Running From A Prison Cell
I have to admit, in an otherwise rather extraordinary week in the presidential campaign, I learned an interesting factoid: there is already a convicted felon running for president from the inside of a jail cell. Amusingly, this is happening over on the Democratic side of things. The so-called "Tiger King," a.k.a. "Joe Exotic," is currently serving a 21-year sentence in a federal prison for a murder-for-hire scheme (as well as other lesser charges). He is currently also a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination. He's run for president before, in 2016 and 2020, but this is his first time running as a Democrat. Amusingly enough, an article about his campaign launch prominently featured one campaign promise from the Tiger King: "First of all, as soon as I'm sworn in, I have the right to pardon myself."
If I were President Joe Biden, I wouldn't be all that worried, to put it mildly. However, there is a different Democratic candidate who, while he almost certainly won't derail Biden's eventual renomination, might make a splash in the early primary news that could at least prove embarrassing for Biden. Here is what very well could happen, according to Axios (emphasis and gratuitous bullet point in original):
President Biden is almost certain to be Democrats' pick for president in 2024, but he might not win the first two contests of the primary season if they're in the traditional first-to-vote states of Iowa and New Hampshire -- a scenario that seems increasingly likely.
Driving the news: Biden's team is indicating he won't be on the ballots in those states if they vote before South Carolina, his choice to have the first primary.
Why it matters: Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire could defy Biden and move ahead with their contests -- even as the party warns it will strip them of their national convention delegates if they jump the gun.
- That sets up a scenario in which Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or another long-shot Democrat could win those states -- and embarrass the president.
According to the rest of the gratuitously-bullet-pointed article, Iowa Democrats have "quietly moved to hold their contest the same day as Iowa Republicans -- in January, but with a mail-in option for ballots." New Hampshire lawmakers may respond by moving their "first in the nation, by law" primary ahead of Iowa.
If these states do so, they will be in open defiance of the Democratic National Committee's rules. What this means is that candidates who want the official imprimatur of the party apparatus (like Joe Biden) are not supposed to put their name on the ballots and would be barred from campaigning in these states. The states risk losing all or perhaps half of their delegates to the national convention by breaking the party's primary calendar rules, but they may not particularly care (especially in a year with an incumbent running who is going to walk away with the nomination no matter what).
So the primary ballots in Iowa and New Hampshire may only have Marianne Williamson, R.F.K. Jr., and perhaps Joe Exotic listed on them for the Democratic voters to choose from. Team Biden could push (unofficially) for voters to write in Biden's name, but even with such an effort the chances are quite high that R.F.K. Jr. will be getting headlines in two states in a row for winning the earliest primaries. The media won't care that these are unsanctioned primaries, the headlines will still read: "Biden Loses To R.F.K. Jr."
Which, as the article pointed out, would be embarrassing to the president. It's not exactly the ideal kickoff to primary season for Biden.
Is any of this going to matter in the grand scheme of things? Probably not. President Biden is certainly tough enough to survive a couple of weeks of bad press, and R.F.K. Jr.'s chances of winning the nomination are likely not going to budge at all -- especially since the increased media attention is only going to inform more voters that he is a full-blown conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer, and not just some generic politician bearing the Kennedy last name.
Still, at least some of this was entirely avoidable. After all, it was Biden himself who set the early primary schedule, and his demotion of New Hampshire from first-in-the-nation status was a huge political mistake.
Iowa, on the other hand, did deserve demotion. It has screwed up its caucus system so badly and so repeatedly that it deserved being moved from the front of the line. Add to their poor execution over the last few cycles the fact that Iowa is no longer a swing state and has never been all that diverse in its electorate, and it was a pretty easy choice for Democrats to give Iowa the boot. Which may have led to the exact same situation, even if New Hampshire had been allowed to still go first. Iowa doesn't have a lot to lose by defying the national party, and even if the state's Democrats weren't in a rebellious mood, it might prove impossible to separate the Democratic primary from the Republican one (since this is done at the state-government level, which Republicans completely control).
The heart of the problem is that the national parties cannot actually dictate to the states when they hold their primary elections. They can threaten, they can cajole, but they cannot "lay down the law" because the parties are not actually "the law" -- the laws are made by the legislature and signed by the governor. When the Democratic Party tries a new experiment in which states vote early, they may be able to convince states where Democrats rule to fall into line, but in states where Republicans are in charge sometimes this is impossible. That reality wasn't really a part of the selection process for the early-voting states, although in hindsight it probably should have been.
This isn't the first year that there have been states going rogue on the national party's preferred primary calendar. It likely won't be the last, either. So few states have any real say in the selection of a national party's nominee that it is a prized position to be in the front group of the line. Early states get outsized media attention and a ton of money from the campaigns and all who follow them (all those hotel rooms and meals eaten and travel expenses). The nation turns its eyes to you. Virtually none of this happens for any of the states which follow the first group. So it's easy to see where the draw is -- in money, power, and attention.
As I began with, I am not just optimistic but downright certain that, barring unforeseen events, Joe Biden is going to be the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party next year. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or Marianne Williamson (or even Joe Exotic!) could make some headlines if Biden is completely absent from the ballot in the first two states to actually vote. But it won't matter in the slightest once South Carolina votes (and for the rest of the campaign). Because Democratic voters -- unlike their GOP counterparts -- are simply not going to nominate a conspiracy-theorist or a man running from a federal prison cell. That much, at least, we can count on.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
CW
The so-called "Tiger King," a.k.a. "Joe Exotic," is currently serving a 21-year sentence in a federal prison for a murder-for-hire scheme (as well as other lesser charges). He is currently also a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination.
Wait, what!? He has run as an Independant and Libertarian; when did he decide to run as a Democrat? *checking*
April 2023... ridiculous.
Joe exotic vs the feces volcano... Hmm.
Oh come on. That was damn funny.
-Tom Cruise (Lt. Chaffey), a few good men
Caffey! Damn you, autocorrect!
It's a wonder that any country in the world takes the US seriously, anymore ... and, I'm not talking about Tiger King aka Joe Exotic, either. Ahem. Take a good, hard and long look at what's happening around the globe and how the US figures in it, not to mention the state of affairs inside American democratic institutions.
On the other hand ...
Because Democratic voters -- unlike their GOP counterparts -- are simply not going to nominate a conspiracy-theorist or a man running from a federal prison cell. That much, at least, we can count on.
... are ya sure about that?
Elizabeth Miller
5
Take a good, hard and long look at what's happening around the globe and how the US figures in it, not to mention the state of affairs inside American democratic institutions.
On the other hand ...
Take a good, hard and long look at the figures the United States sends to countries around the globe and how many other countries are eagerly taking it while asking for more:
*
Perhaps you might know someone who's even claimed on this blog that the United States wasn't doing enough; you need look no further than your mirror.
Seems like every country is full of dang critics with their hands out taking US very seriously when they take our foreign aid.
Probably we should tell them all to sod off. :)
Yeah, that's the remedy. ;)
Unfortunately, foreign aid is not going to solve the problem that the US has with much of the world.
How many more years will the US be funding the destruction of Ukraine?
Btw, keep in mind that 'counteroffensive' is just another word for bloodier stalemate and another forever war.
Elizabeth Miller
7|8|9|10
No less than four comment boxes in 18 minutes. *laughs*
You definitely should have given that a lot more thought, though.
How many more years will the US be funding the destruction of Ukraine?
How many more comment boxes will you be littering this forum with right-wing and Russian propaganda disinformation? This comment of yours is the type of asinine claptrap playing on a loop on Russian state TV.
Btw, keep in mind that 'counteroffensive' is just another word for bloodier stalemate and another forever war.
By the way, "counteroffensive" actually is a response to having been on the defensive under attack, blood isn't bloodier in the same way water isn't wetter, stalemates can change, and nothing lasts forever.
Big picture... you're (still) totally missing it. :)
Mines Everywhere: Ukraine's Offensive Is Proving A Hard Slog - Wall Street Journal
As my (decidedly non-Russian) source relates, "the Wall Street Journal belatedly realizes that attacking Ukrainians get stuck in mine fields, shot up by mobile defenders, and hammered by Russia’s supposedly non-existent air superiority… [the Ukrainian} Joint Forces Operation might have been savvy and polished enough to operate effectively. But JFO no longer exists."
Hopefully, Biden and his crack foreign policy team are now mapping a way out of this war with some realistic goals.
Ukraine War Is A Marathon, Not A Sprint"
Reality is setting in ...
Elizabeth Miller
I correctly identify your dissemination of right-wing and Russian talking points, and you follow that post with a link from the WSJ.
As my (decidedly non-Russian) source relates,...
More propaganda that could have come straight off Russia state TV. You and your so-called "friend" are living proof, you neither have to be a Russian nor a Righty to post the Kremlin's talking points about Russia's "air superiority" and how war is hard and resistance is futile.
Kick,
You don't actually think Ukraine is going to win this thing, do you?
Would you prefer I post something from Glenn Greenwald? Oh, wait ... you wouldn't! Heh.
I'll stop now and give you some time to, ah, catch up!
Before I go, may I ask what sources you rely on for your knowledge and understanding of what is happening on the ground in Ukraine?
Obviously, it's hard to cut through the fog of any war and it's never easy to navigate all of the propaganda emanating from all corners. Of course, it helps to be able to decipher fact from fiction from any sources we are relying on to help us understand what is happening.
Elizabeth Miller
15
You don't actually think Ukraine is going to win this thing, do you?
I think if I were you, I would also attempt to downplay the most recent Russian attack on Ukraine as "this thing" and then reframe the discussion with a question that implies what somebody else thinks.
Since I am actually me, I am laughing at your pathetic attempt. :)
Elizabeth Miller
16
Would you prefer I post something from Glenn Greenwald? Oh, wait ... you wouldn't! Heh.
I think the rhetoric of the extreme left and extreme right of political discourse sometimes resemble each other.
Elizabeth Miller
18
Before I go, may I ask what sources you rely on for your knowledge and understanding of what is happening on the ground in Ukraine?
You just did. :)
I see. Well, not to worry, I will keep everyone here abreast of things as the situation unfolds ...
most of us are probably following it more closely than you are, liz.
Oh, I doubt that very much.
But, I would like to know where you are getting your information on the topic, though ...
pretty much everywhere. i've tried to cast as wide a net as possible, to get as complete a picture as possible.
Me, too.
What I find amusing is how so many media outlets rely on the information from facebook posts and the Institute for the Study of War, run by those who advocated for the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, one of the great geopolitical blunders of all time.