This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Subscribe here to get stories like this sent to your inbox.
Back in August 1987, Joe Biden found himself delivering the closing remarks at a debate in Iowa. Unfortunately, his memorable lines were far from original; they were borrowed. Biden and his team immediately recognized the blunder but misjudged the impact, believing his intentions would outweigh the mistake and that his strong reputation would carry him through.
Nearly four decades later, that misstep remains the most damaging of Biden’s long debate history, derailing his first bid for the presidency. As his team preps for another high-stakes debate against former President Donald Trump, the lessons from that day are undoubtedly at the forefront. Securing the moral high ground means little if the facts provide ammunition for the opponent.
A review of Biden’s debate track record shows bright spots but nothing as impactful as the 1987 flub ahead of the Iowa caucus. In a setting framed by red-clothed tables and garish yellow curtains, seven Democratic contenders entertained an audience still deliberating their choices. Most of the harsh dialogue was aimed at the Reagan administration, with a few jabs directed at frontrunner Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis. Though stakes seemed low in the pre-viral era of VHS tapes, the incident nonetheless left a mark.
At the time, Biden was an influential senator and chairman of the Judiciary Committee reviewing the Supreme Court nomination of Robert Bork. Yet, even as he returned to the Iowa campaign, his focus wandered. Dissatisfied with his prepared closing speech, a young aide, David Wilhelm, suggested that Biden use some language borrowed from British Labor Party Leader Neil Kinnock, which Biden had used previously. Biden agreed to test it out.
Descending from the debate stage, Biden immediately sensed the anxiety in aides Larry Rasky and Tom Donilon. They convinced themselves that the media had heard Biden use the Kinnock lines before and wouldn’t make much of it. The New York Times’s coverage from the fairground didn’t even mention the borrowed phrasing, focusing instead on Biden’s idea to fund government programs with so-called “sin taxes” on alcohol and cigarettes.
Biden, however, had moved on mentally to other pressing concerns, notably the crucial Bork hearings. Mismanaging the narrative about the Kinnock borrow ultimately sank his presidential hopes, overshadowing other priorities.
Reflecting on the ordeal years later, Tom Donilon explained that Biden was “on autopilot,” distracted, and careless.
This pattern of rushing through high-level tasks has occasionally plagued Biden. Like a student racing against time on a math quiz, he sometimes sacrifices the details for the right answer. The fallout from 1987 haunted him for two decades before he made a comeback in 2008, albeit with another infamous gaffe describing then-Senator Barack Obama as “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean.”
His attempt at the 2008 Democratic nomination didn’t fare well either. Despite memorable jabs, such as his quip about Rudy Giuliani, Biden ended up in the second tier, quickly exiting the race. However, Obama chose him as a running mate, leading to a vice-presidential debate against Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. Here, Biden’s cautious approach was affected by his son’s deployment to Iraq and Obama’s earlier debate missteps with Hillary Clinton.
In 2012, Biden returned to form in a debate against GOP VP pick Paul Ryan, where he robustly challenged Ryan’s points, invoking memorable comparisons to John F. Kennedy. However, this boldness retreated during the 2019 Miami debate against Kamala Harris, where Biden kept his responses concise and careful, perhaps overly so.
As Biden prepares to face Trump again, maintaining that discipline is critical. His exchanges with Trump are often marked by impatience, highlighted by his 2020 retort, “Will you shut up, man?” These days, he frequently uses the euphemism “the other guy” instead of naming Trump directly.
Biden’s history suggests he often assumes a forgiving audience, a risky gamble given the questions surrounding his suitability to handle another presidential term. In a race against an opponent indifferent to merit or facts, Biden’s occasional tendency to get derailed by small mistakes could be decisive in the 2024 campaign, putting his decades of experience to the ultimate test.
Make sense of what matters in Washington. Subscribe to the D.C. Brief newsletter.
Leave feedback about this