The only candidate who I rarely, if ever, hear anyone on DU say that he's unelectable is Joe Biden

[mtnsnake]

Depending on which group of DU'ers you're talking to, part of DU thinks Obama is unelectable, part of DU thinks Hillary is unelectable, part of DU thinks Edwards is unelectable, and everyone who says it is convinced that they're right.

So, if Joe Biden is the only electable Democrat, then why doesn't he do better in the polls?

Is he not being picked apart like the other candidates because he's not taken as seriously? Is he just being overlooked? Are the voters just missing something that's standing right in front of their faces?

What is it? :shrug:

[TwilightZone]

1. Well, the first problem is that DU is not indicative of the voting public at large.

So, whether or not we think a candidate is electable is largely irrelevant.

[mtnsnake]

4. Yes, I will surely agree with that, but still, you have to wonder

[TwilightZone]

11. In a way, he picked the wrong time to run.

As did pretty much everyone else not named "Obama" or "Clinton".

Not because those two are more "electable", but because the idea of a precedent-setting election pretty much guaranteed that they would get a ton of media coverage.

[mtnsnake]

17. Yeah, but he's tough as nails and he's been around, so I would think it would be a good time

for a tough, experienced cookie like him to go up against the Repukes. I'm not saying he's better than anyone else, I just wonder why the polls make him appear so much lesser.

[PatSeg]

31. Maybe the media also views him as someone who's been

there before and see this as an unimpressive comeback from someone who already had his chance. He was big news for them in the past and they raked him over the coals. If he had more money or a couple of real scandals, they might be tempted to focus on him again.

[PatSeg]

5. This is true

Not everyone is following the race as closely as we are and they depend on the MSM for their info. And Joe Biden isn't very visible in the MSM. More money would help.

[K Gardner]

2. I dunno. I blame it on the MSM and lack of coverage.

It was an easy choice for me once I really took a close look at him.

[PatSeg]

7. A lot of people still don't know who he is

In 03 I didn't know beans about John Kerry, except he had a LOT of hair!

[Gman]

3. If the truth be known

Biden is probably the most electable of all.

[mtnsnake]

6. I have always thought that too, so is it that Democrats want more than "electability"?

Even if we do want more than just electability, there wouldn't many problems with this guy running the country, would there?

[PatSeg]

8. Or does mainstream America even know what it wants?

They are barraged with Hillary and Barack every day and they are familiar with Edwards from the last election. For many, these may seem like their only choices.

[mtnsnake]

10. That's a good question.

I wish I knew.

[PatSeg]

12. Sometimes I forget that not everyone who votes

follows politics like I do. There was a time when I was that way, so I guess I can relate somewhat.

[K Gardner]

14. Exactly. n/t

[1corona4u]

13. If he would have been able to start his campaign...

with more money and more media exposure, he'd be doing better. Most people don't know who he is, because they are not political junkies like we are. If they never watch MTP, Tweety, or political talking shows in general, they would never know about him. MSM is where it's all at. The nightly news, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox,(bleeecck)CNN, and all of the other affiliates, who only serve the most well known candidates are to blame the way I see it.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Biden is from a teeny weeny eastern state and has accepted

matching funds.

He is not the most electable.

[1corona4u]

16. I don't follow your logic...

Could you elaborate?

[FrenchieCat]

20. The op asked how come he never hears that Biden is "unelectable"

when one hears that about the rest of the candidates.

I like Joe Biden, but I'm responding to that specific question.

Many don't believe Biden will win the primaries, and so they are not taking the time out to explain why Biden might not be the best candidate.

I believe that coming from Delaware, a state who provides very little electoral support, is not a plus for Biden. The fact that this is an eastern state doesn't help either...when one thinks of those who have ran in the past coming from such states, and have lost.

Acceptance of matching funds is important during those crucial months leading to the GE. It limits what one can and cannot do. It ties a candidates' hands...in particular if the opponent has no such restrictions to live under.

Until Public financing is applicable to all candidates, it cannot work the way that it was intended.

Here's more on that:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3832347

[1corona4u]

23. Ok, this is the part I don't get...

"The fact that this is an eastern state doesn't help either...when one thinks of those who have ran in the past coming from such states, and have lost."



What does being from an eastern state have to do with it?

[Think82]

25. Biden will win more republicans than anyone because of Nat. Sec. , respect, and family values.

[faithfulcitizen]

30. Exactly. Delaware or not, he's more appealing to repubs.

Atleast the ones in my (very red Indiana) family.

[1corona4u]

32. Hey, my sister is in Indiana, and she's voting or Joe too!!

You might be right about Indiana...

[Occam Bandage]

15. I think Biden's the most electable of all, as well as the most competent and best-qualified.

Why isn't he leading? He's got a bit of the "also-ran" taint on him from the get-go, though, given his 1988 implosion; I think in many voters' minds he's only defined vaguely as "one of those other guys." He isn't a particularly exciting candidate, nor does he have a flashy message, nor is he a fundraising titan. For him to win the nomination, everything has to break right from the get-go. That didn't happen.

[mtnsnake]

19. I definitely agree that the 1988 part of your reasoning might have something to do with it

but I think he could be as exciting a candidate as any of them. He sure would make us laugh more!

[PatSeg]

21. He does have a rare and quick wit

That is something Americans really appreciate in a candidate.

[pinto]

18. He brings a good voice to the race. May do the "better than expected" in Iowa.

(Seems he comes across well in small groups - as do many of our other candidates - which plays a big role in Iowa caucuses.)

I think we have a great slate. The media may play up the snark of the campaign - makes for good TV - but these opening small state referenda tend to have a life of their own.

We'll see.

[mtnsnake]

22. Yeah, I too think we have a great slate

I could see just about every one of our candidates beating the Republican and going on to be a real good president.

[Think82]

24. That is because he IS the most electable! It's not rocket science!

Unimpeachable national security credentials, as well as knowledgeable as anyone in the country, a pragmatist who has, as Bill Clinton said tonight on Charlie Rose, a HISTORY of MAKING POSITIVE CHANGE HAPPEN.

[Stop Cornyn]

26. There have been folks who focus more on the bankruptcy issue that the electability issue. Like Dodd

and Richardson (who you also hear little "unelectable" chatter about), I think people don't consider Biden and them high enough in the polls to discuss their electability so instead the debate is focused on substantive issues like bankruptcy instead of trivial "horse race" issues like electability.

[cascadiance]

27. Those needing to declare bankruptcy won't want to vote for him...

And the numbers of those people are growing more and more each day as this nation goes into the toilet.

[Cass]

28. I blame it on the fact that the media is creating the race they want.

The media gives the majority of coverage to the candidates they want to push for whatever reason. I believe Biden is the right person for this job, and the most electable. However, the public gets their "news" from the MSM who, as I say, has their own agenda.

[THUNDER HANDS]

29. because he fits no natural democratic demographic

he's not a woman, he's not black, he's not young.

He's an old, white, Senator. Not that that's uncommon, but that's who he is, and we sorta tried that in 2004.

Who's going to get excited about a guy we've known for 30 years in the senate?

He's VP material, and that's what he's running for - same reason Dodd and Richardson are running.