On public service – The Economist:

‘In november 2022 The Economist said that, after a lifetime of public service, Joe Biden should not seek re-election as president. In January this year we put our concerns on the cover. But even those worried about his age were not prepared for Thursday’s debate against Donald Trump. Over 90 agonising minutes, Mr Biden was befuddled and incoherent—too infirm, frankly, to cope with another four years in the world’s hardest job.’

(…)

‘Mr Biden’s chances of winning in November have taken a savage knock. His team sought to debate Mr Trump because their man was trailing. Our forecast modelhas consistently given him a chance of victory of roughly one in three—worrying, but not hopeless. His staff had been limiting his exposure to interviews, even as they insisted that in private he remains sharp, vigorous and in total control.’

(…)

‘Two men on that stage were unfit to be president, but only one of them was morally unfit. Given the threat Mr Trump poses to decency and democracy, it is reckless to entrust a man as frail as Mr Biden with the task of keeping him out of the Oval Office. Is there time for Mr Biden to give way to a better candidate?’

(…)

‘Thursday’s debate was designed to answer the question of whether Mr Biden was fit to be president—and in this it succeeded. It has brought clarity to a race that currently offers Americans a choice between two candidates they do not want.’

Read the article here.

Joe Biden should have listened to The Economist, and the weekly is now a bit sad that he didn’t.

The future is unpredictable, anybody who believes that he can foresee the future, especially this part of the future, is a con man.

I would put my money on Biden stepping aside before the end of the summer, but never underestimate stubbornness and even with an alternative Democratic candidate Trump might still win.