Hmm, so attacking Biden is being unbiased, not attacking him is cheerleading. Thank you for clarifying.
It should be a worry that the Magas want Biden to stay in.
I’m deeply unsure of what should happen, and am put off by all the people insisting with absurd certainty–here and elsewhere–that they know the results of Biden’s dropping out or refusal to drop out. People think that the more certain they are, the more persuasive they are; but it’s the exact opposite.
That said, I think you’re wrong here. Some people who want Biden to stay in are literally saying
And there are plenty of pro-Biden pundits saying similar things (cites available on request).
The folks who want Biden to step aside are not saying anything like that, that I’ve seen.
From your link:
So I am to believe that 98 percent of registered voters have not only heard of Whitmer and Newsom, but actually have an opinion regarding them? Extremely implausible.
The more the polling question is an unlikely hypothetical, the less it can be relied on. The choice between Trump and Biden is real. Voters have made it before. They talk to their family about the choice. That’s why I focus on that real choice, as polled today, vs. as polled four years ago. The choice between Newsom and Trump is one most voters never thought about until the moment the pollster asked. So Newsom and Whitmer numbers are meaningless.
As for the Trump vs. Harris numbers, I do not really know the extent to which responses represent locked in views as opposed to momentary guesses. I think the race needs to be shaken up, and I know Biden cannot do it.
And yet Dopers, who like nothing more than arguing, think Democrats can’t convince enough voters to do the same.
That boilerplate notwithstanding … Huppke is USA Today staff. For what its worth.
That said, he does inject a good amount of observational humor into his political discourse. He lays it on a bit thick to make a point sometimes.
I was specifically referring to PhillyGuy’s expressed opinion.
Reporting in the NYT that the money is not happy. Live Election Updates: Donors Freeze Roughly $90 Million as Long as Biden Stays in Race https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/12/us/biden-trump-election?smid=nytcore-android-share
I was expecting a flurry this morning. There was a quick three public statements for Biden to step down last night, and then this morning … ???
Agreed. And the “shut up and get in line” attitude, not just here, only fan the flames of frustration. I prefer Clyburn’s take, who is “all in” for Biden but who also states that there is still time for Biden to change his mind and that he would also be thrilled with Harris.
The bulk of the models that I trust most give Biden roughly 1 in 4 chance (e.g. Silver’s, The Economist). That’s not zero. But not odds I want for these stakes. Nowhere close. And I personally remain convinced that the path to improving it is not likely and that other choices have a better chance of digging out. No certainties but shaking up the race seems wise to me.
If it one out of four then I hope for a lucky roll.
But it really is the population, though. For every American citizen who votes for Trump, there are a significant number who would have cast a ballot for Trump as well but didn’t (either too young to vote, or sat on the couch rather than going to the polls, or didn’t vote because they are in a deep-red or deep-blue state and figured their vote didn’t matter, or aren’t eligible to vote, etc.)
Voter turnout is always 50-70%. The number of Americans who support Trump significantly exceeds the number who voted for Trump.
To recap how dire Biden’s situation is, four years ago, he was consistently polling 8-10% ahead of Trump in the summer, yet when Election Night came around, he won by a margin of only 4% in the popular vote and came shockingly close to defeat, winning by only the margin of 44,000 votes in three key swing states.
Biden is currently polling 6-12% worse right now than he was back then.
I probably wouldn’t take that at face value.
If you invest heavily in a particular campaign strategy – in this case, just how awful Joe Biden has been for the country – it’s not a trivial matter to have to pivot and recreate a powerful and comprehensive negative campaign against another person, totally from scratch.
And the less well known that other candidate is, the harder the task of ramping up to shit all over them would be.
It’s a bit like “Who does Vladimir Putin want to be the next US President?” It’s just another manipulative political tool that has very little intrinsic value.
| biden | 0.384615384615385 | 0.1 | 0.26 |
|---|---|---|---|
| harris | 0.431034482758621 | 0.172413793103448 | 0.4 |
| newsom | 0.0588235294117647 | 0.0357142857142857 | 0.607142857142857 |
A summary of the top 3 Dems, using the current Betfair odds for the first 2 columns. The figure on the left is the odds of them becoming the nominee, the figure in the middle is the odds of them becoming president. Therefore the figure on the right is the odds of “if they were the nominee, what would the odds be of them becoming president”
Biden has just over 1/4, wheras Newsom would be the favourite.
To be fair those number can be spun another way, demonstrating that last time there was significant volatility in the polls. Trump nearly dug out last time maybe Biden can dig out this go?
But the state of the race is much more calcified now.
Is every election cycle a new game with different priors – even if the candidates are the same – or not so much?
One way to interpret your post is that large polling leads, in general and for any candidate, are volatile.
EDIT: Ow! @DSeid , you left your shuriken behind.
If I was taking that poll, it would not matter if I had heard of them or had an opinion of them. It could be Butthead or Trump. Anyone or Trump. I’m going with Butthead or anyone. Certainly easier if the poll was Butthead/Anyone (D) or Trump (R). Or rather, I think a big factor is knowing who Trump is/having an opinion on him.
Maybe, but they seem to only be volatile in favor of Trump, not against him.
In 2016, Hillary was heavily favored to win, yet shockingly lost to Trump.
In 2020, Biden was heavily favored to win, yet came shockingly close to losing.
So the phenomenon only seems to work one way. There doesn’t seem to be any “hidden Democratic voter” phenomenon, whereas Trump’s support has twice been understated. If Trump were slightly trailing on the eve of Election Day, one could believe that he’d pull off a surprise upset over Biden, but it’s harder to envision it happening the other way around.
Mary McNamara, LA Times, thinking deeply about the generally-overlooked risk in pressing Biden to bow out (free link courtesy of Yahoo News):
It’s certainly not going to help the Democrats if they are seen as having hounded a successful, and nonfelon, president from seeking a second term because of one bad debate and the media firestorm that followed.
As former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said, with her signature political canniness, the only person who can make that decision is Biden, though, she added, “time is running short.” …
… She also knows that what Biden needs is a little space, perhaps in which he can feel less set upon. If Biden should remove himself from the ticket, he must see it, and sell it, as an offensive — rather than a defensive — move.
His replacement could not be perceived as a usurper, put in place by editorial boards, donors and disgruntled congressional representatives over the will of the voters. She or he would need Biden’s unequivocal and very public support.
Biden would have to campaign on behalf of whomever were to replace him, and he would have to convince voters that he was not pushed off the slate by Trump, the media or poll-obsessed politicians. That he came to the decision himself, for the good of the country, and that he had complete and utter faith in his replacement.
It is, to put it mildly, a big ask.