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.

    • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      This whole media narrative of “Biden should step down” is all fabricated.

      All fabricated to help trump.

      Trump should step down. Oh ya, we know he won’t and it would just be dismissed by the people it should matter to. This narrative of Joe stepping down is an attack designed to go after people with morals and standards. Which is sad, that being principled will be exploited by our so called 4th estate.

      Only someone voting democrat can agree in ernest that someone with limited mental capacity should not be tasked with the job of president. Why this is true, is the entire problem.

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Not necessarily, it’s just a common tactic in politics to “leak” something to the media to make a positive story seem more credible by making people think it’s some hush hush secret.

        So it may well be true, but I suspect the messaging is coordinated by the Biden campaign.

    • btaf45@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      If during the debate, the building had collapsed and accidently killed everyone in the room, Americans would be overjoyed at our luck.

    • John Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not if Biden steps down. Having a new candidate puts some much needed energy into this election cycle. I’m just worried Hillary will rear her head.

      • crusa187
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        There is still time for Biden to do the right thing and step down, but the window is closing fast. If this is such an important election where we choose democracy over fascism, you’d think they would act to preserve the nation’s best interests.

        It’s also extremely dangerous at this late juncture…Hillary isn’t the only frightful replacement being bandied about by the establishment right now. I’ve also seen calls for Kamala or Jeffries to step in, which would be disastrous in both cases.

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The issue with Kamala is people can now say she’s known about Joe for a while and kept it hidden for selfish reasons. I think there are lot of Dems that could do better than Biden, but there isn’t much time left like you said. The sooner, it shows that Biden himself isn’t just power hungry, and people will be empathetic given what they saw during the debate. I don’t see how it would hurt the odds for a party to do what is right for once.

  • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    I understand I’m voting for Kamala Harris with my vote for Biden, but I don’t think she could beat Trump.
    There’s a lot of independents still on the fence between Trump and Biden (for some reason) and I think that anyone who’s even entertaining the idea of voting for Donald Trump would never vote for a woman of color.
    So, unfortunately because we’re so late in the election year, I think we’ll have to vote for the old white guy to keep the old white felon out of the Whitehouse.
    The only silver lining to all of this is that they’ll probably both be dead before the next election and we can firmly remember to take age into account in the next primary if Biden wins.
    If Trump wins there won’t ever be another primary or general election and I think a lot of people lose focus on that because Biden is 2½ years older than Trump.

    • John Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      We still have 4 months. Biden can be replaced in a heartbeat right now so we don’t get Trump. Biden stepping down is likely to increase Democrat support in all elections. The longet they wait the more likely it is that we’ll end up with more losses other than the Presidency.

      • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        I see this parroted a bit and am not convinced most of the people who repeat it know what they’re talking about. On what do you base this belief on? How do you know that voter turnout will increase if Biden steps down?

        • tamal3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Ezra Klein has had some good content on this topic recently. He talks about how a new candidate might be agreed upon at the upcoming Democratic National Convention, and the positives and negatives that might result from that switch. The drama of it all would likely lead to increased political engagement, too.

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          Pre debate and postdebate polls, aggregate sampling data, testing public sentiment on social media, comparing similarities to polls for Clinton to drop run in 2016 for Bernie who was polling higher, etc.

          • LeadersAtWork@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I suppose I walked into that one. Though those are big words. It doesn’t explain anything, however. Once again, you seem to be parroting. Understanding is the key here, which is what I meant under it all.

            You see, the issue we face today, one of many in fact, is that people tend to read a headline, listen to a sentence, do “research” all in the name of confirming their personal theories or perspectives, not challenge them. Thus why I ask.

            Because most won’t have the slightest idea, though they sure will be able to repeat what they heard.

  • solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Staying in and keeping fighting is a lot to ask from a guy in his condition. Maybe he could drop out and keep fighting, or possibly stay in and quit fighting. Those would both be easier, and it doesn’t much matter at this point anyway.

    • crusa187
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      All signs point to stay in and quit fighting. Brace yourself!

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      6 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
          5
          ·
          6 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
            ·
            6 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
                ·
                6 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
              ·
              6 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
            17
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            6 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
          ·
          6 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.

      • tamal3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 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
          ·
          6 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.

      • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 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
          ·
          6 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.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        6 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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 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
          ·
          6 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
            ·
            6 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
        ·
        6 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
          ·
          6 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
            ·
            6 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
            ·
            6 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.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes. You should. Because the alternative is a dictator. So if he is the nominee, you should support him.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m just wondering why they left the fate of the entire free world to…this guy? Seriously? A turtle would have been better. Why run him again when it was this obvious of a bad idea even back in the primaries? Anyone but Hillary would have been a shoe in, now we have to worry.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Who did you canvas for as an alternative? Anyone?

          That would be your answer.

          Edit: Interesting thing to get downvoted for- asking who someone canvassed for. Do you downvoters not know how political campaigns are supposed to work?

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

              You know registered Democratic voters pick the nominee, not the DNC, correct?

              If you want someone like Bernie to win, you have to fight with the establishment over the Democratic voterbase, and the Bernie campaign never succeeded in winning over the majority of the Democratic voterbase. You can argue this is because the majority of the endorsements and media were on Hillary’s side, but that was inevitable, you can’t just expect your internal Party opponent to roll over, you have to build up an opposing powerbase within the party and media.

              Seems like a lot of socialists and progressives got too disenchanted from Bernie losing to ever accept that, though.

              • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                6 months ago

                I still think it’s a ridiculous notion that I alone am responsible for the failures of the democrat party simply because I am unable to go door to door and say “Vote for Zippy,” regardless of who puts forth the candidate. Short of being the sole arbiter of ballots of course.

                • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  regardless of who puts forth the candidate

                  That’s the thing, though, no one “puts forth” a candidate except the candidate themselves, parties will sometimes reach out to activists or local party officials for local or state office nominations, but Federal office candidates are almost always decided by candidates themselves getting signatures and putting their name forward.

                  You’re no more responsible for the failures of the party than party establishment officials at the DNC, and likely quite less responsible, but you are responsible for writing off the party as a whole, and thereby abandoning the about 50% of the party that wants to take it in a progressive/anti-capitalist direction.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              6 months ago

              You expect others to canvas on your behalf? Campaigns are made up of people willing to go out and do things on behalf of the candidate. You wanted to know why not someone other than Biden wasn’t the nominee. The answer is because I didn’t canvas for anyone else and neither did you and neither did almost anyone else.

              Blaming everyone but yourself when you were just as complicit is just an excuse to get out of doing it the next time. If there’s going to be a next time.

              And before you point fingers at me, remember I’m not the one complaining about it.

    • John Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I saw with my own two eyes and heard with my own two ears too the state of Biden’s health. Biden’s family are elder abusers. His wife was so cringey too and came off as a power hungry megalomanic.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Is anyone voting for Biden because they really love him?

      He could be replaced at the snap of a finger and it would not cost votes.

      • TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        As much as I don’t think Biden should run at his age, you’re basing the “changing the nominee now wouldn’t cost votes” on nothing whatsoever. There is a proven benefit to incumbency. I don’t like it, but it’s true. And the other massive question mark is who does a majority of the country like enough in the Democratic Party (that the Democratic Party actually wants being its nominee) to just install? Because you also have to factor in the mileage the right would get out of “the Democratic Party’s nominee was installed like a dictator!” shit. No to mention the optics of a party elite-chosen candidate. You can’t say a change wouldn’t lose votes without a definitive other candidate to compare to and without considering the optics.

        So basically, what you’re saying is mostly just nonsense. This is a terrible situation for us to have to be I . But we’re in it. No use pretending.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Camp David

    There’s some joke in here involving Jimmy Carter but I really hope he isn’t in actual pain watching this go down.

    • John Richard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I never did and then he and his campaign team went and proved me wrong. The whole recent issue with Merrick Garland has to do with Biden asserting executive privilege over the audio tapes of his national documents investigation where the special investigator found that Biden legitimately has a poor memory now not being able to recall life events. Instead Biden’s team pressured the investigator to revise his report and said his assessment wasn’t supported by facts.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        They have the transcripts. They are only pushing for the tapes for sound bites for ads. There’s no additional information that is related to national security that isn’t provided in the transcripts

        • John Richard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          The transcripts has repetition and long pauses removed. I agree they will use those audio tapes against him, but for Biden’s team to try to hide the memory loss and then say the other side is lying only gives Republicans more ammo. He must have known his base would be defend him only to be shown that the Republicans actually had something right for once.