We have to think about how to handle the polling data now. For the time being, we are just going to switch to Harris-Trump polls and not remove any of the older polls. The scores above are for Biden vs. Trump even though we have replaced Biden's photo with Harris'.

Biden Drops Out and Endorses Harris for President

Guess what? It's another one of THOSE sorts of days. You know, with one story so significant that anything else pales in significance? And by now, every reader undoubtedly knows what that story is.

In his interview with George Stephanopoulos, Joe Biden said it would take the Lord Almighty to get him to drop out. Joe Biden is a religious man who goes to mass most Sunday mornings. Apparently yesterday at mass, Biden had a chat with the Lord and the Lord said: "I'm sorry Joe. Time to go." So yesterday afternoon, Biden announced that he was dropping out of the presidential race. He also endorsed Kamala Harris for the Democratic nomination. Clearly he understood that a free-for-all at the convention would tear the party to shreds and wanted to prevent that. Here is the tweet seen round the world:

Biden also wrote a letter to the American people announcing his decision and his plan to address the nation later this week. Here is the letter.

The Democratic Response

While the Lord Almighty might have had the last word with Biden, much, if not most, of his party was already there. Yesterday, everyone was talking about how the calls for Biden to withdraw would get louder and louder this week if he didn't drop out very quickly.

These soothsayers were not wrong. The calls began getting louder early in the day yesterday as Sen. Joe Manchin (I-WV) became the fifth senator to openly call on Biden to throw in the towel. The others were Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Jon Tester (D-MT) and Peter Welch (D-VT). The number of other elected Democrats calling for Biden to stop his campaign was already in the dozens by yesterday and growing. It is possible that the combined weight of the Lord Almighty and most of his party got Biden to finally make the call. It must have been tough for him, but losing to Trump and ending democracy in America would have been even worse. If the book Profiles in Courage is ever updated, Biden will certainly deserve a chapter, if not an entire section.

Was this decision a known unknown or an unknown unknown? Hard to say. Yesterday morning the chairs of the Democratic Party in the swing states released a joint letter supporting Biden. They obviously had no idea this was coming. Saturday night, Biden was telling everyone that he was all in. Yesterday at 1:45 p.m., he told his closest aides that he was dropping out. At 2:13 p.m. he posted the tweet above. Not everyone got the message since, 19 minutes earlier, at 1:54 p.m., the Biden campaign blasted out a fundraising appeal for Biden. Add it up, and it looks like the President flipped from "in" to "out" pretty quickly.

Biden's endorsement of Kamala Harris probably shuts down all the competition, except of course, Marianne Williamson. We can't imagine Govs. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) or Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) risking everything challenging Harris. If Trump wins, they can battle it out in 2028. If Harris wins they will have to wait until 2032 when they are long out of office. Definitely a bummer for both of them. Did we ever mention that in politics, a week is a long time? We forget.

Harris will no doubt get an outpouring of support from leading Democrats in order to drive Marianne Williamson from the race. Billary Clinton is already on board. They wrote: "Now is the time to support Kamala Harris and fight with everything we've got to elect her. America's future depends on it." Hillary, in particular, knows what it is like for a woman to run against Trump. She will no doubt become a close adviser to Harris.

It is not a done deal that Harris will be the nominee but we can't see how anyone else could displace her. No serious Democrat will challenge her for fear of being first crushed and then ostracized. There has to be a bit of kabuki theater now, saying it is up to the delegates blah blah blah. But if her name is the only one formally placed in nomination, she has to win. You can't beat somebody with nobody.

Adding to the parade of inevitability, Harris has already been endorsed by all of the Democratic state party chairs. Keeping in mind that these are exactly the sort of people who end up as convention delegates, that is another argument against jumping in for any serious aspiring Democrat who wants to keep their powder dry.

One interesting aspect of a Harris-Trump race would be the cop vs. the crook angle. Harris was Deputy DA in Alameda County, then DA in San Francisco County, then California AG before being elected to the Senate in 2016. Most of her career she was a prosecutor. Donald Trump is a convicted criminal and has been indicted in D.C. and Georgia. His indictment in Florida was thrown out by Judge Aileen Cannon, but Special Counsel Jack Smith has appealed that. If Harris is the nominee, she is sure to constantly talk about the cop vs. the crook. For Republicans, claiming to be the party of law and order could be tough when Harris recites the names of all the bad guys she put in prison and also recites all the crimes Trump has been accused of and convicted of.

Also a point sure to come up over and over now is Trump's age. He is 78. Harris is 59. She is surely going to note that he is too old and should drop out. We can easily envision oppo researchers putting together a video of Trump's many misstatements and verbal blunders that would make him look like a blithering idiot. When Biden was the nominee, discussing being too old was taboo. Now it is front and center with the shoe on the other foot.

In short, assuming the nominee is Harris, two of the Republicans' biggest issues—crime and infirmity—are not only mooted, but the script has been flipped. Trump & Co. will try mightily to amp up the "border out of control" narrative, especially since Harris was "assigned" responsibility for that issue by Biden. But the fact is that both apprehensions and fentanyl seizures are way up under Biden. The GOP has been trying to spin that as "See? It's PROOF the border is out of control!" However, it can also be framed as "See? Democrats do a better job at enforcing the laws at the border than Republicans do." Harris will also point out that the Senate had a bipartisan bill for beefing up the border and Trump ordered Republicans to kill it so he would have a campaign issue. Most people don't know that. They will soon.

Not every Democrat will back Harris, at least not off the bat. Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), for one, has called for an open convention presumably because he fears that if he backs Harris now, that could prove fatal for him in his Senate race. Speaker emerita Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) didn't endorse Harris yesterday. She has previously said she wants an open convention, but if no other serious Democrat is nominated, she will come around, of course. Actually being put in nomination is not so simple, necessarily (see below). Barack Obama hasn't chimed in yet.

A big issue now is what happens to the money Biden/Harris has in the bank. Most legal experts say that Harris could get the money without any formalities. For any other candidate, it would be more complicated, although our understanding of FEC rules is that the Biden/Harris campaign could transfer all the money to the DNC to spend as it wished. One downside of that is that candidates get cheaper advertising rates than anyone else.

The Independent Response

To the extent that any politician of national stature has signaled a challenge to Harris, that politician is every Democrat's favorite, Joe Manchin. Yesterday, after Biden dropped his bombshell, the Senator said he might just re-register as a Democrat and jump into the presidential race.

We very seriously doubt that Manchin thinks he has even a snowball's chance of becoming the nominee. First of all, if you want to know what party he's a member of today, you have to turn alerts on, on your phone. Second, the Democratic rank-and-file are bitter about his obstruction of various efforts, most obviously the filibuster, Supreme Court reform and a greater outlay to fight global warming. Third, the type of people who attend the convention strongly favor loyal party men and women, and not apostates. Fourth, Manchin is about to turn 77. You may recall that one of the main concerns about Biden is his age.

Our guess here is that Manchin is really trying to set himself up as a potential VP pick. He's a long, long, longshot there, too. However, if he does throw his hat into the ring, it could be helpful to the Democrats, since they will have had a "contested" nomination, without seriously harming Harris or disrupting party unity.

The Republican Response

Here was Donald Trump's response when he learned the news, courtesy of his dubious boutique social media platform:

Crooked Joe Biden was not fit to run for President, and is certainly not fit to serve - And never was! He only attained the position of President by lies, Fake News, and not leaving his Basement. All those around him, including his Doctor and the Media, knew that he wasn't capable of being President, and he wasn't - And now, look what he's done to our Country, with millions of people coming across our Border, totally unchecked and unvetted, many from prisons, mental institutions, and record numbers of terrorists. We will suffer greatly because of his presidency, but we will remedy the damage he has done very quickly. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

It is a reminder that Trump has absolutely no class. Never has, never will. He is no longer facing off against Biden, and so there was no need to kick the President while he's down. Trump could have shown some grace or, if that was not within him, he could have remained silent. But that's not who Trump is. This notion that the assassination attempt made a "new man" out of him, and gave him a new perspective, was very hard to swallow. The latter two-thirds of his convention speech, and now this, confirm beyond all doubt that was all B.S.

That said, it is a well-established truth that Trump lashes out when he's angry or fearful. And that is what he's really telling us with his response. The former president was feeling VERY good about his chances, to the point of being reckless. He chose a VP of questionable value to the ticket, prioritizing loyalty (and, very possibly, legacy) over attracting votes in 2024. His campaign was bragging about an expanded map, proposing they might just try to win all of Maine, or maybe Virginia, or Colorado. And, as part of all of this, the GOP had built a finely-tuned "Biden is senile" propaganda machine. Now, it's a new ballgame, and Trump is clearly not feeling great about it.

It is even possible that Biden was playing 3D chess here. He held off dropping out until after the Republican convention to encourage Trump to pick a veep who wouldn't help get any new voters. If Trump knew last week that he would be facing Harris, he might have picked Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) instead of Vance. The gender gap is going to rival the Grand Canyon this time and having the Harvard-educated Stefanik on the ticket could have helped with suburban women.

You might have to read between the lines with Trump, but not so with other Republicans. For example, NRCC Chairman Richard Hudson (R-NC) knows exactly who he wanted as the Democratic presidential nominee: Biden. He knows what the Republicans' whole campaign was based on: Joe Biden is too old and feeble. Well, what about CO-08, a district with a PVI of EVEN? Answer, Joe Biden is too old, even though he is not running for the House there. And NH-01, also EVEN? Again, Biden is too old. Now that Biden will not be the nominee, the whole strategy falls apart in an instant. In fact, it gets worse, since Democrats will say: "You were right, Biden was too old and dropped out. Your guy is also too old and should drop out." Republicans don't want that discussion.

Hudson talked with a reporter from Politico and said he expected that Republicans will (barely) hold the House because waves just don't happen anymore. Everything is too baked in. When asked about the assassination attempt, Hudson said it is too early to tell if there will be a long-term effect. But he did note that Trump's reaction to being shot was "Fight, fight, fight" and that will galvanize his supporters, but they were already planning to vote. Whether it will affect the undecideds is not clear.

The reporter asked Hudson whether he has any influence with Donald Trump to get him to stop talking about the 2020 election, talk which doesn't go over well in suburban districts. Basically, Hudson admitted that Trump marches to his own drummer and doesn't take advice from him (or anyone else).

As the red team tries to recalibrate, saddled with a candidate who does what he wants regardless of how wise it is, the scrambling has already begun. Some Republicans are planning lawsuits to prevent Biden from dropping out, but they have almost no chance. Biden is not officially the nominee of the Democratic Party. The nominee is chosen by the Democratic National Convention, which isn't going to meet until Aug. 19. Any state that printed ballots already jumped the gun and had no business doing so.

Some Republicans are calling for Biden to resign the presidency. They include Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL), Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT), Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), and Rep. Kevin Hern (R-OK), among others. That is a truly stupid idea. Not only will Biden ignore them, but even if he did resign, Harris could run with all the power of incumbency. People wouldn't have to imagine her giving speeches from the Oval Office, they would see her actually doing it and assuming she did them well, she would seem presidential. The Republicans would be very sorry if Biden did resign now. Be careful what you wish for. But Biden said he won't resign and no Democrats will even bring up the subject.

Note that the calls for Biden to resign are, of course, meant to suggest he is currently incompetent and that, by extension, the Democrats are both incompetent and are corrupt traitors who hid Biden's infirmity from the world. This is nonsense, and you should not buy into the implication that Johnson, et al., are peddling. Even if Biden were stepping down due to infirmity (a "fact" that is not in evidence), it could entirely be concerns about future infirmity rather than current infirmity. Put it another way: A fair number of Republicans have announced they will not seek reelection to their seats in Congress. Until every one of them tenders their resignation right now, then Johnson, et al., can shut their yaps.

Will Trump and his fellow Republicans go full sexist and racist? It is likely, either intentionally or accidentally. No doubt that would play well with parts of the base, the so-called deplorables (although we aren't supposed to say that). But insulting women, Asians or Black people is likely to be noticed by those groups. Trump can and will attack Harris for what he sees as Biden's policy failures, but that will give her the opportunity to claim some credit for his successes, like the CHIPS Act and the Inflation Reduction Act.

Assessing Kamala Harris (Preliminarily)

The $64 billion question is whether Harris is stronger than Biden as a candidate. So, as we try to answer that, what do we know? The main reason Biden beat Trump in 2020 but Hillary lost to him in 2016 is that Biden did better among white men. There are thus a substantial number of white men who won't even vote for a white woman. It is our guess that they won't be too keen on voting for a Black woman either. They are probably lost to Harris, although some of them might have Trump fatigue that outweighs their dislike of women politicians.

Harris also has some strengths. As we have written several times, Biden was bleeding support among Black voters, Latino voters, and minorities in general. Harris will probably win 95+% of Black women and a much larger chunk of Black men than Biden would have. She will also drive Black turnout through the roof. Her father is Afro-Jamaican. Does that make him at least Latino-adjacent? Maybe a little bit. Harris can make the case to Latinos that she understands their situation far better than Trump does. In addition, her husband, Doug Emhoff, is Jewish. Trump got 30% of the Jewish vote in 2020. With a potential Jewish first gentleman, we suspect Trump's percentage will go down. In other words, Harris will lose some white men, especially white working class men, but she has real potential to pick up support from groups Biden was having trouble with. And, of course, the many voters who are grudgingly supporting Trump simply because they think Biden is old and demented are all going to rethink their position.

For many Democrats, the key thing is beating Trump, not necessarily electing some specific Democrat. Aaron Sorkin, who created the NBC series The West Wing, has a suggestion for the Democrats that would almost certainly guarantee that Donald Trump would be defeated: They should nominate Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) for president. The deal would include him picking a sitting Democratic vice president, governor, or senator as veep and agreeing to serve only one term. He would also have to agree to a bipartisan cabinet with half the secretaries being Democrats and perhaps a few other things (e.g., not nominating anyone to the judiciary without the advance approval of the leader of the Senate Democratic caucus). Romney is very well known already and completely sane. Democrats would all prefer him to Donald Trump and all the "Nikki Haley Republicans" would, too. He would also flip Utah, and every EV counts. If he refused the deal (which is unlikely because he spent many years pursuing the presidency), then he could be replaced by some other moderate Republican, say Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). Interesting idea, but we suspect the Democrats won't take it.

The Decline and Fall of Joe Biden

Why did Biden drop out? The Lord Almighty no doubt played a big role, but internal pressure from his own party surely did, too. Some strategists and people close to the president have said: "The coverup is worse than the crime." Oh, wait. That was a different incident. No, they said Biden's response to the aftermath of the debate was as damaging as the debate itself. They said there was nothing Biden could do to salvage his candidacy. Insiders also knew that a majority of Democratic senators wanted Biden out.

If Biden had completely recovered after the debate and been flawless in all his subsequent appearances, the debate could be written off as a fluke due to his cold or jet lag. But Biden made gaffes at the NATO summit and in some interviews, including those with George Stephanopoulos and Black Entertainment Television. At the NATO summit, Biden referred to the president of Ukraine as President Putin. Putin would love to be president of Ukraine, but so far he isn't. At the BET interview, Biden seemed potentially unable to remember the name of his Secretary of Defense, and just called him a "Black man." It's true that Lloyd Austin is Black, but Biden looking like he could not remember Austin's name is not a good sign.

It is increasingly clear that it wasn't just one bad night at the debate. Barack Obama had a bad debate with Mitt Romney, but afterwards there were no more flubs and Obama recovered easily. And he was many decades younger then than Biden is now. Too many insiders became convinced that Biden didn't have the right stuff anymore and had to go. He got the message and went.

Democratic strategists expected the calls for Biden to step down to get much louder this week if he didn't go yesterday. Polls have shown that huge majorities of Democratic voters want somebody else to head the ticket and head-to-head polls show several other Democrats doing better than Biden against Trump.

Many career civil servants are distraught. Some have served for decades under both Republican and Democratic presidents and are now facing the possibility of being replaced by political appointees who will simply do what Trump wants them to do, the public welfare be damned. Some are contemplating leaving now or shortly. They are fearful for themselves and the country, and the uncertainty over the Democratic ticket and general gloom about any Democrat's chances. Now that Biden is out, that could change, but the threat of Trump is still in the air. Others are desperately trying to get some work done while it is still possible but are afraid that Trump could quickly undo it if he wins. It is not a good time to work in D.C.

The Potential Running Mates

As we note above, Kamala Harris is now on track to be the Democratic nominee for president. If Harris gets the nod, who might her running mate be? The speculation has already started here and here, among other places. Let's start by dismissing two options listed in the first article: Govs. Gretchen Whitmer (D-MI) and Gavin Newsom (D-CA). Whitmer would mean an all-female ticket. Men get to vote in elections. Quite a few of them would feel left out. That would never fly. This is not fair, since women voters have been presented with male-male tickets roughly 50 times since getting the vote (women got the vote in different places at different times, and there are, of course, two major-party tickets every presidential year). However, the Democrats are frightened enough that they are not looking to break any further glass ceilings right now, thank you very much.

Meanwhile, Newsom and Harris are both from California. One of them would have to move and for political reasons, it can't be a sitting governor. Theoretically, Harris could move to D.C., but it would look phony and be challenged in court. Who's left, in alphabetical order?

• Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY): At just 46, Beshear and Harris would form a youthful ticket and would allow the Democrats to harp on Trump as an old geezer who should drop out. Beshear is a moderate from a deep red state and wouldn't scare off anyone. He was formerly Kentucky AG, so a ticket with two former AGs (technically AsG if you want to be really picky, which we don't) would allow the Democrats to show they are tough on crime. He's also one of the most popular governors in the country. Despite his being from a red state, he campaigned as pro-choice last time and won. As governor, he restored voting rights to 180,000 nonviolent former felons, the most of any governor in history. He supports the legalization of marijuana at least for medical purposes. He accepts climate change as real. By picking him, Harris would reassure many moderate Republicans that she is not some wild-eyed pinko.
  
  
• Gov. Roy Cooper (D-NC): As a two-term governor from a swing state, his job would be to win North Carolina and nearby Georgia. It might be possible. He did win his state six times (four as AG, two as governor). At 67, he wouldn't add youth to the ticket, but he does have executive experience, and he'd give the Democrats a double-state-AG ticket, which would help even more when it comes to talking about crime. Like Beshear, he is a moderate and it would be impossible for the Republicans to get away with calling him a socialist. As governor, he wasn't able to get a lot of his priorities through, despite trying hard, because Republicans hold a supermajority in the state legislature (due to massive gerrymandering) and just passed bill after bill that he vetoed and they overrode. One thing he did get through is an expansion of Medicaid, which helped 600,000 poor people in North Carolina.
  
  
• Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ): As a highly decorated Navy combat veteran and former astronaut who spent 54 days in space, Kelly wouldn't have to prove his patriotism to anyone. This could easily appeal to veterans nationwide. He is from a key swing state and a prolific fundraiser. Since he is from a border state, he could claim he knows much more about the border than Trump, who has been there only a couple of times for quick photo ops. His calm style could attract moderates to the ticket, even though he is pro-choice, pro-dreamer, and anti-gun. His wife, Gabrielle Giffords, was nearly assassinated when she was in the House. If Trump uses his shooting to claim he is a martyr, Kelly could counter with his wife's shooting and use that to talk up gun control. He is a popular senator and would be missed there, but Gov. Katie Hobbs (D-AZ) would appoint another Democrat to his seat. He is almost the same age as Harris. She is 59 and he is 60.
  
  
• Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-IL): At 59, he is exactly the same age as Harris. With him on the ticket, Democrats would be sure to carry Illinois, but they would also do that without him, so he adds nothing there. He is fiery and outspoken, which might not be a plus picking up moderate Republicans. He is worth about $3.5 billion, so he could toss a couple of hundred million into the campaign war chest if he wanted to. He definitely has national ambitions. We think Pritzker is the least likely name on this list because he brings so little to the ticket except money.
  
  
• Gov. Josh Shapiro (D-PA): He is 51, so he would be part of a youthful ticket. He is also a very popular governor of the biggest swing state. The increased chances of getting those crucial 19 EVs would be a huge reason to take him. He also spoke after the assassination attempt in his state and did a masterful job of it. Although he has been governor for only 1½ years, he was elected to the state House four times, AG twice, and governor once, so he is no newbie to politics. Like Beshear and Cooper, Shapiro would give the Democrats a ticket with two former attorneys general so they could make fighting crime their issue, especially against a convicted criminal. Shapiro won his gubernatorial election by 14.8 points over a rabid Trumper. As governor, his focus has been on the workforce, education, and transportation. Shapiro, his wife, Lori, and Harris' husband are all Jewish, so that would make the Middle East a hot topic. Shapiro has stated his belief that Israel has a right to exist and that Hamas consists of barbaric terrorists. He probably wouldn't get many invitations to speak on elite college campuses, but moderates, including Republicans (and some evangelicals), would probably be happy with this.
  
  
• Gov. Tim Walz (DFL-MN): At 60, he doesn't bring a lot of youth to the ticket, but he is a Midwesterner and could be assigned to campaign in the neighboring swing states. He is more liberal than all of the above except Pritzker, which argues against him since if progressives don't think a Black woman on top of the ticket is good enough, nothing will satisfy them. We see him as a long shot.
  

If we had to rate each of them by their value to the ticket, it would be Shapiro, Kelly, Cooper, Beshear, Walz, and then Pritzker. The first three could bring in their own (swing) states, whereas the last three don't have that potential. Beshear, Cooper, and Shapiro are all former AGs, so they could completely defang the Republicans on crime, especially with a convicted criminal heading their ticket. In any event, we are quite sure the veep will be a fairly bland straight white man.

And now that we've run down the most viable candidates, how about some off-the-board choices? We like to cover all bases and, besides, readers like to ponder unusual options. Here, we're going to focus on "types" more than individuals:

• "Unity" Picks: If the Democrats' message is "This election is about democracy versus fascism," then one way to really underscore that would be for Harris to pick a running mate who is a Republican. This would allow the now-purple team to run on "It's now loyal, patriotic Americans united against the authoritarians who are pretending to be Republicans." Recall that Abraham Lincoln ran this play in 1864, albeit with a Republican in the top slot and a Democrat as #2. Possible options: Adam Kinzinger, Liz Cheney, Evan McMullin.
  
  
• "Semi-Unity" Picks: Maybe picking a Republican is a bridge too far. The Democrats could split the difference, and go with someone who is an independent. That would also make a statement about this being bigger than any one party. Were this to be the path the blue team chose, we are dubious that Joe Manchin would be the pick (see above), the Bern is too old, and the people on eX-Twitter who are proposing Tulsi Gabbard are just fooling themselves. Possible options: Sen. Angus King (I-ME), Justin Amash.
  
  
• Businessmen: A very large number of voters think that the federal government is basically USA, Inc. It's not, as Donald Trump has shown. Nonetheless, the thought of a successful businessman as president/VP has a lot of appeal for people who don't know that. Possible options: Bill Gates, Mark Cuban.
  
  
• Core Issue: One problem the Democrats have is that they're getting a very, very late start on their messaging. One way to address that, as we discussed over the weekend, is to pare the platform down to 2-3 core issues and to really, really hammer on those. A running mate could be a well-known expert in one of those issues, and could basically be the guy who goes around and talks about what the Democrats are going to do about global warming, or Supreme Court reform. Possible options: Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Special Presidential Envoy for Climate of the United States John Podesta.
  
  
• Someone for the Kiddies: This is the longest of long shots, we think, but if the Democrats decide that what they really have to do is get Millennials to the polls, they could choose someone with no political experience, but with aspirations and with a high Q score. Possible options: The Rock, George Clooney, Taylor Swift (yes, that would be a two-woman ticket, but maybe the Democrats make an exception for her...)

Even as we ponder longshots, we'll tell you that the VP will NOT be someone with the last name Obama. The problem there is not a double-minority ticket, it's that Michelle simply does not want the job, while Barack's eligibility to be VP is an open question and would have to be decided by the courts. The Democrats cannot afford that kind of uncertainty right now, even if he was willing to try it.

The Democratic Convention

In the (unlikely) event that there is a contested Democratic convention, be sure to watch the boring stuff on C-SPAN (although this year, it may not be so boring). In any event, small things could matter a lot. We have seen this in the past. What the rules are, who gets seated, what's in the platform, and things like that give a strong hint of what will happen later and can even affect what happens later.

In 1952, a credentials fight over who would get seated gave Dwight Eisenhower his victory over Robert Taft for the GOP nomination. In 1976, the defeat of his rules proposal that candidates had to name their running mate in advance led to the defeat of Ronald Reagan and gave the Republican nomination to Jerry Ford. In contested conventions, candidates always have rules and platform planks they want and the votes on them presage what will happen on the main roll call.

The rules are especially important. Can superdelegates vote on the first ballot? Are pledged delegates really required to vote for the pledgee, or are they in reality free agents? Will first-past-the-post voting, or ranked choice voting, or some hybrid form (like Alaska uses) be used? In 1980, Jimmy Carter had a majority of delegates but his supporters were afraid of a Ted Kennedy insurgency, so the Carter delegates passed a rule stating that a delegate who did not vote for the candidate he or she was pledged to could be removed and a substitute installed. In 1984, the delegates adopted rule 13.j, which states: "Delegates elected to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them." That rule is still in effect, even though you could drive a Mack Truck through the loophole there. Some states have laws requiring delegates to vote for the candidate they are pledged to, but no one has ever gone to prison for violating those laws, and they have not been well explored in court.

Current rules state that potential candidates must submit a list of at least 300 supporters, with no more than 50 from any one state. Changing the "50" to "100" or even "200" could favor candidates from big states. There are many other changes that could affect the outcome in a truly open convention.

It will also be very interesting to see who gets the speaking spots at the DNC. As we saw at the RNC, when the candidate is known, it's basically just a parade of a**-kissers genuflecting before the nominee. But if the DNC is contested, there may not be time for 100+ speeches, meaning only the real big donkeys will get a spot. And even if the DNC isn't contested, there will have to be a lot of thought put into the best way to put forward a message of unity. Do they give slots to some Never Trump Republicans? To Teamsters president Sean O'Brien? To Joe Manchin?

Another big question is what role Biden will play at the convention. We, and in particular (Z), continue to think his infirmities were overblown. But, in any case, he's still clearly quite capable of delivering prepared remarks. And if he gets up and gives a whiz-bang of a "this is bigger than any one of us; this is about the future of the country" address, it could be one for the ages. And remember, he would be reading a speech written by the best speechwriter the Democrats have from a teleprompter, as he did at the SOTU. On the other hand, if he has a bad night, it could be a real drag for the blue team. And if he does NOT speak, it will be hard to avoid the inference that he's farther gone than anyone in the White House has let on.

A Few Final Thoughts

We're going to finish up with a few observations that did not quite fit in anywhere else.

To start, there are some well-known "strikes" against Kamala Harris, namely that she is: (1) not terribly popular, and (2) not a good campaigner. As to the first, allow us to point out (yet again), that we are in a highly polarized era where EVERY politician (foreign and domestic) is basically unpopular. YouGov publishes approval ratings for hundreds of politicians each quarter; their most recent update is for Q2 2024. According to their figures, 49% of respondents have a favorable opinion of Harris. That sounds pretty mediocre until you see their complete Top 10:

Rank	Person	Favorable %
1	Jimmy Carter	60%
2	Arnold Schwarzenegger	59%
3	Barack Obama	56%
4	Bernie Sanders	54%
5t	Bill Clinton	49%
5t	Kamala Harris	49%
7	Joe Biden	48%
8	Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez	48%
9	Donald Trump	47%
10	Elizabeth Warren	46%

So, you can say Harris is not especially popular, and that would be true. But you could also say that she is the most popular person who can plausibly run, once physical condition, age and eligibility are factored in. For what it is worth, here is a video from Reuters with voters talking about how much they do or do not like Harris (the solid majority say they would vote for her, or are at least open to doing so).

As to Harris' campaigning, the bad rap she gets there comes from her failed presidential campaign, which ended very early during the 2020 cycle. Certainly, that campaign was not one for the history books. However, she has run successful campaigns before, most obviously getting herself elected to the U.S. Senate from California. That's no small feat. Further, you know who else botched their first presidential campaign? Joe Biden. And Donald Trump. Running for president is definitely a learn-by-doing thing. Few wannabe presidents hit the ground running, and are superstars from the beginning (Barack Obama would be the exception that proves the general rule). Also, part of the reason Harris dropped out of the 2020 race so quickly is that she read the tea leaves, realized that the presidency was not in her immediate future, but also realized that the #2 slot might be, and that particular ambition was best served by abandoning the SS Kamala and quickly climbing aboard the SS Scranton Joe. Point is, don't put too much stock in the "Harris isn't a good campaigner" bit. She could, and probably will, surprise people if she gets the nod. She will also be advised by all the best people the Democratic Party has to offer, including Joe Biden, Billary Clinton, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and quite a few others who know a thing or two about politics and campaigning. She didn't have all of them coaching her in 2020.

Also, what happened yesterday has no meaningful historical analogue. We have gone through the various sort-of precedents, like Harry S. Truman in 1952 and Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968. But those aren't really all that similar, particularly in that both of those men (and, ultimately, their parties) were primarily doomed by an ongoing and unpopular foreign war. There is no foreign war right now. So, we're in something of a brave new world when it comes to switching horses midstream. In 2016, people said: "You don't get elected president unless you have experience as a politician or a general." That was true... until it wasn't. "You can't change horses midstream" will also be true... until it isn't. Will this be the year that old political aphorism gets an update? It's very possible.

One last thing. There has been some polling of a Harris-Trump race, but we don't take that terribly seriously. It has all been hypothetical so far. Voters don't react well to hypothetical questions. Now that Harris is something like 95% certain to be the Democratic nominee, the polls suddenly become more serious. There are going to be a bunch of Harris-Trump polls in the next week or two, and a bunch of [Candidate X]-Trump polls, too. We will certainly report on them, because that is what we do. But as we will likely write many times in the next several weeks, you can't put much stock in any of them. We have the assassination attempt, the RNC, the exit of Biden, the Olympics and the DNC, all of which could affect the numbers in wonky ways. The dust really won't settle in a meaningful way until mid-September or so.

It will, however, be VERY interesting to see the fundraising numbers for July and August. Here is a potential preview; this shows the donations made to the Biden/Harris campaign yesterday, with the dashed red line marking when Biden withdrew:

That actually doesn't capture the full story; in their final report of the evening, around 10:00 p.m. ET, ActBlue said that the total haul in the 12 hours after Biden dropped out was a staggering $55 million. Donations are a pretty good proxy for enthusiasm, so it's fair to say there are a lot of enthusiastic Democrats right now.

If nothing else, it's a very good time to be someone who writes a blog about politics. If you like what we have been writing, please tell your friends and family about our site or even make a small donation if you can. (V & Z)

Today's Presidential Polls

We already have our first Harris-Trump poll (the one from New Hampshire). Again, don't put too much weight on it, but with 21% of respondents undecided/third party, and with Trump being VERY well known, it does suggest that Harris' support has room to grow. (Z)

State	Kamala Harris	Donald Trump	Start	End	Pollster
Georgia	46%	51%	Jul 08	Jul 16	U. of Georgia
New Hampshire	39%	40%	Jul 19	Jul 21	Praecones Analytica

Click on a state name for a graph of its polling history.

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger