As we all watch with bated breath for Joe Biden to verbally stumble I thought I’d just take a moment to remind ourselves of the kinds of stuff that other guys says. Here’s one from a couple of months ago:
“Our nation was saved by the immortal heroes at Gettysburg. Gettysburg, what an unbelievable battle that was. The battle of Gettysburg, what an unbelievable. I mean it was so, was so much, and so interesting, and so vicious and horrible, and so beautiful in so many different ways — it represented such a big portion of the success of this country. Gettysburg, wow! I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to look and to watch. And uh the statement of Robert E. Lee, who’s no longer in favor — did you ever notice that? He’s no longer in favor. ‘Never fight uphill, me boys, never fight uphill.’ They were fighting uphill, he said. Wow, that was a big mistake, he lost his great general and uh they were fighting uphill. ‘Never fight uphill, me boys,’ but it was too late.”
Trump goes on a weird rant about the battle of Gettysburg and then notes of Robert E Lee that "he's no longer in favor. Did you ever notice that?" pic.twitter.com/hs9GjmCh6K
It’s 120 days until Election Day, and our model thinks the presidential election could go either way. Right now, President Joe Biden is favored to win in 481 out of 1,000 of our model’s simulations of how the election could go, while former President Donald Trump wins in 516 of our simulations. There is still a small chance of the pure chaos scenario: In 3 simulations, no candidate wins a majority of Electoral College votes, which would throw the election to the House of Representatives.
It might not seem like it based on the panicked reaction to Biden’s poor debate performance nearly two weeks ago, but the election is still a considerable ways away. This means there is a lot of uncertainty about where the polls will end up on Nov. 5. In turn, the 538 election model puts a healthy amount of weight on non-polling factors such as economic growth and political indicators. Today these indicators suggest an outcome closer to a 3-point Biden win — clear in the opposite direction of national polls.
538’s focus on uncertainty partially explains why our election forecast has not moved much in reaction to new national polls showing Trump gaining on Biden. In effect, we are hedging our bets, putting more weight on the so-called “fundamentals” because we believe the campaign could be volatile or polls could be biased. The other big factor explaining our model’s relative stability is the flurry of swing-state polls that were published over the weekend, most good for Biden. The average swing-state poll published since July 6 has Trump leading Biden by 1 point, compared to his 2.2-point lead in national polls today.
538’s forecast is based on a combination of polls and campaign “fundamentals,” such as economic conditions, state partisanship and incumbency. It’s not meant to “call” a winner, but rather to give you a sense of how likely each candidate is to win. Check out our methodology to learn exactly how we calculate these probabilities.
—G. Elliott Morris
Also:
There’s a new chart on the 538 forecast showing the divide between the Electoral College and popular vote for 2024. Currently the forecast suggests Biden would need to win the popular vote by 2 points to win the election, a decline compared to 2020
Seriously, it’s like a 4th grader’s book report — and the 4th grader didn’t read the book. Utterly embarrassing. Steve Benen does a nice job of succinctly critiquing it:
The preamble: Before the blueprint begins in earnest, there’s a preamble, spanning nearly three pages, which appears to have been written by Trump himself. It’s filled with vapid, all-caps, bumper-sticker-style declarations, featuring a combination of vague goals and proposals that President Joe Biden has already delivered.
Here it is. Definitely a Trump special. Replete with inappropriate caps and bad punctuation.
Our Nation’s History is filled with the stories of brave men and women who gave everything they had to build America into the Greatest Nation in the History of the World. Generations of American Patriots have summoned the American Spirit of Strength, Determination, and Love of Country to overcome seemingly insurmountable challenges. The American People have proven time and again that we can overcome any obstacle and any force pitted against us.
…
But now we are a Nation in SERIOUS DECLINE. Our future, our identity, and our very way of life are under threat like never before. Today we must once again call upon the same American Spirit that led us to prevail through every challenge of the past if we are going to lead our Nation to a brighter future.
For decades, our politicians sold our jobs and livelihoods to the highest bidders overseas with unfair Trade Deals and a blind faith in the siren song of globalism. They insulated themselves from criticism and the consequences of their own bad actions, allowing our Borders to be overrun, our cities to be overtaken by crime, our System of Justice to be weaponized, and our young people to develop a sense of hopelessness and despair. They rejected our History and our Values. Quite simply, they did everything in their power to destroy our Country.
In 2016, President Donald J. Trump was elected as an unapologetic Champion of the American People. He reignited the American Spirit and called on us to renew our National Pride. His Policies spurred Historic Economic Growth, Job Creation, and a Resurgence of American Manufacturing. President Trump and the Republican Party led America out of the pessimism induced by decades of failed leadership, showing us that the American People want Greatness for our Country again.
Yet after nearly four years of the Biden administration, America is now rocked by Raging Inflation, Open Borders, Rampant Crime, Attacks on our Children, and Global Conflict, Chaos, and Instability.
Like the Heroes who built and defended this Nation before us, we will never give up. We will restore our Nation of, by, and for the People. We will Make America Great Again.
…
America needs determined Republican Leadership at every level of Government to address the core threats to our very survival: Our disastrously Open Border, our weakened Economy, crippling restrictions on American Energy Production, our depleted Military, attacks on the American System of Justice, and much more.
To make clear our commitment, we offer to the American people the 2024 GOP Platform to Make America Great Again! It is a forward-looking Agenda that begins with the following twenty promises that we will accomplish very quickly when we win the White House and Republican Majorities in the House and Senate.
Benen continues:
The contents: Some of the reporting about the new RNC blueprint has suggested that it was made deliberately more “moderate” than some far-right partisans preferred. Don’t believe it. As American Bridge’s Brandon Weathersby summarized in a statement, “The Republican National Committee platform is one of the most extreme party platforms ever in the history of modern presidential elections.” From immigration to education, taxes to law enforcement, there should be no doubt that this assessment is correct.
The omissions: Hoping to avoid campaign-season attacks, the Republican platform no longer calls for federal prohibitions against abortion and same-sex marriage, but as the editorial board of The Washington Post summarized, “The former president wants the 2024 GOP platform to be anodyne, but don’t be fooled. He has an extreme agenda.”
The language: It was hard not to notice that the new Republican platform condemns “Christian-hating Communists,” which is a phrase with a deeply ugly history.
The length: The party’s platform in 2016 was nearly 60 pages. There were some reports indicating that this total, at Trump’s insistence, would be cut in half. Those reports understated matters: The actual text of the 2024 platform spans roughly 10 pages — reinforcing the fact that the contemporary Republican Party just isn’t serious about governing and policymaking.
The process: While Republicans have spent decades crafting the party’s platform in public, this year, the process was moved behind closed doors. Even more incredibly, Politico published this report on the way in which the platform was approved: “Representatives from Trump’s campaign walked around the room with a ‘vote yes’ sign as voice votes were being held. … One RNC member who was present inquired about why staff of the Trump campaign and RNC were taking photographs of delegates as they voted.”
We all know the real platform is Project 2025, of course. But this is what Trump and his henchmen know will appease his deluded base. It’s up to all of us to make sure the rest of the country knows the truth.
Donald Trump is expected to launch a new legal battle to suppress any damaging evidence from his 2020 election-subversion case from becoming public before the 2024 election, preparing to shut down the potency of any “mini-trials” where high-profile officials could testify against him.
The plans come after the US supreme court last week in its ruling that broadly conferred immunity on former presidents opened the door for the US district judge Tanya Chutkan to hold evidentiary hearings – potentially with witnesses – to determine what acts in the indictment can survive.
In the coming months, Trump’s lawyers are expected to argue that the judge can decide whether the conduct is immune based on legal arguments alone, negating the need for witnesses or multiple evidentiary hearings, the people said.
If prosecutors with the special counsel Jack Smith press for witnesses such as former vice-president Mike Pence or White House officials to testify, Trump’s lawyers are expected to launch a flurry of executive privilege and other measures to block their appearances, the people said.
The plans, which have not been previously reported, are aimed at having the triple effect of burying damaging testimony, making it harder for prosecutors to overcome the presumptive immunity for official acts, and injecting new delay into the case through protracted legal fights.
Cute that they would argue there’s no need for evidentiary hearings when they are demanding — and getting — them for every little thing in the Florida trial. But I guess that’s to be expected as are the claims of executive privilege, which is a convenient catch-22 sinc e the whole point is to determine if the behavior was an official or unofficial act.
The idea of this “mini-trial” si great. But I have to admit that I wondered if they would be able to pull it off. The courts seem unable to act in haste when it comes to Trump’s criminality in this election year. The closer we get to the election the less it seems likely.
It’s possible for two conflicting ideas to be true at once.
And so it is with the mainstream media’s unrelenting focus on Joe Biden’s mental acuity, following his terrible debate performance earlier this month.
First truth: the president’s stumble and the political fallout that followed is a huge, consequential news story that deserves a lot of coverage.
