Liberals Nate Silver and Ezra Klein Both Whine: It's Time for Biden to Say Bye-Bye;
NYT: Biden Shook His Fist At Us For Reporting On His Advanced Age

Sorry for another Biden Old post after the last one.

Hot Air, quoting garbage tier propaganda mill Politico:

The New York Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger said Monday that the White House is "extremely upset" about its coverage on President Joe Biden's age but the newspaper will "continue to report fully and fairly."
Advertisement

"We are going to continue to report fully and fairly, not just on Donald Trump but also on President Joe Biden," Sulzberger said in an interview with The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

"He is a historically unpopular incumbent and the oldest man to ever hold this office. We've reported on both of those realities extensively, and the White House has been extremely upset about it."M.b>

I wouldn't say you reported on these issues "extensively." You covered them up until the public no longer believed your lies, at which point you very belatedly offered a Modified Limited Hangout version of the truth.

It's a full court press in the liberal media, driving a drumbeat of "Dump Brandon."

Mike Miller at RedState covers Nate Silver's "truth bombs" for his fellow bloodthirsty authoritarians on the left:

If you're someone who would rather not see Trump re-elected again or who cares about the election for other reasons, it's time to face the facts. You need to adjust to the new reality and not be mired in anchoring bias by your previous impression of the race.

He lists some reasons to doubt that Biden is capable of winning:

First, the president's approval ratings do have some meaningful predictive power at this stage as compared with a year ago. And with the general election matchup all but locked in, Biden's head-to-head polls against Trump provide some meaningful signal, too. So it's no longer safe to ignore that Biden has consistently trailed Trump in polls both nationally and (more importantly) in swing states. Or that Biden's approval rating is just 39 percent and shows no signs of improvement, well below the threshold that would ordinarily make a president a favorite for re-election.

Second, to borrow the poker term, Biden no longer has as many "outs" -- meaning, contingencies that could improve his situation:

In the Republican nomination process, Trump is probably going to win all 50 states; he hasn't gotten bruised up or exposed new fissures within the GOP base.

Trump's various criminal trials are (perhaps predictably) facing delays and the Georgia one is a mess, fairly or not, because of an alleged improper romantic relationship between Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and another member of the prosecution team. Yes, Democrats still have some upside if Trump is eventually convicted of something. But so far Trump's favorability ratings have only improved.

And the economy? Well, it has gotten better and both consumer and investor moods have turned more optimistic. I've argued there was never really a gap between economic reality and economic perception in the first place, but if there was, it's pretty much gone now. And yet Biden's standing has not improved. On balance, that ought to be a concerning fact for the White House. It implies that Biden's poor position is not the result of something fixable (the economy) but rather something that very much isn't -- the fact that he's 81 and getting older every day.

His third point is the public perception of Biden has shifted strongly -- maybe even violently -- about Biden's mental fitness.

He notes that Biden refused to take advantage of the traditional Super Bowl powder puff interview (for liberal Democrat presidents, I mean), his caregivers apparently deciding that he wasn't up to such an easy task:

Biden also declined to do a Super Bowl interview that might have allayed public concerns -- something that President Obama did all eight years in office, Trump did three times, and Biden did in 2021. The White House skipped the interview last year when the Super Bowl was carried by Fox, part of a general pattern of Biden avoiding Fox News. But with the game on CBS this year, there were no such excuses.

...

It is a reason for Democrats to be the adults in the room and acknowledge that someone who can't sit through a Super Bowl interview isn't someone the public can trust to have the physical and mental stamina to handle an international crisis, terrorist attack, or some other unforeseen threat when he'll be in his mid-80s.

John Sexton at Hot Air reports on leftwing blunderkind Ezra Klein reaching the same conclusion -- and also basing his argument on Joe Biden's self-assessment that he is too cognitively deteriorated to stand up to a puffball interview with CBS leftwing propagandist Gayle King.

Klein points out that while Biden's Praetorian claims he's able to be president -- supposedly -- we have strong evidence he's not capable of running for president. He's simply not traveling to swing states, not giving speeches, and not sitting for powder puff Super Bowl interviews with CBS's biggest Democrat boosters.

This is the question Democrats keep wanting to answer, the question the Biden administration keeps pretending only to hear: Can Biden do the job of president? But that is not the question of the 2024 campaign. The insistence that Biden is capable of being president is being used to shut down discussion of whether he's capable of running for president...

I was stunned when his team declined a Super Bowl interview. Biden is not up by 12 points. He can't coast to victory here. He is losing. He is behind in most polls. He is behind, despite everything people already know about Donald Trump. He needs to make up ground. If he does not make up ground, Trump wins.

The Super Bowl is one of the biggest audiences you will ever have. And you just skip it? You just say no?...

More at the link.

Klein is pushing for an open convention, in which delegates choose which candidate to support at the convention itself.

This strategy, he admits, is not without big, delicious risks:

The last open convention Democrats had was 1968, a disaster of a convention where the Democratic Party split between pro- and anti-Vietnam War factions, where there was violence in the streets, where Democrats lost the election.

Blogging Nirvana.

How an Open Convention works (I think):

If Biden withdraws from the race -- or is otherwise incapacitated -- all the delegates he has accumulated are released from supporting him, and can support any other candidate (I think).

So this all depends on Biden withdrawing.

The DNC "superdelegates"* are unbound and can always support who ever they want. I think they make up like 25% of the delegates (something like that, anyway). They can't elect a candidate themselves, but they could embarrass Biden by saying they will support someone else at the convention, thus pressuring him to withdraw.

* DNC "superdelegates" -- party hacks and associates of the Clintons not yet murdered by them

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 01:25 PM

| Access Comments