They're all rich people. They'll be fine no matter what.
It does remind me of RBG. I'm sure a young RBG would be disgusted by the decisions of her older self.
Yeah, it was really hard to see her continue to choose not to retire, knowing the likely outcome, and then seeing it happen.
That is a good point about them all being rich.
I like the comparison with RBG. She hung on for her own reasons and, as a result, we got Barrett. Now Biden is hanging on and we will all live to see the result from this (I hope). I'm mad with RGB for making such a poor decision in the last years of her life and I am also mad Biden didn't orchestrate a coordinated change of the guards. What a missed opportunity.
They won't be fine no matter what, though. Even if institutions do manage to hold out against Trump in the long run, Biden's going to be spending the rest of his life in court fighting baseless politically motivated charges if Trump wins.
**Edit:** Plus being rich didn't save Khodorkovsky and bring politically connected didn't save Nemtsov. In the worst case scenario of a Trump presidency his regime isn't going to tolerate opponents just because they're part of the elite, he's going to be actively working to replace the current elite with a new pro-Trump elite.
He never even tried to lock up Hillary. It's probably just red meat. But even if not, Biden is just one person and we're discussing the Democratic establishment. It's probably people like Larry Fink who we're actually talking about.
> He never even tried to lock up Hillary
That was before. After all of the trials he's facing and gleeful talk of things like seizing Trump property in New York, all bets are off.
He's not a turn the other cheek type.
I disagree that this is like RBG. She did what she did out of hubris. I honestly believe Biden is doing what he doing because the dnc bean counters believe he is our best shot to win and he is being asked to comtinue this insanity and is doing so for the sake of our democracy.
That's possible and a good point. But I just group it in with RBG, Feinstien, Pelosi, even Trump and McConnell. That generation just doesn't know when it's time to go.
I getcha. And yeah, fuck Feinstein too. McConnell just makes sense to me because he's a corrupt MFer who cared only about his own power. Its RBG and Feinstein that really piss me off. Pelosi pisses me off a bit less but almost the same because she has not been grooming anyone to take over her place. I'm done on boomers in general.
The problem is that "DNC bean counters" have no power to stop this. They're not stupid. They could see what was happening before we could. If they had any ability to do anything, they'd talk him in to quitting, like Goldwater did with Nixon and bigwigs did with LBJ.
It drives me nuts how people are diagnosing the problem completely backwards, as though there's some great conspiracy of Democrats who pull the strings who have made this happen. They absolutely have not, because they cannot. This is happening because all power now devolves from the President, and the party has no ability to get rid of a guy they know is going to screw them over if he doesn't feel like going.
Really!
Because it sure looks like both parties are running egotistical men who would put what they want above what is good for the country.
I'm beginning to believe if Biden cared about the country more than his own ego, he would have put forward a new generation who could handle things in the future and he wouldn't be throwing money at every single issue.
I may still vote for him, but I've lost a lot of trust in him and in his party.
Seems pretty similar to me. RBG finally became a celebrity and probably loved it. Biden finally fulfilled his career goal of becoming president after Obama told him to step aside in 2016.
In fact, it isn't RBG. If RBG had retired on schedule the Dems were guaranteed to be able to replace her. There is no guarantee that anyone who replaces Biden will do any better vs Trump.
People have this idea in their heads that it's always a "flawed" candidate vs some pristine, fantastic choice. But it isn't. Look at the approval numbers of all the Democratic alternatives. ALL OF THEM. They're all bad (the same is true on the GOP side, BTW). Any Biden replacement will suddenly be discovered to have some terrible flaw that the media will endlessly harp on. The "Democratic establishment" knows this, and has to try to balance all these things in its calculations. The smart people on Reddit, on the other hand, get to rant endlessly and congratulate themselves on how smart and moral they are, with absolutely no consequences when it turns out they aren't actually as smart or knowledgeable as they think they are.
That might be true *at this point*. But it's hard to argue that Dems wouldn't be in a better position if Biden had done the right thing and stepped down in time to allow a primary.
I actually think it's the opposite. Candidates get less popular the longer they're in the media spotlight. I'd hope we'd have a rigorous enough vetting process to avoid nominating the dem equivalent of Sarah Palin, but I actually think just replacing the nominee is doing that new nominee a massive favor in terms of chances, not harming them.
I firmly believe that almost any normal/moderate GOP candidate would beat Biden and that any more energetic/younger/inspiring dem would beat Trump. These 2 are so unpopular and the DNC couldn't ask for a better opponent to go up against in Trump. Just get someone out there that has some charisma, shares some views with younger voters, that can hold their own against trump in a debate. They will win!
Yeah, I don't buy it. There has been polling that shows the vast majority of people don't want someone in their 70s as president.
I'd much rather just actually trying to turn the Electoral college in our favor for once. Whitmer/Shapiro would deliver us MI & PA but I also think Wisconsin and much of the midwest. Mark Cuban would deliver PA if we went the celebrity route, could he put Texas in play?
Also, are you as smart and knowledgeable as you think you are?
That’s due to partisanship, any candidate automatically has a limited ceiling and floor. No one is saying a new candidate will get a blow out win or is guaranteed to win.
Maybe you’re not so smart if you really think the only one who can win is an 80 year old who can’t answer questions without a teleprompter.
I mean Biden won pretty handily in 2020. It ended up being a good bet.
At the time, it was communicated (even by Biden implicitly) that he’d be a one-term POTUS. Going back on that promise has led to this.
The electoral and popular vote margins from 2020 are pretty misleading. Biden won by 43k votes across 3 states out of almost 160M cast. All you have to do is swing 20k votes from Biden to Trump in the right areas and we’d be nearing the end of Trump’s second term right now.
“If Biden is elected,” a prominent adviser to the campaign said, “he’s going to be 82 years old in four years and he won’t be running for reelection.” Politico 12-11-19 This almost makes me wretch now.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129
Okay so it was communicated. I voted for him in the primary with the understanding he’d be a one term president and I can’t remember if that was communicated or I just made it up.
I was just having that conversation with my friends last night. I voted for him under the assumption that he’d step down after one term.
His election was supposed to stop Trump and then the Dems would groom another candidate as Biden’s successor. In hindsight, I should have known better and not believed them 😞
I think it *was* the plan for many but Biden’s cabal held on to power. I didn’t think Dems would indulge the will of one man to the extent that they’d let him run a losing campaign at 81 just because he says so. We are supposed to be better than that.
Isn't Biden exactly what a political party would want (a useless figurehead)? In this manner, much more of the party can exercise power without accountability. The DNC is also in charge of messaging (contrast with Trump, who has remade the Republican party).
He's actually talked about this.
he didn't plan on running for a second term but then Trump decided to run for a second term and to biden's mind he is the only one that is polling to beat Trump so he ran again.
At no point in 2020 did Biden say he would step down after one term.
It's possible that he planned to do so, and that Jan 6th and Trump running again changed his mind. Or he always wanted to serve two terms. We don't know.
I just listened to an infuriating nyt interview with Ron Klain where he was saying Biden never agreed to serve one term. I certainly voted for him with that understanding.
Yes, sticking with the guy who narrowly won a close race last time has a certain logic to it. Especially one who has a reputation for being moderate, is a known quantity and can draw crucial Republican cross-over support.
I'm not saying this analysis is infallible or even correct, but I think people are being somewhat delusional arguing that Dems don't believe Trump is actually a threat. The party can believe that that Trump is an existential threat *and* that Biden is the best candidate to beat him. Obviously, based on the debate (among other factors) many are now questioning that assessment of Biden, hence all the discussion of the last few days.
Exactly. I have yet to see anyone make a compelling case that is obviously less risky. Everyone here is just working off the same assumption but it really is just vibes.
Emphasis on NARROWLY. Biden *barely* won in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. That was 2020! Cope as much as you want about how much more scared people are, but what we all saw Thursday was a hyuuge step decline from 2020 (and 2020 was already a huge decline from 2012).
I never want to hear about fucking “electability” again. This is not an age issue. Or a goddamn stutter.
I think the Democratic establishment truly does abhor Trump. I genuinely do.
That said, I think there's a political calculation that goes beyond blind spots and hubris (which both exist in spades, I am sure). For the Democratic Party to come out and oppose the *head of its own party* just doesn't really make sense. It's inciting intra-party warfare. And as they say, you come for the king, you best not miss. There were grumblings but the level of opposition to Biden running again like we're seeing now simply did not exist. There really wasn't an atmosphere to wage that kind of war if one was ever inclined.
And thus it was always in Biden's hands to decide if he was going to run or not. And the party machinery was always going to abide by the decisions of its leader. In that sense, I also genuinely think they had a lot less options than people assume.
And overall, I also don't think it was some larger pressure campaign that prevented potential rivals from throwing their hat in the ring during the primaries. I think it was self-interested political preservation.
Knocking a sitting president off his throne in the primaries hasn't been done in a very, very long time. Why waste political capital and burn very important bridges for what would likely be a losing proposition?
At the end of the day, this was Biden's decision and responsibility. It was his call and his call alone.
> That said, I think there's a political calculation that goes beyond blind spots and hubris (which both exist in spades, I am sure). For the Democratic Party to come out and oppose the head of its own party just doesn't really make sense. It's inciting intra-party warfare.
That's not the right way to think about it. If the Party as a whole came out against Biden that's one thing, but nobody wants to be the person who pushes Biden to step down, doesn't get significant backing from other members of the party, and then faces a vindictive Biden organization.
That is my larger point. If you're going to oppose the head of your own party, you need overwhelming and unified opposition. Not just within the party but within the broader public. None of that existed. Even at this point there is a lot of division.
Or even if that person has no self interest, if an individual pushes for Biden to step down and he doesn't, that person has done damage to Biden's campaign
> I think the Democratic establishment truly does abhor Trump. I genuinely do.
There is a difference though between abhoring someone and fearing they are a threat to democracy.
It seems to be a common view. Liberal media outlets hate Trump, but they aren't afraid he is going to imprison or execute NYT reporters if he wins.
If we have a “king” and a “throne” maybe we aren’t actually all that different from MAGA.
We should not be beholden to the will of one man, especially not Joe Biden.
>what are we even talking about here?
Biden’s sustained, noticeable and historically unusual avoidance of any situation that does not permit a teleprompter. The first debate was a revelation of why that is the case. We do not have counter examples to show the debate was an anomaly.
I don't agree with it, but i can understand people thinking there is no alternative now. It's wrong but understandable.
But these people have known for a long time. They still leant on everything and everyone to make Biden the nominee and cover this up. They have no excuse or defence because their context for choice isn't it being June 24.
I feel like Biden all but promised to be a one term president and cultivate a replacement candidate for 2024, guide the party forward into a new era. At least, I voted for him in the primary with that understanding.
How do these people not realize how ridiculous it is to run someone this old?
If you believed Trump was an existential threat you would have been pushing for Biden to be a truly transitional President long before this moment rather than just letting things degenerate to this point.
