Important lessons from US and Israel elections The Statesman 10 Nov 2026
https://epaper.thestatesman.com/reader/4219176/Delhi-The-Statesman/10-11-2026/page/7/2/rw
Important lessons from US and Israel elections The Statesman 10 Nov 2026
Weeks prior to midterm elections, assuming he still possesses charisma to gain votes, Trump pleaded that voters ‘pretend I am on the ballot.’ They did and rejected him. Public opinion surveys state that economy was the foremost concern of most Americans. Polls in Oct indicated that 59% disapproved of his policies while 51% believed Democrats could do better. Trump had attempted every trick in the trade to bring down gasoline prices prior to elections, including by striking a deal with Russia, thinking it was the main reason for his unpopularity, but failed.
Prior to his election as President, Trump had promised to solve America’s economy and stop the US from entering unnecessary military operations. He had reduced support to Ukraine while pushing for peace talks with Russia. He had even produced a Gaza peace plan which would have been funded by the Middle East. His intervention in Venezuela was accepted as the US gained control over its oil. All these were positives. His disaster was Iran, where victory eludes him, even after eight months, while oil prices have skyrocketed.
In Israel, the economy, despite three years of war, has flourished and hence was not a major concern to voters. It grew by 2.5% in 2025 and is expected to grow by 4% in 2026. The Israeli currency, Shekel, has strengthened against the dollar and its stock market has surged. Unemployment is 2.8% and inflation 1.5%. Thus, the economy, unlike, the US, was not a major factor in the elections.
Netanyahu, backing on his actions in Gaza and Lebanon as also attacks on Iran, in conjunction with the US, was hoping to return to power on his promise of delivering security for Israelis. It did not work. Israeli’s accused him of being responsible for the Hamas attack, undermining freedom of the judiciary, only to save himself from being prosecuted for corruption. Netanyahu had hoped that victory in Iran would guarantee him success in elections and all earlier flaws cleared. That was not to be.
The opposition in both nations was closely watching, aware as things moved that the Iran war and its fallout was disastrous. In both cases, strategy adopted by the opposition were different. In an interview, post midterm elections in the US, Mo Elleithee, Democratic strategist and former spokesperson for the Democratic National Committee, mentioned, ‘every Democratic candidate was talking about cost of living and corruption, and, in many cases, tying those two things together.’
He added that Trump normally dropped contentious subjects and Democrats took the bait and focussed on it. This time they did not. What emerged was that the Democrats worked with discipline and silently over months, especially concentrating in rural regions where they lacked a strong base, to counter claims made by the Trump administration. While Trump was possibly aware of his forthcoming defeat, his White House was reported to be preparing for a series of investigations which the democrats would launch against the administration.
In Israel, Netanyahu was aware that the opposition was united in challenging his rule. A month before the elections he criticized opposition leaders for joining hands to challenge him. The opposition planned together, concentrating on higher voter turnout and attracting support from different sectors of society. They had even planned beyond elections including agreeing to establish an official commission into the 07 Oct 2023 attacks as also drafting a new constitution. They had also decided to work together to counter fake news and smear campaigns.
In both nations the leaders were losing public support. In the US, Trump was facing backlash on the economy due to the impact of the Iran war. Netanyahu was already unpopular on his attempts to overhaul the judicial system and keeping the ultra-Orthodox Jews out of the draft system while providing state subsidies to the community and its religious institutions, solely to retain power.
The Iran war directly impacted both elections. Trump and Netanyahu believed in Feb this year that targeting Iran militarily would, in a short campaign, achieve what years of sanctions did not. Trump promised his constituents a short swift victory, while Netanyahu believed he would provide Israel with its ultimate security by destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons. Both had projected this view in their campaign, such that Trump even backed Netanyahu in Israeli elections.
Iran may have suffered militarily but not politically. There is a difference between overwhelming military power and overthrow of a regime without boots on the ground. Added was the belief of both that supporting one another would be beneficial. It failed. Netanyahu is now considered a liability to Israel with Democrats now gaining control of both houses in the US. Trump also appears to be dumping him by mentioning that the US would stop supporting Israel with military aid from next year.
At the end of the day, Iran, whose regime the US and Israel worked to change, did the unthinkable. It left both leaders facing defeat. While Trump tended to ignore it, his Vice President JD Vance tweeted that the debacle was due to participation in the Iran war. The message was clear, conflicts cannot guarantee victory in elections unless they are short, decisive and have an end state, all of which was lacking in Iran. Further, a weaker nation like Iran only has to survive for victory.
What emerges from both elections is that the opposition in both countries worked silently and largely across regions where they lacked a base to target the ruling party and bring down its standing. A clear example is Texas which elected a Democrat after 37 years. They let the ruling party commit blunders and watched from the sidelines. There were no protests or threats. They worked silently, covering regions where they were weak to regain ground.
In India, the opposition believes that rallies, threats and name-calling will bring them success in future elections. Picking one subject after another, seeking to corner the government with little proof, is never the answer. Rallies may provide a few hours/days of limelight and with just a few thousand paid supporters attending will never assure victory. India is not a small nation where a youth led protest can overthrow a government, especially where options are equally bad or even worse. They can only challenge the government by working at grassroot levels silently countering government claims. Will they learn?