How has the public reacted to the allegations against Joe Biden?

1. What were the core claims people discussed and why they mattered

The central allegation in 2020 was Tara Reade’s claim that Joe Biden inappropriately touched or assaulted her in 1993; Biden and his campaign denied the allegation and questioned inconsistencies in Reade’s account, while also calling for any relevant records to be released after he left public life. The debate immediately split into two competing frames: one emphasizing the importance of hearing and believing survivors, and the other emphasizing the need for corroboration and scrutiny of changing accounts. Analysts noted that the dispute intersected with broader #MeToo questions about how to weigh historic allegations against powerful figures and how political incentives shaped both amplification and skepticism ^{[3] [4] [5]}.

2. What polling showed in 2020 — a partisan story with gender and factional nuances

Multiple May 2020 polls documented a clear partisan divide: roughly 31–37% of Americans found the Biden allegation credible while a substantially higher share of Republicans did so, and only about 14% of Democrats agreed, illustrating polarized credibility assessments. Women and former Sanders supporters were often more likely to continue supporting Biden despite doubts, but many Sanders-aligned voters also said proven misconduct would be disqualifying. Polls indicated that for a significant subset of voters belief about the allegation did not override opposition to Donald Trump, suggesting electoral calculations often eclipsed the assault claim itself ^[1].

3. Media coverage and accusations of selective attention — different narratives, different audiences

Commentators and some outlets accused mainstream media of uneven coverage: critics argued the Biden allegation received less sustained attention than similar allegations against other men, while defenders insisted outlets treated the story with appropriate skepticism because of inconsistent details and corroboration challenges. Coverage choices tracked audience and outlet partisanship, with conservative media seizing the allegation as damaging and some liberal outlets framing initial reporting as muted; this produced competing narratives about whether the media applied a double standard or exercised necessary caution ^{[6] [5]}.

4. Corroboration, records, and procedural questions — what facts were and weren’t available

Investigative and legal questions centered on whether contemporaneous records existed and who controlled them; Biden declined to authorize searches of certain archives while the National Archives clarified Senate personnel complaints from 1993 would have remained under Senate control, complicating efforts to verify or refute Reade’s claims. Observers flagged the procedural tension between a survivor’s demand to be heard and standards of evidence in historical allegations, with Biden’s team emphasizing inconsistencies in Reade’s accounts as a basis for denial and others arguing that inconsistency does not automatically negate a survivor’s account ^{[4] [3]}.

5. How later polling and broader allegations shifted public calculus by 2024–2025

By 2024–2025, polling attention expanded beyond the Reade allegation to ongoing investigations and corruption-related allegations involving Biden and his family. A 2025 poll reported only 22% of likely voters confident in Biden’s innocence on corruption claims and substantial support for continued investigations, suggesting escalating public skepticism on separate fronts that affected overall perceptions. This later polling shows that while the 2020 sexual-assault allegation remained a flashpoint, subsequent and distinct allegations about corruption shifted public focus and eroded confidence among a broader slice of the electorate ^[2].

6. What the mixed reaction means politically and socially

The public response combined partisan assessment, gendered differences, media-driven narratives, and evolving priorities: many voters judged the allegation through partisan lenses and electoral calculus, some prioritized concerns about Trump over the allegation, and later corruption inquiries introduced new credibility questions that further complicated Biden’s standing. The reaction illustrates how single allegations become embedded in larger political narratives, with implications for trust, media credibility, and how societies reconcile support for survivors with standards of evidence and due process ^{[1] [2]}.