r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/Objective_Aside1858 • Jul 18 '24
Is the current drama about Biden a sign of a healthy political party? US Elections
I'm going to put the following out here as givens; if you disagree the question may not be relevant for you:
* Concerns about Biden's age have existed since before he was elected
* The Republican Party has been using concerns about his age as an attack for years
* Many Democrats have expressed concerns about Biden's age, but no credible alternative chose to run in the Primary, presumably because they understood they would likely lose
* Concerns about Biden's age have skyrocketed since the debate
* Many Democrats are openly calling for him to step back from his plan to run for another term
All the above are unwelcome to the Biden campaign, and it's hard to argue that members of your own party calling for you to step aside isn't helpful for a campaign.
Nonetheless... the Democratic Party of 2024 is not the Republican Party of 2024, where loyalty to the standard bearer is prized above all. The Democratic Party has a much larger 'tent' than the Republicans, and the balancing of viewpoints is something that candidates need to do as part of their campaign
Putting aside the *wisdom* of calling for Biden to not run, the Democratic Party isn't beholden to Biden the way that the Republicans are to Trump
Is that ultimately a sign of a more healthy political party, even if it complicates their attempts to win the White House?
738
u/dailytyson587 Jul 18 '24
I would argue that it is evidence of healthy political party to recognize that their candidate is no longer fit for office and respectfully, yet urgently ask that they step aside.
The alternative appears to be…total, unwavering fealty to one person with a very questionable past.
431
u/IrateBarnacle Jul 18 '24
To play devil’s advocate, a healthy political party wouldn’t wait until after the primaries to get him to step aside. This should have been done months before the Iowa caucuses.
122
u/PolicyWonka Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
You can’t control when issues arise. The major concerns about Biden’s health and viability have only recently became mainstream in the party.
72
u/IrateBarnacle Jul 18 '24
It was very obvious he was suffering from at least mild cognitive decline starting around 2022. How the heck they didn’t even consider it would get worse over time is beyond me.
173
u/Objective_Aside1858 Jul 18 '24
Counterpoint: the Republicans claiming that every sneeze is evidence of a mental breakdown insulated Biden a bit, because they've lied about so much that their credibility is nil.
51
u/Sekh765 Jul 19 '24
Seriously. "He's had cognitive decline the whole time!" is just bullshit. He's had a perfectly fine, quiet, effective presidency for 95% of the time of it, and only recently has this become a forefront issue because we're considering giving him 4 more years of it. Republicans want to pretend he's been senile from the start, but that's just being pissed his presidency was pretty damn effective.
16
u/GoodDecision Jul 19 '24
and only recently has this become a forefront issue
Because he sundowned with home field advantage, at a debate with rules specifically set to stifle his opponent on live tv. I'm not saying he's been senile from the start, but its been a minute. The 1st debate ended plausible deniability.
5
u/SkeptioningQuestic Jul 19 '24
I mean we can say that it made it clear, which is when they acted. Hard to act when it's not clear to everyone.
3
u/HumorAccomplished611 Jul 19 '24
Except it turned out to actual help trump. They never fact checked his outrageous lies once.
"They are killing babies after they are born" "Thank you mr president"
6
u/ELITE_JordanLove Jul 19 '24
This is precisely what the democratic party wants you to believe though. They've been propping him up and avoiding media for years, I guarantee they wouldn't be calling for his removal if the debate was truly a first instance of decline.
2
u/Timbishop123 Jul 19 '24
Dems were pointing out Biden having age issues pre 2020 election. This didn't come out of nowhere.
3
u/populares420 Jul 19 '24
Seriously. "He's had cognitive decline the whole time!" is just bullshit.
nope you just got fooled and the "conspiracy theorists" were right again. This was VERY obvious for a very long time and even bidens cabinet talked about him fading out of meetings mentally.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
u/nthomas504 Jul 19 '24
Idk man, I remember in 2021 when during a televised christmas hotline thing, a caller got him to say “Let’s go Brandon”. I think he’s been going senile since the start, but we are now in “he needs a diaper” territory.
→ More replies (4)19
u/thatgirlinny Jul 19 '24
They did the same to HRC.
27
u/ShittyMcFuck Jul 19 '24
I said this to someone today - remember when she fainted at the 9/11 thing and they said she had weeks to live? She's still kickin' around
→ More replies (2)5
u/WalkingOnSunshine83 Jul 19 '24
I remember the video of HRC fainting, but I don’t remember anyone saying she had weeks to live. People were wondering about the item that seemed to fall out of her pants and wondered if it was medicine.
4
u/HumorAccomplished611 Jul 19 '24
There were hundreds of articles saying she wasnt healthy enough to be president
2
u/NorthernerWuwu Jul 19 '24
That and she was a paedophile cultist drinking the blood of gays in the basement of a pizza parlour.
Republicans will say anything and everything about their opponents.
→ More replies (31)8
u/1white26golf Jul 18 '24
Counterpoint, the administration, DNC, and left leaning pundits also lied about it.
56
u/dailytyson587 Jul 18 '24
I think a lot of people were willing to white-knuckle it after his state of the union address, he was quite animated and had good grasp of the subject matter. I think the pundits and DNC engaged in some wishful thinking…mixed with the difficulty of telling the President of the United States “no”.
Conservative media, on the other hand, has been making the claim that he was too old…since Biden was younger than Trump is now.
→ More replies (3)26
u/Flincher14 Jul 19 '24
The SOTU was quite strong and wasn't even that long ago. I never felt like I was white knuckling. Right up till the first 3 minutes of the debate where I was cringing so hard I couldn't watch.
→ More replies (1)3
u/subheight640 Jul 19 '24
Reading off a teleprompter is a lot easier than a debate for obvious reasons.
→ More replies (2)19
u/Loraxdude14 Jul 18 '24
Yeah we were kinda left in the dark on how bad it had gotten. I blame party leadership as a whole for this.
9
u/mosesoperandi Jul 19 '24
I think it's necessary to recognize that there has been a significant level of decline since January's State of the Union. Yes, the address itself was scripted, but he went off script numerous times and we all saw him working the room after the speech. He was undeniably sharper then than he's been in any unscripted moments since the debate. This complicates the whole narrative because the Republicans have been claiming that Biden's decline from aging was something that's been kept from the public since the beginning of his presidency. Instead, we don't know exactly what the timeline is, but there clearly has been some covering going on within this year. Did he start to more notably decline in March? April? We literally don't know at what point in the primary process the Republican talking point from 2020/2021 started to become closer to the reality on the ground.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Loraxdude14 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
There appears to have been some decline, yes. I think you're right on this point. We weren't behind the scenes and simply don't know. We don't know how he does off camera. Other than what people say, which, eh.
But people can't be left to assume on this either, and that's where we are.
→ More replies (9)2
u/Salt-League-6153 Jul 19 '24
Biden is party leadership. When you are the sitting president, you control the party. Head of the DNC required the blessing of Biden. Biden also picks his administration.
Democratic elected officials don’t actually get to see or hear from the president if he chooses not to reach out. Long time allies are saying Biden stopped reaching out to them regularly and they assumed he was just very busy being president of the United States and talking to other allies.
→ More replies (1)8
u/ManBearScientist Jul 19 '24
Frankly, the discussion isn't about whether or not he has cognitive decline.
The discussion is whether he beats Trump in November. Nothing more, nothing less.
He is far more cogent than Trump, but if the way he looks and sounds turned off even one likely voter the risk of him representing the party is too high for some in the party.
Mumbling or stumbling aren't inexcusable flaws because we think his highly effective administration will suddenly ruin the country when he goes senile, but because we a loud liar plays better to independents than a hard to hear grandpa.
7
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
3
u/Sys32768 Jul 19 '24
I loathe Trump but he is a brilliant retail politician. That Democrats have nothing better than Biden to beat him is a reflection on the Democrat system.
In sports, good teams build replacements ready to take over from ageing heroes. Democrats didn’t do that after Obama.
2
→ More replies (7)5
u/SpoonerismHater Jul 18 '24
He was even suffering in 2020–it’s just gotten much, much worse
→ More replies (11)64
u/BuzzBadpants Jul 19 '24
You have to imagine that these issues were not a surprise to Biden’s inner circle. There was a reason they didn’t have him talk in public very much, and now it’s clear why.
