Okay Dems, What Now?
Do not despair, all you who watched the debate. (Democratic Vistas Newsletter, June 28, 2024)
My debate watch lasted less than ten minutes.
I am not proud of this. I just couldn’t keep watching.
In the opening minutes, I paced up and down my hallway. I listened. I occasionally peeked at the television. Then, after a few exchanges between the candidates, I switched to a show on BritBox. Occasionally, I flipped back for a quick glance. Very quick.
So, this is not going to be a nuanced analysis of the debate. You can find that elsewhere. Heather Cox Richardson (Letters from an American on Substack) posted a detailed and insightful analysis last night, shortly after the debate. I don’t know how she pulled off such a good post so quickly. The morning-after discussion (a phrase that sounds a little like the morning-after pill) on Morning Joe showed compassion for Biden and his family, yet they also raised all the hard questions. Everyone on the panel spoke with compassion and concern for the future of our country.
I admit that I am woefully ill-informed to say anything about what happened last night, but I will. Here is my analysis, which is hardly comprehensive, informed, or nuanced, but I think it is probably accurate: The debate was over in the first ten minutes, maybe the first minute. Without a major intervention, Trump will win.
In “Debate Prep for the Rest of Us,” posted a week before the debate, I wrote: “What will be different about this debate, regardless of our politics, is that most of us will watch eyes wide, jaw clinched. We will be fearing disaster for our candidate and, if we are honest, hoping the other guy falls apart.” In other words, all of the factors that usually matter in a normal presidential debate will probably not matter in this one. We would either witness a single disaster or a dual disaster. It would be a debate about meeting or failing to meet a low bar, a very low bar. It was a single disaster.
From all reports, Trump lied for the entire ninety minutes. I predicted that none of this would resonate, and that Trump would have a win if he only could remain calm. Although he faded as the debate went on, he reportedly remained fairly composed. Swing voters will be less likely to believe that he is unhinged or in mental decline. He met the low bar.
From all reports, Biden was fuzzy for ninety minutes. I predicted that, if Biden even had a brief moment when he seemed confused, he could potentially lose the election. He had a lot of those moments. Swing voters will be more likely to believe that he is too old. He failed to meet the low bar.
The Biden campaign is saying he had a cold. I don’t think that explanation is going to cleanse the image of him looking like he arrived at the debate straight from a nursing home.
On Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski said that we need to calm down and let this play out. I agree. But not for long. We need to see how the debate registers in the polls, but I also believe that any intervention needs to happen in the next two weeks.
As with any intervention, it is difficult to tell the truth to someone you respect and love. Part of what I am feeling this morning is profound sadness for Joe Biden and his family. I deeply want him to be okay and strong enough to run a successful campaign. After last night, I have my doubts.
I suspect that Biden is going to experience a significant drop in the polls.
If Biden decides that it is best for the country for him to withdraw, what might happen?
It is too late to schedule new primaries. This is not necessarily a bad thing. The primary system is broken, and that is why we have double-haters who rightly ask: “In a country of about 333 million, how is it that we can’t come up with two good candidates?” They feel that Trump is too crazy, and Biden is too old. I understand their position. I feel like I have been voting for the lesser of two flawed candidates most of my life, with few exceptions.
The democratic nominee would have to be picked the old-fashioned way—at the convention. The two major political parties moved away from this system because it seemed undemocratic to have a bunch of cigar-smoking old men pick the nominee behind closed doors. True enough, but it is also possible to rig the primary system, as the DNC attempted to do in 2016 so that Hillary Clinton would win. We know how that turned out.
Most primary systems also tend to favor extreme candidates who win the general election in skewed districts or bland candidates who lose the general election in contested districts. Maybe, having delegates pick a candidate at the convention will have a better result, if done right.
The democrats don’t have to go behind closed doors. They can take it to the convention floor. It will be chaotic, but this might be a good thing. For the last fifty years or so, national conventions have become increasingly irrelevant and painfully dull. The outcome is typically decided weeks or sometimes months in advance. Having a convention with some serious floor fights might give democrats a huge burst of enthusiasm. At the very least, it won’t be dull.
The democrats do have options. Kamala Harris, who has been in the dark for the last three and a half years, has recently been eloquent when commenting on the Dobbs decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. She will likely be a good person to take women’s healthcare issues to swing voters. Gavin Newsom, Governor of California, has been one of the most effective defenders of Biden’s record, even on Fox News. For the last couple of years, he has been fund-raising like he was already running for president. Wes Moore, Governor of Maryland, is a rising star. He is less well known, but that might not be a bad thing.
I went to bed last night full of despair. I woke up feeling better. We don’t know how all of this will play out. Biden’s poor performance might actually turn out to be a good thing for democracy.