What if Joe had Run?
Vice President Joe Biden told ABC News on Tuesday that while he would have made for the “best president,” he was not able to devote himself to a campaign after the death of his son, Beau Biden.
“I had planned on running. It’s an awful thing to say. I think I would have been the best president. But it was the right thing, not just for my family, for me,” Biden told ABC’s “Good Morning America” in an interview that aired on Wednesday. “No one should ever seek the presidency unless they’re able to devote their whole heart and soul and passion into just doing that. And Beau was my soul. I just wasn’t ready to be able to do that.”
So he was going to run until Beau died last summer. Wow. That makes me wonder how the primary would have turned out in hindsight. Joe Biden running would have damaged the prospects of Bernie Sanders, not Clinton. Bernie has benefited in this campaign as being the only option for opposition to Hillary. If there are two options, including a populist Joe Biden (which is probably the kind of campaign he would have run), Biden would have sucked a lot of oxygen out of the Sanders campaign.
Sure, Sanders would still mount a successful and strong campaign. Think a longer and more successful Dean campaign. And Biden would have been more competitive with Clinton in the Northeast and Midwest. In the end though, Hillary probably still wins, and probably earlier and more decisively too. Because Biden would divide the opposition, which less delegates for each, and more for Clinton. The question that can’t be answered is how many Hillary supporters would become Biden supporters. I don’t know if we’ll ever know that. As a Hillary supporter, I am torn. I probably would want to see Hillary win, but I would have voted for Joe in the Delaware primary.
The Senator from MBNA has pretty much the same negatives as Hillary with respect to Wall Street and Iraq, so I would expect him to fare about as well as Hillary against Sanders. For Joe’s positives, he isn’t the target of Clinton Derangement Syndrome, and as far as I know he enjoys higher approval ratings that Hillary, so I would expect Joe to do a little better than Hillary in the general.
Yeah, but I think you are assuming a two person race between Biden and Sanders. I was talking about a three person race between Hillary, Biden and Sanders. I don’t think Hillary would drop out just because Biden got in.
No, but he would have divided the establishment vote with Hillary, possibly enough to make Sanders the nominee.
In a three-person race I think Sanders gets the plurality. Joe and Hillary would split the anti-Sanders vote. From the Berniac point of view, what’s wrong with Hillary is also wrong with Biden.
@DD “I don’t think Hillary would drop out just because Biden got in.”
Probably not. Remember that when Biden did drop out, his polling numbers were terrible.
@a “No, but he would have divided the establishment vote with Hillary, possibly enough to make Sanders the nominee.”
Not sure. Is the anti-establishment vote larger than the anti-women vote?
If Sanders were polling at a plurality against Joe and Hillary, either Joe or Hillary would drop out to assure an establishment victory.
Yeah, I am not so sure the “establishment” vote would be divided. The Establishment, such that it is, was with Hillary. Further, Hillary has her own base of support aside from the establishment. The assumption being made here is Sander’s support is 100% with him because they support Sanders and his platform, rather than being against Hillary. Some of Sanders’ base of support is due to opposition to Hillary, and that is what would probably leave Sanders if Biden was in the race.
@; “If Sanders were polling at a plurality against Joe and Hillary, either Joe or Hillary would drop out to assure an establishment victory.”
Oh yea.. That plan worked out really well for the GOP.
DD I think you are misunderstanding the nature of Bernie’s support. It’s not anti-Hillary or even pro-Bernie; it’s a pent-up yearning for a more liberal Democratic party leadership. Joe Biden won’t scratch that itch.
@LE: I’m not sure what your question means. Who’s the “anti-woman” candidate here? Or are you suggesting that all women would back Hillary and only the men would vote for one of the two men?
My assumption is that people who don’t like the Clintons (or Hillary specifically) but are close to the center would opt for Joe. I don’t know how many people that group includes. But we already know what a centrist without name recognition or charisma would do. His name was O’Malley, and he got a solid 1%. That’s why I said Sanders could “possibly” win if Hillary and Joe split the centrist vote.
@a “Or are you suggesting that all women would back Hillary and only the men would vote for one of the two men?”
No. I’m suggesting that there are many who would vote against Hillary simply because she is a woman. There’s good evidence for that… And those votes would be split in the 3-way race, providing an easier path for Hillary.
” there are many who would vote against Hillary simply because she is a woman. There’s good evidence for that…”
@LE: You knew you were going to get challenged to produce that evidence, right?
@LE: Interesting. So you think there are people — Democrats, specifically — who like Bill Clinton but don’t like Hillary? I don’t see a lot of anecdotal evidence for that. Most people seem to either like them both or dislike them both.
Also anecdotally, because I don’t know if they poll it and I’m not going to look it up, most Sanders supporters I know like Elizabeth Warren even more.
I don’t doubt that there are woman-hating voters. But I think the vast majority of those people are Republicans.
@p “You knew you were going to get challenged to produce that evidence, right?”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
@a “Also anecdotally, because I don’t know if they poll it and I’m not going to look it up, most Sanders supporters I know like Elizabeth Warren even more.”
And yet her polling numbers were much worse than his. Why is that?
@LE – you might as well have said “Because Chewbacca lives on Endor!”
“And yet [Warren’s] polling numbers were much worse than his. Why is that?”
Because Warren isn’t running for anything. LE, go have another cup of coffee.
It’s called “name recognition.” You might want to check Sanders’ poll numbers against his name recognition numbers, then do the same for Warren.
Polling for president isn’t the same as polling favorability.
They were all petrified of Hillary, except for Bernie. and he is running for a true cause of reform. Its called COURAGE. My true condolences for the VP Biden’s loss, but its not very noble to saying how great a President Joe would have been, especially from his own mouth. How about a little dignity and humility in politics? Oh I forgot, this is the world we now live in of reality television, Trump, etc. Oh how I long for the good old days…
Story online about Chelsea’s husband Mark Mezvinsky just shut down his Greek hedge fund which lost 90% of its value. OUCH! Tough to have a failed hedge fund– with former Goldman Sachs employees involved– in the Clinton family in this current environment.
@chris: That’s easy to understand. The universities these two went to were highly conscious of how well-connected they were. So while they have credentials, they’re dubious, as they were gained under the legacy admissions rules — affirmative action for the rich and connected.
This is the illusion of competence conferred by the system on the children of the affluent. It’s not primogeniture, but it’s not far removed.