geoff: good evening. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on the “news hour” tonight, european allies criticize the u.s. for moving ahead on ukraine peace talks while seeming to sideline ukraine. geoff: president trump announces new reciprocal tarrifs, a move that could escalate trade wars and raise inflation.

amna: and what trump voters think about his first weeks in office, marked by immigration crackdowns, controversial cabinet picks, and a gutting of the federal workforce. >> so far they are saying, ok, he gets a honeymoon period, i'm waiting to see what he does and so far i like what i am seeing, because what i am seeing is movement. ? >> major funding for the pbs "news hour" has been provided by. >> cunard is a proud supporter of public television. on a voyage with cunard, the world awaits. a world of flavor, diverse destinations, and immersive experiences. a world of leisure, and british style. all with cunard's white star service.

>> carnegie corporation of new york, working to reduce political polarization through philanthropic support for education, democracy, and peace. more information at carnegie.org. and with the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions. ♪ this program was made possible by the corporation for public pcos station from viewers like you. thank you.

our today your amna: welcome to the "news hour.” today, european leaders pushed back against what they describe as concessions and shifts by the trump administration on ukraine. geoff: yesterday, president trump started cease-fire negotiations, while his defense secretary doubted ukraine's future in nato. today, ukrainian and european officials demanded continued support for ukraine and a seat at the negotiating table. nick schifrin is in munich for us tonight. nick: at nato headquarters today, the traditional class photo was all smiles, but behind the show of unity tension over ukraine from britain. >> there can be no negotiation about ukraine without ukraine and ukraine's voice must be at the heart of any talks. nick: lithuania. >> whether we decide to fall i under the illusion that mr. that trump and mr. putin are going to find a solution for all of us, and that would be a

deadly trap. nick: germany. >> it is regrettable, and i say this myself, but as part of the truth, the trump administration has already made public concessions to putin before negotiations have even begun. nick: the u.s.' nato allies demanded that nato fulfill its 2024 promise that ukraine's future membership is -- quote -- "irreversible" and ukraine and europe be part of any negotiation. kaja kallas is the european union's top diplomat. >> it is clear that any deal behind our backs will not work. any agreement will need also ukraine and europe being part of it, and this is clear, that appeasement also always, always fails. nick: that appeared to be criticism of secretary of defense pete hegseth's statement yesterday. pete hegseth, u.s. defense secretary: the united states does not believe that nato membership for ukraine is a realistic outcome of a

negotiated settlement. nick: today, hegseth tried to walk that back. sec. hegseth: i want to be clear about something as it pertains to nato membership not being realistic outcome for negotiations. i'm not going to stand at this podium and declare what president trump will do or won't do, what will be in or what will be out, what concessions will be made or what concessions are not made. pres. trump: i thought his comments were good yesterday, and they're probably good today. nick: in washington, president trump suggested russia can veto ukraine's entry into nato. pres. trump: i don't see any way that a country in russia's position could allow them, just in their position, could allow them to join nato. i don't see that happening. question: when putin says that he really wants peace, do you believe him? pres. trump: yes, i do. go i believe he wants peace. question: do you trust president putin? pres. trump: i believe -- yes, i believe that he would like to see something happen. i trust him on this subject. nick: in ukraine, during a visit

to a nuclear power plant, ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy said the u.s.' shutting the door to nato would be -- quote -- "difficult.” >> it's important that everything does not go according to putin's plan, in which he wants to do everything to make his negotiations bilateral between him and the united states of america. we as a sovereign country simply will not be able to accept any agreements without us. nick: if ukraine sounded worried, the kremlin sounded encouraged. spokesman dmitry peskov: dmitry peskov, spokesman for vladimir . >> the current administration, as far as we understand, holds the view that everything must be done to stop the war and for peace to prevail. we are much more impressed by the position of the current administration and we are open to dialogue. nick: back in brussels: sec. hegseth: the u.s. is committed to building a stronger, more lethal nato. nick: in his press conference and his first meetings with his nato counterparts, hegseth tried to reassure that the trump administration had their backs.

but he also reiterated the u.s. would push nato members to spend 5% of their gdp on defense. sec. hegseth: make no mistake, president trump will not allow anyone to turn uncle sam into uncle sucker. nick: the trump administration's push for europe to do more now turns to the munich security conference, where vice president vance leads the delegation. today, he and his wife, usha, visited one site of europe's darkest moment, the dachau concentration camp, where the nazis murdered tens of thousands of jews. it was liberated by u.s. soldiers 80 years ago this april. >> being here and seeing it up close in person really drives home what unspeakable evil was committed and why we should be committed to ensuring that it never happens again. nick: tomorrow will be a vital day for the trump administration's relationship with europe and ukraine. ursula von der leyen, european

commission president, speaks first, and then vice president j.d. vance. after that, vance will meet ukrainian president zelenskyy in a meeting that ukrainian officials are already saying today will describe or will actually find out the country's fate. geoff: and, nick, what are officials telling you about how they're feeling ahead of what could be a pivotal day there? nick: geoff, they describe themselves as both anxious and a little bit confused. senior european officials describe themselves as anxious to me because of what they heard from pete hegseth at nato headquarters this week, even if he walked back some of his comments yesterday, and what they have heard from president trump all week about nato, russia, and how he feels about ukraine. but they are also a little bit confused, because they tell me that they have had different messages from different people. senior european officials met with j.d. vance in paris earlier this week and left that meeting very

reassured about how vance felt about nato and ukraine. american officials, in fact, tell me that they're trying to explain to european officials that the trump administration does not have a normal policymaking procedure and that they just have to be patient until the trump administration and specifically president trump comes out with a specific policy. but the bottom line, though, is that the europeans and ukrainians are very anticipatory about tomorrow's comments by j.d. vance, not only what he will say in public about ukraine and nato, geoff, but also what he will say in private in that meeting with zelenskyy, whether the u.s. will treat europe and ukraine as partners as they try to end this war. geoff: nick schifrin in a snowy munich for us tonight. nick, thank you. stephanie: here are the latest headlines. in washington d.c., where

president donald trump hosted india's prime minister narendra modi at the white house. pres. trump: we're going to talk about trade. we're going to talk about many things. but it's really an honor to see you. stephanie: they appeared in the oval office together this afternoon just hours after trump signed a plan to impose so-called reciprocal tariffs on many of america's trading partners. that would include india. at a press conference this evening, trump did say it would increase military sales to india. earlier, modi met with elon musk, one of trump's closest allies and the world's richest man. modi later posted on musk's social media platform, x, that the two discussed "space, mobility, technology, and innovation.” a federal judge today paused president trump's executive order restricting gender-affirming care for transgender youth. a lawsuit was filed earlier this month for families with trans and nonbinary children, saying their health care has been

compromised by the order. judge brendan hurson granted today's hold while that case proceeds. he says trump's action -- quote -- "seemed to deny that this population even exists or deserves to exist." the pause is effective for 14 days and could be extended. in germany, authorities say at least 30 people were injured this morning when a driver rammed his car into a crowd not far from the site of the munich security conference. police flocked to the scene, where union demonstrators were striking. authorities quickly detained the suspect, a 24-year-old afghan who had been turned down for asylum several years ago. they hoisted his mini cooper onto a tow truck. local officials believe it was a deliberate attack. german chancellor olaf scholz said the suspect should not expect leniency. >> even if we do not know everything we will know at some point, one thing is already apparent.

an afghan perpetrator has seriously injured people here, and that is something we can neither tolerate nor accept. stephanie: today's incident follows a number of recent attacks that have reignited the immigration debate in germany. last month, an afghan suspect was arrested after a knife attack left two people dead. in december, a saudi doctor plowed his car into a massive christmas market, killing six and injuring hundreds. hamas said today that it will release three israeli hostages on saturday, allowing the shaky cease-fire with israel to hold for now. the group had threatened to suspend further handovers, claiming that israel violated their agreement, namely by not allowing tents and shelters into gaza. hamas announced today that mediators are helping to resolve the dispute. an israeli government spokesperson said troops are in position to resume fighting in case hamas does not follow through on saturday's release. >> we have already amassed

forces inside and surrounding gaza. so if those three are not released, if hamas does not return our hostages by saturday noon, the cease-fire will end and the idf will resume intense fighting until the final defeat of hamas. stephanie: the names of the three people expected to be handed over have not yet been announced. there are still 17 hostages set to be released during this phase of the cease-fire. of those, israel says eight are dead. back here in the u.s., the justice department's call to drop charges against new york city mayor eric adams have sparked outcry and resignations. the top federal prosecutor in manhattan, danielle sassoon, resigned her position today, rather than obey the order. five other high-ranking justice department officials also quit rather than carry out orders to drop the case. adams, a democrat, has been

accused of accepting illegal campaign contributions and bribes in exchange for political influence. he denies any wrongdoing. minnesota senator tina smith announced today that this term will be her last. sen. smith: i have decided not to run for reelection to the united states senate in 2026. stephanie: smith said on social media her decision was not political, but entirely personal. her open seat deals a blow to her fellow democrats, who already faced an uphill battle to retake the majority in 2026. potential democratic candidates were quick to emerge. minnesota's lieutenant governor peggy flanagan said she plans to run. representative ilhan omar is considering it, according to her chief of staff. and governor tim walz, the running mate of former vice president kamala harris, is reportedly also in the mix. a new study suggests that bird flu has silently spread from animals to some veterinarians.

