www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/replace-biden-strategic-plan/678884/
I think the smartest appraisal is to assess that the likelihood of there being yet another disaster between here and November is by far the more likely scenario.
This is my fear. Biden is a ticking time bomb. The average American male lifespan is 74 years. Even if Biden doesn’t pass away before November, any number of health issues could be the nail in the fucking coffin for the DNC. Not only Biden, but many democrats running this season.
The DNC needs new life in the party, but Joe’s ego may be the beginning of the end. What a great legacy for him and his family to go out on.
Yes. And this risks of course are not limited merely to physical health. He may simply have another cognitive fail like he did last Thursday. In a way, I'm mildly hoping that he has another fail tomorrow on ABC. This way, we can finally dispatch the delusionally hopeful and proceed with picking a new candidate.
My worry about tomorrow is that it’s edited and not live TV. So the campaign can spin it as “he did great in his interview! See we told you he was doing good and the debate was a fluke!”
My worry is Biden makes a claim that he is not stepping down and he’s talked to many major democrats and they all support him. I fear this is the campaign doubling down.
I really hope I’m wrong but all signs point to this.
If the interview has too many cuts, the "he did great" crowd will IMO be drowned out by those calling for the release of the full conversation. We shall see.
Considering how the media covered the debate and subsequent fallout I don’t know if I’d rely too much on them being partisan now.
What amuses me is this honest talk everyone is having about too many cuts or soft ball questions or editing and not admitting they seen it happen for years. Only now that the ship is threatened does it matter.
I agree with this. It seems as though he is tripling down. Doing radio interviews this morning with friendly journalists. This will not change the situation. The damage is done. I'm worried there is a legality to the ballots not being able to be changed this late that we don't know about. Yes I watch Fox (like to see what the enemy says) and they were talking about the ballots in some states not being changeable.
That doesn’t make sense, when the Democratic Party hasn’t officially decided on the candidate until the national convention. But I could be wrong about the states deadlines - it’s hard to find info on this online.
Please try to understand lifespan averages, at least. The average American male lifespan at BIRTH in 2024 has zero to do with the lifespan of an 80-year-old man in the US, which is currently an average of eight years (as in, living to 88, on AVERAGE).
I know what I quoted. I’m not doing bidens current trajectory. I quoted the average lifespan for American males. If we wanted to get in the minutia we can but it’s kind of secondary to my entire point.
You quoted the average lifespan of American males at BIRTH. Absolutely not relevant.
So not only is Trump dead as per your lifespan, but also a convicted Felon, rapist, insurgent, and cognitively worse than Biden. Dems got nothing to worry, a toaster should win against him.
Nothing to worry? The polls state otherwise. Trump has a very loyal following. Biden was already losing before the debate and it got a few points worse after. He needed the debate to be the beginning of an upward slope and it did the opposite.
From our side it seems the choice is clear, but for the rest of the country it’s not.
Debates don't win elections. Apart from MAGA everyone despites Trump, closer to elections the polls will change. Also polls now mean nothing (Hillary etc)
First off, that rhetoric only works during a normal election year with normal politicians. This isn’t normal in any way. Second, It’s not just this debate that is the issue. People have had concerns over Biden for months (or in some cases, years) and the debate was just the nail in the coffin. Never before has a presidential nominee come out on stage and fumble THAT hard. The fact he was debating Trump just made Biden look a bit better since Trump is also deranged.
Polls are important. He’s constantly trailed in the polls. Never once has Biden gotten a significant lead in any real way. That’s majorly concerning. Hillary’s polls were also correct. She won the popular vote. It came down to a handful of swing states and she was polling way better than Biden is now.
Exactly. Despite all the gas lighting, excuses like "he had a cold" "he was jet lagged" etc. He clearly has some kind of significant mental deterioration that they're struggling to keep hidden. My aunt is a similar age, but in much worse condition. She's got days where she just sounds like an older version of herself. Then she'll be nearly comatose for 3 days and we all think she's going to die--wakes up on day 3 wondering why everyone is upset and wanting to go out for fried chicken. It gets worse and more frequent, until the bad days outnumber the good.
Obviously, Biden is in much better health, but it seems clear that the frequency of "bad days" is increasing, and it's just a matter of time until he has another one very publicly.
Yes. Exactly. Anyone suggesting that that debate performance was due to a cold just a silly bad faith partisan.
Right, and once cognitive decline/infirmity begins in someone Biden's age it only gets worse, and typically happens rapidly.
It actually isn't always that rapid -- it can be very, very gradual. Early onset dementia (that is, dementia that occurs before the age of 65) tends to be far more rapid.
Moderator removed comment
2d
Moderator removed comment
2d
Moderator removed comment
2d
So, I can absolutely see a scenario where things get better for Biden:
Scenario 1: In 1987 a secretive group within DARPA began working on a Time Machine not capable of moving people back and forth in time per se but rather with the ability to cause a persons mental and physical capacity to alter to earlier or later states of time. In the run up to the potential September debate, people will begin noticing Biden is performing not only better but vastly better (not realizing that this is mentally a much younger Biden) and Trump, suddenly seeing himself tied with Biden, will be forced to debate him only to lose, bigly, and then go on to be trounced in the general; not realizing that Biden was time machined.
Scenario 2: Pete Buttigieg wears a Biden mask and swaps in for all Joe’s appearances and somehow nobody notices.
These are my two scenarios where things get better. You’re welcome.
In all seriousness, the best case scenario for Biden is for Trump to have some sort of debilitating health incident.
No scandal is gonna do him in thanks to his cult of personality but he's still a fat old man.
I can't imagine either, to be honest with you. I think Biden resigning/withdrawing is likely to result in a colossal shitshow, not the scenario you outline.
News flash: it’s already a shit show.
Yeah as soon as he resigns they will coronate Kamala, but other candidates will enter because Kamala is an awful candidate while using language quite similar to the one-term crowd talking about Biden (Why is an incumbent entitled to the nomination ? Who needs an incumbent advantage ? We need a stronger candidate...)
But of course there isn't a stronger candidate. Those with name recognition (Newsom, Buttigieg, Kamala) cannot win swing states. Whitmer might win Michigan but nobody knows her and she can't become known in 4 months.
There is nothing for other candidates to enter. The primaries are over. There are no agreed-upon rules by which a new nominee can be chosen in a situation like this. I think we'd likely see a huge fight about how to make such rules which would be catastrophic for the party.
The only way I can see it working is if Biden resigns and lets Harris take over as POTUS and run as a semi-incumbent, and even that I think would be messy (the Republicans would be unlikely to confirm a VP nominee for her, for one).
'Brokered convention' is what I assume happens. And Im sure there are contingent rules there for if a candidate drops out.
I can easily see a shit show as well, it’s just that I can also imagine a scenario in which it goes relatively well.
Have you read the article and listened to Ezra’s podcast on Open Democratic Conventions? It would draw lots of media attention - Trump would be ignored while huge numbers of voters would be paying attention to an exciting new candidate.
I know how it works in theory.
In practice I think it would be a factional fight over the nomination and the media coverage would be an endless parade of "Democrats in disarray" stories, while Trump being out of the limelight would actually be good for him because it would enable goldfish-brained swing voters to forget how crazy he is.
I think it's wildly optimistic to think it would play out to Democrats' advantage.
It’s an enormous risk, it is just a question of whether it is riskier than staying with Biden. I see no path to a Biden victory, so I think the risk is worth it.
Kamala is the other option. For the first time ever, she is polling above Biden.
Cool, who do you put in? Because everybody loves throwing names around but nobody is willing to agree on the same one and also conveniently overlooks the numerous issues that come along with ballot access in every state, limitations on using already existing fundraising, and the severe disadvantage whoever that person is would be coming in with the fact that they weren’t selected by voters and are a last ditch effort that nobody originally wanted by a panicked party.
The problem with this kingmaker shit is everybody envisions a different name as the savior while saying “hey it can’t get any worse right?” when it ABSOLUTELY can.
It’s as stupid to be demanding names at this point as it is to be offering them. The real answer is that it’s a process: listen to Ezra’s recent reposted podcast. Any candidate offered through that process I’d support.
Yes if Biden steps aside the knives come out. It will be raucous murder between candidates until the convention and possibly after.
Kamala will expect it but she is a bad candidate, mistrusted by different groups as a San Francisco liberal but also a cruel DA who put marijuana smokers in jail while laughing about smoking it herself.
Newsom can't win. Buttigieg can't win. Whitmer might win Michigan but has no name recognition. Michelle Obama beats Trump by 11 points in some poll where pollsters decided a first lady was a good clickbait question, but she won't run and can't win anyway.
Putting in a new candidate this late in the game would be a risky hat trick.
Democrats have been running on a "anybody but Trump" platform for years. They need to start with "anybody but Biden." You can do worse, but it would be pretty tough.
Go on a path you know will lead to losing or take another path that could lead to a win or a loss. Biden will lose. A different candidate could either win or lose.
☝️
The DNC ensured Biden faced no real competition. “Chosen by voters” is a farce.
Sure bud 🙄
They moved his strongest state to this front of the line and held zero debates. It was over before it started.
It was over before it started because he was the sitting president and anybody meaningful who could have contested chose not to. Even in the state that he wasn’t on the ballot in that also had a dedicated campaign to move voters away from him because of the I/P conflict he destroyed everybody else.
“Chose not to,” i.e. protecting their standing in the party. Even if nobody else ran we’d be in a very different place if there were debates.
Because your imagination is evidence?
Mate, I literally said “to me”
I hope this can just be a forum to exchange thoughts and opinions on a very tricky political situation without having to claim to be some ultimate authority with divine foreknowledge of the future?
Throwing the Republicans off their game and taking attention away from them is a compelling argument.
This is an actual worthy argument.
Republicans have stuck with trump until now. They aren’t dumping him because he says dumb shit, or lies all the time, or is a felon, etc.
You people are being delusional.
They aren’t dumping him because Trump is still popular with Republicans. Biden isn’t popular with Dems, let alone independents. It’s completely different.
I think the delusion is in thinking the man we saw the other night can move undecided/uninvolved voters; the delusion is in ignoring the meaningful changes in polling since the debate; the delusion is ignoring the growing body of evidence that Joe Biden's mental condition is deteriorating.
The error you make in comparing this to Trump -- is that most people forgive Trump's pathology simply because they perceive he can win. If I thought Biden had a good chance of winning I wouldn't care if he were catatonic.
This is the exact right point to make.
If Biden were up 5-6 points in the swing states, the story would be the GOP freaking out about Trump and his mental state. It would be their problem.
The polling is reversed. That’s why it’s our problem.
How many undecided voters actually are there anymore? I mean seriously, how many people looked at the chaos of 2016-2020 and the relative calm since then and are saying, “yeah, I might be ok with that chaos, I just don’t know”?
It's tiny. But that's who you have to move. The 2016-2020 dynamic was observable in the last election, and Biden won by fewer than 49K votes in the EC.
My bigger concern, honestly is the people who, basically since Biden took office have been all over social media telling us how they can’t vote for him because of x or y. I’ve seen student loans, the border, inflation, and Gaza all as reasons. I’m pretty sure many of them are foreign based, but they are absolutely going to convince some to stay home.
Trump is winning right now. Why would they ditch a candidate that is poised to win?
We’re talking about Biden…
The person they responded to is talking about Trump
Yes it’s delusional to think Trump voters would leave Trump. Trump consistently polls around 48%. To win, the democrat would need to get all of the remaining 52% and us “delusional” people realize that Biden can’t do it. Enough of that 52% is either going to vote third party or sit out. A new candidate is the only legitimate path to stopping Trump.
Trump is winning, Biden is not. Blatant false equivalency
Who’s saying anything about republicans dumping Trump?
They aren’t dumping him because he represents them perfectly.
He’s a bigot. A liar. A predator. A rapist. A criminal. A narcissist who cares for nothing but himself.
He’s their hero. He’s the person that they wish they were.
If Trump is half the threat the Dems claim he is (and I agree he really is) they should be in full blown crisis mode. Instead, we get a half ass interview with a friendly journalist on a Friday evening, and the President taking advice from his crackhead son.
Biden is absolutely cooked IMHO. Trump will win and it will be absolute chaos.
Hunter being considered a trusted advisor struck me like a thunderbolt out of nowhere.
I am totally fine with Biden still loving his son, and supporting him etc. when it doesn't interfere with his duties, or in any way look like nepotism. But actually accepting the counsel in any way of someone who has not only shown the worst judgement, but caused so much grief to the whole American public is a complete mindbogglingly stupid slap in the face. Hunter is not a good person, and he has every incentive to give bad advice here. You can love someone without taking their advice or even pretending like you will.
Not to mention he's desperate for a pardon on that gun charge.
This is what I’m saying. Democrats like to say he’s the second coming of Hitler and Project 2025 is going to end the US as we know it, yet the left doesn’t want to put a candidate in there that can actually win?
The vote blue no matter who crowd is doing a big disservice to the Democratic Party. There are at least a couple other options I could see gaining support from undecideds or independents, but some people are actually suggesting Kamala Harris is the best replacement. Jfc lol, it was evident when she ran for president that no one wants her in office. She may even perform worse than Biden.
The vote blue no matter who crowd doesn’t understand that normies don’t think like they do.
They aren’t thinking about cabinet picks.
They aren’t thinking about Supreme Court picks.
They don’t care about “Bidenomics”
They don’t give a shit about 2025
These are all things that partisans and very attuned political folks care about. My mom is a boomer immigrant who can’t stand trump. Her rational to me the other day was “yea but at least he has his senses” which is just an insanely low bar and yet Biden can’t get over it.
My mom said they both were like two schoolboys trying to one up each other but "it's kinda scary how feeble biden is."
Good luck with running on that...
Trump does not "have his senses." He just yells a lot. The thing is, when it comes to aging men, they lose all of their cache when they become physically weak and can no longer communicate "powerfully." Trump is a total moron who also has diminished quite a bit mentally in the past decade, BUT he can still yell, wave his arms around and look like a solid, fat man, and that HELPS him, because he can still retain a facade of being "powerful." Weak men in general are abhorred, and weak aging men are doubly so.
Because most of the Dem leadership behind the curtain isn’t that worried about Trump winning again or project 2025. Yes they would prefer those things not happen, but life will go on if they do.
Yes. They are rich and beyond child bearing age. Nothing for them to really worry about.
The left doesn’t have anyone who could win. The democrats as a whole can’t manage to figure out that they need to not just anoint someone because it’s their turn.
How is it that in 4 years you have less than 500 karma? And you refer to the vote blue no matter who crowd as though you're not a part of it.
Because I’m not a fuckin loser lol. Too busy living life. Doesn’t mean I don’t lurk Reddit.
Jesus Christ, over 400k comment karma for you? I’d hate to have wasted so much time on social media.
Always cracks me up when people wear their Reddit karma like a badge of honor.
I won’t be voting blue no matter who, and I will not be voting Trump, for clarifications sake.
So you don't care that a guy who has been charged with voter fraud and stealing national security secrets could be the next president. Got it.
Your presumption is incorrect. I do care about democracy though, and having someone tell me who to vote for goes against the foundation of that concept.
Keep it up, guy! You’re getting downvoted repeatedly here. Don’t want to watch that precious Reddit karma take a hit!
When one guy wants to end democracy, you need to vote for the other guy.
I think they are in crisis mode. They are just desperately trying their best to not look like it. Biden's campaign can't entertain the idea of him dropping out, because it legitimizes everyone's concerns. Only when it is final, will they announce it. So I think publicly most of the party will seem 110% behind Biden. It needs to be coordinated, not through intraparty fighting
Exactly. Biden is no longer the safe choice.
He wasn't the right choice last year, but no one wanted to listen.
Oh look another Joe Rogan fan with a new account and low karma in here to shit on Biden.
Doesn’t make him wrong tho
Yes it does
Everyone that opposes Biden is a Russian bot
Anyone that follows Joe Rogan should be ignored.
They're hoping we all shut up so they can lose the election in peace. Yay.
I agree. Basically I would normally not. I think the process of a primary and then general election campaign would bring the prospective D candidate roughly in line with Biden.
But this is a golden opportunity to basically get a generic D candidate as the actual candidate. By the time ds make the choice thr gop won't have much time to define them as an unacceptable alternative to Trump.
Usually this wouldn't work because the favorable of the incumbent are mostly about the fundamentals. But bidens age really even before the debate seemed to be a major drag. He routinely comes in behind senate candidates by a fair amount.
The downside risk is that the chaotic process of picking a replacement might leave dems so disunity even in the face of trump. Also you might just turn people off entirely by introducing a new candidate thus late in the game.
But frankly I think Biden is shot. He has not chancr of winning. Or rather the circumstances where he wins (because trump is so unnacceptable that basially any d would win) are meaningless. So might as well roll the dice with someone new.
I know it’s completely far-fetched, but Obama-Romney (Michelle and Mitt) would be an unstoppable ticket and would communicate volumes about the seriousness of the danger posed by Trump. Talk about history-making.
That would be an amazing move
I don’t think you have a ticket where the Pres and VP are that far apart on policy.
Is Michelle ready to get dragged through the mud to try and save America?
I think Liz Cheney would be a better option than Mitt at this point.
I’m VERY for a split Dem-Rep ticket.
Maybe Bernie and Liz Cheney or Kamala and Liz Cheney
When I see comments like this I am reminded of just how much of a bubble Reddit is in holy shit
BERNIE. 82-year-old fucking BERNIE. Just stop that. Please.
What is wrong with people that they would vote for Trump
I mean, it's some non-zero chance with unnamed dem versus zero chance with Biden.
At least sticking with Biden is a sure thing - he will surely lose. If they pick a new candidate, then you don't know what's going to happen.
He should have committed to being a one term President in 2020.
Can we stop pretending it would be anyone but Kamala?
Why? If Biden drops out, there’s no precedent for it having to be Kamala.
There's so many reasons it would have to be her, but I can start with one. The delegates are loyal to Biden, and if you think he's going to step down (only way he's getting replaced) and nuke his VPs political career by not endorsing her after choosing her as VP as a nod to the black electorate that got him elected in the first place, then you don't know a thing about Biden's political career. He is much too loyal to do something like that
The delegates will be loyal to whomever the DNC pushes as the candidate. I don’t think Biden can just hand the nomination to her. He certainly can endorse her, but what needs to happen is a series of quick debates between the 5-6 front runners. We need to see new polling numbers on these people before deciding. If the DNC is going to pull a Hail Mary, we need to be confident the new person has the support of the American people. The fastest way right now is televised debates followed by polling in battleground states.
With current technology, we could pull this off between now and the convention. It would be tight but it’s possible. The media and the world moves at a much faster pace now, and no doubt it would be all any news outlet would be talking about.
PLUS you’d get 4-5 candidates all discussing live on national television why Trump is going to ruin the country, which means Trump is going to have a hard time doing a smear campaign on 5 people this close to the election.
I see what you’re saying, but once Biden steps down, it’s not really on him at that point outside of him endorsing a candidate and he wouldn’t shoot the party in the foot by prematurely endorsing Harris.
The delegates were chosen by Biden, you're fooling yourself if you don't think they're loyal to him
They’re not chosen by Biden? The delegates chose Biden. But he was running virtually unopposed so that’s no surprise.
Edit: becoming a delegate is a long process and varies from state to state, but AFAIK, Biden doesn’t exactly choose them (though certainly could influence them heavily). The delegates choose who the nominee is. Which again, stating he has all the delegates doesn’t mean much when he was running virtually unopposed this election.
However the system was also designed that the DNC doesn’t confirm the nominee until the national convention. The original purpose of the convention was to debate and hash out if the current nominee is the one they want on the ticket, and if not, decide who they do want. It’s their final checkpoint before confirmation. It’s made for situations just like this where the party is questioning if their “guy” is the right one.
However usually by the convention the party is fully committed to the current nominee so it doesn’t mean much. This time it’s less clear.
Tbf I don't remember where it was I was listening to an episode about the delegate selection, I thought it was Ezra but maybe it was somewhere else. They said when a candidate wins a primary usually they're allowed to select the delegates
It’s a much more complicated process and varies from state to state. But that also doesn’t make much sense - the candidate wins the primary because the delegates chose the candidate. So how could the candidate then choose the delegates?
