Leave it to Democrats to line up the circular firing squad at the slightest provocation. In the face of encroaching fascism, turfing the incumbent with one of the few household names in the party...
Leave it to Democrats to line up the circular firing squad at the slightest provocation.
In the face of encroaching fascism, turfing the incumbent with one of the few household names in the party is certainly the path forward.
I don’t think this really counts as a “slightest provocation” or a sleepy debate but I agree the stakes are high. The polls have been pretty bad and are getting worse. I think if he botches the...
I don’t think this really counts as a “slightest provocation” or a sleepy debate but I agree the stakes are high.
The polls have been pretty bad and are getting worse. I think if he botches the interview at the end of the week or the NATO summit he’s going to be pressed into backing down and Harris will take over the ticket. If he does well, maybe this blows over.
Yeah this is a vast understatement. People have been saying Biden's age is a problem since the last election. A large portion of political loudmouths blew up at Jon Stewart for daring to point it...
I don’t think this really counts as a “slightest provocation” or a sleepy debate but I agree the stakes are high.
Yeah this is a vast understatement. People have been saying Biden's age is a problem since the last election. A large portion of political loudmouths blew up at Jon Stewart for daring to point it out. Many people have expected, and been rightly worried, about this outcome.
I do personally think it's too late to do anything reasonable about it, but leave it to the modern dems to fuck up so badly that's when they try to fix it.
The Dems messed it up when they didn't have Biden announce 2 years ago that he wanted to be a one term transition president. Most people knew the age was an issue and didn't want him to go two...
The Dems messed it up when they didn't have Biden announce 2 years ago that he wanted to be a one term transition president. Most people knew the age was an issue and didn't want him to go two terms anyway. They had the opportunity to get someone exciting going in the 4 years Biden was in office, and they didn't. Pretty much everyone saw his age as being an issue, hell it was an issue last election too. Feels too late to fix. Running him out there has not been a good look, and switching out this late in the run is also not a good look and just weakens their already weak position. It's a situation they got themselves into and I don't see a good solution to.
It's what he promised, too. He didn't outright say it, but he went on and on about being a bridge to the next generation, a transitional figure. My support back then was conditional on that...
It's what he promised, too. He didn't outright say it, but he went on and on about being a bridge to the next generation, a transitional figure. My support back then was conditional on that assumption. Just couldn't resist that second term, though.
Multiple news articles (can't find them at the moment but can later) that his thinking changed once it became clear that Trump was running again and would be the nominee. For whatever reason,...
Multiple news articles (can't find them at the moment but can later) that his thinking changed once it became clear that Trump was running again and would be the nominee. For whatever reason, Biden believes he is the only Democrat ready to run who can beat Trump. For what it's worth, he's the only politician to have succeeded in beating Trump in an election.
And so is Trump. But the Republicans are lined up behind him chain gang style, which makes it a non issue for Trump. Dems need to STFU and get behind Biden or we're all screwed.
And so is Trump. But the Republicans are lined up behind him chain gang style, which makes it a non issue for Trump. Dems need to STFU and get behind Biden or we're all screwed.
I don’t see why it even matters that much. Clearly the cabinet are running the White House. And they are doing better than Trump would. I have my complaints but I’d rather not go for a dictatorship.
I don’t see why it even matters that much. Clearly the cabinet are running the White House. And they are doing better than Trump would. I have my complaints but I’d rather not go for a dictatorship.
No one in this thread is at risk of voting for Trump over Biden. The fear we have is that the 50k in Wisconsin that delivered Biden his victory in 2020 stay home this time.
No one in this thread is at risk of voting for Trump over Biden. The fear we have is that the 50k in Wisconsin that delivered Biden his victory in 2020 stay home this time.
I certainly hope not. We in WI have clawwed back a little bit of gerrymandering from the GOP. Hopefully that reminds some voters of the importance of voting this election.
I certainly hope not. We in WI have clawwed back a little bit of gerrymandering from the GOP. Hopefully that reminds some voters of the importance of voting this election.
People say it’s a problem but they never actually say what the problem is. Because, considering the alternative, there is no problem. Yes none of us like that he’s this old. Yes we would all...
People say it’s a problem but they never actually say what the problem is. Because, considering the alternative, there is no problem. Yes none of us like that he’s this old. Yes we would all prefer he go into a Lazarus pit and come back as a 30 year old. But he’s more mentally fit than Donald Trump so, electorally, what’s the problem?
People don’t like Biden, which is fine and fair. But instead of just saying “Aw man it sucks this is where we’re at. We should figure out how to reform the system so it doesn’t end up like this” they put that sentiment in the mouth of an imaginary “regular voter” and metamorph it into an “electability” argument. But the thing that hurts his electability is that these people won’t shut up about Biden’s age while ignoring all of Trump’s insane shit. If they’d just stop treating the national discourse as a therapy session there would be no electability problem.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Any negative dip from the debate is easily recoverable. The constant shrieking and rending of garments after the debate, however, will be ruinous. If...
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Any negative dip from the debate is easily recoverable. The constant shrieking and rending of garments after the debate, however, will be ruinous. If Democrats can’t have the message discipline to have this discussion in a dignified way instead of back-channeling to the public by gossiping with journalists I don’t know why anyone thinks replacing Biden on the ticket won’t be an epic clusterfuck of bad blood and backbiting.
Voters have been expressing concerns about Biden's age and mental acuity for years. Then his performance during the debate put a massive spotlight on those concerns and highlighted what his office...
Voters have been expressing concerns about Biden's age and mental acuity for years. Then his performance during the debate put a massive spotlight on those concerns and highlighted what his office has been trying to hide. I don't see this as a "negative dip." This a big crack in the dam, the start of an avalanche, a tsunami of shit - whatever you call it, it's really bad. We're already in epic clusterfuck territory.
The polling numbers after the debate are disastrous. 72% say his physical and mental abilities are a reason to vote against him. An impressive figure when you consider the fact that 30% of Americans believe literally anything. A majority of voters think they Democrats are better off running someone else. This is unprecedented.
How do Democrats expect to turn this around? I mean, it'd be one thing if he was actually popular, if this was the first time the public has felt uneasy about his mental faculties, or if he had been leading in the polls prior to the debate. But none of that is the case. Maybe they could turn things around if there are examples of Biden sounding sharp when speaking extemporaneously at any point in, I dunno, the last two years. But that isn't the case either!
Their job is to go out and tell people not to believe their eyes and ears. They're going to have convince millions of people that have seen firsthand what dementia looks like that they shouldn't be concerned about the way he speaks, looks, and sounds. They're going to have to tell people, "Hey, I know you don't want this guy, but you need to take him." WTF?
I know the lifeboat is scary, but I'll take it over the sinking ship 10 out of 10 times.
Unless you saw different poll numbers than I did, what that 72% of people said was that they didn't have confidence in his physical/mental health for the next 4 years, not that they wouldn't vote...
Unless you saw different poll numbers than I did, what that 72% of people said was that they didn't have confidence in his physical/mental health for the next 4 years, not that they wouldn't vote for him because of it.
That's what I'm basing that off of. And I guess I placed the emphasis in the wrong area when I said "his physical and mental abilities are a reason to vote against him" because I never meant to...
When asked about whether certain attributes were reasons to vote for or against each candidate, 72% of voters say Biden’s physical and mental abilities are a reason to vote against him rather than for him.
That's what I'm basing that off of. And I guess I placed the emphasis in the wrong area when I said "his physical and mental abilities are a reason to vote against him" because I never meant to imply that 72% of people are voting against him because of his mental faculties.
But let's take a step back and look at what we're talking about. Until he proves otherwise, Biden's candidacy is going to be about whether or not he is senile. That wipes out any potential incumbent's advantage, and it takes all the focus off of Trump. Biden barely won in 2020 despite all the shenanigans Trump pulled, covid, mail-in voting, and clearly looking better than he does now.
About an hour ago, Karine Jean-Pierre was hounded by the press asking where Joe Biden is and why he hasn't made any public appearances to reassure voters, donors, and party leadership that he has what it takes to campaign. Her answer was he has a sit-down interview with ABC later this week. That's not very reassuring.
This is the exact same kind of arrogance that made Hillary lose to Trump in the first place but I guess if Biden is the only one the Democrats could muster to face a man so fake and unbelievable...
This is the exact same kind of arrogance that made Hillary lose to Trump in the first place but I guess if Biden is the only one the Democrats could muster to face a man so fake and unbelievable it's laughable they reap what they sow...unfortunate that means the US and the rest of the world have to suffer the consequences. It's exceptionally frustrating looking in from the outside.
If there was a strong secondary Democratic candidate nipping at Biden's heels, sure. This guy didn't even throw out a single suggestion for who would replace Biden, but even if he had, not a...
If there was a strong secondary Democratic candidate nipping at Biden's heels, sure. This guy didn't even throw out a single suggestion for who would replace Biden, but even if he had, not a single one of the potential replacements that anyone has aired has raised a dollar that could legally be used to run a presidential campaign. For anyone who still cares about campaign law, that's an impossible hurdle to overcome.
She's probably the only option because of that but I doubt she'll do well. She comes with a pile of baggage (as most prosecutors do) and has generally done poorly when put in the spotlight.
She's probably the only option because of that but I doubt she'll do well. She comes with a pile of baggage (as most prosecutors do) and has generally done poorly when put in the spotlight.
Sure, but in hypothetical matchups against Trump, Biden still does better than Harris. She's second best among everyone polled, but I'm not sure why dropping from best potential matchup to second...
Sure, but in hypothetical matchups against Trump, Biden still does better than Harris. She's second best among everyone polled, but I'm not sure why dropping from best potential matchup to second best is worth it unless the polls really swing against Biden, and they don't seem to have done so yet.
This may no be longer be true. Harris, and other potential replacements, are apparently now polling ahead of Biden in swing states according to some internal polling:...
Additionally, swing voters think he should drop out of the race by a 2-1 margin.
I think a case can be made for him to stay in, but it involves a near flawless performance from now until November. If you don’t think you can get that I think it might be prudent for the nomination to go to someone else.
A) That's paywalled, so I can't really speak to the linked article. B) I'm not saying that Puck isn't reporting in good faith, but a media company initially funded by a private equity firm and an...
A) That's paywalled, so I can't really speak to the linked article.
B) I'm not saying that Puck isn't reporting in good faith, but a media company initially funded by a private equity firm and an industrial conglomerate and run by the person who used to be head of advertising for Twitter is not who I'd go to for unbiased reporting on Biden and his chances.
C) A single leaked poll does not a trend make, especially not without being able to see the polling data. In fact, that sort of "leaked" "insider info" thing is exactly the kind of event that makes me believe that someone is just trying to fearmonger or push a particular narrative, especially when it comes from Puck, for the reasons I laid out in B.
Sorry, I would usually post an archive link but I’m on mobile at the moment :/ I don’t really have an opinion on Puck, but in this case it’s referring to an OpenLabs internal poll done for Biden’s...
Sorry, I would usually post an archive link but I’m on mobile at the moment :/
I don’t really have an opinion on Puck, but in this case it’s referring to an OpenLabs internal poll done for Biden’s Super PAC. If it’s being misrepresented by Puck, it would be pretty easy for the Biden camp to refute the story.
Trying to shut down what people are saying only ever really increases the attention on a story. Regardless of its veracity, I can't imagine Biden saying anything. Regarding the article, here's the...
Trying to shut down what people are saying only ever really increases the attention on a story. Regardless of its veracity, I can't imagine Biden saying anything.
Sadly, the document is only a summary of the poll and not the polling data itself. Maybe the debate really was the end for Biden, but we'll really just have to see what additional polling shows. The last week has had remarkable upsets since the debate, and I'm sure that things aren't going to stay just as they are over the next 4 months.
Donald Trump leads Joe Biden by 6 points among likely voters nationwide in a New York Times/Siena College poll taken after the debate. He leads by 9 points among registered voters.
Where I am/among the folks I know: The independent folks are looking at it more hard-nosed in a way I haven't observed much before. Basically, "fuck it we ball I'm voting for biden no matter what,...
Where I am/among the folks I know:
The independent folks are looking at it more hard-nosed in a way I haven't observed much before. Basically, "fuck it we ball I'm voting for biden no matter what, ya'll are crazy for trying to drop him now". They're seeing it from a more basic viewpoint - what's more survivable, basically. The liberals are freaking out and speculating like anyone could replace the guy without providing much justification that isn't just being regurgitated from stuff you've likely already seen/read. The conservatives have their guy, and a host of folk being pressured along with them in various ways. Interestingly, there's a segment of folks in the republican circles who are going to vote for Biden, but you will never hear them talk about it or get into it with folks. They too think it's crazy to consider dropping Biden at this point. They understand themselves as having to make a better call as a matter of personal principle, a lot of the time. I wonder about that a bit, because around where I live I have noticed some places stopped flying their Trump flags. I can't really go too deep on that because I just don't know, but that's not something I expected to see. Basically, the view from a rural southern town, in which the majority is not in the cult. It's pretty much shaking out that there's the cult, and then a coalition of center-right/center-left/left/unaffiliated crystallizing and they are all in on Biden. It really doesn't have much to do with either man when I talk to people, either it's blind loyalty to the mean one or a simple act of rationality going for the nice one.
As for the party, small wonder honestly. It's the classic difference playing out again - republicans always hold the line, democrats never hold the line. The more things change, the more they stay the same, I suppose, this time. I will clarify, I mean lawmakers and media folk, not your everyday voter. My impression of the everyday voter for a very long time is that they've never been properly represented, just to be straight. Republicans just delude themselves into wanting what's there, Democrats settle for what's there, independents are often depoliticized and otherwise belong to ideological lineages that aren't represented at all.
Personally I don't see this as a choice between "democracy" and "fascism" in the abstract. It's "inverted totalitarianism" in both instances, with this weird, highly unlikely glimmer of possibility should the nicer guy win. The moment we are in is a moment of that system buckling, and the shape that takes is folks actually having a kind of sway over the outcome they don't usually have. Trump is F-tier on the post-truth populist scale of competence, there's no way he lives out a time akin to Putin or something - people with power will want someone with more consistency, they'll find a hard-nosed replacement one way or another if the dude doesn't just up and die at some point. Biden is like the last vestige of the old ways, with no clear replacement and a party infrastructure that means it's unlikely we get someone much different from him. Regardless who wins, this is still a country facing multiple interconnected crises (and a global conflict) with much of its power cut up and divided between whichever corporate interests are most relevant to the specifics of the power in question. They had outsized control well before this whole saga began, they are what will last through either outcome of the election, and their challenge appears to be having to repair a veil that just got pierced in a very real way. Right now, it is more possible for the president to do a lot he could realistically do anyway, it is because it's on paper now that it means so much more. The paper means the other parts of the system can't fight it as simply, and in that, there is the glimmer. Of using that power to do things no one expected, that actually do return power to the hands of the everyday voter. That's why I've said before Biden's position right now is unique. I think it would be genuinely ridiculous for the party to ditch a man who demonstrated his relationship to power the way he did. He is a product of a system, like any of them he's got a whole host of shit in his history and he is coming down pretty fast on us, but when a big moment like that happened, dude did not immediately change.
I appreciate your write up as it both shares your personal experiences and doesn't just follow the same lines of argument everywhere else right now. I am especially curious about the Republican...
I appreciate your write up as it both shares your personal experiences and doesn't just follow the same lines of argument everywhere else right now. I am especially curious about the Republican voters moving to Biden, but at the same time, not super surprised after seeing the last 3 and a half years.
Do you think these are the last two candidates of this generation? Who do you see brought forward in 2028? Not even thinking names, I'm just trying to think about what this system has created and who will be the newer political figures.
I do think it's the end of an era, might be the way to say it. I just can't help but look at it from a more "storybook" angle sometimes: Both men are ancient. Both are deteriorating quickly. They...
I do think it's the end of an era, might be the way to say it. I just can't help but look at it from a more "storybook" angle sometimes: Both men are ancient. Both are deteriorating quickly. They don't have clear replacements. They represent political lineages which barely hold answers for what lies ahead, lineages that did fail to prevent how the system became different. They lost control, but we don't live at the point where they have just lost it. We live at the beginning of the end of their failure.
I can divide it up:
Trump wins: I just don't see him getting a dynasty out of it. He's too easy to anger, and the bigger interests out there would have more of a license to do something extreme to rectify his existence when he inevitably tries to lash out at the wrong folks. There are wrong folks, and Trump's deteriorated mental state will only mean he gets dumber and more reckless. An election after him is just not something I think I can be very detailed about.
Biden wins: A really historic moment balloons pretty much to its fullest with this. Everything Biden does will matter a lot more, so he will determine a big chunk of the future, and that will determine the next candidate. I doubt he tears the system up, but if I'm gonna ride with the glimmer a minute, at best I think that means something resembling the past but with so much shit going on that those who will lead will be revealing themselves, we won't be picking them out I think. An election after him will really depend on how he uses his power, so much so that it's really hard to say who would come after that.
Either way, I don't see anything remotely like what we've had happening. It can't. There isn't a way to go back to sleep, the cult won't just disappear. We've had the internet for going on three generations working all kinds of things on people. We've had an education system fall pretty much apart. The war is escalating, and what I can understand about Russia is some pretty grim shit. It may not be the most successful play at going fascist but that is what is happening, because there's no other way to get a completely despondent/depoliticized polity to do something like fight a war for years. They do talk about it being a thing they do until they are no more, that's not some rare thing or a joke or something. The mechanisms are being used, the gears are turning, the system is producing. Against all of this, there's the rapid and unpredictable changes in the climate which will guarantee a gigantic shift in material conditions over time. America, being the inverted thing that it is, is about to have granddad go handle that. It's like when I start to consider the future in serious detail, it comes back to being so ridiculously absurd that my brain just stops. Anything could happen.
Edit: Sorry, I meant to add a little from a more systemic view. We have a rare opportunity to drastically alter a political formation that is built upon being depoliticized. Before it can recover, before it can harden or try to put the image back in place, we've got an opportunity that depends on a 20th century liberal acting very much out of character, against his lineage - a strange predicament.
Edit again: Sorry, I woke up with a thought and figured this is as good a place as any to include it. Pretending for a second, that democrats do replace Biden - that is a bet on chaos. Within chaos, leaders do arise, but you can't predict it much at all. In my opinion, given the sentiments I can observe, this would be just about as precarious a thing to do as you could. It would entirely depend on the presentation of it and the leader who appears, how that goes. The malign forces out there in the world make that bet all the time, it's part of what it means to be "Machiavellian". There's a quote from him about what Fortune is, what you must do with Fortune, that is downright disgusting but is adhered to pretty strongly in that world. If the democratic party makes this kind of bet, that will be a time when they will have to be as their enemies to meet with success - what I meant by having to be "out of character".
Of course he has bad days, he's almost 80, he's over the average life span of an American already. That means a ton of Americans that were born the same time as him have already died. Humans...
Of course he has bad days, he's almost 80, he's over the average life span of an American already. That means a ton of Americans that were born the same time as him have already died. Humans deteriorate as they age, that's just a fact of life, I don't really understand the make believe land that they're trying to construct, like he's immune from the trudge of time. His bad days will get worse and with the weight of an entire country on him, who knows if he'll make it.
This could probably be its own post but unfortunately it's paywalled and an archive link doesn't circumvent the paywall so I'll just post it here because a decent amount is free-to-read:...
This could probably be its own post but unfortunately it's paywalled and an archive link doesn't circumvent the paywall so I'll just post it here because a decent amount is free-to-read:
For one, I would like to point out this is written by one of Obama's senior advisors. I think there are some liberals who'd like to pretend this is just the anti-liberal progressives who are jumping on Biden at an opportune time (and to be fair they certainly are) but that is definitely not the only factor.
But more importantly, I think it speaks to an important central point: where was Biden this last week?
After a debate performance like that, you need to convince the public it was a one-of and not what they're voting for at the ballot box. Biden should be on a media blitz right now, he should be on every talk show, doing interviews and press conferences. Instead the Biden team has circled the wagons. It seems highly likely they are protecting him and that they're worried this will happen again.
Hopefully I don't need to spell this out but ultimately, if Biden's health is impacting his ability to have conversations and process information, he should not be nominated. He will lose the election, possibly in a landslide. There is basically no benefit to sticking with him vs having Harris at the top of the ticket. I don't think Harris is a very good politician, but I do think she's better than running someone who is visibly senile.
I'm willing to give Biden the benefit of the doubt. At the end of this week he has a live interview scheduled. Next week he has the NATO summit. If he can demonstrate he's 'still got it' I think he should probably stay on. But if he stumbles again or he's hidden away again I think he'll quickly turn into an albatross in a very important campaign.
If you look at his schedule he's speaking and doing campaign events. He has never really gotten coverage of his events because IMO he isn't as "engaging" as coverage of Trump. I am one of those...
If you look at his schedule he's speaking and doing campaign events. He has never really gotten coverage of his events because IMO he isn't as "engaging" as coverage of Trump. I am one of those people that was relieved not to have to hear about what Trump randomly tweeted at 4 am when I woke up at 6. Its been part of the appeal, but the press really seems inclined not to cover him if there's not a scandal or he doesn't say something biting about Trump.
This isn't a lack of coverage issue. The news is laser focused on Biden post-debate. Since the debate, he's not been in public without reading off a teleprompter. People need to be reassured we're...
This isn't a lack of coverage issue. The news is laser focused on Biden post-debate.
Since the debate, he's not been in public without reading off a teleprompter. People need to be reassured we're talking about an episode rather than a condition. We'll probably find out more on Friday, but his lack of presence is somewhat alarming.
I know they've been focused post-debate - although in the scandal way, but this is not a new issue on their part. I get what you're saying; I'm just saying it fits perfectly in the bigger picture...
I know they've been focused post-debate - although in the scandal way, but this is not a new issue on their part. I get what you're saying; I'm just saying it fits perfectly in the bigger picture of coverage he's gotten. I have plenty of complaints about his PR team atm.
Breaking my own rule for a second because I'm curious, what do people think about Jon Ossoff as a potential replacement candidate for Biden? I'm aware there are other potential candidates. I'm...
I'm aware there are other potential candidates. I'm aware democrats would prefer to not give up a senate seat. I don't even know that much about Ossoff, but every time I read some version of the words "replace Joe Biden" Ossoff is the guy who pops into my head, and I don't even really know why.
So if anyone wouldn't mind taking the time to explain why and why not he would be a good candidate, I'd love to read your explanation.
He hasn't had the last 6 months to develop name recognition, a war chest, or anything. He may well be a fine candidate in some hypothetical election, but trying to bootstrap him to president with...
He hasn't had the last 6 months to develop name recognition, a war chest, or anything. He may well be a fine candidate in some hypothetical election, but trying to bootstrap him to president with 4 months to go is a heck of a task.
Essentially my response is "who" and not because I'm being flip but because I vaguely recognize his name at best. Despite him being the senator from Georgia which I just had to go look up, despite...
Essentially my response is "who" and not because I'm being flip but because I vaguely recognize his name at best. Despite him being the senator from Georgia which I just had to go look up, despite being actively engaged in paying attention to that Senate campaign, I didn't connect the dots... How would he have the name recognition?
After looking him up, he has three years of political service and nothing notable during that time from a quick scan. I don't see the appeal of him for president to be quite honest. I do want a president with some amount of practical leadership experience and ability to build a strong team. He doesn't have that. Had he been in politics since he was 22 or something, he'd have 15 years of experience to build from.
I think the options at this point are really Biden or Harris. I wouldn't particularly say I'm a fan of either, but to drop the incumbent ~140 days before the election and then pass over his VP (a...
I think the options at this point are really Biden or Harris. I wouldn't particularly say I'm a fan of either, but to drop the incumbent ~140 days before the election and then pass over his VP (a black woman, fwiw) for anyone else would be horrible horrible optics and sure to splinter the party. It's Biden or Harris. Most likely it will be Biden.
I do agree that it's probably not a great idea to drop Biden this late, and it probably should have been slow rolled for a while in advance. There was part of his campaign that hinted at him being...
I do agree that it's probably not a great idea to drop Biden this late, and it probably should have been slow rolled for a while in advance. There was part of his campaign that hinted at him being a one term president just to hold the line for a newer generation, but that has clearly been forgotten.
I just feel this is a failure of the system. I am not happy with either candidates age, and I think both are showing signs that they are old enough to warrant severe questioning of their abilities, and that they should be replaced by younger candidates. I don't think we should be in the position where there is a very real risk of a head of state dying in office from old age. I also don't like that that is a regular cause for turnover in the Supreme Court.
He’s a senator in a state that may not elect a Democrat if he leaves. That’s a very compelling reason against having him as a presidential/VP candidate.
He’s a senator in a state that may not elect a Democrat if he leaves. That’s a very compelling reason against having him as a presidential/VP candidate.
I dunno, while Georgia is a very red state, I think a lot of political analysis heavily undervalues the black vote in the South, and how I hope many other voters could be swayed if actual working...
I dunno, while Georgia is a very red state, I think a lot of political analysis heavily undervalues the black vote in the South, and how I hope many other voters could be swayed if actual working class policies were something politicians campaigned on again, instead of just immigration and hate.
I'd much rather see someone like Gretchen Whitmer or Gavin Newsom or Jared Polis. Someone who has a higher profile, and preferably executive experience as a governor. I'd even take Pete Buttigieg,...
I'd much rather see someone like Gretchen Whitmer or Gavin Newsom or Jared Polis. Someone who has a higher profile, and preferably executive experience as a governor. I'd even take Pete Buttigieg, since he leads the DoT.
But when's the last time anyone mentioned anything about Ossoff after the 2020-2021 elections he was in? As a senator, and one who's not from my state, I feel like I haven't heard much from or about him since. There are many other Dem senators I hear about, aside from Chuck Schumer, but Ossoff isn't one of them.
I'm sure Ossoff could be a good candidate. But it'd be in a future election where he's running not as a potential last minute replacement.
I'd rather elect a governor or a congressperson. The Senate is nearly evenly split and we need all democratic senators who are incumbents to stay there or risk losing the majority
I'd rather elect a governor or a congressperson. The Senate is nearly evenly split and we need all democratic senators who are incumbents to stay there or risk losing the majority
Leave it to Democrats to line up the circular firing squad at the slightest provocation.
In the face of encroaching fascism, turfing the incumbent with one of the few household names in the party is certainly the path forward.
Because he had a sleepy debate.
Insanity.
I don’t think this really counts as a “slightest provocation” or a sleepy debate but I agree the stakes are high.
The polls have been pretty bad and are getting worse. I think if he botches the interview at the end of the week or the NATO summit he’s going to be pressed into backing down and Harris will take over the ticket. If he does well, maybe this blows over.
Yeah this is a vast understatement. People have been saying Biden's age is a problem since the last election. A large portion of political loudmouths blew up at Jon Stewart for daring to point it out. Many people have expected, and been rightly worried, about this outcome.
I do personally think it's too late to do anything reasonable about it, but leave it to the modern dems to fuck up so badly that's when they try to fix it.
The Dems messed it up when they didn't have Biden announce 2 years ago that he wanted to be a one term transition president. Most people knew the age was an issue and didn't want him to go two terms anyway. They had the opportunity to get someone exciting going in the 4 years Biden was in office, and they didn't. Pretty much everyone saw his age as being an issue, hell it was an issue last election too. Feels too late to fix. Running him out there has not been a good look, and switching out this late in the run is also not a good look and just weakens their already weak position. It's a situation they got themselves into and I don't see a good solution to.
It's what he promised, too. He didn't outright say it, but he went on and on about being a bridge to the next generation, a transitional figure. My support back then was conditional on that assumption. Just couldn't resist that second term, though.
Multiple news articles (can't find them at the moment but can later) that his thinking changed once it became clear that Trump was running again and would be the nominee. For whatever reason, Biden believes he is the only Democrat ready to run who can beat Trump. For what it's worth, he's the only politician to have succeeded in beating Trump in an election.
Didn't trump run in 2000 and get beaten by both the Republican and democratic candidate?
He withdrew from the race and did not participate in the general, but won both primaries he qualified for before withdrawing.
And so is Trump. But the Republicans are lined up behind him chain gang style, which makes it a non issue for Trump. Dems need to STFU and get behind Biden or we're all screwed.
I don’t see why it even matters that much. Clearly the cabinet are running the White House. And they are doing better than Trump would. I have my complaints but I’d rather not go for a dictatorship.
No one in this thread is at risk of voting for Trump over Biden. The fear we have is that the 50k in Wisconsin that delivered Biden his victory in 2020 stay home this time.
I certainly hope not. We in WI have clawwed back a little bit of gerrymandering from the GOP. Hopefully that reminds some voters of the importance of voting this election.
People say it’s a problem but they never actually say what the problem is. Because, considering the alternative, there is no problem. Yes none of us like that he’s this old. Yes we would all prefer he go into a Lazarus pit and come back as a 30 year old. But he’s more mentally fit than Donald Trump so, electorally, what’s the problem?
People don’t like Biden, which is fine and fair. But instead of just saying “Aw man it sucks this is where we’re at. We should figure out how to reform the system so it doesn’t end up like this” they put that sentiment in the mouth of an imaginary “regular voter” and metamorph it into an “electability” argument. But the thing that hurts his electability is that these people won’t shut up about Biden’s age while ignoring all of Trump’s insane shit. If they’d just stop treating the national discourse as a therapy session there would be no electability problem.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Any negative dip from the debate is easily recoverable. The constant shrieking and rending of garments after the debate, however, will be ruinous. If Democrats can’t have the message discipline to have this discussion in a dignified way instead of back-channeling to the public by gossiping with journalists I don’t know why anyone thinks replacing Biden on the ticket won’t be an epic clusterfuck of bad blood and backbiting.
Voters have been expressing concerns about Biden's age and mental acuity for years. Then his performance during the debate put a massive spotlight on those concerns and highlighted what his office has been trying to hide. I don't see this as a "negative dip." This a big crack in the dam, the start of an avalanche, a tsunami of shit - whatever you call it, it's really bad. We're already in epic clusterfuck territory.
The polling numbers after the debate are disastrous. 72% say his physical and mental abilities are a reason to vote against him. An impressive figure when you consider the fact that 30% of Americans believe literally anything. A majority of voters think they Democrats are better off running someone else. This is unprecedented.
How do Democrats expect to turn this around? I mean, it'd be one thing if he was actually popular, if this was the first time the public has felt uneasy about his mental faculties, or if he had been leading in the polls prior to the debate. But none of that is the case. Maybe they could turn things around if there are examples of Biden sounding sharp when speaking extemporaneously at any point in, I dunno, the last two years. But that isn't the case either!
Their job is to go out and tell people not to believe their eyes and ears. They're going to have convince millions of people that have seen firsthand what dementia looks like that they shouldn't be concerned about the way he speaks, looks, and sounds. They're going to have to tell people, "Hey, I know you don't want this guy, but you need to take him." WTF?
I know the lifeboat is scary, but I'll take it over the sinking ship 10 out of 10 times.
Unless you saw different poll numbers than I did, what that 72% of people said was that they didn't have confidence in his physical/mental health for the next 4 years, not that they wouldn't vote for him because of it.
That's what I'm basing that off of. And I guess I placed the emphasis in the wrong area when I said "his physical and mental abilities are a reason to vote against him" because I never meant to imply that 72% of people are voting against him because of his mental faculties.
But let's take a step back and look at what we're talking about. Until he proves otherwise, Biden's candidacy is going to be about whether or not he is senile. That wipes out any potential incumbent's advantage, and it takes all the focus off of Trump. Biden barely won in 2020 despite all the shenanigans Trump pulled, covid, mail-in voting, and clearly looking better than he does now.
About an hour ago, Karine Jean-Pierre was hounded by the press asking where Joe Biden is and why he hasn't made any public appearances to reassure voters, donors, and party leadership that he has what it takes to campaign. Her answer was he has a sit-down interview with ABC later this week. That's not very reassuring.
This is the exact same kind of arrogance that made Hillary lose to Trump in the first place but I guess if Biden is the only one the Democrats could muster to face a man so fake and unbelievable it's laughable they reap what they sow...unfortunate that means the US and the rest of the world have to suffer the consequences. It's exceptionally frustrating looking in from the outside.
If there was a strong secondary Democratic candidate nipping at Biden's heels, sure. This guy didn't even throw out a single suggestion for who would replace Biden, but even if he had, not a single one of the potential replacements that anyone has aired has raised a dollar that could legally be used to run a presidential campaign. For anyone who still cares about campaign law, that's an impossible hurdle to overcome.
Harris? From what I've read she should be able to use the money raised by the DNC if Biden chooses to drop out.
She's probably the only option because of that but I doubt she'll do well. She comes with a pile of baggage (as most prosecutors do) and has generally done poorly when put in the spotlight.
Sure, but in hypothetical matchups against Trump, Biden still does better than Harris. She's second best among everyone polled, but I'm not sure why dropping from best potential matchup to second best is worth it unless the polls really swing against Biden, and they don't seem to have done so yet.
This may no be longer be true.
Harris, and other potential replacements, are apparently now polling ahead of Biden in swing states according to some internal polling: https://puck.news/biden-plunges-in-swing-states-in-leaked-post-debate-poll/
Additionally, swing voters think he should drop out of the race by a 2-1 margin.
I think a case can be made for him to stay in, but it involves a near flawless performance from now until November. If you don’t think you can get that I think it might be prudent for the nomination to go to someone else.
A) That's paywalled, so I can't really speak to the linked article.
B) I'm not saying that Puck isn't reporting in good faith, but a media company initially funded by a private equity firm and an industrial conglomerate and run by the person who used to be head of advertising for Twitter is not who I'd go to for unbiased reporting on Biden and his chances.
C) A single leaked poll does not a trend make, especially not without being able to see the polling data. In fact, that sort of "leaked" "insider info" thing is exactly the kind of event that makes me believe that someone is just trying to fearmonger or push a particular narrative, especially when it comes from Puck, for the reasons I laid out in B.
Sorry, I would usually post an archive link but I’m on mobile at the moment :/
I don’t really have an opinion on Puck, but in this case it’s referring to an OpenLabs internal poll done for Biden’s Super PAC. If it’s being misrepresented by Puck, it would be pretty easy for the Biden camp to refute the story.
Trying to shut down what people are saying only ever really increases the attention on a story. Regardless of its veracity, I can't imagine Biden saying anything.
Regarding the article, here's the archived version and Here's the document.
Sadly, the document is only a summary of the poll and not the polling data itself. Maybe the debate really was the end for Biden, but we'll really just have to see what additional polling shows. The last week has had remarkable upsets since the debate, and I'm sure that things aren't going to stay just as they are over the next 4 months.
Another poll: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/03/upshot/poll-biden-trump-debate.html
Where I am/among the folks I know:
The independent folks are looking at it more hard-nosed in a way I haven't observed much before. Basically, "fuck it we ball I'm voting for biden no matter what, ya'll are crazy for trying to drop him now". They're seeing it from a more basic viewpoint - what's more survivable, basically. The liberals are freaking out and speculating like anyone could replace the guy without providing much justification that isn't just being regurgitated from stuff you've likely already seen/read. The conservatives have their guy, and a host of folk being pressured along with them in various ways. Interestingly, there's a segment of folks in the republican circles who are going to vote for Biden, but you will never hear them talk about it or get into it with folks. They too think it's crazy to consider dropping Biden at this point. They understand themselves as having to make a better call as a matter of personal principle, a lot of the time. I wonder about that a bit, because around where I live I have noticed some places stopped flying their Trump flags. I can't really go too deep on that because I just don't know, but that's not something I expected to see. Basically, the view from a rural southern town, in which the majority is not in the cult. It's pretty much shaking out that there's the cult, and then a coalition of center-right/center-left/left/unaffiliated crystallizing and they are all in on Biden. It really doesn't have much to do with either man when I talk to people, either it's blind loyalty to the mean one or a simple act of rationality going for the nice one.
As for the party, small wonder honestly. It's the classic difference playing out again - republicans always hold the line, democrats never hold the line. The more things change, the more they stay the same, I suppose, this time. I will clarify, I mean lawmakers and media folk, not your everyday voter. My impression of the everyday voter for a very long time is that they've never been properly represented, just to be straight. Republicans just delude themselves into wanting what's there, Democrats settle for what's there, independents are often depoliticized and otherwise belong to ideological lineages that aren't represented at all.
Personally I don't see this as a choice between "democracy" and "fascism" in the abstract. It's "inverted totalitarianism" in both instances, with this weird, highly unlikely glimmer of possibility should the nicer guy win. The moment we are in is a moment of that system buckling, and the shape that takes is folks actually having a kind of sway over the outcome they don't usually have. Trump is F-tier on the post-truth populist scale of competence, there's no way he lives out a time akin to Putin or something - people with power will want someone with more consistency, they'll find a hard-nosed replacement one way or another if the dude doesn't just up and die at some point. Biden is like the last vestige of the old ways, with no clear replacement and a party infrastructure that means it's unlikely we get someone much different from him. Regardless who wins, this is still a country facing multiple interconnected crises (and a global conflict) with much of its power cut up and divided between whichever corporate interests are most relevant to the specifics of the power in question. They had outsized control well before this whole saga began, they are what will last through either outcome of the election, and their challenge appears to be having to repair a veil that just got pierced in a very real way. Right now, it is more possible for the president to do a lot he could realistically do anyway, it is because it's on paper now that it means so much more. The paper means the other parts of the system can't fight it as simply, and in that, there is the glimmer. Of using that power to do things no one expected, that actually do return power to the hands of the everyday voter. That's why I've said before Biden's position right now is unique. I think it would be genuinely ridiculous for the party to ditch a man who demonstrated his relationship to power the way he did. He is a product of a system, like any of them he's got a whole host of shit in his history and he is coming down pretty fast on us, but when a big moment like that happened, dude did not immediately change.
I appreciate your write up as it both shares your personal experiences and doesn't just follow the same lines of argument everywhere else right now. I am especially curious about the Republican voters moving to Biden, but at the same time, not super surprised after seeing the last 3 and a half years.
Do you think these are the last two candidates of this generation? Who do you see brought forward in 2028? Not even thinking names, I'm just trying to think about what this system has created and who will be the newer political figures.
I do think it's the end of an era, might be the way to say it. I just can't help but look at it from a more "storybook" angle sometimes: Both men are ancient. Both are deteriorating quickly. They don't have clear replacements. They represent political lineages which barely hold answers for what lies ahead, lineages that did fail to prevent how the system became different. They lost control, but we don't live at the point where they have just lost it. We live at the beginning of the end of their failure.
I can divide it up:
Trump wins: I just don't see him getting a dynasty out of it. He's too easy to anger, and the bigger interests out there would have more of a license to do something extreme to rectify his existence when he inevitably tries to lash out at the wrong folks. There are wrong folks, and Trump's deteriorated mental state will only mean he gets dumber and more reckless. An election after him is just not something I think I can be very detailed about.
Biden wins: A really historic moment balloons pretty much to its fullest with this. Everything Biden does will matter a lot more, so he will determine a big chunk of the future, and that will determine the next candidate. I doubt he tears the system up, but if I'm gonna ride with the glimmer a minute, at best I think that means something resembling the past but with so much shit going on that those who will lead will be revealing themselves, we won't be picking them out I think. An election after him will really depend on how he uses his power, so much so that it's really hard to say who would come after that.
Either way, I don't see anything remotely like what we've had happening. It can't. There isn't a way to go back to sleep, the cult won't just disappear. We've had the internet for going on three generations working all kinds of things on people. We've had an education system fall pretty much apart. The war is escalating, and what I can understand about Russia is some pretty grim shit. It may not be the most successful play at going fascist but that is what is happening, because there's no other way to get a completely despondent/depoliticized polity to do something like fight a war for years. They do talk about it being a thing they do until they are no more, that's not some rare thing or a joke or something. The mechanisms are being used, the gears are turning, the system is producing. Against all of this, there's the rapid and unpredictable changes in the climate which will guarantee a gigantic shift in material conditions over time. America, being the inverted thing that it is, is about to have granddad go handle that. It's like when I start to consider the future in serious detail, it comes back to being so ridiculously absurd that my brain just stops. Anything could happen.
Edit: Sorry, I meant to add a little from a more systemic view. We have a rare opportunity to drastically alter a political formation that is built upon being depoliticized. Before it can recover, before it can harden or try to put the image back in place, we've got an opportunity that depends on a 20th century liberal acting very much out of character, against his lineage - a strange predicament.
Edit again: Sorry, I woke up with a thought and figured this is as good a place as any to include it. Pretending for a second, that democrats do replace Biden - that is a bet on chaos. Within chaos, leaders do arise, but you can't predict it much at all. In my opinion, given the sentiments I can observe, this would be just about as precarious a thing to do as you could. It would entirely depend on the presentation of it and the leader who appears, how that goes. The malign forces out there in the world make that bet all the time, it's part of what it means to be "Machiavellian". There's a quote from him about what Fortune is, what you must do with Fortune, that is downright disgusting but is adhered to pretty strongly in that world. If the democratic party makes this kind of bet, that will be a time when they will have to be as their enemies to meet with success - what I meant by having to be "out of character".
Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein reports many sources describe Biden cognitive bad days
Of course he has bad days, he's almost 80, he's over the average life span of an American already. That means a ton of Americans that were born the same time as him have already died. Humans deteriorate as they age, that's just a fact of life, I don't really understand the make believe land that they're trying to construct, like he's immune from the trudge of time. His bad days will get worse and with the weight of an entire country on him, who knows if he'll make it.
This could probably be its own post but unfortunately it's paywalled and an archive link doesn't circumvent the paywall so I'll just post it here because a decent amount is free-to-read:
https://www.messageboxnews.com/p/why-the-dem-panic-over-the-debate?r=27wr3&triedRedirect=true
For one, I would like to point out this is written by one of Obama's senior advisors. I think there are some liberals who'd like to pretend this is just the anti-liberal progressives who are jumping on Biden at an opportune time (and to be fair they certainly are) but that is definitely not the only factor.
But more importantly, I think it speaks to an important central point: where was Biden this last week?
After a debate performance like that, you need to convince the public it was a one-of and not what they're voting for at the ballot box. Biden should be on a media blitz right now, he should be on every talk show, doing interviews and press conferences. Instead the Biden team has circled the wagons. It seems highly likely they are protecting him and that they're worried this will happen again.
Hopefully I don't need to spell this out but ultimately, if Biden's health is impacting his ability to have conversations and process information, he should not be nominated. He will lose the election, possibly in a landslide. There is basically no benefit to sticking with him vs having Harris at the top of the ticket. I don't think Harris is a very good politician, but I do think she's better than running someone who is visibly senile.
I'm willing to give Biden the benefit of the doubt. At the end of this week he has a live interview scheduled. Next week he has the NATO summit. If he can demonstrate he's 'still got it' I think he should probably stay on. But if he stumbles again or he's hidden away again I think he'll quickly turn into an albatross in a very important campaign.
If you look at his schedule he's speaking and doing campaign events. He has never really gotten coverage of his events because IMO he isn't as "engaging" as coverage of Trump. I am one of those people that was relieved not to have to hear about what Trump randomly tweeted at 4 am when I woke up at 6. Its been part of the appeal, but the press really seems inclined not to cover him if there's not a scandal or he doesn't say something biting about Trump.
This isn't a lack of coverage issue. The news is laser focused on Biden post-debate.
Since the debate, he's not been in public without reading off a teleprompter. People need to be reassured we're talking about an episode rather than a condition. We'll probably find out more on Friday, but his lack of presence is somewhat alarming.
I know they've been focused post-debate - although in the scandal way, but this is not a new issue on their part. I get what you're saying; I'm just saying it fits perfectly in the bigger picture of coverage he's gotten. I have plenty of complaints about his PR team atm.
Breaking my own rule for a second because I'm curious, what do people think about Jon Ossoff as a potential replacement candidate for Biden?
I'm aware there are other potential candidates. I'm aware democrats would prefer to not give up a senate seat. I don't even know that much about Ossoff, but every time I read some version of the words "replace Joe Biden" Ossoff is the guy who pops into my head, and I don't even really know why.
So if anyone wouldn't mind taking the time to explain why and why not he would be a good candidate, I'd love to read your explanation.
He hasn't had the last 6 months to develop name recognition, a war chest, or anything. He may well be a fine candidate in some hypothetical election, but trying to bootstrap him to president with 4 months to go is a heck of a task.
Essentially my response is "who" and not because I'm being flip but because I vaguely recognize his name at best. Despite him being the senator from Georgia which I just had to go look up, despite being actively engaged in paying attention to that Senate campaign, I didn't connect the dots... How would he have the name recognition?
After looking him up, he has three years of political service and nothing notable during that time from a quick scan. I don't see the appeal of him for president to be quite honest. I do want a president with some amount of practical leadership experience and ability to build a strong team. He doesn't have that. Had he been in politics since he was 22 or something, he'd have 15 years of experience to build from.
I think the options at this point are really Biden or Harris. I wouldn't particularly say I'm a fan of either, but to drop the incumbent ~140 days before the election and then pass over his VP (a black woman, fwiw) for anyone else would be horrible horrible optics and sure to splinter the party. It's Biden or Harris. Most likely it will be Biden.
I do agree that it's probably not a great idea to drop Biden this late, and it probably should have been slow rolled for a while in advance. There was part of his campaign that hinted at him being a one term president just to hold the line for a newer generation, but that has clearly been forgotten.
I just feel this is a failure of the system. I am not happy with either candidates age, and I think both are showing signs that they are old enough to warrant severe questioning of their abilities, and that they should be replaced by younger candidates. I don't think we should be in the position where there is a very real risk of a head of state dying in office from old age. I also don't like that that is a regular cause for turnover in the Supreme Court.
He’s a senator in a state that may not elect a Democrat if he leaves. That’s a very compelling reason against having him as a presidential/VP candidate.
I dunno, while Georgia is a very red state, I think a lot of political analysis heavily undervalues the black vote in the South, and how I hope many other voters could be swayed if actual working class policies were something politicians campaigned on again, instead of just immigration and hate.
I'd much rather see someone like Gretchen Whitmer or Gavin Newsom or Jared Polis. Someone who has a higher profile, and preferably executive experience as a governor. I'd even take Pete Buttigieg, since he leads the DoT.
But when's the last time anyone mentioned anything about Ossoff after the 2020-2021 elections he was in? As a senator, and one who's not from my state, I feel like I haven't heard much from or about him since. There are many other Dem senators I hear about, aside from Chuck Schumer, but Ossoff isn't one of them.
I'm sure Ossoff could be a good candidate. But it'd be in a future election where he's running not as a potential last minute replacement.
I'd rather elect a governor or a congressperson. The Senate is nearly evenly split and we need all democratic senators who are incumbents to stay there or risk losing the majority
77 year old from Texas says Biden should step down. Pot meet kettle.