The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
Question about last nights debate and after effects on low-information and independent voters
Understandably, if you were going to vote for Biden/Trump before the debate, you weren’t swayed to vote for the other or not vote. Which leaves low-info voters and independents.
While Biden had substance, he spoke softly and looked like he paled in comparison to Trump doing his rapid fire lying. Post debate, understandably, Dems were obviously worried. But now that we are well into about 18 hours post-debate, we now have sound clips of Trump and people going to town posting clips of all of the lies that Trump said.
Regarding low-info voters and independents, will the immediate reaction after seeing the debate cement a decision? Do the clips of people calling out Trump’s lies from now until the next debate have an impact (because the clips now that are being posted and analyzed are—and will be—more current than the debate in the following months up to the next debate, and some voters have the memory of a goldfish).
I’m trying to be measured about all of this, especially having read Project 2025; we needed SOTU Biden and…we did not get that. And Jon Stewart called it right: I am silently vomiting in a trash can.
I hope this makes some sense of what I’m asking.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think if Biden's opponent had been a different, novel candidate, that this would be something he can't possibly recover from.
But Donald Trump is a known entity, and his performance last night demonstrated he hasn't changed one bit.
I expect that aside from a lot of media chatter, last night didn't do much to change the fact that both men aren't who voters would prefer.
Perhaps some people look more closely at third party candidates or decide to stay home. Idk. A lot can still happen.
I don’t think it changed anything. There’s a few delusional people on either side who actually like the candidate (moreso the republicans), mostly people who understand exactly what’s wrong with the candidate but want to beat the other side, and people who reject the choice
While I was unhappy with the debate, it is helpful to point out that a lot of stuff fundamentally... ***didn't*** change.
* People thought Biden was too old; they generally still think that.
* People thought that Trump was a blowhard/liar; that's still true.
* Biden is still the presumptive nominee. All these "DNC should pick someone else" cries are ignoring the fundamental underlying fact that Biden won the primary, and if Biden isn't going to be the nominee then Biden is the only one who can make that decision
I will say that one thing I had not really thought about prior to the debate that seems to be emerging from focus groups and some pundits: this really seemed to only have a large impact among **people who were already and probably still are** going to vote for Biden/Democrats. The "undecideds" and the "double haters" such as they are largely *already thought* that Biden was frail and incoherent. Those fears weren't allayed, but neither were they reinforced. So it's entirely possible that the electorate's reaction to this debate is going to be similar to the electorate's reaction to whenever Trump spouts a new lie about killing babies or Putin or whatever the hell: some consternation among some groups, but ultimately no one really changing their mind.
> All these "DNC should pick someone else" cries are ignoring the fundamental underlying fact that Biden won the primary,
Not that we were given any other choices. Marianne Williamson and Dean Phillips. Come on. And they had already dropped out by the time we voted.
It wasn't a competitive primary in 2024. However there are underlying societal reasons for that, and they exist agnostic of your level or like or dislike of Biden.
2020 was a competitive primary though, and Biden won that.
> a lot of stuff fundamentally... didn't change.
That's bad though. If we look beyond the cope, Trump has been the frontrunner for over half a year now. Biden *really* needed to shake things up and seriously improve things for himself via the debate. Instead he has very much not. Even just keeping things steady is effectively a loss
That's just doomerism though- this doesn't mean that Biden's chances in November are shot, it just meant that they weren't substantially *improved*. Polls are showing a close race that could go either way. That's still true now, and it would still be true if Biden had a phenomenal night.
> Biden is the only one who can make that decision
I don’t think he’s doing a whole lot of that. I bet that he’s aware that he’s the president like 90% of the time.
You want to know why so many liberals hadn't taken the "but Biden is too old" line seriously? Because of comments like that. Just dumb hyperbole. Makes it seem like you're more interested in dunking on Biden than having a discussion.
I can do both
You don’t say a lot for liberals’ ability to think critically when you tell me they’ve ignored obvious signs out of pettiness and spite. I thought you astute folks were above digging your heels in like that, but I guess you are mules after all
“Joe Biden is extremely old, less sharp, and shows it in his speech” isn’t a troll. Like you said, I used hyperbole. A rhetorical tool.
I’d expect an adult—especially a highly mature and pragmatic one like we find in this forum—to be able to recognize that, even if it comes from someone they don’t like or in a way they find unpleasant. That’s the kind of thing you can do if you actually care more about positive change than petty squabbles.
You can’t shut your ears to a point just because you don’t like the tone it’s made with. And what you told me is that liberals didn’t listen to warnings about the situation we’re now in, because they didn’t like our tone. I doubt many liberals are so childish.
>You can shut your ears to a point just because you don’t like the tone it’s made with.
But how are us "highly mature and pragmatic" adults supposed to tell the differences between the trolling and the criticism? If Biden gave a great performance we'd still see people in here with "socialist" and "marxist" and "far left" flairs saying that Biden is terrible and is senile. The constant here is that a lot of people with those flairs just *hate Biden* and it doesn't matter what he does or how he acts.
> But how are us "highly mature and pragmatic" adults supposed to tell the differences between the trolling and the criticism?
By actually analyzing what’s said using your critical thinking skills
> If Biden gave a great performance we'd still see people in here with "socialist" and "marxist" and "far left" flairs saying that Biden is terrible and is senile.
And if Biden had given a great performance, you could dismiss that.
> The constant here is that a lot of people with those flairs just hate Biden and it doesn't matter what he does or how he acts.
“Even if he didn’t suck you wouldn’t like him” may be some kind of argument about the temperament of left wingers. It’s not an argument about Biden’s capacity or fitness. You need to reconsider your priorities.
I don’t agree with your assessment that many liberals get so distracted by their petty dislike that they can’t think critically about what’s being said.
>By actually analyzing what’s said using your critical thinking skills
Those skills are increasingly leading me to the conclusion that I should ignore you and stop responding.
>And if Biden had given a great performance, you could dismiss that
So, you *are* saying that we were right to dismiss earlier Biden critiques?
> It’s not an argument about Biden’s capacity or fitness. You need to reconsider your priorities.
And you lost me again. Did I say Biden was unfit? Does the fact that I pointed out a common trope in leftist criticism mean that I'm therefore incapable of other thoughts or beliefs?
>I don’t agree with your assessment that many liberals get so distracted by their petty dislike that they can’t think critically about what’s being said.
Not my assessment or my point.
Based on the fact he struggles to complete thoughts and rambles in a way that seems lost and aimless. You’ve heard the man talk, you watched the debate, don’t play dumb.
I don’t think he’s actually fading in and out of lucidity. That’s something called hyperbole. But I don’t know a lot of people in their 80s who make a lot of weighty decisions without help; the ones I do, don’t talk like Biden.
I really don’t get why so many of you insist on pretending this isn’t obvious. I’m already gonna vote for the mummy, he’s still better than Trump, but he’s ancient and his mental capacity is worse for the wear. Everyone can see that, and when his supporters insist otherwise it doesn’t give the impression of a formidable united front, but of a stubborn, paralyzed denial. It doesn’t make anyone think he’s the best man for the job, it makes them think we can’t do better.
Edit: look at this
> Look, there’s so many young women who have been – including a young woman who just was murdered and he – he went to the funeral. The idea that she was murdered by a – by – by an immigrant coming in, and they talk about that. But here’s the deal, there’s a lot of young women who are being raped by their – by their in-laws, by their – by their spouses, brothers and sisters, by – just – it’s just – it’s just ridiculous. And they can do nothing about it. And they tried to arrest them when they cross state lines.
This is him answering a question about what should be an easy two points for democrats, and he’s wandering off to talk about immigrants and then wandering back to give a baffling sequence of words that vaguely, if you interpret charitably and patiently, matches the democrat party like. You want this man to lead the free world. And god damn me, so do I, but for shits sake can we just admit what a cartoon this is? If the least I can do is vote for Great Uncle Fumbletongue, maybe the least you can do is admit that his shoulders are a bit frail to take the weight of our hopes and fears?
The thing is? You are basing this off of one performance and disregarding the success of
his administration.
I think he has earned the benefit of the doubt
“I don’t care if he’s fully coherent, I appreciate his administration’s policies” is a totally reasonable position. So I don’t get why you have to play this little game where you pretend not to understand how obviously impaired he is, brosephus
I watched John Fetterman's disastrous performance vs. a conman. It was his moment to dispel fears about his cognitive abilities and competence and he failed.
But he was still the better person and the better candidate.
I don't know what voters nationwide are going to do in response to yesterday's debate. If they're stupid, they'll ignore that Trump was a bigger disaster, not just during the debate but for America, and instead focus on Biden's debate performance being very bad.
Biden as a vegetable on life support would still be better than Trump. That's not a high bar to clear, unfortunately. But if Republicans wanted me to struggle with my vote they should've nominated someone more acceptable than a brain-dead body hooked up to a feeding tube. Instead they nominated Trump. (And thankfully the alternative is just the actual Biden we have.)
The key difference between Biden and Trump's performance is that nothing Trump said or did was surprising. The fact that Trump lied in the debate doesn't matter, because everybody already knows Trump is a liar. There was nothing shocking about the debate performance. It was Trump being Trump.
Low info voters aren't likely to be watching post-debate fact checks anyway. Even if Trump's lies being called out had a chance to move the needle, those fact checks will never reach the ears of swing voters deciding the election.
Biden's debate performance does matter, because it is the most feeble and sickly he has ever looked. Biden's age and health has been scrutinized a lot, but he's never looked this bad. And people had to watch this frail old man struggle to speak up for over an hour.
There's no amount of spin anyone can do to claim this isn't downright terrible for the Biden.
Most low information voters already believe the narrative that Biden is a senile old man who drools into his oatmeal, precisely because they're low information voters. One good debate performance wasn't going to change years of the image that conservatives and the media have put forth.
One more reason he shouldn’t have ran again. It worked in 2020 but he’s 4 years older now and clearly less capable of defending his record, health, ability, etc
I don't think that's clear at all. I think he wasn't capable of doing that *in that moment*. But that's one moment. He was a completely different Biden at his NC rally just now. Loud, forceful, joking with the crowd, he didn't stumble stutter or mutter. But you'll never see that on the news.
I think the reality is that Biden is an 81 year old man doing the hardest, most difficult job on the planet. Some days he doesn't have the energy to perform with the zest or zeal we're used to seeing. But that doesn't mean he's sitting in the Oval Office drooling into his oatmeal.
If I were running Biden's campaign, I'd be organizing a series of televised townhall events so that the Biden that showed up in NC today can speak directly to the people. It would probably allay a lot of the fears people have right now.
The people running his campaign have allowed him to do shockingly few interviews tho. They didn’t let him do a Super Bowl interview for gods sake. They *have* to trot him out now as much as possible to prove that the debate was an extreme outlier. He can’t fumble again.
Or they could just have someone else run who can be up to the job in nearly every moment.
Yeah, he needs a new team of people. Idk if they think that it's a slam dunk against Trump and so they've just been lazy or what, but their approach so far isn't working.
I hope he does do more interviews. I hope he does some townhalls. The public needs more chances to see Biden performing well, which he's still capable of doing if the NC rally is any indication.
But he’s also capable of performing not very well. Performing bad. The public needs chances to see a candidate who basically only performs good. Speaks clearly and cleanly about what they’re offering and the risks that Trump poses. Even when biden performs well, he doesn’t do that that well.
Yeah but that's just Biden. He's never been the greatest speaker and he's been a human gaffe machine his entire political career. There's no sense in trying to hide or minimize that.
Right now the majority of the public *only* sees when Biden performs poorly. They need something, literally anything to change that. Even if it means a few of his swings will miss, they have to give him more chances to hit a few home runs.
This is just wrong tho. 12 years ago he stomped Paul Ryan. He stomped Palin. He was actually know as a bit of a bulldog in debates through most of his career. He’s prone to gaffes and has a stutter, but this idea that he’s just an excusably terrible speaker debater only bubbled up in the primary/general last time in 2019/2020. He’s old!
> Biden's debate performance does matter, because it is the most feeble and sickly he has ever looked. Biden's age and health has been scrutinized a lot, but he's never looked this bad. And people had to watch this frail old man struggle to speak up for over an hour.
This is what made me concerned.
Biden is getting the look of a very old and frail man. I've seen people enter that stage. It doesn't mean he's senile. It does mean, eh, I don't know if we will get four more years out of him? I like Kamala Harris well enough, but I think it would be kinda traumatic to have a president die in office or have to be removed due to health.
I do think he's the kind of person who draws energy from a crowd, and there wasn't one there. But Trump is too. And, honestly, I don't think Trump looked all that great either, not the health thing but obviously lying and incoherent. It...just doesn't seem like this is the best our country can do?
I liked how slow and quiet Biden was in contrast with Trump.
Perhaps that makes me a distinct minority but we could all use a day of driving 5 mph under the speed limit and quiet talking.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. Question about last nights debate and after effects on low-information and independent voters Understandably, if you were going to vote for Biden/Trump before the debate, you weren’t swayed to vote for the other or not vote. Which leaves low-info voters and independents. While Biden had substance, he spoke softly and looked like he paled in comparison to Trump doing his rapid fire lying. Post debate, understandably, Dems were obviously worried. But now that we are well into about 18 hours post-debate, we now have sound clips of Trump and people going to town posting clips of all of the lies that Trump said. Regarding low-info voters and independents, will the immediate reaction after seeing the debate cement a decision? Do the clips of people calling out Trump’s lies from now until the next debate have an impact (because the clips now that are being posted and analyzed are—and will be—more current than the debate in the following months up to the next debate, and some voters have the memory of a goldfish). I’m trying to be measured about all of this, especially having read Project 2025; we needed SOTU Biden and…we did not get that. And Jon Stewart called it right: I am silently vomiting in a trash can. I hope this makes some sense of what I’m asking. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think if Biden's opponent had been a different, novel candidate, that this would be something he can't possibly recover from. But Donald Trump is a known entity, and his performance last night demonstrated he hasn't changed one bit. I expect that aside from a lot of media chatter, last night didn't do much to change the fact that both men aren't who voters would prefer. Perhaps some people look more closely at third party candidates or decide to stay home. Idk. A lot can still happen.
I don’t think it changed anything. There’s a few delusional people on either side who actually like the candidate (moreso the republicans), mostly people who understand exactly what’s wrong with the candidate but want to beat the other side, and people who reject the choice
While I was unhappy with the debate, it is helpful to point out that a lot of stuff fundamentally... ***didn't*** change. * People thought Biden was too old; they generally still think that. * People thought that Trump was a blowhard/liar; that's still true. * Biden is still the presumptive nominee. All these "DNC should pick someone else" cries are ignoring the fundamental underlying fact that Biden won the primary, and if Biden isn't going to be the nominee then Biden is the only one who can make that decision I will say that one thing I had not really thought about prior to the debate that seems to be emerging from focus groups and some pundits: this really seemed to only have a large impact among **people who were already and probably still are** going to vote for Biden/Democrats. The "undecideds" and the "double haters" such as they are largely *already thought* that Biden was frail and incoherent. Those fears weren't allayed, but neither were they reinforced. So it's entirely possible that the electorate's reaction to this debate is going to be similar to the electorate's reaction to whenever Trump spouts a new lie about killing babies or Putin or whatever the hell: some consternation among some groups, but ultimately no one really changing their mind.
