The Current - Trump won. What comes next?

Episode Date: November 6, 2024

What might the next four years hold? We talk to Connecticut Republican Party chairman Ben Proto and Keneisha Grant, an associate professor of political science at Howard University.

In 2017, it felt like drugs were everywhere in the news, so I started a podcast called On Drugs. We covered a lot of ground over two seasons, but there are still so many more stories to tell. I'm Jeff Turner, and I'm back with Season 3 of On Drugs. And this time, it's going to get personal. I don't know who Sober Jeff is. I don't even know if I like that guy.

On Drugs is available now wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is The Current Podcast. To see how that victory is resonating with Donald Trump supporters, we're joined now by Ben Proto. He's chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party. Ben, good morning to you. Good morning, Matt. Hi, thanks for having me. Thank you for being here. How are you feeling knowing that Donald Trump will be your president again? I think we're in a lot better place this morning with Donald Trump having won than we are if Kamala Harris had won. Why is that? Well, I think, you know, I've had a lot of these

conversations. And I boil it down to this simple phrase that I had a voter tell me, when Donald Trump was president, I had money left at the end of the month when Joe Biden and Kamala Harris were running the country, I had month left at the end of the money. I think a lot of it came down to financial issues for people, real table talk, kitchen table type issues for people, very worried about their children and their grandchildren's future, their retirement opportunities. And, you know, the border situation, the crime situation, just things that have really deteriorated over the last number of years. And I think people are scared. They're very worried. And I think they

saw four more years with Kamala Harris as just a continuation of that. And they looked at Donald Trump and said, look, I may not like, you know, how some of the things he says, but I know when he was president, we were doing a whole lot better. Can I ask you about that? I may not like some of the things he says. We heard this a lot from, we were just down in the United States and in Arizona and in Michigan and elsewhere talking to people. And you heard that from a lot of Donald Trump supporters, that they may not believe or they may not support, or they may not be comfortable with some of the things that he has done or said, but they're still willing to vote for him. Can you explain that to us? Yeah. Look, I think, you know, we kind of get caught up a lot of times in, you know,

the president being the role model or the president being, you know, the shoulder in chief, things along those lines. And they are, and they should be at times. But I think ultimately, at the end of the day, you're hiring a president to manage our company. You're hiring the president to manage our country. You're hiring the president to keep us out of trouble, keep us safe, keep us on a path of success. And if that's someone who has some character flaws, I think people look at that and say, yeah, that might not be somebody who I want to have dinner with, who I want to hang out with. But at the end of the day, that's somebody who I want running my country, who I want making these decisions because they're going to do a better job at it. As the end of the day, that's somebody who I want running my country, who I want making these decisions because they're going to do a better job at it.

As the chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party, are you at all given pause when his former chief of staff calls him a fascist? I don't agree with him. I think, you know, a lot of people say a lot of things about that. And look, politics is a dirty game. Politics has become a far more personal game uh i also think his former chief of staff is selling books um and so you know when you start looking at some of the motivations behind things that are said and done uh you have to take all that into situation and and you know when you have someone say that donald trump is a fascist yet And, you know, when you have someone say that Donald Trump is a fascist, yet the vast majority of people seem to want him back, they're like, we don't agree with you.

We disagree with you. We don't see that. You may believe that, but we don't. Is this his Republican Party now? Do you think Donald Trump's Republican Party? I think the president of the United States is always in charge of their party. This is different, though, right? There are a lot of people in the party who have had some concerns about him. They might have been Republicans.

Maybe they feel like the party has abandoned them. I just wonder whether he has now stamped his name on that party and stamped his ownership on that party. I think probably to a great extent he has. I think probably to a great extent he has. And look, at the end of the day also, I think when you look at what happened in the U.S. Senate and what's in all probability going to happen in the U.S. House, those are in large part because of Donald Trump and Donald Trump winning Pennsylvania, Donald Trump winning in Wisconsin, Donald Trump winning in places that he really wasn't supposed to win. That's taken us from a 49-member U.S. Senate to possibly as many as 54 when all is said and done. That's a huge increase. And the House is probably going to stay in control

of the Republicans. And I think you're going to see those three, the House, the Senate, and the White House, really moving forward on an agenda over the next two years. Can I ask you about that agenda and what that change is going to look like? He has said that he would use military force against his political opponents, that he would fire public servants by the thousands, that he would deport something like 11 million undocumented people in the United States. What should we take from those, the things that he has said? What should you take from the things that he has said? Do you think that that will be the change that you'll see in your country? I think, you know, again, political rhetoric is political rhetoric. And I think oftentimes you have to take a lot of things

with a grain of salt. I think ultimately, you're going to be looking at changes that are going to occur and changes that are needed. You know, when you talk about, you know, deporting people, I think you're going to start looking at, you know, I think there's a large sentiment that people who are here illegally, who are committing crimes, who are committing, you know, deporting people, I think you're going to start looking at, you know, I think there's a large sentiment that people who are here illegally, who are committing crimes, who are committing, you know, violent crimes, need to be removed from this country. These are people who, if they came here legally or attempted to come here legally, would not be allowed entrance into the country and not be allowed citizenship because of their records back home. But somehow they're okay to be here if they're not here legally. So I think, you know, he's taking the rhetoric to a particular position, but I think

ultimately when all is said and done, I think you're going to see some changes that will, you know, change the immigration policies, which everyone has agreed needs to be changed for at least the last 50 years that I know, but no one has ever really changed them and made it easier and a better process. I think what you saw with the Democrats utilizing of lawfare against him completely backfired on the Democrats. And as a result, I think they emboldened a lot of people to support Donald Trump because they looked at Donald Trump and said, if you can do this to the former president of the United States, what can you do to me as just a guy who's going to work every morning and trying to raise his family. So I think they were, in some

cases, metaphoric in what he was attempting to tell people. And I think we're going to see some changes come about that are probably needed and have long been needed and have long been discussed, but no one has ever done anything about. Just finally, you are in Connecticut. Kamala Harris won that state. 54 percent is the last count. What happens now in terms of trying to bring this country together? He ran a campaign that was, I think most people would admit, pretty dark, fairly nasty at times. Is he capable of bringing the country together and being a president for all the people, including the people in your state that voted for his opponent? Yeah, look, I think that's always the trick for any president.

I think, you know, Kamala Harris' campaign was not exactly the most positive, upbeat, fun campaign. And I think the same could have been said about her had she won, that she was going to have to bring together a country that's deeply divided. There's no ifs, ands, or buts about that. The country is deeply divided politically, and it's going to require a lot of work to try to bring people over. You know, when you have, you know, celebrities who, you know, think all of a sudden, oh, I got to leave this country, I'm going to move to Canada, you know, you may be getting some new residents, you know, or I'm leaving the country, or, you know, the world's going to come to an end. You know, we've been through this for 250 years in this country,

and those prognostications have never come true when they come about. Ben, we'll leave it there. Good to talk to you. Thank you very much. Thanks, Matt. You have a good day. Thanks for having me on. Ben Proto is chairman of the Connecticut Republican Party.

In 2017, it felt like drugs were everywhere in the news. So I started a podcast called On Drugs. In 2017, it felt like drugs were everywhere in the news. So I started a podcast called On Drugs. We covered a lot of ground over two seasons, but there are still so many more stories to tell. I'm Jeff Turner, and I'm back with season three of On Drugs. And this time, it's going to get personal. I don't know who Sober Jeff is.

I don't even know if I like that guy. On Drugs is available now wherever you get your podcasts. Kenesha Grant is an associate professor of political science at Howard University. She is in Washington, D.C. Kenesha, good morning to you. Good morning, Matt. It's great to talk to you again. How are you feeling this morning? I am unhappy and unsurprised. Okay.

Start with the unsurprised and then we'll get to the unhappy. I have training in political science, as you know, and the political scientists have a theory about understanding American polls that has guided my thinking about this race throughout the campaign season. And it's called the Bradley effect. I know your listeners are smarter than the average bear, so to speak. And so that this thing called the Bradley effect is basically this theory that individuals seek to be viewed positively by pollsters. And so sometimes they lie to pollsters. positively by pollsters. And so sometimes they lie to pollsters. And so when this information was coming out from the polls that the race was neck and neck, I took this to mean that individuals might not be telling the truth about what they intended to do in their political participation. And so as a result, and again, let me be clear, that a part of the reason that people don't tell the truth to pollsters is that they don't want to be viewed as racist or sexist or some other thing that is negative. And so I took from the polls being very close that it was likely that individuals had not been honest about their intention to support the vice president in her run for the presidency.

And for that reason, was unsurprised when we got the results that we got. Tell us about the unhappiness. I'm a black woman in America who teaches at Howard University. And so I have some identity points that are the same as Harris's. And so for that reason, would have been excited. But I also share many of her positions on policy and many of her positions about how the government should operate, how it should work. And so for that reason, was upset that she didn't get the opportunity to put forth her vision. She would have been the first black woman, the first South Asian woman to be president of the United States. Why do you think she couldn't get over the line? I think that this nation still has a lot of work to do as it pertains to race, as it pertains to being honest about race,

as it pertains to being honest about privilege that people have as a result of their own race or their own gender. have as a result of their own race or their own gender. I think that these kinds of things are sometimes not even intelligible to the individual who is benefiting from these privileges and so that they don't really have the ability to talk about them. And we don't have many moments in this nation where we are quiet and contemplating these things. We almost had a true and genuine moment in 2020 after George Floyd was murdered, but that moment didn't last. And the changes that came right after it are being rolled back in large quantity over the past four years. And certainly in the years days of this campaign and this opportunity agenda that she was directing toward them. You had the former president of the United States, Barack Obama, in many ways, scolding black men saying, get over yourself and vote for a woman. Why didn't those pitches land, do you think? Because the suggestion, and again, we're just getting the details now. It's the granular kind of information is just coming in. But the suggestion is that Donald Trump did a whole lot better with black men than people perhaps expected, especially in light of, of those pitches. that that information is uh like clear as clear as it has been described okay i think that we need to wait and get the like the the close data about what black men did um i think that democrats have

a an understanding or a hope that black people will turn out at rates of 95 or 98 percent for a democratic candidate uh which is a little bit unfair, I think. I think that there should be an ability to win a presidential race if two or three or even 5% of Black people, Black men or women defect from the Democratic Party. Do you think Obama was wrong to make those comments to Black men in particular? I don't think, I wouldn't make a – I wouldn't use the word wrong. I think that's what he believes. I think that it's necessary to campaign to black men as it is necessary to campaign to everyone else. I think the real thing that we need to be focused on is white women. We know from 2016 that many of them voted for Donald Trump, that they had great remorse for voting for Donald Trump, and we saw that through the Women's March that happened thereafter. great remorse for voting for Donald Trump. And we saw that through the Women's March that happened thereafter. And I think that the evidence might bear out the same kind of thing in this instance, that the Harris campaign made a big bet on women, made a big bet on reproductive freedom

under the assumption that they would come to her in their voting. And it does not seem to be the case that they bear it out. And I think if we look at the numbers, both the electoral college numbers and the numbers on the ground, those numbers, the numbers of white women supporting Kamala Harris are going to be what turned the tide in this election, not the two or three percent of black men who may have defected to Donald Trump. I ask you this as a professor of political science. I mean, there's a suggestion, this was mentioned this earlier, a house Democrat told the Washington post this morning that, um, the democratic party has had a long time problem with, uh, the working class that this started out with white voters and now is spread across racial lines that the issue is not so much about race or gender, but it's about

class right now. And that, that, that, that the Democrats have lost the working class. What do you make of that argument? I don't think we have enough time to deal with that argument in total. I think that we live in a capitalist society in the United States. And so in some way, somebody has to always be the working class.

And if there is going to be a ruling class or a class that is making like the most money, that this class of people has to in some way have an employee or somebody who does not make that much money. But that's not how we talk about the overall economy in America. That's not how we talk about the society. We talk about the society as one that should be good for everyone, one where everyone should have a basic living, where they should be doing well even, where they should be wealthy. I think the Republicans have said make America wealthy again. And if everyone is wealthy, that's a different system of government than a capitalist system.

I guess it's really about whether the Democrats took their eye off the ball in terms of what people were really focused on, that it was about, what was the James Carville? It's the economy stupid. Like that, that this was about the economy in many ways. He was talking about,

you know, the Clinton campaign way back when, but that, that was the issue now for people that people feel because of inflation, because of what they came out of through the pandemic, that, that, that that was the burning issue for them and that somehow the Democrats didn't

either understand that or didn't speak to it in a meaningful way. I think we can say that the Democrats didn't speak to it in a meaningful way. I do think they understood it. But if you are currently understood to be in charge of the economy, there's only so much that you can do to separate yourself from the economy. And Harris made it clear, and maybe this was one of the things that she should have done differently, that Joe Biden was her guy. And so maybe it could have been the case that she could have ran a campaign where she suggested that she was not like Biden, that everything that he had done was wrong,

and that she should be understood as a completely separate person. I don't know if people would have bought that. I think that she made the calculation that she was not going to be as compelling on the economy as he was, no matter what she said, because she was a sitting vice president, and so chose this other strategy as a result. Clearly, that was not the best route to take. Some other route would have maybe given her a different result. But I think that the thing about Trump and the economy and people's belief that he was better on the economy has to do with more about like their memory or lack of memory of what was happening before Biden came into office than it has to do with his pitch being necessarily better or more specific, stronger,

what have you. I'm assuming you had a long night. And so this last question is probably unfair at the best of times, but especially on not a lot of sleep. Where does your country go from here, do you think? That's a big question, Matt. And I knew that I was going to talk to you today, so there would be one in here somewhere. That's a big question, Matt. And I knew that I was going to talk to you today, so there would be one in here somewhere.

I think the country is being very clear about what the country wants, about what the country values, about what the country is willing to accept. And I think that the country values things, is willing to accept things that many of us would not have ever expected, especially people who have my background are surprised that individuals who have felonies can not only run for president, but vote and do all these other kinds of things that people who I grew up with will never have the opportunity to do. And so I think that at the moment, it depends on where you are in the country. Where we go depends on where you are. I heard the caller previously to me talking about people need to get in line behind Donald Trump. And the truth is, like, please have a government that works for everybody if that's possible.

Like, please do things that are great. Please do not be harmful. I don't think anybody on the Democratic side is anti-Donald Trump because they just want to be anti-Donald Trump. I think they're afraid. I have had many conversations this morning where people are expressing fear about their gay marriage or fear about their body or fear about the democracy. And so we would all love to have a president who doesn't incite that kind of fear, who maybe changes what he was saying on the campaign trail so that it's better in practice than what he talked about. But I don't know if that's going to happen. So I think we just have to wait and see how it turns out. It's good to

speak with you again, especially this morning. Kenesha, thank you. Thank you so much for the invitation. Kenesha Grant is an associate professor of political science at Howard University in Washington, D.C. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.