299

Biden’s debate performance sets off alarm bells for Democrats (www.cnn.com)

submitted 4 months ago by nekandro@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

315 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Beastlygr@lemmy.world 53 points 4 months ago

Welp, we’re fucked.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 51 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

No. We're "un-fucked".

We cant win with Biden.

We CAN win without him.

Finally the dense mother fuckers who have been denying Biden's inadequacy have been dragged, kicking and screaming, into reality.

We'll have a brokered convention (like all conventions before 1970's), we'll get "generic corporate democrat", and they'll be instantly polling in the low to mid 50's and we'll actually have a fucking chance.

Biden has had no chance at winning this election at any point in his candidacy. Ever. Look at the polling. Look at the data. He's never stood a chance and plenty of people here and elsewhere have been trying to get this through some extremely thick skulls that have basically been insisting that we need to run an un-electable candidate.

Well the goose is cooked. The rat is out of the bag. Here comes the moose or whatever. He's done. Adios Biden, don't let the door hit you on the way out. You did fine on some stuff but wow you fucked up on Gaza/Israel.

Minutes after that debate Newsom was on MSNBC. We're gonna get Newsom, or maybe Inslee; a way smarter choice would be Witmer or Andy Beshear.

And guess what? Litterally ANY GENERIC CANDIDATE PUTS 10 POINTS BACK ON THE BOARD.

Bam. Switch candidates and Democrats are instantaneously back in this race.

[-] classic@fedia.io 22 points 4 months ago

Not only switch candidates, but have Biden have the humility to back that person. Do it in the name of Democracy, you know: this election is too important and I realize we need a stronger candidate than I can be. That would sell well, and that's what's needed for better or worse: a good narrative

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah, it takes a lot of chutzpah to say, "Look, I tried, but I can't do it. This guy can do it, and I'm giving him my full support, you should too".

I think just about anyone who has the confidence to run for President is narcissistic enough to think they are the only person who can do the job, so Biden, or Trump, stepping down willingly is not going to happen.

[-] classic@fedia.io 2 points 4 months ago

Oh, nothing about our culture would permit someone to do that. I don't expect him to. It's just a nice fantasy

[-] xhieron@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago

This probably doesn't work, and it's probably not as good idea as anyone hopes (genuinely or not). It might happen anyway, but no matter what, we're coasting toward a second Trump presidency, just like all the Russian agitprops here wanted all along.

If Biden is polling down 10 points or worse at the convention, they could drag someone else onto the stage, but my suspicion is that no one else outperforms him on short notice, even after his abysmal performance in the debate.

A few reasons:

Newsom probably doesn't want it. If he calculates Trump wins either way (not unreasonable), he's not going to want that loss on his record since he's already gunning for 28. He would be the best chance at getting an up-and-comer who already has good name recognition and looks and sounds good.
Harris. If Harris wants it, she has a lot of leverage to make it hard or outright impossible for the party to push anyone else out in front of her. She's a poor candidate for a lot of reasons, but she's also the most attached to Biden. That's both good and bad for her. If they want to run anyone else, they have to have her playing ball too. Ask yourself, if you were Kamala Harris, would you give up your only conceivable chance at the Oval in favor of another non-Biden candidate? Remember, in any scenario the odds are good Trump wins anyway.
The truth may be that the party would rather just let Trump win. That sounds unthinkable, but this isn't a secret cabal of idealists we're talking about: it's a bunch of self-interested rich people who want to put themselves in power. Getting them to do anything for the public good is difficult under the best circumstances. They could easily decide--rightly--that Biden is still their best shot at beating Trump. That was the call in 2020, and it paid off. Don't forget that many of these same names being batted around now were active in the party four years ago. Newsom loses to Trump, and he's largely seen as the best alternative. If you're running the party and looking at those odds, you should run Biden if you actually want the best chance at winning. You might decide it's just a lost cause and start planning for a four year long nightmare.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Newsom probably doesn’t want it. If he calculates Trump wins either way (not unreasonable), he’s not going to want that loss on his record since he’s already gunning for 28. He would be the best chance at getting an up-and-comer who already has good name recognition and looks and sounds good.

Bro Newsom was on MSNBC 15 seconds after the debate ended. Newsom is 100% gunning for the job.

Harris. If Harris wants it, she has a lot of leverage to make it hard or outright impossible for the party to push anyone else out in front of her. She’s a poor candidate for a lot of reasons, but she’s also the most attached to Biden. That’s both good and bad for her. If they want to run anyone else, they have to have her playing ball too. Ask yourself, if you were Kamala Harris, would you give up your only conceivable chance at the Oval in favor of another non-Biden candidate? Remember, in any scenario the odds are good Trump wins anyway.

This is a real issue that I think you are right to bring up. Harris can basically put the brakes on/ gatekeep whomever the nominee is going to be.

If you’re running the party and looking at those odds, you should run Biden if you actually want the best chance at winning.

Yeah you are just wildly off base here. Biden was at between a 5-20% chance of winning the election prior to this debate (not polling, but probability). He'll be in the 3-10% range after this. Did you watch the post debate coverage? CNN's only topic of conversation was that we need to replace Biden. This is CNN! They are the party insiders. He's cooked.

[-] xhieron@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Newsom was on MSNBC singing Joe's praises, just like he would have done regardless, because Newsom wants to be president, but Newsom also polls worse than Biden. That's not hypothetical. Those polls already exist, and a drop in Biden's numbers isn't automatically a boost for Newsom. If Newsom thinks losing in 24 hurts his viability in 28, he wouldn't do it. And who could blame him? It's five months to the election.

The point is: It's possible that all of the options are bad. Biden was in the mid-forties before the debate and the thirties after. He went from near toss-up to probably losing if the election were yesterday/today. Newsom might out-poll Biden today, but that's not the contest.

The contest is with Trump. It's not good enough to poll better than Biden. You have to actually carry all of Biden's states and then some. If I'm Newsom and deciding whether to try to cobble together a five-month campaign and limp to November to save the DNC from itself and protect Amtrak Joe's legacy when I'm starting 15 points in the hole or run my own campaign against the likes of a Haley or DeSantis also-ran once Trump is term-barred, dead, or both in four years, I'm not taking a risk at the convention unless someone makes me very, very confident that I could win.

And there's the rub. Newsom wants to be president, and he'd love to be president in six months, but he's not going to take over a campaign that's already lost. If the party thinks Trump wins no matter what--not an unreasonable conclusion--why on earth would they burn their best shot of a rebound in 28?

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Biden was in the mid-forties before the debate

Bro Biden was in the mid thirties before the debate.

[-] xhieron@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Uh... okay, bro. You know that Donald Trump is also running in this election, right? Biden could be running single digits, and it still wouldn't change the calculus: If a Biden alternative can't beat Trump, they're not going to put an albatross around the neck of their political career just to lose in November.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

You've got the entire thing backwards: Biden is the albatross.

ANY other democrat polls better than Biden. Biden is the worst possible democrat to be running. Period. Except maybe Hillary, and even then, she'd be doing better than Biden right now.

You swap out Biden with literally any hollow blue suit, and you are suddenly 10 points up in the polls.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Good luck with Project 2025, because that's what third party voters are voting for.

We need to get rid of FPTP voting before a 2 party system can be derailed.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Are you like, actually touched?

We're talking about the Democratic nominee right now. Not any third party candidate.

[-] davidgro@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Biden is the Democratic nominee. Sure it's not official until August 19-22 but unless he resigns, dies, or is otherwise fully incapacitated before then, he is the candidate who will be on the ballots in November. None of those possibilities seem likely.

load more comments (7 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Without ranked choice voting a third party vote is throwing away a vote.

[-] PunnyName@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Correct. And almost always a vote that would go to a Democrat candidate.

[-] concrete_baby@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 months ago

LOL. A lot of flowery language there but not much substance. The Dems can't switch now. Trump can instantly snatch on to that and attack whoever replaces Biden as an inferior desperate backup. Trump will say you Democrats have no idea what they're doing and they can't even stand behind their incumbent. This isn't only about 2024 but also about the midterms. Who would vote for a party that backstabs their incumbent?

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Yeah your just wrong.

You obviously don't know the rules for the DNC or how primary's work, or have any kind of meaningful political acumen. You are your archetypes have been spouting this plainly wrong "political wisdom" both here and across cable news for months, years even. And reality has now bucked your claims.

Bidens not the nominee. He lost that last night. And it's a good thing. He's losing dramatically to Trump right now.

[-] tacosplease@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Such confidence in statements that will be proven wrong in a matter of days. LOL. You'll forget these comments by then though.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] concrete_baby@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

I'll eat my hat and comment here if Biden doesn't gets his nomination. I didn't say Biden is the nominee. I didn't even use the word "nominee". Its you who keeps attacking the straw man. But you know what? I'm 100% sure the DNC will nominate Biden. That debate performance was bad but he ain't losing his presumptive nomination. Don't confuse reality with what you want to happen.