Transcript of Rahm Emanuel on 2026 Midterms and Politics in the Trump Era

Democrat Rom Emmanuel has seen many elections and has advice for this year's.

This is a referendum election. Keep a focus on the rubber stamp, Republican Congress to President Trump.

What does he think Democrats are doing right and wrong? It's a special edition of Up First from NPR News. Emmanuel is a Democratic Party insider with a critique of the Democratic Party.

Republicans have walked away from public education, abandoned it, and Democrats abandoned accountability and standards.

What did he learn about education from a Republican-dominated state? Also, how did Democrats lose corporate America, even though many executives worried about Trump?

You're watching from the sideline a nation being destroyed and walking away from the rule of law.

Stay with us for a talk with Ram Emmanuel. Ram Emmanuel has been involved at every level of government. He was a Democratic leader in Congress, President Obama's Chief of Staff, Mayor of Chicago, and President Biden's ambassador to Japan. Now he's thinking about a run for President, which gives him a platform to promote a particular idea of the Democratic Party. We sat down to talk to him about everything. Welcome to our studio. Thanks for coming by. Thank you. I want to begin with the Prime Minister of Canada, which is a sentence that has never been said at the beginning of an interesting podcast before.

That's where the Prime Minister wants to begin.

I think so. Mark Carny, just before we sat down here, gave a speech at the World Economic Forum in which he effectively said, The US-led rules-based economic order is over. That it's always been partly a lie, but that people benefited. Now it's been exposed as a total lie, and it's done.

Is he right? Did he use the word lie?

He talked about things being false, falsehoods. Yes.

Well, I mean, it probably is a proper follow-up to we chased him into the arms of President Xi of China, which was totally unnecessary. Days ago, trade deal with China. Which also shows the inconsistency. If you wanted to talk about President Trump's policy of having this region be our region, you take the country with the largest, longest border with the United States, and you were shoving them away when they wanted to actually run closer and be more aligned. So there's just consequences and also an inherent contradiction to the President's own stated policy. I do think there's two things that I would say that I think are getting lost in all the news, and I'll respond to it, and the speech fits in that. Okay. America today is exporting its political dysfunction, and China, under President Xi, is exporting their economic dysfunction. Let me unravel that. Sure. China is now 40% of the world's or nearly 40% of the world's manufacturing, more than the United States, Europe, and Japan combined. And because their economy is imbalanced, massive overhang of public debt, massive overhang of housing, deflation, the President Xi's decided they're going to export their way out of this, and they're destroying even not just us, but other allies of theirs, not us, industrial base.

They're exporting their problems onto the world economy, which is why Europe is trying to protect itself. Sure. That's an example, Chile. The reason The EU has an anti-coerasion plank in their economic toolbox, which they refer to as the bazooka. It was designed to protect Europe post-Lithuania getting attacked by China. It's being only deployed or talked about in defense of the United States, but it was originally conceived of because of China.

Oh, meaning that they were preparing for a trade war with China. Instead, they have one with the United States.

When Lithuania did something with Taiwan and China did a three-year economic coercion, they They came up with this tool, an attack on one. Economically, you could use an anti-coerasion tool, etc. Now they're talking about, and the only time they would ever think of deploying it, not to say they're going to, was because of the United States, and mainly because of what the United States is doing threatening tariffs on EU countries, mainly EU as a whole, because of the way we're approaching Greenland. I don't think Carny's take is totally I'm not sure it's totally right because of the size of the economies, but the order in which we have been a beneficiary is now fundamentally broken and cannot be repaired, so it has to be thought anew.

I want to talk that through. Carnegie is essentially saying the US set up these rules for the global economy and also for human rights and conduct among nations. It was always partly a fiction, he says. I believe he uses the word fiction, but it worked. But now Now he says the US has stripped the fiction away. It's a naked power grab or great powers, he says, are making a naked power grab. So it's done and smaller nations have to defend themselves.

You expanded the point. I thought he said only economic. Now I'm hearing also political.

I think it's all in there. Everything is in there. Freedom of the Seas, all manner of things.

Let me say that the United States, while maybe never totally lived up to its idealistic claims, it was more consistent with it, even when it did things in violation of that. I think him saying is, Okay, the game is off. The mask has been ripped off. There's actually no even head faking these aspirational goals.

You guys aren't even pretending anymore. Smaller nations have to fend for themselves.

Yeah. There is going to be a legacy of damage and collateral damage from the United States walking away from not just that it constructed this. It constructed an international economic, political, and strategic, that's what I call NATO and other allies in Europe. Sure. A whole set of systems that we benefited from. Let me give one example, having been ambassador to Japan for the United States. When we deployed export controls was the semiconductor industry of China. We had Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Dutch, and the European standing with us. So we didn't have to do it alone. As we saw the President try to do something against China alone and fold it. That's where the phrase tackle comes from. But because we had allies who were invested with the United States, China used to say we're being isolated, and the answer was, ding, you're right. But it was isolated because allies stood shoulder to shoulder with us. We were a direct beneficiary When we wanted a strategic objective, we had an army that came, and it wasn't just US. I mean that metaphorically, not economic, et cetera. But that was an example of having people work with us.

