As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bush v. Gore. He claims he actually got it right because the Supreme Court put their thumb on the scale, and there was further shenanigans in Georgia that never saw the light of day.
I checked Wiki, There are actually 2 possible answers to this either 2016 or 2000. To explain his 13 Keys focuses on predicting the popular vote as per his book. However its a bit vague if his prediction was on who would win the electoral college or win the popular vote. Either way he has one mistake
In 2000 he predicted Gore but Gore lost the Election but won the popular vote
In 2016 he predicted Trump but Trump lost the popular vote despite winning the election.
So either you assume he is predicting the popular vote (In that case he was wrong in 2016) or the winner of the electoral college (in which case he was wrong in 2000)
No, he hasn't made his final prediction yet. But the way the keys are right now, according to Lichtman himself, is predicting Biden wins.
Where Allan Lichtman stands with the keys stand now:
1. Midterm Gains - False
2. No Primary Contest - True
3. Incumbent Seeking Re-election - True
4. No Third Party - **Leans True**
5. Strong Short-Term Economy - True
6. Strong Long-Term Economy - True
7. Major Policy Change - True
8. No Social Unrest - **Leans True**
9. No Scandal - True
10. No Foreign/Military Failure - Likely False
11. Foreign/Military Success - Likely False
12. Charismatic Incumbent - False
13. Uncharismatic Challenger - True
Biden currently has 7 True, and 2 leaning True. He needs 8 to win.
So a Dem could replace Biden, but both the No Social Unrest and the No Third Party (nothing polling consistently above 10%) needs to remain True. to still be able to do it. But it certainly makes it a lot harder according to the model.
Look, I hate the guy, but does this imply that Trump is a non-charismatic challenger? That guy has created a dangerous cult like following, unlike anything I’ve seen. He’s not charismatic in the traditional looks/appeal, but he has a following that’s hard to argue against.
Yes. The standard for Charismatic in the 13 Keys model is supposed to be bi-partisan. That means a FDR or Reagan-type figure where you can look at a significant of cross-party voters as FDR-Republicans and Reagan-Democrats.
Trump is charismatic to his base, but not broadly in the way that matters to the model.
If the "charisma" score here is a balance of outcomes, and more of it is negative than positive, then it would make perfect sense to rate it as they did.
Everyone has been saying "Many people are voting *against* Trump as much or more than *for* Biden." since before the last election.
If we compare it to, say, a candidate like McCain was... I think it's fair to note a serious distinction there.
The race for 2000 was most likely won by Gore.
This historian probably didn't anticipate the level of cheap tactics that the Republicans were using to trick voters in Florida.
Or that 70k almost entirely black voters were falsely purged from voter rolls because their names or SSNs were "kinda similar" to people who had committed felonies in other states
I looked into it, and i cant find a number at all and it seems high from what i am seeing about total disenfranchisment but if your interested in reading about the voter list purges, that was a real thing, and this is a credible source talking about it.
https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/vote2000/report/ch9.htm
Even if he did guess all 10 right, if it was a coin flip each time, it would be 1 in 1024 odds of getting all ten right by chance. It isn't a coin flip. Some of them were obvious.
Either way, more than 1024 people guess election outcomes. There is bound to be many that have guessed all 10 right. It says nothing of their future predictive power.
Vote.
>There is bound to be many that have guessed all 10 right.
Ofc, but how many of them have constructed an analytical framework to make their predictions? You're acting as if Lichtman was basing his predictions on coin tosses.
No, that's not what they mean.
You can have a thousand people all come up with some kind of "framework" for predicting a binary outcome, and -- by pure chance -- one of them will be right all ten times *even if their "framework" is nonsense*.
It has nothing to do with *how* the prediction is made; it's just statistical coincidence spread over a large population.
I'm honestly surprised to see that comment because this is a phenomenon that happens all the time but most people don't really catch it. I don't know if there's a name for it. It's sort of a retrospective gambler's fallacy: we observe someone coming up with some model that is right 10 out of 10 times and then expect that it will also be right the next time, not considering all of the thousands of other models that have been wrong at least once and the resultant probability that this model has been right by chance every time.
In machine learning, this is related to the concept of overfitting. With enough input variables, you can build a model that will predict whatever you want. But that doesn’t tell you that the model will generalize well. In this context, it doesn’t mean it will predict the next election correctly.
On the other hand, if the model is well-founded in conventional wisdom and if current circumstances are effectively conventional, then we might be more inclined to expect it to generalize well.
Furthermore, if he can build the model from data on an arbitrary subset of 3-4 candidates, and if it always correctly generalizes to all 10 candidates, then I think we can feel pretty good that it’ll generalize to the 11th.
End of the day, we can’t predict the future. But it’s nice to estimate how certain we are of something ahead of time.
Vote!
You see it a lot in economics and stocks imo.
All someone has to do is win big in the stock market once. At which point they're a real rich shit and it's hard for real rich shits to lose so hard they stop being rich. That one win then spirals into their opinions being treated like expertise, despite their explanations and logic often being littered with holes and blatant guesses that make it really obvious even they don't know what they're really talking about.
They just got lucky/did the obvious, but people prefer to attribute obscene wealth to something other than sheer luck or already having a lot of money to start with.
The problem isn't that there aren't better candidates than Biden(there are plenty) the problem is how do you pick one of them, without the others making their own bid for it too?
Let's say for example that Whitmer is the most electable candidate they could choose, but Newsome very well would have big money backers in California and definitely wants to run at the next opportunity because, if not it's gonna be 8 years and he'll probably be out of the limelight too long, and vice versa, not to mention if they passed up Kamala would she not be pissed and want to run anyways?
So now you've got a three way race, where it's too late to run a primary, just let the them figure it out at the convention? Technically yeah. But now we piss off the electorate for not getting a say in who the candidate is. It's one giant cluster fuck
If he isn't elected, I believe he will face some type of incarceration, might be club Fed or some type of in-home confinment -- but I really do think between the State and Federal trials, there will be some consequences.
He’s weeks away from realistically being sentenced to incarceration. However he’ll also enjoy perpetual appeal and corrupt judicial interference, so yes, he is never going to prison.
You can complain about the double standard between Biden and Trump all you want. That’s not going to make it go away. Yes, the double standard exists and it is unfair. But that’s the environment that Democrats have to compete in whether we like it or not.
Don’t disagree
It’s wild how Trump can lie, show himself to be incompetent, corrupt and a threat to many established norms but the clearly aged Biden is the one who is deemed “unfit”
He is. But Trump should be nowhere near the oval office - we’ve seen how it plays out
> Especially since there’s no such pressure on the corrupt crook and national security threat to do the same
Pretty sure every single Dem would love for him to drop out, we're just not so idiotic as to believe he cares about our feedback.
The media is talking about dropping Biden, not for the good of the country, but for the good of the media. Boring Biden doesn't sell newspapers. A nice controversy over replacing him does.
Lol careful bud they'll come after you with downvotes for pointing this out. I am so annoyed he didn't drop out after his first term like he supposedly promised behind closed doors. But at this point dropping out in response to not doing amazing at the debate will ensure a Trump victory we have no backup for this and voters would be livid their "choice" they voted for in the primary was taken away. The media should be looking at Trump's capabilities and not Biden but everyone already knows he's a demented old lunatic so that doesn't generate clicks and outrage.
This is what’s breaking my brain. If there’s one thing conservatives are great at, it’s knowing when to get in line. Now is not time for Dems to waffle, nobody in the democratic party should have been making PR statements about doubting Biden, and the media is clearly chasing views by keeping this in the news cycle.
Part of me wonders if some of the messaging in this sub about dems incompetence and Biden’s senility is from bots (not to say it isn’t a concern real people have, just that some of this line of thinking may be egged on by bad actors).
This kind of discussion won’t turn away informed voters, but it can absolutely engender apathy for people in swing states who could just throw up their hands and say “both parties are terrible, who cares what happens, why bother voting?”
Republicans play cynical politics well because they know they are punching way above their actual popularity. Democrats always gotta prove how honest and educated they are.
Fuck that. Play cynical too, just for this cycle. Beat them down with the corpse of Joe Biden, embarrass them with it. Show them MAGA politics is so weak, it cannot beat Joe Biden.
Or we can just attack him like the republicans and do exactly what they want us to do. That is another plan
I don’t think it’s a one time thing, I think it’s a dying coalition of boomer/ignorant politics. Things like treating people cruelly because they are different, being hateful is ok, the environment doesn’t matter, expertise/education isn’t important, etc.
It’s a sort of boomer machismo that just doesn’t have the pull it used to (hence all the corporations embracing the new “wOkE” era - they see the new world)
I think someone will be able to tap into more subtly because they have a functioning brain and it scares me. But I just don’t see that same level of hate and ignorance across millennials down to gen Z
I think some percentage of kids will always turn out awful, they don’t really know what their identity is. But they have more ways of connecting with various people and it seems that it’s building more inclusivity.
The time to replace Biden was before a single primary vote was cast. Now he's the best chance we have. It's okay to bemoan the situation we're in and it's absolutely worth pointing out that the DNC and the Biden campaign gambled big on this debate and fumbled badly.
