The poll found 50% of Democrats approve of how Biden has navigated the conflict while 46% disapprove — and the two groups diverge substantially in their views of U.S. support for Israel. Biden’s support on the issue among Democrats is down slightly from August, as an AP-NORC poll conducted then found that 57% of Democrats approved of his handling of the conflict and 40% disapproved.

  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Pro-Tip - Nobody serious will primary him.

    The history of primarying a sitting President is that if you do the damage, you won’t win, but the President will fail in the General.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      How many times has that happened?

      Once with Carter?

      And wasn’t that the moderate establishment intentionally kneecapping his second term because if a Republican won they could say it was because Carter was too progressive and the Dem party needed to be more conservative? But if Carter got a second term, progressives would keep winning primaries?

      I can’t think of another time an incumbent Dem president was primaried.

      But I bet the next time it happens is after the first term of a progressive president. Suddenly party leadership will decide we deserve a say in their private event where they don’t have to respect the results.

      • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Johnson was primaried, did poorly in VT and withdrew his nomination. Nominee lost to Nixon.
        Ford was primaried, lost to Carter.
        Carter was primaried, lost to Reagan.
        H.W. Bush was primaried, lost to Clinton, but was also fighting Perot.

        So basically every time it’s happened in recent times.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Guess there was few more.

          This article should help you:

          https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-2024-primary_n_6503225de4b0800d579d8f64

          Tldr:

          Saying primary challengers make incumbents lose is like saying getting a warning for speeding makes someone more likely to get a speeding ticket

          Driving over the speed limit makes both more likely.

          So in addition to my point about Carter, and this shouldn’t need to be said, but if a president is so bad that they have to fight a tough primary as an incumbent, they’re probably not going to win their general.

          An easy fix is to normalize a primary. Strong incumbents get a second go, and we’re not running an incumbent no one likes in the general if they lose

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think there were legit weaknesses in Johnson, Ford, and Carter.

            Johnson because of Vietnam of course. Ford because he pardoned Nixon, and Carter due to the hostage crisis.

            Bush was more hurt by Perot than the primary. Buchanan got all pissy over the “read my lips, no new taxes” thing.

    • APassenger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If Biden foregoes a run (he won’t) and named an heir, we’d be in a better place than described. But it cannot look like Hillary Clinton on the way to a coronation. We lost that one.