President Joe Biden’s family used a Sunday gathering at Camp David to urge him to stay in the race and keep fighting despite his dreadful debate performance, and some members criticized how his staff prepared him for the faceoff, according to four people familiar with the discussions.

Biden spent the day sequestered with first lady Jill Biden, his children and grandchildren. It was a previously scheduled trip to the presidential retreat in Maryland for a photo shoot with Annie Leibovitz for the upcoming Democratic National Convention.

But the gathering was also an exercise in trying to figure out how to quell Democratic anxiety that has exploded following Thursday’s performance.

While his family was aware of how poorly he performed against Donald Trump, they also continue to think he’s the best person to beat the Republican presumptive nominee. They also believe he is capable of doing the job of president for another four years, according to the people who were not authorized to speak publicly about internal discussions and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    5 months ago

    The time to switch candidates was 6-8 months ago. It’s too late at this point, at least for US politics. Too many “undecided” voters seem to think they need a year to get to know a candidate.

    If they were to switch from Biden, Trump would win in a landslide without having to say a damned thing or remind anyone he existed between now and then.

    This country is fucked.

      • Orbituary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        5 months ago

        And yet, it’s exactly the point. He broke the biggest campaign promise that caused me to vote for him. Now we’re exactly where we don’t want to be.

        I have to vote for him because the alternative is infinitely worse. I don’t think he can win. Fuck the DNC and Biden for not foreseeing this and sticking to the promise.

        • xtr0n@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          The DNC has been snatching defeat from the jaws of victory my whole life. I’m so sick of this shit.

            • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              5 months ago

              Obamacare did not give us healthcare. It mandated purchasing insurance and made insure follow more human rules. There are still plenty of people without insurance who instead take tax penalties every year. Sure it’s better that what we had but it’s not healthcare like normal nations have.

          • Orbituary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            5 months ago

            If she had stepped down when Obama asked her to, we wouldn’t have this current SCROTUS. Seems like Obama had some foresight about aging. Too bad Biden’s handlers didn’t.

        • Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          I think you’re suggesting that he committed to being a 1-term president as part of his campaign. You might be remembering a bunch of sensationalized articles based on a Politico article where an unnamed “prominent advisor” said “he won’t be running for reelection” and a bunch of other mostly unnamed people also suggested he wouldn’t/shouldn’t run again. Which led to tons of other articles, which parroted it as fact.

          The Politico article even further went on to be updated after it was first published to add a quote from Biden’s deputy campaign manager and communications director at the time, which stated Biden was “not privately considering declining to run for re-election.”

          So he never made that commitment and the only official communication refuted the speculation.

          Reference Politico - Biden Single Term

          Slate even covered this recently in another article, where they were unable to locate any official commitment related to serving a single term.

          Reference Slate - Biden Single Term

          Disclaimer: I also wish we had another option, just presenting some evidence. Maybe it’ll make you feel better with your choice.

      • seathru@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        5 months ago

        Back then we were told “But no party has run a different candidate when they had a setting president that was eligible for reelection.” There was never a choice.

    • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Interestingly, according to the most recent Ipsos poll where they polled different candidates against Trump, every major democratic candidate lost in the polling to Trump including Kamala (who did poll I think one point better than Biden), some by a lot…

      Except Michelle Obama, who won in the polling against Trump by 11 points (50-39), i.e. by a landslide. I was pretty surprised by that.

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

        I think it’s probably because she generally wasn’t publicly political during her husband’s Presidency, or after. She did what was expected of the First Lady, didn’t do anything too controversial, and that was about it. And there’s likely a lot of people that want Obama again, but he cannot run, but if she’s there obviously his counsel would be as well.

    • tamal3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not too late. Imagine if Biden actually had a health crisis between now and November and had to drop out. No way would the Democratic party not galvanize to find a replacement.

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

        That’s an entirely different situation voters would be responding to, and they would only be doing it because they would have no other option. Even then, it 100% would end up being Kamala Harris and a running mate they scramble to find, only because they need the name recognition. Those are totally different circumstances, extremely obvious and avoidable, but still technically not under their direct control like the entire cycle up to now.

        What we have now is the party’s unwillingness to accept that Biden needed to be told not to run again, so we could get a real primary and voters actually deciding. They are only now starting to question the shitty decision when it’s becoming glaringly obvious that an 80+ year old shouldn’t be running again and younger blood is needed.

        The party is run by the old fucks though, and they don’t want to give up what they have to the younger generations. Look at AOC’s seat, it’s the perfect encapsulation of the DNC’s belief that the old fucks should be running everything.

        AOC handily beat Joseph Crowley in the primary with 57% of the vote (against the #3 Dem at the time, a 20 year Congressional veteran, it’s unprecedented), and he still refused to drop out. Instead he stayed on the ballot under a third party where he again lost, with only 7% of the vote. 7% despite being the “safe” politician, with 20 years experience, #3 in the party, the incumbent with all the name recognition in the world, being challenged by an upstart young female “bartender”. The old fucks don’t want to give it up, and will do anything to prevent that, even losing the election entirely to the Republicans, because they aren’t doing it for the country, they’re running for themselves.

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

      The time to switch candidates was 6-8 months ago. It’s too late at this point, at least for US politics

      That’s simply not true.

      If they were to not switch from Biden, Trump would win in a landslide without having to say a damned thing or remind anyone he existed between now and then

      Fixed it for you. His chances were already bad due to his insistence on not listening to the people telling him to stop participating in a genocide, and that debate killed it. Even Kamala Harris would have a better chance now.

      • crusa187@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Even Kamala Harris would have a better chance now.

        Come on now, it’s bleak and Trump is going to trounce him with ease, but it’s not that bad.

      • CptEnder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        The fact that there are undecided voters at all says it takes longer than a year. 4 even. It’s too late.

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

          Are there, though? Or is it just people who won’t admit that they don’t plan on voting and/or don’t know shit about dick?

    • CompostMaterial@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      My preference would be for them to flip the ticket. Put Kamala as first and him as vice. I don’t really care for her, but it would be worlds better than another Trump reign of terror. Flipping the ticket would be the least destabilizing move and would appease the concerns of age while also keeping him on for those that didn’t like her (or a woman).

      • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        There are too many sexist voters that would never vote for a woman. Look at Hilary, even ignoring how unlikeable she could be, a ton of people were very vocal about not voting for her only because she was female, including other women.

        Besides, I’m fairly certain Kamala is making a lot of the current decisions anyway. Joe and her have been together a lot more than other VPs and Presidents in the past.

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

          even ignoring how unlikeable she could be

          You can’t ignore that, because it’s the reason she lost. And despite it, she won the popular vote and came really close to winning the election. We easily could have had a woman president if she didn’t have Hillary’s baggage.

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          People didn’t like Hillary for lots of legitimate reasons as well. A different female candidate like Whitmer would do fine. I think AOC is the best choice personally though.