Robert Draper (2:03)

Well, the one that has become the most prominent, Sarah, is over Israel. And that causes a kind of conflation between people who are anti Semites and avowedly so, and people who might call themselves anti Zionists or something or who believe it's not in America's best interest to be, in their view, led by the nose from Israeli interests. And that has caused all sorts of fractures, as I'm sure talk about. There have been others. I mean, by and large, there is still a striking unity around Trump, but it's not entirely unanimous. I mean, Nick Fuentes being the notable exception. The white nationalist Fuentes, who used to be on board with Trump and no longer is and seldom misses an opportunity to savage Trump on his own show. Fuentes has a following that's difficult to quantify, but real, and it's growing. The people who see themselves as custodians of the conservative movement, and Charlie Kirk, for example, when he was alive, would have been at the top of this list, do all that they can to keep everyone on the right corral together and mainly unified in their antipathy of the left and trying to focus on the left as a common enemy. Which is why the apostasy of Fuentes to towards Trump and the just big mess that has been created regarding Israel has made that task a great deal more difficult.

Sarah Longwell (3:37)

So if the Israel fault line is sort of the one you're watching the most, tell me, is it different than the fault line on the left? Because the left also has this fault line. Right. The Democrats had this fault line. It was very prominent in 2024. Does this mirror that same fault line or is it substantively different in some way?

Robert Draper (3:58)

It seems to me substantively different. Now, there certainly are anti Semites on both sides, right. But you don't find that many people on the right who are pronouncedly anti Israel, who are pro Palestinian. You will find some. Marjorie Taylor Greene has been a very, very notable person in this regard who have expressed the view that what's taken place in government Gaza constitutes a genocide. Tucker Carlson falls in that category as well. And so here and there you'll find some real sympathy towards the plight of Gazans, maybe towards Palestinians writ large. But that's usually not where it is on the right. It's mainly America first dictates that we take care of our business at home. Why are we spending so much money over there, where on the left? I do think that there is a very hardened view against the Israeli government and certainly in some areas, bigotry towards Jewish people.

Sarah Longwell (4:56)

And you don't think that that same bigotry towards Jewish people exists on the right? Because I gotta say, the anti Semites on the right feel like they got a real home these days.

Robert Draper (5:05)

Oh, yeah, yeah. Don't get me wrong, there certainly are tons of those on the right. And I'd say, if anything, they feel more comfortable expressing that outwardly without mincing any words than on the left. Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean to suggest.

Sarah Longwell (5:21)

No, no, no. I'm just I have watched these fault lines sort of emerge because pre October 7th, you know, it wasn't as on people's radar nearly as much. And now it has become this defining issue in both parties. And it has, it shines a light on sort of the roach of antisemitism pushback if you think this is wrong. But I would say on the left they try very hard to say this is not about being anti Semitic, this is about being anti Zionist and the role that Israel plays in the world. And we're anti Israel's government and much more sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians. As you sort of lay out, like this is a humanitarian crisis and America should not be funding it. And I know you're right that the America first element, and sometimes I think people don't always realize that America first isn't just a slogan. Right. It is a statement of prioritization. And a big part of that prioritization is isolationism. Although somehow we've managed to send a lot of money to Argentina recently, which some on the right are mad about, because their whole point, the whole animating feature from these folks is anything that draws our attention away from what we are dealing with here at home is a distraction, is bad for us and we shouldn't be doing it. And it's weird though, how that then blends with what has been a very active sort of cross groiper subculture that kind of tinges with the darkest corners of the manosphere. The incel culture, the Andrew Tate woman hating culture, like antisemitism is also in there. And it's all kind of baked into this weird stew that Trump has allowed to become not just welcome sort of part of the coalition, but sort of a more and more a sturdy part of the coalition, like a necessary part. Which is why the Heritage foundation thing blew up, because it called into stark relief. Are we letting these people into the coalition or aren't we? And Heritage's answer was, yeah, we're letting these people into the coalition. And obviously there's been some pushback to that from what remains of the vaguely responsible. Right. Do you think that sounds right?

Robert Draper (7:30)

I think that sounds right, yeah. And certainly the groiper subculture for your listeners, corporate, the group of sort of white disaffected conservative males of which Nick Fuentes is the leader. There's an undisguised antipathy not just towards Israel, but towards Jews as a problem in the United States, as people who control the culture, who control so much of industry and so unfairly and at the direct expense of the sort of white Europeans. You know, America first is, I think, a distinct ideology, albeit one whose chief protagonist, one would think, Donald Trump continually confounds with things like his $20 billion bail out of Argentina, leaving people to sort of assume a kind of pretzel logic of all this. But that America first has, in the wake of October 7th, I think somehow America first. There are a number of people I've talked to, and I'm sure you have, too, Sarah, sort of thought leaders in the conservative movement who said, well, you not only can be America first and be pro Israel, the two are very compatible with each other because Israel is this great strategic ally of the United States and does all this dirty work and in the Middle east, saving us the trouble for having done so. There are others, Tucker Carlson among them, who say that no, Israel is actually a net liability strategically and is a drain. And you do see online in Gruper subculture, that particular view being elevated, and Fuentes has said that now everyone has come to his side. And of course, that is a classic conflation of antisemitism and an arguable suspicion about just how supportive Americans should be of the Israeli government, given what's going on in Gaza and giving our limited resources at home. But circumstances have enabled Fuentes to pull that one off.

Sarah Longwell (9:29)

Yeah. Okay. I want to start the focus groups by talking about the Trump 2028 question, because this, like, question mark is going to hang over our politics in a very stupid way until probably until 2028, until everybody's like, sure, he's going to leave. And I think it's not really something Trump can attempt without the buy in of a critical mass of Republican voters, which I think people assume he has. But I'm pretty skeptical of that, in part because so far, the bulk of those we've talked to have been less than enthusiastic about the idea. So let's listen to how this sounded in our most recent groups of Trump voters.

Focus Group Participant 2 (10:11)

I think the purpose of a term is to represent the population.

Robert Draper (10:15)

You know, eight years is sufficient to.

Focus Group Participant 1 (10:18)

Kind of get your agenda out there and give the next person up their time.

Focus Group Participant 2 (10:22)

We don't want to create a system and go back to 1700s.

Robert Draper (10:27)

No, eight years is enough. Whether I like the guy or don't like him, whether it's male or female in office, if I like the person or not, it's. It's not relevant. I don't want to be stuck with somebody I don't like for longer than eight years.

Focus Group Participant 1 (10:38)

I see where Nancy Pelosi is going to be retiring after what, 40 years. I wish we had term limits and in the House and Senate too.

Focus Group Participant 2 (10:47)

I just think that, you know, with this second term, he comes in to do what he has to do. I think that, to make sure that he stays moving quickly to get the things done. But I also think that again, I'm a big J.D. vance supporter. If you take that off the table, it puts, I won't even say pressure, but it makes it so that within that same amount of time he really has to sort of mentor in ideas, get J.D. vance on board. Because I do think that he is a good bridge between the young people and the people in power. I mean, I just had a funny conversation with my father in law and basically it was about how between the generations, like the slang words that are used for the kids in the skibidi and the 6, 7, like at his age, he's like, I have no clue what these kids are talking about.

Focus Group Participant 1 (11:34)

I mean, martial law would have to be it. From what I understand from my limited pea brain, you know, I hope that the country is not in anywhere near that shape where martial law needs to be declared at all. So no, I think he needs to go enjoy his money and his retirement and his kids and grandkids.

Sarah Longwell (11:55)

So that last guy was responding to whether there were any circumstances because the moderator was asking this, a war terrorist attack where the group wanted to see Trump do an end run around the Constitution. And so basically this guy was like, I guess if he had to declare martial law because something terrible was happening. Although I would like to just point out that that is maybe exactly what Donald Trump would do, right, like declare martial law, although for no good reason, much like the way that the, the National Guard is currently in our, our streets. So there have been a couple polls on this and the third term idea is usually underwater among Republicans in the 35% to 40% support range. There is something though that, like a certain corner of the MAGA ecosystem, like Steve Bannon, whatever, that they're taking very seriously and that some elected Republicans, including Trump himself, are sort of unseriously promoting and going along with. So for example, giving out Trump 20, 28 hats, selling them in the White House gift store. So how seriously do you take this third term prospect and how seriously do you think the people around Trump take it? And what would make Trump pursuing this more or less likely?

Robert Draper (13:06)

Yeah, I took it seriously enough to look deeply into doing it as a long magazine story. And I've since tabled the idea because I'm not convinced that there is a whole lot of locomotion behind the idea, apart from Steve Bannon talking incessantly about it on his war room show. And, you know, I've heard Bannon's arguments for it, the necessity of it in his view, et cetera. I think it's really striking, frankly, Sarah, to hear how opposed every one of the people you had in your focus group were to this. You couldn't find any sort of sympathetic voice in that regard. However, a caveat does come with that, and that's that if Trump tells people to change their minds in his base, they are likely to change their minds. I mean, you heard your one listener mentioned the one circumstance, a state of emergency, the need for martial law. And you're exactly right, Sarah, to say, as you did before, that that is, of course, the circumstance that one could see Trump paving the way for right now. You know, he's used the word war that we're at war with, this war with, you know, the Venezuelan drug cartels that he's, you know, ceded distrust in our electoral process. And so if he believed that we could not have fair and honest elections in 2026 and then maybe 2028, he could suspend them. And if he were to do so, would the base really turn on him? Well, they haven't yet thus far. Having listened to one of the focus groups in its entirety, I was struck by how so many of them repeated what we've heard so often from Trump supporters, that he's a man who tells it like it is, and they tend to go along with him, they tend to trust him because they believe that he is transparent. Another word that I heard used a lot. So if Trump turns on a dime and said, actually, I think this is necessary, you know, I think it's necessary for me to run again, I think I can do it again. I think the Constitution allows me to. But regardless of that, I think the emergency, that the times warrant it, I think the base will be with him.

Sarah Longwell (15:06)

Yeah. Can I just say, I do think sometimes we get ourselves wrapped up around, like, oh, well, Trump's going to run again. And I just think that's very unlikely. He can't run again Constitutionally. Voters don't want him to do it. The question is, though, will he leave? Like, and I just think that's a different question, and it's really highly based on, I think, does he feel like staying at the time, like, by the time he gets there, is he. Whatever age he is, does he think something bad will happen to him if he leaves? Will he get prosecuted for something like. I don't think that there's any question now, having seen what we've seen with the National Guard, that the bombings of the Venezuelan boats, like, would Trump declare war to stay in power? Probably, maybe.

Robert Draper (15:50)

Yeah, sure. Yeah. And by the way, I mean, while I think that you're right to focus more on will he leave rather than could he run again, there is actually an argument about how one interprets the 22nd amendment, which I won't bore you or your listeners with.

Sarah Longwell (16:03)

I'm familiar with it. Yeah.

Robert Draper (16:05)

Yes. And scholars, including some who are serious, have advanced that argument. But I think even Trump himself has said that he feels that's a little too cute to try to turn the 22nd Amendment into something other than what the standard interpretation of it tells us that it is.

Sarah Longwell (16:21)

This is the idea that he could run like as the vice president with J.D. vance and then, you know, he's still in control, puppeteering, whatever.

Robert Draper (16:28)

Yeah, yeah. So he'd be the Putin to, you know, Medvedev basically. The even cuter one is that a Vance and Rubio could run as a ticket and then they would stand down after they're elected. The Republican controlled House would make Trump the Speaker. Trump would then elevate Speaker Trump all the way. He would ascend next in line. So there's that as well. Super clever.

Sarah Longwell (16:52)

Super clever. As the air turns crisp and the holidays draw near, comfort becomes the best gift of all. Quint delivers layers that last. Sweaters, outerwear, and everyday essentials that feel luxurious and make holiday dressing and gifting effortless. Quince has it all. $50 Mongolian cashmere sweaters made for everyday wear. Denim that never goes out of style. Silk tops and shirts that add polish and down outerwear built to take on the season. And down vests are a key part of my wintertime lesbian uniform. I love a good vest. Quince is one of those brands that I've gotten fully addicted to since I've had them as a podcast sponsor. And it's going to be a big part of my holiday shopping this year. I've been spreading the Quint's gospel all over my social circ circle as well as my podcast audience. Honestly, Quint's Italian wool coats are at the top of my list. This is what I'm asking for if anybody wants to get me a present. The cuts field designer and the quality rivals high end brands, but without the high end markup. By working directly with ethical top tier factories, Quince skips the middlemen and offers prices 50% less than similar brands. Step into the holiday season with layers made to feel good, look polished and last from quite quint perfect for gifting or keeping for yourself. Go to quint.com the Focus Group for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns now available in Canada too. We love you Canada. That's Q-U I N C E.com the focus group to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quint.com the focus group all right, so the focus groups that we did that we are discussing today of these two time Trump voters, they took place against the backdrop of the government shutdown. So the government, it looks like as of this taping they will have a deal by the time this airs and government will be back up and running. But there was a real divide in one of our focus groups over whether Republicans should act on their own to eliminate the filibuster. Because if we were going to get out of the shutdown, there were really only two ways, Dems caving or Trump and Republicans nuking the filibuster so that they can pass it themselves. The other thing we asked about the shutdown was just sort of what they thought the electoral impact would be like, you know, who did they blame? Just kind of the normal pundit stuff. And there was some trepidation about how the shutdown was going to play come election time. So let's listen to how this tension sounded.

Focus Group Participant 3 (19:21)

We need to open it up per se. We need to make this happen. And since we've already got the influence, we just need to move forward. So if we need the filibuster to just get the votes, then that needs to happen so we can get the lights on for the folks that need it. The biggest thing I think for that is that this government shutdown is just a huge black eye on the Republican Party and the Democrats are going to use that against us in the future. And the longer this takes for us to get the government open, the more even though it's their fault per se, it's not going to look like that.

Focus Group Participant 1 (19:57)

I think they need to vote to eliminate the filibuster and go forward because that would have been done by the Democrats but for Manson and Senator Chief Marizona too. She's no longer Houston Cinema. Thank you. If it wasn't for them, the filibuster would have already been broken during Biden's term. So it's going to happen anyway. So let's just get it done and then let's move forward with the next Few years.

Sarah Longwell (20:24)

I mean, they can do it if they get in. Hopefully that won't happen in the future, but of course we know that's a possibility. And so I don't, I don't want them to get that opportunity to do it. So I just, I want this done. I want it passed for us. But I don't know, I'm just not sure.

Focus Group Participant 4 (20:44)

I mean, 60 votes, I mean, we need that. We need the majority, not just the one vote over. Because if you just get that one vote over, it's going to keep switching everybody. The laws are going to keep changing over and over every administration. It should be the majority, and hopefully it'd be a Republican majority. And I don't see that happening in the future. Especially the way this, the last elections went. Democrats got the majority. And I think the shutdowns doing that, more people are jumping on the Democrat bandwagon because the shutdowns like bringing the economy down. So we need to get rid of that. Right. When you keep the filibuster there and it's a good thing for this country, got to keep everybody equal.

Sarah Longwell (21:24)

So, number of things going on there. One was sort of the implicit assumption that the shutdown was hurting Republicans. Right.

Robert Draper (21:32)

Look, Sarah, I mean, that's what President Trump has said. I mean, he said, you know, didn't think it's fair, but that it clearly blew back against the Republicans.

Sarah Longwell (21:40)

It's funny to listen to these Republican voters because on one hand, on the 2028 question, they're sort of natural Republican conservative instincts rear their heads. They're like, term limits, term limits matter. And then on the filibuster, though, pretty mixed. And there was a bunch of them was like, no, blow it up. And like, let's get our agenda through while Trump is in there. Because this is one of the things people love about Trump, even the ones that don't love everything that he's doing. They love that he is doing something that it feels like he is advancing things through sort of the sclerotic, can't get anything done Congress, whatever. Trump's just doing stuff and voters like that. So why was Mitch McConnell so protective of the filibuster? And why do you think Thune is following suit in a world where they want to give Trump basically everything he wants?

Robert Draper (22:24)

Yeah, I mean, I do think that McConnell is a believer in the Senate as a deliberative body, which distinguishes it from the House, and that the implication that flows from that is that if you eliminate the filibuster, you bring the Senate one step closer. To the sort of raucous everyday chaos that is the House. And I think that the filibuster has worked for him in the past when Harry Reid thwarted it with the nuclear option. You know, he's held that over the head of Democrats. So to me, the question isn't so much, I guess as someone who grew up covering institutionalists like McConnell, it surprises me less that someone like him, you know, at his age of 80 or whatever, still believes that. And it's more striking to me how anti institutional so many MAGA voters are. And I think that they, they may not articulate as such, but I think that they basically believe in a strong unitary executive. I think your focus groups indicated that they see a practical limitation to executive authority, which is that Trump has done all this stuff by executive order. And that doesn't last, which I thought showed a certain amount of sophistication on the part of the focus groups for them to recognize that and to say that this stuff needs to be codified into law. But I think that there's nothing about the performance in the Senate over the last several years that has imbued people in the focus group with any kind of confidence that the Senate as an institution and all of its subsidiary parts are worth preserving. And I, I think that their distrust or dismissiveness of the filibuster flows from that.

Sarah Longwell (24:11)

I think you're 100% right. I could talk about the filibuster for a long time, but I want to move us on because I want to get in this very interesting character that you have spent a lot of time with Marjorie Taylor Greene during the past government shutdown. She's has behaved like a different person, like an alien, has snatched the old Marjorie Taylor Greene that we know and replaced her with like a normal human kind of. And you know, I've certainly speculated that her heel turn against the GOP establishment, you know, going on the view, trashing the GOP leadership and their lack of a health care plan is probably a 2028 play. Although it's interesting to me she's running to the normie side of things, given who she is. Let me tell you what we asked the voters what they thought of it and that act was not landing with them, at least in these groups that we fielded. Most hadn't really followed what she's been saying, but those who were were not super impressed. Let's listen.

Focus Group Participant 4 (25:12)

She just all over the place. I mean, she's a rhino. I think she's a rhino right there. She's Republican when she wants to be Republican. But right now, she's kind of talking with the Democrats more, trying to. Just trying to hold her hands more or something. To me, it seems like she's just a rhino.

Focus Group Participant 5 (25:27)

I don't know what's going on. Just like you have John Fetterman sounding like a Republican, you have Marjorie Taylor Greene sounding like a Democrat.

Focus Group Participant 4 (25:35)

I.

Focus Group Participant 5 (25:37)

There's some weird stuff going on. I can't explain it. I don't know if it's like these people put on acts just to get into office, to be here. But I'm really shocked at what I'm seeing coming from her, and I'm really disappointed because I liked her a lot.

Robert Draper (25:53)

I don't follow it to a T, but I've never really liked her, honestly. So I never really took much of what she said seriously.

Focus Group Participant 6 (26:02)

Seemed like the Democrats have had consistent infighting, and now the Republicans are doing that, and you just see this train wreck happening. You're like, I don't remember the name or where the governor was elected, but Jay something who was calling for the murder, basically, of people and their children, you know, and he won. And you just wonder like, holy crap. And then you see the Republican Party start to do this, and those people are getting voted in. Now, let's not start destroying our party from within, because what's going to happen come 2028, you know, that's terrifying. And you just want to, like, zip it, just so.

Sarah Longwell (26:40)

You've covered Marjorie Taylor Greene at length in your book, and we have forgotten how awful she is. Like, especially early in her congressional career, she was out there accosting David Hogg, yelling at transgender congressional staffers that they were really mentioned, saying that Nancy Pelosi is guilty of treason, speculating about the Rothschilds and their space lasers causing wildfires. Just nuts. And now she's on Caitlin Collins, talking about how Adelita Grayalva, she's saying, oh, she should be sworn into Congress, and she's one of the most outspoken members of Congress in either party about releasing the Epstein files. What has gotten into her? We've had a great deal of speculation about that over here at the Bulwarks.

Robert Draper (27:24)

I think I can put a lot of the speculation to rest because I'm in frequent touch with her and I have a lot of insight into what's going on with her and what isn't going on with her. As to 2028, I don't know. I think she's probably leaving open that possibility. But there are other things at play, too. But start with this. She's not a Democrat. So for the people in the focus group who think that she worked with the Democrats very briefly with Ro Khanna in an effort to open up the Epstein files, but otherwise, she has found no common cause with them and has nothing good to say about them. I do think that with Republicans, it is a case of familiarity, breeding contempt, that the more she's gotten to know her Republican colleagues, the less she's liked them and the more she sees them as phonies. And she had promised me that she would be doing this, that the next time the Republicans came into power and ran the table, and yet did not get done what the America first constituency expected of them, she was going to be screaming from the rafters about it. And she hates Obamacare. She always has. But she also hates the fact that health care premiums have been rising. And she learned this from her own daughters who are now worried about their premiums due to the subsidy perhaps being repealed. And so she's made a lot of noise about that. She also had told me that she's during the shutdown, she's been at home a lot, like most of the members of Congress are. She's talked to her constituents. She has heard constituents use the G word genocide in reference to Gaza. And I think that there's a lot of why are we spending so much money over there killing children when there are people here who need the money more? So I think she hasn't been untrue to her principles, but as to why she's being so outspoken about it, I think she feels and I'm not getting this directly from her, but I think it's evident that she feels a certain sense of betrayal in terms of the loyalty she has shown the Trump administration and how it has gone largely unpaid. We've reported on this and stories about how Tony Fabrizio, the Republican pollster, dropped a poll saying basically that she'd get creamed in a Georgia Senate race. And so Greene is of the view that that was put in there by certain people just to kneecap her chances. Trump did not lend any encouraging words when she was mulling over the possibility of running for governor of Georgia. She hasn't been offered any Cabinet positions. And there are other reasons for her just to believe that she is kind of homeless. You know, she was booted out of the House Freedom Caucus for the sin of siding with Kevin McCarthy on some things. And so the one person she likes is a person who is very proudly homeless, and that's Thomas Massey. And Massie is this kind of libertarian Republican who's been very outspoken about releasing the Epstein files and a variety of other things that he has in common with Marjorie. And so that's kind of where she's at. But it is interesting to see her, especially given how hostile she was towards the mainstream media now being on the View and on cnn. But, you know, she has indicated to me that she, she doesn't like it when mainstream outlets constantly refer to her QAnon past and the Jewish space lasers and all of that stuff, but that she feels increasingly comfortable with the possibility that she'll get a fair shake or at least that her own viewpoints will be honestly aired.

Sarah Longwell (30:58)

You know, I saw some quotation from her to the effect of like I got it wrong on QAnon. Is that right? Has she sort of renounced?

Robert Draper (31:07)

Yes.

Sarah Longwell (31:07)

Like, what's the growth pattern been for her?

Robert Draper (31:10)

Yeah. And look, I do think that, though I said a couple of minutes ago that I think she's largely remained on track with her America first beliefs, I do think that behaviorally we've seen a real evolution in her. Those things that you were citing, which I also did in my book about her, like chasing David Hogg down hallways and harassing aoc, those were when she was a so called influencer in 2018 and 2019 and was an avowed QAnon person. She doesn't do that kind of stuff now that she is an elected official, you know, since she was elected in November 2020. And she made clear to me that her QAnon views grew out of a distrust of the mainstream media and the permission structure given by people on the right to seek alternative information elsewhere. And then there formed this whole community, community of people who she knew, people who like, you know, did CrossFit gym like she did. You know, people were friends of hers on Facebook who were starting to read these Q drops. And it was kind of fun and sort of a parlor sport. But she said that it also, you know, it imposed a certain kind of logic on areas where there was a lot of lack of clarity. I don't think that she believes that Democrats wear the faces of baby corpses on their own faces or anything like that. She has been clear about how she got it wrong. She's defensive on the subject because she feels like, you know, why is it that every story that she, that the New York Times writes about Elizabeth Warren doesn't include that she once claimed she was part Native American, you know, to get into Harvard? Or why is it that Senator Blumenthal isn't always mentioned that he was not honest about his military service. And yet every time a story is done about me, it's always. It always has the obligatory paragraph about being a conspiracy theorist. I hear her, you know, but it's a notable beginning point of her revolution and kind of hard to forget.

Sarah Longwell (33:08)

Yeah, I mean, I think one of the answers to that might be that she's just newer. Like it happened more recently that she was this person. Like what Elizabeth Warren did in college just probably doesn't bear as much on what Marjorie Taylor Greene was doing in 2018. But I take that point. I guess one of the things that I've been wondering about and something you're saying makes me think that this might be true. Because for me, as sort of a never Trumper, what was astounding to me was learning that so many of the people who had taught me what it meant to have conservative principles, like they were the ones imbuing those on a younger generation, it turned out they had none of those principles. And it's a wild thing to suddenly be around a bunch of people who were telling you you joined their side, whatever, and then you're like, you guys didn't mean this at all, not even a little bit. Is that the experience that she's having in Congress where she's like, wait a minute. Yes.

Robert Draper (34:02)

Yes. The answer is yes. I mean, is she principled, though? Yeah. No, I think that Greene has always been principled. You could argue with her principles. You could say her principles are misguided. You can say that her views on immigration are really strident, that she sees this kind of a zero sum proposition that everything that an immigrant gets is at the expense of some able bodied, working class white person or something. But no, I think that she does have principles and she certainly come to fall into the sadder but wiser category of people who recognize that Congress is increasingly a do nothing body. It's frustrating to her. Now, I mentioned earlier that she's not a Democrat. She has not made the slightest effort, as far as I know, to ever find any Democrat with whom she could seek common cause in advancing certain legislation. There was a point in time, around the time of the J6ers being at the D.C. jail, that she was very interested in criminal and justice is, you know, perpetrated. And since Trump pardoned all the J6ers, she's gone conspicuously silent, you know, on that particular subject, like so many other people in the Republican Party. But at least for a moment in time, it was of interest to her. But she never spoke to any Democrats about it. Having said all that, though, yes, she's become really disillusioned with leadership, with her own colleagues, who seem much more interested in the performativeness of Congress, which is a bit ironic coming from her. But I do think that, like, the Doge subcommittee of which she was chairwoman didn't have much teeth in it. But, like, she actually really. I went to a couple of hearings. It was interesting to see because, I mean, she, she really comported herself as a chair and she recognized the Democrats and wasn't insulting to them and ran an honest hearing. I think that she took seriously the notion that, okay, we Republicans are in charge, let's act like it. I think she's been very disappointed that a lot of her colleagues haven't fallen suit with them.

Sarah Longwell (35:52)

Last Marjorie Taylor Greene question. It was funny to me to hear a voter call her a rhino, because this is what you get, everybody, whether you're Liz Cheney or you're Mitt Romney. But if you buck Trump, you are suddenly a rhino, because Republican used to have, like, actual meaning. There used to be ideas behind it. Now there's just Trump. And so if you don't support Trump or you are perceived to not be supporting Trump, you're suddenly a rhino. Is that going to be tough for her? Like, does she get tossed, or is her brand now kind of big enough to withstand her being somebody who goes against the grain? Like, does she need Trump at this point or does Trump need her? Or can they both just live in their own ecosystems? Like, what do you think?

Robert Draper (36:43)

Well, I think that the answer to that question is she herself is trying to find that out. That's why she's going on the View, for example. I think she's trying to find out, how does my brand play beyond Congress and beyond Georgia? She's not a party person. And so the idea that she's a rhino, while obviously that's meant to be a pejorative, is in a way not entirely inappropriate, given that she has said recently, I'm not a Democrat, but I'm not sure that I'd call myself a Republican anymore. I mean, she really does have a hostile view towards her own party. And so I think she may come, as Massie does, to wear that independence as a badge of honor. She's been very careful, like every conservative leader not named Nick Fuentes, to not disassociate herself from Trump. You know, she has said in stories that we, the Times have reported that she feels like Trump has gotten bad advice from his staff. That's A very familiar one that we hear. But she has been loath to criticize Trump himself. So I don't think we're going to see her step out the way Nick Fuentes did. And for the record, also, she loathes Nick Fuentes, so it's. I doubt she'd want to be in his camp, but I don't see her separating herself from Trump. But then again, we'll see. I mean, she's given the Trump administration some heartburn with some of the things that she's been saying and doing, and may well be that she comes to figure, what the hell do I have to lose? Staying by Trump's side has gotten me only so far and in fact, has been at times a bitter pill to swallow. So we may see more independence from her. But I think she's testing the waters on all this stuff now.

Sarah Longwell (38:21)

Well, it will be interesting to see where she goes from here. The last couple sets here are a bit contradictory in nature. We're going to focus on the rising antisemitism on the right for a second. Even though we've talked about this in recent months, we've heard, especially with young people on the right, a rise in anti Israel sentiment, sometimes related to the actual war in the Middle East. But there's like some obvious anti Semitic conspiracy theories. And this is the part that I really want to get to, is just how many of the conspiracy theories on the right now end with the Jews. Like, that's where we land. It's not something that our whole group was dabbling in, but we do occasionally hear a smattering of this from Trump voters. And in these recent groups, it came up when people were skeptical of how Charlie Kirk actually died. So let's listen.

Focus Group Participant 7 (39:11)

I follow Candace Owens very closely. I have for years. You know, the left wingers or even some people on the right say she's crazy, but if you listen to her, she's extremely articulate and she also investigates things. She doesn't just come up with her own theories. And she worked for Turning Point for years. She was on college campuses with Charlie for a long time. So she knows the ins and outs of that organization. So she's not going to stop until it's found out. Hopefully she's not next, honestly. But I think, you know, inside Turning Point, maybe even inside the government, inside, you know, some relations with Israel, there's just some things that we're not being told and it's just not adding up. And she's really the only one who's willing to ask those Hard questions and to get the bottom of it. And I would think that our government, Trump included, would be like leading that force. So that's been a concern.

Focus Group Participant 1 (40:04)

I think Charlie Kirk was having such a profound influence in the political arena and the religious arena that the radical left, and I mean the radical left, like people that are being socialist and heading toward communism are pushing. So it's scary. I don't know. I don't know what's truth anymore that I would be questioning on. Was it a young man that just got radicalized from watching videos and being in chat rooms? I'm questioning that.

Focus Group Participant 2 (40:32)

There's not necessarily a distrust towards the overall picture. You know, I just think there's a lot of discrepancies that either could be cleared up that are not being cleared up. I think that if I step back from the thing that happened, which I feel like there's some discrepancies and how it's all being explained, I think that it was something that revealed certain things that are going on outside of the US Political system that are tied to other places, that it shined a light on some other things going on. And so maybe that's why they're taking a little bit of time to really get into the meat and potatoes or the details of things of it. They're letting that, that, that light kind of show other things out. But I do think that they could have really gotten in and said, hey, this, this, this, and this and this is. Doesn't seem like it adds up, but this is why, you know, and they didn't do that. So I think it shined a light on stuff that's going on with Israel and things that are tied to that. One thing that I, I've appreciated seeing Donald Trump do is, like, he stands up to Netanyahu and says, like, that's not going to be okay. Don't do this thing where you see just about everybody else folding on, you know, this whole Israel thing, maybe I was not paying as close attention as I needed to be, but it seems like right around this time frame, Charlie Kirk got assassinated and like, the curtain came back and they're like, so much stuff was like, tied to Israel. You saw a lot of political people going and doing all this stuff. But Donald Trump has stayed firm throughout that process of, like, he's doing something wrong. I'm gonna tell him not to do that thing.

Sarah Longwell (42:11)

So you've spent a lot of time reporting on Turning Point both before and after Charlie Kirk's death, and what is the way forward for them now? Without Charlie?

Robert Draper (42:23)

Sure. Let me first just say that that is a very commonly expressed sentiment on the right, that Charlie Kirk's assassination, that there's more to it than meets the eye and a lot of insinuation that the Israeli government played a role in it. As to where Turning Point goes forward after this, it's more easy to say what won't happen than what will. Erica Kirk is the CEO now, and she's greatly respected and beloved within the organization. And a lot of people on the right love her as well. She's not a polemicist like her husband. She's not going to go on college campuses and debate people. She has only campaigned at a grand total of one event, I believe, for Andy Biggs, and that was really just to introduce her husband, where Charlie did that all the time. So she's not going to be a political organizing force. She's not going to be a confidant to either President Trump or if he's followed by JD Vance, who was so close to Charlie Kerr, to him either. I don't see how then Turning Point USA remains the political force that it was, except insofar as it continues to incubate conservative ideology on high school and college campuses. I think there's every reason to believe that remain formidable in that view. But, you know, the other way in which Kirk was so significant a force was that he provided, whether you or I agree with this, he provided a certain kind of role model for young conservative males, this very Christian oriented, very traditional family variant, pro marriage. Kirk is gone now. And presumably those young males who are looking for a voice, looking for some kind of leadership, that maybe some of them will turn to the Tate brothers, maybe some of them will turn to Fuentes. And this is where, you know, Kirk really was such a dominant and irreplaceable personality. There's no one inside Turning Point USA who could be expected to fill that void.

Sarah Longwell (44:25)

Yeah.

Robert Draper (44:28)

All right.

Sarah Longwell (44:29)

Well, we also talked to these groups about Tucker Carlson's interview with Nick Fuentes, which touched off the firestorm. The Heritage foundation, which is this storied conservative think tank, which in my youth they always had, like, talks there and events there. And so I've spent a lot of time in their atrium or whatever. And we've heard from some Fuentes viewers in our groups before. Like, we've specifically had the younger people where they talk about Fuentes a lot. In fact, my conversation with Will Summer a couple months ago, if you want to listen to more of that. We did that episode not that long ago. These groups were largely not tracking this particular disillusion. And they weren't like Fuentes defenders, though they did defend Tucker's decision to have him on. Let's listen.

Focus Group Participant 7 (45:13)

What I've heard is that Tucker has really taken some heat for even interviewing him and kind of giving him a platform, you know, But I believe that just because he interviewed him doesn't mean that he agrees with him or he's trying to promote him. You know, he's just trying to get the information out there. So he seems to be this Nick Fuentes, an up and cominging leader of the socialist movement. He's pretty close to being a true communist. And like, he. He's said that Hitler was a good man. I mean, that's how far he is. So I didn't see the total interview, but just the fact that Tucker was sitting down with him to kind of get his viewpoints. He seems to be grabbing a big following of these nut jobs, really. So Tucker was just under a lot of heat for even bringing his name to the table.

Focus Group Participant 6 (46:01)

The thing that I respect about Tucker is he pushes back. He's not just giving this person this platform to spew their crap. I don't agree with Nick Fuentes, but I respect Tucker for not bending the knee and staying true to himself and covering all angles from everyone, because that's what we're lacking. You know, let him show his true colors.

Focus Group Participant 5 (46:24)

I.

Focus Group Participant 6 (46:25)

A lot of people don't agree with what he says. Absolutely. I think he's not a very good person. But I think that when we talk more and like when people stop talking, that's when bad things happen. So let's talk. You know, there's just this consistent division that will never go away if we can't even talk to each other about things, even with our worst enemies. And Tucker made it very clear in the Dave Smith interview, after the Nick Fuentes interview, after he's getting all this slack that, you know, like, this is the reason why. And it was. It's very Tucker of him.

Focus Group Participant 5 (46:58)

I absolutely agree. Free speech, this is what America was founded upon. If you want to be racist, it's your right to say and feel whatever you want to say and feel. But I don't feel like people should be censored for how they believe. If that's how you feel, speak your mind. But the very little that I'm hearing, I'm hearing this Adolph Fuentes, some remark he made about Stalin, that's going viral and I'm just like, wow, like, that's terrible. I don't know how true it is because I didn't hear it directly. You know, myself is just what's. What I'm hearing is going viral. But I'm like, you know, I didn't know much about Nick Fuentes at all prior to the Tucker Carlson interview. Just I've heard of him and things about him. But honestly, I admire Tucker Carlson for even taking it there. To let someone who I guess is controversial in the sense to come onto his platform and speak their mind, because he does push back.

Focus Group Participant 8 (48:01)

I didn't know who Nick Fuentes really was. I mean, last year, in December, when the attempted assassination on him happened, I saw it in news, but I didn't know who he was. I didn't look into him until the Charlie Kirk situation happened. I see a lot of memes. I'm on social media a lot, and I saw a lot of people saying, like, oh, Nick Fuentes can be the next Charlie Kirk. And I didn't realize, like those messages, messages were coming from probably Democratic liberal people. And I went and looked up Nick Fuentes and I watched a couple of his streams because I thought maybe, you know, movies, stuff that he's saying is being clipped out of context. I need to see this for myself. And I watched probably three of his two hour streams and I was dumbfounded by the stuff that he was saying. But, like, what everyone says, let him say what he wants. Let Tucker Carlson to let him come on the podcast, say what he wants, and let people be the judge of whether they're gonna support him or dislike him.

Sarah Longwell (48:57)

So Nick Fuentes now has around a million followers on Twitter. He's become sort of a household name, certainly just in politics. Maybe not a household name in every household, but like, certainly on the right and certainly in people who follow politics. In fact, Marjorie Taylor Greene, who you said hates him, she was one of the early stars to go to one of his white nationalist conferences when he wasn't as big of a deal. But one of the historians you talked to, and I think this is really right, and I want to dig into it as like a closing conversation. He said, what we're seeing is Fuentes, Carlson, Vance and others. And I would throw, like Candace Owens in there. Laura Loomer engaged in the battle to be the legitimate heir to Trumpism. Do you think that's a fair read of what kind of influence Fuentes wants to have on the right? Because we're watching just the crack up on the right right now. And some of it is, as I've been watching it, I'm like, okay, Is this partly trying to fill the void? That Charlie Kirk, he was like a pretty larger than life figure. He was kind of a glue in the movement. And a lot of people been looking at Megyn Kelly lately. Is she the glue? And so she's basically taken this. I will not say anything negative about Tucker, about anybody else. Mr. Johnny Clean Hands here. Is this what's happening? Are we trying to be Trump's heir, Charlie Kirk's heir, lead the right? Is that how these people view themselves? Is that what they're fighting for?

Robert Draper (50:17)

I think to some degree. You know, Fuentes doesn't strike me. I've talked to him a few times as a terribly strategic person, but he has pretty good instincts. You know, he was a severe critic of Kirk when Charlie was alive, immediately doubled back on the heels of Charlie's assassination, devoted an entire program to really talking about what a giant Charlie Kirk was. And now it's loath to say hardly anything about Kirk, though he said a couple of unkind things about Kirk's widow, Erica. But he's very conscious of the fact that that following is up for grabs and Fuentes possesses no organizing skill of the type that Charlie Kirk once did. And I mean, he is a true unmade bed of a human being. And there's actually, I talked about it on the show about how he once slept on his couch for a day because he had put all of his freshly washed clothes on his bed and didn't feel like folding them. I mean, that's Fuentes's shtick. And, and honestly, that's relatable. Yeah, yeah, no, totally. Yeah. And again, I think he's very clever at, at describing in a self deprecating way the life of his own listeners in addition to himself, you know, what the focus groupers, a lot of them didn't know who he was, but I suspect that that's generational, that if they were 25 or under, they would have known. And it was interesting how so many of them said, well, you know, Tucker was staying true to his brand by having anyone and everyone on being a free speech absolutist and all. Well, the criticism Carlson is facing is that he really didn't push back that much. And especially given the fact that Fuentes was kind of on his Sunday school behavior with Carlson, left a lot of his more virulent views at the doorstep, you know, on the way in to doing that interview. So for the uninitiated, that did not give anyone the crispest distillation of who Nick Fuentes is and what he believes. And so for those people who object to the interview, there are some who object to just the fact that Carlson, with his large following, platformed Fuentes at all. But I think more saliently, he was criticized for not pushing back on Fuentes and allowing Fuentes basically to kind of command a very sanitized narrative of himself.

Sarah Longwell (52:35)

Yeah, it was a total, like, fluffball interview. But going back to this question of the jockeying for position on the future of the right, because I sometimes get from a lot of people in the media when they ask me questions, whatever, they're like, well, you know, what would it take for the Republican Party to go back to the party of Mitt Romney? And then we could just argue about, you know, taxes. And I'm like, listen, guys, there's no going back. It's never coming back. And let me tell you what would J.D. vance and Marco Rubio would be the most normal ticket on a field against the Candace Owens, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Tucker Carlson, like that is the future of the right. Because you watch this stuff really closely. Where do you think it's all going?

Robert Draper (53:16)

Look, I do think that there is still a Republican establishment. There is still a donor class with formidable energy, and that has become increasingly at cross purposes with the MAGA small donor base. And so we'll see how that plays out because clearly JD Vance is trying to appeal to both. It is a conspicuous silence on Vance's part regarding Tucker Carlson and, you know, his whole thing with Heritage and with Nick Fuentes. Vance is very close to Carlson, and if he doesn't have to take a position, he won't. But I'm with you, Sarah. It's hard for me to imagine that the Republican goes anywhere near anything resembling the days of Mitt Romney. And I think you're also right that a Vance Rubio ticket would be looked back on as the most softball MAGA ticket imaginable. Which is exactly why Nick Fuentes speaks in the terms that he does towards JD Vance and Marco Rubio and Steve Bannon too, for that matter. Not a fan of either of those. And so I think that where this is going is not wanting to sound like I'm idealizing Charlie Kirk or something, but that Kirk was so gifted at keeping the Republican Party focused on the common enemy, the left. And now we are clearly seeing a sentiment in which not just the Rhinos, but a broadly expansive definition of Republican apostates or conservative apostates is going to really be the state of play. And I think we're going to see an increasingly fractured party, but one where as long as Candace Owens and Tucker Carlson and increasingly Nick Fuentes have the traction that they do, the party's moving their way, not in the opposite direction.

Sarah Longwell (55:12)

Okay, Robert Draper, thanks for joining us, man. This was so good. And thanks to all of you for listening to another episode episode of the focus group podcast. We'll be back next week, but in the meantime, remember to rate and review us on Apple Podcasts, subscribe to The Bulwark on YouTube and become a Bulwark plus member at the Bulwark.com See you guys next week.