Two-thirds of Americans in a new ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll – including a majority of Joe Biden’s own supporters – say he should step aside as his party’s presumptive nominee for president given his debate performance two weeks ago. That’s even as Biden continues to run evenly with Donald Trump, with no meaningful post-debate change in vote preferences.
Americans divide 46-47% between Biden and Trump if the election were today, almost identical to a 44-46% ABC/Ipsos poll result in April. Among registered voters (though there’s plenty of time to register) it’s an absolute tie, 46-46%.
Were Vice President Kamala Harris to replace Biden as the Democratic nominee, vote choices are 49-46%, Harris-Trump, among all adults (and 49-47% among registered voters). Harris’ 49% is slightly better than Biden’s 46%, although she doesn’t have a statistically significant lead over Trump.
Vote preference between Joe Biden / Donald Trump now, and in Apr. 2024, and Kamal Harris / Donald Trump in Apr. 2024
ABC News / Washington Post / Ipsos and ABC News / Ipsos polls
This doesn’t mean Biden didn’t take on damage from the debate. Sixty-seven percent overall say he should withdraw from the race. More, 85% now say he is too old for a second term, a new high, up from an already-broad 81% in April and 68% just more than a year ago.
Too Old for a Second Term?
ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll
Further, the poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates with fieldwork by Ipsos, finds Trump leading Biden by 30 percentage points, 44%-14%, in being seen as having the mental sharpness it takes to serve effectively as president. Trump’s lead is about as wide in being seen as having the physical health to serve, and his advantages on both have widened since April.
As the horse race shows, those views may not be determinative. Biden’s job approval rating is stable, albeit at a weak 36%. Though neither is broadly popular, Biden continues to have a better personal favorability rating than Trump. And Biden leads Trump by 17 points, 39%-22%, in being seen as more honest and trustworthy, essentially unchanged from the spring.
Both candidates face a high degree of scorn. About 4 in 10 Americans say neither has the mental sharpness or the physical health to serve effectively, and as many say neither is honest and trustworthy. Sixty percent say Trump is too old for a second term, also a new high, up from 44% in spring 2023. And in a sign of the nation’s political polarization, 50% say that given his debate performance, Trump should step aside in favor of another nominee — although, in contrast with Biden, very few of Trump’s own supporters say so.
It’s clearly Biden who suffered more reputational harm from the debate. Half of Americans say it left them with a less favorable opinion of him, versus 22% who say that about Trump’s performance. Twenty-seven percent see Trump more favorably because of the debate, versus just 7% for Biden on this measure.
Even among people who say they’ll vote for Biden in November, 81% say he is too old for another term and just 44% say he should continue in the race; 54% say he should step aside. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, more — 62% — say he should go. (For comparison, just 16% of Republicans and GOP leaners say Trump should withdraw.)
% Saying Biden Should Step Aside
ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll
Should Biden withdraw — and he maintains he won’t — just 44% of Americans overall say they’d be satisfied with Harris as the Democratic nominee, with 53% dissatisfied. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, however, satisfaction with Harris reaches 70%, and it’s 76% among current Biden supporters.
Taken another way, in an open-ended question, Democrats and Democratic leaners were asked whom they’d like to see take Biden’s place if he withdrew. Twenty-nine percent named Harris, easily the leading choice in this group, with all others in the single digits. Still, demonstrating fragmentation, more than 30 potential candidates were named.
The debate
The verdict on the debate is not close: Two-thirds of Americans say Trump won it, rising to 74% of those who watched it. (This includes those who initially call it a tie but then lean toward one or the other as the winner.)
Among Biden supporters, 59% say he won, demonstrating a significant degree of loyalty in this group. Among those who favor either Trump or another candidate, by contrast, a nearly unanimous 94% say Trump won the debate.
Another result may raise the stakes for Biden’s future appearances, including his scheduled news conference later Thursday: Among viewers, 61% say their opinion of Biden worsened as a result of the debate. Among those who didn’t watch, many fewer say so — 34%.
Stay or go
Majorities across most groups say Biden should step aside, albeit to varying degrees. It’s lowest, 49%, among Black people, including 32% among Black people age 50 and older, an especially strong group for Biden.
Fifty-six percent of Democrats say Biden should withdraw, rising to 72% of independents and a nearly identical share of Republicans, 73%. Six in 10 liberals say so, as do about 7 in 10 moderates and conservatives. It’s also about 7 in 10 among both white and Hispanic people. Even among people who have a favorable opinion of Biden personally, 55% say he should step aside, as do 77% of those who see him unfavorably.
Vote choice
Like the Biden-Trump horse race overall, preferences among groups are very similar to what they were in April. It’s 39-53%, Biden-Trump, among white people, for example, 49-42% among Hispanic people and 77-17% among Black people.
His debate performance notwithstanding, Democrats stick with Biden, 91-5%; Republicans with Trump, 94-4%; and independents, often swing voters in national elections, split 40-44% (Biden-Trump), not a significant difference.
There are some differences in Harris’ support against Trump compared with Biden’s, though not enough to make that race anything but another dead heat. Harris does better against Trump with women, 52-44%, compared with 47-46% for Biden-Trump among women.
Further, Harris has a significant lead over Trump among Hispanic people, 56-40%, while Biden does not. And Harris does 8 points better than Biden with urban women, 61% versus 53%. Harris’s 82% support among Black people, and 86% among Black women, are not significantly different from Biden’s results in these groups.
Another test, including Biden, Trump and third-party or independent candidates, again finds no meaningful change from April, with 41% for Biden, 42% for Trump, 10% for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and 2% apiece for Cornel West and Jill Stein.
Attributes
As noted, even after the debate Biden carries a comparative advantage in one key measure of goodwill. He’s 8 points underwater on personal favorability, seen favorably by 42% of the public, unfavorably by 50%. Trump, by contrast, is 25 points underwater on this score, 34%-59%.
These favorability ratings are essentially unchanged since April, with no debate impact apparent. That’s even while, among people who see Biden favorably overall, nearly 4 in 10 (37%) also say they see him less favorably than previously because of the debate.
Personal Favorability
ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll
A question ahead is what candidate attributes matter most to the public. That includes, for example, how much juice Biden gets from his clear advantage on honesty and trustworthiness, or his smaller, single-digit leads as the candidate who “represents your personal values” and “will protect American democracy.” He and Trump run essentially evenly in another, historically important attribute, understanding “the problems of people like you.”
That said, the hit to Biden on his perceived mental acuity and physical health are real. In April he trailed Trump on mental sharpness by 19 points; today, as mentioned, it’s 30 points. And Biden’s 22-point deficit on physical health in the spring is 31 points now.
Personal Attributes
ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll
Trump, moreover, betters Biden in terms of job approval. With 36% approving versus 57% disapproving, Biden is 21 points underwater on this score. Thinking back to Trump’s presidency, 43% approve of his job performance, 52% disapprove, a narrower 9-point gap. Biden’s job rating has been essentially steady for more than a year, and negative for three years.
Plan B
As to possible successors, 67% of Black people — an overwhelmingly Democratic group — would be satisfied with Harris, the first Black person and first woman to serve as vice president, taking over from Biden. Fewer Hispanic people (51%) or white people (38%) would be satisfied, at least in part reflecting their differing partisan preferences.
Satisfaction with a Harris nomination is about the same among Black women (70%) and Black men (64%; the 6-point difference isn’t significant given sample sizes). Similarly, there’s no difference between men and women overall in their views on Harris as the nominee.
In the open-ended question among Democrats and Democratic leaners, Harris leads in preference to replace Biden across groups — named, for example, by 27% to 34% of men, women, Black people, Hispanic people and white people alike.
As many skipped or declined the question as picked Harris. Distantly following her, 7% named California Gov. Gavin Newsom as a preferred stand-in; 4%, former first lady Michelle Obama; 3% each, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer; 2%, independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.; and 1%, eight other political figures from Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear to Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Others showed up with less than half a percent.
