My 16 year old daughter was laughing at President Biden. She is not into politics, but said "He just quits talking". She also said "She hopes Biden will not be running when she is old enough to vote."

I explained that situation is unlikely to the extreme.

I believe Biden will be replaced by Newsom or Harris. That debate was "cringy" at best

It was unwatchable.

Why? Did you watch it, and what did you think if you viewed it?

The wife had it on, and early on turned it off, saying "I can't watch this." I left it off. What little I saw was very difficult to watch.

Has the debate made you change who you wish to vote for? Should Biden be replaced as the Democratic nominee?

What other fallout do you see from the debate performance?

It does not change who I am voting for. Should Biden be replaced? Yes. 25th Amendment is in play.

This is how democracies turn into autocracies..

I am going to vote for the guy who is not a fascist...

The US Supreme Court just cleared the way for an authoritarian to seize power with their dreadful immunity decision yesterday..


The only candidates right now are democracy and fascism: so while dumping a guy because of a bad debate performance after he has done a great job as president is inconceivable, now the only question is who is the best candidate to beating Trump? I think that's still Biden. But we'll see.

The more fascist forces desire Biden to get out of the race, the more I oppose it. Clearly, major media ( perhaps due to corporate owners) have failed to properly present the danger of Trump/Fascism. Getting control of Twitter was an obvious move to make it harder for anti-fascist forces to network/share information but corporate owners desire for more money has constrained their coverage of Trump.

If Trump wins Americans will not live in a free country, anymore. It's that simple.

Hyperbole much, Freeman? I will reference this post if/when President Trump wins and 2 years goes by.

I've never been a Biden fan, but, as Freeman said, you vote for the guy who's not a wanna be dictator.

I don't know if a replacement would have a better shot of being elected, but I think a replacement would likely govern better, and if I could have both, that's what I would want.

Hyperbole? The Supreme Court decision gives them the path for taking over the government. Roberts could not even decide that a president's involvement in a fraudulent elector scheme was not immune; the president has absolute immunity for firing the attorney general or asking him to do sham investigations; he is at least presumptively immune for ordering the vice-president to participate in the fraudulent elector scheme and presumably on a similar analysis presumptively immune if he orders the head of IRS to audit his political opponents or turn over their tax records. And a president is also clearly presumptively immune from asking his supporters to storm the capitol.

(yes, if a president did not use coded words about instigating a coup the presumption of immunity might be rebutted but Trump did and moreover Roberts stated that with regard to non-core presidential official acts there is AT LEAST a presumption of immunity; the court has not decided yet whether non-core official acts should get absolute immunity as well.) And of course this obviously politicized Supreme Court will get to decide the issue and could decide differently based on which party the president is...)

AND motive evidence cannot be used to with regard to whether a president actions were an official act. So doesn't matter if a president had a criminal motive as long as the act was official...

All the things Trump did to attack our institutions from instigating a coup on Jan. 6th, firing Comey to impede the Russian investigation (that act is actually he has absolute immunity for), pressure state officials about elections ("find me 11,780 votes) and the fraudulent elector scheme he now at least presumptively immune from prosecution.

As long as the president can say he is acting with regard to some presidential power (think how the Commerce Clause has been stretched) and he is conspiring with public officials then he is at least presumptively immune. That was the one reservation that Roberts clearly implied was an issue with holding Trump immune with regard to the fraudulent elector conspiracy because some of the conspirators were private parties; on the other hand if he were talking with state officials about federal elections, well then might be presumptively immune; interestingly enough justice Amy Coney Barrett broke with Roberts and found that the fraudulent elector conspiracy has no presidential immunity because the president has no power there and she disagreed about allowing in evidence of a president's motives but then again she is only one justice and five other justices had no problem with either issue so it really doesn't matter...

As part of project 2025 they will fire federal civil service employees en masse and replace them with loyalists. And nothing to stop Trump from doing that with this decision. Also Trump (or anyone else) can wield the pardon power en masse without ANY checks because the pardon power is a core presidential power. So he can tell his supporter to do illegal acts, pardon them, and then be absolutely immune.

This is Dred Scott level bad....

I was hopeful that you would have spoke tour mind concerning President Biden, and not resorted to the TDS mentality of “Orange man bad”. You do realize you are the only person bringing up President Trump.

The ghost of Toronto still haunts apparently.

Norman Orstein (Twitter)

"Let me be clear: I don’t criticize our media for intense coverage of the health of the president and whether he can fill another term or stay on the ticket. Those are big stories. They are not the only stories. The fact that he is the incumbent does not excuse the inattention to the other major party candidate who was a former president, much less the dereliction of duty that comes with treating his abnormal behavior as normal."

"Of course, Biden’s disastrous debate performance was the biggest news. But Trump’s serial lies was also really big, and brushed aside. The revelations from Jeffrey Epstein’s investigation, including the multiple trips Trump took with him, largely ignored. Far worse is what we know will be the consequences of another Trump presidency."

"He completely ignored the question in the debate about deporting migrants. It is a clear responsibility of a free press to report on this, meaning the plans to put 12 million people in the United States in detention camps, people that he has called animals. His closest advisor and press secretary are tied directly to Project 2025. It was written in intimate connection withTrump‘s principaladvisors. That he lies openly about whether he knows anything about it no excuse for our press, largely ignoring it."

"If Joe Biden has moments where he falters, there is a stellar team of top advisors and staff to keep this from becoming a policy catastrophe. As Liz Cheney has said, even if you don’t like Biden’s policies, the country regularly survives, presidents, whose policies and don’t like."

"But as she says courageously and eloquently, we cannot survive the destruction of democracy and fundamental freedoms, which is openly in the game plan of Donald Trump. Trump talks about creating military tribunals to punish his enemies in an administration built around retribution. It is dereliction of journalistic responsibility beyond imagining that this gets shrugged off and not covered as if it were a four alarm fire."

"The shocking decisions of the court, especially Chevron and immunity, have not been covered as front page above the full stories or as a runaway Court that will turn governance upside down. Much less Supreme Court that will end up with a 72 right wing extremist margin if Trump is elected, probably including replacing Thomas and Alito with justices at least as extreme and much younger."

"Covering the deathwatch around whether Biden survives as a candidate, while ignoring the fact that this is truly an existential election, less about Biden and Trump, and more about whether our democracy survives , is simply not what mainstream press, much less everybody else, should make as their singular focal point. Don’t ignore it but please, please get a grip and make your focus what really matters. End"

Brad: "Hyperbole much, Freeman? I will reference this post if/when President Trump wins and 2 years goes by."
Brad: "I was hopeful that you would have spoke tour mind concerning President Biden, and not resorted to the TDS mentality of 'Orange man bad'."

Trump: "Get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what: it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”

No hyperbole evident...

Vote Democrat if you want democracy to live...

freeman3 wrote:Trump: "Get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what: it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine. You won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”

Orange man bad.

No, seriously, the orange man is really freaking bad.

Well, I thought Tim Walz was older. Turns out he is the same age as I am.

Debate impressions:
Walz fumbled and misspoke. Often. Not impressive in the least. His one mediocre topic of abortion seemed like name dropping.

Vance sidestepped a couple questions. I did not like that. Jan. 6th statement "looking to the future" is not an answer. Vance looked more presidential than Adm. Stockdale. (er, I mean Gov. Walz)

Moderators were better than ABC. I would still like Real Clear Politics to moderate.

Elon Musk: President Trump must win to preserve the constitution. He must win to preserve democracy in America.

Guess I'll be deleting my social media posts if Trump wins...

This is why all the discussions about Biden's fitness or Kamala qualifications were silly. If Trump wins America will not be the same. Our rights and democracy are on the ballot this November. Please vote accordingly...