The White House/ZUMA
Now, anyone who follows The political world is arguing over what to do after President Joe Biden's debate panic raised questions, concerns and fears about his mental health. So far, a handful of Democrats have urged him to withdraw from the 2024 race. More experts are doing the same. Major donors are worried. And the White House and his campaign insist Biden can and will do the job. On social media, his most fervent supporters are raging against critics and renegade Democrats, arguing that Biden's age should be the focus instead on Donald Trump, his lies and numerous debts, and the threat he poses to American democracy.
Not surprisingly, there is no consensus in Democratic world.
After speaking with many in Democratic circles, I've been pondering this mess and possible steps forward, and I humbly believe my thoughts are worth sharing.
Let's look at this as a decision tree. First branch: What does Biden's disastrous debate performance mean? Many of his supporters and his own team have dismissed this as simply an overnight failure, some pointing to the disastrous first debate between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. But Obama's poor performance was due to a lack of preparation and an arrogant decision not to treat Romney as a worthy opponent. It says nothing about his ability or health.
Biden's debate raised the question: Is this a passing event (perhaps due to a cold or fatigue from the rigorous journey) or a sign of worrisome symptoms that may or probably will return? If it is the latter, it means that his reelection efforts, and efforts to prevent Trump from returning to the White House, are in grave danger. Another public appearance like this would probably end Biden's campaign. And if such an event were to occur after the convention, the Democratic Party would be left helpless. With a candidate who is perceived to have significantly reduced cognitive abilities, the Democratic Party could suffer major setbacks, including a loss of the Senate and failure to retake the House of Representatives. Authoritarian Trump would return to power and Republicans would control Congress.
So here's your first decision: If you give up after just one night and still support Biden, your calculations are over. You're going to have to work hard and be nervous for the next four months.
If you believe the debate revealed a potentially existential threat to Biden's operation, then you move on to another branch of the decision tree: The next question is, if not Biden, then who?
Before we go any further, let's note that, according to Democratic Party rules, there is currently no way for the party to reject Biden's nomination for president. Biden holds a majority of the delegates at next month's convention in Chicago, and they have pledged to vote for him. For anything else to happen, Biden would have to drop out of the race. If he continues to run, this remaining “if” becomes irrelevant.
For now, there seems to be a gradual buildup of pressure from the Democratic Party for Biden to walk off into the sunset. There may come a time when a consensus emerges among the Democratic Party establishment (which doesn't really exist as an institution) that Biden is finished. How this position is presented to Biden could influence his decision. One obvious way is to shower him with love. You ran a very influential and successful presidency, passed great legislation, and led the country out of a terrible pandemic. We can celebrate that at our convention. You saved us once by beating Trump. Now you can save us from Trump again by stepping down. And unfortunately, if you continue as a candidate and are defeated, it will overshadow the great legacy you have built.
For this exercise, let's assume that Biden steps down himself. This brings us back to the question of what or who comes next. The question is whether Biden will nominate a successor and call on delegates to vote for this person, or leave it to the delegates at the convention to choose someone else.
If Biden wants to have the deciding factor, he has no choice but to rely on Vice President Kamala Harris. Abandoning her would create serious rifts in the party and alienate a loyal base of black Americans, especially black women. The cleanest scenario for Biden would be to announce his withdrawal and simultaneously call on his delegates to support Harris.
If Biden doesn't do so, we will finally have the open convention that political journalists and political enthusiasts have been waiting for for years. This means that anyone can enter the race and compete for the nomination. Potential candidates include Governors Gavin Newsom (California), Gretchen Whitmer (Michigan), JB Pritzker (Illinois) and Harris. The convention could be full of conflict and chaos. The party will certainly be in some turmoil. And if there is rift outside the convention venue due to protests against the Gaza war, the impression given to the American people may be that Democrats = disorder.
So what's better for Democrats: a quick transition to Ms. Harris or a drawn-out battle with a few or many candidates that could split the party apart — and, again, a loss for Ms. Harris that could infuriate large swaths of the Democratic base?
What if an open convention scenario were preferable? The result could be a candidate who has never run a national campaign and has yet to build a national organization for the presidency. And this person would be largely unknown to voters (especially the less-informed, less-engaged voters who are likely to decide the outcome of this race) but would immediately face hundreds of millions of dollars of negative advertising as part of a smear campaign designed to define him or her in the worst way imaginable. This would be a recipe for swiftvoting. Moreover, no one other than Harris would be able to inherit the campaign funds accumulated by the Biden campaign (which will likely be transferred to a super PAC to support a new candidate other than Harris, but that could lead to a clumsy operation). This new candidate would have only about 10 weeks to put it all together.
Compare that to the scenario where Harris is nominated. The convention is likely to be smooth sailing, at least on the floor. There is no talk of Democratic chaos. Biden and Harris may be heartily celebrating what they've accomplished in their first term and celebrating Harris being the running mate. (Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear might be one hell of a contender.) And Harris will have a ton of money.
A big factor in this crossroads of a Harris-versus-Nothing decision is whether Harris can be an effective candidate to beat Trump, and whether replacing her with Biden would improve the party's chances of victory, although of course the easiest move would be to do so.
Harris is a mercurial politician. She had bright moments as a senator and as a 2020 presidential candidate (including when she scolded Biden about racism). But her presidential effort fizzled. As vice president, she has often been seen as a nonentity, perhaps because the Biden team held her back or gave her impossible tasks, such as solving the border crisis. But she has also been a stumbling block for Biden, who has been a key figure in the Democratic presidential race. Dobbs She opposes the ruling that would end women's right to abortion and has been active on this issue, which is a driving force in this election. She is younger and more active than Biden (59). She has experience as a prosecutor and will be able to scathingly criticize Trump in debates and other forums. And she has already taken a lot of flak from the MAGA attack machine. She has been thoroughly vetted and is not a newcomer.
Back to the decision tree: known quantity or a conventional brawl that produces something nobody knows?
Unfortunately, when it comes to Harris, an ugly question arises: Can a black woman win enough of the key battleground states that will decide the outcome: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona, and Georgia? For many, the answer will depend on their views of humanity and the forces of racism and sexism. Polls show Harris as equally or nearly as competitive overall as Biden if she faced off against Trump. But that could easily change either way. If she campaigns hard, her approval rating could go up. If right-wing alarmists find an effective attack vector (racism, sexism, or otherwise), her approval rating could go down.
If you're wondering my opinion, I think Harris gives the Democrats their best chance at this point, rather than a rocky convention and a slew of inexperienced candidates. Some might choose the chaotic route and hope that a different candidate emerges who they prefer and who has different weaknesses than Harris.
It's important to remember that any path the Democrats can take now carries significant risk. What's the risk that Biden will exit like a zombie again? What's the risk that Harris will falter in her campaign? What's the risk that the convention will devolve into chaos and internal civil war? And what about the risks attached to whoever emerges from that chaos? No path will be without risk.
Having decided to support Harris over an open-ended election, we move on to risk assessment of the first two options. They are different in nature. Biden's risk is similar to the risk of a huge natural disaster. If what is feared about Biden happens (after the convention), the Democrats lose everything. Game over. (Technically, the Democrats could replace him after the convention, but there are many logistical hurdles to doing so.)
In Harris' case, the risks are more general: they relate to her statesmanship and her ability to win over voters in key states. These are manageable problems, but there's no guarantee they can be overcome.
At the bottom of this decision tree, we are left with two options, each with different risks: Biden, whose momentary misstep could derail the campaign, or Harris, whose mundane flaws mean she must overcome powerful forces of racism and sexism.
It will not be easy for the Democratic Party to get out of this situation that Biden and his allies have created. Biden has presented the party with a tremendous dilemma. And in the end, Biden may decide to maintain the status quo and not empower the party on this crucial decision.
Whatever happens, there is no perfect, or even near-perfect, path for the Democratic Party. It comes down to what risk you want to live with: Biden further decline, Harris fizzling out on the campaign trail, or the convention being a circus that spits out unknown candidates, flawed and all. To me, picking Harris on this day is a better risk for the Democratic Party than it is worth. Still, it's possible that Biden will be persuaded to back out. But none of these calculations are meaningful until Biden gives up on his dream of a second term. Still, considering them at this point is a good way to prepare for what may be an intense and highly consequential event.
