that will do it for me, thanks for watching. tune in tomorrow to the sunday show, when i will discuss what is next for democrats with the chair of the congressional hispanic caucus, congresswoman the net berrigan. former cbc chair, congresswoman barbara lee. and chair of the emeritus progressive caucus, mark polk and. that is right here on msnbc. follow us on x, instagram, tiktok, and threads . and at catch clips of the show on youtube. you can also listen to every episode of our shows as a podcast for free. just scan the qr code on your screen to follow. keep it right here. amon is next. good evening, tonight on ayman, with the blame game in full swing, we examine the critical question missing from

this postelection discourse. plus, revenge and retribution. trump made the promise his maga allies are eager to keep. and what to make of trump's historic support among latino voters, and the wake-up call it is for democrats. i'm ayman mohyeldin, let's do it . tonight i want to start the show by focusing on one number and a lot of questions, as it now stands, donald trump sits with about 74 million votes nationwide compared to 70 million votes for the vice president kamala harris. it is safe to say those numbers will change as more votes are counted. but compare these numbers to 2020. from the strength of the highest voter turnout in recent american history. the democrats won more than 81 million voters, while trump was at 74 million, a number very close to what he won in tuesday's election.

whether that number ends up being five or 10 million less than in 2020, my first question is an obvious one. what happened to those voters? for the most part, trump matched and slightly increased his number. but the democrats fell short of those. how did the party lose them? why did so many stay at home? there is a big debate happening right now in the democratic party. some say it is the focus on trans issues, others say the already moved too far in one direction or the other. some point to specific issues, like the war in gaza. the reality is, there is no single one issue that we can point to to explain the results in its entirety. but we do have some glimpses into key races that can shed some light. take, for example, michigan. harris lost to trump by about 78,000 votes. the democratic senator elect defeated her republican opponent by 21,000 votes. as former democratic staff

pointed out on x, a big supporter of israel did in fact express a willingness to condition usaid if it kept restricting aid to palestinians , something that the harris campaign never wanted to do. was that enough to swing michigan? certainly something to consider. as happens every election cycle, there is a cottage industry that immediately blamed the progressives, and so that the party had moved too far to the left. that is a ridiculous argument for many reasons. the democratic campaign spent its closing weeks with its candidate touring liz cheney. she was with liz cheney and telling the endorsement of cheney. and while trump and his movement spent the campaign firing of its base with red meat and making sure they got out and voted, democrats were once again chasing the mythical moderate swing voter. but is not just the cheney's. for all the talk of democrats,

once the party of working-class now losing ground with those voters of all races to trump, take a look at this new york times headline from mid- october. how wall street is suddenly shaping the harris economic agenda. the vice president has repeatedly incorporated suggestions from business executives and her economic agenda. now after the election, harris had a wall street approved economic pitch. it fell flat. it is this wall street friendly strategy that prompted bernie sanders to issue this rebuke of the party on wednesday. it should come as no great surprise that a democratic party which has abandoned working-class people would find that the working class has abandoned them. while the democratic leadership defends the status quo, the american people are angry and want change. unlike joe biden's 2020 campaign, which actually incorporated bernie's platform into its own, party leadership now is rejecting this critique. first, the d.o.c. chair jamie harrison calling it straight up bs. and today nancy

pelosi telling the times of bernie sanders, he has been a wonderful, shelley seay, champion from his point of view. but his point of view is not correct when he says the democrats have abandoned working families. the trans issue has come up quite frequently in election postmortems, thanks to a multimillion dollar anti-trans ad from the trump campaign. trans americans are not the only ones feeling the brunt of the postelection democratic scapegoating. similarly, democrats won the majority of latino americans. but the slight shift of some latinos to trump has some democrats wagging their fingers at latinos, wondering how they could support a man promising the largest mass deportation and history. arab and muslim americans are also being blamed, as israel's war on gaza has caused many of these voters in swing states abandoning the democratic party. in michigan, for example, donald trump won dearborn and made huge gains in hamtramck,

the two cities that have the highest percentage of arab- americans in america. and while we should all practice some humility and patience while trying to assess the collective decision of 145 million americans, we should have no patience for those who want to scapegoat certain racial , religious, or minority groups for their electoral failures. for a party running against the racism of donald trump and the maga movement, scapegoating minority groups for not voting democrat in high enough numbers is not really a good look. while millions of americans rightfully fear the policies of the republican party, some of these groups have added burden now of also fearing some democratic party policies as well. the truth of the matter is there is no single reason for the democrats failure to defeat such a repulsive candidate, and there were multiple factors at play. but there is one complaint that absolutely no one is making. not a single party official or pundit can argue that the democrats did not raise enough

money to compete in this race. in fact, just the opposite. over all the democratic campaign and democratic outside groups spent almost $1.8 billion while the trump campaign and his allies spent $1.4 billion. which leads me to my final point, this week 145 million american voters decided who the next president will be. but they did so in a political system, and economic system, and an information ecosystem that is dominated by a few wealthy individuals. powerful corporations. and those capable of writing hundred millions of dollars worth of checks to their favorite candidates. the events of this past few weeks, including the actions of people like elon musk and jeff davos have helped him in straight that. donald trump is a massive and unique threat to the freedom and rights of americans, and his victory is a major setback for our society. but there are forces larger than him that preceded his first term in office, propped him up, and will live on post trump.

american oligarchy. throughout the campaigns homestretch, democrats openly wondered whether they're saving democracy message was actually working. one reason why it may not have worked as this. with the obscene amount of power so few individuals have over our lives and our political system, what democracy were americans being asked to actually save? kicking us off tonight is pulitzer prize-winning author of the sympathizer, which was recently adapted for television by hbo. he is also a professor at usc. great to have you on the show, thank you for joining us. you know, in 2016 after trump won the first time, i think the country collectively learned of this word resistance. it was on everyone's tongue, so to speak. in your piece, before this election, you wrote that our fight is against both, no matter how we vote. and it seems you were better prepared for resistance than most of us as of today.

give me your thoughts on how this election turned out and where we go from here. >> ayman, such a pleasure to be here with you today. i thought you did a good summary of the variety of different possibilities. but i will push on a couple of different things. i don't think resistance is new in this country. resistance has been practiced by many different populations in this country since the very beginning of the united states, and that is one of the things i wanted to bring attention to. donald trump and what he represents is nothing new in this country. we had a long tradition of people exactly like him, who demonize, who scapegoat, who use terror against numerous others. it is very easy politics, of hatred and expectation that he has founded. but it goes all the way back to the beginning of the country itself. we should ask indigenous peoples and african-americans whether or not they have ever been subjected to these kinds of politics before. i think they have, and they have always resisted. so the idea that we have not resisted before, or that we are

facing something new, something that we should dispose of, one of the things that needs to be stressed is that the republican party has moved far to the right and brought the center of the democratic party with them. and i don't think the democratic party has resisted enough. that is where we should put some emphasis on the question of resistance. not necessarily among the people, but amongst the democratic party and their leadership. >> let me ask you about contradictions. i was very moved by some of your commentary after the election. you wrote a series of powerful posts, and you write the united states was born from a fundamental contradiction that has never gone away. on the one hand, the beauty of democracy, opportunity, freedom, and equality, on the other hand, the brutality that made that beauty possible. colonization, genocide, enslavement, occupation, and war. what was it like following this campaign with everything going on in this country, certainly what is happening overseas. how are you processing these contributions in real time, that still exist to this day?

>> on the beneficiary of many of the beauties of this country that i listed. i am deeply appreciative of those things. but i think the fact is that the brutality has always been there, as well. the genocide, the colonization, the enslavement. we can dispute with those mean, but they have been there since the beginning of the country. when i said the donald trump is nothing new, what i'm saying is that the various policies and injustices we see being enacted today are repetitions of the things we've seen in the past. i've talked a lot about the genocide that i believe israel is carrying out in gaza, with our very active support as the united states. and genocidal policy is something that, again, it has constituted the very history of this country. so if we are not willing to recognize that that contradiction is a part of who we are as americans, whether we are democrats or republicans, we are going to have a very hard time addressing what it is that donald trump symbolizes and his appeal to a significant part of the american population. not just white people, but a

substantial number of people of color, as well. >> do you believe that this country is becoming more polarized, in a way that information silos are hard to break through and to cross in terms of speaking to people across the divide? are we so polarized that we are beyond the point of depolarization, if you can use that word to try to bring people back together? >> i think the polarization is pretty intense. now, i think we should continue to make good faith efforts, having dialogue and conversation, and certainly part of the democratic party from barack obama, joe biden, kamala harris. the relative ineffectiveness of those efforts and dialogue need to be recognized. one of the things that i think donald trump and the white ring of the republican party is to not engage in dialogue. they staked out their political position very clearly. they have move things to the right. the democratic party has not been able to as effectively articulate a more full throated politics of solidarity, not just in terms of the many kinds

of identity issues that you brought up in the many different kinds of diverse populations that we had, but also a full throated defense of the economic interests of the american people. from the poor, to the working class, to the precarious middle- class who, no matter whether they are getting certain kind of benefits, feel that they are losing in today's environment. i don't think the democratic party's leadership has been as appealing in defending this particular interests. >> pulitzer prize winning author and scholar, inc. you so much. greatly appreciate your insights and joining us this evening. next up, trump allies are intensifying threats of retribution, and they are well- positioned to make good on that. wait, can we afford a safari? great question. like everything, it takes a little planning. or, put the money towards a down-payment... ...on a ranch ...in montana ...with horses let's take a look at those scenarios. j.p. morgan wealth management has advisors in chase branches and tools, like wealth plan to keep you on track.

when you're planning for it all... the answer is j.p. morgan wealth management.

♪♪ missing out on the things you love because of asthma? get back to better breathing with fasenra, an add-on treatment for eosinophilic asthma that is taken once every 8 weeks. fasenra is not for sudden breathing problems or other eosinophilic conditions. allergic reactions may occur. don't stop your asthma treatments without talking with your doctor. tell your doctor if your asthma worsens. headache and sore throat may occur. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection.

step back out there with fasenra. ask your doctor if it's right for you.

president-elect donald trump and his allies are gearing up for their revenge tour. davis, a conservative lawyer who is advising the transition team on justice department issues has spent the last few days attacking trump my in

perceived enemies. wednesday morning he tweeted, quote, i want to drag their political bodies through the streets, presumably referring to democrats. he also says former congresswoman liz cheney should lawyer up. he also did a podcast with a pro trump influencer and said something so vile about new york attorney general letitia james that we are simply not going to air it. but in short, he demeaned her looks and threatened her with prison for her civil lawsuit against donald trump. then there is mark colletta, who nbc news recently learned trump is considering for attorney general. he reposted an article on x arguing that trump has the legal authority to order the attorney general to investigate specific people. trump ran a campaign on a promise of retribution, and it appears he and maga will keep it. with me now, msnbc legal analyst lisa ribbon, and partners, who recently served as a campaign operator for trump and his recent term. the morning after the election,

you wrote on x a post that said there is one phrase you will never hear donald trump say, and that is forgive and forget. he is the type of person who will burn down the house with a flamethrower to get a fly. how worried are you for this revenge tour and the safety of those trump and his allies have deemed a target? >> thanks for having me. i'm extremely worried. i've been speaking to people around, and there are actually lists that are being made, different lists, like there is a personal list where i am on top with michael cohen. there is a media list where rachel maddow, msnbc is on top. there is the doj list, where you have people like jack smith that is going to be on top. i mean, they have actual list of people that they are going to go after, and it is just incredible to see that we are living in this type of environment right now.

>> just to be clear, you are saying these lists exist based on sources you have spoken to people within the trump world, or are you hearing this secondhand? >> inside the world, secondhand, i mean, from several sources. >> lisa, there was this new msnbc piece, you report about the morning after, and you kind of give us a little bit of insight into what is the thinking there. trump in good spirits, as you said, but there was no talk about the special counsel jack smith or the new york attorney general letitia james. his allies, though, they have not wasted any time in kind of identifying who they want to go after and how they want to go after them. give us a sense of what that might look like when you have powerful people who are seeking retribution and revenge in positions of legal authority. >> first, i want to give credit where credit is due, that reporting comes from dr. burns, from his senior campaign official close to former and future president trump. with respect to what that retribution tour might look like, they are threatening people with prosecution under a

