- Friday, February 2, 2024

What do President Biden’s recent pause in licensing of liquefied natural gas exports — because of the climate — and the administration’s long-standing resistance to securing the southern border have in common?

The answer is that both misguided and disastrous policies are part of a doomed effort on the part of Mr. Biden to mollify the Marxist wing of his party.

Unfortunately for him, the last hundred years or so pretty much dispositively indicate that Marxists are mollified only when they have their way entirely and without reservation. One gets no credit for half measures.

A more immediately pressing problem for Mr. Biden is that those who dominate the policymaking apparatus of both the nominal and real Democratic parties are not, under any circumstances, going to allow him to wander to the right on any issue, and certainly not on issues such as border security or climate change.

In other words, his fellow Democrats — now driven and dominated by progressive individuals and organizations — are in charge of which policies are emphasized and enforce acceptable variances within each policy. For example, Mr. Biden shifted leftward on LNG exports despite all evidence that such a shift makes no sense for environmental, national or economic security. This was merely to avoid enduring a sit-in planned in early February by the crazy wing of the environmentalists.

As soon as he announced the cessation of the licensing of LNG exports, the environmental provocateurs canceled the sit-in.

The enforcement of policy purity by the leftward most members of the party is a significant challenge for the Biden administration. If the president is unable to course correct on important policies — and it seems like his own side will not allow such a thing — he will lose this election.

At the moment, Mr. Biden seems to be trailing former President Donald Trump by about 4 points in the polls, and, perhaps more importantly, seems to be trailing Mr. Trump in the swing states — North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Pennsylvania. Indeed, the recent spreads in North Carolina, Georgia and Nevada are large enough to suggest that the campaigns may need to revisit their definition of swing states.

More concerning for the Biden campaign is that this election may be fought over the economy and border security, which for some time have been the two issues identified by voters as the most important.

That’s bad news for Mr. Biden. The surge in inflation over the last three years, created in large measure by increased and unwarranted federal spending, means that real household wages have dropped almost 10% over the last three years. That doesn’t take into account the surge in regulatory costs that has occurred on Mr. Biden’s watch, which has also diminished the economic power of individuals, families and businesses.

With respect to border security, the news is worse. For obvious reasons, when voters are asked who would do better at ensuring border security, Mr. Trump enjoys an advantage of 15 to 30 percentage points. Even at this late stage in the republic, voters apparently cling to the belief that presidents are responsible for what happens when they are in charge.

The economic ship has pretty well sailed at this point. The only thing the Biden campaign can do is try to convince people that they really are better off now than they were at the beginning of 2021. Good luck with that.

With respect to border security, even if Mr. Biden wanted to change course, the left wing of his party, dominated by rich, college-educated people — who in some instances benefit from the suppression of working-class wages that often accompanies illegal immigration — would not allow him to do so.

In short, the very composition of the modern Democratic Party — rich, college-educated, segregated by ZIP code — makes it difficult for them to win a national election focused on working-class issues.

Mr. Biden needs to figure out a way to become the tribune of the people that he imagines himself to be. Or he needs to get used to the idea of being a one-term president.

• Michael McKenna is a contributing editor at The Washington Times and a co-host of the podcast “The Unregulated.”

Copyright © 2024 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide