Years ago, I had to have a difficult conversation with my aging father.
He was living alone at the time, my mother having passed. More significant to my visit, he was 81 years old, had experienced a stroke a few years earlier, and was still a licensed driver. I drove to his home in western New York to tell him he needed to no longer drive his car.
Not surprisingly, he first defended his abilities and insisted he remained fully capable of handling any situation. I sensed his defensiveness, his fierce pride, as he bristled at the notion that he might not be the capable and confident driver he had been. The man he had been.
No one wants to be reminded that their strongest days are no longer in front of them. When I felt that my message was being lost, I turned to what I knew he loved more than anything.
I said: “Dad, if a 5-year-old chased a ball into the street and your reflexes didn’t allow you to stop in time, could you ever live with yourself?” He closed his eyes for the longest time. Then he said quietly: “OK.”
The advisers to the president must have that conversation – if they’re not already having it. Without a doubt, it will be challenging.
President Biden is a very proud man. He’s been striving for this office for his entire career, and he won’t relinquish it easily. For the sake of the nation and his own legacy, though, it’s a conversation that must occur. The consequences are far too high. He can, and should, be reminded of how essential his 2020 election was for this country, and that he genuinely was the man to deny his predecessor a second term. He can be assured by those closest to him that through his many legislative accomplishments despite a hostile political climate, his place in history is secured.
He and Jill can be also be warned, by contrast, that if he insists on running, and he ends up losing in November, history will only remember him for that decision. If he takes this in and reflects on his often-stated love of country, he can then be urged to stand before the American people and tell us that he truly intends to be a bridge to the next generation – and that he fully recognizes that turning back the other party’s menacing nominee is far more important to our very future as a democracy than his own personal desire to prevail in a final campaign.
Political parties theoretically exist to nominate the strongest, most capable and most electable candidates to put before the voters. They are not meant simply to coronate. A withdrawal at this point is very late, but it need not be too late. After a spirited and open six-week process, culminating in the Chicago convention, his party can put forth a ticket that will bring new energy, will draw a stark and necessary contrast to the opposing candidate, and will say to our friends and allies throughout the world that we can be counted on going forward. And it will say to those who follow that, as we turn to a new generation for leadership, we are fully confident in their ability to guide us in confronting the problems we face as a nation.
It’s a difficult ask. No one wants to admit to decline. No one wants to confront it. But last week’s debate showed us that conversation is imperative. It has to happen now.
For the sake of the children and their future, Mr. President, please turn over the keys.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Modify your screen name
Join the Conversation
Please sign into your Press Herald account to participate in conversations below. If you do not have an account, you can register or subscribe. Questions? Please see our FAQs.