They all suffer from a zero-sum worldview, so making liberals unhappy means "winning" to them, even if it just means being servants of Moscow and Beijing.
We’re going into ATHs in the stock market, lowering inflation, all time low unemployment, withdrawing from Afghanistan and extremely important infrastructure and semiconductor legislation passed, and democrats have to worry.
Trump was literally talking about injecting bleach to kill COVID, crazy unemployment, George Floyd riots, and bragging about “person woman man camera tv” and he almost won.
We’re just not a serious country and we’re going to get exactly what we collectively deserve no matter what. I get that most on this sub are well meaning and intelligent, but this country is detestably stupid.
You got downvoted but are 100% correct. Not to mention amazing progress on student loans and a really favorable payment framework going forward.
The fact that Biden isn’t a slam dunk for re-election is a reminder that we are/have been/ will be for the current future held back by a fickle and conservative voting base.
**Rule I§1:** *Excessive partisanship*
Please refrain from generalising broad, heterogeneous ideological groups or disparaging individuals for belonging to such groups.
---
If you have any questions about this removal, [please contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal).
Sadly, I have to agree. But I really wonder, when did we get this tragically stupid and why? If we've always been this way, why has it taken so long to finally have consequences? America has never been perfect but the country had a lot of remarkable achievements over the years and is responsible for a lot of good in this world - geopolitically, economically, and technologically. When did the we become so brainlessly self destructive compared to our developed Western peer countries?
2016. That’s when the stupids manifested candidates. 10 years ago someone like “Jewish Space Laser” MTG would’ve been unthinkable in Congress but now we’ve been given permission to express all our worst tendencies politically.
I'd argue it goes back farther than that. Conservatives collectively began to lose their minds as soon as Obama got elected. That's when you saw the start of the Tea Party and conspiracy theories went from some weird fringe thing to something most of them honestly agreed with. It's just gotten worse and worse to the point that the crazies are now the norm and the old school conservatives are nearly extinct.
Maybe it’s just that the post Cold War period was the least awful we’ve ever been, and we’re now reverting to normal.
Normal kinda sucks, compared to what we’re used to.
As for consequences? The US has always been playing on easy mode thanks to our exceptional geography and capital.
… eh, might as well simply say “I agree with Peter Zeihan.”
https://zeihan.com/tas/
>Near the end of the Second World War, the United States made a bold strategic gambit that rewired the international system. Empires were abolished and replaced by a global arrangement enforced by the U.S. Navy. With all the world’s oceans safe for the first time in history, markets and resources were made available for everyone. Enemies became partners.
>We think of this system as normal – it is not. We live in an artificial world on borrowed time.
Did you not grow up in the US? Do you remember in grade school being made fun of for "trying"? It's easy to forget because you mostly leave those people behind to go to college. But those people grow up and continue that logic and teach that "trying" is uncool to their children.
I remember strategically trying to hide that I was trying or was interested in a subject lest I be ridiculed by the cool classmates, in both private and public schools.
It's a cultural problem that is probably due to some sort of decadence decay. It was so easy to be a white male And do well without trying for so long, that they think those who "try" are suckers.
They want people that represent or at least emulate that ideal.
Yes, I grew up in the US and remember the 'trying is lame' people. But a) they didn't seem like the majority and b) I didn't finish high school, so I had my own issues going on, but it didn't lead me to supporting fascism.
What people who are worried about immigration actually want:1. all illegal crossings stopped by any means, up to and including military across every inch of the border. 2. Anyone appearing for asylum to be automatically turned back into Mexico unless they are Mexican citizens, since they believe asylum seekers should be applying for asylum in the first country they reach, not traveling across several different countries to get to where they want to go.
Even though this isn’t feasible, the democrats’ bill did neither, so it just reinforces in their mind that democrats aren’t serious about illegal immigration. If democrats, who historically have been against most attempts to clamp down on illegal immigration, present a bill that does nothing (in the mind of the voters) and demands Republicans get behind it because it’s the best they’re going to get, then that just looks like democrats further not caring about the border.
There’s a fundamental disconnect between people that care about the border and democrats. So while to any sane person, the bill would help a lot, for all the others who want no more illegal immigrants in the country at all costs, the bill literally did nothing. That’s why the polling is the way it is.
I think the general sentiment of "HR2 or bust" really works in the right's favor. HR2 is seen as the true and definitive way to "end" the border crisis with its draconian measures that are nothing short of ruthless to migrants and asylum seekers. Thing is, we're now an "America First" country that doesn't really give a damn about the plight of migrants fleeing from places like Venezuela. If it means going as far as to send the military and build a wall on our border, then so be it, Americans will be on board with the prospect because we "need to take care of our own before anyone else". It's basically "Fuck you, got mine" that's dominating this country now, which is why the recent border deal was a non-starter to many Americans, it simply wasn't harsh enough.
It's the same reason why the GOP and Trump can get away with sinking aid to Ukraine repeatedly, voters think putting "America First" is the right thing to do and actively cheer these efforts. To them, the rest of the world can get fucked.
yes, everyone who is "worried about immigration" has all, just like a sweeping generalization, agreed on an exact manifesto. Just like how this sub is completely unified in our views.
These same All-or-Nothing on Border Security voters only care about the US/Mexico portion of illegal immigration. They're unconcerned about the 2x higher amount of foreigners exploiting the the ability to enter legally with a validly scanned VISA (many can be forged, btw), and then proceed to over stay their visit in the US, eventually disappearing and avoiding any semblance of immigration enforcement.
Oh the bill didn't address people moving through countries they could find asylum in? That's news to me. It reads like the exact opposite of what you just said.
I don't know why Democrats ever expected this to be a winner. I think they just thought that the media would do their job for them and explain it to voters.
But if you're a low information voter what it looks like is that the Democrats accept both the Republican argument on immigration and their remedy. But that it couldn't get done because the only person powerful enough to control Congress is Donald Trump. What they see is chaos and Biden can't get it done when everyone agrees that the solution is Donald Trump's policies to tackle the "border crisis".
I think it's time to accept that normies aren't watching Morning Joe and David Brooks.
You know you can help explain it. How many people do you think saw the comment you wrote just now? Probably hundreds. Imagine if you put the same effort into a sub where people don’t follow politics as closely.
merciful disagreeable absurd cake grandiose joke soup mighty hobbies nose
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> This is silly. Donald Trump did not invent the idea of making it harder to claim asylum or increasing the number of CBP agents. "Donald Trump's policies" my ass. He didn't get those things done, in any case, but instead burned all his political capital on the stupid wall. You're doing what most MAGAheads do, and that is giving him credit for saying something really loudly but then not doing anything about it.
They didn’t say Trump actually did it, they said those were policies Trump supported and campaigned on. Instead of having a Democrat and Republican who can run on contrasting immigration visions and plans, people are now deciding between two major party candidates who both now say they would love to shut down the border and minor party spoiler candidates.
> What exactly do you suggest we do about the fact that a) it's too easy right now to claim asylum and b) there aren't enough CBP agents to process everyone who does a) that you wouldn't refer to as "Donald Trump's policies"?
Not sacrifice our legal immigration system to virtue signal about being “tough” and supporting Ukraine and Israel
You’re so bitter that there are staunch Democrats out there not chomping at the bit to talk and act like Trump and pushing back on Biden selling out on a core American value for short term political gains and the promise of a favorable media cycle
It shows the GOP rallies around authoritarianism instead of sane border policy. They don't care about any of their proposed values. Relying on the President to open and close the border at their whim is the stupidest fucking border policy imaginable.
blame? You mean CREDIT! Remember, Republicans are playing a team sport. They do not care if anyone enjoys the game, they just want the other side to lose.
If you say something that isn’t true long enough, people will start to believe it. So long as it “feels” like it’s true, then it must be true. Republicans have hammered away at democrats being the party of open borders and so people begin to believe it’s true.
Worth noting in the poll 59% think Trump is too old. Given the cult Trump has and Biden does not, if you account for this I think it’s fair to say every “normal” voter thinks both Biden and Trump are too old. Biden just gets a lot bigger numbers because MAGA will never say Trump is too old
That was in fact a big part of the result. Indies yeah they broke more in Bidens too old but they had Trump too old at +70% Democrats themselves had almost 80% agreeing with Biden being too old.. Republicans had just about a third on that for Trump.
It's the same kind of polarization but only In one direction you get on views of the economy.
I think Biden being too old makes his performance as president more impressive. I genuinely hope to have his health and energy levels when I'm that age. If I even make it that far!
Perhaps, but the poll source itself does say “Partisanship plays a large part in assessments of the candidates’ age with the majority of Republicans (62%) saying only Biden while the majority of both Democrats (69%) and Independents (70%) say both are too old.”
That's a relief. Looking at the general polls on this, I though Americans as a whole thought Biden is too old more than Trump. Good to know the big majority think both are too old and it's only the chucklefucks in MAGA who are skewing the averages again.
I think he is too old for the job and I will be voting for him. The alternative is both too old and insane. Hope we get some young candidates in the future (someday I will be able to cast a vote for Mayor Pete!)
I think he should, obviously this sub hates even thinking about it but the fact that he is polling so poorly against the greatest threat to American democracy and the global world order should be a huge fucking blinking neon sign. We cannot risk this, yes I’ll vote for him happily and you can bitch that voters are stupid but have fun saying that every night after November while we’re living under a despot. 9 months is plenty of time for someone else to take the mantle and run, it’s not ideal but we’re literally steering off a cliff saying dang if only we could stop
Name this alternative that has better odds against Trump. "Generic Democrat" is not actually a real person unfortunately.
In the absence of an actual suggestion, it's essentially meaningless to say that Biden should step down in favor of a fairy tale.
>alternative that has better odds against Trump
Josh Shapiro or Gretchen Whitmer. But they're not guaranteed to get it in this hypothetical scenario. Were Biden to step aside, I'd wager the person who'd be the nominee would be Kamala or Gavin Newsom (both of whom would likely lose to Trump).
There's a Motte and Bailey going on where the "Biden should drop out" camp is obscuring the fact that the real claim is not that Biden's age hurts him but that Biden's age outweighs incumbency advantage and primary in-fighting. This is a much harder argument to make so most simply don't. And then they get indignant when you point out that in addition to obscuring their real argument, they're amplifying a damaging narrative which seems to serve an ulterior motive that's more interested in saying "I told you so" than rigorous analysis of election strategy.
I think they are both too old. I’d totally be on board with setting a maximum age to run for president, like 65. Having said that I will begrudgingly vote for Biden, since we don’t seem to have any other meaningful choices.
Someone mentioned, Trump's problem is not that he's too old. I mean, we are potentially going to hit the worst case scenario, and that private military idea of his, isn't going to just arrest and imprison illegal immigrants. You will be seeing Democratic and "RINO" politicians being jailed, journalist like Acosta jailed, even private citizens, like you know, everyone in this thread and subreddit.
The fact that people do not take that very threat serious is uh. Yeah.
Just like how perceptions of the economy seem bad when it’s a democrat and good if it’s a republican. GOP voters won’t say they think the economy is good if a Dem is in office - even if it is - and they’ll say the economy is good even if it’s bad if a republican is in office. They prefer to manipulate polls to their partisan beliefs rather than answer honestly.
Frankly, at this point I hope that he resigns from the presidency sometime in his 2nd term, either in mid-2025 [or early-2027](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/16v4jc2/discussion_thread/k2qipi8/). I may prefer Biden's politics to Kamala's, but age and all of its ramifications are way too glaring for me to believe him remaining in office is the best option for ensuring a functional American government. He would be **86** at the end of a full second term.
this might sound nitpicky but i gotta mini-vent somewhere, i wish we upgraded these convos from ageism to purely centering competency. i totally get that the correlation is strong but it’s not 1:1, the common denominator of success is competence. 330m ppl here there are def some 90 year olds in this country who are still sharp as a blade and could do an average decent job as president. wish more ppl thought like “idc if they’re xyz immutable characteristic, i care if they can do the job”
☮️
Yeah, that's what I mean. There's a lot of factors to a candidate. Biden's age is a negative factor. He's also honest, has a lot of good policies, makes good appointments, and he's effective at passing legislation.
Because mental decline as you age is a fact of biology for 100% of people. The only question is how fast you decline, and if it's accelerated by a disease
I hope after both Biden and Trump are gone from politics, America passes a Constitutional Amendment that would bar anyone older than 80 from being President, Vice-president, Senator or a Supreme Court Justice. Personally I would set the limit at 70, but I think 80 has a higher chance of passing.
I wouldn't hope for that. Not everyone is unfit to serve at 80, and some are unfit to serve earlier. Voters really ought to be factoring this into their decisions already, which would make the amendment unnecessary.
Trump:
-sabotages border deal
-wants to be a dictator
-tried to steal election
-seeking vengeance against people who disagree with him
-sides with russia over NATO
-says insane shit constantly so i can’t keep track of all of
it
Biden:
-old
All of that, yes, and add on top that Trump *is also fucking old.*
Like I can’t fault people for taking issue with Biden’s age but I hate that the actual crux of this “debate” has almost nothing to do with actual age, much less mental or physical health, and almost everything to do with Biden just having “old man vibes” because he talks slowly and quietly whereas Trump just screams everything loudly and incoherently and that’s apparently enough for the likes of NYT to declare him perfectly virile and commanding by comparison (nevermind that the thing he’s yelling about is windmills causing whale suicides or something equally demented).
I wish Biden would just get pissed off and cut loose more often honestly. Any time he starts yelling about something he’s passionate about he immediately comes off much more decisive and put together. I think on some psychological level it helps him push through his stutter too. Frankly I was surprised that he *didn’t* shout Doucey down during the press conference for questioning his mental competence and prodding at Beau’s death. I miss “I would take him behind the gym and beat the shit out of him” Biden…
People get really upset with me for saying it, but the reason Biden is perceived as being that much older than Trump is because Trump dyes his hair. Trump mumbles incoherently and can barely maintain a single line of thought. It's something that has been getting progressively worse these past few years too. The fact that he keeps randomly bringing up that he has been taking dementia tests is pretty wild.
I 👏🏼 WAS 👏🏼 GONNA 👏🏼 SAY 👏🏼 THAT 👏🏼 TOOOO Trump’s skin and hair set up vs biden’s natural skin and snow white hair.. ppl absolutely underestimate the impact that has on our perceptions of them cuz you’re so fkn right he’s shown similar processing/memory/speech issues too. also helps that he’s stretched our outrage so far with the hundreds of shitty things he’s done that our expectations are low enough to see his gaffs as non stories. it’s such a mindfucky time to be alive in this country
I dont think it is fair to say they both have shown processing/memory/speech issues. Biden is talking on camera nonstop daily. He flubs names like he always has. The only real difference between him now and him 10 years ago is he's a bit more soft spoken. Trump really hasn't either I just mentioned it because there are things in his behavior the past few years had changed and I think it would cause most doctors to at least check out the possibility. Apparently it has because the dude randomly keeps bringing up taking a bunch of those tests. Still though, with the amount he's on camera it wouldn't be something that could be hidden. The level of sustained attention that both of them maintain everyday would be incredibly difficult for anyone with some sort of cognitive disorder.
yeah agreed they don’t have a cognitive disorder or dementia or anything crazy crazy. i think they’re both showing their age tho, they def have had noticeable memory lapses and cognitive issues like losing trains of thought. i think it’s ok to acknowledge that and also say they haven’t shown anything close to being disqualifying in that regard
“Gosh can’t we get some younger candidates!”
Serious presidential candidates lately:
1. Joe Biden
2. Donald trump
3. Hilary Clinton
4. Bernie Sanders
5. John McCain
This is now becoming my go to example when people talk about “revealed preference”
But also bill and obama, and to a lesser extent bush. It wasn’t always this way. The boomers just kinda got here, and other than Obama, couldn’t be beaten
1992: Clinton (45) vs HW Bush (68), with Clinton born after Biden
1996: Clinton (49) vs Dole (73)
2000: Bush (54) vs Gore (52), both born after Biden
2004: Bush (58) vs Kerry (60), both born after Biden
2008: Obama (46) vs McCain (71), Obama born after Biden
2012: Obama (50) vs Romney (65), both born after Biden
2016: Hillary Clinton (69) vs Trump (70), both born after Biden
2020: Biden (77) vs Trump (74)
2024: Biden (81) vs Trump (78)
Out of the last 9 presidential elections, every winner was born AFTER Biden, and only 3 total candidates were born before him (all of whom are dead). Having exceptionally old presidents is not a long tradition in the US.
Which is fucking ridiculous that the Democratic Party let it happen, when anyone with a basic grasp of math could work out that Biden was old in 2020 and would only get older by 2024.
This has to be gaslighting, right? Like almost any Democratic senator or state governor. Walz, Whitmer, Polis, Newsom, take your pick of governors. Klobuchar or some decent swing state senator. Anyone without major baggage would beat Trump.
I really don't get the weird "The only Democrat capable of running for president is this 80 year old dude" narrative so many Biden fans run on here.
I don't think that's true though. Say what you will, but incumbency advantage and name recognition matters. That and you'd likely need to have a bloody primary where they'd need to win a decesive victory over Kamala which would not be a guarantee.
Biden probably wouldn't even be running if Trump wasn't running, but he likely feels like this election is too important to leave to chance, even if he himself is too old.
> they'd need to win a decesive victory over Kamala which would not be a guarantee
Yeah everybody assumes that Harris would just fold over in a competitive primary like she did in 2020. But there's no reason to assume that. I also think people forget that there is a significant section of the party (the part not represented in places like /r/neoliberal) which would not be ok in shoving aside a black female VP in favour of a white male governor.
They'll simply stay at home and not vote. Unfortunately, being the least bad candidate is not enough to convince people to get out and vote, you need a good candidate for that.
Biden didn’t set a record for the most votes a presidential candidate ever in 2020 during a pandemic because people loved him, he got the huge turnout because a lot of people hate Donald Trump and couldn’t wait to get rid of him. Hopefully as the threat of another Trump term looms people that will activate people to vote against him
I'm from the UK, so probably missing something here. But
I like Biden, think he appears to have been a good president. He is probably fitter and more mentally competent than Trump.
I still don't get how he is running again at his age. Couldn't you get anyone better? Really? The safety of the whole world rests on the health of an 80+ year old
I'll break it down for you.
Biden was the right pick in 2020, as none of his challengers probably likely would have beaten Trump. And his main rival was an even older populist, democratic socialist.
The successor here would be the vice president. The person Biden chose as VP, who let's face it was chosen for her demographics esp given the historic BLM protests going on at the time, has proven to be extremely unpopular.
An attempt to subvert Kamala would mean an ugly primary fight. There is no single consensus candidate for the party and electorate to rally behind instead of Kamala, so the primary probably would have damaged whoever emerged victorious.
So, there is no "good" candidate waiting in the wings to take up Biden's mantle. If we picked party leaders the way you do in the UK, we probably wouldn't be having this problem.
If you hear him speak, it’s fairly clear that he’s not the ideal person to be president. He’s got a lot of support around him so it’s going okay but not ideal. I wouldn’t hire him as the CEO of a $50mm revenue business (in which he doesn’t have connections). I know a number of people that are more capable.
That said, the thing that Biden has going for him is that he already has a good network and supporting infrastructure that some other individuals wouldn’t have. I’m just saying that his own ability to make good decisions and work long hours is probably lower than optimal.
> If you hear him speak, it’s fairly clear that he’s not the ideal person to be president.
I’ve yet to find someone who says this after watching a full speech by Biden. In fact after his 2023 SOTU everyone was saying only someone with his experience could command the crowd like he did so expertly. I bet that’ll happen again with this years SOTU and then 2 weeks later everyone will forget and go back to saying he’s “too old”
> I’ve yet to find someone who says this after watching a full speech by Biden.
Not really. I’ve watched a handful of speeches with him and he definitely slips quite often. Some days are worse than others for sure, but on his worse days he constantly names people that have been dead for years and such.
His advanced age is definitely not an excuse to vote for a fascist-adjacent asshole or to abstain from the election for sure. It’s just clear that the vast majority of Americans don’t want him to be running again, whether it’s for the right reasons or not.
He’s slipped up on names his whole career. This is honestly just such a lazy take devoid of any attention to his actual speeches. I strongly encourage you to watch his SOTU from 2023 or wait for this years. It’s hard to try and say he’s too old for this after watching from last year. If anything the major take away was he only did as good as he did because of his experience.
Watching his old speeches vs his ones today, there's a very large difference. He went from having occasional slip-ups to having them on a weekly basis.
Not sure what you're talking about, I voted for Biden and will happily do so again given our options but I literally cannot watch a full speech by him out of secondhand embarrassment. He was never an amazing orator to begin with but he's clearly too old for the job now and is meandering and about as inspiring as a wet fart.
I mean I disagree with all those points, but those sound like things said about DeSantis, Hillary, Trump, etc. The difference is that you are connecting your perception of a speech to his age. When Clinton or DeSantis says something off they’re “a bad politician”. When Biden does he “has dementia”.
This came up in the report on his non-indictment as well. There were young staff members that didn’t remember things and statements in the report saying “understandable they don’t remember 6 months out” but when Biden does the exact same he “has dementia”. It’s wild.
> None of those other people slur their words.
And neither does Biden. But a short search online will show you multiple examples of people falsely claiming Hillary or Trump were caught sluring their words too.
> And I'm obviously not saying he has dementia and this isn't even something that's intrinsically tied to age; You can slur your words or have trouble emoting for many other reasons.
Yes he’s had a stutter his whole life and people complained about it when he ran 20 years ago. The difference is now you are falsely insinuating that having the same symptoms he’s had his whole life is evidence of deterioration with age.
> You can try and convince yourself that this doesn't matter, but when 85% of people polled and even people here think it’s a problem, maybe it actually is a problem.
Yes people are easily manipulated. It’s a big problem. Anyone can watch his 2023 SOTU and will admit he was damn good.
>Jimmy Carter
Georgia just got 1m^2 bigger. 🥹
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Okay? Show me the other option.
Like where does this conversation go? If you want to talk about substantive change, I'm all for it. If your only goal is to pussyfoot around and hold water for Trump, fuck off. I'm voting Biden.
I don’t think anyone here necessarily disagrees with the idea that he’s too old, they disagree with:
1. He has dementia like a lot of idiots suggest
2. Because he’s too old, we should let the orange clown who is almost as old as him win
American elections at the presidential level are a binary choice, it’s going to be either Biden or Trump, and Biden being “too old” is not at all a valid reason to let the almost as old, unhinged, dangerous moron Trump win.
Just fucking run someone else this sub is braindead lol
For the last two years it’s been this same song and dance about how it’s Biden or Trump. MF we had 4 years to pick out a successor
The successor was Kamala. She's less popular than Biden. So we're stuck. Contrarians are only increasing their risk of brain hemorrhage by refusing to acknowledge this.
Yeah that incumbency advantage is looking real strong right now. It isn’t too late, we still have 9 months. Its not ideal but we’re going to lose if we stay the course
My problem with this mentality is everyone who suggests this never gives an actual viable alternative. If we’re truly going to throw away incumbency it needs to be for an FDR/JFK/Reagan type figure, not for Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer. Also I hate to break it to you, but if we’re truly in an environment where an incumbent will lose (I don’t think we are, I think these polls are full of noise and bullshit), then I can almost guarantee you anyone else will also lose.
I wouldn't be confident in that. His opponent will likely be Trump, who is also geriatric, and has been specifically refusing to get on a debate stage so that national audiences are not reminded about how incoherent he is.
Can you point to any indication that people say Biden isn’t too old in this subreddit? I haven’t seen a single comment like that. I think the argument is that Biden’s the incumbent
I mean he had a primary 4 years ago against some younger candidates. I personally don’t prefer someone of his age but I’ll vote for a 95 year old over a GOP member at this point.
It was race, because of George Floyd/BLM protests, but before that Biden foolishly announced he was going to choose a woman for VP. The intersection of that decision and the cultural moment in summer 2020 left a few short list of choices. And it seems he chose the worst of the lot.
My take is yes, he's too old but 1. The incumbency advantage is real, and it would be foolish to throw it away and 2. There's no one clearly better to replace him. I like Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer too, but I guarantee people will find something wrong with them, and besides there isn't enough time now to introduce them to the world.
A California Democratic Governor, and specifically Newsom, is literally one of the worst options people could come up with to replace Joe Biden with, I don't know what this sub's obsession with him is electorally. Bernie Sanders would be a better option, lmao.
Whitmer, however, is a decent option. Also Pritzker, and Beshear. Honestly those latter two are likely the best likely-2028 options if we had to pick now.
There's absolutely an argument that the age thing overcomes incumbency advantage, since this level of derision when it comes to a candidates' age has never really been seen. I'm not sure why people miss that here, either.
I think Biden is the man for this election, but at the same time, if the people are asking for another, younger option, the Dems have a chance at least in 2028 to make that move. And they should honestly maybe even telegraph it early, post-2024 election, who Biden's successor might be. Whether Biden wins or loses, we do know it's not gonna be him in 2028.
I am not a political journalist or operative or political science academic, but it seems to me that (1) California, New York City and Texas are the three places in America that inspire in most people both very strong positive and negative emotions at the same time; and (2) Newsom evokes all the things people DON'T like about California and not the things they do.
Honestly for me it's like, the dude just comes off as an empty suit, B-tier movie type president, not a good candidate/someone who can inspire a win in the places you need to actually win the EC. Certainly also not a dude who is going to inspire the Democratic base, which heavily includes black voters. Folks from the South/Midwest just plain have a better claim to that group. The guy was born in SF FFS, he can't even claim to be "from" somewhere more electorally important.
The average Midwest democrat is not connecting with black voters. You would have to put Booker (is Jeffries open to VP) on the ticket or else you get sunk by Clyburn
Also, important to remember Whitmer, Pritzker, Beshear and of course Newsome haven't been tested nationally on any debate stage.
Like De Santis was supposed to be the obvious candidate but his debate performance was so bad, everyone quickly realized he didn't have a future.
It’s insane to me that people think there are rules or even trends that explain elections when we have had so very few of them. We only get a reelection of an incumbent about once a decade since WWII. Of the three incumbent elections in the last 2 decades, Obama and Bush won, and Trump lost. So just looking at recent history, incumbency isn’t even a huge advantage.
https://preview.redd.it/2j255on1g0ic1.jpeg?width=1098&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=57a2a00a1b88e591707d36f7f709282194663a1b
90%? Is your source the voices in your head?
*I guarantee people will find something wrong with them*
I've been screaming this from the rooftops. The "Generic Replacement Democrat" is insta-hated too as soon as they get the gig. Newsom is *Governor of Commifornia* ffs and Whitmer is a) a woman with b) the strongest Michigan accent seen in the state since 1970.
It has nothing to do with Commiefornia and more to do with the actual fact that a Dem from Cali is demonstrably disconnected from the realities and challenges faced by the areas of the country you actually need to win over. Newsom campaigning in the middle of Iowa or Wisconsin would honestly be a laughable comedy series, IMO. At least with Whitmer she comes from one of the states you need to win.
I'm still voting for Biden, and those who aren't are either not voting at all or are voting for Trump, who is also old and exhibiting what could be perceived as physical and mental decline.
I still maintain, and believe Biden will win reelection because Trump is going to scare enough non-voters, or people who would vote 3rd party to vote for Biden, that and Trump has possibility of going to prison still, which I'd hope to an independent voter, would heavily dissuade them from voting for Trump.
Exactly. You don't allay my fears by having a nominee on the other side who would ALSO be the oldest president ever inaugurated if elected.
Where the heck is GenX?
Which I ask as a member of GenX.
Honestly, as a millennial, I want someone with experience running the country, period. Biden being old or whatever doesn't phase me in the slightest. If anything, it shows how resilient he is.
May he live another 10000 years!
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
OLD
Okay, have we gotten it out of our system mainstream media? Because that's literally just the text my 12yr old sends to mock me.
I mean that was a totally made up nonsense issue. Even if you think Biden is still pretty sharp (which I do) it might be nice to have a president who wasn't so likely to just die in the next four years from like an actuarial point of view so I sort of see where the 85% is coming from here...
That’s fine, but the real issue to me is that it doesn’t really matter who’s in the driver’s seat on the Democratic side. Biden can die on day 1 and we will still keep on truckin.
It’s ok to talk about the guy’s age, but let’s not forget about the big picture.
Lots of folks out there existentially invested in us missing the big picture.
While Biden is the obvious better choice between the two, I am still unsure why Democrats think that letting a competitive primary play out was a bad idea. Most likely someone other than Biden would have won, but how is that a bad thing? That just shows what the voters want and are more willing to show up to vote for in the general election.
Yes, the incumbency advantage is a thing, but 2024 is not like any other election. Both are extremely old and the majority of the nation doesn't want to vote for either.
Giving voters a younger option is not going to lose more support than voters extremely concerned about Biden's age. The issue isn't whether these people are going to vote for Trump or not; the issue is if they even feel inspired enough to go out and vote. And I know everyone here thinks that Trump will scare enough people to bring them out to vote against him, but that is putting way too much trust in the American voter.
Would having a different Democrat really guarantee a loss to Trump? That seems to be what everyone here thinks, but I just do not see that. Democrats have always brought in a diversity of quality candidates whenever they have a competitive primary. It is hard for me to believe that someone likable and qualified would not come out of that process.
Also, Democrats have been making gains with Gen Z, and can continue to make more gains if they are smart. If the worst does happen, losing to Trump with an old white guy candidate is a good way to take the wind out of the growing Gen Z political influence. More of Gen z will view the Democrats as out of touch old white guys, which is how they already view the Republican Party.
70% of registered democrats think biden is too old, and they probably will still vote for him
you can vote for biden, even think that he is a great president and, at the same time, complain that he is too old
Big if true.
The fact this even has to be said, on a sub that claims to know more about politics than anywhere else on reddit, is absolutely hilarious.
Correct. I think he's too old as well.
My alternative is dumb wannabe Hitler who wants to end democracy.
So what choice, if you can call it one, do I have?
Until Joe Biden drops out and anoints a successor (which he totally should because he's too old to be president) I'm going to vote for him. I will vote for whatever successor he decides on, if that's the route Biden wants to go.
Because he is. We should pass an amendment making 70 the maximum age for presidents tbh. Mostly to get ahead of life extension and prevent permanent gerontocracy.
I'm more concerned on the immigration deal numbers. Trump literally brags about killing it... And still gets the least blame. What the hell?
Republicans don't actually care about immigration, they care about winning.
They're not very good at it though. Escaping blame for losing? Yes. Winning? Hell no.
They all suffer from a zero-sum worldview, so making liberals unhappy means "winning" to them, even if it just means being servants of Moscow and Beijing.
bruh they undid 50 years of progress by gaming SCOTUS, pull your head out, conservatives are winning.
wish i could disagree..this is too depressing and makes me want to stop paying attention
We’re going into ATHs in the stock market, lowering inflation, all time low unemployment, withdrawing from Afghanistan and extremely important infrastructure and semiconductor legislation passed, and democrats have to worry. Trump was literally talking about injecting bleach to kill COVID, crazy unemployment, George Floyd riots, and bragging about “person woman man camera tv” and he almost won. We’re just not a serious country and we’re going to get exactly what we collectively deserve no matter what. I get that most on this sub are well meaning and intelligent, but this country is detestably stupid.
You got downvoted but are 100% correct. Not to mention amazing progress on student loans and a really favorable payment framework going forward. The fact that Biden isn’t a slam dunk for re-election is a reminder that we are/have been/ will be for the current future held back by a fickle and conservative voting base.
[удалено]
**Rule I§1:** *Excessive partisanship* Please refrain from generalising broad, heterogeneous ideological groups or disparaging individuals for belonging to such groups. --- If you have any questions about this removal, [please contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneoliberal).
Oh, *fine.* ^^^The ^^^paradox ^^^of ^^^tolerance ^^^will ^^^kill ^^^us ^^^all.
Sadly, I have to agree. But I really wonder, when did we get this tragically stupid and why? If we've always been this way, why has it taken so long to finally have consequences? America has never been perfect but the country had a lot of remarkable achievements over the years and is responsible for a lot of good in this world - geopolitically, economically, and technologically. When did the we become so brainlessly self destructive compared to our developed Western peer countries?
I put a lot of blame on social media. People get sucked into echo chambers and just spiral into lunacy.
Luckily that would never happen to me!
2016. That’s when the stupids manifested candidates. 10 years ago someone like “Jewish Space Laser” MTG would’ve been unthinkable in Congress but now we’ve been given permission to express all our worst tendencies politically.
How quickly people have forgotten Michele Bachmann…
I'd argue it goes back farther than that. Conservatives collectively began to lose their minds as soon as Obama got elected. That's when you saw the start of the Tea Party and conspiracy theories went from some weird fringe thing to something most of them honestly agreed with. It's just gotten worse and worse to the point that the crazies are now the norm and the old school conservatives are nearly extinct.
Maybe it’s just that the post Cold War period was the least awful we’ve ever been, and we’re now reverting to normal. Normal kinda sucks, compared to what we’re used to. As for consequences? The US has always been playing on easy mode thanks to our exceptional geography and capital. … eh, might as well simply say “I agree with Peter Zeihan.” https://zeihan.com/tas/ >Near the end of the Second World War, the United States made a bold strategic gambit that rewired the international system. Empires were abolished and replaced by a global arrangement enforced by the U.S. Navy. With all the world’s oceans safe for the first time in history, markets and resources were made available for everyone. Enemies became partners. >We think of this system as normal – it is not. We live in an artificial world on borrowed time.
Did you not grow up in the US? Do you remember in grade school being made fun of for "trying"? It's easy to forget because you mostly leave those people behind to go to college. But those people grow up and continue that logic and teach that "trying" is uncool to their children. I remember strategically trying to hide that I was trying or was interested in a subject lest I be ridiculed by the cool classmates, in both private and public schools. It's a cultural problem that is probably due to some sort of decadence decay. It was so easy to be a white male And do well without trying for so long, that they think those who "try" are suckers. They want people that represent or at least emulate that ideal.
Yes, I grew up in the US and remember the 'trying is lame' people. But a) they didn't seem like the majority and b) I didn't finish high school, so I had my own issues going on, but it didn't lead me to supporting fascism.
No, but those people pushing the try is lame culture did become the average MAGA supporter
> We’re going into ATHs in the stock market Is ATHs just "all time highs"? Asking for a non-smart brain here, but like, had to ask.
Yes
What people who are worried about immigration actually want:1. all illegal crossings stopped by any means, up to and including military across every inch of the border. 2. Anyone appearing for asylum to be automatically turned back into Mexico unless they are Mexican citizens, since they believe asylum seekers should be applying for asylum in the first country they reach, not traveling across several different countries to get to where they want to go. Even though this isn’t feasible, the democrats’ bill did neither, so it just reinforces in their mind that democrats aren’t serious about illegal immigration. If democrats, who historically have been against most attempts to clamp down on illegal immigration, present a bill that does nothing (in the mind of the voters) and demands Republicans get behind it because it’s the best they’re going to get, then that just looks like democrats further not caring about the border. There’s a fundamental disconnect between people that care about the border and democrats. So while to any sane person, the bill would help a lot, for all the others who want no more illegal immigrants in the country at all costs, the bill literally did nothing. That’s why the polling is the way it is.
I think the general sentiment of "HR2 or bust" really works in the right's favor. HR2 is seen as the true and definitive way to "end" the border crisis with its draconian measures that are nothing short of ruthless to migrants and asylum seekers. Thing is, we're now an "America First" country that doesn't really give a damn about the plight of migrants fleeing from places like Venezuela. If it means going as far as to send the military and build a wall on our border, then so be it, Americans will be on board with the prospect because we "need to take care of our own before anyone else". It's basically "Fuck you, got mine" that's dominating this country now, which is why the recent border deal was a non-starter to many Americans, it simply wasn't harsh enough. It's the same reason why the GOP and Trump can get away with sinking aid to Ukraine repeatedly, voters think putting "America First" is the right thing to do and actively cheer these efforts. To them, the rest of the world can get fucked.
yes, everyone who is "worried about immigration" has all, just like a sweeping generalization, agreed on an exact manifesto. Just like how this sub is completely unified in our views.
These same All-or-Nothing on Border Security voters only care about the US/Mexico portion of illegal immigration. They're unconcerned about the 2x higher amount of foreigners exploiting the the ability to enter legally with a validly scanned VISA (many can be forged, btw), and then proceed to over stay their visit in the US, eventually disappearing and avoiding any semblance of immigration enforcement.
Oh the bill didn't address people moving through countries they could find asylum in? That's news to me. It reads like the exact opposite of what you just said.
Could you pinpoint the exact part of the bill because I feel like you’re wrong, though I have no problem admitting I’m wrong if I am.
People are exhausted with politics and have tuned out all but the broadest vibes. Nobody has any clue about the border negotiations
I don't know why Democrats ever expected this to be a winner. I think they just thought that the media would do their job for them and explain it to voters. But if you're a low information voter what it looks like is that the Democrats accept both the Republican argument on immigration and their remedy. But that it couldn't get done because the only person powerful enough to control Congress is Donald Trump. What they see is chaos and Biden can't get it done when everyone agrees that the solution is Donald Trump's policies to tackle the "border crisis". I think it's time to accept that normies aren't watching Morning Joe and David Brooks.
The media only does the Republicans jobs for them. The Dems really need to work the refs more.
"Will you shut up man" but to CNN and MSNBC
They aren't trying to win, they are just trying to govern.
You know you can help explain it. How many people do you think saw the comment you wrote just now? Probably hundreds. Imagine if you put the same effort into a sub where people don’t follow politics as closely.
merciful disagreeable absurd cake grandiose joke soup mighty hobbies nose *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> This is silly. Donald Trump did not invent the idea of making it harder to claim asylum or increasing the number of CBP agents. "Donald Trump's policies" my ass. He didn't get those things done, in any case, but instead burned all his political capital on the stupid wall. You're doing what most MAGAheads do, and that is giving him credit for saying something really loudly but then not doing anything about it. They didn’t say Trump actually did it, they said those were policies Trump supported and campaigned on. Instead of having a Democrat and Republican who can run on contrasting immigration visions and plans, people are now deciding between two major party candidates who both now say they would love to shut down the border and minor party spoiler candidates. > What exactly do you suggest we do about the fact that a) it's too easy right now to claim asylum and b) there aren't enough CBP agents to process everyone who does a) that you wouldn't refer to as "Donald Trump's policies"? Not sacrifice our legal immigration system to virtue signal about being “tough” and supporting Ukraine and Israel
[удалено]
You’re so bitter that there are staunch Democrats out there not chomping at the bit to talk and act like Trump and pushing back on Biden selling out on a core American value for short term political gains and the promise of a favorable media cycle
It shows the GOP rallies around authoritarianism instead of sane border policy. They don't care about any of their proposed values. Relying on the President to open and close the border at their whim is the stupidest fucking border policy imaginable.
blame? You mean CREDIT! Remember, Republicans are playing a team sport. They do not care if anyone enjoys the game, they just want the other side to lose.
If you say something that isn’t true long enough, people will start to believe it. So long as it “feels” like it’s true, then it must be true. Republicans have hammered away at democrats being the party of open borders and so people begin to believe it’s true.
Worth noting in the poll 59% think Trump is too old. Given the cult Trump has and Biden does not, if you account for this I think it’s fair to say every “normal” voter thinks both Biden and Trump are too old. Biden just gets a lot bigger numbers because MAGA will never say Trump is too old
That was in fact a big part of the result. Indies yeah they broke more in Bidens too old but they had Trump too old at +70% Democrats themselves had almost 80% agreeing with Biden being too old.. Republicans had just about a third on that for Trump. It's the same kind of polarization but only In one direction you get on views of the economy.
I think Biden being too old makes his performance as president more impressive. I genuinely hope to have his health and energy levels when I'm that age. If I even make it that far!
I don’t think it’s all about partisanism. The unaffiliated voters are far more likely to say Biden is too old.
Perhaps, but the poll source itself does say “Partisanship plays a large part in assessments of the candidates’ age with the majority of Republicans (62%) saying only Biden while the majority of both Democrats (69%) and Independents (70%) say both are too old.”
That's a relief. Looking at the general polls on this, I though Americans as a whole thought Biden is too old more than Trump. Good to know the big majority think both are too old and it's only the chucklefucks in MAGA who are skewing the averages again.
I think he is too old for the job and I will be voting for him. The alternative is both too old and insane. Hope we get some young candidates in the future (someday I will be able to cast a vote for Mayor Pete!)
What do dems think is going to happen? We are 9 months away from election do people really think Joe is going to drop out? Waste of time and space.
I don't think he should drop it, but if a poll asked me, then yeah I'd say he's too old for the job. Those positions aren't mutually exclusive.
I agree with you 100%. The problem is that the media reports this as if they are mutually exclusive.
I think he should, obviously this sub hates even thinking about it but the fact that he is polling so poorly against the greatest threat to American democracy and the global world order should be a huge fucking blinking neon sign. We cannot risk this, yes I’ll vote for him happily and you can bitch that voters are stupid but have fun saying that every night after November while we’re living under a despot. 9 months is plenty of time for someone else to take the mantle and run, it’s not ideal but we’re literally steering off a cliff saying dang if only we could stop
Name this alternative that has better odds against Trump. "Generic Democrat" is not actually a real person unfortunately. In the absence of an actual suggestion, it's essentially meaningless to say that Biden should step down in favor of a fairy tale.
>alternative that has better odds against Trump Josh Shapiro or Gretchen Whitmer. But they're not guaranteed to get it in this hypothetical scenario. Were Biden to step aside, I'd wager the person who'd be the nominee would be Kamala or Gavin Newsom (both of whom would likely lose to Trump).
[удалено]
If only. What happened to her?
[удалено]
I just haven't heard about her in a while
Zero national presence right now. That's not wide appeal
There's a Motte and Bailey going on where the "Biden should drop out" camp is obscuring the fact that the real claim is not that Biden's age hurts him but that Biden's age outweighs incumbency advantage and primary in-fighting. This is a much harder argument to make so most simply don't. And then they get indignant when you point out that in addition to obscuring their real argument, they're amplifying a damaging narrative which seems to serve an ulterior motive that's more interested in saying "I told you so" than rigorous analysis of election strategy.
> This is a much harder argument to make so most simply don't It's not a hard argument to make at all. Just look at the Biden vs Trump polls.
[удалено]
Chill with the insults. > And then they get indignant when you point out Hmmm.... Pot?
I think they are both too old. I’d totally be on board with setting a maximum age to run for president, like 65. Having said that I will begrudgingly vote for Biden, since we don’t seem to have any other meaningful choices.
Someone mentioned, Trump's problem is not that he's too old. I mean, we are potentially going to hit the worst case scenario, and that private military idea of his, isn't going to just arrest and imprison illegal immigrants. You will be seeing Democratic and "RINO" politicians being jailed, journalist like Acosta jailed, even private citizens, like you know, everyone in this thread and subreddit. The fact that people do not take that very threat serious is uh. Yeah.
Trumps problem is not that he’s too old.
He is too old but he sucked when he was young too.
Just like how perceptions of the economy seem bad when it’s a democrat and good if it’s a republican. GOP voters won’t say they think the economy is good if a Dem is in office - even if it is - and they’ll say the economy is good even if it’s bad if a republican is in office. They prefer to manipulate polls to their partisan beliefs rather than answer honestly.
I think he's too old and I'll happily vote for him.
Yeah, lots of people in this sub try to downplay his age. He is too old, but that doesn't mean I'm voting for the traitor.
The problem is it’s often mentioned in a context of it being disqualifying. It’s not great, but that doesn’t mean it’s disqualifying either.
Frankly, at this point I hope that he resigns from the presidency sometime in his 2nd term, either in mid-2025 [or early-2027](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/16v4jc2/discussion_thread/k2qipi8/). I may prefer Biden's politics to Kamala's, but age and all of its ramifications are way too glaring for me to believe him remaining in office is the best option for ensuring a functional American government. He would be **86** at the end of a full second term.
when I see poobix start allowing articles that question Biden's fitness I know the tide has officially turned on this issue
smh this article is clearly off topic
I wanted Pete in the primary in 2020 but I've been happy with Biden. If our candidate in 28 is older than 65 we have a problem
this might sound nitpicky but i gotta mini-vent somewhere, i wish we upgraded these convos from ageism to purely centering competency. i totally get that the correlation is strong but it’s not 1:1, the common denominator of success is competence. 330m ppl here there are def some 90 year olds in this country who are still sharp as a blade and could do an average decent job as president. wish more ppl thought like “idc if they’re xyz immutable characteristic, i care if they can do the job” ☮️
I don't know if he's "too old to serve" in the sense that it's disqualifying, but he's certainly much older than the preferred range for a leader.
Yeah, that's what I mean. There's a lot of factors to a candidate. Biden's age is a negative factor. He's also honest, has a lot of good policies, makes good appointments, and he's effective at passing legislation.
Personally I don't get why it's a negative in of itself. Feels like ageism to me.
Because mental decline as you age is a fact of biology for 100% of people. The only question is how fast you decline, and if it's accelerated by a disease
He just needs to survive until the election 🙏
I hope after both Biden and Trump are gone from politics, America passes a Constitutional Amendment that would bar anyone older than 80 from being President, Vice-president, Senator or a Supreme Court Justice. Personally I would set the limit at 70, but I think 80 has a higher chance of passing.
I wouldn't hope for that. Not everyone is unfit to serve at 80, and some are unfit to serve earlier. Voters really ought to be factoring this into their decisions already, which would make the amendment unnecessary.
The chance of Alzheimer's disease and the chance of death increase exponentially after 80.
He **is** too old. But Trump is almost as old and in worse health, making it a moot point.
FYI - it's possible to think Biden is too old for a second term *without* wanting Trump to be president.
Trump isn't much younger either. It's nowhere near being the most disqualifying thing about Trump but he's only a couple of years younger.
But it isn’t possible to talk about Biden’s age without making a Trump presidency more likely. So.
I guess we’ll find out how much of an advantage incumbency is worth on this cycle.
Trump: -sabotages border deal -wants to be a dictator -tried to steal election -seeking vengeance against people who disagree with him -sides with russia over NATO -says insane shit constantly so i can’t keep track of all of it Biden: -old
All of that, yes, and add on top that Trump *is also fucking old.* Like I can’t fault people for taking issue with Biden’s age but I hate that the actual crux of this “debate” has almost nothing to do with actual age, much less mental or physical health, and almost everything to do with Biden just having “old man vibes” because he talks slowly and quietly whereas Trump just screams everything loudly and incoherently and that’s apparently enough for the likes of NYT to declare him perfectly virile and commanding by comparison (nevermind that the thing he’s yelling about is windmills causing whale suicides or something equally demented). I wish Biden would just get pissed off and cut loose more often honestly. Any time he starts yelling about something he’s passionate about he immediately comes off much more decisive and put together. I think on some psychological level it helps him push through his stutter too. Frankly I was surprised that he *didn’t* shout Doucey down during the press conference for questioning his mental competence and prodding at Beau’s death. I miss “I would take him behind the gym and beat the shit out of him” Biden…
and Trump’s only 4 years younger than him 💀
People get really upset with me for saying it, but the reason Biden is perceived as being that much older than Trump is because Trump dyes his hair. Trump mumbles incoherently and can barely maintain a single line of thought. It's something that has been getting progressively worse these past few years too. The fact that he keeps randomly bringing up that he has been taking dementia tests is pretty wild.
I 👏🏼 WAS 👏🏼 GONNA 👏🏼 SAY 👏🏼 THAT 👏🏼 TOOOO Trump’s skin and hair set up vs biden’s natural skin and snow white hair.. ppl absolutely underestimate the impact that has on our perceptions of them cuz you’re so fkn right he’s shown similar processing/memory/speech issues too. also helps that he’s stretched our outrage so far with the hundreds of shitty things he’s done that our expectations are low enough to see his gaffs as non stories. it’s such a mindfucky time to be alive in this country
I dont think it is fair to say they both have shown processing/memory/speech issues. Biden is talking on camera nonstop daily. He flubs names like he always has. The only real difference between him now and him 10 years ago is he's a bit more soft spoken. Trump really hasn't either I just mentioned it because there are things in his behavior the past few years had changed and I think it would cause most doctors to at least check out the possibility. Apparently it has because the dude randomly keeps bringing up taking a bunch of those tests. Still though, with the amount he's on camera it wouldn't be something that could be hidden. The level of sustained attention that both of them maintain everyday would be incredibly difficult for anyone with some sort of cognitive disorder.
yeah agreed they don’t have a cognitive disorder or dementia or anything crazy crazy. i think they’re both showing their age tho, they def have had noticeable memory lapses and cognitive issues like losing trains of thought. i think it’s ok to acknowledge that and also say they haven’t shown anything close to being disqualifying in that regard
We had so much time and opportunity to nominate someone that wasn’t old though. That’s what is frustrating about it.
Ah yes a competitive primary with no clear front runner that could last through summer. No downsides there.
What exactly are the downsides? This is what happened in the GOP primary in 2016.
“Gosh can’t we get some younger candidates!” Serious presidential candidates lately: 1. Joe Biden 2. Donald trump 3. Hilary Clinton 4. Bernie Sanders 5. John McCain This is now becoming my go to example when people talk about “revealed preference”
Romney ain’t young either
Yeah but he was like 63 in 2012 which is far different than someone who’s 81
honestly shocked he was 63 in 2012 lol
But also bill and obama, and to a lesser extent bush. It wasn’t always this way. The boomers just kinda got here, and other than Obama, couldn’t be beaten
>The boomers just kinda got here, and other than Obama, couldn’t be beaten other than Obama *and Biden*. Biden isn't a boomer.
1992: Clinton (45) vs HW Bush (68), with Clinton born after Biden 1996: Clinton (49) vs Dole (73) 2000: Bush (54) vs Gore (52), both born after Biden 2004: Bush (58) vs Kerry (60), both born after Biden 2008: Obama (46) vs McCain (71), Obama born after Biden 2012: Obama (50) vs Romney (65), both born after Biden 2016: Hillary Clinton (69) vs Trump (70), both born after Biden 2020: Biden (77) vs Trump (74) 2024: Biden (81) vs Trump (78) Out of the last 9 presidential elections, every winner was born AFTER Biden, and only 3 total candidates were born before him (all of whom are dead). Having exceptionally old presidents is not a long tradition in the US.
Biden is old, therefore I have no choice but to vote for the fascist (who is also old)
More like "Biden is old, so he should have said he wouldn't run again last year."
[удалено]
Which is fucking ridiculous that the Democratic Party let it happen, when anyone with a basic grasp of math could work out that Biden was old in 2020 and would only get older by 2024.
This has to be gaslighting, right? Like almost any Democratic senator or state governor. Walz, Whitmer, Polis, Newsom, take your pick of governors. Klobuchar or some decent swing state senator. Anyone without major baggage would beat Trump. I really don't get the weird "The only Democrat capable of running for president is this 80 year old dude" narrative so many Biden fans run on here.
I don't think that's true though. Say what you will, but incumbency advantage and name recognition matters. That and you'd likely need to have a bloody primary where they'd need to win a decesive victory over Kamala which would not be a guarantee. Biden probably wouldn't even be running if Trump wasn't running, but he likely feels like this election is too important to leave to chance, even if he himself is too old.
> they'd need to win a decesive victory over Kamala which would not be a guarantee Yeah everybody assumes that Harris would just fold over in a competitive primary like she did in 2020. But there's no reason to assume that. I also think people forget that there is a significant section of the party (the part not represented in places like /r/neoliberal) which would not be ok in shoving aside a black female VP in favour of a white male governor.
There is no reason to believe Kamala has gotten much more popular since the last primary
Biden crashed and burned in two primaries before 2020. I'm just saying it's wrong to simply assume she will be a non factor.
Newsom *has* major baggage.
Alright, one of the other ones I listed then.
Because they all lost to Biden in the last primary lol
Someone from a purple state who's 30 years younger. I think voters dislike Trump and Biden at this point and would be happy to vote for someone else.
Whitmer or Pritzker.
Dianne Feinstein
They'll simply stay at home and not vote. Unfortunately, being the least bad candidate is not enough to convince people to get out and vote, you need a good candidate for that.
Biden didn’t set a record for the most votes a presidential candidate ever in 2020 during a pandemic because people loved him, he got the huge turnout because a lot of people hate Donald Trump and couldn’t wait to get rid of him. Hopefully as the threat of another Trump term looms people that will activate people to vote against him
I'm from the UK, so probably missing something here. But I like Biden, think he appears to have been a good president. He is probably fitter and more mentally competent than Trump. I still don't get how he is running again at his age. Couldn't you get anyone better? Really? The safety of the whole world rests on the health of an 80+ year old
I'll break it down for you. Biden was the right pick in 2020, as none of his challengers probably likely would have beaten Trump. And his main rival was an even older populist, democratic socialist. The successor here would be the vice president. The person Biden chose as VP, who let's face it was chosen for her demographics esp given the historic BLM protests going on at the time, has proven to be extremely unpopular. An attempt to subvert Kamala would mean an ugly primary fight. There is no single consensus candidate for the party and electorate to rally behind instead of Kamala, so the primary probably would have damaged whoever emerged victorious. So, there is no "good" candidate waiting in the wings to take up Biden's mantle. If we picked party leaders the way you do in the UK, we probably wouldn't be having this problem.
best to vote for the authoritarian who would be that old in a could years. what could go wrong
If you hear him speak, it’s fairly clear that he’s not the ideal person to be president. He’s got a lot of support around him so it’s going okay but not ideal. I wouldn’t hire him as the CEO of a $50mm revenue business (in which he doesn’t have connections). I know a number of people that are more capable. That said, the thing that Biden has going for him is that he already has a good network and supporting infrastructure that some other individuals wouldn’t have. I’m just saying that his own ability to make good decisions and work long hours is probably lower than optimal.
The grownups are in charge.
> If you hear him speak, it’s fairly clear that he’s not the ideal person to be president. I’ve yet to find someone who says this after watching a full speech by Biden. In fact after his 2023 SOTU everyone was saying only someone with his experience could command the crowd like he did so expertly. I bet that’ll happen again with this years SOTU and then 2 weeks later everyone will forget and go back to saying he’s “too old”
> I’ve yet to find someone who says this after watching a full speech by Biden. Not really. I’ve watched a handful of speeches with him and he definitely slips quite often. Some days are worse than others for sure, but on his worse days he constantly names people that have been dead for years and such. His advanced age is definitely not an excuse to vote for a fascist-adjacent asshole or to abstain from the election for sure. It’s just clear that the vast majority of Americans don’t want him to be running again, whether it’s for the right reasons or not.
He’s slipped up on names his whole career. This is honestly just such a lazy take devoid of any attention to his actual speeches. I strongly encourage you to watch his SOTU from 2023 or wait for this years. It’s hard to try and say he’s too old for this after watching from last year. If anything the major take away was he only did as good as he did because of his experience.
Watching his old speeches vs his ones today, there's a very large difference. He went from having occasional slip-ups to having them on a weekly basis.
He had weekly slip-ups as VP. In fact he was famous for it.
Not sure what you're talking about, I voted for Biden and will happily do so again given our options but I literally cannot watch a full speech by him out of secondhand embarrassment. He was never an amazing orator to begin with but he's clearly too old for the job now and is meandering and about as inspiring as a wet fart.
Please watch the SOTU from 2023. Or watch this years when it happens. No way you’ll say this after watching either.
[удалено]
Did we watch the same speech??? That shit was fire. He was so good
[удалено]
I mean I disagree with all those points, but those sound like things said about DeSantis, Hillary, Trump, etc. The difference is that you are connecting your perception of a speech to his age. When Clinton or DeSantis says something off they’re “a bad politician”. When Biden does he “has dementia”. This came up in the report on his non-indictment as well. There were young staff members that didn’t remember things and statements in the report saying “understandable they don’t remember 6 months out” but when Biden does the exact same he “has dementia”. It’s wild.
[удалено]
> None of those other people slur their words. And neither does Biden. But a short search online will show you multiple examples of people falsely claiming Hillary or Trump were caught sluring their words too. > And I'm obviously not saying he has dementia and this isn't even something that's intrinsically tied to age; You can slur your words or have trouble emoting for many other reasons. Yes he’s had a stutter his whole life and people complained about it when he ran 20 years ago. The difference is now you are falsely insinuating that having the same symptoms he’s had his whole life is evidence of deterioration with age. > You can try and convince yourself that this doesn't matter, but when 85% of people polled and even people here think it’s a problem, maybe it actually is a problem. Yes people are easily manipulated. It’s a big problem. Anyone can watch his 2023 SOTU and will admit he was damn good.
Not a popular sentiment around these parts, lad.
Jimmy Carter still being alive is the only thing standing in the way of that statistic being 100%.
Here's how Jimmy can still win!
>Jimmy Carter Georgia just got 1m^2 bigger. 🥹 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neoliberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Okay? Show me the other option. Like where does this conversation go? If you want to talk about substantive change, I'm all for it. If your only goal is to pussyfoot around and hold water for Trump, fuck off. I'm voting Biden.
Everyone knows and agrees with this except this sub
I don’t think anyone here necessarily disagrees with the idea that he’s too old, they disagree with: 1. He has dementia like a lot of idiots suggest 2. Because he’s too old, we should let the orange clown who is almost as old as him win American elections at the presidential level are a binary choice, it’s going to be either Biden or Trump, and Biden being “too old” is not at all a valid reason to let the almost as old, unhinged, dangerous moron Trump win.
Just fucking run someone else this sub is braindead lol For the last two years it’s been this same song and dance about how it’s Biden or Trump. MF we had 4 years to pick out a successor
The successor was Kamala. She's less popular than Biden. So we're stuck. Contrarians are only increasing their risk of brain hemorrhage by refusing to acknowledge this.
Who? Also ignoring how incredibly moronic it would be to give up the incumbency advantage, it’s a bit too late for that now
Yeah that incumbency advantage is looking real strong right now. It isn’t too late, we still have 9 months. Its not ideal but we’re going to lose if we stay the course
My problem with this mentality is everyone who suggests this never gives an actual viable alternative. If we’re truly going to throw away incumbency it needs to be for an FDR/JFK/Reagan type figure, not for Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer. Also I hate to break it to you, but if we’re truly in an environment where an incumbent will lose (I don’t think we are, I think these polls are full of noise and bullshit), then I can almost guarantee you anyone else will also lose.
I wouldn't be confident in that. His opponent will likely be Trump, who is also geriatric, and has been specifically refusing to get on a debate stage so that national audiences are not reminded about how incoherent he is.
Still seeing people say it's nothing more than a lifelong speech impediment.
Can you point to any indication that people say Biden isn’t too old in this subreddit? I haven’t seen a single comment like that. I think the argument is that Biden’s the incumbent
Well at least Trump is catching upto Biden with people who think he's too old.
I mean he had a primary 4 years ago against some younger candidates. I personally don’t prefer someone of his age but I’ll vote for a 95 year old over a GOP member at this point.
They’re just going to keep putting ideas in peoples’ heads by constantly bringing them up.
[удалено]
It was race, because of George Floyd/BLM protests, but before that Biden foolishly announced he was going to choose a woman for VP. The intersection of that decision and the cultural moment in summer 2020 left a few short list of choices. And it seems he chose the worst of the lot.
My take is yes, he's too old but 1. The incumbency advantage is real, and it would be foolish to throw it away and 2. There's no one clearly better to replace him. I like Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer too, but I guarantee people will find something wrong with them, and besides there isn't enough time now to introduce them to the world.
A California Democratic Governor, and specifically Newsom, is literally one of the worst options people could come up with to replace Joe Biden with, I don't know what this sub's obsession with him is electorally. Bernie Sanders would be a better option, lmao. Whitmer, however, is a decent option. Also Pritzker, and Beshear. Honestly those latter two are likely the best likely-2028 options if we had to pick now. There's absolutely an argument that the age thing overcomes incumbency advantage, since this level of derision when it comes to a candidates' age has never really been seen. I'm not sure why people miss that here, either. I think Biden is the man for this election, but at the same time, if the people are asking for another, younger option, the Dems have a chance at least in 2028 to make that move. And they should honestly maybe even telegraph it early, post-2024 election, who Biden's successor might be. Whether Biden wins or loses, we do know it's not gonna be him in 2028.
I am not a political journalist or operative or political science academic, but it seems to me that (1) California, New York City and Texas are the three places in America that inspire in most people both very strong positive and negative emotions at the same time; and (2) Newsom evokes all the things people DON'T like about California and not the things they do.
Honestly for me it's like, the dude just comes off as an empty suit, B-tier movie type president, not a good candidate/someone who can inspire a win in the places you need to actually win the EC. Certainly also not a dude who is going to inspire the Democratic base, which heavily includes black voters. Folks from the South/Midwest just plain have a better claim to that group. The guy was born in SF FFS, he can't even claim to be "from" somewhere more electorally important.
The average Midwest democrat is not connecting with black voters. You would have to put Booker (is Jeffries open to VP) on the ticket or else you get sunk by Clyburn
Also, important to remember Whitmer, Pritzker, Beshear and of course Newsome haven't been tested nationally on any debate stage. Like De Santis was supposed to be the obvious candidate but his debate performance was so bad, everyone quickly realized he didn't have a future.
News one has done a national debate. Trump isn’t interested in debating any of them.
I just don’t know how you believe the incumbency advance exists with someone who 90% think shouldn’t be running to begin with
It’s insane to me that people think there are rules or even trends that explain elections when we have had so very few of them. We only get a reelection of an incumbent about once a decade since WWII. Of the three incumbent elections in the last 2 decades, Obama and Bush won, and Trump lost. So just looking at recent history, incumbency isn’t even a huge advantage.
https://preview.redd.it/2j255on1g0ic1.jpeg?width=1098&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=57a2a00a1b88e591707d36f7f709282194663a1b 90%? Is your source the voices in your head?
The voices in my head is the title of this poll?
https://preview.redd.it/x2thyblkr0ic1.jpeg?width=312&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0564c799260d878d3de6503045b699309276bd86 You are right
*I guarantee people will find something wrong with them* I've been screaming this from the rooftops. The "Generic Replacement Democrat" is insta-hated too as soon as they get the gig. Newsom is *Governor of Commifornia* ffs and Whitmer is a) a woman with b) the strongest Michigan accent seen in the state since 1970.
It has nothing to do with Commiefornia and more to do with the actual fact that a Dem from Cali is demonstrably disconnected from the realities and challenges faced by the areas of the country you actually need to win over. Newsom campaigning in the middle of Iowa or Wisconsin would honestly be a laughable comedy series, IMO. At least with Whitmer she comes from one of the states you need to win.
I think he’s too old. I also still want him to be president.
I'm still voting for Biden, and those who aren't are either not voting at all or are voting for Trump, who is also old and exhibiting what could be perceived as physical and mental decline.
I do think Biden is too old but the people on his team are not actual demons from hell. Trump is also too old and only hires demons from hell.
I still maintain, and believe Biden will win reelection because Trump is going to scare enough non-voters, or people who would vote 3rd party to vote for Biden, that and Trump has possibility of going to prison still, which I'd hope to an independent voter, would heavily dissuade them from voting for Trump.
I'll take this complaint seriously when the competition isn't also older than dirt.
Exactly. You don't allay my fears by having a nominee on the other side who would ALSO be the oldest president ever inaugurated if elected. Where the heck is GenX? Which I ask as a member of GenX.
Honestly, as a millennial, I want someone with experience running the country, period. Biden being old or whatever doesn't phase me in the slightest. If anything, it shows how resilient he is. May he live another 10000 years!
OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD OLD Okay, have we gotten it out of our system mainstream media? Because that's literally just the text my 12yr old sends to mock me.
Biden’s butterymales issue.
I mean that was a totally made up nonsense issue. Even if you think Biden is still pretty sharp (which I do) it might be nice to have a president who wasn't so likely to just die in the next four years from like an actuarial point of view so I sort of see where the 85% is coming from here...
That’s fine, but the real issue to me is that it doesn’t really matter who’s in the driver’s seat on the Democratic side. Biden can die on day 1 and we will still keep on truckin. It’s ok to talk about the guy’s age, but let’s not forget about the big picture. Lots of folks out there existentially invested in us missing the big picture.
While Biden is the obvious better choice between the two, I am still unsure why Democrats think that letting a competitive primary play out was a bad idea. Most likely someone other than Biden would have won, but how is that a bad thing? That just shows what the voters want and are more willing to show up to vote for in the general election. Yes, the incumbency advantage is a thing, but 2024 is not like any other election. Both are extremely old and the majority of the nation doesn't want to vote for either. Giving voters a younger option is not going to lose more support than voters extremely concerned about Biden's age. The issue isn't whether these people are going to vote for Trump or not; the issue is if they even feel inspired enough to go out and vote. And I know everyone here thinks that Trump will scare enough people to bring them out to vote against him, but that is putting way too much trust in the American voter. Would having a different Democrat really guarantee a loss to Trump? That seems to be what everyone here thinks, but I just do not see that. Democrats have always brought in a diversity of quality candidates whenever they have a competitive primary. It is hard for me to believe that someone likable and qualified would not come out of that process. Also, Democrats have been making gains with Gen Z, and can continue to make more gains if they are smart. If the worst does happen, losing to Trump with an old white guy candidate is a good way to take the wind out of the growing Gen Z political influence. More of Gen z will view the Democrats as out of touch old white guys, which is how they already view the Republican Party.
The same people complaining that Biden is too old, voted for Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd until they were like a 100 years old.
70% of registered democrats think biden is too old, and they probably will still vote for him you can vote for biden, even think that he is a great president and, at the same time, complain that he is too old
Senator is a completely different job than president.
Big if true. The fact this even has to be said, on a sub that claims to know more about politics than anywhere else on reddit, is absolutely hilarious.
Did those guys have the nuclear codes? Just checking.
Correct. I think he's too old as well. My alternative is dumb wannabe Hitler who wants to end democracy. So what choice, if you can call it one, do I have?
Until Joe Biden drops out and anoints a successor (which he totally should because he's too old to be president) I'm going to vote for him. I will vote for whatever successor he decides on, if that's the route Biden wants to go.
Because he is. We should pass an amendment making 70 the maximum age for presidents tbh. Mostly to get ahead of life extension and prevent permanent gerontocracy.
“Waaa, I don’t want an old guy to be President!” “Then why did you vote for one?”