He's out.

I think what I'm missing is some kind of action plan. Everyone seems to be content with voicing their concern but then the Biden circle has already made plenty clear they're not going to step aside. — Echarmion

I think there's starting to become a more organized movement here as more time passes and Biden continues to not reassure his party while pissing them off with his arrogance. It's clear that leadership is not happy with him and are not letting things move on as much as the Biden campaign would like to pretend like nothing happened.

So either there is some avenue to remove him, in which case they need to pursue it. Or there isn't in which case further complaining just hurts them. But what it looks like is they simply cannot figure out what to do. — Echarmion

There's always challenging him at the convention and putting up somebody else which is an extreme measure that's very unlikely but who knows with a party that finds Biden's presence increasingly unacceptable. One could argue that it may hurt Biden's chances if they continue to complain, but as more and more polling suggests he's a goner anyways and will drag the entire party down with him, then there's also reason to think that it won't matter much anyways so might as well complain.

I wonder why there hasn't been a grassroots movement to reform the party structure after 2016. Perhaps going after Trump was too easy and allowed the party to deflect the attention. It would explain the willingness to give Trump all the attention all the time. — Echarmion

Well like I told Benkei, Bernie tried to run in 2020 but was stopped by the establishment that gave us Hilary in 2016 and Biden in 2024. If Trump ends up winning again because of their shenanigans then hopefully we will see such a reformation. I don't blame the Democrat voters for what is happening because the problem really was they never had a say in the process.

The fact people don't get decent choices reflects the USA is simply not a democracy. — Benkei

There are plenty of reasons why the US isn't a democracy and alot of them involve the SCOTUS, particularly their decisions in 2000, 2010, and this year. Of course the primaries are also pretty terrible too and the way general elections have locked out serious third party contenders since the 90s.

I would add complacency and arrogance also got you Biden in 2020. — Benkei

It was actually fear that got us Biden in 2020, not of Trump but of Bernie Sanders. In 2020, there was a point where Sanders was about to run away with the nomination and the entire establishment rallied behind Biden in a matter of a few days before Super Tuesday in order to stop him. Biden wasn't the best candidate but he was the one they settled with because he's the easiest one to rally behind. If Biden ends up dropping out this year then we will see the exact reverse of that, as all the anti-Biden forces will likely coalesce around Kamala this time around, not because she's the best candidate but she's the easiest one to rally behind. The lord almighty have giveth and the lord almighty will have taketh away, to use some of Biden's own words.

That the party is not able to coordinate an effective response to Biden's flagging mental state is damning, especially since it's an entirely predictable scenario. — Echarmion

It's still uncertain since Biden could very well stay in or drop out at this point but what more do you think could be done here? The donor money has dried up, the polling has gotten even worse for him, the media is completely dogpiling the Biden campaign now, and members of the party have been defecting en masse and increasingly so.

Of course if you're talking about their inability to foresee Biden's age problems after RBG and even Feinstein months before he started running again, then yeah it is entirely a failure of leadership though that ship has already sailed. Complacency and arrogance from the ones at the top are what gave us Clinton in 2016 and Biden in 2024.

Hopefully, Biden will be eased out of the race and replaced by a more worthy opponent for Trump. Kamala Harris is good at reading teleprompters, but does she have presence of mind and ability to argue off the cuff? — jgill

She's a prosecutor so I'm not worried about her ability to make a factual case. It's her ability to not seem fake that's more worrisome about her. That being said, still better than the corpse we have now.

I think Trump's stance on China and hitting it with tariffs is the only correct stance. It's ridiculous to give an autocratic country that oppresses its own people this much economic power and influence over our own economies, which it only reaches because it's not playing by the same rules as we expect of our own businesses. — Benkei

Sure and Biden has sort of been doing that too but I'm not sure the unilateral way Trump did it was wise. He should've coordinated with other countries and worked out a plan but he's not a man who's known for that. Apparently for his next term, he plans to not only put major tariffs on China, but a global 10% tariff on all imported goods, which doesn't sound like a good idea and will probably worsen the inflation that people will vote him in for.

I think the West's stance on Ukraine is cowardly. If Ukraine is to join NATO and Russia basically (predictably) attacks it because of those NATO statements, they should bear the consequences of those statements. Letting Ukrainians die and not being prepared to actually risk our own people is horrible. And if we're not prepared to stand up for our own security, we shouldn't antagonised Russia. Who knows what Trump would've done but it hardly could've been more callous than what happened now. — Benkei

I'd support sending them weapons as long to defend themselves as they work out a peace plan, which unfortunately doesn't seem like what the Biden administration is doing (though I can't say I'm aware of what kind of talks are being had behind the scenes). It just seems inevitable that this whole war will end up with Russia not taking over all of Ukraine, Ukraine not taking back Crimea, Ukraine not joining NATO (which could be used as a bargaining chip, and whatever negotiated settlement being determined along the Donbas region.

