This is an audio transcript of the FT News Briefing podcast episode: ‘Listener mailbag, the election and 2025’
Peter Spiegel
Welcome to Swamp Notes, the weekly podcast from the FT News Briefing where we talk about all the things happening in US politics. I’m Peter Spiegel. I’m US managing editor of the Financial Times, and for the last episode of the year, we are doing something different. Today, we are answering your questions about the US election and the second term of Donald Trump. So thanks for sending them in. We got some good questions, and joining me to answer them is the FT’s global business columnist, Rana Foroohar. She’s also my occasional sparring partner on the FT Swap Notes newsletter, and more importantly, she’s my neighbour in Brooklyn. So hello Rana.
Rana Foroohar
Hello, hello. Happy holidays.
Peter Spiegel
Happy holidays. Let me start with something that actually isn’t actually listener question, but just to kinda get us started. We’re doing this because we have 2024 in the rear-view mirror. What is your biggest takeaway from this crazy year in US politics?
Rana Foroohar
Well, I would say my biggest takeaway is that economic populism and who can do it best will be the question, lesson, path forward for both parties, Democratic and Republican, going forward. I think this is particularly true for Democrats that they’re coming around to economic populism as the biggest tent-pole for a fundamentally new messaging strategy. Now, on the Republican side, I still think despite the fact that — yes Donald Trump is all about the market and the market can’t fail — that there is gonna be a real push along these lines. I just think that it’s gonna be really hard for populism not to be a topic and tariffs not to be a topic.
Peter Spiegel
That’s a really interesting take. I mean, I was a little bit worried that we would agree on this one ‘coz you and I are supposed to disagree, (laughs) but I also have a . . .
Rana Foroohar
Good! We do, good.
Peter Spiegel
I know it’s terrible. I also have a slightly economic takeaway for the year, but it’s a little bit more narrow, I guess, than what you are laying out. It’s a little bit trite, I know, but I would just go back to the old James Carville saw: It’s the economy, stupid. I think, you know, you may be right. Maybe we’re at a moment where populism is going to transform the way our politics are done. I would take a much more basic lesson, which is inflation, inflation, inflation. Americans were paying too much. They were angry and they took it out on the incumbent party. That is much less sort of eventful perhaps than what you were arguing, but I think it goes back to some very basic political truths.
All right, let’s go to our listener questions. And first off, it touches on something you were talking about, but one listener wants to know: how do we think that the Democrats will recover? You know, not only did it lose the presidency, lost the House, lost the Senate. How do you think they’ll recover from that?
Rana Foroohar
So let me answer. Rather than getting into the the political tick tock. Although, you know, Peter, I’d love to hear what you have to say about that. I will speak from a policy and sort of an existential standpoint. There are huge conversations, some of which I’m a part of going on right now about, OK, where’s our Joe Rogan? Where are the influencers? Where are the people that can really speak to average Americans that are, you know, just tryna get on with their lives? And Bruce Reed, who was the Biden whisperer, once told me that he thought about 60 per cent of Americans just wanna live their lives. And Republicans know how to talk to those people, and they have media that is set up to talk to those people. Democrats do not. And I think that that goes to this bigger question again, of economic populism and who’s gonna reclaim working people.
Peter Spiegel
I would agree with you, but I guess I think it’s a slightly different approach in that — I think you’re talking a lot about the messaging and I’m a little bit more concerned about the message — and I guess, look, I’m a child of — first moved to Washington and cover politics in the ’90s, so I’m very much a child of the the Clinton presidency. And the two things Clinton brought, frankly, were the message and the messenger, right. The messenger was on Bill Clinton, and I (Bill Clinton voice impression) could talk to that average American about what his . . .
Rana Foroohar
That’s pretty darn good (laughs).
Peter Spiegel
It’s a little bit old, I’ve been doing for a long time.
Rana Foroohar
You got the scratch. (Laughter) That’s late years Clinton you got the scratch voice, which I really like.
Peter Spiegel
But the other point about Clinton is a return to the center, and I do think the [inaudible] were very successful, rightly or wrongly, are portraying the Democratic party as the party of woke. And I think you need to — from a from a policy perspective and a rhetorical perspective — return to the centre, and I think you’re right though there has to be a messenger there that can deliver that in a way that that Biden and Harris just weren’t able to.
Let me turn to a slightly more frankly, esoteric question. A listener asked about recess appointments, and I think we all know why this is in the news. Donald Trump has threatened to use recess appointments to get some of his more controversial Cabinet appointees in. When I start by talking specifically about the issue of what a recess appointment is [inaudible], I’ll ask you specifically, what do you think this is gonna happen? So, it is one of these odd things in American politics and maybe legal history that there are certain things that are not really explicitly talked about or in the Constitution or in legality that are sort of traditions. And the problem with Trump is he just ignores the traditions. It is in there from the original constitution, 1787, in which, you know, at the age where it took you, you know, weeks, if not months to ride a buggy to Washington. They needed to be able to have a thing in there that, oh gosh, the Senate’s not in session. How do you get a cabinet secretary appointed? So, they said if the Senate’s in recess, the president can — for one term — which is just basically a year, appoint someone in an interim basis. Now, there’s been a Supreme Court ruling that says, what does it mean the Senate in recess? Well, the Senate gets assigned when it’s in recess or not. And the Senate can say, oh gosh, well, we’re not in recess right now or it’s a pro forma session. So it’s become increasingly difficult for presidents to do this, but what Trump is trying to do is say, hey, you’re my loyal Republicans and treat them almost in a parliamentary manner that they want. You want to sort of dissolve the Senate in order to appoint these guys. Now, let’s go to the politics of this, Rana, because I think what we learned thus far, particularly with the Gaetz nomination for attorney-general, the Senate spoke up and said we don’t want him and he withdrew. So, I think Trump’s bluster about recess appointments I haven’t heard it much in the last few weeks or months, and I suspect he realises he needs to actually go through the Senate on this. Is that what you’re reading it?
Rana Foroohar
Well I mean, it’s interesting the way you lay it out because a couple of things spring to mind. Parliamentary systems. I mean, in some ways I feel like Trump has almost built a weirdly kind of coalition government in a way that is different from what you’ve seen in the past from Republicans and is unique for America. I mean, in Europe, this happens all the time. You get weird groups of people coming together to form governments and, you know, they’re able to find some agreement around discrete policy issues. In some ways, that’s sort of what Trump’s coalition, if you wanna call it that is. I think he’s gonna find that in Trump, too. When there’s not a second term coming, there’s not as much maybe favours to be given out and received by Congress that he is probably gonna have to play ball more with conventional Republicans.
Peter Spiegel
And I would argue we’ve seen that already, right. There was the battle over the funding of the government in which . . .
Rana Foroohar
Right. Exactly.
Peter Spiegel
It proved that they could that that coalition you’re talking about kinda splintered apart, and it sort of a little bit more like the French government that has followed recently than any sort of unified coalition in the House in particular. So I think you’re right about that analysis.
Let’s quickly go to another topic that is more in the FT’s perhaps core competency which is foreign affairs and international affairs. Both you and I [inaudible] lived overseas quite some time as war correspondents. Are there any countries that stand to gain or benefit from a Trump presidency?
Rana Foroohar
India. I mean, India is already doing well, and I think India has autocratic tendencies. I think it’s a nice counterbalance to China. I think that Italy maybe is another country that . . .
Peter Spiegel
His relationship with Meloni he’s bragged about, yeah.
Rana Foroohar
Right, and I think that the common thread between some of these places is they have autocratic political leanings or they, let’s say, are countries that understand corruption and understand (laughs).
Peter Spiegel
Well, it’s — the other two key ones I would put in that same category about one will be controversial. I put into an autocratic category is Israel.
Rana Foroohar
Yeah, yeah fair enough.
Peter Spiegel
I mean, clearly Netanyahu was actively hoping that Trump would come back on the scene. Trump has already stated that, you know, he thinks that Biden was too weak on Israel. So I think the Israelis are very happy about it. I would also say somewhat, unfortunately, that Vladimir Putin’s Russia is also probably a more enthusiastic about a about a Trump presidency for obvious reasons, and that Trump is talking about, you know, stopping the war largely on Russian terms. And I think that is very much stands to benefit.
The one question that is then comes up second from another reader or listener is related, which is, what about Iran? And they put the question: could negotiations over a nuclear deal restart? I think that’s kind of a wrong question because it was the first Trump administration that killed the nuclear talks. And I don’t think that’s anywhere on the books, but what would you think about Trump approach to Iran and how it might different from a from a Biden-Harris administration?
Rana Foroohar
Tough, tough and not worried about being tough. I think a lot of Iranians have lived with the pain of this regime for a long time. They’re sick of it. They want the US in some ways to be tough. I really think Americans misunderstand Iran. I do. I mean, I think they misunderstand the Middle East, but I think Iran in particular, people are not happy under this regime. I mean, they are really, really suffering, and I think they’re ready for change. And I’m actually kind of pro Trump on Iran to be honest.
Peter Spiegel
Interesting. I mean, I think you’re right in terms of direction of travel. I mean, if again, if we look at the first Trump, a Trump presidency, not only killing the nuclear deal, but obviously attacking killing Soleimani, the Quds Force. And Iran on the eve of a Trump presidency is in a very different place now than it was eight years ago in that — it’s lost a lot of its axis of instability in the region. Hamas, be it Hizbollah. Syria has now fallen, which again, is an Iranian ally. And so there is a weakened Iran that is going to have to now deal with a much more aggressive Trump presidency, and I think it’s an interesting thing to watch. Look, Rana, you know Iran better than I do. The only thing I would say is I think the people you and I talk to tend to be from the more cosmopolitan urban centres like Tehran. I think there is more support for the more religious elements of the Iranian government in the countryside, and that is that’s divided opinion, too.
Let’s finish this up with the Financial Times. We have to have a financial question wrap this up. I think you’ll like this one, Rana. One of the readers, one of the listeners asks about a recent piece in the FT that made the argument that there is a US stock market bubble that is ready to burst. Listener asked: where is it safe to invest currently if the US bubble pops? But Rana, I’d love to hear what you think about the stock market more generally. Is it high? And could we see a downturn going forward?
Rana Foroohar
God, I have such strong feelings about this and such a painful history. People who read my column will know that I’ve been warning about a bubble in the US stock market for a long time. And maybe that makes me a perma bear. But I will tell you, I was at a dinner party a couple of nights ago where two of literally the world’s top venture capitalists were at the dinner table. Both of them were going significantly to cash and taking their gains. I think if you look at it historically and I would say this honestly, even if Kamala Harris were in the White House right now, we are by any normal historical standard, about six years over for a recession, if you discount the Covid, you know, V-shaped blip, which I would, we are possibly decades over for a serious market correction. We are in a period where there are a lot of sobering geopolitical echoes and sort of political economy echoes. There’s a lot of transformation right now. There’s no question to me that we will at some point, I think of next few years get a 20 per cent or more correction.
Peter Spiegel
Well, I would just say both Rana Foroohar and Peter Spiegel have children in colleges right now. So please, can the market correction happen after we pay the next tuition payment to the University of Michigan?
Rana Foroohar
(Laughs) Take your profits, Peter! Take your profits, send them to UM.
Peter Spiegel
(Laughter) Absolutely. Go blue. I would just say to agree with you, Rana. I mean, I think the political economy end of this is I can’t quite figure out why the market is so sanguine if Trump is serious about the tariffs that he tends to impose.
Rana Foroohar
Well, I have thoughts on that actually. It’s where else do you go, right? Well, it’s the fact that the US is still — the dollar is still the global currency. So it’s US v China. So it’s kind of, do you wanna buy into the, you know, only game in town markets or are you gonna buy into the Chinese recovery and China as investable story. That — tricky. I mean tricky. I’m not yet convinced about the latter.
Peter Spiegel
Or you put it in [inaudible]. That was a lot of fun. Rana, do you have any big plans for the holidays?
Rana Foroohar
I will be sleeping 10 hours a night. I will be cooking for my extended family, and watching a viewing of Love Actually on Christmas . . .
Peter Spiegel
Oh everything else sounded great until you got to that last thing . . .
Rana Foroohar
Oh come on, I’m gonna to talk to your wife. I bet she would watch it with me.
Peter Spiegel
That’s probably true. I’m off to Phoenix, Arizona, where I am going to celebrate my dad’s 80th birthday. Hello, dad.
Rana Foroohar
Woohoo happy birthday!
Peter Spiegel
Rana Foroohar is the FT’s global business columnist and co-author of the Swamp Notes newsletter with yours truly and Ed Luce. Thank you so much, Rana.
Rana Foroohar
Thank you, Peter.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
Peter Spiegel
This was Swap Notes. The US politics show from the FT News Briefing. If you wanna sign up to the Swamp Notes newsletter, we’ve got a link to that in the show notes. Our show is mixed and produced by Ethan Plotkin. It is also produced by Sonja Hutson, Lauren Fedor and Marc Filippino. Special thanks to Pierre Nicholson. I’m your host, Peter Spiegel. Our executive producer is Topher Forhecz, and Cheryl Brumley is the FT’s global head of audio. Original music by Hannis Brown. The show will be off next week. We hope everyone has a good holiday, and we will see you again on January 4th for more US political analysis from the Financial Times.
Are the Democrats doomed? Which world leaders are happiest to see Trump back in the White House? And why are investors flooding into American stocks? The FT’s US managing editor Peter Spiegel and global business columnist Rana Foroohar answer all of your questions after a wild year in US politics.
Mentioned in this podcast:
Trump team aims to bankrupt Iran with new ‘maximum pressure’ plan
How ‘the mother of all bubbles’ will pop
Sign up for the FT’s Swamp Notes newsletter here
Swamp Notes is produced by Ethan Plotkin, Sonja Hutson, Lauren Fedor and Marc Filippino. Topher Forhecz is the FT’s executive producer. The FT’s global head of audio is Cheryl Brumley. Special thanks to Pierre Nicholson.