We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
Election Watch
Jon Lieber, Eurasia Group's head of research and managing director for the firm's coverage of United States political and policy developments, shares his perspective on US politics from Washington, DC.
What we're watching in US Politics:Kamala Harris is off to a blazing start since replacing Joe Biden as the Democrats' pick for the presidential race, raking in almost $250 million in just one week. The big question: Can she maintain this momentum in the race against Donald Trump?
Joe Biden drops out of the race last Sunday, unexpectedly, as the oldest candidate ever, instantly making Donald Trump the new oldest nominee in American presidential history. Now he's going to have to run against a Democrat who's 19 years younger than he is, and the sitting Vice President of the United States, Kamala Harris. She's off to a scorching hot start raising almost $250 million, a quarter of a billion dollars in a single week since Biden announced he was dropping out, and she's picking up a lot of buzz and excitement online.
But the real question is, is her current momentum about Harris? Or, is it just about someone other than Biden? That's really what the rest of this campaign is going to be about. Harris comes in with some strengths that Biden didn't have, namely the fact that three-quarters of the population doesn't think she's too old to be president, but she probably also has some weaknesses where Biden had unique strengths, such as his strength with working-class white voters in the Midwest. On that front, Harris is just kind of an unknown.
We can't really trust what the polls are telling us just yet, because what you'd expect to see after a big event would be a surge in support from Democrats, who are more eager to respond to polls at the moment, so it might be a few weeks before we actually have an understanding of where this race stands in public opinion polling. Then there's the question of Harris herself who hasn't really done much to distinguish herself as vice president and ran a pretty poor presidential primary campaign in 2020 that led to her dropping out and becoming the vice-presidential pick. So is this election going to be about Harris, the person, versus Donald Trump, who Americans know and either love or hate very well? Or is it going to be about Kamala Harris, the meme, running against Donald Trump?
Right now, she's polling as a generic Democrat would, doing two to four points better than Biden would nationally. We don't really have a lot of granularities on what's happening at the swing states, but it looks like this is starting to be a competitive race, and we have to see how Harris holds up once the American people get a better look at her. This is going to happen through her campaign appearances, which will be tight and scripted, but probably the most important event coming up on the election calendar is going to be the debate, where Harris won't have a chance to answer scripted questions or read off a teleprompter and is going to have to face Donald Trump live.
As for Trump, suddenly, this race that was breaking strongly in his favor is now sort of starting to turn against him because of the fact that Kamala Harris now can position herself as the change candidate, and talking about a break from the past, as Trump as the old former president that Americans maybe want to move on from. So very fluid dynamic in the race. Trump is probably still favored, just because he has more paths to victory through the Electoral College, but this could all change drastically over the coming weeks. Thanks for watching, and stay tuned for what we're watching in US politics next week.
President Joe Biden addresses the nation about his decision to step back from the 2024 presidential race on July 24, 2024.
For a moment last night, America lived up to its best ideals. It often does in the dark hours.
President Joe Biden addressed the nation from the Oval Office to explain his reluctant decision to step away from the 2024 campaign — a campaign he was forced to accept, in a humiliating but necessary way, that he could not win — in a rare moment of sacrifice over ego, service over ambition.
Though age has severely diminished Biden’s capacities, it has not diminished his dignity or character.
Character is not something we talk about a lot in politics these days. But as Biden raspily and haltingly defended his presidential record, his vision for the future, and his 50 years of service, he showed genuine character.
Character is more than just toughness, grit, and fortitude amid a fight, though surely it can encompass those qualities. Character is more than just grace in loss, and Biden knows more about that than most, having lost his wife Neilia and his 1-year-old daughter Naomi to a car accident in 1972, and then his son Beau to brain cancer in 2015. Character is what happens after those moments. It’s what you do with the time left, how you reassemble the pieces and build something with purpose. It’s reflected in the ideas you hold and the people you serve, even if those ideas fail and people turn on you. Character is the story your life tells when you might no longer have the strength to tell it yourself.
“Nearly all men can withstand adversity,” President Abraham Lincoln once said, “but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” You don’t have to agree with what Biden fought for, you don’t have to like his record, and you don’t have to support his party, but last night, President Joseph R. Biden, who still has more power than anyone on earth, passed the character test. And he asked a riven country to try to do the same.
Now let’s turn to the campaign, which, as ever, is a testing ground of character.
Campaign rallies are not known for their subtle rhetoric, so when a local politician is trying to juggle the twin duties of whipping up a partisan crowd while simultaneously kissing their candidate’s butt, it’s usually not surprising they get a little sloppy.
But it’s worth paying attention to what Ohio Sen. George Lang said to a crowd as he introduced former President Donald Trump and JD Vance the other day. Arriving at the podium chanting Trump’s now-famous epizeuxis “fight, fight, fight,” Lang warned of an upcoming civil war if Democrats win the election. “I believe wholeheartedly Donald Trump and Butler County’s JD Vance are the last chance to save our country politically,” Lang said, sweating with enthusiasm in the summer sun. “I’m afraid if we lose this one, it’s going to take a civil war to save the country.” And then, he added a little boost for those prepping for battle. “If we come down to a civil war, I’m glad we got people like Bikers for Trump on our side.”
No one followed Lang on stage and pushed back or suggested it was horrendously dangerous rhetoric. It wasn’t until much later when the recklessness of the comments began to circulate more widely that Lang was forced to apologize.
“Remarks I made earlier today at a rally in Middletown do not accurately reflect my view,” Lang said, as if somehow his mouth had gone rogue from his brain. “I regret the divisive remarks I made in the excitement of the moment on stage. Especially in light of the assassination attempt on President Trump last week, we should all be mindful of what is said at political events, myself included."
Amen to that.
Still, fears of a second civil war permeate the campaign, and while I don’t normally hyperventilate over these hypothetical, partisan-stoked fears because the institutions in the US have mostly proven to be resilient, the horrific assassination attempt on Trump and the events of Jan. 6, 2021, have made the descent in political violence a genuine scenario that demands attention. Stable democracies, like bankruptcy, end in two ways: gradually, and then suddenly.
People in the US are getting used to this sort of rhetoric by now — though normalizing it is one of the most dangerous signs of decline — but people outside the US, especially in the country’s closest allies, are deeply apprehensive. Is the US really inching toward a civil war?
To find out, we partnered on a poll with David Coletto, CEO and chair of Abacus Data, and the results are unsettling. Thirty-nine percent of Canadians say it is likely that the United States will descend into civil war, while another 23% believe it is somewhat likely. 39%? Yes. The numbers are starker among young people, with 48% of people between the ages of 18 and 29 saying a civil war is likely.
“Canadians are watching the increasing polarization and political violence in the US, and many of them are not shutting the door to that division escalating into full-scale civil war,” Coletto says. “Younger Canadians, in particular, are inclined to think that the very worst outcome is at least a possibility.”
While the polling figures are accurate, let’s hope the sentiments are wrong.
Abacus also asked about mandatory retirement ages for politicians in the wake of Biden’s agonizing decision to step aside and, again, most Canadians heartily agree that he is too old to lead. Seventy-three percent believe there should be a maximum age for a president or prime minister. What age? 28% say 71-plus while 48% say somewhere between 61 and 70, which is surprising.
“The whole Joe Biden saga put into clear perspective the effect aging can have on leaders charged with the most important executive functions in the world,” Coletto says. “Most Canadians think political leaders have a best-before date, and the average age of a president or prime minister is around the usual age of retirement, which is 65.”
You can see the full poll results and Coletto’s comments about it here. GZERO will continue to work with Abacus Data, a well-respected Canadian polling firm, to explore how Canadians and Americans feel about their relationship, the US election, and more in the coming 100 days. Check out their work here.
Harris breathes new life into Democratic Party. Could someone do the same for Canada’s Liberals?
When President Joe Biden announced on Sunday that he would not seek reelection, his decision, albeit a little late, was quickly applauded by Democrats as a service to his country — and party.
In the higher-minded rhetoric, Biden was cast as a modern Cincinnatus, putting duty above personal interest. Perhaps the writing was already on the wall, with Biden unlikely to resist the growing calls for him to step aside. But the immediate effects of his decision are the same either way: Vice President Kamala Harris is now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, an energetic change candidate, and the party has enjoyed an immediate reenergizing.
After Biden dropped out, the Dems raised an astonishing $150 million from big donors, as well as $81 million from small donors in a record-breaking 24 hours. As many joked on X, Harris outgrossed “Twisters” in her opening weekend. Of note, much of the money came from smaller individual donations of $200 or less — 888,000 of them, in fact.
The Harris campaign immediately rallied tens of thousands of volunteers, hitting 28,000 by Monday, many in battleground states. Scripps News reports that’s 100 times greater than the campaign average. A Zoom call with Black women who support Harris drew 44,000 participants — a staggering number that exceeded the company’s limit of 1,000 people and required it to move the group to a webinar.
The energy boost Democrats are enjoying may have Canadian Liberals wondering if a similar outcome might be possible for them. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau insists he’s staying on as leader, readying to fight in the fall 2025 election despite being roughly 20 points behind Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre. By the time the vote rolls around, Trudeau will have been in power for a decade.
Trudeau has been asked to step down by a few notable sources within his party, but the pressure to leave hasn’t risen to the level Biden faced. That could be because the election is still more than a year away, or because Poilievre doesn’t present the existential threat to democracy and rights that Dems say Trump poses. Liberals may also think that for all their misfortune, they could still turn things around and that Trudeau is their best bet for doing so. But things don’t look great.
Election projection site 338 Canada’s Philippe Fournier projects the Conservatives will win 212 seats compared to 74 for the Liberals. That’s based on a popular vote projection of 42% for Poilievre’s side compared to 24% for Trudeau’s, a spread that reflects federal polls that routinely find the Conservatives ahead by 14 to 20 points or more. Trudeau’s approval rating, meanwhile, has sunk to all-time lows.
The Conservatives are leading their rivals in fundraising by a lot. In the first three months of 2024, the party brought in just under CA$11 million from 51,000 donors, which was triple what the Liberals managed and more than all opposing federal parties combined. Political donations in Canada are a fraction of what they are in the US, but the Conservative numbers are high for the country. In 2023, Poilievre broke records with roughly 200,000 donors pledging over $35 million. The Liberals managed $15.6 million.
As bad as things look for the Liberals, however, there doesn’t seem to be much hope that anyone else could turn the Liberal campaign around like Harris looks poised to do in the US.
“There’s pretty good data to suggest that when incumbents are replaced by a successor [in Canada,]” says Graeme Thompson, a senior analyst with Eurasia Group, “the successor has much lower chances of reelection than the original incumbent, especially when that original incumbent’s poll ratings are below a certain threshold where they’re doing pretty poorly.”
Perhaps the most infamous example was in 1993, after Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney stepped down amid plunging poll numbers and was replaced by Kim Campbell. The PCs lost that election to the Liberals, dropping from 156 seats to two.
The United Kingdom’s recent election is further evidence of the phenomenon. The unpopular Conservatives dropped to 121 seats from 365, losing control of the government to an ascendant Labour Party after roughly 14 years in power — and after cycling through five prime ministers.
Thompson says it’s unlikely there’s anyone in the Liberal Party who could replace Trudeau and turn the ship around. Those within Trudeau’s Cabinet are tied to his government and record, painted with the same brush. And those outside the party would face their own challenges, including time.
“Somebody would have to come in and distance themselves from the government here up to this point," he says, "and embrace a set of policies and a style which would have to be very different.”
“I don’t think that just putting a new coat of paint on the same sort of decrepit structure is going to change the fundamentals. You would really have to be a new government, and that’s going to be very hard for somebody who has been a member of that government up to this point who doesn’t have a long runway to prepare that pivot or transition.”
Thompson also points out that for external candidates, like former Bank of Canada and Bank of England Governor Mark Carney — with whom sources say Trudeau recently met in a bid to get him to join his government — there are few if any incentives to hop on a sinking ship. Moreover, no replacement candidate of Harris’ caliber seems ready, willing, and able to serve.
The numbers bear out that analysis. A recent Nanos poll found that while 19% of respondents chose Carney as the most appealing Liberal leader, followed by Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland at 19%, and Trudeau himself at 9%, a quarter chose “None of the above” and another 20% chose “unsure.”
Harris may be able to continue to inject life into the Democratic Party. She may have a real shot at turning the Democrats' campaign around. But she still has to prove she can stand up to Trump on the national stage.
It doesn’t seem that anyone can — or wants to — do the same for the Liberals, which means Trudeau looks likely to stick around, go down with the ship, and leave the reinvigoration and rebuilding to a successor, who’ll find themselves not on the government side but in the opposition seats.
President Joe Biden addresses the nation from the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, on July 24, 2024, about his decision to drop his Democratic presidential reelection bid.
In his first address to the nation since ending his reelection bid last weekend, President Joe Biden framed his decision to bow out of the race as a sacrifice for the sake of American democracy.
“I revere this office but I love my country more,” he said in a historically minded address from the Oval Office on Wednesday night. “This task of perfecting our union is not about me … it’s about ‘we the people.’”
While calling for unity, he framed the November election as a pivotal choice for American voters between “hope or hate” and said that while he felt his experience and record justified another term, it was time to pass the torch to “a new generation of leaders.” Vice President Kamala Harris, he said, is “experienced, tough, and capable.”
To help shape her campaign, he pledged to focus his remaining months in office on key Democratic themes: protecting the right to abortion, reducing gun violence, accelerating the fight against climate change, brokering a cease-fire in Gaza, and reducing prescription drug prices.
He also reiterated his intention to reform the Supreme Court – with term limits for justices and an ethics code likely to be on the agenda.
Vice President Kamala Harris is on track to replace President Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee, leaving one major question remaining: Who will she choose as her number two?
"Harris needs someone who compliments her strengths,” says Eurasia Group’s US director Clayton Allen. “To put it bluntly, a white, male, moderate.” She is also looking for someone who can unify the party, draw in a new coalition of voters, or win in a swing state.
Former Attorney General Eric Holder is reportedly in charge of vetting a list of 10 Democrats being considered for the job.
The names getting the most buzz:
Josh Shapiro: The Pennsylvania governor, a can-do moderate, could help Harris win his state’s 19 electoral college votes by making inroads with rural, potentially Trump-leaning voters. A poll earlier this year showed that more than three in 10 Trump supporters in Pennsylvania supported Shapiro.
Shapiro, who is Jewish, has been an outspoken supporter of Israel’s policy in Gaza and an opponent of campus protests and divestment calls. The extent to which those stances could alienate progressive Democrats is an open question. Shapiro’s support for school vouchers also ran afoul of Pennsylvania’s largest teachers union, an issue that will likely also attract attention.
Mark Kelly: Like Shapiro, the Arizona Senator also hails from a swing state, and his tough stance on border security could help Harris – who was given the southern border as a portion of her issue portfolio – withstand attacks on the administration’s border record. Plus, “he has a nice story,” says Eurasia Group US expert Jon Lieber. “He’s an astronaut and loyal husband to his wife, who was a victim of gun violence.” Kelly is married to former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who was severely wounded in a mass shooting in Tucson in 2011.
His downside: If he ran it would mean abandoning a Democratic Senate seat in a swing state, forcing the Dems to defend it again two years earlier than expected.
In the middle of the pack …
Andy Beshear: The governor of Kentucky “brings a southern state moderate appeal that boosts Harris’s blue-collar appeal,” says Allen. Beshear has won two terms in a solidly Republican state that Trump won by 26 points in 2020. He is vocal about his Christianity and has emphasized the need to work with Republicans on legislation – traits that could boost Democratic support among moderates and independents. But Trump is almost certainly going to win in Kentucky, putting Beshear at a disadvantage to the other swing-state governors.
Roy Cooper: At 67, Cooper has had a long political career as the former state’s attorney general and North Carolina senator, making him among the most qualified of the VP picks – but age has proven to be a double-edged sword in this election season. Cooper’s successes as a Democratic candidate in an increasingly Republican state may sweeten his odds for VP in helping turn the Tar Heel State, a key battleground state, blue for the first time since 2008.
JB Pritzker: The Illinois governor’s family owns the Hyatt hotel chain, and his deep pockets could help Harris raise money – though having received a $100 million money shower after Biden stepped down, the vice president isn’t exactly desperate for cash. Pritzker, who is also Jewish, has been more moderate on the Gaza issue than Shapiro. But as a 1-percenter, Pritzker won’t help Harris connect with the working-class midwestern Biden-2020 voters she needs, says Lieber. And Illinois isn’t a state in danger anyway: Biden won it by 17 points.
At the bottom of the list …
Pete Buttigieg: The 42-year-old secretary of transportation is an unlikely choice despite being, in Allen’s words, “a lightning rod for self-harming Republican commentary,” referring to the fact that Buttigieg is often the target of homophobic rhetoric from the right. Buttigieg, a former management consultant who is known for his meticulous challenges to Republican talking points in Congress and on TV, would be the first openly gay veep. But he is an unlikely choice because his appeal is limited to urban liberal voters who are already almost certain to vote for Harris.
Tim Walz: The Minnesota governor and veteran of the US Army National Guard has snuck his name onto the list even though he lacks much national recognition. Walz’s efforts to protect abortion rights and his introduction of free school meals for students and gender-affirming care fit nicely with Harris’s policy preferences, and his rural sensibility bodes well with moderate Americans. Plus, Minnesota – once a Democratic stronghold – has been leaning further right in recent years. However, that’s not likely enough to land Walz the VP pick, as neither he nor his state is competitive enough to truly sway this election.
Gretchen Whitmer: The Michigan governor was rumored as an alternative replacement to Biden but has since endorsed Harris – and is likely waiting for 2028 to throw her hat in the ring. The former senator and prosecutor’s impressive and progressive record aligns with Harris’s as a strong defender of abortion rights, advocate for improved gun legislation, and co-chair of the Biden-Harris campaign. She would be a strong counterweight to the hyper-male Republican bid; however, for a country that has yet to elect a female president, an all-female ticket may be a stretch.
For Allen, “the two most obvious, at least for now, are Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly and Josh Shapiro.” Who do you think she is most likely to choose? Who do you think she should pick? Let us know here.
I have little doubt that President Joe Biden’s belated but essential decision to bow out of the 2024 presidential election on Sunday will go down in history as a patriotic act.
Following his infamous debate performance on June 27, an overwhelming majority of Americans – including two-thirds of Democrats – came to the conclusion that the president was no longer physically and mentally fit to serve another four-year term in office. As things stood last Saturday, Donald Trump – fresh off a failed assassination attempt and a triumphant Republican convention – looked set to retake the White House and likely control both houses of Congress, with little an ailing Biden could do to turn things around.
By finally agreeing to step down when his term ends in January, Biden jolted the race 100 days out and gave his party a fighting chance to protect the country – and the world – from what he sees as the existential threat of an unrestrained Trump. Only he had the power to do that, and when push came to shove (and there was plenty of shoving), he met the moment. It was a fitting capstone to a lifetime of public service.
This is what leadership looks like. Contrary to what many are claiming, there was nothing inevitable about Biden’s decision to withdraw. Yes, he was under immense pressure from his party and the media to step down. Yes, all evidence pointed toward near-certain disaster in November if he stayed on. Yes, his legacy was on the line. And yet … he still had a choice. His exit was not preordained. No one forced his hand – in fact, no one could force his hand. It was entirely up to Joe Biden, and Joe Biden alone, to do the right thing. This couldn’t have been easy – if it was, everyone would do it. And we know for a fact that not everyone would’ve made the same choice – least of all Trump, a man who is constitutionally incapable of putting party and country above himself.
Did Biden come to his decision reluctantly, and only after weeks spent in anger and denial? No doubt. It’s hard enough for anyone to voluntarily give up power, but it’s even harder for a person with Biden’s life history who’s also coming to terms with his own mortality. Should he have withdrawn much sooner? Absolutely – I never thought he should have run for reelection in the first place, and I said so publicly many times. Will this delay end up costing Democrats the election? It’s possible, though we may never know.
But we shouldn’t forget the “better” in “better late than never.” What matters most is that he finally got there. Biden could’ve held on until the bitter end, consequences be damned. Instead, he chose to put America first. It was a decision worthy of a leader. Not a winner, but a leader. He deserves credit for it – as does the Democratic Party, which has shown itself to be a much healthier and more functional institution than anyone thought. Can anyone seriously imagine today’s GOP launching a coordinated pressure campaign to depose Trump, even though so many Republicans privately criticize him as unfit and believe him to be an electoral drag?
It gives me a little hope in a country where politicians don’t often do the right thing, and where political parties all too easily bend to the will of their leaders even when it becomes clear they serve only themselves.
Harris or bust. Shortly after announcing his withdrawal, Biden endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris for the nomination. The entire Democratic establishment – with the notable exception of Barack Obama – quickly followed suit and rallied behind her. Within 24 hours, Harris had been endorsed by every viable potential challenger as well as an overwhelming majority of Democratic governors, members of Congress, and state party chairs. By Monday evening, her campaign had raised $150 million from major donors and $81 million from small donors, and she had secured more than enough pledged delegates to become the party’s presumptive nominee.
Although an ostensibly competitive and democratically legitimate nomination process would have ultimately benefitted Democrats by ensuring the winner had what it takes to take on Trump and appeal to a broad swath of voters, the speed with which the party coalesced around Harris ensures next month’s convention in Chicago will be little more than a coronation ceremony. With only 54 delegates currently undecided and a minimum of 300 needed for any would-be nominee to compete, it’s impossible to imagine a challenger not named Marianne Williamson or Dean Phillips emerging.
And that’s … not a disaster for the Democrats. Harris may not have been the best possible candidate Democrats could’ve put forward a year (or four) ago, but she was the most viable candidate to replace Biden, unite the party, and avoid a down-ballot bloodbath at this late stage.
What can be, unburdened by what has been? The question now is not whether there was a better Democratic candidate than Harris, but whether Harris can beat Trump. And on that front, the jury is still out. We simply don’t have enough recent polling data on this matchup yet to get a decent idea of where things stand today.
Here’s what we do know: This is an incredibly tough environment for an incumbent’s successor, with a majority of voters telling pollsters they are unhappy with the state of the country. And Harris is no Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, or Ronald Reagan – a generational talent with the charisma and vision to work political miracles. So she starts as the underdog accordingly. But off the bat, she has dramatically better odds than Biden because she solves the president’s biggest electability challenge: his age. And she has more upside than Trump, who remains a historically unpopular candidate with a hard ceiling of 45% of national support. By contrast, nearly 10% of Americans don’t even have an opinion of her yet, so she has room to define herself.
Can Harris break above Trump’s ceiling? She’s neither a proven national candidate nor a distinguished campaigner, having fizzled out before reaching the Iowa caucus during the 2020 presidential primaries. She has plenty of weaknesses for Republicans to exploit, including unpopular Biden administration policies (notably on the border) for which voters may blame her. And there’s a chance she could lose more older, white, and moderate working-class voters relative to Biden than she picks up young, nonwhite, and progressive ones.
But at 59, Harris is able to string together full sentences, give cogent stump speeches, campaign vigorously, and effectively deliver the abortion and democracy messages that worked well for Democrats in 2022. She can also play offense on Trump’s age – he’s 78 – and mental fitness, now an exclusively Republican liability that 50% of all voters found disqualifying in the former president nary a week ago.
How this will all net out in November, no one knows yet. Think about all that’s happened in the last two weeks, and imagine all that could change in the next 100 days. That’s an eternity in US politics – certainly longer than entire general election campaigns normally take in most other democracies.
All we can say for sure is Biden has given the Democrats a fighting chance and made the election both more competitive and more uncertain than it was a week ago.
VP pick United States Senator JD Vance Republican of Ohio and Usha Vance after Former US President Donald J Trumps speech at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin at the Fiserv Forum on Thursday, July 18, 2024. Monday night was Trumps first appearance since a rally in Pennsylvania, where he sustained injuries from an alleged bullet grazing his ear. Trump recounted the story in his speech, and also talked about Biden, immigration, and other topics.
On July 15, Donald Trump announced that he has selected JD Vance as his running mate. Vance, the junior senator from Ohio, rose to prominence after publishing his memoir “Hillbilly Elegy,” but his humble roots took him first to Yale Law School and then to the world of venture capital. He’s hailed as a politician with strong ties to Silicon Valley, and also as a politician fiercely critical of Big Tech. “What do you get when you cross a tech bro with a luddite?” Eurasia Group's Jon Lieber responded when we asked him to summarize Vance’s views.
This apparent contradiction is further highlighted by Vance’s recent statements on artificial intelligence. He has advocated for reduced regulation of the AI sector, and has claimed that tech companies’ focus on existential risks of AI are a lobbying tactic to elicit friendlier regulations.
He also shows a surprising regard for FTC chair Lina Khan’s leadership on antitrust enforcement under Joe Biden, saying that Khan has been “doing a pretty good job” especially in bringing suits against bloated tech companies. Khan notably supports AI regulation.
“I would assume someone who puts the concerns of working people and families first and foremost in his policy orientation would be relatively hostile to specific policies that accelerated the adoption of disruptive technologies,” Lieber notes. “But on the other hand, I would also think this will result in only a limited number of policies that actually attempted to curtail them.”
Lieber suggests that Vance's policy focus might include “restrictions on minors’ access to social media, data privacy rules, and investigations into tech companies for monopolistic practices.” He sees Vance as fundamentally opposed to centralized power, which could have mixed implications for AI innovation.
“This could be either good for AI innovation if you think it will happen in a decentralized way, or bad for AI innovation if you think it can only come from large incumbents with massive resources to spend on energy, compute, etc.,” Lieber said.
Some of Vance’s contradictions may become clearer over time, but they could easily be dwarfed by the whims and policy goals of Trump.
Latest
Civil Wars and Civil Exits
Biden passes the torch to veep and voters
Who will Harris choose as her vice president?
Why Biden’s exit gives Democrats a fighting chance
Vance offers AI contradictions
