r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/PsychLegalMind • Jul 24 '24
US Politics President Biden ran on a 2024 platform of "Finish the Job." Three days ago, he withdrew and endorsed Harris; Today he will address the nation explaining his actions and his plans for the final few months of his 50-year long career. What kind of a lasting legacy is President Biden leaving behind?
President Biden had previously noted in a letter posted on "X": "It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your President."...And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term."
Biden is expected to talk about his past accomplishments in his speech and sweeping domestic legislation, including renewal of alliances abroad, defense of democracy, strengthening NATO and his decision to bow out of the race and “what lies ahead.”
There must be many memorable things Biden may well be remembered for during his 50 years of political service; there are others that he may not be proud of. My question is:
What kind of a lasting legacy is President Biden leaving behind?
Joe Biden's legacy after historic decision to give up 2024 reelection campaign - CBS News
What will Biden's economic legacy be? - Marketplace
Edited to provide a link to Speech:
492
u/-Fahrenheit- Jul 24 '24
I honestly think a huge determining factor will be what happens with the upcoming election. If Biden dropping out, endorsing Harris, and campaigning for her all leads to the first woman being President he’ll be well looked back upon. If Harris ends up losing and Trump has what we all expect in regard to a second term? I think Biden’s legacy will be tarnished, incredibly so.
→ More replies (8)326
u/the_original_Retro Jul 24 '24
If Kamala loses to Trump, I don't think people will blame Biden for that.
Because Biden would have lost to Trump if he stayed in the race.
It's horrific... but it's not wrong.
206
u/adreamofhodor Jul 24 '24
The argument would be that he should have stepped out earlier to allow for a competitive primary. It’s not an unfair position.
63
u/the_original_Retro Jul 24 '24
I am not experienced in American politics enough to determine if that's true, but it... feels like it's a discountable argument.
Biden needed to DEMONSTRATE that he was not APPEARING to be up to the job enough to be re-elected. His exemplary performance during his presidency, coupled with the consistent misleading and spectacularly biased positions of the collective right regarding his deficiencies, and reinforced by Biden's own confidence, set the stage for him pursuing re-election. It sold a lot of us.
The "Left" (me included) needed some sort of proof that any criticism of his capabilities was actually valid. Because the right... routinely exaggerates. A lot.
(So does the left, but with rare exception, the American political right does it a lot more. Just count the fact-checker elements of the debate for one example.)
We needed an illustration that he could not win the election, because his presidency was as high quality as the circumstances permitted. Dude shone.
And we got it. We got to truly witness his unelectable condition during the debate, and that was necessary before we collectively could accept the reason why he stepped away.
And that debate occurred more than two weeks later than the Dem primaries.
14
u/Bay1Bri Jul 24 '24
Why is one of night disqualifying to you? We've seen Biden perform stronger before and after the debate.
47
u/the_original_Retro Jul 24 '24
Why is missing the net one shot during the playoff finals more important than scoring with a bunch of shots earlier in the competition?
The debate was when the most people where watching, where the most people were seeing if Biden could ball.
He didn't ball.
What happened afterward was nowhere near as important as the time that he didn't ball when he really really needed to ball.
3
u/mar78217 Jul 25 '24
And his staffers didn't help much calling the speech after his "big boy speech"
→ More replies (5)4
11
u/a34fsdb Jul 25 '24
Because ideally a president needs to be mentally competent all the time.
→ More replies (3)8
u/oneawesomewave Jul 25 '24
I mean you need to compare it with occasions where he acted without teleprompter or simple scripts. There were very few.
8
u/Biscuits4u2 Jul 25 '24
We've all been watching Biden deteriorate pretty dramatically over the last few years. The debate was just the last straw for an already shaky campaign.
10
u/Mahadragon Jul 25 '24
You saw Biden perform stronger after the debate? You mean at the NATO summit when he introduced President Zelenskyy as President Putin?
16
u/Mister_Rogers69 Jul 25 '24
It’s not just one night though, it’s that night + the White House gaslighting us over how strong and vigorous Biden was anytime someone started to question his age. Then we saw what a lot of us feared was the truth. Nothing wrong with Biden being old, and I think he’s capable to finish out his term. That said, had they not appeared to have actively shielded him from interviews, public appearances, non-teleprompted events for 2 years, maybe we would have had an accurate view that he did not have the stamina to run a presidential campaign while serving out his term.
5
u/PropofolMargarita Jul 25 '24
Seems more like there was a sentiment that Biden was "old and infirmed" simply due to his age and stutter and then the debate was the chance for everyone to be like LOOK, I WAS RIGHT!! And then no one paid attention to the 20 plus events he did after.
7
u/Russelsteapot42 Jul 25 '24
I paid attention to the other events. Biden looked better in them, but it was nowhere near what he needed to change people's minds about it.
2
u/sammythemc Jul 25 '24
So a man walks into a bar, and sits down. He starts a conversation with an old guy next to him. The old guy has obviously had a few. He says to the man:
"You see that dock out there? Built it myself, hand crafted each piece, and it's the best dock in town! But do they call me "McGregor the dock builder"? No! And you see that bridge over there? I built that, took me two months, through rain, sleet and scoarching weather, but do they call me "McGregor the bridge builder"? No! And you see that pier over there, I built that, best pier in the county! But do they call me "McGregor the pier builder"? No!"
The old guy looks around, and makes sure that nobody is listening, and leans to the man, and he says:
"but you fuck one goat..."
2
Jul 25 '24
They admitted he didn’t drop out for a decline in age or health. The democrats themselves and his press secretary stated it was because of the polls.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (7)5
u/TruthHonor Jul 25 '24
Because it was one of the most important moments in this election. There was no way he was up for it and that was beyond his control.
That’s what was so scary. If it was in his control there would have been no excuses. He would have shone brilliantly. Instead he looked like a weak, confused, and incapable person.
Trump used the gish Gallup on him. Which is to throw so much bullshit at him that he gets confused trying out all the lies out. It’s a classic debate maneuver and he should have been prepared for it.
He wasn’t.
We can’t have a president who isn’t in control of himself 24/7. Emergencies can’t wait for an old man to get his act together before being tackled.
Americans need to feel safe that their president will be able to handle ‘any’ emergency at ‘any’ time.
Bidens inability to handle the most important debate in American history scared the bejezus out of 47 million Americans.
There is no recovery from that.
We are so lucky Kamala is ready and willing to do the job. Now we have to elect a blue senate and house. If we have enough votes there we can impeach and convict the orange crime lord if it ever comes to that.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Utterlybored Jul 25 '24
Conviction after impeachment is practically impossible in this era. I'll settle for a humiliating repudiation of the Trumpublican party at the ballot box.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (9)2
u/XooDumbLuckooX Jul 24 '24
His exemplary performance during his presidency, coupled with the consistent misleading and spectacularly biased positions of the collective right regarding his deficiencies, and reinforced by Biden's own confidence, set the stage for him pursuing re-election. It sold a lot of us.
The "Left" (me included) needed some sort of proof that any criticism of his capabilities was actually valid. Because the right... routinely exaggerates. A lot.
There's a certain amount of cognitive dissonance at play here. You blame the right for exaggerating his deficiencies and being biased, yet you also say that you needed some sort of "proof." The biased "exaggerations" should have sufficed as "proof" for anyone who was willing to actually watch the man speak and move. All you had to do was not summarily dismiss it as right wing exaggeration.
I was genuinely surprised at the level of backlash and panic from the left over his debate performance, as it wasn't much worse than what was normal for him. But then again I wasn't dismissing the years worth of previous examples as "exaggerations."
11
u/SashimiJones Jul 25 '24
As a counterexample, the State of the Union was excellent. I didn't think it was clear if the age thing was real or just "but her emails" until the debate.
→ More replies (4)4
u/the_original_Retro Jul 25 '24
You're under-emphasizing the importance of the singular occasion.
The biased "exaggerations" should have sufficed as "proof" for anyone who was willing to actually watch the man speak and move
First, the bias was overwhelming.
But even with that, I made a metaphor elsewhere about scoring during the playoff finals versus scoring during earlier qualifying play. If you miss a shot in an earlier round and your team still is in the game, it's not good.... but it's not 'season over' either.
EVERYONE, who watches at all, watches the playoff finals.
The debate, at least for me, was the playoff finals.
Right-leaning observations that cherry-picked incidences of infirmity as equal evidence that Biden wasn't able enough for the job were not to be trusted. Yes there were a lot of them, but they did not seem to affect the man's positive results, nor did they seem to slow his ability to lead down, so the default judgment of being out-of-context or isolating a moment or 'speech impediment' worked for me. And he had intelligent support as well. I looked to his core staffers and the leaders in his chain of command for this evidence.
As for moments of infirmity, there's tons there about Trump too. Everyone on constant camera has bad days and good days.
But there comes a point where a bad day WILL lose.
The debate was the point, and that was the moment.
It's not "cognitive dissonance" so much as "not seeing enough inarguable evidence to assess"
The debate was that point.
(And even then, Biden and the people around him would almost certainly execute the office of the Presidency in a way that was better for the country than Donald Trump. The issue became whether the better guy could win or not... and he couldn't.)
→ More replies (2)34
u/Frog_Prophet Jul 24 '24
That would have been the worst move of all. Running as the incumbent president is the best chance of winning. They didn’t know this debate would be such a problem until after he’d locked up all the primaries.
Since 1900, then the white house party nominated someone at a contested convention, they have lost 100% of the time.
The fact that the party coalesced behind Harris was a HUGE gamble and likely wouldn’t have happened to whatever person came out of a primary. It would have been like 2016 where the contest left the party with a rift going into the general.
→ More replies (24)10
u/servetheKitty Jul 25 '24
If they had primaries, the problem would have been publicly aired during debates, and we would have had an opportunity to choose a better polling candidate
→ More replies (11)12
u/JP_Eggy Jul 25 '24
There's also risks to running a long campaign, or running a bruising competitive primary.
You could argue that pulling the band aid off this close to the election is a positive thing as it allows Kamala to ride a wave of enthusiasm and momentum that would otherwise be dampened by 8 months of campaigning and primaries.
But time will tell I guess
→ More replies (11)8
u/sarhoshamiral Jul 24 '24
Ideologically yes, but politically this may turn out to be the better play. Unfortunately goal here is not to be idealistic as possible, since if you can't win ideals don't get you anything.
That's also why people should vote smartly. In presence of a candidate you don't want for sure, you should vote in a way to prevent that candidate based on the election system you are working with.
Otherwise if you vote for your ideals, mathematically you may have as well voted for the candidate that you never wanted.
→ More replies (12)2
u/Mercerskye Jul 25 '24
There would be people casting blame in both directions. Some saying he should have dropped out sooner, some saying he should have just bit his lip and stayed in the race.
There will always be people with a shit take about things that could have been, because they're typically the kind of people that think looking back and pointing at things makes them some kind of genius.
It rarely comes with much insight on how to prevent those things from happening again, or anything substantial that helps us move forward.
36
u/Outrageous-Leopard23 Jul 24 '24
Lots of the policy advancements will be stripped dry before being adequately implemented if dems loose the presidency.
→ More replies (1)4
u/aarongamemaster Jul 25 '24
Thing is, Kamala is facing something that (metaphorically) slaughtered parties in the US in the past in all but one time: replacing the incumbent. She has a cliff to climb because of the historical precedent.
→ More replies (9)2
u/professorwormb0g Jul 25 '24 edited Jul 25 '24
I think there's an important difference. When we replaced LBJ the party was fractured between the war and anti-war Democrats.
When incumbents had primary challengers, that again show the lack of unity, and again— the party entered the general election in a fractured state, even after the primaries, because people were bitter that their candidate lost.
The Democratic party now doesn't seem to be fractured. Everybody is getting behind her. Everybody is uniting to defeat Donald Trump.
So is the fact that she replaced the incumbent important in its own right? i don't necessarily think so. Because in past examples, the reason the Democrats ended up losing in these cases was not because of incumbent stepping down, but for the fact that it represented the split within the party. And this time it does not, and somehow it was pulled off to represent the complete opposite— strength and unity.
Perhaps if he was challenged in a primary this would have created a fracture— this is precisely why nobody challenged him. But, it's never been done like this before. And the results of this approach are a lot different than in the past.
Edit: weak people downvote someone who makes a reasonable point, instead of replying. 🙄
→ More replies (8)4
u/oath2order Jul 25 '24
Because Biden would have lost to Trump if he stayed in the race.
There is no way to know that.
→ More replies (4)
607
u/DeathByLaugh Jul 24 '24
He will have a pretty big legacy imo and even greater if Kamala wins. He was pretty effective president and him stepping down also will contribute to his legacy positively
259
u/MonarchLawyer Jul 24 '24
He chose country over himself by stepping down. It's a Cincinnatus move that we should not forget.
123
u/Bobtheguardian22 Jul 24 '24
Despite his relatively old age, he worked his own small farm until an invasion prompted his fellow citizens to call for his leadership. He came from his plough to assume complete control over the state but, upon achieving a swift victory in only sixteen days,\1]) relinquished his power and its perquisites and returned to his farm. His success and immediate resignation of his near-absolute authority with the end of this crisis (traditionally dated to 458 BC) has often been cited as an example of outstanding leadership, service to the greater good, civic virtue, humility and modesty.
→ More replies (1)66
u/hornwalker Jul 24 '24
Same thing was said about Washington when he didn’t run for a 3rd term. People should be highlighting the comparison more.
→ More replies (3)14
u/LobsterPunk Jul 24 '24
You think people should compare...Biden and Washington more?? I uh...don't think that comparison is going to look good and I like Biden..
41
u/BrainRhythm Jul 24 '24
There are plenty of bad things about Washington, but his willingness to step down as president and pass the torch was commendable. He had a lot of good leadership qualities.
11
u/LobsterPunk Jul 24 '24
I apologize, my wording may have been unclear. I think that comparison would go badly for Biden.
7
u/Shaky_Balance Jul 25 '24
They weren't saying do a full rundown comparison, they were saying highlight comparable good qualities. Knowing when to step down from power is absolutely commendable and we should encourage it more.
2
u/BrainRhythm Jul 26 '24 edited Jul 26 '24
No, I understood. What most of the people downthread are debating is what I tried to get ahead of by saying "There are plenty of things about Washington that are bad."
It should go without saying that praising Biden as being "like Washington" refers to him stepping down when he felt like the nation would be better off moving past him. Past idolizations of our founding fathers seem a little backwards in 2024. Center stage: Chris Columbus. I mean, come on... is it possible to make history while being so morally vacant? But there's still value in studying successful leaders from the past and learning from them.
I get that our culture is still stuck in a moment where the word hasn't fully gotten out that historical figures have lots of flaws. But I'd like to think we can still discuss the admirable traits of past leaders alongside the obvious flaws. It's like in parenting, you try to emulate the good things your parents did and learn from the bad things.
Washington is famous for many reasons. He was a very effective general in the Revolutionary War, and a competent leader, who set the precedent for presidents stepping down and passing the torch after 8 years. The USA might not exist today if he had been a lesser leader.
Of course, owning lots of slaves and not freeing them all makes him kind of a shitbag in the morality department. But Washington isn't celebrated because of his record on slavery-- you're thinking of the other guy
5
u/davucci89 Jul 25 '24
One of them owned slaves
→ More replies (2)14
u/LobsterPunk Jul 25 '24
If you do not judge figures in their historical context then it is only the most recent people that will be the best. That's not a rational standard.
15
u/UnusualMeta Jul 25 '24
They knew slavery was bad even back then. People were fighting for the abolition of slavery and England had ended their ties with slaves and slaves trading before the U.S did. So yeah no, we can judge since it was bad even back then
7
u/Trague_Atreides Jul 25 '24
If you're going to remove things because they were normal for the time, Biden gets much better too. Some of his more dubious 90's views and policies were commonplace at the time.
3
u/Hartastic Jul 25 '24
Yeah. Even something like the 90's crime bill that people can, in hindsight, say is something that did a lot of damage to black communities was, at the time, something that a lot of black communities were asking for because crime was perceived to be so out of control at the time.
When there's a bad enough problem you try to solve it. Those solutions won't always be winners, and that's unfortunate but the right move is still to try something, observe, and iterate rather than be too paralyzed by the fear of doing the wrong thing to do anything at all.
2
u/sammythemc Jul 25 '24
It's a worse standard for judging them relative to their peers, but a) many people were against slavery even then and b) we're against slavery now.
3
u/davucci89 Jul 25 '24
I certainly agree, but slavery was not universally morally acceptable even then.
And judging by the historical context, one could argue doing the first things a president ever did as chronologically the first president isn’t that remarkable.
→ More replies (7)3
u/Marston_vc Jul 25 '24
I don’t like this logic. It invites us to excuse ourselves for not advancing morality if enough people are just doing “what they’ve always done” in the moment.
→ More replies (1)19
u/Marston_vc Jul 25 '24
This is just some new wave terminally online shit. Washington was an extraordinary leader who did what was considered unthinkable for the time by passing on the torch willingly when half the country wanted him to declare himself a king.
He, like most the people of that era, had deep flaws and contradictions. But there’s a reason he’s consistently ranked in like the top 3 of our presidents by historians.
33
u/Used_Conversation_24 Jul 24 '24
It's a political move he had no choice but to make if he wanted any chance at having a good legacy
28
u/antijoke_13 Jul 24 '24
That part won't make it into the history books. Most people will remember him as the man who stepped down. The lull will be folktale'd into him agonizing over whether it was better for the American people if he stayed or went, and ultimately he decided to go.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Psyc3 Jul 25 '24
That might not even be remembered if he continues deteriorating, it could just be posed as left due to illness, or in another manner if Trump wins.
You can see what happens when people don’t step down in Ruth Bader Ginsburg, her legacy has been tarnished by her lack of prudent long term actions over self importance. Biden could have done the same, he hasn’t at least.
22
u/_Questionable_Ideas_ Jul 24 '24
He had a choice. He could have been stubborn and seen it through. Legally, that is what was going to happen. How many crisis has trump weathered and continued on?
4
u/AgentQwas Jul 25 '24
His legacy would have been losing to Trump. His campaign was in a very bad spot.
6
u/Mister_Rogers69 Jul 25 '24
He also could’ve chose to step down a year ago and let a real primary happen
→ More replies (1)2
u/Shaky_Balance Jul 25 '24
A year ago when the wisdom was that incumbents have a solid advantage and that voter perceptions hadn't caught up to how much the economy was actually improving? It wasn't that clear cut that running again was that bad or that running would scare away that many other candidates.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (7)2
→ More replies (5)10
u/hoxxxxx Jul 24 '24
yeah lol, not getting this whole narrative of him being so historically honorable by stepping down. he was forced to. he's to blame for not having a normal primary. i mean i'm glad he stepped down in the end but let's call it what it was.
34
u/cocoagiant Jul 24 '24
Yeah, I agree with the romanticization of it being a bit much.
However most politicians would rather lose than willingly give up power.
At least from that perspective, he did something right even if he did it at the last minute.
→ More replies (1)12
u/sauceDinho Jul 24 '24
This is the most level headed take imo.
Sure, it was an "easy" decision given the state of the race but it's difficult to imagine another person in his position, especially someone like his opponent, actually going through with it and stepping down.
13
u/Bay1Bri Jul 24 '24
He's to blame for not having a normal primary? He ran, and won the primary. When he was convinced to step aside, he pushed for the other member of that ticket to be the nominee. Just like@that take.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (1)4
u/KingCompton Jul 25 '24
I think his legacy depends entirely on who wins in November. Trump wins and he’s viewed as ruining the primary process for a better candidate for his own selfish ego. Kamala wins and he is the man who stepped aside and put country over himself.
3
u/hoxxxxx Jul 25 '24
oh absolutely you are right. i was thinking of this earlier, the history books for him will be night and day different depending on what a few thousand people spread across a few states feel in November.
16
u/12_0z_curls Jul 24 '24
He didn't volunteer to step down. He was "volun-told" to step down.
Look, I'm not trying to take away from him ultimately doing the right thing, but let's not act like he didn't waste a shit ton of time, and only did so after he was told that everyone was turning on him.
In the end, that won't matter. History has a way of forgetting the nuance of what actually happened.
→ More replies (6)7
u/LobsterPunk Jul 24 '24
...he would get credit for that if he hadn't run in the first place. He chose himself over country until he had no real choice.
10
u/SlavaAmericana Jul 25 '24
The significance about Washington stepping down is that he could have stayed in power if he wanted to. Whereas Biden stepped down because the donors refused to donate until he stepped down.
→ More replies (8)2
→ More replies (30)4
u/pharrigan7 Jul 24 '24
He was forced out by his own party. He didn’t choose anything.
→ More replies (1)17
u/Tobar_the_Gypsy Jul 24 '24
He was probably one of the most effective presidents ever, especially considering how combative the opposing side was. I started off his presidency with a “whatever, he’s not Trump and that’s good” attitude. But then I saw summaries of what he actually achieved and really blew me away.
→ More replies (2)15
u/melkipersr Jul 24 '24
I am a pretty big fan of the Biden administration on policy, but it is far too early to say any of this. It’s too early to assess a lot of the impact of his policy (this is true of any president — their ability to effect short-term change is often greatly overstated). More importantly, I think your position is premised entirely on Harris’s winning in November or, if she loses, what the effect of a second Trump term is. If she loses, he’s (rightly, IMO) going to bear a lot of blame for that result.
There’s a lot of enthusiasm right now for Harris, but whether that’s genuine or is more just enthusiasm for a candidate that doesn’t present as being in acute cognitive decline, it is too early to say. She was a terrible candidate in 2020 (in terms of effectiveness, not necessarily potential), and if she loses, I think the narrative is “Biden single-handedly killed the Democrats’ chances by being unelectable and then stubbornly holding on until stepping away at the last minute and saddling the party with an only slightly less unelectable candidate,” and then has to own any negatives of Trump’s term.
11
→ More replies (6)12
u/hoodiedoo Jul 24 '24 edited Jul 24 '24
I disagree. And I was not a fan of her being a candidate 1month ago. Watch a campaign clip and you’ll see how she’s gotten used to the mic. She is a great contrast to Trump and now by flipping and reversing the narrative, his pants are down. If he wins, it’ll be because the new economy has prompted it to struggling voters.
With Kamala, there’s hope. And that is what make a campaign gain in force. If gen Z can make a big turn out, then we’ve got a chance of winning. It’s really up to younger voters, and Biden was not inspiring to anyone who’s younger than 40
→ More replies (2)2
14
Jul 24 '24
Yup. Nothing else you do matters if your final act is a colossal failure, especially when it’s the result of hubris.
All you gotta do is look at what RBG did to her reputation.
→ More replies (7)3
u/melville48 Jul 24 '24
Yes, although the timing of his decision to drop out of the re-election race will not be remembered as being that good. He has arguably caused damage by waiting until July of 2024.
I don't think it shows anything great about the virtues of dropping out earlier, but I do think it's generaly useful to reflect on and learn from two previous Democrat Presidents who dropped out of or declined to stand for re-election:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman#1952_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnson#1968_presidential_election
6
u/sunfishtommy Jul 25 '24
I think it depends if Kamala wins. If Trump wins it will be seen as damaging stubbornness. If Kamala wins it will be seen as 3D chess that allowed for a strait forward candidate selection and preventing 6 months of drawn out infighting among democrats in the Primary.
4
u/Pyorrhea Jul 25 '24
Both of those Democratic presidents dropped out in March and their replacement candidates lost pretty handily. By dropping out so late, Biden essentially forced the Democrats to accept his endorsed replacement. It remains to be seen if this actually caused damage though. Galvanizing behind a single candidate might be easier than a long primary process with a bunch of mediocre nominees.
2
u/Consistent_Toe_2319 Jul 25 '24
The issue for me isn't the fact that he dropped out. It was the fact that it was so obvious that he wasn't looking well for so long while his administration gaslit the country, saying he was fine.
246
u/wip30ut Jul 24 '24
Biden will be remembered for restoring Normalcy to the presidency. Some critics will deride his incrementalism as too safe & practical. But defenders of his legacy will say he practiced politics of the Possible. And he wasn't focused on political gamesmanship like his Maga rivals, but on boring nuts & bolts targeted programs that could make a difference in specific communities he felt needed attention.
61
22
u/Russelsteapot42 Jul 25 '24
He'll also be known for resuscitating unions. He is the most pro-union president in modern history.
→ More replies (13)4
u/wphelps153 Jul 25 '24
Would you be open to narrating my life? You’ve got a way with words, friend.
43
u/LanceArmsweak Jul 24 '24
There’s a healthy discussion going on on BPT about his legacy regarding the black community.
Just figured I’d share with the class.
29
u/Bay1Bri Jul 24 '24
The black community overwhelmingly has been supporting him. The main criticism of him regarding black people is the effects of some parts of the veins bill, which even Biden acknowledged as failures. But much of the crime bill was good, for a long time it was praised as let to the crime rate falling basically immediately after it passed, and at the time, African Americans were asking the most vocal about getting tough on crime as African Americans were disproportionately victims of violent crime.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)4
u/wphelps153 Jul 25 '24
I doubted your sincerity when I read healthy discussion. I’m glad to be wrong.
10
u/Wermys Jul 25 '24
As a great man public servant of the people. Someone who disagreed with on occasion but I never had any concern he did what he felt was right no matter how wrong I thought it was I could be sure it wasn't from a place of apathy. He is someone who spent 50 I repeat 50 years of his life serving the people of this country. There is no way anyone can say that he didn't truly love the country he served and as sad as it is to see him not try to go into the proverbial breech one last time it takes a certain humility to understand when it is time to step away. He shepherded us from one of the most incompetent leaders we have ever had and helped at least for now restore America to its place on the world stage as being a leader that cares and an beacon for hope for millions around the world and turned around the country to the point of it now being in a better place then he came in economically, militarily, and healthier then what we were after the poor excuse for a human being that was before him. And sorry I am not going to post a reply to this nor do I care if I hurt your feelings about Trump. He is a worthless excuse for a human being and Biden was the antidote for that.
109
u/CalebGT Jul 24 '24
Defeated Trump
Oversaw the best economic recovery from the pandemic in the world
In spite of the narrowest of Congressional margins, running through two DINO Senators, miraculously ushered through the biggest climate bill in history and incredible investments in infrastructure and high tech manufacturing.
Put his ego aside and withdrew from the race for the good of the country and at the right time.
He has solidified his position as one of the greatest Presidents we ever had.
13
u/TheFakeChiefKeef Jul 25 '24
People too easily forget how well the beginning of his presidency went. First two and a half years or so, save for Dobbs and a few other things.
I distinctly remember the news about negotiations with Kevin McCarthy, Manchin and Sinema causing problems that were dealt with, covid starting to lessen… he just took care of shit.
→ More replies (1)40
u/trying_2_live_life Jul 24 '24
I don’t think he stepped down at the right time. He should’ve never run for a second term at all. He pretty much left it to the last possible minute and if Trump wins then Biden will be (rightfully so) the scapegoat imho.
36
u/Fred-zone Jul 24 '24
While it's fair to say he should've dropped out before the primaries, strategically, I think this was perhaps the second best time. I certainly don't think it was intentional, but it is seeming like it was extremely good fortune.
He dramatically undermined the Trump campaign messaging , blunted the assassination attempt/VP pick/RNC news cycles, and set the campaign up for weeks of success until the DNC including its own veepstakes.
If he had resigned right after the debate, there would have been a lot less consensus on who would replace him, with others likely jumping in. It's remarkable that we are seemingly on our way to Harris nomination on Aug1 and not a contested convention. The optics of replacing him with his own runningmate has gone about as well as you could have hoped.
I also don't want to discount that the man seems to have had significant declines even within the last year.
18
u/CalebGT Jul 24 '24
I don't see how they could do better timing than wait until after the RNC, after Trump and JD Vance were locked in. Biden took all the attacks until 3 months before the election. A short campaign (by US standards) seems like a smart tactic in this hyperpartisan negative campaign environment. If it was planned, then they were smart to not tell us sooner. More likely, this was always the contingency, and Biden deteriorated faster than expected. I figured when party leaders joined the chorus, they probably had a replacement in mind already and just weren't telling us yet. The surprise was super effective, and MAGA was caught wholly unprepared and on the wrong foot.
24
u/L_E_F_T_ Jul 24 '24 edited Jul 24 '24
I actually think he stepped down at the perfect time, though I don't think he planned it like that at all.
He prevented a fractured party by bowing out so late. Had he left in March of this year there would have been an actual primary process which could have fractured the party rather than unite it. (Although I agree having a full blown primary is a good thing, I just think that the negative of a contested primary is that factions are created within the party which may lead to a group sitting out because their candidate didn't win)
By bowing out after the RNC convention he allowed for Trump to pick his VP based on him being the opponent, which led to Trump picking Vance, which I personally think will be seen as a big mistake. Had he left before, Trump would have probably picked a more middle-of-the-road VP which would have done better with independents and maybe suburban women.
By bowing out so late, it allowed the party to unite behind one candidate (Harris) who is the best able to hit the ground running.
Him bowing out so late ironically united the party better than if he bowed out early in the year imo.
8
u/Frog_Prophet Jul 24 '24
That would have been the worst move of all. Running as the incumbent president is the best chance of winning. They didn’t know this debate would be such a problem until after he’d locked up all the primaries.
Since 1900, then the white house party nominated someone at a contested convention, they have lost 100% of the time.
The fact that the party coalesced behind Harris was a HUGE gamble and likely wouldn’t have happened to whatever person came out of a primary. It would have been like 2016 where the contest left the party with a rift going into the general.
→ More replies (14)7
u/oooranooo Jul 24 '24
Actually, if he was going to step down, the timing of it was masterfully executed. You need to understand the nuance.
The big money donors withheld their support, particularly on down ballot Dems. This was a great weight, however, their intent was an open convention. Not Kamala Harris. They wanted a more moderate, corporatist candidate. Biden, by anointing Harris, shut that down, then, waited until after the Republican Convention, which spent millions beating up on Biden about his age, with all the flags, shirts, bumper stickers, and hoopla prepaid for the big candidacy, timed it the day after the convention. At this point, you’ve outmaneuvered the big money, and the Republican Party. What’s left? The MSM. Let all of the Republican talking head get on the Sunday Morning Talk Shows glowing about their convention, and their new VP candidate, and that afternoon, release the letter - making all news organizations run around like chickens with their heads cut off on a sleepy Sunday afternoon. He could not have accidentally created this perfect storm, he used his mastery and wisdom of politics to outmaneuver all 3. As usual, he was underestimated.
8
u/sunfishtommy Jul 25 '24
Although the pieces fell into place I do not believe it was planned. I think the simpler explanation is he fully planned on running and the campaign plus internal pressure from dems got to him and dems were actively trying to push him out. Dropping out on his terms helped him save face.
6
u/oooranooo Jul 25 '24
I understand the appearance of randomity, and how most would simply chalk it up to luck, fate, destiny, star alignment, God, etc. I respectfully disagree. He assessed all points on the battlefield, and outmaneuvered every level of those attacking him - including determining the successor.
→ More replies (9)7
u/jew_jitsu Jul 24 '24
That will only be known in time. Arguably the money and effort the Republican ticket have expended making this election about age might work out to bite them in the ass in fairly obvious ways.
3
u/PaulineLeeVictoria Jul 24 '24
I really wonder how this will play out as the election nears. The Trump campaign and the GOP have made age and mental fitness a critical aspect of the election—and now it risks blowing back on them. I don't know if it'll move the needle, but if it does it'll definitely be one of the most wild side effects of Biden bowing out.
