What a disaster. Democratic Party shenanigans booted Bernie Sanders and installed Hillary Clinton, thus gifting the presidency to Trump in 2016. Democratic Party shenanigans prevented the public...
What a disaster.
Democratic Party shenanigans booted Bernie Sanders and installed Hillary Clinton, thus gifting the presidency to Trump in 2016.
Democratic Party shenanigans prevented the public from seeing the reality of Biden's old-fogeyness until it might be too late to do anything about it, thus gifting to Trump the presidency in 2024.
And the world will suffer for it. I hope I'm wrong.
I don't know what the right course of action is but I can guarantee two things: If Biden stays in the race and loses, it'll be the biggest strategic misstep in modern political history. An...
I don't know what the right course of action is but I can guarantee two things:
If Biden stays in the race and loses, it'll be the biggest strategic misstep in modern political history. An unforced error that irreparably damages global society. Every single political pundit and commentator will talk about how stupid it was to let Biden stay in the race.
And if Biden steps down and the new Democrat loses, it'll be the biggest strategic misstep in modern political history. An unforced error that irreparably damages global society. Every single political pundit and commentator will talk about how stupid it was to push Biden out of the race.
Yeah at this point I do agree with that. I suspect that if Biden had never decided to run for a second term, that it wouldn't be viewed that way at least. Granted I am sure some would still...
Yeah at this point I do agree with that.
I suspect that if Biden had never decided to run for a second term, that it wouldn't be viewed that way at least. Granted I am sure some would still criticize it, because incumbents do have some advantages and giving up incumbent advantage might be seen as a strategic misstep, but I don't think it would have been as roundly criticized even if Democrats lost to Trump in that scenario.
I think it would have been more expected because he mentioned he was a 'transition' option before and his age is obviously catching up to him. He probably wouldn't have to carefully play up his energy in public showings if he had resigned himself to one term, he'd probably look a lot more like the debate Biden and even less would question his decision to stick with one term. It'd also look wise for him in the sense that he would have had the self awareness to recognize his limitations.
Also had he stuck with it from the beginning that he was going to only do one term, they probably would have better prepared another candidate to step up at this point, rather than scrambling at the last minute to replace Biden's failed attempt at going for a second term.
I don't actually think there would be that much criticism over it. People had already largely assumed that Biden would be a one term president, and during the 2020 primaries they essentially tried...
I suspect that if Biden had never decided to run for a second term, that it wouldn't be viewed that way at least. Granted I am sure some would still criticize it, because incumbents do have some advantages and giving up incumbent advantage might be seen as a strategic misstep
I don't actually think there would be that much criticism over it. People had already largely assumed that Biden would be a one term president, and during the 2020 primaries they essentially tried to force Biden to say that he would be a one term president. His 2020 primary platform was basically "I'm the only one that can beat Trump" with policy largely being secondary. People voted for him during the 2020 general, because he wasn't Trump. He never seemed to be a two term president.
I was a big supporter of Sanders in 2016, but looking back, is absolutely no way he could have realistically won the presidency if he had been the Democratic nominee. What's weird is that I think...
I was a big supporter of Sanders in 2016, but looking back, is absolutely no way he could have realistically won the presidency if he had been the Democratic nominee.
What's weird is that I think Trump is even worse than Biden when it comes to mental ability. Have you heard Trump talk for more than a sentence? Sometimes the words that come out of his mouth are literal gibberish and make no sense. The only difference is that he has this weird ability to keep talking and not pause, making him look "strong" compared to Biden, who speaks a lot slower and more deliberately.
Why not? He did well in the primaries and polled well amongst people that ended up voting for Trump. We'll never know for sure and I won't argue that he likely would have won, but it doesn't feel...
Why not? He did well in the primaries and polled well amongst people that ended up voting for Trump. We'll never know for sure and I won't argue that he likely would have won, but it doesn't feel like "absolutely" territory for me.
A significant number of his voters were more anti-Clinton than pro-Sanders, and Clinton avoided playing dirty with him to avoid alienating his base. If he'd gotten the nomination, the GOP in...
A significant number of his voters were more anti-Clinton than pro-Sanders, and Clinton avoided playing dirty with him to avoid alienating his base. If he'd gotten the nomination, the GOP in partnership with the corporate media would have launched a withering assault on all his untested vulnerabilities -- the "rape essay", his honeymoon in the USSR, the "deadbeat dad that never worked a real job" narrative, his wife's college financial affairs, video of him saying M4A would raise taxes, his self-identified socialism, etc., etc., etc. He would have been the American version of Jeremy Corbyn. And the failure of his "political revolution" to manifest in the primaries in 2016 and 2020 suggest there would not have been any real groundswell of support had he been the nominee.
There’s anecdotes that float around about GOP operatives saying they had a feet-thick binder full of opposition research on Sanders. Even if that’s an exaggeration, the GOP would’ve had a field...
There’s anecdotes that float around about GOP operatives saying they had a feet-thick binder full of opposition research on Sanders. Even if that’s an exaggeration, the GOP would’ve had a field day with what they had. Additionally, @Jordan117 is correct in that many voters in 2016 were more anti-Hillary than pro-Sanders. Compare the Michigan primary results in 2016 and 2020, there is a big drop-off in Sanders support.
Both political parties have binders of research for any opposition candidate. Every candidate has something that should take them down (Trump??) when you phrase it like that, but in the end,...
Both political parties have binders of research for any opposition candidate. Every candidate has something that should take them down (Trump??) when you phrase it like that, but in the end, whether or not voters even care is hard to tell. If you told me in 2015 that Sanders used the phrase "You can do anything. ... Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything", I would 100% believe that it would tank his campaign. Yet, Trump said it and nothing happened.
I wouldn't compare 2016 and 2020 Michigan primary results. First, there's a bunch more candidates that muddy the water. Maybe people are pro-Sanders > Clinton, but pro-Biden > Sanders? Or maybe 2020 Sanders is less appealing*? Consider that Sanders did better in Nevada, and that would negate that he did worse in Michigan in terms of "he did worse in Michigan, therefore people didn't actually like Sanders". Else, you'd have to then equally hold in your head "he did better in Nevada, therefore people actually did like Sanders". That said, it's possible people were voting Sanders as anti-Clinton, but I'm sure there's better ways to measure that with pre-2020 data.
* I was a big Bernie supporter in 2016 and only mildly put him over Biden in 2020.
Yeah, Democrats need to restructure and respond to this realignment towards populism that the Republicans were forced into. It's a damn shame that each and every election is an extensional threat,...
Yeah, Democrats need to restructure and respond to this realignment towards populism that the Republicans were forced into. It's a damn shame that each and every election is an extensional threat, so them having a learning experience means that the Republicans can go full throttle on remaking the government to their own ends.
It's weird to complain about Democratic Party shenanigans overriding the Will of the People and then implying that the preferred outcome here would be for the Democratic Party Elites to override...
It's weird to complain about Democratic Party shenanigans overriding the Will of the People and then implying that the preferred outcome here would be for the Democratic Party Elites to override the will of primary voters and install someone else at the last minute.
It wasn't a contested primary. I've seen accounts by donors and politicians that Biden didn't recognize them at events while being familiar in the past. The correct action depends on the nature of...
It wasn't a contested primary.
I've seen accounts by donors and politicians that Biden didn't recognize them at events while being familiar in the past.
The correct action depends on the nature of the problem and it is really hard to tell from the outside.
Sanders was actively seeking a contested convention. Which donors? Which politicians? The problem is that every public statement by the people who are advocating for this the loudest indicates...
Sanders was actively seeking a contested convention.
Which donors? Which politicians?
The problem is that every public statement by the people who are advocating for this the loudest indicates that they have zero clue how all of this will actually work, mechanically. AOC pointed this out. It's a huge problem and going "Biden steps down, ?????, we win" isn't convincing anyone.
If Biden is actually failing mentally, then Biden stays in and we either lose or we have a 25th amendment situation or Dr Jill runs the country like Mrs Wilson did after Woodrow's stroke. I will...
If Biden is actually failing mentally, then Biden stays in and we either lose or we have a 25th amendment situation or Dr Jill runs the country like Mrs Wilson did after Woodrow's stroke.
I will see if I can find the articles I saw. I wasn't taking notes
Reading these articles over the last few days it really feels like he'd already decided to step down and they are just laying the groundwork to the announcement that Kamala is the new nominee. But...
Reading these articles over the last few days it really feels like he'd already decided to step down and they are just laying the groundwork to the announcement that Kamala is the new nominee.
But even if no one is announced to be the new nominee right away I don't think it will be long now until he makes a speech that he's no longer running.
Edit: I was right (about him stepping down at least), but I still need to disconnect from politics for my own mental health.
I feel covid might have sealed it. He's a really old man with covid, and even if he recovers perfectly, he can't campaign anymore in the short term, and he really really needs to, vigorously.
I feel covid might have sealed it. He's a really old man with covid, and even if he recovers perfectly, he can't campaign anymore in the short term, and he really really needs to, vigorously.
Sorry, I should've been more specific. I didn't mean speeches to the faithful and teleprompter conferences. That's easy, he could always do that. I mean back to back non-stop unscripteded...
Sorry, I should've been more specific. I didn't mean speeches to the faithful and teleprompter conferences. That's easy, he could always do that. I mean back to back non-stop unscripteded interviews with unfriendly (and unfair) networks, like Fox and the rest.
We were losing badly before the debate, we were losing really badly after the debate, and now it's day after day where an elected Democrat publicly is seen to lose confidence in him. Whatever he's doing, it's not vigorous enough, not even close.
Yes, I've been following. Not enough, and they haven't been good. I feel that this is devolving into questioning each other's good faith, so I'll be disengaging now.
Yes, I've been following. Not enough, and they haven't been good.
I feel that this is devolving into questioning each other's good faith, so I'll be disengaging now.
These articles are a lot of Twitter addled press trying to manifest what they want to see. It’s basically ONLY on Twitter and the press that you see this, nowhere else. This whole sequence has...
These articles are a lot of Twitter addled press trying to manifest what they want to see. It’s basically ONLY on Twitter and the press that you see this, nowhere else.
This whole sequence has been a clear indicator that social media algorithms have profoundly screwed up the brains of everyone in the media. The level of unsourced gossip being passed off as vetted news is journalistic malpractice for click farming. And even the Democratic pols are falling into it, the tail is wagging the dog. They’re leaking random anxiety texts to the press instead of controlling the media cycle they’ve surrendered to it completely in panic.
I been thinking about your comment for a little while and it caused me to have a realization: I'm doing the same thing I was doing before the 2016 and 2020 elections which is constantly scrolling,...
I been thinking about your comment for a little while and it caused me to have a realization: I'm doing the same thing I was doing before the 2016 and 2020 elections which is constantly scrolling, reading and ingesting every bit of news, rumor or theory so I can figure out where the truth lies. And by doing so it is causing me to have much more erractic thoughts, anxiety, depression and feelings of being overwhelmed, just as it did before the other elections.
And you know what? I'm no closer to any truth than I was before, and end up just spinning my internal wheels. Time to get off the ride for a bit and try to focus on something else, thanks for your post.
Honestly the intensity of people’s feelings on this on Vichy Twitter are so different from what I see on BlueSky or Mastodon or even Threads. I think Twitter itself is overstuffed with these...
Honestly the intensity of people’s feelings on this on Vichy Twitter are so different from what I see on BlueSky or Mastodon or even Threads. I think Twitter itself is overstuffed with these journalism/media insiders and the algorithm is weighted to Elon’s preferences that’s really geared to get people wound up.
Elsewhere it seems like most people are just anxious about having a path forward instead of a yolo flipping of the apple cart. Circling wagons around Biden or replacing him matters less than just shutting the hell up and moving forward.
One thing to note from the 2020 primary is that he was discounted early on, but his campaign was the least Twitter brained of everyone which led to a chronic underestimation of his strength of Black and older voters that coasted him to the nomination. We gotta hope that holds again. It bad for our collective ability to read reality when all the journalists are addicted to this dogshit website.
This convo is exactly me since the debate. Panic, anxiety, dread, then onto threads or xitter to doom scroll, wash, rinse, repeat. But now I am worried the endless narrative will spill over into...
We gotta hope that holds again. It bad for our collective ability to read reality when all the journalists are addicted to this dogshit website.
This convo is exactly me since the debate. Panic, anxiety, dread, then onto threads or xitter to doom scroll, wash, rinse, repeat. But now I am worried the endless narrative will spill over into meat space in a bad way because some of these "twitter brained" pols are also getting panic from the donor class, and big flashy op-eds are so bad. I am so so curious what's happening inside the Biden campaign about trying to reign this all in.
This. David Shor (Blue Rose Research) and his crypto bro buddies are running around waving cash and/or bad polling data in the faces of anyone they can convince to stab Biden in the back....
This. David Shor (Blue Rose Research) and his crypto bro buddies are running around waving cash and/or bad polling data in the faces of anyone they can convince to stab Biden in the back.
With the caveat that there’s a lot I don’t know about politics, I’m wondering why an open convention would be a disaster. I think it’s too soon to say what it would be like. Sure, historically,...
With the caveat that there’s a lot I don’t know about politics, I’m wondering why an open convention would be a disaster. I think it’s too soon to say what it would be like. Sure, historically, open conventions were not the kind of choreographed pageantry we expect nowadays, but wouldn’t that also mean they’re more fun to watch? Politicians would have to make speeches that matter. Imagine the ratings. It’s like a reality TV show. Has there been an open convention on live TV? Even if it’s somehow determined through back room negotiations, maybe it would be smart not to reveal that.
Nearly all delegates expected to be at the convention to back Biden. If they have to pick someone else, are they really going to deadlock?
What matters is that after the convention, the party is unified on a candidate. They’re going to have to hit the ground running.
With the same caveat, I'm bullish something like this could end up being a slam dunk for democrats winning the presidency. I've read a lot of very well written and thought out arguments here on...
Sure, historically, open conventions were not the kind of choreographed pageantry we expect nowadays, but wouldn’t that also mean they’re more fun to watch? Politicians would have to make speeches that matter.
With the same caveat, I'm bullish something like this could end up being a slam dunk for democrats winning the presidency. I've read a lot of very well written and thought out arguments here on Tildes about Biden being the only potential candidate. Anyone else seems to lack the apparently vital trio of "name recognition", campaign warchest, and popularity.
The thing is, I feel pretty good about the right candidate being able to surmount all three of those obstacles, assuming the right candidate actually exists.
I'm voting for whoever or whatever the democrats nominate. If that's Biden, that's fine with me. If it's a crusty sock, I'll still vote for it. I have been trying really hard not to think too much about this election because I've already made my main voting decision.
And yet I can't help but think what democrats really need right now is a candidate that's much younger and a much better orator. When was the last time we had a president that you could actually call a great orator? Obama was good, but I don't think he was great. Bless Bush's heart, he tried his best. Was it Kennedy? Roosevelt?
Seriously, just put forward someone who is young-ish and can own their words. The information age will take care of everything else and Trump, Vance, and co will be left shitting their pants. (Or at least that's my fantasy.)
I just don't know man. Everyone seems to be very doom and gloom about this election now, but I don't buy it. Maybe I'm naive, maybe I just don't have any other choice, but I think these lowest moments are the best opportunities for moon shots.
Oof man, Obama is the absolute best orator of modern times in English speaking politics. Not to talk about the actions that follow, but he really is; he inspired a huge wave of both citizens and...
Obama was good, but I don't think he was great
Oof man, Obama is the absolute best orator of modern times in English speaking politics. Not to talk about the actions that follow, but he really is; he inspired a huge wave of both citizens and even other presidents (Macron especially visibly takes from him).
And nah… your fantasy is what it is. Maybe it would work but you have to remember there’s plenty of very Information Age agencies out there propping up republicans (here’s what it looks like: https://targetedvictory.com/)
Honestly I might be sleeping on Obama a bit, let’s give it a few more years then come back to review again. I’m fine with that. I have no skin in this pre-electoral game. Like I said, I already...
Honestly I might be sleeping on Obama a bit, let’s give it a few more years then come back to review again.
And nah… your fantasy is what it is.
I’m fine with that. I have no skin in this pre-electoral game. Like I said, I already know who I’m voting for. My entire attitude towards all of this prior to Election Day is to think and write and talk about it as nonchalantly and jovially as possible. I have zero interest having arguments about any of this or letting it bother any more than an errant fantasy might.
The amount of doomerism I've been seeing online about the polls in July about this election has genuinely surprised me. Biden is down like 2-5 points depending on what polls you look at. Obviously...
The amount of doomerism I've been seeing online about the polls in July about this election has genuinely surprised me. Biden is down like 2-5 points depending on what polls you look at. Obviously that is not great, and I understand the stakes at play here. Even then, it feels like people have just collectively forgotten 2022, when Democrats were consistently polling behind Republicans yet ended up over performing, or the previous elections where polls have notoriously been difficult to interpret. Polling within the margin of error in the middle of July before the convention should not be grounds for panic.
Now, I get that the situation here is a bit different. The main concern with Biden is his age, and that is fundamentally something that he can't address or turn around. The initial panic was sparked by his horrible debate performance, but if that was truly an "off night" he and his campaign could have demonstrated this by having multiple decisive interviews and news conferences to demonstrate that his age was not an issue. The fact that they tried this and it has not assuaged concerns is an indication that his age is an issue, and the debate simply revealed that. The lackluster damage control after the debate has done as much to cement this image of Biden as did the performance itself. This is coming from someone who thinks his press conference and interviews weren't bad, too. With all of that in mind, I feel like the calculus within the party at the moment is that it would be better to run someone (i.e. Kamala) who can run on Biden's record, which is pretty good and there's a lot there, but not have this intrinsic albatross around the neck. Impossible to tell now how it plays out, but I just want a definitive end to the this saga so the focus can turn back to defeating Trump.
Every move he makes now is getting heavily scrutinized, and boy does he look old. Maybe he always has done over the last couple of years, but I can't stop seeing it now. He's doddery, infirm and...
The fact that they tried this and it has not assuaged concerns is an indication that his age is an issue, and the debate simply revealed that.
Every move he makes now is getting heavily scrutinized, and boy does he look old. Maybe he always has done over the last couple of years, but I can't stop seeing it now. He's doddery, infirm and slow. I think everyone is seeing this now, and it's only a matter of time before he steps aside. I can't believe he wasn't advised to do it earlier, but I think they genuinely thought he could beat Trump again. It's looking less likely by the day, however.
Neither can I. As in, I literally do not believe that there were not influential people close to Biden telling him not to run. His numbers were already bad before he made the announcement. The...
I can't believe he wasn't advised to do it earlier
Neither can I. As in, I literally do not believe that there were not influential people close to Biden telling him not to run. His numbers were already bad before he made the announcement. The economic situation was worse than it is today. He had already had a rocky first two years before Republicans took control of the House, and the clusterfuck there gave him the perfect opportunity to bow out while the GOP's inability to legislate was more recently on everyone's minds. To say nothing about his age being a factor from day one.
No, I think Biden chose to run in spite of internal opposition to the idea, and did so out of hubris.
I mean, Trump is a convicted felon who tried to over throw the government. In any other election in our nations history it wouldn’t even be a contest. Why wouldn’t they assume Biden could beat him...
I mean, Trump is a convicted felon who tried to over throw the government. In any other election in our nations history it wouldn’t even be a contest. Why wouldn’t they assume Biden could beat him again? Im a progressive and have generally been pretty happy with Biden, he’s trailing behind Trump because of self-inflicted wounds, not because Trump has a vision for the country that people are resonating with. I think Biden stepping down revitalizes with campaign against Trump.
You can't stop seeing it because there is literally a 24/7 news cycle dedicated to publishing multiple articles per day about how old he is. Meanwhile Trump rambled his way through a boring, slow,...
You can't stop seeing it because there is literally a 24/7 news cycle dedicated to publishing multiple articles per day about how old he is.
Meanwhile Trump rambled his way through a boring, slow, and low-energy speech at the RNC and there hasn't been a single article about him seeming old and tired.
Biden might "only" be 2-5 points behind (a sizeable gap in this polarized era), but he's been down that much consistently, for a year, and even the most seismic events have barely moved the...
Biden might "only" be 2-5 points behind (a sizeable gap in this polarized era), but he's been down that much consistently, for a year, and even the most seismic events have barely moved the needle. Polling is clear that both candidates are deeply unpopular, in Biden's case primarily because of his age and acuity concerns. You can't fix that, and it speaks directly to his ability to campaign and do the job. And there's zero indication Biden or his team have what it takes to turn that around.
Not only is he down two points, he’s down two points despite a large wing of his own party in revolt against him, the entire press corps egging them on like degenerate gamblers at a cockfight, and...
Biden is down like 2-5 points depending on what polls you look at
Not only is he down two points, he’s down two points despite a large wing of his own party in revolt against him, the entire press corps egging them on like degenerate gamblers at a cockfight, and the party’s major donors doing a full court press to push him out. Meanwhile his opponent survived an assassination attempt and got an epic PR photo out of it.
And this has led to Biden being down by two fricking points and any alternative candidate or generic democrat polling, at best, 1 or 2 points better than him despite no negative attacks levied against them yet and often with adjustments for name recognition included (which sort of begs away the incumbency advantage being given up).
