Is it undemocratic to replace Biden on the ticket?

Christia Lagar

President Joe Biden’s insistence on staying in the 2024 presidential race has sparked a significant debate about the essence of democracy within the Democratic Party. In a letter to House Democrats, Biden emphasized his commitment to the race, arguing that primary voters had chosen him and that overturning their decision would be undemocratic. He framed his stance as a defense of democracy, both within the party and the nation.

“The voters of the Democratic Party have voted. They have chosen me to be the nominee of the party. Do we now just say this process didn’t matter? That the voters don’t have a say?” Biden wrote. He stressed the importance of respecting the primary voters’ decision and positioned his candidacy as crucial to upholding democratic principles.

However, this argument has its flaws. Biden faced no serious opposition in a low-turnout primary season, as Democrats worked to deter credible alternatives from running. Without debates, primary voters lacked crucial information about his performance. Yet, Biden’s assertion isn’t entirely baseless. The push to replace him is largely elite-driven, with strong support in the media but mixed feelings among rank-and-file Democratic voters. Any late-stage process to choose a new nominee would likely lack widespread popular participation, and any credible challenger would have faced an uphill battle against an incumbent president.

But should the votes of the 15 million people who participated in the Democratic primaries be the ultimate determinant of democracy? Perhaps the party deliberating and choosing a different option is also a form of democracy. And what about the 150 million people who may vote in the general election, many of whom express concerns about Biden’s age and prefer a different Democratic nominee? Should their views matter?

Biden’s Preemptive Victory

Biden’s primary victory was secured long before voting began. Despite low approval ratings and speculation about his candidacy, he consistently signaled his intention to run, officially announcing his candidacy in April 2023. Once he declared, Democratic officials rallied behind him, deterring ambitious governors and senators from challenging him. The only notable challenger, Rep. Dean Phillips (D-MN), lacked substantial support, while others like Marianne Williamson and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. were not serious contenders.

Polling indicated Democratic voters were not thrilled with their options. In September, a CNN poll found that 67 percent of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents wanted someone other than Biden. Yet, no specific potential candidate polled near Biden’s numbers. Even if someone like Gov. Gretchen Whitmer or Gov. Gavin Newsom had run, they would likely have struggled to unseat an incumbent president.

Biden effectively won the primary by mastering the “inside game,” preventing disgruntled Democrats from having a realistic alternative. Thus, his claim that the process represented a sacrosanct verdict of the people rings somewhat hollow, though he likely would have won even with a formidable challenger.

The Role of Primary Voters and the General Public

Questions linger about whether the primary results still reflect the “will of Democratic voters.” Polls have shown varying results, with some indicating a majority wanting Biden to stay in the race and others showing a preference for a new nominee. The true will of Democratic primary voters remains unclear.

Another critical question is whether the “will of Democratic primary voters” should outweigh all other concerns in determining Biden’s candidacy. The modern primary process, designed to give voters more say, has come under criticism for prioritizing low-turnout primaries over broader public appeal. Critics argue that party deliberations are a form of democracy, allowing parties to respond to circumstances and present their best candidates. They contend that Democrats would be justified in replacing Biden.

Other critics argue that the primary process often favors extremists and ideologues, failing to produce candidates who appeal to the broader electorate. They believe the system should be more responsive to the general public, noting that a majority of voters have expressed concerns about Biden’s age. The primary process failed to present a viable alternative, leaving the country with a choice between Biden and Trump.

Replacing Biden at this stage would be driven by party elites and lack the mass participation of primaries. However, the 2024 primaries were not a shining example of democracy either. A process to replace Biden could potentially produce a more popular nominee, aligned with the preferences of a larger portion of voters.

In conclusion, the debate over replacing Biden on the ticket raises fundamental questions about democracy within the Democratic Party. While primary voters chose Biden, broader democratic principles suggest that the party and general public’s preferences should also be considered. As the election approaches, the Democratic Party faces a crucial decision that will shape its future and its commitment to democratic values.