Author: openjargon

• After a shockingly weak debate performance, President Joe Biden is asking voters not to count him out.
• But looking past worries over Biden's mental acuity and ability would mean ignoring obvious flaws.
• In that way, Biden's strategy to ignore and deflect looks similar to how Trump campaigns.

After a shockingly weak debate performance, President Joe Biden is employing a Trumpian strategy: asking voters not to count him out despite obvious flaws in his campaign and to look past the questions of his fitness for office.

"I would not be running again if I didn't believe with all my heart and soul that I can do this job," 81-year-old Biden said Friday, attempting to reassure the crowd at the North Carolina State Fairgrounds.

But that's not what it looked like on Thursday when Biden floundered in his debate performance against former President Donald Trump, political strategists told Business Insider.

"It was a disaster for President Biden," Alex Zdan, GOP political strategist and former New Jersey Republican candidate for US Senate, told BI. "It was a train wreck, impacting a volcano, going into a black hole, going into a comet. It was the worst-case scenario. It was everyone's fears come true. It got so bad, it's to the point where conservative Republicans, who never thought they'd feel this way before, are expressing empathy for the president."

Some of Biden's most loyal Democratic defenders have now publicly called on him to leave the race. So far, Biden has ignored those calls and urged voters to overlook his tired and, at times, incoherent debate performance.

"I don't walk as easy I as used to," Biden said Friday in North Carolina. "I don't speak as smoothly as I used to. I don't debate as well as I used to. But I know what I do know: I know how to tell the truth."

Representatives for the Biden campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.

But looking past worries over Biden's mental acuity and ability would mean ignoring obvious flaws — likely to the detriment of his own campaign, two public relations experts said.

"Given the conversation surrounding his age and the public being worried about his mental state, that performance could have swayed some undecided voters to either vote for Donald Trump or simply not vote at all," David Triana, a consultant for Triana PR, told BI. "Given how members of the Democratic Party are suggesting Biden should step aside and give someone else an opportunity this November, and the media seemingly propping up Gavin Newsom to do just that, I think this crisis reached DEFCON 1."

Biden's current refusal to acknowledge his shortcomings and his persistence in the race despite calls to drop out has begun to echo Trump's typical strategy of ignoring and deflecting criticism, Triana said. Dustin Siggins, a former political journalist turned PR consultant, agreed.

Both candidates are stubborn, Siggins said, and that stubbornness has bred success in spheres where it can be rewarded: politics and business.

"However, Trump's habit is both a choice and part of his natural personality," Siggins told BI. "Joe Biden, as we saw on Thursday night, seems too cognitively impaired to understand how he came across to the entire country."

Not everyone sees Biden's persistence in the race as an act of ego or hubris. Brand strategist Rebecca Horan called it "par for the course for any politician."

"For one thing, he is still president, so stepping down from the race due to his age might seem like he is conceding the MAGA Republicans' case that he is not an effective president. It's easy to understand why someone would have difficulty doing that," Horan told BI. "I also believe there's some optimism — an 'I can fix this' stance — to Biden's persistence, where he does believe he is doing this for the good of the country."

If it got to the point where the overwhelming sentiment within the Democratic Party was that Biden should step down, Triana said he believes Biden would — another difference between the two candidates.

Where the similarities end

Another Trump presidency would mean a vastly different America than if Biden won a second term. Trump has promised his second term would be categorized by "revenge" against his political enemies; he has threatened to indict Biden if the federal courts don't grant him immunity from prosecution, and authoritarianism expert Timothy Snyder worries democracy may not survive if Trump wins again.

Trump has asked the American people to ignore the events of January 6, 2021, and his lies around the 2020 election. He's asked that they ignore that he was convicted on 34 felony counts related to hush money payments to a porn actor. He'd rather voters forget that he still faces three additional criminal cases — including two that center on allegations that he attempted to overthrow American democracy — and that he was impeached twice during his first term.

He also wants us to forget his lies, of which there were at least 30 on Thursday night (compared to Biden's nine, a fact-checker found). These included vastly overstating the economy's health during his tenure, exaggerating the size of the US's trade deficit with China, and falsely claiming the Biden administration is weak on border policy.

The GOP has, for the most part, gamely followed this selective amnesia. Politicians that haven't have largely been primaried or siloed to be talking heads on cable TV.

When BI reached out for comment, representatives for the Trump campaign declined to answer questions about similarities between Trump and Biden. Instead, a spokesperson pointed to the former president's recent statement declaring victory during Thursday's debate.

A harm to democracy?

The election will ultimately be decided by Independents, undecided voters, and anyone who might stay home. To have a chance, Biden will need that constituency to ignore his poor debate performance and questions about his age. So the question becomes: Will they come November?

Even some of Biden's most strident supporters are worried he's no longer the country's greatest chance of defeating Trump and has instead become a liability in the fight against him.

"One of the key arguments for Biden is saving democracy: 'Trump tried to lead an insurrection on January 6, and I'm the one that will stop that,'" Christian Grose, a professor of political science and public policy at USC, told BI. "If there are now Democrats calling for Biden to step down or not run, it sort of messes up that narrative."

Qasim Rashid, a human rights lawyer and former Democratic candidate for congressional seats in Virginia and Illinois, told BI there needs to be an off-ramp built for Biden that protects his dignity and his legacy and "allows us to continue our momentum on the values of protecting democracy, fighting for economic justice and ensuring that 2024 is not the last presidential election, but a stepping stone to 2028, 2032 and so on."

"At the end of the day, for me, the top priority is, how do we protect our democracy?" Rashid said. "And if the evidence shows that that's with Biden, OK — but I think the evidence is now starting to show, pretty compellingly, that there's a better alternative, and we should take that seriously. Whether Biden and his team and the Democratic Party listen to that, it's up to them."

The New York Times Editorial Board argued that Biden's staying in the race could ultimately be a detriment to democracy. In an opinion article published Friday, the board stated that the greatest act of public service Biden could do now would be to end his campaign for reelection.

Refusing to do so, the board wrote, puts America at risk of the very fate Biden aimed to avoid by running in the first place: a second Trump presidency.

"The clearest path for Democrats to defeat a candidate defined by his lies is to deal truthfully with the American public: acknowledge that Mr. Biden can't continue his race, and create a process to select someone more capable to stand in his place to defeat Mr. Trump in November," The Times' board wrote. "It is the best chance to protect the soul of the nation — the cause that drew Mr. Biden to run for the presidency in 2019 — from the malign warping of Mr. Trump. And it is the best service that Mr. Biden can provide to a country that he has nobly served for so long."

• President Joe Biden had a disastrous debate night against Donald Trump on Thursday.
• The president, 81, coughed, stumbled upon his words, and didn't complete some sentences.
• His performance did little to convince voters that he's fit for office, The New York Times Editorial Board wrote.

After President Joe Biden's disastrous debate performance on Thursday night against former President Donald Trump, The New York Times Editorial Board has declared that it's seen enough: Biden should step aside.

The Times editorial board, which provides opinions on critical issues facing the country at the moment, published a column on Friday criticizing Biden's performance and wrote that it did little to convince American voters that the 81-year-old president is fit for another term.

"The president appeared on Thursday night as the shadow of a great public servant," the editorial board wrote. "He struggled to explain what he would accomplish in a second term. He struggled to respond to Mr. Trump's provocations. He struggled to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his lies, his failures, and his chilling plans. More than once, he struggled to make it to the end of a sentence."

The board praised Biden's accomplishments in the past three years, calling him an "admirable president," but concluded that "the greatest public service Mr. Biden can now perform is to announce that he will not continue to run for reelection."

A spokesperson for Biden's campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

The Times' editorial board, which typically leans left on issues, has previously called on Biden to take voters' concerns about age seriously.

And Thursday's debate only cemented those concerns that the editorial board argued won't be dispelled through more public appearances.

The New York Times newsroom, which operates independently from the editorial board, has been criticized by the Biden campaign and some of the left for its coverage of the president.

Biden's team has bristled at the newspaper's coverage of the administration and the president, while a spokesperson for The Times has criticized the White House for lack of access for journalists.

"Mr. Biden has granted far fewer press conferences and sit-down interviews with independent journalists than virtually all of his predecessors," The Times' spokesperson wrote in an April statement.

A Times spokesperson declined to comment.

The editorial board acknowledged in the column that Trump's debate performance should also be disqualifying, as the former president repeatedly misled and lied throughout the debate.

But the board wrote that Republicans aren't interested in "deeper soul-searching" and that the party has been hijacked by Trump.

The editorial board also wrote that Trump poses a serious threat to democracy and that if the choice came down to him and Biden, the board's "unequivocal pick" would be the sitting president.

"That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses," the board wrote. "But given that very danger, the stakes for the country, and the uneven abilities of Mr. Biden, the United States needs a stronger opponent to the presumptive Republican nominee."

• Donald Trump is wracking up wins after Joe Biden gave a dismal debate performance.
• The Supreme Court also issued two conservative rulings hours after the debate.
• But Trump's seeming wins this week could fizzle out by November. 

Former President Donald Trump is back on top — at least for now.

The Republican nominee secured a spate of political wins this week after President Joe Biden delivered a disastrous first debate performance, and the Supreme Court handed down two Trump-friendly decisions.

But Trump's Thursday night and Friday morning victories are far from permanent, and aspects of this week's ostensible wins could fizzle in the long run.

Biden's big blunder

Political experts and pundits seem to agree that Trump also performed poorly in the Thursday debate. He lied several times, failed to articulate his plans and policies, and once again boasted about his golf swing.

But few were focused on Trump's faux-paus in the debate's aftermath. The focus was on Biden's raspy voice and seeming memory gaffes, which only exacerbated growing concerns about the 81-year-old president's age and fitness.

Throughout the debate, Trump managed to inject some of his notorious zingers, including after one particularly incoherent Biden ramble, saying, "I really don't know what he said at the end of that sentence. I don't think he knows what he said either."

Democrats responded to the debate with abject panic as some Biden loyalists started pushing for him to step down. The resulting liberal frenzy is at least marginally good for Trump, according to Christian Grose, professor of political science and public policy at the University of Southern California.

"Trump is benefiting only in the sense that Biden did not benefit," Grose said.

Most voters, however, are already decided. While the debate might have swung undecided Americans further toward Trump, Grose said Biden's poor performance is unlikely to sway Democrats toward the Republican nominee in today's partisan age. Biden may have lost himself some votes, but it's not evident that those will bolster Trump's base, Grose said.

"Those who support Donald Trump will continue to support him in November, no matter what happens until then. Those that do not, will not," said David Triana, a public relations consultant focused on legal figures. "The question there remains: will they vote for Biden or stay home?"

The early nature of this first debate could, however, end up playing in Biden's favor. Public recall tends to be short, and there is still ample time between now and November for Biden to try to change the narrative around his age — especially amid Trump's ongoing legal woes, Grose said.

"Something terrible happens to one of these candidates once every two weeks — usually Trump," Grose said.

SCOTUS surprises

Less than 24 hours after the debate, the Supreme Court handed down two major decisions, which, at first glance, appeared to be more good news for Trump.

The top court overturned the Chevron doctrine, a decades-old legal precedent that required courts to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of congressional statutes when reasonable. Conservatives long had their sights set on overturning the doctrine, which they argue granted too much power to the executive branch.

In a separate 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court also narrowed charges for several January 6, 2021 rioters, ruling that the obstruction statute used to prosecute the defendants was employed too broadly by the Department of Justice.

Both decisions are a reminder of the outsize role Trump has played in shaping the modern court. During his first term, he appointed three conservative justices who helped swing the court further right than it had been in many years.

The January 6 case also has positive personal implications for Trump, who also faces a federal obstruction charge in Special Counsel Jack Smith's case. On Friday, legal experts told Business Insider that the decision was good news for Trump's legal prospects.

But the personal benefits Trump may reap from the Supreme Court's decisions could have unwanted political effects on his campaign, Grose suggested.

It could remind voters unhappy with the Supreme Court's conservative drift that another Trump term could mean more Trump SCOTUS appointees.

Much of Biden's platform revolves around his claims that he alone can protect democracy from the dangers of a second Trump term. Undecided voters with strong opinions on abortion and January 6 could be turned off by Trump's Supreme Court appointees and their increasingly conservative rulings, he suggested.

Should the court rule in favor of Trump's presidential immunity case next week, voters could be more inclined to believe Biden's narrative about democracy needing to be saved, Grose said.

Many undecided voters are also particularly concerned with a candidate's character, and Trump's refusal to acknowledge responsibility for his crimes could come back to bite him with independents — especially if the Supreme Court grants him broad immunity, Triana said.

But ultimately, it's just too soon to say how this week's events will impact November, Grose said.

"We just have to wait and see how the polls shake out," he said.

• Ari Emanuel, CEO of media conglomerate Endeavor, called for guardrails on artificial intelligence.
• He said in an interview at the Aspen Ideas Festival that the technology will be necessary.
• But he said OpenAI CEO Sam Altman can't be trusted and the government needs to step in. 

Ari Emanuel, CEO of Endeavor, the sports and entertainment conglomerate, called OpenAI CEO Sam Altman a "con man" who can't be trusted with artificial intelligence.

During the Aspen Ideas Festival on Friday, the media juggernaut was asked to share his thoughts on AI and the reassurances innovators such as Altman give about the technology.

Emanuel first thought of Elon Musk, whom he called a "friend," and said that they disagree on many things but not on the risks of AI.

"If he's nervous, then we should be nervous," Emanuel said. "And I do think there should be guardrails."

On Altman, Emanuel was less kind.

"As it relates to Sam Altman, I think he's — he's a con man." he said, criticizing how OpenAI began as a nonprofit, but Altman is "now making a lot of money."

OpenAI has an unusual corporate structure known as a "capped-profit" company in which the for-profit arm is governed by a nonprofit. Altman doesn't directly hold equity in OpenAI.

The purpose of the structure was to ensure that OpenAI pursued artificial general intelligence to benefit humanity before it prioritizes profits. In recent months, OpenAI's commitment to that mission has come under scrutiny.

"I don't know why I would trust him," Emanuel said. "I don't know why we would trust these people."

An OpenAI spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Two days before Emanuel spoke at the festival, Altman and Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky were at the same event, saying that building AI responsibly will require society's input.

"We need to learn how to make safe technology," Altman said. "We need to figure out how to build safe products, and that includes an ongoing dialogue with society."

Emanuel said that people like Altman are likely very intelligent and that he doesn't want to stifle innovation; however, he doesn't trust that innovators have properly weighed the benefits of AI against the cons.

"I thought about a whole host of stuff that's bad," he said. "So you're telling me you've done the calculation, and the good outweighs the bad. Really? I don't think so."

The Endeavor CEO added that government regulation will be necessary as AI continues to develop.

"I don't want to stifle innovation either cause I do think we need AI. But we have to have the rails around it," he said. "And I know a lot of people in Silicon Valley don't like the government coming in — and it's not like the government's performed great in that area given guardrails — but this is a pretty dynamic technology that needs really long thought about what can and can't happen."