We’ve had months of manipulation about Joe Biden. Now we need reality: It must be Kamala

I didn’t want to write this column, I really didn’t.

Since Thursday night, I have been torn between borderline obsession (monitoring every tweet, reading every article, calling donors, journalists and insiders by phone) and trying to ignore the democratic world that has suddenly and rapidly collapsed around us.

But I was always taught that in life you can’t solve a problem if you’re not willing to admit it.

The major question that drives the debate is both naive and misleading: How could we, the Democratic Party, at a time when there is already a crisis of confidence in fundamental democratic institutions, both assert this skepticism in the eyes of the world and, potentially, deprive ourselves of the election in 90 minutes?

To answer this question honestly, many people have a lot to confess. So, let’s start by heading to the collective confessional and having a little chat.

First, there are the “they” who hid the truth about the president’s apparent condition.they” is comprised of a long and distinguished list, starting with the first family, senior White House and Biden campaign officials, and likely a notable list of Democratic senators, members of Congress and Cabinet officials.

They’ve been doing this for months, if not over a year. And make no mistake, it’s creating a lot of anger among the rank and file.

Second, there are those who manipulated us and made this possible. These “they” are the Fourth Estate, whom I would like to congratulate for confirming Trump’s infamous 2016 mantra of “fake news.” The American public, whose faith in the news was already at an all-time low, may never fully recover. So, for all the “journalists” who seem to have figured it out in recent days: too little, too late. No one will ever believe that the mainstream media didn’t know this story existed. They will believe that they made a conscious decision not to report it.

Jill Abramson, former editor-in-chief of The New York Timesembodied the problem herself in a head-spinning statement that, at first glance, seemed to blame the White House and the media for a massive cover-up and a failure to do their jobs, but in doing so, she revealed herself and her former colleagues as complicit when she said aloud the silent part of her speech to Semafor: “I worry that too many journalists didn’t try to get the information because they didn’t want to be accused of helping elect Trump. I understand that…”

“I understand?” Really? Really? So do you understand why the American public doesn’t trust the news and thinks it’s biased? Do you understand that too?

Breaking news alert: It is not the role of the media to weigh the pros and cons, regardless of their personal political views or those of their editorial boards.

To compound the problem, since Thursday night’s slow-motion car crash, “they”— in this case, the Biden campaign and its inner circle — committed a series of missteps that could best be described as malpractice. They thought the stunning revelations surrounding the debate could be dismissed as “a bad night” compared to “Obama/Romney 2012” and masked by a few scripted appearances on a teleprompter. No questions from the press would be taken, no hostile media would be allowed.

And then the Bidens left for Camp David.

In a few hours, a story in the New York Times He painted a picture of the first family clinging to the East Wing and blaming White House staff for the debate disaster.

The article goes further, arguing that given the staff’s poor performance, the family will take a more active role. All will be well, as the grandchildren will start volunteering for the campaign. The president, it claims, is leaning on Hunter Biden for advice, leading many Americans to question the president’s judgment as much as they questioned his mental acuity.

On Monday, straight out of the horrible timing department, Jill Biden, seemingly doing her best Claire Underwood impersonation, graced the cover of Vogueleaving the country’s top Democratic donors and operatives wide-eyed and mouths hanging open.

And in the midst of the party’s greatest crisis in modern political history, the party’s elders have been virtually absent. Neither Bill Clinton nor Barack Obama appear to be playing a leading role in shepherding their successors toward their moment of conversion, nor are they playing the role of public spokespersons in their defense, their support limited to social media.

With the Bidens entrenched and the party’s institutional forces apprehensively toeing the line, the only thing that could change the dynamic is numbers.

And then… the polls started coming in.

CBS was the first significant poll to do so: 72% of Americans believe the president no longer has the mental and cognitive health to perform his duties. A New Hampshire survey put Trump in the lead, at 2%. 12 points difference Since December, Harvard/Harris has given Trump a 6-point lead nationally, results that have been picked up by CNN. Leaked internal Democratic polls have Biden trailing in all seven key states.

Suddenly, elected Democrats, who were split between publicly complying with the vote and privately indignant, began openly calling for the president to leave office.

And now? Where are we going? Identify the solution. Or, in this case, choose between two less than ideal and realistic options.

After days of fantasy football-style maneuvering, shouting out names that are good on paper but largely unknown, untested and unverified nationally—some of whom we don’t care about at all (Michelle Obama), others who could turn the next four months into a referendum on the state of San Francisco (Gavin Newsom)—let’s allow a dose of reality to set in.

Campaign finance laws do not allow for the Biden/Harris fund to be channeled to a whole new group of anointed candidates. While another duo could certainly energize the donor class, no sane person would throw $240 million down the drain and start over. Kamala’s being chosen as the party’s top candidate to compete with Trump, and the already complicated politics of trying to avoid the nation’s first black woman vice president, have put to rest the question of who the party’s nominee will be—if not Joe Biden.

The only realistic paths forward are either 1.) President Biden remains the nominee and, in turn, barring a seismic governmental or political event in his favor (which could (to happen) — Trump will probably win in November;

Or 2.) The historically unpopular Kamala Harris takes over the party. In the latter scenario, Harris could choose Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro as her running mate, putting the crucial swing state back in play, hope that the historic nature of her candidacy energizes the party’s backbone, and take a chance.

Nothing is less certain. But we have reached a crossroads.

And our deadline is not Due to a quirk in Ohio election law, presidential candidates must be certified by August 7, meaning the Democratic Party has 35 days to make its choice.

The awareness of the existential threat that a second Trump presidency would pose only compounds the recklessness and culpability of all involved. And there is not a minute to lose.

Tick ​​Tock.