Back in the early 1980s (before he was in his early 80s), the punk band The Clash put out a song asking what has now become Joe Biden's new existential question:

Should I stay or should I go now?

If I go there will be trouble

And if I stay it will be double

So you gotta let me know

Should I stay or should I go?

The only problem with fitting the song lyrics to Biden's current conundrum is that it is Joe and Joe alone who will be making this decision. Others can "let him know," but the choice is going to be his and his alone to make.

The political world is still abuzz with all the speculation, days after Biden's disastrous debate performance. Team Biden has so far been showing a strong and unified face to the rest of the Democratic Party and the press, insisting that Biden will not be stepping down while demanding loyalty from the party ranks. Biden has huddled with his family members over the weekend -- who are really the only ones who probably could influence him in this decision -- and reportedly they all urged Joe to stay the course and continue his campaign, insisting that it was just "one bad night" that can be overcome.

But the cracks are beginning to show. At first it was just the political media, although some very big names in the media universe have now gone on record explicitly calling for Biden to step down. Then it was a handful of Democrats no longer active in politics anymore who expressed the idea that the party's best chance was to replace Joe. Now there are cracks in the congressional delegation, as a few sitting Democrats are either openly calling for Biden to step aside or expressing some rather serious doubts.

This is a trickle, so far, but it could turn into a flood after some solid post-debate polling arrives. So far, the polls Team Biden has released essentially show that the debate didn't really change anyone's mind in terms of supporting him, but also that worries about his advanced age have indeed grown among Democrats. If independent polls appear later this week that tell a different story, however, it's going to get harder and harder for the Biden campaign not to admit that they've got a very real problem.

So should Joe stay or should he go? Well, let's break this down into three parts. Because these are really the only three possibilities.

Joe stays

Joe Biden continuing as the Democratic Party's presidential nominee is now a lot riskier than it was before last Thursday night. But then all of these options have significant risk to them -- there simply are no guarantees.

So far, Biden is stubbornly insisting everyone stay the course. "It was one bad night," his campaign insists. "He can recover." Biden did himself a world of good in his campaign rally the next day, where he appeared as a whole different person than the "Debate Joe" we all witnessed the night before, but whether this sort of thing will be enough or not is an open question.

The risk is a very large and very real one: Biden could lose to Donald Trump. Biden's key message from the very start has been we have to protect America from Trump winning a second term. But if that is true and Biden is not the best person to do that, then his staying in the race is no more than hubris -- the firm (but possibly misguided) belief that he is the only one who can beat Trump. That was true in 2020 but is it still true now?

If Biden stays in and wins, he will be entitled to the largest "I told you so!" in American political history. But if he stays in and loses, the "I told you so!" chorus from others will be absolutely deafening. The country will have to endure Donald Trump being back in the Oval Office again, and with every new scandal he causes (and there will be many) the afterthought will be: "Thanks a lot, Joe, for putting us in this position." That will be absolutely brutal for Biden's legacy -- something most presidents care deeply about. Biden won't be the man who saved us all from Trump anymore, he will instead be the man who handed the Oval Office back to Trump.

So far, in the polls conducted after the debate, Biden's support hasn't collapsed. Nobody saw that debate and thought to themselves: "Well, Biden is indeed old, I guess I'll vote for Trump," in other words. Plenty saw it and thought: "Biden is old, I truly hope he is up to the task," though.

If this were a normal campaign season, then a bad first debate could be countered with a much better second debate a few weeks later. But that's not in the cards -- the second and assumably final debate is months off. And it's now an open question whether it will even take place or not. Either Biden or Trump could decide that not debating was more advantageous and pull out at any time.

If Biden is going to stay in and stay competitive, he's at least got to sit down for some no-holds-barred interviews with journalists. His team has not scheduled many of these -- he even skipped a now-traditional appearance before the Super Bowl -- and one has to wonder why this is so. Is it because his campaign team is not confident that he would do well in an unscripted setting with a journalist asking anything under the sun? That would be a big concern, if it is true. Doing a few televised interviews would put this fear to rest -- assuming they went well, of course.

Biden staying the course would avoid convention chaos, that is the biggest argument for sticking with Joe at this point. If the convention chooses someone else because Biden drops out then it's going to be a big fight and might even tear the party apart. The nominee would have to essentially run a "European-style" campaign, since it would only last a matter of months, not years. Biden, on the other hand, has already been running all along and there wouldn't be the whole "changing horses in mid-stream" problem.

Biden staying in runs the big risk of him either emerging as a Democratic hero or a Democratic catastrophe. He did beat Trump before, and he could assemble the same sort of coalition behind him and beat him this time as well. But there is no guarantee of that actually happening, and the polling isn't very reassuring at this moment in time.

Joe anoints Kamala as his heir apparent

If Joe Biden is not going to be the nominee, then the immediate question becomes: "What about Kamala Harris?" Democrats already voted for her as vice president once, signifying that she would be an acceptable replacement should the unimaginable happen. But that's putting it too politely, because it wasn't "unimaginable" that a man of Biden's advanced age might possibly create a sudden vacancy in the Oval Office that Harris might have to step into. It was perfectly easy to imagine that even in 2020, and Democrats were fine with the prospect of Harris taking over.

The problem with Harris is that she was pretty obviously more of an identity-politics selection than Biden just choosing the best person for the job. Harris hadn't made much in the way of a splash in her own presidential campaign (other than one memorable debate moment against Biden himself) and doesn't exactly have her own wide base of support or popularity within the Democratic Party.