Although people keep saying that Putin wouldn't have invaded Ukraine if Trump were president, I honestly feel like the opposite is true. Trump is an isolationist who has bad ties with NATO and a bad history with Ukraine's president, so it's not hard to see that Putin would have an easier time if he were in power, and probably sort of bet on him being reelected in 2020 as part of his plans. As for what Trump would do if he got back in power, he'd probably force a peace deal on Ukraine which I support though it's what follows and how this relates to the situation in Taiwan I'm not as sure about.

Not saying you have to agree with this assessment: but preferring Trump (or GOP) over Biden isn't the insanity people like to pretend it is. — Benkei

No, no, I can certainly see why his America First policies are appealing to people, especially in the aftermath of the interventionist and globalist policies of previous administrations. The problem is that he's an idiot so he doesn't really know what he's doing half the time. He pulled out of the Iran Nuclear Deal and then tried to do make a similar agreement with North Korea for instance.

I still think he should be in jail as well for J6. — Benkei

Well he's gonna be king now, because the Democrats like in 2016 are too incompetent, arrogant, and anti-democratic to mount an effective challenger. And by "Democrats" I really just mean the handful of people in leadership, not the voters who never had a say in nominating an 81 year old man, the majority of whom thought was too old.

Yeah his press conference even if it's rambling shows he's saying something, while Trump doesn't really say anything at all. I'm not saying he's been great on foreign policy, though Ukraine and China are fine as far as I can tell, with his policy on the middle east being more problematic.

I mean, to be fair, he's saying that he's more competent than Trump, which is probably the case. Joe may be dead half the time but that's made up for by Trump's excessive "executive time" and in terms of knowledge Trump knows little to nothing about anything so Biden wins out there because at least he does know something about foreign policy.

If I was religious, I'd assume god really is on Trump's side. — Echarmion

If I was religious I'd be denouncing my own faith about now to be honest.

Well America good luck with your new king I guess. At this point I'm just trying to find a nice seat for myself to watch as society continues to burn itself to the ground.

I would say I am 65/35 that Trump will win if Biden stays in at this point. Historically he always over preformed his polling by a lot and right now he is winning every swing state and even the popular vote. — Count Timothy von Icarus

LOL, I'd say it's 80/20. Trump is gonna get a bump from this whole assassination attempt and be seen as a martyr to his rabid cult. Meanwhile the Dems are running an unpopular uninspiring octogenarian in cognitive decline who's selfishly gambling away our futures for a second term in office.

If that happens, I'm 90/10 sure they are going to abolish the filibuster to push through a lot of new legislation to ensure they are less likely to lose elections in the future. — Count Timothy von Icarus

This is less likely since the GOP don't really need the filibuster to do alot of what they want, which is cut taxes for the rich and defunding every government program out there. The Democrats would benefit way more from getting rid of it since their policies tend to be more popular.

A lot of Dem voters would be unhappy and confused. — fishfry

Actually I'd say alot of them would be relieved if Biden were replaced right now. Like I said alot of Dem voters didn't want Biden to run again and the debate has been spread around so much that people know what's going on with Biden. Most of the in person takes from Democrats I've seen seem to be "yeah I'll vote for Joe over Trump because Trump, but honestly I think I will prefer anything else".

Biden had a bad approval rating and was losing the election to Trump even before the debate. — fishfry

Part of what makes me see the debate as a blessing in disguise. I thought Biden's campaign was a dying campaign that was gonna lose before anyways so a disastrous debate performance was just the sort of jolt needed in desperate times. I mean Biden may still stay in but if things were going in a bad direction already then hey gotta take a chance right?

Many of the Dems' policy results such as inflation, unchecked immigration causing blue cities to be overrun with a humanitarian and financial disaster; the two wars, etc etc, are quite unpopular. And Kam is to the left of Joe. I don't see how this solves the Dems' electoral problems. — fishfry

I'm not gonna argue policy but politically Kamala would be wise to try to distance herself from the unpopular policies of Biden's administration and tie herself to the more popular aspects. The Gaza issue for instance is something that is splitting the base right now for Biden, so another candidate who isn't as tied to Biden's actions would be better, if simply for the fact that they won't be seen as having Palestinian blood on their hands as the chief director of an administration's foreign policy.

Trump is 100% the Democrats' fault — fishfry

I don't think alot of Democrats would disagree with that, particularly on the progressive left (the "Bernie would've won" types). The Dems utter incompetence in running an effective candidate against an easily beatable buffoon like Trump is what got us here and may get us to another Trump term. Hilary was unpopular but the DNC decided it was her turn and she was the nominee. Biden was also uninspiring but the DNC decided it was his turn and pulled alot of strings to get more popular candidates like Buttigieg to drop out and endorse him before Super Tuesday, winning him the nomination. And now the DNC is again ignoring the will of it's voters by putting up a man the majority of the country think is too old.

It's funny how apart from Biden the two candidates who won the general elections since 2008 were dark horse candidates in Obama and Trump who genuinely built up a base of support from the ground up. Maybe the Democrat party should take some lessons from that or maybe they'll try to force Kamala down our throats in 2028 since it's her turn next.

The Democrats created all of this. They made a martyr then a hero out of Trump; and they refused to confront reality about Biden's condition. The Dems did this. Not the GOP. Most of the GOP hate Trump, they'd love an alternative. The Democrats forced the GOP to rally around Trump. — fishfry

I'd say the GOP also bears some of the blame too for what happened post Jan 6. They condemned Trump and what he did, rightly so. They could've impeached and gotten rid of him forever but they chickened out, perhaps because they thought that he was gonna go away on his own. The Dems thought the same and also did nothing too.

You may have your own ideas on why it took Garland so long to start an investigation into Trump but I think it's just because they had the same mindset as the GOP: That Trump would simply go away and disappear because there's no way the people would flock back to a loser who tried to pull off that, right? There was no need to start a politically charged investigation into a highly controversial figure which would probably just anger the people at Jan 6. It was just pure incompetence and trust in the public to move on when they clearly seem unable to.

Like I said before, courage is a rare thing for elected officials, and nobody has the guts to actually go after Trump effectively and snuff him out for good, causing him to come back as he always has. It's not that Trump is invincible but everyone else is a coward.

I wouldn't mess with Jill and Hunter. — fishfry

Well at this point they have to talk as much sense into Jill as they do to Joe.

And just now we have Pelosi coming on to Biden's favorite show Morning Joe and laying out that this issue is clearly not over right to Joe's face. She is still saying Biden "needs to make a decision" after he decided to stay on, which is essentially code for "we'll let you do it on your own terms, but get the hell out or else more people will lose confidence in you".

I truly do not understand that talking point. Trump was already president for four years and he didn't end democracy. On the contrary, he got rolled by the bureaucrats and most of the people who worked for him. — fishfry

Well that's the idea. He clearly has a tendency for dangerous ideas given Jan 6, but was stopped by some of the people who were working for him like Mike Pence. I guarantee you whoever he picks for his running mate and his administration won't be professionals who would keep him in check like last time.

I assume we probably are gonna disagree here but I'll just leave things there. I'm not looking to debate Trump's policies or Project 2025 right now.

He's the president of the United States. He doesn't have to do or say a damn thing. He said something the other day I really liked. He said, "If someone wants to challenge me at the convention, let them." He's a tough old bird. I don't like the guy but this might be his finest hour! — fishfry

Similarly nobody in the Biden White House can truly stop the congressional Dems from coming out and distancing themselves from the president, which is clearly something Biden is working hard to avoid. Both sides are lobbing threats at each other and Biden according to one article is promising mutually assured destruction if he is attacked. Of course if the Dems are in a sinking ship anyways then why not pull a mutiny?

The 1968 Democrats had a wild primary that ultimately drove LBJ out. — fishfry

LBJ stepped aside and a chaotic primary ensued where RFK was assassinated.

Wouldn't have to. He can run then turn it over to Kam in 2025. Would have made his point. Kam is not any more likely to win the election than Biden. Kam has high unfavorability. She's a lousy politician, the 2020 primaries showed that. She had to drop out in 2019. She is not the Dems' savior. — fishfry

The average voter just cares about who is at the top of the ticket and a bit about who is running with them. They're not gonna think that far ahead like you are. In fact I imagine alot of them are ignorant of how succession works. Plus it's very unlikely a narcissist like Biden would just hand over the presidency to Kamala as soon as he is inaugurated. He will be in the office most likely until he dies partway through the term at 85.

The party will look like a clown show if they throw over Joe after telling us he was "sharp as a tack" for three years. People will not like that.They don't have to vote for Trump, but enough of them might just stay home.

The message would be, "We said Joe is sharp as a tack but we were lying, so here, vote for highly unpopular Kamala." I don't think that's a winning message for the Dems. Not a partisan point. Biden has a better shot to win than Kamala. It doesn't matter that his mind is gone. He's not Trump, AND the DNC isn't pulling a last-minute switcheroo.

I don't think the voting public is going to like a switcheroo on top of the fraud they've already seen. Hope I made my point that I'm not talking partisanship. I think Kam's a terrible candidate. Her negatives don't go away if they elevate her. — fishfry

I don't think the party will spin it that way. Biden won't make a speech saying "Yeah I've been lying about having dementia for 2 years now so I'm stepping aside", but probably saying something along the lines of "I believe I can serve another 4 months, but not another 4 years, so I'm renouncing my candidacy". The GOP will probably continue with the narrative but as far as the Dems are concerned, they didn't lie and they Biden is just making a personal decision about his next 4 years.

Also more would stay home if given the choice between Biden and Trump. Sure people hate Trump but the DNC is essentially making them walk through glass to vote against him by making the alternative just as despised and with crippling flaws of his own.

Ok, so that's a point we disagree on. But not a partisan point for me. If Trump didn't exist, the Dems should still run Joe. The swicheroo factor, I'll call it. People will feel that they've been played. — fishfry

My perception is people would just be relieved that they won't have to vote for a criminal geriatric and a senile one. You can say the scandal and the coverup is a bad look and the right wing circles will certainly go wild with that, but in an election full of conspiracies and scandals about laptops and documents that people seem to care very little about, at the end of the day the inattentive swing voter will just care about who they're voting for at the top of the ticket. Kamala isn't great, but she's not a corpse or a convicted felon.

I am pretty sure Biden is way beyond embarrassment at this point. And Jill and Hunter surely have no shame. But I see your point. At some point he'll cave to the political pressure of being so unliked. Could happen. Or it could just make him dig in more. He's been in politics over 50 years. Survival is an instinct. We see it all the time. His body knows how to be a politician even if his mind is gone. — fishfry

Yeah Biden has been in politics for 50 years but that has made him an institutionalist. Unlike Trump, he is a man who highly values norms, running on "restoring normalcy" as his 2020 pitch. The idea of running without the full support of your party is certainly breaking one of those norms and sure he may continue to soldier on as the donor network and congressional support dries up, but that is not easy for someone who's been a lifelong Dem. Trump certainly would since he never was a traditional politician, but as much as he tries to imitate him would Biden?

Could happen. And Trump is no spring chicken either. One more Big Mac could do it. — fishfry

If the lord almighty visited Biden and Trump the same day that would be the greatest day in American history where we're saved from this nightmare of an election.

I mean she may be First Lady but that doesn't at all give you any idea of what being president is like.

That being said if Jgill's prediction about Biden stepping aside (which is more likely now after the debate) and endorsing Michelle Obama that will certainly be Trump's worst nightmare. Plus the optics of passing over Kamala for another black woman wouldn't be as severe. Michelle just needs to last 4 months and the election is in the bag. A wonderful fantasy indeed.

Wouldn't she need a sufficiently detailed political program? Or is that no longer relevant? :) — jorndoe

I think we've long since past that this election cycle.

Judging by what I've seen of/from her, I can see her as US president. Surely a whole class above the Clown. From memory, she had some qualms about a normal life with/for their kids. — jorndoe

Honestly I still don't see the obsession people have with Michelle Obama, especially since she doesn't seem to have any political ambitions or policies of her own. Like is it purely because people miss Barack Obama that much?

They had a meeting today. A reporter asked an attendee if they were on the same page, and he said, "We're not even on the same book." Reports that some people were in tears. Lot of misery in the Dem party. Pretty much anything could happen. — fishfry

Yeah the dam didn't break for now, but clearly nobody is eager to unite behind Biden just yet. Bennet's comments recently indicate that Biden isn't gonna be able to ignore and move on from the problem as he usually likes to do.

Right. Rumors they're all pretty upset and no solution in sight. — fishfry

Courage is a rare thing among elected officials which is why Trump wasn't banished from the GOP, despite their occasional concerns about him post Jan 6 and 2022 midterms.

Right again. Nate Silver has an article out implying that Biden is bluffing. Maybe he is. He was at NATO today, didn't embarrass himself. He's hanging in. A politician who's been running for office for fifty years or more isn't going to go out easily. — fishfry

I'd say call the bluff. Biden isn't exactly a guy who embodies strength as we saw during the debate and how he's been handling the Gaza situation. I mean sure he has alot of angry stubborn grandpa energy but Netanyahu has been crossing his red lines repeatedly and he has not done anything to stop him.

At this point I don't know what the congressional Dems have to lose either so they might as well try to improve their party's situation and place themselves on the right side of history in case Biden stays in, Trump wins, and he ends democracy.

One interesting aspect of Biden's ABC interview was that he never really specified how he would react if the congressional Dems turned on him. He outright refused to answer the question and acted like there's no revolt going on. If he was really delusional you would've thought that he would give a non-assuring answer like, "I would sit down and tell them 'We will win'," or something to that effect. That will probably hang over the Dems minds as they contemplate what to do next.

But why didn't the Dems do something sooner? If they'd just have had a competitive primary they'd have replaced him already. — fishfry

Arrogance. They thought they could probably roll with Biden into the next election and dismissed people's concerns about his age. I mean they got pretty far before we saw what happened a week ago... putting aside all those viral videos of Biden having senior moments.

Biden's status, or lack thereof, in the Democratic party cuts both ways. They clearly don't have loyalty to him, but he also has no loyalty to them. That's another reason he's hanging in. He's not thinking of the good of the party, he's taken a lot of disrespect from his fellow Dems over the years. It's the Bidens versus the world at this point. — fishfry

Sounds like great qualities to have in a leader, both for the party and the country.

Definitely not over. This thing's just getting started. Even if they swapped in Kamala, it would not be smooth sailing. The public would have a lot of questions about "What did they know, and when did they know it," as they used to say during Watergate. — fishfry

Yeah, but that would be much better than well, trying to convince the public to vote for a soon to be 82 year old man who clearly has cognitive issues to serve another 4 years in office.

He's gotten much worse just in the past few months. It's heartbreaking at a human level. Especially since none of us are immune. I kind of admire his stubbornness. I'd like to see him stay in and stick it to the party — fishfry

Depends on your political affiliation but as someone who doesn't want Trump winning I have no sympathy for an old man who is selfishly staying in and gambling with his party and country simply to try and get a second term in his 80s.

Not clear a last-minute swap would help. Not entirely clear that Biden's condition is the only reason he's behind in the polls. — fishfry

At this point I can see way more upsides to a new candidate than running with Biden. Biden can't do anything to fix the fact that he's down in the polls but another candidate can.

As Nikki Haley said, in a race between two incredibly unpopular geriatrics, the first party to get rid of their candidate wins the election. Polling seems to back that idea up, showing that a generic Dem or Rep running against either Trump or Biden respectively will easily win. It'll be interesting to see if that theory holds true.

When the GOPs came to Nixon, they told him he was certain to be impeached and convicted. The Dems have no such leverage. This really is a day-by-day situation. Next week is the GOP convention, that might take some of the media attention off the Dems. — fishfry

Yeah but they can severely harm and embarrass him, which at this point Biden frankly deserves. As a narcissist that's something he probably cares deeply about. Leverage isn't the same as having complete control over someone.

BIden is not a good man. His lunchbucket Joe act is just for the public. — fishfry

Yeah doesn't seem like it so far. He's become oddly Trumpian in just about every respect since the debate happened. That being said it could all be a bluff and he may fold if his party lost faith in him. Biden's recent attempt at painting his problems as the elites trying to get rid of him as Trump usually does just isn't believable coming from him, a man who has been propped up by the elites all his life.

I think if the Dems coalesced behind Joe that gives them their best chance. Then Kamala can take over shortly after the inauguration if Joe should win. It's going to be a close election either way. It's very unclear if swapping out Joe actually improves the Dems' chances. — fishfry

They're likely gonna coalesce if Biden lasts until the convention, and the party and the media will never bring up the age or replacement issue again.

Or... maybe they will continue bringing up the issue of replacement if it's possible to swap him out post nomination, though at that point it'd just be Kamala who would be the nominee. Could be possible (apparently there was discussion of Pence taking over the GOP ticket in October of 2016 after the Access Hollywood tapes came out after all). Biden is likely to have a major senior moment in the next 4 months especially during the next debate which may reignite the discussion, or he could just die of old age. He's 81 after all, so it's not a possibility you can definitively rule out.

No they didn't, but the DNC should've seen what voters were thinking and not ignored public sentiment like they always seem so eager to do.

You can look up the polls yourself back then which always had a majority of people saying Biden is too old. Biden ran as an incumbent president against other candidates who got very little to no coverage in the media so the result was pretty obvious. Perhaps they should've done some debates.

If opposition to Biden has not managed to coalesce into a united front until now, then it will not. Fear of uncertainty and sheer inertia will keep him in the race. — Echarmion

Like the Republicans with Trump, the Democrats in congress are cowards who would rather stay the course then try and do what they know is the right thing.

Really the party (at the federal level) should just be dissolved at this point. — Echarmion

Hopefully to be replaced by a party that actually gives it's base a voice instead of forcing candidates that they prefer on them, like Hilary in 2016 and Biden in 2020 and 2024. The voters made it very clear that they didn't want Joe to run again due to his age, and they ran him again.

