Title: A Good Week for Democrats

[MUSIC]

Amina Srna: It's the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Amina Srna, a producer for the Brian Lehrer Show, filling in for Brian today. Good morning, everyone. First, did you hear the news that Mayor Eric Adams announced he will be running for reelection as an independent? This means he will not appear on the ballot in the June primary election, which is for candidates in parties only. The winner of that primary will face Adams for the general election in November.

It's a definite shakeup to the race and came after the mayor found out yesterday that a judge dropped the corruption charges against him. Our lead Eric Adams reporter Elizabeth Kim, has been telling us for weeks that the mayor has been barely campaigning for the primary election. I think if you're a close listener to this show, you are probably not that surprised he made this decision.

We will get much more into this and let you share your thoughts on Tomorrow's show when WNYC's Brigid Bergin will be here sitting in as guest host.

Coming up on today's show, experts are anticipating deep cuts to federal food assistance programs like SNAP or food stamps by Republican-led Congress in this year's budget negotiations. We'll take a look at how those cuts will affect 1.8 million New Yorkers, including more than half a million children. Then we'll hear a new series from NPR's Embedded podcast on how one journalist tried to break through to his conspiracy-believing dad by wagering a bet. We'll end the show today with a story from Vox about why being bored might not be such a bad thing, but only if you do it right.

First, this week, the Democratic Party made some big gains, maybe even their biggest so far in the Trump 2.0 era. In Wisconsin, a liberal judge won a fiercely contested state Supreme Court race. That's in spite of Elon Musk himself pouring millions of dollars into the race to support the conservative candidate. In Florida, Democrats lost two special elections, but the voter turnout in support of the party surprised so many.

New Jersey Senator Cory Booker lit up the party with a record-breaking 24-hour speech on the Senate floor in which he criticized President Donald Trump's policies. This all comes ahead of a planned nationwide March on Saturday, April 5th, likely to be the largest protest against this administration so far. Joining us now to break it all down is Katie Glueck, political reporter at the New York Times. Katie, welcome to WNYC.

Katie Glueck: Hi. Thank you so much for having me.

Amina Srna: Thanks for being here. Listeners, we can take some of your calls. How did this week's news resonate with you, if at all? Do you think the Democratic Party is gaining momentum? What more would you like to see from your elected officials? Call or text us now at 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. Katie, you cover Democrats for the New York Times mostly, but before we get into some of the news from the party this week that you wrote up, the big news this morning is all about Trump's tariffs. They were expected but very sweeping in their scope. Any early reaction from the Democrats that you cover?

Katie Glueck: Certainly. On Capitol Hill, we are seeing a number of Democrats and even a handful of Republicans looking for ways to push back specifically on some tariffs concerning Canada, but also a number of Democrats are also looking more broadly. What has been interesting as well, even before this news, is to see how a number of governors, some of them thought to be potential 2028 candidates, how they are looking at ways to help their voters and residents understand the ways that some of these tariffs might result in costs being passed on to consumers.

We've seen Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania talking about the ways that some of these economic policies may affect the craft brewing industry, for example, or in Michigan, I was with Governor Whitmer actually in January when she was at the Detroit Auto Show really right across the border from from Canada, talking about the ways that some of the proposed changes to economic policy under the Trump administration might affect the auto industry.

You really do see some of these leading Democrats looking for ways to help connect what is happening with Washington with literally what Americans may end up paying for various goods. That's how you see some of these guys pushing back, for starters.

Amina Srna: Got it. We'll have to see how it all shakes out. Still pretty early. Let's start with some of the things that you reported on, and starting close to home. On Tuesday, New Jersey Senator Cory Booker completed the longest Senate speech on record. He spent 25 hours and four minutes making an impassioned speech against the Trump administration's policies. Let's take a listen to a bit of Senator Booker on Tuesday. Here he is referencing the late, great John Lewis.

Senator Cory Booker: Tonight, I rise with the intention of getting in some good trouble. I rise with the intention of disrupting the normal business of the United States Senate for as long as I am physically able. We need that now from all Americans. This is a moral moment. It's not left or right. It's right or wrong. Let's get in good trouble. My friend, Madam President, I yield the floor.

[applause]

Amina Srna: Katie, I don't imagine that for part of your job, you had to watch all 25 hours of this speech. It's hard to sum up, but I wanted to maybe ask you if you could talk a little bit about his goal here. I think he began by talking about Medicaid and Medicare.

Katie Glueck: He did, and it was really striking and memorable, and of course, as you noted, record shattering, effort to draw attention to what he and many other Democrats and certainly some independents, see as the excesses of the Trump administration, of what he and other Democrats see as the real threats that they believe the Trump administration is posing to the fabric of the country.

It calms, as we have seen, a lot of frustration from Democratic activists, from some Democratic voters who are horrified at what they see playing out in Washington. They want to see their leaders, in their view, fight. They want to see more pushback. They want to see more fight from Democratic leaders in Washington. Certainly, many Democrats in Washington would point out they are in the minority. They are functionally powerless to stop a lot of what we are seeing coming under the administration, but many of their voters want to see people trying.

What that looks like, people have different views on, but what Senator Booker did was for some of those Americans, Democrats and others who did want to see more literal pushback, he did that, and he seemed to really tap into a sentiment that a lot of Democrats who have been feeling helpless and looking for anywhere to channel some of their anxiety, he seemed to tap into that and was really cheered on by many in his party who felt that he was quite literally standing up for them. What that does at a policy level is maybe a different question, but it really tapped into sort of an emotional moment for some Democrats.

Amina Srna: I think you're getting to this, but so much in the media has been made about the previous record held by Senator Strom Thurmond, who spoke for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act. That was a filibuster. A filibuster is a speech designed to obstruct the passage of a bill. What Senator Booker did was not a filibuster. In terms of what-- You were just talking about, what Democrats can actually do. Is it worth just very briefly to parse the difference for us or what did Senator Booker do yesterday, technically?

Katie Glueck: He spoke for, as I recall, around 25 hours, beating that speaking record, at least from Strom Thurmond. I think symbolically, it was meaningful to a lot of his supporters. He is, of course, a Black man from New Jersey. In addition to that pushback that caught a lot of attention and was almost a release valve for some in his party, there was also that symbolic moment of out-speaking Strom Thurmond and having that come from a Black man.

Amina Srna: Senator Booker went live on TikTok during his speech, garnering 350 million views. Katie, a viral moment for the Democrats, for sure, but any plan to ride that momentum? I'm wondering if there's any precedent for when the viral moments from social media did break through.

Katie Glueck: It's something that politicians are always looking for and especially for Democrats who have been so demoralized coming out of the last election cycle where they did really struggle to break through and they struggle to break through on social media and certainly, as we've been talking about for months, they struggle to reach the voters who really are not following news day to day, but tend to get more of their information from podcast, for example. The Republicans ended up having a real advantage in that right-leaning media ecosystem.

Democrats have really been struggling with what are their ways to break through. Certainly this suggests one example of a Democrat breaking through and where you go from here and what that does for fundraising, et cetera. Certainly, you see Democrats trying to build on momentum on that front. I think even beyond using this moment to try and fundraise, for example, I think you do see other Democrats thinking about, "What are other ways we can break through and continue to tap into a base that does seem to be newly energized?"

Amina Srna: Katie, that brings me to a text that we're getting from a listener that says, "As a New Jersey resident, I loved what Senator Booker did. I would like to see more town halls and community events in red towns like what Senator Kim is doing." Can you talk a little bit about how the Democrats are heading to red districts and holding town halls there for constituents that maybe didn't even vote for them, definitely didn't vote for them, but they're speaking to them in light of the GOP leadership telling representatives to stand down and not go to town halls.

Katie Glueck: Yes. You see Democrats doing that around the country. From Governor Walz of Minnesota was, of course, the vice presidential nominee for the Democrats last fall, to Senator Kelly in Arizona to Congressman Greg Casar, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus from Texas. You see a lot of Democrats going into deeply conservative areas and holding some of these events. I think the question is, who is turning up at some of these events?

I was actually at a rare Republican town hall in Asheville recently. The Republican congressman there represents Asheville but also a district that more broadly is much more conservative. He did go ahead and have a town hall despite the recommendations from the national party to stay away from that. It was no question, a release valve for angry Democrats and some other independents. It was really striking for me to be there.

There's a man who stood up, he was sitting just a couple seats away from me and was sitting speaking so passionately about what he said was his experience being laid off from a VA hospital, I believe. He was really emotional, stood up, and said, "I was fired." That really connected in the room. I do think the one question here is, are these Democrats who are trying to do similar things in more conservative areas, are they speaking to anyone beyond Democrats?

The National Democratic Party would say that if you look at the results in Wisconsin, that was a big win, and we can talk about that certainly for the liberal judge there. If you look at the turnout at some of these town halls, this can't just be the most committed members of the Democratic base to turn out to everything. I do think that is an open question, though. How much of what we're seeing now is just the most committed elements of the Democratic base, highly motivated, highly energized, often highly educated, who are turning out of these events and certainly re-engaging or is something broader happening? I think that that's a bigger question.

Amina Srna: To your point, another text. "We need political actions as bold and eye-catching as Cory Booker's filibuster to happen every day. We need to be making the negative impact of DJT's cuts and policies as clear as possible." Listeners, we can continue to take your texts and calls, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692, as we move on and talk about the Supreme Court race in Wisconsin and the special election races in Florida, which Democrats did lose, but the voter turnout was pretty impressive.

Katie, you did preview Wisconsin, so let's head there next. I'll just fill in. Liberal Judge Susan Crawford beat out conservative Judge Brad Schimmel for a Supreme Court seat there. The Brennan Center reports that this race is the most expensive judicial race in American history, racking up roughly $90 million. I've also seen reports of $100 million. We'll talk about one particular donor in just a moment, but for our tri-state area listeners who are scratching their heads, why is the Wisconsin Supreme Court so important nationally?

Katie Glueck: There are implications or perceived implications for how congressional maps in Wisconsin might be drawn. That could have implications for the path of the House majority or trying to reclaim that for Democrats and retain that for Republicans. There are those implications, but far more broadly, it was the most significant test to date of whether Democrats can get up off the mat after the November elections. It was a very clear test of the power of Elon Musk, of course, the top Trump adviser who is spearheading the vast cuts to the gutting of the federal government that we're seeing underway now.

I assume that is the donor you were alluding to. He plunged millions and millions of dollars into this race in support of a Conservative candidate.

Amina Srna: 20 to 25, I've seen reported.

Katie Glueck: There was a real question of how much that would move the needle. Certainly, Democrats take the result as evidence that Elon Musk's money alone is not enough to overcome real Democratic and perhaps some independent anger at what we're seeing unfold. Again, as we were talking about the-- how broad this angry coalition is nationally is I think, a different question which we can certainly discuss, but no question that Democrats are feeling, I think in this moment, buoyant. You could even use that word, at least about the results in Wisconsin, a closely divided state that, of course, Trump won in November. Then they ended up having a not-so-close victory.

Amina Srna: Let's go and listen to a clip of Judge Susan Crawford's victory speech on Tuesday, where she references Musk directly.

Judge Susan Crawford: Today, Wisconsinites fended off an unprecedented attack on our democracy, our fair elections, and our Supreme Court. Wisconsin stood up and said loudly that justice does not have a price. Our courts are not for sale.

Amina Srna: I'm wondering if you could talk a little bit about Crawford's anti-Musk messaging. It's my understanding that the ads that she was running before the election were pretty much hammering on Musk.

Katie Glueck: The Democrats absolutely embrace this as a moment to create essentially a referendum on Elon Musk. Musk certainly presented himself in a way that allowed them to do that. Not only did he spend millions of dollars in support of the conservative judicial candidate, but he was out there campaigning. Ryden held quite a striking-- spoke at great length at quite a striking campaign event in the lead-up to the election. Democrats saw this as a real test, and perhaps the biggest, clearest test yet of whether there is backlash brewing to the Trump administration and certainly to Elon Musk and the way that he is maneuvering. They took the result as a resounding yes, there is a backlash brewing.

Amina Srna: Let's go to a call. Dan in Brooklyn. You're on WNYC. Hi, Dan.

Dan: I don't understand this big hoo-ha over this woman's election into a judicial position when, in the meantime, Trump is tearing the country apart. I just don't get it. I wish somebody would tell me what gives so much enthusiasm to anybody. The fact is that Americans are beginning to accept the idea that we're going to have to play Mafia politics to save the country, and that seems so absurd.

I thought there were some basic standards of decency and so on in American politics, but nobody's saying anything about how and with what intent Trump is doing what he's doing. They're saying that it's just a battle between Democrats and Republicans, and now the Democrats have gained the judge somewhere in Wisconsin and, therefore everything's looking up. No. People are supporting Trump in a state of rage, and no one's discussing why they did that because a lot of the people who voted for Trump are either people who didn't vote or people who are Democrats. Why don't you talk about--

Amina Srna: Got it, Dan. Thank you so much for your call. Katie, a couple of points there, in addition to what you mentioned as to why we should care-- why Democrats should care or the media should look at Wisconsin Supreme Court race. The Wisconsin Supreme Court also has-- It has the power to order new congressional maps right now. I saw House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries recently spoke about this. Are you familiar with that? How likely is that to happen now with Crawford's victory, or what could that mean for the Democrats? What are the Democrats hoping it would mean for them?

Katie Glueck: Certainly, and this is something we were alluding to, I think, a bit earlier. There is the potential for a reassessment of congressional maps with potential impacts for, again, what the potential path to the House majority back for Democrats could be or for Republicans to retain seats. I think our caller raises a really important point, which is that, yes, Democrats and the liberal candidate triumphed in Wisconsin, and they overperformed in a few districts in Florida in special elections on Tuesday, and they've been overperforming in a number of other special elections this year, but it is such a good point that, in fact, the Democrats continue to face staggering challenges.

Trump is still in power. They are still completely locked out of power in Washington. In fact, favorability ratings for the Democratic Party are at a generational low. Their activists are continuing to be angry with their leaders. It's just not clear that, in fact, Democrats have figured out any answers yet for how to win back some of the voters they lost in the last election and how to coax back into the game some of the people who sat it out, as the caller was noting.

Absolutely, while this is an injection of energy and perhaps will fuel a sense of momentum again for Democrats, the feeling that maybe they're back in the game and they're going to ride some of this energy and anger into, they hope, victories in the Virginia governor's race later this year and perhaps what path to taking back the House next year, that's certainly something they're hoping for. No question, they have really deep fundamental problems. The results on Tuesday do not make any of those problems go away.

Amina Srna: A listener adds that what the GOP did in Wisconsin, they aggressively gerrymandered, and the balance on their state court is the only hope of restoring it to fairness. A bit of that from our guest. Technically, this was a nonpartisan election. There wasn't Democrat or Republican on the ballot. You're a national reporter, not a Wisconsin reporter, but beyond a referendum on Musk, I wonder if you have a sense of were there other breakout national issues as Wisconsinites cast their ballots? I understand there were questions about voting rights, collective bargaining, reproductive care or is that not on your beat?

Katie Glueck: Certainly, yes, those issues were also in play. What is interesting is that you mentioned reproductive rights and issues around abortion rights. That had been the central message for Democrats for-- It's something that has certainly been in play in other judicial races in Wisconsin before this, and certainly following the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, that had been the central message for Democrats in all these special elections. It's special elections, some of these judicial elections.

It's striking and new that the closing argument for Democrats and Democrats, of course, were supporting the liberal candidate, Republicans were supporting the conservative candidate, that the message focused so much on Elon Musk as opposed to some of these other issues that have been driving their messaging in prior races.

Amina Srna: Let's go to another call. Danielle in Suffolk County. Hi, Danielle, you're on WNYC.

Danielle: Hi, how are you?

Amina Srna: Hi.

Danielle: Hi, how you doing?

Amina Srna: Good. What do you have to-- Go ahead.

Danielle: Thank you so much for taking my call. I appreciate it. This is my first time calling into NPR, but I listen to you guys every morning, and I love the work that you're doing.

Amina Srna: Don't let it be the last.

Danielle: It won't. I have donated before and I'll continue donating.

Amina Srna: Thank you.

Danielle: Absolutely. Especially with the recent attacks of the GOP against NPR and SEDS and other really, really important news outlets for us. I just wanted to mention I've been listening to your broadcast this morning, and I know that your guest speaker, she had mentioned that open ended whether or not Democrats are targeting Republican constituents when they're going to these red states from Long island, especially Suffolk County and Nassau County.

We are pretty divided here, but in general, we're pretty red compared to, let's say, New York City. What I'm seeing, because I have been to these rallies and any town halls that anyone has available, what I'm seeing is Democrats speaking with Republicans more than I think I've ever seen it before. What I have noticed is that-- I'm a registered Republican, by the way. I did not vote for Trump in either election, but I've stuck with my party up until this point.

What I'm seeing now is a discourse between Republicans and Democrats and this bipartisan conversation that has never happened before. I think it's a good thing. I think that what we're seeing is a lot of Republicans that did vote on Long Island for President Trump aren't happy with what they're seeing happening right now, and I do see Democrats targeting issues and trying to bring Republicans that voted for him into the fold. I'm very surprised at how many of them are actually making their way over and being open for the first time to not more liberal agendas necessarily.

I think that the reason that that's happening is because the agenda for the GOP is touching everybody. That's the difference. I just read the other day that people like Meghan McCain, for example, she's suddenly heartbroken that there's all these cuts to brain cancer research. I just think that's so interesting how privileged people are that they can make these general sweeping cuts, and it's only upsetting when it affects them. I think that's what we're starting to see, and I think that that's what's making the big changes.

Amina Srna: Very interesting. Thank you so much, Danielle, for your call. Katie, as you're listening to Danielle, is anything resonating with some of your reporting?

Katie Glueck: Thank you so much for calling in. Honestly, I'd love to hear more. Feel free to get in touch if you're open to it because we would love to hear more about what you are noticing on the ground where you are. That's really interesting. I think that, broadly speaking in politics, anger is a great motivator. That is certainly the bet Democrats and frankly, some Republicans are making that when some of the actions that are being undertaken in Washington, when some of the cuts that are underway start affecting people in their daily lives, that resonates in a way that's different from theoretical debates about-- that may well driven the election in some ways.

I think that's really interesting, Danielle, that that's what you are seeing on the ground. I was talking with a Republican yesterday in Virginia, where, of course, there's many federal workers, who was saying that across the aisle as people are starting to have real experience with some of the things that are being cut that, that's forcing a real backlash. I think again, it remains to be seen how wide that goes, but that's certainly something Democrats are betting on happening when people do start to experience some dramatic changes to their lives because of what's happening in Washington.

Amina Srna: [crosstalk] Katie, we're going to take a short break. I do wonder if we have any listeners with connections to Wisconsin. After the break, we will also talk about the two special elections in Florida. Please give us a call at 212-433-WNYC. That's 212-433-9692. We will take your calls right after this.

[MUSIC]

Amina Srna: This is the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. I'm Amina Srna. Good morning again, everyone. My guest is Katie Glueck, A political reporter for the New York Times, and we're talking about how the Democrats had a pretty good week. Katie, Democrats lost two seats in a special election in Florida this week. One was for the seat vacated by Matt Gaetz, and the other was the one for the seat vacated by Michael Waltz. The silver lining here, as I understand it, was that the voter turnout from the Democrats was pretty unusual. Can you tell us more?

Katie Glueck: Yes. In these deeply conservative seats that both Republicans won by huge margins in November, and there were special elections to fill these seats, the Democrats did far better this week than the Democratic showing in November. We should also note that the turnout was quite a bit smaller.

What we were seeing in Florida is a reflection of what we have seen really since the first Trump era, which is in these lower-turnout, less high-profile elections where there is not a presidential candidate on the ballot, there is a slice of, as we were talking about earlier, highly engaged voters who tend to be Democrats, who tend to be very upset about the Trump administration who have gotten in this habit of closely following big races, certainly, but also the most hyperlocal races.

They have seen it as the best way to drive change is their hope, but also, if nothing else, to send a message to Trump, voicing their displeasure. We saw that very much so in these two deep red congressional districts in Florida. If this was a presidential election this past Tuesday and you had presidential-level turnout, I think it's probably unlikely that you would have seen the same Democratic margins just because we are talking about a smaller turnout here, but certainly it does show that the Democratic base is very much engaged again and perhaps some independence as well.

In fact, we even saw a county in one of the congressional districts that Trump had won considerably actually go in the Democrats' direction this past Tuesday. It's hard to extrapolate too much to suddenly say all these deep red counties are now transforming. I think that's probably going too far, but it is meaningful for Democrats, a sign that their base, which has been demoralized and distraught and burned out, that they are back, they're engaged. I think the big question again is are they broadening that base at all?

Amina Srna: Katie, slight correction. We have some very, very smart listeners, as you can imagine. I must clarify, Dems lost two Florida elections, not two seats. These were Republican seats.

Katie Glueck: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.

Amina Srna: I believe I misspoke. They were Republican seats. They will remain Republican seats. Thank you so much to this texter who did not identify themselves. Also, surprisingly, we got a caller from Wisconsin before we got a caller from Florida. Sometimes, I think Florida is an unsung borough of New York City. Let's go to Kim in Westby, Wisconsin. Hi, Kim. What would you like to tell us?

Kim: Hi there. I heard the call-out for someone from Wisconsin, but I just wanted to share my feelings about this. We really rejected Trump and Musk and his money big time here in Wisconsin. We have a really strong grassroots. We're organized very strongly in the grassroots. Here where I am on the west side of the state in Vernon County, I'd say we have an exceptional Democratic Party coordinator. We saw more volunteers come out than we saw during the presidential election, knocking on doors, writing postcards, making phone calls. I don't know what else to say. I just wanted to share that we're pretty elated here for the moment, but we know it's just one battle in the war.

Amina Srna: Thank you. Thanks, Kim, for that reporting on the ground. So cool to hear from you. Katie, I wanted to ask about some other smaller hyperlocal wins that you briefly mentioned in your analysis this week. Do you want to tell us a little bit about what happened broadly in Iowa, Pennsylvania, and maybe even Louisiana?

Katie Glueck: Yes. We saw Democrats flipping Republican-held legislative seats in Iowa and Pennsylvania. In Louisiana, we saw voters rejecting efforts. You had a constitutional amendment that the governor had put forth, a Republican governor. It can certainly be seen as a rebuke to the Republican governor there. Taken together again, it is a sign that at every level of government, Democratic voters are very much engaged again and are willing to turn out again up and down the ballot, at least this slice of highly engaged, highly motivated voters.

As our caller was just noting, I think she encapsulated how a lot of Democrats are feeling, which is they're overjoyed by the results of that margin in Wisconsin but are well aware that there are many more battles for them to fight.

Amina Srna: Let's go to Eleanor on Staten Island. Hi, Eleanor. You're on WNYC.

Eleanor: Hi, good day to everybody.

Amina Srna: Hi, good day.

Eleanor: I wanted to bring up-- I was hearing the word win earlier, and I hear that a lot. I hear the fight, and when the politicians get into that mode where they change from being a common person into some kind of tilt, I always tune into that, and I go, "Why are they doing that? From Hillary Clinton to Biden to, obviously the Republicans as well. The point is that we all need to lean into the good and teach the good and build the good and develop the good. That is truly the answer, it seems like in every aspect of my life. I think we can think of ways very simply how it can apply if we react to all this rage and militant mentality, that's what we're going to have more of.

Amina Srna: Thank you so much for your call, Eleanor. Katie, as we wrap up here, I want to share with you a little behind the scenes as we have our screen up here, the messages that we're getting from our listeners. There's a mixed bag, as you acknowledged in your first answer. There are people who are very happy with these, what they perceive as signs that things are going well for the Democratic Party with Booker's speech in particular. Then there are others that are saying these are just words or that Democratic politicians are not doing enough on their part.

This came up-- It reminded me of something that Senator Booker told Rachel Maddow on MSNBC on Tuesday night right after he made his 25-hour and 4-minute speech. Let's take a listen to that.

Senator Cory Booker: I hope that we're all served to be ignition points for each other. My constituents, the letters, the calls, the demands were definitely an ignition point for me, but we've got to continue to ignite this movement. The only thing that stopped Donald Trump from tearing away the Affordable Care Act was the engagement of tens of thousands of Americans who didn't think they would become little lobbyists or activists or come down to the Capitol or protest in their communities.

Amina Srna: Katie, as a reporter covering Democrats, any reaction to that?

Katie Glueck: I think the reaction from listeners certainly captures the range of views and competing views within the Democratic Party. There are plenty of people who were both very happy to see Senator Booker doing what he did as one example of standing up and, in their view, while also feeling strongly that that is nowhere near enough. They want to see more pushback from their leaders, and they want to see whatever tangible steps are possible to stand up again, in their view, against what they oppose seeing coming out of the Trump administration.

I think Senator Booker alluded to other times when there's been a real injection of grassroots activism and the degree to which that ends up shaping elections and shaping policy. I think we saw that kind of engagement in 2017 and 2018, that kind of backlash to Trump that ended up manifesting in all kinds of victories for Democrats. The local level people were channeling that frustration into those races and helped Democrats retake the House in 2018.

Certainly Democrats are hoping that there is that level of engagement again in the lead up to next year's midterms, while at the same time, plenty of them acknowledge that they fundamentally continue to face really steep electoral challenges in terms of building a national coalition, because we should remember Democrats won all kinds of special elections in off-year races in the lead up to the 2024 election as well. Just when you do get into that bigger national electorate their path was just far more difficult. They're both excited about the results this week, while I think some, at least, are clear-eyed that really significant challenges remain.

Amina Srna: That's all the time we have for today. Our guest has been Katie Glueck, political reporter for the New York Times. Thank you so much for your time today.

Katie Glueck: Thank you so much for having me.

 

Copyright © 2025 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.