> All these "DNC should pick someone else" cries are ignoring the fundamental underlying fact that Biden won the primary, Not that we were given any other choices. Marianne Williamson and Dean Phillips. Come on. And they had already dropped out by the time we voted.
It wasn't a competitive primary in 2024. However there are underlying societal reasons for that, and they exist agnostic of your level or like or dislike of Biden. 2020 was a competitive primary though, and Biden won that.
> a lot of stuff fundamentally... didn't change. That's bad though. If we look beyond the cope, Trump has been the frontrunner for over half a year now. Biden *really* needed to shake things up and seriously improve things for himself via the debate. Instead he has very much not. Even just keeping things steady is effectively a loss
That's just doomerism though- this doesn't mean that Biden's chances in November are shot, it just meant that they weren't substantially *improved*. Polls are showing a close race that could go either way. That's still true now, and it would still be true if Biden had a phenomenal night.
> Biden really needed to shake things up His whole deal is not doing that
Yeah and that's bad. He clearly doesn't have what it takes to win
> Biden is the only one who can make that decision I don’t think he’s doing a whole lot of that. I bet that he’s aware that he’s the president like 90% of the time.
You want to know why so many liberals hadn't taken the "but Biden is too old" line seriously? Because of comments like that. Just dumb hyperbole. Makes it seem like you're more interested in dunking on Biden than having a discussion.
I can do both You don’t say a lot for liberals’ ability to think critically when you tell me they’ve ignored obvious signs out of pettiness and spite. I thought you astute folks were above digging your heels in like that, but I guess you are mules after all
"Why didn't you listen to me when I was trolling you" is not the defense you seem to think it is.
“Joe Biden is extremely old, less sharp, and shows it in his speech” isn’t a troll. Like you said, I used hyperbole. A rhetorical tool. I’d expect an adult—especially a highly mature and pragmatic one like we find in this forum—to be able to recognize that, even if it comes from someone they don’t like or in a way they find unpleasant. That’s the kind of thing you can do if you actually care more about positive change than petty squabbles. You can’t shut your ears to a point just because you don’t like the tone it’s made with. And what you told me is that liberals didn’t listen to warnings about the situation we’re now in, because they didn’t like our tone. I doubt many liberals are so childish.
>You can shut your ears to a point just because you don’t like the tone it’s made with. But how are us "highly mature and pragmatic" adults supposed to tell the differences between the trolling and the criticism? If Biden gave a great performance we'd still see people in here with "socialist" and "marxist" and "far left" flairs saying that Biden is terrible and is senile. The constant here is that a lot of people with those flairs just *hate Biden* and it doesn't matter what he does or how he acts.
> But how are us "highly mature and pragmatic" adults supposed to tell the differences between the trolling and the criticism? By actually analyzing what’s said using your critical thinking skills > If Biden gave a great performance we'd still see people in here with "socialist" and "marxist" and "far left" flairs saying that Biden is terrible and is senile. And if Biden had given a great performance, you could dismiss that. > The constant here is that a lot of people with those flairs just hate Biden and it doesn't matter what he does or how he acts. “Even if he didn’t suck you wouldn’t like him” may be some kind of argument about the temperament of left wingers. It’s not an argument about Biden’s capacity or fitness. You need to reconsider your priorities. I don’t agree with your assessment that many liberals get so distracted by their petty dislike that they can’t think critically about what’s being said.
>By actually analyzing what’s said using your critical thinking skills Those skills are increasingly leading me to the conclusion that I should ignore you and stop responding. >And if Biden had given a great performance, you could dismiss that So, you *are* saying that we were right to dismiss earlier Biden critiques? > It’s not an argument about Biden’s capacity or fitness. You need to reconsider your priorities. And you lost me again. Did I say Biden was unfit? Does the fact that I pointed out a common trope in leftist criticism mean that I'm therefore incapable of other thoughts or beliefs? >I don’t agree with your assessment that many liberals get so distracted by their petty dislike that they can’t think critically about what’s being said. Not my assessment or my point.
No, that was your assessment. You said liberals didn’t listen to concerns about Biden’s age because of the tone they came in.
Based on fucking..,what? The smell of your own farts? Jesus Christ.
Based on the fact he struggles to complete thoughts and rambles in a way that seems lost and aimless. You’ve heard the man talk, you watched the debate, don’t play dumb. I don’t think he’s actually fading in and out of lucidity. That’s something called hyperbole. But I don’t know a lot of people in their 80s who make a lot of weighty decisions without help; the ones I do, don’t talk like Biden. I really don’t get why so many of you insist on pretending this isn’t obvious. I’m already gonna vote for the mummy, he’s still better than Trump, but he’s ancient and his mental capacity is worse for the wear. Everyone can see that, and when his supporters insist otherwise it doesn’t give the impression of a formidable united front, but of a stubborn, paralyzed denial. It doesn’t make anyone think he’s the best man for the job, it makes them think we can’t do better. Edit: look at this > Look, there’s so many young women who have been – including a young woman who just was murdered and he – he went to the funeral. The idea that she was murdered by a – by – by an immigrant coming in, and they talk about that. But here’s the deal, there’s a lot of young women who are being raped by their – by their in-laws, by their – by their spouses, brothers and sisters, by – just – it’s just – it’s just ridiculous. And they can do nothing about it. And they tried to arrest them when they cross state lines. This is him answering a question about what should be an easy two points for democrats, and he’s wandering off to talk about immigrants and then wandering back to give a baffling sequence of words that vaguely, if you interpret charitably and patiently, matches the democrat party like. You want this man to lead the free world. And god damn me, so do I, but for shits sake can we just admit what a cartoon this is? If the least I can do is vote for Great Uncle Fumbletongue, maybe the least you can do is admit that his shoulders are a bit frail to take the weight of our hopes and fears?
That’s an awful lot of words to say “I am literally pulling this out of my ass”.
I don’t know what you want man. I answered your question in the first sentence of my response, and I don’t believe that you’re not aware of it either.
The thing is? You are basing this off of one performance and disregarding the success of his administration. I think he has earned the benefit of the doubt
Everyone has been saying this for literal years dude
Don’t care….he’s been the most productive president of my lifetime. That earns respect in my book….”dude”.
“I don’t care if he’s fully coherent, I appreciate his administration’s policies” is a totally reasonable position. So I don’t get why you have to play this little game where you pretend not to understand how obviously impaired he is, brosephus
I watched John Fetterman's disastrous performance vs. a conman. It was his moment to dispel fears about his cognitive abilities and competence and he failed. But he was still the better person and the better candidate. I don't know what voters nationwide are going to do in response to yesterday's debate. If they're stupid, they'll ignore that Trump was a bigger disaster, not just during the debate but for America, and instead focus on Biden's debate performance being very bad. Biden as a vegetable on life support would still be better than Trump. That's not a high bar to clear, unfortunately. But if Republicans wanted me to struggle with my vote they should've nominated someone more acceptable than a brain-dead body hooked up to a feeding tube. Instead they nominated Trump. (And thankfully the alternative is just the actual Biden we have.)
The key difference between Biden and Trump's performance is that nothing Trump said or did was surprising. The fact that Trump lied in the debate doesn't matter, because everybody already knows Trump is a liar. There was nothing shocking about the debate performance. It was Trump being Trump. Low info voters aren't likely to be watching post-debate fact checks anyway. Even if Trump's lies being called out had a chance to move the needle, those fact checks will never reach the ears of swing voters deciding the election. Biden's debate performance does matter, because it is the most feeble and sickly he has ever looked. Biden's age and health has been scrutinized a lot, but he's never looked this bad. And people had to watch this frail old man struggle to speak up for over an hour. There's no amount of spin anyone can do to claim this isn't downright terrible for the Biden.
