Presidential historian lays out the problem with blaming 'an election on a previous incumbent'

CNN presidential historian Tim Naftali offered takeaways from President Joe Biden's Thursday address following Donald Trump's win over Vice President Kamala Harris.

"President Biden really had two audiences," Naftali began. "In part, this is a pep talk. A pep talk to the members of the administration — apparently, who were sitting right front of him — and to Democrats across the country. But this was also a way for the president to ensure stability. To make clear to every American that their vote not only counted, but it counted for him, and that he would assure the country, and did assure the country of a peaceful transition. He didn't have to say — unlike in 2020, 2021 — but the point was, he wanted to make clear that he is not seeking revenge."

The presidential historian emphasized, "So it was a very successful speech, directed at two audiences. But he said one thing that I think had a double meaning. And he said 'setbacks are unavoidable. giving up is unforgivable. to many democrats, that might be a reminder of his decision to wait late in the election cycle not to run again. It's very Biden. It's the essence of Joe Biden. Someone who has had many setbacks over the course of his political career, but has always gotten up. And what many Democrats, of course, are debating now is whether he should have decided, if you will, to give up the opportunity of a second term, just after the midterms."

READ MORE: How a 'red line' for Republicans sunk a working class policy Dems could have run on: journalist

"I want to say one thing about that," Naftali noted. "Soul searching doesn't imply simply finding one fault. Historically, to just blame an election on a previous incumbent doesn't allow you to rethink the reason why in 2024, Vice President Harris could not keep the Biden coalition. As we see, as we've worked through the numbers, what we're seeing is that she wasn't able to get the same number of votes, and percentage, that Biden had in many counties."

The CNN historian concludes, "I don't have the answer, but the answer isn't simply that Biden stayed too long. We don't know if inflation how far made it possible for Biden, if he'd been healthy and vigorous to win. We also don't know whom the Democrats would have chosen, if Biden had decided to be that bridge to the next generation in 2023, rather than 2024. So there are a lot of unknowns. It's very interesting for me as a historian to see that people are just trying to find one causal explanation for the dramatic reemergence of Donald Trump as a gnash leader, the greatest comeback -- perhaps the greatest comeback ever, certainly the greatest political comeback since Richard Nixon, two nights ago."

Watch the video below or at this link.

- YouTubewww.youtube.com

READ MORE: 'Jettisoned a strong argument': Biden aide says this Harris strategy cost her the election