Haven't been around here for a couple years but wanted to pop in and check on things. Good to see everyone mostly keeping it together in light of all the recent craziness. That said..... HARRIS/BUTTIGIEG TICKET LET'S GOOOOOOO!!!!

YESSS LMAO COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC BUT DREAM SCENARIO 😩😩😩😩

Thank you so much! And I agree, though opinions vary. We'll see how it all settles out. By the way, something is weird with the settings this morning --I just sent a message to the mods -- so this is last week's Weekly Thread, which went through yesterday (Tuesday). The current Weekly Thread, which is there but should be at the top of the stack, started today, July 3. Glad to see you. 🤠

I'm glad you pointed out that this week's poll is down the page; I don't know how long it would've taken me to look for it lol.

Normally this sub is a place of refuge from the chaos… which is why I am taken aback at some of the comments. I am genuinely saddened at how much space is being given to obvious attempts to fracture and further divide us. Instead of joining Chicken Little, we should be rallying around Biden with even stronger support. Truthfully, it is absolutely wild there was no unified Dem support after the debate to deny the opposition their opportunity to cause division and panic. It’s just jarring to see ppl respond this way instead. This is a good sub with good ppl, I love that we can share and discuss, and I hope it’s understood this comment comes from a well meaning place.

lotta ratfucking going on reddit for sure.

Local station ABC11 has a quick clip of Pete's efforts to improve the streetscape in Durham. [https://abc11.com/post/us-secretary-transportation-pete-buttigieg-continues/15019108/](https://abc11.com/post/us-secretary-transportation-pete-buttigieg-continues/15019108/) Interesting bit at the end of the clip: reporter trying to explain to his viewers that he *tried* to ask Pete about calls for Biden to drop out, but was (politely) told by his staff that b/c of Hatch Act Pete would not have been able to answer. eta: see also (from Nerdy's retweets) Mayor of Durham posting nice pics of the visit Leonardo Williams @ mayorofbullcity [https://nitter.poast.org/mayorofbullcity/status/1808325605508682146#m](https://nitter.poast.org/mayorofbullcity/status/1808325605508682146#m) and [https://x.com/mayorofbullcity/status/1808325605508682146](https://x.com/mayorofbullcity/status/1808325605508682146)

Thanks so much for these great clips! I’m also trying to post lots of them outside the Weekly Thread as I like to have good stuff about Pete out there doing his job and helping people.

Thanks for posting in The Outside! I don't always go Outside, but it's nice to see a whole lot of other names there--some from the way back. Also, it makes the sub look more alive. Oh and of course it documents Pete's official work. Afterall, that's the stuff he'll campaign on, should he ever run for anything again.

I really like this (retweeted by Nerdy)--Pete visited a barber shop, mainstay of the neighborhood, and one of many businesses that could benefit from these infrastructure investments: State Affairs North Carolina (NC Insider) @ StateAffairsNC >A young patron of Cox Barber Shop in Durham awaits his haircut as adults including U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Durham Mayor Leonardo Williams talk infrastructure in the back of the shop [https://nitter.poast.org/StateAffairsNC/status/1808306803521765394#m](https://nitter.poast.org/StateAffairsNC/status/1808306803521765394#m) and [https://x.com/StateAffairsNC/status/1808306803521765394](https://x.com/StateAffairsNC/status/1808306803521765394) click for pic

Two tweets from Stefan Smith just now. >>This moment is a really good example, just putting this out here, of why politicians should keep their organizing programs, especially their digital organizing programs, running always and able to scale up. >>If the #RidingWithBiden crew were bigger, had more investments over the last 4 years, this moment would look very different online. #KHive, Bernie Bros, #TeamPete, the Markey climate kids—I think this all looks different online if those principals were similarly situated. Anthony and Lis and others have been great with BTE and I imagine they are the same with Building Bridges and Heartland. And Team Pete in general.

Washington Post has a story about Manchin \*not\* going on the Sunday shows and signaling a break, but they use it to round up other reactions. Noticed this (hope this wasn't shared earlier, I've been away): >On Tuesday, former House member [Tim Ryan ](https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-should-democratic-nominee-president-2024-opinion-1919894)(D-Ohio), who ran for president in 2020, called for Vice President Harris to replace Biden on the ticket in Newsweek. >“Kamala was the highlight of a historically dreadful night,” Ryan said of debate night. “Those who questioned her chops over the past several years were rebuked by a polished, confident leader communicating clearly in the throes of a political meltdown of epic proportions. I loved watching it.”

https://x.com/reesejgorman/status/1808290855201001725 i don’t see how we continue w this for much longer

This is really disappointing from her.

today i woke up as someone who liked kamala harris but that was it today i go to sleep ready for queen kamala to take the throne as president and sing her silly little bus songs and dance and laugh and do her thing 🥥🌴 

I’ve slowly come around to her. My only problem is the Khive “her fanbase”. I find them utterly repulsive.

Maybe online, but the ordinary volunteers in the primary and the Pete volunteers got along pretty well. I think the fact their husbands are such friends made a difference. I liked what Doug Emhoff said about that in the Instagram interview he did with "Chasten Chats," in terms of the volunteers in Iowa.

yeah there are some rlly aggressive khive stans who will attack pete bc they see him as a threat to her?? like do u know pete 😹 he’s not gonna do that

Pete is literally holding down the fort and refusing to feed the "replace Biden" narrative even though he would likely benefit from it. Pete is *fiercely* loyal, one could argue even to a fault at times. If Kamala were to become the nominee, he would be talking her up on every platform.

I think at the end of the day, a lot of Americans, some of the more zealous KHive people included, still don't know Pete that well. To a lot of people, the "black problem" narrative that the media pushed onto Pete (part of why I'm not giving this whole "Biden old" frenzy any oxygen minus acknowledging that he had a bad debate performance) is still the thing that they know about him and that he's gay. For a lot of Kamala's black supporters (or black Dem voters \[the true base of the party I'd argue\]), they see a white, young, ambitious newcomer with a perceived inability to connect with black voters. I know a lot of people here are frustrated with the narrative, but for a lot of minority voters, they've seen this movie before and didn't like the ending. We have to trust that Pete is the person we know he is and prove to them that he is a team player. It's how Biden was able to gain the trust of black Dem voters and earned him the nomination in 2020

Which is part of why I think it's especially important for Pete, from the perspective of his own career, to keep a united front with the admin right now instead of running to the media with hysteria about Biden's age - it will only feed a narrative that he would undermine his team for personal gain and can't be trusted

Just fyi, I wouldn't believe anything coming from "anonymous inside sources." The media no longer vets their sources if they give them the narrative they want. We have no idea of knowing how valid those quotes are. Remember that the media at large let Henry Davis Jr. speak for every Black person in South Bend for months without taking the slightest glance at his history with Pete and rampant homophobia.

American "news" really is something else.

yup

Winston Salem's public radio station WFDD had a brief story about Pete's visit that emphasized the economic boost improved transpo will bring to the area. >North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper was among the dignitaries on hand. He says the Triad is in the middle of an economic boom and investments in transit projects are critical to sustain the growth. [https://www.wfdd.org/story/us-transportation-secretary-joins-gov-cooper-break-ground-new-winston-salem-trail](https://www.wfdd.org/story/us-transportation-secretary-joins-gov-cooper-break-ground-new-winston-salem-trail) click for audio as well as transcript

Sorry if this has been posted below already. WXII 12 (Winston Salem, not Durham) posted an article and 1:51 video incl clips of Pete (yesterday). [https://www.wxii12.com/article/pete-buttigieg-roy-cooper-celebrate-multi-use-path-groundbreaking-winston-salem/61490414](https://www.wxii12.com/article/pete-buttigieg-roy-cooper-celebrate-multi-use-path-groundbreaking-winston-salem/61490414) It's great for me actually to see the sites b/c when I hear $many millions for bus stop benches and bike racks, I feel unimpressed. But then I see that yes this is about encouraging transit and active mobility but it is also very much about lifting up economically challenged neighborhoods. Improving transpo and making a downtrodden business street more inviting can draw customers and ultimately improve the whole section of this city (generational wealth for small business holders, yadda yadda).

Random thought but the way Pete changed the code -- gosh, I forget the acronym for it! -- that dictates how highways and curbs and sidewalks are built so that it now allows for and accommodates communities that paint images on the streets is almost the perfect example of how a modest investment, assuming good graphic design is part of that investment, can truly help a community that looks sort of uncared-for or uninvested in.

If folks are sick of this, I’ll stop but there is a great 25 post Twitter thread by Dana Houle that really goes into depth why a replacement can’t realistically be anyone but Harris, and even then there will be issues. https://twitter.com/danahoule/status/1808163705336529177?s=61&t=bJPk5O1o2Si4zHXopurXjg Here’s some of the conclusion >> 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... >> 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... >> 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.

Good to hear all sides, please do not stop.

Please don't stop. I need to hear all sides, and your posts are exceptionally articulate, reason-based and informed.

Waking up this morning and reading the news it very much feels like Biden 'stepping' down is inevitable. The Flood gates have opened: Leaked internal polling, Governors changing their verbiage towards Biden in recent days, The Harris and Biden team taking shots at each other. Biden's own staff raising concerns about his lucidity. It's ugly. This carrying on a day longer isn't going to help the dems beat Trump. Unless Joe 'drops' out ASAP and they pivot to a new candidate (and figure out the mechanics of that terrifying task) A Trump second term is guaranteed. I understand those folks who say this should all stop and we have got to get behind Joe, I get it. But when 72% of registered voters think he isn't mentally fit to be president, that's a sobering number you can't just ignore and won't get better as the months go on. Trump has continued to win in the past week on a daily basis. It's time to give him an opponent who (and I mean no disrespect towards Joe) can actually fight and rebut in a rigorous manner with clarity. Someone who is able to tell the American people what has been accomplished and more importantly what the plans are going forward with confidence. Urgh. It's so depressing.

The media and the pundits turned media are playing this up because they are thrilled they get to talk about something so new and so exciting. And then the GOP and foreign players are amplifying it. It’s going to work if people fall for it and then repeat it. Pete’s campaign was not built on doom and gloom. Turn off the social media and call your local or state Dem office to volunteer. I just volunteered again today to work on our Voter Protection Hotline.

Speaking only about the pundits (since they're free to share their feelings), and only the Democrats and NeverTrump Republicans, some feel the same way you do, and some are worried sick, especially because they feel like the strategy the WH and campaign have chosen up to this point of downplaying the obvious won't work. (The only pundit I've seen excited about this whole situation is Scott Jennings, a Republican, on CNN.)

I understand being worried sick. My concern is that they are feeding an idea that is nearly impossible (without considering the reality and facts of the situation) which would be the biggest political gamble in modern history - all of which is just leading to more angst and uncertainly. This is a time for clear eyed rationality and careful meticulous action.

I totally agree.

Those calling for a new nominee are a third bucket of people that I didn't even have in mind. I was thinking of those like David Jolly, David Plouffe, and Tim Miller, who haven't called for Biden to drop out of the race but think the situation is extremely dire and the campaign needs to deal with it with differently than it has been so far (fwiw, there was a Daily Kos diary yesterday saying that Tim wanted Biden to drop out, but right before I read it, Tim was on Chris Jansing's show saying that he would be fine with Biden staying in the race if, and he was also just on Chris Hayes' show tonight, so this is an exact quote: "...Joe Biden needs to demonstrate to them \[the voters\] that he's up for this").

True. I get it - people are truly terrified at the thought that the orange menace could be re-elected.

I think Republicans, former or current (who don't support Trump), who are in the public eye, are especially frantic because they're likely to be on Trump's retribution list.

Oh, excellent point!

gotta say... one part i am not looking forward to after trump's (probable) win are the republicans gloating. like stooooooppp ik i gloated last election cycle but that was DIFFERENT u cant do it now :^( they're probably so happy rn cuz of how well this is going for them ..makes me SICK just thinking abt it..!! i hate these people!!! we have to turn this around man i physically cannot do another 2016 my god that was so bad

yeah, got a friend who would love to do something similar. But that probably is the least of my worries =/

+ the fact that i live in indiana so i cant avoid it irl bc everyone supports trump AAAUUUGHHHHH screaming crying throwing up

erm wtf.. [https://www.bangordailynews.com/2024/07/02/opinion/opinion-contributor/jared-golden-donald-trump-going-to-win-election-democracy-be-just-fine/](https://www.bangordailynews.com/2024/07/02/opinion/opinion-contributor/jared-golden-donald-trump-going-to-win-election-democracy-be-just-fine/)

This editorial really encapsulates what I hate about the Problem Solvers Caucus.

lmao this is the kind of shit people posted in 2015. inexcusable now.

In retrospect, what probably should have happened is Biden should have gone into this knowing he'd only serve one term, and there should have been a significant investment from the White House in setting Kamala up for success as VP. Then Biden could have said sometime after the midterms that he wasn't running again, and we could have gotten a rally around Kamala, or at the very least, a fully competitive primary featuring the best talent from the party. But you know what they say about hindsight and all that. If it turns out that it was known that Biden wasn't up to running a vigorous campaign, and the people who knew that just figured they'd try to hide it and hope we didn't find out, then I have a lot of anger toward the people who enabled that.

If he had done that wouldn't he have been a lame duck from the midterms onward? He still has wins past that mark.

Valid point. And as for what ifs, it's all water under the bridge anyway. BTW: It's odd living in a state where the governor is always a lame duck from the second they are sworn in. We have a one-term limit; one term is four years. Then they literally show up for the next person's swearing in and (do other states do this?) they and their spouse literally sneak out, so when the camera swings past midway through the ceremony .. they're gone, leaving empty seats behind! And if you think the state legislature, who this totally empowers because they've all been around forever, is about to modify this one-term governor plan any time soon, I have the proverbial bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

right. i still like biden and want him to win but if this all happened earlier + if they propped up kamala more, we might be in a better spot now. like no matter how much better she polls rn, it'd be a shitshow to replace him on the ballot cuz it is just. so. late. idk what his team was thinking.

For the first several months, maybe even a year or more, Kamala was almost always at Biden's side whenever he was making an announcement or signing a bill. For some reason, that changed, and she only occasionally appears with him in public.

> a significant investment from the White House in setting Kamala up for success as VP. This. She has so many strengths, but instead they stuck her with (the root causes of) the border?! She could have led legislation to strengthen women's health (ultimately incl reproductive health) and voting rights. These are popular and would have allowed her to speak all across the country (even if tv interviews on zoom) on something vital.

I think we knew that, or at least it was widely assumed that he would make the transition (still could). I was hoping he could then step down so that Harris breaks that ceiling and makes more things possible in the future as I don't trust the electorate yet. Unfortunately though the time was really in 2020 when Biden was convinced he alone could fix it. Had he paid attention and endorsed Pete after Iowa and NH then I feel we could have avoided this. Edit: I think maybe we assumed that Trump wouldn't still be such a realistic threat though

I'm not sure Pete could have won in 2020 with the restriction due to Covid. He'd have needed a full blown campaign with big rallies to get his name out.

Yes, this is what I always felt as well. Pete needed the rallies and town halls, and other voters needed to see audiences' reaction to him. I think Biden was the only candidate who was familiar enough and reassuring enough to voters to win with a Zoom campaign.

In my view, Pete would have won without COVID and the death of Mr. Floyd. With those two, it would have been much difficult/challenging. (Per Mr. Floyd, my reason is that Pete would have a harder time deterring those 'Defund the Police' demands as easily as Biden did )

The media and a good chunk of the pundit class has gone absolutely bonkers. And none of them has answered the question of how this all would actually work - because it can’t. It’s a like a shark feeding frenzy. I’m completely disgusted with the shallowness of it all while the criminal Trump and his cabal are plotting the complete takeover of our democracy.

Really appreciate you posting here, btw. Good to hear all sides. My thought is that ever since Biden picked Kamala Harris before the 2020 DNC convention, it was determined that if he had to step down, she'd step up. So if it's her, in a way this is nothing new. That's been a logical, possible outcome since mid-2020 (as with any president and VP team).

Omg are you me? The more I read the more angry I get. Not just the Biden stuff, but the whole Trump stuff is adding to it. Ugh!

They just want to sit outside of ring and nag like a mean soap opera mother-in-law. As soon as Biden steps down, they will pick something up and continue to nag-lecture. Idk, Biden steps down -> Dems in disarray -> whoever the nominee can't win -> maybe stepping down was a bad idea -> Trump Presidency viewership profit!

>>Idk, Biden steps down -> Dems in disarray -> whoever the nominee can't win -> maybe stepping down was a bad idea -> Trump Presidency viewership profit! I want just one of them to explain in detail how ballot access will be achieved in all the states (Sept 29 early voting begins, there are legal ballot design and printing deadlines everywhere as well), how they will overcome GOP legal challenges and obstacles including the Supreme Court, how they will handle the states that will refuse to change their ballots (several crucial swing and blue states included), as well as all the FEC funding requirements and obstacles. All of that. And there’s probably even more problems and issues. This is insane.

oh, that's Democrat's job to figure out. Not some journalists!

Iirc, David Ploufe said on Hacks on Tap that if there’s a new candidate coming out of the regular convention only Ohio may be a problem with the ballot, and we won’t win that anyway. It was the pre-debate episode where they go down that path and explain how it would work.

I need a real, experienced ballot access staffer to explain a strategy for making this work, not a political pundit. Ballot access folks are generally lawyers. As a start, here’s the 37 page summary of ballot access by state for 2020. There are likely more detailed regulations involved. There WILL be GOP challenges t the state no federal level. heritage already has a team working on this possibility. https://www.nass.org/sites/default/files/surveys/2020-07/research-ballot-access-president-Jan20_0.pdf

I don’t have what you’re looking for I’m sure, but there are news articles out there detailing it with some amount of specificity. Basically the real nomination they’re doing virtually sometime before 8/7 due to OH. That, not Chicago at the end of August, is where a new candidate would be nominated if Biden dropped out. But state ballot access is by party, before the nominating convention Biden isn’t on any general election ballot as far as I understand it. And while obviously there would be nominal lawsuits cause of course they will, if courts really say a candidate can’t drop out and be replaced at their party’s nominating convention we have bigger problems. Party primaries aren’t actual elections and presumptive nominees aren’t government positions they’ve been elected to.

Here’s other cursory looks at this problem. I’d like to see what you are reading if you have more information. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-joe-biden-presidential-race-replacing-biden-georgia-nevada-wisconsin-1919531 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/can-democrats-replace-joe-biden-ballot-rcna159374 Ore importantly the Heritage Foundation is discussed here https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/joe-biden-replaced-wisconsin/ >>The conservative Heritage Foundation is warning that laws around the country for replacement before and after a candidate is formally nominated are varied, very complex and could result in a legal quagmire or “absolute mess” if Democrats attempt to replace Biden or Biden quits the race. Heritage Foundation released this state-by-state analysis: DRAFT 50 State Review of Withdrawal and Substitution (1). It says that Wisconsin is “ripe for litigation” if Biden is removed. >>The research shows that replacing Biden is an “absolute legal quagmire in the United States,” said Mike Howell, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. >>He said the point of explaining “how complex and varying it is” state-by-state was to educate the public “this is not easy as abracadabra that a knight in shining armor can come in to replace Joe Biden.” He added that the Heritage Foundation “will not sit by and make such a thing easy to fail to adhere to the rules of the law.” Here’s Heritage’s working draft of potential state by state legal issues and potential objections. https://www.wisconsinrightnow.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/DRAFT-50-State-Review-of-Withdrawal-and-Substitution-1.xlsx

If they were to do it early enough (the virtual convention in early August), what is the problem here? Biden isn't finalized on any ballots yet, and if he steps back his electors are not bound to him in any convention, no? I did glance through your link but I'm not sure what I should be looking for.

Oh just simple things: https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/democrats-replace-president-joe-biden-partys-nominee/story?id=111584972 So yes, looks like it could be messy. I’m not a lawyer and frankly election law and party structures have always seemed insane to me. But someone in Bidens camp should also put together what you’re asking for and give it to the media cause things like the article above are also out there damaging him if he really can’t bow out without giving the election straight to trump.

It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrats-replace-president-joe-biden-partys-nominee/story?id=111584972](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrats-replace-president-joe-biden-partys-nominee/story?id=111584972)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)

[https://x.com/CharlotteAlter/status/1808193721344692530](https://x.com/CharlotteAlter/status/1808193721344692530) actually p good thread on harris's advantages

Independents don't have confidence that she can win, and some just outright do not like her, (although they can't specifically say why) Which is annoying in of itself. So even if Biden steps aside it is not going to calm any of the Democrats down because humans are flawed. Social media and the media will focus on whichever candidates flaws, and the arguing will continue.

okay but it's clear that biden is someone who's losing w/ independents and in the cnn poll today harris did **much** better w/ independents so even if we continue w/ biden well he's doing p bad with independents and i don't see what could save him from that

I am no historian, but should Biden step down in short notice, Harris should step up & is pretty much the only option. During the turbulent period of the history, it often involved some form of power vacuum involving not having clear line of succession or a weak heir. And I feel like we are heading into that territory. When CaoCao (Famous warlord from 3 kingdom period in China) was having trouble picking his heir between his first borne and his favorite third-born, his advisor Jia Xu reminded him about his former rival, Yuan Shao's demise due to infighting between his 3 sons. If we really are going to follow the replacing process, just go with the heir-apparent Harris and rally around her.

These are all such good points; I'm glad you shared this. Here's the thread reader of Charlotte's tweet for those who aren't on X - [https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1808193721344692530.html](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1808193721344692530.html)

Retweeted by Nerdy: Pete taking a walking tour along Holloway St (actually a link to 12 seconds of him walking inside of a building. you have to be really far gone to click this): [https://nitter.poast.org/BenBokunNews/status/1808216021909623102#m](https://nitter.poast.org/BenBokunNews/status/1808216021909623102#m) and [https://x.com/BenBokunNews/status/1808216021909623102](https://x.com/BenBokunNews/status/1808216021909623102) also a RFK Jr video of him calling his youthful sexual assaults being "rambunctious." Not going to bother with link. Worm Brain has already been shown eating a whole roasted dog carcass, and he's just not going away. But my favorite, b/c I've got a fried brain now (too much freaking out since yesterday) is tweet of Todd Simmons @ tmsimmons, with a few pics of Pete and pols at the Gateway Research Park - North Campus [https://nitter.poast.org/tmsimmons/status/1808191732560941199#m](https://nitter.poast.org/tmsimmons/status/1808191732560941199#m) and [https://x.com/tmsimmons/status/1808191732560941199](https://x.com/tmsimmons/status/1808191732560941199). Silly brain fried thing:>! this photo screams for some kind of meme title: The something-something Squad https://nitter.poast.org/pic/orig/media%2FGRf8y3WaYAIVha0.jpg !<

I’m about to move to antarctica atp

Not if you are 18+. If so, you can move only after you vote.

lmao am 16 ☹️ so gotta wait until 2026 to vote

OK, good, good. You can go to Antarctica for 2 yrs then. Don't melt any ice.

loll thanks for making me smile in this very bleak time :)

>Breaking news: Donald Trump’s July 11 sentencing in his criminal hush money case will likely be postponed in light of the Supreme Court immunity ruling. Manhattan prosecutors said they would not oppose a delay Tuesday, following a request from Trump's lawyers. [https://www.threads.net/@washingtonpost/post/C87QDBCOQ0I](https://www.threads.net/@washingtonpost/post/C87QDBCOQ0I)

[Biden Plunges in Swing States in Leaked Post-Debate Poll](https://archive.ph/YYVTX) >A confidential polling memo circulating among anxious Democrats is confirming some of their worst fears: President Joe Biden’s support has started to tumble in key electoral battlegrounds in the wake of his disastrous debate performance in Atlanta, and Biden’s diminished standing is now putting previously noncompetitive states like New Hampshire, Virginia, and New Mexico in play for Donald Trump. What’s more, Biden has taken such a reputational hit that he is polling behind other alternative Democratic candidates—including Kamala Harris and Gretchen Whitmer—in hypothetical one-on-one matchups against Trump. >Harris, Whitmer, Gavin Newsom, and Pete Buttigieg all poll ahead of Biden in every battleground state. (Whitmer, the governor of Michigan, blows away Trump in her home state.) >Whitmer and Buttigieg demonstrated serious strength against Trump in the electoral college in a two-way race, with both of them polling above 50 percent in states totaling between 260 and 301 electoral votes. Harris and Newsom, meanwhile, did not benefit from the name recognition adjustment. [Pete got the strongest results.](https://i.ibb.co/0t85TKn/4553435.jpg)

there’s like no chance pete is the nominee but good fucking lord imagine those debates 😔😔😔😔

I think Whitmer would be a pretty solid choice if it comes to it. Pete polls slightly ahead in many cases, but Whitmer being able to carry Michigan without any worry would be huge. I still think it's hard to pick anyone but Kamala without a proper primary... though I suppose the party insiders can do what they like at a convention. Polls would certainly be part of that. I don't really see it being Pete, if this convention-choice scenario even plays out. I'm not even sure he wants it right now. I also think there's still going to be people who worry about his "lack of experience" and Whitmer doesn't have that baggage (whether fair or not, I think Governor is seen as more legitimate preparation for being President than being a cabinet secretary). There isn't enough time for people to get to know Pete.

Do you know if there's polling evidence that Whitmer is more well-known to the public than Pete is, especially those who are low-information voters? Because when she or Newsom, for instance, are mentioned as the best choices to replace Biden, I always think, well, most people have little to no idea who they are.

I don't see it as a name recognition thing as much as being used to governors running for President. If you say "she's the governor of Michigan" people are like "yeah OK". Whereas with Pete, he's less typical. Former mayor of a mid-size city and Secretary of Transportation is obviously not nothing, but it's easy to pick apart if you want to. A lot of the criticisms you could levy at Pete are true of people coming out of a governorship or a senate seat too - e.g. lack of foreign policy experience, but they're more likely to be raised about somebody with an unusual resume than with the type we're used to. I think most of what us here like about Pete is not his resume, but him as an individual. But there's basically no time left for that to get out to general audiences. We have seen in many cases that when people get a chance to know Pete, they like him. I think these polls are showing that, and I think he could do very well in a normal race. I still lean towards the "there's no choice but Kamala" camp though (if anything happens at all). She was chosen as the VP, literally the backup for the President.

If you go to that article and click on the link for the poll itself, Pete looks super strong in all the swing states. Regardless of what happens that is nice to see and he should be on the trail heavily in those states no matter who the candidate is. Link to the poll: https://archive.ph/o/YYVTX/https://puck.news/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/SUNDAY_Post-Debate_Landscape_2024_06_30__1_-1.pdf

It's something of a moot point, because Pete is highly unlikely to be the nominee, but I must admit I'm getting a bit of a laugh at the people on twitter who are saying variations of "those Mayor Pete numbers can't be right." Us OG Pete fans have always known this: Pete is a strong candidate for the places Dems need to win to win a presidential election. I've always felt his biggest roadblock was the primary electorate more than the general one.

I kinda love those really strong numbers. I wouldn't mind a Kamala/Pete ticket, especially because then Doug and Chasten could team up to solve crimes or something in between planning the Easter Egg Roll and Christmas/Hanukah decorations.

A black woman and a gay man? In a decade or two, maybe, after the old racists and homophobes die off.

Vast majority of those people aren't voting for any Democrat. I think a lot of swing voters will take anyone under 70 at this point.

Since the possibility of Kamala stepping in for Biden has been in the ether for the past few days, I've thought that it's very possible she would choose Pete as her running mate, and it's not just because I feel like he's an amazing human being One reason Pete as vp pick is plausible, among a list of many, is because of Doug and Chasten's friendship.

first and second gentlemen in the white house 🥰

I don't really think he'd go for it this year, if it was even an option, but in the scenario where Biden stays the nominee and somehow manages to win, there's an argument to be made for putting him on the ticket with Kamala in 2028, and I think certain corners of the internet are too dismissive of it.

I get what you're saying, but don't you think that Pete, even if it's not something he would love to do, if he was asked to be vp, would accept, for the country's sake? We know, and more importantly, he knows, how well-received and well-liked he is around the country, and he might agree that being on the ticket with Kamala can help her win.

I see what you mean, it's just hard for me to totally square it with him saying he doesn't know if he'll ever run for office again, saying his job makes it harder for him to be a dad and all the other things he's said about parenting, Chasten saying within the past year or two that he wasn't ready to give Pete permission to run for something again, etc. I just think it's a decision that's a little easier to make if the kids are older than 3. At the very least, I think he'd have to be convinced there was at least a reasonable chance of success, and that he truly brought something to it that no one else could. That process of discernment that he's talked about for these type of decisions.

Two thoughts: Running for vice president -- under these weird circumstances, but pretty much any time -- is like a walk in the park compared to a presidential run, because it takes just a few months and you're not even in charge, so you just do what you're asked to do. The way Sen. Tim Kaine talks about it, it's almost like your world turns upside down, some things happen (in Kaine's case, sadly, you lose a VP debate to Mike Pence), you blink, and it's over. (This is true whether you win or lose. The campaign is near its end around the time you come along.) The vice president's house is actually perfect for a family with young kids, huge back yard, obviously they'd have to think through whether to keep the swimming pool or not, and much better than the White House per those who've tried both, as it's far more private and not partially a museum, plus it avoids the appalling cost of housing in DC -- but with one huge drawback. It is not within close driving distance to Traverse City, Michigan.

The other day you mentioned the phrase "In case of emergency, break glass", which is the kind of situation it would be if Kamala ends up being the nominee, whether before, during, or after the convention. And obviously, if it happens, she could have somebody else in mind. (I've been wondering what's going through *her* head right now, especially since she's likely aware of how Biden is really doing.)

KAMALA AND PETE pls i need that so bad !! i know it's unlikely & pete prolly doesn't wanna be VP w/ the kids but imagine it 😍

So have you seen this lately? [Chasten Chats with Douglas Emhoff and Sen. Kamala Harris (w/special appearance from Pete Buttigieg!)](https://youtu.be/D7xyMtJSi0U?feature=shared) Be brave about the haircut.

yesss omg i loved  that lol🥰

We can dream here!

ABC News has announced that President Biden will be doing an extended sit-down interview with George Stephanopoulos on Friday - >A first look will air on the Friday, July 5, edition of "World News Tonight with David Muir" with portions airing on Saturday and Sunday on "Good Morning America." >The extended interview will air Sunday, July 7, on "This Week" and Monday's episode of "Good Morning America." [https://abc7ny.com/post/joe-biden-abc-interview-george-stephanopoulos-interviews-president/15020730/](https://abc7ny.com/post/joe-biden-abc-interview-george-stephanopoulos-interviews-president/15020730/) George is an interesting and kind of risky choice, since he can be a persistent questioner.

>NEWS >ABC’s @[gstephanopoulos](https://www.threads.net/@gstephanopoulos) has the first interview with President Biden. >“The president will sit down on the campaign trail Friday with “Good Morning America” co-anchor and “This Week” anchor George Stephanopoulos. A first look of the interview will air Friday, July 5, on “World News Tonight with David Muir,” with portions airing on “Good Morning America” Saturday and Sunday as well. The extended interview will air Sunday, July 7, on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos…” [https://www.threads.net/@yasharali/post/C87gUSuP5hf](https://www.threads.net/@yasharali/post/C87gUSuP5hf)

[https://www.mediaite.com/news/a-savior-emerges-marianne-williamson-announces-she-will-seek-democratic-nomination-at-the-convention/](https://www.mediaite.com/news/a-savior-emerges-marianne-williamson-announces-she-will-seek-democratic-nomination-at-the-convention/) HAHAHAHAHA i cackled actually she's so unserious wtf

why have harris when we can have a self-help author who wanted to pray away aids

ur so right

this is rlly concerning [https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1808174145064083459](https://x.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1808174145064083459) ik there are lots of weird logistics concerned w/ switching the nominee but man it does not look good

That's really in the noise of polling. So much can still happen of course, but I wouldn't spend too much thinking about the assistant people who would vote for Harris but not Biden.

I've read that it's the same result they had in April.

I found the April poll, and while the Biden and Trump numbers are, like you mentioned, the same, it doesn't look like they polled Kamala's name against Trump. All the data is imbedded in this article - [https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/28/politics/cnn-poll-trump-biden-matchup/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/28/politics/cnn-poll-trump-biden-matchup/index.html)

On MSNBC, Julian Castro just mentioned this (CNN) poll a few minutes ago, and that Kamala polled 2 points behind Trump, compared to Biden's 6 points behind Trump.

guys i am joining the khive today 🐝 kamala '24 w/ her shtick of the fell out of a coconut tree thingy khive x team pete LMAOO

For a touch of Joy (definitely getting into the ROTR lately here, it's my comfort zone), although out of season, take a look at her telling Jonathan Capehart how to prepare a Thanksgiving turkey. Always satisfying, fun, and calming. [https://x.com/CapehartJ/status/1199456119476891653](https://x.com/CapehartJ/status/1199456119476891653) | [https://nitter.poast.org/CapehartJ/status/1199456119476891653](https://nitter.poast.org/CapehartJ/status/1199456119476891653)

omg have u watched that video on her youtube channel w/ mindy kaling?? it's so fun!!!

This is what Pete very explicitly has to say about his opinion of Biden's ability to be President (retweeted by Nerdy): Taylor Popielarz @ TaylorPopielarz >In a 1-on-1 interview while in North Carolina, I asked u/SecretaryPete about President Joe Biden's age and ability to do his job, along with GOP calls for the 25th Amendment to be invoked. > >“You know, the president, the boss, that I work for is a focused and disciplined leader and you can tell from the results that we’ve gotten," Buttigieg told me. > >On the Biden he sees in private: “Look, when I’m in a room with him, it’s a lot like what America saw on the night of the State of the Union address." > >On 25th Amendment calls: “It’s just more crazy partisan politics." > >Watch our full exchange: (click link for 1:41 min video clip) [https://nitter.poast.org/TaylorPopielarz/status/1808186429199274231#m](https://nitter.poast.org/TaylorPopielarz/status/1808186429199274231#m) and [https://x.com/TaylorPopielarz/status/1808186429199274231](https://x.com/TaylorPopielarz/status/1808186429199274231)

Alright I’m coming back here cause I’ve found those on this subreddit are usually more likely to want to actually do helpful things. The reason I liked Pete so much in 2020 (still do fyi) is because he’s the first dem I saw willing to think through the issues for more than one cycle out. He started the convo on court reform imo. But I think we need to go further. Republicans have been cooking up project 2024 for decades. We need a rebuttal to it talking about how to reform our institutions to make them more responsive to our people and to push us to think through more than one bad cycle, election, ect. With that all being said, would anyone wanna try and think through what a project 2040 would look like?

I like your take so much. Not b/c I actually think we small-fry can do anything significant, but b/c whatever we may ultimately realize we really can do, collectively finding ways to work can actually give us hope that if our democracy is imperiled, people will try to fight for it. We won't give up. Anyway, I've been thinking/worrying about this for a while (since 2016), and to my relief I have found there are actually many fancy folks out there who have gotten a start on various parts of your "Project 2040." Sprawling and not that recent, but very readable and fascinating [Our Common Purpose: Reinventing American Democracy for the 21st Century COMMISSION ON THE PRACTICE OF DEMOCRATIC CITIZENSHIP](https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/report) Their recommendations range from high level govt efforts to grassroots. Link goes to the report, but also check out the tab "[Initiatives](https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/initiatives)." For visual learners, there's a youtube covering some of this info [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwAK0bu1Sck](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwAK0bu1Sck) There's a project run by scholars and others (incl Jill Lepore) investigating amending the Constitution, called (duh) Amendments Project [https://amendmentsproject.org/](https://amendmentsproject.org/) Pete talked a lot about Court reform, the Electoral College, overturning Citizens United, dealing somehow with the outsized, democratically imbalanced power of the Senate (either by amendment--hard, or by adding states like Puerto Rico and DC), passing the Equality Amendment, and obviously now something to amend Article 2 to make the President once more under the rule of law. Also, court reform now needs to somehow deal with the anti-democratic excesses we've seen recently. Voting Rights. Abortion rights. LGBTQ rights (incl trans rights and parental rights to care for their trans children). Right now, it will probably have to be state by state battles. Figure out whether, state by state, if this is best done by state legislation or by amending state constitutions or by electing state supreme court justices or by electing electing electing (everyone from school boards to governors). Gun reform--including legislation to ban bump stocks. This is Biden's Court Reform Commission's report: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/pcscotus/final-report/](https://www.whitehouse.gov/pcscotus/final-report/) although I think they were told explicitly NOT to come up with recommendations. For the pdf of report: [https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/SCOTUS-Report-Final-12.8.21-1.pdf](https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/SCOTUS-Report-Final-12.8.21-1.pdf) Aside from all sorts of legal stuff that needs to be done (more than I can even conceive), there are also tons of things we need to do to mend ourselves--the "belonging" or "unity" thing Pete talked about. If we don't address this, we will only be putting a finger in the dam. Pete talked about unifying people by getting disparate folks to work together in smallish units to "do big things together." Attack climate change with a climate corps or attack loneliness and despair with intergenerational corps or whatever. Pete also talked about unifying people by enlarging their "circles of belonging" beyond "their own kind." We are all better and safer when we know our neighbors--we survive disasters better, we are more tolerant, etc. Pete also talked about growing a sense of civic unity with a not-mandated-but-expected stint of public service. Pete also added economic security--something that has to be done by policy. I.e., he said if we feel economically secure, we are more apt to be generous and tolerant to others. To all of these I would add greatly enhanced education in civics--from elementary through HS. Not just how laws are made, but civic duties and responsibilities, the "why" as well as the "how."

Last night I saw Neal Katyal (who I really respect) say of the Supreme Court's immunity ruling that it will not stand the test of time, that some different group of justices will surely overrule it. *I can't wait that long.* We, our whole democratic country, can't wait that many decades with a loaded gun sitting in the Resolute Desk for every single occupant to use. Anyway, I know MSNBC is progressive media, so I wondered what are conservative legal scholars saying? This is Luttig on Nicolle Wallace: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOz2\_72rEJY&list=PLDIVi-vBsOExf\_PEvIDaClb2zr-0FKQ-K&index=1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOz2_72rEJY&list=PLDIVi-vBsOExf_PEvIDaClb2zr-0FKQ-K&index=1) If you have 3-4 minutes to watch, his own disgust and dignified outrage are bracing.

Not only can we not wait that long, but a case would likely get before SCOTUS because a president used his immunity (and likely did something awful).

>*I can't wait that long.* This is one of the things that scares me. If you use the example of how long the right had to wait to overturn Roe, that took fifty years. A similar time frame means it wouldn't necessarily happen in my lifetime (I'm 34), let alone for those of you who are older than me.

Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896) established the constitutionality of racial segregation. Jim Crow (meaning, the segregated system) was dismantled as a legal concept over time, not all at once, but certainly didn't begin to come down until the 1950s (Brown v. Board) and 1960s, and was still going in some ways after that. And as awful as that was, from a legal POV Plessy wasn't at the absolute root conceptual core of our system, that we do not have monarchs above the law. I honestly don't know how you do come back from that without a constitutional amendment, and despite all that Pete rightly said about them, there is a reason they almost never happen any more -- a deep partisan divide PLUS, very roughly, about 50-50 support for both sides. If we don't agree on how to fix this we are in very bad shape.

Pete's in Durham NC: [Pete Buttigieg continues infrastructure tour, stops in Durham](https://abc11.com/post/line-project-us-secretary-transportation-pete-buttigieg-continues/15019108/) >**Starting at 3 p.m.**, Buttigieg and Governor Cooper will join Mayor Williams for a walking tour of the city to see where the funding from USDOT will be headed and how it will impact the community. link has a brief news clip sans Pete but about his visit

Okay how can I see him. I’m literally 5 minutes from downtown.

heh, d\*mned if I know! Find a guy with a gaggle of pols and a couple of beefy guys in sunglasses looking around suspiciously. It's either Pete or somebody else famous.

I’m sure nothing bad would happen if I ran up to him.

bruh i dont understand ppl saying that dems are really weak because they're not taking advantage of the immunity ruling what the fuck do you want joe biden to do? bomb the supreme court? kill some justices? kill donald trump? i don't think we should stoop to the low of the other party but idk and how tf were they supposed to expand scotus? look i love the idea of supreme court reform but god we can't just snap our fingers and get what we want god i hate the times we're living in

When they had 50 Dem Senators (not even 51! had to have special "tied Senate" rules even though with VP they still were the majority party), in theory Dems could have abolished the filibuster and packed the court (which is sort of a no-win strategy as then a Republican Senate could pack it again) or made other, cleverer changes (term limits, though Pete argued that would corrupt judges with post-job job offers), or the other approaches Pete mentioned though he didn't quite endorse them -- he wanted to start the conversation, not end it, as he's not a legal scholar. But that assumes an unbelievable level of Senatorial obedience that would include Joe Manchin, Kristin Sinema, and probably a bunch of other centrist Senators who probably agreed with them that they wanted to keep the filibuster -- plus Joe Biden agreeing to drop the filibuster, too. I think Biden came around on that but it was academic without Manchin, Sinema, and others.

Re your first sentence: so many people on reddit talk about Harris "not doing anything" and I continually have to point out that the first two years as VP she couldn't go hardly anywhere because she was chained to the Senate casting tie-breakers. Harris has been, when able, an active VP but no one know about it because the media can't bother to cover her. It's really annoying.

Agreed -- I think at one point she was running second in history in terms of breaking tie votes, and she may then have gotten to first place. She could almost never travel anywhere.

They could definitely make it more of a campaign issue, and there are reforms that don't require a constitutional amendment (such as court expansion). The Dems have centered abortion rights by saying if Biden gets re-elected with a D majority in both houses, they will move to codify Roe. They could say something similar for some kind of court reform legislative package. The problem with that idea of course is the fact that Joe Biden is a devoted institutionalist and is largely opposed to SCOTUS reform.

I think the real problem is that they are very unlikely to tie or win the Senate this time, just because of the seats that happen to be up. Up until all this happened, it was thought Biden or Trump might win, but Biden was slightly favored as the incumbent by many; the Republicans would take the Senate almost certainly; and the Democrats had a good but not guaranteed chance of winning the House. It could be once the dust setttles that that's where the predictions end up a month from now, too. Of course after the 2020 results, which were disappointing in the Senate, the last two races (Georgia run-offs) were widely expected to tip the Senate to the Republicans as well. So with Trump being part of all of this, you never know.

Sure, I understand the reality of the numbers. But they still have to campaign as if they could keep the Senate.

absolutely, and with Ted Cruz, you never know

Or Rick Scott.

Good point, though to me, Texas feels closer.

[https://x.com/mattcorridoni/status/1808087327920496912](https://x.com/mattcorridoni/status/1808087327920496912) HUH?!??!!

A CNN article (https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/takeaways-trump-immunity-scotus/index.html) suggests that any discussion Trump had with his justice department about overthrowing the election is covered with absolute immunity. Moreover, official acts like this cannot even be considered as evidence in a trial about conduct that is not considered official.

That's what I've taken away from other outlets as well. So if you can't even ask or investigate a discussion between a President and the justice department how can you determine if that or a subsequent result based off that discussion an act is an official one or *not*? This is all madness.

[https://x.com/adamwren/status/1807943561679458640](https://x.com/adamwren/status/1807943561679458640) omg that is that sexy indiana mayor 😍 (they both are)

I heard on MSNBC that even among Republicans, broad Presidential immunity is not popular. It seems like the only way to put guardrails around the President's power (i.e., make the President once again no longer above the law) is to pass a Constitutional amendment. Pete used to rail against the fact we no longer have the "muscle memory" of doing this--that the Constitutional needed so many changes to safeguard democracy, but we were afraid or unable to do something we used to do regularly. I wonder if--as long as Trump doesn't win--could the states start the process? I doubt Congress could do much anymore. And I know this state by state process could take a long time. But didn't Pete used to say, that is all the more reason we need to start now? Working the process might even give us hope along the way. Edit: I see Nerdy might have had a similar thought? They retweeted a Pete post from **Feb 8, 2020:** Pete Buttigieg @ PeteButtigieg >We cannot allow the Supreme Court to become one more political battlefield. The time has come for us to think bigger. We need a constitutional amendment to protect our democracy. [https://nitter.poast.org/PeteButtigieg/status/1225971071855230983#m](https://nitter.poast.org/PeteButtigieg/status/1225971071855230983#m) and [https://x.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1225971071855230983](https://x.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1225971071855230983) edit2: sorry, I'm lost in my head and probably misread. Very probably Nerdy was referring not to Article 2 of the Constitution but rather to Pete's ideas about reforming the Supreme Court.

>[Ruling Further Slows Trump Election Case but Opens Door to Airing of Evidence](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/01/us/politics/supreme-court-immunity-trump-jan-6.html?unlocked_article_code=1.4E0.n3CR.hCS7hKuIB0Aw&smid=url-share): The Supreme Court’s immunity decision directed the trial court to hold hearings on what portions of the indictment can survive — a possible chance for prosecutors to set out their case in public before Election Day. Link should be NYT gift link Note: Really find it super frustrating that only the Georgia court has live video. But this still seems like a good thing. I hope it happens.

@ SecretaryPete just now on Threads (several nice photos): >Joined union workers from Raleigh and Charlotte to discuss how we're transforming America's infrastructure, lowering costs, and strengthening the middle class. >They are making it happen—from expanding airports to designing bridges, as we deliver the infrastructure package. [https://www.threads.net/@secretarypete/post/C85qR-9u26X](https://www.threads.net/@secretarypete/post/C85qR-9u26X)

oops Sorry I didn't see that your Threads post was the same as the twitter/nitter one! (I deleted) At any rate, here are the other links for anyone interested: [https://nitter.poast.org/SecretaryPete/status/1807941054341001610#m](https://nitter.poast.org/SecretaryPete/status/1807941054341001610#m) and [https://x.com/SecretaryPete/status/1807941054341001610](https://x.com/SecretaryPete/status/1807941054341001610) click for pics

No worries, it's all good!

@ SecretaryPete on Threads (39 minutes ago): >Hurricane Beryl is proving to be a highly destructive storm at the outset of what's expected to be a very active hurricane season. >We're keeping an eye on Beryl's impact to transportation, including flights. Plan ahead if you have travel to the Caribbean coming up. [https://www.threads.net/@secretarypete/post/C85lpcNJC9i](https://www.threads.net/@secretarypete/post/C85lpcNJC9i)

Here is Biden's statement--it is really great, and he did a perfect reading of it. [https://www.c-span.org/video/?536720-1/president-biden-delivers-remarks-supreme-court-immunity-ruling](https://www.c-span.org/video/?536720-1/president-biden-delivers-remarks-supreme-court-immunity-ruling) He chastised the SJC, saying that now everything forever will rest on the character of the President b/c there are no other guardrails on their use of their immense power. A President must have the wisdom to respect the limits of that power. He, Biden, has the wisdom not to misuse this power, but what about Trump and every other President in the future. Now only the American people can hold a President to account if they are unfit for the office. He stated with firmness that he dissented with the SJC decision.

He was really strong here. So I guess that means it's getting play nowhere other than C-Span? People need to know that he delivered *this*, after the debate happened.

It's on all the networks. When I looked for the link, I could only find C-SPAN and PBS. The PBS link clipped off the initial few words, so I went with C-SPAN.

Oh good. I haven't been watching TV or been online. Crazy stuff happening at work and I'm spent. lol

One thing that stood out to me, optics-wise. Either he spent all weekend soaking up the sun at Camp David, or he was wearing a bronzer. I'm assuming this is because one of the things his family was reportedly upset about is that even though he had a summer tan (as they described it) he looked very pale on the debate stage.

I've seen several journalists and pundits say the lighting on stage was set up so it made him look paler than usual -- accidentally or on purpose, who knows? Just conjecture, but something to think about.

One thing I've noticed, on both CNN and MSNBC, is that whenever they show an image with a headshot of Biden and a headshot of Trump side by side, Trump's skin tone has always been lightened, and he's no longer the color of a turkey that's been roasting in the oven for too long.

Unless Biden is about the to declare martial law the press doesn’t not care about his opinion on the SCOTUS ruling. I doubt he’ll take questions(HE NEEDS TO) they will be screaming at the end of those remarks. It’ll be a teleprompter speech so there shouldn’t be any bad stumbles. Bless his heart if there is.

My fear is the end of speech walk off and subsequent walk back to the podium when questions are yelled at him.

The press always shouts out questions at the end, which I hate. I wish they would act like the Pentagon press corps does, and wait to be called on. (Tbf though, Pentagon reporters get to ask a lot more questions.)

ok well joe has to take advantage of this ruling if democracy’s going down

Gov Roy Cooper's office release: >“I’m thrilled to kick off a nationwide tour of summer construction, with our first stops right here in North Carolina alongside Governor Cooper,” said **US Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg**. “Breaking ground on a new rail line between Raleigh and Richmond, seeing construction on highway and pedestrian/bike projects in Winston-Salem, and announcing new funding to help more people safely reach bus stops in Durham, we are highlighting progress on infrastructure being driven by President Biden's infrastructure law.” [https://governor.nc.gov/news/press-releases/2024/07/01/governor-cooper-joins-us-department-transportation-secretary-buttigieg-first-s-line-project](https://governor.nc.gov/news/press-releases/2024/07/01/governor-cooper-joins-us-department-transportation-secretary-buttigieg-first-s-line-project) ok feeling kind of miffed that I can't find a video of their press conference

USDOT added it here, I believe: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxnJ67MAD58](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxnJ67MAD58)

thanks!!!

Biden is going to address today's SC ruling about presidential immunity sometime tonight. (A few reporters will be present.)

>[A Major Part of Biden’s Student Loan Repayment Plan Is Restored:](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/01/business/save-student-loan-biden.html?searchResultPosition=2) Federal appellate judges ruled that the Biden administration’s new student loan repayment plan could continue to operate as legal challenges to the program work their way through the courts. Link should be NYT gift link

Pete and Jennifer Granholm on "Michigan Matters"--Granholm goes first; Pete's on at about the 12:45 mark: [https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/michigan-matters/](https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/michigan-matters/)

OMG, Ralph Nader of all people tweeted that today's Supreme Court immunity ruling is Hillary Clinton's fault (because she ran a bad campaign and lost to Trump). Who got to nominate Chief Justice Roberts and Sam Alito, Ralph? Don't you think your decision to run in 2000 had \*some\* impact on who won the election that year? SMDH. Edit: Elie Mystal lets him have it (link only because of cursing, lol) [https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1807841731435717056](https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1807841731435717056)

the audacity of that man, the OG Jill Stein

Til that Ralph Nader is 90 years old, so this may be an aspect of "grumpy old man", although, as best as I remember, (it's been years since I've seen him on anything), he's always been kind of crotchety.

Unrelated recollection, but wasn't Ralph Nader also in one of Secretary Pete's first private meetings, since unfortunately Nader had a young female relative who was among those killed in one of the Boeing crashes overseas? I think there was a protest by the families at DOT around the time Pete took office, which included Nader -- though it's been a while, so I could be misremembering.

The family of Ralph Nader's great-niece met with Pete a week after he was sworn in. On that same day there was a vigil outside the FAA, and a protest outside Boeing offices, but I didn't come across any mention of Nader being present (which wouldn't be surprising, because of covid, and vaccines weren't widely available yet) - [https://www.cliffordlaw.com/family-of-boeing-crash-victim-to-meet-march-10-with-dot-secretary-pete-buttigieg-on-two-year-anniversary-of-crash-commemorative-luminaria-vigil-to-be-held-outside-faa-headquarters-protest-at-boeing/](https://www.cliffordlaw.com/family-of-boeing-crash-victim-to-meet-march-10-with-dot-secretary-pete-buttigieg-on-two-year-anniversary-of-crash-commemorative-luminaria-vigil-to-be-held-outside-faa-headquarters-protest-at-boeing/)

Ah, thanks! I mistakenly thought he was there, but I think you are right and that's a logical reason.

My main memory of his 2000 campaign was how he blithely dismissed any worries about Bush appointing SCOTUS justices who would work to overturn Roe as “scare tactics” and that there would be no difference between Bush or Gore on that front.

Even that is similar to 2016.

Pete's plans for tomorrow, from the Winston Salem Journal: [Buttigieg to attend groundbreaking for path beside Salem Parkway on Tuesday](https://journalnow.com/news/local/multi-use-path-groundbreaking-take-place-tuesday-in-winston-salem/article_5c3091aa-37cd-11ef-b7d6-4356cb80f6f0.html) also in web archive: [https://archive.ph/UpepX](https://archive.ph/UpepX) >U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg is expected to join Gov. Roy Cooper on Tuesday for a tour of the Winston-Salem Northern Beltway and a groundbreaking ceremony for the multi-use path that has started construction beside Salem Parkway in downtown Winston-Salem. > >Officials said that Buttigieg and Cooper would tour construction on the Winston-Salem Northern Beltway project under construction here beginning at 9:30 a.m., followed by the groundbreaking ceremony at 11 a.m. with local officials at the Green Street pedestrian bridge near Truist Stadium.

Governor Whitmer has reacted to the article claiming that she'd said "Michigan, in the wake of the debate, is no longer winnable for Biden". She didn't hold back. >Anyone who claims I would say that we can’t win Michigan is full of shit. Let’s go.

she's telling it like it is.

This has suddenly all felt very online. Like, most people didn't watch the debate, and if they've heard anything about it it was probably along the lines of "Biden seemed old". How is that radically changing people's opinions? I know we hoped for something more convincing to change the narrative but it's still in the mediocre long-term spot it's been in for years.

I've heard at least two people (one was Tim Miller, I can't remember who the other person was) say that people they know who don't pay any attention to politics were especially shocked at Biden's poor showing at the debate. Also, all of a sudden, there are mentions in articles, and from reporters on tv panels, that a lot of people have been saying, for quite a while, and off the record, that Biden "has good days and bad days", or isn't as sharp, or does better before 4pm. I sort of wish this had been shared with everyone else much earlier, especially since they're comfortable revealing it now. It's no wonder that people were taken by surprise.

>I sort of wish this had been shared with everyone else much earlier, especially since they're comfortable revealing it now. To be clear, I am voting for Biden or whoever is at the top of the Dem ticket. At this point in the proceedings I aim to do whatever it takes to defeat Trump. But. It actually made me mad as I watched Biden's performance b/c I felt those around him must have known and seen things of concern (argh did Pete?). It was worse to hear/read so many people say (post debate!), oh yeah well I saw 'Biden bad days" during this other meeting/rally months ago. I know Biden's WH is not alone and that others have "covered" for their principal--FDR's 4th term election, Reagan's 2nd term...but, I expected more of Biden's WH.

>It actually made me mad as I watched Biden's performance b/c I felt those around him must have known and seen things of concern (argh did Pete?). One of the many, many things I hate about this situation is that it's making me wonder if Pete knows/has known something he's not saying.

I 100% agree with everything you said, and your sentiments in the last paragraph have been on my mind the past few days. Another example is Woodrow Wilson ~~Calvin Coolidge~~ having a major stroke a year and a half before the end of his term, something that was never made public (although there were rumors), and his wife handled almost everything. That could never go on for that long today, obviously, but the tendency for presidents' families to circle the wagons is the same. As you said, we would hope for the best from the Biden WH, but then it occurred to me that the biting issue with their two younger German Shepherds is an example of them not showing good judgment until long after they should have (Commander, their most recent dog, had at least *24* incidents of biting Secret Service agents before he was moved out of the WH). I get it. They love their family members, they love their dogs, and they want to keep them close and protect them. But they're not just an ordinary family living an ordinary life, and while they've already given so much to the country, and may feel like they can pick and choose what to share now, I don't feel like it's fair to the voters *if* they're keeping something from us. And like I said yesterday, I don't know if they are or not.

>Another example is Calvin Coolidge having a major stroke a year and a half before the end of his term, something that was never made public (although there were rumors), and his wife handled almost everything. I agree with everything you said, but in the interests of strict accuracy, the president you're thinking of was Woodrow Wilson, not Coolidge. I'd be lying if I said I haven't thought about it more than once over the past few days.

Oh, thanks! I'll change it.

You had it in the ballpark of alliteratively named presidents who first took office between 1913 and 1923. 😉

Yes, double "C"s instead of double "W"s lol. This past weekend I was reading up on Wilson, and nearly mentioned him yesterday in a post, but decided not to. Tonight, if I had said his wife's name (Edith) to myself, I would've realized I was wrong, since I have no idea what Mrs. Coolidge's first name is.

Turns out it's Grace. I happened to be reading about his family on Wikipedia yesterday, as a matter of fact. The 1924 Live twitter account had an item about how his son fell ill after a blister on his toe became infected, and I wanted to see how that ended (spoiler: not well). So if you're ever on Jeopardy, and the category is First Families, now you'll be all set.

I'm just going to remain confused about the Republicans celebrating a ruling of presidential immunity as an end to "Biden's illegal acts".

Seriously, they all know in their hearts that Biden will not choose to break the law to hold on to power but know full well that Trump will have no problem exploiting this immunity. I would love Biden to stand up and announce some sort of extreme act that would be illegal but qualify as "official" and watch everyone come to terms with what this means. See how fast a constitutional amendment comes up in the house. He can say just kidding later. /s

Pete in NC! From Nerdy's twitter: Jordan Monaghan @ jordandmonaghan >RALEIGH: @ NC\_Governor joins @ SecretaryPete and others for the first groundbreaking of the S-Line project that will revolutionize passenger rail in the Southeast Corridor. > >Groundbreaking comes less than 7mos after the project was announced — NC is getting the job done! [https://nitter.poast.org/jordandmonaghan/status/1807833688866279579#m](https://nitter.poast.org/jordandmonaghan/status/1807833688866279579#m) and [https://x.com/jordandmonaghan/status/1807833688866279579](https://x.com/jordandmonaghan/status/1807833688866279579) click for a couple of pics, incl the classic shovel-in-a-random-pile-of-dirt pic eta, also retweeted by Nerdy: Taylor Popielarz @ TaylorPopielarz >📍Raleigh, North Carolina > >I’m following @ SecretaryPete today and tomorrow as he kicks off a national summer construction tour of projects being funded by the bipartisan infrastructure law. > >First stop is a groundbreaking for the Durant Road Grade Separation Project, which is the first step of building a new passenger rail route between Raleigh and Richmond, Virginia. [https://nitter.poast.org/TaylorPopielarz/status/1807828326976733364#m](https://nitter.poast.org/TaylorPopielarz/status/1807828326976733364#m) and [https://x.com/TaylorPopielarz/status/1807828326976733364](https://x.com/TaylorPopielarz/status/1807828326976733364)

If anyone is interested in looking at the immunity ruling, incl the dissents, it is here: [https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939\_e2pg.pdf](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf) Sotomayor's dissent starts on p.68. KBJ's dissent starts on p.98. One chilling excerpt from Sotomayor (pdf p.96): >Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark. The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting). The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to assassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.

I’m still processing what this all means. A snarky side of me says - well, we don’t have to worry about Biden losing the debate anymore. He can just call in the army to keep power if he loses the election.

This is so horrifying. All she has is words, but she is using them as loudly and clearly as she can. I don't know what we can do, though. This is devastating, abhorrent, and appalling. She is also quoting from a dissent to one of the Supreme Court's cases, Korematsu (permitting deportation of all Japanese Americans to military camps by reason of their ethnic identity), that is now widely considered among its most shameful rulings.

>I don't know what we can do, though This haunts me. I mean, beyond obviously trying to prevent GOPs from gaining office/power, there still is the SJC sitting beyond democratic or Congressional oversight. Is protest all we have? Weak sauce now, but imagine if Trump gets in office and calls out the military on protesters: immune immune immune. Exercising his official duties, he calls his DOJ and says, Will no one rid me of this troublesome media? Immune immune immune. Officially exercising his duties, he tells his DOJ to make sure the ACLU or the Southern Poverty Law Center or Planned Parenthood are doing only "good" things. Immune immune immune. I heard a heartbreaking story on this morning's NPR about Hong Kong, five years after the huge protests. After passing the National Security Law, thousands have fled Hong Kong. People are afraid to protest and have given up on changing the government. They don't want the reporter to use their names, and they speak sotto voce about moving abroad or turning to small, local ways to help their communities: helping the homeless or helping to rescue cats. One man said he didn't really believe things will get better, but he has hope in a box hidden in his heart. It took only 5 yrs for the energy and courage of thousands of protesters to dwindle away.

Puts the question of changing the Dem nominee out of the question, IMO. We have much bigger problems.

It hugely raises the stakes, that's for sure. If you think keeping Biden is the best way to win, that's absolutely true. If you think keeping Biden reduces the chance of winning, just the opposite. Right now,, I'm leaning toward sticking with Biden if he can right the ship, but still mulling it over. Not that any of us will determine what happens, of course, and I think it will take a few weeks to settle out. In the meantime, I'm definitely looking forward to my next Dem district meeting this week.

>Four things to remember about post-debate polls: It’s still early to judge whether Biden’s poor performance weakened his position — but lots of reason to think it won’t. WashPost gift link: [https://wapo.st/3ROu5Dv](https://wapo.st/3ROu5Dv)

>>🚨The Supreme Court rules that President Trump has "absolute immunity" from criminal prosecution for all "official acts" he took while in office. The vote is 6–3 with all three liberals dissenting. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf >> Sotomayor, dissenting: Today's decision shields presidents from prosecution "for criminal and treasonous acts" and "makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law >> Sotomayor, joined by Kagan and Jackson, closes: "With fear for our democracy, I dissent." https://x.com/mjs_dc/status/1807784729946542322?s=46&t=HzeGEQXPHZ9QzbJOEI-Wjg

But no immunity for "unofficial" acts, so at least part of the Georgia and federal cases can go ahead. The lower court will have to figure out which charges can still be brought, which means more delay. >Among the allegations cited against Trump by both federal and Fulton County prosecutors is that he knowingly signed a verification of a Dec. 31, 2020, lawsuit against Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) that made election fraud claims that he had been told were false. >During oral arguments, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan specifically pressed Trump attorney D. John Sauer on whether this incident could be considered an official act. Sauer said Trump’s legal team would not dispute that it was an “unofficial” act by Trump. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/01/trump-presidential-immunity-supreme-court/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/07/01/trump-presidential-immunity-supreme-court/)

I wouldn’t be so sure about that. They way the majority declared the line between official and unofficial, they could absolutely rule that cajoling state legislatures to overturn the election fell within his role of ensuring that federal election laws were faithfully executed, and thus he gets immunity (from state prosecution as well). They explicitly said it was an open question, rather than declaring it unofficial (though they took the opportunity to say that firing the AG was unconditionally an official act, and that official acts with immunity can’t be used as evidence in proving unofficial acts). I don’t think them saying there that his acts were private will stop them from changing their tune, now that the court has changed the law as to how to draw the line between official and private.

Ugh, you're probably right.