Today, we are releasing the full, 21-minute interview, unedited as seen from the view of the single camera focused on Biden. We understand that this video captures a moment in time nine months ago and that it will not settle the ongoing arguments about the president’s acuity today. Still, we believe it is worth giving the public another chance to see one of Biden’s infrequent conversations with a reporter. (2)
I watched it once without reading a transcript. My impression was that he slurred words several times, though you could tell what he was saying. His line of thought seemed to trail off once or twice. I only noticed one “anyway” moment.
The keep-Biden Democratic hardliners could object – rightly – that I’m focusing first of all on his fluency and not one Democracy vs. Authoritarianism. Unfortunately, after his disastrous debate performance against Trump this year, not only reporters but the general public and, of course, Republicans will be doing the same.
And when we’re talking about Biden’s ability to campaign effectively between now and November, his coherency is very relevant.
When it comes to worries about his age, that September 29 video shows us that Biden is old. But everyone knew that, then and now. The fact that he slurs some words could even make him more relatable in a friendly, great-grandpa kind of way. And his age also goes along with the fact that he’s spent most of his adult life in politics, most of it in the Senate and now the White House. Experience counts.
Presidents like John Kennedy and Bill Clinton benefited from a more youthful image that conveyed energy, a fresh perspective, hope for the future, and so on. (And, yes, sex appeal.)
What we expect from older candidates is different. In Biden’s case, experience and understanding of complicated political processes at home and abroad and a large network of contacts with knowledge and successful careers in politics and government. But Biden needs to be able to convey to voters that he is clear-headed and focused enough to make the most of those resources.
And he can’t do that if he’s completely losing his train of thought to the point of being incoherent, as he was in the debate with his “we finally beat Medicare” comment. (“He meant to say he beat big pharma,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a briefing when asked about the president’s words.) (3)
Democracy vs. Autocracy
My position on this framing is that it is good framing that is both true and necessary to use, as it is in other countries where that challenge is real. In the September 29 interview, Biden stated that framing in an accessible way.
But that framing needs to be applied to individual issues like abortion rights and labor rights and access to public schools. And applied in a clear way. I didn’t catch any reference to abortion, for instance, in the September 29 video.
And whether it’s age-related or not, Biden is applying inappropriate old assumptions from the politics of previous decades. On Ukraine and Israel, it’s clear that he is applying assumption from the Cold War period and from the heyday of “liberal interventionism” and NATO expansion in the 1990s. He even alludes to his successful bipartisan relationship with hardline rightwinger and racist Strom Thurmond. This is part of the old “Democratic Leadership Council” (DLC) schtick of Democrats trying to show how receptive they are to “moderate” ideas.
Ironically for Biden’s case, the DLC approach was largely a create a narrative by which Democrats could apply neoliberal economic policies of privatization, deregulation, economic and globalization, in which concepts like healthcare for all or labor rights were not especially welcome. And what Democratic and labor progressives have given Biden’s move away from neoliberal economic and back toward what was called “industrial policy” in the 1980s, strong antitrust enforcement, defense of labor’s right to organize, and to more sensible Keynesian economics generally.
Since Biden has actually, surprisingly, moved away from the basic neoliberal model, its ironic and regrettable that he still with so much of that rhetorical framework.
Because nobody in the US actually votes on their worries about the budget deficit, which is hardly understood at all even by many politicians. And nobody cares about “bipartisanship.” If you ask people in a poll if they want bipartisanship, many would say yes, because it’s a totally conventional thing to say and sounds kind of polite. But when it comes to seeing programs or policies enacted that they prefer, nobody really cares if it gets passed with a “bipartisan” vote or not.
Something similar applies to the Democracy vs. Autocracy framing. It has to be put in terms of concrete policies like a Voting Rights Act or a national law guaranteeing abortion rights. Otherwise, it winds up sounding like one of those vague sentiments like “being proud of America” or “reaching across the aisle” (i.e., bipartisanship). And most Republican voters, even most Trumpistas, aren’t explicitly opposed to democracy. Trump is telling them that democracy is being thwarted by Stolen Elections and Voter Fraud and “political prosecutions” against him.
Notes:
(1) Unedited: ProPublica Interviews President Biden, September 2023. ProPublica YouTube channel 07/02/2024. <https://youtu.be/oZFeBHWtgzs?si=n07dVBHtsYPWHeGD> (Accessed: 2024-13-07).
(2) We’re Releasing Our Full, Unedited Interview With Joe Biden From September. ProPublica 07/02/2024. <https://www.propublica.org/article/biden-interview-unedited-september-2023> (Accessed: 2024-13-07).
(3) Suter, Tara (2024): White House explains ‘We finally beat Medicare’ debate flub. The Hill 07/03/2024. <https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/4754968-white-house-explains-we-finally-beat-medicare-debate-flub/> (Accessed: 2024-13-07).
No comments:
Post a Comment