← Americast
Americast
Americanswers…on 5 Live! Will Kamala Harris (and Donald Trump) run for president again?
00:32:34
Harris and Trump have both said they’d be open to assuming the presidency after 2028.
Loading summary
Transcript96 lines
- [00:00]
Justin Webb
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.
- [00:06]
Asma Khalid
America is changing and so is the world.
- [00:10]
Tristan Redman
But what's happening in America isn't just the cause of global upheaval. It's also a symptom of disruption that's happening everywhere.
- [00:18]
Asma Khalid
I'm Asma Khalid in Washington, D.C. i'm.
- [00:21]
Tristan Redman
Tristan Redman in London and this is the Global Story.
- [00:25]
Asma Khalid
Every weekday we'll bring you a story from this intersection where the world and America meet.
- [00:30]
Tristan Redman
Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.
- [00:38]
Matt Chorley
Welcome to another episode of our Monday question and answer session with Matt Chorley on five Live. I was at Milbank with Matt. Anthony came live from Tokyo as he travels with the President on his tour of Asia, during which he has presided over a ceasefire between Cambodia and Thailand. There were some rather provocative questions on this edition, including will Kamala Har run again for the presidency in 2028 after brokering that next ceasefire? Is Donald Trump going to formally say that he has ended another war? And lots of you are asking about the President knocking down the east wing of the White House. He's building a ballroom there. Is it really worth more than 200 million pounds? Welcome to America. Answers on Five Live. AmeriCast AmeriCast from BBC News.
- [01:26]
Steve Bannon
When Donald Trump calls, they say, yes, sir, right away, sir, happy to lick your boot.
- [01:31]
Justin Webb
S. We are the sickest country in the world.
- [01:34]
Kamala Harris
Oh dear.
- [01:35]
Laura Kuenssberg
Are you worried that billionaires are going to go hungry? Of course the President supports peaceful protests. What a stupid question.
- [01:40]
Josh
Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein?
- [01:50]
Justin Webb
So we've got Justin, the studio and Anthony is in Tokyo. Anthony, why are you in Tokyo?
- [01:57]
Anthony Zurcher
Well, I'm in Tokyo because Donald Trump is now in Tokyo. It's the middle of a three country Asia trip that he has been on. He was in Malaysia earlier. He is in Tokyo. Tuesday and Wednesday he flies to South Korea where he is going to be at the APEC Asian Pacific Economic Conference. And then on Thursday, he's having a meeting with Xi Jinping, the Chinese leader, before flying all the way back home to Washington D.C. and you get in about Thursday afternoon, just a little after by the clock from when he leaves.
- [02:30]
Justin Webb
And what does he hope to get out of it?
- [02:33]
Anthony Zurcher
Well, I think the Xi Jinping meeting, there have already been some talks between this Treasury Secretary and Chinese officials to lay out a framework for some sort of a trade deal to prevent these export controls that China has been threatening to put on rare earths and convince China to start buying American agricultural export course again, particularly soybeans. And in exchange, Trump will drop his threat of 100% tariff on Chinese goods. So if he can get out of, out of this trip with an agreement with China, I think that will be a big win. He's also talking to South Korean and Japanese officials about trade deals. And when he was in Malaysia, he had a new peace deal he helped negotiate and get signed between Cambodia and Thailand. So add that onto the list of, of peace deals that Donald Trump likes to talk about brokering.
- [03:25]
Justin Webb
Well, we'll see how that trip unfolds. He's been talking as well, Donald Trump on Air Force One, which we shall come to, I suspect. But first, the most popular topic in the Americast inbox has been the ongoing destruction. I suppose it is ongoing, isn't it? Because we've taken quite a long time to tear it down of the White House east wing to make way for a new ballroom. So a week ago or a few days ago, Donald Trump said his big beautiful ballroom wouldn't disrupt the original structure of the historic building. So that was on Monday. Then on Tuesday he began celebrating the demolition.
- [04:02]
Josh
You probably hear the beautiful sound of construction to the back. You hear that sound? Oh, that's music to my ears. I love that sound. Other people don't like it. I love it. Josh. I think when I hear that sound, it reminds me of money. In this case, it reminds me of lack of money because I'm paying for it. So it's the opposite.
- [04:22]
Matt Chorley
Number one, he's not paying for it. And that's a source of some controversy, as Anthony will say as well. Who is paying for it? Well, not the taxpayer, but a load of private individuals and companies are paying and there is a question there about what they get in return, obviously and actually goes in a sense to China policy. So are they able to influence the deals that he does? Is it going to make Trump more pro China than it otherwise be? Because a lot of these big companies, tech ones, want to be able to do business with China very easily and with other parts of the world as well. So in a sense, for those who are true MAGA people on the outside, that wing of the party that wants toughness against China and all the rest of it and doesn't think much of big business, in fact, abhors big business. This isn't great actually, because he's having this stuff done essentially paid for by a load of people who want something in return, presumably the flip side is.
- [05:21]
Justin Webb
The taxpayer isn't paying for it. And if good natured, deep pocketed Americans want to get their checkbook out just to have Something nice. That is a possibility. Anyway, we've had so many questions on this. Tom in Sheffield has emailed three alone. He says, how is Trump able to do this in the White House? Is the building not protected? Is there any precedent of a family, of a privately funded extension to a public government building? And the ballroom has been referred to as the Donald J. Trump Ballroom. Is there a procedure for the naming of buildings or monuments? I'll let you pick your way through those, Anthony.
- [05:54]
Anthony Zurcher
Well, first, let's talk about the numbers here. It's a $300 million construction project, up from $200 million that Donald Trump first spoke about when he envisioned this. And I can say looking out the window of my plane and as I was taking off from Washington National Airport and looking down at the White House, the east wing of the White House is totally gone. It has been totally leveled all the way up to the edge of the executive Mansion, the original White House building itself. Now, can Donald Trump do this? Is it legal? Well, interestingly enough, there's a federal law, the National Historic Preservation act of 1966, that house all these kind of requirements for what you can and can't do to federal buildings. But the White House is exempt from that. And there are boards that have been instituted to approve and review construction projects in Washington, D.C. if you want to put an extra building onto the Pentagon, for instance, or change the footprint of the State Department, there is a long process. But Donald Trump has appointed all of the members as a majority on these boards, and they are expected to sign off on this project. So, you know, the long and the short of it is that Donald Trump can do this. There's no one out there who can stop them. There's been one lawsuit filed, but that's considered unlikely to have any kind of success. And then the question about whether it's legal for him to raise money from private sources to pay for this. The federal government has done that before for construction projects. But usually Congress sets out in the approval process for this construction project project that private donations are allowed. They haven't. Congress hasn't said anything about what Donald Trump is doing at the White House, but it's kind of a legal gray area, which kind of is typical of Donald Trump operating over the past eight months. He finds a way. No one has any kind of grounds to stop it. He operates in kind of breaking norms, but he does it. And then no one can really say no.
- [07:57]
Matt Chorley
It's funny, isn't it? You have a written Constitution. And so much about America we think was set in stone by the founding Fathers. And actually all they need to do is just look at the text. And I mean, we might talk later about whether it'll run for a third term. There is all sorts of things that you think are certain until someone like Donald Trump, or in fact Donald Trump comes along and doesn't do them or does them a different way, and suddenly you're allowed to.
- [08:19]
Justin Webb
And we should point out, and this is no disrespect to you, Anthony, but this building we're talking about was only built in 1942. It's not, you know, if you knock down part of Brit government building, it'll be hundreds of years old.
- [08:31]
Matt Chorley
I was going to say, with due respect to Anthony, the White House is nothing much, frankly, to be worried about. I mean, you know, the west, the West Wing's a complete dump. I mean, it's, it's wonderfully glamorous simply because of what happens and not least the actual building.
- [08:45]
Justin Webb
I mean, now he's painted it all gold, which is why it looks so nice. Let's move on then to the topic, which it's a regular topic, but there's a reason why it keeps coming back, because it keeps on being talked about. Steve Bannon is the latest Trump's former advisor, floating the idea of Don Donald Trump running again for a third term in 2028. Here's Steve Bannon speaking to the Economist.
- [09:06]
Steve Bannon
He's going to get a third term. So Trump 28. Trump is going to be president 28. And people just ought to get accommodated with that.
- [09:13]
Beth
So what about the 22nd Amendment?
- [09:14]
Steve Bannon
There's many different alternatives. At the appropriate time, we'll lay out what the plan is. But there's a plan. We had longer odds in 16 and longer odds in 24 than we got in 28. And President Trump will be the President of the United States. And the country needs him to be President of the United States. We have to finish what we started.
- [09:33]
Justin Webb
Which prompted a question from Hannah in Oxford on the back of the Economist interview with Steve Bannon. She says, where he states the inner circle has a plan for Trump to hold a third term. Any thoughts on how likely this could be and what the response would be of the American people?
- [09:47]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, he was asked about that and what he thought of 2028. He said he'd like to be president in 2028, but he says he doesn't think about it that much. And he shot down one of the theories about how he might do that, which is running as vice president with some sort of a Placeholder presidential nominee winning and then that nominee would. Or that new president would resign and Trump as vice president would elevate into that. And he said that was too cute and he didn't think the American public would buy it.
- [10:16]
Josh
No, you'd be allowed to do that. But I wouldn't do that. I think it's. It's too cute. Yeah, I wouldn't rule that out because it's too cute. I think the people wouldn't like that. It's too cut.
- [10:26]
Matt Chorley
The weird thing about it is that when you look at the 22nd Amendment, it says you can't be elected twice, doesn't it, Anthony? But what it doesn't say is you can't be president more than twice. And what I think Bannon is getting at is if you're really super keen Trump liking lawyer, you can find some wiggle room there. Because it doesn't actually say you may not be president twice. It, it's specifically about being elected. So for instance, I don't know, could you be speaker of the House and somehow kind of get in from some other way? It all sounds incredibly far fetched, doesn't it? But it is interesting that the 22nd Amendment, when you look at it, doesn't actually say, no way, Jose, you're not going to be president more than twice. It's sort of slightly ambivalent. Or am I now reading too much into it? So this is what it says.
- [11:21]
Justin Webb
This is what it says. Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of, of the President more than twice elected. And no person who's held the office of president or acted as president for more than two terms of a. Two years of a term to which some other person was elected president shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. So that's if you do the.
- [11:41]
Matt Chorley
Yeah. So if you're vice president, you and.
- [11:43]
Justin Webb
You come in and you do that for more than two years, you can't be then elected more than once. So it's a sort of counts towards it. I was struck actually. So on Newsnight on Friday night, we spoke to a. What do we call him? Confidant. So Rabamani, anyway from Unherd is a sort of friend of Jay, a J.D. vance whisperer. And he put forward the idea that the reason that Steve Bannon was saying this is that Steve Bannon wants to run himself. And at this point, being seen as the ultra Trump supporter, being so pro Trump, you're saying he's gonna have a third term was the way to outflank JD Vance on the pro Trump side. So then when it's a contest between J.D. vance, Steve Bannon. Steve Bannon's more likely to get the Donald Trump. Are you still following this? More likely to get the Donald Trump seal of approval, which is presumably actually what this is all about.
- [12:34]
Anthony Zurcher
I don't know if you've seen Steve Bannon and listen to him speak. He did. Not exactly a charismatic Persona, not a natural politician. So I would be shocked if he actually ran for president. Donald Trump's actually been talking up who his successor might be, and J.D. vance is one of the names he likes to mention. The other one is Marco Rubio, interestingly enough, his secretary of State and his former rival when they both ran for president in 2016. Little Marco, as Donald Trump called him. And he got kind of acrimonious there. But apparently he sees Rubio as a potential contender.
- [13:08]
Justin Webb
We've had a question, actually from Edward in Swindon about the 2028 election. Hi, AmeriCasters, Here's a question for you. Do you think it's likely that Ivanka Trump or Jared Kushner could be put forward as candidates for the 2028 election to continue the Trump dynasty? Justin, they've already got the. They've got the hats. If it's Ivanka, they've got Trump 2028.
- [13:30]
Matt Chorley
Yeah. I mean, they're not that keen. I think they're keener on. Jared Kushner has certainly been involved, heavily involved in what's been going on in the Middle east, and it seems rather successfully involved, too. But it's off the back of his business interests, and Ivanka seems to have zoned out a bit of politics. I'm not sure they're really keen. I think it's much more likely that the sons, the Trump sons, go for it. If it is going to be a family thing.
- [13:54]
Justin Webb
Well, we'll see. It's a good question, though. Thanks for that, Edward. Right, we move on to the other side of the aisle and the Democrats and what they might do in 2028. Kamala Harris has been speaking to Laura Kuenssberg on Sunday. She's been asking about the prospect of Kamala Harris running again in terms then.
- [14:11]
Laura Kuenssberg
Of what is next for you. You write very powerfully about the differences that many women have made to your life, whether that was your meeting with Angela Merkel or the experience of growing up with your extraordinary mother or the stories of your baby nieces, Amara and Leila. When are they going to see a woman in charge in the White House.
- [14:29]
Kamala Harris
In their lifetime, for sure.
- [14:32]
Laura Kuenssberg
Could it be you?
- [14:33]
Kamala Harris
Possibly.
- [14:35]
Laura Kuenssberg
Have you made a decision yet?
- [14:36]
Kamala Harris
No, I have not.
- [14:38]
Justin Webb
So we've had a question from Stephen on the discord. He says the Republicans in the US Must be overjoyed at the thought of Kamala Harris running for president again. From this interview, she clearly has no awareness of why she failed last time. And somebody else is texting Kamala Harris. Surely she can't believe there's a chance of running again. If so, why she remains so silent now, other than her book? And where are the Democrats in challenging Trump now? There is nothing from them. I mean, Anthony, my main takeaway was that Laura Kingsburg did her best in slightly trying circumstances of trying to get to the heart of the the issue. Asking Kamala Harris, she said she needed more time to run, more than the 107 days. And then she said, well, if you'd had more time, would you have won? She said, I'm not getting into that type of that. It was all. It was all a bit trying. Which is sort of points apart. The problem of Kamala Harris as a candidate wasn't her. Her ability to answer questions and connect in a world where Donald Trump will answer any question on almost anything.
- [15:33]
Anthony Zurcher
Right. Very cautious, very meticulous in answering, never really opening up. And that raised questions about, you know, whether she was authentic, whether she was being a little too programmed in her answers. And, you know, I think she probably does still want to be president. I mean, once you run for president, once you look in the mirror and then you see a president, a position, potential president looking back at you, you never let that go. That will stay with you for the rest of your life. So she might decide to run again. You have to remember though, she ran in 2020 and lost and really didn't do a very good showing of it. So there's no guarantee that if she ran again in 2028 or whenever that she would be able to put together an effective campaign. I mean, she got the nomination essentially handed to her in 2024 and there were trying circumstances and I think she did a dec campaign, but that may have been her best shot in 2020.
- [16:31]
Matt Chorley
She didn't even get to Iowa. I mean, that's what people forget, isn't Anthony, she didn't even get to Iowa because her campaign just fell apart.
- [16:39]
Justin Webb
People explain the significance.
- [16:40]
Matt Chorley
So Iowa is the first is the caucus, you remember, written in January in Iowa in the presidential election year. They all gather. Actually, they might not next time rounds. The Democrats have changed their dates. But let's just let. This is what has happened for decades now, they all gather in the snow. And it's the initial kicking off thing and it's the thing that Obama won and it sent him into. And you can lose in Iowa and still win the presidential election, but it gives you this kind of kickstart. So getting to Iowa is like the first step of any serious presidential run. And she didn't get to Iowa. She ran out of money because people were saying, what's the point of funding this? Because we don't really know what she's about. And given that that was the case then, and given the fact that the next Democrat is going to have to be very, very critical about the party, because that is almost certainly the way you're going to get the nomination next time around, it's just inconceivable, really. I think not that she'll run because as Anthony said, once you've seen a president in the mirror, you are going to run. But I can't see the run getting anywhere.
- [17:43]
Justin Webb
What is the precedent? How far back do you have to go to find someone who lost an election and then came back and, oh.
- [17:48]
Anthony Zurcher
Well, aside from Donald Trump, Adlai Stevenson was the Democratic nominee. Elections in a row in the 1950s. So, I mean, it is, it is possible. But to be the nominee, to be the person who won the nominee, ran for the president general election and then lost nothing, nothing since then, it's really hard. Usually you get.
