We were on our way back from a family gathering in upstate New York when we learned that President Biden had stepped aside from his re-election campaign and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris. I was checking social media at the Lee rest stop on the Mass Pike eastbound; I think I was about an hour behind. We’d been anticipating the moment for days, if not weeks. Still, it came as a surprise.
I’m hearing some people grouse that Biden should have acted sooner, but this had to be incredibly difficult. No doubt he believes he can still do the job. What he couldn’t do was govern and campaign simultaneously. Nor was it reasonable to expect voters to believe he could serve more than a fraction of a second term. He’s now given us the best chance of beating Donald Trump and the authoritarian menace he represents.
Harris is an accomplished leader who, after all, is already the elected vice president. Opening up the process to some sort of vague celebrity bakeoff could have led to disaster. Can Harris win? I don’t know. Every possible choice was a risk, but I think giving her a chance of claiming the nomination quickly is less of a risk than continuing with Biden or having an open convention. (To be clear: It will still be an open convention.)
There’s one important media angle to all this that I think needs to be addressed. It really looks like Biden was driven out of the campaign by the press, and that’s not a good perception. There have been stories over the past year or two suggesting that Biden shouldn’t run for re-election because of his advanced age, the three most notable being a Mark Leibovich piece in The Atlantic in 2022, an Ezra Klein commentary in The New York Times this past February, and a Wall Street Journal article in early June. But Biden’s age-related problems have been a 24/7 obsession since about 9:10 p.m. on June 27, when it became clear in the presidential debate that something was seriously wrong.
Many diehard Biden supporters have erupted in fury at the media, and especially the Times, for publishing story after story after story about Biden’s infirmities while not dwelling nearly as much on Trump’s far worse deficits. There are many on the left who’ve come to the conclusion that the corporate media — I’m not using quotation marks because there really is a corporate media — want to see Trump back in office for ratings and circulation. I don’t think that’s the case. Biden’s age, questions about his cognitive health, and fading electoral prospects were a huge and entirely legitimate story. But that doesn’t mean the media covered themselves in glory.
My own belief is that the media — again, led by the Times — were shocked and horrified by the prospect of Trump’s return to the White House, so they embarked on an overwrought effort to bring Biden’s campaign to a close. The Times put it this way in an editorial today: “Had he remained at the top of the ticket, he would have greatly increased the likelihood of Mr. Trump retaking the presidency and potentially controlling both houses of Congress as well.” That’s not just a statement of truth; it’s also an explanation for the media behavior we’ve seen over the past three weeks.
Jon Keller of WBZ-TV asked me the other day if this was evidence of “bias.” I responded that yes, I suppose it was. But it was bias in favor of democracy, something that media observers such as Margaret Sullivan and Jay Rosen have been calling for from the start of the campaign. This is not Bill Clinton versus Bob Dole in 1996. Trump represents an existential threat to democracy.
Still, the media excesses were notable, especially a Times report that a physician who specializes in Parkinson’s disease had visited the White House repeatedly. That was just irresponsible journalism. It didn’t pan out, and no evidence has emerged that Biden has Parkinson’s. Another example of excess was published by The New Yorker last week, in which nine physicians were allowed to speculate anonymously about the state of Biden’s neurological health. Now, I have to say that the story was interesting and possibly shed some light. But that doesn’t mean it should have been published.
President Biden said he will address the nation later this week. He could do Harris a lot of good if he acknowledges that he’s leaving not because of the media, not because fundraising had dried up, not because Nancy Pelosi told him to, but because his age and his health had finally caught up with him. And the media should ask themselves how they once again managed to turn a legitimate story into the only story for the past three weeks, embarrassing themselves and calling their judgment and fairness into question.
Biden has been an outstanding president, and he cements his legacy by knowing when it’s time to leave. He deserves our respect and gratitude. We are all going to miss his steady hand come next January, regardless of who succeeds him.
Leave a comment | Read comments
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Have you looked back at your own pushback to calls for Biden to step aside due to his age and acknowledged you had misread the situation? Biden’s selfishness blocked a competitive primary on the Dem side. Regardless of his health enough swing voters in seing states saw him as too old even prior to the debate and any defenders put our country’s future at risk.
Have you considered that Republicans spent years trying to convince voters that Biden was senile even though there was no evidence of that, and that the poll numbers you cite were a reflection of a smear campaign? I think when the story of Biden’s decline is told, we’re going to learn that he’s been declining very rapidly in recent months. He seemed fine at the State of the Union — not just reading a speech but mixing it up with Republicans very effectively and seeming to have a good time.
What continues to baffle me is the lack of mainstream media stories about Trump’s lack of mental fitness to lead? I see lots of reporting in lefty blogs, but almost nothing in the NYT or Post, etc. Trump has always gotten a pass.
Steve, the Times’ editorial page has been unstinting about that. Also, Trump’s not going anywhere. He’s not going to be driven out of the race; he has to be beaten.
On the grousing that Biden should have acted sooner, this looks in retrospect like it was very well timed. The organized response (quick endorsements of Harris by all credible challengers and state party chairs and the big fundraising haul) makes it look like this was planned out in advance. And doing this immediately after the GOP convention and Trump’s VP pick means that they are locked in with their uniquely very old nominee and his extremist running mate. And doing it just after the Sunday morning shows wrapped seems deliberately timed to deprive them of a big story to cover. We’ll see how this changes the race, but the trajectory with Biden as the nominee was not looking good.
Thank you for admitting the excesses, but I believe you left out the main motivation–money. And that is a sad reason to take the democratic decision of the people to decide who they want to be governed by away from them EVEN IF you thought you knew better based on evidence. Such actions can lead to authoritarian fascist actions very easily by the other side. I would hope our Press and other Media would maintain democracy, not destroy it.
Judith, are rich donors obliged to spend their money on things they don’t want to spend it on?
That’s one thing when they say they won’t back Biden, another thing when they threaten other races unless they get their way. And when the difference could mean a Trump presidency? I hope Harris and the rest of our party push for more progressive taxation.
I thought Joe should have taken himself out of contention in 2022 and given Kamala two years of mentoring and room to cultivate her electability. I now see that, whether he planned it or more likely not, his timing was spot-on. The Republican campaign bit on the fake run and left Kamala wide open … hopefully with a clear lane to the endzone.
More recently I’ve also feared that the Democratic process of contention would consume far too much time and lose critical weeks that should be directed at beating Trump, but it now looks like the DNC could be a very energizing affirmation of truly American values and all focused on one strong ticket.
I don’t know, I think this massive death toll of Palestinians will not be looked at kindly for the current president.
This is what a real candidate looks like. Not this stumbling, ‘look folks’. We have finally found the way to beat Trumpism.
Very happy Harris will not participate in Nuttyyahoo’s speech. 39000 dead in Gaza and the living envy the dead. Nothing but rubble is there. Will not be a safe place to live for 20 years, if ever. Why do we support genocide of Palestinians with arms for a fascist Israel government?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngBJS5W7–o
Even in his public endorsement of Harris, Chuck had to read from notes and barely looked at the camera How about a leader in that role?