If Biden Loses, What’s Really to Blame?
I’m sure there will be a laundry list of factors his team will point the fingers at.
There’s no denying that in recent weeks, it has felt as though — and polling has indicated — presumptive democratic nominee and former Vice President Joe Biden has had the upcoming general election against Donald Trump locked in. While most signs may be pointing to the idea that the current occupant of the White House could be voted out of office in just a matter of months, I’ve been trying to remain cognizant of the fact that there is still plenty of time for Biden to ruin it. Under what we might perceive to be normal circumstances, there’s no doubt in my mind that Joe Biden would not have even the slightest chance of winning, and it’s important to be mindful of the fact that if 2020 has shown us anything, it’s how rapidly things can change.
Recently we’ve been reminded of the rapid pace of change with results of new polls, which have shown that what might have felt like an insurmountable lead for Joe Biden might be diminishing.
Matthew Impelli with Newsweek writes:
“Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s lead over President Donald Trump has diminished by 6 percentage points, according to a new national poll.
The poll, which was conducted by The Hill/HarrisX, surveyed 933 registered voters from July 3 to July 4. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.
According to the poll, 43 percent of respondents said they would vote for Biden if the presidential election were held today, while 39 percent sided with Trump. Among the remaining percent of voters, 5 percent said they would vote for someone else, 5 percent said they wouldn’t vote, and 8 percent said they were not sure.”
It doesn’t end there.
In news that’s certainly not concrete, but unnerving nonetheless, Louise Hall with The Independent reports that:
“President Donald Trump has a 91 per cent chance of winning the November 2020 election, according to a political science professor who has correctly predicted five out of six elections since 1996.
“The Primary Model gives Trump a 91 percent chance of winning in November,” Stony Brook professor Helmut Norpoth told Mediaite on Tuesday.
Mr Norpoth told the outlet that his model, which he curated in 1996, would have correctly predicted the outcome for 25 of the 27 elections since 1912, when primaries were introduced.”
Again, it cannot be overstated how much can change between July and November, but given how the results of the 2016 continue to be explained not only by Democratic lawmakers and pundits but Hillary Clinton herself, I can’t help wondering if Biden doesn’t win, what’s really to blame?
At the very least, we can predict with some certainly where the fingers are going to be pointed if the results don’t go their way.
From the day Bernie Sanders conceded the nomination, I knew it still would not be enough. Ever since we learned that Barack Obama said he would “speak up” to stop Bernie Sanders, ultimately made the decision to do so, and ended everything his movement had worked for with nothing more than a few phone calls, it’s been abundantly clear that the corporate wing of the Democratic party never had any intention of letting him win. But the conspiratorial part of my mind can’t help wondering if they tolerated him for so long this time around because he’s evolved in to a far too convenient excuse for their failures since the 2016 election. Naturally, they’ll be all too happy to use him again.
Having said that, Bernie’s supporters in particular will undoubtedly bear the brunt of it this time around.
To be clear, I would not be the least bit surprised of voter suppression and disenfranchisement runs rampant throughout the general election on a scale even worse than we’ve seen in the primary. There’s no doubt in my mind that Trump and the Republican party will do anything within their power to retain their control of the White House, the Supreme Court, and the Senate. But surely, that would mean the Democrats would be as prepared as possible to take on whatever games they have planned. But time and time again, all we see from them is little more than rhetoric of disappointment and some shaking heads.
I’m sure it wouldn’t even occur to most of the Democratic lawmakers or pundits on the television screen to consider what the Biden campaign itself could have done differently.
It certainly never occurred to Hillary Clinton, but it would be nice if the Biden campaign might consider the fact that they had next to no campaign staff or ground game in a number of critical states up until just weeks ago. It would be nice if they might consider the fact that the Democratic party coalesced around a candidate who’s campaign was dead in the water just days before he shot to victory, salvaged by not by fundamental belief in his message and genuine enthusiasm, but by a few phone calls from a man who didn’t even want him to run and a couple days of positive media coverage. Perhaps they might reflect on the fact that they have made “limited exposure” a campaign strategy, and expected to resonate with voters. Maybe it might have something to do with voters feeling less than inspired to take the time out of their day, and risk their health and safety in the midst of a pandemic to vote for a man who said he would veto medicare for all. A proposal — it’s certainly worth noting — has a 70 percent approval rating.
At this point, I still do think Joe Biden is the favorite to win. But if he doesn’t, don’t say we didn’t warn you.
