logo
Democrats fume over Biden's return to spotlight

Democrats fume over Biden's return to spotlight

Yahoo09-05-2025
Democrats are blasting former President Biden's reemergence in the spotlight following his interview Thursday on 'The View,' his second major post-presidency interview.
During the sit-down, which took place alongside former first lady Jill Biden, Biden slammed President Trump's second administration, saying he's had 'the worst 100 days any president's ever had.' The former president also denied reports of his mental decline during his term and took responsibility for Democratic losses in 2024, telling the show's hosts, 'I was in charge and he won.'
But some Democrats are criticizing Biden's recent appearances, arguing the former president is becoming a drag on the party as it seeks to rebuild following its widespread losses in 2024.
'Elections are about the future. Every time Joe Biden emerges, we fight an old war,' said Democratic strategist Anthony Coley, who worked for the Biden administration. 'Every interview he does provides a contrast to Trump that's just not helpful for the Democratic brand, which needs trusted messengers and fighters who can reach independents and moderates and inspire the base. Joe Biden ain't that.'
Coley said it was 'good' that Biden took responsibility for the events that led to Trump's election but questioned whether it mattered going forward.
'Honestly, what good does that do now? Many Democrats — from elected leaders to the party faithful — are just ready to turn the page. I just don't think he understands how wide and deep this sentiment is,' he said.
Other Democratic critics argue that the former president did not go far enough.
One Democratic strategist said Biden needs to 'take responsibility for his actions' and 'own up to the fact that he caused Democrats to lose.'
'I don't think there's a willingness to cop to the fact that he should never have run again in the first place,' the strategist said. 'Why can't he come out and acknowledge that part of this is on him?'
Thursday's interview with 'The View' was his second sit-down interview of the week, with the first airing Tuesday on the BBC. Biden took multiple opportunities to criticize Trump's foreign policy in his conversation with the British broadcaster, taking particular aim at Trump's handling of the Russia-Ukraine war.
Some Democrats say Biden would be better suited avoiding sit-down interviews and instead focus on community outreach, much like former President Carter.
'There is a way for President Biden to build his post-presidency, but this isn't it,' said Steve Schale, a longtime Biden ally who ran a pro-Biden super PAC in recent cycles. 'I really wish he'd embrace the thing that's been his calling card for 50 years: His humanity.'
While Biden focuses on preserving his legacy, Schale said he would take an approach similar to what Carter took in the years following his presidency.
'By the end of his life, we were reminded of the decent and humble nature of the man thanks to his acts, not his words,' Schale said. 'I really wish Biden would follow a similar path.'
'Get out and work in the community. Do … things that highlight the things his administration did to help people,' Schale said. 'Let the images of his human interactions and the stories they tell rebuild the brand. That's way more powerful than playing pundit.'
The interviews come amid a slew of books detailing the last year of the Biden administration, including accusations that his mental acuity was slipping while in office. Biden denied those reports, calling them 'wrong.' The former first lady also slammed reporting on Biden's mental acuity while in office, noting 'the people who wrote those books were not in the White House with us.'
A second Democratic strategist predicted that the Biden narrative on his mental acuity will not go away and will be something that future presidential contenders will have to answer for.
'There's a good chance that the most significant litmus test for any Democrat in the 2028 field will be how and if they admonish Biden for the political judgment in the final 18 months of his political career,' the strategist said.
But Biden still has staunch defenders within the Democratic ranks who argue his storied career in politics is needed in the party.
'I thought that was good for Joe Biden to just be honest and open about where things were, and where they are, and where he thinks they very well could be based on his own life experiences,' said Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright, who has spent time with Biden after his administration.
'If you know Joe Biden like I know Joe Biden and have spent time with him post-the presidency like I've spent time with him, then you will know that Joe Biden is doing what is still in the best interests of the country,' he continued. 'Joe Biden can still be helpful to the country, to the Congress, the Constitution, and the community.'
Seawright said the choice of 'The View' for Biden's first American post-presidency interview was good given the program's broad reach.
'I think 'The View' is a very captive audience. It's also a very diverse audience that crosses many sectors of the country,' he said.
But as younger voices become more prominent voices in the party, other Democrats are questioning why the interview was even necessary.
'I don't know who's asking for this,' Democratic strategist Jon Reinish said. 'I actually think that a lot of people are starting to pay much more attention to a younger generation of Democrats free of baggage and who are finally starting to move the party away from folks who stayed too long at the fair.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

California voters support EV tax incentives, but are wary of sales mandates says poll
California voters support EV tax incentives, but are wary of sales mandates says poll

Yahoo

time4 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

California voters support EV tax incentives, but are wary of sales mandates says poll

California drivers don't want to lose their electric vehicle tax incentives, but even voters in one of the bluest states are wary about reviving plans to phase out gas cars. Voters are split down the middle on whether California should stick to its guns on its Trump-blocked plans to phase out sales of gas cars by 2035, according to an exclusive POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll. Only 46 percent of the more than 1,400 registered voters surveyed said they support the policy, while 47 percent said no. Yes, there was an obvious partisan split: 60 percent of Democrats said they backed the phase-out, compared with 40 percent of independents and 31 percent of Republicans. But the results offer a note of caution for Gov. Gavin Newsom, who directed the California Air Resources Board to start writing new vehicle emissions rules after Republicans revoked the state's sales mandates for cars and heavy-duty trucks in June. 'None of us really like the idea of government intervening to take something away from us,' said Dan Sperling, a former California Air Resources Board member and director of the University of California, Davis' Institute for Transportation Studies. 'That's even the most liberal of us.' Poll respondents are more bought into Newsom's plan to backfill the soon-to-be-defunct $7,500 federal EV tax credit. Nearly two-thirds — 64 percent — said they would support state-funded tax incentives once the federal subsidy ends Sept. 30, as part of the Trump administration's ongoing attacks on clean energy policy. That question again showed a partisan divide, with 80 percent of Democrats saying they back the approach, compared with 60 percent of independent voters and just 43 percent of Republicans. But the overall result bolsters Newsom's push to backfill incentives that the Biden administration used to coax drivers off fossil fuels, as he suggested using cap-and-trade revenues last year and directed state agencies to consider in a June executive order. But Jack Citrin, a veteran political science professor at UC Berkeley and partner on the poll, said a closer look at the poll results shows that Democrats need to keep affordability in mind. He pointed to the fact that 28 percent of respondents said they'd support new EV incentives only if gas prices aren't impacted and another 20 percent said they should be reserved for low-income buyers, reflecting the fact that cost of living was the top concern of voters polled. And 64 percent of respondents said gasoline prices are putting a significant, extreme or moderate burden on their household budgets. 'That reflects a concern with the cost of all of this,' Citrin said. 'Yes, we're for environmental protection. Yes, we're for all of this, just as long as it doesn't cost a lot.' The poll comes as state agencies released a joint report Tuesday with recommendations for countering Trump's assault, calling on lawmakers to bolster tax incentives, improve charging infrastructure and regulate facilities that attract polluting trucks, but offering few specific timelines or dollar figures. CARB Chair Liane Randolph framed the report — which Newsom asked for in his June order — as a first step in the state's defense against a hostile federal government. 'Clean air efforts are under siege, putting the health of every American at risk,' she said during a press briefing. 'California is continuing to fight back and will not give up on cleaner air and better public health.' Sperling called the report a surprisingly 'modest document,' and said it lacks the specificity he hoped to see. 'The word I would use is disconcerting,' Sperling said when asked about where California stands in its fight against Trump. The POLITICO-Citrin Center-Possibility Lab poll was fielded by TrueDot, the artificial intelligence-accelerated research platform, in collaboration with the Citrin Center and Possibility Lab at UC Berkeley and POLITICO. The public opinion study, made possible in part with support from the California Constitution Center, was conducted in the field between July 28 and Aug. 12. The sample of 1,445 registered voters was selected at random by Verasight, with interviews conducted in English and Spanish, and includes an oversample of Hispanic voters. The modeled error estimate for the full sample is plus or minus 2.6 percent. The policy influencer study was conducted from July 30 to Aug. 11, among 512 subscribers to POLITICO Pro, and the modeled error estimate is plus or minus 3.7 percent. Like this content? Consider signing up for POLITICO's California Climate newsletter.

Ana Navarro Calls Out Melania Trump's ‘Performative' Letter To Putin
Ana Navarro Calls Out Melania Trump's ‘Performative' Letter To Putin

Yahoo

time4 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Ana Navarro Calls Out Melania Trump's ‘Performative' Letter To Putin

Ana Navarro of 'The View' is accusing first lady Melania Trump of hypocrisy, and she has a long list of receipts to back it up. On Aug.15, President Donald Trump met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in an attempt to negotiate a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine — a goal that ultimately went unmet. During the meeting, Trump reportedly handed Putin a letter from Melania Trump urging him to protect children and future generations worldwide, saying, 'It is time.' Related: The letter, which was obtained by Fox News, was reposted by Navarro on Instagram on Tuesday — but not before the political commentator added her own unflinching critique of Melania Trump's message. 'I just can't with the performative, hypocrisy from these people,' Navarro captioned her video, right before reading the first lady's words claiming that Putin could usher in peace with merely 'a stroke of the pen.' In the video, Navarro juxtaposed Melania Trump's appeal for global peace with the Trump administration's treatment of immigrant families in the U.S., especially children. She pointed to the fear among immigrant children, many of whom are U.S. citizens, who live in constant anxiety over 'their parents being dragged through the streets of America.' Among Navarro's list of examples were the school children in Los Angeles, California, who were detained by ICE. Earlier this month, the government agency mistakenly detained a disabled youth outside of his L.A. school. 'Trump and his minions have literally destroyed U.S. aid that could feed starving children, instead of distributing it,' Navarro continued in her caption. 'They are destroying and separating families. They are taking safety nets away from poor American children and giving tax-breaks to the ultra wealthy.' Related: While Navarro acknowledged the importance of advocating for Ukrainian children, she urged the first lady to turn her attention closer to home — namely, to the policies enacted by her own husband. She wrote that Trump should 'spare' her the gestures towards influencing Putin, and suggested that she 'stands a better chance of influencing Trump.' Related: 'There are children in America crying, suffering, going to bed in fear,' Navarro said, 'returning to homes that are abandoned and empty, not knowing where their next meal is coming from because of what her husband is doing.' Related... Ana Navarro Urges One Of Trump's Kennedy Center Honor Nominees To Reject His Award Michael B. Jordan Makes Ana Navarro Swoon With Just A Single Sound On 'The View' Ana Navarro Shares Her Thoughts On Meghan Markle Controversy

Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American
Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American

Yahoo

time4 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American

When President Donald Trump first declared a crime emergency in the nation's capital and sent hundreds of federal law enforcement agents to patrol its streets, this district resident had a hard time taking it too seriously. The initial images of bored Drug Enforcement Administration agents strolling past perplexed joggers on the National Mall were more clownish than carceral. Local street resistance to the occupation was limited to a drunk guy throwing a sandwich at a federal agent. But inevitably, as this operation has dragged on, things have taken a darker turn. The sandwich-thrower was overcharged and rearrested in a needless, publicized show of force. Masked federal agents have set up an unconstitutional checkpoint, violently arrested at least one delivery driver, and filmed themselves tearing down a banner protesting their presence in the city. Each day, more and more National Guard members pour into the capital. The conversation about Trump's declared crime emergency has understandably, albeit unhelpfully, provoked a lot of discourse about how safe D.C. is, whether a federalized local police department will make it safer, whether federal agents are being deployed in the right places and going after the right crimes, and on and on. This incessant crime conversation has distracted from just how un-American Trump's show of force in the nation's capital is. Uniformed troops and masked federal agents doing routine law enforcement at the command of the president is just not how we do things in the United States. The entire point of the U.S. Constitution is to prevent the federal government from becoming a despotism, and one of the primary ways it does this is by limiting how many men with guns it has at its disposal. This is why the Constitution places strict constraints on maintaining a standing army. It's why there are only three crimes mentioned in the Constitution, none of which would plausibly require federal agents to patrol U Street. It's why questions of what to criminalize and who to prosecute were largely left up to the states. The Third Amendment is mostly treated as an anachronistic joke today. In fact, it is a load-bearing part of the Constitution that makes clear that the military and the police are different things and that Americans should not have to tolerate the presence of armed agents of the states as a routine part of daily life. Obviously we've deviated considerably from this ideal since the founding generation. The federal criminal code is now extensive. The feds' wars on drugs, terror, and immigration have grown the number of militarized federal agents doing law enforcement activities. Federal money has subsidized a similar trend of militarization of state and local police forces. Reason has been decrying this trend for decades. In his book Rise of the Warrior Cop, Radley Balko writes about how the trend of increased police militarization has eroded the "Symbolic Third Amendment" and the free society it protects. It's darkly ironic then that, after decades of politicians of both parties in D.C. gifting the federal government vast powers to police the rest of the country, a militarized federal police force is now being deployed on the streets of America's capital against its residents. This is why arguments about whether federal agents could be more effectively deployed in less visible, higher crime areas of the city are completely beside the point. The federal government acting as a beat cop is inimical to our constitutional design, regardless of how effective its efforts are. That D.C. is a federal district might seem to complicate this point. In fact, it reinforces it. Despite being a constitutionally peculiar special district, a lot of effort has been put into giving D.C. a local police force that does not practically function as an arm of the federal government. Even in the seat of federal power, it's understood that a force of federal agents policing everyday life is not something ordinary citizens should have to put up with. That Trump has the power to federalize the D.C. police or deploy the D.C. National Guard doesn't stop his actions from being authoritarian and offensive to the spirit of the Constitution, even if it doesn't violate the letter of it. It's also cold comfort that Trump's declared crime emergency is clearly mostly a performative act to rile up the libs and not a serious effort at combating crime. While the president is staging the performance, it's disconcerting that he's opted to cast himself as the villain in the play. Moreover, the longer federal agents are deployed on D.C. streets, the greater the odds that more serious abuses do happen. It's true that D.C. today is not as locked down as it has been in recent years. The police-enforced curfews during the George Floyd protests or the security cordons that sprang up after the January 6 riots were a lot more visible and heavy-handed. Excessive as those police actions were (particularly the latter), they were at least being done as an emergency response to widespread breakdowns in public order. Trump is rolling out the feds in D.C. to do routine law enforcement. That's un-American. The post Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American appeared first on Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store