Biden has a weak hand

Democrats don't know how to spot a bluff.

It’s not what usually attracts people to Las Vegas. But one of the pleasures of being in Nevada — where I am this week for the World Series of Poker¹ — is that you’re in a swing state, which means you see a lot of political commercials.

The other day, for instance, I saw a Spanish-language commercial that emphasized how Joe Biden had ushered in a return to normal. This pitch for Biden’s steady hand hasn’t really been selling in the Silver State, where Donald Trump has had a consistent polling lead. But it is nevertheless something that Democrats could hold out some hope for as a closing argument. Trump was extremely unpopular throughout his term in office. And his final stanza in office — from when the COVID pandemic hit our shores in February/March 2020 though January 6, 2021 — was among the most chaotic periods in American history.

The problem is, the pitch is kind of a lie — and everyone knows it. Not the Trump part — he very much is some sort of chaos agent. But the Biden part. A steady hand? Absolutely nothing about Biden’s debate performance two weeks ago — and almost nothing that’s happened since then — suggests a president who’s in command of the situation. (I don’t mean to make light of the president’s situation, but Biden’s hands might literally be unsteady.) And I doubt even most Biden’s ardent supporters would bet on him completing another 4-year term until he’s 86.

Instead, the campaign is asking voters to make a risky bet: not a choice between Trump and Biden so much as one between the Blue Mystery Box and the Red Mystery Box. As Biden ages further, the White House will almost inevitably have to stage-manage his public appearances even more carefully and take more and more decisions off his plate. And then at some point between 2025 and 2028, they’ll probably seek to transition the presidency to Kamala Harris. This might go very poorly. Would Biden listen to his staff — or, as recent reporting suggests, does Hunter Biden have his ear instead? Who’s really in charge in the event of an international crisis? And if Biden isn’t willing to gracefully exit the stage now, who says he would later?

Confronted with situations where all the paths are risky, people often act out of fear. Consider who Biden’s opponent is: A strong man or a con man can thrive in situations like these.

It isn’t necessarily a fight-or-flight situation, though. A third reaction that people commonly have in situations where risk is inescapable is to freeze, rendered incapable of making any decision at all. That’s a problem, because sometimes doing nothing is the riskiest plan of all. Frankly, I’d rather take 264 randomly-selected players from the World Series of Poker over the 264 current Democratic members of Congress² when it comes to strategizing their way through a position like this one. That’s because politics tends to select for the exact opposite of the type of people you’d want in this situation. Instead of rewarding clear-headed, independent-minded thinking under pressure, politics is a “game” where you get ahead by being a risk-averse people-pleaser, drinking the Kool-Aid rather than being the turd in the punchbowl.

I don’t mean to suggest that Democrats who would like to see a different nominee are in an easy position, however. Indeed, reporting suggests that very few of those 264 Democrats in Congress actually think Biden can win — and many if not most would privately prefer another candidate. But they have a collective action problem: those Democrats who stick their necks out — and some have, but not all that many — risk social sanction and perhaps damage to their career prospects. Let’s call these Democrats what they are — cowards — but the narrowly self-interested move is to let someone else dive into the pool first.

Biden is probably bluffing — and if he’s not, Democrats have the nuclear option

There are also tactical considerations in play — like whether publicly calling for Biden’s ouster might only make him more obstinate. And at Semafor, Benjy Sarlin brings up another problem — the game theory doctrine of mutually assured destruction:

What Biden can do is be stubborn in a way that sets up a scenario of mutually assured destruction for Democrats. So long as opponents of his nomination believe it’s impossible to force him to step aside, any escalation of their criticism risks damaging him even further in November. And the worse his standing gets, the more his party is likely to suffer up and down the ballot.

At this point, Biden isn’t even trying to convince anyone that he’ll run an effective campaign against Trump. Instead, he’s just telling Democrats they don’t have a choice — so any further criticism will only enable Trump and make the situation still worse. Notwithstanding that this is exactly the sort of thinking that got Democrats into trouble in the first place, I don’t think this argument should persuade anyone. Biden has an extremely weak hand, and Democrats should call his bluff. Here are seven reasons why:

(1) Biden's situation is probably already beyond repair. Even before the debate, Biden was roughly a 2:1 underdog in our forecast. His chances have fallen since then, and they’ll probably continue to decline as more battleground state polling comes in. The bigger problem, though, is that even Biden’s 29 percent chances (our model’s forecast as of Tuesday) are built from past examples where candidates were capable of running relatively normal campaigns, which Biden isn’t. The whole premise of Biden’s campaign — steady, adult leadership — has now been fatally undermined.

Does that mean Biden’s chances are zero? I wouldn’t say that. Maybe the polling has been way, way off since the beginning. Maybe Democrats can sell voters on the dangers of Project 2025. Maybe there will be some other shocking news event that redounds to their benefit. But all of these are things that would help any Democrat, not just Biden. If Democrats retain the presidency, it will be despite Biden, not because of him.

