Email to Congressman Jamie Raskin in the wake of President Biden's interview with George Stephanopoulos

On July 2, Thomas Friedman published a thoughtful and persuasive op-ed in the New York Times explaining why Joe Biden should step aside from the 2024 Democratic Presidential Nomination.  It seemed quite persuasive.

President Biden is now seeking to convince people that he is, in fact, up to being the standard bearer of the Democratic Party (and thus the forces who want to continue the American Experiment as envisioned by Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Martin Luther King, and Barack Obama) against Donald Trump's Republican Party.  

So I watched with interest George Stephanopoulos' interview with President Biden this evening.  Afterwards, Bobbi and I wrote this to our Congressman, the great and good Jamie Raskin.

Dear Congressman Raskin,

 

We just listened to President Biden’s interview with George Stephanopoulos. The questioning was fair and sympathetic.

 

However, the President’s answers did not give us confidence that he is the best choice to lead us in the campaign to defeat Donald Trump and his MAGA crew.  The stakes are too high to nominate someone who is much less likely to win than other Democrats, including Vice President Harris.  We urge you to join with your colleagues in the Democratic Party Leadership to tell the President that, in the interest of the country, he should step aside as the nominee.

 

While the President correctly pointed out how much he has accomplished in the White House, he did not satisfactorily answer the relevant concern:  Whether he is cognitively able to perform at the level we need if we are to be able to mobilize enough voters to defeat Trump.

 

The President did not give clear answers as to whether he had had a thorough medical examination regarding his cognitive abilities.  Rather, he kept saying that he knows he can do the job.  We have no doubt that he believes this in good faith.  But this has been a big concern, particularly among those who have seen declines – often steep declines – of their elderly relatives and friends. This can be hard for the person in decline to admit.  But in this situation, it is necessary.

 

The President turned every question about his ability to continue by talking about the job he had already done.  That is understandable, but not useful.  The point is whether he can CONTINUE to be an effective political leader in the current environment.  Nothing he said assuaged our concern.  Last week’s debate was not just a “poor performance.”  It was a performance that leads voters to legitimately worry that he would not be able to be a 24/7 President. 

 

The debate showed the country an incumbent President who could not complete thoughts and sentences and who was unable to effectively respond to Trump’s firehose of dangerous lies.  As a result, many of us began to fear that he would not be able to be an effective candidate in the next four crucial months leading up to the November election.  The President’s record has been very good.  But there are others who have been part of the progress of the last several years who could pick up the banner and make a more effective case to the American voters.  And, perhaps most significantly, the continuing discussion about the incumbent President’s cognitive situation is distracting from public focus on the existential threat the former President poses to the American Experiment.  This distraction can only be eliminated if President Biden steps down from running.

 

We had hoped that the President’s “inner circle” would convince him to step aside.  That does not appear to be happening.  So it is the responsibility of our most respected Democratic leaders to jointly urge him to step aside.  This may be an even more challenging act of patriotism than your brave and effective resistance to Trump.  But it is necessary.

 

Stephanopoulos ended his interview by asking the President how he would feel in January 2025 if he ran and lost in November.  The President responded that he would know that he did everything he could to prevent the loss.  But he could not admit to the possibility that the most important thing he could do would be to step aside NOW.  This crisis is not about him, but about the country.