Thursday’s presidential debate debacle — widely regarded as a low point for President Joe Biden, who appeared feeble and sometimes confused — many Democratic elites and nonpartisan pundits are suggesting a break-the-glass-in-case-of-emergency move that resided on the margins of conventional political thought just a week ago: The incumbent president, they argue, should step aside in the interest of the country, and delegates should name his replacement at the upcoming Democratic National Convention.

Any move to replace Biden just four months before the election carries considerable risk. The party can ill afford to pass over its sitting vice president, Kamala Harris, who represents a core Democratic constituency as a Black woman — but Harris consistently underperforms in polling. And allowing delegates to make such a momentous decision, negating the will of millions of primary voters and turning a nomination process that has been the norm for decades upside-down, is surely a recipe for division and rancor.

But it’s not like we haven’t been here before. On March 31, 1968, Lyndon B. Johnson stunned the nation when he announced that he was pulling out of that year’s presidential election. The Democratic National Convention that followed several months later devolved into chaos and violence and left the party’s eventual nominee, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, hobbled at the start of the fall campaign season. He ultimately lost a painfully close election to Richard Nixon, in no small part because of the unruly convention in Chicago.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Someone remind me of what happened after Johnson was replaced and how that worked out for the Democrats…

    I don’t like Biden. None of us here appear to like Biden. The problem is that no one can agree on who would be best to replace him with. Unless that can be resolved right away, we’re stuck with Biden whether or not that means failure. Honestly, at this point, I’m seeing Trump’s presidency as a horrific inevitability.

    • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah if we had somebody who was a consensus candidate sort of waiting in the wings, I would push harder. But we don’t. And as the article says, leapfrogging over Harris would be a terrible look.

      • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is the problem with the Dems. Worried about giving people “their turn” or whatever. That’s why Hillary got the nomination and why we will be stuck with Kamala. We are handing Trump the presidency on a silver platter. Running an incoherent 81 year old man with a VP nobody likes because he’s the incumbent. Jesus Christ we are doomed.

        • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          It’s not about “it’s their turn,” it’s that if she isn’t fit to be president then why is she fit to be vice president? Skipping over her creates even more messaging issues and such.

          Unfortunately the presidential election is largely a popularity contest. Optics are incredibly important. And the optics on just kind of pretending she’s not there are terrible.

          • toast
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 months ago

            Being fit to be president and being a candidate with a good chance to win are very different things.

            Right now, the Democrats need a candidate that can win. If this isn’t their top priority, then how can anyone take seriously their claim that Trump threatens democracy itself. They have to pick a candidate that people really want

          • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            It’s not about “it’s their turn,” it’s that if she isn’t fit to be president then why is she fit to be vice president? Skipping over her creates even more messaging issues and such.

            Yeah, imagine the message it would send. “We’re willing to admit when we make a mistake and we listen to party membership.”

            Completely off brand for the Democratic Party.

    • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is why, despite the fact that many of us also dislike Kamala, she should be the only name in the running, and he shouldn’t wait until the convection to step aside. He should resign now, let Kamala be president for a few months, and then she can run in the election as an incumbent with full party support. No one else can legally claim his delegates or even use the campaign’s money, only she can do that if he resigns. This would be the only real way to force the DCCC into not shitting the bed, which is their default setting. Any other approach, in my opinion, is a recipe for mayhem at the convention, and yeah, an inevitable Trump presidency.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t think a black woman has much of a chance of being elected president in this climate, but even if that weren’t the case, it’s my understanding that she’s even more disliked than Biden.

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          I think a black woman with Obama’s gravitas would mop the floor with trump. She doesn’t have that, and she’s got a ton of baggage too.

      • toast
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        she should be the only name in the running

        I very much disagree

        For her (or anyone) to have a chance, there has to be some semblance of competition (if not for voters, at least for delegates)

        A spectacle at the convention would get news coverage, and competition between Biden replacements would be the best way to vet the candidates’ viability

        The last thing anyone should want is for the DNC to simply anoint any one person without any outside input