We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
US government shutdown: No end in sight
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC shares his perspective on US politics:
How long will a US government shutdown last?
I'm here in Miami, Florida, which feels very far away from the drama happening in Washington, DC this week, where the House and Senate are unlikely to agree on a new government funding bill in time to stop a government shutdown from happening on Saturday night.
This raises a couple of key important questions. One, what are they fighting for? Well, there's a group of conservatives in the House who want to see deep deep spending cuts on appropriated spending. That means defense spending and all non-mandatory spending, like interest payments and Social Security and they're piqued that the government has grown quite a bit since pre-pandemic and they want to see about a 10% cut back to 2022 levels. And they're unlikely to get it because most other members of Congress are in favor of the debt limit deal that was agreed to earlier this year, which would have increased defense spending by about 3% and kept all non-defense discretionary spending flat.
Two, how are they going to get out of this thing? Well, no one's quite no one quite knows. There's some talk about a deal to exchange Ukraine money in order for border funds, some funds to secure the southern border and stop the flow of migrants coming over the border. But it's really unclear at this point whether or not that kind of deal can work out or if it can be worked out quickly given the deep divides between the House and the Senate.
And then three is how long is this thing going to last? And while it could be resolved early next week, some of the pain of the federal government shutdown starts to hit in for constituents, lawmakers. This could also potentially go deep into October. And as it goes deeper into October, the vast majority of members of Congress who want to see the debt limit deal be honored with the 3% increase in defense and 0% increase across the board that I talked about earlier. They may start to feel more pressure to agree to some additional cuts, which means that you could see those cuts be enacted into law as the price of the government reopen. Probably this will be resolved in the next week or so with another deal to extend current levels of funding until November, mid-November. And then we're going to be right back in the soup, having to deal with this all over again later this year.
So lots of drama still to come. Outlook is very uncertain and this could go on for weeks if not much longer than that.
- Will McCarthy stop a government shutdown? ›
- US debt ceiling looms over a House divided ›
- Who will cave on raising US debt ceiling (again?) ›
- Explaining the long history of US debt (& which other countries are saddled with debt) ›
- US debt hits record: Should you worry? ›
- Biden returns to join US debt ceiling talks ›
- The Graphic Truth: Who blew up the US national debt? ›
- Democrats and Republicans unite! At least against China. ›
- Episode 1: What infrastructure spending means for you ›
- Chris Christie weighs in on US debt limit fight ›
Mitt Romney will be defined by opposing Trump
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC shares his perspective on US politics:
Mitt Romney is retiring from the Senate. Will he be missed?
Utah Senator Mitt Romney and former Republican presidential candidate announced this week that he won't be running for reelection in the Senate to represent Utah in the next election cycle. Some people are speculating that this is because he might lose a primary challenge.
Romney remains pretty popular in his home state, but he does represent a dying breed of Republican, which is kind of a Reagan's Republican, Reagan's Republican. He's firmly from the pro-business country club wing of the party that has really been demolished by President Trump over the last several years as more populist Republicans, who have a stronger appeal to white working-class voters, have really taken over the party and trying to reshape it in President Trump's image. Romney was well-liked by some people in Washington, but not necessarily by his Republican colleagues in the Senate, where he was a bit of an oddball, supporting President Trump's impeachment, going against the tide of several other Republicans on a host of issues. And even though he ran as a conservative Republican in the 2012 nomination process that he won, he's now retiring with a reputation as a moderate Republican in today's party.
Romney always had kind of a difficult time fitting into the political world. He was obviously a businessman who was looking for ways to succeed, running as pretty liberal on issues like abortion when he was governor of Massachusetts and then positioning himself as, quote, “severely conservative” when he ran for the Republican nomination in 2012. And his legacy, however, is probably going to be mostly defined by his opposition to President Donald Trump over the last several years in his tenure as a Utah senator.
He'll probably be replaced by somebody further to the right of him. And the Senate itself is set to go through a generational transition as more of the old era Republicans start to retire and a new crop comes up. It's going to move the party in this much more populist direction.
- Romney: Sloppy classified docs "a danger" ›
- Sen. Mitt Romney on TikTok: Shut it down ›
- Ian interviews Mitt Romney: US political divisions & tough foreign policy calls ›
- Sen. Mitt Romney on DC dysfunction, Russian attacks, and banning TikTok ›
- Podcast: Mitt Romney on uncharted US waters, Russian malevolence, & China’s economic ambition ›
No-show Trump wins first GOP debate
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC shares his perspective on US politics.
Who were the big winners and the big losers from this week's Republican debate?
Three clear winners were probably Vivek Ramaswamy, who's done pretty well in making a name for himself as a first time politician, and came across as likable and energetic, full of some fresh ideas that are probably going to appeal to a lot of Republican voters who were otherwise thinking about supporting President Trump. Two is Nikki Haley, the former UN ambassador and governor of South Carolina, who had herself a pretty good night scoring some points against Ramaswamy on foreign policy, and coming across as competent and credible. And of course, the third winner is Donald Trump, who didn't show up but kind of dominated the proceedings anyway and continues to be the front-runner even after the debate.
On the loser side, you had a couple of people who just didn't have great nights. Chris Christie got resoundingly booed for his strategy of attacking Trump and presenting himself as the alternative, or trying to create space for somebody else to get in that lane. Mike Pence really did nothing to distinguish himself. In fact, I kind of forgot he was up there at times, as I've forgotten that he's even running for president right now. Same with Tim Scott, who I think has a very great story and is a very likable guy, but just isn't resonating with a lot of Republicans.
And the biggest loser was probably Ron DeSantis, who's presented himself as the most credible alternative to Trump so far but has really been tailing off in the polling, has shown himself to be vulnerable to people like Ramaswamy, and last night didn't really do much to change that narrative. He kind of has his line of attack against the cultural left, which resonates with a lot of Republican voters. But there's no real reason to prefer him over President Trump at this point, and there probably aren't enough Republican voters who will do so, that will help propel him to the next level.
There won't be any votes cast in this election until Iowa, which is next year. And in the meantime, there's going to be another debate, probably also without Trump, in California, in late September. So, stay tuned for an entertaining Republican primary, but one that kind of feels like they're play-acting a little bit without the dominant force, former President Trump, up on stage.
Trump skips debate
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC, shares his perspective on US politics.
Is it really a Republican debate without President Trump?
Eight candidates are going to show up in Milwaukee this week in order to debate on stage for the right to be the Republican nominee for President, and all of them are going to be living in the shadow of the one candidate who won't show up: Donald J. Trump, former President of the United States, who's been indicted four times for various criminal charges across multiple jurisdictions in Georgia, New York, Washington, and Florida.
Trump is dominating the Republican field right now, and even though he's not showing up for the debate, he's going to be the main topic, because every single one of these candidates who is going to be there, who met the RNC's strict qualifications to show up on stage, is going to be trying to distinguish themselves and take down his massive polling leads. So this contest this week isn't going to be about these candidates trying to get out ahead of one another. They're trying to break through so they can knock away at Trump's polling lead.
We're still months out from the first vote being cast in this election, and Trump right now looks unstoppable. Ron DeSantis is the only credible candidate who's in double digits on the polling, but his campaign has largely flailed out over the last several months, with his approval ratings dropping and his meager polling advantage over the rest of the field starting to droop. So, this is Trump's race to lose. He's not likely to show up for any of the debates because he's so far in front of the field. This is a great front-runner strategy of just ignoring everybody else and not even acknowledging that it's a real contest, and right now it looks like it isn't one.
So, the debate may be pretty entertaining, but it's going to be a lot less entertaining without Trump there. The debates in 2016 is where he really distinguished himself from the field and established himself as the greatest show on Earth in American politics. He'll try to dominate media through his post on Truth Social, and of course, the rest of the campaign is going to be him dominating because of his criminal trials.
So, tune in for the debate. Should be entertaining, could be a lot better, and we'll see if he shows up for the second one.
Trump's new rival, Vivek Ramaswamy
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here, and a happy Monday to you. Want to turn to US domestic politics for this week's Quick Take in part because there's been a surge in the GOP among the candidates. We've had Trump way out in front, and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis as the major challenger pretty much for the last several months until this last week, with an outsider Vivek Ramaswamy in a couple of polls showing up as number two. Certainly enjoying a surge. So thought it was worth taking a little bit of a look at him.
First of all, I mean, let's be clear, the big news remains the Trump indictments and the Democratic efforts to drive them. It's all about the politics. It is not about rule of law. That's what it should be if it were a properly functioning representative democracy. That is not the state of US politics right now. But aside from that, it's "is anyone a potential challenger to Trump on the GOP side?" And, you know, the idea that Trump is not going to participate in the Republican primary debates, as we see this Wednesday, is his political interest in showing that "I'm going to get this nomination and all the rest are pretenders to the throne." Completely understandable that that's the way he's handling that, but it's interesting to me that to the extent that anyone else is getting oxygen, it is the candidates that are most like him. In other words, those that are willing to take on his message that are proactively being supportive and engaging.
It is DeSantis and Vivek and that shouldn't surprise anyone in terms of where the Republican party is and is going as the Democratic party has increasingly become a party identified with urban elites and the Republican party increasingly with rural working and middle classes. And that is a grievance-based and anger-based "let's beat up on the establishment." It is not the center. Trump did very well as an outsider, not because his policies made a lot of sense, but rather because they really animated the emotional anger channeled the sense of disenfranchisement and otherness of people that felt like the elites were part of this shadowy, globalist deep state. Vivek Ramaswamy, in my view, has been the most effective at engaging on the political stage in that. He's basically portraying himself as the young Trump, as the person that can carry the mantle that, you know, if Trump is one more Covid episode away from not being with us,
Vivek is 38 years old. He's an entrepreneur, young kid. You know, he's an outsider. He is never been a candidate. Heck, he's barely voted most of the presidential elections. He hasn't participated in, said he was jaded at the time. That is a feature, not a bug for someone who is, you know, wants to run on "I'm not a politico, I'm not a part of Washington. I have no political experience, and that makes me better." I mean, he proactively said like, "I want to run the government the way Elon runs Twitter/X, which I'm not clear that appeals to people that care about governance, but that's not the point. This is anger and people that want to hurt the folks that are benefiting from the fruits of governance over the course of the past, say, 40 to 50 years in the United States.
He's aligned with Trump. He's aligned with Tucker Carlson, that's the lane here. I definitely see in his policy statements that, you know, anti-woke but more effective in his rhetoric on that front than DeSantis has been. Talking about the global reset versus the great uprising. In other words, anti world economic forum, anti-woke, anti global control, anti deep state, anti all of this, you know, anything that feels like the forces that you don't understand that are in control of you, Vivek is opposed to them. It's very much like Trump's drain the swamp, which again, of all the things that Trump did, drain the swamp was, you know, the one he was least actually interested in. Fantastic on the rhetoric, and then appointed all the CEOs and billionaires to run cabinet to reduce taxation. I mean, the men north of Richmond did fantastically well under Trump and likely would under Vivek.
But that's not the point. The point is not appealing to an analytic reasoned policy debate. It is appealing to a sense of anger, and we want to burn it down. And in that regard, Vivek has been most effective in some of his policy statements that really antagonizing the mainstream media. I saw this in particular, with a CNN interview that he did in talking about Russia and Ukraine and in saying, "hey, I'm going to make the Ukrainians give up some of their territory and say there won't be any NATO for Ukraine because I want to pull Russia away from China." And I mean, you can just imagine this is absolutely intended to drive mainstream media crazy, and they do, and it's a massive amount of attention for this young outsider. And he's winning, not winning for the nomination, of course, that's not the point.
But he's winning in the performative sweep that allow him to do far better from personal career perspective on the back of deciding to run. Running this presidential campaign is an absolute no brainer for someone like Ramaswamy. He'll have bigger book deals, higher speaking fees, has a decent shot of being on a Trump cabinet if Trump were to potentially win. But he also is setting himself up to be one of the younger forces that can wear the populist MAGA mantle assuming the GOP stays intact beyond this presidential cycle. And so in that regard, I find him a very important cultural phenomenon and political phenomenon. We are going to see more of this as long as American political dysfunction continues to be a primary driving force, as long as the US is more polarized, riven with more disinformation, more mistrust, and more feeling of illegitimacy than any of the other G-7 advanced industrial democracies.
This is the lane to run on, at least on the right. I think we'll see more of it on the left as well. But again, the demographics of where the GOP is doing well, it aligns particularly with this form of nativism and populism. And I do feel like Vivek has been very effective there. We'll see on Wednesday night with the debate how he does on a stage with, you know, ten folks, many of whom are fully part of the GOP establishment. I suspect he'll do very well because this is really meant for small sound bites social media, and he's going to be an effective bomb thrower there. So will Chris Christie, by the way, who's a fantastic debater and is the one that is really taking Trump on individually, but of course, Trump is going to be talking to Tucker Carlson who has said in his private texts that he can't stand the guy, thinks he's a lunatic.
But that doesn't matter because they occupy the same lane. And as political entrepreneurs for themselves, this is exactly what they should be doing, which is teaming up to make the establishment debate that the party forces want to have less relevant. And it makes Tucker Carlson more relevant to his fans and to his revenues as bottom line, and it makes Trump more relevant too. So that's where we are this week, kind of depressing state of affairs in terms of US politics, but from an analysis perspective, got to get that right either way. Hope everyone's well, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
Will Trump's indictment in Georgia do him in?
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC shares his perspective on US politics.
Trump's fourth indictment: is this the one that does him in?
Former President Trump was indicted this week in Georgia on charges that he attempted to overturn the election results there. He was indicted along with a broad group of co-conspirators by a local prosecutor. And this case represents some more serious legal jeopardy for Trump because even if he wins the White House, there's not much he can do to either pardon himself or get the charges dropped. There's now four criminal indictments against the President, one in Manhattan on a relatively minor set of document charges that he probably won't go to jail for. Two in a federal courtroom, one in Florida and one in Washington DC about his mishandling of classified documents and his attempts to overturn the election on the day of the Capitol riot on January 6th.
Both of those he could be convicted of, but if he wins the White House, he can either drop the charges against him if they're still pending or pardon himself. If he doesn't win the White House, then he faces some legal risk. However, in Georgia, whether or not he wins the White House, this case will be brought and he will be trialed. And if he's found guilty, the state may attempt to force the sitting president of the United States to go to jail. Truly an unprecedented situation. Never had anything like it in the United States. Never even had somebody facing criminal indictment like this, running for the White House. So this is going to be the dominant news story over the most of the campaign. Over the better part of the next year and a half, as President Trump sits in a courtroom in Georgia potentially with the cameras rolling or sits in the federal courthouse or the courthouse in Manhattan facing the hearing, the charges that are being leveled against him.
By day and then at night he goes out in campaigns in Michigan, Ohio, Georgia, and talks all about how the system is corrupt and trying to take them down. And longer term, this is going to end up eroding support for law enforcement among Trump's Republican supporters, which is going to be ultimately bad for the rule of law as Republicans start to turn away from the local prosecutors and the federal law enforcement that are going after President Trump for what they believe are purely politically motivated issues. So, huge story. You're not going to be able to avoid it. He's the most famous man in the world. He's facing four trials overlapping to one degree or another that'll probably play out over the next several years. Good luck trying not to hear about that.
A view of the damage caused by wildfires in Lahaina, Maui, Hawaii.
Maui fires fan political flames
With 96 people confirmed dead, more than a thousand still unaccounted for, and an estimated $5.6 billion in rebuilding costs, last week’s Maui wildfires are shaping up to be one of the US’ most devastating natural disasters. The catastrophe may also set the scene for nasty political battles in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election.
Over the weekend, Republican US Rep. Lauren Boebert questioned why President Joe Biden remained on vacation in Delaware, railing on X, formerly known as Twitter, that "There is a total crisis in Maui. 3,000 destroyed homes. 80 people dead. Where's Joe Biden? On vacation of course. There is no bottom for this president.”
The post immediately garnered both bouquets and brickbats. Some equated Biden’s absence with President George W. Bush’s delay in visiting New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina hit there in 2005. Others commented that “the last thing the rescue effort needs is a presidential entourage.” Meanwhile, Democratic Hawaii Gov. Josh Green praised Biden for approving the state’s request for a disaster declaration on Friday.
But the most significant impact may be on public support for Biden’s green energy policies and the fight against climate change. Boebert’s attack came after Biden noted that she, "along with every other Republican,” voted against the Inflation Reduction Act, which Biden recently credited for creating 850 clean energy jobs in Boebert’s own district, in Pueblo, Colo.
Far from being Biden’s Katrina, Maui may drive home the point that Americans ignore climate change at their peril. While Republicans like Florida Gov. and presidential candidate Ron de Santis busy themselves with removing the subject from school curricula, Democrats may simply point to images of a torched Lahaina as evidence that the country cannot wait to take the threat seriously – while claiming that they are the only party that does.
Trump indicted (again)
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi everybody, Ian Bremmer here and a Quick Take from Nantucket.
Another exciting week, far more eventful than we'd like in the US political environment, particularly because of more indictments that have come down on former President Donald Trump. You're used to me saying that these are unprecedented times in US politics. Unfortunately, all of the new precedents that are being set are about eroding political institutions. They are corrosive. The guardrails are being weakened, and it is very hard to find structural changes that are strengthening US democracy. All sorts of things that we can say that are promising about the US economy, maybe being able to avoid recession, about the US defense sector, and about its ability to protect not just the US but other countries around the world.
I can go on and on, but when it comes to the political system, it's getting weaker. And that is particularly in terms of the upcoming US presidential election. Now, these latest indictments that have come down from the special counsel, Jack Smith, focusing on Trump's efforts to overturn a legitimate, free, and fair election in the United States, are rejected categorically out of hand by Trump himself. Not surprisingly, that's what he would say in any case. And also by the overwhelming majority of his supporters. They are serious charges. They are, in my view, much more serious than the other charges that we have seen, the charges that we saw about obscuring hush money for sex that he had with a porn star, which also were illegal in terms of framing in the campaign contributions, are unserious charges. They're real charges, but they shouldn't rise to a level of felony, in my view. They are politicized, and I certainly don't think they should have an impact on his ability to run for 2024. I think that the issue of classified documents is more serious, but still, in my view, something that a lot of political leaders have been caught mishandling documents is a massive level of over classification that occurs with documents.
I also think that Trump, the big thing that he has done wrong, in my view, is not the fact that he originally took those documents, but rather that he has acted like a child in lying about the fact that he had them in telling people to destroy video. In other words, it's the cover-up and not because anyone really believes he was trying to do anything particularly malevolent with the classified documents. It wasn't like anyone is credibly accusing him of trying to give them to or sell them to, you know, spies or, you know, other governments. It's more that, you know, Trump just thinks that because he's all-powerful and former president and the Donald, that means that the rules don't apply to him. So he should be able to have those documents, and he's busy, and he shouldn't have to respond to the FBI when they demand a response. In other words, you know, he's just, you know, he couldn't be bothered. I do think those are serious charges. And I think that they should probably have a significant impact in whether or not he can run again. But I don't know that I would try to preclude him from running on the basis of those charges.
These charges are different, these much closer to the second impeachment. These have much more to do with the fact that President Trump attempted to subvert the core principles of rule of law in having a peaceable transition from one president to another. He has never accepted the legitimacy of the 2020 election. He's never accepted the legitimacy of President Biden and did everything in his power and a lot of things that were not in his power to try to ensure that there would not be a peaceful transfer of power. In other words, that there would not be an effective republic that democracy would not hold, and that certainly takes him out of the running for being able to be president going forward in my view. But my view is not just positive here. And unfortunately, irrespective of the severity of the crime, how you feel about this, almost certainly if you're an American citizen, is aligned with how you feel about the person of Trump. If you like Trump, if you would vote for Trump, if you believe that he is someone that is a better and more suitable president than Biden, it is overwhelmingly likely that you feel like these charges are politicized, that the Department of Justice and the FBI are engaged in a vendetta, probably led by Biden to unjustly remove Trump from the running. If you can't stand Trump, if you wouldn't vote for him, you believe that he's guilty before you even have a case. And it doesn't matter what the charges are, he should be out anyway. That is the opposite, of course, of rule of law is the opposite to the way a functional democracy runs. And that's because the United States is increasingly a dysfunctional democracy. It is the weakest part of America's global power status, the state and the trajectory of the American political system. And I don't think this is going to get resolved legally. I think this is going to be resolved politically, which is exactly the way it shouldn't be resolved. What's going to happen is that you're going to have a nomination process for the GOP.
It is very likely Trump is going to be the GOP nominee. It is more likely because of these crimes, which is, of course, the opposite of what it would be in a functional democracy because of the tribalism, because of the political alignment, because of the belief that this is a witch hunt. And it is possible that one or two of the cases will be resolved before the actual election. But it is not probable. It is more likely that the election itself will be held without having any of these cases concluded, which means that the outcome of the vote is what's going to determine to what extent and whether Trump himself will be punished or whether Trump will be president again. It is a horrible position to be in. It means that the election increasingly looks likely to be seen as illegitimate by virtually the entire political opposition, no matter who it is. In other words, if Trump wins in that environment, Biden supporters believe that he should be president and that the election was not legitimate. If he loses, Trump's supporters believe that the election is not legitimate.
This still has a long way to go because, of course, American elections are entirely too long. They are way too expensive. The Republic would probably be better off if there wasn't an election going on in 2024, even though, of course, that's also a subversion of the US political process and of course, around the world for all of those countries that look to the United States as an ally, as a partner, as someone you need to count on. In this environment, it becomes much harder to do so, much more dangerous going forward because we are in an environment of active war with the Russians, of much greater political tension and crisis with the Chinese. The only countries out there, the only actors out there that are excited about the 2024 US elections are rogue actors, rogue states, core adversaries of the US and terrorist groups. Really not what you want to say about the most important political transition that occurs in the world. What I'm not looking forward to, but one I'll certainly be focused very closely on. We'll be talking about it over the coming months and year plus.
So that's it for me. And I'll talk to you all real soon.