I think Biden dropping out like this makes a second Trump presidency more likely, not less. Whether this does anything good for Biden's legacy is based on several "if this helps Trump lose" assumptions involving future contingencies that feel more than a little speculative. It's possible that this may help Donald lose, but at the same time it may also help him win. It is not clear to me why that should pad someone's legacy, especially in advance.
Given that his campaign rallies before and after that debate were much better, for me that answer is still a clear yes. It is still not compelling to me that the only history that should matter in my judgement was that evening. I think he was capable of an energetic campaign because to me that is what he was still doing while everyone else was spending their time watching footage from that one evening on their TV and smartphone screens.
Party unity may be necessary for the election coming up in November, but after that this affair will not be forgotten. Others can make an open plea for unity, but no one within the party who wanted this outcome will help their own causes by doing so. With friends like these, MAGAheads will find it trivial to divide attention one way or another, even when Biden isn't there.
That was a bad debate night, but if you really looked over the polls, voters didn't really move on it. The way some editorials were written almost sounded as if they wished more voters had left Biden. To me this is him recognizing that most in the media won't stop setting him on fire for mostly disingenuous reasons, or more charitably, due to their smartphone-addled minds.
Do these journalists, pundits, and their editors who try to cover politics on mass media platforms not understand that taking part in this fiasco *to the degrees* that they did have meaningfully degraded their credibility?
I think Biden dropping out like this makes a second Trump presidency more likely, not less. Whether this does anything good for Biden's legacy is based on several "if this helps Trump lose" assumptions involving future contingencies that feel more than a little speculative. It's possible that this may help Donald lose, but at the same time it may also help him win. It is not clear to me why that should pad someone's legacy, especially in advance.
A lot of it comes down to this: Do you think Biden was able to campaign strongly this year and carry about the job of president for the next four?
My answer to that is no. Which means the 2020 version of Biden could've have pulled it off, but the 2024 version recognized that he could not.
Given that his campaign rallies before and after that debate were much better, for me that answer is still a clear yes. It is still not compelling to me that the only history that should matter in my judgement was that evening. I think he was capable of an energetic campaign because to me that is what he was still doing while everyone else was spending their time watching footage from that one evening on their TV and smartphone screens.
Party unity may be necessary for the election coming up in November, but after that this affair will not be forgotten. Others can make an open plea for unity, but no one within the party who wanted this outcome will help their own causes by doing so. With friends like these, MAGAheads will find it trivial to divide attention one way or another, even when Biden isn't there.
That was a bad debate night, but if you really looked over the polls, voters didn't really move on it. The way some editorials were written almost sounded as if they wished more voters had left Biden. To me this is him recognizing that most in the media won't stop setting him on fire for mostly disingenuous reasons, or more charitably, due to their smartphone-addled minds.
Do these journalists, pundits, and their editors who try to cover politics on mass media platforms not understand that taking part in this fiasco *to the degrees* that they did have meaningfully degraded their credibility?