Behind the Essay: In Rolling Stone, I worry that yesterday's news is tomorrow's crisis.
Biden wasn't the disease; he was merely the most visible symptom.
Consider this chilling political horror story: A victorious Trump, older than Biden was at inauguration, dies in office, leaving us with President J.D. Vance. Suddenly, the euphoria surrounding Kamala Harris as a panacea to our gerontocracy problem seems as woefully inadequate as using a Band-Aid to reattach a severed limb. It's wasn’t just misguided—it was a dangerous delusion.
As I write in Rolling Stone, this isn’t my imagination run wild. It’s a plausible outcome of the 2024 election.
I've watched with mounting horror as the collective consciousness pivots away from the "Biden's too old" narrative, treating it like yesterday's news rather than tomorrow's crisis. Biden wasn't the disease; he was merely the most visible symptom.
And here's another point, one I just thought of as I wrote this newsletter: imagine the revealing spectacle if our leaders were to resist age limits—while maintaining an age requirement. Nothing would expose the grip of power more starkly than watching septuagenarians and octogenarians fight tooth and denture against it.
We're not just flirting with disaster; we're courting it with the reckless abandon of a nation that's forgotten the weight of its own history. This isn't a problem we can simply age out of—it's one we need to confront head-on, before our democracy needs a walker.