the centers for disease control tested 150 dairy veterinarians across 46 states for antibodies to the virus. three of them were positive. none of the vets reported working with infected cows or having symptoms. the results echo two smaller studies that found evidence of past infections in farmworkers that went undiagnosed. researchers say this suggests that the u.s. is significantly undercounting bird flu infections nationwide. tiktok is back, starting tonight users can again download the video sharing platform on apples and googles app stores. u.s. attorney general pam bondi sent a letter to the tech giants prompting them to restore downloads. shortly after his inauguration, president trump halted a law banning tiktok nationwide. he said it was to give its china-based owner or time to sell the platform. in california, a powerful storm known as an atmospheric river is hammering the state with

torrential rains and wind. man: we won't be here, but we're hoping that everything will stay off our driveway and just flow down. stephanie: in southern california, officials have advised residents of four counties to evacuate. they say heavy rains could trigger mudslides in areas that were ravaged by recent wildfires. forecasters expect as much as six inches of rain in higher elevations. that same storm has already piled two feet of snow in parts of the sierra nevada region and caused whiteout conditions in oregon. law enforcement there say more than 100 vehicles were involved in a pileup which closed part of interstate 84. meantime, in the eastern u.s., road cleanup continues following two days of heavy snow and freezing rain. over 150,000 people are still without power in virginia and north carolina. still to come on the news hour, lawmakers question president trump's nominee for education

secretary. a nobel prize-winning economist on the potential financial risks ahead as the u.s. shifts course; and a look at efforts to eliminate the historical practice of genital mutilation in african communities. >> this is the "pbs news hour" from the david m rubenstein studio at weta in washington and in the west from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university. geoff: this was a big day for president trump's team and some of his most controversial cabinet picks. robert f. kennedy jr., a noted vaccine skeptic and critic of the pharmaceutical and food industries, was sworn in as secretary of health and human services. he now has oversight over the fda, the cdc, medicare and medicaid. he was confirmed in a tight vote with no democratic support and a no-vote from the former senate majority leader republican mitch mcconnell. the senate confirmed brooke

rollins overwhelmingly with a bipartisan vote to become the new secretary of agriculture. as the top official on food supply, she is expected to deal with the impact of tariffs and a crackdown on immigration that could affect farmers. amna: one of the president's most controversial nominations, kash patel to be the next fbi director, also took a big step forward after the senate judiciary committee voted along party lines to advance his nomination. and linda mcmahon was pressed about president trump's plans for the department of education during her confirmation hearing today. lisa desjardins has our report. man: ms. mcmahon, i appreciate you coming. lisa: for linda mcmahon, a capitol hill interview for a job the president suggested she should work herself out of. linda mcmahon, u.s. education secretary nominee: the legacy of our nation's leadership in education is one that every person in this room embraces with pride. unfortunately, many americans today are experiencing a system in decline. lisa: democrats presented a united front against the nominee

for secretary of education. sen. sen. markey: will you oppose any cuts to public education, yes or no? linda mcmahon: well, the president is not -- he is not saying that we should cut funding to public education. sen. markey: yes, he is. linda mcmahon: he is simply saying -- well, i would disagree with you there. sen. markey: elon musk yesterday announced he would immediately cut $900 million from the department of education. lisa: mcmahon said she has not talked with musk about the agency at all. yesterday, the president made his position clear. pres. trump: oh, i'd like it to be closed immediately. look, the department of education is a big con job. lisa: but, in her hearing, mcmahon walked a finer line. linda mcmahon: it is not the president's goal to defund the programs. it is only to have it operate more efficiently. lisa: aiming to reassure senators. sen. sanders: if there is a movement to abolish the department of education, it has to go through the united states congress. linda mcmahon: yes, it is set up by the united states congress and we work with congress. it clearly cannot be shut down without it. lisa: but she left open that it

could be dismantled. for example, democrats raised concern about special education funding, part of the individuals with disabilities education act, or idea. sen. hassan: there is a reason that the department of education and idea exists, and it is because educating kids with disabilities can be really hard, and it takes the national commitment to get it done. lisa: mcmahon said she could not cut that, but she could move it. linda mcmahon: i think it could very well go back to hhs, where it started. sen. hassan: all right, so i just want to be clear. you're going to put special education in the hands of robert f. kennedy jr. lisa: this was a fundamental debate on education and government. sen. sanders: is it the responsibility of the federal government to say that every kid in america, whether you're poor, middle class, rich, gets a quality education? it is. >> the department needs to get out of the way of states and local communities, who are best positioned to actually address students' needs.

lisa: republicans have advocated for school choice, more dollars for private and charter schools, and less federal involvement in education. linda mcmahon: department of education was set up in 1980. and since that time, we have spent almost a trillion dollars and we have watched our performance scores continue to go down. lisa: u.s. results actually are a mixed bag, but years of increased per-pupil spending have not risen scores in proportion. and there are still pandemic setbacks. a recent national analysis showed that the average student is still half a grade level behind scores before covid. it is complex, though republicans see a simple bottom line. sen. tuberville: we're failing. it is a disaster. if you can't read, you can't learn. >> what a pleasant surprise, my wife. lisa: the billionaire is best known as the ceo of world

wrestling entertainment, or wwe. she and her husband have been trump donors and friends for years. but she is also an experienced nominee, running the small business administration in his first term and serving on the connecticut board of education and as a trustee at sacred heart university. democratic senators were on guard. this was the first hearing since trump and elon musk began gutting usaid and other agencies. sen. murray: what will you do if the president or elon musk tells you not to spend money congress has appropriated to you? linda mcmahon: we will certainly expend those dollars that congress has passed, but i do think it is worthwhile to take a look at the programs before money goes out the door. lisa: mcmahon backed the administration's ban on transgender girls from competing in women's and girl's sports and his threat to pull federal funds from schools that don't comply. linda mcmahon: i do not believe that biological boys should be able to compete against girls in sports. lisa: and trump's executive order against diversity, equity and inclusion programs. she was asked about whether

african american history classes could be in violation. linda mcmahon: i'm not quite certain and i'd like to look into it further and get back to you on that. sen. murphy: i think you're going to have a lot of educators and a lot of principals and administrators scrambling right now. lisa: despite protest and interruption, the hearing itself was among the less heated so far, though the debate over education is likely to remain boiling. for the "pbs news hour," i'm lisa desjardins. ♪ amna: president trump ramped up his trade battles with countries around the world today after he announced a plan for new reciprocal tariffs that could take effect this spring. the tariffs would match the tax rates that other countries charge on american-made imports for allies and adversaries alike. and the president insisted that tariffs would collect so much

money they would help reduce the debt. pres. trump: they say this is going to be the thing that makes our country really prosperous again. and this is going to be what pays down the $36 trillion in debt and all the other things. and this is going to be -- this is an amazing day. this -- i think this is going to be a very big day and in a very positive way for our country. amna: once again, there are many concerns about the president's goals, questions about when the tariffs might take effect and the reaction to them. mark zandi is chief economist at moody's analytics and joins us now. mark, thanks for being with us. let's just begin with your reaction to today's announcement from president trump, the scope of what he's announcing and also the way in which the president is proposing a new regime of reciprocal tariffs here. >> yes, i am worried about this, very disconcerting. feels like the president's moving to broad-based tariffs, if not so-called universal tariffs on every country and every product, something closer

to that. and i think that's a problem. it means higher inflation for u.s. consumers. it's a tax on american consumers. and just to give you a sense of the magnitude of that, just the tariffs on chinese imports in the u.s., the 10% tariff that president trump just imposed, if sustained, that will reduce the real purchasing power of the typical american family by between $200 and $250 a year. so just do the arithmetic. you can -- the impacts will be very serious. and then it's going to cost jobs, because it's unimaginable that the rest of the world is just going to stand still. they're going to respond. they're going to respond with their own tariffs and other trade restrictions. and, of course, that's going to cost american jobs. and at the end of the day, it's not only going to raise inflation and the cost of living. it's going to reduce the amount of jobs and the strength of the economy. so i just don't -- it's just a lose-lose for everybody, including the folks overseas and here at home. amna: well, the president did

say these aren't set to go into place until april, if they do it all. and it does inject some more uncertainty into the economy. but when you look at how investors and the markets are reacting, do they show the same concern that you have right now? mark: not yet. i mean, they don't believe -- i think investors don't quite believe that the president's going to follow through on the tariffs that he's articulated because he hasn't, right? they're on again. they're off again, this country, that country, this product, that product. hard to know. and i think investors are convinced, at least at this point in time, that the president's not going to follow through. but if the president actually does follow through, i think we will see a clear reaction in the stock market. in fact, you can go back to the tariffs that the president imposed in his first term, lots of really good research that was done by the new york fed, for example, that shows the impact on businesses in terms of profitability, in terms of jobs, and also in terms of the impact on the stock market.

so, buckle up. i think, if the president actually follows through -- and, again, who knows? but if he does, i think the stock market is going to take it on the chin. amna: well, you have heard the white house argument for these tariffs from the president and from his economic advisers that these tariffs serve to even out trade imbalances with other countries and that, if there is short-term pain in any way, they say, overall, over the long term, it will lead to greater productivity and lower prices for american consumers. does that argument make sense to you? is that grounded in anything we have seen before? mark: no, absolutely not. i mean, the history -- and we have had a long history of tariffs across the globe, including here in the united states. it is very clear that the greater the tariffs and trade restrictions, the less trade that you have, the worse off economies are. i mean, there's near-term effects. i talked about the effect of the higher tariffs on the cost of living for americans. there's longer-term effects. i mean, it reduces competitive -- the competition in markets,

which makes productivity lower, slower, and ultimately reduces the standard of living of everybody. and, again, it's a lose-lose. it's not like someone wins, someone loses in the grand scheme of things. everyone's going to lose here. so that -- to argue the other -- the alternative, is, i think, in the face of historical experience. amna: mark, we should point out president trump is not the first president to employ and levy reciprocal tariffs. what is different to you about the way this president is using them to presidents in the past? mark: there's two big differences. the potential scale. i mean, the tariffs that, let's say, president biden put into place, those $18 billion additional tariffs on chinese product, e.v. batteries, solar panels, very strategic, saying, hey, look, you're not playing fair, you got to play fair, and this is a penalty if you don't. in the case of president trump, again, a lot of uncertainty here, but president trump is

talking about broad-scale tariffs across the board. and the second thing, the uncertainty. just think about all the switches and changes and this tariff, that tariff, it's on again, it's off again. i'm going to impose tariffs on this and on that. i think businesses are getting dizzy with all that. how can you make a large investment decision, a hiring decision if you don't know what the tariffs will be? by the way, amna, the other important point in terms of the uncertainty is, these are being done under executive order. it's not legislation. it's not like congress voting and saying, hey, i want to raise these tariffs. it's the president imposing them. so, if i'm a businessperson thinking -- seeing that, i know that those tariffs can go away with another executive order, and certainly the next president could change them. so if that's the case and i'm making a decision about an investment that's going to last 10, 15, 20 years, i'm just not going to do it, because i just don't know what those tariffs are going to be. and i don't know what it means for my business. amna: mark zandi, the chief economist at moody's analytics. mark, thank you. good to speak with you.

mark: thank you. ♪ geoff: new insight tonight into a group of voters that helped swing the 2024 presidential race, those that voted for democrats in prior elections, but for donald trump this past november. the analysis comes from recent focus groups conducted by republican strategist sarah longwell. she joins us now with more on what led these voters to shift political allegiances. thanks for being here. sarah longwell, longwell partners: yes, thanks for having me. geoff: so our team pored over the hours of tape that you recorded with this group of voters. and a common refrain seems to be, as expressed by this group, that at least donald trump is doing something. here's what monty from new york had to say. >> i think he's running the country like a business. so what happens if management steps into a business for the first time? shut everything down. let's see the books. let's look at everything. let's see what needs to stop being spent on and what. so i understand that.

it sounds scary, the funding freeze. and i know it does -- it does, like, shake up a lot of industries or a lot of places. but it's something that needs to be happening. geoff: how did this group respond to some of the specific actions president trump has taken, the dismantling of government agencies, the mass deportations, the pardons for january 6 defenders? sarah: yes, well, look, those are all different issues. but i think one of the things that you have to understand about a lot of these voters is that they can't disentangle all of the crazy news stories, right? so they tend to just take it in general as an assessment of, does it feel like things are moving? does it feel like things are happening? and i do think, contrasted with a lot of frustrations i heard from voters just going back six months ago with joe biden was, hey, i don't feel like i hear him. don't feel like i see him. and so the way that donald trump just kind of gets in people's

faces and hits people with tons of information, tons of action, they're not necessarily there to adjudicate, is it a good action or a bad action? they just know stuff is happening. and so they say, well, i'm seeing ice trucks in my community. and i'm glad it means they're doing something about immigration. and the january 6 pardons, that's such an interesting one to me, because it's people don't like the january 6 pardons, but it's not a deeply held conviction. they're sort of like, well, i wish he hadn't done it, but whatever. like, it's just one of those things that doesn't sit with them as a really important issue. and so i think that right now donald trump is benefiting with the people who kind of took a flier on him because they were frustrated with joe biden and the democrats. and they're -- so far, they're saying, ok, he gets a honeymoon period, i'm waiting to see what he does. and, so far, i like what i'm seeing because what i'm seeing is movement. geoff: this group, how do they know what they know? what are their information sources? how are they getting their news?

sarah: yes, well, i mean, even over the years that i have been doing focus groups, which is really since donald trump came on the scene, so in the last eight years, i have just seen such a total shift in the media environment and the way that people consume media. so, for a long time, you really did hear people say that they were still getting a lot of their news from local news. but now it's just almost entirely podcasts, scrolling on their phone. they catch bits on social media. they don't live on twitter or x or necessarily social media platforms, but maybe they follow things like -- about wellness or about health or about working out, and they get their politics kind of infused in that, or they get politics infused in the sports podcast they listen to. and so the way that people are sort of putting together their information sources now is just pulling a little bit from here and a little bit from there in this very fragmented media environment. geoff: you also asked them about dei, diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, which president trump campaigned heavily against and is now

rooting out. what stands out to me is the way in which this group seems to have adopted donald trump's view on this, that diversity and competence are somehow mutually exclusive. here's what steve from las vegas and brian from tucson had to say. steve, trump voter: i don't want like to be hired just because i'm black. i want to get hired because i deserve the job. at the same time, i can understand why in certain career fields or certain industries, there might be a need for more inclusion of diversity. but i'm not for including that diversity at the risk of having quality workers. brian, trump voter: when you're talking about government places like fire department, when you're talking about things that are there to save lives, right, you want the best of the best, right? i want the best firepower. of all the firefighters, i want the top ones if i'm going to be safe. geoff: so how did this issue in particular resonate among those voters you spoke with?

sarah: well, look, i got to tell you, this is something i hear across the board from voters, and it includes a lot of democratic voters, where they just -- they don't love -- it's not just dei. it's sort of you hear a lot of these different words. sometimes, it's dei. sometimes, it's woke. but voters are sort of -- they seem to want to push past this era of kind of segmenting people. and this is one where i think democrats maybe just lost the cultural conversation a little bit on this. and voters even when -- because there's a lot of voters who don't like the way donald trump talks about people or don't like the way that republicans talk about people. but they will still say things like, i just don't think there's 1,000 genders or i wish we talked less about these issues. i want to focus on issues like the economy or on immigration. and so it's just something that falls flat with voters, not just republican voters, but often voters across the board.

geoff: you mentioned the issue of gender, which president trump often refers to as gender ideology. that also came up in these focus groups. here is karin from arizona. karin, trump voter: when my daughter was in the fifth grade, they had this whole conversation about what your pronouns are. and so, like, i was routinely like scolded for not respecting my daughter's pronouns as they/them. and i'm like, that's not something that's going to happen in this house. i gave birth to a daughter. it says it on her birth certificate. she's a girl. this is the same girl who wanted to be spider-man three years before that. so she doesn't have the capability of deciding what she wants for breakfast, let alone adding a penis. geoff: you know, given the way that donald trump in particular in republicans more broadly have really changed the parameters of the debate around some of these cultural issues, how does that complicate the effort that democrats now have in trying to win back voters and in trying to go on the offensive on some of

these issues? sarah: well, it's a little complicated, in the sense that, yes, you hear a lot of -- i hear a ton of voters talking this way, where the sort of new way that people are talking about gender and identity just doesn't sit well with them. at the same time, they do not like the cruelty. they don't -- there are a lot of voters who say, look, i think donald trump's going too far in how he demonizes people or in how he talks about people. i don't think it's kind. i don't think it's decent. and so i think donald trump is going so far into dei -- i mean, the extent to which he blamed dei, for example, for those horrific plane crashes in washington, d.c., that is not something that lands with voters. and so i do think that democrats should really focus on the places where donald trump is going to excess on these issues, where they are obsessing over them. i mean, right now, certainly, trump and his administration are doing far more rooting out things around gender ideology

than they are in the economy. and voters care much more about the economy than they do about sort of singling people out. and so i think they're -- i think democrats have to figure out how to stop defending some things that are deeply unpopular or even just focusing on things that are broadly unpopular with voters and instead focus on things that matter. but i think it's fair for them to point out the places where donald trump is being unnecessarily cruel and targeting groups of people, because voters don't like that either. geoff: republican strategist sarah longwell, thanks again for joining us. sarah longwell: thanks for having me. amna: let's dig a little deeper on how the public mood and political attitudes have shifted over time, tied in no small part to economic shifts and dislocation. geoff: paul solman recently spoke with economist and columnist paul krugman about his career and how the combination of polarization, globalization

and job loss changed the way many americans see the economy. paul solman: for just short of 25 years, nobel laureate economist paul krugman was a new york times columnist. he began the column in the clinton years. krugman left the times just before donald trump was inaugurated. i asked him back then what has changed in 25 years. paul krugman, former columnist, the new york times: when i began writing the column, people were extremely optimistic. i was hired basically to talk about all the good news and maybe funny stuff that was happening in this glorious late 1990s economic boom. and it's been a very troubled world since then. paul solman: by trouble, he means, at least domestically, donald trump's policies. but americans voted for them, didn't they? paul krugman: most voters have very little idea of policy. i mean, you look at the polling, ask people, do you approve of obamacare, and it's still pretty negative. and you ask, do you approve of the affordable care act, and it's very positive. so that's telling you something about what voters understand

about policy. paul solman: krugman pointed to this recent michigan consumer confidence survey question. paul krugman: are you personally better off than you were five years ago? in october, a clear plurality of americans said, no, we're worse off. in n of americans said, yes, we're better off than we were five years ago. so, people's assessment of their own financial situation turns out to be kind of driven by narratives that are floating out there. paul solman: krugman supported president biden's policy of manufacturing investment to help regions hurt by trade and china. but voters in those regions went for donald trump. did they reject the policy? paul krugman: maybe, or maybe they just didn't really attribute it to biden or whatever, although i think we are seeing a dynamic now, which is that it's going to be harder than some republicans think to reverse those policies, that people may not have given biden

credit for that new battery factory in your town, but they will get really angry if the battery factory closes because we have cut off the subsidies. paul solman: did most economists, including yourself, not appreciate how huge a factor the cost of living change pre-covid to today was, is? paul krugman: i would have thought -- i did think -- i even looked at statistical analyses that said that most of the discontent over inflation, which inflation peaked in the middle of 2022 and has come way down, and i would have expected people to have largely gotten over it by now. and they haven't. paul solman: do you have an explanation for it? paul krugman: i think that part of it is just that the shock of this coming for the first time after decades of price stability was part of it. and then part of it is just that we are -- our political

discourse has become much more fragmented, much more polarized. paul solman: for voters with incomes under $50,000 a year, household incomes, donald trump actually did better than kamala harris. why do you suppose that was? paul krugman: trump promised to bring prices down, which is a promise that he immediately abandoned as soon as he won. but that -- so, that would have appealed to low-income voters as a promise. and, also, there's a lot of confounding of income and education and paying attention. we know that trump won heavily among people who pay very little attention to the news. paul solman: one great burden of a low income, besides not affording things, says krugman. paul krugman: is the cognitive burden it places on people.

the biggest benefit once i started earning a nice income was not having to worry all the time about what things cost, whether i could afford this or that. so, asking people to have a sophisticated view on what economic policy can and can't do is going to be correlated with income, unfortunately. paul solman: krugman not only made a good living. he also advised various administrations on economic policy. advice taken? paul krugman: the thing that i have learned in real life is that, no matter how much you know, no matter how right you have been, your ability to actually influence policy is very, very limited. i mean, if you ask, how many times has somebody with actual power actually taken advice that i gave them, the answer is once my whole life. paul solman: what are you least proud of? paul krugman: i think maybe the thing i'm least proud of is that i missed one of the important

problems of globalization. i thought it was on the whole a good thing, but that it would be problematic. but what i missed was the way that the impact would be concentrated on particular communities. so we can look and say that the china shock displaced maybe one or two million u.s. manufacturing workers. a million-and-a-half people are laid off every month, so what's that? but what i missed was that there would be individual towns that would be in the path of this tidal wave of imports from china that would have their reason for existence gutted. paul solman: yesterday, i caught up with him again for two final questions, first why he left the times and moved to substack, where more than 200,000 followers now read whatever's on his mind. paul krugman: it's very important to me, given my sort

of dual career, to be able to weigh in on ongoing discussions of economics in a way that you can't do in an 800-word column written for a general audience. and so i had a newsletter at the times, which was summarily canceled. they said i was writing too much. that was when i decided i needed to leave, but also that i had always been very, very lightly edited at the times, until the last year. and then the editing became extremely intrusive. and i felt that i was putting in an enormous amount of effort trying to undo the damage and that everything was coming out bland and colorless as a result of the fight over the editors trying to tone things down. paul solman: and, finally, what is he most worried about at the moment with trump now back at the helm? paul krugman: well, i'm most worried about that 2024 may have been our last real election, i mean, given that the -- what appears to be a loyalty purge of the federal bureaucracy, what

appears to be unwillingness of the trump administration to obey court orders, maybe historians will look back and say that american democracy ended in january 2025. that's top of the list. paul solman: well, like his substack, not bland, not toned down. for the "pbs news hour," paul solman working from home outside boston. ♪ amna: it's a taboo topic and an age-old practice across several countries and religious traditions in africa, the middle east and asia. an estimated 230 million women and girls are subjected to genital mutilation, or cutting. geoff: fred de sam lazaro reports from senegal, where one group has had success in getting thousands of african communities

to abandon the practice. a note that the group does not receive any current funding from usaid, so it's unaffected by cuts to that agency. and a warning: this story contains some explicit references. fred: in the small town of dialakoto recently, there was a coming-out party for several nearby rural communities, a boisterous and until a few years ago very unlikely gathering called a declaration attended by elected, traditional and religious leaders. one after the other, these communities came forward to proclaim that they were abandoning female genital mutilation, or cutting. it's a removal, partly or wholly, of the clitoris, a practice some scholars trace to beliefs about chastity until marriage or even hygiene, dating back some 2,000 years, one that

the u.n. and governments have long tried to eradicate. molly melching, founder, tostan: the new rule is you do not, you do not cut your daughter. fred: on a bumpy ride to the declaration, i asked molly melching what's bringing about change here. the key difference, she says, it's not a directive to eradicate, but a decision to abandon cutting. molly melching: we need to abandon ourselves. it's not because someone tells us to. fred: melching is globally recognized as founder of a group called tostan, or breakthrough, best known for helping communities across several african countries abandon fgc. it's not exactly what the danville, illinois, native set out to do when she moved to senegal as a student, then peace corps volunteer, a long time ago. molly melching: i would not have dreamed that i would be here 50 years, although this is a magical country. it's beautiful. fred: she began in education, working to develop children's reading materials in local languages. in senegal, books, if available at all, were in french, the former colonial language that

few can read or even speak. with a small grant, she began in the village of sam ndiaye, where she also lived for three years. molly melching: we saw this great hunger for education among the populations. they wanted to learn to read and write. they wanted to learn more about health and how they could prevent illnesses. fred: it grew into adult education, first for women, eventually everyone, and focused on the causes of various health problems. molly: they wanted to learn what happened to them. we didn't even bring up fgc until much later in the program. and, meanwhile, they had learned what are the practices that may harm and lead to problems later on in life. fred: as fgc came up organically, she says, the newly acquired health education helped link the practice to its myriad painful short and long-term consequences, infections, hemorrhage, even sterility and death. tostan's approach includes teaching about human rights and,

in discussing fgc, she says, the message was one of support, not shame. molly: we understand that you did this not because you wanted to harm your daughters. and no woman wants that her daughter not be able to marry because no one respects her. so they had no choice. and suddenly they realized that together, collectively -- today, we're going to a declaration of 29 villages. they have come together to collectively decide that this is no longer the expectations. fred: although she's not active in the day-to-day running of tostan any longer, melching is a celebrity, reconnecting here with many alumni from its education programs, women like 52-year-old doussou sissao, who have carried the torch forward after attending one of the earliest declarations. >> in 2003, we did a declaration for many communities around here

because of that desire to see to end violence and practices which are harmful to people, to girls. so now we need to even go to other places where people are still practicing. fred: her own three grand-daughters are now free of the pain endured by their elders. sissao is one of hundreds of so-called social mobilizers for tostan, traveling to communities to urge abandonment. how did the men react to all these changes? >> in the beginning, it was hard because the men didn't know what goes on when you practice this female tradition. they just accepted that that was what was to be done. fred: we visited sounkarou diambang, village chief, now in retirement, who recalls being approached by women in the community. he called together religious leaders. senegal is a predominantly muslim country. >> they said, let us look in the

koran and see where it is written that women must go through this. and they found nowhere where it said that they must be cut. fred: that interpretation removed a significant hurdle to abandoning fgc in many communities and drew the support of men. indeed, many social mobilizers and tostan staff are male, many driven by memories of a loved one's suffering. melching took time to stop by the family of one late campaigner, boubou sall, who years earlier had lost an 8-year-old daughter. molly: he thought when she got a fever two weeks after she got the fgc operation, he thought that it was malaria, and so he treated her for malaria because he had the pills with him. and when she got worse, he then was told that she had tetanus and it was too late. fred: it was an emotional reunion with sall's family. the tostan manual he used, in the local mandinka language, was

still on the shelf 12 years after his death. molly: this was the hygiene and health module where boubou sall said he learned the transmission of germs and realized that his daughter died because she was cut with a knife that was not sterilized. fred: he traveled village to village with his story and guidebook, urging people at tostan classes to attend a declaration event like the one in dialakoto. these are a critical step in normalizing a social change. for communities considering abandoning female genital cutting, one last concern is, will they be ostracized for abandoning a time-honored tradition? the hope from these gatherings is that they can be an instant cure for that stigma. as one person put it to me, everyone now sees that everyone else is doing it. melching says that that decision to abandon is just one part of a holistic approach to improving life in communities. she took me to sam ndiaye, the

village where it all started decades ago. after a ceremonial welcome, we were shown the latest vision board, a development wish list for the next 10 years, illustrated by hand in a community when not all adults can read. the most pressing priority, adding a doctor to the nurse who now heads the health center they brought to the village a few years ago. so none of this existed when you moved into this village? molly: no, this was all empty space here. fred: its spartan but a solid building block toward better health. the key to tostan's success, she says, has been to play a supporting, not directing role that's so common in aid work today. help communities write a grant for example, or provide health information and let communities decide for themselves. how many villages have abandoned now? molly: over 9,500.

fred: in eight countries? molly: in eight countries. fred: a small dent in a global problem, melching says, but a lesson that development works best from the inside out. for the "pbs news hour," i'm fred de sam lazaro in dialakoto, senegal. amna: and a reminder that fred's reporting is a partnership with the under-told stories project at the university of st. thomas in minnesota. geoff: and that is. -- and that is the "news hour" for tonight. i'm geoff bennett. amna: and i'm amna nawaz. on behalf of the entire "news hour" team, thank you for joining us. >> major funding for the pbs "news hour" has been provided by. >> on an american cruise lines journey, along the colombia and snake rivers, travelers retrace the route forged by lewis and clark more than 200 years ago. american cruise line's fleet of modern riverboats travel through american landscapes to historic landmarks, where you can experience local customs and cuisine. american cruise lines, proud sponsor of "pbs news hour."

>> the ongoing support of these individuals and institutions, and friends of the "news hour," including leonard and norma klorfine, and the judy and peter blum kovler foundation. the ford foundation, working with visionaries on the front lines of social change worldwide. and with the ongoing support of these institutions. and friends of the "news hour." this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.]

>> this is the "pbs news hour" where from the david m rubenstein studio at weta in washington and from the walter cronkite school of journalism at arizona state university.

♪ -"cook's country" is about more than just getting dinner on the table. we're also fascinated by the people and stories behind the dishes. we go inside kitchens in every corner of the country to learn how real people cook. and we look back through time to see how history influences the way we eat today.