those cubans have been plunged into darkness as the nation's power grid and stuff as yet another failure. it's this that in 2 months and it's being blamed on chronic fuel shortages and an aging power network, which is there is less than american out as soon as you need in the dark. yet again, at 2 am, wednesday cubis national electricity system collapsed for the 3rd time in less than 2 months. the entire island was left without electricity, with the exception of a few hotels and buildings with generators. the government says it was caused by what it calls the disconnection of the country's largest power generation plant. the new, the bid us brought on by a deteriorated infrastructure and it to he can only crisis and one natural disaster after the other 2 years a they've got a lot of work in education related activities will be suspended during this

national electric image contingency. maybe the list, basic services will be maintained based on the conditions, the screw passing. if conditions allow it. uh, the services can also be provided you through the calculation tube is obsolete power plants have been struggling to meet demand for decades. but now the systemic problem has come to a head to largely to the dwindling supply of oil imports from venezuela, russia, and mexico, which i used to fuel the plants. cubans say they aren't surprised just increasingly frustrated by the latest blackouts which left millions of people without power. and my part in this house where i live, we don't have gas either. if there's no electricity, we can't cook, we need firewood for that. everything is a little complicated. i didn't realize it was a general blackout again. let's see what happens. the energy administer a choice be both the recovery process is under way,

which he didn't mention is for how long to see in human algebra. that coined has traded above $100000.00 us dollars for the 1st time. the crypto currency has more than doubled in value. this yeah, when tough and wasting weeks off the don't from one the us selection is now nominated crypto advocate pool atkins to have the us secure sees regulator. trump is also promised to make the united states the crypt so capital off as it for me, money inside lots more information on websites out. is there a dot com and these continue use of the hundreds of palestine solidarity protests escaped to damned square to let their

voices heard. since the protest band has been in place, i just want to speak out against the genocide. they also protested against racism and is lemme phobia heard in parliament in response to what pull additions have described this anti semitism during last week's football riots. the leader of defies freedom party wants to withdraw passports of dutch people of more welcome descent. he claims a tech is where in the science and kicked them out of the country. we should start thinking, owing our problems with immigration, our problems are some of all kinds of problems. the salon, while the government in the hey, is trying to limit the democratic rights they. i'm here to define a protest that they say we need to speak out against the genocide in gotcha. after allowing them to protest for our police doctor to detain more than 200 demonstrate just by one. hi, i'm steve clements. i have a question, is trump's thrashing of the democratic party, a sign of

a great realignment in american politics. let's get to the bottom line. the, if we learned anything from the us elections this year, it's that americans were in the mood for disruption. all of the snooty talk about inflation being, quote, transitory, and what a bad example it would be for a convicted felon to become president would just throw out the window by millions of americans. folks have democrats could always count on like young men and women, african americans, and latinos came out in droves for the republican party. even states where the democrats always thought they were safe, like new york and new jersey. so on erosion of support. so it has been table flipped in american politics is a republican party, led by trumps maga movement. now, the voice of blue color america, in opposition to the elite ism of the democratic party. and is this a temporary good rich or a sea change in the country? today we're talking with historian jeff kappa service, vice president,

a political studies after the scan and center and author of ro, and ruined the downfall of moderation and the destruction of the republican party. jeff, it's a real pleasure to have you with me today to kind of help us understand what just happened in the us presidential election. so tell me from your perspective is, is this just a new chapter in american politics? well, it's a great pleasure to be with you, steve, and i have to say that i think this election could be seen in hindsight, as having been a re aligning election almost as important as the 1932 election that brought the new deal coalition to power under the roosevelt, right, franklin roosevelt. exactly. because what we're seeing now is that the republican party is the party, not just the of the white working class, but of a multi racial, multi ethnic working class. we really have gotten into a situation where the electorate is polarized by degrees, and there are 2 thirds of the country that don't have a college degree. and they see themselves as really being opposed to the college burying elite. and that's a problem for democrats. so populism,

basically just one in america, and we've seen populace movements around the world, but it's happened here in the united states. and populism usually means not a lot of care and concern about the global seen a lot of focus on the united states in my mind. it looks a little bit like ignatius nationalism tell me where i'm wrong. you're not wrong, you're exactly right. and what we've seen play out in this election is what we see in play out in a lot of countries around the world. there's a lot of upset on the part, particularly working classes about the influx of migrants. there's a lot of concern about public disorder and crime, and there's lot of concerned about installation. and people are not understanding of the fact that inflation was a world wide phenomenon coming out of the pen. demik. people hate inflation. inflation tends to be a precedent killer in american history, and i think we've seen the results of that in this selection as well. but this may be on fair because i'm going to go back and kind of hide. we live a decision that was made to move from joe biden,

for him to step out of the race because of concerns about his debate performance, his age, stumbling over things which, you know, every presidency is not just an individual as a franchise of people. and when you look at jo biden's connection with working class americans, which was still out there, you asked, wouldn't michigan, pennsylvania and wisconsin have gone for joe biden, and, you know, i think they might have. and if they had, might, joe biden as old as he is as bumbling as he is aged, as he is, might have won the selection. i don't believe the joe biden would have won the election. i think he actually would have under performed couple of harris because he had really lost the ability to energize democrats. she gave them a chance to get together behind one candidate and feel enthusiastic about i think she did about as well under the circumstances as she could help. but you do point to something interesting, which is that joe biden had his roots in the working class. and he sort of seemed to be a remnant of that democratic party that wasn't extreme on cultural issues that didn't just for represent the professional in managerial glasses. i think joe biden

ultimately will be seen as kind of a tragic figure because in moving away from some of the free market ideology of a bill clinton towards something like industrial policy, i think he actually glimpsed the future. the problem was the democratic party couldn't deliver, particularly in the blue states on the money that they shoveled toward building green energy and, and ships factories and the rest of it. all, most of that money got spent in the red states, which said thank you for those billions of dollars. thank you for the jobs. now we're gonna vote for trump. yeah. so you have to, if you're going to put money towards that strategy, actually deliberate, particularly among your own people. it was very clear that donald trump did something and secured something that he had not even in his previous elections. his number swelled up and he seems that he won this election fair and square what didn't she do to win? so i don't think democratic viewers are going to a hearing from a registered republican and about what harris did wrong. and in truth, i don't think she ran a bad campaign. there weren't

a lot of egregious mistakes. but i think the whole strategy was geared towards maximizing turnout from college educated voters. it was kind of a class play. and that works when it's a mid term election and a college educated will just turn out disproportionately relative to the working class. but in this case, going after liz cheney is constituency. it's really just dumpling, down on a strategy that isn't going to work in a democratic high turn out election. and in this case, harris didn't know what she didn't know. and her whole campaign didn't feel the actual pain that the working class, those feel from the installation. and they didn't actually have any sense of why these concerns about immigration and crime and public disorder. and, and cultural disconnection between the elite and the working class was so important . can you tell her audience is a little bit more about list change in what she represented in the republican party daughter of a former vice president, a real war hawk, dick cheney. so liz cheney had some troubles in the republican party,

but tell her audience more. so let's training the daughter of dick cheney the former vice president under george w bush and was a down the line conservative on every issue, including the importance of adhering to law and order and the constitution. and that was the one factor that turned her against donald trump and ultimately cost her for leadership position with the republican conference and then her position in congress altogether. and for this, she was actually a hero to many, never trump republicans, but also to a lot of college educated democrats who liked seeing this example of a principal conservative. but the point is that you didn't have a constituency beyond a fairly small number of college educated voters who already were drifting into the democratic column. so to some extent, she turned off the democrats progressive faction, who remember the iraq war and dick cheney's failures there. but she also didn't really bring a lot to the democrats as it turned out relative to what they lost in terms of working class voters. you, i've had the privilege of knowing a lot of republic const including president george w bush, whom i just saw a few weeks ago. john mccain, mitt romney, chuck hagel, in your book this,

these are the kind of republicans that you sort of hang out with and that you sort of share a brand within my view. you know, they're often called rhino republicans by donald trump. is it strange that so many people who ran as the republican candidate for president would no longer fit in today's republican party? it seems strange on the face of it that the, the former leaders of the republican party are no stigmatized as republicans in name only. that's weird. how did that happen? but i think the reality is that the moderates that i was writing about were dwight eisenhower style republicans who believed in the legitimacy of the new deal order. so they were in some sense, new deal order republicans. then along comes ronald reagan and brings and what we now refer to as the neo liberal era. and even the democrats came around to that. i mean, bill clinton was someone who actually operated under the term set by ronald reagan . dumptruck. now maybe moving us into a kind of populist era which is different from the other. so in that sense,

all previous models of republicans are outmoded and they're going to have to decide whether they find a better home in trumps populous republican party or with the democrats. as we know, donald trump once to deep court, undocumented immigrants. he wants to stop immigration at the border and he wants to hire us. those are the things that really stand out very consistently from president elect from. what are the other tenants of trump as well? i think you've identified the key tenants of trump. and this is interesting because donald trump has the opportunity to really have this be a real learning collection that that will be felt perhaps a generation into the future. in other words, there are more working class voters than there are college educated voters from could lock in republican majorities for a long time to come. but in addition to the importance of terrorists, the importance of a, i guess i would call it muscular unilateralism on america that may have alliances, but isn't bound by them. in addition to his desire to deport immigrants. trump is

also a chaos president. and he doesn't like the deep state by which he means really any people in the civil service who might actually have a greater fidelity to the constitution. and the rule of law than to what donald trump wants to have done at any given moment. so trump could actually on do what he has has made in the selection. are we running that risk of becoming a kind of new soviet order where you've got political people put in 2 jobs that were previously held by, by non partisan experts that were looking at the weather and how to deal with environmental issues or how to, you know, working in, uh, you know, developing and deploying what the federal government was supposed to do by way of highways and data. and all of this i'm just sort of interested in, is anybody worried about the depth of expertise? the schedule f idea which donald trump tribes and tell our audience what schedule that schedule is essentially a plan to reclassify, career civil servants as people who can be fired or transferred at will in

a lot of ways. this is actually going back well, further into american history to the spoils system of andrew jackson. trump would like to get rid of these co, called deep stake bureaucrats and replace them with absolute trump in loyalists who will do whatever he says. but as you point out, these are people without any particular expertise, and they're going to be significant costs to a government where positions of authority are occupied by people who don't know what they're doing. and yet at the same time, when i go into university campuses talk to some of the administrators there, they strikes me as soviet projects. so there's a sense in which a ideology and loyalty to a particular cause are becoming more important. it expertise across the board in these 2 separate caps, or do you think that's still the case as we hear about panels that are going to purge generals from the pentagon, that donald trump doesn't like, or that were involved in certain decisions. they were ordered to do and come up with a kind of trump approved command staff of the united states military forces. yeah.

when we talk about purging of generals, that also sounds a lot like what stalin did in the 1930 is and it didn't work out too well for him in the short term when nazi germany invaded. you know, i think generally, the viewpoint of the military is going to be very different from that of the trump populist in a really important way. um, we're in a cold war with china. china is a competing us in terms of manufacturing. they would tend to one advantage of, but they're also now starting to outcompete us in terms of scientific and technological breakthroughs. and i'm kind of a dwight eisenhower republican at heart. and you eisenhower laid the foundations for our victory in the cold war. and he did so by investing heavily in infrastructure, particularly at the highway program, but also in science and technology. he created darpa, the end of the research agency, and the government, a funded advanced scientific research at the higher education. he has also funded lots of college education. he believes strongly in a highly competent bureaucracy and strong alliances. all of those things are things to which the populace,

trump and republicans are opposed. and the military sees this as a source of weakness and our global strategic competition. well, donald trump's choice at the moment, uh, standing there to be the next x ray defense is a news host like me, but he's on fox news. p takes f, a former, a veteran of reserve and, and pete hex that has a tattoo on him. it's a, a crusader cross and he calls himself a, b, o, bro, theology, bro. and is beginning to look around this sort of question of evangelical christians and i find it interesting because mike pence, the former vice president, was a favorite of evangelical christians. but they seem to have wanted a more muscular, a kind of more rob, brutish sort of champions. and i'm interested if you have any insights into how that fits. because, you know, you've been a republican for a long time. you've been commenting on what it should look like, but even jellicoe christians have been a part of that equation also for a long time. what's, what's changed that is empowered,

that dimension of the g o. p. in a better timeline, steve, here would be the nominated for the defense department instead of pete hex. of you know, i think we've seen a real tribal ization of american life and an inability to even understand what our opponents are thinking about. because we regard them as our enemies and we don't want to know what they're thinking. and i think that's applied to the evangelical christians community just as it's applied to lots of other communities. they really let slip a lot of their former principals because they want to win, and they feel under threats and they look to trump is their champion. and therefore they're willing to overlook moral feelings. maybe even the governing feelings that they never would have tolerated in a previous republican liter. isn't donald trump really the guy who's trying to strangle government in the bathtub? and isn't it a mistake, as we often discuss what republican stand for today? we're trying to talk about policy and competition over views and policy and issues . when in fact, donald trump seems more like a wrecking ball. as you know, it's not a problem is a wrecking ball and a lot of ways, but this was

a change election. americans want to change from a status quote that they didn't feel was serving them. and in that sense, the wrecking ball isn't necessarily the worst thing in the world as long as it leaves the foundation intact. i do think that the government needs a lot of change. it could be that the loan must, might actually suggest some things that would be beneficial to getting rid of the sort of absolute spaces in, in the federal civil service. the real difficulty, not just been firing people, but also in hiring the kind of talent that we need to compete effectively. on the other hand, from, as i said, bring such a chaos factor to this, that it's hard to believe that he won't destroy more than he actually might create . but do you make a really interesting point and that is, might trump and just listen to me, folks might not be a good thing that someone, this disruptive is destroying what i find to be the most powerful characteristic of government. and that is a nurse yet, that we do tomorrow just to incrementally a little bit different. what we did yesterday. we've been creeping along in foreign policy, national security entitlements,

all these issues for 7080 years without much adjustment. if you go back and look at it, people can quibble with me on, on those issues. but there's a lot of inertia baked into us policy impact. both political parties from abroad have traditionally looked pretty close uh, in view and they kind of say, hey, the debates, pretty silly. this is a major change. and might that not be the kind of thing that america needs to push, reset overall, even for the democrats to come back and find out what they're really about for republicans to congeal around what they are really about. you know, steve, i think you've identified the phenomenon that we've seen and developed countries all around the world, which is that things don't seem to work as well anymore as they used to. the trains don't run on time. the government bureaucracy isn't efficient in a way that it used to be um, and the question is, what to do about that? and the democrats usually have just said, just keep doing what we're doing. and i know who poses us must be a bad person. but in fact, we really do need some kind of real shake up and it could be the trump provides

that jacob, i just wish it wasn't that he was coming at it from a jack sony in spoil system. i wish that he would actually maybe adopt a slogan that the other side once had, which is let's get this country moving again. do you think there's an element of massage any built into american politics that won't allow a woman to run and win us election? this is the 2nd time a woman is run. i would say, you know, you kind of look across both parties. there are women leaders, nikki haley got, you know, knocked out on the republican side. but it raises the question of whether or not that was a fatal mistake on the democratic ticket, even though aspiration only. i think many women course desert, but you know, you've got to ask the question, is there something massage in istic and, and opposed to a female running the united states government? i mean, i don't want to discount the power of massage in the, in american life, and certainly in people like trump and p takes of that charge can stick. um, on the other hand, a lot of women vote for donald trump in this election to. and i think there's

a feeling on the part of many women, particularly the working classes that a lot of developments in american life are driving men and women to parts. and that's not the way things were and they don't like it. and again, maybe it takes a disruptive force like trump, to get things back to what we remembered as a time when there was less tension and less entity really between the genders. so what's going on in the minds of women who voted for donald trump, but also voted in many cases around the country for abortion protections. abortion was the big issue. the democrats were gambling on to say, republicans, in particularly donald trump, has set up the circumstances, robbing women of their rights to determine what they'd like to do with their bodies and over abortion, politics. but we saw in florida where'd or, or a majority not enough voted for abortion protections to reveal a repeal in abortion band, a 6 week abortion band. but donald trump one that said by 13 points. and so usually you have this kind of the economy where women are voting for trump,

the guy who set up taking abortion rights, but they want their abortion rights to what's going on. you know, i think important points of the fact that the republican party is even now an ungainly coalition of factions. but don't really see ida, i believe angela, for christians do not have much in common with the bar stool. conservatives were basically a libertarian, who like trumps macho swagger, and think abortion is fine. there is sexual libertines, if anything. and that's something they liked about trumpet too. and then again, there's also the sort of paul ryan republicans who wanted cost cut social spending, who were part of this equation too. and it all has to get resolved somehow. trump is trying to actually split the difference on the abortion issue, saying in some states, abortion will be legal and that's fine. in some states, it will be illegal and that's fine. whether he's allowed to get away with that ultimately long term, i don't know, but it doesn't seem that a portion is what actually drove a lot of votes in the selection was really weird about this selection is that joe biden had a sky high. dow jones average in the stock market,

he had historic levels of unemployment in the country. we had an economy that was growing and inflation, which had really been a problem for him. i think one of the biggest problems that drove america's choice and their view that america was on the right track was clearly on the substantial decline. but you had americans didn't kind of feel the vibe of that. donald trump was able to deliver to working class americans, the sense that they're going to do better in his future with tariffs, with protections, with, you know, shutting down migration, etc. what do you think? do you think you'll be able to deliver in and are those are those americans permanently his or do you think that he's kind of delivered substantial ways to get wages up and to really impact in a way that no american has done extensive? the are the real state of support and cushioning and you know, the livelihood of working class americans. so you raise a lot of good questions there, steve. i know a lot. yeah, yes you do. i think part of the democrats fill your under bite and was to

