We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Vice President Kamala Harris is performing so poorly in the 2024 race that some are now asking whether it would have been better to run President Joe Biden instead.

Take Harlan Ullman, a senior advisor at the Atlantic Council. On Monday he published a column at The Hill asking, “What if Joe Biden was the better candidate all along?”

Just the title alone of the column triggered an outpouring of mockery and taunting given as Democrats brought this on themselves by pushing Biden out and then immediately replacing him with Harris — the most unpopular vice president in history — instead of holding a new primary.

Look:

In his column, Ullman defends the thesis that Biden would have been a better candidate than Harris by pointing to some findings in Bob Woodward’s latest book,” War.”

“Woodward paints a very positive picture of Biden’s ability to lead and to govern despite making mistakes, most notably the disastrous withdrawal from Kabul,” he writes. “Woodward also reports that Biden’s obvious decline was physical and not mental.”

“This was caused in part by prior medical conditions accelerating the effects of age on a body. There were also the strains of high office; the president refused to limit his overworked schedule despite valid criticisms that he was on near-permanent holiday in Delaware or Camp David,” he adds.

According to Ullman, Biden could have overcome his physical limitations versus former President Donald Trump had he focused on highlighting Trump’s dubious criminal convictions.

“If Biden were still the candidate, he would have to overcome these physical and visual disparities with Trump,” Ullman writes. “To do that, Biden would have to mount an aggressive campaign to portray Trump as a convicted felon, unfit for public office. For some reason, the Harris campaign has downplayed this conviction and his three other pending cases, as well as Trump’s major character flaws.”

Ullman’s column comes amid a Newsweek report filed Tuesday revealing that Trump’s betting market odds of winning the 2024 race are now higher than they were before the infamous debate that prompted Biden to drop out of the race and endorse Harris.

“As of 4:20 a.m. ET on Tuesday, Polymarket gave Trump odds of 64.3 percent on victory in November, substantially ahead of Democratic rival Kamala Harris on 35.7 percent,” Newsweek notes.

“The GOP candidate’s chances of winning according to Polymarket are now higher than they were at 1 a.m. ET on June 27, just hours before the Biden debate in Georgia, when they stood at 60 percent against 34 percent for the incumbent president,” the report continues.

What happened is that Trump’s betting odds were very good, then Biden dropped out, and then Trump’s numbers collapsed as Harris enjoyed a “honeymoon” during and after the Democrat National Convention. But months later, Trump’s numbers have now spiked once more.

ElectionBettingOdds.com, a site that averages betting odds across multiple markets, had former President Donald Trump leading with 60.3 percent of bets and Harris losing with a paltry 39.1 percent of bets as of the morning of Oct. 22nd.

RealClearPolitics, another site that tracks betting averages (and polling averages), meanwhile had Trump up 60.1 percent and Harris down 38.7 percent.

Vivek Saxena
Latest posts by Vivek Saxena (see all)

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.