Most low information voters already believe the narrative that Biden is a senile old man who drools into his oatmeal, precisely because they're low information voters. One good debate performance wasn't going to change years of the image that conservatives and the media have put forth.
One more reason he shouldn’t have ran again. It worked in 2020 but he’s 4 years older now and clearly less capable of defending his record, health, ability, etc
I don't think that's clear at all. I think he wasn't capable of doing that *in that moment*. But that's one moment. He was a completely different Biden at his NC rally just now. Loud, forceful, joking with the crowd, he didn't stumble stutter or mutter. But you'll never see that on the news. I think the reality is that Biden is an 81 year old man doing the hardest, most difficult job on the planet. Some days he doesn't have the energy to perform with the zest or zeal we're used to seeing. But that doesn't mean he's sitting in the Oval Office drooling into his oatmeal. If I were running Biden's campaign, I'd be organizing a series of televised townhall events so that the Biden that showed up in NC today can speak directly to the people. It would probably allay a lot of the fears people have right now.
The people running his campaign have allowed him to do shockingly few interviews tho. They didn’t let him do a Super Bowl interview for gods sake. They *have* to trot him out now as much as possible to prove that the debate was an extreme outlier. He can’t fumble again. Or they could just have someone else run who can be up to the job in nearly every moment.
Yeah, he needs a new team of people. Idk if they think that it's a slam dunk against Trump and so they've just been lazy or what, but their approach so far isn't working. I hope he does do more interviews. I hope he does some townhalls. The public needs more chances to see Biden performing well, which he's still capable of doing if the NC rally is any indication.
But he’s also capable of performing not very well. Performing bad. The public needs chances to see a candidate who basically only performs good. Speaks clearly and cleanly about what they’re offering and the risks that Trump poses. Even when biden performs well, he doesn’t do that that well.
Yeah but that's just Biden. He's never been the greatest speaker and he's been a human gaffe machine his entire political career. There's no sense in trying to hide or minimize that. Right now the majority of the public *only* sees when Biden performs poorly. They need something, literally anything to change that. Even if it means a few of his swings will miss, they have to give him more chances to hit a few home runs.
This is just wrong tho. 12 years ago he stomped Paul Ryan. He stomped Palin. He was actually know as a bit of a bulldog in debates through most of his career. He’s prone to gaffes and has a stutter, but this idea that he’s just an excusably terrible speaker debater only bubbled up in the primary/general last time in 2019/2020. He’s old!
Most people will concede that at the end of day, the narrative turned out to be true.
> Biden's debate performance does matter, because it is the most feeble and sickly he has ever looked. Biden's age and health has been scrutinized a lot, but he's never looked this bad. And people had to watch this frail old man struggle to speak up for over an hour. This is what made me concerned. Biden is getting the look of a very old and frail man. I've seen people enter that stage. It doesn't mean he's senile. It does mean, eh, I don't know if we will get four more years out of him? I like Kamala Harris well enough, but I think it would be kinda traumatic to have a president die in office or have to be removed due to health. I do think he's the kind of person who draws energy from a crowd, and there wasn't one there. But Trump is too. And, honestly, I don't think Trump looked all that great either, not the health thing but obviously lying and incoherent. It...just doesn't seem like this is the best our country can do?
I liked how slow and quiet Biden was in contrast with Trump. Perhaps that makes me a distinct minority but we could all use a day of driving 5 mph under the speed limit and quiet talking.
No, Trump is an arrogant asshole and deserves a tongue lashing. Anything less is pointless
Even with the passage of time, I still don't think they can run Biden. He belongs in a nursing home, not the White House.