Brian Lehrer: It's the Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. Thanks to Brigid Bergin and Tiffany Hanssen for filling in last week. Happy Thanksgiving Week to everybody, and what a weird and uneasy one this is likely to be for many people. We, Americans, will be feasting on Thursday, giving thanks for a bounty, knowing that at the same time, hundreds of Israelis and some Americans remain in captivity as hostages in Gaza since the 7th of October and as thousands of adults and thousands more children get killed there in the Israeli campaign to destroy Hamas.

What a weird cognitive dissonance it might be this week to have the family togetherness and abundance of Thanksgiving for many people while we're thinking about the extreme suffering taking place at the same time on both sides over there. On the Gazan Children, a New York Times headline yesterday read, The War Turns Gaza into a 'Graveyard' for Children. The word graveyard was in quotes, says a quote from the United Nations.

The article says, "Gaza, the United Nations warns, has become a graveyard for thousands of children." That's the quote, a graveyard for thousands of children. Determining the precise number of children killed in Gaza in the midst of a fierce bombing campaign with hospitals collapsing, children missing, bodies buried under rubble, and neighborhoods in ruins is a Sisyphean task. Health officials in Gaza say that 5,000 Palestinian children have been killed since the Israeli assault began and possibly hundreds more.

The Times doesn't take those Hamas numbers at face value as they shouldn't. It then goes on to say, "Many international officials and experts familiar with the way death tolls are compiled in the territory say the overall numbers are generally reliable." Continues, "If the figures are even close to accurate, far more children have been killed in Gaza in the past six weeks than the 2,985 children killed in the world's major conflict zones combined across two dozen countries during all of last year, even with the war in Ukraine, according to UN tallies of verified deaths in armed conflicts." That from The New York Times yesterday, hard to look away.

As for the hostages, various media outlets are reporting a hostage for a temporary ceasefire deal is near. Here's a Times of Israel headline, US and Qatar Indicate Hostage Deal Near as Rumors Swirl of Swap with a Short Ceasefire. It says, "Hebrew media outlets report differences remain over number of captives and stages of the deal." Also, the Washington Post describes the potential agreement as involving the release of groups of about 50 hostages released over a five-day period as Israel holds its fire. Washington Post.

Not so fast. The Wall Street Journal has an article called Israel's War in Gaza Tests Limits of Biden's Support. That one begins by saying President Biden is struggling to persuade Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to take steps US officials believe could help prevent the conflict in Gaza from further escalating, straining the relationship between the two longtime allies according to US and European officials.

Over the past two weeks, it says, Biden has pushed Netanyahu on issues ranging from limiting civilian casualties to agreeing to a pause in fighting to free hostages. While there has been agreement in some areas such as when Israeli commanders accepted American advice not to rush into Gaza immediately, US officials are still concerned about Israel's ultimate plans for Gaza, including any extended occupation, and are alarmed by the number of Palestinian casualties. That from The Wall Street Journal over the weekend.

Today will be a complicated day for President Joe Biden. He's trying to close the deal on whatever ceasefire and prisoner release he can get, and did you know it's his birthday? Biden turns 81 today. A headline on Politico says, Biden Campaign Facing Heat Over Plans to Deal with His Age. We'll talk to Politico's White House Bureau Chief in just a second. Donald Trump, meanwhile, is right behind Biden at 77 and would also be in his 80s during his term if he is reelected.

With us now is Politico White House Bureau Chief Jonathan Lemire, who is also the host of Way Too Early in the 5:00 AM Eastern Time hour on MSNBC, a regular on Morning Joe there after that, and author of the book, The Big Lie: Election Chaos, Political Opportunism, and the State of American Politics After 2020. Jonathan, always good of you to extend your morning way too late. Welcome back to WNYC.

Jonathan Lemire: I'm always glad to be here, Brian, and Happy Thanksgiving Week to you and your listeners.

Brian Lehrer: Absolutely to you and your family, Jonathan. I read those headlines on the war and Biden's reported role in brokering some kind of temporary ceasefire for hostage release. What's the most you can tell us about what the administration is doing or what they believe they're closing in on?

Jonathan Lemire: It's not done yet. There have been some reporting over the weekend, actually from The Washington Post, suggesting that an agreement had been reached for a temporary pause and they use the phrase pause rather than ceasefire, in order to bring the fighting to a brief stop in order to get more hostages out as part of a deal. However, the White House, the National Security Council, pushed back immediately on that and said that a deal was not done but they do believe they're close. As we sit here Monday morning here on the East Coast, it isn't done yet.

There is still some apprehension from the White House and officials that I speak to there about whether it will conclude. There's a real divide in the Israeli Knesset, their legislature, as to whether or not this will be approved, but were it to happen, it would be of a few days. There's some suggestion it could be three days, some think it might be five, but a substantial pause in the fighting to allow potentially dozens of hostages out of Gaza, looks like women and children, in exchange also for potentially the release of some women and children who have been held by the Israelis. This is a very fluid situation, and we should caution that it is not done. There had been some thought right before actually Israel began its ground operation to Gaza a couple of weeks ago. They were on the precipice of a deal. That time it fell through, it could again now.

Brian Lehrer: What's your best information, if you have any, on what the biggest sticking points are?

Jonathan Lemire: The Israelis have always been, they've been consistent on this. They feel like any substantial break in the fighting beyond a couple of hours allows Hamas to move their positions, get their fighters and equipment to safer places, potentially to move hostages, those they could be keeping, into areas that would be tougher to reach. They believe that if there's any break only allows Hamas to re-arm, potentially even to launch some sort of strike against Israel.

Now, Hamas, it seems to be, is significantly diminished because of the brutal campaign and the bombardment that Israel has put forth now for weeks. That has always been the concern and also just telegraphing any weakness here. They don't want to do that. They say this is not the time for anything other than fighting and trying to eliminate Hamas, but of course, the US believes that this would be an opportunity to get some of the hostages out. That's a priority concern.

There are still some Americans believed to be held as well as, of course, up to 200 or more other hostages. Now it's unclear, sadly, how many of them may still be alive in recent days. Israeli forces in Gaza has found the bodies of some of those who had been taken hostage on October the 7th, but while intelligence is, as you might imagine, pretty hard to come by right now from Gaza, there is widespread belief that at least some of the hostages are still alive.

Brian Lehrer: You're talking about the difference between a pause and a ceasefire as a matter of language and Israel's concern that either of those things would allow Hamas to continue to attack it. Do you happen to know if anything characterized as a ceasefire would pertain fully to both sides in the fighting? One of the critiques of the Ceasefire Now movement is that it only seems to demand a ceasefire of Israel, say its critics, not equally of Hamas to stop firing rockets towards civilian targets in Israel, for example, or to promise no more October 7ths. Is anything like that part of a temporary cessation of hostilities under discussion as far as you know?

Jonathan Lemire: That would be part of a deal but as you just rightly raised, there's real doubts whether Hamas' word could be believed. Let's be clear, this is a terrorist organization and has been noted by so many, there was a ceasefire up until October 7th, and Hamas is the one who broke it with their brutal attacks over the border into Israel. That would be part of this, but it's unclear whether it would be adhered to. We should note it pales in comparison, of course, to the force that the Israeli military is bringing on Gaza, but Hamas has not stopped their attacks either. They're still launching rockets as best they can now and then into Israel. That doesn't include, of course, some of the fighting we've seen up north from Hezbollah and other Iran proxy groups that have also launched some strikes from Lebanon into Israel. That, to this point, has not escalated into a full-fledged new front of conflict, but that is still happening and there's no expectation that Hezbollah would agree to any truce, or ceasefire, or pause, whatever word we want to use, between Hamas and Israel.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, we can take calls and texts for Jonathan Lemire, Politico's White House Bureau Chief and MSNBC host, specifically on President Biden's role in the Israel-Hamas war shorter term or longer term. Also, on Biden's turning 81 today. Jonathan's latest article, again, is called Biden Campaign Facing Heat over Plans to Deal with His Age. If you're a Democrat listening right now, do you want Biden not to run because of his age as some people do, or how you fear his age appears to others, or if you do want him to run for reelection, how do you think he should deal with the age issue?

We'll get into the various disputes within Biden world that Jonathan's reporting on in that article as we go. 212-433-WNYC. Call or text, 212-433-9692. Jonathan, The Wall Street Journal article I cited called Israel's War in Gaza Tests Limits of Biden's Support, and saying, "Biden is struggling to persuade Netanyahu to take steps US officials believe could help prevent the conflict in Gaza from further escalating, straining the relationship between the two longtime allies according to US and European officials." Again, those are the words of The Wall Street Journal article.

Both Biden and Netanyahu are only saying supportive things about each other, at least in public, at least that I've heard. Tell me if I'm missing any nuance. What can you report about any struggle or strain, as the journal puts it, between the two leaders on what exactly to do next?

Jonathan Lemire: That strain definitely exists, and we've reported on it as well, both for Politico and NBC. Publicly, you're right. President Biden continues to be supportive of Israel. He, of course, visited Israel just a few days after the attacks, and his statements ever since have been clear that Israel has a right to defend itself. Israel has a right to seek justice. First of all, in his public remarks, and that's been echoed by members of his cabinet as well, they've urged Israel to show some restraint, to remember the lessons that America went through after 9/11 when it perhaps overreached with the Iraq war, to not end up in a situation it couldn't control.

That there have been certainly a lot of behind-the-scenes guidance and advice offered to Israel about the nature of urban warfare. Again, the US has experience with that in the Middle East in the last decade or so, Israel now in Gaza. Also, to show restraint. To try to limit the number of civilian casualties as much as possible. There's been some friction here. There's been real disagreement. The US believes Israel could be doing more to limit those civilian casualties. The US believes Israel should be more specific and targeted in their strikes. There's been, as we heard from Deputy National Security Advisor John Finer over the weekend, some consternation that Israel is attacking hospitals, even if hospitals that are believed to be built above Hamas hideaways.

There has been some real disagreement behind the scenes. As I broke the news two weeks or so ago, the Biden administration has already started looking beyond Benjamin Netanyahu time and power. Now, they don't think that's happening anytime soon. They think Netanyahu will remain in power through at least this first phase of the war, but they see the poll numbers out of Israel. They see that he's deeply unpopular. He's blamed for the intelligence failures of October 7th. They believe eventually that Israel will move to oust him, so the US is starting to look at what the future could hold. Right now, Biden and Netanyahu have known each other a long time. That said, it's not exactly a pretty warm relationship. There are things that Netanyahu's done that has really frustrated the American president.

Brian Lehrer: Are the events of recent days in Gaza drawing any specific reaction from the president or his administration like they are from the UN and other places? The hospital seizures and child death counts have been horrific, and again, by independent accounts, not just Hamas ones. Even if Israel is finding Hamas fighters or infrastructure below a hospital, and Hamas using the patients and medical staff horrifically as human shields is true, a war crime in itself, that's in various amounts of disputes by the two sides. Even assuming it's basically true, the humanitarian toll is still on a massive scale. It's impossible to be numb to the enormity of it. What do Biden or others at the White House say?

Jonathan Lemire: The president himself hasn't addressed that too publicly in recent days. Although, again, he has in remarks previously urged Israel to try to limit these sort of things. We did hear, as I said, from the deputy national security advisor over the weekend, we have heard that publicly, and we've also heard private concern voiced by US officials about some of the targets, a UN school, hospitals. They can see the death count. They see the images coming out of Gaza.

You were right to note that the Gaza Health Ministry, which is run by Hamas, can't be believed, taken at face value, but other independent watchdogs, they believe their death totals aren't that far off than what the health ministry is putting forth. Certainly, whatever the exact number is, it is unbearably high. These are civilians, these are children. That is something that has really-- Go ahead.

Brian Lehrer: I've seen some articles on US agency staff in various numbers signing petitions, US government employees are in a few cases resigning in executive branch agencies over the degree of Biden's support for Israel and the conflict. Do you have any information that there is much disagreement within his policymaking circles?

Jonathan Lemire: Not his immediate circles. There's worry, but not disagreement, but you're right to note. There's been letters signed by a few dozen members of his administration, including White House staff, who are concerned about the unequivocal support for Israel. This is a worry. It's also a political one. We've seen the president's polls in recent days, in recent weeks take a little bit of a hit because of this. The polls suggest that Americans are less happy with how he's handled this particular crisis, particularly young Americans, many of whom are siding with the Palestinians, we're seeing in demonstrations across the country. For a president heading into an election year, who's going to need the youth vote, that's a real worry.

Right now, the strategy from the White House has been hold Israel tight publicly, so you can then privately behind the scenes chide them when needed, offer guidance if needed. US realizes they can't tell Israel what to do, but we're their biggest ally and significant benefactor. We do get a say, to voice our opinion. To this point, the question remains, if Netanyahu continues to turn a blind eye or a deaf ear to what the White House is urging him to do, will the US public position start to change? To this point, it hasn't really.

Brian Lehrer: What about any longer-term plans that Biden may have for ending the occupation after the immediate war? The New York Times foreign affairs columnist, Thomas Friedman, you probably saw this, you probably talked about it on MSNBC, Thomas Friedman had a column saying there needs to be a Biden peace plan for a two-state solution to get the parties unstuck longer-term that only the US, and he says Biden himself right now can do it. Other reports are emerging of some groups with various three-state solutions trying to get some more lasting peace for the state of Israel and a creation of a state of Palestine and other new kinds of ways to get everybody unstuck. Can we expect any kind of Biden peace plan or other bold leadership that way? Any indication of that?

Jonathan Lemire: The president wrote an op-ed for The Washington Post that ran over the weekend, in which he unequivocally said the US believes there must be a two-state solution. That is the only way that could bring peace to the region, both for the Palestinians but also for Israel. That, of course, has been a source of real friction with the Netanyahu government because Netanyahu did not place a priority on the two-state solution. In fact, there's been a lot of criticism from the administration about how Netanyahu's focus was on the West Bank and then the settlements there, the hyper right-wing conservative settlers there who now in recent days have been accused of sparking some violence in the region. He was far more concerned about that, appeasing his political base in Israel, than working towards a two-state solution.

The US has been clear. They see that as the only solution. They have urged Israel to not occupy Gaza whenever the fighting comes to an end, but that's another moment where Israel has suggested they believe that they will, at least temporarily. That is a real concern because the US remembers its lessons of occupation from the Middle East of the last decade or so. Israel setting up even somewhat permanent presence in Gaza only risks to radicalize more Palestinians who live there and also inflame the region further.

Brian Lehrer: On Biden's struggling to influence Netanyahu, listener texts, "Biden could end the carnage in Gaza immediately by withdrawing military aid, and he has diplomatic power. This famed impotence is chosen." How do you think the president would react to that, especially on the military aid? Here he is reportedly by The Wall Street Journal and others, and you, struggling to influence Netanyahu to what Biden thinks is the exact right position on the Gaza war. At the same time, he's asking Congress for, what is it, tens of billions in additional aid to Israel for the military right at this time?

Jonathan Lemire: I think the President would reject that out of hand, believing that Israel is a long-time and staunch US ally and needs to be supported in the Middle East. There's no suggestion, I think, that the President would cease sending aid to Israel. Now, could there be other means to apply pressure? That's possible, but I do think that President Biden has been a staunch supporter of Israel for decades, long before he took office. Certainly, his administration is deeply concerned about what they're seeing in Gaza, but they're not going to withdraw support from Israel. That's not going to happen.

You also raise a good point about the aid that the US hopes to send there, which we're now six weeks since the attack. Outside of the limited funding that the President can do just unilaterally, the US hasn't been able to because Congress has been broken. The Congress do not have a speaker and then barely passed a continuing resolution, and it does not seem particularly close on sending over a significant aid package to Israel as well as Ukraine.

There's some thought that if it doesn't happen in the next week or two before the Christmas holidays, it's going to spill well into next year because as soon as Congress gets back to Washington in January, it's immediately going to have another budget fight, and it'll be very difficult to put together a substantial aid package.

Brian Lehrer: Regina in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC. Hi, Regina.

Regina: Hi. I've been wondering for weeks, given that Netanyahu and Hamas, they're obviously not going to come to the table and broker any kind of two-state solution, independent states for both sides. Who are the essential international leaders and countries among the United States, the Arab nations, the Western allies, who need to come together if this actually has any hope of happening?

Brian Lehrer: Good question. Jonathan, who, besides the United States, could be a broker? There's certainly talk about Arab countries coming in, those same countries who the US has been trying to coax into the Abraham Accords, as they're called, recognizing Israel before a two-state solution or a state of Palestine in some way is established. Maybe it's those countries in some way along with the United States. It's not 1979 when Jimmy Carter and, rest in peace, Rosalyn today, but 1979, when Jimmy Carter almost singlehandedly brought together Israel and Egypt, or even the '90s when President Clinton played such a major role in the Oslo peace process, even though it failed at the end of the day, maybe the United States can't do it by itself in the same way as it did or came close to doing in those times. Regina asked an interesting question.

Jonathan Lemire: Yes, no doubt. A couple of thoughts on that. First of all, you're right, it's harder for the US to do this alone than in previous decades. The Abraham Accords showed signs of progress. In fact, Saudi Arabia was on the verge, it seemed, of joining those accords, of recognizing and normalizing relations with Israel right before the Hamas attacks. In fact, seen as one of the reasons why Hamas attacked when it did, to try to slow that process down, which they have accomplished. They've certainly not abandoned that thought, and there's still a role perhaps the Saudi or other Middle East players could play.

Also, the effort to try to revitalize the Palestinian authority in the West Bank, that's who the US believes, President Biden says in his op-ed that he wrote this weekend, they should be the ones to eventually get jurisdiction over Gaza as well, ousting Hamas, putting them in charge, but they have become a diminished group themselves in recent years. An uphill climb, to be sure.

Brian Lehrer: We are going to take a break, listeners. We'll continue with Politico White House Bureau Chief Jonathan Lemire in a minute and talk about the intersection of Biden's birthday today and his re-election politics. Stay with us.

[Music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. We continue with Politico White House Bureau chief and MSNBC host, Jonathan Lemire, who is also author of the book The Big Lie: Election Chaos, Political Opportunism, and the State of American Politics After 2020. Let's talk about the state of American politics heading into 2024, specifically right now, the intersection of Biden's birthday today and his re-election politics. Jonathan, your article is called Biden Campaign Facing Heat Over Plans to Deal with His Age. I guess we know what the issue is. What are these plans to deal with it, and what's the heat the campaign is facing?

Jonathan Lemire: President Biden turns 81 years old today, and poll after poll suggests that his age is Americans' biggest concern with his efforts in seeking a second term. This is something that, as I have noted, Democrats are deeply sick of talking about President Biden's age, and Democrats can't stop talking about President Biden's age. I'm sure there are listeners to the show and believe me, there are viewers of MSNBC who wish we'd stopped talking about it. These are Democrats who want President Biden to win again, and they believe that it's the media's fault that we're obsessed about his age.

Our job is simply to report what's out there. Not only is polling suggesting this is a real thing, but a lot of significant Democratic Party leaders and organizers believe it's a real thing, too. The White House itself and the President's campaign acknowledge the President's age is perhaps his greatest vulnerability. However, they, of course, believe it can be overcome. They're also happy to point out that if Donald Trump were to be elected again next year, he would be the oldest person ever elected President because he would be older in 2024 than Joe Biden was in 2020. There's only a three-year age gap between the two men.

Now it is striking that at least for polling, Americans don't seem as bothered by Trump's age as they do Biden, that he projects perhaps younger than the incumbent. Although I will say several Democrats have pushed back on that and tell me that they believe that Americans simply haven't heard much of Donald Trump in recent years. Even though his name is [unintelligible 00:26:40] from the headlines, it's been a long time since most Americans who are not living this day-to-day have heard Donald Trump give a speech. They think that next year, when people start paying attention to the campaign and start listening to Trump, they'll recognize that he is as prone to misstatement as Joe Biden and certainly more prone to outright falsehoods.

I think that is a thing that's possible. Yes, right now there is a debate within the campaign, within the party itself as to how the White House should handle Biden's age. Do you lean into it? Do you acknowledge it? Do you use more humor? Do you try to ignore it? Do you do things to try to mitigate it? Those are the debates that are driving the party right now.

Brian Lehrer: I guess Trump and Biden are aging differently from a public image standpoint. Trump remains a more fiery speaker, I guess you could say, but Biden is actually in much better physical shape in terms of how people usually think of it. Looking trim and fit, he probably works out much more than Donald Trump does. You could probably confirm or refute-

Jonathan Lemire: Safe bet there.

Brian Lehrer: Safe bet there, says the White House Bureau Chief for Politico, but his walk has that gait, and his speech has that gravelliness and, I guess, slow speed. Any thoughts there of emphasizing different types of fitness?

Jonathan Lemire: You're exactly right. It's how they project. Trump is also a much bigger guy. He seems off as garrulous and has more energy and is still more likely to deliver an hour and a half speech at a rally, even if half of it is nonsensical. Biden, his doctor, White House doctor, gives him a clean bill of health for every physical we've seen, but they acknowledge. His gait has really slowed. The broken bone in his foot that he suffered playing with his dog during this transition never really healed. He moves slowly, he shuffles. He is fit and trim. Some though wonder if he's almost too skinny, and he does-- Even his closest advisors say, and members of his own family, to a person, he is mentally fit for the job. I think there's very little doubt of that. They also acknowledge he can project at times as frail.

They acknowledge he tires easily. He, of course, is someone who has battled a stutter his entire life. He's made remarkable progress in overcoming it, but by his own admission, when fatigued, it either reemerges itself or he has to work on it so hard to suppress the stutter it makes it look like he's speaking slowly or haltingly. That also adds this idea that he might be aged.

I think that the Democrats can't run away from the number 81, but the word fitness you use there is a telling one where I think that we might hear that more from Democrats about fitness and saying not only, despite perhaps appearances or what Americans think per polling, not only is President Biden more physically fit, he has more physical fitness for office, but he has fitness in terms of the capability of doing the job. That's where they'll draw the sharp contrast to his time in office to what we've heard from Donald Trump in terms of fueling an insurrection on January 6th, but all his plans if he were to be reelected again.

Brian Lehrer: Robert and Englewood, you're on WNYC. Hi, Robert.

Robert: Hey, how are you? Thanks for taking my call. It's very interesting. My uncle passed last year. He was 103 years old. He used to drive to Manhattan every single day to his office at Columbus Circle and then walk to 46th Street and play chess probably five or six days a week. Yesterday, I went to a memorial service for his girlfriend who died, unfortunately, at 71, with a bunch of hipsters in Brooklyn, in Williamsburg. I don't understand what people talk about. Old, I think, maybe 80s and 60, but the thing is people that are 81 years old have a certain sense of history and knowledge. The people that are like Ramaswamy or whatever these people, they don't know anything about the history. Same with Donald Trump.

I know Donald Trump from Studio 54 and Rob Cohen. Well, he is what he is. I think that people need to listen to what he says and how he says it, and not be so concerned about the physical age of-- 81 is really almost not old at all. After COVID, you had the average age of men in America that is-- it's going down. To be honest with you, my uncle told me not to get married until after I was 40 years old because, he told me, you don't really know what you can get.

Brian Lehrer: Robert, thank you very much. Jonathan, does the Biden campaign, or let's say, do people like Robert, delivering the message that Robert just delivered, have the Biden campaigns here?

Jonathan Lemire: That call took us on quite a journey, Brian. They do lean into his experience, and I think credibly so, particularly on matters of foreign policy. That is where, frankly, this president has received kudos from even the other side of the aisle about how he has handled the crises in both the Middle East and in Ukraine, that he has drawn upon his decades of experience on foreign policy in order to be able to handle these difficult moments.

His campaign certainly is of the belief that they can ignore the noise, that Joe Biden has been doubted before. He was seen as too old in 2020. He was seen as too old and too unpopular in 2022. What happened? Well, he won in 2020, and his party did really well in the midterms in 2022, and two weeks ago in the 2023 off-year elections, also, a strong night for Democrats.

Now, how much of that translates to 2024? We don't know, but certainly, President Biden, by almost any measure, has had a successful three-plus years in office, but he and his team will have to-- they know this. They don't pretend that age is not an issue, they know that it is. Right now, the debates are simply how to handle it. I do think the president will see more of him. His campaign won't really ramp up until early next year, but that I think is when we'll see him on the road more, but then the question becomes how much?

Brian Lehrer: If they're debating in the campaign as you report, whether to try to downplay his age or whether to lean into his age and talk about his experience, and don't forget Trump's about the same age, what's the president's plan and his campaign's plan for anything public today about this being his 81st birthday?

Jonathan Lemire: Well, we will hear from the president today. It is one of the more amusing dates on the White House calendar. He's pardoning turkeys. He heads off for his Thanksgiving break tomorrow. He and his family, by tradition, go to Nantucket for a few days around Thanksgiving. He's in Washington today. He'll pardon the turkeys. I would not be surprised if the president makes a few jokes at his own expense about his age. He has been doing that more and more since the White House Correspondents Dinner this spring, a few other occasions since trying to manage the issue with [unintelligible 00:33:49]

Brian Lehrer: Unlike Mayor Adams, who's pardoning Turkey. That was completely unfair.

Jonathan Lemire: Oh, there it is. We can have a whole another conversation about the Mayor and his turkey.

Brian Lehrer: That's right. In fact, our next guest will have, but okay, bad joke, unfair slap, but I couldn't resist. Nicole in Essex County, you're on WNYC with Jonathan Lemire. Hello.

Nicole: Hi, thanks for taking my call. I think one of the issues that we're not dealing with with why the talk about Biden's age keeps happening is who his vice president is. Kamala Harris is a Black woman, and I think a lot of people say their concern about Biden's age is that they fear he won't make it through his second term and Kamala Harris will be president. I think a lot of the talk would disappear if he had a random white man who was his vice president at this time.

Now, what the Biden administration can do about that, it may be a discussion on finding a way for Vice President Harris to step down, but then you risk alienating a lot of the African-American voters who elected him the first time. I think that issue of racism is the undertone of why people are talking about his age. Again, if it was a random white man who was vice president, some man in his 50s or 60s, his age wouldn't be a problem because they'd be comfortable with the person who'd be the vice president. They're not comfortable with a Black woman being president if something happens to President Biden.

Brian Lehrer: Nicole, I wonder if you have any other thoughts on what the Biden campaign could do to combat that racism, which I think it's widely believed exists towards Kamala Harris. Having her step aside, that would be, to so many people, morally repugnant. You don't take a qualified vice president off the ticket because other people are racist toward her. What else might they do? Have you given that any thought?

Nicole: I have. Racism is probably the biggest issue that we have in this country that is both spoken and unspoken, and people don't speak about this issue. He needed to have Kamala Harris on his ticket in 2020 because he needed that right demographic to thread the needle. In 2024, it's a little bit different. Do you find a respectful way for Kamala Harris to step away? It has to be a way where she's saying it could be personal reasons or health reasons so that he doesn't alienate that support.

There are going to be a significant bunch of people, no matter what they say in the polls, who aren't comfortable with her being president. It was okay in 2020 because it seemed a little bit far away, but now, it seems more and more possible and they're not comfortable with it. They're not going to admit that in a poll, but when they get in that poll box in November, that's what they're going to be voting for. We know that Trump is going to have someone younger and someone they're more comfortable with.

Brian Lehrer: Sending out dog whistles, if not explicit statements, which Trump doesn't seem so shy of doing, when it comes to building a white supremacist base. Jonathan, Is there good polling, is there measurable data on the risk or benefit to Biden's re-election of Kamala Harris on the ticket?

Jonathan Lemire: There was a poll recently that showed that, actually, she polled more favorably than President Biden, which was new because, to this point, many polls do not suggest that, that she was less popular than the President. I think there is a reflection here that she's found her voice and grown into the role [unintelligible 00:37:43]. Let's be clear, there is no talk of stopping her from the ticket. There never has been. That has been a DC parlor game for some time. How could the president move her off the ticket without insulting her and that constituency? Could they move her to the Supreme Court? All that is nonsense. None of that is happening.

First of all, White House aides feel like she has stepped into the role and really dramatically improved. She is, without question, their leading voice on abortion rights, a topic that we just saw so powerfully drive voters in 2022 and 2023. Surely will again in 2024. The president himself has acknowledged, he's not particularly comfortable talking about the subject, so they really lean on the vice president, and she has stepped into the breach and West Wing thinks she's done a very good job on that.

Also, yes, the heart and soul of the Democratic Party are women of color, and the risk of alienating them by dumping Kamala Harris off the ticket is just too high. That's not going to happen. More and more aides say that they don't-- even if Harris they believe is not a particular positive for the ticket, she's no longer a drag on it either, which had been the fear early in their terms, fair or not.

Brian Lehrer: Interesting. Jonathan, let me touch one more thing with you. Again, thank you for your time and so much time this morning after your morning show. Just one more campaign development that I really want to touch on is the entrance into the campaign, presidential campaign arena recently of a few other people. Minnesota Congressman Dean Phillips, in particular, now running as a Democrat, primarying Joe Biden. Who's Dean Phillips and what's he running on against the president from his own party?

We now have this collection of third-party and potential third-party candidates. We know about RFK Jr and Cornel West who could take votes away from Biden. I guess nobody is too sure which side, let's say Trump or Biden if they're the nominees, RFK would take more votes from, but now, we also have the Joe Manchin third-party prospect. Give us your take on all these other horses in the race or potentially in the race.

Jonathan Lemire: Well, first of all, I think it just shows a broad dissatisfaction with the possible choice of Trump versus Biden and poll after poll shows that. Americans really don't want this rematch, that no one is excited, frankly, about either candidate going into this race. I think there's an appetite for something different. We're seeing some of these third-party candidates get a little traction, or they very least see that in [unintelligible 00:40:16] opening.

The representative from Minnesota, Phillips, he is a relatively anonymous lawmaker. No one perceives him as a serious threat. He is representative of perhaps unhappiness in some of the party about just simply a default renomination of Joe Biden, but no one expects that to go anywhere. I think it's more interesting these third-party candidates you highlighted. RFK Jr., you're right. New polling suggests he might steal more from Donald Trump, which is why the Trump team has suddenly attacked him. They seem to be fighting for perhaps the same conspiracy theorist block of the electorate and anti-vaxxers, but then, whether it's Cornell West or Jill Stein, whoever everyone remembers in 2016, she's back in and potentially [crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: That's right. I didn't even mention Jill Stein, who ran as the Green Party candidate in 2016 that hurt Hillary Clinton.

Jonathan Lemire: Very much so, provided the margin of difference, in fact, in those three states in the middle of the country, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Then there's Joe Manchin, who's openly flirting with the No Labels bid. There is a sense that those candidates would hurt Biden, and traditionally, third-party candidates tend to hurt the Democrat. We can ask Al Gore, Hillary Clinton about that.

There is a belief in Biden world, the sources I've talked to, that most of these candidates will eventually abandon their bid because no matter what happens, they're done the rest of their career. If one of these candidates runs as a third-party bid and it does reasonably well and therefore provides Donald Trump with the White House, that would be the first line of their obituary, and the Biden world believes that most of these bids will eventually be abandoned.

Brian Lehrer: Politico White House Bureau Chief Jonathan Lemire, who is also host of Way Too Early in the 5:00 AM Eastern Time hour on MSNBC, a regular on Morning Joe there after that, an author of the book, The Big Lie, Election Chaos, Political Opportunism, and the State of American Politics After 2020. Jonathan, thank you so much. Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.

Jonathan Lemire: Happy Thanksgiving to you, Brian. Love to do it again.

[00:42:19] [END OF AUDIO]

 

Copyright © 2023 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.