[epistasis]

I disagree heartily with Biden and the deeper US intelligence communities assessments, like you do.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't call Biden incompetent on any of that.

Biden did not lose, Kamala Harris lost. Biden was not incompetent, but he was successfully portrayed as incompetent by applying a very different standard to Biden than to Trump 45.

[pibaker]

> I disagree heartily with Biden and the deeper US intelligence communities assessments, like you do.

Maybe if they were actually competent they wouldn't have made the mistake then?

> Biden did not lose, Kamala Harris lost.

Harris had no choice but to carry the Biden administration's poor approval on her back. Furthermore if Biden knew he would be unelectable in 2024 earlier he could have dropped out earlier and allow Harris (or other Democrats) more time to campaign. But he chose to stay until a disastrous televised debate forced him out, out of… what, exactly?

> but he was successfully portrayed as incompetent by applying a very different standard to Biden than to Trump 45.

Biden defenders always bring up how we shouldn't criticize him because Trump is worse. Ok. But you realize that's an absurdly low bar to clear, no? We are not upset that Biden is worse than Trump, we are upset that Biden is worse than what we expect from a someone with a letter D next to his name.

[anonymars]

> Harris had no choice but to carry the Biden administration's poor approval on her back.

Is that so?

"Vice President Kamala Harris was asked by the co-hosts of The View on Tuesday whether she would have done anything differently than President Biden, responding 'not a thing comes to mind,' before coming back to the question and adding that she plans to appoint a Republican to her Cabinet if she is elected in November."