No Joe. Not That.

Filed in National by on August 17, 2015

Donors are not especially anxious about Joe Biden getting into the race. If he did declare this late in the game, he would be in at least a $45 million dollar fundraising deficit against Clinton, with no real hope to catch up since virtually every major fundraiser in the party — including many who were once Biden people — are now on Clinton’s team.

For this reason, as I have said many times here, I am not a fan of Joe Biden getting into the presidential race, for I believe it will tarnish his legacy. Instead, I viewed him as a Plan B that could step in should Clinton die or drop out.

But it seems that Joe Biden, while on vacation down in South Carolina, was actively considering a campaign, if not planning for it. And one of the trial balloons that was floated as a result, through the fingers of one Carl Bernstein, was this notion of a one term Presidency that would finally bring this country together.

“[O]ne thing that I keep hearing about Biden is that if he were to declare and say, because age is such a problem for him if he does, I want to be a one-term president. I want to serve for four years, unite Washington. I’ve dealt with the Republicans in Congress all my public life,” Bernstein told CNN’s “New Day.”

“I think there’s a conversation going on to that effect among his aides and friends,” he said. “It could light fire to the current political environment.

Fuck. No.

First off, Joe Biden has already been working his “magic” on the Hill during these past eight years. Take away Obama, and tell me what compromises will Republicans agree to? And pray tell, what concessions would Biden make to the GOP so that the beltway media and pundits can luxuriate in the notion that Washington is United? Ending Obamacare? Privatizing Social Security? Voucherizing Medicare and Medicaid?

Nothing makes me angrier than this bullshit about unity in Washington from the punditry, because they have fond memories where the parties got along in the 50’s and 60’s and 70’s and 80’s. Because it tells me that our punditry are in fact political and historical idiots. An era of bipartisanship existed during the Cold War because of the Cold War and because the two parties were both ideologically divided. There were liberals and conservatives in both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. And a lot of them, not just one or two. So there was bipartisanship because either the liberal wing of both parties voted for something, or the conservative wing of both parties voted for something.

That era is over. It is not coming back. We are now in a Parliamentary Era where each party represents one ideology. We have been since 1994. Our punditry, and old fools like Carl Bernstein, need to finally finally wake up to it.

Washington cannot be united. And it shouldn’t be. What instead has to happen is that, if you want anything to get done in Congress, is to vote for one party completely or the other, so that you have Congress and the Presidency controlled by one party.

Second, making such a promise of being a one-termer is the ultimate sign of weakness. It is a beg. John McCain did it during the general election in 2008, and people appropriately laughed. If you get elected as one-termer, then you have no leverage. No political capital. If they wanted, the opposing party could just wait out your presidency.

So I hope Joe Biden does not run. I hope he preserves his legacy as a very effective and good Vice President. I hope that if he does run, then he does not make this one term pledge. Because if he did, well, let’s just say it won’t speak well of him.

About the Author ()

Comments (21)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. donviti says:

    it’s bullshit washington is divided bro. They are right in line with corporations and the 1%. To think they on are on the same fucking side as you and me is comical. (Obama and TPP) Some have different “interests” (donors) but they all have the same agenda and goal.

  2. ben says:

    Gotta drive ratings. The punditocracy is bored with the D race and they are running out of reasons not to cover Bernie.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Run Joe Run!!

  4. anon says:

    If all America has to offer are Clintons and Bushes, we’re fucked. Go Joe!

  5. Geezer says:

    What, exactly, is Joe Biden’s “legacy,” and how could it be “tarnished” by another losing presidential run?

  6. fightingbluehen says:

    Go Joe! I pledge that I will vote for Joe Biden over Jeb Bush. That’s coming from a life long Republican. That’s what I think about another Clinton or Bush.

  7. mediawatch says:

    OK, so if we believe that Joe wants to be a one-term president who could unify the nation … is he saying the only differences between him and Carper and Carney are his ambition and the office he now holds?
    If that’s it, Joe, we don’t need you.

  8. Geezer says:

    Another question: Since when did anyone ever have to talk Joe Biden into running for president?

  9. puck says:

    The next president needs to consolidate and extend the progressive gains made by Obama, not reach backwards across the aisle for some bipartisan consensus. Joe is too tight with banks and law enforcement, which is where the biggest problems are this cycle.

  10. Dorian Gray says:

    I’m a Puckist on this one. One of the staunchest “drug warriors” ever. Author of the Clinton Crime Bill that even WJ Clinton now admits was a ghastly mistake. Joe had his time and good for him. He seems like a sincere and affable fellow. It’s over. Let’s move on.

  11. ben says:

    Im for Moving On too…… too bad Moving On in 2016 means “back to Clinton”

  12. Anonymous says:

    You know when they have those diving competition and they throw out the high & low score? Puck your thrown out.

    Vote me in for Joe!

  13. pandora says:

    Wait… Back to Clinton? While I’ll agree that spouses tend to have a lot of things in common, she is not an extension of him. She is her own person, and while they may agree on things, he didn’t instruct her – any more than all of us “instruct” our spouses on how to think.

    Look, I’m not thrilled with the Bush/Clinton thing, however… Jeb is at least being asked about policy, while Hillary is just being called out for being Bill’s wife. Careful now.

    (And for the love of god, I’m not saying she shouldn’t be called out for her policies – just make sure they are her policies.)

  14. Anonymous says:

    Joe IS middle America. I think Joe can mend the divide.

  15. Jason330 says:

    Trolls gotta troll.

  16. cassandra_m says:

    Joe isn’t going to mend any divide as long as that divide works for the GOP and Fox Noise.

  17. Dorian Gray says:

    In all fairness, if HRC is her own person and not an extension of her husband than JEB! is not an extension of his kin either. Some people here would make that argument… but fair is fair, no?

    One could argue as candidates and politicians, Jeb is to W as Hills is to Bill. This is not a huge stretch.

    I understand that the knee jerk reaction is to call the Hillary/Bubba connection sexist… but actually I’m not so sure it is…

  18. Jason330 says:

    There is a difference. Since Bill continues to be popular, associating Hillary with Bill helps her. Since w’s multiple fuck ups are fresh in everyone’s mind, Jeb’s association with W hurts.

  19. Anonymous says:

    @ Jason I’m not trolling, I like Joe and believe it or not I think he has much more to offer than Bernie or HRC. Thats if your talking about me.

  20. mouse says:

    I’ve met Biden. He’s a sincere and reasonable person. He certainly doesn’t poll test every word he speaks like other candidates. Still a Sanders supporter at this point but anyone is better than the current bellicose sex obsessed GOP field

  21. kavips says:

    I would support a Biden run if we could get the primary on January 2nd 2016. His run might be able to grease the wheels here in Delaware to prod our GA to make it happen.