That’s what Republicans claim (here), but I doubt they’d praise anything Biden said, no matter what it was.
Biden delivered his “Soul of the Nation” speech on Thursday, September 1, 2022, using Philadelphia’s Independence Hall and two U.S. Marines as props. (All politicians love props.) Watch the video below and/or read the transcript here. Apart from the controversy over the Marines (see story here), there was much in his speech that’s praiseworthy.
I listened to all of it. At one point, he talked about his administration’s accomplishments, and that certainly was a campaign speech, this being an election year.
But most of what he said needed to be said, all of it was true, and he was talking about a subject that transcends day-to-day politics: The threat to our democracy from Trump and his MAGA movement. I don’t expect Republicans to like being called out for that. But as the expression goes, if the shoe fits, wear it.
Biden said democracy is “under assault,” which is true. Republicans tried to overturn a fair and democratic election, they’re scheming to do it in future elections, and they’re attacking the right to vote and have our votes counted.
He asked “our nation to come together” and “unite behind the single purpose of defending our democracy regardless of your ideology.” Who can be against that, unless they’re against democracy? He called political violence “wrong.” What’s wrong with saying that?
He was unsparing in his criticism of Trump and his MAGA supporters. He said they “promote authoritarian leaders” and “fan the flames of political violence,” look at the Capitol rioters as “patriots,” and tried “to stop a peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election” and “nullify the votes of 81 million people.” They won’t like hearing this, but it’s all true.
Republicans called his speech “divisive” (see, e.g., story here). Talking in the language of lofty and noble aspirations, Biden called America an “idea” that guarantees everyone will be “treated with dignity” and “gives hate no safe harbor.” He spoke of equality and said, “I believe America is big enough for all of us to succeed.” He spoke about “opening doors” and “creating new possibilities.” That’s not divisive.
Biden isn’t dividing our nation. He said, “I’m asking every American to join me” in heeding “our better angels” and making our nation “free and fair, just and strong, noble and whole.”
I’m inclined to think we’re divided because America is changing. We’re moving away from being a white male dominated society to a more pluralistic society with greater equality, and some people used to the old ways are having trouble coping with that. A political system is supposed to thrash out differences, but a faction who are not a majority are on the verge of rejecting the system if they can’t dominate it, which isn’t fair to the rest of us.
I see Biden’s speech as a last-ditch appeal to reason and our “better angels.” I don’t think that’s going to work. They don’t even accept facts; they spurn facts and truth while embracing wild conspiracy theories. How do you reason with that? Or with talk of “civil war” and threats against public officials and election workers? It’s already at the point where democracy has to defend itself with the force of law.
But more than anything, I think he wanted to reassure us that he’s not blind to what’s happening and won’t be caught flat-footed by it. And, as the Guardian puts it (here), it shows that “Biden has evolved a long way from the man who suggested that he could turn back the clock to a golden age of Democrats and Republicans debating together, dining together and respectfully agreeing to disagree.” If only he could.
However, there’s another way to interpret the purpose and content of this speech. Realistically, Biden wasn’t speaking to Republicans, but to his Democratic base. You could conclude his real intention was to show them he’s got a spine, will defend democracy, and above all was trying to create a sense of urgency in order to boost Democratic turnout in November. If this is how the GOP politicians criticizing it see things, then it certainly would look like a political speech to them.
But even in that case, is it really fair to call “divisive” a campaign speech in an election year that says “vote for us, not them”? I mean, politicians do that every time there’s an election, including Republicans, so if you’re going to criticize it on those grounds, you’d have to say their campaign speeches are equally “divisive.”