To be sure, Haley faces a number of formidable obstacles that make it unlikely for her to succeed. First and foremost, Iowa Republicans tend to be Evangelical, and as we’ve seen in the past, prefer the most conservative, right-wing candidate. 

Whether it be Mike Huckabee in 2008, Rick Santorum in 2012, or Ted Cruz in 2016, the winner of the Iowa GOP caucuses in recent times has not fit Haley’s mainstream Republican mold. It seems former President Donald Trump holds the mantle of most conservative this time around, especially given his appointment of the Supreme Court justices that overturned Roe v. Wade.

Secondly, while 16% in the latest polling in Iowa is impressive for Haley, she still remains tied with DeSantis, the oft-scrutinized Florida governor. Although she has risen ten points since the previous Des Moines Register poll and has the momentum, it is highly unlikely DeSantis will cede to Haley and drop out, especially given the deep pockets of his allied Super PAC, Never Back Down.

Furthermore, with 8 major candidates still in the GOP primary field, the opposition to Trump is seemingly more divided than might otherwise be needed to present an opening for Haley. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, who Haley appointed to the Senate, is well funded and seems insistent on remaining in the race at least through Iowa and former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie appears intent on competing in the New Hampshire primary. 

For Haley to make a legitimate run at the nomination, she needs to consolidate the field so it becomes a two-person contest between herself and Trump, something that looks unlikely to happen given the current dynamics of the race. Positively for Haley, former Vice President Mike Pence dropped his presidential bid this past weekend.

A third barrier for Haley is Trump’s continued strength among the GOP electorate. The Des Moines Register poll shows that he has a favorability of almost two to one positive among Iowa Republicans, giving him a rating that is as high as any other Republican, indicating, as the polls show, that roughly two-thirds of Iowa Republican caucusgoers are considering supporting the former president.

A final obstacle for Haley, who is the former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is her strong vocal support of Ukraine and Israel in their wars against authoritarians and terrorists. Conservative Republicans, particularly those in the House and the base of the GOP electorate, have been skeptical of American support for Ukraine, despite being vocally supportive of Israel at the same time.

There is a growing isolationist movement within the Republican Party which is pulling its foreign policy away from Ronald Reagan’s doctrine of peace through strength abroad. Put another way, Haley’s hawkish stance on foreign policy is most likely out of sync with that of many, if not most, Iowa Republican primary voters.

Furthermore, as alluded to above, over 35%, of Iowa GOP primary voters categorize themselves as Evangelical Christians, making them a crucial bloc in the caucuses. Based on her career and the tact of her current campaign, Haley has not positioned herself as a candidate who appeals to Evangelicals. 

Going back to the first debate, Haley was arguing for a 15-week compromise on abortion and ruled out the possibility of a national ban. Her recommendations are at variance with those in the Evangelical community specifically, and conservative Republican community more generally, who philosophically and emotionally, are deeply committed to an outright ban on abortion.

If Haley can pull off a massive swing in the Republican primary and win the nomination, she will be in a strong position for the general election. In fact, she outperforms Trump against Biden in four of the six battleground states included in the recent New York Times/Siena College poll.

Even if everything swings Haley’s way and she continues to ride the current momentum into the new year, the success of the Haley presidential campaign will still be predicated upon whether the rest of the field coalesces around her to defeat Trump. If this consolidation does not materialize prior to the February primary in Haley’s home state of South Carolina, it is very likely Donald Trump will walk his way to a third straight GOP presidential nomination.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

It is a welcome development for the country and for Washington’s ability to govern. Unfortunately, the selection does not guarantee that the United States will be able to swiftly come to the aid of its close allies, including Israel, as well as fund its own government and sustain domestic strength.

After conservative firebrand Jim Jordan’s third failed attempt at becoming Speaker of the House of Representatives last week, the Republican conference dropped him as their nominee.

This led to a new open nominating process that started with nine candidates from across the Republican spectrum and ended with moderate-leaning Majority Whip Tom Emmer as the nominee.

However, within four hours, his bid was shot down by the MAGA wing of the party and he never made it to the House floor. Right-wing representatives were following the lead of former President Donald Trump who signaled he was against Emmer and even made calls to House members expressing his opposition.

The root of the MAGA hostility towards Emmer’s nomination was his vote to certify President Joe Biden’s 2020 electoral college victory. Some GOP members also singled out Emmer for supporting same-sex marriage, and in an appalling exchange a colleague even questioned his Christian faith.

After Emmer’s withdrawal on Tuesday, the Republican conference miraculously coalesced around the lesser known Mike Johnson – a deeply conservative member and mentee of Jordan who was backed by the far-right of the party – and he was elected speaker on Wednesday afternoon without losing a single Republican vote on the floor.

While it is undoubtedly positive that the American people finally have a Speaker of the House again, the Republican Party is playing with fire by choosing someone with little leadership experience and a rigid hard-right track record. Democrats are not innocent either, as their decision to join the motion to vacate on Kevin McCarthy led to an extreme conservative gaining the speaker’s gavel

Johnson is extremely conservative on social issues, as he voted against federal protections for same-sex marriage and has repeatedly supported and co-sponsored national abortion ban bills. In fact, he is the first former chair of the deeply conservative Republican Study Committee to become speaker.

