Has the press been covering for Joe Biden over the past few months? Until now I've considered this to be little more than typical Fox News nonsense, but I'm beginning to wonder. Here is Olivia Nuzzi:
This April, at a reception before the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, I joined a sea of people waiting for a photo with the president and First Lady in the basement of the Washington Hilton.... The first person I saw upon entering the subterranean space was the First Lady.... I smiled and said hello. She looked back at me with a confused, panicked expression. It was as if she had just received horrible news and was about to run out of the room and into some kind of a family emergency. “Uh, hi,” she said. Then she glanced over to her right. Oh …
I followed the First Lady’s gaze and found the president. Now I understood her panicked expression.... My heart stopped as I extended my hand to greet the president. I tried to make eye contact, but it was like his eyes, though open, were not on. His face had a waxy quality. He smiled. It was a sweet smile.... He spoke very slowly and in a very soft voice. “And what’s your name?” he asked.
Exiting the room after the photo, the group of reporters — not instigated by me, I should note — made guesses about how dead he appeared to be, percentage wise. “Forty percent?” one of them asked.
The whole story has much, much more. Nuzzi says she's been hearing questions about Biden's mental state since January, always sort of whispered and always anonymous:
They were scared and horrified. But they were also burdened. They needed to talk about it (though not on the record).... Their disclosures often followed innocent questions: Have you seen the president lately? How does he seem? Often, they would answer with only silence, their eyes widening cartoonishly, their heads shaking back and forth. Or with disapproving sounds. “Phhhhwwwaahhh.” “Uggghhhhhhhhh.” “Bbbwwhhheeuuw.” Or with a simple, “Not good! Not good!” Or with an accusatory question of their own: “Have you seen him?!”
....Longtime friends of the Biden family, who spoke to me on the condition of anonymity, were shocked to find that the president did not remember their names.... Saying hello to one Democratic megadonor and family friend at the White House recently, the president stared blankly and nodded his head. The First Lady intervened to whisper in her husband’s ear, telling him to say “hello” to the donor by name and to thank them for their recent generosity. The president repeated the words his wife had fed him. “It hasn’t been good for a long time but it’s gotten so, so much worse,” a witness to the exchange told me. “So much worse!”
As Nuzzi acknowledges, she's been skeptical of Biden's stamina for years, and is hardly a Biden family favorite. Still, there's no reason to believe she's making this up.
I've known older relatives who have shown some slippage over the years and it's genuinely hard to know if it's really gotten bad enough that something needs to be done. A misstep here or there might mean they're declining or it might just be a misstep here or there. How bad do they have to get before you have The Conversation? How often do the missteps have to occur? Anyone who's dealt with this—and that's a lot of us—knows this is hard.
But it sure sounds as though Biden's debate performance has finally given everyone permission to say what they've been thinking for the past half year or so: Yeah, it's bad. Someone needs to have The Conversation.
But no one has.
Been going on for months and you're only now, just now, hearing about it, at this carefully choreographed, time-critical moment?
What this is they're trying to reflect back all the bad press Trump has been getting about his mental state, and there is nothing else here at all.
"only now, just now, hearing about it, at this carefully choreographed, time-critical moment?"
good grief
hi, sean trende.
well
you tried
that's not a denial.
Or they all could be orchestrated anonymous GOP ratf*ckers. YOU make the call! PS: Remember how HRC was at death's door in 2016? Have we learned nothing?
OK, so Biden's confused and halting debate performance is just a GOP conspiracy. Good to know.
Did you watch more than the first half?
Did you watch any of it?
Apparently not.
You know, if you read the transcript instead of looking at the physical manifestation vusuals it's pretty damn clear that Biden was the candidate on that stage providing the deepest, most responsive, least delusional answers.
He looked really, really bad doing it.....but mentally he cleaned TRump's clock other than the one arly response that ended with 'break Medicare'.
people het up to contrast biden now to 2008-12 & even 2020 biden but no one comparing 2024 trump to 2015 & '16 & 2020 trump. earlier donald could at least marginally stay on topic vs. the gop field or hillary, yet this donald could only offer unrelated ejaculations about how terrible america is right now when offered a question.
Riiiight. Cite the passages in the transcript that backs up your contention. Think you stir your stumps to do that, tuds? Otherwise, you got nuttin' but your own personal opinion about what you say you saw, and trust me, you don't have reputation around here to make anyone care about it.
& then hillary died in march 2017.
Or they all could be orchestrated anonymous GOP ratf*ckers. YOU make the call!
Joe just called himself the first Black woman to serve as Vice President on a Philadelphia radio show. Did the GOP ratfuckers trick him into saying that?
https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-proud-first-black-woman-serve-white-house-slip-2024-7
Believe me, the GOP at this point isn't trying to sabotage Joe's candidacy. Far from it. They're desperately afraid he's going to withdraw because they think this thing is in the bag. Wake the hell up.
Agreed! The best thing that can happen to Trump is that Biden is the nominee.
The Biden campaign could and should have flooded the zone after the debate, a sit down with someone of Leslie Stahl's stature, and loads of unscripted appearances. Instead, we've gotten a couple of tightly controlled events. From a comms perspective, it's a horrible approach that will do nothing to reassure voters.
This is true, even though CNN did not fact checking, and Don Trump is a terrible person who will let Bannon and Stephen Miller run amok.
Or with Andrea Mitchell, if they could keep her awake long enough for the interview.
It sounds to me like the press has a shiny new toy and they are all piling on.
...Or they did what you suggested but whatever.
Olivia Nuzzi was saying this in 2020, _before_ Bidens impressive to very impressive accomplishments over the last three-plus years. And told in the first person? Who does she think she is Hunter Thompson?
I'll give her gonzo points though for saying the President didn't know who she was, as if it was evidence of mental decline as opposed to evidence that she's extremely small potatoes, butt-hurt potatoes at that.
[insert bingo gif here]
she's also the slampiece of ryan lizza, from the famous twitter colloquy with chris hayes & brian beuttler about trump running to hillary's left. on a lot of things.
Without a single named source in the entire 'story'.
Or even an explanation as to why she herself sat on the 'story' for six months.
Sigh. Look, it MAY be that there really HAS been significant deterioration very recently. It hasn't been materially evident at other public events (deliberate barbering of things like video from the Normandy remembrances notwithstanding), but mmmmaybe so.
One thing that IS clear is the overt bias -- hell, active favoritism -- of much of the major media, eg the NYTimes' coverage, which is worse even than Her Emails. And the incentives of the media to play up the Latest Exciting Drama, to the complete neglect of any balance in coverage, are well known, even when they aren't putting both thumbs and a foot on the scale. I don't put ANY stock in what the Olivia Nuzzis of the world publish.
*IF* there is a "conversation" to be had, I have confidence in the people around Biden -- Dr. Jill, Obama, his Three Wise Men, Schumer, et al. -- to have it, and I have confidence in him to have the wisdom and self-awareness to listen to it -- very much UNlike the Felon I would add. And if it leads to action, we'll hear about it.
In the meantime, perhaps we could stop posting endlessly about it? I'm sure it garners all sorts of delicious clicks, but it's tiresome and utterly uninformative.
"It hasn't been materially evident at other public events."
There have not been many public events. Biden has been shielded from us for too long. They even passed on the soft ball Super Bowl interview.
Citation not included, of course.
Citation of what? That he hasn’t done many public appearances?
It's part of the Narrative, therefore no citation or facts are required.
I think people get a sense of belonging from repeating the Narrative.
Reading from a teleprompter isn't the same as being able to enter into a one-on-one discussion, to debate someone, or speak extemporaneously.
Biden couldn't even explain why abortion bans were bad, warn that his opponent is proud of Dobbs and would likely sign a nationwide ban, or even say the word abortion. He couldn't even say one coherent sentence on the topic
And this is part of the Narrative, when in FACT there have been SEVERAL REGULAR UNSCRIPTED &/or LIVE appearances in the past few months, including F2F and recorded interviews, one-on-ones, and press gaggles.
I genuinely don't know how many of the people repeating this stuff actually believe it and how many are just bots and trolls, but ffs check the facts before you make assertions like this.
Oh, that's easy: It's because it's what they want to believe. I don't think they realize that if we take them at face value, they're borderline functionally illiterate; certainly they aren't critical readers.
I've seen some elderly relatives go through cognitive decline, and one thing I have noticed is that this isn't a black/white issue. It's gradual, and goes through shades of grey. They get more forgetful, they miss appointments, they get behind on bills, they have more and more "senior moments". And as Kevin said, at some point it crosses a line that makes family members decide that someone needs to have The Conversation. This might be triggered by a phone call in which they clearly are not all there, or getting so far behind on bills that they are in real trouble with the bank, or - gawd forbid - they try to cook a meal and end up starting a fire in the kitchen.
In Biden's case, the trigger was the debate. That's why everyone is talking about this now. People around the President have been seeing signs of decline for months, but out of loyalty to the man and to the D Party they have kept their mouths shut. But then the debate happened, and now we are having The Conversation.
But what they don't do is stumble, recover within a half hour.
Which is what you're attributing to Biden. How did he get better?
Apparently Biden can still read from a teleprompter, a not-entirely difficult skill.
ron burgandy might disagree.
In my experience, yes, they do stumble and then later recover. Periods of confusion can be followed by periods of greater clarity. I have no idea what Biden's mental state is, but 'he got better after a while' does not reassure me.
Somebody who ignores statistics when it gets in the way of their narrative. "Just because this coin came up heads twenty times in a row doesn't mean it won't come up tails on the next toss!"
I don't think he makes it through the weekend without announcing that he won't run. This story has real legs. As far as his decline being discussed back in January, Ezra Klein was calling for him to drop out in February.
They were discussing this in 2020, same names.
I don't think he makes it through the weekend without announcing that he won't run.
