www.nytimes.com/2024/07/03/opinion/biden-harris-trump-democrats.html?unlocked_article_code=1.4k0.vFOb.7RDB8R7IdbLZ
What is crazy to me is how fucking long the US election periods are. How the fuck is four month too close to the election to select another candidate? The UK is having an election today that was called 44 days ago!
The Citizens United v. FEC ruling essentially resulted in no cap on campaign funding. Corporations, unions, special interest groups, independent groups, etc. can spend however much they want on political campaigns.
Both sides are spending crazy amounts of money, because they're raking in crazy amounts of money. Thus they can afford campaign all year long. It is also rather easy when you have a two-party system, and donors don't have to spread their money among numerous smaller parties.
yet another ruling by the conservative SCOTUS (which has controlled law and order in the U.S. steadily since the 1960s, not a single year of liberal majority).
This is why we can't have nice progressive things, young Americans. Putting Republicans into office isn't cutting the mustard.
“Great, you’ve pinpointed it. Step two is washing it off.”
Citizens United isn't the actual problem. The core problem with US elections is that we don't have public campaign financing, like the civilized world. That means that our politicians must raise millions (if not billions) of dollars to pay for commercial air time that should be free in a limited election window (e.g. 6-8 weeks) leading up to the election -- like every civilized nation has.
That money is in amounts that the American 99% just can't contribute, so it comes from the 1% -- who then control all of our politicians by default now.
With public campaign financing, Citizens would let the 1% run all the issue ads they want whenever they want, sure, but it wouldn't make the politicians indebted to them because they won't need the 1% to do their job, or vote the way their constituents want, get elected, or vote their conscience.
Both parties know this. The GQP is just ignoring it because they like the graft. The Dems are claiming we need a Constitutional Amendment (we don't, Roberts made that clear during the CU ruling!) in order to sound reasonable while pushing the issue aside because they like the graft too. 8(
tl;dr - The CU ruling is a scapegoat intended to draw attention from the real problem -- no public campaign financing.
One of the downsides of being among the first modern democratic countries is you didn’t have a whole lot to go off of. Other countries that formed democracies later can point to the U.S. and go “yah, let’s not do that”.
That means that our politicians must raise millions (if not billions) of dollars to pay for commercial air time that should be free in a limited election window (e.g. 6-8 weeks) leading up to the election -- like every civilized nation has.
I don't know about the UK, but in my country I have never seen a political ad (on TV) paid by a campaign telling you to vote for or against anybody. Not even on public channels or the ones owned by a politician.
Here people that run for elections, if they want to be elected or their manifesto known, they are invited to talk shows where journalists ask them questions and also fact check them. Sometimes multiple are invited and they have informal debates. It's not always perfect and there's been a progressive weakening of the public channels in the last few years but that's still pretty much how it works, and we have good independent channels as well.
To me political ads on TV are wild, especially since the American ones I've seen on social media more often than not look like an excessively dramatic movie trailer. And the fact that you have multiple entire channels dedicated exclusively for political news and talks doesn't help. The very fact that politics is entertainment, coupled with a two party system, is what's been ruining the US. Describing that as sports team mentality is being generous.
Precisely. It is a requirement in many civilized nations that broadcasters are required to give air time to qualified candidates, for free, during the short election windows.
All of this is possible and legal already in the USA. But our politicians don't want to stop the gravy train from the 1%, of course.
Public campaign financing? We’re not socialists, bro! /s
Citizens United is one very important aspect of that problem. It overturned McCain-Feingold, which placed sharp limits on campaign spending. It was a bipartisan effort overturned by a partisan court.
I think if we were to really fix Citizens United we need to r/ExpandTheCourt (to dilute the far-right idealogues) and/or we need a Constitutional amendment (far more out of reach even than a new law).
This court would strike down any law proposed by Congress, the way they did with McCain-Feingold.
It's so sad. Because we could be spending all that money on real help for real people, instead of just making each other angry. We spent $1B on the presidential race alone in 2020. How many people would that have fed? How many children vaccinated?
I'd be curious if you ran a lean campaign on half the budget and just targeted areas that were a toss up, ignoring the race until about 6 months before if that would still be successful because only 1 candidate per party is picked ultimately. You can get in the news a lot of ways without spending a lot of money if you are noisy on social media.
Elections have become a money making machine for everyone involved. It’s so bad here the media is already talking about the next cycle sometimes months after a president is sworn in. House representatives basically live in a constant election cycle since they’re up every two years. And, senators have a bit of a reprieve.
So aside from the entire country being exhausted from what feels like a decade of constant campaigning, almost nothing happens in congress anymore because no one wants to vote on something 8-12 months prior to an election which could be used against them (both by other parties and by internal challengers).
Honestly how the fuck did America ever have the claim of #1 democracy? Your entire election / candidate process sucks complete donkey balls compared to pretty much every other democracy out there. And don't get me started on your winner takes all bullshit system.
Yeah, we are kind of stuck in a suicide pact. Our 230 year old Constitution is almost impossible to change because the minority factions it empowers have veto power over any changes that would dilute their power.
I think the problem of Citizens United cannot be overstated. Campaign spending limits placed practical guardrails on how many ads could run for how long - there simply wasn't the cash available for non-stop attack ads.
Citizens United also did something worse. It hid the audit trail for campaign contributions at the same time as it gave corporations unlimited spending, but still held back individuals, and paved the way for the big money PACs that aren't supposed to "coordinate," but of course find ways to do so.
The rapidity with which dark money has corrupted the entire American electoral system is really astounding.
I know Roberts (who wrote that opinion) isn't stupid. I'm not even sure he's corrupt, in the sense that someone like Thomas is, who accepts large gifts from donors. I think Roberts is one of the "true believers" who bought into all this originalism nonsense, but lives in such an Ivory Tower he can't really conceive of just how bad all the others really are.
In his head, I think Roberts believes his "balls and strikes" nonsense. There's something fundamentally wrong with law school and the way the law is taught in this country, because on the one hand there is the idea of "respect for the rule of law" but there is a constant probing to find the exceptions to exploit for gain.
There is also something strange about the way that the very religious read our laws, and it's a bit creepy they way they refer to "The Founders" and "the Founding Fathers' intent," as though they are still perched on a cloud and watching from above. I have always believed it's useful to divine their intent and understand the historical context in which the Constitution was written and the various laws enacted, much the same way as a costumer I might look to clothing construction methods in the 18th century to build a replica of one of their suits. However, we do not live in their time, and should not be entirely bound by their original intent when applying the principles laid out. I certainly wouldn't hold myself to dressing as an 18th century colonial every day because that's what the founding fathers wore, and even if I did I would not be bound to spinning the thread and weaving the cloth by hand for such an outfit.
There is a fundamentalist Mormon sect that dresses as pioneers of the 19th century, something like the Amish. One of the joys of America has been that we can look at these things and think they are a bit dotty, but that we co-exist alongside them just fine. These offshoots are likely to be at least as threatened by Project 2025 as the Muslims. Even mainstream LDS will come under fire in a relatively short amount of time. Their money will buy them a bit of breathing room, but they don't have the numbers to survive if the Evangelicals decide to exterminate them - which left unchecked the Evangelicals will.
What is crazy to me is how fucking long the US election periods are.
It's just for fundraising from billionaires, since the USA still doesn't have public campaign financing...
One reason, in England is the candidate is elevated after the party wins. Here we nominate the candidate, then vote for the candidate. Also the American system is not really one big election, but more like 50 small elections for each of the states.
Yeah, the logistics of your voting system are definitely another crazy aspect. As someone used to having preliminary finale results four or five hours after polling closes, waiting days for final deciders seems so weird. And then the former government gets another two months to fuck around...
That was very anomalous, and because we already knew the Trump camp was threatening our elections. People needed to be *VERY* sure of the result, and we still suffered the Insurrection.
Name recognition is an advantage, being the incumbent is an advantage, being associated with Obama is an advantage. It's not that we can't select another candidate logistically, it's that doing so would ensure that candidate loses.
Our elections work completely differently, as much as anything else because the power to administer them is explicitly delegated to the states. This means a patchwork of rules and deadlines and forms to fill out.
If this were a normal election year, my guess is Biden wouldn't be running. He came out of retirement to heed the call to serve his country once again. No matter what else happens, the greatness of his sacrifice must be acknowledged. He's had a thankless job, pulled us out of COVID, avoided a recession, patched up relationships around the world, and watched the GOP destroy his son for sport while taunting him with the pardon power he has but should not and will not wield for personal gain.
Hell, I might be hoarse and tired too, after four years of that.
But back to our elections. Because of the way our process works, for us this would be a very late juncture to switch. If the GOP were a normal party, they'd point and laugh as they did when McGovern changed his VP late in the 1972 cycle, use it as evidence of instability of the Democratic Party, and sail to victory on the merits of that argument.
But in 2024, the Heritage Foundation is already readying legal challenges in the swing states, so that if the Democrats change their candidate, they will sue to keep the new Democratic candidate off the ballot entirely.
While this seems like crass election interference that one would think would be easily struck down, it won't be based upon that - at least ostensibly. It will be based upon rules and deadlines, and the Democrats will be forced into begging for exceptions to the rules, which further undermines the rule of law.
We are here. There is only one way out of this, and that is forward.
Trump's been campaigning since 2022 and right as the first indictments dropped. I remember the cycles being 1 year max to get started but he just wanted to grift the suckers who didn't check the boxes they were sending back to help. Some found that it's a recurring donation. So imagine you gave $500 bucks one month and another the next without your notice.
Yeah, it's usually only like 6 weeks of campaigning in Canada as well. The 2 year long campaign season in the US is insane.
They spend all their time raising money and sucking up to donors instead of actually representing their constituents.
Selecting a party's candidate is a very divisive thing in America. The primary process is a bitter dramatic process where candidates tear each other apart and most voters rarely ever get the candidate that they actually want. It takes a very long time before voters overcome their anger and grief and actually begin to fully support the party's candidate.
Selecting a new candidate this close is pretty risky. Finding a candidate that all dems will fully rally around is a nearly impossible endeavor in just a few months. The rationale is that it's better to play it safe and assume that most voters will vote for Biden, even if he's braindead as opposed to chanceing it with someone new.
My thinking is that the current situation is so unprecedented that most of the political science conventional wisdom is at best, quaint.
I keep thinking back to 68, LBJ doing bad in the primary and deciding not to run again. Then Humphrey wins the nom and loses close to criminal Nixon. It’s risky just never know what can happen.
Selecting a party's candidate is a pointless thing in America.
Just have people run for the office, then there's an election and people vote. If there is no clear winner, you keep the top candidates in the race and vote again. You repeat until there's a candidate who got more than 50% of the votes.
Why limit the vote to 2 options?
You're describing ranked choice voting. It got its first real test in Maine, and despite the far right's doom and gloom, it carried Susan Collins over the finish line.
You’re describing (a tremendously impractical version of) instant-runoff voting, which is used in some parts of the country. It has definite advantages, but as the people of New York City found after accidentally electing a guy everyone hates as mayor, it’s got its own set of problems too.
That's a blessing and a curse. Let's say Biden was really sick on that stage. Let's say his convention speech and 2nd debate performances are amazing. What happens?
America loves a comeback story.
On the other hand, he could be far worse for 4 months, half conscious...and his poll numbers would bleed every day until Trump wins a 420 EV mandate.
And will have a new prime minister, in No.10 by tomorrow, Saturday at the latest (if there are counting issues/ queries)
You're conflating the selection of a party leader/presidential candidate to an election period (not sure if the US has one).
In Canada federal elections are typically a one month long affair. But the time to select a new party leader can vary a lot with some parties taking 12 months to select a leader.
I believe it took roughly 4 months for both Keir Starmer and Jeremy Corbyn to win their leadership races in the UK Labour Party.
The major difference I see is the intense coverage of the US primaries compared to party leadership races in other countries.
I am American and Canadian so I vote in both countries. Should’ve kept the parliamentary system rather than the untested and hair-brained scheme Jefferson et al saddled us with. Better to vote for the best party instead of the prom king beauty contest America runs.
That said, the far right is making gains even in countries most besieged by Fascism in WW II. Europe's faring better, but not great.
The election cycles no longer actually end.
That’s why Fox News put out 40+ news stories in 24 hours, that and a way to change the narrative away from the Supreme Court ruling’s.
This is such a bad take. No one in there right mind is voting for Biden because it’s Biden. They are voting for Biden because he isn’t Trump. There are also a ton of people who will vote independent because it’s Biden. We can hopefully capture those votes if we had a breathing candidate instead of a corpse.
Exactly. Biden wasn't Trump in 2020, and he's still not Trump in 2024. The idea that anyone says, "Biden is senile, I'm going to vote for the grab'em by the pussy guy who leads a crazy rightwing cult" is what is really nuts.
Right?? The only thing that’s insane to me is how many millions will and how many hundreds of thousands of swing voters may still vote for Trump, as if bumbling a debate and being old is worse than a narcissistic sociopathic dictator. I’m so tired of this country and so much of its population. We covet image more than substance; and it’s been destroying our country for decades.
To me it all just seems disingenuous. As if that debate was more important than the Dobbs decision. Women have to carry their rape baby to term and raise the child of their rapist, but none of that matters because Biden's mouth was agape and he whispered.
The debate is just the new shiny object this news cycle, and this is what the DNC is probably thinking. Sure they have to come up with a way to make people forget about the debate, by showing Biden in a series of better moments, maybe even seeing if it's possible to coach an old person not to act old. If they weren't drugging Biden before, they will surely start.
If they couldn't convince people Biden isn't too old for the past 2 years, I don't know how the hell they could manage in the next 4 months, especially given that a large number of people will only have seen that debate and won't pay any more attention to the political cycle until the election.
The same people who claimed Biden was too old several several years ago just voted for Trump who is now the same age or they voted for Bernie who was two years older. America has two choices Democracy or Fascism, this is so easy a neanderthal could do it.
The debate wasn't bad because Biden didn't do well. The debate was horrible because Biden is old and the debate showed how old and bad he is. He literally couldn't attack trump and he turned Abortion (a winning issue) into a murder of a white woman by an illegal alien (a losing issue)
Joe isn't as sharp as he was 4 years ago. it'd be great if there were no undecided voters but unfortunately there are and they will select the next president. We need someone who will get these people to vote.
The issues will get people to vote. The importance of these matters do not hinge specifically on who the Democrats put up. but if you consider the people vote emotionally, the very act of Democrats changing candidates this late in the season could make voters feel that the Democratic party is indecisive and unreliable. they would lose the incumbency advantage. they would be giving up the only candidate who has actually beaten Trump once already in exchange for one that has not.
Women have to carry their rape baby to term and raise the child of their rapist, but none of that matters because Biden's mouth was agape and he whispered.
But that's the entire argument, isn't it? It's his job as the candidate to make the case - we were expecting him to passionately argue the former but instead we got the latter.
This is all so alarming because of pressing issues like the Dobbs decisions.
If they weren't drugging Biden before, they will surely start.
Well then they should have started days ago. It's too late now.
have you considered the possibility that the existence of so many people just like that might suggest your framing of their thought process is incorrect?
not everyone is terminally online like you (or I). a lot of people remember Trump more as the president before Biden and yes there was a circus but also:
- humans suffer from recency bias. Biden is president now, "grab her by the pussy" was "a long time ago". look at how quicky liberals have forgotten why Biden lost his various previous primary efforts or the things he's actually voted for
- liberals keep going on about how Trump is a convicted felon without understanding that most people who aren't barely center-left fundamentally do not trust the US government anymore. as a leftist I would absolutely consider voting for many of the people arrested protesting "Cop City" in Atlanta if they had a good platform and I suspect that's pretty common amongst people with my perspective of the world.
- Donald Trump at the end of his presidency sneakily engaged in one of the largest stimulus efforts of any US administration between the pause on student loans and interst accruance, PPP loans which were forgiven left and right like crazy to obvious grifters who were going to spend the money on rennovating their house or whatever, many direct payments to families even making quite a bit of money (well into the six figures), etc. the economy is THE issue every election if there's not an active war.
Im not saying you have to agree with centrist "swing voters" but if you have a desire to get their votes, rather than just feel better scolding them, you do have to understand them.
There are voters that need someone to vote FOR and for many reasons when those voters looked at Biden in 2020 they saw someone they could support. Those same voters aren't going to turn around and vote for Trump BUT it's very likely they don't vote at all. Voting Democrat because you're a Democrat gets you the turnout we saw in 2016 where many people could not support Clinton and we are looking at a redo of that for 2024.
Look at it this way, those people willing to vote Biden because he's not Trump will still be voting in November, changing Biden to someone else won't make those people stay home so there is no downside to changing Biden to someone who can inspire more people to vote for them.
I keep seeing this argument. It's weak bc it brushes over how contentious finding a replacement could be. All those Biden voters that just had their candidate forced out, they'll be fine with it? All those Harris supporters if she isn't given the nod etc.
I've never met a Harris supporter in my life. Nor a Biden supporter. Most folks vote D only because there's no other choice that won't guarantee a dissent into a fascist future for America. When voters literally have no other (reasonable) choice, It's silly to dither over who might replace Biden. Anyone decent human with a pulse is going to get the vote.
That's not an argument. I've never met a giraffe yet I know they exist.
Sure, they exist and my assertion is that they'll vote for anybody except for Trump
I really don't know how many times this has to be spelt out. It's not about them switching, to Trump.. if people are disillusioned with Biden, They-just-won't-show-up-to-vote. And if that is all that happens, trump will win in a land slide
The polls aren't even remotely uncertain at this point, it was an iffy proposition before the debate, since the debate Biden is going to get beaten like a red headed stepchild.
It’s not that they’ll switch to trump, it’s that they just won’t show up to vote at all.
Again, women lost the right to an abortion at the federal level, and to not have to retreat to some specific states to have their bodily autonomy respected in the eyes of the law. People just like drama, so they're choosing to pretend this ace up the sleeve doesn't exist, even though when the tables were turned, it had paid dividends for Republicans candidates for decades on end. People acting as if the only difference between Trump and Biden is their physical fitness to be commander in chief, is really a huge joke, when we all know full well that these old men are just a means to a greater political end.
Nobody is acting like the only difference is their physical fitness.
What's being pointed out is that, no matter how obvious the choice should be in terms of policy, there is a significant swath of "moderate"/apathetic/terminally-uninformed voters whose behavior will be swayed by non-policy factors, and given how close the election looks to be, the way that set of voters breaks is very likely to determine the outcome.
Like, do you understand that people's intention to vote or not vote can be significantly impacted by something as minor as the choice of words in a word search? https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17457289.2016.1160909
The people who think like us, who are tuned in to policy and highly activated by understanding the absolute nightmare we're facing, are precisely the people who will go out and vote against Trump regardless. Stop thinking in terms of how strongly we feel about policy, and try to imagine that you are a person whose intention to vote can unconsciously be swayed by the contents of a goddamn wordsearch, yeah? And realize that 2-5% of the electorate with that level of engagement are likely to determine the outcome of the election.
Now, if your argument is that the best strategy for capturing those voters is sticking with Biden because of incumbency/appearance of stability, I would disagree as a matter of opinion, but I think it's a perfectly valid argument. But, please, stop thinking that it's voters who think about policy like you and I who are going to tip the election one way or the other, it's gonna be decided by the people whose voting behavior can be influenced by a word search.
Biden had been a good president. I don't get the hate. In general I would vote for him again, but when the other option is Trump, that's like asking would I like a chocolate chip cookie or to get kicked in the nuts.
Speak for yourself. Biden has been one of the most effective and most progressive Presidents we've had in decades. I'm perfectly happy to vote for him.
I would vote anyone else over Trump, but Biden has been a good President.
That's you, sure. But if it were a different nominee, would you stay home or vote for Trump? Is Biden the only reason you're voting?
But if it were a different nominee, would you stay home or vote for Trump? Is Biden the only reason you're voting?
Of course not. But just because I'd vote for a ham sandwich over Trump doesn't mean Biden is a bad candidate. He's been a very good President and considerably effective despite Republican obstruction.
You seem to be suggesting that just because I'd vote for anyone over Trump that they're better than Biden, but that's exactly what I'm disagreeing with.
No, I'm suggesting that you and I are not the people we need to convince. I would vote for anybody over Trump, even if it's biden. You would vote for anybody over Trump, even if it's not biden. But we are not the deciding voters, there are millions of undecided voters and Independence that do not like Biden and will not vote for him
The idea that there are lots of people that will vote for Biden and only Biden and not some other Democratic candidate is absurd
Okay? Has nothing to do with the point I was addressing. The original claim was that no one in their right mind can want to vote for Biden in the first place. I find that absurd.
You all are just aiding Trump and his legion in their disinfo campaign against Biden.
Right? Anyone voting for Biden will switch to whoever the new candidate is because they’re just voting for “not Trump”. A new candidate then has the ability to attract independents that Biden couldn’t.
Everyone is forgetting that four years ago wasn’t about Biden either. He got the most votes ever with 81 million. That wasn’t a sign of love for Joe Biden, it was a rebuke of Trump.
But who WOULD attract these independents? As far as I can tell, that means some further RIGHT of Biden, not left.
Not necessarily. Independents absolutely loved Obama in 08, and he was considered Left of HC. Independents, above anything else, want a confident, charismatic leader.
Oh come on. Whitmer gets Michigan. VP Beshear - dem gov liked in a HEAVILY red state, could pull all the moderates who hate trump but can’t bring themselves to vote biden/harris. Or Shapiro to get PA - there, you have already 2 critical swing states. Plus all the youth who (misguidedly) will stay home to protest gaza, have no reason not to vote now
No one in there right mind is voting for Biden because it’s Biden.
This is such a bad take. Biden may be the best President of my lifetime, and I would gladly vote for Biden because it's Biden. He has gotten a ton of game-changing bills through the most divided Congress in decades and brought unemployment to its lowest level in decades.
That being said, I think it was a mistake to break his one term pledge, if only because of electability, but he has been a fantastic President who doesn't get the credit he deserves because he doesn't do a good job of promoting his accomplishments. He just gets things done.
Yeah it's so obvious that the only reason why Biden is even getting a good chunk of the vote is because he's not Trump. Maybe swap him out for another guy who also isn't Trump but has the advantages of not being Biden either? Trump is not exactly strong. He has his cult but the majority of the country thinks he's insane and a criminal, so run someone who isn't that and also isn't old. It shouldn't be that hard to give voters what they want when they're all begging for "anybody else".
People keep forgetting that Biden won the 2020 primaries, and then defeated Trump. He was what Democrats wanted in 2020, and there is no clear alternative today.
Literally the GOP wants Biden to stay in the race so bad. I don’t know what planet the people who write these articles are living on
Fox News headlines don’t seem to line up with this statement. They are giddy about the idea of Biden dropping out
This is such a bad take. No one in there right mind is voting for Biden because it’s Biden. They are voting for Biden because he isn’t Trump.
This is why I know these headlines that are "pro biden" are disingenuous. its not based on any evidence. People aren't going to sit home if Biden is replaced.
If you replace Biden you only have voters to gain.
And doubt doesn’t exist in the presence of God. There are throngs of advisers, boosters and confidants around Biden to keep that doubt at bay; to introduce it is blasphemy.
So he's surrounded by yes-men who don't give a fuck about anything but currying his favor. And we're supposed to find this reassuring?
his withdrawal would only add credence to the idea that some Democrats had, in effect, conspired to conceal a disqualifying impairment and only changed course when forced
As opposed to leaving him in the race, which adds credence to the idea that some Democrats had conspired to conceal a disqualifying impairment and then kept trying to do it after the jig was up.
his withdrawal would only add credence to the idea that some democrats had, in effect, conspired to conceal a disqualifying impairment
We already think that.
All presidents are surrounded by advisors. Many of trump's are now in prison. Pick your poison.
A disqualifying impairment? What impairment have you seen in his running of the White House? What policies have shown him incapable of running the office? Was it his build back better policy that makes him impaired? Was his his student loan relief program that makes him impaired? Was it him stopping inflation that makes him impaired? Was it his getting us completely energy independent that makes him impaired? Was it him getting better healthcare for veterans that makes him impaired? Was it him capping prices on medicine for people on medicare that makes him impaired? Was it him putting us back in the Paris accords and addressing climate climate change that makes him impaired?
What of his work demonstrates that he is impaired? Or are you going to just dismiss his proven track record of success and accomplishments because he spoke weakly at a single debate?
If this is all it takes for Democrats to turn on the best candidate by miles just to get anyone else in, then Democrats deserve Trump to win. Trump has proven to be impaired over and over again, but you will never see Republicans turn their back. They may be insane, but at least they don't panic at the smallest bump and jump ship.
And who would replace him? Who would be this magical super popular candidate that polls better?
See this is where democrats lose. Being good at the job is a different thing than being a good candidate, especially if you fail to market your achievements, which the Biden campaign has done a miserable job of.
But also, the age is an issue to the job performance chiefly when he needs to negotiate with other world leaders.
If Bidens debate performance hadn't been the worst debate performance in the history of presidential debates, Trumps would have been. If Bidens age wasn't so acutely on display, Trumps would be. These are underhand pitches that any of the perspective replacements would be able to hit out of the park.
My pick would be Big Gretch.
The fact that not a single one of you can name a better candidate says it all. You don't have a better candidate. There is no better candidate. And that's why none of you can name one that is.
The fact that Biden has been successfully negotiating with world leaders proves the claim about his age bunk.
Biden's debate performance was not even bad. You guys just think it was because instead of listening to what he said, you only heard the tone of his voice and nothing else. The same way MAGA don't listen to a word Trump says they only listen to the tone of his voice.
If you'r talking about Whitmer, most voters don't even know who that is. You think someone most Americans don't even know is going to poll better than Biden?
This entire controversy is completely manufactured. It's 2016 all over again. Some people just never learn.
Literally any of them is obviously a better candidate than Biden, and the fact that his presentation overshadowed his content (which was mediocre at best) so strikingly reiterates that. The debate was actually a golden opportunity to market some of his administrations achievements, and they fanned on that too. You're trying to project this election on the terms you want it to be on, not the terms that it is on.
You know what a real good remedy to people not knowing who Whitmer is? Put her on the National stage. She has 4 months, and people will learn quickly. She already comes with one of the must win swing states. Right now, Biden has zero.
People saying it's a manufactured controversy are only fooling themselves, meanwhile his already delicate polling numbers are slipping further and further, especially in swing states. Bidens campaign is dead, dems can either see the writing on the wall and put someone else in, or hand the white house back to Trump
The guy you're replying to literally named a candidate and your immediate response was a tirade about how no one can name a candidate.
And a relatively unknown Whitmer is already polling ahead of Biden and close to Trump. If she wins the nom she will rocket upwards because she has tremendous upward potential that neither Biden nor Trump do.
Whitmer would generate a buzz of new excitement, pump life into the democratic party. She would be the headline of every talk show, on every news channel immediately. She will rip Trump to shreds. Women who are scared about repro rights will vote for her. College students who hate ‘genocide joe’ will go out and vote for her.
NOTHING new about Biden will happen between now and election, - he only has possibility to lose more ground with poor appearences. Whitmer gets us a critical swing state. Smart VP choice could get us another like PA. Its honestly a no-brainer
he spoke weakly at a single debate
C'mon, man, as Joe would say. The public saw him not just "speak weakly", but stare blankly off into space, struggle to put together coherent thoughts, and completely whiff against multiple easy pitches. Then they saw his handlers make a series of lame excuses. Jet lag from a trip two weeks prior? "Overpreparedness"? If you don't know how this plays with the median voter, I don't know what to tell you. Look at the polls.
And who would replace him? Who would be this magical super popular candidate that polls better?
You're right -- there is no magical solution. There isn't even really a good solution. There are only distinguishable bad solutions, and the worst one of all is sticking with a candidate who has no realistic chance to win. No amount of spin is going to change that. Telling people to shut up and clap louder isn't going to change it.
It's not even the bad debate. It's what has happened (or not happened) since.
If you just had a cold and were jetlagged and tired at the debate and it was a one-off thing, why the fuck aren't you out talking to every camera you can find right now to let people know that you're actually fine??
If this is all it takes for Democrats to turn on the best candidate by miles just to get anyone else in, then Democrats deserve Trump to win. Trump has proven to be impaired over and over again, but you will never see Republicans turn their back. They may be insane, but at least they don't panic at the smallest bump and jump ship.
How can you possibly hold up what Republicans are doing as an example to follow? Haven't we been fighting them for the past eight years precisely because they won't abandon the world's worst candidate? Can't you see the hypocrisy? The scariest thing about the aftermath of the Biden debate might actually be the Democrats that are starting to sound a lot like the Republicans, putting a person/party over their country.
Don't you feel at all ashamed that your candidate is going to be 86 by the end of a second term? Don't you question whether it's healthy for America to have a leader that old? A leader is policy, yes, but a leader is also a persuader. A leader is supposed to be a powerful voice guiding the nation. A leader has to be able to reach out to other foreign leaders and persuade them. After that debate, it's doubtful that Biden can be that leader. And it's not just the debate anymore. It's the lack of unscripted interviews. It's the excuses that his performance was the result of travel he took 12 days ago - travel that we need the president to be able to handle regularly in fulfilling his duties. I would argue that Democrats deserve to lose if they don't get rid of Biden. They've put forth a feeble candidate at a time when we need strength. This is pathetic. I can't blame independents for staying home when these are the options we give them.
Whenever I see this argument I think there are 3 options about the author:
1 - You're somehow part of the campaign.
2 - You think lying and gaslighting is the best chance to defeat Trump.
3 - You're a very dim bulb who can't understand why a president who can think is preferable to one that can't.
Which one fits you best?
Yup you summed it up perfectly. It’s mind boggling
The age problem Biden faces isn’t whether he can do the job today. He clearly can, because he is.
The perception problem he has to overcome is can he do the job for another four years. If he can’t then we are already electing an alternate candidate, Harris. And we would be dangerously close to having a President Johnson.
At 81, Biden doesn’t get to have bad days. Any sign of decline shifts the public conversation from “is he in decline?” to “how bad is it?”
Most of us have seen old folks in decline. They have good days and bad. Over time their bad days become more common. Eventually people celebrate the good days. When they end the person’s time is almost up.
I hear what Blow is saying, and I don’t want to minimize it. But if he thinks a bit of political spin will fix this he is naive. Biden isn’t just running against Trump anymore, he is running against his own mortality.
No amount of good days in public will prove that Biden isn’t having bad days in private. Shielding Biden from public view won’t work either. From now on Biden will be campaigning with the grim reaper at his side.
Nailed it. I would just also add that the white house and/or dnc ignoring Biden’s aging was unacceptable- and now we’re looking at the consequences and a pretty shitty situation. This was avoidable- and, of course, no one will face any consequences for giving the US citizens absolutely miserable choices. Possibly the worst ones ever…
Polls indicate otherwise. Strongly.
We need someone who can win WI, MI, PA, and VA. Through in one of AZ, NH, and NV plus the Coastal states and you win.
You only need to win WI/MI/PA/VA, and one vote from NE, and lose all the swing states Biden won in 2020. Or if not NE then one of those states you mentioned.
Easier said than done.
Whitmer/shapiro gives us MI and PA. Job just got a lot easier
Says Trump. A younger Democrat running and all of the sudden Trump has to defend his age and health.
His Epstein friendship
January 6th
I guarantee you that the news cycle won’t bring up age anymore if Biden drops out. They’d cling onto the next thing
Put anyone not named Biden on the debate stage w Trump and polls afterwards would speak otherwise heavily.
The amount of layups Trump gave Biden last time and Biden incoherently rambling instead was so frustrating.
Trump’s camp WANTS Biden to stay in because they know they can beat him. That’s their strategy as of late. Y’all are ridiculous; I was stoked to see that democrats and liberals were finally agreeing with people on the left: they finally wanted to oust Biden. Now, all I see is an influx of bullshit articles about him staying in. So silly.
Whitmer will win the rust belt and the presidency
She is the best path forward
Literally nobody outside of her home state knows her name and she's already polling within the margin of error against Trump. She really is the obvious choice.
She will carry the upper Midwest and that’s all that matters
National polls are irrelevant
User deleted comment
3d
Its a great idea.
You want to hear a bad idea? Having Joe Biden attend another debate.
Would help lock up Michigan which may be vulnerable due to Biden's involvement in Gaza (another downside of the incumbent running and stubbornly doing stuff that everybody is telling him to stop).
I thought NYT wanted Biden out...
Surprised to see this comment so far down. Has no one noticed how many articles in the last week that were calling for Biden to be replaced have come from the NYT? So why is there now suddenly an article claiming it would be a bad idea?
Which is it, NYT? Feels like they're just blatantly fomenting discord at the point.
NYT has a number of columnists, many of whom are very conservative, other are liberal. They each have their own opinion on the matter.
Most of the op-eds called for him to drop out because it's the right thing to do. It's morally repugnant that he isn't dropping out.
You have to have a candidate that can speak coherently. Biden has issues, it's ok he's old. We need someone that's a fucking firebrand, that can make the easy case against autocracy.
Ah yes the full circle articles like the media put out in 2016 for Hillary, they trash the candidate their owners dont want in office to keep the rage bait click attention. When that starts to wane due to fatigue, the outlets put out sympathetic articles to get those clicks right back by gaslighting the other side.
Propaganda 101
It's all right wing trash that is pushing this narrative.
Kinda crazy how everything changed all the sudden. Is Biden really that bad or is it a vocal minority? The economy is doing well. Stock is great. People have jobs. The dollar is strong. All done under Biden. But people want to throw that out and put up a candidate I never even heard of. Saying poll are saying she would win. Polls say Hillary was going to win too
Voters don’t think about policy, most probably couldn’t tell you much about any policy Biden implemented. It’s a popularity contest, and while no one likes Trump, those who do will show up to vote.
Democrats have a problem where they have to motivate people to vote for them. Biden is not exciting, it is not hard to imagine a low turnout leading to a Trump victory. Low turnout favors Republicans, it’s why they spend so much effort disenfranchising people.
User deleted comment
3d
When everyone is asking for "anybody else" because they despise Trump and Biden, perhaps running someone who isn't that would be a winning candidate. Just give people what they want.
Staying with biden leads to trump
I'm with Lawrence O'Donnell, Randi Rhodes, Seth Abramson, and Allan Lichtman, all of whom think Joe Biden should stay for the best chance of winning in and they give reasons. :)
More gaslighting. More delusions.
Are Trump supporters writing this horseshit? Biden is feckless and enfeebled. He's too weak to put up any fight against the orange shit stain.
Quit fucking around and drop out of the race so we can have a real, viable candidate. The longer you wait, the harder it's going to be.
I’ve seen like 9 comments all saying the same things. “Critics of Biden are bots/trolls. No one can say how the campaign donations would transfer. No one has an alternative.”
All three of those are pure bullshit. They’re all on the same script & accusing others of being bots in a stroke of peak irony. 😆
The author is some social justice head who sees everything in terms of black and woman. Hilary lost because she's a woman (not because she sucks as a candidate). America would never vote for a black person because it's racist (except that one time). Harris would lose because she's both, but we can't also ditch her because America is also concerned about passing over the first female-black woman for president and now people will revolt over that very idea. Nothing about candidate quality and if the vast majority of the country cares about skin colour over, I dunno, voting against a fascist and protecting democracy.
Blue MAGA strikes again. Reality suggests otherwise.
God this article is out of touch. It acts like Hilary lost because of misogyny (I'm pretty sure it has to do with all the baggage she carries) and that society would never elect a black person (except when it did in 2008).
To say it had nothing to do with misogyny is willfully ignorant. Almost all of her baggage was manufactured by the right wing for daring to be a woman in politics.
Hillary's issues went beyond the right wing. That's why she lost the primary in 2008.
This article is kind of full of shit
The media made this story up now this.
This article is horrible
Less than a week after the editorial board declared he should step aside. Are we in the bargaining stage?
It will be a close election no matter what. If someone is definitively telling you that one decision or the other will for sure win or lose the election then they are selling you something. It’s a gamble on marginal voters no matter what we do.
The best possible outcome would be for Biden to win, then resign sometime in 2025
The real debate is about Biden's performance v. Trump's performance.
Mr Biden had done his homework and had the facts. The raspy presentation was unfortiunate but it is a small thing. The debate went quite well in spite of the raspy voice. Mr Biden made good points. Mr Biden did all the fact-checking.
Mr. Trump made all sorts of lies, and denials. Mr Trump did not attract any converts to his candidacy. Trump did not convert anyone. There is evidence he lost prospective voters for him in November.
Talking about it only has one beneficiary: Trump.
What has Biden done to alleviate our concerns? What is the plan for if he stays? Looks like they want to stay the course as we crash into an iceberg
This is such bullshit. We are losing and our pitcher's arm is broken and all our bats are missing. People think it would only help our opponent by replacing our pitcher and buying new bats? Ridiculous anti logic thinking. He is unable to campaign. He is already losing. There is plenty of time in today's 24/7 internet/cable news/podcast culture. Any mediocre or better candidate will be ahead in the polls in less than a week. Not a tough concept: Biden is unable to campaign. Replace him with someone able to campaign.
Can a new candidate even get on the ballot in many states legally?
Switching to a new candidate might make us lose, so our only choice is to *checks notes* lose.
Replace Forcing with Keeping and Out with In
Basically keeping the status quo we have now puts the Democrats in extreme danger.
All these pundits have no idea about the mindsets of the middle 10% of half a dozen states who are going to decide the election. It’s a mix of apathetic voters who need to be motivated to vote, and a small bunch of undecideds who are not terribly sophisticated about things like Project 2025, January 6, etc. I know it sounds crazy but that’s our populace. They aren’t gonna vote for a corpse just because it’s a Democrat.
Anybody who is at all interested—and I doubt there are that many “undecided” voters given the dichotamy between these two parties—should be shown Project 2025. That’s the strongest argument for voting Biden. If that doesn’t do it, no candidate change would matter.
There’s an obvious online campaign trying to sway public opinion to oust Biden, very reminiscent of the online campaign against Clinton. It’s hard to say how many of these comments are from troll farms and bots. Biden is not dropping out and so late in the game should absolutely not drop out.
Yeah, and running Clinton went So well. Maybe running a candidate that helps the ticket instead of bringing it down because he doesn't have a working brain if he misses his afternoon nap time would be a better plan.
Whoever runs will get assaulted with the online propaganda that you're convinced doesn't exist. You'd be saying the same thing about Sanders after bots post the 10,000,000th comment about his beach house and be convinced you really believe it.
NYT is so irresponsible. First they argue for Biden to drop out and now they argue for him to stay? It's like they are trying to divide us.
I'm no big defender of the NYT but publishing opinion articles with different points of view is a pretty normal thing for a major newspaper.
The editorial board argued that he should drop out...this piece is by someone else.
Leaving him in is a boon to Trump. Almost any half decent democrat could beat Trump. That fact that this race is so close is a testament to how bad of a candidate Biden is.
Wait a minute. NYTimes…you started this conversation with your editorial board calling for him to step down. WTF.
The idea had no traction before that.
More than one person works at the New York Times.
"opinion"
Right at the top of the article.
If those kids could read they would be very upset!
The conversation was started the moment Biden started talking during that debate.
but isn't it nice of NYT to allow a story or two of the opposite viewpoint from what they push over and over and over again? :P
Since so many of these spammers and campaigners against Joe Biden now summarily assume Donald Trump would beat Joe Biden and some unknown replacement would win without even providing information to support that contention are using block to avoid any challenges, I would like to repeat the reply that caused it to happen again here:
'biden leads to trump'
I'm with Lawrence O'Donnell, Randi Rhodes, Seth Abramson, and Allan Lichtman, all of whom think Joe Biden should stay for the best chance of winning in and they give reasons. :)
Same, this whole discussion needs to move beyond anxiety and opinion. There are many good reasons to stick with Biden, and far fewer good reasons to replace him. He deserves a shot to turn things around. Switching tickets would be a disaster according to the keys.
Biden is polling nearly 3 points down against trump nationally and that number is only getting worse as more post-debate polls are coming in. He's cooked.
Whitmer is polling within the margin of error against Trump right now, and literally nobody knows who she is. Honestly I don't think the correct choice could be any clearer.
I feel this whole subreddit has turned pessimistic or pro Trump? After the debate it turned Biden……Well even if he is old. At least, he listens to his cabinet members. Unlike the other POS!!!! Who wants nothing but "yes” men!
I don't see a lot of people here declaring they'll vote for Trump.
Moderator removed comment
3d
So many anti-Biden comments echo the same talking points without any thought to the consequences Biden dropping out would have. Definitely bots and trolls.
As bad as Biden was in the debate—and Trump wasn’t much better—the Heritage Foundation’s comment about a second American Revolution should be much, much worse.
There’s no way you could lose to a convicted felon…
Democrats: hold my Biden!
Keeping him has the same beneficiary. Wrong candidate for this race; same mistake as nominating Hillary being repeated.
So a week after the New York Times goes on a full-born assault against Biden...
... do they realize just how bad of an idea it was.
Fucking idiots.
Bullshit article.
The Trump campaign is literally praying that Biden remains the nominee. Those circling the wagons around a fading octogenarian are insane.
Keeping Biden in would also have only one beneficiary: Trump.
Voting blue no matter who got us to this point. Thanks dems.
Having him pass the torch willingly on the other hand could lead to a new day in America. He should be making that speech today
At this point Biden supporters are just as delusional as Trump supporters. The idea that the best option for Democrats is a feeble old man with cognitive impairment is completely absurd. He’s not magically going to become less old or more fit for office as time goes on. Trump is an awful candidate, literally any Democrat who isn’t senile should be able to beat him.
It’s not that Biden is an ideal candidate by any means. What concerns me is the reaction of getting rid of Biden without fully understanding how Republicans would take advantage of the change—which they would fight on every state ballot and appeal to the SC if they lose. Bots and trolls are saying Biden staying is an automatic win for Trump, but the opposite may be true.
Nah. Get him out. Save the country.
Shouldn't have to force him out. He should leave on his own. I'm not American but democrats should be embarrassed. Fucking pick someone and beat trump.
I agree. Biden is probably still our best chance. I'm not convinced Harris would outperform Biden and holding a mini primary would create too much chaos
I agree Biden stepping up and proving he’s capable is the best path. Never been a fan of Biden, but jettisoning him at this point is enormously risky.
But I’m not certain he’s going to be able to prove it.
The problem with Harris isn't Harris so much as the optics of replacing Biden. It would make the Democratic party look indecisive and weak, and they would deserve to lose. If they are going to replace Biden, it has to be for cause, and that cause can't be public opinion polling, it would have to be a real medical emergency that literally cripples him beyond what we see even now. It wouldn't surprise me if he suffers a stroke, he looks like he's half way there.
It could be beneficial if there is the right candidate that can consolidate progressives and independents effectively. I just don’t know who that person actually is. Though I know it’s not Harris.
I almost feel like if Dems went with Newsome it could work, but only if they had someone else in the ticket they could argue would be more moderate aka Never Trumper. Linzinger would make sense, but that would be a tough pill for many progressives to swallow.
Which is why it’s being played up so much imo…..Trump sells papers, gets ratings and makes the rich richer.
Thats a redirection to the point. The point is Bidens current health status and a medical opinion regarding his condition and his “episodes”, is needed.
The public should be informed with the cause of these “episodes”.
I think he's scared of Kamala and that's why that video of him on the golf cart "leaked"
Horseshit!
They're clearly scared (and they should be given how 2020 went) or they wouldn't be pushing this replace Biden narrative so hard.
Democrats want a perfect candidate and Republicans are happy with a 34x felon. Biden’s age is an infinitely better choice than Trump’s infinite bullshit. This election is about getting rid of the Trump cancer. Nothing more.
I'm not voting for Biden, this was never about voting for Biden. I'm voting for his cabinet. The people who won't turn environmental regulations over to corporations, the people who won't mandate religion be taught in public schools in tandem with science. I'm voting for the people who won't strip vulnerable people of healthcare and public assistance. I'm voting for the people who will fight to uphold the civil liberties of the many over the few.
Poor, uneducated whites think Trump has their best interests at heart; educated liberals think the New York Times has their best interests at heart. Both groups are deceived.
The NYT completely fumbled, if not misrepresented, the lead up to the multiple wars George Bush & Cronies led us into. Under some misguided rubric of “both sides-ism”, the NYT has given Trump excessive and unchallenged coverage for more than 8 years. There is no such thing as pure objectivism in journalism, and The Times would do well to recall New York’s own Patrick Moynihan, who said that you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
“The Old Gray Lady” shares Biden’s infirmities: age-related befuddlement and a belief the world will or should conform to their dusty perspective. When I occasionally read the New York Post, I at least know the agenda being pushed in 72 point font. The Times has lost all its authority and, as of last week, my highly discounted subscription. I hope Governor Whitmer steps forward.
Sure
As a Trump supporter, it's been amazing reading all of these news articles. Keep them coming!
Paid for by the Biden campaign
NYT and CNN are both beating the ‘keep Biden in the race’ drums. Which makes me suspect that conservatives think Biden gives them the best shot at winning. I’ll vote against trump either way, the stakes are far, far too great. I just wish more people would realize them. And I wish the DNC had prepared for all of this far sooner.
No it wouldn’t. Trump hoping Biden stays the nominee.
Nobody can force Biden out. I know, let's be upset with Biden and not vote! That will show everyone! Especially Trump. Biden isn't the problem. Trump is the problem.
Yup, Joe Biden is the best choice the us has until ranked voting is passed everywhere in the country.
"But here’s the deal, there’s a lot of young women who are being raped by their – by their in-laws, by their – by their spouses, brothers and sisters, by – just – it’s just – it’s just ridiculous. And they can do nothing about it. And they try to arrest them when they cross state lines."
Joe Biden
Yup. Which is how I know that most of this drop-out clamor is just GOP frothing.
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.