People watched Trump shit the bed for years and Biden is losing to him.

Well, no. For two reasons: the first is that other quote i pasted in where he says he explicitly doesn’t care if it’s Biden (or Harris, or “warm vomit”) he’s voting for who - or, theoretically what-ever it is.

This just reads to me as the standard “while I too would love to have progressive policy, here’s my 25 passionately argued reasons we should just pursue centrist policies”. It’s a sentence to say “I’m with you, now let me spend all my effort arguing against you” that mainstream Dems trot out.

So I read it as, the media are not inclined to actually do their jobs and put paid to trumps constant lying and his grotesque unqualifiedness, despite nominally having held the position before. They won’t do it because it’s less profitable, but more importantly, it’s no fun.

People dig into trumps mania because you either love it or hate it - if you ignore it, that defaults to the ‘love’ category. Like people who ignore a raging house fire they’re in.

Any change to the ticket - in fact no change to the ticket - means more of the same. Commentators and journalists will not help save democracy. It doesn’t get clicks, and it’s just “no fun”.

Oh, I agree with all of that, but this isn’t coming out in a void. He didn’t write this thread a month ago. It’s not like only now have the media followed this pattern. He wrote it when the thing they’re doing is (admittedly happily) covering a real campaign to swap Biden. The implication to me is that this is just evergreen shitting on Dems, not a real issue for true Democrats, and a change would somehow generate just as damaging coverage so why are you letting them cause discord.

And if the argument is really just “the media will be harsh to the new candidate”, yes, everyone knows that and no one is arguing otherwise. But there’s a difference between picking at trivialities and not ignoring one of the biggest election stories of the cycle, and the former is far better for us. And it can’t happen with Biden.

I read it, but the subtext of it (and explicit text at the end) is that this is a Dems shitting on their own problem. There are a lot of words battling a straw man of complainers who think the replacement wouldn’t get attacked, but the message of “shut up and support Biden” is very clear.

Gaslighting worried Democrats is in no way a method of building support for whoever the Democratic nominee is. This isn’t a media issue. This isn’t a “always happens” issue. This was 50 million people watching the oldest president ever shit the bed on TV, fail to counter his fascist opponent, and throw every possible explanation against the wall to explain it. Whatever you think of the media and their motivations, this isn’t business as usual and isn’t fake, and pretending it is just makes the rank and file more suspicious of and less engaged with the Democratic party, the absolute worst thing you can be doing in the lead up to an election.

Biden’s already been losing the base. I think just changing away from his does wonders for base motivation. No messy questions around Gaza, no age hanging over us, a new voice able to say “we’ll do something different” for things that aren’t going well.

Plus then we can hammer Trump for being old and incoherent. He wasn’t good at the debate (or all his nonsense stream of consciousness speeches), but Biden’s jumbled speeches (before this) didn’t give us a good footing to be much harsher toward it. “Democrats have chosen a new nominee who will actually be alive in 10 years, Republicans are stuck with an elderly man who slurs his words, forgets things, and talks nonsense about getting eaten by sharks”.

Biden will pull more moderates and centrists, the key group in this election

Says fucking who?

I don’t know why he wouldn’t simply ignore this ruling. This is one of those situations where the executive has all the power and a judge is telling them to do something. Just don’t.

It’s like you can’t even be a rightwing fascist without people jumping to conclusions when you’re photographed wearing Nazi memorabilia! This is cancel culture, which is clearly the worst problem in society. /s

They’re not white supremacists, they just “celebrate their European ancestry”.

Polling bonus for triggering the libs.

The judge, who was appointed by Donald Trump, wrote that the pause “is completely without reason or logic and is perhaps the epiphany of ideocracy [sic].”

Truly the person we should listen to when determining national climate policy. Ignore him.

Doesn’t the Chevron ruling doom basically any standard originating from the executive? It’s almost impossible to talk about planned regulations after the Supreme Court seized that power.

Kicking it to the lower courts is a boiling the frog tactic. They’ll give him immunity once the appeal gets back to them, but they want to spread out their shocks. Just like they leaked the Roe ruling so there wouldn’t be as singular a rallying event.

That’s very important. The court has given itself the power to decide which acts are official, so step one is assassinating anyone who would say it’s not. You probably don’t need to do all of them, just a few, then the others will get the idea.

(Note I am not calling for actual assassinations, just pointing out that the court is both the decider and vulnerable to the edict enshrining a lawless president.)

This is an incredibly consequential case making entirely new law that is conveniently on a case by case basis and under the control of a corrupt court. Just read the dissents. And it overruled a unanimous ruling that Trump was not immune. Trying to downplay this is wrong.

Progressive Dem campaigns are essentially free because the voters themselves are donating the bulk of the money.

Ya, people forget that Bernie was always the top money raiser during the primary and Warren was usually #2, both on small donations. And that was during the primary when individual donations from Democrats were spread across many options.

In February 2020, Bernie + Warren raised $67M in individual donations. The entire rest of the crowd totaled $56M. Democrat individual donations can put out $123M in single month. For a primary, in a single month.

When it was Biden alone going into the 2020 general, he was pulling in $160M in small donations. That’s more than Trump raised during most of his 2016 campaign. We don’t need to be beholden to these large donors.

Not everything, but it’s incredibly easy to fall into something being an official act, and most things of consequences would end up there, especially if you’re a corrupt president planning to use this ruling. There are a few constitutionally-defined acts that are 100% absolute immunity, but the ruling also gives a presumption of immunity to other official acts that are not defined. That’s why they’re sending it back to the lower court - to determine which acts were official. Which will then be appealed and affirmed and then appealed back to the Supreme Court. But by the time they have to grant immunity, the election will be over. They very much did not want to make a decision about what acts were official so they wouldn’t have to make explicit that Trump is immune until after the election.

“The only way to solve this is by voting harder.” They leave out the “for the next 30 years, continuously, until the court is rebalanced through natural causes and decides to undo what is now ‘precedent’”.

Andrew Jackson was a racist pursuing genocide, but he was right that the court doesn’t have any inherent power to enforce its edicts. That was explicitly outlined in the Federalist Papers as a reason giving court “ultimate decider” powers wasn’t a problem.

Amici curae aren’t Supreme Court decisions. “Amici curae” means “friend of the court”. It’s an argument from third parties submitted for a pending case. The dissents by the actual Supreme Court justices explicitly reference the assassination potential.