(2) Biden is almost certain to have other “senior moments”, which could come past the point of no return. Even under ideal conditions — a phone call to Morning Joe, a program with hosts who are extremely sympathetic³ where he could read off scripted talking points — Biden struggled to stay on message. What’s it going to be like when he has to debate Trump again in September? Or there’s an international crisis and Biden has to give an impromptu news conference? Or his health situation continues to notably deteriorate over the next four months, or he has some sort of acute medical episode? Or his polling declines further rather than rebounds — not hard to imagine given that his approval ratings have moved steadily downward throughout his term? If they stick with Biden now, Democrats could easily be faced with a situation later where they are drawing dead and don’t have the option to replace him (for instance, ballots might already have been printed).

(3) Democrats haven’t gone all that far up the escalatory ladder. We’ve all been in positions where we’re seeking to change someone’s undesirable behavior — a boss or a subordinate, a child or an aging parent . You start with subtle hints — what if we bought you some new shirts, those ones smell a little musty, you might say to a teenager with poor personal hygiene — and then gradually work your way up the escalatory ladder. Over the weekend, I put out this ordered list of steps that Democrats might take to persuade Biden to step down. They’d gotten to roughly Step 6 or Step 7, but then the progress stopped:

It’s a natural place for an impasse, because we’re basically at the end of the steps that allow Biden to move aside gracefully. Steps beyond this plausibly could damage Biden irreparably — but that doesn’t matter if he’s already irreparably damaged (see point #1) or he’s not going to be the nominee anyway because at some point the escalation will work. In MAD terms, Democrats potentially have first strike capabilities. If they can damage Biden to the point where his chances of winning are not merely low but essentially zero, he loses his leverage.

(4) Democrats do have some nuclear options. So it may be time to stage an intervention — for a group of senior leaders to directly confront Biden, first privately and then if necessary publicly, and tell him it’s time to go.

And what if that doesn’t work? Well, Democrats actually can escalate further. In fact — and there is a lot of incorrect reporting on this point — it is actually not Biden’s choice whether he wants to be the nominee. Instead, it’s technically up to convention delegates. Democratic party rules contain a provision that allows delegates to back another candidate if they cannot represent their original choice “in all good conscience.” There is nothing legally binding them to vote for Biden.

Now, this is a challenging path because 99 percent of the delegates who will vote on the first ballot⁴ were selected by Biden’s campaign, who won all but a handful of delegates in Democrats’ largely uncompetitive primaries. Still, people who serve as delegates to a party convention tend to be loyal to their parties as well as to the candidate who selects them, and some of these delegates are already having doubts about Biden. In fact, contrary to the White House’s talking points, many rank-and-file Democratic voters would also prefer to replace Biden in surveys conducted since the debate.

Plus, under mutually assured destruction, the threat of going nuclear can be a powerful deterrent even if you’re relatively unlikely to exercise it. So it isn’t a trivial consideration that Democrats have the “conscience clause” — or even the 25th Amendment. They actually have the most powerful weapons in the “game”.

(5) Running for another term is probably not in Biden’s best interest. This is because he’s probably going to lose. And if he loses, his considerable first-term accomplishments will be overshadowed, and he’ll be remembered by history as the stubborn old man who refused to exit the stage and enabled a second term for Trump.⁵ If you’re hoping to soothe Biden off the stage with carrots rather than sticks, seeking to persuade him of this might still work.

(6) Kamala Harris is probably a mutually agreeable option. I’ll want to write more about Harris if I can find the time. But my strong sense is that people who want Biden out would be perfectly happy with Harris (even if they’d prefer some sort of open nomination process) — whereas people are defending Biden are more indifferent between Biden and Harris (but are strongly against an open process). In technical terms, Harris is probably the choice that would emerge from a negotiation in a game-theory equilibrium — not necessarily the party’s best option to defeat Trump, but the one minimizes the loss function for respective party stakeholders.

And in more practical terms: Biden’s biggest defenders so far have been the Congressional Black Caucus. Would they really balk at replacing Biden with his Black vice president? There is plausibly a deal to be struck: Biden doubters agree to drop their demand for an open convention and support Harris, an option that Biden defenders can live with.

(7) Here be dragons. I’ll conclude with this: even if the tactics and strategy are hard to work out, it can’t possibly be a good idea to nominate someone in Biden’s condition to another four years in office. It just can’t be. If you think it is, try again because you did the math wrong. It’s not a sales pitch Democrats can make with a straight face, and voters aren’t buying it.

Their best argument, of course, is “well, Trump is worse” — but that doesn’t answer the question of why Democrats were in a position to offer voters an acceptable choice and didn’t exercise it. When in doubt, make the responsible move. And don’t try to run a bluff when you so obviously don’t have the goods.

1. My Main Event ended unceremoniously late on Day 2, but there are other tournaments for the rest of the week.

2. 213 representatives and 15 senators

3. Another four-syllable ‘S’ word might be more appropriate.

4. Superdelegates — not chosen by Biden — can begin voting on the second ballot.

5. This also holds for Biden’ staffers: it’s tough to screw up badly enough in politics that you won’t get hired again, but this would probably qualify.