Here's the bet Joe Biden is making

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Democrats have usually won the presidency by offering a fresh face to the American people like Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, and Obama. The Republicans usually go with the experienced next in line candidate like Nixon, Bush Pere, and Dole... But we live in unusual times. Joe Biden is betting Americans don't want new as much as they want calm.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. He may have a point. Trump has been so chaotic, destabilizing and downright bizarre

that a president who offers contrasting stability, calm and a return to accepted norms of governance might be welcome. I haven't decided on a particular candidate yet (probably won't at least until the debates), but I would like very much to have a president who won't make me come home and check the news with trepidation, wondering what the hell they've done during the two hours when I was out shopping. It would be kind of nice to have a president who isn't controversial for a change.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. The average American rarely thinks about the president except when it comes to voting.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. I think they think about the current one a lot because he never shuts up.

[PatSeg]

11. That's for sure!

People shouldn't have to watch their president on a daily basis to make sure he isn't going to blow up the world. When we elect competent people, we can do our jobs because we know they are doing their's. Most people should be more aware of what is going on in government, but it doesn't have to be politics 24/7, if we hire trustworthy, capable people.

When Obama was in the White House, I felt comfortable focusing on other things, because we had good people throughout government doing their job. I didn't feel the need to constantly check DU or MSNBC. It has been exhausting.

[Thekaspervote]

4. Agree!

[honest.abe]

5. Yes, that is how I see it as well.

Typically to unseat a sitting President you would need a real head turner but this situation is so much different from typical. Many see Trump as a dangerous fool bent on becoming America's first dictator. A familiar safe face is what many are looking for.

[KPN]

6. That didn't work last time. We would have had calm, measured, experienced, thoughtful,

intelligent, wise and patriotic all rolled up into one. And what did we get: new ... and the opposite of all those other good things we would have had.

[Demsrule86]

13. She was attacked by the right and the left and sadly some nominally on our side

caused her to lose the electoral college. If a candidate is attacked on the right and the left we lose. Given the midterms, we need a candidate who can appeal to moderates.

[KPN]

19. I'll have to think about that. At first read, your argument strikes me as self-contradictory.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

16. It was very different last time. While it's true about the candidate with all of those qualities,

we were also coming from eight years of similarly calm, thoughtful, etc. However, there was also an undercurrent of racism and resentment, which Trump was able to weaponize. That's what he really meant when he talked about shaking up the system. Plus, hardly anyone seriously believed he'd win. Now that we've had a couple of years of a truly chaotic, frightening presidency we can see more clearly what a difference a stable president can make. That wasn't so obvious in 2016 but it is now.

[KPN]

20. I hope you are right. But my gut tells me it's a mix of the two -- as a whole, we still want

something different from the standard, but also calm as compared to the current chaos. I'm not convinced that Biden is our best choice by any stretch.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

24. Most of our candidates, with the exception of perpetually-angry Bernie,

are calm, reassuring people. I'm not necessarily advocating for Biden in particular, but that calm quality, which stands out in Biden especially, is likely to be an important and positive contrast to Trump.

[KPN]

26. Well, not saying that Sander's is my front-runner at this point, but we obviously perceive him

differently. I don't see Sanders as being uncalm, as in chaotic, unstable, etc. He is direct, no doubt about that.

[Dream Girl]

18. But she was also next in line.

[KPN]

21. As is Biden at this point.

[Skya Rhen]

63. Biden is not "next in line" as in the DNC/Democratic establishment have put him forth...

Regular voters have demonstrated, en masse, that they desperately want him. He is well-liked by the establishment BUT he had to earn his stripes through the backing of the majority of the Democratic voters who are making their voices heard...

[R B Garr]

54. All of the lies about her are what didn't work -- to get

her in the White House, that is. It’s been well documented who the lies helped...

[marylandblue]

7. You are right that's his bet, but is it a good one?

When we've offered up experienced and steady - Mondale, Kerry, Hillary - we've lost to a less experienced, less competent competitor.

[Demsrule86]

8. And in every case you mention the candidate was attacked from the right and the left.

It is not our candidates that are wrong but some of our voters refusal to accept reality and insist on candidates who can't win like McGovern.

[marylandblue]

30. I don't anyone thought Kerry couldn't win.

In fact, Bush was another unqualified idiot who (so we thought) was the worst possible choice. Kerry argued he was "electable." I certainly didn't think where Kennedy was in Christmas 1970 would be a campaign issue. So much for experience and being a war hero.

I didn't think Mondale was really electable, but he was the pick of the party establishment and voters went along.

And very few thought Trump would be a serious challenge to Clinton. If you thought her experience, steadiness or past errors would actually make her a poor choice against Trump, congratulations on your forethought. What do you think Trump will do to Biden?

[Demsrule86]

40. Kerry was viciously attacked by the left early in the primary

During the primary Kerry was attacked for voting for the Iraq war, being in bed with lobbyist and not being different from Bush... made it close enough the pugs could steal it in Ohio.

[marylandblue]

41. What do think will happen to Biden? Do you really think he is immune?

Or are you just counting on Trump hatred to protect Biden, but not help any other candidate all?

[Demsrule86]

50. I think we take our chances. The midterms show we need a candidate who can appeal to moderates.

We could make up any votes the left cost us. And I would hope if they are smart, they STFU and let Biden beat Trump. A left candidate won't win period...our only shot. If you don't believe me, check out the electoral map.

[marylandblue]

51. Well I don't disagree as far as that goes, but I think it's a lot more complicated than that.

The major parties are alliances. For Democrats, it's an alliance of social progressives, economic progressives, moderates and a few conservatives who hate Trump.

At the same time, both conservatism and progressivism are changing. White supremacism was once a fringe part of conservatism, now it's leading the way. Free trade was once the default for both moderates and conservatives, now conservatives have rejected it.

Progressivism is changing by it's increasing diversity and also moving more into the economic mainstream. Universal healthcare and fair trade are now mainstream rather than far left dreams.

In my view, the winner of the primaries will be the person who best pulls together these disparate factions into a unified whole. Give each of them enough of what they want to keep them in the coalition. This is true even if we only look at the 3 or 4 key midwestern states, since we can't afford to lose even a single vote there. There aren't ZERO progressives there, so what good does it do if we pick up 80,000+ moderates and lose an equal number of progressives? Sure, it would be idiotic for a progressive not to back Biden in the general, but the world is full of idiots who vote. Calling them idiots doesn't win their vote.

Sure, Biden could pull it together, but it isn't a given and he isn't the only choice. And because progressivism is changing and becoming more mainstream, isn't a given that a nominal progressive couldn't win any moderates.

This sort of analysis makes a lot more sense to me than anything involving hope that "they are smart." Because a lot of people really aren't that smart.

It also makes a lot more sense to me than looking at a state map and pretending that 30 million people now hate Trump because he's an idiot and now all love Uncle Joe because he's Uncle Joe, but won't vote for any other Democrat, moderate or progressive, under any circumstances.

That's really where I differ from you. I agree we need to appeal to moderates. I don't agree that you can just look at a map and decide Biden is the salvation of America.

My brain doesn't work that way. It never will work that way. That might make me some kind of idiot. But we idiots vote too. There's a lot of idiots like me in Michigan.
I know because I meet a lot of idiots from all over.

Do I need to vote for Trump to prove I'm an idiot, or is it sufficient that I call myself one after dismissing your simplistic analysis?

[Demsrule86]

71. You can't run left unless the voters are left.,.clearly this is not the case as the

Midterms clearly show. Also an examination of the Senate map shows that country is not left and we must run candidates that can win in national elections. Everytime you elect Republicans, they pull the country further right.

