• ralphio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      He dropped over 2 points to Trump since the debate and I doubt more public appearances from him were gonna help especially since he already committed to another debate. He’s outside the margin of error for winning any sunbelt state and losing everywhere in the rustbelt. It’s not impossible that he would have won but seems pretty improbable.

      • Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        It would have taken some big, unexpected developments for him to win at this stage. Especially after the failed assassination attempt invigorated and united Trump’s cult further.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        especially since he already committed to another debate.

        It’s actually the opposite problem. There’s wasn’t going to be another debate for Biden to potentially redeem himself. Trump wasn’t going to do with another debate with him to give him that chance, why would he? He didn’t debate anyone in the primaries, because he didn’t need to. He wasn’t going to give Biden a chance to prove “it was just a bad night.”

        But with Harris as the candidate, Trump has to do another debate or he’ll look weak. In the next debate Trump will look like the guy that’s too old. Which he is, just didn’t look that way next to Biden.

    • Stupidmanager@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      I mean, reading between the lines, something else is wrong with biden. His age wasn’t all that helpful in the current situation, and then he gets sick? If he has only Covid, then we were in for 2+ months of a foggy candidate who already had questionable levels of clarity. No, this is not reckless, this is trying to save the election from an almost assured trump win.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        The only recklessness I see is waiting til the 11th hour to read the writing on the wall. Someone posted in a different thread that Biden even stated in 2019 that he was only going to run a single term. The party leadership has had 4 years to choose a proper successor but chose party over country instead.

        • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Someone posted in a different thread that Biden even stated in 2019 that he was only going to run a single term

          He didn’t. He said he saw himself as a transitional candidate, but never outright said single term.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Down 3% is horrible. In swing states, he is losing even worse while Democratic Senators are polling up.

      • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        I just don’t understand this with a non-felon, non-rapist candidate. Biden and those Democratic Congressional candidates are running on the same platform.

    • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      2020 was pretty close and Biden’s image hasn’t gotten any better and clearly wasn’t going to. He was never going to win.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Would have been better if he did this last year, would have allowed for a normal primary, rather than the clustefuck that is going to happen over the next month.

      • Reyali@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Though even this delayed back out might be what the DNC wanted all along. Primaries in the last two elections showed there are a lot of people who want Bernie or other less-establishment politicians. By waiting so long, they basically get to name whomever they want without pretending they should listen to voters.

        “The only thing worse than bad leadership is broken leadership” is a quote from my favorite book, and I can imagine the DNC operating from this perspective. Campaigns and primaries would have broken up the party’s voters, and they might just be banking on whatever call they can make themselves.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      If you want lockstep unity you get to be fascist, too. Just like the republicans.

      The best thing about Dems and libs is their general inclusivity. We want to have everyone to have a voice and a place to exist in the government. Shared control over the direction of the country. We want to exist and have lives free of violence, prejudice and misogyny, among other things, and to be who we are. But that’s also a drawback. Every group has their special interest. That’s hard to work with. If they don’t feel that their special interest has been advanced in some way they tend to sit on their hands. Vote third party. Not vote at all. We have a LOT of people all pulling in slightly different directions at the same time.

      The republicans? They really have only one simple agenda, and that’s god, guns, and fuck the liberal agenda. And they show up to vote to do just that.

    • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It seems reckless, but the people who were pushing it were party insiders and big donors like George Clooney. I am not sure if it was a good idea, but I figure they must see things we don’t.