Hillary Clinton says Biden's re-election bid cost Democrats the 2024 election

[ForgoTheConsequence]

Source: The Guardian

Joe Biden’s decision to seek a second term was “a terrible mistake” that cost Democrats the presidency and may have permanently damaged his legacy, Hillary Clinton has declared.

Speaking at the 92nd Street Y in Manhattan on Monday, the former US secretary of state and 2016 Democratic nominee said Biden had reneged on a prior commitment to step aside – and that the betrayal of that promise proved catastrophic. “He made a terrible mistake for himself, his legacy, and for the country,” she said.

Clinton argued that had Biden announced in late summer 2023 that he would not run, a genuine Democratic primary would have produced a stronger nominee.

“I believe whoever emerged from that contest, whether it was the vice-president or a governor or a senator or anybody else, would have beaten Donald Trump,” she said, calling the decision to stay in the race “a terrible miscalculation”.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/lhQp47IdK0w

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/16/hillary-clinton-joe-biden-2024-election

[calguy]

1. She's not wrong

[68er]

2. He should've announced he wasn't running again, right after the (fairly) successful midterms...

The political buzz would've kept more of the wind-up doll media spotlight away from Tr*mp during that period, too...

[Bluetus]

20. I very openly advocated that he should be running in 2020 expplicitly as a one-term President.

There were already concerns about his age. Announcing in 2020 that he intended to come in and spend 4 years using everything he had learned during his career to get the country back on track following the disastrous Trump first term (rampnt graft, selling out to our enemies, COVID, 2 impeachments, etc.) and NOT run for a second term. That would have been seen as the capstone of a long career of public service.

He could have even taken it one step further and committed to convening ann the living Presidents (except Trump) regularly as were were putting the country back together.

This kind of posture could have given him a much broader mandate to make needed changes like reforming the Spureme Court. because he honestly could say it had nothing to do with any of his political ambitions.

[68er]

21. Agreed. He would not have had to keep any "powder dry" for a second term, in that case...

... and could've been much more unfettered in protecting the democracy we've now lost.

[SomewhereInTheMiddle]

29. I had strongly hoped when I voted for him ...

... he would commit to a single term and spend much of that term trying to codify into law all the norms and traditions that Trump showed to be ignorable and toothless in his first term. Setting strong boundaries on the power of the president that Trump so flagrantly abused and enlarged.

I was saddened when he did neither.

I would still have voted for him in 2024 if he had stayed on the ballot and I did vote for Harris.

But the lack of new laws has allowed Trump to go much further in his second term. Not that he does not regularly flout the existing laws.

[Chemical Bill]

43. Manchin and Sinema...

made sure no laws were passed to prevent the second coming of TSF. Biden did his best, to no avail.

[JBTaurus83]

3. She's definitely correct

I’m sure there will be people pointing that out about her as well. Democrats as voters seem to be pretty “one and done” with our candidates if they don’t succeed in a race like the Presidential race.

[littlemissmartypants]

4. To embed a YT Short video on DU...

Replace: shorts/

With: watch?v=

And voila...

[ForgoTheConsequence]

6. Thanks! Noted for next time.

[littlemissmartypants]

7. 👍❤️

[Callie1979]

5. File in the "no shit" file. He said in '20 he'd likely NOT run for a 2nd term.

We shouldve had a primary.
Once again Hillary is right.

[bromeando]

8. Hillary

She's right. Biden and others want to stay in power too long.

[Bayard]

24. I don't think it had anything to do with power

I have never doubted that Pres. Biden was always trying to do the right thing for this country.

[pat_k]

56. Yes. But he was a stubborn man too convinced that he could overcome any challenge.

His determination made him a good president.

I think that determination turned into a stubborn bullheaded belief that he could overcome "the age problem," just as he had overcome so many seemingly insurmountable challenges in his personal and political life.

And that was a terrible mistake.

But he was not alone in his belief in himself.