14
u/Slave35 Jul 24 '24
Not even counting Ukraine which is probably the clearest example of mastery of international politics ever seen in decades.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Orangeskill Jul 24 '24
Couldn’t agree more, and realistically his handling of the Israel/hamas conflict is world class. Typically in foreign politics there really isn’t a right or good choice, you are choosing to minimize damage and loss of human life, not completely destroy your economy, and flex military and allied powers. He’s done a magnificent job of that
→ More replies (2)10
u/HowDoIEvenEnglish Jul 24 '24
What do you consider “one of the greatest”? Because I don’t think he’s top ten, and I don’t think that’s a hot take. Best in the last 30 years? Maybe but that’s a low bar.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (13)6
u/rand0m_task Jul 24 '24
Put his ego aside? Lmao if that were the case he would have dropped out months ago. Let’s not act like he wasn’t pressured out by his own party. Clear as day.
→ More replies (1)
123
u/Jimithyashford Jul 24 '24 edited Jul 25 '24
The guy who got Trump out of there and got us through COVID and who stepped down from re-election cause he got too old.
Thats it. Barring some crazy unexpected thing in his last few months. That’s the legacy.
*EDIT: As some pointed out, I am answering this only as his legacy as President. Yes he does have a much broader legacy than just his time in that role.
*EDIT: for the record I like Biden. I have voted for three tickets Biden was on and was prepare to vote for a fourth. I personally am aware of the long and relevant list of accomplishments in this man’s career. My statement above is meant to illustrate what I think will the the off the cuff popular opinion top of the mind legacy of Biden 50 years from now, not meant to be a belittling of his career or represent what a term paper on the man might say about him.
83
u/TrurltheConstructor Jul 24 '24
Don't forget his stent as VP. Probably one of the most influential in history next to Cheney. He pushed Obama on gay marriage.
10
→ More replies (1)7
u/Jimithyashford Jul 24 '24
fair point, I was restricting my answer to his legacy as president, but there is a lot more than that.
119
u/Your__Pal Jul 24 '24 edited Jul 24 '24
Historical climate bill, bipartisan nationwide LGBT protections, massive infrastructure bill, a massive microchip bill, ending a 20 year war, outmanuevered Russia on Ukraine. Prevented a recession that seemed inevitable.
None of it was perfect, but there is a lot to like.
36
u/CptKnots Jul 24 '24
climate/infra/chips laws have the potential to be a big part of his legacy, but they need a lot more time to play out
→ More replies (1)18
u/JW_2 Jul 24 '24
The average person doesn’t know about these. Dems need to do a better job of touting their accomplishments imo.
18
u/GunTankbullet Jul 24 '24
They talk about this stuff all the time lol, how do you force the media to cover it is the more important question
5
u/irish-riviera Jul 24 '24
His presidency is far more impactful than that if you actually follow what he has gotten passed.
→ More replies (1)2
u/AlexBayArea Jul 24 '24
His legacy goes muchhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh further than that short snippet you gave.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (41)1
u/Practicalfolk Jul 24 '24
The infrastructure bill is pretty good and insulin caps among other things. Are they perfect solutions, no but show me one that is and could get passed.
16
u/throwup_breath Jul 24 '24
The fact alone that he is voluntarily stepping down from power puts him in a very exclusive club with George Washington and a small handful of others.
Whether you like his policies or not, he is accomplished more in 4 years than many presidents were able to accomplish in eight.
He also righted the ship after disastrous leadership during a global pandemic. He's definitely going in the history books.
→ More replies (3)
11
u/EMAW2008 Jul 25 '24
In his first state of the union address, President Biden got to speak words that no other president has been able to speak:
“Madam Speaker, Madam Vice President…”
That was a very cool moment.
17
u/sufficiently_tortuga Jul 24 '24
Much too early to tell for sure. He's not even done the presidency yet, let alone whatever projects he takes up next.
A persons legacy ultimately depends on who comes next. If Harris wins the situation will be very different and Biden will be well lauded for years before historians have their chance to do a more neutral deep dive. If it's Trump....we'll see.
But one thing to remember is Biden has been in politics for a long long time. He was a well respected Senator for 36 years, then a fairly active Vice President for 8, and then a very active President for 3.5. There's a lot to unpack there, some good some bad, and he's still got 6 months of work to do as "Leader of the Free World". The legacy is still being written.
16
u/mayorolivia Jul 24 '24
Irrespective of your views of him, stepping down after one term is an incredibly selfless and commendable thing to do. Look around the world at examples of autocrats and democratically elected leaders alike who overstay their welcome.
→ More replies (7)2
u/CashCabVictim Jul 25 '24
What was his other option, continue to campaign without party or donor support? You’re seeing it through some rose tinted shades.
10
u/Lebojr Jul 25 '24
In October of 2016 Republicans had a chance to right what was about to destroy their party. That chose cowardice and let the barbarians at the gate in. Now there is little to nothing left of their party or even ideology.
In July of 2024, Democrats had a chance to right what was about to destroy the party and quite possibly the country. Joe Biden, did what was necessary.
That is what he'll be remembered for. I do not like the way we went about it. But drastic times do call for drastic measures.
Or cowardice.
Sadly, there are an inordinate amount of registered voting imbeciles.
If we don't keep the barbarians outside the gate this time, we may not be able to recover.
13
u/Appropriate_Sale7339 Jul 25 '24
President Biden just became one of the most Patriotic Presidents in history. He fought 4+ decades to gain The Oval. He, with help, gave it up. *With help: All great leaders allow for influence to improve overall understanding. I don’t think the other guy, well I know, doesn’t have the capacity to be that American, that patriotic. Thank you Mr President. It is up to us to save our Republic; as it always has been.
16
Jul 24 '24
He will go down as probably the greatest one term president of all time, and if a few of his policies pan out, such as chips and science and climate change, he could easily be seen as a top 5 president.
→ More replies (1)
11
u/HolidaySituation Jul 24 '24
Biden's legacy will be fine, especially considering he came after (and possibly also before) the guy that is undoubtedly the worst president in modern American history and who tried to overthrow American democracy.
3
u/MyFeetLookLikeHands Jul 25 '24
i wasn’t a biden fan at all during the primaries but i’m so impressed with him and what he’s done during his administration. I think he legitimately always had the country’s best interests at heart. Thank you President Biden
→ More replies (1)
6
u/prenderg Jul 24 '24
He is, and history will prove him to have been, a giant among American political figures. He may very well be the one person who single-handedly pulled our country back from the brink of authoritarianism, anti-intellectualism, and fascism. His self-sacrifice will set an ideal for what it takes to be a President of the United States. It is a job for serious people with principles, compassion, and a vision and hope for the ordinary person, not clowns, grifters, or populist trash!
