criminal who tried to overthrow the government instead of turning over power at the end of his previous term...Dems hammering that home for 18 months instead of just 3 would've made all the difference.

Biden should have stuck with the idea of a transitional presidency and set it up for another candidate to run. I think Carville is right, Trump was a weak candidate, and as close as this election turned out to be, he's guessed correctly.

think Trump would be the one that benefitted from that. If a nobody like me knew Biden would be too old, the powers that be in the Democratic party should have seen the writing on the wall.

and say "America is deeply damaged by the past 4 years. I believe I am the best person to put us back on track, to get the vaccines into rapid distribution, to repair the international relations poisoned by the Trump years, and to get our economy back on a solid footing. I know I would be the oldest President if elected, and I pledge to you that all of my energy will go into rebuilding America. I will not run for any further office and I will not be a candidate in 2024."

Basically, Carville is right. What he didn't say out loud is that it is likely we would have chosen a candidate other than Harris. Kamala has always been my first choice, and I probably would have voted for her in the primary. But we now know that the USA remains a bastion of male dominance, being almost unique among developed nations in never having elected a female head of state. It saddens me deeply to say that this woman, who ran a perfectly executed campaign, could not have been elected, regardless of when Biden stepped aside.

So that really makes this a matter of speculation: what man would have become the nominee who would have beaten Trump in 2024? Unfortunately, Carville didn't share that wisdom with us.

I thought Joe Biden knew that one-term was enough.

It's not that he was a bad president. He's been great but I thought there was a sense shared by most people that Democrats needed to go into 2024 with a new candidate.

Gaza and the economy were suggested in the article

Carville is claiming the voters wanted a change. I reckon it was not just age, gender and race?

So what did they want? A hot dog and a beer?

Truth is, it was a good question. She was essentially interviewed for an important job

Who would have ever thought that a question on "The View" would have been so problematic ?

It was a death from a thousand small cuts.maybe we we all fooled. A change of age was just not enough

We have lost the blue collar workers.

I am reminded of that scene from field of dreams where the Costner character asks James Earl Jones ‘ so what do you want’. JEJ goes into a long political diatribe and Costner goes ‘ no what do you want? ‘ indicates the concession booth

‘Oh a beer and a hot dog’

This election loss was the fault of racism
and misogyny, which fueled enough elections
over the last forty years to change laws and
swing courts enough to allow media to be
biased, voting rights to be weakened, and
hate and guns to flourish.

Period.

Certainly the candidate and timing matters. But so too does the listening to the electorate and giving serious voice to their cares and concerns, even when party leadership has other ideas. I think we failed more on the latter as we did with which candidate and when.

So I shall ask you . How could she have answered the question or should she have campaigned to address the cares and concerns of the electorate?

Asking cuz I don’t know

One thing they should’ve done differently was beating back the mis and dis information tactics

They should’ve known from the HRC defeat it was a problem

...started happening mid way thru Biden's term to make a difference. And in his defense Biden did make some economic and other initiatives that were working class focused and beneficial, unfortunately the time horizon for them to be felt was too late for the election and most folks don't do the analysis to realize things will get better, just not right away. Some of things he beat the drum on, like student loans, may have been too narrow in overall electoral appeal, however just and worthy, and I think turned off the many more that did not directly benefit as niche causes distracting from bigger perceived problems like inflation. And with his handlers keeping him away from media and other opportunities to promote the positives, the surrogates didn't get the air time and exposure to pump the positive. Trump promises instant gratification and endless Can Do, which is a lie, but he sold it.

And no evidence he thought so then.

A normal nominating process with contested primaries would have taken place had Biden announced he wasn't running in '23. I suspect Democratic interest and turn out would have been higher in the general election. It's all Monday morning quarterbacking now, we'll never know.

Everyone who suggested that Biden not seek reelection was met with scorn and was accused of being ageist. The vast majority of people--especially on this site--were convinced that Biden would not succumb to the realities of growing old. Essentially, a lot of Democrats had their head in the sand.

I agree that the race would have been close no matter what, because a vast amount of our population are complete idiots. But having a primary candidate would have given us our best chance.

But we need to move on. There are no do overs. We need to re-focus on winning state legislatures and governorships, along with the midterms.

We just could not avoid the conversation about his, and I wasn't even say anything negative about his age. I was saying then that we can't pretend the age issue doesn't exist, and people were basically telling me to shut the fuck up... and especially on this site.

maybe we might have ended up winning but the problem was bigger with the bs on social media.

The more I see everything the one thing that might have helped us win is coming out against Transgender women in sports and some other things related to this issue. I think Bill Clinton and Obama would have done that if they were running.

But you are seeing right now that most democrsts think this since they are being mostly silent on this issue. But those that run in the primary will have to stsrt speaking on the issue .

Right now the right wing media is all over a gay couple that adopted some kids and were abusing them. They really push these stories. There are far more stories of hetero men abusing women and girls but they will ignore that.

Carville shut his stupid mouth

It's not like Talk radio and cable news where they are clearly conservative and political.

Social media pushes things in a way those that are non political could be influenced. Most of their discussion isn't about politics directly. It's more about picking random news stores or even just things people say on the internet and making idiots think this is the biggest problem.

If he didn't look and sound like a shaved goat.

They’ve all done quite enough. ZERO respect for this.

Instead of Carville's blathering we need someone to explain how we're going to counter Elmo, Russia, China, and all the right wing social media figures who have brainwashed a significant portion of our population.

Not later, now.

the opposite position from what he said when he thought things were going a different way.

If the country could have seen earlier that the June debate performance was coming, the party would have probably pressed him to stick to the plan of being a transitional president and not running for reelection.

Then the Dems should have run full bore FDR on Biden’s accomplishments. Lots of debates to showcase our deep bench of talent but no centrist Clinton era Demlite bullshit (sorry Carville). Fire breathing FDR populism (now called class warfare).

I would have loved to see who would have come out on top of that battle!

Many replies blaming the messenger and ignoring the message here

Which is what happened in the election, no?

There should have been a real primary with debates and other candidates. Of course I'm still of the opinion that the election was stolen in swing states by some vote cancellation nonsense.

Biden was in no condition to be running again. I get how difficult it is to step aside, but it was irresponsible of him to not do so sooner.

Having a primary might have given the nominee a chance to distance themselves from Biden, even if it was still Harris. But by Biden waiting so long and then directly endorsing Harris, coupled with her comment about no differences, made it really hard to show why she would not be more of Biden which clearly people didn't want.

of opinions. And he was instrumental in getting Bill Clinton elected so I am interested in what he has to say

What if the candidate on the stage against Trump brought a new sense of hope and a vision of the future, that could have swayed the electorate. (And please don't say Harris did that, she wasn't the fresh face we needed. Though I thought she presented a case against Trump, obviously the public did not)

It is on the voter to pay attention to what is being done. What is being DONE, not what your tv says.

There’s a lock on misinfo happening on the right and Dems haven’t found a way to break through that.

Rs genuinely believe crime is skyrocketing, inflation is horrific, unemployment is high, this administration is in bed with China etc etc etc

Despite all of it being lies, Dems could not/did not break through.

(And let’s say Harris DID win that mythical primary, which as the sitting VP was certainly plausible - she’d still have lost because Americans aren’t ready to elect a black woman)

his aging. If he would have dropped out earlier, we would have had other candidates
running in the primaries and I doubt Kamala Harris would have been the candidate. Don't
get me wrong I think Biden has been a good president, but every time I would see Biden in
public I hoped that he would not have a stroke or worse. With Trump I hope he does have a
stroke worse. What were they thinking running a black woman for president in this country, she
started out with 2 strikes against her from the get-go.

If Biden announces in early 2023 that he's choosing not to run, then it allows for a full primary. Maybe Kamala wins it, maybe it's someone else, but it would have allowed for the winner to separate him or her from the Biden administration that was blamed for the higher prices we've seen.

Kamala's biggest weakness was something she couldn't control. It wasn't that she was black or a female, it was that the Biden administration was unpopular, and she was attached by the hip to it as the VP. An open primary would have allowed her to create some distance between herself and him, or another candidate to win that has no connections to the Biden administration at all.

Yet every viable option other than Biden was strongly "discouraged" from running. I believe Biden should have been a popular president for what he did for our country. But he wasn't, and his age was a significant part of that. Warning signs were flashing and Democrats sped right through them, arguing that public opinion would shift toward supporting Biden as the 2024 election approached. It didn't. We believed what we wanted to be true, what should have been true instead of the actual ugly truth hiding in plain sight.

Sexism and racism are impossible to overcome, the sexism especially.

He wouldn't have been debating anyone.

One sentence, that's it, it's over, Trump is better. What fictional Biden monster have they created in their vacant minds? Idiots.

Which would not have been a bad thing.

...just a harpie.

He's supposing Biden's VP should have distanced herself from his historically successful presidency. He's one of the one's who likes to complain about things that Biden already took care of, pretending the Democratic party was flawed, instead of the entire republican party.

He should look at his own act and the negative effect it had in garnering support for the president. He's just a drag on the party, thinking he's supposed to be pulling the opposite way.

Carville needs to exit from public life. His opinions are useless.

A pre- primary/ primary starting in 2023 could have led to a very fractured party. Here, he argues that the problem was that Harris could not separate from Biden.

For sake of argument, what completely different position would have led a Democrat to success? Biden was more populist, more pro union than any President in many decades. On foreign policy, the two main issues were Ukraine and Israel. Even ignoring what you think is right, what position would be better politically?

Now, imagine there was a primary. Would Biden endorse anyone? Would many think it was Harris's term? Would elected Democrats rally behind her, as they did Gore, even if ideologically they might be closer to an opponent?

Carville, like most pundits, of course sees that the person who could win to be (surprise) someone he ideologically syncs with. Here, someone probably to the right of Harris and to the right of how Biden acted as President. He clearly preferred someone to Harris. Yet imagine what skipping a woman, a POC to select a white male would have done to turn out of the base would have been.

Someone noted that maybe we are in a period of such unhappiness that the Presidency has changed parties in each of the last 3 elections. It may not have been so clear cut that even with the best candidate, best messaging etc we would easily win.

Fuck off james.

That doesn’t make sense.

So now, he's rewriting history and acting like he knew they were going to lose and it was Biden's fault (one of the objectively most successful presidents of all time). Proving once again that Carville should be completely ignored and never taken seriously again.

You can snipe around the edges all you want, but the big factor in the past few elections is the conservative media machine and the way it defines the terms of how people think of things. We don't have a counter to it, and there needs to be one. Without it, we're always fighting an uphill battle.

You know lots of people with big checkbooks. Maybe you can work on that. Being a "Democratic strategist" and all, maybe focus on doing something strategic like this.

It shouldn't have been close. We are a stupid flock of voters, it seems. We have done this many times and still get it wrong about half the time.

There was absolutely nothing wrong with Kamala Harris as the candidate. What was wrong was the thinking of so many people who decided not to show up at all or who voted for Trump to "send a message." A message to whom?

We are stupid as a collection of voters. We don't really think about our votes, but vote based on stupid biases and prejudices. We did that with Hillary Clinton, as well. Both times, we ended up with an ass-clown as President. How is that a good thing? How is that even justifiable?

What it is is freaking depressing.

The reg news barely covered the young protesting almost every weekend all around the world. Many on my Facebook feed said they were not voting at all to protest.
In polls, the younger the voter the more anti war.

But to me, the biggest deal was the Republicans were all over the internet -even on comedians talk shows like Theo Von. I think the Dems underestimated social media. I read some of Kamala’s handlers thought putting money into rallies would be more successful than really ramping up their social media presence.

trump's character assassination of ms harris could have had mor time to reach his cult and ooze out into the media.

would a primary have helped? i don't think we could have had a better candidate, and the division of a primary campaign swoul,d not have helped.

...of driving home all of Presidents Biden's accomplishments during his time in office, instead of forcing him out and then praising those accomplishments after the fact, it wouldn't have been close. Hard to do when the other side lies about everything.

We sacrificed both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for nothing.

Why was Donnie even allowed to run in the first place? Let's start with that...

We've had enough of this. Why is anyone still listening to him?

How?

I alway vote democratic irrespective of who the nominee is - but there are obviously some fair weather D's.

This is a guy who says we're too woke but solicits money from the Hollywood elite.

Last edited Sat Jan 4, 2025, 11:08 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't think it was a good idea what happened and when it happened though obviously. I knew orange psycho would be running again short of him expiring. I did not trust the legal system to do a damn thing to actually stop or eliminate him, and he still had a lot of support.

Having a primary and choosing the candidate probably would have been the better course but it is what it is.

Nothing to be done about it now.

while Harris would have had more time, the misogyny would still be there, along with the chronic media white-washing of Trump

But we'll never know. Can't go back in time (that I know of).

“If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a trolley car.”

We had a full primary in 2016 and Hillary still had to contend with the fact that this country is deeply sexist and wouldn't elect a qualified woman over an unqualified man. Kamala had to overcome that same sexism, plus racism. That wouldn't have changed.

That said, I think Biden made a critical error when he didn't step down in early 2023. There was literally no one excited about him running again, no one saying good things about the prospect of a president who would be 86 at the end of his second term. It allowed 3rd party candidates like RFK to elbow their way in because everyone was so horrified by having to choose between Trump and a president who would be 86 while in office, and who was hiding from the cameras, and who in the moment he finally did appear on camera in the debates, gave a very stumbling weak performance, making it look like he'd been deteriorating horribly all along.

We should have had a full primary. One reason Kamala lost was because of low, unenergetic Democratic turnout, and this happens when Democrats aren't allowed to engage in the process and don't feel their voices are being heard. I thought she ran a good campaign and did the very best she could have done in such a short time. I was really impressed. But no one chose her except Joe Biden. It was a repeat of 2016 when there was strong energy for Bernie and his supporters felt the DNC gave Hillary an unfair advantage so she would ultimately triumph. In this case, Harris had to be the candidate in order to keep the campaign funds, but that didn't change the fact that voters who were never enthused by her in 2020, where she had very low support, may have felt their voices weren't heard and that they were being cheated out of a chance to vote in a full primary and that Biden (whether this was true or not--and I do not believe it is) somehow engineered it so she could be the candidate without her having to face the rest of the democratic field in a primary. We need to have a full primary every time.