All of those are needed. Ask Obama.
These are requirements, certainly for the reactive portion of the job, but they’re not enough. You need a network, you need allies, you need relationships. An outsider is lost without these and hiring an insider Chief of Staff is not enough. This is where Biden has been effective both as POTUS and Vpotus.
And every single one of them are unnamable by you, apparently.
That puts them pretty damn far down on any nominee list, wouldn’t you say?
I’m still waiting to see this legion of thousands of viable Democratic candidates. Or even half a dozen.
Stranger
I mean, I don’t have anything planned for January 2025, so…
Hey, with your skill at channeling trump, you could be a Trojan horse candidate who gets MAGA votes!
The problem is that you can’t just ‘pretend’ to be a fascist candidate to get the votes; you actually get seduced by the Dark Side and pulled into conspiracy to ultimately become what you once aspired to undermine with your feckless and innocent enthusiasm.
Stranger
I wouldn’t doubt Biden isn’t quite as mentally sharp now compared to 30 years ago.
But it doesn’t matter, considering the opposition.
Melonville voters were smart enough to re-elect Tommy Shanks as mayor over the sleazy Vic Hedges.
Yes, I’m aware of that; I was just joking. Some say I have a dry sense of humor. Other describe it as ‘subtle’ or ‘nonexistent’.
I’m only a few years younger than Biden and I’m a helluva lot sharper mentally than I was 30 years ago. I’ve been through and grappled with a bunch of stuff since then. I know more than I did at 45. I’ve read more since then than in the years previous. I’ve written more, thought more, and analyzed a lot more ideas and events in the past 30 years than in the first 45.
Yep. Not uncommon.
If there are not a half dozen viable Democratic candidates today, in the very unlikely event Biden drops out tomorrow, the Democrats are in big trouble for 2028.
As for the idea that a Whitmer or Harris or Shapiro would have more good experience by 2028, yes, but they would be less viable because of four more years of life for opposition research to find material for a smear.
Well, the last time we did this shindig Biden came out clearly on top despite being the electoral equivalent of plain oatmeal. So, again, who are all of these highly appealing Democratic candidates who are going to sweep the field clear?
It isn’t like the GOP has to do “opposition research”; at this point, they just make shit up out of whole cloth, and their base laps it up like cats in a gravy factory.
Stranger
In order- Harris, Newsom, Adams and Whitmer maybe. So three solid choices. Maybe 5, Not bad at all.
They’d be fine candidates if there wasn’t an incumbent who most Democrats like. They’re not running. Face it - Biden will be the nominee. I’m glad of that - he and his team have shown to be good campaigners. Their performance in '20 defeated an incumbent who improved their original vote total by millions (a rare feat that Obama, for one, didn’t achieve), and helped the Democrats to one of the best midterm incumbent-party performances in recent memory.
Harris almost never broke single digits in opinion polls in the run-up to 2020 primaries even before she dropped out prior to caucuses. Newsom is an oily, charisma-less candidate who is really only fêted by the tech-bro crowd. Eric Adams has had so many obvious problems as mayor of NYC that he’s probably never going to be able to run for national office. Of your list, Whitmer is the only hypothetical candidate who might have broad appeal (based upon her performance in a purple-leaning toward red Michigan) but has made it clear that she’s staying in her current role for her next term. She’s a solid consideration for 2028 but the only way she steps out for this election is if Biden suddenly keels over in the Oval Office because she’s not about to be the candidate who cut in on an incumbent and then blew the whole election.
Stranger
Most Democrats like him. I like him. I know it is too late for Joe to drop out. But most of us registered Democrats wanted someone else:
https://thehill.com/homenews/3552202-most-democrats-prefer-new-presidential-candidate-in-2024-poll/
I hope you are correct. But the vast majority of voters have already made up their mind as to whether they will vote and who for. So being a great campaigner probably will not matter.
Voters are not going to think that it is Labor Day, so now I should start reading the newspaper, or watching the CBS Evening News, so I can give Trump and Biden a fresh look. Maybe they should listen to the link in the OP, and some will, but too few to matter.
Trump has been running a unhinged bad campaign that could never pass a general election swing voter focus group. His hideous Christmas messages, easily googled, will I predict, not hurt him in polls. This is because political messaging, whether competent or incompetent, doesn’t much matter when the candidates are as super-famous as Biden and Trump. To get a fresh look, Democrats needed a fresh candidate. Now the election will be close because both parties are highly likely to nominate unpopular weak candidates.
Your hypothesis is unknowable. Based on past history, IMO any change is likely to be worse for Democrats because of the inevitable chaos that would occur. That’s also an unknowable hypothesis. But again, like it or not, Biden’s going to be the nominee. So why spend so much time and effort complaining about it? He’s a good president. Use that time and effort to explain to others why they should vote for Biden.
I know when I’m looking for a representative view of what America thinks the first source I turn to is The Hill.
Stranger