There are rather large doubts about whether Harris would be the best candidate to take on Trump, if Biden drops out. Other Democrats might be better on the campaign trail, and other Democrats might generate more enthusiasm with the voters.

But Harris does have advantages too. As mentioned, post-debate polling has been sparse as of yet, but one poll did show her in exactly the same place Biden now is with Trump -- a few points behind him overall, but close. She's not as toxic as some Democrats would have you believe, in other words, and she might have a better chance of convincing undecided voters to support her than Joe might now have.

Admittedly, Harris can be off-putting when she speaks. She has a tone and delivery that she likely developed as a courtroom prosecutor that is very professorial and authoritative. But you could also call it condescending and elitist as well. To some, hearing her speak is akin to fingernails on a chalkboard. And hearing her laugh sets some teeth on edge as well.

Harris also has a looser and softer side as well, though. She doesn't show it much these days, since she's been trying to grow into her job, but it is assumably still there and would come out in the spotlight of a presidential campaign. Harris has already settled on her major issue, and it's a good one: she is now the administration's point person on fighting back against the overturning of Roe v. Wade. This is personal, for her, and it shows. Her speeches on abortion access and women's rights are the best she's probably ever given. And it will indeed be a potent issue in the 2024 race.

Kamala Harris has already charted several "firsts" as a woman. If Joe passed the baton to her, she could become America's first female president. That is a very big deal right there. But like Hillary Clinton before her, she will have to overcome a lot of sexism and "I'd vote for a woman, just not that woman" type of thinking.

The idea of Joe Biden dropping out of the race and anointing Harris his successor has some big positives to it. She's already been vice president, she is nationally-known, and backing her would likely generate some enthusiasm within two Democratic demographics that so far have been pretty tepid: young voters and Black voters.

Moving Harris up the ticket would make things easier in a very practical sense as well, since the campaign war-chest that Biden has already built up could be transferred to her campaign directly. This is not the case if the party nominates someone else, because election law puts some very big hurdles in the way of transferring all this money to someone who isn't already on the ticket.

And finally, Biden anointing Harris would avoid one big possible headache, since there wouldn't be a huge convention fight over the presidential nominee. If Biden throws all his support behind her -- or even resigns the presidency to allow Harris to run as an actual incumbent -- then assumably he could convince his own convention delegates (or enough of them) to fall in line behind Harris. This would mean there would only really be a contest for who would be vice president to Harris -- which is a much more subdued thing than an open floor battle for the presidential nomination.

Harris might not be every Democrat's first choice to replace Biden, but if he did a really good job of pointing out to everyone that she was his first choice to replace him, then the party would likely rally 'round her in the end. The question, of course, is whether she could convince enough undecided voters to push her over the top with Trump in November, but that's an open question for any of these scenarios, really.

Joe goes; an open convention picks his replacement

Then there is the "free-for-all" option. Biden announces he is ending his campaign, throwing the contest wide open. The problems with this are many, not least of which is the fact that the convention will be in Chicago. Endless clips of the 1968 convention will be played for the public, to remind everyone what happened the last time a Democratic president stepped back from a re-election campaign. But even if there are spirited protests, there likely won't be anything like an out-of-control police force battering protesters in the street right in front of the convention hall. No matter how much the media wishes that would happen, it just isn't going to, in other words.

But it will still be a spirited battle within the convention hall. If Biden releases his delegates without backing a successor, then a whole bunch of ambitious Democrats will likely toss their hats in the ring. The weeks leading up to the convention will be an absolute frenzy of glad-handling and wooing behind the scenes (as well as out in public). As in 1968, the voters themselves will have no say in the matter at all, since primary season is already over. Instead, the only votes that will matter are all the party insiders who have been selected as delegates. If Biden refuses to put his thumb on the scale for any of them, then the politicking to gain these votes will be fierce.

The Democratic Party certainly has a deep bench to select from. I could easily rattle off ten names of prominent Democrats who all would have a decent chance of beating Donald Trump. The question would be which of these the delegates begin to rally around, and how vicious the battles truly get. To cite just one example, if Biden doesn't anoint Kamala Harris as his heir apparent, then a whole lot of Black voters and a whole lot of women are going to be incensed if she isn't chosen. And that's just one dynamic -- there will be many others as well, as the party descends into the depths of factionalism.

Could a nominee emerge from this fray without seriously annoying one faction or another? Possibly. But it'd take a deft politician to achieve that. Could the convention truly unite after a knock-down, drag-out floor fight over the nomination? Again... possibly.

Whatever nominee emerged victorious from this fight would have to move incredibly fast. They'd have to enthuse large swaths of the population with their campaign. They'd have to be very effective in taking on Donald Trump directly. Ideally, they'd also have enough political charisma to generate some real excitement in the electorate.

This is all possible, even with a tough convention floor fight. The stakes are high -- beating Donald Trump is still seen as saving American democracy by millions of voters. Most Democrats would fall into line (reluctantly or not) behind a new nominee. The question (as always) is whether such a change would entice voters now considering either voting third-party or staying home and sitting out this election. If enough of them get on board with whichever Democrat wins the nomination, then Trump can indeed be defeated. But if the change backfires and doesn't generate that kind of enthusiasm, then we'll still be in for another term of Trump in the White House.

All of these options are risky. There are no guarantees. But they all should be openly considered and discussed, at this point in time. Joe Biden is the only one who will ultimately make the "Should I stay or should I go now?" decision, so he should indeed seriously explore all of these options to try to figure out which of them is the least risky.

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant