Donald Trump’s America

Summary

Episode Summary: "Donald Trump’s America"

The Daily by The New York Times delves deep into the seismic shifts in the American political landscape following Donald Trump’s remarkable electoral victory over Kamala Harris. Hosted by Michael Barbaro alongside journalists Nate Cohn and Peter Baker, this episode dissects the factors contributing to Trump’s widespread support and explores the potential long-term implications for American politics.

---

1. Election Night Reactions and Initial Observations

The episode opens with a vibrant depiction of election night, capturing the jubilant responses of Trump supporters. Listeners are introduced to personal reactions, such as Michael Barbaro's expression of relief and triumph:

• Michael Barbaro [00:31]: "Daddy's home, baby. Welcome back, Donald J. Trump. The results of the election are amazing and just and the real, true voice of the people. I'm excited, jubilant."

Contrastingly, voices like Meredith Turner from Virginia convey fear and apprehension about the future under Trump’s leadership:

• Meredith Turner [01:30]: "I’m heartbroken and I’m terrified."

2. Nate Cohn’s Analysis: The Breadth of Trump’s Victory

Nate Cohn provides a comprehensive breakdown of Trump’s unprecedented gains across diverse demographic groups and regions, emphasizing the depth and breadth of his support.

a. Shifts in the Latino Vote

One of the standout revelations is Trump’s significant traction within the Latino community—a demographic traditionally leaning Democratic:

• Nate Cohn [03:53]: "The exit poll found that Harris only won the Hispanic vote 52 to 46. That is the best result for a Republican."
• Michael Barbaro [04:37]: "And suddenly Trump not only best Kamala Harris, but by 15 points by a lot. Wow."

The discussion highlights key counties like Starr County in South Texas, where Trump overturned decades of Democratic dominance:

• Nate Cohn [04:14]: "Trump won by more than 15 points in a place that Obama was winning 80% of the vote just a few years ago."

b. Gains Among Arab American and Muslim Voters

Trump’s appeal extended to Muslim and Arab American voters, notably in Dearborn, Michigan:

• Nate Cohn [05:14]: "Donald Trump won it 42 to 36 with Jill Stein getting 18. Joe Biden won Dearborn, 69 to 30 four years ago."

This represents a stark shift, flipping the county from a Biden stronghold to a Trump victory by a significant margin.

c. Unexpected Strength in Blue States

Trump made surprising inroads in traditionally Democratic strongholds:

• Nate Cohn [05:45]: "Trump made big gains in blue America, including where we are right now in New York City."
• Michael Barbaro [07:11]: "Latino voters show up for Trump in a huge, and I think we are safe in saying historic way for a Republican."

Upcoming battlegrounds like New Jersey and Illinois exhibited narrowing margins, showcasing Trump’s ability to penetrate deeply Democratic regions.

d. A Unified Electoral Shift

Cohn underscores that Trump’s victory wasn’t confined to specific demographics but was a nationwide phenomenon:

• Nate Cohn [07:46]: "Donald Trump made inroads among almost every group and in almost every county and almost every region."

This widespread support suggests that Trump’s appeal transcended traditional political boundaries, indicating a fundamental shift in voter sentiment.

3. The Grand Theory: Dissatisfaction with the Status Quo

When pressed for the underlying reason behind Trump's broad support, Cohn posits a straightforward yet profound theory:

• Nate Cohn [08:53]: "Voters wanted change. They were deeply dissatisfied with the status quo. They were deeply dissatisfied with the president and the economy, and they were not willing to send the vice president back into the White House as a result."

This dissatisfaction cut across all demographics, making Trump’s victory a reflection of widespread desire for change rather than support from a niche group.

4. Political Realignment: A Lasting Transformation?

Michael Barbaro introduces the concept of political realignment, questioning whether Trump’s success signifies a fundamental and enduring shift in American politics.

• Michael Barbaro [14:51]: "Trump seems to have done so much better with so many different groups, is that realignment?"

Nate Cohn responds by considering both the immediate election and the broader trajectory across multiple election cycles:

• Nate Cohn [15:07]: "I can definitely see the case for that, especially if we're only looking at the 24 election in isolation."
• Nate Cohn [15:34]: "If we step back and take the three Trump elections together, 16, 20, and 24, I think there's a real case that we have witnessed a Trump realignment."

