Have you actually never met an elderly person in cognitive decline? They have good days and bad days, that’s not news. I’d rather not have to hope that our President is having a good day the next time a crisis erupts.
Yes. My grandmother had Alzheimer’s for the last decade of her life. She sounded nothing like Biden did on Thursday night.
I’d rather not have Donald Trump be our president. Biden is our only alternative.
Again, excluded middle. Cognitive decline happens to everyone, eventually. Alzheimer’s is a specific disease involving cognition. Please don’t take someone’s mention of apples and respond as if it were oranges.
Cognitive decline outside of senile dementia is real, but needn’t be an indication that someone is mentally unfit.
It’s been about three days. He probably spent the weekend strategizing and discussing the campaign with those he trusts. Thankfully Biden doesn’t appear to rush into decisions without fully exploring all possibilities.
I trust that he and his team have a better handle on this than a bunch of idiot pundits and random strangers in the internet.
Already done by several juries. He’s a sexual assaulter and a convicted felon. There have been loads of TV ads on this over the last month or so and they did not move the needle.
Per 538:
July 1, 2020 - Biden + 9.5
July 1, 2024 - Trump + 1.4
Biden is thus behind where he needs to be, as of today, by about 10 percent. Nothing new about that. And nothing magically changed in the last four years so that the Democratic ticket can win with anything in the ballpark of a national polling tie.
As for Biden acing some future debate, that’s a fantasy because of the evidence that his cognitive problem has been growing for a while. Scroll down to the “Spin #2: It Was Just One Bad Night!” section here:
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/dear-dems-gaslighting-isnt-helping-biden-debate
I didn’t post this way before the debate because I do not watch TV. But now I see I missed Joe’s decline. It was easy for me to miss because almost everything else Trump says is a lie.
Not enough time? The U.S. election process has become ridiculously long. That’s not why to panic. If there is any reason to panic, it is that Joe will not resign because one of the symptoms of cognitive decline is stubbornness.
And I think if I hear one more time that giving a rousing speech, off a teleprompter, requires the same skill-set as being U.S. president when there’s a major war in Europe, or beating a demagogue in an election, I may also come down with dementia.
We’re 8 years into the Trump era. If the things that you mentioned above worked, they would have worked long since by now. Democrats have brought up Trump’s scandals, lies, pettiness, immaturity, appalling words, racism, fascism, Putinism, sexism, a million times. If such a tactic had ever been effective, Trump would be trailing Biden by 30% in the polls by now.
Um, he lost the last election. And some of this stuff is pretty recent. Trump is eminently beatable.
Even still, I would argue 2020 wasn’t a good example. Trump came within a hair of beating Biden when he, logically, should have been obliterated in a 538-0 landslide (and, logically, Hillary should have obliterated him too.) I mean, many candidates such as Dole, McCain, or Romney were far more decent than Trump, and lost by more than him.
Whatever it is, the guy is nearly Teflon and almost nothing sticks. If Democrats simply double down on calling Trump a racist, sexist, fascist, whatever, I think it would hardly budge the electorate. it would be like telling people that the sky is blue.
Again, it’s been 8 years. It’s not like America doesn’t know Trump inside and out by now.
Well, I disagree. Yes, Trump has an inexplicable (to me) appeal to many. By any reasonable standard he shouldn’t get a single vote. I get that.
But I believe there are enough people already aghast, and enough more we need to scare shitless, to win the election. Sure, Trump will still get his 70M votes. But it won’t be enough, not in the right states.
I strongly disagree.
First of all there was the Paul Ryan debate in 2012. Everyone is citing that Obama had a bad debate in 2012 against Romney. Which is true. Not because of old age or stumbling answers but because he looked disinterested and Romney caught him on the backfoot on issues. Obama just had to be in the groove next time for those attacks which he did. But in between Biden helped stem the bleeding by completely dismantling the Republican economic plan point by point.
Before that Biden did well in the post debate polls of the 2008 Democratic primary. He was up against Obama and Hillary Clinton and it was his answers at those debates that helped Obama pick him. Biden did not have the name relevance in 2008 or funds or unique selling point in much the same way that someone like Klobuchar lacked in 2020 but she also had good debates.
For 1988 Biden debated Michael Dukakis, Jesse Jackson and Al Gore and was being renowned for his speaking abilities in that race. Again he lacked the name ID at that time but his campaign ended before it could really begin by what would now be a minor controversy.
I’ll buy that for 2016 and 2020, but in 2024, this Claire Berlinski zinger will explain it:
I agree.
That’s why we should describe how those factors (and others related to Republicanism in general) will impact people:
- Women could lose their right to not just abortion but possibly birth control.
- The entire executive branch could be devoted to one person’s enrichment (and it ain’t you).
- Russia could be given free reign to invade all of Ukraine as well as the Baltic states and Poland.
- The global power of the U.S. could be forever crippled.
- LGBTQ rights could be reversed and stripped.
- Your right to clean water and air could be at the mercy of corporations with no recourse. Kids got cancer? Too bad.
- Etc. etc.
I don’t know which of those messages will resonate most strongly (and I likely missed a few), but triple down on whatever works and scare people to the polls.
He won’t. Biden is not able to debate with any time limits. His debate prep also involved policy. Throw that out. Not needed. And CBS will not do it any differently. Trump will still not answer any questions. It is all Trump rally minus sharks and electricity.
I believe he is still cognizant enough to give prepared remarks on issues of substance and think on his feet for zingers. The problem is can he be cognizant enough to think on his feet for issues of substance. He used to be very good at this. In that debate he was stumbling trying to get out data points for the economy and responding to what should have been his easiest answer on abortion. I get that as a Catholic and really the last stand of what is the “safe, legal and rare” breed of Democrats with the emphasis on rare that he may not be as passionate as most other Democrats today, but there was no reason to pivot into a case of immigration which he is considered to be open borders anyway.
I keep harping on about Biden in the past in the 2012 debate. This was much closer to what he should have been saying. Yet he didn’t.
MS. RADDATZ: I want to move on, and I want to return home for these last few questions. This debate is indeed historic. We have two Catholic candidates, first time on a stage such as this, and I would like to ask you both to tell me what role your religion has played in your own personal views on abortion. Please talk about how you came to that decision. Talk about how your religion played a part in that. And please, this is such an emotional issue for so many –
REP. RYAN: Sure.
MS. RADDATZ: — people in this country. Please talk personally about this if you could. Congressman Ryan.
REP. RYAN: I don’t see how a person can separate their public life from their private life or from their faith. Our faith informs us in everything we do. My faith informs me about how to take care of the vulnerable, about how to make sure that people have a chance in life.
Now, you want to ask basically why I’m pro-life? It’s not simply because of my Catholic faith. That’s a factor, of course, but it’s also because of reason and science. You know, I think about 10 1/2 years ago, my wife Janna and I went to Mercy Hospital in Janesville where I was born for our seven-week ultrasound for our firstborn child, and we saw that heartbeat. Our little baby was in the shape of a bean, and to this day, we have nicknamed our firstborn child, Liza, “Bean.” (Chuckles.)
Now, I believe that life begins at conception.
That’s why — those are the reasons why I’m pro-life.
Now, I understand this is a difficult issue. And I respect people who don’t agree with me on this. But the policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortion with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.
What troubles me more is how this administration has handled all of these issues. Look at what they’re doing through “Obamacare” with respect to assaulting the religious liberties of this country. They’re infringing upon our first freedom, the freedom of religion, by infringing on Catholic charities, Catholic churches, Catholic hospitals. Our church should not have to sue our federal government to maintain their religious — religious liberties.
And with respect to abortion, the Democratic Party used to say they want it to be safe, legal and rare. Now they support it without restriction and with taxpayer funding, taxpayer funding in “Obamacare,” taxpayer funding with foreign aid. The vice president himself went to China and said that he sympathized or wouldn’t second- guess their one-child policy of forced abortions and sterilizations. That, to me, is pretty extreme.
MS. RADDATZ: Vice President Biden.
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: My religion defines who I am. And I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And it has particularly informed my social doctrine. Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who — who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help.
With regard to — with regard to abortion, I accept my church’s position on abortion as a — what we call de fide (doctrine ?). Life begins at conception. That’s the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life.
But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and — I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman.
I — I do not believe that — that we have a right to tell other people that women, they — they can’t control their body. It’s a decision between them and their doctor, in my view. And the Supreme Court — I’m not going to interfere with that.
With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution, Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic Social Services, Georgetown Hospital, Mercy — any hospital — none has to either refer contraception. None has to pay for contraception. None has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.
Now, with regard to the way in which the — we differ, my friend says that he — well, I guess he accepts Governor Romney’s position now, because in the past he has argued that there was — there’s rape and forcible rape. He’s argued that, in the case of rape or incest, it was still — it would be a crime to engage in having an abortion. I just fundamentally disagree with my friend.
MS. RADDATZ: Congressman Ryan.
REP. RYAN: All I’m saying is if you believe that life begins at conception, that therefore doesn’t change the definition of life. That’s a principle. The policy of a Romney administration is to oppose abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. Now, I’ve got to take issue with the Catholic Church and religious liberty.
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: You have, on the issue of Catholic social doctrine, taken issue.
REP. RYAN: If they — if they agree with you, then why would they keep — why would they keep suing you? It’s a distinction without a difference.
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: (Chuckles.)
MS. RADDATZ: I want to go back to the abortion question here. If the Romney-Ryan ticket is elected, should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried?
REP. RYAN: We don’t think that unelected judges should make this decision; that people, through their elected representatives and reaching a consensus in society through the democratic process, should make this determination.
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: The court — the next president will get one or two Supreme Court nominees. That’s how close Roe v. Wade is.
Just ask yourself: With Robert Bork being the chief adviser on the court for — for Mr. Romney, who do you think he’s likely to appoint? Do you think he’s likely to appoint someone like Scalia or someone else on the court, far right, that would outlaw Planned — excuse me — outlaw abortion? I suspect that would happen.
I guarantee you that will not happen. We picked two people. We picked people who are open-minded. They’ve been good justices. So keep an eye on the Supreme Court –
REP. RYAN: Was there a litmus test on them?
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: There was no litmus test. We picked people who had an open mind, did not come with an agenda.
If I were Barack Obama I would be calling him to say in light of Friday’s SCOTUS rulings and today’s SCOTUS ruling to deliver a prime time address from the Oval Office on July 4th about how the decisions pose threat posed to American society and American democracy if we go down the route of an authoritarian.
If I got a response that it can’t happen I’d be getting the party leadership to move to replace. I don’t care if they are great friends which sure they probably are. Ted Kennedy tried to campaign in 1980 that the presidency of the United States did not belong to Jimmy Carter and I would say that was a narcissistic attitude that weakened a president in his bid for re-election. Well it probably rings true today that it does not belong to Joe Biden because unlike Carter who was most likely doomed because of inflation and the Middle East, Biden is most likely doomed not because of inflation and the Middle East - I believe he’d be re-elected in spite of that if those were the concerns - but because he is seen as doddering. Only he can change that perception.
Of course there was evidence that he’s in cognitive decline. There’s no PROOF. But the claim that Biden is in cognitive decline is more plausible now to a neutral evidence-based observer than it was before the debate. How plausible is it? Who knows, and of course “in cognitive decline” isn’t just a binary.
But if I were evaluating my best guess as to Biden’s level of cognitive decline, and were a perfectly objective evidence-based observer, the debate would clearly have moved the dial at least some.
(I find discussing Biden’s level of cognitive decline somewhat weird, in that it obviously should matter. I mean, “is the president in cognitive decline” ought to be an important issue that I devoted some effort to researching. But given that I will vote for him over Trump basically no matter what… it weirdly doesn’t even matter. But I don’t think we get anywhere by pretending that the situation is other than it is.)
Bingo! And all of this panic about whether Biden is fit to run or should be replaced based on a bad night is generating a self-fulfilling prophesy and materially hurting his chances of being elected.
I think the ever since 2016 the left has been suffering from a serious case of PTSD with regard to Trump. Every election of mid-term has turned into a hand wringing as we remember that fateful night November 8, 2016 where our world view shattered in an instant, and suddenly the monsters were real.
I am as freaked out as the rest of you at the prospect of a possible second term for Trump. But the one thing I take solace in is that in terms of whether its Biden or Harris, that decision will be made by other people and there is not a damn fucking thing I can do about it. The best I can do is to try my best to make sure whichever one it is that they have the best chance possible to beat Trump. And given that odds are that person is going to be Biden, ranting about how demented, infirm and incompetent he is the exact opposite. If on the other hand they do decide to pull the plug and nominate someone else, other than a bit of smug self satisfaction that comes from being right, telling the world what a demented, infirm and incompetent person they are replacing won’t help their chances either.
So Pascal wagers style, panicking hurts if its Biden and doesn’t help if its not, so it is counter productive. Instead, find a comfortable dark corner to curl up in, clutch your favorite towel and follow the Hitchhiker’s Guide.
2016? I’m not sure the Democrats have gotten over 1972 yet.
That may very well be where we are now. A younger candidate may get more people out to vote. Might energize them, if they feel they are being spoken too. That’s what we need.
I’m telling you the reason this saddens me the most is because I am sure had Biden been the nominee in 2016 there would have been no Trumpism taking hold.
Trump would have lost the election in a big margin because Vice President Biden carrying on from President Obama maintains the 2008-2012 coalition and prevents the exodus of white working class from the party.
Joe Biden used to be a blowhard motor mouth but he had authenticity and an ability to reach the everyday man while having a left of centre message.
That is gone now he just does scripted events.
He either rolls back the years or he turns the keys over now.