appreciate the pain that inflation caused a working class americans. you know, in my study of, of the 19 seventy's, i really came to the belief that inflation is a president, killer americans hate inflation to them. the prices that exist after inflation are always going to be wrong. a car used to cost what a so what, what a sofa cost now, you know, a home cost. now what a car used to cost they'll never get used to the prices being wrong and the democrats didn't appreciate that until it was too late. um, you know, having said that, um, you know, i think the donald trump does have to deliver for those working class people who voted for him. largely because they remembered good times in the 3 years up to 2020, which they have a certain amnesia about. but donald trump's ideas for tariffs, who's i guess from s b port taishan. these are really inflationary ideas. and people who want him to get prices back down are not going to be happy if he makes things worse for them if he imposes what amounts to a regressive tax, which is what a tariff is. so front best of the site,

i think whether he wants durable majorities for republicans or whether he wants to lose the working class support that has come his way from people, not just white working class, but multi racial, multi ethnic working class borders. i'm just wondering whether that view that these people have that being engaged in the world, america being the security guarantor of the world, with all this capacity. people don't feel like it pays off for them. and donald trump used to say, hey, we're getting ripped off. is all of that come back, are we going to become basically a kind of semi isolationist country and pull back from the world? so i do agree with you this donald trump was able to speak for and 2 people who felt left behind in a way to know where the politician could actually think his pick of j. d. vance turned out to be fairly pressure. and in that sense, to vance, actually being an intellectual of sorts who was able to make a coherent program out of trump's instincts. but the problem here is that donald trump doesn't fundamentally believe in the post world war to us with global order, right? which has done so much to make america

a prosperous country more prosperous than any other country in the world. it's what made america great back then. absolutely is what will make america great. again, what i worry about is that donald trump really is kind of 19th century and his thinking he believes in great powers. none of us live but border, and each great power has its own sphere of influence. and therefore, what china wants to do with regard to taiwan, that's fine. what rusher wants to do with regard to create that's fine to united states needs to attend to its own meeting. but the problem is, our prosperity is undergirded by a free and open global training order, and i think very few americans will be happy if that goes away. but we will have to end it there, historian and author jeff kappa service. thank you so much for being with us today . wonderful conversation, real pleasure to take care. so what's the bottom line? i interviewed then vice president joe biden in 2016. that's when hillary clinton and donald trump were facing off in the presidential election. and body knew that the democratic party had a problem. he said, steve, the problem with the democrats today is that they become

a party of snobs. now listen to be, not everybody agrees with joe biden on that. but since then, his party has come to be seen as even more out of touch with working class folks of . busy races, white black, latino take your pick to day one, half of the country. totally understand how the democratic party last so badly in this election, while the other half is still scratching their head. but what we all know is that trump ism, is creating a new chapter in american history. sweeping aside america's pretensions and globalization to sure the silicon valley. all the guards like you on must help trump when. but in the end, america's work or send him to the white house fair and square, and now we're in a whole new political world. and that's the bottom line, the of breaking barriers and define expectations. there has never been an unofficial

match with multiple score against brazil until we the short such a team did it from local fields and member, okay, to the international stage. these play as proof that size doesn't define strength. i'll just say well, for those and instead of racing and story of the house and disappointments and trust rising to the challenge on the houses era, asking questions, what does it leads to that could view and solve the crisis? understanding the reality is take on marginalized communities and you blame them, refusing from the action to me over i'm to them has always sat that demonstrates it isn't very basic, right? and now you see many at the top 10 arrested with the latest local news, an insightful documentary. i'll just say it was teens across the world. when you closer to the thoughts of the story, asking these democratic nations justify this kind of behaviorist collateral. the

average has collateral damage, that's what we all team is leading to. what we're seeing that will allow me to push back for a moment is the you are system, corporate israel, affecting it's global, standing from the impact of the us selections, the escalating conflict in the middle east. and the urgency of climate action upfront sets the stage for serious debate on outages. here we don't simply focus on the public, accept the conflict. it's the consequence of wars. the human suffering definitely is a 4th time. it is one of the most serious spouts of violence in recent years. we brave bullets involved because we give voice to those demanding freedom the rule of law. and we always include the views from all sides. the or the

there's no limit to how a dream continue to study in your own event, you know counter and things the other i'm a ricardo. this is the news. our life from doha. coming up in the next 60 minutes is where the strikes kill them. 50 palestinians in northern galls of victims of bank polls and from the russell one in the south magics, a women and children being incineration as a report from understands national shows, evidence. but as well as intentionally committing genocide and garza.