Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone, and yes, we are back live today after giving our team a holiday day off yesterday. We'll have some fun later in the show with a list of the various words of the year that the different dictionaries have chosen for 2023, and we'll invite yours.

We'll talk to New York economy journalist, Greg David, about the year that was in the New York recovery, including that the city is back to around where it was in the number of jobs from before the pandemic, but there were some very New York ups and downs that we'll talk about as well, and some predictions that Greg has for the year ahead. With the war in the Middle East so dominating in the news in the last quarter of the year, we'll open the phones for anything other than that that you want to mention as a story to remember from 2023. That's all coming up after we start here.

Susan Page is with us, Washington bureau chief for USA Today, among other things. Here at year's end, she's been watching Liz Cheney's book tour and what it might mean for next year's election. Cheney is not ruling out a third-party presidential run, for example. Susan has been watching President Biden grapple with and participate in the war in the Middle East. We'll discuss the latest on that complicated dance of his. Susan has been watching the Republican primary campaigns take shape.

For those of you who've been taking a holiday break from the news, you may have missed a potentially big story for the 2024 presidential race. A poll came out in New Hampshire just a few days ago, with the primary there less than a month away now, that showed Nikki Haley would be just about tied there with Donald Trump in a head-to-head matchup, just three points behind with a four-point margin of error, the poll cites. That assumes, though, that the other candidates were to drop out by then, but this is a continuation of a trend that Haley was already celebrating in a campaign appearance a few weeks ago. Listen.

Nikki Haley: Donald Trump has started to attack me. A couple of days ago at a rally, he said, "I don't know what this Nikki Haley surge is all about." Do you want me to tell you what it's about? It's a new poll that came out in New Hampshire. It's got Trump 44, Haley 30. We're surging.

[applause]

Brian Lehrer: If Trump, 44, and Haley, 30, it doesn't actually sound that good, a 14-point gap. That was enough for Haley to sound triumphant then. Now it's just a three-point gap in a hypothetical one-on-one matchup if this poll from the Koch brothers' conservative political universe is to be believed. Let's discuss with Susan Page, Washington bureau chief for USA Today and author of books including Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi and the Lessons of Power and The Matriarch: Barbara Bush and the Making of an American Dynasty.

Susan, Happy New Year. Thanks for giving us some work time on the holiday week. Welcome back to WNYC.

Susan Page: Hey, Brian. It's great to be with you.

Brian Lehrer: Since we always have to take polls with a few tablespoons of salt these days, do you believe those numbers? Is there really a Nikki Haley surge in New Hampshire?

Susan Page: Well, I don't necessarily believe a single poll by an advocacy group. I think that's a little dangerous. Also, we won't have a head-to-head contest between Trump and Haley in New Hampshire, but there is no denying that Nikki Haley is doing pretty well. If you look at the average of recent statewide polls in New Hampshire by fivethirtyeight.com, Trump's at 44.1 and Haley's at 25.7. Now, 19 points may sound like a big gap, but it's much closer than things have been there up to this point.

If you look at Chris Christie, he's at 11.1. If Chris Christie, who has been an anti-Trump candidate, say, he got out of the race before the New Hampshire vote and endorsed Haley and all of his voters went to Haley, all of them would not go to Haley, but let's say they would, that puts Haley within striking distance of Donald Trump in a serious way at 36.8%. This has been an interesting phenomenon. Nikki Haley has done what Ron DeSantis has failed to do, which is to survive and prosper in a primary contest that is still, of course, dominated by Donald Trump.

Brian Lehrer: Since we always have to look at who paid for a poll as well, sometimes questions are written to produce a certain outcome desirable to the sponsor. As I'm sure most of our listeners know, I see that this poll does come from the Koch-backed American for Prosperity Action. That's not Coke the soda, that's Koch, the Koch brothers. The conservative Koch brother political universe is maybe, above all, the fossil fuels lobby. Does Koch World want Nikki Haley more than Donald Trump if you happen to know?

Susan Page: Yes, they do. They've publicly put their political arm behind Nikki Haley. They haven't been big Trump backers before, so not a big surprise, but it was they have a big grassroots political operation that we think if Nikki Haley does well, they'll deserve some of the credit.

Brian Lehrer: The actual numbers with the actual current field are Trump 45%, Haley 32% in New Hampshire. Let's talk more about the Chris Christie factor. He is the most explicitly anti-Trump candidate, and he's third at 9% is what I saw. You were citing 11%, even a little better in a recent poll. Big question now from an anti-Trump perspective is, should Christie drop out and endorse Haley before New Hampshire votes? Any indication that he might, since the reason for being for his campaign, at least as he sounds to most people, seems less about getting himself elected and more about stopping the insurrectionists from getting reelected.

Susan Page: Right. That's been his stated purpose, and he's been the most frontal in criticizing Trump in ways that Nikki Haley has been unwilling to do, although she has been somewhat critical on the occasion of Donald Trump. He does say he's running against Trump. That's his agenda. That leaves the question. If it's most helpful for him to get out of the race before New Hampshire and endorse Haley, will he do it? He says no, so maybe he won't. Politicians do run because they like to see their names on ballots. They like to do well in elections. Elections are mercurial things, especially in the New Hampshire primary, so he can hold on to hope that he'll do better than expected.

The fact is, it is not possible to imagine a world in which this Republican Party nominates Chris Christie for president. It is possible to imagine a world, difficult, but not impossible, to imagine a world in which this Republican Party might nominate Nikki Haley. That is the pressure that Chris Christie is going to face for the next few weeks.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. To the point you were just making, the clip of Haley that we just played is about the most critical we ever hear her get of Trump. She criticized him for criticizing her. They are not for anything he's ever done. People wonder if she can ever fully break through without that. Do you know if there's a strategy or a debate within the Haley camp as to when or a calculation as to if to break that barrier?

Susan Page: The Nikki Haley people believe it should not fully break with Trump because this is the Trump party. He commands the loyalty of most Republican voters, so you're in dangerous territory if you take him on in the kind of direct and extremely critical way that Chris Christie has. What she's tried to do is she's made the argument. She says Donald Trump did some good things as president. Donald Trump gave her some important foreign policy experience when he was president by making her the UN ambassador. She says she understands the appeal that the Trump policies have for voters, but she says that Trump has been a chaotic leader and that electing Trump again or choosing Trump again as the party's nominee will make them less likely to win the general election, and more likely to have the kind of chaos that a lot of Americans are are pretty exhausted by.

Brian Lehrer: After New Hampshire comes South Carolina, where Nikki Haley was governor. Have you seen polling from there yet? I keep meaning to look it up, and I haven't gotten to it. Presumably, her only path would be to do well in New Hampshire, whether it was first or a meaningful second, and then win her home state, and that momentum sets her up for a competitive Super Tuesday, which comes after that, but if she can't win her own home state, that narrative never takes shape. Is she more popular in New Hampshire than in her own home state of South Carolina?

Susan Page: She is. New Hampshire, of course, is a friendlier state for non-Trump Republicans than is South Carolina, where Trump is very popular. If you look at at recent statewide polls in South Carolina, again, these are from fivethirtyeight.com, Trump is at 50.7%, and Haley is at 21.8%. Trump is beating her by two to one, and Trump was there in the middle of the summer on the 4th of July, he got a huge crowd in South Carolina. 50,000 people was the estimate. He's got the backing of the governor and the senator and half of the house members. He is in a formal position in South Carolina.

I think you'd have to say Trump is a likely Republican nominee, but things happen when voters start to vote. That's why we reporters love the time when the votes actually come. Maybe Trump does less well than expected in Iowa. Maybe Nikki Haley manages to win New Hampshire. That would be just a huge event. Then maybe you have a fight in South Carolina and she lives to fight on March 5th when we have Super Tuesday. That's a lot of ifs, but it's not impossible.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, your calls on national politics on December 27th, on the Republicans who are trying to stop Trump, on Biden and the Middle East war, which we will get to, on the negotiations over a southern border crackdown, which we will get to, the right and wrong of any of these things, as well as the presidential race implications, 212-433-WNYC for Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today, 212-433-9692. You can call or you can text.

Susan, you've been following Liz Cheney's book tour, the Ultimate Never Trump Republican who co-chaired the January 6th committee in Congress. She told this story, for example, on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert during this tour earlier this month. Maybe a too-little-known moment from January 6th itself. Listen.

Liz Cheney: He was handed a note saying that there had been a civilian who'd been shot at the entrance to the house chamber. We had a White House witness who testified that they saw that note sitting on the table in front of him in his dining room as he watched the violent attack on television. That level of depravity is not something that we can simply ignore and walk away from.

Brian Lehrer: Susan, if that isn't evidence of him participating in the insurrection, I don't know what is. Do you think this book tour and so much media for Liz Cheney might be playing into whatever Nikki Haley surge is happening?

Susan Page: Maybe. I think when you think about Liz Cheney, one thing to remember is who she is. She is the daughter of a Republican vice president. She is a member of a very prominent Republican family. She was in the congressional leadership until she became a crusader on January 6th, a crusader against Donald Trump and against what happened on January 6th. She's had a remarkable journey.

She, like Chris Christie and some Democrats say, it's crucial to democracy to not elect Donald Trump President again. She does it from that very particular standing that she has. I have to say, the thing that surprised me in the interview that I did with her about her new book, which continues to be on the New York Times bestseller list, is that she said she had basically given up on the Republican Party.

She was interested in trying to form a new conservative party that is, as we know, a very difficult thing to do, and most interestingly, that she was willing to consider going on the no-labels ticket. That's that ticket, that's a group that promises to nominate a centrist Republican and a centrist Democrat to run for a president and vice president next year in the 2024 election. They're working on getting on the ballot in key states.

That is a effort that Democrats believe could do a lot to elect Donald Trump to a second term, could hurt Joe Biden because it would give Republicans and centrist moderate voters, who are uneasy with voting for Trump but are not so crazy about Joe Biden, another place to go. That struck me as the more powerful potential implication of Liz Cheney's journey now than it does what she's doing in the Republican Party. Her standing in the Republican Party is very high among the most anti-Trump forces, but no longer so influential, I think, with the bulk of Republican voters.

Brian Lehrer: Well, about that potential no-labels bid and that was really interesting in your interview with Liz Cheney. Listener, as you can see, Susan Page's Liz Cheney interview take and her article on that, of course, on the USA Today website, but if Liz Cheney is most concerned, as she says, and she seems very credible, with wanting to stop Donald Trump and the implications for democracy in the United States for the future of electoral democracy in this country, stop Donald Trump from becoming the next president of the United States, she would have calculating the effects of a no labels run or any third-party forum that she might run on in the way that you were just describing.

Would it actually hurt Trump because Republicans would vote for her, or would it actually hurt Biden? Let's presume it'll be Biden because it'll be an alternative to him for people who don't like him but would never vote for Trump? Somebody's got to figure that out before no labels as a party or Liz Cheney as an individual cast their net. Right?

Susan Page: Yes. Well, let's hope. Of course, the effect of third parties is sometimes hard to calculate. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., you'd think he'd hurt the Democrats. In fact, he's drawing a fair amount of support from Trump, so you don't want to be too confident about the effect of a third-party candidacy. The no-labels advocates insist they say they'll only do this if they see a path to actually winning the White House.

Now, everyone else is skeptical they can do that given kind of the nature of our politics, but that's what they say. Maybe you make the good faith calculation that this is a way to regain the White House with a bipartisan ticket, but the no-labels effort and the other multiple significant third-party candidacies we see in the works for 2024 is going to make this more like algebra than addition or calculus. I can't actually do calculus, but let's say it makes a campaign more like calculus and arithmetic. It's not just a binary choice, Republicans and Democrats, it's possible many voters are disenchanted with the choice they have. It gives them a bunch of other options to choose from.

Brian Lehrer: I've heard a leader of a no-labels movement say this, do you think they really believe that they could put up a candidate who would win the presidency, actually get the electoral votes, not just some meaningful minority in each state that doesn't give them electoral votes, or doesn't certainly give them enough electoral votes? Do you think they really believe it?

Susan Page: They say they believe it and they have done a lot of polling that they present to try to make the case that it's not impossible, but I think the rest of the political world is really skeptical about it.

Brian Lehrer: Beth in Westchester, you're on WNYC with Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today. Hi, Beth.

Beth: Hi there. I had a question. I am a Democrat and I registered myself as a Republican last week, so I can vote in the primary. I'm wondering if there's ever been a successful movement in Democrats re-registering themselves so they can vote against a certain candidate, whoever that candidate is.

Brian Lehrer: Go ahead, Susan. Go ahead

Susan Page: Beth, thanks for your call. It's hard to get a significant number. It's hard enough to get people to vote, much less to switch their party registration because of some kind of strategy. One thing that we are watching for in the New Hampshire primary where independents can vote in either primary is since there's not really a big contest on the Democratic side, and in fact, Joe Biden isn't on the ballot there because Democrats don't recognize the primary as legitimate for purposes of choosing delegates.

There's not really a contest on the Democratic side that independents and Democrats will choose to vote in the Republican primary and help those who are posing Donald Trump. Sometimes in New Hampshire, we've seen that had some effect when one side has a really active contest and the other side doesn't, that independent New Hampshire voters tend to go to the primary that's more interesting.

That's one reason New Hampshire has such a potential for long shots and for people who are not the dominant front-runner in the contest because they can catch fire and do well because of the mix of the electorate. New Hampshire also has pretty independent-minded people, generally, which makes them more interesting to watch in contests like this.

Brian Lehrer: It's something worth reminding the listeners of as we head into a presidential primary season. Some states have open primaries, where any voter can choose to vote in either primary, and some states have closed primaries, like New York, where Beth is calling from, where you have to be registered in advance in one party or the other, and you can only vote in that party's primary. Yes, it becomes interesting in those open primary states where anybody can vote in either one. It would take a lot of people making an advanced calculation like Beth, in the closed primary states, which I think is a majority of states. Susan, do you happen to know?

Susan Page: I don't know the number, but yes. I believe most states where the primary process is controlled by the political parties are not enthusiastic about having independence in those and the other party voting in their primary. I believe that a majority of states have closed primaries, and that makes it harder.

Brian Lehrer: By the way, Beth, if you're still there, when did you switch your registration from Democrat to Republican? Do you remember?

Beth: I did it last week. It's really easy. You just go online and it takes 30 seconds.

Brian Lehrer: Now, here's what I'll try to check for you and other people who you might be inspiring to do the same thing, at least with respect to New York State. I think it might be too late for this coming--

Beth: No, I don't think it is.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, you looked?

Beth: I don't think it is. For some reason, I thought it was until February but double-check my--

Brian Lehrer: I'm going to double-check, but you certainly might be right. I'm not saying I know this, I'm saying I think I remember this in the back of my mind and I'm going to double-check. I think in order to prevent exactly your kind of strategic last-minute party switching. It's got to be done over a year in advance of the particular election you would vote in.

Now, let's see. An application, okay. My producer, Zack, right on the ball is copying and pasting something for me to read. It says an application to change one's party enrollment for the primary election in any year must be received by the Board of Elections no later than February 14th of that year, which would mean Beth is right. Changes received on or after February 15th until seven days after the June primary will be set aside and open seven days following the June primary and entered in the voters' registration record. Well, I'm not sure what that last part means, but that first part from New York's rules seem to indicate that Beth is right.

If you want to do that, registered Democrats, that came from elections.ny.gov. Just in case, the New York primary rolls around and the Republican presidential nomination is still undecided, seems unlikely considering when in the primary calendar that falls, not until June, but you'd never know. Interesting call. All right, Susan, you're ready to take an anti-Liz Cheney call?

Susan Page: Absolutely. I'm ready.

Brian Lehrer: Here comes Bill in Maywood, New Jersey. Bill, you're on WNYC. Thank you for calling in.

Bill: Thank you. Thank you very much. First of all, Liz Cheney only wants to defeat President Trump because he correctly called her a warmonger, which she is along with her father, Dick Cheney, if you remember Iraq, and she's also a war profiteer. My other point, thank you, regarding the border with all the fentanyl deaths from the open border, I believe it's over 250, on average, deaths per day. I think it's a valid concern with the drug traffickers basically running that show, and the sex traffickers also.

Brian Lehrer: Let me ask you a question that has probably popped into the minds of a lot of listeners as you were saying that. If they were able to somehow close the border to fentanyl without closing it to human beings trying to seek asylum because of the conditions in their countries south of the border, would that satisfy you?

Bill: Well, the good people who want to better their lives should be able to come across, but I believe legally, the way it's done because that penalizes people who have done the process legally or gone through the process and still have to wait. Does that make sense?

Brian Lehrer: Bill, thank you. I'm going to take that as an answer rather than a question. I appreciate your call. I guess that's one of the things that they're debating right now, which we're going to get to between President Biden and the Republicans on the border issue because they would have to change the law because, technically, the asylum seekers are legal. They are legal.

They're not just people sneaking across and trying to weasel their way into the workforce undocumented. They're people coming across and saying, "We present ourselves to you, Mr. Border police, and we are seeking asylum in the United States, and we are willing to go through the process." That's what so many of them are doing. They're actually debating in Washington now, whether to make that less legal. That's where that is.

On his Liz Cheney question, why is Liz Cheney like this? One might ask because before Trump and whether we accept the caller's assertion that she's a warmonger and a war profiteer or not, we do know that before Trump, her father, Dick Cheney was the person most often accused by Democrats of trying to suspend the Constitution, in his case, to allow torture of prisoners in the Iraq and Afghanistan war-era. Remember waterboarding, and Cheney arguing it was okay? He's even a wanted war criminal in at least one country, I think Malaysia because of what he did in the war on terror era. How did Liz Cheney turn out like this?

Susan Page: You can think Liz Cheney is great, and you can think she's terrible, but I think you would have to conclude that the reason she's taken on Trump in this way is because she was appalled by the events of January 6th. She had supported Trump, before that, I think she'd saw this as an assault on democracy. She professed to be stunned by the reaction of most Republican leaders, almost all of them, and by her Republican colleagues in Congress by their unwillingness to take him on on this issue.

The Cheneys have a long history. Her father, of course, was a controversial figure. Not so controversial when he served in the House or as Defense Secretary, but very controversial in the aftermath of 9/11. I don't actually think that's what Liz Cheney's current course is about. I take word that it's about her concerns about democracy, and what she sees as a failure of her party to stand up for it.

Brian Lehrer: We'll continue in a minute with Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today, more of your calls. We'll talk more about Biden and the border, we have an Eric Adams clip that's relevant, and we'll talk about Biden and the war. Stay with us.

[MUSIC - Marden Hill: Hijack]

Brian Lehrer on WNYC. As we continue with Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today and author of books, including Madam Speaker: Nancy Pelosi and the Lessons of Power, and her previous one, The Matriarch: Barbara Bush and the Making of an American Dynasty, which we will have reason to touch on before we run out of time with Susan.

Susan, let me segue from the conversation we were having just before the break to these negotiations between President Biden and the Republicans in the House if he wants to get aid to Israel and Ukraine that's being held up until he comes to some kind of new border rules for asylum seekers as we were referencing. Is it clear to you either how close they are or what kind of change the President may actually be considering compromising on?

Susan Page: The bipartisan group of senators who are working on a package to try to get aid to Ukraine in Israel through and tying it to changed asylum rules at the border. The administration has been willing to entertain this. There are people at the White House who think the administration is not in a good place on immigration, that the situation on the southern border needs stricter attention, even though that dismays some core democratic voters like Latinos and progressives. The White House is game to talk about some of these changes in asylum rules that might raise the threshold to be able to claim asylum at the border to detain asylum seekers at the border, including families with children.

That's quite controversial that you remember when Trump did that during his administration and how controversial that was. Also capping the number of asylum seekers who can cross the border on any one day. Some of these provisions could very well be part of a Senate proposal. The trouble is, even if the Senate agrees to it, which is possible, it's hard to see it getting through the House, which is more fiercely divided along partisan lines in the Senate is, so a hard road ahead. Some big issues there, IsraAid to Ukraine southern border. This is a measure that touches on some of the biggest national security foreign policy challenges we've got at the moment

Brian Lehrer: Of local interest, Mayor Eric Adams of New York keeps shaking the trees to try to get money at least out of Washington, DC to help the city footage bills having to do with the surge of asylum seekers here just in 2022 and 2023, they say over 150,000 people, and so many of them need city services to survive from day to day at the beginning of their time here. Can't get the money out of Congress because of the Republicans. They say they don't want to put a bandaid on the ultimate question as they see it, which is too many people coming across seeking asylum. If they're helping to fund it in New York City, then they'll be aiding and abetting it, not helping to stop it.

Mayor Adams also wants President Biden to do something that's not economic. He wants Biden to engage in what Adams calls a decompression strategy, which involves the federal government telling asylum seekers where they have to go at first. You can't all go to New York and Chicago and Southern Texas and Arizona. If you're going to come across and you're going to register for asylum and you're going to go through a process, we're going to distribute you. Something may be creepy to a lot of people about distributing you in beings, but we're going to distribute you to various places so no place gets overwhelmed. Here's one of many Eric Adams entreaties to the federal government over the last few months. This is just a few seconds.

Eric Adams: DC has abandoned us, and they need to be paying their course to this national problem.

Brian Lehrer: That's asking for the money. Susan, what about the decompression strategy? Have you been on this as a Washington Bureau Chief? Has there been an explicit response to that notion of telling people, "Okay, you have to start out here in the United States," that Eric Adams has been asking for in addition to money?

Susan Page: I have not heard about that proposal. Many of the people who come across the border are joining family members who already are here, who tend to be located in places like Chicago and New York and Los Angeles. I wonder about the enforcement of a measure like that. Although there are efforts to try to enforce the requirement that asylum seekers respond could come back to court, appear in court when their case comes up. The problem seems so very difficult.

We posted a story this morning. I saw by our USA Today reporter in El Paso, who does a lot of border stories, immigration stories, who says there are now 3 million immigrants in the United States awaiting court action, which is a huge number. I think a lot of Americans look at that and say, "The system is out of control, and what can we do to get it under better control?"

One of the changes in the past since the last election, say, is that we're hearing complaints from Democratic governors and mayors, as well as from Republicans who've been very critical of the Biden administration already on this issue. That's one reason some Biden partisan, some Democratic strategists who support Biden think making a deal on the border would not be a bad thing for President Biden. It would help him address an issue that is really cutting against him when you look at general election polls.

Brian Lehrer: I want to go back to Nikki Haley for a minute because we're getting what might be an interesting call from Amy in Manhattan. Amy, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Amy: Hello. Yes, I just said, well, two things, I hope. One is it just seems to me that it would be seriously ironic if the first woman elected President or Republican, and I wonder what Susan thought of that.

Brian Lehrer: Amy, thank you. Yes. Put a lot of Democratic voters maybe who've championed the idea of a woman president, if not in a difficult position, at least they would have to have a thought.

Susan Page: Well, it would be interesting, and also don't forget, she is the daughter of immigrants. That would also be interesting given that tough stance that the GOP has taken on the issue of immigration.

Brian Lehrer: Biden and the Middle East. It continues to be such a horror show in Gaza. There are no words. From what we hear just in the last few days, and again, for people not following the news closely over the holiday weekend from what I'm seeing, Susan, Biden continues to implore Netanyahu to go down a de-intensifying path of the way the war is being fought to still try to get Hamas, but save more civilian lives, many more civilian lives, hopefully.

Netanyahu, in a public speech the other day, blew him off. He went to Gaza, I believe, on Christmas Day and came back and gave a speech before the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, and said, "No, we're going to be intensifying the war," is basically what he said. It's going to go on for months more. Yet the United States is publicly supporting the war. By the United States, I mean President Biden, and continuing to fund the war and give a lot of weapons to the war, and argue for more funding for the war. That's what he might make the compromises on the border in pursuit of. Is Biden conflicted about this more than we're hearing?

Susan Page: I think initially, President Biden's reaction to the events of October 7th was total and complete support for Israel, has been a supporter of Israel for many years as a senator from Delaware and as Vice President. I think this issue has become one of more conflict within the administration because of Israel's actions against Gaza that have put so many women and children and aid workers and journalists at risk, that record number of journalist being killed in Gaza by Israeli attacks, not to mention all the civilians that we see and the devastation there.

I think the administration is now frustrated by the unwillingness of top Israeli officials to take seriously their argument that they need to do more to protect civilian lives, to allow aid to go through, and to think about endgame strategy of what's going to happen in Gaza when the war eventually is over.

The Israeli officials so far have not paid very much attention to these arguments that they have heard from a series of US officials, including the Secretary of State and the National Security Advisor, and the Defense Secretary, and the CIA director. The United States is, of course, continues to be Israel's strongest supporter, but Israel and the United States on this issue are increasingly isolated in the whole world for the fact that this war is being pursued in a way that puts so many civilians at risk.

Brian Lehrer: Biden doesn't seem to be considering any consequences for Israel of refusing to follow his entreaties to follow a less intense. I think that's the word, right? Is de-intensifying, there's a word like that that the administration is using, I think.

Susan Page: More targeted attacks, once directed, more directly at Hamas. Not this block-to-block devastation we've seen, even in now most recently in a place that had been designated by Israel as a safe zone.

Brian Lehrer: No policy changes on the horizon as far as you could tell?

Susan Page: Well, so far as I can tell, I don't see a withdrawal of support for Israel. I guess the route that would take would be to cut back on military assistance. I haven't heard any talk about that. No. On the list of tough problems that the United States faces and the President faces, this would definitely be toward the top of that list.

Brian Lehrer: Last question. This is for you who wrote the book a few years ago, The Matriarch: Barbara Bush and the Making of an American Dynasty. I see you also wrote an article upon the passing of Rosalynn Carter recently. We know that she had a close working relationship with President Carter. She had his ear on policy. A few people have looked at first ladies as closely as you have. What do you think people should remember about Rosalynn Carter that maybe they don't think to look at, but that you might know to look at because of your experience covering them?

Susan Page: Rosalynn Carter was very reserved in public. She wasn't a great public speaker. She was a tough interviewee too. I can tell you having interviewed her a couple of times. Yet she was a huge groundbreaker for first ladies. She was the first First Lady to do a series of things that now every First Lady who followed her has done.

She, for instance, had an office in the East Wing. No First Lady had done that. She went to cabinet meetings and took notes. Some people were appalled by that. She adopted a cause that she pursued to legislation on the issue of mental health, something she pursued then for the rest of her life. She was a really crucial advisor to Jimmy Carter. In fact, Jimmy Carter strategist told me that she had better political instincts than he did. He was a pretty fiercely competitive guy, but so was she. I think that some of the things she did didn't get attention just because her manner was quieter, but her actions were, in fact, in their own way, pretty remarkable and changed the definition of the Office of First Lady.

Brian Lehrer: Susan Page, Washington Bureau Chief for USA Today. Again, thanks a lot for some working time here on the holiday week. Happy New Year to you. We'll talk to you in 2024.

Susan Page: Hey, thank you, Brian.

 

 

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.