Second truth: the media coverage is overkill – not only too much in quantity and too breathless in tone, but also taking up so much oxygen that a story even more important is shoved to the back burner.
That bigger story, of course, is the former president’s appalling unfitness for office, not only because he tried to overturn a legitimate election and is a felon, out on bail and awaiting sentencing, but because of things he has said and done in very recent weeks. As just one example, he claimed that he doesn’t know anything about Project 2025, the radical rightwing plan hatched by some of his closest allies to begin dismantling our democracy if he wins another term. Trump’s disavowal is a ridiculous lie, but I doubt most members of the public know anything about it, nor do they likely know much – if anything – about Project 2025.
But anyone following mainstream media coverage could not miss knowing about the latest polls on whether Biden should step aside, how Kamala Harris would fare in a head-to-head competition with Trump, and which members of Congress have called for a new Democratic nominee.
And those are just the news stories – not to mention the nonstop punditry on cable news and the near takeover of the opinion sections of major publications.
Meanwhile, what of Trump’s obvious cognitive decline, his endless lies, his shocking plans to imprison his political enemies and to deport millions of people he calls “animals”, his relationship with the late accused sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein?
“Sure, you can say, we’ve covered those things,” commented Norman Ornstein, emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a longtime observer of media and politics. But, Ornstein pushed back: “Where? On the front page above the fold? As one-offs before moving on? In a fashion comparable to the Defcon 1 coverage of Biden’s age and acuity?”
There really is no comparison in the amount or intensity of coverage. One journalist, Jennifer Schulze, counted New York Times stories related to Biden’s age in the week following the debate; she counted a staggering 192 news and opinion pieces, compared to 92 stories on Trump – and that was in a week when the US supreme court had ruled he has immunity for official acts.
Nor is there much self-scrutiny or effort to course-correct. Only self-satisfaction and an apparent commitment to more of the same.
Erik Wemple of the Washington Post queried the Times about any pushback, specifically from the White House. “Have you gotten any complaints about age coverage since the debate?” Wemple asked top Times editor Joe Kahn, who recently praised the paper’s coverage in a note to staff. Kahn said no.
[…]
Where does that leave us?
All of these disturbing elements – the Democrats’ dilemma, the media’s failures, and the cult-like, unquestioning support of Trump – could add up to one likelihood in November.
A win for Trump, and a terrible loss for democracy.
Biden’s debate performance made discussions of his age big news. Nobody can suggest otherwise. But if someone was looking for him to bow out, this aggressive, petty, non-stop frenzied media pile-on made it less likely. On a human level, nobody would want to be chased down and beaten up in front of the whole world. On a political level it’s not unlikely that a lot of Democratic voters don’t like the idea of their candidate being beaten up like this either, especially by media elites.
Meanwhile, Orange Hitler is waiting in the wings and these people yawn and say it’s old news. And the freakout is damaging Biden and the Democrats every day it continues.
Chris Hayes’ show has been the best during this Biden crisis in my opinion. Measured, fair and insightful.
"I don't think the polls are all wrong. But we have no idea what the future will bring. And as France just showed the world, there is still time to do the hard work necessary to beat back the right-wing authoritarians again," says @chrislhayes on lessons from France's elections. pic.twitter.com/jUpkPwrydK
— All In with Chris Hayes (@allinwithchris) July 10, 2024
“There are a few areas where it’s just so starkly clear what the choices are in November. Climate is one of them—as we watch the world cook.” —@Chrislhayes with a warning about Republicans' Project 2025pic.twitter.com/ff8TSzIq05
I can’t find a video of the interview with Dave Roberts and Jamelle Bouie but if you happen to record his show and haven’t watched it yet I urge you to do it. It’s the most thoughtful discussion I’ve heard since this crisis began. We need more of this.
There’s a new USA Today poll that show Harris beating Trump by one point and Trump beating Biden by one point. (They also polled Hillary Clinton for some reason and she beats Trump by two points.) In other words, it tells us nothing.
Then there’s this:
I don't think of Emerson as the best pollster but on its face this isn't terribly good data for the switch scenario. pic.twitter.com/ZUu5MYYDlZ
As you can see, Biden does best against Trump but they all lose.
If we were to take all this at face value we’d say that this is a party problem more than a Biden problem. And I’m not sure it’s any more of a problem than it’s been through this whole cycle so far.
And then there’s this:
The most important result in our new national poll of registered voters is that a majority of 53% of all voters believe that Donald Trump and his administration would represent “a grave danger to democracy continuing in the United States,” if he wins the election.👇🏼 pic.twitter.com/G8zIAegVoR
Today it does look as if Biden is staying in. And as I’ve been writing since this crisis began, (and even before, to tell you the truth) this isn’t about the candidates as much as it’s about a worldview that’s clashing all over the world. It would be very helpful if we had a president who was vital and exciting but we don’t. And the other side may have someone who’s exciting but he’s also an imbecile who is loathed by half the country.
It’s been close all year and nothing has changed. Yet. Gird yourself.
Public Notice sees fallout from the SCOTUS decision to overturn the Chevron deference doctrine. It’s already heading to courts:
It’s been barely a week since conservatives on the US Supreme Court radically upended the balance of power between the branches of government, giving the federal courts the exclusive power to interpret statutes rather than deferring to agency experts. And we’re already seeing impacts on the ground.
Right-wingers have been in the habit of running to their preferred courts to get regulations overturned, but the decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which officially destroyed agency deference, will make it easier — even routine — to block every Biden administration rule they don’t like.
Lawsuits to invalidate specific rules had been proceeding through the federal courts before Loper Bright, generally arguing that agencies exceeded their authority in promulgating a rule. These lawsuits exist in no small part because the Supreme Court made it clear they would destroy Chevron deference for years now, with Justice Neil Gorsuch having led the way well before his appointment to the Court.
Trump appointee Sean Jordan, who sits in the reliably hard-right Eastern District of Texas, was so eager to block a Biden administration’s overtime rule that he dropped his decision the same day Loper Bright came out. It runs 36 pages and mentions Loper Bright multiple times, which means either Jordan was so confident of the Supreme Court decision that he either wrote it in advance or he hurried to stuff Loper Bright into his already-written opinion.
Jordan’s opinion also rests heavily on dictionary definitions rather than expertise from the Department of Labor, which issued the rule. So now, the rule that would have made 4 million more Texas workers eligible for overtime, and thus more pay, is blocked thanks to a hurried read of a SCOTUS opinion and Webster’s Dictionary.
What this mean is that anytime a business doesn’t like a federal rule, it can just sue. It promises to be a free-for-all. Three hospitals in New Jersey sued HHS the day Loper Bright came down, saying the agency’s interpretation of a statute governing Medicare reimbursement is unlawful.
In another case, filed before Loper Bright, a trucking company challenging the Biden administration’s rule that addressed misclassification of independent contractors filed a memorandum on July 2 arguing that Loper Bright means the court should not defer to the Department of Labor’s interpretation of the law. The next day, Trump appointee Ada Brown of the Northern District of Texas enjoined enforcement of the Biden administration’s rule prohibiting non-compete agreements but limited the injunction to the plaintiffs, which are various pro-business groups like the Chamber of Commerce.
Taken together, it’s evident that any moves the administration makes to tilt the playing field even slightly in favor of workers are designed to fail once they reach a conservative federal judge. And thanks to right-wing judge shopping, plaintiffs are often able to get their case in front of an anti-regulation judge they know will be favorable to their challenges.
You know, if we were not citizens of this country but merely renters, under standing property law we would at least be entitled to the quiet enjoyment of this country. The ownership class might actually respect that. But I wouldn’t count on it even then in the United States of MAGA. There’s no quiet enjoyment in our futures for some time.
It’s that much harder to enjoy the protection of the law when the law is whatever some reactionary judge decides it is today.
Lisa Needham concludes:
… rather than having a well-reasoned rule that applies uniformly across the country, courts will invalidate or uphold rules in a piecemeal fashion based on the whims of judges who are in no way qualified to interpret complex regulatory issues. Those judges, though, are extremely well-qualified to find a way to strike down regulations whenever conservatives demand it. The demise of the regulatory state is as grim as anyone could have possibly guessed, and absent court reform, there seems to be no way out.
How far might the fringe right take this? A gallon of milk or gas need no longer be a gallon. An inch is 2.54 centimeters. Or is it? How many eggs is a dozen? Depends now on how the judge feels today.
Running a presidential election is a specialized job. Among the details to manage is ensuring the candidate gets on the ballot in each state, no minor logistical task. There are filing dates and fees to get onto the state’s primary. There are other deadlines varying by state for when a major party must deliver the names of its presidential candidate (electors) to the state elections board/commission, often from late August to early September.
