BThe Wall Street Journal's opinion page is already asking the 2028 question: can MAGA endure after Trump?
BTwo years out. That's not early, that's the starting gun.
BWilliam Galston's piece asks whether Democrats turn left or back to the center. I think that's the wrong question.
BWhat's the right one?
BWhether either party can actually govern. The midterms just happened, and the realignment is still settling.
BBut the MAGA question is real. Trump is the movement. Take him out, and what's left?
BA coalition that won on immigration and the economy. That doesn't vanish because one man leaves.
BIt might. We've seen personality-driven movements collapse before.
BName one that had this much institutional buy-in. Governors, senators, donors—they're all in.
BFair. But the Journal's question about Democrats is just as live. They're fighting over whether to be the party of the working class or the party of the professional class.
BAnd that fight is going to be ugly. You can already see it in the primary chatter.
BMeanwhile, there's a post going around claiming a Democratic sweep of Congress. I checked—can't confirm that.
BRight. The account says global capitals are recalibrating for the second half of Trump's term. But the premise is shaky.
BWe should be careful with that one. The midterm results are still being counted in some places.
BAnd even if Democrats did take Congress, the idea that a boxed-in president doubles down on foreign policy is a theory, not a fact.
BA theory with some history behind it, though. Clinton after '94, Obama after 2010.
BTrue. But Trump isn't Clinton or Obama. He's already been aggressive on foreign policy from day one.
BWhich brings us to the Gulf. Al Jazeera reports the U.S. embassy is pushing back on Houthi claims about a Yemen blockade.
BThe embassy says the real siege is on Taiz. That's a city that's been under Houthi pressure for years.
BThe Gulf remains a powder keg, as one OSINT account put it.
BThe Houthis are not a ragtag militia anymore. They have sophisticated weapons, and they're using them.
BWhich is why the U.S. embassy's statement matters. It's a signal that Washington is still engaged in Yemen.
BEngaged, but not enough to stop the missiles. That's the frustating part.
BNo, it's not enough. But it's better than silence.
BDifferent corner of the world: Pakistan and India. Al Jazeera says imports are back to pre-war levels despite formal non-trade.
BThat's a fascinating story. Two nuclear powers that officially don't trade, but the goods are moving anyway.
BIt's the classic gray market. Third countries, transshipment, all the tricks.
BAnd it raises the question: if the trade is happening anyway, why not just normalize it?
BBecause politics. Kashmir, terrorism, history. The trade is economic, the freeze is political.
BBut the fact that it's back to pre-war levels suggests the economic pressure is winning.
BOr that both governments are quietly okay with it. Don't ask, don't tell.
BThat's a thaw, even if nobody admits it.
BAnd speaking of thaws, Pakistan's PTI is demanding access to Imran Khan after a hospital visit.
BKhan's been in jail for a while now. His party says he was taken to the hospital overnight.
BThe demand is for regular access. His lawyers and family say they're being kept in the dark.
BThis is a man who was prime minister. Now he's in jail, and his party is fighting for basic visitation rights.
BPakistan's political crisis is not going away. The military, the courts, the parties—everyone's at war.
BAnd the economy is suffering. Inflation, debt, IMF conditions. It's a mess.
BWhich is why the India trade story matters. Pakistan needs the goods, and India is the cheapest source.
BSo the politics says no, but the economics says yes. That's the whole story in one sentence.
BEvery story moves on eventually. That's the thing about this job.
BIt does. And we'll be here when it does.