Opinion: Why Joe Biden Needs a Primary Challenger

[brooklynite]

New York Times

To understand why progressives should challenge Joe Biden in the upcoming Democratic presidential primary, remember what happened during the last one.

When Bernie Sanders exited the 2020 race — after winning more than 1,000 delegates — he cashed in his votes for public policy clout. Mr. Sanders’s supporters joined Mr. Biden’s allies in working groups that crafted a common agenda on the economy, education, health care, criminal justice, immigration and climate change. From those task forces came what Barack Obama called “the most progressive platform of any major-party nominee in history.” And that progressivism continued into Mr. Biden’s presidency. One hundred days after he took office, The New York Times concluded that he had “moved leftward with his party, and early in his tenure is driving the biggest expansion of American government in decades.”

By challenging him from the left, Mr. Sanders didn’t only change Mr. Biden’s candidacy. He also made him a better president. But only on domestic policy. There was no joint working group specifically devoted to foreign affairs — and it shows. With rare exceptions, Mr. Biden hasn’t challenged the hawkish conventional wisdom that permeates Washington; he’s embodied it. He’s largely ignored progressives, who, polls suggest, want a fundamentally different approach to the world. And he’ll keep ignoring them until a challenger turns progressive discontent into votes.

Take China. America’s new cold war against Beijing may enjoy bipartisan support in Washington, but it doesn’t enjoy bipartisan support in the United States. According to an April Pew Research Center poll, only 27 percent of Democrats see China as an enemy — roughly half the figure among Republicans. In a December 2021 Chicago Council survey, two-thirds of Republicans — but less than four in 10 Democrats — described limiting China’s global influence as a very important foreign policy goal.

[CentralMass]

1. No thanks.

[Mister Ed]

2. Sanders did in 2020 what I wished he would do back in 2016.

As a Sanders supporter in 2016, I hoped he would win the nomination, but I knew that I might have to settle for having him leverage the clout of his movement to exert influence on Hillary Clinton's administration once she was in office. I felt that his reluctance to wholeheartedly support her after she was nominated contributed to her eventual defeat, with disastrous consequences.

Sanders did not repeat that mistake in 2020. Such influence as he and his movement may have had on the Biden administration has been a boon to the nation. However, I reject that NYT writer's premise that a primary challenge from the left is the best way to continue that sort of influence. Instead, I fear that it could contribute once again to the election of a proto-fascist Republican, over whom the left would have absolutely no influence once he was in office.

[CentralMass]

6. The Clinton campaign ran a scorched Earth style of campaigning.

Joe Biden did not.i Think that Biden also accepted that policies that put people first was a winning strategy.

[Mister Ed]

9. As a Sanders supporter, that was not my perception.

However, DU has rules against re-fighting past primaries. I may have already gone too far down that forbidden path, and I don't want to drag others along with me.

Suffice it to say that I've been very pleased with both Sanders and Biden since 2020, and I hope that whatever is going on there continues. Biden, for whatever reasons, has proven to be the most progressive president of my (long) lifetime, and I fervently hope he's re-elected. I don't think a primary challenge will help make that happen.

[betsuni]

15. No. The opposite. Hillary: "I felt like I was wearing a straitjacket."

"Throughout the primaries, every time I wanted to hit back against Bernie's attacks, I was told to restrain myself. Noting that his plans didn't add up, that they would inevitably mean raising taxes on middle class families, or that they were little more than a pipe dream -- all of this could be used to reinforce his argument that I wasn't a true progressive. My team kept reminding me that we didn't want to alienate Bernie's supporters. President Obama urged me to grit my teeth and lay off Bernie as much as I could. I felt like I was wearing a straitjacket."

Her campaigning, despite the bullshit that Democrats only run on "I'm not as bad as Republicans, vote for me," wasn't all negative against Trump. Number one word in her campaign speeches was "jobs." But we're supposed to think she "ignored" the working class and had no economic policy and wasn't progressive.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

40. Thank you....many people were banned from DU

simply for not trusting in Bernie....for speaking ill of Bernie....that was unfair and uncalled for. Meanwhile, the attacks on HRC went unabated. I remember the wars well. With HRC supporters forced into a safe space for daring to disagree with the Bernie Supporters.

[TheFarseer]

56. That's not how I remember it

I remember getting posts removed, seeing friends banned and feeling like I couldn’t say what I really wanted to say in favor of Bernie, but let’s agree to disagree. I merely wanted to illustrate that there is another side to that story.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

58. That is totally false.....Let me introduce you to the concept of BernieBros.

I know of at least two....and To THIS DAY you cannot say anything about Bernie.

[Rob H.]

61. BernieBros are a myth

Why does the “Bernie Bro” myth persist? Because pundits don't understand how the internet works

But that was five years ago, before we had as much data on Sanders' support base — which, as it turns out, should be sufficient to debunk the stereotype that Sanders' support base consists entirely of a mythic tribe of entitled, pushy young millennial men. To wit: young women make up more of Sanders' base than men. He polls especially high with Hispanic voters, far more so than with white voters; Hispanic voters also donated more money to him than any other Democratic candidate. Polls consistently show that nonwhite voters prefer him over the other candidates. Notably, the demographic group that likes Sanders the least is white men.

Moreover, of all the candidates, Sanders has taken in the most money from women. Many of Sanders' female supporters bemoan how they are ignored by the mainstream press. "The 'Bernie Bro' narrative is endlessly galling because it erases the women who make up his base," writer Caitlin PenzeyMoog opined on Twitter. "To paint this picture of sexism is to paint over the millions of women who support Sanders. Do you see how f**ked up that is?"

Emphases added by me.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

62. Uh no no it was not a myth

It was quite obvious
Why do you think Putin Trolled Bernie Supporters too...PER Bernie himself

And read #15. This is starting to sound like the same process....deny and silence us

[TheFarseer]

69. No one is trying to silence anyone

I’m sure both sides felt like they had to hold back. Because we are essentially in the same side, that’s how primaries worked until Trump blundered Onto the scene. Let’s just agree that we had different experiences in 2016.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

70. Same as then.....pretend that it is not

what it was always about....deny the women who said it happened to them

Linda Sarsour was literally WHY Hillary Clinton was not invited to nor even mentioned at the Women's March. She was persona non gratis

[TheFarseer]

72. You seem really bitter

And you are in the group that won. I’ll never understand this thinking. Peace ☮️

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

73. Those who forget the past

Are doomed to repeat it it

And like a lot of Hillary Clinton Supporters. I will die angry...bitter whatever you want to call it.. Imagine how many Americans would still be alive today...

[betsuni]

83. Democrats are still accused of ignoring the working class and that didn't come from the Right.

Neither did accusations of being corrupt because of legal campaign contributions, being beholden to corporations and billionaires, Democratic leadership/DNC scheming and plotting to rig elections. The word "establishment" as an insult was resurrected. Ironic because Republicans think Democrats only care about poor people and want to give them free stuff. Trump is going with the anti-establishment populism again, bigly.

Every time I hear someone say Democrats ignore the working class, I think: Wait, you accused Democrats of paying too much attention to "identity politics" but the working class is majority women and PoC and those policies help them economically so ... doesn't even make sense.

[TheFarseer]

100. Whoa whoa whoa

Nothing productive is going to come out of re-arguing the 2016 primary. My only goal was to assert that the idea that Bernie people could say whatever they wanted and Hillary people couldn’t say anything, is in my view, not correct. If you felt censored, just know that the other side felt the same way.

[betsuni]

102. I didn't say anything about supporters or anything about being "censored" in that comment.

Last edited Tue May 9, 2023, 02:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Point is damaging attacks with no basis in fact against the Democratic Party from 2016 right to 2023, which we will see from primary challengers and other public figures next year. I think you meant to reply to a different post.

[TheFarseer]

105. I was kind of trying to reply to a couple posters

with one post. Btw, I hope you are not saying Bernie MADE UP vicious LIES about Hillary. That would be a pretty explosive allegation. Maybe you could clarify.

I would like to clarify that I do not believe anyone should challenge Biden in 24. Open primary vs having an incumbent is a totally different situation.

[Torchlight]

103. Ironic.

[betsuni]

64. Women journalists lived it. Amy Chozick, "Chasing Hillary":

"I'd spent most of my day the way the other women covering Hillary had -- fending off death threats from the Bros who thought we prematurely called the race in Hillary's favor. The colorful strings of expletives I'd grown used to, even amused by, became more violent. Several Bros called my number at the 'Times' to tell me the revolution was coming for me. One of them left a voice mail about how he knew my type of 'rich b****.' Others seemed to read from a script that went something like, 'You lying Hillary-loving ****. We will hunt you down in the f****** streets.'"

Just in case: This is a quote from the book (what the " " things mean) and is what Chozick experienced, not my words.

[edisdead]

66. Bwahahahahahahahaha!

Ok. I personally know quite a few of them. But sure its a myth because of something posted on salon.

[emulatorloo]

26. Scorched earth? You must be thinking of Jeff Weaver.

I was a Sanders supporter in 2016, Weaver was a Karl Rove wannabe and the way you got elected was to lies, half-truths, and dump raw sewage on your opponents.

Trump was more than happy to adopt those tactics, even re-using some of the material. IMHO. Weaver cost Bernie the nomination.

Anyway we are not going to talk about 2016.

[betsuni]

27. That's for sure.

Was paid a lot of money.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

41. And lets not even bring up Paul Manafort and Tad Devine's history of chumminess.

Who I still believe was responsible for the hacking of the DNC polls as I recall three of the 4 that were found to be in there were fired....but not the 4th

[CentralMass]

63. Having supported Hillary in 2008 and voting for her then and in the general in 2016

I have to day tge the 2008 campaign was not without it contentious moment between tge Obama and Clinton camps. The PUMA movement was born. Hillary primary voter voted in for McCain at a 2:2 margin over Sanders primary voter who voted fir tge Itange Anus. Now arguably voting fir McCain pakes in comparison to voting fir tge Irange Anus. But tje stat are the stats. It is a fact if live that in every presidential election tgere is a percentage of primary voters who don't vote fir the candidates who won the primary when there candidates loses. Biden ran a much different across the board. Harris hit him the hardest and he picked ger for a running g mate. Biden has thick skin and (actually to my suprize) ran a great campaign. His adoption of poli is tgat put people first over tge Third Way political mindset paid off and it pulled in a lot of voters.

[Hortensis]

30. No, she didn't, CentralMass. The nation was awash in poison Kool-Aid

during that election, and some effects are still hanging on.

ALL the claims that she and the state Democratic Party "rigged" dozens of state primaries were proven false then, but to this day some tragically still believe she did and also that she "stole" the presidency from the winner.

We know know the tRump/GOP campaign studied the effects of those pernicious techniques closely, of course -- and copied them: "Rigged" elections. "Corrupt Democrats." Of course, the promises to refuse to accept and to "take back" the election if the Democrats succeeded in stealing it.

Scorched earth, all right. Nation devastated.

Btw, it wasn't all okay in 2016 just because it had no real chance of succeeding that time. That was the run-up, prepping the nation for a stronger, RW, attempt.

[betsuni]

31. What were the differences between the 2016 and 2020 platforms? You're saying the 2016

platform didn't "put people first"? How not? For example, the 2016 platform was the ACA with a public option and Medicare at 55. The 2020 was ACA with a public option and Medicare at 60.

[W_HAMILTON]

50. Yeah, that's revisionist history.

Obama barely beat Hillary.

Hillary didn't need to go """scorched Earth""" to beat Sanders, who was just a stand-in for the anti-Hillary vote, which ended up losing heavily to the Hillary vote.

And this is coming from a Sanders voter in 2016 that regretted that decision after seeing how my vote was used by many unscrupulous people on the left against Hillary in the general and who proudly voted for Biden in 2020 -- and made sure to bring company to the polls! -- so that there would be no doubts about our intentions that election.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

75. Wish I could upvote.....this is the kind of

thing I expect .....not the pretending none of that happened at all. It's patronizing

[StevieM]

57. Seriously? She barely laid a glove on him.

The restraint she showed was almost unprecedented. I think she learned from what happened in 2008 when the media jumped at any chance to label her as "throwing the kitchen sink."

[elocs]

35. Sanders endorsed Clinton with faint praise & campaigned for her tepidly.

Last edited Mon May 8, 2023, 02:50 PM - Edit history (1)

How many Sanders supporters withheld their votes from Clinton or as was reported, up to 12% of the BoBs actually voted for Trump to teach the party a lesson for not nominating him? Here in WI that was a big deal since Stein of the Green Party received more votes than Trump's margin of error.

No, Biden needs no legitimate primary opponent since at the very least that person would likely be younger and would only highlight his age, meaning to or not.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

74. And remember how close to the event he finally conceded and then

acted all pissy. I have always thought he resented being beaten by a woman

[Walleye]

3. Yes Joe Biden has won something like nine elections so let's just all tell him how to do it

Go ahead and underestimate Joe, works every time. Can you imagine what the news media would make out of a primary challenger, it’s bad enough they got looney RFK Junior to quote.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

10. And is oh so helpful

Some people never learn

[rampartc]

4. bernie did so much more in 2020

but in 2016 his service as a debate prep for ms clinton was extremely valuable.

bernie has often been the only voice of reason in the senate and in the wider policy debate.

[CentralMass]

7. +1

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

11. Biting my tongue

As you might imagine....I disagree

[rampartc]

36. we are democrats. we need not agree, or bite our tongues.

our party consists of factions, none of which can win without the others. the largest current rift - the liberal vs progressive, has been with us since shortly after the 1912 election, and has cost us dearly in 1968, 1980, 2000, and2016.

bernie could have done more in 2016, and did more in 2020, to heal the party.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

39. Ummmmmm....might want to check his registration...he caucus's with us...so does Kristen Sinema.

I do not forget....I do not forgive. He helped cost me something I have wanted since the day I was born. Fool me once... shame on you fool me twice shame on me. I have seen nor heard any remorse or accepting of any responsibility. Do not tell me I am not allowed to have my own reasons....excuse if I do not trust. He has been albatross around our necks for a very long time....I have not seen him denounce that history either...and THAT has cost us dearly too. He is not above sticking in a shiv either...as he recently did with his "Tax idea" Big fucking eyeroll.

[betsuni]

5. 2008, 2016, 2020 party platforms were all the most liberal in history.

This article is bad and stupid. "Ignoring." Favorite anti-Democratic buzzword.

[mcar]

68. This!

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

76. Just more sour grapes....

[Phoenix61]

8. "Why the New York Times needs Biden to have a challenger"

So they can stir the pot and print headlines like “Democrats in Disarray!”
No thanks.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

12. Exactly ....thank you

Let's do to Biden what we did to Hilary Clinton....that will work

[uponit7771]

13. +1

[Spazito]

48. +1

[treestar]

89. +1

[JustAnotherGen]

14. Stupid

No thanks

[Blues Heron]

16. America's new cold war against Beijing

Let`s declare war on the people who make all our stuff - I`m sure that will work out great! Who makes this shit up? When was a new Cold War Against China announced?

[Demsrule86]

19. Let's make out own stuff. China is not our friend

Friend and enriching them is foolish.

[Blues Heron]

21. I agree, but not remotely likely any time soon.

[Beastly Boy]

17. Give Bernie all the credit for Kamala's hard work.

Will anyone at NY Times give any credit to her? Ever?

I don't think so.

[betsuni]

20. Kamala wasn't even a senator for very long but had an impressive legislative record.

Actually getting thinks done.

[Hekate]

44. And before that she was the AG of California 2011-2017, which is not a small job.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

77. She is a woman......thats all it takes

[Demsrule86]

18. Absolutely not. Anytime a sitting

President is challenged we lose.

[Polybius]

45. Yup, and their side loses too when their sitting President is challenged

1976 with Regan, and 1992 with Buchanan.

[Midwestern Democrat]

22. About the only benefit I could see to Biden having minor primary opposition would be it would give

him and his team some practice before the general election, which Biden might need more than the usual incumbent president. Because of COVID, Biden in 2020 basically got to run a front porch campaign from Wilmington from March until after Labor Day and only did relatively light campaigning on the stump after Labor Day - he certainly did not have to campaign nearly as hard as any pre-COVID nominee - he won't have that luxury in 2024.

[betsuni]

23. He needs more practice? At what?

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

78. THIS

The advantage of experience...

[treestar]

88. thought that too

and the debate could be against the same moron? "Will you shut up, man?"

[emulatorloo]

24. Biden has won a lot of elections. And a lot of debates. He doesn't really need "practice."

[liberal_mama]

47. Yeah, he was able to have a really easy campaign due to Covid last time, but not this time

With Biden ending the Covid emergency, he's going to have to keep up with Trump who will be drugged up on Adderal and cocaine and doing 5 rallys every day.

[EYESORE 9001]

25. Why is anyone listening to this guy?

Beinart was the editor of The New Republic when the publication editorially supported the 2003 Invasion of Iraq; Beinart was identified as one of the major forces behind the magazine's support for the war; his status as a liberal hawk who supported the Iraq War is cited as a primary cause of his rise.[23][24][25][26] In 2004, a New Republic editorial written during his editorial tenure assessed its support for the Iraq War thus: "We feel regret, but no shame. . . . Our strategic rationale for war has collapsed."[23] In 2010, Beinart said he was motivated to support the Iraq War by a concern that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons.[27]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Beinart

His judgment is highly suspect.

[Cha]

53. Oh Shit.. I remember Peter Beinart..

Not in a good way. So he believed "the yellow cake" discovery.. and he does have "shame".. Thousands dead bc of his ilk.

TY.. I wondered who wrote this.

[JI7]

28. What a fucking joke . It just never stops .

[quickesst]

29. If there was a Democrat..

... or independent who thought they had a snowball's chance in hell winning the nomination, they would already be in the race going full steam ahead. There is not. For democrats, Joe Biden is it. For myself, the most disappointing party in this entire episode are those Democrats who have helped Donald Trump stay competitive with Joe Biden in approval ratings. It's going to be either Donald Trump or Joe Biden in the White House, and there is not an inkling, or even a rumor there's a younger Democrat who is going to save America from Trump and the magas. These Democrats who have helped Trump stay competitive in recent polls seemingly do not have the capacity to understand it's either going to be a or b. There is no c, and wishful thinking nor whining crying pissing and moaning is not going to make one goddamn bit of difference. It's going to be either democracy saved, or an autocracy installed. As far as ignorance and stupidity, there's a faction of the Democratic party who for all intents and purposes have decided that their misguided (my opinion) scruples are more important then preserving democracy.

Here is the bottom line. For those who are belly aching about Joe biden's age, or for a single aspect of Joe biden's administration they don't agree with they need to understand there is no one else who can take his place and preserve this country's democracy. They can spit in one hand and wish in the other, and guess which one's going to fill up first? For a Democrat to undermine Joe Biden because of his age, or a single policy issue only feeds the beast which is the GOP, and right now they are dining on steak, shrimp, and caviar courtesy of the "Not Joe Biden Left". Joe Biden should be leading polls by double digits across the Nation, but sadly.. 🤥

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

80. Joe Biden is now all that stands between us and

Armageddon just like Hillary Clinton warned us. It's us or FULL ON Fascism

[quickesst]

84. Exactly....

....and I am just mad as hell that there are so many Democrats willing to sacrifice this country for the sake of their negative personal opinions concerning Joe biden's ability to lead this country. And I'll tell you another thing, the petty squawking coming from the left when it comes to Joe Biden's age is a solid vote of no confidence for Kamala Harris despite those same squawkers who loudly speak of the confidence they have in her. Apparently, that's just a lie. Are they really fearful that Joe Biden won't finish his term, or are they more fearful of the prospect of Kamala Harris becoming president? Personally, I've never had any use for anyone who speaks out of both sides of their mouth. Democrat, Republican, or Independent. As a democrat, I often wonder how a republican voter could possibly be in favor of installing a want to be dictator / criminal in the White House. It defies logic, and common sense. The same goes for Joe Biden's democratic detractors. Logic and common sense are being ignored for the sake of personal opinions that accomplishes no more than to feed the ego of the person ignoring these two traits. For myself, and most Democrats, I would never willingly, nor consciously give the republican party talking points to use as ammunition against Joe Biden.

It all comes down to one simple question for every Democrat. If not Joe Biden, then who?

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

85. Exactly just like many

still claim that their real problem with Hilary wasn't because she was female

[quickesst]

87. One of the reasons...

.... but certainly not the most important reason I voted for her was that she is a woman who would have made a great president. The main reason I voted for her was the prospect of the unfathomable happening, which, sadly came to pass.

[betsuni]

86. Same old "I'd vote for a woman, just not THAT woman" which was supposed to only mean Hillary

but then it was Elizabeth Warren and now Kamala Harris. All are progressive Democrats.

[quickesst]

92. Yep...

.... so if someone does not have confidence in Joe Biden, it only reveals that same lack of confidence in Kamala Harris. What's missing in this thread is a name. The name of any Democrat who could possibly challenge Joe Biden for the nomination. If any other Democrat decided to run, they would not do so for the sake of a possibility that Joe Biden will become more progressive. They will be in it to win it. If successful, it will probably be for naught, and we will most likely say goodbye to democracy.

[treestar]

90. +1 million zillion

[quickesst]

93. Appreciate it treestar...

[Just A Box Of Rain]

32. What a bunch of rubbish.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Every time an incumbent president has had a strong primary challenger he has lost.

See 1976, 1980, and 1992.

[Polybius]

46. Yup, although I think Bush still loses 1992 with no Buchanan

A lot going on in 1992, even a major third Party candidate with Perot.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

104. They lose because a strong primary challenge indicates a weak incumbent.

[Polybius]

106. I wouldn't call 1992 a particular strong challenge though

No Buchanan, Bush still loses.

[David__77]

34. The Cold War stuff needs to be opposed.

…

[mcar]

37. Boy, they desperately want TFG to win

Between yesterday's bogus WaPo poll and NYT's ongoing anti-Biden themes, they seem to have not learned one thing from the Trump years.

Horse race, horse race, horse race.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

38. This is a stupid idea designed to help to re-elect TFG

The NYT wants to help re-elect TFG

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

81. This is Rich men who do not want to pay more taxes

They will say anything to not pay another penny...

[Hekate]

42. Biggest mistake of Teddy Kennedy's career was challenging Jimmy Carter. They both lost.

We ended up with Reagan.

For Gods’ sake, have we learned nothing?

[Cha]

54. Peter Beinart hasn't.. he was For the War On Iraq..

Beinart was the editor of The New Republic when the publication editorially supported the 2003 Invasion of Iraq; Beinart was identified as one of the major forces behind the magazine's support for the war; his status as a liberal hawk who supported the Iraq War is cited as a primary cause of his rise.[23][24][25][26] In 2004, a New Republic editorial written during his editorial tenure assessed its support for the Iraq War thus: "We feel regret, but no shame. . . . Our strategic rationale for war has collapsed."[23] In 2010, Beinart said he was motivated to support the Iraq War by a concern that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons.[27]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Beinart

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=17893481

I tried to go to the link at NYT but it's a paywall so I'm depending on Eyesore's post.

[Mad_Machine76]

59. What was his reasoning for primarying Carter?

[Mad_Machine76]

43. I don't believe in primaries

simply "just because". It should be reserved for a real emergency situation if the incumbent is totally incompetent/inappropriate for the job and/or if somebody really have a strong case to make that you can do things better than the incumbent (neither Kennedy nor Williamson are credible candidates) and if neither things apply, you're just creating unnecessary and divisive electoral drama and draining resources that should be spent elsewhere.

[Spazito]

49. What a load of codswallop.

[edisdead]

67. Some might even call it bullshit

That some is me by the way. It’s bullshit. Complete Bullshit.

[treestar]

91. on top of a bunch of

malarkey

[Spazito]

94. Exactly!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

51. The NYT wants to re-elect TFG

Link to tweet

[Cha]

65. TY & TLP!

[Scrivener7]

52. NYT, stirring the shit.

[ecstatic]

55. No. Any challenger needs to negotiate behind closed doors

Work it out privately and then, if necessary, Biden would announce he's stepping aside for x candidate. Whoever wrote this article is full of shit.

[kentuck]

71. I think it could be good for Democrats if they were on TV debating the issues...

...rather than attacking each other personally, like Repubs prefer.

It would definitely be different from what the Republicans are doing.

A primary challenger is not necessarily a bad thing.

Just my opinion.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

82. History does not support your opinion

[kentuck]

95. There is no history to study in unprecedented times.

We are at a place we have never been before.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

97. There is not unprecendented....we have been headed down this path for decades...

Stop blaming the only people standing between you and Fascism. It doesn't have anything to do with what Democrats do or don't do.

The ONLY thing the Right does better than Democrats is messaging....the constant bashing from the left only helps their messaging not the Democrats...

[kentuck]

99. "The ONLY thing the Right does better than Democrats is messaging..."

And you don't want a national debate to get your message across to the voters?

No debates. Political ads are all we need?

I tend to favor more debate in almost all instances. I do not see it harming Joe Biden or the Democrats.

[RegulatedCapitalistD]

101. NO I do not want to give the impression that we are the ones infighting

I have seen what Primarying a successful Incumbent does. Have you investigated what happens. Apparently not.....Be the solution not part of the problem.

[DemocraticPatriot]

79. HEY brooklynite! So are you here advocating

a "viable challenger" to President Joe Biden ???


I hardly think so.... but your reposting of this article is confusing....

[ismnotwasm]

96. No, he doesn't.

[Autumn]

98. Any other election I would be okay with a primary challenger. It's any citizens constitutional right

but Joe is the one who will beat Trump or any other Republican so at this time it would be ridiculous.

[LudwigPastorius]

107. Two straight-up fascist authoritarian assholes are currently the leading GOP candidates.

...and the author of this piece is worrying about nudging President Biden to the left?

That's like worrying if the fire fighters dousing your burning house are using all natural sparkling spring water.

How about this? How about we put all of our resources behind reelecting Joe and Kamala and give them congressional majorities?

Then you'll see just how progressive they can be.