Methodology
This ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll was conducted online via the probability-based Ipsos KnowledgePanel® July 5-9, 2024, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 2,431 adults. Partisan divisions are 32%-29%-27%, Democrats-Republicans-independents. Results have a margin of sampling error of 2 percentage points, including the design effect, for the full sample. Sampling error is not the only source of differences in polls.
The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates, with sampling and data collection by Ipsos. See details on ABC News survey methodology here.
In a move that sent shockwaves through British Columbia’s political landscape, B.C. United leader Kevin Falcon announced on Wednesday that his party would suspend its campaign for the upcoming provincial election and throw its support behind John Rustad’s resurgent B.C. Conservatives. This unprecedented decision has left political watchers and analysts scrambling to make sense of the ramifications for the province’s political future.
Kevin Falcon, who took the reins of the B.C. Liberals—now rebranded as B.C. United—in February 2022, delivered the stunning news at a press conference that left many in disbelief. The former cabinet minister, known for his confidence and assertiveness, appeared uncharacteristically somber and introspective as he explained the rationale behind his decision.
Shachi Kurl, president of the Angus Reid Institute, observed the stark contrast in Falcon’s demeanor. “This is a man who has always exuded confidence, even cockiness, throughout his political career. But today, he seemed on the brink of tears, visibly struggling with the weight of this decision,” Kurl noted. The emotional toll of Falcon’s announcement was evident, underscoring the gravity of the situation both personally and professionally for the B.C. United leader.
The roots of B.C. United’s collapse can be traced back to two key decisions made by Falcon: the expulsion of John Rustad from the party and the controversial rebranding from the B.C. Liberals to B.C. United. Rustad, who was removed from the party in February 2023 for questioning climate change science, quickly capitalized on his dismissal by revitalizing the dormant B.C. Conservative Party. Since then, Rustad has attracted a growing number of former B.C. United MLAs and candidates to his cause, turning the B.C. Conservatives into a formidable political force.
The decision to rebrand the B.C. Liberals as B.C. United, which was meant to signal a fresh start for the party, has been widely criticized as poorly timed and poorly executed. Bill Bennett, a former Liberal cabinet minister, lamented the lack of public understanding of the new brand. “There was no real effort to rebrand and help the public grasp who B.C. United was. The entire process lacked sufficient resources, which ultimately led to its failure,” Bennett said.
Political scientists have been quick to analyze the implications of Falcon’s decision to suspend B.C. United’s campaign. Stewart Prest, a political science lecturer at the University of British Columbia (UBC), expressed shock at the sudden turn of events. “This was a party that, just moments ago, was preparing to compete in this election. To suddenly wave the white flag and step aside in favor of another party is unprecedented. We haven’t seen anything quite like this before,” Prest remarked.
The move has also raised questions about Falcon’s leadership and the future of B.C. United. Gerald Baier, an associate professor of political science at UBC, suggested that Falcon’s decision to expel Rustad may be viewed as the pivotal moment in his leadership. “If Falcon could go back and change one decision, it would likely be the expulsion of Rustad. That move set off a chain reaction that ultimately led to the party’s collapse,” Baier explained.
With B.C. United stepping aside, the B.C. Conservatives are now positioned to become the main opposition to the ruling B.C. NDP in the upcoming election, scheduled for October 19. However, the transition will not be without its challenges. The Conservatives will need to decide which B.C. United candidates to include on their slate, a process that could leave some candidates and voters in a state of uncertainty.
As the political landscape in British Columbia shifts dramatically, the upcoming election promises to be one of the most closely watched and hotly contested in recent memory. The decision by Falcon to back the B.C. Conservatives has not only upended the election but has also reshaped the future of politics in the province. As the dust settles, all eyes will be on John Rustad and his ability to capitalize on this newfound momentum.
In conclusion, Kevin Falcon’s decision to suspend B.C. United’s campaign and endorse the B.C. Conservatives marks a pivotal moment in British Columbia’s political history. The move has raised numerous questions about the future of B.C. United, the leadership of the B.C. Conservatives, and the upcoming election itself. As the province braces for what promises to be a highly volatile election season, one thing is clear: British Columbia’s political landscape will never be the same.
VICTORIA – British Columbia’s auditor general says his office has found no evidence of a conflict of interest in the handling of provincial grants for the zero-emission vehicle sector, after an accusation by a truck maker earlier this year.
Michael Pickup says in a statement the investigation looked into accounting firm MNP’s handling of Advanced Research and Commercialization grant applications, reviewing “a significant amount of information” from the company, the government and all applicants.
Pickup says the results show no evidence MNP wrote grant applications for clients, influenced the evaluation process to benefit clients or used its administering of the program to “recruit” clients for the company’s other services.
In April, the provincial legislature unanimously directed Pickup’s office to examine allegations by electric-hybrid truck maker Edison Motors that MNP was both administering the grants and offering services to help businesses with applications.
The Office of the Auditor General says the allegations from Edison, which is based in Merritt, B.C., suggested MNP “was offering to write grant applications in exchange for a success fee while also deciding who received grant funding.”
MNP said at the time that the allegations were “false and misleading.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 28, 2024.
Certain solar farms will be banned on prime agricultural land in Ontario as the province expands energy production to meet demand in the coming decades, Energy Minister Stephen Lecce said Wednesday.
Ontario is looking to add some 5,000 megawatts of energy to the grid, with Lecce directing the Independent Electricity System Operator to secure “technology agnostic” energy resources. That means the province will use a mix of natural gas, hydroelectric, renewables, nuclear and biomass energy sources, he said.
But the province is making efforts to protect key agricultural areas in the process, the minister said.
Ground-mounted solar panels will be prohibited on prime agricultural farmland, said Lecce, who pledged the province would “never misuse” those lands.
“Our farmers need more energy more than ever,” Lecce said.
“They need access to to affordable energy and so we made a commitment to work with them on a policy that ultimately will respect prime agricultural land.”
Other energy products being considered on prime agricultural land will now require an impact assessment before proceeding.
The province is also giving power to municipalities to decide if they want a particular energy project.
“Long gone are the days where Queen’s Park imposes projects on unwilling communities, undermining those agricultural areas,” Lecce said.
The news is welcome to farmers, said Drew Spoelstra, the president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.
“The new energy procurement framework is a major step forward for Ontario,” he said.
“Reliable and affordable energy is incredibly important to the growth of the Ontario economy, including food production, food processing and the agri-food sector.”
Farmers and Premier Doug Ford’s government have had an up-and-down relationship in recent years in light of the Greenbelt scandal.
The province had said they were going to build 50,000 homes on the protected Greenbelt, which includes prime agricultural land. But several investigations by provincial bodies found the process was flawed as it favoured some developers with ties to the government over others.
Farmers did not like the possible encroachment onto farmland and joined the chorus to denounce the Greenbelt move. Last summer, amid mounting public pressure to reverse course, Ford walked back those Greenbelt plans.
Lecce’s announcement Wednesday comes as the province’s electricity demand is expected to grow by about two per cent each year, although that could be even higher depending on electrification within the broader economy.
The IESO has said the province will need at least 60 per cent more energy by 2050.
Ontario has also recently been adding electricity storage projects, with an eye to about 2,500 megawatts, and the IESO said the province’s emerging battery fleet will pair well with wind and solar, so that the power generated by those methods can be stored and injected into the grid when needed.
Ford cancelled 750 renewable energy contracts shortly after his Progressive Conservatives formed government in 2018, after the former Liberal government faced widespread anger over the long-term contracts with clean power producers at above-market rates.
The province is also moving ahead with nuclear energy expansion, including seeking to refurbish units at the Pickering nuclear plant, build small modular reactors at the Darlington nuclear plant and exploring a new, large-scale plant at Bruce Power.
In 2021, the electricity system was 94 per cent emissions free, but that is now down to 87 per cent as it uses natural gas to meet demand.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 28, 2024.