Which reminds me that in 2020, the Dems had an excellent black female VP candidate, Val Demings. But she was a cop, and cops were not in style in the Democratic party of 2020. — fishfry

I mean Kamala was a prosecutor. I don't think either were gonna be popular with the Democrat base in 2020 due to the BLM riots, but Biden decided on Harris.

In fact now that Biden's dug in, some Dems are coming around. House Speaker Hakeem Jeffries is for Joe. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez came out for Joe today. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer came out for Joe. And surprisingly Senator John Warner, who the other day said he was gathering a group of anti-Joe Senators, today came out for Joe. — fishfry

I'll wait until tomorrow since alot of other congressional Dems are kind of staying silent and clearly are not just falling in line like the president wanted. I'm assuming you meant Mark Warner there, and his statements are also very noncommittal. Nobody except one representative came out today against Biden, and my guess is that the dissenters are currently keeping quiet so they can present a united front when they meet later.

From what I can tell the House Dems are planning a meeting in the morning to discuss the matter privately, while the Senate is also doing the same at noon. Whether they'll decide to confront the president and whether any of that will be made public is anyone's guess.

I believe that once Joe said he's staying in, people realize that he's going to be virtually impossible to dislodge. He has the power of the presidency, which is huge. He has Hunter and Jill on his team. And drug and hooker jokes aside, Hunter appears to be a capable ally at the moment. Joe has all those delegates. And the Democrats risk looking very anti-democratic if they swap in a last-minute candidate chosen by the party insiders. Joe looks stronger today than he did a few days ago when everyone thought he was toast. — fishfry

That's Biden's intended play here, but given that nothing he's done in the past week has assured worried Dems about his reelection prospects, and his complete dismissal of the concerns being thrown his way, I think he's only infuriated and emboldened his critics more. He couldn't convince them that he's not senile so now he's trying to say "don't oppose me or else I'll make it ugly for all of us" to get them to fall in line. Could be a sign he really is hopelessly stubborn or it could be a last ditch attempt at keeping the dam from breaking. Whether the Dems speaking tomorrow will act or not will depend on how they read what he said, but it's clear the president is daring them to oppose him.

And a lot of the backstabbers look unseemly, a point I've been making. You love a guy yesterday and knife him in the back today? That says more about the backstabber than it does about Biden. Looking at you, New York Times, Washington Post, Joe Scarborough, etc. — fishfry

Biden isn't at all a beloved figure. That was why he was thrown under the bus so easily. He's doesn't command a cult like following like Trump so it's easy for them to do so. He was nominated in 2020 purely for his perceived electability and now in an election where he seems to be losing that by being down against a convicted felon the Dems have largely soured on him. I mean they'll still vote for him to stop Trump but they have no support for Biden himself.

I'm on record that the Dems are not going to dislodge him as long as Jill and Hunter want him in. The Dems do not have the stones to impeach him or invoke he 25th amendment. My bet's a long shot, I'll give you that. Joe looks like toast. But what are the Dems really going to do if he refuses to step down? — fishfry

What are they gonna do if he stays in? It seems at this point he's dragging the entire party down for his own selfish goals. At this point they might as well try to make it untenable for him and hope he isn't gonna stubbornly let his own party collapse under his hubris.

Like I noted, prominent Dems are also stepping up to support him. They realize that panicking right now could well come out worse than just getting behind Biden. — fishfry

It's kind of a mixed bag at this point. Alot of them have "concerns" as well. May be a civil war situation but who knows, some of the supporters may believe deep down that Biden isn't the right guy for the job. Reportedly you have folks like Don Beyer saying in private that Biden should resign and let Harris be president while openly supporting him for instance.

Not so. The tide began to turn today (Monday evening US time as I write). Lot of Dems came out for Biden, even some who'd been against him just a day or two ago. — fishfry

Like I said, I'll wait until Tuesday to see if Biden has weathered the storm. The critics have been silent until they meet and gather. Here's a Politico article from Monday evening suggesting that things aren't necessarily over.

Of course Biden is incapable of doing any of that. But we started seeing it in 2019! They hid the guy all during the 2020 campaign. People have been talking about Biden's tragic age-related cognitive impairment for years. Media types have admitted they covered it up so as not to help Trump. — fishfry

Yeah I was one of the people who noticed it back then too (comparing it unfavorably to his 2012 debate performance), but it's way worse now. He could at least debate and do a forceful interview in 2020.

