The Daily - Trump's Bad Week

Episode Date: November 7, 2025

Over the past few days, Republicans have suffered some major losses at the ballot box, Supreme Court justices have expressed skepticism about tariffs and Congress’s refusal to end the government shutdown will result in thousands of canceled flights. It adds up to a very bad week for the Trump White House.In a special round-table episode, The Times’s national political correspondent Lisa Lerer, the White House correspondent Tyler Pager and the congressional editor Julie Davis try to make sense of it all.Guests: Julie Hirschfeld Davis, congressional editor at The New York Times.Lisa Lerer, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.Tyler Pager, a White House correspondent for The New York Times, covering President Trump and his administration.Background reading: Republicans point fingers after their losses, but not at Trump.Here are five takeaways from the Supreme Court argument over tariffs.As the hours dwindled before flight cuts, the government spent most of the time in silence.Photo: Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesFor more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.  Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. You can also subscribe via your favorite podcast app here https://www.nytimes.com/activate-access/audio?source=podcatcher. For more podcasts and narrated articles, download The New York Times app at nytimes.com/app.

From New York Times, I'm Michael Bobarrow. This is the Daily. Over the past few days, President Trump has endured major setbacks at the ballot box where Republicans lost races across the country, at the Supreme Court, which appears poised to strike down his tariffs, and in Congress, whose refusal to end the government shutdown will result in thousands of canceled airline flights beginning on Friday. Today, I try to make sense of all of that with three of my colleagues,

national political correspondent Lisa Lair, White House correspondent Tyler Pager, and congressional editor Julie Davis. It's Friday, November 6th. So shall we get started? Yeah. Okay. Lisa Lairn.

Hi. Welcome back to the roundtable. Julie Davis, good to see you. Great to be here. Tyler Pager, always a pleasure. Thanks for having me. I want to start this conversation with you all with a very simple question for the three of you. has this been the worst week for President Trump in the second term?

I think there's a good case to make yes because voters actually weighed in on how he was doing. And I think we've seen a lot of polling, but it's different when people actually go to the ballot box and register their feelings. And their feelings were overwhelmingly opposed to the broader Republican Party at this point. And up until this week, President Trump has. has had remarkable success pushing forward on a number of fronts, just politically, as Tyler was saying, he hasn't had much in the way of obstacles in front of him. And we really saw that pivot a lot this week on a lot of different fronts. So I think it was a bit of a wake-up call. You've been nodding, Lisa. Yeah, I think the president learned and perhaps the country learned

that Democrats can, in fact, still win elections. This was a party that was pretty demoralized, and they got a huge boost of momentum and energy this past week. and showed, I think, the White House that there is still an opposition party. So it feels like the three tent polls of this not great week for the president is obviously number one, Tuesday's election. Perhaps number two, the Supreme Court's profound skepticism of the president's tariff regime.

And third, what I would describe as the metastasizing impacts of the government shutdown. Now, officially the longest in American history. Let's dive deeper into the first one. which is Tuesday night's election. We've now had several days, Lisa, to sift through the data in the aftermath of this election. And what we've discovered is just how meaningfully

the victorious Democratic winners, especially the governors, won over Trump voters, voters who voted for Trump just a year ago and made him president. Yeah, and so one statistic that really stood out to me in this whole thing is that Mikey Cheryl, the Democratic nominee, who now is Democratic governor-elect of New Jersey, got more than 300,000 more votes than the Democratic nominee did in the last off-year election like this, which was 2021. So not only did she mobilize Democrats, she also got voters who were not previously voting for Democrats, people who voted for President Trump. And in particular there, we're looking at black and Latino voters. Trump made some real inroads in those.

communities in 2024. And what we saw in these elections is some of those voters came back to Democrats that Trump was, in fact, like renting. He didn't own those voters. It's not a permanent coalition. And for the White House, that's a big blow because that means that people are changing their minds about Trump in a negative way, that they were excited about the president. They voted for him. And now they're coming to the bowls and saying, well, this isn't really working for us. Just voting Democrat. Right. And just to be very specific, and here I'm going to crib from our colleague, Nate Cohn, he found that Hispanic voters in New Jersey, where Mike U.S. Cheryl is now governor-elect, that group of voters really swung from Trump to

Cheryl. And let me give you the number. Exit polls found that Cheryl won 18 percent of Trump's Hispanic support in New Jersey. That's a pretty big number, wouldn't you say, Tyler? Yeah, I mean, I think one of the things that Democrats are excited about, is that they were able to win over these voters that were a long part of their base and had been slipping away. These coalitions that parties have relied on for decades are just way more movable than I think they had been. Right. Which gives both parties opportunities, but also has warning signs for both parties who were relying on voters to turn out and support them and are not reliably doing so in the same ways. And I think what they want on the Democrats

is really important, perhaps the most important thing. about that? Well, all three of the candidates and really the major races here. So, governor of New Jersey, governor of Virginia, and mayor of New York City, which captured outside attention, as it is want to do, ran on really these messages that were so focused on cost of living and affordability. Like this was the, my rent, housing, electricity, grocery, health care costs are all too damn high election. And they did that successfully. The reason why that is so unnerving for Republicans is traditionally economics have been a very strong point for the president. People have thought that he would do a better job handling the economy than the Democrats.

And we've really seen that edge erode to the point where Democrats were able to run a very successful campaign, almost exclusively focused on those issues, along with a heavy dose of, you know, opposition to the president who's long been probably the best motivator for Democrats in the country. And to your point, I had a conversation just before the election with Steve Bannon, one of President Trump's longtime advisors, who was very concerned about the president's hyper-focus on foreign policy. He's meeting with foreign leaders multiple times a week. He's done a lot of global travel. He has not been traveling at all really domestically outside his homes in Florida,

New Jersey. And some of the president's longtime advisors are saying, you need to get back to focusing on the American people. But why did the president take, and this is for all of you, Why did the president take his eye off of the economy? It's not exactly news to him based on his presidential election victory a year ago that he won because of Americans' economic insecurities and their belief that he was going to make life more affordable. Well, but I think that he has focused on the economy in a lot of ways, right? We've talked about how he really leaned into tariffs and imposing tariffs on various countries, but he kept on making the case that that was going to help Americans and help consumers and help manufacturers. during in this country. You look at the big tax cut bill that he spent a lot of political capital and a lot of time pushing through Congress earlier this year. That was supposedly all about the

economy. I think the problem has been that in doing all of those things, he has really seen a blowback. Some of the tariffs have had negative effects on people in the United States. Same thing on the tax bill. In order to pay for that bill, they imposed massive Medicaid cuts. They cut nutritional benefits for Americans. And that was a calculated gamble that a tax cut was going to be politically positive for them. But in the end, that did not help a big portion of his coalition. So I don't think it's that he hasn't been focused at all on the economy. It's just some of the impacts of what he has chosen to do are now just starting to be felt.

And Michael, just to add on to that, it's very reminiscent in some ways of Joe Biden's presidency. Because Joe Biden passed all this legislation and promised that the economy was going to get better, but said that it would take time. A lot of what Trump has done, he said, is in service of the economy, the tariffs, Julie, said, the tax cut, trying to take stake of companies saying he's bringing in all this business and investment into the United States. But that is something that happens over a many-year period. And I think that is a challenge for presidents who are stewarding an economy is Americans want relief right now, and it's often hard to deliver that. It's one thing, of course, for Democrats to have won races in blue places, right? New York City, blue. New Jersey, pretty blue.

Virginia, pretty blue, although a little bit less than perhaps in Jersey and New York. But Lisa Lear, I noticed these two races that nobody thought all that much about in Georgia, statewide commission races,

where Democrats ousted Republicans by, like, the largest margins in decades. And if I'm the president, that would really worry me. Yeah, I think the scale, of the Democratic wins here is really important, as you're pointing out. We sort of was widely expected in the newsroom. We anticipated that Democrats would win those three major races that we've

talked about. But it was these lower races. They made huge gains in the Virginia Statehouse. They won these two Georgia Utility Board races, which, you know, I talked to Republicans there and they said, well, we weren't paying attention to this. We weren't invested in it. But, you know, Democrats still flipped those seats. And the margins were really high. It shows that the energy is still there. And it shows that Republicans haven't solved one of their most sort of pernicious problems, which is their inability to get their voters to turn out when Donald Trump's name is not on the ballot. Right. That has been a problem for them since 2017, and they still haven't solved it. Julie, I want to ask this to you because you wrote a whole book