I think it'll be longer than that, but, yes, for better or worse I sense this thing is coming to an end.
I just hope he resigns the presidency, and not merely withdraws from the campaign. Although I'm not the least bit concerned the Republic is in danger because of the president's cognitive deterioration, I think it will be maximally awkward to have him in office between now and November given the implications regarding his fitness for the world's most difficult job. His remaining will also allow Trump to continue campaigning on many of the same themes. This does not mean I think President Kamala Harris should be gifted with the nomination. Others should feel free to throw their hats in the ring if they like.
Resigning the presidency leaves Mike Johnson as first in line until a new vice president is confirmed by Congress. And what do you think the chances are of the MAGA-fied House confirming anyone -- let alone anyone remotely acceptable to the Dems?
Yes, But fortunately Kamala Harris is very healthy, and Democrats hold a Senate majority until at least January.
Fear of the microscopic chances of a two or three month Johnson presidency shouldn't dissuade us from doing that which is mostly likely to defeat Trump.
"The party’s leaders have been insistent to the point of pedantry that “democracy is on the ballot” in the race against Trump—and now they have a chance to act like it! Whenever the question is asked in a poll, large percentages of voters say they would like to see a major-party candidate besides Trump or Biden. (Half of respondents in a Pew poll said both candidates should be replaced.) Thousands of delegates deliberating (on television) to select such a person would be a substantive response to those voters, and proof that democracy does actually matter to Democrats. The event would further direct national attention onto the new nominee, who would likely have also completed a gantlet of interviews, appearances, and risky TikTok drug-consumption challenges that honed and validated their camera-readiness. It would be a name-recognition bonanza."
Ben Mathis -Lilley
Nonwithstanding this happy-talk blather, the fact is that Kamala Harris is the *only* viable replacement for Biden. If someone else is chosen, the Biden campaign funds will be off-limits. And women and people of color will stay home.
I'm not at all convinced that Harris can win, but I'm certain that anyone else will lose.
if biden & harris, who are a team, bow out of the race together, i think a whitmer-warnock or laura kelly-jon ossoff ticket could keep the women & black/other nonwhite constituencies together. even j.b. pritzker/sharice davids likely could.
Hahahahaha great idea. Who needs money? Or all the goodwill the candidates have banked? Just toss it!
Honestly, you trolls need to get a LITTLE less obvious...
my preference if biden steps aside from the race while remaining resident is harris/inslee.
actually, as well, two of the three I supported in the 2019 phase of the democrat primary 2020. (buttigieg was the third.)
Dream Ticket Bingo! I’ve got Cory Booker/ Nikki Haley Unity Ticket.
could work.
haley has already appointed a gay black senator, so she'd be personally comfortable with booker.
Except for her not being popular among Biden supporters who saw her staff turnover as VP just as they saw it in her potus campaign. He will endorse her but the delegates can get behind someone else. As far as women and minority voters, a ticket of Whitmer/Wes Moore fixes that.
...the fact is that Kamala Harris is the *only* viable replacement for Biden. If someone else is chosen, the Biden campaign funds will be off-limits.
Completely false:
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4753737-biden-drop-out-rumors-campaign-funding/
I'm comfortable with Harris as nominee (especially if she has become president), and I believe she may well win. But in the event the convention chooses another nominee, money won't be an issue. In addition to the various loopholes described in the article above, any fresh Democratic nominee is likely to attract a tsunami of contributions. Likewise, since Citizens United, rich liberals are entitled to spend as much as they want promoting Whitmer/Shapiro/Kelly/Beshear and attacking Trump.
And in any event, if campaign money is your concern, the quicker Joe exits the better:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jul/05/joe-biden-election-donors-abigail-disney-pause
Isn't it obvious that this is the whole point of this malicious exercise? They want to counter the anybody-but-Trump voters with anybody-but-the-scary-black-woman voters.
Kevin decides to go with a hit piece on Joe Biden on the 4th of July. So, again:
If Biden withdraws or resigns, Trump wins. Simple as that. Now, I am all in favor of urging Biden to do more campaigning. But urging him to drop out or resign is the.exact.same.thing as promoting a second Trump term.
And in other news:
CNN —
Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz said Wednesday that President Joe Biden is “fit for office,” following a meeting with the president as he looks to ease fears about his ability to lead the country and take on Donald Trump in November.
Walz added, “I think this idea that you get in your own head, you get a little bit cycled up on that. What we saw in there today was a guy who was the guy that all of us believed in the first time who could beat Donald Trump and he did beat Donald Trump.”
Democratic Govs. Gavin Newsom of California and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, whose names have been floated as possible choices to enter the race should Biden step aside, were present at the meeting …
In a statement to CNN, Newsom said, “I heard three words from the President – he’s all in. And so am I. Joe Biden’s had our back. Now it’s time to have his.” And in a post on X, Whitmer similarly said, “@JoeBiden is our nominee. He is in it to win it and I support him.”
