Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Biden vs. Trump: A partial voting guide, part 1

Donald Trump and Joe Biden debate
Melina Mara/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Corbin is professor emeritus of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa.

This is part one of a two-part series to help voters compare and contrast Joe Biden and Donald Trump. Part one is a meta compare and contrast analysis of five major issues in hopes the review may assist voters come Nov. 5. The second part will address 13 additional topics.

An early-April poll focused on adults’ perspective as to how Joe Biden’s and Donald Trump’s respective presidencies have hurt America. Two issues surrounding Biden’s term are of concern: the cost of living and immigration. Five issues about Trump’s presidency are still perplexing to voters: election security, voting rights, relations with foreign countries, abortion laws and climate change.

The 2024 choice for presidency — and issues of concern — couldn’t be more different.


The opinions of two prominent and revered writers for the conservative-oriented Wall Street Journal are referenced below. First is Alan Blinder, professor of economics and public affairs at Princeton and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve. The other is William Galston, who writes the WSJ’s weekly “Politics and Issues” column. He is an expert on domestic policy, political campaigns and elections.

Immigration: On March 27, Blinder wrote: “Mr. Trump directed his followers in Congress to scuttle a `compromise’ bill to bolster the southern border — a bill Mr. Biden and many Democrats had already accepted, partially so that they could move on to other pressing matters regarding Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan and the budget. Mr. Trump, by contrast, preferred to let the border crisis fester so that he could use it as a campaign issue.”

Trump’s zero-tolerance policy separated thousands of migrant children from their parents, an action opposed by two-thirds of Americans. Biden ended that policy on the 13th day of his presidency. It’s ironic Trump believes immigrants are “poisoning the blood” of our country, while he and 97.1 percent of Americans are here due to immigration.

Abortion: Biden, a devout Catholic who has supported women’s rights for decades, has vowed he’ll restore the 1973 Roe v. Wade landmark decision if Democrats get control of Congress. Trump, a former pro-choice advocate, proudly boasts he was “able to terminate Roe v. Wade” and “honored” to do so by appointing three conservatives to the Supreme Court.

Trump’s most recent pronouncement that state legislatures and courts should control reproductive rights means – according to Republican Voters Against Trump – “33,360,789 women now live in a state where abortion is banned without exceptions for rape or incest.” A Gallup survey found American support of legal abortion access remains strong; 61 percent say overturning Roe v. Wade was a “bad thing.”

North Atlantic Treaty Organization: Seventy-eight percent of Americans remain committed to the NATO alliance. Galston wrote: “Donald Trump has made clear that he has no intention of honoring the commitment the U.S. made when it signed the NATO charter (April 4, 1949), including the defense of other members who come under attack. For Mr. Biden, NATO is a solemn compact based on common interest and shared values. For Mr. Trump, it’s a financial transaction.”

Ukraine: Seventy-four percent of Americans view the war between Russia and Ukraine as important to U.S. national interests. Galston made his thoughts on the conflict quite clear: “The U.S. has worked for three quarters of a century under presidents of both parties to help Europe remain safe and free. Now one ignorant, amoral demagogue has persuaded a majority of one party that this effort is a mistake. A great tragedy is in the making unless leaders in both parties can find a way to thwart him.”

Israel-Hamas war: According to an April 5 PBS report, “Israel’s handling of the war in Gaza has become a major U.S. election issue. Both President Biden and former President Trump have expressed concern with the humanitarian situation and Israel’s international standing after an airstrike killed seven aid workers.” Biden, Trump, the Democratic Party and the GOP are miffed as to what to do since, according to the Pew Research Center, “Americans’ views about the Israel-Hamas war differ widely by age, as do their perceptions about discrimination against Jewish, Muslim and Arab people in the United States.”

Part two will focus on 13 topics including education, economy, trade policy, tax policy, Jan. 6 insurrectionists, infrastructure, democracy-authoritarianism and climate change.



Read More

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

A memorial for Ashli Babbitt sits near the US Capitol during a Day of Remembrance and Action on the one year anniversary of the January 6, 2021 insurrection.

(John Lamparski/NurPhoto/AP)

How Trump turned a January 6 death into the politics of ‘protecting women’

In the wake of the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, President Donald Trump quickly took up the cause of a 35-year-old veteran named Ashli Babbitt.

“Who killed Ashli Babbitt?” he asked in a one-sentence statement on July 1, 2021.

Keep ReadingShow less
Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

Supreme Court, Allen v. Milligan Illegal Congressional Voting Map

Gerrymandering Test the Boundaries of Fair Representation in 2026

A wave of redistricting battles in early 2026 is reshaping the political map ahead of the midterm elections and intensifying long‑running fights over gerrymandering and democratic representation.

In California, a three‑judge federal panel on January 15 upheld the state’s new congressional districts created under Proposition 50, ruling 2–1 that the map—expected to strengthen Democratic advantages in several competitive seats—could be used in the 2026 elections. The following day, a separate federal court dismissed a Republican lawsuit arguing that the maps were unconstitutional, clearing the way for the state’s redistricting overhaul to stand. In Virginia, Democratic lawmakers have advanced a constitutional amendment that would allow mid‑decade redistricting, a move they describe as a response to aggressive Republican map‑drawing in other states; some legislators have openly discussed the possibility of a congressional map that could yield 10 Democratic‑leaning seats out of 11. In Missouri, the secretary of state has acknowledged in court that ballot language for a referendum on the state’s congressional map could mislead voters, a key development in ongoing litigation over the fairness of the state’s redistricting process. And in Utah, a state judge has ordered a new congressional map that includes one Democratic‑leaning district after years of litigation over the legislature’s earlier plan, prompting strong objections from Republican lawmakers who argue the court exceeded its authority.

Keep ReadingShow less
New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) (L) and Rep. August Pfluger (R-TX) lead a group of fellow Republicans through Statuary Hall on the way to a news conference on the 28th day of the federal government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on October 28, 2025 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

New Year’s Resolutions for Congress – and the Country

Every January 1st, many Americans face their failings and resolve to do better by making New Year’s Resolutions. Wouldn’t it be delightful if Congress would do the same? According to Gallup, half of all Americans currently have very little confidence in Congress. And while confidence in our government institutions is shrinking across the board, Congress is near rock bottom. With that in mind, here is a list of resolutions Congress could make and keep, which would help to rebuild public trust in Congress and our government institutions. Let’s start with:

1 – Working for the American people. We elect our senators and representatives to work on our behalf – not on their behalf or on behalf of the wealthiest donors, but on our behalf. There are many issues on which a large majority of Americans agree but Congress can’t. Congress should resolve to address those issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less