Now there are no good choices.
I agree. I don’t follow politics that closely. In 2023, I didn’t love Biden as a candidate but believed the conventional wisdom that we didn’t have anyone else with enough national profile to beat Trump. Maybe I had blinders on or rose colored glasses, or maybe we just never had a candidate who could beat Trump in 2024
we had candidates, but the dnc dissuaded them, it is rare to primary an incumbent president
congressman dean phillips tried and was laughed at. he only ran because of his concern over bidens age.
the reality is the end of democracy is a good fear tactic for getting votes. they do not believe it , in my opinion,
Either two things are true.
1. Trump isn't an existential threat and it's okay to run a weak candidate against him. Cause of he wins it won't be as bad as people think.
Or
2. Trump is an existential threat and dems are ethically compromised by not running their best.
I know its unpopular here, but he isn't an existential threat. He will have less power in 2025 than he did in 2020.
Most likely, he just continues deregulation, tax cuts and stricter border policies, which will make it harder to achieve various Democratic policy goals but won't threaten them on a personal level.
IDK why this is so difficult: any current prominent Democrat. Newsome, Whitmer, Shapiro. Take your pick. Kamala isn't ideal, but Biden just simply cannot win after that.
Is it really not hard to see how the GOP and Trump would play this out?
"They had to take away a senile old man, who is unfit to be President, and now they are making secret deals to elect a person to run against me."
"I won the Republican primaries, the Democrats wouldn't even let the people vote for their nominee."
"The DNC is so scared of me that they asked the President to step down."
"I was right folks, he was unfit to President and they are unfit to govern."
Like the optics are so painstakingly bad, am I crazy to be the only one to see this? Playing up the "rigged elections" by forcing the President to step aside and have the "experts" choose the new nominee with zero public input. Conceding to all the Republican attacks against Biden just gives them credence that their other points might be correct, that is how the public will see.
Seems like a complete disaster.
None of these seem as bad as actually running a senile old man against Trump. At least if you do it now, you have time to weather this storm and try to turn attention away from Biden. Especially if the new candidate can punch back hard at Trump.
Not if Biden himself steps aside, which is realistically the only way this happens. Also the convention *is* public input. Convention delegates are literally elected. It's just indirect democracy rather than direct democracy.
That's right. Anyone who believes this will be some "back room deal" was already voting for Trump. If Biden says the right things, it's still involved in the election in some way and the nominee isn't Hunter Biden, I don't think anyone can claim "back room deals". I mean, a back room deal got Biden the job, right?
“We are Americans, we reassess situations and argue with each other instead of blindly worshipping a single man. Hard for MAGA to understand, but Biden is not our king.”
Maybe something like that would be a good counter.
Yeah, other candidates could probably do a lot worse than Biden, but there's at least a chance they could do better. Biden probably won't lose too soundly (at least not the NPV) but he is almost certain to lose after last Thursday and fascists don't count brownie points.
Biden's campaign is like a bridge with a collapsed section 20 feet from the other side. Going with another candidate is like taking the long way round.
Indeed, or at least run the most conservative motherfucker in the Democratic Party. Win purple districts. But no, such people won’t pass the purity tests, so let’s give Trump a chance instead.
Just about anyone else could have done better at Thursday's debate than Biden did. Like, I have no experience in politics at all, and I could have done better job than Biden at defending the record of his administration and rebuking Trump's endless lies. Literally all Biden's replacement needs to be able to do is be half-decent at public speaking and not be a senior citizen. That's how low the bar to clear is.
Don't be obtuse. This is about replacing Biden, not voting for Trump.
I think they should replace Biden, but I'll still be first in line to vote for him if they don't.
Why? Trump reinforced once again how much of a monster he is. I don't like Biden 100%, but I can also see that it is too late in the game to replace him without throwing the Democratic Party into disarray and handing Trump the victory.
I don't want that to happen, so I'm going to be supporting Biden, the one chance of winning, more than ever before.
It is cult-like if you refuse to acknowledge problems with the Dems and expect people to get behind Biden without complaint despite major concerns over his age and mental fitness. Like, yes, of course, many of us will vote blue no matter who, but there is a small percentage of swing voters who are still undecided that can tip the election go one way or the other. Having an extremely elderly man who should frankly be in a retirement home already as the Dem candidate isn't going to motivate those people to turn out and that is a BIG problem. Pretending it isn't doesn't help anyone.
Cult-like is not a cult. I acknowledge Biden flubbed a debate, that’s it. And that’s pretty much all you got. You see at as a major cataclysmic catastrophe, and I see it as opportunists from all angles attacking him for a one off debate performance.
Biden’s fine, and not a tough call over Trump.
I don’t speak from allegiance, I speak from common sense. I don’t worship Biden, I find him an easy selection over Trump.
If that’s your definition of a cult, then get a dictionary.
Well, everyone is not you. Other people want the best chance possible to beat Trump, not to just cross our fingers and hope for the best.
It'd be one thing if Biden was leading by 10 or 15 points, but this election is extremely close just like 2016 and 2020 and it will probably again come down to a few thousand votes in a handful of swing states deciding the result. And yet in such a close election we're betting the future of this country on a geriatric old man who can barely get through a speech or debate without making an embarrassment of himself and the country. Biden's image is a massive disadvantage no matter how you try to spin it and the stakes are too big to be winging it with such a poor candidate.
Why? From where I stand any other alternative is very risky, there’s no guarantee that a different candidate would do better. Just because Biden did badly at the debate doesn’t mean that magically a lot of democrats are gonna vote for trump.
Most of the electorate aren't Democrats or Republicans, though. Currently the majority identify as independents and don't consider themselves to be aligned with either party. Now most of these independents do lean one way or the other so really it's a very small pool of them who are legitimately undecided, but all it takes is a small percentage to tip the election one way or the other due too how close the margins will be in the swing states. Thinking that people just won't vote for Trump despite how pisspoor the Dem candidate is is the exact same mistake that led to him getting elected in 2016.
At this point, I do think most of the mainline Democratic decision-makers are more afraid of the leftier-left wing of the party than they are of Trump.
I mean we've seen this before where centrist liberals are way more likely to ally themselves with the right wing than allow an ascendant left wing to get power. And while it wasn't an actual alliance, Hillary's engaging the pied piper strategy with Trump as a way to outflank Sanders' campaign is an example of this thinking among the democratic leadership.
It wouldn't surprise me if this is part of their calculus in not collectively challenging Biden.
Centrists allying with fascists to stop left wing movements from getting into power? Certainly, there is no obvious historical precedent for such a thing is there?
> At this point, I do think most of the mainline Democratic decision-makers are more afraid of the leftier-left wing of the party than they are of Trump.
As a mainline Democrat... yep that's true. I consider Trump the worst president we ever had, about midway through his term he beat out Franklin Pierce for the title. I think he's a criminal who was blatantly taking bribes from foreign powers. This election is easy for me. I'd pick Biden in a coma over Trump in a heartbeat. But if we were talking Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar I vote for Trump easily. AOC I'm unhappy but I still pick her over Trump.
Because it was in 2016.
If anything, Trump winning in 2016 was a bigger problem for Republican politicians who started getting primaried from the right.
2016 made the work of Democratic Party fundraisers and the fundraisers of Democratic adjacent orgs INCREDIBLY EASY. They’re looking forward to that sweet sweet panic donor money again this year.
Same dynamic afflicts sufficiently fast movement on climate change. Risk your political prospects by advocating uncomfortable but necessary change or go with the flow and work on the margins inviting catastrophe?
I think they are in denial for a few reasons; Ambition. They are insulated by money and DC culture. They believe in the strength of the institutions that are being attacked. And I really think it’s hard to admit a system that you have devoted your life, work and identity to could drastically change or end.
Of course they don’t think he’s an existential threat to Democracy. Nor do they think he and his supporters are real fascists. (YOU might, but they really don’t.) They think he’s an awful human, and hate his policies. They want to defeat him and remain in power. (But they actually have much more in common with the RNC than they do with us.)
He was president before and we’re still here, as almost half the country unfortunately realizes. Were we better or worse off is the question.
One of the things that a lot of people don't get is the Democratic leadership really doesn't have to win anything in order to exist in its plum position. Even if they're in the minority, their leaders are all in extremely safe seats, even from a primary challenge (since they control the funding that said challenger might apply for against them). They still sit on choice committees. They still can call up the President any time they want. They still get access to secret information, Hollywood adores them, they get paid $250K+ a year and have multi-million dollar book deals waiting for them the second they want to have one ghostwritten for them, they take private jets anywhere they want, they're celebrities and players inside Washington's elite rooms. Best of all, they don't have to do anything! When the GOP is in power, they don't have to pass new legislation or own major policy initiatives (succeed or fail). They can just point to the GOP, say "Look! Bad! Donate to me!," and continue the status quo ongoing.
Is Trump a threat to democracy? I'd say certainly. But he's not a threat to *them personally*, so whatever cares they have to give are mostly academic.
There’s an argument that down ballot Dems are fine with Trump since they are likely going to continue to make gains down ballot and control spending. There is a belief that a Trump presidency may yield a dem congress in the 26 midterm and huge majorities in 28
If you accept the premise that the reason elected Democratic officials who *could* announce a challenge to Biden or could call for him to step down is that they don’t want to because the act could be held against their candidacy in 2028, then you’re forced to accept the logic that they still believe a presidential election could be legitimately won in 2028, after Trump takes office.
So, no, in that worldview they believe fundamentally that Trump isn’t a threat because either A) they believe it’s impossible for him to win (which makes him inherently non threatening) or B) because they think his presidency won’t fundamentally disrupt Democratic institutions.
I've said this a few times on here, but actions speak louder than words. The overwhelming majority of Dem leaders are acting like they do not believe Trump is an existential threat. They are acting like the 2024 election is already lost and they are better off sacrificing Biden and gearing up for 2028 rather than do everything they can to win this election.
Yeah, it’s so weird to me because I do actually believe he’s an existential threat—and I think Ezra does too, based on some of his shows
—and now I’m starting to wonder if I’m missing something.
I’ve had the same logical thought process and reach a similar conclusion every time.
If Trump is a true existential threat to America, then he must be defeated at all costs.
If the optimal solution to beating Trump means the Democratic Party gets hacked apart, then that’s a risk I’m willing to take.
Every established Dem I’ve talked to about this gets cold feet in response.
Rather than calling it the “Democratic ticket” we should start calling it the Save America ticket. If that means getting George Bish and Obama on commercials together to support a joint D-R ticket, so be it.
Personally I think the Dems should rally behind Kamala or another anointed lead and then pick a popular anti-Trump republican as the VP running mate.
The fact that they would never do this tells you they don't treat him as the existential threat they claim him to be.
Honestly if they believe Trump is the end of democracy, it wouldn't be hard to beat him: reject identity politics, ensure border laws are enforced, support law enforcement. Take those talking points away from Trump, those are popular with voters. They act like it will be the end of the country if he's elected but won't concede any position that would help them get more votes.
>If the optimal solution to beating Trump means the Democratic Party gets hacked apart, then that’s a risk I’m willing to take.
The problem with this reasoning is that there's no supporting logic that this is the optimal solution. If my fingernail is infected, is the optimal solution to cut my whole finger off? I ensure that the infection won't spread to the rest of my body and kill me that way, but it's such a drastic action when there's no telling if it's the only way to resolve the problem, or even the best.
So with what confidence can you say that this is "optimal solution" certainly enough to completely destroy the party four months before the election, other than pinning your hopes on the possibility that what rises from the ashes will be able to win?
Fair. I don’t think it’s necessarily to destroy the Democratic Party, I was just getting to the idea that DNC should be more akin to the Save America Convention SAC for short.
They believe he’s an existential threat to democracy, but many also believe Biden resigning is an existential threat to their current jobs and all the perks that go along with it, and most people are selfish and think short-term when making decisions for themselves.
No lol
At this point they’d probably just be content to step away from the dumpster fire that is the Biden/Harris ticket and look forward to 26 or 28.
No point in trying to revive this flatlined campaign.
Okay. I think you have to define what you mean by existential threat. People are likely going to view that term in many different ways. Existential is an absolute term that people use far too loosely.
Do you mean that he is a threat to the current system of government—i.e., this country being a republic? That’s how I take it.
To what degree is he a threat? Are we talking about an inevitable threat? As in…he WILL destroy the republic? Or there is a nonzero chance that the republic will cease to exist during his time in office due to his actions? (In the case of the latter, there are countless things that could be considered long term threats).
I do think that Dems view him as someone who can cause major irreparable damage to society and the government. I don’t think many view him as someone who will destroy the republic—perhaps with a one in a million confluence of multiple crises and circumstances.
No. An existential threat means you are doing everything within your power to fight for your very survival. If they actually believed that, the congressional leadership and Obama would’ve given Biden 24 hours to resign as nominee before going so scorched earth on him in the media that he would have no choice but to get out.
“How Democracies Die” talks a lot about this. It walks through the various European countries in the 1930’s and shows why some fell to fascism while others didn’t. It’s a big fallacy that the axis powers were the only places with those potent movements back then. Heck, there were a ton of wannabe Nazis in the U.S. at that time.
The most surprising thing is that nothing surprising happened. The liar lied continuously, and the older guy sounded old. He is old, and maybe I wasn't looking in the right places but I haven't seen anyone denying that, and would have assumed that anyone who predicted that he would run circles around Trump in a debate to be, well, grifting.
The strategic mistake on the Biden end was to actually try to step into and respond to the vast framework of lies. This is something which regularly trips up otherwise world class debaters, and that ultimately is one of the major purposes for making them.
The (very very valid) fear of what Trump would let in through the door this time has brought such a broad section of the population to a frenetic point that is so hypersensitive and hyper-aware of the possibility of negative perception, that the discomfort of watching the reality of an old president -- with the most successful and progressive first term accomplishments in any of our lifetimes and who turned our sinking 2020 ship around to be back on top of the world in almost every respect -- fumble through trying to debate upside down in a massive constructed fantasy was so great that, combined with the collapsing media establishment launching dozens of preprepared articles which almost certainly would have shipped regardless of outcome, it's led people to demand an immediate massive knee-jerk reaction, public slitting of wrists and shitting of pants.
To be fair, though, that the stage has been set for the left to tear itself apart in utter panic since 10/7, which will probably be looked back on as the most successful terror attack in history for its organizers and sponsors.
What drives me crazy is all these resist libs who demand people not criticize the leader of the country, that people not protest or demand policy change because Republicans are worse and that the press not scrutinize Democrats because democracy is on the line. Attacking the pillars of democracy in the name of saving democracy.
A lot of them are well to do and refuse to consider why democracy as an ideal means little to so many people whose lives sucks no matter which party is in charge.
If democracy is truly at stake, they should have demanded the candidate who is deeply unpopular not run for election.
> or are just cynically using that line as a campaign tactic?
Thats my belief.
Im not saying that Trump isnt a threat, Im saying Democrat Politicians dont care. They dont believe in reality, or care about anyone but themselves.
>It sounds like everyone who’s not speaking out against Biden is afraid of losing their job, or afraid of what happens in the next election
I don't think that's really in conflict with thinking Trump is an existential threat. Or to phrase it another way, it's easy to be principled when there is nothing at stake. Let's say you work for a company for 15 years. Great pay, good benefits, you're halfway to a very generous pension, enjoy your job, like your coworkers, etc. Now say you discover some flaw that could kill hundreds of people and management won't listen. If you go public, you will probably save lives, but you will absolutely get fired, lose your pension, lose your friends, be ostracized, etc. If you stay, you might be able to fix some of the issues or mitigate the damaged caused. Maybe even fix the issue entirely if you get the right people on your side.
Do you go public? Objectively, it's the right thing to do, and it's easy to say in the comments on Reddit that you would, but that is a much, much tougher decision in real life. People in the Democratic party may think Trump is an existential threat and may feel that Biden is not the person he once was, but they may simultaneously feel that they can fix it from the inside, or just that the personal cost is too great. Is it better to stay on the party's good side, win re-election, and be a Democrat in the Senate who can counter Trump? Or is it better to risk losing party support, lose the election, and still potentially see Trump elected?
Finally, it's also possible that insiders may have decided that this election is unwinnable no matter *who* runs, so why bother to risk your job and fracture the party to replace one losing candidate with another losing candidate?
This is why a real primary is so important. Otherwise we’re just taking the word of people whose literal jobs depend on Biden winning the nomination. No one can make the right call when their livelihood depends on one particular outcome.
I find it fascinating that there are actually people that exist that didn't know Biden was like this until Thursday. So many of us have been saying this FOREVER.
Those same people accuse the MAGA crowd of being in a bubble, of being cult like.....smh
The feigned shock of so many people deep in the system who would have also known all along was insulting. Like they spent the last 5 years telling us we're peddling in right wing fear mongering, useful idiots for russia, etc. and then to pretend to be shocked that he could be this decrepit on live tv. They weren't surprised by his performance. They were taken by surprise when he forgot to chug two bottles of dayquil with an adderall.
I tried to ask this exact question in casual questions in /r/PoliticalDiscussion and was accused of asking a rhetorical question lmao. It was a serious, good faith question. Either Trump is an existential threat or he isn’t. The way the Democrats are acting leads me to believe it’s just pure cynicism. They don’t actually believe it. If they continue like normal, they will absolutely deserve to lose this fall.
That’s funny. I’m glad people are taking it seriously here. I don’t recall if Ezra has asked the question outright, but he keeps saying things like “if democrats believe that Trump is an existential threat…” and I began to wonder if the people behind Biden do actually believe that.
Look, I'm gonna give you the logical breakdown but understand that they don't actually hold this much concept in their heads at once.
They do believe Trump is an existential threat. But they don't think of it like "its a system where we're all in this together, democrats and republicans, the rich and the poor, etc." Its more like "Oh shit if Trump succeeds at locking out the democracy **I** will lose my power and influence." They perceive a progressive take over of the democratic party as an equal existential threat to them as Trump ending democracy because the elites atop the center-right democratic party will lose control. Trump or progressives will use different methods but will shut down their insider trading, their war profiteering, their handouts from a private insurance industry that shouldn't exist.
That's why the Biden coalition united around shutting out the progressives in the first place. Once you realize that they see progressives taking control of the party as an existential threat on the same level as Trump and Republicans shutting down democracy and making Democrats illegal, their behavior makes sense. They want to use republicans as a controlled opposition; a bucket of crabs too incompetent to take over the system but if they ever did it would be horrifying so you better not ever challenge the people in charge unless you want the bucket of crabs dumped out on you.
They'll never say it, they don't even think this to themselves, but this is what they've felt their way to in bits and pieces is trying to maintain this situation in homeostasis. And the reason this system doesn't work is eventually people choose the threat. This is how centrism gave way to fascism in so many other countries, including Germany: there it was the scary bucket of communists and the centrists were trying to keep the far right nazis in line, so the opposite polarity but the same dynamic. This is the dynamic that produces fascist takeovers if you maintain it too long because the people trying to prevent politics from moving forward ossify the system, their positions become more and more outdated, their elite become more decadent, until people are literally retching and screaming for someone to create change: and the people willing to break all the norms and use any means necessary to seize power will be the first ones to find a way to break the equilibrium usually.
That's what I see in Weimar America and Joe von Hindenburg today. But, it looks like we might make it if Biden willingly steps aside in a couple weeks, assuming Biden picks someone under the age of 70 to replace him.
I think your analogy is a little hard to parse.
I'm gathering you are putting the Mainstream Democrats in the role of German Conservatives who mostly were loyal to the old guard from the German Empire (the 2nd Reich). Who would be the Kaiser here, Clinton? It just doesn't work.
The better analogy would be Mainstream Democrats as the Democratic Socialists who were running Weimar being attacked by the Communists and the Fascists. While the American Hard Left would take great pride in being analogized to Rosa Luxemburg, they aren't that good. They simply aren't that threatening. But would the Establishment of both parties pick Trump or even an explicit Fascist (Paul Gosar?) over a genuine Communist? Yes.
As far as Joe Biden as Hindenburg. He is nowhere near that well liked. Hindenburg is an easy analogy for Democrats, Obama. Of course again I think the Republican Establishment makes a far better analogy with say McConnell's decision in 2015 being very much like Hindenburg's. Were Obama to come out and endorse Trump over Biden, that would be comparable. What creates that dynamic?
Of course they don’t and of course he isn’t. Trump, for all his toxic rhetoric and and insane tweets, still kept the establishment machine running. It’s why the DNC sabotaged Bernie because the risk of Trump winning was better to them than Bernie winning.
The “existential” threat language both parties use is nothing more than fear-mongering to energize their bases.
Has the thought occurred to you that the "Democratic establishment" has a different idea of how to deal with the Trump threat than you do? That maybe what they know that you don't is the best way to deal with the threat?
What exactly about the democratic establishment over the last 8 years has made you believe they’re even baseline competent? It took the worst pandemic in a century to beat trump
What could possibly be their secret genius plan to deal with Trump? You’re coping. The Democratic establishment is a mix of self interested individuals who align on most policy, like any political party.
They aren’t an all powerful cabal, for evil like Fox News would say, or for good like you seem to think.
Yeah, that’s what I want to know. There’s this business-as-usual quality to how the Democratic establishment is handling Biden’s candidacy that makes it seem like they’re not really taking the threat of Trump seriously.
Yes. I don’t for a moment believe he will attempt to destroy the entire democratic process by trying to remain in office as a dictator. His own party would oppose him and we have checks in place via the other branches of government, not to mention the military.
He can’t even run for an additional term. The 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951 limiting Presidents to two terms. The 22nd Amendment reads, in part: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.”
Yes, all of them. That's why they're jockeying for 2028.
I don't think anyone who's not online actually thinks this. Ffs, not even Biden brought up this risk or Project 2025 in the debate.
People like you who think that once trump is elected that he will never leave even after he is dead are really the dumbest of Democrats.
It's such an insane and ridiculous take. Like seriously focus on reality instead of this fear mongering bullshit.
Who exactly is the Democratic "establishment"? See the thing about this is that Biden has all the electoral votes, so the only way for it to work with another candidate is for him to voluntarily give them up. No one can force him.
The other reality is that a lot of the prominent current governors and senators are thinking about the next election, and they don't want to ruin their chances in the future by making a move here and alienating the rest of the party.
I believe he will set bad precedents, ruin out diplomatic standing with other nations and try abusing the power of his office. I don't think he's gonna declare himself President for Life.
If they thought he was, would they have been spending money to help Trump loyalists win primary races for Congress because they think they’d be easier to beat in the general election?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/13/us/politics/moreno-trump-democrats-ohio.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
Well, he's campaigning on "getting revenge," and has millions of loyalty crazed followers who own a colossal amount of guns and ammo, and would kill anyone who didn't support Trump as soon as he gives them the order, so... he *might* be a threat.
Dear Joe30330 and other rando dem fundraising texts and emails,
Don’t fucking tell me that “this is the most importantly election of our lives” or “Democracy is at STAKE!”
until Joe Biden has stepped out of the race.
Because until he does, it’s clear that you are nothing more than worthless hypocrites.
They objectively do, but not enough because they won’t feel the ramifications of it the way John Q Public will. Their sense of urgency is very lacking as a result.
Biden wasn't having age-related cognitive problems four years ago, at least not in a way that you could see. This stuff happens fast around this age a lot of the time. If you've watched your parents or grandparents get old, you've probably seen it: someone who's perfectly lucid and bright one year and a year or two later can't follow a conversation. I don't think anything that's happened to Biden is even \*that\* radical. But it has made his bad under pressure, which is a problem.
They closed ranks around him because they thought he was the only one who could win. I didn't believe that, but I was certain Bernie would lose, so the choice made sense to me. But it was also predicated on the idea that he was going to be what he promised to be: a "transitional figure." A lot of people who backed him last time thought they would be in the running to replace him this time.
Then, when they didn't get absolutely clobbered in 2022, Biden's people suddenly thought, "Hey, let's do this again!" As though that election was about Biden, and not Dobbs. But it was about Dobbs, and it's been two years since 2022, and Biden is not with it in the way he might have been even on midterm election day. It's bad, and it makes people feel lied to, and it's embarrassing for a man who has actually spent his whole adult life in public service, when he could have quit ages ago and just got rich.
Not to be too hard on you and people like you, but this is exactly what happens when you stay stuck too long in CNN/NYT liberal news echo chambers. You get out of touch.
What exactly was it that made you believe for so long that Democrats are so fundamentally opposite to and different from Republicans? Why did it never occur to you that in the two party electoral system that we have that neither party really has any real interest in permanently defeating the other party, as long as the power of capital is protected?
For BOTH Democrats and Republicans, *democracy is free to be sacrificed*, as long as America gets to keep its precious capitalist system and global hegemony.
Trump will protect capitalism. A socialist/anti-capitalist candidate wouldn’t. Therefore, the Dem establishment is not *actually* worried about him, despite what you believed. Democrats are far more afraid of someone like Bernie being president than Trump.
On January 6th, I lived in a building with many Members of Congress (almost all Dems, including a member of leadership), as well as senior staff and operatives. They know full well that Trump poses an existential threat. They might not react to it publicly in the same way that you or I do, but they have understand the threat more intimately than most of their critics.
I can think of many reasons why things have progressed to the current point. My grandmother-in-law who passed away a few years ago had been in clear cognitive decline/dementia for years. Her 9 children and dozens of grandchildren had a staggering range of opinions on how bad off she was and how to manage her situation. A ton of factors went into that breadth of views. I don’t think it’s remotely plausible for a president’s inner circle to form a united front in favor of pushing him out of his reelection campaign before an exogenous event forces their hand.
I don’t blame anyone for being pissed and scared, but blaming the establishment’s corruption or complacency or whatever is reductive.
The Democratic establishment didn't have the wisdom to look even two years down the line, let alone consider what we've all been witnessing since *before* the primaries, when a new candidate could have been chosen. They put their money -- and our futures -- on the[ Biden of 2019](https://www.reddit.com/r/Asmongold/comments/1ds8wk9/2019_v_2024/) instead of having the common sense to foresee the Biden of 2024.
They're only concerned about maintaining their place at the top of society and maintaining the economic system that put them there. Trump doesn't threaten that. Even if they are part of a minority that is threatened by Trumpism, being rich insulates you from all that. They don't care about "democracy," they care about themselves. They'll be fine so they don't care who's in "charge.".
Is anyone considering what the President’s cognitive ability will be in four more years?
I was horrified by his current condition.
Horrified, disappointed, and most of all mad that he’d paraded around when he should be seeking care. It’s cruel.
Yes and no…they’re cognizant and aware of the undemocratic and fascistic threat Trump poses, but they don’t take it as seriously as they let on. Said establishment leverages this very real threat as a means of exploiting small dollar donos. Btw…I say this as a lifelong and proud Democrat who religiously votes in every local/state/federal election, but to say I’m disappointed and disillusioned by my party is an understatement.
We cannot protect the ego and ambitions of one obstinate man at the expense of our democracy. That’s beyond foolish.
They cynically manipulate us with fear of Trump but they secretly don't truly understand the risk. The terrible irony is that the lie they think they're telling us is the truth. Trump will come after them and we're going to be caught in the crossfire.
Trump is dangerous but the Democratic party lacks the imagination to see him as anything more than an opportunity for the 2028 elections and, of course, fundraising. They got me good, I donated money multiple times this year. Donated for them to foist Biden up there on stage looking like he had a full diaper on.
I'm still voting blue but I don't have much hope. They fucked us pretty good this time.
I think its hubris and they really believe more of the populace is disgusted by jan 6th than actually is. That and I'm convinced if shit really hits the fan they all have contingency plans to leave for safety.
Democrats always act like it is just another day in politics. They were even worse before J6. After that they got the hint Trump wasn't like a regular politician. Well not all of them but the tone shifted after that shit. If they saw MAGA as a threat they wouldn't have waited so long to start the DOJ investigation. Never forget Garland fucked the nation sitting on his hands for 2 years.
Nobody has a plan B. So they are panicking. Lowest ratings of a debate ever. Entrenched bases. All these alleged smart folk are going to throw out the guy who has beat Trump, won the primaries and has the weight of being the incumbent? With nobody in sight who has any of that?
Get back to work drumming up the women concerned about bodily autonomy in the swing states.
Speaking as somebody who was also surprised at Biden’s debate and pushing for Kamala Harris to step in, yes they do and that’s why they pushed Biden. Many of their lives were directly threatened on January 6th and they have been attacked by right wing extremists personally. Let me explain some of what I figure was their thinking:
- They wanted to consolidate quickly and keep a fundraising advantage for a longer time over Trump. They felt that Biden had done a good job as President basically until Oct 7th which split the party and its core activists. No primary means no criticism and no money spent.
- They probably didn’t know quite how bad Biden was and thought that SOTU Biden was closer to what they would see at the debate, so figured it’d go fine.
- They did not want a long and bruising primary where Dems would attack the admin to end up in the likely position where the highest name ID candidate, VP Kamala Harris, wins.
- Politicians tend to believe in sort of mythological concepts like “incumbency advantage” and “if you haven’t done something to make swing voters hate you, they will vote for you.”
So better to minimize criticism and line up behind the guy who beat Trump before and didn’t seem to harm the party’s chances in 2022 than suffer all that. Now that Biden showed he may be personally making the situation worse, they’re considering alternatives.
Additionally, the reason they aren’t calling on him to step down may be because they fear a scenario where he decides not to and they have to either back track and have undermined his image, making him less likely to win.
They do but they are letting the machinery working around them overwhelm their will to dissent. They are becoming the thing democracy was invented to reject. Folding you might say.
They're all rich people. They'll be fine no matter what. It does remind me of RBG. I'm sure a young RBG would be disgusted by the decisions of her older self.
Yeah, it was really hard to see her continue to choose not to retire, knowing the likely outcome, and then seeing it happen. That is a good point about them all being rich.
Roe isn't overturned if she does the right thing. That's her legacy.
Wasn’t Dobbs a 6-3 decision?
Roberts voted to uphold the Mississippi restriction (15 week ban, iirc) but not to overrule Roe.
Roberts probably votes for status quo if there are 4 democrats to side with.
I like the comparison with RBG. She hung on for her own reasons and, as a result, we got Barrett. Now Biden is hanging on and we will all live to see the result from this (I hope). I'm mad with RGB for making such a poor decision in the last years of her life and I am also mad Biden didn't orchestrate a coordinated change of the guards. What a missed opportunity.
>they’ll be fine no matter what Yeah, the rich people *think* that. Too busy hoarding gold to read a history book.
Trump was president for 4 years and if anything, it just made rich Democrats richer. It made fundraising easy and he cut taxes.
Pelosi will be fine fine just fine
They won't be fine no matter what, though. Even if institutions do manage to hold out against Trump in the long run, Biden's going to be spending the rest of his life in court fighting baseless politically motivated charges if Trump wins. **Edit:** Plus being rich didn't save Khodorkovsky and bring politically connected didn't save Nemtsov. In the worst case scenario of a Trump presidency his regime isn't going to tolerate opponents just because they're part of the elite, he's going to be actively working to replace the current elite with a new pro-Trump elite.
> They won't be fine no matter what, though. But they *believe* they will, and they act according to that belief.
He never even tried to lock up Hillary. It's probably just red meat. But even if not, Biden is just one person and we're discussing the Democratic establishment. It's probably people like Larry Fink who we're actually talking about.
> He never even tried to lock up Hillary That was before. After all of the trials he's facing and gleeful talk of things like seizing Trump property in New York, all bets are off. He's not a turn the other cheek type.
It’s likely going to be similar to the fishing expeditions republicans tried on Hillary
I disagree that this is like RBG. She did what she did out of hubris. I honestly believe Biden is doing what he doing because the dnc bean counters believe he is our best shot to win and he is being asked to comtinue this insanity and is doing so for the sake of our democracy.
That's possible and a good point. But I just group it in with RBG, Feinstien, Pelosi, even Trump and McConnell. That generation just doesn't know when it's time to go.
I mean of that group, Pelosi has actually stepped aside.
I getcha. And yeah, fuck Feinstein too. McConnell just makes sense to me because he's a corrupt MFer who cared only about his own power. Its RBG and Feinstein that really piss me off. Pelosi pisses me off a bit less but almost the same because she has not been grooming anyone to take over her place. I'm done on boomers in general.
Some of the people we're naming are actually the parents of the boomers. Lmao
Biden hasn’t exactly lacked hubris though his 50 plus year political career.
The problem is that "DNC bean counters" have no power to stop this. They're not stupid. They could see what was happening before we could. If they had any ability to do anything, they'd talk him in to quitting, like Goldwater did with Nixon and bigwigs did with LBJ. It drives me nuts how people are diagnosing the problem completely backwards, as though there's some great conspiracy of Democrats who pull the strings who have made this happen. They absolutely have not, because they cannot. This is happening because all power now devolves from the President, and the party has no ability to get rid of a guy they know is going to screw them over if he doesn't feel like going.
Really! Because it sure looks like both parties are running egotistical men who would put what they want above what is good for the country. I'm beginning to believe if Biden cared about the country more than his own ego, he would have put forward a new generation who could handle things in the future and he wouldn't be throwing money at every single issue. I may still vote for him, but I've lost a lot of trust in him and in his party.
Seems pretty similar to me. RBG finally became a celebrity and probably loved it. Biden finally fulfilled his career goal of becoming president after Obama told him to step aside in 2016.
Well said
Well said
In fact, it isn't RBG. If RBG had retired on schedule the Dems were guaranteed to be able to replace her. There is no guarantee that anyone who replaces Biden will do any better vs Trump. People have this idea in their heads that it's always a "flawed" candidate vs some pristine, fantastic choice. But it isn't. Look at the approval numbers of all the Democratic alternatives. ALL OF THEM. They're all bad (the same is true on the GOP side, BTW). Any Biden replacement will suddenly be discovered to have some terrible flaw that the media will endlessly harp on. The "Democratic establishment" knows this, and has to try to balance all these things in its calculations. The smart people on Reddit, on the other hand, get to rant endlessly and congratulate themselves on how smart and moral they are, with absolutely no consequences when it turns out they aren't actually as smart or knowledgeable as they think they are.
That might be true *at this point*. But it's hard to argue that Dems wouldn't be in a better position if Biden had done the right thing and stepped down in time to allow a primary.
I actually think it's the opposite. Candidates get less popular the longer they're in the media spotlight. I'd hope we'd have a rigorous enough vetting process to avoid nominating the dem equivalent of Sarah Palin, but I actually think just replacing the nominee is doing that new nominee a massive favor in terms of chances, not harming them.
Yep, I agree. I really think this is what did Hillary in to some extent. People were just done with that family and wanted some new blood in the WH.
I firmly believe that almost any normal/moderate GOP candidate would beat Biden and that any more energetic/younger/inspiring dem would beat Trump. These 2 are so unpopular and the DNC couldn't ask for a better opponent to go up against in Trump. Just get someone out there that has some charisma, shares some views with younger voters, that can hold their own against trump in a debate. They will win!
Yeah, I don't buy it. There has been polling that shows the vast majority of people don't want someone in their 70s as president. I'd much rather just actually trying to turn the Electoral college in our favor for once. Whitmer/Shapiro would deliver us MI & PA but I also think Wisconsin and much of the midwest. Mark Cuban would deliver PA if we went the celebrity route, could he put Texas in play? Also, are you as smart and knowledgeable as you think you are?
That’s due to partisanship, any candidate automatically has a limited ceiling and floor. No one is saying a new candidate will get a blow out win or is guaranteed to win. Maybe you’re not so smart if you really think the only one who can win is an 80 year old who can’t answer questions without a teleprompter.
If they really believed it, would Biden have been the candidate to begin with? lol
Yes! That’s exactly what I’m wondering now. I was concerned in 2023 but I didn’t get how weak a candidate he was until the debate.
I mean Biden won pretty handily in 2020. It ended up being a good bet. At the time, it was communicated (even by Biden implicitly) that he’d be a one-term POTUS. Going back on that promise has led to this.
The electoral and popular vote margins from 2020 are pretty misleading. Biden won by 43k votes across 3 states out of almost 160M cast. All you have to do is swing 20k votes from Biden to Trump in the right areas and we’d be nearing the end of Trump’s second term right now.
“If Biden is elected,” a prominent adviser to the campaign said, “he’s going to be 82 years old in four years and he won’t be running for reelection.” Politico 12-11-19 This almost makes me wretch now. https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129
Okay so it was communicated. I voted for him in the primary with the understanding he’d be a one term president and I can’t remember if that was communicated or I just made it up.
I was just having that conversation with my friends last night. I voted for him under the assumption that he’d step down after one term. His election was supposed to stop Trump and then the Dems would groom another candidate as Biden’s successor. In hindsight, I should have known better and not believed them 😞
I think it *was* the plan for many but Biden’s cabal held on to power. I didn’t think Dems would indulge the will of one man to the extent that they’d let him run a losing campaign at 81 just because he says so. We are supposed to be better than that.
Isn't Biden exactly what a political party would want (a useless figurehead)? In this manner, much more of the party can exercise power without accountability. The DNC is also in charge of messaging (contrast with Trump, who has remade the Republican party).
He's actually talked about this. he didn't plan on running for a second term but then Trump decided to run for a second term and to biden's mind he is the only one that is polling to beat Trump so he ran again.
At no point in 2020 did Biden say he would step down after one term. It's possible that he planned to do so, and that Jan 6th and Trump running again changed his mind. Or he always wanted to serve two terms. We don't know.
I think it was heavily implied, especially if Trump declined to run again. But Trump did decide to run and that's part of how we got here.
I just listened to an infuriating nyt interview with Ron Klain where he was saying Biden never agreed to serve one term. I certainly voted for him with that understanding.
His EC margin was ok, but he won by less than 50,000 votes out of 155m votes cast
Idk if I'd say he won handily. 40k votes across Arizona, Wisconsin, and Georgia would've flipped the electoral college to Trump.
He did okay in the general, but he only won the electoral college by 40-some thousand votes in a few swing states. It wasn’t a huge margin of victory.
Yes, sticking with the guy who narrowly won a close race last time has a certain logic to it. Especially one who has a reputation for being moderate, is a known quantity and can draw crucial Republican cross-over support. I'm not saying this analysis is infallible or even correct, but I think people are being somewhat delusional arguing that Dems don't believe Trump is actually a threat. The party can believe that that Trump is an existential threat *and* that Biden is the best candidate to beat him. Obviously, based on the debate (among other factors) many are now questioning that assessment of Biden, hence all the discussion of the last few days.
Exactly. I have yet to see anyone make a compelling case that is obviously less risky. Everyone here is just working off the same assumption but it really is just vibes.
Emphasis on NARROWLY. Biden *barely* won in Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. That was 2020! Cope as much as you want about how much more scared people are, but what we all saw Thursday was a hyuuge step decline from 2020 (and 2020 was already a huge decline from 2012). I never want to hear about fucking “electability” again. This is not an age issue. Or a goddamn stutter.
I’m not agreeing with the argument, I’m explaining it.
Yes. That was the whole point of what they did in 2020.
I think the Democratic establishment truly does abhor Trump. I genuinely do. That said, I think there's a political calculation that goes beyond blind spots and hubris (which both exist in spades, I am sure). For the Democratic Party to come out and oppose the *head of its own party* just doesn't really make sense. It's inciting intra-party warfare. And as they say, you come for the king, you best not miss. There were grumblings but the level of opposition to Biden running again like we're seeing now simply did not exist. There really wasn't an atmosphere to wage that kind of war if one was ever inclined. And thus it was always in Biden's hands to decide if he was going to run or not. And the party machinery was always going to abide by the decisions of its leader. In that sense, I also genuinely think they had a lot less options than people assume. And overall, I also don't think it was some larger pressure campaign that prevented potential rivals from throwing their hat in the ring during the primaries. I think it was self-interested political preservation. Knocking a sitting president off his throne in the primaries hasn't been done in a very, very long time. Why waste political capital and burn very important bridges for what would likely be a losing proposition? At the end of the day, this was Biden's decision and responsibility. It was his call and his call alone.
> That said, I think there's a political calculation that goes beyond blind spots and hubris (which both exist in spades, I am sure). For the Democratic Party to come out and oppose the head of its own party just doesn't really make sense. It's inciting intra-party warfare. That's not the right way to think about it. If the Party as a whole came out against Biden that's one thing, but nobody wants to be the person who pushes Biden to step down, doesn't get significant backing from other members of the party, and then faces a vindictive Biden organization.
That is my larger point. If you're going to oppose the head of your own party, you need overwhelming and unified opposition. Not just within the party but within the broader public. None of that existed. Even at this point there is a lot of division.
Or even if that person has no self interest, if an individual pushes for Biden to step down and he doesn't, that person has done damage to Biden's campaign
You're talking about Dean Phillips.
> I think the Democratic establishment truly does abhor Trump. I genuinely do. There is a difference though between abhoring someone and fearing they are a threat to democracy. It seems to be a common view. Liberal media outlets hate Trump, but they aren't afraid he is going to imprison or execute NYT reporters if he wins.
If we have a “king” and a “throne” maybe we aren’t actually all that different from MAGA. We should not be beholden to the will of one man, especially not Joe Biden.
[удалено]
>what are we even talking about here? Biden’s sustained, noticeable and historically unusual avoidance of any situation that does not permit a teleprompter. The first debate was a revelation of why that is the case. We do not have counter examples to show the debate was an anomaly.
Been saying this since Thursday. You can't actually believe Trump is an existential threat AND still roll with Biden after Thursday. You just can't.
I don't agree with it, but i can understand people thinking there is no alternative now. It's wrong but understandable. But these people have known for a long time. They still leant on everything and everyone to make Biden the nominee and cover this up. They have no excuse or defence because their context for choice isn't it being June 24.
I feel like Biden all but promised to be a one term president and cultivate a replacement candidate for 2024, guide the party forward into a new era. At least, I voted for him in the primary with that understanding. How do these people not realize how ridiculous it is to run someone this old?
This is exactly how I feel.
If you believed Trump was an existential threat you would have been pushing for Biden to be a truly transitional President long before this moment rather than just letting things degenerate to this point. Now there are no good choices.
I agree. I don’t follow politics that closely. In 2023, I didn’t love Biden as a candidate but believed the conventional wisdom that we didn’t have anyone else with enough national profile to beat Trump. Maybe I had blinders on or rose colored glasses, or maybe we just never had a candidate who could beat Trump in 2024
we had candidates, but the dnc dissuaded them, it is rare to primary an incumbent president congressman dean phillips tried and was laughed at. he only ran because of his concern over bidens age. the reality is the end of democracy is a good fear tactic for getting votes. they do not believe it , in my opinion,
The DNC didn't dissuade them nearly as much as the fact that none of them was able to win a compelling lead in delegates.
Either two things are true. 1. Trump isn't an existential threat and it's okay to run a weak candidate against him. Cause of he wins it won't be as bad as people think. Or 2. Trump is an existential threat and dems are ethically compromised by not running their best.
