4:17
Well, let's get an overview. As I say, two sleeps before the midterms. Lori Dundon is the former state official for President Obama and an American foreign policy and national security specialist in Bordeaux. And in New York, we have Donald Green, American political scientist at Columbia University and the co-author of Get Out the Vote. Good evening to both of you. Great to have you both on the program. Let's start. First of all, just set this up uh Don Green for us. Hitchhiker's Guide to the US elections wherever you're watching around the world right now. Now, if we want to watch a couple of states to be emblematic, you think right now, uh, of
where perhaps the wider picture might be, where would you take us? I would take you to Michigan, which is where you were just a moment ago, in part because it's not only a significant battle in terms of the battle for the control of the Senate, which is obviously super important, but it's also a battle for control of the Democratic Party. Um, if the progressive Democrats score a victory there, the message to for 2028 is they need to nominate somebody who will be sympathetic to progressive politics. But if they were to lose, um, then the opposite message is taken home and so much is hanging in the balance.
Very interesting. And just to pick up on that point, Donald, just to explain a bit of the contest as to what's going on. So, first of all, it's worth saying that Alexandria Quesio uh Cortez was saying that she's put what a million um from her campaign funds into Abdul El's campaign and she says effectively you can win here. The Democrats, the progressive democratic socialist Democrats can win anywhere in the US. So, there's great hope for him as you say on that wing. What do you read into what's going on right now with this sort of political blue-on-blue moment? So the Haley Stevens who lost in the primary for the Democrats to Elsed appears to be supporting the Republican rival.
There's tremendously bad blood between the centrist Democrats and the progressive Democrats. And uh her reaction is not particularly um sportsmanlike, but uh is a sign of the times in a way um because everybody understands how the Michigan Senate race outcome will be interpreted. The other thing of course of relevance is that um you know everybody kind of is kind of jockeying to seize the interpretation of the 2026 elections if the Democrats as expected win both the House and the Senate. The question is uh what will the how will it be interpreted? will be interpreted as a referendum on Donald Trump or more the appeal the special appeal that progressive politics have in at a moment of high inflation and uh you know real struggle on
the part of people who are you know basically trying to make ends meet. Um that I think also dovetales with the concern that has been aired in weeks and weeks of news coverage about corruption and the kind of over-the-top behavior of the billionaires whose um influence in American politics has uh surged in the wake of Supreme Court decisions that allow them to essentially donate unlimited amounts of money to campaigns. You've just hit up on something that might actually give us a reading of probably possibly Lori. I don't if you'd agree with this just from listening to the professor there um that two referendums perhaps going on in the midst of this vote. One on the
Republicans which we'll get to kind of Trump versus the old guard and we'll talk about Maine shortly what's going on with Susan Collins there. Um but also the Democrats, the progressives and those toward the center including you know the for your old boss President Obama. Do you share that view that what we could see in the next 48 hours is essentially the message of going forward for the Dems. We can't hear you. Lori, we're going to try and sort your sound out. Um, let's see if we can get your sound back, Lori. Um, hello.
Are you there? We can hear you loud and clear. Yes, take the floor. Great. Uh, no. I that's I think one of many uh many fallout. Are you getting an echo there? Okay. One of many fallouts we'll be looking at um after the results come in. I mean, I think the professor hit it completely right that there is a real question about the identity of the Democratic party and where it goes and after what's very likely to be a large win to some extent and we just don't know how big those numbers will be. We don't know if that will also carry the Senate for the Democrats or just some numbers large numbers in the House. But either way, what they do with that win, um, it seems that Democratic
strategists are focused on showing they can deliver by 2028 and really focus on kind of a long-term strategy. But that's that's going to depend on how uh, Congress actually functions to legislate. Will the speaker have enough uh, leeway if they gain 30 seats? you know, that gives them a lot more leeway to navigate between these factions within the Democratic party to pass legislation or to get something done whether uh rather than if it's a very tight margin and he has to uh you know he's almost kind of held hostage to one side or the other. So where the Democratic party goes after this will be a big question. there will be big questions. They can deliver on the expectations, the very high expectations
that the population are now putting on them. If they're frustrated with Trump not delivering the on the economy, the Democrats will be that do win will be pressed uh to deliver. But there's so many other takeaways I think that are are uh huge both for uh how Trump will govern after the results come through. Um as and also what it means for what's kind of been the classic Trump coalition in the last two big presidential um presidential elections. this unusual coalition that he was able to uh to cobble together that really undermined what we had known for political campaign strategies.
Well, let's look at those in detail quickly uh on terms of how he governs most presidents when they lose big in a midterm cycle and that's not necessarily surprising. Historically, that happens. the midterms are a referendum and on how the president's doing and a lot of times the population said not good enough and you know the other side wins a good number but this is quite a bit different if Trump does not change how he's going to act executively if he just says you know I'm still the one who knows best I'm still the one who has executive power and pushes back on congressional or ignores congressional um uh efforts to get to get things done. Um, so this will be unique and what comes forward on that
track. And within the Republican party, we can talk a little bit later about what this means, what the takeaways mean for this coalition. When you look at areas like Kansas or areas in the Midwest that are up for grabs now that the Republican party had not expected at all to be this close, had unexpected to spend their campaign money on, had not expected to be um having to invest time in. Uh this is really going to raise some questions. I hear you, Lori, there's a number of issues you've brought up. Let's just try and triage some of them. And before we do that, Professor Green, I want to come to you in a moment. Let's go to Maine first of all because as we're on now, as we're speaking,
uh let's go to the uh to the Democratic candidate right now, Troy Jackson. What he's got to say that actually had um their son uh held up by ICE and detained for 48 hours and the only way that he was able to get released was to self uh deport himself to Canada. I mean, he's a main citizen. Um and that's what's going on right now. you know, people that are know that fuel prices are out of hand and they're going to get worse. People that know that um you know, we're going to lose three to five billion dollars in our healthcare. So, Troy Jackson, for context, worth saying here, clearly we're hearing the rhetoric that he's against pushing back on the uh the controversial ICE
maneuverings of this year, but also he was the replacement candidate for the Democrats. They had their big problems in Maine. And doesn't it get to the point, professor, that this is the other referendum possibly that's worth looking at, which is Susan Collins's case for the Republicans keeping Trump at arms length and what sort of popularity that proves of the old Republican God. I agree. I think this is a turning point really in the um in the Republican party because if she loses, she is one of the very last remaining uh centrist Republicans and she was a kind of ambivalent supporter of the Trump agenda
casting a crucial uh vote um uh in the uh big you know the big legislative juggernaut in 2025. I think the main thing though that is happening is this idea that the candidates um running in these battleground states on the Republican side have to tack to the center because they know that Trump is largely unpopular in their states. And so when he announces pretend that I'm on the ballot um you think well that really does play into the hands of the Democratic opponents. Very interesting. Just going back just listening to that point, Lori, going back to your point a second ago, which is about what happens for this kind of the beginning of the end really of the Trump era, this next two years and the
checks and balances. And to kind of ask you your the question that you raised, you know, if we've got a president who's been leading particularly on many policies on executive orders, not needing Congress, and you the courts catching up with him all of the time, always lagging behind it seemed. Um, where do you see the change happening if the Democrats take both the House of Representatives and the Senate? Um, well, I uh like I said, I think he's we should not expect that he's going to change his behavior of going full-blown on executive power changes politically believing that his team can pull together whatever justification uh that is enough for them to keep
moving forward. he's going to go forward with the um you know, I'm going to act try and catch me. Uh whether that's the courts or just reality catching up with him like in this election. Um the Congress I think will uh be looking to areas where they can start to or try to rein in uh some of his most extreme policies. for example, even so far, there was enough will to kind of block the voter suppression uh legislation that was able to that was pitched to go through and hoped by the uh Trump Republicans to go through before this election. Um so I think things like that there will be even stronger uh ability to block. There will be questions of how far I'm sorry it's an open question as
to how far uh the Democraticled Congress uh especially would get distracted going down the indictment track. Uh that I think will uh be tempting particularly in areas of corruption. But whether they will allow that to kind of divert all of their energies, uh that would be a challenge to again the governing agenda and meeting the expectations that are being put on them uh from the citizens in this election. But I think something it's also going to be very interesting to watch is let's say how this plays out within the dynamics of the team of adviserss and staff around the president. So I don't think this is going to change much of how Trump himself acts. He acts how he wants and decides what he thinks, you know, is
his decision is best. But I wouldn't be surprised if there's a round of firings. I wouldn't be surprised if, you know, some of the he turns to some of the military uh leadership and says, you know, the Iran war was your fault. You gave me bad advice. Um, you know, and on other cabinet positions, he, you know, doing it before the election means indicates, well, I'm I was wrong. So, he doesn't he hates to do that. but afterwards could be kind of a cleaning house. And what's interesting is there were splits and factions even within his White House and political circles before the Iran war of whether this would be a risk to his domestic agenda. Yes. And delivering on his promises on energy and
no forever war. So there were people that inside semi voiced those uh opinions or at least uh were talking amongst themselves about these worries. Will those type of groups have more leeway um and more of a voice internally uh after the results come through tomorrow? Who knows? But the these are kind of very in the weeds dynamics that'll matter. One thing coalition I think is on your point there Lori just for a second I want to pick to fall out it will also matter greatly to the care campaign strategist. Okay, Lori, to that point, let me bring um let me bring Professor Green back in because one
thing that we've been talking about the checks and balances and how things might change, but let's just take us up to Alaska for a moment and I want to look at perhaps difficult moments for the Democrats as well in the kind of last stages of this cycle, particularly this New York Time explosive piece saying that the Democrats, the allegation is that they were looking for the rival, the Republican rival Dan Sullivan, other Dan Sullivanss of the same name that they'd found the Dan Sullivan that he put him on the ticket to dilute the vote and therefore confuse the voter as well. Now Mary Pelah, the Democrat candidate, says, "Well, they deny any wrongdoing this, but this is surely explosive." And does it play into
President Trump's claims that he'll only accept the election quote if it's honest? You know, it certainly um is part of the storied American history of election shenanigans. Um, this is certainly not the first time that the uh name game has been played in US elections. Um, so it's a kind of time-honored tradition to uh to make monkey business with um the you know with candidates of the similar name as your opponent. Um and both sides have done this. But I I would say that the point you're making, the broader point you're making of federalizing the uh state control of election administration is an important one. Up to this point, uh, the Trump administration has lost every court battle that involves its attempts
to reign in the states. Um, and it's not clear what's going to happen, um, if they weigh in. The problem with the Alaska case is it's not obvious what law they are enforcing exactly. Um, and so I don't really expect them to prevail in the courts, especially since what they're asking to have the states do, segregate ballots, is seems almost impossible. Um so the at any rate the point there is um you know the Trump administration has really put the pedal to the metal in terms of every possible maneuver to save seats in this election um from gerrymandering and other things. But I think that in the end uh you know the end of this effort to styy the you know the democratic juggernaut
is going to it'd be similar to Orban's Hungary where you lose badly enough and there's no plausible way that you can reverse um things even if you were to intervene in Alaska. So my sense is that um the defeat will be too great for them to overturn. And you might wonder, well, why then would they play these cards when they're when this is why make it so partisan? Why not go to the center? And I think that the answer is that President Trump's instincts are always to go to his base. Um he I think he psychological level, he likes the kind of um adoration that he gets when he goes to uh these kinds of rallies, but also at a more fundamental level, both sides want to play to their base because it means that they don't have to
compromise. And um and in some sense, you know, the fact that the progressives in Michigan are playing the America first card is a reminder that these kinds of um maneuvers not going to the center um play well potentially in both parties. And Professor Green, let me to follow up to that point you made. the Democrats, senior Democrat to the House Intelligent Committee this week, um Jim Hines, saying this, "We're making the assumption that the president is not going to accept the results of what looks to be a very challenging election for him and his party. I mentioned the quote from President Trump. I will accept a quote if it's honest. But it's worth also saying, isn't it, that in 10 years, he has never conceded defeat in an election.
True. In a way, it's part of his political genius, if you like. you know, um, every other candidate who loses an election, uh, presidential election is consigned to irrelevancy. So, John Kerry or Al Gore, their campaign defeat leads to the end of their political career really as a presidential contender. But Donald Trump by denying the outcome of the 2020 election basically prevented himself from being consigned to irrelevance. He said, "I won." And um, and indeed that was his calling card for running again. Can we make a point about your former boss, Lori? Um, you worked for President Obama's administration. It's worth saying the call and the response. No.
Yes. No. But I was formerly in the US government under his administration. Yes. I guess he would be the overall boss of that. No, it wasn't under Obama. No, no, no. Different timing. Apologies. Just a I would love to have worked there at that time, but I was already in France here. Uh for clarity, which president was it under? Um it was under the Clinton administration and then I worked uh on politics in Washington DC for about another 10 years.
Right. Well, it takes us back to a point. So for Clinton clearly a extraordinary uh orator similar pattern with Obama too. And we've seen this incredible call and response this week kind of the two well the president and a predecessor all about you know the cheesecake factory about Saddam Hussein about the White House and it's gone on and it's gone viral and I wonder if it's a blessing and a curse for the party that both he gets this level of viral attention and perhaps we can only compare it maybe with John Ooff in Georgia right now. So my question to you is twofold. To the level that the lack of Obama is a problem for the party and whether you see Osaf as his successor.
Well, I think actually how we began this interview with the professor's point about you know the where this uh where the takeaways lead the Democratic party to its self-reflection and how it uh will address its internal fissures uh for the next two years to come. That's that's an open question and I think you know trying to predict who would be uh the potential presidential candidate is far too early uh to see how that will play out within the dams. Uh I think um you know I think one of the takeaways though will be both sides looking at how their coalition of voters uh shifted from this election. And I mentioned that earlier in terms of Trump, but you know, if we look at things like the core part of his
core base or the core electoral group he had brought in, Trump had brought in of rural white uh voters, rural white and lowerass voters. You know, if you look at what's happening in the heartland and the Midwest and all of the races that are surprisingly close, you may see a lot of those rural communities now kind of shifting back to the Dems and that will change the strategy and the thinking of the party. Uh its candidate recruitment, the way they see going forward for 2028. Uh, Hispanics are also another uh, large group that are seeming to shift back away from Texas. There was an surprising uh, ad by one of the candidates in
Texas, Maria Elvie, who put a bold ad on the air and literally, you know, showing her break from Trump said, "Some of your policies on immigration enforcement are just wrong. Don't believe what your adviserss are saying." um you know and and we uh some of the Hispanics who helped you get the same Hispanics who helped you get elected in 2024 feel betrayed today. So for you know Republican uh candidates to come out and say things like that so ble um it really demonstrates there's there's some some questions going on uh within these blocks and how both parties will strategize going forward remains to be seen. Final thought, Professor Green.
Lori did a very good diplomatic swerve on me there. She didn't give a sense of her personal thoughts on John Oaf, but I do want to end on this point because it goes back to the beginning. Takes us to Georgia and a an ortor who people speak of as almost certainly putting his name into the ring to be president, yet he's not said. Um, what's your take? Give us your perspective on John Oaf and internationally what we should know about him. You know, it's a certainly a meteoric career. um up to this point has won a red state and uh wanted you know last time in a very contentious election. I mean it so in some ways he is in that narrow class of Clintonlike Democrats
who can win in the south um even as you know left of center candidates. So it's um it's kind of remarkable. That said, you know, there's kind of a sense, again, that there's a fork in the road for the Democrats, but there's kind of a sense that going into this next election, they're likely to nominate a governor in part because they want to show off their executive experience. So, Basher, Newsome, probably more likely uh nominee. Very good to speak to both of you. Thank you, Professor Donald Green, Columbia University. And thank you to you, Lori, as well. Lori Dundan, former state official for President Clinton, an American foreign policy and national
security specialist. Thank you both.
