The 2024 Biden Debacle: A Five-Step Outline of Democratic Grief
The air is thick with post-debate tension, the kind that leaves you picking at the remnants of a veggie platter while pretending to text someone important. The election cycle is in full swing, and the Democrats are awash in that familiar blue hue, but this time, it’s not just about party affiliation. It’s the color of worry, the color of…grief. Joe Biden, the man who campaigned on a return to normalcy, is anything but. His recent debate performance? Let’s just say it’s got Democrats everywhere frantically Googling, “Five stages of grief… what are they again?”
The whispers started as murmurs, then escalated to panicked shouts echoing through the halls of Twitter. Biden’s performance wasn’t just “off” — it was a full-blown system error. The man who once charmed world leaders with his folksy demeanor seemed lost on stage, fumbling for words, and struggling to complete a coherent thought. The elephant, or perhaps the donkey, in the room? This wasn’t a one-time glitch; it’s becoming a disturbing pattern. Now, the Democrats, clinging to the wreckage of Biden’s presidential aspirations, find themselves thrust onto the Kübler-Ross express, hurtling through the five stages of grief.
Denial: It’s Just a Cold…and Jet Lag…and Maybe a Touch of Netanyahu?
Ah, denial, the knee-jerk reaction that allows us to pretend the train wreck we just witnessed was actually a perfectly choreographed dance number. In the immediate aftermath of Biden’s disastrous debate, the spin machine went into overdrive.
First came the excuses, delivered with the practiced nonchalance of a teenager explaining a dent in the family car. “Foreign travel fatigue,” they cried, citing Biden’s recent trip abroad. Never mind that he had ample time to recover on Air Force One, an aircraft equipped with more creature comforts than a five-star spa.
Then came the press secretary, armed with enough talking points to make a politician blush. Initially, it was a “bad cold” that had plagued the President. Later, it morphed into a potent cocktail of “cold” and “jet lag,” because, hey, why settle for one excuse when you can have two? The ever-shifting narrative, however, only served to highlight the growing inconsistencies in their claims.
Manufactured “Toughness”
As the denial train chugged along, a new tactic emerged: manufactured “toughness.” Aides, desperate to project an image of strength, began leaking stories of Biden “putting his foot down” with foreign leaders. “He even yelled at Netanyahu!” they exclaimed, as if berating an elderly statesman was a sign of cognitive prowess rather than, well, something we probably shouldn’t be celebrating.
But here’s the thing about manufactured toughness: it rarely survives contact with reality. The real test, the one that keeps even the most seasoned political strategists up at night, is whether Biden can handle a genuine international crisis in his current state. Can he, as they say, walk and chew gum at the same time when the stakes are this high? The answer, whispered in the corridors of power, is a resounding, “We’re not sure, and that’s terrifying.” The parallels to potential cognitive decline, however uncomfortable, are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
Anger: Blame It on the Aides (and Maybe Hunter’s Laptop?)
Denial, as we all know, is a river in Egypt, and eventually, even the most ardent believers must confront the gators. Enter stage two: anger, the fiery, often irrational, cousin of denial.
Reports emerged of Biden’s inner circle, led by the ever-protective Jill and the perpetually enigmatic Hunter, unleashing their fury on his beleaguered aides. Fingers were pointed, blame was liberally assigned, and the phrase “you had one job” may or may not have been uttered (repeatedly). The underlying message? This isn’t Joe’s fault; it’s those meddling aides! They forgot to give him his afternoon prune juice!
The problem with this line of thinking, of course, is that it conveniently ignores the elephant—or donkey—sized elephant in the room. Aides can prep a candidate, they can write speeches, they can even (allegedly) feed them lines through an earpiece. But they can’t, despite their best efforts, prevent the inevitable ravages of time. And in Biden’s case, time, coupled with the immense pressure of the presidency, seems to be taking its toll.
Campaign Aggression: Because Attacking Voters is Always a Winning Strategy, Right?
Meanwhile, the Biden campaign, fueled by a potent mix of anger and desperation, adopted a new tactic: aggression. Those who dared to express concern over Biden’s performance, from seasoned political analysts to concerned citizens on Twitter, were branded as “bedwetters,” “doom-and-gloomers,” and, in a particularly creative flourish, “Putin puppets.”
The problem is, attacking your own base—or at least a significant portion of it—rarely ends well. It’s like trying to put out a grease fire with gasoline: messy, ineffective, and likely to leave a lasting mark. The Biden campaign’s aggressive tactics, far from silencing the doubters, only served to amplify their concerns. It’s one thing to acknowledge that your candidate has flaws; it’s quite another to pretend those flaws don’t exist and then attack anyone who dares to point them out. Not exactly a recipe for electoral success.