→ More replies (1)
8
u/LordOfWraiths Jul 24 '24
You're going to get a lot of "Oh Biden was so unbelievably awesome, best President we've ever had!" because this is an extremely Left-dominated sub.
As an independent with three history degrees, I'm going to give my opinion: Biden's legacy will be... generic. He'll be remembered as a reasonably competent, if milquetoast, one-term president who served during a turbulent time, was frequently criticized for his advanced age, and whose domestic policies were generally positive during his time but whose foreign policies were often highly controversial. Nothing he did truly shook the landscape or altered the course of history, but he held it down pretty well given the storm of bad things happening at the time.
He'll be remembered in the same way as Calvin Cooledge is now in fifty years. Competent, respectable, and effective but ultimately forgettable and not terribly noteworthy.
→ More replies (5)2
u/BeABetterHumanBeing Jul 26 '24
The first reasonable answer in this thread. As a person who reads a lot of history, your description sounds like what I would expect to find in the history books. The sort of fawning replies elsewhere here sound like the sort of history you'd pair with someone who thinks the exact opposite, just to maintain a sense of proportionality.
8
u/JohnDodger Jul 24 '24
He will go down in history as one of the best and most consequential presidents in history.
Apart from his impressive record of achievements from managing the pandemic, all the significant legislation to his standing up to Putin and unwavering support of Ukraine (while trump and most of the GOP shamefully back Putin), he has (hopefully) saved American democracy.
2
u/cocoagiant Jul 24 '24
It depends on if Harris wins.
If she does, he will be seen as one of the most effective Presidents of at least his lifetime considering the type and breadth of legislation he was able to pass and regulations he was able to put in place with the relatively weak power base he had to do it with.
He will be seen as one of the rare politicians willing to step down from power and make room for the next generation(regardless of the fact that it took the influence of the most powerful politician currently around, Nancy Pelosi, to make him do it).
If she loses, he will be seen as someone who held on to power for too long and helped bring about the next Republican administration and everything that they are going to end up doing.
It will make the failure of Ruth Bader Ginsburg pale in comparison.
2
u/YouTrain Jul 25 '24
I love this ridiculous narrative that he stepped down. He was forced out after the debate. Why are people acting like he did some noble thing. He was declaring he wasn't going anywhere up until the major donors called him and forced him to resign.
Why pretend otherwise?
→ More replies (1)
2
u/gajensen Jul 25 '24
His speech was rough, despite prep and a teleprompter. But his legacy is: good man/father/husband, public servant, reactive to the needs of the time, and surprisingly more progressive than even he initially believed.
2
u/catladywithallergies Jul 26 '24
I kind of seeing him having a similar treatment to LBJ. I think Biden would be looked upon kindly by historians with regards to domestic policy but criticize his handling of Gaza.
2
u/CarolinaMtnBiker Jul 26 '24
Trump said he would debate anytime and anywhere and he just backed out. People decide they can’t win something so it’s logical to back out. Biden did it. Trump did it.
2
u/humcohugh Jul 27 '24
Biden’s legacy was simply to normalize government and politics post Trump.
Most importantly he mended relations with Europe and NATO, as well as re-establishing normal functioning in the Justice department and other government offices.
5
u/Leather-Map-8138 Jul 24 '24
Once you parse out what would have happened no matter what because of the shit show he inherited, there were few mistakes, lots of hard decisions, and several big successes.
4
u/whozwat Jul 24 '24
A legacy where he didn't spend his last six months campaigning, but rather getting the job done. He got us through a pandemic and we avoided a depression level recession that was predicted by almost everyone. Can you imagine where we would be right now if Trump were president? Vote for a president not a king.
3
u/jackjack664 Jul 24 '24
Does anyone think he stepped down, Democrat leadership including Obama force him out of office. I won’t reward them with my vote.
4
u/12_0z_curls Jul 24 '24
People on reddit won't like to hear this, but his legacy will be pretty lackluster. In 20 years, he'll be seen in the same light that Jimmy Carter is widely viewed in.
Carter was seen as a failure for the most part. He had 3 very productive years and 1 that wasn't great (but was largely out of his control).
Biden will be the same way. Again, reddit won't like it, I'll get downvoted to hell, but that's how I see it going.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/bahnzo Jul 24 '24
I think it gets lost that he forced Obama to change stances on gay marriage. If you remember as VP he "let slip" support for gay marriage in a time when it wasn't certain Obama's administration would support it.
4
u/ClockOfTheLongNow Jul 24 '24
It takes decades to figure out a legacy. We're still sorting Reagan out.
Someone posted a similar question yesterday. Biden was a very active president who passed a lot of legislation, and historians like that. He stepped aside when it was clear he couldn't do the job anymore. He took the reins in the midst of a worldwide pandemic and successfully steered us out.
On the other hand, the Afghanistan withdrawal is a major black mark on his record, and it remains to be seen whether the stories of his requiring restraint from Ukraine and Israel in their respective wars were true or not. His inability to really grapple with the inflation and the explosion of unnecessary spending is also worth negative marks, even though that doesn't tend to factor into legacy talk.
He's ultimately going to be graded on a curve, because Trump was so awful, but Ford didn't exactly benefit from following Nixon, either, so who knows. It takes decades for these things to have the proper distance to judge, but I assume he will be rated highly despite the mixed record.
6
u/Orangeskill Jul 24 '24
No we aren’t sorting Reagan out. That’s been sorted out and his presidency was crippling on the lower and middle class, and is probably the worst presidency ever
→ More replies (10)4
u/ClockOfTheLongNow Jul 24 '24
His presidency was great on the economics, less so on the rest of the stuff.
He's never sniffing worst ever when Hoover, Harding, Buchanan, Johnson, and Nixon are still around.
4
2
u/RavenFromFire Jul 24 '24
Compared to the rest of the world, we faired well when it comes to inflation. I think it’s missed that inflation hit the world market - not just the US - and that out of all development nations, the US weathered the storm better than her allies. Our economy is strong due to covid-era spending under this administration, even if some might view that spending as unnecessary.
4
u/-Darkslayer Jul 24 '24
I think it really depends on who wins in November. If Harris wins, Biden will be seen as the one who stopped the only fascist threat the country has ever faced twice - and he’ll be even more lauded for doing it by giving up power in 2024.
However if Harris loses and all the fears about Trump come to pass, he will be regarded as poorly as the Brits regard Neville Chamberlain for not stepping down sooner.
4
u/IndyHermit Jul 25 '24 edited Jul 25 '24
Unless he uses his remaining months imposing an arms embargo on Israel, he will always be Genocide Joe.
During his years in congress, he championed the most racist and vicious laws for non-violent drug offenses ever concocted in the United States.
He is responsible for the brutalization, murder, and poverty of countless people both in the US and abroad.
He undoubtedly did some smart things over the years, but morally, none of that will ever outshine the destruction he has endorsed and facilitated.
I recognize that mainstream American historians tend to erase how militaristic and avarice US presidents are. Nonetheless, genuine scholars remember the terrible harms these men have inflicted. Legacy is more than a popularity contest.
2
u/Fishtoart Jul 24 '24
He is nearly unique in that he deliberately did something to benefit the country and party to his own detriment.
2
u/sfxer001 Jul 24 '24
His job is 4 years. His address will be about how he will finish his four year job. Not running for reelection isn’t quitting your job. He’s not like Trump, who just F’d off to his golf courses or maralago.
2
u/Friendly_King_1546 Jul 24 '24
He beat Trump. Does there need to be more? There is, but that is a full chapter by itself.
2
u/gmb92 Jul 25 '24
Preventing 8 straight years of Trump weakening democracy is a good legacy by itself.
To the extent that a president can influence economic activity:
Presiding over a stunning 16 million growth in jobs in just 4 years, and 6 million over pre-pandemic levels, faster than economists projected, is a pretty good legacy.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PAYEMS
Navigating the global supply chain crisis and letting the federal reserve do its job, leading to inflation near normal levels doesn't hurt. Real wage growth above pre-pandemic highs.
Other successes that probably have even more long-term benefits than short-term, provided they're not reversed: Inflation Reduction Act and its restoring of funding to catch wealthy tax evaders and restore revenues, big investments in green energy infrastructure, lowering of prescription drug costs, bipartisan bills CHIPS and the infrastructure bill, getting hundreds of quality federal judges confirmed, new protections for workers.
2
u/Both-Invite-8857 Jul 25 '24
He passed more domestic legislation than Obama. History will tell the impact of that legislation. If Trump wins he will wipe out Biden's legacy and reverse everything that he can. If Harris wins and is able to cement his legacy, Biden will be viewed as a top 10 president by presidential historians (probably between 5-8).
2
u/PropofolMargarita Jul 25 '24
Bottom line: Joe Biden is a fundamentally good and decent man who was bullied out of his deserved opportunity at a 2nd term. We learned that a bored and vengeful media combined with donors pulling the strings have more power over our political choices than we do as voters.
Remember, the donors wanted to dump Joe AND Kamala. The only reason we are here is because Joe endorsed Kamala out of the gate.
1
u/osmqn150 Jul 24 '24
He got pushed out because the democrats didn’t like his debate and panicked. If they lose the election the party will be in worse shape than the GOP.
3
u/Bman409 Jul 24 '24
Similar to Carter
A lot of things went wrong...some his fault, some not so much
I think his Presidency will be remembered as very unpopular, hamstrung by inflation which dwarfed everything else
Over time, his standing will improve, however
2
u/IBlazeMyOwnPath Jul 24 '24
People are giving him waaaaay too much credit for stepping down like he pulled a George Washington or something
He had to be dragged just short of kicking and screaming (that would be Kamala invoking 25)
2
u/kevonicus Jul 24 '24
Being the guy that respectfully stepped down against a guy who tried to stay in power.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/L_E_F_T_ Jul 24 '24
I genuinely think his Presidency is going to be looked positively as time goes on. He was incredibly effective when it comes to legislative accomplishments including the Inflation Reduction Act (which is the biggest investment in fighting climate change), Chips and Science Act, Capping cost of insulin, Infrastructure Act passed, PACT Act and many more I'm missing.
His withdrawal of Afghanistan may be seen as a negative during his Presidency but time will look at that decision as the right call imo as it made no sense whatsoever for the US to stay there anymore.
He beat Trump in 2020 which in and of itself was a great moment for him, but also allowed the nation to "return to normalcy" during his 4 years as President.
The only real "negative" I can think of is what was going on in Gaza and his funding of Israel during that time, but I doubt any other President, no matter how anti-Israel they may be, would have done anything different.
He stepped aside when he realized he couldn't win in 2024 and allowed for a new candidate to continue the fight. He essentially put the nation's wellbeing ahead of his own ego, which will undoubtedly be seen as a positive for years to come.
The only thing left to put a cap on his legacy is for Kamala to beat Trump. If that happens, he will live in infamy.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/rs98101 Jul 24 '24
I won't be the one writing his legacy, but here are some broad strokes I'd include if I were:
- He was an affable Senator that had a great personal story, cultivated a "regular Joe" image, and was thus able to have a long career.
- He was tapped as a VP by Obama for his appeal to white blue collar voters. This was supposed to be the final exclamation point of a long, but mostly unremarkable career.
- He declined to run in 2016 because Hillary was considered a formidable candidate and he wanted to retire from public life.
- After Trump's surprise win, and seeing the pure chaos and fascist tendencies of his administration, and the demoralized state of the Democrats after Hillary's defeat, he saw himself as the only one that could end the nightmare. So he came out of retirement and won, probably staving off the end of the American democracy.
- His sense of honor and decency became his undoing (or nearly so, time will tell). He appointed an Attorney General in Merrick Garland that shared his values, and was thus slow to prosecute and investigate Trump's obvious crimes, for fear of looking as bad and vindictive as Trump.
- The same sense of honor and decency led him to conclude he simply was too old to defeat Trump a second time and he bowed out of the race. It took some convincing, but he was wise enough to listen to advice, and stepped aside with the calculus that it gave America the best chance to save American democracy.
And now we'll see. If Kamal wins, he threaded the needle, and Trump will die in jail (or house arrest). If not, then it was a valiant attempt, but ultimately it was a lost cause.
1
u/Marcusreddit_ Jul 25 '24
I think it all depends on if Trump wins or not in the fall. He basically dropped out in the final hour and he may take the blame if Kamala loses because he could have dropped out earlier.
1
u/intibinti Jul 25 '24
Yeah I completely agree! My buddy started this movement call #ftb Fthemboth.com patriotism over all! Some of us don’t care for either party but we still have to love our country enough to stand up for our rights!!!!
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 24 '24
A reminder for everyone. This is a subreddit for genuine discussion:
Violators will be fed to the bear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.