Atkins Stohr and Parker on political fallout from Trump's call to 'nationalize' elections

Geoff Bennett:

For more now on the fallout from President Trump's call to nationalize elections and his immigration crackdown, we turn tonight to the analysis of Atkins Stohr and Parker.

That's Kimberly Atkins Stohr, senior opinion writer and columnist at The Boston Globe, and Kathleen Parker, a columnist with The Washington Post. David Brooks and Jonathan Capehart are away this evening.

Good evening. It's great to see you both.

(Crosstalk)

Kathleen Parker, The Washington Post:

Good evening. Nice to be here. Thank you.

Geoff Bennett:

So President Trump is openly talking about nationalizing voting, something that is plainly unconstitutional. He's doing this months before the midterm elections.

Kimberly, do you hear this as bluster or a deliberate attempt to undermine the elections and then seed doubt about the legitimacy of future election results?

Kimberly Atkins Stohr, The Boston Globe:

I think it's definitely the latter, Geoff.

We have seen Donald Trump since before his first term, even before he won the election in 2016, casting doubts and disparaging with no -- with absolutely no evidence, the U.S. voting systems and claiming fraud, either as a hedge before the election he may think may go badly for him or as a way to disparage the results after they happen.

That has been part and parcel. And it's really dangerous. I mean, this call is not just a call to nationalize elections, which, as you point out, the Constitution makes very clear that elections are handled, by and large, by states, with the federal government playing a minimal role.

But I'm concerned about call -- not denying that ICE will show up at election stations, that the call for this increasing redistricting, mid-decade redistricting in states in order to try to game the system. Elections are supposed to be sacred in any functioning democracy. And that the president of the United States is the one making the call to disparage them and try to rig the system is really alarming.

Geoff Bennett:

Kathleen, to Kimberly's point, we have seen this from President Trump before. How much this time feels more organized and, because of that, more dangerous?

Kathleen Parker:

I agree. It is more organized.

And everything he does in terms of, he's trying to undermine confidence and faith in the electoral process all along. And with this whole -- now he's still clinging again to the 2020 -- we know it was a fully regular election he lost. And he can't let it go because I think he's taken a page from "Mein Kampf," frankly, the saying that if you say -- tell a big lie often enough and repeat it, then people will believe it.

And the theory was further refined by the propaganda head in Nazi Germany, Mr. Joseph Goebbels. And the idea is, apparently, it's true that -- they would know, I guess -- that people will believe a big lie quicker than they will believe a small lie.

So Trump goes big with everything he does, big beautiful bills, big beautiful lie. And I think he's just going to keep going and going and trying to make people lose confidence. Maybe they stay away from the polls. Maybe they get together and his MAGA troops will come together and challenge the election results.

I think you're right that ICE will show up and I think the activists and the MAGA troops, so to speak, will be present at many polling places. So it's very dangerous, because where does that lead, ultimately? It gives Trump an opportunity to say -- maybe it gives him an opportunity to challenge the next election, whether it's the midterms or the presidential election in 2026, assuming he allows it to come -- to take place.

Geoff Bennett:

On the matter of ICE potentially at polling places, our White House correspondent, Liz Landers, asked that question at a White House press briefing this past week, because it was Steve Bannon who floated it, and the White House didn't rule it out. Here's that.

Liz Landers:

Thank you, Karoline.

Steve Bannon recently said -- quote -- "We're going to have ICE around the polls come November." Is that something that the president is considering?

Karoline Leavitt, White House Press Secretary:

That's not something I have ever heard the president consider, no.

Liz Landers:

So, you can guarantee to be American public that ICE will not be around polling locations or voting locations in November?

Karoline Leavitt:

I can't guarantee that an ICE agent won't be around a polling location in November. I mean, that's, frankly, a very silly hypothetical question.

Geoff Bennett:

And you can argue it's not a hypothetical question. It's not a rhetorical question, because, in many ways, this is a multifront strategy, legal pressure, DOJ demands, raids at the Fulton County election office. How do you see it?

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

That's exactly right. And we can use another historic analogy, which is during Jim Crow, the fact that police were often sent around polling stations in order to discourage people of color from casting votes, even though the Constitution was amended to specifically protect that right.

The law won't protect you if you don't have government that is backing it up and actually flouting it. So all of this is from playbooks from the darkest times in our history, and they can't be ignored. I'm concerned about it, because I don't want people -- once people lose faith in their elections, that's a big pillar of democracy that falls in itself.

Geoff Bennett:

On the matter of the president's immigration agenda, we have some fresh polling data. Six in 10 Americans disapprove of the job ICE is doing, while about three in 10 approve. And opinions about the agency and its actions are sharply divided along political lines, as you might imagine; 91 percent of Democrats, 66 percent of independents register their disapproval.

Republicans, though, remain supportive with 73 percent approving of the agency's work.

Kathleen, why is that? Has ICE become an identity issue, rather than a policy issue, the way that they are carrying out the president's agenda?

Kathleen Parker:

Well, I don't really know exactly how to answer that, but I think that I'm first surprised that that number of representative Republicans are approving of what we're watching.

And I think the image of that little boy was so powerful. And I think Americans generally saw that and thought, well, no, we can't have that in this country. That's not what we do here. And the image is powerful. And I think, when we look at the elections coming up, the midterms, you're going to see a lot of people turn out on the ICE issue, whether it's -- I don't know what you meant exactly by whether it's an identity question.

But I do think it's definitely a pivotal voting issue that will have legs through the midterms and possibly thereafter, depending on how they change their behavior, if they do.

Geoff Bennett:

And this is a live issue on Capitol Hill, because Democrats and Republicans right now are debating how ICE can carry forward with the president's immigration approach as part of its funding.

And yet it appears Democrats have folded on their demand that ICE agents not wear masks. Chuck Schumer said, well, they can wear masks if it's an unusual circumstance. And they're also not including in their demands this notion of what we were talking about before, that ICE doesn't show up on Election Day at the polls.

This comes back to this issue why Democrats aren't as tactically ruthless on the things that they say they care about as compared to Republicans.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

I think that's exactly right.

And at this moment, when we're talking about a partial shutdown, most of the government now has been funded. They did a good job of carving out this issue so that they could hold firm. I think if Democrats do anything other than completely hold the line on what they have seen, the snatching up of men, women and children, deporting them without full due process, American citizens being targeted -- two American citizens dead on the streets of Minneapolis.

If this is not the issue where Democrats can say, no, we hold the line and we are not giving an inch on this, not because it's politically right, but because it's morally right, I just don't know what it is that they're doing. They should maybe consider giving their jobs to someone who will.

Geoff Bennett:

How do you see it?

Kathleen Parker:

Well, I do think Republicans tend to be more ruthless, just as a rule of conduct.

But I think if the Democrats force the hand and the government has to shut down partially, it's going to send -- well, it'll make Donald Trump very happy because he will have chaos again. And he's the captain of chaos. But so many other agencies within the Homeland Security Department will be affected, FEMA, TSA.

I mean, people are going to be stranded at airports and, again, we will have all sorts of travel issues. And there's even other things. The Coast Guard, I think, would be docked.

Geoff Bennett:

Yes.

Well, you mentioned airports. I want to squeeze in this last topic, President Trump offering to unfreeze roughly $16 billion in federal infrastructure funds already appropriated for the Gateway Hudson River tunnel project. But this is only if, according to the reporting, the Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer agrees to rename both Washington Dulles International Airport and New York's Penn Station after Donald Trump.

Kimberly, you have been shaking your head left or right, no.

(Laughter)

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

You know, it's just -- it's amazing that with all the issues that we're talking about, the president is still so concerned about his own vanity and pettiness, that he probably can't stand the fact that DCA is named after Reagan and he wants one too.

I mean, really, this is what he's spending his time on.

Kathleen Parker:

Well, he may actually deserve Dulles Airport. As we were talking about earlier...

(Laughter)

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

It is a terrible airport.

Kathleen Parker:

... it's not the friendliest airport.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

No.

Kathleen Parker:

But I think, instead, I just think, what did this fellow miss in childhood? Can we just give him a daily participation trophy, perhaps?

(Laughter)

Geoff Bennett:

Kathleen Parker, Kimberly Atkins Stohr, our thanks to you both.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Thank you.