Joe Biden is a sexual predator

The argument

Some opponents of Joe Biden's candidacy argued that allegations and conduct concerning his behaviour towards women should disqualify him from the presidency. The most serious was the claim made in 2020 by Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer, who alleged that Biden had sexually assaulted her in 1993. Biden categorically and repeatedly denied the allegation, and it was never substantiated; major news organisations that investigated it reported they could not corroborate the central claim, and some elements of her account were challenged. Proponents of this argument nonetheless held that the accusation was serious enough to weigh heavily against him. Beyond that specific allegation, the argument drew on a longer, well-documented record of Biden's physical conduct in public — a habit of touching, embracing and standing very close to women, and to children, at official events. In 2019 several women said publicly that this behaviour had made them uncomfortable, prompting Biden to release a video acknowledging that expectations about personal space had shifted and promising to be more mindful. To proponents, this pattern indicated a man who repeatedly disregarded women's physical boundaries. From this standpoint, the combination of a serious assault allegation and a documented pattern of unwelcome physical conduct was disqualifying for the nation's highest office, particularly for voters who treated a candidate's character and treatment of women as decisive. It must be noted that the central assault allegation was denied and never substantiated, and the broader conduct was disputed in how it should be interpreted. Still, on this argument, proponents concluded that this record showed Joe Biden would not be a good president.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Opponents reply that the central assault allegation was categorically denied and could not be substantiated — major investigations failed to corroborate it, and elements were challenged — so treating it as disqualifying sets aside the presumption of innocence. On the pattern of tactile conduct, Biden acknowledged the concerns and pledged to change, and discomfort at close physical contact, while a legitimate criticism, is a far lesser charge than 'sexual predator.' More broadly, they argue, whether someone would be a good president turns on policy, competence and temperament across a long public career, not on a single contested allegation; reducing the judgement to this one charge ignores the decades of legislative and executive record on which the office should be assessed.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The Reade allegation was categorically denied and could not be corroborated by investigators, so treating it as established enough to disqualify sets aside the presumption of innocence. [Rejecting P2] Biden acknowledged the concerns about physical closeness and pledged to change; unwanted-proximity complaints are a lesser matter than the label 'sexual predator' and do not establish it. [Rejecting C] Whether someone would be a good president turns on policy, competence and record across a long career, so a single contested allegation does not settle the question.