Excellent piece. At this point, we ride with Biden, encourage moderation on key issues appealing to swing voters, run a solid campaign about accomplishments and future plans, and pound Trump into the ground. It’s not a great option, but it’s better than the others I think.
Good piece; I agree with the overall thesis. If anything, Suozzi's decisive win in NY-3 - aided by a moderate view on immigration - provides an easy road map to follow for Biden. Take aggressive action and dare the GOP and the courts to stop him, then brag (rightfully) that he's been more successful than Trump at controlling the issue.
As for the doom-and-gloom by other media types:
Ezra Klein, et al. doth protest a bit too much. According to the Economist, when the junky, right-leaning pollsters are eliminated from the aggregate, Trump's lead (which, BTW, hasn't seemed to get better than the margin of error in the best of polling) evaporates.
Factor in the ever improving economy, plus the interest rate cuts that are coming (which even Trump fears, as he's said publicly, "watch the Fed save Biden"), and the overall conditions for Biden will improve. Panic-driven moves, like forcing Biden out, guarantee greater odds of losing.
This premise rests on Biden running a halfway normal Presidential campaign over the next 8 months which seems 50-50 at best. And why would Dean Phillips be evidence of anything when the electorate is not at all similar to Dem primary voters?
This is exactly correct on all fronts. Biden stepping down immediately turns into a question of whether or not to endorse Kamala Harris. Harris is incredibly unpopular but the failure to endorse her then turns into a dramatic squabble internally and Harris represents an important part of the Democratic coalition.
On top of that, there is no Star power in the Democratic Party toward that is more moderate than Biden (even accounting for the fact that the staffers have pushed policy far to the left of Biden’s moderate instincts) with the possible exception of John Fetterman. But that’s a big ask for a first term senator recovering from a stroke. Klobuchar or Buttigieg who are probably lateralish to Biden don’t have anything resembling a plurality of Democratic Party popularity. Biden is a liability, but there is very little chance that an alternative candidate would be a better bet even before taking into account the damage that would be cause by internal fight.
Biden needs to choose a new running mate. If he chooses a viable successor people will relax. Otherwise, we'll be stuck with President Trump. Kamala Harris should find a reason to ask Joe Biden to release her after this term. It's the right thing to do.
I think that while Biden is too old, he’s the candidate. I think an open convention would be an absolute disaster, and the Democrats would come out with a candidate who can’t win.
In an ideal world, Biden wouldn’t have picked Harris in the first place. But since he had such a narrow group of candidates he was looking at, she’s the VP. Offering her a Supreme Court seat is creative, but it would be interesting if she would take it, could get Senate confirmation and then who Biden picks after her.
Regarding Biden’s ideology, it may be that he’s genuinely more liberal than he seems. It’s not that he’s being overruled by staffers, it’s that his perspective has shifted. I think student loan forgiveness are an example of this.
BTW, a bit off topic, but let me provide a bit of a defense for Kamala Harris:
1) Turning on her based on polls is kinda weaksauce, IMO. First, didn't we learn our lesson on the unreliability of polling in the period of 2016-2022? Republicans ran the most statistically unpopular candidate in history in 2016, and all the time run on unpopular platforms and ideas. Cocaine Mitch tosses out crazy proposals, and supports godawful judicial picks...but the difference between Republicans and Democrats is that the former are perfectly fine with absorbing bad press, and even using this to their advantage with their base.
I'm not a psychologist, but methinks in some weird way, voters conflate, rightly or wrongly, steadfastness with integrity, and doubling down with strength and decisiveness. Meanwhile, we panic if even one crappy poll shows a negative, while the GOP doubles down hard, and that's why we lose.
2) On that note, turning on Harris - an accomplished African American woman - will do untold damage to the base, all to placate people that would likely still never vote for us anyway. This is insane. I don't think I need to explain why.
3) In regards to Harris' future electability, who cares what the polls say now? Sure, she's getting killed on the topic of immigration, but who knows what the big issue will be in 2028? Maybe Putin invades Scotland, or some other batshit crazy stuff becomes the prominent issue. Future events can't be framed in the present tense. Meanwhile, the media goes nuts at the news of "The Great Trump Pivot," for some stupid reason. If Trump can "pivot," Harris can too.
Klein praised Biden for uniting the party by cooperating with Bernie, but thinks the party will unify without some similar concessions by the new nominee. Biden earned some credit from his party for that, spending it on border exec actions makes sense to me.