Cohn argues that Trump has redefined the Republican Party from a conventional conservative entity to a radical, anti-establishment force, attracting a coalition that includes working-class Black and Hispanic voters and younger demographics who were previously opposed to Trump.

5. Peter Baker’s Insights: Trump’s Enduring Legacy

Peter Baker expands on the implications of Trump’s victory, drawing historical parallels and contemplating Trump’s unique position in American politics.

a. Comparing Trump to Historical Figures

Baker acknowledges that while comparisons to figures like Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) or Ronald Reagan are tempting, Trump’s influence is distinct:

• Peter Baker [24:51]: "Trump is very sui generis here."

He suggests that Trump's dominance has reshaped the Republican Party and the broader political discourse in ways unprecedented in recent history.

b. Trump’s Extended Influence

Baker highlights how Trump’s influence is projected to extend beyond his presidency, potentially affecting American politics for up to 12 years—a span longer than traditional two-term presidencies:

• Peter Baker [21:58]: "The Trump era isn't over. It's gonna go on for another four years. It will last basically at least 12 years between the time he takes the office the first time and assuming he finishes the second term."

c. The Unique Nature of Trump’s Political Brand

Trump’s brand of politics, characterized by nationalist, protectionist, and nativist sentiments, coupled with culture war issues, sets him apart from past political leaders:

• Peter Baker [25:53]: "His conservatism is nationalist and Protestant, protectionist and isolationist and nativist, all of these things. At the same time, it's culture war and appealing to those who feel like the country has drifted away from what they remember it being."

6. The Path Forward: Implications for American Democracy

The episode concludes with reflections on what Trump’s victory means for the future of American democracy and policy:

• Peter Baker [26:22]: "He existed to rewrite our understanding of the politics of America, rewritten our understanding of the electorate, rewritten our understanding of our place in the world."

The discussion raises critical questions about the durability of this political realignment and whether Trump’s influence will persist long after his presidency, shaping policies and the national conversation for years to come.

7. Closing Remarks and Election Aftermath

In the final moments, the episode touches on Vice President Harris’s concession speech and the broader political landscape:

• Meredith Turner [29:28]: "This is not a time to throw up our hands. This is a time to roll up our sleeves. This is a time to organize, to mobilize, and to stay engaged..."

Barbaro underscores the significance of Republicans potentially controlling every major power lever in Washington, setting the stage for future political dynamics.

---

Notable Quotes:

• Michael Barbaro [00:31]: "Daddy's home, baby. Welcome back, Donald J. Trump."
• Meredith Turner [01:30]: "I’m heartbroken and I’m terrified."
• Nate Cohn [03:53]: "Harris only won the Hispanic vote 52 to 46."
• Nate Cohn [08:53]: "Voters wanted change. They were deeply dissatisfied with the status quo."
• Peter Baker [25:53]: "His conservatism is nationalist and Protestant, protectionist and isolationist and nativist."
• Peter Baker [21:58]: "The Trump era isn't over. It's gonna go on for another four years."

---

This episode of The Daily provides a thorough examination of Donald Trump’s unexpected and extensive electoral support, challenging longstanding narratives about his political viability and hinting at profound shifts within the American political system. Through insightful analysis and compelling narratives, Barbaro and his guests illuminate the complexities of Trump’s influence and the potential pathways forward for the United States.

Transcript

[Ava]

Amgen, a leading biotechnology company, needed a global financial company to facilitate funding and acquisition to broaden Amgen's therapeutic reach, expand its pipeline and accelerate bringing new and innovative medicines to patients in need globally. They found that partner in Citi, whose seamlessly connected banking markets and services businesses can advise finance and close deals around the world. Learn [e-mail] clientstories My name is Ava.

[Michael Barrow]

I live in Atlanta, Georgia. I am 33 years old and I am so relieved. Daddy's home, baby. Welcome back, Donald J. Trump. The results of the election are amazing and just and the real, true voice of the people. I'm excited, jubilant.

[Ava]

I feel a sense of pride in my country.

[Peter Baker]

It just feels like a heavy burden has been lifted off of me.

[Michael Barrow]

Last night, it was like finally earning.

[Peter Baker]

A certain type of respect. It was redemption. Wars are going to finally end, and America will be back on the hands of Americans again.

[Nate Cohn]

I feel like God answered our prayers.

[Michael Barrow]

I feel like God's giving us another chance.

[Ava]

My name's Meredith Turner. I live in Virginia, and I'm heartbroken and I'm terrified.

[Michael Barrow]

I'm feeling more than just sad. I'm scared. I'm worried for my patients who might not be able to be covered under the Affordable Care Act. I'm so surprised.

[Nate Cohn]

I really thought that we were ready to move on from the sky. I feel like I'm out of touch with America.

[Michael Barrow]

I guess the opposite is true.

[Nate Cohn]

More people love him than ever.

[Michael Barrow]

I just feel like I don't know this country anymore. From the New York Times, I'm Michael Barrow. This is the Daily. On Wednesday, Americans began to absorb, celebrate and mourn the reality of a second Trump presidency and the sheer scale of his victory over Kamala Harris. Today, my colleagues Nate Cohn and Peter Baker on the voting blocks that Trump conquered and the legacy he has redefined. It's Thursday, November 7th. Nate, welcome back to the same studio where we spoke. It feels like just a few hours ago.

[Nate Cohn]

It really doesn't feel like it's been long at all.

[Michael Barrow]

No. And I think the lack of sleep confuses the chronology even more. I want to talk to you about what we didn't get around to talking about in our conversation in the wee hours of Wednesday morning.

[Nate Cohn]

The one I walked out of, the.

[Michael Barrow]

One you walked out of because you needed to call Pennsylvania. We just didn't have a lot of granular data that took us under the hood of Trump's victory. So that's what we want to do with you now and understand, really the sweep of his Victory in the smallest possible details. So where do you want to start?

[Nate Cohn]

Well, Donald Trump made large gains in places all over the country. He made large gains with many, in fact, most demographic groups. One example is the Latino vote. Overall, the exit poll found that Harris only won the Hispanic vote 52 to 46. That is the best result for a Republican. Since we have been asking about Hispanic ethnicity in exit poll data. There's a county in South Texas called Starr county, it's almost entirely Latino, where Trump won by more than 15 points in a place that Obama was winning 80% of the vote just a few years ago and where Democrats have won in every election since the 19th century. As long as we have election results.

[Michael Barrow]

And suddenly Trump not only best Kamala Harris, but by 15 points by a lot. Wow.

[Nate Cohn]

Miami Dade County, Trump won by 11. That's a place where Hillary won by 30 just a few years ago.

[Michael Barrow]

That's extraordinary.

[Nate Cohn]

It's a huge shift.

[Michael Barrow]

Hillary won by 30, Trump wins by 11. And I'm not so good at math, but that's a 40 point swing.

[Nate Cohn]

You've got it. It's a huge swing. It's the sort of swing that in a polarized country, you might think isn't possible, and yet it happens.

[Michael Barrow]

So Latino voters show up for Trump in a huge, and I think we are safe in saying historic way for a Republican.

[Nate Cohn]

Yes. And it's part of why Trump did so well in Texas and Florida. And the next group I think we should talk about might be Muslim or Arab American voters. Dearborn, Michigan, a place where Arab Americans represent a larger share of the population than anywhere else in the country. Donald Trump won it 42 to 36 with Jill Stein getting 18. Joe Biden won Dearborn, 69 to 30.

[Michael Barrow]

Wow.

[Nate Cohn]

Four years ago. So we can do our quick math of 39 plus 6. That's a 45 point swing in Dearborn.

[Michael Barrow]

In which Donald Trump gains among Arab American. Muslim American voters, we have to suspect because of the protest vote against the sitting Vice president for the Biden administration's policy towards Palestinians.

[Nate Cohn]

That's exactly right. To me, maybe the next most surprising area of strength is just in general in the blue states. When Donald Trump won in 2016, there was something fundamentally narrow about it. It was just concentrated on white working class voters in the Midwest. And if you were in a highly educated metropolitan area, you might have thought Hillary Clinton was going to win decisively.

[Michael Barrow]

Right.

[Nate Cohn]

And you were surprised on election night. This time, Trump made big gains in blue America, including where we are right now in New York City. And in New York State, where right now Kamala Harris is only winning by 12 points.

[Michael Barrow]

You say only 12 points. What's the.

[Nate Cohn]

Biden won by 23, just over the river. In New Jersey right now, Kamala Harris is only up by four, closer than Arizona and Nevada. If we were redrawing the battleground map, New Jersey has as good of a case as some of the states that the candidates have been visiting over and over again. The margin right now is 8 points in Illinois, and she's only up by 17 points right now in her own home state. In California, Donald Trump made big gains in the sort of places that seem to be the heart of the opposition to him four and eight years ago.

[Michael Barrow]

So overall, what seem to be the kinds of gains that rewrite a party's and a candidate's relationship with the electorate, with entire ethnic groups and entire regions of the country?

[Nate Cohn]

Yes. But I have to say that I am more struck by the breadth of Donald Trump's gains than I am by any narrow breakthroughs that he made among particular demographic groups. Donald Trump gained almost everywhere. If you go to the New York Times results page, we have this map that shows where places shifted from 2020.

[Michael Barrow]

Right.

[Nate Cohn]

It's a series of red arrows, red arrows if it's towards Trump, blue arrows if it's towards Harris, everywhere's red. I mean, there are a handful of exceptions, especially in the sparsely populated west, but this is an election where Donald Trump made inroads among almost every group and in almost every county and almost every region. And that tells me that Donald Trump was propelled by something that's equally broad, something that cut through across demographic lines, that this wasn't a story fundamentally about narrow demographic changes or groups, but instead something, I think that to explain what happened, you need something that explains all of these shifts. And I think it's harder to do that if you focus your explanation on, well, what caused the Hispanic vote to shift or what caused New Jersey to shift. There was something that was doing it everywhere.

[Michael Barrow]

A grander theory.

[Nate Cohn]

A grander theory. And based on the doubt, the theory resonated somewhat differently from different groups. But a lot of it has to be coming from the same thing for the same pattern to emerge more or less everywhere.

[Michael Barrow]

Okay, so now that you've brought us to this stage, please lift the curtain, give us the grand theory.

[Nate Cohn]

It's not too grand. I think it's pretty simple that this comes down to some of the most basic, fundamental things about how elections work. Voters wanted change. They were deeply dissatisfied with the status quo. They were Deeply dissatisfied with the president and the economy, and they were not willing to send the vice President back into the White House as a result. And just to put a fine point on it, no party has ever retained the White House when so many voters disapprove of the president and think the country is heading in the wrong direction.

[Michael Barrow]

Never.

[Nate Cohn]

Never. Now, there were plausible reasons to think that the opposition to Donald Trump was so strong that Democrats could defy political gravity. That was a plausible theory for what would happen in this election.

[Michael Barrow]

Listening to you say this, it doesn't make a lot of sense that Democrats were so confident that this was plausible, but they were pretty confident, or at least they acted like they were very confident. Where do you think that confidence came from, given the rules of political gravity you just described?

[Nate Cohn]

I think it all goes back to the midterms.

[Michael Barrow]

To 2022.

[Nate Cohn]

To 2022. Because the Democrats seem to defy political gravity in that election. You may remember that was supposed to be the red wave. Biden's approval rating was bad in that election. Midterms are usually bad for the party.

[Michael Barrow]

In fact, inflation was happening in that election.

[Nate Cohn]

But the Democrats were competitive in the House and they swept key Senate race after key Senate race where the Republicans had nominated MAGA backed candidates, stopped the steel candidates, the Kerry Lakes. Right, the Kerry Lakes of the world candidates who Democrats thought and who, frankly I also thought were basically akin to Donald Trump. And so the implication was that voters dislike Donald Trump and the MAGA movement so much in the wake of January 6th in the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade, that Donald Trump or his allies would not be able to win even the most classic battleground states, even in an environment where they really ought to win. And I think that outcome is behind a lot of the assumptions that people made about the 2024 campaign.

[Michael Barrow]

And the assumption was that even against some pretty serious economic headwinds, a Trump style candidate, thus perhaps Trump himself would not prevail, given the baggage of Roe and January 6th.

[Nate Cohn]

That's right. And it seemed very plausible in the wake of the midterms, and especially when Donald Trump was looking ahead to the next two years of criminal indictments and so on. But that's not the way that it turned out.

[Michael Barrow]

And why, I mean, if the lesson of 2022 was mistaken, where did it go? Sideways.

[Nate Cohn]

I think that the core mistake was in drawing an equivalence between Donald Trump and the Kerry Lakes or Doug Mastrianos.

[Michael Barrow]

Of the world, candidate for governor of.

[Nate Cohn]

Pennsylvania, candidate for governor of Pennsylvania. Stop the steel guy. If you are in our political analyst shoes, Lake and Mastriano and Trump, they seem like peas in a pod. These are all candidates who are distinguished by the effort to overturn the election and by their conduct that defies the norms of usual politics. And so when a Lake and a Mastriano go down, you might infer reasonably that Donald Trump will also suffer the same fate. But it is clear with hindsight that voters do not necessarily see an equivalence between Donald Trump and Carrie Lake or Doug Mastriano. In fact, we saw it last night. Kerry Lake is probably going to lose, right?

[Michael Barrow]

Because now she's running again.

[Nate Cohn]

She's running again for Senate in Arizona, and she's probably going to lose with the same group of voters that's about to send Donald Trump back to the White House by maybe a comfortable four point margin. So clearly there are a lot of voters who look at Carrie Lake and look at Donald Trump and say, actually, I'm fine with Donald Trump, but they're not fine with Kerry Lake. That's not something I would have assumed a few years ago. I think that one way to think about it is that Donald Trump is sort of reaping some of the advantages of being an incumbent.

[Michael Barrow]

An incumbent who skipped a cycle, an.

[Nate Cohn]

Incumbent who skipped a cycle. And maybe that's even better than being an actual incumbent, given the anti incumbent mood, not just here in the US.

[Michael Barrow]

But all around the world, to become nostalgic.

[Nate Cohn]

Yeah. That people looked back on Donald Trump's presidency as a time of relative stability. There weren't wars abroad, the prices were lower, and Donald Trump today is a much stronger candidate than he used to be. And I think it's the same factors that make Donald Trump stronger today are the same ones that distinguish him from a Kerry Lake, even though they seem to be more or less the same kind of politician.

[Michael Barrow]

So just to make sure I understand what you're saying here about 2022, the mistake that political analysts seem to have made, the mistake that perhaps Joe Biden, Kamala Harris and the entire Democratic establishment made, was to think that when MAGA acolytes of Donald Trump faltered in those midterms, it meant that he would falter when instead, what we have seen from your grand theory explanation here and all the gains within it among these different groups is that wasn't the case and Trump did well with all these voters in all of these states who had real objections to the mini ME candidates.

[Nate Cohn]

That's exactly right, Nate.

[Michael Barrow]

All of this makes me wonder whether Trump's victory is a political realignment because that word gets used, the R word, when a candidate fundamentally alters their relationship or their party's relationship with the entire electorate or major groups within the electorate. It's the high watermark of what someone can do in politics and we look for it really closely. And I think all of us have wondered if this race, because Trump seems to have done so much better with so many different groups, is that realignment? I'm personally listening to you starting to doubt that it is a realignment because it sounds like he did really well because of these age old political forces that are at play in this race. Unpopular president, bad economy does not necessarily a realignment make.

[Nate Cohn]

I can definitely see the case for that, especially if we're only looking at the 24 election in isolation.

[Michael Barrow]

But I knew there was going to be a but.

[Nate Cohn]

There was going to be a but. But if, if we step back and take the three Trump elections together, 16, 20 and 24, I think there's a real case that we have witnessed a Trump realignment, a change in the basic conflict in American politics between the two parties that Donald Trump redefined what the Republican Party was. It is no longer the lowercase C conservative party of the establishment and the status quo. It is now an anti establishment party that advocates radical, at times, changes to the American establishment.

[Peter Baker]

Right.

[Nate Cohn]

On issues like immigration, immigration, trade, foreign policy, issues that were a consensus between the two parties in many cases. And as a result, I think this election looks like the culmination of a realignment that really started in 2016 when Trump made those enormous gains among white working class voters. He didn't make the same gains among black, Latino or younger voters in that election, in part because he was inexperienced, he offended millions of people. He was seen as a sexist and a racist and so on. And for whatever reason, eight years later, those concerns have gradually faded and the dissatisfaction of the status quo has risen to the point we're now working class black voters, working class Hispanic voters, young voters who previously would have been part of the opposition to Donald Trump have now joined white working class voters and built a fundamentally different political coalition than the Republicans had at the beginning of the Trump era. And to me, that meets the definition of a realignment if it lasts after Trump, if it's added up to a lasting change in politics, rather than just be about this celebrity who's occupied center stage in American life for eight years.

[Michael Barrow]

And I think that is where our colleague Peter Baker is going to pick up, where you just left off. So, Nate, thank you very much.

[Nate Cohn]

Thanks for having me.

[Michael Barrow]

I hope you do get some sleep.

[Nate Cohn]

I do, too. You too.

[Michael Barrow]

We'll be right back.

[Ava]

With Instacart, you can get all your holiday essentials delivered in as fast as 30 minutes, whether it's the white elephant gift everyone will want to steal or the secret ingredient that makes great Grandma Jo's cookie recipe so great. Just download the Instacart app to find recipes, shop ingredients and whip out dishes so delicious your aunts and uncles will forget to ask about your love life. Enjoy free delivery on your first three orders. Service fees and terms apply.

[Michael Barrow]

This podcast is supported by Landman on Paramount plus welcome to the oil business.

[Peter Baker]

Billy Bob Thornton, Demi Moore and Jon.

[Michael Barrow]

Hamm star in a new Paramount plus original series. The world has already convinced itself that.

[Nate Cohn]

You are evil, and I am evil.

[Michael Barrow]

For providing them the one thing they interact with every day. You're all right.

[Nate Cohn]

Here we go.

[Michael Barrow]

From Taylor Sheridan, executive producer of Yellowstone. Get everybody back. Go, go.

[Peter Baker]

You just put a giant bullseye on this place.

[Ava]

We rolled the dice one last time.

[Michael Barrow]

Landman new series, streaming November 17th, exclusively on Paramount. Peter we just spoke to Nate Cohen about the mechanics of Donald Trump's victory across the electoral map and these broad gains that he made with pretty much every single group of voters. And for so long, Democrats have been telling a story about how Donald Trump is a fringe candidate whose victory was a fluke in 2016. And what's clear now is that that's not true. Which is what you, our chief White House correspondent, and our resident presidential historian have been thinking about since Election Day. So tell us about.

[Peter Baker]

Right, exactly. Because the question always was, is Donald Trump, you know, the asterisk in history or the inflection point where things have actually changed in a meaningful, sustained way. And Democrats have said, as you rightly point out throughout this campaign, that he was an anomaly, an aberration, that he's not representative of the United States that we've all known for these many generations. In the final week of the campaign, at Kamala Harris's sort of big closing rally, I was out on the Ellipse, and one of the things she said there was really striking. She says, you know, Donald Trump is not who we are. This is not who we are. And the only conclusion you can come to when you wake up after the election is, that's exactly who we are. At least a majority of us, a majority who are voting, clearly not only find Donald Trump to be acceptable, but their preferred champion. He's the one that they think does represent them. The things that outrage and offend his opponents are actually appealing in a lot of ways to his own base. Or at the very least, if they're not appealing, they're willing to put any concerns about them aside and far beyond.

[Michael Barrow]

His base, as we learned from the fact that he's won the Electoral College and we believe the popular vote.

[Peter Baker]

Exactly. And that's what makes this so striking. This is not 2016, when he got in through the Electoral College but still lost the popular vote. That was always sort of an election with kind of a checkmark next to it. It obviously counts, but he didn't have the support of the majority of Americans. And by the way, not for a single day of his presidency did a majority of Americans say they approved of his job performance, unlike any president in our history. And of course, he didn't get a majority in 2020 either. So the thought was he's always a minority candidate, one who succeeded, but really doesn't represent the American people writ large. This election shows that he does, actually. And you're right, if he wins the popular vote, which is the way it looks right now, he will take that as vindication that he was right all along. And in fact, what this tells us now is we've had a president who's done something that nobody has done, no president has done in more than a century.

[Michael Barrow]

Which is what?

[Peter Baker]

Which is to bounce back from a defeat and win again. Right. Not since Grover Cleveland in the 1880s has a defeated president come back to win again. And what that means is that the Trump era isn't over. It's gonna go on for another four years. It will last basically at least 12 years between the time he takes the office the first time and assuming he finishes the second term, that's an extraordinary amount of time.

[Michael Barrow]

So what you're positing here is that by losing in the middle, Trump expands the timeframe of his influence over our politics from the traditional eight years of a two term presidency to 12 years.

[Peter Baker]

Yeah. Because in fact, who do we talk about most over the last four years? It actually wasn't Joe Biden, certainly wasn't Kamala Harris. The person who dominated the national conversation for four years even though he wasn't president was Donald Trump. Why? Because he was indicted once, twice, three times, four times. He was put on trial, convicted. There was another trial, civil trial and another civil trial, and then there was his dominance in the primaries. And suddenly you realize that he's not gone away. He's not the pariah that I think a lot of people, even Republicans, thought he might have been. After January 6th, in fact, he's as powerful within his party as ever.

[Michael Barrow]

Right. There was this temptation to see his loss as a very important repudiation of him. Right. But it feels like his time outside the White House actually seemed to increase his popularity and make his return to power more possible.

[Peter Baker]

It really did. And that's a unique thing in modern times. Our politics, traditionally in our lifetime, Michael, has been that if you lose, you're done. You know, nobody wants you back, we're going to move on. That never happened here. And he forced Republicans who might have wanted to move on to get in line behind him anyway because he showed that he had such a connection to the base, such a connection to the Republican voters that elected officials who thought he was bad news or wished he had moved on realized that they couldn't afford to do that because they themselves would be then on the outs. And his dominance of the Republican Party allowed him to vault back into the arena with a head of steam and then propelled him through this fall campaign with enough energy and enough enthusiasm to take on the first the incumbent president and then the incumbent vice president, and to force one out of the race and then defeat the other one at the ballot box.

[Michael Barrow]

And not just defeat that other one at the ballot box, but in a fashion that broadened the coalition that Trump had created back in 2016. Peter, this is going to appeal to your historical mind, but there really only is a single president that I can think of whose legacy extends to something like 12 years. And that, of course, is FDR. I don't know if that's a comfortable analogy. I know Joe Biden wouldn't like it. He saw himself as FDR esque. Is that the right place to go?

[Peter Baker]

Yeah. This is one of these great geek questions the historians will sit there and argue about, but I think it's an important one because obviously Trump is no FDR in lots of ways. And that's not a comparison either one of them would embrace. But to the extent that FDR was president for 12 years, won a fourth term and would have been president longer had he not died in office, he dominated the American scene for so long that a whole generation grew up without knowing any other president. And I think about that today, like you have 30 year old voters who went to the polls this week who have never voted for a president that didn't, you know, contest did not involve Donald Trump in it. Right. He has now been the Republican nominee in three presidential elections in a row. And I think that his dominance is unlike any president I've seen in his own party. I don't think Reagan commanded the loyalty of the Republican Party in the same way that Trump does now. And I don't think Clinton or Obama did in the Democratic parties. I think that Trump is very sui generis here.

[Michael Barrow]

Well, Peter, if we think that FDR is the closest analogy in this conversation to Trump, I think we can agree on what FDR and his legacy mean to us to this day. Right. It's the birth of a social safety net. It's Social Security. It's the promise of a government to the American people embodied by the New Deal. Many of those programs remain with us to this day. How are we supposed to think about Trump's 12 year legacy and what it means to us?

[Peter Baker]

Right. Absolutely. No, I mean, FDR changed the course of the country. Right. He invented, in effect, a new American social compact. Reagan did the same thing. It was sort of like the reaction 40 years later to FDR. Well, now here we are, 40 years after that, and we may have the next president who is changing the course of the country. In this case, Donald Trump, with 12 years both in power and influential on the stage, has rewritten our understanding of the politics of America, rewritten our understanding of the electorate, rewritten our understanding of our place in the world. And it's not on the same liberal conservative spectrum of an FDR at Reagan. It's a whole new version of that. His conservatism is nationalist and Protestant, protectionist and isolationist and nativist, all of these things. At the same time, it's culture war and appealing to those who feel like the country has drifted away from what they remember it being. So it's its own unique Trumpian brand of politics. And I guess the question will be after 12 years, and this is looking too far ahead probably, how enduring is it, you know, what happens after he leave? Does it continue to have an effect the way FDR did long after he was in office?

[Michael Barrow]

Right. And Peter, in our conversation with Nate, he looked at all the things you just described and said that it amounts to a political realignment. But of course, what it may also amount to is a policy revolution. That, of course, was cut short in 2020 when Trump lost. Now there's going to be a second term and we're going to see if Trump is going to remake the country in pretty much his own image.

[Peter Baker]

Yeah, I think it's kind of an American realignment, not just a political realignment in that sense. Right. It is one of these moments in history where you can see things begin to turn and so that's the question. I think you've framed it exactly right. We are gonna have four more years now of Trump in office. And then the question becomes, what is the impact after he leaves? What legacy does he leave behind? Has he changed us permanently? Or at least for a sustained amount of time, years to come? Is Trump still the guiding force, in effect, for where our country is heading and how it sees its place in the world?

[Michael Barrow]

Peter, thank you very much.

[Peter Baker]

Thanks for talking to me.

[Michael Barrow]

On Wednesday afternoon, Vice President Harris conceded to Donald Trump during a phone call shortly afterward. Good afternoon, everyone. Good afternoon.

[Nate Cohn]

Good afternoon.

[Michael Barrow]

Harris addressed her supporters on the campus of how Howard University in Washington, D.C.

[Nate Cohn]

The outcome of this election is not.

[Michael Barrow]

What we wanted, not what we fought for, not what we voted for. But hear me when I say.

[Nate Cohn]

Hear me when I say the light.

[Michael Barrow]

Of America's promise will always burn bright. In a speech, Harris said that while she had conceded the election, she would never concede the values that had animated her campaign.

[Nate Cohn]

And so, to everyone who is watching, do not despair.

[Michael Barrow]

This is not a time to throw up our hands. This is a time to roll up our sleeves. This is a time to organize, to mobilize, and to stay engaged for the.

[Nate Cohn]

Sake of freedom and justice and the.

[Michael Barrow]

Future that we all know we can build together. We'll be right back. This podcast is supported by Landman on Paramount.

[Peter Baker]

Welcome to the oil business. Billy Bob Thornton, Demi Moore, and Jon.

[Michael Barrow]

Hamm star in a new Paramount plus original series. The world has already convinced itself that.

[Nate Cohn]

You are evil, and I am evil.

[Michael Barrow]

For providing them the one thing they interact with every day.

[Nate Cohn]

You're all right. Here we go.

[Michael Barrow]

From Taylor Sheridan, executive producer of Yellowstone. Get everybody back. Go, Go.

[Peter Baker]

You just put a giant bullseye on this place.

[Ava]

We rolled the dice one last time.

[Michael Barrow]

Landman new series streaming November 17th, exclusively on Paramount.

[Ava]

The American Diabetes association wants you to know that November is American Diabetes Month. It's a month to raise awareness of the nearly one in two of us living with diabetes or prediabetes. A month for the mother diagnosed with chronic kidney disease. A month for the friend who's learned diabetes is causing their blurred vision. A month for the child placing an insulin pump. For the first time, the ADA is fighting for a cure for them all. Will you join the fight by making a donation? Visit diabetes.org today.

[Michael Barrow]

Here's what else you need to know today. On Wednesday, the Democratic Party's hopes of retaking the House of Representatives began to fizzle. Republicans held on to four seats that Democrats had sought to flip in New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin and Iowa. As a result, Republicans expressed growing confidence that they would keep control of the chamber. If that happens, Republicans will control every lever of power in Washington, the House, the Senate, and the presidency. Today's episode was produced by Asta Chaturvedi, Shannon Lin, Mary Wilson, Luke Vanderploek, Stella Tan, Nina Feldman, Claire Tennisketter, and will read with help from Muj Zaidi. It was edited by Devin Taylor and Brendan Klinkenberg, contains original music by Marian Lozano, Sophia Landman and Rowan Yamisto, and was engineered by Alyssa Moxley. Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsfurk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Rhonda Kaysen. That's it for the Daily I'm Michael Balbaro. See you tomorrow. This podcast is supported by BetterHelp online therapy what comes to mind when you hear the word gratitude? Maybe it's a daily practice, or maybe it feels hard to be grateful right now. Don't forget to give yourself some thanks by investing in your well being. BetterHelp is the largest online therapy provider in the world, connecting you to qualified professionals via phone, video or message chat. Let the gratitude flow. Visit betterhelp.comthedaily to get 10% off your first month. That's betterhelp h e l p.comthedaily.