CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 21, 2015 11:14 AM UTC

Biden Declines Run As Hillary Consolidates Support

  • 34 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Vice President Joe Biden.
Vice President Joe Biden.

CNN:

Vice President Joe Biden ended months of intense speculation about his political future on Wednesday by announcing he wouldn’t seek the presidency, abandoning a dream he’s harbored for decades and putting Hillary Clinton in a stronger position to capture the Democratic nomination.

With his wife, Jill, and President Barack Obama at his side in the White House Rose Garden, Biden said the period of grieving his family has endured after the death of his son Beau meant that the window for a successful campaign “has closed.”

Still, Biden positioned himself as a defender of the Obama legacy and made clear he views himself as the best possible successor to the President. In tone, the remarks sounded like the kind of speech defending staunch Democratic values that he might have given had he reached the opposite conclusion.

“While I will not be a candidate, I will not be silent,” he said in a speech that highlighted Democratic themes on income inequality along with a call for a national movement to cure cancer. “I intend to speak out clearly and forcefully, to influence as much as I can where we stand as a party and where we need to go as a nation.”

Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton.

The broad consensus in the wake of this announcement is that Joe Biden’s window of opportunity to get into the presidential race closed after Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton’s strong debate performance on October 13th in Las Vegas. Perhaps most helped by opponent Bernie Sanders’ powerful call for the Democratic base to move past the GOP’s strategy of hyping petty scandals against Clinton, since that debate it’s become much clearer that Hillary has the strength to fight through the kitchen-sink attacks and own the primary.

Biden’s decision to stay out of the race is thus a large momentum boost for Hillary’s campaign, and could be pivotal to helping her consolidate support ahead of the first primary states. Looking ahead, a successful Hillary Clinton nomination and campaign could result in big coattail assists for Democratic candidates–in particular, for self-evident reasons, women like Democratic CD-6 candidate Morgan Carroll, but also for Michael Bennet and others down the ticket. As the opportunity to elect the nation’s first woman president begins to take shape, there is a scenario in which her campaign becomes a game-changing political snowball, with ramifications for American politics even greater than the election of Barack Obama in 2008.

Yes, we know, the Hillary haters in your life do not want to hear this.

Tweet
Share

Comments

34 thoughts on “Biden Declines Run As Hillary Consolidates Support”

        1. wink

          In the original British version of “House of Cards,” the main character is not Frank Underwood but Francis Urquardt. When he becomes prime minister the British tabloids appropriately refer to him in their front page headlines as “FU.”

  2. Smart move, Joe.  My clue was when I learned that Jeff Berman, Obama delegate guru, was working for HRC. 

    Now we can focus on electing Hillary.  The geniuses on Morning Joe today actually believe that Trump may get the GOP nomination and beat HRC in the general.  Of course, that insight was provided by Steve Schmidt who ran the McCain/Palin campaign.  It was so easy convincing undecided voters to vote for Obama when they realized that Sarah Palin would be a heartbeat away.  

    News flash:  actual general election voters do take their responsibility seriously.  Donald Trump, or Ben Carson, or Ted Cruz, or any of the other "mad as hell" clowns will never be president.  But, go ahead GOP, make my day and nominate one of them.

        1. Nicely done.
           

          I don't even necessarily disagree with him/her/it. I just think, if you're not going to run anyone else, then shut the EFF up about it. Seriously.

  4. Should we be bipartisan with the current crop of Radical, Anti-Government Republicans?

    It is clear that the even within the Republican Party it is impossible to form a compromise at the moment. The fatuous delusion that there is some middle ground to be found with the GOP and the Democrats sounds like something out of a fairy tale. Indeed, as Greg Sargent points out in this perspicacious piece in the Washington Post, the most successful moments of the Obama administration’ dealing with this outlaw GOP congress have been, as Dan Pfeiffer admitted in that exit interview, when they accepted that the only way to deal was to simply say no:

     

    “The whole point of Obama’s repeated refusals during his second term to negotiate on the debt limit was to break the Republican addiction to using leverage in fiscal standoffs to extract concessions from Democrats. The idea was that, even if these standoffs continued to be treated falsely as conventional negotiations, they had in fact strayed on to unconventional, dangerous grounds. The ground rules needed to be reset, so that these standoffs no longer threatened to unleash extreme damage (say, if we defaulted), if something were to go wrong and a deal were to fall through. And it worked. In this sense, it was the refusal to negotiate with Republicans that in the end produced more functional government.”

    We are not dealing with normal political opponents. This has been clear to many observers for  two decades ago, since GOP House Oversight Committee chairman Dan Burton was blowing up watermelons in his backyard to prove that Bill and Hillary Clinton must have killed their friend and colleague Vince Foster. But some people still haven’t grokked that the Republican Party has gone completely over the cliff. Jim Webb and Joe Biden are apparently among them.

