Democratic senators quietly hope Biden wins over rivals

[Gothmog]

Link to tweet

There’s a growing sense among members of the Senate Democratic Conference that life would be easier if Joe Biden wins the party’s presidential nomination instead of his two closest competitors, Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Most Democratic senators are staying neutral in a presidential race that includes six sitting senators along with Biden, who served for decades in the Senate before becoming former President Obama’s vice president.….

Another factor is the race for the Senate. Some Democrats think it will be easier to win races in conservative-leaning states such as Alabama, North Carolina and Georgia if Biden is their nominee and not Warren or Sanders.

One Democratic senator who requested anonymity to discuss the race said a number of senators neutral in the race are more aligned with Biden.

“Ideologically, they’re definitely more with Biden,” said the Democratic senator, who described colleagues as having doubts about Warren’s and Sanders’s boldest proposals.

[liskddksil]

1. What a spineless group. Either endorse or be quiet nt

[onetexan]

18. i wouldn't label them as spineless. It's their prerogative re: who and when they come out supporting

maybe they're waiting till after the primaries before they endorse the nominee.

I do agree that Biden's moderate stance does make him more appealing to more conservative voters than Warren or Sanders. I have conservative friends who've mentioned the same.

[qazplm135]

28. waiting isn't spineless

anonymously leaking your preference is pretty spineless.

[onetexan]

41. that's your interpretation of it. I don't agree.

they were probably asked about how they feel about the candidates and chose to remain anonymous. As i've said, it's their prerogative. President Obama, for example, remained silent all through the period prior to the primaries, then endorsed Hillary once she won the nomination.

[qazplm135]

48. what does it being

their prerogative have to do with anything?

It can be both things.

[Celerity]

70. +10000

[Thekaspervote]

35. It isn't spineless at all it's smart! Just like President Obama not weighing in on the primaries

Last edited Wed Sep 18, 2019, 08:04 PM - Edit history (1)

It’s politics..a nasty game with lots of thorny barbs

[onetexan]

42. funny, i posted the same of Pres. Obama before i read your response :)

[Thekaspervote]

93. K&R!!

[Gothmog]

59. It is not spineless to want to get the strongest/most electable candidate on the ballot

We need to take control of the Senate and Biden is the best candidate to do this. These senators want to be back in the majority

[George II]

69. Spineless? Sheesh.

[gldstwmn]

79. Someone who won't go on record says

Biden is the best. Mmmkay.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

103. Can't blame em for being quiet about it... especially with other senators running.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!! or
Elizabeth & Bernie 2020!!
Either way, welcome to the revolution!!!

[Skya Rhen]

2. Of course they do! Thanks for the post...

[Gothmog]

98. These senators want to beat trump and if possible take back control of the Senate

[BeyondGeography]

3. "Life would be easier."

The key to understanding the core of Biden’s institutional support.

[Ace Rothstein]

5. Nothing will fundamentally change.

[Demsrule86]

10. I hear this horror at the though of cooperating or compromise to get stuff done...but what is your

alternative...spend four years getting zingers in...talk the talk ?

[True Blue American]

55. Thank you for that!

Working together accomplishes things.

[LanternWaste]

14. And there's the back of the t-shirt

[Demsrule86]

16. Right without some sort of cooperation, it won't change and maybe the GOP will not

cooperate but we have to try and if they don't ...run on the do nothing congress as Truman did.

[bluewater]

9. Easier for whom? Oh... themselves..

What about the rest of us?

[Demsrule86]

12. Easier for Americans...I for one am tired of endless car repairs due to the poor roads, the

ACA glitches that could be fixed, the bloated military budget...all things we could work on but won't get done without some sort of cooperation...again what is your alternative...and we will tossed out if we get nothing done.

[pangaia]

17. cooperation with whom? narcissistic, greedy, power hungry fascists ?

[Demsrule86]

25. Elected members of the US senate that we disagree with...but must deal with in order to get stuff

done...what is you plan?

[pangaia]

27. i don;t have a plan. I'm a musician

that's why we hire people to have a plan

[bluewater]

62. Merrick F-ing Garland says Hello.

My plan would start with not letting the rThugs continue to steal Supreme Court appointments from Democratic Presidents.

Realizing how slimy the rThugs actually all are is the important first step.

[Demsrule86]

78. How exactly would you do this...we have no way to confirm anyone without the Senate...and

appointments made in other ways have been knocked down by friendlier court than we have now...maybe we support Democrats who can win...and win elections...fifty state strategy...only way we get the Senate back.

[Autumn]

22. How and what will they cooperate on? Do you think the Republican will go along with cuts to the

bloated military budget, expanding the ACA and an infrastructure bill to fix those roads? They will give more money to the Military than what they request. Those ACA glitches are caused by the Republicans because they wanted it damaged so repeal would be easier. They are not going to expand it and add more money for more subsidies. I don't believe they think those damaged roads are a problem. Again. How and what will they cooperate on?

[Demsrule86]

24. I don't know what they will or won't do...but maybe infrastructure might be a start...we are going

to have to end the filibuster. That might give us some cooperation so bills on popular issues are bipartisan...what is your plan? we have to try.

[Autumn]

31. I don't have a plan, if I did it I'm sure it wouldn't matter. I'm hoping the Democrats have one

but I'm still waiting to hear HOW they will get these Republicans to work with them. We can't even get those fucking Republicans to investigate the corruption of taxpayers money going into the Cons pocket, they have no desire to protect our elections. They ignore Congressional requests and subpoenas and do whatever they want.

[BeyondGeography]

32. Biden will end the filibuster?

He's betting on Republican epiphanies. Understand your candidate, please. Not.going.to.happen.

Keeping the SOP's in place and avoiding hard politics is why these Senators are rooting for him.

[Autumn]

37. No Biden won't and Bernie said he won't end it either. Bernie's idea is to use existing

parliamentary tactics to get bills through without being filibustered. I don't know how that would work. And I don't think anyone in leadership will be willing to end the filibuster so I guess it would stay and Republicans will use it.

[Demsrule86]

80. He will end the filibuster...just wait...he will first try to work with them but then end it if he

can't. No president can do it of course but I believe we will do this with Schumer.

[Gothmog]

61. We need to beat trump and these senators think that Biden is the best candidate

The top of the ticket is very important and these senators want to beat trump and to pick up seats in the House and the Senate.

[ritapria]

4. Amen to that

If they like Joe , they should support him pubicly

[NurseJackie]

6. Great photo! He's always well-groomed and his suits always fit nicely.

He's always well-groomed and his suits always fit nicely. He's got great posture and that projects a demeanor of vitality and strength. I like how he treats everyone with respect. All I'm saying is that I could never support or seriously consider any candidate who lacks these basic good qualities.

[Skya Rhen]

7. I'm with you, NurseJackie!

[Gothmog]

19. Joe is in great shape

I got to shark his hand last week

[NurseJackie]

20. Very cool!

[crazytown]

38. Impeccable suits

There's a lot to be said for a finely tailored suit.

[Sugarcoated]

107. Be still my heart

Soooo fine

[George II]

65. So is Dr. Jill, too. They know how to appear in public.

[NurseJackie]

73. Future first ladies should be seen in clothing OTHER than Frederick's of Hollywood, or Walmart...

Future first ladies should be seen in clothing OTHER than Frederick's of Hollywood, or Walmart, or Lane Bryant.

[mcar]

91. Ha! I forgot about Frederick's of Hollywood

[NurseJackie]

92. Future presidents should be seen in suits OTHER than off-the-rack JCPenney and ill-fitting Goodwill...

Future presidents should be seen in suits OTHER than off-the-rack JCPenney and ill-fitting Goodwill mismatched jacket and pants. It's always a good idea to bring along a travel-iron or a quick steamer when on the road. Smart politicians never wear clothes that have been crammed-in to their tiny carry-on bags (except, maybe, their underwear and socks.)

[mcar]

94. They at least should learn the art of rolling one's clothes before packing

Helps a lot with wrinkles.

[Gothmog]

100. I met Joe in person last Friday at a fundraiser

He was well dressed. He also gave a great speech

[Scurrilous]

8. ...

[DeminPennswoods]

11. I want "can do", not "can't do"

apologists and scardy cats.

No. More. Of. The. Same.

[Demsrule86]

13. By definition...only cooperation will beget 'can do'.

[DeminPennswoods]

95. Cooperate with who, exactly?

Republicans? They haven't shown any interest in cooperating with Democrats for 25+ years.

[Demsrule86]

96. You have to try...what other avenue is there to get anything done? What is your plan to accomplish

policy goals? Or is the plan to spend the first two years investigating and talking ? I say two years because we will lose either the house or the senate at the midterm if we do this. Of course, this assumes we win the Senate which is tough with a moderate candidate like Biden and not possible in my view with a left leaning candidate.

[pangaia]

15. I am not for or against anybody at this point be my god

"life would be easier if Joe Biden wins"

An easy life is no life at all !!


Just don;t get out of bed in the morning.
if you do------
eat white toast and drink instant coffee
drive the chevy to work
have some canned soup for lunch
go shopping-- milk, crackers, chips, Spaghetti-O, prepared meals, pop
microwave a frozen dinner to eat while watching netflix

on sat night go to one of those fake chinese restaurants
drive the chevy home
on sunday go to church and try to stay awake, sing a couple of sickeningly sweet sentimental songs..

rinse and repeat--

[IndyOp]

21. A number?

MOST Democratic senators are staying neutral in a presidential race that includes six sitting senators along with Biden, who served for decades in the Senate before becoming former President Obama’s vice president.

MANY don’t want to take sides in a battle that is pitting colleagues against one another, and senators obviously don’t want to create bad blood with any contenders — who will either return to the Senate or end up at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Yet A NUMBER of Democrats privately acknowledge that if Warren or Sanders wins the nomination, it will create immediate tension within the party.

---

The author later mentions that 5 Democratic Senators have endorsed Biden - is "5" out of 49 the number? About 10%?

---

I *WILL* support Biden if he wins the nomination. The article in The Hill is weak journalism at best. At worst, it is an attempt to manipulate Democrats to make a decision and plead their loyalty to one candidate well before it is time to vote.

[pangaia]

29. it's THE HILL have you ever seen 'strong' journalism in THE HILL ?

[IndyOp]

30. Yeah. Okay. Sorry. Gut reaction. It is The Hill - not the Onion, so...?

[pangaia]

36. HA HA ! I wonder oif it might be the same ;publisher...

[Amimnoch]

23. Not too quietly actually.

Little exercise in math:

45 Democratic Party Senators. 2 Independent Senators that caucus with us = Total 47

Harris, Warren, Klobuchar, Booker, Gillibrand, and Sanders are all running = Total 6

Total remaining 41 available for endorsing.

Number of sitting senators that have endorsed Biden? 5 (Jones, Feinstein, Carper, Coons, Casey)

So, even this early in the primary process, Biden has racked up 12% of the remaining available Senate endorsements.

Bernie so far has 1 with his co-Senator from Vermont Patrick Leahy.

I have failed to identify a concise list of Senator Warrens endorsements, if someone has a link to a list, I will most happily update with her own numbers.

[IndyOp]

33. 10% or 12% - my point still stands. No flash of insight. It just irked me. (nt)

[Amimnoch]

39. Your post wasn't given any consideration or seen.

I replied to the OP.

My post was posted 3 minutes after yours, and I certainly didn't throw it together in 3 minutes. Heck, when I started typing it out and looking up information for it there were only a few posts in the thread.

I don't blame you though, I know that some are rather passive aggressive and do reply posts outside, and sometimes to troll.

If I'd had a problem with what you'd posted though, I'd have replied directly. Not played that kind of game.

[IndyOp]

52. Oops! Thanks for the clarification. (nt)

[George II]

68. Here's a summary of Senate endorsements:

Biden - 5, Jones, Feinstein, Carper, Coons, Casey
Sanders - 1, Leahy
Klobuchar - 1, Smith
Warren - 1, Markey
Harris - 0
O'Rourke - 0
Buttigieg - 0
Castro - 0

Here's a link to all endorsements (this appears to be kept up to date):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorsements_in_the_2020_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries#Elizabeth_Warren

[Taraman]

26. Rinse and Repeat.

Ugh, how depressing.

[KPN]

40. "Life would be easier ...". That's downright offensive!

Fuck that. Living on easy street is what created this frigging mess.

[highplainsdem]

43. I think we have a much better chance of retaking the Senate if Biden's the nominee.

[NYMinute]

44. All level-headed, realistic and real Democrats also wish the same thing.

[TCJ70]

45. So everyone who isn't supporting Biden is what? Crazy, unrealistic, and a bunch of fake Dems? n/t

[NurseJackie]

46. Oh, good grief!

So everyone who isn't supporting Biden is what? Crazy, unrealistic, and a bunch of fake Dems? n/t

and

But mostly:

[TCJ70]

50. Would you like to offer an alternative interpretation of his post? n/t

[NurseJackie]

54. No need. It's easy enough to take it at face value. What good purpose does it serve....

You know perfectly well that the other poster said NOTHING OF THE SORT.

Would you like to offer an alternative interpretation of his post? n/t

No need. It's easy enough to take it at face value. What good purpose does it serve for anyone to perform these types of linguistic gymnastics in order to come up with imaginative "interpretations" and invent reasons to be offended.

[TCJ70]

56. Let's break it down.

According to the post I replied to:

ALL people who hope Biden wins over his rivals in the primary are:
- Level-headed
- Realistic
- Real Democrats

Therefore, if you don't hope Biden wins over his rivals in the primary you are:
- Not Level-Headed
- Unrealistic
- Not Real Democrats

Or some combination of those three. This is taking what they wrote at face value. I'm not inventing anything. It's what they wrote.

[NurseJackie]

57. That's NOT what they wrote. That's what YOU wrote.

Oh, please That's NOT what they wrote. That's what YOU wrote.

[NurseJackie]

58. All people who love cats are generous, caring, and real animal lovers.

According to the pattern of your previous analysis and "interpretation"... if someone had written:

ALL people who love cats are:
• Generous
• Caring
• Real Animal Lovers

... would you then presume to be offended by coming up with some outlandish "interpretation" about how the writer was supposedly suggesting that if someone doesn't love cats (or if they love dogs more) then that person is:
• NOT Generous
• Uncaring
• NOT Real Animal Lovers

Or some combination of those three. This is taking what they wrote at face value. I'm not inventing anything. It's what they wrote.

See, that's where you're wrong. The writer said NONE of those things and you know it. It's nothing but a wild interpretation that has no basis in fact.

Here's another: "Women who wear basic black are very chic and stylish." --- I suppose (using some outlandish pretzel logic and interpretation) this could be twisted to mean that women who wear other colors are classless slobs. Eh? But that would be wrong... and silly.

[ehrnst]

63. Alrighty then.

[TCJ70]

66. Yes. That is also an inaccurate thing to say. What we're dealing with are if/then statements.

- If (generous, caring, real animal lover)
- Then (loves cats)

No. That means if you don’t love cats, you can’t be all three of those things at once. Even if you reverse the statement:

- If (loves cats)
- Then (generous, caring, real animal lover)

That’s also inaccurate as there are certainly people who love cats who aren’t generous or caring.

Similarly:

If (level-headed, realistic, real Democrat)
Then (hopes Biden wins)

Also, no. It’s possible to be all three of those things and hope someone else wins the primary. It’s the “real” [whatever you want here] part of the statements that are more problematic than the other two qualifiers. It suggests that you aren’t a real Democrat if you don’t support Biden. Or maybe you are a real Dem but you’re either not level-headed or unrealistic.

On your fashion example, you didn’t explicitly say that you can only be part of the larger group (fashionable people) by wearing black, so that example simply doesn’t work. In order for it to be incorrect like the other examples you’d have to do this:

- If (chic, stylish, only fashionable outfit)
- Then (wears black)

Reverse it:

- If (wears black)
- Then (chic, stylish, only fashionable outfit)

Once again, no. There are many ways to be fashionable and they aren’t limited to just black.

[NYMinute]

71. You need to perhaps reexamine the logic.

1. There is no if-then-else statement, particularly note that there is no "else" statement.
2. The predicates are determined in "one or more of" paradigm.
3. As another poster wrote above, it is a multivariate discriminant and thus needs to be evaluated using "Mahalanobis distance" and not a binary "on or off" or "either or". Multivariate discriminants have multiple shades.
4. Multivariate discriminants have no corollaries because of the shades involved. The shades are evaluate by "preponderence of" logic and not "absence or presence of" logic. (Ref. Cat lover analogy vide supra.)

I sincerely hope there were some informative responses to stimulate cogent and salubrious cogntition.

[TCJ70]

72. It's interesting you have O'Rourke as your candidate...so I have a question:

Since ALL level-headed, realistic, and real Democrats hope Biden wins, which one (or more) AREN’T you?

Side note: The “All” in your original statement makes it an if-then.

[NYMinute]

77. What? No comment on the content of my erudite post?

That is disappointing.

The "all" refers to a collective cohort. There are excellent articles about cohorts in anthropological statistics.

However, Beto looks like he has no chance of winning so I want him to be Biden's running mate. That makes me level-headed, realistic and real - plus suave, debonair, charismatic, cool, youthful and passionate. (And of course, modest and humble.)

[TCJ70]

86. Thank you for (inadvertently?) answering the question. n/t

[NurseJackie]

75. It does nothing of the sort.

It suggests that you aren’t a real Democrat if you don’t support Biden.

It does nothing of the sort. You know perfectly well that it doesn't.

There is no "if then"... you're adding that yourself. The only insults or slams are the ones you've written yourself. It's just an imagined insult because the egos and vanities of the supporters of OTHER candidates weren't adequately stroked and massaged.

Please continue. This is very entertaining. I enjoy laughing.

[TCJ70]

76. One last post:

Do you agree with NYMinute’s statement?

If you do, and you have Buttigieg as your candidate...so since ALL level-headed, realistic, and real Democrats hope Biden wins the primary, which one AREN’T you?

[NurseJackie]

81. I have no problems with it. I have thicker skin and tend to not imagine things that don't exist.

Do you agree with NYMinute’s statement?

I have no problems with it. I have thicker skin and tend to not imagine things that don't exist.

If you do, and you have Buttigieg as your candidate..

Why do the two things necessarily need to be mutually exclusive? I understand that many people prefer to live in a binary black-and-white world with no shades of gray... but that's not very realistic or practical, is it? I guess it makes things easy for someone who may not want to take an extra moment or two to be thoughtful and reflective. I mean... after all... the "with-us-or-against-us" philosophy and the "fear the other" philosophy is all the rage these days, right?

which one AREN’T you?

Who said I'm "not" anything? I'm the kind of person who doesn't need my ego continually stroked, and I'm not the type of person who feels personally offended when supporters of other candidates engage in their own cheerleading and gilding. I may disagree, but I'm not offended. Why should I be? It would be silly for me to do so. What good purpose would it serve for me to get so bent out of shape about those types of passing comments like that?

Personally speaking, I just cant get as worked up and distraught about these things as others appear to do.

[TCJ70]

83. NYMinute said you aren't one of those things since you aren't hoping Biden wins the primary..

At least, you say you aren’t. But maybe there’s another reason you can be so aloof and nonchalant about one DUer insulting many other DUers. After all, it wouldn’t be the first time you had a candidate at the bottom of your posts you didn’t actually support, would it?

[NurseJackie]

84. You don't know that.

since you aren't hoping Biden wins the primary..

You don't know that to be factual.

At least, you say you aren’t.

I've said no such thing.

But maybe there’s another reason you can be so aloof and nonchalant about one DUer insulting many other DUers.

S/he's done no such thing.

After all, it wouldn’t be the first time you had a candidate at the bottom of your posts you didn’t actually support, would it?

Huh? This makes no sense. Can you elaborate, please?

[TCJ70]

85. OK.

You don't know that to be factual.

It's reasonable since you have Buttigieg at the bottom of your posts. And that purpose of that section is outlined as this:
"In order to participate in the Democratic Primaries forum you must set your current first-choice candidate preference."
So is he not really your preference?

I've said no such thing.

By selecting Buttigieg, you did.

S/he's done no such thing.

Since they said you can't be level-headed, realistic, or a real Democrat all at the same time without supporting Biden in the primary, yes they did.

Huh? This makes no sense. Can you elaborate, please?

Sure. In april of this year you wrote this post while having Sanders as your first-choice primary candidate preference (https://www.democraticunderground.com/128770950#post57). You were called out on it, not only by me, because I don't think anyone who's been around here as long as you and I have would ever believe that you, NurseJackie, would ever support Bernie Sanders to win the primary.

[NurseJackie]

87. What a great memory!

Sure. In april of this year you wrote this post while having Sanders as your first-choice primary candidate preference (https://www.democraticunderground.com/128770950#post57). You were called out on it, not only by me, because I don't think anyone who's been around here as long as you and I have would ever believe that you, NurseJackie, would ever support Bernie Sanders to win the primary.

I'm full of surprises, aren't I? It's a mistake for anyone to assume anything about me. It's also a mistake for anyone to think that holding a grudge against me serves any good purpose.

yes they did.

No, that's wrong. No such thing happened. Your interpretation is incorrect.

By selecting Buttigieg, you did

No, I didn't. It's a mistake to assume that when someone supports ONE candidate that they automatically OPPOSE all others. Again... we do not live in a binary world. Black-white. On-off. Friend-enemy. Us-them. There are shades of gray that thoughtful and intelligent people can recognize.

you must set your current first-choice candidate preference.

Oh no! Horrors! Too bad the DU software doesn't account for someone who has more than one "first choice" preferences. Flip a coin, pick one... who the fuck cares? What difference does it make? I don't live in a black and white world.

[NYMinute]

90. Sadly, some people don't get the simple statement

"If you had to vote now, who would you pick?"

It doesn't say anything about yesterday, tomorrow or next week or next month or next year does it?

[ehrnst]

102. Especially after the GOP & Putin actually let loose oppo... after the primary...

After all the promoting of their Democratic nominee of choice during the primary is done.
.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/20/18508880/karl-rove-bernie-sanders-could-beat-donald-trump-in-2020

[George II]

64. You equate not being level-headed with being crazy?

[TCJ70]

67. Maybe crazy is the wrong word. What alternative would you suggest?

Looking at a thesaurus “excitable” comes up as an antonym to level-headed but I don’t think Biden supporters would want to be inexcusable. A synonym for level-headed is “sane” so may insane is what I should have used.

[GeorgeGist]

47. Weak journalism..

Name names else I ignore.

[Tarheel_Dem]

49. Agreed. n/t

[MRDAWG]

51. They are right Biden is the one**

*

[Gothmog]

53. Joe Biden can help the Democrats retake control of the Senate

Link to tweet

[RhodeIslandOne]

60. Weird considering it seems half the Democratic Senators are running for President.

[gldstwmn]

74. Oh come on...

[5starlib]

82. Neither Warren or Bernie can campaign for other Dems in red states

That's a problem with Warren. She has limited appeal. Say what you can about Biden, but the man can go in all 50 states and campaign for ANY Dem wanting him to do so. He's not kryptonite like Warren and Bernie. No Dem is going to run away from Biden. Warren can't go to Alabama and campaign for Doug Jones or go to NC and campaign against Tillis. This is a fact. Warren is bad for our congressional candidates in moderate/swing/red districts.

[Demsrule86]

89. Very true...

[DeminPennswoods]

97. Don't think this is true at all

Warren and Bernie both bring a populist message, although on somewhat different tracks. It appeals to the same people who voted for Trump.

Don't believe me? In the 2016 Dem (we have closed primaries) primary, Bernie got a lot of support in the "red" areas of Pennsylvania where he either beat Clinton or ran nearly even with her.

No Dem will ever win over the Trump cultists, but there are voters who went for Trump because they felt alienated from the federal gov't, that the federal gov't just doesn't "work for them" or work in their interests. Absolutely both Warren and Sanders appeal to those voters.

[quickesst]

88. hahaha....

A bunch of people mad cuz their candidates name isn't where Joe Biden's is in the article

[LakeArenal]

101. Yes it's always the same characters ranting about Joe.

Never miss an opportunity to blow smoke at Joe.

Sometimes reading the headline I can guess who is going to reject anything good said about Joe.

And I wasn’t wrong this time

[quickesst]

104. here is what I think is happening....

I believe the goal of some people is not to elevate their candidates to a higher plane than Joe's, but rather to drag him down far enough so that their candidates existing numbers are higher than his without actually changing or elevating their candidate. If another candidate is going to get the nomination, I would rather they get it with a 35 or 40% poll number rather than a 20 percent poll number, which will only weaken us in the general election.

[LakeArenal]

105. Exactly...

[Gothmog]

99. From my twitter feed

Link to tweet

[Cha]

106. Retweeted!

Thank you, Goth!

[Gothmog]

108. Biden's Electability Advantage Will Be Hard to Shake Among Risk-Averse Democrats

Link to tweet

The most obvious is Biden’s consistent strength in head-to-head polls against Trump. You can remind people all day long that these are unreliable indicators of how a general-election campaign will actually play out, but they won’t be able to ignore them. And Biden’s advantage here is significant. There is not a single poll in the RealClearPolitics database of 2020 trial heats between Biden and Trump in which Biden does not lead. His current lead in RCP’s polling averages is an enormous 11.5 percent (Sanders’s is 7.0 percent, and Warren’s is 5.2 percent, but both have trailed Trump in some surveys).

A second factor making Biden Mr. Electable is the widespread belief among pundits and voters alike that, all things being equal, proximity to the political “center” is a general-election asset. The more we approach a three-candidate nominating contest in which Biden’s only real challenge comes from Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, the more Biden’s relative “moderation” will become evident. That may hurt him with some primary voters, but it could at the same time enhance his perceived electability.

A third factor some analysts focus on is the practical ability to win voters the party lost in 2016 — either to Trump or to third parties or to the living-room couch. There’s at best limited evidence that Biden is more popular than other Democrats in the much-chewed-over white working-class demographic (especially Obama-Trump voters). But he certainly talks about his focus on these voters a lot, which enhances the perception they are his people. And he certainly has conspicuous strength among African-American voters, whose fall-off in turnout was a big problem for Hillary Clinton in 2016. Biden does not look like a good bet to energize younger voters, but Trump might well do that for him...…

“Risk-averse” is probably the most important term to remember in assessing Democratic voters heading toward 2020. They still don’t entirely understand how Hillary Clinton managed to lose to Donald Trump in 2016, but they aren’t inclined to take anything for granted this time around. And that will make it difficult for candidates other than Biden to convince Democrats their other qualities are worth taking a bit of a risk on. Sure, Biden could in theory blow himself up with some high-profile gaffe that undermines the very premise of his candidacy. But that’s not within anyone else’s control.