[marylandblue]

73. I think you didn't either didn't read or didn't understand my post.

[Demsrule86]

76. He was born in Pennsylvania. He is well liked. He speaks their language.

Who else could do it. I did read your post. The last time we won a big election was in 08...Dean had a 50 state strategy. We must do this too. He is best suited to be our nominer and it is unlikely anyone but him can win those states.

[marylandblue]

77. Then you didn't understand my post.

Which is based entirely on factors unrelated to the candidate's birthplace or perceived likeability. Likeability is not a static thing, and if I'm right, Biden may not be so likeable by Election Day.

Who else could do it? Obviously I think Buttigieg can. Some others could too.

[Demsrule86]

85. I do understand your post.,. Biden is already well liked. Could others be liked

Maybe...maybe not. Why risk it. We need to win. Caller after caller on pxm radio said they supported Biden...because he can win. This was the a progressive channel.

[LongtimeAZDem]

15. Mondale was going against Reagan, GWB had a 70% approval rating, and we know what happened to HRC

In this case, we're going up against an embarrassment of a President whose approval rating has never even cracked 50%.

[marylandblue]

45. Reagan's average approval rating for all of 1982 and 1983 was 44%

The low point was 35% in January 1983, by April it was still only around 45%.

And Reagan was in fact considered an embarrassment by many.

[LongtimeAZDem]

48. Those numbers don't adequately reflect how popular he was going into the election. Mondale never

had a chance; choosing Ferraro was a "Hail Mary" tactic.

[marylandblue]

56. They reflect where he was in 1983 when nobody knew what would happen in 1984.

Which is sort of like where we are right now in regards to 2020. Quite a few Biden backers act like they have crystal balls. If you have one, can you send me a screenshot so I can verify your forecast?

[LongtimeAZDem]

61. Except that Regan was killing Mondale in the polls

[marylandblue]

64. I could not find any head to head polling for April 1983.

The earliest on Wikipedia is from December 1983 at which time Reagan was around 50% approval and rising. We are 8 months away from that. Do you have any earlier polls?

Mondale's closest rival in the primaries was Gary Hart, who started out in as an unknown in January 1983, and ended up osing to Mondale by only 300,000 votes.

At this point in 2016, neither Trump nor Sanders had even announced yet.

[John Fante]

79. The last Gallup poll before the 1984 election showed Reagan's

approval at 58%. It was consistently above 50% throughout the year.

Trump has a better chance of actually forming a coherent sentence than he does seeing popularity levels that high. In fact, the economy is only reason his aleady-dismal numbers aren't worse than they are. Imagine if he was hit with the brutal recession that plagued Reagan in 1982?

[marylandblue]

84. Thanks you've made my point.

We only know what we know today. I can imagine A LOT of things changing between now and Election Day. Some of things are very likely to happen and very unfavorable to Biden.

So my point is that it's really too early to say Biden is our best (some say only) hope. However it's not too early to create a misguided strategy based solely on how he's polling today.

I think a lot of other Biden doubters are trying to make the same point in various ways.

[KPN]

22. I'm with you in questioning that. My sense is as a whole the electorate is still looking for

something/someone who is not more of the same, but would also welcome stability and calm. I think the ideal candidate will offer both.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. "When we've offered up experienced and steady - Mondale, Kerry, Hillary - we've lost..."

I noted that in my original post Biden is betting this time is different. I think he's right. Trump is a unhinged narcissist with authoritarian tendencies.

[marylandblue]

46. Yes I realize he is betting this time is different. And Buttigieg is betting the exact opposite.

Should be interesting to see what happens.

[AlexSFCA]

78. it's funny how we quickly forget history

Kerry lost, what’s our excuse? Comey, russian interference, fox news?
In 2004, social media was a niche, fox news was much less extreme, putin certainly did not want bush to win. And all we can say to this is that he lost cause of Ohio?? Well, same Ohio voted for Obama, mind you who was MUCH less likely to win than Kerry was and with more contentous primary.

[John Fante]

80. Bush was still reasonably popular in 2004.

His approval ratings didn't crater until the following year.

Kerry was trying to defeat a war-time president with 50% approval ratings. Not an easy feat, and he almost pulled it off.

[CrispyQ]

9. Biden has the experience to hit the ground running.

Joe knows how the federal government works. He has decades long relationships with people in government. We will be on much better footing with our allies on day one of a Biden presidency than we would be with any other democratic candidate. Joe is a known factor & right now that counts for a lot.

[PatSeg]

14. Oh yes

It isn't just Joe and what he will do, it is all the excellent, experienced people he will put in key positions throughout government. He might even restore The State Department to a functioning government agency.

[marylandblue]

32. That's certainly a useful quality for a President, but it rarely wins any votes.

The qualities needed to win a campaign are different from the qualities needed to govern. It's an unfortunate consequence of democracy - the best campaigner wins, not the best resume.

[musicman65]

67. it has to be

that he shall prevail,it is the only hope we have for changes

[Demit]

10. For me, I don't want retro or the past as much as I want hope.

You want to go back to Obama's time, I get it. But vice-presidents don't necessarily continue to follow their boss's policies. They tend to want to forge their own paths. I know you are very sure that Biden will beat Trump. Is that the same ability that enable you to predict what policies Biden would follow if he won? Once he becomes boss?

[CrispyQ]

17. First order of business - wrest control of our government from the fascists.

You don't get to set policy if you don't win at politics.

[Demit]

29. Then you don't know what policies the new president will have.

At least when candidates are setting out their plans, you get an idea of what they will try to do. What is most important to them. You know that they've thought about these issues.

If you are telling one candidate you don't care anything about policies now, you're letting him know that he can do whatever he likes, because he's made no promises to you that he has to (try to) keep.

[KPN]

25. I think a better question is are wwe really so certain that Biden would win? Haven't we been

down that path of certainty already? It seems to me that we are missing the entire point that has been made by our electorate in Obama's and then, sadly, tRump's victories.

[Demit]

37. I know I'm not so sure at all.

I think there is every possibility he will trip himself up during the primary season, despite the air of inevitability that's being created around him now. Only time will tell. We political junkies are watching closely now, but he has to go out and convince non-political junkie voters too. Maybe he'll project such an air of calm for the next 8 months that voters will be mesmerized and say That's what I want! Here's my vote! Here's a blank check for whatever you want to do as president.

But I don't think so.

[Celerity]

38. +1

It is far too early to say that Biden is the only (or even the best) path to victory. Saying it 10,000 times in April 2019 does not make it a fact. It is a far from persuasive argument that unfortunately seems to be the bedrock rationale for some of his early supporters.

[Demsrule86]

47. No we haven't. We need three specific states to guarantee a win. Biden

Can take them...MI,PA and WI.Look at the electoral map..

[marylandblue]

59. You mean the blue wall that everybody was certain we would win in 2016?

[Demsrule86]

70. Exactly, the blue wall will save us from defeat this time because if Trump

takes those states he wins an electoral college victory again...and we win the popular vote much good it will do us. We lost because the blue wall. crumbled in 16. We have nothing to replace it. I suggest people look at the Senate map and electoral college map. The situation is dire

[marylandblue]

72. Right, and I suggest you find out what the people really want

before you assume that they just want a friendly old white guy from Scranton.

You also shouldn't assume I don't know how to read a map.

[Demsrule86]

74. I can tell you that Biden is not seen that way in the rustbelt.

What do the other candidates offer the rustbelt?

[marylandblue]

75. Good question, maybe we should listen to the lesser known candidates a little more

before assuming they have nothing to offer?

But since you know, how is Biden seen in the rust belt? And other than looking at a map and taking your word for it, how could I verify your opinion?

[marylandblue]

58. Exactly. We are trying to forecast swing voter opinions 18 months from now.

80%-90% of people already know who they will vote for in the general election. The remaining 10-20% have no clue, so how can we really know?

[oasis]

12. Make America Sane Again. nt

[crazytown]

23. How did VP Mondale work out?

Aged President, Republican ‘revolution’, return to normalcy campaign, VP four years out of office, entrenched as front runner while Reagan was unpopular.

[BannonsLiver]

28. And you think the situations are comparable because...?

Seems like quite a reach tbh.

[crazytown]

33. VP four years out of office, Republican 'revolution'

return to normalcy, entrenched as the front runner while the President was unpopular.

VP Biden is no Mondale and Trump ain’t Reagan, but the parallels are there. No one expected Reagan to recover in May 83. It’s a warning.

[BannonsLiver]

34. I have a different memory of that time.

But I see your point. That being said, there’s no way we’ll ever see this country so massed on one side ever again. The electoral college victory that year will never be seen again. Country is much more divided now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. Ronald Reagan was around 61% approval in November of 1984.

If Chump is at 61% approval he's on his way to a landslide like Reagan in 1984 but he most likely won't be.

[John Fante]

83. Reagan was hamstrung by the nasty 1982 recession and recovery.

Prior to that, Reagan was far more popular than Trump could ever dream of being. Once the economy began recovering in late-1983, Reagan's popularity followed.

Trump, despite inheriting a robust economy that continues to do well (despite his antics), has been unpopular since day one. He can't "recover" because he has always been stuck in a 40-42% rut.

Funny how Reagan had 61% approval ratings with the unemployment rate at 7.8%. Trump OTOH has 42% approval ratings at with the rate at 3.8%. There's no comparison between the two.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. Ronald Reagan was around 61% approval in November of 1984.

https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/presidential-approval/

which is unsurprisingly just two points higher than the percentage of the vote he received in the election.


If Donald Trump is at at 61% approval in 2020 he's on his way to a landslide but it is infinitely more likely than not he will remain mired in the low forties.



BTW Reagan reached 65% approval in your graph. Trump has never reached 47%. His approval rating is static.

[LongtimeAZDem]

49. That's more in line with what I remember

[Cattledog]

55. In Nov 1983 Reagan had a 50% approval rating, by Oct. 1984 it was 58%.

Reagan entered office with a 57% approval rating...He beat Carter by 8 million votes. People liked him. His legitimacy was never in doubt. You can't say any of that for Trump.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/11887/ronald-reagan-from-peoples-perspective-gallup-poll-review.aspx

[WA-03 Democrat]

81. Trump has never

Been past 50% approval.

Nor has he made any effort expand his base since election night.

He is a psychotic abnormality with no political experience and is a gut decision maker. He’s got no strategy other then bully everyone:

[Skidmore]

27. We do need a period of calmness to rebuild

our foundation. Trump has trasned the house and has been at work on the foundation.

[marylandblue]

65. No, you need that, and assume others need that too.

I don't need it and I have no idea if blue collar rust belt voters need it, because nobody ever asks that question.

My guess is that a disgruntled worker is more likely to want immediate action than calmness. More likely to be worried about their healthcare than Trump's latest stupidity.

[Skidmore]

66. You assume much.

You have no idea what I need, especially when it comes to healthcare or for household income. Trump's chaos detracts from the ability to act to the good for the entire nation and we sure fast losing our institutions and rule of law because of it. The first action we need o focus on is restoring order by replacing him and gaining a Senate majority so we can make those changes.

[marylandblue]

69. You said we need calmness. I say we need other things more.

I didn't say anything about your personal need for healthcare or income.

Trump's chaos is a symptom of a divided nation not a cause. The divisions existed before Trump and will continue after he is gone. The next President's tenure may not be very calm at all, even if the White House itself is.

I agree we need to take back the White House and the Senate. I disagree that promising calmness, restoration or no Trump is the path to victory. I think a compelling vision for the future will win. Biden has not, so far, offered that.

