Brooks and Capehart on progressive Democrats winning primaries
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/brooks-and-capehart-on-progressive-democrats-winning-primaries
David Brooks of The Atlantic and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW join Geoff Bennett to discuss the week in politics, including President Trump once again upending the GOP's agenda in Congress, progressives sweeping the Democratic primaries in New York and Vice President JD Vance's comments defending Richard Nixon.
Read the Full Transcript
Notice: Transcripts are machine and human generated and lightly edited for accuracy. They may contain errors.
Geoff Bennett:
President Trump once again upends the GOP's agenda in Congress, and progressive Democrats swept the Democratic primaries in New York.
To discuss that and more, we turn tonight to Brooks and Capehart . That's "The Atlantic"'s David Brooks, who joins us tonight from the Aspen Institute's Ideas Festival, and Jonathan Capehart of MS NOW.
It's great to see you both.
So, Congress passed the most significant housing affordability bill in decades with overwhelming bipartisan support in the House and Senate. President Trump abruptly cancels the ceremonial bill signing because he's upset that Congress won't embrace his elections bill.
With affordability being the defining issue of both parties heading into November, what is it -- what do you make of this president walking away from what could have been a victory lap?
Jonathan Capehart:
And let's not forget just how big the vote was for this housing bill in the Senate, 85-5. When was the last time you heard of any bill passing the Senate, especially the configuration of this Senate, by that much?
This was something Republicans desperately wanted. It was something that they would be able to run on in the midterms. Some were already crowing about it on social media, and then the president lowers the hammer over a fit of pique over whatever it was in that moment.
And now they all have to run away from it. There's -- we don't even know if the speaker has or when he's going to transmit the bill to the White House so that the 10-day clock can start ticking. This, to me -- I can't remember who I heard say this. But they said it seems that the president doesn't care that much about a Republican majority.
What he cares about is dominance over the Republican Party, whatever the size of it is. And if that's the case, he very well might get his wish.
Geoff Bennett:
David, what about that, the president really being focused on being the dominant player here, trying to use this refusal to sign the housing bill as leverage for this voter I.D. bill that is stalled in a Republican-led Senate?
David Brooks:
Are you asking me if Donald Trump is concerned about himself?
Geoff Bennett:
Yes.
(Laughter)
David Brooks:
Yes, I think so.
I have been trying to go back through history and think of a time where somebody who -- an impulsive narcissist got less chaotic or less impulsive as he aged. And I can't think of any times in history. The course of the behavior is toward decay, and Trump is moving from impulsivity to just chaos on that day.
And I think it's part of just the natural process of the psychological deterioration that happens to a lot of presidents. But it's also part of what's happened over the last six months. I don't think, that day, that day when he canceled the signing ceremony with like 90 minutes before it was supposed to happen, when he ran off -- went off on a tear about the things he's obsessed with, I don't think it it's unrelated to Iran.
I think he understands, as everybody within the administration must understand, that this was one of the big defeats of the last many decades. Republicans know it. Democrats know it. People in the White House know it. And so he senses things sliding away from him, his power weakening, his stature humiliated.
And I think it's leading him to behave in much more obsessive ways than even he has the last decade.
Geoff Bennett:
Well, let's shift our focus to the outcome of the New York primaries, because the candidates who were backed by New York's Mayor Zohran Mamdani ousted two sitting House Democrats, to include the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.
And the House Democratic leader, Hakeem Jeffries, he campaigned aggressively against Mamdani's candidates and ended up losing. So, Jonathan, is this a genuine realignment of the Democratic Party, or is this in many ways specific to New York City politics?
Jonathan Capehart:
I think it's very specific to New York City politics. And let's have the realignment conversation once we get through the November general election.
But, even then, let's keep in mind, this -- we're talking about congressional seats. We're talking about seats within the five boroughs of New York City. If anything, this shows that, yes, Mayor Mamdani is a political force in New York City. But is Mayor Mamdani a political force outside of the five boroughs of New York City?
Is he a political force in, say Maine or Iowa or Michigan, Minnesota, in a purple district? If a Democratic socialist wins in a non-blue majority district or a purple district or even in a red state, then let's have the conversation about a realignment of the Democratic Party.
But this could -- this makes me think Speaker Tip O'Neill's -- I think it was Speaker Tip O'Neill who said all politics is local. If you are a politician right now in New York City and you have got DSA behind your name, your chances of getting elected are much greater than they were when I lived there 20-something years ago.
Geoff Bennett:
And let's talk about that label DSA, because, David, for a generation, a socialist was the attack that Republicans hoped that Democrats would walk into. And now you have a generation of Democrats, progressive Democrats, who are claiming this title, this Democratic socialist title outright.
They're declaring it with no apologies. What do you make of that generational split here?
David Brooks:
Yes, I think there's somewhat of a realignment going on.
The Democratic Party's heart and soul used to be the labor movement. It used to be the unions. It's not anymore. The heart and soul of the Democratic Party is the universities and especially the elite universities. And so the candidate who won in New York 13, Darializa Avila Chevalier, went to Columbia, was an activist in the Gaza protests. She is a sociology Ph.D., or I think she's trying to get her Ph.D.
And she grows out of that place. And if you look at all the candidates that -- the DSA candidates, where they did well, they did very well in the more affluent, the whiter and the better educated parts of New York City. And the traditional candidates did well in the poorer and more multiracial parts of New York City.
And so the faculty lounge has become a strong part of the Democratic Party and faculty lounge politics have become a strong part of the Democratic Party. And that I think extends somewhat beyond New York City. You have Democratic socialist candidates in Washington, D.C., mayoral race, around the country. You have other DSA candidates.
I don't think it's going to totally realign the party. There just aren't that many people with sociology doctorates and people who respond to this faculty lounge politics. But there are enough. And I think one of the things that will shift within the Democratic Party as a whole is I think Israel will become a flash point for whoever wants to be the nominee in 2028.
I think the Democratic Party is really shifting strongly on that one, I think on some of the economic issues. Where I'm curious to see, if we go back to no fund of police. Avila Chevalier is a prison abolitionist, and she's been asked repeatedly, do you think murderers should serve time in jail? And she refuses to answer that question.
Democrats did very poorly a couple of years ago because of the defund the police. That just seemed out of touch to a lot of people, including a lot of Democrats. And will the party make that mistake again because the -- where the energy is in the party is in the DSA wing? But hope for the long-term elections is the traditional parts of the party somehow getting some mojo and some energy to match what they're up against.
Geoff Bennett:
Well, as you have got some Democrats embracing the socialist title and far left policies, you have got J.D. Vance embracing Richard Nixon. He said this past week that if Watergate happened today, it would be a 12-hour news story and that the idea it took down a presidency is crazy.
Listen to this.
Vice President J.D. Vance:
I think that his historical legacy is enjoying a bit of a renaissance, but I think deservedly so. As I joked with Robert backstage, if Watergate happened tomorrow, it would be like a 12-hour news story. The idea that it would have taken down a presidency is crazy.
Geoff Bennett:
Thoughts?
Jonathan Capehart:
So many, we don't have an we don't have enough time.
Look, this isn't -- Nixon did not fall because of the deep state, which is what he said in another part of that answer. His presidency fell because he had the one thing that Donald Trump has never had, and that's a sense of shame.
When fellow Republicans went to President Nixon and said, because of all the stuff you did, bugging the DNC and all these criminal acts, we are going to impeach you, and rather than President Nixon suffering the shame of being at the time what would have been the first president impeached in a very long time, he decided to resign.
That's not what we're dealing with here with President Trump. And certainly Vice President Vance wrapping his arms around Nixon is a very curious thing to do.
Geoff Bennett:
Well, he also drew an explicit parallel between himself and Richard Nixon. Here's another clip.
J.D. Vance:
At a personal level, OK,young senator, vice president, writes some bestselling books, is hated by the media, it kind of sounds like J.D. Vance. So I'm a little -- I have always liked -- I have always liked Richard Nixon.
Geoff Bennett:
David, in the minute we have left.
David Brooks:
They both have a 5:00 shadow.
I -- first, Watergate was a serious criminal business. Dozens of people went to jail, Haldeman and Erlichman, the two top White House aides, John Mitchell, John Dean, Jeb Stuart Magruder. Dozen -- more than a dozen people went to jail. It was a criminal enterprise.
But having said that, J.D. Vance is absolutely right. It would be a one-day story today, because you define deviancy down. The standards of the entire country have been deteriorating because of what we have had lived through over the last decade. And for that reason, the Republicans would not do what Republicans did in 1974, which was to tell him you got to go.
And so it would -- he is right. It would be an absolute one-day story, and we would all move on.
(Laughter)
Geoff Bennett:
David Brooks joining us from the Aspen Ideas Festival, Jonathan Capehart joining us from this very desk, thank you both.
(Laughter)
Jonathan Capehart:
I was just wondering, is Vice President Vance a bestselling author? I don't know. I would just throw that out there too.
(Laughter)
Jonathan Capehart:
Sorry, Geoff.
No comments:
Post a Comment