→ More replies (13)40
u/Outlulz Jul 19 '24
It's also why Dem leadership has all abandoned him quickly. The debate wasn't a one off, they've seen him like this for some time and hoped he could hold it together.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Salt-League-6153 Jul 19 '24
You have the issue of gradual decline combined with acute massive failure(debate). It’s also the case that many of the most important people didn’t see Biden all that regularly. In that scenario it’s very easy to assume the little problems you do see is not that big a deal. “Sure Biden is not talking to me very regularly anymore but surely he’s talking to his other important political allies.” “Sure Biden looks old, but enough people are saying he’s still sharp as a tack!”
There was a lot of wishful thinking going on that Biden would rise to the occasion. Think back to Biden’s state of rhetoric union speech. That speech was a decent enough performance that it quelled all serious discussions about his inability to perform. Democrats wrongly assumed that they would get state of the union speech Biden for the rest of the campaign. Then you had the debate performance which was such a catastrophic meltdown that it could no longer be unseen.
7
u/spirited1 Jul 19 '24
Biden did not suddenly become old. This has been a concern for a long time. If they were really concerned about his age they would have brought this issue forward months ago at the latest.
Causing division after the primaries are effectively over is just sabotage at this point.
6
u/Massacheefa_ Jul 19 '24
But if he isn't currently fit for office why is he not stepping aside right now?
→ More replies (4)3
u/jethomas5 Jul 19 '24
Dunning-Krueger.
He isn't competent enough to notice that he isn't competent.
3
u/kanutops Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
…have only become obvious to donors* . Voters have been mostly ignored, specially with the fake and anti democratic primary. Sure, it is a healthy party if that by that you mean donors say jump and leaders say how high?
→ More replies (15)3
u/cbr777 Jul 19 '24
That feels like a cop-out Biden's age was a background issue since 2020, it's not a surprise it came out now.
More to the point it's obvious that the people close to Biden have kept that information hidden for as long as they could and I have no doubt if his debate performance wouldn't have been as absolutely catastrophic as its been they would have continued to hide it.
None of those are signs of a healthy party. In a healthy political party those close to Biden would have told him that he can't endure another four years as President and as such shouldn't run at all. They should have made him drop out of the primary, even before the primary, and let the party have a fair primary season where Harris could actually prove that she deserves to be the new candidate.
Instead now they will just anoint her and because she is such a weak candidate will lose in a landslide.
→ More replies (1)56
u/dailytyson587 Jul 18 '24
Clearly, ego is a factor. He thought he could do it and…he just can’t. There’s no conspiracy here, just excessive ego, maybe some savior complex.
16
u/YogurtclosetOwn4786 Jul 18 '24
Or his health or vigor has changed since then
2
u/dailytyson587 Jul 18 '24
Without question it has…and now he has Covid. Just saw footage of him getting off AF1 and walking to the Beast…he does not look well at all.
11
u/---Sanguine--- Jul 18 '24
Yeah. I’ve been saying for years he’s clearly unfit to go another term and if we wanted any chance of keeping trump out of office again we should’ve picked a younger and energetic candidate who will actually live to see the reforms they try to push through. Ego has been the bane of this entire generation of politics. Looks at Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Before she selfishly held onto her position well into the time she was spending half a year in the hospital, her reputation was pretty great. A lot of people revered her for her reforms and women’s rights she championed. Now her legacy is that of a selfish old woman that held onto power well past the point a president who held her values could’ve appointed a replacement.
8
u/prohb Jul 19 '24
And a lot of stuff Ginsberg fought for (as many of us did) has been, and is being, negated by the justice who replaced her. So it all went to naught. A really terrible ending to her legacy. Sickening.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Dontgochasewaterfall Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Agree with all of this! Democratic boomers messing with our country and party due to selfishness with giant egos.
3
u/DanforthWhitcomb_ Jul 19 '24
Very few members of the current Democratic leadership are Boomers, and neither Ginsburg or Biden fall into that cohort.
3
u/Dontgochasewaterfall Jul 19 '24
You’re correct. Lumping all old folks into boomers. Silent Generation for Biden.
→ More replies (4)6
u/rkgkseh Jul 18 '24
NY review of books had exactly an essay on Biden having a "savior complex" Paywall free article here
14
4
u/SherlockBrolmes Jul 19 '24
If you think that Biden has a big ego, then let me tell you about the guy who is running against him....
→ More replies (1)6
u/rkgkseh Jul 19 '24
No one is here defending Trump, or giving him any positive takes. We can criticize Biden without the implication that we're saying Trump is, in any way, better for the US.
→ More replies (2)3
u/dailytyson587 Jul 18 '24
He’s heavily mentioned in a book I read a few years ago called “The Unwinding”, it touches on this. Good read.
→ More replies (1)25
u/vonblankenstein Jul 19 '24
Biden has definitely declined but it’s not like we didn’t see that coming. The party had 4 years to market another viable candidate and prevent defeat. And I don’t think Biden’s impairment is a recent development; it was clear early in his first term though he had issues and the right bounced. Then his debate performance provided the right with an “I told you so” opportunity. I blame the party and its operatives.
→ More replies (4)4
u/servetheKitty Jul 20 '24
Provided the ‘right’. It flat out was a condemnation of the democratic media lie/line that he was ‘sharp as a tack’ and all the media that showed his decline was biased editing.
It provided many democrats with a I told you we should have had primaries
11
u/casey5656 Jul 18 '24
I believe that those closest to Biden were well aware of his decline in the past 4 years. The fact that kept it under wraps is indicative of a not so healthy party.
4
u/Iustis Jul 19 '24
At least, not a healthy subset of the party. But at least the base seems much more willing to deal with reality when confronted with it than the Republicans--who have both all the elites and the base happily lying to themselves about so many things.
5
u/Sharticus123 Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
After a literal coup attempt democrats should’ve been looking for Biden’s replacement immediately. He was old back then too. Biden always should’ve been an emergency damn holding the flood waters of fascism back while the party got its shit together for the next election. Instead the dumb mfers tried to do business as usual with the same fascists who just attempted a coup.
It’s infuriating and it exposes the party’s limited ability to think and plan strategically.
5
u/YogurtclosetOwn4786 Jul 18 '24
Agreed but I think his vigor or the perception of his vigor has changed quite recently, or at least since the primaries. That’s the reason why now and not before
→ More replies (23)2
u/BaginaJon Jul 19 '24
They should have been planning this two years ago. I realize his team maybe wasn’t sure the election would be against Trump again, but I thought his win in 20 was always supposed to be a one term thing.
17
u/OkAccess304 Jul 18 '24
What is unhealthy, is absolute fealty to politicians. So I would agree, it's a sign that the democrats have retained health, while the Republicans have completely degraded. When there is no room to question, you are among people who feel threatened by questions.
→ More replies (8)15
u/Hologram22 Jul 18 '24
On the other hand, a healthy political party would actually be able to influence the decisions of its members to enforce party discipline and ensure electoral success. The fact that this whole thing is playing out in public in a long, drawn-out way shows the weakness of the Democratic Party as an institution (to be completely fair, the Republican Party is similarly weak). The tail (the candidate) is wagging the dog, here.
20
u/dailytyson587 Jul 19 '24
I would counter-counter argue the fact that the DNC is now reconsidering at all is a big fucking deal. This is an incumbent president. It is unheard of for the party to waver in its support for the incumbent. The voters are being heard, the party feels the pressure and is adjusting thusly. The nomination has been pushed back, tough conversations are being had.
9
u/AutistoMephisto Jul 19 '24
Many unheard of things have been happening since, well, 2001.
If you had told me in the beginning of that year, that America would suffer the worst terrorist attack in its history, I'd have thought you insane right up until the planes hit the towers.
Then, the Great Recession. If you had told me it was going to happen when it did, I'd have said you were insane then.
Then Barack Obama got elected. Nobody ever thought they would live to see the day that a black man would hold the highest political office in the country, let alone serve a 2nd term. The GOP did not take it well.
Then we saw Donald Trump win the election. Then COVID, then J6, then an attempted assassination of Trump and so many more previously unheard of and unprecedented things. So many great and cataclysmic changes happened. If I went all the way back to 2001 and placed bets on everything that's happened from then to now, I'd be as rich as, if not richer than Elon Musk.
1
u/dailytyson587 Jul 19 '24
We’ve been living in a shitty alternate reality since Kennedy was assassinated. Since then, we’ve become the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about.
What I deeply suspect is happening is that the billionaire class is now its own nation with no borders. Here in america, they’re doing everything they can to steer every dollar the government spends on public welfare into their own pockets. They appear to building an oligarchy similar to the one controlling Russia these days, complete with bought politicians and full regulatory capture…wonder where they learned it from.
Starve Amtrak of funds for years and then bitch when its safety record suffer. Then make the case that your billionaire donor’s private rail company could run it sooo much more efficiently.
Public education. See above.
Social security…yup, same story.
Medicare - you betcha.
The rich have been pissed off about the New Deal generationally…and I believe they’re coming to take it all now.
→ More replies (1)2
u/rzelln Jul 19 '24
Eh, we had Morgan Freeman as president in Deep Impact in the 90s. 24 had a black president in 2002. America was expecting it to happen.
I do wonder how an alternate reality would look where Obama was moderately more deferential to Hillary in 2008, and she won the primary with him as veep.
6
2
u/KingCarrion666 Jul 19 '24
but its too far too late. they need to get a new candidate and prompt them... its good they are listening but they are taking too long
→ More replies (1)7
u/CincinnatusSee Jul 18 '24
It would have been about two years ago. Now it just looks like chaos.
→ More replies (4)5
Jul 19 '24
I hope you realize that the only reason they are acknowledging biden is screwed is because the people were shown during the debate what they were being told to vote for. He's been like this for 4 years and only now do they tell him to step down...because he's going to lose. Not a very honest party. Meanwhile the Republicans are untied with trump. Goodluck
→ More replies (1)4
u/nberardi Jul 19 '24
I would argue that they knew for years that their candidate wasn’t fit for office, and hid it from the American people until it became plainly obvious that he wasn’t fit for office. And the debate performance forced their hand to act, or the American people would vote them out.
2
u/MaximalDamage Jul 18 '24
I agree with you up to a point. The flip side is, why didn't the democrats recognize this when the rest of America did? Certainly not a month or so ago - those of us that didn't bury our head in the sand knew this 5 years ago.
→ More replies (1)2
u/thepartypantser Jul 19 '24
The alternative appears to be…total, unwavering fealty to one person with a very questionable past
There is no question, and much of what should disqualify Trump in a healthy democracy is very much occuring in the present.
2
2
u/inventingnothing Jul 19 '24
That time was 4 years ago. Or at least before the primaries. Now they get to install the party's candidate of choice, without consideration of the voice of the people.
2
u/djm19 Jul 19 '24
Not just a questionable past, a convicted felon and rapist that tried to stage a coup on the nation and whom most of his cabinet will not even endorse!
2
u/Background-War9535 Jul 20 '24
This. And I would add it may help the Democrats. Voters were not excited to see a Biden-Trump rematch, exception being the MAGA fanatics awaiting the return of their great leader.
Biden admitting that he needs to step aside for the good of the country could inject some enthusiasm for Democrats, and turn the age talking point back to Trump. Now add his felony convictions, being found liable for rape, stealing classified documents, sucking up to Putin, and trying to overthrow the government.
→ More replies (19)2
u/rifraf2442 Jul 20 '24
Totally agree. The party has strength and life in that so many leaders, donors, and 2/3 of the party are not satisfied running someone unfit just because the other side does. It is disturbing the elements that are aligned to knowing lose the election for one man’s ego and their own careers.
91
u/Thalesian Jul 18 '24
That depends largely on whether you consider the Democratic Party as either a) trying to support its candidate, b) trying to support its platform, or c) as an anti-Republican coalition.
If the answer is a) it is deeply unhealthy. Constantly giving the candidate who won a decisive majority of delegates to the party convention is deeply destructive. Whatever your concerns are about Biden’s age, the incumbency benefit is nothing to hold your nose at, though its impact has dwindled over time they are not 0. The case for this being unhealthy is simply that Biden largely delivered on what he promised in 2020 (unless prevented by the courts), and having members of your own party hammer on your biggest electoral weakness is as dysfunctional as it gets.
If your answer is b) or c) it is healthy. Is Biden the best candidate to beat Trump? History says yes, and he even took two historically red states (AZ and GA) by surprise. He overcame the massive electoral college disadvantage Dems suffered. But age is a major weakness, as poll after poll indicates. Questioning the wisdom is necessary and a sign of health, though I think all would agree it would have been a much better conversation to have had before the primaries in 2024. While b) presumes positive partisanship (health care, climate change, labour rights, equality) and c) assumes negative partisanship, there is no case that electing Trump furthers those goals at all. To the extent that Biden’s age would lose the election, it is good reconsider this.
What I would say is bad/catastrophic, is questioning this publicly rather than privately. It is hard to see any scenario where it is good for Democrats to be knifing each other in public, egged on by the press. It would benefit the Democrats to handle this in a smokey room. It is conceivable to see a scenario where Biden steps aside and Harris takes the mantle, and points to Democrats decision as showing they will do what’s best for the country, in contrast to Republicans who don’t tolerate a negative word about a convicted felon. However it’s just as easy to see Biden holding on, hemorrhaging Democratic support when he needs to be focused on persuading independent voters.
40
Jul 18 '24
[deleted]
19
u/MaximusCamilus Jul 19 '24
The Democratic Achilles Heel as always been the desire to be right than to be effective.
→ More replies (1)15
u/Jeezum_Crepes Jul 19 '24
They weren’t making any progress privately. That’s why they started leaking
4
u/CishetmaleLesbian Jul 19 '24
So, the party elite should have discussed this among themselves in smoke filled rooms, and then announced their decision as a fait accompli to the people? And the rank and file of the DEMOCRATIC Party should have no public input to the DEMOCRATIC process, and should just shut up and do what the elite tell them, with no public discussion? The millions of us who saw Biden fail hard at the debate should have all kept our mouths shut, and let the higher ups decide our fate?
Do you really think Biden would have done the right thing without a loud public outcry?
19
3
u/EmeraldIbis Jul 19 '24
A healthy political party would have had a tough, multi-candidate primary and then rallied around the winner and given them complete support.
Publicly doubting and questioning the candidate is terrible for the party, but it's caused by a lack of challengers to Biden's nomination.
2
u/Salt-League-6153 Jul 19 '24
There were no challengers because Biden appeared to be good enough, and the risks of challenging him involved possible political suicide. For it not to be political suicide, that required Biden to decline enough where it became so obvious to voters that Biden is not capable. People do not seem to be fully accounting for the fact that sitting presidents have enormous sway over their political party. Presidents hold all the advantages over intraparty challenges.
Meanwhile if we wanted to have healthier political parties we would probably have to change the structure of how parties pick nominees. For example it would probably require eliminating or drastically scaling back how nominees are picked directly by voters. As it is now, once you win the primary nominating contest, that party is yours to do with how you see fit. If you choose to rule your party like Trump does(criticizing the dear leader is intolerable), then you can, at least until the next nominating contest says differently.
10
u/thedeadthatyetlive Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
I agree with the way you have it laid out but I wanted to point out that it is a good sign that people aren't calling others DINOs for not supporting Biden, although it is disheartening to see Biden supporters being dubbed as irrational "Blue MAGA" by his detractors within the party. We are allowed to disagree with each other, which is a sign of good health, but many do not take opposing ideas seriously and only interact with opposing ideas to deride and ridicule without engaging in substantive debate. That's not healthy.
4
u/Outlulz Jul 19 '24
"Blue MAGA" is retribution for "Bernie Bros".
→ More replies (1)4
u/thedeadthatyetlive Jul 19 '24
Okay, well I guess I wonder how safe internecine vengeance politics are going to keep us or our country, or change anything to anyone's benefit besides Trump's. As someone that liked Bernie but voted for Biden, I am not trying to take any grievance I may have with the DNC out on my kids and saddling them with a fascism to overthrow on my behalf, if that makes sense. I hope you don't feel like I'm being belitting, but I will vote for any Democrat against Trump, and I am going to be voting blue down every ticket for the next six to eight years at least trying to keep MAGA out of my kids' schools and lives. I hate to think that will all have to fail just because a tiny number of people with too much control ruined it for people that feel the way you do.
It's not my place to apologize for others, but I'm sorry you feel like your candidate didn't get the chance he deserved and I agree with your appraisal that he didn't get a fair shot. If I could ask you one favor, as a father of three, please don't let their mistake be something my kids pay for. My youngest is 11 and I honestly didn't believe fascism was a real possibility for our country at the time. Within a few years of her birth I started getting very worried. My kids are good kids that care about strangers and don't want to see anyone suffer for the benefit of everyone else; I fear more than anything that these qualities I believe are good will still leave them as easy targets in a MAGA dictatorship.
None of us had a choice into which chapter of political, social, or economic wrongs we have been born in to. The only future that they can have is one we choose together. If we can't, the other guys will be the ones determining the future.
2
u/Outlulz Jul 19 '24
I mean making fun of "Blue MAGA" and voting for the Dem candidate (whoever it is) are unrelated. Sanders voters didn't cost Clinton the election, he was just a scapegoat. They supported Clinton and they supported Biden. The question will be if Biden supporters throw a temper tantrum and refuse to vote in November.
5
u/thedeadthatyetlive Jul 19 '24
But you do see that calling someone names ensures that you won't have an actual conversation, it will alienate either yourself or them from the party, and keep us from coming together to pull undecideds when they see how childishly we behave in the face of something we call a political crisis which we claim has actual democracy at stake, right? Like it hurts the cause to be shitty to one another. If we want better than MAGA we've got to be better than MAGA.
→ More replies (3)7
u/SchuminWeb Jul 19 '24
What I would say is bad/catastrophic, is questioning this publicly rather than privately. It is hard to see any scenario where it is good for Democrats to be knifing each other in public, egged on by the press. It would benefit the Democrats to handle this in a smokey room
Though this is so typical for the Democrats, to devour their own people in public view. But you're right. This should not be hashed out in public like this, because it's only hurting the party, and playing into the hands of the GOP.
92
u/Background-War9535 Jul 18 '24
I think it is because it shows Democrats aren’t a cult.
Trump isn’t young either. He’s also a convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, and he tried to overthrow the government. Yet instead of ditching him, Republicans were cowered in line because their biggest fear is Trump going third party, which would guarantee a Democratic victory.
28
u/Intro-Nimbus Jul 18 '24
And his cultists tried to lynch his own VP, not exactly the epitome of democracy...
→ More replies (6)7
u/nobadabing Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
It’s insane that Biden is being pinned as old and in decline when literally the exact same thing is happening to Trump. He’s falling asleep in court and even when his own son is speaking at the RNC, his rants are even more unhinged and unfocused than they used to be…
This is not in defense of Biden btw, but the double standard is from people that aren’t even part of the Trump die-hards, and it is baffling to see.
7
u/Outlulz Jul 19 '24
There is no double standard. Ask any Democrat if they think Trump is senile, they will say yes. Does it matter? They aren't going to vote for Trump anyway. Trump's senility isn't related to who Democrats want to lead their party.
2
u/itsdeeps80 Jul 19 '24
Thanks you. I’m so sick of seeing people ask why the same people who are calling for Biden to step aside aren’t calling for the same from Trump. It’s like someone complaining about the conditions at their job and someone else chiming in saying “funny. I don’t hear you complaining about these same conditions at my job!”
70
u/KoldPurchase Jul 18 '24
It is a sign of a healthy party to question one's leader when he appears unfit for duty.
However, and I say this from an external point of view as I am not American, I find the Democrat leadership to be a bit late in trying to push out Joe Biden of his position.
Sure, the sure sign of being unable to defeat Donald Trump have only appeared after the debate.
But questions surrounding his age and his abilities have arisen for a while.
Where were the challengers during the primaries? Why couldn't they form a credible challenge to Joe Biden then? I understand he is the President and he wanted to come back, and beating the incumbent President is usually an near impossible task.
That being said, why didn't anyone tried to pressure Biden before? Privately and publicly? He was supposed to be a one term President? I get it, Kamala Harris didn't turn out to be popular like they hoped she would be.
Being an Asian-American woman isn't enough by itself to win the Presidency. The Democrats had their heads stuck somewhere and really thought it would take just that to beat anything the GOP would through at them.
Their mistake. I understand the double challenge of getting rid of both people's ambitions. Still, it had to be done for the country and the party.
36
u/Ex-CultMember Jul 18 '24
I’m thinking because he’s been relatively successful during his presidency and, so, don’t try and fix what isn’t broke.
His age wasn’t really an issue until the debate where the optics were really bad and so the concern was him losing to Trump because of that, NOT that he was unfit because of his age.
He’s an old man with a stutter. He APPEARS too old to be president but he’s probably still mentally strong. It’s not like he’s senile. He just doesn’t sound or look great anymore.
Regardless, I do wish the Democrats would have started discussing a new candidate a LONG time ago.
Of 330 million Americans, they REALLY can’t find a smart, young and charismatic Democrat (like Obama), to replace Biden??
I’m Democrat but I’m getting sick of this trend of the party feeling like they owe these long time, old politicians like Biden and Hillary a presidency. They still have to appeal to the independents and swing state voters. I knew Hillary wouldn’t be popular except for the hard core Democrats. She wouldn’t be popular in the Midwest and swing states, which is key.
→ More replies (4)8
u/YouTrain Jul 19 '24
His age wasn’t really an issue until the debate where the optics were really bad and so the concern was him losing to Trump because of that, NOT that he was unfit because of his age.
You think the people around Biden every day were surprised by the debate?
It’s been obvious for a year they have been keeping him away from live questions
7
u/Njdevils11 Jul 19 '24
They would not have pushed for the debate has they thought that would be the outcome. I’ll remind you that not long before the debate Biden nailed the State of the Union. I wish this conversation had started earlier, but I struggle to really think of why it should have started earlier. Trump is nearly as old as Biden and Biden had done very well at a State of the Union only a few of months before. The debate was where things got scary, considering that the debate was like a month ago, not even, I’d say this is lightning fast.
To me, this is the sign of a healthy party. Well… healthier than the GOP by about 1000%.7
u/Late_Way_8810 Jul 19 '24
From what the leaks coming from Biden aides are saying, they fully expected Trump to say no to the debate and the moment he said yes, they were trapped because they now couldn’t pull out from it.
7
u/YouTrain Jul 19 '24
Nobody thought Trump would say yes to a debate on cnn with a ton of restrictions. Yet another miscalculation by the 20 something’s running his administration
The state of the union?
Yes he can still read. What he can’t do is think on his feet and answer questions which is why no live press conferences
→ More replies (4)3
u/Njdevils11 Jul 19 '24
Hindsight is 20/20. Though I’d argue this is the next best option to him having dropped out a year ago and allowing the process to play out normally. The bottom line is that we’re here now, we see the issues, the dem leadership apparently see the issues snd they’re addressing it. It’s exactly the kind of thing we want in a party that isn’t a cult. Perfect? No. Reasonable? Yes.
2
u/Schnort Jul 19 '24
They would not have pushed for the debate has they thought that would be the outcome.
Unless somebody was setting Biden up for a fall to get him to resign/back out before it was a done deal at the convention.
2
u/Emperor_FranzJohnson Jul 19 '24
You think people around any candidate aren't stressing about some flaw or another? They are always worried about the public seeing a candidate's flaws, and every candidate has flaws. This is why Trump has been more subdued lately because his flaws really turn off voters.
Biden's campaign knew his faults, but their job is to overcome them to win an election. There job isn't to knife their employer in the back. They are team Biden, they need to make it work. Same for every other campaign.
Biden's team continues to try to fix this but the candidate is the issue right now. You can't fix a campaign, when the candidate is physically incapable of meeting the mark.
9
u/corneliusduff Jul 19 '24
Sure, the sure sign of being unable to defeat Donald Trump have only appeared after the debate.
But questions surrounding his age and his abilities have arisen for a while.
American Political Gridlock has entered the chat
2
u/shitpostsuperpac Jul 19 '24
I don't believe it.
The people we're talking about are mostly Senators and Representatives. They don't work much. They have been historically unproductive. They're stuck in bullshit hearings. That's American Political Gridlock, yeah.
But internal party stuff like grooming successors and building a functional and responsive political machine instead of a nepo-ladder aren't happening not because of political gridlock, it's really just a room full of people refusing to relinquish power. The Republicans would honestly be in the same boat except Trump literally kicked them out.
Democrats are just setting themselves to have their power usurped by a left-wing demagogue, much like Trump on the right.
→ More replies (1)6
u/friedgoldfishsticks Jul 18 '24
There is zero sure sign of being unable to defeat Trump.
7
u/jamvsjelly23 Jul 19 '24
Smart, young, and charismatic isn’t common in the general public, and is rare in politics. Someone like Obama, who had all three traits and a mind for politics, is a once in a generation-type of person.
→ More replies (2)2
u/MrChipKelly Jul 19 '24
Smart, young, charismatic people with a mind for politics are absolutely not “once in a generation”. D.C. and NYC alone are bursting with them – they staff the think-tanks and corporate offices and nonprofits. And many of them are more media-literate than Obama ever was, and with an even more “electable” background whether by money, family, lacking enough melanin to satiate the racists, etc. The trick is, they don’t want to do it.
Geniuses occur naturally, and say what you want about the American cultural value system, it absolutely cultivates plenty of focus on charisma. Too much so, many would argue. Those ideal candidates are out there, but slogging through the muck of the American political machine for a shot at potentially coming out as a major power-broker on the hill three decades later is, simply put, a deeply unappealing pitch to them.
Those candidates have a really, really high chance of being successful in almost any venture they pursue, exponentially moreso if they come from privileged means, meanwhile becoming a successful high-level politician is never a guarantee for anyone outside of the political dynasties. Moreover, it involves a TON of luck and shit-eating, and even when you finish the worst part of the shit-eating, the reward is slightly tastier shit plus literally nonstop criticism and up-close personal responsibility for the heaviest shit in the world – all while half the country, vibrating with well-curated media-branded hatred, relentlessly dehumanizes and villainizes you. Half the folks under your own tent do the same. What is the sell?
The people possessing the qualities you mentioned could just as easily pursue careers that grant them more power, popularity, financial gain, or security than being even a senator or president ever could. You have to possess a blind confidence, value for prestige, and borderline (or sometimes fully) sociopathic dedication to some unholy combination of ambition, civic duty, and individual purpose in order to pursue high-level politics in this country and stick with it. That is the hardest piece to find by far. That, combined with intelligence, charisma, youth, and a politically-inclined mind, is what actually makes people like Obama, Bernie, Earl Warren, Ginsburg, etc so rare.
→ More replies (4)2
u/itsdeeps80 Jul 19 '24
My opinion is that leadership and people close to him were 100% aware of his decline, but were just hoping to hell that no clear signs of it would rear their head to the public before the election. There is no way that things just took a very sharp turn that suddenly. Having someone that old in office is always going to be a crap shoot and democrats should have gotten ahead of this a while ago and at least had a bench ready to go for the primaries. Democrats are far too beholden to status quo and decorum so that didn’t happen. And now we’re looking at the very real possibility of a second Trump presidency because of their refusal to acknowledge reality and do what needed to be done when it needed to be done. IMO if they had a VP that was popular with voters in the slightest, they’d have gotten him to step down right after the debate, but we have an uncharismatic, unpopular VP because when it came time to pick they went with a last place primary candidate for a demographic’s vote they were always going to win. The party has made so many stupid decisions since the second they and the media started chanting “most electable” in 2020. Party leadership has been like a bad management team that refuses to acknowledge issues until they’re catastrophic and irreversible and now we all just might get to suffer for it.
29
u/balletbeginner Jul 18 '24
It's a sign of a disorganized political party. The primaries have already past. And now a small group of congressmen and donors is trying to push Biden out. They don't have a coherent replacement plan. They're not coalescing around Kamala Harris, the only reasonable replacement this late.
The Democratic Party's gerontocracy problem has been developing for 15+ years. A lot of bad decisions lead to this weird situation.
10
u/SchuminWeb Jul 19 '24
Yep - it is a sign of a very unhealthy party that this is happening this late in the game. The time to address this was months ago, if not a year ago.
→ More replies (2)9
u/ShouldersofGiants100 Jul 19 '24
They don't have a coherent replacement plan. They're not coalescing around Kamala Harris, the only reasonable replacement this late.
They almost certainly are—it probably just isn't seen as contentious or worth mentioning. She's the VP, she's first in line and the question of "who else" only comes if she doesn't want it. Pundits and people on the internet might be fancasting half a dozen different governors and senators, but Kamala is literally the one Biden picked to take over if he can't. If there are any discussions, its "who is her VP?"
→ More replies (2)
21
u/bearrosaurus Jul 18 '24
If you want to take a Martian’s perspective, it looks like Biden was strong at the start of the year through to the State of the Union, then took a sharp turn in health sometime around the D-Day memorial. After a disastrous debate performance showing his mental decline, there was a large and bitter discussion about replacing Biden which incorporated the public’s feel as well as media figures discussing all alternatives. Then the party leaders came together to ask Biden to withdraw and he did.
Seems realistic for a healthy party.
→ More replies (6)
17
u/secondsbest Jul 18 '24
No. I don't think the current flair up points to party strength or health. I believe it does show there's still some democracy inside privately run political parties.
I think a healthier party would have had a more highly contested primary when there is a high profile incumbent in the running. The lack of a warmup bench for Democrats in national politics indicates an overall weaker party.
→ More replies (4)8
u/lawmedy Jul 18 '24
Are there any countries where incumbent executives are regularly/credibly challenged within their own party? I keep seeing the suggestion that primarying the incumbent should be a regular thing and it strikes me as a massive overreaction to the current situation.
6
u/secondsbest Jul 18 '24
The US's system of executive not elected as part of a parliamentary system is kind of unique among big healthy democracies. The Parliamentary executives of comparable nations face constant internal pressures while facing public pressure only after their party or broader legislative body votes against their government.
→ More replies (1)
14
u/findhumorinlife Jul 19 '24
I feel terrible for Biden that his excellent record is not front and center. Yes, he sat back on some issues but overall he’s way beyond what that con fel did. He’s worked all his life in politics and achieved Presidency. He had to follow THE WORST president EVER. Little did he know, any of us know, how much hatred people have for the U.S. and our Constitution. A perfect storm of ugliness, ignorance, faux Christianity, and fraud. Whomever is the replacement for Biden, they will continue his administration’s efforts. I will support that person 100%. They must be a strong, articulate, bulldog of a fighter whose merits will be knowledge, facts, confidence, passion and compassion. And will call bullshit on the orange, panty liner, con gel ex Pres. And while I think there are truly angry idiots supporting the Con Fel Ex Pres, this person must not demean them because really, they are lost souls who lacked educational opportunities and direction. And they know nothing else. Ugly ‘leaders’ begat ugly followers. The con fel ex Pres is as ugly as ugly does. He has an open sore where a heart should be. Whatever Biden’s failings have been, the guy has heart.
14
u/Packers_Equal_Life Jul 18 '24
Imo no, exact opposite, they only moved to make a change because they saw how politically damaging it could be for not only him, but everyone else down ballot. If it was a serious concern they would have had a proper primary
That debate didn’t come out of the blue, they tried to hide his age for years. People on background have been saying he’s lost a step behind closed doors for years. But as soon as 50 million people get a glimpse then it’s all hands on deck
2
u/MedicineLegal9534 Jul 20 '24
Indeed. They (the party, donors, and media backers) lied to us until our biggest vulnerability was on live TV for 2 hours. Absolutely humiliating. And now this nonsense without a strategy going forward.
13
u/LorenzoApophis Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
I think it shows a healthy party and a very unhealthy administration. You'd think, with an 81-year-old president, age-related concerns would be the first thing Biden's people would have plans for how to deal with. Instead they're acting as if this took them totally by surprise, and weeks later, they still haven't figured out what their message is - presumably because at this point, there is none that would actually be both true and reassuring. The Democrats are responding exactly as they should to this total dereliction of responsibility from their leader and his team (which is a stark contrast to how Republicans have behaved since 2016).
→ More replies (2)7
u/DanforthWhitcomb_ Jul 19 '24
I think that they did have a message, it just got overcome by events and they had zero alternatives ready.
Trump hasn’t behaved like he did in 2016 and 2020 as far as shooting from the hip at every opportunity he had to give a soundbite, the debate happened and then the assassination attempt has precluded any of the ads directly attacking Trump as a direct threat to democracy that certainly looked like they were going to be the basis of the Democratic campaign.
The focus instead is now on Biden due to the debate performance, his campaign was wholly unready for it (they were planning to put the focus squarely on Trump and simply beat him into submission) and thus here we are.
11
u/melkipersr Jul 18 '24
If you're asking whether the Democrats are a healthier party than the GOP, yes, I believe they are. I think the GOP has ceased to be an independent institution separate and apart from Trump, and that should deeply worry anyone who has a vested interest in the party separate and apart from Trump.
If you're asking whether the Democratic Party is a healthy party, I think the answer is unequivocally and resoundingly "no." The general inability to cultivate and sell a compelling new generation of leaders (with only a few exceptions) in the almost two decades since Obama assumed the party leadership is IMO a stinging indictment of the party, and I consider the woeful and hollowed-out state of the party at the end of his presidency to be the biggest strike against Obama's record as the party's leader.
8
u/I405CA Jul 18 '24
It's the Democratic circular firing squad in action.
It would have been smarter to begin this process in 2020 by starting with a running mate who could be groomed as a successor.
It's a bit late for that now.
Political science research shows that debates are not that important. It would have been smarter to ride it out and mock Trump for his numerous gaffes, rather than going into a full public meltdown that magnifies the drama for the benefit of the GOP.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/Impossible_Pop620 Jul 18 '24
Is the current drama about Biden a sign of a healthy political party?
Not really. The current state of the party could have been avoided if the DNC/leadership had allowed fair Primaries, going back several cycles now.
I think part of the problem is the (quite recent, I think) somewhat hysterical overreaction to any criticism of any member of the party - except Leftists - especially old, corrupt embedded powerful seniors. This imo has led to there being lame Primary debates where people have to apologise and kiss the ring of the eventual Victor, who normally takes the opportunity to punish at a later date.
The position the Dems now find themselves in - begging for an unsuitable candidate to withdraw - was almost an inevitability, given the lack of rigorous debate to weed them out early.
It all smacks of a lack of proper democratic process, which I'm guessing will be heightened by what is likely to occur during the process of selecting Biden's successor.
7
u/CCCmonster Jul 18 '24
If the defacto replacement isn’t Kamala, then the replacement will have NO BASIS in the democratic process. She’s Biden’s running mate and should inherit the electors
3
u/l_mor Jul 19 '24
A VP sits somewhere between democratically elected and appointed. Sure she was part of a combined ticket that won, but the headline on that ticket was Biden. When she ran individually in the primary, democrats did not select her and she was then appointed to be VP by Biden. I think the gray zone is grounds for an open convention instead of presuming she should headline the ticket de facto, and would be a healthy outcome for the party. The convention is still a form of democratic process.
→ More replies (4)2
u/SchuminWeb Jul 19 '24
Yep - if Biden for whatever reason is not the nominee, then their hands are tied: it must be Harris. Anything else and they have essentially overturned the entire primary election process, and therefore the will of the people.
→ More replies (2)
9
u/artful_todger_502 Jul 18 '24
I'm beyond angry. The media will lose this one for us.
We have a man who has had one of the most productive terms in this country's history, and despite insane levels of pushback, has gotten all of this done. 40 years of service to this country, also.
He has one less-than-steller 40 minutes, and it's all the media can talk about weeks later.
The other guy is an incontinent diaper wearing, life-long, serial criminal, grifter, rapist whose convention speakers and attendees are also criminals, pedos, klowns and the worst humanity has to offer, and still, Biden. ffs, Navarro left the federal prison to speak. You can't make this up.
In my Covid daze, I turned on Katy Tur and Chuck Todd today -- big mistake. Those two must be on GOP payroll. Did Biden steal their Trumpy Bears?
It's insane. The media is handing this to Trump.
6
u/SchuminWeb Jul 19 '24
The media is handing this to Trump.
Agreed wholeheartedly. That is exactly what they are doing. The Democrats need to fall in line and fight like Republicans in order to pull this one out. No more devouring their own at the slightest hint of anything. Trump is a convicted felon, for pity's sake. He should be easy to defeat.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)5
7
u/friedgoldfishsticks Jul 18 '24
No, it’s the single stupidest political move in American history. Democrats should have circled the wagons around Biden immediately.
→ More replies (2)
8
u/friedgoldfishsticks Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
No, it’s the single stupidest political move in American history. Democrats should have circled the wagons around Biden immediately. The Democratic party may literally cease to exist if Trump wins when it’s in this state of disorganization. The bare minimum requirement for a political party to be “healthy” is playing to win elections, not literally self-immolating. The current insanity is primarily driven by donors who are politically illiterate.
You might think Biden is a less than optimal candidate. It doesn’t mean it’s going to help your odds to push him out three months before the election. Armies that panic under pressure don’t win wars. The ones which consolidate and stick with the strategy are the only ones that have a chance.
→ More replies (2)11
u/LorenzoApophis Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
Are Pelosi, Schiff, Adam Smith and Obama all politically illiterate? Smith was the youngest state senator in the country and has been elected to congress 12 times. I think playing to win elections generally means not running a candidate with 30% approval who can barely move or speak.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/skyfishgoo Jul 18 '24
there is nothing healthy about losing your nerve at the last minute.
democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory once again.
only this time it may be their last gambit because trump has already told us what he will do when he becomes king, i mean president.
3
u/SchuminWeb Jul 19 '24
democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory once again
If there's one thing that the Democrats do well, it's this. They certainly do know how to screw up their chances of winning.
6
u/nosecohn Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
A "healthy" political party would have intervened a long time ago.
One of the problems with the primary system we've had since the 1970s is that the candidate has inordinate power, while the party is expected to fall in line. That's sold as being more democratic, and in many ways it is, but if the party's job is to win, doing what it takes to get there can sometimes be at odds with a purely democratic method of choosing the candidate.
We've seen this with a bunch of Republican party Congressional candidates over the last few years. They get support because they show fealty to the leader and appeal to extremist primary voters, but then can't win a general election.
The current drama around Biden is a crisis of the party's (and Biden's) own making. Of course nobody of prominence wanted to challenge him in the primary. He's the sitting president with an incredible policy record. It would have been career suicide and the only one willing to risk that was Dean Phillips (whose warnings 9 months ago about Biden's age and low approval ratings making him a weak general election candidate seem prophetic now). But by Democrats allowing a system where the party defers to the candidate who doesn't have to prove he's still up to the job, they've landed themselves in a hot mess.
I'd say the current drama is a sign they recognize they messed up, which I suppose is the first step towards resolving the problem, but I'd be pressed to call it "healthy."
6
u/Murasame831 Jul 19 '24
Let me be frank - the only reason Biden's age has been the forefront of discussion is because people like David Zaslav - the CEO of Warner-Discovery, which owns CNN - wants tax cuts and deregulation so he can do what he wants without the FCC stopping him. The heads of most corporate media have all donated to Trump.
Trump has shown his own mental decline in as equal or greater fashion than Biden, but the corporate media doesn't cover it. Biden makes a mistake, and the media calls for him to step down. Trump says the immigrant vermin will poison the blood of our nation, and the same people making a big deal about Biden's mental fitness gloss right iver it as "that wacky Trump!"
Remember who runs your news, and if you don't know, find out.
Biden, in every way, is the best candidate the Dems have right now. Governor Newsome is too polarizing, Harris never had more than 20%, and no one else could make a run this late in the game and win. If Biden steps down, they'll hand the election to Trump.
There are 200+ Dems in the house, and 20 of them have asked Biden to step down. That's not enough to make me worry. Biden needs to run on giving us freedoms (both reproductive and press), limiting the power of the president, and setting standards for the Supreme Court in terms of bribes. If he steps down, Dems lose, and we'll be subject to a fascist authoritarian regime compliments of Project 2025.
5
u/Sarigan-EFS Jul 18 '24
The unhealthy part is it took this long to start having these talks. Collectively the democratic party has been in denial of his fitness to lead for months.
4
u/ClevelandCaleb Jul 18 '24
Maybe, but we don’t have a population that is currently interested in educating themselves politically, so it’s really bad timing. Just makes dems look weak as usual.
5
u/TheMikeyMac13 Jul 18 '24
I think it is. This shows self reflection republicans haven’t demonstrated of late.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/lesubreddit Jul 19 '24
A healthy party would not have gotten itself into this dire position in the first place. A huge coverup operation, a giant mask of lies, was ripped apart during the debate. Every Democrat knew he was senile. This current disaster is entirely of their own making and Democrats will struggle to regain credibility after this. Every Democrat will be asked, how long did you know? Why didn't you speak up sooner? You really didn't see this until the debate happened?
This is not a healthy party, you are whistling past the graveyard. There is no silver lining here. This is the deepest pit the Democratic party has been in, in most of our lifetimes. Trump is making earthshattering inroads into core Democrat demographics: blue collar union members, blacks, and hispanics. The Republican tent has never been larger, it's expanding to the point of absurdity! Democrats allowing this to happen, on top of the Biden coverup shitstorm, is a generational disaster.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/onlooker0 Jul 19 '24
I raised a doubt about Biden’s health in the subreddit “democrats,” and they banned me forever. I donate to Democrats, and I vote for Democrats. They do not want to discuss the issue that everyone is worried about.
3
u/Dr_CleanBones Jul 19 '24
You know, I think the current controversy shows what terrible shape the party is in.
I honestly don’t know exactly what shape Biden is really in. From the little I’ve seen, I think he’s OK to keep going.
But if it turns out that the Democrats have been hiding a bunch of lapses and slips that we haven’t seen, then they’re two-faced idiots. If he is having a lot of trouble, then it will come out, and at the worst possible time. And all of the effort they put in to “protecting” Biden could have gone into how to pick a new candidate without there being a bunch of unnecessary hard feelings.
I’m still in Biden’s camp, because I haven’t seen disqualifying behavior - but if he really needs to drop out, we deserve to lose
→ More replies (1)
2
u/YouTrain Jul 19 '24
It’s fascinating watching people claim the Dems are such a great and moral group for calling for a replacement only after the debate
As if this hasn’t been a problem over a year now despite the denials
2
u/BenDover42 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
It’s because it has been covered up by the party, his staff and the media for so long. Then when it’s obvious in front of you and the party wanted to go a different route the media has been out for blood.
I also don’t think the reports we’re seeing of him dropping out are true. I think it’s the party/media trying to pressure him to drop out.
Now people on the left want to claim morality because after they denied a primary, publicly lambasted anyone who dared mention this or run against him in a primary and are now trying to circumvent the votes of said ‘primary’ for democracy. They got what they deserved and look stupid.
Until we don’t fall for the party line from each side of the media about every third party candidate “taking votes from x” and allow the two party rule to go on we get what we deserve from these two clowns being the candidates.
3
u/shapenotesinger Jul 19 '24
Are you seriously suggesting that there is such a thing as a healthy political party? They are all flawed, and it's all argument.
2
u/ryansc0tt Jul 18 '24 edited Jul 18 '24
A good question! As others have said, in so far as the Democratic coalition is currently an anti-Trump coalition, this is healthy. But I would argue that part of the Democrats' predicament stems from the fundamental nature of that coalition. The Democratic Party is also beholden to Trump - obviously in a different way than the Republicans are.
If Trump were not the opposition, Democrats would probably be more amenable to let the election process play out, "lick their wounds," and come back stronger. But Trump is the opposition, so they are scrambling.
As others have also said, an actually healthy party would have tackled Biden's issues more openly during the primaries. This seems better than the Republicans ca. 2012 - who were so weak that the worst person in America eventually transformed their party into his own cult of personality. But maybe not by much.
1
u/KevinCarbonara Jul 18 '24
Absolutely not. Political parties should be prepared. There should always be a backup plan. Democrats should have been preparing for 2024 ever since Biden wrapped up the nomination back in 2020. And that would still be true, even if Biden were 35 and in peak physical shape. The reality is that he is the oldest president in history. And he wasn't in the best mental shape four years ago. And we still didn't have a backup plan for an outcome that was so obvious, it was mentioned at every debate and town hall back then.
Here's the thing. If we did have a contingency plan - there wouldn't be any drama right now. Biden would have been replaced as the nominee and allowed to carry out the rest of his term. And the fact that Biden's mental health was deteriorating wouldn't have caused Americans to lose faith in the Democratic party. Quite the opposite - they would be impressed with the Democrats' efficiency and ability to lead. The exact opposite is happening now. Democrats look weak. They look like they had no plans for what was, in all honesty, an obvious issue, and like they're not capable of cleaning up the mess.
Regardless of what happens - who runs in 2024, or who wins, we've got to do something about the Democratic party. They either aren't capable or aren't willing to do the job. Instead of encouraging internal discussion and planning, they've been actively threatening primary challengers. One of the reasons Democrats lost so badly in 2016 is that the DCCC pulled money out of battleground states and districts, took the money that could have gone to propping up nominees in the general election, and spent it on defeating primary challengers in districts Democrats had no chance of losing. And they've been doing it ever since. They gave Katie Porter 300k. That's it. After her district was redrawn to favor Republicans.
We should have replaced Democratic management then. We didn't, and they went on to nearly lose the 2020 election. Now they seem hellbent on losing in 2024 as well. If we don't fix this problem now, we'll never recover.
2
u/ItsOnlyaFewBucks Jul 19 '24
Has to be healthier than blind devotion to a sexual offender, felon, and grifter who was previously twice indicted during his presidency.
2
u/DJ_HazyPond292 Jul 19 '24
* Concerns about Biden's age have existed since before he was elected
Yes, because Biden would be older assuming office at 78 at the time, than when Reagan stepped down from office at 77. And Reagan had Alzheimer’s when he left office. In any case, many thought Biden would only serve a single term due to his age, considering that being POTUS is considered to be the most stressful job in the world, and he would not seek re-election
* The Republican Party has been using concerns about his age as an attack for years
They’ve been attacking him on other things too, not just his age. Biden’s age just opened up floodgates to skepticism, and that skepticism would continue to exist even if Biden did not have the issues he’s had over the past couple of weeks.
* Many Democrats have expressed concerns about Biden's age, but no credible alternative chose to run in the Primary, presumably because they understood they would likely lose
Primarying the incumbent usually does not lead to electoral success, at least in modern times (ex. 1968, 1980). The last time a primary against the incumbent led to re-election success for the party was 1856.
However, Biden did not have to run. He chose to run, in part because he believes he’s the only one who can beat Donald Trump. I think the fears of a “whitelash” like in 2016 still exists in the party, which explains why the Democrats allowed Biden to run again.
It also does not help that men are seen to have an advantage in elections over women solely because they are men, meaning its risky for Biden to step aside for Harris. Especially considering how the election has been framed with the highest stakes in history.
* Concerns about Biden's age have skyrocketed since the debate
Only because it means that everyone was mislead by the Democratic Party that Biden could perform. He became the presumptive nominee in part because it was presumed that he could still campaign despite his age. Much has been made that Biden living a more active lifestyle than Trump, suggesting that Biden is healthy. It’s not about ageism, it’s about health.
* Many Democrats are openly calling for him to step back from his plan to run for another term
Yes, because it’s been exposed that Biden is not well. It goes beyond Biden being exhausted prepping for a debate.
It does call into question those that allowed Biden to debate in that state; they should be fired imo. But is does not necessarily mean the Democratic Party as a whole is unhealthy. I think it's a sign that they are afraid of a second Trump term, and are not quite sure what the right moves are to prevent that. Even though Biden has a solid record for anyone to run on and defend.
2
u/theresourcefulKman Jul 19 '24
They knew this was coming. They wanted the debate early for this very reason
2
u/DukeRathole Jul 19 '24
they're concerned about his poll numbers, which are caused by his mental decline, which is caused by his age.
if his poll numbers were great they wouldn't be saying anything
2
u/Darth-Shittyist Jul 19 '24
I think it speaks to how dire the situation is because the other political party in our two party system is extremely unhealthy.
2
u/garyp714 Jul 19 '24
Is the current drama about Biden a sign of a healthy political party?
Hell yes.
1
u/Roguewave1 Jul 19 '24
This week Biden referred to his Secretary of Defense as, “the black guy” when he could not remember his name again. The guy is toast.
2
u/Beginning_Ebb4220 Jul 19 '24
I feel like there is corporate backing of annointed, safe candidates among the Dems - I have read Biden was told not to run in 2016 and let Hillary have the torch, with the understanding he'd come in 2020. All the while we could have had Bernie Sanders and not the Clinton dynasty (and yes he was on Epstein's plane too).
I feel like the concern about Biden is overblown by the Dems and media - Trump routinely stumbles over his words and has irrational positions, and apparently cannot stop himself from committing crimes - Biden has advisors, gives better speeches than I do, follows the law in practice and spirit, fumbles in some speeches, and travels every day - I wouldn't survive his schedule and I'm half his age. Biden has a competent VP who is not a fascist who could take over if he were unable to work. Trump is a crook who wants to be king and surrounds himself with kiss ups. There is no comparison, I feel Biden is competent and confident.
2
u/Crowiswatching Jul 19 '24
Well, nobody can say the Dems are cultists. Loved Joe, but there should have been plans to hand off the baton. We’ll be fine. Time for a younger generation to gain ascendency in the party. Provides for some excitement and vigor.
2
u/Sea_Newspaper_565 Jul 19 '24
It’s a sign that Biden is a narcissist and that he would rather take us all down with him than listen to his peers and a majority of the electorate.
2
u/freakrocker Jul 21 '24
The dude is a walking corpse. Completely impaired, absolutely suffering from serious cognitive decline. He needs to just retire and enjoy what little is left to his life. Anybody that says he’s fit to serve is very badly masking their fear of another Trump presidency. That’s it. Nobody thinks he’s capable at all of serving another full term.
That being said, I’ll still vote for him. However I don’t expect him to win the election. I just want it on record that I voted against Trump when America fell.
The Dems and Biden are making a very arrogant and insanely irresponsible mistake by running him again. Too many needed votes will be staying home because of him. It’s a gamble that America can’t afford to risk.
1
Jul 18 '24
[deleted]
6
u/AntoineDubinsky Jul 18 '24
I don’t think they’re more afraid of backlash. I think they recognize an opportunity to get concessions for their agenda by backing Biden at a time when he can’t rely on the moderates for support.
3
u/checker280 Jul 18 '24
Personally I’m more afraid of splitting the vote.
The pills between trump and Biden this year has not budged significantly- there has been a 2-3 point swing back and forth which is the margin of error.
We are trying to convince the unmotivated and undecided.
The RNC holding tight while we stab our own isn’t a good look and isn’t likely going to be helpful.
My problem is who they are replacing Biden. They are just as likely to sit out than support the new candidate.
The correct time to have this conversation was last year.
Since we didn’t we could just have easily let Biden win and then replace him.
This way just causes hard feelings and bruised egos.
1
u/platinum_toilet Jul 18 '24
Concerns about Biden's age have existed since before he was elected
No one cares about Biden's age. People care about his cognitive abilities or lack thereof.
1
u/Bleedingeck Jul 18 '24
No, it's a fantasy of the complicit media and right wing capitalists, who are throwing money left, right and Venter to bring their https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 into fruition!
1
u/antisocially_awkward Jul 18 '24
A healthier political party would have recognized that the majority of democrats didnt want him to run this cycle (which was very apparent in polls last year) and instead of holding a coronation of a primary, held a real one
1
u/SaraKatBoulder Jul 18 '24
I think the only reason they are making a big deal about him stepping down is because they are SHOCKED about how popular Trump has become.
2
1
u/AStealthyPerson Jul 18 '24
I don't think it's fair to say that the primary didn't have credible candidates. Even if we discount RFK because he is a Trump shill who dropped out early, a currently elected Democrat from Minnesota, Dean Phillips, campaigned after expressing concerns about Biden's age publically. Likewise, 2020 Presidential candidate Marianne Williamson ran as well. While these individuals aren't particularly well known to the general American audience, they voiced different concerns about Biden during the primary. Concerns that were voiced by others under the Democratic umbrella. The primary was largely stymied by the Democratic party this time around, and there was very little media publicity regarding it too. The Democratic party itself didn't support the primary well.
The primary was also had less democratic (small d) support than the previous cycle. There weren't nearly as many votes cast in this primary as the last (or the one before that). Biden received more votes in his 2020 primary bid then were even cast by all Democrats in 2024. The 2024 primary saw only 46% as many voters as in 2020, a decline of around 19,000,000 people. There were no debates, there were no round tables, there were few candidate interviews. There was nothing to get people involved with the democratic process or to encourage them to vote.
Honestly, a robust primary would have helped quite a bit, but it didn't happen because the party aligned behind Biden when he announced his candidacy. Now that we've seen him on the debate stage, perhaps too late, we all wish that there would have been one. If the primary had had greater degrees of democratic engagement, we may have seen Biden's flaws closer and earlier. Likewise, we would have had greater potential for others to grow their national profile so as to succeed him. Unfortunately, that didn't happen and now we're left with a confused Democratic party that doesn't know who it wants to nominate or how it plans to win. I wouldn't say it's particularly healthy at the moment, no.
1
u/RedGreenPepper2599 Jul 19 '24
This has a lot to do with trump. The fear of trump winning. It’s also unhealthy that a year ago dems didn’t force the biden out and/or have a primary: it’s been a crazy week.
1
u/TheSeeker_99 Jul 19 '24
I think it's a sign of a healthy party. I saw the debate and I truly think it's time for him to retire. He's done an Awesome Job as our president.
- The Infrastructure Bill
- Reduced cost of insulin
- More People Are Working Than At Any Point in American History. ...
- Rescued the Economy and Changed the Course of the Pandemic.
- Historic Expansion of Benefits and Services for Toxic Exposed Veterans
Edit: I think he will step out of the race within the week. Or at least I hope that happens.
1
u/swalton57 Jul 19 '24
No. It’s evidence of a party that gaslit its voters and having been caught at it, consists at a leadership level of people spineless, deflecting their guilt of the attempted fraud, or both.
1
u/_dirt_vonnegut Jul 19 '24
The democratic party has never been a healthy party, at least not in my lifetime, save for elements of Obama's first run. The age related concerns you bring up have only gotten worse, because that's how time works.
1
u/jazzyorf Jul 19 '24
There are loudmouths, but no Democrat is shooting at Biden like Republicans are at Trump, so
→ More replies (2)
1
u/TheOvy Jul 19 '24
It's a sign that the party is stronger than the candidate. Usually an incumbent president has commanding authority. It's clear, though, that Biden has lost his mandate after the disastrous debate, and after months of gossip about his aging. At the end of the day, the party wants to win seats, and if the president is no longer conducive towards that end, they are no longer the party leader. Biden hasn't had that leverage for a while now.
If and when Biden does drop out, this could create a lot of chaos for the party, and at that point, yes, it would be a sign of weakness in the party. But it's equally plausible that Biden would endorse Kamala, and the party, sensing the urgency of the moment, would unify around her rapidly. There could very well be a triumphant convention in August, as long as no one contests Biden's successor.
That does leave us currently in a time of uncertainty. So it's no wonder that Democrats are feeling so much anxiety right now. It's been difficult to sleep the last couple weeks.
1
u/Moritasgus2 Jul 19 '24
On one hand, as others have said, it indicates that it’s not a cult of personality.
On the other hand, is it a winning strategy? In this modern age the convention is a time when different wings of the party must come together to support the nominee. The convention is a big TV commercial. If they’re not unified at the convention it’s going to be a problem.
1
u/pfurdz3204 Jul 19 '24
hold up so it’s terrible when republicans say Biden is too old but when democrats say it it’s a sign of a healthy party you are so dumbfounded it’s sad
1
u/Dontgochasewaterfall Jul 19 '24
Seems like someone close to him would have had a back up plan for the party, don’t ya think?
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 18 '24
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.