As President Joe Biden’s campaign scrambles to calm nerves about the president’s disastrous debate performance, Democrats on Capitol Hill are growing increasingly furious at those around him and increasingly despondent about his prospects for re-election — and their own chances of winning House and Senate majorities.

Conversations about a strategy shift are already underway, with some Democratic lawmakers and many deep-pocketed donors plotting how, should Biden continue in the race, to ensure a congressional check on a second Donald Trump term.

“The way I’m talking to my donors is: The House is the last firewall, folks. We have to flip the House,” one frontline House Democrat told Playbook last night. “Ninety-nine percent of the people I talked to can’t get their credit card out fast enough.”

But make no mistake: The despair and frustration are real, and it is pushing upward inside the party. It has been felt acutely by frontline members — the swing-district Democrats who would be the cornerstone of any majority. Donors blew up their phones over the weekend, with some prodding them to go public with a group letter calling for a new candidate, an idea that some discussed over the weekend.

  • Omega_Man@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 months ago

    You can’t just vote for an alternate candidate. That’s a non-viable strategy. In a fptp system (and one that requires owner money) ,you are reliant on party leadership to put forth worthwhile candidates. Democrats should have started grooming the heir apparent on Jan 21, 2020.

    • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      True, I’m more referring to the primaries in 2016 and 2020. You get all too many around here clamoring for 3rd party protest votes or disengagement.

      Even with the sketchy goings on during those two, if there was an overwhelming vote for Bernie (who’s no younger mind you, but it’s an alternate that appeals to a different demographic) it’d be a tough sell to go against that even if the party did get a court to agree they could.

      Even without party backing though, if there was a particular person that people took to en-masse the rules don’t preclude them from office or appearing on national ballots. Look at Trump, people at first wrote him off as a joke, similar to the other times he ran before, now he’s a major threat to both parties.

      • Omega_Man@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Oh, I completely agree. This is way too complicated to fit into simple comment chains. There will be books upon books about this (assuming we’re still allowed to write books in the future).

    • mctoasterson@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I know the word “rigged” is overused in politics these days but I’m not sure how else to describe the method the RNC and DNC use to select candidates. We have a matchup of historically unpopular individuals who were both President already, and yet most feel as though there was an inevitable quality to each receiving his party’s nomination.

      I live in a primary state where party registration is arbitrary and I could have easily participated in the process for either major party (just providing this background lest I be accused of being something I’m not). Problem is, by the time it rolls around to my state, the momentum of previous caucuses and primaries has all but secured the nomination already and my ability to influence the process is effectively zero.

      The DNC and RNC have created a system of managed coronation disguised as some sort of democratic process. And what’s worse is they now set the precedent of rigged debates designed to exclude meaningful alternatives. If they have a second debate they’ll probably make up something about minimum Twitter mentions or shoelace color to purposely exclude RFK and other 3rd party candidates again.