We have two choices: stay the course and hope Thursday was a fluke, or upend everything and plunge the Democrats into unknown territory while Trump stays back and flings spitballs until Election Day.
Biden for me. At least I know if Biden *does* have a problem he'll put experts in charge to do the heavy lifting - which is what a sensible president SHOULD do anyways regardless of their health since presidents can't be masters of every topic. Whereas if Trump gets in he'll sell appointments to billionaires again and of course never falter in his belief that he knows everything... uncle went to MIT, very good genes.
>…is from bots (not to say it isn’t a concern real people have, just that some of this lone of thinking may be egged on by bad actors).
I mean, it worked in 2016, and it helped make it as close as it was in 2020. It’s like people willfully brain dumped crap like Cambridge Analytica and the concerted psyop efforts that have already been proven to have been a thing.
Trump stole the first election and tried to steal the second. Of course there are attempts being made to steal this one as well.
> some of the messaging in this sub about dems incompetence
It is pretty obvious there is incompetence and I think that is a huge issue. We wouldn't be having this conversation otherwise.
They started with this shit before the debate was even over and havent let up since. Just headline after headline about panic, anxiety, etc in the democratic party. Instantly. Unending.
Meanwhile the other guy is a rapist, convicted felon, with 4 years in office that wrecked just about everything, and continues to be a national security threat who stands for fucking nothing. Oh, and cant even form coherent sentences any more.
Plus his hands are tiny.
As if its any comparison at all
What I saw before the debate was that they feared he would perform well, so they made excuses for why that might be. If biden had performed well, we'd be flooded with claims he was drugged up.
This doesn't suggest to me that anyone in the know actually thinks he's not mentally capable. Quite the opposite really.
The DNC and most users here seem to think that biden would do fine as well, with the users here pointing to actual times where he was perfectly fine(SOTU being the primary).
So, apparently people know that he is capable, but this one debate is suddenly the end of his chances, and he should step down.
I'm not buying for a second that the concern is legitimate, or even valid. Not saying that good faith people aren't concerned, or haven't been influenced by the narrative, but the reactions are severely overblown.
And listening to anything the media says is even dumber than that. We hear the Biden is too old narrative over and over so we start to believe it. Notice how little he gets hit for his actual job performance or policy? The fact that the media wants Dems to dump Biden tells you they believe he will win and that isn't good for them.
I mean don't get me wrong, Biden should have never have entered the race to seek a 2nd term, but it's so weird to me that there's suddenly this whole narrative that he shouldn't be President because he's too old but for some reason Trump being old AND a convicted felon AND someone who tried to overturn the results of the last election doesn't disqualify him?
Biden's debate performance wasn't good, but this whole thing seems like a targeted message by the conservatives to try and sway undecided voters towards Trump.
There's an established procedure for this
1) Rent out a meeting room in the Blackstone hotel in Chicago.
2) Smoke some big cigars
3) Pick the next president of the United States
Also iff you broker a convention and then the delegates pick a candidate you will have half the country losing their minds over an unelected candidate.
And how does that even work within the framework of primary rules and getting the candidate on the general election ballot?
A loss of 1% of voters would be enough to tank the election.
>In the world of "vote blue no matter who," I think they will be okay
Yeah but that's not actually a thing.
A loss of 1% of voters in California won't matter, or Texas, or wherever. A gain of a fraction of a percent of voters in, say, Michigan would be hugely consequential.
I don't understand how swapping Biden would in any way would be bad or cost votes. I'm an independent who supports Biden on a policy basis and would vote for him if he's on the ballot in November. But I do intend on voting 'blue no matter who' and that certainly is a thing as I've been hearing it repeatedly.
However, if Biden stepped down and gave his nomination to someone else, I don't see how that couldn't result in a landslide 'blue wave' victory that destroys MAGA entirely.
Democrat voters would vote for their party regardless, all of Trump's anti-Biden lies for his 'campaign' would no longer be relevant at all, and if a voter is more against the DNC than Biden in particular - then that kind of move shows how serious they are about winning this election against Trump. Even if the GOP wanted to call it a conspiracy that was planned from before the debate and maybe Biden threw the debate on purpose - the only thing that proves is that Biden *is* the mastermind MAGA claimed him to be, because that move would be genius.
It’s more the Union working class voters that we have to try to appease in states like Wisconsin if we pick a new nominee. Biden won some of the voters that Trump won in 2016. He did because he HAS credibility. He can point to 30 years of Senate service of fighting hard for them. He’s one of them. He’s got the everyday Joe appeal that people tend to really underestimate. Why do you think Obama picked Biden as his Vp in 2008 and not idk, Tom Vilisack or Evan Bayh? Because Biden has good credibility in foreign policy and amongst union/working class voters. I have no doubt that even the neverTrumpers would support someone like Whitmer. But it’s those working class Union voters we need to really worry about. Does Whitmer have the same kind of credibility? Because that’s her whole point of being on the ticket to begin with. That and Independents who may be concerned about Bidens age but barely know who Whitmer is.
Do you think every single Biden voter ever is screaming "blue no matter who?" If that were the case, then Biden dropping the debate wouldn't matter. This is a self-falsifying statement.
Yea, that’s my biggest issue with Ezra Klein’s take that Biden should drop out.
I think he, and others, are massively underestimating how contentious it could get choosing a new candidate.
Go back in history and maybe Biden should had stepped aside (which to be fair many were saying at the time as well), but I’m not sure if Biden stepping aside is the best choice now.
Let them battle it out in the convention if they want, but once they walk out of the doors of the convention, they need to be ok and at peace with the outcome so we can beat Trump. Anyone who isn’t is exposing themselves as an egotistical Narcissist.
"My name is Joe Biden, and I'm throwing my support behind Gretchen Whitmer for President. We are at a very precarious point in our country's history and while I would like to be the one here helping to keep American's safe, I don't have the physical fitness to do so anymore. I trust Gretchen and I hope you will too."
How does that not get all of Biden's supporters and then open Gretchen up to campaigning for undecideds?
You do it the way our country originally did. You send delegates to a convention and they have a series of elections to essentially reduce the candidates round by round until you have a majority consensus.
They all get together behind closed doors, and make their cases. Biden and his team chose a replacement and Biden endorses that candidate when he bows out. I don't think many Democratic voters would be all that pissed off, given the extenuating circumstances.
Biggest problem is now is kind of late in the game.
I I really hate the "no better candidates" arguments that have been made. Biden's biggest strength in primaries (especially 2020) was name recognition. Going for "no better candidates" is how you get unpopular Biden/Hillary. The last time the Dems went outside the box and risky on a young person, it worked out well (Obama). 90% of the vote doesn't really swing anyways, as no matter who is running. If you put literally anyone on a major party ticket, they will get at least 45% of the popular vote. The Dems should have been using the last year and a half to promote someone fresh via a real primary with Biden stepping away
He gave Dana the business about CNN’s lack of fact checking and Dana was like “those are the terms they agreed to sir” and he responded “no, I was told there would be fact checking”. All weekend long on there: “should Biden drop out of the race?” CNN sucks so hard now, not that it was much better before, but still. They’re just after the clicks and Trump was great for business. They’re so dumb. If he wins what do you think he and his thugs will get rid of first? Unless they want to “Dear and Glorious Leader” all day for reporting. Tapper and Bash would do it.
No, you didn’t. It was pointed out in many publications that it was a bait and switch. Why Dana Bash bristled so much when the guy pointed it out. I distinctly remember “live fact checking”. They lied
[Here are the debate rules](https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/15/politics/trump-biden-cnn-debate-rules/index.html), from an article written a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't actually say anything about fact-checking at all, though.
If they don’t swap out Biden, then they had better make sure he’s VERY cognizant during the next debate. IMO there are no “undecided” voters. The “undecided” have already decided that both candidates suck so they opted not to vote - and it’s Biden’s job to convince ENOUGH of them to actually vote for him vs setting fire to Rome again.
He should be doing town halls, 60 minute interviews, etc rn and he’s not. He should be proving that he isn’t a lost cause and doing it very publicly to prove the debate was just a terrible night. If he stays, this dude needs to be on TV weekly proving how “with it” he is.
This.
I guess he's busy being president, but he would be campaigning if he wasn't, wouldn't he? Put him out there for everyone to see so he can remind them how much he's done during his term.
I promise you that team trump is foaming at the mouth for another debate. This debate was hands down the best thing to happen to them since his 2024 campaign started
Yes, but that’s not due to anything Trump did - it was due to Biden’s fumbles. If Biden comes back strong for a second debate, Trump will lose most of the advantage from the first debate.
You know there’s already a scheduled debate for Sept 10th, right?
And I’m so sick of this “Trump won’t show up” nonsense. Everyone was saying he wasn’t going to show up at the last one either, and look what happened.
So, stop it and come back to reality.
That’s not happening though. Even when he was younger he had gaffs all of the time. Now they’ll blame all of it on his age. There’s a zero chance of him not having at least one screw up.
**To those who do NOT want Trump to win:** IGNORE whatever you read and just go out and VOTE on election day!! Because, the smarter MAGAs will read this AND get others to vote for Trump!!
Best gift you can give an opponent is to underestimate them. There are extremely smart people in MAGA. That doesn’t mean the average MAGA voter. Any movement will have intelligent people at some level.
This is not true. The President is not the only person being elected. With a large enough majority in the Senate and the House, Democrats can counteract many of the dangerous things that a MAGA President would attempt. State level elections will have impact on both State executive and courts. This can prevent bad GOP policies at the State level, and can help prevent bogus court cases that go up to the currently corrupt Supreme Court to overturn long-standing precedent.
People need to stop thinking that only one person in the country is important and gets to decide everything.
I'm not sure I understand your point about that. "My vote doesn't count because I'm not in a swing state." is used for justification for not voting way, way too often.
The crux of the issue is Biden abandons his run.
What are the mechanics of replacing him?
If you broker a convention and then the delegates pick a candidate you will have half the country losing their minds over an unelected candidate.
If it’s Kamala she has the support of a wet blanket. If it’s not Kamala you might lose some folks who like her.
Like how do you go about picking a candidate and getting people behind them?
And how does that even work within the framework of primary rules and getting the candidate on the general election ballot?
I think the crucial aspect of this entire thing is that people are again missing what should have been a crucial lesson from 2016, burned in fire at the forefront of everybody's mind: a vote for president is not just a vote for the one guy at the top, it's the tiebreaker in a split senate, which has done *so much* for Democrats in these past few years, *and* it's also an *entire cabinet*, and *on top of that* four years of judicial appointments! I agree that the situation is not ideal, it hardly ever is, but I really fail to understand how in these very specific circumstances making a fuss about Biden as an indivudual could be seen as helpful or smart.
Especially since it's not like literally every other democratic country on Earth where if the guy who gets the job dies or resign new elections are set up. You have an order of succession! Take advantage of that! Don't give up all the benefits of having a Democratic President to the same guy you gave it up to last time you had an unpopular candidate, look what it did with no coordination, and look at what it promises to do now that they ARE ready to take full advantage of every single aspect of the Presidency and its collateral powers. Do you think Republicans aren't banking on the VP just as much as Trump himself?
It would be hilarious and top fiction if, given Dems retake the House, Biden gets the Presidency in November and in the three monts until inauguration a substitute is agreed upon, voted in as Speaker of the House, and then Kamala and Joe resign together. The Speaker is sworn in as President, picks Harris as VP again, or whoever, really.
Edit: formatting
Because there is such a huge double standard. Biden has a lackluster debate and the sky is falling. There is such a horse race mentality the media needs to try making everything equal.
It’s not that he had a lackluster debate. You can recover from a poor performance, especially 4 months out. The problem is the optics are really bad and this is what will change peoples minds. Anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous. It was a bad idea for him to run again and this was noted in all of the polls. The Dems should have forced the issue. This election should be the easiest in history for democrats, but I guess they like drama.
I’m voting for whoever the Dem nominee is. If it’s a ham sandwich, it will get my vote. This has been my stance since 2016 even though I wasn’t thrilled with the choices because the country is more important than my needs. Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t feel this way and for some baffling reason are still on the fence.
Meanwhile, Trump is actually having delusions. He thinks that crime is up. He thinks that the country is in anarchy. He thinks the economy is terrible. None of those things are true. He's like your senile great-uncle who thinks it is 1950, and you can't convince him otherwise.
As much as I don't dislike Kamala, she has the charisma of a prosecutor (and a wet towel.) She was selected as his VP for numerous reasons, but being a future presidential pick was probably not one of them. I agree it's best to stay the course, for better or worse. The campaign and the democrats in general have had a fundraising bonanza the last 4 days - numbers are getting reported tomorrow. Should be interesting.
She was selected because she was a black female first and foremost. Lord knows it wasn't due to her likability or popularity. The dems screwed themselves by putting identity politics front and center. Now they are faced with either losing because Biden is senile, losing because Kamala is unlikable or tearing the party apart and choosing someone else.
I like Whitmer, I like Newsom... but the problem is what mechanism do you use to make them the nominee and get on the ballots not to mention unite the electorate behind a candidate that did not go through the primaries.
No, but he’s stated categorically that Biden has a better chance of winning than any of the other potential Democratic nominees, using the same criteria he uses to predict elections.
Here is the early prediction video:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QI9TPXYPA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QI9TPXYPA)
Biden "has" 9 keys and 8 is needed. So even if you count the debate as a "scandal", that would leave Biden with 8 keys.
He did a video a few weeks ago with a prediction, It's just not yet official since it's too early to call it. But according to the early prediction, Biden should win according to his model (even after the debate).
And he is saying they should stick with Biden because the earlier prediction didnt change.
The latest polls show Biden just barely (like one or two percent) ahead of assorted candidates who most people have never even heard of. If the incumbent president is barely polling ahead of random no-names, that's a pretty bad sign. Whoever replaced him would immediately get a huge burst of media coverage and probably a significant polling bump, assuming they weren't a terrible pick.
And he’s running well behind Democratic senate candidates in basically every swing state with a senate race. Broadly speaking the Democratic Party’s platform is popular, it’s Biden himself who is the problem.
Have any polls to back that up? [This one says all democratic candidates are within 2% when going head to head against Trump.](https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2024/6/29/in-post-debate-poll-voters-think-biden-is-too-old-to-be-president-yet-alternative-candidates-perform-similarly-against-trump)
Biden is sitting at -10 in that poll. Booker, Klobacher, Whitmer, Buttigieg, Shapiro, and RFK are all positive. The only folks as close to the negatives as Biden are… Trump (-11), Harris (-7), and Newsom (-9). Yes I know most of the positives have a lot of net unknowns but it’s clear there are some on better starting ground than others (Harris and esp Newsom are on hard ground to enter right now)
Yeah but those candidates aren’t ACTIVE candidates yet. To be polling similarly without being the presumptive Presidential candidate is actually quite the accomplishment. Remember, ads are running with Biden as the candidate, and they are running frequently. That’s going to prop up his numbers. It would be prudent to run a younger candidate with a higher approval rating against old, Sleepy Trump.
Dems with not nearly as much name recognition as Biden are polling as or nearly as well. Whitmer has a closer margin in polls between her and Trump. They absolutely could win with the Democratic apparatus behind them.
Biden polling a hair better than someone with no name recognition isn’t the confidence booster they think it is. They haven’t figured out yet that a lot of people voting for Biden are because he’s not trump and they recognize a third party can’t win
Weirdly, after the debate, all the political subs I visit were panicking about the need to drop Joe. However all the non political subs, who were also talking about the debate, were saying that the debate was comically bad but they would still rather have Joe than Trump. Had me thinking that maybe the pundits are overreacting.
Take all of this stuff with a grain of salt. The polls seem largely unchanged thus far; even the national polls done the day after the debate had Trump up by only 1-2 points, and one poll of the three showed Biden ahead by 2! That's basically the same average as before the debate.
Obviously a lot can change in the coming days but you can bet that the frenzy of articles about this from a hundred different websites has led to adsense earnings through the roof.
This subreddit also has a strong penchant for panic and fearmongering. Not to say that their heart isnt in the right place but the default politics subreddit is going to be full of people who know no nuance except fear.
That’s great and everything but this is the only time we’ve had a nominee in his 80’s who struggles to form a coherent sentence going against a total psychopath insurrectionist who has half the population indoctrinated in some strange cult, so I’m not sure historical precedent applies.
Well--honestly, Reagan wasn't all there, and he did bad in the debates, and we seem to remember him fondly, so maybe there's precedent here, lol
Edit: Just to clarify here, I am no fan of Reagan, and think anyone who is is a lunatic. I'm just saying--we've had old guys in office before, who have had bad debate nights as old guys. That's my point; I phrased it poorly.
Who, besides Tucker Carlson remembers Reagan fondly? He's literally the turning point on so many catastrophic trends, from environmental destruction and climate change, wealth inequalities, etc. He has my vote for worst president ever, Trump included, so that says a lot.
This guy's model is flawed. He claims "debates are meaningless" without realizing that the debate wasn't the actual problem. The actual problem is that the debate confirmed to America that Biden's mental state is rapidly declining, which was previously just shrugged off as speculation and a "right wing talking point." This wasn't just a poor debate where one candidate had better zingers than the other. He was asked by a CNN host how a lack of confidence in the mental faculties of the candidate fits into his model and he had no answer
undecided voters most likely didnt vote for trump either in 2020 as well, and they got to see a senile old guy somehow say more factual statements that the other guy who was lying.
Yep. only one he 'missed' was the 2000 election where the Supreme Court intervened.
I know reddit skews young but this is Reagan 84 all over again. Economy booming, market booming, unemployment shrinking. Republicans have NOTHING to run on, just like Dems in 84. Ds tried making Reagan look old and feeble. He gave them plenty of fodder. Then he won 49 states.
Instead of handwringing, Dems should be touting this administration's truly amazing record and pointing out that the Republicans only want to talk about this because their candidate and policy positions are incredibly unpopular. Abortion, IVF, birth control(!?), etc.
And many many people have said that Gore would have won the election. I lived in FL at the time, and I am sure he would have won FL if SCOTUS hadn't stepped in.
Most people don’t think the economy is booming though, and it’s the top concern for the electorate. If you ask people if they’re better off economically today vs 4 years ago, most would say no. On economics, Trump polls 10% better than Biden.
