"Despite all the evidence that the single most important determinant of getting elected president may be whether a candidate can excite their own party’s voters, we never treat that as a factor in electability. We discuss the electorate as though it has a fixed number of voters, and there will be no one who either stays home because they’re uninspired or turns out when they otherwise wouldn’t have because a candidate excites them. If that’s your assumption, then naturally you conclude that all that matters is whether someone can pull votes from the other side. Not only that, you’re actively discouraged from thinking that the person whom you really like might be electable. After all, if you’re a partisan, and you love a particular candidate, that must mean they won’t be able to appeal to those magical swing voters."

The headline is a mid-item part of an integrated WaPo op-ed that Strib posted here. The argument is fleshed out in opening text leading to the headline-quote, and follow-up text adding more. Read the item. It is worth the time it takes, and then, agree or disagree? And Joe Biden, electable? Is there one single thing you can say about Joe Biden that excites your interest and loyalty? Me neither. Some bunch of paid pundits are selling us a bunch of "electability," where quality of mind and message is what to trust. Trust your instincts, not someone's puffing over who is "electable." The closing thought here, the people funding some candidates are ordinary people trusting their heart in support of who they write small checks for, whereas the big donor insiders of large-scale commerce and of the beltway establishment in all its tentacled reach, put their money into manageability. The big donors see Biden as manageable. I do too, but as just a citizen, I have no handle from which I might manage the man. He does not give a shit about me. Comcast-man cannot be stretched to care about you, or me, or anything beyond capturing our vote via MSNBC and other propaganda, in large part, repetition of "electability" as if once elected, what the person might be expected to do in office is an afterthought. Biden, as with Trump ramping up to November 2016, can say good things, but what's the trust level you actually place in him? When you watch, does he seem more scripted than legit? Does Elizabeth Warren appear to you to be brighter and fresh? Tulsi Gabbard, same thing, what has she to say and how much would you trust her in hearing it? Would she in office change tunes, or stay true to election ideas? Bernie, ditto. And any reader who really finds Biden a resonant person, good, vote your instincts. That is the point made by the man writing the WaPo item linked to in the opening sentence. Ditto Beto or Kamala, or Pete, or some other of the current candidates who resonates most with you.

Ignore the "electability" shibboleth. Don't buy that brand. You have a heart, a mind, instincts. Vote how you think best and not how you gauage the minds of "the electorate," as if you expect other voters to be tricked in ways some want to trick you.

YouTube.

__________UPDATE___________
Energizing the base to assure a strong GOTV? Before the sheep dogs get to woofing and herding, repeatedly telling us green is blue, and looking at the sidebar images of Bernie's crowds, an images websearch -

Google = biden crowds

The big crowd pic, Biden at the lectern, here, note venue and date. Otherwise, Breitbart weighed in prior to the 2018 mid-terms, clearly different than now with Biden a declared Democratic Party presidential candidate; and there is here, where Crabgrass did not stream through the photo gallery, but the lead "doing a selfie" image belies "crowd" headline. Readers are urged to scan the entire set of gallery images. Politico:

[..] “We choose hope over fear! We choose unity over division! We choose truth over lies! And we choose science over fiction!” Biden said to loud applause. “Remember who we are!” Biden said. “This is the United States of America!”

[...] Each of the venues — a veterans memorial hall in Cedar Rapids, the Dubuque convention center, an Iowa City taproom, an old Des Moines nightclub — hosted a few hundred people. The crowds weren’t as large — or as electric — as at Trump’s events at this stage of the 2016 election cycle, but the attendees say it’s simply a reflection of familiar but low-key style.

“Biden doesn’t go to the base insanity like Trump. We need sanity again,” said John Roethig, a 66-year-old Dubuque Democrat.

For Roethig and other Biden Democrats, the lack of policy specifics doesn’t matter. There’s an understanding among them that Congress will only pass so much of a president’s agenda, and all the major Democrats are generally in line on the big picture ideas that matter anyway — more affordable healthcare, college affordability, a need for more renewable fuels.

Biden can say, "This is the United States of America," but that is distant to "Healthcare is a right and Universal single payer is the route." Also distant, "Rein in the excesses of the pharma giants." Also distant, "Free education at public universities and relief for existing student debt."

Joe was the one pushing bankruptcy "reform" making it harder from his bill's passage, onward, for students to have protections of washing debt burdens they could not meet after graduation without a decent job. He pulled the bankruptcy rug out from under the young, and are they in any numbers at Biden speeches? If so, let's see images of Bernie-sized enthusiasm. It ain't there. End of story.

---------------------------

A horse's tail can show what it's hidin'; lift the tail and you'll see Biden.

---------------------------

That's taking liberties with the Roosevelt era ditty about Wendel Wilkie, "... tail is long and silky, ...".

All for now; but please do not let the incessant sheep dogs herd you toward mistake. Be wiser.

FURTHER: Biden in Pennsylvania, union crowd, young people props placed behind him, the camera does not pull far back on the people in front of him, no really massive crowd viewing, and clearly it is harder to see young looking ones when the camera does pull back wide angle. My hopping through to random points in the speech; so what? He's saying little in many words, that being my opinion, but the link is there for readers to view and consider, apart from the outlook here.