And Carny is not wrong. We decided that is a burden on us, and we're going to see the price for that. That price will be more than the American people and a host of issues, economic, political, strategic, defense-wise, that the American people are ready to bear alone.

Here's the next question, though. You're talking about that system in the past tense, which may well be appropriate. And Carny You talked about it in the past tense. Do you believe the next president, after President Trump, could put that system back again?

I think the biggest damage will be the trust level, which is we could do it with you, but what's the guarantee it will stand the test of time? That's what's being tested in Ukraine. That's what's being tested in Greenland. That's what's being tested on the tariffs. That's what's being tested when the United States, as somebody who was part of this, creating the trilateral between the United States, Japan, and Korea, which was the worst nightmare for China. The Korean President and the Japanese Prime Minister just had a two-day state visit, and the United States was AWAL, wasn't even invited. That tells you the cost of going alone. And so I don't think it's thrown meaning it's over. I understand why the Prime Minister of Canada would feel that way, having just been in Montreal last week. I think being forthright with our traditional allies, here's the trust we have to build, both of us have a role to play. I think that's the most important thing you can do, how we construct NATO, how we construct our economic relationships or political coordination in the G7, et cetera, roll those out. That you can do and to reform them, not just hit a reset button, but reform them to better serve the future.

Reform, meaning you would not want everything to go back to just the way it was in 2016.

First of all, you can't wish these four years away no matter how much I want or maybe your audience wants. You can't. So the question is, and the biggest damage is going to be to the trust of the American word. You have a president in the United States, and let's deal with Greenland. It's in the news. Sure. I said this the other day, why would you pay full price for something you can get for free? Denmark and Europe are saying, We will do all of that.

In terms of national security for Greenland.

Everything you want.

Minerals and everything else.

Let me say this. This goes back to Truman set up a defense treaty. Why would you want to pay full price for What do you get for free? You're asking the American taxpayers to build this. Second, is this a geo strategic or is this ego strategic? Because he says, Well, I need it psychologically. Well, that may not be true for America.

This is the thing the President said we should know. He said it's psychologically important to me to own it.

Now, because of the way both the stock market but also the bond market is reacting, American homeowners who want to get a mortgage for the first time home are going to have to pay more on a mortgage because of the president and the way he's behaving. Pause. Is his strategic vision about Greenland correct? Not wrong. How he's going about doing it is massively dangerous and damaging to America, short, medium, and long term. To me, so you just can't say, Okay, I'm back. Let's hit reset. You're going to have to make fundamental reforms, and I would do it together that serve us collectively. Reset, no. Reform, yes.

I want to move domestically. There's so much to talk about with you because you've had such a range of experiences in your life. Immigration. There's a lot of focus on Minnesota right now. The other day on television, you said you wanted to, End ICE as you know it today.

As we know it.

As we know it today. Some people will hear that and think you meant Abolish ICE.

Did you mean that? No. As we know it today. Go on. That could have been, I think, clearer.

I'm inviting you to be clear now.

That will be a test. We'll see if I could pass it. Okay. No, But ICE has become a lawless mob rather than a law enforcement agency. It serves a role, but not trying to be an occupying force in our cities. Taking a US citizen out of a school, grabbing people who are filing their immigration papers at the courthouse, which means they understand that the rules, and this is the law, is lawless. Wearing masks without identity, no body cams. There's a lot of reforms, and I'll tell you, not just for immigration. As a former mayor of a big city, you have a national crisis one day, a terrorist act. I've seen it both as a mayor and also as a chief of staff to a president. The trust between a national security entity entity, whether it's ICE or any other entity, local law enforcement, and the public is essential to responding to a crisis. You're destroying that trust. And so I say, and ICE as we know it, because it's not a law enforcement entity anymore. It's become a lawless mob. And you can see the action, and the American people agree with this conclusion. What they're doing is creating lawlessness and disorder.

So how it's functioning and the way it's lacking both oversight is ended as that is, the Congress is going to improve the appropriation with some changes here. But another point and illustrating of this example, no police chief of any city of size would ever allow A young man who, six months ago, got 33 stitches having served back on the street, given all the other both physical, mental, and emotional scars.

You're referring to the agent who shot Renee McElin-Coo.

Yes. To For me, it has lacked supervision, it lax purpose, it lacks focus, and it is serving for a political goal, not a law enforcement goal. Well, let's talk about- That's what I said, and that's what I meant by end it as we know it, not end it.

That leads to It's a further question. Do you think that, in your view, a more competent, better trained ICE with better guidance could accomplish the goal the president has in mind, which is deporting millions of people as quickly as possible?

I think you're cleaning up. The president had consensus in the country. And what he claimed we were going to deport is deport undocumented immigrants with criminal records.

Sure. He said many things. That was one of the things.

Well, that was primary. He said everything at once. Yes. It was like a salibar. You could pick which one you wanted.

I think that's actually accurate.

What this has morphed to is not what the American people will bargain for. You can see it. If you don't trust me, listen to Joe Rogan. Referring to them as Gestapo. This is not a political... I'm making a political, not a partisan, but a political observation. He has lost the American people for good reason because he has over extended, be way way beyond, he never had a mandate, but way beyond what you could have said was the support of the American people. I think it's more than just a tweak of management and reform. I don't think any city, and I'm talking about this as having lived through this in Chicago, Should have the federal government come in as an occupying force. It's just wrong.

That leads to another question, though. You talked about coordination.

I think all of these lead to another question.

That's absolutely true. Between federal state and local authorities. We're just going to continue on. It's going to be a flow of conversation as things often are. But the next question has to do with that collaboration between federal and local authorities. In many cases, of course, as in Chicago, the governor of Illinois, Pritzker, has said, Well, they're not even communicating with us. But there's still a question, should local authorities be cooperating with the feds, even when they're committing to a mission they don't like?

I believe in community policing. Community policing means The first word is community. It's working with the community. When you have a wall of distrust that breaks down, every police chief, every head of any law enforcement, federal, local, state, will tell you that's a massive problem. One anecdote, if I can. Sure. Our mayor of Chicago, President Obama decides we're going to have the largest NATO meeting in the history of NATO at that time in Chicago. I'm doing this by memory, so I could be off, but 63 countries come, not only NATO, but participating countries, et cetera. Sure. We're going to have clearly demonstrations. The federal government loved our OEMC, which is an emergency management department, modern technology. They take it. We coordinate with them. There's Heads of state, foreign ministers, defense ministers from 60 plus countries. There are 25,000 protesters each night for four nights. Nothing bad happens, meaning from either property damage or otherwise. That's the type of coordination you want. That's the type of trust you want. That's the ability of this. When you have a major event, you have other types of things that are crises that happen. But here was a major international event held in what I consider the most American of American cities, city of Chicago.

Sure. And the federal government, and I'm not talking about one single entity. There's national security, there's FBI, there's Homeland Security. A lot of entities, Chicago Police Department, state troopers, There were protesters, exercising their First Amendment rights. All went off without a hitch. And everybody high-fived at the end because people were able to express their protests, their First Amendment right. There was an agreement at NATO that was historic as it related to Afghanistan, and you had more countries as a state defense minister ever in the situation. I get it, but there's two- You're asking me, so I'm saying that's what you want.

When Governor Printer says- But let's talk about that. There's two sides to the cooperation. I mean, there's a federal government informing the locals what they're doing. But the other question is, should local governments be assisting immigration authorities in finding people who are in the country illegally? Should they, for example, be allowing access to jails where people who may have an immigration record are also in jail on charge?

If we have to go through every location, let's go through it. One, a school down the block from where Amy and I live. There were ICE agents in our car waiting for parents to pick up their kids from school. No, that's a parent doing exactly what you'd want a parent to do. That is not the crisis we're seeing of. Somebody who's doing their small business and picking up resources at Home Depot is not where you want it. Somebody filing their papers At the court, following the laws we have established as a country based on the law, following the rules for their immigration papers is not where you want to go. Now, I don't want to go through every location, but I think you get the general gist of what I'm saying. The consensus on the country was, and Democratic, Republican governors and elected officials at many levels, you had an undocumented immigrant with a criminal record. We don't want them in the country. That was the basis of what we have done. But there's a particular question. Wait, Okay, go ahead. Under President Obama, we deported, I'm doing this by memory, I think it was like- Millions of people.

Over two million, two and a half. Enough that people decided to protest his event and call him deporter in chief. Sure. But you did not have You did not have the federal government using tear gas. You did not have the federal government being massed security people without names, et cetera, showing up, taking kids out of schools or people out of places of worship. There is a difference Yeah, but there's one specific question I have here.

Alejandro Mayorkas, who you know very well, who served in the Obama administration, was Secretary of Homeland Security under President Biden, has said the same thing that Tom Homan, who works for President Trump, has said, Essentially, we would like to be able to go into jails locally and bring out people who have a criminal record and also have an immigration problem, and not every city will allow that. Should that be allowed?

No. Particular thing, I would say no.

It should not be allowed.

Well, hold on. Let me draw the distinction. Prison, yes. Jail, I'm not sure what they're charged with and whether they're convicted.

If they're in jail- If they've been convicted, take it away.

They're in jail, I mean, rather in prison. A hundred %. Yeah, they're undocumented and they're serving time because they've been found guilty. Yes. If you're in jail, we don't know whether you're guilty yet, and we don't know whether it's a misdemeanor or a felony yet. There's a lot of unanswered questions. So there's a distinction there. I don't want you to say, You send end welfare. That's not what I said. I said, End it as we know it.

I quoted you and invited you to explain.

I have a feeling with NPR. I want to make sure the whole answer was there. That's good.

We're going to make sure the whole answer is there. This is all going to get out there.

Prison is not jail, and prison is what I said, yes.

Got it. Prison is what you said, yes to.

Because they're convicted.

That's how this longtime Democrat views immigration right now. Ram Emmanuel is one of three prominent brothers. In a moment, we'll hear how they're experiencing this time in history. This message comes from Wise, the app for international people using money around the globe.

You can send, spend, and receive in up to 40 currencies with only a few simple taps. Be smart. Get WISE. Download the Wise app today or visit wise.

Com.

T's and C's apply.

At Radiolab, we love nothing more than nerding out about science, neuroscience, chemistry, Country.

