Actually, Yes, We are Being Ageist about Biden
As everyone knows, the biggest negative against Joe Biden is his age: 77% of Americans say he’s too old for the job. Already our oldest president, Biden is turning 81 next month, and, in many ways, he seems to show it. Aides carefully manage his travel plans, conserve his energy, and try to avoid any literal missteps that could become fodder for Donald Trump’s next campaign ad.
I’ve written and spoken about this issue a lot lately, in the context not only of Biden but of Senators Mitch McConnell and the late Dianne Feinstein (my tribute to her career is here) and of the overall “gerontocracy” in which we are living today. There are many factors in play: the need to have competent leaders, and people in touch with the concerns and values of younger Americans, and, on the flip side, having respect for our elders and avoiding the biases of ageism and ableism.
Lately, though, I’ve come around to the view that, actually, a lot of the “concerns” people have about Biden are better described as biases. They should be fodder for introspection, not the basis of sound political decisions.
Let me distinguish this point from two related ones.
First, even if concerns about Biden’s age are legitimate, they pale in comparison to concerns about Trump’s authoritarianism, criminality, and enrage-ification of the American polity. Even if we were to posit that Biden is impaired, and even if we were to grant that that impairment is a major issue, still, there’s no ethical choice to be made between these two candidates.
Second, I don’t want to suggest that anyone concerned about Biden’s age is bigoted, biased, or benighted. This kind of accusation is an unfortunate and counterproductive aspect of progressive discourse today: that if you hold a problematic idea, that you yourself are bigoted. As I wrote about in the context of trans issues last week, it’s possible to innocently hold views that are saturated with bias. That’s part of the whole point: that racism, sexism, transphobia, ableism, and so on are systemic, and may thus be imbibed unconsciously.
So, I’m not trying to call anyone out or shame anyone for raising a concern about Biden’s age. I’m just saying that, upon close inspection, the concerns don’t stand up.
Try this experiment. Close your eyes and imagine what you see when someone says “Biden is too old to be president.” Really, try it for a second. When I did this, I came up with a lot of ageist bullshit: how he looks, how he squints, how he’s a little stiff. None of this has any relevance to his fitness to hold public office, but it’s what came to mind.
Some of what I found was ableist: his awkward speech patterns, some of which may be due to age, and some of which are due to his lifelong stutter, which he has mostly mastered but which often causes him to speak haltingly. Again, completely f—-ing irrelevant to his fitness to be president.
Meanwhile, if we turn to what does matter — mental fitness, physical fitness — the guy is fine. You might agree or disagree with Biden’s decisions, actions, and statements, but they are clearly well thought-out and articulate. Is there actually any evidence that Biden’s age is impacting his ability to be president?
A lot of these concerns, I think, also misunderstand what it is to be president. Presidents are surrounded by aides, experts, assistants, and confidantes who keep them on track (which is why Trump kept firing and replacing them). If Biden has a health crisis, they and the vice president will be there. The country won’t fall apart. That’s just not how it works.
Similarly, while I share people’s critiques of American gerontocracy, it’s also true that gerontocracy is as gerontocracy does. And as Gen-Z Biden booster Victor Shi has repeatedly articulated, Biden has the best record of standing up for young people of any president in history: taking unprecedented action on the climate crisis, trying (even if failing) to cancel student loan debt, speaking honestly about the outrageous disparities between Boomer and Gen-Z economic opportunities, and so on. Obviously, Biden is not like JFK, or Obama, or Bill Clinton playing the sax. But his record on things that actually matter to people under thirty is arguably better than theirs.
So what’s left? I’m not really sure. Okay, some people don’t love Kamala Harris; I actually think she’s underrated, and that the historic nature of a possible Harris presidency is pretty damn awesome. But even if you don’t agree, she’s certainly prepared for the job. The country would be in very capable hands.
The situation would be different if Biden were showing signs of mental decline. For all I’ve said above about aides and assistants, still, the person in the Oval Office needs to be sharp. (I’m old enough to remember the end of Reagan’s second term, when he clearly no longer was.) But I haven’t seen evidence of that - just a lot of BS from Fox News and outlets further right.
In the end, while I want to validate the concerns people have about Biden’s age, I just don’t think they’re based on evidence, and I think they are based on ageist and ableist stereotypes that we want to look at more closely. From an electoral politics point of view, I might prefer a younger candidate who didn’t carry this particular baggage. But when I really get into the substance of these concerns, the person I need to scrutinize isn’t Joe Biden. It’s the person in the mirror.
Note: This post was updated following the passing of Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
