Debate disaster
President Joe Biden did not have a good night. Within minutes of last night’s debate starting, the president, who was reportedly sick with a cold after spending the last week at Camp David, struggled to make himself heard.
“The first presidential debate lasted 90 minutes, but President Joe Biden had lost it within 10 minutes,” the Washington Examiner wrote today in our editorial. “He stumbled immediately, lost his train of thought, and fell silent. It was painful to watch and obvious that no matter how much preparation he had done, he was utterly incapable of stringing sentences together and making a coherent argument.”
When he did get his hoarse voice above a whisper, his stilted way of speaking was especially pronounced compared to former President Donald Trump, who kept himself restrained and on message for the length of the debate.
Before the debate ended, Democrats online had started calling into question the feasibility of keeping Biden as their candidate.
But during the 90-minute showdown, both men tried to give voters what they said they wanted going into the event and delivered a full slate of policy discussions. National Political Reporter Mabinty Quarshie drilled down into the substance last night and picked out the top takeaways voters have to mull over — including the fitness of the men at the top of the ticket.
Low energy Joe
“The split-screen between the two candidates did not favor Biden, who struggled to complete full thoughts and barely smiled, while Trump appeared sharper in his appearance and his remarks,” Mabinty wrote. “A source familiar with knowledge told the Washington Examiner that Biden was struggling with a cold.”
Biden and Democrats have been telling voters for months the president’s age will not affect his ability to run or govern. However, the performance last night might have been worse than low energy. If voters are concerned about how the president is faring now, less than five months out from Election Day, Biden might see the confidence in him slip away as fast as his control over the terms of the debate.
Abortion again
The signature issue Democrats won with in 2022 was a centerpiece of the debate.
“Trump reiterated his support for legal abortion in the case of rape, incest, and in the case of the mother’s health, championed individual states deciding when to limit access to the procedure, and said he wouldn’t prohibit abortion medication access,” Mabinty wrote. “But he did concede: ‘Some people don’t [support exceptions to abortion bans], follow your heart, but you have to get elected also.’”
Biden side-stepped Trump’s admission that Republicans aren’t unified on the question of how tightly abortion should be restricted. Instead, he pointed to some of the tightest, six-week ban rules in the country and questioned whether those weren’t going to set the precedent for Congress to pass a nationwide rule.
Click here to see what else you need to know about last night’s debate.
Grading on a curve
In a contest that has run largely on “vibes,” last night’s contest gave voters and analysts the first chance in four years to compare the two nominees side by side. White House Reporter Haisten Willis caught up with several experts and asked them to give each man a letter grade.
The return to school wasn’t pleasant for Biden, who received mostly failing marks. Trump fared better, mostly on the back of Biden’s performance and the former president’s show of discipline that allowed Biden to implode without interruption.
Alex Conant – Firehouse Strategies
“Biden got an F,” Conant, a founding partner of Firehouse Strategies, told Haisten. “He failed to clear the basic bar. Democrats are seriously going to consider replacing him.”
“Trump gets an A-,” he said. “He mostly let Biden self-implode.”
Scott Jennings – adviser to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
“You can’t grade it,” Jennings told Haisten. “The image of him out there was beyond grading.”
Sasha Tirador – South Florida-based Democratic strategist
“Neither guy moved the needle,” Tirador said. “We had a very low-energy President Biden and a very incoherent ex-President Trump.”
“Tirador gave both candidates an ‘F’ for failing to change any minds in the course of the night,” Haisten wrote. “However, she rejected the notion that Biden should be replaced.”
Click here to go back to school and see the whole report card.
Cryptic problem for vulnerable Congress members
Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) was felled for a long list of reasons. His constituents had begun to lose faith in his seriousness as a lawmaker. His strong criticisms of Israel also didn’t go over well with the large slice of Jewish voters he represented. And George Latimer followed a trend of centrist Democrats coming in and beating out more extreme left-wing politicians, a move that could give Democrats a more durable majority in the House than Republicans have.
But Bowman had another problem. His skepticism about cryptocurrency raised the hackles of a big-spending super PAC that dropped $2 million to defeat him, and Fairshake PAC is prepared to spend millions more to bump other crypto-skeptic members, Senate Reporter Samantha-Jo Roth wrote this morning.
“A super PAC supported by top cryptocurrency companies is emerging as the newest big player in election financing, adding more victories in Tuesday’s congressional primaries,” Samantha-Jo wrote. “Fairshake PAC has already emerged as one of the top spenders in the 2024 election cycle. Along with its two affiliated PACs, it has now spent more than $37 million on ads in primary races, according to AdImpact. The group still intends to spend $100 million more to support candidates it sees as pro-crypto.”
The deep-pocketed group hasn’t been bogging voters down with the details about cryptocurrency, digital wallets, or the intricacies of blockchain technology in its attack ads. Instead, the group has opted to make races and candidates more opaque, forcing Rep. Katie Porter (D-CA) to disavow accusations she was taking corporate money for her campaign.
Click here to learn more about the group.
The next Joe Manchin?
The world’s greatest deliberative body is on track to have fewer deal-makers next year with Democrat-turned-independent Sens. Joe Manchin (I-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) choosing retirement over another term in Congress. Even before the centrist senators abandoned the “D” next to their names, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) could rely on them more often than not to support Democrats. But they rode to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-KY) side more than once — especially in his efforts to shield the Senate filibuster from being eliminated to promote partisan policy ends.
After Manchin spent most of the last four years being a constant thorn in Biden’s side, a possible President Trump might find himself with his own agitator, Economics Reporter Zachary Halaschak reported from Maryland.
Zachary caught up with Larry Hogan on the sidelines of a campaign event for the former governor, who is running in a tough contest against Angela Alsobrooks to try and be the first Republican to capture a Senate seat in Maryland in nearly 40 years.
Hogan told Zachary that former President George W. Bush encouraged him to run for the seat and put the bug in his ear he could be a senator along the same lines as Manchin.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The possible future senator and outgoing one have been tied together for months, with Hogan previously serving as co-chairman of No Labels, an organization that flirted with pairing Manchin and a Republican on a unity ticket to offer voters an alternative to Biden and Trump in November.
While that bid petered out, the pair’s relationship might have only just begun.
Click here to read Zachary’s full report from Maryland.
