Political polling frequently finds that American voters are quite comfortable with the government raising taxes, so long as the tax increases fall on other people, and not themselves. Incidentally, one of the reasons why it's so important for Congressional Republicans to extend the Trump tax cuts by the end of the year is that if they don't, that tax relief will expire and huge, across-the-board hikes will land on every income group in America. That's because, contrary to false Democratic attacks in 2017, those tax cuts weren't for "millionaires and billionaires;" they were for everyone. Back to the point: "Tax increases for thee, but not for me" tends to poll much better than the overall concept of tax hikes.
A similar phenomenon appears to have taken hold in Europe, where recent polling shows sweeping support for additional aid to Ukraine in its defensive war against Russia. European leaders were galvanized into a full-throated display of rhetorical solidarity with the Ukrainian president after last week's fiasco in the Oval Office. European elites certainly talk a good game on such things, and their populations are generally with them – but only up to a point, it would seem. European populations are heavily in favor of Ukraine receiving more Western support. They are...far less favorably disposed toward of their own countries providing that support. Via YouGov and The Guardian, these findings come from polls taken at the very end of last year:
These charts are the most concise explanation of Europe I’ve ever seen. pic.twitter.com/WddPyqTVac
— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) March 3, 2025
A majority of respondents in all seven nations surveyed, including supermajorities in a few, said Western support for Ukraine ought to increase. But when asked if they'd favor their own government increasing support for Ukraine, support ranged from a paltry 11 percent to 29 percent. In five of the seven countries the "we should reduce our aid" contingent was actually larger than the "we should increase our aid" crowd. In short, if you ask Europeans if Ukraine needs more help, they'll lopsidedly answer in the affirmative. If you ask them who should bankroll the extra help, they'll gesture generally at everyone else. Human nature, and part of the dilemma here. Another part of the dilemma (as I mentioned yesterday) is that Europe has outsourced too much of its self-defense to the United States, spending lavishly on welfare programs. Some NATO allies still aren't meeting defense spending minimum requirements, and very few are north of three percent of GDP:
Today, only five Nato countries in the 32 nation alliance spend more than 3% of GDP on defense (United States, Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Greece)
— Lucas Tomlinson (@LucasFoxNews) March 2, 2025
Only one spends more than 4%: Poland
For context, Reagan buildup: 6%, lowest under Jimmy Carter: 4.5% United States today: 3.4%
Meanwhile, here is another problem. Because they're overly reliant on Russian energy, Europeans are effectively funding both sides of Russia's illegal war:
“EU paid EUR 21.9 bn for Russian fossil fuel imports in the third year of the invasion, a mere 1% year-on-year reduction in volume. EU’s Russian imports in the 3rd year of the invasion surpassed the EUR 18.7 bn of financial aid sent to Ukraine in 2024.”https://t.co/tHJuokshyy pic.twitter.com/rllsIolAZM
— Jerry Dunleavy IV 🇺🇸 (@JerryDunleavy) March 2, 2025
Every European leader will tweet about “standing with Ukraine” when the can chide Trump about the amount of US support for Ukraine.
— Matt Whitlock (@mattdizwhitlock) March 1, 2025
How many are tweeting about their own EU neighbors funding Russia’s continued aggression? pic.twitter.com/ntg3IT1f7P
Remember, President Trump explicitly warned about this during his first term, which earned him derision from the Germans and others at the time:
7 years ago, Trump warned NATO they will one day regret buying Russian oil.
— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) March 2, 2025
Everyone mocked him for it.
pic.twitter.com/Mm5x1QQVLo
But he was right. Trump tried to hit Putin where it hurts, then Biden green-lit Putin's pipeline and made the "minor incursion" comment, and the rest is history. That doesn't solve any of the entrenched problems now, of course, but it's context that led us to this point. And when I've written that Zelenskyy failed to read the room, resulting in Friday's mess, I also mean that he also failed to read the shifting mood of our country:
A little bit of a reality check for some:
— (((Harry Enten))) (@ForecasterEnten) March 3, 2025
-Trump's net approval on Russia/Ukraine (+2) is far more positive than Biden's was by the end (-22).
-The share (31% to 50%) who want a compromise in the war is way up
-The share who say Russia is an enemy is way down (64% to 34%). pic.twitter.com/z6k0x6A1yn
For those of us who feel precisely this way about the conflict and the actors involved, the confrontation at the White House was a disaster. And while I have several quarrels with Trump in all of this, Zelenskyy foolishly precipitated the setback that occurred. Extremely foolish and counter-productive. I'll leave you with this:
Waltz: We had a beautiful setting in the East Room ready for both leaders to sign that would have bound the US and Ukraine together economically for a generation.
— Tymofiy Mylovanov (@Mylovanov) March 2, 2025
It involved critical minerals, investment, and commitments from the UK and France to put boots on the ground.… pic.twitter.com/ug0ttSqaLL
As I wrote yesterday, Zelenskyy's latest statement offered a productive opportunity to get things moving back toward meaningful progress.
