To quote a line from The Sound of Music, “How do you solve a problem like Joe Biden?”
It is widely recognized that the President is constrained by a number of factors that limit his ability to effectively lead the country. The issue is not merely age; supporters have been known to rationalize away other considerations. The fact that the President is 80 years old and would turn 82 in the same month as the 2024 elections is a significant factor that cannot be ignored.
Many pro-abortion Democrats are disconcerted by the prospect of Biden running for a second term, a decision he has thus far been unable to dissuade himself from. In a lengthy column published today, New York Times pro-abortion columnist David Brooks (a “moderate conservative”) enumerated the reasons why Biden should run for reelection. This begins with the observation that if he did not run, there would be the problem of his vice president, Kamala Harris. “If the door were open, the vice president would probably run, despite her poll numbers being lower than Biden’s.” Her lackluster 2020 presidential campaign does not instill confidence.
The entirety of Brooks’s column is, in essence, a nostalgic reflection on the presidency of Joe Biden. Brooks’s admiration for Biden and his visceral dislike of former President Trump are so profound that he is capable of writing paragraphs such as the following: Those Republicans who portray him as an elderly man based on highly selective YouTube clips are incorrect. In my interviews with him, he demonstrated a decline in performance, akin to a pitcher who once threw at 94 miles per hour but now throws at 87. He is demonstrably still an effective pitcher.
To continue the baseball metaphor, Biden is comparable to a non-athlete who is asked to throw out the ceremonial first pitch and winds up 20 feet short of home plate.
Furthermore, Brooks asserts that Biden has exhibited “improvements in his communication style as he’s aged.” One might inquire as to the nature of these purported improvements. It is difficult to express the extent of my dismay. To provide a more accurate assessment of Mr. Biden’s communication skills would necessitate addressing the observations made by Mr. Brooks. Mr. Biden’s ability to read text off a teleprompter is a notable area for improvement.
Furthermore, if the criticism of Mr. Biden is solely the domain of Republicans, how might one reconcile this admission from his column?
“Biden’s approval ratings are stubbornly low. In a recent ABC poll, only 30 percent of voters approve of his handling of the economy and only 23 percent approve of his handling of immigration at the southern border. Roughly three-quarters of American voters say that Biden, at 80, is too old to seek a second term. There have been a string of polls showing that large majorities in his own party don’t want him to run again. In one survey from 2022, an astounding 94 percent of Democrats under 30 said they wanted a different nominee.”
This column oscillates between a grudging admission that the President bears some responsibility for his declining poll numbers and his assertion that, despite his extensive tenure in Washington, D.C., Biden remains “rooted in the unpretentious middle-class ethos of the neighborhood he grew up in.” He appears to possess an innate capacity to establish rapport with individuals experiencing distress.
This “instinctive ability to bond” also manifests in his avoidance of cultural matters that might offend others through overly academic verbiage or virtue signaling. This is truly remarkable. “This is why I am concerned when he makes strident statements about those on the right, when he resorts to name-calling and denounces large segments of the population as MAGA.”
You think?
As proponents of the pro-life movement, our primary concern is that the current administration is ardently pro-abortion. Joe Biden is unrelenting in his pursuit of this goal. He even attempts to hijack programs whose entire purpose is to affirm life.
In a previous statement, Congressman Chris Smith articulated this sentiment. He recalled President Biden’s inaugural address, in which he stated that “the dream of justice for all will be deferred no longer” and that this is “a cry for survival from the planet itself.” This cry is one that cannot be more desperate.
Smith, co-chair of the House Pro-Life Caucus, posited that the dream of “justice for all” cannot be achieved if an entire segment of society is legally ignored and discriminated against because of where they live—in their mothers’ wombs—and how small and defenseless they are.
It is evident that the President is aware of this. He grasps the issue, or at least he did at one time.
Chelsea Garcia is a political writer with a special interest in international relations and social issues. Events surrounding the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel are a major focus for political journalists. But as a former local reporter, she is also interested in national politics.
Chelsea Garcia studied media, communication and political science in Texas, USA, and learned the journalistic trade during an internship at a daily newspaper. In addition to her political writing, she is pursuing a master's degree in multimedia and writing at Texas.
