David Ignatius: Biden is wonderful, great, fab – but shouldn’t run in 2024
I’m in awe of the mental gymnastics it takes to write an opinion piece like this one by David Ignatius:
What I admire most about President Biden is that in a polarized nation, he has governed from the center out, as he promised in his victory speech. With an unexpectedly steady hand, he passed some of the most important domestic legislation in recent decades. In foreign policy, he managed the delicate balance of helping Ukraine fight Russia without getting America itself into a war. In sum, he has been a successful and effective president.
Pravda could not have done better. But Ignatius is not through – oh no, he’s just getting warmed up:
But I don’t think Biden and Vice President Harris should run for reelection. It’s painful to say that, given my admiration for much of what they have accomplished. But if he and Harris campaign together in 2024, I think Biden risks undoing his greatest achievement — which was stopping Trump.
Say what? Stopping Trump is his greatest achievement (I’d say it’s his only achievement, if you consider it to be an achievement, which I don’t). But why not run again, if Biden has indeed accomplished that great achievement and all the other ones that Ignatius claims have made Biden “a successful and effective president”? What more could a person want from a candidate, really?
This is why not, according to Ignatius: Biden is too old. And Harris is too unpopular – or, as Ignatius puts it: “Harris has many laudable qualities, but the simple fact is that she has failed to gain traction in the country or even within her own party.”
“Failed to gain traction.” Now, that’s a turn of phrase. But tellingly, Ignatius says that, although “time is running out” on finding an alternative to Biden, there’s another problem:
Right now, there’s no clear alternative to Biden — no screamingly obvious replacement waiting in the wings. That might be the decider for Biden, that there’s seemingly nobody else. But maybe he will trust in democracy to discover new leadership, “in the arena.”
Ignatius doesn’t speculate on why, in this enormous country full of Democrats in elected office, there are no clear alternatives to this old geezer and his incredibly unpopular veep. But I’ll take a guess: the Democrats have gone so far to the left that the vast majority – maybe even all – of their younger politicians are way too extreme for the general electorate. Biden was old enough and fake-avuncular enough to have been able to fool a lot of people into thinking he was a genial middle-of-the-roader, but the vast majority of younger Democrats would be unable to perform such a feat. And Kamala seems to be unable to perform even the simplest political moves without flubbing them.
Of course, it may not matter. If the Democrats “fortify” the election enough, by hook or by crook, any Democrat could win, even Kamala. But why should the Democrats make the task of winning more difficult for themselves by nominating Biden and Harris?
I am convinced, however, that Biden will not be listening to the likes of David Ignatius and leaving the field voluntarily. Of course, I very much doubt that Ignatius is speaking for himself and without coordination with other Democrat movers and shakers saying more or less the same thing. They would like Biden out; but, as I’ve written many many times, they face several obstacles in accomplishing that goal. One of them is Biden’s overweening ambition and stubbornness. The other – and probably the larger one – is the lack of a decent replacement.
If the Democrats “fortify” the election enough, by hook or by crook, any Democrat could win, even Kamala.
“If”? That’s adorable.
Stopping Trump is his greatest achievement (I’d say it’s his only achievement, if you consider it to be an achievement, which I don’t).
_______
There’s Bork. He even managed to look somewhat intelligent and responsible during those hearings, largely because he was sitting next to The Lion of the Senate.
Seen over on the Althouse blog: one commenter suggested a Fetterman/Harris ticket for 2024 with the campaign slogan “Hoodie and the Blowfish.”
They’re stuck with him for now (and sadly, we all may be stuck with him for another 5 years). But in the near term if it appears that (for whatever reasons) Trump is starting to pull ahead significantly, measures might have to be taken. Ultimately, both the media and the deep state apparatus could remove him if they so chose. We all know that there’s reams of evidence of the Biden’s… shall we say… extra-legal excercises in cupidity and perfidity. The mere threat of the Justice Department actually doing their job might be enough to persuade Biden to magnanimously step down in favor of “someone younger with new ideas” (or whatever heaping pile of horse manure needs to be generated). It will be interesting if that indeed comes to pass. But time’s running out.
1. It’s not at all clear Biden himself fooled anyone. Rather, I’d give the credit to Ignatius and his colleagues who did that. The whole profession was always dishonest (the contrary is a myth) but one thing has changed. Today they don’t even try to hide it. I wonder about their parents. I was quite young when I realized that lies as blatant as those above would lead to immediate punishment. I guess that is no longer true.
2. As to their stealing the election, I was on it well before most. I saw it coming after 2018, and was derided by others in comments sections. I remain angry at Trump and his campaign for not seeing just how bad it was.
But I also know that their resources are not infinite. After all, we won in VA, and here in NC’s Senate race last year. (I now regret voting for Tillis, though.) It is possible we could pull it out. Possible. I don’t say likely.
That is pure Propaganda at its best.
I do think like it or not, DJT is coming like a freight train down the tracks, everything they tried isn’t stopping him.
I still don’t see Sundowner making it to the end, his brain is getting worse by the month.
CNN had a piece on bidens lies. Really surprised me they would air that, but it seems clear he is toast.
Harris is too. The only Dem I can stand to listen to is RFKj, but he is hated almost as much as Trump
Newsom is a pussy, and there really isn’t anyone else I can think of-the only one being Michelle Obama, whose name has come up a few times on Dem twitter feeds.
They will come up with someone, who will benefit from the lefts ability to use propaganda, illegal voting, and intimidation.
Sad state of things. Remember how the founders envisioned normal people serving in the house, and then going back to their businesses?.
mikeski:
The word “enough” is most important in that sentence. The ability to “fortify” is not infinite.
its an implausible work of fiction on his part,
Jb Pritzker of Illinois is waiting in the wings.
It will be simplicity itself for the Democrats to rid themselves of Biden. First Manchin, then Sinema, then 7 other Democrat Senators just need to decide that, gee whiz, there actually is evidence of corruption, and that they will vote to remove Biden from office when his impeachment comes to the Senate floor.
Evidence such as the countless shell companies uncovered, countless millions funneled from foreign (and hostile) interests into shared bank accounts of at least nine Biden family members. Countless transactions flagged as suspicious by the nation’s biggest banks. Countless dinners that turned into paydays. Emails. Emails under aliases. Texts. Phone calls. Burner phones. Sworn statements. Public admissions. Hunter’s business arrangements coinciding near perfectly with his father’s VP portfolio. “10% for the Big Guy.” A highly trusted, highly credible confidential human source detailing a $10 million bribery scheme.
To say nothing of a video where Joe Biden openly brags about doing precisely the thing Burisma was paying the Bidens to have done.
It is easy. But Democrats, even the “moderate” Manchin and the free spirit non-Democrat Sinema, do not have the strength of character that Goldwater et al demonstrated in their little chat with Nixon, neither for their party nor for the nation.
Paul Harmon:
Actually, I think that Sinema and Manchin might do it, but they’d be alone among Democrats and it wouldn’t be enough. Oh, and Romney wouldn’t vote to remove, either. So Joe would not be removed that way. Also, the Democrat higher-ups wouldn’t allow it as the means of removal because it would be too ignominious and might hurt the party as a whole. They want a cleaner way to get rid of him.
“Right now, there’s no clear alternative to Biden — no screamingly obvious replacement waiting in the wings.”
But there is–namely, Gavin Newsom. If he were the Democrat Party presidential nominee, he would have the legacy media at his back and he would get a huge turnout of Democrat voters.
Hey, I think he is a failure as California’s governor. Yet, he survived a recall with almost 62% of the vote effectively in his favor, and then was actually re-elected to a 2nd full term with 59.2% of the vote.
