My half informed lefty perspective is this. The message that people my age and younger want is the 2008 Obama one: hope and change. Trump represents fascism, which is terrifying. But Biden represents liberal politics as usual, which is not inspiring or motivating, especially when its chief messenger is very old. So, the only kind of candidate who could generate excitement is someone who can attack Biden from his left--why has Biden not fought for universal healthcare? Why is Biden trying to be friendly with the ghost of a GOP that doesn’t exist anymore? But that kind of person wouldn’t have the support of the DNC, who DO largely want an establishment liberal. And as you said, it would be hard for such a candidate to say much of anything against Biden’s record. And even Bernie supporters like myself have a hard time articulating what a more left-leaning candidate could have reasonably accomplished in such a divided government.
So idk. I think they need to lean into the age thing, and make the message about democracy, not the economy. Me and my wife make more money than our parents did at our age, but have no path to home ownership and struggle to make ends meet. The economy is very bad for everyone except the upper middle class, and I’m not even convinced the middle class as A Thing exists anymore. If they think the economy is a winning message, they’ll fail.
When Biden is most inspiring (imo) it’s when he’s talking about democracy. When he denounces hate and prejudice. When he talks about the ideals of America that we learned about in school, but don’t see reflected in real life.
As a nerdy kid I was always charmed by the idea of fireside chats, and I think Biden could shine doing that kind of thing. Direct addresses to the nation, being America’s nice grandpa, which would better contrast him against his running mate: America’s crazy racist uncle.
Jacob, I agree. Leave the economy promotion to surrogates. Democracy is Biden’s strength, as well as his unmentioned mastery of foreign affairs, including NATO, and presently Israel. Afghanistan was signed and sealed by TFG, and delivered by our military; yet the MSM made it stick to Biden. As former military, I am still amazed that they did not have more casualties, and by how many people they were able to evacuate after the betrayal by the Afghan government! But not enough Americans see or care about foreign affairs because it it isn’t about DC, or their statehouse--or on FAUX News. Pity.
No one can be everything to everybody. I hope the entire Democratic Party, including all lawmakers, will decide to go All In for the President. Right now their waffling is just begging to lose....
I agree with most of this, except that I don’t think Biden is capable of doing a captivating, fire side chat. Find somebody in his government who can do it for him in his cabinet and foreground the leadership team that he’s surrounded himself with or at least the good ones
I agree! But I also think a lot of people weren’t paying attention to politics closely back then (or weren’t old enough to be tuned in). So they know of Obama as an inspiring figure, but don’t know of his actual record?
Is the focus on Biden's age organic to us, as voters, or is it because we keep getting polls where that's the first question? Looks to me like the press and its pollsters are pushing this to the top, just as "Hillary's emails" were. If so, then opinion pieces like this are part of the vast mistake being foisted on us as voters by the press.
I tend to discount almost everything in Politico as part of the right wing media structure. I seriously doubt that these "concerns" being raised are anything organic and instead are part of an agenda not friendly to the Democratic Party or voters.
A Senator we reelected at 84 and who didn't know what year it was for most of the last 5 years just died in office.
Another 81 year old Senator has frozen in public appearances twice in the last six months.
While the media may be helping push these concerns along, the idea that they aren't organic doesn't fit in that we're governed by a gerontocracy that at best is deeply wedded to a hopelessly outdated vision of American politics based on institutions as they functioned in the 1970s and of policy and public opinion based on a 90s era cable news cycle, and at worst is physically and mentally on the edge of death.
You're kind of burying your lead here: "I don’t know if a competitive primary would be the best thing for Biden, Democrats, or the country right now."
Well I and most Dems do! It would be a disaster. Frankly, it's not "timidity" staying the hands of prominent Democrats - it's strength of character. Sure, it's not an ideal situation but our toughness and resilience has the no primary strategy flourishing, not timidity. Have you see Trump lately? 😬
Also I gotta throw in a "never Jmart" with what's good for the Dems or American democracy.
Nothing is more important in this moment than shoring up our democracy, and Jamie Raskin has the across-the-board cred to get that done. Who could argue against him?
I think this story was set when Biden chose Kamala Harris as his VP.
Anyone who looks at replacing Biden hasn't been able to get past the problem that as his VP, she would likely expect to be the candidate to replace him or at least be in the mix. And she doesn't have enough support to win the Dem nomination, much less the general election.
A lot of her supporters claim this is a sign of racism or misogyny. But the truth is that there are non-white candidates - including women - who would do well. Harris has always struggled to win elections. But unless she was willing to step down as well, Biden being primaried or stepping down would just make things worse.
I’m someone who really wants to like Kamala, but whenever I see her in interviews, I get why we don’t see her in more interviews lol. She just isn’t a very captivating messenger. Now, I don’t think she’d be a bad president, just a boring one. And if the argument against Biden is that he’s boring, Kamala isn’t mitigating that.
And yet, should it become necessary next July or August to think about a 2026 (or August 2024) replacement for Biden, there will only be one acceptable name: Harris. Not my choice in 2020 (and I'm from San Francisco), but anyone else will send the message that she was wrong then, has been wrong all along, and even with 4 years as VP, a black woman is somehow the wrong choice now. A PR disaster.
Yes, this gets to my concern about Biden's age -- a perspective Brian did not address. My concern is NOT about anything he has or has not done, but that his age makes it that much more vulnerable to charges of physical or mental decline next summer, and that much more likely that we will have to change horses midstream. And at that point Harris will be the ONLY choice; for PR purposes, she is already. And I fear she's at best 50-50 against Trump.
Unfortunately, a primary doesn't change this. The only solution is to make the Biden campaign as much about Biden-Harris as about Biden. Harris must be reintroduced as the "new, younger Biden herself." Is this possible? I don't know.
You know that in general I am in your side of these questions. However in this specific case I disagree. I do not think there were good opportunistic moments for ambitious democrats to exploit to foster a reasonable primary narrative now.
It’s true that the debt limit deal in some ways lead to the present funding standoff but it’s also true that it removed the most problematic consequence of default until the 2024 congress is sworn in. To me that is important because it has enabled he dems to be more hard line on questions about the cr and to participate in throwing the Republicans in to their present chaos with respect to the speaker election. Would they have done so if default was on the table? I think it’s a much riskier proposition.
Finally, to me the time to worry about and be concerned about Biden’s longevity as a future concern absent actual evidence of diminished capacity was in 2020 and the party chose not to do that, so I think given how his presence has gone we’re stuck.
I think we're probably stuck, too. But then that militates for what I wrote at the end. If Biden wants the age question to fade, he can address it directly in a new way, or he can embrace a different more fighting register against Republicans. Timidity seems to be foreclosing those options as well.
That I definitely agree with you on. I will say Biden’s number of sit down long form interviews has increased lately, which is a good first step even if more is required. Also I will add that the situation in Israel and Gaza gives Biden a good vehicle for projecting strength that will be covered by the media (even though it is awful to think about that in pure political terms)
Brian, I share your criticisms of Biden, but nothing matters more than winning the next election and there’s nobody else better positioned to do that than him.
To the extent we’ve been too timid about anything in this context, it’s that we haven’t rallied to his side to shout down these nonsensical concerns about his acuity, which have been conflated with concerns about his age.
I hate to say it, but we need to run a version of W’s 04 campaign (without the swiftboating) - which is, in short, “how dare you consider voting for anyone else?”
It’s time for us to fall in line and do all we can to win. Figure out the rest later.
I am game for this! But I think it entails doing *something* a bit different than he has been doing about his age. What you propose is totally consistent with telling disaffected young voters 'I hear you, your concerns are valid, and they will be addressed—now we need to beat these scumbags together.'
I'm with you Zachary, but stronger support won't mean anything if Biden breaks a hip or falls ill next August -- possibilities directly linked to his age. Even if that happens, he'll still get my vote, but if Harris is not *already* perceived as ready for the job, it will absolutely fuel the other side.
Yes, right. "How dare you consider voting for anyone else" is a hard line to make stick when you're also a) ignoring the reasons they're giving for considering others, and then b) those reasons are validated by the physical inevitabilities of aging.
I’m simply saying I find scolding people to be an ineffective means of persuasion. You never see it used in marketing, yet many Democrats like to indulge in it.
This is separate from either criticizing or praising Biden. I’m just saying that hectoring people to Clap Louder is unlikely to get the desired reaction.
Yup, plenty of concerns about Biden as a candidate. Concerns about Biden as president? Zero. Hard to imagine an untested relatively inexperienced alternative managing a world on fire with the adeptness of Biden and his very experienced and smart team. This is not a time for amateurs learning on the job. And I say that with great anticipation for the emergence of the next gen Dems like Whitmer, Warnock, et al. I would like to see the Biden campaign go right at the age issue. Sure, a step slower and stiffer, but a man who has shown great leadership on the world stage, in managing multiple crises, and getting stuff done for the American people despite a completely dysfunctional and incapable opposition party.
I can't agree with this enough. In a world that is literally combusting right now, he's simply the most competent person for the job at the moment. Plus, I'm simply not bedwetting about his liabilities as a communicator this early in the campaign cycle.
Another "Anybody But Biden" screed, naming no names as alternatives. I suppose anyone who might win a Democratic primary is a favorite son somewhere, but history isn't replete with Presidents whose primary qualification was brotherly love. Name some names so we can talk about what effect their odor might have on a persuadable voter.
Jamie Raskin is uniquely positioned in this moment to save our democracy which is the most crucial goal that nobody anywhere is talking about and that totally blows my mind. He has the constitutional and legal knowledge, he knows where all the coup bodies are buried, and he has all the name recognition from the committee. Plus, who could attack him after what he’s been through or deny his commitment after working through what he’s been through? He could do what we needed Biden to do in his first 2 years but he decided to play footsie with his Republican brothers-cum-fascists instead.
I think he's very good: fluent, bright, comes prepared. I'd vote for him, but I'm voting for anybody but Trump. Remember, Biden's margin of victory in 5 swing states that would have flipped the Electoral College outcome was 157,079 votes. Just playing devil's advocate here: Doesn't Raskin have SERIOUS HEALTH ISSUES? I'm not confident that Jamie could take Virginia.
There is only one name: Kamala Harris. I'm not thrilled about that (it's whay I thought she was an iffy choice in 2020), but anyone else is a PR disaster for the Dems. And if it happens by force next summer, that's an even bigger problem. This , imo, is the real and only problem with Biden's age.
I like this perspective as I feel there's a lot of important truths in here but I don't fully agree with everything.
I think Biden is concerned with governing the middle of America which has the consistent optics of sacrificing on ideals that feel like common sense to the hyper-engaged.
I don't understand why you think the debt limit negotiation was fertile ground for Biden to make a big strategic shift in dealing with Republicans.
The country almost ubiquitously was not ok with the debt limit negotiations going south and in tandem seemed to expect Biden to figure it out. Biden's options were to negotiate (considered normal) or take a hardline stance (considered asinine). If your take on this matter has aged better, it's because people are less afraid of global economic failure.
I like the idea of playing hardball when we're not taking unnecessary risk for the sake of some principle. I like politicians who pick a hill that is worth dying on and preferably make their point well without something so dramatic as dying.
RE the debt limit, I just think he should've stuck to the line that Obama adopted successfully after Republicans shook him down in 2011. After that he said "no negotiations" and Republicans groused a lot, but then raised the debt limit. So it wouldn't have been a strategic shift. The strategic shift was agreeing to pay them ransoms again.
That's how you and I might see it. But I don't think the general electorate was on the same page. I think that since Biden can't force an overton window shift in the direction of well founded hill dying, he should govern as best he can given the circumstances. At the very least, you might see his actions as well founded in the principles of democracy instead of simply timid milk toast baffoonery.
I'm having a hard time arguing against Biden running when he's been the most effective Democratic President of my lifetime. I never thought I'd write that and lacklusterly supported him as a Trump alternative. Age or no age, he is getting things done and I won't underestimate him again.
I agree. But "Biden's age" is not about Biden. It's about Harris.
I am not advocating a primary. I am arguing that we as Dems need to prepare ourselves to get behind Harris with every ounce of energy we are ready to give to Biden. She will need it, and we will need her. She's not my first choice, but anything else would be a PR disaster -- imagine telling the Dem base that despite 4 years as Vice President, a black woman is not ready. It will make our internal factions look worse than Gatez v. McCarthy, and at exactly the worst time.
Mr. Beutler, I’ve been reading your recent posts with interest. But this is the wrong post to tell people to pay up or get their access limited. I’ve decided to not pay up. The other commenters here have the better points and succinctly sum the appropriate criticisms of your essay. I am looking for analysis based on facts and I especially am not looking for arm waving based on polling and ignoring history. My decision to refrain from being a paying subscriber is not because I disagree with your prescription, but because you have so little to back it up.
Biden is old, old is bad, therefore Biden is bad--not an argument. We know Biden is not bad because we see what he’s accomplished in a supremely challenging environment. Which Democratic president has been better for both their current moment and for the long term health of the country? Most would say Truman (I would hold out for Carter but I’m in a distinct minority there). Which incumbent Democratic president has survived a serious primary challenge? **crickets**
Biden probably believed he was a one term president and ran in 2020 anyway because he thought (mistakenly) that there was an actual political party to his right that just needed a moment to compose itself. He didn’t fear an open primary in 2024 and didn’t have any plan to promote Harris. He now seems to recognize that there is no political party to his right. There are just Brown Shirts. His democracy themed speeches make that clear. He knows that economic growth in the middle is the only way to tamp down the racist fueled authoritarian drive. His legislative agenda demonstrates that.
I recognize that Biden was the perennial second choice his entire political life. He was so for me, or a third choice. But whether it’s a matter of character or intellect or, dare we say it, age, he has risen to the moment. I support his re-election.
Hope you'll reconsider Gary, but fwiw "Biden is old, old is bad, therefore Biden is bad" is a perfectly sound argument! It's not the argument I made, but it follows logically, and I think a lot of people believe it, and Dems blow those people off at their peril.
It's only a sound argument if you take "old is bad" to mean that everything that's old is bad, which is absurd. Being as old as Biden is a weakness for a presidential candidate, but every presidential candidate has weaknesses. Being the incumbent is a huge strength. You're focusing on one weakness as if there are no counter-balancing strengths. That's misleading rhetoric, not logic.
That is a sound argument? You better hope you never get old is all I have to say. That’s pathetic. It’s bias. Substitute Black or women or Asian for “old” and there would be no question of the discrimination here.
Gary, if Biden realized the Republicans were fascists, don’t you think he’d have been yelling, “the fascists are coming!” for the last 4 years (like he did with BBB which I’ll remember on my death bed)? Instead, he calls them “my friends” and “my brother” and gives up the farm while they rape his bills for the tiniest bit of “bipartisanship” while they crime away into a fully corrupt Court, operating without any form of oversight from him or Congress. His DoJ ignored the Trump coup for a YEAR. Why? B/c Biden arranged that with Garland. So your position is that Biden trotting out “I’ll protect democracy!” on the high American holidays and when he’s standing in a war zone will protect our democracy?
Yes, I realize I’m emotional about this, but I’ve been watching fascism evolve from inside Texas for decades. I’ve worked in government, in all the branches, for the party, for candidates--I believed in the mission fully. If you mute them and watch what they DO, our democracy has already collapsed. I suspected before but knew it for sure the day Pelosi seated what, 126 members of Congress who had signed the TX AG’s sedition suit. D leadership wasn’t going to heed the Civil War founders--no, they knew better. If you live in a red state, you know what I’m talking about b/c it’s come for you already--you’ve watched the institutions you trusted devolve into corrupt banana republic adversaries. Blue staters think you’re immune, but the fascists ARE CHEATING. You don’t seem to have noticed, but in the electoral college they are only one weird math equation away, and they won’t Trump it up this time. He was the dress rehearsal. We won’t get another chance to vote our way out of it.
Biden was our one shot to shore up our institutions. I’ll be shocked if we get another. I pray that I’m wrong.
As far as age goes, the difference between Biden and Trump is three chronological years and light years in the competency to actually lead and govern. The press have made Biden's age an issue while giving Trump a pass because Democrats have allowed it to be so. I agree with point made by Arthur Sechet and Whit Blauvelt
What is the difference between Democratic timidity and Republican timidity? By the latter I mean that this morning we are seeing a procession of "Never Jordan" Republicans roll over one by one and announce their support for Jordan. As comically timid as Democrats can be, I struggle to see them doing the same.
They are similar, particularly in outcome. But I think they are engaging in different forms of risk aversion. The GOP is a personality cult, so the Never Jordan Republicans are rolling over because Trump supports Jordan and they can't get on the wrong side of the cult leader. It's too risky *for them*. Timid Dems are timid because they're unsure what the best course of action in a high-stakes moment is and want to minimize risk *to the country*, and so are biased toward rocking the boat as little as possible. Democrats are on much more solid moral and ethical ground—if Biden had a major corruption scandal, I think Dems would be willing to move against him—I just question the judgment of those who think ignoring this issue will make it go away.
I don’t know. I really think the better way to spend your time between now and the election is trying to convince people that Biden has done a really good job as president. The ship has sailed on any other nominee. It might be a different story if there was a single clear alternative, but there isn’t.
Even on the debt ceiling stuff he at a minimum seems to have taken down the highest elected official of the opposing party and might end up getting a power sharing agreement in the house.
I perceive President Biden’s age as an asset. His long experience as a public servant is a strength that doesn’t get much notice. He has performed so well, and without demand for accolades, I really don’t get why there is so much noise and fear. I support him because he is a skilled, compassionate and forward looking. I feel he has the country’s best interest at heart.
My half informed lefty perspective is this. The message that people my age and younger want is the 2008 Obama one: hope and change. Trump represents fascism, which is terrifying. But Biden represents liberal politics as usual, which is not inspiring or motivating, especially when its chief messenger is very old. So, the only kind of candidate who could generate excitement is someone who can attack Biden from his left--why has Biden not fought for universal healthcare? Why is Biden trying to be friendly with the ghost of a GOP that doesn’t exist anymore? But that kind of person wouldn’t have the support of the DNC, who DO largely want an establishment liberal. And as you said, it would be hard for such a candidate to say much of anything against Biden’s record. And even Bernie supporters like myself have a hard time articulating what a more left-leaning candidate could have reasonably accomplished in such a divided government.
So idk. I think they need to lean into the age thing, and make the message about democracy, not the economy. Me and my wife make more money than our parents did at our age, but have no path to home ownership and struggle to make ends meet. The economy is very bad for everyone except the upper middle class, and I’m not even convinced the middle class as A Thing exists anymore. If they think the economy is a winning message, they’ll fail.
When Biden is most inspiring (imo) it’s when he’s talking about democracy. When he denounces hate and prejudice. When he talks about the ideals of America that we learned about in school, but don’t see reflected in real life.
As a nerdy kid I was always charmed by the idea of fireside chats, and I think Biden could shine doing that kind of thing. Direct addresses to the nation, being America’s nice grandpa, which would better contrast him against his running mate: America’s crazy racist uncle.
Jacob, I agree. Leave the economy promotion to surrogates. Democracy is Biden’s strength, as well as his unmentioned mastery of foreign affairs, including NATO, and presently Israel. Afghanistan was signed and sealed by TFG, and delivered by our military; yet the MSM made it stick to Biden. As former military, I am still amazed that they did not have more casualties, and by how many people they were able to evacuate after the betrayal by the Afghan government! But not enough Americans see or care about foreign affairs because it it isn’t about DC, or their statehouse--or on FAUX News. Pity.
No one can be everything to everybody. I hope the entire Democratic Party, including all lawmakers, will decide to go All In for the President. Right now their waffling is just begging to lose....
I agree with most of this, except that I don’t think Biden is capable of doing a captivating, fire side chat. Find somebody in his government who can do it for him in his cabinet and foreground the leadership team that he’s surrounded himself with or at least the good ones
And YET, Biden is a better president than Obama. So that's what I don't get - people want a young Biden? Should've voted for Pete Butiegeg in 2020.
I agree! But I also think a lot of people weren’t paying attention to politics closely back then (or weren’t old enough to be tuned in). So they know of Obama as an inspiring figure, but don’t know of his actual record?
Is the focus on Biden's age organic to us, as voters, or is it because we keep getting polls where that's the first question? Looks to me like the press and its pollsters are pushing this to the top, just as "Hillary's emails" were. If so, then opinion pieces like this are part of the vast mistake being foisted on us as voters by the press.
I tend to discount almost everything in Politico as part of the right wing media structure. I seriously doubt that these "concerns" being raised are anything organic and instead are part of an agenda not friendly to the Democratic Party or voters.
A Senator we reelected at 84 and who didn't know what year it was for most of the last 5 years just died in office.
Another 81 year old Senator has frozen in public appearances twice in the last six months.
While the media may be helping push these concerns along, the idea that they aren't organic doesn't fit in that we're governed by a gerontocracy that at best is deeply wedded to a hopelessly outdated vision of American politics based on institutions as they functioned in the 1970s and of policy and public opinion based on a 90s era cable news cycle, and at worst is physically and mentally on the edge of death.
You're kind of burying your lead here: "I don’t know if a competitive primary would be the best thing for Biden, Democrats, or the country right now."
Well I and most Dems do! It would be a disaster. Frankly, it's not "timidity" staying the hands of prominent Democrats - it's strength of character. Sure, it's not an ideal situation but our toughness and resilience has the no primary strategy flourishing, not timidity. Have you see Trump lately? 😬
Also I gotta throw in a "never Jmart" with what's good for the Dems or American democracy.
Amen. And who exactly is the alternative who can build up a national following in barely a year?
Nothing is more important in this moment than shoring up our democracy, and Jamie Raskin has the across-the-board cred to get that done. Who could argue against him?
I think this story was set when Biden chose Kamala Harris as his VP.
Anyone who looks at replacing Biden hasn't been able to get past the problem that as his VP, she would likely expect to be the candidate to replace him or at least be in the mix. And she doesn't have enough support to win the Dem nomination, much less the general election.
A lot of her supporters claim this is a sign of racism or misogyny. But the truth is that there are non-white candidates - including women - who would do well. Harris has always struggled to win elections. But unless she was willing to step down as well, Biden being primaried or stepping down would just make things worse.
I’m someone who really wants to like Kamala, but whenever I see her in interviews, I get why we don’t see her in more interviews lol. She just isn’t a very captivating messenger. Now, I don’t think she’d be a bad president, just a boring one. And if the argument against Biden is that he’s boring, Kamala isn’t mitigating that.
And yet, should it become necessary next July or August to think about a 2026 (or August 2024) replacement for Biden, there will only be one acceptable name: Harris. Not my choice in 2020 (and I'm from San Francisco), but anyone else will send the message that she was wrong then, has been wrong all along, and even with 4 years as VP, a black woman is somehow the wrong choice now. A PR disaster.
Yes, this gets to my concern about Biden's age -- a perspective Brian did not address. My concern is NOT about anything he has or has not done, but that his age makes it that much more vulnerable to charges of physical or mental decline next summer, and that much more likely that we will have to change horses midstream. And at that point Harris will be the ONLY choice; for PR purposes, she is already. And I fear she's at best 50-50 against Trump.
Unfortunately, a primary doesn't change this. The only solution is to make the Biden campaign as much about Biden-Harris as about Biden. Harris must be reintroduced as the "new, younger Biden herself." Is this possible? I don't know.
You know that in general I am in your side of these questions. However in this specific case I disagree. I do not think there were good opportunistic moments for ambitious democrats to exploit to foster a reasonable primary narrative now.
It’s true that the debt limit deal in some ways lead to the present funding standoff but it’s also true that it removed the most problematic consequence of default until the 2024 congress is sworn in. To me that is important because it has enabled he dems to be more hard line on questions about the cr and to participate in throwing the Republicans in to their present chaos with respect to the speaker election. Would they have done so if default was on the table? I think it’s a much riskier proposition.
Finally, to me the time to worry about and be concerned about Biden’s longevity as a future concern absent actual evidence of diminished capacity was in 2020 and the party chose not to do that, so I think given how his presence has gone we’re stuck.
I think we're probably stuck, too. But then that militates for what I wrote at the end. If Biden wants the age question to fade, he can address it directly in a new way, or he can embrace a different more fighting register against Republicans. Timidity seems to be foreclosing those options as well.
That I definitely agree with you on. I will say Biden’s number of sit down long form interviews has increased lately, which is a good first step even if more is required. Also I will add that the situation in Israel and Gaza gives Biden a good vehicle for projecting strength that will be covered by the media (even though it is awful to think about that in pure political terms)
Brian, I share your criticisms of Biden, but nothing matters more than winning the next election and there’s nobody else better positioned to do that than him.
To the extent we’ve been too timid about anything in this context, it’s that we haven’t rallied to his side to shout down these nonsensical concerns about his acuity, which have been conflated with concerns about his age.
I hate to say it, but we need to run a version of W’s 04 campaign (without the swiftboating) - which is, in short, “how dare you consider voting for anyone else?”
It’s time for us to fall in line and do all we can to win. Figure out the rest later.
I am game for this! But I think it entails doing *something* a bit different than he has been doing about his age. What you propose is totally consistent with telling disaffected young voters 'I hear you, your concerns are valid, and they will be addressed—now we need to beat these scumbags together.'
I'm with you Zachary, but stronger support won't mean anything if Biden breaks a hip or falls ill next August -- possibilities directly linked to his age. Even if that happens, he'll still get my vote, but if Harris is not *already* perceived as ready for the job, it will absolutely fuel the other side.
Yes, right. "How dare you consider voting for anyone else" is a hard line to make stick when you're also a) ignoring the reasons they're giving for considering others, and then b) those reasons are validated by the physical inevitabilities of aging.
Regardless of who the candidate is, hectoring voters for having insufficient enthusiasm is a self-defeating tactic.
I disagree. Refraining from doing everything each of us is capable of doing to defeat the Fascist enemy is the prima facie self-defeating tactic.
Doing so does not erase the entirely valid criticisms of Biden and the Dem party that many of us here share because we subscribed to Brian’s writing.
We can continue to advance those criticisms once President Biden is inaugurated into his second term.
I’m simply saying I find scolding people to be an ineffective means of persuasion. You never see it used in marketing, yet many Democrats like to indulge in it.
This is separate from either criticizing or praising Biden. I’m just saying that hectoring people to Clap Louder is unlikely to get the desired reaction.
Yup, plenty of concerns about Biden as a candidate. Concerns about Biden as president? Zero. Hard to imagine an untested relatively inexperienced alternative managing a world on fire with the adeptness of Biden and his very experienced and smart team. This is not a time for amateurs learning on the job. And I say that with great anticipation for the emergence of the next gen Dems like Whitmer, Warnock, et al. I would like to see the Biden campaign go right at the age issue. Sure, a step slower and stiffer, but a man who has shown great leadership on the world stage, in managing multiple crises, and getting stuff done for the American people despite a completely dysfunctional and incapable opposition party.
I can't agree with this enough. In a world that is literally combusting right now, he's simply the most competent person for the job at the moment. Plus, I'm simply not bedwetting about his liabilities as a communicator this early in the campaign cycle.
Another "Anybody But Biden" screed, naming no names as alternatives. I suppose anyone who might win a Democratic primary is a favorite son somewhere, but history isn't replete with Presidents whose primary qualification was brotherly love. Name some names so we can talk about what effect their odor might have on a persuadable voter.
Jamie Raskin is uniquely positioned in this moment to save our democracy which is the most crucial goal that nobody anywhere is talking about and that totally blows my mind. He has the constitutional and legal knowledge, he knows where all the coup bodies are buried, and he has all the name recognition from the committee. Plus, who could attack him after what he’s been through or deny his commitment after working through what he’s been through? He could do what we needed Biden to do in his first 2 years but he decided to play footsie with his Republican brothers-cum-fascists instead.
I think he's very good: fluent, bright, comes prepared. I'd vote for him, but I'm voting for anybody but Trump. Remember, Biden's margin of victory in 5 swing states that would have flipped the Electoral College outcome was 157,079 votes. Just playing devil's advocate here: Doesn't Raskin have SERIOUS HEALTH ISSUES? I'm not confident that Jamie could take Virginia.
There is only one name: Kamala Harris. I'm not thrilled about that (it's whay I thought she was an iffy choice in 2020), but anyone else is a PR disaster for the Dems. And if it happens by force next summer, that's an even bigger problem. This , imo, is the real and only problem with Biden's age.
I like this perspective as I feel there's a lot of important truths in here but I don't fully agree with everything.
I think Biden is concerned with governing the middle of America which has the consistent optics of sacrificing on ideals that feel like common sense to the hyper-engaged.
I don't understand why you think the debt limit negotiation was fertile ground for Biden to make a big strategic shift in dealing with Republicans.
The country almost ubiquitously was not ok with the debt limit negotiations going south and in tandem seemed to expect Biden to figure it out. Biden's options were to negotiate (considered normal) or take a hardline stance (considered asinine). If your take on this matter has aged better, it's because people are less afraid of global economic failure.
I like the idea of playing hardball when we're not taking unnecessary risk for the sake of some principle. I like politicians who pick a hill that is worth dying on and preferably make their point well without something so dramatic as dying.
RE the debt limit, I just think he should've stuck to the line that Obama adopted successfully after Republicans shook him down in 2011. After that he said "no negotiations" and Republicans groused a lot, but then raised the debt limit. So it wouldn't have been a strategic shift. The strategic shift was agreeing to pay them ransoms again.
That's how you and I might see it. But I don't think the general electorate was on the same page. I think that since Biden can't force an overton window shift in the direction of well founded hill dying, he should govern as best he can given the circumstances. At the very least, you might see his actions as well founded in the principles of democracy instead of simply timid milk toast baffoonery.
I'm having a hard time arguing against Biden running when he's been the most effective Democratic President of my lifetime. I never thought I'd write that and lacklusterly supported him as a Trump alternative. Age or no age, he is getting things done and I won't underestimate him again.
I agree. But "Biden's age" is not about Biden. It's about Harris.
I am not advocating a primary. I am arguing that we as Dems need to prepare ourselves to get behind Harris with every ounce of energy we are ready to give to Biden. She will need it, and we will need her. She's not my first choice, but anything else would be a PR disaster -- imagine telling the Dem base that despite 4 years as Vice President, a black woman is not ready. It will make our internal factions look worse than Gatez v. McCarthy, and at exactly the worst time.
Mr. Beutler, I’ve been reading your recent posts with interest. But this is the wrong post to tell people to pay up or get their access limited. I’ve decided to not pay up. The other commenters here have the better points and succinctly sum the appropriate criticisms of your essay. I am looking for analysis based on facts and I especially am not looking for arm waving based on polling and ignoring history. My decision to refrain from being a paying subscriber is not because I disagree with your prescription, but because you have so little to back it up.
Biden is old, old is bad, therefore Biden is bad--not an argument. We know Biden is not bad because we see what he’s accomplished in a supremely challenging environment. Which Democratic president has been better for both their current moment and for the long term health of the country? Most would say Truman (I would hold out for Carter but I’m in a distinct minority there). Which incumbent Democratic president has survived a serious primary challenge? **crickets**
Biden probably believed he was a one term president and ran in 2020 anyway because he thought (mistakenly) that there was an actual political party to his right that just needed a moment to compose itself. He didn’t fear an open primary in 2024 and didn’t have any plan to promote Harris. He now seems to recognize that there is no political party to his right. There are just Brown Shirts. His democracy themed speeches make that clear. He knows that economic growth in the middle is the only way to tamp down the racist fueled authoritarian drive. His legislative agenda demonstrates that.
I recognize that Biden was the perennial second choice his entire political life. He was so for me, or a third choice. But whether it’s a matter of character or intellect or, dare we say it, age, he has risen to the moment. I support his re-election.
Hope you'll reconsider Gary, but fwiw "Biden is old, old is bad, therefore Biden is bad" is a perfectly sound argument! It's not the argument I made, but it follows logically, and I think a lot of people believe it, and Dems blow those people off at their peril.
It's only a sound argument if you take "old is bad" to mean that everything that's old is bad, which is absurd. Being as old as Biden is a weakness for a presidential candidate, but every presidential candidate has weaknesses. Being the incumbent is a huge strength. You're focusing on one weakness as if there are no counter-balancing strengths. That's misleading rhetoric, not logic.
That is a sound argument? You better hope you never get old is all I have to say. That’s pathetic. It’s bias. Substitute Black or women or Asian for “old” and there would be no question of the discrimination here.
Gary, if Biden realized the Republicans were fascists, don’t you think he’d have been yelling, “the fascists are coming!” for the last 4 years (like he did with BBB which I’ll remember on my death bed)? Instead, he calls them “my friends” and “my brother” and gives up the farm while they rape his bills for the tiniest bit of “bipartisanship” while they crime away into a fully corrupt Court, operating without any form of oversight from him or Congress. His DoJ ignored the Trump coup for a YEAR. Why? B/c Biden arranged that with Garland. So your position is that Biden trotting out “I’ll protect democracy!” on the high American holidays and when he’s standing in a war zone will protect our democracy?
Yes, I realize I’m emotional about this, but I’ve been watching fascism evolve from inside Texas for decades. I’ve worked in government, in all the branches, for the party, for candidates--I believed in the mission fully. If you mute them and watch what they DO, our democracy has already collapsed. I suspected before but knew it for sure the day Pelosi seated what, 126 members of Congress who had signed the TX AG’s sedition suit. D leadership wasn’t going to heed the Civil War founders--no, they knew better. If you live in a red state, you know what I’m talking about b/c it’s come for you already--you’ve watched the institutions you trusted devolve into corrupt banana republic adversaries. Blue staters think you’re immune, but the fascists ARE CHEATING. You don’t seem to have noticed, but in the electoral college they are only one weird math equation away, and they won’t Trump it up this time. He was the dress rehearsal. We won’t get another chance to vote our way out of it.
Biden was our one shot to shore up our institutions. I’ll be shocked if we get another. I pray that I’m wrong.
As far as age goes, the difference between Biden and Trump is three chronological years and light years in the competency to actually lead and govern. The press have made Biden's age an issue while giving Trump a pass because Democrats have allowed it to be so. I agree with point made by Arthur Sechet and Whit Blauvelt
What is the difference between Democratic timidity and Republican timidity? By the latter I mean that this morning we are seeing a procession of "Never Jordan" Republicans roll over one by one and announce their support for Jordan. As comically timid as Democrats can be, I struggle to see them doing the same.
They are similar, particularly in outcome. But I think they are engaging in different forms of risk aversion. The GOP is a personality cult, so the Never Jordan Republicans are rolling over because Trump supports Jordan and they can't get on the wrong side of the cult leader. It's too risky *for them*. Timid Dems are timid because they're unsure what the best course of action in a high-stakes moment is and want to minimize risk *to the country*, and so are biased toward rocking the boat as little as possible. Democrats are on much more solid moral and ethical ground—if Biden had a major corruption scandal, I think Dems would be willing to move against him—I just question the judgment of those who think ignoring this issue will make it go away.
I don’t know. I really think the better way to spend your time between now and the election is trying to convince people that Biden has done a really good job as president. The ship has sailed on any other nominee. It might be a different story if there was a single clear alternative, but there isn’t.
Even on the debt ceiling stuff he at a minimum seems to have taken down the highest elected official of the opposing party and might end up getting a power sharing agreement in the house.
I perceive President Biden’s age as an asset. His long experience as a public servant is a strength that doesn’t get much notice. He has performed so well, and without demand for accolades, I really don’t get why there is so much noise and fear. I support him because he is a skilled, compassionate and forward looking. I feel he has the country’s best interest at heart.
I agree. But "Biden's age" is not about Biden. It's about Harris.
You used a phrase that could/should be a title ... for something. It is "small ransoms."
Make that, "Small Ransoms."