Hegseth, Rubio: We Followed Trump’s Orders

0:00Every day, animals across the country face abuse and neglect. And every day, the ASPCA shows up to rescue animals in crisis. But they can't do it alone. Visit ASPCA.org slash need. Become a donor today to provide the care and shelter these animals urgently need. And for a limited time, the ASPCA will send you a free gift as a special thank you. Visit ASPCA.org slash need. Tonight, Pete Hexeth escapes impeachment for now, but a new talking point emerges. Everyone was a lawful operation ordered by the commander-in-chief. The president of the United States makes these decisions. Plus, the losing party doubles down on hardline leaders, while the winning party may be doubling down on change.

0:50I will not be supporting Chuck. Also, the gap between the rich and the rest grows wider, So why did voters reject a wealth tax on billionaires? And the freshmen arrive, and an upperclassman warns, don't get schooled. If we don't fight, shame on us. Live at the table, Ashley Allison, Noah Rothman, Christopher Hahn, Caroline Sunshine, and Camille Foster. Americans with different perspectives aren't talking to each other, but here they do.

1:34Good evening. I'm Lulu Garcia Navarro in New York for Abby. You may as well call Pete Hegseth Harry Houdini because the defense secretary managed to escape an effort to oust him from his cabinet post, at least for now. Tonight, in a surprising show of unity, House Republicans blocked Congressman Thomas Massey's push to impeach Hexeth, preventing a humiliating vote for President Trump. We're told GOP leaders and White House officials worked furiously behind the scenes to convince enough Republicans to kill Massey's resolution by voting to essentially bury it in committee. Their efforts actually paid off.

2:11Massey was the only Republican who voted against their bid to tank the measure. President Trump wasted no time celebrating the failed impeachment attempt and attacking Massey, calling him a, quote, major loser. Before we open it up to the table here, we invite you at home to join the debate, not calling us major losers. Head to CNN.com slash Abby and weigh in. We'll get to some of your comments throughout the show. Hello. Quite another evening of news. Noah, I'm going to start with you. I have a lot of thoughts about this because this was started by a Republican. A disgruntled Republican, and that Donald Trump is right, Thomas Massey.

2:48He is being sort of his last salvo before he leaves exit stage left from the stage. He was not reelected. He was booted out in the primaries because of Donald Trump. So what was the point of this? What was Thomas Massey's point? Perhaps to get quite a lot of attention for Thomas Massey. Members of the Republican conference do have plenty of problems with Pete Heggseth. They probably have more problems with Thomas Massey, but that was irrespective. I think they're most likely that the conference realized that they didn't want to spend whatever floor time they have left litigating an issue that Democrats are likely to litigate themselves when they take control of Congress.

3:26But the articles themselves were rather flawed. There were elements in there where they have Pete Hexas dead to rights. The mishandling of classified information on the Signal Chat, you got him. Mark Kelly, the suppression of his speech over a political dispute, hard to argue with that. The notion that we are kidnapping, the language that they use, kidnapping a sovereign leader in the form of Nicolas Maduro, I don't know, sounds like we're invalidating, for example, the effort that extricated Manuel Noriega from Panama. And beyond that, a lot of these are just bank shots at the president. The president executed these orders, ordered these orders, rather.

3:58And he and Pete Hex has executed them. If your problem is with the orders themselves, your problem is with the president and his subordinates. Well, that is certainly something that was argued today by not only Pete Hegseth, but Marco Rubio. Let's listen. Iran, the cartels, Maduro, Yemen, everyone was a lawful operation ordered by the commander in chief. The president of the United States makes these decisions. I mean, ultimately, our job is to execute now, you know, on the president's orders. Everything that he's done, he is executing on President Trump's mission and what President Trump has said we should do.

4:35Explain to me what you think that defense is about. That defense is about, hey, Democrats, try to impeach the president. Go down in flames by doing that, right? Look, I'm not happy with the president. I'm surely not happy with Pete Hexet. Pete Hexet needs to go, and I think he will go. I think the president's going to fire him probably Thanksgiving week. So good luck, Pete. Enjoy your success for a little while. But ultimately, what they're saying is bring it on, do another impeachment, lose your momentum that you gained in this election, And then really good luck in 2028. You were shaking your head when he was talking.

5:10Oh, yeah. Pete Hegseth is not going anywhere. He gave, at least by the president's account, he gave a phenomenal press conference today. He's a fighter. He was tough. He's a great communicator. Congress doesn't have any balls and they don't care about ending wars. If they did, they would cut funding to Ukraine tomorrow. But we all know they're not going to do that. Congress is the only people to blame for not stopping this war. All of them had a vote. They could have voted to use the war powers. They did. They voted a couple of times. Even people who agreed with the war decided that they were not going to exercise their authority on the war.

5:42Now, the charge against Pete Hegseth, first of all, the secretary of war has not been impeached since 1867, 150 years. The charge against him is bogus. The charge is that he carried out unlawful military operations because there was no congressional authorization. But did we have any legal authority to go into Pakistan when we were getting Osama bin Laden? No. Did we have any legal authority to go get Noriega? No. Did we have any legal authority to go get Saddam Hussein in Iraq? We sure as hell did not. And so what Congress is saying, there was no legal authority to go into Pakistan. Very, very different.

6:18I worked in the Senate at the time. No legal authority to go into Pakistan. Nobody was impeached. But what they are saying is the American people might be anti-war, and they spoke in this election and said that they are, but the American people are pro-soldier. And what Congress is doing by picking this fight with Pete Heggseth is saying that if his... Pause, pause, pause. Hold on, this is important. If the orders that he gave were all unlawful, then that means all of our men and women who carried out their longest employment on the USS Abraham Lincoln... I'm the host of the chair. Pause for one moment here.

6:49All of them who went to save our soldiers in Iran are all following unlawful orders. Are you filibustering the table? She's filibustering. Yeah, I'm right. No. No. Because you're conflating a lot of things about, first of all, the War Powers Act. But I don't want to even debate that. Because at the end of the day, this motion failed. So why are we going to debate if this was actually... Because it didn't fail on the merits. It failed actually on a political procedural matter. So I think debating that is something else. But what is interesting is this argument about that somehow impeaching Pete Hegseth is hurting the troops.

7:24Because if you look at what the American people say, and this is across party lines, They just had a poll, November 6th to 9th, from Reuters, Ipsos. And support for Congress ending the Iran war, overall 71 percent. Republicans, 51 percent. Democrats, 93 percent. Independents, 70 percent. The idea that Pete Hegseth is the same thing as the soldiers, Democrats could argue. And I'm someone who spent a lot of time with the military in the Middle East for many, many years. And what Democrats would probably tell you, in fact, they do say, is that they're trying to protect the military from Pete Hegseth.

8:01And so I'm just wondering what you see. I think that we're still experiencing folks in Washington, D.C. that haven't caught up with the rest of the country, if I'm honest. Democrats and Republicans. Republicans could have actually voted to impeach. They would have had the votes as well, but they didn't go with Massey. And that is a failure of leadership on their part. And then there were some Democrats that didn't show up. And I don't. And I think that they are. Including Nancy Pelosi. And I think they are trying to figure out the what the settlement of this earthquake that just happened in this country.

8:36So I think politically, just the observation is like folks are still trying to recalibrate where their power is in Washington, D.C., as opposed to the voters. I think the other thing is what I heard Marco Rubio say and what I heard P. Hexf say is that I'm with the president, but in two seconds, if it just gets, if this anchor gets a little too heavy, which it already is, I'm out. I'm out. Like, they are literally saying this is not my fault. This is his fault. And I actually think the president is still trying to recalibrate where he is because there is a way that he's like, wait, why is everybody paying attention to Hexf?

9:10Is he more important than me? Like, come after me. I'm the guy. I'm the guy. We've been staffed. Staffed every story. This is all just like folks in Washington not in the real world, in their bubble, in their D.C. Hold on. Camille, you're looking like you don't buy that. Well, I'm just not sure I heard the subtext that you're referring to there, that Rubio was hedging in a way to protect himself. I think they've made the best argument that they can, that ultimately the president is the one making these decisions. I do think that perhaps this is a little bit of a hope that they can hate Democrats.

9:42They were following orders. They were following orders. How does that work? I'm not the big guy. But what else would you expect them to say? I think that's the part that's clear. I think what is interesting is to take... That I believe what the president's decision is, and I agree with him. I think what is interesting is to take... Or I resign. If I could just continue to talk more often, it would be nice if we could have a conversation. Let's take a look at the actual articles of impeachment, the particular things that are there. I think Noah is absolutely right. There are certain things that don't really wash quite as easily, but there are other things about which there are profoundly serious questions.

10:11Should the United States of America be in the business of simply murdering people who are traveling across the high seas without any sort of approval from Congress, without any sort of authorization to commit war, without any sort of presentation of the evidence in public that says these people were actually headed to the United States of America? When they actually apprehend people, they hand them back over and then they're simply let go. Why not interdict? Why not have conversations? Why not actually conduct a serious intelligence operation? This seems like an administration that is interested in simply running afoul of the law or doing whatever they want irrespective of the law.

10:48And that is deeply concerning. I mean, and the issue is that the Pentagon under Pete Hegseth has become a bit of a black box. The press is not allowed there in the way that it used to be. They don't give press conferences and press access. And let us remind everyone that the media, the press is there as the representative of the public. We are there to ask questions in the public's name. So when you push out the press, you are essentially saying we are not allowing the public in to view what it is that we're doing here. There hasn't been a good explanation as to why we went to war. They didn't really make the case very well, hence these numbers.

11:23And Republicans themselves, Noah, are unhappy, as you rightly point out, with Pete Hegseth's leadership. And with the conduct of the war, but I think you don't get a consensus like you just saw with those numbers without a lot of people having a very different interpretation of what that means. Do you want to end the war? Yeah. How? Do you want it to end with the IRGC in control of an international waterway and tolling it and therefore allowing our adversaries to create spheres of influence, which will, by the way, make everything a lot more expensive? I bet you probably a lot of people would say, actually, no, we don't want to see America cut and run and be humiliated and abandon our allies.

11:58They also don't like the person who made that possible for them. But that's Congress. Congress is going to have to make that case now. Now we're going to run, and we're going to cut and run. We're going to get the troops. It's going to be for the troops. You'll see. That's going to be a tough message. You don't agree with this, I'm assuming. Congress can use their war powers, which they have not used in decades. So, no, I don't agree with it, and neither do the American people. Like I just told you, the American people might be anti-war. They just used their voice and told you that this election.

12:22But they're pro-soldier. Of course. And they are not going to stand for the United States Congress in their nice warm beds going after our war fighters who have carried out all of their missions, whether they have politically supported the war or not, flawlessly. Why is Hegseth the same thing? And so Congress wanted to pick a fight. And the soldiers the same thing. Because if the charge against Hegseth, which is the charge, to be clear, is a very specific one. The charge is he carried out unlawful military operations that were not authorized by Congress. So if Hegseth carried out those orders, if that's the accusation, then that means every brave man and woman in uniform who has fought valiantly in this war, who have missed the birth of their children, who have been on the longest deployments in their life, who have gone and rescued their brothers in arms in Iran, something none of us at this table have had the courage to go do.

13:06That means that they were all carrying out the arms. And like I said, if Congress wants to pick a fight, going after the men and women who serve in our armed forces go right ahead because that is a fight that they will lose, and that is a fight that they will end every day. The American people are not with you on that issue. They are anti-war, but they are pro-soldiers. But what I will say is, I think that's a valiant effort to say, like, stand with your troops. We all do. We do. The American people. We should not support this impeachment effort. We want a real competent person in charge of the troops.

13:37He's an incompetent guy. Here's the thing. It is saying that all of those orders were unlawful. No, it is not saying. Americans are smart enough. Americans are smart enough. And you have to believe Americans are smart enough to know that impeaching Pete Hickseth is not invalidating. How many service members have you talked to? Because I talked to several before. I do under a meeting on that. My family. I talked to a ton of service members. I hosted the Building Home for Heroes. You're talking is not more important than mine. What I'm saying is the American people are smart enough to separate P.

14:03Kexeth, Donald Trump, and our troops. And our troops are smart enough to know. And I think you are, too. And I hope you will. All right. We're going to leave it there. Very, very spirited debate here. Next, Republicans double down on MAGA with a new leader, while some prominent Democrats come out against Chuck Schumer. Plus, despite a blue wave, why did voters in California reject the wealth tax on billionaires? We'll debate.

14:522026, his 27-year-old son Nathan went missing near Nathan's home in Georgia. Three days later, his body was found in a pond nearby. Lil Jon has a memoir that just came out called I Only Shout So You Can Hear Me. It takes time to heal, and I kept myself busy that I didn't let myself mourn. I needed to laugh again. I needed to be silly and interact with people and feel other people's energy and make people happy too. We have to share so other people can see that they can get through it too. Talking grief, building community. That's what the podcast is all about. This is all there is. Listen and follow wherever you get your podcasts.

15:35I'm Dr. Sanjay Gupta, host of the Chasing Life podcast. You may have noticed gambling doesn't require a casino anymore. You can just open up your phone. It's designed to keep us coming back or maybe never even leaving in the first place. We're going to talk to Dr. Timothy Fong, co-director of UCLA's gambling studies program. You're going to learn what your brain is really chasing when you place a bet and also importantly, how to keep the game from playing you. Gambling addiction, gambling disorder is the hidden addiction. You can't smell it. You can't taste it. You can't see it. You can't have a urine drug test.

16:10Who are we talking about here, professor? Who's the most likely demographic to be affected by this. Literally any single human on earth. Listen to Chasing Life, streaming now, wherever you get your podcasts.

16:28Despite the route, Republicans are doubling down and going back to their old playbook. Today, House Republicans picked Trump ally Jim Jordan to be the next minority leader. Jordan has been angling for the leadership role for the better part of a decade and has served as chair of the Judiciary Committee since 2023. In running for the position, Jordan pitched himself as battle-tested, vowing to aggressively counter Democrats. The pick is a reflection of Trump's enduring power over his party. With a source familiar to Jordan's thinking, telling CNN, quote, Trump is still the leader of our party. Meanwhile, despite calls for the conference to delay its elections, GOP Senate leader John Thune was re-elected to his position by secret ballot.

17:10In a press conference, he vowed this time will be different. Listen. Obviously, the election result was not what we had hoped for. But I think it's important that we take the lessons from that and internalize the message the American people were sending to us and focus on the things that really matter to them. Okay. I'm a little confused here because things seem to be a little bit different in the Senate than in the House, right? So in the House, they picked a new leader, Jim Jordan, ally of the president, super MAGA, and fight, fight, fight, right? That's like the president's kind of will being enacted there.

17:55The president's never been a fan of John Thune, blames him for a lot of the things that he purportedly hasn't gotten over the table, and yet John Thune was elected without a problem. Who wants to take this? What's going on? Is this you? Yeah, my guess is that if you're a House member, a Republican House member, one of the 165 or so, and you survived this wave, you're in a far redder district than the rest of the nation. You're much more insulated from the public opinion. That's not the same in the Senate. The Senate experience, you can't gerrymander a state, and the state's experienced a blue wave at a pretty significant rate, maybe nine seats flipping.

18:27That'll put the fear of God into you, whereas quite a lot of these members are much more insulated. This is the guy you put in charge of a defensive position that is besieged. And I think that's how Republicans feel. I think how this White House feels if they're putting Stephen Miller in charge of the White House. And even though the president kind of blamed him for some of what we experienced in that interview with 60 Minutes, where he said, oh, the deportations were a little intense. Well, that was Stephen Miller's policy to put people in Home Depot parking lots in Los Angeles. This White House is beginning to pare back.

18:54Republicans are paring back. They're expecting to be besieged. And they're right. They're right. But isn't there an opportunity? I mean, I don't know. Color me crazy. But isn't there an opportunity? This enormous wave has just washed over you. You are going to be besieged. But couldn't there be a moment where you say, like John Thune did there, hey, maybe we can do something for the American people. Why not take that tact in the House? I mean, in the House of Representatives, as Noah was pointing out, These are people who, I mean, Donald Trump has been the largest character on the Republican stage for over a decade at this point.

19:28The people who are elected to the House, by and large, are people who have been elected during that period of time. They've sworn allegiance to the president of the United States. That allegiance has only intensified in recent cycles. As Noah said, these are the reddest of the reddest districts in a lot of cases. These are people who are prepared to fight. They want someone who's going to be a pugilist, and that's exactly what they've got. That's all you can do when you're in the minority in the House is be a pugilist. In the Senate, you actually can work and make deals and cut things. And also, there are a lot more swing state senators in the Senate now than there used to be, like Ted Cruz from Texas.

19:59We've got a lot of new swing states, and he's got to manage that. Democrats have to manage that, too. We've got to be thinking about Texas as a state that if we seize for a while, it could take the White House from Republicans for a very long time. Do you think Jim Jordan's good? I mean, is he a fighter? He's a fighter, but will he be able to really manage to do the business? But I don't know if you really have to. What they're about to have, the majority for the Democrats is so large that he doesn't really need to whip. They're going to die on every hill for messaging purposes. I also think for the Senate, if John Thune had his way, Cornyn is the candidate, right?

20:41I can't remember, but Collins is not the candidate in Georgia, right? I forget the guy who was. Right. Donald Trump picked a lot of these candidates in 2022. Oz and Herschel Walker. And again, I can never Katie. Sure knows how to pick them. The blurry background lady. I can never remember her name in Arizona. But he picks them. And much to Thune, Thune wasn't in power then, but much to Thune and McConnell at that point chagrin. And I think, to Noah's point, they know, and if Democrats have the Senate, they are going to be up against a tough hill. And so this is like the last markage of the Republican Party to say we can't lose it all.

21:23All right. Well, let's go to a different party where they are a little bit more divided, unsurprisingly, which is the Democrats. Let's listen to two high-profile senators and what they're thinking about exactly who should run the Senate for them. I personally have known Chuck Schumer for over 30 years, and I like Chuck. Nobody who works harder than Chuck Schumer. But in my view, the time is now for change, and I will not be supporting Chuck to be re-elected as the Democratic leader. I've been very consistent for a very long time that we need a new generation of leadership. I said it before when I served in the House.

22:13I said it about Joe Biden, and I'm saying it here. I think we need to acknowledge that Senator Sanders and I disagree on some items, but we agree on the need for change. This is obviously going to you. I mean, you work for Chuck Schumer. I mean, should he be majority leader again? He built this majority. He will lead this majority. And I think experience is an important factor to have right now. Democrats have to manage this majority. They have to understand what it's going to take to expand this majority. And Chuck has gotten things done when he was in the majority. Just look at what he did when Biden was president and the bills that got passed and the help and the relief that American people got.

22:52I understand what a lot of activists are saying about what they want. But what they're actually talking about is a presidential candidate. Chuck's going to lead the Senate. He's going to lead it well. And we can have this conversation all we want. I'm telling you right now, Chuck Schumer is going to be the majority leader. So I take a I'm more than an activist. I've worked in the White House. I worked on two presidential campaigns and one of them both. I think he does. I don't think he should be the leader. And I and I'm sure my phone will ring and I don't care. And I think that's actually what we need right now is people who have the courage to say what they believe and stand 10 toes down.

23:27We just had something historical happen in this country. And some of it was because of Chuck Schumer. Because of him. No, no, no, no, no. Some. And he didn't support all of them. He didn't support. Sherrod Brown been around since I was born because I'm from Ohio. But he was retired and lived in life. So let me just, Sherrod Brown been around. He's going to stay around. How about Cooper? That's not Chuck Schumer's doing. What about Angie Dixon? How about Paul? What about Abdul? What about, so all I'm saying is leadership. Leadership is the ability to be challenged and still prevail. And he will.

23:56And then still be able to rally your group. And he will. I think it is problematic for Democrats to do the exact same thing Republicans are doing right now and double down what has been forever. Have a discussion. Let people rise to the occasion and see what happens. And if Mr. Schumer is the leader, then let him lead. But if he is not, let other leaders come to the point. But he is going to be the leader. Senator-elect Abdul El-Sayed did not float Chris Van Hollen's name for leadership because he was sour grapes over the primary or Medicare for all. It is all about Israel. We have not seen the degree to which Israel is going to break this caucus into and set it against itself.

24:38Yes, Chris Van Hollen is now sort of quietly campaigning for this on one issue, defense authorization bill, which he says we should decouple the U.S.-Israel intelligence sharing relationship, which is impossibly stupid because we do not have great human intelligence, and Israel has fantastic human intelligence. And between that and our signals intelligence, it actually makes us much more safe. They don't want that. What they want is an argument over the U.S.-Israel relationship. That's what the freshmen want. That is not what the establishmentarians want. And they are going to fudge heads over this very soon.

25:05A lot of the freshmen are from very moderate states, right? So there's got to be a balance here. And as I said before, we've got to be thinking about Texas and how we are going to keep Texas. That has got to be a singular focus the next two years. What about Mississippi? Hold on, hold on, hold on. I want to hear Caroline. I think as somebody who went through 2016 and watching what happened in the Republican Party in 2016, I'm watching a very similar phenomenon happen in the Democrat Party where you have an anti-establishment insurgent force that is taking over the Democrat Party. So, no, maybe we'll make a bet right here.

25:37I don't think. I will bet you right now. I do not think Chuck Schumer is going to be the leader of the Senate. It's not an anti-establishment insurgent. It's 76 % of the American country is run by Democrats. That is not. That's why candidates. I think this election doesn't. Come on. There are clear divisions. There are clear divisions. There are clear divisions, Ashley. There are divisions. But what I'm saying is, like, these are not willy-nilly people that didn't fight for their life to get here and have a constituency that is not responsible to Chuck Schumer. Let me ask you a question, though.

26:14And this is to Ashley's point. There are all these new people who were elected who want things that Chuck Schumer does not want. Israel, by the way, is only one of them. There's Medicare for all. There's, you know, there's just like a host of issues that Chuck Schumer is pretty much on the record as being against. So how do you then have him be and who is divisive, especially among this new people coming in? How does he get to lead this group of people when he's all when there's already just such an antipathy? And why should we get to lead that? I think that is the whole point of being a leader and having the experience of leader.

26:57You have to manage all these different things. There's nobody else that can do it? Look, I am sure that there are other. I think everybody in this world is replaceable. But I think Chuck Schumer has worked very hard to build this majority. And I think Chuck Schumer is particularly skilled at leading a majority like this. And I think he's ready to do the work. I just think that Chuck Schumer thinks he worked really hard. I bet you if you ask these news candidates, many of them wouldn't say that he worked as hard. to get this majority. And I think that is a really important point. I have the utmost respect for what he has done for this party.

27:27But if you actually talk to a Scott Cologne who is in the fight for his life right now. Chuck Schumer did a fundraiser for Scott Cologne a year ago. He recruited Scott Cologne. He is why Scott Cologne is going to be a senator in a lot of ways. He was a big part of that. Scott Cologne is not because of Chuck Schumer. I just want to be on the record. Well, Trump, Scott Cologne himself. So I think that there is a lot of credit. is due when it's but like there is a lot of stuff that Chuck Schumer is taking credit for right now that I think he should just take a beat and not be so arrogant to just come out the day after to say well then why is it arrogant for other people to say I'm going to challenge you I hate arguing with you because I love your politics I really do and I understand why there are people in the party that want change but I'm telling you right now you are looking for a presidential So why can't he help other people lead?

28:19He will. And he has. And not be leader. Oh, I think he's going to be leader. All right. But if he wasn't, why couldn't he help another generation lead? I mean, we've heard from Bernie. Hey, hey, hey. This isn't Couchy, okay? We're not making bets on this. I like the handshake, though. We're going to have to leave it there. I don't think this is going to get any easier. And we don't have a vote. We don't. Neither one of us have a vote. We just get to talk about it. I don't even work there anymore. But it's like being in the Swiss Army. You never leave. Yeah. Another place, though, that did have a vote.

28:48Next, the California billionaire tax proposal fails to pass. Why key California Democrats were against it, but Bernie Sanders calls it a temporary victory.

29:13OK, it appears the blue wave has some limitations. As California, the bluest of the blue, narrowly rejects a state billionaire tax, Voters dismissed a measure that would have imposed a one-time tax on those with a net worth exceeding$1 billion with a B dollars. The revenue generated from that tax would have been earmarked for health care following federal cuts to Medicaid and other programs. It's an issue that has, there's a theme this evening, divided Democrats. Governor Gavin Newsom and his successor, Javier Becerra, both opposed the measure. They argued it would drive billionaires out of the state and that the one-time benefit didn't outweigh the long-term harm to the budget.

29:56However, Newsom does support a wealth tax at the federal level. Bernie Sanders pointed out that the, quote, oligarch spent more than$400 million to oppose Prop 40 and only got 52 percent of Californians to vote against it. He warned that their victory is fleeting and that Congress will, quote, pass a billionaire wealth tax and end your greed. as the resident Californian here. Why did this fail? You know, I think it's voters saying that they understand that they're living in late-stage capitalism, but that they don't think the solution is to necessarily punish wealth. They're interested in policies that are going to help them feel directly more benefit in their own lives.

30:35Something really interesting happened this election generally across the board, where people under 40 proved that they now have the political power in this country. They are the swing vote for both Republicans and Democrats. If those voters stay home or if those voters turn out, they're going to decide elections. And so I think what you hear repeatedly from that demographic is, hey, we feel a lot of economic anxiety. And they are looking to both parties to have a bigger answer to that beyond just taxes, beyond gas prices, beyond we're going to tax billionaires. They're saying, no, what's the what's the vision here?

31:10I think the vision that the Republican Party can offer is you have to answer this question of the middle class as we know it doesn't really feel like it exists anymore. And I think the answer is that the middle class wasn't an accident. It was actually created by the U.S. government in the 50s and 60s as a direct reaction to the fear that communism was going to spread in the U.S. Because after World War II, it was only the U.S. and Russia that were the remaining powers. The U.S. government saw that if there's a country with high wealth inequality, if there's a country with low family formation or where economic prosperity doesn't feel widespread, people are going to turn to communism.

31:48And I think that when you have a government that's of for and by the people, which is what we have, it's not socialism to say we're going to have government policies that allow the government to be for you. However, what you just saw in California is a socialist policy like taxing billionaires, which is just punishing wealth, not creating more of it, isn't going to be the answer. Very funny that the governor said, well, I don't support it in my state, but I support it nationally. I have to say that made me laugh too. It's like I don't have to take responsibility for it. You guys in Congress deal with this.

32:19It wasn't just this initiative, though, and it wasn't just California. In California, they also passed a constitutional amendment preventing raids on savings, on retirement savings, and also retroactive tax increases. So it wasn't just, oh, we don't like this. We don't like tax increases. And it was coupled with conservative ballot referendums that succeeded across the country. Voter ID, property tax decreases and limits, increasing fines, reducing the capacity to get out on bail, for example. Across the board, transgenderism in bathrooms, in locker rooms, in places like Colorado and Washington and Arizona.

32:53This was not something that was just Democrats saying we're going to vote against Republicans and conservatism across the board. No, no, no. They made distinctions. Yeah. I do want to show, though, that billionaire wealth tax at the federal level actually is pretty popular. The Wall Street Journal had, you know, a poll from September 16th and support was 61 percent for a billionaire wealth tax. So, yes, up to a point, I think people do. This is America. People dream of being able to one day become a billionaire. But wealth inequality is a huge issue. I think the outcome of this ballot initiative is incongruent with the general public sentiment of the need for billionaires and even a trillionaire at this point.

33:43I think money and politics played a big role. Like, you can see elections where$60 million was spent against a candidate and the candidate can overcome it. When you spend$400 million and you still only went by two points, like, you're not actually winning the issue. Wealth is winning still. And so I think that there is also some calculation. California is also kind of like in a turbulent state right now. You had a socialist candidate win the mayorship in L.A. You have a rebuke on a wealth tax. So there's some inconsistencies. I would be interested to see this play out in a state where there aren't as million billionaires and see actually what happens.

34:21I'm just going to let you bring it home. Briefly, I think Noah makes a very good point. There have been so many places where we saw various issues that were championed by Republicans actually win at the same time that Democrats were finding their way into office. I don't think it's enough to just kind of point at money in politics. Elon Musk spent a bunch of money in Texas and did not get a return on that investment. Late. I think late or early Donald Trump in two different presidential cycles got outspent by a pretty tremendous margin and still managed to win. And I think what we're kind of seeing here is almost the mainification of national politics in a way, in a way that actually makes me somewhat optimistic that you can kind of select particular candidates or vote against the incumbents and the incumbent party and still vote for particular policies on the merits.

35:01I think the billionaire tax as conceived in California was not particularly smart. All right. Next, the new members of Congress are arriving and one veteran Democrat has a warning to the freshman. Do not be afraid of the president's veto threats. We'll discuss.

35:43So we need to do both. We can walk and chew gum. But lowering people's cost of living is the most important thing. Those were some of the new incoming lawmakers voicing their opinions on what the new Congress should prioritize. More than 100 soon-to-be freshman members have reported to Capitol Hill this week to prepare for the upcoming legislative session in January, which will usher in a new era of Democratic control. But as they get down to the business of governing, one senior Democrat is offering this warning about how the party should wield their power. Democrats must deliver popular, meaningful legislation to Trump's desk and then dare him to veto it.

36:30Dare him. You can't win what you don't fight for. And if we don't fight, if we hang back and sand down the edges of our economic agenda or trim our ambitions because we're worried about what rich donors or giant corporations might think, then shame on us. Chris? 100 percent. I agree with her 100 percent. Pass popular legislation that lowers the price of goods, makes people's lives better, does the things Democrats have been asking for for years and years and years and ask Trump to sign it. He might sign some of it. Abdul Al-Sayed was on just before us saying, hey, we'll name it the Donald Trump Health Care Act for all.

37:16Great. Whatever it takes. Let's make Americans' lives better. We want to keep this majority. We want to keep these red swing states that we now won. We've got to do things for the American people. We can't just sit back on our heels. Yeah, one of the things I heard from Abdul El-Sayed on Caitlin Collins earlier is he was talking about how instead of these big omnibus bills and he was, you know, talking about the Inflation Reduction Act, that it was so hard to message because it was just a big jumble in there. And this is how legislation now gets passed. It's just like everything gets stuffed in like a messy sausage and nobody understands what's in it.

37:54And so he was saying you have to cut it up and dish it out. It's not like Joe Biden wanted Build Back Better be his entire agenda or the Inflation Reduction Act. It's because progressives wanted that. They wanted all their desiderata in a single legislative package. And that's what's going to happen now. The Congress, they're going to try to. Bigger majorities now. A lot more room to move. Some of them want to pare back Medicare cuts. saw the one and nationalized the health insurance industry. Let's see if you can wed these two issues. Good luck. I think this goes actually back to the question of leadership because most Americans in their job, if they got to do only one, accomplish one thing in two years, they would get fired.

38:31And that is actually how our government has been working, that like in two years of a Congress, you only get to pass one bill. And Americans are saying, do it better, fix it better. And I think if you take smaller bites of the apple that people understand, that is a strategy for Democrats. I don't really agree with analysis. That's what progressives are. Chuck got a lot of judges. This is not an assassination on Chuck Schumer. I'm just saying, like, the strategy in which you move these packages should not look the same like they have under Donald Trump with the big ugly bill or with Joe Biden with the bill back better.

39:04I'd love to see Democrats return to regular order. I will not hold my breath. I definitely agree with the whole table, and I agree with Pocahontas, who has said that the only legislation that they should be sending, our first Native American senator. That's unfortunate. I believe that they should only send... Well, we do have our first actually Native American senator. I do believe... Peggy Flanagan. And we're going to have another one. And a governor. We've got another one coming. Go down, guys. And popular legislation to President Trump's desk. And so in that case, the best piece of legislation that they could send would be the No Invasion of Our Country Act, which seals our border permanently, making sure that no future president can reopen it.

39:38That is policy that is extremely popular with the American people. It's an 80-20 issue still across the board. Americans want that border closed. Democrats used to believe in it. If they're looking for popular legislation, I'm sure we can all agree that's what's going to send a president Trump's desk. And he should veto anything. Are he messaging exercises or are this actual attempt to get legislation through a veto-proof majority through the president? There's two ways to go about that. One is persuasion, collegiality behind the scenes. That's no fun. The other is a pressure campaign on Republicans who are now insulated by virtue of the fact that they're all in these very red districts.

40:10How do you do it? with lawful legislation closing our border. They don't need any House Republicans. And the senators have problems right now because a lot of those senators are in states that they now know can become Democratic and there will be a presidential election where they turn out ultimately even higher. So get ready for some of those guys who are going to be so well-controlled. I'm all for it. Hey, Cruz, come on in, baby. Water's warm. But can I tell you one thing that's interesting that I hear actually from both sides here, which is that, you know, everyone retreats to their corners.

40:42And we see from polling that 74 % of Americans say it's important for Democratic leaders to make efforts to work with Trump and Republicans. And so the message is not pointing the finger. Because what I hear from Senator Warren there is, hey, listen. Dare him to veto it. It's going to help us either way. And that actually isn't saying I have an agenda that works with Republicans that is going to actually. It's clearly not a governing. He will veto legislation that closes the border permanently. He will not veto legislation that closes the border permanently. Nope. That is what majority of people are.

41:16But that's not the number one issue. The number one issue is cost of living. 78 % of people. That's right. Cost of living and corruption. Ultimately, people want to see certain kinds of legislation get passed. But beyond the kind of signaling and the messaging around the legislation is the efficacy and the effectiveness of the legislation. And the reality is that the Affordable Care Act didn't actually do anything that it suggested it would do. That Democrats arguing in favor of more subsidies for insurance companies as one of their cause celebs in the next year, I don't know that that's going to be particularly popular.

41:50If candidates like El-Sayed, who actually now is Senator-elect El-Sayed, are concerned about wait lists, for example, for cardiologists, then tell me how you're going to get more cardiologists actually certified. Are you going to go after the AMA's monopoly here? Or are you just going to tell me that putting the government in charge of more and more of health care is actually going to fix things? I don't know that most Americans find that credible. Well, I think that if the ACA was so unpopular, the 60 times Republicans tried to repeal it, they would have actually been able to do it. I'm not even talking about its popularity.

42:19I'm talking about its effectiveness. It didn't lower costs. If you talk to the millions of Americans that are not rebuked from health care because they don't have pre-existing conditions, the 26-year-olds who get it. I'll tell you why. I'll tell you why. I'll tell you why there's going to be deals. And we'll leave it with you. You got three guys from the outer boroughs who grew up five miles from each other, right? And Trump doesn't believe in anything, right? So if it's something popular with the American people, I think he might want to make a deal because his time in power is running out. And I don't think he wants to go down as a failure.

42:49All right. Next, we're going to react to your feedback from CNN.com slash Abby.

43:07Now, viewer feedback from CNN.com slash Abby. So we have one comment. Bernie is 100 % correct. The wave wants and demands radical change in our government. And we have another comment along the same lines. It's time for new young leadership. I appreciate Chuck for his service and time. Step aside and turn it over to younger representation. We should say that Chris Van Hollen is not. younger than Chuck Schumer, and he's the man who's in the running. So perhaps generational change isn't necessarily what's on the table, but there is a desire, Caroline, to your point, that people want something at least representative of that something huge has happened.

43:47I think the huge takeaway from this election was it was a generational change election. People under 40 are in power now and in both parties, and that's not going to change. That's not going back. I like that the wave is sentient now. We've given it a person. The wave is alive. The wave is alive. Nobody votes. Nobody votes for who's going to be alive. I mean, there is a misconception in that, that this is some unified thing. It's news junkies. It will be much more set against itself in short order. Right now, everybody's in high spirits. No, I love how, like, this wave is not a mythical thing.

44:21This wave was voters. It was. And they're humans. For every vote, there is a person with a lived experience, and that is not a mythical thing. just like in 2024 there were voters that made a decision and you cannot under and i think that this like passive like oh it's all frills no they want change whether it point blank period and you can ignore it if you want but you will not be here for the long run but is the change to move in a completely progressive direction and be aggressively popular or is it is it some more moderate you guys i think that you don't think that there's a whole spectrum that like saying no to a chuck Schumer means that you have DSA.

45:00No, I'm asking you the question. I think that there are more humans in the world than Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries. So what should the leadership look like from an ideological standpoint? I think the caucus will discuss, but what I think it looks like is an opportunity for those who want to lead to stand up and throw their hat in. I do think that people are looking for a symbol that the message was received, and this is both from the Republicans and the Democrats, and that they are going to do something about that message. And sometimes that is symbolic, perhaps Chuck Schumer not being the leader, and sometimes that is substantial, perhaps Donald Trump signing some legislation.

45:39We shall see. We have a few more here. Viewer 4 says, Lulu, love your sneakers. Okay. They can see your feet. I just want to show these. I like my kicks, too. They're pretty cool. I was able. I've been on this show that long, and I never knew they could see our feet. Yeah, I have to say I wore sneakers because I didn't know they could see my feet either, even though there's a glass table, so hello. And somebody else wants me to wear my glasses. My glasses are not coming back. And you know why? Because it was bad juju aimed at me, and my glasses actually cracked. And so they do not exist anymore.

46:12So whoever the haters were out there, you have destroyed my glasses. Before we go, you can stream the show live or watch on demand anytime with an all-access subscription. And thank you for watching Newsnight. Laura Coates Live starts right now.

46:52at this point kind of outside the system. And so the question that we're going to try to tackle is... Is fashion terrible now? Well, no, I mean, I would phrase it as how do you develop a personal style in the age of AI slop? You know, on social media, like creators have to try a whole bunch of different things and see what catches and then they make it over and over and over again. The same thing happens with clothing. So they're sort of seeding the market, seeding the internet with all of these different ideas and then they can see what sells and then they can just make them really fast. Follow Engagement Party.

47:22Wherever you get your podcasts.