top of page
Search
Writer's pictureThomas Neuburger

The Donor Convention


President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris stand on stage at the Democratic National Committee winter meeting, Feb. 3, 2023, in Philadelphia. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

By Thomas Neuburger


The Donor Convention is happening as we speak — the behind-the-scenes (sort of) discussion being had by big money Party donors and grandees to (a) force Biden to either resign or withdraw, and (b) figure out who should replace him.


The takeaway: None of this includes voters, except indirectly. (Questions like “Can Harris beat Trump?” include voters indirectly, by guessing their choices.)


The problem: Even though everyone in the Party seems to want to beat Trump, including most Party-adjacent voters, some may feel miffed at the obvious undemocratic nature of the process and thus stay away. At this point the Party needs all the votes it can get. That’s a hard circle to square.


Candidate Requirements

What are the requirements for the candidate in this process? I think there are four:


  1. Donors must approve of that person and give freely to her or his race.

  2. Party office-holders — House members and senators, especially those up for re-election — must fully support the choice.

  3. The press must also fully support the choice. No more talk about “uncertain futures.” No more “Dems in disarray.”

  4. Voters, both Democrat-adjacent and true independents, must think either • The donors chose well, or • Voters had a real say in the process.


All these seem required, but especially 1 and 4. When the donors decide to whom to open their wallets — and do so together — the Party and press will follow. Nervous Democrats needn’t worry about them.


But to voters, the process can’t look too undemocratic. As Ryan Grim wrote, “The key for an open convention to be legitimate in the eyes of the public is that it has to feel open.”


Grim is exactly right. A product can’t just be good for you; it has to feel good for you too. That’s why they put fizz in some toothpaste brands: It fizzes; that means it’s working. Of course, the fizz is often hydrogen peroxide, which does provide benefit. But it also feels beneficial, and that’s what moves product.

If the various candidates and their allies are on TV regularly and giving speeches on their behalf, with regular breaking-news around endorsements from big-wigs, unions, environmental groups, etc., it will feel like what we understand today as authentically real and democratic: reality TV.

Reality TV. Why would that work?

The spectacle will captivate global attention and create a bond between the viewer and the stars of the spectacle – especially if it seems like social media sentiment is playing a real role in how things are unfolding. If that sentiment is seen as helping choose the next nominee, Trump is toast. If Democratic bosses anoint somebody, that person is toast.

Not sure I’m as confident in the outcome as Grim is, but I agree the process has to feel right to voters, or few will buy into it.


Intelligence Community Speaks

I would be remiss in not saying that the “vote” of the intelligence community matters as well. They’ve already weighed in at least twice, and they don’t want Biden.


The first time was September of last year. David Ignatius is as spook-adjacent as a reporter can get. In 2023 he wrote in the Washington Post, “President Biden should not run again in 2024”. His reason, Biden’s two “liabilities”: his age and Kamala Harris.


After all, if every donor knew early that Biden was frail (as Krystal Ball said on her show), did the spook state not also know? Ignatius and his whisperers may have changed their mind about Harris, but not about Joe.


The second time came just this week. Matt Taibbi wrote this about Senator Mark Warner (subscriber post; emphasis added): “The [Washington] Post report said the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Virginia Senator Mark Warner, was planning to gather prominent Democrats to ask Biden to consider stepping down. The optics of the elected official with perhaps the closest ties to the intelligence community dropping that news so shortly before Biden’s biggest televised interview since the debate were not hard to decipher.”


Court-watchers and King Lear’s “God’s spies,” please take note. Do you think they want Trump? The IC gets a vote too.


How Donors Could End Biden’s Reign

Before I say this, remember, I don’t have a horse in the Democratic Party race. There’s no real progressive option. I do want the strongest candidate though, and I’d like it soon. To that end, I offer this.


If every donor agreed that Ms. Somebody Else is their choice, the way to remove Biden and the people who’ve stiffened his spine is simple and clear: Refuse to finance his and his family's retirement.


You know what I mean. No library money, fewer speeches, a total cold shoulder from all the big money types. It’s not even a bribe; it’s a post facto carrot that’s also a perfect stick. Even the Court says post facto tipping’s all right.


And it would work. Every modern ex-president would take that deal. The Bidens and their closest friends, if they choose right, would sail to the islands of sun on boats made of gold, surrounded by flowers and praise.


And we, the public, would know who our choices are … finally.

13 Comments


WOW. Consider my ghast flabbered that even a smart guy like Neuberger doesn't see or write beyond Step One which to him and other scaredy cat Dems is getting rid of the duly elected and lawfully serving POTUS.


Step Two has questions that Neuberger doesn't address.. Here are a few. There are probably more.


Can POTUS just discharge his lawfully won delegates enmasse to a candidate that all the subgroups of the Democratic Party find acceptable?


Would that be acceptable to ALL the Democratic orgs in every state?


Failing that, do DNC rules require that the Democratic Party run primaries again to determine a candidate?


And if the Dems just ignore all their rules about primaries THAT will be the…


Like
Guest
Jul 10
Replying to

the party didn't play into the nazis' hands. YOU VOTERS did. You did it in 2016 by rejecting your best candidate in, at that time, 50 years. Instead you nom'd the money's candidate and lost. So you doubled down for the money ("yass massah') in 2020 and got lucky that enough had seen trump for what he is and won. But the money said double-down again and you all just chanted "yass massah" even though there was plenty of proof 2 years ago that he's toast. He just hasn't dropped dead yet.


And don't you know that the dnc has maintained those $uperdelegates for just such an occasion as this? To force the money's candidate down the throats of al…


Like

Guest
Jul 09

I'm a bit disappointed in Thomas here too. His (investor) convention is apt. But it isn't even required.


I had hoped Thomas would have shown a little more principle about having a wax figure in a brooks brothers suit making decisions that might end the world.

A principled democrap party would have invoked the 25th at least 2 years ago. THAT would have elevated harris (who I absolutely loathe, about as much as biden) AND would have inspired maybe a truly open and vigorous primary season to see if we couldn't get us a better than shit candidate for a change. harris will lose. but newsome might be able to sneak by trump since only CA knows truly how odi…


Like

ptoomey
Jul 09

One quibble with your always excellent work--they're "investors," not "donors." There may be a relative handful of Hollywood types who make big contributions without getting tangible benefits in return (besides getting access to power and being treated as VIPs).


The mega-contributors from FIRE are all investors. They invest in candidates/campaigns with the express expectation of obtaining tangible economic benefits. They're not "donors" by any reasonable definition.


As to whether Biden can still be replaced, it's not looking too good right now:


https://www.salon.com/2024/07/09/he-is-not-leaving-this-race-aoc-professes-support-for-joe-biden/?in_brief=true


In addition to AOC, Omar is backing Biden, too.


God help us all.

Like
Guest
Jul 09
Replying to

with the exception that it worked in "Bull Durham". It has NOT worked for yous since 1964. But you soldier on chanting "yass massah" anyhoo.

Like

barrem01
Jul 09

So threaten / bribe the "good man" into doing the right thing and skip (even further) down the primrose path to plutocracy? Yeah, that's a good look. The things we have to consider when we don't plan ahead.

Like
barrem01
Jul 11
Replying to

"bless your naïveté." From the guy who keeps getting "censored" but keeps posting every day.


"biden should have never run. he was too old." You're going back 4 years and I thought you would be mad I went back 2.

I think Biden was too old in 2020, but not because he was incompetent then, because he would likely become incompetent before his term was up. "when did someone who was king ever just abdicate except for a woman?" Nixon, LBJ

Like
bottom of page