@mcfate They spread it on quite thick here, with the hand-wringing that Kamala is a dunce who is prone to saying stupid things. But the element of Obama intending to back Kelly keeps coming up. But just this morning. The rationale yesterday for Obama delaying his nod was too make it an event and maximize the impact. Then they dribble it out in a tweet.

What fits is Obama saw this whole thing going differently. He isn't enthusiastically in this thing for reasons.

@Fellixe

I think this is all horsecrap, just fiction masquerading as reporting.

Kelly's got no money, no ground game, and less name recognition.

And "Harris is a DEI-hire idiot" is nothing more than parroting Trump's bullshit.

HARD TO IMAGINE THAT THE ECONOMIC TIMES WOULD TRY TO GIN UP A WEAKER OPPONENT FOR TRUMP, HM?

@Fellixe

I'm not sure what the benchmark for "enthusiasm" is. The Obamas' endorsement of Harris is all over the news.

That's a lot of "impact", right?

Biden "dribbled" his declining to run "out in a tweet", too.

"The rationale yesterday"? WHOSE "rationale"? The Economic Times?

Mm-kay.

@Fellixe

If I were to guess, Obama waited to endorse Harris until he was sure that she had the nomination pretty well nailed-down, which doesn't seem senseless.

@mcfate Well, put you guesses into the pile of speculation then, I guess. Obama - my favorite president, mind you - hesitated to endorse Biden and left room for doubt. He's doing it again. You can guess and imagine all you like but in the meantime while he was playing 3D chess here comes the opening the press was looking for. The Economic Times, Washington Examiner, Telegraph are all running with this because he had to 'um' and 'uh' his way to a pretty mild endorsement.

@Fellixe

I note that these are all outlets with a right-wing slant.

All THEY'RE doing is "guessing" and "imagining all they like". Right?

@mcfate No, they're publishing and claiming to have sources. So while you're guessing they're drawing eyes to a story that may be a malicious hoax, may not, but is definitely based on Obama's hesitancy.

@Fellixe

EVERYBODY claims to have "sources". Sometimes, they're just making shit up, though. Like right now.

The "hesitancy" is likewise an act of pure imagination. Obama, sensibly, didn't want to put a thumb on the scale prematurely, and make it look like he was crowning someone before any consensus had been reached.

@Fellixe

Look, any story claiming that Obama thinks Harris is "dumb" is idiotic on its face.

That's TRUMP'S line.

And claiming that publishing stuff and claiming to have "sources" makes them something other than sources with a distinct right-wing slant is silly.

The Gateway Pundit publishes stuff, and they claim to have sources, too. But they're lying.

@mcfate Well believe what you like. But know that when I discuss politics I'm a pretty shit cheerleader. I talk about what's happening out there. I'm not into pillows and I'm not into hopey changey speculations (much) 😉

@Fellixe

You seem to be into them when they're talking smack about Harris.

@mcfate My guess and your guesses only add up to one vote each. Stories that are in the news cycle are a fact of the campaign that will have a real impact, so I discuss them.

@Fellixe

And I call bullshit when I see some.

@Fellixe

"According to the New York Post..."

Come on. You're being sold a bill of goods here.

@Fellixe

Fox news, the editorial board of the WSJ will reference the NYP's seedling horseshit MAGA propaganda (as if the NY Post is some kind of ACTUAL newspaper and not joke)and the stirring of the pot begins as non-Murdoch media picks up the stories. The shit gets clicks and eyeballs. and that's the game the Economic Times is playing here.

Strike 2 is this: "Quoting an unnamed Joe Biden family aide.."

WTF? LOL!! So some "aide"??

Not to mention Obama has endorsed.

It's total shit.