Julian Castro Picked the Wrong Moment to Challenge Joe Biden at the Democratic Debate

When the third Democratic primary debate folded up shop after nearly three hours Thursday night, broadcaster ABC cut immediately to its panel of Blue Dog Democrats to weigh in on the proceedings. Yvette Simpson featured as the lefty panelist, but the crew was mostly dominated by performatively middle-of-the-road types like Heidi Heitkamp and Rahm Emanuel, the latter of whom jumped on the mic almost immediately to declare that Julian Castro had been "mean" to Joe Biden.

My first thought was that Castro's line for Pete Buttigieg in the debate might apply to Emanuel, as well.

You're competing to see who will face off against Donald Trump, a primally vicious operator whose main skill is identifying weakness and thrashing at it, which has made him the world's most powerful person. It's going to be rough-and-tumble. It should be.

Of course, that exchange came after Castro went after Biden for supposedly forgetting what he'd said about his position on healthcare "two minutes" earlier—the exchange Emanuel blasted as beyond the pale. Castro suggested Biden had said people in certain scenarios—say, those who get laid off—could "opt in" to his public Medicare option when they lose their private health insurance. The former HUD secretary zeroed in on this, declaring that under his own plan, people would be automatically enrolled, and blasting Biden's plan as a betrayal of Barack Obama's vision of universal coverage.

It was a prickly exchange, and for the Biden supporters ABC ushered on-screen afterwards, it was an ugly one. The truth of the back-and-forth wasn't particularly easy to decipher: Earlier in the debate, Biden did say that, "Anyone who can’t afford it gets automatically enrolled in the Medicare-type option we have, et cetera." But he also said, "If you lose the job from your insurance—from your employer, you automatically can buy into this. You don't have—no pre-existing condition can stop you from buying in." The latter would seem to indicate there would be some sort of buy-in process.

But the details seemed secondary. The policy minutiae are probably not going to move the needle for a lot of voters watching—an argument AGAINST! having yet another hour-long session on granular healthcare policy details at the next debate in October. It's the tenor and theater of the proceedings that might.

In that respect, it was clear Castro had prepared this line of attack after weeks of questions—and I was one of the people asking them—on whether Biden's advanced age was affecting his public performances. The former vice president would be 78 on Inauguration Day, and he's had a number of episodes on the campaign trail that add up to more than just a few gaffes of the kind that have been peppered throughout his sprawling public career. He thought, for instance, that he was vice president during the Parkland shooting, and met with survivors in that capacity. When you're asking to be given the nuclear codes, is it ageist for the public to demand assurances about your mental performance? After all, we're getting a lesson right now in the consequences when you install a president who may not have all of his faculties.

And after all, Biden showcased later on in the debate why these questions persist. Castro's barb was tenuous, but just have a look at Biden's answer when asked about his comments, decades ago, on reparations for slavery.

Here's the transcript of that one.

And then he started talking about Venezuela. Remember, this question was about reparations. Biden skirted that like many politicians might, but then he went down a winding cul-de-sac about school psychologists, and, "School. Not daycare. School," and then suggested someone—parents? teachers?—put the television on at night. Except then he corrected himself to say "record player." What?

The moderator turned to Castro, looking for another conflagration, but the man at the end of the stage pretty much spoke for everyone watching.

It's not a nice business, politics, and not just because the people who get into it are ambitious and ruthless. The stakes are goddamn high. And we've learned over the last two-and-a-half-going-on-three years that you've got to be sure the person you're putting in the top job is firing on all cylinders.

There's no comparing Joe Biden to the incumbent in terms of basic human decency and empathy. There's no comparing them on knowledge of the issues. The answer Biden offered on a question about our Forever War in Afghanistan showcased the kind of nuanced understanding of the dynamics within the country that Trump somehow has not acquired by setting himself up Clockwork Orange-style every morning to watch Fox & Friends. It's the kind of grasp you get from sitting in the Situation Room as the vice president. Trump senses Afghanistan is a quagmire, but he would never bother to find out exactly why. He lacks even the basic curiosity that someone like Biden can call on, along with the knowledge and experience and rudimentary emotional intelligence.

Biden will not be the vicious know-nothing Trump is, and hopefully he will not be ranting about how energy-saving lightbulbs make him look orange, but he will be 82 by the end of his first term. It cannot possibly be "ageist" to ask how old you can be and still handle the rigors of running for and serving as president. This is supposed to be about all of us, after all. It's all of our futures, not just Biden's, that are on the line here.

You Might Also Like

• HOW TO FIND THE PERFECT SUNGLASSES FOR YOUR FACE SHAPE

• If You Don’t Have a Denim Shirt Yet, What’s Stopping You?

• Why You'll Never Understand Mezcal Like You Understand Scotch