Conversations with Bill Kristol

We face an ever more dangerous geopolitical environment. In this Conversation, Princeton professor and AEI nonresident senior fellow Aaron Friedberg analyzes America’s foreign policy challenges and considers how a Harris or Trump administration might approach the threats we face. According to Friedberg, the cooperation among Russia, China, Iran, North Korea “has grown more and more sophisticated and complex” in recent times, making the challenges in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Southeast Asia more difficult to address—as well as more interrelated. Friedberg argues that the volatility in American domestic politics makes predicting the American approach to countering these threats increasingly uncertain. As he puts it, “If Trump comes back, the range of possible policies in each of these areas is just much wider than would have been typically the case in the past”—and a key question with Harris is "To what extent does she share [Biden’s] gut instinct regarding American leadership?"

How might Tuesday’s debate shape the race in the weeks ahead? How can Harris capitalize on her performance? Will the debate affect the results in November?  With less than eight weeks to Election Day, veteran Democratic strategist James Carville shares his advice to the Harris campaign and analysis of the race. As he puts it: “People still, for better or worse, know Trump. [Harris] had a great debate, a great convention, but still has some more to fill out here.” According to Carville, now Harris might benefit from giving speeches on issues from the economy to foreign policy. The Democratic base, he argues, “will allow her great leeway in appealing to more unaligned voters—and Trump doesn’t have that.” Carville and Kristol also discuss whether another debate will happen, Trump’s struggles to focus on issues, and possible key moments ahead in an extraordinary campaign.  

Where do things stand in the race after the Democratic convention and before the presidential debate? When veteran political strategist Doug Sosnik joined us the day after Biden’s withdrawal from the race he explained why the next month could be decisive in the fight to define Harris. Reflecting on the first five weeks of the campaign, Sosnik argues that she has been successful: “so far Harris is winning the battle about the campaign being about change, and she is the change candidate—making the campaign about the future and not about the past.” However, he cautions that the race remains very close. As he puts it: “Harris is still running behind the Biden-Harris numbers in 2020, and measurably behind. So, she does have more ground she’s going to need to gain.” Sosnik shares his in-depth analysis of what the campaigns might do going forward, why the upcoming debate may be the most consequential in contemporary history, and the current dynamics in battleground states where the race will be decided.

Where do things stand in the race now that the matchup is set?According to veteran Democratic strategist James Carville, the replacement of Joe Biden by Kamala Harris has improved prospects for the Democrats—though “not as much as some people think.” As he puts it: “It’s like I tell people, if you have an infected wisdom tooth and you go to the dentist and they pull it out, you feel on top of the world—[but] God, you really don’t feel any better than you would if you never had the infected wisdom tooth.”  In a race that may be won at the margins, as in 2016 and 2020, Carville explains that Harris must define herself and her candidacy successfully where she still isn’t well known. According to Carville, she has the opportunity to brand Trump as “past, yesterday, and stale”—but the Harris-Walz campaign must have a forward-looking message and run on concrete policy proposals. Carville also discusses the selection of Walz, the mood at Mar-a-Lago since Biden’s withdrawal from the race, how the Trump strategy against Harris might develop, and offers advice about whether to have and how to handle a Harris-Trump debate.

The withdrawal of Joe Biden from the presidential race three weeks after his disastrous debate performance, followed by the swift decision by Democrats to select Kamala Harris as the presumptive nominee, leaves us in uncharted waters. According to veteran political strategist Doug Sosnik, the broad contours of the 2024 election remain: “It’s a narrowly divided country. It’s a fairly even race. But Trump has the advantage in an Electoral College system that [today] favors Republicans.” Yet this election has been like no other.In this Conversation, Sosnik shares his analysis and practical advice for the next four weeks and the next four months. Sosnik explains why the next month may prove decisive. Each campaign now is racing to define Harris, and the stakes of the Democratic convention in August are higher than they have been in many decades. In the weeks ahead, Harris faces the daunting challenge of both running on strengths of the Biden-Harris record and presenting a case for the future that is her own—all as she decides on the most effective case to prosecute against Trump. This will not take place in a vacuum. At the same time, Harris will face an onslaught from the Trump campaign, which has done little advertising during the past weeks and has a war chest to spend on defining her. Sosnik warns that, to win, it is essential for Harris to avoid the peril of presidential candidates like Mitt Romney, John Kerry, and Bob Dole, who have allowed their opponents to define them before their nominations. As Sosnik puts it: “Success always begets more success in politics. So the more successful she is at consolidating the party, demonstrating her capacity to be the nominee, the more successful she is on the run-up to the convention, the more likely the convention is to be a success.” To that end, he argues that Harris's decisions over the next weeks—about her campaign staff, defining her vision, organizing a successful Democratic convention, selecting a strong vice-presidential candidate, etc.—likely will determine her prospects in November.

