2024 Presidential Election: Who should replace Joe Biden?

[MSC]

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

Alex may or may not have an agenda, but he’s been calm and rational and fact focused and I find the suggestion he’s spinning crap hyperbolic and unrepresentative. It’s ok to disagree, but he’s hardly deserving of this type of reply, IMO.

I appreciate you standing up for others, but I'm polemically turning up the heat with a reasonable intent as to why. Can't say much more than that at the moment. 

As far as I'm concerned, unless Michelle Obama does a full 180 and suddenly becomes keen to replace Biden, I just see Unity behind Biden as the best way to beat Trump now and right now by engaging in this debate about Bidens mental competency, we are playing into Trumps hands, this is what he wants. This is what he does. When his competency, cognitive, mental and moral competency are far worse than Bidens every day of the week, here we are discussing Bidens way too late in the game. 

[iNow]

34 minutes ago, MSC said:

Who barely said a word or gave any coverage to the democratic primaries

There really weren’t any challengers. It was like one overly ambitious idiot from Wisconsin and nobody else. The media didn’t cover it bc he was the only person on the ballot 

2 minutes ago, MSC said:

playing into Trumps hands, this is what he wants. This is what he does.

Others are helping him, too. Beyond the right-wing media echo chamber, there’s help from autocrats around the world pushing these stories like they have specific views on Gaza and Ukraine. 

[CharonY]

14 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

When we discuss this subject, I always assume you guy's know which side I'm on.  It is my fervent hope that the GOP are kept away from leading at least until Trump and his closest acolytes are dead or neutered. It is my opinion that Biden is no longer fit to lead and he needs to bow down with dignity and let Harris, or some other Dem, take reins at the next election.

I am not referring to you. But to the overarching discussion when it comes to Trump in media even before the debate. But I will add that specifically to that, there are also worries that having another candidate will make situations worse for the Dems (again, the ratchet). In other words, the discussion is not framed that with candidate X there would be a sure win against Trump, rather it is about who might be less likely to lose. And this is worrisome.  In a normal world there would be no discussion. A piece of ham stuck between the teeth would be more fit to lead than Trump. But now the Dems have to worry about each weakness. And strangely, they might be right (ratchet). There is no swing to normalcy and there i no pendulum. Things just continue to move into crazytown it seems.  And it is not only the US, looking at Europe makes me equally concerned.

 

[MSC]

29 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Indeed, we should have been having this conversation some time ago, but the people surrounding Biden have, it seems, been covering up his problems right up until this debate revealed his real state of mind. I don't think it's a blip

But you also don't know that it isn't a blip. Some key things to keep in mind; these are very psychologically stressed out elderly people. Trump and Biden. Let's get that right. The format of the debate is relatively new also which adds to the stress. Also we as ordinary people can't really fathom that stress. It's a live debate, televised and broadcast to billions of people, because it wasn't just watched by the USA the world has a vested interest in knowing what's going on with the US presidential elections. 

Now onto Biden, who it should be known, has had troubles with stammering and stuttering his entire life. Stammers and stutters are harder to control and flare up as stress increases. Let's take a moment to maybe imagine the narrative as it could be in his head. "I've got to engage in a debate and talk to this extremely dangerous individual, this would be Hitler, this Stalin and Putin fanboy. I've got to do well, I can't let people buy more of this mans crap, if I lose, US democracy could fail and fall and it could have devastating ramifications for my country and the world." 

Now, I've only seen a little bit of the debate so far, but I'm going to watch it all through and if anyone has any examples of worrying behaviour they saw during the debate they should probably start to pick them out and share them here. If we are going to seriously have this discussion then I would implore everyone here to stop assuming either way and determine what the most probable answer actually is by viewing the primary source and discussing it more directly. Will post more when I've finished the whole thing.

 

22 minutes ago, iNow said:

There really weren’t any challengers. It was like one overly ambitious idiot from Wisconsin and nobody else. The media didn’t cover it bc he was the only person on the ballot 

Well that's a problem. So basically either Biden stays on until he beats Trump in November or he tags Harris and hopes she can win in November. Since there are essentially no other takers. 

So the question that matters for the sake of the discussion; could Harris beat Trump and could she do it more tidily than Biden could? What do you think @iNow? You have been pretty level headed through out this discussion and we usually align politically pretty well so I'm curious as to what you think of Harris and her chances hypothetically. 

Edited July 4 by MSC
Fixing glitch that caused same post 3 times

[Peterkin]

11 minutes ago, MSC said:

So the question that matters for the sake of the discussion; could Harris beat Trump and could she do it more tidily than Biden could?

Not at this time, in this fascist-leaning climate. 

train-wreck

[MSC]

9 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Not at this time, in this fascist-leaning climate. 

train-wreck

Hate that I agree but that is what we are dealing with isn't it. 😕

[iNow]

38 minutes ago, MSC said:

stop assuming either way and determine what the most probable answer actually is by viewing the primary source

I watched it live and in total, as I have every debate including those for primaries for decades 

38 minutes ago, MSC said:

what you think of Harris and her chances hypothetically. 

Her chances are poor despite her obvious capabilities. She’s consistently polled worse than Biden since they took office.

 We’re still very much a misogynistic and racist country, at least in the swing electoral college states where a coin flip and a stiff breeze is all that’s required to change the outcome overall. 

Edited July 4 by iNow

[MSC]

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

Her chances are poor despite her obvious capabilities. She’s consistently polled worse than Biden since they took office.

Besides her are there any obvious choices who would also retain the African American voters?

10 minutes ago, iNow said:

watched it live and in total, as I have every debate including those for primaries for decades 

What stuck out for you?

[iNow]

Yes, but candidates aren’t picked based on the wishes of SFN commenters

 

 

2 minutes ago, MSC said:

What stuck out for you?

How old and tired he looked 

[Alex_Krycek]

5 hours ago, MSC said:

Basically none of your criticisms are going to be constructive and this thread should have went up months ago or even a year ago in order for us to consider it an objectively viable alternative. 

Better late than never.  The fact is, quite a few in the media were raising questions about Biden's mental state over a year ago, but were shouted down with the same objections we're seeing here.  

Those to blame are the corrupt DNC and those around Biden who sought to shield his decline from the public eye for their own personal gain.

I disagree that it's too late.  Trump remains deeply unpopular outside of his MAGA base.  If you think Biden is really the best candidate the Dems have to offer, we've got much bigger problems.  Unfortunately, "Blue MAGA" seems to have arisen in the Democratic party.

5 hours ago, MSC said:

I just see Unity behind Biden as the best way to beat Trump now 

 A contrived attempt at "unity" won't capture independents unfortunately, which is what we need to win.

People have to actually believe Biden is the best man for the job, which he clearly demonstrated that he isn't.  It's questionable that he'll be able to do the job in 1-2 years, given his age.  

[Alex_Krycek]

 

 

It's over, guys.  Biden is withdrawing.  

My prediction, anyway. 

 

Edited July 4 by Alex_Krycek

[MSC]

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

Better late than never.  The fact is, quite a few in the media were raising questions about Biden's mental state over a year ago, but were shouted down with the same objections we're seeing here.  

Those to blame are the corrupt DNC and those around Biden who sought to shield his decline from the public eye for their own personal gain.

I disagree that it's too late.  Trump remains deeply unpopular outside of his MAGA base.  If you think Biden is really the best candidate the Dems have to offer, we've got much bigger problems.  Unfortunately, "Blue MAGA" seems to have arisen in the Democratic party.

 A contrived attempt at "unity" won't capture independents unfortunately, which is what we need to win.

People have to actually believe Biden is the best man for the job, which he clearly demonstrated that he isn't.  It's questionable that he'll be able to do the job in 1-2 years, given his age.  

Tell you what actually, read and address everything I've written. Spelled it out for you why it won't work now. Harris polls worse and nobody else is running to step in and suggest they can do it. So explain how this is supposed to work and explain how someone new is supposed to mass up enough support in less than 5 months before the election? 

Explain how this doesn't go worse than when LBJ stepped down and was replaced by Nixon? And when LBJ stepped down, there were about 7 months to the election. 

This is just an example of the sort of infighting that will not quiet down before the election and ridiculous standards Biden is held to that Trump never got close to meeting in the first place. 

But hey, if Biden steps down, I hope you're right that a new person can win but if they lose I'm gonna come back here to say I told you so. 

3 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

If you think Biden is really the best candidate the Dems have to offer, we've got much bigger problems.  Unfortunately, "Blue MAGA" seems to have arisen in the Democratic party.

He's the only candidate who was up for it it seems. Oh so now because we are sure a less than 5 month campaign isn't going to beat Trump, we are blue MAGA? Don't you have to deny reality to be considered MAGA? 

8 hours ago, iNow said:

How old and tired he looked

Like Obama at the end of his second term. Definitely not an easy job. We will probably find out in the next two weeks what the democrats will decide to do and I think it will be largely based on what Biden chooses to do. If he opts not to drop out, the DNC will have a choice to make, support him or actively work against him for not falling in line behind the convention and I doubt they will do latter as that will only benefit Trump. 

4 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

People have to actually believe Biden is the best man for the job, which he clearly demonstrated that he isn't.  It's questionable that he'll be able to do the job in 1-2 years, given his age.  

If you're going to argue that he isn't the best man for the job to beat Trump, despite having the best chance of anyone in this country on incumbency alone, you're going to have to start making suggestions for who could actually replace him that also has a chance of beating Trump that isn't a fever dream. Michelle Obama is out as she doesn't want to do it, Bernie is older than Biden, Harris polls worse than Biden and the democratic primary was dead with only Biden and one Wisconsin unknown barely making any impact at all. 

Keep in mind whomever you suggest needs to have a distinct lack of skeletons in their closet because the Republicans will drag them out, or claim a pressed suit is a skeleton and cry fake news when you show them a picture of the suit. 

I'm open to being convinced but you actually need to start having the discussion you started in order to do that. I want names, bios and good arguments in favour of other candidates, otherwise this thread is just a place for you to vent about how you feel about Biden and nothing else. 

It also occurs to me that I'd agree with OP completely if Biden was facing off against someone like Bush or Romney, but it's against Trump and the risks associated with losing are just too great. Like I said, this feels like deciding between which of your own feet to shoot. On that note Biden is still the dominant foot to me and there are so many unknowns surrounding replacing him.

[iNow]

4 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

 

 

It's over, guys.  Biden is withdrawing.  

My prediction, anyway. 

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, MSC said:

He's the only candidate who was up for it it seems.

It doesn’t seem this way at all, but there is a certain deference offered to those already in power and in positions of party leadership.

It’s extremely rare for a sitting president to get challenged during the primaries, and the incumbent has enormous power and ability to win. 

2 hours ago, MSC said:

I want names, bios and good arguments in favour of other candidates

Gavin Newsom

Gretchen Whitmer

Pete Buttigieg

Josh Shapiro

JB Pritzker

Andy Bashear

None of whom will matter unless Biden voluntarily leaves or unless there’s a messy bunch of backstabbing and infighting and self immolation at the convention in Chicago.

Edited July 4 by iNow

[TheVat]

11 hours ago, MSC said:

we are playing into Trumps hands, this is what he wants. This is what he does. When his competency, cognitive, mental and moral competency are far worse than Bidens every day of the week, here we are discussing Bidens way too late in the game. 

Trump doesn't always want things that are sound strategy.  If Harris or Newsom could defeat him, and Biden could not, then we need that discussion even if it's eleventh hour.  No one here seems to disagree with Trump being a lying sociopathic turd - this chat should consider optimal strategies when the margins are narrow.  A winning chess player will sacrifice their queen if that is the best path to mate, no matter how much they like keeping material advantage.

 

11 hours ago, iNow said:

There really weren’t any challengers. It was like one overly ambitious idiot from Wisconsin and nobody else. The media didn’t cover it bc he was the only person on the ballot 

MINNESOTA!

6 hours ago, Alex_Krycek said:

 A contrived attempt at "unity" won't capture independents unfortunately, which is what we need to win.

A crucial point of strategy.  Thank you.  

[MigL]

I think we can all agree that J Biden is well past his 'best before' date, and not the best Presidential material.
But that isn't the question.
The question is should he be replaced  ?

And that involves many other important questions.
Does he want to be replaced ?
Replaced by whom ?
Will the media and MAGA spin it as an act of desperation from a losing party ?
Etc.

My personal choice would have been K Harris, IF, they had given her some exposure ( like Biden got under Obama ) during the last couple of years.
Instead she was kept hidden and on low key assignments, so that she would not challenge Biden ??

She is certainly sharp, and would have had some of the incumbent/name recognition advantage Biden has. But the Democrats didn't, so it'a all academic.

either way, America, and the world, are in for a frantic 4 months, and the very real possibility of another sh*t-show Presidency ( or worse yet, dictatorship ).

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

Trump doesn't always want things that are sound strategy.  If Harris or Newsom could defeat him, and Biden could not, then we need that discussion even if it's eleventh hour.  No one here seems to disagree with Trump being a lying sociopathic turd - this chat should consider optimal strategies when the margins are narrow.  A winning chess player will sacrifice their queen if that is the best path to mate, no matter how much they like keeping material advantage.

The issue is that having him drop out has clear risks but the benefits are uncertain. In part, there is just not enough data to devise an "optimal" strategy:https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/358559/biden-harris-whitmer-newsom-shapiro-buttigieg-alternative-nomination-candidate-2024

Also, it seems that swing voters are at best volatile and I wonder whether anyone has a good model to figure out how they would actually vote. 

For example, in this a swing voter would need to find Trump's conduct and desire to overthrow democracy not disqualifying, be swayed by signs of weakness in a debate (but not as much as by someone who is outright ignoring the debate and just piles on lies). Some suggestions are that there are folks who are either in a worse economic situation than pre-pandemic (or believe they are) and therefore believe in an economic benefit of a Trump presidency (but then, how would they be swayed by arguments, if they vote based on personal experience/feelings)? I.e. much of the factors appear to be undefined and intangible and I am not sure how to construct a sound strategy around that. 

I suspect the best would be somehow a person who would just sway folks by charisma alone rather than anything related to facts or evidence.  

[TheVat]

5 minutes ago, CharonY said:

 

Also, it seems that swing voters are at best volatile and I wonder whether anyone has a good model to figure out how they would actually vote. 

Good question.  Anne Applebaum, a political analyst at The Atlantic, suggested that swing voters need to get interested enough to vote, and that if GOP was forced to actually talk about its policy positions (generally quite unpopular) this would help the Dems.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/07/replace-biden-strategic-plan/678884/

The delegates to the Democratic National Convention don’t need to sleepwalk into catastrophe. They can demand that Biden release them from their pledge to support him. They can tear up the rule book, just like political parties do in other countries, and carry out a cold-blooded analysis....

...Three states are essential to a Democratic presidential victory: Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. All three have popular, successful, articulate Democratic governors. A tactical, strategic political party would pick one of the three as its presidential nominee....

... Vice President Kamala Harris and any other candidates who stand a chance of winning those three states would be welcome to join the competition too. Everyone who enters should pledge their support to the winner...

...The Democrats can hold a new round of primary debates, town halls, and public meetings from now until August 19...

...the television networks would compete to show them. Millions would watch. Politics would be interesting again. After a turbulent summer, whoever emerges victorious in a vote of delegates at the DNC can spend the autumn campaigning in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—and win the presidency...

...There are risks. The Democrats could gamble and lose. But there are also clear benefits. The Republican convention, due to take place in less than two weeks, would be ruined. Trump and other Republicans wouldn’t know the name of their opponent. Instead of spending four days attacking Biden, they would have to talk about their policies, many of which—think corporate subsidies, tax cuts for the rich, the further transformation of the Supreme Court—aren’t popular. Their candidate spouts gibberish. He is also old, nearly as old as Biden, and this is his third presidential campaign. Everyone would switch channels in order to watch the exciting Democratic primary debates instead....

[CharonY]

52 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Instead of spending four days attacking Biden, they would have to talk about their policies, many of which—think corporate subsidies, tax cuts for the rich, the further transformation of the Supreme Court—aren’t popular.

That sounds like wishful thinking. They would just attack the "extreme socialist left" which would include everyone but themselves. They don't need a name. Heck, Trump repeatedly attacked Obama instead of Biden and it does not seem to matter.

While the commentator talks about tearing up the rule book, I think they are gauging the public and voters by their own, obsolete playbook. All the listed arguments might have been valid 20 years ago, I suspect most won't work today.

It might be a sign of getting old, but I suspect that norms and rules have become more volatile due to ever faster and changing forms of communication and media consumption. Thinks that were unthinkable 10 years ago are normal now and probably outdated in five years from now. The pandemic has shifted the ground even faster. It is not just about Trump, but it may be more connected to issues of social cohesion (or lack thereof) and separated realities.

[MSC]

2 hours ago, CharonY said:

might be a sign of getting old, but I suspect that norms and rules have become more volatile due to ever faster and changing forms of communication and media consumption. Thinks that were unthinkable 10 years ago are normal now and probably outdated in five years from now. The pandemic has shifted the ground even faster. It is not just about Trump, but it may be more connected to issues of social cohesion (or lack thereof) and separated realities.

No I agree with this and I'm 30. This is why earlier I said i don't trust polls as far as I can throw them until we are much closer to election day. A new ipsos poll was just released already showing recovery in Bidens position with neck and neck 40% support each.

