Morning Joe - War with Iran enters 19th Day

Episode Date: March 18, 2026

War with Iran enters 19th Day 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 https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

All of the NATO allies agreed with us, but they don't want to, you know, despite the fact that we help them so much, we have thousands of soldiers in different countries all over the world. And they don't want to help us, which is amazing. I mean, amazing. And I didn't do a full court press because I think if I did, they probably would be. But we don't need help. Okay. President Trump, again yesterday, complaining about NATO. allies saying they're not helping with the Iran war, while also claiming the United States does not need them. We'll bring you the latest from the Middle East in just a moment. Meanwhile, the president's pick to lead the Department of Homeland Security, Senator Mark Wayne Mullen, will be on Capitol Hill today trying to convince his colleagues he's up for the job. That comes

as top TSA officials' warning of serious consequences. At the airports, if the partial government shutdown now at nearly five weeks drags on any longer. And good morning. Welcome to Morning, Joe. It is Wednesday, March 18th. With us, we have the co-host of our 9 a.m. hour, staff writer at the Atlantic, Jonathan Lemire, MS now National Affairs analyst, John Heilman. He's a partner in chief political columnist at Puck. Columnist and associate editor at the Washington Post, David Ignatius, is with us. Writer at large for the New York Times. Elizabeth Bue Miller's here and senior writer at the dispatch and a columnist at Bloomberg opinion, David Drucker is with us this morning. And Joe, a lot to cover a lot of questions about the war in Iran, who's

going to support the United States, who's required to and who wants to at this point in time. A lot of questions. It's interesting, the Washington Post breaking with the news this morning that actually the Gulf states are now pressuring the president and the administration to stay in this war. They don't want a beaten up, damaged, this Wall Street Journal, an angrier, Iran to survive. So the Gulf states, especially, you look at the UAE, the Saudis, others, want the United States now that they're in to cripple the regime before ending the war. That's not how they were sounding the first days of the war, but it's where they are there. So we're going to get to all that. I do have to ask, so, Jonathan Lemire, did you stay up?

for Venezuela's victory over the United States. He definitely stayed up. Unfurling banners, the USA versus Venezuela. This time it's personal, and they got their revenge. The Nicholas Maduro Bowl. No, I did not quite make the end. I watched for a while. And first of all, let's just say, what a remarkable tournament this was.

Just so fun, each and every way. The crowds were great. The players cared, the enthusiast. shown through. But as we're watching here, Venezuela had jumped out to a 2-0 lead. Team USA couldn't hit. But then Bryce Harper hits a dramatic tying home run on the 8th. 2.2. You feel like the USA could do it, but there. Rouenio Suarez for Venezuela, that's being the game. Here's the Harper home run on the 8th. We just skipped ahead. We saw Suarez with what became the game winning RBI double in the ninth.

And USA could not do anything in the bottom of that inning. So Joe, 3-2, Venezuela, the final. I think our two takeaways are, this is a wonderful tournament. We'll be excited for three years from now. That's number one. Number two, the most important takeaway, captain of Team USA, Aaron Judge, 0 for four, three strikeouts. Yet again, coming up small and a big small. A little harsh there. It's really sad.

We do cheer for America. We really do. That doesn't mean we have to take delight in the Yankees doing horribly John Lamar. I'm absolutely a sure. ashamed of you this morning. That's sad. That's sad. I will.

I will say that our own Roman Anthony certainly had an extraordinary series. You know, John Hylman, what's so crazy about this is we're watching, we're watching this in March, man. And I said last week, my son went to a gang. And it was like the DR versus Netherlands. And, you know, we, we go. We got a lot of baseball games. Sure. And he said there's the most electric environment he's ever been in in a baseball stadium.

How great this is. I mean, I had no idea, really, when people started talking about this back three years ago, what this was. This is now, like, it's getting bigger and bigger, and the excitement's pretty crazy in March for baseball. Yeah, you know, it's like, I know, Joe, we're in the part of the world where you grew up is like where I grew up, where baseball was like a year-round thing in Southern California. So people were playing, you know, but people played winter league. And you think about the way the World Series, just kind of the actual World Series last fall, an incredible World Series, even if you weren't a Dodger fan, which is an amazing World Series. Just sort of like the very next thing on the baseball calendar has been this electrifying

world baseball classic. Lemire and I were talking about yesterday. Man, baseball, just baseball, on a roll right now. Nicholas McIruder apparently very happy in the Brooklyn jail last night, too. I'm told by my sources on the inside. A lot of Nicholas Maduro celebration going on over in Brooklyn. And let me just say, John Heilman has a lot of sources on the inside that gel. When he says he does, you can take him at his word.

All right, Mika, so from baseball to chaos still gripping the Middle East, take us through the news. I'll do that. Just Alex wanted me to point out, it was Roman Anthony who struck out to end the game. We get a great series. So there you go. Well, come on. You know what? I really, seriously.

I do not need communists. Pushing. And I delivered it to viewers. Yeah. Corson's always been pro-Rigin. Yeah. Seriously, pro-Rijian. All right, let's get to work.

He's always been pro-Modero. Always been promudero. And once again, it's really sad. Makes me sad. Okay. To the news now, strikes are causing destruction in cities and towns throughout the Middle East this morning as Iran vows revenge. For the killing yesterday of its top security chief,

Israel's emergency response service says at least two people were killed in the early hours today when an Iranian ballistic missile hit central Israel where damage and debris can be seen from the impact. Iran also continues to target areas near U.S. embassies in the region. Renewed attacks around the embassy in Baghdad sparked a fire in the fortified green zone hours ago. And Saudi forces say they shot down drones today approaching the diplomatic quarter in Riyadh. This comes as the Washington Post reports the State Department has ordered all U.S. diplomatic posts worldwide to immediately undertake security evaluations, according to a cable reviewed by the paper. Israel, meanwhile, continues to ramp up its airstrikes across Lebanon. Video this morning shows an entire building collapsing upon impact shortly after the Israeli military warned residents to evacuate the area.

The U.S. military said last night it struck Iranian missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz with 5,000 pound deep penetrator bombs in an apparent bid to clear the crucial waterway for oil tanker traffic. There is also new reporting this morning on the growing anxiety among Iranian officials after Israel took out a pair of regime leaders, including the de facto ruler. As the New York Times puts it, quote, they all wonder, who would be next? And the Wall Street Journal says the Gulf states want the U.S. to cripple Iran's regime before ending the war as they face daily missile attacks and massive disruption to their economies. Meanwhile, President Trump continues to criticize NATO, NATO allies, for not helping U.S. forces reopen the Strait of Hormuz, all while claiming that the U.S. does not need their help. The president

posted on social media yesterday morning claiming the relationship with NATO was a one-way street. And then he wrote, quote, we no longer need or desire their assistance. Followed by in all caps, we never did. The president continued

those very conflicting messages moments later in the Oval Office. Well, we don't need too much help and we don't need any help actually. In fact, we just put out a notice. I was watching over the last couple of weeks and all of our NATO allies were very much in favor of what we did. They thought it was very important. We were just discussing it actually. All of the NATO

allies agreed with us and but they don't want to, you know, despite the fact that we help them so much, we have thousands of soldiers in different countries all over the world and they don't want to help us, which is amazing. I mean, amazing. And I didn't do it. full court press because I think if I did they probably would be but we don't we don't need help I think NATO is making a very foolish mistake and I've long said that you know I wonder whether not NATO would ever be there for us so this is a this was a great test because we don't need them but they should have been there so everyone agrees with us but they don't want to help and we you know we as the United States have to remember that because we think it's pretty shocking

Well, even in the middle of a war, one of the most significant wars in our lifetimes, Donald Trump's obsession with running down the alliance that helped defeat the Soviet Union continues. And he's been stuck on this for well over a decade now, forgetting that it was NATO allies who sacrificed time and time again for the United States in Iraq, the first time, the second time. the second time in Afghanistan. They stood shoulder to shoulder with us for years. So to be attacking them, to be attacking Ukraine at the same time, making life easier for Vladimir Putin with sanctions relief, has a lot of allies and a lot of lawmakers on the Republican and Democratic side shaking their head. So, David, let's break things down this morning.

And when I say, let's break things down this morning. I mean, you break things down because you've got the great sources. Yesterday, in our newsletter, my opening statement said, listen, we were all wrong about Iraq. If you were right about the invasion, you were wrong about the surge. If you were right about the surge, you may have been wrong about us leaving in 2011 as abruptly as we did and about the need to go back. and destroy ISIS. So I stand here humbly not able to predict what's going on, but there are two extraordinarily, two extraordinary truths that are going right now. One is, of course, the truth that we talked about yesterday, and I quoted in the newsletter yesterday, from the writer in Al Jazeera,

saying, by all military measures, this is historic. The United States is degrading in days, what it took Iran, decades to build. So that's on one side. On the other side, Mark Hurdling gave an absolute, excuse me, chilling quote, said, it's been said that good tactics with bad strategy is the slowest way to lose a war. Put another way, if your ends, means, and ways, or misaligned, you can win all the battles and lose a war. And he quotes, U.S. Army Colonel Harry Summers Jr. in a discussion that he had with Vietnamese Colonel 2 in 1975. You know, Summer said, you never defeated us on the battlefield.

Two replied, that may be so, but it is also irrelevant. When Mika read that, she goes, that sounds like something my father would have said. But how chilling from Vietnam. Now, you know, you never beat us once on the battlefield, and the Vietnamese colonel goes, that's true. It's also irrelevant. I'm not saying that's the case there. But these are the two truths. These are the two lessons of history that we need to learn.

That often extraordinary tactics without extraordinary strategy leads to a long defeat, as it did in Vietnam, as it did in the first Iraq war, as it did in Afghanistan. So take everything you know right now and tell us where we are in March the 18th. So, Joe, I think that dilemma is weighing on President Trump. When a war is going badly, when you're unable to find a way to terminate it successfully, that's the most painful thing possible for a president. I watched that in my lifetime with President Johnson and then President George W. Bush. and it's a tough moment. So breaking it down, the level of tactical success is extraordinary.

Your viewers might want to look at the Wall Street Journal this morning, which has an incredibly detailed account of how Israel has been hunting down every element of power in Iran, finding people as they hide in tents on the outskirts of town, as was the case with the leader of the Basij militia. who they killed yesterday, finding people who were gathered in stadiums to seek refuge, finding those stadiums, targeting them, taking them out, finding individual guard posts where besiege militia were harassing Iranians, taking them out. So it's an extraordinary campaign, and every day it goes further.

There's more pressure on the regime. Killing Ali Larjani, who arguably was the most powerful man in Iran, finding him. He was in hiding on the edge of the city, according to these reports. Again, an amazing demonstration of success. But the thing that Trump still hasn't found is a pathway to ending this war. Ahead of us is what the Wall Street Journal's editorial page this morning called the Battle of Hormuz. In other words, the battle to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and put global commerce back to normal. Trump has to do it, and he has two choices. He can either do it by coercion, by military force landing Marines on Harg Island is one of the ways that's talked about. We can

discuss later whether that makes sense or not, or reopening it by negotiation. There are mediators from Qatar and Oman, who'd love to be back in the business of trying to find a negotiated settlement that allows cargoes to go back through the strait. But, But that's his dilemma. For Donald Trump, this war cannot end without a successful reopening of that straight. And I have not yet heard from anybody in the administration a clear plan for how to do that with an acceptable amount of force in an acceptable period of time when our allies are saying, sorry, Charlie, this is your war.

