The press vs democracy

July 3, 2024

The media has latched onto the Joe Biden debate performance and has anointed itself as the kingmaker of Democratic politics. They have concluded that Joe Biden is out of touch and unable to focus. They are telling the American people what to believe because—of course—we should believe the press, right? When has the press ever been wrong before? They want Joe Biden out of the race—damn the damage to democracy!

For example, please read the following description of the president and then wait for the reveal at the end:

“For a smart man, President Biden professes to know very little about a great number of things,” said Dana Milbank in The Washington Post.

Biden’s problem is not that he’s disengaged; it’s that a lot of his aides are doing lousy jobs, and he won’t fire them.

“Those aides seem to tell Biden very little,” said Hendrik Hertzberg in The New Yorker.

Peter Baker in The New York Times said, “But if Biden keeps saying, “I didn’t know,” people will begin to wonder “Just how much in charge he really is.”

Sound familiar? It should. It is from an article about President Obama in 2015. See The Week (1/8/15), “Obama: Is the president out of touch? (I replaced “Biden” with “Obama” in the above quotes from the article.)

Here’s my point: The thrashing that the media is giving President Biden was also administered to President Obama. On Tuesday, stories with nearly identical language were circulated among the Trump-curious outlets and then dutifully repeated by major media outlets based on reports from anonymous “senior aides.”

The media is whipping itself into a self-sustaining nuclear reaction of disinformation—because they can smell the increase in profits just over the horizon if they can force Joe Biden out of the race.

As Jason Karsh wrote on Twitter,

The political press seems dug in. The trade-off they seem to want is, ‘Give us a brokered convention—or at least another nominee so we can cover the chaos or we’re going to ignore the Republican effort to end democracy all the way through November. Your choice.’

Karsh’s words hit the mark. Today, the NYTimes wrote about Biden’s challenges and then buried this gem 20 paragraphs into the story:

Mr. Trump, 78, has also shown signs of slipping over the years since he was first elected to the White House. He often confuses names and details and makes statements that are incoherent. He maintains a lighter public schedule than Mr. Biden, does not exercise and repeatedly appeared to fall asleep in the middle of his recent hush money trial. His campaign has released only a three-paragraph health summary. Voters have expressed concern about his age as well, but not to the same degree as Mr. Biden’s.

This is “But her emails” all over again. The Times’ obsessive and unfair coverage of a non-story about emails handed the 2016 election to Trump. The Times now seems hellbent on repeating the same mistake. The Times has not only put its thumb on the scale to disadvantage Trump's opponent (again), but has also removed the scale and said, “Trust us. We know better than you.” The day we surrender our political judgment to the New York Times is the day we lose our democracy.

There is some pushback (noted below), but the fecklessness of Democratic leaders is beginning to hurt Joe Biden. Jamie Raskin was the first to suggest that Joe Biden will “at least” be the keynote speaker (not the nominee) at the Democratic National convention; Nancy Pelosi has had to walk back two sets of clumsy remarks about Joe Biden; Jim Clyburn said he will meet with Joe Biden this weekend to give him “an assessment” of where things stand. And Democratic Rep. Jared Golden of Maine published an op-ed that said Biden will lose, Trump will win, and “I am okay with that.”

Joe Biden deserves better treatment from party leaders, lifelong friends, and congressional colleagues, regardless of their views on his ability to continue. If they have something to say to Joe Biden, they can say it in private. Making qualified, hesitant, or cryptic remarks in public is shabby treatment for the best president of the last 75 years.

But not everyone is giving up. Stuart Stevens wrote a stirring defense of Joe Biden in The Atlantic, The Absurdity of the Dump-Biden Uprising (accessible to all, and I ask you to read the whole article in fairness to Mr. Stevens and The Atlantic after my lengthy quotation below):

Stevens writes,

The Democratic Party held 57 primaries and caucuses; voters in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and five U.S. territories had their say, as did Democrats abroad. Joe Biden won 87 percent of the total vote. He lost one contest, in American Samoa, to the little-known Jason Palmer. Suddenly, there are cries in the Democratic Party that, as goes a single territorial caucus [American Somoa], so should the nation.

I worked in five presidential campaigns for Republicans and helped elect Republican senators and governors in more than half of the country. For decades, I made ads attacking the Democratic Party. But in all those years, I never saw anything as ridiculous as the push  . . . to replace Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee.

For many in the party, the event raised genuine concerns about the incumbent’s fitness for a new term. But a president’s record makes a better basis for judgment than a 90-minute broadcast does. Biden has a capable vice president, should he truly become unable to serve. The standard for passing over Democratic voters’ preferred nominee should be extraordinarily high—and has not been met.

The fundamental danger of Donald Trump is that he’s an autocrat who refuses to accept the will of the voters. So, [is] the proper response is to throw out millions of votes, dump the overwhelming choice, and replace him with someone selected by a handful of insiders? What will the message be: “Our usurper is better than your usurper”?

What is it about the Democratic Party that engenders this kind of self-doubt and fear? At a moment when Democrats’ instinct should mirror what Biden declared in a rally the day after the debate—“When you are knocked down, you get back up”—some in the party are seized by the urge to run, not fight. Think about how this would look: Hey, I guess Donald Trump is right; our guy isn’t fit to be president. We’ll give it another shot. Trust us, we’ll get it right eventually.

Madness.

Trump is the candidate of chaos, uncertainty, and erratic behavior. Democrats can win a race against him by offering Americans the opposite: steady, calm, and confident leadership. Joe Biden has provided that. His record is arguably the most impressive of any first-term president since World War II.

My advice to Democrats: Run on that record; don’t run from one bad debate. Show a little swagger, not timidity. Forget all this Dump Biden nonsense and seize the day. Now is the worst time to flinch. Your country needs strength. You can crush Donald Trump, but only if you fight.

Worth repeating: We can crush Donald Trump, but only if we fight!

In response to the uproar over the debate, Pro Publica published an unedited, twenty-minute interview with Joe Biden from a single camera angle (to prevent claims of misleading editing). The interview took place in September 2023—ten months ago. If you doubt Joe Biden’s competency and want to replace him (even if you don’t), watch the ENTIRE twenty minutes. Joe Biden is smart, coherent, knowledgeable, and truthful. Unedited: ProPublica Interviews President Biden, September 2023. In the interview, President Biden discusses fine points of the Constitution—a document Donald Trump has never read and attempted to overturn on January 6.

To similar effect is Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo, who makes the compelling point that the election is now about Donald Trump and the extraordinary powers granted to the president in Trump v. US:

The election is about Donald Trump and the Supreme Court, the two forces working to overthrow the American republic. That’s the subject. It’s not Joe Biden. So, both substantively and politically it makes all the sense in the world. The Court has done us all the favor of not always being as aware as it might be of the political and electoral dimensions of the justices’ bad acts. Yesterday’s ruling is a helpful if disastrous reminder of what the election is really about.

I also urge you to watch this four-minute video by the Lincoln Project: Democrats: Stop Panicking.

But . . . there are millions of Democrats who believe President Biden should step down. I feel like I have corresponded with most of them over the last four days. After many unsuccessful, pointed, and heated discussions, I am now focused on process and unity. At the end of the day, Democrats must be unified. Tearing the party apart over this discussion is exactly what Donald Trump wants. We can’t give him that gift.

So, here are my observations:

• If you want Joe Biden to resign, you should do everything in your power to promote a realistic path to victory. “Joe should resign” is not a path to victory, nor is “An open convention.” Get behind a competitor, play by the rules, and work your ***** for your chosen replacement to emerge as viable candidate to beat Trump. The convention will be too late. That’s a heavy lift, but if you want change, it’s up to you to bring it about.

• Don’t demean and belittle Joe Biden in an attempt to convince him, or others, that he should resign. Some readers have made vile, disrespectful, mocking statements about Joe Biden in attempt to dissuade me from my support for Biden. He doesn’t deserve that. And, at least as importantly, if you adopt the tactic of attacking Joe Biden, you offend the millions of Democrats who love and respect Joe Biden, and who have worked their tails off to help elect him. At the end of the day, you need them, and they need you to defeat Trump. Don’t create divisions or grudges in your effort to persuade the party that a different path is the only way to victory.

• Don’t attack those of us who believe Joe Biden is the best candidate and only viable option. We disagree with your view. Don’t accuse us of “gaslighting” you or being “rigid” or “unthinking” in our support. We hold our opinions in good faith. At the end of the day, you need us, and we need you to defeat Trump. Don’t create divisions or grudges in your effort to persuade the party that a different path is the only way to victory.

My final plea is this: Don’t let the media tell you what to believe. The media has lined up in lockstep to hound Joe Biden out of his candidacy. Over the last seven years, we have seen with our own eyes that the media is biased, cowardly, greedy, short-sighted, and inaccurate in its coverage of Trump and his opponents. They have not magically put all those faults behind them and suddenly become paragons of truth and justice.

No, they are up to their old, hackneyed attacks—just like the similar attack on Obama in 2015. With very few exceptions, they are in it for the money, clicks, and fame. Do not allow yourself to fall victim to the media’s campaign against Joe Biden and democracy. That is what Trump wants; that is what Fox wants; that is what Rupert Murdoch wants; that is what the WSJ wants; that is what NewsMax wants; that is what Leonard Leo wants;—and sadly, sadly, sadly that is what the New York Times wants.

Make up your own mind, based on everything you know about Joe Biden and apply your common sense about what it takes to run and win the most expensive campaign in history. Polls are not elections; political insiders are not voters; television pundits are entertainers; and the media prioritizes profits over truth and democracy.

Voters will have the final say, so stop obsessing over what the media is saying and work to convince the 80 million “Did Not Vote” voters of 2020 that they must show up in 2024. That is the most productive use of your time.

---

Heather Cox Richardson on Trump v. US

Many news organizations are attempting to minimize or soft-pedal the implications of the holding in US v. Trump. Heather Cox Richardson gave a tour-de-force smackdown to the GOP spin that “There’s nothing to see here, move along.” See Historian discusses Supreme Court's immunity decision and shift in presidential powers (youtube.com).

HCR’s discussion is six minutes long but worth every minute. I assume 100% of my readers also subscribe to Heather Cox Richardson, but if you don’t, you are missing out on an essential voice defending democracy. Check out HCR’s Substack here: Letters from an American.

---

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes gets it right

The Supreme Court considered two cases this term that dealt with constitutional provisions that affect the president. The first considered the Disqualification Clause in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibited Trump from appearing on the Colorado primary ballot. The second dealt with Trump's defense of presidential immunity.

MSNBC’s Chris Hayes commented on the disparate treatment of those two constitutional questions as follows:

Grimly hilarious to compare the textual foundation for disqualifying Trump for insurrection (right there in the 14th Amendment) and the foundation for absolute criminal immunity for official acts (nowhere to be found in the Constitution despite explicit grants of other forms of immunity).

---

Opportunities for Reader Engagement

Movement Voter Project event for NH District 2

Please join the Movement Voter Project (with special guest Congresswoman Annie Kuster - NH District 2!) on Wednesday, July 10 at 7 PM Eastern/4 PM Pacific to learn how MVP invests in the best local organizing groups who can turn out the exact voters that we need to win in November. 

MVP does the research on local organizations so you don’t have to. MVP maximizes your impact by investing in the best local voter engagement organizations and streamlines your giving — operating like a “mutual fund for political donations.”

To learn more about MVP, watch this inspiring two-minute video which shows how these groups plan to win this election and understand why your donation to MVP offers excellent value for your money!

Where: RSVP HERE for Zoom Link.

Can’t attend (no charge to attend) but want to give? Donate Here.

---

Center for Common Ground discusses Trump v US

I am on the mailing list for the Center for Common Ground and received an email today with the following event information, which appears to be timely, helpful, and positive:

Yesterday's Supreme Court ruling demonstrated that our democracy is in jeopardy. The 6-3 decision claims that Trump is above the law for trying to overturn the 2020 election, setting a dangerous precedent for future presidents to break the law without consequence.

Join us on Thursday, July 11 at 5 pm PT/ 8 pm ET for a webinar that will debrief recent Supreme Court Decisions and talk about where we go from here. This much-needed, pick-me-up webinar will leave you feeling hopeful about this election and equipped with the tools to take action!

---

Concluding Thoughts

My wife and I will be taking two of our granddaughters (and their parents) for a short holiday at our cabin in Sequoia National Park. In fairness to my family, I will not be writing lengthy newsletters over the weekend. But out of devotion to this community at a difficult time, I will be in touch with short, daily notes (no audio recording). Those notes will open the Comment section to paying subscribers. Although I would prefer to make the Comments more widely accessible given the dramatic events of the last week, the trolls (and a Chinese bot!) found the open forum and spoiled it for everyone. I will look for future opportunities to do so again.

Today, I received my first, “I give up” email from a long-time reader and strong supporter of Joe Biden. She was overwhelmed by the negative press and comments by Democratic officeholders. Her reaction is understandable and likely shared by many.

I told her that millions of grassroots volunteers aren’t giving up. We have Joe Biden’s back—because he deserves our support. I trust Joe Biden to be honest and realistic about his abilities. He told us he can go the distance; we should believe him and support him with everything we have. If he tells us differently, we should respect him. But we should not be part of a media-driven frenzy to maximize drama, clicks, and profits.

We are not giving up. It is okay if some need a rest or can’t participate in this election. In times of crisis, there have always been “enough of us” to save democracy “for all of us.” That is not a criticism; it is a description of the strength of American democracy and truism about all successful political systems.

Today, in a Zoom call with subscribers, I said we are involved in a generational struggle. A reader followed up by asking what I meant by that phrase. I said that it might take 30 years or more to overcome the damage of the last six. If true, we can reach the ultimate victory in 30 years only if those of us on the ground today hold the line for future generations.

Our role may be to provide the shoulders for others to stand on so they can achieve the ultimate victory. If so, providing broad shoulders is an honorable calling and sacred duty. After all, we are standing on the shoulders of men and women who devoted their lives to bring us to this moment.

But change might come much more quickly than we anticipate. With control of both chambers of Congress and the presidency, we can achieve mighty things if we have the imagination and courage to act decisively. The corruption of the Supreme Court should provide the final impetuous for a massive turnout in November.

Dobbs alone should have been enough to secure victory. But with Trump v. US, Loper Bright (administrative agencies), Garland v Cargill (machine guns), Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP (gerrymandering), and threats to mifepristone deferred but not defeated, Democrats should turn out in epic numbers.

It is up to us—despite the media’s best efforts to claim for themselves the role of decision-maker. Let’s make our voices the loudest and strongest in determining the future of our democracy.

I will be in touch with a short note tomorrow. Stay strong!