Started By
Message

Joe Biden will not be the Democratic nominee in 2024

Posted on 5/14/24 at 11:50 am
Posted by jb4
Member since Apr 2013
12698 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 11:50 am
Just caught the last minute of his speech, dude is completely lost and belongs in a retirement home. I wouldn’t be shocked if he starts claiming to have had an abortion in the 60’s …he is going to go off script sometime in a speech and say something batshit crazy which will result in him dropping out. My prediction is a Hakeem Jeffries/Gretchen Whitmer ticket
This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 4:16 pm
Posted by SirWinston
PNW
Member since Jul 2014
82417 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 11:51 am to
Stop
Posted by tigger4ever
Member since Apr 2021
647 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 11:56 am to
That was painful to watch. Had to hurry through the last part because of the rain but no one in audience had umbrellas or were hurrying out of the rain. Then remembered he had to sign something. No cover for the paper he was signing. God Help Us!
Posted by LSUvet72
Member since Sep 2013
12150 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 11:57 am to
Jefferies who has a muslim first name?

Don't think the name Hakeem goes too far in American election selection.

Already had a Barrack Hussein Obama...... never again especially with thousands of Pro-Hams flags being waved around the US.

No, the Dems are stuck with the Puppet and the puppeteers' strings are getting weak every day
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
80064 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:00 pm to
quote:

no one in audience had umbrellas or were hurrying out of the rain


Ever hear the phrase “too dumb to get out of the rain”?
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26771 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:00 pm to
quote:

Joe Biden will not be the Democratic nominee in 2024

They are rapidly running out of time to change to anyone else.
Posted by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
60783 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:02 pm to
quote:

They are rapidly running out of time to change to anyone else.


This is factually incorrect.

quote:

Without a rule change, many delegates who were assigned to Biden would likely go into the Democratic convention uncommitted, Kamarck told us. (Even though she is on his ticket, they would not automatically shift to Vice President Kamala Harris: The presidential and vice presidential ballots are separate at the Democratic convention.) Unlike Republican delegates, Democratic delegates are "pledged" rather than "bound" to a candidate, and while party rules say that delegates "shall in all good conscience" reflect the views of those who elected them, Kamarck said there is no penalty if a delegate votes differently. This could make it easier for Democrats to adjust to a highly fraught situation in which the incumbent president has unexpectedly left the picture.


quote:

From June to the conventions

What happens if a presumptive party nominee dies, withdraws or becomes incapacitated after primary voting has ended? Kamarck said the answer is straightforward. "In June, when the whole thing is over, it's very clear that it's going to the convention."

As in the first two situations, the Republican National Convention (which takes place July 15-18 in Milwaukee) or Democratic National Convention (which takes place Aug. 19-22 in Chicago) in this scenario would become a once-in-a-lifetime political spectacle. Once the delegates that had been bound to the presumptive nominee are officially uncommitted (which would happen according to the same rules described above), there would be a scramble by newly minted candidates to win their support. "There'll be some formidable candidates," Kamarck predicted. "They will start calling delegates as quickly as they possibly can."

Any new candidate who wants to run at this point would have to get nominated at the convention itself, the rules for which are different for each party. At the Democratic convention, new candidates need to get at least 300 delegate signatures in order to be nominated. For Republicans, convention rules state that candidates have to submit evidence of support from a plurality of delegates in at least five states at least one hour before names are to be placed in nomination.

The model for this kind of contested convention would be nominating contests before 1972, which is generally seen as the start of the modern presidential nomination system. Before then, party insiders dominated the delegate selection process in most states, and primaries (when they were held) chose far fewer delegates. Primaries instead mainly served as an opportunity for candidates to prove to uncommitted party leaders that they could win votes in a general election.

One notable contested convention came in 1968, when Vice President Hubert Humphrey won the Democratic nomination without having entered a single primary. That convention, with its chaotic protests, police rioting and internal party divisions over the Vietnam War and other issues, helped precipitate the reforms that led to the modern primary process as we know it today. For Republicans, the 1952 convention battle between General Dwight Eisenhower and the more conservative Ohio Sen. Robert Taft stands out. Eisenhower narrowly led Taft on the first ballot, but he stood just short of a delegate majority when Minnesota delegates began a tide of vote-switching to Eisenhower that clinched the nomination for him.

In the most chaotic scenarios, it could even take more than one ballot for a candidate to win a majority of delegates and clinch the presidential nomination. The last time a major party needed more than one ballot to nominate a presidential candidate was in 1952, when Democrats took three ballots to choose Illinois Gov. Adlai Stevenson as their standard bearer.
This post was edited on 5/14/24 at 12:09 pm
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
96541 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:03 pm to
Which means the average Dem voter is on par with my cocker spaniel.
Posted by LSUbest
Coastal Plain
Member since Aug 2007
11326 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:03 pm to
quote:


Jefferies who has a muslim first name?

Don't think the name Hakeem goes too far in American election selection.

Already had a Barrack Hussein Obama...... never again especially with thousands of Pro-Hams flags being waved around the US.


Meanwhile, Lurch is winning the hearts of Republicans across Pennsylvania
Posted by RobbBobb
Matt Flynn, BCS MVP
Member since Feb 2007
27972 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:15 pm to
Youre going to be sadly disappointed

Joe aint letting go. The Obama handlers arent giving up their power to another white male in Newsom
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
109298 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:17 pm to
quote:

My prediction is a Hakeem Jeffries/Gretchen Whitmer ticket


No one who doesn’t keep up with politics even knows who Hakeem Jeffries is. I think most people think that Nancy Pelosi is still the Speaker or Minority Leader, and it’s hard to blame them.
Posted by Leto II
Arrakis
Member since Dec 2018
21471 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:20 pm to
Somebody starts one of these threads every day.
Posted by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
60783 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:21 pm to
quote:

Joe aint letting go. The Obama handlers arent giving up their power to another white male in Newsom


Those are two different premises.

I agree that Joe (more accurately "Dr." Jill) is holding on white knuckled in an effort to prevent being ousted.

That doesn't preclude the entrenchment being what the Obamas want, however. They've already tanked Joe's illegitimate administration by using it as a blunt force object to bludgeon America, the Constitution and the rule of law with their garbage policies. This gives those pulling the strings (Obama domestically and others in the western central bank cabal elsewhere) the ability to drop Joe like a bad habit at the last moment via multiple pathways.

His age is the lowest hanging fruit. Ditto for his rapidly deteriorating mental state. They could always let him collapse under the weight of the investigations into his family's influence peddling racket, too.
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26771 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:42 pm to
I didn’t say the legally couldn’t change him out later. But the practical considerations are huge.
Posted by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
60783 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:59 pm to
There's no material difference in replacing him today vs on the convention floor, save that he's still Resident, and allegedly drawing breath.

His political survivability is inversely proportional to the level of exposure drawn to his influence peddling/family criminal enterprise, as currently being undertaken by James Comer's committee in the House.
Posted by keakar
Member since Jan 2017
30152 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 12:59 pm to
quote:

No cover for the paper he was signing.


it was fake just for him to scribble on for the cameras, most likely it was his lunch menu, they dont allow him any access to anything real
Posted by GeauxtigersMs36
The coast
Member since Jan 2018
8349 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 1:02 pm to
I believe the Democratic Party is ok with losing in 2024. It will be trumps last term so he will go away and they can spend those 4 years pounding him and pushing the younger crop of progressive left verses a Republican Party searching for its next rock star. Win in 28 and 32 will give them the best path to finishing their agenda
Posted by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
60783 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 1:05 pm to
quote:

I believe the Democratic Party is ok with losing in 2024. It will be trumps last term so he will go away and they can spend those 4 years pounding him and pushing the younger crop of progressive left verses a Republican Party searching for its next rock star. Win in 28 and 32 will give them the best path to finishing their agenda

The counter to this line of thinking is that Trump has openly said that his term as 47 will be marked with the pursuit of justice against those who have wronged this nation.

The Democrat party (and the Uniparty RINOs) are facing a literal existential crisis in the form of another Trump Presidency.

This is the point where the boo-birds squawk incoherently about his hires that he made in his first term, etc.
Posted by Y.A. Tittle
Member since Sep 2003
101726 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 1:06 pm to
quote:

I didn’t say the legally couldn’t change him out later. But the practical considerations are huge.


What a lot of people don't seem to understand is, no matter how much chicanery you may think the Democrats can pull off, they still need a baseline number of ACTUAL VOTES in order to even come close to the point they can employ such a thing. For years now, they've needed someone who they could at least pass off as a reasonable moderate, with a certain amount of name recognition, to get to that baseline.

The question is, have we crossed over to the point where that is no longer necessary? Maybe I'm a bit overly optimistic, but I don't think we have.
Posted by Indefatigable
Member since Jan 2019
26771 posts
Posted on 5/14/24 at 1:06 pm to
quote:

There's no material difference in replacing him today vs on the convention floor, save that he's still Resident, and allegedly drawing breath.

I disagree. The later it gets, the harder it’s going to be for them to replace him with anyone other than Kamala.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram