> Even Saudis couldn't have stopped them. That's not particularly American election issue

Energy prices are absolutely an American election issue. Variations in real personal disposable income growth and inflation predict a vast majority of the variation in election outcomes after accounting for incumbency.

And Iranian proxies seizing the Bab el-Mandeb–and the U.S. being unable to help Saudi Arabia respond militarily while Iran cements control of the Strait of Hormuz–is the direct result of an American foreign policy choice to, once again, blunder into a war in the Middle East.

Is it not clear that American election issues are directly related to those things?

Uh... and Iran and the Straight of Hormuz?? Did you forget to mention that? Is that an election issue? And who funds the Houthis? And why would they want to close the straight to us? Is it something to do with supporting Israel? No? Ok.

Even Russia would be better off today if we'd given Ukraine the tools to end the war two or three years ago.

Yeah, but the important question is where would Putin be after that?

Houthis were in a weird truce with Saudis and Yemeni government for the last few months. Without US war in Iran destabilising the area, I am pretty sure houthis diplomats wouldn't have been bombed by Saudi Arabia. They might have broken the truce anyway, Houthis still claim south Yemen (wrongly imho, South Yemen is probably the most secularised area of the middle east, probably due to its high literacy rates and Marxist leanings, this would be a really hard sell. Also, Houthis, like Saudis, and former north Yemen leaders, has a clan-based leadership, which isn't a thing at all in South Yemen).

Imho a peace over the old borders could have been possible without additional destabilisation from the US. The Iran war made that impossible. Hopefully a peaceful resolution can still be found, quickly.