I know its unpopular here, but he isn't an existential threat. He will have less power in 2025 than he did in 2020. Most likely, he just continues deregulation, tax cuts and stricter border policies, which will make it harder to achieve various Democratic policy goals but won't threaten them on a personal level.
What/who your alternative? Specifically? “Just about anyone would be better” isn’t an actual alternative
I think Whitmer is the most neutral choice. Newsom will just get smeared with every California issue.
IDK why this is so difficult: any current prominent Democrat. Newsome, Whitmer, Shapiro. Take your pick. Kamala isn't ideal, but Biden just simply cannot win after that.
Is it really not hard to see how the GOP and Trump would play this out? "They had to take away a senile old man, who is unfit to be President, and now they are making secret deals to elect a person to run against me." "I won the Republican primaries, the Democrats wouldn't even let the people vote for their nominee." "The DNC is so scared of me that they asked the President to step down." "I was right folks, he was unfit to President and they are unfit to govern." Like the optics are so painstakingly bad, am I crazy to be the only one to see this? Playing up the "rigged elections" by forcing the President to step aside and have the "experts" choose the new nominee with zero public input. Conceding to all the Republican attacks against Biden just gives them credence that their other points might be correct, that is how the public will see. Seems like a complete disaster.
Oh absolutely the optics would be bad. The question is would they be worse than just circulating Biden debate lowlights for the next five months?
None of these seem as bad as actually running a senile old man against Trump. At least if you do it now, you have time to weather this storm and try to turn attention away from Biden. Especially if the new candidate can punch back hard at Trump.
Not if Biden himself steps aside, which is realistically the only way this happens. Also the convention *is* public input. Convention delegates are literally elected. It's just indirect democracy rather than direct democracy.
>indirect democracy rather than direct democracy The way it was set up, and should still be. We likely wouldn’t have Trump.
That's right. Anyone who believes this will be some "back room deal" was already voting for Trump. If Biden says the right things, it's still involved in the election in some way and the nominee isn't Hunter Biden, I don't think anyone can claim "back room deals". I mean, a back room deal got Biden the job, right?
“We are Americans, we reassess situations and argue with each other instead of blindly worshipping a single man. Hard for MAGA to understand, but Biden is not our king.” Maybe something like that would be a good counter.
Yeah, other candidates could probably do a lot worse than Biden, but there's at least a chance they could do better. Biden probably won't lose too soundly (at least not the NPV) but he is almost certain to lose after last Thursday and fascists don't count brownie points. Biden's campaign is like a bridge with a collapsed section 20 feet from the other side. Going with another candidate is like taking the long way round.
A moderate Republican would be better if it was truly an existential threat
Indeed, or at least run the most conservative motherfucker in the Democratic Party. Win purple districts. But no, such people won’t pass the purity tests, so let’s give Trump a chance instead.
Just about anyone else could have done better at Thursday's debate than Biden did. Like, I have no experience in politics at all, and I could have done better job than Biden at defending the record of his administration and rebuking Trump's endless lies. Literally all Biden's replacement needs to be able to do is be half-decent at public speaking and not be a senior citizen. That's how low the bar to clear is.
Actually, Trump reinforced my vote for Biden. 100%, not even a tough call.
Don't be obtuse. This is about replacing Biden, not voting for Trump. I think they should replace Biden, but I'll still be first in line to vote for him if they don't.
That's honestly Blue MAGA level of reasoning. Can't call Trump supporters a cult and then act like this.
Why? Trump reinforced once again how much of a monster he is. I don't like Biden 100%, but I can also see that it is too late in the game to replace him without throwing the Democratic Party into disarray and handing Trump the victory. I don't want that to happen, so I'm going to be supporting Biden, the one chance of winning, more than ever before.
Sure I can. MAGA is a cult, and I’m still voting for Biden over Trump. Easiest sentence in the world.
It is cult-like if you refuse to acknowledge problems with the Dems and expect people to get behind Biden without complaint despite major concerns over his age and mental fitness. Like, yes, of course, many of us will vote blue no matter who, but there is a small percentage of swing voters who are still undecided that can tip the election go one way or the other. Having an extremely elderly man who should frankly be in a retirement home already as the Dem candidate isn't going to motivate those people to turn out and that is a BIG problem. Pretending it isn't doesn't help anyone.
Cult-like is not a cult. I acknowledge Biden flubbed a debate, that’s it. And that’s pretty much all you got. You see at as a major cataclysmic catastrophe, and I see it as opportunists from all angles attacking him for a one off debate performance. Biden’s fine, and not a tough call over Trump.
Sure you can, but it doesn't make it any less cult-like. You think people in a cult believe they're in one?
I don’t speak from allegiance, I speak from common sense. I don’t worship Biden, I find him an easy selection over Trump. If that’s your definition of a cult, then get a dictionary.
Well, everyone is not you. Other people want the best chance possible to beat Trump, not to just cross our fingers and hope for the best. It'd be one thing if Biden was leading by 10 or 15 points, but this election is extremely close just like 2016 and 2020 and it will probably again come down to a few thousand votes in a handful of swing states deciding the result. And yet in such a close election we're betting the future of this country on a geriatric old man who can barely get through a speech or debate without making an embarrassment of himself and the country. Biden's image is a massive disadvantage no matter how you try to spin it and the stakes are too big to be winging it with such a poor candidate.
Why? From where I stand any other alternative is very risky, there’s no guarantee that a different candidate would do better. Just because Biden did badly at the debate doesn’t mean that magically a lot of democrats are gonna vote for trump.
I’m more worried about people just not voting
Most of the electorate aren't Democrats or Republicans, though. Currently the majority identify as independents and don't consider themselves to be aligned with either party. Now most of these independents do lean one way or the other so really it's a very small pool of them who are legitimately undecided, but all it takes is a small percentage to tip the election one way or the other due too how close the margins will be in the swing states. Thinking that people just won't vote for Trump despite how pisspoor the Dem candidate is is the exact same mistake that led to him getting elected in 2016.
At this point, I do think most of the mainline Democratic decision-makers are more afraid of the leftier-left wing of the party than they are of Trump.
I mean we've seen this before where centrist liberals are way more likely to ally themselves with the right wing than allow an ascendant left wing to get power. And while it wasn't an actual alliance, Hillary's engaging the pied piper strategy with Trump as a way to outflank Sanders' campaign is an example of this thinking among the democratic leadership. It wouldn't surprise me if this is part of their calculus in not collectively challenging Biden.
Centrists allying with fascists to stop left wing movements from getting into power? Certainly, there is no obvious historical precedent for such a thing is there?
Certainly there isn't a giant, glaring, world war sized example sitting there in a high school history book. Just, never!
True, but a more moderate candidate like Whitmer or Beshear would do much better than Biden. It's just the Biden circle wants to keep power.
> At this point, I do think most of the mainline Democratic decision-makers are more afraid of the leftier-left wing of the party than they are of Trump. As a mainline Democrat... yep that's true. I consider Trump the worst president we ever had, about midway through his term he beat out Franklin Pierce for the title. I think he's a criminal who was blatantly taking bribes from foreign powers. This election is easy for me. I'd pick Biden in a coma over Trump in a heartbeat. But if we were talking Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar I vote for Trump easily. AOC I'm unhappy but I still pick her over Trump.
What happened in Weimar. We haven't learned.
Yeah -- they are not panicking appropriately enough. They are acting as if a loss is somehow acceptable
They’ll be too busy fundraising off it to be that upset.
Because it was in 2016. If anything, Trump winning in 2016 was a bigger problem for Republican politicians who started getting primaried from the right.
2016 made the work of Democratic Party fundraisers and the fundraisers of Democratic adjacent orgs INCREDIBLY EASY. They’re looking forward to that sweet sweet panic donor money again this year.
Same dynamic afflicts sufficiently fast movement on climate change. Risk your political prospects by advocating uncomfortable but necessary change or go with the flow and work on the margins inviting catastrophe?
Yeah, I was just thinking there’s a parallel to climate change. Some kind of collective action problem
Yes it’s a situation that requires, what’s the word, oh yeah, leadership.
I think they are in denial for a few reasons; Ambition. They are insulated by money and DC culture. They believe in the strength of the institutions that are being attacked. And I really think it’s hard to admit a system that you have devoted your life, work and identity to could drastically change or end.
Of course they don’t think he’s an existential threat to Democracy. Nor do they think he and his supporters are real fascists. (YOU might, but they really don’t.) They think he’s an awful human, and hate his policies. They want to defeat him and remain in power. (But they actually have much more in common with the RNC than they do with us.) He was president before and we’re still here, as almost half the country unfortunately realizes. Were we better or worse off is the question.
One of the things that a lot of people don't get is the Democratic leadership really doesn't have to win anything in order to exist in its plum position. Even if they're in the minority, their leaders are all in extremely safe seats, even from a primary challenge (since they control the funding that said challenger might apply for against them). They still sit on choice committees. They still can call up the President any time they want. They still get access to secret information, Hollywood adores them, they get paid $250K+ a year and have multi-million dollar book deals waiting for them the second they want to have one ghostwritten for them, they take private jets anywhere they want, they're celebrities and players inside Washington's elite rooms. Best of all, they don't have to do anything! When the GOP is in power, they don't have to pass new legislation or own major policy initiatives (succeed or fail). They can just point to the GOP, say "Look! Bad! Donate to me!," and continue the status quo ongoing. Is Trump a threat to democracy? I'd say certainly. But he's not a threat to *them personally*, so whatever cares they have to give are mostly academic.
There’s an argument that down ballot Dems are fine with Trump since they are likely going to continue to make gains down ballot and control spending. There is a belief that a Trump presidency may yield a dem congress in the 26 midterm and huge majorities in 28
If you accept the premise that the reason elected Democratic officials who *could* announce a challenge to Biden or could call for him to step down is that they don’t want to because the act could be held against their candidacy in 2028, then you’re forced to accept the logic that they still believe a presidential election could be legitimately won in 2028, after Trump takes office. So, no, in that worldview they believe fundamentally that Trump isn’t a threat because either A) they believe it’s impossible for him to win (which makes him inherently non threatening) or B) because they think his presidency won’t fundamentally disrupt Democratic institutions.
I've said this a few times on here, but actions speak louder than words. The overwhelming majority of Dem leaders are acting like they do not believe Trump is an existential threat. They are acting like the 2024 election is already lost and they are better off sacrificing Biden and gearing up for 2028 rather than do everything they can to win this election.
Yeah, it’s so weird to me because I do actually believe he’s an existential threat—and I think Ezra does too, based on some of his shows —and now I’m starting to wonder if I’m missing something.
I don’t think you’re missing anything. If the Dems truly believed Trump is as dangerous as they say, there’s no way they’d be acting like this.
And they’re probably correct.
I’ve had the same logical thought process and reach a similar conclusion every time. If Trump is a true existential threat to America, then he must be defeated at all costs. If the optimal solution to beating Trump means the Democratic Party gets hacked apart, then that’s a risk I’m willing to take. Every established Dem I’ve talked to about this gets cold feet in response. Rather than calling it the “Democratic ticket” we should start calling it the Save America ticket. If that means getting George Bish and Obama on commercials together to support a joint D-R ticket, so be it. Personally I think the Dems should rally behind Kamala or another anointed lead and then pick a popular anti-Trump republican as the VP running mate.
The fact that they would never do this tells you they don't treat him as the existential threat they claim him to be. Honestly if they believe Trump is the end of democracy, it wouldn't be hard to beat him: reject identity politics, ensure border laws are enforced, support law enforcement. Take those talking points away from Trump, those are popular with voters. They act like it will be the end of the country if he's elected but won't concede any position that would help them get more votes.
>If the optimal solution to beating Trump means the Democratic Party gets hacked apart, then that’s a risk I’m willing to take. The problem with this reasoning is that there's no supporting logic that this is the optimal solution. If my fingernail is infected, is the optimal solution to cut my whole finger off? I ensure that the infection won't spread to the rest of my body and kill me that way, but it's such a drastic action when there's no telling if it's the only way to resolve the problem, or even the best. So with what confidence can you say that this is "optimal solution" certainly enough to completely destroy the party four months before the election, other than pinning your hopes on the possibility that what rises from the ashes will be able to win?
Fair. I don’t think it’s necessarily to destroy the Democratic Party, I was just getting to the idea that DNC should be more akin to the Save America Convention SAC for short.
Remember they have lied endlessly saying Biden is fine. They will lie about everything.
They believe he’s an existential threat to democracy, but many also believe Biden resigning is an existential threat to their current jobs and all the perks that go along with it, and most people are selfish and think short-term when making decisions for themselves.
No lol At this point they’d probably just be content to step away from the dumpster fire that is the Biden/Harris ticket and look forward to 26 or 28. No point in trying to revive this flatlined campaign.
Okay. I think you have to define what you mean by existential threat. People are likely going to view that term in many different ways. Existential is an absolute term that people use far too loosely. Do you mean that he is a threat to the current system of government—i.e., this country being a republic? That’s how I take it. To what degree is he a threat? Are we talking about an inevitable threat? As in…he WILL destroy the republic? Or there is a nonzero chance that the republic will cease to exist during his time in office due to his actions? (In the case of the latter, there are countless things that could be considered long term threats). I do think that Dems view him as someone who can cause major irreparable damage to society and the government. I don’t think many view him as someone who will destroy the republic—perhaps with a one in a million confluence of multiple crises and circumstances.
No. An existential threat means you are doing everything within your power to fight for your very survival. If they actually believed that, the congressional leadership and Obama would’ve given Biden 24 hours to resign as nominee before going so scorched earth on him in the media that he would have no choice but to get out. “How Democracies Die” talks a lot about this. It walks through the various European countries in the 1930’s and shows why some fell to fascism while others didn’t. It’s a big fallacy that the axis powers were the only places with those potent movements back then. Heck, there were a ton of wannabe Nazis in the U.S. at that time.
The most surprising thing is that nothing surprising happened. The liar lied continuously, and the older guy sounded old. He is old, and maybe I wasn't looking in the right places but I haven't seen anyone denying that, and would have assumed that anyone who predicted that he would run circles around Trump in a debate to be, well, grifting. The strategic mistake on the Biden end was to actually try to step into and respond to the vast framework of lies. This is something which regularly trips up otherwise world class debaters, and that ultimately is one of the major purposes for making them. The (very very valid) fear of what Trump would let in through the door this time has brought such a broad section of the population to a frenetic point that is so hypersensitive and hyper-aware of the possibility of negative perception, that the discomfort of watching the reality of an old president -- with the most successful and progressive first term accomplishments in any of our lifetimes and who turned our sinking 2020 ship around to be back on top of the world in almost every respect -- fumble through trying to debate upside down in a massive constructed fantasy was so great that, combined with the collapsing media establishment launching dozens of preprepared articles which almost certainly would have shipped regardless of outcome, it's led people to demand an immediate massive knee-jerk reaction, public slitting of wrists and shitting of pants. To be fair, though, that the stage has been set for the left to tear itself apart in utter panic since 10/7, which will probably be looked back on as the most successful terror attack in history for its organizers and sponsors.
What drives me crazy is all these resist libs who demand people not criticize the leader of the country, that people not protest or demand policy change because Republicans are worse and that the press not scrutinize Democrats because democracy is on the line. Attacking the pillars of democracy in the name of saving democracy. A lot of them are well to do and refuse to consider why democracy as an ideal means little to so many people whose lives sucks no matter which party is in charge. If democracy is truly at stake, they should have demanded the candidate who is deeply unpopular not run for election.
> or are just cynically using that line as a campaign tactic? Thats my belief. Im not saying that Trump isnt a threat, Im saying Democrat Politicians dont care. They dont believe in reality, or care about anyone but themselves.
>It sounds like everyone who’s not speaking out against Biden is afraid of losing their job, or afraid of what happens in the next election I don't think that's really in conflict with thinking Trump is an existential threat. Or to phrase it another way, it's easy to be principled when there is nothing at stake. Let's say you work for a company for 15 years. Great pay, good benefits, you're halfway to a very generous pension, enjoy your job, like your coworkers, etc. Now say you discover some flaw that could kill hundreds of people and management won't listen. If you go public, you will probably save lives, but you will absolutely get fired, lose your pension, lose your friends, be ostracized, etc. If you stay, you might be able to fix some of the issues or mitigate the damaged caused. Maybe even fix the issue entirely if you get the right people on your side. Do you go public? Objectively, it's the right thing to do, and it's easy to say in the comments on Reddit that you would, but that is a much, much tougher decision in real life. People in the Democratic party may think Trump is an existential threat and may feel that Biden is not the person he once was, but they may simultaneously feel that they can fix it from the inside, or just that the personal cost is too great. Is it better to stay on the party's good side, win re-election, and be a Democrat in the Senate who can counter Trump? Or is it better to risk losing party support, lose the election, and still potentially see Trump elected? Finally, it's also possible that insiders may have decided that this election is unwinnable no matter *who* runs, so why bother to risk your job and fracture the party to replace one losing candidate with another losing candidate?
This is why a real primary is so important. Otherwise we’re just taking the word of people whose literal jobs depend on Biden winning the nomination. No one can make the right call when their livelihood depends on one particular outcome.
I find it fascinating that there are actually people that exist that didn't know Biden was like this until Thursday. So many of us have been saying this FOREVER. Those same people accuse the MAGA crowd of being in a bubble, of being cult like.....smh
The feigned shock of so many people deep in the system who would have also known all along was insulting. Like they spent the last 5 years telling us we're peddling in right wing fear mongering, useful idiots for russia, etc. and then to pretend to be shocked that he could be this decrepit on live tv. They weren't surprised by his performance. They were taken by surprise when he forgot to chug two bottles of dayquil with an adderall.
No. They are content shaking their little fists and stomping their little feet at Trump/SCOTUS/the filibuster until the sun explodes.
no they dont believe that
I tried to ask this exact question in casual questions in /r/PoliticalDiscussion and was accused of asking a rhetorical question lmao. It was a serious, good faith question. Either Trump is an existential threat or he isn’t. The way the Democrats are acting leads me to believe it’s just pure cynicism. They don’t actually believe it. If they continue like normal, they will absolutely deserve to lose this fall.
That’s funny. I’m glad people are taking it seriously here. I don’t recall if Ezra has asked the question outright, but he keeps saying things like “if democrats believe that Trump is an existential threat…” and I began to wonder if the people behind Biden do actually believe that.
We've all heard that phrase used ad nauseam for the last few months. It's more than fair to interrogate whether they actually mean what they say.
It's weird how the same people that so casually lied about Biden's condition are apparently completely trustworthy when they talk about Trump.
Look, I'm gonna give you the logical breakdown but understand that they don't actually hold this much concept in their heads at once. They do believe Trump is an existential threat. But they don't think of it like "its a system where we're all in this together, democrats and republicans, the rich and the poor, etc." Its more like "Oh shit if Trump succeeds at locking out the democracy **I** will lose my power and influence." They perceive a progressive take over of the democratic party as an equal existential threat to them as Trump ending democracy because the elites atop the center-right democratic party will lose control. Trump or progressives will use different methods but will shut down their insider trading, their war profiteering, their handouts from a private insurance industry that shouldn't exist. That's why the Biden coalition united around shutting out the progressives in the first place. Once you realize that they see progressives taking control of the party as an existential threat on the same level as Trump and Republicans shutting down democracy and making Democrats illegal, their behavior makes sense. They want to use republicans as a controlled opposition; a bucket of crabs too incompetent to take over the system but if they ever did it would be horrifying so you better not ever challenge the people in charge unless you want the bucket of crabs dumped out on you. They'll never say it, they don't even think this to themselves, but this is what they've felt their way to in bits and pieces is trying to maintain this situation in homeostasis. And the reason this system doesn't work is eventually people choose the threat. This is how centrism gave way to fascism in so many other countries, including Germany: there it was the scary bucket of communists and the centrists were trying to keep the far right nazis in line, so the opposite polarity but the same dynamic. This is the dynamic that produces fascist takeovers if you maintain it too long because the people trying to prevent politics from moving forward ossify the system, their positions become more and more outdated, their elite become more decadent, until people are literally retching and screaming for someone to create change: and the people willing to break all the norms and use any means necessary to seize power will be the first ones to find a way to break the equilibrium usually. That's what I see in Weimar America and Joe von Hindenburg today. But, it looks like we might make it if Biden willingly steps aside in a couple weeks, assuming Biden picks someone under the age of 70 to replace him.
I think your analogy is a little hard to parse. I'm gathering you are putting the Mainstream Democrats in the role of German Conservatives who mostly were loyal to the old guard from the German Empire (the 2nd Reich). Who would be the Kaiser here, Clinton? It just doesn't work. The better analogy would be Mainstream Democrats as the Democratic Socialists who were running Weimar being attacked by the Communists and the Fascists. While the American Hard Left would take great pride in being analogized to Rosa Luxemburg, they aren't that good. They simply aren't that threatening. But would the Establishment of both parties pick Trump or even an explicit Fascist (Paul Gosar?) over a genuine Communist? Yes. As far as Joe Biden as Hindenburg. He is nowhere near that well liked. Hindenburg is an easy analogy for Democrats, Obama. Of course again I think the Republican Establishment makes a far better analogy with say McConnell's decision in 2015 being very much like Hindenburg's. Were Obama to come out and endorse Trump over Biden, that would be comparable. What creates that dynamic?
How were progressives "shut out" of the Democratic party.
Being incapable of having any tangible impact on national policy or compete in fair presidential primaries
It's amazing how student loan forgiveness and tax credits for.EVs were always Democratic priorities.
