Panic! Bullshit!

On the New York Times swing state polls.

(President Joe Biden)

On Sunday, the New York Times dropped a political bomb — in the form of polls conducted in 6 of the swingiest states in the coming presidential election.

Here’s what they showed:

Nevada: Trump 52%, Biden 41%

Georgia: Trump 49%, Biden 43%

Arizona: Trump 49%, Biden 44%

Michigan: Trump 48%, Biden 43%

Pennsylvania: Trump 48%, Biden 44%

Wisconsin: Biden 47%, Trump 45%

If those polls reflected what actually happened on election day (and all of the other states went the way they did in 2020), Donald Trump would win a second term with more than 300 electoral votes.

Here’s what the map would look like (thanks to 270towin.com):

The reaction to the polls among Democrats went in one of two directions:

1. Utter bullshit! The polls are wrong. There’s a ton of time between now and the 2024 election. Pay no attention.

2. Utter panic! Joe Biden needs to be replaced on the ticket STAT. This is a national emergency.

Here’s a representative tweet from category 1 — via Jim Messina, who managed Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign:

And here’s one from category 2 — via David Axelrod, Obama’s senior strategist in both of his national campaigns:

The truth? I think the radically different reactions within the Democratic party to these polls are BOTH wrong.

Let’s go through each of them.

Start with the crowd who wants to dismiss these results as meaningless.

I think that’s wrong for a whole host of reasons.

First, this is not some fly-by-night polling operation. The New York Times/Siena College polls get an A+ rating in 538’s pollster ranking — one of only four pollsters to do so.

You may not like these numbers but the Times’ history of polling suggests that they are very likely to represent an accurate reflection of the playing field at the moment.

Second, these polls are FAR from an outlier. There is a wealth of data out there that suggests that Biden is in a very weak position as he prepares to enter his reelection year.

A CBS News national poll released on Sunday showed Trump at 51% to Biden’s 48%. A Washington Post/Ipsos poll also released Sunday revealed that three quarters of Americans are unhappy about the direction of the country. A Gallup poll released late last month had Biden’s approval rating at 37% — and a less-than-stellar 75% among Democrats.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump continues to run away with the Republican presidential nomination as GOP voters continue to line up behind him.

Third, the detailed data in the Times poll affirms problems that we already know Biden has — especially with young voters and Hispanic voters. From the Times writeup of the poll: “Voters under 30 favor Mr. Biden by only a single percentage point, his lead among Hispanic voters is down to single digits.”

Voters are also deeply concerned about Biden’s age. Again, the Times story on the poll results:

An overwhelming 71 percent said he was “too old” to be an effective president — an opinion shared across every demographic and geographic group in the poll, including a remarkable 54 percent of Mr. Biden’s own supporters.

(If you are wondering — and I know you are — only 39% of voters think Trump is too old to serve effectively.)

We knew these things! The Times poll just confirms it.

There’s every reason to believe then that, in the main, the results of the Times/Siena poll are an accurate reflection of where we are in the race.

You can not like that! I am sure that many readers of this newsletter feel that way! But, there’s a BIG difference between wishing things were different and simply discounting results because they don’t show what you want them to.

But, the other side of this argument seems to me equally detached from reality. And that goes something like this: This polling shows Biden is too damaged to beat Trump. And beating Trump has to happen. Therefore, Biden needs to step aside — allowing some other, presumably more electable, Democratic candidate to emerge.

That line of thinking is summed up by this tweet from never Trump Republican Mike Murphy:

And, to some extent, I get it. The public — as shown by the Times poll and lots of other data — believe Biden is too old to do the job. Biden can’t change that. In theory, if you take that issue off the table, the election becomes more about Trump and his excesses. And Democrats believe they win that election.

To my mind, that drastically underplays, however, the learning curve that Whitmer (or any other Biden substitute) would have in a presidential race.

Remember that, for all his flaws, Joe Biden has two things going for him:

1. He is the incumbent president of the United States

2. He’s already beaten Donald Trump once

Those are NOT insignificant things!

The power of incumbency — in terms of organization, name identification, fundraising etc. — is vast. Biden is a known commodity to voters. That makes him harder to demonize. (Read this on why Biden’s fundamental decency may save him.)

Any candidate — even a governor — would start WAY behind where Biden is today. He or she would have to simultaneously introduce themselves to voters while attacking Trump (and being attacked by Trump.) And, say what you will about the former president but he has proven to be VERY effective at creating caricatures of his opponents.

I agree with The Bulwark’s Jonathan V. Last here:

At least with Biden, there’s a track record. With the others, you’re asking voters to take a chance on a fresh face even though the voters are clearly saying that while they don’t like Trump, they’re comfortable with him.

And knowing how to beat Trump? Just ask Hillary Clinton how easy that is. The former president represents a sort of asymmetric threat. Because he will say and do ANYTHING — including things that seem bad for him — it’s very hard to plan for a campaign against him. It’s also hard to know how to respond — and when to respond.

Biden has done it all before. He has a sense for the rhythm of a campaign against Trump. That is a hugely valuable asset.

There is in politics, as in life, a tendency to assume the grass is always greener on the other side. That a nominee Whitmer (or Newsom or Harris or whoever) would cruise to a victory over Trump.

I just don’t think that’s the political world we live in. I think we are something pretty damn close to a 50-50 country — which means that whoever Democrats nominate is going to have a VERY close election against Trump.

So…..where does [waves hands around wildly] all of that leave us?

Here: As of today, Joe Biden is a slight underdog to win a second term against Donald Trump. Despite that fact, he remains the strongest possible Democratic nominee at this stage and replacing him at this late hour won’t work.

Again, you may not like to here any (or all) of that. But those are the facts as I see it. Today.