Ponderings on Presidents’ Day

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has been the Managing Editor of Ordinary Times since 2018, is a widely published opinion writer, and appears in media, radio, and occasionally as a talking head on TV. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter@four4thefire. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast. Subscribe to Andrew'sHeard Tell Substack for free here:

Related Post Roulette

50 Responses

  1. Pinky
    Ignored
    says:

    I think you’re overestimating both of our presumptive candidates.

    I’ve been thinking about this a lot, and whether it indicates that the primary system is broken. Our current primary system came about after the catastrophic 1968 Democratic Convention and then Watergate. Things change in 50 years, and it’s at least worth thinking about making changes to our primary system. But I’m struck by the fact that every one of the candidates in the past 50 years does generally represent the largest or second largest faction within his respective party. I consider Trump an exception in many ways, but he at least governed as if he did. Both of our likely choices have a presidential term in which they’ve governed to their party’s satisfaction. So I can’t say that the party system is broken.

    It’s more like the voters are broken. They’ve regularly nominated people who lack the character to be president, and this time they’re supporting (at least) one candidate who lacks the physical and mental capacity. They’re convinced it doesn’t matter. And again, since each of these men has had a presidential term that generally represents their parties, they have a good argument that the candidate doesn’t matter.

    But I don’t like that conclusion. My gut says that the voters are really messing up, and no matter how much the winning party and the administration members control the direction of the country, character and ability matter a ton, and we’ve gotten used to something we should never have accepted.Report

  2. InMD
    Ignored
    says:

    I don’t want to pretend nothing has gone awry. But it’s always worth mentioning that Washington was not without criticism or controversy in his day, and it’s really only in retrospect that legacies are determined. The thing Washington did that will always make him outsized not just in American history, but world history, is his decision to walk away when he had no obligation to, and the precedent it set for our national character. IMO that’s something worth celebrating. The fact that it’s hard to imagine many prominent national politicians doing that today illustrates the dimension in which they fall short.Report

  3. Saul Degraw
    Ignored
    says:

    Joe Biden is pretty damn worthy of the officeReport

    • Damon in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      Maybe going into this first term, but he’s memory problems, well documented, render him a figure head. I doubt he even knows where he is half the time. Of course, the other possible candidate, at this point, is terrible too.Report

    • Pinky in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      By this point, Biden being unfit for office is likely an uncontroversial opinion. You don’t have to agree with it, but you should expect to encounter it, and probably need to formulate an argument against it.Report

      • Greg In Ak in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        The argument would involve tfg doing coups, found liable for sexual assault, liable for fraud mult times and having various horrible ideas like the prez is above the law. That’s an easy case and i know how each of these things would be unconvincingly argued against.

        Biden is also going a pretty damn good job at foreign policy given the crappy hand he was dealt.Report

        • Pinky in reply to Greg In Ak
          Ignored
          says:

          Trump being unfit for office is equally uncontroversial. What’s your point?Report

          • Jaybird in reply to Pinky
            Ignored
            says:

            What about Ronald Reagan?Report

          • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
            Ignored
            says:

            Trump: absolutely unfit for office (on many fronts). Biden: someone preferable can easily imagined, but in the context of being an experienced front man for a capable and not particularly corrupt administration, easily makes the “fit for office” grade. No one sane expects POTUS to be the smartest, most capable person in the world…just the leader of a dedicated team that may add up to something like that.Report

            • Koz in reply to rexknobus
              Ignored
              says:

              This was more credible six months or so ago, but right this second it’s basically so much lib copium.

              Specifically the idea being circulated by a lot of prominent libs and NeverTrumpers that the point of this election is about getting rid of Trump to the exclusion of all other things, well that idea is in the process of being repudiated right now imo.

              This cycle is the most fundamentally unpredictable of my lifetime, and there are _a lot_ of outcomes which are legitimately in play.

              If I had to guess, Trump is winning the race as it stands right now by a healthy margin. But strictly in horse-race terms I’d still rather be Biden than Trump.

              As we get closer and closer to Election Day and the intensity of the camaign increases, I suspect Trump will do some ugly-Trumpy things in a context where people are paying attention, in way where people recoil and remember why they were so happy to get rid of Trump the first time.

              But like I said, that’s just a guess. Right now, the tide is with Trump and against Biden.Report

            • Pinky in reply to rexknobus
              Ignored
              says:

              I think you’re making the argument that we don’t need a fit president, and most of the time we probably don’t.Report

              • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                “Fit” is doing a lot of work there. By “fit” do we mean the smartest, toughest, most knowledgable person anywhere? Probably not. By “fit” I’m satisfied, as I was in many jobs that I have held, with having a good administrator. One who didn’t need to know it all, but needed to know who did and wasn’t afraid to access that knowledge. Biden may not be the perfect choice. He may not be my favorite, but this is a two choice system. You get to pick one or the other or just not participate. No other effective actions are available. That anyone, anyone, thinks that there are any criteria where TFG is superior, or even admissible as a choice, sincerely confuses me. Our system puts the president at the head of an administration. We have seen TFG’s. We have seen Biden’s. Honestly, is there any real doubt who is better at the job?Report

              • Pinky in reply to rexknobus
                Ignored
                says:

                Biden and Trump are unfit for office. “Unfit” isn’t doing a lot of work there. It’s doing just as much work as it should.Report

              • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Yeah, I guess we are at an impasse. One of these guys is absolutely “unfit” to me, and the other is “less desirable.” Very different concepts for me, but not for you.Report

              • Pinky in reply to rexknobus
                Ignored
                says:

                I can see them as different concepts. I would vote for generic Republican over generic Democrat, while understanding why people choose differently. I can even understand why people would feel like they have to vote for Biden or Trump. But this is exactly the kind of occasion for faithless electors to intervene. Neither is fit to run the country.Report

              • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Maybe I’m getting a bit lost here. What does “fit to run the country” even mean? No president actually “runs the country.” We’ve had comatose, or senile, or venal, or spectacularly corrupt, or just plain dumb bunnies as president. And yet the country got “run.” No president has ever had 100% approval or disapproval. All have had supporters and detractors. It’s not some absolute value. Therefore it’s always some kind of comparison, and a binary one at that. You continually equate TFG and B as “unfit” without noting the differences between their “unfitness.” Those differences are huge. We’ve seen them both in action, both as presidents and as human beings. To equate them is a simple ploy, but not very productive. My understanding is that a large number of people really want there to be two other folks running for the office. Me too. Doesn’t look as if that is going to happen. So, to me, the choice is obvious. No equivalence in “fitness” at all. So, because I find your comments interesting and enlightening, I would like to see you write up a posting wherein you list the pros and cons of each of our current choices and how those add up to any sort of equivalency. Cheers.Report

              • Pinky in reply to rexknobus
                Ignored
                says:

                I don’t consider either of them choices. I can’t justify casting a vote for either of them. I don’t mean that it’s a tough choice; I mean that it’s an impossible one. I can’t cast a vote for Donald Trump – who could? I can’t cast a vote for Joe Biden – who could? Trump is morally and maybe cognitively incapable of serving as the executive of the country. Biden is cognitively and maybe morally incapable of serving as the executive of the country. We’ve had corrupt or cognitively impaired presidents before, but I don’t think a person can justify voting for one.Report

              • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Fair enough. It’s an unfortunate year. I haven’t seen that much evidence of what you mention concerning Biden, but I guess there’s some. Anybody in the wings (pun intended) that you would vote for?Report

              • Pinky in reply to rexknobus
                Ignored
                says:

                If one of the minor parties has a candidate I could support and makes it on the ballot, I’ll throw my vote away on him. Otherwise, not even a throwing motion for me. It’s just going to sit there blank.

                Have you seen Biden’s special counsel press conference? It’s only maybe 15 minutes. If my dad was in that state, I wouldn’t let him on the phone with his bank.Report

              • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                O.k., as you recommended, I watched the press conference. (I guess I’m not sure it’s the same one, but what I watched was about 12 minutes on NBC and C-SPAN and had the usual opening statement from B and then a Doocy question and then lots of shouting by reporters and Biden responding to questions). I’m going to get a little bit stronger in my response than I have been. What the hell are you talking about? He is absolutely coherent, absolutely on point, energetic in his responses, and even owns up to his own fault in not handling the transfer of the documents as he wishes he had, and all that in a pretty stressful situation. If that person at that moment doesn’t meet your standards of a functioning intellect, then you have a real problem with your prejudices. Now, possibly we are referring to different occasions, but this was a press conference with lots of shouting and noise, and the man did better than fine, he did great. What the heck do you want?Report

              • Pinky in reply to rexknobus
                Ignored
                says:

                Feb 8, 2024?Report

              • rexknobus in reply to Pinky
                Ignored
                says:

                Yup. I challenge you to find anything wrong with how he is functioning. Watch it. If anyone is listening to this exchange, watch the Feb 8, 2024 press conference and weigh in on the man’s performance. Glad to hear some opinions. I see no problem…at all.Report

              • Philip H in reply to rexknobus
                Ignored
                says:

                I don’t see a problem either, except he’s not a conservative republican giving conservative republican answers.Report

            • Chip Daniels in reply to rexknobus
              Ignored
              says:

              I’m not even seeing any real evidence for Biden being “unfit”.Report

              • Koz in reply to Chip Daniels
                Ignored
                says:

                There’s the Biden Crime Family-type stuff, which nobody cares about but has produced the goods more than enough to not get boomeranged on.

                More important for the campaign, there’s the eye test, which Biden has consistently flunked since Afghanistan.

                Biden is old, but the problem goes substantially past that. Ie he’s old, not that bright in the best of circumstances, and he’s only coherent for two hours a day, four tops.

                Right now, the Demos are split between trying to sweep the whole thing under the rug and blame anybody who bring it up, and Yglesias types who say Biden should be leaning on staff less and do more public media.

                Maybe there’s alternative universe where Matt is right, but this world that ain’t happening specifically because Biden can’t be trusted to hold it together.

                And when he does lose it, it’s far better for the Demos is Biden is inside where nobody can see it.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Koz
                Ignored
                says:

                Biden crime family stuff huh? Based on what the now discredited fabrications of an indicted liar? That Biden crime family?

                Look we all get it. There is no Democrat you will ever support, no matter how much you have pivoted away from Trump. But you don’t need to be clown yourself by parroting fox ne s talking points in support of a man who doesn’t know who Nancy Pelosi is.Report

              • Koz in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                Biden crime family stuff huh? Based on what the now discredited fabrications of an indicted liar? That Biden crime family?

                Based on patterns of criminality and corruption relating to Joe, Hunter and Jim that have been largely swept under the rug by Demo-friendly media.

                I don’t think normie America cares about this. Tbh I don’t care about it very much.

                Nonetheless I don’t think Biden is going to want his or Hunter’s financial history to gain any traction, which is yet another narrative burden Demo’s are going to have to carry.

                Look we all get it. There is no Democrat you will ever support, no matter how much you have pivoted away from Trump.

                That’s just it. One of the reasons why I know the last six months or whatever have been legit good for Trump winning in November is that I’m personally moving toward Trump. If the election were held today (and I were registered) tbh I’m not sure what I’d do.

                Like I wrote before, for libs like you and the more obnoxious NeverTrumpers, the point of the election is that Trump has to go, over and above any other consideration.

                We may yet be living in that world in November, but we’re not now.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Koz
                Ignored
                says:

                Hunter’s indictments are well reported. And unlike TFG Biden keeps releasing his tax records and always has.

                Was hunter likely trading on the family name? Yes. So are all of TFGs kids – including a son in law who got a billion Saudi dollars after serving officially in the last administration. But clearly you are ok with that sort of corruption.Report

              • Dark Matter in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                To be fair, Hunter was so out of control he was giving his bank cards to hookers and drug dealers to get cash for him.

                To be even more fair, this is Hunter and not Joe. As fun as it is to connect them, that doesn’t seem to have been a thing.Report

              • Koz in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                But clearly you are ok with that sort of corruption.

                Actually, no. If I do end up voting for Biden (and I might) things like that will be a large part of the reason why.Report

              • Philip H in reply to Koz
                Ignored
                says:

                And yet I don’t recall you ever dissing the Trump Crime Family.Report

              • Koz in reply to Philip H
                Ignored
                says:

                Maybe I didn’t write anything, but more probably you just missed it.

                I have quite a bit of respect for Melania (and for that matter I have no beef against Barron or Tiffany).

                Nobody of any political inclination seems to have any use for Jared or Ivanka. Though, in what seems like the most unrealistic foreign policy development of all time, Jared deserves substantial credit for bringing peace and realignment to the Middle East.

                But in general, they are all turds and I hope they all go down the same toilet as The Donald.Report

      • Philip H in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        My argument is 23 straight months of positive job growth, coming out of the pandemic. My argument is steadily declining inflation. My argument is new computer chip manufacturing plants bringing critical supply chains out of the hands of China.

        And that’s just what comes to mind at the end of a long day of science conferences.Report

        • Brandon Berg in reply to Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          My argument is 23 straight months of positive job growth, coming out of the pandemic. My argument is steadily declining inflation.

          Come on, man. You know better than this. The President just doesn’t have enough control over macroeconomic stuff like this. Do you want to give Trump credit for rapid real wage growth and unemployment reaching the lowest level in 50 years?

          But in this particular case, Biden actually deserves considerably less than no credit for these, because he really fished up spectacularly.

          The credit for the quick recovery, which was already more than halfway complete by the time Biden took office, goes to the vaccine researchers and (ugh!) Trump administration for pushing to get it out so soon, not the Biden administration.

          Then one of Biden’s first major legislative “victories” was the ARP, a huge burst of deficit spending at a time when there was no macroeconomic justification for it, exacerbated by his unilateral decision—again, not even arguably justified by the economic circumstances—to extend the student loan payment pause until the Republicans forced him to end it 2 1/2 years later.

          This huge burst of deficit spending at a time when the economy was already growing robustly and people still had plenty of pandemic savings to spend caused aggregate demand to increase at a rate far faster than real production could keep up, leading to rapidly rising inflation.

          Yes, the fact that the Fed kept its foot on the gas didn’t help, nor did temporary supply bottlenecks due to COVID and the Russian war, but Biden’s reckless deficit spending really did make inflation worse, causing it to peak at 9% instead of perhaps 6%.

          It’s the Federal Reserve bringing inflation down, not the Biden Administration. Furthermore, because the Fed has to fight Biden’s deficit spending, they’ve had to raise rates higher and longer, greatly increasing the interest on Federal debt, which is why we’re on track for a $1.8 trillion deficit this year.Report

          • Philip H in reply to Brandon Berg
            Ignored
            says:

            So if a president should get no credit, why do they get the blame? Can’t have it both ways.Report

            • Koz in reply to Philip H
              Ignored
              says:

              Of course we can. That, in particular, is the legacy of Afghanistan.

              Anything bad that happens is the result of Biden’s bad motives or lack of intelligence, energy or engagement, eg Afghanistan or border crossings. Anything good that happens, Biden was just there warming the chair and would have happened without him.

              And it’s going to stay that way until Biden can meaningfully demonstrate some energy, stamina, or engagement to the American people, to the point where he’s something more than an NPC figurehead for Team Blue.

              Of course, our team has our share of problems with Trump, probably worse.

              However, the idea that this election is about repudiating Trump over and above everything else, that had a lot of traction six months or a year ago. Now, not as much.Report

        • Pinky in reply to Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          Steadily declining inflation would mean the second derivative of CPI, correct? Biden’s been in office for 36 months, and that number went up 20 months, down 15, steady 1. The slope of the change in CPI is -.02%, which is to say that one bad month could reverse it.Report

      • Pinky in reply to Pinky
        Ignored
        says:

        Nate Silver – “Biden is probably a below-replacement-level candidate at this point because Americans have a lot of extremely rational concerns about the prospect of a Commander-in-Chief who would be 86 years old by the end of his second term. It is entirely reasonable to see this as disqualifying. The fact that Trump also has a number of disqualifying features is not a good reason to nominate Biden. It is a reason for Democrats to be the adults in the room and acknowledge that someone who can’t sit through a Super Bowl interview isn’t someone the public can trust to have the physical and mental stamina to handle an international crisis, terrorist attack or some other unforseen threat when he’ll be in his mid-80s.”

        https://www.natesilver.net/p/its-time-for-the-white-house-to-putReport

    • Brandon Berg in reply to Saul Degraw
      Ignored
      says:

      It’s okay to say that Biden is trash, but that we should still vote for him because he’s better than Trump. That’s a totally respectable position to take.

      This is not.Report

  4. LeeEsq
    Ignored
    says:

    We should celebrate President’s Day with civic ceremonies like gladiator games and chariot races. That would bring the country together like ancient Rome.Report

  5. Burt Likko
    Ignored
    says:

    The OP describes Biden as “old and corrupt.” But the article it links to describes Biden as “old and forgetful.” Indeed, like the special counsel’s report it analyzes, it acquits Biden of willful wrongdoing based upon the possibility that Biden lacked enough mental capacity to form the requisite intent.

    A lawyerly point, but hey, I’m a lawyer.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *