Breaking Joe Biden drops out of 2024 presidential race

[Smacktard]

There was a debate scheduled.

There was a debate scheduled with Biden.

His campaign said it was inappropriate to finalize the details in light of Biden pulling out of the race, mostly just to further the "chaos in the DNC" narrative that the Reps are trying to spin.

So, the "debate" story is being spun this way:
Trump backs out of debates
This implies a intentional and underhanded effort to avoid all debates.

When really the story is:
Trump awaits DNC nominee formalization before finalizing debate details
This represents the situation factually (as reported by the Trump team). And until there's proof of the contrary, it would be a non-story... except for the yellow journalism at work with titles like these.

 

[Ancle Suck]

So he correctly predicted that Biden could drop out and said there was no point scheduling VP debates with Harris, and this is evidence that he's being wishy-washy? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

He didn't predict shit. He didn't actually believe it would happen and was just trying to make Biden look weaker. He didn't actually want Biden to drop out, he wanted to be able to tell Biden he should drop out.

Did you forget the part where there was no sourced claim from the Trump team that Trump wouldn't debate her? Kamala's remarks came BEFORE Trump's official statement, from . Out of thin air, the narrative appeared that Trump wasn't willing to debate. She wasn't responding to Trump or an official statement from his campaign. She was responding to Literally a Tweet from a former editor of The Daily Beast. She didn't have to say anything at all.

"Out of thin air" is a complete lie. He always has ideas floated out to see how people will respond and never fully commits to something until it's a positive. It's why he says "people are saying" about most everything

Yeah, Trump is a piece of shit. We know this. I'm not saying Kamala is literally the ethical equivalent of Trump. I'm saying that it exhausts me when Dems are dishonest, too.

It's not dishonest. He feeds rumors out there and people are acting on them. The rumors aren't being made up by the democrats, they're being made by him and his team and the democrats are responding.

That's supposition. They could just as easily have been bait so that Harris campaign accuses him of trying to back out of debates, at which point he could say something like, "I'm not backing out of the debate; I'll debate whoever the de facto nominee is." Yknow, like what's happening now.

Yeah, it is bait. He always baits people, and hopes the response works in his favor.

If historical context is important, why ignore the history of multiple news stories from the past two elections claiming Trump would dodge primary and presidential debates? It's all bullshit. It's just more fucking political theater to drum up drama and clicks. If I'm wrong in September, feel free to quote this post and rub it in my face. I'll even hang my head in shame and eat my humble pie.

Yet you're ignoring the historical context of him doing all of these things in order to get more favorable terms in the debates. It's not bullshit to call him out and put it back on him.

 

[VashTheStampede]

What is dishonest here? It's weird you believe Trump so readily when he's used dodge and delay and posturing tactics on debates before. He's not doubtful about who the nominee is, he's trying to cast doubt on it. It's not legit. Calling him out on it IS honest. Again this is not the example you should go with to try to continue this point of yours about the Dems.

Plus you know, that was Trump's whole shtick the first time he was elected:

Reporters report on him. He says they're lying about him and not being fair. Stokes anger towards reporters whenever they don't blindly follow his talking points.

A few years ago I read Katy Tur's book "Unbelievable" about her experiences being an embedded reporter on the victorious Trump campaign. It got so bad at one point the Secret Service had to escort her out of his rallies.

 

[Smacktard]

What is dishonest here? It's weird you believe Trump so readily when he's used dodge and delay and posturing tactics on debates before

Name an instance where he delayed or dodged debates.

He's not doubtful about who the nominee is, he's trying to cast doubt on it

...I know. I said that. Him doing that does not negate the fact that it's dishonest to claim he's "backing out of debates". He's still committed to the debates. His team said as much. He's just trying to further the "Dems in disarray" narrative.

It frankly fuckin blows my mind that someone can say "He IS backing out of debates BECAUSE he committed to debates only after the nominee is finalized officially!"

 

[VashTheStampede]

When really the story is:
Trump awaits DNC nominee formalization before finalizing debate details
This represents the situation factually (as reported by the Trump team). And until there's proof of the contrary, it would be a non-story... except for the yellow journalism at work with titles like these.

And we're back to just accepting what Trump says as the "real" story.

It frankly fuckin blows my mind that someone can say "He IS backing out of debates BECAUSE he committed to debates only after the nominee is finalized officially!"

Where did he commit to debates after the nominee is finalized?

 

[Ants!]

Name an instance where he delayed or dodged debates.

You're joking, right? Please tell me you're joking.

 

[Ancle Suck]

There was a debate scheduled with Biden.

His campaign said it was inappropriate to finalize the details in light of Biden pulling out of the race, mostly just to further the "chaos in the DNC" narrative that the Reps are trying to spin.

So, the "debate" story is being spun this way:
Trump backs out of debates
This implies a intentional and underhanded effort to avoid all debates.

When really the story is:
Trump awaits DNC nominee formalization before finalizing debate details
This represents the situation factually (as reported by the Trump team). And until there's proof of the contrary, it would be a non-story... except for the yellow journalism at work with titles like these.

You're honestly acting as if you're in the bag of the Trump campaign at this point.

There was a debate scheduled, yes with Biden, but it was scheduled. The Harris campaign wants to keep it scheduled. The Trump campaign does not. That is the Trump campaign backing out of a potential debate since the other campaign wants to keep it. It doesn't matter that the nominee changed. The fact of the matter is that there as a debate on the books that one campaign wants to keep and the other is not being non-commital on.

The debate was scheduled for after the DNC is done. There would be weeks worth of time between them. If he wants to come across as not backing out of the debate he should say he will debate whoever the nominee is at the agreed to time, rather than "I need to wait for them to have their nominee"

 

[Ants!]

...I know. I said that. Him doing that does not negate the fact that it's dishonest to claim he's "backing out of debates". He's still committed to the debates. His team said as much. He's just trying to further the "Dems in disarray" narrative.

It frankly fuckin blows my mind that someone can say "He IS backing out of debates BECAUSE he committed to debates only after the nominee is finalized officially!"

She didn't even claim he's dropping out. She said "what happened to any time, any where."

Only after the DNC is not any time. Only on fox news is not any where.

 

[Ants!]

Also: Harris wasn't expecting to debate Trump either.

 

[Ancle Suck]

Name an instance where he delayed or dodged debates.

October 15th, 2020. He was diagnosed with COVID a bit before it and refused to do it remotely (an option that was presented to him) or to reschedule it. It resulted in the Biden campaign just doing a town hall on the date and time reserved for it.

 

[VashTheStampede]

October 15th, 2020. He was diagnosed with COVID a bit before it and refused to do it remotely (an option that was presented to him) or to reschedule it.

I 100% understand not doing it remotely but not rescheduling is a bitch move.

 

[Smacktard]

"Out of thin air" is a complete lie. He always has ideas floated out to see how people will respond and never fully commits to something until it's a positive. It's why he says "people are saying" about most everything

I think this is the crux of the argument. I think, all in all, the question boils down to whether these rumors that were shared on Twitter by a journalist were TRUE and whether they were GENUINE. Was Trump angling at dipping from the debates? I feel like I've gotten a good enough sense over the past 9 years for when Trump is bullshitting and when he's being honest. I don't genuinely believe he would attempt to skip the debates with Kamala, in the same way I didn't think he would try to skip the primary debates, the debates with Hillary, and the debates with Biden, despite what media was saying about each of those debates at the time.

Is he likely to try to get more favorable debate terms for himself? Well, yeah, 100%. Hence why he started attacks on Stephanopoulos recently. No dispute there. Candidates typically try to get the most favorable debate terms for themselves.

But consider the other perspective: Biden camp accused Trump of being to afraid to debate just recently, and as a result, Biden was able to get a ensure rules that favored HIM in the debate, specifically microphones being cut off while the other was speaking.

So... if you believe that it's possible that Trump camp is leaking stuff to get more favorable debate terms, is it not possible that Dems are leaking false claims in order to accomplish the very same thing?

He didn't predict shit. He didn't actually believe it would happen and was just trying to make Biden look weaker. He didn't actually want Biden to drop out, he wanted to be able to tell Biden he should drop out.

For the record, I agree with you on all of these points.

 

[Smacktard]

October 15th, 2020. He was diagnosed with COVID a bit before it and refused to do it remotely (an option that was presented to him) or to reschedule it. It resulted in the Biden campaign just doing a town hall on the date and time reserved for it.

I was even going to say "except for the Covid thing", but I forgot whether it was him or Biden that got Covid at that time.

Kind of hard to expect him to slot in another debate between Oct 22nd (the day of the final debate) and the election day. I think we can agree that he didn't intentionally get Covid to dodge the debate, right?

 

[VashTheStampede]

I think we can agree that he didn't intentionally get Covid to dodge the debate, right?

I can't even tell you with 100% certainty that he really had COVID.

I believe he did.

 

[VashTheStampede]

I think what really should be the case is that we should codify laws regarding rules and numbers of debates between candidates going forward in perpetuity.

Would never happen though.

 

[Smacktard]

And we're back to just accepting what Trump says as the "real" story.

And in absence of evidence to the contrary, refuting it has no basis. After the convention, then there's proof.

Where did he commit to debates after the nominee is finalized?

The part where they put out a press statement saying nothing could be finalized UNTIL the nominee is decided.

You're joking, right? Please tell me you're joking.

Why resort to ridicule when you could just give an example? It would make your argument much stronger.

There was a debate scheduled, yes with Biden, but it was scheduled. The Harris campaign wants to keep it scheduled. The Trump campaign does not.

Again: this claim is based on a rumor shared on Twitter.

The debate was scheduled for after the DNC is done

Exactly. So until then, this is a non-story with no proof.

She didn't even claim he's dropping out. She said "what happened to any time, any where."

Only after the DNC is not any time. Only on fox news is not any where.

Kamala isn't the only Democrat. Point in case: https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...la-harris-trump-backs-out-debates-1235068484/

They claim Trump is "backing out of the debates".

If Trump attends the debate in September, I wonder if people will still continue to say the claim of him "backing out of the debates" was totally true and valid.

 

[Smacktard]

I think what really should be the case is that we should codify laws regarding rules and numbers of debates between candidates going forward in perpetuity.

Would never happen though.

Pretty crazy the one of the most influential Presidential debates of all time happened involving someone who ended up not actually running for President. I wonder if there's any other examples of this in history.

 

[VashTheStampede]

The part where they put out a press statement saying nothing could be finalized UNTIL the nominee is decided.

They say nothing about committing to anything. Just that this isn't the time. They don't say anything about scheduling or negotiating after the nominee is decided.

That's just your presumption.

 

[VashTheStampede]

Pretty crazy the one of the most influential Presidential debates of all time happened involving someone who ended up not actually running for President. I wonder if there's any other examples of this in history.

I've seen the argument that this was one of the ONLY influential Presidential debates.

I don't necessarily agree, but it's fascinating.

 

[Ants!]

Why resort to ridicule when you could just give an example? It would make your argument much stronger.

He did it during primaries, not rescheduling after he got covid as we just discussed, countless times he threatened not to attend if he didn't get his way, and oh WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HIS MOST RECENT EXAMPLE JUST NOW.

 

[Ancle Suck]

The part where they put out a press statement saying nothing could be finalized UNTIL the nominee is decided.

This part is untrue. They can absolutely finalize a debate prior to then. (that he made a release is true, the contents of the release are untrue)

Again: this claim is based on a rumor shared on Twitter.

It's not a rumor. There's nothing saying they need the candidate to be finalized before scheduling a debate. They know who the candidate will be and just don't want to currently schedule a debate.

Exactly. So until then, this is a non-story with no proof.

Nope, it's a story. The proof is his own release saying he cannot finalize the debate details yet. There is nothing preventing him from doing that. He scheduled a debate with a presumptive nominee already, 2 in fact. He can schedule one now and is just using it as an excuse. There is a presumptive nominee and more than enough time to prepare for a debate with that person. If somehow that person changes again then it would reasonably need to be rescheduled.

But he already was willing to schedule a debate before things were official and is now unwilling to do so.

 

[Ants!]

What is the overall message of saying "not until the nominee is official" if not leaving not-attending as an option? If he's 100% going to debate no matter who it is, then the message should be that. Saying otherwise is keeping an Out as an option.

 

[Mark]

So... if you believe that it's possible that Trump camp is leaking stuff to get more favorable debate terms, is it not possible that Dems are leaking false claims in order to accomplish the very same thing?

I think this is the main thing that gets overlooked because everyone is preoccupied with shitting on Trump for, and I quote someone else here… “*gestures broadly*”

Trump is the perfect candidate to oppose a party that has their own agenda, because you can focus all the attention on him, throw little treats out there like the promise of this or that, and do what you do while the show is going on.

We can’t forget that all politicians suck and are playing their own game, regardless of what it is. Trump being a piece of shit doesn’t mean that the Dems are incapable of their own shitty actions. They all deceive us to further their own, some are just more obvious than others.

 

[VashTheStampede]

I think it's pretty telling that they didn't deny they were backing out and instead just tried to massage the narrative.

But yeah, it was all a Democrat plot.

 

[Quagmire]

Harris is going to run on mostly if not all of Biden's policies and they would have had stuff on her since she is the current VP and they would have debated her in the VP debates...there is very little if anything new here.

The Dems didnt trot out Sanders or AOC who would have been more different than Biden. It reeks of nothing but BS from Trump who claims to be the greatest. There are things that can change quickly while president with no warning and not being able to prep, they could prep for this easily

 

[Ants!]

There is a presumptive nominee and more than enough time to prepare for a debate with that person. If somehow that person changes again then it would reasonably need to be rescheduled.

Of course not, don't be silly! They want to sit on their hands and not prepare for ANY candidate because they have no idea who to expect. It could be anybody!

 

[Ants!]

It's not like they already had notes and talking points and preparations when she was expected to debate as the VP and they could just use that, that would be crazy.

 

[Mark]

Plot twist… all this debate about the debate is to drum up interest in the debate, so more people watch it, so advertising placements rival the Super Bowl. They’ll call it… the Super Bowel.

 

[Ants!]

Like Alu said, if for some weird reason it's someone other than Harris (it won't be, but just for the sake of this ridiculous argument), then yes it will make sense to want to change the timeline to allow for debate prep. But unless that happens, there's no reason not to schedule a debate with Harris. They already know their stuff anyway: hammer her about the border crisis, and just make up the rest.

 

[Jon]

He did. He will 95% push back in. But he has currently pulled out.

Name an instance where he delayed or dodged debates.

Legit every single debate. He uses this, as someone else said, as a ploy to get favorable debate terms. And networks lap it up because ratings with his dumb ass. And the Dems agree because they think they can take the high road and push policy. Which, by the way, only works if BOTH sides are pushing policy. In a debate you need to mention policy and push the narrative. So many Dems have failed at this the last 10 years because they keep forgetting MAGA isn't the old Republican party.

It frankly fuckin blows my mind that someone can say "He IS backing out of debates BECAUSE he committed to debates only after the nominee is finalized officially!"

Biden was not the finalized nominee either though... he was no different than Harris... He was the presumptive nominee with enough pledged delegates. Harris is now the presumptive nominee with enough pledged delegates. Let's not forget Trump was ALSO only the presumptive nominee with enough pledged delegates when he debated Biden. The way for him to properly handle this would be "The Sept. debate was with Biden. Since he is no longer the presumptive nominee we will schedule debates with the Democratic nominee once it has been made official."

That's it. Problem solved. What they are doing now is classic gaslighting. Don't fall for it. He's backing out of debates while saying he wants to debate. Remember, it's not JUST the debate with Biden he's backed out of. He's backed out of THREE that are prescheduled AFTER conventions. Biden also said he wasn't going to those, granted. And hence we ended up with the June and Sept. ones. But he's still backed out of four debates.

His reasoning is simple: no audience and mic cutoff on a fair network, Trump cannot beat Harris. He can't confuse her and can't tout unsubstantiated lies that won't be pushed back on. Those rules would destroy Trump. He NEEDS the venue change now. Remember, after the June debate the talk was already how he'll blow off the Sept. debate because Biden needed it and Trump owned him in June. There was no reason for Trump to possibly lose ground in Sept. Now? He's lost every ounce of momentum after June and the assassination attempt. Picking Vance has also caused him more issues that they are talking replacing him already. Polls are WILDLY shifting to Harris at this point. He's in a bad place and he NEEDS debates too. Dodging it with gaslighting makes no strategic sense.

Harris is going to run on mostly if not all of Biden's policies and they would have had stuff on her since she is the current VP and they would have debated her in the VP debates...there is very little if anything new here.

There's one new thing: Energy. The renewed energy of "literally anyone but Biden" has completely changed the course of this election. The momentum cannot be overstated.

 

[Quagmire]

.


There's one new thing: Energy. The renewed energy of "literally anyone but Biden" has completely changed the course of this election. The momentum cannot be overstated.

100% and he can't match that, and he knows it. He knows she will keelhaul him

 

[Jon]

100% and he can't match that, and he knows it. He knows she will keelhaul him

There is no candidate that he could even replace Vance with that would generate excitement at all. Replacing him at all makes him look weak. He picked Vance because Vance won't outshine him and lessen any "victory" Trump achieves. Problem is.. Vance IS upstaging Trump right now because he's a couch and dolphin fucker. Trump like any news good or bad about HIMSELF. Vance is usurping the negative publicity and hurting Trump. We got trouble in paradise.

 

[Quagmire]

There is no candidate that he could even replace Vance with that would generate excitement at all. Replacing him at all makes him look weak. He picked Vance because Vance won't outshine him and lessen any "victory" Trump achieves. Problem is.. Vance IS upstaging Trump right now because he's a couch and dolphin fucker. Trump like any news good or bad about HIMSELF. Vance is usurping the negative publicity and hurting Trump. We got trouble in paradise.

Exactly when his whole Persona is doubling down and never being wrong he can't change his mind on the guy he picked to be his running mate

 

[Ants!]

This is one-thousand-percent a dodge and delay tactic. Like others have said, he'll just make another excuse after the convention. He's going to do it eventually anyway and is just trying to make it more favorable you say? Fine, but that is still a dodge, he's dodging the debate as it's currently scheduled on its current network in its current format. That's still a dodge.

He can only lose ground if he debates Harris, right now they're neck-and-neck which is better than letting Harris ride momentum to be the favorite over him. So if he gets heckled into doing it because the other side calls him a chicken and people start believing that (and is it not true?), the response is going to be "see, I told you he was going to debate all along"? Yeah okay

 

[Ants!]

I need to bow out of this argument, I don't think I'm capable of being civil.

 

[Quagmire]

I need to bow out of this argument, I don't think I'm capable of being civil.

Release Dark Ants!

 

[shortkut]

I need to bow out of this argument, I don't think I'm capable of being civil.

I think you’ve been fine

 

[Ants!]

I think you’ve been fine

Sorry bro I'm married.

 

[MC74]

And to your credit, I can 100% see why your first instinct would be to think I'm overreacting (and I'm not completely disregarding the possibility that I somewhat am).

But there's been a few times where I've been discussing current events with the wife and my 10 year old daughter will pop in and be like "ugh Trump sucks" and we feel the need to tell her to be careful about just blabbing that sentiment at school because we don't know if the wrong person is going to hear and what they might do.

Tangentially related, her science teacher this past year was a climate change denier. Ugh, this fucking place.

Even here in Canada, I like to keep my thoughts on politics and such to myself because of how divisive it is. I mind my own business and go about my life, and when people do bring it up and ask my opinion, I just answer back that I'm not into politics. Nuh-uh, not pulling the pin on that grenade.

Trudeau is very much a polarizing figure though.

 

[Ancle Suck]

Sorry bro I'm married.

Ants confirmed more moral than Trump.

 

[Ants!]

Ants confirmed more moral than Trump.

I also brag about my sexcapades instead of paying a hoe hush money.

 

[Ants!]

Of course, that was the single life so you are still correct.

 

[shortkut]

I also brag about my sexcapades instead of paying a hoe hush money.

Thanks for bragging about me

 

[Ancle Suck]

Thanks for bragging about me

 

[Ants!]

Thanks for bragging about me

I did get you wet that one time. And the badge to prove it!

 

[Quagmire]

Smoke coming from Kentucky about possible VP? Posted by our governor who has had his name mentioned a little

 

[MC74]

There's one new thing: Energy. The renewed energy of "literally anyone but Biden" has completely changed the course of this election. The momentum cannot be overstated.

I'd like to think so. Biden dropping out is for the best. As for what happens come election day, who knows. I hope for the best, but never underestimate the ignorant.

 

[Ancle Suck]

Smoke coming from Kentucky about possible VP? Posted by our governor who has had his name mentioned a little

He's been the most vocal in terms of auditioning for the spot without actually straight up saying it.

He's a good choice, though his state brings no electoral consequences (which is the main thing against him).

 

[Jon]

He's been the most vocal in terms of auditioning for the spot without actually straight up saying it.

He's a good choice, though his state brings no electoral consequences (which is the main thing against him).

I still want Kelly...

 

[Quagmire]

He's been the most vocal in terms of auditioning for the spot without actually straight up saying it.

He's a good choice, though his state brings no electoral consequences (which is the main thing against him).

Yep, I love him, he would be a great pick but will not deliver KY