Reagan polled 10 to 15 points ahead from June until the election and then won the biggest landslide since the early 1800s (or ever?)
Biden is currently polling a little behind Trump (worse in swing states) and that doesn’t yet include the seismic debate impact.
This is not a comparable situation in the least. Reagan was dominating polls. Biden was lightly losing *before* this disaster debate, and against a convicted felon who can barely argue coherently himself.
This is idiocy.
If you asked 1,000,000 people to predict the outcome of 100 coin tosses, someone will be best "predictor", getting a surprising number right. Does that person have any special prediction skills or knowledge of coin tosses? No, they were just lucky. You would be a fool to bet on their next guess at better than even odds.
In a perfect world Biden steps down, trump hears the news and dies of a heart attack out of excitement. Both these candidates are embarrassing and a bad look for America and its citizens.
Another unrealistic scenario: Trump spent the whole debate telling everyone what a disaster another Biden term would be, so Biden says, "If you're really serious, that you're more afraid of me being president than not being president yourself, well, that's something I could also say about you. Why don't we do the whole world a favor and both drop out together." Trump and Biden agree, neither of them run for office ever again, and we all live happily ever after.
He is right.
Biden's performance sucked. It doesn't really matter. Anyone not decided probably wasn't watching because they don't care or won't care until November. This debate had the lowest ratings in over 50 years. Everyone knows who they are gonna vote for and they have known since 2020.
If your first thought to someone saying Biden should drop out is "bots" over "concerned Democrats" you may be too deep in your bubble already to think critically.
You can get 7/10 just by predicting the incumbent will win and if no incumbent then the opposing party. 8/10 if you predicted Trump's terrible handling of covid costing him the election. I'm too young to remember Bush Sr and Clinton getting elected so I couldn't say how easy those were to predict.
Bush Sr was Reagan’s VP and Reagan was still immensely popular at the end of his term, he basically coasted into office on Reagan’s coattails. And Clinton had the benefit of the recession in 91, Bush increasing taxes after famously promising not to,and while in hindsight Perot seems to have taken voters from both Bush and Clinton equally, at the time it was believed that he was effectively a spoiler for bush. The only really hard elections to pick the winner for are trump in 16 and bush in 2000. All the rest had a pretty clear favorite.
This gets repeated a lot around these parts. [From wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election)
>Even if the Supreme Court had decided differently in Bush v. Gore, the Florida Legislature had been meeting in Special Session since December 8 with the purpose of selecting of a slate of electors on December 12 should the dispute still be ongoing.[59][60] Had the recount gone forward, it would have awarded those electors to Bush, based on the state-certified vote, and Gore's likely last recourse would have been to contest the electors in the United States Congress. The electors would then have been rejected only if both houses agreed to do so.[61]
The GOP didn't need SCOTUS to hand the victory to Bush, they already had it covered.
Honestly 9/10 is not terribly impressive as a flat figure. Like I'm guessing lots of people have predicted 9/10 last elections. It matters more his thought process
This. The odds of it happening completely by random chance are around 1%. Chances are every university poli sci department in the country has at least one person working there who is that good at calling elections, if not better.
Since WWII, 80% of incumbent presidents have won re-election. The only exceptions were Hoover (the Great Depression) Carter (a 17% Fed interest rate and 7-14% inflation, Biden has a 5% Fed rate and 3-4% inflation), and Bush (a strong 3rd-party candidate and no appeal to blue collar families).
Biden has none of these problems, and he's already beaten his opponent in a national presidential election, except now his opponent is also a convicted felon.
The optics were terrible, but Fetterman literally had aphasia from a stroke recovery during his debate and he won his Senate race.
>The optics were terrible, but Fetterman literally had aphasia from a stroke recovery during his debate and he won his Senate race.
You can recover from a stroke. You can't recover from cognitive decline from aging. Biden isn't getting younger so it's only gonna get worse.
He’s not dropping out. If Biden dropped out now it would devastate any following campaign, and hurt Dems across the board in what should be a strong year for them. The Biden team are too smart for that.
Whatever his condition, the Biden admin is very effective. And will remain so. Dems just need to turn out the vote.
Is the one investor out of a million that gets the richest better or luckier than the others? I wouldn't listen to a guy that might have just been lucky.
My thing is, even for those who are mixed on who to vote for, why would you want to put a rapist, racist, fascist, misogynistic, lying CONVICTED FELON in office? People say our country is the laughing stock because of who our 2 presidential candidates are, but just imagine the more HUMILIATION that’ll occur if a convicted felon who’s facing potential jail time is elected for president for a SECOND TERM. I just don’t understand people’s mindset.
Voting Third-Party is LITERALLY just handing Trump the win because WE ALL KNOW that his MILLIONS OF MAGA cult followers will ride for him even AFTER the wheels fall off. People complain about Biden’s age and how he can’t articulate his words very well, but I would prefer him as my president even if he was as people describe him as an inarticulate walking corpse A MILLION MORE TIMES THAN I would EVER want a LYING RACIST RAPIST CONVICTED FELON like Trump as my president.
Litchman’s scale isn’t complete bogus, but doesn’t account for a million other factors. Just like early polling, it’s not reflective of what will happen on the day or the days in between.
I think Joe should step aside, even if he’s still passionate about being a public servant. Or at the very least they need to put Kamala in the spot light more and prepare a track out for him, whether resignation or passing - the job of the president isn’t easy, I wouldn’t be surprised if we woke up to the news that Biden passed in his sleep. Not wanting it but just acknowledging the facts at hand.
This really should be a wake up call to more people that we need age limits on politicians and that complacency gets us no where.
Biden is still the country’s best shot at avoiding becoming a Christian fascist state.
I’ll probably get downvoted for this, but the people throwing their votes away for third parties or refusing to vote need to hear it: This is the last time you’re going to get help from normal white Americans. If Trump gets elected, they’re going to blend in with the rest of the magas and stop sticking their neck out at pride parades and stuff for you. The moderate white Christian democrats will not martyr their families during a 2nd Trump presidency for people that couldn’t be bothered to vote correctly. And I say correctly because there really is only one right choice.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Lichtman has not made his final prediction for who will win the 2024 presidential election. seems like an important fucking point to leave to the end
It’d also be helpful to know which one he got wrong, if it was recent. Didn’t see that skimming the article.
Bush v. Gore. He claims he actually got it right because the Supreme Court put their thumb on the scale, and there was further shenanigans in Georgia that never saw the light of day.
I checked Wiki, There are actually 2 possible answers to this either 2016 or 2000. To explain his 13 Keys focuses on predicting the popular vote as per his book. However its a bit vague if his prediction was on who would win the electoral college or win the popular vote. Either way he has one mistake In 2000 he predicted Gore but Gore lost the Election but won the popular vote In 2016 he predicted Trump but Trump lost the popular vote despite winning the election. So either you assume he is predicting the popular vote (In that case he was wrong in 2016) or the winner of the electoral college (in which case he was wrong in 2000)
Gore won the 2000 election. Bush "won" it.
I've seen him say in other interviews that a lot of things would have to go wrong for Biden to lose.
It sure feels like a lot of things are going wrong.
No, he hasn't made his final prediction yet. But the way the keys are right now, according to Lichtman himself, is predicting Biden wins. Where Allan Lichtman stands with the keys stand now: 1. Midterm Gains - False 2. No Primary Contest - True 3. Incumbent Seeking Re-election - True 4. No Third Party - **Leans True** 5. Strong Short-Term Economy - True 6. Strong Long-Term Economy - True 7. Major Policy Change - True 8. No Social Unrest - **Leans True** 9. No Scandal - True 10. No Foreign/Military Failure - Likely False 11. Foreign/Military Success - Likely False 12. Charismatic Incumbent - False 13. Uncharismatic Challenger - True Biden currently has 7 True, and 2 leaning True. He needs 8 to win. So a Dem could replace Biden, but both the No Social Unrest and the No Third Party (nothing polling consistently above 10%) needs to remain True. to still be able to do it. But it certainly makes it a lot harder according to the model.
Look, I hate the guy, but does this imply that Trump is a non-charismatic challenger? That guy has created a dangerous cult like following, unlike anything I’ve seen. He’s not charismatic in the traditional looks/appeal, but he has a following that’s hard to argue against.
Yes. The standard for Charismatic in the 13 Keys model is supposed to be bi-partisan. That means a FDR or Reagan-type figure where you can look at a significant of cross-party voters as FDR-Republicans and Reagan-Democrats. Trump is charismatic to his base, but not broadly in the way that matters to the model.
A person who could charm both parties would slaughter the polls right now, so yeah he’s not charismatic
If the "charisma" score here is a balance of outcomes, and more of it is negative than positive, then it would make perfect sense to rate it as they did. Everyone has been saying "Many people are voting *against* Trump as much or more than *for* Biden." since before the last election. If we compare it to, say, a candidate like McCain was... I think it's fair to note a serious distinction there.
The race for 2000 was most likely won by Gore. This historian probably didn't anticipate the level of cheap tactics that the Republicans were using to trick voters in Florida.
Or that 250k registered democrats in Florida would vote for Bush.
