Tale of two Bidens:
It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.
Things are looking up for Joe Biden. Things are falling apart for him.
The good news: Gasoline prices are down. Worker participation is up. Unemployment is low. Rents are declining. Inflation is abating. Trump faces indictments on multiple counts, and there is the slam-dunk case of Trump having taken government documents and stored them insecurely. He has admitted it!
The past six months had looked good for Joe Biden. Biden looked competent and effective--something of a surprise to many. Inflation was a problem, and responsible people at the Fed are doing something about it, with the blessing of the executive branch. How refreshingly sensible. The gridlocked and dysfunctional Congress got something done addressing climate, the "Inflation Reduction Act." Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Both were passed over Republican opposition and messaging. Republicans have a narrative: If Democrats did it, by definition it is wasteful and socialist. The message has limited credibility. Most people have a recollection that when Trump was president Republicans supported the deficit double-whammy of big spending and tax cuts. Biden got agreement from Joe Manchin. How crazy-liberal could it be if Joe Manchin approved it? Republican partisans will be unpersuaded, but there is a vast middle in America's electorate--the margin of victory in close districts and states--who are pleasantly surprised. Somehow the grownups in D.C. got things done.
On top of that Democrats made a careful gesture on the culture wars, a law requiring states to recognize same sex marriages performed in other states. Public opinion has moved on the issue of same-sex marriage. (Live and let live. Love who you want.) Republicans are choosing to be the meddling scolds.
The Biden career arc improved. He wasn't an over-the-hill placeholder. He was a get-thing-done leader. Biden was going to run for re-election.
Now this. Biden had documents. Of course, he immediately turned them over. It was a matter of neglect, not intention, but that doesn't change the political effect. Biden isn't the scofflaw. That is Trump's brand. Biden is the guy who messes up by bumbling. Biden dug his hole deeper by saying the documents were locked along with his Corvette. I am saddened by the image of an 80-year-old man with aviator glasses driving a Corvette.
Biden's stored documents muddle the political case against Trump. It now hinges on a distinction of intent, not national security. In the law the matter may be significant. Politically, it is a nit-pick. Hunter Biden is back in the middle of the story of Joe Biden. What did Hunter Biden see and when did he see it?
I wish two things would happen. The first is that Biden appoint a special prosecutor to investigate both his own children and Trump's. Drain the swamp. This won't happen, but it should. Of course, Hunter peddled influence, as did Jared, Ivanka, Eric, and Don Junior. The influence-peddling might simply be ugly and corrupt, but legal. If so, clear their names of illegality. If they did illegal acts, prosecute them. Trump pardons corrupt people. Democrats should prosecute them.
The second is for Biden to announce, like LBJ in 1968, that he is not running for re-election so that he can devote his time and energy to addressing America's problems. A week ago, I thought this was unlikely. Now Joe Biden has a real reason. Hunter is fragile at best. Joe needs to take Hunter out of the line of direct fire. This might happen, and it should.
18 comments:
There are differences between the Trump and Biden classified documents cases, but the DoJ couldn’t prosecute one and not the other without appearing partisan. As an alternative to prosecution, they should both be disqualified from running again in 2024. They may never admit it, but they’d probably be relieved. I know I would be.
Good observations and interesting recommendations Peter, but I think your comment “The most pathetic image in the world is the self delusion of an 80-year-old man with aviator glasses driving a Corvette” was unnecessary to your otherwise good points, and unkind. “Pathetic”? No more than wealthy drivers of Porsches, Aston-Martins, Lamborghinis, or Ferraris- people with pedestrian driving skills and reflexes (regardless of age) who (happily) are constrained by speed limits and traffic laws. I would argue that the Corvette is precisely the right image for his generation (along with the aviator glasses). It’s right there with Harleys and giant 4x4 trucks with lift kits (that are grocery-getters) - the epitome of American “boy toys”. It’s about how it makes them feel. Most of the people I see driving Corvettes these days are gray-hairs, finally being able to afford to drive what they’ve always dreamed of as young men. Btw cars aren’t my thing these days, but they used to be so I get it.
Biden has been a good president. He is old and I hope he does not run again, but we could certainly do worse for president than an old president Biden.
My first thought is in regards to how the media is handling the issue. There is so much time spent on the false equivalency of the two situations that it looks somewhat desperate. On the other hand there is a difference and it's significant, and yes, that is about intent but no, it does matter. At this point they might as well shutter the investigation, save some taxpayer dollars and send Jack Smith back to Europe, just the latest victim of whataboutism, now the reigning political argument despite its grade school origins.
One thing seems clear to me. When the Trump docs story broke I can imagine a scramble at the White House..."Do WE have any docs floating around?" Call the lawyers! That detail is conspicuously missing from the coverage, along with any mention of the aides responsible for the oversight. I'd be asking questions like; "What was the nature of the papers that the classified material got mixed with?", "What was the chain of custody?" and "Has anyone looked into Bush's junk drawer or Obama's couch?"
Will this hijack Biden's re-election? My guess is that strategists are counseling to tough it out, at least for the time being, but as the months drag on the corrosive effect may well be inescapable.
I agree with some of what you wrote, but think Biden must run again. Who else could win? I see no democrat out there who could at this point, especially if it is trump or DeSantis running.
Inflation is slowing down for reasons largely out of Biden‘s control. Legislation passed by Congress is also largely out of his control. Biden does not deserve much credit for either of those.
It’s an iron law of practical politics that a president gets credit or blame for what happens “on his watch”; luck is a crucial and often unacknowledged component of political success.
Where Biden had almost total control, the withdrawal from Afghanistan, he produced a clusterf**k of monumental proportions. I do give him a lot of credit for his support of Ukraine. Biden’s record is decidedly mixed.
Amazingly enough, I agree with Mike today. It would be good for the country if both Trump and Biden did not run for president in 2024.
Both parties will face big problems in that case:
* The Democrats will have to figure out a way to get past Kamala Harris to a candidate with actual political competence; it won’t be easy for them to violate their commitment to identity politics and sideline “a woman of color.” Or they could try to keep that commitment, but then they have to figure out how to get past Stacey Abrams.
* The Republicans will have to find a candidate who appeals to the broad middle without alienating Trump supporters. So far, Ron DeSantis seems to be threading that needle, but it’s early days. Mitch Daniels would be a formidable candidate, but it’s doubtful he would decide to run.
As far as his Corvette and the Rayban sunglasses go, it could be far worse; he might be like the gray beards riding Harley Davidson Tricycles down to their local gathering spot. I think the sunglasses are cosmetic, as much as needed. Without them, his eyes are very small and kind of squinty appearing.
I agree with Peter about him needing to direct the A.G. to appoint a Special Counsel to investigate all the Presidential Spawn, from both sides. I hear John Durham is looking for work, although it is to be hoped somebody far more competent can be found to take on that role, should it happen. I have been hoping for some time he would announce his withdrawal from consideration for the Nomination in 2024. He is already in a Lame Duck period of his Administration, and continuing to hold out the possibility of running again is keeping any other potential Democratic Candidates from going after the job.
I'm posting a link to an opinion writer whom I value as much as I do this Blog, concerning what appears to be absolute fecklessness on the part of Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a42486320/merrick-garland-special-counsel-biden-trump/
The Democratic Party has plenty of experience and talent. The problem is a primary system that comes up with candidates as unlikeable as Hillary Clinton or as yesterday as Biden instead of someone who can inspire the country.
I have to laugh at the thought of Republicans finding anyone who can appeal to the broad middle without alienating Trump supporters. He'd have to be crazy enough claim Trump won, but sane enough to admit he didn't. Maybe he could pander to each on alternate days. I know DeSantis was sent by God to protect us from gays and Black history, but I'm still not sure he has what it takes.
The primary system is definitely a problem. The reforms of the early 1970s that led to our current primary system were idealistic but turned out very poorly.
Mike and I agree again. I’m starting to get worried… 😱😀
The system for nominating Democrats has worked well: Clinton was elected twice; VP Al Gore won the popular vote but SCOTUS handed the electoral college victory to GWB; Obama was elected twice; Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the electoral college; and Joe Biden beat the incumbent GQP candidate (thank God), winning both the electoral college and the popular vote BY 7 MILLION VOTES.
The problem has been the electoral college.
Despite the nastiness, sexism and last minute FBI e-mail scandal announcement, Hillary R. Clinton received almost 2.9 MILLION MORE VOTES than the Traitor In Chief. So apparently HRC was not "unlikeable." But she was the first woman EVER in our nation's history to be nominated.
I would think that the folks commenting here would review the history as to why the electoral college determines wo is elected President. It's not a popularity contest.
Similarly, there's a good reason why there are Senators, as well as Represtatives.
Highly populated metro regions should not be the sole determining factor. The current constitutional system of our republic helps assure a fairer government that represents all regions of the US. A popular vote doesn't. Recall the urban/rural divide, and add to that the rise of suburban growth.
For the record, when Hillary Clinton ran against Donald Trump, it was the first time we had two candidates whose unfavorability rating exceeded their favorability. According to Gallup, they were the least liked candidates in history.
To the commenters who think we need to amend the Constitution to eliminate the Electoral College, they neglect to recall why our founders took this path.
Would we rather let our larger cities and states be the ones to judge what is best for the country? Do urban voters know what the needs and interests are for the suburbs and rural areas?
Our legislators are also allocated to incorporate the needs of residents. Representatives are apportioned based on numbers of residents/voters, with provisions to ignore those who are not citizens. Each state however is allocated to 2 Senators. Duties are split between the House of Representatives as well as the Senate. And the Electoral College makes sure that urband, suburban, and rural voters are heard.
For those advocating a popular vote to determine who is our president, be sure to understand the chance for unintended consequences.
To M2inFla. What ever happened to the idea of one person one vote? That is more important than having various regions of the country represented.
To: Diane
I think you misunderstand me. No where did I advocate that voters get more than one vote.
Voter fraud is when one voter votes more than once for a candidate or measure. I agree. One voter, one vote.
Inflation increased also because of things beyond Biden's control.
The Afghanistan debacle was solely because of Trump's surrender to terrorists.
Please read before you post.
Post a Comment