Talk:Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election

Is this page really necessary?

Pure WP:FORUMSHOP. AFD is this way. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Oh come on, is it really necessary to create a separate Wikipedia page for something like this? That's a bit over the top. Cenbutz1 (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2024 (UTC) Agree. Just because an event is notable doesn't mean it needs a separate article, as there's not much to write about for someone simply dropping out of a race. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 18:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC) I agree it should be merged with the article about his presidential campaign. Procyon117 (talk) 19:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC) I'm also in agreement that it should be merged. David O. Johnson (talk) 19:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC) wait but probably merge, let’s see what happens. Some republicans like trump are calling this a “coup” (another source) I just say let’s see we wait to see what happens, this is a historical event. LuxembourgLover (talk) 19:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC) To be fair, it is a historical event, but there is no page for Lyndon B Johnson’s withdrawal in 1968, and much of this article isn’t even about what happened today. Can easily be merged into Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign, but hold off from that for now, and wait for consensus Jason Ingtonn (talk) 21:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC) we have I do not choose to run, dont know how similar that is. LuxembourgLover (talk) 22:27, 21 July 2024 (UTC) Also with Harry S. Truman. I don't believe in sequel articles, not to mention something on his regular page, 2024 presidential re-election page, and now on this. FloridaMan21 (talk) 23:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC) This article is 100% not needed as of typing this (21 July) but some more info may come to light in the future on the whole thing. Candidates drop out all the time, so I see no logical need for an article that can easily be covered at Joe Biden or, as you had said, Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 02:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC) I agree sigmas — Rexter7890 (talk) 01:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC) @Rexter7890 Very Interesting statement🤔 FloridaMan21 (talk) 02:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC) This has been AFDed twice now. It's not going to change anytime soon. David O. Johnson (talk) 02:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC) It's very essential to have a separate article. So, yes. Ahri Boy (talk) 04:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC) I don't believe so. This article is not needed, and I would say to merge it with Joe Biden 2024 presidential campaign. SteelerFan1933 (talk) 04:26, 22 July 2024 (UTC) @SteelerFan1933 I'd say we should wait a week or so. Let the fallout from this situation settle before we make that decision. MaximumMangoCloset (talk) 05:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC) See also: Kamala Harris 2024 presidential campaign Change the title. Turn off the protections and make this about “The 2024 Democratic nomination transition crisis.” We can turn most of the current article to background chapters, then go on to the technicalities that Harris campaign (and others) have to go through in real time. Reliable media reports state that the online balloting is still on for the first week in August and the Harris people say they’re going to have enough pledges to win the nomination by the day after tomorrow. A sequel article to the primary campaign one is necessary at this point. It should go like this: the June debate and it’s fallout The growing crisis and pressure on the president. The decision to go. The withdrawal itself and the releasing of the delegates. Harris’ announcement The transition from the Biden Victory Fund to the Harris Victory Fund. The emergency Zoom meeting among delegates. Coalessing around Harris. The possible opposition The logistics of the online balloting. While this event was somewhat expected it’s still a bit of a shock. Life goes on. 64.18.11.15 (talk) 10:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Paragraph 2 needs attention

Current: "Concerns of Biden's age mounted in June 2024, following a debate in which Biden's faltering appearance, speaking with a hoarse voice and failing to recall statistics and express his opinion on several occasions. After what many deemed was a poor performance, he received numerous calls for him to withdraw from the election." (n.b. that the first sentence as-is is syntactically incorrect and does not read)

Change to: Concerns around Biden's cognitive ability mounted in June 2024 following a live television debate with Donald Trump. Biden's debate performance was universally criticised as being poor, something which he himself acknowledged. In the weeks that followed there were numerous calls for him to withdraw from the election."

Specific points: "Concern of" is grammatically incorrect. Should read "concern about" or "concern around". The concerns were not about Biden's age per se. They were about his cognitive/physical health (which are often correlated with age). Should his hoarse voice be mentioned? That doesn't really signal anything in itself. "he received numerous calls.." isn't really correct. Calls for him to withdraw were generally made publicly in the mass media.

A general point I'd like to make is that (if this isn't already included) the article should mention how this announcement was made, and I personally would like to see the exact time of the announcement. I think this is a groundbreaking moment in global history and that the exact time is noteworthy (if merely for posterity). Flusapochterasumesch (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Withdrew from race, or what?

The lede currently says Biden withdrew his nomination but I don't think he nominated himself, so technically he can't "withdraw" his nomination. How about "dropped out of the race" or "withdrew his candidacy"? --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

The whole article is a con. It was rushed by someone looking for glory on the front page. FloridaMan21 (talk) 23:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Gaza war in background

considering the Israel–Hamas war protest vote movements article exists, the "Uncommitted" campaign during the Democratic primary should definitely be included in the background section of the article (not in the least because it received more votes than Dean Phillips). Its not like Democrats were unanimously backing even before the debate performance. — jonas (talk) 19:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

“Palestine has nothing to do with anything. It was age and age alone. Remove any references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.18.11.15 (talk) 10:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

File:President Biden letter on resigning from reelection.png

FYI, File:President Biden letter on resigning from reelection.png (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion at COMMONS:Commons:Deletion requests/File:President Biden letter on resigning from reelection.png -- 65.92.247.96 (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

This page is unnecessary

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Why does this page exist. Sertyt (talk) 00:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lede

Lots of the text in the lede is repetitive and says the same thing a few times over. Volunteer Marek 02:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Did Biden actually post the letter?

Leave your conspiracy theories for Twitter. Also BLP violations. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This article seems to very credulously claim the President Biden personally posted this letter, at a time when he is widely known to have dementia and also reportedly in isolation sick with COVID, and after stating numerous times that he had no intention of withdrawing from the race. He tweeted numerous times during the debate which indicates that someone else controls his X account. Shouldn’t we wait until Biden personally gives a statement before definitively stating that he personally withdrew from the election? rdl381 (talk) 03:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC) Came here to express this exact sentiment. For all we know, Joseph R Biden has been arrested and executed – at the very least, there is good reason to suspect that the post went up on X without his cognizance. Many are questioning the means and possible motives, and that this letter is being taken at face value is absurd. The DNC speaking for Biden while he is trapped in his vacation home in Delaware comes from the same playbook as the politburo speaking for Gorbachev while he was isolated in his dacha in the Crimea. We may well be watching a color revolution play out in real time, and Wikipedia must take greater care to maintain NPOV. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 03:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC) Good lord. I genuinely can't tell is this is some intellectually advanced form of sarcasm or if you are dead serious. Either way, this was 100% the best possible response to rdl381's statement. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC) It might be the case that I can't tell either but until we get proof of life it can't hurt to play it safe. It's not like the article loses anything by implicitly allowing for the fact it does seem odd that a sitting president would choose to end a re-election campaign via a post on X. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 04:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC) I'm on the floor laughing right now, I had no idea that an "Is Biden Still Alive" website actually exists (LMAO). Anyways, I need sleep. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC) @Rdl381 There is no proof Biden has dementia, him stumbling his words is just a symptom of being old. MaximumMangoCloset (talk) 04:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC) What exactly is the difference? rdl381 (talk) 04:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

A better title would be beneficial

The current title is very long and cumbersome. This article could benefit from a shorter and more concise title. Something like 2024 Joe Biden Campaign Withdrawal would be much better. Tomhol811 (talk) 04:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Procyon117 (talk) 05:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I also agree. MaximumMangoCloset (talk) 05:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree in general. But maybe something like Joe Biden's withdrawal from 2024 United States Presidential Election could also be a better title in general. Of course that's not much shorter than the original title lol. NewishIdeas (talk) 06:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

It should be something like “Biden replacement crisis,” or better yet, “Emergency Democratic nomination replacement crisis.” Expand it to include everything up to and including the online balloting the first week in August. The closest anything like this happened was shortly before the 1844 Whig National Convention, when John Tyler withdrew.

Also, remove the protection, the damn thing happened just yesterday. Jeez! 64.18.11.15 (talk) 10:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

irrelevant

Re [1] and [2] @TinaLees-Jones:: What does Trump's call with Zelensky have to do with the subject matter of the article? — hako9 (talk) 07:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Don't you think it's a great coincidence and result, driving by Mr. Zelensky? TinaLees-Jones (talk) 07:13, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I think a lot of things, but I keep it to myself unless I find reliable sources to back them. — hako9 (talk) 07:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 July 2024

71.181.117.47 (talk) 10:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

 Not done, please make requests in clear "please change X to Y" format. TarnishedPath^talk 12:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

wording, also copyright

currently the withdrawal section states "the official X account of President Joe Biden", which is false, "@JoeBiden" is his personal account, the official account would be "@POTUS" (it might be official because its verified, but not the official presidential account. This could get further complicated by some of the things the National Archives have previously said about Trumps personal account and him not being allowed to delete tweets under the Presidential Records Act.).