Excellent piece. At this point, we ride with Biden, encourage moderation on key issues appealing to swing voters, run a solid campaign about accomplishments and future plans, and pound Trump into the ground. It’s not a great option, but it’s better than the others I think.
If Sotomayor retires, Biden should offer Harris the slot.
Good piece; I agree with the overall thesis. If anything, Suozzi's decisive win in NY-3 - aided by a moderate view on immigration - provides an easy road map to follow for Biden. Take aggressive action and dare the GOP and the courts to stop him, then brag (rightfully) that he's been more successful than Trump at controlling the issue.
As for the doom-and-gloom by other media types:
Ezra Klein, et al. doth protest a bit too much. According to the Economist, when the junky, right-leaning pollsters are eliminated from the aggregate, Trump's lead (which, BTW, hasn't seemed to get better than the margin of error in the best of polling) evaporates.
https://www.economist.com/united-states/2024/02/04/trumps-lead-over-biden-may-be-smaller-than-it-looks
Factor in the ever improving economy, plus the interest rate cuts that are coming (which even Trump fears, as he's said publicly, "watch the Fed save Biden"), and the overall conditions for Biden will improve. Panic-driven moves, like forcing Biden out, guarantee greater odds of losing.
This premise rests on Biden running a halfway normal Presidential campaign over the next 8 months which seems 50-50 at best. And why would Dean Phillips be evidence of anything when the electorate is not at all similar to Dem primary voters?
This is exactly correct on all fronts. Biden stepping down immediately turns into a question of whether or not to endorse Kamala Harris. Harris is incredibly unpopular but the failure to endorse her then turns into a dramatic squabble internally and Harris represents an important part of the Democratic coalition.
On top of that, there is no Star power in the Democratic Party toward that is more moderate than Biden (even accounting for the fact that the staffers have pushed policy far to the left of Biden’s moderate instincts) with the possible exception of John Fetterman. But that’s a big ask for a first term senator recovering from a stroke. Klobuchar or Buttigieg who are probably lateralish to Biden don’t have anything resembling a plurality of Democratic Party popularity. Biden is a liability, but there is very little chance that an alternative candidate would be a better bet even before taking into account the damage that would be cause by internal fight.
Biden needs to choose a new running mate. If he chooses a viable successor people will relax. Otherwise, we'll be stuck with President Trump. Kamala Harris should find a reason to ask Joe Biden to release her after this term. It's the right thing to do.
I think that while Biden is too old, he’s the candidate. I think an open convention would be an absolute disaster, and the Democrats would come out with a candidate who can’t win.
In an ideal world, Biden wouldn’t have picked Harris in the first place. But since he had such a narrow group of candidates he was looking at, she’s the VP. Offering her a Supreme Court seat is creative, but it would be interesting if she would take it, could get Senate confirmation and then who Biden picks after her.
Regarding Biden’s ideology, it may be that he’s genuinely more liberal than he seems. It’s not that he’s being overruled by staffers, it’s that his perspective has shifted. I think student loan forgiveness are an example of this.
BTW, a bit off topic, but let me provide a bit of a defense for Kamala Harris:
1) Turning on her based on polls is kinda weaksauce, IMO. First, didn't we learn our lesson on the unreliability of polling in the period of 2016-2022? Republicans ran the most statistically unpopular candidate in history in 2016, and all the time run on unpopular platforms and ideas. Cocaine Mitch tosses out crazy proposals, and supports godawful judicial picks...but the difference between Republicans and Democrats is that the former are perfectly fine with absorbing bad press, and even using this to their advantage with their base.
I'm not a psychologist, but methinks in some weird way, voters conflate, rightly or wrongly, steadfastness with integrity, and doubling down with strength and decisiveness. Meanwhile, we panic if even one crappy poll shows a negative, while the GOP doubles down hard, and that's why we lose.
2) On that note, turning on Harris - an accomplished African American woman - will do untold damage to the base, all to placate people that would likely still never vote for us anyway. This is insane. I don't think I need to explain why.
3) In regards to Harris' future electability, who cares what the polls say now? Sure, she's getting killed on the topic of immigration, but who knows what the big issue will be in 2028? Maybe Putin invades Scotland, or some other batshit crazy stuff becomes the prominent issue. Future events can't be framed in the present tense. Meanwhile, the media goes nuts at the news of "The Great Trump Pivot," for some stupid reason. If Trump can "pivot," Harris can too.
Klein praised Biden for uniting the party by cooperating with Bernie, but thinks the party will unify without some similar concessions by the new nominee. Biden earned some credit from his party for that, spending it on border exec actions makes sense to me.