“May you live in interesting times” is reputedly a Chinese curse — although one that most likely emanated from a British statesman. Nevertheless, it applies to the presidential race. We recently witnessed an assassination attempt of Donald Trump. Then Joe Biden bowed out of the race. He couldn’t shake questions about his mental acuity after his disastrous debate performance.
In this context, “interesting” suggests troubling times — and that’s certainly true. We rarely agree with Biden’s policies, but admire his decision to step down. His supporters spun the episode as just “one bad debate,” but that didn’t stick. Since June 27, the president did nothing to alleviate — and some things to confirm — fears that he’s not up to a tough campaign.
Americans — including members of this editorial board — vociferously disagree about whether Trump is a wannabe authoritarian whose re-election threatens our republic, or a norm-breaking disruptor who is challenging a moribund government. Based on their pronouncements, Biden and most Democrats believe the former. It takes courage to step away from power to give his party a better chance to, in their view, save democracy. Hats off to him.
That decision doesn’t alleviate questions about how the nation got to this point. It’s reasonable to wonder whether members of Biden’s inner circle concealed the aging president’s deterioration. Democratic leaders berated the media and party members who raised such questions a year ago, when the president could have more gracefully bowed out. What did they know and when did they know it?
Typically, political parties are about loyalty rather than truth-telling — which also explains why Republicans have defended (or ignored) every irrational statement, cruel social-media post and rambling incoherence from their nominee. We’ve also learned the media is largely ill-equipped to deal with the “interesting” new political and social-media times, where balanced coverage falls between the cracks of the online conspiracy and outrage mill.
We’re entering unusual although not entirely uncharted territory, as the Democrats struggle to choose a nominee before — or during — their Aug. 19-22 convention in Chicago. The party’s infamous 1968 convention also took place in Chicago after President Lyndon B. Johnson pulled out of the race five months earlier. He handed his delegates to Vice President Hubert Humphrey, who gained the nomination but lost the election to Richard M. Nixon. Anti-Vietnam-War riots at the Chicago event helped doom the Democratic ticket.
Biden, of course, endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris — and most major Democrats have followed suit, although former President Barack Obama hasn’t done so. We’ll have plenty to say about Harris and her disappointing tenure as U.S. senator and California attorney general if she secures the nomination. But that’s not certain. Delegates will likely hold a vote before the confab. If they can’t agree on a nominee, the party will have an open convention like the madhouse in 1968. As The Washington Post wryly noted, “The potential for chaos is high.”
Top Republicans are suggesting the Democrats’ late-game nominee selection is undemocratic — an ironic position given Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Others say Biden ought to also resign as president. After all, he’s too diminished to run a vigorous race.
It’s all very interesting. We wish it were less so.
