just like inaccurate stenographer NYTimes. This is not what she said. She said the decision is his to make. Yes, the future tense opens a window a crack, but that is not a hint or a call for him to reconsider. When I heard her, I feared The Times would wishfully run with this, as they predictably have.

        AltText: Headline: Pelosi hints that Biden should reconsider re-election run.

        Jul 10, 2024, 10:24 AM

        The folks who teach journalism are regularly noting these gross abuses by media and yet the media refuses to change their practice. Is the entire profession under attack by its members at NYT and WaPo?

      • originalK says:

        I’m a dipshit? And here I thought there would really not be any reason for democrats to tear themselves apart.

        Nancy Pelosi was not prepared to give Joe Biden her full support. That was the question asked of her.

        But I didn’t need to hear her answer. Nor did I need to read the NYT. She is no longer House Minority Leader and doesn’t represent the party. The House Minority Leader should be talking with the president and his campaign until they find common ground and a shared strategy.

        Until Pelosi is ready to say – (unlike some of my colleagues) Joe Biden is my candidate; There is nothing more important than beating Trump, her message is mixed.

        • Rayne says:

          Nancy Pelosi is 84 years old; she has been in the House since 1987. If she’s going to continue this weak sauce support I don’t understand why journalists aren’t asking her when is she going to leave the House and set an example; she’s running for yet another term in CA-11 right now.

    • Grain of Sand says:

      Nicolle Wallace’s lead off panel (Maya Gay and Matt Dowd) did a hit on Biden.
      Gay said she was feeling so uncomfortable, poor thing.

      • Dark Phoenix says:

        I see after a few years of calling people out about it, Matt has returned to the Holy Church of Both Sides Do It. I’m sure David Brooks welcomed him back.

      • Grain of Sand says:

        Last night Alex Wagner hosted a 2 person panel in another hit piece calling for Joe’s resignation.

  7. Sussex Trafalgar says:

    Both Jeff Bezos and the Sulzberger Family, owners of the WAPO and NYTimes, respectively, have turned their respective newspapers into replicas of the National Enquirer.

    I’m surprised David Pecker doesn’t yet have an ownership interest in both papers; then again, maybe he has an ownership agreement that is not in writing.

    And the writers at both papers, especially writers like Sanger and Dowd at the NYTimes, have become political prostitutes looking for one last hurrah before retiring. And when they retire, I’m betting each will spend most of their retired time outside the US.

    As for Senator Michael Bennett, he’s coveted being president for a while now. Unfortunately, his latest comments are premature, ham-handed and amateurish.

    And George Clooney, I hope he had the courage and integrity to speak to Biden privately about his decision to publicly state Biden should abandon his campaign. If he didn’t, shame on him.

    • Magbeth4 says:

      George Clooney is a lightweight. He has about as much authority in his persona as a bed of seaweed. Commercial success in Hollywood is not a crucible by fire, such as being President of the United States of America.
      When he has something of credit to offer the free world other than the famous waggle of his head, I’ll listen to him…Hell will freeze over in the meantime.

  8. Upisdown says:

    This validates my decision to cancel my WaPo subscription. And I don’t agree with Dems making any change decisions until they get assurances from WaPo, NY Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN that a replacement would be treated more fairly than previous Democrats, and that those media will finally hold Trump accountable for what he has done and what comes out of his mouth.

    Also, I would like to do an informal survey. Are the inequities in today’s mainstream media political coverage more the product of laziness or management policy?

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      Because most of the higher ups at the NYT and the WaPo hobnob with and mostly cover said out-of-touch elite donor class, and weigh their opinions more highly than they really should.

      I remember it being noted in 2016 that the Beltway media has insulted itself in a bubble where they are the higher ups, proclaiming from on high how things are. And the message they took from missing Trump in 2016 is that they hadn’t asked enough conservatives in red state diners to weigh in.

      • Harry Eagar says:

        A friend of mine who worked at the NYT tried to get me a job there.

        Part of the process was an interview with an assistan managing editor, who asked me what I thought was the paper’s weakest point. I said the amount of attention it paid to Upper East Side society.

        My friend had warned me beforehand not to say, no funnies.After the interview, he asked what I had said.

        When I told him, he said that that AME’s fondest ambition was to become part of Upper East Side society.

        Well, at the time (1985), I thought that was the weirdest ambition for a newspaperman I’d ever heard of. I know better now.

        The Times did not hire me.

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      There’s also another big problem with that article; it’s written by an ex-Beltway insider, and the entire thrust of it is that EVERYONE is out of touch and should donate to a random “grassroots” group that suddenly appeared a couple of days ago to demand Joe and Kamala both drop out in favor of… An unnamed candidate.

      And the suggestion given partway down the article, that the Dem party doesn’t get money from average Americans anymore… Just WHAT? WTF is this guy talking about?

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        You’re probably the first person to call David Dayen an “ex-Beltway insider.”

        His point is fundamentally that the grassroots need a voice at the table. Unlike the elite campaign to quite Joe, Dayen admits that there’s no apparent successor to Biden, or even a process to replace him.

        He’s not asking for donations to a week-old group. He’s saying the Democratic elites focus more on fundraising from elites than the rank and file, and they should rethink that. Traditional corporatist Democrats, like Adam Schiff, who successfully opposed Katie Porter, illustrates his point.

        • Dark Phoenix says:

          You didn’t see this part?

