What's the "critical mass" needed for the D's to nominate someone other than Biden in 2024?

I have some serious doubts about that poll. The article says that Manchin’s big jump in popularity is primarily due to Republicans. That is apparently in reference to his popularity in W.Va. but I’m sure it’s also true for the country as a whole. He also has the highest disapproval rating of any major-party senator. And regardless of national polls, I’m sure his true nature is best known (and best appreciated) among the coal mines of rural West Virginia.

It’s hard to see Manchin as anything other than a reactionary conservative in Democratic clothing who, among other things, infamously helped to kill climate change legislation and promoted the coal industry and also helped kill other important progressive legislation.

The idea of Manchin as the Democratic nominee is beyond ludicrous and would mean America no longer has either a progressive or even a centrist party, just a very conservative one and another one on the outer fringe of complete lunacy.

I just had an epiphany.

I don’t want to kick Biden to the curb. How about he runs as Vice President? And my pick for President then is Obama… no, not the one who can’t run for
a third term. The other one: Michelle.

Obama/Biden '24

Or Barack runs as VP: Biden/Obama '24

Michelle Biden polled well, last time I looked. But Pres. Obama can’t run for Veep.

I would not mind seeing her as Veep, but she has made it clear she is not interested.

Maybe not:

As a former conservative who has become a moderate liberal since 2016 (no I didn’t vote for Trump l), I was pretty happy supporting Biden in 2020.

My only concern with him is his age. That’s it. Otherwise I have no issue and would happily vote for him for a second term.

To be honest though, if Trump manages to stay eligible to run (avoiding a conviction that makes him ineligible) and gets the R nomination, I’ll vote for anyone or anything the Ds nominate.

And it would take a lot for me to vote for any Republican anymore, honestly.

Why? She’s never held any elected office or government position of any type.

Neither had Trump before 2016. That clearly isn’t a deal-breaker anymore. Even being First Lady gives her more experience than Trump had.

I’d vote for her. She’s smart and has a good presence. She’s also very popular. Obama would be First Gentleman (or whatever you’d call it).

I don’t think we should be taking “Trump did it first!” as a precedent worth following.

If the Democrats nominated a ham sandwich, I’d vote for it in a heartbeat over any Republican, but we can do a lot better than nominating someone because of nostalgia for their spouse.

That’s not at all what I said or meant. My point is that it is no longer a disqualification as it might have once been.

That’s also neither what I said or meant. I think she has qualities herself independent of her husband that could make her a good candidate. I even listed them.

Here is some other good info.

I think she’d be an intriguing candidate that might bring out more enthusiasm than simply voting against Trump.

This is probably moot though, I have the feeling she wouldn’t be interested. She’s seen firsthand how difficult the job is.

Right. I have ten quatloos that say he changes his mind again before that comes up for a vote. Manchin is just playing with the other Dem Senators. He can get away with this because of the 50-50 split, but if the D’s gain a Senate seat or two in the upcoming election (which I think is likely), he’s going to have a hard time finding support for any bill he wants passed in the next Congress.

We would have to go back to Jimmy Carter.

mmm

True — though there is this, in today’s news, about an interesting power a party’s national committee can have over certain potential candidates: