Politico’s Proposed Reelection Strategy for Joe Biden Is Absolutely Bonkers

Joe Biden’s reelection chances are dimming, and about the worst thing he could do is cozy up to Rahm Emanuel, the Clintons, and Liz Cheney. Yet that’s the kind of advice he gets in a bizarre new column from one of Politico’s senior writers.

APEC Economic Leaders Hold Meetings In San Francisco

President Joe Biden arrives at San Francisco International Airport ahead of the APEC summit on November 14, 2023 in San Francisco, California. (Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)


If Joe Biden is indeed the Democratic nominee for president next year, there is a more than negligible chance that Donald Trump will reenter the White House. Even before his decision to bear-hug Benjamin Netanyahu and his recent eleven-point approval rating drop, Biden’s weaknesses were manifold. Trump now leads in key battleground states like Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and the 2020 electoral coalition that narrowly ensured Trump’s defeat appears to be coming apart thanks to huge dips in support from black Americans, Arab Americans, and those under thirty.

For what it’s worth, after months of denialism from pundits and Democratic operatives alike, there now seems to be a growing consensus that Biden could actually lose. This is perhaps the most generous thing that can be said about the latest intervention from Politico’s Jonathan Martin (titled “Here’s How Biden Can Turn It Around”), which offers up a veritable buffet of strategic suggestions about how Biden can win: whatever else, Martin doesn’t try to wave away the terrible polling or bury his head in the sand when it comes to a possible Trump victory. Taking as axiomatic that Biden will be the Democratic nominee for president (the most likely possibility at this point), he even has a few ideas that aren’t terrible and might help a hypothetical Biden candidacy.

The lion’s share of Martin’s piece, however, is no more or less than a bizarre smorgasbord of different ideas and strategies — many of them apparently crowdsourced from interviews with “dozens of Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans” — that often contradict each other and do not add up to anything resembling a coherent whole. The result is something like the pundit equivalent of fantasy football: a peculiar exercise in political wish-casting assembled from disparate fragments that cannot actually exist together in the real world.

This article is for subscribers only. Please login or subscribe to access our full archives and beautiful print and digital magazine starting at just $3 a month.