A strong Super Tuesday for Biden
March 6, 2024
As I await meaningful results from Super Tuesday voting, I want to return to a story that continues to vex Democrats: Biased coverage of Biden.
No news is good news (for the NYTimes)
This story has a happy ending, so stick with me.
The last week was a rough one for Democrats because the New York Times sponsored a poll that (allegedly) showed that Joe Biden was currently trailing Trump. The Times covered its own poll as front-page news for three days. After the Times conducted its poll, three other polls from reputable organizations were released that showed Biden leading (slightly in one poll) or tied (in two polls).
If the Times mentioned the three recent polls that contradicted the breathless coverage of its poll, I can’t find that story. What I can find is another front-page story about Joe Biden’s age. (NYTimes: Amid Age Concerns, the White House Tries a New Strategy: Let Joe Be Joe.) At the New York Times, “No news is good news”—because if there is good news about Biden, it’s not news at the Times.
The gratuitous dig at Biden’s age was published on Super Tuesday—and after a weekend during which Trump melted into incoherence while he promoted anti-immigrant hate and election denialism, called the country of Argentina “a great guy,” was defeated in his attempt to pronounce “Venezuela,” confused former President Obama and current President Biden, and asked the crowd to look at the back of his head because “I am like an artist.” (See Newsweek, Donald Trump's String of Gaffes Over Weekend Raises Eyebrows.)
If the above weren’t enough, Trump made a crude sexual gesture about Fani Willis. (The crowd cheered.) But not a peep from the Times. Just a story about the White House struggling to make people forget that Biden is 81.
The good news is that the obvious bias of the Times is becoming a story. Because readers like you have raised your voices, other media outlets are noticing and commenting on the Times’s obsession with Biden’s age and unwillingness to address Trump's obvious unfitness and threat to democracy. So, for example, CNN published a story entitled, The New York Times is facing backlash over its coverage of Donald Trump and the 2024 election.
Several readers recommended an excellent article by Elliot Kirschner on his Substack blog, Through the Fog, by Elliot Kirschner. Kirschner addresses the broader question of polls, but addresses the Times in particular:
In the wake of its poll, The Times has spent three days with dramatic headlines extrapolating the results into breathless news coverage. Because the poll showed Biden not doing well, the coverage had to match. For example, the reports include testimony from voters that support the poll’s findings. But in a country of more than 330 million, a reporter can always find an anecdote to fit a preconception.
Let’s be clear: A poll is a manufactured news event. And I would argue that means it shouldn’t be considered a news event at all. Journalistic organizations should not be in the business of creating news, especially in ways that they have the power to control.
The last line is particularly apt: News organizations should report the news, not create it. But the Times has not only created news, it has also exercised extraordinary editorial discretion to make its poll a HUGE story when, in truth, a snapshot of voter sentiment eight months before an election is a data point, not a three-days news event. Shades of “But Hillary’s emails.” The Times has learned nothing from its history of giving Trump an assist in winning the 2016 election by obsessing over a non-story.
The best commentary on this point is (again) by Lucian K. Truscott IV, There is something wrong at the New York Times. Happily, Lucian’s excellent Substack article also appears in Salon, There is something wrong at the New York Times | Salon.com
Lucian Truscott writes,
Two things…check that…three things appear to have gone off the rails at the paper we used to call the Gray Lady. First, whoever is in charge of the paper’s polls is not doing their job. Second, whoever is choosing what to emphasize in the Times coverage of the campaign for the presidency is showing bias. Third, the Times is obsessed with Joe Biden’s age at the same time they’re leaving evidence of Donald Trump’s mental and verbal stumbles completely out of the news.
Here's the point: When you have voices like CNN, Elliot Kirschner, and Lucian Truscott beating the drum about the bias at the Times, other media outlets will notice and pursue the story. That’s good because it may change the unfair coverage of Biden.
But here’s the real point: This story has legs because of you. You raised your voices, wrote to the Times, posted on social media, and republished and shared this newsletter (and others like Lucian Truscott’s and Simon Rosenberg’s). Keep it up! You are making a difference!
Trump's Super Tuesday victory speech vs. Biden’s State of the Union.
I watched Trump's “victory” speech on Super Tuesday. It was a low-energy, rambling speech that barely mentioned his victories on Super Tuesday. The link is here: PBS, Trump offers little celebration in Super Tuesday victory speech at Mar-a-Lago. Trump appeared to be sedated. As the speech droned on, Trump was rambling, confused, and detached from reality.
Trump repeated an internet rumor that Biden “flew in 325,000 immigrants” into our country (a grotesque misrepresentation of how the CPB processes asylum applicants fleeing their home country). He descended into incomprehensible comments about Venezuelan oil being “tar” that is refined in the US and “goes up into the air” (complete with whirly-gig hand gestures). He repeated a dozen easily disprovable lies. Even though Melania was noticeably absent, he thanked his ”family” for being present.
We have not seen Joe Biden’s State of the Union address, but when we do, the appropriate comparison will be Trump's train wreck of a speech two days before Biden’s address to Congress.
In the interest of fairness and completeness, MAGA commentators are rhapsodic about Trump’s speech because “He spoke in complete sentences” (not true) and “He did not attack Nikki Haley.” That is a low bar, indeed, and a reflection of how unhinged Trump's recent speeches have been.
A few early observations about Super Tuesday.
Biden turned in a strong performance.
President Biden had a strong night on Super Tuesday, a fact that is being under-reported by the media. As Al Sher commented, President Biden is (generally) running stronger than President Obama did on Super Tuesday in 2012 (when Obama was also running as an incumbent president). Here are the preliminary results for Biden compared to Obama’s 2012 primary performance:
AL
Biden 90%
Obama 84%
AR
Biden 90%
Obama 58%
MA
Biden 82%
Obama 81%
NC
Biden 88%
Obama 79%
OK
Biden 73%
Obama 57%
TN
Biden 93%
Obama 89%
TX
Obama 88%
Biden 86%
VT
Obama 98%
Biden 89%
MN
Obama 96%
Biden 70%
More importantly, President Biden not only outperformed President Obama’s 2012 performance, but Biden consistently outperformed Donald Trump's performance.
Biden outperformed Trump’s margins of victory.
President Biden’s winning margins were all greater than 70% (save one) and most were greater than 80%. Donald Trump, on the other hand, achieved a 70% winning margin in only a single state, and had winning margins in the 30 to 40% range. See Super Tuesday Results: Key Races to Watch
A substantial portion of Nikki Haley voters will not vote for Trump.
Based on exit polling by NBC, a substantial portion of voters who supported Nikki Haley will not guarantee they will vote for Trump in 2024.
· North Carolina: 35%
· Virginia: 36%
· California: 33%
Trump underperformed against the FiveThirtyEight final averages.
Although complete data is not available, it appears that Trump will again underperform his FiveThirtyEight predicted margin of victory.
Virginia
FiveThirtyEight final average: Trump +49
Preliminary results: Trump +29
Underperformance: -20
Tennessee
FiveThirtyEight final average: Trump +69
Preliminary: Trump +59
Underperformance: -10
Massachusetts
FiveThirtyEight final average: Trump +37
Preliminary: Trump +23
Underperformance: -14
Many states did not have enough polls to qualify for a FiveThirtyEight average, but in Vermont, the most recent poll had Trump winning by 30%. In fact, Haley won by 4%, an underperformance by Trump of -34.
Trump overperformed in one state—North Carolina—by +5.
“Candidate quality”
Mitch McConnell famously said that the Republican Party suffered from a “candidate quality” problem in the 2022 Senate campaign. The candidate quality problem is repeating itself with the GOP nominee for governor in North Carolina. Republicans selected North Carolina Lieutenant Gov. Mark Robinson to run for the open seat for governor.
Robinson has a history of attacking Jews, gays, and Black citizens. See Talking Points Memo, North Carolina’s Lt. Governor Is A Facebook Brawler Whose Posts Railed Against Gays, Blacks, And Jews.
Read the details in the Talking Points Memo article. Robinson’s statements are shocking. He will be running against Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein, who has a record of success in fighting the opioid epidemic and curtailing price gouging of consumers who purchase tickets online.
Speaking of candidate quality, Texas Senator Ted Cruz is a miserable person hated by most of his colleagues in the Senate. Democratic Representative Colin Allred won the Democratic nomination for US Senator and will be running against Ted Cruz. Recall that Cruz beat Beto O’Rourke by only 2.5 percentage points. Colin Allred is a candidate to support. More later.