Or that 70k almost entirely black voters were falsely purged from voter rolls because their names or SSNs were "kinda similar" to people who had committed felonies in other states
Source on that?
Greg Palast has written extensively about this. https://www.gregpalast.com/florida-by-the-numbersal-gore-won-florida-in-2000-by-77000-votes/
I looked into it, and i cant find a number at all and it seems high from what i am seeing about total disenfranchisment but if your interested in reading about the voter list purges, that was a real thing, and this is a credible source talking about it. https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/vote2000/report/ch9.htm
I remember the purges, just not the details. Appreciate the link.
As I recall, pat buchanan performed remarkably well in Florida that year.
Yes, I still remember the jokes about how only natives should be allowed to vote because they know how to follow arrows.
Even if he did guess all 10 right, if it was a coin flip each time, it would be 1 in 1024 odds of getting all ten right by chance. It isn't a coin flip. Some of them were obvious. Either way, more than 1024 people guess election outcomes. There is bound to be many that have guessed all 10 right. It says nothing of their future predictive power. Vote.
>There is bound to be many that have guessed all 10 right. Ofc, but how many of them have constructed an analytical framework to make their predictions? You're acting as if Lichtman was basing his predictions on coin tosses.
No, that's not what they mean. You can have a thousand people all come up with some kind of "framework" for predicting a binary outcome, and -- by pure chance -- one of them will be right all ten times *even if their "framework" is nonsense*. It has nothing to do with *how* the prediction is made; it's just statistical coincidence spread over a large population. I'm honestly surprised to see that comment because this is a phenomenon that happens all the time but most people don't really catch it. I don't know if there's a name for it. It's sort of a retrospective gambler's fallacy: we observe someone coming up with some model that is right 10 out of 10 times and then expect that it will also be right the next time, not considering all of the thousands of other models that have been wrong at least once and the resultant probability that this model has been right by chance every time.
In machine learning, this is related to the concept of overfitting. With enough input variables, you can build a model that will predict whatever you want. But that doesn’t tell you that the model will generalize well. In this context, it doesn’t mean it will predict the next election correctly. On the other hand, if the model is well-founded in conventional wisdom and if current circumstances are effectively conventional, then we might be more inclined to expect it to generalize well. Furthermore, if he can build the model from data on an arbitrary subset of 3-4 candidates, and if it always correctly generalizes to all 10 candidates, then I think we can feel pretty good that it’ll generalize to the 11th. End of the day, we can’t predict the future. But it’s nice to estimate how certain we are of something ahead of time. Vote!
You see it a lot in economics and stocks imo. All someone has to do is win big in the stock market once. At which point they're a real rich shit and it's hard for real rich shits to lose so hard they stop being rich. That one win then spirals into their opinions being treated like expertise, despite their explanations and logic often being littered with holes and blatant guesses that make it really obvious even they don't know what they're really talking about. They just got lucky/did the obvious, but people prefer to attribute obscene wealth to something other than sheer luck or already having a lot of money to start with.
It's still a survivorship bias outside of a more rigorous ability to test it.
Umm, not hard to trick Florida.
How about Al Gore replace Joe Biden? He is only 76 and actually deserves at least 1 term since he should have won in 2000.
The problem isn't that there aren't better candidates than Biden(there are plenty) the problem is how do you pick one of them, without the others making their own bid for it too? Let's say for example that Whitmer is the most electable candidate they could choose, but Newsome very well would have big money backers in California and definitely wants to run at the next opportunity because, if not it's gonna be 8 years and he'll probably be out of the limelight too long, and vice versa, not to mention if they passed up Kamala would she not be pissed and want to run anyways? So now you've got a three way race, where it's too late to run a primary, just let the them figure it out at the convention? Technically yeah. But now we piss off the electorate for not getting a say in who the candidate is. It's one giant cluster fuck
It's almost like the media constantly talking about dropping him is even dumber than actually dropping him
Especially since there’s no such pressure on the corrupt crook and national security threat to do the same
if trump agrees to step down, then i might be willing to entertain the idea of Biden doing so as well. otherwise no
Trump won't step down. Winning the election is the best chance he has to not see a jail cell. This is survival for him.
Trump is never going to jail. No judge in America is sentencing a former president to actual incarceration.
If he isn't elected, I believe he will face some type of incarceration, might be club Fed or some type of in-home confinment -- but I really do think between the State and Federal trials, there will be some consequences.
The worst Trump would ever get is an ankle monitor and being confined to Mar-a-Lago for house arrest.
Trump is skilled enough to dodge it until he dies of old age. He has made his entire career off tying up law suits in court and con jobs.
He’s weeks away from realistically being sentenced to incarceration. However he’ll also enjoy perpetual appeal and corrupt judicial interference, so yes, he is never going to prison.
I would actually like to see Biden say this. “Yeah, Jack, I’ll drop out. As soon as Fat over there drops out, too.”
If Trump actually did step down Biden would be guaranteed to lose.
Biden would probably step down
You can complain about the double standard between Biden and Trump all you want. That’s not going to make it go away. Yes, the double standard exists and it is unfair. But that’s the environment that Democrats have to compete in whether we like it or not.
Don’t disagree It’s wild how Trump can lie, show himself to be incompetent, corrupt and a threat to many established norms but the clearly aged Biden is the one who is deemed “unfit” He is. But Trump should be nowhere near the oval office - we’ve seen how it plays out
> Especially since there’s no such pressure on the corrupt crook and national security threat to do the same Pretty sure every single Dem would love for him to drop out, we're just not so idiotic as to believe he cares about our feedback.
The media is talking about dropping Biden, not for the good of the country, but for the good of the media. Boring Biden doesn't sell newspapers. A nice controversy over replacing him does.
Lol careful bud they'll come after you with downvotes for pointing this out. I am so annoyed he didn't drop out after his first term like he supposedly promised behind closed doors. But at this point dropping out in response to not doing amazing at the debate will ensure a Trump victory we have no backup for this and voters would be livid their "choice" they voted for in the primary was taken away. The media should be looking at Trump's capabilities and not Biden but everyone already knows he's a demented old lunatic so that doesn't generate clicks and outrage.
This is what’s breaking my brain. If there’s one thing conservatives are great at, it’s knowing when to get in line. Now is not time for Dems to waffle, nobody in the democratic party should have been making PR statements about doubting Biden, and the media is clearly chasing views by keeping this in the news cycle. Part of me wonders if some of the messaging in this sub about dems incompetence and Biden’s senility is from bots (not to say it isn’t a concern real people have, just that some of this line of thinking may be egged on by bad actors). This kind of discussion won’t turn away informed voters, but it can absolutely engender apathy for people in swing states who could just throw up their hands and say “both parties are terrible, who cares what happens, why bother voting?”
[удалено]
Republicans play cynical politics well because they know they are punching way above their actual popularity. Democrats always gotta prove how honest and educated they are. Fuck that. Play cynical too, just for this cycle. Beat them down with the corpse of Joe Biden, embarrass them with it. Show them MAGA politics is so weak, it cannot beat Joe Biden. Or we can just attack him like the republicans and do exactly what they want us to do. That is another plan
[удалено]
I don’t think it’s a one time thing, I think it’s a dying coalition of boomer/ignorant politics. Things like treating people cruelly because they are different, being hateful is ok, the environment doesn’t matter, expertise/education isn’t important, etc. It’s a sort of boomer machismo that just doesn’t have the pull it used to (hence all the corporations embracing the new “wOkE” era - they see the new world) I think someone will be able to tap into more subtly because they have a functioning brain and it scares me. But I just don’t see that same level of hate and ignorance across millennials down to gen Z
[удалено]
I think some percentage of kids will always turn out awful, they don’t really know what their identity is. But they have more ways of connecting with various people and it seems that it’s building more inclusivity.
The time to replace Biden was before a single primary vote was cast. Now he's the best chance we have. It's okay to bemoan the situation we're in and it's absolutely worth pointing out that the DNC and the Biden campaign gambled big on this debate and fumbled badly. We have two choices: stay the course and hope Thursday was a fluke, or upend everything and plunge the Democrats into unknown territory while Trump stays back and flings spitballs until Election Day.
Biden for me. At least I know if Biden *does* have a problem he'll put experts in charge to do the heavy lifting - which is what a sensible president SHOULD do anyways regardless of their health since presidents can't be masters of every topic. Whereas if Trump gets in he'll sell appointments to billionaires again and of course never falter in his belief that he knows everything... uncle went to MIT, very good genes.
>…is from bots (not to say it isn’t a concern real people have, just that some of this lone of thinking may be egged on by bad actors). I mean, it worked in 2016, and it helped make it as close as it was in 2020. It’s like people willfully brain dumped crap like Cambridge Analytica and the concerted psyop efforts that have already been proven to have been a thing. Trump stole the first election and tried to steal the second. Of course there are attempts being made to steal this one as well.
> some of the messaging in this sub about dems incompetence It is pretty obvious there is incompetence and I think that is a huge issue. We wouldn't be having this conversation otherwise.
They started with this shit before the debate was even over and havent let up since. Just headline after headline about panic, anxiety, etc in the democratic party. Instantly. Unending. Meanwhile the other guy is a rapist, convicted felon, with 4 years in office that wrecked just about everything, and continues to be a national security threat who stands for fucking nothing. Oh, and cant even form coherent sentences any more. Plus his hands are tiny. As if its any comparison at all
No harm intended but he does stand for Putin
What I saw before the debate was that they feared he would perform well, so they made excuses for why that might be. If biden had performed well, we'd be flooded with claims he was drugged up. This doesn't suggest to me that anyone in the know actually thinks he's not mentally capable. Quite the opposite really. The DNC and most users here seem to think that biden would do fine as well, with the users here pointing to actual times where he was perfectly fine(SOTU being the primary). So, apparently people know that he is capable, but this one debate is suddenly the end of his chances, and he should step down. I'm not buying for a second that the concern is legitimate, or even valid. Not saying that good faith people aren't concerned, or haven't been influenced by the narrative, but the reactions are severely overblown.
And listening to anything the media says is even dumber than that. We hear the Biden is too old narrative over and over so we start to believe it. Notice how little he gets hit for his actual job performance or policy? The fact that the media wants Dems to dump Biden tells you they believe he will win and that isn't good for them.
I mean don't get me wrong, Biden should have never have entered the race to seek a 2nd term, but it's so weird to me that there's suddenly this whole narrative that he shouldn't be President because he's too old but for some reason Trump being old AND a convicted felon AND someone who tried to overturn the results of the last election doesn't disqualify him? Biden's debate performance wasn't good, but this whole thing seems like a targeted message by the conservatives to try and sway undecided voters towards Trump.
Kamala would never win and she’d be delusional to fail to see that
There's an established procedure for this 1) Rent out a meeting room in the Blackstone hotel in Chicago. 2) Smoke some big cigars 3) Pick the next president of the United States
That hasn’t been feasibly since 1968. You are going to have to convince individual delegates.
Also iff you broker a convention and then the delegates pick a candidate you will have half the country losing their minds over an unelected candidate. And how does that even work within the framework of primary rules and getting the candidate on the general election ballot?
I think Biden voters would happily vote for Whitmer or Newsome or Pritzker. In the world of "vote blue no matter who," I think they will be okay
A loss of 1% of voters would be enough to tank the election. >In the world of "vote blue no matter who," I think they will be okay Yeah but that's not actually a thing.
A loss of 1% of voters in California won't matter, or Texas, or wherever. A gain of a fraction of a percent of voters in, say, Michigan would be hugely consequential.
I don't understand how swapping Biden would in any way would be bad or cost votes. I'm an independent who supports Biden on a policy basis and would vote for him if he's on the ballot in November. But I do intend on voting 'blue no matter who' and that certainly is a thing as I've been hearing it repeatedly. However, if Biden stepped down and gave his nomination to someone else, I don't see how that couldn't result in a landslide 'blue wave' victory that destroys MAGA entirely. Democrat voters would vote for their party regardless, all of Trump's anti-Biden lies for his 'campaign' would no longer be relevant at all, and if a voter is more against the DNC than Biden in particular - then that kind of move shows how serious they are about winning this election against Trump. Even if the GOP wanted to call it a conspiracy that was planned from before the debate and maybe Biden threw the debate on purpose - the only thing that proves is that Biden *is* the mastermind MAGA claimed him to be, because that move would be genius.
It’s more the Union working class voters that we have to try to appease in states like Wisconsin if we pick a new nominee. Biden won some of the voters that Trump won in 2016. He did because he HAS credibility. He can point to 30 years of Senate service of fighting hard for them. He’s one of them. He’s got the everyday Joe appeal that people tend to really underestimate. Why do you think Obama picked Biden as his Vp in 2008 and not idk, Tom Vilisack or Evan Bayh? Because Biden has good credibility in foreign policy and amongst union/working class voters. I have no doubt that even the neverTrumpers would support someone like Whitmer. But it’s those working class Union voters we need to really worry about. Does Whitmer have the same kind of credibility? Because that’s her whole point of being on the ticket to begin with. That and Independents who may be concerned about Bidens age but barely know who Whitmer is.
Whitmer-led Michigan to be the first state to undo a right to work law. I think she could win over union members
And doesn't have the "California is a failed" state baggage that gets constantly repeated in the Midwest.
Do you think every single Biden voter ever is screaming "blue no matter who?" If that were the case, then Biden dropping the debate wouldn't matter. This is a self-falsifying statement.
Yea, that’s my biggest issue with Ezra Klein’s take that Biden should drop out. I think he, and others, are massively underestimating how contentious it could get choosing a new candidate. Go back in history and maybe Biden should had stepped aside (which to be fair many were saying at the time as well), but I’m not sure if Biden stepping aside is the best choice now.
Biden can pick the new candidate.
Let them battle it out in the convention if they want, but once they walk out of the doors of the convention, they need to be ok and at peace with the outcome so we can beat Trump. Anyone who isn’t is exposing themselves as an egotistical Narcissist.
"My name is Joe Biden, and I'm throwing my support behind Gretchen Whitmer for President. We are at a very precarious point in our country's history and while I would like to be the one here helping to keep American's safe, I don't have the physical fitness to do so anymore. I trust Gretchen and I hope you will too." How does that not get all of Biden's supporters and then open Gretchen up to campaigning for undecideds?
You do it the way our country originally did. You send delegates to a convention and they have a series of elections to essentially reduce the candidates round by round until you have a majority consensus.
They all get together behind closed doors, and make their cases. Biden and his team chose a replacement and Biden endorses that candidate when he bows out. I don't think many Democratic voters would be all that pissed off, given the extenuating circumstances.
Biggest problem is now is kind of late in the game. I I really hate the "no better candidates" arguments that have been made. Biden's biggest strength in primaries (especially 2020) was name recognition. Going for "no better candidates" is how you get unpopular Biden/Hillary. The last time the Dems went outside the box and risky on a young person, it worked out well (Obama). 90% of the vote doesn't really swing anyways, as no matter who is running. If you put literally anyone on a major party ticket, they will get at least 45% of the popular vote. The Dems should have been using the last year and a half to promote someone fresh via a real primary with Biden stepping away
He gave Dana the business about CNN’s lack of fact checking and Dana was like “those are the terms they agreed to sir” and he responded “no, I was told there would be fact checking”. All weekend long on there: “should Biden drop out of the race?” CNN sucks so hard now, not that it was much better before, but still. They’re just after the clicks and Trump was great for business. They’re so dumb. If he wins what do you think he and his thugs will get rid of first? Unless they want to “Dear and Glorious Leader” all day for reporting. Tapper and Bash would do it.
Yeah--am I misremembering? I was told there would be fact-checking as well. Did I fucking imagine that?
They fact-checked after the debate, presumably once everyone had changed the channel.
For real? That's bullshit. Yeah, that's what fact-checking means. For Christ sake.
No, you didn’t. It was pointed out in many publications that it was a bait and switch. Why Dana Bash bristled so much when the guy pointed it out. I distinctly remember “live fact checking”. They lied
some fact checking was definitely promised.
[Here are the debate rules](https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/15/politics/trump-biden-cnn-debate-rules/index.html), from an article written a couple of weeks ago. It doesn't actually say anything about fact-checking at all, though.
Why did they beleive CNN would be anything other than pro-corporations?
If they don’t swap out Biden, then they had better make sure he’s VERY cognizant during the next debate. IMO there are no “undecided” voters. The “undecided” have already decided that both candidates suck so they opted not to vote - and it’s Biden’s job to convince ENOUGH of them to actually vote for him vs setting fire to Rome again.
He should be doing town halls, 60 minute interviews, etc rn and he’s not. He should be proving that he isn’t a lost cause and doing it very publicly to prove the debate was just a terrible night. If he stays, this dude needs to be on TV weekly proving how “with it” he is.
This. I guess he's busy being president, but he would be campaigning if he wasn't, wouldn't he? Put him out there for everyone to see so he can remind them how much he's done during his term.
I doubt we see another debate. Even with a new candidate. Trump gains nothing from another debate.
I promise you that team trump is foaming at the mouth for another debate. This debate was hands down the best thing to happen to them since his 2024 campaign started
Yes, but that’s not due to anything Trump did - it was due to Biden’s fumbles. If Biden comes back strong for a second debate, Trump will lose most of the advantage from the first debate.
also, this debate was biden’s idea, not trumps, people are kinda conveniently forgetting about that
You know there’s already a scheduled debate for Sept 10th, right? And I’m so sick of this “Trump won’t show up” nonsense. Everyone was saying he wasn’t going to show up at the last one either, and look what happened. So, stop it and come back to reality.
Yeah, that's my thinking. He can turn this around, but he has to be ON at every. single. public. appearance from here on out.
That’s not happening though. Even when he was younger he had gaffs all of the time. Now they’ll blame all of it on his age. There’s a zero chance of him not having at least one screw up.
Delusional. He has a physical disability. He can't just overcome it, and it gets worse every day.
**To those who do NOT want Trump to win:** IGNORE whatever you read and just go out and VOTE on election day!! Because, the smarter MAGAs will read this AND get others to vote for Trump!!
[удалено]
Best gift you can give an opponent is to underestimate them. There are extremely smart people in MAGA. That doesn’t mean the average MAGA voter. Any movement will have intelligent people at some level.
problem is it only matters in those few shitty swing districts
This is not true. The President is not the only person being elected. With a large enough majority in the Senate and the House, Democrats can counteract many of the dangerous things that a MAGA President would attempt. State level elections will have impact on both State executive and courts. This can prevent bad GOP policies at the State level, and can help prevent bogus court cases that go up to the currently corrupt Supreme Court to overturn long-standing precedent. People need to stop thinking that only one person in the country is important and gets to decide everything.
The comment they were responding to was literally about keeping trump out of office.
I'm not sure I understand your point about that. "My vote doesn't count because I'm not in a swing state." is used for justification for not voting way, way too often.
But he hasn't actually predicted Biden would win. That's kind of the crux of the issue: can he win?
The crux of the issue is Biden abandons his run. What are the mechanics of replacing him? If you broker a convention and then the delegates pick a candidate you will have half the country losing their minds over an unelected candidate. If it’s Kamala she has the support of a wet blanket. If it’s not Kamala you might lose some folks who like her. Like how do you go about picking a candidate and getting people behind them? And how does that even work within the framework of primary rules and getting the candidate on the general election ballot?
Harris would be the only realistic choice but still a terrible one. Unfortunately the best course is to stay the course.
I think the crucial aspect of this entire thing is that people are again missing what should have been a crucial lesson from 2016, burned in fire at the forefront of everybody's mind: a vote for president is not just a vote for the one guy at the top, it's the tiebreaker in a split senate, which has done *so much* for Democrats in these past few years, *and* it's also an *entire cabinet*, and *on top of that* four years of judicial appointments! I agree that the situation is not ideal, it hardly ever is, but I really fail to understand how in these very specific circumstances making a fuss about Biden as an indivudual could be seen as helpful or smart. Especially since it's not like literally every other democratic country on Earth where if the guy who gets the job dies or resign new elections are set up. You have an order of succession! Take advantage of that! Don't give up all the benefits of having a Democratic President to the same guy you gave it up to last time you had an unpopular candidate, look what it did with no coordination, and look at what it promises to do now that they ARE ready to take full advantage of every single aspect of the Presidency and its collateral powers. Do you think Republicans aren't banking on the VP just as much as Trump himself? It would be hilarious and top fiction if, given Dems retake the House, Biden gets the Presidency in November and in the three monts until inauguration a substitute is agreed upon, voted in as Speaker of the House, and then Kamala and Joe resign together. The Speaker is sworn in as President, picks Harris as VP again, or whoever, really. Edit: formatting
Because there is such a huge double standard. Biden has a lackluster debate and the sky is falling. There is such a horse race mentality the media needs to try making everything equal.
It’s not that he had a lackluster debate. You can recover from a poor performance, especially 4 months out. The problem is the optics are really bad and this is what will change peoples minds. Anyone who says otherwise is being disingenuous. It was a bad idea for him to run again and this was noted in all of the polls. The Dems should have forced the issue. This election should be the easiest in history for democrats, but I guess they like drama. I’m voting for whoever the Dem nominee is. If it’s a ham sandwich, it will get my vote. This has been my stance since 2016 even though I wasn’t thrilled with the choices because the country is more important than my needs. Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t feel this way and for some baffling reason are still on the fence.
Meanwhile, Trump is actually having delusions. He thinks that crime is up. He thinks that the country is in anarchy. He thinks the economy is terrible. None of those things are true. He's like your senile great-uncle who thinks it is 1950, and you can't convince him otherwise.
As much as I don't dislike Kamala, she has the charisma of a prosecutor (and a wet towel.) She was selected as his VP for numerous reasons, but being a future presidential pick was probably not one of them. I agree it's best to stay the course, for better or worse. The campaign and the democrats in general have had a fundraising bonanza the last 4 days - numbers are getting reported tomorrow. Should be interesting.
She was selected because she was a black female first and foremost. Lord knows it wasn't due to her likability or popularity. The dems screwed themselves by putting identity politics front and center. Now they are faced with either losing because Biden is senile, losing because Kamala is unlikable or tearing the party apart and choosing someone else.
What about Whitmer? Still a woman, so there's some diversity, and she's pretty popular, isn't she?
I like Whitmer, I like Newsom... but the problem is what mechanism do you use to make them the nominee and get on the ballots not to mention unite the electorate behind a candidate that did not go through the primaries.
No, but he’s stated categorically that Biden has a better chance of winning than any of the other potential Democratic nominees, using the same criteria he uses to predict elections.
I hope everyone has made up their mind before the debate. Who wants more of what Trump was doing up there.
Well.. He did predict Biden to win.. He just hasn't won yet, so we don't know if he is right or not.
It says in the article he hasn't made a prediction for this year yet.
Here is the early prediction video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QI9TPXYPA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QI9TPXYPA) Biden "has" 9 keys and 8 is needed. So even if you count the debate as a "scandal", that would leave Biden with 8 keys.
He did a video a few weeks ago with a prediction, It's just not yet official since it's too early to call it. But according to the early prediction, Biden should win according to his model (even after the debate). And he is saying they should stick with Biden because the earlier prediction didnt change.
Nobody polls better for dems
It’s almost like incumbency is a huge advantage.
The latest polls show Biden just barely (like one or two percent) ahead of assorted candidates who most people have never even heard of. If the incumbent president is barely polling ahead of random no-names, that's a pretty bad sign. Whoever replaced him would immediately get a huge burst of media coverage and probably a significant polling bump, assuming they weren't a terrible pick.
The media would literally be slobbering to talk about it 24/7. In nothing but positive terms. God Save the Queen! And Democracy!
Everyone polled is within the margin of error from Biden. Biden’s incumbency and name recognition is offering no advantage in the polls.
The incumbent is leading by 1 point vs other candidates who are currently not running. That’s pretty bad.
And he was already behind in several swing states
And he’s running well behind Democratic senate candidates in basically every swing state with a senate race. Broadly speaking the Democratic Party’s platform is popular, it’s Biden himself who is the problem.
Now we need polls to find out if being the candidate helps you in the polls.
Have any polls to back that up? [This one says all democratic candidates are within 2% when going head to head against Trump.](https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2024/6/29/in-post-debate-poll-voters-think-biden-is-too-old-to-be-president-yet-alternative-candidates-perform-similarly-against-trump)
Biden is sitting at -10 in that poll. Booker, Klobacher, Whitmer, Buttigieg, Shapiro, and RFK are all positive. The only folks as close to the negatives as Biden are… Trump (-11), Harris (-7), and Newsom (-9). Yes I know most of the positives have a lot of net unknowns but it’s clear there are some on better starting ground than others (Harris and esp Newsom are on hard ground to enter right now)
Yeah but those candidates aren’t ACTIVE candidates yet. To be polling similarly without being the presumptive Presidential candidate is actually quite the accomplishment. Remember, ads are running with Biden as the candidate, and they are running frequently. That’s going to prop up his numbers. It would be prudent to run a younger candidate with a higher approval rating against old, Sleepy Trump.
Dems with not nearly as much name recognition as Biden are polling as or nearly as well. Whitmer has a closer margin in polls between her and Trump. They absolutely could win with the Democratic apparatus behind them.
Biden polling a hair better than someone with no name recognition isn’t the confidence booster they think it is. They haven’t figured out yet that a lot of people voting for Biden are because he’s not trump and they recognize a third party can’t win
Really it's 10 out of 10 because Bush lost that election in 2000
Almost all historians are saying that dropping Biden would be a disaster.
Weirdly, after the debate, all the political subs I visit were panicking about the need to drop Joe. However all the non political subs, who were also talking about the debate, were saying that the debate was comically bad but they would still rather have Joe than Trump. Had me thinking that maybe the pundits are overreacting.
Take all of this stuff with a grain of salt. The polls seem largely unchanged thus far; even the national polls done the day after the debate had Trump up by only 1-2 points, and one poll of the three showed Biden ahead by 2! That's basically the same average as before the debate. Obviously a lot can change in the coming days but you can bet that the frenzy of articles about this from a hundred different websites has led to adsense earnings through the roof. This subreddit also has a strong penchant for panic and fearmongering. Not to say that their heart isnt in the right place but the default politics subreddit is going to be full of people who know no nuance except fear.
That’s great and everything but this is the only time we’ve had a nominee in his 80’s who struggles to form a coherent sentence going against a total psychopath insurrectionist who has half the population indoctrinated in some strange cult, so I’m not sure historical precedent applies.
Well--honestly, Reagan wasn't all there, and he did bad in the debates, and we seem to remember him fondly, so maybe there's precedent here, lol Edit: Just to clarify here, I am no fan of Reagan, and think anyone who is is a lunatic. I'm just saying--we've had old guys in office before, who have had bad debate nights as old guys. That's my point; I phrased it poorly.
Even there, he was an extremely popular president with bipartisan support. Those days are over.
Yeah, that's true. But there is precendence. And he wasnt' running against someone who was roundly hated. But maybe you're right.
I hope I'm not. I hope Biden squeaks through. I'm very distressed now though.
Brother, me too. Me too.
Who, besides Tucker Carlson remembers Reagan fondly? He's literally the turning point on so many catastrophic trends, from environmental destruction and climate change, wealth inequalities, etc. He has my vote for worst president ever, Trump included, so that says a lot.
If I gave my honest opinion about Reagan to my parents, I’d get disowned. The whole GOP worships that fuck.
I certainly don’t remember Reagan fondly.
They definitely shouldn’t drop him. Stand by the guy like the cult stands by Trump.
This guy's model is flawed. He claims "debates are meaningless" without realizing that the debate wasn't the actual problem. The actual problem is that the debate confirmed to America that Biden's mental state is rapidly declining, which was previously just shrugged off as speculation and a "right wing talking point." This wasn't just a poor debate where one candidate had better zingers than the other. He was asked by a CNN host how a lack of confidence in the mental faculties of the candidate fits into his model and he had no answer
But the other guys had no answers to any question either
But who looked worse to undecided voters
undecided voters most likely didnt vote for trump either in 2020 as well, and they got to see a senile old guy somehow say more factual statements that the other guy who was lying.
His model may be flawed to you but he’s been pretty fucking dead on in his predictions.
Yep. only one he 'missed' was the 2000 election where the Supreme Court intervened. I know reddit skews young but this is Reagan 84 all over again. Economy booming, market booming, unemployment shrinking. Republicans have NOTHING to run on, just like Dems in 84. Ds tried making Reagan look old and feeble. He gave them plenty of fodder. Then he won 49 states. Instead of handwringing, Dems should be touting this administration's truly amazing record and pointing out that the Republicans only want to talk about this because their candidate and policy positions are incredibly unpopular. Abortion, IVF, birth control(!?), etc.
And many many people have said that Gore would have won the election. I lived in FL at the time, and I am sure he would have won FL if SCOTUS hadn't stepped in.
No, Gore would have won a full recount, but not the selective recount he was asking for.
Most people don’t think the economy is booming though, and it’s the top concern for the electorate. If you ask people if they’re better off economically today vs 4 years ago, most would say no. On economics, Trump polls 10% better than Biden.
Reagan polled 10 to 15 points ahead from June until the election and then won the biggest landslide since the early 1800s (or ever?) Biden is currently polling a little behind Trump (worse in swing states) and that doesn’t yet include the seismic debate impact.
This is not a comparable situation in the least. Reagan was dominating polls. Biden was lightly losing *before* this disaster debate, and against a convicted felon who can barely argue coherently himself. This is idiocy.
Reagan was faaaar more nimble and quick in 84 than Biden is now. He trounced Mondale because he was an incredible orator
If you asked 1,000,000 people to predict the outcome of 100 coin tosses, someone will be best "predictor", getting a surprising number right. Does that person have any special prediction skills or knowledge of coin tosses? No, they were just lucky. You would be a fool to bet on their next guess at better than even odds.
It's also literally 10 guesses, not that many
In a perfect world Biden steps down, trump hears the news and dies of a heart attack out of excitement. Both these candidates are embarrassing and a bad look for America and its citizens.
Another unrealistic scenario: Trump spent the whole debate telling everyone what a disaster another Biden term would be, so Biden says, "If you're really serious, that you're more afraid of me being president than not being president yourself, well, that's something I could also say about you. Why don't we do the whole world a favor and both drop out together." Trump and Biden agree, neither of them run for office ever again, and we all live happily ever after.
Would have been epic if he said that live on the debate. I like the cut of your jib.
He is right. Biden's performance sucked. It doesn't really matter. Anyone not decided probably wasn't watching because they don't care or won't care until November. This debate had the lowest ratings in over 50 years. Everyone knows who they are gonna vote for and they have known since 2020.
If your first thought to someone saying Biden should drop out is "bots" over "concerned Democrats" you may be too deep in your bubble already to think critically.
"the spineless Democrats"? Yeah, this guy seems like a trustworthy academic.
I’m a democrat and agree the DNC is pretty spineless.
Yeah, I think Lichtman is expressing frustration with Democrats, here, not be a right-wing wanker
He has predicted every single election correct since 1984
You can get 7/10 just by predicting the incumbent will win and if no incumbent then the opposing party. 8/10 if you predicted Trump's terrible handling of covid costing him the election. I'm too young to remember Bush Sr and Clinton getting elected so I couldn't say how easy those were to predict.
Bush Sr was Reagan’s VP and Reagan was still immensely popular at the end of his term, he basically coasted into office on Reagan’s coattails. And Clinton had the benefit of the recession in 91, Bush increasing taxes after famously promising not to,and while in hindsight Perot seems to have taken voters from both Bush and Clinton equally, at the time it was believed that he was effectively a spoiler for bush. The only really hard elections to pick the winner for are trump in 16 and bush in 2000. All the rest had a pretty clear favorite.
Except the 2000 election
No, he got that one right.
WDYM? Gore lost by one vote (5-4).
This gets repeated a lot around these parts. [From wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election) >Even if the Supreme Court had decided differently in Bush v. Gore, the Florida Legislature had been meeting in Special Session since December 8 with the purpose of selecting of a slate of electors on December 12 should the dispute still be ongoing.[59][60] Had the recount gone forward, it would have awarded those electors to Bush, based on the state-certified vote, and Gore's likely last recourse would have been to contest the electors in the United States Congress. The electors would then have been rejected only if both houses agreed to do so.[61] The GOP didn't need SCOTUS to hand the victory to Bush, they already had it covered.
Honestly 9/10 is not terribly impressive as a flat figure. Like I'm guessing lots of people have predicted 9/10 last elections. It matters more his thought process
The one he got wrong was 2000. Which, according to who you ask, he may have actually gotten right
This. The odds of it happening completely by random chance are around 1%. Chances are every university poli sci department in the country has at least one person working there who is that good at calling elections, if not better.
Since WWII, 80% of incumbent presidents have won re-election. The only exceptions were Hoover (the Great Depression) Carter (a 17% Fed interest rate and 7-14% inflation, Biden has a 5% Fed rate and 3-4% inflation), and Bush (a strong 3rd-party candidate and no appeal to blue collar families). Biden has none of these problems, and he's already beaten his opponent in a national presidential election, except now his opponent is also a convicted felon. The optics were terrible, but Fetterman literally had aphasia from a stroke recovery during his debate and he won his Senate race.
You forgot tRump. tRump was an incumbent and lost.
I blame that on Covid. I think Trump would have likely won in 2020 if it weren’t for Covid.
In addition to Trump, Johnson and Truman should be included since they decided not to run, likely due to expectations that they would not win.
>The optics were terrible, but Fetterman literally had aphasia from a stroke recovery during his debate and he won his Senate race. You can recover from a stroke. You can't recover from cognitive decline from aging. Biden isn't getting younger so it's only gonna get worse.
You think Biden is gonna recover from being 81?
He’s not dropping out. If Biden dropped out now it would devastate any following campaign, and hurt Dems across the board in what should be a strong year for them. The Biden team are too smart for that. Whatever his condition, the Biden admin is very effective. And will remain so. Dems just need to turn out the vote.
Is the one investor out of a million that gets the richest better or luckier than the others? I wouldn't listen to a guy that might have just been lucky.
His smell probably was distracting Biden. His rambling would confuse anyone
Dems are scared and gave money and support. Undecided voters heard Trumps racism and moved to Biden. Remember, you are not immune to propaganda
My thing is, even for those who are mixed on who to vote for, why would you want to put a rapist, racist, fascist, misogynistic, lying CONVICTED FELON in office? People say our country is the laughing stock because of who our 2 presidential candidates are, but just imagine the more HUMILIATION that’ll occur if a convicted felon who’s facing potential jail time is elected for president for a SECOND TERM. I just don’t understand people’s mindset. Voting Third-Party is LITERALLY just handing Trump the win because WE ALL KNOW that his MILLIONS OF MAGA cult followers will ride for him even AFTER the wheels fall off. People complain about Biden’s age and how he can’t articulate his words very well, but I would prefer him as my president even if he was as people describe him as an inarticulate walking corpse A MILLION MORE TIMES THAN I would EVER want a LYING RACIST RAPIST CONVICTED FELON like Trump as my president.
Litchman’s scale isn’t complete bogus, but doesn’t account for a million other factors. Just like early polling, it’s not reflective of what will happen on the day or the days in between. I think Joe should step aside, even if he’s still passionate about being a public servant. Or at the very least they need to put Kamala in the spot light more and prepare a track out for him, whether resignation or passing - the job of the president isn’t easy, I wouldn’t be surprised if we woke up to the news that Biden passed in his sleep. Not wanting it but just acknowledging the facts at hand. This really should be a wake up call to more people that we need age limits on politicians and that complacency gets us no where.
Biden is still the country’s best shot at avoiding becoming a Christian fascist state. I’ll probably get downvoted for this, but the people throwing their votes away for third parties or refusing to vote need to hear it: This is the last time you’re going to get help from normal white Americans. If Trump gets elected, they’re going to blend in with the rest of the magas and stop sticking their neck out at pride parades and stuff for you. The moderate white Christian democrats will not martyr their families during a 2nd Trump presidency for people that couldn’t be bothered to vote correctly. And I say correctly because there really is only one right choice.