Morning Joe - Morning Joe 12/28/23

Episode Date: December 28, 2023

IDF expands operations in refugee camps

Governor Abbott has made it clear he wants to destabilize cities and send in thousands of migrants and asylum seekers here to the city. We have to address. I have to navigate this city out of it. The bottom line is I'm the mayor and it's my obligation and responsibility to find the solutions, even if we're not getting the help that we deserve from Washington, D.C. That is New York City Mayor Eric Adams again calling out the Republican governor of Texas and the Biden administration. We'll go through the mayor's executive action to address the busing of migrants from the border as the tension continues to grow between the Democratic mayor and the president of the United States. This all comes as Secretary

of State Antony Blinken met yesterday with Mexico's president to discuss what can be done about the surge of migrants with another caravan moving toward the border. Also ahead this morning, Nikki Haley making headlines this morning for her response to a question about the Civil War. Wasn't a hard one. We'll show you that exchange from a campaign stop in New Hampshire. Plus, another warning about Donald Trump's plans for a second term, this time coming from Ron DeSantis, one of his opponents for the Republican primary. Good morning. Welcome to Morning Joe. It is Thursday, December 28th. I'm Willie Geist. Joe and Mika have the morning off with us. Host of Way Too Early, White House Bureau Chief at Politico, Jonathan Lemire, and former White House Director of Communications to President Obama, Jennifer Palmieri. Great to have you both along for the morning. Let's get right into it. Israeli forces

moving forward with their expanded operations in refugee camps in Gaza. Yesterday, the IDF launched new strikes across the region targeting shelters where they believe Hamas terrorists are hiding. Officials say troops also are fighting in the northern part of the Gaza Strip, and Israel's Navy has attacked targets along Gaza's coastline. NBC News senior national correspondent Jay Gray is in Tel Aviv with more on Israel's offensive. But first, NBC News foreign correspondent Josh Letterman takes us inside what the Israeli military says is one of Hamas's largest tunnel systems in Gaza. Ever since this war started, Israel has been saying that the Hamas move to build tunnels underneath civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip was one of the reasons that it is so difficult for Israel to conduct this war without

potentially putting the lives of civilians in danger. And today we got a firsthand look inside what Israel says is the largest Hamas tunnel discovered during this war so far. It's about 10 feet tall with concrete walls. It's actually able for a car to be driven into it based on the width and the fact that there is a declining slope from the surface of the earth into this tunnel. Israel says that this is only about a quarter mile from the Israeli border, but that it extends some two and a half miles into Gaza toward Gaza City. Now, NBC News cannot independently verify what Hamas was using that tunnel for, whether it was used for any military purposes or how recently it was inhabited. But NBC was invited to tour this tunnel by the IDF as they are really working to bolster

their claims about how Hamas and their few has jeopardized the safety of their own civilian population. As Israel says that there are hundreds of these types of tunnels throughout the Gaza Strip. The Israeli government now looking for ways to try to destroy these tunnels, even as they say that getting every single one of them is going to be a very difficult task. But they say it is critical that Israel be able to root out these tunnels if they are going to be able to accomplish their goal of completely eliminating Hamas. Let's begin on the ground in Gaza, where the offense is expanding in the central portion of the strip outside of Gaza City. The IDF now saying it is targeting some of the refugee camps in that area, calling the areas, quote, a new battlefield,

saying that Hamas has mingled in amongst those who have left their homes for an area that they were told would be safe and now must find somewhere else to go. Adding to the chaos, the panic on the ground there, the fact that there continues to be a communications blackout, so no cell phones, no internet. So that's making it much more difficult for those trying to find someplace where they can be safe. The fighting is very intense in very densely populated urban areas, and the IDF says that they will continue this effort for as long as necessary while continuing airstrikes to the north. And over the last 24 hours saying that they have indeed killed a senior Hamas military leader. They haven't said who at this point and that they've hit more than 100 targets

in that 24-hour time. The Hamas-run Palestinian health ministry says that more than 250 people have died during that same time period. Israel says that they are dealing now with seven other fronts to this war, seven other areas where they are taking and responding to fire, and says that everyone who acts against us is a potential target. There's concern not only here in Israel, but globally about the regional escalation of fighting to the north along the Lebanon border. We know that the Israeli Air Force carried out a raid in the last 24 hours on what they say are military sites and other infrastructure belonging to Hezbollah.

And let's remember, American troops across the region have been targeted as well, more than 100 times since the middle of October, with no expectation that those attacks will ease anytime soon. In Tel Aviv, I'm Jay Gray. Back to you. NBC's Jay Gray and Josh Letterman reporting for us there from Israel. You heard Jay mention Hezbollah, a member of Israel's war cabinet, is threatening to open a second front along the country's northern border with Lebanon. The Iranian-backed group Hezbollah has been firing rockets into Israel since the war with Hamas began. Earlier this week, the group struck a Greek Orthodox church, injuring two Israeli Christians. Now, former Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz is warning, quote, if the world and the Lebanese government don't act in order to prevent the firing on Israel's northern residents, the IDF will do it. A spokesperson for

Prime Minister Netanyahu's office appears to support that view, saying either Hezbollah backs off or Israel will push it away themselves. The Israeli military says its northern command is, quote, in a state of very high readiness. Joining us now, national security reporter for Politico, Alex Ward, and senior correspondent at Foreign Policy, Michael Hirsch. Good morning to you both, Alex. I'll start with you. You heard Jay say it. It kind of stopped you in your tracks, talking about a six or seven front war for Israel. And obviously, as Jay also mentioned, American troops in Iraq and Syria have been targeted. So is this part of what Hamas was looking for on October 7th with that heinous

attack was to provoke Israel into just this kind of war? I'm not sure Hamas expected it to be this wide. They were definitely expecting a massive reaction in Gaza itself, which they have definitely received. The fact that it has gotten as broad as it has at this point is perhaps beyond Hamas's expectations. We should note, of course, that, you know, the Houthi attacks, which they say are in response to Israel's retaliation in Gaza. Of course, what's going on with Hezbollah, all of this is sort of tangentially and around that central conflict. They haven't necessarily broken out into, you know, major fighting. They are, of course, there's been the deaths and there's been skirmishes, but it hasn't gone to the all out stage like Israel, Hamas.

That is still, of course, a concern. And that I think Hamas would see as a culmination of their heinous attack. And so, Michael, I guess the question has to be raised. Can Israel, is Israel capable, even with the support of the United States, of fighting a war on six or seven fronts to the north, in Gaza, of course, in some ways in the West Bank and across the region? What would that even look like? Oh, it would be very ugly indeed. Capable, yes. But the Biden administration is rather desperately trying to prevent it from happening, particularly on the northern front with Hezbollah, because that would truly inflame the region, bringing Iran in a much more direct way than Iran has been so far and could go on for years.

I mean, the Israelis are already warning that this conflict with far and could go on for years. I mean, the Israelis are already warning that this conflict with the Palestinians could go on for years. This would be rather a nightmarish turn of events. So, Alex, let's talk about this with the backdrop of the threat of a expanded war. We've had some high level diplomacy between Israel and the Biden administration in recent days. A close Netanyahu advisor was in D.C., met with Secretary of State Blinken, met with National Security Advisor Sullivan this week. We also now know that Secretary Blinken heading back to Israel in the coming days. Tell us what we know now in terms of the latest, in terms of the impasse,

the real difference of opinion right now between Washington and Israel as to how the Netanyahu administration is conducting this war? Yeah, I mean, the biggest division here is that you have Israel saying that this war is going to last months, maybe years, as Michael noted. And then you have the U.S. saying that now is the time to wind down the all-out operations, that now is the time to go after high-value targets, minimize the harm on civilians, minimize the widespread bombing campaign. Today, I read a report preparing for this, that there were folks in some of the refugee camps that felt that the bombardments overnight were as large as sort of the earliest days of this war. And so that is where the big

division is. The U.S. is really trying to get Israel to wind down operations. It's unclear that that's going to happen. The messaging, at least in public, they are completely far apart. So if the efforts of this diplomacy was to get Israel to change course, we haven't seen any evidence that that's going to happen anytime soon. Michael, while the Biden administration is managing its relationship with Israel, it's doing the same with Ukraine. The Biden administration announcing more assistance for Ukraine yesterday as part of another weapons drawdown from U.S. stockpiles.

The $250 million package includes artillery shells, air defense equipment, anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, as well as small arms ammunition. Officials say this latest batch of weapons could be the last from U.S. stockpiles unless Congress approves new funding for Ukraine. So, Michael, you've got new reporting for Political Magazine on the inside discussions between the Biden administration and European allies surrounding the war in Ukraine, specifically that both are now shifting their focus away from total victory and toward a negotiated path to end the war. So this is something that's been floated now for several

months, that there isn't probably going to be total victory. In other words, Ukraine at the end of this may not get back all it has lost during this war. So what is your sense of where those talks are and how Ukraine is feeling about them? Well, there aren't any talks yet, nor are there any planned. The Ukrainian position, that of President Zelensky, is, you know, we're not talking right now. And the only conditions for negotiation would be to start with complete Russian withdrawal, which, of course, is not going to happen. I think what's happening now is an attempt by the United States and Europe to set up the Ukrainians in a much stronger defensive posture to make Russian advances much more unlikely as we get into what is probably going to be a spring offensive

by Russia. I think there's a great fear that the Russians will bring in their very formidable air force in a way they haven't done so until now as the Ukrainians run out of air defense munitions. So there's a very quiet push going on to strengthen their hand at any future negotiating table, although there's a pretty, I think, good consensus at this point on the part of the United States and the Europeans that Putin is unlikely to come to the table until he sees who wins the United States presidential election in November. Well, you led me, Michael, to my next question. A negotiation requires somebody on the other side of that table. What is your sense of Vladimir Putin being willing to come to a negotiated end to this?

Of course, almost two years ago, he thought he was going to roll his tanks into Kiev and raise the flag over the capital there. That hasn't happened. He's been frustrated by that. Would he at some point, maybe after, as you say, after the 2024 election, sit down, talk and have a negotiated end to this war. Yeah, I mean, it's entirely possible. There was a New York Times report last week, which no one really has matched, indicating that Putin has signaled through back channels a willingness to talk, to keep what he's got, which is approximately 20 percent of Ukrainian territory in the east. There has been no indication of actual negotiations being planned.

I was a Biden administration official told me that that he knew of nothing like that. So there is a sense that at some point Putin might be willing to negotiate. And I think that would be particularly true if Joe Biden wins reelection and Donald Trump does not get back into the Oval Office, because there's a sense that Trump might he's he's indicated this himself, you know, quickly cut a deal with Putin that could leave the Ukrainians at a disadvantage. But, you know, I think it's going to be many months, possibly even more, you know, more than a year before we we know of any negotiations that might be underway. We know who Putin's rooting for in the upcoming American election. Senior correspondent at Foreign Policy, Michael Hirsch, national security reporter for

Politico, Alex Ward. Thank you both. We appreciate it. So, Jonathan Lemire, we just talked about the Department of Defense giving that last supply of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine. Now it comes back when everybody comes back from this holiday break to Congress and to whether they are willing to put forth money for Ukraine and for Israel as well, which, of course, has been tied up in their demands for something on border security. Is the president of the United States who you cover every day? Is he ready to sit down and give Republicans something on the border in order to keep the support flowing into Ukraine and Israel? He has telegraphed that he's willing to do so. It's just a question of what.

And there's a lot of internal pressure here among Democrats to not give Republicans too much, fearful of empowering the chief executive when potentially Donald Trump could take control of the White House again in a year or so and therefore be equipped to do more on the border. There's also concerns that, you know, from particularly progressive liberal Democrats who don't want to see too restrictive policies at the border, even though so many in this country do think something needs to be done there. President Biden, the White House, they've largely taken a hands off approach to these negotiations, Jen. But we have heard from the president saying he's willing to make a deal at the border. He wants to make a deal at the border. And I think it's for two reasons. One is, to Willie's point, he needs to make a deal at the border in order to keep the funding flowing to Israel and Ukraine. And Ukraine in particular right now seems to be at a pretty vulnerable point in this war. They'd be in real trouble if the U.S. funds disappeared. But also for his own political future, he needs to make a deal at the border because migration right now in the numbers are staggering in terms of how many people are trying to cross

the border is going to overshadow the 2024 election. The I think that they would, you know, the Ukraine and Israeli funding was sort of the the original impetus to be talking about border security. But we would be talking about border security. But we would be talking about border security, whether or not that was whether or not Ukraine and Israel were on the table with Congress right now. Regardless, I mean, images of caravans approaching the United States is an election. Your staple. It's an election staple. And it's and it's brutal. And I know, you know, I talked with the White House to earlier to see how they're feeling about these, you know, about the border security negotiations. And there is a chance that this could come together and actually actually get done. But there is you know, there is a big pressure to get something done.

There is the concerns about from, you know, from the left about giving away too much. But you look at those images coming from Mexico, and that is a tough thing entering the election year if you're not able to. Jen, when you talk to people inside the White House and you see the images you're describing there, you hear every day the Democratic mayor of New York City, the mayors and governors in Illinois and Chicago saying, please, please, we need your help. Biden administration, this is a completely untenable situation. We have 10,000 apprehensions a day. Border Patrol is saying this is a humanitarian crisis. We're not equipped to handle this. Does the Biden administration, does this White House, does the campaign now get that this is a real problem? This is not a creation of Fox News or whatever they may have thought it was in the past? Yeah, it's a yeah, it's a real problem. And I think what they you

know, they are hoping that Congress will actually get something done. And then absent that or alongside that, making sure people understand they have asked for more funding for the border that the Republicans have not acted on. They have been trying. They have put forward comprehensive immigration reform in different years that the Congress has not acted on. They have been trying. They have put forward comprehensive immigration reform in different years that the Congress has not acted on, that the Republicans in Congress in particular have not acted on. And, you know, it has been true since 2013, when the last time there was a very serious bipartisan effort to pass comprehensive immigration reform when President Biden was working with Republican Congress. And the underlying political vice there is Republicans like to talk about immigration

and make it a political issue, and they do not want to act on it because they don't actually want to solve the problem, or at least many of them don't. And so I think the Biden team needs to, they understand they need to make that argument as well. So if something doesn't get done, people understand who's preventing that. And just to expand on Jen's point there, Willie, I mean, there was progress made in the Senate before they went away on the holiday break. I think there is an appetite to deal in the upper chamber. The question is the house. The question is that what happens then with this new speaker who has the slimmest of margins, who is inherently barely hanging on to power, who has to deal with the radical right, who want significant demands and to Jen's point, may not even really want a deal. They just want to be

able to talk about immigration as we go into this campaign. So the Senate and the House may be two very different stories. And I also have heard some slight optimism towards a deal, but no one is taking it for granted that it's going to get done. Yeah, you're right. In the House, at least they certainly like this as an issue to hit the Biden administration on every day. Speaking of that race for the presidency coming up in one minute, we'll have an update on the Republican presidential campaign. Ron DeSantis trying to trim Donald Trump's lead in the polls by pointing out the former president's authoritarian plans for a second term. Plus, Nikki Haley's answer to a question about the Civil War. We'll show you what she said. Morning Joe back in just 60 seconds. Beautiful live picture of the United States Capitol, 620 on a Thursday morning.

Joining the conversation now, we've got White House correspondent for Politico and co-author of the playbook, Eugene Daniels. Gene, good morning. It's good to see you. Republican presidential candidate, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is warning Donald Trump is likely to use the power of government against his political opponents if he is reelected. In an interview with Real Clear Politics, DeSantis described how a second term would be focused on revenge and targeting his rivals, saying in part, Trump is fine with weaponization if it's against people he doesn't like. End quote. DeSantis cited an ethics complaint the Trump campaign filed against him earlier this year as one piece of evidence of Trump's willingness to use the government against his enemies. So no news here, really, Jen, other than it is a Republican who's been supportive broadly of of Donald Trump over the years coming out and saying publicly this guy is going to be an authoritarian. Now, we should pause and mention

if Ron DeSantis doesn't win the nomination, I'm sure he'll come right back around and circle the wagons around Donald Trump. But at least he's saying it for now. Well, he's saying it for now, although he also said that when Trump was indicted, he said that it was a weaponization of against of the federal government against against Trump. And this is a great argument to great argument to make to Republican voters. It probably would have is a great argument to make to Republican voters. It probably would have been a great argument to make to Republican voters all along in order if it was going to actually have an impact and move people, but move Republican voters DeSantis' way. It's almost January 1. We're about two and a half weeks away from the Iowa caucuses. And, you know, you can't now be making an argument that the indictments that we set along were politically

motivated, that Trump is also trying to weaponize the government against his opponents. Like, this isn't just going to work. Badlands, you got to live it every day, as we opened the segment with. It's like it's it's where DeSantis that's where DeSantis is living. Nicely done, Jen, right from New Jersey to your ears. So, Jean, let me ask you then about that, because it's two and a half weeks until the Iowa caucuses. This Republican primary field outside of Chris Christie has dipped its toe in Trump criticism. It has sort of had its moments where that's Nikki Haley or Ron DeSantis, where they push back ever so slightly,

but not ever fully. It just I think it strikes most political observers as a difficult way to defeat somebody if you're not willing to really go after him full throated. Yeah, Jen is completely right. Right. This is the argument that Ron DeSantis and others could have been making this entire time. Donald Trump has always made it very clear that he would use a second term to go after his political opponents. He has talked about the vindictiveness of a Trump 2025 and on for months and months and months. So this isn't new, right? And if you want someone's job, you have to say why you're better at the job. And they have not done that, right? And if you want someone's job, you have to say why you're better at the job. And they have not done that, right? They have tried to needle around it because they are worried

and scared of Trump supporters, right? They are worried that trying to get those folks on their side during this primary means trying to figure out how to be nice to Donald Trump. But that also means that there's no constituency. You don't have Donald Trump supporters liking you. And then the folks who maybe are never Trumpers or don't want to be Trumpers don't really have a reason to go to you either. Why go for, you know, the fake Coke, the Shasta when you have Coke standing right in front of you? That's what Republican voters have been looking at this entire time. This change probably isn't going to change a lot of minds in New Hampshire and Iowa for Ron DeSantis, especially when we're just days, a couple of weeks away

from things actually really kicking off. And so figuring out how he's going to continue to say that, especially if voter reporters ask him this question and ask him to go further, will be kind of something folks need to watch. And of course, Governor DeSantis has put most of his eggs in that Iowa basket. So he's got to do something right out of the gate here on the 15th of January. Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, during a campaign stop, Republican presidential candidate, former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, was asked this question by an audience member. Quote, what was the cause of the Civil War? This is how Governor Haley responded.

What was the cause of the United States Civil War? Well, don't come with an easy question or anything. I mean, I think the cause of the Civil War was basically how government was going to run, the freedoms and what people could and couldn't do. What do you think the cause of the Civil War was? I'm sorry? I'm not running for president. I want to listen to your opinion on the cause of the Civil War.

I mean, I think it always comes down to the role of government and what the rights of the people are. And I will always stand by the fact that I think government was intended to secure the rights and freedoms of the people. It was never meant to be all things to all people. Government doesn't need to tell you how to live your life. They don't need to tell you what you can and can't do. They don't need to be a part of your life. They need to make sure that you have freedom. We need to have capitalism. We need to have economic freedom. We need to make

sure that we do all things so that individuals have the liberties so that they can have freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to do or be anything they want to be without government getting in the way. Thank you. And then in the year 2023, it's astonishing to me that you answer that question without mentioning the word slavery. What do you want me to say about slavery? No, you answered my question. Thank you. Next question. So, Eugene, we can pick through that a million different ways. Perhaps the follow-up question where she says, what do you want me to say about slavery, is what stuck with most people as they watched that commentary on Governor Haley, perhaps, but also about the state of the Republican Party.

And as you watch the gears turning there, what she should and should not say in order to keep her support. Yeah, that's absolutely right. And if you watch the crowd as things were going downhill, you could start to see people kind of scream, get a little squeamish as she was answering those questions. You know, my family's always been from South Carolina. So I am very, very well versed on the conversation that happens. That was just earlier this week for Christmas. I'm very well versed in the conversation that happens versus, you know, whether it was states' rights or slavery, what was the real conversation.

So she's showing that, right, that she's a product of that conversation. This is also something in line with what she said before when asked, when running for governor in 2010 about slavery or about the cause of the Civil War. Obviously, it was about slavery. If it was about states' rights, it was the states' ability to hold slaves. If it was about freedoms and what the government could tell you what to do, it was whether or not the government could tell you whether or not you can own and beat people, rape and kill them, because they were your property, right? That is clear to everyone who has eyes and has read history books. But what she is showing is the fact that in the Republican Party right now, there is not a lot of room for folks who would say something like that, who would be honest

about slavery as the cause and the main cause of the Civil War. You know, you think about the last few years and what the Republican Party has focused on, the conversation about race in this country, their attacking of critical race theories. So there's almost no other answer that she could give in this Republican primary that wouldn't take some votes away from her as she is moving forward. I will say I got some texts from some of the staffers on the other campaigns of this exact message when it happened. But then when I asked them how their candidate would answer, they got a little little pissed off at me and said, you would never ask them that question. And so it tells you that while they want this to knock her, they don't want to answer the question either.

Jen, this shouldn't have been hard. Slavery is the answer here. But to to Eugene's point, it is reflective of where the Republican base is right now, that you can't tell a simple truth for fear of losing voters in what has become such a radicalized Republican Party. But let's take a step back and put this in the context of this primary season. I mean, we didn't quite have a Ron DeSantis welcome to the resistance moment there, but at least he's telling the truth about what Trump is going to do very late to the party. You feel like DeSantis is actually saying now what he has always thought, but not because his campaign appears to be in its death throats. He's got nothing left to lose, I suppose. But I wonder if this is going to this this moment here last night, Haley in the Civil War, which is really exploding on social media. We had the Biden campaign weigh in and already also making clear it was about slavery. This could blunt some of her momentum because it does seem like she has some, at least Iowa's always been hard for her,

but it seems like going to New Hampshire, she did have the wind at her back. Maybe this cost her. It's breathtaking. I mean, I had read the transcript, but I had not actually seen it. And it is just breathtaking when she says, what do you want me to say about slavery? I mean, that is her campaign in one question. Right. It is like, who do you want me to be right now? Who do I need to morph into in order to never take Trump on, but be acceptable enough to sort of the MAGA majority that should something happen outside of my control, because she's not doing anything to actually beat Trump, I could be the person that inherits everyone else's votes. And this could be, so, you know, this is in New Hampshire, right? That New Hampshire voters,

they don't, they want you to be courageous. They like independent thinkers. They want you to speak frankly. This could, you know, so I think that it could hurt her. And, you know, if DeSantis's operation is effective, they should be doing more to lift it up and make it a thing. But it also could have been a really big moment for her because she came on the national scene by becoming by being the Republican governor who who took down or was part of taking down the Confederate flag over the South Carolina state legislature after the terrible shooting, race based shooting in Charleston at the AME church there in 2015. And that is when we first learned of Nikki Haley. This could have been a great moment for her to say, like, I came from I come from the South. This is what we've learned. And instead, it is this panic. What do you want me to say about slavery?

