Morning Joe - GOP campaigns weigh the impact of Trump's involvement

Episode Date: September 8, 2026

September 8, 2026: 7am — GOP campaigns weigh the impact of Trump's involvement To listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads, sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

We are back at 714 here on the East Coast. President Trump reportedly pushing to increase his involvement in Republican campaigns as we approach the midterm elections less than two months away. But there is concern, to put it mildly, from some Republican candidates that an appearance from the president whose poll numbers have fallen precipitously could hurt their campaigns. Politico interviewed more than two dozen Republican lawmakers, operatives, and candidates about the president's role in the election. According to that outlet, many privately admit they're stuck in an uncomfortable. spot by running too far from Trump, Republicans risk alienating the MAGA faithful or the president himself, whose super PAC is sitting on more than $400 million they desperately need deployed to help them win key races. But if the candidates keep Trump close, they could be dragged down by the president as the unpopular war in Iran has increased costs for Americans across the country. Meanwhile, Axios is reporting this morning, most Republicans are getting behind the president's all about me midterm strategy, even if some think it could. cost them a little credibility.

One top Republican campaign official who's in contact with Trump's political operation told Axios, quote, we're stuck on the boat with him, whether we like it or not. This comes as the president prepares to speak at both nights of the party's midterm convention and as two new ads from the pro-Trump Super PAC MAGA Inc. focused largely on Trump rather than on the Republicans who are on the ballot this fall. Joining the conversation, senior writer at the dispatch columnist at Bloomberg Opinion, David Drucker and publisher of the bulwark and hosts of the Focus Group podcast, Sarah Longwell. She's the author of the new book, How to Eat an Elephant, one voter at a time.

Jonathan Lemire, Katty Kay, still with us. Good morning, everyone. Sarah, congratulations on the book. We'll talk about it in just a minute. But just first year impression, obviously this is a district by district, race by race, question of how close you want to hug or how far you want to shun Donald Trump. But what is that conundrum, as you see it, for Republicans trying to win elections this fall? I mean, Trump is just deeply unpopular, even with his own voters.

You know, one of the problems for Trump by doing unilaterally both the tariffs and the Iran war is he never made the case to the American public. He certainly didn't make the case to Congress. And now he is deeply tied to both of those things. And both the tariffs and the war have negative personal consequences for the voters. They are feeling them themselves. And so I do focus groups all the time, multiple times a week. I listen to voters constantly. they are actively angry about the war in Iran. And the reason is, is not only is it hurting them

financially raising gas prices, but it is a betrayal of everything Trump said he was going to do. Voters, especially people who aren't super plugged into politics, they hired him to do two things. Lower prices, not getting us into stupid wars. He is not lowering prices. Gas prices are not political. That's something tangible they can see when they go to the station every day, John. It seems though this is a president who cannot accept a world where his influence is not a positive one. He believes that just by virtue of his force of will, by going somewhere, he can tip the scales in the direction of Republicans. But that's, as Sarah points out, just not true in many races. No, he's always had that confidence in himself.

But AIDS tell me that after what he pulled off in 2024, which we should note, is a historic, remarkable, miraculous political recovery after January 6th, he feels like he can do anything. And he just assert his own reality. But in this case, it's not working. that this is we have seen these polls, his polls collapsed. We have seen Democrats fully expect take back the House. And look, there's at least a chance for a wave where we showed earlier in the show, all those tight Senate races. There's a scenario where a bunch of them, if not all of them, break blue.

And Joe Trump, though, is refusing to step off the stage. I'd argue this is a preview of what the Republicans are going to have to face. Here are the polls here for those looking at home. You know, that he is going to be grappling with his own irrelevancy before too long, when he's officially a lame duck. when he is when the political conversation officially turns to the race to replace him. And we're seeing getting a preview of it now, he's not going to step off the stage. He's making the ad campaigns about himself.

He's going to hit the road. He still thinks he's his own best messenger, but he's clearly not the Republicans' best messenger right now. He's his own best messenger when he's on the ballot. When he's not on the ballot, he's probably the worst messenger right now when you look at the numbers. So you look at the numbers on the economy. You look at the numbers on the cost of living on inflation. And what's driving these voters in 2026 are costs, costs and costs. I mean, that is the bottom line of it.

And Sarah, that's the problem with Donald Trump going out and campaigning and going off on attacking this person or that person talking about building a ballroom or a reflecting pool, talking about this grievance. or that grievance, if he were to actually go out and campaign across the country, and I highly doubt he will. But if he does do that, every speech, as Coral Roves said last week, is just going to be a reminder about how he's focused on his ballroom and not their rent, his reflecting pool, and not the cost of filling up their car so they can get to work. It is, it's the last thing. probably that Republicans need right now with Donald Trump's name not on the ballot. Yeah, he's like an albatross around their neck. And you actually hit on something.

You know, normally voters wouldn't pick up on a story like the ballroom or like the reflecting pool or the arch that a lot of times that Washington stuff isn't what voters kind of grab onto. However, in this case, it is the contrast. I hear it all the time from voters. They say, why does he keep talking about his ballroom when? And things are so bad when there's a war in Iran he can't get out of. And so voters are really aware that Donald Trump is distracted from the things that he said he was going to do.

And I can't tell you how many voters made sort of a Faustian bargain about Trump. They said, look, this guy's a businessman. I liked his first term economy. And therefore, I'll just take a flyer on him, even though I know, you know, he's not a very good person. And, you know, he's divisive. But they were willing to do it for the good economy. Man, I'll tell you, voters will tolerate a lot if they have a good economy. But if they don't and you're focused on all of these other things, they are out on you.

And so Donald Trump is really down to his hardcore base. And the problem for Republicans is a lot of those people are Trump-only voters. They're people who will turn out in droves when he is actually on the ballot, but they might stay home when he's not and it's not about him. So, David, obviously all of the polls are looking good for Democrats. And they'll look at those numbers that we put up at the beginning. and those state-by-state races. But there are a couple of things that I have heard that are kind of caveats.

And I'm sure, you know, this is something that Sarah focuses on as well. But one is that several of those races are within the margin of error, right? You've got Michigan up to Texas up to, I or up one. Those are very tight. They could fall either way. The second thing that I've heard

as a point of concern from Democrats is that Democrats recently have tended to over-poll. What are you hearing on both of those things and are they things that Democrats, that should kind of add a doubt? dose of reality as Democrats start to get pretty optimistic about their chances in November? Yeah, well, I think the first thing, Katty, is the map, right? I mean, you look at Democratic chances of winning back the Senate, and it's a gauntlet march through a host of

red states. And what we've seen in this polarized era, the Trump era, but even preceding Donald Trump as president, is that a lot of these states have abandoned split-ticket voting, voters don't tend to do that in races for Congress anymore. And so these cultural polarizing issues will pull voters back to where they feel the most comfortable. It's really instructive that not since 2006 have we had a two-chamber flip in a wave, right? In 2010, we had a one chamber flip to the Republicans, a historic gain. They gained a lot of Senate seats. They couldn't get over the hump in the Senate.

2014, they finally get it done. You look at 2018, Democrats gained 40 seats in the House. They lost a couple of Senate seats on net. 22, Republicans barely win the House. Democrats gain a Senate seat. And that's just a reflection of where the country is. And the other thing I think we have to remember, and look, Democratic professionals understand this,

is we tend to look at these waves cumulatively as this party won that many seats, this party lost that many seats, usually within these big gains, you have individual races that are razor thin. That includes House races and Senate races. And so Democrats have been through this before. At least their advisors have. Their consultants have. And I don't think anything is going to surprise them.

But I think for voters looking at polls and trying to make heads or tails of it, what they have to understand is even in years where a normal president isn't a hicker on his party, let alone Trump. These are super close race. and given political polarization across the country, we actually haven't seen what the polls are suggesting in quite some time. Yeah, I mean, and David, let's continue talking, going down the list of the caveats. First of all, the polling hasn't been accurate in many cases, and it has leaned pro-democratic. You also, though, have Donald Trump still trying to interfere with the U.S. Post Office and Melon,

voting, going back to the Supreme Court yet again. He's not going to let that issue die, even as people are about to start voting early in North Carolina. You've had Mark Wayne Mullen over the weekend talking about sending ice to polling places. That obviously is going to cause huge concerns and problems, and I'm sure some court filings. And then you have Donald Trump. I mean, anybody who thinks Donald Trump's going to sit back and not provide an October surprise of some kind. They just don't know Donald Trump. So add all of these caveats up, does that look at it all together like any opportunity for the Republicans

to hold under the House? Or is that considered even by most Republicans in the House to be a lost cause? So the Republicans that I'm talking to, and I mean I'm talking to Republicans that have been doing this quite a long time, Joe, as long as we've been talking about it. And they don't feel any better about all of this stuff. You know, one of my sources said, Donald Trump's our best surrogate. You know, he could be helpful.

I said, but what's he going to talk about? My source was like, oh, yeah, never mind. I don't think we know for sure what all of this means because we haven't seen it before. So I don't want to act like I've already figured out that none of this is a problem. What I will tell you is that Republicans are acting like they don't have any particular help here. The one caveat, I would say that we do know exists is this. Because of midterm redistricting, mid-decade redistricting that we just went through and the failure of Virginia on the legal front to keep the change in house districts in that state, there are in particular far fewer

competitive house seats than there otherwise would be in a cycle where the president's numbers are as bad as they are. Right. So in 2018, in 2006, in 2010, we had dozens and dozens and dozens of competitive house districts that could flip. And that number is just much smaller this time around. And so the opportunities for gains on the House side are much smaller. And that's why I think you have to keep a closer eye on the House than you otherwise would. David Drucker will be reading your latest work at the dispatch and Bloomberg opinion. David, thanks so much.

Sarah, let's talk about the book. and the Trump era, really, because you are to be commended along with a list of others who I don't want to leave anybody off. But there are a group of them who have remained true to your principles in this Trump era. You are conservative and you've stayed that way as conservatism. The definition has changed and kind of just become Trumpism. You work on Republican campaigns and you've stayed right there as it's drifted away from you. So part of what you write in this book and you say, how to eat an elephant, not just how to win elections to unseat Republicans who you think deserves. to be unseated, but how, in the bigger picture, kind of to pull America back from this era of

maga politics and personality cult and all those things. So where do you begin whenever this day ends? Yeah, well, the reason I call it how to eat an elephant one voter at a time is it's about how to solve a big intractable problem, which is not just Trump, but also Trump voters. And I think right after the 2024 election, which is when I decided to write the book, I was hearing from so many people, they thought America's gone. We're never going to come back from this. Like the idea that we could elect a president who had done an insurrection, who had, you know, had lied about the election being stolen. How was it possible that America could reelect this person? But I knew the answer because I had been listening to voters in focus groups day in and day out ever since I started them because

I was trying to primary Trump back in, you know, 2018, 29. I was trying to figure out how do you beat this guy? And in listening to voters all of these years, there's a bunch of things that have become really clear. But one of them is that they're ever changing. And also that Donald Trump is a super specific person. There's not a lot of people who can come along and do what he's done. And he has hollowed out the Republican Party to such a degree that in a post-Donald Trump world, this party has no idea how to function. And my pitch to people is to say, America is not lost.

And in fact, we have a generational opportunity to take MAGA and sort of bury it in the ash heap of history where it belongs. But it's going to require Democrats figuring out how to go on offense, figuring out how to go back to reaching a lot of these working class voters that they've lost, them rebuilding a multiracial working class coalition where Republicans have done a good job of kind of eating their lunch on that. Like one of the things that I hear from voters all the time is enormous, frustration with Republicans, and yet they don't want to vote for Democrats. So why is that? And I have a lot

of theories in the book, a lot of things I've heard from Democrats, Republicans, swing voters, about how you go on offense and ultimately seize this generational opportunity to take this whole movement and push back on it. It is going to take some real effort in time, though, to unwind. Because it's just striking, just the ecosystem that's been created around Trump. You're right about the Republican Party. Think of how the Republicans in Congress, that makeup has changed since 2016 to now. These are loyalists. These are Trumpists, far more than Republicans, with only a handful of exceptions. There's a whole media ecosystem around him. Influencers, podcasts, the list goes on and going on. How is that going to do? Do you think that just disappears? Like, how does that, what's the work

that requires to undo that? No, I don't think it disappears. I do think it starves a little bit. And so part of my real pitch here is, how do you feed a sort of bigger coalition at a time when that whole media ecosystem that's been built around Trump and circulates around Trump, and circulates around Trump, all the sudden it doesn't have the food that it needs, right? It's got this entire influencer community. They're not going to bat for J.D. Vance. This is, Trump has so remade the Republican Party. And then he's also kind of split it, right? There are your America First Republicans, your Tucker Carlson's, your Marjorie Taylor Green. Those guys are moving in one direction. And then there's the MAGA establishment. And this is your Mike Johnson. This is

your Marco Rubio. Those factions don't have something to hold them together, which without Trump. And so if Democrats could figure out how they can hold a coalition together, a big broad pro-democracy coalition that focuses on people's material well-being, which is what voters desperately want, their physical and material well-being to be taken care of, I think that this version of MAGA will be able, it can wither and die basically for want of anything that looks like Donald Trump. So, Sarah, help me out here. Because I, I agree with you. Donald Trump, like Reagan, like Barack Obama, one of a kind for his time.

There is, just as there was no follow up with Reaganism or Barack Obama success won't be for Trump. That said, I still hear, and I'm curious what you're here in focus groups. I still hear people in conversations. Yeah, Trump's crazy. Yeah, I wish we had a sane person. person in the White House. But at least he's better than the other side. And, you know, back in 2004, it was gay marriage. And then, you know, they moved on to immigration, even though when Trump was talking about building his wall, you know, cross border, border crossings from Mexico, we're at a 50-year low. Of course, that changed very quickly. Then it was after immigrants, it was trans issues. Now it's DSA. There's all, you know, they always pick something.

Republicans do, and they always use it effectively. So people go, yeah, these people, they work against our economic interest. Yeah, they're crazy, but at least they're not Democrats. So how do Democrats handle that? I do hear that all the time, especially from swing voters. And there's a few places where Democrats are really out of step with the vast majority. of sort of the swingier electorate. And obviously, look, you mentioned immigration.

Donald Trump is interesting because the wall, he never built the wall. And voters didn't hold him responsible for not building the wall. Why? Because talking about the wall was a stand-in for Donald Trump saying, I'm going to take immigration seriously at a time when voters are really frustrated that nobody is taking immigration seriously. And so he never had to build the wall. He just had to focus on things that voters were frustrated about.

I would say Mom Dani in New York is sort of a similar, he does a similar thing where it's a lot of his individual policies around groceries and, you know, transportation. They're not particularly good policies, but voters didn't care about those policies. What they cared about was he was talking about affordability. He was talking about the things that were bothering them. And so I just, I do think that Donald Trump does not have, while Democrats are struggling to figure a, few things out. They've got to say, look, the border's got to be closed. They've got to understand that Republicans are going to try to move the conversation on trans issues, not to whether or not trans people should be treated with dignity and respect and not discriminated against, because the

vast majority of Americans agree with that. Where they don't agree with them is on sports. And Democrats are going to have to figure out how to talk about this issue in a way that both, I think, acknowledges people's humanity in the way that Republicans don't, acknowledges people's dignity, but also on some of those 70-30 issues aren't forced into such extreme positions. I'll just say very quickly, look, I came up during the gay marriage debate. And one thing that we understood as advocates for gay marriage on the Republican side was that, you know, we were going to have to give politicians some space on that. Barack Obama wasn't for gay marriage in 2008.

And the advocacy community understood they had to persuade people of that before they asked politicians to take a tough position on something that voters didn't agree. with and I think that the advocacy community is going to have to give some Democratic politicians some space on this because Democrats would obviously be better for trans people in the long run. So there's just a few places where Democrats do have to sort of get in a better position with the American public, but then they've also really got to think about building a bench of better communicators. Democrats cannot rely on, you know, generational politicians every single time. they have to build a much bigger bench of people who are out there communicating with voters.

Donald Trump and Republicans have practiced a kind of narrative dominance for so long that Democrats live on defense. They've got to find a way to get on offense on these issues. The new book, How to Eat an Elephant, one voter at a time, is out today, author, publisher of the bulwark, and host of the Focus Group podcast, Sarah Longwell. Thank you very much for coming on the show. congratulations on the book. And still ahead on Morning Joe,

while the trade war between the U.S. and Canada escalates. Mexico is watching closely. Mexico's ambassador to the United States joins us next to talk about how his country is navigating its relationship with the U.S. You're watching Morning Joe. We'll be right back. Beautiful live picture, New York City 740 on this Tuesday after Labor Day weekend. this week in New York City. Mexico is looking to continue to strengthen its economic ties with the U.S.

as the countries navigate a relationship divined by both deep partnership and political tension. Mexico Investment Week kicks off today, runs through Thursday. It's bringing together U.S. investors, financial institutions, and Mexican government and business leaders to highlight investment opportunities in Mexico. The event comes as the U.S. and its southern neighbor remain deeply interconnected, of course, on trade and investment despite friction over tariffs. security and migration. Join us now, the Mexican ambassador to the United States, Roberto Lazzari. Mr. Ambassador, thanks for being with us this morning.

So this actually, this Mexican investment, we started about 10 years ago, perhaps as a bit of a boondoggle for some people, but now it's gotten, it's a decade in. Tell us a little bit more about what you seek here. Yeah, thanks so much for having me. I appreciate the space. Basically, 10 years ago, the Capital Market Association and some other players in the investment and the financial sector in Mexico decided to come here to have an enhanced conversation with investors.

And now it has developed into an overhauling effort with the whole embassy, with all the sectors. And so you're going to have the biggest bankers, business people from Mexico trying to engage with their counterparts in the U.S. And at the end, what we want is to show the world that Mexico is still the best place to invest. Also, John, U.S. Open Week. That's nice, too.

Yeah, let's be on. Not a bad week to be in New York. Yeah. So, Mr. Ambassador, let's talk writ large in terms of the relationship between the United States and Mexico right now. Certainly, tensions high between the U.S. and Canada at this moment. We've been covering that all day. With Mexico, certainly President Trump has used pretty harsh rhetoric of Mexico at times. But things seem a little calmer in that relationship, though we should note.

Every so often, there are some threats of, like, a military campaign against the cartels and the like. Talk to us. Do you think that is something that could actually happen? And how would you categorize the relationship between these two governments right now? Actually, I was asked this question when I was in my confirmation hearing at the Senate, and I set that Mexico and U.S. relationship at the highest of collaboration, from the illicit finance front to the security and migration front. So honestly, I do believe that we have achieved a lot.

We have a President Schema who has historical approval and the biggest mandate in the history of our country. We have President Trump who has an enhanced mandate. So I think this has basically allowed us to have additional understanding, and you see it in the results. The homicide rate has decreased in Mexico. The fentanyl that's had decreased in the United States. So at the end, I will say what we're doing is working, and we should keep at it. How we want to frame the relationship is we have a shared but differentiated responsibility. So each on their own has to do their own part to tackle every problem with a bilateral relationship.

So Mr. Ambassador, so if, if you're on their own own part, to tackle every problem with a bilateral relationship. So, Mr. Ambassador, so if I'm coming to this conference, and I just happen to have investors who have a few extra billion dollars that want to invest, why Mexico? What separates Mexico from Canada, from Europe, from other countries? I will say at this point, the conversation regarding the economic environment is the access to the biggest markets, and the U.S. is for sure the biggest. market. But also if you at Canada and Mexico, you have the biggest consolidated regional market. So at the end, what we're seeing and we're always talking about trade tensions, I will say Mexico, the U.S. and Canada, we have a car production system. So basically, if the discussion is that we want to resure all the investments, we want to have secure supply chains, then Mexico

and Canada are the answer. And specifically Mexico to this equation adds a lot of productivity and a young population and a very active workforce. So at some point in what we're seeing as a reshuffling and a redrawing on the industrial map, Mexico has a big role to play, and that's why we're inviting investors to come and talk about what are the opportunities regarding these poverty sectors

and the new trends of the economy. So Ambassador President Scheinbaum has won a lot of applause really around the world for the way that she handled Donald Trump with sort of a cool head, but also a lot of firmness as well. But then over the course of this weekend, the president posted a meme that showed the American flag passed it all over Mexico,

and President Scheinbaum responded with a tweet saying, we will never be a protectorate or a colony. When he lashes out like this or posts memes like this, how do you decide when to respond and not to respond to the president? When do you think it is effective to draw a line like she did publicly by calling him out? And when do you keep quiet? I believe President Shambound is very good at just pointing the aspects that every Mexican knows.

We are very much very well of our sovereignty of what we are as a country. And I think it's a message for the people that that perspective and that point of view will never change. But at some point, the work that we're doing on a daily basis with our U.S. counterparts, it's far from these posts or things that could become. We are working on a daily basis to have better understanding, better access to our own markets. So we should focus on that. We should focus on building a bilateral relation that actually works for our national plan. National plan is plan Mexico.

It's a rebamping of all the industrial best to the benefit of the people. So we have in mind the benefit of the people, as President Chienbaum says, cool heads should prevail. So we can focus on the important things. You're one of the lead negotiators on the USMCA, which was an achievement of the Trump, in 2020 opening trade, continued trade. So when the president says we don't really need Mexico, like he did on Friday, he said, you're only good for hot tamales and tomatoes, we can get those elsewhere, and that we lose a bunch of money to Mexico every year.

What's your reaction to that? Our reaction is that we actually are better together. I don't know if we're talking about needs or wants, but I've been around the country for some time in these past months. I've been in Texas a lot, and you can speak to the people in Texas, Republican or Democrats, they are well aware of what the relationship with Mexico represents. So I honestly think that we are, and I think that's what we're doing with Secretary Lovnik and Ambassador Greer, to making the point that we are better together.

And at the point we're so convinced about that, that we do believe that is the best economic thesis for the region. Mexican ambassador to the United States, Roberto Lazari. Great to have you in New York this morning. Thanks for joining us. Thank you. Coming up, our next guest says, you cannot form and grow effective relationships without a battle. New York Times best-selling author, Priya Parker,

joins us with a look at her new book, The Art of Fighting. Morning Joe's coming right back. All right, you know what? I don't want to get into some nasty fight, so can we please talk to each other the way the therapist told us to talk to each other? Fine. Fine.

It makes me feel sad when you are dishonest. I understand it makes you feel bad when I am dishonest with you. It hurts my feelings when you treat me with contempt and corner me and try and trick me. into lying. Okay. It makes me sad when it's so easy to trick you into lying because you're such a lying bag. That's not, you can't do that. You can't do that. The therapist said you're not allowed to judge me. That's not a judgment. That's just a fact. Oh man, Leslie Mann and Paul Rudd, so good from

the hit comedy. This is 40 might sound like odd advice, but our next guest says we all need to fight more because conflict is key to our relationships. That's the premise of the new book. The art of fighting, the transformative power of conflict. Join us now, New York Times bestselling author, the brilliant Priya Parker. She's trained in the field of conflict. Resolution has worked with Fortune 500 companies, nonprofits, universities, civic organizations, and other groups around the world to resolve issues and to come together in a more intentional way.

Priya, it's so good to see you. Congratulations on this book. Thank you. You were laughing along with us at that clip because it may be a little familiar to some people. But let's talk first about the kind of fighting we're talking about. When you say fighting, what are you addressing in the book? The message of this book may surprise a lot of you, which is, I don't think we are fighting too much. I think we are not fighting enough, but I think we're doing it badly. And so much of what we see in this country is what I call unhealthy heat, unhealthy conflict.

So cancellation, online mobs, sort of aggressiveness, insulting, or unhealthy peace, which we see a lot of political parties where a lot of people know things are going very wrong, but no one has the courage to say anything. I work in a lot of organizations, enter. Everyone knows the flaming truths at the center of them. No one's saying anything. And part of what we actually need is what I call healthy heat, which is the ability to actually. to actually hold tension with care to get us somewhere new. And so the art of fighting is an invitation

to have closer connection with the people you love by learning how to fight well. It feels like in the public square anywhere, there's so much bad faith fighting that goes on. I'm on this side, you're on that side. So I'm going to attack, not your argument, but your character, find something out about you that

undermines what you're saying. How do we get away from that, especially in the era of social media? I mean, so much of our fights tend to be framed with the other, like screaming at strangers on the internet. And the core question in the art of fighting is actually how do we fight with the people we want to belong to? And when we only look at fighting, like if you think about the Democrats, and Sarah was on earlier, and she's talking about going across and trying to kind of convince Republicans, one of our biggest problems is we

don't know how to have the fights within. And so the first step is actually how do we have the big conversations within the Democratic Party, within the DSA, between the Democrats and the DSA that are focused on relational longing with the people who you are wanting to actually build a better world with because then you're not going out there and being defensive and saying we're not them. You're actually able to articulate who you are because you've had the fights to figure out the answer. So we'll certainly accept the premise that you conflict is because you care, right? If you didn't care and you didn't fight, that would be a real problem too. So, okay, so what are some of the ways to fight better? Add warmth to heat.

So one of the biggest surprises as I restarts the art of fighting was how important humor is in conflict. And it's kind of ironic because it's really hard to fight. It's really hard to be funny when you're mad. But I actually think this show, I think Morning Joe does this really well. I think you all add warmth to heat. You banter. You keep inviting people back. You folk you're not afraid to disagree.

But there's an underlying relationship. You can feel y'all want to be here. You have guests. I mean, I know Joe and my husband on in this. Girda Das on here regularly. Some of the best fights of his life are on the show. And it's helpful because we're sorting out how you actually think about the core questions of our life. But if there's one thing I learned in the art of fighting is you have to tap into the relational longing, the desire to keep coming back. And so a good way, whether it's within your organization,

whether it's in your workplace, whether it's within your political party, is to also focus on the underlying relationship and not get sort of a, fractured and brittle. But even as it's hard, maintaining warmth, even as you're fighting. Don't you find Priya 2 in your work that the minute you get face to face with someone, there's respect, even if you completely disagree, you think they're wrong or maybe they're even bad in some way, that online gives you the easy, you write the ugly thing and then you walk away from your phone, but getting in a room with someone seems critical. Our digital tools are not designed for healthy heat. They're actually designed to exacerbate

conflict. I spoke to a digital anthropologist for the art of fighting named Rahaf Harfush, and she said, if y'all are in a group chat and it starts to get really tense, her number one, a digital anthropologist, her number one tip, get off the chat, pick up the phone and call the person or get in a room. So when we're online, we flatten, we perform, we do all of the things that actually exacerbate unhealthy heat. I mean, the best way to actually grow your followership is to pick a beef with someone, that ain't good. Right, right. That is deeply unhealthy heat, but a lot of people have grown up with these tools and they don't even know how to have healthy heat in a room with somebody. They'd rather just text somebody and hope it goes away. I mean, part of what I look at

the art of fighting is where are places that are practicing healthy heat? And one of the places is in restaurants that expect conflict in every night of service. I look at a restaurant called Canlis in the Pacific Northwest, fine dining, and they bake conflict and conflict skills. They have two rooms in their restaurant. One is called the hooch. One is called the cachet, where if stuff, if tension grows across the staff, someone literally rings the bell or yells out, take it to the hooch. And they're taught the skills to go and sort it out with one another so that they can come back in and be a strong team together. And so, I mean, in our schools, so often when we, you're in terms of the digital tools, when we teach our kids how to actually apologize, how to slow it down,

and also on the other side, articulate what I did wrong. We always think, oh, how do we make sure that they apologize? But we also need to learn how to let the arrow pierce to be able to literally say, this is what I did, and take ownership, builds the civic skills. This is a civic habit that's actually related to our democracy to be able to understand where and how we can be in healthy conversation with each other.

And contrary to what we see in public life, that apology and humility is a show of strength, believe it or not. We need a good hooch in America. We need a hooch. We need a national hooch. We need a national hooch. And, Willie, I want you to know that I care enough to fight with you. Thank you.

We'll continue our daily battles around this table. The new book is The Art of Fighting, The Transformative Power of Conflict, available now. New York Times best-selling author, Priya Parker. Thanks so much. Congrats on the book. Come back soon. Thank you for having me. And the next hour of morning, Joe, begins right now.