hindsight is 20/20. yes, biden would have been the better candidate, if only because of the incumbency advantage. but he was never going to win a second term. that much was clear, so why not take a shot at running kamala? you all have to admit that there have been times in the last 2 months when you have been just a little nervous. anyway there is a theory that the switch to kamala was never about winning the presidency, but was to give the dems a bit of an energy boost that will help them in competitive races down ballot. biden may have gotten more ticks next to his name than kamala, but a lot of those votes may have been from weary centrists who would have either not voted down ballot or even voted republican down ballot to balance out power in washington as a hedge against the qualities in biden they don't like. meanwhile the more youthful energetic dem base may have just stayed at home due to their lack of enthusiam for the dem party under biden. but with kamala in they will show up, and they will vote dem down ballot. so the argument goes that the dem powerbrokers knowingly gave up more votes in the presidential race to secure more votes down ballots, knowing full well that the presidential race was already lost.
Australia