Furthermore, Johnson was a prominent election denier in 2020 and the legal architect of the Electoral College objections that were denied by the Supreme Court.

It is clear that Trump and his MAGA acolytes got exactly what they wanted, as one of their own is now the most powerful Republican in Washington. If their victory could not be any more clear, Rep. Matt Gaetz emphasized it with glee on Steve Bannon’s podcast, “If you don’t think that moving from Kevin McCarthy to MAGA Mike Johnson shows the ascendance of this movement and where the power in the Republican Party truly lies, then you’re not paying attention.”

House Democrats are already seeking to paint Johnson as “Jim Jordan in a suit.” Make no mistake, Johnson’s extreme positions along with his lack of fundraising skill compared to his predecessor will hurt congressional Republicans’ electoral chances in 2024. While former Speaker Kevin McCarthy raised over $100 million for Republicans during the 2022 election cycle, Speaker Johnson has raised just $553,013 total this cycle.

This dynamic will certainly create challenges for Republican congressmen from moderate districts in California who benefitted from McCarthy’s robust political operation. Along with losing out on fundraising opportunities, Johnson’s extreme right-wing social positions will not play well in these swing districts.

There is also some doubt over whether Johnson will be on the side of public opinion on upcoming legislation to strengthen our allies and ensure we avoid a government shutdown that could have catastrophic economic consequences.

Johnson voted against the current continuing resolution, which has reached its halfway mark, and he has been one of the staunchest opponents to sending aid to Ukraine.

It is clear the American people want Congress to support our allies as they battle terrorism and authoritarianism, and Johnson and the GOP must show voters they can be trusted. A poll this week from The Economist/YouGov found 61% of registered voters think the U.S. should maintain or increase military aid to Ukraine and 83% of registered voters think the U.S. should maintain or increase military aid to Israel.

While President Biden, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries line up behind a supplemental bill that will send military aid to Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan, as well as new funding to help secure the southern border, there is significant opposition among House Republicans to additional spending, especially for Ukraine.

The first big test for Speaker Johnson is in less than a month when he will either let the government close down or work on a bipartisan basis to keep America as a functioning democracy at a crucial moment for our allies. Positively, Johnson seems to be moving towards the middle in his new leadership role, as he has proposed a second continuing resolution that would last through January, albeit with little detail about the spending numbers.

In order to have a successful speakership and meet the needs of the United States at this critical inflection point, it would be wise for Johnson to moderate his views and seek productive compromise with centrist Republicans and Democrats. Speaker Johnson must put policy over politics to bolster our allies and protect our economy.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

Instead, House Republicans again failed to display any semblance of leadership and elect a Speaker of the House, despite a number of international and domestic crises, and continued to paralyze our government. 

Indeed, this dysfunction comes at a critical moment for global affairs as the Middle East is engulfed in a full-blown war between Israel and Hamas, while Ukraine continues to battle against Russia’s invasion. 

Further, we are barreling towards a government shutdown later in November when the continuing resolution expires. With the House frozen, Congress will be unable to prevent the economic consequences such a shutdown would have.

To be sure, the United States cannot expect to lead the free world and support our allies if we are unable get our own house in order. Failing to quickly empower McHenry with the ability to move legislation would be a mistake, as House Republicans risk permanently undermining American credibility and respect around the globe.

Yet, some in the GOP are not finished causing chaos, risking America’s credibility around the world, and undermining Republican’s own electoral viability ahead of 2024. When it looked like Jordan may step aside for McHenry, Rep. Jim Banks said that, “Expanding powers for a temporary Speaker is a dangerous precedent and exactly what the Democrats hoped would happen.”

Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz also came out in opposition to empowering McHenry. As Republicans would likely need buy in from Democrats to overcome the extremists in their caucus who are the root cause of the current situation, Greene slammed the idea as “The wrong thing to do,” while Gaetz said, “I’m against speaker lite. It’s constitutional desecration.”

Notably, Republicans do not seem to care that their constant infighting is harming their own political stock ahead of crucial 2024 elections. Last week, Majority Leader Steve Scalise was forced to withdraw from the Speaker’s race after he could not garner enough support to bring his bid to the floor. Jordan played a significant role in undermining Scalise’s bid and then became the Republicans’ nominee for speaker. 

Scalise allies along with moderate Republicans in Biden-won congressional districts are particularly wary of voting for Jordan, a prominent election denier and abortion rights opponent who will create additional political vulnerability for the Republican conference in 2024.

Jordan rallied his allies against Scalise despite offering to nominate him on the floor, and top Jordan-backer former President Donald Trump and fellow Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene even raised questions about Scalise’s health. Fox News host Sean Hannity also got involved on Jordan’s behalf as well by using both his television program and personally calling Jordan’s opponents to apply pressure within the fractured GOP.

After toppling Scalise’s bid, Jordan took his nomination to the House floor on Tuesday and subsequently lost 20 Republican votes, finishing with a lower total than Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and well short of the 217 votes required to win. After a second attempt on Wednesday, Jordan did not make any progress and instead lost two additional votes. He then seemed prepared to temporarily withdraw from consideration and endorse the empowerment of McHenry, but House Republicans reversed course on Thursday and Jordan is now seeking a third vote.

The entire Republican delegation from California backed Jordan the second time around, taking the risk of supporting Jordan in the hopes that the House could move on with its business. In his official statement, Rep. Darrell Issa of San Diego County clearly recognized the harm this is doing to the country, saying, “Let’s come together, elect Jim our Speaker, and show the American people how we can lead again.”

Unfortunately for Issa and House Republicans, time and again this does not come to fruition. Not only are they unable to compromise with Democrats, but they are also unable to compromise with themselves – leaving their conference totally unable to govern. 

In fact, it is increasingly difficult to see a way for any Republican to get the 217 votes to become Speaker of the House without reaching across the aisle for Democratic support.

This scenario appears to be a non-starter for Republicans, which led to the initial momentum for passing a resolution empowering Speaker Pro Tempore Patrick McHenry to temporarily conduct the work of the speaker, allowing the House to function.

Quite simply, the House is running out of time to get its act together. Both Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell appear eager to swiftly pass a bipartisan package that includes military aid for Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan as well as more funding for the nation’s southern border. 

Meanwhile, a paralyzed House risks undermining the pledge President Biden made in Tel Aviv on Wednesday, telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the U.S. “Isn’t going anywhere. We’re going to stand with you.”

Unfortunately, this effort will be for naught if Republicans in the House are unable to organize and unite around a leader. Furthermore, if Jordan somehow does climb the steep hill ahead to become speaker, he will likely oppose Ukraine aid as well as nearly any other initiative coming from the Biden administration. 

Further, a possible government shutdown, while war rages on two continents, could cause devastating damage to the economy, our national security, and America’s global reputation. Republicans would be wise to avoid this outcome, both for the sake of the American people and if they want to have any chance of holding the House next year.

To strengthen America’s resolve on the world stage and avoid potential economic catastrophe, it is essential for congressional Republicans to end this circus, get their house in order, and work with moderate Democrats to responsibly govern and address the serious threats facing our country and our world.

Douglas Schoen is a Democratic political consultant.

The decision was largely political in nature for Newsom, a top surrogate for President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign who is likely looking to position himself for the 2028 Democratic presidential primary, or, as I have written previously in these pages, a potential 2024 run if Biden makes a late decision not to run, whether due to his age, mental fitness, or any other factors.

Despite concerns about Butler’s previous status as a registered voter in Maryland and complete lack of experience holding public office – which caused Butler herself to be surprised by the appointment – even if Newsom does not run in 2024, his pick to replace the late Sen. Feinstein will surely help in 2028, although it would be foolish to overlook the impact of this appointment in the here and now.

Principally, Newsom had to make good on his prior commitment or he would have been excoriated by members of his own party. Butler belongs to Democrats’ two most important demographic groups; African Americans and women. Further, Butler is a member of the LGBTQ+ community, an increasingly influential voting bloc for Democrats.

Put another way, in a Democratic Party often looking to play identity politics, Newsom’s choice may cushion the inevitable pushback he would receive by challenging Vice President Kamala Harris in a Democratic primary.

Indeed, Butler helps secure Newsom’s position on multiple key policy fronts. As the president of pro-choice Democratic fundraising powerhouse EMILY’s List prior to her Senate appointment, Butler is a leading voice for reproductive rights and commands a strong network of advocates and allies, many of whom EMILY’s List fundraised for. Reproductive freedoms will undoubtedly be a top tier issue for women and Democratic voters in the post-Roe era.

Additionally, Butler worked for nearly 20 years at the Service Employees International Union, and, as president of its California chapter helped raise the State minimum wage to $15. Newsom has had a rocky relationship with labor throughout his tenure as Governor, so appointing Butler could go a long way to smoothing those issues over.

Newsom’s appointment of Butler, aside from shoring up his left-flank by selecting someone who is representative of several crucial Democratic constituencies, is also pragmatic and politically tactical. Any candidate seeking the Democratic nomination in 2028 will have to secure wide swaths of support among African Americans, women, and unions.

The move also showed political deftness. The governor will likely have to maneuver around fellow Californian Vice President Kamala Harris if he wants to be the Democratic nominee, either in 2028, or as Democrats’ ‘emergency option’ in 2024.

If President Biden bows out of the race, Harris would be the obvious Democratic frontrunner and the California governor would have to make up significant ground quickly, and appointing a black woman would certainly help Newsom vis-à-vis Harris in a primary.

In the wake of Newsom’s decision, there will likely be a messy 2024 California Senate primary. Senator Butler, the third Black female U.S. Senator in history, will have just two months until California’s filing deadline in December to decide whether to run for reelection and shake up the race.

Democratic Representatives Katie Porter from Orange County, Adam Schiff from Los Angeles, and Barbara Lee from San Francisco are all currently in the primary race. Porter and Schiff are fundraising heavyweights while Lee has the full weight of the Congressional Black Caucus behind her.

The caucus had urged Newsom to select Lee, but the governor was – wisely – wary of wading into an open Senate race and did not want to lend any of the three declared candidates an upper hand. Picking an outsider insulates Newsom from potential attacks that he played favorites and sought to influence next year’s election.

Although the primary election is still six months away and thus polling is scarce, a late September poll of likely voters in the state found Schiff at 20%, Porter at 15%, and Lee at 8%, underscoring that the race is wide open and the potential impact on the race had Newsom appointed one of the already-declared candidates.

Now that Butler joins Lee in the Congressional Black Caucus, it will be interesting to see how the CBC proceeds if Butler announces a run, which Newsom has said she is free to do, despite a lack of indication from her camp. Indeed, it is possible that after a couple months of campaigning the caucus decides it is in their interest to use Butler’s incumbency advantage to win a full term.

Should Butler decide to run, and win a full term, it will be interesting to see who she endorses in a primary between Newsom, who has started Butler’s career in public office, or Harris, who Butler advised in 2020 and remains a friend.

Even if Butler does not run next year, her appointment is the first in what will likely be an array of high-profile political moves by Governor Newsom to position himself to win the Democratic nomination in 2028 — or maybe even sooner than that.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

That said, whether due to increasing concerns over Biden’s approval numbers, age, cognitive abilities, and the multiple investigations into his son Hunter, it is increasingly possible that Biden may decide within the next few months not to seek re-election. Were that to happen, Vice President Kamala Harris would likely be the odds on favorite to replace Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket.

However, given the way California Gov. Gavin Newsom has sought to aggressively raise his national profile lately – assertively defending Biden’s record, traveling widely to campaign for Democratic candidates, and serving as Biden’s mouthpiece following the GOP debate on Wednesday, there are legitimate questions as to exactly what Newsom is trying to do, and why is he doing it?

It must be said that Newsom himself has been very careful not to give the impression that his sights are set on challenging Biden. In fact, he has often done the opposite, calling for Democrats to rally around Biden, despite any reservations, saying, “The train has left the station, we’re all in. Stop talking. He’s not going anywhere. It’s time for all of us to get on the train and buck up.”

As a sign of the close relationship between Biden and Newsom, the Biden campaign asked Newsom to attend the second Republican presidential debate, held in Simi Valley, California, as part of a group of top Democratic officials in order to promote Biden’s agenda in contrast to Republicans’ “extreme and out of touch views.”

For Newsom, being asked to attend the debate on behalf of the president is an easy win in his ongoing efforts to build his national brand. He has traveled to six red states, created a PAC to distribute $10 million to Democratic candidates, and provoked Florida Gov. and GOP presidential candidate Ron DeSantis to a debate hosted by Sean Hannity this November. 

Any politician doing what Newsom is would certainly be assumed to have their eyes on the White House. He is integrating himself with donors, building political goodwill with the base, and is hoping to develop a reputation as a determined leader who is willing and able to take on the GOP, an important factor, as Newsom has never had to face a credible Republican challenger due to Democrats’ stranglehold of California statewide politics.

As Democratic strategist Brad Bannon put it, Newsom is “Doing what any able and ambitious politician is doing, he’s putting himself in position to run for president if Biden doesn’t.”

To be sure, the spotlight on Newsom’s ambitions may have more to do with sentiments around the incumbent and his running mate, more than Newsom’s actions. Democrats are deeply concerned about Biden’s age, low job approval, and the widespread unpopularity of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Indeed, slightly more than three-quarters (76%) of American adults say Biden’s age may “Negatively affect his ability to serve another full term as president,” while two-thirds (67%) of Democrats and Democrat-leaning Independents want the party to nominate someone other than Biden in 2024, per CNN polling. 

Further, Harris’ 37% favorability rating even trails Biden’s (41%) according to the RealClearPolitics average, and Republicans have taken notice, running ads declaring that a “vote for Biden is a vote for Harris.”

For her part, VP Harris has stayed relatively quiet on Newsom, although her advisors have made their displeasure at Newsom’s recent attention-grabbing activies known. One Harris advisor told NBC, “It’s disrespectful” and others complained that the upcoming debate with DeSantis may give some voters the impression that Newsom is running a “2024 shadow campaign.”

Newsom had a chance to assuage the VP’s concerns on 60 Minutes last Sunday, when he was asked about any presidential hopes, although his answer is unlikely to have soothed Harris. 

When asked if recent efforts to clean up the streets in California factors into a presidential run, Newsom was evasive, saying, “I’m never going to overpromise that in the short run,” when pressed on whether that was a yes or a no, Newsom replied, “That was a…that was a never-ending response to your question.”

Last year, in response to the same question, Newsom said emphatically, “No, no, not happening, no, no, no, not at all.”

This is not to say Newsom would automatically be able to beat Harris in a hypothetical matchup. She often leads him in polling, and, as the face of the Biden administration’s high-profile campaigns to protect abortion access, voting rights, and strengthen gun control, Harris has plenty of opportunities to continue improving her image and record. 

