Prediction: Sorry Democrats, Biden Isn't Going Anywhere
Biden wants to retain his power. Most political leaders do!

President Joe Biden sent a defiant letter to congressional Democrats on Monday morning stating unequivocally: "I am firmly committed to staying in this race." This followed his Friday interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, in which he said it would take a literal act of God to force him off the 2024 Democratic presidential ticket.
"If the Lord Almighty came down and said, 'Joe, get out of the race,' I'd get out of the race," said Biden. "The Lord Almighty's not coming down."
That interview failed to reassure many Democrats that Biden has the stamina to defeat Donald Trump in November, or even that he is cognitively fit to serve as president for another term. But make no mistake: He has every intention of continuing his campaign. Moreover, it is extraordinarily unlikely that he will be forced off the ticket, and pundits who expect Biden to ultimately bow out are glossing over some hard truths about power and politics—namely, that Biden wants to be president again.
At the moment, the prevailing wisdom in Washington, D.C., is that Biden's immediate fate is uncertain at best. A previously neutral-to-supportive political media has turned on him completely, in part due to a toxic combination of betrayal—reporters feel duped by the White House about the extent of his impairments—and despair over his dwindling reelection odds; countless mainstream news organizations are now calling for him to drop out. Some congressional Democrats have endorsed these calls, and Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are currently meeting to discuss Biden's future. Major donors want him gone. Hollywood is out.
These defections have impacted the betting markets. On PredictIt, Biden went from having about an 80 percent chance of being the nominee on July 1 to just 40 percent a week later. Over the weekend, New York Times columnist Ross Douthat made the case that not only should Biden drop out, he is likely to do so eventually.
"I think Biden will bow out, his current protestations notwithstanding," writes Douthat.
The columnist does make note of the major counterexample: Donald Trump, who himself faced open revolt against his candidacy in 2016 following the Access Hollywood tape. Leading Republicans, including the two most recent Republican presidential nominees at the time—Mitt Romney and John McCain—called on Trump to quit the race, but Trump defied them all. He remained the nominee and even won the presidency for good measure.
Then, in 2020, the Republican National Convention held competitive primaries and scheduled debates with alternative candidates. (Trump did not attend.) Conservative media christened Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis as Trump's successor. Leaders of the party did everything in their power to move on from Trump. None of this worked. Trump's conviction that he should seek the presidency again is a more powerful motivator for Trump than the party's conviction that he should go away quietly.
Douthat acknowledges this dynamic but writes that things are sufficiently different on the Democratic side. Unlike Trump, Democratic political figures actually care what their thought leaders think about them, argues Douthat. Furthermore, "Democrats still appear more capable of functioning and deciding as a party than the Republicans." Republican elites are at the mercy of Trump and his throng of supporters, whereas Democratic elites are dealing with a much more obedient, quiescent base.
These are all compelling points. The problem is that they don't matter very much.
In order for the Democratic National Convention to nominate someone else when it meets in August, Biden would have to be persuaded to willingly step aside: He already won the delegates, they are bound by "good conscience" to vote for him, and delegates have shown little indication they would do otherwise unless he assented. Biden is the leader of the Democratic Party; there is no higher authority that can remove him from the ticket (other than the Almighty).
This means that Democrats who want to nominate a different candidate must convince Biden to go. That's going to be a tough sell, because Biden wants to be president again. (If he didn't want to serve a second term, he wouldn't have run for one.)
No one should be surprised by this. It may seem very basic, but political figures—particularly at the highest levels of influence—generally seek to retain power. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D–Calif.) recently died in office, and she's hardly the first senator to do so. Ruth Bader Ginsburg cost Democrats a pivotal Supreme Court seat by refusing to retire. In 2022, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R–Iowa.) ran for reelection; he's currently 90 years old.
Trump has been willing to risk nearly everything—including his freedom—in order to retain control over the GOP and regain the presidency. Polls showing that other Republicans had an even greater chance of beating Biden in 2024 made little difference to Trump; Trump wants Trump to be the president, not just any Republican.
Perhaps Biden is not so self-centered and would—at some point—put the good of the party over his own ambitions. It's at least possible that if Biden were convinced he had no shot at beating Trump, and some charismatic Democratic rival had a good chance at beating Trump, he would step aside. These conditions have not been met; they are not anywhere close to being met.
According to recent polls, Biden is likely to lose to Trump. But his only plausible replacement—Vice President Kamala Harris—fares only slightly better. A CNN poll has Biden six points behind Trump and Harris two points behind Trump.
To be clear, this could be a meaningful difference if you're the Democratic Party and your only goal is to maximize your odds of beating Trump. It would be wild and potentially destabilizing to swap the candidates at this point, and historically Harris has been viewed less favorably than Biden—but it's certainly possible to construct an argument that the Democratic Party should take the gamble.
Biden is not the Democratic Party, however. If he drops out, he reduces his own odds of being the president again to approximately zero. No one can explain why Biden—from the Biden perspective—should do this.
Democrats need to persuade their president that his shaky debate performance has made his reelection so improbable that he doesn't lose much by bowing out now. They also need to make the case that Harris is so much more appealing to the electorate that Biden's continued presence in the race is blowing an actually winnable election for her. Again, that's a tough sell—particularly when the people controlling access to Biden are Jill Biden and Hunter Biden, whose judgment in this matter might be far from objective.
It's possible, of course, that Democrats overcome these significant hurdles and convince Biden to exit. There's also a possibility that Biden could have a more serious health emergency that does necessitate him dropping out. Barring that scenario, I am comfortable predicting that Biden will be the Democratic nominee for president in November. You can bet on it.
I now have a $100 bet with @robbysoave about Biden dropping out. https://t.co/eYhG8aPctV
— Brianna Wu (@BriannaWu) July 6, 2024
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"There's also a possibility that Biden could have a more serious health emergency that does necessitate him dropping out."
Hillary is working on it.
Most likely scenario:
Complicit aides stop helping him walk, and there will be a tragic 'slip and fall' leading to a coma and mostly regrettable death.
Found in his bunker face down with blood pooled on his backside. Cameras watching the hallways surrounding the bunker will show no one coming or going, but cameras in the bunker will have been mysteriously deactivated. Staffers charged with keeping him bubblewrapped will be unable to account for the 5-10 min. between when he was last seen and when the body was discovered.
Did you hack Hillary's emails?
He has had two brain aneurysms in the past I'm sure that will be triggered, if you know what i mean
And my prediction: He will win the 2024 election with even more votes than he did in 2020.
You’re probably right, but with quotes around “votes”.
The ballots will be counted, recounted, and re-recounted, and the numbers will come up the same. Proof our democracy is the most secure in historicity.
So an improvement from 2020 when they kept finding more votes.
The election isn't over until the Democrat wins by any means necessary.
The most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics, again.
Exactly! Similar to the red wave and France.. betting markets and polls can show an 80percent conservative lead. Democrats get the White House the senate and the house.
The Economist in Britain rejoices while calls for dense public housing projects in every county across the country (except the politico vacation bunkers). The NIMBYs will be defeated and socialised consumption rules the lands. Now with food trucks.
One factor you forget. Biden is a criminal, and now the long knifes will come out and expose all the things the media has refused in the past to talk about. Or they’ll threaten him with it and he’ll drop out to avoid the repercussions.
Yes, Robby naïvely assumes that Biden's ouster would be accomplished by legal, ethical, and transparent means. If our rulers decide Biden can't run, he won't.
"A previously neutral-to-supportive political media has turned on him completely"
Oh please, Robby. The mainstream media has been completely in the tank for him, and any other Democrat.
They haven't completely turned on him. They have only decided they can't win with him after the public at large saw how bad he really is and they had no way to spin it. They still support all of his destructive actions and cover for his corruption. The narrative is only that he is "too old" and not that he is and always was mentally incapable of the task
"reporters feel duped by the White House about the extent of his impairments"
Oh please, Robby. Reporters have been knowingly covering up his condition for many months. It's been obvious to me in every video of him for the last year or so.