[watoos]

31. I don't know what everybody else wants,

but I want someone, male or female, to punch Trump in his fat face. I don't give a dam about policy. I want the toughest MF to make it through our primary to take on Trump.

I like what Biden did, he changed the narrative back to Trump being a Nazi. I have 3 others in mind of our candidates who aren't afraid of Trump. eom.

[Mme. Defarge]

36. KEEP CALM

and GOTFV!!!

[nolabear]

39. I obviously like Joe but he's also a bridge over troubled water.

We’re drowning in the chaos, the lies, the rage, the division, the outside forces, the sheer madness of everything 45, his minions and the GOP have subjected us to. We’re shaky and depressed and traumatized, and that’s a hard place to launch off in a new direction from. We need to reestablish trust, in leaders, in one another, in the government being who and what it claims to be before we can have firm ground to launch off and implement these exciting new ideas.

My fervent wish is that Joe can tell that vast, horrified swath of America that it’s okay, we’re damaged but not dead, we can rise up and become the new, inclusive, multicultural, optimistic land we aspire to be.

I really hope Kamala is his VP pick, and she’ll be very active. The energy of those two is just what we need.

[Bayard]

86. Totally agree

People who pay attention are tired of being constantly stressed out over the lunatic fringe and the Loon in Chief.

Regular Americans are going to relate better to a candidate with humble beginnings, who has paid his dues. Joe knows how government works, he knows foreign policy, he's a regular guy, and he's smart. He can actually listen to people, instead of always singing a one note song, "Me, Me, Me."

tRump has provided so much ammunition on so many levels. I SO look forward to the debates! And I think Kamala would be an excellent VP, and gain the necessary Big Picture experience to put in 8 years as prez after Joe gets the country back to halfway normal.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

52. That's an interesting point... it's not necessarily a bad way for Joe to state his case.

It could work... though I do like Bernie's more revolutionary approach, which is more in line with the progressive agenda most voters are demanding. Of course, they're the ones who will decide, as it should be.

May the best candidate win... and then voted blue, no matter who!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[R B Garr]

53. Sounds about right. I was just listening to some MSNBC

discussion that said Biden has a high center middle to aim for. Trump’s base only goes so far and the rest are up for grabs, but they tend to the center.

I was also listening to Joe Donnelly who lost his re-election, and he said the heartland (i.e., rural voters) are very religious, like it or not, that’s how it is. Running socialism is not going to win those conservative areas. It’s not the Bronx.

[marylandblue]

68. There are social conservatives (mostly religious) and economic conservatives.

They have had a 40 year marriage officiated by St. Ronnie himself, but they might be ready for a divorce.

[BlueStater]

57. I want to do a billion times better than Trump.

Not just a million times better than him.

We have more progressive candidates than Biden. Being better than Trump shouldn't be the extent to which we strive for.

[nancy1942]

60. I'd be happy with sane.

[BlueIdaho]

62. We can offer both!

A ticket with Biden and... a younger progressive fresh face could be a winning ticket.

[Jarqui]

82. I think the world of Joe. He's a good, capable, experienced and decent man.

And he would make a good or great president. He has a great temperament for the job.
Millions of times better than the incumbent.

I worry the GOP have caught on. Trump was the GOP's fresh face. Hillary wasn't.
What if the GOP dump Trump for a fresh face ... as Joe gets a commanding primary lead??

I still think Americans are so upset with Washington, they would still go for a new face over calm.

The GOP won't look like they did it. They'll just let the dirt leak. Maybe Putin sends them the Pee Pee tape in exchange for sanctions relief.

Sadly, it is a conspiracy theory. But I would not put it beyond the realm of the GOP. They probably hate Trump as much as we do. If throwing Trump under a bus gets them a good shot at the White House, they'll do it in a heartbeat.

If Joe Biden were President, I would sleep at night. So I get the calm part. I worry that not enough will if the GOP pull a switch.