It was said that George H. W. Bush had Dan Quayle as a life insurance policy, and it seems that the incumbent has his:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/kamala-harris-needs-to-get-serious-biden-administration-competency-approval-rating-polling-11639093358
It concerns me that the only people who could do a particularly good job of the presidency have better things to do, and we are stuck with second-raters from which to choose.
The campaign slogan of "We Suck Less" could be used by either party - but it would be patently untrue in either case.
The ideal candidate would be a combination of an Academic with a deep knowledge of History, Law, Psychology, Geography, Economics, Mathematics, and the hard sciences, a Gambler who knows when to hold them, when to fold them and leaves them guessing whether whether its a bluff or a Royal Flush, an Illusionist who can convey whatever perception is appropriate, and an Entertainer who makes you want to tune in, even if you're from the other party.
Ronald Reagan knew how to work a crowd, but knew less than nothing about the underlying Academics, much to our detriment. Bill Clinton was a slut, who would do ANYTHING for 'true love.' George W. Bush was born on third base and thought he hit a triple. And so forth.
Maybe, since we are a very flawed people, we deserve very flawed leadership. We sure as hell have it.
BSBD,
Winsor