• Because the disadvantage displayed by current polling may be an artifact of no one but Biden actually campaigning, and the recognition of the possibility that, were they to actively campaign, they’d have a higher probability of winning.

            • I might be mis-remembering, but I remember being pretty confident that almost any Democrat in the primaries could and would have beaten Trump. We’re past the point where it’s meaningful to debate whether one candidate would have outperformed another hypothetically (eg would Bernie have pulled more of the disaffected blue collar white voters who went for Trump). It was closer than I expected and closer than I would have liked, but coming off the polling and voting trends we were seeing I didn’t think the Dems would lose it.

              This is feeling more like 2016 in that the Dems are committed to running an unpopular candidate (like her or not as a politician, she was the least popular candidate in presidential history, except for Trump).

              There was simply overconfidence on the Democratic side that people would see through the Trump arguments and a refusal to acknowledge that Hillary, while a great candidate on paper, had all the charisma of a Manila folder. Obama and Bill Clinton won on charisma. W kinda cheated and then rode the 9/11 train (but honestly Kerry was a Democratic Bob Dole). Reagan won on charisma. Trump won on racism and charisma (although it’s not a charisma that I get).

              I think Biden won on being not-Trump combined with reflected glory from Obama and (for the primaries) being seen as the safe choice. The reflected glory is gone - Obama is far back in the rear view mirror and Biden has his own record now. Agree with it or not, he’s no longer being presented as the safe choice by the press because of his policies and his honestly pretty dismal approval rating. Head to head there’s a serious chance he could lose, and there’s not a Ross Perot coming in from the top rope to tip the election. The board is still out on the third parties - who they’ll pull from - but it’s telling that third party candidates with low single digits could swing the election. Again, 2016.

              • @FlowVoid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                0
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Hillary led Trump in the polls throughout the 2016 campaign.

                So if 2024 resembles 2016, then after Biden wins we can look forward to more complaints that the polls had it wrong, and that an overconfident GOP lost because they ran the least popular candidate in presidential history.

                  • @FlowVoid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    0
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    I understand that you don’t like Biden. But there is no evidence that another candidate would do better. I think that any Democratic candidate would be criticized as fiercely as Biden, especially the natural choice to replace him: Kamala Harris. And in this political climate, no Democrat is going to poll +5% against Trump.

                    Finally, recent history does not support your inclination to replace him. If anything it suggests that we should be more optimistic.

    • @RainfallSonata@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      15 months ago

      The only reason he beats trump is he’s not trump. Anyone else is not trump either. If Biden weren’t an option, the others would poll at biden’s numbers.