I stopped reading at "but it'll be fun to watch Biden topple off the stage as he swings right on immigration" because your privilege is blinding, Ashley.

Ummm Ashley, The court did not “The court also ruled Thursday that it plans to allow Idaho's ban on all abortions”

In fact it decided the opposite,

From the New York Times,

“The decision reinstates a lower-court ruling that had halted Idaho’s near-total ban on abortion and permitted emergency abortions at hospitals if needed….”

In case you need a scorecard, Idaho banned all abortions including emergency ones. The Justice Department sued claiming abortions in emergencies are guaranteed. The court stopped Idaho from banning emergency abortions.

Oh and it’s not CNN deciding the rules. The rules (no audience, muted mics) were agreed to by the Biden and Trump campaigns.

i think you mean "swinging to the center on the asylum seeker crisis." there's no one who thinks the current situation is acceptable.

interesting that you want Biden to fall, and not the sociopath that will be sitting across from him.

@4
No. I think they said exactly what they meant.

Any bets on whether the person who put that genocide sticker in the McDonald’s window will be casting a vote for the guy the left routinely refers to as Genocide Joe?

if The Rules
don't Prevent it
perhaps smoulderin' Joe
might flaunt a pair of those
mood-ring-inspired glasses:

blue for all's well

brown for Eltrumpsfter's
massive Lying dumps

Fire Engine Red for indignation

mirrors for any mentions of
bibi nutnyahoo’s Genocide

yellow for Cadet Bonespurs’
fetid record of Military Service

and green for any
Mentions of Mother Nature
whom the Capitalists HATE most of All.

Sic 'em,
Joe!

@6, "bibi nutnyahoo’s Genocide"

You conveniently neglect Israeli polls that show that no matter what government Israel has, they would be prosecuting the same war, in the same manner, with the same aims.

And for the the millionth time its not a genocide. It's about 2 million short of a genocide.

ah yes
the voice
of reason
once again
rears its ugly

If the definition requires wiping an entire people off the map then there has never been a single genocide in all of human history.

I fail to comprehend why ANYONE would watch the debate. Nothing constructive will happen. There will be no information shared that anyone with more than one brain cell doesn't already know. No one's mind will be changed as everyone has already chosen for whom they will vote.

It's just a fucking clown show. This country should be ashamed and sickened by the fact that we're supposed to believe these are the two guys who are best suited to be the Commander in Chief from 2025-2029.

And while everyone pretends any of this matters, SCOTUS continues to destroy the country, one ruling at a time. The United States of Israel is on fire. It's a huge fucking dumpster fire that NO ONE is even attempting to even THINK ABOUT trying to figure out how to put out.

@9
well
Gawd
him-Self
came Awful
Close: see: Noah

@10: After 3.5 years of the Biden Admin, I can't think of another individual better suited to do that shitty job.

No one can put out the American dumpster fire. It is the Eternal Flame.

@10: Curiosity, drama, some chuckles and some OMGs.

@11: The Good Lord will have the blessings of AI to make the next attempt successful. Amen.

@9: Heck, the actual definition of “genocide” doesn’t even require the murder of a single person. There are at least two other ways to do it:

“…genocide means any of the following acts committed with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its
physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

(https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf)

Note Hamas’ 10/7 attacks in Israel appear to satisfy at least (a) and (b), and also (d) if their mutilation of women’s genitals suffices.

It’s a testimony to the quality of the Stranger’s contribution to civic dialog that, after eight months of both the Stranger and multiple commenters here using the word daily, they still cite body counts as proof of “genocide”.

@12 Someone in touch with the times, such as willing to acknowledge that this economy isn't working for most Americans (72% living from paycheck to paycheck) would be infinitely better suited to handle Trump populist demagoguery. This could well be a repeat of 2016 and for the same reasons.

Okay, so both Hamas and Israel have met some of the criteria genocide. Cool.

I don’t think the term needs to be applicable to be morally repulsed by the actions of either side. I just find a proxy debate over the definition of a word to be intentionally avoiding the point, as though you can reference a dictionary entry and all the death and destruction is rendered moot. It doesn't change anything about what's happening at the present moment, nor anybody's feelings about it.

@16: IOW, a hypothetical politician.

@17: There are plenty of words to describe the humanitarian disaster which Hamas’ terrorists have brought upon the civilians of Gaza. Is it entirely unreasonable to ask writers to know the definitions of words they use, and use only the words they know?

Or are they using “genocide” because they want to win the argument by declaration, i.e. “if you don’t agree with us, then you support genocide?” Because that would be dishonest, instead of merely ignorant.

@10: We are running a bit low on fatal car wrecks to rubberneck.

Fingers crossed in hopes of a campaign-ending meltdown by Trump that forces the Rs to nominate someone sane. Or a campaign-ending gaffe by Biden that forces the Ds to nominate someone electable.

For all who don't give a shit about Gaza being wiped off the face of the earth and every Palestinian life along with it (especially the children, I mean you aren't even pretending to give a shit about tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of CHILDREN being slaughtered, starved, orphaned, having to have limbs amputated, etc. etc. etc.), it's astonishing that none of you give a shit about HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS being used to do it!!!!

Meanwhile homelessness and hunger explode in the United States (where Biden is such a great leader) and the "cost of living" (why is that even a thing) is so grossly out of pace with what corporations and the top 1% are hoarding in wealth is just as incomprehensible.

Bitch about homeless people.
Bitch about the price of groceries or gas or the cost of whatever you choose to bitch about on any given day at any given moment and yet...
Bitch about not being able to afford anything.
Bitch about protesters ruining everything.

Bitch and bitch and bitch and bitch and yet...

Support Israel's slaughter and starvation of 2.3 million people and the devastation they have done in Gaza with American weapons (which by the way has a significant impact on the world's climate).

The cognitive dissonance you all live in is not just astonishing, it's downright psychotic.

@19, People are using the English language to express their feelings about an ongoing humanitarian crisis, and as you’ve helpfully pointed out, some of the UN’s genocide criteria are applicable to Israel’s efforts in Gaza. You certainly have no problem getting your point across given the multiple daily walls of text you’ve posted about it, and I doubt it would be a challenge to identify instances where you’re reaching if anyone were so inclined. I’m sure some already have.

Everyone is communicating with the words they find appropriate, including you. I would ask you to chill out because we’re just a bunch of nobodies blowing off steam here but teetering on the brink of a meltdown appears to be your resting state.

"Today's [USSC] decision in Jarkesy could kneecap enforcement by the FCC, the FTC, the NLRB, the Department of Labor, and more—it goes WAY beyond the SEC. This is a massive blow to the federal government's ability to enforce regulations against lawbreakers."

so much for hoping the
"D"NC & corporate
'centrist' Dems'd
pull our asses
outta the
Morass.

@21 fuck-
ing Bingo.

Kind of ironic that TS continues to try to support Trump by bashing Biden while simultaneously complaining about the rulings by Trump’s justices.

@22
but it's easier to bitch
about the Symptoms than
to acknowledge our insidious
and Systemic failures. so go Joe!

@22: It's not that people aren't concerned about the same things you are, it's that you conflate the volume of rage as a measurement of "giving a s##t". It doesn't work that way. So you're becoming unglued unnecessarily as you preach to a far more polite choir.

Polls heading into this have Biden behind Trump - wondering what Biden can possibly say to swing anything at this point.

@21 Either of those scenarios would almost guarantee a GOP sweep of the White House, Senate, and House.

If Trump drops out Nikki Haley is best positioned to get the nomination. Her policies are just as bad as Trump's, but not being a Narcissistic jackass she will be able to attract more moderates across the aisle. Additionally being more competent than Trump she has a better chance of actually getting the horrible GOP agenda enacted.

On the Democratic side: just take a look at the NY-16 Primary from Tuesday. Since at least 2016 there has been a simmering civil war in the Democratic Party between the progressives and the moderates. Joe Biden is the only thing keeping the Democratic Coalition together. If we needed to choose another candidate in the next 6 weeks, the chaos would be so great that no matter who emerged victorious they would loose (both the EC and Popular Vote) in a landslide to the Trumpster.

@23: “People are using the English language to express their feelings about an ongoing humanitarian crisis,”

Whether a writer thousands of miles from the scene “feels” there is genocide happening has no impact of any kind whatsoever on whether genocide is actually happening there or not. Again, is it entirely unreasonable to ask writers to know the definitions of words they use, and use only the words they know?

“…some of the UN’s genocide criteria are applicable to Israel’s efforts in Gaza.”

If you read the except I provided, you’ll see it requires intent. There’s no doubt Hamas had the intent of killing Jews, for being Jews, on land Hamas has declared it will make free of Jews. Yet, strangely, writers here have seemed reluctant to use the word “genocide” to describe Hamas’ acts on 10/7 and after (e.g. launching rockets into Israel from Rafah).

On the other hand, Israel’s intent to kill Palestinian civilians does not seem as obvious, given Hamas’ long-documented record of shooting at the IDF and Israel from behind those civilians. Yet that uncertainty concerning intent does not seem to have restrained writers here from using the word “genocide” constantly to describe the IDF’s actions. It seems there is either a lot of confusion about what the word means, or the use is dishonest. Either way, that’s an argument against continued use of it.

“…but teetering on the brink of a meltdown appears to be your resting state.”

It would not be the first time here you have misinterpreted what I wrote, now would it?

@30, You’re completely unhinged and you bring the same manic energy to every topic you discuss. That’s my opinion based on the various comments of yours I’ve skimmed over, and if I’ve ever misconstrued you it’s only because there is no way I’m reading all that. I’ll sleep great tonight knowing I don’t agree with you about this or nearly anything else.

@18 The party machine has to promote other politicians before they become more than hypothetical. Everyone falling in line behind the incumbent way before the contest while claiming that anyone else offering an alternative is some kind of traitor secretly working for the opposition will not result in any factual better suited alternative. I don't understand the logic of claiming that a vigorous challenge promotes division and failure. On the contrary, challenging the incumbent is a sign of vibrancy and renewal that mobilizes diverse viewpoints and makes coalitions possible. Democrats are sending vibes of sclerosis around the status quo, not vibrancy. Trump is way worse but when people are desperate for change they are ready to blow up anything.

I used to visit Slog every weekday but I finally gave up earlier this year. Came back just to say Fuck the Stranger and their tiktok fueled agenda. Fucking entitled shits can fuck right off.

@31: The depravity of the Pro-Palestinian protestors and the horrors of what's going on in Gaza (including the suffering of hostages imprisoned by Hamas) are two very different things. I've said a lot about the former, but not much about the latter.

@29 Your misgivings are duly noted. Personally I regard Trump (and his impenetrable personality cult) as posing such a unique danger to the world that I would welcome his replacement on the ticket by Haley, even if political analysts think she'd be more likely to win. I disagree with her on almost everything but I'm fairly confident she at least won't blow up NATO, start a global trade war the U.S. would badly lose, destroy what's left of the domestic social fabric trying to deport millions of deeply rooted undocumented immigrants, or mount a coup to overturn the election if she loses. And as for Biden holding the Democratic coalition together, that was arguably true up until late last year. He's now lost a major part of the progressive vote, perhaps for good, over Gaza and his border crackdown. More broadly, he's also weighed down by the widespread perception (whatever the reality) that the rates of inflation and violent crime are still unacceptably high and rising.

Yes, a contested convention poses risks, but right now Biden is on a glide path to defeat. That's just the reality. Something has to be done to fundamentally reset the terms of this race, and if he can't get his numbers up convincingly by late August, I think asking him to step aside is a risk worth taking. This election is far too important for Democrats to obediently follow Biden off a cliff just because he's the incumbent.

@36

Consider how ballistic the progressives will get when the nominee is an establishment Democrat like Gavin Newsome or Sherrod Brown.

What’s going to happen when the candidate is not a far left ideologue willing to throw Israel under the bus?

The time to deny Biden the nomination was prior to the various caucuses and primaries months and months ago - that didn’t happen. The fantasy that the delegates are going to deny Biden his nomination (after all of those victories) needs to end.

If zealots like Xina want to scream burn it down (albeit more like BURN IT DOWN!!!!), so be it - it won’t change the reality that a president represents a party, and Progressives are far better off under a Democratic presidency than a Republican presidency (regardless of who that president is). Any argument to the contrary is delusional.

when the "D"NC
shoved out Bernie
Hillary told Bernie's
Supporters to STFU
& Vote for Her 'cause
where Else were we gonna
Fucking GO? let's hope smokin'
Joe can see and reads the Writing
on the fucking Wall and steps Aside

'Centrists''re Still
Angry over RBG blaming
her for Obama's failure to
appoint a lefty . yet're silent
when it comes to geriatric joe

except to claim
It's Not Genocide

yet.

if only
we might
Vote 'meh.'

@39

The DNC did not “shove Bernie aside.”

Hillary received the votes of 55% of Democratic primary voters, winning 34 state contests and 3,707,303 more votes than Bernie.

You’re not an election denier are you?

@38 Actually a President represents the United States, not a party.

Though I think you meant a Presidential candidate represents a party. Which is accurate.

As for the President I would say Biden has done as well as possible in being the president for all the people, not just the ones who voted for him. Even though that has pissed off many on the far left, but hey it seems like everything pisses off the far left.

Eltrumpfster
doesn't like staring
silently into the camera

his bankrupt eyes're
as Shifty as his
manner

& Olde Joe
ain't lookin'
any younger

but it's
Early

nyt:
Oklahoma’s
State Superintendent
Requires Public Schools to Teach the Bible

The mandate
comes as part of
a conservative movement to
infuse Christian values in public schools.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/27/us/oklahoma-public-schools-bible.html

tipping point
bitches

@2

The court rendered a decision based on aprocedural matter and NOT the substance of Idaho's all encompassing abortion ban. In other words, they kicked the can down the road until after the election.

Which has apparently conned a lot of people without legal knowledge. Or they're simply being dishonest about what the court actually decided.

@44 fair enough and accurate.

Which is more accurate than Ashley’s contention that “The court also ruled Thursday that it plans to allow Idaho's ban on all abortions”

This is going poorly and Ckathes is correct. If Joe were to step aside next week the DNC could absolutely facilitate a fellow moderate's stepping in to pick up the torch in his stead. There are dozens of qualified candidates out there, and modern day news cycles are such that any one of them could blitz the media and talk show circuits for the next month to have a viable platform out there for consumption, proliferation and support. Any one of them would be freaking eviscerating this shithead tonight.

I'll reiterate that I thought his first term went as well as could possibly have been expected, given all the constraints he was saddled with. But we've watched him deteriorating both physically and cognitively in real time, and if he loses this election it's entirely on him and those in his immediate orbit that enabled the reelection campaign.

Yeah, that fucking sucked.

@38 "Progressives are far better off under a Democratic presidency than a Republican presidency"

Exactly, which is why progressives and everyone else to the left of Romney should hope to hell someone at the DNC convinces Biden to step aside and let someone who can actually win (ie any Dem who can complete a sentence) take over. But they won't, and we'll all suffer the consequences.

Jon Stewart's real time reaction is worth your time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SJr44m-w1Y

nyt:
Biden’s Strug-
gles in Debate
Alarm Democrats

Shaky Performance
Against Trump Re-
inforces Doubts

President Biden
hoped to build fresh mo-
mentum for his re-election bid
against Donald Trump. Instead, he
prompted a wave of panic in his party.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/27/us/politics/biden-debate-democrats.html

and

A Fumbling Performance,
and a Panicking Party

President Biden’s shaky, halt-
ing debate performance has
Democrats talking about
replacing him on
the ticket.

the commentariats
are eviscerating Smokin'
Joes decision to stick around

and rightfully so.

those who scream the Loudest
"JOE MUST STAY -- HE'S
OUR ONLIEST HOPE!

are they
secretly Eltrumpfster
Supporters? at This stage

is seems quite
Likely.

you gotta
Step Down
Joe. you did
Great but Father
Time Waits for No One.

for fucks sake
remember RBG?

from The New Republic:

Ditch Biden. That
Debate Perform-
ance Was a
Disaster.

Joe Biden’s job
at Thursday’s debate should
have been easy. He failed on every level.

This is a debate that can and should lead Democrats to ask serious and complicated questions. Biden had one job here, and it shouldn’t have been hard. He had to convince voters that he could clear the lowest bar in American history: that he is more capable of leading and governing than Donald Trump.

He not only failed to clear it, he made Trump seem reasonable and coherent by comparison. The questions facing the party will be logistically complex, but they shouldn’t be emotionally difficult.

Joe Biden is losing this election. He has been for months. And for months, we have been told by his defenders that once we get a split-screen moment with Donald Trump, that will all change: Voters will be reminded of the disaster that Trump is and the existential risk that he poses to the country itself.

We just had that split-screen moment. Biden not only failed to make the case that he is capable of beating Donald Trump, he failed to make the case that he is capable of leading for another four years.

Democrats are panicking, and they are right to. This was a disaster, from start to finish. Unless something is done, it could have catastrophic consequences.

--by Alex Shephard

more:
https://newrepublic.com/article/183242/joe-biden-debate-performance-disaster-trump

@51

My biggest fear is that the battle between the pro-Hamas faction and the pro-Israel faction (see NY16) would tear the party apart and hand all three branches of government to the GOP.

Would you support a candidate, who supports Israel?

@51

there's
Massive
Difference
'twixt supporting
Israel & supporting
Israel's reich-wing Zealots
currently genociding their way
to a Massive -- ILLEGAL -- Land Grab

can You
make that
distinction?

will "our"
Corporate-
Owned Media
make that distinction?

they OWN the
fucking Magaphone

and as we all* know
Propaganda fuck-
ing WORKS.

*well
Not the
Dunning/
Krogers. duh

speaking
of Duh --
that was
for @53
apologies!

@54

How about Gavin Newsome? He was part of the Grants Pass lawsuit that just was decided, giving cities the ability to sweep encampments.

You’ve been pretty adamant that anyone who supports sweeps is as horrible as a MAGA, would you support Newsome?

And what would the activist branch of a CIS white male cutting in line in front of vice-president Harris?

@53 the obvious answer, although she's also a weak candidate, is for Biden to step aside and name his VP his successor. It should not be a contest between multiple candidates in any event

@56

"You’ve been
pretty adamant
that anyone who
supports sweeps is
as horrible as a MAGA... "

no, I don't believe I've made
that comparison - perhaps
you might refresh my
memory?

a Sheldon Whitehouse
or a Gretchen Whitman'd
shred Eltrumpfster in a heartbeat

as might a number
of Dems -- but with the
"D"NC in fucking Charge*
all bets're Off. do They prefer
another Disastrous trumpf rerun
surely more devastating than before?

*they fucking gave us
Joe & Hillary
FFS.

@56 -- oh
and you Ignored
my reply @54 btw. why?

@57

That’s pretty good actually. There would be a fight over the Veep but that wouldn’t be as bloody as one over the top spot.

Wonder whether resigning would benefit or hurt Harris, on the one hand she could run as incumbent, on the other it could be seen as gaming the system.

@57,

That certainly is the obvious route. Not sure it's correct though, as you note she's a weak candidate and actually polls even worse than Joe. I think I'd also prefer a clean break from this administration at this point, though I've no idea who I'd prefer see propped up. A few months ago I made the case for Cory Booker on one of these threads and I still think he'd be worthy of strong consideration.

@50: “the commentariats
are eviscerating Smokin'
Joes decision to stick around”

Do tell us
How eight months
Of your commentary copypasta
From the New York Times
Has caused any change
In Israel’s actions
Against Hamas
In Gaza.

Please
feel
Free
To
Start
Any
Time
Thx!

bugger off
Wormtongue

and take
the "d"nc
along with.

@61 Booker was my first choice in 2020. His climate change platform was the only one to seriously consider nuclear, which means he was the only one who understood the seriousness of climate change.

speaking of Must See TeeVee
& Jon Stewart (thanks, Mike!)

nyt:
Jon Stewart
Is a Little Stressed
Out About That Debate

Hosting a live “Daily Show” after
the Biden-Trump spectacle,
Stewart said he needed
“to call a real estate
agent in New
Zealand.”

oodles More:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/28/arts/television/jon-stewart-debate-trump-biden.html

thee best reader’s
comment on the
article:

why has no one declared this to be the best thing the democratic party could have done by having biden debate trump on a public stage this early in the election cycle?

surely his aides and inner circle knew exactly what they were dealing with: a man of diminished faculties in his 81st year. and if they were unable to convince him to step down for the good of the country then maybe it would take the voice of the electorate to make that point forcefully enough.

thank you democratic party for making it clear, however painful the process might have been, that a new voice is needed at the top of the democratic ticket.
--riotta rigotta; manitoba

more:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/28/arts/television/jon-stewart-debate-trump-biden.html#commentsContainer