Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
It was clear from an early point that, barring some unforeseen circumstance, the 2024 presidential election would be a rematch between Donald Trump and Joe Biden — the first contest with two presidents on the ballot since 1912.
Most Americans, according to several polls, say they do not want this. Most, a recent CBS News survey reports, think such a rematch is evidence of a broken political system. But most Americans are nonetheless resigned to it.
This palpable sense of exhaustion is perhaps the reason so many political observers have taken to speculating about a future in which Biden, at least, doesn't run.
David Ignatius wrote recently in the Washington Post that if Biden and Kamala Harris "campaign together in 2024, I think Biden risks undoing his greatest achievement — which was stopping Trump." Likewise, Eliot Cohen wrote this summer in the Atlantic that Biden "has no business running for president at age 80."
I find this drumbeat, which has been ongoing since at least 2022 ("Let me put this bluntly: Joe Biden should not run for re-election in 2024," Mark Leibovich wrote last summer, also in the Atlantic. "He is too old"), to be incredibly strange, to say the least. The basic premise of a voluntary one-term presidency rests on a fundamental misconception of the role of re-election in presidential politics and governance.
Re-election — or rather the act of running for re-election — is one of the ways presidents wield and preserve their influence, whether they ultimately win another term or not.