The greatest act of public service Joe Biden can do now is step aside, New York Times Editorial Board says

• President Joe Biden had a disastrous debate night against Donald Trump on Thursday.
• The president, 81, coughed, stumbled upon his words, and didn't complete some sentences.
• His performance did little to convince voters that he's fit for office, The New York Times Editorial Board wrote.

After President Joe Biden's disastrous debate performance on Thursday night against former President Donald Trump, The New York Times Editorial Board has declared that it's seen enough: Biden should step aside.

The Times editorial board, which provides opinions on critical issues facing the country at the moment, published a column on Friday criticizing Biden's performance and wrote that it did little to convince American voters that the 81-year-old president is fit for another term.

"The president appeared on Thursday night as the shadow of a great public servant," the editorial board wrote. "He struggled to explain what he would accomplish in a second term. He struggled to respond to Mr. Trump's provocations. He struggled to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his lies, his failures, and his chilling plans. More than once, he struggled to make it to the end of a sentence."

The board praised Biden's accomplishments in the past three years, calling him an "admirable president," but concluded that "the greatest public service Mr. Biden can now perform is to announce that he will not continue to run for reelection."

A spokesperson for Biden's campaign did not immediately return a request for comment.

The Times' editorial board, which typically leans left on issues, has previously called on Biden to take voters' concerns about age seriously.

And Thursday's debate only cemented those concerns that the editorial board argued won't be dispelled through more public appearances.

The New York Times newsroom, which operates independently from the editorial board, has been criticized by the Biden campaign and some of the left for its coverage of the president.

Biden's team has bristled at the newspaper's coverage of the administration and the president, while a spokesperson for The Times has criticized the White House for lack of access for journalists.

"Mr. Biden has granted far fewer press conferences and sit-down interviews with independent journalists than virtually all of his predecessors," The Times' spokesperson wrote in an April statement.

A Times spokesperson declined to comment.

The editorial board acknowledged in the column that Trump's debate performance should also be disqualifying, as the former president repeatedly misled and lied throughout the debate.

But the board wrote that Republicans aren't interested in "deeper soul-searching" and that the party has been hijacked by Trump.

The editorial board also wrote that Trump poses a serious threat to democracy and that if the choice came down to him and Biden, the board's "unequivocal pick" would be the sitting president.

"That is how much of a danger Mr. Trump poses," the board wrote. "But given that very danger, the stakes for the country, and the uneven abilities of Mr. Biden, the United States needs a stronger opponent to the presumptive Republican nominee."