Useful idiot

Would you mind elaborating on this? Polls don't favor Biden right now and obviously his debate performance was really REALLY bad. I mean, if he's the nominee, you gotta vote for him, but I'm curious why you think it's so crazy that a person would feel like another Democratic nominee has a better shot. Especially considering how dissatisfied almost everyone in the country is regarding the two choices we have before us, and how often the explanation of that dissatisfaction ends up being because of age.

I think it's a pretty reasonable take to want someone other than Biden to run, considering those things I mentioned. Even if you personally think another candidate besides Biden kills the chances of us beating Trump, why do you think it's so absurd of a position to want someone to take Bidens place?

It seems right now your position, that Biden is the only chance we have against Trump, is the one that is kinda illogical, but I'm curious what your take on that is because there's a chance I'm not accounting for something big, like the logistics of getting a replacement candidate in there and publicized.

Because Biden is currently doing a good job as president and the poll you linked show Trump and Biden polling within 1.5% of each other.

Why would you decide to try something never done before and switch up nominees four month before the election?

That's the position that seems illogical and almost wanting Trump to win.
- I mean, regardless of whether you personally believe Biden is doing well as President, that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the general population's disposition toward him. And also, I just averaged the spread of each general election poll listed on that site, all of which have Trump leading.The number came out to 4.63%. That's kinda a far cry from 1.5% that you mentioned.
  
  Let me be clear. I do not want Trump to win. Please do not put that in my mouth. Thinking he will win and actively hoping and voting for him are not the same. I do not want to be right in my feeling that he will win.
  
  Why try something that's never been done before? Well, I think Trump broke politics already. We are already in unprecedented territory regarding presidential power, this particular election being between two previous Presidents, etc, so I personally don't think the "established norm" argument holds too much water. And then you have my other arguments: The polls aren't looking good, and we just came off a terrible debate performance.
  
  This isn't all to say another candidate would definitely beat Trump, or that I even think it's a good idea to get someone else in there. But I don't think it's a silly or idiotic to want that, as it seems you're making it out. I can empathize with people who feel that way, because I am also frustrated with having to choose Biden.
  
  I was just wondering why you think its so silly, and I guess the answer is, "because it's never been done before." Thanks for responding.
  
  Actually i think the ‘why do this’ question about a replacement isn’t much about it hasn’t been done before. I think it’s more to do with custom and party politics. To a very large degree Biden leads the DNC and there would need to be a huge show of support to get him to step aside that I think people are not really interested in doing.
  
  Once again the benefits of being a selfish, power-hungry, assholish party are given to republiQans. Hell they’ll throw each other under the bus for fun. But the DNC isn’t like that.
  
  That may change. I’m watching Obama, if he says something that’s the sign they’re making a move, but absent that I tend to doubt it.
  
  I definitely agree with all that. I think its highly highly unlikely Biden steps aside. I guess I was trying to get at why OP thinks it's so silly that a person would think that another candidate has a better shot of beating Trump.
  
  Huh. I took your position as the opposite of that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  
  Okay - well, sorry - agree! Moving on 😄
  
  Where are you getting 4.63%?
  
  Oops, I didn't see that they had a weighted average there, I literally just counted the spread and divided. Well that's better than I thought, but I'm still just not feeling good about November.
  
  You can laugh me off, but I think even the fact that there are mainstream publications coming out with articles about the logistics of replacing Biden shows it's, while not probably in any sense, still a thing on many people's minds. I still empathize with those people and don't think they're laughable. But thank you for correcting me.
  
  I don't think I've laughed you off yet.
  
  Nah, you haven't, I appreciate that
It seems right now your position, that Biden is the only chance we have against Trump, is the one that is kinda illogical

Mmmmpretty sure that is the case. All the “replacement” talk is not something they’ve asked for input on, although there is a lot of it available should they ask. As it stands today, right now, Biden is the only chance we have against trump
- You're technically right there, but I think you know what I mean: the OPs position is that if any other candidate replaced Biden, they will not have a chance of beating Trump.

Humanity fools itself into believing a lot of unbelievable things. Like there’s a man in the skies causing virgin births turning water into wine like a stage magician. It’s Harry Potter with genocide all the way down.

I think Harry Potter only killed Voldemort so he didn't commit genocide.
- I think they’re referencing the series lol.
  
  What series?
  
  Harry Potter, the books.
  
  He only killed Voldemort in the books, right?

I consider anyone pushing anyone over Biden as part of the Trump campaign. This is a two party system. Creating indecisiveness like this is a very viable and practical subversion tactic and with Trump's Kremlin backers as the Russian candidate as Putin's puppet, anyone that fails to recognise this ploy is being foolish and falling for their nonsense. The Platonic sophism tactic is hard for the simple minded to see through. Unplug from the news cycle and think for yourself outside of the sophist spin doctor nonsense. Ask your own questions and seek out those answers without distraction and exercise skepticism about all sources. If your general media leads your thoughts, you have no real thoughts of your own.

100% on point. The pivot from “Genocide Joe” to “Anyone/Anything Else Now That Names Are Already On Ballots” is very telling. Also on this list are all the “leftists” pointing fingers at other “leftists” instead of the fascists and centrists.
A list crypto-Trumpists:

The New York Times: "If the race comes down to a choice between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden, the sitting president would be this board’s unequivocal pick. That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses. But given that very danger, the stakes for the country and the uneven abilities of Mr. Biden, the United States needs a stronger opponent to the presumptive Republican nominee. To make a call for a new Democratic nominee this late in a campaign is a decision not taken lightly, but it reflects the scale and seriousness of Mr. Trump’s challenge to the values and institutions of this country and the inadequacy of Mr. Biden to confront him."

David Remnick of The New Yorker: "For him to remain the Democratic candidate, the central actor in that referendum, would be an act not only of self-delusion but of national endangerment. It is entirely possible that the debate will not much change the polls; it is entirely possible that Biden could have a much stronger debate in September; it is not impossible to imagine that Trump will find a way to lose. But, at this point, should Biden engage the country in that level of jeopardy? To step aside and unleash the admittedly complicated process of locating and nominating a more robust and promising ticket seems the more rational course and would be an act of patriotism. To refuse to do so, to go on contending that his good days are more plentiful than the bad, to ignore the inevitability of time and aging, doesn’t merely risk his legacy—it risks the election and, most important, puts in peril the very issues and principles that Biden has framed as central to his Presidency and essential to the future."

The Economist: "There are a lot of arguments for resisting such a drastic step, but the main one is that the election is barely four months away. That may be enough time for Mr Biden to recover in the polls. But with the Democratic convention in August, it would be too brief for the party to find another candidate who could campaign and win. Replacing him could divide Democrats at a time when they need to stay united. Those assertions may have been convincing once. Not any more."

Chicago Tribune

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

You're underplaying the severity of his failure. All of these publications understand what you're saying. Every single one of them know that creating uncertainty now is risky, but in their calculations, it's worth it. I, ultimately, think they are wrong, but calling them part of the Trump campaign just has to be something only someone trying to win internet points would say.

I'll end by quoting ~~Steve Bannon~~ Pod Save America co-host Jon Favreau, "Anyone who says this is easy or that we shouldn't have this debate is not being honest."
Nancy fucking pelosi is questioning his candidacy, is she a paid Russian troll? This is high stakes situation that we need to discuss and calling anyone who disagrees with you a Russian troll or crypto trump supporter is counter-productive and serves only to divide two groups who both want to stop fascism. To do that both sides need to recognize the validity of each other's arguments and move from there not dismiss them as foolish.
- Nancy isn't questioning Joe's health that quote is mis interpreted. She is responding to a reporter who asked her that question and she said it's a fair question to ask of both candidates. Here is the full response so you can make your own mind up.
  
  "So he has a vision. He has knowledge. He has judgment. He has a strategic thinking and the rest. He has a bad night. Now, again, I think it's a legitimate question to say, is this an episode or is this a condition? And so when people ask that question, it's legitimate of both candidates, because what we saw on the other side was a line of just, you know, I tore up his speech when he lied to the Congress on every single page of his State of the Union."

It would only work in some kind of magical scenario.

Magic 1) Biden agrees to ... revoke his renomination or whatever.

Magic 2) The Dems can produce an actually good candidate.

Its maybe possible that Biden would step down, as in 1% chance, but they'd just run with Kamala, who would lose.

Why would that not be the case? People despise both candidates, a new candidate free of all Biden's bullshit would be nothing but good.

At this point I'm convinced people who reject the idea of Biden stepping down want a Democratic loss in November. There's no one actually this committed to Joe Biden.

Biden, the current president, is actually doing a pretty good job.

Who would you suggest take over?
- Agreed, I'm getting pretty sick of morons on the left holding him to unreasonable standards. So what, he had a bad performance at a debate. That doesn't mean his politics aren't good, that doesn't mean he didn't do a fine job as president. He isn't an existential threat to America like Trump is.
  
  Okay, we can say he's done a fine job in aggregate and that he's probably our only shot at beating Trump, but that does not mean his politics are good.
- Gretchen Whitmer
- He's doing an alright job, but it doesn't matter what I think, or what you think, it matters what the country as a whole thinks and his approval ratings are lower then Trump's were at the depths of covid
  
  As for who would replace him, looks like Michelle Obama's got the best chance but even with the others it seems, besides Kamala, they suffer more from lack of name recognition since they put more voters in the don't know. If Biden would open the question up and allow them to "campaign" up into the convention maybe we could get a clearer sense of what people want. Maybe it is Biden but with the lack of a real primary this season and his decline in the polls we don't know.
  
  When was the last time a sitting president had a primary?
  
  Biden and Trump are sitting within 1.5% in polls right now, it’s neck and neck.
  
  Biden and Trump are sitting within 1.5% in polls right now, it’s neck and neck.
  
  Those numbers are from polls taken before the debate. According to leaked internal polls, Biden is down in Pennsylvania (which is the tipping point state) by 7.3%, following what was the worst week of the campaign. Once new polls come out, we'll get a clearer picture of how much further behind he is than he was before.
  
  It was 1980 , which was also the last time a democrat had an approval rating this low . Before Carter that was lbj and at least he had the good sense to not even run.
  
  Did you miss the part where Biden and Trump are neck and neck in the polls?
  
  Why change 44 years of tradition if they’re both within the margin of error?
  
  Fuck tradition, this election is unprecedented. His opponent is a CONVICTED FELON and he's still down in the polls. He has historically low approval numbers, is the oldest person to ever take office, and his opponents seem lined up to deny the election and orchestrate a coup regardless of the result.
  
  Also we still have the electoral college, being neck and neck and barely squeaking by 1% will not win us the election. Hillary won the popular vote by 2% and still lost. Biden had to win by 4.5% to win a close race in the electoral college by barely taking Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona, states where he's currently down by 2-5%.
  
  The situation is not looking good and the stakes are high after the supreme Court ruling. Something's gotta change, whether that be Joe stepping down or his team hopping him up on Adderall and going on a mass speaking and press tour to ensure the American people.
  
  it's not 44 years: it's two. 1996 and 2012 were the only years a sitting Democrat ran for president.
  
  I’m talking about a sitting president, I don’t care what party they are in.
  
  oh, i don't have republican traditions.
  
  Ya sure do. Misinformation and bad faith arguments all corner stones of Republican traditions.
  
  Now report my comment like you always do.
- Biden, the current president, is doing a milquetoast job. In fact, most of the things I hate about the current administration, like their bizarre about face on border policy and their love of genocide, have been things he's directly worked on.
  
  The very few precious wins this administration has achieved have been thanks to the FCC and bipartisan work done by House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries. Great wins, certainly love our government not shutting down after months of gridlock, but the kinda wins any Democrat's administration could get.
  
  Biden's term has been defined by him doing the bare minimum. I think it's fair for people to think any other Democrat could step in and continue doing the bare minimum.
  
  I remember the last election, with the pandemic, economy and country going to absolute shit and I'm very happy that things are calm and quiet this time around.
  
  Biden is doing a good job.
  
  Lowering your standards to "not causing an immediate disaster" is a pretty poor idea, especially when there's an ongoing genocide supported by the U.S. and fascists are actively destroying our government before our eyes.
  
  Navigating us out of that mess was impressive.
  
  I'll vote Biden again and work with my next preferred candidate to hopefully get some fresh young blood on as the DNC nominee in 2028.
- Anyone/anything. A dog, a pile of sawdust, don't care as long as it's not a genocidal right-winger.
  
  Very vague but I asked you for a specific person you think has a chance.
  
  What? How is that vague? I'm saying I'm open to whoever replaces him, why is that difficult to understand? It's an incredibly flexible position, dealers choice as long as it's not Biden or Clinton.
  
  Does the super low bar make it difficult for you to try and make me seem unreasonable or uncompromising? Is that what this is? It just breaks the script you had prepped or something?
  
  No, I'm asking what you say is an easy question but you're unable to answer it.
  
  Why are you unable to accept that I'd literally vote for anyone besides Biden or Clinton, that makes no sense.
  
  If he steps down it's not going to be an open primary, so it doesn't matter what my ideal preference is because it's the convention that would be picking the nominee, or it would possibly be Harris.
  
  So I'm saying whoever that party pick is, I'd vote for them, and you're saying that's unacceptable for whatever reason. It's Schrodinger's politician, I don't know who they're going to pick until they pick them, and at the moment that they do select someone I will know who I'm voting for.
  
  That's the second time you've brought up Clinton.
  
  When did she start running again?
  
  I'm asking how you think has a chance because I'm curious but it sounds like you think Biden is the absolute worse choice if you'd rather vote anyone else besides him.
  
  I'm listing the two politicians I wouldn't vote for, since it's quicker than listing the ones I would vote for.
  
  Mention Clinton I'm just addressing a potential, since the neoliberal media was trying to float the idea few months back of replacing Harris with Clinton. I've learned not to underestimate the lengths Democrats will go to in order to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, I could see them trying to do something stupid like trying to nominate Clinton in the event Biden is convinced to step down. You wanted specifics, so I gave them.
  
  it sounds like you think Biden is the absolute worse choice if you’d rather vote anyone else besides him.
  
  Now you're getting it!
  
  Anyone/anything. A dog, a pile of sawdust, don't care as long as it's not a genocidal right-winger.
  
  This tells me you don’t have zero idea what it takes to satisfy the gape of the fence-sitters needed to beat Trump.
  
  Democrats win when the left comes out, not the vapor that is undecided voters.
  
  Anyone undecided about Trump at this point is not worth wasting your breath on.
  
  Democrats, have for a decent period of time, showed up. Look at the votes in major elections since 2008. Republicans have only won on technicalities for a while now, exploiting weak points of our system like voter suppression/partisan judges/foreign assistance. When all that fails they attempt a coup.
  
  You may think centrists are not worth your time, but they decide the purple electoral votes, and those are pivotal to winning outright. You will die of lack of oxygen holding your breath for them.
  
  Are there fence-sitters? Pretty sure there are basically only dedicated Trump voters and people who'd vote for anyone but Trump.
  
  If you have to ask if there are centrists who vote for whoever ruffles the least amount of feathers, I don’t even know what to say to you. You have literally zero idea why both parties spend millions on capturing that vote. You can’t fathom that there are people just fine with the status quo.
  
  I can’t believe you actually asked that lmaoooo

I think there's a shot of it only because Trump is genuinely hated enough at this point that "unnamed democratic candidate" probably could beat him at this point.

I've done my fair share of shutting down bullshit being spread about Biden, but he definitely got into this game way later than he should have. His golden opportunity was when he skipped 2016 to grieve, I don't begrudge his reasons but the results speak for themselves.