The delegates are required by state law to vote for the candidate who won that state’s primary. So typically it doesn’t matter who they actually are. That said I think the delegates are often chose along with the candidate. So delegates from a state that chose Biden would all be Biden supporters. It’s supposed to be a ceremonial role now so it usually doesn’t matter. But if Biden drops out and all these delegates become unpledged, it will certainly matter that they’re Biden supporters and he would probably have a lot of influence on how they vote.
That’s wrong. They are not required by law.
But that also doesn’t make much sense - the candidate wins the primary because the delegates chose the candidate. So how could the candidate then choose the delegates?
I'm not sure how familiar you are with the process, winning the primary doesn't have to do with delegates choosing the candidate, at least until the DNC in August, when the delegates actually vote.
This isn't quite the episode I was thinking of but it covers a lot of the process. Whole thing is worth a listen though. I'm throwing together a few quotes from a really long conversation, so it's probably worth getting the full context.
Well, there’s two stages to picking a president, right? One is the primaries, and second is actually choosing the delegates. So the primaries allocate the delegates. The winner of the primary gets five delegates from this state. The actual people who are chosen as those five people are not picked until weeks or sometimes months after the primary.
Well, there’s two things that really changed fundamentally the way this whole system works. The first was that primaries had to be binding. And so in the old days, a lot of people went to the convention uncommitted. What changed in ’72 was the delegates still had to get themselves elected, but they had to be pledged to a presidential candidate. You had to establish a presidential preference, and the presidential preference had to have some relationship to the outcome of the primary.
Well, beginning in April, you’re going to see a lot of state conventions, county conventions, etc., going through April, May and June. And in those conventions, the party participants — and anybody can come to the first of these things — they will pick delegates. They’ll pick delegates to the state convention or to a congressional district convention, and they will actually choose the people who go to the national convention in Chicago.
It is a politicking among the activists in the Democratic Party because those are the people who seek to run as delegates. You would be finding your supporters in the state and encouraging them to go to the county convention or go to the state convention. You would be finding your friends. And again, you need a lot of friends to run for president, and you need to have a lot of friends all over the country — which, by the way, is why incumbent presidents do so well and incumbent vice presidents actually do so well, is that they have a chance to make friends all over the place. And in this scenario, you would really need friends all over the country. In Pennsylvania you’d need them. You need them in California. You need them all over the place in order to find enough people who would be willing to go engage in this election and get elected as your delegates to the convention.
This is why I would hope that Biden would release his delegates without endorsing anyone. “I look forward to the process playing out and I hope we select the best candidate for the job.” Would Kamala have any chance if he dropped out and said this?
I already stated why I think that's a fantasy who haven't been paying any attention to Biden's political career .
But even in that scenario, I also think passing over Kamala would be at the Democrats peril. Clyburn has already explicitly stated that.
Personally, I think anyone other than Harris is engaging in fantasy, I'll probably just stop engaging with it myself
What would be the peril of passing over Kamala? Alienating black voters? Of course she could still attempt to get the nomination even if it isn’t handed to her, as could some other prominent African American or female candidate. I just want whoever has the best chance of winning.
Yes, that's what Clyburn is signaling very clearly when he says the democratic party should not try to go around Harris in any way. Biden explicitly chose her as a nod to the black electorate that voted him in the first place. Those voters saved Democrats in the 2022 elections, how quickly people want to turn their back on them.
It's also a vote of no confidence in the current administration that they've been hyping for the last 3 years.
I also think it would be terrible to run a campaign of we're saving democracy and then you have party elites choose two white people from the Midwest or whatever.
This all ignoring the delegates are loyal to Biden and will take his recommendation, and there's no way he doesn't recommend his VP.
Harris polls as well as Biden generally and better among women, which could be a key to this election. Don't think her chances are good but better than people give her credit for.
By the end of her campaign, Kamala was polling at less than 1%, and she ultimately withdrew before even reaching the starting line in Iowa. No one wants Kamala.
Kamala's current approval rating is lower than Biden's, and both are lower than Trump after Jan 6. It's not good.
At least one recent poll has her 2 points ahead of Biden:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4752020-vice-president-harris-trump-biden-poll/
She’s still better than Biden
Kamala, VP Beshear.
Shapiro would be better. Beshear is from an unimportant state.
I suspect this is why they are stalling. They will wait till it's too late for anyone but her.
There is no reason to do this. The money thing is overblown, as is the idea that black voters will be betrayed. Black voters like everyone else will understand the need to drop a candidate that isn't even popular with them, and they could even pick another candidate who is black if that turns out to be such an issue, it just cannot be someone who polls as badly as Biden.
No, no, don’t you understand that black voters are completely and totally myopcially focused on the race of the candidate even though they’ve literally voted for one white man after another (except ONE TIME) ever since they won the franchise?
It’s crazy how white people project their own stuff on to others (ie, a myopic focus on candidates being the same race as them).
Kamala would be a terrible choice - even worse than Biden. Beshear running for president and Whitmer as his VP would give the Democrats the victories they need in key battleground states (MI, GA, WI, PA).
Both are governors so there would need to be special elections to replace them, but the upside of winning the election in the face of a would-be-tyrant whose future administration would support Project 20205 is worth any downsides to their respective states.
The clock is ticking and the more time Democrats sit on their hands, the less time they have to prepare for the convention in mid-August. Thursday's debate was the tipping point.
Honestly I don't think we're that rushed yet. The DNC is like a month after the RNC, let Trump waste his time attacking Biden, then announce that Biden is dropping out and have a mini-campaign that culminates in a vote of delegates at the DNC and an official nomination.
I don't see any reason why this would actually be.
Feeble old man has done more for Americans since FDR. Goes he has good people all around him.
They said that back in 1992 in regard to Clinton too...
Dumb as fuck
Agree (you are). I read a few of your comments.
Cool! What candidate can get on the ballot in time? None?
Tell me you nothing about state election law without telling me.
Any proof, or all you got is tired internet phrases?
Read this string. YOU made an assertion. YOU said no one could get on the ballot in time. Logically, this means YOU have to support that assertion. (Otherwise, people might think you're the kind of person who makes informationless claims.)
Sounds good, I’ll do just that
Here’s the FEC’s report thingy on election deadlines. Primaries are already done, Biden won them. so this theoretical Biden replacement is basically an independent. I’m on mobile, but taking a look in:
11 states’ deadlines have already passed, including Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Texas and Utah.
another 8 are this month lol
Ballotpedia shows the party deadlines, and it’s even worse - all of the party filing deadlines have already passed.
So good luck missing out on those states! By the way, who is this theoretical Biden replacement? We’re supposed to figure that out, do all the vetting and all that, and get them in ballots in what, days?
Thinking we can replace Biden right now is pure wishful fulfillment. The republicans would absolutely torch us for mixing it up, that’s us literally responding to their game. Absolutely pathetic that some people think it’s a good idea.
I’ll keep waiting for your data btw!!
You are exquisitely wrong. A major party candidate is absolutely not an independent, by any definition. And, all states have statutes that guarantee a ballot position for major party candidates. The “independent deadline” is exactly that, and applies only to Independent candidates.
Here’s an example of the major party statute from bright red Alabama.
Alabama Code Section 17-13-5 states:
"The names of the candidates for President and Vice President of the United States of the political parties that have been recognized and certified by the Secretary of State shall be placed on the general election ballot."
The law goes on to specify that for a party to be "recognized and certified" by the Secretary of State, they must have received at least 20% of the total votes cast for president or governor in the previous general election.
You can pull this for every state.
Stop calling people names. Learn how to learn.
How many elections has this writer won? Why should anyone care what she thinks?
Joe Manchin?
Oh not him said the greens in the party.
Kamila no she polls badly.
Sanders well the Kristen Cinemas of the party will vote Trump.
Their are people too liberal and too moderate that is why we got Biden
How can Biden or anything surrounding him think he can do the job for one year let alone 4 more?
" There are risks. The Democrats could gamble and lose. But there are also clear benefits."
I don’t think I can vote for Biden at this point. Writing in Whitmer. He is going to lose my state by a MILE so it won’t matter but can’t vote for this dude again.
There’s just so much working against Biden at this point it’s an impossibility.
The progressives/left were already flanking him and he was trailing Trump in the polls. Now 4/5 don’t think he’s mentally fit for the job today, let alone in four years. It’s over.
And I can understand fears from Dems not wanting to potentially repeat the disastrous 1968 open convention—a year Nixon ultimately won—but the alternative is a surefire loss.
At this point you’re throwing a Hail Mary instead of taking a knee.
Love the football analogy, but given the strength of the anti-Trump coalition, any fielded candidate will have a considerably better chance than a hail mary.
Harris all the way! Beshear or Whitmer as her running mate!
Harris is the only logical candidate since she's the only one who can inherit the war chest.
This is the dumbest talking point. The war chest can be transferred to the DNC or a PAC. Any new candidate would receive a metric fuck ton of money upon getting the confirmation. Money is not an obstacle or something to be considered.
The Biden-Harris ticket doesn't exist yet. VPs don't run in the primary and Biden/Harris have not been nominated for the general election.
Someone else said Biden can put it in a PAC
What about getting the new candidate on the ballot in the 50 states? Maga Republicans are threatening to sue to make sure only Biden can be on the ballot, and we can't trust the courts to not aid them.
There is no legal mechanism for this. They can sue all they want.
The Supreme Court will invent one.
They could try, but the entire point of having a national convention is to decide who the party wants on the ticket. Until the convention, there’s zero ground to stand on, because the party has never officially confirmed who’s on the ticket.
And the entire point of the Maga movement is to seize power and overthrow constitutional democracy. They're not going to let shit like standing get in their way and the courts are on their side.
This is fantasy fiction. Like polls saying Michelle Obama could win. Not a candidate. No desire to be a candidate. No platform. No record. But the polls say she could win by 11 points. What the fuck are we talking about. The sad pathetic desperate attempts to find a solution to Biden is old are going to lose the election. Dems are going fuck themselves at the convention and wonder how Trump could win again.
No. They're way more likely to stick the heads in the sand and ignore the glaringly obvious signs of their candidate's unelectability. Then, in the end, they will recall the debate, and also recall the unimaginable disasters yet to come, and will not remotely wonder how Trump could win again.
This is true only if you ignore the precedent of 1968's contested election. Nixon was able to come to power because of the sheer chaos that the Democrats had demonstrated on the floor of Chicago's convention. Challenging Biden right now will probably set up a similar situation making Trump's rise inevitable. It may be the case that we are damned if we do and damned if we don't. However, the fundamentals of the economy seem to favor the incumbent. If Biden steps aside, there is no incumbency advantage. Any new candidate doesn't have a track record or platform to campaign on effectively. A new candidate would be starting at square one. Neither scenario is ideal.
I would argue that 1968 is not a particularly relevant comparison point. There was an enormous war raging, and an associated conscription program. Gaza is in no way comparable. Poll after poll shows the Middle East as not even being in the top three of American voter concerns. So if 68 is a primary reason why you think we should not consider another candidate I would suggest further study into the causes of the disruption at 68. Historically, a candidate being selected at the convention was simply convention.
A new candidate, overall, is simply a better bet. ___________
... for two reasons:
The country will be better off led by a non-parasitic, highly competent individual who has full cognitive abilities.
The Dems will be better off if the Party is led by someone who can beat The Parasite.
It’s a bigger gamble, sure. Allan Lichtman, who correctly predicted the last 9/10 presidential elections, is adamant that ditching Biden makes Trump’s chances better.
Yeah but he’s delusional here — Biden just nuked himself in the polls and he’s not going to get any better.
I’m calling it, Lichtman is wrong this time.
He predicted 10/10. The only one he got "wrong" was Bush/Gore, and it turns out Gore really did win Florida.
If you all think that Republicans will let Dems replace Biden on state ballots, you're gonna be really disappointed.
But he's not even on the ballot yet right? He hasn't been officially nominated by the Dems at the convention.
Uh-huh. Now, what happens when that "new candidate" isn't allowed on the ballot in certain states?
How will that new candidate amass enough of a ground game in swing states to be able to cold call, canvas, run polls, and hold "get out the vote" drives?
How much money does that new candidate have in their warchest? 0 dollars and 0 cents?
How many people know the name of the new candidate, and will feel compelled to vote for a complete nobody instead of Donald Trump, who was president before, and "didn't do so bad" (in the mind of the low-information voters)?
How will the new candidate handle the four-month media smearjob of how the Democrats are in disarray and how they're just a "desperation pick" because they started to panic about Biden, and repeatedly claim that this person isn't actually up to the job of being president (with no evidence to the contrary)?
I want to know how a new candidate overcomes these things.
The new candidate would have access to literally hundreds of millions of dollars that have been donated through the Democratic superstructure.
Name recognition would be a problem for about five minutes.
The smear-job of "desperation pick" is less damaging than the true attacks about Biden's inability to do the job.
There is no legal mechanism to keep the Democratic candidate off the ballot, so long as they are nominated in time.
These concerns are silly.
We'll see.
The democratic candidate is decided at the convention, Biden has the delegates for that, but he hasn't actually been officially chosen yet.
Going through and open convention and everything leading up to it will be the biggest political event in decades. The DNC will create the campaign for the new candidate, and it will largely absorb the infrastructure from the Biden/Harris campaign. The Biden/Harris campaign and donate their money to the DNC or create a superpac.
The idea that people would show zero interest in learning about a new candidate and instead just instantly commit themselves to someone they don't like is insane. Trump is not popular, Biden just happens to be even less popular.
A four month media job really limits the ability for Republicans to create a proper smear campaign, there is a lot of explanation for the "Dems in disarray" headline. How about Democrats are listening to voters and hear they wanted to go in a different direction, knowing the stakes of this election, they took a chance on the unknown to try and meet voters where they are. Voters do not trust Biden can be president for another 4 years, he has shown that fears about his age affecting him are not unfounded, and there is an incredible amount of doubt about where he is going to be in 4 years. He would not have given that debate performance 4 years ago regardless of how sick or tired he was, what is he going to be like in 4 years? That is a question that no democrat has a good answer to, and acting differently just leaves voters feeling gaslit.
Yeah I really think this is a risk worth taking. The fact that a new candidate would have a lot less time is sort of a double edged sword that could work in favor of the DNC. Not only is there less time for a smear campaign and curating an October surprise, but the DNC could run on being a party that listens to the people and has new energy and life in the party. That may excite people. That may even get younger people to vote too. Hell, it excites me just thinking about it.
My generation (Millenial/Gen Z) is so tired of grandparents running our country and making decisions that they won’t have to suffer the consequences of. I want a candidate that’s setting my generation up for success. We are the future.
Absolutely, changing candidates has the potential of not helping at all (I really can't see how it could possibly hurt), but there are some actual really incredible upsides if we can do it right. I don't see how Biden can possibly win at this point, and losing should be seen as not an option.
Agreed, but it’s a good bet a last minute swiftboat attack or Comey email will happen. A counter response team will need to be well oiled and ready.
Yep that's why Humphrey beat Nixon in '68.
Nixon wasn't despised the way Trump is, he was an unknown and voters were upset with the Vietnam war. This is not the exact same situation. It is really condescending to believe that no one learned anything from that event and we are going to repeat it in exactly the same way. Beyond that, you have no idea how LBJ would have performed if he didn't resign, just because Democrats still lost, doesn't mean that LBJ would have done any better. Right now, people are upset with Biden, they think he's too old, but are generally preferring Democratic policies. It's cowardly to believe because we lost once that things can never go differently in the future.
Which states wouldn’t the candidate be allowed onto? What are the deadlines for those exactly?
In my limited research it doesn’t seem there are any. The NYT misstated a deadline for Ohio (I think) that was before the national convention, but that date got moved. It seems like the DNC has up until the national convention to make a choice. Which makes sense because originally that was sort of the whole point of the national convention- to dispute and certify that the nominee is who the party wants on the ticket.
So the article is stating that within the next week Biden should step down to allow basically a month of debates between new candidates. Then at the convention, the party would decide. It would be unusual because there would be no primary, but AFAIK there aren’t any legal rules in place to forbid this.
But Biden would have to step down. There’s really not realistic way forward without Biden stepping down himself.
My view of redditors has collapsed this last week.
Just replace him, it will be so easy and success will follow!
No you fuckwads.
Who would replace Biden? No can agree on anyone. So you'll have a protracted battle.
The DNC would pick the candidate and no one will be happy.
The new pick would have to create a national campaign in a month, and get name recognition.
Biden cannot transfer ANY funds to the new candidate.
All those campaign offices have to be closed. Just transferring them over to a new person doesn't work like that.
How do you get that person on the ballot?
Primaries are just for voting, they perform a specific legal function of getting you on the ballot.
This is all incredibly dumb, and you all are dumb for thinking it can work.
It's a pipe dream and legal nightmare, though.
How? The DNC doesn’t decide the nominee until the convention. That’s the entire purpose of it. There’s no major legal issues here.
A better bet for Trump, certainly.
Otherwise, having Biden step aside will result in the Democrats experience 1968 2.0
People that keep talking about 1968 don't obviously know what exactly happened. Let me fill you in. RFK was running, the front runner far and away and was going to absolutely dog walk Nixon like his brother did, he then got his head blown off in Chicago before the convention, then Democrats ran a snooze fest who I can't even remember the name of. They weren't running an old man with dementia then decided to change it to a younger more energetic candidate. Know history before trying to use it against making good decisions..
Yeah starting with a sample size of one was bad enough, but then referencing an election where a popular candidate was assassinated really does not add to the discussion
And then comparing it to an election 60 years later where both candidates are historically unpopular and replacing one of them guarantees that the replacement wins but both parties are just happy being slightly less hated than the other, because who cares if the America public likes you, just disliking you slightly less than the other guy is the winning strategy. Let's see where that gets us. Seems like likeable candidates haven't been a thing since 2012.
Not necessarily true. Nixon was a very different candidate in 1968 than Trump is in 2024. The reason people will vote Democratic is because they won’t be Trump.
Plus, Nixon’s main strategy was running a more moderate platform to pick up more voters, which Trump most certainly isn’t doing
When you have an N of 1, there is no predictive power.
Joe Biden is going to lose to Trump. Even if last week was a one-off -- and is there anybody in the world who seriously believes that? -- it was the death blow for his campaign.
And folks wonder why the left doesn’t get any policy victories when they shoot themselves in the foot with doomer bullets
It ain't dooming if it's real. Look at all the new polls since the debate. Sharp trend downward for Biden
To be fair he’s not been doing that great for awhile, which is even more reason for him to pull out. Also, how much of his positive polling numbers are simply “because he’s not Trump” which ANY candidate would have?
Like how everyone went doomer when Romney won the first debate against Obama?
Like how the polls show Clinton ahead of Trump throughout 2016?
Give me a break lmao
A new Democrat on the ballot would invite chaos and would be a disaster, and that's why corporate media is pushing it so hard. How is a new candidate supposed to raise the money and set up a campaign apparatus in less than 4 months? How are they supposed to get on the ballot in all 50 states? Is Biden perfect? God no. Is he the best choice? Probably not. But this false equivalencey that is being pushed between an old man who had a bad debate, but has proven to be a solid president, despite being past his prime versus a convicted felon who was twice impeached and had a disastrous presidency is ridiculous. Trump is unfit for office. All the attention is being focused on Biden, when the alternative is clearly so much worse.
This is a completely unbalanced conspiracy take masqeurading as being reasonable. There is not come cabal of "corporate media" people who get together and plan this stuff. You need to get a grip.
6 companies control up to 90% of US media.
Campaigns spin up super fast - this isn’t a logistics issue. I think there are definitely reasons to be wary of a switch, but Biden didn’t have a bad debate, he had a devastating media cycle that’s not going away and we’re seeing states that have no business going R start moving away from D.
Biden’s done, and it’s a shame that he seems to be one of the only people who don’t recognize that.
1) Campaign funds can be transferred via a pac
2) The DNC doesn’t finalize a candidate until the convention
3) The media isn’t pushing anything. They’re reporting on what everyone is concerned about.
4) The internet and media are also a new candidates greatest asset, as every single news outlet would want an interview or to host a town hall. Something Biden should be doing, but he isn’t other than one curated interview.
5) News spreads fast these days. What could happen in 2 years in 1992 would take only months now.
9 missing replies
To me, at this point, it boils down to this:
Can you honestly see any scenario where things GET BETTER for Biden? I can't, at best, this is peak Biden.
Can you imagine a reasonable scenario in which a decent new dem candidate assuages fears among dem voters and breathes new life into the democratic campaign? No way to know for sure, but it's definitely possible.