0:10

I'm Charlie Sykes. Welcome to this episode

0:12

of To the Contrary podcast. One of

0:14

my very, very first podcast guests joins

0:16

me again today, Peter Wiener. You know

0:19

him from the New York Times, The

0:21

Atlantic, a senior fellow at the Trinity

0:23

Forum, former White House aide, and all

0:25

around smart guy. So Peter, first of

0:28

all, welcome back to the podcast. Great

0:30

to be with you, Charlie. Thanks. Love

0:32

your work and it's more important than

0:34

ever. So, it's thrilled to be with

0:36

you. Okay, so we are recording

0:39

this in the midst of

0:41

the third consecutive day of

0:43

a global meltdown. You have

0:45

real panic across the markets

0:47

internationally. The global markets crashed

0:49

overnight and Donald Trump has

0:51

reacted by number one going

0:54

golfing and number two apparently

0:56

now midday on Monday threatening

0:58

even more tariffs against China

1:00

that I think if you

1:02

do the math. that if

1:04

he raises the tariffs as

1:06

much as he's now threatening it

1:08

would be 130% tariffs. So I

1:11

guess let's take a deep breath

1:13

because you know day by day

1:15

by day we've had another extraordinary

1:18

story whether it is the attack

1:20

on the rule of law whether

1:22

it is the attack on the

1:25

health system whatever I guess this is

1:27

what I'm really wrestling with right

1:29

now. Why are so many people

1:32

surprised? Why are they shocked by

1:34

this? Given the fact that, you

1:36

know, guys like you and me, and

1:38

I'm not saying the, I'm not trying

1:40

to do the, I told you so,

1:42

but for eight years, we've been saying,

1:45

look, it's right there, why are

1:47

you not seeing this? Do you

1:49

understand what a dangerous thing this

1:51

is to put him back in

1:53

the Oval Office? Why are people

1:55

shocked by what we have been

1:57

telling them was going to happen?

1:59

The short answer is they shouldn't

2:02

be, but in terms of why

2:04

are they, that I think is

2:06

complicated. And I think human psychology

2:08

bears a lot on the answer

2:10

to that question, which is that

2:13

if you chart the. support that

2:15

Trump has gotten over the last

2:17

10 years. You know, it started

2:19

somewhat gradually. Some of his qualities

2:21

were more of a bug than

2:23

a feature, but over time, a

2:26

series of accommodations were made by

2:28

his followers. They became more and

2:30

more deeply invested in him. And

2:32

then as the polarization increased, the

2:34

acrimony, the cruelty and crudity of

2:37

Donald Trump, the antipathy between Trump

2:39

supporters and his critics grew and

2:41

grew. And I think a while

2:43

ago that an awful lot of

2:45

supporters simply cannot at this point

2:47

break with him, not just because

2:50

it would be breaking with him,

2:52

it would be breaking in some

2:54

fundamental way with themselves. And it

2:56

would be essentially saying... to Pete

2:58

Wainer and to Charlie Sykes and

3:01

to a lot of other people,

3:03

maybe you were right and maybe

3:05

we were wrong. And I think

3:07

that they, that is too psychologically

3:09

painful for a lot of them

3:12

and they won't do it. And

3:14

then on top of that, I

3:16

think that Trump has rewired the

3:18

emotional. brain of a lot of

3:20

his supporters and the the acrimony

3:22

the intensity of the conflict is

3:25

actually almost addictive it's like a

3:27

dopamine rush. So I think a

3:29

lot is going going on that

3:31

is understood in the realm of

3:33

human psychology that doesn't make it

3:36

any. any better and in some

3:38

ways it makes it worse but

3:40

I suspect that's part of the

3:42

explanation. Well and there are people

3:44

who rationalized that there were people

3:46

who made the the Faustian bargain

3:49

was to was transactional but other

3:51

people who have just been in

3:53

denial you know I wrote about

3:55

a guy who saying he was

3:57

just assumed that with all of

4:00

his flaws that there would still

4:02

be adults in in the room

4:04

but I think there's been a

4:06

failure of imagination that Donald Trump

4:08

was who he told him told

4:11

us that he was all the

4:13

time so here's here's a quote

4:15

from and this is from Susan

4:17

Glasser's column it's a quote from

4:19

Gary Kasperoff who you know attributed

4:21

the failure to anticipate Trump's trade

4:24

war to an epic level of

4:26

denial about Trump's Vladimir Putin-like brand

4:28

of autocratic personality disorder. After all,

4:30

Putin's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine didn't

4:32

make any sense either to many

4:35

of those presented with irrefutable evidence

4:37

he was playing it. Instead, Kasparov

4:39

suggested a maxim for our unhappy

4:41

times. Dictators always lie about what

4:43

they've done, but they're often quite

4:45

plain about what they want to

4:48

do. And Trump's made it very

4:50

clean what he wants to do.

4:53

Yeah, I think that's quite right.

4:55

I mean, Gary Kasparov has been

4:57

a clear and powerful moral voice

5:00

during this whole period. And I

5:02

think he's right. For an awful

5:04

lot of Americans, the idea of

5:07

an authoritarian takeover and authoritarian mindset

5:09

in the present simply alien to

5:11

our experience. And so I think

5:14

a lot of people find it

5:16

hard to assume that's the case.

5:18

Beyond that, Charlie, and I have

5:21

been saying this really from 2015,

5:23

I remember having a conversation with

5:25

a very well-known Washington Post reporter

5:27

in the spring of 2015 who

5:30

was making calls to Republicans about

5:32

how to cover Trump. And I...

5:34

told him at that time, was

5:37

about a 45 minute conversation, I

5:39

said, the most important thing that

5:41

you can do if you want

5:44

to understand Trump is talk to

5:46

psychologists and psychiatrists, because I said

5:48

the fundamental thing to understand about

5:51

him is at the time I

5:53

was using the phrase disorder personality.

5:55

He's a sociopath. And I think

5:57

even people that might nod their

6:00

head in agreement, if I said

6:02

that, still have a very, very

6:04

hard time knowing what that means

6:07

and accepting that reality, there's a

6:09

book called The Sociopath Next Door,

6:11

which is a very good book.

6:14

in part because it explains how

6:16

difficult it is for people who

6:18

are non-sociopathic to understand people who

6:20

are. It's just a simply a

6:23

different universe. And Trump, I think,

6:25

falls into that category, the sort

6:27

of authoritarian sociopathic category. And people

6:30

aren't used to it. So they

6:32

keep giving in the benefit of

6:34

the doubt, like, you know, your

6:37

friend. And I have friends too.

6:39

somebody that I know actually didn't

6:41

vote for Trump or Harris, but

6:44

in the conversation leading up to

6:46

the election, he told me, I

6:48

think that Trump is going to

6:50

spend just a lot of time

6:53

on his golf game. And he's

6:55

not going to do a lot

6:57

of the things he says. And

7:00

my response to him was, you

7:02

know, given his record and his

7:04

history, you better assume something more

7:07

than he's going to go on,

7:09

play 18 holes, you know, every

7:11

day. Well, I mean, and let's

7:13

stick with this psychology because he

7:15

did go and play, I don't

7:18

know how many holes he played

7:20

over the weekend, and he's at

7:22

least publicly, you know, suggesting that

7:24

he is not going to budge,

7:26

even though we had these confused,

7:28

even though we had these confused

7:30

messages over the weekend, that we're

7:33

going to negotiate the tariffs to

7:35

maximum amount of confusion. You have

7:37

Howard Letnik out there saying we're

7:39

going to bring back out. But

7:41

is Donald Trump, as he's watching

7:43

this meltdown in the global marketplace,

7:45

as he's watching all these numbers

7:48

go down, is he alarmed or

7:50

is he enjoying the power that's

7:52

come to him and the drama

7:54

that he's created around him? Is

7:56

Donald Trump worried? Or is he

7:58

pretty like, this is what I

8:00

want? I've come into my full

8:03

power. Oh, I think it's much

8:05

more the latter, and that's important

8:07

to understand. It's part of the

8:09

reason why the normal political laws

8:11

of gravity don't apply to him,

8:13

which is approval rating goes down,

8:15

party gets anxious, midterms on the

8:18

horizon, special elections in the horizon,

8:20

special elections in the horizon, president

8:22

adjusts, president adjusts, in light of

8:24

that. I don't think that really

8:26

applies to him. I imagine he's

8:28

having the time of his life.

8:30

I don't think, in fact, I

8:33

would, I'm almost certain he doesn't

8:35

care about the pain that he's

8:37

inflicting because I've said before, I

8:39

think, morality, empathy, sympathy for Trump

8:41

is like trying to explain color

8:43

to a person born blind. I

8:45

just think it's possible for him

8:48

to see it. And his life

8:50

has to be understood as a

8:52

life in large part, not totally,

8:54

but in large part of vengeance.

8:56

That is what he lives for.

8:58

That is what motivates and gets

9:00

him up in the morning. And

9:03

I think that if you compare

9:05

him. this term to the first

9:07

term and people within the administration

9:09

have said as much. He's much

9:11

happier because the chaos is unconstitutional

9:13

checks on him. Exactly. And so

9:15

I think, you know, there's a

9:18

line in in the Dark Night,

9:20

one of the Batman movies where

9:22

Alfred says, says to Bruce Wayne,

9:24

who doesn't understand the Joker. And

9:26

Alfred says, I think it's actually

9:28

you who don't understand him. He

9:30

said some people just want to

9:33

watch the world burn. I think

9:35

Donald Trump just wants to watch

9:37

the world burn or at least

9:39

he wants to watch much of

9:41

America burn and that's what's happening.

9:43

Okay, but he, okay, I don't

9:45

disagree, but Donald Trump's image... What

9:48

he will tell his supporters is

9:50

that he is the great builder,

9:52

that he wants to make America

9:54

great again, that he wants to

9:56

create vast new prosperity. So on

9:58

the one hand you have this

10:00

image of somebody who claims that

10:03

I'm going to do this, and

10:05

yet we are seeing him running

10:07

around with a box of matches

10:09

burning down. the burning down so

10:11

again i hate this question but

10:13

is this is this just another

10:15

one of those moments that just

10:18

passes or is this a hinge

10:20

is that cognitive dissonance the great

10:22

builder who in fact in front

10:24

of the whole world is burning

10:26

things down does that actually do

10:28

you think that this will be

10:30

different than in the past i'm

10:33

not saying things like turning point

10:35

or hinge a fate or anything

10:37

like that but will this be

10:39

different you think and we don't

10:41

know of course Yeah, I think

10:43

it will be different. I just

10:45

think it's a more dangerous moment.

10:48

I think once he got that

10:50

second term and he surrounded himself

10:52

and what he believes, what he's

10:54

internalized is this relentless persecution on

10:56

him, that is his mindset. Now,

10:58

the important thing I think to

11:00

also always understand with Trump is

11:03

that there's not a strategy involved

11:05

and these different parts of him

11:07

don't necessarily cohere. He is often

11:09

at war with with with himself

11:11

and it's why. one day he

11:13

may say one thing and the

11:15

next day he may say he

11:18

may say something else he's an

11:20

almost entirely impulsive creature. So I

11:22

think these things can can exist

11:24

at the same time but I

11:26

think at the end of the

11:28

day what will drive him most

11:30

is the nihilism and the and

11:33

the cruelty and the sort of

11:35

unchecked power and that sort of

11:37

if you understand if you go

11:39

through when you've studied, talk to

11:41

psychologists about about sociopath's narcissistic personality

11:43

disorder. There's something else that I

11:45

think is probably relevant here, which

11:48

is he won and he won

11:50

on his own terms, right? A

11:52

lot of people were saying, you

11:54

can't win a second. term, you

11:56

know, closing by talking about Arnold

11:58

Palmer, Palmer's, Pina's size and, you

12:00

know, the J6 choir and all

12:03

of that. And he did it

12:05

and he still won. So what

12:07

that does for him in particular

12:09

is ratifies and says, your judgment

12:11

is best. Ignore what the other

12:13

people are saying, saying around you.

12:15

So what's the storyline now? The

12:18

storyline now is that these tariffs

12:20

may cause, you know, a collapse

12:22

of the global economy, but to

12:24

relax, everything's going to be fine.

12:26

That's the talking points of the

12:28

right wing. They don't believe it,

12:30

but he may. Well, you know,

12:33

the other thing that was interesting

12:35

over the weekend is Maggie Haberman,

12:37

who's studied him from the, you

12:39

know, the reporter for the New

12:41

York Times, she studied him for

12:43

years, she says, you know, he

12:45

doesn't no longer cares about certain

12:48

optics, you know, he's all a

12:50

lot of fucks to give. You

12:52

know, you know, and to your

12:54

point about how he won, that

12:56

campaign was Trump in full. That

12:58

campaign was there was that was

13:00

no pretense whatsoever you wrote about

13:03

this at the time everything there

13:05

was to know about the darkest

13:07

Impulses of Donald Trump were right

13:09

there front and center each rally

13:11

Was you know pushed that line

13:13

further and he won anyway and

13:15

then he comes into office and

13:18

he surrounds himself with this group

13:20

of misfit toys who are selected

13:22

basically by their their their most

13:24

slavish loyalty to him, but also

13:26

their extreme politics and the fact

13:28

they owe everything to him. That

13:30

should have been an indication. So

13:33

I want to keep coming back

13:35

to this point because something happened

13:37

on Monday morning that I thought

13:39

was was maybe kind of a

13:41

warning sign. Stock market was plunging

13:43

and by the way by the

13:45

time people see this we don't

13:48

know what the numbers are going

13:50

to be but during the morning

13:52

stock market was was plunging a

13:54

tweet. goes out. A fake tweet

13:56

implying that Paul Hassett, the economic

13:58

advisor, had said on Fox Business

14:00

that they were going to have

14:03

a 90-day pause in the terrorist.

14:05

The stock market soared. Trillions of

14:07

dollars changed hands. Then people realized

14:09

it was fake news. It was

14:11

bullshit. There was going to be

14:13

no. And the market went again.

14:15

And it occurs to me that

14:18

right now, the most... valuable thing

14:20

in the universe, or at least

14:22

in the world economy, is in

14:24

Donald Trump's head. And I hate

14:26

to say this, because we now

14:28

have an economy that is at

14:30

the mercy of the whims of

14:33

Donald Trump. We talk about authoritarianism

14:35

a lot. We talk about one-man

14:37

rule. But Donald Trump can move

14:39

trillions of trillions of dollars by

14:41

just changing his mind. First of

14:43

all, he's got to love that.

14:45

But also... How on earth do

14:48

we get to the point where

14:50

we gave him that power, including,

14:52

let's start with Congress, that Congress,

14:54

Article I, ceded all of this

14:56

power to him. The Parliament of

14:58

Great Britain did not give George

15:00

the third, the unilateral power to

15:03

impose massive taxes on the Congress.

15:05

They would have thought you were

15:07

crazy if you'd said, no, well,

15:09

he's the king. No, the king

15:11

does can't do that, but our

15:13

president can't. Yeah. Well, that's that

15:15

is the question that historians. The

15:18

whim economy. Yeah, absolutely, absolutely. And

15:20

I agree completely. And I also

15:22

agree that having that much power

15:24

being able to move markets is

15:26

for someone with his psychological makeup,

15:28

just an extraordinary terrifying sort of

15:30

addictive. quality. Yeah, you know, how

15:33

did, how did, how did we

15:35

get to this point? How did

15:37

people not anticipate it? Why didn't,

15:39

why didn't they stop it? I,

15:41

I think it was a cat

15:43

scan on, on, America and an

15:45

awful lot of Americans, a plurality

15:48

of Americans, most especially I might

15:50

say as a person of Christian

15:52

faith among evangelical Christians and fundamentalists

15:54

who are the group that are

15:56

most responsible for having put this

15:58

this freak and this freak show

16:00

in into power and you know

16:02

I think what happened over time

16:05

is in terms of what you

16:07

raised about Congress and the fact

16:09

that there are no checks that

16:11

there are no checks. It really

16:13

is a remarkable thing to look

16:15

back at the last 10 years

16:17

and just to plot how this,

16:20

not plot in the sense of

16:22

on a timeline and in terms

16:24

of events, you know, what happened

16:26

and how month after month, year

16:28

after year, they gave more and

16:30

more, and then as he gained

16:32

control over the Republican Party, first

16:35

the grassroots, not the so-called elite

16:37

or the establishment in the Republican

16:39

Party, they came later. But the

16:41

grassroots had this bond with Trump,

16:43

which is unlike anything that I've

16:45

ever seen, including with Ron Reagan.

16:47

Then the establishment falls like dominoes,

16:50

people like Marco Rubio and Jay-D

16:52

Vance and Josh Holly. I mean,

16:54

you go through them, Pete Hex,

16:56

of all of them, you know,

16:58

have collapsed and come into line.

17:00

They're fearful of taking him on.

17:02

They're worried about the fate of

17:05

Adam Ginsinger, it's Cheney and Romney

17:07

and Romney and so forth. And

17:09

so they do his bidding and

17:11

then they enter that world and

17:13

they become more and more a

17:15

part of that world. Look, look

17:17

at Marco Rubio now, but he

17:20

was 2015, right? He was a

17:22

leader of the so-called reform economy,

17:24

of which I was a part

17:26

of. And now he is one

17:28

of the authors. of a set

17:30

of policies that is going to

17:32

kill literally millions of people overseas

17:35

with the gunning of USAID and

17:37

PEPFAR. And it doesn't seem to

17:39

bother him at all. He doesn't

17:41

seem to be lifting a finger

17:43

to do anything about it. And

17:45

he's hardly the worst of it.

17:47

So these people have just gone

17:50

in the tank and we are

17:52

where we are. Well, and Marco

17:54

Rubio is, I think, completely unrecognizable

17:56

from what he used to be.

17:58

And you know, his transformation is

18:00

extraordinary. Also, it's worth remembering that

18:02

when he was confirmed as Secretary

18:05

of State, he was the normy.

18:07

he was the safe one. Every

18:09

single Democrat in the United States

18:11

Senate voted to confirm him as

18:13

US Secretary of State and apparently

18:15

he did not consider that in

18:17

any way limiting on his his

18:20

his zeal to become as as

18:22

magnified as possible. The other thing,

18:24

and again this is now an

18:26

old story for the two of

18:28

us, but it certainly turns out

18:30

that the ideological commitment of free

18:32

market conservatives to free markets was

18:35

extremely thin. It was millimeter thin.

18:37

That you go back and you

18:39

look at, for example, the speeches

18:41

that Ronald Reagan gave about why

18:43

protectionism was dangerous, why tariffs were

18:45

dangerous, and then you watch the

18:47

embrace, the magga embrace, the entire,

18:50

not just the magga embrace, but

18:52

the embrace of the congressional Republican

18:54

Party. of tariffs. It's truly extraordinary.

18:56

Now there are some voices pushing

18:58

back against it. You know, weirdly

19:00

enough, people like Ran Paul, who

19:02

remember why they're their fiscal conservatives.

19:05

There are others who are putting,

19:07

you know, legislation through. My guess

19:09

is nothing will come of that.

19:11

But just a reminder that this

19:13

is not about conservative economics in

19:15

any way whatsoever. I completely agree

19:17

with you Charlie and it's not

19:20

confined by the way to conservative

19:22

economics. He used to take the

19:24

pro-life movement, which would have had

19:26

an uprising against the slightest. act

19:28

against the pro-life cause from their

19:30

perception. And now what do you

19:32

have a person as head of

19:35

HHS, which is the most important

19:37

federal agency when it comes to

19:39

abortion, who as recently as last

19:41

year didn't believe in any restrictions

19:43

at any point with abortion. Trump

19:45

himself is de facto pro-choice. And

19:47

you see it with America's role

19:50

in the... the world. So you've

19:52

seen a complete flip ideologically. This

19:54

is not a conservative party. It's

19:56

a nativist populist, nihilistic party. And

19:58

it also underscores just what a

20:00

cult of personality it is. I

20:02

mean, I know as you do,

20:05

many people who I think at

20:07

the time really believed what they

20:09

said about traditional conservative policies. But

20:11

once Trump came in and he

20:13

decided to flip them on their

20:15

head, those people just went along

20:17

with him because their loyalty was

20:20

to him not to the ideals,

20:22

not to the convictions. And so

20:24

now the entire party has been.

20:26

you know, has been transformed. In

20:28

some cases, of course, people had

20:30

a financial incentive to do it

20:32

if you're part of the right

20:35

wing ecosystem. You know, there's a

20:37

lot of money, you can't upset

20:39

your audience. So that exists. But

20:41

even apart from that, I think

20:43

it is a kind of cult-like

20:45

moment, unlike we've seen in this

20:47

country. I want to get your

20:50

thoughts, though, on how this is

20:52

spread from the Republican Party, which

20:54

feels like last year's story, to

20:56

civil society as a whole. watching

20:58

these big law firms, this billion

21:00

dollar law firms, basically going to

21:02

receivership for Donald Trump. The universities

21:05

caving in, even media outlets, now

21:07

suddenly being afraid. And I'll give

21:09

you my theory is that part

21:11

of it is this is the

21:13

sense that there are no checks

21:15

and balances on Donald Trump, that

21:17

the courts, I think, have been

21:20

good guardrails. far, but I think

21:22

that there's a lack of confidence

21:24

in them, that there's not a

21:26

belief that it's just not worth

21:28

fighting because Congress is not going

21:30

to protect you, the independent agencies

21:32

are not independent anymore, and we

21:35

can't count on the courts that

21:37

have granted him immunity. So there

21:39

is this kind of sense that

21:41

none of the normal protections any

21:43

longer exist in our society. What

21:45

do you think? Yeah, I think

21:47

that's a very good analysis. I

21:50

agree with it. very little that

21:52

Donald Trump has done over the

21:54

last 10 years has surprised me

21:56

or the reactions that he has

21:58

elicited. What has surprised me a

22:00

little bit is how quickly the

22:02

across-the-board capitulation took place. She said

22:05

that the law firms, that the

22:07

universities, many media outlets, thankfully not

22:09

the ones I write for, but

22:11

Atlantic, they've remained strong. And principle,

22:13

but the others have collapsed. Why

22:15

has, why has that happened? There

22:17

I don't think it's, it's the

22:20

spread of... of a cult-like mentality.

22:22

I think it's just sheer fear

22:24

and terror for the reasons you

22:26

said. I think they feel like,

22:28

look, this guy is unhinged, he's

22:30

the most powerful man in the

22:32

world, there are no checks on

22:35

him, and he can go after

22:37

us, he can isolate us, he

22:39

can try and destroy us, and

22:41

we've got to do everything that

22:43

we can to duck, to hide,

22:45

to placate him, to cut deals

22:47

with him, not to upset him,

22:50

because there's fear that's how... authoritarian

22:52

takeovers happen. It's not simply that

22:54

you convince the majority or vast

22:56

number of people to believe in

22:58

what the authoritarian leader believes, but

23:00

it is that the other people

23:02

who don't believe become part of

23:05

the lie. They live the lie.

23:07

This is what Sotomayot wrote and

23:09

warned about and Havel and others.

23:11

I think that's really what is

23:13

what is going on. I feel

23:15

like we've just got to try

23:17

and survive for the next four

23:20

years plus and this is how

23:22

we're We're doing it, you know,

23:24

John F. Kennedy said that there's

23:26

a reason the profiles encourage is

23:28

a thin volume, and I think

23:30

we're seeing that play out. No,

23:32

and what's interesting is how quickly

23:35

it's become normalized. This is how

23:37

you do business with Donald Trump,

23:39

right? That you have to, you

23:41

know, slavishly praise him. Did you

23:43

need to go on cable television

23:45

if you work for him and

23:47

sound like some sort of a

23:50

North Korean television anchor, that you

23:52

need to come back to North

23:54

Korean television, that you need some

23:56

sort of a North Korean television

23:58

anchors. I think so. But I

24:00

mean, you even see like the

24:02

mainstream smart kid analysis is saying,

24:05

well, well, you know, you know,

24:07

You know, again, it's become systematized

24:09

that you pay him off, that

24:11

you praise him, that you cave

24:13

into him because this is the

24:15

way you do business in a

24:17

prudent world, which is like, wait,

24:20

this is also how you, you

24:22

know, how a president becomes above

24:24

the law and without any restraint.

24:26

And of course, now we're seeing

24:28

what if you give the president

24:30

this maximum power to hold the...

24:32

entire world economy hostage. And that's

24:35

why I wonder, it's like, where

24:37

did you think this was going

24:39

to lead? Where did you think

24:41

it was going to go? Did

24:43

you think this was a man

24:45

with a plan with great strategy?

24:47

And by the way, I love

24:50

the Fox News spin. He's a

24:52

billionaire. He's been talking about this.

24:54

He has a plan. He knows

24:56

exactly what he's doing. If anything

24:58

is clear right now, Peter, it's

25:00

that there is no plan. There

25:02

is no thing about that. And

25:05

I think the embarrassing part about

25:07

it is that you look at

25:09

the numbers the way he's doing

25:11

it, and it's so deeply incompetent.

25:13

And I think this is the

25:15

other thing is that you can

25:17

make a case for radical change,

25:20

but whether it's Elon Musk and

25:22

his 19-year-old Doge guys or this,

25:24

you have to ask yourself, you

25:26

know. Are these people who have

25:28

any clue of what they're doing?

25:30

I mean, the damage that these

25:32

misfit toys, almost at every level

25:35

of government, I mean, they can't

25:37

even put together, you know, a

25:39

chat, a group chat about... bombing

25:41

the Houthis, right? I mean, this

25:43

is incompetent stupidity. At an epic

25:45

level, if you wrote this in

25:47

a script, nobody would accept it.

25:50

It would be like, oh, come

25:52

on. You're not gonna do the

25:54

group chat thing, right? That's like

25:56

too much. Let's just stick with

25:58

you on Musk and the chainsaw.

26:00

Right. Yeah, no, even the chainsaw

26:02

might not make make the final

26:05

cut. I agree with that. I

26:07

will tell you what's interesting and

26:09

I don't know how this is

26:11

going to play out because you

26:13

do see this across some for

26:15

capitulations. We've been talking about this

26:17

institution by institution, but there is

26:20

an authentic grassroots revolt that is

26:22

happening and we're seeing it. you

26:24

know the signs are all around

26:26

us we we've saw it in

26:28

the town hall meetings a few

26:30

weeks ago which Republicans have now

26:32

stopped the reaction against Tesla we've

26:35

seen it and then we saw

26:37

these these gatherings and protests around

26:39

around the the the country I

26:41

think what's happening with the tariffs

26:43

and the the destruction of the

26:45

global economy. That is going to

26:47

cut in a way that nothing

26:50

else really, really, really has. It's

26:52

a sad commentary that you could

26:54

destroy USAID and PEPFAR and cost

26:56

millions of lives and people don't

26:58

care. They care about the price

27:00

of eggs and cars exactly. But

27:02

that is, that's where we are,

27:05

and that's what's happening. And I

27:07

think there's going to be a

27:09

huge public reaction. against what is

27:11

happening. And then the question is,

27:13

what unfolds after that? What does

27:15

the Republican Party do? What does

27:17

Trump do? Does he respond and

27:20

adjust in light of it? Does

27:22

it push him like a wounded

27:24

animal? And that he becomes more

27:26

enhanced, more aggressive, you know, is

27:28

a danger of the insurrection act

27:30

or martial law, sort of in

27:32

our future? We don't know. I

27:35

think something significant and fundamental is

27:37

is happening and we're at the

27:39

early stages of what I think

27:41

is going to be a very

27:43

powerful public revolt against Trump. Okay

27:45

I want to come back to

27:47

that in a second but your

27:49

point here about we need to

27:52

use our imaginations in terms of

27:54

like what could he do? You

27:56

know when the President of the

27:58

United States declares an economic emergency

28:00

it does unlock certain powers. He

28:02

has people who are... you know,

28:04

ferreting out those powers and will

28:07

he can he mean, sorry, can

28:09

he abuse them? Yes, will he

28:11

abuse them? He's going to be

28:13

tempted. I think it was George

28:15

Conway who might have knows who

28:17

was somebody who tweeted out, you

28:19

know, keep in mind that at

28:22

some point, Donald Trump's gonna become

28:24

much more interested in all the

28:26

nuclear weapons he has too. I

28:28

mean, we need to really get

28:30

our heads around it. So let's

28:32

talk about these these protests. I

28:34

was surprised by how successful they

28:37

were. I didn't really pay that

28:39

much attention beforehand. It looks like

28:41

as many as a million people

28:43

might have turned out. I think

28:45

that's necessary but not sufficient. Probably

28:47

the most important thing was there

28:49

was no, there was no violence,

28:52

there was no excuse for Donald

28:54

Trump to say that there were

28:56

thugs or to invoke the insurrection

28:58

act. So you are seeing this

29:00

turnaround and there's no question in

29:02

the last week there was a.

29:04

You know, the anti- Trump forces

29:07

needed last week, what happened in

29:09

Wisconsin, what happened in Florida, the

29:11

people turning out. I think that

29:13

folks who were shocked by the

29:15

election kind of took a deep

29:17

breath, have gotten off the floor.

29:19

But there's a long way to

29:22

go. And I guess one of

29:24

the questions, though, is will Democrats

29:26

overread this in the sense that

29:28

as an excuse not to fix

29:30

some of the problems that they

29:32

have? because there are some systemic

29:34

problem. People like, you know, Ruite

29:37

Tashara says, look, you still got

29:39

the culture issue problem. That has

29:41

not gone away. You can't just

29:43

pretend that you, that there was,

29:45

there was kind of a fluke

29:47

here and, and if you. If

29:49

you overread this, then you won't

29:52

affix the problems you have. Yeah.

29:54

Yeah, I agree with you 100%.

29:56

In fact, I'm at the beginning

29:58

of working on an essay, maybe

30:00

a joint essay on exactly this

30:02

question. And one of the things

30:04

that I would counsel Democrats to

30:07

do is to think through what

30:09

they want to do, what they

30:11

stand for, without mentioning the words

30:13

Donald Trump or Republican Party. Just

30:15

as an exercise, because I think

30:17

It has been so deeply ingrained

30:19

in them for the last 10

30:22

years that we're running against him.

30:24

that I think it stopped them

30:26

from thinking what is our mission,

30:28

what is our identity apart from

30:30

him. And certainly you're right that

30:32

at least up until now they've

30:34

consistently said look we have a

30:37

communications problem. They thought what happened

30:39

in 2016 was a parenthesis rather

30:41

than a pattern. We know now

30:43

it's a pattern. I think a

30:45

lot of them do too. They're

30:47

having this internal debate. They should,

30:49

I hope. the voices of reform,

30:52

when to me, I would look

30:54

and I would urge Democrats to

30:56

look to Bill Clinton in the

30:58

early 1990s and Tony Blair in

31:00

the mid-90s, right, that the context

31:02

for your listeners is that the

31:04

Democratic Party had been wiped out

31:07

in three straight elections, four out

31:09

of five, especially I think. what

31:11

left a mark on the Democratic

31:13

Party and opened them to reform

31:15

was a 1988 election in which

31:17

George H.W. Bush beat Michael to

31:19

caucus 40 states to 10. Democrats

31:22

had thought, well, okay, Reagan has

31:24

put this magic spell over the

31:26

country and it'll break and it

31:28

didn't. That created the opening for

31:30

the Democratic Leadership Council and Will

31:32

Marshall and Bill Galston and Elaine

31:34

K. Mark and Bill Clinton, right?

31:37

And so he comes in, he

31:39

runs as a reformided government, governor

31:41

and welfare as we know it,

31:43

sister soldier and he wins and

31:45

Democrats begin a dominant run. Tony...

31:47

Blair. Similarly in the UK, the

31:49

Labor Party had been destroyed by

31:52

Margaret Thatcher starting in the late

31:54

70s. It almost ceased to exist

31:56

as a party. And Tony Blair

31:58

takes pages out of the Clinton

32:00

playbook. They had different application, obviously,

32:02

because the UK is not the

32:04

United States. But it was the

32:07

same approach. Symbolic statements and issues

32:09

to signal we're not where we

32:11

were. Policy changes. And a young

32:13

and impressive kind of centrist reassuring,

32:15

talented figure comes onto the scene.

32:17

So I think the Democrats have

32:19

to do that. I don't think

32:22

that they should or it would

32:24

be wise for them to assume

32:26

that the Republican Party will collapse

32:28

of its own weight. And of

32:30

course. on the horizon is the

32:32

2030 consensus, which is going because

32:34

of the number of people who

32:37

have left, fled blue states to

32:39

red states, the electoral map is

32:41

going to change electoral college and

32:43

that's going to make it harder.

32:45

So Democrats have a lot of

32:47

work to do, I think both

32:49

public policy-wise and in terms of

32:52

culture, how do we signal to

32:54

the country that we're not crazy?

32:56

No, and I think that's that

32:58

that's really important because there's been

33:00

all this focus on you know

33:02

how to communicate You know, you

33:04

know, which podcast do you go

33:07

on should you be on tech

33:09

doc? I think that it's also

33:11

a crisis of values by which

33:13

I mean people want to know

33:15

do you share my values? Do

33:17

you look down on me or

33:19

do you understand who I am?

33:22

Those are crucial and I think

33:24

that a lot of voters simply

33:26

look to the political parties and

33:28

they say, you know, will I

33:30

be better off with you? Then

33:32

with the other guy, will you

33:34

make me richer? Will I be,

33:37

you know, be able to, you

33:39

know, send my kids to school?

33:41

Will you keep me safe? You

33:43

know, those two things. Will, will,

33:45

will I be able to rise

33:47

and will... you keep me safe?"

33:49

And it used to be the

33:52

Democratic Party could answer, yes, we

33:54

were the party of prosperity for

33:56

the middle class and yes, we

33:58

were going to keep you safe,

34:00

but the Republicans have taken both

34:02

those things away, you know, as

34:04

well as, and in part because

34:07

Democrats have become... dominated by their

34:09

professional elites who became concerned with

34:11

a lot of other things, identity

34:13

politics, other, you know, things that

34:15

go into the name of Woke,

34:17

which I think is misleading, but

34:19

at some point people need to

34:22

believe that the Democratic Party is

34:24

a party of prosperity, of safety,

34:26

of national security, and Donald Trump

34:28

is opening the door for them

34:30

to do that, but they have

34:32

to take advantage of it. And

34:34

I think they need to think

34:37

in those terms, you know, am

34:39

I on your side or am

34:41

I not on your side? Do

34:43

I care about people like you

34:45

or do I not care about

34:47

people like you? And I think

34:49

they were losing that argument that

34:52

when they looked at the Democratic

34:54

Party, they thought, your concern is

34:56

with other people, not with us,

34:58

you don't really understand me, you

35:00

kind of despise me, you look

35:02

down to me, you make fun

35:04

of me, not a formula for

35:07

electoral success. Yeah,

35:09

I think that's I think that's

35:11

right and and strength and that's

35:13

always an important quality in in

35:15

in electing a president and I

35:17

think it's it's the way that

35:19

a lot of Americans understand strength

35:21

is Is is distorted to an

35:23

extraordinary degree, but a lot of

35:25

people thought Donald Trump is a

35:27

strong figure and the Democrats are

35:29

you know are are are we

35:31

the other thing that we just

35:33

have to see Democrats do and

35:36

they'll get the chance is to

35:38

see what that bench that they

35:40

have is. I mean, I know

35:42

James Garville says that they have

35:44

a great, great bench and maybe

35:46

they do. But at the end

35:48

of the day, you know, you

35:50

can promote certain policies, but you

35:52

just need a political figure, somebody

35:54

who's really, really talented. And the

35:56

Democrats got it with Clinton and

35:58

with Obama. They didn't get it

36:00

with Joe Biden. He still won

36:02

in 2020, but he was obviously

36:04

a mediocre political, political talent. Republicans

36:06

got it in their recent history

36:08

with several of the presidents. That

36:10

has to happen. And so there's

36:12

going to be a lot of

36:14

jostling. I do think it's interesting

36:16

that someone like. Gavin Newsom with

36:18

his new podcast seems to be,

36:20

you know, running, running away as

36:23

fast as he can from the

36:25

so-called woke policies. I'm glad he

36:27

is. He's not exactly my, California,

36:29

D. Oh, yeah. There's something about

36:31

him that just, I don't know,

36:33

a little too smooth, a little

36:35

bit, sort of too much out

36:37

of central casting. But the point

36:39

is that the message, I think,

36:41

is being received. And I think

36:43

a lot of different Democrats, Josh

36:45

Shapiro, obviously, his name was bandied

36:47

about a lot. And there are

36:49

others. So we're going to see

36:51

what they do. I think a

36:53

couple of things have to have

36:55

to happen. One is that there

36:57

has to be an opening, which

36:59

I think Trump is giving the

37:01

Democratic Party. But then as you

37:03

said, they have to take advantage

37:05

of it. You know, you mentioned

37:07

the bench and just, here's the

37:10

cautionary note because I remember going

37:12

to one of the Republican debates

37:14

in 2016 before it was all

37:16

over when everybody was still in

37:18

the race. And do you remember

37:20

that cast of characters? And there

37:22

was Donald Trump there. But you

37:24

remember thinking, boy, the Republicans have

37:26

such a deep bench, look at

37:28

all of these impressive characters. And

37:30

yet in the spotlight, particularly up

37:32

against Donald Trump, how each one

37:34

of them. Each one of them,

37:36

intern, was exposed as a phony

37:38

or a weakling or flawed in

37:40

some way. And so presidential politics

37:42

can expose people in ways that

37:44

are, that you will never be

37:46

able to guess until they actually

37:48

get into the race. A lot

37:50

of people look great on paper

37:52

and they absolutely implode when they

37:54

get in that race. And I

37:57

can think of a lot of...

37:59

people who that who that would

38:01

apply to on both sides of

38:03

the aisle. Well, I can too.

38:05

I'm 100% with you. I've been

38:07

involved in a couple of presidential

38:09

campaigns. There's nothing like them. And

38:11

if people think that running as

38:13

governor of senators the same as

38:15

running for president, it's not. I

38:17

will say it's interesting observation about

38:19

about 2016. was a lot about

38:21

a lot about it and you're

38:23

right. I mean, a lot of

38:25

those people who went up against

38:27

Trump were obviously consumed and devoured

38:29

by him. I do think that

38:31

part of it was the base

38:33

of the party had become so

38:35

radicalizing much more radicalized than most

38:37

people understood. I'm not sure that

38:39

Donald Trump's act would have worked

38:41

in 2012, 2008 or any other

38:44

time. So all these other candidates.

38:46

some of them really were genuinely

38:48

talented. Yeah, never had any experience

38:50

in dealing with somebody like Trump.

38:52

And they didn't know how to

38:54

do it. And they tried to

38:56

ignore him. Sometimes like Rubio, they

38:58

went, they tried to replicate him.

39:00

And it just didn't work. Now,

39:02

some of it was because of

39:04

their own limitations. But I think

39:06

an awful lot of it had

39:08

to do with nobody was as

39:10

good at being Donald Trump, as

39:12

Donald Trump, and that's what the

39:14

Republican. primary voters wanted and I

39:16

think that's an indictment of them

39:18

more than it is of the

39:20

candidates even though at the end

39:22

of the day the candidates didn't

39:24

rise to the degree they had

39:26

to. So two of the things

39:28

that and again I know that

39:31

you know this as well the

39:33

Democrats really hate getting any advice

39:35

from us because you know who

39:37

are we know since we did

39:39

such a great job with our

39:41

with our with our own party

39:43

but on these cultural issues obviously

39:45

they need to do some rethinking.

39:47

But clearly they also need to

39:49

think through things like the importance

39:51

of good governance. And I'm really

39:53

glad there is this debate that's

39:55

broken out with the other. recline

39:57

Thompson book about the abundance, you

39:59

know, the abundance agenda because, you

40:01

know, the reality is that the

40:03

Democratic Party became the party of

40:05

NIMBYism. They became the party of

40:07

red tape and bureaucracy. And it's

40:09

a legitimate question to ask how

40:11

you can spend, you know, billions

40:13

of dollars on charging stations around

40:15

the country and end up with

40:18

only five of them. So there

40:20

was, there was, I think, a

40:22

lack of attention to, okay. If

40:24

you want people to vote for

40:26

you, you need to get shit

40:28

done. You can't just pass a

40:30

bill and say you're building things

40:32

back better and then not build

40:34

them back. You need to do

40:36

that. The second thing is that,

40:38

and you and I have lived

40:40

through this, watching the Echo Chamber

40:42

form on the right, there was

40:44

a bubble on the left as

40:46

well. And I worry, I've been

40:48

reading a lot of these books

40:50

now about the last days of

40:52

Joe Biden. And I'm really troubled

40:54

by the level of delusion that

40:56

must have taken place. And I'm

40:58

raising my hand as somebody that

41:00

believed that, you know, that somehow

41:02

that Biden was going to be

41:05

able to get through this. But

41:07

the Democrats did create this bubble

41:09

of delusion that really, I don't

41:11

think is going to look good

41:13

in the eyes of history. And

41:15

I think that this is something

41:17

that we all need to do.

41:19

It's like, how do we not

41:21

fall into? this incredible grip of

41:23

wishful thinking of not seeing things

41:25

that are right in front of

41:27

our eyes. Now we've talked about,

41:29

you know, magga people looking at

41:31

Donald Trump and not processing what

41:33

they see in front of their

41:35

eyes. But let's be honest about

41:37

it. There were a lot of

41:39

any Trump folks, a lot of

41:41

Democrats who look right at Joe

41:43

Biden, and it was right there,

41:45

and we didn't see it, or

41:47

we weren't willing to admit it.

41:49

Your thoughts on that? Yeah, yes,

41:52

that's that's that's right. Just on

41:54

the first, I agree that the

41:56

book abundance and what they're trying

41:58

to do is is very very

42:00

important. And I never heard liberals

42:02

give a response when I would

42:04

ask questions about what was happening

42:06

in cities like Portland. Seattle, San

42:08

Francisco. And some of the cities

42:10

I know, well, I went to

42:12

school at the University of Washington

42:14

in Seattle. And just seeing parts

42:16

of Seattle, which I remembered when

42:18

I was a student and just

42:20

being hollowed out. And this was

42:22

really a product of liberal and

42:24

progressive governance. So I think that's

42:26

very, very important and relevant. In

42:28

terms of the delusional bubble that

42:30

you referred to with with Biden,

42:32

yeah, that is that is right.

42:34

I mean, I remember I have

42:36

email conversations leading up to, you

42:39

know, the utter collapse of the

42:41

during the debate, but I mean,

42:43

months and months in advance, and

42:45

just. checking with people like are

42:47

you seeing what I'm seeing this

42:49

he really this age issue is

42:51

really really worrisome to the point

42:53

that I would write doctors and

42:55

ask them what do you think

42:57

that he's he's you know he's

42:59

suffering from of course it's hard

43:01

to diagnose from a distance but

43:03

on the other hand there's a

43:05

kind of clinical clinical eye and

43:07

then of course what was happening

43:09

within his inner circle his closest

43:11

aides and his wife that we've

43:13

been talking about the psychology of

43:15

politics which is psychology of human

43:17

life. It's true of human beings

43:19

across the board. Now, at different

43:21

moments, it afflicts one side more

43:23

than the other, but it is

43:26

not as if it's any one

43:28

side is immune to it. And

43:30

Democrats, for sure, it is the

43:32

nature of what life is like,

43:34

wishful thinking, not wanting to admit

43:36

things that are going to be

43:38

painful. So in the case of

43:40

Joe Biden, these people loved him.

43:42

They kept telling themselves that this

43:44

was just a bad day or

43:46

it was a bad week or

43:48

there are moments in which he's

43:50

able to rise up. So I

43:52

don't think all of them were

43:54

being cynical. I think that they

43:56

were telling themselves stories and then

43:58

they had convinced themselves in a

44:00

way similar to what what what

44:02

what what Maca world has has

44:04

has done and how do you

44:06

cure that? Well sometimes reality cures

44:08

it in this case for Democrats

44:10

it was a debate in which

44:13

you know 50 or 60 million

44:15

people saw it but beyond that

44:17

you need people within your life

44:19

who have different perspectives than than

44:21

than we do whom you trust

44:23

to be able to say You

44:25

know, you're not seeing something because

44:27

our own judgment It's so easy.

44:29

There's a reason we call them

44:31

blind spots Yeah, no, no, it

44:33

is so easy and it's not

44:35

a rip on people to say

44:37

that the people do in fact,

44:39

you know, process things in a

44:41

certain in a certain way. I

44:43

mean, that's the way that we

44:45

are wired. And by the way,

44:47

I'm having the authors, John Allen

44:49

and Amy Parnas on the next,

44:51

they wrote the book, the final

44:53

days of Biden, we're going to

44:55

spend a lot more time on

44:57

all that. I guess here's the

45:00

other challenge of dealing with Donald

45:02

Trump is so malevolent. is so

45:04

and he poses such a deep

45:06

threat that it's very easy staring

45:08

at that. to minimize any of

45:10

the problems on the outside. So

45:12

therefore, it's one thing to oppose

45:14

and really recognize and internalize the

45:16

threat that Donald Trump poses. And

45:18

I understand what people then become

45:20

emotionally attached to anyone who is

45:22

not Donald Trump and are willing

45:24

to overlook all of their problems.

45:26

So you had people who were

45:28

saying, Joe Biden is not just,

45:30

you know, okay, Joe, Joe Biden

45:32

is the best president of my

45:34

lifetime. Joe Biden is absolutely wonderful.

45:36

And I think that there was

45:38

a blindness on the part of

45:40

a lot of folks to what

45:42

was happening to cities like Seattle

45:44

and Portland that hollowing out the

45:47

extremism. The rest of the country

45:49

saw it, but we were so

45:51

focused. And the problem is that

45:53

Donald Trump will continue to be

45:55

malevolent and dangerous, and we're going

45:57

to continue to have that change.

45:59

of, and again, I'm balancing this

46:01

out because, you know, the enemy

46:03

and my enemy is my friend.

46:05

We have to have a big

46:07

tent. I don't have a purity

46:09

test for anyone that wants to

46:11

get involved in the coalition, but

46:13

I do think that we need

46:15

to make a really strong effort

46:17

to be clear-eyed, because otherwise, then

46:19

we are going to get blindsided

46:21

again as we were in 2024.

46:23

And I think this is hard.

46:25

This is psychologically hard to do

46:27

sometimes. It is

46:30

hard to do. It's hard for all

46:32

of us to do. I do think

46:34

that working to the advantage of Democrats

46:36

and a lot of the critics of

46:38

Trump is the fact that just kind

46:40

of. reality is setting in. It's harder

46:42

than it was for people to live

46:44

in this hall of mirrors and to

46:46

think that everything was fine with the

46:48

Democratic Party. So we'll see. I mean,

46:50

these are these are epic dramas that

46:52

are that are playing out right now.

46:54

These are interesting times. This is a

46:56

Chinese proverb. We live in the gift

46:58

of living in interesting times. Part of

47:00

it is what's happening to the two

47:02

parties and and how they're sorting through

47:04

this. And of course, the major one

47:06

is what's happening to the to the

47:08

country itself. And it's a kind of

47:10

an open question, how we're going to

47:12

get through this, not as if the

47:14

nation is going to, you know, dissolve

47:16

and fall off the face of the

47:18

earth, but whether when we're through this

47:20

process, the country is going to resemble.

47:22

anything close to what it was at

47:24

its best and whether American ideals are

47:26

destroyed in the in the process. That

47:28

hasn't been determined. and that's why it's

47:30

it's an why it's

47:32

an unfolding drama, we

47:34

and it's why we

47:36

need people to

47:39

speak up as best

47:41

they can, and

47:43

not to give up

47:45

hope, because there's

47:47

too much love and stake,

47:49

that too many things

47:51

that we love

47:53

and care for we don't

47:55

know if we're gonna be attack.

47:57

or not but you can't you

47:59

know, we don't

48:01

know if we're going

48:03

to be successful

48:05

or not, but I think

48:07

all of control whether

48:09

you're faithful or not.

48:11

And I think

48:13

all of us in

48:15

our own ways

48:17

have to figure out

48:19

how to be

48:21

faithful. faithful. Exactly. Peter Wiener,

48:23

thank you so

48:25

much for joining me

48:27

me once It's always

48:29

great talking with you,

48:31

Peter. talking with you, Peter. And

48:33

thank for all for listening to

48:35

this this or to the contrary

48:37

This is why

48:39

we are doing this,

48:41

because because now or it's

48:43

important to remind

48:45

ourselves that to remind not

48:48

we are not a ones. ones.