Joe Biden’s age is a serious problem for his reelection bid, for the Democratic Party, and, above all, for the United States of America. How do I know this to be true? I know this to be true because, in the New York Times, the usually sensible David Leonhardt is busy explaining in earnest that, “strange as it may sound, the American government can function without a healthy president.” “The biggest reason that many Democratic officials are nervous about President Biden’s age,” Leonhardt reports, “is not his ability to do the job in a second term.” No, “the issue that makes many Democrats even more anxious than Biden’s second-term capabilities is whether his age will prevent him from winning a second term.” As a matter of prosaic fact, this may be true. That does not prevent it from being a disgrace.
As evidence that Biden’s age does not matter much to his role as the chief executive of the federal government, Leonhardt names two former presidents: Franklin Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan. “The U.S. marched toward victory in World War II while Franklin Roosevelt was ailing in 1944 and 1945,” he writes. As for Reagan? “The government managed its relationship with a teetering Soviet Union while Ronald Reagan’s mental capacities slipped.” I would quibble with this characterization of Reagan, who was thoroughly involved in his presidency until its end, and whose lucid year-eight press conferences compared favorably with what Joe Biden is capable of even now. But let’s assume that I’m wrong, and that, at age 76, Reagan was indeed slipping mentally. What sort of case is that in favor of reelecting Joe Biden — who is already three years older than Reagan was when he left office, and who would be 86 at the end of his second term? If one squints, one can understand why Democratic partisans would rather have an unhealthy Democrat rather than a healthy Republican in office. One cannot understand why the median voter would.
Comments