Stidmatt

64% of Americans disapprove of Israeli action in Gaza, despite Biden’s unconditional support. https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx

74% of Americans disapprove of how the withdrawal from Afghanistan was handled. https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/354182/american-public-opinion-afghanistan-situation.aspx

Only Republicans oppose American support of Ukraine. 86% of Democrat support helping Ukraine. https://news.gallup.com/poll/513680/american-views-ukraine-war-charts.aspx

On these three issues, and only these issues, the Biden administration’s actions were out of line with what the American people want.

There are three keys to successfully running for any political office.

First of all, stand for popular positions. Don’t be undecided on major issues, have your stances aligned with your party unless you have a very good reason not to.

Second, more experience is better if you are running for a state-wide office or a seat in Congress.

Third, if your party dominates state government, your party should be doing a good job. Otherwise, the opposite, obviously.

The party index of your state doesn’t matter as much as these factors. These factors ultimately determine the party index of your state.

This is similar to  the Cook Partisan Voting Index

We can quantify this for governors and Senators.

1. Governor’s Party
2. State plurality for the President in the last election
3. Incumbent party
4. Senators partisan affiliation
5. Which candidate has been at a higher level of office.

Add up the scores for both candidates, the candidate with the higher number is likely to win.

When the predictions do not match reality, this is sending you a signal that something is wrong. If it is a local issue and happening once or twice, it is likely a problem with one of the candidates the system does not capture. Maybe they had a scandal. Maybe their issue stances did not align with their constituents. If it is isolated to only a few cases per year then it is a local issue.

However, if there is a large number of upsets across the country all at once it tells us that a fundamental problem is in play. Either the President did something that makes people upset, or the party machinery is in trouble.

It is easy to tell the difference, by looking at presidential approval ratings. If the president’s approval ratings are low, the president is unpopular and there is something wrong with policy.

This tells you whether the party’s strategy is wrong, or whether the president is unpopular.

Historical analysis

My system only misses the Pennsylvania Senate election in the 2024 elections for governor or Senator. It was a very tight race. It predicts Montana and Ohio were tossups, and they were. This shows that the losses this year were basically what we should have expected. So we look at presidential approval, which was low. Biden must have made unpopular decisions in his last two years which cost Democrats the election. The party machinery did not fail.

Biden’s disapproval in the midterms was higher than his approval, so one would expect a small loss in the midterms but not a large one, exactly as we observed. We also observe that my system has only one miss, the Nevada governor’s race where conservative Democrat Steve Sisolak barely lost reelection. Everything else is exactly what my system would predict. Biden needed to look and analyze what he did which was unpopular, but he did not in his hubris. Furthermore, Harris underperformed Democratic candidates nationwide, meaning this was not a problem with the Democratic party, but there were fundamental problems with the Biden Administration that remain unaddressed.

Moving back in time, Donald Trump was unpopular throughout all of his first presidency, leading to the shellacking the Republicans received in 2018. This is pretty clearly voters sending a message that we were angry at Donald Trump. Trump should have analyzed his results and moved back to what Americans want, but he will never do that because he is a demagogue. I expect him to do the same over the next two years, pissing off Americans, and Democrats will likely win in 2026.

Obama’s approval however was never very low, in the midterms of 2014 his disapproval was around 5o-55%, and in 2010 it was 50%. You would expect some loss of seats, but not the massive gains by Republicans as we observed in 2010 and 2014. This implies that voters are not unhappy with the president overall, and there is something wrong with the party machinery.

What is interesting about Obama compared to Biden and Trump is that his approval increased over the second half of his first term. As opposed to what would happen later with Harris he won his reelection and significantly outperformed Democrats running for Congress. He had some coattails, with Democrats picking up 8 seats in the House in 2012, but not enough to get another trifecta. This is a lot of proof that Americans were not unhappy with Obama, but the Democratic Party’s machinery was failing outside of his control.

I have analyzed results back to 2010 focusing on seats that flipped and every senate seat in 2024. You can view my results here: https://1drv.ms/x/c/6c8d84458ba76309/EegBqMb4-bFBn1WX6IK9eIkBzYVmBtG59OrI64-AqrgbtA

If you don’t have good candidates to vote for, you won’t have good people in office.

A summary of how Orban came to power:

In 2009 the Hungarian Prime Minister resigned after the war in Georgia because he had put his entire political fortunes on a gas pipeline from Russia. This is a very unpopular move in former Russian colonies like Hungary.

Orban ran and won in 2010 offering a different stance compared to the nominally center-left party which was leaving office. The Democratic Coalition has remained a minor party ever since due to its pro-Russian history.

Under Orban, there has been fairly consistent growth in Hungary’s GDP per capita. They have remained part of the European Union, NATO, and most importantly the Schengen area. Granted, he is a right-wing asshole, postponing Romania and Bulgaria’s accession to the Schengen Area and refusing to send Ukraine military aid during this war, but Hungary has remained part of these vital institutions.

It’s only since Orban has been refusing to send Ukraine military aid in the last few years that a real opposition has formed against him. The left-wing coalition in Hungary has not recovered since. The only opposition to Orban which has managed to form in response to him over the last few years is also center-right and also opposes sending aid to Ukraine, so don’t expect them to change any.

Plus, Fidesz has never won an outright majority in parliament, they have always been in coalition with a center-right party.

The reason Orban has stayed in power is simply because the left wing in Hungary effectively does not exist.

If the center-left parties can make it clear they oppose Putin and support Ukraine, maybe things will change. The polling data tends to match up with the election results very closely. If Hungary got too despotic, they are in the Schengen Area so there is nothing stopping Hungarians from moving anywhere else in the Schengen Area or European Union. This acts as an effective brake on Orban’s right-wing policies.

For a counter-example, British citizens used to have the same rights Hungarians do but since Brexit went into effect they no longer have the right to freely live and work in the European Union. If the Tories come to power under Nigel Farage, the British people will be effectively trapped in a way that Hungarians are not.

For this reason, while I am no fan of Viktor Orban for many legitimate reasons, he is still a better prime minister than Keir Starmer or David Cameron.

First of all, I do not think anyone from Biden’s cabinet is going to run again. Even if they do, I do not think any of them will be able to win. They’re done. They had their chance. They blew it. Biden set Trump up for a victory through many mistakes in foreign policy, and everyone in the cabinet will have to face the question “you were working on the Biden team, and when Harris ran against Trump she lost the popular vote. What makes you more qualified than her?” They’re all done with their careers in government.

Generally, candidates will be sitting senators or governors. There are no living Democratic vice presidents who are likely to run again. It is unheard of for a Democratic candidate who lost the general election to run again and win. Harris will not be the first. Trump was able to pull it off because he has built a cult of personality. Harris does not have a cult of personality. It will be someone new.

So if we look at incumbent Senators or governors both after 1970 there are only 3 senators who will likely run. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, and Chris Murphy of Connecticut.

I think it is indisputable that the War in Gaza was a major factor in bringing down the Biden administration, so we want a candidate in 2028 who supported a ceasefire. I think it is also indisputable that the War in Ukraine harmed the economy, made Biden look weak, and significantly harmed Harris’ chances of winning last November. Chris Murphy is the only sitting senator born since 1970 who has supported arming Ukraine above what the administration has done and supported a ceasefire in Gaza. He might be low profile as Senators go, but I think that could change over the next 4 years if he plays his cards right. He is well-positioned to run for president.

Other senators who supported a ceasefire and were born after 1960 were Klobuchar, Booker, and Duckworth. These three senators are other likely candidates for the presidency in 2028.

There are a wide array of democratic governors who might run for president, including Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, J.B. Pritzker, and Wes Moore.

We are looking for a governor who supports Ukraine, and supported a ceasefire in Gaza.

The one member of the House who has built up an impressive public profile and might run in 2028 is AOC.

Our next president is likely on this post.

It was negotiating with Ho Chi Minh to prolong the war in Vietnam in 1968.

It was keeping Americans hostage in Iran in 1980.

It was ending work visas for farm workers.

It was implementing visas for EU citizens to travel to the United States.

They allowed money laundering from the Gulf States to flow freely.

They allowed Russian oligarchs to set up bank accounts in London and Tel Aviv without scrutiny.

It was Brexit.

It was the support for qualified immunity.

It was abandoning Afghanistan without congressional approval.

It was the lack of solidarity with Ukraine.

It was bombing civilians in Gaza as Hamas leadership was safe in Qatar.

It was prolonging the bombing of Gaza until inauguration day.

It was giving US visa-lite access to Qatar before Bulgaria, Cyprus, and Romania.

Don’t be surprised they have now banned the word liberal on Instagram.

All of these are signs of looming fascism.

We need strong progressive leadership to stand up to all of these policies that have brought Trump to power.

We need to offer a real alternative.

Vote progressive.

This old article popped to the top of my results when looking for a summary of Ricardo’s trade theory, so I have to comment on why Ricardo was right.

200 Years of Ricardian Trade Theory: How Is This Still A Thing?

If this article was right, Brexit would have had a negative or beneficial impact to the United Kingdom’s economy. The truth has been the exact opposite.

Ricardo’s main ideas are the following:

• When countries are able to trade freely with each other, they will specialize in what they are best at and both countries will be better off by trading than producing everything at home. This is comparative advantage.
• Free trade does not have to be reciprocal to be beneficial to the country with low to no tariffs on imports. So even if the other country requires visas for your citizens, you are still better off allowing their citizens to travel to your country without a visa. Reciprocity is shooting your foot to spite your face.

Brexit is a near-perfect test of Ricardian trade theory, and Ricardo has been vindicated once again.

This is why he is still a major part of every economics education. Because his predictions work.

In 2001 bin Laden bit the hand which likely fed him and attacked the United States.

Afghanistan had undergone over 20 years of war already, starting with the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, followed by a brutal civil war which the Taliban won in 1994. They then decided to attack the United States only 7 years later.

As a result, the United States went in to take out their support of international terrorism and prevent future attacks coming from Afghanistan. The cheapest way to do this is through nation building. The least expensive way in terms of both lives and money. Giving people options and building a civil society reduces the number of potential recruits for terrorist organizations, at a very low cost for taxpayers.

This was the status quo for twenty years and the literacy rate in Afghanistan increased rapidly. As soon as Trump became president we reduced our investment in Afghani literacy, leading to his verbal agreement with the Taliban to give them control of the country, which is exactly what happened.

During the time we were in Afghanistan under Bush and Obama we continued to invest in Afghani education which was a very good investment.

Afghanistan was not highly rated on indices under the Islamic Republic scoring at 2.85/10 in 2020 on the democracy index. There was a lot of corruption, a lot of poverty, and lots of work to do. But at least girls were going to school.

But nowadays they are the lowest ranked country in the world according to the Economist Democracy Index. It had a poor score on par with Egypt and Cuba, and today they are rated lower than North Korea.

Al Qaeda has been increasing its network of training camps in Afghanistan now that the Taliban controls the country. If you don’t think they will attack the United States and our allies, you are a fool.

Terrorism is going to increase as a result of the unratified Trump/Biden agreement.

People know this, as we can see with how the withdrawal from Afghanistan was the lynchpin which moved Biden from net approval to net disapproval. Biden did not have any significant wins to counteract his loss in Afghanistan. He had a major loss in 2022 6 months after the withdrawal when Russia invaded Ukraine. He had a further loss in 2023 when Hamas kidnapped 30 Israeli citizens.

He lost the midterms.

He did not have any significant wins to counteract his three major foreign policy losses.

No one really cares about the reasons why. The United States is the most powerful country in the world. We alone have the power to deter terrorist groups and rogue states into compliance. We alone have the ability to send a large amount of weapons or troops to any place in the world to keep the peace. No other country in the history of the world has had the amount of military power the United States has today. No other country has more alliances. No other government has more information than us.

Which means that when a terrorist group launches a surprise attack anywhere in the world like happened from Gaza we must ask how much the United States knew? What could we have done to prevent it? Why didn’t we?

When Russia invades its neighbors, what information did we already have to know of the pending attack? Why didn’t we send significant military equipment to Ukraine before the invasion to prevent the attack in the first place? Why did we put significant barriers towards Ukraine using the weapons we did send them from the beginning? What was going through Biden’s mind?

Nuclear war? Give me a break. Send them missile defense systems to block the missiles like we have given to Israel.

The truth is that after these massive failures Biden has not had a single success. Biden has not been the major voice speaking out for Ukraine. Leaders in former Warsaw Pact colonies and Macron have done far more than Biden has as a percentage of GDP, along with fewer restrictions. Biden has been far more like Scholz, Merkel, and Starmer.

Biden was played like a fiddle with the situation in Gaza, which brought down his presidency.

There are a lot of lessons from the Biden presidency which we need to learn to do better in the future. Republicans are obviously going to be worse.

We cannot afford to make these mistakes again.

The next time we have a Democratic president we need someone who is unabashadly Atlanticist. Someone who opposes authoritarianism, and is willing to use all available tools to strenghten democracies and preserve the peace.

We need a president who will bring us closer to our allies. Cut down on visa restrictions, end ESTA, and bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO.

That’s the type of foreign policy victory which will allow the next Democratic president to win reelection.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-tiktok-ban-bill/

The last chapter in Howard Zinn’s book A People’s History of the United States is called “Bipartisan Consensus” and is mostly him talking about the Clinton administration’s privatization of Conrail, deregulation of banks, and other right-wing policies.

In the last 250 years of American history, a New Democrat has won a majority of the popular vote for the presidency one time, in 2020 in the midst of a pandemic. This is despite all but one candidate from the last 35 years being a New Democrat. We could have run a potato against Trump during the COVID pandemic and won.

As a startup owner and hosting my own website, I am very disturbed by the willingness of Democrats and Republicans to support the banning of individual companies in bills of attainder. This is wrong. I am disturbed that the Republican-controlled Supreme Court let the bill of attainder stand.

I posted a full thread on Bluesky going through the complicated legal proceedings that led to the TikTok ban becoming law. https://bsky.app/profile/stidmatt.bsky.social/post/3lg42cpcozk2v

I support the United States passing reasonable laws on data privacy and security. I am wary of requiring popups like the EU does, but I do support reasonable laws requiring companies to protect consumer data which is included in the GDPR.

I am an American and I am opposed to bills of attainder. I am opposed to laws forcing foreign-owned companies to sell to American stockholders.

As an economist, I have a heavy bias against protectionism.

I’m disturbed by how many Americans support a TikTok ban, based on this data from 2023 where over 60% of respondents supported the ban. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1376628/us-adults-opinion-on-banning-tiktok/

However, as more Americans became familiar with the reality of this ban and the precedence it sets for the future, only 32% of Americans continued to support the ban into 2024. Most of its support is from Republicans. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/09/05/support-for-a-us-tiktok-ban-continues-to-decline-and-half-of-adults-doubt-it-will-happen/#:~:text=Republicans%20and%20Republican%2Dleaning%20independents,supported%20the%20government%20banning%20TikTok.

What Americans do support though is reasonable laws governing data privacy. 72% of Americans and a majority of Americans from both parties support extending and modernizing data privacy laws. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/10/18/views-of-data-privacy-risks-personal-data-and-digital-privacy-laws/

The European Union has more advanced data privacy laws than the United States, and instead of banning TikTok outright, they are bringing them to court and demanding that TikTok comply with the law or leave the EU. First, they have to pay large fines giving them a chance to do the right thing. https://www.reuters.com/technology/tiktok-5-other-chinese-firms-hit-by-eu-privacy-complaints-2025-01-16/

Infuriatingly, there was a proposal in Congress in 2022 to modernize American data privacy laws in a way that would apply to every company. It was not even referred to a committee. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Data_Privacy_and_Protection_Act

When we elect leaders, they need to be above the fray. They need to be willing to focus not on getting along with everyone or just doing things because they are popular, but doing what is right. We need people who will make it clear what their values are and then use their values to determine how they vote in the future. Popular opinion is easily swayed by the media, and people can be easily convinced into contradictory opinions. This is exactly why we don’t have direct democracy, instead voting for leaders who can be above the noise in mass media, and spend the time to understand issues and ideally guide us towards a better future. But democracy only works if politicians are willing to put the values they were elected on above constantly shifting political opinion on whatever issue is being pushed by pundits and grifts. Democracy only works when politicians are willing to stand for what is right.

Joe Biden has made it clear over his career that his primary value is unity. He cares most about working with Republicans, no matter who is harmed in the process. He is willing and has regularly thrown his allies to the side throughout his entire career to try to make his vision of bipartisanship a reality, and he has done so with his TikTok ban, which he supports.

In the vision of unity, we will now see many of Joe Biden’s policies continue under the next presidency of Donald Trump. Our Ukraine policy will remain mostly unchanged from before the election. We will restrict how they can use weapons beyond the rules of war, giving Putin an advantage on the battlefield. Our Israeli policy will not change. Our policy towards the EU will remain unchanged as well. If we were going to withdraw from NATO, we would have done it when we had a Republican trifecta in 2017.

The two candidates are so similar in their viewpoints that they are both claiming credit for the ceasefire in Gaza, which is clearly modeled almost exactly off the proposal Biden made almost a year ago.

The Biden presidency had one job which was to heal this country from Trumpism. At least this is what I believe most Democratic voters wanted, including myself. Instead, he chose a different path, to seek out unity with the Republican party and bring the two parties together. In doing so he has not brought the Republican Party away from the abyss, but under his leadership, the Democratic Party has drifted further right as we see through the bill of attainder against TikTok. He successfully convinced every member of his caucus to vote in favor of a bill of attainder, and his most important proposals such as the John Lewis Voting Rights Act failed. Expanding voting rights is still one of the most important issues in America and it failed because of the filibuster, which Biden supports.

Because when it comes down to it Biden has always valued unity above human rights.

That is very dangerous.

Now we will have unity by switching back to the second Trump presidency.

So, by Biden’s own metrics in terms of a president accomplishing his goals after being elected, Biden has successfully accomplished his most important life goal and we have now achieved unity in the United States, exemplified by the votes for the TikTok ban.

Nothing will fundamentally change.

Unity.

Unity.

The ceasefire is pretty simple when you get down to it.
Hamas will release all hostages. Israel will release most hostages. Israel ends its blockade on Gaza. Hamas will not rebuild its military abilities.

That’s pretty much it.

It does not solve the fundamental problems that underlie the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These problems are:

• Giving Palestinians voting rights in a UN member state.
• It does not define and enforce solid borders between Israel and Palestine. Solid borders do not require a closed border, just clear boundaries of jurisdiction.
• It does not grant Palestinians any rights when they are faced by Israeli citizens or authorities.

So, in short, I think this entire war was designed to put Trump back into office.

• This benefits Putin by reducing aid to Ukraine.
• It protects Netanyahu by preventing his impeachment which was about to happen in 2023.
• It protects Trump by putting him in office.
• It harms Israelis by not putting in place a permanent framework for peace in the region.
• It harms Palestinians by not removing Hamas and giving the Palestinian Authority a seat at the UN, which is the only way to undermine Hamas.
• Terrorist organizations have benefited significantly by using this war to their advantage to recruit suicide bombers.
• Iranian mullahs have benefited to consolidate power in Iran and portray the United States and Israel as the enemy.
• Qatar has benefited enormously to portray themselves as mediator while Hamas’ leadership is safe in Doha.
• Europe is significantly weakened by a second Trump presidency.

It’s the best we can do at this point in time. There is not a chance in hell of Netanyahu abandoning the settlements in the West Bank. Keeping Gaza as a fiefdom of Hamas strengthens his party by allowing them to fight when it is politically advantageous. It will not bring in democracy in Gaza, and Hamas will continue to rule Hamas. If you think that Hamas will not rearm over the next few years… I have a bridge to sell you.

The only silver lining to this is the bombing of Gaza will temporarily stop and rebuild.

Sorry if this doesn’t make me super happy, it’s better than nothing, but it has not ended the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Nothing has fundamentally changed.