about immigration. Lisa's suggesting that this election may serve as a rebuke broadly of Trump, perhaps not just his economic agenda, the whole package. Do you think it's possible that among the parts of the package that voters rejected on Tuesday was something like the very big disruptive immigration crackdown? I'm thinking back to the turnout of Hispanic voters in New Jersey, the number of Hispanic voters who went for Trump just a year or so ago and went from Mikey Cheryl there. Yeah, I mean, listen, it's always very possible to overread the results of these. elections and off years. Off year elections. And lots of issues of play, all of which we've been

talking about. But yeah, I think in general there is a pretty good possibility that all of the chaos and disruption that those raids have had, the fear that's been sown in some of these communities is showing up in some of these results, not least because the overarching goal of why President Trump said he wanted to do this, lowering crime and getting people out of this country who shouldn't be here. People are not feeling the positive impact that he may have promised. And all they're seeing is these very aggressive and in some cases brutal tactics in their cities, in their towns. And I think it's very possible that that's having an impact on how people are evaluating both parties right now. Okay, so that is Tuesday's

election. The next blow to Trump in this pretty bad week for him came from what We mostly think of as a very reliable source of strength for the president, his conservative majority in the Supreme Court, which started to express these huge misgivings about the president's legal rationale for his tariffs. Julie, to me, what was so interesting about how the conservative justices spoke about these tariffs was that they were so overtly offended, it felt, by the way Trump is taking power from Congress. We heard Neil Gorsuch, who, by the way, is a Trump appointee, not to mention one of the most conservative. justices on the court, and we played this clip on yesterday's daily. But he basically said, if I sign off on this, it's a path toward congressional irrelevance. And no one's really said that to the president before. Right. The only people who have been saying that to the president, much this year, have been Democrats in Congress who have been watching with increasing alarm

as he imposes tariffs, tries to make unilateral moves on spending. But it was really striking to hear the justices in the selves voice those concerns. Incidentally, this has been a concern rising on the Republican side as well. We've seen just in the last week, the Senate's taken three different votes on ending various tariffs that President Trump has imposed. All of them passed, but none of them have a chance of being enacted, of course, because the House is not going to take them up, and President Trump certainly won't sign them. But what they are is a very clear sign that there is rising unease, even on the Republican side, with the president taking this power away from Congress

and using it himself in ways that many of them are concerned are really going to hurt their constituents. And you know who else doesn't like tariffs? Voters. The voters, it's really interesting because I was in, this conversation reminding me, I was in North Carolina in February. And the tariffs were just starting.

They were talking about them. And I was asking people, you know, what do you think about this? And even some moderate Democrats said, Well, we've got to give the president more time. This is what he promised to do. Let's see how it works out. Fast forward nine months.

And these women running for governor in Virginia and New Jersey are running assailing the tariffs, just laying into them. They're really unpopular. And I think not only do people believe that they have hurt the economy and maybe contribute to these affordability concerns, they also, because of the back and forth and the headlines and the next headline, the next one, they also add to this sense of chaos coming out of Washington that, people also, I think, were reacting to in some of these results. Tyler, the president, I have to imagine, is preparing for the very real possibility that the Supreme Court, his Supreme Court in a lot of ways, is about to strike down this centerpiece of his agenda, these tariffs. And so I wonder what his plan is and also if he's upset by it. I mean, look, Michael, President Trump loves tariffs. He has loved the tool for decades, and he tried to do a more aggressive tariff regime in the first term but was held.

back by some advisors. And so he is going to be very, very disappointed to put it mildly if the Supreme Court overrules his ability to do this. He likes the unilateral aspect of it. We've seen throughout his presidency. He likes to sign executive orders. He doesn't like to defer to other agencies or to Congress. And he is very focused, as we talked about earlier, on foreign policy. And so if his ability to institute tariffs is rolled back by the Supreme Court, He's going to be extremely angry. And it's unclear what his strategy is going to be. Maybe he'll try to go through the process of getting approval from Congress.

But as Julie said, they're not all so interested in his current posture. They may not give him that power, even if he were to do what, in the eyes of many Supreme Court justices, is the right thing, which is to go to Congress and get the authority. Okay. So we're going to take a break. When we come back, we're going to talk through the final element of the president's rough week, which very much does involve Congress. and that is the increasingly dire dynamics surrounding the government shutdown and the possibility of airline Armageddon. We'll be right back.

Okay, we're back. Lisa, Julie, Tyler, welcome back. It hasn't been that long, but so good to see you still here. The final way in which this week has proven so taxing for President Trump is that the shutdown moved into even darker territory because after hurting hundreds of thousands of government workers who weren't getting paid and millions of Americans who rely on food stamps, the shutdown is now about to hit millions of people

who don't have that closer relationship to the government. government who just want to get on a plane and fly. We just got a list of 40 airports that the administration says have to cut flights by 10 percent each. Tyler, first to you, what is that really about? Is it about safety? Or is it about the president and those around him deliberately trying to deepen the crisis of the shutdown to try to end it? Yeah, look, Michael, what we can point to is what the Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said, which was that the reductions were an attempt to, quote, alleviate the pressure on air traffic controllers. Prior to these cuts, we've seen flight delays, flight cancellations, because air traffic controllers are working without pay. And in previous shutdowns,

we've seen that they just start calling in sick and don't show up to work because they don't want to work without getting paid. Right. But also, Michael, to your point, the way that shutdowns off and end is through political pain points. One of the biggest ones is the troops not getting paid. The president has sort of taken that off the table. Right. You explained that in our last round table, how he worked around that. Exactly. So I think there are many people that see this as the administration trying to ratchet up the pressure, particularly on Democrats, who they've been saying need to reopen the government. But Michael, what's really interesting is that President Trump seems to really only be focused on negotiating with Republicans, not with Democrats. Jeffries and

Schumer, the two Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, requested a meeting with President Trump. But the president is really just calling on Republicans to abolish the filibuster as a path forward. I'll defer to Julie on all matters of the filibuster. But really, he wants to see the shutdown end by Republicans blowing up Senate rules, not really bringing the Democrats to the table and figuring out how to get compromised. Julie, is this the 20th time we ask you to explain the filibuster? That seems low, but happy to do it. The filibuster is relevant here because the Democrats are blocking passage of a bill that would reopen the government, which needs 60 votes because the filibuster allows any senator to block action on any bill unless the proponents

can get 60 votes to let it move forward. Right now, the Republicans don't have those votes. They only control 53 votes in the Senate. There are only three members of the Democratic caucus who have been voting for a spending bill. So they're stuck. And rather than try to engage in any real negotiation with the Democrats, as Tyler said, President Trump's position has been, wait them out, try to get him to cave, and in the meantime, put pressure on Republicans on his own party to blow up the filibuster rule so that they can just ram through a spending bill and not worry at all about what the Democrats want. That is clearly not going to happen. John Thune, the majority leader, has said many times he does not have the votes to do that. There are 15 or so Republicans who are

dug in against doing so. And why are they dug it? Because that's another notable rebuke of Trump in this past week or so. Right. I mean, it's really because of the be careful what you wish for rule of the United States Senate, which is if they do this, then when and if the Democrats win the majority, they would be able to ram through whatever legislation they wanted to get through the Senate without any regard for what the Republicans wanted. And to do it for a third. And to do it for a three or four or five week temporary government spending bill would be really quite remarkable because this is a Senate precedent that has been around for many, many decades, and the votes are just not there to do it. But it's interesting to hear Trump say that he thinks it's not

necessarily Democrats. It's Republicans. It's his own party who have to get off the dime in order to end this thing. But it's hard to believe that there isn't a parent. effort going on to get Democrats to do what Trump has believed from the very beginning that they would have done weeks ago, which is cave and just finally allow the government to reopen. I'm just not sure how much the air travel will force Democrats to cave, right? If they didn't cave over snap benefits, you know, it's only 20% of people or so in the country that fly more than three times a year. Like most people, a lot of people don't fly at all. That's a great stat. Where did you find you find that? I looked that up when this happened because I was curious, like, how many people do. does this actually impact? Now, granted, I looked it up. It was like 44% or something fly once a year. And if you fly once a year, there's a chance you're flying over Thanksgiving, right? It's a major holiday, American holiday. I mean, it impacts a lot of people. The footage that'll be running on all the

news of these lines and chaos at airports is certainly bad. But I'm not, I do wonder if this is the thing that causes Democrats who are coming off this very big suite of wins who feel like they have the wind at their back to come to the table with concessions. Now, you're saying you don't think it will be the thing. No, I'm not sure it will be. I mean, we can't know. And, you know, the holidays will be approaching and that obviously people travel. It's a heavy travel season.

But I do think there are divides in the Democratic Party. And some of that has to do with how they are interpreting the results, right? There's certainly a group of people in the party who say these results show that voters want Democrats to fight. You know, they like to say resist Trump. and they absolutely should not give in on the shutdown that they're being rewarded for refusing to give in to Trump to keep the government open. But I do think there's another group of Democrats

who look at these results and say, this was not about the shutdown. This was about cost of living. And the risk with this is that if the shutdown doesn't end, all those cost of living pressures get worse and worse for people. And in fact, they really want the shutdown to end and then move to this issue that they see as more politically salient and positive for them,

which is talking about cost of living. an affordable. Well, but here's the riddle, right? The last batch of polling that I looked at, correct me if you've seen more recent polling, is that most Americans are still blaming the shutdown on Republicans and on Trump. So if you combine that with the election results on Tuesday, and like you said, this view that Democratic resistance is good for the party, if you put all those things together and layer in one more thing, President Trump himself said on election night that the shutdown is why Democrats did well. If those things were all in the air,

what incentive do the Democrats have to end the shutdown? The shutdown's been working. And the shutdown's about affordability on some level, which is health care. I mean, I think one incentive is it's quite bad for people, right? Like the SNAP benefits are going to be a big problem. They may be delayed. The airline travel is going to get messier and messier. You know, at some point, that could reverberate against Democrats.

But there are real consequences, right? So certainly one would hope that for people in elected office, that would be some kind of an incentive. But you're right. I think there is a sense in the Democratic Party that they see the same numbers you do. And I've been told in their internal numbers that they're doing in battleground states that they do see that President Trump is so far carrying the blame for this. But that could, of course, change. I will say that after the results on Tuesday, there was a real notable shift in the sort of body language coming from Democrats. before the elections, I think there was a real sense of they felt that they had won the messaging fight here. Their message about extending the expiring Obamacare subsidies had resonated. People

agreed with them. That was showing in the polls. But also that this was starting to be very painful and they needed to find an off-ramp here that would get some sort of concession that they've been asking for, but also allow the government to reopen pretty quickly. I think there was a little bit of a pivot, frankly, after the results came in, and particularly after Trump, like you said, Michael, said the next morning that the elections were lost in part because of the shutdown. The shutdown was bad for Republicans. I think that did give Democrats at least a few more days here of feeling like they really needed to put up a fight and try to get the best possible deal they could get in exchange for reopening the government. And some of this, of course, also in terms

of Democrats, depends on where they sit. So if you were a Democrat that's looking at a tough midterm re-election race in a purple state, you may be slightly more inclined towards getting a deal. If you were a Democrat who is wistfully looking at 2028 as a presidential run, and what we all sort of expect is going to be a very crowd and chaotic field, you may be looking at resistance and showing that you're a fighter against the administration as a better political play. So there are these political cross currents in the party, too. So just to wrap this all up, friends, everything we're talking about here points to the success of an anti-Trump message in this moment. And the question, of course, is, is Trump going to really change in response to that? Is he going to be more focused on the economy? Is he going to be talking about affordability? Is he going to be ratcheting back some of the more divisive elements of his agenda? Or, is he going to remain exactly as he has

and stay focused on international diplomacy, mass deportations, White House renovations, from the east wing to a bathroom off the Lincoln bedroom, now clad in statuary marble. Is this, Tyler, Julie, I'm curious what you're thinking, Lisa, too, going to potentially, if it really is the worst week of the second term,

maybe going to make the president rethink some of this stuff and change. Michael, it's really interesting. I think back to this moment, on the campaign where Trump had a campaign event in New Jersey where his advisors wanted him to focus on inflation. And what they did was they set up this table of all these different grocery items for him to highlight how prices rose under the Biden administration. But privately, Trump didn't want to talk about that. He thought it was boring. His aides were like,

please just talk about the economy briefly, and then you can go talk about whatever you want. So he goes out to this table with all these groceries and says, you know, my advisors want me to talk about this, but I'm not all that interested in this. But they say I need to do it. So here's the speech and basically says it's boring and then moves on. And I think about that because I think it's going to be really hard for the president to fully pivot and just focus on the economy. He's really interested in renovating the White House, as you said, and he really wants to win the Nobel Peace Prize. And he didn't win it this year. And there's more foreign conflicts that he thinks he can solve to bolster. his case. And look, I think there may be moments where his advisors are successful in convincing him to stay focused on the economy. I know he is deeply concerned about losing the midterms and Democrats taking control of the House and investigating him. And so his age are trying to redistrict and do other things to try to make it possible for the Republicans sold the House. But I don't imagine a full pivot from Trump on messaging. I think he feels vindicated by his win and focus on what he wants to do,

and there's only so much his advisors are able to convince him to focus on as evidenced by that scene during the campaign. I think that the overarching thing that we can take from what Trump said after Tuesday is not that he's changing so much as that he's doubling down.

I mean, the fact that he went directly to, we now have to change the rules to ram through as many things as we can before the Democrats can get control and ram through as many things as they want to do, I think tells you what you need to know about whether his message or his pitch has changed it all. And while I think it's certainly the case that his advisors at the White House and probably he on some level recognize that there was a reckoning in these election results, a lot of these things are already in train. The tariffs are already in place.

The tax cut and all these Medicaid cuts are already there. And I think this is going to become a messaging battle in the run-up to the midterms. And the message seems to be, we did all the right things. We just need to talk about them better. That's what Speaker Johnson said this week after the election results, not that there was any real lesson for the party, but just that they needed to sell President Trump's policies more effectively than they have in the past. Just like Democrats during Joe Biden's entire presidency. It sounded very familiar to what Democrats said the entire time, which is that. Nothing wrong has been done. No policy change is needed. It's just a messaging change. And I think we know from history that Trump is not a person who really changes his approach very much. So I think despite all of the rebukes that he received this week, he is in a posture of doubling down. And we've seen the Republican Congress generally follow in his footsteps at those kinds of moments. So that's where we are now.

Well, Julie, Tyler, Lisa, thank you all very much. Thanks so much, Michael. Thanks for having us. Thanks for having us. On Thursday night, Trump faced a new setback. A federal judge ordered the administration to fund food stamps in full for about 42 million low-income America. during the shutdown, something the president has repeatedly resisted. In his ruling, the judge criticized the White House for attempting to delay such payments,

writing, quote, this should never happen in America. The Justice Department almost immediately told the court that it planned to appeal the ruling. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to another day. Tesla shareholders have approved a compensation package for their founder, Elon Musk, that could be worth as much as $1 trillion. The pay plan is the largest in corporate here. history for a CEO. The arrangement, which requires Tesla to hit ambitious financial milestones

under Musk, aroused skepticism from some shareholders. But Musk had threatened to leave Tesla if the plan had been rejected. And on Thursday, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said that she will retire from Congress when her term expires in 27. ending a path-breaking career in which she rose to become the most powerful woman in American government. In a video, Pelosi said that after nearly 40 years in the House of Representatives, the time had finally come to leave it. I say to my colleagues in the House all the time, no matter what title they have bestowed upon me,

speaker, leader, whip, there has been no greater honor for me than to stand on the House. floor and say, I speak for the people of San Francisco. I have truly loved serving as your voice in Congress. And I've always honored with someone of St. Francis. Today's episode was produced by Mary Wilson and Stella Tan. It was edited by Chris Haxel and Paige Callet, with help from Rachel Custer. Contains music by Roney Misto and Dan Powell. engineered by Alyssa Moxley. The Daily's engineers are Chris Wood and Alyssa Moxley, with engineering support from

Brad Fisher, Maddie Massiello, Nick Pittman, and Kyle Grandillo. Our theme song is by Ben Lansfirk and Jim Brunberg of Wonderly. Our radio team is Jody Becker. Ruyn Misto, Diane Wong, and Catherine Anderson. Alexandra Lee Young is our deputy executive producer. Michael Benoit is our deputy editor. Paige Cowitt is the editor of the Daily. Ben Calhoun is our executive producer.

Special thanks to Paula Schumann, Larissa Anderson, Sam Dolnick, and to the founding editor of the show, Lisa Tobin. That's it for the Daily. I'm Michael Barrow. See you on Monday.