-
Now could it be said that CNN is somehow biased in favor of Biden? Or that the Dem Governors have a vested interest in his success? Of course, but it’s even easier to say that the NYT is biased against him.
Here is Aaron Rupar on Twitter describing the situation: “Biden's age and poor debate showing is obviously a legit story, but what we've seen over the last week is a hysterical feeding frenzy aimed at some combination of self-vindication, settling old scores, claiming a scalp, and the desire of some in the media to have Trump back in power. If Biden can't campaign he should consider passing the torch, but the elite press (and especially the NYT) is desperately trying to will this into existence. And it's really gross.”
You can now add Kevin Drum’s name to the list of people trying to will Trump’s second term into existence.
And one thing that Rupar doesn’t mention, and that Kevin may not be smart enough to realize, is that if the NYT’s hit pieces have the desired effect of pushing Biden out, the NYT will then dive full force into stories of Democratic chais and dissension in the Democratic ranks. And by republishing.their.stories. on his blog, Kevin is helping the NUT’s attempt to overthrow the Dem party.
And at least with the CNN article above, we have clearly identified and high profile elected officials putting their names on the line to state their support for Biden.
Is there anything comparable in the NYT article that Kevin essentially republishes on his blog? Or is that article all (or mostly) referencing people who prefer to stay anonymous?
Certainly, it’s ultimately up to Biden to put doubts to rest in public, and there’s at least one AP story I know of detailing his upcoming plans for public appearances. But what the rest of us can do, unless we want a second Trump term, is to not contribute to the “hysterical feeding frenzy.” And on that score Kevin has failed badly. On the Fourth of July. Talk about cognitive decline!
"some of the media want trump back".
try all. all of the lamestream jackwagons want trump back.
lol and the righties say the "lame stream jack wagons" have it in for dozing donnie.
It'd be easier to believe the Dems on this if they hadn't pulled the same strategy with Feinstein.
RBG. Feinstein. Biden.
We jeered Trump when he said, "Only I can fix it."
@ Bones99:
The way I understand things is that it can sometimes be fairly straightforward to spot a problem but there just aren’t always easy solutions.
So, what exactly could anyone do with Senator Feinstein? Sure, the problem was obvious, but what’s the solution? I remind you that elderly people do in fact have rights. They’re real people with human hearts and human minds. They make their own decisions. And if we disagree with those decisions, then what? Lock them up? Commit them to any asylum? Bring their long and distinguished careers to a humiliating end by trying (and likely failing) to force a resignation?
There were no good options. No one has a magic wand they can wave to make old people disappear.
Similarly with Biden, the “just resign” people (like Kevin Drum) or the “just withdraw” people (like the NYT editors attempting to overthrow the Dem party) are reductive morons.
If Biden drops out Trump wins the White House and the Repubs probably keep the House and win the Senate. But is Biden in ideal condition to campaign? Obviously not! Hence: no simple solutions.
That being said I am unequivocally opposed to the hysterical jackals (and that includes Kevin’s effort at promoting anti-Biden propaganda) screaming for Biden to resign or withdraw. If Biden steps down, Trump wins in that exact same moment. The rest of the campaign will simply determine the extent of Trump’s victory.
So we go to the campaign with the candidate we have, and that’s Biden.
“Biden's age and poor debate showing is obviously a legit story, but what we've seen over the last week is a hysterical feeding frenzy aimed at some combination of self-vindication, settling old scores, claiming a scalp, and the desire of some in the media to have Trump back in power. If Biden can't campaign he should consider passing the torch, but the elite press (and especially the NYT) is desperately trying to will this into existence. And it's really gross.”
Exactly this. "Biden is old" is an easy fluff topic for lazy "journalists" to chew over instead of "boring topics" that don't generate clicks. To hell with everyone working this side of the street. You can discuss the topic without hearsay, but I'm seeing little of it.
“If Biden withdraws or resigns, Trump wins. Simple as that.“
Really? Is it simple as that? It seems to be equally valid to say “If Biden stays in the race, Trump wins. Simple as that.”
It may be that both of those statements are true and we’re doomed. If only one of them is true it’s incredibly important to figure out which it is. At the moment the second seems the more likely.
There are two types of plans. Ones that won’t work and ones that might work. Replacing Biden seems like one that might work.
@Jambo:
From your post:
“Really? Is it simple as that?”
Yes.
“It seems to be equally valid to say If Biden stays in the race, Trump wins. Simple as that.”
You’re wrong.
The two statements are not equally valid. Incumbent presidents (with decades of experience successfully winning national elections) presiding over booming economies are favored to win over challengers. I am unaware of any precedent in modern American history which contradicts this fact.
Then you add in some other considerations: Biden’s campaign and fundraising apparatus are already effectively deployed. He’s got hundreds of millions to spend and he’s been regularly rolling out anti-Trump and pro-Biden adds in swing states for months. Even Harris would need time to transition into that spotlight. No other Dem would even get their foot in the door before the election is already over.
So the assertion that Biden’s departure is Trump’s victory is obvious. Biden is the firewall. If he resigns or withdraws, The Republicans win full control (White House, Senate, House of Reps) of the Federal government, the ACA (Obamacare) is replaced, millions of people lose health insurance, Putin conquers Ukraine, the IRS is defunded and the EPA may be shut down, and the rich get a massive tax break.
Anyone telling Biden to resign or step down is throwing their full support behind all of those things. And if they don’t realize that’s what they’re doing then they are the worst kind of self destructive fools imaginable.
+1
Except you’re ignoring the fact that polls show Biden deep in the hole against Trump while also showing folks across the board saying they want different candidates. Polls also show Biden way underperforming Dem senate candidates in swing states. There are tons of people who support Dems but won’t vote for Biden.
Simply saying “you’re wrong” is not an argument that changes any of that. You can’t deny that Biden is set to underperform his 2020 numbers, can you? With the electoral college stacked against us it doesn’t take much of a slip to Lise the race. Biden’s wins in AZ and GA were razor thin four years ago. You think he’s heading for a win in either of those states? How about PA and MI? Lise those four and he’s done. At this point I’m not even confident he will carry NV.
Your argument comes down to what are basically quibbles about current polling. Without naming a specific alternate to Biden that you believe would do better, it's as valid to say "you're wrong" as anything else. And since you're quibbling about polls, keep in mind that current polls show only that a few other prospects might do as well as Biden--none that would unequivocally do better. So, yeah, you're just wrong.
Only if the replacement is Kamala Harris, If not, they lose the Biden campaign money and a bunch of female voters and voters of color will stay home.
If Harris is the candidate I might forget to vote. Honestly--the thought of being stuck with her for possibly the next eight years gives me the heebie-jeebies. At least with Trump, in four years we get another open shot at identifying a new Democratic candidate. If Harris were in and somehow miraculously she won, we'd be stuck with her. (Sure seems like the Harris-bros are already in full campaign mode. What's that about?)
Meanwhile we've already got an unexpectedly great president running for re-election. Whether it seems more interesting or not, swapping him out now seems like about the stupidest thing to do. Who cares if he gets a little tired after dinner or his eyes glaze over during press photo ops? Seems normal to me.
Does anyone really think Harris would win? As much as I want to like her...just not feeling it at all.
"At least with Trump, in four years we get another open .."
That is plain dumb. Trump will destroy democracy in the US, and you are not going to get another chance in 4 years.
the trumpfiriato ain't going to be just four years. donald, sr., himself may not make it all 36 years, but he'll serve more than the first four years of it.
he won't leave the white house, most probably in a casket, til 2031, at the earliest. 85 years old sounds about inline with his life expectancy.
also, neal, what about kamala is more heebyjeeby worrisome than donald, sr.?
Trump is running for Lord President of the United States. He and his supporters aren’t going to content themselves with mere election fuckery; they’re going to try and establish one party rule.
My gut tells me @jambo is right. I think Biden has no real chance in this election. The polls are awful, and the likelihood of more and more stories like Nuzzi's coming out is about 100%, give or take.
And even now, with the election on the line, the Biden team's response is a 15-25 minute interview which will probably allow for an intro followed by two or three questions. Which hopefully he'll be awake enough to handle at the 3 PM taping time.
You are entirely ignorant of the logistics, aren't you?
Thank you!
“ Now, I am all in favor of urging Biden to do more campaigning. ”
Now *that* is promoting a second trump term.
I was 100% behind the Biden second mandate, until a week ago. I would/will still vote for him if he is the candidate. I still think he is a good reasonable man, and most decisions by a President can be made during the day (this is not an episode of 24).
But to become President he needs to get elected, and that means that a large number of people must get off their ass and go vote for him. We are now reaching the point where people are so stunned, they may not go vote.
The debate has done great damage. One can say that a person shouldn't be defined by 90 minutes -- anyone could have a bad night. That's true. But the excuses are strange, like he travelled too much and was tired. I get that, sure. But by being so caught exposing weaknesses and vulnerabilities in the most public setting, you mean that they could not plan ahead to make sure he was at his best for ONE night? Shouldn't he know himself well enough by now to have planned ahead? Like get up late, sleep well, have your ideas clear between 7 PM and 9 PM? The debate performance is like being a concert pianist. When you start to play, you must be in top shape. You don't have hundreds of false notes and then say, oh sorry the concert was at night and I was tired. Like, you didn't know that ahead of time?
" One can say that a person shouldn't be defined by 90 minutes -- anyone could have a bad night."
Just a reminder that Gerald Ford's "bad night" in a debate cost him the '76 election
You're right. Someone does need to have the conversation. I'll start.
Knowing where you are requires two variables. To focus on one variable while ignoring on the other is to be lost. The two geographic variables are latitude and longitude. The two political variables are competence and intent. Biden's good intent is to serve the greater good, and Trump's bad intent is to serve himself at the expense of the greater good. With good intent, competence is an asset. With bad intent, competence is a liability. Democracy survived POTUS 45 because he was an evil idiot and not an evil genius.
But talking about Biden's competence is a great distraction for anyone not wanting to have "the conversation."
The Conversation is not about Trump for goodness' sake. It's about how to beat him best, with Biden or with a younger Democrat. And then, yes, competence is an issue.
I agree. The Conversation is about the best way to beat Trump. I too am concerned about Biden's fitness for office, but I'm a hundred times more concerned about MAGA World's dystopian vision. The best way to beat Trump is to put those two concerns in context. Instead of focusing less on intent and more on competency, focus less on competency and a lot more on intent.
The day after the debate CNN had wall-to-wall coverage of Biden's poor performance and next to nothing on Trump's appalling performance. What made them think they should compare Biden to the Almighty, and not to the alternative? For the same reason Fox News lies to their audience: short-term profit at the long-term expense of the greater good.
Taking a step back and looking at three important elections, US, UK and France, what is obvious is that people are sick and tired of The Establishment. Like in empires before their fall, including the USSR, it grew and grew and became more and more haughty, unaccountable and hubristic. The press that covered up Biden's ageing? MSM. The staffers, people close to him? Part of The Establishment. And his own hubris? What else to expect from the epitome of The Establishment he always was, already as a senator. All have the failing of a litmus test in common: the Iraq war. And all of them, though proved wrong, still believed they knew better than those who were right at the time.
The remarkable thing with Biden is that the sclerosis is physical and not just systemic. But it's a logical consequence of a system that becomes topheavy and overconfident. If it's any comfort, the gerontocracy in the Soviet Union was worse and the political center in France blew itself up.
I have long thought that I need to get myself an "I <3 The Establishment" T-shirt to wear to public events. People who have worked hard, climbed the ranks, and become insiders are Established for a reason: they beat out all the other clowns who tried to get in and simply weren't as good. The Establishment doesn't get everything right, but they are better than any alternative that exists in the real world. Give me The Establishment over those "outsider" morons any day of the week!
"And all of them, though proved wrong, still believed they knew better than those who were right at the time."
Nobody's right all the time, but the the Biden administration has done amazingly well. And nobody's wrong all the time, but the MAGA Republican Party is doing their best to disprove that theory.
The time for the conversation is passed. I will vote for his corpse to keep what's left of this country together and hope that his replacement then will stamp out these reactionaries toot sweet.
So,
why does no one ask if someone managed to drug Biden before the debate?
That's as likely as the rest of this conversation.
I think I read somewhere that he had a cold and took some cough syrup. Some of those can make you drowsy...
"So,
why does no one ask if someone managed to drug Biden before the debate"
good grief part 2
Here, have a benadryl.
Olivia almost had me there for a minute. She blew it when she reminded us how she had written all this stuff during the 2020 campaign. And between then and now President Biden has had one of the most successful and consequential presidencies in living memory. Since that success was nowhere mentioned in her article, I will have to file her article under "hit piece". She needs to get back to us when she covers how her 2020 "reporting" matches up with the actual Biden presidency. Everybody on Breitbart says Obama is running things. Is it her plan to go with that?
Kevin says:
"But it sure sounds as though Biden's debate performance has finally given everyone permission to say what they've been thinking for the past half year or so: Yeah, it's bad. Someone needs to have The Conversation.
But no one has."
Well, we don't know that. The "Someone" is Harris and the Cabinet. They are specifically mentioned by the 25th Amendment, Section IV.
They might have already had that conversation, and they sure as shit aren't going to share it with US citizens before they share it with Biden, because Biden has the specific ability to answer in writing that he is fit for office under that same 25th Amendment.
So, let's not pretend that we know what is going on in the background.
Engaging in public panic isn't the way to go about getting to the most correct solution. Biden has the decision to make. This is a complicated decision.
When you find yourself with a pantsload of shit, quit shitting yourself and take a minute to think about what needs to happen. This is happening now.
Stop shitting yourselves. Full-on public panic isn't going to make any decision any better.
if you want him to stay you want people to calm down
but for those who believe biden should leave, voter panic is the only way that happens
Nothing says probity like complete panic, and that over every wingnuts dream date of a news cycle.
Bunch of malarkey. If the polls were to turn sharply against Biden, while other Democrats held up, that would be something to play into a decision. ~150 million people voted in the last Presidential election. A relative handful is running around with their hair on fire at the moment. That's a poor basis for a decision.
if you want him to stay you want people to calm down
IOW if you want him to stay in power, don't talk about his cognitive decline. Maybe the pressure to quite the race will die down.
But if you think he's headed for defeat, better to, uh, keep talking about it.
By the way, the president has apparently pledged to not do events after 8pm. That should do wonders for voter confidence!
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/biden-trump-news-polls-debate-interview-b2573970.html
How would any of those Governors be hurt by telling the truth?
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/continuing-thoughts-on-the-turmoil
you know who else was a famously early to bed president?
george w. Bush.
& the press laurelized it as an antidote to bill clinton's all hours of the nite activity.
meanwhile, trump was equally as prone to wee small hours activity as clinton -- though donald, sr., was typically on the toilet for his 3am tweerstorms -- but biden's more reserved white house hasn't been treated as an antidote to anything.
If you think W. Bush in 2004 faced the same problems with respect to voter perceptions regarding brain function deterioration, I don't know what else to say.
i watched the debate with 10 liberals who ranged from very politcally engaged to not at all so. the debate performance is what caused their panic, not subsequent media coverage. and not the coverage before the debate about biden's age. it was watching him for 90 minutes. these are all people who will vote biden no matter what, but for the gettable swing voters or dem voters we need to persuade to get to the polls, i think his debate performance is going to be disastrously damaging.
+1
Yep. I'd walk over glass to vote for Joe Biden even if he were in a coma. But I feel certain the same thing cannot be said of a sufficiently large number of voters in seven key states.
Nuzzi has a history of bad judgment, such as cheering on Ann Coulter, and weird access-journalism behaviors, such as a drooling, squishy profile of known dirtbag Hope Hicks. Although, if we judged every journalist for being soft on silmy Hope Hicks, there would be a lot of judging to do.
So triangulate everything Nuzzi says, no matter how entertaining the writing. She's Trumpcurious.
not curious.
she'd fullon blow him.
Congress should pass a law requiring all federal employees above a certain age to get an annual neurological screening. That will ensure that all our presidents, congresspeople, judges, generals, officials, and bureaucrats have solid early warning if their brains start to go and can get out of their jobs long before their colleagues are faced with the wrenching decision of dealing with someone who has lost the ability to see their own impairment.
What we really need is an age limit for federal elected officials. I'd go with 80 for the presidency and 85 for Congress.
I've never like the idea of term limits for Congress and I still don't. There's something to be said for staffing the legislative branch with at least some members who have been there a very long time (especially true in light of the two terms limit on the presidency).
But an age limit to me is a common sense response to what we've seen in recent years (Grassley, Feinstein, Biden etc). It's must basic constitutional housekeeping.
*just basic
Kevin, your middle of the road, look at all sides, give the benefit of the doubt attitude has gotten more exasperating in the last year.
But this really tears it.
Biden had a bad debate. Period.
He has had the most successful Presidency of any Democrat since FDR - you think he did that as a doddering, senile old man?
He has been in public, speaking and looking just fine. He has met with Democratic Governors, members of Congress, and the MSM, and shown he is still able to do the job.
Yes, the MSM really does have it in for him. As they really did have it in for Hillary Clinton. As they pretty much had it in for Barak Obama. As they definitely had it in for Bill Clinton.
The MSM DOES NOT LIKE Democrats. The MSM especially does not like Democratic Presidents. They will make stuff up, cause panic, fan the panic, and then emerge, triumphant, with a scalp.
This time, the fate of the US is on the line. It is on the line because too many people listened to previous panics generated and sustained by the MSM (often at GOP instigation, and always with GOP connivance) which is why we are where we are.
FFS, do NOT do their job for them. Do NOT aid and abet them in doing to Biden what they did to both Clintons, and tried to do to Obama.
If the fate of the nation is on the line maybe the Democrats should act like it. They spent the last 4 years playing up Trump as the danger while doing nothing to rein in the court and still playing that the GOP could be reasonable. Now they aren't even saying what they'll do if they win, just "vote." Their actions and words do no match.
And just how were Democrats supposed to "rein in the court," pray tell? Perhaps you're a believer in magical thinking?
Pretty sure "they" have said what they'll do if they win, but it's not hard to guess even if you haven't heard it. They're going to stay the course and finish the jobs they've already started. Just one example: The federal bench still needs a lot of replacements from the Bush and Trump administrations. Might even get a crack at replacing Thomas and / or Alito.
Don't forget the flaying of Al Gore for his claim to have 'invented' the Internet, which went on despite the fact that he never made that claim ....
i would never.
I'm 100% confident the Biden administration has the capability to ably run the country. They've been very successful these past 3.5 years.
I'm 0% confident candidate Biden has the capability to protect us from the horrible danger of a Trump victory.
I am 0% < confident < 100% that the Democrats can win the election, whoever is the candidate. The Republican/Fox/rightwing media propaganda campaign of mistrust of government and demonizing of Democrats has been going on for decades, and Democrats have not countered it effectively. I think we just thought that programs that benefit the broad population, more equitable tax policies, and a well-managed economy will be recognized and rewarded. Hasn't worked. Voters have been persuaded to focus on 'threats' that government really has no business dealing with, like secularization and increasing acceptance of human diversity. Now, on top of that failure to get through, we face a demagogue and cult leader with a virtually impenetrable base of support. We need a different approach. I disagree with Leo on this point, that if Biden voluntarily steps aside, and the party coalesces quickly around a new candidate*, we could still win this one. TFG's ceiling is as solid as his floor, IMHO. But a way has to be found to beat him down to that floor.
*VP Harris is the only one whose name was on primary ballots, and dropping an Asian-African-American from the ticket would be nuts, IMHO.