Agreed, of course. But again: Who is going to dislodge him? The parallel's been made with Nixon, when his advisors came to see him and told him it was all over. But he was facing certain impeachment and conviction. What leverage to the Dems have over Biden? A strongly worded letter? They have nothing. Let's see if they'll start impeachment or 25A proceedings. Of course they will not do it. — fishfry

Yeah I understand that ultimately it really is on Biden to step aside unless the Dems are brave enough to take stronger measures. The hope I guess is to make the situation as untenable to Biden as possible because clearly he is out of touch with the reality of the situation, and also hope that the supposed good man in Joe will make him realize how destructive his political ambitions are to a party and country that's lost faith in him. Who knows, maybe he will let the party crumble before he steps aside, but even he should realize that he can't win an election if even his team lacks any confidence in him.

With Trump out there, there’s a very good chance Biden wins. — Mikie

Fear of a second Trump term and Project 2025 is the only thing keeping the Dems alive at this point. Would've been nice if they just ran some generic 50 year old or somebody that didn't massively turn off voters nationwide.

Biden's rolling the dice. If he wins, even by a narrow margin, the GOP will suffer the worst trouncing a political party has ever had in American politics. How could anyone lose to this guy??? The GOP would immediately go into circular firing squad mode. — RogueAI

Then they'll re-nominate the same guy who lost again 4 years later.

Do you mean Whitmer for veep or prez? Kamala has a constituency within the party. — fishfry

Yeah a Harris/Whitmer ticket would be more realistic. That being said Harris will more likely go for Shapiro because he's a white man.

That does seem like an out. I thought the delegates were firmly bound, but evidently not. — fishfry

Yep, and the delegates are not very eager to nominate him right now. We'll see if it snowballs into something.

In fact Joe has stated that he's in it to win it, and he has Jill and now Hunter on his side. And he's President of the United States. There's a lot of power in that. — fishfry

Sure, but everybody adamantly says they're in it until they aren't. I think it's too late for Biden to stop the dam from breaking within his own party. Too many different groups from the donors to the representatives to the senators are already saying he should step aside and likely this week (as congress reconvenes) this will lead to a large number of public statements for Joe to step aside. At some point such a situation becomes untenable.

But who knows how he'll react. Is Joe selfish enough to stay in anyways even if it means the total collapse of his party? Perhaps but it's clear his attempts to quiet any dissent through a mix of stubbornness and finally getting out there have been completely unsuccessful so far. A normal politician would've taken drastic action immediately after that debate, doing numerous interviews, town halls, and unscripted events in order to assure people that they can do this. Biden instead went back to hiding for a week and later did a 20 minute interview where he still sounded rambling and delusional, and well we can sort of guess why. I think the video I linked to where he said he will be content with losing to Trump and ending democracy because all that matters to him is his reelection attempt will turn his critics off more.

Not a good year for Shapiros in the Dem party as long as Michigan's in play. — fishfry

Michigan is in play in large part because Biden is the nominee and pissing off Arabs with what he's doing in Gaza. That's why I think Whitmer is an ideal candidate since she can take any stance on Israel and win Michigan easily but apart from his age, Biden's foreign policy is a big drag on the ticket.

Are Democrats ready to either impeach him or invoke the 25th Amendment? If not, how are you going to dislodge him? — fishfry

I've heard there's also a "good conscience" rule the DNC can add for delegates to not vote for Biden, but right now the Dems are trying to convince grandpa that he is perhaps not the best driver in the world and relinquish his car keys voluntarily. Next week will probably see the dam breaking.

If Harris is the nominee I imagine Shapiro would be a top pick for VP, at least if she were smart.

US democracy's last line of defense everyone:

They have no one to blame but themselves. — Mikie

Really you can blame Jim Clyburn for that. He stepped in to save Biden's campaign in the South Carolina primary because he feared Bernie winning the nomination and then insisted on a black woman diversity pick for Biden's running mate, giving us Harris. He essentially gave us the ticket we see today.

That being said it's probably better for the Dems to go with Harris at this point and have her pick an actually talented running mate. Biden's campaign is about as dead as he is but at least with Harris you can see some potential room for improvement and a restart.

If they happen to pull it off, it’ll be only because Trump is that bad — which he is. — Mikie

Indeed. A generic candidate who is neither Trump nor Biden would win in a landslide against either of these people.

Too bad the Democrats couldn't put up a candidate that isn't as unpopular as Trump. Shouldn't be a low bar to pass but yeah let's just run the 80 year old man who the majority of the country didn't want to run again.

At this point literally everyone in the party wants him out because they think he'll lose them the House and Senate and will probably speak up in the coming days, the donors are revolting, and the media is unanimously calling for Biden to step down on a daily basis. I don't see him coming back from this but who knows, he's incredibly stubborn.