We didn't want you to do this. You started it. Now, you've got to finish it. So that's basically, Joe, what I think Trump is struggling with today. Yeah, my reporting lines up with what David heard there in terms of administration officials know the straight of foremost. That is the ballgame right now, but there's no clear plan yet as to what to do there. And that's why, despite what he said yesterday, President Trump is so unhappy, so frustrated with the lack of ally support because he knows the U.S. really does need them, or this job is going to get that much more difficult. and the risks involved to the U.S. ships and to potentially a ground force there, very real and would

overly increase. So Elizabeth B. Miller, I wrote, as you see on the headline there, a story out this morning, that this is the Trump's daunting dilemma. This is the decision he has to make. Does he, does he escalate the conflict with ground troops to achieve his ambitious goals, even though polls suggest it is deeply unpopular here in the United States, and Republicans are very afraid of what it could mean for the midterms, including because of gas prices continue to surge? Or does he declaim some sort of hollow victory pull out, reduce the economic pain? But that would leave in Iran, an embittered, violent regime that would potentially still have some control, at least of the Strait of Hormuz, still have its nuclear stockpile, and be

completely unwilling going forward to ever trust a U.S. negotiation again. Correct. You are correct. And once again, there are no good options here at this moment for President Trump. And I'd like to also point out another dilemma he's facing, like my colleague David Sanger wrote this morning in the Times, which is that he has talked increasingly publicly about perhaps the need to send in commandos to somehow seize or destroy the nuclear material that is under a mountain that is Fahun and Iran. And he is talking more and more about this. You know, as we know, what you see with the president is what is going through his mind at any given time.

And he's talked about this. And that's a very tough decision, too. It's highly risky. It would put the going after Osama bin Laden, that would look like a picnic compared to this. And it would, potentially, it could cause a, you could, there's canisters stored underneath this mountain. They could rupture. It could cause radioactivity, spring. all over the area.

But also if you leave it there, Iran still has a bit of nuclear fuel that it can use as leverage and its source of its power. It's a very tough decision. And what you see with the president every day is just this back and forth about, I want the allies, I don't need the allies. You know, it's just what you're seeing is President Trump thinking in real time that he doesn't know what his options are. I mean, he doesn't know what to do right now. It's a little alarming to watch it. There's no easy way out. There's no cutting and running.

If he does that, of course, David Drucker, he leaves with the straits in chaos and leaves with the possibility of oil, eventually getting up to 150 a barrel. It's only around 100. And I say only around 100. That's really devastating for working Americans, but many predicted it would already be much higher

as we get close to 20 days into this war. I want to talk about what we're seeing. Just just, first of all, Joe Kent, a conspiracy theorist, but who was high up in the Trump administration yesterday, quitting. Tulsi Gabbard, in a very muted statement of a, seeming to put it all on Donald Trump, the same Tulsi Gabbard, and we'll show it later, who in 2019 warned Americans that Donald Trump would get us into a stupid war in Iran.

But I still, we're all transfixed. I know you and I have the same attitude, have had basically the same attitude, about what we're hearing from, you know, this battle between Mark Levin, Megan Kelly, Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro. And then as you moved sort of to the sort of floating comedian slash podcasters, Joe Rogan, Andrew Schultz,

who are openly embittered about this war. You know, it seems to me that at some point, the Republican base does start falling off like they did with George W. Bush and the Iraq War. I'm curious, any sense of that on the Hill from Republicans, any growing concerns that were almost 20 days in and no closer to resolution? Well, I don't know, Joe, that there's a,

concern that we're 20 days in and it doesn't appear that we're close to a resolution. I think we have to understand this as Republicans on the Hill and the people in the trenches working campaigns knew that this was a tough midterm election for Republicans to begin with as we rounded the corner from last year into this year. And, you know, there was initially some thinking in the late summer, early fall that this Trump presidency from a political standpoint was unfolding a little bit differently than the first term. Some of the numbers suggested of that, and then with concerns about affordability, the cost of living, and then now the mass deportation program, things really began to unravel, and we're now in a place where Republicans

that I talk to are talking openly about the Senate majority being in play, not that it's necessarily on its way out in the same way that the House of Representatives is, majority is on its way out, likely, but that it's in play, and that's a new development. You know, I think I like to look at this as this could surely impact, and when I talk to Republicans, this could surely impact voter turnout for Republicans in terms of getting the full element of the Trump coalition out in 2026. But I think what this really portends is difficulty for the next Republican nominee to reconstitute the Trump coalition in 2028. Because Trump's a unique figure. obviously a lot of people have issues with him. But on the Republican side, as I like to say,

and as the numbers show, he's just normal enough for the normies, and he's just out there enough for the populists and the conspiracy theorists and the people who think everything's rigged to get them to show up and they normally don't show up because they just think there's no point in showing up because all politicians are the same. And so how do you recreate that coalition in 28. This is where these splinters to me are very significant. And it's sort of similar to what we saw with Barack Obama and the Democratic coalition. Once he was no longer a candidate, the Democrats had a hard time, you know, putting together his coalition. And everybody thinks our thought Democrats thought the Obama coalition was transferable. It wasn't like the Reagan coalition wasn't

transferable. Like the Trump coalition just isn't transferable, especially after the wars, after everything else. You look, Meek, and J.D. Vance is just, he's completely disappeared because this obviously is the antithesis of everything he said during the campaign that he and Donald Trump would be doing together. And so it is, it is fascinating time. And right now, you can look at Republican polls that may show that 80, 85 percent of Republicans are still with the president. Some say it's in the 70s. But for people that are running campaigns, for Republicans, for Republicans, they're not looking at that number so much as they're looking at party registration. How many people are voting in primaries? How energized the base is. And the danger here is that

Donald Trump in 2016 and 2024 was able to energize people that didn't usually get out and vote. Those people are American firsters. They hate wars. They hate, you know, they're the people that were shouting the loudest throughout the Epstein files. You have all of these things that are not going to show a massive collapse in polls for wars during, during the middle of a war from Republicans, but those are the people who stay home. Midterms, it's not about who gets out to vote. So often it's who's depressed, who's disappointed in their party in power, and who stays home. And right now, that seems to be a massive, massive problem on the horizon for Republicans. Yeah. Still ahead on morning, Joe. We're going to get to new reporting about Russia, expanding its intelligence sharing with Iran.

Plus, what to expect later this morning during a Republican Senator Mark Wayne Mullen's confirmation hearing to become the next Homeland Security Secretary also had a key deadline in the Texas Republican Senate race has come and gone without an endorsement from President Trump. We'll talk about what it could mean for that high-stakes runoff. And as we go to break, a quick look at the Travelers forecast this morning from Accuethers, Bernie Rayno. Bernie, how's it looking? Well, it feels like February today, Mika. But we don't have the wind in the Northeast. We do have some sunshine. Your Acuether exclusive forecast, 36 in Boston, 38 in New York City, 43 in Washington, D.C.

A couple of flurries this morning in Chicago this afternoon. in Detroit. Now, one more chilly day across the southeast with sunshine, 56 in Atlanta, 50 in Charlotte, but you see all this heat in Texas, that's going to be heading on east. No big travel delays today, only some minor delays in Miami this afternoon. To help you make the best decisions and be more in the know, download the Accuather app today. The 26 primary season headed to Illinois last night, voter selected Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton as their nominee for U.S. Senate in the Democratic primary. She managed to overcome a fundraising deficit,

thanks to backing from Governor J.B. Pritzker, to defeat Congressman Raja Krishna-Morthy and Robin Kelly for the nomination. Stratton will now face off against the Republican nominee, Don Tracy, the former state GOP chair in November to fill the seat of retiring Senator Dick Durbin. Meanwhile, Governor Pritzker ran unopposed in his primary, seeking a third term for the state's top office. He'll face Republican nominee Darren Bailey this