Ultimately, while it is incredibly unlikely that Gavin Newsom would challenge Joe Biden in 2024, he has laid the groundwork to be Democrats’ top choice should Biden decide to withdraw for age or health reasons, although the longer Biden stays in the race, the weaker any Newsom campaign would be, if he could launch it at all. 

However, whether Newsom is eyeing a last-minute entrance into the 2024 race, or jockeying for the leading position ahead of 2028, it is clear that he has been the Democrat who is most active and preparing for any opening, should one be created.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

As I have previously written in these pages, at the center of the battleground map is Southern California. Five of the region’s congressional seats are included on the Cook Political Report’s list of competitive races for 2024.

Both parties have made clear they are ready to invest heavily in the state to win swing races which could tip control of the House of Representatives either way. Speaker McCarthy, no stranger to California politics, put it plainly, saying, “Is my future as Speaker dependent on holding the five seats we picked up in California? Yeah. We have our entire majority because we won in California.”

Meanwhile, House Majority PAC, which is tied to Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, has committed to spending $35 million in California. In Southern California, they have specifically labeled the 27th, 40th, and 45th districts in Los Angeles and Orange Counties as targets to flip blue. Each of these districts voted for President Biden in 2020 while sending a Republican to the House in 2022.

Yet, in the fight for these important Southern California districts, House Republicans are proving to be their own worst enemy. Indeed, to the chagrin of battleground Republicans and the delight of Jeffries, far-right members in the House Freedom Caucus used the threat of a motion to vacate the speakership to force McCarthy to open an impeachment inquiry into President Biden.

Put plainly, McCarthy had to make the move to preserve his reign as Speaker, but it could jeopardize his party’s electoral hopes in the 2024 election cycle, as well as cost him the job anyway.

An August Wall Street Journal poll found that 52% of registered voters nationwide oppose impeaching  Biden, while just 41% are in favor. Furthermore, in polling conducted across the 18 House districts won by Biden in 2020 that are currently represented by Republicans (including CA-27, CA-40, and CA-45), 56% think the inquiry is more of a partisan stunt than a serious investigation.

In addition to defending these three districts, McCarthy and the GOP will target the 47th and 49th districts as potential pickups.

Representative Katie Porter(D) is leaving her seat in the 47th district in Orange County to run for the Senate in 2024. This has opened the door for national Republicans, who back former California State Assembly member Scott Baugh.

Baugh previously lost by just four points to Porter in 2022, even though Porter outspent him by more than $20 million. He will certainly receive more financial support this time around, especially since he will not be facing an incumbent. 

Rep. Mike Levin (D) won the 49th district–containing parts of both Orange and San Diego Counties–by five points in 2022. Most election handicappers have put the 49th on their 2024 maps, but wresting control of a district Biden won by double digits could prove a difficult task. 

Although McCarthy would like to pick up these seats, his priority is defending the competitive seats Republicans hold. It will be challenging in Southern California, as three of the GOP-held districts were won by Biden in 2020 and he will be back at the top of the ticket in 2024.

An impeachment inquiry into Biden raises tough questions for Republicans in Biden-won districts. If the inquiry gains momentum and leads to a House vote on impeachment, Republican Reps. Mike Garcia (CA-27), Young Kim (CA-40), and Michelle Steel (CA-45) will face potentially the most difficult decision of their political careers. 

Further, if Republicans are unable to deliver any credible evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors, the impeachment inquiry will appear as purely politically motivated to swing voters. This could lead to a similar outcome as in 1998, when Democrats gained seats in the wake of a Republican impeachment inquiry against President Bill Clinton. It marked the first time since 1934 that the president’s party gained seats in a midterm election.

Ironically, while Speaker McCarthy’s decision to open an impeachment inquiry likely saved his job in the near term, it may very well cost him the speakership come 2024. Even a small swing in voter preference toward Democrats could cost battleground Republicans their races and cede control of the House of Representatives to the Democrats.  

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

This is by no means the first time age has played a role in politics – Ronald Reagan was asked whether at age 73 he was too old to be reelected in 1984 – although rarely have politicians’ ages been front and center the way they are now.

Both frontrunners for each party’s presidential nomination – President Joe Biden (80 years old) and former President Donald Trump (77 years old) – would be the oldest president in our nation’s history – a record Biden already holds, while Trump would occupy both the 3rd and 1st spots on that list should he win next November.

The issue extends to Congress as well. Rep. Nancy Pelosi recently announced that at age 83, she is seeking another term in the House. And Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who is 81 years of age, has now had two separate, very public, health scares in the span of a month, appearing to freeze for more than 30 seconds in front of reporters, yet he remains in his powerful Senate position. 

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who is 90 years old, made headlines earlier this year when she was away from the Capitol for months due to health issues that forced her to miss more than 90 floor votes and held up a number of Biden’s nominees, including judicial appointments to Federal Courts.

Americans are overwhelmingly united in their concerns about the age of our political leaders, and want change. More than three-fourths of Americans (77%) say there should be a maximum age limit for elected officials, with a plurality (45%) putting that limit at 70 years old, according to a CBS News/YouGov survey. Support is bipartisan in a way that very few issues are in our current political environment: nearly 8-in-10 (79%) Republican voters and 76% of Democratic voters agreed with instituting age limits.

To be clear, while the median age in the House (58 years old) and the Senate (65 years old) makes the current Congress the oldest in history, the issue is most prominent in the race for the presidency.

Indeed, nearly 8-in-10 (77%) Americans – including 74% of Independents and 69% of Democrats – say Biden is too old to effectively serve another four year term as president, per a recent AP-NORC poll. When asked about Trump, a majority (51%) of adults said the same. 

While age is a bigger political vulnerability for Biden than for Trump, the data underscores that at least one-half of Americans feel that either of the two most likely presidential candidates is too old for nation’s highest office. To put these numbers in context, towards the end of his second term in 1987, just 48% of Americans said Reagan – then 11 and 8 years younger than Biden and Trump, respectively, would be at the end of their second terms – was too old to be president.

The administration has begun pushing back on concerns about Biden’s age, as Republicans continue to make it a centerpiece of their campaign, including telling voters that “A vote for Biden is a vote for [Vice President] Kamala Harris,” insinuating that Biden would be unable to finish a second term.

Responding to a CNN article which referenced concerns about Biden’s age and fitness, deputy press secretary Olivia Dalton tweeted, “Here on Earth, we saw the President start his day in India at the G20, end the day in Hanoi with a substantive & detailed 40-minute press conference at 9pm, and continue to answer questions—including from @cnn—as he departed. What will be enough?”

For his part, Biden has attempted to make light of voters’ concerns by suggesting that with age comes the required experience to be president. Earlier this year, he joked at the White House Correspondents Dinner, saying, “I believe in the First Amendment, not just because my good friend Jimmy Madison wrote it,” and, “You call me old; I call it being seasoned. You say I’m ancient; I say I’m wise.”

That said, these efforts are unlikely to address what is a growing political liability for the incumbent. The percentage of Americans who say Biden does not have the stamina to effectively serve as president has risen from 51% in November 2019 to 74% in CNN’s most recent tracking poll. 

Further, among Democrats and Democrat-leaning Independents, Biden’s age was their top concern about Biden as a candidate in 2024 (49%), while his mental competence (7%) and his health (7%) were tied for second.

Even Biden’s admirers have concerns. David Ignatius recently wrote in the Washington Post, imploring Biden not to run due to his age, Harris’ unpopularity with voters, and asking Biden to trust the Democratic process to find a new leader for his party. Ignatius notes that Harris – who he correctly notes would become voters’ focus – is “less popular then Biden,” with just a 39.5% approval rating, per FiveThirtyEight.

Yet, it is doubtful any meaningful legislation will be forthcoming, or that a generational change will happen anytime soon. Our political system tends to reward incumbents, allowing officials to hold office years after they should have stepped aside. 

And, older Americans tend to vote at higher rates than younger Americans, and are less likely to hold a candidate’s age against them. The data bears this out: While nearly 80% of Americans under the age of 40 say the ideal age range for a president is in their 40’s and 50’s, less than half of adults over 60 years old say the same, per Pew Research. 

Ultimately, while it remains to be seen how large of a role a candidate’s age plays in 2024, voters are clearly concerned about the age of our elected officials generally, and President Biden specifically. For an issue to have such widespread, bipartisan support is exceedingly rare, and officials in both parties must honestly begin answering the question of how old is too old for public office.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.

To be clear, while the economy and inflation will surely be the top priorities when voters go to the polls next November, immigration will not be far behind. In fact, roughly one-quarter (24%) of registered voters say immigration is the most important issue facing the country, just slightly lower than those saying the economy (26%), and inflation (34%) – the top concern – according to a recent Harvard-Harris poll.

Moreover, immigration is one of Biden’s biggest vulnerabilities. Only 31% of Americans – including 27% of Independents – approve of how Biden has handled immigration. Comparatively, nearly 4-in-10 (37%) Americans approve of the president’s handling of the economy, per Gallup polling.

Closer to home, while California’s left-leaning immigration policies are well supported in the state – two-thirds of Californians believe immigrants are a benefit to California and a majority (55%) approve providing healthcare coverage to undocumented migrants – red state governors have increasingly sent migrants to the Golden State in an effort to publicize the issue, with implications for a handful of competitive Southern California districts which both parties are targeting, and which may determine which party controls the next Congress.

Specifically, in the 40th, 45th, 47th, and 49th districts – all of which have been competitive in recent years – immigration will likely be a key issue for voters, especially if Republicans can convince voters that Biden’s policies are responsible for the surging migrant crisis.

Indeed, Biden’s struggles on immigration come amid a growing humanitarian catastrophe at the southern border, upending months of steady decline in illegal border crossings. The Washington Post reported that August saw a record number of migrant families cross the U.S. – Mexico border, and the total number of arrests at the border has now increased by 30% for two straight months. 

To put those numbers in context, the Washington Post notes that in August, Border Patrol agents made 177,000 arrests at the Southern Border, up from 132,652 in July, and 99,539 in June.

Following the repeal of the Trump-era Title 42 rule last May, Biden held up the declining number of border apprehensions as proof of his policy’s success, but the drastic increase in arrests at the southern border make it clear that Biden must formulate a new approach, or immigration will remain a political open wound when Biden can ill afford one.

To that point, Biden finds himself locked in a neck and neck race with former President Donald Trump – who will likely win the Republican presidential nomination – with the incumbent leading by just 0.9%, per the RealClearPolitics average. Given Biden’s sagging poll numbers on immigration, Republicans – and whoever wins the party’s nomination for president – will almost certainly make the issue a centerpiece of the 2024 campaign.

In such a close race, Biden should prioritize winning over moderates and reinforcing his left flank, yet he is struggling on both fronts. 

Biden has found himself under fire from both the right and the left over his administration’s handling of the southern border. Republicans, predictably, have slammed Biden for what the political right calls his “open border” policy, however, the most notable attacks have come from within Biden’s own party. 

Progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently took aim at the Biden White House, saying, “Immigration is arguably this administration’s weakest issue… it’s my belief that some of the hesitation around this has to do with a fear around just being seen as approving…or really just the Republican narratives that have surrounded immigration.”

Democratic leaders of deep-blue cities and states – such as New York City, Massachusetts, and Illinois – are also voicing their frustrations with the White House over a lack of federal assistance to deal with the influx of migrants. 

Massachusetts Governor Maura Healy recently declared a state of emergency due to the surge in migrants, Illinois Sen. Dick Durban said he asked the Biden administration for more help to deal with the ongoing crisis in May but has yet to hear back.

Further, multiple outlets have noted the “total breakdown” in the relationship between Biden and NYC Mayor Eric Adams amid the federal government’s limited support for the Big Apple, which is dealing with a migrant crisis that Adams said “will destroy New York City.” 

Adams has also ripped into Biden, accusing the president of playing politics at the expense of New York, decrying the White House’s “conscious decision that it’s better politics to let New York suffer than to actually try to fix the problem.”

Quite simply, unless Biden drastically overhauls his approach to immigration, the administration will continue to find itself under fire from both sides of the aisle and will struggle to convince voters that he should be trusted with another four years in office.

Ultimately, this will require Biden to reiterate a commitment to strengthening border security, strictly enforcing current immigration laws, and imposing harsher penalties for repeated attempts to cross the border illegally, with continuing to push for expanded pathways to citizenship for DREAMers and reducing barriers for refugees who are credibly seeking political asylum.

To be sure, immigration has been an issue every modern president has struggled with, and Biden is no different, although it is a unique Achilles Heel for the president, who largely seems unable to decide whether he wants to placate the left-wing of his party, or if he wants to soothe concerns held by an overwhelming majority of Americans that his approach to securing our southern border is ineffective at best, or dangerous at worst.

Douglas Schoen is a political consultant.

If, for whatever reason, Biden is unable or unwilling to seek a second term, the front runners to be the next leader of the Democratic Party would likely come down to two Californians: Vice President Kamala Harris and current Gov. Gavin Newsom. 

While any vice president is the most obvious choice to succeed a president, Harris’ low polling numbers have caused many Democratic insiders to consider other high-profile politicians who could mount a last-minute campaign, like Newsom.

Indeed, new polling by my firm, Schoen Cooperman Research, found that Harris’ favorability – just 41% favorable – was even lower than Biden’s (46%), and recent NBC polling revealed that Harris was viewed more negatively than any other Vice President in the history of its poll. 

Recognizing the dilemma Democrats find themselves in with Harris, Newsom has quietly been trying to boost his national profile ahead of a possible last minute 2024 run. As I previously wrote in these pages, Newsom has spent the past year campaigning for Biden in red states, taking out ads attacking Republican Governors in Florida and Texas, and is preparing to debate Florida Governor and GOP presidential candidate Ron DeSantis this November in the swing state of Georgia. 

It is highly unlikely that Newsom would be spending this much time outside of California, and presenting himself as a strong, national leader of the Democratic Party if he did not see an opening in 2024.

That being said, new data suggests that Harris may not be in as weak a position as previously thought, and indicates that Newsom may be overconfident if he thinks that he would be able to successfully top the Democratic ticket should Biden withdraw.

In the NBC poll, which was conducted in June, just 32% of voters had a favorable view of Harris – compared to 41% in my firm’s latest poll – marking an impressive 9-point increase in just two short months.

Moreover, evidence of Harris’ improved standing among Democratic voters extends beyond her favorability ratings. In a horserace that asked who voters would like to see replace Biden on the ticket should he withdraw, nearly 4-in-10 (37%) Democratic primary voters support Harris, more than double Newsom’s support at 17%, per SCR polling.

Perhaps even more impressive for the Vice President is that by a 28-point margin (50% to 22%), Democratic primary voters see her, rather than Newsom, as having the best chance to win a general election were Biden to step aside as the nominee. Harris is also stronger than Newsom amongst crucial voter groups such as suburban women – 27% of whom say Harris has the best chance to win a general election compared to 12% for Newsom. 

