What digby said:
Contrary to what we’re reading from the Kewl Kidz at Axios and Politico, CNN has a piece today that says the Democrats are actually coming to a consensus that Kamala Harris has to be the nominee if Biden steps aside. (Duh…)
The CNN piece, by Edward-Isaac Dovere and Lauren Fox, explains:
No one quite knows what the process of picking a new nominee would be if Joe Biden did step aside – but many Democrats say that any process is likelier than ever to quickly end with Vice President Kamala Harris as the nominee.
This has been obvious to me all along, and in the interest of full disclosure I am agnostic about Biden withdrawing, although I've wavered back and forth. I think he has been the best president since FDR, and I thought he handled the ABC interview and press conference just fine, but from what I’ve read the district level internal polling from Democratic House candidates has painted a much more dire picture than the national polling. We may be seeing a hint of that in the public swing state polling, where Biden lags significantly behind our Senate candidates, sometimes by double digits. And I will also add that four years ago Harris was my first choice. But I remain agnostic. I’m deeply torn. But either way it goes, I'm all in.
Back to CNN:
It’s not that everyone has suddenly coalesced – but exhaustion is gelling into consensus.
Internal polls that show Harris would at least be more helpful to boosting Democratic enthusiasm and aiding down ballot races are getting passed around. Arguments that she would be fastest to put together a campaign are landing harder. Daydreams of her making a more active and vigorous case against Donald Trump are taking root.
There has been talk of a series of town hall primaries or an open convention or whatever, and for some that's not an attack on Harris, it's not wanting to give the appearance that she was coronated. There may indeed be some who do aspire to be the nominee, but that would be political suicide.
If nothing else, people connected with several of the other possible most serious options and others acknowledge, they would likely feel boxed in by both party loyalty and their own future ambitions. Pressure will be high to unify after the last month of infighting, and anyone who takes her on would be risking torpedoing their reputation with the base in a potential 2028 open primary if she were seen as weakened by that and went on to lose.
No shit.
Kamala Harris is Biden's Vice President. He chose her to be his political heir. She is on the ticket that we voted for in the primaries, and IF he were to withdraw, only she could access the enormous amounts of money they've raised for the campaign. And IF he were to withdraw, he would certainly endorse her to be the nominee.
As digby adds:
Anyway, the CNN piece goes on to argue that Biden endorsing is hugely important, which it is, and I expect he would do. It points out that there have been no whispers of her plotting a takeover, not even one and that’s pretty impressive. No one has defended him more vociferously and I think that matters to him.
This is also why so many of the good Democrats who are calling or hinting for Biden to withdraw aren’t explicitly calling for Harris to replace him. It’s not that they wouldn’t quickly endorse her, it’s that the media would run with a false narrative of a Biden faction vs. a Harris faction, when in fact she is lock down loyal; and as digby said, that the media haven’t been able to concoct a whisper campaign against her is indeed pretty impressive.
Josh Marshall adds this:
In a formal sense, if Biden bows out, the decision cannot not be open. Biden can release his delegates. He can’t assign them to Harris or anyone else. Each delegate – all but a tiny number of whom are Biden delegates – can vote for whomever they want on the convention floor. The question is whether there’s a collective decision to move toward Harris, helped forward by rapid endorsements from top party leaders. You could have an open process and – as I expect would happen – Harris would win, even in a full Thunderdome/Carville model.
Indeed, I think there’s a good chance no other major figures would even run.
The two biggest next generation names other than Harris are governors Gretchen Whitmer and Gavin Newsom. Both have ruled out running. Newsom has always said he would never run against Harris. He's said it for years. They're not close friends, but they clearly greatly respect and appreciate each other. Their political careers have run roughly parallel, from San Francisco to Sacramento, and now that she's Vice President he has been one of the best and most fierce allies of the Biden-Harris team. He was there at the debate, to be one of the Democratic surrogates on TV. So, with Whitmer and Newsom out, who would challenge Harris? Who that isn't dumber than a rock?
Marshall:
I’ll reiterate my earlier point: there’s neither the time nor the apparatus for having anything but a fake, illegitimate and parodic process. And you have no electorate to make a choice. The delegates are just a mix of Biden friends, allies, elected officials and party activists chosen for the purely symbolic purposes of ratifying his nomination at the national convention. There’s no basis or logic for them to be choosing between Gretchen Whitmer and Gavin Newsom or whoever those guys are imagining. The whole idea that you’re going to have a three week barnstorm of townhalls with the all half dozen rising governor hot shots hosted by Barack Obama and Bill Clinton is just a fantasy of politics influencers. I doubt that could happen even if James Carville organized it to appear on Pod Save America with Barack Obama as host because I don’t think anyone will throw their hat in the ring.
It’s not just a fantasy, it’s stupid. IF Biden decides to withdraw, he will endorse his loyal and already chosen political successor, and the party will rally around her. I expect it would be quick and seamless.
