Biden Is An Elderly Swimmer In A Sea Of Sharks

Let’s have an open debate on whether he should run again.

Generated by Dall-E 2

First, welcome to all of my new subscribers. Thanks for signing up! As longtime readers know, I have no paywall on this site, but my producer Meredith Stark and I appreciate all of you who have decided to become paid subscribers. If you like what you read, please support us by subscribing or upgrading here.

Many of you signed up after reading my recent opinion piece in The New York Times, where I described Joe Biden as a good president but “an elderly swimmer in a sea of sharks” who should not run for reelection. So this week — instead of my normal column or interview with a wise old goat — I’m going to answer some of the 1800 or so comments posted at the bottom of the article in The New York Times.

My goal is to highlight interesting arguments, expand on my analysis and — with any luck — open a broader debate about whether President Biden should run again. Is he too old? That’s an especially good subject for Old Goats subscribers to tackle — even if you’re a spring chicken yourself.

So please consider commenting at the bottom of this newsletter. I hope that’ll be the beginning of a beautiful relationship between us— and each other.

Now to the matter at hand:

I did not write this piece because I think the classified documents story will by itself destroy Biden’s chances for reelection. Tommy Vietor, the very smart former Obama aide and co-host of Pod Save America, thinks immigration might be a more serious problem for Biden and he could be right. Because the political press knows it screwed up by hyping the Hillary emails story, reporters for mainstream outlets are unlikely to harp on this, as so many Democrats fear. My point was a little different. It was about Joe Biden himself and why he may have lost the benefit of the doubt when shit of various kinds hit the fan, especially if his opponent is someone other than Trump, which I think is increasingly likely.

So here we go with some New York Times readers. [Some comments have been edited for length.]

Just to be clear at the outset: I described this comparison as “phony.”

This comment helps explain why I wrote the article.

This raises a paradox of our political process. I prefer a statesman, too, and Biden — especially in mustering support to defend Ukraine — has been one. Unfortunately, the presidency is not a reward for a job well-done. When it comes to winning elections, we have to see the political world as it is, not as we wish it to be.

Henry has identified the main argument in Biden’s favor — he has unified the Democratic Party. In that sense, his political skills as president are actually fairly strong. It’s impressive that he has broad support now from progressives without losing moderates. Alas, those skills are necessary but not sufficient for campaigning, which is different than governing.

I wish the voters cared a lot about Biden’s great achievements, but there’s no indication that they do.

That’s true. Because of Polk, I struggled over the last line, where I wrote that if Biden didn’t run he’d be remembered as “arguably the most accomplished one-term president in American history.” In my original draft, I wrote “one of the most” instead  of “the most…”  Polk was a slaveholder who launched an ill-advised war of conquest against Mexico but he accomplished everything he set out to do — on the treasury, tariffs, and — most important — acquiring much of Oregon and California. He promised he wouldn’t run again and didn’t. Some define Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson as one-term presidents because each was elected only once. But each served at least five years, so I don’t include them.

This blessing-in-disguise argument goes further than I do in my piece but I basically agree with it. These mishandled documents are unlikely to hurt national security but they may indirectly help Democrats nominate someone who can beat a younger Republican, which makes this whole story good for the country.

All good questions.

Many Democrats are afraid of a feisty primary but I think they’re fighting the last war. The party this time is in no danger of nominating a self-described socialist (Bernie Sanders) and a competitive primary season will air good ideas for the future. I’m not sure what Biden’s ideas for a second term are, which is a problem in itself. By the way, I wrote two chapters in my Jimmy Carter biography about Ted Kennedy’s disastrous challenge to Carter in 1980, and we all know how harmful Bernie’s challenge was to Hillary Clinton in 2016. But I see this race more like 1968, when Gene McCarthy did surprisingly well in New Hampshire and LBJ dropped out.

I should have mentioned young voters in my story. I’ve heard the same from them.

This is an important argument and I basically endorse it. There’s too much coverage of “optics” and “how things will play.” We need more substance. But this story is an exception. First, there have been many stories in recent days about whether Biden is actually to blame. But we’ve had a cone of silence in mainstream media in debating whether Biden should run again. In fact, the reason my piece resonated is that I discuss in public what many Democrats have been saying in private.

This is what I fear. If not DeSantis, then Glenn Youngkin, Brian Kemp or some other younger Republican.

If Biden announces this spring that he’s not running, he would be celebrated as a selfless hero, not a lame duck. If he runs and wins, he really would be a lame duck — like every other two term president, but without Clinton and Obama’s survival skills.

That’s a fantasy for political reporters.

I agree, which is one reason I founded Old Goats — lots of people over 60 still have much to contribute. I’ve interviewed several people for this newsletter who are in their ‘80s and ‘90s and incredibly sharp. But sharp and energetic enough to be president?

Correct. If Trump had quietly returned the documents as requested in 2021, it wouldn’t have been a problem for either one. Unfortunately, he didn’t. Once again, the man destroys everything he touches.

I didn’t write that there is no contrast, only that it has been muddied in the mind of independents.

Fred is a friend and outstanding journalist. The one point he missed in this fine piece is that Obama issued an executive order accelerating declassification in 2009 and I haven’t seen anything about how it’s working out.

It’s worse than that. Chairman Comer signaled their new argument, which is that Trump is innocent because he declassified the documents (in his head, apparently) but Biden is not because vice presidents have no power to declassify. Ridiculous.

The only interview subject in nearly three years who thinks “old goats” is a negative is Ralph Nader. We just disagree on that. But you’re right about “alter” meaning old in German. That gives this newsletter some unity of purpose.

I’d love to hear your thoughts on my piece, who you think should be the Democratic nominee in 2024, and anything else. See you in the comments!