The aftermath of President Biden's miserable debate last week leaves me with a sense of déjà vu.
In the internal discussions on the political right about Donald Trump, I got some things right and others wrong, but I think I was unquestionably right on one point: From the beginning, I argued that the Trump presidency would end badly because, to paraphrase Heraclitus, character is destiny.
Trump’s presidency ended badly, but sadly his political career did not end with it. Regardless of what laws he may or may not have broken on January 6, 2021, he spent much of the afternoon watching television as violent vandals stormed the Capitol in his name, attempting to steal the election, shouting death threats, and literally and figuratively defecating in the people’s house. He was even impeached on his way out the door.
If I had bet on my prediction, I would have probably cashed out my winnings that day.
You know what else is destiny? Age.
Not everyone is lucky enough to reach the golden age, but those who do inevitably lose the qualities of youth, both mentally and physically. Some lose more than others, but all decline.
Even Biden acknowledges that he is not immune to old age, but denies that it matters much. And so does virtually the entire Democratic Party.
The rhetorical circle consists of a few interchangeable talking points.Bad nights of debate happen” Barack Obama said. The Biden family “will not let those 90 minutes define his four years as president,” first lady Jill Biden told Vogue. “We will continue fighting“The essence of all this is that the president's performance last week was just a snapshot, an isolated incident.
This is all nonsense. Nonsense that we already know. For years, whenever Donald Trump displayed his ineptitude, his defenders said it was a random comment, an isolated incident. You have to judge it in context. He's a good man. He's fighting for you.
In short, they would say all the things that Biden's partisan praetorian guard is now saying.
But these were isolated events, like frames in a movie when you watch them one by one. If you play the movie, you see the man in action. Biden’s poor 90 minutes were not an isolated case, but an example of a long-standing problem that was, disastrously, televised for all of America to see.
The déjà vu doesn't end there.
After securing the nomination in 2016, Trump’s defenders responded to any denigration of the candidate, particularly in the wake of the “Access Hollywood” tape that caught him bragging about sexual assault, by saying, in effect, “What about Hillary?”
Anyone who questioned Trump's suitability was accused of supporting Clinton. Today, any concerns about Biden's suitability are met with the same tone of disbelief when it comes to Trump.
After Trump was elected and the “isolated incident” defense lost all credibility, his defenders resorted to telling people not to believe their own lying eyes. For years, Democrats and other Trump critics called this “psychological manipulation” — trying to get people to doubt their own perceptions rather than acknowledge that something was wrong or false.
Now the enemies of gaslighting have become the gaslighters.
It was Biden’s idea to hold this debate. He set the date and the rules. He locked himself away in solitude for a week to prepare. Why? Because the Biden campaign knew it needed to refute the narrative that he was too old and too diminished to do the job.
Instead, Biden confirmed it.
Defenders rightly point out that Trump's performance was full of lies (although Biden was not exactly a model of truth), but Biden was utterly unable to refute them.
Asked about abortion, his hottest issue, the president offered a word salad that ended with a confusing rant about how crimes committed by illegal immigrants aren’t a big deal because American women get raped all the time, even by their sisters. In response to Trump’s ridiculous rant about the national debt, Biden rhetorically rambled, declaring, “We finally beat Medicare.”
Old age is different from bad character, but the similarities are more important than the differences.
If you think Biden is the best possible choice to defeat Trump, make that argument. If you think a man who is “Reliably Committed“Only between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m., as Axios reported, can work be done for the next six months, let alone another four years, that argument goes.
But spare me the talk of Biden’s legacy, a bad night, and “What about Trump?” The only relevant questions are “Can he do the job?” and, a very distant second, “Can he win?”
