A 1,400-County Crisis for Democrats
Hosted by Michael Barbaro
Featuring Shane Goldmacher
Produced by Asthaa ChaturvediOlivia Natt and Alex Stern
With Nina Feldman
Edited by Rachel Quester
Original music by Diane Wong
Engineered by Alyssa Moxley
It's conventional wisdom that President Trump has transformed American politics. But a new county-by-county voting analysis from The New York Times of the last four presidential races shows just how drastically Mr. Trump has changed the electoral map.
Shane Goldmacher, a national political correspondent for The Times, explains why the trends are a five-alarm fire for the Democrats and discusses the debate within the party over what to do about it.
Unlock full access to New York Times podcasts and explore everything from politics to pop culture. Subscribe today at nytimes.com/podcasts or on Apple Podcasts and Spotify.
Shane Goldmacher, a national political correspondent for The New York Times.
How Donald Trump has remade America's political landscape.
Six months after the election, Democrats are still searching for a path forward.
There are a lot of ways to listen to 'The Daily.' Here's how.
We aim to make transcripts available the next workday after an episode's publication. You can find them at the top of the page.
The Daily is made by Rachel Quester, Lynsea Garrison, Clare Toeniskoetter, Paige Cowett, Michael Simon Johnson, Brad Fisher, Chris Wood, Jessica Cheung, Stella Tan, Alexandra Leigh Young, Lisa Chow, Eric Krupke, Marc Georges, M.J. Davis Lin, Dan Powell, Sydney Harper, Michael Benoist, Liz O. Baylen, Asthaa Chaturvedi, Rachelle Bonja, Diana Nguyen, Marion Lozano, Rob Szypko, Elisheba Ittoop, Mooj Zadie, Patricia Willens, Rowan Niemisto, Jody Becker, Rikki Novetsky, Nina Feldman, Carlos Prieto, Ben Calhoun, Susan Lee, Lexie Diao, Mary Wilson, Alex Stern, Sophia Lanman, Shannon M. Lin, Diane Wong, Devon Taylor, Alyssa Moxley, Olivia Natt, Daniel Ramirez, Brendan Klinkenberg, Chris Haxel, Maria Byrne, Anna Foley and Caitlin O'Keefe.
Our theme music is by Jim Brunberg and Ben Landsverk of Wonderly. Special thanks to Sam Dolnick, Paula Szuchman, Lisa Tobin, Larissa Anderson, Julia Simon, Mahima Chablani, Elizabeth Davis-Moorer, Jeffrey Miranda, Maddy Masiello, Isabella Anderson, Nina Lassam, Nick Pitman and Kathleen O'Brien.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
32 minutes ago
- CNBC
Palantir CEO Karp says AI is dangerous and 'either we win or China will win'
Palantir CEO Alex Karp said the artificial intelligence arms race between the U.S. and China will culminate in one country coming out on top. "My general bias on AI is it is dangerous," Karp told CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" on Thursday. "There are positive and negative consequences, and either we win or China will win." Karp has been a vocal advocate for U.S AI dominance. He told CNBC in January that the country needs to "run harder, run faster" in an "all-country effort" to develop more advanced AI models. In a recent letter to shareholders, he also touted Palantir's commitment to equipping and enhancing U.S. defense interests. The billionaire tech CEO said Thursday that the U.S. currently has a leg up in the AI race and Palantir is leading the way in making companies more secure and efficient with its tools. "There is no economy in the world with this kind of corporate leadership which is willing to pivot, which understands technologies, which is willing to look at new things, but also has deep domain expertise," he said. "Our allies in the West, in Europe, are going to have to learn from us." Shares of the Denver-based data analytics and AI software firm outperformed in 2024 and have continued their ascent in 2025 as investors bet on their software and work with key government contractors and agencies. The stock is up 74% this year, but investors have to shell out on a higher earnings multiple than its tech peers. "You don't like the price, exit," Karp said on Thursday in response. Karp also asserted that the company is "not surveilling Americans" in response to recent New York Times report that Palantir is helping the Trump administration gather data on Americans.
Axios
33 minutes ago
- Axios
"Who cares": Congress' Dems say good riddance to Karine Jean-Pierre
If former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre thought she would set off a five-alarm fire among top Democrats by leaving the party, she is about to be sorely disappointed. Why it matters: Democratic lawmakers who spoke to Axios characterized her personal motives as too transparent to be a knock on the party — and they don't exactly feel like they're losing their best messenger either. "Who cares," exclaimed one House Democrat. "It's easy for paid operatives to leave the party ... until they need something." Said another: "Her explanation for this move is as confusing and disjointed as her answers in her White House press briefings." Jean-Pierre did not respond to a request for comment. Driving the news: Jean-Pierre revealed Wednesday that she is becoming an independent after serving in two Democratic presidential administrations. The announcement coincides with the release of a new book, "Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines." The book's description decries "blind loyalty to a two-party democratic system" and promises to delve into "the three weeks that led to Biden's abandoning his bid for a second term and the betrayal by the Democratic Party that led to his decision." What they're saying: "Other than Sean Spicer ... she was the worst press secretary in American history," a third House Democrat told Axios of Jean-Pierre. "There were rumors that the Biden folks were trying to get rid of her because she's so terrible," the lawmaker said, speculating that she is trying to curry favor with Republicans to avoid a congressional subpoena. "I don't know who wrote her book. We know she couldn't give a press conference without reading every word from her briefing," they added. Zoom in: Jean-Pierre has also been lit up by her former Biden White House colleagues, with one former official telling Axios' Alex Thompson she was "one of the most ineffectual and unprepared people I've ever worked with." "She had meltdowns after any interview that asked about a topic not sent over by producers," the official said. Said another: "The amount of time that was spent coddling [Jean-Pierre] and appeasing her was astronomical compared to our attention on actual matters of substance." Zoom out: The latest Bidenworld infighting comes after the release of a new book from Thompson and CNN's Jake Tapper, " Original Sin," which recounts how Biden's team shielded him from public scrutiny about his age.
Axios
33 minutes ago
- Axios
Democrats more likely than Republicans to boycott brands, new survey
Why it matters: These murky expectations highlight the complicated environment businesses are currently operating in. What they're saying: "Businesses need to understand how their brand aligns to current issues and the values that matter to their customer base," says Mallory Newall, vice president at Ipsos. "Brands cannot please everyone, and wading into the political fray does not come without risk. It needs to be done in a strategic way. However, there are potential upsides if companies have a clear understanding of who they're talking to and who their customers are. Those who act inauthentically will lose ground in this environment," she added. State of play: There's a disconnect in what consumers say and what they do. 53% of Americans say they are less likely to buy from a company that takes a stance they don't agree with, but only 30% actually do. Between the lines: A company's political or social stances influence Democrats more than Republicans, per the survey. Democrats are more likely to boycott (40%) than Republicans (24%), but they are also 2x more likely to go out of their way to support a brand that aligns with their values. Target is the latest American corporation to grapple with these boycotts, following its retreat from diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Of note: Boycotting is a luxury afforded to those with disposable income, per the survey. Households with incomes of $100k and above are 50% more likely to stop buying from a company they disagree with than those households making $50k and below. What to watch: 67% of Democrats say they are closely tracking how companies respond to pending Supreme Court decisions, compared to 52% of Republicans. There is more appetite across party lines for business commentary on economic issues — like inflation and trade policies — than other policy issues. The bottom line: "The data suggest that Democratic consumers are much more likely to actually follow through on the threat to withhold or reduce spending when they disagree with brands during this era of complete GOP control," says Matt House, managing partner at CLYDE.