Maybe but I doubt they'd want to force gramps out when he's kicking and screaming. The Dems crave unity above all else so it's unlikely there will be an independent open revolt or attempt to replace Biden unless he says he is okay with it. Of course, that unity is ironically a great reason why the worries about the chaos of a replacement are unfounded IMO. They'll fall in line behind a new guy if they're allowed to. After all if the consesus was that questioning an octogenarian candidate's capability months ago when they had ample opportunity to pivot was considered "helping Trump", then I don't see anyone complaining about a Whitmer candidacy post convention, even Kamala and her dozen or so diehard supporters.

The news media have been floating names. Pretty much a bunch of governor names like Newsom and Whitmer. Also, unfortunately, Kamala Harris.

Doesn't really matter though if Biden doesn't want to step aside. If he does, then things will probably move quickly.

I think you should distinguish the Democrat voters with whoever's running the DNC. The Democrats by and large didn't want Biden to run in 2024 and the DNC as usual didn't listen.

You should probably listen to what the guy has to say first, instead of parroting slogans peddled by political rivals. — Tzeentch

Look at this point I just want somebody who's not insane, not a criminal, and below the expected retirement age. Is that too much to ask?

Bobby Jr! Another long shot idea. — fishfry

The 70 year old anti-vax conspiracy theorist who has dealt with literal brain worms... we really have a great slate of candidates this year.

Both sets of exams can be independently verified by a third party (audit) if Biden's campaigb is serious about getting the maximum effect (no matter how marginal). — 180 Proof

Doesn't really matter in this post-truth world. We live in an age where Trump can shoot someone on fifth avenue, claim he didn't, and alot of his supporters would take his word.

If not, if the "perception" is so irreparable", then he needs to step aside like Lyndon Johnson did in 1968 – of course, VP Harris might also lose (after a brutally divisive convention floor fight) like VP Humphrey lost to Nixon. :brow: — 180 Proof

That's my solution honestly, for Biden to step aside like he should've months ago.

I actually don't think the convention floor fight would be as divisive as some may fear. The Democrats have proven they are capable of unifying very quickly when necessary. That's actually how Biden became the nominee in 2020 after all, where in the span of 3 days they managed to get all the moderate candidates to drop out and endorse Biden before Super Tuesday in a desperate attempt to block Bernie Sanders from the nomination.

I feel like if they are gonna go through with a new convention all the leaders should simply agree beforehand to fall in line behind whoever the candidate is given the urgency of the situation. That's where I suspect any potential divisions could come from. As for the voters themselves... honestly I'd imagine most would just be happy that they don't have to vote for either Trump or Biden.

I think Biden should have complete physical and cognitive exams which witll then be released in document form (minimally redacted only for national security) and summarized by his physicians in a public press conference asap. — 180 Proof

Doesn't matter since the public perception is that Biden is too old to run. If it's a good report his opponents will claim they falsified it and if it's not then they will run with it.

This is of course putting aside the fact that Trump when he was president released an incredibly dubious health report from his physician, who at the time claimed he could "live to be 200 years old". I don't know where that physician is now, but rumor has it that he is serving in the US congress as a Republican.

Regrettably, Trump seemed vigorous and not affected by age in that debate. — Wayfarer

He's also fat and eats a bunch of junk food which goes great with being 78. If he gets a heart attack or chokes on a BIg Mac that wouldn't surprise me.

I'm now rather hoping that he is found medically ineligible to continue in the very near future. — Wayfarer

Same goes for the other guy. I mean both are really old after all.

Well right now the biggest obstacle to them changing leaders is Biden himself. It wasn't that long ago where we got this exchange, which I still look back at every now and then as I wonder why the race is as it is. If he ends up losing and dying the next day, we'll have to deal with the consequences of his stubbornness.

Who is forcing the poor old guy to do this? — Lionino

Mostly Joe himself because he's the only person on the planet insisting he's the "best person to beat Trump".

DNC: Yes the planet got destroyed but for a beautiful moment in time we stood by and did nothing as an 82 year old man selfishly tried to seek a second term against the wishes of his constituents.

Well maybe they can convince him now that's he crashed the car. Or maybe we really are screwed.

The one bit of good news is that this debate was really early (perhaps intentionally) and now that we see that Biden can't do it, there is enough time for a change in leadership. Literally anybody else would be better and likely win given how Trump is intensely disliked.

Well I think Biden is the one who's ultimately making this gamble wanting to spend his final years as a two-term president even if he may not live through it, but the people around him seem content in not putting too much pressure on him either.

People have been trying to convince him for several months but he's too stubborn to get out. The Democrats would easily win if they just ran another generic candidate, but they chose to stick with someone who's arguably just as unpopular as Trump is. I mean maybe this debate would convince him to step aside, that's the one upside I see, but if not then we're really taking a huge gamble on all of our futures for the sake of one really old man's desire for a second term.