Yeah, it's that last line. What do you want me to say about slavery? Almost sort of defiant that she was going to refuse to say something there. So, Eugene, let's talk about now the man you cover at the White House for Politico, Joe Biden, as we turn the corner into a new year, into this all important election year, how he's feeling, how his campaign is feeling about its prospects, encouraging economic data, and yet his approval numbers and some of these head-to-head matchups that we see, obviously most of them within the margin of error, some polls better for him, some worse, how they're feeling about a matchup likely with, unless something dramatic happens, likely with Donald Trump. Yeah. One, they feel good about a matchup likely with unless something dramatic happens, likely with Donald

Trump? Yeah, one, they feel good about a matchup against Donald Trump. Right. They have kind of always seen that as what was going to happen. And obviously, you know, Biden beat Trump once. They feel like he could do it again. And more importantly, they want to make this a choice election. Right. They don't want to make it a referendum on President Biden. They want to say to voters and have said to voters, this is what I'm going to do. Look how scary this guy is, right? And you have all of this great reporting about what a second term for Trump would look like. Ron DeSantis now adding to that reporting about how, you know, he would be vindictive

and how he would go after his and attack his political rivals. Donald Trump has said he would do as much. So that's one thing. But I will also say on the kind of selling the economy and their agenda, they have to figure out a way, and they know this, to make people feel better about the economy, right? You can't just explain the macroeconomics and talk about jobs, though that's right? You can't just explain the macroeconomics and talk about jobs, though that's great. You can't just talk about inflation going down, some prices going down. You have to figure out a way to get people to feel differently about the economy. And that's going to be their struggle here. They have, over the last three

plus years, struggled with selling the things that they've done to the American people. Now they have to figure out a way to make folks feel better. And so that contrast against Donald Trump, I think, would be extremely helpful for them moving forward, because you can say, you know, our economy is much better. You may be feeling scary, but give us the wills again, and you won't have to be scared that, you know, Donald Trump is going to be in the White House. Jen, you've been at the center of presidential campaigns in the past, of course. How would you be feeling right now holding the hand that Joe Biden has turning into an election year? I would say it's, you know, look, it's super scary, you know, like the fate of the republic is hanging in the balance.

And there are polls that have Donald Trump leading right now. But I would have faith that I mean, on the on to Eugene's point on the economy, we know that the we know that the Federal Reserve is planning on lowering rates. We know that we know that, you know, that is something that can that is that is something that signals to actual consumers, real voters. Things are different and things are improving. You hear that when you hear about people not liking Biden's economic policies. If you dig underneath that, interest rates are a big part of that. I would feel good about making the economic argument. I would feel great about being able to make the argument against what the sort of threat that Trump represents. And we can use Ron DeSantis talking about Trump weaponizing government. We can use Chris Christie's voice talking about the danger that Trump represents. So it's not just going to be Biden. But there is

just this scary thing that overhangs everything about whether, you know, we're just too divided. It's just too late. There's too many silos. How am I going to reach all of the voters I need to reach given all the media silos that there are? I mean, that is what I would be churning on every day is just sort of the mechanics of getting that message out. And the Biden administration also has to contend with this sort of anti-incumbent sentiment globally right now that leaders in office just aren't polling well. People are coming out of the pandemic. Prices are too high. People all over the world are just sort of unhappy with what they have. And I think that is

a real fear among some in Biden camp that even though the economic metrics are good, to Jen's point, they should get better. People say they like things about it, but there's a sense that just they've written off the Biden economy, that they won't ever give him credit for it. And that's something they're worried about. But Willie Aides tell me, Biden Aides tell me that they're really believe that their best chance to win, though, is the next year. It won't be. It'll be months from now. But when it actually becomes that binary choice, when the Republican field is gone and it's simply Biden, Trump, and Americans start paying attention again, because most people are not paying attention like we all do each and every

day. When they start paying attention again and they see what Trump is saying, they hear what he's threatening to do. They're reminded of what has the chaos of what his time in office was like, that they simply won't want to make the choice to go through that all again. And it may not be an enthusiastic vote for President Biden, but it'll be a vote for President Biden. And they feel like that's enough to win. And you can bet the Biden campaign will be leaning heavily on Donald Trump saying again and again, I am the man who got rid of Roe versus Wade, took away the right to an abortion.

White House correspondent for Politico, Eugene Daniels. Thank you so much as always, Eugene. Good to see you. Coming up next, we will break down the good, the bad and the wild political stories that define 2023. Semaphores Dave Weigel joins us for his second annual Americana Awards. Plus, we'll remember Tom Smothers, one half of the famed comedy and music duo, the Smothers Brothers. Morning Joe's coming right back. Current comedian Tom Smothers died yesterday at the age of 86 after a battle with cancer. He, of course, made up half of the Smothers Brothers duo, whose variety show in the 1960s became a bane for network executives.

NBC's Harry Smith reports. Singing right now. No. How do you know? Because I can't. Tommy Smothers made us laugh. First, that look on his face while listening to Brother Dick. Then, what came next.

Yeah, well, Mom always liked you best. In 1967, the Smothers brothers got their own variety show on CBS. We do everything as a unit. We do CBS. We do everything as a unit. We do not. We do everything as a unit. Hey, Todd, just because we're brothers, we don't do everything as a unit. As brothers, we do everything as a unit. Hey, listen, listen.

You couldn't touch my wife with a 10-foot pole. That's right. Here's an 11-foot pole. They satirized the powerful and made clear their opposition to the Vietnam War. And if you ever get a war with that blood and gore, boy, I'll be the first to go. The show was a hit, but the network was not amused. I guess it was something that we said. After multiple run-ins with network censors, CBS canceled the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour in 1970.

We feel that it's a grave, very grave thing when any network can take off a show that is reflecting these maybe unpopular views. The duo continued to perform for decades. Of Tom, his brother Dick said this in a statement. Our relationship was like a good marriage. The longer we were together, the more we loved and respected each other. We were truly blessed. Tom Smothers was 86 years old. NBC's Harry Smith reporting there. Coming up next, NBC's Steve Kornacki will give us a look ahead. What to expect with next year's election season as President Biden and Donald Trump are on a course for a likely rematch, while independent and third party candidates could impact the race.

Morning Joe will be right back. A picture of Reagan National Airport in Washington, 647 in the morning for the second year. Semaphore is out with its annual breakdown of the biggest political hits and misses of the year. And joining us now to take us through the Americana Awards is senior politics reporter for Semaphore, David Weigel. Dave, it's great to see you. I feel like I should be in black tie for this award ceremony, but this will have to do at this hour of the morning. So let's get right into it, starting with the best winning campaign, talking the non-candidate division. Who was it this year? Oh, that was the Ohio Coalition for Reproductive Freedom, the people who really twice in August and then November won by double digit margin these

abortion referenda. And Republicans, I should say social conservatives in coalition Republicans had a year to figure out a strategy. They tried everything. They tried linking it to gender surgeries. They tried warning that without language is a little bit inaccurate how far reaching this would be. It didn't work. You had at this point one of the most efficient operations in center left politics are these pro these pro choice campaigns. And this Ohio one was probably the most effective we've seen. And as you point out in the piece, August, there was that first run to sort of stop the way constitutional amendments are made. That was one run at it, defeated by 14 points. And then the amendment itself defeated by nearly the same margin.

Let's move to best winning campaign, talking about an actual candidate here and an incumbent governor. Yes, that was Kentucky's Governor Andy Beshear, who started the year with a lead. He was the top priority on defense for Democrats, on offense for Republicans. Republicans had Attorney General Daniel Cameron, a rising star in the party, who had to navigate a tough primary, but won it pretty easily with Donald Trump's endorsement. And you had, in a red state with very bleak mood about President Biden, Biden's approval rating in some parts of the state and in the single digits, Bashir able to win and expand his margin from four years ago. And he did so, there's going to be a theme this year. He did so for a number of reasons. He talked about the state's economy, but he also talked about abortion rights. And he had what I thought was the most effective ad of the year about a woman talking about her very gruesome, unpleasant personal

experience with abortion, really befuddling Republicans who were on the hook defending a statewide total abortion ban. So good campaign, blocked and tackled, did all the right things, and also came up with messaging that I already, within hours of the campaign, was seeing other Democrats try to copy in other states. We'll, Dave, we'll revisit that ad in just a moment or later in this awards show. But let's continue with the honor roll here. Best winning campaign challenger division. Tell us who it is and why it matters. Yes, it was Jeff Landry in Louisiana. He's somebody who did not make a lot of national news this year just for the dynamic that if somebody is winning by a lot, they don't get the same coverage. But this is a campaign that very early on organized to replace

John Bel Edwards, the popular outgoing Democratic governor of Louisiana, started with a simple message about, I'm the attorney general. I'm a former cop. I'm going to crack down on crime, specifically in the big urban precincts, big urban parts of Louisiana, big urban parishes, and did a combination of that outreach to Republican voters and outreach to black voters. He had very effective early ads directed at black voters in Louisiana who do not vote Republican mostly about how crime was affecting them. Black victims of crime talking about why they supported Jeff Landry. Just the kind of very efficient base expanding, I should say, not just electorate expanding, but pulling in people who don't vote Republican normally.

Very efficient campaign of how we did not see a lot of in 2023. Dave, you have best losing campaign. That doesn't often get a good mention. So you've picked the Glenn Youngkin effort to win back the state legislature in Virginia. Now, this is something I paid attention to because I was you know, there was worry among Democrats that he had a 15 week abortion ban, that he was sort of putting the campaign for Republicans behind. And there was concern that if that was succeeded and he was succeeded in capturing the Senate that the Democrats controlled in Virginia, that this would mean that a national and a state like Virginia Virginia, pretty blue-ish, a little tinted purple in there,

that that would mean that that sort of, that moderate position, you know, that this could be perceived as a moderate position that would do well in 2024 for Republicans across the board. So I, you know, I looked at this as a loss, but you look, you're giving Youngkin credit for almost winning. So explain why you think that was significant. Yeah, there's a little bit of the holiday spirit going on. But I'm trying to also correct, I think there was a lot of obituary writing for the Youngkin effort after they narrowly lost these elections. They lost the State House of Delegates by one seat.

They lost the Senate by one seat. That involved them losing seats in the House of Delegates on a new map. The reason I say it was an effective campaign is because they won every seat in both houses that voted for Joe Biden by less than eight points. So they won everything that was Republican. They really came very close to the Yunkin 2021 margin. Again, I'm comparing this to what Republicans were doing around the rest of the country. Outside Louisiana and Virginia, there was not much overperformance. They were losing in suburbs.

They lost some mayoralities in Indiana and other parts of the country where they were feeling confident. In Virginia, they were able to come close to build this Yunkin coalition of MAGA voters and some suburbanites, not just around D.C., but around Richmond and Tidewater region. They were able to do that with a, hey, we are Republicans. We're going to improve the economy. We also do not want to ban abortion. Democrats say we do. We don't. We want a 15 week limit because they lost. There was not much of a conversation about how effective that was. It was fairly effective. It did. And I talked to Republicans afterward. It did encourage them that you can run in a swing house seat with a version of this message in 2024. They were outspent in the end by Democrats. They were hurt, frankly, by all the presidential speculation around

Youngkin. You had very wealthy donors saying we need Glenn Youngkin to win these elections and run for president, even with that complication, which scared up tens of millions of dollars for Democrats, they again ran way ahead of their baseline close to 2021. It was like the rest of the election. The Dobbs decision wasn't happening in Virginia. It just wasn't enough for them because it was such a Democratic state. All right. As we move to best campaign ad, we come back around to one you mentioned already from Andy Beshear, the governor of Kentucky. It's titled Unthinkable Around the Issue of Abortion. It is a stunning ad. Let's watch it. I was raped by my stepfather after years of sexual abuse. I was 12. Anyone who believes

there should be no exceptions for rape and incest could never understand what it's like to stand in my shoes. This is to you, Daniel Cameron. To tell a 12-year-old girl she must have the baby of her stepfather who raped her is unthinkable. I'm speaking out because women and girls need to have options. Daniel Cameron would give us none. Dave, so that's Hadley Duvall. She's 21 now, talking about her experience when was 12, being raped by her stepfather. And that really echoed well beyond Kentucky. She sort of in many ways became the voice of this abortion rights movement nationally. Yes. And that format of that is one we've seen a lot of since 2022, since the Dobbs decision

is Democrats finding a woman who can tell a personal story. There's not a rebuttal from somebody else. There's not a third narrator. The candidate's not even featured in it, apart from endorsing the ad. This is, I think, the most effective version of it we've seen, because in Kentucky, like I said, it's one of these states that had a ban ready to go. If Roe was overturned, you had an attorney general, Daniel Cameron, running for governor, who had defended the total abortion ban. I was saying at the top of the segment, it wasn't just this ad was effective and it humanized the issue. It totally scrambled his strategy. He started to say, well, maybe he was open to some exceptions

that the legislature would pass them. He denounced the ad, but it wasn't quite clear what he was denouncing. He didn't have a good answer for Democrats or really for the electorate on how situations like hers would not happen. I think a dynamic we've seen all year is that the Republican line on abortion for a long time, at least since 2016, has been, well, Democrats want no limits. No limits means abortions up to the ninth month. It means abortions on the table after a baby's born. What Democrats say is, well, look at what is actually happening in a total ban situation. You have the contrast of a story that is happening. You saw what out of Texas after the elections. And look at the fantasy Republicans are talking about of a healthy pregnancy being terminated in month nine.

That's not a thing. That's not a thing that happens. It's nothing to generate stories. These stories are real. And it's not just the Democrats are good at running ads about them. They're realistic that this is happening in America. It is something that horrifies those voters who maybe have got five or six reasons they might vote Republican for parts of the ballot. Maybe they're angry about inflation or whatever. But on this issue, they know that Democrats are not in favor of total bans. And that really has been enough for Democrats to hold and take back a lot of ground across the country this year, again, with the president operating in the dumpster in a lot of ground across the country this year, again, with the president reverberating in

the dumpster in a lot of these states. And you're right, Daniel Cameron, the Republican candidate there had no good answer for that ad, because what could you possibly say to Hadley when confronted with that? Dave, stay with us if you can. We love this list. We want to take a quick break and then bring everybody the worst campaign ad of the year. We'll be right back on Morning Joe. Just past seven o'clock in the morning, sun not quite up yet in Times Square. Three days from now, about a million people standing right there to watch the ball drop as we turn the corner to 2024. Speaking of which, Steve Kornacki is standing by for us at the big board with a breakdown of the 2024 presidential campaign, the primaries, third party contenders and everything that's going into the stew into a campaign unlike any of us ever has seen. Welcome back to the second hour of Morning Joe 701 here on the East Coast. We're talking to Dave Weigel of Semaphore

with the second annual Americana Award. So, Dave, let's hop right back in. We're talking to Dave Weigel of Semaphore with the second annual Americana Award. So, Dave, let's hop right back in. We just gave the best campaign ad of the year to Andy Beshear's campaign in Kentucky. What was the worst campaign ad of 2023? That was Trump attacks Iowa, which is one of the first negative ads never back down. The Ron DeSantis super PAC, which still exists, but has been downscaled massively. Ron, it was it was one of several. It ran about Trump criticizing Kim Reynolds, the governor of Iowa, who ended up endorsing DeSantis. But it was most notable for using an AI reconstruction of Trump's voice.

He had posted something on True Social. He hadn't said it. It turned the Trump quote into this kind of tinny, like any voice that you've heard. It sounded off. And so instead of creating a clear hit for the campaign on message, it created a, Alex Eisenstein from Politico noticed this first, created a negative, what the heck are they doing news cycle, that really, if you imagine a domino, one domino spilling over a number, maybe this is domino number five in the tumult of Never Back Down. It wasn't just that this super PAC with a ton of money lifted from DeSantis' state PAC

wasn't effective. It was that its ads often backfired, had something negative the campaign didn't want to be associated with by September and October when the campaign was reformulating, I should say later in November, Never Back Down's brand was terrible. And a Super PAC should not have a brand at all. People should not see something's button on TV and say, oh, it's the Super PAC. I don't like that. But it kept running these ads that made bizarre decisions and did not help DeSantis at all.

This is the most dramatic of them, I think. Some really strange stuff. Here is that ad that said before calls the worst of 2023. Let's watch. Governor Kim Reynolds is a conservative champion. She signed the heartbeat bill and stands up for Iowans every day. So why is Donald Trump attacking her? I opened up the governor position for Kim Reynolds in which she fell behind. I endorsed her, did big rallies, and she won. Now she wants to remain neutral. I don't invite her to events. Trump should fight Democrats, not Republicans. What happened to Donald Trump? Never Back Down is responsible for the content of this advertising. So, Jonathan, that was an AI recreation of a post that Donald Trump has written. Not great there.

And as Dave says, one of the many reasons that Ron DeSantis supporters sort of abandoned, never backed down. It was also just so poorly done. That didn't sound anything like it. There are so many people, comedians out there who do terrific Trump impersonations. Frankly, most of us around this table do at least a version of him. We all could have done better than that. Dave, I want to turn to an intriguing category, which is called worst best friends. We all have a few of those, but tell us what you mean in this context. The worst best best friends were the mega donors. I mentioned some before who

kept giving their unsolicited advice to candidates, often without money attached. And so a theme of this cycle, as it was, not so much with Democrats in 2020, because Democrats were a little bit embarrassed about having super PACs. But like 2016, there were a bunch of donors who everyone knew could put $20 million in a campaign, like Larry Ellison, like Ken Griffin, like Thomas Petterfie. And they would talk to reporters on or off the record, often on the record, about what they wanted the candidates to do. They created this superstructure, this layer of criticism over the campaigns that made expectations higher, sometimes randomly,

sometimes in ways they couldn't deliver. Pederphy with Youngkin, I've talked about. This is a donor who just kept stepping on Youngkin's message back home by saying, if he wins this election, he should run for president. But with Ken Griffin, you had somebody who made it known that he thought that DeSantis signing the heartbeat bill, the six week abortion ban in Florida, which you saw referenced that ad not popular with voters outside their Hulligan base. He made it known that was a mistake. You saw with Larry Ellison, he made it known early on he loved Tim Scott. He'd supported him in every race given his super PAC, $20 million. And the Tim Scott made budgeting decisions based on Larry Ellison coming back. The campaign ended up, I should say the super PAC ended up retracting its

buys, leading an embarrassing cycle for the campaign. Now, maybe Tim Scott wasn't going to win anyway. But you saw the risk there of relying on a donor who thought this candidate was amazing. This happened a few times. Who did it not happen to? Donald Trump and Nikki Haley. Nikki Haley, until the very end of the campaign, I think, with some of the donations she's gotten, didn't get much criticism for who was supporting a super PAC. You did not see donors coming out and saying bad things about her. You saw them praising her in ways that I think could hurt her down the line, like Jamie Dimon saying good things about her. You've seen Ron DeSantis say that she's bought an owned establishment candidate. There is no upside in having these donors talk so much about the

candidates. And I think coming from 2020 and watching Democrats so closely, it's an advantage to them. They don't have people who expect them to deliver exactly the message that they're delivering to CNBC on Squawk Box to these candidates just because they have 20 million dollars. Talkative donors. And it also gives I guess Trump a big opening to say that each of these people are owned by established, you know, specific and establishment billionaires. And so, OK. And speaking of giving Donald Trump a big opening, you have an interesting choice for your best bet of 2023. Yes, it was Donald Trump's decision not to debate, which hurt a lot of people's bottom lines and reporting targets. But it was not obvious when he when he announced that he wasn't

going to participate in the first debate in Milwaukee. It was not obvious that this was going to pay off. There was a risk of him alienating some people. You saw both Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie, really more at the time, Mike Pence, who's still running, criticize him and say, this is Donald Trump who's changed. He has new statements and allegations that he needs to address before his voters. But what happened? The first debate in Milwaukee, Fox News organizing it, the first half of it did not touch on Trump at all because they were trying to keep Trump's audience watching the debate. He did a counter-programming event with Tucker Carlson.

He did two more counter-programming events for the next two debates and then stopped bothering, really by the second. I mean, I was talking to his campaign manager in the spin room in the second debate and the campaign was already saying, look, he's up by so much. Why are the rest of these candidates indulging in this exercise and hurting our nominee and debating? It was the only thing you can only do as a candidate up by 30 points. I'm not trying to privilege this and say in the future, all candidates who are winning by this much should skip debates. But it was a smart move for Trump to make that was not obvious, that was risky, and that left everyone kind of scrambling. And by the end, as I point out, Ron DeSantis is trying to have a fundraiser around the debate in Alabama in December and has to

cancel it because donors aren't even showing up in the number that they should be for these things. Trump, through force of personality and force of 30-point lead squash the whole process. Dave, let's end the Semaphore Americana Awards for 2023, where we began, which is with the issue of abortion and worst bet. You have Susan B. Anthony's pro-life America promise to oppose any presidential candidate who refuses to embrace, at a minimum, a 15-week national standard. Why was this such a bad bet? Yes, and that's also partly a Trump story. This is the problem of a lot of organizations on the right, is can you get Donald Trump on board?

If he's not, then what is the impetus for anybody getting on board? That was the problem Susan B. Anthony, Pro-Life America, I should say, had here. As they said, flat out, we want at least a federal 15-week limit on abortion as a standard for our candidates. We want that. We're going to say we want that least a federal 15 week limit on abortion as a standard for our candidates. We want that. We're going to say we want that, but we can't get Donald Trump to commit. So who will? What ends up happening? Tim Scott commits to that. Mike Pence commits to

that. They use their speeches at events to say they want a 15 week ban. But who doesn't commit? Trump, Nikki Haley, who actually gives a speech at Susan B. Anthony Perlis headquarters, which people going in think might be her announcing a 15 week limit as her policy. It's not. It's her going to this group and saying, I'm a different kind of candidate who believes in compromise. We're not going to get a federal abortion ban. I'll tell you to your face. And it was the phrase this to soldiers overused. It wasn't quite that. But it was Haley taking a fairly careful, poll-tested position, doing it looking like she was taking a big risk from this group.

So you have, by the end of the year, a group that has won generational gains. I mean, the pro-life movement has won more than it would have dreamed of five, 10 years ago. But it can't get Republican candidates for president to commit to its abortion position. It's coming off a cycle, as we talked at the top, where they lost key winnable looking races on abortion rights. The movement has taken a lot of territory. There are a lot of red states where its laws are in place, but it does not have the clout in the Republican primary that a lot of conservative groups do. And that was not obvious. That was because of a couple of choices made early on to show their clout that totally backfired. The threat of abortion running all the way through 2023 and will be through 2024. Honorable mention here. Best political book,

The Squad by Ryan Grimm. Best presidential biography, An Ordinary Man by Richard Norton Smith. That's the definitive study of Gerald R. Ford. And best, as you put it, almost presidential biography, Romney by McKay Coppins. All great books. Semaphores, Dave Weigel doing a lot of work for us today, taking us through Semaphores Americana Awards. Dave, thanks so much. We will see you at the after party. We appreciate it, man. Thank you.