The NPR Politics Podcast - Roundup: Mike Waltz Is Out, Young Democrats Ask What's Next, And Can't Let It Go

Episode Date: May 2, 2025

Mike Waltz is out as President Trump's National Security Adviser, it's the first major departure for the Trump White House since the start of his second term. Then, young Democrats are expressing dissatisfaction with their party, and making moves: primarying sitting incumbent lawmakers in the House of Representatives. This episode: political correspondent Sarah McCammon, White House correspondent Asma Khalid, national security correspondent Greg Myre, and political reporter Elena Moore.The podcast is produced by Bria Suggs & Kelli Wessinger and edited by Casey Morell. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi.Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Support for NPR and the following message come from Jarl and Pamela Mohn, thanking the people who make public radio great every day and also those who listen. This is Will from Concord, California. I'm currently drinking a beer in a Munich beer garden. This podcast was recorded at 1241 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, May 2nd, 2025. Things may have changed by the time you hear it, but hopefully I'll be enjoying another beer. Prost. Prost. Cheers.

I can't say it. Yeah. Cheers. Wow. I'll have a drink right after this podcast. It is Friday. Hey there. It's the NPR Politics Podcast.

I'm Sarah McCammon. I cover politics. I'm As McCammon. I cover politics. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. And I'm Greg Myrie. I cover national security. And today on the show, Mike Walz is out as national security advisor. He's at least temporarily being replaced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Greg, we're going to talk about that today. And I want to start with you because you've been covering a lot of these issues all week. What exactly is happening with Waltz? Right. So Mike Waltz was pushed out in that key role in the White House and Trump says he'll nominate him to be US ambassador to the United Nations. Now Trump wouldn't be doing this if he wasn't unhappy at some level with Waltz's performance, but he does seem to be giving him this consolation prize at the UN.

Now, Waltz took responsibility for accidentally adding a journalist to that now infamous Signal Group chat back in March, and that was probably one contributing factor. We have some tape of Trump talking about that a while back. Well, yeah, Mike Waltz, I guess he said he claimed responsibility, I would imagine. It had nothing to do with anyone else. It was Mike, I guess. I don nothing to do with anyone else it was Mike I guess I was told it was Mike but again the attacks were unbelievably successful and that's ultimately what you should be talking about Mike did he took responsibility for now we should also note Waltz had

taken some policy positions that seemed to be a bit out of sync with Trump. Before he joined Trump's team, he was very tough on Russia and supportive of Ukraine in contrast to Trump. So this may have also been a factor. So he's going to stay in the administration. He's being moved to UN ambassador, but he is losing his current position. I mean, does it look like this is sort of punishment for Signalgate? Well, it's punishment for something, certainly, and Signalgate would seem to

be part of that. Perhaps one of his those who did not like him in the White House or in the national security team used that to help push him out, and now he'll have to go and be confirmed by the Senate for this new position. So this this could come up again. And Marco Rubio will be stepping in to fill that job, at least temporarily. And the first thing Rubio may have to do is clone himself, because he's going to need to be in two places at once. The Secretary of State is in constant motion, traveling from one foreign capital to the

next. In contrast, the National Security Advisor is usually quite close to the president. His natural habitat is the White House and often the Situation Room, working with the Pentagon, the CIA, the State Department, and sorting out and helping the president sort out possible policy options. So it's really not a natural fit to do both jobs simultaneously. Just one last note, the last time this happened, one person holding both of those jobs was under President Nixon when Henry Kissinger had both roles.

So it's been a while. I mean, Asma, what is the White House saying about all this? So thus far, as of this taping, we have not actually heard from President Trump weighing in, offering some context for why he made this decision. We did hear from the Vice President, JD Vance, who did an interview yesterday with Fox News' Brett Baer, and they are trying to reshape the narrative around this decision, argue that it wasn't about philosophical disagreements. But Vance ultimately argued that this had nothing to do with the group chat that Greg

was referring to, and they were really trying to downplay any level of controversy. The media wants to frame this as a firing. Donald Trump has fired a lot of people. He doesn't give them Senate confirmed appointments afterwards. Look, I think anybody who's covered Washington, anybody who's covered the White House for a while will know that at least in current political dynamics, the national security advisor is a far more influential role than being the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. And secondly, I will say, this is a job that is going to require Senate confirmation. So it's not a done deal.

And you know, those signal group chats that Greg was referring to earlier, they are very likely to come up in Senate confirmation hearings. And it's not clear how that might actually impact his confirmation. SONIA DARA, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC

CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT, MSNBC CORRESP of USAID and he has a job, what, acting archivist of the United States. He's gonna have his hands full. How is this going to work? I think it's an excellent question how it will actually in practical logistical terms work. It hasn't been done for several decades at this point and, you know, when Kissinger did this in the early 1970s, it certainly came with some controversy. It wasn't necessarily the norm. You know, I called up Katie Dunn-Pass about this. She's over at the Brookings Institution because she is somebody who has researched and studied staffing in various presidential

administrations. And she told me that the idea of somebody having multiple roles was something that caught her attention during President Trump's first term because he did this. He did this with somebody who was both the director of his Office of Management and Budget and then he also gave him the job of being the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. And it caught her attention because she said she had never seen this in prior administrations, that people were doled out and giving, say, like two, three jobs. But it seems to be a returning trend here now in Trump's second term. You know, Greg, it wasn't just Mike Walz who got attention because of Signalgate.

I think all remember Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was also a big part of that story. What does this mean for him? Well, given Trump's unpredictability, it's very hard to say, but it does look like Hegseth is probably safe for the moment. But we should note he's still facing a lot of criticism. Several top advisors, and these were his hand-picked advisors have been dismissed so it does seem there's still some turmoil at the Pentagon. And Sarah we should note that the Trump administration is dealing with several tough foreign policy issues

right now. The Russia-Ukraine war where the ceasefire that Trump wants is proving elusive. The Israel-Hamas war where a ceasefire collapsed. wants is proving elusive, the Israel Hamas war where a ceasefire collapsed, and the US bombing campaign against the Houthis in Yemen. It's been going on daily for the past seven weeks now, though we hear very little about it. All right. It's time for a quick break. Greg, we're going to say goodbye to you for now. Thanks for joining us today. Sure thing. My pleasure. When we get back, how young people are trying to change the Democratic Party on the indicator from Planet Money podcast we're here to

help you make sense of the economic news from Trump's tariffs it's called in game theory a trigger strategy or sometimes called grim trigger which sort of has a cowboy s green to it to what exactly a sovereign wealth fund is. For insight every weekday, listen to NPR's The Indicator from Planet Money. Support for NPR and the following message come from Yarle and Pamela Mohn, thanking the people who make public radio great every day and also those who listen. And we're back. And we're joined now by Elena Moore, who's here to talk to us about how young Democrats are approaching the midterms.

Hi, Elena. Hey, guys. Good to have you here. So the Democratic Party is, I think, safe to say, struggling at this moment to find their footing after the 2024 election, which, of course, saw Republicans take control of the House, the Senate, and the presidency. Not to mention the House, the Senate, and

the presidency. Not to mention the fact that the Supreme Court is controlled by conservatives as well. An NBC News poll in March found that just over a quarter of registered voters say they have a positive view of the Democratic Party. Elena, you've been reporting on young voters for a while. People seem to be angry, but that anger is spurring some young people, some young Democrats to get involved in politics, right? Yeah. I think that this anger is being channeled, you know, people will say in the past, channel your anger into action. And I think that that's a very clear trend that we're seeing on the Democratic side right now. There is more than a handful of young people in their 20s and

30s who have launched bids for Congress to challenge sitting Democratic members of the House. And they share a common message. They say, we need a new generation, we need new voices, and the current voices are not cutting it. It's something we've seen over and over again from folks in Florida to California to Indiana to Michigan. And they're popping up and we're still kind of far from the midterms right now. There was a new Harvard youth poll that just came out that surveys folks under 30. And it showed that young voters now approve of the job that Republicans are doing in Congress at higher

rates than they do Democrats in Congress. It's like 29% to 23%. And for Democrats, that's like a 25-point drop from the fall of 2020. So not only is the Democratic Party down bad among the whole country, but I would say, especially among this group, there is anger. You know, we've talked a lot in recent months about the shift to the right among younger voters, especially young men. We saw that in the exit polls in 24, which makes me wonder, Elena, these, these Democrats were talking about these young Democratic candidates who are already running for office

ahead of the next year's midterms. Are they identifying as more liberal or sort of how do they fall in the political spectrum? Yeah, I mean, these are two generations, the millennials and the Gen Zers. It's a lot of people, you know, no one is a monolith. I feel like I should get that like tattooed in my arm. But so far, a lot of these democratic challengers that through line is they're all pretty angry with the party. But yeah, they do have slightly different ideological stances.

And I think we'll see that play out as their campaigns either pick up steam or they don't. But I had one candidate tell me in an interview, his name is Shoikot Chakrabarti and he's running to unseat Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the house. That's going to be a big challenge. But he told me, you know, he's pushing issues over party. And that's something we've heard young people say a lot. I don't think I just fit into like a neat progressive, oh, I actually want to do stuff. And I think that's like the real divide also is in politics. It's not just progressive versus moderates.

I think it's doing versus not doing, you know, it's action versus inaction. And, you know, he was like, don't get me wrong. I support a lot of progressive issues. He was like, I think that healthcare should be more accessible. I think the minimum wage should be higher. But then he was also like, don't get me wrong, I support a lot of progressive issues. He was like, I think that healthcare should be more accessible. I think the minimum wage should be higher. But then he was also like, we need to rebuild high wage American jobs.

And he was like, that's something Trump says, but I actually want to do it. So I think that it's going to be interesting to see how some of these folks really focus on issues over party. And again, the Harvard Youth Poll, for years we've seen that party affiliation for folks, especially younger folks under 30, is pretty split. They're, you know, Dem, Republican, Independent. It's not that different. In this latest one, around 47% of young people surveyed identified as independents, and then

like 24, 24 Dem and Republicans. So we saw that Democrats are continuing to struggle with this generation. They have really low approval rating. And you know, we know that in the 2024 election, Trump made pretty noticeable gains with young voters. It's a generation that does trend Democratic in past years, but he kind of chipped away at Democrats lead there in the last election. But to say they have a political home is not the case. Alaina, I do want you to contextualize what some of these challenges actually mean, because it is incredibly difficult, I imagine, to unseat an incumbent. And so, yes, I understand people seem like they're frustrated perhaps with their party, but what are their odds

here, would you say? I think this is probably one of the hardest things you could do in politics is unseat an incumbent. I talked to Amanda Lippman about this who runs the organization Run for Something, which helps state and local progressive candidates that are younger run for office. And she was like, look, for every Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the younger member, progressive member who won in 2018 in New York, ousted a member of Democratic leadership, she said for every AOC, there were so many candidates who did not

take out the incumbent. And I think that's important to remember, that when this happens, it's quite dramatic. And it shocks a lot of folks. But it's hard. I mean, the people who challenge incumbents, incumbents have a huge bully pulpit. They have fundraising networks. They've done this a long time and running for office is tiring and takes a lot of reps sometimes.

So I think it's much harder to do than it sounds. And the other thing is unlike in 2018, when we did see some of these candidates run for office and win, I'm thinking of Ayanna Pressley in Massachusetts, who also challenged a sitting incumbent and won. You know, that was a little less, you know, publicized, I think you could say. AOC was running against Joe Crowley. That race was kind of a sleeping giant. I think you can argue that Crowley didn't see her as a threat, and that probably helped AOC. The incumbent in her district at the time. Yes, Crowley.

And I think that that probably helped her. And these days, we are following these challengers a lot closer, a lot earlier, and incumbents are going to have to keep an eye out for them. You know, Asma, you mentioned you covered the 2018 midterms. So did I. I mean, I think we remember there was this big surge on the Democratic side of anti-Trump energy, a real push to organize and mobilize, particularly women and people of color as

incoming candidates. How does this moment compare, really a question for both of you, to eight years ago? You're correct in identifying that there was a lot of energy on the left that was anger towards President Trump at that point in time. I mean, I remember going out to Michigan where that midterm election cycle, they took over the governorship and a lot of that organization was happening the door knocking by women, women who were just really frustrated with the 2016 election results.

I think what is striking to me about this election cycle is that the anger amongst some on the left doesn't seem to be solely directed towards Donald Trump. It seems to also be directed at their own ostensible party, which was the Democratic Party. So there's a sense among Democrats that, you know, their party really messed up. They kind of dropped the ball here and these younger candidates are challenging, you know, members of their own party, these incumbents saying, I guess that they think they can do a better job.

Yeah, I think so. And it's funny, there's I think there's an argument that like, yes, they want to see more fight and anger against Trump. Also, like for a lot of these people, either they were very young adults when Trump was elected, or this was like all they've ever known is Donald Trump as their politics. And so I think for a lot of these people, they're like, why are we not pulling the fire alarm at a level that a lot of these people want? And then on top of that, they're like, but how are you still going to advocate for people? I had one candidate tell me we need more members who know what it's like to go to a pharmacy

and like kind of cross your fingers that the prescription is affordable and know what it's like to be someone who struggles to pay the bills and can empathize with just what a lot of current Americans are feeling, not as an age thing, but as a lived experience thing, which you might not if you've been in Congress for decades. All right. We're going to take one more quick break and then we'll come back for Can't Let It Go. And we're back with everybody's favorite Friday segment, Can't Let It Go.

That is, as we know, the part of the show where we talk about the things from the week that we just can't stop thinking about politics or hopefully otherwise. Asma, I'm going to start with you. Okay, sorry to disappoint you, but mine is actually related to politics this week. So earlier this week, President Trump was at a cabinet meeting at the White House, and he was speaking, you know, trying to dismiss some of the anxiety about potentially higher prices from his tariff policy. And he made this comment.

Much of it we don't need. You know, somebody said, oh, the shelves are going to be open. Well, maybe the children will have two dolls instead of $30. And maybe the two dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally. So I definitely didn't have 30 dolls. But look, like I, especially now being a mom and like walking into a toy store,

can acknowledge that you sometimes get overwhelmed. Like we have a lot of options as Americans to buy things. I mean, you go to the grocery store, there's like 50 options for yogurt. And I'm like, I don't need 50 options. So yes, perhaps we could be a little less materialistic. Maybe we'd be better off with a little bit less consumerism. But question, do you all really think

that President Trump, who has been known for his gilded, some would say extravagant, style of decor and love for luxury, is really the best spokesperson for warning Americans about over-materialism. I'll never forget, you know, recording something for our newscast in a Trump hotel in New York, and just, I had to go in the bathroom stall of this just elaborately decorated bathroom.

So you make a good point, Esma. Also, you know, I'll just say it's hard not to like things. Things are not necessary, but sometimes they hit the spot. We're all for restraint and against materialism until our particular kind of nonfat Greek yogurt is out of the bill. But also, treat yourself. Yeah, treat yourself. Get that fancy yogurt. Okay, so Sarah, what can't you let go of? Okay, my can't let it go is finally some good news about booze. You know, I have lived through several cycles of evolving research about the health impact of drinking. You may remember a time when a lot of people thought that red wine was good for you. But the data in recent

years is casting more and more doubt on that idea, especially when it comes to diseases like cancer. So, you know, the recommendation from most public health officials is don't drink or don't drink very much. That said, there was a glimmer of hope for those of us who do enjoy the occasional sip in a new study in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology. It looked at factors that are associated

with a reduced risk of cardiac arrest. And there were things you would expect like eating more fruit, maintaining a healthy weight, avoiding what the study described as fed up feelings. And my personal favorite though was drinking white wine or champagne. Yeah. Now, as far as I'm concerned, I have fewer fed up feelings when I am in fact drinking champagne. Yes.

And it's important to note though that a companion article in the same journal described these findings about champagne's potential protective benefits as intriguing, and it noted that the mechanisms are unclear, but it just suggests that the benefits of moderate alcohol consumption may be more complex than previously assumed. Honestly, that's great. I feel like we'll take it. We'll take the win, right? Go home and be like, glass of wine with my salad,

and two healthy things in one. I do wonder, though, about all these studies that try to affirm or discredit the health benefits. So I think you guys know I don't drink, right? And so I'm sort of intrigued by the cycle of studies. By the cycle of studies, though, that try to find an answer to this question one way or the other. Yeah, that's interesting.

You know, a lot of research on it. Yeah. Yeah. And on coffee. And you know what? That's the one. Don't ever take my coffee away. But anyway, in the meantime, I guess we can all probably feel safe upping our fruit intake. You know, we can always be healthier. We can always have less things. But alas, you got to enjoy life too. All right, Elena, what can always have less things, but alas. You gotta enjoy life too. All right, Elena, what can't you let go? Okay, I'm a little nervous to bring this up because I'm a New Yorker and I was raised to

despise the Massachusetts sports fandom. No. I was raised, I grew up thinking Fenway Park, I was told Fenway Park was unsafe. That's what I was told as a child. I was gonna take this personally. Asma's gonna take this personally. As a Yankee fan, I was told I don't go there. That's not for me.

But I'm switching to football, which I don't know as much about, but I still have a lot of opinions because I'm a New Yorker. And I cannot let go of the former coach of the Patriots, Bill Belichick's interview on CBS Sunday Morning. Look, there's a lot to say about this and I'm just gonna say, obviously,

what's gotten a lot of news from this is Belichick's girlfriend, Jordan Hudson, kind of intervened during the interview. How did you guys meet? Not talking about this. No? No. It's like when you hear, don't think about pink elephants, it's like, now I wanna know how they met.

Like, I can't get over it that they wouldn't just like be honest about like they met you know there are lots of news reports that they met on a plane. Yeah they've talked about it before. They've talked about it like I think like love is love, you should be happy, I think it's really cute when people show off their relationship in a non-gushy way. But like don't, now the internet, now we're like what is it? Like tell us because the internet's horrible. It's also like branding 101. Try to control the narrative.

If you don't control the narrative, somebody else will write it about you for you. Well, we're talking about Bill Felichick all week long, so mission accomplished, perhaps. Anyway, that is a wrap for this week. Our executive producer is Mathony Maturi. Casey Morell edits the podcast. Our producers are Bria Suggs and Kelly Wessinger. Special thanks to Krista Deff Kalamer. I'm Sarah McKemmon.

I cover politics. I'm Elena Moore. I also cover politics. And I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. And thank you for listening to the NPR and the following message come from Yarle and Pamela Mohn, thanking the people who make public radio great every day and also those who listen.