Sign up decisionThis is a newsletter covering the 2024 elections.
The first question on January 6th was asked at 41 minutes.
Donald Trump responded with outrageous lies, which ultimately resulted in him seemingly blaming Nancy Pelosi's documentary-writer daughter.
Then, to be fair, CNN host Jake Tapper asked President Joe Biden: Did he really mean to say that Trump voters were a danger to democracy?
Biden messed up that answer, as he did many others. The octogenarian president botched the Atlanta debate stage. But it wasn’t just Biden.
Everything about this event was designed to blur the choice before the American people. The two candidates, the incumbent president and the convicted criminal, were both referred to as “president.” The questions dealt with the attempted coup as one of many issues. The candidates were left to monitor or not monitor the truth of each other's statements. That was nobody else's business.
It may not be a coincidence that the modern televised presidential debates were born at a time of national political consensus. In 1960, John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon presented viewers with a choice that was very familiar in an era when there were only three major channels and a limited number of mass-market products. You could choose between two very similar products, Crest or Colgate, to meet similar needs. One might be a little minty, the other a little spicy, but both worked. We live in a very different world now, a world where choices are much more existential, but we still maintain the Crest vs. Colgate format.
How could that be? We live in a political culture where some Americans think the most important issue of our time is the attempted violent overthrow of the Constitution, while others think it is Hunter Biden's laptop. There are means and institutions that can mediate these differences. That is elections. But televised debates cannot do that. Televised debates cannot be conducted without the consent of both sides. Televised debates are therefore designed to inevitably ratify the concept of “both sides.”
There will likely be a heated debate about Biden’s leadership in the Democratic Party. All sorts of plans will be made to replace him. They may be feasible, but they probably won’t be. Amid the commotion, it’s important to remember that this election isn’t about Biden. It’s about you and your commitments and values. Biden is just a tool. Like any tool, he’s imperfect. But an imperfect tool is better than a potential dictator who demands a cult of personality.
A century ago, socialist leader (and presidential candidate) Eugene V. Debs chastised his idolizing followers: “I wouldn't lead you to the promised land if I could, because if I did, someone else would lead you. You have to use your head as well as your hands, and get out of your present situation.”
Americans must save themselves from the threat of Trump. It cannot be delegated to a charismatic savior. After all, that charismatic savior has not yet appeared. Television has always been keen to reduce active human beings to passive viewers. The presidential debate format has been particularly suited to this purpose. “Would you prefer the candidate wearing a red tie or the candidate wearing a blue tie?”
This latest debate has taught us the dangers of the crowd. Saving democracy from Trump is not a job for old men on a fancy stage, but for people who care about saving democracy. Biden’s apparent weakness has made that job worse and more difficult, but it has also made clear whose job it is. It’s not his job. It’s your job.