particular statute. 18 usc 241. it punishes, essentially, conspiracies against civil rights. not ironically, it is the same statute that has been used to prosecute people, including former and future president donald trump. usually when we think about 18 usc 241, we are thinking about people who suppress civil rights, like the right to vote, for example. but here, folks like mike davis are saying the people who should be prosecuted under 18 usc 241 are people like jack smith, and letitia james. he has also said that liz cheney should be prosecuted for perjury and obstruction of justice. you might ask how did liz cheney commit either of those two crimes? their theory is that liz cheney -induced cassidy hutchinson to lie and to obstruct justice by basically going against the back of her attorney and talking to liz cheney privately when she was represented by somebody in trump world, and

completely changing her story to the january 6 committee. these are the kinds of prosecutions they are envisioning right now, and i take someone like mike davis at their word. the piece you are just referring to, he retweeted part of it earlier today. he is clearly enjoying the fact that we don't know whether he is serious or not. and i would say to you, ayman, and all of our viewers, don't discount the fact that mike davis, even though he says he doesn't want to go into government, is sort of fashioning himself like a legal ban and. someone who stays on the outside, but continues to be incredibly influential even though he does not step foot in the white house. >> yeah, it's a very important point that lisa brings up. trump has suggested going after or using the military to go after what he calls the enemy within. a very kind of vague term that can apply to anyone, basically, that he does not like, or someone that he thinks is threatening to his rule. all of his allies who are coming out with vile attacks have only been emboldened by this kind of rhetoric from donald trump. is there any way to stop this train wreck from moving forward?

>> i mean, i truly don't know. back in 2016, 2020, we had guardrails. there were people in place that were fighting trump, like the general kelly's, the general middle east that since i've come out and you have heard them say about their own opinion of trump. today donald trump has learned from the past, and the one thing he is learned is that the people he is going to put in power are people that are loyal to him. not loyal to the constitution, not loyal to the american public, but loyal to him. and that is dangerous. that is what authoritarianism is. that makes him basically unstoppable, and especially with the supreme court ruling, that gave him almost complete immunity, i don't know. maybe lisa knows better, but i have no idea what could stop it now. >> what you think, lisa? could we expect, obviously this is very premature. but can you anticipate a scenario where attorneys at the doj, prosecutors resigned en masse to protest what they might

perceive as political prosecution? >> well, i hope they don't. i think we are going to need them. the career prosecutors in the department of justice are the first line of defense against the kinds of prosecutions of mark pallotta and mike davis have been talking about. the other major guardrail that people don't count on is the fact that are lower courts are suffused with people who continue to uphold the law, regardless of who they were nominated. so, put aside what you might think about judge aileen cannon, or some of the justices on the supreme court who have entered what some consider nakedly political opinions over the last year. for the most part, all throughout the country, we see lower court judges including those nominated by former president and future president trump upholding the rule of law again and again. and as long as those people stay in place and have a firm spine, i feel okay, even though it's going to cost our nation a lot and cost the people who are defendants, wrinkly, a lot. you can torture people just by making them defend themselves against crimes that were never

committed. >> yeah, they're going to put them entire system under a massive stress test. let me ask you quickly before we go about jack smith. obviously the anticipation is that he is going to wind down his case, we are not going to trial, certainly not anytime soon former and future president returns to the office. but what can jack smith do in the remaining time he has to establish a record of evidence, so to speak, that the public can know about? >> well, we had thought that the immunity brief might be the most fulsome exhortation of his case that we might see. now think about the fact that most special councils before they wrap up issue a report, and jack smith, by asking judge chutkan, and she has agreed to vacate all remaining deadlines in that case, has given himself and whoever remains on his team a lot of time to put together that report before president biden leaves office. my hope is that jack smith takes the evidence that we have not yet seen, evidence that remains under seal and still is

under seal in the immunity brief, takes more of that and makes it transparent to the american people while he saw the chance. >> is allowed to do that, he is allowed to make evidence public. >> he is. when we see the special counsel reports in the past, they've been heavily redacted. but i will remind you, the mueller report as it was originally released, and as you and i can look it up on the internet today looks a lot different, thanks to the litigation efforts of good government groups and journalists like jason leopold at bloomberg. >> lisa rubin, greatly appreciate the both of you joining us. i'm sure we are going to be having many more conversations, unfortunately about this subject, in the weeks and months ahead. next up, the irony of women who voted for abortion rights and for donald trump. and next hour, paolo ramos, weighing in on the shift in media culture and help from leveraged itch to win the white house. three — i want a treatment with minimal downtime. four — i want a nonsurgical treatment. and five...

and if nonsurgical treatment isn't offered? i'll get a second opinion. let's go! take charge of your treatment. if you can't lay your hand flat, visit findahandspecialist.com to get started. ♪♪

you'll love this! centrum silver is clinically proven to support memory in older adults. so you can keep saying, you mastered it! you fixed it! you nailed it! you did it! with centrum silver, clinically proven to support memory in older adults. [crowd cheering]

sore throat got your tongue? mucinex instasoothe sore throat medicated drops, uniquely fomulated for rapid relief that lasts and lasts. that's my babyyy! try our new sugar-free cough drops. instasoooooothe!

y'all see this, patrick mahomes is saying goodbye! patrick! patrick! people was tripping. where are you going!? he was actually saying goodbye to his old phone. i'm switching to the amazing new iphone 16 at t-mobile! it's the first iphone built for apple intelligence. that's like peanut butter on jelly... on gold. get four iphone 16s on us, plus four lines for $25 bucks. and save on every plan versus the other big guys. what a deal. that's a lot if you ask me. you all are giving away to fast t-mobile, slow down. less than a day after trump's win on tuesday, request

for reproductive and gender affirming medication started pouring into healthcare providers. the founder of the group ate access, the top supplier of abortion pills by mail in the united states told the guardian that she and her team had gathered in person before the election, knowing they might have to spring into action. turns out they were right. in less than 12 hours, the website received more than 5000 requests for abortion pills. that surge was even larger than the day after roe v wade fell. the massive increase was felt by groups across the country. requests for emergency contraception increased by 300% at the telehealth service wisp. in the abortion pill finder site plan c found a increase in traffic. as the cofounder put it, clearly people are trying to plan for the reproductive apocalypse that we anticipate will be happening under a trump residency. this is the immense fear and uncertainty that millions are feeling now the trump's president elect. on the flipside, a record number of

abortion -related measures past tuesday. seven out of 10 states where abortion-rights measures were on the ballot, chose to enshrine protections in their state constitutions, including missouri, which passed the first abortion ban after roe v wade fell. there were also winds tuesday for antiabortion forces that broke a two year winning streak with ford, nebraska, and south dakota upholding them the procedure. what we are looking at here is a reality where voters showed they are overwhelmingly in favor of abortion access, and for the most part, actively support expanding protections. in fact, abortion-rights proves to be more popular than kamala harris herself. but not more popular than donald trump. a man who has made it resoundingly clear, despite his recent attempts to soften his antiabortion stance, he is no champion of abortion or women's rights. let's zero in on that very dynamic dual support for

trumpet abortion-rights for a second. the ap surveyed 115,000 voters in the days leading up to the polls closing tuesday. kf f analysis of that data finds in missouri, nevada, and arizona, roughly three in 10 voters who supported the abortion right measures also supported donald trump. it is a contrast that speaks volumes about the uncomfortable truth, that there are women who voted for abortion ballot measures but still supported a candidate who has a storied, mile high history of antiabortion rhetoric and policies. where does this leave the fight for abortion rights in america? what does trump returning to the white house mean for states that just expanded abortion protections? a few things are clear. trump refused to say for months whether he would veto a national abortion ban if it landed on his desk. then last month he posted that he would not support a federal abortion ban under any circumstances. but there is a mountain of evidence to suggest otherwise. antiabortion advocates, as well as the far right forces and

former trump officials behind product 2025 have laid out how the archaic 1873 comstock act should be enforced to prohibit anything associated with abortion care from being sent in the mail. such a ban would mean not only restricting abortion medication, the most common method used to end a pregnancy in the united states, but also any medical equipment used during abortion procedures. vox also notes the other ways that trump could ban abortion care, by appointing antiabortion leaders to control key federal agencies that could use executive power to restrict reproductive rights, or by appointing antiabortion federal court judges. so, knowing what trump and his party could do, and knowing where most americans stand on protecting abortion-rights, how do we prepare for what the next four years could bring? we are going to talk to professor michelle goodwin, a good friend of the show, about that and will only come back

with vaseline, hydrated skin is just the beginning. level up to even toned, radiant skin. new vaseline radiant x body lotion with 1% niacinamide. level up to even toned skin.

with a second trump presidency looming, it is an uncertain future for reproductive care for millions across the country. joining me now is michelle goodwin, constitutional and global health professor at georgetown law school, host of the podcast on the issues with michelle goodwin. she is the author, of course, of policing the womb, invisible women and the criminalization of mother hood. it is great to have you back on the show. i want to start with your reaction to this dual reality of abortion-rights measures winning in seven states, and yet another trump presidency. how do you parse out the implications of these results for people in states with strict abortion bans, and those in states that just protected access to care? >> thank you so much. it's good to be back with you. what is happened in these ballot initiatives that has prevailed, is that constitutional protections for abortion, or contraceptive rights now ensconced in their

state constitutions. but as you are mentioning in the opening dialogue, if there happens to be a type of federal ban, that could trump what is in state laws or state constitutions, so that is what makes part of this very worrisome. or, in fact, if there is the return of comstock, this 1873 wall that would ban contraception, abortion, medications coming through the mail, or that which is perceived as lewd and lascivious that in any way relates to the performance of either of those, potentially being banned in the mail. you have asked what this means. in some ways, what voters have done is they have cut out half the tumor. if you think about it, with voters thinking that what they have done is to protect reproductive freedom in those states, and partly they have done that. those ballot initiatives are

very important actions. really important. but at the same time, voting for those who would otherwise seek to make a national ban , if given the opportunity, is like having a cancer but deciding you are only going to remove 50% of the tumor, or 60% of the tumor and not realizing it can metastasize and grow. >> professor, i don't know if you have any insight into this, but how do you explain that in many states where abortion was on the ballot, and protecting or enshrining abortion measures was on the ballot and they passed, the vice president, who ran on a campaign of protecting abortion-rights and reproductive rights came up short. how, was it a misreading of the harris campaign, or the democratic party to think that people would just associate protecting women's rights, reproductive rights with the

democratic party, and they didn't think that voters would be able to separate those two and split tickets, which ultimately they did in many states? >> well, amen, that is such a big question, and it is an important one to end a great campaign, a strong campaign. she was concerned about these issues before the dobbs decision. i was in the white house with the vice president before the dobbs decision was released. she had gathered a group of concerned professors to come together and to brief her, so she has been genuinely concerned about these issues, even before the decision came down. to really get at the heart of what has taken place, although there have been concerns that have been raised that this was really about the economy, this is really about immigration, in so many ways what people voted for was something that was anti- democratic. and to tease that out is to really understand conversations that we have into afraid to have in the united states, about our own origin stories. i think that there were people who really, rather than

thinking of a person who has been in the white house, who was an elected senator, was the attorney general of her state, was a prosecutor in her state, that did not come up enough, right? it was not strong enough for most americans, who find it very difficult to vote for a woman, let alone to vote for a black woman. now, there are those who are saying that is really not the case, this is really about the economy. but that just simply does not hold water when you are actually interviewing and listening to the interviews of people who say well, no, i couldn't vote for her. they just simply had more confidence in donald trump. >> we are, as many people have said now, in uncharted territories on this issue in the next few years. you're going to have the republicans controlling the senate, they are controlling obviously the white house. the supreme court has made it very clear where they stand on this issue. they could potentially also control the house. where, if any in this bleak horizon do you see refuge for

reproductive care in this country. because as you laid out in the first question, for the states, it's a temporary fix. it is great to have right now, but it is by no means a lasting one, should there be a national ban. >> well, as i have talked with you before, and thank you for having me on. we really are in a period of a new jim crow. this is a period in which there really is not the kind of safety , full equality, full citizenship for women and girls in this country. just the very fact that there are going to be people in florida who have to flee that state, and continue to flee that state. louisiana, and many other parts of this country, there are people who could die, who are suffering during miscarriage and not getting the care which they need. for them it is a tragedy like that we saw during jim crow in the united states.

and this is not much different, at all. and that is the real tragedy. we have a very uneven citizenship for women and girls in the country, depending upon what county, what state they happen to live in. that is a real tragedy. >> indeed, it is a tragedy when all of our citizens are not living equal lives under the law. michelle goodwin, thank you so much. it is always a pleasure, i look forward to having more conversations with you in the weeks and months ahead. >> thank you. silicon, trump my in historic gains among latino voters, and the lessons for democrats. serious side effects, including ketoacidosis that may be fatal, dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections, and low blood sugar. a rare, life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis.

♪ far-xi-ga ♪

known for pursuing your passions. no one wants to be known for cancer but a treatment can be. keytruda is known to treat cancer. fda-approved for 17 types of cancer, including certain early-stage and advanced cancers. one of those cancers is early-stage non—small cell lung cancer. keytruda may be used with certain chemotherapies before surgery when you have early-stage lung cancer, which can be removed by surgery, and then continued alone after surgery to help prevent your lung cancer from coming back. keytruda can cause your immune system to attack healthy parts of your body during or after treatment. this may be severe and lead to death. see your doctor right away if you have cough, shortness of breath, chest pain, diarrhea, severe stomach pain, severe nausea or vomiting, headache, light sensitivity, eye problems, irregular heartbeat, extreme tiredness, constipation, dizziness or fainting, changes in appetite, thirst, or urine, confusion, memory problems, persistent or severe muscle pain or weakness, muscle cramps, fever, rash,

itching, or flushing. there may be other side effects. tell your doctor about all medical conditions, including immune system problems, such as crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or lupus, if you've had or plan to have an organ, tissue, or stem cell transplant, received chest radiation, or have a nervous system condition, such as myasthenia gravis or guillain-barré syndrome. keytruda is an immunotherapy and is also being studied in hundreds of clinical trials exploring ways to treat even more types of cancer. it's tru. keytruda from merck. see all the types of cancer keytruda is known for at keytruda.com and ask your doctor if keytruda could be right for you.

postelection we are seeing a lot of focus on the latino vote, and the gains trump made within this community. nbc news is exit polling across 10 key states, showing the trump won 46% of their vote, a 14 point lead from 2020. support for trump was even higher among latino men at 55%. that was a 19 point gain since the last election. now latinos, particularly latino men, or be squarely blamed for trump's presidential win. by some democrats. some people on social media have gone so far as to see that some latinos who voted for trump see their own family

members deported. tensions are high, we are all trying to make sense of how a twice impeached former president who was found liable for sexual assault, who is convicted of a felony, multiple felony charges was able to win a second term. but playing the blame game is reductive. it does not help democrats understand the root cause behind latinos shift to the right, and works to reverse it. and while trump has made some significant inroads with this community, their support is not the sole reason for his victory. it all comes down to the numbers. if you look at battleground pennsylvania, which trump flipped, latinos make only about 5% of voters. one point of white support there is equivalent to 19 points in latino support. joining me now is in ms. obesity contributor paola ramos. she recently wrote a book called defectors, the rise of the latino far right and what it means for america. also with us is jack herrera, freelance reporter covering the border and latino communities. it's great to have both of you with us. there are so many angles that

we can take about this conversation. i thought we would just start broadly. and then we can kind of narrow it in. but just give me your reaction, your big take away. we kind of outlined the headlines of what we have learned since tuesday, but what do you think is the big take away right now that we should be focused on? >> i mean, the big take away is that i think that this goes beyond trumpism in politics. i think that donald trump was able to tap into something deeper. those other racial and ethnic grievances that i think are part of our community. i think he was able to tap into the sort of traditionalism and these sort of moral values that i think we also carry as a community. and i think that really resonated with the culture wars. i think this is when we have to now start having a conversation about what that manifested into. and that manifested into folks who felt comfortable being racist and anti-immigrant and anti-black, and trans-public. i think now is when we get to

dissect and talk about things that the democratic party was too scared to talk about. >> you been talking about this, jack, for a while, but it's not just about a racial realignment, but it's also about a class realignment that is taking place within the latino community. how does that factor into this conversation about understanding the latino vote? >> yeah, when you look at the numbers, over 80% of latinos are working class. the places i report from our factory towns in iowa, and, you know, down on the border, really working class, very underserved communities down on the border in south texas. and these are places where when the price of eggs goes up, people know exactly how much it is. and when inflation is felt, not just in your wallet, but in your body, you are hungry if prices rise. so i think there is a large class of people, especially in places like south texas, where you see this really far shift right, who are voting more or less as a referendum on the economy. and i completely agree with paola, that there is a conservativism, a cultural conservativism. i think that is almost a

smaller component, during this election, it is like a shadow thrown on the wall. it's really there, it really exists, it is enthusiastic. people are passionate about trump for all these cultural reasons. but then you have a much larger population of people who are voting as a referendum, basically on inflation. >> let me ask you about some of the conversations that you have been having with families, because obviously there was this question, and i think it is very reductive, but everybody was saying oh, how can you support a guy who is so openly campaigning against hurting the latino community by deporting undocumented people in this country? and in some cases, it would be ripping out the families in this country, american families who may have an undocumented relative in this country. i just want to play a little bit, i will get your reaction to this exchange. watch. . watch.

>> i was just asking your mom about, have you heard of donald trump? yeah. you, too. yeah. >> it's okay. >> again, the word we have used so much over the last several months of talking about this is that the latino community is not monolithic. it cuts across different nationalities, different degrees of conservativism, different degrees of class. what do you think emma kratz need to do to re-engage this community on a footing where they can speak to them? >> yeah, so that was taped in arizona. and i think with some of the activists would tell you, is

that the democratic party lacks imagination and courage. that perhaps they were tiptoeing around the issue of the immigration, because they were too scared to go too far to the left, and they sort of positioned the vice president as someone that had to be moderate. but those people in arizona wanted a vice presidential candidate, or a presidential candidate that promised conference of immigration reform every single day. someone that would really, really, and blamed donald trump for criticizing immigrants the way that he did. and to think that there is a way to explain, to your point, that all of this is happening because of economic anxiety. i think what trump did so well is intertwined that anti- immigrant sentiment within the economy. the anti-trans sentiment within the economy. i think that is where things start to get a little bit complicated for me, because i also don't think the democrats did a good job of really calling out the racism that also exists within our communities. >> and what are your thoughts on that, as well? >> i think they are

intertwined. inflation inflames the feeling of i am being cut in line by the people crossing the border right now. i talked to undocumented immigrants who feel resentful of biden, because they are saying hey, these people who crossed in the last four years, they are getting work permits in some limited cases. or they have parole status. i've never gotten anything, i've been here 30 years and i've been working. that is undocumented people, right? so there is that frustration, and i think is exactly right, but emma kratz did not get ahead of that. they do not explain what was happening. they did not get on the news, biden and harris did not talk about here is what's happening. migration is a global high. we are dealing with this issue. it is global and we are doing our best to handle it. inflation, that's a global issue happening everywhere and we are doing our best to handle it. they are not giving people that assurance. >> and in your interactions, or people aware in these communities that trump torpedoed bipartisan immigration reform? and put aside whether they thought that reform was good or

not. there was an attempt by the democrats, and some people criticize the biden harris at administration for saying it had gone too right with this bipartisan immigration reform before donald trump came out and torpedoed it. are they aware at that granule level that there is that attempts to reform, but the republicans, specifically donald trump who they voted for, blocked it? >> the people i talked to, i think the people who were already voting for harris could sort of underline that. if you are complaining about the border, letting you do anything? but i do, from my own reporting, it does seem like democrats are overestimating how much of a selling line that was for people who want immigration restriction. i think if your main issue or one of your main issues is i want the border shutdown, i want people blocked, there was a clear choice in this election. >> yeah, who was for closure, and who is trying to solve it in this political policy discussion. >> yeah, we talked about that before. the idea that the vice president could out trump trump

at the border, to me that was never going to work. there was never a strategy that could position her to the right of trump on that issue, and perhaps there was a missed opportunity to do maybe what joe biden did in 2020, which was close with those messages and the images of those children being separated at the border, that really resonated with mothers in ohio, and in virginia, that saw themselves not just as voters, but as mothers that had something in common with those immigrants. i think we have just been dehumanizing immigrants for so long that it got lost. >> yeah, we could talk about this for hours, and i'm sure we will, because we are all still trying to understand what has happened since tuesday. but i really appreciate both of you reporting. you guys have helped us make some sense of all of this. i know it is a complex issue, hopefully when we will continue to cover. thank you so much, we really appreciate it. we will have a new hour of ayman after a quick break. don't go anywhere. where.

at betmgm, everyone gets a welcome offer. so whether you're courtside trying to hit the over... or up here trying to hit the under. whew! or, hitting that win with your crew. ohhh! yes, see defense!

or way up here with a same game parlay. yaw! betmgm's got your back. get your welcome offer. and play with the sportsbook born in vegas. all these seats. really? get up to a $1500 new customer offer in bonus bets when you sign up now. betmgm. download and bet today.