It wouldn’t have even been a contest if Biden stayed in. He was utterly fucking done after that debate. He should never have run and the stupid DNC pricks that let that happen are responsible for trump getting elected.
The mistake was running Joe. Even originally, he even said he was only going to run once and then give up the reigns to someone else, didn’t he?
Not having a primary was destructive to our democracy. It’s almost like the Democrats wanted to be anti-democracy before Trump and his goons destroyed democracy.
deleted by creator
But what does Ja think?
Wow thanks for nothing George
Well he’s a fucking idiot. Joe Biden would have made Harris loss look 10x worse. Biden was one of the least popular Presidents in modern history and if he would have just fucked off into the sunset instead of running again, we’d probably be fine. Models had him at between 5-15% in May.
Harris could have done things much better and much of that was obvious at the time, but Biden stepped aside for very, very, very obvious fucking reasons.
That’s not what he’s saying; the Guardian title is misleading and the article is behind a paywall so you can’t see that.
This article is much better: https://variety.com/2025/film/news/george-clooney-mistake-kamala-harris-replace-joe-biden-1236568042/
He’s not saying it was a mistake to replace Biden… he’s saying it was a mistake to pick the replacement without a primary, and that Harris was not a good candidate because she had to run against Biden’s record.
He’s actually right about those things but is also leaving out the important bit that the time to hold such a primary was during the actual primary elections when people could have voted for the candidates.
Why is that even news worthy then? I don’t know a single person who wanted Biden to run again at all, not having a primary has been called out for over a year now.
Thanks for the corrections. I’m keeping my comment as is.
But this really does reveal the persistent issues that paywalled advertising masquerading as journalism represents. Its clickbaity, disingenuous, and unverifiable. If Clooney had said those things, as the headline clearly implies, and which can-not be verified, he would be an idiot.
buden was one of the least popular Presidents in modern history
How did you manage to step into the one way of looking at why the Democrats fucked this up that is objectively wrong lol
Biden was one of the least popular presidents in modern history. That is absolutely true. The reason that “one of the” needs to be there is because his opponent, Donald Trump, was in his first term the least popular president in all the time since Harry Truman that they have been tracking the numbers.
Did you work for the New York Times or something? This is the pitch perfect type of talking point version of why Biden sucks and it’s a big problem in the election, that people were talking about before the election.
I’m definitely not agreeing with Clooney obviously, Biden in the general election would have been a catastrophe. I’m just saying that you are addled by talking points that weren’t designed to be remembered after the election if you are bringing up this way of looking at Biden.
Oh stfu. You don’t even actually disagree and your comment is utterly incoherent.
I know these things because I was litterally running the statistical models to know these thing you dumb turd. And I posted the results here, regularly. And my models performed very well. Using them I was able to predict pretty much what happened as early as February and March
But this place had its head so squarely up its own ass about any obviously bad news for Biden being “misinformation”, the comments and posts would just get downvoted to oblivion.
You really need to just stfu most of the time. you really don’t know what the fuck you are talking about.
Let’s try this: Who has been the most unpopular president in all the time that they’ve been tracking the numbers? In your statistical models you’ve been running?
Truman, Then Nixon, then W. Bush, Then Carter, then HW Bush, all had lower approval raitings, toolbag.
You are so utterly incoherent that its not even clear what fallacies you are actually engaging in. Like, its not even clear what psychotic projection you are actually making here.
What NYT talking point is it that you think I am parroting?
Identify what in my original comment you actually take issue with.
What NYT talking point is it that you think I am parroting?
The one that picks a metric where Biden is second-worst, and makes a huge histrionic deal about what a problem it is for Biden in this election that Biden is second worst, when Trump is the actual worst by that exact same metric.
Like I said, it is pitch perfect. It’s like a parody of how the NYT and mainstream press covered Biden in general. And, it is still true now that you’re changing the metric to the minimum of all the date ranges where they measured an approval rating, instead of the average. Although, yes, if you go back to Dubya you can find a week where his approval rating was worse than Trump’s worst week. Fair play on that part.
Who’s the president with the worst average approval rating over their entire term?
The one that picks a metric where Biden is second-worst, and makes a huge histrionic deal about what a problem it is for Biden in this election that Biden is second worst, when Trump is the actual worst by that exact same metric.
You are an idiot and arguing with the wrong person. I was making the argument that Biden would lose the election, should they run, midway through 2023. And thankfully, its all here, documented. You can’t catch me on this, because I’m probably the most consistent commenter on Lemmy in this regard.
Who’s the president with the worst average approval rating over their entire term?
Who cares? If you give a shit about the goal post you just move, you tell me why it matters.
Like I said, it is pitch perfect. It’s like a parody of how the NYT and mainstream press covered Biden in general. And, it is still true now that you’re changing the metric to the minimum of all the date ranges where they measured an approval rating, instead of the average. Although, yes, if you go back to Dubya you can find a week where his approval rating was worse than Trump’s worst week. Fair play on that part.
This is just non-sensible gobblety-gook that your word hole is vomiting out in lieu of having to back up what you originally said, because what you originally said was utterly incoherent. Dubya had a lower approval than Trumps worst approval for almost their entire second term. In Truman’s second term, at almost no point did the poll higher than Trump. Nixon polled at better-than-Obama levels for almost all of their time until scandal broke out.
Polling is always an instantaneous snapshot. “Average” polling over time is irrelevant because of the concept of time.
And for the analysis I was conducting, the only polling data set with sufficient longitude is the Gallup poll, because its the longest run consistently applied, methodologically consistent poll. There isn’t a different dataset I could have done my analysis on.
The point is that Trumps bad polling as outsider in 2024, is not nor ever had been, supportive of Biden as candidate. Biden was losing the election independently of anything that was happening with Trump. And like I’ve been trying to communicate the cavalcade of morons for decades now: Voting isn’t a binary, no matter how much you wish it was, and further, if you treat voting like a binary, as the harm reduction brain-rot-meme does, you will lose elections. Strategic voting as a strategy is a losing strategy in that it doesn’t get you the outcomes it should.
Trump being a bad candidate, and he was (you can check all of my comment and post history on this), doesn’t make Biden a better candidate, and voters always have another option which is to simply not show up.
This is just non-sensible gobblety-gook that your word hole is vomiting out
It’s pronounced “gobbledy.”
