Much of "the right" would be happy to see Trump taken out, and much of "the left" would be happy to see Biden taken out. Both men still have bases of support. Much of the "the right" would also be happy to see Harris positioned as the incumbent for 2024; much of "the left", less so.
My guess is that sloppy document handling by politicians is, and always has been, widespread. Among the most powerful, I suppose a sense of entitlement must exist, based on other behaviours - so why shouldn't they feel entitled to hold paper about whatever they want?
I suspect there’s a fair bit of truth to this, and that there’s a line somewhere in the sand where security lapses become criminal offences; a big part of that will be intent, including actions taken and choices made once an issue is identified that needs addressing.
As near as I can tell, the complaints about the handling of the Biden revelations is this: days before the election, someone on Biden’s team found classified material in an office. NARA was contacted immediately and the documents, in their totality, handed over to NARA the next day, also before the election. A search was then conducted or other locations that identified more at his Delaware residence. All of this, so far, is proper. Where people appear to be taking offense is that this was not immediately revealed in time to impact the election. The complaint appears motivated by politics rather than out of concern for the law. What’s not clear is whether there is any standard practice of proactive public disclosure of the recovery of mishandled classified documents. I strongly suspect there isn’t. It’s also not clear who, exactly, people believe should have been in a hurry to disclose this.
So, something damaging was found and properly remedied just before the election, and nobody at that time leaked it. That’s what I’m taking out of it. What they did NOT do was say “ok, lock the room, STFU, and we’ll deal with this next week”. They did the correct thing under the law and under national security best practices, despite risks of a politically damaging leak immediately before the midterms.
The US Department of Justice has a practice of not taking overt investigative steps in politically sensitive investigations in the 60 days prior to an election; that’s why visible actions by DOJ in the Mar-a-Lago and January 6th grand jury investigations dried up in late August and stayed quiet til later in November. The intent is not to potentially sway elections by taking public and potentially sensational investigative acts. That’s entirely reasonable; for instance, there were people baying for more investigate steps against Trump in September and October; DOJ appropriately did not do so. Anything that mattered in Sept or Oct could wait til Nov or Dec. However, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Just as both sets of facts deserve a proper investigation, so too should both cases not be leveraged by the most ration or other executive branch actors to potentially impact election results.
If the thing that would make people happy would have been for a leaker in NARA to disclose this days before the election, well then it’s very clear what motives underlie that want. By all means people can be as partisan as they like, but that doesn’t make the gripe legitimate or well founded.