My main disagreement is the suggestion that the staff was planning for “two possible outcomes.” I don’t think that is the case. The staff is very loyal to him. They were not “planning” on some type of scenario whereby he would have to get out of the race. We can debate who is speculating and whose speculation is wilder. I understand you will side with your son, which is understandable, but I think his notion is pretty far out.
I don’t disagree that he has slipped physically in the last year or so, but that isn’t very significant to me. I understand younger people will see it differently. Here’s some speculation for you. When those younger people are in their 70s or 80s, they will see it differently than they do now.
In the last year, Joe put together an extraordinary coalition of our European allies to stand up to Putin. He greatly strengthened NATO and got everybody to contribute huge amounts of money, arms, etc. He shepherded the admission of two new NATO members, having to battle through strong opposition in Hungary and Turkey. A truly remarkable achievement. Indeed, historic.
Could Harris have done that? No. Obama? No. Obama did nothing when Putin invaded Ukraine. Joe did all of the above.
Joe has had some less than stellar performances (beyond the debate) to be sure. He never has been a great communicator. Certainly no Churchill. Far from it. But lots of presidents haven’t been good communicators. W for one.
You are probably right that “took him to the cleaners” is too strong. But if Joe had done as I suggested about the “cold” disclaimer at the start and had he attacked Trump hard from the beginning, I think we would be in a different situation today.
As I have been saying over and over, I think Joe could’ve won. I don’t think Harris can win. I sure hope I am wrong.