    Nobody really knows what is going to break the fever. We are in unmapped political territory. But if the definition of insanity is continuously doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, then the country would be certifiably nuts to be seduced again into believing that the problem will be solved by a Democratic president reaching out the hand of friendship to Republicans in hopes of finding a reasonable compromise.  Certainly, until the Republicans sober up and figure out how to tame the right wing monster in their own midst, Democrats will have to give up any illusions about the president and the speaker knocking back bourbons on the Truman balcony after working hours and concentrate on how to keep these obstructionist Republicans from destroying the country while working around them to bring the country forward. The presidency today is a very tough job that requires creative thinking about how to govern with an insurrectionist opposition. The old bromides about bipartisanship are no longer convincing.

    Times have changed. Sanders and Clinton both get this. Perhaps it’s because they have not ever been welcomed into the old boys club as Webb and Biden were. In today’s political environment that experience may be exactly what’s called for.

    We shouldn't pine for a one-sided bipartisanship. Unlike what Michael Bennet wants us to believe, both sides are not alike in their attitudes towards government and reasonable solutions to current problems. Like FDR, we should welcome their hatred, and move towards solutions that make sense and that are provably effective, no matter if we get one, or 2 or more, stinking votes of those crazy Republicans.

    1. This time, I'm with you, Zap. But you could shorten that to "You don't negotiate with terrorists." That may sound extreme, but the stated intent of the "Freedom Caucus" is to destroy the Federal government as we know it. That is either terrorism or insurrection. Either way, you can't reason with them, so you fight them with everything you've got.  

  5. This is a bombshell landing on the last Benghazi witch hunters.  It comes a day before her testimony and everyone in the room is going to assume that she is going to be the nominee.  It is like a presidential debate with her on center stage the whole time.  You can bet she has reviewed her notes on these proceedings.  Hard to see her wilting after the Republican gaffes, Sanders help in the debate over her emails and now Biden making it official that he won't run.  Between Sanders and Biden, the Dems are showing remarkable solidarity.  That could be the key difference in the end.  Supreme Court nominees hang in the balance.

  6. Probably looking at me but I'm not exactly a Hillary hater. Just not a fan. But I've been resigned for quite some time that she's going to be our candidate because it's been pretty much too late to change that for years now already.

    I did make note of one thing in the recent burst of candidate like statements from Biden. It may not have been wise for HRC to name Republicans as among the enemies she's most proud of. As much as I wish Obama had realized they were indeed his and all Dems' implacable enemies and proceeded accordingly, saying that could have been viewed negatively by a public looking for a way to get government working better (even though it's true that Republicans are the enemy of any such thing happening) while running. Lots of people really don't like that sort of thing.

    However in HRC's case the Republicans have made it so abundantly clear that they view her as enemy number one and she said it in a light kind of joking manner and the polls certainly don't show it did her any harm. It could in the future general in ads using the whole she's a divider not a uniter thing but Dems loved it and the primary comes first.

    I think Biden's team may have thought that if the enemy statement was received poorly and caused HRC trouble in the polls or among the chattering classes it would give them a good pushing off point and that's probably why Biden made a point of saying he did not consider Republicans the enemy, that he wants to get things done. But there was no negative reaction, she gained in polls so that was that.

    I just hope that everyone excited about getting the first woman president doesn't wind up deeply disapponted. All I want is a Democratic president and I'd feel better if we had a candidate who wasn't so disliked by so many. I wish we found ourselves at this juncture with something a little less risky feeling than a choice between high negative HRC and an old socialist Jew. That would also describe my late grandpa BTW. So HRC it is. Good luck to us with that.

    1. There cannot be a more honest statement made in politics today than that the Republicans are Hillary Clinton's enemies.

      Anyone asked about Republicans as enemies can certainly make some hay. It's easy to expound on the topic. Express regret at the changes in the party that have made it the way that it is. Note that the GOP can't even be nice with its own members. That they can't compromise enough with themselves to even choose a House Speaker. That Republicans and their allies have spent decades demonizing Democrats, Liberals, and anyone who doesn't agree with the Republican view of life and politics.

      I think most of us would prefer a functional system of respect and compromise. If Republicans are leading, I would like them to hear Democrats as the voice of compassion and vision, to temper their desire for smaller government and business-friendly policies. And if Democrats are in chard, I'd like for them to be able to listen to Republicans as a voice of practicality and restraint. (Choose other roles for each party as you see fit – but the two parties can and have balanced each other somewhat more effectively in the past…)

      1. Here is a really good summary of the pickle the GOP has gotten themselves into (and I think they are describing our own Buckhead as well):

        Some republican House members are at the point where they're grumbling about quitting congress if Paul Ryan is not elected speaker. This is one of a number of results that can be directly linked to the GOP's RedMap (gerrymandering) Project; a virtual firewall.

          The republican party, in their effort to eliminate any possibility that a Dem candidate could take a republican held seat, gerrymandered this virtual firewall in conjunction with campaigns built on fear-mongering attack ads (and not a little racism) ended up electing a group of unfit fringe congresspersons protected from normal electoral challenges of a more moderate republican that very likely could have corrected this warping of the legislature.

        http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/21/1436421/-GOP-elite-freakout-fearing-Trump-may-win?detail=email

        1. That's it in a nutshell. They have not only gerrymandered and fear mongered away the prospect of having to face serious Dem challenges in the safe districts which now mean almost all districts. They've gerrymandered and fear mongered away the prospect of electing any more moderate Rs in these districts.

          And by more moderate we really no longer even mean more moderate. We pretty much just mean staunch conservative but understanding how legislating works via the democratic process.  We mean being interested in getting  as much of what they want as they can through that process, a lot when they hold majorities, while understanding that our three branch system, including a two chamber legislature, is going to make it impossible for one party or caucus within one party to get everything it wants all the time. 

          Simply recognizing that reality and the concurrent reality that some level of real compromise is almost always required and that extortion and threats of government shutdown are not a alternatives that serve the people or even their agenda well is enough to qualify as a "moderate" Republican in the 21st century, no matter how strictly conservative one's views on economic, social and all other issues may be.

          The idea that Paul Ryan isn't conservative enough or even that John Boehner or Mitch McConnell aren't conservative enough is ridiculous. They just aren't quite crazy enough.

    2. I hope you are rooting for Ms. Clinton to acquit herself well tomorrow BC.  It is a real chance for her to turn the spotlight on Chris Hitchens and his heroism in trying to build peace in a violent time.  Blessed are the Peace Makers for they shall be known as the sons and daughters of God.  I hope you root for her BC.  Please.

    3. There is no way that we won't be deeply disappointed if Hillary or Bernie gets elected, or if Biden had gotten in and won. We will not control the House, and without a Congress that is at least willing to work with the Executive Branch nothing will get done. We will get SCOTUS nominees if either Hillary or Bernie wins, which is a pretty bright spot, and we are locking up the Latino vote for a generation, and they are breaking Hillary's way a lot more than they are Bernie's.

      The thing that I loved about Hillary saying that Republicans are the enemy is that she is willing to take on the Republicans on issues that I care about. Bernie would be a thorn in their side, but he really wants to take on big (insert terrible industry here).Big banks or whoever are faceless monoliths that we can all hate, but until you are really going after the politicians that vote their policies into law, you aren't going to do damage to them.

      There is an ever dwindling number of House seats that are competitive, but if Hillary gets elected I see her as being the type of president to stump for a Morgan Carroll, and use her position to attack a Mike Coffman. I don't see Bernie doing that. I could see him attacking industry, and CEOs by name, but not republicans.  I don't know a House map well enough to know if there are enough seats where republicans might have a 55-45 edge that if Dems picked them up we could take back the House, but I want a President who will call out those representatives for being destructive, and working with candidates to get elected to increase Dem seats, not just saying whole industries are destructive. 

      1. The next real chance to change the House is in 2020 when it is a presidential election and Congressional redistricting.  Dems do better in presidential elections so it could swing some statehouses which could influence the redistricting process.

        1. While you're right about Dem turnout in presidential years… that's a trend that can be fixed and turned around. And must be if we want to accomplish anything before the end of the decade.

          1. My recommendation for generating better turnout is to make protecting the environment and dealing with climate change as big of issues for the left as eliminating women's health care is for the right.  Even the oil companies are forming associations to find better ways to deal with Methane gases.  The swing voters are already persuaded that it is a big deal.  Don't run away from the issue.  Get out front and make it a citizen taboo to vote for anyone who is a Climate Denier.  It's the winningest issue of the late 2010's.  Humanity is going to be screwed anyway but at least there is a small hope that a remnant will survive if we act now.

        2. But… Legislatures, governorships, and state supreme court justices are often elected to terms that begin well before the 2021 census. By the time the 2010 elections with their Republican wave came in, it was already almost too late for us in a number of states – we had let the ship sail in 2008 or 2006 at the state level.

          So – no leaning back and relying on presidential election outcome. Next year is the very beginning of the cycle where we need to start pushing hard to regain territory for 2020. 2018 will be vital, and 2020 as well.

        1. I didn’t explain that clearly. What I meant was US House districts that might have a republican advantage, but nothing that is so overwhelming that a real concerted effort couldn’t at least put the seat in play. Our 6th district would be a good example. I want to see a rerun of Dean’s 50 state strategy. I want to see Dem candidates in all races, and more importantly party support for those races, including the current, and hopefully future, presidents calling out the members of Congress who they will be taking on.

  7. Very disappointed in learning this.  In a Biden/Trump race I would have been likely to vote for Biden. In a Clinton/Trump race, I think I will just vote third party. 

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

195 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!