Joe Biden is the luckiest man to ever assume the presidency.

He succeeded an unpopular figure. He was inaugurated just two weeks after the dramatic storming of the U.S. Capitol by extremist Donald Trump supporters seeking to stop the certification of the 2020 election, which was also the beginning of the year after widespread race riots. He inherited COVID-19 vaccines and a vaccine rollout plan, and could rightly expect to ride the tsunami of natural economic recovery that was predicted for the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic; he inherited a series of historic Middle Eastern peace deals.

In other words, President Biden had it easy. All he had to do was nothing. He could expect a new era of good feelings emerging from a tumultuous time. He could expect a booming economy, a more peaceful Middle East, a solution to the pandemic. All he had to do was calm the waters.

This, after all, was what Americans voted for: not a transformational figure or a figure of radical change but a stodgy, supposedly empathetic grandfather figure who could barely be bothered to leave his basement for the entirety of the presidential campaign. Normalcy could be restored by installing a nearly inanimate object as president.

Instead, Biden has served as a facade for the most radical administration in modern American history. And America is already paying the price.

In his first few months in office, Biden rammed through a $1.9 trillion spending package that completely rewrote the bargain between individuals and the state, shifting the incentive structure for people to go back to work. He simultaneously proposed another $4 trillion in spending — to go along with the annual $4 trillion budget. The result: skyrocketing inflation in commodities, along with dramatic labor shortages resulting in an April shortfall of three-quarters of a million new jobs.

Simultaneously, he downplayed the efficacy of a vaccine he insisted was the key to ending the pandemic. His Food and Drug Administration pressed pause on a highly successful vaccine based on six cases of blood clots; his Centers for Disease Control and Prevention rewrote its school reopening guidelines, apparently with input from the teachers unions. He wore a mask publicly despite being vaccinated, despite being outdoors, despite being indoors with others who had been vaccinated — and declared such activity “patriotic.” The result: widespread vaccine hesitancy and a tremendously uneven national reopening, with red states going back to normal and blue states continuing nonsensical shutdowns.

He ramped up the rhetoric with regard to racial polarization, injecting the terms “anti-racist” and “equity” into every element of federal policy, supplanting meritocracy and individual rights with equality of outcome and outright discrimination. The result: undercutting police forces nationally, resulting in a continuing crime wave in America’s biggest cities.

And he abandoned the Trump administration’s Middle East policy, refunding the Palestinians with money that will obviously go to terrorist groups and defy the Taylor Force Act; making concessions to the Iranian terror regime; and pressuring Israel. The result: riots in Jerusalem, chaos on the Temple Mount and an increase in regional Iranian aggression.

We’re only four months into Biden’s presidency. He’s going for broke: He wants his legacy, and if that legacy comes at the cost of the economy, the polis and international stability, so be it. If the conflagration we’ve seen thus far is any indicator, Biden won’t leave a lot standing when he’s done.

Ben Shapiro is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of “The Ben Shapiro Show” and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is the author of the New York Times bestsellers “How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps,” “The Right Side of History” and “Bullies.”  

(20) comments

Mr. T

Mr. Schapiro has done a pretty good job enumerating all the right wing talking points.

And he’s certainly correct that President Biden is lucky to follow a very unpopular president who himself didn’t “leave a lot standing” when he left office.

Trump’s critical failure was his incompetent sacrifice of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans’ families and friends who perished unnecessarily in the COVID-19 pandemic, which then brought on a terrible economic melt-down.

Ben’s right. That’s an easy act to follow. Had Trump been willing (and able) to face this challenge, he probably would have won a second term.

But Biden is even luckier that the Republican party has chained itself to their very unpopular ex-president who has them pinned down to their sole remaining principal - the BIG LIE that the election was stolen from their dear leader.

Now the race is on to see whether Mr. Schapiro’s dire predictions will be accurate enough to erode Mr. Biden’s solid popularity and hand political power back to the Party of Trump.

Kate70

Unfortunately, President Biden is incompetent to be in charge of our country. Sad. Sadder yet, when the charade of his mental status as being "good" is finally acknowledged, his successor, supported by her own party by only 2% during the 2019 debates will take over. Our country is in dire trouble already less than 150 days into this Administration. If "Mr.Biden's solid popularity" truly exists, those who support what he is doing need to examine their priorities. Do we love him because of his party affiliation, or do we love our Country and our Freedoms, which are fast fading into oblivion. I am an Independent. The "political power" needs to be handed to ANYONE who is capable of keeping us a free, non-socialistic republic, with all of our constitutional rights intact. It needs to be handed to anyone competent enough to be allowed to answer questions, speak with foreign leaders, take care of our Veterans and our homeless , stop supporting violence in our cities, and stop giving all of our tax monies to immigrants who have not yet gained citizenship before helping the American citizens who need it most. We need to have a President who can be fiscally responsible with our money. I feel badly for Mr.Biden. I am sure that at times he must be lucid enough to know and hear and feel his own inadequacy, and that is sad for him ....no, it is tragic; for him and all of America. There are incredible people in both parties who could help salvage our country and our republic.

E pluribus

Kate, you’ve declined to respond to the two questions I’ve asked of you in several previous postings. Will you please answer just one question now?

Do you believe the election was stolen from Trump?

We’ve had respectful conversations before, and I’m truly curious what you think. Whatever one believes about our current politics, Americans’ trust in the peaceful transfer of power is the single, most essential foundation of our Democracy.

BigSky57062

Kate, multiple polls show Biden is quite popular - for now at least. Mostly of this is because of his success suppressing the pandemic and confronting our economic collapse. Obviously all that can change. But for now he’s clearly riding high.

And I wonder if your contention that he’s mentally unfit to be president is based on any evidence. Or is just your speculation?

This administration is micromanaging so many things that he seems to be on top of his game, even if you don’t like the moves he’s making.

Or do you subscribe to a prevalent conspiracy theory that he’s not really in charge? If so - who do you think is?

Friedrich Farmer

Kate, you got my attention with your impassioned plea for a “non-socialistic republic.”

Does that mean if you get your wish, South Dakota farmers will have to go it alone without the farm subsidies we’ve come to depend on?

Farm subsidies even increased under your Mr. Trump. Was he a socialist? Truthfully, I’d be sorry to see our subsidies go in your non-socialistic republic.

You must not be a farmer, Kate, but government subsidies benefit South Dakota’s non-farmers as well. When free money from Washington flows through our economy, it’s good for all of us.

Actually, South Dakota has always received more money from America’s taxpayers than South Dakota’s tax payers contribute to the national coffers.

Do you really want to end this? I think it’s been a pretty good deal.

In your “best of all possible worlds” will we have to give all that up and start living solely on our own resources?

I’m not particularly political, and I've always been happy to receive free government money under both Democrats and Republicans. And if this isn’t socialism, I don’t know what you’d call it.

But it’s OK with me.

TruthFairy605

Kate, I've noticed you often make startling assertions and then fall silent at the responses you elicit. You’ve occasionally explained this is because people on this feed are uncivil and there’s no point in engaging in dialogue.

But folks are now addressing you who have never approached you disrespectfully.

You've made some rather provocative declarations. I wonder - will you respond this time?

E pluribus

Mr. Shapiro should turn his attention to a Republican insurrection of another kind.

This one isn’t a rioting mob of violent Trump supporters attacking the Capitol. Instead it’s a revolt among Republicans who haven’t pledged their undying loyalty to their ex-president.

A group of national, state, and local Republican leaders are calling for an end to Trumpian division and political extremism.

Now that Republican “cancel culture” has canceled conservative Liz Cheney for telling the truth about Trump's BIG LIE and put the loyal - but not so conservative - Elise Stefanik in her place, these “disloyal” conservatives are declaring that if the Republican Party doesn’t rededicate itself to the Founder’s ideals they’ll work to create an alternative Party.

Google “Call for American Renewal” if you’re interested. I suspect they’ll be an impediment to Trump’s hopes to reclaim the Presidency.

Kate70

EPluribus, I am sorry if you missed my one reply to your repeated question. I did indicate that it was pointless to list my two biggest concerns about the country when there were far too many to pick the worst and that could turn into a lot of useless back and forth on what two ARE the worst. As for your question this time, I unequivocally do NOT believe the election was stolen. Thank you for asking!

E pluribus

Thanks, Kate. I find this encouraging. Trust in our elections is essential to the peaceful transfer of power. 👍

However, I remain very concerned that - unlike you and me - a major portion of the electorate continues to believe this falsehood.

I think this threatens our republic even more than the January 6th insurrection it inspired.

Kate70

Friedrich Farmer, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I think we are differing on definitions of a non-socialistic republic . I am definitely for Govt subsidies to farming as needed and necessary and always have been. I guess I inadvertently left it out of my list of needs: "ANYONE who is capable of keeping us a free, non-socialistic republic, with all of our constitutional rights intact. It needs to be handed to anyone competent enough to be allowed to answer questions, speak with foreign leaders, take care of our Veterans and our homeless , stop supporting violence in our cities, and stop giving all of our tax monies to immigrants who have not yet gained citizenship before helping the American citizens who need it most." (see original letter); I don't consider subsidies to our farmers as socialistic. My definition (which I admit may be my interpretation of the definition) is that Socialism provides that everything be divided equally among all the people regardless of whether it is "fair' or not. With that definition in mind, I would say that in a socialistic system all farmers would need to divide their profits equally among all their peers and other citizens who had less profit so that no one ever had more than the other. I don't believe in free handouts to those who do not need them or are not entitled to them. (that is an abbreviated definition of my own and I am sure some will differ). Please reread my original letter with farming subsidies included in my partial list. And I again apologize for any misinterpretation of socialism on my part.

Kate70

Truth Fairy: I am not silent if the "questions" are reasonable and without condemnation for simply having a differing viewpoint. If that is the case, I do not think it is necessary to keep the narrative going. (I don't think of an argument is a dialogue but given my mix up in interpretations with Friedrich, your definition and mine of dialogue may be differing...and that is ok with me as long as mine is different but not offensive.) I would be more than happy to repsond to your questions and anyone else's as long as I know what it is I am addressing and what the objection or question is. You say that I have made "startling and provacative proclamations" and have no responded to replies. I would need to know what those are , without animosity or implications that I am an ignorant person for my beliefs. (you did not imply that by the way; curiosity is welcome!) Additionally, I sometimes do not answer only because I have forgotten to do so, have been very busy, or have been ill. Thanks for asking and I look forward to your response. As you can see, I am trying to answer all of the questions that were put to me in a reasonable way when time permits.

Friedrich Farmer

Kate, the preeminent example of a socialist republic in our era was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (the USSR). In this sample of a “socialist republic” the state OWNED the means of production, which NO politically significant actor on the national stage is advocating - not even Bernie or AOC.

Since NO ONE in America is calling for state-owned means of production, the only difference between the two political parties - as far as I can see - is WHO gets government money.

For example, what is the difference between subsidies for farmers (which works fine for some of us and which you wholeheartedly support) and food stamps for the working poor who can’t feed their kids on wages that over the decades have fallen far behind inflation?

No one is advocating policies to make everyone equal. There are just different constituencies for each party who push for government money for the needs they prioritize.

When we’re accusing folks of being “socialist” I really don’t see much difference between the two parties.

TruthFairy605

Kate, I was responding to your "startling proclamation" that Biden is mentally compromised.

And I thought BigSky57062’s question was “reasonable and without condemnation.” So let me gently rephrase it:

Is this just your speculation? Biden’s administration is moving on a lot of policies. So he seems to be acting with a sense of purpose, even if you don’t like the moves he’s making.

Or do you believe he’s really not in charge? If so - who is?

Kate70

Truth Fairy, I will be answering Big Sky now, despite your misgivings that I might not do so. However, you did not give me any 'startling proclamations' that I "tend to remain silent on in the past" so I cannot address whatever those were. As for the startling proclamation made about Biden, it is supposition based on research and my education and experience as a therapist for nearly 49 years. It is always supposition unless one has, as I have obviously not, conducted an examination of him personally in other areas of his life other than speaking. (Nor, I assume, have you been able to do so in order to judge him competent?) My presumption is based on a personal and publicly available large sample study of his past speeches from 40+ years ago up through the present. Both his speech, his inability to respond to most anything extemporaneously or without written prompting, his loss of words, his frequent inability to resume a sentence after a mixup but instead shaking his head, mumbling and moving on to something very much unrelated to topic are all showing marked signs of deteriorated mental capacity to speak relevantly. By his own admission he is "not allowed to answer questions because he might not get them right." He shows other signs of a diminishing ability to think lucidly or logically or to express himself in a coherent manner, as opposed to his past speeches (all available online) back many years and on forward and finally to the present. He has conducted his only actual question and answer interview/press briefing with written out lists of who to call on for what question and then shuffled through his pages to find that reporter's name and the answer to the question in order to read it....even sometimes reading the wrong answer and not seeming to realize it. Therefore my statement is supposition but it is based in some very obvious reasoning, listening, watching body language and clinical judgment. In a personal comparison of his speeches / talks/ answers to inquiries, behaviors, I also looked at President Reagan's talks and speeches when he began to show signs of dementia and subsequently was diagnosed with the onset of Alzheimers and President Biden's very sad and frequent instances of extreme confusion (sometimes even with prompters and notes). I observed that Biden is far less coherent . I do NOT know who is in control but there is rather obviously people or persons directing his speaking engagements, manner of presentation , and even who he can be trusted to meet with in diplomatic situations. Vice President Harris spoke on the phone with and in person with all or with most of the foreign leaders in the first several months of his term and continues to do so despite the President's self reported (stopping frequently to say "now where am I? where was I" and trying to read what is apparently on a teleprompter) that he has met with or talked on the phone with some heads of foreign countries. I find it sad that whoever IS directing this administration, is allowing it to go on. Perhaps they are taking steps to have the vice President take over and are grooming her to do so. I am sure those of you who are in highest admiration of him, as was pointed out several times, will disagree and that is your right. I hope, at the very least, that I have clarified where I was coming from. This is not a man I hate... I feel deeply saddened for him and deeply afraid for our country if whoever IS in control does not soon take steps to have the Vice President take command. Thanks for reading, for researching and for asking other questions if you wish... or just commenting or remaining silent. We all have choices and voices.

BigSky57062

“Gaff machine” Biden has always been a “space cadet.” But wouldn’t a diagnosis of ADHD be most likely? Especially in conjunction with his past stuttering which studies show is accompanied by ADHD around 50% of the time.

Many very creative and highly intelligent people with ADHD manage to achieve much in their lives. And despite what you think of Joe now, he’s crafted a long and accomplished career.

Whatever the truth is, so far the Biden administration appears to be - at the very least - just as competent as the previous regime was at this point in its unfolding. Before the unprecedented parade of folks came and went from the Trump administration.

A good dozen or so of these fellows were even convicted of felonies or are currently under investigation. E pluribus gave us a rather comprehensive list of these folks

And of course it was much later in the Trump administration that the mishandling of the pandemic revealed a willful incompetence without historic equal. It was this failure that cost America hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths.

If Joe is failing, we can at least hope he doesn’t kill as many of our families and friends as Trump has.

But if you're correct that we’re watching “Dementia Joe,” then I guess the race to the midterms may depend on which happens first - whether Biden unravels mentally before Trump is undone by the many civil and criminal lawsuits he is facing.

Then perhaps we'll see which party has shackled itself to the biggest loser. And you’ll get to plumb the depths of your empathy and pick which character “deeply saddens” you the most.

Never a dull moment!

Kate70

Big Sky: apologies for the delay in responding to your remarks. And thank you for your response to mine! I will make this short for a number of reasons, some personal and some based on your reply. First, I agree completely with your observation that many people with ADHD are creative and highly intelligent, and I would even add, with some whose intelligence would put ours completely to shame. Genius is not unknown to those afflicted with ADHD. I don’t, however, agree with a diagnosis of ADHD for President Biden based on the very reasons I gave for the supposition for his incompetence. (and again, without a full personal evaluation of the man, I cannot say with complete certainty what is true.).But aside from that, he is quite devoid in speech and presentation of several key components in ADHD. And again, while I do see the components of incompetence in his speech and ability to independently orate without prompts or aids, I DO see it has it has deteriorated so drastically over the years as well.

Secondly, I did not mention nor bring up the competency, intelligence, decisions or any comparisons either good nor bad in the Trump administration or the man and am disappointed that you did. I have not seen you use the assertions of failure of that man or his administration in the past to bolster your contentions regarding the question at hand, in this case, the incompetence of President Biden, or our give and take on other possible reasons for his speaking capabilities and their abject decline within the past 40 years of his political career. While Mr. Trump may WELL be guilty of all that you contended, and multitudes believe it so, it has no bearing this particular conversation. It is a very frustrating example of what I have seen happen in many discussions which have ended abruptly. It is very often the reason I have felt the need to end a conversation or not respond to it at all.

Last of all, and I think I may be feeling a bit defensive… or at least I hope I am. I felt ashamed of my having expressed my feelings of sadness over what I see as Mr. Biden’s mental state upon hearing that after we find out the biggest “loser” I will need to ‘plumb the depths of my empathy and pick which character “deeply saddens” me the most.’ It felt like a belittlement of a personal emotion for a person I perceive to deserve empathy/sympathy . (Perhaps you are correct to call me on it. Although unintended on my part, it may have resonated as insincere or condescending.)

I have enjoyed our past discussion but since neither of us can “prove” our stance, I hope we can just agree to disagree now. Thanks, Big Sky. Kate C.

BigSky57062

True, you did not make any comparisons with Trump and Biden. But your “disappointment” puzzles me. Didn’t you make those comparisons last November? Don’t you make them now?

I sure did. And do. So have most Americans, I suspect.

Rather than having “no bearing on this particular conversation” I submit that the comparison of these two is at the very heart of this dialogue.

As I approached this last election the possibility of Joe being well past his prime was foremost on my mind as I contemplated my vote in the primaries. I preferred someone who was younger. But once Joe won the nomination my choice was easy.

Then - for me - the worst case scenario was clear. I faced a “Hobson's Choice.” Did I want to choose someone who might be approaching dementia, but has a lot of experienced people around him?

Or would I choose someone who acts like an uncle I’d never want around my kids and had already lost or fired all the “wiser heads” who might have helped him govern rationally?

And why would I choose someone who was floundering about, denying our pandemic, hawking foolish remedies and failing to prevent America from losing far more lives to the coronavirus than any other country on the planet?

For me this was an easy choice. Apparently it was for a lot of other folks, too. Except for political “true believers,” most of us older folks know politics is almost always the choice of the lesser evil.

However, if Joe turns out to be falling apart from dementia, I hope my consolation will be that his administration doesn’t kill as many of us as we lost when Trump was in charge.

Doesn’t seem too much to expect….

BigSky57062

I should have added:

I'll gladly “agree to disagree” when I understand what I’m disagreeing with.

Kate70

Big Sky: My disappointment was explained in the paragraph in which I expressed it. It was also because I did not expect it from YOU to change the subject from the President's incompetence (my stand) to condemnation of someone/something else, ie introducing a whole new topic.

If you agree to disagree it is that you disagree with me on my suppositions about President Biden and the need to replace him as soon as possible for the sake of the country and you would be agreeing to disagree that we will likely never see eye to eye on the matter. If you read all of my replies in this thread, you will understand when I repeat "It (running out of responses or evidence of why something is not what you believe to be true so turning the subject of the conversation to something or someone else) is very often the reason I have felt the need to end a conversation or not respond to it at all." Therefore, I think it is best that I end the conversation on my end. Thank you for prior engagement in dialogue. As for me, that has now ended . Sometimes things just need to be over.

BigSky57062

OK, Kate.

You've focused on whether Biden is demented. I’ve focused on what is at stake if he is.

And I’ll assume you disagree with my sentiments that if Biden proves demented, it’s still the lesser of evils so long as his administration results in a lower body count than we experienced under Trump.

So if he IS demented - and more Americans die on his watch than Trump’s - for once we’ll actually “see eye to eye on the matter.”

And I’ll post this admission:

“You were right Kate, Biden should have been removed from office before so many of us died.”

Too bad that didn’t happened under Trump.

Until next time...

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.