The Unbearable Lightness of Biden
For being as popular as he is at the moment, it is amazing that people have forgotten about Joe Biden. Not Joe Biden the ideal candidate, who is uber popular as many await with bated breath whether or not the former vice president will enter the 2020 race to unseat President Trump. That Joe Biden has never done better, been more loved, or been thought of more highly. If only Saintly Ol’ Joe would deign to descend from Retirement Olympus and save all the land.
But to praise that Joe Biden is to forget Joe Biden, the actual person.
The Joe Biden who, when last seen running for president, placed 5th in Iowa, behind not-yet President Barack Obama, never-would-be president Hillary Clinton, soon-to-be disgraced John Edwards, and a hey-remember-him Bill Richardson.
The Joe Biden who fell to 5th after uttering this immortal line of deep thought about his soon to-be running mate, and the explanation of which brought to light his long series of gaffes:
That long list of gaffes was up-to-date… in 2007.
The Joe Biden whose first campaign in 1988 was derailed by plagiarism charges.
The Joe Biden whose campaign was fined by the FEC $219K for spending violations during that curtailed 2008 effort.
The Joe Biden whose propensity to get handsy with people has been a boon to meme generators and is sure to be a boom to content creators everywhere, should he declare, and be fun for supporters to explain away in the #metoo era.
The Joe Biden who in 45+ years of public service has been in the proximity of important things, always appears in the pictures of important events, but who, when viewed historically, really did not have much effect at all.
You get the idea. Joe as the fun crazy uncle gets such things chuckled away. Joe Biden, serious candidate, has twice been DOA in national electoral politics for the same reasons.
“But the poll numbers,” exclaim those to whom a Biden 3.0 campaign seems like a good idea. Fair enough, let us consider that for a moment, using 538’s take on it:
To be clear, I don’t think you should be going solely or necessarily even mostly by the polls at this stage of the primary. There are lots of other quantitative and qualitative ways to evaluate the candidates; we think a multifaceted approach is best. There’s still a lot to be said for tracking measures of insider support such as endorsements, for instance, which despite having been a useless indicator in the 2016 Republican primary still have a strong track record overall. Those insider metrics are middling for both Sanders and Biden. In Sanders’s case, he’s off to a much better start in endorsements than four years ago, but is nonetheless behind Harris, Booker and Amy Klobuchar. It’s harder to evaluate Biden because he hasn’t entered the race yet; he does have some endorsements, but the sheer number of candidates running suggests that he doesn’t have the field-clearing power that Clinton did in 2016.
But at the very least, the polls aren’t reason to be dismissive of Sanders and Biden. If you think of a mental scale that spans the categories “bad,” “meh,” “pretty good,” “good” and “great,” Biden’s polling qualifies as good even if you do count for name recognition, and Sanders’s as pretty good (inching toward good in the most recent polls).
That line about field-clearing is something to stick a mental asterisk beside.
To review, Bernie Sander’s supporters, and other progressives for that matter, are very much driven by the idea that 2016 was robbed from them by the Democratic establishment and powers-that-be who put their finger on the scale for Hillary Rodham Clinton. They have plenty of evidence to support their claim, although the presumption that Sanders would have won without it is still debatable. The irony that such interference was, in theory, paying HRC back for shoving her aside in 2008 in favor of the Obama/Biden ticket should also be savored and appreciated.
But now comes the latest example that the folks backing/supporting a 3rd Biden campaign for the White House are woefully tone deaf on the 2020 election. On Thursday, Axios ran this item about Joe Biden and his potential campaign having met, at their request, with Stacey Abrams last week:
Close advisers to former Vice President Joe Biden are debating the idea of packaging his presidential campaign announcement with a pledge to choose Stacey Abrams as his vice president.
Now, with all due respect to the venerable Mike Allen, there is no such thing as a leak; just information people want to get out for a reason. This was clearly a trial balloon released into the commentariat ether to gauge the reaction. While many respected people think this is a great idea and smart strategy, historically speaking, it is not.
Nearly every campaign cycle someone floats this “package” idea of President and VP. It’s not the worst idea in the world, and has been tried before. Ronald Reagan did it… in his failed campaign in ’76. Cruz did it more recently, and it was rightly seen as the desperation move it was. The idea of a package, and adding a one-term pledge with it, is doubly questionable, as the message is “vote for this candidate that is immediately a lame duck and whose VP will spend half that time running themselves.” Every event, every news story, every crisis will have a double narrative of what will the president do, and what will the wanna-be president say about it. It is the antithesis of leadership to purposefully create such a situation.
And it would be with Joe Biden as well. Many would rightly see the addition of Stacey Abrams not as a positive, but Biden trying to use a young rising progressive star as an inoculation shot against “old white guy” criticisms. Besides, Abrams might as well run for president herself, and then worry about VP opportunities. After all, she has won as many senate races as Beto O’Rourke has, and enjoys plenty of support from the base after her competitive Georgia campaign for governor. She already nabbed a prime spotlight gig doing a State of the Union response, and earning bipartisan praise, if not for content then for keeping it short and too the point compared to the Margret Mitchell approach the president took in time allotted.
Such a union would not only be ill-advised but brand killing for Abrams. Unlike previous campaigns, when his primary opponents couched their criticisms of Joe since the old rules of “same team” were still at least tacitly in place, no such restraint will be shown this time. Whereas Barack Obama was careful to cover for Joe Biden after the “clean” controversy, the progressive wing of the party is not going to do that this time around. Biden 2020 will be supported by many of the folks who championed Hillary Clinton, but there will be no field-clearing and all 20-odd candidates will direct fire on the front-runner, who will be perceived to be Biden should he enter. Why would Abrams want to be the shield for all that when she could do so for herself in her own campaign, or with a candidate more fitting her political ideology and brand?
It feels like some in the Democratic party would rather take a run at known quantity Joe Biden, or more specifically the highly-idealized concept version of Joe Biden currently being presented, than deal with the very hard questions a progressive wing that is rapidly growing both in influence and volume is demanding be addressed.
If you want to make a bet that those voices can be placated into supporting Joe Biden were he to somehow conquer those folks’ preferred progressive candidates, you will surely be making a bet that did not work out well for Hillary Clinton.
If you place a bet that it doesn’t matter who the nominee against Donald Trump is in 2020, victory is assured and the primary fight sore feelings will not bleed over into the general election, you may be right, but that is quite a gamble.
If you want to wager that – in what will be hours of footage per day for the next 10 moths until voting starts – we can go without a major Joe Biden gaffe or controversy, you are betting against time, tide, and 70+ plus years of recorded history on the man.
The real man, as he exists.
But feel free to take a chance on Joe Biden the dream.
Just don’t say you weren’t warned.
“Many would rightly see the addition of Stacey Abrams not as a positive, but Biden trying to use a young rising progressive star as an inoculation shot against “old white guy” criticisms. ”
Which was exactly what McCain did by picking Palin, and it…did not work.Report
Totally off-topic, but I thought this would interest you:
http://www.walterjonwilliams.net/2012/05/running-off-the-cliff-city-on-fire/#comment-159748Report
Aww, thank you! He’s been teasing that one since he did the epub of Metropolitan/City On Fire, but it’s nice to see that there’s a business case for it.
I think we all wanted him to do a crowdfunded thing (this was back when Kickstarter was really ramping up) but he was writing Quillifer then and wasn’t excited by the project.Report
The Democrats already have too many people in the race. The next generation of democratic Senate leaders is setting themselves up for a fall by all running for president at the same time. As republicans proved however, running a ton of folks is how you get a winning candidate with pluralities and not outright majorities in primaries. Of course, that could be how Pete Buttegieg gets the nod, but I digress.
Joe Biden was a decent Senator, but really never presidential material. He got elevated to that level because his folksiness was an attempt to recreate a throwback to Bill Clinton’s style. And he did an amiable job as VP to Obama. But he needs to step aside and let the younger generation have a shot. He’s not my choice and I don’t think he’d beat Trump.Report
“The next generation of democratic Senate leaders is setting themselves up for a fall by all running for president at the same time”
Nah, the first primaries will start knocking them over like bowling pins. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if a good quarter drop out before the first primary.
The Democrat’s proportional delegate system will help. They do proportional delegate allotment, not winner take all. Which means if you have a solid 30% of the vote, you…get 30% of the delegates. There’s a slight bonus if you have a majority, but not a huge one.Report
I agree with you and Phil both. Biden is simply not appropriate for this cycle, especially considering how many solid alternatives we have, and I’m not particularly concerned about the number of candidates running. They’ll winnow down fast enough. I don’t think the Dems have the rules or the wealthy sugar daddie/mommie constituency that the right has to sustain a long term fractured field.Report
I think you’re right on … well … just about everything in this post. Offering VP to Abrams reaks of cyniycism; the idea that he’s the safe pick is the “play to not lose” philosophy which many Dem voters but especially progressives detest in the Dem party; his track record on policy is open to wide criticism within and outside of the Dem party; and his gaffe-proneness indicates (to me) that he doesn’t have the steely discipline to stay on point under siege by Trump. He’ll crack, early and often.
Maybe a shorter way to say it this: interest in Biden’s candidacy is directly proportional to those people’s fear that the Dems are going to lose. He’s a “play to not lose” candidate, and I don’t think that philosophy is going to beat Trump and the GOP.
On the ironic other hand, I think if somehow the party and base got behind Abrams she’d get the job done pretty handily. Assuming she’s milkshake free.Report
I’ll post this here, cuz it seems relevant to the problems national Dem has pulling their heads out of their *****.
NEW: @DCCC makes moves to block primary challenges against Dem incumbents. Per new hiring standards DCCC won’t contract with or recommend to House campaign any political firm that works against a sitting member.
In my mind, it’s stuff like this, more than (eg) college social justicers demanding reparations, that make people turn away from the Democratic party.Report
As a left-wing, but partisan Democrat who has defended the institutions of the DNC for being dumb, not corrupt, this is the first action taken by them that makes me feel sympathy for the “they’re going to screw Bernie” types.Report
WOW! There is still no shortage of butthurt over Bernie ’16. Now, they institute a policy seeming to say “no more AOCs”. Maybe this is some 7 dimensional chess thing, but it looks like they are actively trying to depress their base.Report
They’re trying to prevent another peasant’s revolution. The kind which got us Trump.
Our political servants really want to be our political masters.Report
I’m going to vote enthusiastically for whomever has a D next to their name in 2020 because the Republicans and Trump have proven themselves to be loathsome beyond belief.I’m also a partisan D.
That being said, Biden is not my first choice for the Presidency.
At this stage, most polls are based on name recognition and Biden has that in droves. He can also rest on warm and sunny feelings of the Obama years because Democrats loathe Trump and miss Obama strongly. The best Biden primary campaign would all be about how great Obama was especially compared to the loathsome Trump.*
That being said, even without his other issues, I think he is too old.
*Since I’m also a cynic, I wonder how many people confuse the Onion’s Joe Biden with the real Joe Biden. It is saying a lot though that Biden was at least able to say he found the Onion versions of himself funny in public. Can you imagine any GOP politician doing that?Report
In the short term, I’m going to need you to push for a Yang/Buttigieg ticket.Report
Yang = UBI Guy
What is Buttigieg’s deal? Nothing of significance on his campaign website. So far all I got to hold him in my head is calling him “Baby Beto”. You know.. cuz he looks like a Baby Beto.Report
He’s the Mayor of South Bend Indiana.
He’s a surprisingly eloquent politician, and really has a habit of nailing questions he gets from the press and would-be supporters, which are all qualities that Dems tend to find really appealing.
Yang is a total crank, but a lot of his crank ideas overlap with my crank ideas so I don’t hold them against him. He’s also trolling around Kekistan for votes, which I find unsavory, but he’s doing it by promising to mail NEETs monthly checks, which is at least honest (and good public policy!)Report
Buttigieg is the first openly gay candidate for President. He currently gets a lot of love for being the anti-Trump (he allegedly learned Norwegian to read more of a particular author). He is also young (only 36). The other thing I remember is that he is open to the idea of Court Packing.
He has no chance in hell but I feel sorry for him because being from Indiana means that he doesn’t have much of a political future beyond maybe a Congressional seat if he is lucky. The same is true for Beto. Running for President is his most likely move.Report
My guess is he’s running for VP.
He’s young, charismatic, has a limited political future if he chooses to go a conventional route, and would be much better VP from Indiana than either of the last two.Report
Biden v. Trump is my first choice for an entertaining election season.Report
Abrams seems sharp, she’s young and if, if Georgia is trending her way, she would be wise to go for the Senate seat that is coming up. Get some time up top, then after a term or two run for Gov. before going in for the white house.
And that would show everyone that the D’s are serious about running a gov’t.Report
I think you’re probably right about Joe Biden.
But if you are right about Joe Biden, it won’t really matter. He’ll flame out quickly and leave a bunch of other guys whose names begin with B to fight it out with Harris, Warren, and the rest.
If you’re not, if he actually makes it and pulls across the finish line, well, that will be a whole different kettle of fish.Report
The best argument for Biden is that he polls best against Trump right now, so has an argument for being the surest bet in a race you desperately want to win. That’s a pretty good reason to support him all things considered, even if it’s not a satisfactory one to the very politically involved who want someone closer to their ideological preferences.
If that holds up into the campaign season he’s got a legit argument for being a front runner. If it doesn’t, then he has much less to recommend him and stronger candidates should push him aside. This is entire purpose for having a primary campaign in the first place, to see who is catching the public’s imagination at this point in time and not just choose from a stack of resumes.Report
He is in every way preferable to Trump.
Admittedly, if you dug a hole 100 miles deep and dropped a bar into it, this one would be lower.Report
What? No idle speculation thread about the Mueller report?Report
It’s up there in ten second news! (Andrew has you covered!)Report
I will bet good money that if Biden runs, he will be the Jeb Bush of this election cycle.Report
Seriously, Biden should have talked to her *FIRST*.
Report
Yeah, Biden’s toast. (I mean, we *KNEW* he was toast but he wasn’t jelly-side-down.)Report
I don’t know if he is toast but I hope he’s toast. Just endorse one of the existing centrists Joe.Report
He’s still polling in first place according to the last couple of polls I saw:
That should keep him limping along for a bit.Report
Well of course he is. We’re nowhere near the election. 90% of that support consists of “I know who that name is; he was the veep for that President I liked”.Report
From the only trustworthy political commentator on twitter:
Report
The cultural and political moment we find ourselves in is so weird that I often find myself forgetting the old standards of normalcy, and barely even notice that we have a guy LARPing Richard Nixon on the Interblag, and providing pretty good political commentary while doing so.Report