New Leadership

“The bird is freed”, Elon Musk tweeted at the end of October. Tesla and SpaceX’s CEO (as well as the world’s richest man), Elon Musk has the world in turmoil after his latest stunt. After months of negotiations and legal battles, Musk’s $44 billion takeover of Twitter became official on October 27, taking the company private. Now, multiple waves of layoffs are causing outrage among Twitter’s employees, with more than half of the 7500-person workforce already laid off by Musk. But more widespread concerns have risen about the future of Twitter and its policies on free speech after Musk said he wants to reverse bans on specific users.

Elon Musk has never been afraid to share his opinion on Twitter. The free speech absolutist is known for sharing his thoughts on the platform, posting jokes and memes, and of course, posting tweets that greatly influence the stock market. He has publicly criticized Twitter multiple times, for example on its large number of spambot accounts and its policies regarding free speech. Musk started getting involved in April of this year by purchasing 9.2% of Twitter’s shares, making him its largest shareholder.

Shortly after his failed attempt to join Twitter's board of directors, Musk offered to purchase Twitter for around $44 billion. This is at the agreed-upon $54.20 per-share price that Musk offered back in April. However, Musk is greatly overpaying for the company: At the deal price, Musk is paying nearly eight times the amount of revenue Twitter is expected to generate over the next 12 months. That compares with a sales multiple of just three times for Meta and 3.6 times for Snap. In July, Musk backed out of the deal, stating in a regulatory filing that Twitter had made unfair representations about the number of spambots on the service. This led to Twitter suing Musk for trying to terminate the deal. In October, Musk agreed to the deal and the lawsuit was halted to allow the deal to close. Now that Elon Musk is in charge of Twitter, what are the billionaire’s plans for the social media giant?

Twitter is often accused of being left-leaning when it comes to banning individuals from their platform. Republicans especially often call Twitter out on their shadowbans or bans of important Republican political figures. In fact, Twitter’s ex-CEO Jack Dorsey has publicly admitted Twitter’s employees have a left-leaning bias. When US President Donald Trump got banned back in January for what Twitter called a “risk of further incitement of violence”, Musk called it “foolish”. He said he was buying Twitter because he wants "civilization to have a digital town square" and plans on using the platform to preserve free speech. Additionally, he plans to clean up spam accounts. After reinstating several previously suspended accounts (including that of Trump's), he tweeted a poll asking users if Twitter should provide a general amnesty to accounts "that have not broken the law or engaged in egregious spam”. In response to upset people fearing for the future of Twitter, Musk tweeted that Twitter “obviously cannot become a free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences”.

However, it is still uncertain how Musk's takeover and proposed policy changes will be received around the world. For example, Thierry Breton the EU Commissioner for the Internal Market tweeted "In Europe, the bird will fly by our EU rules" suggesting regulators will take a tough stance against any relaxation of Twitter's policies. Apart from these changes, Musk also has bigger long-term plans for Twitter's future. He has hinted at plans for his new company to become the “app for everything”, similar to China’s super app ‘WeChat’. Such an app would be the go-to place for most digital activities, including social media, messaging, finance, food orders and more. The West does not have anything like this yet, so this is a possible market Musk may be trying to get into. Another possibility, since Musk is known to be a huge fan of cryptocurrency, would be the acceptance of cryptocurrency as a payment method by businesses through Twitter. Musk's company Tesla has already been accepting the cryptocurrency Dogecoin for some time now and has also been experimenting with Bitcoin. Whatever happens, we can definitely expect some big changes in Twitter from the visionary, volatile, ambitious, and creative Musk.

Now, almost a month after Musk became the head of Twitter, nearly half of the employees have been laid off. Most of the former executives are either fired or left and entire chains of management within divisions of Twitter are gone. After Musk became CEO he sent out an ultimatum to all Twitter employees: either have an “extremely hardcore” work ethic with long hours at high intensity or leave with a three-month severance. This is not a new phenomenon for the hardworking CEO, as Musk has previously asked Tesla workers to “go super hardcore” to meet targets. As a result, many Twitter employees are outraged and have started a class-action lawsuit claiming they had not been given enough notice under US federal law that they had lost their jobs. Another ongoing concern for Musk, is a statement by the NAACP’s president and CEO, urging companies to pause ads on the platform and since then, there has been a massive drop in revenue. Twitter has lost 50 of its top 100 advertisers since Musk became CEO.

Was Elon Musk wise to purchase Twitter? Only time will tell. One thing is certain, the success of Twitter will be heavily influenced by ongoing and future comprehensive social and technological changes, such as increased polarisation. With political extremists returning to the platform and most administrative functions limited due to a lack of employees, this is a highly uncertain time for Twitter. If Musk manages to successfully reconstruct the company it is likely we will see revolutionary changes. But rest assured, in a tweet Musk promises us that he did not buy the firm "to make more money” but to “try to help humanity”. The coming months will be pivotal for determining whether Musk will be able to achieve either.

The numbers are (mostly) in: there are 50 Democratic lawmakers in the Senate; meaning that Kamala Harris will once again cast the deciding vote for the next 2 years. However, the story is different in the House with projected final results of 222 Republican to 213 Democratic Representatives. Simply put, the Biden legislative agenda is dead without control of both houses, but the results of the election bucked historical precedent for the President’s party, upended the expectations of Republican strategists, and bolstered Biden’s standing within the Democratic Party.

As we enter the lame duck session of Congress, before the new members are sworn in on January 3rd, there are already power struggles over house leadership, criticisms flying among the opposition over midterm shortcomings, and bipartisan plans for an unprecedented aid package to Ukraine. Most of the clouds have parted over the election results with no evidence of a “Red Wave”, (thanks in part to abnormally large youth turnout in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Dobb’s decision) and we can now draw some conclusions about the future Congress and brewing divisions within the Republican party.

Any tale of the internal GOP conflict cannot be told without first introducing our antagonists: the House Freedom Caucus (HFC). This 40-odd group of right-wing lawmakers (who host their own separate “bootcamp” on House rules and procedures) from incontestably red districts have made an infamous name for themselves. They compelled a former House Speaker Boehner, a fellow Republican, into early retirement in 2015, actively support MAGA candidates against incumbent GOP representatives, and have obstructed hundreds of (normally instantaneous) voice votes as retribution for Marjorie Taylor-Greene’s removal from her committee assignments [after posts of her supporting violence against Dem. lawmakers surfaced on social media]. Moreover, they have adopted a culture of open criticism, if not hostility, towards the Republican party establishment. This culture was inherited from the Tea Party movement - which should be seen as the ideological forebearers of the HFC.

Ironically, with the narrow margins in the House, Rep. Greene and other troublemakers look set to be given powerful committee assignments in the Oversight and Judiciary committees (among others). Positions these HFC members will use to begin politicized investigations of Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and the Department of Justice.

Upwellings of populist anger and enthusiasm have energized the conservative movement for decades. A notable strain of modern relevance emerged from the “America First” isolationist and nativist movement of the late 1930s and early 1940s, with repeating movements on near generational cycles, of approximately 18 years, since then. The Tea Party departed from the historical pattern of upswell, moderation, and eventual recession. The 87 Republicans propelled into the House by the Tea Party wave in 2010 primarily came from gerrymandered conservative districts, so they had no need to moderate their position to win over Democratic and independent voters - the only threat to their reelection came from being outflanked on the ideological right in a GOP primary.

That ideological belligerence carried into the formation of the House Freedom Caucus in 2015. Although the Tea Party was another casualty of the 2016 presidential election - its adherents split between Ted Cruz and Trump - hindsight shows us that even Tea Party darling Cruz folded into the MAGA political sphere. Trump himself was well aware of the continuity between the Tea Party movement and his own. “Those people are still there. They haven’t changed their views,” he told reporter Tim Alberta. “The Tea Party still exists — except now it’s called Make America Great Again.” From the ashes of the Tea Party there are two main offshoots of the movement (that are not strictly separate): the MAGA squad and the HFC.

The Washington Post has likened Trump’s brand of conservatism to Trotsky’s concept of an endless, all-encompassing, global struggle against established authority. Claiming that the #MAGA tribe loosely parallels Trotsky’s proletarian class, pursuing its own interests against those of every other class in society, without allegiance or compromise. However, it has become a perpetual grievance machine unwilling (or unable) to resolve those grievances through governance and legislation, while simultaneously waging a never-ending war against Democrats, independents and non-Trump Republicans. When Donald Trump was elected president in 2016, President Obama observed that Trump “is not an outlier; he is a culmination, a logical conclusion of the rhetoric and tactics of the Republican Party.”

This sentiment was in its own way echoed by John Fredericks, a syndicated conservative talk-radio host who attended Trump’s candidacy announcement on Tuesday Nov. 15, when he said, “Beat us. Stop talking, stop having meetings, get in the primaries, get into conventions, get into the delegate meetings and beat us. This is a populist party and there’s no other candidate that we have except Donald Trump.”

However, as Geoff Kabaservice opined, the party’s base - especially the large portion of non-college-educated, working-class citizens - legitimately need the government’s help with many of their problems. A strategy of politicized and intractable obstruction (against both the Democratic and Republican establishment) endangers the party’s long-term viability if it persists in its inability to resolve real problems. Cynical political realism, if nothing else, suggests that the Republican Party can’t carry on forever as a permanent grievance machine.

This may explain why outlets owned by acerbic conservative media mogul Rupert Murdoch have been lambasting Trump in the wake of midterm underperformance - The New York Post even depicted Trump as Humpty Dumpty with the caption: “Don (who couldn’t build a wall) had a great fall – can all the GOP’s men put the party back together again?” In the next week’s issue, the Post put Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on its cover – calling him “DeFuture.” One person familiar with how the billionaire mogul runs the companies told CNN’s Oliver Darcy that the decision to focus on DeSantis “is not an accident.”

Moreover, it seems that Trump has lost his super power - he can’t get constant media coverage and blind support. Prime time media snubbed the event, Matt Gaetz didn't show up at Trump’s candidacy announcement, and even the excoriation of Trump by the Post was buried on the 26th page. When asked about his last minute cancellation Gaetz claimed: "We're focused on [the midterms] and the Georgia election.” Even Trump’s return to Twitter isn't making waves with his apparent abstinence from the social media platform. While his account was banned it appears that most people forgot to unfollow the former President, as he retains 87 million followers despite posting zero tweets since January 8th 2021.

Former Trump ally, Representative Mo Brooks of Alabama, who spoke at the Jan. 6th rally before the attack on the Capitol, put it more bluntly: “In 2020, there was no other option. In 2024 we will have candidates who are vastly superior and will do much, much better competing against the Democrat nominee than the loser Donald Trump has proven himself to be.” Four major party donors (Stephen Schwarzman, Thomas Peterffy, Ken Griffin and Ronald Lauder) announced that they plan to support candidates other than Trump in 2024. Ivanka Trump - a staple during Donald Trump’s tenure in the Oval Office - says that she is “choosing to prioritize'' her children and would not be involved with his campaign.

Lobbying groups like the Club for Growth, once a steadfast Trump ally, are circulating polling showing Trump trailing Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida by double digits. Even Representative Kevin McCarthy, who is in a leadership struggle with the HFC (many of whom are part of the unofficial MAGA squad), wouldn’t say if he will endorse Trump for president. For those who have been more vocal, their previous “concerns” have changed into direct attacks as they try to capitalize on what they see as a possible chance to hurdle over Trump and embrace a new era of party leadership.

The disillusionment with Trump means that Desantis could take over a large portion of the Republican base when it comes to the 2024 primaries - especially conservative voters who found Trump to be uncouth, traitorous, or just dumb. There is a looming split in the Republican party, whether that split is with Trump or within its own ranks is uncertain. However, the latter seems more likely given the cult of personality responsible for much of Trump’s political power. If that is the case, and if a true schism occurs within the Republican party it could cause a cascade effect that ruptures the existing peace in the Democrat party between overzealous progressives and old school moderates.

The Freedom Caucus is already trying to flex its leverage in the House by proposing the reinstitution of a rule that allows for a vote to oust the Speaker of the House - a rule which the same caucus used to compel John Bohner’s resignation in 2015. Although a long shot, it illustrates the kind of power struggles that are ongoing within the Republican Party. These divisions have been brewing since before the Tea Party shut down the government in 2013 despite having Republican control in the House. This exact scenario could play out again given the narrow margins the future House leadership will have to pass funding bills. Especially if firebrand HFC Representatives refuse to work with the Speaker to pass bills that have any chance of making it through the Democrat controlled Senate.

Former Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, another former Trump ally, received applause when he told a room full of party donors, governors, and strategists that Trump cost the party victory in the past three federal elections. What happens if the Republican party faces a scenario where the anti-establishment Freedom Caucus/MAGA squad shuts down the government (as they persuaded Trump to do in 2018/19) and leads the Party to another stinging defeat? Polling indicates that about one-third of the Republican Party remains devoted to Trump, making it difficult for another candidate to oust him in a sprawling primary field. Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah, who said he’d like Gov. DeSantis to enter the presidential race, pointed out that Trump posed a unique threat to the party — particularly if he does not end up as its nominee. “You have a candidate who isn’t afraid to bring down the party,” Mr. Cox said. “It’s a different calculation for him than it is for my colleagues.”

Irrespective of whether the Republican party can salvage itself from its extremist elements, it is the sincere wish of this author to see both major parties fragment from their radical fringes and coalesce into a majority moderate party. Regardless of how improbable that currently sounds, our parties are overdue for a paradigm shift and neither represent any kind of cohesive political platform or ideal, they are merely brands that lose legitimacy and meaning each election cycle.

On November 3rd of 2021, I had the chance to meet the former (and incoming) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin ("Bibi") Netanyahu at the Knesset, at quite an unpleasant moment for him. The Naftali Bennet and Yair Lapid governing coalition were in the midst of achieving a major victory, narrowly passing the budget in the Knesset (60 in favor-59 against) for the first time in 3 years. I waited outside his office to meet him because I guessed he would be returning there soon, to get back to work. After all, Netanyahu has been the longest serving Prime Minister in Israel's history, an achievement that would not be possible if he did not have resilience and determination. Sure enough, 20 minutes later, Bibi was heading towards his office, flanked by an entourage of bodyguards. We had a brief conversation and upon parting, I told him "I'm looking forward to seeing you as prime minister again".

On that November 3rd day though, it seemed anything but a foregone conclusion. After 4 elections and a few years of political deadlock, Israelis were feeling fatigued and frustrated by the stalemate between the pro-Bibi and anti-Bibi camps. Netanyahu's failure to prevent Bennet from passing the budget, had led to rumblings within the Likud party about potentially replacing him. Yuli Edelstein, Nir Barakat, Miriam Regev and others, had begun to openly contemplate a post-Netanyahu Likud. Some Likud members were enticed by a post-Netanyahu Likud, one that could allow the party to enter into agreements with parties that refused to deal with the Likud, so long as it was being led by Netanyahu.

Despite these obstacles, over the past year, Bibi was able to continue leading the Likud. Following the collapse of the anti-Bibi coalition, he managed to pull off an epic comeback in the Israeli elections in November. His right-wing bloc, comprised of the Likud (32 seats) Religious Zionism (14 seats), Shas (11 seats) and United Torah Judaism [UTJ] (7 seats) won 64 of 120 Knesset seats, make him the next likely Prime Minister.

To assemble a governing coalition, a Member of Knesset must garner a majority of 61 Knesset members to support their bid to lead the government. In order to determine the distribution of Knesset seats, Israelis vote for their preferred party and after all the votes are counted and any party that doesn't receive 3.25% of the total vote count, fails to make the Knesset. The 3.25% minimum is often called the "threshold", because votes for this party aren't considered in the final distribution of the Knesset seats. Although no party has ever won an outright majority of 61 seats, parties can gain the support of other parties and their Knesset seats, by promising their leadership a range of incentives, that might include benefits for a specific community and/or important positions in the new government, such as the Finance Ministry, or appointments to key Knesset Committees.

During the election campaign, Netanyahu once again demonstrated his ability to broker deals, in an effort to avoid wasting right-wing votes. He helped to unite Betzalel Smotritch, Avi Moaz and Itamar Ben Gvir behind the banner of Religious Zionism, an effort that paid dividends after Religious Zionism became the third biggest party in the Knesset, winning 14 seats. Netanyahu also made a successful effort to prevent the division of UTJ, into 2 smaller parties, Aguda and Degel Hatorah. The 2 sides agreed to put aside their differences, because of Bibi's promise that Haredi schools (aka "Yeshivas") would receive state funding, regardless of whether the Haredi schools taught secular subjects or not.

In contrast, the leader of the Anti-Bibi coalition, Yair Lapid, missed a number of opportunities to ensure left-wing votes were not wasted. The head of Labor, Merav Michaeli, refused Lapid's incentive-laden overtures to merge Labor with the far-left party Meretz, with Labor putting out a statement that "a union between the parties was tried in the past and was a total failure". Lapid was also unable to prevent the collapse of the Joint List party. This proved disastrous for Lapid, as numerous Arab parties failed to make it past the 3.25% threshold, which meant less anti-Bibi votes would be counted. The far-left Meretz also failed to make it past the threshold, an unmitigated disaster for a party that won 6 seats last year and joined the anti-Bibi governing coalition. Lapid's failure to unite Labor-Meretz, proved to be a costly failure, costing his bloc 151,000 votes, since Meretz did not pass the threshold.

In the next few days, Negotiations will continue in earnest between Netanyahu and the leaders of his right wing political allies, including Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir of Religious Zionism, Aryeh Deri of Shas and Yitzhak Goldenknopf of UTJ. Netanyahu has reportedly offered the Finance Ministry to Smotrich, who will be replaced in 2 years by Deri. It has also been reported that Ben Gvir will be given the new title of "public security" Minister, giving him control over some security forces (including the police).

Although the 4 parties have reached an agreement in some areas of the negotiations, a full agreement has yet to be struck. Still, it is likely Netanyahu will be able to strike a deal in the next few days that would initiate arguably the most right-wing government in Israel's history. When a final coalition agreement is reached between the Likud and its right-wing allies, it will mark the return of Israel's longest serving Prime Minister and a return for the Israeli left-wing to the Knesset opposition.

There's an old and common saying, "pride goes before a fall", which is an apt description for the failure of the Republican party to anticipate the mood of the electorate in the 2022 midterm elections earlier this month. Republicans expected they would unleash a "red wave" in the midterms that would take back control of the house and senate. After all, Republicans had good reasons to feel optimistic: firstly, midterms are typically harmful for the incumbent President's party. The sitting President's party has lost seats in the House of Representatives 17 times and lost seats in the Senate 13 times, in the 19 midterm elections that have taken place after World War II. Additionally, President Biden's approval ratings were setting benchmarks for mediocrity. Unfortunately for the GOP, the anticipated "red wave" never materialized, as Republicans only managed to gain a slim majority in the House of Representatives, while Democrats managed to gain control of the Senate (including 3 independents that are closely aligned with the DNC). While progressive leaders felt vindicated by the results of the midterm elections, Republican leaders have engaged in soul searching, bemoaning their inability to take advantage of President Biden’s abysmal approval ratings and the historical trend for midterm elections. Republicans still managed to win 222 of the 435 races for the House of Representatives and 20 of the 35 Senate races, as well as 18 gubernatorial races, winning half of the 36 races for Governor. The results have been considered, almost indisputably, as a disaster for Republican hopes heading into election day and Republicans will have to re-configure their strategy as both parties prepare for the Presidential elections in 2024.

To understand the results of the 2022 Midterm elections, one must be cognizant of the political system and landscape of the US. The US has midterms elections every 4 years, at the "midway" point of every presidential term, hence the name "midterm". Although Presidents are not on the ballot in the midterms, it is a widely accepted view that the outcome of the elections is affected by and considered an important reflection of the public approval of the job performance of the incumbent President. However, it's also important to expand on some other factors that also can influence the outcome of the midterms. For example, because members of the Senate are elected for six year terms, an average of about one-third of all senators, are up for re-election in the presidential or midterms elections. In addition, the entire house of representatives, and many (but not all) governors are selected in the midterm elections. Similar to the presidential elections, not all states have an equal likelihood to win. Some states consistently vote Democratic, for example, Washington, Illinois, California or New York. Other states consistently vote for Republican candidates, such as Oklahoma, Montana or Idaho. There are also the famous swing- states, such as Pennsylvania or Nevada, where both Republicans and Democrats have viable chances of being elected. This fact gives the outcome of the 2022 midterms additional context, because it shows that the likelihood of changing the balance of power in the Senate is partially dependent on which states have Senate and Gubernatorial races and how they typically vote.

One important dynamic that's an encouraging sign for Republicans was the slim margin of victory for Kathy Hochul in her campaign to be re-elected as Governor for New York. Although her Republican opponent, Lee Zeldin, lost the race, he managed to garner 47.1% of the total vote count, which should be considered an impressive achievement, relative to the typical margin of victory for Republican candidates in New York. It would be a boon for the GOP, if they are able to continue and even improve on these results in New York, which could force the DNC to divert resources from battleground states.

Aside from Zeldin’s strong campaign in New York and its implications for the GOP’s future efforts there, things looked far bleaker in states that are considered swing states and usually more conducive to Republican success. Republicans lost Senate races in Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Nevada and New Hampshire, although they did manage to win Senate races in other swing states, including Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Iowa. So, the midterms did produce some good news for conservatives. Perhaps the 2022 midterm elections have been viewed as a disaster for Republicans because they were extremely confident they would be able to capitalize on Biden's extreme unpopularity. Regardless, a Republican-controlled House will further increase President Biden’s difficulty in passing legislation through Congress and the likelihood of further deadlock in Congress and more Presidential executive actions from President Biden. Thus, the results of the November midterms produced concerning dynamics for both parties, but the biggest loser of the 2022 midterms was the American people that desperately needed bi-partisanship to pass legislation to deal with the many challenges facing the United States today. Unfortunately, the 2022 midterms only produced yet another example of the ongoing, deep political division that is plaguing our country.