This is an insane panic over nothing. And when you bring it up the “Biden should drop out” people lean on catastrophizing exaggerations like “he literally can’t speak!” Social media has people in an alternate reality where they’re ONLY looking at Biden instead of thinking about what the actual choice is they’re making.
He's down by maybe 2 points at best nationally, but thanks to the structure of the electoral college he needs to be ahead by around 2-3 points to have even odds of winning. Clinton won by 2% but...
He's down by maybe 2 points at best nationally, but thanks to the structure of the electoral college he needs to be ahead by around 2-3 points to have even odds of winning. Clinton won by 2% but lost the EC decisively, while Biden won by 4.5% and only barely won the EC by a few tens of thousands of votes in the swing states. So if he's behind a few points in the popular vote nationally, or even tied, that leads to an easy Trump win, which is born out by all the state polling showing him 5+ points behind in every battleground.
That’s just what being down by 2 translates to in swing states. If he made that up to be up by two his state level polling would shift dramatically as well. The down ballot senate races are...
That’s just what being down by 2 translates to in swing states. If he made that up to be up by two his state level polling would shift dramatically as well.
The down ballot senate races are strongly D leaning and there remain lots of undecideds so there is a strong argument to be made that as economic outlooks improve and rates cut the undecideds will drift back and commit.
This is an argument for replacing Biden. In an environment where every other D is doing well, Biden is behind, sometimes by 7+ points compared to down ballot candidates. Relying on a rate cut that...
The down ballot senate races are strongly D leaning and there remain lots of undecideds so there is a strong argument to be made that as economic outlooks improve and rates cut the undecideds will drift back and commit.
This is an argument for replacing Biden. In an environment where every other D is doing well, Biden is behind, sometimes by 7+ points compared to down ballot candidates. Relying on a rate cut that may or may not come or an economy that, despite being alright, has horrendous 'vibes' is not a great plan.
Ultimately for me, where there's smoke, there is fire. We wouldn't be at a spot where pretty much every major D is working behind the scenes to convince Biden to step down otherwise. I find it hilarious that on Twitter the most recent (astroturfed?) campaign is to paint this as some sort of conspiracy orchestrated by Rs. People have eyes, you guys.
Every other D at the top of the ticket does similarly though, even when adjusted for name ID. And that “name ID adjustment” involves being introduced with a paragraph of praise so they have a...
This is an argument for replacing Biden. In an environment where every other D is doing well, Biden is behind, sometimes by 7+ points compared to down ballot candidates.
Every other D at the top of the ticket does similarly though, even when adjusted for name ID. And that “name ID adjustment” involves being introduced with a paragraph of praise so they have a significant advantage in those polls.
Ultimately for me, where there's smoke, there is fire. We wouldn't be at a spot where pretty much every major D is working behind the scenes to convince Biden to step down otherwise.
With political media there often is nothing there but smoke. This “where there’s smoke there’s fire” phrase was something I heard many times regarding the Swiftboat Vets for Truth ads, and it’s just a framework for gullibility and credulousness.
People have eyes, you guys.
People’s eyes only look where the media is pointing. And the media points where your anxiety spikes.
or an economy that, despite being alright, has horrendous 'vibes' is not a great plan.
The economy is good enough to be worth 10 points by itself. It’s more than “alright.”
I am forever reminded that eyewitness testimony is factually and without question the worst evidence. Forget bias, our memories are just not nearly as good as we think they are, and people broadly...
People have eyes
I am forever reminded that eyewitness testimony is factually and without question the worst evidence. Forget bias, our memories are just not nearly as good as we think they are, and people broadly and often overestimate their own analytic ability.
I'll say this, though, I don't think it's a Republican conspiracy, I think it's just a bunch of self-interested parties doing what they do. Crypto guys want the money and no taxes, media loves the ad-dollars and clicks because they can't compete with social media, Dems are anxious and worried, and the MAGA base is happy to cheer on anything that makes their guy strong and everyone else weak.
The idea that a large portion of the Democrats, including their leadership, are trying to remove their candidate because of what the media or people on Twitter are saying is ridiculous. This isn’t...
The idea that a large portion of the Democrats, including their leadership, are trying to remove their candidate because of what the media or people on Twitter are saying is ridiculous.
This isn’t just some people being anxious — this is a lot of people who do this for a living deciding this is the best path forwards to winning an election.
Polling for hypothetical candidates is kind of terrible for a lot of very obvious reasons — the reality is that no one knows how Harris or whoever would poll against Trump but we do know how Biden...
Polling for hypothetical candidates is kind of terrible for a lot of very obvious reasons — the reality is that no one knows how Harris or whoever would poll against Trump but we do know how Biden is polling and it’s really bad relative to how he should be doing.
The idea that all of this is just smoke seems like a pretty wild assertion. Something is convincing a significant fraction of the Democrats that this slightly hostile takeover is their best option. I don’t believe that’s just because of media induced panic but even if you do — that panic is not going anywhere. If Biden stays, every slip up, every gaffe is going to be firehosed at people for the rest of the election campaign. You can think that’s wrong or whatever, but that is the reality.
Biden's errors raise doubts and fears about his basic mental acuity and competence because of his age. Reading reddit threads about the debate I saw so many jokes about sundowning, needing to be...
Biden's errors raise doubts and fears about his basic mental acuity and competence because of his age. Reading reddit threads about the debate I saw so many jokes about sundowning, needing to be in bed before eight pm, dementia generally, needing to take car keys from Grandpa etc
Reddit is a complex mess. However I don't believe so many different donors and elected officials would be advocating for Biden to step down if there wasn't a serious problem. Like many people I...
Reddit is a complex mess. However I don't believe so many different donors and elected officials would be advocating for Biden to step down if there wasn't a serious problem.
Like many people I have personal experience with family members who gradually lost mental capacity due to age. It happens.
I could say a lot more about the debate and the press conferences and the demands of being chief executive officer and commander in chief but I am going to stop. I will say that being a successful candidate is a very different job than being a successful president.
I'm apt to agree, especially with the very last part. Frame it like pulling all the voters together to spit fire right in the face of disaster, through an underdog. Biden having had a rough go...
I'm apt to agree, especially with the very last part. Frame it like pulling all the voters together to spit fire right in the face of disaster, through an underdog. Biden having had a rough go might enhance the effect, even. I can't say I'd bet a lot on the party actually doing it but it would be pretty awesome to see. Give folks something to remember if nothing else.
If the times have proven anything, it's that anything is possible, might as well take the hardest shot after all the shit that's gone on.
Why would giving Democratic Superdelegates the sole ability to decide the next Presidential nominee be the epitome of listening to voters? These are the superdelegates that threw their weight...
Why would giving Democratic Superdelegates the sole ability to decide the next Presidential nominee be the epitome of listening to voters?
These are the superdelegates that threw their weight behind Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders before any primary voting even began!
Why would folks trust them to carry out the Will of the People?
Any open convention would be voted by the regular delegates from around the country first, who are primarily loyal to Biden and would likely give it to Harris on the first ballot. Superdelegates...
Any open convention would be voted by the regular delegates from around the country first, who are primarily loyal to Biden and would likely give it to Harris on the first ballot. Superdelegates only come into play on later ballots if there's no majority.
It's how the DNC has worked since 2016. First ballot, only the regular delegates vote. If they can't reach a majority for one candidate, superdelegates come into play for subsequent ballots.
It's how the DNC has worked since 2016. First ballot, only the regular delegates vote. If they can't reach a majority for one candidate, superdelegates come into play for subsequent ballots.
My understanding is that if it is to be an "open" convention the delegates are released and able to vote for whoever they want, so it is not as certain that the first vote would go to Biden but it...
My understanding is that if it is to be an "open" convention the delegates are released and able to vote for whoever they want, so it is not as certain that the first vote would go to Biden but it is obviously still possible. The specific wording in the party rules is
All delegates to the national convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.
This is understood by some at least to mean that delegates are free to vote for a candidate other than the winner of their state's primary, should circumstances require it. In the extreme case that a candidate died after the primary but before the convention, no one would expect delegates to vote for a deceased person. Personally, unless Biden declares he is not running I cannot see a mass defection of delegates under this reasoning unless something extreme happened. But it is technically possible that enough people defect so that the first ballot will not go to Biden, in which case superdelegates can become relevant.
I've been thinking the same. An open convention with real stakes on the line (whoever wins gets to run for President!) actually sounds like it could potentially build a surge of momentum and...
Sure, historically, open conventions were not the kind of choreographed pageantry we expect nowadays, but wouldn’t that also mean they’re more fun to watch? Politicians would have to make speeches that matter. Imagine the ratings. It’s like a reality TV show.
I've been thinking the same. An open convention with real stakes on the line (whoever wins gets to run for President!) actually sounds like it could potentially build a surge of momentum and enthusiasm in the run-up to November. This drama around Biden and the possibility that he could be replaced with a younger, "more exciting" candidate has had me glued to US election news for the first time in months. I'm not sure if that's just because I'm casually into politics (maybe the non-voters we need to bring in wouldn't care), but I feel like there's a real possibility that this could turn into a spectacle--in a good way.
People love drama!
Harnessing that energy could be really dangerous, but it could also be very powerful. "Biden's getting dumped! The President is getting dumped?! And now they're holding a lightning round mini-election to replace him???" I think people will pay attention.
"Ability to defeat Trump" needs to be the top criterion for choosing a new candidate though. It can't be "who's kissed the most ass and won the most favours?" among Democrat insiders. You also need to make sure no one becomes so toxic in the convention that you can't get people to rally around them after the selection is complete.
Done right, I think this could go well.
Let me add three disclaimers: 1) I'm not American, and 2) I actually like Joe Biden and think he's done good work in a post-COVID America; I'm sorry to see him going out like this, and 3) like you, "there's a lot I don't know about politics".
It wouldn't be a "disaster." The objection, and the position the Democrat elite take, is an open convention would be uncontrolled. Unpredictable. Rather than being something they (the core...
It wouldn't be a "disaster."
The objection, and the position the Democrat elite take, is an open convention would be uncontrolled. Unpredictable. Rather than being something they (the core strategists of the DNC) had planned and prepared and managed and handled. Something that was fully in their grasp at every single moment and step along the way.
Every single objection to letting the voters (either general or the DNC voters) pick a replacement basically boils down to that lack of control at some point. The elites apparently would rather see Trump win than fix a disaster of the DNC's making.
Even if one grants the concern of the DNC elite, it's still their fault! They had four years to prep other candidates. Four years to lay groundwork and introduce them to the nation, four years to ensure one of the two national political parties of America had other candidates who would be (internally as well as in the eyes of the public) ready and welcome to step in.
And they didn't. They failed. Quite spectacularly.
330+ million people in the country. Even if you take out all the non-natural citizens, you still have literally hundreds of millions of potential candidates that could've been identified and briefed and introduced to the public, standing by. But now, here we are, a double handful of weeks before an election that's likely going to determine the course of the country for the next several decades, and they're like "oh no, what do we do?"
At some point, you have to wonder if they're fucking up on purpose. If it's part of the plan, to leave everyone so without options, pushed right to the edge of disaster. If it's not purposeful, then it's negligent or inept.
But any scenario where they truly mean well, truly did attempt to "give their all and do their best", and ended up in this position where they're scrambling to figure out the damn ticket ... I would love to hear the truth that explains it's not purposeful, negligent, or inept. That's a story worthy of a movie.
This is such a completely wrong read of the situation you seem to be using as a soap box. The ‘DNC elite’ in this case are seemingly split between open convention and a Harris nom.
The objection, and the position the Democrat elite take, is an open convention would be uncontrolled. Unpredictable. Rather than being something they (the core strategists of the DNC) had planned and prepared and managed and handled. Something that was fully in their grasp at every single moment and step along the way.
This is such a completely wrong read of the situation you seem to be using as a soap box.
The ‘DNC elite’ in this case are seemingly split between open convention and a Harris nom.
The convention has turned into an occasion to introduce a candidate to the public and present the party’s platform and agenda. An open convention takes that free media exposure and uses it to have...
With the caveat that there’s a lot I don’t know about politics, I’m wondering why an open convention would be a disaster.
The convention has turned into an occasion to introduce a candidate to the public and present the party’s platform and agenda. An open convention takes that free media exposure and uses it to have competing candidates publicly ripping into each other. Instead of a convention bounce you get a convention cut.
And that’s the best case scenario where it goes smoothly. The more likely scenario is single issue activist groups start raising a rukus that looks terrible and makes the party look like a disorganized clusterfuck or an outright riot.
Said this in the weekly thread already, but the Dems are out of good decisions to make at this point. An open convention with no heir apparent would be a chaotic mess that would completely chuck...
Said this in the weekly thread already, but the Dems are out of good decisions to make at this point.
An open convention with no heir apparent would be a chaotic mess that would completely chuck the Democratic primary out the window, would not spare any candidate a thrashing, and the only price would be straight into battle with the beloved of his party and his base, Donald Trump.
Biden staying in is a triple dog dare to the base not to stay home and may play better with swing voters who think that swapping out the sitting president for someone they never voted for but has a D next to their name is suspect, but then the party has to stand by putting their hand on the scale and kneecapping their bench because the adult is in the room and it's still their turn.
There is a lot of coulda woulda shoulda at this point, but I don't envy any decision makers that have to figure this one out.
Her name was not on any ballot - technically Biden could even choose a different VP. These kinds of technicalities are out-of-bounds when you've been casting the election as a contest for "the...
Her name was not on any ballot - technically Biden could even choose a different VP.
These kinds of technicalities are out-of-bounds when you've been casting the election as a contest for "the future of Democracy" to just disregard the votes of millions of people... At best it's "not a good look" and it's probably closer to the scheming hypocrisy Republicans tend to try to get people to believe about the Democrats.
Her name was absolutely on my (Ohio) ballot for the 2020 election. Since I received my ballot via email (I vote from abroad) I was even able to double-check. Even the third-party candidates were...
Her name was absolutely on my (Ohio) ballot for the 2020 election. Since I received my ballot via email (I vote from abroad) I was even able to double-check. Even the third-party candidates were listed alongside their vice-presidential picks.
I don't remember whether she was on the ballot for the Democratic primary, though, and since I voted in-person for that I can't check. I voted "undecided" anyway.
I don't think enough people are taking into consideration the long term consequences of Democrats' options. If you're thinking solely about this election, you're right -- there are no good...
I don't think enough people are taking into consideration the long term consequences of Democrats' options. If you're thinking solely about this election, you're right -- there are no good options. Everything seems to be going Trump's way and it might just be too late to make an argument against his presidency while making a case for yours.
However, even if Democrats lose the election, they can still get to dictate their post-election messaging. Barring any surprises, Trump will be elected president again and one of the most important things that can stop him putting forward his nationalist and racist agenda is a motivated and united opposition. I've been living in an illiberal democracy on and off for the past 22 years and during that time I've learned quite a few things about politics. One of them is the thing wanna be dictators want the most is a jaded opposition that accepts the status quo. If Democrats go with Biden, they will lose the legitimacy of their message and shun their voters out. It will send them the message that their voice do not count. And a defeated opposition with no motivation will give Trump and his lackeys more room to enact their policies for the country and the world.
By doing something against the threat Democrats warn the public about Trump, they will give weight to their rhetoric and prove to the public that they mean what they say. Will it be enough? Probably not. But it will be something. They will show the opposition that their elected officials will not leave them alone and that they're in it together, show the institutions that they will not cede from being a check on their power, and most importantly make themselves believe that there is a future worth fighting for.
On the contrary, if they don't go with Biden, voters' voices won't matter at all because Biden won the primary. Elites anointing a candidate would ignore the people's voices. That said, if the...
If Democrats go with Biden, they will lose the legitimacy of their message and shun their voters out. It will send them the message that their voice do not count.
On the contrary, if they don't go with Biden, voters' voices won't matter at all because Biden won the primary. Elites anointing a candidate would ignore the people's voices.
That said, if the Democrats want to essentially accept defeat and just focus on future elections, I wouldn't mind giving Pete Buttigieg an opportunity to get some more face time.
All other arguments and concerns aside, it's disingenuous to frame it that way considering he effectively ran unopposed. For all intents and purposes, the DNC closed the primaries down the moment...
Biden won the primary
All other arguments and concerns aside, it's disingenuous to frame it that way considering he effectively ran unopposed. For all intents and purposes, the DNC closed the primaries down the moment Biden announced his run. There were no primary debates and no one with any political capital or name recognition dared to run against the incumbent. Say what you want about the RNC, but they at least held a real primary with real candidates even after Trump announced his intentions.
If Biden runs, then I plan to vote for him. That was always my plan. From the very beginning though, more than anything else (well, aside from Trump dropping out), I wish Biden had committed to being a one-term president. I cannot overstate how disappointed I am that he decided to run again.
He ran unopposed because any competitive candidate knew they’d lose if they ran against him, so they saved their ammo for next year. Winning in that context is a hell of a lot more of a popular...
He ran unopposed because any competitive candidate knew they’d lose if they ran against him, so they saved their ammo for next year.
Winning in that context is a hell of a lot more of a popular mandate than the output of a party coup led by centrists freaking out about their donors turning off the money spigot.
They’re not even interested in having the elected delegates be released and choose. They want to have some insane Oprah Winfrey led reality show to select the candidate. It’s all deeply unserious. There is no plan, just a bunch of TV addicted nerds writing screenplays.
The DNC didn't close the primaries down, Dean Phillips was able to run just fine, and now his faction is literally part of the "Replace Biden" campaign. They absolutely did not have a primary in...
The DNC didn't close the primaries down, Dean Phillips was able to run just fine, and now his faction is literally part of the "Replace Biden" campaign.
Say what you want about the RNC, but they at least held a real primary with real candidates even after Trump announced his intentions.
They absolutely did not have a primary in 2020. Incumbent parties do not generally have people run against the incumbent for the Presidency.
I think he means in 2024 where Trump ran against DeSantis and Haley. Incidentally if the Republicans had picked either of them they’d be coasting to win in a landslide. Instead they picked a...
They absolutely did not have a primary in 2020. Incumbent parties do not generally have people run against the incumbent for the Presidency.
I think he means in 2024 where Trump ran against DeSantis and Haley.
Incidentally if the Republicans had picked either of them they’d be coasting to win in a landslide. Instead they picked a convicted felon with severely degraded brain functions who is running for President solely to avoid going to prison and the media wants to cast no light on this with the public. And not only that, but the Democratic Party has decided to give up on pounding that argument and focused their fire on tanking their own candidate instead.
This is why I've been saying since 2016 that the democratic will of primary voters should not be confused with the will of the people, let alone that their selection results in better candidates...
they picked a convicted felon with severely degraded brain functions
This is why I've been saying since 2016 that the democratic will of primary voters should not be confused with the will of the people, let alone that their selection results in better candidates than backrooms filled with bribes and cigar smoke. A candidate with a consolidated base of support can legitimately trounce the competition during the primary—even in a respectable election system where similar alternatives don't split the vote—and then stumble in the real election or turn what should be a landslide into a nail-biter when the politically-disengaged say "I don't care for any of these assholes" in late October because their strong primary showing was, in fact, near the ceiling of their support.
Yeah, in 2024 Trump was not the incumbent. And I don't actually think that DeSantis would sail to victory, the dude is supremely bad at...almost everything. Florida Republicans flop on the...
Yeah, in 2024 Trump was not the incumbent.
And I don't actually think that DeSantis would sail to victory, the dude is supremely bad at...almost everything. Florida Republicans flop on the national stage
I'm wondering who would be all that disappointed about what happened to their vote in the primary? The people effectively had no voice in the Democratic primaries either, because nobody with any...
I'm wondering who would be all that disappointed about what happened to their vote in the primary? The people effectively had no voice in the Democratic primaries either, because nobody with any possibility of winning ran against Biden. A vote that's not much of a choice also isn't much of a mandate.
Also, Democratic delegates at the convention will come from every state. You can sorta say they represent the rest of the party. Isn't that better representation than we get for the selection of vice-presidential candidates?
If they pick someone good, maybe all will be forgiven?
(In practice, we didn't choose the delegates, but I was curious and looked into it. In California they're picked by some kind of in-person vote in each legislative district that takes place after the primary. So in theory, maybe I could have showed up somewhere to vote for Biden's delegates on April 21? The details aren't very clear on cadem.org.)
I think something that would make a crucial difference is Biden choosing to step down on his own. Nothing says he has to run again. Let’s say a candidate for president was diagnosed with terminal...
I think something that would make a crucial difference is Biden choosing to step down on his own. Nothing says he has to run again. Let’s say a candidate for president was diagnosed with terminal cancer, would anyone blame them for deciding to bow out?
Hell you'd expect them to not bow out these days, that's the whole fucking problem really. So many people have ignored this as an issue for too long because "their team" or "their candidate" is...
Hell you'd expect them to not bow out these days, that's the whole fucking problem really. So many people have ignored this as an issue for too long because "their team" or "their candidate" is the exception.
80 year olds are not policy material if just from the absolute limitation of lifespan, let alone all the other issues.
Since all signs and rumblings are pointing toward Biden stepping aside, I'm now nurturing a small hope that Kamala might pull it away from Trump. Since the latest polls have her at least doing...