Opportunities for reader engagement.
Blue Tennessee launch!
Please join our Blue Tennessee Launch Event on Wednesday, March 13, 2024, at 4:30pm PDT/7:30pm EDT. Blue Tennessee joins Blue Ohio, Blue Missouri, and Blue Texas as the newest Every State Blue project. Our guests will be Trae Crowder, native Tennessean and popular comedian; Jess Piper, Executive Director of Blue Missouri; Aftyn Behn, state representative for TNHD51; Kate Craig, Founder and President of Harvesting Democracy (recruiting, training, and supporting rural candidates in Tennessee); and Allie Phillips, candidate for TNHD75 and abortion rights activist.
Like its sister projects, Blue Tennessee will crowdsource grassroots donations and distribute 100% of the money to Democratic state house and senate nominees in Tennessee, starting with those who need it most. Funding Democratic nominees increases voter turnout, activates local Democrats, and makes incumbents defend their voting records and self-dealing. We will be celebrating our successful launch and inviting others to join us as sustaining donors of Blue Tennessee. There is no cost to attend.
Register here: Meeting Registration - Zoom
Sign up for Grassroots Connector on Substack
With democracy at stake, the online Grassroots Directory has been launched by the Grassroots Collaboration Project (GCP). Completing a Questionnaire to List Your Organization that takes only minutes provides these benefits:
The opportunity to help make a public display of grassroots muscle.
Fo groups engaged in voter outreach in a battleground state in which the presidency and the balance of power in the U.S. Senate and House will be decided, opportunities to learn more about what other pro-democracy grassroots groups are doing in the same state.
For groups just wanting to locate other groups new to them, an easy ”yellow pages.”
By listing your group in the Directory, you are sending this message: We are here, we are strong and we will prevail up and down the ballot in November! PLEASE SUBMIT ONLY ONE QUESTIONNAIRE PER GROUP
Questions? Contact Julie Greenberg (a long-time member/leader of 31st St. Swing Left) at julie.collaborationproject@gmail.com
Concluding Thoughts.
After the polls closed on Super Tuesday, President Biden issued a short statement emphasizing the stakes of the upcoming election. I will adopt his words as my concluding thoughts this evening:
“Tonight’s results leave the American people with a clear choice: Are we going to keep moving forward or will we allow Donald Trump to drag us backwards into the chaos, division, and darkness that defined his term in office? . . .
“Today, millions of voters across the country made their voices heard — showing that they are ready to fight back against Donald Trump’s extreme plan to take us backward.
“My message to the country is this: Every generation of Americans will face a moment when it has to defend democracy. Stand up for our personal freedom. Stand up for the right to vote and our civil rights. To every Democrat, Republican, and independent who believes in a free and fair America: This is our moment. This is our fight. Together, we will win.”
Talk to you tomorrow!
Before it gets too late, and this is on subject, I sent this to <editorial@nytimes.com> when I sent them the intro to Lucien Truscott's piece earlier today. You all might understand :
to: editorial@nytimes.com
Dear Experts,
As a long time paying subscriber, I demand a truthful and unbiased publication of issues that impact our nation, from "The Newspaper of Record".
Your current publication of "news" is a disgrace. The evidence of such is well presented by our esteemed Lucien Trusctt IV in the attached excerpt below. It must be required reading by ALL on your editorial staff. With so many of your subscribers bailing on you, you might reconsider your overt bias.
Yours,
Ransom W. Rideout Jr.
Hopefully the NYT and other news media will reconsider and reduce (or remove entirely!) their obvious bias in their coverage of President Biden, based on what might be the best part of your newsletter tonight:
"Here's the point: When you have voices like CNN, Elliot Kirschner, and Lucian Truscott beating the drum about the bias at the Times, other media outlets will notice and pursue the story. That’s good because it may change the unfair coverage of Biden.
But here’s the real point: This story has legs because of you. You raised your voices, wrote to the Times, posted on social media, and republished and shared this newsletter (and others like Lucian Truscott’s and Simon Rosenberg’s). Keep it up! You are making a difference!"