US Politics, July 2024 - "Will you just drop out, man?"

It’s bizarre that “support” is understood as “adoration” by some people in these threads.

It’s bizarre that “support” is understood as “adoration” by some people in these threads.

It's just really, really important to beamish that you know that he hates Joe Biden. In case you forgot in the 15 minutes since the last time he made that clear, he'll come in again.

Biden’s poor debate performance had almost no impact on voter preference, new report says

President Joe Biden’s performance during the first presidential debate has been widely panned, with critics and even those within his own party calling for him to step aside. But the question remained: Would Biden’s shaky performance against former President Donald Trump result in a noticeable dip in the polls for the president?

According to a new report from the Northeastern University-led data project CHIP50, the answer is no.

Led by David Lazer, university distinguished professor of political science and computer science at Northeastern, the report indicates that the debate had little if any impact on people’s voting preference. Lazer hopes the report helps illustrate the dangers of making a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the media interpreting data.

“Even the New York Times, which is usually better about this, talked about a very tiny shift that was totally insignificant statistically like it was evidence that it was a shift toward Trump after the debate,” Lazer says. “My hope is that reporters look at this and say, ‘Maybe we need to be careful in overinterpreting noise as actual signal.’”

Seeing the dominant narrative coming out of the debate, Lazer and the team at CHIP50 decided to test the hypothesis that Biden had lost ground in public opinion after the debate. Notably, Lazer says, they didn’t survey two different cross-sectional groups of people before and after the debate like most polls. Instead, the team was able to survey the same group of respondents from a survey conducted before the debate.

Lazer says using the same group of people helps make the results more precise, which is important in polling that inherently has a margin of error.

What the report finds is that Biden held on to 94% of the people who said they would support him before the debate. For Trump, 86% of people who said they would support him before the debate said they would do so after the debate.

“What we see is that there is some churn –– maybe 10 percent or so of people change what they answer –– but that the net result is not a movement away from Biden,” Lazer says. “If anything, it seems that Biden is holding on to his people somewhat better than Trump.”

In fact, generally, the shift in support was actually more in Biden’s favor, although Lazer notes it’s not statistically significant and well within the margin of error.

There were very minor shifts between the candidates: 1% of people who said they would vote for Biden before the debate, switched to preferring Trump, while 3% switched from Trump to Biden. Similarly, respondents who said they were unsure who they would vote for before the debate were slightly more likely to switch to preferring Biden after the debate.

“[It all] points in the same direction, which is that it seems unlikely, based on our data, that things shifted toward Trump after the debate,” Lazer says. “If anything, our point estimate is a little more toward Biden, but I wouldn’t make a lot of noise about that.”

There were more significant, but still minor, shifts toward people preferring other third-party candidates after the debate. About 4% of Biden’s supporters and 6% of Trump’s supporters said they would prefer the “Other” category on the survey post-debate. Meanwhile, 6% of those who preferred another candidate before the debate shifted to both Biden and Trump after the debate, resulting in a small net impact.

The relatively stable trend of poll numbers in the 2024 election is indicative to Lazer of how polarizing politics have become where very little will sway voters from their preferred party.

“Trump was convicted of a set of felonies,” Lazer says. “The impact it had on surveys was zero. Biden had a debate where most people said it proved he was too old. Survey respondents said, ‘Yeah, I saw that. He’s too old. I’m still voting for him.’ The numbers just aren’t moving.”

lol, well nevertheless

Oh, please, appeals to your personal dissatisfaction with the result of the process in the face of the real problem of what to do about all those Biden delegates who must vote for him is just silly.

I've said a bunch of times that the only way anything happens is if he releases his delegates. What I'm objecting to is the pretense that "the primary voters decided on Biden," which is just a bad faith argument.

yeah there was no process, he decided that he would run again and steamroll the careers of anyone who'd challenge him.

idk if aimless remembers that a good chunk of the electorate chose to vote for literally no one over voting for biden in the primary.

What the report finds is that Biden held on to 94% of the people who said they would support him before the debate.

Not to overstate the obvious, but the challenge here is not "people who said they would support him before the debate." Most of us itt would be in that 94%, that doesn't mean we think he's a good candidate or is going to win.

By the time we had our primary it was a forgone conclusion

I recognize there needs to be a process, I just think pretending he "won" the primary is silly. Democrats did not "make a decision," the decision was made by Biden and his team.

― Blitz Primary (tipsy mothra), Wednesday, July 10, 2024 1:19 PM bookmarkflaglink

in my state, I was given the opportunity to vote for Joe Biden, or Joe Biden, or Joe Biden, or Joe Biden, in the primary

also...uh....it happened when we all still thought fucker was much less diminished than he is

He's betting on enough people to vote for Not Trump (and any other options being too small to matter) just like in 2020

all I’ve heard all year is people saying they hate that strategy and mindset and they’d be right

i didn't watch this when it was on because *yawn* kamala but now she's the savior of the world so i watched and she's better now! she's so clear. its very refreshing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne3-KA8ja6g

He can prop up RFK. Worked just fine for Hillary with Trump in 2016

That Northeastern study argues that Biden is losing but just not losing worse after the debate. Very comforting!

there's no way the democrats can get rid of Biden at this point without breaking all their own rules established in 1972 after the disaster in 1968 that ensure an orderly democratic process

1968 had a far closer general election than 1972.

I voted for Joe Biden in the primary over Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson. Even if I'd been looking for an alternative to Biden at the time (when I was not yet worried about his capacity to win), there was no reason to think that his challengers were serious, viable candidates who would benefit from my vote.

Jaymc OTM

A competitive primary would’ve had some real contenders involved.

every senator's comments on biden are like the thing someone in the mob says when they want to do a crime but they're not sure if the feds are listening in https://t.co/u59YbbGKbT

— Tim Murphy (@timothypmurphy) July 10, 2024

I voted for Joe Biden in the primary over Dean Phillips and Marianne Williamson. Even if I'd been looking for an alternative to Biden at the time (when I was not yet worried about his capacity to win), there was no reason to think that his challengers were serious, viable candidates who would benefit from my vote.

― jaymc, Wednesday, July 10, 2024 2:28 PM (twenty-eight minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I voted for Uncommitted in the primary. I liked that guy's positions.

same

I voted for some guy named Robinette.

The point isn't that Biden ran without serious opposition and therefore the Democratic rank and file didn't have much room for real choice. Rather, it's that the party has an elaborate process to select a nominee, that includes various rules in all 50 states and several other jurisdictions for assembling a slate of delegates, most of whom are bound by party rules to vote for a particular candidate on at least the first ballot. Then there's a convention where the delegates convene and vote until one person gets a majority of the delegate votes. This is the ONLY process the party recognizes as legitimate.

As much as the Democrats in Congress, governors, and down ballot candidates wish they could remove Biden on their own, there is no legitimate way for them to accomplish that. None. No rules process to grab onto, unless they somehow succeeded in not seating enough of the delegates pledged to Biden to prevent his winning on the first ballot and that would be such a transparent power grab that it would wreck every vestige of party unity and alienate millions of voters. Whatever happens, it has to look more like Biden's gracious choice and not like strong-arming (which, of course it would be).

Biden’s poor debate performance had almost no impact on voter preference, new report says

btw, this is from the report:

Our approach has its own limitations. Most notably, our sample of repeat respondents is
not randomly selected from the initial wave. Rather, a subset of respondents in our
April/May survey also chose to participate in the June/July survey. Since we did not
construct this panel of repeat participants from a randomly drawn set of potential
respondents, they may not be a representative subsample of the April/May sample.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/s32r38vj3sct3kkrijoyw/CHIP50-REPORT-105-DEBATE-2024.pdf

there is also substantial attrition. their sample included around 32000 respondents in april-may-june pre debate, but only around 6200 respondents post-debate

it's worth looking at, but you have to look at this data point in combination with all others. and when you look at the time-series of poll averages, the gap that opens up right around the debate is either at or above the previous maximum in the preceding 12 months, during which it oscillated between a dead-lock and biden being behind

https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/
https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-biden

Not endorsing Steve Krakauer except for the purposes of this tweet, but I was thinking about this in re comments from Pelosi and others.

Dems: "Joe, it's time to decide if you're staying in the race."

Biden family: "We're staying in."

Dems: "You don't have to decide today, but definitely soon."

Biden family: "We're in."

Dems: "Let us know when you decide."

Biden family: "Decision made, in."

Dems: "Ok, but...

— Steve Krakauer (@SteveKrak) July 10, 2024

the (public) elementary school on my street is holding some kind of day camp for transgender kids - they're flying the rainbow flag and the similar trans flag, giant pro-trans youth banner, and all kinds of pro-trans chalking all over the playground

God I wish DeSantis could see this lol

:-)

I think the Dem elected officials know better than I do and better than most or all pundits whether their chances against Trump are better with Biden, with Harris, or with someone else entirely. What I can't tell is whether their stance is "it's just not obvious what's better, Biden could win or Biden could lose, Harris could win or Harris could lose, four months is a long time, nobody knows anything" or "We'd definitely be better off if Biden dropped out but he's not gonna do it, we can't make him, and it makes matters even worse if we publicly beg him not to run and he runs." I feel like there are a lot of people who think it's OBVIOUSLY the latter but that's not obvious to me at all. By design you can't tell the difference from outside. And by the same token there are people, people I find hard to understand, who seem to think Biden is obviously the best candidate against Trump and moreover that it would be an affront to democracy if his friends and colleagues pressured him to drop out and he did.

A little comic relief, House Republicans held a hearing today basically on why more companies don't advertise on conservative media outlets. Lead witness was Ben Shapiro. Among those called was the CEO of Unilever, which makes Dove soap. This Ohio congressman is really sad he never gets to see Dove soap ads.

Rep. Michael Rulli (R-OH) goes on a bizarre rant about soap, saying he's never seen a Dove soap ad as a conservative in up to 20 years and asks the president of Unilever USA to respond:

"I haven't heard a Dove soap ad in at least 10 to 15 or 20 years!" pic.twitter.com/lzh79Af6uG

— Heartland Signal (@HeartlandSignal) July 10, 2024

there are people, people I find hard to understand, who seem to think Biden is obviously the best candidate against Trump and moreover that it would be an affront to democracy if his friends and colleagues pressured him to drop out and he did

To me it's simple: Biden is the best candidate against Trump because he's the incumbent president, with a really good record of achievement over the last 3-plus years, and he already beat Trump once. Harris, who I like, is not as good a candidate because people who would vote for Biden — even with her as VP — will refuse to vote for her because she's a black woman. They'll never say so, of course; the vote totals will just drop precipitously and everyone will shrug at the mysteriousness of it all. I don't think it'll be "an affront to democracy" if he gets pushed aside; I think it'll be an electoral fuck-up of historic proportions. I think it's the best way to guarantee a Trump victory. But maybe I'm wrong! Maybe Americans aren't sexist or racist!

The RNC Convention is Mon-Thurs next week, and I wonder if there’s sense in not making a big move re Biden until after that. The Republicans can give a ton of speeches without knowing who their opponent is going to be.

To be clear, unperson, I don't find it hard to understand people who on balance think Biden is the best candidate against Trump (if I were making that case I'd say basically what you said.) What I find hard to understand is people who think he's OBVIOUSLY the best candidate and there's no argument, or that him being old isn't now a much bigger electoral liability than it was in 2020 or even in 2023.

Also I’m thinking something might be going on with the polling if they’re getting results like this:

Biden support slips in deep blue New York: ‘We’re a battleground state now’ https://t.co/BCjnRloMmT

— POLITICO (@politico) July 10, 2024

https://i.imgur.com/8ZaOJ16.png

Harris, who I like, is not as good a candidate because people who would vote for Biden — even with her as VP — will refuse to vote for her because she's a black woman.

I'm sure this is true, but is it a larger number of people than those who would vote for Harris but not Biden because of his age (or other disqualifying factors)?

there's also a whole bunch of women voters (of all stripes) who would happily vote for her to see a woman finally take the presidency

Just a reminder, there's a ton of polling like this out there going back to last year, but this is from just a few months ago: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/24/in-tight-presidential-race-voters-are-broadly-critical-of-both-biden-and-trump/

The big consistent finding is that people don't want to have to choose between these two guys again. Sure, they didn't ask about Harris here or anyone else, and Harris by other measures is not super popular herself — it's hard to find anyone who polls as "very popular" at the national level these days, politics being what it is. But Harris is not one of those two guys. She would absolutely present a different choice on the ticket, and I think she would actually benefit from stepping in late just in terms of providing some relief from a 2020 rematch that most people are very clearly unenthusiastic about. I really don't think there are many Biden diehards out there who wouldn't also vote for her or any Democrat, because at this point the only Biden diehards left are people who want anybody but Trump. But she (or any non-Biden candidate) would have the potential to reach people who are in the "anybody but these two guys" camp, which is most likely not a small number. That doesn't mean winning over Trump voters. It could mean winning over RFK or Jill Stein voters, where they're on the ballot, and a much bigger potential pool of people who may or may not vote at all.

Being the incumbent is doing Biden zero favors right now, it's actively hurting him. You don't want to be the incumbent when 80 percent of the population is unhappy with the state of the nation. And yes obviously the attack on Harris would be that she's part of that administration too, but she's not nearly as tainted by it because she's mostly been an afterthought the last four years.

Anyway, I agree that it's hard to saying any path is OBVIOUSLY the best one. But Biden had huge negatives even before the debate, and now he's had two weeks of very public discussion — among many of his own erstwhile supporters — about his fitness as a candidate and president. His odds of making any significant improvements on his standing in the next less-than-four-months seem very long, with the ever-present daily potential for him to say or do something that reinforces the sense that he's not fit to serve. (Note that even in that survey in April, 65 percent of respondents said they didn't think he was physically fit for the office.) Whereas Harris would come in with her own negatives, but would have a much larger potential upside to sell herself to people who are turned off by the whole thing.

If they aren’t going to make a switch what the hell is the plan to turn this around? They have none

Also I’m thinking something might be going on with the polling if they’re getting results like this:

Biden support slips in deep blue New York: ‘We’re a battleground state now’ https://t.co/BCjnRloMmT
— POLITICO (@politico) July 10, 2024
― frogbs, Wednesday, 10 July 2024 4:30 PM (forty minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

this is just clickbait misinfo. it’s two private polls of an undisclosed district. doesn’t have any bearing on the standardized national polls

the incumbent president, with a really good record of achievement over the last 3-plus years

Undecided voters, including many who don’t follow politics at all, don’t know about the record of achievement, they just know that Biden is old and struggled in the debate. And the Republicans and the media are going to just keep reinforcing that point which will trickle down to social media faster than Biden’s list of accomplishments domestically over the last 3 1/2 years.

the incumbent president, with a really good record of achievement over the last 3-plus years

Undecided voters, including many who don’t follow politics at all, don’t know about the record of achievement, they just know that Biden is old and struggled in the debate. And the Republicans and the media are going to just keep reinforcing that point which will trickle down to social media faster than Biden’s list of accomplishments domestically over the last 3 1/2 years.

He can’t effectively communicate his accomplishments.

As someone said upthread, Biden's presence is related to people not knowing about the achievements. From the start of the term he has not been a vibrant figure on TV screens (or the social media equivalent) able to trumpet his achievements. You have to be a fuckin' nerd to know about anything other than the struggles (getting things past Manchin and Sinema in the Senate) and disasters (Gaza) that have cost him support.

Undecided voters, including many who don’t follow politics at all...know that Biden...struggled in the debate

Are you sure about this? Really. Like, you can't say "people aren't paying attention" in one breath and "everyone knows Biden was terrible in the debate" in the next. We scream with frustration that "regular people" and "undecided voters" (read: fucking idiots) don't know that Donald Trump is a dangerous psychopath whose brain is rancid pudding, but at the same time we're absolutely convinced that everyone in America watched the debate and came to the conclusion that Joe Biden needs to be euthanized.

It's not just that people don't know about the achievements, it's that they actively think Things Suck. And the Biden campaign's message on that has been kind of like the messaging on the debate: Let us tell you why you shouldn't trust your own direct experience.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1669/general-mood-country.aspx

i get the argument that it’s risky to elect harris because she’s a black woman. but americans weren’t too racist to elect a black man 16 years ago, and they very nearly elected a white woman 8 years ago. so you have to believe in a really powerful degree of intersectionality. you also have to believe not just that the harris vs generic white dem bias is large, but that so is the harris vs senile old guy with historically low approval rating

It's not really words/It's just the power to charm

Also I’m thinking something might be going on with the polling if they’re getting results like this:

Biden support slips in deep blue New York: ‘We’re a battleground state now’ https://t.co/BCjnRloMmT
— POLITICO (@politico) July 10, 2024
― frogbs, Wednesday, July 10, 2024 1:30 PM (fifty-four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

would be nice for morale if one of these skewed polls showed him winning by a lot

i think harris would be disaster because like who is the one person who has done less for the country than biden over the last 4 years? if she had some accomplishments than sure but as it is the right and center would have a heyday with "democrats think that identity is all that matters" .. and *cough* they would be right.

I mean, what did Biden achieve during the eight years as Vice President? Or Quayle or Gore etc etc.