A very poor debate performance after denying the very obvious cognitive decline which we could all see for months on end is a diffferent level.
Sure, it’s always different. This time is always different.
In an of itself, no, of course not. The problem is if the poor performance creates or reinforces a narrative that takes hold. In this case, the narrative is that Biden is old and senile and not fit to serve; it’s been a constant drumbeat for months, and not just in the whackadoodle-sphere. This debate performance by Biden has supercharged that narrative, and that’s why people are panicking. It is not an over-reaction to think that - if this narrative takes hold - it will doom Biden’s chances. He and his team need to respond both quickly and over and over again to combat this narrative taking hold.
Maybe. Or maybe that narrative (at least that he’s old and doddering) is already built in and accepted by voters, just like the narrative that Trump is personally disgusting and a user of women.
The person whose current job it is to become President if Biden is unable to fulfill the duties of the Presidency due to illness or death ? Wouldn’t she be a reasonable choice ? Maybe the only reasonable choice ?
The problem with that is Biden is already losing. Not by a lot, but he is behind the polls. He doesn’t need to just not lose more ground, he needs to convince on the fence voters to come to him. That debate isn’t going to help.
I think I’ve come around to thinking the best course of action for Biden would be to drop out. I don’t understand all the comments that say he is the only one who could beat Trump or the Democrats have no chance if they swap candidates. Part of is there are no absolutes here. Any Democrat candidate is going to have a reasonable chance of winning and losing. The question is if the odds would increase. My suspicion is that switching from Biden would get rid of all the Biden specific concerns mostly about age and make the election more about Trump who remains very unpopular. It is certainly risky, but so is staying the course with a losing hand.
Based on the morning after panic (seriously, who suggests making major life altering decisions without at least a night’s sleep?), what Will Rogers said nearly a century ago still holds - “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.”
IMO a ton of American politics is white noise esp to disengaged voters, but every once in a while something cuts through. Soundbites from this debate have a huge chance of doing that, and if Biden is like this regularly it could happen again
The way I think about it, if you’re a voter who isn’t following politics around the clock but is going to vote and might start actively paying attention immediately before the election, your right-wing coworker can show you a video of Biden wandering away and you already know it could easily be doctored or something. Plus your coworker is always showing you clearly biased stuff and you’re conditioned to take everything with a grain of salt. Biden not being coherent in a debate is something that you aren’t going to be able to handwave away like that. And people are likely going to be picking up the soundbites from places they’re less likely to write off than before.
Stipulating again that this is all just wild conjecture, Politico has an article up today regarding the mechanics of replacing Biden on the ballot. Among the relevant points:
- Although 95% of DNC delegates are “pledged” to Biden, they are not actually required under the rules to vote for him. But the Biden campaign had a strong hand in selecting who would be delegates, and so they’re likely to be loyal to Biden.
- While the power of “superdelegates” has been pared back since the 2016 convention, these party insiders still represent about 700 of the 4,000 delegates. They are not allowed to vote on the first ballot but may vote on any subsequent ballots.
- Time is actually shorter than you might think – although the convention isn’t until August 19, in order to meet an earlier deadline for registering in Ohio, the DNC plans to formally nominate their candidate by August 7.
We’ll see. Those who want to panic will panic. I’m going to give it some time and see what happens.
I do think that even the stuff that cuts through the white noise will possibly change a percentage point or two. But as others have said it’s already close and probably favoring Trump which is part of the issue.
The “we’ll see” is a problem though because we’re basically at the latest opportunity for Biden to drop out and have his replacement have a chance.
Seems like regardless of party rules, the only way to replace Biden and not just straight up concede the election is if Biden announces he’s going to drop out and names his replacement.
I think that “latest opportunity” was months and months ago. Probably mid 2023.
As it is now, one candidate is a convicted felon, has been determined a sexual assaulter by a court of law, is being prosecuted for several other alleged crimes, and lies with every breath. The other is an old man who sometimes seems like an old man but has been an excellent president so far. The voters haven’t decided yet, and I don’t think it’s likely that a single debate in June is the last or most influential piece of information voters will use to make their decisions.
It’s my understanding that Biden would have to step down. That would force the convention to consider a different nominee.
Sadly the Democrats no longer coalesce behind promising political talent. Leaders are nurtured and supported from the beginning. It takes years for a politician to get experience and reach National prominence.
I can’t think of anyone that the Democrats would rally behind and support. It would be a free-for-all with every politician fighting for attention and the nomination. Tearing down each other leaves everyone too damaged for a run.
We’re stuck with Biden if he has a pulse in November.
I think it’s far from ideal and a huge risk to replace Biden now. And honestly part of the reason Biden got the nomination in 2020 is because there isn’t a younger democrat who has been able to get his level of national appeal. But I do think it could be done in today’s political climate. A lot of the voters that are going to vote for Biden despite his age would absolutely vote for Harris in spite of her personal unpopularity.
Both options are risks, and hopefully Biden and people close to him are aware of how much risk there is that he’ll continue to show signs of cognitive decline throughout the campaign.
You are stunningly underestimating just how hated Hilary Clinton is in this country. I’m not saying that hate is valid, but it exists. Both the Trump and Sanders campaigns in 2020 made major mistakes based on their results in 2016 by not taking into account that there are people who will eat glass before voting for Hilary.
LBJ declined to run for a second term because he recognized that he would probably not win, largely because of the quagmire in Vietnam. Biden should have recognized the limitations of his age and similarly declined to run for a second term. I’ve been saying this since last year. His failure to do so, despite generally being a man of principle, has now put the Democrats in a terrible bind and the country in grave peril.
I don’t know what the answer is at this point. Replacing Biden would undoubtedly create an image of a party in panic and disarray. Not replacing him might not be much better. It should never have come to this.
Newsom has already said he would not accept the nomination.
I think this could have worked if, all along, he was grooming Kamala Harris as the heir apparent – giving her a more prominent public role. Then maybe, just maybe, by now she’d have a base, which would help balance out the racist / sexist, low-information-voter “There’s something about her I just don’t like” perceptions.
Yeah, this election has being campaigned in one way or another since November 2020. That’s the reality of the way that American politics works these days with Trump raring for a rematch from the moment he lost.
I think the biggest things Biden has going for him are that he’s the incumbent and that he’s defeated Trump before. Both of those are advantages. What he has going against him is his public perception as an ancient old geezer, and possibly his policy choices (if you’re inclined to disagree with them).
Switching horses mid-stream for the Democrats would be essentially ceding the incumbent advantage to Trump as a former President, and the second would just evaporate. Of the things against him, you’d presumably win on the first, if you didn’t choose another old graybeard like Bernie Sanders, and the second would be a big question mark, as this person has no Presidential record.
In essence the election would go from being a contest between two people who have been President who are both old, and one of whom is a hostile, felonious liar, and the other is an old fossil who’s showing his age, to an election about a hostile, felonious liar vs. some vital younger person who doesn’t really have a Presidential record.
I’m not sure how that would play among the set of voters whose votes aren’t already decided one way or another; that seems incomprehensible to me that people haven’t already made up their minds, but who knows.
The bigger question is whether the DNC thinks that Biden can beat Trump on the virtue of his previous record and being incumbent, or whether someone new can beat Trump based on youth and vigor. The DNC seems to be betting on the former.
I’d question whether incumbent advantage even really exists. In the past half-century, incumbent presidents have lost their attempts at reelection nearly as often as they have won it (Ford, Carter, Bush Sr. and Trump all lost.) And even if such advantage exists, Biden is a uniquely vulnerable incumbent.