Did the primaries cause permanent and irreversible damage on Biden’s image

[MR DARK BRANDON]

?

Something I’ve been thinking about recently, a lot of the attacks biden receives today such as “dementia joe” stem back to the way he ran his primary campaign, and it seems now that no matter what he does or says now, Biden can’t seem to shake that image of himself off. Is a lot of the attacks biden receives now thanks to his primary campaign.

[All Along The Watchtower]

I think there's a case to be made for the primaries causing immense damage to the Democratic Party's image.

[Mr. Smith]

Quite the opposite.

He got elevated to be this really down-to-earth, common sense grandpa staying "above it".

I'd argue Sanders and Beto suffered the most.

[MR DARK BRANDON]

Quite the opposite.

He got elevated to be this really down-to-earth, common sense grandpa staying "above it".

I'd argue Sanders and Beto suffered the most.

I mean it can be argued that had Biden run his primary campaign the way he ran his GE campaign the term “dementia Joe” would never exist

[Pres Mike]

I think the primaries helped Biden win in the general.

1. It became impossible to paint Biden as a leftist or even just a tool of the left. Biden made serious gains with suburbs and moderates.

2. A lot of Democrats did not turn out in 2016 because they felt the 2016 primaries were rigged from the start. For someone who doesn't understand the process, it was weird that Hillary had a huge lead in delegates before a single vote was casted.

Biden may have led the polls. But he was never the first choice of the media or donors. So it didn't look like the elites/insiders had it rigged. Plus he had other establishment folks like Harris or Bloomberg fighting him.

Coronations hurt. The coronation hurt Hillary. Biden did not get a coronation. Hence no one accussed him of rigging the game.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Absolutely not. If anything, the primaries lit a fire under Biden right before South Carolina & Super Tuesday.

Folks need to stop being so afraid of competitive primaries. I'd rather a candidate become battle-tested and deal with their negative qualities early rather than a coronated candidate confronting them all at once when most of the electorate is starting to pay attention.

All the attacks would've likely come up eventually, certainly come debate-time. At least by then, Biden's team was prepared on how to deal with the negativity.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

I think the primaries helped Biden win in the general.

1. It became impossible to paint Biden as a leftist or even just a tool of the left. Biden made serious gains with suburbs and moderates.

2. A lot of Democrats did not turn out in 2016 because they felt the 2016 primaries were rigged from the start. For someone who doesn't understand the process, it was weird that Hillary had a huge lead in delegates before a single vote was casted.

Biden may have led the polls. But he was never the first choice of the media or donors. So it didn't look like the elites/insiders had it rigged. Plus he had other establishment folks like Harris or Bloomberg fighting him.

Coronations hurt. The coronation hurt Hillary. Biden did not get a coronation. Hence no one accussed him of rigging the game.

I think this is true but so is what Liam said. The primaries helped him win the general but also permanently damaged his image.

[LabourJersey]

Absolutely not. If anything, the primaries lit a fire under Biden right before South Carolina & Super Tuesday.

Folks need to stop being so afraid of competitive primaries. I'd rather a candidate become battle-tested and deal with their negative qualities early rather than a coronated candidate confronting them all at once when most of the electorate is starting to pay attention.

All the attacks would've likely come up eventually, certainly come debate-time. At least by then, Biden's team was prepared on how to deal with the negativity.

Competitive primaries are fine in theory, but the way presidential primaries are structured now (incredibly long, absurd number of candidates, an extensive media apparatus ready to throw mud at all times) makes things difficult for candidates. Especially candidates who don't have monolithic bases of support.

[MABA 2020]

Don't see how the primaries damaged him in any real way, the republicans would've given Biden a silly little nickname if it had been a coronation too.

[BG-NY]

Quite the opposite.

He got elevated to be this really down-to-earth, common sense grandpa staying "above it".

I'd argue Sanders and Beto suffered the most.

I mean it can be argued that had Biden run his primary campaign the way he ran his GE campaign the term “dementia Joe” would never exist

If Biden asked China to unleash Covid a year earlier and he was able to hide during the primary campaign as he did in the general, then sure.

[Mr. Smith]

Quite the opposite.

He got elevated to be this really down-to-earth, common sense grandpa staying "above it".

I'd argue Sanders and Beto suffered the most.

I mean it can be argued that had Biden run his primary campaign the way he ran his GE campaign the term “dementia Joe” would never exist

He barely ran anything on both counts.

[Senator Incitatus]

No; his flaws have been pretty much baked in since 2008. If the primaries dinged anyone, it's Harris.

[darklordoftech]

If anything the primaries helped his image because he stayed above all the fighting between the other candidates.

[Ferguson97]

The only people calling him Dementia Joe are leftists and right-wingers, it just offended everyone who didn't already dislike him.

[darklordoftech]

I'd argue Sanders and Beto suffered the most.

What about Warren and Bloomberg?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Absolutely not. If anything, the primaries lit a fire under Biden right before South Carolina & Super Tuesday.

Folks need to stop being so afraid of competitive primaries. I'd rather a candidate become battle-tested and deal with their negative qualities early rather than a coronated candidate confronting them all at once when most of the electorate is starting to pay attention.

All the attacks would've likely come up eventually, certainly come debate-time. At least by then, Biden's team was prepared on how to deal with the negativity.

Heck thats why 1988 in many ways was different from 1960 and 2000. George HW Bush unlike Nixon and Gore despite being an incumbent Vice President did not have the field cleared for him so he actually had to fight for the nomination.

Early on HW did take things for granted and it resulted him losing IA to Dole and made NH a must win for him otherwise Dole would have been the nominee. That basically turned HW into a fighter for the result of the campaign which he brought to the general election and cruised to victory.

[Mr. Smith]

I'd argue Sanders and Beto suffered the most.

What about Warren and Bloomberg?

Bloomberg was always a joke alternative, even with his money...but I guess you could argue for Warren too.

[SInNYC]

Biden was always a very weak candidate as someone who ran multiple times and never achieved more than a blip, but I think the primaries only helped him.

The ones who were hurt were:
Beto: he was considered a young rising star, but now he probably couldnt win anything significant in TX after his gun remarks.
Harris: She was anointed the future leader of the party but showed absolutely no skills, either intellectually or politically.
Bloomberg: He was the centrist dream candidate with all the money in the world, but ended up an afterthought.

[Tekken_Guy]

Biden was always a very weak candidate as someone who ran multiple times and never achieved more than a blip, but I think the primaries only helped him.

The ones who were hurt were:
Beto: he was considered a young rising star, but now he probably couldnt win anything significant in TX after his gun remarks.
Harris: She was anointed the future leader of the party but showed absolutely no skills, either intellectually or politically.
Bloomberg: He was the centrist dream candidate with all the money in the world, but ended up an afterthought.

How did the gun remarks hurt Beto? The kind of people who would have been offended by them would have voted for Cruz in 2018.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Biden was always a very weak candidate as someone who ran multiple times and never achieved more than a blip, but I think the primaries only helped him.

The ones who were hurt were:
Beto: he was considered a young rising star, but now he probably couldnt win anything significant in TX after his gun remarks.
Harris: She was anointed the future leader of the party but showed absolutely no skills, either intellectually or politically.
Bloomberg: He was the centrist dream candidate with all the money in the world, but ended up an afterthought.

How did the gun remarks hurt Beto? The kind of people who would have been offended by them would have voted for Cruz in 2018.

That's not true. Gun control is very unpopular in Texas among moderate dems and independents. Beto won the majority of independents and a lot of moderate Republicans in 2018, many of which were anti-gun control and saw Beto as a moderate.

[ElectionsGuy]

No. People who could see his decline early on already had an opinion on him. It's the independent periphery voter who isn't fully engaged with politics that started believing he was not mentally fit for the job starting in mid-2021, coinciding with his approval decline.

[Mr. Smith]

Biden was always a very weak candidate as someone who ran multiple times and never achieved more than a blip, but I think the primaries only helped him.

The ones who were hurt were:
Beto: he was considered a young rising star, but now he probably couldnt win anything significant in TX after his gun remarks.
Harris: She was anointed the future leader of the party but showed absolutely no skills, either intellectually or politically.
Bloomberg: He was the centrist dream candidate with all the money in the world, but ended up an afterthought.

How did the gun remarks hurt Beto? The kind of people who would have been offended by them would have voted for Cruz in 2018.

That's not true. Gun control is very unpopular in Texas among moderate dems and independents. Beto won the majority of independents and a lot of moderate Republicans in 2018, many of which were anti-gun control and saw Beto as a moderate.

No one saw Beto as a moderate at all, nor did he act like one despite the previous and since record being exactly that.

What they did see was someone who didn't sound like an a-hole, while progressives saw someone with backbone. The combination was almost enough.

There's a reason "true to form" resonated so much.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

Biden was always a very weak candidate as someone who ran multiple times and never achieved more than a blip, but I think the primaries only helped him.

The ones who were hurt were:
Beto: he was considered a young rising star, but now he probably couldnt win anything significant in TX after his gun remarks.
Harris: She was anointed the future leader of the party but showed absolutely no skills, either intellectually or politically.
Bloomberg: He was the centrist dream candidate with all the money in the world, but ended up an afterthought.

How did the gun remarks hurt Beto? The kind of people who would have been offended by them would have voted for Cruz in 2018.

I think the gun remarks are really overblown on here. I'm not saying it didn't hurt him, but to blame his political future solely on that downplays all the other problems Beto faces and continues to face since his presidential campaign (Naked ambition, "I'm just born to be in it", seemingly viewing Texas as a stepping stone, spanish-speaking pandering, vague policy platitudes, etc.).

His biggest mistake was running for President to begin with. The gun comments are just an easy excuse.

[Pres Mike]

Biden was always a very weak candidate as someone who ran multiple times and never achieved more than a blip, but I think the primaries only helped him.

The ones who were hurt were:
Beto: he was considered a young rising star, but now he probably couldnt win anything significant in TX after his gun remarks.
Harris: She was anointed the future leader of the party but showed absolutely no skills, either intellectually or politically.
Bloomberg: He was the centrist dream candidate with all the money in the world, but ended up an afterthought.

How did the gun remarks hurt Beto? The kind of people who would have been offended by them would have voted for Cruz in 2018.

I think the gun remarks are really overblown on here. I'm not saying it didn't hurt him, but to blame his political future solely on that downplays all the other problems Beto faces and continues to face since his presidential campaign (Naked ambition, "I'm just born to be in it", seemingly viewing Texas as a stepping stone, spanish-speaking pandering, vague policy platitudes, etc.).

His biggest mistake was running for President to begin with. The gun comments are just an easy excuse.

I can see a world where Beto does better.

1. Joined the primaries earlier, at his peak popularity
2. Actually campaigned in the early states
3. Not do stupid things like his drive through the desert or live streaming his dentist cleaning
4. Take the middle road between moderates and progressives

A Biden/Beto ticket would have been very strong. Especially if Beto takes a progressive lane in the primaries.