this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024
39 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22694 readers
599 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try [email protected] if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As I understand it, replacing a VP nominee is doable, but tricky. Legally, Vance would have to resign voluntarily (or "voluntarily"); I don't think Trump or the party can unilaterally decide to fire him at this stage according to party rules. Even if he does resign, there's probably a bunch of logistical hurdles and potential setbacks associated with changing the nominee this late in the game. Point being, Vance is undoubtedly an albatross, but replacing him would create problems of its own. Trump has probably already talked about replacing him, and the party is likely doing the political math on whether it would be worth doing, and how to go about doing it.
At the end of the day, Vance was a big own-goal for Trump, even if he does get replaced. The GOP doesn't have a particularly deep bench at the moment, but I have to imagine there were better options.
A smarter pick against Harris would have been Haley. Of course, Trump picked Vance before it was announced Harris would be replacing Biden, and I’m pretty damn sure the Dems planned this out so that would be the case.
I think assuming the Dems planned any of this is extremely generous. It's working out okay for them, but I think the simpler explanation is that Biden stepped down because he wasn't physically able to do the job and he was going to get forced out if he hadn't gone willingly. If they were doing any actual planning, they would have forced a competitive primary. Harris wouldn't be on the ticket if they were that competent.
I think the claim is that the planning started after the disastrous debate. The inner circle of the DEM party knew he was going out, but was orchestrating a "he isn't going anywhere, he will remain our nominee"-narrative in the media before and during the RNC.
Ah, that makes more sense. Could easily see them reacting to that debate and coming up with a strategy to turn it to their advantage in the near-term. That sort of relatively reactive and opportunistic planning should be within the Democrats' capabilities, even if their long-term strategic thinking is questionable.