If you think Democrats have a problem convincing President Joe Biden to abandon his quest for a second term after his disastrous first presidential debate, consider their even bigger problem: Whom would they, or could they, pick to take his place?
And would any serious potential Democratic candidate accept the challenge this close to the election, especially with Vice President Kamala Harris and the progressive, identity-politics crowd screaming it was her turn?
You know Democrats are scrambling because so many in the media are reporting those concerns. For the last few years those in Biden’s power circle, including his wife, first lady Jill Biden, and family, have assured the public and high-level Democrats that Joe is just fine, even at the top of his game. Everyone now knows that was a lie, even if some of the liars won’t concede the fact.
But even if the Democratic powers-that-be can persuade Biden to bow out gracefully, whom would they offer up instead?
One obvious candidate-in-waiting is Kamala Harris, who, as vice president, has an understandable argument to be the heir-apparent. Especially since she constitutionally would take the role if something prevented Biden from serving out the rest of this term or the next one.
But Democrats seem to know she would be a political, economic and foreign policy disaster as president — or even as a candidate, should Biden step down before the election. Her poll numbers are even worse than Biden’s. Her thoughts and sentences are often just as incoherent and nonsensical. No one except woke progressives would want her leading the country, and that only to make a political statement that a Black woman broke the presidential glass ceiling.
Beside vice presidents, successful candidates for president usually come from the pool of governors and senators. But the Democratic bench is pretty shallow in both categories. There are 23 Democratic governors. How many voters can name more than a few of them? There are 47 Democratic senators (plus four independents who caucus with the Democrats). Again, can voters name more than a handful?
Of course, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is widely viewed to be drooling for the opportunity to do to the country what he’s done to his own state. But given that individuals and companies have been voting with their feet to flee the high-tax, heavy-regulation, green-mandated, woke-obsessed California, Newsom might be the only Democratic presidential candidate easier to rout than Harris.
But who would want to step into a presidential race two or three months before an election? The candidate would have almost no time to set a narrative about his or her accomplishments, if there are any. And the onslaught of negative ads would be immediate and fierce. And if the replacement presidential candidate wasn’t named until the Aug. 19-22 Democratic National Convention, he or she would have only one month to campaign before the earliest of early voting states begins: Sept. 20 in Virginia, South Dakota and Minnesota and Sept. 26 in Illinois.
But there’s one more, very important reason why a replacement Democratic presidential candidate would be (or should be) reluctant to accept the nomination: Harris and the progressive, identity-politics cabal. If the candidate was a male, the cabal would claim the party-deciders were sexist. If the candidate wasn’t a person of color, they would claim the leadership was racist.
It’s those two concerns that led to the speculation that the only not-Harris Democrat who could accept a presidential-replacement nomination without causing an intra-party civil war, and maybe even have a chance to win, is Michelle Obama — even though she has repeatedly stated publicly that she would not run for president.
In short, Biden and his family’s vanity and quest to remain in power, even though it’s clear to most voters he should step down, have put the Democratic Party in an awful position. Given his frailty, Biden would likely lose to Donald Trump. If Biden voluntarily steps out (or is politely nudged out) or suffers a medical incident before the election, Harris would likely become the nominee, which would likely lead to an even bigger electoral rout.
The great irony in this development is that Biden and Democrats frequently accused Trump of doing anything to hold on to power, leading to the Jan. 6 riot. Now, by pushing a man who’s clearly in an age-related decline that will only get worse, it’s Biden and his enablers who seem willing to do anything to hold on to power.
Merrill Matthews is a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation in Dallas, Texas. Follow him on X@MerrillMatthews.
