... of the Batman movie franchise has thoughts on replacements.On the one hand, every American citizen has a voice that is equal in public discourse. On the other hand, what makes George Clooney qualified to occupy such a high profile space on this question? I just-- don't know. pic.twitter.com/5srbDTWjgd
— Anthony Michael Kreis (@AnthonyMKreis) July 10, 2024
Or they’re saying what the rich Hollywood donor wants to hear, because they’re politicians. And they want to sit at the kewl kids table.This is from the George Clooney opinion piece in @nytimes today. Speaking as a journalist, I think it's important that these elected Democratic politicians say what they actually think on the record. Only a handful have done so. https://t.co/17iHaITbsI pic.twitter.com/tkbg4nVGL8
— Edward Wong (@ewong) July 10, 2024
No one has yet explained how a brokered convention with delegates being told they came to Chicago to vote for the guy who just quit is going to produce a stronger candidate. What if the convention doesn’t go for Harris? Smoke-filled rooms do the job? Superdelegates save the day? Sure, that’ll rally the grassroots. And if it isn’t Harris, who gets the $240 million, and ballot access? And even if it is, after a rancorous convention, how much support can you build between now and November? When you’ve taken a sledgehammer to support of the candidate who won the primaries?
And who takes the blame? George Clooney? The NYT editorial board? Kamala Harris? That last is probably the primary reason she declines the opportunity. Better to be away from the ruins than seen as the architect of failure.
Ask Hillary Clinton.
So far, the only person acting like he can handle the pressure of the office, is the incumbent. But he’s being “defiant.” You mean like JFK in the Cuban Missile Crisis? Or Harry Truman? Or Reagan in Berlin?
Yeah, I still don’t see the problem; much less the “solution.”
No comments:
Post a Comment