That is why I call it magical thinking to believe that Democrats can simply swap out their presidential ticket in July. It’s not that it cannot happen, but it is a logistical nightmare. It doesn’t matter that France and England can hold national elections in a couple of months, whatever Jon Stewart says. It doesn’t work that way here. Election laws in the 50 states and territories are not set up for it, and GOP-controlled legislatures will hardly be willing to accomodate rival Dermocrats.
Many voters are unhappy with a rerun of the 2020 contest. Yes, many want younger candidates. So do some reporters. Post debate, reporters for major news outlets want Joe Biden gone. They want the excitement of a major campaign shakeup, and damn the logistics. They want what they want.
Major outlets have yet to call for the insurrectionist, wannabe dictator with 34 felony convictions, more felony cases pending, and a history of sexual assault to step out of the race. They’re leaning hard into “Biden’s unfit,” as Marcy Wheeler picks out.
I should note that I'm seeing some configurations of NYT FP where they DO include comment on the GOP platform: Maggie's misleading spin that it moderates on abortion.
— emptywheel (checking account) (@emptywheel) July 9, 2024
A White House press briefing yesterday devolved into a shouting match. The New York Times declared that “press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, repeatedly dodged and refused to answer questions about the president’s health, and whether [8 visits last year] to the White House by a Parkinson’s doctor were about the president.”
If Biden stays in, the Dems & the media who are hugely invested in his withdrawal w/likely spend the next 4 months subtly undermining him to justify their position. Many won't know they're doing it but the need to say "I told you so" often subconsciously leads people to do that.
That turns out to be a gross mischaracterization (ABC News):
In a letter released late Monday night by the president’s physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, he confirmed that Dr. Kevin Cannard, the Parkinson’s expert who visited the White House eight times in an eight-month span, “was the neurological specialist that examined President Biden for each of his annual physicals.”
Canard’s visits to the White House don’t represent examinations of the president, according to O’Connor’s letter. Cannard is involved in a range of care for others beyond the president at the White House, O’Connor said in his note.
“Prior to the pandemic, and following its end, [Cannard] has held regular Neurology clinics at the White House Medical Clinic in support of the thousands of active-duty members assigned in support of White House operations,” his letter reads. “Many military personnel experience neurological issues related to their service, and Dr. Canard regularly visits the WHMU as part of this General Neurology Practice.”
On the subject of Biden’s physical, O’Connor noted that “President Biden has not seen a neurologist outside of his annual physical.”
O’Connor also stressed that Biden’s last physical found no signs of Parkinson’s, which he detailed in a Feb. 28 letter.
Reporters badgering Jean-Pierre had access to that publicly released letter.
As ABC News reported earlier on Monday, an expert in Parkinson’s disease visited the White House eight times over an eight-month span between last July and March of this year, including one visit with the president’s personal physician, according to White House visitor logs.
Asked repeatedly at Monday’s press briefing about Cannard, Jean-Pierre refused to say if the neurologist ever treated the president or consulted on his care, citing privacy concerns, but did say Biden was not being treated for Parkinson’s disease.
MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell took the reporters to task Monday night. The informtion they demanded was available to them in February.
Lawrence: If you saw any of The White House Press Briefing today, it was The White House Press Corps and many of them at their absolute worst.. pic.twitter.com/U5DflrETuA
Democrats in leadership are split. But now it seems members of The Squad, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Rep. Maxine Waters, and others are standing with Biden.
Rep. @AOC: President Biden has made clear that he is in this race. The matter is closed. Biden is our nominee. He is in this race and I support him. He is running against Donald Trump, who is a man with 34 felony convictions. Not a single Republican has asked for Donald Trump to… pic.twitter.com/MOvUu3VQU5
“We’re losing the plot,” Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) told a swarm of reporters at the Capitol on Monday. “We are not talking about what we need to be talking about.”
The Biden fans span the gamut from lefties such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) and Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) to Democrats who’ve won in swing districts and states such as Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.). Members of the influential Congressional Black Caucus make up a sizable chunk of the defenders. Some have been loud and feisty in their counterarguments, mixing it up with other politicians and people onX and seem, in some cases, to be relishing the fight.
To be clear, I’m a pledged Biden delegate. He’s the candidate until he’s not.
Friends and family have asked if I’m worried about violence in Chicago because they remember the convention there in 1968. What they don’t remember is that the incumbent president (LBJ) stepped aside at the end of March, leading to a contested convention. In November that year, Democrats LOST.
They have brainwashed their audience. And they’ll keep doing it because when they took the tiniest step toward the truth after the 2020 election they all fled to OAN and Newsmax. They won’t make that mistake again.
