← Next Up with Mark Halperin
Next Up with Mark Halperin
Trump's Media War Strategy, the 2028 Dem Calendar, Immigration Narratives, with Jaime Harrison and Emma-Jo Morris
01:12:57
Mark Halperin opens the latest episode of "Next Up" with his reported monologue on how President Trump’s decade-long war against the Dominant Media remains one of his most effective political tools. Mark highlights Trump’s unparalleled understanding of the news business, which, unbelievably, he gets better than journalists themselves do. Trump’s critique of the industry's flaws is as muscular as it is accurate, highlighting liberal bias, elitism, and a broken business model, all of which further erode the press’ credibility, which also energizes Trump’s base and conservatives at large. Then, former DNC Chair Jaime Harrison joins the program on a special occasion – his 50th birthday. Harrison offers an insider’s perspective on the Democratic Party’s fundraising challenges against the "billionaire class" of the GOP. He also dives into the heart of the 2028 presidential nominating process, noting that potential White House candidates do not yet seem to be lobbying for specific early ...
Loading summary
Transcript141 lines
- [00:00]
Mark Halperin
Try Angel Soft for your tushy. It's made by Angels Soft and Strong. Budget friendly. The choice is simple. Pick up a pack today.
- [00:12]
Emma Jo Morris
Angel Soft, Soft and strong.
- [00:14]
Jaime Moore
Simple.
- [00:16]
Commercial Announcer
Valentine's planning starts now. Get ahead of the game with 1-800-Flowers xoxo sale and save 20% on gifts for the ones you love. For 50 years, 1-800-Flowers has made Valentine's special. But by delivering millions of high quality roses with unmatched reliability right now, save 20% on premium bouquets, all backed by their seven day freshness guarantee. This Xoxo sale ends February 5th, so don't wait. Save 20% at 1-800-flowers.com sxm that's 1-800-flowers. Com sxm.
- [00:48]
Mark Halperin
Everybody. Welcome to NextUp. I'm Mark Kalperin, editor in chief of the live interactive video platform Two Ways, host of this program and fired up about today's episode. I have a reported monologue I think you're going to really like about President Trump and the media. Very grateful to have you here. And then Jamie Harrison, former chairman of the Democratic Party, a guy from South Carolina who is just so insightful about the Democratic Party when he was chair of the party, like all chairs, you know, a little constrained about what he can say about things because he's an official role. But now that he's out, he's still a very loyal Democrat but super important voice in understanding what's going on. You and I are going to talk about the nominating process for the Democrats and how things are shaping up for the party in terms of fundraising and in terms of the all important calendar of primaries and caucuses that will determine who the Democrats will nominate. Historically that's been as big as anything, Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, what happens in those states. And I'm curious to see if he's hearing what I'm hearing, which is dogs not barking of the prospective candidates. If this were Hillary Clinton or, or Bill Clinton or or other Joe Biden super connected Democrats in the old establishment era, they'd be jockeying to make sure the Democrats picked as the early states, states they could do well in. I've not heard that. I'm curious to see if he's heard whether they are and if they're not lobbying, it's going to just be a wide open process after that. Emma Jo Morris, my friend and colleague at Two Ways, she's the co host of the group Chat. She's a senior consultant at Beckinstone, longtime conservative journalist and thinker and talker and commentator. We're going to talk about immigration and whether that's dividing the party and the country and also about the Trump administration, what's going well, what's not. And also I want to ask her about J.D. vance because my view continues to be that he'll, he'll be the Republican nominee on this trajectory for 2028. But for the first time in the last couple of months, I've started to hear some negative things about J.D. vance from the wider circle of MAGA and the conservative movement. I'm going to ask her what she's hearing on that front. Before that, before our guests, I want to start with my reported monologue on President Trump and the media. You know, regularly here in the reported malag, what I try to do is explain Donald Trump. I'm not the most knowledgeable person in the world about Donald Trump, but I've studied him for a long time. I talked to a lot of people who know him and I also talk to a lot of people who don't understand him at all. And one of the most heartening things that I get from my newsletter from this program from Two Way is when people who don't like Donald Trump at all, to say the least, say to me, you know what? I get Trump better than I used to because of you. I spend a lot of my time talking to people to try to explain him, understand how to explain him, and then explaining him both publicly and privately. And I look to understand, you know, lately here we've talked about his decision making process. We've talked about what causes him to change his mind. Today I want to talk about something I've been asking people about for over a decade. But in the last couple days, experts on Trump and in the media, his relationship to the media and how Donald Trump's critique of the media, which is a very negative critique. And I'm talking what I call the dominant media, the traditional media, the legacy media, whatever you want to call it, I call it dominant media. It's not a perfect description, but it's what I use. How his critique of the dominant media has helped him reduce their power even further. One of his critiques is their power is reduced, but also build support amongst maga. And part of this grows out of my experience on Two Way where people will say, I don't like this about Trump, I don't like this about this Trump, this about Trump. But I voted for Trump three times and the answer is why? Often it's not I like his policies on immigration or trade. Often it's he sticks it to the media. Because for decades before Trump, every Republican I knew said media is biased against us and liberals would deny it. And I'd say to my liberals, colleagues in the media and liberal politicians and strategists, you may not think the liberal, the media is liberal, but know that half the country does. Trump's is simply based on Trump's. Calling out the media for their flaws, including being liberal, has helped Trump enormously build his coalition, increase his coalition, win two out of three presidential elections. There's a lot of reasons covering Donald Trump is a big challenge, okay? His temperament, the velocity of what he does, the sheer volume of what he does. But the fact that he can game out and generate news cycles, two or three or four news cycles every morning before most reporters have finished their first cup of coffee and is a huge sort of strength, source of strength for him. Okay? One underrated explanation, though, of why it's so hard to cover Donald Trump for a lot of people in the media is he understands the business of news better than any modern president has. Better even, I think, than a lot of people who work in the media. I'll say that again. Donald Trump, I believe, understands how the media works, including the business side of the media, better than a lot of people in the media, better than a lot of reporters, better than a lot of news managers. It's uniquely hard to cover him because of this, because if you understand something now, knowledge is power and it has allowed him to keep the press weaker than they were, and it has allowed him to unify and expand his base. Okay? And we've all seen this now, for a decade, Donald Trump has been a prominent critic of the media. Now, again, every Republican politician, including the people who've run for president and been president, has seen the bias and the other flaws in the media, but they haven't understood it as well and they haven't called it out. With rare exceptions. There's some exceptions. Newt Gingrich called out John King in a debate when he was running for president in 2012. That was a high profile moment. And there have been others, but they haven't made it as big a part of their agenda, of their critique of their public presentation. In any case, the way Donald Trump did, he did it in part because of his knowledge, but he also did it in part because it worked for him. Okay? We've seen it for 10 years. There are lots of examples. Here's one from just this week. Donald Trump in the Oval Office going up against Kaitlan Collins, White House correspondent for CNN and anchor for CNN no president would take on a reporter in the Oval Office this way. But this is no longer new. Add this to the clip reel. This is S17, please.
- [07:17]
Donald Trump
I think it's time now for the country to maybe get onto something else.
- [07:21]
Commercial Announcer
What would you say to people, Mr. President?
- [07:24]
Donald Trump
Something that people care about. You know, what, what do you say?
- [07:27]
Emma Jo Morris
What would you, what would you say to the survivors who feel they've got the worst reporter?
- [07:31]
Donald Trump
No one to see. CNN has no ratings because of people like you. You know, she's a young woman. I don't think I've ever seen you smile. I've known you for 10 years. I don't think I've ever seen a smile.
- [07:42]
Emma Jo Morris
I'm asking you about survivors.
- [07:44]
Donald Trump
You know why you're not smiling? Because you know you're not telling the truth and you're, you're a very dishonest organization and they should be ashamed of you.
- [07:53]
Mark Halperin
Okay, now it's important to remember that before Donald Trump was a politician, when he was a business person, an author, a TV star, he got a lot of positive press. He was treated by the political press like a serious presidential candidate. Ironically to me, they treated him like a serious candidate when he wasn't. And then when he was, in 2011 and 2015, they swept, they flipped and stopped treating him seriously. But he used to get asked all the time, why are you going to run for president? And he, he benefited from the New York Post. Cindy Adams GOSSIP COLUMNIST but the media in general, positive coverage. When he became a politician, though, he got on hostile terrain in part because he became a Republican and the press is hostile to Republicans. So Donald Trump understands the press, as I said, better than any, any president, presidential candidate I've covered. Number two is probably George W. Bush. And the reason for that, I believe, is because they had to study it, they had to test it out, they had to fight it, they had to think about it because they knew to get elected president, they had to understand what was basically the dimensions of a two on one contest. A Republican running for president is going to be going up against both the Democrats and the media. The Democrats haven't had to do that because they've benefited from the friendly coverage. Right? So you look at the recent Democratic presidents, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, they benefited from what amounted to, you know, home team coverage. Not uniformly positive, you know, obviously not free of criticism. Obviously, all three of those guys got criticism. But what they had in the dominant media was, was structurally friendly. They always got the benefit of the doubt. The framing was softer More patience when they made mistakes, more empathy. So they didn't need to spend a lot of time. Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Donald and Joe Biden, time and effort, thinking, how do I understand the realities of this? They just luxuriated it in the fact that the Democrats were going to support them. Trump didn't have that luxury so early on because, because he understands media generally. From his time as a, as a business person, as a TV, reality TV star. Long before 2017, long before he got on the escalator, Trump watched. He watched how stories got framed, which voices get elevated, which voices don't, what kind of mistakes get forgiven, what kinds don't, what narratives stick and what can you move on from. And then on the business side, because Trump's a business guy, so he looks at every business, including the media business, and looks at the profit and loss realities. And he saw that this was an industry in decline. I saw that the press, the political press, the networks, the magazines, the big newspapers, the wire services, they weren't what they were when he got into politics in 2015. They weren't what they were five, 10, 15 years ago, 30 years ago, when he first started following all this stuff. What Trump saw in 2015, as he got into politics was the press is hostile to Republicans. The press could be a problem for him, really, for the first time in his career. And so right away, he adopted a posture of negativity towards the media. Okay, here's one of a thousand examples we could show you from the 2016 presidential cycle of Trump making it clear to folks what he thought of the legacy media, the dominant media. S18, please.
- [11:11]
Donald Trump
James, are you ready? Do you have your pen? And again, I really think the press, look, the media, you know, my opinion to the media, it's very low. I think the media is frankly, made up of people that in many cases, not in all cases, are not good people.
- [11:29]
Mark Halperin
Just classic Trump, right? And press is not made up of good people. He'd always hedge it a little bit and say, well, there's some good people. But Donald Trump went into that presidential race from the get go and throughout the cycle and for the last 10 years, 11 years, criticizing the press, expressing the views not just of other Republican politicians who couldn't say it, but of tens of millions of people around the country, including some, some, a lot of independents who just said, this industry screwed up. This industry has real problems. So Trump saw basically four flaws in the press that he has critiqued openly for the, for the entire time, for the last decade plus. First, as I'VE said liberal bias, right? The press is, is going to favor Republicans, Democrats over Republicans, unless you force them not to. And the reality is, and one of the paradoxes here is Trump got more favorable coverage than Hillary Clinton did in 2016. The other Republican president of this, of this era. We're in here where it was possible for Republicans because of the rise of, of talk radio and blogs and social media and the Internet and YouTube. Bush is the other Republican president of this era. George W. Bush, he was the other one. As I said, he understood the media better than his Democratic counterparts because he had to. And what they saw was this liberal bias could be overcome. Bush should have been, should have suffered the fate of other Republican presidential candidates. McCain, Romney, Trump in 2016, 20 and 2024. He should have gotten more negative coverage, but Bush didn't. Bush got more positive coverage than, than al Gore in 20, in 2000, than John Kerry in 2004, Trump in 2016. All three of those cycles, the Democratic presidential candidate got less favorable coverage. And it happened, I believe, primarily because Bush and Trump understood the media and they understood how to curry favor, even in the case of Trump as he attacked the press. So first was liberal bias. And Trump has talked about that, talks about it all the time. When Trump says fake news, when Trump says, you know, that the media is crooked, it's primarily saying they're liberally biased. And I'll say again, it's emphatically true. You've heard me say it in public many times. But it rallies tens of thousands of people and the press just stays in denial about it. Elitism is number two. The second thing Trump saw that the press is a bunch of northeastern liberals, primarily the political media, who are biased against Republicans. But also add a touch, part of why my colleagues missed the win of Trump in 2016, and frankly, the win of Trump in 2024, was because they're just, they're talking to people in Washington and New York. Now, for me, the irony is I. I've lived only in Washington and New York, except when I went to Harvard. And I spend a lot of time talking to elites, okay? But I also spend a lot of time talking to people who are not elite. When I travel to over 30 states covering Trump rallies in 2016, I talked to people from all over America, and I do it every day on two way. And I try very hard to understand that not all the wisdom in America is found in Washington or New York, but the press is in that bubble. Did the press appreciate when Trump talked about Americans who'd been killed by illegal immigrants and their families? No. Did the press appreciate when Trump would talk about the economic destruction this country faced because of unfair trading practices? No. So, too liberal, too elite, third, broken business model. And again, this is where Trump knew more about the media business than people in the media. All these people running dominant media places went years and years not understanding that the digital age was upon us. They needed new business models. And, and the, and the being too elite and being too liberal meant they were selling to half the country. You know, Michael Jordan said he didn't endorse Democratic candidates because Republicans bought sneakers too. Abc, NBC, New York Times, Washington Post. They just went decades saying, we don't need new products and we don't need to change our orientation to try to sell to the full country. We can just keep selling to liberals. For the most part, Trump saw the broken business model. And then lastly, too liberal, too elite, broken business model adds up to the fourth thing Trump saw. Lost credibility, right? If you, if you attack the media 50 years ago the way Trump does, or 40 years ago or 30 years ago, you would have been going up against the famous expression, don't attack people who, who buy ink by the barrel. Don't attack people who have access to the airwaves. But the lost credibility, and you see this in every public opinion poll, meant Trump could do it with impunity. And the paradox is, as Trump exposes, Trump, called it out, said, the press is liberal, the press is elite, the press is failed. Businesses call them the failing New York Times, etc. And therefore the press doesn't have credibility. The press didn't say, we got to fix those things. Trump could. Trump sort of right or really right. And the people who like the liberal press didn't say, oh, maybe Trump's right. We got, we got to change. He exposed the flaws and he made them worse. Since Donald Trump in 2015 started saying these things about the press, they got more liberal, they got more hostile to Republicans because it was Trump, okay? They didn't improve them. They got worse. They got more elite. They just continued to read each other's articles in the op ed pages of the New York Times and in the Atlantic. Their business models continued to fail because they didn't know how to survive in the era of Trump. And of course, their credibility has been shredded. Trump has relished this. He's benefited from it, but he's relished it, and his supporters have, too. Trump's destruction of the weak media has gone over really well with tens of millions of people in this country. It's put the media in a defensive crouch. And instead of listening to the critique and seeing the fact that they were being knocked down further, they just circled the wagons, hardened their attitudes, became even more ideological, more insular, more brittle. In their mind, every criticism they got for Trump was proof that they were doing something right, which in almost every case was exactly wrong. The media switched, not at all, except in the wrong direction. And that's weakened them as a business. It's weakened their credibility. Trump's weapon since 2015 has to make the press the villain of every piece. He's the hero and they're the villain. And he does it, of course, in a style that is extremely effective, with huge humor, aggression, ridicule. It's a constant rallying cry for him in almost every storyline. No matter what he's talking about immigration, foreign policy, the economy. It's. The press is, is liberal and failed and out of touch. This still works, and it's not an accident. Trump is a great student of what works. It's one of his great strengths as a political figure. He knows that he can exploit this and the press has been ineffective in, in, in trying to stand themselves back up. He understands their incentives and he knows how to crush them. He can trigger coverage, dominate attention, redirect scrutiny because he's dealing with an ally who he under an enemy rather, who he understands better than they understand themselves. He's turned that criticism into a way to make them even weaker. Okay, and the system, the journalists say, well, well, we're going to operate the way we wish the world was and the way we think it is, rather than the way it actually is, which is tens of millions of Americans have turned away from them. Turn to platforms like this, turn to Fox News, turn to Newsmax, turn to other sources of news. And for reporters and the managers in these news organizations, just a huge challenge. Okay, Trump doesn't do this on his own. Right. He's also got his cabinet. He's also got the people around him who understand they're in on it too. They, they can't do it as well as Trump in most cases, but now they're trying to amplify Trump's voice. Here's just some of the folks in Trump's circle. Vice President, Secretary of State, Secretary of Commerce Caroline Levitt. Here's some of their echoing all these same themes that have been so effective for trump. This is S19, please.
- [19:40]
Emma Jo Morris
Oh, okay, so you're a biased reporter with a left wing opinion.
- [19:43]
Mark Halperin
What do you want me to Do. Yeah.
- [19:45]
Emma Jo Morris
Because you're a left wing hack.
- [19:46]
Mark Halperin
Yes.
- [19:46]
Emma Jo Morris
You're not a reporter. You're posing in this room as a journalist. And it's so clear by the premise.
- [19:51]
Mark Halperin
Of your question, the way that the media by and large has reported this story has been an absolute disgrace. If the media wants to tell the truth, they ought to tell the truth. But, you know, occasionally people send me articles and like, there's just this fever swamp.
- [20:07]
Emma Jo Morris
This is such a stupid media narrative.
- [20:09]
Mark Halperin
That they're coming here tomorrow because the Trump is going to bully Zelensky into a bad deal. Now, past Republicans in this era, and we're basically talking about the Bush era, the eight years of Bush from 2001 to 2009, there are plenty of people in the Bush administration who felt the same way. Ari Fleischer, Bush's press secretary, would occasionally at the White House podium sound like Caroline Levin, but. But the cabinet members, the other officials, and the President himself, they didn't do it the way Trump does it, not on a consistent basis. Trump and his team are very media savvy and they systematically exploit the weaknesses that they see. All the same things that Trump have been talking about. They know how to do that. They know how to exploit it. So the core challenge for journalists now is how do you cover someone who not only understands your weaknesses, but knows how to exploit them? Every day, in the context of the battles in Washington and then thinking about the midterms, Trump's fighting the Democrats, but he's also fighting the media. And, and he knows the weaknesses of the Democrats, but the weaknesses of the media and how to energize his people on that, how to turn people against the media and how to, and how to crush the media. Now, I'm a journalist. I want the media to be strong. I don't want any president to exploit us for political gain. I don't. But we open the door to that as an industry if we continue to be liberal and elite and not have robust business models. What I would be worried about if I was the Democrats is J.D. vance gets this really well, probably the Republican nominee. Most of the 2028 Democrats don't understand the media. Gavin Newsom understands it better than most, but even he, I don't believe, is in Trump's class. And he's, he's easily the strongest of the Democrats in that category. Every day, Trump is, is making the media weaker by running against them. He knows exactly where those weaknesses are. As I've said, he knows better than any president, really almost as well as anybody who's alive right now in our lifetimes or lived in our lifetimes, how to exploit those weaknesses in the media for his advantage. It's a huge benefit for Trump, and it's something you see in the whole party, in the, in the members of Trump's team. You see it in the, in the media, the conservative media. This is an asymmetrical advantage. I talk about them all the time. They're so important. When one side has an asymmetrical advantage that they can exploit, it's so powerful. And in this case, Trump is continuing to give the same critiques, the same criticisms. And the press hasn't figured out how to deal with it yet, how to cover Trump, but also how to do the right thing. The press shouldn't be liberal. It shouldn't be elite. It needs to have effective business models, and it needs to have credibility. And Trump's made all of that harder to his advantage. All right, I want to hear from you what you think about all that. I know lots of you have opinions about the media. Send me your thoughts on today's reported monologue. Email is nextup halperinmail.com after you send the email, do another smart thing. Subscribe to NextUp on your YouTube channel. On our YouTube channel, rather, you can see every episode there. You'll get notified when a new one drops. There's bonus clips and clips from the program. That's YouTube.com nextup halperin. And of course, if you like to listen to us, rather than see what I'm wearing on any given episode, you can subscribe to the program as a podcast. Apple, Spotify, wherever you get your podcasts, do it now. So Nexters can be a bigger group.
- [23:33]
Jamie Harrison
Right.
- [23:33]
Mark Halperin
I want you to be able to hear the show or watch the show whenever it drops. The moment it goes live, you can do that, but you got to go to the platforms where we are again. YouTube, Apple, Spotify, wherever you get your podcasts or please go do that now. Make sure you tell all your friends we're still a pretty new program and we're trying to grow. All right, quick break. And then next up, the former chairman of the Democratic Party. After the break, Jamie Harrison, host of his own podcast called At Our Table. Chairman Harrison is next up after this. Here's something you ought to know. High blood pressure is the number one risk factor for mortality, or one in two adults has it. That means there's a 50, 50 chance you're a walking time bomb. Here's some good news, though. You can take control of your blood pressure naturally without relying on Big Pharma. 120 Life is a blend of great tasting super fruit juices that have been shown to help lower blood pressure. It's backed by hundreds of doctors and trusted by thousands of people who've seen measurable results. And here's the very best part. It's completely risk free. Try 120 Life for two weeks and if you don't see differences in your numbers, you can get your money back. Go to 120life.com that's 120life.com and use the code. Next up to save 20% and get free shipping. This is serious stuff. This is your life we're talking about. 120 life can help. El programa Nacional de Vacas a ser.
- [25:04]
Emma Jo Morris
The McDonald's a beneficiado masdeville student Incommisiones de dolares and becaso torgadas esta esma.
- [25:12]
Mark Halperin
Historia de generaciones de estudiantes que les.
- [25:15]
Emma Jo Morris
Mosques.
- [25:29]
Mark Halperin
And McDonald's Punta com Yagonal hacer.
- [25:32]
Commercial Announcer
Busy work weeks can leave you feeling drained. Prolon's five day fasting mimicking diet rejuvenates you at the cellular level, lets you enjoy real and does not require an injection. Developed at USC's Longevity Institute, Prolon supports biological age reduction metabolism, skin health and fat loss when combined with proper exercise and nutrition. Get 15% off plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe@prolonlife.com PandoraPromo.
- [26:02]
Mark Halperin
All right, next up and joining me now, Jamie Harrison, former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, host of the great podcast at our table and celebrating his 50th birthday today. Honored. Mr. Chairman, you spent some time with us besides being on Next up, what do you got planned for 5 0?
- [26:18]
Jamie Harrison
Oh, I, I don't know. My wife is, is doing something in the kids. I, you know, I, I try not to get into the planning of my birthday parties or birthday dinners or whatever, but one of the things we just, I told them just low key, you know, this is, it's one of those, it's a big birthday, the 50th. But it's an emotional one for me, Mark, because my grandmother passed away last year and she, she practically raised me. And so there's this tradition every birthday that usually when I wake up in the morning there's a voicemail message and it's my grandma singing happy birthday. So for the first time in the 50 years I've been on this planet, I don't have that. So it's, it's, it's a It's a bit emotional, but, you know, I'm so happy to be here. You know, young black guys who grew up in my community in rural Orangeburg, South Carolina, many of them who I grew up with were not as fortunate enough to live to see 50. So I'm blessed in so many ways because of the things that I've done and things that I hope to continue to do. So it's definitely one of those moments of reflection, celebration. But, you know, they're moments of sorrow, too.
- [27:36]
Mark Halperin
Yeah, I can, I can hear it in your voice, how much she meant to you and, and how significant it is for you as you think about the bitter and the sweet together. You've accomplished so much for 50. You've been the national chair of your party. For anybody in politics, that's an extraordinary achievement. You could rest on your laurels on that. And yet you're doing your podcast. Just tell folks you book incredible people and you have conversations that are so special. Just tell people why you're doing, why you're spending time doing the podcast and what people can hear there that they maybe can't hear other places. Yeah.
- [28:05]
Jamie Harrison
You know, Mark, one of the things that I was frustrated the most about when I was chair of the dnc and I think it's important for folks to understand when you're chair of the DNC and you have the White House, sometimes there are restrictions on the things that you can do. You can have all of the ideas and you could be chair in terms of name, but ultimately you got to have signed off from the White House. And it doesn't matter if it's a Democratic president or Republican president. Same thing goes on at RNC and DNC when you have the White House. And so there were things that I wanted to do in terms of messaging and framing, but also highlighting our folks and showing them in a three dimensional fashion. And I often thought back to the conversations I would have with my grandparents, the conversations we would have at our kitchen table where we talk about things and we'd be passionate and about things. And I felt like that was missing in the Democratic Party, that what you get right now when you look at cable news, you get these caricatures of folks in politics, but you don't get to see them in a three dimensional fashion. You don't get to understand what are the things they're passionate about, what are the things that they are feel for, fearful about, what are their true values. And so what I want to do in the At Our Table podcast is to peel Back layers of onion a little bit. Let people see behind the curtain on some of these people so that they can make their own characterization of who they are and what they are and whether or not they support them or not.
- [29:34]
Mark Halperin
So just give folks examples of some folks who've been on lately who have, who you have coming up.
- [29:38]
Jamie Harrison
Yeah, perfect example. You know, I've had Jasmine Crockett, Vice President Kamala Harris, I've had Governor Andy Beshear, Tim Walls, even Hunter Biden was one of our first ones. And you know, a number of folks came back were like, I didn't know Hunter did this or that. And I've even gotten some report who said, you know, Jamie, I, I actually like listening or watching your podcast because I learned something about these politicians that I never knew or that nobody's ever asked them.
- [30:11]
Mark Halperin
Yeah.
- [30:12]
Jamie Harrison
And so in the coming weeks we're going to have Cory Booker on. I, I think Corey may be coming next week. Colin all read to talk about some of the controversy going on in, in Texas right now. Texas is a hotbed of both, both sides, Republican and Democrats. They are all fighting down there in Texas. So but it's going to be an interesting year and you know, I, I hope to announce very soon, Mark a really, really big interview. I can't say right now, but really, really big.
- [30:44]
Mark Halperin
All right. Until you reveal it, I'm assuming it's the Pope. The way you described this. Exactly, exactly why I think why I enjoy it and I think why people will and you should sample it, go on YouTube, listen to the podcast is you have familiar people on but you're asking them different questions than a reporter might ask or then you'd see in a short interview on cable news or Sunday show. So it's really, it's not everybody who everybody in politics, almost everybody think well maybe I should have a podcast. And a lot of them do, but a lot of them are just kind of run of the mill. They're not distinctive in yours is. So I do recommend you and I congratulate you on it. It's an incredible achievement to, to switch over to that different realm and perform at such a high level. I want to ask you about some things going on with the party.
- [31:24]
Jamie Harrison
Yeah.
- [31:25]
Mark Halperin
And one thing I also admire about you is you're in politics to help the real lives of real people. You look at politics as a game. You look at it as you think your party's the better party in the country and a two party system and you're trying to get people elected. But a lot of what you did as chair under President Biden and Vice President Harris, a lot of what the party does now is the mechanics of politics. It's the process. So I want to ask you about some of those things that really have their germane for the midterms and they're germane for the presidential. One is fundraising. Some Senate candidates are doing quite well in your party raising money, but the national party is not doing as well as that as the, as the Republican Party is. And then the billionaires, the red billionaires are writing big checks, big to, to, to, to dark, so called dark money groups, to super PACs. Got Elon Musk given $10 million to a Senate candidate in a three way primary. What's going on when, when, when, when President Trump's poll numbers are down, when you're the out party, but you have a real chance to be in the majority and a lot of big donors, they just want to bet on the winner. So what's standing between the Democratic Party and being more competitive on fundraising in some of these important areas?
- [32:34]
Jamie Harrison
Yeah, you know, Mark, when you look at all of the other committees, the dscc, when you look at that dccc, when you look at dga, I think they are in parity with the Republican counterparts. The big difference on the radar right now is the difference between the DNC and the rnc. And historically that tends to happen when you have the White House. There's a lot of attractive things for big donors in terms of having the White House. You go to the White House Christmas party, you get the Easter egg rolls, you get all these things. And because the White House is connected to the party committee, either the RRNC or the DNC, it is easier than when you can package all those things together and then big donors are willing to write the check. Because if that means you can go to the Christmas party because you wrote a big check to the RNC this year, then you're writing that check so that you and your wife, or your wife and you get that invitation. And so you often see, you can take a look at what happens post a presidential loss for the out party. Fundraising tends to be slow going into that midterm election. But my hope is, and the thoughts and if we look at the historical precedent, it will start to kick back up as we get a little closer and the donors start to pay more attention. But when you look at some of the other committees, there's definitely much more parity. And that's partly because, you know, you know, even as a minority party, you still have power Right. It's, it may be limited. You have power and people and donors are looking at the potential of you gaining more power, and so they're willing to make that bet. What does the DNC or the RNC have, have to give to a donor when they don't have the White House?
- [34:28]
Mark Halperin
Yeah. So are you, are you worried about, as you point out, as I said, there's some areas where the money is not that different or Democrats are even doing a little better. But in the areas where there's disparity, DNC versus RNC and the billionaire classes of both parties, are you worried about that disparity going into the midterms?
- [34:46]
Jamie Harrison
You know, I, I will worry about that disparity if I don't see fundraising pick up, say by June or July. Mark.
- [34:55]
Mark Halperin
All right, that's right around the corner. We'll check the numbers then.
- [34:57]
Jamie Harrison
But yeah, and it's still a trickle. But, but right now I'm not concerned because again, this is sort of on parity with where Tom Perez was, you know, coming off of the, the 2016 loss. It is on parity with some of the other chairs previously. So I'm not concerned at this point.
- [35:17]
Mark Halperin
Okay. The schedule, when I was a boy starting in the business, Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina were everything. And those voters in those three states, particularly Iowans and, and New Hampshire, your South Carolina as well, a disproportionate influence in the process. There was, every four years there was a debate that said, why should these states, particularly the Iowa, New Hampshire, unrepresentative of the party and of the country, very white, no big cities, et cetera, why should they have so much influence? And I always said, well, because I've been to those states and the voters there take it so seriously. You're not going to go to the 47 other states and have a mid level candidate town hall in the middle of a workday and have 100 people show up. And so there was a trade off. Those voters took it seriously. They got a lot of influence that has exploded now and the calendar is up for grabs, although all three of those states and the other states that have voted in the front of the process are all competing now. The DNC saying, given approval for 20 a dozen states to be early and there's going to be four or five states that go first. Okay. And historically there's some exceptions. Bill Clinton didn't win Iowa or New Hampshire, but he became the nominee. Joe Biden didn't win or Iowa, New Hampshire, he became the nominee, but historically in both parties, if you don't win either Iowa or New Hampshire, you're locked out. And, and it winnows the field. You got to, you got to be in a win place or show usually in order to get to go forward into the later states. So you can't overstate historically the importance of these early voting states. Now, this is an inside baseball thing, but, but it's really something I'd love to hear from you on as much as anybody I could ask. I don't hear much in the press or in my own reporting of the people who might run for president trying to affect which states are going to be picked. The DNC has a list of criteria. They say, here's what you need to be an early state. But if I were running for president or thinking about it, I'd want states to go early. That would be. I'd do better in. So my first question is, are you hearing this? Are you hearing anybody who's thinking of running that their operatives are working the DNC decision makers to try to get states that are favorable to them?
- [37:19]
Jamie Harrison
I, you know, Mark, I actually, if I were running for President, I would be doing that right now.
- [37:24]
Mark Halperin
Yeah. And, but it sounds like you haven't heard it either.
- [37:28]
Jamie Harrison
No, no, I haven't heard anybody sort of, you know, working, working the RBC to actually do it. And I think that's part of, part of the problem. And maybe it's not even a problem, but part of, I think the issue is that I don't think a lot of folks really understand the process as well as maybe you and I do.
- [37:52]
Mark Halperin
Right. To say. True.
- [37:55]
Jamie Harrison
And as a result of that, I mean, even. And you saw it in the discussion about, you know, when Joe Biden got out, like, well, you should have an open primary. Okay. There's two weeks before the Ohio deadline, right. To get on the ballot. All 50 states have already conducted their primaries. My question is who's going to pay for it?
- [38:16]
Mark Halperin
Right.
- [38:16]
Jamie Harrison
Who's going to pay for a primary in all 50 states? Because normally state. The states pay for their primaries. So are you saying the DNC then is going to underwrite a primary in.
- [38:26]
Mark Halperin
All 50 states with ballot integrity and efficient polling places?
- [38:32]
Jamie Harrison
And so one of the things is, Mark, I think in this process, more and more I understand that people don't understand the process. They really don't. They get a little bit of it and so then they take that little bit of it and they, they have all this conjecture about where things is and how it should work or how they want it to work. But when reality is here and your expectations or expectations, your expectations are here and the reality is here, they never meet and you're always going to be frustrated. So my thing to all of these folks is before you start pontificating about the process, understand the process, understand the rules, because those are the things, those are the boundaries in which you have to operate in. But if you, if you don't even understand the rules and you just want to make stuff up, you know it's, you're going to bound to be disappointed every single time.
- [39:23]
Mark Halperin
Couldn't agree more. And again, we're talking about very sophisticated people. Can't potential candidates, their advisors. But this group of people, Pete Buttigieg might run again and he's run before, but most of these would be first time candidates and they just don't understand it and it's complicated. You mentioned the rbc. That's the Democratic Party's Rules and Bylaws Committee. They're the ones who will decide the order of the calendar. And it's incredibly important. I'll say again, you can't overstate, at least historically, the importance of the early states in determining who the nominee will be. So this is a massive decision they're going to make. And of course they, they've said what their considerations are. Journalists and, and people who tell stories for a living will be disappointed if they pick a different set of dates and state order than the Republicans because we like to cover both races at the same time. And, and there's some value to that. You see the side by side and in states where, like New Hampshire where you can vote in either primary, it's interesting to see, you know, the sort of the, how you appeal to those swing voters, the independent voters. What's, if you have one, what's your prediction? What will be the early voting states? How will the DNC come down on this after a lot of more deliberation? Right. They're not supposed to decide. It's months away. But it's, it's the most important decision probably that will be made by anybody about who the nominee will be. So do you have a guess about which states will be early?
- [40:42]
Jamie Harrison
Yeah, I mean, and I have recommendations. I mean in the end of the day 2020 is going to be so important for the Democratic Party and, and this primary process. And I think given the stakes, Mark, my recommendation, if I were to chair right now, I'm not tinkering with it too much. You want to make sure that your battleground states or your, your early window States are ones that have been through the ringer. They understand how to conduct their primaries and how to conduct these things and, and it's probably not time to hand over the reins to a bunch of new states and rookies and. Because if you mess up.
- [41:26]
Mark Halperin
Yeah, man, that huge risk.
- [41:28]
Jamie Harrison
Huge, huge risk.
- [41:29]
Mark Halperin
So the early states traditionally have been Iowa, which, which is one of their problems. They screwed up the caucuses, and caucuses in general have fallen out of favor with the party for good reason. The notion that you can only vote in a two or three hour window at night if you're a nurse or, you know, working at the night shift at Walmart, crazy. So Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and then the state where. Las Vegas, Nevada. I can never pronounce Nevada. Nevada. Thank you. So your recommendation would be those four?
- [41:56]
Jamie Harrison
Well, well, at least the three. I mean, you know, Iowa is still up there. And I think Iowa is vying for, you know, the way the DNC has it, there's an eastern state, there's a Southern state, there's a western state and there's a Midwestern state. And so Iowa is vying against Michigan and Illinois for that Midwestern state slot. And I, and I'm totally fine. You know, I was doing some interesting things right now. I think, you know, their governor's race and their Senate race may be interesting. They got two congressional races. So I would be totally fine Iowa getting back into, in back into the window. I just, I'm not the biggest fan of the caucuses, though. And I get it. I know, you know the tradition of it. But like you said, you want to give people an opportunity to vote. And if your work schedule doesn't allow you to sit in a gym, you know, for three hours or four hours, that shouldn't mean that you shouldn't have the opportunity to pick the next person who will be the leader of the free. Next of the free world. So.
- [43:01]
Mark Halperin
And it could be work, could be child care. There could be, yeah, all kinds of things. So what about New Hampshire? New Hampshire insists on going first. Unless they'll go, they'll go after a caucus, but they won't go after another primary. Would you just let them go first?
- [43:13]
Jamie Harrison
No. I mean, and I love, you know, Ray Buckley, who's the chair of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, longtime chairs. He's the dean of all of the Democratic state party chairs. I love Ray, but, you know, my, my analogy of that is, you know, I got a kid that was in kindergarten, right? And if he wants to be the line leader every, every day and just because he says he's a line leader doesn't mean that he can be the line leader every day.
- [43:40]
Mark Halperin
Right, you say that, but let's extend the metaphor. Ray's position would be, if you don't name me the line leader, I'm just going to walk to the front of the line. And if the kid who's supposed to be the line leader moves in front of me, I'm just going to keep moving.
- [43:50]
Jamie Harrison
Well, guess what, Guess what. And then you go to time out, and then you. And, and then, you know, you don't get all of the accolades, and then, you know, the resources that we were able to. To send. Well, maybe you don't get that extra grant.
- [44:04]
Mark Halperin
All right, so we're going super inside baseball here. That's what party chairs have done. They've said to New Hampshire, you're. You're not going to get your delegates. Are not going to get all your delegates. And then they go first, and then. And then the dnc, they get all their delegates and the candidates all go. No one's ever boycotted a sanctioned Democratic primary, so why not just bow to reality? They're going to go first. There's some downsides. Just let them go first and not have all this drama.
- [44:28]
Jamie Harrison
So, Mark, what do you do if another state says, you know what, we're going to pass a law that says that we, we should go first. Now, how do you then decide between the two laws that say that we should go first?
- [44:38]
Mark Halperin
No state is as. No state is as chauvinistic and selfish as New Hampshire. No one's going to do it. No one's going to do it.
- [44:44]
Jamie Harrison
But, but regardless, you know, the states don't determine what we do as parties. And that's, that's the bottom line. That just because you want to doesn't mean that you will.
- [44:55]
Mark Halperin
Who's going to be first, second, third, and fourth?
- [44:58]
Jamie Harrison
I don't know. You know, it depends on the stomach that people have in terms of the rbc. The rbc. Very different RBC than the one that I had because Ken has added a lot more folks.
- [45:10]
Mark Halperin
It.
- [45:10]
Jamie Harrison
It is. Whereas it used to be like maybe 30 people, now it's about 50. And there are a lot of people.
- [45:16]
Mark Halperin
Who, I agree it's unpredictable. But I'm, I'm asking. Give me. I don't think anybody. I haven't heard anybody make this prediction in, in any format. So I'm asking you, make your prediction. I won't. I won't hold you to it strictly, but based on what you now know about the committee. It's different based on our agreement that the candidates don't seem to be trying to influence it. Give me your. What's the order the DNC is going to announce?
- [45:37]
Jamie Harrison
I am, and I'm a bit partial in this.
- [45:40]
Mark Halperin
Yeah.
- [45:41]
Jamie Harrison
I still think we go South Carolina first, New Hampshire, New Hampshire, Nevada second, third, and then either, my gut says either we bring Iowa back if they do a primary or it's Michigan.
- [45:57]
Mark Halperin
All right, so. And, and that. And the Midwest state is fourth.
- [46:00]
Jamie Harrison
Yes. Now there may be, there may be a stomach to add. The rules allow for a fifth to be added. And so there may be some, some, some notion that we should add a fifth state to the mix.
- [46:14]
Mark Halperin
Right.
- [46:15]
Jamie Harrison
And, and you know, North Carolina and Georgia are trying to vie for it, but the problem that they have and, and this is the difference between many of these other states and why South Carolina is so unique in this.
- [46:27]
Emma Jo Morris
Mark.
- [46:29]
Jamie Harrison
In South Carolina, the party chair gets to set the date for.
- [46:33]
Mark Halperin
Unilaterally.
- [46:34]
Jamie Harrison
Unilaterally without the legislature, without anybody else saying the party chair can set that date. But in North Carolina, in Georgia, they can't. They have to go through the legislature. And is the state willing to split up the Republican primary from the Democratic primary? In South Carolina, the primary is on different schedules because both party chairs can do it. And so again, it's, it's understanding the, the logistics. Just because you want to do it doesn't mean you can. And, and that is the part that the RBC is going to push these states on. Like. Yes, you're, what is the intention? Isn't North Carolina Republican Party, who controls the legislature actually going to allow North Carolina to move up? Why would.
- [47:21]
Mark Halperin
They're foolish to waste their time considering North Carolina and Georgia? Because I agree with you. They're just not going to make it happen. No, but, but I do think they'll be a fifth state because they're going to. Yes. The easiest way to kind of try to, you know, split the baby, if you will, is to, is to add a fifth in there. But I still want to see what New Hampshire does if they're not first, because they'll go, they'll go first before you go. And again, I want to keep talking about this with you because I don't understand it as well as you do, but I understand it decently and it's, it's so important and you understand it as well as anybody. So grateful to you for spending all the time on that and hope the nexters care and, and I should have said the top. The chairman is from South Carolina, so he's open about his biases. He thinks South Carolina should go first. And there you go, first in the nation. Given the weather and the quality of the food. I'm all good with South Carolina.
- [48:07]
Jamie Harrison
Well, and you know, most of the reporters want to come. They don't, they don't want to go to New Hampshire. They want to go down to Charleston. Shrimp and grits.
- [48:13]
Mark Halperin
And I love New Hampshire. I love South Carolina too. As we said, it's your birthday and we wanted to give you something special. And, and what could be more special than Jaime Moore, your friend and former advisor who's regular on two Way and, and we've come to just our community and two way just loves him so much. Uh, here's a little birthday greeting from your friend Jaime.
- [48:34]
Jaime Moore
Hey, Mr. Chairman, it's Jaime Moore, your good friend stopping by to wish you a happy 50th birthday. It was an honor to serve as your chief of staff. But more importantly, it was an honor to travel with this great country of ours with you hearing from everyday voters. And whether we were in Philly or Portland, we always found a good steakhouse. And so Mr. Chairman, I hope that you and Marie and the boys are somewhere eating a great steak today. Happy birthday.
- [48:57]
Jamie Harrison
Oh, I love that guy.
- [48:59]
Mark Halperin
That guy. I don't know how much influence you had on whether he came to you pre form but he is just a thoughtful, brilliant. He really is a man of such great integrity and spirit and character. And I'll credit you for at least some of it and consider that they blessing Mark.
- [49:13]
Jamie Harrison
I hope Jaime runs for something one day because he's just, he's top notch. I mean he really is and wonderful person and his home state of Louisiana would. They should really welcome him back home so, so that he can run because he would be a tremendous leader.
- [49:29]
Mark Halperin
I'm all for him running someday but I want him to have a good long run on two way first. So Mr. Chairman, grateful to you for spending time with us and love having you on. And again, go to. Go to where you get your podcast on YouTube at our table. Jamie Harrison. Great interviews and. And we two way. Our slogan is our tagline is conversations like no other. And. And. And that's what the chairman's conversations are. They really are. I like grateful to you for joining. Happy birthday to you. Thank you. To getting a full readout on what the wife and kids planned for you.
- [49:57]
Jamie Harrison
Thank you. Take care of yourself and, and thank you everybody.
- [50:00]
Mark Halperin
Thank you, Jamie. All right, Mr. Chairman. Goes. But next up, Emma Jo Morris, my friend, senior consultant at Beck and Stone, a longtime conservative commentator and journalist and co host on two Way of the Group Chat. Emma Jo is next up. Have you ever taken a look at the nutrition label? On a typical bag of chips you'll find pretty much a chemical cocktail. There's seed oils, msg, artificial dyes, vague references to natural flavors and ingredients that sound more like a science experiment than a healthy and delicious snack. Masa is redefining snacking now with real food. Their chips have just three ingredients organic corn, sea salt and 100% grass fed beef tallow. Clean, simple and tasty, Masa chips leave you satisfied and energized without the crash, bloat or sluggishness that typical chips can bring. No binging, no lingering hunger. Just a snack that feels and tastes very good. I love the lime. Lately they're the ones that are my go to. But they're all great flavors and if you love Masa then you'll love the Vandy Crisps. Vandy is Masa's sister company. They make three ingredient potato chips that are super delicious. My favorite flavor is the original. I'm kind of a classic guy. But you have other flavors that I bet you'd enjoy, including the smokehouse barbecue that I've been snacking on lately. If you're ready to give Masa or Vandy a try, use the promo code mark. It'll get you 25% off your first order at either masachips.com or vandycrisps.com or you can click on the video description or scan the QR code to claim this delicious offer. And if you want to buy them in person, not online, you can do that too. Masa and Betty are now available nationwide at your local Sprouts supermarket. Stop by now, grab a bag or two or three before they're sold out.
- [51:55]
Emirates Airline Announcer
There's so much more to enjoy when you fly in Emirates Economy More legroom, delicious regionally inspired meals, complimentary free flowing drinks and with the latest movies, TV shows, music and live sport, some of the best entertainment in the skies and our family services make your journey simple and fun. Plan your next trip and start the vacation early in Emirates Economy. Fly Emirates fly better.
- [52:23]
Commercial Announcer
Busy work weeks can leave you feeling drained. Prolon's five day fasting mimicking diet rejuvenates you at the cellular level, lets you enjoy real food and does not require an injection. Developed at USC's Longevity Institute, Prolon supports biological age reduction, metabolism, skin health and fat when combined with Proper exercise and nutrition get 15% off plus a $40 bonus gift when you subscribe@prolonlife.com PandoraProMo.
- [52:53]
Mark Halperin
All right, next up and joining me now, Emma Jo Morris, my friend. She's a senior consultant at Beck and Stone and a co host of the Group Chat on two way. So she's also my colleague. Emma Jo, what up with the group chat?
- [53:07]
Emma Jo Morris
We're going to be on today, so I don't know yet. We're later today, but you'll have to tune in and find out.
- [53:12]
Mark Halperin
Explain been more generally just explain the concept to people.
- [53:15]
Emma Jo Morris
Oh well, I hope that everybody who watches Mark Halpern content is also tuned into Mark Halperin's child. The group chat on 2way, which is where I and colleagues who all come from different places on the political spectrum get together to talk about the week's news and fight, but with peace, love and understanding woven throughout each line.
- [53:39]
Mark Halperin
And like all two way programs, you take questions from the community and it's yes, it's, you guys have executed what the original vision was, which is all voices under one roof, spirited conversations, disagreements, but everybody's friendly about it and anybody can raise their hand and ask a question. 4:00pm Eastern Time live and then of course on demand on YouTube, etc.
- [53:59]
Emma Jo Morris
Thank you. Yes, I'm too humble to be that that blatantly self promoting, but you can do it.
- [54:04]
Mark Halperin
It's my job. One of the things you guys talk about a lot, you have been and of course everybody has who talks for a living about this stuff is immigration. Is, is the, is the, is what's happening in Minnesota. What impact does that have on, on the national debate over these issues, not just about ICE enforcement, but about questions about who should be deported. You know, you've got people, everybody agrees the violent criminals who came to the country illegal should be deported. And then you've got people who say nobody should be deported and then most people in the middle. So how do you see what's happening in Minnesota impacting that debate about who should be deported?
- [54:42]
Emma Jo Morris
No, I don't think, you know, I was about to, I was about to jump in. I had to restrain myself to disagree with you when you originally just said that everyone agrees that criminals should be deported because that's apparently not true according to Chuck Schumer the other day. But yeah, you know, I think that this, this, this ongoing issue in Minnesota and this ongoing conflict between Minnesota's elected government, local government and protesters on the street there really highlights this, I think central clash in American politics, which is not about who should be deported or whatever. It's a sovereignty question. Because according to Jacob Fry and according to Tim Waltz, although they won't say this explicitly, I think that this is implied by their defiance of ICE and federal immigration law is that they don't believe anybody should be deported and therefore don't believe in borders. And I think that that is the central issue dividing the right and the left. And the central issue perhaps defining domestic politics right now and the political like debate is, is, are we a country with borders? And I thought that, you know, I thought that this was such an easy question to answer and that it was answered 10 years ago in 2016, when Trump was first elected on this central, basically campaign issue. But no, because, because the original request by ice, obviously, if you have a long memory, was to go into the jails in Minnesota and do deportations via jails. And that was rejected. And so then they were forced to go door to door and operate on the street, which was then how you got the venue for all these protests and some unfortunate incidents that have come of them. But I don't think that this is even that sane of a debate where we're talking about criminals being deported, of course, and then we can quibble and about the dreamers. That's not what's going on.
- [56:33]
Mark Halperin
Okay, let me give. I, I normally eschew hypotheticals, but on this topic, I'm big into hypotheticals. So you're the head of ice, and you've got a giant van that can hold vans that can hold 400 people. So there's no capacity question. And you get a tip that there's a, there's a meatpacking plant in Iowa and there's 200 people working at that plant. And 90, 98 of them are in the country illegally. And they've been here a long time. They're members of their community in good standing. They've committed no crimes whatsoever. But 98 of the company's 200 workers are here. They came here illegally. They, they've got no, no, no status that entitles them to stay in this country. Would you drive by the plant, pick up them all and deport them?
- [57:19]
Emma Jo Morris
Well, if I'm, that if I'm an ICE employee or the head of ice, I guess I have to execute the law. So that would mean the answer to that question is yes, our law actually doesn't have. Which people don't maybe realize that our law doesn't have like a little, like sub, sub point that says you have to have committed a second Crime. That cactus.
- [57:40]
Mark Halperin
Understood, Understood. And so you're the head of ice, and, and you get this tip and it's like, okay, let's go do it. And then you get a call from Susie Wiles that says the President's friend owns that plant. And the President's friend thinks if you take 98 workers away, they'll go out of business. And we don't think that plant produces a lot of valuable to the economy. So go find some violent criminals to deport. If you were the head of ice, what would you tell her?
- [58:08]
Emma Jo Morris
That's not the law. I don't think that that's the position of the people who elected Donald Trump. Obviously. I can't imagine what it would be like to have to answer to Susie Wild. Perhaps I'd be a little more polite than I am in real life when I'm with you just hanging out. But that's not the position of the voters at all. The position of voters with mass deportations and actually, despite the emotional blackmail that we're seeing being ginned up on the streets, in the cities and sanctuary cities, the numbers haven't moved on that most people and that doesn't discriminate by demographic, by the way, the mass deportation agenda.
- [58:44]
Mark Halperin
But if you're right that the public is basically like, you don't need to be a rapist or a murderer, if you're here illegally, you should be deported. If you're right, why, when the President and Tom Homan, when they're asked about it and most spokespeople in the administration, they say worst of the worst. Our focus is on the worst of the worst. They try to fudge this question by making it seem like they're only focused on violent criminals. When you're saying, it seems to me what their policy should be is, well, we may start with the worst of the worst, but we're not going to rest till we've deported 20 million people. They're saying the opposite of that. They're fudging it up. If the position you have is so popular, why aren't they embracing it more in a more full throated way?
- [59:26]
Emma Jo Morris
Well, I don't think that, I think that Trump tries to hedge. I think that Trump as a person, and I think you would agree cares very much about what the hostile, dishonest, disingenuous, fake media says about him. Still, you know, that's part of who he is and it's something that we haven't been able to shake out of it. So he'll hedge for, I think to appease the media. But Homan doesn't.
- [59:50]
Mark Halperin
Well, maybe he's doing it partly for the media, but he's doing it partially for his friends who work in hospitality and ag, who say this will be ruinous to the economy. So it's not just maybe.
- [60:01]
Emma Jo Morris
But J.D. vance, who I think has pretty good authority, just spoke with your colleague Megyn Kelly in an excellent, fascinating interview. And he was, it really is. They were both like, I think actually like, they were both so good. But anyway, he was just talking about how this is just the beginning and she pressed him on this, actually saying, you know, well, not this specifically, but she said, hey, it's been kind of slow, which I loved. It's been kind of slow. Then we got to get those numbers up. Those are rookie numbers. And he acknowledged that and agreed and was talking about how they've done, you know, they've inherited such a, a skeletal kind of immigration enforcement team and how they are building it up and ramping it up and in process training agents right now. So, you know, maybe you could say, like, I think that when Trump's sitting with NBC or whatever, he's maybe feeling a certain way and having that convergence conducting the conversation in a way where he's thinking about obviously his political capital, his pr, whatever, and obviously the tension in that conversation. But you have JD Talking to Megan literally on the same day, being like, no, no, no, this is just, this is, we're just beginning.
- [61:11]
Mark Halperin
Yeah. All right. We could talk about immigration the whole time, but we're not. Let's talk about J.D. vance. I'm the king of transition because I want to ask you about this. I feel like three things have happened with J.D. vance of late that have taken some of the luster off what I thought was going to be a cakewalk to the nomination in 2028. Number one, he's really inflamed a lot of supporters of Israel in the United States. He's really, they're practically calling him an anti Semite. And some are because of various things he's done on social media and in interviews, which they contend shows insufficient support for Israel and insufficient concern for anti Semitism. Number two, some donors have, and politicians who previously only sang his praises are now saying that in private, they find him a little bit smarmy, they find him a little bit fake, they find him a little bit non commanding in a way that makes some of them say, maybe I'll support him for president, but maybe I won't. And then number three, in interviews and on X, he is, he is often sarcastic, vituperative, negative, condescending. And some people are just saying, like, that's just not a good look for a guy who's supposed to be if he's going to get a third term for Trump, Vance is supposed to be a little bit kinder, gentler than Trump is and that he's acting, you know, as, as negative as Trump. Are those three things, things you're hearing? And, and what about the overall thesis? Has he lost some luster as a, as a member of the administration, but, but also as a 2028 candidate?
- [62:48]
Emma Jo Morris
So I do think that those are probably the three main criticisms. And as you do so well, this is like your best quality, I think, as, as a broadcaster and as a good at synthesizing information perfectly and crystallizing it perfectly.
- [63:02]
Mark Halperin
That is what I would better than my hair.
- [63:06]
Emma Jo Morris
It's close. But that I think is probably the three main points that if you had to collect little stray data over the last few months about JD I think you're right. Yes. But I don't agree that these are dinging him for his 28 nomination. And I'll go through the list that you just said and explain why the anti Semitism, anti Israel. I think that this is somewhat of an online discourse zeitgeist that we're in and that I actually think we're tapering out of for a couple reasons. But in terms of its relevance in 2028 and even its relevance right now, I mean, and this is kind of, by the way, just I hate doing this and I find this spiritually leftist of me, but I'm going to anyway. I'm Jewish and a Zionist.
- [63:57]
Mark Halperin
Yeah.
- [63:57]
Emma Jo Morris
Just to say that at the outset, I do not think that Israel is an important issue. I just don't. And the level of passion with which he speaks about Israel, I don't think that that's a real thing. I'm a Zionist and a Jew. I'm also a parent of one kid and a second kid coming. I'm also living in a major city, trying to afford a home, trying to afford my life, trying to afford school. And the amount of minutes I spent thinking about Israel in my life is just so negligible that I couldn't even name like one minute, like one full minute.
- [64:35]
Mark Halperin
Hold on. Just let me, let me just clarify, though. I totally take the point you just made. You're saying for people in the real world, not the online world, not commentators at Commentary, this is not an issue that's going to decide whether J.D. vance is the Republican nominee. Or president. But what about the judgment that some are making that because of his affiliation with Tucker and because of some of the things he said and hasn't said, that he is legitimately open to the charge, if not of anti Semitism, of being far too concerned about projecting support for Israel and for Jews. Is that on the merits? Leaving the politics aside, is that something you see as a legitimate line of point of view regarding J.D. vance?
- [65:15]
Emma Jo Morris
I mean, listen, I wish, including you, all my friends who were just by means of being friends with me, shared my radical ideology, but unfortunately that is not the case. I don't think that any serious and reasonable person believes that being friends with somebody who has a certain ideology or certain opinions means that that imbues the friend with their opinions. I don't think that JD Max is also seen as like some sort of vulnerable, you know, easily persuadable, like flower that he hangs out with Tucker and all of a sudden he's like an impressionable teenage girl. That's just not realistic.
- [65:51]
Mark Halperin
Okay, all right, so number two is this question of whether he's, he's rubbing people the wrong way through being smarmy or, or, you know, not, it's just not in these private meetings. He's just not being given great reviews for how he's coming across.
- [66:09]
Emma Jo Morris
Yeah, I, I, so I don't, I don't know, I don't hang out with him in private. I think that you could of say that he has like kind of a contemptuous tone when he's in interviews sometimes, but that's also when he's in an interview with a hostile journalist. And that is one of the things that MAGA loves about him actually is that he has this ability to reject the fake frame that the journalist puts on him in the way that they pose the questions. And so reject that frame, break the frame and then shut them down and answer on his terms. He's excellent at that. And we saw that at the debate, the vice presidential debate. The whole world got to see it in the way that he handled that and wiped the floor with Tim Walsh, obviously ended up winning the election with Trump. But that is one of his biggest strengths. He cannot turn off the contempt and the snide tone with people who, frankly, again, according to the people who align with his worldview and feel attacked by these people, think that they deserve it. And if you see him again, like to bring up the Megyn Kelly interview just because it happened yesterday. So it's fresh in my mind when he's hanging out with somebody who isn't antagonizing him. Clearly, he's super chill. Like, listening to that felt like listening to two friends just having a conversation. So I don't think it's fair to say that he's smarmy. He is smarmy when people are smarmy to him.
- [67:35]
Jamie Harrison
Yeah.
- [67:36]
Mark Halperin
Well, he did say in one of his interviews yesterday, I can't remember if it's the one with Megan or with Daily Mail, he did call Don Lemon the dumbest person on television.
- [67:46]
Emma Jo Morris
I think that was with Megan. Is he wrong? I mean, and then he corrected himself to say not on television anymore.
- [67:52]
Mark Halperin
Right. All right, let me. Let me ask you this, because I want to jump around a little bit because I want to hear from you on different stuff. If immigration obviously is not a divide within the Republican Party right now, there's pretty broad consensus about what, what, what should happen both in Minnesota and more generally. What are the. For. For you, what are meaningful divisions in the conservative movement within MAGA now on ideas? Are there any. Are there fissures that you think matter and are interesting and important to talk about?
- [68:21]
Emma Jo Morris
Listen, I think that there's a delicate. There's a delicate coalition being held together by a leader who is very strong. I think that because there is a very strong leader that is President Trump right now, the Republican or MAGA party coalition, whatever base, is pretty much okay. The main issue which we already touched on, I think that's the main dividing issue right now, is like Zionism and opinion on Israel. But thank God that issue isn't, I don't think, again, a real issue that's going to have people sitting at home in the same way it may on the Democrat side. They're very interested in Gaza in a way that I don't think Republicans are in Israel. That said, it's a tenuous position, because if there is not a strong leader, I think that there is total possibility for that to fall apart. And we saw a glimpse of it when Charlie died, when he got murdered. And all of a sudden, there was a big, big piece that was taken out of the Jenga Tower and a lot of pieces, I think, got wobbly or fell. Leadership is really important. And you're seeing that in the Democrat side, where they have a lack of leadership, a leadership vacuum, and they're directionless, hapless, and at each other's throats. I think that the Republican Party is equally vulnerable to that. But as of right now, I don't think that we have meaningful divisions. I don't think we have divisions where I'm nervous, like, oh, God, we're going to have a third of people staying home if this isn't. If this isn't danced around or fixed. No, I don't think that that issue exists. We are big on sovereignty, immigration, security.
- [70:06]
Mark Halperin
I give you a magic wand, and it can perform two functions. You can change one Trump administration policy and you can change one aspect of Donald Trump's behavior. What do you do with your magic wand on those two fronts?
- [70:18]
Emma Jo Morris
Whoa. The immigration. Sorry. The administration is doing really quite well. I think that they're doing so well within the realm of things that they have power over. I guess I wouldn't change a. Probably change a line of sight or a direction that they're looking. I think that up until now, the first year has been very much preoccupied with foreign policy, and that foreign policy, for the most part, has been strong. But I wish that just, even, just the conversation, even if they don't have the power necessarily to do things unilaterally without Congress, that they would just focus a little bit more on domestic issues. Maybe a lot more on domestic issues. Iran is interesting if you're kind of in this bourgeois position to sit and in your leisure time think about things. But this is something that is interesting to somebody who doesn't have that leisure time and doesn't have that luxury. And in terms of if I could change one behavior from Trump, I also think I touched on it. I think his stomach turns a little bit. He gets squeamish from bad press, and he does withstand a lot of bad press. But there are certain things that I think he still gets sensitive to. And I wish that I could just cut the cords on all of the TVs at the White House and maybe dismantle his Internet a little bit. Not because I don't want him posting, because I love his posting, but I don't want him seeing all this, all the Democrat, like, snuff footage that they're putting out of the immigration enforcement, because it's meant to scare people and it scares even him. And I understand why. But we must have the fortitude and the will to continue on what the mandate of the people was.
- [71:54]
Mark Halperin
All right, I don't like to see anybody get fired. But another hypothetical, the president said, imogen, I'm going to get rid of a Cabinet member because I think I need to start making changes. Who should I get rid of and why? What Cabinet member would you tell them to get rid of?
- [72:08]
Emma Jo Morris
Wow. It's tough. Honestly, I'm pretty impressed. I'm pretty impressed with everything going on, maybe I would say I don't love Kristi Noem. I think it's a little too glam and a little, not enough substance and not enough pushing. She has, she has the main role here and I don't like the ride along camera stuff. It's too cute.
- [72:36]
Mark Halperin
I'm not recommending this. But you're perfectly happy with Secretary Kennedy.
- [72:41]
Emma Jo Morris
Super. Oh, he's one of my favorites.
- [72:43]
Mark Halperin
Tell me why.
- [72:46]
Emma Jo Morris
Because he's been so dedicated to exactly the Maha promise. He has. Totally. I mean the amount of vaccines that we had was, was terrifying frankly. It was terrifying. And the opacity at the CDC in terms of why we had all of those vaccines for babies was terrifying. And he has completely broken this fake consensus that we had no visibility on, on, on that. And that was like I think the main reason he was elected. What was the second elected whatever that he became so popular. What was the second one which was the food and the food supply. He has, he has gone crazy on that. Actually flipped the pyramid upside down. Like literally done a 180 and, and, and so much of private industry is responding to him. Walmart is responding to him. Nestle is responding to him. These are incredible gains taking out things that are just garbage in the food just for no reason. Just garbage to cheapen the food. No, like he, he's been, that's excellent nutrition and, and quality of, of like chemical intake I think are probably the two main health points that we, that we could, could look at and if we're serious people. And he has been tackling both of them. And, and by the way, another thing that I'm really impressed with that he seems to be pursuing alongside these like kind of concrete deliverables or he's now going back retroactively checking for the politicization of past guidance and past data. If you saw like the health guidelines that they just put out, it changed on a lot of things. And now they're going to go back and do like kind of like an audit of why was the direction the way it was given that it's wrong. How did that happen? And that's going to be fascinating.
- [74:34]
Mark Halperin
All right. My friend Emma Jo Morris, who is an uncloseted fan of Democrats Bobby Kennedy running Love Love. Okay Emma Jo, you can see her every Thursday, 4pm Eastern Time on Two Way. Watch it on YouTube, listen to it on Spotify or Apple. It's a great show. We're very happy to have Emma Jo and her colleagues as part of the network. So go every Thursday or Watch it on Demand, the group chat. Emma, Joe, thank you. Great to see you.
- [74:59]
Emma Jo Morris
Thank you so much for having me. Thank you.
- [75:01]
Mark Halperin
We'll see you soon. All right, that's it for today's program. Grateful to you for joining us. Another program coming on Tuesday, this one's available to you now. Now listen to it as a podcast or watch it on YouTube. Tell all your friends we need more Nexters. The Nexter community must grow. We want to be bigger than Greenland times 100. That's our goal. So subscribe on YouTube, subscribe as a podcast, listen, share, etc. Have a great weekend and we'll see you on Tuesday. Watch all I listen all the time so you always know what's coming. Next up.
- [75:39]
Emirates Airline Announcer
There's so much more to enjoy when you fly in Emirates Economy More legroom, delicious regionally inspired meals, complimentary free flowing drinks and with the latest movies, TV shows, music and live sport, some of the best entertainment in the sky and our family services make your journey simple and fun. Plan your next trip and start the vacation early in Emirates Economy. Fly Emirates Fly better.