Let's cut through the innuendo and list the facts in this article:
1. He forgot someone's name
2. The person thought he had a funny expression.
The rest is just a lot of gossip.
[insert side by side gif of donald trump & charles manson]
It makes no sense that Biden himself issued the challenge to debate if "everyone knows" he's been diminished mentally for months.
It also makes no sense that Biden has done nothing to address the freakout over this past week if the debate was just an off night for him.
I'm confounded.
He hasn't 'done nothing', tho. Look at the campaign or whitehouse media feeds.
Seems like a lot of confirmation bias going on with Kevin and various others in the media.
You'd think no one had ever seen a media frenzy before.
I don't know what went on before the Correspondents' Dinner in April. I saw the show itself and didn't notice anything odd about the way Biden was speaking or responding to things. This was moments after the first encounter Nuzzi describes. So I don't know.
I also saw the debate last week. And I don't know quite how to describe what happened there or what it means. So that's two things where I don't know.
People like Nuzzi get told all kinds of things by all kinds of people, all the time. A whole lot of them have ulterior purposes to serve, so no honest reporter (I know, I know, oxymoron) can take any of it at face value. But anyone like her could probably write stories about almost anything from two completely opposite points of view and based on the same quotes. The source who was there with the donor, for example, might well have been with some Silicon Valley type who had ties to Newsom, trying to grease the skids for Gavin. And in a different story, Nuzzi might even use the same quote and describe that same encounter in just that way. And this is not to mention what we already know well about gop interests planting stories and using whisper campaigns.
What happened at the debate happened and it can't be undone. All that can be done from here is for Biden to seize the chance to belie stories like this. And if he can't, then decisions need to be made by people who know far more about how nominations and campaigns work than I do, and whose decisions have consequences. If this was my platform, I don't think I'd be so definitive when I'm so far from the situation (sorry, Kevin) and can only look on as someone who despises and fears trump and MAGA. And especially not, given what we know about how willing republicans in general, and trump in particular, are to use and abet any opportunity and any means to destroy opposing candidates both electorally and personally.
Considering the stakes, I'd say first and foremost it's important to try to be aware that there are a lot of ambitious and unscrupulous people and forces at work behind almost everything we see, and try to stay as icy cool as we can.
I know very little about what is said in conservative media, how frequent/ loud are the calls to use the 25th amendment. I am starting to wonder if Kevin is right that that Biden should not only drop out of the race, but also resign the presidency.
I wish he would just drop out already and it doesn't go that route. It would be better if dem leadership does not need to call for this publically.
How is this supposed to work in your head, tho?
If Biden drops out of the race, the only viable alternative is Kamala Harris. Anyone else will have to start fund-raising from scratch. Also, a bunch of women and people of color will stay home if the Democrats dump Harris.
If Biden resigns, then Harris is president? Who is VPOTUS? They will have to be approved by both houses of Congress. Think the GOP house will approve any Democrat when the alternative is Mike Johnson as next in line of succession. Who will preside over the House meeting in January to approve the EC ballots?
Simply bleating the Biden should go away isn't an answer, it's a reaction. Real answers are hard.
I agree with an earlier comment that we are likely doomed either way - Biden or Harris. I also agree with your reasoning that Biden should not resign as president.
As I think Harris will soon be on the top of the ticket, I am currently wondering what attack Trump and the GOP will use that will stick. Probably countering her greatest strength - whatever that is.
Do you think his COVID infection from summer 2022 is partly responsible? It's something that's been on my mind since the debate debacle.
Jill Macbeth
Did you read this bullshit, Kevin, since you're so busy eating the rest of it? https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2024/07/why-i-dont-vote-and-by-i-mean-you-and-by-dont-i-mean-shouldnt
Waxy? Have these people never seen anyone over 70? Spent Too much time with trump and his make up?
Next up, “Wrinkled old prune!”
I could certainly believe that people close to Biden could have hidden something like this. But the press? In an election year? That has been salivating over this potential story? That has been running pieces about his mental state, even pieces like the one by Ezra suggesting he should drop out? They've had the goods on his mental state and didn't run it? I don't buy that. If the press had concrete evidence that Biden's mental state had deteriorated, why didn't they include it in any of these articles about his age and mental state? It's not like they shied away from the topic.
yup.
would have been like sitting on monica's blue dress.
Good point
These narratives are designed to capture people and Kevin is hooked. The media has been actively passing along and encouraging this planted narrative for many months. And now Kevin tells us that the media is finally free to encourage this story.... even though they have been doing bit for months. Repetition works. The more the same story is repeated by the same people (some have been repeating themselves for years), the more convincing the narrative becomes.
The linked article is an obvious work of... persuasion.... she's selling the narrative pretty hard here.
Saw a lot of this with the Clinton narratives. The Trump team floated the same 2 basic narratives in both races (emails/files and physical health/mental health). The Biden files storyline flopped, similar to the Hillary health narrative. But you only need one story to take off.