Understanding the numbers behind Biden's likely change of heart

Within the next few days, President Biden may decide to drop out of the presidential race and hand the baton to Vice President Kamala Harris.

He’s been under increasing pressure to do so but has resisted, in an apparent belief that he can win — and that he stands the best chance of wining.

As readers of American Crisis know, I think it’s extremely important that Donald Trump not prevail because of the grievous harm a second Trump term would do to our already faltering democracy and to the most vulnerable American citizens.

Like many of you, I was stunned by Biden’s poor debate performance last month; his decline since the State of the Union address last spring was dramatic. But I haven’t been convinced that he couldn’t defeat Trump. Now, I’m afraid, I am reluctantly convinced.

I got there, in part, through a phone interview I did a few days with Dave Wasserman, one of the nation’s top election forecasters. (He’s the senior editor of the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter.)

I called Wasserman after seeing his organization’s new national polling average, which tracks the 2024 presidential race through a curated average of national polls.

The top-line takeaway of was this: “The current average shows former President Trump leading Joe Biden 47 percent to 45 percent.”

 

I asked Wasserman to explain how that conclusion — a mere two percentage points — squares with the generally accepted idea that Biden can’t win, or at least is very unlikely to win. For example, I quoted to him a line from political journalist Brian Beutler, a progressive, who wrote recently of the president being “on a path to ignominious defeat.” Beutler wrote: “It’s clear that Joe Biden would rather not drop out of the race for a younger, more nimble candidate. It’s also clear that he’s on track to lose.” He’s in very good company with that view.

Wasserman responded that nothing is impossible. “I don’t know how anyone can be certain of anything given the past 10 years of politics.” But he went on to say that Trump is the clear favorite. After all, we know that that national average is measuring, as he put it, “an election that we’re not going to have.” If we elected presidents via a pure popular vote, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton would have won their respective races.

No, it all comes down to the voters swing states — and right now there is a startling number of swing states. Not just Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia and a couple of others, but well beyond.

“The fact that we’re even talking about Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire and New Mexico” says a lot, Wasserman noted. Those should be squarely in Biden’s column. But right now they’re in play.

Wasserman also noted that Republicans are united behind Trump, while “two thirds of Democrats believe Biden should leave the race.” What’s more, the Trump campaign will have a big spending advantage from this point on. Biden is behind while having had over a hundred million dollar spending advantage to this point in the campaign; meanwhile, “his numbers have gone backwards.”

And perhaps most significant is a comparison to four years ago. At this point in 2020, Biden was up over Trump by nine percentage points; now, he is down two points. “That’s an 11 point swing from four years ago.”

And, Wasserman notes, polls have tended to underestimate Trump. So, the outcome could be lot worse than the actual numbers suggest, which are plenty bad enough for Biden.

Biden seems to have been in denial about these realities but that may be over, or nearly over. This may be the weekend that he faces what seems to be the inevitable. There’s certainly no guarantee that Harris will beat Trump if she becomes the nominee. But she could have more of a fighting chance.

“We operate in probabilities, not certainties,” Wasserman reminded me. But sometimes, probabilities become hard to ignore, and we seem to be at that point.

And now, a note of explanation for my foray here into the topic of polling. Isn’t that the very kind of “horserace” coverage I’ve been railing against and doing my best to discourage? The focus of this newsletter is to encourage journalism that is about the consequences of the election. In Jay Rosen’s felicitous phrase, we need coverage that emphasizes “not the odds, but the stakes.”

I know many of you care about that, too, and that it’s why you’ve decided to subscribe.

So what gives?

What gives is pretty simple. I’ve come to the conclusion — as many have well before me — that the Biden campaign is headed for disaster. And that means four more years of Trump, which is about as consequential as it gets. Like Biden, I’ve resisted facing this apparent reality.

My interview with Wasserman, who is non-partisan and respected across the political spectrum, changed my mind. So I thought it might be useful to share his observations with you here.

Thanks so much for coming along as we head toward November’s election. I am really grateful for your interest, for the many new subscribers who have joined us, and for those who have commented so thoughtfully. (Please know that I read all the comments, though I don’t respond to every one.) I promise not to become preoccupied with polls and horserace coverage. But I also promise not to look the other way when the facts are clear.

Leave a comment