What Went Down During Joe Biden’s Inauguration

A woman of color was just sworn into the vice presidency by another woman of color, while the second gentleman dutifully held the Bible.

Blunt also said today is a day for “unification” rather than division. I anticipate Biden will offer a fair amount of “unity” language in his inaugural address, but with the vast majority of the GOP inclined to think he didn’t actually win the election and with the violence we saw on Jan. 6, it’s hard to see there being much unity in supply.

That’s why I think someone like AOC ultimately will have a much better chance to become her party’s nominee. She’s pretty far to the left, of course, but isn’t anti-Democratic Party.

The party definitely “decided,” and part of why they were likely effective is because the progressive left fits fairly uncomfortably within the Democratic Party. Partisanship, as the conventional wisdom in political science states, is a social identity that many Democratic primary voters embrace fairly strongly, so it’s not terribly surprising that Sanders ultimately did not clinch the nomination even though he had quite a bit of steam in the primary. By running against the party in a lot of respects, Sanders was an uncomfortable choice for a lot of voters who both identify strongly with the Democratic Party and are fairly left-leaning in their policy views.

Blunt also said today is a day for “unification” rather than division. I anticipate Biden will offer a fair amount of “unity” language in his inaugural address, but with polls showing that the vast majority of Republican voters don’t think Biden won the election legitimately and the violence we saw on Jan. 6, it’s hard to see there being much unity in supply.

Yeah, Julia, Blunt’s description of our democracy as both fragile and resilient seems timely.

Julia, I think that’s a really interesting question about “peaceful transfer of power.” I feel like the issue is that people see a false dichotomy: Either a “peaceful transfer of power” or a violent coup. But a transfer of power that is supposed to happen doesn’t necessarily have to be peaceful. I think that’s the category I’d put this transfer into.

What struck me about Blunt’s remarks was the reference to democracy as an aspirational project, realized imperfectly. This seems like it will be a big theme going forward, and resonates with something I see as a major part of the legacy of the last four years: that a lot of the invisible structures that make up democracy and weigh it down with flaws have become visible. Things we took for granted now seem more fragile.

Trump broke the presidential mold in many ways, but public attitudes toward him early in his presidency delivered one especially obvious break with the past: Trump didn’t get the “honeymoon” period that most presidents have enjoyed early in their presidency.

Traditionally, newly elected presidents have enjoyed strong approval ratings in the first six months of their presidency. Having just won a national election, new presidents usually enter office with some sort of political mandate and are more likely to receive positive attention from the public and the media. As the table below shows, until Trump every first-term president elected since World War II had a relatively positive approval rating — oftentimes a really high one.

In fact, only two presidents averaged below 60 percent approval in the first six months of their presidency — Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. By contrast, Trump’s approval was in the low 40s and his disapproval rating above 50 percent during the same period.

Now, Trump was unusually disliked for a presidential candidate, and he arguably won the 2016 presidential election, in part, because he faced Hillary Clinton, who also was very unpopular. Given that Trump entered office as an especially polarizing figure and without much of a mandate (having lost the national popular vote), he never got to enjoy a honeymoon period.

But given increasing polarization and how much each side dislikes the other, is Trump’s lack of a honeymoon an exception or the new normal?

For Biden, the answer may lie somewhere in between. One hint for what Biden’s early ratings could look like is his current favorability rating. Favorability and approval are not the same thing — the former measures how well-liked presidents are, the latter how well they’re doing their job — but the two ratings often move in similar directions. And based on polls released this month, Biden’s favorability rating is in the low 50s, so his approval rating will probably begin at a similar spot.

If his approval rating doesn’t decline too much during his first six months in office, Biden’s honeymoon period may end up looking somewhat like Clinton’s first six months in 1993 — positive overall, but not overwhelming so. That’s in part because Biden’s disapproval rating will almost certainly be higher than Clinton’s, due to more Republicans having a negative opinion of him at the start of his presidency.

As my colleagues have already mentioned, as Vice President, Harris will be the first woman, and Black woman of South Asian descent, to hold that position. Klobuchar’s remarks are also drawing attention this historic moment.

But “firsts” can get bogged down in discussions of novelty, which can have a negative effect on perceptions of credibility, according to academic research. That said, Harris herself isn’t shying away from the history she is making, recognizing she’s a role model for young people, everywhere. And if you’ve read our coverage about women in politics you already know this — political science research has shown that young women grow more politically active and hopeful about democracy when they witness women as political leaders. These “role model effects” are important for encouraging more women to run for office down the road and to further chip away at women’s underrepresentation at all levels of government

Here’s the sort of dumb thing I like to think about when I don’t have any models to work on. Have you spent more of your life under a Democratic or a Republican president?

The answer is as follows: you’ve spent more time under a Democrat if you were born between April 17, 1925 and Jan. 19, 1941; between Jan. 21, 1989 and Jan. 19, 1997 or between Jan. 21, 2005 and Jan. 19, 2013.

And you’ve spent more time under a Republican if you were born between Jan. 21, 1917 and April 15, 1925, between Jan. 21, 1941 and Jan. 19, 1989, between Jan. 21, 1997 and January 21, 2005 or from Jan. 21, 2013 until yesterday.

If your date of birth is not listed here, you’ve spent an equal number of days under presidents of both parties. And in case you’re double-checking this work, I’m counting the day on which the president is inaugurated as belonging to the new president, and I’m not counting today yet.

Yes, Nate, the party decided, after they learned from loss.

So what you’re saying, Seth, is that the party decided?

Galen makes a great point. Party leaders and elites, including the bulk of major candidates running against him at the time, withdrew in favor of Biden at the end of last February and essentially made him the Democratic nominee. They didn’t tell Democratic voters how to vote as much as limit their choices to Biden versus Sanders, and at that point the nomination became Biden’s. Biden’s inclusion of Klobuchar in the transition and Buttigieg in the cabinet signified his “coalitional” orientation.

It’s striking to see Klobuchar, one of Biden’s former rivals for the Democratic nomination, speaking at the inauguration. I’m thinking back to the last public event I saw Biden speak at, which was a rally in Detroit right before the Michigan primary (this was just as people were starting to get worried about the pandemic, and I remember lots of hand sanitizer but no masks). Biden was joined at that event by Harris, Booker, and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and said he was a “bridge” to a “new generation of leaders.” Wondering if we’re going to hear more about that idea today.

Worth noting here that there are no Senators appointed to Biden’s cabinet, which isn’t a surprise considering that any potential vacancy could cost Democrats control of the Senate, either immediately or after a special election. But it does mean that Klobuchar, who could have been a fairly logical cabinet pick, has to settle for something like this, instead.

Klobuchar’s position today is also linked to her position as ranking member (in the 116th Congress) of the Senate Rules committee, which places her in a key role — on the Joint Congressional Committee on Inauguration Ceremonies.

It’s hard to know exactly what to call this moment. A few commentators have already referred to today’s inauguration as a “peaceful transfer of power.”

It is true that we are seeing the winner of an election taking power. But peaceful, frankly, seems like the wrong word. Two weeks ago, a mob stormed the Capitol, interrupting the process of certifying the Electoral College votes. And some even had the intent to harm public officials. Notably, leading up to this moment, Trump had also filed a number of lawsuits to overturn the election result, in addition to repeatedly exerting pressure on officials to change the result.

Following attack at the Capitol, the House then passed an article of impeachment against the president for inciting the insurrection. Washington, D.C. is also now under the protection of the National Guard – 12 members of which were removed because of security concerns. And some members of Congress are wearing body armor to the ceremonies today.

There’s clearly an effort to regain a sense of this crucial democratic value today — high ranking Republicans, including former president George W. Bush and former House Speaker Paul Ryan are in attendance today, as is outgoing Vice President Mike Pence, even though Trump is not. But I’m not sure we can call it a “peaceful transfer of power.”

Why does it matter how we speak about this transfer of power? In one sense, it makes a lot of sense to talk about democracy in aspirational terms – we do it all the time, highlighting ideals like equality and justice for all. Talking about a peaceful transfer of power therefore emphasizes its importance and isolates those who worked against a peaceful and legitimate outcome, and shifts focus to the institutions that remained strong in the face of existential threat.

At the same time, as Amanda Cronkhite, a political scientist noted on Twitter, calling this a peaceful transfer of power moves the goal posts. It lowers the standard and at the same time expands the range of behavior – from elected officials and others – that can fall under the label. These words carry a lot of weight in terms of the kind of democracy we want to be.

To follow up on Meena’s post:

• Biden will become the oldest president in U.S. history; at 78, he’s older than Ronald Reagan was even when Reagan left office.
• Biden will become the first president from Delaware.
• Harris will also be the first Democrat from the Western U.S. to serve in the White House, as either president or vice president. (No, Texas doesn’t count as the West.)

Klobuchar did not get to be vice president, but she does get to open the inaugural proceedings. An interesting aspect of the Biden presidency will be how much he owes to the party apparatus and how he pays his dues. The apparatus — including Klobuchar, O’Rourke and Buttigieg — stepped in to ensure Biden, not Sanders, would be the Democratic nominee.

Today, Harris is expected to be sworn in by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a historic first in which the first woman, the first Black person, the first Indian American person and the first woman of color to be vice president will take her oath from Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina and the first woman of color on the Supreme Court.

I think I’m bullish on Pence’s chances relative to the conventional wisdom. In part because that name recognition and those relationships you accumulate as the vice president are worth a lot, as the man being inaugurated today reminds us. And in part because the events of the past few weeks gives Pence a more credible (though still highly debatable) chance to claim that he repudiated the most dangerous elements of Trump.

In response to the question about Pence’s political future, I’d like to reference my piece about former VPs winning the presidential nomination. One thing I’d note is that a little time passing makes it easier for the former VP to benefit from the experience and name recognition while distancing from the more difficult parts of a presidential legacy.

I do think Pence has one liability that would have been true regardless of whether he was vice president: He’s just not the kind of fire-breathing, red-meat-on-the-trail conservative that Trump is. I think Republican voters want more 🔥 from their nominee.

Yeah, Amelia, it’s been pointed out before, but I think it’s a poignant fact: when Kamala Harris was born in 1964, Black women in this country still hadn’t secured the right to vote. Now, a Black woman is about to be sworn in as the first female vice president. Regardless of your political views, this is a historic moment.

From the beginning of his candidacy, Biden has been promising a return to the era of political bipartisanship and compromise. But apart from the very real question of whether Republicans will actually work with him, there are signs that Americans as a whole aren’t uniformly on board with the idea of dialing down the partisan animosity in Washington.

According to a recent Pew Research Center survey, Biden is coming into office with a decent amount of goodwill on his side: 64 percent of Americans approve of his conduct since the November election, 58 percent approve of the way he’s explained his policies and plans, and 57 percent approve of his Cabinet choices.

That all seems promising for Biden. But when it comes to how they want the parties to work together, rank-and-file Republicans have a very different outlook than Democrats. It’s Democrats, of course, who will hold a razor-thin majority in the Senate, giving them full control of government. But according to Pew, many Democrats (62 percent) still want Biden to work to forge compromises with Republicans, “even if it means disappointing some of his voters.” Republicans, on the other hand, want their leaders to take a much more combative approach: A majority (59 percent) want their elected representatives to “stand up” to Biden.

That lopsidedness isn’t as bad for Biden as it could be — at least many members of his own party seem to be on board with the kind of bipartisan efforts he’s promised. But as he takes office, Republican voters aren’t exactly holding their leaders’ feet to the fire when it comes to cross-party agreement — and that could make the unity Biden’s promised difficult to deliver.

A reminder of all the “firsts” that Harris’s vice-presidency represents, as she walks in with her husband — the first woman and woman of color to serve as vice-president, the first Jewish second spouse, the first “second gentleman.” Lots of significant barriers being broken with this administration.

That’s a really great question, Amelia! I think Pence’s actions in trying to generate some semblance of an orderly transition in an otherwise disordered (to put it lightly) lead-up to the inauguration sets him up well as a sort of conduit between more moderate Republicans who wish to move beyond Trumpism and Trump’s more dedicated Republican base. Given that Trumpism is likely here to stay, I think these past two weeks potentially set Pence up for a political future in the Republican Party — albeit an incredibly tenuous one that will require doing quite a bit of gymnastics to navigate the rift in the Republican Party.

Yeah, I agree with Galen. Seth, I don’t think the GOP’s split is as severe as “Romney vs. Trump.” There are plenty of people in the middle who were on board with Trump until the last couple weeks.

I think there’s an exact opposite way to look at that dynamic, Micah. I think Pence is in one of the best positions in the party to bridge the gap between Trump’s movement and less erratic parts of the party. He can claim both that he backed Trump and the constitution/norms.

There’s a significant split in the GOP right now, and it’s not clear to me which side of it Pence lies on. Trump loyalists currently see him as a traitor, although there are few who have devoted more of their political capital to help Trump. I don’t think he’d be welcome in the Romney faction or the Trump faction. If he were to take a firm stance against Trump, that would be fascinating, but that might not impress a lot of people at this point.

I suppose it also depends on his ambitions. I can’t imagine the last four years were an easy run. He’s only 61, but is it crazy to think Pence might retire?

Great question, Amelia! I have to disagree with Nathaniel. Pence’s political future looks bleak to me. He stood by and endorsed most of what Trump did during his term, making Pence a bad choice if you’re a Republican wanting to move away from Trumpism. And Pence, in not going extra-constitutional to help Trump overturn the election results, may be a hard sell for Trumpist Republicans too. Of course, Nathaniel is right that Pence wasn’t exactly in a great position before Trump tapped him as VP, so … 🤷‍♀️.

On the one hand, Amelia, Pence is far and away in a better position to run and win the presidency in 2024 than if he’d never become vice president. On the other hand, you do wonder if he’ll be somewhat damaged in that campaign if Trump and his allies attack him for not doing more to help Trump overturn the election. Still, his favorability among Republicans remains pretty strong — 77 percent favorable to 18 percent unfavorable in a recent Politico/Morning Consult poll — so I think Pence came out better for having been vice president than not.

Interesting question, Amelia. I think the answer has to be yes? Remember, Trump arguably saved Pence from losing reelection in Indiana in 2016 (although given how that election turned out in the Midwest, Pence probably would have eked it out). And now Pence has the name recognition that comes with being vice president, which the incoming president can tell you comes in handy in a primary. Ultimately, I think it will come down to what Trump says publicly about Pence in the next few years.

Before flying to Florida, Trump gave a short speech (about 10 minutes) from Andrews Air Force Base. He thanked his family and specifically praised his wife Melania Trump, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Vice President Mike Pence and Pence’s wife Karen. Trump listed some of his accomplishments, like cutting regulations and taxes, appointing conservative judges to the federal bench, the strong economy before the COVID-19 outbreak and the rapid creation and rollout of COVID-19 vaccines.

“This has been an incredible four years. We have accomplished so much,” he said.

He predicted that the economy would grow and more Americans would get vaccinated over the next year and implied that Biden should not get all the credit.

“Remember us when you see these good things happening,” he said. … “We’ve left it all on the field,” Trump added.

He did not directly use the terms coronavirus or COVID-19, nor the names Harris or Biden. But Trump noted how the “China virus” was something that countries around the world had struggled to contain, implying the hundreds of thousands of deaths from COVID-19 in the United States should not be blamed solely on him. In terms of his successor, Trump said, “I wish the new administration great luck and success.”

Trump concluded by hinting that he was not leaving the public stage, even if he is now leaving the presidency. “We will be back in some form,” he said. He added, “So, have a good life. We will see you soon.”

What was perhaps most notable about Trump’s final day as president was what he didn’t do and who was not around to celebrate the end of his presidency. Trump opted not to attend Biden’s inauguration. He also opted not to pardon himself, his children, his lawyer Rudy Giuliani or any of the Trump supporters who invaded the Capitol two weeks ago. Some Trump critics had feared that he might issue such pardons on the way out. Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell, the top Republicans in the House and Senate respectively, opted to skip Trump’s speech and join Democratic congressional leaders and Biden at a church service instead.

What do we think Pence’s political future looks like? Is he better off now than before he became Trump’s vice-president?

One thing that is pretty weird to see (if we’re all being honest!) is a masked inauguration. While something like this isn’t exactly typical inauguration style, having everyone wear masks not only reduces COVID-19 transmission, but is also important for communicating mask-wearing norms to the public. It’s much easier to uphold important social norms when elites themselves model good behavior.

With everything else going on in the country, it’s almost easy to forget that we’re still in the height of a deadly pandemic. Though vaccines are being distributed across the country, we’re still a long way from being out of the woods when it comes to COVID-19. So, like everything else over the past year, this Inauguration Day will be different, as Meena mentioned.

The fact that the ceremony is outdoors helps reduce the risk of spread, but that means that the traditional indoor events surrounding the Inauguration — the balls, the luncheons — have been cancelled, and replaced (like so many of our office holiday parties) with virtual events. Biden did attend a church service in D.C. this morning, as is tradition, but it was with a small group of invited members of Congress. Meanwhile, the transition of the White House itself, a process that is hectic at the best of times, has been further complicated by the need to thoroughly deep clean the space before the new first family moves in. It’s a task being tackled by the White House’s 90-person residence staff, who are also busy moving furniture and stocking the kitchen in preparation for the Bidens.

Sure, it’s a watered-down version of the inauguration we’re used to, but there’s something unifying about the fact all of us have had to make sacrifices during this pandemic, even the new president.

Pence was just introduced and took his place on the inauguration stage. He is, of course, the highest-ranking Trump administration official in attendance today.

In the Before Times (i.e., before the pandemic), Washington, D.C., would be in a frenzy with supporters of the president-elect flocking from all corners of the country. Picture crowds wearing their warmest coats, packing the city’s metro, flooding the National Mall and anxiously awaiting the hoopla and balls that follow a presidential inauguration.

Typically, the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, which is in charge of organizing much of Inauguration Day, issues 200,000 tickets to the ceremonies at the Capitol, along with some tickets to members of Congress to distribute to their constituents. (The tickets are color-coded with various entrances and areas corresponding to ticket colors. There is also usually a non-ticketed, overflow viewing area.)

Turnout can be quite high, too. In 2009, an estimated 1.8 million people attended Obama’s first inauguration — the largest ever. And in 2017, for Trump’s inauguration, the crowd was likely between 250,000 and 600,000. You might recall the bizarre debate Trump began his presidency with. (He often exaggerated crowd sizes.)

Of course, these are not normal times. The pandemic continues to wreck the nation, with vaccine rollouts in states markedly slow. As of Tuesday, more than 400,000 people who had the coronavirus in the U.S. have died. So since December, Biden’s team has asked people to stay home for the event to avoid spreading the virus. Then, just two weeks ago, a violent insurrection at the Capitol made attending the inauguration even more unlikely. Mayor Muriel Bowser declared a state of public emergency and asked Americans not to come to D.C., urging residents to avoid downtown altogether. Much of the city is now closed, with barricades and metal fencing around the Capitol and other federal buildings, and the National Guard has also been deployed — up to 25,000 troops are expected to help with security today.

So, yes, today will be different. About 1,000 guests will attend the inauguration in person — most will be members of Congress and their guests.

As we turn the page from the Trump administration to the Biden administration, the face of the Cabinet will change as well — literally. Trump had two people of color and four women in the 24 executive offices that Biden has designated as Cabinet-level. By contrast, Biden’s Cabinet will be majority-minority (with 13 officeholders of color compared with 11 white people) as well as the first gender-balanced Cabinet in U.S. history (12 women, 12 men).

In a memo released on the weekend before the inauguration, incoming White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain wrote, “We face four overlapping and compounding crises: the COVID-19 crisis, the resulting economic crisis, the climate crisis, and a racial equity crisis. All of these crises demand urgent action.” He then referred to these four crises several more times in the memo.

It’s not that these four priorities are particularly surprising — I tend to think any of the candidates who ran in the Democratic primary would have had similar priorities. But I don’t recall a recent administration being so specific. Publicly declaring that these four issues are their priorities also enhances our understanding of how Biden and his team will govern. It also provides some level of accountability, in that the new administration is providing four measures by which to judge it.

Inaugurations mark a change in presidential administrations, an event usually accompanied by a change in policy and approach to governance. But the symbolism associated with them also emphasizes continuity, as presidents follow traditions that have built up over time. And while inauguration festivities can celebrate the new leader and first family as distinct individuals, like the “Black Ties and Boots” inaugural ball Texas threw in honor of George W. Bush, the day itself also serves to highlight the traditions of the office that go far beyond any specific individual.

What does this mean for Biden today? He ran for president on the promise to restore “normal” politics – but between the pandemic and the presence of the National Guard everywhere following the Jan. 6 attack of the Capitol, the day will be anything but normal. One possibility is that this will lead Biden and Harris to lean especially heavily on historical references and creating images with significant D.C. landmarks – as they did yesterday at the reflecting pool on the National Mall – to create this sense of continuity.

Donald Trump will likely be the first president tried for impeachment in the Senate after he leaves office. Here, FiveThirtyEight Politics podcast host Galen Druke reflects on the factors determining whether Trump will be convicted.

Today, former Vice President Joe Biden will be sworn in as the 46th president of the United States, and as my colleagues will tell you, it’s an inauguration unlike any other.

Given the continued severity of the coronavirus pandemic, it is a largely virtual affair — just 1,000 people are expected to be in attendance. But it will also be sparsely attended given the violent insurrection at the Capitol two weeks ago that put Washington, D.C., in a state of emergency. Up to 25,000 National Guard troops are expected to be at the national mall today.

It is also the first time in 152 years that a president (Trump) will skip his successor’s inauguration. Inaugurations often involve a lot of pomp and circumstance, but today’s comes at an incredibly tense moment in American history. Biden ran on a campaign of unity, but as we’ll discuss on this live blog and more, whether Biden will be able to deliver on the unity he’s promised remains to be seen.

As always, thanks for following along, and if you have any questions, ping us @538politics and I’ll try to get your question answered on the live blog.