I give Gutfeld some credit. Probably every episode for the last year has had a joke about Depends or nursing homes in it.
No one is more upset about this than Journalismists!
*They’re* the real victims here! Their 1A right to inform the populace has been infringed!
They were tricked! All those unedited cheap fakes were going around!
“We're going to get to the bottom of this, you’ll see!”
MSM has been as willfully complicit in creating this disaster as much as any Democratic strategist who sought to maintain a pliable president in office. It simply got to the point where they could no longer get away with lying about it. If only they could have kept the farce going for another 4 months…
reporters feel duped by the White House about the extent of his impairments
They duped themselves. The only news stories about politics are stories about polls. Find out what regular people think – and then present what they think as some big news story. Repeat every few weeks. That’s the entirety of most political news.
Regular folks know roughly what the polls think even if the news stories about polls don’t really drill down much. It’s a poll. There’s no news there. Even when you drill down – it was obvious in 2020 that young Dems wanted Biden to serve only one term. Because he’s too old. Which just gets more obvious over time. Other D demographics have a different take – but none of it is ‘news’ to them. The polls have been telling the story since forever.
Only reporters think polls are news. They also don’t drill down into the polls at all because to a reporter, its all just a horse race and reporters are basically lazy and conformist. So a reporter gets surprised when there’s an obvious discontinuity. And yes that debate was a jaw-dropping discontinuity in public.
It’s not because he’s old.
Fine, You argue with the polls. Age is how poll questions (and therefore media discussion) are being framed. And in particular re the demographic I discussed. Millennials and Z’s want boomers gone from power. Years ago. That is purely an age thing.
You will find out if the issue is age the nanosecond Biden leaves the race. Trump has been quite fortunate in one respect. If he is elected, he will become the oldest prez ever by the time he leaves office. And yet there has been very little partisan focus re his age in any election. Clinton is same age but in 2016 she was the unhealthy one. Biden and his campaign obviously ain't emphasizing age. If/once Trump is the oldest by decades - then age will become the big issue against him.
"I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience." - Ronald Reagan
Some octogenarians can handle their job. Biden is just not one of them.
betrayal—reporters feel duped by the White House about the extent of his impairments
Occam's razor. Is A or B more likely?
A -- the non-conservative media have been reporting honestly about Biden; were surprised to see his physical and mental condition at the debate; and feel betrayed that the White House previously hid this from them.
B -- the non-conservative media cooperated with the White House in hiding Biden's physical and mental condition from the American people; they could see all along, just like the rest of us, how deteriorated he was; and now see the handwriting on the wall that it's going to be someone else as the candidate, or that Biden is going to lose, so are scrambling to create a record of "having reported the truth."
Well, the Occam's Razor analysis yields A as the correct answer. But we all know you are going to choose B.
It must amaze you that all those non critical thinking conspiracy theorists have been pointing out the same signs you finally admitted to, only when Sulu and Katie Hill gave you the okay, since 2019. Almost like those are the people relying on critical thinking skills, primary evidence, and their own eyes instead of Dark Brandon fanfic from your favorite "neutral" news agencies.
Holy crap Jeff, a new low.
A new low, so far.
LOL
That a bunch of sentient adults who report on the WH/President didn't notice what we have all plainly seen with our own eyes and ears for years, is so wildly implausible, that yes it's B.
Occam's Razor = when confronted with two equivalent explanations, choose the simpler one.
So, Occam's Razor is the one that does NOT posit the existence of some conspiracy.
You asked for the Occam's Razor analysis and that is what you got. That doesn't mean it is the correct answer, only that it is the simplest. And since we are on a libertarian forum, we both know you are going to pick the one involving shadowy government conspiracies over the one that does not.
there is another way to look at this:
A: MSM has been honest and were honestly fooled. When the truth was revealed, they reported and it happened to be 180 degrees from what they were doing.
B: MSM is and always will be in the bag for Democrats. Reporting changed to still be in the bag for Democrats (except for Joe)
B is simpler
I think the most honest answer here, is that reporters were being honest in their reporting on Biden, based on the scope of work that they assigned to themselves. The problem is, that scope of work consists of copying press releases and scanning Twitter for hot takes, not really investigative reporting in a meaningful sense. I think that is the real problem here. Not that the MSM writ large is "in the tank" for Biden - although I am sure some reporters are - but that they don't actually do their jobs the way that the rest of us would expect them to do.
thats a lot of justification to make the case for the 'simpler' choice
Not a conspiracy. Motivated reasoning. People are very good at lying to themselves when they want a certain outcome. If you're a deep-dyed Democratic partisan, it's going to take a lot before you'll allow yourself to notice that the current President, a Democrat, needs to be in an old-age home rather than the White House.
A. Incompetent.
B. Dishonest.
So, your answer is A?
His dementia has been obvious for at least FIVE YEARS you fat faggot. Seriously, this morning did you say to yourself “I have zero credibility among the Reason commentariat. How can I lower the bar further today?”
It is not my problem that you cannot see beyond your narrow range of vision.
We all get it, you and your team hate Democrats, hate Biden, hate the left, will never give them the benefit of the doubt, everything they do is for incompetent/evil/corrupt reasons. So when Joe, back in 2020 or even earlier, stumbles on his words or utters some gaffe, the ONLY EXPLANATION is that he has dementia. Not that he had a ‘senior moment’ or that he is just continuing in his long tradition of gaffes that he has been known for, for decades now. “Dementia” is the only acceptable explanation.
You ascribe the worst possible explanation for everything that Democrats and the left do, and, what’s worse, you will not tolerate anyone who has a different explanation even if made entirely in good faith. And if they change their mind, it is insincere and ‘too little too late’, never offered in good faith. You demand nothing less than total submission.
So tell us, how long has Biden been a dementia patient? 5 years? 10 years? What is the ‘correct’ answer to give here?
chemtard hates it when his lefty boos and his defenses of them are called out.
No, I hate it when you and your team completely give up on the concept of pluralism. You all don't actually want to live near people who disagree with you, even if that disagreement has absolutely no effect and no bearing on your life. I think it's pretty clear that your end goal here is a culturally homogeneous society where the dissenters are treated as heretics and driven out, or worse.
"Pluralism" is a glittering generality that shouldn't be taken seriously.
You all don’t actually want to live near people who disagree with you
Huh, so much for your contention you made today that people should be able to live in their own cultural milieus. Thanks for confirming you're fine with that, as long is it's not right-wing.
even if that disagreement has absolutely no effect and no bearing on your life
The last 50 years are elegant proof this assertion is a load of shit.
I think it’s pretty clear that your end goal here is a culturally homogeneous society where the dissenters are treated as heretics and driven out, or worse.
You really hate it when your lefty boos get a taste of their own medicine.
He really hates people noticing how full of shit and constantly wrong his team is. Biggest outrage when you dont fall for his gaslighting.
I pissed him off enough to get a response. He usually hides. Of course I crushed his premise below. Which is fun. And he needs to be treated far more harshly. I’m sure we’re all completely sick of his shot.
And I do enjoy how much you manage to piss him off. Always well done.
Ot has nothing to do with hating democrats. It’s just obvious as far back as 2019 that Biden suffered from dementia. Most of us here having been saying that since then, while you were giving him cover. We’ve also been saying that about Mitch McConnell, and there was much criticism of John McCain, Diane Feinstein, etc..
We’re not the ones lying and covering for these people. That would be you.
That reminds me that we haven't heard much about turtle man in forever. Has he stroked out completely and the establishment is using his puppet corpse to move their legislation through?
C – the non-conservative media were willing to play along with the narrative that Biden was fit, but they expected the White House to hold up their end of the bargain by properly choreographing events and avoiding situations where the risk of major embarrassment was high. The debate – not just Biden’s answers, but agreeing to the event at all and even worse a no-notes rule – was a failure to perform.
So the White House did “betray” the press. Not by lying to them but by failure to fulfill their share of the project.
This "C – the non-conservative media were willing to play along with the narrative that Biden was fit, but they expected the White House to hold up their end of the bargain by properly choreographing events and avoiding situations where the risk of major embarrassment was high. The debate – not just Biden’s answers, but agreeing to the event at all and even worse a no-notes rule – was a failure to perform."
The media was shocked that the 'machine' was so incompetent that it couldn't pull off the illusion better.
Occam-Markov’s Razor Chain (Chainsaw?):
Given the statement “Blue No Matter Who” specifically referencing Fetterman and Joe’s respective mental deficits, is A or B more likely?
A – The non-conservative media and their readership has been reporting and consuming honestly and objectively about Biden and were surprised to see his physical and mental condition at the debate and feel genuinely and justifiably betrayed that the WH previously hid this from them.
B – The non-concervative media and their readership openly aligned their values with the WH and the DNC to ignore Biden’s (and others') physical and mental condition; they could see all along, just like the rest of us, how deteriorated he was; and now see the handwriting on the wall; that continuing this charade is going to wind up ultimately costing them power rather than setting humanity on some golden path. And, as a result, are scrambling to cover the shit-covered path they’ve been frog-marching dissenters along for 8 yrs. now, working out their story of how they knew all along just like the rest of us, and we should just grant them amnesty for their mistake and follow them in their quest to choose a next TOP MAN (who’s totally not just an empty suit) in the endless quest for power to bring about their utopia.
He may or may not be senile, but he has always been corrupt. I would think that some well-financed publishing company will offer him a $15 million advance for his memoir, with an extra $10 million for his editor, Hunter, if he doesn't mind retiring to the beach to start working on it. That should do it.
I believe there were many in the media who knew of his slowly deteriorating condition and hoped it wouldn't be blindingly obvious until after the election. Then, we get President Harris (Obama term 4) for 3 3/4 years or so. If powerful Republicans could get an egomaniac like Nixon to resign, then I suspect some combination of Dem elites could persuade Joe, Dr. Jill and Hunter to pull the plug on their candidacy.
“Nobody fucks with a Biden “.
Joe Biden
An education major demanding people call her doctor isnt giving a damn thing up.
It may seem very basic, but political figures—particularly at the highest levels of influence—generally seek to retain power.
There seems to be a very clear correlation between age and desire for cold dead hands to keep hold of power. But I suspect it is more than just the age of an incumbent. I think it’s also donors. They are also old and have both the desire for continued influence/control and for a resistance to even the existence of younger people than they choosing to retire from power.
More significant – political investment/corruption has a massive tilt towards rewarding incumbency. Once there’s an ‘open race’, the cost goes way up and the likely odds of winning drop. So just keep the incumbents in power until they die and make sure no new young blood gets funded to challenge. We have already spent 100+ years tilting the political field towards requiring big money to grease everything (see huge districts and zero-sum re-apportionment). You don't throw that away by anything that will force more frequent competitive elections.
You sure know how to make an ass of yourself:
"Democratic donors call on Biden to step down"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democratic-donors-call-on-biden-to-step-down/ar-BB1pxnd9?ocid=BingNewsSerp
Donors donate MONEY you twit. Not press releases. When they stop donating money, they stop being donors and the campaign looks for other donors.
Biden campaign money raised - $389mm -
Cash on hand - $186 mm
Trump campaign money raised - $388 mm
Cash on hand - $231 mm
Donors already enabled a shit-ton more weeks for Biden to dither away HIS money. If Biden views Harris with contempt, he'll spend until the coffers are near-empty and then graciously drop out and leave Kamala with nothing. No one donated to the VP slot.
Are you becoming a shrike sock? Same retarded word usage. Same retarded commentary.
And as assholish piece of shit, you claimed "donors' heald the reigns only to be shown you are:
Full.
Of.
Shit.
This is JFucked who claimed you needed to wear 5 masks (or am I maybe exaggerating, JFucked?) Well, maybe a bit.
FOAD, slimy pile of lefty shit.
"We're in a situation were we have put together and you guys di did it for our administration the president Obama's administration before this"
“We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,”
Biden said.
When Obama got a second term I thought voters were the dumbest humans on the planet. When Biden gets re-elected I'll think Democrats setup and I quote "the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
The main thing is, Jill wants to keep him out of jail. And the way to stay out of jail is to be the one who puts other people in jail.
June job creation was bolstered by a 70,000 surge in government jobs, with significant contributions from the health care sector (49,000), social assistance (34,000), and construction (27,000).
119,000 govt or grant funded non production jerbs.
Pre Meili Argentina
If the Democrats want a different candidate, there is one way, and one way only.
25th Amendment.
No, the only way they get rid of him is by stuffing a pillow over his face and then claiming he died of an aneurysm.
Biden wants to retain his power. Most political leaders do!
FYI, Biden doesn't even know he's president. It's Jill Biden who wants to keep her power-- you know, the J Biden that "will still be good so no need to reprint ballots" J Biden.
As long as we aren't talking about the Deep State, which doesn't exist and doesn't in any way pose a threat to democracy, that's what's important.
As I've said before, Biden is the candidate the Democrats deserve. They shit their own bed, they can fucking well lie in it.
-jcr
No one can unsee what happened in the June 27th debate. What more the Biden campaign is not doing what it needs to really convince people the debate was just a bad night. The excuses are not selling, and Joe Biden is coming under more scrutiny. Things that could be written off can no longer be.
You can also not sell the idea of a second Trump Presidency as an existential threat and then allow a candidate now as weak as Biden to remain as the nominee. What is scarier to Democrats? A second Trump Presidency or speaking the truth to Joe Biden? It cannot be the later.
The scariest thing for the dems right now is a Harris presidency, or having her on the top of the ballot. But they are stuck with her more than they are with Biden.
I disagree, a Harris Presidency is scarier to the Republicans. The age issue instantly changes over Trump. Harris can also call Trump on his lies, something Joe Biden failed to do. And she can sell achievements of the Biden Presidency of which she was part.
There is a reason she finished near the bottom in the 2020 primaries. She was merely the DEI pick for VP.
Yes, but still a real threat to the Republicans.
How? The democrats have had plenty of time to destroy the GOP, lock up the Jan 6 rioters, and call out Trumps bs, and the republicans have helped them with ridiculous anti-abortion laws, yet Trump still leads.
Trump can point out that he never tried to murder a black man by suppressing the DNA evidence that exonerated him like Harris did.
-jcr
The scary thing is his attempts to "clean up" the damage have only made things worse.
It is nice to see, though, how much of an utter whore Joe and Mika Scarborough are.
Democrats can (and will likely) replace Biden as the Democrat nominee next month if/when Kamala Harris and half of Biden's cabinet privately threaten to deploy the 25th Amendment against him (to remove him as President) if he refuses to withdraw from the November election.
That way, Biden could still serve out his presidency, Harris becomes their nominee for November, and the Democrats will likely chose Josh Shapiro (if he's agreeable) to be VP (as he's the best VP option). Newsom won't be the Democrat's VP nominee (as two left wingers from California is a losing ticket), nor will Whitmer (as two women is also a losing ticket).
But in order to pull this off, Harris, Biden's cabinet members and Biden would all have to agree to not let the news media know about their secret arrangement/deal until after November's election.
Mr. Biden has said repeatedly that he is not dropping out. More importantly, Mrs. (sorry, Dr.) Biden has said that she does not want him to drop out. I take them at their word. President Biden will not willingly drop out.
He might suffer a true health collapse, leaving him comatose or dead. He might conceivably be impeached and removed from office, or VP Harris and the Cabinet might invoke the 25th Amendment. Some extraordinary event may intervene and cause the election not to happen at all--say, a Russian nuclear strike on Washington D.C.
Figure out the cumulative chance of all those eventualities. That's your chance that Joe Biden does not head the D. ticket this November.
But the chance that he willingly (if reluctantly) withdraws? 0%.
And the chance that helps Trump turn the houses red: 100%