Americanswers…on 5 Live! Is Trump worried about the US economy?

Summary

Americast: Americanswers…on 5 Live! Is Trump worried about the US economy?

Date: March 10, 2025
Host: BBC News (Sarah Smith, Justin Webb, Marianna Spring, Anthony Zurcher, with Matt on Five Live)
Episode Overview:
This episode of Americast is a classic Americanswers installment, where the team fields listeners’ questions live on BBC Five Live. The focus is on Trump's evolving policy towards Canada, his economic strategy (especially tariffs and layoffs), the Democrats' response, shifts in US political communications, and the impact of meme culture in politics. Throughout, Americast's US-based correspondents draw connections between high-level policy and on-the-ground effects, particularly for Trump's core voting base.

---

Main Discussion Themes

1. Trump’s Tough Stance on Canada

• Topic: Reassessment of Trump’s threats toward Canada — tariffs, border changes, intelligence sharing.
• Key Points:
  • Previously-dismissed “51st state” rhetoric has gained seriousness with whispers of border changes and punitive tariffs (“Is this an existential threat to Canada?” — Sarah Smith, 03:19).
  • Tariffs could devastate the Canadian economy, but Canada can't retaliate with equal strength. Canadian nationalism has been invigorated by the threat.
  • The possibility of destabilization is discussed: “He could destabilize Canada, break it apart, and scoop up some of the pieces…without firing a shot.” — Anthony Zurcher (06:03).
• Notable Quote:

  “If they succeeded, they would destroy our way of life. And Canada never, ever will be part of America in any way, shape or form.” — Mark Carney, Canadian PM (as quoted by Sarah Smith, 06:49)

2. Tariffs, the Economy, and How Trump’s Base is Responding

• Topic: Trump’s tariffs on Canada, China, and their effect on markets and public opinion.
• Key Points:
  • Trump’s supporters (“the Trump wave”) perceive the tariffs as fighting for American interests, with little reflection on personal economic impact yet.
  • Rising grocery prices and market drops are rapidly visible. The stock market dip is meaningful to many because US pensions (401ks) are sensitive to its fluctuations.
  • Trump is downplaying concerns: “You were asked…might there be a recession? And his answers are kind of, eh.” — Justin Webb (11:16).
  • Deliberation if Trump may accept short-term pain for long-term gain — “Maybe [he] wants an economic downturn now…then the United States bounces back.” — Anthony (12:05).
• Notable Quote:

  “We’re bringing wealth back to America. That’s a big thing…and it takes a little time.” — (Paraphrasing Trump, 11:43–11:54)

3. Democrats’ Quiet Response: Regrouping, Not Resisting

• Topic: Why aren’t the Democrats fighting back more visibly?
• Key Points:
  • Visible protest has been limited to symbolic acts (e.g., the “paddles” at Trump’s congressional address). “The Democrats came ready to fight back. With their little paddles.” — Anthony (14:22).
  • The party is focused on “regrouping” and self-critique on issues such as gender and identity — specifically, Gavin Newsom’s apparent shift on trans athletes (16:26).
  • Democrats’ internal debates are hampering a unified message, especially around contentious cultural topics (“it is a fight within the party.” — Justin, 16:52).
  • Changing social media dynamics mean viral moments are largely contained within ideological bubbles.
• Notable Quote:

  “They’re not exactly resisting, they’re not opposing, they’re regrouping… clearing the barnacles off the boat.” — Justin Webb (14:43)

4. Political Communication Styles: Trump Vs. Predecessors

• Topic: Trump’s unique, unscripted daily press interactions.
• Key Points:
  • Trump holds frequent, unpredictable press conferences, unlike previous Presidents. “It’s not scripted, you don’t know what he’s going to say, which is part of what makes it engaging.” — Anthony (22:29).
  • In contrast, Obama and Biden held highly controlled media events where access was determined in advance.
  • Trump’s unpredictability keeps him in the spotlight and generates international interest.
• Notable Quote:

  “Remarkable for everything that Trump has done cracking down on the media…he’s also drastically expanded access directly to the president.” — Anthony (21:39)

5. Impact of Federal Layoffs and Tariffs on the Economy

• Topic: The economic consequences of mass government layoffs and tariffs.
• Key Points:
  • Recent jobs report: 150,000 jobs added, but 170,000 losses, including 62,000 federal jobs (24:46).
  • Layoffs threaten to undermine the economy — a vulnerability because Trump’s political appeal partly relied on economic strength.
  • The risk: Early-term economic turbulence may be a gamble to set up a later recovery.
  • Tariffs on China and Canada could have an outsized effect on agriculture, a key Trump-supporting sector.
• Notable Quote:

  “It could well be that in the next quarter’s jobs report, this will have an impact because more than 2 million federal workers…are going to face the sack.” — Justin Webb (24:02)

6. Meme Politics: JD Vance and Cultural Tactics

• Topic: The role of memes in shaping political personas.
• Key Points:
  • Memes mocking JD Vance (e.g., his face superimposed on Kim Kardashian’s “breaking the Internet” photo) have gone viral, prompting Vance to respond in kind.
  • Engaging with memes—rather than ignoring or condemning them—can increase relatability.
• Notable Quote:

  “Humor is maybe the best way…not taking yourself too seriously, but like creating this kind of content and everyone goes, ‘Oh, that’s quite funny.’” — Mariana Spring (28:27)

---

Key Timestamps and Segments

• [02:15–06:49] — Seriousness of Trump’s threats toward Canada and geostrategic motives.
• [07:39–12:05] — Tariffs, stock market reactions, and responses among Trump’s base.
• [13:30–19:49] — Democrats’ responses, party debates, and shift in social media strategy.
• [20:11–23:34] — Trump’s unscripted press strategy versus predecessors’ controlled communication.
• [23:40–26:41] — Government layoffs, potential economic fallout, and the messaging battle over recession and responsibility.
• [26:46–28:44] — The JD Vance meme saga and online political culture.
• [29:01–31:43] — Impact of China tariffs on American farmers and rural Trump voters.

---

Memorable Quotes

• "Love-hate relationship" (Trump-Trudeau):

  “Flirty and hate-filled relationship of many years, if you can have such a relationship.” — Justin Webb (03:19)

• On Canadian nationalism:

  “It’s brought all Canadians together and revivified Canadian nationalism, I suppose you could probably say.” — Justin Webb (03:55)

• On economic anxiety:

  “There’s a significant chance the price of food will rise in the grocery stores...the connection is between tariffs and prices going up from a president who absolutely promised those prices would go down.” — Matt (10:01)

• On meme engagement:

  “Somebody who undermines themselves is quite appealing, you know…” — Sarah Smith (28:41)

---

Overall Tone

The episode is witty and insightful, trading friendly jabs about technology literacy (especially at Mariana) and British-American cultural differences. There’s a persistent undercurrent of anxiety about political polarization and the volatility of the current US administration, but also a recognition of the democratic process and the shifting battlefields (both online and economic) where political fortunes are made and lost.

---

Conclusion

This Americanswers episode deftly weaves together international strategy, pocketbook economics, party strategy, media habits, and even meme culture, highlighting the tumultuous terrain of Trump’s current presidency. The Americast team underscores that, in 2025, US politics is about more than policy—it’s about perception, communication, and the very ways Americans (and their neighbors) experience and understand change, both online and off.

Transcript

[Justin Webb]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk. The US Electric grid is approaching a breaking point as demand soars from data centers and home energy use. Our aging infrastructure can't keep up.

[Mariana]

And the Department of Energy warns that.

[Justin Webb]

Without action, blackouts could surge 100 fold by 2030. The good news? One solution is already here. Propane. It's American made, stored on site and always ready. Powering homes and businesses with cleaner, reliable energy. That's that doesn't depend on the grid or the weather. Learn [e-mail] this message comes from Greenlight.

[Mariana]

Ready to start talking to your kids about financial literacy? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app that teaches kids and teens how to earn, save, spend wisely and invest with your guardrails in place. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores automate allowance, and keep an eye on what your kids are spending with real time notifications. Join millions of parents and kids building healthy financial habits together on Greenlight. Get started risk [e-mail] iheart BBC Sounds.

[Matt]

Music radio podcasts Hello, Monday morning here in the States. And that means it's time for Americancers when we join five Live and Matt Charlie to answer some of your questions. This week we talked about tariffs. We talked about Trump's threats against Canada. We talked about why the Democrats aren't fighting back. More after the show. We'll all be back here for a little bit of extra chat. Welcome to Americans.

[Mariana]

AmericasT. AmericasT from BBC News, God spared my.

[Anthony]

Life for a reason.

[Matt]

Only when it is dark enough can.

[Justin Webb]

You see the stars.

[Anthony]

A star is born. Elon.

[Justin Webb]

I'm not just maga.

[Anthony]

I'm dark gothic Maga.

[Mariana]

This is what happens when the machine comes after you.

[Matt]

I'm terrified for this country and I'm so hurt that America let this happen.

[Justin Webb]

I think that we just witnessed the greatest political political comeback in the history of the United States of America.

[Sarah]

Right, here we are. Then let's get stuck right in with your questions. This one is from the a thread on the Discord server called O Canada. It's exciting, isn't it?

[Mariana]

I think the use is called O Canada rather than the thread. Or is it?

[Sarah]

No, it's not. The thread is a. Don't tell me about the Discord.

[Mariana]

Discord. Explain me.

[Sarah]

No, the user is called Newbie.

[Mariana]

I'm so sorry, Matt. I take it back. Another apology.

[Justin Webb]

You really need to get up to.

[Sarah]

Date with this Internet business.

[Mariana]

Mariana, the interwebs.

[Sarah]

Yeah, get on the interwebs. So A user called Newbies posted a question which one of our producers, Claire, has voiced up.

[Mariana]

I wonder if the crew, especially Justin, might be ready at this point to revisit their jokey dismissals of Trump's 51st state rhetoric. We are now hearing credible noises about border changes and the withdrawal of intelligence sharing. And the tariffs against Canada are clearly based on a paper thin pretext since Canada accounts for less than 1% of fentanyl entering the U.S. go on then, Justin.

[Justin Webb]

Second apology of the day. I can't even remember. But you've taken back your apology, haven't you?

[Sarah]

Yes.

[Justin Webb]

Well, I should make mine then, I suppose. Yeah, it is much more serious than it looked at first because the trumpet, Justin Trudeau kind of on, off, almost slightly flirty kind of relationship. Flirty and hate filled relationship of many years, if you can have such a relationship. I think I've probably had a few in the past anyway, that relationship, I must say I thought, I don't know what you guys think in the States was just gonna carry on and actually not amount to much. But, but I think that, yeah, that lesson is dead right. Not so much on the border and the intelligence sharing, which I think probably will not come to anything much, but on the tariffs, if he really does go ahead, and we still don't know for certain whether he is, and I don't think he knows for certain whether he is, but if they really did slap punitive tariffs on, then the Canadian economy is in a real mess. And yes, they can hit back, but they can't hit back with anything like the force that they will be hit. And the new Prime Minister Mark Carney has made that point very much and it's brought all Canadians together and revivified Canadian nationalism, I suppose you could probably say, but I don't know, do we now take it very seriously? Is this an existential threat to Canada?

[Matt]

The Canadians are worried that it might be and they're the ones who are saying that talks about shifting the border between America and Canada, revisiting treaties about how the Great Lakes are governed and possibly removing Canada from some intelligence sharing arrangements. They are taking those as some signs that this is about way more than trade. I think we can all be sure it's about way more than fentanyl and illegal immigrants coming across that border because there's such a tiny percentage compared to what comes across the Mexican border. There are other trade, economic issues that Donald Trump's talked about. He complains that it's difficult for American banks to do business in Canada, for instance, and some other trade restrictions that he doesn't like. But of course, the big question is, is it about something much, much more substantial and long term than that? I mean, it's not feasible that he could take it over and govern because almost every single person in Canada would be against that. So he'd need to invade and occupy it, which would be difficult. But look at his fixation with Greenland and look at it on a map. And that's about controlling the Arctic trade routes through there. And also the route ICBM missiles will fly from Korea, China to America. They go over the top of the North Pole, most likely there. Everything he wants Greenland for, you can see there's a huge chunk of Canada between Greenland and Alaska. And so you would imagine that geostrategically, he's probably got ISAI on wanting to control that. But how you get from here to there, I've got absolutely no idea. But that's, that's, that's what I have surmised, but I've got no evidence for that whatsoever.

[Anthony]

Well, I think that gets to the point you're right. Invade and occupy is, is absurd. And that's why we kind of laughed at this at the beginning. But when you listen to Justin Trudeau talking about this last week, he said that the goal was to destabilize Canada, to drive it into economic ruin. And if, if you, if you took this seriously and said, okay, how could the United States take over Canada, destabilizing it, forcing, breaking Canada apart because there are separatist movements in Canada and then scooping up some of the pieces, I suppose could be the way to get at least part of Canada without firing a shot. Now, obviously that still seems absurd at this point, but if you start thinking about, well, do they have a bigger plan that could be the way to get to it and not through rolling tanks in.

[Sarah]

Well, we can hear how Mark Carney is going to tackle it. This is him speaking out on the relationship with the US if they, if they succeeded, they would destroy our way of life. And Canada never, ever will be part of America in any way, shape or form. The Canadian government has rightly retaliated and is rightly retaliating with our own tariffs that will have maximum impact in the United States and minimum impact here in Canada. My government will keep our tariffs on until the Americans show us respect. We didn't ask for this fight, but Canadians are always ready when someone else drops the gloves. So Dave is emailed in. You know what an email is, Marianne?

[Mariana]

Oh, is that a pigeon just looking.

[Sarah]

At the fax machine, Dave sent us an email saying depending on which reports you read, Trump's on again, off again, on again tariffs on his northern and southern neighbours and China is either an intended short term pain for long term gain or simply poor economic policy. How are Trump's base affected by this? Do they own stocks? Are they simply happy that the rich Democrats are losing their money? Mariana, what's your reading of this? How are Trump supporters reacting?

[Mariana]

I think it's interesting. I also enjoy that that on and off again kind of plays into Justin's flirty love hate relationship. There's lots of relationships we're describing or two ways we're describing and I think it's complicated. Well, it's complicated, but I think actually that gets to the heart of it, which is that it all feels quite emotional and that could very much be a negotiating tactic, that it's intended to sort of like be this kind of love hate thing. We've seen it kind of play out with Keir Starmer, we've seen it to some extent play out with Ukraine. So it sort of makes sense that we describe it in those terms. In terms of what my undercover or hidden voters, as you prefer to call them.

[Justin Webb]

Secret.

[Mariana]

Oh, secret, sorry. Oh, another name.

[Sarah]

Because you never mentioned them.

[Mariana]

I never mentioned them ever. You'd not know these fictional characters who have social media profiles across the main sites. In terms of how the pro Donald Trump ones are responding to this sort of stuff. On the whole, again, I would say online particularly, the Trump wave is still very, very strong. I mean, especially on sites like X. And so all of this stuff is perceived as being something that he's doing in American interests for the goal of protecting America and so on and so forth. And it's used to kind of further those narratives and there's not so much of people going, oh, hold on a second. In my day to day life, this could mean this small thing. We've spoken quite a lot about things like eggs and I guess how people feel like change that they'd hope like eggs being less expensive, haven't happened yet. Donald Trump has blamed that on Joe Biden's and the previous government. I think there just probably hasn't been enough time that's passed. So in terms of his base, at least from what I'm seeing on social media, their response is sort of like, wait, and how does this all actually turn out? But Sarah Anthony, you might have thoughts beyond the undercover voters, I imagine.

[Sarah]

Well, I suppose if there is an economic knock on Sarah, then you need someone in this case, probably the Democrats to point it out, to say the reason your life is being affected in this way is because of decisions made by Donald Trump that you thought were a good idea, but now you're being affected. Somebody else needs to join those dots.

[Matt]

Yes, to an extent. The stock market is responding very fast to this. There were big falls last week, and I think there have been already this morning and anticipated to be more this week, mostly in response, response to these tariffs. People will start seeing it in their pockets quite quickly. So there's the significant chance that the price of food will rise in the grocery stores and all sorts of imported goods from China. And it's fairly easy to make the point of where the connection is between tariffs and prices going up from a president who absolutely promised that those prices would go down. And the stock market is interesting in that people feel much more connected to it in America, I think, than they do in Britain. Most people have a slightly more privatized pension than we do, which they call A. And they watch that go up and down with the stock market. So this is not, you know, it's not millionaires who are playing the stock market with excess cash. Almost everybody's pension savings are invested. Of course, that's true in Britain as well. It's just that we don't really watch them rise and fall to the same extent as you see it with the stock market. And the extent to which people credited Donald Trump for having ruled over a great economy in his first term was largely because the stock market did really well during that time and people actually felt it.

[Sarah]

He mentioned it a lot as well, didn't he? He sort of boasted about it.

[Matt]

Yeah.

[Justin Webb]

And now he's being really insouciant about it going wrong. So, you know, he was asked on, I think it was on Fox in the last 24 hours, he's asked, you know, might there be a recession? And his answers are kind of, eh.

[Mariana]

Look, I know that you inherited a mess and you said, I've only been here. Are you expecting a recession this year?

[Justin Webb]

I hate to predict things like that.

[Anthony]

There is a period of transition because what we're doing is very big.

[Justin Webb]

We're bringing wealth back to America. That's a big thing.

[Anthony]

And there are always periods of.

[Justin Webb]

It takes a little time. It takes a little time.

[Anthony]

But I think it should be great for us.

[Justin Webb]

I mean, I think it should be great. That is politically, potentially exactly as Sarah says, very damaging and very quickly damaging too.

[Anthony]

Sure. I mean, that is a challenge for Donald Trump. Trump, a recession early on that could crystallize public opinion about him. Although I have read some interesting bits of analysis saying that maybe Donald Trump and his administration want an economic downturn now, early in his presidency, that it would lower interest rates and weaken the dollar, which would help US Trade, build a US Trade surplus with the tariffs that are also going into effect. And then the United States would bounce back towards the latter four years of Donald Trump's second term, positioning his party for the next presidential election. Now that seems like playing a very dangerous game. But when you listen to Donald Trump kind of downplay the initial harm, the short term pain of this, maybe there is some kind of grounds to that. And as Sarah mentions, more than 60% of Americans own stocks. So it's not just super wealthy who own stocks. People will be affected by this downturn. Although when you look at Donald Trump's base and the white working class and the folks who turned out to vote for him when they had backed Democrats in the past, they probably will be more sensitive to, as Sarah mentioned, the price of consumer goods, the price of food, the price of energy, than they would be towards a dip in the stock market.

[Sarah]

Okay, let's move on because we've got Kieran in Cork on the line. Hi, Kieran.

[Matt]

Hi there.

[Sarah]

What is your question for the emo casters?

[Matt]

My question is simply why aren't the Democrats doing anything? I mean, Trump is running around and he's breaking the government and it's unpopular and it's dubiously legal, yet the Democrats have done really, I mean, they've held up paddle and that's really the extent of their protest.

[Sarah]

I read a really good piece by someone who could that be writing?

[Justin Webb]

Okay, so I confess, I've written a piece for the Times you're all employ in which I say make exactly that point about the paddles. So just in case anyone didn't see it, they held up these cardboard paddles during Trump's speech to Congress which said things like false or Elon steals or stuff like that. And one of the late night comedians held up a paddle of his own at the end of his show saying do something. The Democrats came ready to fight back.

[Anthony]

With their little paddles.

[Justin Webb]

Okay?

[Anthony]

That is how you save democracy, by quietly dissenting or bidding on an antique tea set.

[Justin Webb]

It was hard to tell what was going on. I'm just kidding. That was very cool.

[Anthony]

Democrats. In fact, I made my own sign.

[Justin Webb]

And what I say in my piece is they are doing something and it's going to take time, but they're regrouping that's the word I choose. They're not exactly resisting, they're not opposing, they're regrouping and they're trying to deal with some of the deep seated issues that made it impossible for them to, to get elected last time round. And one of the big ones, which is an interesting one, interesting actually to hear from Mariana how this has played online, because one of the big things that they've done is that over the weekend, Gavin Newsom, who is governor of California, probably going to be running in 2028, has a significant chance of getting the nomination. A big figure in Democratic politics has a podcast, a new podcast, in which he invited a guy called Charlie Kirk, who's the absolute kind of hate figure on the progressive left. Young radical Republican Trump supporter, did enormous damage to the Democrats in the election, had on Charlie Kirk for an amiable conversation and halfway through, Kirk says to him words to the effect of, you've got to ditch all this business of biological males in women's sports and girls sports. You've got to stop your support for that being a thing. And Newsom just says, yeah, I think we got to, we got to own this issue. It's an issue of fairness. He says, we can't do this. It's a massive change of mood and of policy actually, if it comes to fruition on the trans issue, you've got other people. Pete Buttigieg, a very well known guy who's another potential presidential candidate, has been in the past ditching the pronouns on his Twitter or X bio. They're changing. And what I'm suggesting is that, you know, I'm not suggesting at all the trans issue is a kind of central issue to the next campaign. But they've got to kind of clear the barnacles off the boat, as was famously used. That remark here in Britain, when you know that something isn't working, you've got to get rid of that thing and everything like it and start again. That's their thinking. And it's really interesting, it seems to me that they are going in that direction now.

[Sarah]

And you pointed out. But that advert.

[Matt]

But they don't all agree about it.

[Sarah]

The advert, the advert, the Kamala House is for they, them, Donald Trump is for you.

[Justin Webb]

Massively damaging.

[Sarah]

Massively damaging. Whatever the, you know, the fact it was used.

[Justin Webb]

But I mean, but Sarah's about to make a really important point because Sarah, it's not only just to, just to underline this, it's not just the progressive left who are annoyed, is it? You've Got people like John Fetterman, who is actually in many ways kind of to the right of the party, saying he supports trans athletes in Pennsylvania, where he's the senator and he's going to carry on. So it is. I'm not suggesting it's not a fight. It is a fight within the party.

[Matt]

Yeah. But you look at somebody like Alyssa Slotkitt, newly elected senator from Michigan, who gave the Democratic response to Trump's speech to Congress, and she was on some of the talk shows at the weekend as well, being asked specifically about this. So here is somebody who has won several elections in the state of Michigan in years when Donald Trump also took the stage. So, you know, she ought to be able to. Somebody who can plot a path back to victory for the Democrats, and she couldn't bring herself to agree with Gavin Newsom about trans athletes. And as you say just now, it's not that this is the Morton important issue in America, but it's quite emblematic of where the Democratic Party goes and how it finds a way to talk to America about the things that really do matter to people the most. And it's pretty clear that there are mainstream Democrats who are angry with Gavin Newsom about this. So, yeah, there's a whole internal debate that needs to be played out before really they can speak with one voice to the people.