Public polling reinforces Harris’ strength vis-à-vis Newsom. Weekly polling by FiveThirthyEight shows Harris consistently leading an expanded field of candidates, and notably besting Newsom by double digits overall, and among key demographic groups such as African-American and Hispanic voters.

Despite early stumbles, Harris has clearly benefited from being the administration’s point person on hot button issues such as abortion, civil rights, and gun control, all of which figure to be centerpieces of the 2024 general election. Or, as a Biden campaign aide put it in Politico, “The issues where she’s out in front happen to be the ones that people care about and that motivate our base.” 

To be sure, both Harris and Newsom face legitimate questions over whether their political styles would appeal to moderates and Independents if they were at the top of a national ticket. Whereas Harris leads Newsom in the horserace among Democratic primary voters by 20-points (37% to 17%), her lead drops to just 7-points among all voters (17% to 10%) in SCR polling.

However, before either Harris or Newsom faced general election voters, they would have to win the support of the Democratic base, and in that contest, the data clearly reveals that Harris is in a much stronger position than Newsom, and that the base believes Harris gives them the best chance to win if Biden were to decide to bow out of the 2024 race.

Douglas Schoen is a longtime political consultant and the founder of Schoen Cooperman Research.

Put another way, the first Republican debate was more notable for Trump’s absence – both physically and as the target of attacks – rather than anything that other candidates did or said, as no candidate did anything to stand out from the pack or weaken Trump’s commanding lead over the rest of the field. 

And, while it is too early for post-debate polling, one should expect little, if any, decrease in Trump’s lead.

Indeed, even when the candidates did discuss Trump – whose interview with former Fox host Tucker Carlson aired at the same time on X (formerly Twitter) – they mostly offered weak criticism, clearly afraid of alienating the party’s base and drawing Trump’s ire. When asked whether they would support Trump if he were to be convicted in any of his many legal cases, only Chris Christie and Asa Hutchinson said they would not, drawing boos.

To be sure, going into the debate, expectations should have been tempered. Trump leads his GOP rivals by 41-points according to the RealClearPolitics average, and just one other candidate, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, is even polling in double digits. 

That said, there were times when various candidates attempted to make the case for why they should be the party’s nominee, even if none were strong enough to remotely threaten Trump’s path to the nomination. In particular, DeSantis, Pence, Christie, and Haley stood out, as did Vivek Ramaswamy. 

One of the biggest questions going into the debate was whether DeSantis would capitalize on the chance to reverse his campaign, which has struggled amid sagging poll numbers, high-level staff turnovers, and donors abandoning him over his hard-right swing on positions such as abortion and gun rights in Florida. 

The Florida Governor mostly stayed on message, touting his landslide 2022 win and his record in the Sunshine State, however DeSantis noticeably shied away from taking on Trump by name, opting for general calls for the party to “look forward” before mostly fading into the background as other, more charismatic candidates made their case.

Former VP Mike Pence clearly tried to associate himself with the accomplishments of the Trump administration, while criticizing his former boss for his actions and behavior surrounding January 6th 2021. Pence also showed some fire by demanding DeSantis “answer the question” when DeSantis initially tried dodging whether Pence had done the right thing in certifying the 2020 election. 

The former VP also channeled Reagan-esque Republican principles of America’s place as the “arsenal of democracy” vis-à-vis supporting Ukraine against Russia’s full-scale invasion, a position antagonistic to the MAGA crowd. 

However, Pence is arguably the furthest to the right of any candidate – save for Tim Scott – on abortion, and his calls for a national abortion ban are sure to alienate moderates and Republicans who have seen anti-abortion measures fail in multiple states.

Christie, who essentially has a better chance to be Attorney General in a second Biden administration than he does at securing the Republican presidential nomination, often seemed like the straight-talking attack dog he wants to be. He chastised Donald Trump’s conduct and attacked Ramaswamy over his inexperience and flip-flopping on Trump. 

Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley made a well-rounded case for her candidacy, especially on foreign policy and abortion. She slammed Pence’s proposed national abortion ban, saying, “No Republican president can ban abortions any more than a Democrat president can ban all those state laws.” 

Further, Haley, who served as Ambassador to the UN under Trump also took Ramaswamy to task over his calls to end U.S. support for Ukraine, and lack of foreign policy experience, saying Ramaswamy has, “No foreign policy experience, and it shows,” drawing raucous applause from the crowd.

Ramaswamy offered little in terms of substance, even seeming arrogant at times, but in a primary election dominated by personality over policies, he held his own, did not wilt under the lights of his first-ever debate, and succeeded in bolstering his image as the young, energetic, political outsider who deserves to be taken seriously. 

Moreover, Ramaswamy cemented himself as Trump’s most vocal defender among the other candidates, even challenging Mike Pence to, “Join me in making a commitment that on day one you would pardon Donald Trump” and declaring Trump “The best president of the 21st century.”

Ultimately, while many of the candidates on the stage in Milwaukee did their best to convince Republican voters that they should be the party’s nominee, it is incredibly unlikely that any of them did enough to seriously challenge Trump, who despite not being on the debate stage, walked away the winner, and remains poised to secure a third straight GOP presidential nomination.  

Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant.