Brooks and Capehart on Republicans facing backlash over federal cuts

This seed is commentary, not news itself but a discussion thereof.

From the linked page: New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart join Geoff Bennett to discuss the week in politics, including fresh tensions between the U.S. and Ukraine, town hall backlash to major cuts to the federal workforce and how inflation could sink Republicans. 

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T

Transcript by ChatGPT:

Geoff: From fresh tensions between the U.S. and Ukraine to town hall backlash, we turn to the analysis of Brooks and Capehart.

David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart, great to have you here as always.

Let's start with Ukraine.

No one expected Donald Trump to handle global affairs like his predecessors, but he has adopted Russia's false propaganda on Ukraine—calling Zelenskyy a dictator, saying that Ukraine started the war, and rhetorically turning against the democracy that was invaded in favor of the invader.

David Brooks: This is pretty revolutionary.

You can say goodbye to NATO, built around Article Five, where we promised to defend each other.

I think the bigger story is a shift in values. American foreign policy and Western foreign policy have been about human dignity and human rights. We banded together to promote those causes.

Donald Trump does not see the world that way. He sees the world as a place where ruthless mafiosos can do what they want.

I think in Donald Trump's world, there are three ruthless countries. Russia will have had hegemony over its region, we will have had hegemony over our region, and China will have had hegemony over its region. Anything that gets in the way is being eliminated.

Some of that is international alliances, but some of it is the idea that you should not interfere in others' elections or neighboring countries. The rules are being rewritten by someone who wants to turn local affairs into a survival of the fittest.

Geoff: Are we on the precipice of the end of the alliance?

Jonathan Capehart: There is nothing that David said that I disagree with.

The language we heard from Donald Trump in the first term was already alarming. I'm thinking specifically of the Helsinki press conference when he said, "Vladimir Putin told me he did not do anything to our elections."

Now he has ratcheted that up with calling Zelenskyy a dictator.

If you are the leader of a Baltic nation, the leader of Poland, of Germany, or of France, you must be scared out of your mind about what this means—about what the red brick of Ukraine means for Europe.

And if you are in Taiwan, you better be prepared for what China can do.

Geoff: What about this idea that it is high time we had an American leader who acted in such a way that effectively forces Europe to take control of its own security? You can point to Dwight Eisenhower, who raised concerns about Europe's lackadaisical approach to its own security.

David Brooks: It is a valid point.

As long as the Cold War was going on, they did not have to pay their dues. Now they have to because the Cold War is over.

But they have increased their spending. The amount of spending Donald Trump wants as a percentage of GDP—not even we pay that.

Look at what Donald Trump has said about Ukraine over the last week. He sends in the Treasury Secretary and says, "Hand us over 50% of your mineral rights."

"I'm making you an offer you cannot refuse."

In ancient Rome, they would go to a little country and say, "Give us all your money, or we will kill your women." That is like an imperial power saying, "Give us tribute."

Initially, Putin said no, but now it could be an offer he cannot refuse. He needs the Americans.

We're coming close to a deal where we are taking an invaded country that bravely resisted and saying—pay up.

Jonathan Capehart: I want to jump in on defense expenditures.

Donald Trump says these countries are ripping us off, as if they are paying the United States money for protection.

That is not what is happening at all. The argument is that they should spend more of their GDP on their own defense and rise up to the level of where the United States is, relatively speaking, so the burden is more fairly shared.

The way the president talks about it—it is not the real world.

But to your point, where people are saying, "Maybe we should start to care about America," those folks, I don’t think, fully understand what a peaceful world, what the NATO alliance, and what American leadership on the global stage have meant for their own peace and prosperity here at home.

Geoff: President Trump's poll numbers appear to be falling.

New numbers show that the majority of Americans say he has overstepped his presidential authority and hasn't done enough to address high prices.

When you look at these numbers more closely, what do you see?

David Brooks: People do not like chaos.

And second, people do rely on government—postal service, SNAP benefits, getting a passport renewed. If there is no one in the office, you will be upset.

And the big thing is inflation. It has begun to tick up again.

The very thing that took down the Biden administration could, in turn, drag down the Trump administration if inflation kicks up after his explicit promise that he would bring it down.

He swore to us that interest rates would come down immediately.

Geoff: It seems to have come to a head last night.

Rich McCormick held a town hall and faced an angry crowd. His constituents were upset over the steep cuts to the federal workforce instituted by Elon Musk and his Doge aides.

Town Hall Attendee: I would like to know—or rather, the people would like to know—what you, Congressman, and your fellow Congressmen are going to do to rein in the megalomaniac in the White House.

(Cheering)

Jonathan Capehart: When you talk about tyranny and presidential power, I remember having the same discussion with Republicans when Biden was elected.

Geoff: This is a deep red district. Donald Trump won this district by more than 20 points. What do you see happening?

Jonathan Capehart: To me, you have people in a district—who voted, as you say, in a deep Republican district—but they did not vote for Elon Musk or the chaos.

They don’t like the fact that someone who is unelected and unaccountable is wreaking havoc on the federal government.

More importantly, the congressman is from a coequal branch of government. The woman asking the question—"What are you going to do?"—why are you not stepping in to push back against the president?

And what we saw there is that they are not willing.

You cannot have guardrails if the guard won’t guard.

If Congress does not want to step in...

Geoff: You wrote about this last week, saying it is the working-class communities that will languish because Donald Trump ignores their main challenges and focuses on cultural war distractions.

People want to see change.

David Brooks: High school-educated people die eight years sooner than college-educated people. They are much more likely to live in devastated communities without social capital.

If you had a populist government, they would have policies to address these serious issues. The Trump administration is not leading with that and has no plans for this.

The president and Elon Musk are University of Pennsylvania graduates and billionaires. Pete Hegseth went to Princeton and Yale.

These are highly educated right-wingers.

I’ve been among these people all my life. There are two types. One believes in conservative government, and the other is anti-left.

They want to tear down the institutions they believe the left controls.

The problem with that is the pain is borne by the woman in New Medby who will die of AIDS.

Rich people are careless and break things.

Geoff: Jonathan Capehart and David Brooks, thank you.