The democratic taboo

The Democratic Party has had no shortage of arguments and dissent over the years. Internal strife and backbiting are part of what it means to be a modern Democrat.

But in recent months, Democrats have been noticeably reluctant to publicly raise concerns about President Biden — particularly whether he is too old at 81 to run for president again, but also criticism of the next months. strategic decisions of his campaign.

This has played out on platforms large and small, most recently after Jon Stewart, upon returning to his former Comedy Central show after a nine-year hiatus, mocked the “objectively old” President Biden. “Please make it nine more years,” says former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann said on X.

Prominent Democratic strategists like David Axelrod and James Carville who criticize Biden are facing a barrage of backlash on social media and from the White House — and sometimes, reportedly, from Biden himself. They are accused of boosting Donald Trump’s prospects and being disloyal alarmists (or, in a phrase from the 2008 campaign that has come back into vogue this year, bedwetters).

There are also critics of Trump on the Republican side, but they have been relegated to the sidelines and ignored rather than seriously engaged. This reflects the party’s commitment to Trump and the increasing belief among his supporters that he will win.

What’s happening among Democrats should come as no surprise. The political climate has changed dramatically. Politics is more of a team sport: you are with me or against me. Olbermann labeled Stewart a “bothsidesist fraudster.” Mary Trump, the former president’s niece and one of his biggest critics, mentioned Stewart “A potential disaster for democracy.” And platforms like

But it is also about the special dynamics of these elections. Biden is almost certainly his party’s nominee, despite Democrats’ concerns. But he is viewed unfavorably by a large part of the electorate and is competing against Trump in swing states such as Michigan. “Democrats have a better option than Biden,” my colleague Ezra Klein said in Times Opionion in a 4,000-word audio essay devoted to why Biden should step aside. (“No. Ezra Klein is dead wrong. Here’s why,” read Talking Points Memo’s answer.)

Biden supporters argue that Democrats should not do anything that could be seen as contributing to a second Trump term. That includes asking questions about any shortcomings by Biden or the decisions of the Biden campaign command. Memories of 2016, when some Democrats piled on Hillary Clinton in the weeks leading up to her loss, remain raw.

“Privately, there are enormous doubts that Biden will return to power,” said Douglas Sosnik, a senior White House adviser to Bill Clinton. “But there are, at least for some people, some concerns about publicly voicing concerns about Biden.”

Axelrod, Barack Obama’s chief strategist, has been sidelined by the White House and X for questioning the way the campaign was conducted, especially how it addressed Biden’s age.

“There’s a sense that this is a hugely consequential election and that Biden is the man and everyone should march behind him unconditionally and not talk about the things they see,” Axelrod said. “I don’t think this helps him.”

“Everyone knows the score,” he said. “This is not a challenge you can wish away. I’d rather tell the truth and take my chances.”

Carville, a lead strategist for Bill Clinton when he was elected to the White House in 1992, has also come under fire for his criticism of Biden’s reelection team.

“Look, if I was in the White House, I wouldn’t like myself right now either,” he said. “But that’s just part of the territory.”

And for what it’s worth, it doesn’t seem likely that the backlash against critics like Stewart, Axelrod and Carville will keep them quiet. Stewart used his second television appearance to take aim at his critics. “I have sinned against you, I am sorry.” said Stewart. “I never intended to say out loud what I saw with my eyes and then with my brain.”

Carville said it was important for Democrats to recognize the reality of Biden’s age as he seeks reelection.

“I didn’t say anything wrong,” Carville said. “I think some people think if you don’t mention it, it will sort itself out. I don’t think that’s feasible.”

Trump’s primary results don’t match expectations

It’s still early in the primary season, but there’s already a whiff of a possible election error in the air: Donald Trump has underperformed in the polls in each of the first three competitive contests.

• In Iowa, the last FiveThirtyEight poll average showed Trump leading Nikki Haley by 34 points with a 53 percent share. He ultimately defeated her by 32 points and 51 percent. (Ron DeSantis came in second.)

• In New Hampshire, he led by 18 points with 54 percent. In the end he won by 11 points with 54 percent.

• In South Carolina, Trump led by 28 points and 62 percent. He eventually won by 20 points with 60 percent.

In the scheme of the primaries, these are not particularly big misses. In fact, they are more accurate than average.

But with Trump doing well in early general election polls against President Biden, even a modest underperformance by Trump in the polls is worth some attention.

So what’s going on? We can’t say anything definitive based on the data we have, but three theories are worth considering.

Theory No. 1: Undecided voters

A simple explanation is that undecided voters ultimately supported Haley, the former governor of South Carolina.

This is plausible. Trump is a well-known candidate – even effectively an incumbent for his party. If you’re a Republican who doesn’t know whether you support Trump right now, you’re probably just not particularly inclined toward the former president. It’s easy to see how you might ultimately support his challenger.

Theory No. 2: The Electorate

Another possibility is that the polls simply misrepresented the composition of the electorate. According to this theory, pollsters did a good job of measuring the people they wanted to measure, but they measured the wrong electorate. In particular, they did not include enough Democratic-leaning voters who turned out to support Haley.

For many pollsters, the problem has been there from the start: They don’t even interview previous Democratic primaries.

The decision to survey past Republican primaries is understandable – it makes the poll much cheaper and focuses on respondents most likely to vote – but it will obviously miss any previous Democratic voters who had not voted in a Republican primary and are now there choose to do that. So.

Theory No. 3: A hidden Biden vote

If you’re a Democrat and you’re hoping the polls underestimate Biden in the general election, your best-case scenario is that the polls are wrong because there’s a hidden Biden vote, or at least a hidden anti-Trump vote.

In this theory, the polls did well at modeling the electorate as undecided voters split between the candidates, but anti-Trump voters were simply not as likely to take surveys as pro-Trump voters. If this theory were true, general election polls might underestimate Biden as much as they underestimated Haley.

There’s one reason the anti-Trump turnout could be relevant to the general election: It lines up with other data showing Biden has the edge among the most engaged voters. This could provide a small turnout advantage even in a general election. It could also mean that current polls of all registered voters slightly underestimate Biden compared to the smaller group of actual voters.

This wouldn’t mean that today’s polls vastly underestimate Biden, but it could make the difference in a close election.

—Nate Cohn

Read Nate’s full newsletter, available to Times subscribers, here.