mtutiger

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...

My theory (has been suggested elsewhere today) on the Univision panel MB shared earlier all thinking Biden did better is that there were likely subtitles involved. If you were reading that debate off of subtitles, that likely swings the entire view of what took place lol

When you consider that his polling rests a lot on relative strength with black and Hispanic voters at the moment, there are changes within groups that can happen on account of this debate that may not help him.

Interesting thread. The one thing I've really come around on is that while Biden had a terrible night, Trump did himself zero favors as well, particularly with Black voters (ie. "black jobs), with how he came across last night.

August to November doesn't provide a whole lot of time for fundraising.... and Kamala Harris would be the only candidate who can avail themselves of the $212 million that the Biden campaign is sitting on right now. People can joke about "replacing Baez with McKinstry" all they want as if these are excuses, but these are real issues that people just avoid when dealing with these hypotheticals that extend beyond Kamala Harris. It just is what it is.

Would you want a Democratic Senator from Georgia replaced with a Republican, Lee? lol

Brian Kemp is white, he's a Governor, and he'd be replacing Warnock on Earth 2.0 if Warnock won as a candidate on a D ticket Or are we just gonna throw names out like this is fantasy baseball some more without thinking about the second order effects?

The Democratic Party isn't a cult built around Joe Biden, that seems like a pretty significant difference.

Certainly the Dems aren't helping themselves with their messaging, but the media has been absolutely savage since this debate took place. And that would have happened regardless. They can't just ignore their way out of this.

Initial ratings suggest a 30% decline versus 2020 as well.... mirrors people's relative lack of interest in this election, on one hand maybe hide's the performance to a degree, but the downside for Biden too is that the coverage thereafter (which has been disastrous, fair or not) is likely to fill in people's perceptions of the event more had more tuned in and watched the whole way through

The chutzpah of these guys talking about "Twitter is not real life" when they are two of the most Twitter-brained people on my feed lol

It's not getting press, but Trump's "black jobs" comments did go viral and are undoubtedly a negative

It's very non-committal in a way that we haven't seen out of Dem leadership thus far, that's for sure. I'm not even sure if this situation is entirely fair, but it's taking on a life of its own at this point and it's getting harder and harder to see Biden's campaign outrunning it.

In general, it's probably not wise to read too far into any statements that any of the politicians are making today for this reason. People make bad decisions when they are reactionary, of course you are going to see anodyne statements of support. In the event that Biden does step aside (pretty unlikely still IMO), it's not something that will happen overnight, will take some coordination and behind the scenes stuff that we probably don't know about to make it reality. Dem Party leaders would hold the line until he would theoretically make that call.

Certainly true once he became nominee in 2020, but there's been a lot of reporting (anonymous sources of course) to the idea that parts of Obama's team and Biden's team didn't play well either. My point is more that simply saying that because they served together doesn't mean incredible loyalty to Joe Biden....