mtutiger

Put another way, if this is going to happen, it stands to reason that the campaign is going to think through every possible angle... They don't have the luxury of acting out of pure emotion like the NYT Editorial Board does.

I am less concerned with them spinning about this because, if in fact this is a process to bring about a change (IDK at this point), a lot of **** needs to happen in order to do it in the best possible way. It at least buys some time. It's easy to fire off a round on Twitter about Joe needing to stand down, but gaming out what the reaction to him serving out his term, for instance, needs to thought through

Practically speaking, she would just end up not having a VP until if she won the Presidency

My only wish from those demanding Biden step aside is that they recognize the reality that there is no Plan F, Netflix scenario with a contested convention and Gretchen Whitmer emerging. Kamala Harris, for a variety of practical reasons, is the next available option. Those who make the demands while ignoring her presence are hard to take seriously. And frankly, a lot of supposedly serious people (and now editorial boards) are doing that.

The odds have gone up that he drops IMO.

To be clear, I'm not blaming the moderators for this performance. Biden owns his performance in that debate. But both things can be true: Biden sucked and, even if it was a format the campaigns agreed on, there are things they could have done during and after the production that would have served and better informed viewers.

Guessing the campaigns would have had to agree to that...

I didn't watch on CNN (I watched on WGN locally here), but my understanding is that they had Daniel Dale do a pretty thorough segment going through all of the candidates lies.... but, naturally, that segment didn't air until something like 11:45 pm eastern. Like, maybe run that segment immediately at the conclusion of the debate? Do we really need an hour of their hack panels before cutting through some of the BS? I understand Eric's point here, most of it falls on the candidate, and it's like drinking through a firehose when you are going against a profligate liar like Donald Trump. But CNN shouldn't escape scrutiny here.... both in terms of moderation and in terms of production, they could have done better to highlight the falsehoods that were thrown around in a way that would have served the viewer better.

The more fact checking of both candidates, the better

People have their issues with Axelrod (myself included), but he's right here.... there aren't going to be public calls for him to step down. Maybe there's a few party elders (ie. Schumer, Jeffries, Pelosi, Clyburn) *behind close doors* who can have the conversation with him, but ultimately it's a decision that he's going to have to make, in consultation with his family. Expecting a jail break from rank and file or Dem surrogates (ie. Whitmer, Shapiro, Pritzker, etc.) is unrealistic. And there is no mechanism to force him off the ballot that doesn't involve him making that choice. And in the unlikely event that it happens, it will be Kamala Harris. If you are advocating he step aside, be comfortable with that.

I believe that. The overall lack of conversation about the substance really stands out in political media though, and the fact that I hear and see more conversation from more normie / non-political types about the substance than from people who are paid to cover this stuff for a living should be really embarrassing

Not a columnist, but Jonathan Martin is also the worst. Probably makes at least 5x what I make and yet keeps suggesting "West Wing" BS that even novices like any of us know cannot happen in reality

More like Oz's abortion comments in his Fetterman debate (ie. More or less ignored by the media but far more consequential than acknowledged in real time)

My hottest take from what happened last night is that the "black jobs" comment is going to hurt Trump a lot more than people realize. Especially when you consider that a lot of the polling shows Trump overperforming with AAs/Latino voters, and that his polling lead, to some extent, rests on that. We always assume that it's only about style, but on substance, this likely hurt him a lot with a group he has polled relatively well with during this cycle.

Based on everything I know about Tater, he will be advocating for Biden and against Trump going forward.

And it dates back years.... this isn't new. This is the same editorial board that excoriated Joe Biden when interviewing him during the 2020 primary and whose elevator operator went viral with Biden going down after the interview. I stand behind my earlier comments about this and that I have concerns about Biden's candidacy going forward, but I'm just not going to pretend that the Times, or the Post, or many other journalists are completely straight when they cover Joe Biden. They weren't during the last primary season, and IMO, it's explained in part because he's not an Ivy Leaguer and came from a different class than many of them did. And it mirrors their inability to really capture the median American in their coverage IMO

I hate to pick on the NYT because it went beyond them, but if we are sitting here two weeks from now and it's status quo or close to status quo in this Presidential race, given how far out over their skis they got.... like, how do you walk that back? They aren't going to let up, but jeez, it would make them look a lot more irrelevant.

Have they written their "To Serve His Country, Donald Trump Should Leave the Race" editorial yet? For the record at least?

The same New York Times who will not utter a word about Trump using "Palestinian" as a slur.

I think there's legitimate concerns coming out of last night, but it gets exhausting watching guys like Wasserman, Astead Herndon with NYT, others in the national press who have *never* liked Biden even dating back to 2019/2020 act impartial about this stuff. They just are not. I would say not moving the needle isn't good even if it's the best case scenario here (Biden needed to use this debate to help gain on his current standing), but given the freakout from the pundit class, it would be kinda hilarious if their hysteria amounted to a hill of ****. Truly some of the most cloistered people in society.

It's amazing how this stuff just gets ignored by the media. Just normalized now

Jesus H Christ

538/Ipsos panel suggests minimal change post debate...