Joe Biden and Donald Trump Make Each Other's Candidacies Possible
Neither would be viable contenders for office in the absence of such a disliked opponent.
Wildly unpopular with much of the American public and blatantly unsuited to the office of the presidency to which both men hope to be reelected, Donald Trump and Joe Biden both seem ripe to be replaced by younger, more competent candidates who evoke less popular revulsion. But while Biden in particular may yet be shuffled aside to make room for somebody else, they currently exist in a state of political symbiosis. Biden and Trump may hate each other, but each owes a strong measure of his political viability to the failings of his opponent.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Nobody Likes Them
In April, AP-NORC polling found "the public generally says the presidencies of both Joe Biden and Donald Trump did more harm than good, but each president is viewed negatively on different issues." Specifically, about half of respondents said Biden hurt the U.S. on cost of living, immigration, and foreign relations. A similar proportion thought Trump did harm to voting rights, election security, foreign relations, abortion, and climate change.
Unsurprisingly, the same month, Pew Research reported that "voters overall have little confidence in either candidate across a range of key traits, including fitness for office, personal ethics and respect for democratic values." Forty-nine percent favored replacing both Biden and Trump as the major parties' presidential nominees.
As of Tuesday, Trump has a 38.6 percent approval rating, according to ABC News/FiveThirtyEight (57.9 percent disapprove). That's miserable, but it's higher than Biden's 37.4 percent (56.8 percent disapprove). These are two political candidates who seemingly threaten to be dead weight for their respective political parties, dragging down prospects for ballot box victory. But in truth, each has a secret weapon: his much-loathed opponent.
"Biden likely can only win going up against a candidate as unpopular as Trump," Harry Enten, CNN's senior data reporter, commented last September. "Trump likely can only win going up against a candidate as unpopular as Biden."
The Parties Could Do Better
Surveys bear out the weakness of both men. With Biden trailing Trump by a widening margin after a disastrous debate performance put his cognitive decline on public display, voters (barely) prefer Vice President Kamala Harris over the former president by 42 percent to 41 percent, and one-time presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton by 43 percent to 41 percent in a recent Bendixen & Amandi poll.
On the same note, January CBS News/YouGov polling found Trump beating Biden by 50 percent to 48 percent. But Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis out-did Biden by 51 percent to 48 percent, and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley led the incumbent by 53 percent to 45 percent.
Each of the major parties' primary voters have selected relatively weak candidates propped up by the similarly questionable decisions of their counterparts across the political divide.
Upsetting the Balance
Of course, matters have changed in recent weeks after the presidential debate that was supposed to put Joe Biden's dynamism on display did exactly the opposite. The incumbent president's incoherent word salad and flat affect not only raised questions about his ability to campaign for another four years in the White House, but serious concerns that, whoever has been making presidential decisions, it hasn't been the guy behind the podium that night.
"It's unclear even to some inside the West Wing policy process which policy issues reach the president, and how," Semafor's Ben Smith reports he was told by an anonymous government official. "Major decisions go into an opaque circle that includes White House chief of staff, Jeff Zients (who talks to the president regularly) and return concluded."
The fallout from that debate debacle, and subsequent not-very-reassuring interviews has upset the symbiotic political relationship that previously balanced Biden's obvious failings with Trump's glaring flaws. Both national and swing-state polls show Donald Trump pulling ahead of Joe Biden by a growing margin, with averages putting the Republican's national advantage anywhere from 2 percent to over 3 percent. That has prominent Democrats battling one another over whether and how Biden should be replaced as the party's standard-bearer going into the election.
A new candidate without Biden's cognitive deficits and political baggage could well erase Trump's advantage. Voters resigned to casting a vote for the GOP candidate just because he's not Biden might decide differently if Democrats put forward a different option. Well, they might if it's a less-bad option.
Right now, the likeliest replacement is Vice President Kamala Harris, who would inherit the Biden-Harris campaign apparatus and, importantly, cash. But despite a small advantage in the Bendixen & Amandi poll, she's not well-liked (37.1 percent approve, 51.2 percent disapprove). Harris has a reputation as a formerly authoritarian prosecutor who abuses staff until they quit in droves, and as an intellectual lightweight who just isn't up the limited demands of the vice presidency, let alone the White House.
The Candidates We're Stuck With?
Replacing Biden with Harris could just trade one hobbled candidate for another who would have no obvious advantage going into the race—other than a greater likelihood to live until Election Day, that is.
For his part, Biden (or somebody acting on his behalf) insists he is "firmly committed to staying in this race, to running this race to the end" and that he "wouldn't be running again if I did not absolutely believe I was the best person to beat Donald Trump in 2024."
Unless Biden, or those around him, changes his mind, it looks like he'll get a chance to try. With a lock on the Republican party and a lead in the polls, Trump is the certain GOP nominee. No matter what so many Americans want, the two mutually dependent rivals appear destined to once again present the voters with a choice between damaged and unpopular candidates.
Of course, the real problem here isn't just the candidates, but parties and a political system that deliver such flawed options to a nation of 330 million people. If the best they can come up with are people who are viable political contenders only because they balance each other's awfulness, a better means of winnowing political hopefuls is in order, as is wider access to the ballot for potential contenders.
Until then, we're stuck with options that few want. May the less terrible choice, if such one is, win.