- [18:10]
Justin Webb
That's what, that's what I told you to actually been. The candidate lost.
- [18:13]
Matt Chorley
Yeah.
- [18:14]
Justin Webb
Been rejected once and then come back, with the exception of Donald Trump, president before.
- [18:19]
Matt Chorley
Yeah, yeah. No, that is quite a long time.
- [18:20]
Justin Webb
That's a good pub quiz. Good quiz question. And on the question of which we do get this quite a lot, this question of like, the Democrats are invisible, is that just because the Democrats, what they're up to, doesn't travel across the Atlantic in quite the same way as Donald Trump does for listeners in the UK or is it that they aren't taking the fight to Trump in a way that actually some Democrats would like them to?
- [18:43]
Anthony Zurcher
Well, you know, they don't have a platform. They don't have power right now, you know, without any kind of power in Washington, it doesn't give them any kind of ability to stand up to Trump. And the ones who have been standing up to Trump are the ones who have been getting at least some national attention in the US and that's Gavin Newsom in California, the Governor of California, J.B. pritzker, the governor of Illinois. Both of them are potential presidential candidates. So I think you could see, you could see attempts at resistance and some now with the shutdown and Democrats in the Senate digging in and not reopening the government in order to, to try to get health insurance subsidies renewed. But it's a tough spot the Democrats are in because when the other party holds all the levers of power and the other party has Donald Trump who dominates the scene, it's difficult to get your voice heard.
- [19:36]
Matt Chorley
They're also fabulously unpopular. I mean, it is really amazingly so given that Donald Trump himself isn't particularly popular. He sort of polled at around 45% of approval rating. But actually the Democrats as a party have really shared a lot of their kudos with the American people, not just in the last few years, but in a sense further back than that. The party itself has been flailing and they absolutely can come back. But they've got a lot of soul searching to do and a lot of self discovery to do. And this is the moment that they're doing it. So it's not a surprise really that they're not really heavy hitters at the national level.
- [20:14]
Justin Webb
Just finally then, we've had a very interesting message in from Beth. So let's take a listen to her message and then we'll try to pick through what it actually means. This is Beth in Leicester on the White House website.
- [20:26]
Beth
Hi there, AmericasT team. So of all the things that have happened with the Trump administration and the White House in the past week, the one that has astonished me the most is the new updates that have been made to the White House website. On there they have a historic moments timeline which now not only includes the history of the House and various things that have happened in regards to development and major milestones, but there is also now updates on the new ballroom and some giant flag poles. But more interestingly, they have now chosen to include sections on the Bill Clinton scandal, Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood, and cocaine. I actually can't quite believe that it's real and would love to hear your opinions on it. And if you think that it's an appropriate thing to have on the current official history of the White House.
- [21:10]
Justin Webb
So I've looked at this and Beth is quite right. And on the website timeline page there are a series of, as she points out, events recorded, which includes what's called the Bill Clinton scandal in 1998, Barack Obama hosting members of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2012. That's followed by Melania Trump installing a Tennis Pavilion in 2020. And on and on it goes. And then Something about cocaine being found in the White House. I mean, I suppose this is. This is just what happens when Donald Trump is president. Justin.
- [21:48]
Matt Chorley
Yeah. I mean, was it Churchill who said, history is going to be kind to me because I intend to write it, or words to that effect. And he's taking that literally, isn't he? Maybe from the man himself. I think there is something about Trump. We were talking about the buildings and all the rest of it, and you look at his diplomacy and everything that he does, it's outside the normal. It presses against all the normal ways of doing things. And I think this is just another of those.
- [22:13]
Anthony Zurcher
It's Donald Trump and the Republicans in the White House trolling Democrats. I mean, one of the central premises of their movement is owning the libs, trying to stick it and anger Democrats and people on the left. And this is another example of it. Obviously, totally not in keeping with the way the White House website has been managed up until now. But definitely in the same vein as, I don't know if we talked about the presidential portraits that line the colonnade near the White House and they replaced Joe Biden with an auto pen. I mean, this is, you know, they're just trying to get a reaction. They're trying to needle the opposition.
- [22:51]
Justin Webb
And then, and then what happens is the Democrats go into a total spiral for 24 hours about it, which means they're not talking about.
- [22:58]
Matt Chorley
I'd put the Steve Bannon stuff in the same bracket, actually. It's owning the libs is so upsetting and annoying people that they have absolute fits and meltdowns. And you feel yourself to be winning. And it takes. Yeah, it can take you off the serious stuff as well. And it means people talk about it. You know, people think about it and talk about it, and rather than other things that might be less helpful, that has been part of the style of government. And let's be frank, to a large extent, seems to work.
- [23:24]
Justin Webb
Before I let you both go, lots and lots of listeners have been in touch to mention Richard Nixon, who lost in 1960 and then won again in 1968, who we all failed to remember.
- [23:40]
Matt Chorley
I'd forgotten about Nixon. Yeah. But I mean, the big thing about.
- [23:44]
Justin Webb
Biden, I'm not sure Carmen Harris necessarily wants to declare I'm doing a Nixon.
- [23:49]
Matt Chorley
Well, yeah, there might be some problems.
- [23:51]
Justin Webb
He's a campaign slogan.
- [23:52]
Matt Chorley
But the thing about someone of the longevity of Biden, which is so, so huge, going right back to the early 70s when he was first a senator, you've got this kind of sense of yourself as part of the establishment. And if Kamala Harris sees herself also as part of the party establishment, that is what is failing for her this time round. Because where it was useful for Biden, in the end, he managed to get there because they needed that kind of candidate that time around. Next time round, that kind of candidate.
- [24:24]
Justin Webb
They don't need somebody who comes in and has a fight with the party and is seen to grab it by the scruff of the neck. It's it might be able to do a Donald Trump.
- [24:40]
Matt Chorley
Okay, we're off the air on five Live with Matt Chorley. Anthony's still with me. I tell you what, let's talk a little bit more about that Kamala Harris interview because she's been in the UK as we were saying, promoting her book, talking to Laura Kuenssberg, big sort of set piece interview and a range of questions Laura asking her as well. Let's hear the response. She asked her whether she thought Trump was running a fascist authoritarian government.
- [25:06]
Kamala Harris
I was asked if he was a fascist and I said yes. And the reason is that I look at what is happening right now and again, it is what I predicted. He said he would weaponize the Department of Justice. He has done exactly that. He has used the United States Department of Justice, which should be an independent agency that makes decisions based on fact and law and not personal vengeance of the president of the United States. You look at what has happened in terms of how he has weaponized, for example, federal agencies around going after political satirists who he didn'this skin is so thin he couldn't endure criticism from a joke and attempted to shut down an entire media organization in the process.
- [25:59]
Laura Kuenssberg
And you are critical.
- [26:00]
Anthony Zurcher
I mean, those examples are certainly true. Donald Trump has used the Justice Department to go after his political enemies. James Comey, John Bolton, Letitia James are some of the examples. He has definitely ramped up immigration enforcement and has now billions of dollars to spend on paramilitary forces to to round up undocumented migrants. Now, going from those examples to does that mean Donald Trump is an authoritarian? Obviously, Kamala Harris says yes, Trump and his side will say no. That's just meeting his campaign promises, the promises that he ran on in 2024 and voters said yes, this is what we wanted elected him.
- [26:44]
Matt Chorley
Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking when she said yes, exactly what I predicted has happened. Well, I mean, she predicted it and voters voted for him anyways, which is kind of the answer, by the way. There was an answer as well from the White House, wasn't there when Kamala lost the election in a landslide. She should have taken the hint. The White House said the American people don't care about her or her absurd lies. Or maybe she did take the hint, they say, and that's why she's continuing to air her grievances to foreign publications. There was another question I thought Anthony was interesting, which was about actually the circumstances, these vexed, fraught circumstances around the dropping out of Joe Biden after that disastrous debate, et cetera, et cetera. Let's hear what she had to say about that.
- [27:28]
Kamala Harris
I was concerned about his ability to run for reelection, given what the campaign would require.
- [27:35]
Laura Kuenssberg
There's a lot of very well respected reporting now in the United States that uses phrases like cover up, that talks about, well, widespread concerns. And you yourself say in the book it shouldn't have been a choice for an individual's ego.
- [27:52]
Kamala Harris
I do reflect on whether I should have had a conversation with him urging him not to run for reelection because of what that would require.
- [28:08]
Anthony Zurcher
If it was a cover up, it wasn't a very good one since all of us were talking about how Joe Biden was too old to be president. And if you asked Americans in polls, the majority of the Americans said he was too old to be president. But that's an interesting question, whether Kamala Harris should have said something to Joe Biden. And I tend to think that if she had, he would have blown her off. And it is because, I mean, Joe Biden didn't want to let go of the presidency. He wanted to stay in the White House for another four years. And once his mind was made up, there is no institutional power to try to stop him. I mean, it's the opposite side of the coin that we were just talking about with Donald Trump and imposing his will on renovating the White House.
- [28:51]
Matt Chorley
Yeah, it sort of goes, doesn't it, to this question that we were talking about with Matt Chorley about her saying that she might run again if she were to run again. Then these questions about what on earth she was doing in that last year or so in the White House, not just in the last weeks, but in the whole last year. Well, it was obvious to a lot of people, it seems that Joe Biden was failing in his abilities. What was she playing at? Did she not know? Did she not inquire? Was she not, as she says, not very active in getting rid of him? She openly says that she wasn't. I mean, I thought that answer was interesting, actually rather more interesting than some of the other answers she's given on this subject. But even so, it really does. It sort of lays her open, doesn't it, to the accusation that she's a passenger in all of this. She hasn't got the kind of executive oomph that somehow gets you into the White House in the first place.
- [29:45]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, she's going to have to answer questions about the. The Biden presidency, full stop. And that is how it ended, of course, but also some of the policies while she was there. One of the things that's happened on this book tour she's been on is regularly there have been pro Palestinian protests that have disrupted her events. People coming up and shouting and protesting during her public speaking engagements, calling her a facilitator of genocide and the like. You know, that is going to haunt her as well. And if you're running in a Democratic primary, I think that may even be a bigger challenge than what did you think about Joe Biden's health? And when did you think it?
- [30:28]
Matt Chorley
That's a really interesting one. Because if you're going to run, I mean, which lane are you running in? If you're not running in the progressive left lane, which you sort of dabbled with doing before back in 2020 in that pretty disastrous effort, and then it all fizzled out and it sort of came to nothing. So next time around, which lane is she? Is she the bucolic centrist, you know, appealing to folks in South Dakota sort of that lane that's not a lane that is available to someone who comes from California or Eliza. So where is the opportunity? I really don't get it.
- [31:04]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, that's what killed her in 2020 is that she didn't have a lane to run in. I mean, she had this big, splashy kickoff I was at in Oakland, California in 2019. Tens of thousands of people showed up. It felt like she had kind of the legacy of Obama, the same kind of big movement behind her. She had a really good first debate later that year in the summer where she kind of eviscerated Joe Biden for his support of anti segregation, segregation busing. And then she didn't really do anything with it. And the problem was she wasn't left enough to compete with Bernie Sanders, and she wasn't the centrist candidate because Joe Biden had that locked down and that left her no clear constituency. So she would have to make up her mind next time. But from listening to her and reading that book, you know, it may be difficult for her to find that lane.
- [32:00]
Matt Chorley
Anthony, you're going to be jet lagged. You probably don't know what your next meal is? Breakfast, lunch, dinner, whatever. Yeah, but look, sleep well and we'll be in touch with you later in the week. Bye.
- [32:11]
Anthony Zurcher
Bye.
- [32:14]
Matt Chorley
AmeriCast. AmeriCast from BBC News. Well, look, thanks for listening all the way to the end of today's AmericasT. You are now officially an ameracaster. 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.
- [33:14]
Asma Khalid
America is changing and so is the world.
- [33:19]
Tristan Redman
But what's happening in America isn't just the cause of global upheaval. It's also a symptom of disruption that's happening everywhere.
- [33:26]
Asma Khalid
Asma I'm Asma Khalid in Washington, dc.
- [33:29]
Tristan Redman
I'm Tristan Redman in London, and this is the Global Story.
- [33:33]
Asma Khalid
Every weekday, we'll bring you a story from this intersection where the world and America meet.
- [33:39]
Tristan Redman
Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.