What does a BIDEN Presidency look like?

[HVC]

Good on them for punching above their weight. Lose some points for helping to try to bring about America's downfall.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I guess we can now answer the question in the topic:

Over.

[crazy canuck]

If he had just did what he implied he would do, and be the person whom beats Trump and then steps in 2020 and then steps aside, his legacy would have been assured.  But now he is going to be the cautionary tale of holding on too long.

[Jacob]

If Harris wins, I expect that to be Biden's legacy.

[crazy canuck]

If Harris wins, I expect that to be Biden's legacy.

Why would he get any credit, other than he was finally forced out?

[Jacob]

I've seen plenty of people online saying that the timing of his withdrawal was perfect, as it left the Trumpists in disarray and with little time to react. That narrative could gain traction.

In general, people can be reasonably generous in victory. If Biden is a one term president who is followed by a successful successor, I expect most people to be willing to forgive his phase of thinking "I can do this" before giving up on a second term. Certainly you can construct a narrative that he sucks and should have done differently, but you can also construct a narrative that focuses on "all's well that ends well". Many people love a bit of character growth, especially when it is followed by victory.

If Harris is successful, Biden can correctly claim that he was the one who put her in position to succeed (in both senses of the word). He chose Harris as his VP, and he withdrew in a way that essentially ensured Harris got the nomination an won (if she wins).

If Harris wins, there isn't going to be much impetus for folks to dwell on why Biden sucks. At the same time Biden's going to benefit from the tendency to rose-tint and mythologize previous presidents.

Of course it Trump wins, folks will be looking for scapegoats and Biden will be an obvious candidate. But if Harris wins, I don't think there'll be much of a constituency for "Biden was [decent to great], but ruined his legacy by hanging on too long and having to be forced out"; people will be much too relieved that Trump lost. And after that, it'll all be about Harris.

[crazy canuck]

And if it had been planned that way we could give him some credit.  But it's just dumb luck that it worked out.

[Jacob]

And if it had been planned that way we could give him some credit.  But it's just dumb luck that it worked out.

Sure, but his legacy is not determined by your objective judgement of the merits of his actions, but by a wider social consensus. My guess is that if Harris wins, Biden's legacy will be "defeated Trump, set up Harris to defeat Trump too" with only politics nerds having opinions on whether he could've done it better or worse than he actually did.

[DGuller]

I think history would be very kind to Biden if Trump loses.  Objectively his presidency has been pretty successful, and his coming to grips with his diminished capacity would be quickly forgotten.  If Trump wins, then we won't know what history will say about Biden, it'll be whatever historians think will please Trump or his successors.

[crazy canuck]

And if it had been planned that way we could give him some credit.  But it's just dumb luck that it worked out.

Sure, but his legacy is not determined by your objective judgement of the merits of his actions, but by a wider social consensus. My guess is that if Harris wins, Biden's legacy will be "defeated Trump, set up Harris to defeat Trump too" with only politics nerds having opinions on whether he could've done it better or worse than he actually did.

My subjective judgment?  What part of what I said is subjective and peculiar to me?

You seem to have a dog in this fight for some reason.  It is objective fact that Biden decided to go for a second term when he was clearly unfit to do so.

You may recall we at Languish even had a discussion about it at the time.

[Jacob]

I wrote "objective" not "subjective"

I don't have any dogs in this fight. I expect Biden to have a generally positive legacy if Harris wins, for the reasons I outlined. I think the negatives you outline have substance and are essentially correct, I just don't think it'll matter in how Biden's legacy is assessed. You evidently disagree. That's fine.

[Sheilbh]

I think it'll probably be both - six of one half dozen of the other.

I had read (I think in Politico) that part of the reason people around Biden were very strongly resistant to him stepping aside after the debate was they did not want it to define him. So I think it is interesting how legacy interacts with actual present day politics and the decisions they are consciously making.

I think the first books on Biden's presidency will probably be by journalists about what went on in the Democrats around Biden running again (including rule changes to the primaries) up to the politics behind Biden stepping down. I suspect he won't come out well from that (though I'm not sure anyone else will either necessarily). I think the first draft of history won't be about his presidency but the slightly gossipy blow-by-blow of how his campaign ended.

Other than that - who knows? I think there'll be an initial consensus and then there'll be revisionist accounts and there may well not end up being a "settled" view on the legacy. History is the argument, after all. This is part of it - but I think the IRA and the foreign policy decisions (China, Russia and Israel-Gaza) will be what define it. My instinct is that the initial views of his presidency will probably be quite negative.

Perhaps the other angle is what will be Trump's legacy? I've always thought the only way to beat Trumpism is electorally. It needs to be shown to lose - I think the more Trumpy candidates have done worse in every election since 2016 (and even worse when he's not on the ballot). If Trump were to win again then I think what he's done to politics and his politics will, I think, probably be defining. If he loses again consistent electoral failure in four consecutive elections at a Congressional and Presidential level will have an impact and it may end up being more of a Trump footnote than the age of Trump.

[crazy canuck]

I wrote "objective" not "subjective"

I don't have any dogs in this fight. I expect Biden to have a generally positive legacy if Harris wins, for the reasons I outlined. I think the negatives you outline have substance and are essentially correct, I just don't think it'll matter in how Biden's legacy is assessed. You evidently disagree. That's fine.

I thought you mistyped.  How can an objective truth be specific to me.  Or maybe better to ask what did you mean by "your objective judgment"?

Is it that you're just trying to say that my opinion means less than somebody else's?  I'm a bit confused.

[Norgy]

I looked up Biden's DNC speech on YouTube. It wasn't half bad, really.
Not quite Obama, but more cogent than whatever Trump is doing these days.

Back ages ago, I remember some of you vying for Biden (well, you Americans, at least), but he was a loose cannon on deck, it was said. I think his presidency showed he was anything but that. He brought stability back into NATO after four years of every country being whether the US actually would support us. Although I grant the raising of the percentage of GDP spent on defence in the European part of NATO mostly to Trump, Biden stood by Ukraine. The only foreign policy failure, and it would be harsh to call it a failure, was not being able to end the IDF-Hamas war.

Put on those Ray-Bans and ride into the sunset, Joe. You've deserved it.

[Barrister]

You know Biden might not have been wrong to seek the nomination in 2020.

Think back to 2020.  The Dem nomination process was kind of a disaster, with all the candidates trying to out-do themselves in trying to run to the left.  It looked to be a contest between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.  Even Harris was taking some very left positions.  It was only when Jim Clyburn endorsed Biden, plus several second-tier but moderate candidates dropping out, that the party rallied around Biden.

So if Biden hadn't run in 2024 - maybe Harris would take it as the sitting VP, but she hadn't built up much of a profile.  Maybe it goes to an AOC, or a (gulp) RFK Jr.  But in any ways - a candidate who would be forced to the party's far left wing and thus more easily defeatable by Trump.

But the discussion of Biden's legacy... I think it'll be fairly positive.  Of course a lengthy legislative career.  He was Obama's running mate for 8 years.  He delivered the nation from Trump.  His initial couple of years were hamstrung by Covid, then of course the Dems lost the house in 2022 so hard to get anything passed.  His passing the torch to Harris will be seen as a noble sacrifice.  He had of course every right to take it right to election day, and nobody could take that from him.  He was probably going to lose of course, but he had earned that right.