Why not? Punting is what Joe Biden does best, whether that’s on policies like fracking and the Green New Deal, or on campaigning itself. A 9:22 AM lid on a weekday less than seven weeks out from Election Day doesn’t exactly scream enthusiasm, after all. Or energy either, for that matter.

Wisconsin reporter Brittany Schmidt asked Biden about threats from fellow Democrats to pack the Supreme Court if Biden wins in November, in retaliation for Donald Trump appointing a replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg. After acknowledging it as a “legitimate question,” Biden refused to answer it lest Trump hold him accountable for his position.

That certainly takes not campaigning to a whole new level …

It’s a legitimate question, but let me tell you why I’m not going answer that question. Because it will shift the focus, that’s what he wants, he never wants to talk about the issue at hand and he always tries to change the subject. Let’s say I answer that question, then the whole debates gonna be about what Biden said or didn’t say, Biden said he would or wouldn’t. The discussion should be about why he is moving in a direction that’s totally inconsistent with what founders wanted. The Constitution says voters get to pick a president who gets to make the pick and the senate gets to decide. We’re in the middle of the election right now, you know people are voting now. By the time this supreme court hearing would be held, if they hold one, it’s estimate 30 to 40% of American people already have voted. It is a fundamental breach of constitutional principle. It must stay on that and it shouldn’t happen.

So let’s get this straight. Biden’s in the middle of campaigning for president, but won’t discuss issues because his opponent might hold him accountable for the position he takes? That’s utter nonsense, especially since Trump isn’t the one bringing up the court-packing. As the old horror film warned, those calls are coming from inside the Democrats’ House … and Senate. His own party threatens to do this under his prospective administration. And Biden thinks answering a question about that is about Trump?

To quote Sheriff Joe … come on, man.

The same applies to his “constitutional principles” argument, too. Trump’s term didn’t end with early voting, and it won’t end until January 20. Until then, he’s still president and has the authority and constitutional responsibility to address vacancies in the federal judiciary, especially at the Supreme Court. The Senate can choose to act on it or not — that’s their constitutional authority — but claiming a nomination to be some sort of “breach of constitutional principle” is utterly absurd. One can certainly criticize Republicans for hypocrisy over their 2016 arguments about Merrick Garland, but Joe Biden’s just as guilty of that in the other direction:

Does Biden now want to argue that the American people don’t “deserve a fully staffed court of nine”? Because that’s an argument that might be even more entertaining than an argument for sore-loser court-packing.