2024 Presidential Election: Who should replace Joe Biden?

[Alex_Krycek]

29 minutes ago, swansont said:

 A G E N D A

Are you eligible to vote in US elections?

No agenda other than to keep Trump out of the White House.

Frankly, it seems like you're using the agenda trope as a convenient deflection from a very uncomfortable reality, one that requires a very difficult reconciliation and choice. That, or you have a personal bias that favors Joe Biden and is obscuring objective analysis.

15 minutes ago, swansont said:

Why aren’t we discussing why the convicted felon, rapist and fraudster, who regularly engaged in corruption, should withdraw?

The idea that Trump will withdraw, or that Democrats can influence him to withdraw, is wishful thinking and will never happen.   We should only seek to control what we can.

[Peterkin]

31 minutes ago, TheVat said:

I am talking about perception of millions of voters who will not make the purely rational choice of Biden based on his track record or how fantastic his brain trust is. 

But will they judge him on the one debate itself or on all the media commentary afterward? The talking heads have way too mush political power in situations like this. I don't know what their coverage of Trump was in the same debate - just one article on the number of lies he told -  what I've heard and seen was how poorly Biden performed.

It's quite true, people don't vote rationally, taking all aspects of the situation into consideration. If they did, we (by which I don't just mean the USA; it has very far-reaching consequences), would never had the disaster of a Trump presidency in the first place.

But the Democrats haven't been all that sharp in selecting their candidates, either.

Whom do you see as credible?

[StringJunky]

9 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

But will they judge him on the one debate itself or on all the media commentary afterward? The talking heads have way too mush political power in situations like this. I don't know what their coverage of Trump was in the same debate - just one article on the number of lies he told -  what I've heard and seen was how poorly Biden performed.

It's quite true, people don't vote rationally, taking all aspects of the situation into consideration. If they did, we (by which I don't just mean the USA; it has very far-reaching consequences), would never had the disaster of a Trump presidency in the first place.

But the Democrats haven't been all that sharp in selecting their candidates, either.

Whom do you see as credible?

People are now going to be laser-focused on everything he says and does. Sometimes a spade is a spade. WYSIWYG is applying here.

[TheVat]

30 minutes ago, Alex_Krycek said:

The idea that Trump will withdraw, or that Democrats can influence him to withdraw, is wishful thinking and will never happen.   We should only seek to control what we can.

I think this is the practical view, where we are talking the art of the possible AKA politics.  We are stuck with the deranged bully, his adoring and fact-immune base, and his indelible impression that he is strong, authoritative, and gets things done, no matter what a monstrous fraud that all is.  Whatever Trump's cognitive decline, it has not alas affected his grifter powers.  Calling for Joe to step down seems like a viable course precisely because Biden is not Trump, but rather a decent and reasonable man.  

7 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

But will they judge him on the one debate itself or on all the media commentary afterward? The talking heads have way too mush political power in situations like this. I don't know what their coverage of Trump was in the same debate - just one article on the number of lies he told -  what I've heard and seen was how poorly Biden performed.

It's quite true, people don't vote rationally, taking all aspects of the situation into consideration. If they did, we (by which I don't just mean the USA; it has very far-reaching consequences), would never had the disaster of a Trump presidency in the first place.

But the Democrats haven't been all that sharp in selecting their candidates, either.

Whom do you see as credible?

Trump lied his head off.  It got less coverage because news outlets cover news, and Trump's bullying and lies are "Dog bites Man."  Or "Water is Wet."

I agree that Democrats stink at the whole party machine thing, where wise veterans gather in the proverbial smoke filled room and hash out the nuts and bolts of candidate selection.  It's a shame given all the potential great pairings out there....Gretchen Whitmer and Ralph Warnock, Newsom and Gina Raimondo, Harris and Sherrod Brown, Andy Beshear and Cory Booker...hell, you could throw the top dozen into a basket and hold a random drawing and get a duo that would reenergize the Dems and leaning Independents.

[Alex_Krycek]

45 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Calling for Joe to step down seems like a viable course precisely because Biden is not Trump, but rather a decent and reasonable man.

Well said.

Edited June 30 by Alex_Krycek

[StringJunky]

Jill Biden uses Biden's long experience as a defence as well, it seems. Experience is no good if one can't draw from it in his job, on demand and in short order.

Quote

EAST HAMPTON, N.Y. (AP) — Jill Biden was right at her husband’s side Saturday as they exited Air Force One to head for a pair of campaign stops at luxurious vacation homes on Long Island. And she got straight to the point when it was her turn to introduce the president at a tony fundraiser.

“Joe isn’t just the right person for the job. He’s the only person for the job,” she declared.

The first lady also told donors, “Anyone can tell you what they want to do, but Joe Biden can tell you what he’s done with his judgment, his experience, and his relationships with leaders across the globe.” https://apnews.com/article/jill-biden-first-lady-debate-c8fae7bab90c0f79ab88c9e783ca5ecd

 

Edited June 30 by StringJunky

[iNow]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

Biden is not the only option

The risk is that voters lukewarm to cold on Biden will be pushed to RFK Jr or similar (which is de facto a vote for Trump given electoral college)

[sethoflagos]

Most of you seem to regard this as a US internal matter and of no one else's concern. But it was watched with interest in one bar in Lagos at least, by a bunch of not-much-younger- than-them expats of various nationalities.

The consensus was that it amounted to a slanging match between the pub gobshite and the drunk in the corner who'd been there since yesterday.

If that is the best that the USA can offer at this critical time then heaven help us all - which for an atheist doesn't give a great deal of hope.

 

[iNow]

10 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

If that is the best that the USA can offer

The candidates that qualify to be placed on our ballots are never the best the US has to offer.

They’re just those who had funding, organization, and support enough to beat there others who challenged them in earlier contests.  They’re the ones who knew how to leverage power and get things done in their favor.

The “best” we have to offer (besides being subjective and representing different things for Neighbor A versus Neighbor B) don’t run bc it’s such a miserable job with real harm done to the wellbeing of those who hold it and their families. 

There’s a saying that anyone who actually wants to be president should be automatically disqualified. I tend to agree. Hubris is a seductive siren, though.

Edited June 30 by iNow

[sethoflagos]

26 minutes ago, iNow said:

The candidates that qualify to be placed on our ballots are never the best the IS has to offer.

They’re just those who had the finding, organization, and support enough to beat there others who challenged them in earlier contests.

Then leadership of the free world must pass by default to the EU. The US is clearly unable to deliver leadership to match Scholtz and Macron.

Edited June 30 by sethoflagos
sp

[swansont]

Biden bowing out at this point would be viewed as weakness and desperation, much like McGovern replacing Eagleton with Shriver as his running mate in ‘72. Any new candidate would be basically unvetted, and whatever skeletons are in their closet will have to be dealt with in real time. Exposure at the last minute will be like “but her emails” and be similarly blown out of proportion by the press even if it’s much ado about nothing.

2 hours ago, TheVat said:

I agree that Democrats stink at the whole party machine thing, where wise veterans gather in the proverbial smoke filled room and hash out the nuts and bolts of candidate selection.  It's a shame given all the potential great pairings out there....Gretchen Whitmer and Ralph Warnock, Newsom and Gina Raimondo, Harris and Sherrod Brown, Andy Beshear and Cory Booker...hell, you could throw the top dozen into a basket and hold a random drawing and get a duo that would reenergize the Dems and leaning Independents.

And yet few of these people ran in 2020. Booker did and dropped out pretty quickly - his polling wasn’t high enough to keep him in the debates. Why would they garner national support now, when they are not nationally known? I think you overestimate how much attention the average person pays to politics, especially outside of their own state. You’re talking about energizing a small subset of the voters, while the rest are wondering who these people are  

[Peterkin]

Scramble as they might, they're not going to get anyone electable in the time. I love Sanders but he's old, too. Unless Trump self-destructs (we keep praying and thus proving there is no god) it will be close and close means hotly contested and that means a giant mess. 

I don't think the world can really afford a giant mess in US leadership.

If Biden can't hold out till January, this could be the beginning of the global meltdown.

[iNow]

1 minute ago, Peterkin said:

If Biden can't hold out till January

Biden will quite likely be fine. He is fine, just older and more easily tired. He certainly looks like the crypt keeper, but isn’t nursing home material according to people who actually spend time with him.

I say this despite the Republican Christian nationalist Speaker of the House playing shady politics and suggesting it is “time to deploy the 25th Amendment” the following morning. 

He shit the bed at the debate, no doubt, but he isn’t otherwise incontinent.

[MigL]

I have to agree with Swansont, INow and Peterkin.

This was a mistake 4 years in the making; any attempt to fix the problem by replacing the candidate in the next4-5 months will result in greater chance of a disaster than sticking with J Biden.

He really has to push the fact that he is surrounded by a very competent team, and how well that has worked out during the last 4 years.

[Peterkin]

28 minutes ago, iNow said:

Biden will quite likely be fine.

That's what I'm hoping. He needs to make a really strong comeback in September.

Next February, once this horribly messy election is over, we'll see what happens....

...always assuming Putin doesn't hurl a nuclear missile, in which case, all wagers and life insurance policies are void.

Edited June 30 by Peterkin

[iNow]

14 hours ago, iNow said:

The risk is that voters lukewarm to cold on Biden will be pushed to RFK Jr or similar (which is de facto a vote for Trump given electoral college)

I would like to slightly modify this comment / offer an addendum after some further consideration:

The risk is also that people will simply choose NOT to vote.

Trumps voters are animated to the point of being rapid. Apathy on the democratic side and an inability to match that level of intensity and anticipated turnout is extremely dangerous for those who wish to avoid a second Trump term as POTUS.

[J.C.MacSwell]

Biden has done better than I expected, but let’s face it, he was nominated in 2020 with the expectation he could beat Trump in that election, with the hope he could last 4 years with his experience making up for his decline. 

He made a selfish decision to run again. He’s declining, obviously, as expected. He will have good days and bad but going forward he will decline further. Expecting folks to vote for him in November just because the alternative is worse and not wanting to hurt his feelings doesn’t cut it.
 

Anyone that would lend him their car should be criminally liable. Not that he, generally, needs those skills and the required presence of mind to run the country every second, but what he is asking, for an extension of 4 years starting still 6 months way, is substantially more than he is likely capable of living up to, possibly even living for. 
 

Give him a set of clubs and a bag. If he can drive 50 yards without falling on his face, and then proceed to carry the bag and finish 18 holes as he implied in the debate then maybe the many Democrats asking him to step down should maybe rethink this, but otherwise he really needs to go. 
 

He’s simply demonstrating poor judgement, and ego, over his country. 
 

 

[StringJunky]

13 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

He’s simply demonstrating poor judgement, and ego, over his country. 

Pride comes before a fall. He clearly has no sense of realistic personal insight. He's just soldiering on regardless.

[TheVat]

14 hours ago, swansont said:

Biden bowing out at this point would be viewed as weakness and desperation, much like McGovern replacing Eagleton with Shriver as his running mate in ‘72. Any new candidate would be basically unvetted, and whatever skeletons are in their closet will have to be dealt with in real time. Exposure at the last minute will be like “but her emails” and be similarly blown out of proportion by the press even if it’s much ado about nothing.

While I agree the less national profile options like Klobuchar or Booker would be harder to hit the August ground running, I would guess that those who have been in the national spotlight like Newsom and Whitmer have more capacity to do a whirlwind campaign and are somewhat vetted already.  And Michigan is an important swing state for 2024, so Whitmer has a useful edge there, as well as with other midwestern swings where her style might go over especially well.  

The candidate who has polled highest against Trump (but that as a while ago, I haven't kept up) lives over at the Naval Observatory, and is vetted, but seems to have a "but her personality" liability with some voters, which I haven't quite figured out.  My wife says it's a certain way she smirks during a debate, and a sort of lecturing tone, but I just don't see it.  I am sure the RW media cesspools would geyser methane on her every misstep, given their fear of strong black women.  

Honestly I just don't know if a contested convention would be a giant goatf---, or the best thing for a party whose blood is getting stagnant.

[Peterkin]

The party didn't have the foresight to groom a plausible alternate from the beginning of the campaign. The DNC is not real big on foresight at the best of times, which these are not. What the party workers need to do now is light a fire under young voters, wake them up to a their realistic prospects under a Trump administration - lure them out to vote for the Biden-Harris ticket in the expectation of getting Harris for most of the term.  

[TheVat]

13 hours ago, MigL said:

He really has to push the fact that he is surrounded by a very competent team, and how well that has worked out during the last 4 years.

I am skeptical of that Strong Team theory, which I've heard many times.  I feel there are vast tracts of voters who do not cast votes for a competent team.  What you describe is a very pragmatic and reasonable way to vote, and I have yet to see most Americans do that.  

10 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

The party didn't have the foresight to groom a plausible alternate from the beginning of the campaign. The DNC is not real big on foresight at the best of times, which these are not. What the party workers need to do now is light a fire under young voters, wake them up to a their realistic prospects under a Trump administration - lure them out to vote for the Biden-Harris ticket in the expectation of getting Harris for most of the term.  

As with MiGL, I sense the presence of a sensible Canadian who gives American voters way too much credit.   Voters here do not get fired up by a candidate who will die or become incapacitated.  Reagan managed to deflect the age issue, but did so with a famous snappy one-liner and general agility in debate matched by well-publicized woodchopping skills.

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

 Voters here do not get fired up by a candidate who will die or become incapacitated. 

No, but young voters, especially the female ones, not happy with the idea of either the abusive or the indulgent grandfather figure deciding their future, might pin their hopes on a sharp, energetic youngish aunt.

Edited June 30 by Peterkin

[Alex_Krycek]

15 hours ago, Peterkin said:

The party didn't have the foresight to groom a plausible alternate from the beginning of the campaign. The DNC is not real big on foresight at the best of times, which these are not. What the party workers need to do now is light a fire under young voters, wake them up to a their realistic prospects under a Trump administration - lure them out to vote for the Biden-Harris ticket in the expectation of getting Harris for most of the term.  

Seems like the the DNC has played the "best of two evils" card ad nauseum at this point.  People are tired of it.

A recent poll showed that a majority of Americans don't even believe Trump is the bigger threat to democracy compared to Biden. 

The DNC's machiavellian talking points are all used up. 

Edited July 1 by Alex_Krycek

[Peterkin]

5 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

A recent poll showed that a majority of Americans don't even believe Trump is the bigger threat to democracy compared to Biden. 

I wonder whose poll that was. If true, which I doubt, the majority of Americans are sleepwalking to the slaughterhouse.

[MigL]

6 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

A recent poll showed that a majority of Americans don't even believe Trump is the bigger threat to democracy compared to Biden. 

Seems Swansont was right about the OP; there is an agenda.