Here's what happened the last time the Democrats switched out a nominee at the last minute.

Happy Independents Day weekend, Brad!

Unilaterally front loading the Democratic National Convention is not a democratic process.

It really turned off the electorate when Hillary did so when she ran for the Presidency... and lost.

Releasing the delegates and letting ALL of the good contenders run (and debate) in the seven weeks left before the convention will assure voters that they have the best choice.

Unfortunately, giving up power to someone in power is one of the hardest decisions for a sitting President.
For the good of the country, LBJ did so in 1968 in a time of national unrest... a time that has come around once again.

One debate does not an election make.

No one can know how future will play out under these conditions.

Hillery Clinton was strong, truthful and won debate over lying, criminal Trump. Ultimately, that was not enough to override right-wing treachery.

So, no matter what is decided, any of the choices are better than the right-wing's and Trump's Fascism.

Big themes need repeating instead of policy details. Save Democracy. Restore Voting Rights, Human Rights, Environmental Rights and Empathy itself. End neo-liberalism as only Biden was doing. Stop billionaires' resource grab.

Here is a debate reaction that supports Biden's staying. It includes information about the foreign and domestic networks that have worked to undermine democracy in America and worldwide for decades. We must know how tech and military grade propaganda have been used to turn Americans against each other. That will help us rebuff it and knit together to save democracy.

https://youtu.be/lMual4N-lnE
Presidential Debate Reaction Livestream...

https://www.bettedangero...-of-internet-espionage-a
20 YEARS OF INTERNET ESPIONAGE: A Timeline
Heidi Siegmund Cuda

(A future article will include more than the promptitude timeline of this beginning article)

As we discussed internet espionage and the birth of the alt right meme machine, I kept searching for solutions. And we end on solutions — holding high-level criminals accountable, regulations, privacy protections, wrestling platforms away from nefarious oligarchs and turning them into public utilities.

I’m of the mind that people are wearying of the nihilism they’ve been sold and that a return to decency is imminent and urgent.

PDiddie @1:

Yup, I had previously read that piece (well, the original NYT piece that it references) and am well aware of the previous similarish situations. But, while the Eagleton 1972 replacement isn't particularly germane here, the Johnson 1968 case certainly is. And that's one of the reasons I posted the piece above.

The Open Convention of 1968 (in Chicago!) turned out to be a nightmare for Dems (leading to our current modern Primary process for choosing candidates instead, ironically!)

But that's why the suggestion would be for Biden to help craft his succession with an endorsement of a continuity ticket when/if he announced that he was bowing out.

As noted, it would be "risky", but IF he decided to step down, here is a relatively reasonable, drama-free (ish) way to have an orderly transition with continuity to the current Administration.

JMiller @2 said:

Releasing the delegates and letting ALL of the good contenders run (and debate) in the seven weeks left before the convention will assure voters that they have the best choice.

And while, in practicality, my suggestion in the article above does something akin to that (it would allow for an open process), it recognizes the realities of the short time left, the need for continuity, the need for minimizing chaos and for defeating Donald Trump.

In fact, I go much farther to state that having "the best choice" is not a particularly important part of this plan. It would be about having the best chance of assuring Donald Trump does not win.

For the good of the country, LBJ did so in 1968 in a time of national unrest... a time that has come around once again.

And, of course, Democrats lost the the Presidency that year in the bargain. So, doing it right, in a way that best ensures a positive outcome for Dems --- especially at this much later date --- would be critically important.

A Caller-in to the Thom Hartmann tv program on Link TV (I think it was on June 25th) talked about the legal concept of "EXTERNALITY" used in economic and environmental law to protect people as being perhaps useful, applicable to purged voters to restore their right to vote that was taken from them without their permission nor knowledge by a third party.

Is this a law that Stacey Abrams, Free Speech for People and others could use? Or, talk about so loudly that people know legal voters are being purged (by Fascists), and have been for decades which undermines democracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

Externality

The next debate will be different. Trump may be in jail, won't answer the question, and lie. Biden will be a lot better, the moderators will fact check Trump, and more people will watch. I'm not ready to give up on Biden unless he has serious health problems.

I disagree with Bill Maher on an increasing number of things
lately.

But I'm with him 100% when he says:

"I would vote for Biden's head in a jar of blue liquid over Trump".

I don't worry about MY vote.

I'm worried about everybody else's.

Newsom has shown he can punch.

He went right into Fox Nooz and hit 'em pretty hard, IMO.

A smart, poised debater should wipe the floor with Trump.

America needs to see that happen.

I'd go for Newsom, for sure.

I'll criticize his centrism AFTER he wins big (and only then).

Others have suggested that Harris would have to be the formal Prez to keep the ballot access, money, other bureaucratic details. Newsom or whoever could be the VP, although I like the idea of a Midwestern VP who could help - and given the country's sexism, two women is probably asking too much (Josh Shapiro to help with PA's electors?). And any administration is a team effort - the idea that there's a superhuman Prez who does everything is childish. Definitely none of these are my first choice, but that's irrelevant.

I respect Nelson Mandela for many things, including that he served one term (as a senior) and then left gracefully, offering good wishes to his country. Bye, Don should have done that, too.

Brad, your suggestions on this topic are among the most thoughtful I have read. It's a really good problem solving effort.

Did the supreme court just make Biden a king too, or, only Trump?

If the answer is yes, then despite whether time frame is very short or longer (whether he steps down or stays), could King Biden enact policies that are very popular across the board, yet always stopped by GOP, which frustrates voters about effectiveness of government/politics?

Could Biden as King overstep existing federal/state lines, and make all legal votes count, undoing the purging of legal voters, undoing uncounted provisional ballots, and ensuring that the Post Office performs to protect and deliver ballots in timely manner.

Could he strengthen democracy, by correcting gerrymandered states?

Could King Biden intervene in Houston, Texas where GOP have given themselves the right to determine the outcome of votes there, where there are large minority populations that could turn the state blue?

Could King Biden give women back their full person-hood, health care and autonomy?

Could he buy back or ban assault weapons to stop the right-wing violence intended toward everyone who is not them?

Could he give money he wanted to give, but GOP stopped, to reduce even more student loan debt, other money policies?

Could he enact more climate policy that is hurricane related, fire related in time for what is going to be a terrible season?

Could he do anything about DARK MONEY. Someone suggested he should take all Dark Money Out of System. What could he do with that?

https://www.dailykos.com...ncer-in-the-body-politic

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse tells it like it is: 'one crew, one plan, one cancer in the body politic'

Our current situation should give Dems a rejuvenating chance to focus better on fixing what’s gone wrong in America.

We face three huge threats: persistent internal attacks on our democracy, unbridled climate upheaval, and a captured Court with some deeply corrupt justices

Behind each threat is dark money; massive anonymous political spending by special interests who hide their identities from the public.

The political class has reoriented itself to this new reality, pivoting to the big secret spenders. Voters notice they’re not so important anymore.

An entire dark-money ecosystem has been spawned, with front groups, ‘Donors Trusts,’ coordinating 501c3s and c4s, and superPACs.

This whole filthy bestiary of influence is new (or refocused and expanded) since Citizens United. It didn’t used to be this way; it doesn’t have to be this way.

Democrats keep voting to get rid of dark money, and Republicans keep voting to protect dark money, but voters have no idea. We basically haven’t told them.

Which is pathetic because voters hate dark money with a passion, Republicans, independents and Democrats alike. Polling is off the charts.
....................

What if King Biden did what people want to have done, in very fast fashion. Then he would be very popular for finally paying attention to citizens. And, he would have a great legacy, no matter what.

Any more things that he could do to shore up democracy, climate, protect voters, initial policies that are popular?

Could King Biden do this, or President Biden?

Good ideas, Brad. I just saw this:

https://boingboing.net/2...ace-with-gov-newsom.html

Harris-Newsom 2024? Biden meets VP for lunch today, followed by face-to-face with Gov. Newsom
Carla Sinclair 9:14 am Wed Jul 3, 2024

After President Joe Biden's disastrous debate performance last Thursday, an interesting appointment popped up on his calendar: he's meeting Vice President Kamala Harris this afternoon for "lunch."

And while the Harris team is downplaying calls for Biden to pass the baton to his VP, one can't help but wonder what other reasons Biden might have for his sudden interest in stepping off the campaign trail for a spot of tea.

Furthermore, later in the day, Biden is meeting with California's Gavin Newsom and as well as a few other governors, including J.B. Pritzker of Illinois and, possibly, Michigan's Gretchen Whitmer. Although this gathering had already been on the books prior to his debate, perhaps the pre-4th-of-July shindig will turn into more than just a long weekend holiday for the president.

Re JMiller @2.

I question whether LBJ's withdrawal led to Nixon's win.

There are significant distinctions between 1968 & what we are faced with now.

Unlike Joe Biden, who has already secured the delegates needed for the nomination. LBJ, whose dynamic domestic agenda (such as passage of the Civil Rights & Voting Rights Act and Medicare) were overshadowed by the Vietnam War. So he dropped out immediately after the NH primary.

The real factors behind Nixon's win were (1) an assassin's bullet that ended the life & campaign of RFK Sr., (2) immensely unpopular manipulations by the Dem Party establishment that (a) created bitter protests both inside & outside the convention, and (b) led to the nomination of VP Hubert Humphreey, a perceived pro-war candidate who did not run in, let alone win, a single primary, and (3) Nixon's behind-the-scenes sabotage of the Paris Peace talks coupled with his bogus "Secret Plan" to end the war.

A couple of points, Brad:

1) Any suggestions along these lines must convince an audience of one. Absent Joe Biden's agreement, there is no legal means for nominating anyone other than Biden/Harris.

2) While I think Kamala Harris would make an excellent President, I think Gavin Newsom is, by far, a more dynamic speaker, as demonstrated by this clip.

Assuming the 12th amendment issue could be avoided via a Harris declaration that she is a DC resident, I believe that a Newsom/Harris ticket would offer the best chance to defeat Trump & save democracy.

Bev @12:

Yes, SCOTUS also made Biden a king as well. Though unlawful kingly powers only matter with folks willing to violate the law, knowing they are immune from accountability. That's not Joe Biden.

Furthermore, many of the things you cite are matters of law. Even after what SCOTUS did, a President can't simply declare a new law. It must be passed by Congress, signed by Prez, etc. There would be no way to enforce such an "unlawful" law, at least without sending in military in a full fascist crackdown or some such.

So, for example, it would be both unlawful AND impossible for Joe Biden to fire 6 Supreme Court Justices. There is no Constitutional mechanism for that. But the SCOTUS ruling on immunity would, however, allow him to order Seal Team 6 to assassinate them. Sure, its unlawful, and OTHERS may face a penalty for carrying out an unlawful order, but Biden could not be prosecuted for it either during or after office...if you accept the SCOTUS ruling.

Ernie said @14:

2) While I think Kamala Harris would make an excellent President, I think Gavin Newsom is, by far, a more dynamic speaker
...
I believe that a Newsom/Harris ticket would offer the best chance to defeat Trump & save democracy.

Though I didn't go into details in the piece above, I would not that whether Newsom is more dynamic or would make a better President, that choice is not particularly available short of a likely chaotic Open Convention. And the choice of Newsom --- giving the cold shoulder to the first female black VP who is next in line to the Presidency right now --- would be a likely TERRIBLY choice for the Democratic coalition.

Moreover, as I understand it, only Harris can inherit the mountain of Biden-Harris money and the apparatus already in place to go with it.

I think Newsom would make a great Prez, and make mincemeat of Trump in debates, etc. But that is not the choice that is really available right now.

It seems to me that if Joe decides to drop out, it needs to be Harris and SOMEONE. Hopefully SOMEONE who is endorsed by Biden at the same time as Harris. And having Newsom in that "SOMEONE" slot would add a LOT of strength to the ticket on a number of levels, while shoring up a lot of Harris' perceived (or feared) weaknesses. All while STILL keeping the Dem Coalition together.

Re: Brad @17:

A chaotic, open convention entails risk that far exceeds the risk of an aging Biden remaining. The last thing the nation needs is a repeat of 1968.

If Biden agreed to step down --- and right now that's not happening --- he would need to, at a minimum, meet with Congressional Democrats AND his committed delegates, perhaps via closed circuit teleconference, at the earliest possible date.. He would have to ask his delegates to commit to a specific ticket. Newsom/Harris would make the strongest ticket.

Absent that commitment, Biden should not agree to step aside.

If Biden refuses to step aside, everyone in the Democratic Party and the mainstream media will need to STFU & concentrate on the grave danger Donald Trump, his MAGA Cult, Project 2025 and 6 SCOTUS seditionists-in-robes pose not only to the survival of democracy, but also to every individual liberty ostensibly guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.