That is an important distinction for many purposes. “Should this guy be President”, however, is not one of those purposes. Call me crazy, I would like a President who doesn’t even have occasional “moments of inability to function”.
Personally I’m tired of the thinking Biden is somehow some magical politician that is way more talented than any other Democrat. Biden barely beat a very unpopular incumbent four years ago. I’m glad he won, but lets not act that like this was some amazing result that no one else could replicate. He is by all accounts diminished from 4 years and much more unpopular. I just don’t see how he is a better option than Harris or Shapiro or Whitmer or Warnock or any number of alternatives, many of which won races as competitive much more convincingly. They might not match Biden’s folksy charm, but they have other ways to convince voters that have been shown to be successful.
On this you would be mistaken. There are people in this thread and other places on the board who have said exactly that. In fact @Thing.Fish used exactly that word up thread and I don’t believe they are Republican propagandists, they are just incorrect.
Are you a neurologist? Have you examined the President? Unless the answer to both of those questions is yes you have no credible way of knowing that. He may just be a typical 81 year old and tires more easily than younger people.
And in case it isn’t clear - I’m not clinging to Biden because I think he is the only one who can beat DJT. I do happen to think it may be too late to make a change like this. The time to do this was months ago. And unless he chooses to step aside, there is nothing that can be done about it other than a second ballot at the convention which would be highly divisive.
Democrats need to be focusing their energy on defeating DJT and the GOP. An intraparty fight is not the way to get there.
That might not necessarily portend anything about the 2024 polling environment, however. While little can be conclusively proven, “Too many polls are gamed” does not strike me as crazy talk. Further: “Too many pollster-commentators are letting their bias leak through”.
EDIT: If “polling” says “It’s all in the bag for Trump” … why doesn’t Trump himself have the 10-point leads in “the polls” right now? In an individual poll, a lead of less than twice the margin of error is still a statistical tie (more precisely: the poll results cannot tease out a preference among respondents). Fairly few Biden-Trump polls have Trump leads large enough to overcome this (check out your favorite poll-aggregate site and count up how many have Trump leads of, say, six points or more).
Not sure that edit was addressed to me, but I am certainly not making the claim that polling says it’s all in the bag for Trump. He is definitely leading, but not by that much.
Addressed to you? Kind of yes, kind of no – the audience in my head expanded as I was giving this issue some further thought and added the edit.
I know you’re not claiming to speak for House Democrats, Nancy Pelosi, et al … but what’s the disconnect between “Trump is leading, by not by that much” and reports that Nancy Pelosi told Biden point blank “Polls show that you cannot win”? Why would Biden, in the face of equivocal information, rush immediately to the conclusion “Yeah, you all are right … I better drop pronto”?
Now THAT is certainly true. My advice is to listen to Nate Silver and ignore the rest. (he currently has Biden with a 45% chance of winning the popular vote and a 30% chance of winning the Electoral College…so again, nowhere near “in the bag” for Trump).
There are lots of bad and irresponsible journalists out there telling their audience that “the polls” say whatever the audience wants them to say.
I dunno. Maybe Nancy is bad at reading polls, maybe she was speaking hyperbolically. Maybe what she really meant was "You’re currently behind in the polls, and you’re not capable of running the kind of campaign you would need to catch up.
Silver thinks that his mathematical model overestimates Biden’s chances, because it assumes that Biden will be fit enough to run a normal campaign between now and November, which is clearly in doubt.
It doesn’t. Models based on polling do in general say that Trump winning is roughly a 75% likelihoods. Not all of them. One makes it up down around 50 50. But the Trump lead in the polls and the state of the swing states leads the models to spit that out.
Beyond that everyone is spitballing. As individuals do we have confidence that Joe Biden of today has the energy, stamina, and verbal skills to turn that around? Do we believe a replacement candidate is more likely to do that?
Personally I like the odds better with Harris right now but that does not mean that I think it impossible for Biden to win.
That’s roughly where I am at. I think it’s probably pretty close to even (the odds of either of them winning) at about 25%-30%. But I think the big events that could help the Democrats (Trump sentencing, tape leaks, other Trump explosions) are more likely to help Harris than Biden.
She just has more upside as a potentially more energetic campaigner without the weight of the immovable “Biden is too old and weak” factor.
I have to say that I’m a little surprised at how many posting here seem to really want Biden. I’m inclined to think the Dems are screwed at this point, because I don’t think Biden can win, and I don’t think Harris can win.
He looks like crap. I mean, so does Trump, but put them next to each other and Biden looks worse. And honestly, there are many Boomers I love, but it’s time for them to step aside. Ignoring, for a moment, that Biden isn’t even a Boomer. He’s Silent Generation.
Chuck Todd was on a local radio program today (WGBH Boston) and he said he was sure Biden is going to get pushed out. FWIW.
Is there one or the other that you are less absolutely confident has zero chance?
Chuck Todd’s take isn’t worth all that much on this honestly.
Not Chuck Todd … but from July 3rd:
The time used up on all this hand-wringing is brutal to contemplate.
…
Just as an aside: What’s the downside to however many Democratic US Representatives and Senators crowding up somewhere together, having a news conference, and speaking one by one into the microphone: “I am [Senator Adam Schiff of California]. I believe Joe Biden cannot win the general election and must step aside for the good of the nation.”? One by one … all afternoon long if they indeed have 200-something people assembled to make this statement?
Are there really Democratic Reps/Senators that cannot afford politically to go public and full-throated with this? The fact that beyond 20-ish incumbent lawmakers, it’s all leaks and soft-selling (e.g. Pelosi saying something to the effect “Biden should think on it some more” instead of “Get the F out of the way, fool!”) makes the overall effort to oust Biden look all the weaker. Go hard – and public – or stand down.
If I had to pick one it would be Harris. I think there’s enough anti-Trump votes that she just might pull it off.
But I’m so irritated by the gerontocracy that if the Republicans were running a sane candidate (like a Charlie Baker, except he’s 68 FFS) I’d probably vote for that person over Biden myself.
Something occurred to me recently (as a GenX-er): The oldest GenX are now 60 years old, and we’ve never had a GenX president.
Why not? There’s nothing Biden can do, or nothing Trump might do or might happen to him, that could possibly tip the scales?
It’s not that Biden is magical: it’s incumbency that’s magical. That, and Biden polls better than other Dems.
Sure the Dems have a deep bench. But the process of elevating most of them to the top would be fratricidal. For that reason at this late date, Harris is the clear choice. And she’s… not that popular. Could she win? Yes. But so could Biden I say. On the other hand…
Kevin Drum reports that there’s emerging consensus among Democratic leaders for Biden to step aside. Specifically, "at least four leading Dems are urging him to exit: [they are] Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and Nancy Pelosi. IF those anonymous reports are true, well I trust that group’s political instincts more than my own.
I didn’t say that. I said I don’t think he can win. Trump could have a stroke. We could get some amazing economic news that people actually notice.
I only said I don’t think he can win. I don’t want to vote for him. I will, but I don’t want to. And I think lots of people feel the way I do. Only Trump’s repugnance keeps Biden’s hopes alive.
Dude. The record of Biden’s team is more accomplished than Obama’s. And even during the debate, Biden was operating at a higher level than Trump, who papers over his declining faculties with aggression.
I agree that Biden has a political problem. What he doesn’t have is a performance problem. The record shows that. Furthermore, if Biden’s health dips below a certain line, well that’s what VPs are for. The literal job of the Vice President is to be able to step in.
I am not a neurologist, and I have not examined the president, and I never claimed to have a way of knowing about his condition, credible or otherwise. I can, however, gather and interpret evidence. My interpretations are non-expert, so they’re just general knowledge-informed opinions, and anyone reading them on a message board is free to discount or refute them—especially if your evidence or reasoning is better (as is often the case here).
The incumbency advantage is pretty weak in recent years. There is enough throw the bums out attitude that it counteracts a lot of the advantage. And I’d say the polling is more mixed on who polls better then showing Biden. The most recent polls have Harris right around where Biden is and some a bit better. Others are a little below but mostly due to lack of name recognition, Trump doesn’t really get a higher percentage against them. I don’t really doubt though that Harris might start right around where Biden is now. I just think the Harris is better able to address her weakeness of unlikability then Biden is going to be able to prove he is not old.