Since all signs and rumblings are pointing toward Biden stepping aside, I'm now nurturing a small hope that Kamala might pull it away from Trump. Since the latest polls have her at least doing decently, I'm hoping that she can motivate some voters (women of various stripes, I'm hoping) to show up to the polls that otherwise would have stayed home.
This has been a surreal week lol. I can not believe this stuff didn’t happen back in late 2022 for an open primary to take place. Instead we’re getting either a deeply unpopular replacement in...
This has been a surreal week lol.
I can not believe this stuff didn’t happen back in late 2022 for an open primary to take place. Instead we’re getting either a deeply unpopular replacement in Kamala or someone that no one has ever voted for. Disaster.
It's hard for me to resolve thoughts on this. I am terrified of another Trump presidency. I'm considering leaving the country if he wins, as I wouldn't really feel safe here. I don't mind Biden,...
It's hard for me to resolve thoughts on this. I am terrified of another Trump presidency. I'm considering leaving the country if he wins, as I wouldn't really feel safe here. I don't mind Biden, he's passed more policy than I had expected and while he's nowhere near as progressive as I'd like, it was at least a good change of pace from Trump's presidency. The thing I'm having trouble with is whether I think dems have a better chance of another presidency through Biden (since incumbents can have an advantage) or through someone else. The media is a shitstorm right now about Biden's age, despite Trump being a million times more incoherent than Biden is. I really don't know what to think the best chance are. I mean, I'm voting blue no matter who as lives might literally depend on it, but I'm afraid Biden withdrawing and being replaced by Harris or anybody else might lessen the chance of dems winning this year at all.
I feel like this should have been happening 6 months ago, it seems really late to be putting forward a different candidate (only four months to election?!?!?!).
I agree that this should have happened months ago. There was a primary but there were no very serious contenders at the time, when there should have been. Personally I think Biden should have...
I agree that this should have happened months ago. There was a primary but there were no very serious contenders at the time, when there should have been. Personally I think Biden should have stuck to his wink wink nudge nudge promise of being a "transitional president" and never stood for re-election in the first place. We could have had a proper primary instead of trying to compete against the incumbent only to end up where we are now, with a few months until the election. I think the most important thing at this moment is for the Democrats to get their shit together and decided one way or another what they are doing. Something like, Democratic leaders like Obama, Jeffries, Schumer, Pelosi, etc write a joint op-ed either fully endorsing Biden or calling for him to step aside. That would end this debate one way or another and let the party move past it and focus on winning the election. The three week long drip drip has only weakened whoever the eventual nominee is.
I don't think he ever did this, though. He mentioned once about being a "bridge candidate [to the next generation" and I think a lot of people in 2020 who wanted a more progressive candidate...
Personally I think Biden should have stuck to his wink wink nudge nudge promise of being a "transitional president"
I don't think he ever did this, though. He mentioned once about being a "bridge candidate [to the next generation" and I think a lot of people in 2020 who wanted a more progressive candidate swallowed the line as a compromise and then themselves assumed he'd be a one term guy. A lot of that was driven by the same anxiety we see today that he wasn't/isn't up to the task. But he ended up being one of the most progressive and effective presidents in decade, so all the popular progressives are backing him and he still has pull with more moderate voters.
Honestly what I can't believe are the Schiff's of the world being so open and public about replacing him. It makes me wonder if they are personally scorned, terrified and anxious, or getting donor pressure from centrists.
Nah, my understanding is that he did initially plan on serving one term, but Trump re-entering politics after his brief exile in 2021 convinced Joe to change his mind. He talks a bit about it in...
Nah, my understanding is that he did initially plan on serving one term, but Trump re-entering politics after his brief exile in 2021 convinced Joe to change his mind. He talks a bit about it in this article, but I'd seen the Trump explanation elsewhere and a while ago, so I can't track it down now.
I'm very conflicted on the push to replace him. On one hand, I think it could be good to have a younger candidate who is still able to run on Biden's record, but without the baggage of being so damn old (his age being far and away the main concern voters have with him). On the other hand, I have been extremely impressed by his domestic policies (foreign, not so much, mainly because of Gaza), and I think he does pull in a unique coalition that other candidates wouldn't. I think it is telling that so much of the core Democratic base still in his corner.
I'm also wary of the donor influence in replacing him. I think it sets a very bad precedent if large donors can just come in and essentially replace the winner of the Democratic primary, especially when that winner is the sitting president. I know some others have raised the point that it wasn't a real primary, but despite the lack of competition it was a genuine primary. I wish he had some real competition, as it may have forced the party to confront these issues a year ago, but alas here we are. It is a extremely uncertain situation, and I honestly don't know what outcome I think is preferable. All I know is that this needs to get resolved quickly and it has happened far too publicly and for far too long.
Don’t see it happening. Biden’s Twitter is on fire today, AOC gave a long explanation why Biden can’t step down (tldr getting on ballots and money) and no one else has a good plan. It’ll be Biden....
Don’t see it happening. Biden’s Twitter is on fire today, AOC gave a long explanation why Biden can’t step down (tldr getting on ballots and money) and no one else has a good plan.
It’ll be Biden. So uhh donate where you think it matters.
I posted several Reddit comments back in early/mid '23 (now purged) which predicted that Biden would not be the Dem nominee, but would stay in the race and provide cover for another candidate to...
I posted several Reddit comments back in early/mid '23 (now purged) which predicted that Biden would not be the Dem nominee, but would stay in the race and provide cover for another candidate to prepare. I was thinking Newsom or maybe Whitmer (didn't consider Harris, tho). Eventually, Biden would say he's too tired and it's time for newer and younger blood to take the reins.
Then for most of '24, I started to believe I was wrong. Now here we are, contemplating essentially that.
If Biden steps down, it wouldn't be for the reasons you stated. If this was intentional, Biden would have stepped aside earlier to give this candidate more time to prepare and also avoid the...
If Biden steps down, it wouldn't be for the reasons you stated. If this was intentional, Biden would have stepped aside earlier to give this candidate more time to prepare and also avoid the debate debacle. Clearly this was not in the works in 2023.
Oh I know, and agree, Biden has made the shift much later and for different reasons than I thought, but the end result will be the same - we thought we'd have one candidate running against Trump,...
Oh I know, and agree, Biden has made the shift much later and for different reasons than I thought, but the end result will be the same - we thought we'd have one candidate running against Trump, but we may well wind up having a different one.
What a disaster.
Democratic Party shenanigans booted Bernie Sanders and installed Hillary Clinton, thus gifting the presidency to Trump in 2016.
Democratic Party shenanigans prevented the public from seeing the reality of Biden's old-fogeyness until it might be too late to do anything about it, thus gifting to Trump the presidency in 2024.
And the world will suffer for it. I hope I'm wrong.
I don't know what the right course of action is but I can guarantee two things:
If Biden stays in the race and loses, it'll be the biggest strategic misstep in modern political history. An unforced error that irreparably damages global society. Every single political pundit and commentator will talk about how stupid it was to let Biden stay in the race.
And if Biden steps down and the new Democrat loses, it'll be the biggest strategic misstep in modern political history. An unforced error that irreparably damages global society. Every single political pundit and commentator will talk about how stupid it was to push Biden out of the race.
Yeah at this point I do agree with that.
I suspect that if Biden had never decided to run for a second term, that it wouldn't be viewed that way at least. Granted I am sure some would still criticize it, because incumbents do have some advantages and giving up incumbent advantage might be seen as a strategic misstep, but I don't think it would have been as roundly criticized even if Democrats lost to Trump in that scenario.
I think it would have been more expected because he mentioned he was a 'transition' option before and his age is obviously catching up to him. He probably wouldn't have to carefully play up his energy in public showings if he had resigned himself to one term, he'd probably look a lot more like the debate Biden and even less would question his decision to stick with one term. It'd also look wise for him in the sense that he would have had the self awareness to recognize his limitations.
Also had he stuck with it from the beginning that he was going to only do one term, they probably would have better prepared another candidate to step up at this point, rather than scrambling at the last minute to replace Biden's failed attempt at going for a second term.
I don't actually think there would be that much criticism over it. People had already largely assumed that Biden would be a one term president, and during the 2020 primaries they essentially tried to force Biden to say that he would be a one term president. His 2020 primary platform was basically "I'm the only one that can beat Trump" with policy largely being secondary. People voted for him during the 2020 general, because he wasn't Trump. He never seemed to be a two term president.
I was a big supporter of Sanders in 2016, but looking back, is absolutely no way he could have realistically won the presidency if he had been the Democratic nominee.
What's weird is that I think Trump is even worse than Biden when it comes to mental ability. Have you heard Trump talk for more than a sentence? Sometimes the words that come out of his mouth are literal gibberish and make no sense. The only difference is that he has this weird ability to keep talking and not pause, making him look "strong" compared to Biden, who speaks a lot slower and more deliberately.
Why not? He did well in the primaries and polled well amongst people that ended up voting for Trump. We'll never know for sure and I won't argue that he likely would have won, but it doesn't feel like "absolutely" territory for me.
A significant number of his voters were more anti-Clinton than pro-Sanders, and Clinton avoided playing dirty with him to avoid alienating his base. If he'd gotten the nomination, the GOP in partnership with the corporate media would have launched a withering assault on all his untested vulnerabilities -- the "rape essay", his honeymoon in the USSR, the "deadbeat dad that never worked a real job" narrative, his wife's college financial affairs, video of him saying M4A would raise taxes, his self-identified socialism, etc., etc., etc. He would have been the American version of Jeremy Corbyn. And the failure of his "political revolution" to manifest in the primaries in 2016 and 2020 suggest there would not have been any real groundswell of support had he been the nominee.
There’s anecdotes that float around about GOP operatives saying they had a feet-thick binder full of opposition research on Sanders. Even if that’s an exaggeration, the GOP would’ve had a field day with what they had. Additionally, @Jordan117 is correct in that many voters in 2016 were more anti-Hillary than pro-Sanders. Compare the Michigan primary results in 2016 and 2020, there is a big drop-off in Sanders support.
Both political parties have binders of research for any opposition candidate. Every candidate has something that should take them down (Trump??) when you phrase it like that, but in the end, whether or not voters even care is hard to tell. If you told me in 2015 that Sanders used the phrase "You can do anything. ... Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything", I would 100% believe that it would tank his campaign. Yet, Trump said it and nothing happened.
I wouldn't compare 2016 and 2020 Michigan primary results. First, there's a bunch more candidates that muddy the water. Maybe people are pro-Sanders > Clinton, but pro-Biden > Sanders? Or maybe 2020 Sanders is less appealing*? Consider that Sanders did better in Nevada, and that would negate that he did worse in Michigan in terms of "he did worse in Michigan, therefore people didn't actually like Sanders". Else, you'd have to then equally hold in your head "he did better in Nevada, therefore people actually did like Sanders". That said, it's possible people were voting Sanders as anti-Clinton, but I'm sure there's better ways to measure that with pre-2020 data.
* I was a big Bernie supporter in 2016 and only mildly put him over Biden in 2020.
Yeah, Democrats need to restructure and respond to this realignment towards populism that the Republicans were forced into. It's a damn shame that each and every election is an extensional threat, so them having a learning experience means that the Republicans can go full throttle on remaking the government to their own ends.
It's weird to complain about Democratic Party shenanigans overriding the Will of the People and then implying that the preferred outcome here would be for the Democratic Party Elites to override the will of primary voters and install someone else at the last minute.
It wasn't a contested primary.
I've seen accounts by donors and politicians that Biden didn't recognize them at events while being familiar in the past.
The correct action depends on the nature of the problem and it is really hard to tell from the outside.
Sanders was actively seeking a contested convention.
Which donors? Which politicians?
The problem is that every public statement by the people who are advocating for this the loudest indicates that they have zero clue how all of this will actually work, mechanically. AOC pointed this out. It's a huge problem and going "Biden steps down, ?????, we win" isn't convincing anyone.
If Biden is actually failing mentally, then Biden stays in and we either lose or we have a 25th amendment situation or Dr Jill runs the country like Mrs Wilson did after Woodrow's stroke.
I will see if I can find the articles I saw. I wasn't taking notes
Seth Moulton
I found the article about someone claiming Biden was forgetful at the summit but that person was anonymous so I won't use it.
Reading these articles over the last few days it really feels like he'd already decided to step down and they are just laying the groundwork to the announcement that Kamala is the new nominee.
But even if no one is announced to be the new nominee right away I don't think it will be long now until he makes a speech that he's no longer running.
Edit: I was right (about him stepping down at least), but I still need to disconnect from politics for my own mental health.
I feel covid might have sealed it. He's a really old man with covid, and even if he recovers perfectly, he can't campaign anymore in the short term, and he really really needs to, vigorously.
He's been campaigning vigorously for the last three straight weeks...
Sorry, I should've been more specific. I didn't mean speeches to the faithful and teleprompter conferences. That's easy, he could always do that. I mean back to back non-stop unscripteded interviews with unfriendly (and unfair) networks, like Fox and the rest.
We were losing badly before the debate, we were losing really badly after the debate, and now it's day after day where an elected Democrat publicly is seen to lose confidence in him. Whatever he's doing, it's not vigorous enough, not even close.
He's done multiple unscripted interviews? Some even against people who are pretty hostile to him.
Have you not been following any of this?
Yes, I've been following. Not enough, and they haven't been good.
I feel that this is devolving into questioning each other's good faith, so I'll be disengaging now.
These articles are a lot of Twitter addled press trying to manifest what they want to see. It’s basically ONLY on Twitter and the press that you see this, nowhere else.
This whole sequence has been a clear indicator that social media algorithms have profoundly screwed up the brains of everyone in the media. The level of unsourced gossip being passed off as vetted news is journalistic malpractice for click farming. And even the Democratic pols are falling into it, the tail is wagging the dog. They’re leaking random anxiety texts to the press instead of controlling the media cycle they’ve surrendered to it completely in panic.
I been thinking about your comment for a little while and it caused me to have a realization: I'm doing the same thing I was doing before the 2016 and 2020 elections which is constantly scrolling, reading and ingesting every bit of news, rumor or theory so I can figure out where the truth lies. And by doing so it is causing me to have much more erractic thoughts, anxiety, depression and feelings of being overwhelmed, just as it did before the other elections.
And you know what? I'm no closer to any truth than I was before, and end up just spinning my internal wheels. Time to get off the ride for a bit and try to focus on something else, thanks for your post.
Honestly the intensity of people’s feelings on this on Vichy Twitter are so different from what I see on BlueSky or Mastodon or even Threads. I think Twitter itself is overstuffed with these journalism/media insiders and the algorithm is weighted to Elon’s preferences that’s really geared to get people wound up.
Elsewhere it seems like most people are just anxious about having a path forward instead of a yolo flipping of the apple cart. Circling wagons around Biden or replacing him matters less than just shutting the hell up and moving forward.
One thing to note from the 2020 primary is that he was discounted early on, but his campaign was the least Twitter brained of everyone which led to a chronic underestimation of his strength of Black and older voters that coasted him to the nomination. We gotta hope that holds again. It bad for our collective ability to read reality when all the journalists are addicted to this dogshit website.
This convo is exactly me since the debate. Panic, anxiety, dread, then onto threads or xitter to doom scroll, wash, rinse, repeat. But now I am worried the endless narrative will spill over into meat space in a bad way because some of these "twitter brained" pols are also getting panic from the donor class, and big flashy op-eds are so bad. I am so so curious what's happening inside the Biden campaign about trying to reign this all in.
This. David Shor (Blue Rose Research) and his crypto bro buddies are running around waving cash and/or bad polling data in the faces of anyone they can convince to stab Biden in the back.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/top-democrats-prepare-for-campaign-without-biden-b57946a8?mod=hp_lead_pos1
I consider it a bad sign for my own mental health that I even know who David Shor is
With the caveat that there’s a lot I don’t know about politics, I’m wondering why an open convention would be a disaster. I think it’s too soon to say what it would be like. Sure, historically, open conventions were not the kind of choreographed pageantry we expect nowadays, but wouldn’t that also mean they’re more fun to watch? Politicians would have to make speeches that matter. Imagine the ratings. It’s like a reality TV show. Has there been an open convention on live TV? Even if it’s somehow determined through back room negotiations, maybe it would be smart not to reveal that.
Nearly all delegates expected to be at the convention to back Biden. If they have to pick someone else, are they really going to deadlock?
What matters is that after the convention, the party is unified on a candidate. They’re going to have to hit the ground running.
With the same caveat, I'm bullish something like this could end up being a slam dunk for democrats winning the presidency. I've read a lot of very well written and thought out arguments here on Tildes about Biden being the only potential candidate. Anyone else seems to lack the apparently vital trio of "name recognition", campaign warchest, and popularity.
The thing is, I feel pretty good about the right candidate being able to surmount all three of those obstacles, assuming the right candidate actually exists.
I'm voting for whoever or whatever the democrats nominate. If that's Biden, that's fine with me. If it's a crusty sock, I'll still vote for it. I have been trying really hard not to think too much about this election because I've already made my main voting decision.
And yet I can't help but think what democrats really need right now is a candidate that's much younger and a much better orator. When was the last time we had a president that you could actually call a great orator? Obama was good, but I don't think he was great. Bless Bush's heart, he tried his best. Was it Kennedy? Roosevelt?
Seriously, just put forward someone who is young-ish and can own their words. The information age will take care of everything else and Trump, Vance, and co will be left shitting their pants. (Or at least that's my fantasy.)
I just don't know man. Everyone seems to be very doom and gloom about this election now, but I don't buy it. Maybe I'm naive, maybe I just don't have any other choice, but I think these lowest moments are the best opportunities for moon shots.
Oof man, Obama is the absolute best orator of modern times in English speaking politics. Not to talk about the actions that follow, but he really is; he inspired a huge wave of both citizens and even other presidents (Macron especially visibly takes from him).
And nah… your fantasy is what it is. Maybe it would work but you have to remember there’s plenty of very Information Age agencies out there propping up republicans (here’s what it looks like: https://targetedvictory.com/)
Honestly I might be sleeping on Obama a bit, let’s give it a few more years then come back to review again.
I’m fine with that. I have no skin in this pre-electoral game. Like I said, I already know who I’m voting for. My entire attitude towards all of this prior to Election Day is to think and write and talk about it as nonchalantly and jovially as possible. I have zero interest having arguments about any of this or letting it bother any more than an errant fantasy might.
The amount of doomerism I've been seeing online about the polls in July about this election has genuinely surprised me. Biden is down like 2-5 points depending on what polls you look at. Obviously that is not great, and I understand the stakes at play here. Even then, it feels like people have just collectively forgotten 2022, when Democrats were consistently polling behind Republicans yet ended up over performing, or the previous elections where polls have notoriously been difficult to interpret. Polling within the margin of error in the middle of July before the convention should not be grounds for panic.
Now, I get that the situation here is a bit different. The main concern with Biden is his age, and that is fundamentally something that he can't address or turn around. The initial panic was sparked by his horrible debate performance, but if that was truly an "off night" he and his campaign could have demonstrated this by having multiple decisive interviews and news conferences to demonstrate that his age was not an issue. The fact that they tried this and it has not assuaged concerns is an indication that his age is an issue, and the debate simply revealed that. The lackluster damage control after the debate has done as much to cement this image of Biden as did the performance itself. This is coming from someone who thinks his press conference and interviews weren't bad, too. With all of that in mind, I feel like the calculus within the party at the moment is that it would be better to run someone (i.e. Kamala) who can run on Biden's record, which is pretty good and there's a lot there, but not have this intrinsic albatross around the neck. Impossible to tell now how it plays out, but I just want a definitive end to the this saga so the focus can turn back to defeating Trump.
Every move he makes now is getting heavily scrutinized, and boy does he look old. Maybe he always has done over the last couple of years, but I can't stop seeing it now. He's doddery, infirm and slow. I think everyone is seeing this now, and it's only a matter of time before he steps aside. I can't believe he wasn't advised to do it earlier, but I think they genuinely thought he could beat Trump again. It's looking less likely by the day, however.
Neither can I. As in, I literally do not believe that there were not influential people close to Biden telling him not to run. His numbers were already bad before he made the announcement. The economic situation was worse than it is today. He had already had a rocky first two years before Republicans took control of the House, and the clusterfuck there gave him the perfect opportunity to bow out while the GOP's inability to legislate was more recently on everyone's minds. To say nothing about his age being a factor from day one.
No, I think Biden chose to run in spite of internal opposition to the idea, and did so out of hubris.
I mean, Trump is a convicted felon who tried to over throw the government. In any other election in our nations history it wouldn’t even be a contest. Why wouldn’t they assume Biden could beat him again? Im a progressive and have generally been pretty happy with Biden, he’s trailing behind Trump because of self-inflicted wounds, not because Trump has a vision for the country that people are resonating with. I think Biden stepping down revitalizes with campaign against Trump.
You can't stop seeing it because there is literally a 24/7 news cycle dedicated to publishing multiple articles per day about how old he is.
Meanwhile Trump rambled his way through a boring, slow, and low-energy speech at the RNC and there hasn't been a single article about him seeming old and tired.
Biden might "only" be 2-5 points behind (a sizeable gap in this polarized era), but he's been down that much consistently, for a year, and even the most seismic events have barely moved the needle. Polling is clear that both candidates are deeply unpopular, in Biden's case primarily because of his age and acuity concerns. You can't fix that, and it speaks directly to his ability to campaign and do the job. And there's zero indication Biden or his team have what it takes to turn that around.
Not only is he down two points, he’s down two points despite a large wing of his own party in revolt against him, the entire press corps egging them on like degenerate gamblers at a cockfight, and the party’s major donors doing a full court press to push him out. Meanwhile his opponent survived an assassination attempt and got an epic PR photo out of it.
And this has led to Biden being down by two fricking points and any alternative candidate or generic democrat polling, at best, 1 or 2 points better than him despite no negative attacks levied against them yet and often with adjustments for name recognition included (which sort of begs away the incumbency advantage being given up).
This is an insane panic over nothing. And when you bring it up the “Biden should drop out” people lean on catastrophizing exaggerations like “he literally can’t speak!” Social media has people in an alternate reality where they’re ONLY looking at Biden instead of thinking about what the actual choice is they’re making.
He's down by maybe 2 points at best nationally, but thanks to the structure of the electoral college he needs to be ahead by around 2-3 points to have even odds of winning. Clinton won by 2% but lost the EC decisively, while Biden won by 4.5% and only barely won the EC by a few tens of thousands of votes in the swing states. So if he's behind a few points in the popular vote nationally, or even tied, that leads to an easy Trump win, which is born out by all the state polling showing him 5+ points behind in every battleground.
That’s just what being down by 2 translates to in swing states. If he made that up to be up by two his state level polling would shift dramatically as well.
The down ballot senate races are strongly D leaning and there remain lots of undecideds so there is a strong argument to be made that as economic outlooks improve and rates cut the undecideds will drift back and commit.
This is an argument for replacing Biden. In an environment where every other D is doing well, Biden is behind, sometimes by 7+ points compared to down ballot candidates. Relying on a rate cut that may or may not come or an economy that, despite being alright, has horrendous 'vibes' is not a great plan.
Ultimately for me, where there's smoke, there is fire. We wouldn't be at a spot where pretty much every major D is working behind the scenes to convince Biden to step down otherwise. I find it hilarious that on Twitter the most recent (astroturfed?) campaign is to paint this as some sort of conspiracy orchestrated by Rs. People have eyes, you guys.
Every other D at the top of the ticket does similarly though, even when adjusted for name ID. And that “name ID adjustment” involves being introduced with a paragraph of praise so they have a significant advantage in those polls.
With political media there often is nothing there but smoke. This “where there’s smoke there’s fire” phrase was something I heard many times regarding the Swiftboat Vets for Truth ads, and it’s just a framework for gullibility and credulousness.
People’s eyes only look where the media is pointing. And the media points where your anxiety spikes.
The economy is good enough to be worth 10 points by itself. It’s more than “alright.”
I am forever reminded that eyewitness testimony is factually and without question the worst evidence. Forget bias, our memories are just not nearly as good as we think they are, and people broadly and often overestimate their own analytic ability.
I'll say this, though, I don't think it's a Republican conspiracy, I think it's just a bunch of self-interested parties doing what they do. Crypto guys want the money and no taxes, media loves the ad-dollars and clicks because they can't compete with social media, Dems are anxious and worried, and the MAGA base is happy to cheer on anything that makes their guy strong and everyone else weak.
The idea that a large portion of the Democrats, including their leadership, are trying to remove their candidate because of what the media or people on Twitter are saying is ridiculous.
This isn’t just some people being anxious — this is a lot of people who do this for a living deciding this is the best path forwards to winning an election.
Polling for hypothetical candidates is kind of terrible for a lot of very obvious reasons — the reality is that no one knows how Harris or whoever would poll against Trump but we do know how Biden is polling and it’s really bad relative to how he should be doing.
The idea that all of this is just smoke seems like a pretty wild assertion. Something is convincing a significant fraction of the Democrats that this slightly hostile takeover is their best option. I don’t believe that’s just because of media induced panic but even if you do — that panic is not going anywhere. If Biden stays, every slip up, every gaffe is going to be firehosed at people for the rest of the election campaign. You can think that’s wrong or whatever, but that is the reality.
As opposed to some hypothetical other candidate who wouldn't be raked over the coals in the same way whenever they make even the smallest errors?
Biden's errors raise doubts and fears about his basic mental acuity and competence because of his age. Reading reddit threads about the debate I saw so many jokes about sundowning, needing to be in bed before eight pm, dementia generally, needing to take car keys from Grandpa etc
Yes, Reddit is full of trolls, bots, and liars. I have no reason to believe that Reddit is representative of the electorate, and you shouldn't either.
Reddit is a complex mess. However I don't believe so many different donors and elected officials would be advocating for Biden to step down if there wasn't a serious problem.
Like many people I have personal experience with family members who gradually lost mental capacity due to age. It happens.
I could say a lot more about the debate and the press conferences and the demands of being chief executive officer and commander in chief but I am going to stop. I will say that being a successful candidate is a very different job than being a successful president.
I'm apt to agree, especially with the very last part. Frame it like pulling all the voters together to spit fire right in the face of disaster, through an underdog. Biden having had a rough go might enhance the effect, even. I can't say I'd bet a lot on the party actually doing it but it would be pretty awesome to see. Give folks something to remember if nothing else.
If the times have proven anything, it's that anything is possible, might as well take the hardest shot after all the shit that's gone on.
Why would giving Democratic Superdelegates the sole ability to decide the next Presidential nominee be the epitome of listening to voters?
These are the superdelegates that threw their weight behind Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders before any primary voting even began!
Why would folks trust them to carry out the Will of the People?
Any open convention would be voted by the regular delegates from around the country first, who are primarily loyal to Biden and would likely give it to Harris on the first ballot. Superdelegates only come into play on later ballots if there's no majority.
Based on what rules? Who institutes these rules?
Where are you getting how this works? Others are saying it will go significantly differently!
It's how the DNC has worked since 2016. First ballot, only the regular delegates vote. If they can't reach a majority for one candidate, superdelegates come into play for subsequent ballots.
My understanding is that if it is to be an "open" convention the delegates are released and able to vote for whoever they want, so it is not as certain that the first vote would go to Biden but it is obviously still possible. The specific wording in the party rules is
This is understood by some at least to mean that delegates are free to vote for a candidate other than the winner of their state's primary, should circumstances require it. In the extreme case that a candidate died after the primary but before the convention, no one would expect delegates to vote for a deceased person. Personally, unless Biden declares he is not running I cannot see a mass defection of delegates under this reasoning unless something extreme happened. But it is technically possible that enough people defect so that the first ballot will not go to Biden, in which case superdelegates can become relevant.
Hi mike! Been a long time, hope you’re doing well!
I'm sorry, I don't actually recognize your username, but I'm notoriously bad at names.
Lmao that's fine, I didn't expect you to. I just noticed it had been a while since you posted and wanted to say welcome back
I've been thinking the same. An open convention with real stakes on the line (whoever wins gets to run for President!) actually sounds like it could potentially build a surge of momentum and enthusiasm in the run-up to November. This drama around Biden and the possibility that he could be replaced with a younger, "more exciting" candidate has had me glued to US election news for the first time in months. I'm not sure if that's just because I'm casually into politics (maybe the non-voters we need to bring in wouldn't care), but I feel like there's a real possibility that this could turn into a spectacle--in a good way.
People love drama!
Harnessing that energy could be really dangerous, but it could also be very powerful. "Biden's getting dumped! The President is getting dumped?! And now they're holding a lightning round mini-election to replace him???" I think people will pay attention.
"Ability to defeat Trump" needs to be the top criterion for choosing a new candidate though. It can't be "who's kissed the most ass and won the most favours?" among Democrat insiders. You also need to make sure no one becomes so toxic in the convention that you can't get people to rally around them after the selection is complete.
Done right, I think this could go well.
Let me add three disclaimers: 1) I'm not American, and 2) I actually like Joe Biden and think he's done good work in a post-COVID America; I'm sorry to see him going out like this, and 3) like you, "there's a lot I don't know about politics".
It wouldn't be a "disaster."
The objection, and the position the Democrat elite take, is an open convention would be uncontrolled. Unpredictable. Rather than being something they (the core strategists of the DNC) had planned and prepared and managed and handled. Something that was fully in their grasp at every single moment and step along the way.
Every single objection to letting the voters (either general or the DNC voters) pick a replacement basically boils down to that lack of control at some point. The elites apparently would rather see Trump win than fix a disaster of the DNC's making.
Even if one grants the concern of the DNC elite, it's still their fault! They had four years to prep other candidates. Four years to lay groundwork and introduce them to the nation, four years to ensure one of the two national political parties of America had other candidates who would be (internally as well as in the eyes of the public) ready and welcome to step in.
And they didn't. They failed. Quite spectacularly.
330+ million people in the country. Even if you take out all the non-natural citizens, you still have literally hundreds of millions of potential candidates that could've been identified and briefed and introduced to the public, standing by. But now, here we are, a double handful of weeks before an election that's likely going to determine the course of the country for the next several decades, and they're like "oh no, what do we do?"
At some point, you have to wonder if they're fucking up on purpose. If it's part of the plan, to leave everyone so without options, pushed right to the edge of disaster. If it's not purposeful, then it's negligent or inept.
But any scenario where they truly mean well, truly did attempt to "give their all and do their best", and ended up in this position where they're scrambling to figure out the damn ticket ... I would love to hear the truth that explains it's not purposeful, negligent, or inept. That's a story worthy of a movie.
This is such a completely wrong read of the situation you seem to be using as a soap box.
The ‘DNC elite’ in this case are seemingly split between open convention and a Harris nom.
The centrist elites are the ones calling for an open convention. It’s the rank-and-file that oppose it.
The convention has turned into an occasion to introduce a candidate to the public and present the party’s platform and agenda. An open convention takes that free media exposure and uses it to have competing candidates publicly ripping into each other. Instead of a convention bounce you get a convention cut.
And that’s the best case scenario where it goes smoothly. The more likely scenario is single issue activist groups start raising a rukus that looks terrible and makes the party look like a disorganized clusterfuck or an outright riot.
Said this in the weekly thread already, but the Dems are out of good decisions to make at this point.
An open convention with no heir apparent would be a chaotic mess that would completely chuck the Democratic primary out the window, would not spare any candidate a thrashing, and the only price would be straight into battle with the beloved of his party and his base, Donald Trump.
Biden staying in is a triple dog dare to the base not to stay home and may play better with swing voters who think that swapping out the sitting president for someone they never voted for but has a D next to their name is suspect, but then the party has to stand by putting their hand on the scale and kneecapping their bench because the adult is in the room and it's still their turn.
There is a lot of coulda woulda shoulda at this point, but I don't envy any decision makers that have to figure this one out.
We did vote for Kamala though. She has two jobs:
Power move would be for Biden to step down now making Kamala the 47th president, rendering all of Trump’s 45-47 hats useless.
Then as soon as they replace the hats, she resigns and whoever is next takes over. Repeat until they give up.
Her name was not on any ballot - technically Biden could even choose a different VP.
These kinds of technicalities are out-of-bounds when you've been casting the election as a contest for "the future of Democracy" to just disregard the votes of millions of people... At best it's "not a good look" and it's probably closer to the scheming hypocrisy Republicans tend to try to get people to believe about the Democrats.
Her name was absolutely on my (Ohio) ballot for the 2020 election. Since I received my ballot via email (I vote from abroad) I was even able to double-check. Even the third-party candidates were listed alongside their vice-presidential picks.
I don't remember whether she was on the ballot for the Democratic primary, though, and since I voted in-person for that I can't check. I voted "undecided" anyway.
I don't think enough people are taking into consideration the long term consequences of Democrats' options. If you're thinking solely about this election, you're right -- there are no good options. Everything seems to be going Trump's way and it might just be too late to make an argument against his presidency while making a case for yours.
However, even if Democrats lose the election, they can still get to dictate their post-election messaging. Barring any surprises, Trump will be elected president again and one of the most important things that can stop him putting forward his nationalist and racist agenda is a motivated and united opposition. I've been living in an illiberal democracy on and off for the past 22 years and during that time I've learned quite a few things about politics. One of them is the thing wanna be dictators want the most is a jaded opposition that accepts the status quo. If Democrats go with Biden, they will lose the legitimacy of their message and shun their voters out. It will send them the message that their voice do not count. And a defeated opposition with no motivation will give Trump and his lackeys more room to enact their policies for the country and the world.
By doing something against the threat Democrats warn the public about Trump, they will give weight to their rhetoric and prove to the public that they mean what they say. Will it be enough? Probably not. But it will be something. They will show the opposition that their elected officials will not leave them alone and that they're in it together, show the institutions that they will not cede from being a check on their power, and most importantly make themselves believe that there is a future worth fighting for.
On the contrary, if they don't go with Biden, voters' voices won't matter at all because Biden won the primary. Elites anointing a candidate would ignore the people's voices.
That said, if the Democrats want to essentially accept defeat and just focus on future elections, I wouldn't mind giving Pete Buttigieg an opportunity to get some more face time.
All other arguments and concerns aside, it's disingenuous to frame it that way considering he effectively ran unopposed. For all intents and purposes, the DNC closed the primaries down the moment Biden announced his run. There were no primary debates and no one with any political capital or name recognition dared to run against the incumbent. Say what you want about the RNC, but they at least held a real primary with real candidates even after Trump announced his intentions.
If Biden runs, then I plan to vote for him. That was always my plan. From the very beginning though, more than anything else (well, aside from Trump dropping out), I wish Biden had committed to being a one-term president. I cannot overstate how disappointed I am that he decided to run again.
He ran unopposed because any competitive candidate knew they’d lose if they ran against him, so they saved their ammo for next year.
Winning in that context is a hell of a lot more of a popular mandate than the output of a party coup led by centrists freaking out about their donors turning off the money spigot.
They’re not even interested in having the elected delegates be released and choose. They want to have some insane Oprah Winfrey led reality show to select the candidate. It’s all deeply unserious. There is no plan, just a bunch of TV addicted nerds writing screenplays.
The DNC didn't close the primaries down, Dean Phillips was able to run just fine, and now his faction is literally part of the "Replace Biden" campaign.
They absolutely did not have a primary in 2020. Incumbent parties do not generally have people run against the incumbent for the Presidency.
I think he means in 2024 where Trump ran against DeSantis and Haley.
Incidentally if the Republicans had picked either of them they’d be coasting to win in a landslide. Instead they picked a convicted felon with severely degraded brain functions who is running for President solely to avoid going to prison and the media wants to cast no light on this with the public. And not only that, but the Democratic Party has decided to give up on pounding that argument and focused their fire on tanking their own candidate instead.
This is why I've been saying since 2016 that the democratic will of primary voters should not be confused with the will of the people, let alone that their selection results in better candidates than backrooms filled with bribes and cigar smoke. A candidate with a consolidated base of support can legitimately trounce the competition during the primary—even in a respectable election system where similar alternatives don't split the vote—and then stumble in the real election or turn what should be a landslide into a nail-biter when the politically-disengaged say "I don't care for any of these assholes" in late October because their strong primary showing was, in fact, near the ceiling of their support.
Yeah, in 2024 Trump was not the incumbent.
And I don't actually think that DeSantis would sail to victory, the dude is supremely bad at...almost everything. Florida Republicans flop on the national stage
Yeah, even the people I talk to who have absolutely brain-dead takes on politics think DeSantis is dumb.
To say he won the primary is misleading at best. There was no real primary.
I'm wondering who would be all that disappointed about what happened to their vote in the primary? The people effectively had no voice in the Democratic primaries either, because nobody with any possibility of winning ran against Biden. A vote that's not much of a choice also isn't much of a mandate.
Also, Democratic delegates at the convention will come from every state. You can sorta say they represent the rest of the party. Isn't that better representation than we get for the selection of vice-presidential candidates?
If they pick someone good, maybe all will be forgiven?
(In practice, we didn't choose the delegates, but I was curious and looked into it. In California they're picked by some kind of in-person vote in each legislative district that takes place after the primary. So in theory, maybe I could have showed up somewhere to vote for Biden's delegates on April 21? The details aren't very clear on cadem.org.)
I think something that would make a crucial difference is Biden choosing to step down on his own. Nothing says he has to run again. Let’s say a candidate for president was diagnosed with terminal cancer, would anyone blame them for deciding to bow out?
Hell you'd expect them to not bow out these days, that's the whole fucking problem really. So many people have ignored this as an issue for too long because "their team" or "their candidate" is the exception.
80 year olds are not policy material if just from the absolute limitation of lifespan, let alone all the other issues.
Since all signs and rumblings are pointing toward Biden stepping aside, I'm now nurturing a small hope that Kamala might pull it away from Trump. Since the latest polls have her at least doing decently, I'm hoping that she can motivate some voters (women of various stripes, I'm hoping) to show up to the polls that otherwise would have stayed home.
This has been a surreal week lol.
I can not believe this stuff didn’t happen back in late 2022 for an open primary to take place. Instead we’re getting either a deeply unpopular replacement in Kamala or someone that no one has ever voted for. Disaster.
It's hard for me to resolve thoughts on this. I am terrified of another Trump presidency. I'm considering leaving the country if he wins, as I wouldn't really feel safe here. I don't mind Biden, he's passed more policy than I had expected and while he's nowhere near as progressive as I'd like, it was at least a good change of pace from Trump's presidency. The thing I'm having trouble with is whether I think dems have a better chance of another presidency through Biden (since incumbents can have an advantage) or through someone else. The media is a shitstorm right now about Biden's age, despite Trump being a million times more incoherent than Biden is. I really don't know what to think the best chance are. I mean, I'm voting blue no matter who as lives might literally depend on it, but I'm afraid Biden withdrawing and being replaced by Harris or anybody else might lessen the chance of dems winning this year at all.
I feel like this should have been happening 6 months ago, it seems really late to be putting forward a different candidate (only four months to election?!?!?!).
I agree that this should have happened months ago. There was a primary but there were no very serious contenders at the time, when there should have been. Personally I think Biden should have stuck to his wink wink nudge nudge promise of being a "transitional president" and never stood for re-election in the first place. We could have had a proper primary instead of trying to compete against the incumbent only to end up where we are now, with a few months until the election. I think the most important thing at this moment is for the Democrats to get their shit together and decided one way or another what they are doing. Something like, Democratic leaders like Obama, Jeffries, Schumer, Pelosi, etc write a joint op-ed either fully endorsing Biden or calling for him to step aside. That would end this debate one way or another and let the party move past it and focus on winning the election. The three week long drip drip has only weakened whoever the eventual nominee is.
I don't think he ever did this, though. He mentioned once about being a "bridge candidate [to the next generation" and I think a lot of people in 2020 who wanted a more progressive candidate swallowed the line as a compromise and then themselves assumed he'd be a one term guy. A lot of that was driven by the same anxiety we see today that he wasn't/isn't up to the task. But he ended up being one of the most progressive and effective presidents in decade, so all the popular progressives are backing him and he still has pull with more moderate voters.
Honestly what I can't believe are the Schiff's of the world being so open and public about replacing him. It makes me wonder if they are personally scorned, terrified and anxious, or getting donor pressure from centrists.
Nah, my understanding is that he did initially plan on serving one term, but Trump re-entering politics after his brief exile in 2021 convinced Joe to change his mind. He talks a bit about it in this article, but I'd seen the Trump explanation elsewhere and a while ago, so I can't track it down now.
I'm very conflicted on the push to replace him. On one hand, I think it could be good to have a younger candidate who is still able to run on Biden's record, but without the baggage of being so damn old (his age being far and away the main concern voters have with him). On the other hand, I have been extremely impressed by his domestic policies (foreign, not so much, mainly because of Gaza), and I think he does pull in a unique coalition that other candidates wouldn't. I think it is telling that so much of the core Democratic base still in his corner.
I'm also wary of the donor influence in replacing him. I think it sets a very bad precedent if large donors can just come in and essentially replace the winner of the Democratic primary, especially when that winner is the sitting president. I know some others have raised the point that it wasn't a real primary, but despite the lack of competition it was a genuine primary. I wish he had some real competition, as it may have forced the party to confront these issues a year ago, but alas here we are. It is a extremely uncertain situation, and I honestly don't know what outcome I think is preferable. All I know is that this needs to get resolved quickly and it has happened far too publicly and for far too long.
Don’t see it happening. Biden’s Twitter is on fire today, AOC gave a long explanation why Biden can’t step down (tldr getting on ballots and money) and no one else has a good plan.
It’ll be Biden. So uhh donate where you think it matters.
I posted several Reddit comments back in early/mid '23 (now purged) which predicted that Biden would not be the Dem nominee, but would stay in the race and provide cover for another candidate to prepare. I was thinking Newsom or maybe Whitmer (didn't consider Harris, tho). Eventually, Biden would say he's too tired and it's time for newer and younger blood to take the reins.
Then for most of '24, I started to believe I was wrong. Now here we are, contemplating essentially that.
[/coolstorybro]
If Biden steps down, it wouldn't be for the reasons you stated. If this was intentional, Biden would have stepped aside earlier to give this candidate more time to prepare and also avoid the debate debacle. Clearly this was not in the works in 2023.
Oh I know, and agree, Biden has made the shift much later and for different reasons than I thought, but the end result will be the same - we thought we'd have one candidate running against Trump, but we may well wind up having a different one.
The last few days have sealed it
Newsone whitmer 2024!