          “There is one group trying to change this. A very new organization (it literally started last Friday afternoon) founded by a handful of Democratic organizers called Pass the Torch is trying to motivate ordinary Democrats to speak out about the need for a stronger ticket to defeat Donald Trump. They have a petition at their website making the case for Biden to enable a transition to a new set of leaders, and pledging to unite behind that new nominee and contribute to their success with money and volunteer hours.

          The effort is mostly targeted at Democratic leaders who have the most authority to persuade Biden to leave the race. According to Pass the Torch’s numbers, 11 members of Congress have explicitly asked Biden to exit, and another 25 “have expressed grave concerns.” House Democrats are holding a members-only meeting about the matter in Washington today. The group has also had conversations with convention delegates, who will have the ultimate task of choosing a replacement nominee if it comes to that.

          But an effort like Pass the Torch will really only derive legitimacy from having a large number of rank-and-file voices behind it. I talked to one of the organizers behind it, who told me that, without much publicity or money as of yet, Pass the Torch has generated several thousand signatures on its petition.

          The group is not identifying one successor to Biden or any process to make that choice. Their focus is really to bring it back to what Democratic voters actually want to see. “Fifty million people saw the debate,” the organizer said. “There is vast grassroots energy for this call. We’re grassroots organizers, and we want to make sure they have a voice in this process.””

          Yeah, more grassroots involvement is good, but grassroots involvement for the sole purpose of removing Joe Biden and Kamala Harris and replacing them with a “stronger” ticket, which they don’t name and admit they haven’t figured out? It’s better than the elites doing it, but I suspect I know why they’re having trouble attracting people…

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          “This” is doing a lot of work in your argument. He’s talking about a relatively powerless group that wants a seat at the table. It isn’t going to change squat in this election. That’s what he wants to change.

      • rosalind says:

        David Dayen is a longtime colleague of Marcy’s (and many of us) from the Firedoglake days. His tenure at The American Prospect has raised the political discourse in many refreshing ways. Many I agree with, many I do not. The point: RTs (do not) = recommendations. What you are highlighting in this article is Dday REPORTING on what is happening. Not advocating.

    • harpie says:

      Dayen 7/9/24:

      […] One such voice managed to get on stage at last Friday’s Biden event in Wisconsin, holding a “Pass the torch, Joe” sign. Organizers were coy about whether they had anything to do with that. [link][…]

      The story he links to is from The Western Journal: Camera Catches Sign Begging Joe to Step Aside RIGHT BEHIND HIM at ‘I’m Running’ Speech 7/5/24

      What does he mean by that “coy”? More about that sign:

      He Told Biden to ‘Pass the Torch.’ It Cost Him His Role in a State Campaign. Clint Keaveny, an outspoken volunteer, was removed from a Democratic congressional campaign for holding up a protest sign at a Biden rally. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/09/us/biden-democrats-pass-the-torch-sign.html July 9, 2024

      Photo caption:

      Clint Keaveny held a sign that read “Pass the torch, Joe” at a rally for President Biden in Wisconsin last week. The Democratic congressional candidate he volunteers for quickly informed him he was being let go. Credit…Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York Times

    • Magbeth4 says:

      As Bob Dylan so famously said, “Money doesn’t talk; it screams.”

      Wherever this stuff is coming from, it amounts to a form of hysteria which has its generation in a numbing of the intellect by reading Editorials and political analysis by lightweight thinkers. But, when even the likes of Paul Krugman pile on, one wonders, have they lost their minds?

      If any one of these “serious” people stopped to think for themselves, could they at least imagine how much glee Putin is getting out of this? It seems downright un-American to want to discard the will of the People who voted for Biden in the Primaries. Have they even considered how this avalanche of
      repetitive behavior is disruptive to the entire Democratic Process, guaranteed by the Constitution? It’s as if they have already started the 2025 engine before Trump could even be elected!

      I am beyond outraged! Doesn’t anybody in power and influence care about Democracy?

      • ButteredToast says:

        Have you considered whether “the likes of Paul Krugman,” as well as various named and unnamed Democratic members of Congress, might have a point? Or that they simply have a well-meaning but different opinion from yours? They are not all “lightweight thinkers.” They might just have looked at internal polling, have had more interactions with Joe Biden (or Democrats who’ve spoken to him lately) than any of us, and are of the opinion that he cannot beat Donald Trump in 2024. It’s fair and reasonable if you think that our best chance at winning the election is for Biden to lead the ticket, that the risks of switching candidates to Kamala Harris are too great. There are risks either way. But implying that those who disagree with you do not “care about [d]emocracy” is ridiculous.

        As for “discard[ing] the will of the People who voted for Biden in the Primaries,” that is a fair point, though I think it’s worth noting that he never faced meaningful opposition. (No-names and publicity hounds Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson don’t count.) Political parties and the primary process, of course, are not in the Constitution. Personally, I think the highest priority should be defeating Trump, and Biden winning the primary should play no part in whether he decides to keep running. But again, it’s perfectly fair to disagree.

        I don’t care at all if Putin is getting glee out of this. He’ll get even more glee if Donald Trump wins the election due to Biden being unable to change the perception he’s too old among low-info swing voters.

        • P J Evans says:

          That his opposition in the primaries was “no-names and publicity hounds” should tell you something about the voters, too. *We* had choices, and chose Joe!

        • Just Some Guy says:

          Why on earth would you expect an incumbent president to have any serious primary opponent(s)? The lack of “meaningful opposition” wasn’t unique to Biden! Nor is it remotely remarkable.

        • Rayne says:

          Why on earth would an effective incumbent have serious primary opponents — especially one that ran and won against this same candidate four years ago.

          Let alone why would any Democrat with low national profile even try to mount a serious candidacy without adequate money and infrastructure (ex. Dean Phillips).

          Some people won’t believe or understand this until they get in the trenches and experience the process.

        • Dark Phoenix says:

          “We didn’t have a fair primary (by my randomly made up definition of such), so I DEMAND the Dems hold the shortest primary in American history RIGHT NOW to decide who really should be the candidate! Also, I want a unicorn!”

        • ButteredToast says:

          Reply to Just Some Guy
          July 10, 2024 at 6:47 pm

          Oh, I definitely did not expect a contested primary. There were very good reasons, both merit-based and practical, why no one attempted a challenge. (Hell, if they had, I probably would have stuck with Biden, believing him capable of bringing to the campaign trail and debate stage the forcefulness and concision we saw at the State of the Union. And I was all for him from the beginning of the 2020 primaries.) All I was saying is that a primary victory against token opposition isn’t the same as a bruising competition against multiple high-profile opponents, as Biden won in 2020. If the Biden of the first 2024 debate had appeared in public last year, my guess is that there would’ve been at least one credible primary challenger. Obviously it will forever remain a hypothetical, though YouGov and Cygnal polling released the past couple of days shows a fairly even split among what Democrats want Biden to do.

        • ButteredToast says:

          Reply to Dark Phoenixsays:
          July 10, 2024 at 7:51 pm

          Nowhere did I say that the primary “wasn’t fair” or that we should have another one. Either Biden bows out and endorses Harris, or he remains the nominee.

        • EatenByGrues says:

          By the standard being requested here, the only way a successful President like Biden could foster a “competitive primary” in the year in which he is an incumbent eligible to run for re-election, would be to step aside.

          It’s been fairly consistent since the dawn of the TV era, that vulnerable incumbents get serious primary challenges–and then lose (or step aside). LBJ ’68. Ford ’76. Carter ’80. GHWB 92.

          Incumbents that don’t get serious primary challenges at the end of their first term, tend to get re-elected. Sometimes in a landslide (LBJ ’64, Nixon ’72, Reagan ’84, Clinton ’96); sometimes in a closer fight (Bush ’04, Obama ’12). The one exception, so far, is Donald Trump. Increased partisanship probably has something to do with recent such elections being closer than those in the 20th century.

          Biden has had, by the terms of liberal policy-making, a successful administration. There really wasn’t any reason for someone to challenge him, and nobody who was somebody did.

          But that doesn’t make the process illegitimate.

        • Rayne says:

          The one exception, so far, is Donald Trump.

          When one operates more like a mob boss and less like a politician, yeah, one might be an exception in a political party-based system.

          Even now there’s little to no criticism of Trump by GOP electeds because the Trump family literally and figuratively have overtaken and occupied the RNC, thereby cutting off access to funds and infrastructure of any GOP elected who is in any way critical of the boss.

      • P-villain says:

        “Money doesn’t talk, it swears.”

        — Bob Dylan, “It’s Alright, Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)”


        • Magbeth4 says:

          Sheesh, yourself. The quote I cited from Dylan was taken from something he said back in the day. What he said in a song is something else. He obviously wasn’t too thrilled with the power people with money have.

          And this political process we have is overwhelmingly fueled by money, especially from sometimes nefarious sources, or, from people who aren’t taxed enough. And that could be a reason some of the wealthier ones don’t want a second term of Biden, because he plans to tax them fairly.

  9. klynn says:

    A little OT but related.

    When news and social media fall for propaganda sourced from RU:



    “A network of Russia-based websites masquerading as local American newspapers is pumping out fake stories as part of an AI-powered operation that is increasingly targeting the US election, a BBC investigation can reveal.
    A former Florida police officer who relocated to Moscow is one of the key figures behind it.” -BBC

    • Clare Kelly says:

      From Reuters, yesterday:
      “US Justice Department says it disrupted Russian social media influence operation”


      The Justice Department secured court approval to seize two domain names and search nearly 1,000 social media accounts allegedly associated with the effort.

      “With these actions, the Justice Department has disrupted a Russian-government backed, AI-enabled propaganda campaign to use a bot farm to spread disinformation in the United States and abroad,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.


    • Dark Phoenix says:

      Of course they had to bring an American turncoat into this. Their first attempt was obvious to anyone with a functioning brain.

      First question that would have popped into a thinking American’s brain: “If this is an American newspaper, why does it seem unusually obsessed with the President of Ukraine?”

    • Magbeth4 says:

      This is an example of why we need to stress critical thinking in our education system. The loss of print media to the masses means that folks won’t be able to do what we did as students in the late 1950s: sit down with a newspaper, a blue pencil and a red one. Use the blue one to underline the obvious facts. Use the red one to underline opinion or editorializing, not backed by facts. These days, an exercise such as this would mean an awful lot of red pencil. I still do this, mentally, as I read and listen to news reports.
      Skepticism is a very valuable tool.

  10. punaise says:

    I don’t know if this TPM piece is paywalled, but it has some pretty convincing reader pushback on the “let’s ride with Joe, we’ll be fine” camp that Josh and David Kurtz have been propping up.

    The Do-Something Caucus Responds In Force

    I have to admit to vacillating wildly on this. I really think the damage is done (the debate no one can unsee).

      • Yargelsnogger says:



        I mean, his age and poor communication skills are probably assumed and factored in for 95% of the electorate, and disgust with Trump is so high with most informed voters that it probably couldn’t have shifted things too much, but he certainly made things worse for himself with that performance. At the very least it was an opportunity to dispel doubts about his capacity, and certainly didn’t do that.

        • P J Evans says:

          “Poor communications skills” – oh, you *don’t* mean Donnie?
          Joe communicates fine, tyvm.

    • Tracy Lynn says:

      Particularly when people keep giving it air by talking about it. There is no time to find someone else to run. Also, Biden has been doing the job for 3.5 years… if he is so infirm, so incompetent, why isn’t anyone calling for the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment?

      • dopefish says:

        If Biden becomes incapacitated or dies during his second term, President Harris would take over and probably do a fine job. She certainly couldn’t be worse than Trump or his not-even-named-yet VP candidate.

        So Biden doesn’t need to last another 4 years, he really just needs to last another 6 months.

        Donald Trump is almost as old as Joe Biden, and in worse overall health. He’ll probably croak before Biden does, especially if he doesn’t win, and ends up serving prison time for some of his various felonies. (Or if Satan shows up to connsumate whatever Faustian bargain gave Trump immunity from consequences for the last five decades)

        • Rayne says:

          That’s not a call for a new Democratic nominee — it’s a call to unseat the current president.


        • Just Some Guy says:

          Reply to Rayne
          July 11, 2024 at 9:51 am

          Indeed it is. I posted it in reply to the below comment by Tracy Lynn as a prominent counter-example:

          “…if he is so infirm, so incompetent, why isn’t anyone calling for the cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment?”

        • Tracy Lynn says:

          I was actually referring to the people who can actually make it happen – the Cabinet, not a journalist from the New Yorker.

  11. Magbeth4 says:

    Oh, this is the kind of response which verifies my statement above. Lightweight “thinking” making opinions about things of which they have no direct knowledge.

    Yes, the Debate was a failure. The format was not adhered to, with a rebuttal of facts to counter Trump’s lies. Are you protesting that? And, if you are to judge a man such as Biden on one performance under the stress of multiple international trips and a cold, you might ask yourself if you would liked to be judged incompetent at your job based on one bad day.

    • punaise says:

      If that is in response to me, I don’t like the media drumbeat any more than anyone else. But whistling past the graveyard isn’t a great strategy either.

      • ButteredToast says:

        Exactly. The media is engaged in a feeding frenzy and the NYT seems to have an agenda, but that doesn’t mean we can pretend the race is in the same state as it was before the debate.

        • Clare Kelly says:

          Operative word being “race”.

          “Not the odds, but the stakes.”
          ~Jay Rosen

          My vote in the primary ELECTION was for Biden/Harris, who won over 89% of the votes here and procured the pledges of 424 delegates to the DNC.

          That convention will take place in Chicago from August 19-22. (Virtual roll call aside).

          In the interim, I will continue my GOTV efforts, support progressive candidates, let the process shake out, and try not to become exasperated by the feeding frenzy.

      • Cheez Whiz says:

        But the graveyard is full of cardboard headstones! This is all about perception. Voters will percieve Biden as weak and confused and so will abandon him, so we must replace Biden to have a chance of winning. You see the problem? There’s no evidence of voters abandoning him. It’s all feels. That could change, but it hasn’t yet, though the media is giving it everything they’ve got. There’s some people like Clooney claiming he’s incapable of the job, based on a social interaction, but it’s mostly about fear of what other people perceive. This story is a bonanza for the Post’s plan to triple readership though.

        • Rayne says:

          Media is literally manufacturing consent. It’s not lost on me that Clooney is a member of media himself though entertainment media.

          Governments don’t succeed serving the people on the basis of vibes. It’s going to be on engaged citizens to motivate other voters past and around media’s vibe machine and to the polls to vote blue up and down the ticket.

        • Dark Phoenix says:

          “You see the problem? There’s no evidence of voters abandoning him. It’s all feels.” – Yeah, that’s what I noticed about this whole million dollar media pileup. It’s all based on the assumption that voters decided after watching the debate that there’s no way Joe is up to the job, so they’re either staying home or voting for Trump the liar instead… Except that the only evidence they’ve cited on that are either anecdotal (“We polled a bunch of random unnamed voters and they switched to Trump after the debate!”) or pointing specifically to the Times/Sienna poll… Which has been totally out of wack from the START of the election season (One example? They give Trump an average of 25% of the black voters… IN WHAT UNIVERSE? Non-blatantly racist Republicans have failed to hit the double-digit mark and Trump isn’t quiet about his opinions on black people).

        • Dark Phoenix says:

          I saw an article that mentioned Trump’s entire campaign strategy (according to the main strategist) is to project “Trump strong; Biden weak”.
          Dunno why anyone would think Trump was strong, unless you think being the loudest asshole in the room depicts strength…

  12. Twaspawarednot says:

    A combination of Democrat politicians opining that Biden should step down perpetuates media coverage of the issue and is self fulfilling prophecy of failure that diminishes the possibility of a Biden win. These Democrats wouldn’t be competent poker players.

    • P J Evans says:

      What are “Democrat politicians”? That’s what Fox Noise calls them.
      We call them Democratic politicians.

  13. Clare Kelly says:

    Replying to Magbeth4
    July 10, 2024 at 5:05 pm:


    By law, Media Literacy education is now a requirement in CA K-12.

      • Dark Phoenix says:

        If they can think and reason, they might see through the Republican scam. If you watch some of the “Interviews with Trump Supporters” on Youtube, you can see that his supporters have to be some of the DUMBEST people on the planet.

  14. Chris Frye says:

    Joe has been the most consequential President since LBJ. I have never voted for a reThug and will not in the future. Trump and the reThug party are a clear and present danger to our democracy which are abundantly funded by the sociopathic plutocrats. However, TOO many Americans vote for strength over truth…Trump lies bigly, W lied strongly. Perception is their reality. Joe looked weak and old at the debate. He has not done enough since to push back on that narrative to prove he is up for the fight-to-the-death match that we are in currently. He has progressively become feebler over the last few years. If he wins, he will be 86 at the end of the term…that is problematic. He needs to drop out. We need a STRONG 24/7 Democratic prosecution of Trump and Project 2025 to get back some of the vote strength voters back. VP Harris is election mechanically superior and is more than vigorous enough to do the job. She is better when addressing the abortion issue, which is an electoral winner. Also, the fact that his campaign thought that the debate format would be good for him, has me concerned with their competence,

    The progressive brain and the conservative brain are not the same. The right views power as hierarchical. See Geroge Lakoff’s take on that power dynamic. Also, look at The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer to see why so many of our fellow Americans are fascist lite.

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment as “Semper Curiosa”; it has been edited this one time to match your last known username. Please make a note of it and check your browser’s cache and autofill. /~Rayne]

  15. harpie says:

    This THREAD was reposted by Cheryl Rofer
    [who is a scientist and understands these things…unlike me]:

    Jul 10, 2024 at 1:31 PM

    “What the report finds is that Biden held on to 94% of the people who said they would support him before the debate. For Trump, 86% of people who said they would support him before the debate said they would do so after the debate.” [link] [THREAD]

    Links to: Biden’s poor debate performance had almost no impact on voter preference, new report says Minor changes in voter preference after the debate don’t mean the course of the presidential race has shifted, Northeastern expert says. [link] Cody Mello-Klein July 9, 2024
    [There’s a link to the report here]

    • harpie says:

      Cheryl Rofer also reposted this:

      Jul 10, 2024 at 12:36 PM

      Sherrilyn Ifill: “In case folks have any interest in what Black voters are thinking. But perhaps what Black voters think only matters after the election, during the post mortem.” [I can’t find where that Ifill quote is from] [screenshots] [link]

      Links to: BlackPAC Poll, July 2024. Presented by Brilliant Corners

      Moving in the right direction – a look at Biden’s performance now versus early Spring Among Black voters in battleground states

      • harpie says:

        Some excerpts:

        – A majority of the Black voters who watched the debate said they were more likely to support Biden – most of the damage, was done post debate in the spin heard by those who didn’t watch the debate but heard things that made them less likely to support Biden.

        – Biden’s support among Black Voters in battlegrounds has improved by 15 points since early Spring.

        • P J Evans says:

          Black voters aren’t all *happy* with Biden; they want more action and less talk. They also are tired of being the actual *and invisible* base of the party.
          That’s what I’m getting from reading at Mastodon.

        • Rayne says:

          Reply to P J Evans
          July 10, 2024 at 6:34 pm

          BIPOC are tired of being used in election postmortems. But Black voters, especially women, see through the snowstorm. Sherrilyn Ifill spelled it out:

          Laffy @[email protected]

          Via Sherrilyn Ifill:

          Listen pundits and Dem influencers. Your willingness to continue beating this horse is becoming…weird. Ask yourself why most prominent Black leaders & ordinary Black ppl are for #Biden staying in. We love Kamala, so what could be the reason? Maybe we see America through a different lens. One that allows us to see things that you don’t. Your apparent dismissal of that possibility is very revealing. And not in a good way.

          Jul 08, 2024, 06:19 PM

          This non-stop media operation against Biden is about the right-wing’s fear that a Black woman may become POTUS if Biden should become disabled or resign in his second term, as much as it is about the oligarchy attempting to revert back to the past before antitrust law and wealth taxes were things.

    • harpie says:

      And one more thing shared by Rofer:

      Jul 10, 2024 at 10:09 AM

      Ok, let’s drumbeat this and Trump. [screenshot] [link]

      Links to:
      https:[space] //bsky.app/profile/navigatorsurvey.bsky.social/post/3kwrunhrswq2o
      Jul 8, 2024 at 12:10 PM

      NEW POLL: Opposition to Project 2025 grows as people learn more about the plan. After reading 19 proposed policies for Project 2025, opposition grows from 49% to 63% (net +14) while support for the plan declines from 31% to 24% (net -7%). [screenshot]

      • harpie says:

        Their next comment:
        Jul 10, 2024 at 9:54 AM

        MESSAGING INSIGHTS: How should progressives talk about Project 2025?

        The most powerful description for the Heritage Foundation’s plan is that it’s a “takeover” by Trump and his loyalists who are “power hungry” and “dangerous.” [screenshot]

        [Flow chart titled “Project 2025: A Dangerous Takeover That Threatens Rights and Hurts the Middle Class in Order to Help Trump and the Wealthy”]

  16. MsJennyMD says:

    Washington Post is on a loop of age and fear.
    Democrats continue to shoot themselves in the foot. Tearing each other down isn’t productive. Unity with positive messages are needed: vote for democracy, the constitution, women’s right to choose, voting rights and more. Go positive rather than just say “Trump sucks.” Yes, he does, however those words don’t inform people of the policies. Just plays into the gutter playbook.

    This election comes down to people who vote for democracy or autocracy. Democracy for me. At my age it would be the Immaculate Conception to be barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen.

  17. VinnieGambone says:

    You are only as good as your last screw up. The world awaits Biden’s next.
    The big folks had better be working on a contingency plan before convention.

    I have always loved Elizabeth Warren. She would shred Trump.

    Kamela doesn’t do it for me. Forced. Faked.

    Terrible Mess here. Need someone else on next debate stage. Odds are high JB flubs at next debate, or at the convention.

    “The easiest person to deceive is yourself. “

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      Unless your name is Donald Trump; then you get unlimited mulligans on your screwups.
      But it’s nice to know murdering more Americans than the World Wars isn’t disqualifying in the least according to the media.

  18. dogshelpgod says:

    Our Vice President is Kamala Harris. Her, you don’t know.
    I don’t think Senator Warren would love you back. She is standing by Biden.
    “Odds are high . . .” Do you make book in Vegas?

  19. RitaRita says:

    So much for news media objectivity and “fair and balanced”. The tell is the minuscule number of calls for Trump to withdraw and the refusal to address Trump’s cognitive decline.

    While I think Biden has done an outstanding job of bringing us back from the brink, I have doubts about his stamina but not his cognitive ability. I have not heard a Plan B or of a successor candidate who has overwhelming support and could rally the troops. Maybe something is in the works and will be revealed after the Republican Convention. But if there is not a Plan B or a Candidate B, what are the “rebels” smoking? They want to wait until the Convention to find that perfect candidate?

    As for donors who think the smart move is to withhold Presidential campaign funding and divert it to House and Senate races, what are they smoking? Do they think a President Trump will pay attention to Congress? They are not understanding the threat an unchained Trump poses.

    • Dark Phoenix says:

      I think most of the elites would like to go back to the days of picking a candidate in a smoke-filled backroom and announcing it during the convention, without really bothering with voter opinion.

    • Tracy Lynn says:

      Plan B of a normal succession is the vice president. That would be Kamala Harris. Any questions?

  20. dogshelpgod says:

    I think they understand the threat. So while the threat has them scared shitless, rather than re-doubling their efforts on behalf of Biden, they are crying for some mythical savior. Time and energy are being wasted. That scares me.

  21. Molly Pitcher says:

    Here is direct action that you can take right now.

    The Heritage Foundation is a 501 c3 organization, and as such is expressly denied any political action; such as publishing political pieces like Project 2025.

    You can file a complaint against any organization that you think is participating in political action while it is a 501 3c . Their EIN number is 23-7327730, and they are located in Washington DC.


    Have at it.

      • P-villain says:

        Thank you for the (legal) reality check. Don’t waste limited IRS resources with frivolous 501c3 complaints, attack the substance of Heritage’s work. It’s easier and more fruitful, anyway -their grandiose Project 2025 is so awful that the more people learn, the more they hate it.

        • Rayne says:

          I wasn’t suggesting folks avoid filing a complaint.

          Heritage has played fast and loose for years with 501c3 status. What’s needed are effective complaints which are based in tax code, not wishful thinking.

  22. P J Evans says:

    Rayne says:
    July 10, 2024 at 6:49 pm

    I pay attention to them. I mostly *agree* with them, because on most stuff they have it right.

  23. John H Wolfe says:

    The quotes around the WAPO headline means, to me, that it is what the senator said rather than something the post made from whole cloth. I listened to Senator Bennet and he is the one who used ‘landslide’. My reading of the article was that it simply reported what some have said both pro (AOC quotes) and against Biden continuing to be the candidate.

    As I have said here before, I will vote and work for Biden. But, he has not shown any ability to be a campaigner that can win undecided voters. A great president-YES, a great campaigner-NO. You do not get to be president if you do not win the campaign.

    I know the widely read press does not adequately put forth the many issues with Trump. All the barking at the moon will not change their profit (clicks) incentive.

    I know that it will be ugly to put forth a different Democratic candidate. I also know that the two campaign managers who have successfully beaten Republican candidates have long since made the case that Biden should not be the candidate.

    When the convention is over, and if Biden is the nominee, I am totally on board. Until then, I will hold that there are better candidates and that the party can withstand an ugly convention but not a candidate who is not able to consistently and convincingly campaign.

    • P J Evans says:

      “But, he has not shown any ability to be a campaigner that can win undecided voters.”
      2020 called. It wants to talk about those “undecided voters”.

    • JAFO_NAL says:

      I agree with Stacey Abrams:
      Let’s be clear: The wishful benefits of a contested convention or a late-stage exit are vastly outweighed by the potential harm. President Joe Biden has the integrity, moral character and record needed to beat Donald Trump in November. Our path to victory lies in standing by Biden and understanding the high stakes of this election.


        • SteveBev says:

          This is surely correct.

          No matter how sincere the opposition to Biden continuing as candidate is,
          —based on fears of new debacles, or hopes that some other candidate would have/should have/could have been a better champion for Democratic, —
          the idea that the prospects of Democratic victory can be transformed and assured by adopting a new candidate at this stage is magical thinking.

          The TV debate should never have happened, precisely because fascists always abuse all the rules, because it makes them look strong and powerful, the more so when they are seen to get away with it. Arguments that so-and-so (whether Elizabeth Warren or A.N.Other) would have/will shred Trump in debate is both wrong and beside the point.

          What matters now is defeating Trump and the onward march of fascistic policies. Pushing Biden out is a gift to the enemies of democracy.

          Whoever is the candidate, and it should be Biden, should cancel the September debate, take the hit of being called a coward but adopt the high ground that Trump has proven himself as unworthy for debate as he is for office.

        • JAFO_NAL says:

          Hopefully posting the complete text doesn’t violate site policies but I found it inspiring so here goes:

          Voters have been treated to a post-debate drama that has almost exclusively focused on performance versus principle. Good people stumble. Liars lie. In the face of the latter, we have become myopically fascinated because, for some, soothing anxiety seems easier than confronting the slow-motion death of democracy.

          Let’s be clear: The wishful benefits of a contested convention or a late-stage exit are vastly outweighed by the potential harm. President Joe Biden has the integrity, moral character and record needed to beat Donald Trump in November. Our path to victory lies in standing by Biden and understanding the high stakes of this election.

          The anti-Biden doom loop feels loud right now, but it is largely a phenomenon among those who obsessively follow the news or want to make the news. Most of the voters Biden has won and needs to win again already know his foibles — and they aren’t turning in droves to say, “I’m now voting for the bombastic fascistic liar.”

          Former President Donald Trump has made clear his plans to be a “Dictator on Day 1,” and has openly called for the termination of our Constitution, threatening the very foundation of our democracy. His return to power would deepen this threat, normalizing behavior that undermines our democratic institutions. He is a self-serving felon whose dictatorial tendencies presage a glide path to authoritarianism.
          Trump has repeatedly fetishized the use of the military as domestic law enforcement, seeded a hand-picked judiciary that shrugs off the necessity of regulatory oversight and has legalized corruption, and he continues to celebrate the rise of repressive foreign states as emblems of power. Much of Democrats’ current turmoil is the vain search for a guarantee of his defeat — one that cannot be secured short of our joined efforts.
          As for the narrow sliver of swing voters who are the constant preoccupation of the chattering class, they are not choosing based on age or infirmity but an alchemy we can’t control or predict. We have to make the case to these voters on the issues that matter to them. These voters have to know that a Trump presidency would bring more crackdowns on access to abortion and even contraception, and that the failed real estate maven will not tackle the housing crisis. That Trump’s economic plan and promised tariffs would reignite inflation and risk a major recession. He will cost us jobs again, not create them.

          Our aggressive focus must be on engaging voters who don’t think about politics every day. The ones who haven’t made up their mind about whether they’re going to vote rather than for whom they’d cast that ballot. If that voter gets dedicated, direct attention over the next four months in key states such as Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Biden can secure a decisive victory.

          We who believe in the preservation of the American Dream have a lot of work to do to remind voters that Biden is the one who rescued our nation from Trump. In our darkest hours, Biden worked day in and day out to make our country stronger, safer and more prosperous. And he continues that hard work. Yet, the results of his extraordinary record have not been keenly felt by all.

          During this first term, the Biden-Harris administration has planted the seeds needed to restore America’s manufacturing jobs, protect our climate, modernize our country’s infrastructure and expand health care access to millions. However, as with any planting, the harvest isn’t immediate. A reelected Biden will tend this progress, and we will reap the benefits. Trump has sworn to raze the ground and salt the Earth. It’s that simple.

          If we introduce a new, untested candidate at this stage, Democrats will risk destroying what they seek to save. A last-minute replacement with no established campaign infrastructure, resources or significant national record is certain to fragment our efforts and weaken our message.

          Democrats must not fall victim to overcomplicating our political strategy to satisfy the fever dreams of a silver bullet to success. Instead, we should focus on what we do best: building a strong, unified campaign from the grassroots to the grass tops — not the other way around. As Democrats, our strength lies in our ability to stay focused on the people who need help, avoiding unnecessary gambits that could jeopardize our mission.

          Joe Biden’s leadership over the last three and a half years has provided stability and progress, and it is crucial that we continue to support him. Ignore the allure of the doom loop, and rather than indulge in useless worry, we must do the critical work of getting Biden reelected president. He is our best guarantee for a more just and equitable future for these United States of America.

          About the Author
          Stacey Abrams, a former Georgia House of Representatives minority leader, is an author, producer and founder of Fair Fight Action, Fair Count and the Southern Economic Advancement Project

          [Moderator’s note: I have formatted this to indicate it’s excerpted. I will let this stand this time as the author likely intended distribution; were this a copyrighted piece it would have exceeded Fair Use. A link to this piece on line should have been offered. /~Rayne]

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          To JAFO_NAL, your excerpt does not seem to comply with copyright restrictions. Save Rayne trouble and search wikipedia or the Internets and read up on “fair use” exceptions for copyrighted material. Our esteemed moderator probably already has enough to do.

  24. Krisy Gosney says:

    I’m seeing another similarity to HRC’s campaign against Trump. The media, pundits, celebrities, Dems, DOJ, etc all relentlessly trashed her for months and months. But when Trump was made the winner the same people refused to comprehend that their talk greased the ways and added to HRC not winning. Then they make excuses like she didn’t campaign enough in a state. These same kinds of people are doing similar to Biden now.

    • Molly Pitcher says:

      I agree, but there is also a deliberate campaign against Biden by several media outlets.

    • Rayne says:

      I have pointed to Michigan repeatedly as an example of what happens when the smack talk meets the voting booth. In 2016 there was a record 80K undervote in which voters chose neither candidate at the top of the ticket but voted down ballot — and Trump won the state by a mere 10K votes or roughly 3 votes per precinct.

      Which is why I say Democratic “elites” from elected Dems to celebrity Dems need to shut the fuck up in public, stop leaking to the press, and air their concerns within party ranks. We don’t know how much of the undervote was caused by decades of HRC hate fomented by Fox and Ken Starr, but talking down the presumptive Democratic nominee in public in the media does have a negative effect on voters’ opinions and we goddamn well can’t afford it this election.

      We also don’t know how much influence operations are proliferating and screwing with people’s heads already — cripes, for all we know journalists and editors have been targeted with this crap. Democratic voters do NOT need to assist that toxicity with their lack of party discipline manifest in their denigrating their presumptive Democratic nominee.

      • Dark Phoenix says:

        And how do you know this is the fucking truth? The post above, pointing out that polling among people who watched the debate barely shifted, but people who didn’t watch the debate and only listened to days of the MSM going nutso on Biden DID cause a slight shift.

        • Rayne says:

          Did I mention all the decades of HRC hate fomented by Fox and Ken Starr? By fomented I mean Fox made biased comments repeatedly about HRC, given a fresh spin by other media outlets, then regurgitated and amplified by the public for years then accelerated in 2015-2016, yielding unfavorables which lingered after the election? White male GOP have almost always hated her, but her favorables with Dems dropped more than 10% the month before the election.

          Pew Research did a survey after the 2016 election asking about feelings of validated voters about Trump (no fucking idea why they didn’t do the same for HRC). Of these validated voters there were 4% who were neutral about Trump; another 4% of independent/other voters were neutral about Trump. This 8% didn’t feel strongly positive enough about Clinton to feel cold toward Trump — and that’s the likely space where the affected by negative content about HRC cost her at the polls in states like Michigan.

          If we saw that in 2016 you can bet it’s likely in 2024, especially with all the negative material about Biden related to Gaza. It will be in no small part due to crappy reporting by media and the undisciplined smack talk by Dems who are dissatisfied with Biden’s diplomatic approach. Netanyahu knows exactly how to manipulate both his own electorate as well as ours.

          Democrats don’t need to give the media fuel to fragment the party.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        There’s a reason God invented the woodshed. She meant Democrats to use it. Criticize in private, praise in public is good advice for more than parents and business leaders.

      • Krisy Gosney says:

        Thank you Rayne for your knowledge and specifics. And totally on my point that this constant and relentless beating down of a candidate will effect the vote and as you’ve shown here with MI that just 10,000 votes can determine the winner. What I don’t think people connect is that not just 10,000 things called votes but 10,000 people. Turning off 10,000 people from something or someone can happen fairly easily. I hope Biden or another person/group with power can shut these egos up and/or put out the ego fires with fact checking in a big, visible way.

        We have the lesson of HRC. This will go only one way if the egos are not stamp down. George Clooney FFS!! George Effing I Was On ER and made some movies Clooney wants to sink Biden. Did he think we’d all beg him to run?! But put all these yapping egos together and you can influence 10,000 people.

  25. Dark Phoenix says:

    As for people who were wondering about CNN’s place in all of this, Keith Olbermann has done us all a solid here:


    According to the CEO of CNN’s parent company, who wins the election is irrelevant; what matters is tax cuts and deregulation. Glad he spelled that out, now we know we can disregard everything CNN is doing.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:


      CNN’s CEO, Sir Mark Thompson, former head of both the BBC and NYT, Jesuit-trained and Oxford-educated, knows how to split hairs. When he says he doesn’t care whether Trump or Biden win the election, as long as they’re good for business, he’s lying. What he means is that he’s all in for Donald Trump, because he would more reliably generate clicks, and cut taxes and regulations on his business. If he meant to be neutral, he would have said that.

  26. Nicole Sandler says:

    Just to give credit where it’s due, @[email protected] is not me. She was @GottaLaff on twitter (and some variable on that on other socials). She WAS a regular guest on my show for about 10 years and is still a friend, and many people for some reason think we are the same person, but we’re not. She’s mostly on mastodon these days and is a prolific poster and aggregator. I’m just lazy on that front, and often pick fights with assholes on social media…

  27. Zinsky123 says:

    Thank you for this important thread, Rayne! I’m late to the party but you are correct about the asymmetrical coverage of Biden’s support in the mainstream media. However, I still believe Joe Biden should exit the race, fully and unconditionally support Kamala and infuse fresh energy and vigor into this critical election! My reasoning? Joe Biden has Parkinson’s disease or Parkinsonism. The symptoms are unmistakeable. I have had relatives with it and he clearly has it. It is neurodegenerative and is NOT going to get better. I feel like we are all being gaslit by the Administration by not facing the truth. Kamala is a fully capable, exciting candidate and light-years better than Donnie Doorknob!

    • Nicole Sandler says:

      I’m sorry, did you say where you went to medical school? I didn’t think ‘a few of my relatives had it’ was among approved diagnostic tools.

    • Rayne says:

      The topic of this post was the Washington Post and its biased reporting.

      This is not an open thread for venting.

      • Nicole Sandler says:

        I get it, but diagnosing serious medical conditions should be left to the doctors. Just because WaPo is awful and biased doesn’t mean disinformation should be allowed to stand unchecked. I’ll shut up now.

        • Rayne says:

          I’m with you on this – my comment was to Zinsky because venting like that veers threads off topic.

          I am *right now* caring for a family member with dementia and Parkinson’s-like symptoms. I really need commenters to stay on topic. *mumbling to myself about lay people practicing medicine*

Comments are closed.