Americanswers! Why don't the Democrats have a new leader yet?

0:00This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK.

0:30and more options to their lineup, can shop at machinefinder.com. Booyah! It felt like everything I believed in was suddenly collapsing. This is the story of an Islamic boarding school in Indonesia with a dark secret of the school's head teacher. This was someone I respected above anyone else. And the investigation led by students he's trying to silence. If this is leaked to the media, I'll be destroyed. This is World of Secrets, catching my teacher. Listen on BBC.com, the BBC app, or wherever you get your BBC podcasts.

1:10America Answers is back, answering your questions after another busy week in American politics. There was the big meeting between Donald Trump and President Xi at the White House. It's not clear how much Xi's visit achieved in terms of resetting the US-China relationship, But will it deter Vladimir Putin from attacking NATO countries? Meanwhile, the Democrats still don't have a new leader. How could people vote for the Democrats without one in this year's midterms? And are we any closer to knowing who might take over? Indeed, is the leadership of a party a thing in American politics? Plus, Donald Trump is considering a ban on diesel exports, we're told, after US diesel prices hit new records going past$6 a gallon.

1:53Is this going to help him win the midterms? Welcome to AmeriConsors.

2:23defenceless flying palace gifted by the Emir of Qatar. When I'm not around, you're going to be broke. There's not going to be anybody to report on. Nobody gives a damn about anybody else.

2:39Hello, it's Justin in the worldwide headquarters of AmeriCast in London, England. And it is Mariana sitting next to Justin. Hello, it's Sumi sitting in Washington, DC. And we're answering questions today. So let us start with one. It comes from an AmeriCaster in Wales who asks this. It's extremely worrying news that Trump is considering cutting the exports of diesel, yet there is a suggestion this could also hurt the US. Could you explain how, please? Sumi, it is, to put it mildly, a controversial plan, isn't it, even if it is actually worthy of calling a plan? Yeah, first we should say that there's been a growing amount of pressure on President Trump because of diesel prices.

3:18So in the last few weeks we've seen those prices in the US reach new highs. And that's incredibly important to farmers, right? So they need diesel or use diesel for all parts of their business. And as a result of the ongoing wars in Iran, and also, as President Trump has said, Ukraine striking Russian oil facilities, we've seen the disruption to diesel supply lead to much higher prices. And that has led some members of President Trump's own party, Republicans, like Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa. Remember, Iowa's a big farming state, very rural state, and farming powers a good part of Iowa's economy.

3:56They have called on President Trump to restrict diesel exports coming out from the U.S., saying that that would allow a stabilization of the supply in the U.S. and push prices down. The problem with that is, as you said, Justin, it is a controversial proposal there to do so because for many reasons, But for one reason, if you actually restrict diesel exports, and that means that diesel prices would go down in the U.S., you could actually see as an impact gas prices go up because diesel and gas are refined together. And so when one would go down, the other could go up because it's shared production.

4:33You see refineries in the U.S. produce gas and that creates surplus diesel as a byproduct. So all of that gets very, very complex. Yeah. Donald Trump himself, it's worth saying, doesn't seem to think it's that complicated, does he? So he was talking to Fox News, to a Fox News reporter when he went to a golf tournament on Sunday. Let's listen to what he says about it. Well, we're thinking about it very seriously. That can oftentimes lead to a little bit of an increase on gasoline for cars. So we're looking at it very seriously. We may do it. The big problem is the refineries in Russia are being blown up.

5:08This isn't really a Middle Eastern problem, this is more of a Russia problem, that Ukraine and Russia are going at it, and Ukraine is blowing up diesel refineries in Russia because they do a lot of the refining. But we'll take care of that situation. I think what's going to happen is we're going to win this war very soon, and as soon as we win it, it's going to go, the oil will go down, way down to what it was before the war. And the key is Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. That's the key. It reminds me, Justin, of the last presidential election, us talking about ultimately how affordability is the thing that actually makes the difference in terms of how people vote.

5:45And therefore, it's not surprising necessarily that some of the people who are less keen on Donald Trump might be talking about it. Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed was speaking about high gas prices in Michigan on Tuesday. I want folks to understand when you see that number at the gas tank, yes, that hits you. But then the other number that we all got to pay attention to is the price of diesel. Nearly$6.81 today. That is an insane price. And you may not pump diesel, but diesel pumps you. The way that diesel pumps you is that you got to pay for the price of everything that gets shipped to the places that you buy it in.

6:21So when you look at that loaf of bread or you look at that gallon of milk, that loaf of bread, that gallon of milk is more expensive because the diesel that it took to get that to you, you are now paying the price of. Yeah, diesel pumps you is a good phrase. That's one that Abdullah Sayed has picked up and perhaps coined for his campaign there. But look, it just underlines this question of affordability again, and just how much Democrats are hammering that home ahead of the midterms. We had another question on affordability. This one comes from Mike. He's asking, how come the interest rates on a mortgage are not integral to the affordability issue?

6:54Surely this is potentially as damaging to the young U.S. population as the price of diesel do repeatedly coined. Long-term fixed rates are hitting 7%, but this fact does not seem to be weaponized or featured in any way. Why is this crucial affordability factor being ignored? It's an interesting one, isn't it? Yeah, really interesting because of a big difference. So this question from Mike, I assume Mike is British. And if he is British, there is a very big difference between the way in which mortgage rates happen in Britain and the way in which they're sorted out in the US. And it goes to the heart, doesn't it, of Sumi, of this issue?

7:33Because yes, high mortgage rates are having an impact on people trying to buy homes. But you would expect that that would mean that the prices of the homes themselves would then come down. But it's this weird thing in America, isn't it? And I remember this. I had a mortgage in the States in the early part of this century. And that mortgage, I can't remember what the exact rate was, But if I still had the mortgage, it would still be that rate. If I still was in that house, it would still be that rate. Because typically, I'm right, aren't I in thinking this, Sumi? Most American mortgage holders are on 30-year deals, these really long-term deals.

8:08And what it does, it means if you lock yourself in at a mortgage that you can afford, you then can't afford to move. So you've got all these kind of houses that people are stuck in, but they're not putting on the market. So the price of housing isn't going down. So it's a huge double whammy, actually, on people trying to buy. But actually, for people who've got onto the ladder, it's not like in Britain where you're on the ladder, but you've only got a two year fix. And when the mortgage suddenly goes up in two years, Mariana is nodding at this because she's got the kind of age where this happens.

8:39The mortgage goes up and you're in a real mess and you might even have to sell and all the rest. I'm looking at that 7 percent. That 7 percent. Exactly. Yeah. But that doesn't happen generally in America, does it? People do get these long term fixed mortgages, as you said, Justin. I mean, you can sometimes get a 15-year mortgage, but it depends on how much money you put down, right? So how big your down payment is when you get a mortgage. But it's true. And I have to say, to the question that was asked, it is indeed an issue that people are talking about. And the people are talking about are young people in this country.

9:09I mean, I have colleagues who say, I wonder, you know, are in their early, mid-20s, say, I wonder if I'll ever be able to afford a house because I simply don't see it happening. And it's because of that double-barrel issue that you just mentioned, Justin. And it's the high interest rates plus the high cost of housing. The housing prices are not going down, particularly if you're in bigger cities where younger people are going to tend to get a job. But I think one of the reasons that we hear more about gas prices and diesel prices when it comes to affordability and groceries, it's because those are things that can be, let's say, impacted by shorter term fixes.

9:44So changing the diesel supply, for example, or, you know, if we've seen Zoran Mamdani in New York mandate that beef prices come down in government run stores. But housing is far more complex and it's a lot more long term. And one of the big problems is that people didn't build housing for a long time in many states and cities. And how do you fix that? Well, it takes five to 10 years to build some of the housing stock. And I think the other point, Justin and Marianne, is that it's also local, isn't it? So you need cities, obviously, to take on this issue and the federal government taking on housing affordability is a lot harder.

10:20OK, let's move on to another question that we've had from Chris in California, but originally from Sonny Macclesfield, as he describes it. Bet he's missing it. Not so Sonny Macclesfield. In the UK, we have the prime minister and the leader of the opposition, effectively the prime minister in waiting and the voice and face of that party. This makes complete sense, as you know exactly what you are getting with any vote. But in the US, we are going into the midterms, which Trump is billing as a vote for him, with no idea whether a vote for a Democrat is really for a leader from the farthest left, right or centre.

10:52It makes no sense not to have a recognised leader. What is this craziness about? You are in a midterm election voting for a specific candidate, aren't you? Because you're voting for your member of Congress or your senator. So in a way, you are kind of voting for the direction that you want the party to go in through your specific candidate who's up for election. It's more when you are thinking about the Democrats as a whole, that they don't necessarily have a finger on where they're going. Which one of these faces of the party is where the party's going? Yeah, I was going to say that if you think back to the last midterm elections, obviously that was that point where everyone was questioning whether Donald Trump would essentially be sort of electable again and whether he could lead the Republican Party.

11:34And everyone sort of used the clues from that to say, oh, look, people didn't like the Stop the Steal candidates or they were keener on some of the slightly more moderate Republicans or vice versa. And so I guess, yeah, in some ways it's sort of a bit of a litmus test as to what people are thinking. But I guess the situation can change so much, right? Like even for Donald Trump in those two years, the perception of him changed again so much that it could be that, I don't know, people who are pro-democrats or would vote for the left go for someone, say, more moderate now, but then actually in two years' time, someone who's further on the left is favourable.

12:09It's interesting, isn't it? Could you superimpose onto the American system a kind of British way of doing it, Sumi, so that you had more bang for your bucks, as it were, as a party? Because I think that's really... So Chris, he comes from Macclesfield, So he knows about the British system, but he lives in California. So he knows that the two systems are different. But I think what he seems to be suggesting is that in the US system, in spite of the fact that it is sort of technically different, structurally different, you could have a domineering figure who came and represented pretty much all that the party is.

12:47And in a sense, I think we've been fooled into thinking that that's possible by Donald Trump because he has been the dominant figure in American politics. It's fair to say, isn't it, since he came down the golden escalator or whatever it was in 2016. And that is a kind of unfair because that's not generally how it's done on either side of the aisle. And the Democrats have definitely failed to manage to do it. But actually, for structural reasons, I can't see how they could have done. I suppose what you could say is that Hakeem Jeffries, their leader in the House, and Chuck Schumer in the Senate are neither of them particularly effective campaigners.

13:25Is that, Sumi, fair to say? I think that's more than fair to say. And look how much uproar there has been even among their own caucuses, both in the House side and on the Senate side, with their leadership. There are plenty of Democrats who say, if I get into the Senate, Democrats who are running, if I get into the Senate, I will not vote for Chuck Schumer to be our leadership there. There are members in the House of Representatives who say Hakeem Jeffries has been totally ineffective and is not a good communicator. And as you said, is not a good campaigner. So, I mean, if you're going to think about who the Democrats leader is right now, there'd be many in the party who would say, although those two hold leadership positions, they're not it.

14:03OK, our next question is from Ashley in Thornbury, who sent us this on WhatsApp. Ashley asks, what happened to the Epstein files? They seem to have vanished from the news. Have they been in the news recently, Sumi? Not really. I mean, that's a great question because we thought that this might happen, that as the Epstein files, because it was a drip drip of a release of those files, that they would fade from attention. There have been a lot of rumblings behind the scenes that have been getting press stories here and there. So federal investigators are reportedly looking into two of Jeffrey Epstein's closest advisors, his longtime lawyer, Darren Indyke, and his accountant, Richard Kaa.

14:41The lawyers for both said in a statement that their clients had not been told that they were the subject or target of an investigation. And both have repeatedly denied any knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse of teenage girls and women. But that is kind of the latest that we've seen on the Epstein files. I think what's important to keep in mind is that Congress continues its investigations. So the House Committee on Oversight has continued to scrutinize the Department of Justice's handling of the files. We've seen them continue to investigate what is actually in the files. And lawmakers, many of them who we talk to regularly in our programs, do still bring up the Epstein files.

15:19They say to us, we still don't have the transparency we need. We still don't have all of the files released. And the other aspect of the story that I think is really important is that you have the survivors. They continue to advocate for the complete release of the files and for some sort of accountability for the government and for the Trump administration to do more. and a significant part of the debate is not necessarily about Jeffrey Epstein himself right now but about that question of accountability and what is found in these files. Until now we haven't seen any major moves on that but that's kind of the way that this story is being covered at the moment.

15:56It's a toxicity in the White House that they just can't get rid of, they can't cut out because you can't really because having they've promised to do things that they just can't do, isn't that right? Yeah and I think that actually it shouldn't be underestimated how pivotal everything around the Epstein files as they're called has been to Donald Trump's presidency this time around and particularly the fracturing of the MAGA base on social media who he has relied on so heavily and who were actually so unified really before this point but it was everything around the Epstein files including actually that sort of desire not to talk about it anymore.

16:34We used to have that clip of Donald Trump where he said, like, can we all just move on type thing? Are you still talking about Jeffrey Epstein? This guy's been talked about for years. You're asking, we have Texas, we have this, we have all of the things. And are people still talking about this guy, this creep? That is unbelievable. That went down so badly with that section of people who support Donald Trump because they really, really cared about this. And one of the dangers or risks of releasing a huge number of sort of documents into the public domain like this, some of which are redacted, but there are lots of clues, etc., is that people just continue pouring over them.

17:12And so even when they're no longer in the headlines, so to speak, there's this feeling from the average person, particularly people who I would say are very sleuthy. I don't talk about them quite a lot on top comment, who are like, hang on a second, like it still doesn't really feel like there's been any accountability here. And then there's that feeling that Donald Trump has somehow been complicit in that or a part of that, even though he obviously very strongly denies any connection to the files. And it was interesting because Maggie Haberman spoke about this a bit at this event she did on Friday with the Texas Tribune.

17:42And she's talking about this new book. She's got out Regime Change with Jonathan Swan, who we spoke to recently on AmeriCast. Let's have a little listen to what she said. If you run on, I am going to shatter, or at least some of your advisers, we're going to shatter the Epstein cabal. Trump actually did it less than some of his own people, including Vance. And his son. And that was the moment, by the way, that last year with how Trump handled Epstein and the files, that was when in his, according to his own top allies and advisors, that was when they could start seeing his own base stop believing him quite as much.

18:23It's the first time that Jonathan and I could recall, and we've read about this, Trump saying, believe me, not what you're hearing over there, and it didn't work. So that's one. Yeah, Justin, Mariana, it does feel like this was a significant breaking point for this administration. This was, as Maggie alluded to there, something that was so central to, if not President Trump, his allies in the lead up to the election. And when the administration then turned around and said there is nothing to see here, and President Trump himself really lashed out at members of his own party and those who were part of his base, who wanted to see real transparency and accountability on the Epstein files, it did feel like something shifted.

19:04There's this weird advert he's got out now, isn't there, which is controversial partly because it's paid for by the US government, which is not meant to happen. I mean, big time not meant to happen, isn't it, Sumi? But it's also controversial because it actually feels a bit crazy, doesn't it? Let's listen to a bit of it. This is the final battle. With you at my side, we will demolish the deep state. We will expel the warmongers from our government. We will drive out the globalists. We will cast out the communists, Marxists and fascists. We will throw off the sick political class that hates our country.

19:39We will rout the fake news media and we will liberate America from these villains once and for all. Well, he mentions the deep state, doesn't he, right at the beginning? But that goes straight to Epstein, doesn't it? And all those things that he talked about in the old days are now coming back to haunt him. And he seems to think that by raising it all again, minus Epstein, he can make it work for him again. Well, it's like Donald Trump speaks this language, right? It's a language that I've had to learn. And it's the kinds of buzzwords that exist in very active corners of social media, some which draw on legitimate examples of abuse of power, but quite a few which then spiral into the unfounded conspiracy theory territory.

20:21and what Donald Trump did so successfully really until the Epstein files was to court and indulge to some extent some of those conspiracy theories, some of which ended up being true examples of abuse of power, but others which were totally unfounded. You think of everything around QAnon and Pizzagate and all that sorts of stuff. And it's almost like he's trying to just, he's kind of saying, no, no, no, don't worry, I still speak your language. But actually what he underestimated, I think, is the depth of belief among a lot of these supporters, MAGA supporters, who are genuinely very distressed about the allegations made, very distressed about abuse of power, very distressed about allegations of sexual abuse and what was going on.

21:02And so this kind of like, no, no, no, it's fine. I speak your language. Almost like being involved in this is a bit of a sort of like, I don't know, it just shows what team you're on. It's like for them, that was, it was actually more than that. It was a, it was a real sort of like, we don't want this kind of thing to exist in our corridors of power what are you going to do about it um and so i mean i've seen a few people commenting on this on social media some of the quite vocal maggot influences who don't seem particularly sold on it there are others who you know sing off his hymn sheet no matter what like will say go on donald trump but i'd say the kind of edits that used to exist of donald trump as like the absolute like savior against the deep state that just doesn't feel quite so widespread as it once was or at least as it was say two years ago i find it so interesting that it's a rerun from 2024.

21:47And a lot of the messaging around it is, as you said, Mariana, what propelled President Trump into office. And yet some of it does ring hollow now. I mean, he in that ad says, expel the warmongers. And of course, it is this president who has started is currently at war with Iran, right? And has talked about, you know, bringing the hammer down on other countries as well and bombing allies and annexing Greenland by force. So that one rings a little bit hollow. But I have to say it has been incredibly controversial here. So I actually saw the ad over the weekend. It was running on a number of channels around some of the NFL games that I was tuned into over the weekend around Saturday Night Live as well.

22:27And the big controversy is that there are laws around using government funding, so taxpayer money, of course, for what's considered propaganda, and that this ad says at the end paid for by the U.S. government would do precisely that. I mean, the White House has answered to that and said that this is a public service announcement ahead of the midterm elections and that this is about sending, let's say, an important message to Americans about being patriotic and what's important to the country and defending, I think they said, at home and abroad. And yet it does feel for many Americans who are on the other side of the political spectrum, this is a blatant violation of some of those laws that we mentioned about running a campaign ad, essentially.

23:12It's a far cry isn't it Mariana from the Green Cross Code Do you remember that public service announcements Sumi in this country tended I mean certainly when I was young Yeah they tended to be very very austere And they certainly wouldn't have had any kind of political messaging in them I just wonder whether does he get away with it Because he's not overtly saying vote Republican in the upcoming elections I don't know it almost feels like it has a bit of a sort of like Wink wink nudge nudge to it If you look at the statement that the White House did put out where they describe the attacks on the public service announcements as highly dishonest and then kind of go on to make all these points about like, you know, it's not partisanship.

23:53It's a government still believes in the country it serves. I mean, like, I don't ever think the word deep state would be necessary in a public service announcement. Yeah, no, I think that's right. Unless there's something untoward about to occur right now. Yeah. OK, next up, we have a question on that big meeting between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping at the White House last week. Helen asks, do you think the overly pally bravado of Trump and Xi Jinping is a message of deterrent to Russia as it starts incurring on Polish soil and possibly other NATO countries? Other than Putin, World War Three is of no interest to any of the big global powers.