515
submitted 3 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The president talked about his emotional decision to leave the race and his plans to campaign for the Harris-Walz ticket in the battleground state of Pennsylvania.

In his first sit-down interview since dropping his 2024 campaign, President Joe Biden told CBS News reporter Robert Costa that he bowed out because he feared being a distraction in the Democrats’ efforts to defeat Republican nominee Donald Trump. Their discussion, which aired on CBS Sunday Morning, touched on that infamous presidential debate, Biden’s plans for the rest of his campaign, and what another Trump presidency could look like.

“Although it’s a great honor being president, I think I have an obligation to the country,” Biden said. “The most important thing,” he continued, is “we must, we must, we must defeat Trump.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 45 points 3 months ago

I'd be a little less skeptical of that claim if he hadn't said that he'd be OK losing to Trump, "as long as I gave it my all." I appreciate him stepping aside for the good of the country, but it took nearly a month of pressure from Democrats to get him to drop out, and I'm sure if the party leadership hadn't turned in him, he'd be happy to take his chances against Trump.

[-] teamevil@lemmy.world 39 points 3 months ago

He did drop out at the perfect time though, that could have been strategic

[-] aleph@lemm.ee 18 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Less than two weeks before he dropped out, he wrote an open letter to congressional democrats in which he wrote:

I want you to know that despite all the speculation in the press and elsewhere, I am firmly committed to staying in this race, to running this race to the end, and to beating Donald Trump.

I have heard the concerns that people have — their good faith fears and worries about what is at stake in this election. I am not blind to them.

I can respond to all this by saying clearly and unequivocally: I wouldn’t be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in 2024.

The voters of the Democratic Party have voted. They have chosen me to be the nominee of the party. Do we now just say this process didn’t matter? That the voters don’t have a say?

I decline to do that... I have no doubt that I — and we — can and will beat Donald Trump.

Unless this was all part of an elaborate hoax, it's clear he had no intention of dropping out at that time.

[-] ngwoo@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

Nothing but respect for anyone that old who can change their mind when they're wrong. It's easy to fall into a rut of stubbornness.

[-] textik@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 months ago

I don't think it was a hoax, but campaign 101 is to be absolutely confident in your candidacy until the nanosecond you drop out. If you telegraph weakness to the voting public, and then end up staying in the race, that will be a millstone around your neck. Even if he was wavering in the weeks leading up to his dropout, there would be zero upside to communicating that publicly.

[-] aleph@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It's possible, but I personally don't buy that argument. He didn't have to sit down and write that letter, but he did. That, plus the interview where he said that "giving it his all" was "what it was all about", seemed obvious to me he was all for holding on tight despite everyone's concerns.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

To he honest, I think that if he had dropped out earlier it would have been better. He created a lot of panic within the base that didn't need to be there. I suppose it's not impossible that it was some kind of strategy to make Harris' ascension more welcome and inevitable, but I think that's giving him way too much credit.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

Disagree entirely. This has left the Trump campaign totally twisting in the wind. They have no idea how to compete with a mixed-race independent and smart woman with her kindly dad running mate because they were hoping for Biden.

The attacks I've seen so far:

  1. Harris laughs too much.

  2. Harris hugs people.

  3. Harris is a woman.

  4. Harris turned black all of the sudden.

  5. Harris is black.

  6. Walz... uh... something about tampons.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I mean, I don't disagree that the switch has left Trump flailing, I just think that still happens if Biden drops out two weeks earlier than he did. It was clear by then that he had no chance of winning, and it would have saved voters a lot of fear and despair. You could argue that doing it after the RNC made the whole convention pointless, but given how poorly he's done in a post Biden race, it's just as likely that the entire thing would become an even more public meltdown.

Either way, I think the idea that this was a strategy is a fantasy. I think his actions and reporting at the time made it clear that he was planning to run, and it was only pressure from top Democrats that made him step down.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 months ago

I guess it was 4d chess? Do you know who you sound like?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

No I don't. Do tell me who I sound like.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 6 points 3 months ago

It's still basically a 50/50 toss up. If Harris loses then we will all be wondering what may have happened if they stuck with Biden

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

It's a 50/50 toss up after only 2 weeks of campaigning. Unless she does something to kill her own momentum, she's in very good shape. Also, it's pretty clear what would have happened if they stuck with Biden; Maine and New York were becoming competitive, there's just no universe where he would have won.

[-] kandoh@reddthat.com 1 points 3 months ago

Biden was at a 50/50 before he resigned. He was behind in the polls but they were all always within the margin of error.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago

Yeah, but he was on the downswing, while Harris is on the upswing. It just was not going to get better for him. Also, I can't remember for sure, but I think he was significantly down on the most important swing states, and only polling about even nationally.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 months ago

You might have time to wonder if that happens, but I’ll end up in the ovens pretty quick. Fuck racism and fascism.

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

I give him a pass for that statement. Biden was running on the platform of election trust and legitimacy. How else does he answer the question? "No, and I'll fight tooth and nail to dispute the results if Trump wins?". Maybe the democratic base would have loved to hear that, but it's mixed messaging that would have been used as ammunition against him. He's the President of the United States. He has to project confidence in the system, which means trying hard to win, but stopping right on the dot at "doing your best" and accepting the will of the people, even if it's a distasteful outcome for everyone involved.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Honestly, I still think that's a pretty terrible answer when your entire campaign messaging has been, "Democracy will end if you elect this man." I think if he had said something like, "I understand the stakes of this election, I would feel horrible if I lost and let the American people down, but it less than 5 months to the election and I am the best positioned candidate to defeat him," that would have been a much more reasonable answer. It would have been wrong (clearly), but at least it wouldn't have sounded like he was losing a little league game.

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Oh yeah, I hated the answer he gave too, but it was pretty clear he wasn't expecting the question either. It was a bad answer and a mistake, but definitely one of the less egregious mistakes his campaign had been making in the weeks leading up to his departure from the campaign trail. At it's core, being satisfied with doing your best is a sentiment most people can agree with, but one that falls short of what we actually needed. It did not resonate with the people who were upset with him at the time. We needed Biden to be ruthless after his debate disaster, but he was still playing softball at the major leagues.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Fair enough. It certainly wasn't the worst gaffe from that period.

[-] Beetschnapps@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

The bigger issue are voters clinging to the same shit as you.

His “giving his all” was too icky !

So apparently people couldn’t get past a great administration and hence we have a trump horse race.

[-] pjwestin@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

I mean, we have a Trump horse race now vs. a Trump blow out before. You may think his administration was great. Personally, I was surprised by how strong on labor he was, but disgusted by his handling of Gaza, and I think his blind institutionalism has made him too slow to react to an out of control Supreme Court. But those opinions don't matter; he was not going to win after that debate. He came across as senile and confused, and he was not going to energize the base he needed to win. No matter what you think of his administration, he lost the election on June 27th, and we're just lucky someone made him see that before it was too late.

this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
515 points (97.6% liked)

News

23311 readers
1167 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS