For nearly two years, Democrats have sidestepped this uncomfortable query: Did Joe Biden’s decision to seek a second term hand the White House back to Donald Trump?
Hillary Clinton gave one of the clearest answers yet this week, and it was not a good one.
In a recent interview, the former secretary of state and 2016 Democratic nominee called Biden’s decision to run for a second term “a terrible mistake,” saying that his refusal to step aside earlier hurt both his legacy and the Democratic Party’s chances of hanging onto the White House.
Advertisement
“He made a terrible mistake. He made a terrible mistake for himself, his legacy, and for the country,” Clinton said.
Democrats had publicly maintained for years that Biden was more than capable of serving another term.
Party leaders dismissed the age issue as Republican talking points.
Media allies frequently brushed off questions about Biden’s stamina and mental acuity as unfair attacks.
Now, many of those same figures are rewriting history.
Advertisement
Clinton’s comments are noteworthy both for what she said and for the fact that she was among Biden’s most vocal defenders in the messy aftermath of his disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump in 2024.
She called on Democrats to rally behind the then-president.
Today, she’s saying what many voters had concluded long before party elites would admit it: Biden should never have run.
Her argument: If he stepped aside in 2023, Democrats could have had a competitive primary and selected a stronger nominee.
“Very sadly, I believe whoever emerged from that contest, whether it was the vice president or a governor or a senator or anybody else, would have beaten Donald Trump,” Clinton said.
Ouch. If looks could kill. Hillary does not like Jill at all. pic.twitter.com/ps8jZxXfmJ
— Miranda Devine (@mirandadevine) June 19, 2026
That assertion will undoubtedly be debated. What is harder to dispute is the reality Democrats faced by summer 2024.
Biden’s debate performance exposed concerns voters had already been expressing for years. Poll numbers deteriorated. Donors panicked. Elected Democrats privately and publicly called for him to withdraw.
Eventually, he did, endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris only months before Election Day.
Clinton is hardly alone. Reports indicate Kamala Harris herself has criticized Biden’s decision to remain in the race.
Other Democratic strategists, former administration officials, and party insiders have increasingly acknowledged that the president’s insistence on running again placed the party in an impossible position.
The timing of Clinton’s remarks is especially noteworthy.
Just days after her criticism became public, she appeared alongside Biden at the grand opening of the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago.
The event brought together an extraordinary gathering of Democratic royalty: Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Jill Biden, Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, and a long list of Hollywood celebrities and Democratic donors.
On the surface, the event aimed to celebrate Obama’s legacy.
Beneath the smiles, however, it also served as a reminder of a party still grappling with its recent past and uncertain about its future.
Photographs from the ceremony quickly circulated online, with social media users scrutinizing every interaction between the Bidens and Clintons.
Conservative commentator Miranda Devine summed up one viral image with a simple observation: “If looks could kill.”
Whether or not the photograph actually revealed tension, Clinton’s comments certainly did.
The remarks represent something larger than criticism of one political decision.
They signal the beginning of an effort by many Democrats to distance themselves from the choices that led to the party’s defeat in 2024.
The problem is that Biden did not make those decisions alone.
Party leaders defended him. Donors funded him.
Media organizations protected him.
Many of the same figures now criticizing Biden spent years insisting that concerns about his age and fitness for office were exaggerated.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
