-15
7 Democrats who could replace Biden if he drops his 2024 reelection bid
(www.businessinsider.com)
Here's how Hillary can still win.
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
-15 points (33.3% liked)
politics
19097 readers
3649 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Fucking hell you nearly gave me a heartattack... thank fucking god her name isn't on the actual list - her mentee Harris was though which is still disappointing.
This article is bullshit. Biden is not going to back out unless God forces the issue. And if that happens, Harris is the nominee, because she's on the same ticket. End of story.
All of those other names are only relevant in terms of who Harris might pick as her VP. My money is either on Kloubachar or Whitmer, with Mayorkas as a dark-horse pick intended to troll the House.
OP was trying to convince people yesterday, apparently with their powers of prognostication, that the DNC will drop Biden for another candidate at the convention.
I'd ask them how they know, but they troll me when I ask them questions.
Oh, there is a non-zero chance that Biden will not be the nominee, but if it happens it will be over his dead body, literally.
Agreed, but that is not what they were claiming. They were claiming the DNC would remove Biden as the frontrunner after deeming him too old.
load more comments
(13 replies)
Mayorkas isn't a natural born citizen (Cuban), he can't be President or VP.
So much for that idea, then
I'm all in for President Katie Porter.
She's only 50, she can probably run in any of the next 4 elections after this one and still not be Too Old
4?? She can run in the next 8 elections and still be younger than Biden.
Next 4 Presidential elections
Nobody likes Harris. The only way she's President is if Biden dies.
The only way she runs is if Biden dies. She’s been too much of a non-entity to have appeal with the party and has significant opposition from the Repubs. I think she’d have a really tough time winning.
The Biden administration should have had her in front of the cameras at every opportunity acting as the face of the administration.
It’s too late now - the choices are locked in. I’m voting for Biden-Harris again but it doesn’t matter because I live in California.
I’m living in one of the safest places in the US in terms of states and cities, but my partner and I are putting together a golden visa/work transfer plan that would drop us in Europe if this election goes south, because I don’t think things are going to get better after that. Think national legislation driven by Texas and Florida.
Biden polls better against Trump than Harris, Newsom, and Whitmer.
To bad we don't get a primary to see if he really is the most electable Democrat.
We do have a primary. Biden is currently ahead of Phillips and Williamson.
Biden is more of a national name. All that means is that if he were to drop out, he’d need to do a handoff and they’d need time to campaign. The problem is that they’re running out of runway if they’re going to do that.
Biden is more of a national name.
More national than his own vice president?
Absolutely. The VP position is not a high profile position, and Harris has been disappointing even in that regard - and I’m saying that as someone from California who would have supported her for president. Whether you want to base it on racism, sexism, personality, or the administration in general, she’s mostly been balancing on the knife edge of being a non-entity and being actively disliked.
My personal hope was that Biden would make Harris a front and center member of the administration in preparation for stepping down after one term and giving her a slow pitch over the plate to be the next president. He did not do so - she was more in the shadows than Biden was under Obama, and far more than Cheney was under W or Gore under Clinton. The theme for the past four years should have been transitioning, rather than Biden pulling a Reagan while riding off into the sunset. Whoever Biden picked should have played that role. It could have been Pete, it could have been Warren, it could have been anyone picked from the Democratic candidates or from state governments.
What I’m saying is that there is absolutely no way that we should be looking at a very realistic possibility of a Trump re-election and that this is feeling a lot more like 2016 than 2020.
Why would he drop out if his replacements are at a disadvantage compared to him?
The only reason he beats trump is he's not trump. Anyone else is not trump either. If Biden weren't an option, the others would poll at biden's numbers.
I see no reason to believe that anyone else would poll higher than Biden.
Because the disadvantage displayed by current polling may be an artifact of no one but Biden actually campaigning, and the recognition of the possibility that, were they to actively campaign, they’d have a higher probability of winning.
Whatever the reason, there is no evidence they will ever poll better than Biden
These arguments being made are why this feels like 2016 and not 2012.
Feels more like 2020 to me
I might be mis-remembering, but I remember being pretty confident that almost any Democrat in the primaries could and would have beaten Trump. We’re past the point where it’s meaningful to debate whether one candidate would have outperformed another hypothetically (eg would Bernie have pulled more of the disaffected blue collar white voters who went for Trump). It was closer than I expected and closer than I would have liked, but coming off the polling and voting trends we were seeing I didn’t think the Dems would lose it.
This is feeling more like 2016 in that the Dems are committed to running an unpopular candidate (like her or not as a politician, she was the least popular candidate in presidential history, except for Trump).
There was simply overconfidence on the Democratic side that people would see through the Trump arguments and a refusal to acknowledge that Hillary, while a great candidate on paper, had all the charisma of a Manila folder. Obama and Bill Clinton won on charisma. W kinda cheated and then rode the 9/11 train (but honestly Kerry was a Democratic Bob Dole). Reagan won on charisma. Trump won on racism and charisma (although it’s not a charisma that I get).
I think Biden won on being not-Trump combined with reflected glory from Obama and (for the primaries) being seen as the safe choice. The reflected glory is gone - Obama is far back in the rear view mirror and Biden has his own record now. Agree with it or not, he’s no longer being presented as the safe choice by the press because of his policies and his honestly pretty dismal approval rating. Head to head there’s a serious chance he could lose, and there’s not a Ross Perot coming in from the top rope to tip the election. The board is still out on the third parties - who they’ll pull from - but it’s telling that third party candidates with low single digits could swing the election. Again, 2016.
Hillary led Trump in the polls throughout the 2016 campaign.
So if 2024 resembles 2016, then after Biden wins we can look forward to more complaints that the polls had it wrong, and that an overconfident GOP lost because they ran the least popular candidate in presidential history.
I feel like I explained my reasoning at length and in response get nothing of note, but rather what I’d see on a bumper sticker.
I understand that you don't like Biden. But there is no evidence that another candidate would do better. I think that any Democratic candidate would be criticized as fiercely as Biden, especially the natural choice to replace him: Kamala Harris. And in this political climate, no Democrat is going to poll +5% against Trump.
Finally, recent history does not support your inclination to replace him. If anything it suggests that we should be more optimistic.
I understand that you want Biden to win. I do too.
What you don’t seem to understand is that, in your enthusiasm for the former, you’re failing to identify the difference between “we should have set up an inheritor three years ago” with “we should change the ticket right now! Or in a few weeks!” or whatever it is you’re imagining I’m saying.
I will absolutely guarantee you that our back and forth here - whether it’s an intellectual debate or your defense of Biden qua Democrat - will flip zero votes.
I’d also suggest - and please at this point let’s stop play fighting and just talk - I’d suggest that you take a look at data science or statistics as a career. I think you kind of have an intuition of an argument, but it’s something that you could construct more strongly.
So let’s pretend that we build a function that predicts that a given Democratic candidate wins an election versus Trump etc. We want to maximize the probability of a Democratic win. It’s not necessarily the candidate most likely to win the primary, especially one that’s explicitly non-contested. To be more clear, we want to maximize the chance of a Democratic win, and that may or may not be the candidate most likely to have won either a fairly contested primary election. And even from that model, we’re subtracting the fairly contested primary election. As I implied, no one is going to outpoll Biden because no one is opposing him (which would be VERY BAD) and he did not announce/enact a transition plan staring two years ago (WOULD HAVE BEEN A GREAT IDEA).
So to be even more clear - no, I don’t like Biden. I don’t especially dislike Harris, except that I think she’s a very very bad politician. The Harris we saw in the first debate just never reappeared. I’m not sure Biden will win, and I’m pretty sure Harris would lose. I’m not sure Newsom would have lost (I am a fan and would hate to lose him as governor) had he gotten a $1B coffer and establishment endorsements three years ago. Do you see the difference? I’m not saying that Newsom today could start from Jump Street and beat Trump. I’m saying some people who are supposed to be the adults in the room should have made that call three years ago.
If you built a function that predicts a candidate's chances of victory, you would find that it strongly favors an incumbent.
Furthermore, if you had to build a function that predicts a candidate's chance of winning a primary when the incumbent isn't running, you would find that it strongly favors the sitting vice-president.
So if three years ago a political scientist had to predict the person most likely to win in 2024, they should have chosen Biden. Especially if they had to predict, in 2021, the person most likely to win a rematch of the 2020 election.
And if they predicted that Biden would not seek re-election, then they should also predict that Harris would become the nominee.
Now, perhaps there is data in 2024 indicating uncertainty about a Biden victory. But that data would not have been available three years ago. So I'm not sure it does much good to argue that we should have made a different decision then. And frankly, I'm not even sure we got it wrong.
It’s too fucking late to replace him. This should have started 4 years ago.
7 Democrats who could replace Biden if he drops ~~his 2024 reelection bid~~ dead
As if they wouldn't pull a Weekend at Biden's. He already got the sunglasses
And none of them stands a chance against Trump.
Biden is not leaving unless Trump does.
"Here's seven random corporate hacks the owners of Business Insider want running the Democratic party."
view more: next ›