[ad_1]
With President Joe Biden giving his speech, it looked like the first night of the Democratic National Convention would be about passing the torch. And it was — without the Democrats on stage making that clear.
Biden’s speech was late. It began around 11:30 p.m. ET, so late that some commentators thought the Democratic National Committee Deliberately concealing one’s speech (Convention officials have denied the claim.) When the president finally spoke, he completely ignored the obvious question his presence raised: Why her and not him? Biden spent much of his speech touting his record in office, casting Harris as a champion of his legacy, and not spending a single word explaining why he needed one in the first place.
Biden wasn’t alone in this. Throughout the night, Democrats made sure not to concede the unprecedented move that resulted in the sitting president giving the opening speech instead of the convention’s closing address. The convention essentially treated Biden like a second-term president who is legally barred from running, rather than The president is ostracized by his own party.
This may seem a little awkward. But it may be the best way to handle the situation.
The elephant in the donkey house?
In theory, political conventions are multi-day TV commercials for their organizers. They are supposed to be carefully curated to present a party in the best light, highlighting its most powerful issues, its most talented politicians and its most obvious points of unity.
The Democratic Party is doing quite well indeed. Harris has surged in the polls, helped by enthusiasm among the party’s grassroots. That hasn’t happened since Barack Obama became president. The economy is strong, crime is down, and no American soldiers are dying in major overseas wars. So good, in fact, that election models and prediction markets now give her a slight edge to beat Donald Trump in November.
The last thing you want to do is destroy the Democratic Party by dwelling on the recent past, especially the bitter and still-ongoing internal battle over whether to replace Biden with Harris. Yet can Democrats really avoid acknowledging that the party just made history after the primaries by replacing a presidential candidate?
Yes, it turns out they can.
For much of the evening, it felt natural. The show focused on the choices facing voters in November, contrasting Harris (good!) with Trump (bad!). There was no need to focus too much on Biden, since he wasn’t on the ballot.
The feeling only started to grow strange as the evening drew closer to Biden’s speech, when figures in Biden’s orbit began to speak: Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, first lady Jill Biden and the president’s daughter, Ashley. Report The president is still angry and resentful about the whole thing, and it’s hard to imagine that having his speech delayed until late wouldn’t be salt in the wound for him.
“This is terrible. He literally put together a campaign and gave it to them — they have to cut him out of prime time?” one Biden aide complained. Alex Thompson, Axios reporter.
Yet when the time came, Biden stuck to the script. He talked about himself, sure, but didn’t say or do anything that could be construed as obvious sour grapes about Harris. He, like everyone else, simply ignored the question of succession. The problem was more or less solved.
This acquiescence reflects Biden’s more general political style.
“Biden has indeed built and relied on coalitions, rather than a cult of personality, more than almost any modern president,” wrote Matt Glassman, a political scientist at Georgetown University“He’s not as well-liked as Obama, Clinton, Reagan or Trump. That shows in the way he makes policy, the way he does public relations and the way he relates to factions within the party.”
Arguably, this is why Biden resigned under partisan pressure, while Trump was reluctant to resign (in Access Hollywood This may explain why Biden has been able to resist memories of his ouster and move on as if it never happened.
He is fundamentally a partisan.
[ad_2]
Source link