What should we make of Trump’s plans for the federal bureaucracy in a second term? In recent days, there has been extensive reporting about “Project 2025,” an agenda and road map that openly aims to politicize the civil service and render it more compliant with the executive. In this Conversation, we are joined by University of Pennsylvania political scientist John DiIulio, one of the leading experts on the civil service and bureaucracy in America. DiIulio takes the Project 2025 proposal seriously. But he argues that attacks on the permanent bureaucracy as a “Deep State" are misleading, because the federal agencies all are accountable and subject to Congressional oversight in meaningful ways. DiIulio considers the threat of a second Trump administration prioritizing loyalty over competency in the bureaucracy, the history of the civil service in the US, and what meaningful reforms of the bureaucracy might look like. DiIulio argues that above all we should focus on reforming the use of federal contractors, which remains the most unaccountable part of American government.

What is the state of the economy today and where might it be at the time of the November elections? To discuss, we are joined again by the distinguished Harvard economist Jason Furman, who was deputy director of the National Economic Council during the Financial Crisis and then served as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in President Obama’s second term. As Furman puts it, in spite of the inflation of the past few years and other longer-term challenges, “We really are right now economically the envy of the world. So I think it makes a lot of sense that we worry about our problems and figure out what we can do to make it even better.” In a wide-ranging analysis, Furman shares his perspective on inflation, employment, debt, and both Biden and Trump economic policies regarding immigration, tariffs, and other questions. While highlighting the strength of the US economy today, Furman notes how public policy choices and domestic and world events could affect us in the long term.  

Where do things stand in Ukraine? How are European democracies faring? How should we think about the challenge from autocracies around the globe?  To discuss these questions, we are joined again by Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Anne Applebaum. Applebaum shares her perspective on recent developments in Ukraine, Russia, and Europe including the recent EU elections. She points to Ukraine’s continued resilience in the face of serious challenges, and Europe and America’s support for Ukraine in spite of domestic pressures against it. But she notes that we only have begun to think seriously about the challenges from autocracies, and that much more needs to be done to defend democracy at home and abroad. As Applebaum puts it: “Communist China, nationalist Russia, theocratic Iran, Bolivarian socialist Venezuela, whatever North Korea is… these aren’t countries that share an ideology... but they do share a common interest—undermining us—and by us, I mean America, Europe, the liberal world, the democratic world.” 

Where do things stand in the race as we head into the summer?  According to veteran Democratic strategist James Carville: “It’s clearly very close. There clearly can be events that can impact the outcome. But we’re headed to an election that not many people are very excited about.” Carville argues that the Biden campaign needs a message on the economy that is forward-looking, and suggests it isn’t enough for the president to frame the election as a referendum on Trump. Carville considers how abortion and unpopularity of the MAGA movement are potentially winning issues that the Biden campaign might use more effectively. But he notes the Trump operation has been more disciplined than in 2016 or in 2020, and reflects on the limitations to date of Biden’s campaign as incumbent. Kristol and Carville also consider how the outcome of Trump’s New York trial, a debate in June (if it happens!), the conventions, and other upcoming events could shape the race.   

Is today's anti-liberalism a new phenomenon in American politics? What might earlier eras in US history have to teach us?To discuss these questions, we are joined, again, by Robert Kagan, the historian and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Drawing on his new book, Rebellion: How Antiliberalism Is Tearing America Apart—Again, Kagan argues that we “don’t realize that the [anti-liberal] movement we’re looking at today has been visible in every generation since the founding.” Kagan draws particular attention to the 1920s, when anti-immigration sentiment, white identity politics, and sympathy for authoritarian figures were prevalent in America. Kagan notes that the MAGA movement can be understood as a part of a long history of anti-liberalism that runs counter to the tradition of the founders, yet remains endemic to American democracy. Liberal democracy in America thus needs to be fought for and cannot simply be assumed.