But we do also like to get into other kinds of stories, stories about policing or politics, country music, hockey, sex, of bugs. Regardless of whether we're looking at science or not science, we bring a rigorous curiosity to get you the answers. And hopefully, make you see the world a new. Radiolab, adventures on the edge of what we think we know. Wherever you get your podcast. Public media counts on your support to ensure that the reporting and programs you depend on thrive. Make a recurring donation today to get special access to more than 20 NPR podcasts. Perks like sponsor-free listening, bonus episodes, early access, and more. Start supporting what you love today at plus. Npr. Org.

I want people to know, if they don't, that you are one of three very successful brothers in wildly different fields.

The other two never think that, but I'm glad you are. Never think that you're successful?

Or are they being Humble about themselves.

Ari Emmanuel- Humble does not fit with the manual.

Ari Emmanuel is an entertainment executive, which is really not a large enough phrase for everything that he does. Zeke Emmanuel is a doctor, very instrumental with Obamacare, and also has a book out and other things. I'm just curious, being in such wildly different fields, how are the three of you experiencing this moment in history?

This is not to get teary-eyed, but I will.

It's allowed. Okay.

In our family room growing up, mom and dad had my grandmother on my maternal side purse in the center of the wall. It was framed. Her purse? Her purse. Above it was Grandma Sophie, and Gidey, and Ida's passports. That was a purse that carried their passport when they came in 1914 to America. Oh, wow. On either side of that purse was the black and white photos of mom and dad's family that neither in the programs or the Holocaust made it to America or whatever. And all 28 eyeballs were on you. When you were in the family room. Grandma Hermann and Grandma Sophie, who are my mother's parents, lived with us growing up for part of our childhood. And he, grandpa, comes to America in 1914 by himself, 13, 14 years old, goes to Maxwell Street, steelworker, meat cutter, truck driver. They meet in Douglas Park in Lawndale on the west side of Chicago at a dance for Eastern European juice. We knew growing up that America was a very special place. Those pictures were a reminder to the three, Ari, Zeke and I, you're not to mess this up because you got something that nobody else got.

This was a special place. And I think America's pull is a special place. There's a gravitational towards freedom. America has been that place. And I don't mean this sopially. I don't want to be... Because this story is told in many different languages and different cultures. But the idea that my grandfather, at 15, His three grandsons, one is an oncologist, has made a name for himself. Another in entertainment has achieved riches and capacities unimaginable from a in Moldova. And that his grandson can be both the mayor of the city he called home and the chief of staff to a president. It's not the Emmanuel story, it's America's story. And the idea that you have ICE agents chasing people, firing tear gas, unnamed, a president attacking people, both religion, gender, or faith, and using that is unimaginable in a country that opened its arm to him. And so when we talked and we text him, I saw Ari this weekend. I saw Zeke on Thursday when he was in Chicago. We all went to see my mother. It's hard to put into words how we're living through this because this is in such a violation of every value in principle from about four days old to where we are today.

And I'll close on one thought. Sure. My mother is in a rancor in Chicago in their late '50s, early '50s, civil rights and doing open housing, open beaches in Chicago. And her and grandpa used to fight about politics all the time. Mom was a much more progressive. Grandpa was a Franklin Roosevelt, Terry Truman, Democrat, et cetera. And so my mother said the other day, she goes, I have to live another three She's 93. I have to live another three years just to make sure that that bastard is out of the office.

So she has an opinion is what you're telling me.

Whether you ask for it, she'll give it to you.

Got it. At the same time, you're all trying to continue to succeed in this changing world, in a rapidly changing world. Do you talk about that? Like, Ari is in an entertainment world that is roiled by constant change. You're in a political world that's roiled by constant change.

I think the change we're trying to see is this change, not for ourselves, for other people. And of course you do. I mean, that's what those eyeballs on you are about. You have something that's a gift. This is not to be careless or reckless with. And so there's a responsibility that comes with this, and that is self-evident. And so, yes, are we continuing to move forward? Yeah, because you have a responsibility. It's easy to turn your back on it and be, my three kids are doing fine. Amy and I are doing So at one level, you could just say that. I feel guilty saying my family's well when I look at everything else going on for everybody else's family. And that's the responsibility that comes with being here.

And you're thinking about running for president. If you ran, what would your cause be?

Cause be to make sure that the American dream stays alive for another generation. I think that we have broken faith with it. It's unaffordable, it's inaccessible, and that's totally unacceptable. I'm a product of the American dream. When you said, and Steve, you said this, we're going to get ahead, who are you getting ahead with? Our parents. You can't do that today. Kids are making three times what their parents made when they got out of college, yet they're in the basement, and their parents could afford a home. In the 1950s, 50% of our young adults at the age of 30 were married and owned a home. Today, it's down to 14%. The first-time home buyer is now 40. This is crushing. We have pulled up the ladder, double-locked the door, the bridge is closed rock solid, and a few kids are able to make it. And 97 of the other kids out of 100 can't. They can't own a home. They can't afford. They're one sickness away from a health care. They're fighting with the insurance company to get what the doctor prescribed. Their 401(k) has become a backstop to their paycheck, and the education has become unaffordable and forced them into the basement.

To me, the cause would be restoring both the American dream. I do think both the accessibility and the affordability of the American dream is something If you want stability in democracy, get stability in the economy to work for people. You used to strive to get to the American middle class dream. Today, you struggle to stay in it, and more likely, you're falling behind on it. To me, that would be nice. I've also put at the center of that because it's what makes it accessible. You live in a period of time where you earn what you learn. As you know, because we've talked about this many times, sure. Today, 50% of our kids are not reading at grade level and doing math at grade level. It's the lowest it's been in 30 years. Those kids will be fighting and playing with one hand tight behind their back. If you can't do third grade reading, fourth grade is not easier. That's the answer to the pop quiz. It doesn't get easier. Now, I just came back from Mississippi, where they have what is referred to as the Mississippi Miracle. Sure. But I would refer to it as Mr. Barksdale, to me, who funded this.

It's the Mississippi Marathon.

I just want to underline for people, Mississippi, traditionally right near the bottom, in education.

In education- In For 20 years, they've gone from 49th on reading to ninth.

It's a very conservative state. Let's note that as well.

What are they doing right? But also, two points. One is every other state, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Alabama that have replicated, are all seeing similar Growth in their reading scores. They've returned to the fundamentals. One, back to phonics. Get away from all the whooie that's taught out of Columbia that's ruined kids. Phonics, the science of reading. Retrain the teachers around it. Support the teachers with constant coaching around phonics. Give kids the additional time needed on reading. Give them the additional support if they may need a tutor, and then hold them accountable. No going to fourth grade if you can't hit third grade. That is it. It's the fundamentals. They have succeeded, and every state that has replicated has seen similar growth. They've gone from 49th to ninth. Every challenge we face can be answered what's working in America. Now, I happen to think on the latter years, and we'll get to this as you want, what we did in Chicago in the high school years were the fundamentals. If that needs fundamental reforming, the K through 8 or what we did in Chicago, pre-K through 8, is about returning to the fundamentals, giving the time, giving the teachers the training, giving the kids the support, and you will get gains on reading and math, which are essential for the rest of the education to work.

I just want to note You're a Democrat. You went to an overwhelmingly Republican state.

Not only overwhelmingly, I went to a county, did a town hall, standing room only in a county that Donald Trump won by 21%.

Is there anything partisan about what you're saying? Anything at all?

No, I think actually, if I had to say, as my mother would say, a three on both of you is one. I don't know if that gets translated in the radio, but it's an old Jewish phrase. Got it.

I'll ask you to spell that later.

No, it's like a spin on both of you. No, wait, we're doing phonics. Never mind. All Republicans have walked away from public education, abandoned it.

You mean National Republicans? I assume, since you're praising Mississippi.

But go on. Democrats have abandoned accountability and standards, and both parties are wrong. It is unacceptable that 50% of our kids are not reading at grade level. I grew up, and I believe in the politics where Governor Clinton, governor Winter from Mississippi, governor Reilly from South Carolina, governor Hunt from North Carolina, governor Rizelle Miller from Georgia, Governor Lawton Childs from Florida. They answered Mr. Bloom's A Nation at Risk report. They came up with a major famous report that got us on a 25-year slow, steady progress in reading and math scores. Some fits and starts. That's how this is. You ain't going to have a linear line. Find somewhere else if you want instant gratification. Ain't happening here. It's hard work. But we, as a country, answered that challenge. Today, you know more about the president's position on windmills than you do about the fact that we've had a 30-year low in reading scores. He's never commented on it. No governor of either party has called for a national emergency meeting. And this is not a pop quiz. The answer is with four states who have all adopted something totally fundamental. They showed you not once, not twice, not three times, four times how to succeed.

To me, that is what's essential to getting this country right and getting those kids' future right. One of the things I'll say, and I'll shut up, Steven, I know you want to get one of the 925,000 questions. I got a few more to go. This gets back to when you talk to me about us and my family, our responsibility is when you walk through the door of opportunity is not to reach back, as Ms. Obama said, and grab a door handle and shut the door, but to grab a hand and pull somebody break through that. You can't get from here to there. You can't believe in equity if you're complacent with 50% of the kids not reading at grade level.

To Ram Emmanuel, reading is far more important than divisive social issues, which he says Democrats have focused on too much in the past. This was the subject of a much-debated comment that he had when appearing on Megan Kelly's podcast last year.

Can a man become a woman? Can a man become a woman? No. Thank you. No.

After a break, we discuss that quote and ask Emmanuel what he meant.

This week on the NPR politics podcast, President Trump's first year It's not just that there aren't really the guardrails on Trump's presidency this term. It's that he's doing things that are just not conservative. We unpack the ongoing transformation of the Republican Party on the NPR politics podcast. Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. President Trump says he wants Greenland for national security, but at least one Trump official has said it's also about critical minerals. Geologist Greg Barnes knows these minerals. As well. I just couldn't believe that something of this size and quality was there sitting out there. On the indicator from Planet Money, is this really a land of untapped natural riches? Listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.

This year's Oscar nominations are here, and we are unpacking record-breaking nominations for Sinners, plus nominations for Marty Supreme and One Battle After Another. We'll talk about some of the surprises and snubs. Listen to Pop Culture Happy Hour in the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. You have argued that your party was missing its priorities on education, arguing, and I paraphrase here, that Democrats were spending too much time on who goes into what school bathroom and not enough time on the kinds of issues that you have raised. Too much time on trans issues, to be blunt. You, a few months ago, were on a Megan Kelly podcast, and she asked you a yes, no question. As I recall, the question was, Can a man become a woman? You said no, then said you were heading for the Witness Protection program. I want to ask about that because with that remark, it seemed to me you were going beyond the question of trans kids, where there's all kinds of debate, or trans kids in sport, where there's a very nuanced debate, and you're saying there aren't trans people. Is that what you meant?

No. First of all, that's not what I said, Steve. Okay. Let's dial up since what you said.

Okay.

What I believe, way too much time on bathroom access and not enough time on classroom excellence. You could see it in the whole debate. As a former ambassador of Japan, 8,000 miles away, I was watching this country, and you got 50% of your kids can't read at grade level. You tell me the amount of coverage of that versus the amount of coverage on a bathroom, a locker room, or a sport, as your question indicated. Got it. I will also say number two to you. I've been in Iowa at a front yard, 400 people, 2 hours of questions. I was in Waterbury, Mississippi, standing room only, about an hour and a half. I've taken about 40 questions. Nobody has ever asked me a single question about bathroom, locker room, or sports. Every time I get within 202 area code, it's a second or third question. So that's number one. Okay. It's not a priority. And the American people actually feel in their bones what's missing in education. Now, I'm a mayor. In 2016, a full decade ago, I passed an ordinance on bathroom access, but I never allowed it to distract me from high school, graduation rates, reading scores, and math scores.

I was the ambassador, led one of the largest embassies in the United States across the world. We were a very welcoming community, including I was inclusive, but I never allowed it to be a digression from our mission of serving the US-Japan Alliance and building it stronger and better for the 21st century. Never. Now, did I go from acceptance to advocacy? No. That wasn't the job. That wasn't the mission. You accept trans people as they are. More than accept. I created an accepting culture, but I said, Here's who we're serving, the United States of America. To me, that's what I think is I never took my eye off a ball. We had eight years of graduation growth. Did in 2016, mid-cycle in my eight years as mayor, we changed laws and the ordinance and passed one on bathroom access. Yeah, but I never took the eye off the ball. Unlike what has happened in the debate here. I just say this because you can see the amount of energy and oxygen on a set of issues.

We should be frank, Republicans are going to raise it if you don't.

They're going to be in your face on this. They did in the campaign and walking around in the campaign and saying, I said that in 2020. Well, the campaigns are not about what you said yesterday. They're about what you said in your career. Okay, so that said, you got to deal with that. I believe the American people are a culture of acceptance, but not one that becomes advocacy. That's where it crossed the line. Now, I've made my position clear. It's not the biggest issue. I think when you have, and I've said this in tongue-to-cheek, but I mean this, one child is discussing their pronoun, and the rest of the class doesn't know what a pronoun is. If I want to be frank, I don't know if I'll run, but if I run and the issues on trans are the most important, I'm not your guy, and I'm okay with that. If getting us off of a 30-year low on reading or math scores and somebody that's willing to make that core to what we have to do as a country, then you may think my answers are right, and you may think my answers are wrong, and I'm okay with that.

But I'll tell you one thing I know from history. End of Civil War, turn of the Century, end of the GI, and hit Meeting the Sputnik Challenge. The four greatest periods of economic growth and prosperity in American history are underpinned by one constant. Land-grant colleges under the Civil War, Universal High School education, the GI Bill, and the science and technology challenges of the Sputnik Challenge. We are fighting, and we're letting people in America fight with one hand tied behind their To me, that is what I said I would do. Now, I, again, believe in a culture of acceptance. I have no problem with that. But he will not distract or digress from raising graduation rates, post high school education, and reading a math course. It's something that should be done, but it's not the thing we send kids to school with. I also think arguing about the name of a school after Abraham Lincoln and not worrying about the fact that the kids don't know why Abraham Lincoln is an icon is also messed up.

This was a debate in California over a school called the Lincoln School.

I think we engage, and I say we meaning Democrats, engage in bringing cultural wars to schools, and then found out we were on the losing side of those cultural debates. In politics, it's about picking where you want to have a battle. I think we made a big strategic mistake. We took our eye off of educational excellence, went into a cultural landscape, and found out we didn't have the public with us.

I want to find out if you think there was another strategic mistake. I'm thinking about- Yes. The answer is yes. Many strategic mistakes.

Now you figure out the question that works with that.

Let's be a little more specific. I'm thinking about corporate America, which is thought of as a traditional Republican constituency. But I think that during the Obama administration, you believed that you had some support in corporate America. There were prominent executives like the head of General Electric who were more or less with you. I think a lot of corporate America was on board with a lot of the democratic agenda. It seems clear that in 2024, corporate America made their peace with whatever qualms they had with President Trump and got on board with President Trump. Why do you think Democrats lost corporate America?

We're going to have to come back for a whole 'nother hour. I'm here for you. Is that H-E-R-E or H-E-A-R? Either one. So one thing is when I said yes before the question Henry Kissinger has a great quote. Does anybody have questions for my answers? He just describes it in a manual perfectly. Okay. So here's what I… One is, this is an infamous March 2009 or spring, 2009, I shouldn't say March. We passed the President's Recovery Act, the extension of health care for children of working parents without health care. Sure. Lily Ledbetter, Pay Equity, a series of other things about teen Tobacco National Service. We have this big Saturday meeting of the president's three children, as he called it, health care reform, financial banking reform, and cap and trade. We have this big debate. Now, I point at the other end of the Roosevelt table is domestic policy, every day that you're not doing health care is the day you're not going to get it done. If you look at the history of health care, going all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt, pretty good analysis, especially with Hillary care being front and center.

In the '90s, yeah.

The economic team did not want to do anything, but they also thought specifically financial reform would prevent banks from lending that was important for getting the economy moving again. Representing the political group around the table, myself and David Axel as a vocal, I was for doing first financial and banking reform. One is, if the history, as I told the President, if you want to pass health care reform, the industry, insurance, pharmacy, have to be on your side of the table. That's a lesson from Hillary's fail. In financial reform, the banks and the insurance executives are going to be on the other side. In America, after the Recovery Act, after the TARP, a TARP needs to see you fighting for them against the people that they think have wreaked havoc on their lives, making them lose homes. Obviously, history, his first child, he said, was health care reform.

He went for that, didn't do That's why you get...

No. Look, I argue you got universal health care reform, but you also got the tea party. Not everything's 100%. That's life. But that's why he gets paid the big bucks and you have to have judgment in the oval office, which is something that's thoroughly lacking right now. To me, that's the choices. Now, why corporate America goes from okay with President Obama's policy, and I think this is a little short change, not all of corporate America was there.

Understood.

Yeah, that's a- But you had some It was a good port in this traditionally Republican area. Yeah, I wouldn't say you did. I could give you. Steve Schwartzman yelled at the President. I called him, I think, his policies. I don't want to even get in the language about Nazis and stuff like that. They had images of... I mean, just things that were said about the president from Voices in Corporate America, they were also violently against him doing health care when they said, just talk about the economy and et cetera. It was not like they were always applauding. My memory is slightly different than your memory. No, I understand. But there was a consensus around when we were first coming up with the Recovery Act, Jamie Dimon says in the East Wing in a big meeting with financial and business leaders, and this is when you're facing close to a small D depression, whatever it is, it's got to be big, it's got to be bold, and it's got to be harsh. Just get the thing moving and do it all across the whole waterfront. That became pretty much what we did from the Recovery Act, et cetera.

There was some consensus there. I think corporate America here, just I'll say it here, is I think they've sold out America and America is loyal to them. What I mean by that is You benefit from a nation built on laws, and you're watching from the sideline a nation being destroyed and walking away from the rule of law. Everything you have is built on the premise of the rule of law. Number two, the president's declared war on the greatest research system in the world it's ever seen. And your company is a direct beneficiary of that. And you're like the three monkeys. See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil. You are timid souls. And if you don't want to speak of individually, what is these business groups for but collective voice with a singular message? The core crux of the world economy and the US great economy is built on the rule of law, great education, great research at our great universities, and the capacity to both find the talent, the level playing field that the rule law gives, and the certainty it gives and also the ideas that are coming out of the golden goose called our university system.

Every one of you, but one or two, to the person, have been incredibly timid souls, to quote Teddy Roosevelt. I have lost, and I know this in a respect, so they've decided for their short term stock, I suppose, and I don't want to say all of corporate America, but for a whole host of reasons, and I've heard them say things in private to me, But for a whole host of reasons, they've decided to bite their tongue. I will tell you this will come home to roost.

Did Democrats also do something, as on other issues, to drive people away that might have been- People or corporate America.

Corporate America. You said people there, and I wasn't I'm not sure what you were saying. Thank you for asking for the clarification. No, I don't mean that. I'm serious. I wasn't sure what you were talking about.

I wanted to know, you said that Democrats were driving people away with the wrong focus on education. Is there something having to do with corporate America where Democrats, something about your approach to social issues or taxes or business or regulation drove corporate America away.

I think one of the things my analysis is both parties got around. I'm saying this shorthand, but the Republican parties are dominated by a monopolist mindset, and our party started to get dominated by a bunch of Marxists, and both Marxism and monopolists don't serve the economy well. I think generically, this is generic at 10,000 feet without a name to it, Democrats don't talk about growth and should be the party that talks and actually executes growth versus redistribution. I happen to think education is core to growth. Investing in our energy capacity is core core to our growth, as is modernizing our infrastructure is core to our growth. Our university systems and college systems and community college systems are essential for our growth. A country based not only on rural law is also essential for our growth. I think making sure that more people, not only there's growth, but more people are participating and beneficiary. To me, I take this whole issue of affordability. People are talking about housing, they're talking about groceries, they're talking about gas. I want to talk about income. You have a situation where income, you have one man getting a trillion dollar income from a company, and other people haven't seen the minimum wage or their income grow.

This is insane to me. If you want to deal with affordability, maybe you can drive grocery prices down. I think it's better you have to grow people's income up.

I want to ask separately aboutIn corporate America, to get to this point, their profits have never been better.

Their stock has never been higher until today when the president decided to have war on Greenland. They have done nothing to share that income growth and the growth of the company with all their workers. Final question.

Yes, Steve. What's one piece of advice you would give to Democrats running in this year's election?

My advice is that this is a referendum election. Keep it focused on the rubber stamp from Republican Congress to President Trump. He's unpopular. Midterms that have one party in power have a law of physics. Massive energy by a party out of power. We're seeing that in every special anywhere in the country for the last year. Massive downturn by the party in power. You're seeing that with Republican votes all over the place. You have to win independence two to one to win the House. They are uncomfortable with Donald Trump, and they're uncomfortable that nobody's from the Roberts Court to the press and media to the The problems in Congress are putting a checkmate on him.

What do you have to do with the Senate where you will have to win rural states, Republican states, red states?

Look, nearly 50% of the electorate identifies as independent. In Every house, every US Senate, where you have a chance of building a majority, and also, which is lost, if I may say this, Steve, what's also happening in the state races. This election, there shouldn't be a school board seat all the way up to the governor in the seven most important swing states empty. It should always have a D next to it. But make this a referendum on what the Republicans have been enabling Donald Trump to do because he is going to drive this election. He's driving down, turnout among Republicans and driving turnout among Republicans, win the hearts and minds of the unaffiliated, and you got yourself a majority.

You think that you could even win in Iowa, where Democrats haven't won for years with that formula? Yeah, you have it.

Focus on independent voters. Let's go over the real estate. Not everybody's a weirdo like me. You have a governor's race, a Senate race, four congressional races, not counting also the Capitol. You won five months ago in the area Donald Trump won a state Senate seat, that he won by 22%, it flipped to the Democrats. It was the canary in the coal line, this thing is coming. There is a potential for a wave. But to win in Iowa, yet you are going to have Democrats democratic turnout. Here's how I look at the electorate. Democrats are mad at what Donald Trump's doing and mad that he's getting away with it. Independent voters are uncomfortable. They made a Faustian bargain. They didn't like Donald Trump personally. They were uncomfortable with him, but they thought they were going to get economics out of it. They've got neither the economics and they've gotten all the personality. And so they're furious. They're uncomfortable with a rubber stamp Republican Congress. I happen to think Republican MAGA voters, as seen by Marjorie Taylor-Greene, seen by Joan Rogan, feel betrayed. A different emotion. There are three distinct emotions in this electorate. Anger among Democrats, uncomfortable and disquieted and discomforted it among independents, betrayal among MAGA voters.

Democrats focus is on their base, which are going to turn out because they want to send a message, win the hearts and minds of the unaffiliated voters, and that's your ticket to a majority.

You said also, you don't even want a school board seat to be empty. You want Democrats running for every office. Why does that matter in swing states? Just explain it for me.

Well, one, the closer you get to where people live their lives, the more energized they are. Nothing's more energizing school boards. Number two, not just school boards, but I'm saying anything that gets close to the... I used to have a rule when I was mayor, you better be very smart and strategic about it. It gets to the front door, the back door of the house. My thing is, I happen to think, like 1994, Before, like 2006, like 2010, and like 2018, this is going to be a wave election. If you want to set up 2028, make sure in Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, that you have every office from top to bottom, have a person registered as a Democrat or an independent running under the Democrat line.

Even if they got no chance to win, they need to be running, you're saying?

When you have a wave election, the rule I've always had in politics- In a way, maybe they do.

Okay.

The rule I've had in politics, when you think it's bad, it's worse. When you think it's good, it's better. Where I'm sitting today, good is going to look like better. Could change 10 months to go. But let's just take the news today. Here's how I would see this. He's all focused on Greenland. I want to focus on groceries. You want to focus on Venezuela? I want to focus on Virginia. Number two, there's a consequence, him focused not on groceries and him focused on Greenland. And drive that home. He's not looking at your paycheck. He's looking at his checkbook. Every time. Take a look at what he is doing and may entie the fact that the Republicans are not restraining him, not refocusing him, but it's going to come to you in an electric bill, it's going to come to you in a health care bill, and it's going to come to the fact that your child who did everything right is now living in the basement and can't find a job.

Ram Emmanuel, thanks so much. Enjoyed the conversation.

We got a thousand more questions to go. We do.

We'll do those afterwards or the next time you come by. Thank you.

Thank you, Steve.

This has been a special edition of Up First from NPR News. It's one of our all-platform interviews. It's a podcast, it's video, and it's on the radio at NPR's Morning Edition. This episode was edited by Rina It was produced by Barry Gordimer and Katie Klein. We get engineering support from Robert Rodriguez, and our Deputy Executive Producer is Kelly Dickens. Our executive producer is Jay Schaler. I'm Steve Inskeep. Join us again.

For For 37 years, Iranians have lived under a dictatorship many no longer want. Now, the country may have reached a breaking point. Iranians have recognized that they need to take matters into their own hands, pushing back against authority. We ask three central questions about how Iran got here and what comes next. Listen to ThruLine on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. This year on NPR's ThruLine, Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness. For centuries, America's pursuit has changed the world. Now, 250 years later, who are we? Where are we headed? Join us every Tuesday for a brand new series, America in Pursuit. On ThruLine, listen on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.