I hope that the president does not make a decision with undo weight given the Times/Sienna poll. It is in line with CNN's poll the day before, which was unchanged from CNN's poll in April, and both are outliers compared to other post-debate polls. However, I think the Bidens put more stock in the Times/Sienna poll than the others. It may be consistent with their internal polling. If so, then the first leg of their decision-making triad is weakened, perhaps, in their minds, cut off. I hope that the president waits on other polling, even if it is just through the weekend, but honestly, I don't put much stock in the other legs, the interview/campaign stops and fundraising. Those, to me, are disqualifying but not qualifying. That is, if he speaks gibberish to Stephanopoulos, he's done, but if he is silver-tongued, he has not made the mental competency issue go away at all. Similarly, if the donors snap their wallets shut right now, he's done; but if they keep them open he hasn't increased his viability. Advertising is not going to close this sale. To me, therefore, it's all on the polls. To me, a 3-point decline in support since the DebateDebacle, a 6-point deficit on July 3!, even if those polls were exactly how people would vote on July 3, is not close to being convincing evidence that the president cannot win. Especially given that no plausible Democratic alternative beats Trump in the polls. Be that as it may, I do believe that there is now a 50-50 chance that the president will drop out.
Which brings me to the subject heading of this post. In the CNN poll Vice president Harris did better, -2, than Gov. Newsom, Sec. Buttigieg, and Gov. Whitmer. Harris, I think, also gets Democrats a bit out of the antidemocratic selection process of a replacement. It is true that Joe Biden personally won all those primary delegates. The candidate line was not Biden-Harris. But I have read in two places that according to Democratic Party rules, Kamala Harris, as Biden's incumbent veep, would inherit the Biden-Harris campaign funds. Simply, if President Biden died, Harris would automatically become president. She would not inherit the Democratic Party's nomination for president but she would inherit the Biden-Harris campaign's money if she wished to contest the nomination in Chicago. It is a distinction without a difference, to me. OBVIOUSLY, the Democrats would nominate the incumbent president with a $200M war chest over Gretchen Whitmer.
And that brings up this consideration. If Joe Biden decides not to seek reelection, should he also resign the presidency?
Deciding not to seek reelection would mean that his presidency has four months left. On the normative prong of my personal "difficult-hard" decision-making construct, I decided that Biden is unfit to be president. Four months or--especially--four years, he is unfit to carry on in my judgment. I supported him, I support him now, and I will vote for him if he continues because of the infinitely greater unfitness of Donald Trump. On the pragmatic prong of my analysis, I concluded that Biden had a better chance of beating Trump than any of the other named, floated Democrats. I still feel that Biden has a better chance of beating Trump than does Kamala Harris, but if Biden decides to not seek reelection he would greatly enhance Harris' prospects by resigning the presidency and having President Harris run.
If he decides not to seek reelection, what is the case for Biden remaining president? Normatively, there is none (to me). Practically, there is none, especially as a lame duck.