[Mariana]

I do think as well, it's worth picking up on just what you were saying, Justin, about Gavin Newsom and setting up that podcast and the kind of like how all of that plays out, because we've spent quite a lot of time talking about how effectively Donald Trump's campaign and team and the people around him have acclimatized is maybe the right word to a new media environment and an unsafe media. Yeah.

[Matt]

And one that.

[Mariana]

One that is harder to control. Yeah. And actually that's a kind of like this. And actually that's a sort of virtue of it. Like they make a virtue of it. And so Gavin Newsom having this podcast and deliberately choosing to speak to people who you might not, you know, who he isn't necessarily aligned with in terms of his views on paper, I think is an interesting tactic because also that kind of content will then be amplified to Trump's base because Charlie Kirk can then share it if he so wants to, and everything else. So I think that tells us a bit about how some of the Democrats, at least, are adapting to that new environment. I think what's interesting as well, when. When to this question about. Hang on. They seem like they're really quiet, like Stuff like those stunts with the paddles don't really play on social media in the same way that they might have about five or six years ago or during that first Trump presidency. And now it's that kind of stuff, like a podcast, like someone kind of saying some stuff that's quite sort of quote unquote, common sense or that other people perceive to be, or someone's just straight talking, saying it as it is and what they think that stuff tends to perform well. And so I guess you're seeing that kind of evolution really in terms of how the Democrats deal with this stuff, because you're not seeing. Another thing we've chatted about quite a lot is the fragmentation of the social media world that now a lot of the, for example, Donald Trump opposition is very strongly expressed on sites like Blue sky, where kind of everyone isn't liking Donald Trump. And then on X, kind of everyone is. And so, so you don't get that.

[Sarah]

Moment where something, something goes viral.

[Mariana]

No.

[Sarah]

And everyone's going, oh, he looks a right Wally there.

[Justin Webb]

Yeah.

[Sarah]

Because it's, it's only going viral at the place already think he's a wally.

[Mariana]

Yeah, exactly, exactly that. So, so it doesn't feel the same as last time around because you'd have people kind of disagreeing with one another quite publicly now. It's like everyone's just so hunkered down in their filter bubbles.

[Sarah]

Ok, let's bring in another question. This is Darwin in Ashford. Hi, Darwin.

[Matt]

Hello.

[Sarah]

What is your question for the ameracasters?

[Matt]

Okay, my question is.

[Mariana]

So he sits.

[Matt]

At his desk and holds like press conferences. And I think he looks a bit like Paul o' Grady sitting there, just rambling on. I don't recall seeing Obama or Biden or anyone else doing this on a daily basis. Is this a new thing or is this always gone on? But we just didn't see it.

[Sarah]

Anthony, is it new Donald Trump basically holding press conferences and doing interviews on a daily basis from the Oval Office?

[Anthony]

Well, it's not new to Donald Trump. He kind of did that in his first four years in office as well. I think he's doing even more of it now because it reflects the competence he has in his new administration. But I remember being in the Oval Office at times when Donald Trump had guests in there and he would sit there and answer questions for a half an hour, 45 minutes an hour, until reporters actually ran out of questions to ask him. So this is just a continuation of that, but very different than any other president, the way any other president operated Joe Biden, he would come in. If he was going to answer any kind of questions from reporters, they'd have to shout it before they were ushered out of the Oval Office. Within a matter of minutes. If he had a press conference, he would have a list of five or six reporters that he would call on in order to that were predetermined. They were decided upon behind closed doors in the White House. These were the people they wanted to call on. And then once he was done with that list, he would leave. So it is remarkable for everything that Donald Trump has done as far as maybe cracking down on some media outlets like the Associated Press, he has also drastically expanded access directly to the president and being able to ask questions of the president and to get the president's views directly back to reporters.

[Sarah]

Anthony, is it all also partly, maybe a symptom of the fact that when Joe Biden or Barack Obama did have reporters into the Oval Office, how that played out was probably so boring and certainly inconsequential in sort of international terms that Darwin and Ashford might not have seen it. That actually it's just the appetite for what is Donald Trump saying now is different to Barack Obama thanking some servicemen for their service.

[Anthony]

Exactly. It's not scripted. You don't know what he's going to say next, which is. Is part of what makes it engaging. And sometimes he does say things that you don't expect that are controversial, that change US Policy seemingly on a dime. Whereas when we would go in and see Joe Biden at these events, it was always very controlled. He would say exactly what the administration wanted him to say, and consequently, it would often be pretty boring or things that you already knew.

[Sarah]

That's basically what I was getting at.

[Justin Webb]

But I can remember under Obama getting being told, you've got a question, and I haven't even asked the question, but you've got a question. This is the night before, before you go, it was that structured. I mean, even Obama, who's perfectly capable of answering anything under the sun, but they didn't want to do it in that way. It was very, very structured. You would be told you'd be patted on the shoulder if you had a question. In other words, they would absolutely structure the entire thing.

[Sarah]

Who everyone else was there would know they weren't going to get a question.

[Justin Webb]

Would know that they weren't going to kill questions. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Sarah]

Okay, we've got one more on the subject of question. We've got one more question. Lisa is in New York. Hello, Lisa.

[Matt]

Yeah, hi there.

[Mariana]

Hi there.

[Sarah]

What Is your question?

[Matt]

Yeah. Thank you. I'm just wondering what the Americas think the effect will be of all of these government department layoffs, especially at a time when benefits are likely to be cut.

[Mariana]

I mean, where are these people supposed to find new jobs?

[Matt]

And is this going to have an.

[Mariana]

Effect on the economy?

[Justin Webb]

Such a good point that we just had a jobs report which was pretty flat. They added some jobs, but you've got to add a lot of jobs in America just to cope with legal immigration into America and Americans coming of age and needing jobs, et cetera. It's a vibrant place. It could well be that in the next quarter's jobs report, this will have an impact because, as we've said before, more than 2 million federal workers, a lot of them, it seems, are going to face the sack. And it's not just in Washington, D.C. it's right around the country. And it really does matter. And it seems to me that the politics of this. We've discussed how the economy could do for Trump, but it seems to me that this is also a real threat to the heart of his political appeal, actually.

[Matt]

Yeah.

[Anthony]

And the most recent job figures, there were 150,000 new jobs created, which was not a bad number. But There were also 170,000 layoffs last month, and 62,000 of those were from federal, the federal government. So if the private sector stops creating jobs, it starts to slow down, then these government layoffs are only going to add more on top of it. And that's when you start to see unemployment tick up dramatically.

[Sarah]

And could that be, Sarah, a moment where we definitely saw it when there was a. I can't remember if it ended up being a technical recession or not, but the Labour Party here trying to pin the sort of Rishi Sunak's recession on him. Is there a moment where potentially the Democrats or opponents of Trump end up saying this is a recession made in the overlap, it's by him and his mate Elon Musk laying people off, putting up tariffs. Everything's more expensive to buy. Could that be a turning point? Or is there just so much noise around Trump right now it's hard to land that?

[Matt]

Oh, no, I think that's pretty easy message to land because Elon Musk is so incredibly visible, waving his chainsaw around and boasting about how many jobs he's cutting. That's no kind of secret. And the tariffs also, Donald Trump loves to boast about. So everybody, I think, is pretty aware of these, these big moves that are coming in the economy. And even Donald Trump Himself kind of admits that, yeah, it's going to be a little bit bumpy, he says, to begin with. But they must be gambling on the fact that any disruption that there is, as Anthony was saying earlier, comes early in his term. Before we settle into it and see what the real effect is of, I mean, a massive cut in government spending as well as government jobs as well, which is. All of this is going to have an impact on the economy. But you can sometimes sell it to people saying, hey, look, even though things have tightened up a bit, we're saving billions and billions of your dollars by not paying these federal workers, by cutting these programs. With all the exaggerations that you hear from Elon Musk and Donald Trump about how much money they're saving, can they sell? That kind of all depends whether people are really, really feeling it in their wallets or not.

[Sarah]

Okay, final question that America answers. Jim has been in touch on Instagram. Are you familiar with that, Marianne?

[Mariana]

Yeah, it was on my Instagram.

[Sarah]

It was on your Instagram?

[Mariana]

Yeah.

[Sarah]

Why don't you just reply, why are we using up valuable time on here now? He says, is J.D. vance being stupid in responding to the memes about him?

[Mariana]

So if you use the Interweb, you.

[Sarah]

Just show an alarming. An alarming photo. I hadn't seen that one.

[Mariana]

Had you not? Have you seen any of them?

[Sarah]

I don't.

[Matt]

Well.

[Sarah]

So that was J.D. vance, Kim Kardashian's body.

[Mariana]

Yes. When she broke the Internet, quite famously. And these memes have been breaking the Internet. So it was after the Zelensky, Donald Trump, President zelensky, Donald Trump, J.D. vance meeting in the Oval Office. And this comment he made kind of, you haven't even said thank you sort of thing that JD Vance made inspired this wave of memes of people who don't like J.D. vance inflating his face, making him look like a baby, saying like, oh, you didn't say thank you, all this kind of stuff. But it's kind of gone to next level. So there's like the Kim Kardashian edit of him. There's all of these, like, very hilarious. I mean, if you're watching programs like Severance, there's like an edit that's kind of related to. Related to that.

[Sarah]

And JD Watching, I found it quite slow.

[Mariana]

So good. But we. All programs are available. But it's so good. But the. You have to keep watching anyway. Basically, JD Vance has now responded with a meme, a much more flattering meme than the memes that are being shared of him where he's. It's an edited Picture of Leonardo DiCaprio from Once Upon a time in Hollywood. And he's sort of pointing at the screen, eg, like I know what you guys are up to. It's much his place. His face is not inflated in it. He looks sort of kind of flattering. Yeah. And it's such a good example of where Donald Trump's team are good at leaning into, even if he doesn't necessarily want to quite as much as say Donald Trump would. But leaning into these kinds of trends. And also in terms of this point about resistance to people from people who don't like J.D. vance or Donald Trump, that actually humor is maybe the best way, like not taking yourself too seriously, but like creating this kind of content and everyone goes, oh, that's quite funny and I quite like it.

[Sarah]

And somebody who undermines themselves is quite appealing, you know, that's. Yeah, absolutely.

[Mariana]

Exactly.

[Justin Webb]

Fabulous.

[Sarah]

Well, I think we've covered a lot of ground there from, from tariffs on Canada to Mariana's DMs.

[Matt]

It's always fun talking to Matt, Charlie, but Anthony, it's always fun talking to you too. And you're still here. I want to pick up on a few, few things that we chatted to there and just didn't have time to get into in more depth. And I tell you what's really interesting me is the effect that these tariffs, particularly the China trade tariffs that have come into effect today are going to have on American farmers because they're huge Trump supporting community, you know, in these rural communities in the Midwest. And they could get hit really quite hard by this.

[Anthony]

They could and they were hit fairly hard in the first Trump presidential term where China imposed some new tariffs on farm exports. And the Trump administration at that time had to devise a system of providing subsidies and additional support to these farmers across the Midwest in, as you mentioned, Trump states in order to keep them afloat. I remember talking to farmers during the presidential campaign last year in places like Pennsylvania, western Pennsylvania, and they were concerned about exports and they were concerned about the possibility that a trade war with China would, would hit them the hardest. And now it seems like their fears may be realized and they are going to be turning to the Trump administration once again for some kind of help or they are going to be very vocal in their objections to what he's doing.

[Matt]

Yeah, I looked up some of this because I'm really fascinated by it. And I discovered corn, for instance. It's produced in huge quantities in America. Donald Trump says, oh, well, if you're not selling it to China, just sell more of it in the domestic market. Well, it's not like that because, you know, there just isn't that much consumption to soak up everything that's exported to China. But there are some extra double whammies there. So USAID used to buy all the food it provided to underdeveloped countries from American producers. That was the law that they had to source it here, wasn't it, Anthony? And that's like about $2 billion worth that's not going to be bought now that USAID has been dismantled. And all the chickens, millions of chickens that are being slaughtered because of the bird flu epidemic that's putting the price of eggs up. Well, what do chickens eat? Chickens eat corn and there are millions fewer of them able to eat it. So, I mean, it feels like every way around some of these farming really are going to feel the pain of this.

[Anthony]

Yeah, I think so. And it's, it's going to create these kind of disruptions in the American economy that maybe the Trump administration will, will dismiss as temporary, maybe they'll point towards a longer term benefit somewhere down the road. But when people's livelihoods are at stake, that a little bit of short term pain is a very real thing and, and it's difficult to look past for the good of the country or for the good of the American economy writ large.

[Matt]

Okay, Anthony, you and I should probably go and get ready for whatever assault of news is going to come at us from the Trump White House because there's something else every day it feels like at the moment. We'll be back to talk about it on Wednesday. See you later. Bye bye.

[Anthony]

Goodbye.

[Mariana]

AmeriCast. AmeriCast from BBC News.

[Justin Webb]

Well, look, thanks for listening all the way to the end, end of today's AmericasT. You are now officially an AmericasT. It is of course, a ride, a wild ride, navigating the US News, particularly in the era of Trump. But you have made it. If you have a comment, a question about the things we've talked about or anything at all actually, get in touch with us. The email is americastbc.co.uk the WhatsApp is 033-01-239480. We answer your questions every single week actually on the podcast. So keep them coming. You can join the online community as well on Discord. The link is in the podcast description on your app. We will be back with another podcast very soon. So until then, see you later. Bye.