The emotional-psychological phenomenon that is the current political cycle began (arguably) on the night of the U.S. presidential debate a month ago. Before that, Democrats—and Democrat-leaning media outlets—had long insisted that questions about President Biden’s cognitive decline were part of a “right-wing conspiracy theory”; that he was sharp, alert, and focused on the job. But to most ordinary observers he often appeared dazed and struggling to find the right world or to hold a train of thought. But we took their assurances that he’s able to do his job while maybe not having the surplus energy to remain fresh for PR purposes at the end of a day of “running the world” (as he once described his work). Fair enough. But during the debate, his halting and slurred speech and apparent disorientation destroyed whatever credibility his spin doctors had left. Influential Democrats began publicly calling on him to withdraw from the race. Republicans had a field day calling him “senile” (despite THEIR candidate, former President Trump, being almost as old, though he certainly seems more vigorous).

Meanwhile, news that would be seismic in normal times, came and went, barely remarked by Americans. Julian Assange, wanted for exposing U.S. national secrets, was released, after spending seven years as an asylee in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London followed by another five in a UK prison, awaiting an extradition hearing. He took a plea deal, accepting a guilty verdict on an espionage charge and sentenced to 62 months of time served, and was set free. This was a potential asset for Democrats, who, in recent years have become strongly associated with draconian surveillance practices and military flexing. Assange’s release is welcome news to libertarians, moderates, independents, and even the civil-libertarian segment of the hard left, who are all concerned about freedom of information and government transparency. These voters are very much up for grabs this year and many of them are flocking to former Democrat Robert F. Kennedy, JR., who is poised to garner historically high levels of support for an Independent candidate. Being able to say “I freed Assange” could’ve been campaign gold for Biden, but the Democrats seemed to just pass up this low hanging fruit inexplicably.

Advertisement

Americans did take note (briefly) of two European elections. After months of giddy optimism on the Right and abject fearmongering on the Left regarding the nationalist and reactionary politics that seemed headed for great wins against the tide of the “woke” progressive Left, the Left parties of Britain and France roundly defeated their conservative opponents. In the U.S., this was greeted with surprise by agitators on both sides, and with no regard for how the history and political culture of those countries differ from the U.S., they read the tea leaves. For the Left it meant the tide of “history is on [their] side” and “real people” actually don’t have a problem with “wokeness” or what have you. For the Right, it meant the apocalypse is near, and the “globalist Left” is likely “stealing” elections by importing illegal migrants and letting them vote (and other such accusations).

Then suddenly, things took a frightening turn. At a campaign rally on 13 July, an assassin fired a shot at former President Trump, piercing his ear and missing his brain by a hair’s breadth, killing a rally attendee who heroically shielded his family with his body. Mr Trump rose up defiantly, with his fist in the air and called on his supporters to “fight!” creating an instantly iconic tableau.

In these troubled times, even such a harrowing event was almost immediately treated with partisanship. Internet trolls posted tasteless expressions of regret that the attempt failed. Others, including some famous and influential folk, retaliated by setting out to find them—utterly ordinary people with negligible social media presence and zero clout—and ruin their lives, get them fired and doxed for saying these deplorable things. President Biden condemned the violence and extended his prayers and good wishes to the Trump family, expressing gratitude that President Trump was safe. Still, there were various criticisms of his response and that of the Democrat-leaning media, some of whom published early reports of the incident in puzzlingly obfuscating terms. One headline read: “Secret Service rushes Trump off stage after he falls at rally” not mentioning a gunshot. It is possible that the reporting was vague due to early confusion about exactly what occurred, but in today’s polarised world, there is no room for the tiniest benefit of the doubt. And of course, there’s often actual bad faith in reporting, too.

So high-octane is the partisan tension that the wife of the slain rally attendee refused a condolence phone call from President Biden and, worse, some Biden supporting talking heads couldn’t resist the urge—just for a minute—to excoriate the freshly grieving widow for her lack of grace. And conspiracy theorists started speculating that it was “staged” to boost Trump’s popularity and “fighter” image or, alternatively, that it was a “hit” by his opponents. (Neither theory appears to be supported by any evidence, naturally.)

Then came the long-awaited announcement of Trump’s running mate, J.D. Vance, a self-made lawyer, venture-capitalist and former “never-Trumper” who seems to have changed his mind about almost everything, from the free market and global trade (which he now routinely demonises in favour of protectionism and nationalism) to his dislike of Trump, whom he now practically hero-worships. There is much to be said about this relatively new face in national politics (he is only 38, barely making the 35-year age requirement for the job!). So, let’s leave it for another time. Suffice it to say, his personal story—and the clever gloss with which he tells it—has the unlikely blend of that quintessentially American “self-made” individualism and a newly ascendant appeal to collectivism and identity politics that have captured his party. Being in an interracial marriage to a daughter of Indian immigrants has the potential to create friction, though it is just as much a welcome feature of his story, from the perspective of a broad cross-section of Republicans who are weary of racial divisions.

The NEXT big plot twist: pressured by many prominent Democrats, Biden withdraws from the campaign and recommends Vice President Kamala Harris to succeed him. This is extraordinary enough on its own, but Biden made it even more scintillating by announcing it, not by a live press conference or even a video address, but by digitally signed letter, released on social media and various outlets, followed shortly by an announcement from the White House that he had contracted Covid and would be quarantined for some time. The President was not publicly seen or heard from for an entire week, fueling speculation about his health, whether he was still alive, whether he was forced out by others in his party and was perhaps self-isolating to deal with the anger and pain of betrayal. There was talk of palace intrigue—including speculation about whether Vice President Harris would really be the ultimate nominee or whether the “real powers” in the party have other plans. Some party stalwarts like the Clintons endorsed Harris right away. Others took a few days, mostly conspicuously, Former President Obama and senior congressional leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, spurring rumours of an intraparty contest over a suddenly “open” ticket. As of this writing, the whole party seems to have consolidated their support for Harris, including all of the above-mentioned and almost everyone that pundits had considered as a possible replacement for Biden. Harris brings an entirely different set of strengths and weaknesses compared to Joe Biden. It will be fascinating to watch what happens next.

Some in the chattering class have wondered aloud if this was “the plan” all along, suggesting that Democratic party elites—including perhaps Biden himself—have long known that he couldn’t realistically seek a second term, but they wanted to handpick a nominee instead of opening the field up to a primary election. It hasn’t been customary for a sitting president to be challenged in a primary in own party since 1980, when the Democrats suffered a humiliating routing after an ugly primary challenge to President Jimmy Carter by Senator Ted Kennedy left the party fractured and demoralised. So, the 2024 Democrats, the theory goes, pretended Biden was running, in order to avoid a vigorous primary contest until just after it was too late to hold primary elections, at which time Biden would announce his withdrawal, and the party leadership would simply anoint one of their own as the nominee. No real evidence has been presented for these extraordinary claims, but such are the times in which we live.

The author is a lawyer, writer and editor based in Manhattan, New York