So to get a qualified, charismatic, inspiring first black president we have to overlook that he is half white, raised overseas by white and asian parents, and has more slaver ancestry than slave (all a hard sell to the initially skeptical African American community), but for a first female candidate that is more qualified than any other, male or female, in recent history, their phrase, "not this female candidate" just goes to show that there is no comparing the two constituencies as folks so casually like to do. They felt that comfortable knowing that before too long another was certainly possible, see Sarah Palin.

My only hope is that Harris has received massive amounts of coaching for how to conduct herself and is just staying out of the spotlight like a good soldier until called upon. You have to reach out to the other side, not just be a celebrity for your own. You think Obama wanted to go bowling out in the middle of nowhere? 

I don't think any Democrats (except Joe Biden himself) are burying their heads in the sand.  I think those who support retaining Biden as the nominee do so out of a sincere belief that (despite his obvious, serious flaws) he still has the best chance to defeat Trump out of the available options at this point.

Harris is hardly a slam-dunk winner if nominated.  As has been noted, she'd face the dual attacks of sexism and racism, which Trump is exceptionally adept at harnessing.  Harris is not particularly charming or charismatic (which unfortunately counts even more against women than men).  And she's more liberal than Biden, which isn't helpful in attracting the independent voters in the handful of swing states that get to decide the election.  

And if Harris was passed over in favor of a man or a white person (or both) that would certainly alienate a significant portion of the Democratic coalition, who would turn on that prospective nominee.  Without a series of primaries which would enable them to say "the voters have spoken" it seems pretty much impossible for them to bypass Harris.

So, absent some ridiculous pie-in-the-sky fantasy (like Michelle Obama agreeing to run, or Harris running with Barack Obama as her VP choice) there is not clearcut obvious alternative here.  

If the choice was up to me alone, I'd pick someone else instead of Biden.  But I can see why others disagree with that and still see Biden as the best option.  There is no great option here.  

Not exactly.  She does better than Biden in some polls, worse in others.  Polling-wise, it seems a wash at this point.  It's hard to know exactly how that would change if she were the nominee and receiving more attention.  She might start to win people over, or in the face of a sustained attack campaign from Trump she might become less popular than she already is. 

Nikki Haley voters were Republicans who like Republican policy but don't like Trump's narcissism, stupidity, and racism.  Who they vote for in the fall will be determined by which thing is more important to them:  Republican policies or a sane candidate.  I think it's likely a majority of them will choose policy over personality and vote for Trump (as Nikki Haley herself plans to do).  I don't know that Harris would be more appealing to them than Biden.  Sure, she's younger and more articulate, but she's also more liberal.  The swing state voters Democrats need to persuade are independents and moderates.  They are being turned off by Biden's infirmity, but they might also be turned off even more by Harris' perceived liberalism, depending on how effective the Republican machine is at defining her and exploiting her gender/race against her.

According to 538, Harris is stronger than Biden in Nevada but weaker in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania at this point.  Pennsylvania in particular is crucial... I don't know that Dems have a viable electoral scenario without winning it.

Jumping to Harris is a riskier move.  Potentially greater reward but much greater risk.  Like I said, if it was up to me I'd nominate someone other than Biden, but I can understand why some people see it differently.  Given the stakes of this election, I can see why people are risk-averse.

We've already seen how wrong the polls can be (remember the RED WAVE that took place in the 2022 midterms? neither do I.) so why we all UNITE and support Biden AND his great presidential record... and destroy any chance the wannabe dictator/rapist/traitor has... his base isn't getting any bigger.

When I look at polls like this, I think of all the times a Senate race with an unpopular incumbent looks competitive the entire election season and then the incumbent wins re-election easily when all of the supposedly undecideds jump their way on Election Day.  If the other guy doesn't seem like a step up, best to stick with the guy you have no matter how little you may care for them on the merits.

Sure, but I don't consider that a positive.  Trump as a candidate seems to benefit from being ignored.  I don't think it's a good idea to keep him off the radar for an extended period of time while reporters focus on popping out story after story of "Biden's out, but who should be in?" "Is America ready for a female President?", etc., etc.

Sometimes, but even when they do it's not significantly better (e.g., 47 vice 45).  And that's without the scrutiny and attacks that would come with the nomination (and any negative feelings that would arise amongst the electorate while they were securing it).      

Publicly, candidates HAVE to be "blindly optimistic".  If Biden was out there saying stuff like "um, well, yeah, I think I'm the best option... I-I guess...  they're-they're all pretty bad..." all the people jumping on him for being "I alone can fix it" would instead be jumping on him for looking "unsure."  In private, who knows what he's thinking?  

As for "sense of history," the most recent example (which to be fair isn't all that recent) of an incumbent dropping out "for the good of the country" was LBJ, and the Democrats LOST that one.  Alternatively, 8 years ago today (per 538) the polls had Clinton at 43% and Trump at 37.5%  So history would say that a) it's not a good idea to drop the incumbent and b) there's plenty of time for things to change between July and November.  

According to the polls in the UK and France, the right was supposed to win big … until they didn’t. (Correct me if I’m wrong) Le Pen was supposed to be the winner in France too.

People treat polls like they're holy scripture… we really have to ignore all of the fearmongering. That’s the real problem if it persists.

-C!