Biden Somehow Even Failed on His Best Issue in Last Night’s Debate

A few years ago—maybe even a few months ago—President Joe Biden could have waxed eloquent on foreign policy at a moment’s notice, highlighting the main talking points on a wide range of issues, unraveling their complexities, and persuasively presenting himself as a man who has immersed himself in the subject for decades.

The fact that he failed to do so in Thursday’s debate—that he could not shoot down Donald Trump’s most easily lobbed libels and lies, much less make a coherent case for his approach to the world’s challenges—ranks high among the night’s shockers.

Some Democrats tried to spin it as merely a “bad night.” Some noted that all incumbent presidents have done poorly in their first debates against a challenger. But Biden’s flameout was something else entirely. Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama—they all underestimated their opponent and assumed their vaunted status as leader of the free world exempted them from the need to prepare. By contrast, Biden knew what to expect from Trump and reportedly prepared extensively for the debate at Camp David.

The big, possibly irredeemable problem with Biden’s performance—looking every bit his 81 years, feeble, sometimes unable to string together a sentence—was that it seemed to confirm the worst suspicions about whether he’s up for another four years on the job. When reality matches stereotype for a politician, a bad night can turn into a catastrophe.

For his part, Trump acted as loathsome as ever. “Our veterans and our soldiers can’t stand this guy,” he said of his opponent, the commander in chief. If the 2020 election hadn’t been stolen, he went on, Vladimir Putin “would have never invaded Ukraine … just like Israel would never have been invaded in a million years by Hamas” because “Iran was broke.”

Biden replied, “I’ve never heard so much malarkey in my life.” He was right, but he didn’t elaborate. He could have. Biden has raised military pay and vastly improved the Veterans Administration. Trump has said he would end the war in Ukraine by cutting off U.S. aid to Kyiv—hardly words to make Putin tremble. (Trump has long hated Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whom he insulted later in the debate as a “salesman” who bilks us out of billions of dollars.) How a Trump presidency would have prevented Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack is a mystery. (Iran didn’t fund it, and in any case, the sanctions Trump imposed by pulling out of the Iran nuclear accord—a move, by the way, that has now allowed Tehran to come closer than ever to building an atomic bomb—are still in effect.)

At one point, Biden criticized Trump for saying that he wouldn’t defend NATO allies from an attack—and in fact would encourage Putin to attack them—unless they spent more on defense. Trump shrugged and replied, not for the first time, that his threat spurred them to spend more. Biden had no rejoinder. It’s true that the allies’ arms spending rose during Trump’s term, but this trend began in 2014, three years before Trump took office, in reaction to Putin’s annexation of Crimea and incursions into eastern Ukraine—a trend that continued (and still continues) as Putin’s aggression intensified. That, not Trump’s rhetoric, was the cause of the increase.

There were so many questions (about foreign and domestic issues) Trump refused to answer‍—whether he agreed with Putin’s terms for a cease-fire, what he thinks about the idea of a Palestinian state (he talked instead about how good he is at striking trade deals), how he would counter climate change (he changed the topic to how much support he gets from police departments).

Then there were Trump’s outright calumnies. Biden, he claimed, is destroying Social Security “because millions of people are pouring into our country” and “they’re living in luxury hotels.” “He’s destroyed our country.” “He has become like a Palestinian but they don’t like him because he’s a very bad Palestinian, he’s a weak one.” “Joe could be a convicted felon with all of the things he’s done. He’s done horrible things … the worst presidency in the history of our country.” “He caused the inflation and it’s killing Black families and Hispanic families and just about everybody. … They can’t buy groceries anymore. They can’t. You look at the cost of food where it’s doubled and tripled and quadrupled.” “The millions of people that he’s allowed to come in through the border … they’re taking Black jobs and they’re taking Hispanic jobs.” “What he is doing is destroying all the medical programs because of the migrants.” “He wants to raise your taxes by four times.” “He gets paid by China, he’s a Manchurian candidate.” “We’re a failing nation because of him. His policies are so bad. His military policies are insane. … He will drive us into World War III.”

It would be hard for anyone to fend off such an intense shitstorm of lies, but staying above the fray, sweeping away the distractions, focusing on the stakes and contrasts of this election—that shouldn’t have been such a struggle. This Trump was the same Trump who claimed, back in 2016, that America was a hellhole and he was the only one who could dig us all out. He’s a narcissist, and not a very bright one. There are ways to deal with such miscreants, but the president stumbled. His most impassioned moment came when Trump claimed Biden couldn’t hit a golf ball 50 yards, and Biden shot back that he’d got his handicap down to 6 as vice president, adding, “I’m happy to play golf if you carry your own bag. Think you can do it?” Touché, but really? Biden mustered off one of his sharpest ripostes to counter an insult of his golf game?

Trump had an edge in the polls going into this debate. Biden and his team hoped the event would turn things around, reset the terms of discussion, erase the notion that he’s too old for the job. Instead, it deepened the perception, so much so that it may be impossible for him to dig his way out.

Meanwhile, the debate also confirmed that a second Trump presidency would be absolutely ruinous—not only to our country and the future of our democracy but also to the rest of the world. Even before the debate, allies were alarmed—and adversaries were thrilled—by the prospect. Friday morning, they no doubt started calculating their dangers, options, and opportunities in earnest.

It is quite likely, after this debate, that Biden cannot win. Most of his policies are popular (to the extent that people know what they are), but it’s long been clear—and should now be starkly so—that the impediment to victory is the man. Trump is still unpopular, and the debate couldn’t have boosted his fortunes except to the extent that it ravaged Biden’s. The fate of the Congress is also at stake. In many districts, Democratic candidates for the House and Senate are polling better than Biden—and the more the appeal of the man at the top of the ticket declines, so do the prospects for his partisans in down-ticket races.

The conclusion is clear: What’s needed is Bidenism without Biden. For the good of the party, the nation, and the world, and for the sake of his legacy in history, Biden should step aside, release his delegates, and let a brokered Convention select a candidate better suited for this election and this era.

Slate wants to help. Submit your questions here. It’s anonymous! No question is too dumb—or too existential.