Skip Navigation
124 comments

  • A New York Times poll conducted after the debate, which was published on Wednesday, suggested Trump was now holding his biggest lead yet at six points.

    And a separate poll published by the BBC’s US partner CBS News suggested Trump has a three-point lead over Mr Biden in the crucial battleground states

    Him refusing to listen to voters is reason enough to replace him.

    But Joe can't win without Dem voters. Every indication is he's willing to hand trump the presidency out of spite if the party doesn't force him out.

    He's not fit to be president, even if we beat Trump. We're stuck with this shit where Biden does whatever the fuck he wants, and rarely agrees with the people who put him in office.

    • I mean, this is the kind of messaging we should expect from the office until the exact moment he flips. There isn't anything really "new" in this BBC article, its mostly a rehash of several other articles and polls that have come out since last Thursday.

      I'm still holding out for an announcement this evening/ tomorrow morning, but I am becoming less confident in that. I'm still confident that Biden isn't going to be the nominee, but he's creating a significant cost associated with him continuing to run as a lost-cause candidate. We need to move on and regroup, and we're running out of time to do so.

      At this point, Biden needs to basically recover 30 points in the polling to overcome the disadvantage we know he carries going into a general (we have seen how he underperforms his polling on election day; we also know that Trump typically outperforms his polling on election day). A thirty point swing at this point is a statistical impossibility, for those being practical about the matter. I can post the analysis again, but no swing of that magnitude has ever happened this close to election day. Ever. Based on his current polling, Biden has a less than 1% probability of winning, which is to say, basically impossible.

      • Even changing the nominee is risky at this point. There's never been a party that has won when changing the nominee at the "last minute."

        That's what's scary here, replacing him could even be more disastrous than standing behind him. Both are bad choices. We've been fucked into a bad choice by a party that doesn't give a shit about its own voters.

        If only literally anybody in the party apparatus had listened to reason in four fucking years instead of being like "We can cart his corpse out until he croaks like we did with Dianne Feinstein."

      • Fuck Nate Silver, some random Internet user figured it all out and didn't even cite a source

    • Welcome to how the Democrats have operated as a party since the Bill Clinton era in the 90's.

      I'm ready for the next step, which is to blame voters for not voting hard enough, after *checks notes... two years of viciously saying "You can't critique the President it's too close to an election" as if it's never not too close to an election to critique Democrats apparently.

  • Biden had 1 long-shot chance to bridge echo-chambers and show the country he can lead. To reach those undecided swing-state voters.

    It's why he took this debate. Because he was already losing them.

    And he blew it to such a catastrophic level it's not impacting congressional down-ballot races already.

    Fun fact: Biden now shares the title of Ford, Carter, HW Bush, and Trump who were incumbent presidents who trailed in polls both before and after the first debate... All of whom lost reelection.

124 comments