Stepping Up (November 10, 2023)
Welcome to Home & Away. Here at Home the big news is politics, above all new polls suggesting that one year before the November 2024 presidential election Donald Trump is doing much better in a matchup with Joe Biden than any of the latter’s supporters want to hear.
Poison Polls
Let’s begin with why. Biden has arguably been a good president, one whose performance has been better than the polls indicate. The economy has added 14 million jobs since Biden took office and inflation is now down to 3.7 percent. Much of the world is envious of the American economy. Indeed, the United States’ cumulative economic growth post-Covid has been higher than any other G7 country.
I’d also argue that Biden has handled the war in Ukraine adeptly, rallying Europe to join the United States in sanctioning Russia and providing Ukraine with much of the economic and military help it needs to resist Russian aggression. He has also strengthened U.S. alliances throughout the world, putting the country in a stronger position to face threats from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. His stance on abortion rights is far closer to that of most Americans than the increasingly restrictive position being advanced by many Republicans. And Tuesday’s election results indicate a good deal of support for Democrats still exists around the country.
The problem for the president is that little of this seems to be helping him. One explanation for the relative lack of enthusiasm for Biden is that he has the disadvantage of being the incumbent at a time when the lion’s share of Americans believe that the country is faring poorly and, worse yet, heading in the wrong direction. Such a mood is hardly surprising given what has transpired over the past two decades: 9/11, the 2007/2008 financial crisis, two costly but unsuccessful wars, a pandemic, January 6, and more. More recent events—inflation and with it more costly mortgages and food, an out-of-control southern border, the messy departure from Afghanistan, wars in Europe and the Middle East—only add to the perception that more is wrong than right.
Against this backdrop, Biden will find it hard to win an election that is a referendum on him and the state of the country and world. It doesn’t help that many see him for what he is, a political insider who has worked in government for over half a century. And it doesn’t matter that he may not have been responsible for many of the challenges people see or feel. In principle, Biden has a year to turn things around, but this is likely to prove impossible. His best bet is to make the election a referendum on Donald Trump (if Trump is the challenger), something that might work if Trump is convicted of one or more of the many crimes he has been charged with.
Age is a big issue. Biden is not just 80 but an old 80. The way he walks, the way he talks, does not inspire confidence. I am long enough in the tooth to recall the adjective most used to describe JFK and his administration: vigor. It is not a word much heard around Washington nowadays.
Trump is only four years younger, but he projects greater strength even though he too increasingly has lapses. Despite his four years in office, he still benefits from being perceived as an outsider and as a victim of elites and the establishment in an age of populism. He also benefits from what some perceive as double standards, that he has been treated far more harshly by the legal system than the president’s son. The relentless focus on all this by Fox News, AM radio, and social media have thus far dramatically reduced any political price Trump has paid for his various legal predicaments.
There is also the possibility that Trump may be able to drag out the legal process or get off entirely. And even if he does not, he could continue to play the victim, perhaps successfully. If he were to win, if 45 were to come back as 47, the consequences would be enormous – and likely destructive– for democracy here at home. This week, The Washington Post ran a piece about Trump’s plans to weaponize the Justice Department during his next administration, including alleged plans to go after critics as well as President Biden and his family. This all comes on the heels of other reporting about plans to decimate the civil service. American democracy would be hollowed out just in time to mark the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.
When it comes to imagining the foreign policy of Trump 2.0, what we have to go on largely comes from Trump’s four years in the Oval Office. There is a decent chance that U.S. alliances would not survive, Ukraine would no longer be able to count on U.S. help, China could have its way with Taiwan, Israel would be free to continue building settlements and undermining what little chance remains for a two-state outcome, and the United States would stand aloof from international efforts to combat climate change. In fact, a second Trump administration would likely be even more extreme than the first, as the few qualified political appointees who had worked in his administration would not return, the civil service that restrained many of his worst instincts would be gutted, and Trump would come to the Oval Office feeling even more aggrieved and vengeful.
Democratic Denial
Thus far, the Democratic Party seems to be sleepwalking through history. The prevailing orthodoxy is that it would be disloyal to challenge Biden as it would weaken him and thereby increase the odds that Trump will be elected. Supporters of Biden also believe he is uniquely qualified to defeat Trump, succeeding where Hillary Clinton failed.
There are at least two flaws in the line of thinking arguing against someone with political standing challenging Biden. First, Trump may not be the Republican nominee, and if he is not, Biden would struggle against Nikki Haley, who after three debates looks to be the principal alternative to Trump and is outperforming Biden in polling across six critical swing states. The good news for the country is that if this scenario were to come to pass, a Haley presidency would carry out a robust internationalist foreign policy and would not constitute a threat to American democracy.
The other flaw with such thinking, and as noted at the outset of this week’s newsletter, is much more significant, namely, that Biden might well lose to Trump. Some columnists and pundits have suggested that Biden step down and not seek a second term. I disagree. Biden has every right to seek re-election, even if the Ruth Bader Ginsburg parallel, the danger of staying too long, is real. But a right to seek reelection is not a right to the nomination.
There is an alternative to Biden stepping down: someone plausible as the party nominee stepping up. (For the record, I do not include the congressman from Minnesota in this category. I also do not include third party efforts, which tend to affect outcomes, not provide winners.) Several sitting and former governors surely fit the description. There are undoubtedly others. Not to act is often every bit as consequential as acting. This is one of those times.
In such a scenario, either Biden beats back the challenge, in which case he emerges stronger, or he loses, in which case the party has a nominee better able to take on Trump or whomever. This week’s election results show that the Democratic Party may be more popular than the party’s leader. Even though Biden’s team is citing Tuesday’s results as evidence that Biden will outperform his poll numbers in 2024, they are still consistent with recent polling, which shows significantly more support for a generic Democrat than Biden himself. Just about any alternative would be younger, eliminating the age issue, and would not have to bear the burden of incumbency in a populist moment. Biden would be pressured to declare he would not seek a second term if he fared poorly in one or more early primaries, thereby opening the door to others, including the vice president and members of his administration.
Let me just add one thing lest anyone question my motives: I have known Joe Biden for 49 years and have enormous respect for him. We met in 1974, when he was a young senator and I was a young staffer for the patrician senator from Rhode Island, Claiborne Pell. Biden was incredibly warm and gracious to this nervous youngster. We have stayed friends over the decades and have had any number of meetings and conversations. I should also reiterate, as I noted at the top, that I believe Biden has been an effective president.
I would have no problem whatsoever with a second Biden term, even if we disagree on a number of issues, including trade, Afghanistan, and the border. Biden fully believes in U.S. leadership; indeed, the defining feature of his approach to the world is the centrality of this country’s alliances. And his commitment to American democracy cannot be questioned. He represents continuity with the post-World War II mainstream, which may not make for a campaign bumper sticker but associates him with a tradition that on balance has served this country and the world remarkably well.
And if Biden were to be a one term president, there would be no shame in that. He’d be in good company and, like Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, be seen as a successful president who did real service to this country and left it in better shape than he found it. What he should want to avoid is the legacy of being the person who paved the way to Donald Trump’s second chance to undo America’s democracy and its standing in the world.
Mayhem in the Middle East
As for Away, I will continue to focus on the Middle East. The Biden administration is still trying to figure out how to be supportive of Israel yet rein it in. The United States is providing Israel with intelligence and military support and resisting both domestic and international calls for a total ceasefire, something that would not be in Israel’s interests given the continuing threat posed by Hamas.
The president, the secretary of state, and now all G7 foreign ministers have been pushing for meaningful pauses in the fighting, which would allow critical aid to enter Gaza and hopefully facilitate the release of some hostages. Biden and Blinken have also voiced concerns (correctly I would add) about civilian casualties, the wisdom of an Israeli occupation of Gaza, and settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. And they continue to make the case for a two-state solution.
American calls for pauses in the fighting have finally been accepted in part by the Israeli prime minister. Israel has now agreed to four-hour pauses every day in Gaza and to opening a second corridor that would allow Palestinians to flee to the south. This is still short of what is needed and the Biden administration has been calling for, but is progress nonetheless.
Longer pauses are needed in order to allow aid to flow into Gaza. At least if not more important, U.S. officials should also make the case that Israeli attacks on Hamas must be more discreet, something that calls for less destructive weapons that inherently cause greater collateral damage. They should also call for more disciplined Israeli decision-making and public messaging. It cannot be the case that any strike is justified no matter what the cost in civilian lives. Israel for its part seems to have made the strategic calculation that the prosecution of its war against Hamas must take priority over any other considerations, including civilian casualties or reputational damage. This is shortsighted as it will further isolate Israel, undermine long term support in the West, increase chances the conflict will spread, and strengthen Hamas at the same time Israel seeks to degrade it.
The United States must also come down hard on settler violence and efforts to displace Palestinians, which is not only terrible from a humanitarian standpoint, but further weakens prospects for a Palestinian state achieved through peaceful means, something that obviously works to the advantage of terrorist groups like Hamas.
There is a big gap between how most Israelis view things and how much of the world (and a growing number of Americans) do. Israel is still very much in a world of October 8, the day after the attacks. This is totally understandable. Meanwhile, much of the world has moved on, affected by images of late October and early November, believing that Israel, while well within its right to attack Hamas, has exercised the right of self-defense in an unlawful manner by not taking far more care to protect civilians. There is also a widespread political sympathy for Palestinians given that millions live under Israeli occupation or control and lack a state of their own.
The Biden administration has started talks with the Palestinian Authority (PA) and select Arab governments about post-Hamas rule in Gaza, but such talks won’t get very far unless they are embedded in a larger strategy. The PA and other Arab governments will only be willing to take on a role in Gaza if they can point to clear evidence that there is a larger Palestinian state in the making. PA President Mahmoud Abbas, for instance, has already stated explicitly that the PA would only assume increased responsibilities in Gaza “within the framework of a comprehensive political solution.” All of which is to say that Israel’s strategy of a less than discriminating military effort followed by an occupation is almost certain to fail if it is not supplemented by a serious political effort to address legitimate Palestinian political aspirations.
One final idea here. President Biden has amassed considerable political standing in Israel and, by many accounts, is currently far more popular amongst Israelis than their own leaders, especially Netanyahu. The time has come for Biden to step up, to leverage this and speak over the head of an Israeli government that is not acting in the best interests of either the United States or Israel.
I would suggest an address to the Israeli people (ideally from the Knesset) in which he expresses support for their right to self-defense but makes the case for why it has to be done much more carefully, why settler violence is unacceptable, and why Israel’s military efforts must be accompanied by a political strategy that meets Palestinians half way. Biden needs to remind Israelis why a two-state solution is in their interest, as it offers the best, and possibly only, way for Israel to remain democratic, Jewish, secure and prosperous.
Israeli prime ministers have long been de facto participants in the American political conversation; indeed, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress in 2015, where he attempted to undercut the Obama administration’s impending nuclear deal with Iran. While Netanyahu might fear the political consequences of Biden speaking to the Knesset, he would not be in a position to oppose it.
Getting Personal
On the personal front, four things to report. First, the Government of Japan announced last week that I am to be a recipient of “The Order of the Rising Sun, Gold and Silver Star,” for “contributions to promoting intellectual exchange and mutual understanding between Japan and the United States.” I am not sure I deserve this honor, but what I will say is that I firmly believe alliances are a fundamental strength of American foreign policy, a force multiplier if you will. This is true in Europe and in the Indo-Pacific. And among allies, Japan is increasingly critical for the stability and prosperity of the region and the world. My intention is to continue to look for ways to strengthen this vital partnership.
Second, the paperback edition of The Bill of Obligations was published this past Tuesday. Which means you can go on Amazon or maybe into your local bookstore and get it without delay. The text has not changed, but the new edition does include several pages of questions designed to shape discussions in the classroom and outside of it about democracy and citizenship.
And speaking of the book, I am pleased to report that Colorado Mountain College (CMC) has selected The Bill of Obligations for its 2024 Common Reader Program. All the students at CMC’s campuses will read the book, as will a good many members of the larger CMC community. This should make for some valuable conversations and programs (including one with Walter Isaacson and me) as we head into the 2024 election year.
Last but not least, a flight attendant came over to my seat on a flight from Los Angeles to Phoenix to inform me that I had just crossed the one million mile mark on Delta. Reading from her phone, she said she was supposed to congratulate me, but then she looked up and said the real reason she came over was to tell me I travelled too much. She has a point, but it is safe to predict that in this regard I am unlikely to change. Simply too much going on at Home & Away to stay put.
Just a few links for this week, including a discussion on Morning Joe on the war in Gaza. Thanks for reading and feel free to share Home & Away.
Richard Haass in the news
Tuesday, November 7: MSNBC Morning Joe on Netanyahu’s leadership and the Israel-Hamas war (audio-only; begins at 33:07)
Podcasts
Check out The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.