Ira:
Newsom is more telegenic but has the same problem as all the others. He needs to get more votes than just the loyal yellow dog Democrats. Most people are aware that California is a failed state.He has promoted every leftist cause and is on record as having done so.
Neo, I think Ira is right. Every Dem I know would happily vote for Newsom over Trump. He would even pull in the MotR vote if the choice is him or Trump.
Now Newsom vs DeSantis would be a close call. God, I don’t want Trump as the nominee…just guarantees a D win. I even changed my registration to R after 15 years as an independent justvto vote in the primary for anyone but Trump. He’s being persecuted beyond reason, but he’s poison in the general electorate. Anecdotal, but all my family who are centrists and voted Trump in 2016 will not do it again.
physics guy. Do your family members tell you their reasoning?
Richard, yes…they’ve had enough of his aggressive, over the top personality, especiallyhis insulting name calling. They also think he’s divisive. For centrists they put a pox on either party easily, and think Trump has gone too far in what they see as revenge motivation. The divisiveness and personality are key.
Not that they like Biden, but about half the family switched their votes to Biden in 20 from Trump in 16.
How to get rid of Joe. Bribe him. Substantial sum$ for his family, a nice Presidential Library for him, and all the charges against Hunter taken care of. Simple. Zucker Bucks could make that happen.
Replacements? Newsom and Whitmer.
Will it happen? Who knows.
IMO, it’s not going to make any difference. It’s still the economy, stupid. The UAW strike has the possibility of sinking the big three auto makers. The automakers cannot carry out the stupid electric vehicle mandates and pay the UAW what they want. It’s simple economics – something that Joe and the Democrats don’t want to bother themselves with.
There’s a lot of ruin in the country but the margins are getting smaller. There’s still a lot of the government pump priming money sloshing around, but at some point, the bill will come due. Or maybe I’m just a crazy old coot, and value doesn’t matter anymore. 🙂
I think getting rid of Biden would be relatively easy if whoever is in charge really wanted to do it. As Nonapod mentioned, there is quite a file on old Joe and I think the mere threat of some of the information being leaked would be enough to get him to step down. Impeachment would not be necessary. If only Kamala could have gained a little more “traction” I think Joe would be gone already.
Getting rid of the first black woman VP without a lot very destructive collateral damage is not so easy. It would be relatively simple for Joe to claim that he is stepping down due to concern about some undisclosed health issue, but what would the excuse be for Kamala to step aside?
I think the Ignatius article shows that there are still serious concerns about Biden’s viability, but I can’t see how they can get rid of both Biden and Harris in the next few months without destroying whatever is left of the Dems credibility.
“If the Democrats “fortify” the election enough, by hook or by crook, any Democrat could win, even
KamalaNewsom.By hook or by crook it will be so.
I see the news that Biden will veto a substantial military pay raise for junior officers included in the House version of the 2024 Defense Appropriations bill.*
If I am not mistaken, would be Emperor Biden might do well to remember that it was not being paid or paid enough which was one of the major motivating factors prompting some of Rome’s legions to revolt.
* See https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2023/09/14/biden-will-veto-military-pay-raise-n2628448
meanwhile biden declares war on half the country and sics the fbi on parents they are fine with that, how do they like their higher prices, you think their savings will last them through this dantesque landscape, god help us if he stumbles into a war, and we run out of fuel and/or ammo,
Wes Moore could be the Democrats’ New Obama, but 2024 is probably too early for that. As the VP candidate, he could soften the blow if Harris is dropped. Whitmer has the advantage of being a swing state governor, but is she really likeable enough? Grisham is learning that, while voters may like girl bosses they don’t want them to be too bossy — and after COVID, Whitmer does have a reputation for bossiness. Also, does Whitmer really connect with ordinary voters, or does she suffer from the familiar arrogance of those in power?
Newsom looks like the party’s best bet, since there’s unlikely to be enough time for someone less known to gain traction. If having the media on the Democrats’ side is worth 5-10% at the polls, he could end up in the White House. A third party centrist candidate could complicate things for both parties, most likely taking more votes from Trump. I do wonder though: if people who know California is a failed state don’t automatically vote for the Republican, does that give Newsom an opening?
_________
Official Washington still believes that the country’s problems can be solved by more legislation, more programs, and more spending — the throwing money at problems approach that was much ridiculed in the 70s and 80s. It’s only natural. Government is their business and they want it to grow. They also can’t admit that the country was actually better off under Trump, who didn’t have a Congress that would really go along with his ideas, than under Biden (or Obama or Bush). But do they really believe that Biden’s “accomplishments” amount to very much, or are they just grateful that he got Trump out of the White House?
_________
I suppose a Trump win is very unlikely, but that Biden could beat him in 2020 has left a lot of us dazed and wondering what the hell is wrong with the country.
physicsguy
Sounds like problems with personality, not issues. To put it another way, would they vote for the current crapshow to avoid having to listen to Trump?
Could one differentiate “revenge” from doing something useful about the weaponized organs of government? Have to start at the top….
Trump would likely take an unseemly pleasure in firing Garland (add half a dozen more names we’d recognize) before lunch. Does that disqualify the actions? Many of the rest of us might use up our liquor ration ahead of time. And that would be for the enjoyment of the spectacle. Later on, we can think about the various improvements to follow.
As to following the money. I was in the life insurance business up until about 2016. For the last ten years or thereabouts, several companies with which I had contracts wanted me to take a quick class on spotting money laundering and reporting it. Had to retake annually. And I wasn’t a banker or financial advisor or tax accountant or any of that sort of thing.
Among other things, transfers between companies with no noticeable business advantage were suspect. Ignoring early withdrawal penalties…. Transactions of $10k or more were automatically flagged…for somebody to look at. Various other items were to be looked for or reported. Point is, lots of people with Duty To Report almost certainly saw Biden money going past. Did they raise a red flag? Then what?
Snow on Pine – Upsetting the troops can be a risky venture.
Mob slaughters Emperor Maurice and Family and (Pope) Gregory applauds
“He had defeated the advance by the Avars, but his government was short of money, and he angered his soldiers by reducing their pay and obliging them to pay for their own arms and clothing. Maurice’s frugality also angered his civilian subjects. They had no use for the asceticism in Maurice that they admired in Jesus Christ.”
http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/islam04.htm
I hope for his sake that Ignatius is wearing asbestos underwear.
Neo says that she is “in awe of the mental gymnastics it takes to write an opinion piece” like David Ignatius’ latest:
I fully expect a video in the near future of Ignatius’ “mental gymnastics” under the heading of a new and unusual sport.
wonderful, great, fab
==
Neo refuses to confirm or deny she once wrote a fan letter to Ringo Starr.
==
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ytdpfd4D96U
Richard, another factor is that the centrists in my family tend to avoid politics as much as possible. As I said, they basically despise both parties and think politics is a waste of their time. They are not total LIVs and will pay more attention as the election nears. And yes, personality matters a lot. Since, in their view, all politicians are tainted, then they make their choice based on what they see in personality hoping to translate to some level of integrity. So, in 2016 they had seen decades of Hillary and concluded, rightly, she was a shrew of highest order. They knew who Trump was, but not in detail, and at that time his personality was amusing to a degree. But after 4 years, their view changed. Note how results and policies don’t factor too much into the decision. It is internally consistent: the basic premise is all politicians are bad to some extent, therefore find the one who seems less bad by their personality; ie judge the book by it’s cover and hope it’s a good read.
Given that, Newsom will *appear* much more palatable than Trump. However, as I said, Newsom vs DeSantis could be a close call for them.
Physics guy
Thanks for the explanation.
Some time back, we had a discussion about whether one has a moral obligation to think rationally about public affairs as opposed to consulting one’s feelings.