Joe Biden’s recent triple-flip on the Hyde Amendment, although worthy of an Olympic gold, reveals not only serious concerns about his thought process, but also demonstrates both just how far he is willing to go to win the Democrat nomination and what will ultimately prove to be his undoing.
The Hyde Amendment is a 1977 legislative action that prohibits public funding of abortion in most cases. Individual feelings about abortion aside, the Hyde Amendment is an example of Washington working. Its passage was, at its core, a true compromise. Legal abortion, facilitated by Roe v. Wade, was not thrust upon those with sincere moral objections. The government of the people would not interfere with abortion. The government of the people would not fund abortion. Both sides could be at least somewhat happy. As Joe Biden was for 42 years.
In case you may have missed it, last week Joe Biden took a question at a rope line regarding his support for Hyde. The former VP promptly stated he had reversed his long held (42 year long held) position and that he no longer supported Hyde. An odd venue and manner in which to announce such a monumental reversal. Of course, about fifteen minutes later Uncle Joe, of course, corrected himself and reaffirmed his support for the Hyde Amendment. He, or so he claims, could not fully hear the earlier question. Then, a short 24 hours later, the Biden camp announced, again, that he no longer could support the Hyde Amendment due to changing circumstances. A triple-flip! No small feat for the spry 76-year-old.
Pro-abortion Democrats have always enjoyed telling pro-lifers that a person’s private choices are none of their business. That argument really flies out the window when you hand someone else a bill for what is “none of their business.” And Joe Biden realized that for 42 years. But then came his supposed epiphany on Hyde.
Joe Biden is leading in every single poll for the Democratic nomination. In this political age of identity metrics above reason, how is it that a white, male, Christian, heterosexual, septuagenarian is leading the crowded pack of party hopefuls? There are, in fact, two simple reasons: name recognition and, what once was, a perceived centrist approach.
Joe Biden has been in American politics longer than the designated hitter has been in American League baseball. As a six-term Senator and two-term Vice President, there is no doubt where his name recognition comes from. But Biden’s appeal centered more on his Uncle Joe image. A calm voice that not only could but would play the center and work with both sides, not subject to the daily reactionary cries of the extreme left. And then Biden threw that away.
Joe Biden’s recent abandonment of Hyde (and reason) signals a lack of forethought, political courage, and desperation that will ultimately cost him his third attempt for the presidency. Biden has been leading in the Democratic polls, despite his lack of any discernable victimhood status, precisely because he stood apart from the extreme left.
Now, with his baseless claim that Hyde impacts people based on their “zip code” and race, Joe Biden has immersed himself in the same extreme, left-wing, identity politics of each and every one of his opponents for the nomination. Well, the equation becomes much simpler then. If Joe Biden is running in a competition of identity politics, he loses.
Moreover, if you strip away Biden’s alleged centrist credentials, remove his supposed willingness to compromise, and negate any perceived independence from the pack, you are left with a simple mathematical equation to determine Biden’s chances for the nomination. Take age (A) 76, plus experience (E) 47 years, and multiply by victimhood status (V) 0. Simply, (A+E) x V= nomination chances. In Biden’s case, (76+47) x 0 = 0.
When Joe Biden was sniffing a stranger’s hair or unaware of the occasional hot microphone, he was old Uncle Joe. A bit awkward, a bit embarrassing, never your first choice for a wedding toast, but he was real. Now, his reversal on Hyde, regardless of anyone’s personal feelings on abortion, demonstrates a lack of courage and a lack of character. A desperate need to appeal to extremes regardless of principle.
His campaign has been reduced to simple math.