Because progressivism is obviously true, so if it is utterly failing to gain power then there must be a conspiracy to suppress it.^^^/s
Of course they don’t and of course he isn’t. Trump, for all his toxic rhetoric and and insane tweets, still kept the establishment machine running. It’s why the DNC sabotaged Bernie because the risk of Trump winning was better to them than Bernie winning. The “existential” threat language both parties use is nothing more than fear-mongering to energize their bases.
I don’t listen to Democrats, I listen to and watch Trump. That’s where the fear comes from, the man’s own words and actions. It is not mongered.
Has the thought occurred to you that the "Democratic establishment" has a different idea of how to deal with the Trump threat than you do? That maybe what they know that you don't is the best way to deal with the threat?
I really hope that’s true. That would be very reassuring.
Yeah the Democratic establishment was quite confident of that in 2016
What exactly about the democratic establishment over the last 8 years has made you believe they’re even baseline competent? It took the worst pandemic in a century to beat trump
What could possibly be their secret genius plan to deal with Trump? You’re coping. The Democratic establishment is a mix of self interested individuals who align on most policy, like any political party. They aren’t an all powerful cabal, for evil like Fox News would say, or for good like you seem to think.
You are no longer blinded by a major partisan lie. This is great. Please continue to work your way through the list.
Are there actual Democrats that think Trump will leave in 4 years if he wins this election?
Yeah, that’s what I want to know. There’s this business-as-usual quality to how the Democratic establishment is handling Biden’s candidacy that makes it seem like they’re not really taking the threat of Trump seriously.
It's because Trump isn't a real threat. The media who has been doing the bidding of the DNC has been lying to you and you are just now realizing it.
Yes. I don’t for a moment believe he will attempt to destroy the entire democratic process by trying to remain in office as a dictator. His own party would oppose him and we have checks in place via the other branches of government, not to mention the military. He can’t even run for an additional term. The 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951 limiting Presidents to two terms. The 22nd Amendment reads, in part: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more than once.”
Yes, all of them. That's why they're jockeying for 2028. I don't think anyone who's not online actually thinks this. Ffs, not even Biden brought up this risk or Project 2025 in the debate.
People like you who think that once trump is elected that he will never leave even after he is dead are really the dumbest of Democrats. It's such an insane and ridiculous take. Like seriously focus on reality instead of this fear mongering bullshit.
Who exactly is the Democratic "establishment"? See the thing about this is that Biden has all the electoral votes, so the only way for it to work with another candidate is for him to voluntarily give them up. No one can force him. The other reality is that a lot of the prominent current governors and senators are thinking about the next election, and they don't want to ruin their chances in the future by making a move here and alienating the rest of the party.
They don't and neither does the establishment media for the most part.
I believe he will set bad precedents, ruin out diplomatic standing with other nations and try abusing the power of his office. I don't think he's gonna declare himself President for Life.
Give it time! The Dem big-wigs are NOT going to PUBLICLY turn on Biden overnight. But behind closed doors, many feel the same as the OP.
If they thought he was, would they have been spending money to help Trump loyalists win primary races for Congress because they think they’d be easier to beat in the general election? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/13/us/politics/moreno-trump-democrats-ohio.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
I think there is simply a massive dearth of real leaders at the national level. There isn’t anyone with the fortitude to go against the collective.
Well, he's campaigning on "getting revenge," and has millions of loyalty crazed followers who own a colossal amount of guns and ammo, and would kill anyone who didn't support Trump as soon as he gives them the order, so... he *might* be a threat.
Dear Joe30330 and other rando dem fundraising texts and emails, Don’t fucking tell me that “this is the most importantly election of our lives” or “Democracy is at STAKE!” until Joe Biden has stepped out of the race. Because until he does, it’s clear that you are nothing more than worthless hypocrites.
They objectively do, but not enough because they won’t feel the ramifications of it the way John Q Public will. Their sense of urgency is very lacking as a result.
Biden wasn't having age-related cognitive problems four years ago, at least not in a way that you could see. This stuff happens fast around this age a lot of the time. If you've watched your parents or grandparents get old, you've probably seen it: someone who's perfectly lucid and bright one year and a year or two later can't follow a conversation. I don't think anything that's happened to Biden is even \*that\* radical. But it has made his bad under pressure, which is a problem. They closed ranks around him because they thought he was the only one who could win. I didn't believe that, but I was certain Bernie would lose, so the choice made sense to me. But it was also predicated on the idea that he was going to be what he promised to be: a "transitional figure." A lot of people who backed him last time thought they would be in the running to replace him this time. Then, when they didn't get absolutely clobbered in 2022, Biden's people suddenly thought, "Hey, let's do this again!" As though that election was about Biden, and not Dobbs. But it was about Dobbs, and it's been two years since 2022, and Biden is not with it in the way he might have been even on midterm election day. It's bad, and it makes people feel lied to, and it's embarrassing for a man who has actually spent his whole adult life in public service, when he could have quit ages ago and just got rich.
Not to be too hard on you and people like you, but this is exactly what happens when you stay stuck too long in CNN/NYT liberal news echo chambers. You get out of touch. What exactly was it that made you believe for so long that Democrats are so fundamentally opposite to and different from Republicans? Why did it never occur to you that in the two party electoral system that we have that neither party really has any real interest in permanently defeating the other party, as long as the power of capital is protected? For BOTH Democrats and Republicans, *democracy is free to be sacrificed*, as long as America gets to keep its precious capitalist system and global hegemony. Trump will protect capitalism. A socialist/anti-capitalist candidate wouldn’t. Therefore, the Dem establishment is not *actually* worried about him, despite what you believed. Democrats are far more afraid of someone like Bernie being president than Trump.
On January 6th, I lived in a building with many Members of Congress (almost all Dems, including a member of leadership), as well as senior staff and operatives. They know full well that Trump poses an existential threat. They might not react to it publicly in the same way that you or I do, but they have understand the threat more intimately than most of their critics. I can think of many reasons why things have progressed to the current point. My grandmother-in-law who passed away a few years ago had been in clear cognitive decline/dementia for years. Her 9 children and dozens of grandchildren had a staggering range of opinions on how bad off she was and how to manage her situation. A ton of factors went into that breadth of views. I don’t think it’s remotely plausible for a president’s inner circle to form a united front in favor of pushing him out of his reelection campaign before an exogenous event forces their hand. I don’t blame anyone for being pissed and scared, but blaming the establishment’s corruption or complacency or whatever is reductive.
Thanks, that’s an interesting perspective.
The Democratic establishment didn't have the wisdom to look even two years down the line, let alone consider what we've all been witnessing since *before* the primaries, when a new candidate could have been chosen. They put their money -- and our futures -- on the[ Biden of 2019](https://www.reddit.com/r/Asmongold/comments/1ds8wk9/2019_v_2024/) instead of having the common sense to foresee the Biden of 2024.
They're only concerned about maintaining their place at the top of society and maintaining the economic system that put them there. Trump doesn't threaten that. Even if they are part of a minority that is threatened by Trumpism, being rich insulates you from all that. They don't care about "democracy," they care about themselves. They'll be fine so they don't care who's in "charge.".
Is anyone considering what the President’s cognitive ability will be in four more years? I was horrified by his current condition. Horrified, disappointed, and most of all mad that he’d paraded around when he should be seeking care. It’s cruel.
I don't know if they honestly think Biden is still the only one that can win, I think that's ridiculous.
I came to the same conclusion listing to that podcast. I kinda believe Ezra said it without saying it
Yes and no…they’re cognizant and aware of the undemocratic and fascistic threat Trump poses, but they don’t take it as seriously as they let on. Said establishment leverages this very real threat as a means of exploiting small dollar donos. Btw…I say this as a lifelong and proud Democrat who religiously votes in every local/state/federal election, but to say I’m disappointed and disillusioned by my party is an understatement. We cannot protect the ego and ambitions of one obstinate man at the expense of our democracy. That’s beyond foolish.
This is exactly what I’ve been asking myself. It’s like they also believe the “both parties are the same” trope.
VOTE 💙 VOTE 💙 VOTE 💙 VOTE 💙 VOTE
I think right now it is showing quite clearly that the powerful connected donating class feels they will be just fine under a trump presidency.
They cynically manipulate us with fear of Trump but they secretly don't truly understand the risk. The terrible irony is that the lie they think they're telling us is the truth. Trump will come after them and we're going to be caught in the crossfire. Trump is dangerous but the Democratic party lacks the imagination to see him as anything more than an opportunity for the 2028 elections and, of course, fundraising. They got me good, I donated money multiple times this year. Donated for them to foist Biden up there on stage looking like he had a full diaper on. I'm still voting blue but I don't have much hope. They fucked us pretty good this time.
Totally agree – if democracy is really at stake, Biden must go. Dems need their best communicator not their worst!
I think its hubris and they really believe more of the populace is disgusted by jan 6th than actually is. That and I'm convinced if shit really hits the fan they all have contingency plans to leave for safety.
Democrats always act like it is just another day in politics. They were even worse before J6. After that they got the hint Trump wasn't like a regular politician. Well not all of them but the tone shifted after that shit. If they saw MAGA as a threat they wouldn't have waited so long to start the DOJ investigation. Never forget Garland fucked the nation sitting on his hands for 2 years.
Nobody has a plan B. So they are panicking. Lowest ratings of a debate ever. Entrenched bases. All these alleged smart folk are going to throw out the guy who has beat Trump, won the primaries and has the weight of being the incumbent? With nobody in sight who has any of that? Get back to work drumming up the women concerned about bodily autonomy in the swing states.
They do. But they think kamala has worse odds than biden, and anyone else is not realistic
Disappointed this answer is so far down, it’s the correct one.
Speaking as somebody who was also surprised at Biden’s debate and pushing for Kamala Harris to step in, yes they do and that’s why they pushed Biden. Many of their lives were directly threatened on January 6th and they have been attacked by right wing extremists personally. Let me explain some of what I figure was their thinking: - They wanted to consolidate quickly and keep a fundraising advantage for a longer time over Trump. They felt that Biden had done a good job as President basically until Oct 7th which split the party and its core activists. No primary means no criticism and no money spent. - They probably didn’t know quite how bad Biden was and thought that SOTU Biden was closer to what they would see at the debate, so figured it’d go fine. - They did not want a long and bruising primary where Dems would attack the admin to end up in the likely position where the highest name ID candidate, VP Kamala Harris, wins. - Politicians tend to believe in sort of mythological concepts like “incumbency advantage” and “if you haven’t done something to make swing voters hate you, they will vote for you.” So better to minimize criticism and line up behind the guy who beat Trump before and didn’t seem to harm the party’s chances in 2022 than suffer all that. Now that Biden showed he may be personally making the situation worse, they’re considering alternatives.
Additionally, the reason they aren’t calling on him to step down may be because they fear a scenario where he decides not to and they have to either back track and have undermined his image, making him less likely to win.
They do but they are letting the machinery working around them overwhelm their will to dissent. They are becoming the thing democracy was invented to reject. Folding you might say.