Because of that, people in the Commons:Deletion_requests/File:President_Biden_letter_on_resigning_from_reelection.png discussion mentioned that the text would likely be copyrighted, as it is not an official government record (campaign activity does not count as "executive office material") und uses Bidens personal letter head, not the White House one. As such, the statement could not be quoted in full on this page.

People more knowledgeable on copyright should probably weigh in on the discussion on commons and this article should follow whatever the result of that discussion. — jonas (talk) 12:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Comments of Joe Biden brother about his health after withdrawl

Frank Biden told CBS News that ailing health “absolutely” played a “considerable role” in Biden’s decision to withdraw.

This is notable as it is counter to official statements and the long standing narrative of no health issues for Joe Biden.

This should be included. Helpingtoclarify (talk) 13:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Signature

Not a forum to spitball conspiracy theories
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The signature on this letter does not look like the signature on the Joe Biden page. I think there should be a note about this. 206.0.71.9 (talk) 14:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC) Signatures are never identical unless it's a traced forgery. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 14:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Not everything you disagree with is a 'conspiracy theory'

There has been two discussions prematurely locked on this talk page on the basis of being 'conspiracy theories'. This isn't really a great hill to die on, given it was only a few months ago that the idea that Joe Biden was not in great health was itself labelled an unreasonable conspiracy theory. Shutting down these threads prematurely prevents an opportunity for editors to collectively look into whether any reputable, primary sources are covering these topics. Whatever you think is happening in reality, the timing and manner by which the president announced he would end his re-election campaign is unusual. The lack of self-awareness on an administrator's part to lock a conversation with a rationale of "Leave your conspiracy theories for Twitter." when the event covered in the article pivots on the basis of a posts on Twitter should be noted by everyone reading this talk page. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 15:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree. 73.184.232.224 (talk) 15:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, not a forum to posit conspiracy theories. Acroterion (talk) 15:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Discussing that Joe Biden had not been seen in public for 10 days and his act of stepping down from his re-election campaign came not from an oval office address but from a social media account which is known not to exclusively be under his control is not the positing of a conspiracy theory, but discussing something I'm being seen asked about from people across the political spectrum yesterday leading into today. Are sources Wikipedia considers to be reliable discussing this? AVNOJ1989 (talk) 15:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The WP:ONUS is on you to find those sources. EvergreenFir (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't disagree. My objection to your action is that a conversation was terminated before an opportunity to look into such sources occurred, and hastily dismissed as 'conspiracy'. Now, are administrators always in the habit of closing conversations on talk pages as soon as a policy which applies to writing articles is not met? The haste with which administrators were shutting down the opportunity to even ask about these things has been noted and will hopefully not continue on as unreasonably as it has done so far. Good day. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 15:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@AVNOJ1989: See {{RBLPV}}. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 15:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Those two HATted discussions are conspiracy theories. They are completely unsourced. No <ref> for your WP:EXTRAORDINARY claim? You get a {{hat}}. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 15:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

"Joe Biden had not been seen in public for 10 days and his act of stepping down from his re-election campaign came not from an oval office address but from a social media account which is known not to exclusively be under his control." Please identify for me which part of this statement is WP:EXTRAORDINARY. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 15:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I was not talking about you. I was talking about the signature, which all reasonable people would assume is real. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 15:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

I believe President Biden was last seen in public on July 17 getting off Air Force one, which was about five days ago.

Re: BLP violations, I don’t think anyone has suggested adding false or disputed information to the page, but rather being careful to stick to reported facts. For example, we know President Biden’s debate performance prompted calls to for him to drop out of the presidential race and that he stated that he wasn’t planning to drop out, and also that Nancy Pelosi put pressure on him to drop out (and it’s not publicly known what kind of pressure this was, right?). We can include the relatively non-controversial facts while avoiding doing original research, and in any case we’ll probably have more information about what took place within the next 24–48 hours. rdl381 (talk) 15:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree (in principle); but the way Wikipedia works is by citing reliable sources. There is no reason to believe that, at some point, there will be a lack sufficient sources to support a "Conspiracy Theories" section. However, just not right at the moment. Give it time. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Why Malgorzata Kidawa-Blonska?

Why is Polish politician Małgorzata Kidawa-Błońska listed, "added an analogous situation to see also"? Neither related to Biden nor to US presidential election. Namedropping by a "user is a participant in WikiProject Poland". 2003:C6:3742:EE07:680F:7B94:ED1B:68AC (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Speculation and conspiracy theories

Matt Walsh tweeted:

• If you’re shocked to find out that Joe Biden is dropping out of the race, imagine how Joe Biden will feel when he finds out.

There have been some publicly stated doubts (primarily from opponents of the Democratic Party) about whether Biden's withdrawal letter was authentic. He didn't appear in a live press briefing or speak in person with reporters.

There is nothing wrong with having the article say that a few prominent people have expressed doubts or revealing their reasoning. --Uncle Ed (talk) 16:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

If you have some sources like NYT, WaPo, APNews, etc. covering these tweets and opining, then yes, I concur. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Rep. Thomas Massie is suggesting this is a coup [3]. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 16:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC); as is Rep. Mike Collins [4]. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 16:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

WP:SELFPUBLISHED social media postings ... Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people 174.92.25.207 (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Per that policy, those posts should not be used to cite the coup as fact, but could be cited as examples that people are discussing the possibility that this was a coup. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 16:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

That would be WP:OR, we really need WP:RS editorializing here. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Newsmax quotes Michigan Rep. Bill Huizenga; "I don't believe this, but there's a lot of internet chatter and jokes going around about how we were all shocked getting the letter, just wait until Joe sees the letter, implying that he didn't know that it was happening. But, clearly, there was a palace coup that was happening between [former President] Barack Obama and [former House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi and some others like that." [5] AVNOJ1989 (talk) 16:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

See also; a Wired article citing several reputable individuals suggesting this as an unseemly coup, a FOX News video clip where Donald Trump says he believes that this was a "sort of" coup and JD Vance more definitively says he believes it was (NY Post covers that clip in an article, as does The Independent). AVNOJ1989 (talk) 16:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

@AVNOJ1989: See WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS, WP:NYPOST, and WP:NEWSMAX. Wired is outside its domain of expertise of tech. WP:THEINDEPENDENT is a somewhat acceptable source. The article you cited reports claims but does not assert the claims are factual. If you have a greater number of reliable (according to WP:RSP) sources, or if you're confident with The Independent's article, you can make a Wikipedia:Edit request. The other sources will likely be removed if added. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 16:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

They could be cited for a quote which is backed up by a video clip included in the articles and/or direct links to social media posts which are linked. That those who have determined what is a reliable source have cited some of these resources as generally unreliable does not mean editors have to take them as absolutely unreliable. I don't follow how Wired is outside its domain of expertise if it's covering what is being discussed on social media. I believe the goal here is to find reliable sources who are covering the fact the conversation is being had – if a coup is indeed in progress it would, as I'm sure you might understand, be quite difficult to find organizations covering it as such in real time. I agree with an previous post by User:Kcmastrpc under a previous section that it might be too early to incorporate this into the article, but it harms no one to gather preliminary leads to be ready for if/when that news breaks. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 17:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Ed Poor?? Ed Poor??!!? Did some kind of signal go out?? Is Rob next, ready to show how this all traces back to the Communist Party? 2601:1C0:717E:4C0:35AD:B505:DB58:8E22 (talk) 23:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Joever should have its own article

In the same way Sleepy Joe has its own article, Joever should have its own article too because it’s been a heavily used term for both political and non political terms for almost half a decade now and it’s a meme with a lot of staying power. Vinnylospo (talk) 17:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Agree, it has enough notability to warrant it. I'll also throw in Let's Go Brandon and I Did That! as other examples. --ThingsCanOnlyGetWetter (talk) 18:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Absolutely Vinnylospo (talk) 19:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

You need to provide reliable sources stating it's importance and staying power EvergreenFir (talk) 18:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

No problem Vinnylospo (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

"Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 22 § Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign until a consensus is reached. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Russian response

One of the earliest responses out of the gate came from the Russian FM, and has been documented on Wall Street Journal; [6]. Including national political responses critical of the endgame of the Biden regime should be as much of a priority as including those reactions lauding it, not sure why it's taking so long to be populated into the article. AVNOJ1989 (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

sorry, "regime"? Are you ESL, by any chance? 2601:1C0:717E:4C0:35AD:B505:DB58:8E22 (talk) 23:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)