[00:00:00]
John Zogby: It is Friday. It's another edition of the Zogby Report real and unscripted. And it's our first edition with Donald Trump now as the 47th president of the United States. And so there's a lot to talk about, but as always, we're going to make it consolidated. How's my colleague and managing partner, Jeremy doing?
Jeremy Zogby: I, I'm ready to start the next season, the next cycle of analysis, polling, and, our podcast.
John Zogby: So let me kick it off. All right. there's a lot going on in my head because there's a lot going on in Washington, DC and the border in California, basically. So this is the fifth day. Of the Trump presidency. [00:01:00] And what I can say is that he is making good on as many, if not all, of his campaign promises. In the first couple of days already, he has dealt with immigration.
He's dealt with student loans. He's dealt with, January 6th. he's dealt with the environment and the Paris accords. he's dealt with, tariffs and trade. he's managed to insult. a few world leaders, notably, let's start with Mexico, and, and Panama just to, to name, just a couple. and he is certainly giving the impression of the guy who gets things done.
I made promises, I'm going to fulfill them, I'm going to fulfill them as I said I was going to do. In the first day or first couple of days, whatever is feasible. [00:02:00] That's one thing and one way to look at it. And those fulfillments are directly to his base. In fact, one could argue that he's even gone beyond appealing to his base and, may have some problems with some Republicans.
Remember, he's got a very slim majority in the house of representatives. I think the trouble with what he's doing is simple. And that is that this is not governance. This is shtick and it feels good. And yes, he's fulfilling promises. We've learned from Barack Obama and Joe Biden that ruling by, executive order or by fiat is not legislating and is not a way to reach [00:03:00] across the aisle, which presidents have to do.
You know, you can't make law either signing a pen or saying, I got one more vote than everybody else. And so I got a majority and it's all from my party. There has to be legislating and giving and taking. There has to be some bipartisan support to give the appearance of legitimacy or to make. These executives orders long lasting.
So what we're probably going to see is what we've seen in the past two administrations, executive orders that are then challenged in court, that are then overturned in court or put on hold for a long period of time. And then ultimately the next election, there's 180 degree turn. and that's not legislating and that's [00:04:00] not governance.
Now, I have more to say, but I think what the president is doing, at least as far as this first phase is concerned. is some feel good stuff for his bass. and very soon he's going to find himself in a situation where the honeymoon is over, perhaps sooner rather than later. And I'll pick up on that when, when you're done,
Jeremy Zogby: Yeah. I, I mean, I'm, I'm in complete agreement regarding Fiat executive order and Fiat versus. the democratic, the legislative process. But I think all of that you said, I did hear a recognition that the very least with the previous two [00:05:00] administrations, the expectation is that's what you're going to do in the first 30 to 100 days when you, when you, take the White House, after a win. And you reach out to your base and you want to get some things done quickly. unfortunately, that is the trend in the modern era of the Imperial presidency and the, the presidency, the White House having more and more power through executive action. And, and we've seen that building up over the past several decades and each president who wins going forward in the future. We'll have more of that temptation, and there will be more precedent for that. And so that, that's another conversation, as to whether that reverses. But I think, to give Donald Trump the benefit of the doubt, that is, [00:06:00] the first 100 days. That is the first 30 to 100 days to get some things done, to make due on, on your promises. especially promises that were, were large enough. I mean, these were promises that really with security. most Americans were very concerned about the border and not from a racist standpoint, from a standpoint of crime and safety, and just from national sovereignty in general, having a border and having something that was policed, infrastructure policed at the border. But, what I would pivot to And, I, you know, I don't want to transition too much, but I think, and this, this was with Donald Trump going back to 2016, this is kind of the wave of, of politics around the globe. If, if we're to look at is the current environment [00:07:00] of, politics, and campaigns. In not just the Western world, but a great deal of the Western world, of the, of the rest of the world, it is populism the establishment. And what we saw on display, a major kickoff to Donald Trump's presidency, was speaking before Davos. I think either he spoke yesterday or, or he's speaking today.
He did speak yesterday. He may also be speaking today, but there was also Javier Malay. the, the leader of Argentina what we see here is this, this, this hardening viewpoint of, of those ideas in politics that were associated with left or liberal, flowed from think tanks like Davos and the World Economic Forum [00:08:00] versus those that are Put that nation first, put Argentina first, put America first, really sticking it to the, what has been, known as the globalist ideology.
And so, look, Trump ran on that in 2016. That is his brand. I would say he took that to the next level in, in, in this previous, election. I, I think when we put it all together, what we see is he wants to get ahead, while there's still time before, I mean, look, we already saw with the new year, a terrorist attack now a wildfire that's ravaging Southern California. it looks like events could spiral out of control. Now is the time to get things done. to [00:09:00] satisfy your base before there is a whole new issue on our plate, whether that is another pandemic, whether that is the next phase of geopolitical tensions or a cratering global economy. And that's how I'm trying to understand a lot of what is unfolding very quickly.
John Zogby: you know, I get it. And that makes a lot of sense. And I'll add to your comments by saying that what's very among those many things that are different from, you know, the 100, first 100 days in January 17th, 17 is that the president, despite wisecracks, and there have been many. and insults. And there have been several.
he has modulated his voice. You know, he's not in in every utterance. He is not speaking to tens of thousands. He's speaking to a handful of reporters, and [00:10:00] he is not revving up the crowd. I'll give him that on the other hand, while technically what you say is good, it's good for him to establish his turf and solidify, his base.
What I think is probably troubling for him is that what is he doing to consolidate that very tiny Republican majority, that he has particularly in the house, cause he's going to need to keep that majority. And it's very tenuous. We've already seen that already just in the, you know, the election, re election, I should say, of Mike Johnson, the speaker.
In other words, the, the next big move that will require legislation and not fiat is [00:11:00] doge or doggie department of government efficiency. And we've talked before, you know, you and I can easily take a butcher's knives and go to the carcass of the federal government and to start cutting and slashing and removing and taking away waste and so on, but what's required is.
Finesse and politics and what's required is the understanding that every dollar cut every agency eliminated. Every job eliminated involves a congressional district and a congressional district, which in the short term anyway, is losing jobs. Losing funding is in the middle of, of, a building program or a promise to the local arts council for funding and the local arts council can't exist anymore without the [00:12:00] funding.
And this includes Republicans. And this is a bipartisan concept. so it's, it's not an insult, but it's the truth that that carcass is like a trough and there are democratic pigs at that trough and there are Republican pigs and independent pigs. pigs at that trough. And if you start reducing the amount of goodies in that trough, then you're looking at losing support.
that's one problem with the Department of Governmental Efficiency. Remember, that's been tried before. I mentioned it in this podcast, the Gore Commission. it was actually the grace commission under Al Gore, as vice president. And then the Erskine Bowles, Alan Simpson commission under Obama, which went nowhere.
when you're talking [00:13:00] about federal government, you're talking about something that is much more, you know, than esoteric and that doesn't even, my final point here, that doesn't even get into this relationship between Donald Trump and Elon Musk. I mean, this podcast, we should start a lottery as to when that explodes.
You've got two very volatile guys. Well, I don't think particularly care, for each other. And how much time do you give them before they start taking shots at each other? Okay. I just said a lot. You get a lot to say.
Jeremy Zogby: no, it's, I mean, I'm listening to you and the more I realize, remember, of course, you know this, but it's easy to get lost in this. This is Donald Trump's last term, So if I were to put myself in the shoes of somebody who, who was previously president, who, [00:14:00] was, was fairly competitive in, in the next election, but lost, but then, you one handedly, the third time around and is now term limited. This is the, you know, this is where you start thinking about your biography and your legacy. every day, every week is viewed as what, what, what can I put up on the scoreboard, I, I can and, and I have to do it. And, and there was a great, there was a, there was a pretty sizable amount of disappointment, Trump ran in 2016 on such grand, grandiose promises of, of draining the swamp and, and, and doing exactly a 180 on that.
and so, and now is the time I, and look, I, this, this isn't defending, [00:15:00] this is understanding, this is, this is my trying to. what's going on. So I, I think, this, this would be the, the environment for, for bold action because he's term limited and because he probably more than anything wants his legacy to be remembered for, for being able to accomplish some very bold and, and dare I say revolutionary thing, you know, the way he campaigned in 2016 was revolutionary.
I can't think of. Another presidency that, that called out the elite and called out the establishment more than he did. Maybe Andrew Jackson was the last, right? and so maybe Trump wants to go down in history being on a 500 or 1, 000 bill. God forbid a million dollar bill, if you know what I mean. so that's one piece of it.
And then the, the, the [00:16:00] final thing. what I'll conclude on is, when we talk about cutting and slashing government from an economic standpoint, we have to remember that if you, if you slash a department, yes, in the immediacy, you are cutting the jobs of bureaucrats who work at that department. And that does roll over to contractors who contract with that agency or department. as an economic fact, that money doesn't disappear and dissipate. It's not like it just, it's not like you cut a department, let's say, that's has a budget of a half a trillion dollars. That doesn't mean that that half a trillion dollars just evaporates into the air and doesn't go anywhere. money can then be shifted. Elsewhere. And so while, while a class of people [00:17:00] may miss out on that money, that money has the potential to be transferred elsewhere. And one could argue to the state level or to the local level because that money is in existence. It does have to go somewhere. It doesn't just evaporate. So while the bureaucrats of that agency may miss out and, and you, you may lose support. You can gain support elsewhere.
John Zogby: Well said, but the Zogby law of taxes is that don't look for your taxes to go down even if there's a trillion dollars in cuts in the federal budget because that money does not evaporate. That money gets spent and somebody's got to pay for it, whether they're tax payers or consumers. And that's the zero sum part of all of this.
And that's a whole other issue, isn't it? But wow, what an eventful five days, [00:18:00] we've had already, more to come next week, anything to add,
Jeremy Zogby: No, I, I think, think it's full speed ahead. I, I think this is going to be a very eventful year. on many fronts. And so there's going to be no shortage of, of analysis. We'll have a lot of these.
John Zogby: and I will only add to the mix. We didn't really develop it. And that is all of this is taking place at a time when the Democrats are really in disarray. not only organizationally, but also. In terms of, finding a, finding a message to communicate that matters to people and what I'm hearing in the walls of the democratic national committee and in these very annoying texts that I'm getting, we need money to fight.
We need money to fight. We need money to [00:19:00] fight. My God, they spent 2 billion, 2 billion.
Jeremy Zogby: Yeah.
John Zogby: in 2024. I don't think they need money. I think they need, they need a message that matters to people. They don't have it. They do not have it.
Jeremy Zogby: thought this is what we were going to talk about because I saw a slew of articles this morning about who are they, who they represent, what's their future. And you know, I read passages from Senator Durbin, Senator Sanders, maybe you read some of the same thing, but yes, they don't need money. They need a vision and they just don't have a vision and and I actually thought one thing we would talk about was what went wrong and and what they could do, but we could either save that for time.
John Zogby: We'll be back.
Jeremy Zogby: yeah.
John Zogby: All right. Hey, have a good week.
Jeremy Zogby: Yeah, you too.
john-zogby_1_01-24-2025_093709: I'll talk to you in minutes. Bye bye.
[00:20:00]