[iNow]

6 hours ago, TheVat said:

MINNESOTA!

Ope, sorry. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

5 hours ago, MigL said:

I think we can all agree that J Biden is well past his 'best before' date, and not the best Presidential material.
But that isn't the question.
The question is should he be replaced  ?

And that involves many other important questions.
Does he want to be replaced ?
Replaced by whom ?
Will the media and MAGA spin it as an act of desperation from a losing party ?
Etc.

My personal choice would have been K Harris, IF, they had given her some exposure ( like Biden got under Obama ) during the last couple of years.
Instead she was kept hidden and on low key assignments, so that she would not challenge Biden ??

She is certainly sharp, and would have had some of the incumbent/name recognition advantage Biden has. But the Democrats didn't, so it'a all academic.

either way, America, and the world, are in for a frantic 4 months, and the very real possibility of another sh*t-show Presidency ( or worse yet, dictatorship ).

Not a fan of Harris but she certainly has the inside track. 
I think she can win the election if she:

1. Doesn’t make it about her personal race or gender. Those that care won’t change their vote.

2. Doesn’t make it about her. No one cares if “that little girl” was her. She’ll have 4 years to make it about her if she wants to lose in 2028.

3. She obviously needs to play politics but stop with the obvious lies. She can’t compete with Trump in a lying contest…She doesn’t need to “go high”, but stay out of the mud…that’s Trump territory. She doesn’t even need to exaggerate, just make it about Trump. Plenty to work with.

4. Don’t commit to anything new just run on the Biden/Harris administration’s record and direction. She can sell it better than Biden and Biden can help…it’s his legacy and he’ll be getting an approval bump for bowing out and putting the country first.

5, Don’t let Trump suck her into trading insults. Again that’s his territory and no one is going to out thin skin narcissist liar him. Keep a thick skin, make it about him where it’s demonstrably obvious, but otherwise make it about America not herself..Don’t be the little Adam Schiff that called wolf…unless the wolf is actually there to point out clearly.

6. Don’t insult potential Trump voters as per Hillary. Nothing to be gained and some might stay home if not given the extra motivation to come out…and swing voters aren’t going to be impressed with it either.

Just my $0.02…probably overpriced but I think she can, potentially, do better than Biden. She’s certainly already been vetted yet running close to Trump already. I think she can win if it’s about Trump…right now it’s about Biden and not in a good way. He has good days and bad but that ratio isn’t going to improve between now and November.

No one but Trump’s base want Trump. They just want an alternative. Something other than weekend at Bernie’s….

 

[CharonY]

22 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

No one but Trump’s base want Trump.

I still have not seen any good data or insights that suggests that this is the case. Given the unfavorability/favorability level of Trump as the sole presented data, it would suggest that about half the population is Trump's base.

[J.C.MacSwell]

I really don’t think it’s close to 50 percent. Might be as high as 30. The rest just want his base, that 30, and just want to win…or dislike some of the overcompensating woke politics of the Left even more.

Of his base, that 30 or whatever it is, some just like that Trump can stick it to the Left in ways of one else can or is willing to. That’s Trump’s superpower. For some it might be the only thing they admire about him.

The majority of Americans don’t want Trump. The vast majority don’t want Biden.

Biden’s administration has succeeded in many ways above expectations. 
Credit for that could be lost, along with the election, if he insists on continuing to run.

He’s in no shape to make his own case.

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

No one but Trump’s base want Trump.

I think this statement is a bit misleading as it seems to suggest that there is a large swath of people just waiting to drop Trump. Yet this does not seem to be the case. Even if you assume that 30% of the US (which already would be huge) was the basis, the favorability rating suggests that on top another 10% actually like him. About 50% have an unfavorable view, and if we assume that they indeed don't want him and are not going to be swayed otherwise, there is basically just a gap of 10%. Even in the best scenario the case for any candidate is going to be tight.

If we look at polls, Harris underperformed Biden vs Trump by around 2 points. Dinging Biden would not likely change that (it would just change a Harris/Biden matchup). In other words, what happened post-debate is that Biden's chances might have dropped and even if folks would fare better than Biden in the current situation, past data does not suggest that it is clear that they would be better situated than Biden pre-debate.

 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I really don’t think it’s close to 50 percent. Might be as high as 30.

Thankfully we don’t need to rely on our intuition and have actual numbers across polling agencies and across the years which consistently show him favorable around 45-48%… consistently, and it only goes up after impeachment and conviction.