It appears that former President Joe Biden, in his melancholic farewell address to Democrats, was quick to affirm that ‘America is winning’, an assertion critics might consider dubious at best. This farewell speech, he’d hoped, would signal the beginning of his reelection bid. However, timing being an unpredictable force in politics, this grand send-off came unexpectedly late on the first night of the Democratic National Convention, a characteristic many attribute to Biden’s reputation for poor punctuality.
Biden’s speech lasted nearly an hour, eclipsing the long-drawn tributes to the Vice President, Kamala Harris. Was the intention to keep the applause for Biden insulated to the late-night viewership? The emphasis seemed more geared toward glorifying a politically ‘safe’ choice rather than emphasizing real strides in leadership.
Throughout the evening, event speakers mostly emphasized the historical relevancy of Kamala Harris’s candidacy. However, this attempt to cast her in a positive light only served to eclipse the focus on Biden’s legacy. It raised a critical question: was the convention cherishing the legacy of a forgettable one-term president or prematurely commanding unwarranted veneration for his ‘stand-in’?
Biden’s tenure as President was marked by a sullen refrain in his farewell speech: a quote from Norah Jones, indicating a mindset of wistful regret. Should a president be resigning himself to the status of a nostalgic folk tune? Considering Biden’s half-century-long career in politics, one can’t help but wonder if this was truly the best legacy Biden could leave behind.
Biden’s selection of Harris as his running mate was touted as the paramount decision of his career. In his farewell speech, Biden heralded the benefits of Harris’ potential presidency. However, this premature endorsement of Harrison, before a voting majority had a chance to weigh in, speaks volumes to the bias innate within the party politics.
Before Biden took the stage, the convention speakers adopted an unusually populist tone. This light-hearted fac?ade provided a stark contrast against the heavy, meaningful issues plaguing the nation. The leaders of the United Auto Workers cried chants against an absent Trump, a clear sign that the party was more focused on opposition than on constructing a feasible plan for the nation’s welfare.
The convention played a dangerous game by using Biden as a safeguard while galvanizing support for Harris. The absence of a widespread, popular reception for Biden during the convention was palpably noticeable. The question remains: was this a deliberate attempt to fade Biden into the background?
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, before launching into an overly optimistic forecast of women’s political power, made a scarce tribute to Biden’s tenure, obscuring his achievements and focusing more on her historic run. Throughout her speech, she accentuated female achievement rather than recognizing the broader, more diverse advancements made in American politics.
Numerous speakers vied for the spotlight as they ignited the convention with heated libel against President Trump. This brazen approach to campaign strategy only reinforced the perception that the two-faced nature of politics is alive and well. This approach only left people guessing what the true motive was beyond the barrage of heated dialogues.
Abortion restrictions in many states came up during the convention, with the majority refraining from addressing Biden’s position on these controversies. The tone of the convention suddenly shifted as it dabbled in the personal triumphs and tragedies of the speakers, leaving many unanswered questions about each representative’s stance on essential societal issues.
In the midst of this tumultuous political storm, Biden offered a lengthy speech that felt more like a swan song than a declaration of victory. His efforts seemed to define a stagnant legacy, which the convention attempted to augment with unmerited tribute.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the puzzling advocate behind Biden’s decision to step aside, offered empty praise, calling Biden ‘selfless’ and ‘one of the greatest, most consequential presidents in our country’s history.’ If this were truly the case, critics question why she would have coordinated efforts to nudge Biden out of the political landscape.
In a strange twist of political irony, the Democratic party is in the awkward position of lauding Biden – a supposedly unpopular figure according to the Fivethirtyeight.com polling average – while subtly downplaying his departure. This unusual strategy hails a question: are they genuinely celebrating his legacy or merely utilizing his departure as a diversion from the true state of the Democrat party?
Conceivably, Biden’s retreat from the daily news cycle might result in improvement of his popularity over the next several years. However, this is a speculative approach and hinges on the assumption that former presidents necessarily become more popular after they step back from active politics.
Undeniably, Biden’s attempts to boost Harris have been relentless. Has he truly strived to fortify her position by bequeathing his legacy projects, or is this an elaborate ‘passing of the torch’ designed to distract from an administration’s many failures, downfalls, and shortcomings?