One person familiar with President Biden’s thinking cautioned that he had not yet made up his mind to leave the race, after three weeks of insisting that almost nothing would drive him out.
literally because he had that optically bad “debate” where he couldn’t even deliver the talking points to make donors happy
He’s also historically, horrifically unpopular and anyone paying attention has seen he has essentially no chance to win since even before the genocide in Gaza began but especially since then his popularity has PLUMMETED mostly because he was isolated and pretending pro-Palestine protests were fringe and small and unpopular when they really weren’t.
His own party was polling 80% that Israel had to be forced into a ceasefire- and nevertheless he persisted with mass murder.
A similar portion said they wanted to recognize a Palestinian state- again, nevertheless he persisted.
Month after month straight into hell went his approval.
He took a “close, but winnable” election and cranked it down down down to where it is now where like 8 different planets need to align for him to win. Something those paying attention have been saying since a least a year ago and more. Just took an amazing fuck up to embarrass and motivate the donors to gtfo.
Donors are happy as long as their agenda is advanced and Biden being unfit for office doesn’t really effect that, what made donors unhappy is waking up to the reality that voters don’t like Biden and he can’t win. It’s the backdrop of immense voter dissatisfaction and months of rank-and-file action against him that is causing donors to freak out, the debate was merely the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Ding ding ding. I believe that’s a big possibility. It’s a very neoliberal way of thinking to listen to market forces (donors) over constituents. Because what are constituents really than just molecular portions of the market? Whatever the logos, I think it’s easier to imagine democrats replacing Biden because of funding concerns rather that the direct will of voters.
I think it creates the perception of the decision being made from the direct will of the voters, though, and that would be disastrous for the Party. If voters get it into their heads that they can influence the Party it will be hard to stuff that genie back in the bottle.
I hope I’m not lathing it, but if Joe drops out, they might replace him with Harris, then Trump absolutely dominates, possibly to the point of winning all 538 electors unanimously. Then Democrats will say “See? We shouldn’t listen to the voters!”
I agree. I guess we’ll see how much obfuscation of the voters’ will the Democratic Party can tolerate. If history serves as a guide, they’ll eff it up and replace Biden. Hopefully people will realize the genie’s out of the bottle then.
I think it would be easy to contain any popular sentiment from the voters. They tend to be better disciplined than your average Republican primary voter. Plus, look how effortlessly they were able to stop Bernie when they put their mind to it. The donors are another story though.
Local small-business-tyrant donors putting funds into some small-town mayoral race don’t. But the wealthy donors involved in federal matters will donate to both, so that whoever ends up in office is beholden to them regardless of lawn sign colour. These legal bribes aren’t gifts, they’re investments.
If I told you that you’d make a guaranteed $1,000,000 back in a few years by making two $50,000 donations today, anyone with $100,000 lying around would take that deal in a heartbeat.
The richest people in the room aren’t calculators, they’re people, and I’m willing to bet that a certain chunk of them think their wealth is the direct result of their ability to gamble correctly. When they make a bad bet it hurts them in the feels.
Indeed, they may or may not care ideologically about the issues or Biden’s age and performance, but more importantly you don’t bet on the horse whose owner abandoned it and won’t feed or train it. He can poll at 2% approval, but as long the voters are whipped into voting for him, they don’t care because they can advance their agenda with their guy.
But why? Donors don’t care that he’s old. What is motivating them to pull funding?
imo the donors are worried people won’t vote for him. It’s still the voters driving this.
literally because he had that optically bad “debate” where he couldn’t even deliver the talking points to make donors happy
He’s also historically, horrifically unpopular and anyone paying attention has seen he has essentially no chance to win since even before the genocide in Gaza began but especially since then his popularity has PLUMMETED mostly because he was isolated and pretending pro-Palestine protests were fringe and small and unpopular when they really weren’t.
His own party was polling 80% that Israel had to be forced into a ceasefire- and nevertheless he persisted with mass murder.
A similar portion said they wanted to recognize a Palestinian state- again, nevertheless he persisted.
Month after month straight into hell went his approval.
He took a “close, but winnable” election and cranked it down down down to where it is now where like 8 different planets need to align for him to win. Something those paying attention have been saying since a least a year ago and more. Just took an amazing fuck up to embarrass and motivate the donors to gtfo.
Donors are happy as long as their agenda is advanced and Biden being unfit for office doesn’t really effect that, what made donors unhappy is waking up to the reality that voters don’t like Biden and he can’t win. It’s the backdrop of immense voter dissatisfaction and months of rank-and-file action against him that is causing donors to freak out, the debate was merely the straw that broke the camel’s back.
Ding ding ding. I believe that’s a big possibility. It’s a very neoliberal way of thinking to listen to market forces (donors) over constituents. Because what are constituents really than just molecular portions of the market? Whatever the logos, I think it’s easier to imagine democrats replacing Biden because of funding concerns rather that the direct will of voters.
I think it creates the perception of the decision being made from the direct will of the voters, though, and that would be disastrous for the Party. If voters get it into their heads that they can influence the Party it will be hard to stuff that genie back in the bottle.
that’s why Harris is so perfect for this, because nobody wants Harris
I hope I’m not lathing it, but if Joe drops out, they might replace him with Harris, then Trump absolutely dominates, possibly to the point of winning all 538 electors unanimously. Then Democrats will say “See? We shouldn’t listen to the voters!”
“you leftists got what you wanted, and you still didnt vote!”
Vote with your wallet!!
I agree. I guess we’ll see how much obfuscation of the voters’ will the Democratic Party can tolerate. If history serves as a guide, they’ll eff it up and replace Biden. Hopefully people will realize the genie’s out of the bottle then.
I think it would be easy to contain any popular sentiment from the voters. They tend to be better disciplined than your average Republican primary voter. Plus, look how effortlessly they were able to stop Bernie when they put their mind to it. The donors are another story though.
The donors care that he wins. Its not that they they care about what voters want, just that they want a return on their money.
Because donors don’t want to waste money
bribingdonating to someone who is guaranteed to loseLocal small-business-tyrant donors putting funds into some small-town mayoral race don’t. But the wealthy donors involved in federal matters will donate to both, so that whoever ends up in office is beholden to them regardless of lawn sign colour. These legal bribes aren’t gifts, they’re investments.
If I told you that you’d make a guaranteed $1,000,000 back in a few years by making two $50,000 donations today, anyone with $100,000 lying around would take that deal in a heartbeat.
Embarrassment, at a certain point.
The richest people in the room aren’t calculators, they’re people, and I’m willing to bet that a certain chunk of them think their wealth is the direct result of their ability to gamble correctly. When they make a bad bet it hurts them in the feels.
idk the motivation, but they have pulled significant amount funding, that’s an empirical fact. They could reverse that decision, of course, if he weathers the storm.
Indeed, they may or may not care ideologically about the issues or Biden’s age and performance, but more importantly you don’t bet on the horse whose owner abandoned it and won’t feed or train it. He can poll at 2% approval, but as long the voters are whipped into voting for him, they don’t care because they can advance their agenda with their guy.
deleted by creator