Biden bows out of the presidential election: Experts evaluate precedence, consequences
President Joe Biden’s decision to end his reelection campaign and pass the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris has almost no precedent in American history. Virginia Tech political scientists Karen Hult, Caitlin Jewitt, and Nick Goedert have shared perspectives on this watershed development.
Nicholas Goedert on historic precedent and campaign effects
“Biden’s decision to drop out was a necessary decision for his party to remain competitive in the presidential election in November. He was only behind by a few points in the polls, so I’m skeptical we’ll see a huge immediate change in those polls substituting Kamala Harris’ name for Biden’s. However, the primary concern was with Biden's ability to make up those few points over the next three months through a vigorous campaign and focused message, and it’s possible a new ticket will help immensely with that going forward.
“It’s not clear how Biden’s decision will impact Senate and Congressional races, largely because almost every Democrat running in a swing state or close congressional district was already running several points ahead of Biden in the polls. If Harris starts to improve on Biden’s poll numbers, the likely result is that we'll see the presidential numbers converging with the congressional polls. Over the next few months, it can't hurt for Democrats to mount a more robust campaign at all levels of the ticket with a more unified and forward-looking message, less tied to Biden's past accomplishments and failures.
“There are a few presidents who have voluntarily or involuntarily only served a single term due to their health. James Polk was only 53 when he chose to retire after one term in 1849, but he died just three months after leaving office. Chester Arthur failed to be renominated in 1884, with his poor health being an important factor in this decision; he died a year and half after leaving the presidency.
“It’s unprecedented for a major party presidential candidate to step down after winning a majority of delegates through the primary process. The closest analogue is Lyndon Johnson's decision to drop out in late March 1968 after a narrow victory in the New Hampshire primary. Johnson was perceived as similarly unpopular to Biden, though he didn't present the same immediate health concerns. This election didn't turn out well for Democrats, but it looks like this year the party has quickly converged around a new candidate, in stark contrast to the chaos of the 1968 convention.”
Karen Hult on governing concerns and campaign issues
“The uncertainty and volatility of the 2024 contest for the U.S. presidency continue as the country continues to navigate close-to-unprecedented waters. Most immediately, the decision occurs against the backdrop of U.S. House Oversight Committee hearings on the evident missteps in security linked to the assassination attempt on former President Trump and multiplying demands for Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle to step down. In addition, there’s Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s arrival in Washington, with negotiations over a cease-fire and hostage release reportedly at a critical stage.
“In the longer term, Biden’s withdrawal permits him to focus on governing and serving as president until Jan. 20, 2025. Reflections on his long career and on the Biden-Harris presidency already have begun, with that scrutiny certain to intensify as November draws closer and Vice President Harris becomes the public face of the administration and the primary target of critics.
“His formal withdrawal brought closure to an increasingly public debate among prominent Democrats and others about his viability as a candidate, but also heightens the uncertainty surrounding the November election and the Democratic nomination to replace him with the Aug. 19-21 convention approaching. Although President Clinton, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and other key Democratic voices in Congress, statehouses, interest group, and the donor community have quickly coalesced around Harris, others such as Speaker Emerita Pelosi and President Obama have not joined them. The latter could reflect concerns that rank-and-file Democrats, including primary voters, may support a more open process with consideration of other possible nominees.
“Not surprisingly, as contingency plans have been in the works for weeks, former President Trump, Republican vice-presidential nominee Sen. J.D. Vance, and myriad Republican surrogates flooded social media with sharp criticisms of Harris and the Biden-Harris administration, and TV ads appeared in swing state markets by mid-Sunday afternoon. Likely also not surprising are undertones of racism and sexism in postings on Vice President Harris.”
Caitlin Jewitt on Democratic National Convention procedure and history
“This is an unprecedented situation that is still unfolding. At this point, it is the delegates that will decide who becomes the Democratic nominee. The Democratic delegates are pledged, but not legally bound, to Biden. There are 3,936 Democratic delegates — excluding super delegates who don’t vote on the first ballot. A candidate needs 1,976 delegates on the first ballot to win the nomination.
“It seems that Democratic elites are coalescing fairly quickly around Harris, and she has received several notable endorsements since the initial announcement. Several candidates who might have been considered viable options for the nomination, such as Pete Buttigieg and Andy Beshear, have already endorsed Harris. If it continues this way, with considerable support for Harris, we are likely to see a fairly calm convention, with her receiving a majority of delegates.
“Ironically, both the 1968 and 2024 Democratic Conventions were and will be in Chicago. The 1968 Democratic National Convention selected Hubert Humphrey to be the Democratic nominee even though he did not participate in a single primary. He went on to lose the general election; the Democratic Party overhauled the nomination process to make it more democratic and more closely connect the delegates to the preferences of voters.
“There are other parallels between Humphrey and Harris. Both were and are sitting vice-presidents who were likely to carry on the policies of their predecessors. In both cases, the people didn’t have a chance to voice their support through the primaries. In Humphrey’s case it was because he did not participate in the primary process. In Harris’s case, it was because Biden was the presumptive nominee. And the delegates will be deciding — without the opportunity for people to vote in the primaries — which was the very purpose of the reforms post-1968.”
Find even more Virginia Tech election experts here.
About Goedert
Nicholas Goedert is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at Virginia Tech with expertise focused on legislative elections and American politics. He is the author of “Ground War: Courts, Commissions, and the Fight over Partisan Gerrymanders,” published by Oxford University in 2022. He served as an expert witness in the Wisconsin redistricting case Whitford v. Gill (adjudicated by the U.S. Supreme Court during summer 2018), and also serves on the Executive Board of the voting rights advocacy group UpVote Virginia. Read his full bio here.
About Hult
Karen Hult, professor of political science at Virginia Tech, serves on the faculty of the School of Public and International Affairs’ Center for Public Administration and Policy, with expertise in the U.S. presidency, federal and state politics, policy and governance, and federal and state courts. Read her full bio here.
About Jewitt
Caitlin Jewitt, associate professor in the Department of Political Science and the associate department chair in the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences. Author of “The Primary Rules: Parties, Voters, and Presidential Nominations,” Jewitt is particularly interested in the institutional features of presidential primary elections and their effects on voters, outcomes, candidates, candidate strategy, and political elites. Read her full bio here.
Schedule an interview
To schedule an interview, contact Mike Allen in the media relations office at mike.allen@vt.edu or 540-400-1700.
