A new set of surveys conducted by The New York Times, Siena College and The Philadelphia Inquirer has found that President Joe Biden is trailing former President Donald Trump among registered voters in five battleground states: Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada. With about six months until Election Day, there is still plenty of time for those numbers to change. But given that Trump is consistently leading Biden in national polls — even as he endures an unprecedented criminal trial — the surveys are worth taking seriously and digging into for clues as to the sources of Biden’s vulnerability.
One of the most striking findings is that Trump’s brand as a radical change agent appears to be an asset for him. Nearly 70% of voters surveyed said the U.S.’ political and economic systems required major changes or needed to be torn down entirely. Voters perceive Trump as the kind of person to deliver those kinds of changes by a large margin — 70% think he would deliver major changes or tear down the system, whereas only 24% perceive Biden as inclined to do the same. Notably, “tear it down” voters can’t be dismissed as a trivial fringe. They represent about 15% of registered voters, and Trump leads Biden among them by 32 points.
Biden’s campaign messaging lacks the kind of ambitious big-swing policy positions that can help generate buzz.
Now, to be clear, being perceived as an activist candidate seeking sweeping change isn’t inherently good. Sizable chunks of people think that any change either candidate would bring would be somewhat bad or very bad. But 43% of voters — a plurality — believe Trump would bring about change that’s somewhat good or very good. Meanwhile, a much narrower band of voters — 24% — described Biden as someone who would bring about change that was somewhat or very good, and a plurality (32%) said nothing would change if he were to be elected to a second term.
“The sense that Mr. Biden would do little to improve the nation’s fortunes has helped erode his standing among young, Black and Hispanic voters, who usually represent the foundation of any Democratic path to the presidency,” wrote the Times in its write-up of the results. There is an intuitive component to that trend — it makes sense that low-resource groups are more likely to express a thirst for more robust social change.
The poll results underscore the urgency of a point that a number of left-leaning commentators — me included — have tried to sound the alarms about for months: Biden’s campaign messaging lacks the kind of ambitious big-swing policy positions that can help dramatically improve American life, generate buzz, pique the curiosity of less engaged voters and help mobilize voters who have grown disillusioned with him over his tenure. Instead, Biden has relied primarily on a defensive messaging strategy and pledged to defend the republic from the threat of Trump. While that is in and of itself a worthwhile reason to vote for Biden, it’s a strategy that banks on people showing up to the polls for negative reasons — to avoid the return of Trump — rather than casting ballots out of a desire to see positive change. That strategy might have worked in 2020, when Trump was a vulnerable incumbent, but it’s a risky strategy to deploy in 2024.
A big reason is that 2024 looks more like 2016 than 2020. Biden’s favorability has plunged, making the race akin to Hillary Clinton vs. Trump, both of whom were the most unpopular candidates in modern political history. And while in the last presidential election Biden could pit himself against an unpopular incumbent during a public health crisis, this time he’s the one on the receiving end of relentless critical public scrutiny, and the threat posed by Trump isn’t top of mind for less engaged voters or voters disappointed by Biden’s tenure. What better way to counteract the short memory of the American voter than to adopt something big and simple and buzzy that promises a change to the social contract? How about something like “Medicare for All” (or at least a public option) or a new version of the Green New Deal? How about a decisive move toward commonsense and ethical foreign policy and ending the destruction of Gaza?
One caveat: Among those voters defecting from Biden who want at least major changes, more identify as moderate or conservative than very liberal. But the very fact that they’re second-term Biden defectors at a time when the choices between the parties have long been clear suggests they’re ideologically flexible or idiosyncratic voters who may just be responsive to ambitious policy signals regardless of where they register on the political spectrum.
This isn’t just about the 2024 election; it’s an existential matter for the Democrats. How can the Democratic Party expect to succeed in the long term and deliver on its promises of reform if the conservative party is perceived as a change agent and it, the liberal party, is seen as the defender of the status quo? And how long can a party bank on a strategy of “less bad than the other guy” and still call itself an attractive political party? As the Democrats face the prospect of potentially losing another election to a corrupt and incompetent demagogue, they’d be wise to use this moment not only as an opportunity to appeal to voters in 2024 but also as a moment for some long-overdue self-reflection.
Zeeshan Aleem is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He primarily writes about politics and foreign policy.