Before he announced I had many, many, many, many heated conversations with my step-father.

My step-father was convinced Biden was absolutely the best candidate and absolutely should run. He didn't think there was anyone else out there as strong. He said I was just being ageist.

I was sending messages to the White House begging him not to run. (Others I knew were "praying" for the same in their own ways. Sending my little pleas into the WH abyss was my "prayer" ).

I was flabbergasted with my step-father's view. Every argument I highlighted the many pluses for this or that great candidate. We had, and have, so many great candidates on our bench. He was worried that Kamala would be "anointed" and wasn't the best. I argued she would have challengers. He always had reasons against this or that person. I would get pissed and end up saying (or yelling) that's what a primary is for!!

As time passed and Biden put off making the decision (compressing time for "the field" to emerge) I became increasingly angry and my step-father increasingly convinced that Biden would, and should run.

It wasn't even a month into Biden's campaign that my step-father told me I was right. He had been watching campaign events and realized Biden was not looking good. The campaign my step-father was seeing was miles away from his image of what a Biden campaign would look like. Age had done what age does and Biden was visibly dimished by it.

But then it was too late. We all had to rally behind him and believe this man could pull it off with our support.

And we all know what happen next.

If he hadn't run, would the party have "anointed" Kamala as next in line? Maybe. Maybe not. Had she been "anointed" would a full campaign season have given her space to separate herself from Biden and build a truly winning campaign? Maybe. Maybe not. If it had been a "field" in the running, would it result in the party coalescing behind a candidate that would go on to win? Maybe. Maybe not

The only thing wrong with Hillary's statement is the unequivocal assertion that the decision cost Democrats the Presidency.

We will never know the path not taken. But I do agree that running was a terrible mistake.

The path not taken may not have led to victory, but at least it was not a path that was doomed from the start.

[LymphocyteLover]

9. Biden never promised that or committed to that. There's no reason to bring all this crap up.

[delisen]

11. Clinton was asked a question in Interview. She answered it.

She pulled no punches and also did the same on Trump, Iran, Netanyahu, and Clarence Thomas.

It was refreshing to hear a politician speak her mind. The interview is long. Found it on you tune. David Remnick interviewed at 97NY on June 15, 2026, yesterday.

I found it illuminating.

[Bluetus]

22. And people are sick of politicians being evasive and too "coached"

We are hearing plain talk from people like AOC, Mamdani, Newsom, Pritzker, Platner, and now Ossoff and Talarico. I welcome Hillary adding to that with her voice.

Democrats finding a voice after a couple of generations of constant equivocation. Americans hate that. They want to follow people who speak with some clarity and conviction, not just platitutudes and slogans.

[LymphocyteLover]

33. She could've answered that without dumping so harshly on Joe Biden, a totally decent man and good president

[Akakoji]

12. Yes. He did.

Look it up.

[LymphocyteLover]

32. "So did Biden promise or pledge or signal that he would be a one-term president? No, not explicitly."

Some one-term truthers also cite a March 2020 speech in which Biden called himself a “bridge” to a new generation of Democratic leaders. Here’s what he said specifically: “Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else. There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.”

So did Biden promise or pledge or signal that he would be a one-term president? No, not explicitly. A bridge can be short, like the world’s shortest international bridge, or long, like … various other bridges. As I said Tuesday, it’s really most appropriate to say that the president “floated” serving one term before backing away from the idea.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/06/biden-president-trump-rematch-one-term-promise-nate-silver.html

[Akakoji]

44. https://www.usnews.com/news/elections/articles/2019-12-11/joe-biden-suggests-he-would-only-serve-one-term-if-elected-pre

Former Vice President Joe Biden has reportedly indicated that he would only serve for one term if elected to the presidency.
Several sources within the Biden campaign told Politico that the 2020 Democratic candidate would not run for reelection in 2024, when he would be 82 years old. "If Biden is elected, he's going to be 82 years old in four years and he won't be running for reelection," a prominent adviser to the campaign told Politico. A 2020 front-runner, Biden, has faced questions about his age and fitness to serve in the White House. Campaign advisers argue that announcing his intention to only serve one term and signalling that he will choose a younger running mate and cabinet would increase Biden's chances of being the Democratic nominee.

There are lots and lots more.

[LymphocyteLover]

49. Unnamed sources mean little. Biden himself never made that pledge or promise. He hinted at it once but that's it.

[Mysterian]

48. No, he didn't

Stop spreading lies.

[Akakoji]

10. Stating the obvious

Guess he was lying when he said that he would only be a one term President. He should have just let it go.

[Polybius]

14. Well, technically he was

[Akakoji]

26. What's the difference between technically lying and lying?

What?

[Polybius]

31. I meant technically he was a one term President

[msfiddlestix]

13. She's not wrong but it's still a little bit weird that she's made a statement like that in public All Things Considered,

Throwing rocks and glass windows and all that

[Polybius]

15. She was interviewed, and someone asked if it was a mistake that he ran again (initially)

I appreciated her honest answer.

[msfiddlestix]

18. 👍

[Prairie Gates]

16. I absolutely assumed, when I voted for Biden in 2020, that he would serve a placeholder role

It's truly a lesson in "My precious." People can't let go of it.

[Midwestern Democrat]

59. I basically thought that it was inevitable that Biden would serve only one term.

I thought it would be pretty much an unquestioned given within the party that we could not run an 82 year old man for a second four year term as president. Which is why the Kamala Harris VP selection baffled me - I know why he did it - but given the high likelihood of him only serving one term, I didn't think we really had the luxury of making a choice like that - I strongly felt we needed to have an heir apparent in the spot - one who would be given a prominent role within the administration.

[Martin68]

17. I agree with Clinton. Biden was losing stamina and credibility, but his staff held on too long.

[Akakoji]

28. If Trump weren't stealing so much money for the family syndicate from our tax dollars

The GOP would have thrown him off Trump Tower. Ever heard of Peter Thiel?

[johnnyplankton]

19. Sadly, he undid what should have been a brilliant legacy. He could have been among the best one-termers, instead...

[sprinkleeninow]

23. Sadly, I arrived at the same conclusion.

[usonian]

25. Pardon me. I love them both but

If neither one, even for good medical reason, is going to stand up loudly against the Trump Putsch, then let them work things out very, very privately.

They are party past. We can't win with revisionist history.

HOW WE WIN.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=420478
☝️ ☝️☝️ ☝️☝️ ☝️

The revolutionary Democratic party WILL WIN. The old party just walked away from the battle in 2024, when we needed them the most.

This party.

[Demobrat]

27. So it's okay to say it now?

[dadzilla]

30. But would it have been better?

I'll just say it, she;'s as sharp a mind as you could expect from a blue dog dem. That said, what could we really expected of her term in office. Did she have the ovaries to tell APIC to sit down? Was she astute enough to push back on the tech bros? It's easy to look back and lay out a fantasy of what could have been.

Would it have been better than tRump, clearly. But I wouldn't say it would be a progressive dream either.

[Scruffy1]

34. Did you mean AIPAC? nt.

[Akakoji]

45. Was she trying to be a progressive dream?

Or is that what you were hoping for?

[Katinfl]

35. She is probably right. But we still had a good candidate in Kamala.

The fact remains that people did not realize how much Biden had accomplished to get us through Covid, get the economy back on track and all the other good things he did. They fell for trumps BS, did not remember his first term or chose to forget it, would not vote for a black woman, chose to sit this one out, etc…….whatever the reason, we are where we are because voters simply chose to take the easy way out. Whether Biden stayed in or not, the outcome would have probably been the same. We had a great candidate who stepped up to the plate on short notice, did a fantastic job and still lost to an idiot.

The choice could not have been clearer and yet this is what we got. What does that say about this country?

[ificandream]

38. Don't forget that right wing scumballs at Fox (don't call it) news lied about Kamala and Trump

They did everything to slam her and everything they could to praise him. That's where the blame lies.

[Katinfl]

40. Very true and there are people who listen or pay attention to nothing else.

They are ignorant in my opinion. Hence, we are where we are. Sad fact is nothing will change. They will not change.

[Mysterian]

36. Thanks for the update from the Clinton machine, Hil.

Your looking and speaking to the past is doing nobody except republicans any good.

[ificandream]

39. I don't agree about helping Republicans, but we should have listened to her in 2016.

That's where we really screwed up. What she's saying now really doesn't matter. The 2024 election is over and done.

[Mysterian]

41. At this point in history, every Democratic voice that is not calling for unity to fight fascism

is helping republicans.

[iemanja]

42. The DNC ran a postmortem on the election

The goal was to figure out how not to repeat past mistakes. Martin, of course, fucked it up. But the fact remains that we must understand what went wrong in past elections to be able to win in the future.

[Mysterian]

46. Well, blaming it all on Biden is the easy and wrong way to do that

I don't recall any comparable "post-mortem" when Clinton lost to Trump. Weird.

[iemanja]

50. You can't be serious

That doesn’t even pass the laugh test.

[Mysterian]

54. Is that supposed to be some kind of retort?

Please try again.

[iemanja]

55. It means your comment isn't true

Last edited Thu Jun 18, 2026, 10:00 PM - Edit history (1)

1) There were several autopsies on the election by Democratic groups. 2) There were nothing but recriminations of Hillary, and women’s rights for that matter. If you were on DU at that time, you know it.
3) There were endless articles in the press about what she did wrong. Why are you pretending otherwise?

Your so-called call for unity is rendered hollow by your stated antipathy for Hillary. Then there is the fact that you can’t distinguish her as an individual as district from her husband’s former political power, as though women are mere appendages of men.

[Mysterian]

57. I have no antipathy for Mrs. Clinton, but I realized the only reason she came to national prominence

was her marriage to Bill Clinton. That is reality, as uncomfortable as it might be for you. I considered her a weak candidate on the national level. Please direct me to a link to a Democratic National Committee contracted report on Mrs. Clinton's electiion loss, as was done for President Biden's. Your reference to unnamed "Democratic groups" carries no weight. Thanks.

[CTyankee]

37. When Biden had that moment in the debate where he blanked out, my heart sank.

Something was wrong. I had never seen Biden that way before.

[artemisia1]

47. Perhaps there is some truth in that, but the real reason the Democratic Party lost the 2024 was the dumbsh*ts who

fell for Donald Trump for a second time because they admired his worst attributes and thought he'd help them by going after their scapegoats.

[tirebiter]

51. Hillary will not be in the 2028 finals

[Alice B.]

52. Now I would like to hear about the other valuable life lessons we learned in 2024. And in general.

Just blaming the "who" is too easy and pat. People love simple answers.

We may've won in 2024 but we also might've only been delaying what happened.

I was unemployed at the time and would've invited any candidate to spend some time deep in the communities of the unemployed and job-seekers. Not everyone felt seen and touched by the economic messaging and I could see how some people might've felt left behind and been tempted to push that button.

I have Tr*mp voters in the family and I'm honestly not even sure they *realized* Biden wasn't running, from comments made after the election.

[snot]

53. I believe that the party did itself serious damage

by foregoing primaries, which (a) would have flushed out more clearly whether and to what extent Biden was in fact fit for another term; (b) would have given voters a chance to evaluate other potential candidates and hopefully come up with the one with the best chance of beating Trump; and (c) would have been more democratic, which a lot of voters, both Dem & otherwise, still consider important.

[mahina]

58. Must have been super awkward yesterday in Chicago.

Hillaryʻs comment is fair, but I bet Joe didnʻt agree that anyone else who emerged would win.