10 Jul 2024 , 6:00 pm .
The number of House Democrats calling on the president to resign is beginning to rise (Photo: Getty Images)
An article published on ZeroHedge reveals the growing pressure President Joe Biden is facing from senior House Democrats to drop his re-election campaign.
According to sources from the New York Times, during a private virtual meeting led by Chairman Hakeem Jeffries, Democratic members such as Jerry Nadler, Adam Smith, Mark Takano and Joseph Morelle openly expressed their opinion that Biden should drop out of the race.
In the words of the article:
"...Sunday's meeting of House leaders was not really 'private,' as both the meeting itself and the leaks that emerged immediately in its wake were surely designed to increase pressure on Biden."
This follows reports that Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Mark Warner was reportedly organizing a meeting to create a united petition for Biden to resign.
Additionally, it has been highlighted that while Democratic leaders expressed their doubts in a closed-door meeting, five rank-and-file House Democrats have publicly called for Biden to resign. Growing concerns about Biden's health and ability to take on Donald Trump in the November election have led a growing number of Democratic lawmakers in both chambers to express their concerns.
While they stopped short of calling for the president to resign, their comments indicate growing nervousness in Democratic ranks about the viability of Biden's candidacy.
Appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," California Rep. and Senate candidate Adam Schiff expressed concern about the president's age and its impact on his ability to lead the campaign.
"Biden's performance on the debate stage, I think, rightly raised questions among the American people about whether the president has the stamina to defeat Donald Trump," he said.
Given Biden's experience and Trump's record, the Democratic nominee should be clearly ahead in the polls, according to Schiff. He also expressed concern about Biden's comments, who said he would be comfortable losing to Trump as long as he gave his best effort.
"It's not just about whether you gave your all in college, but whether you made the right decision to show up or pass the baton. That's the most important decision you have to make right now."
According to a survey conducted by YouGov , almost half of Democratic supporters believe that the current US president should withdraw from the election race. The study revealed that 47% of respondents who are Democrats or leaning toward the Democrats answered affirmatively to the question about whether Biden should withdraw from his candidacy and allow another representative of the party to run for president.
The top reason cited by nearly 90% of Democratic respondents advocating for Biden to drop out is his age, while half express concerns about his ability to defeat former President Donald Trump. Despite these views, only 17% of respondents believe Biden will likely or very likely drop out of the race.
On the other hand, the study reveals that 72% of respondents consider it unlikely or not at all likely that Biden will decide to withdraw from the electoral race.
In theory, the Democratic Party has the opportunity to replace Biden at the August convention, but in practice it will be difficult to remove him from the race, since he won the primary. Unless he himself refuses to participate, it will be difficult for the party to take steps to replace him.
In recent days, Biden has made it clear that he has no intention of withdrawing his candidacy. In an interview with MSNBC , the US president said that he considers himself "the best candidate" to beat Trump and will not abandon the race for re-election.
"I am very frustrated by the party elites who 'know better.' If any of them think I shouldn't run, let them run against me. Go ahead and challenge me at the convention."
There is hope that Biden can be persuaded to drop out of the race without having to resort to more forceful tactics, but time is running out and Democrats' patience appears to be coming to an end. The House Democratic Caucus meeting this week will be crucial in determining whether pressure will be brought to bear on Biden to step down or whether he will move forward as a candidate.
https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/bi ... u-renuncia
Google Translator
*****
George Clooney Urges Biden to Drop Out of Presidential Race
George Clooney (L) and U.S. President Joe Biden (R). Photo: X/ @USAfree1979
July 11, 2024 Hour: 8:32 am
‘We are not going to win in November with this president. On top of that, we won’t win the House,’ he said bluntly.
In a New York Times op-ed published on Wednesday, Hollywood superstar and longtime Democrat George Clooney urged U.S. President Joe Biden to drop out of the 2024 presidential race, pointing to Biden’s shaky debate performance last month.
Explaining why he believed it was time for Biden to withdraw from the race, Clooney, who has long been a fund-raiser for the Democratic Party, noted: “This is about age. Nothing more. But also nothing that can be reversed.”
“I love Joe Biden. As a senator. As a vice president and as president. I consider him a friend, and I believe in him…” Clooney penned, “But the one battle he cannot win is the fight against time. None of us can. It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fund-raiser was not the Joe ‘big F-ing deal’ Biden of 2010. He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate.”
He also warned that if Biden refused to step aside in time, the party would face a huge collapse in November’s elections.
“We are not going to win in November with this president. On top of that, we won’t win the House, and we’re going to lose the Senate,” he said bluntly. “This isn’t only my opinion; this is the opinion of every senator and congress member and governor that I’ve spoken with in private. Every single one, irrespective of what he or she is saying publicly.”
“The dam has broken. We can put our heads in the sand and pray for a miracle in November, or we can speak the truth,” Clooney expressed.
The actor’s note came just two days after Biden sent a rare letter directly to both House and Senate Democrats. In it, he made clear that he is not dropping out of this race under scoring division brewing within the party.
Hollywood is a major source of campaign funding for many candidates. The entertainment industry comprises numerous wealthy individuals who can make substantial donations. These funds are critical for campaign activities such as advertising, organizing events, and mobilizing voters.
Just three weeks ago, Hollywood donors poured US$30 million into Biden’s campaign at a star-studded fundraiser hosted by Jeffrey Katzenberg, a movie mogul and co-chair of the Biden campaign, and Clooney took part in the event. However, Biden’s recent debate debacle has spurred a crisis, with some insiders accusing Katzenberg of misleading them about the president’s age-related fitness for office.
While many of Biden’s celebrity backers continue their support, some previously fervent supporters, like Damon Lindelof and Barry Diller, have ceased donations to Biden’s re-election efforts, signaling a potential shift in Hollywood’s political landscape.
https://www.telesurenglish.net/george-c ... tial-race/
******
FATE OF BIDEN HANGS OVER THE NATO SUMMIT LIKE A GHOST CONJURED BY SHAKESPEARE
9 July 2024 by Larry Johnson
The hot political event this year is the NATO Summit in Washington, DC. All Western world leaders showed up, not to discuss NATO’s future, but to see if Joe Biden survives the meetings without dumping a load in his Depends or keeling over dead. Sort of the same reason people attend a car race — i.e., they are waiting for the crash. Nothing like a fiery car wreck to get the adrenaline pumping.
If Shakespeare was still roaming the earth and writing iconic prose, he would be front-and-center at the NATO Summit. It is a meeting of political ghosts, i.e. “dead men walking.” Maybe Will would do an update of Richard III, with the decrepit Joe Biden in the starring role. Accompanying Biden on stage for the official photo is the politically castrated Rishi Sunak, the impotent couple — Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz. Nothing says NATO unity like a photo comprised of some politically irrelevant hacks along with President Orban of Hungary, who has been excoriated in recent days by many of his “colleagues” feigning a smile for the camera.
Biden kicked off the festivities and managed to get through a teleprompter speech without mangling too many words or devolving into gibberish. Mission Accomplished (so far). Yet, the content of Biden’s speech was absolutely delusional. Here are some of the lowlights.
Ukraine can and will stop Putin, especially with our full collective support. They have our full support,
Together we supplied Ukraine with weapons it needs to defend itself, tanks, fighting vehicles, air defense systems, long range missiles, and millions of munitions.
In the coming months, the United States and our partners intend to provide Ukraine with dozens of additional tactical air defense systems.
Make no mistake, Russia is failing in this war. Over three years into Putin’s war of choice, his losses are staggering, more than 350,000 Russian troops dead or wounded. Nearly 1 million Russians, many of them young people, have left Russia because they no longer see a future in Russia. And Kyiv, remember fellas and ladies, supposed to fall in five days, remember? Still standing two and a half years later and will continue to stand.
It is one thing for the addled Joe Biden to be clueless about the true situation on the ground, but many of the NATO leaders in the audience also were applauding this crap. They cannot plead guilty by way of cognitive decline. The claim that, “Ukraine is winning and Russia is losing,” is a craven lie. Ukrainian forces are being pulverized by missiles, 3000 kg FAB bombs and drones. And neither the United States nor the rest of the NATO countries have a stockpile of 155mm artillery shells and air defense systems that they can send to Ukraine. This is pure malpractice by Biden’s speech writers.
In the weeks leading up to this summit, Ukraine was under enormous pressure from NATO leaders to do something dramatic on the battlefield to at least create the impression that a Ukrainian offensive, if properly supplied, could push the Russians back. The anticipated mini-counteroffensive never materialized. Instead, Russia is hitting Ukraine all along the 1000 km front and Ukraine is steadily retreating.
Maybe, behind closed doors, the NATO members will fess up and admit that Russia is eating Ukraine’s lunch and bleeding NATO dry in the process. Biden bragged that the United States has 100,000 troops now deployed in Europe. Wow! I bet the Russians, who have 1.3 million active duty soldiers, are quaking in their boots.
Today’s speech is nothing more than political theater intended primarily for the American political audience. But the youngsters who crafted this garbage had no understanding how these words will be heard in Russia. Russian planners, unless they are fools, will conclude that NATO is intent on attacking Russia and Russia will prepare accordingly.
(More at link.)
https://sonar21.com/fate-of-biden-hangs ... akespeare/
******
Biden Twists in the Wind as Big Donors Close Wallets, Party Criticism Persists Despite Clampdown, and Pelosi Questions His Decision to Continue
Posted on July 11, 2024 by Yves Smith
Biden’s future or potential lack thereof continues to dominate the news, as lead stories in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and Financial Times confirm. A key sign came with Nancy Pelosi’s appearance on Morning Joe yesterday, where she looked to be engaging in an over-caffeinated version of damning with faint praise. As you can see below, she gave an over-the-top review of Biden’s record and his performance at the current NATO summit, while insisting that Biden needed to decide what to do about his candidacy…and stuck to her guns as the hosts pressed her that Biden had already decided. This segment is watchable at 1.5x, with critical exchange starting at 3:24:
As you can see, Pelosi adopts the posture that Biden could not have decided to withdraw from with the NATO summit pending, that that would have damaged US interests.1
The Hill confirms that there’s no doubt about Pelosi’s message:
The Financial Times focused on how big donors were refusing to fund the Biden campaign, as well as not just high profile but also noisy defections like George Clooney. From Democratic donors warn of campaign funds ‘drying up’ as Joe Biden holds on:
Democratic donors have warned that funding for the November election effort is “drying up” because of Joe Biden’s refusal to step aside, threatening to undermine the party’s effort to defeat Donald Trump….
Their increasing willingness to walk away from the campaign, mentioned in interviews with donors from Wall Street to Hollywood, poses a new existential risk to Biden’s re-election if he stays in a White House race expected to be the most expensive in US history.
“As of today, it would be very difficult to raise major donor money for the president,” said one New York-based Democratic donor. “It is so quickly unravelling that it is going to be extraordinarily difficult for him to stay in the race.”
Another donor involved in the party for decades said the money was “in the process of drying up”. The donor added: “Nine to one when I talk to other donors, they’re not planning on contributing . . . because they’re concerned about losing.”…
But much of the White House’s political operation over the past week has focused on wavering Democratic officeholders, particularly on Capitol Hill — although Biden also held calls with governors and mayors in a bid to reassure them….
But donors have been less constrained, with several high-profile Biden supporters — including Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, hotel mogul Stewart Bainum Jr and actor George Clooney — explicitly citing the president’s mental acuity in their calls for him to drop out.
Confirming the Financial Times account on donors pulling back, CNN reported Wednesday evening that a Chicago fundraiser was just cancelled:
Meanwhile, organizers for at least one Chicago fundraiser scheduled during the Democratic National Convention have decided to not to proceed with the mid-August event, a source with knowledge of the discussions told CNN….
The event, designed as a lunch for a few dozen wealthy Windy City denizens, was expected to rally support among the party’s loyal and well-heeled locals in a show of support for the big event in their backyard.
Note that the oft-cited fundraiser shortly after the debate that got a $38 million haul was previously scheduled and so is not a good indicator of Biden’s present prospects. One contact with senior Democratic party and operative contacts said the campaign was touting its supposedly strong results with small donors: “They’ve never been important to Biden. We’ll see if anything has changed when the next reports come out.”2
To continue with the high-profile defections, which will confirm donor decisions to sit on their wallets: George Clooney weighed in not with casual remarks at a talk show, but via a New York Times op-ed. Key sections from George Clooney: I Love Joe Biden. But We Need a New Nominee:
I’m a lifelong Democrat; I make no apologies for that….Last month I co-hosted the single largest fund-raiser supporting any Democratic candidate ever, for President Biden’s re-election….
I love Joe Biden. As a senator. As a vice president and as president. I consider him a friend, and I believe in him….
But the one battle he cannot win is the fight against time. None of us can. It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fund-raiser was not the Joe “big F-ing deal” Biden of 2010. He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate.
The Journal stuck the shiv in with its new story, The Night President Biden Lost George Clooney’s Support:
The president received a standing ovation when he took the stage. But for some audience members, the mood changed when he started taking questions.
To some in the audience, Biden appeared at times to struggle through answers or keep up with the conversationalists, a harbinger of what millions of Americans would see in the debate weeks later….
When Kimmel joked at the Los Angeles’s Peacock Theater that he had given his son, Billy, a stuffed animal of the president’s dog, “and it bit Billy’s toe off,” the president didn’t register an immediate response—but Obama chimed in with a reference to his Affordable Care Act, quipping, “Fortunately he’s covered!”
In a video taken at the event, Biden is halting in his delivery of some responses.
For the most part, the conversation flows, but to some in the room Biden, who had just returned from the G-7 summit in Europe, seemed to have a hard time keeping up with Kimmel’s quick patter. Obama seemed to pick up loose threads in Biden’s responses, and filled in gaps. One attendee who sat near the stage said it was clear to him by the end of the evening that the president wasn’t as sharp as he once was.
When the Financial Times story quoted early in this post went live, as you can see above, it included the argument that at least Team Biden had been successful in tamping down noise. It included this sop: “….no member of the official party leadership explicitly called on him to step aside.”
Erm, yes, he may not be among the party elite, but Democratic Representative Adam Smith of Washington State had called for Biden to withdraw before this piece ran:
Similarly, Vermont Senator Peter Welch may not be a member of the Democratic party apparatus, but any Senate defection is significant. Welch joined the upper chamber only in 2023 but he was a state representative from 2007 till he ran successfully for the Senate. And he did it via a Washington Post op-ed, making it hard to ignore. From the Wall Street Journal:MSNBC - 7/10/2024 - Rep. Adam Smith
"Joe Biden was not picked in 2020 because he was the only person that could beat Donald Trump. He was picked because he was the only person that could beat @BernieSanders"
Late Wednesday, Sen. Peter Welch of Vermont said Biden should withdraw “for the good of the country,” becoming the first Democratic senator to make such a call, and pointed to Vice President Kamala Harris as a capable successor. Writing in the Washington Post, Welch said his constituents “are worried that [Biden] can’t win this time, and they’re terrified of another Trump presidency.”
Welch’s remarks come despite reports of an aggressive, even vicious, Biden effort to crush nay-sayers. From IM Doc on July 7, of a conversation during a nature walk:
This guy has already given millions in donations this year alone. Solid blue Dem to the core….He also told me that Jill and Hunter are not going to be moved. They and I guess Joe have let everyone know that if they keep pushing – career destroying stuff will be leaked to the press on any number of the people pushing the resignation. Indeed, the cannons may be deployed very soon at a target or two just to make sure everyone knows where they stand. A prophylactic hit job. As he said, “a political hit job doing serious damage will get everyone’s attention – and Joe is already hit about as bad as possible. Retaliation means nothing to them.” He stated they have serious goods on about 90% of Dems in DC and many many of their major donors. There are very few if any who are willing to do the “Goldwater goes to Nixon” show. He is anticipating this is all going to get very ugly very quickly. It may also explain why this seems to be taking so long.
Just FYI – I have no idea what if any of this is true. Just someone who would be in the know shooting it off at the mouth. “Worse than despair” is how I would describe his affect right now.
Yours truly opined at the time that this would not work. Biden could not take donor money away, so they would remain powerful if he attempted to dirty them up. And if donors got the idea that Biden was targeting any in their ranks, they would circle their ranks at a bare minimum. IM Doc had reported early that attacks on Trump, specifically the New York tax case and then the Bragg prosecution, had not only accelerated the retreat of wealthy Silicon Valley and Hollywood donors from Biden, but had resulted in them shifting support from RFK, Jr. to Trump. And again, this is not a cohort one would see as native Trump backers.
On top of that, let us not forget the spook whisperers David Iganatius and more recently Sy Hersh have signaled Biden should withdraw from the presidential race. Biden cannot win a war with the CIA. It seems that at least a decent sized cohort in the agency has concluded he needs to go.
A fresh e-mail from IM Doc indicates that Biden trying to go nuclear against those calling for him to quit was not just a wild-eyed rumor:
We had an event with them [high-profile Hollywood-connected neighbors] and other neighbors this weekend. I was basically told the same story. Two disparate sources. The blackmail is ongoing right now. The Mark Warner thing earlier in the week was the shot across the bow. They were all at the Biden event in LA where Obama had to walk him off the stage. It was clear to all that Biden was horribly impaired. But agents, producers et al have made it crystal clear to them all not to say a word. They are all blitzed by the sudden change in the messaging. All of them have closed the purse strings and have started to donate to charity instead. I praised them strongly for that decision. I told them all they should give up on the politics shit and use their money to actually help people.
In case you wonder why the freakout among the Dem-connected is rising despite the thuggish Biden enforcement racket, it’s that he is indeed threatening to take the party down with him. The Senate seats up for re-election are likely to break for the Republicans, so if they lose the Presidency, they need to win back the House to prevent a Republican romp. Yet the trends are going the wrong way in the wake of the Biden debate debacle:
But Biden is capable of burning the house down rather than going willingly. From Semafor:
The message coming from the White House is clear: Biden isn’t going anywhere, and if you come after him you’ll be the one who gets blamed for undermining the party’s general election chances….
What Biden can do is be stubborn in a way that sets up a scenario of mutually assured destruction for Democrats. So long as opponents of his nomination believe it’s impossible to force him to step aside, any escalation of their criticism risks damaging him even further in November. And the worse his standing gets, the more his party is likely to suffer up and down the ballot…
But Biden’s big advantage here is that it really is almost impossible to force him to step aside; he already won the support of the overwhelming majority of convention delegates, who are required to support him. Some Democrats have politely alluded to Biden having a big decision to make, or suggested he talk with his family, in the hopes of giving him space to potentially leave on his own. But if that doesn’t work, the next move would be to organize members to demand he pass the torch — perhaps privately to start, but then loudly if he refuses.
It’s not a very appetizing prospect. If Biden really is willing to fight a Democratic civil war, it would mean heading into convention season with key chunks of the party on the record with doubts about their nominee and pro-Biden factions accusing them of sabotage, all while Republicans quietly sit back and munch popcorn. Biden has been working hard to line up support from Black Democrats and labor — Congressional Black Caucus Chair Steven Horsford backed Biden Monday — setting up a potentially uncomfortable race and class dynamic to the fight as well.
Nevertheless I said from the outset, I don’t see how Biden survives his debate debacle, even before getting to the fact that Sy Hersh reported his decline in the last six months was rapid. Biden said only God could take him out of the race. God may oblige his request.
____
1 A DC-savvy contact said there were other coded messages to Biden, such as the discussion at 6:20 when Pelosi responded to the question of the concern of foreign leaders that Trump might be re-elected. She said there was reason to be concerned, described a series of Trump statements that were hostile to NATO and signaled an intent to reduce US commitments, and depicted a Trump win as a threat to national security. The contact said that was a message to Biden that his continuing in the race was a threat to national security. I see as going a bit too far with what Pelosi said but those more expert in the signals sent on high frequencies in the Beltway are encouraged to weigh in.
2 Another hopium strategy has been to point out that Trump beat Clinton even though Clinton had raised roughly twice as much money. First, Hillary was a singularly terrible candidate. Second, by all accounts, she ran a gold-plated campaign, far more heavily staffed than necessary, and at eyebrowraising pay levels. And third, as “money in politics” expert Tom Ferguson pointed out, the Trump campaign held back a great deal of funds and did a very heavy ad blitz at the end, considerably outspending Clinton in the last two weeks. As we also now know, Jared Kushner led a team that analyzed carefully as to what media markets were most important (including but not limited to swing states) and looks to have done a good job.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/07 ... tinue.html
******
Analyzing the Biden and Trump Debate and the 2024 Electoral Process
Margaret Kimberley, BAR Executive Editor and Senior Columnist, Ajamu Baraka, BAR editor and columnist 10 Jul 2024
Photo: CNN
Reaction to the first 2024 debate between Joe Biden and Donald Trump focused on Biden’s performance. Ajamu Baraka, Black Agenda Report editor and columnist, analyzes the politics behind that debate and the role that Democratic Party machinations played in the event and in the electoral process.
Margaret Kimberley: This is Margaret Kimberley, Executive Editor of Black Agenda Report and I'm speaking with Ajamu Baraka, Black Agenda Report editor and columnist, about the June 27th debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. Welcome, Ajamu. And thank you.
Ajamu Baraka: Thank you for having me.
MK: You know, this debate was very unusual. Debates take place after the conventions. There's a Presidential Debate Commission. The commission was bypassed and the campaigns agreed to hold a debate in June. Before we get to the fallout and the reaction to the debate, why do you think it happened under those circumstances?
AB: Well you know, Margaret, that's a very good question. I was of the opinion that this was a set-up. And I know that may sound conspiratorial. But I know that there had been whispering and even some conversations among Democrats regarding where Biden really would be in 2024 in terms of his position as the nominee of that party. I thought that there were quiet conversations that would allow him to basically step aside and to make a smooth transition. It did mean that there was going to be open primaries. The Democrats are, of course, anti democratic. And they wanted to make sure that whatever process was put in place after the primaries to move him off the ticket, that the party elites completely controlled that.
So I thought that was something that was in play, and that to just sort of sweeten the deal, if you will, or to hammer the deal home, they set up this early so-called debate in June, with the real possibility that the performance we saw was in fact, the performance that they had anticipated. Now, even if that was the case, it's such an undignified and crude way to deal with your party nominee, especially after you used that individual as the main weapon to undermine the popular constituency in your party during the campaign, by Bernie Sanders, to win the nomination, that the party bosses conspired. They grouped around Biden and they made sure that Bernie Sanders became basically a footnote. But now they have moved in a very similar kind of way. So that's what I think, Margaret, I think that basically, this was a power move made by the party bosses. Everyone knew that Biden wasn't really up to the task. And so this performance was basically the performance they needed to have in order to orchestrate what appeared to be a campaign to move him off the ticket.
MK: Well, you know, the response was immediate. The New York Times editorial board said immediately that he should step aside. Cable news networks, who the week before, were saying we shouldn't believe our eyes when we saw these videos of Biden behaving strangely, that we shouldn't believe them because they were being manipulated. Suddenly they said Biden had to go. They all turned on a dime, colluding together, as it were, but do they have a plan for going forward? Biden stepping down or Kamala Harris stepping up, or he quits before November. Do you think they've thought this through?
AB: They thought this through about as well as they thought through their support for the Ukrainian proxy war, or the consistent, almost irrational positions that the Biden administration and the Democrats took on the issue of Gaza. They didn't think it through when they decided that they were going to encourage a violent, repressive response from the authorities against their sons and daughters on these college campuses across the country. These individuals are not very bright, in fact, this crop of leadership, not only in the U.S., but throughout the western world, is probably the worst crop of leaders ever in the history of the West perhaps. And it may sound exaggerated, but it's definitely not something that is beyond the pale. I really believe that.
So no, it wasn't thought through. And you can see the fumbling taking place now, with the conversations around how this change in the nominee would be executed. You know, many people started saying that he had to go of course. But then all of a sudden, his VP was also included in having to go. And there was then some pushback, they said, this is not the wise, especially on the heels of AIPAC and the abandonment of the Democratic Party to Jamaal Bowman, that this is another example of the kind of disregard and disrespect that their party has, for its main constituency, its most loyal constituency, which is the Black vote. So they've been sort of hesitating on that. But it doesn't seem like they have a plan, the plan basically, is to persuade him to step down. If he doesn't, there is going to be a messy open convention, where he will end up probably losing the delegates that he has now pledged to him. So there is no plan at all. But what the result of this non plan is that the Democrats look awfully weak, and it was guaranteed really before the debate that Trump was going to win. Because the main elements of the capitalist class have basically decided that they were going to go with Trump. That's why the funding has shifted already. So no, it's almost guaranteed that this fumbling around is going to assure that Trump will be in fact, the next President of the United States of America.
MK: And you mentioned Kamala Harris and the bad optics of they made a big deal, Biden said he would choose a woman of color as his running mate and so he did. How does it look for her to be dumped along with him? But Kamala Harris presents her own problems, doesn't she? I mean, she's younger and healthier than Biden, but doesn't seem to be any smarter. She was one who often fumbles in her public appearances, can't talk off the cuff. And plus, she's not very popular. People remember her as a prosecutor bragging about putting people in jail. So she's a problem aside from this fact. She's problematic also, isn't she?
AB: She really is. But actually, the polls seem to be suggesting that she in fact would do better in a head to head with Trump than Biden. And it is a marvel, it is a very interesting phenomenon, Margaret, that when you have a whole bunch of money, and if you have institutional support, and the support of the ideological apparatus that we refer to as the national media, along with big tech out of Silicon Valley, you can basically put lipstick on the pig and and call it a Madonna. That can happen. They can transform Kamala and actually make her a viable candidate. Would they? Are they really going to do that? No. Because ultimately, in my opinion, the people who are running the Democratic Party, are white supremacist, and their position when it comes to Black folks, is for Black folks to keep their mouths shut and vote. And it means that there's not going to be much regard for Kamala Harris as the party nominee. So yes, she has some baggage, but that bags can be repaired if there was real institutional support for her. Unfortunately for her, there isn't.
MK: Well, she wouldn't be the first president, the first lackluster and not very bright person who was gussied up for the presidency. So there is historic precedent for these people to get behind someone when they want them. So I see your point. But let's talk about Black people and this election and the debate. I personally came in on the debate as Trump was talking about “Black jobs,” talking about immigrants taking jobs from Black people was what he meant. But we see the unreconstructed racist Trump saying that in a way that was guaranteed to generate antipathy from Black people. So once again, we see this refrain of the trap of the duopoly of Black people feeling trapped. And believing they have to back the Democrats, the “Black people's party.” So not only was this entire performance sad and tawdry, but we see a response that is predictable, but one that ultimately is unhelpful to us.
AB: Exactly, and Trump in his crudeness though, what he was referring to, and most people understood it, was those low level low skilled jobs that Black people have traditionally occupied. And those are some of the jobs, of course, that are in direct competition with migrant workers. That's all part of the plan as a matter of fact. And so that's what he referred to. And of course, people got upset about that, because everybody wants to project the notion of Black progress, and such. But there’s an objective reality where Black folks still occupy these kinds of positions in the labor market. That's not just mythology. That's the fact. But, you know, the white supremacists in the Democratic Party, they are like the white supremacist in the Republican Party, and that they did deal with the issue of power. And if there is a no pushback from the organized Black masses, against these kinds of perceptions, against the undignified treatment, that the parties meted out to them, including primarily the Democratic Party, then they will continue to be the subject of this kind of dishonor, this kind of disrespectful treatment. So this is part of what is in play here.
So, you know, Kamala Harris and Democrats and Hakeem the white folks dream Jeffries, you know, these individuals are there to serve white power. And so, you know, many of us are very reluctant to even frame this as a competition between the white people's party who are the racists and the black People's Party. We know that that's the common perception. But we understand that basically, that the duopoly structure is a dual structure of white capitalist power.
MK: And how do we move Black people away from thinking that our only choices are in the electoral arena, and our only choice is the Democratic Party. Trump and Biden will not be the only two people on the ballot in most states across the country. How do we move folks into thinking there are other possibilities?
AB: Well, it is a difficult challenge Margaret. We will stick with the electoral process for a minute. And we acknowledge that the kind of fundamental change that needs to take place in this country isn't just going to come about as a consequence of participating in the electoral process. But there are spaces that can be exploited in this process, there are opportunities to engage the people in terms of stripping away the mystification regarding policy that is anti-people, that undermines the interests of the working class, that we don't have a chance to strip away because those third party challengers are not allowed to participate, that the analysis that they present is marginalized or completely erased.
So therefore, the choices seem to be only a binary choice between the Republicans and the Democrats. And so part of the challenge is, in fact, you know, trying to penetrate that grip that the monopoly has on communications, on information. But it's a monumental task, Margaret, because the fascistic developments are moving at such a rapid pace. It's becoming more and more difficult to present alternative information and analysis to mass numbers of people. And when you do that, you run the risk of being labeled as spreading disinformation or misinformation, being kicked off of various platforms, being de-platformed, in terms of the colleges and universities, and the driving forces of this narrowing of acceptable discourse and information is, in fact, the neo-liberal Democrats, this is the driving force of a U.S. neo-fascism. So it's a very difficult task, but it's one we have to take up if we're going to survive this next phase of consolidating fascism.
That's why we don't play into this, this popular notion that the republic is somehow under threat if a Donald Trump wins the presidency, we have to take the objective position that it doesn't matter who sits in the white people's house for us, that basically we have to fight. There's a trajectory of movement continuing to the right, that's going to continue because that appears to be the reform that the capitalist class has decided to embrace that is a fascistic reform. People have to understand that it's not about, you know, behaviorism. This is about a particular configuration of class forces. Right now, the driving class force is coming from the neo-liberal, internationalists utilizing the state and the duopoly to impose a totalitarian reality on the people of the United States of America and really, throughout the western world. So this is the task that we have, this monumental one, because, you know, these folks are serious about maintaining that power, and serious about doing whatever is necessary to in fact, maintain that power while we are still being diverted, with all of this nonsense with Trumpism while they are consolidating their grip, on the consciousness of the people of this country.
MK: And before we close, is there anything you wanted to bring up that I didn't ask?
AB: Well, only that basically the debate of course, was a debacle for the Democrats. It played into part of a plan I think they had. But what they didn't anticipate is that the debate exposed the limitations of their intellectual abilities, of their honesty. Everyone knew, it was an open secret that this individual was not up to the task. But they utilized him, they used them to advance their particular interests. And now as a consequence of that, now they're trying to dump him. Now we've seen all of the fissures within the Democratic Party, and it is a spectacle that, no matter what happens, Margaret, they're not going to survive this in the same way. And so I think for those of us who really believe in the possibility of democracy, even though it’s not gonna be good, it's going to be very messy, and we're going to be going through this fascistic phase. All of this is really a good thing. But in order for us to take advantage of it, we've got to get better organized. We've got to be able to confront our detractors with honesty, clear analysis, and boldness. We can't hesitate on this one. It doesn't matter who gets mad at us. Our responsibility is to call it the way we see it.
MK: Thank you so much Ajamu.
AB: My pleasure. Thank you.
https://blackagendareport.com/analyzing ... al-process
