Martin Sherman

INTO THE FRAY: 2020 in retrospect: Not entirely impossible, but extremely implausible

As the Biden administration continues to bring executive incompetence to yet unplumbed depths, any fair-minded person must feel increasingly compelled to question the authenticity of the 2020 poll

Man can believe the impossible, but man can never believe the improbable – Oscar Wilde, “Intentions”, 1891.

As the Biden incumbency drags excruciatingly on, one thing is becoming increasingly clear.

While it is not impossible that Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. won the 2020 presidential elections fair and square, without any underhand shenanigans or fraudulent skullduggery, with time, this is proving increasingly improbable.

Unplumbed depths of incompetency

Indeed, as the Biden administration continues to bring executive incompetence to yet unplumbed depths, any fair-minded person must feel increasingly compelled to question the authenticity of the 2020 poll.

After all, it was always difficult not to have a nagging sense of unease when asked to accept that a lack-luster candidate, and a lackadaisical campaign, managed to reap over 81 million votes—topping the charismatic and energetic Obama’s previous record in presidential elections by almost 12 million, and Donald Trump’s tally of over 74 million…the highest attained by any incumbent president in the history of the USA.

However, as the Biden incumbency unfolds, this sense of discomfort and skepticism has unavoidably grown. For, not only has Biden shown no signs of having exceptional competency that could account for his impressive electoral victory, quite the opposite is true. Indeed, his administration has wrought a stunning series of debacles on multiple fronts. Thus, in virtually every realm with which the White House has dealt, the outcomes have ranged from fiasco to disaster.

Monolithically miserable

It matters little which area of executive policy one chooses, the results have been monolithically miserable.

From the tragically botched evacuation in Afghanistan, and the abandonment of countrymen and allies to the tender mercies of the murderous and medieval Taliban, through blundering bungling of border security in the South with all the attendant criminal and COVID concerns that that entails; the rampant crime wave sweeping through democratically governed cities; and the fatally flawed and failed energy policy that relegated the US from Trumpian energy independence to Bidenesque dependence on imports from some of the most dubious regimes on the globe, to the spiraling inflation that is eroding the welfare of wide swathes of the population.

Against this bleak background, even usually stoutly pro-Democratic media channels are beginning to sour toward the current administration. Thus, CNN reported that while the economy was identified as the most important issue for the public, two out of every three Americans disapprove of Biden’s handling of the economy. Moreover, according to CNN’s David Chalian, over 80% of the population felt their situation had not improved under Biden’s policies, with well over half (55%) stating their circumstances had worsened! Under 20% felt they were better off.

Inapt messaging or inept messenger?

As far as his overall performance is concerned, Biden scored the lowest rating of all modern-day presidents—with just over a 40% approval and an almost 60% disproval. Interestingly, this ties with his predecessor, Donald Trump, who was mauled by the mainstream media, while Biden has hitherto been shamelessly mollycoddled.

Biden’s poor ratings for his overall performance elicited a howl of dismay from New York Times’s Charles Blow, a vehement anti-Trumper, who begins his article, entitled, A Biden Blood Bath? with an admission of grave apprehension: “A recent poll truly shocked me.”

He goes on to explain: “Quinnipiac University found that President Biden’s approval rating had sunk to just 33 percent. You might argue that this was just one poll, but Biden’s approval is down in multiple surveys.” According to Blow: “These are just devastating results … and only seven months out from the midterms.”

He challenges the prevalent Democratic position that the problem is primarily with the administration’s messaging and raises a trenchant question: “But what if the issue is not the messaging but the messenger?

“Too narrowly focused…”

Blow laments that on domestic policy, Biden has moved from the macro to the micro, warning that this makes it too narrowly focused to transform American society or fix the core problems that plague it.

Hinting that the Biden policy may be detached from reality, he writes: “… two major perennial issues are resurgent: crime and the economy. The fear of crime and the pinch of inflation aren’t abstractions or complicated foreign policy or perks for special interests.

Ominously, he warns “They creep into every door and lurk under every kitchen table.

But there is even more for the White House to worry about. Citing the previous Quinnipiac poll, Blow mentions yet another disturbing finding. This is the declining support for Biden among Hispanics. Indeed, this is something that has been noticed by others. Blow refers to the findings of a well-known website according to which “there has been a drop in support for Biden among all three racial and ethnic groups we measured, but the drop among Hispanics …marks Biden’s most precipitous decline.”

Time to trash the taboo?

Ever since the 2020 polls were certified, it has been virtually “verboten” to challenge their validity—despite numerous reasons for concern. Anyone who did so was immediately dispelled by the Liberal Establishment as some sort of misguided “kook” promoting mendacious and malevolent conspiracy theories, bordering on sedition.

However, with the passage of time and the accumulating evidence of the gross incompetence of the Biden administration, the sense of unease that something was gravely awry in the conduct of the 2020 polls, has grown.

After all, there has been no display of great political and/or administrative acumen that could explain the extraordinary harvest of votes without resort to some electoral sleight of hand or deceitful trickery. For if, in the wake of the election, “what you see is what you get” is an accurate picture of the talent pool of Biden and his team, it is hard to accept this was sufficient to carry the day—and certainly not in the manner reflected by the results.

Surely then, the time has come to cast aside the mental bondage that the Left-wing thought police have imposed. It is time to trash their taboos—and call for a penetrating and dispassionate inquiry into the events of January 3, 2020, the days that preceded, and the night that followed it.

Much depends on the conduct of such a probe—and on the results it would yield.

Martin Sherman ( is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies. (

About the Author
Dr. Martin Sherman is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies a member of the research team of the Israel Defense & Security Forum (IDSF)-Habithonistim, and a participant in the Israel Victory Project. . He served for seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli Defense establishment, and was a ministerial adviser to Yitzhak Shamir's government. Sherman also lectured for 20 years at Tel Aviv University in Political Science, International Relations and Strategic Studies. He holds several university degrees: a B.Sc. (Physics and Geology), an MBA (Finance), and a PhD in political science and international relations. He was the first academic director of the internationally renowned Herzliya Conference and is the author of two books, as well as numerous articles and policy papers on a wide range of political, diplomatic and security issues. Sherman was born in South Africa and has lived in Israel since 1971.