;)
Monday
Jul082024
The Conversation -- July 8, 2024
Emily Baumgaertner & Peter Baker of the New York Times: "An expert on Parkinson's disease from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center visited the White House eight times in eight months from last summer through this spring, including at least once for a meeting with President Biden's physician, according to official visitor logs. The expert, Dr. Kevin Cannard, is a neurologist who specializes in movement disorders and recently published a paper on Parkinson's. The logs, released by the White House, document visits from July 2023 through March of this year.... It was unclear whether Dr. Cannard was at the White House to consult specifically about the president or there for unrelated meetings.... Without discussing Dr. Cannard specifically, [White House spokesman Andrew] Bates said that the president 'has been seen by a neurologist once a year' as part of his overall annual physical checkup and 'that examination has found no sign of Parkinson's and he is not being treated for it.' He declined to provide dates of any meetings between Mr. Biden and any of his specialists.... In a six-page letter released after [a February 28] checkup, Dr. [Kevin] O'Connor [-- the White House physician --] said the president's medical team had conducted 'an extremely detailed neurologic exam' that had yielded 'no findings which would be consistent with' Parkinson's, stroke or other central neurological disorders." MB: This clarifies a Guardian story, based on New York Post reporting, that I linked with some skepticism yesterday. So now we know what we know. ~~~
~~~ Michael Shear of the New York Times: "The White House briefing room devolved into shouting on Monday as the press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, repeatedly dodged and refused to answer questions about the president's health, and whether visits to the White House by a Parkinson's doctor were about the president.... At Monday's daily briefing, Ms. Jean-Pierre refused to talk about Dr. [Kevin] Cannard [-- a Walter Reed neurologist --] or to acknowledge his visits to the White House, even after ... news organizations reported on the logs."
Michael Shear & Maggie Astor of the New York Times: "President Biden said in a letter to congressional Democrats on Monday that he was 'firmly committed to staying in the race,' a defiant answer to allies on Capitol Hill who have said in recent days that he should drop out. He then called into 'Morning Joe' on MSNBC to underscore that message. 'The bottom line here is that we're not going anywhere -- I am not going anywhere,' he said. His pledge to remain in the race kicks off what could be the most crucial week of his presidency, as he faces crumbling support from Democratic lawmakers and mounting fears that his defiance could lead to a historic rout by ... Donald J. Trump and his followers in November's races for the White House and Congress." At 11:00 am ET, this is the pinned item in a liveblog of presidential election updates. ~~~
~~~ Politico's story is here. President Biden's letter to Congressional Democrats is here, via Politico. See David F.'s commentary at the top of today's thread. ~~~
~~~ Isabella Ramirez & Maya Ward of Politico: "President Joe Biden slammed his critics as 'elites' in a live interview on MSNBC's 'Morning Joe' on Monday, daring any challengers to run against him as he doubled down on his vow to stay in the race. 'I'm getting so frustrated by the elites -- now I'm not talking about you guys -- the elites in the party, "Oh, they know so much more." Any of these guys that don't think I should run, run against me. Announce for president, challenge me at the convention,' Biden told hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski. During the audio-only interview, Biden shot down Brzezinski's description of him as the presumptive Democratic nominee. 'I'm more than the presumptive, I'm going to be the Democratic nominee,' Biden said, laughing." ~~~
The Best-laid Plans ... Gang Aft Agley. Reid Epstein of the New York Times: "From the outset of President Biden's re-election campaign, the plan for winning was to make ... Donald J. Trump so unpalatable that voters uneasy with the incumbent would vote for him anyway. But now Mr. Biden is stuck in a political tailspin, with an abysmal debate performance highlighting his inability to make a case against Mr. Trump and prompting a collective national hand-wringing about his ability to do his job while an increasing number of House Democrats say he should leave the race. To get voters to focus on the threats posed by a second Trump administration, Mr. Biden's own allies say he first must escape his current doom loop and convince voters -- even and especially fellow Democrats -- that he is up to the job himself."
New York. Katherine Rosman of the New York Times: "Three Columbia University administrators have been removed from their posts after sending text messages that 'disturbingly touched on ancient antisemitic tropes' during a forum about Jewish issues in May, according to a letter sent by Columbia officials to the university community on Monday. The administrators are still employed by the university but have been placed on indefinite leave and will not return to their previous jobs. Nemat Shafik, the Columbia president, described the sentiments in the text messages as 'unacceptable and deeply upsetting, conveying a lack of seriousness about the concerns and the experiences of members of our Jewish community.' She said the messages were 'antithetical to our university's values and the standards.' The announcement came about a month after a conservative website published photos that showed some of the text messages sent by the administrators."
Israel/Palestine, et al. The New York Times' live updates of developments Monday in the Israel/Hamas war are here.
~~~~~~~~~~
Presidential Race
Luke Broadwater, et al., of the New York Times: "President Biden's base of support among key Democrats on Capitol Hill began to crumble on Sunday as a half-dozen top members of the House privately told colleagues he should withdraw from the presidential race amid growing concerns about his age and ability to win re-election. During a virtual private meeting, the House Democrats -- all senior members of powerful committees -- discussed how to use their collective influence to convince Mr. Biden he had little chance of defeating ... Donald J. Trump, according to five people familiar with the confidential discussion.... Among those saying explicitly that Mr. Biden should end his candidacy were Representatives Jerrold Nadler of New York, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee; Adam Smith of Washington, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee; Mark Takano of California, the ranking Democrat on the Veterans Affairs Committee; and Joseph D. Morelle of New York, the top Democrat on the committee on House Administration Politico's story is here.
Oh, for Pete's Sake. Jordain Carney of Politico: "House Republicans are opening an investigation into President Joe Biden's doctor in the wake of his debate performance -- the latest sign that Democrats' political headaches are only growing. House Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) sent a letter to White House physician Kevin O'Connor on Sunday requesting that he appear behind closed doors for a transcribed interview with committee counsel. Comer is giving O'Connor until July 14 to contact staff to schedule the interview." MB: Funny Comer showed no such enthusiasm for investigating Dr. Ronny Jackson (that's Ronny Johnson to the Man with the Very Good Brain) and the Uppers and Downers Pill Dispensary Johnson-né-Jackson ran out of Trump's White House. (Also linked yesterday.)
Yasmeen Abutaleb, et al., of the Washington Post: "When questions about his age and ability to serve another four-year term have surfaced -- whether from the news media, lawmakers or the general public -- the president's aides have been quick to deny any problem.... Aides have increasingly shielded Biden from unscripted encounters -- shortening his interactions with the news media and installing teleprompters at virtually all of his appearances where he would give remarks, even small private events -- sparking suspicion among those who interact with him less often that his aging and decline may be worse than aides have acknowledged."
Maureen Dowd of the New York Times knocks President Biden's verbal gaffes. MB: That's all well and good, but I am reminded that for at least a year after Donald Trump became president, MSM reporters went out of their way to "translate" his incoherent remarks and turn them into complete sentences. They also have not complained in print about Biden's delivery, even though it's obviously been substandard for a couple of years.
Timothy Snyder on Substack: "It should seem odd that media calls to step down were not first directed to Trump. If we are calling for Biden to step aside because someone must stop Trump from bringing down the republic, then surely it would have made more sense to first call for Trump to step aside? (The Philadelphia Inquirer did).... When media folks describe discussions among Democrats as chaos and disarray, they are implicitly suggesting that it is better for a leader of a party to never be questioned."
Azi Paybarah of the Washington Post: "The head of a Philadelphia radio station said Sunday it has parted ways with a host who acknowledged that she interviewed President Biden with questions submitted by his campaign, going against the station's practice and those of most news outlets. 'On July 3, the first post-debate interview with President Joe Biden was arranged and negotiated independently by WURD radio host Andrea Lawful-Sanders without knowledge, consultation or collaboration with WURD management,' Sara M. Lomax, president and CEO of WURD Radio said in a statement.... Later on Saturday, people familiar with the Biden booking operation said the campaign will not continue the practice of offering 'suggested questions.'" MB: I dunno, but it seems that once again the "littlest person" pays the price for a mistake and everybody else get away with it.
J.D. Vance Figures He Is Entitled to His Own Facts. Tom Boggioni on AlterNet: "In just the first half of Sen. J.D. Vance's interview with 'Meet the Press' host Kristen Welker, the Ohio Republican waved his hands and snapped at her as she attempted to fact-check him." Vance first claimed that the Biden administration engineered the New York prosecution against Trump; then claimed that Democrats want to fund abortions up to the time of birth. Welker pushed back against both false assertions.
Washington Post Editors: "... the GOP has an ambitious agenda, and much of it is unpopular. That is likely why Mr. Trump doesn't want it written down in an official document -- and why the party's platform committee also plans to meet behind closed doors, even though sessions have traditionally been televised on C-SPAN.... To be sure, Mr. Trump is an apparent menace even without detailing every weird plan his far-right administration-in-waiting wants to impose on the nation.... He gets away with [incendiary] talk [and disastrous proposals] in part because he does not let himself get pinned down on specifics. Voters should demand better than such cynical strategic ambiguity."
Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law. -- U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 3 (emphasis added)
That's unconstitutional! -- John Roberts, Trump v. U.S.
Eileen Sullivan & Danielle Kaye of the New York Times: "Boeing agreed on Sunday to plead guilty to a felony charge of conspiring to defraud the federal government over two fatal crashes of the 737 Max in 2018 and 2019, according to a late-night court filing. In the deal with the department, outlined in part in the court filing, Boeing also agreed to pay a $487.2 million fine -- the maximum allowed by law -- and invest at least $455 million over the next three years to strengthen its compliance and safety programs. The company will be put on probation, supervised by the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas, for three years. As part of the probation, the Justice Department will appoint an independent compliance monitor who will make sure that safety measures are in place and followed, submitting annual reports to the government.... The company's board of directors will also be required to meet with crash victims' families.... The company has not been convicted of a federal felony in decades. In the filing, the department described the charge of conspiring to defraud the federal government as 'the most serious readily provable offense.'" ~~~
~~~ David Koenig & Alanna Richer of the AP: "Boeing will plead guilty to a criminal fraud charge stemming from two crashes of 737 Max jetliners that killed 346 people after the government determined the company violated an agreement that had protected it from prosecution for more than three years, the Justice Department said Sunday night. Federal prosecutors gave Boeing the choice last week of entering a guilty plea and paying a fine as part of its sentence or facing a trial on the felony criminal charge of conspiracy to defraud the United States."
Ajit Niranjan of the Guardian: "The world has baked for 12 consecutive months in temperatures 1.5C (2.7F) greater than their average before the fossil fuel era, new data shows. Temperatures between July 2023 and June 2024 were the highest on record, scientists found, creating a year-long stretch in which the Earth was 1.64C hotter than in preindustrial times."
~~~~~~~~~~
France. Roger Cohen of the New York Times: "France faced a hung parliament and deep political uncertainty after the three main political groups of the left, center and right emerged from snap legislative elections on Sunday with large shares of the vote but nothing approaching an absolute majority. The preliminary results upended widespread predictions of a clear victory for the National Rally, Marine Le Pen's anti-immigrant party that dominated the first round of voting a week ago. Instead, the left-wing New Popular Front won 178 seats. The centrist coalition of President Emmanuel Macron, who cast the country into turmoil a month ago by calling the election, was in second place with 150 seats. Trailing it was the National Rally and its allies, which took 142 seats." Politico's report is here.
Israel. Isabel Kershner of the New York Times: "Israelis on Sunday marked nine months since the devastating Hamas-led attack of Oct. 7 and the start of the ensuing war in Gaza with a nationwide day of anti-government protests.... Primarily calling for a cease-fire deal with Hamas that would see hostages return from captivity and for new elections in Israel, protesters brought traffic to a standstill at several major intersections in cities and on highways across the country. Much of central Tel Aviv was blocked in one of the biggest protests in months."
News Lede
Washington Post: "Beryl, now a Category 1 hurricane, is expected to make landfall in Texas in the coming hours after tearing through parts of the Caribbean, where it killed at least 11 people, wrecked homes and tore down power lines. It is projected to hit Matagorda, a small town between Corpus Christi and Houston, before bringing destructive winds inland." This is a liveblog. ~~~
~~~ Here's the New York Times' liveblog.
Share Article
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.
Reader Comments (16)
It is unconscionable that the Vice President, the cabinet and leaders in Congress who have spent time with the President have been at least complicit in not acknowledging the physical and mental deterioration of the President so obvious to the nation in the debate and follow-up interview. If his wife and staff have limited access to him, it is even worse.
Now we are learning that the President's condition has been of concern since, at least, January. I'd call it hubris on the President's part to think that a man in his condition is the only one who can save the country from Trump. His is a Trumpian hubris, if tragic. Assuming, of course, that he is even aware of it.
There is no shame in bowing before age and infirmity. He should resign within the week.
VP Harris should be sworn in as our first woman President. President Harris should then declare the Democratic convention open to other nominations and pledge to release her war chest should she not be the candidate.
The good news is that the Dems are keeping Trump below the fold and the first banner ad online. A former Louisiana governor said that the people of Louisiana don't want good government. They want entertainment. This situation, as it plays out, would be riveting through the election.
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan deserves serious consideration.
https://x.com/DanaHoule/status/1808171409891369141
It means unless he quits that Joe Biden is the nominee, and that if it’s not him, anyone other than Kamala Harris would be starting from nothing & be completely overwhelmed & ineffective & would almost certainly lose.
24/It means talking about replacing Biden is a fantasy, bc it’s impossible, & continuing to talk about it like it’s a possibility is stupid & destructive & people who want to win should stop it, & everyone else should be shut down because they’re making shit up that’s not real
There's much more at the link. It's either Joe or Kamala, there is no other option.
Agenda 47.
Finally we are getting those flying cars we have been long promised.
"How the Supreme Court Bolstered Project 2025
By Marc Elias
Setting aside its unilateral abrogation of power, the Court’s decision helps achieve a central goal of Project 2025 — the so-called “dismantling the administrative state.” By removing deference to agencies, the Court tacitly endorses the view that the accumulated expertise within government helps is a problem rather than a solution that achieves better outcomes for its citizens.
In addition to reordering the relationship between the co-equal branches, for it to succeed, Project 2025 must change the mindset of those who work in and around government. For strongmen to rule — rather than serve — they must have a free hand to defy common understandings of the limits of their power. They must also inspire others to follow them in recklessly abandoning the rule of law.
In two of its final decisions of the term, the Court provided Project 2025 adherents’ victories that will enable a future president and their administration to be more ruthless and less concerned with breaking the law."
Politico
"Secret Meetings, Private Threats and a Massive Arms Race: How the World is Preparing for Trump
In 2016, no one in the world was ready for President Trump. America’s NATO allies aren’t making the same mistake this time."
Jerusalem Demsas, in The Atlantic, writes that Biden's defenders "put forth elaborate rationales for why the only option is the status quo. One that has gained traction among Biden’s supporters is that the campaign war chest, about $240 million, is his alone—or, at best, could go only to Vice President Kamala Harris.
...but...
if the Democrats field a different ticket, the only way the new presidential nominee enters the race with 'zero dollars in their bank account' would be if Biden wanted that to happen. Just as the Biden campaign can make cash donations to party committees, it can also make 'in-kind' contributions, such as offices, computers, cellphones, and other campaign infrastructure, which could be used on behalf of a new candidate.
...
Other superficially decisive arguments have been floating around—for instance, that at least in some states no Democrat besides Biden would be able to get on the ballot at this point. This claim is also not true. The UCLA legal scholar Richard Hasen told me that if a candidate were to be replaced, 'this is a good time for it to happen, before there’s been an official nomination.'”
The Biden campaign’s rationalizations for the status quo don’t add up.
I'm almost as old as Joe Biden. If you asked me if I was in top form, had girlish stamina and should be put in charge of some important entity, say the Library of Congress or the New York Times, I'd tell you no. In fact, I'd pull a Sherman ("If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve.") and beg off.
In my case, I'm probably wiser than I was when I was in top form and would make better decisions than I would have back then. Yes, the presidency should be held by a wise person, but it also should be held by someone who has the energy to carry out those wise (or wise-ish) decisions and sell them to the American public.
So don't pick me. And, IMO, don't pick Joe.
This is from the link that I posted above.
2/It’s possible I’m missing something, but I don’t think so. Here’s why the Democrats can nominate Joe Biden, or possibly Kamala Harris, but nobody else.
There’s only one candidate with a 2024 presidential campaign committee registered with the Federal Election Commission.
3/Some of the “stuff” of the Biden campaign can probably be transferred to the DNC (and maybe state parties), but most of it can’t. Another candidate can’t just take over Biden’s campaign.
So, think about it.
A new nominee would not have a campaign. Like, not a tax ID…
4/Not a bank account, not a website or address. There would be nothing. They would start out largely paralyzed for weeks.
First and most obviously, there would be no staff. And there would be no HR process for hiring staff, no payroll process. So a new campaign trying to…
5/…rapidly expand would have to focus on staffing. They could probably hire people from the Biden campaign, but not all would want to work for the new candidate.
Among the first people needed would be compliance and legal staff, because a new campaign would be immediately…
6/…challenged on ballot access and all kinds of other stuff. Compliance would be needed to deal with the massive influx of immediate cash and to be sure everything meets FEC rules.
But to get cash they’d need banking/accounting as well. So that needs to be set up…
7/And since most of the money would come in online, they’d need to immediately set up a web operation robust enough to handle to load, and secure enough to handle the obvious cyberattacks that would happen. So they’d need contracts for servers, support staff, etc…
8/This new campaign would also be immediately inundated with calls and emails from press, potential volunteers and donors, other campaigns/party orgs, orgs inviting the candidate to events, etc.. So they would immediately need staff for press, scheduling, political, etc
9/Some of these people could probably slide over from the DNC or state parties. But that leaves holes at the DNC and state parties.
But let’s say they could immediately staff up. Where does everyone work? Office leases prob can’t be automatically transferred to the…
10/…new campaign, so all of those would need to be renegotiated, and some may not be available to the new campaign. They’d also have to deal with utilities.
Then, how does everyone communicate? As we know from 2016, security breeches can be fatal. So it’s not something…
11/…that can be tossed together in a day or so.
show full post on front page
But let’s say all the staff and infrastructure can be conjured from the ether. What about the data? Some could probably be transferred, but some of the lists would probably need to be purchased at fair market value from…
12/…Biden/Harris 2024. The new campaign would be starting out with no email lists, no volunteer lists, no fundraising lists, etc.
They’d also be starting with no contracts with vendors. All those contracts would have to be negotiated (think of the staff time needed to do…
13/…all of that at once). Some vendors wouldn’t sign with the new campaign, so they would need to be replaced.
There’s also the issue of advertising. The Biden campaign has already reserved tens of millions of dollars of TV ad time from the last few weeks of the campaign…
14/…when the inventory is low and what’s left is expensive. The new campaign probably wouldn’t be able to get the same volume, or get it at the same price. There would be similar problems with digital, with mail houses, etc.
Then there’s voter/targeting data. A lot of that…
15/…is probably used through the DNC. But what about the plans on how to use it? Analytics/targeting would need to be recalibrated for the new candidate, who would not have the same traits/strengths & weaknesses, etc as Biden/Harris.
As for money, well, there are a lot of…
16/…challenges there as well. A new candidate who hadn’t recently run for President (which, since Dean Phillips doesn’t count, is anyone) wouldn’t have much of a finance committee. They’d have no events scheduled/booked. And they wouldn’t have any fundraising agreements…
17/…with other campaigns, state parties, etc.
But let’s say all of that is in place. What’s the plan? The new candidate would start without a campaign plan or budget. They’d have done no polling. No data work. No research. No policy.
Then they’d have to vet and choose a VP.
18/So, even if we live in a fantasy world where there would be no issues with ballot access/state laws, DNC delegate/nomination rules, the political chaos of Biden not running and the first woman & African/Asian-American VP being passed over, the new candidate being untested…
19/…in a primary season and thrown in to the craziest campaign in modern US history, the ceding of the advantages of incumbency, the fact that they’d unexpectedly have to effectively abandon their day job…in the fantasy world where none of those problems would exist…
20/…it would still be impossible–if I’m correct that the Biden campaign is not transferrable to anyone but Harris (and even that would be challenged–it would still be impossible for Democrats to replace Joe Biden unless they tried to win without a campaign.
Now, some may…
21/…point out that Trump didn’t have much of a campaign in 2016. That’s true. But by July he had all of the legal/financial arrangements needed to have a campaign. He had a lot of the physical infrastructure. The RNC wasn’t in chaos the way the DNC would be if Biden…
22/…is replaced. Plus, even before he ran for President he had nearly complete name recognition. And despite the help of the Russians and James Comey, he lost the popular vote. So Trump’s campaign doesn’t show campaign apparatus doesn’t matter.
23/So what does all of this mean?
It means unless he quits that Joe Biden is the nominee, and that if it’s not him, anyone other than Kamala Harris would be starting from nothing & be completely overwhelmed & ineffective & would almost certainly lose.
24/It means talking about replacing Biden is a fantasy, bc it’s impossible, & continuing to talk about it like it’s a possibility is stupid & destructive & people who want to win should stop it, & everyone else should be shut down because they’re making shit up that’s not real
25/Correction: TV reservations would prob be OK bc they’re from the Biden/Harris-DNC joint committee.
But I may have understated the problems w state ballot access. It may be impossible to get anyone else’s name on some ballots except Harris (& I’m not even sure RE her)
Best lede I've seen so far on the Biden/Trump electability controversy was in todays online Atlanta paper. It was on first time voters: "The future doesn't belong to grandpas".
@pat: You have presented a good picture of how hard it is to run for public office. Unless Democrats choose some nitwit like Donald Trump as their standard-bearer, they will be choosing someone who already has run for public office (probably more than once), who has an entire national establishment (DNC) behind her or him and who knows, in general, what she or he is up against.
My sense is that if Democrats, with the help of Biden, choose a qualified person other than Biden to be their presidential candidate, that candidate will get so much buzz that the main person who will be unhappy about it will be the nitwit referenced above.
pat: WOW. Yesterday I had no idea where "we"/they go from here; funny, today I have no idea where "we"/they go from here. I guess I am at square one, Biden is the candidate, we work to get him elected and that will be monumental, given the squads of morons determined to elect an evil, incompetent, dishonest liar and felon/conman to run the country-- who has just been given carte blanche to do any damn thing he (they) want (s). If he falls apart, or is lynched by the people who want to 25th amendment him, Kamala would step in and she would be just fine. Okay, case closed...(today--)
That long post should have been in quotes. It is from the Dana Houle link that I found on Balloon-Juice.
It makes sense that it will not be easy to find, nominate, fund, and elect a totally new candidate. The obvious choice, to me, would be Kamala Harris. In fact, maybe if this debacle is not going to go away, a smart move would be for Biden to step down soon so that she can be on the ticket as president. But who knows.
What really bothers me is that the NYT and WaPo seem to be obsessed with Biden's "mental acuity" and not at all with the mental state of his opponent, or the rants and lies that he spews at every opportunity.
I'm reading Fauci's book, On Call, and yesterday I read the chapter about Covid and his interactions with trump and the thought of that monster getting in the Oval Office again is horrifying and sickening.
Hackwackers
"News Media Can't Handle The "Truth (Social)"
Brian Klass: "... Trump gets away with it because the previously unthinkable has become routine. As a species, we are drawn to fresh and surprising information — something we could call “novelty bias.” What would surprise you more: Trump amplifying a lunatic conspiracy theory in a tweet or him unequivocally praising the sacrifices of immigrant nurses and doctors during the pandemic? The former happens all the time; the latter would provoke breathless commentary. Is Trump finally making his mythical pivot to being presidential? Is this a new general election strategy? For every other mainstream politician, that dynamic would be inverted...""
The news media that has been screaming that Biden and his people can not face the plain truth of his mental slipups continues to ignore the plain truth reiterated daily by many of their readership and critics that they are failing to adequately cover the dangers, past, present and future, of Donald Trump. Being repeatedly named in the Epstein files should warrant a front page headline. But even something like that made for eye grabbing headlines about a leading presidential candidate is not deemed newsworthy enough to break through the nonstop Biden has aged cover stories.
I dream that we all get to see the Donald Trump version of this picture this year.
What those of you who think we should stick with Biden are missing is that Biden is going to lose the election. This doesn't mean that another Democratic candidate won't lose the election to the Orange Jesus, but we know Biden will lose. If Biden were a star brainiac, a great orator & 35 years old, I'd still favor a different candidate -- one who could beat Trump.
The ONLY argument for Biden is that he won all the primaries so he's the candidate "the people" prefer (I would be one of those "people" who voted for him). But that's not a good enough argument for losing a presidential election. I think the polls show that, like me, a majority of those "people" who voted for Biden would rather beat Trump in November than have their primary votes validated.
Pointing out that Gretchen Whitmer or Kamala Harris will have to scramble to get her campaign up-to-speed well may be true, but it's also very Debbie Downer.
Democrats need more if this from Auchincloss