I think the difference is I am refering to a broader demographic to watch than just “old posh white ladies” - across income groups and especially, as I stated in my original hypothesis, older African American women as I feel their votes will be determinative in who wins the Southern states.I'm not sure I've ever stated anything to the contrary?
Old posh white ladies are important in the Democratic Party, but they are hardly the only constituency that matters. And electability is a consideration in every primary - or, more accurately, "perceived electability".
The trouble with old posh white ladies however is that in addition to generally bad politics, they also tend to have very poor perceptions of 'electability', as we might recall from such elections as "the one that Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump".
In fact, the only time the Democratic Party has had any real national success in the past twenty years is when a coalition of young people, progressives, and ethnic minorities teamed up to ignore the electability pleas of old posh white ladies, and nominated Barack Obama instead.
To believe that Joe Biden represents the most electable Democrat is to take at face value his claim that Donald Trump is no more than a strange and unfortunate mistake that happened for no real reason other than the mysterious whims of the heavens, and that what struggling families crave more than anything else is a return to 7 November 2016, when America was already great because the President was somebody who knew what food to serve sports teams, or how to stage a photo-op in a tractor in the appropriate manner.
This is not a bet that anybody should feel comfortable placing.
Touché. I'm still right though
I think you're right. Biden is a very weak candidate, with a track record of having been wrong on just about every important issue since he came to power. His own staff know this, which is why they are doing everything they can to limit his exposure. And, exactly like Trump, he has nothing to offer but tawdry nostalgia, albeit of a different if no less delusional flavour.
It would not be at all surprising if he plummeted after a weak debate performance. His purported 'electability' has not been subject to any serious scrutiny, and it is still very early in the campaign. Few people are paying attention yet. To a large extent, Biden leads in the polls because everybody knows that the media is talking about the fact that he leads in the polls. He is also performing far worse in Iowa (tied with Sanders, according to the latest) and New Hampshire (where he trails Bernie in the most thorough recent poll) than he is nationally, and if he doesn't win those then his electability claim - his only political asset - ends then and there. Keep in mind, for instance, that Obama polled at 3% nationally among African-Americans before he won Iowa, whereupon their support for him overnight became all but unanimous. The reverse can happen just as quickly.
On the other hand, Biden could well end up winning this thing. Democrats are certainly not above putting terrible people like him in power.
And to be sure, setting aside 'electability', perceived and otherwise, there is little doubt that a Biden Presidency, in the not at all certain event that he defeats Trump, would be a disaster for the United States and the rest of the planet.
The day he wins the nomination is the day that every single idea that Elizabeth Warren has ever had dies stillborn - which is why her informed supporters (as opposed to those who like her in the manner of their favourite Love Island candidate) will be doing everything in their power to stop Biden while there is still a chance, rather than invoking the Democrat equivalent of the "but her emails!" defence and excusing him on the grounds that he is less horrendous than Donald Trump, as though that doesn't go without saying.
If Biden wins then it is very likely that just about Trump policy becomes permanent. The wars in Yemen and Afghanistan drag on, the tax cuts for billionaires remain, environmental regulations stay repealed, the Paris commitments are no less ignored, and the fleeting hopes of doing something meaningful about climate change die on the vine. Labour continues to wither, corporate consolidation marches on, Warren's CFPB is still toothless, drug prices and health insurance premiums remain exorbitant, student debt expands, housing and childcare costs keep soaring, the healthcare horror stories which you all love using as a club to bash Trump with continue apace, and there will likely be no more than cosmetic modifications at the border.
Frankly, I'm not sure how many identitarian Democrats will even notice (and if anyone suggests that the new governing party might share responsibility, a Pavlovian chorus of "BUT DONALD TRUMP!!!" will no doubt follow).
Politics these days is mostly abstract to many of those who are most engaged with it. The consequences of politics for everyday people are very much secondary; what motivates much of the discussion instead is tribal identity and moral preening, such that any criticism of one's team feels personal, and emotionally triggering.
I suspect many of those who identify emotionally with the Democrats - not to name names- will actually find themselves oddly more comfortable with Trump in the White House; after all, he's not actually done anything yet that affects them personally, and with him there, one's personal virtue, and ability to be Right About Things on the Internet, has never felt easier or more certain.
But if Biden wins, these same people will feel themselves strangely accountable for issues on which, whilst in opposition, they could be certain they stood on the right side of history, without ever actually needing to solve. Likewise, they will find themselves compelled to react defensively to a Biden government's inevitable failures, and regard criticism of even a man as thoroughly corrupt and cynical as he is to be a bewildering and inexplicable personal attack.
Doing well in Iowa is important, as you mention it was Obama winning that state that gave him a huge advantage against Clinton as it eased any doubts whether he was electable in the predominantly white Mid-West, but the Southern states is where Clinton beat Sanders last time and I feel Biden starts out with the same advantage and the other candidates currently don’t seem to be making much of a dent in it despite Biden’s obvious weaknesses as a candidate. That could well change at the debates but I think it a tad dangerous for the other candidates to assume it will - I am slightly surprised that the other candidates have not been highlighting Biden’s issues more forcefully to date.
I can’t help but notice that the way you refer to current Biden voters seems very similar to how many Clinton voters (and more importantly Clinton and her campaign) talked about initial Trump supporters. At least in the Clinton case I feel it was a barrier to acknowledging there were some concerns of those voters that Trump addressed that Clinton should have found an effective message to counter earlier - either to push back forcefully on the underlying premise and seek to change minds or to explain how her plans addressed those concerns more effectively.
Last edited:
