Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson writing this morning on the Dems' options, which don't include surrender. From his closing paragraphs:
"Changing candidates would be a gamble, and there is no guarantee it would work. It is hard for me to imagine a process that ended with anyone other than [Vice President] Harris as the replacement. At 59, she would turn the age issue in her party’s favor; and I’m confident she could unite and inspire the Democratic base. I’m not sure, though, how she would ultimately fare among independents and the lost tribe of anti-Trump Republicans. No one really knows what would happen.
If the smartest politicians and numbers crunchers in the Democratic Party see a way for Biden to win, they must all agree to make that happen. But if not — and no one has yet shown a credible road map to victory — they must all agree to make a change. A leap of faith is better than an inexorable slide into the abyss."
The issue has always been who is best positioned to deny the felonious sociopath Malignant Loser another term in the White House, which would plunge the country into an authoritarian hell governed by the far-right's dystopian "Project 2025" blueprint. There's not much time left to make that call, and it's dwindling fast. It's imperative for the future of our democratic republic that the Malignant Loser be defeated by the strongest candidate the party can field.
BONUS: The Los Angeles Times editorial board echoes the above.
