According to one journalist’s tally, the New York Times has run 192 stories on the subject since the debate, including 50 editorials and 142 news stories. The Washington Post, which has also gone for saturation coverage, published a resignation speech they wrote for him. Not to be outdone, the New Yorker’s editor-in-chief declared that Biden not going away “would be an act not only of self-delusion but of national endangerment” and had a staff writer suggest that Democrats should use the never-before-deployed 25th amendment.

Although the Biden administration seems to have run extremely well for three and a half years, with a strong cabinet, few scandals and little turnover, a thriving economy and some major legislative accomplishments, the narrative the punditocracy has created suggest we should ignore this record and decide on the basis of the 90-minute debate and reference to newly surfaced swarms of anonymous sources that Biden is incompetent. Quite a lot of them have been running magical-realism fantasy-football scenarios in which it is fun and easy to swap in your favorite substitute candidate. The reality is that it is hard and quite likely to be a terrible mess. Nevertheless, this pretense is supposed to mean that telling a presidential candidate in mid-campaign to get lost is fine.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Yeah, I can’t take any of those pundits (or Lemmings) seriously when they’re making those claims. It’s already a chaotic election, and that would introduce a whole new level of chaos 3 months before it. For the right wingers, it makes sense to be sowing that kind of chaos. For our side to be joining in is absolute insanity.

    Also, the fantasy football comparison is spot on.

    Like, Biden’s the incumbent and candidate. Deal with it. If he’s unable to perform his duties for whatever reason, we have a procedure for that (and for those fantasy football pundits, you’ll get your President Harris).