Sixteen months remain until voters go to the ballot box and pass judgment on the spectacle that is the Trump presidency. Sixteen long months of mostly petty or toxic news cycles. Only a fool would assign significance to something right now.
I'll take the bait. In watching the second of the two Democratic debates last week, it was far too easy to understand the skeptics' initial view of Joe Biden's candidacy. There was the 76-year-old vice president playing defense, left exposed to the onslaught of younger or sharper colleagues.
And it wasn't just his confrontation with Kamala Harris over Biden's history on the busing issue. It was all the moments you suspected he was trying to skirt one of the tough "show of hands" questions by sort of raising his hand or maybe asking a point of clarification.
It was all the times Biden pivoted an inquiry or criticism to the "I was in the room for the big decision" or "I was in the room for the follow-up decision to clean up the mess made by the first decision" talking points when the real issue at hand was his judgment in the first place.
After Biden enjoyed a significant polling bounce in the weeks following his campaign launch, Serious People declared that his electability overshadowed all shortcomings. Beating Trump was paramount, and Biden was the only guarantee.
But in watching Biden live, in relitigating the triumphs and tragedies of nearly 50 years of policymaking and politics, warts and all, you wonder if there's a better path forward. You wonder if we can break from the past without rejecting Biden or dismissing what he accomplished for his party and his country. Biden was the essence of mainstream Democratic thought for decades, so any (justified) reckoning with his record should extend to the entire party.
Two things can coexist. Joe Biden can be a respected and decent man who loved and served his country, who made us laugh and brought comfort to some people wary of voting for a young senator from Illinois, who lived through terrible loss and proved that relationships still mattered in Washington. Joe Biden can also be a man who entered politics in the Nixon years and is now disconnected from the priorities and challenges of younger generations, a man who was on the wrong side of too many big moments, and a man who does not offer the same forceful contrast to Trump as other rivals might.
The question is, can we accept both things to be true and move on? - MS
The frontrunner for worst take of the year goes to...
The Washington Post for printing this opinion piece from Robert Samuelson. How are we defining "presidential"? Have you checked in on the White House of late, Robert?
+ Women score higher than men on most measures of leadership, according to Harvard Business Review. But they don't look or sound like leaders, right?
"For a demagogue, shamelessness is its own reward."
+ Here's your periodic reminder that the president has crafted a narrative that he received next to no financial support from his real estate mogul father, Fred Trump. In reality, the elder Trump lent his son tens of millions of dollars, often fueled by dubious tax schemes.
After we're gone
"'We’re deleting thousands of families from Iraqi society,' the official told me. 'This is not just revenge on ISIS. This is revenge on Sunnis.'" Iraq's bloody campaign of revenge is throwing due process to the wind.
+ Vietnam continues to search for the remains of more than 300,000 soldiers from a war that ended 45 years ago.
Recent podcast episodes that stuck with me:
My Dad's Friendship With Charles Barkley (WBUR) - If you only have time for one, make it this one.
Russ Roberts on life as an economics educator (Conversations with Tyler)
Being Mindful of Race with Ruth King (10% Happier)
Dying of Whiteness with Jonathan Metzl (Why Is This Happening?)
Cal Newport has an answer for digital burnout (The Ezra Klein Show)