November in the traditionally blue state. Joe, we're always looking ahead to the midterms. Always looking ahead to the midterms. And Mika, I sent you a couple of commercials from a candidate in Illinois's ninth, regardless of what you think of her politics and people are attacking her on all sides. Cat, and I will not mess up her last name. It starts with a. I'll just call her Cat A. Some of the most interesting commercials. And there you go. And what I looked at him, I said,

okay, this is a good view into the future of campaigning in American politics. John Heilman, I heard you laugh. I know you know. You know, she started with a smear, an attack ad against herself. And here's somebody It just moved into the district recently. Had been thrown around by ICE agents and protests, and nobody really gave her a chance to win. And she came very close to winning the Democratic primary and being a member of Congress in Illinois 9.

But the story of the night really was not just that progressives, a lot of progressives lost. It was also the fact that AAC played such a huge role in tipping the scales. In fact, APAC last night was bragging about beating Kat. And what they did was when their candidate didn't win, clearly didn't seem like he was going to win, they then found a progressive that they piled a lot of money into to take votes away from Kat A. And they were bragging last night. APEC was that, in fact, it worked. And it did work.

It took the five percentage points away that she needed to win. Yeah, Kat. Boazela, who was a former employee of mine at the recap, by the way. No way. Are you kidding me? Super bright, super social media and digital media savvy. She is going to have a big future in Democratic Party politics because she wants to have it. Whether you like her politics or not, I'm not endorsing candidates. I'm just saying she is young and smart and gets the way the world of media now works. And it took eight back doing what you just and what you just said, Joe. I think she would probably won that primary over the Evanston

Mayor Daniel Biss, who is also a very progressive candidate. He's not a moderate by any means. I think she probably would have won that primary if it hadn't been. She got it on the negative side coming from APEC and then she got it, as you said, boosting her other, the other kind of far left candidate in that race. But you're right. A couple of the big headlines out of this primary. Turnout for Democrats again off the charts. Rarely do you see a midterm primary that equals, as this one did, the turnout for the last time there was a competitive, Democratic presidential primary, which was in 2020. So that number is huge.

We're seeing enthusiasm on the Democratic side that's completely off the charts. The second thing, Big Night for J.B. Pritzker, who backed in a very competitive, Senate primary, backed his lieutenant governor and took a victory lap last night also, Jonathan Lemire. And then thirdly, as Joe pointed out, in every one of those primaries, the furthest left candidate got beat. And if there were Republicans who were hoping that Democrats who are getting we're getting too full of hubris and we're going to nominate a bunch of unelectable candidates as Republicans have sometimes in the past. That does not seem to be happening, certainly not in Illinois,

where, as I said, a bunch of open seats and a bunch of kind of mainstream progressives. Not all the A-PAC back candidates won, but you had a ton of outside money in there. The crypto guys were in there. The AI guys were in there. This was a big nationalized race. And Democrats basically, in every race, kind of pick the mainstream progressive candidate, usually with some decent amount of experience and background to boost them through that in the general election. They look very good in Illinois. Yeah, agree with your takeaways there.

Huge turnout. Big night for Pritzker, who, you know, we all anticipate running for president, so that certainly helps. And then indeed, the most progressive candidates lost. And that ties in David Drucker with something you've written recently for Bloomberg. Your new piece is titled,

Your average Democratic voter isn't a left winger. Very timely. Tell us more as to what you found out. Yeah, there was a Democratic poll conducted for third way, which is a centrist democratic think tank here in town. And, you know, what they discovered in a February poll conducted for them is that your average, your typical Democratic primary voter is a 55-year-old white woman, a 55-plus white woman without a college degree, or put it differently to be very specific about statistics here.

A majority of Democratic primary voters are white. They're also women. They're also over the age of 55. they also do not have a college degree. And, you know, what's so fascinated me about the poll is it sort of tells us one of the things that we have seen in Democratic, and you could say this about Republican politics if we were doing that, but generally the most pragmatic presidential candidate of the bunch in a primary

tends to win the presidential nomination. Sometimes you have a candidate who could excite the base and excite rank and file voters. But every four years, when there's an open primary, you see candidates run to the right, they run to the left. And most of their voters are somewhere in this larger middle, right? They want to win, they want electable candidates.

This poll also show that they want a fighter, somebody's willing to take on Republicans, but that they don't, their personal politics don't line up with the very far left that every party has its wing. when I spoke to Third Way after the poll and I said it, anything surprised you about this? And of course, this is where Third Way lives,

so not much surprised them. But one thing did, which is the poll shows that 57% of Democratic primary voters, your typical Democratic primary voter, calls themselves or says that they are a Christian. And many say that they are evangelical or born again. And so what does that tell you that most Democratic primary voters

are like the rest of America in some way or another, and that if you want to win in 28, if you want to win that primary, instead of trying to satisfy every group and every questionnaire from the progressive left,

look where most voters are and try and satisfy them. Yeah, you know, I took note of this in 2019, I think it was, maybe in the first Democratic debate where there's one of those stupid things where people raise their hands. I don't know why candidates say they'll raise their hands to

yes. But at one point, I'm sitting there and they're re-debating busing. And I think Joe Biden may have been the only person who said in 2019 that he would not support busing in 2020. I mean, it was, and I just said they're going, this is not the real. These are people that are on Twitter way too much. And it proves to me the case. You had what, 15, 16, candidates. Joe Biden was the one moderate. Joe Biden, after being humiliated in Iowa and being humiliated in New Hampshire, Joe Biden won South Carolina and swept through the primary. So on, Liz, but these numbers are crazy here.

If you live on social media on the left, 43 liberal, and that's old line liberal, 34% moderate, only 11 say they're progressive, 6% say they're socialist, 5% say they're conservative. I'm sure there is a generational change here. And we're finding younger Democratic voters being more progressive and more socialists. I'm sure in five to 10 years those numbers may even out a little bit. But it's fascinating. The average Democratic voters are 55-year-old white woman. And then you put on top of that people of color who are far more conservative than those who are running the party and those who contribute to presidential candidates,

whether you're talking especially about black women in church, whether you're talking, You're talking about Hispanics who are showing time and time again that they are moderate and they're not going to follow Democrats over a left wing cliff or Republicans over a right wing cliff. I mean, it's really fascinating and something that I think Democrats need to take heart in because all the energy in these primaries, especially in presidential primaries, seem to be how far left can I go? How can I say yes to every question on the questionnaire? How can I get the most money from the most out of touch extreme far-left donors, billionaire donors? And at the end of the day, the Democratic Party still won in the middle. You're right. And this is you're leaning on an open door here.

I mean, I have said this before, but every single Democratic president of the last decades is a moderate. You know, it's Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, you know, Joe Biden. So it's that that's who gets elected in this country. It is still, you know, still, but now this can change. Obviously, the AOC, Mayor Mom Donnie has excited a lot of younger people. And so the Democratic Party could change in another 10, 15 years. We don't know yet. But right now, that is where Democrats are.

surprise at all to me. Although it's interesting when you say, David, that the average Democratic voter is a white woman who has no college degree because we keep hearing that the Democratic Party is now the college of the college educated. So there is a little bit of a disc – but you're talking about primary voters, I guess. Yeah, yeah. I mean, these are people that said they were going to vote in a Democratic primary, and they're qualified that way. Right. And obviously, the Democratic Party has gained a lot of voters. who are college educated and looking at college educated or without a college degree is a good way these days of kind of trying to figure out what the party coalitions look like. But, you know, I think

what this shows is that when you think of the Democratic Party today, it's true that the center of gravity has shifted somewhat to the left versus where it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. I mean, that is clear. But the average Democratic primary voter still, thinks of themselves, broadly speaking, as center left and not far left. And they're very tolerant of candidates that they may

disagree with on any number of issues. They just want to see their priorities focused on. And in particular, what this poll showed, and I think this is going to be important as well for the candidates who run, is they do want candidates who show a lot of fight. We've talked a lot about this on the Republican side

with the rise of President Trump. Republicans wanted a fighter. Well, Democrats are now in the stage where they want a fighter. And that could redound to the benefit of any number of these candidates. But it's important to remember that part of what helped Trump become a fixture in the Republican Party is for all of his provocative language and unseemly behavior, Republican voters viewed him as the most pragmatic candidate of the bunch in 2016. Joe Biden, I think, is a good demonstration of what Democratic voters broadly prefer, center left, not far left. and it's, you know, I'm curious to see if any of the Democrats that run for president in 2028 will take this to heart.

Yeah, and you know, Mika, nobody here is saying, everybody here is saying that, nobody here is saying that Democrats are conservative or Democrats or whatever, or they want sort of some mushy milk toast candidates. David said they want fighters just saying they're not as progressive as social media may suggest. And I will say, you look at, you know, you look at Mayor Mom. Donnie, this guy we had on, we interviewed him for about 30 minutes, and he was keenly aware to win the Democratic primary. He had to, he had to understand the multiple factions inside the party, and he did very well. You know, I had had an interview with the Chicago mayor weeks before where I asked him five times to more cops on the street make Chicago safer, he couldn't answer the question.

I asked Mayor Mom Donnie. He said, of course. Of course they do. We want community policing. We want, and snow removal, you know, he spent a lot of money, you know, doing the basics, getting snow removed, crime in January, lowest January, crime stats, maybe in over 50 years. So, again, it's not that Democrats aren't electing progressives, they are, it's that the successful progressives, like Mayor Mom Donnie, who has very high approval ratings right now, understand that, you know, you just don't run to the, the far left, you have to engage the center. Barack Obama was extraordinarily successful in doing that in democratic politics and running for election. And progressives who understand how to

do that, the really talented ones, understand that. And they win elections. Exactly. Writer at large for the New York Times, Elizabeth B. Miller, thank you very much for coming on this morning. And David Drucker, thank you as well. David's new piece is online now for Bloomberg. All Street Journal reports that Russia is providing Iran with technical information to aid Tehran's targeting of U.S. forces in the region. That's according to people familiar with the matter who spoke to the outlet. According to the journal's reporting, the technology is meant to improve communication, navigation, and targeting. Russia has also provided tactical guidance on how many drones should be used in operations and what altitudes they should strike from.

The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that Russia has been sharing information about the locations of American military forces with Iran. David Ignatius, is there anything Russia could do that would actually cause Trump to act in a way that is less than helpful toward them? So I've been astonished that Trump hasn't spoken out more clearly. these Russian intelligence feeds to Iran potentially put U.S. troops at risk. Part of the Wall Street Journal's reporting is that Russians have helped provide locations or targeting assistance for taking out U.S. radar positions, which are part of an integrated

air defense system in the Gulf. You've seen the pictures of Iranian drones flying into these big radar dome. that apparently is a result of Russian intelligence. It's something that an American president really ought to be saying, he sees as unacceptable at a time when U.S. lives are at risk and U.S. lives are being lost. The concern also is that Russia is providing the newer technologies that they've been developing on the battlefield in Ukraine

that allowed their drones, Iranian drones, was feeded with this Russian intel to evade jamming, to evade other efforts that are being made to shoot them down. So it's a potential long-term threat to U.S. forces and one that I hope people will speak out about. All right.