Trump's Foreign Policy Pivot, Trumpism's Future, and Democratic Centrism

Deep Dive

The discussion begins with a brief mention of forest management practices, specifically planting more trees than are harvested and mitigating risks through active management as a long-term commitment, with a call to visit workingforestinitiative.com. The podcast "The Opinions" then introduces its hosts, Aaron Retica, Bret Stephens, and Frank Bruni, and touches upon their Thanksgiving experiences, with Bruni noting that among Italians, food is political and the amount of pasta made is a quasi-political question. Retica mentions his Thanksgiving was apolitical because everyone agreed on everything.

The conversation then shifts to President Trump, with Retica noting that Trump is spending a lot of time on foreign policy while Americans are more concerned with affordability. Bruni observes that people in North Carolina are expressing disappointment and concern about the rising cost of living, questioning whether Trump is to blame and noting the contradiction between his promises and delivery. Bruni also senses that voters who were inclined to give Trump a chance have not yet closed the door on him. Stephens agrees, attributing Trump's position partly to a "pathetic" opposition, illustrated by the government shutdown, and suggests Trump could solve affordability issues by lifting tariffs. He believes the current moment does not portend the midterm election outcome, as voters think in longer increments. Bruni adds that voters' perception of Trump's reversals and executive overreach could become his tools to address unfulfilled economic promises by taking sweeping, unilateral actions.

The discussion moves to a second-term president's typical pivot to foreign policy for a global legacy, noting they may care less about daily poll numbers as "lame ducks." This leads to the question of "Trumpism after Trump." Stephens acknowledges the succession of Trumps (Eric, Don, Ivanka, Lara) who will remain politically relevant. He posits that Trumpism without Trump will diverge into different directions: a JD Vance-like isolationist and illiberal strain, a quasi-restoration of normal Republicanism with a populist tinge, and a more terrifying direction embodied by Tucker Carlson, characterized by bigotry and anti-Semitism, resembling European far-right parties. Bruni notes that these distinct ideological tribes within the Republican party are held together by Trump's personality, and their fissures could widen destructively in his absence.

The topic then turns to centrism, with a reader question about the Democratic party needing to "reclaim the dead center" and potentially shift rightward, questioning how this helps Americans and why the U.S. cannot provide a European-style safety net. Retica clarifies that he believes Democrats need to shift right on cultural issues, not necessarily economic ones. Stephens theorizes that politics are won in the middle of the electorate, citing Trump's re-election through voters who shifted from Biden, and the success of moderates like Joe Manchin. He points to Bill Clinton as the most successful Democratic president, who made the party electable by returning to the center culturally and on issues like the death penalty and abortion, arguing Americans dislike "radical touches." Stephens also notes that cities run by progressive Democrats are unappealing to Americans, suggesting Democrats should embrace figures like Andy Beshear and Josh Shapiro.

Bruni pushes back, arguing that Democrats' greatest successes, like the New Deal and Great Society, were ambitious liberal coalitions. He worries that simply tacking toward the median voter might make Democrats seem wishy-washy and less about dreaming big. He recalls that Richard Nixon and Joe Biden, who governed progressively after campaigning as centrists, had difficult presidencies. Bruni raises the challenge of creating a "charismatic center," citing Bill Clinton's unique ability to tie personal charisma to centrist politics. He questions whether a left-liberal coalition can succeed more effectively than Kamala Harris did. He then centers the discussion on North Carolina, a bellwether state, noting Biden's narrow loss there in 2020 and the importance of appealing to the middle. Bruni suggests a Democrat could win in North Carolina by being far-left on economic issues but not overly so on social and cultural issues. He proposes that a centrist candidate could be charismatic by appealing to a desire to heal and lower political temperature, fostering amicable coexistence and incremental progress.

The conversation pivots to foreign policy, beginning with Venezuela. Bruni notes that people in North Carolina are not discussing it, though academics are. He highlights a Washington Post report accusing Pete Hegseth of ordering the killing of survivors of an attack on a boat, calling it a potential war crime and profoundly important, though he doesn't expect voters to discuss it due to its lack of daily impact. Stephens discusses his peculiar position of supporting the administration's policy on Venezuela but finding their methods despicable, especially if the Hegseth accusation is true, stating it would be an "unmistakably a war crime." He draws a parallel to the U.S. invasion of Panama to remove Manuel Noriega, suggesting a similar outcome for the Maduro regime would be viewed positively, but a quagmire would be different. Stephens believes this issue is part of a "McKinleyite obsession with the Monroe Doctrine" in the Western Hemisphere. He suggests Trump is obsessed with potency and appearance, linking it to territorial expansion.

Bruni counters that the Venezuela issue plays to several themes for the Trump administration: the refugee crisis, foreign meddling, and Venezuela's alliances with China, Russia, Cuba, and Iran, as well as its support for drug trafficking. He describes the Maduro government as a terrible dictatorship that stole an election, implying Trump could gain by restoring the democratically elected leader. Stephens amicably pushes back, questioning Trump's concern for stolen elections or dictators, citing his "love letters" with North Korea's leader and pardon of Honduras' former president, suggesting Trump likes to show presidents can act with impunity.

The discussion then turns to Russia, prompted by a reader question from Kazakhstan. The reader expresses fear for their country's northern part, where Russians are a majority, due to Putin's claims on historically Russian lands, similar to Ukraine. Stephens, proud of being banned by Russia for his anti-Putin editorials, fears that negotiations vindicating Putin's war effort would embolden Russia and its allies (Beijing, Iran, Pyongyang) to aggression. He views a potential ceasefire as merely a pause for Putin to regroup and aggress again for the restoration of the Soviet Union, expressing concern that the U.S. administration might be "selling Ukraine out." Bruni agrees with Stephens on this point and praises Senator Marco Rubio for not capitulating to Putin's demands as readily as others, including the President.

The podcast concludes with a lighter segment responding to a reader question about their favorite live music concert. Retica shares a memory of seeing the Dead Kennedys in the late 1980s, recounting Jello Biafra shaving his chest hair into stripes and his quiet retort to a drunken heckler yelling "kill the poor" with "same to you, buddy." Stephens mentions seeing Yo-Yo Ma play the viola da gamba at the Metropolitan Museum, but then admits his true favorite was seeing Rush, the Canadian progressive rock trio, whom he deeply admired. Bruni shares his experience seeing Toni Childs perform at The Bottom Line in Greenwich Village, describing her distinctive voice and the intimate, goosebump-inducing concert. The hosts then thank their guests and mention