463 Comments

My theory of the case for 2024 has been that Biden is a reasonable favorite so long as the current economic trends hold steady. 10 or so months from now of steady real income growth, relatively stable prices, and maybe a drop in interest rates, plus (God willing) the Israel-Gaza war being just about over for at least six or so months prior to the election should do a lot to stabilize Biden's position.

That, plus a re-orientation of the public with an every day in your face DJT should remind people why they hated him in the first place.

I have already noticed a shift in media coverage. Headline of the NYT today is another story about how radical Trump's second term can be, and I have seen more The Economy is Good, Actually stories lately, as well as the media explicitly calling out the gap between people's assessment of their own economic situation and their very negative assessment of the national economy.

All the above just takes time. This is simply the winter of Biden's discontent.

Please tell me why I am wrong

Expand full comment

DJT has accidentally stumbled into talking about actual policy via Obama Care, the more he does that the better for Biden.

Expand full comment

Dem oppo researchers work hard but GOP candidates work harder

Expand full comment

Most of what Trump talks about is based on feedback he gets from his rallies. He tries out different applause lines, keeps the winners, and discards the losers. Likely his focus on Obamacare followed that process. I think that shows something Matt talks about, people want it to be 2019 again. Overthrowing Obamacare is a nostalgic call back for his followers, akin to the Rolling Stones playing Satisfaction on their latest tour.

Trump and his followers, especially his followers, really believe that a vast majority of Americans feel the way they do, and the unpopularity of this position doesn't even cross their minds.

Expand full comment

Agree. It's a strong message Democrats know how to hammer and hammer well. Very useful to have in the messaging toolbox.

Expand full comment

And the more that Biden (or preferably, the newly-appointed Biden Spokesperson Pete Buttigieg) goes to multiple events and contrasts Trump’s record with Biden’s EVERY DAY for the next year, the better his chances.

Expand full comment

Has Trump publicly taken a stance on abortion policy in the 2024 cycle? Right now, he's still pulling the wool over voters' eyes with the moderate vibe, but if he is somewhat forced into adopting an unpopular position at the GOP convention, the above math will shift further into Biden's favor.

Expand full comment

Ah, but Trump won't be forced to adopt an unpopular position at the GOP convention, because I'm willing to wager that the GOP will not adopt a platform at its convention. If it does, it will simply read "Whatever Trump wants."

Expand full comment

It's the Democrats' job to make sure that Trump is carrying the abortion policy albatross no matter what he might say from time to time. He is his party's voice and his party's stand is perfectly clear.

Do you have any doubt that, no matter what he says, that he would sign a national ban if a Republican Congress sent one to his desk? I don't.

Expand full comment

And that's what Dems need to make sure voters know!

Expand full comment

Regardless of his personal opinion, he’s the architect of overturning Roe.

Expand full comment

I think he wouldn't have it come to his desk. He might even pocket veto it and then claim the deep state did it. But he wouldn't sign it.

Expand full comment

He acts randomly so who knows

But of course he might sign it

Why wouldn't he? Think of the coverage and the attention!

Expand full comment

Trump has a strong ability to find the popular positions and meander there (we'll repeal ACA and pass something better, we'll make Social Security even stronger, etc). Will he do unpopular things like pass a tax cut that benefits him - sure. But would he do something unpopular that doesn't benefit him? I can't think of when he has.

Expand full comment

Trump has no interest in policy, beyond (1) the desire to erase any evidence that Barack Obama was ever President and (2) the belief that tariffs are direct payments to the United States by foreigners. The House of Representatives has no interest in anything that doesn't get Republican members booked on FOX News. That means in a Trump Administration with a GOP Congress, the policy agenda will be driven by the senator who cares the most, and that means Mitch McConnell, and that means tax cuts, deregulation, and right-wing judicial appointments. Trump will sign any bill the last person to flatter him tells him to sign. All you have to do say "It's a big beautiful bill, the best bill, people who say how strong and decisive your leadership is."

Expand full comment

In 2022 Democrats in states where reproductive rights were clearly in doubt did a great job hanging Dobbs around the necks GOP candidates. I expect they will hammer the Trump clip saying he's responsible for the end of Roe.

Expand full comment

I agree with you. I'm done moping about having to vote for 81 year old Biden again. It's time for us all to let it go and support Biden because the alternative (any Republican, not just Trump) is so much worse.

Expand full comment

I agree that any Republican is much worse than Biden for the years they are in office. But it seems to me that for the long run, it might be better if some non-Trumpy Republican like Haley actually wins the election, and shows Republicans they do better on that path than on the Trumpy path.

Expand full comment

If Haley directly beats out Trump for the nomination next year, yes. But if Trump is nominated and the Dems “steal” the election again, the competition for the 2028 nomination, assuming Trump is done, will still be very Trumpy.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 4, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

“And then if he sees his shadow, there will be four more years of Democratic Presidents.”

Expand full comment

Eh, nobody likes losing. At some point, even if you believe the other side is cheating, if Trump can't over come that, you need to find someone who can. *Especially when the major selling point for Trump is that he is a fighter who won't back down! If he's a fighter who loses, you need a new fighter*

Expand full comment

Good thing more than half the GOP base thinks Trump won in 2020, and will think the same about 2024.

Expand full comment

Ehh, they could just lose on the Trumpy path and presumably at that point come to the same conclusion anyways.

Expand full comment

No, at least some of them will have the conclusion that the election was “stolen by the elites, just like 2020”.

Expand full comment

There's something here. As soon as possible for the sake of the country the current iteration of the GOP needs to collapse or change radically. Haley winning could be a path towards changing. Trump losing could be a path towards collapsing.

Expand full comment

Sure. In four years. Maybe.

Expand full comment

You have listed all the things that should break right. That’s an awfully low combined probability for a bunch of uncorrelated events. They can also break wrong. Plus there are as always unknown unknowns out there that would hurt the incumbent

Expand full comment

This is a good critique. Taken separately all factors seem more likely than not to go as described (except maybe foreign events) but yeah, running the table on 5-6 factors with even a 90% chance of happening isn't great odds.

Also just made me think of a couple things that could go sideways - a high profile border surge beyond what we even see today, some kind of spectacular terrorist attack, another ill-timed SVB style financial event.

Makes kind of obvious what Biden should do to shore up his position - some kind of high profile border security maneuver, plus jamming all the buttons to get prices to go down wherever he can.

Thanks! Good add.

Expand full comment

> running the table on 5-6 factors with even a 90% chance of happening isn't great odds.

We're really over-quantifying things here, but just to be clear, a 90% chance for five independent events still gives 59% overall and 53% if it's six. Being above 50% a year out seems pretty good, particularly if there are things one can do to increase these odds even more.

Expand full comment

>All the above just takes time. This is simply the winter of Biden's discontent.<

My take, too. I keep getting the vibe that the last 3-4 years have more or less been one, long, vivid illustration of the strong penchant for impatience evinced by homo sapiens. It's an attribute that mostly has served our species well, mind you. But it ain't fun to be a politician on the receiving end of it.

Expand full comment

I don't blame voters for being royally pissed by inflation, even if their purchasing power hasn't declined (or not much at any rate). It was a shocking, near-unprecedented event. It takes a while to get over your fear that it will happen again.

Give us ten more months of very moderate inflation and I believe people's fears will decline and inflation will be far less of an incendiary issue.

Expand full comment

I also think that, even if Biden ends up running below replacement for the Dems, the GOP is likely also going to run a below replacement candidate in Donald Trump, so we have to see how the rematch is going to go relative to each of them.

Expand full comment

I'd tell you why you're wrong except you're not. Well said. Too much political journalism has the feel of "the election is today! or if it's not, there's no way anything will change! or if it changes, we journalists are not capable to conveying to the reader that today's snapshot means far less than our stories pound home."

We truly live in an era of journalistic goldfish memory.

Expand full comment

There needs to be a tremendous amount of the economy is good, actually, type articles because people kind of want to believe it is bad, economics are confusing, and a progressive habit is to promote the need for making things better in part by highlighting what is bad, including the economy. Couple that with the republicans also wanting to promote that things are bad to blame Biden, and their huge more conservative loyal information distribution network, and it is tough to counter.

Expand full comment

My hope is that the herd mentality of the press corps leads to their becoming bored with "despite the numbers, people feel they're suffering" trope and will start moving en masse to "we may be seeing another 'Morning in America."

The most important thing about journalism is "the story always has to change -- that's why they call it 'news.'"

Expand full comment

I don’t think you are wrong per se, but it would help if the passage of time were coupled with some visible deregulation efforts that will quickly or slowly reduce inflation. Biden needs to be seen working on this, at Matt argues.

Expand full comment

I'd put money on it that any deregulatory action Biden could take at the executive level would have an 0.1% chance of affecting inflation in a way that voters would notice over the next year.

Other than opening the taps of the SPR and bringing the cost of gas way down.

Expand full comment

I think you're generally correct, but would like to use your comment to drill a bit deeper.

I think many are making a mistake by focusing on national averaged statistics and then poo-pooing anyone who thinks the economy is bad. The thing with averaged statistics is that they are averages and hide a lot of variability.

So while it's true that the economy is - so far - recovering well when looking at it from a high level, once you drill down there are still a non-trivial number of people who are not doing as well as 2019. They may be a minority, but are still somewhere around 30-40% according to polling. As a matter of promoting Biden's reelection, I think it isn't smart to shove averaged national statistics in their face and tell them, in essence, they are ignorant or stupid. It's like telling someone who is going through a nasty divorce how wonderful it is that the divorce rate has gone down.

Additionally, the most important trends are what's happening in the swing states. How does the averaged national picture compare to what's going on in these states? What demographics are not doing well in those swing states? What can Biden and his allies do or say to address those demographics?

That would be useful to know but there seems to be a surprising amount of incuriosity on this point.

My advice to Democrats and the Biden campaign would be to stop sending the message that the economy is good and anyone who complains doesn't know what's going on. This presumes - incorrectly in my view - that the principle problem is just convincing ignorant people that the economy is better than they think.

The problem, of course, is that the economy is not better for everyone, and so it's critical to understand who is not doing well and then do what FDR did and mention - yes - that things have improved and trend lines are positive, but focus on those who've been left behind and are at the bottom end of those averaged national statistics. This is especially the case if those people are among critical demographics in swing states.

Expand full comment

In an absolute sense, the economy is always bad for some part of the population. What we have to understand is how the public's perception of the economy compares to how they felt in the past under different conditions. Things are out of kilter now compared to earlier both good times and bad times, and the question is why. My belief is that it is a hangover from a truly unusual event (the inflation spike) and that may self-correct over time to bring public perceptions more in line with economic realities.

Expand full comment

I think there are two things to consider - one is what you state here, and I tend to agree that perceptions take time to change.

The other thing is the effort to improve Biden's chance for reelection. That is more what my comment is about. Yes, it's true that the economy is always bad for some people. But in this case, a strong majority blame Biden. That's a problem, and telling people for whom the economy is bad - whose votes Biden likely needs to win - that they don't understand how good the economy is and it's just about misconception and the vibes, is not a constructive message to get them to vote for Biden - quite the opposite IMO.

Expand full comment

I'm not sure about Biden being the favorite.

The Republican/MAGA coalition is more ideologically/culturally homogenous. The Democratic/Anti-MAGA coalition is larger, but it's also more fragmented and diverse. You have everyone from the AOC wing to NeverTrump Republicans, you have moderates who think Biden has been too left-wing and progressives who don't think he has been left wing enough.

In 2020, Biden was able to mobilize the democratic coalition on the strength of being not Trump. In 2024, he'll have a record to defend and some people won't be happy- you can see now that Arab/Muslim voters are threatening to abandon Biden, which could really hurt in Michigan. You risk a situation like in 2016, where Trump wins with a plurality after many democratic voters stay home or vote third party.

The hope has to be that as Trump becomes the nominee and gets more attention, that it reminds enough people why they couldn't stand Trump and the Democratic coalition turns out despite misgivings about Biden.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Dec 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Say more? I suspect Gaza will be less of an issue in November 2024 or other events will overwhelm any lingering dismay among those particular Michigan voters, but how do you see it as being overhyped? They do seem very mad and/or concerned.

Expand full comment

Kagan’s piece was an exceptionally persuasive and well-described Trump scenario that hopefully helps tilt things your way https://wapo.st/3R61yZ0

Expand full comment

Let's hope the winter of Biden's discontent is not made inglorious summer by the son of New York.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Dec 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I've already given a good bunch of money to the Biden re-elect and am trusting his professional team knows how to run a campaign. I'm not sure what the ordinary Democrat should do and how this "apparent complacency" manifests itself. You can react with alarm right now, and you can also burn yourself out months before the actual election.

What should Democrats be doing right now instead of being complacent?

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Dec 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I grudgingly accept that Haley as the R nominee would be much better for the country, even if it hugely increases the chance of the Republicans winning. But I think the chances of that are pretty close to zero and in any case, it's not something that Democrats can really affect.

My own preference is for Haley to consolidate the non-Trump wing and for she and Trump to rip each other apart so savagely over the next five months that the ultimate winner is a bleeding carcass just ripe for a Biden coup de grace.

Except I know that Trump is going to win the nomination easily.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Dec 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Oh God, you again.

Expand full comment

I'm snagging your quote re: Caesar for my English class this afternoon. We're reading Shakespeare's Caesar right now, and this lil' nugget of a juicy quote will do well to show how the subject of Caesar and the concerns bound up within his story crop up time and again. Thanks!

Expand full comment

>Until last night, I really couldn't understand the apparent complacency of Democrats in the looming face of Trump<

We must be living on different planets. Complacency? Most Democrats I know are well aware Trump could very conceivably be our next president. He might even be a modest favorite.

Expand full comment

One implication of this is that Trump is an enormous albatross around the GOP's neck. Starmer and Poilievre are on track for landslide victories and Trump is tied with Biden. If Haley or some backbench senator was likely to be the Republican nominee, 2024 would not be close.

Expand full comment

I'm not sure about "not be close." Haley would still be running on an agenda that would repeal the ACA and a six week abortion ban. Voters don't like that stuff!

Expand full comment

true, Haley is definitely a bigger messaging lift for Democrats. Not impossible though

Expand full comment

I think Haley is a seen as a "generic Republican" who isn't Trump. That would change if she became the actual nominee.

Expand full comment

You’re being imprecise Ben. She said she would have signed a six week abortion ban. I know you’re a Democrat and want to shout that from the mountain top (just like the White House) but that doesn’t mean it’s her preferred position or she’s “running” on it.

She actually signed a 20 week ban in South Carolina. That’s aligned with where many people are at. I’m not sure of her preferred position.

Expand full comment

My party registration is Slow Boring Editorial Assistant!

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 4, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 4, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Title is “as Governor.” What she said in the debate is that she is pro-life, but would let states decide barring 60 senators agreeing, which she said won’t happen. Saying that practically it is up to the states is a GOP candidate testing how to moderate messaging and avoid the issue without losing the base.

Here she takes the extreme ban at 6 weeks position "as Governor" for the base, but what she'll say in a general election is the same thing she said in the debate, which is that the only thing that matters federally is what 60 senators can agree on and that ain't much. That line has the virtue of actually being true, which allows a candidate in a GOP primary to say look I'm true believer just like you, but unfortunately we will never have all the votes general election voters who want abortion to be legal.

Expand full comment

Yes I believe she has.

Expand full comment

People complain about the errors Democrats make all the time, some forced and some unforced, but the GOP has committed a series of own goals on their own side as well.

Expand full comment

Remember, only Democrats have agency. The GOP dousing themselves with gasoline and then jumping into a volcano is apparently our fault because we didn’t stop them.

Expand full comment

I earnestly believe that the "cool" and "serious" opinion in this comment section is not that indistinguishable from the above. The Dems do have a lot of issues and we should examine them and recommend course corrections. That shouldn't blind us to the fact that there is no reasonable opposition. Nominating Haley would certainly be a step in the right direction, but it would still be a party untethered to reality in terms of rhetoric and policy.

I hate that the response to this is then "ugh, all these weirdos believe in 'no enemies to the left' or 'no punching left.'" No, that's not it. You can punch left and have enemies to the left but punch left in a way that tries to persuade them to adjust their tactics to lead to better outcomes.

Wokeism is very damaging and annoying. Progressives can also be very annoying. But I think Derek Thompson said it best on his podcast a month or so ago that "I refuse to make the fact that the left can be really f***ing annoying the centerpiece of my political perspective" I almost drove off the road when he said that because it's so spot on to what I believe but could never properly articulate!

Expand full comment

Murc's Law!

Expand full comment

I'm seething over the fact that a critical mass of my fellow conservatives really do seem to want Trump to be the nominee.

We have two decent alternatives just sitting there, but they still want to force a choice between Biden and gottdamnTrump.

Expand full comment

And while Trump may be the root of the problem, he's not the only problem: GOP primaries went to way too many below replacement clowns like Herschel Walker, Mehmet Oz, Kari Lake, and on and on. I'll be curious if they still have problems with this downballot in 2024.

Expand full comment

You have the GOP always double down and then go on fidelity/purity purges with ever more bizarre and deranged litmus tests. This is why the pool of competent people willing to run in GOP primaries is drying up.

Expand full comment

They have lost my fiancé! He was initially hoping to convince our state GOP to support the young economically-conservative pro-LGBT cohort, but that hope has utterly withered. Genuinely a loss for them: I’ve never met anyone that doesn’t like my fiancé. He has so much charisma and a solid head for policy too.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 4, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Trump appeared to finally fire a shotgun at the head of zombie Reaganism, but when it comes to governing, most Republicans are still coming from that place.

Expand full comment

There was an interview with Tim Walz, who was just elected chair of the Democratic Governors’ Association, where he said, with delightfully subtle Midwestern shade, “These guys are weird.” These guys = Republican candidates or incumbents.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 4, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Outside of very red states, the only candidate who can get away with acting like Trump is, well, Trump. In Georgia, Herschel Walker, a weirdo in the Trumpian mold, lost, but Brian Kemp, who presented as a boring normie Mitt Romney-type Republican, won. In Arizona, Blake “Norman Bates” Masters and Kari the Lake Mess Monster lost, but treasurer Kimberly Yee, a strait-laced McCain Republican, cleaned up. (In the 2022 midterms.)

And George Santos, who managed to out-weird Trump and the late James Traficant put together, did get expelled…though he seems to still be milking his weirdo schtick for all it’s worth.

I think you are right that Trump is going to steal all the Republican thunder, and the wanna-be Trumplets will run behind the normies of both parties.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Dec 4, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Who do you consider your fellow conservatives? I'm not sure most of the Republican voter base could pass a screening test for "conservative." They could certainly easily be considered anti-progressive or just anti-democratic party, but what I understood to be the core values of conservatism through most of my life are no longer the driving force in the Republican party or what passes for the conservative movement. Most disturbing is the tact taken by the evangelical movement. I've always disagreed with them on almost all issues, include their theological interpretations of the Bible. But today they seem to have gone off the deep end in ways that truly frighten me, because they now believe in some faith that I find wholly unreconcilable with Christianity.

Expand full comment

"Critical mass" seems to be around 60% or so. If not more. I.e., a dominant majority. But I feel your pain.

Expand full comment

In a two party system his pain is all of our pain…

Expand full comment

I miss the days when there were Republicans that I would be ok voting for.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Dec 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I’m sure that’s true to some extent, but I think the GOP elites - politicians and conservative media - really drove the base to their present location of Crazytown. The rank and file kept a lot of “forbidden” thoughts to themselves until Fox and Trump gave them license to air racist, anti-democratic, xenophobic, etc. ideas.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Dec 4, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

No, because it took Trump and media to activate and direct their anger. Otherwise we would have heard the majority of Republicans talk that way 20 years earlier.

Expand full comment

I agree. I also cannot decide on the exact moment the GOP jumped the shark. There are so many moments you can point to and say this was the point of no return.

Expand full comment

That's true, but one shouldn't plan on winning by hoping an opponent makes enough errors to lose.

Expand full comment

Agreed, control what you can control.

Expand full comment

There’s much less Democrat fatigue than there is Tory or Liberal fatigue in the countries they’ve been running for many years.

Expand full comment

True. Biden's current low numbers with Democrats strikes me as their venting of frustrations prior to next year's hard work of consolidating the coalition and taking it to Trump and the Republicans. I have to believe that next year when faced with the reality of the Trumpist return they'll come home except for the fringe voters who yearn for Jill Stein or Cornel West.

Expand full comment

"Tied" in national level polling. Biden is at a significant deficit in 6 of 7 swing states, which will likely decide the election.

I really think Democrats need to start focusing in on those states and figuring out what they need to do to improve the numbers there.

Expand full comment

Agreed but my point still holds: he’s behind by less than other incumbents

Expand full comment

Ok, but also the other incumbent parties cited in the article have been in power longer than Biden, so it’s not particularly surprising. Justin Trudeau has won three consecutive elections already and the UK Conservatives have been in power for over 13 years. Anti incumbency bias is bound to take a toll on them at this point.

Expand full comment

Haley would win easily if the election were today. It's not today, so we'll see.

Expand full comment

Would going after the hugely lucrative car dealership sector be a popular move?

Musk is a dick but cutting out dealerships and offering transparent pricing is great for consumers in my book, and if other manufacturers were free to do the same nationwide it would be a good thing.

I have no idea how legally feasible it might be. Would it be a political win?

Expand full comment

I yield to nobody in my disdain for the cartel-like behavior of car dealerships. Other than perhaps a novel anti-trust theory, though, I don't know how the federal government intervenes on state-level regulations. Like all sorts of regulatory capture situations, the solution lies in the states.

I'd love to be wrong on this. Car dealers, Realtors, hairdressers all deserve to have their power knocked down.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, I agree. And has been noted in many times, car dealership owners are sort of secretly the most powerful lobbying force in America; forget congressional districts, there isn't a state legislative district that doesn't have a car dealership in it. As powerful as oil and finance are, the big players are still centered in a handful of places. Creates perfect stew to help influence and block state level policy.

Two perhaps hopeful avenues. First, could a case be made that car dealerships are engaged in cartel/monopolistic behavior? Could a consumer bring a suit arguing the cost of their car was overpriced due to cartel behavior? Not a lawyer, but I would love to see a commentator who is one tell me how feasible or not feasible this is.

The other more fruitful avenue is precisely the fact this is a state level issue. While car dealership owners definitely lobby and give donations to both parties, I think I'm safe in saying this a right leaning constituency. Point being, I think the gambit is to find a state with a blue trifecta that doesn't have their head up their own asses (so definitely not New York, my home state) and try to organize a campaign to deregulate car selling. I'd say right now Minnesota seems like a good place to try to start organizing and lobbying; government there has seemed more willing lately to be forward thinking then almost any other state with a blue trifecta.

Expand full comment

"car dealership owners are sort of secretly the most powerful lobbying force in America"

I would have guessed lawyers since for somewhat obvious reasons they tend to be massively overrepresented in the different layers of government.

Expand full comment