Why the double standard when it comes to Joe Biden's age vis-a-vis Donald Trump?
And why does the mainstream media continue to feed the unfair misperception?
I meet frequently with the president, and every single time I meet with him, he is just fine. how people interpret that is up to them, but I engage with him frequently and he is alert, sound, does his homework, reads the papers, reads all the read-ahead material, and he’s very engaged in issues of very serious matters of war and peace and life and death. so if the American people are worried about an individual who is someone making decisions of war and peace, making decisions about nuclear weapons and that sort of thing, I think they can rest easy.
Gen. Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, speaking on President Joe Biden’s decision-making capabilities
It’s tough to know sometimes, but one has to ask: Are TIME Magazine and the New York Times (and perhaps even the Washington Post) committed to seeing Donald Trump elected in November? Are they doing their level best to slant their reporting just enough to convince the American Sheeple that the cobwebs in ol’ Sleepy Joe’s belfry have seriously impacted his ability to make sound decisions?
Are they deliberately playing down the reality that Donny Diaperfull is only four years younger than the President AND has trouble speaking in clear- never mind coherent- sentences?
As the Times says:
Both Donald J. Trump and President Biden are over 75. But voters are much less likely to worry that Mr. Trump is too old to serve.
And why might that be? Could it be that the Times and the rest of the mainstream media are busily spreading the message that President Biden is too old to serve…while almost wholly ignoring Donald Trump’s cognitive issues?
I’m fully aware that Joe Biden isn’t in his prime. The man’s 81, and while I think most Americans would probably prefer to see someone younger in the White House, when the alternative is Donald Trump most decent Americans would vote for an exhumed and re-animated FDR.
The Democratic Party could also exhume and attempt to reanimate Jimmy Carter. Wait, he’s still alive? Well, even at 99 or however old he is, he’s still a far better President than Donald Trump could ever hope to be.
The complaints about Biden are almost hypocritical:
Joe Biden is less than four years older than Donald Trump. When Biden became the oldest President to ever be sworn in back in 2021, it was Trump’s record he was breaking. Now, the two men once again appear set to be the oldest pair of major party nominees in history.
And yet, polls show voters far more worried about whether the 81-year-old President could handle another four years in the White House than his 77-year-old predecessor, a concern that exploded into the forefront this week after a report alleged Biden exhibited multiple memory lapses. Conversations with voters, political strategists and others suggest that those sentiments are about more than Biden being older than Trump; it’s how the behavior and appearance of the two men, but Biden in particular, has changed in recent years.
“Look at everything that's gone on in the last three years with that dude,” says Travis Aslin, an Iowa independent who says he used to support Democrats but can’t bring himself to vote for Biden. “The word salad, the stumbling, you know, standing on a stage and looking like—honest to God, he looks like my grandfather did. My grandfather had Alzheimer's.”
Sure, Joe Biden looks, acts, and sometimes speaks like an 81-year-old man, but an 81-year-old man with heart, compassion, intelligence, and the ability to put himself in the shoes of everyday Americans.
Donald Trump is 77 going on 12. He neither knows nor particularly cares about the plight of the commoner. Everything he does is staged or half-assed. He stumbles over his words, says completely nonsensical things, and slurs his speech- more than Biden does. Yet the media gives him what amounts to a free pass.
Why?
One Democratic strategist blamed a media double standard for the disproportionate concern about Biden’s age compared to Trump’s. “But you peel back the layers a little bit more and it's a little bit more complicated,” added the strategist, who requested anonymity to speak more freely about the leader of his party. “As someone who's watched him age over the years, it’s basically the same guy I've been watching for years, but he's just—his gait is so stiff. It just sometimes gives Republicans, the RNC, a lot to talk about.”
Beverly Hallberg, who provides media coaching to Republicans as president of District Media Group, says Biden has long drawn attention for his occasional gaffes. When he became Vice President, she says, those moments helped cultivate a “‘Joe's just one of us’ type of mentality” for many voters.
“He could get up there and command an audience. He sounded strong when he was speaking, his consonants were clear,” she says.
What’s changed more recently, Hallberg argues, is the way Biden speaks, which she describes as a “slurring” and “mumbling.” The public saw a flash of that issue when he responded to Hur’s report Thursday night, eliding words when he talked about how long he sat with the Special Counsel.
There are times when we see Biden not at his “best.” Sure, he can’t go at the same pace he did 20 years ago…but how many of us can, regardless of age?
Ideally, we wouldn’t face a choice between a 77-year-old man and an 81-year-old man. Then again, in a perfect world, we wouldn’t face a choice in which one of the candidates has made noises about wanting to be a dictator and suspend the Constitution. Not only that, people on his side have made plans for such an eventuality. That’s what the media should be talking about.
The media and the American Sheeple should be focusing on Project 2025, the plans that have been created by Trump loyalists, which would, if implemented, turn America into the 21st-century version of 1933 Germany. Instead, it’s chosen to ignore that potential for the future destruction of American democracy in favor of pablum about Joe Biden’s age.
Interestingly enough, the Times online version of their article has a flattering photo of Donald Trump taken from a distance. He’s looking hale and hearty with a smile in the spotlight as he stands in front of several American flags.
There are no photos of President Biden…perhaps they couldn’t find one that made him look haggard and dopey enough?
Donald J. Trump has praised Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orban, for his leadership of Turkey, and confused Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi. President Biden has named dead former European leaders when describing his contemporary peers, and referred to Egypt as Mexico.
The episodes might have raised parallel concerns about age and mental acuity. Instead, while Mr. Biden, 81, has been increasingly dogged by doubts and concerns about his advancing years from voters, Mr. Trump, who is 77, has not felt the same political blowback.
In the TIME article, there is only this split-screen photo of Trump and Biden:
Trump, however, is leaving it to others to raise the age issue. He knows he’s vulnerable, given his vintage, so he’s chosen to approach it in a slightly different manner:
When Megyn Kelly suggested to Trump in a September interview that he must have good genes, he agreed, noting that his dad lived into his 90s. “It’s really a parental thing,” he said. “I believe in the racehorse theory. Fast horses produce fast horses.”
But, perhaps sensing his own vulnerabilities on the age question, Trump passed up an opportunity to attack Biden over the issue. When Kelly asked if Biden was too old to be president, Trump said age had nothing to do with it.
“Age is interesting ‘cause some people are very sharp and some people do lose it,” Trump said, adding, “But no, he's not too old at all. He's grossly incompetent. You look at some of the great world leaders, they were in their 80s and they did—Churchill, so many people, they were phenomenal in their 80s. There’s a great wisdom if you’re not in a position like him.”
Of course, Trump might want to exercise caution before accusing Joe Biden of being “grossly incompetent.” If anyone on the other side ever decides to compare their records and accomplishments during their terms in office, it’s doubtful Trump will come out on top.
Besides, Joe Biden can’t be linked with, as Donald Trump has been, responsibility for the deaths of three-quarters of a MILLION Americans from COVID-19. That was the conclusion of one Washington think tank that examined Trump’s laissez-faire response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Bleach and Ivermection? Seriously? Who’s “grossly incompetent?”
The problem now is that Biden is perceived as being old and doddery, while the public isn’t nearly as concerned about Trump’s numerous geriatric faux pas. But the media most often create perceptions like that, and in this case, the mainstream media has focused on President Biden’s age and verbal gaffes, even as they’ve given Donny Diaperfull a free pass. When the media has pointed out a Trump gaffe, it’s most often in almost comedic terms, as if they’re playing it for laughs, not as something that may reflect poorly on his cognitive health.
remember when Trump started channeling Hitler, blathering on about how immigrants were “vermin poisoning our blood of our country”? it was a one-day story, and then the press found some other shiny object to fixate on. Trump is still Hitlering at the top of his lungs. ‘vermin poisoning our blood’ is still part of his stump speech. but the press? they’ve moved on. nothing to see here.
remember Project 2025, the Republican plan to end democracy in America and replace it with Trump Rule Forever? it’s totally scary shit, but it’s pretty much only gotten one article in the Washington Post. the rest of the mainstream media hasn’t bothered to take notice.
contrast that with what’s going on with the press right now: we’re now in Day 4 of the great freak-out over jOe BiDeN’s AgE.
There’s a glaring hypocrisy at work here…and yet no one seems to A) recognize it, B) be willing to call it out, or C) both. How have even mainstream media outlets that may arguably lean to the Left, like MSNBC, remained silent on this issue? There’s no way that I, a lonely and awkward writer tucked away on the Upper Left Coast, have been the first and only one to notice it…because, let’s face it, I’m not that smart.
If I can see this, then others have, as well, people with much greater resources and higher IQs. But why is this not a subject being screamed from rooftops? Are the White Conservative Christian Cisgender Heterosexual males who monopolize virtually all media outlets in this country afraid to allow discussion on this topic?
Or are they too heavly invested in driving the “Biden is a doddery old fart with a faulty memory” narrative that seems to be de riguer in the mainstream media.
Robert Hur, the Republican special prosecutor assigned to investigate President Biden, is a lawyer, not a doctor. On Thursday, Hur issued a lengthy report that came to the legal conclusion that charges against Biden for mishandling classified materials were not warranted. In the report, Hur also opined, based on a few hours of interviews, that Biden had a "poor memory" and "diminished faculties." Hur lacks any qualifications to arrive at these medical opinions. Nevertheless, Hur's decision to include those opinions in the report was newsworthy, as was Biden's forceful rejection of Hur's attack on his mental fitness later that day.
But while Hur's views about Biden's memory were worth mentioning, the media instead treated Hur's amateur medical judgments as a political crisis for Biden and an existential threat to his reelection campaign. But the actual threat to Biden's political prospects is the deluge of negative media coverage based on Hur's conjecture. A Popular Information analysis found that just three major papers — the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal — collectively published 81 articles about Hur's assessment of Biden's memory in the four days following the release of Hur's report. Incidents that raised questions about former President Trump's mental state received far less coverage by the same outlets.
Overall, The New York Times published 30 stories about Biden's alleged memory issues between February 7 and February 10. Over those four days, the story was covered by 24 reporters (some of whom filed multiple stories), four opinion columnists, and the New York Times Editorial Board.
And that wasn’t even the worst of it. The Times treated Hur’s judgment as if he had a double Ph.D. in gerontology and psychology. His words were treated as a definitive judgment on President Biden’s mental state. It was anything but.
Hur's report legally clearing Biden was described in the New York Times as "a political disaster," "a political nightmare," "a new political crisis," and "a political mess." The paper said the report inflicted "searing political damage," placed "Mr. Biden’s advanced age… back at the center of America’s political conversation," and constituted "a gift" to Republicans. And that's just what was included in purportedly objective "news" reports. After Hur's report, New York Times opinion columnists with no medical credentials said Biden showed "signs of senescence" and suggested he was sliding "into dementia." Another said Hur's report proved "Biden should not be running for re-election" and blamed Biden's mental state for "the emboldenment of America’s rivals." The New York Times Editorial Board described the report ominously as "a dark moment for Mr. Biden’s presidency."
Has the Times editoral board and their numerous reporters expressed similar concerns about Donald Trump? I can’t say with any authority, because I haven’t chased down the numbers, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say it’s highly unlikely they’ve put Orange Jesus under a similarly microscopic examination.
Why? I have my theories, but nothing I can back up with credible evidence. One does have to wonder, though.
Sure, voters are much less likely to worry that Mr. Trump is too old to serve.” But why is that the case? And why are mainstream media outlets not challenging that assumption? Why are they not calling out their own implicit bias?
And why are other media outlets not calling them out?
Is it that the chaos Donald Trump brings with him bring clicks, sells newspapers, and thus drives up ad revenues? Could it be that simple?
Or are they also afraid of an 81-year-old man winning in November? And are they willing to take their chances with a wannabe despot who’s all but said he wants to end American democracy and reign in the free press?
Be careful what y’all wish for because you might get it…and a whole lot more you didn’t bargain for.
(All of my posts are now public. Any reader financial support will be considered pledges- support that’s greatly appreciated but not required to get to all of my work. I’ll trust my readers to determine if my work is worthy of their financial support and at what level. To those who do offer their support, thank you. It means more than you know.)
The media(news) are ambulance chasers bypassing the crash site. They conveniently cherry pick the ingredients to bake their new pies, etc.
After all, the media has become a product, choose a shelf.
Hopefully, voters will judge by character and accomplishments, not by age.
Here’s a headline; Felony counts, Biden 0, Trump 90 and still counting!