Beating Donald Trump is not a reason to vote for a candidate like Joe Biden
By Matthew Gagnon
On Monday, President Joe Biden sent a scathing letter to congressional Democrats, admonishing them for being skeptical of his candidacy and more-or-less ordering them to get in line.
It was a stunning letter, if for no other reason than the reason it needed to be sent. In the wake of Biden’s calamitous debate performance, a middling, pedestrian interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, a mini-scandal involving scripted questions sent to radio stations before interviews, a troubling revelation about frequent visits to the White House by a neurologist, and more bad polling — all within a week’s time — Biden needed to do something to cajole squeamish party leaders into sticking with him.
The letter itself was forceful, to say the least. In it, he defends his record as president, and defiantly states that he is staying in the race.
To anyone who wasn’t already a Biden superfan, the letter likely came off as tone deaf and bizarre. But for all the brazen egotism and the inability to recognize his own limitations, I was most offended by the defining reason that his campaign must supposedly continue.
“I wouldn’t be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in 2024,” Biden stated midway through the letter. He reinforced this point in his close, saying that his purpose is entirely political. “The question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now. And it’s time for it to end. We have one job. And that is to beat Donald Trump.”
With all due respect to the president, that is not a reason to elect a president who may not be able to do the job today, and will likely not be able to do the job for four additional years.
If you as a voter believe that Donald Trump is some kind of existential threat to the American Republic, and can not be allowed to win another term, so be it. Despite having no particular love of Trump myself, I, like Democratic Rep. Jared Golden, believe that sentiment is hyperbolic, catastrophist gibberish, but feel free to believe what you wish.
Believing that he is a threat and must be stopped does not, however, give you license to stop him with what appears to be a cognitively compromised president. Doing so means that this country would be in a dangerous position, at a dangerous time when it needs a coherent, strong leader who is capable of being in command. The presidency is not a job conducive to confusion, memory lapses, and extreme susceptibility to fatigue.
Beyond that, a president who is not completely capable of running the government creates other very troubling problems. Chief among them is the assumption of authority by non-elected staff members and appointed cabinet members, none of whom were elected by the American people. We should never be put in a position to ask ourselves, “who, exactly, is running the government right now?”
In response to this, those in the “defeat Trump at any cost” camp would suggest to you that Trump is such an existential threat, that even these problems would be preferable to him in office once again.
This is, of course, nonsense. Setting aside the breathless paranoia such a position implies, it also fails a simple test of logic. One terrible option is not the solution for another terrible option, and the Democratic Party should be ashamed of itself for trying to convince us that it is.
Beating Donald Trump is not a reason to vote for a candidate like Joe Biden.
If you really believe Donald Trump is a modern day Adolf Hitler, as so many seem to, then it is incumbent upon you to beat him with someone who can actually govern the country for four years, and will not be constantly hobbled, in either perception or reality, by questions of mental fitness.
Already it is becoming clear that, despite what President Biden is arguing, there are other people more capable of beating Trump than he is, including his own vice president.
Believe me when I tell you that I have no interest in seeing Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer as president. But at least if one of them were to win, the country would have a president capable of actually governing. For the sake of the country, that is the first bar any candidate should need to pass.
Gagnon of Yarmouth is the chief executive officer of the Maine Policy Institute, a free market policy think tank based in Portland. A Hampden native, he previously served as a senior strategist for the Republican Governors Association in Washington, D.C.