Biden is running - and this historian says he may be the Dems' best bet
Psephologist Allan Lichtman's 'Keys to the White House' makes the case for stability over regime change.
"I don't like Joe Biden - he's too old".
So said the inimitable Fran Lebowitz, answering a question I asked of her when she was visiting the UK last year.
If we’re being totally honest, it's not a statement that's aged badly - and if Biden's age is likely to be an issue in the 2024 race, it will only come into sharper focus as election day approaches.
Biden already has a speech impediment to contend with; it's not unlikely that his age has cast an unfortunate spotlight on that. Referring to his deputy as “President Harris” and coming out with remarks like "poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids" doesn’t improve the general picture of the President’s cognitive health, even if his gaffe-making is provably historic.
I don't say any of this lightly. I certainly don’t wish to appear either ageist or ableist, and the prospect of another Trump victory is all too terrifying; that of DeSantis or one of the other Republican runners and riders only less so perhaps because they are untested in a way that Trump most certainly isn’t.
Let’s examine the current state of play:
Biden's polling numbers aren't great - spinning positively, I could point out that the current average approval rating of -10.6 is far from the low point of -19.7 in July 2022. I might also say that we’re likely past the point, barring a major 9/11-type incident, that an American president can poll exceptionally well, such is the severe polarisation among the electorate (all digits crossed that we don’t have such an incident, of course).
Crucially, Biden’s approval ratings aren’t dissimilar to those of Obama, Clinton and Reagan at a similar point in their presidencies; all would go on to win a second term. (I haven’t accounted for George W Bush, such was the impact of 9/11 on his polling numbers). On the other hand, Biden cannot be said to possess the remarkable charisma which all three of these figures had.
Interestingly, George H W Bush polled much better than any of the figures yet mentioned - but would eventually go on to lose the 1992 election (more on whether presidential opinion polling is all that indicative of eventual voting intention later).
Considering the title of this article, you may well question how an argument could be made from this point that Biden will be anything other than a disaster for the Democrats’ chances. Well, it’s all to do with a prediction model which has its roots in seismology.
*
Professor Allan Lichtman, Professor of History at the American University, might well say that much of what I’ve outlined above is irrelevant, save for mention of Biden’s lack of charismatic qualities. Lichtman is co-creator of the prediction system The Keys to the White House, with which he has accurately predicted the winners of presidential races from 1984 to the present day (with the possible exception of the infamous Bush v Gore race in 2000).
The system lays out 13 statements (keys), which must be marked ‘true’ or ‘false’. The more keys marked ‘true’, the better for the incumbent party (in 2020, with Trump in the White House, the incumbents were the Republicans; in 2024, it will be the Democrats). All 13 keys are given equal weighting.
When six or more of the keys are graded ‘false’, the incumbent party is predicted to lose; this happened in 2020, with seven keys graded false, and so the prediction was for Trump to lose the election (this of course turned out to be the case).
Lichtman would argue that elements such as opinion polling discussed above are moot, and that the factors which determine a presidential election are often those which are decided right up to the final weeks (sometimes even days) of campaigning.
You can examine all 13 keys here, but those which are most pertinent to the case for/against replacing Biden as the incumbent candidate are:
No primary contest
Incumbent seeking re-election (the relative rarity of one-term presidents being testament to this).
Biden being selected as the Democratic nominee uncontested would result in both of these keys being ticked off. To remove him as the incumbent candidate and trigger a primary contest could, according to Lichtman, be a fatal mistake - so why might the party risk that? Well, the final, 13th key is ‘Uncharismatic challenger’.
In reaching a prediction for the 2020 election, Lichtman marked this as positive, concluding that Biden had a lack of charismatic quality to the extent that it would benefit the incumbent Republican party. Biden is many things, but he’s just not charismatic in the way that the likes of Obama and Clinton were. In order to make up for the loss of keys 2 and 3, the Democrats would at the very least need to find a candidate who was.
It’s not clear that any of the likely Democratic candidates who would considering running possess charisma to the extent that would be needed. But it’s worth briefly examining the serious options.
Bernie Sanders
Having run-up for the Democrat primaries in both 2016 and 2020 - most memorably in the former as a constant thorn in Hillary Clinton’s side - I wonder whether it’s likely that Sanders would consider throwing his hat in again. It certainly wouldn’t deal with the age issue that those like Lebowitz identify; Sanders is a little over a year older than Biden. Candidates from the left of the party who could secure his backing are AOC and Marianne Williamson.
Robert F Kennedy Jr
This is really just an excuse to mention the two other candidates who have so far filed paperwork - Kennedy being one, and Marianne Williamson the other. Aside from the obvious familial links, Kennedy is probably best known for being a proponent of vaccine disinformation and other conspiracy theories (yes, most unfortunately, they include those related to the assassinations of his father and uncle).
Kamala Harris
It’s been rumoured that Harris was given the Vice Presidency in order for Biden to hand over to her part way through his first or second term (we can now safely rule it out for the first). If Biden’s popularity is an issue - again, Lichtman would likely argue not - it’s worth pointing out that, if anything, Harris is doing worse.
Pete Buttigieg
I’ve been impressed by Buttigieg for some time, not least during the last presidential election - he seemed to be the go-to Democrat sent out to defend the party and Biden on Fox News in the last election; if he can stand up to do that in one of the toughest arenas for a Democrat as well as he did, then he’s got something going for him. He seems to be one of the more popular, well-recognised members of Biden’s cabinet, too - his potential to be a charismatic candidate in the way Biden is not may well be of importance.
Michelle Obama
I know, I know, I said serious options, and Obama seems to want the job about as much as a turkey wants to be on a Thanksgiving Day table - but she would most definitely be one to watch. She has charisma in bucketloads - and Lichtman notes that ‘charisma’ is not simply about speaking power, but something that extends across party lines.
She’s incredibly well-liked, with a current approval rating of 55.8%. That might not sound like a lot, but it’s been fairly consistent for the last few years (although that might not be surprising when she’s kept relatively out of the limelight). It’s also pretty impressive in such a polarised country and may well speak to her notably charismatic qualities.
*
Were a serious challenger to emerge, then the likelihood of there being No primary contest is slim - especially when Biden, having announced that he is running, would be unlikely to stand aside for them. Aside from key no. 13 (charisma) , there is no other key that a challenger could consequentially effect.
The argument Lichtman would make isn’t ‘stick with Biden and the Democrats will win’. As his first term progresses, other keys such as the strength of the short-term and long-term economy (Keys 5 and 6) will be decided. If these keys can’t be marked as ‘true’ by the time of the next election, the Democrats’ fate may well be sealed irregardless of who their candidate is.
His argument might be more along the lines of ‘don’t stick with Biden and you’re throwing away two crucial keys without being able to make them up’.
Incumbency seems to be one of the most powerful tools at a party’s disposal when determining the outcome of a presidential election. It affects the amount of campaigning a candidate needs to do - i.e. far less without any primary contest to deal with - and also means that any spotlight of divisiveness is firmly on the opposing party; the Republican party is likely to have that in spades over the next year or so.
Lichtman’s model tells us that Biden, for all of his flaws, may be the Democrats’ safest bet.