Tamara Keith and Amy Walter on turnout for 'No Kings' protests

Amna Nawaz:

Organizers of this weekend's third No Kings protests say it was the largest single-day demonstration in U.S. history. They said more than eight million people participated at more than 3,000 events in all 50 states, from Minnesota to Texas, from New York to Iowa, and even in world capitals abroad, chanting, marching, holding signs, and speaking out against President Trump and his administration's policies.

The size of the protests and the frustrations among those who attended have only grown since the last event in October. The administration's immigration crackdown and the Iran war were among the top concerns.

David Wallace, Protester:

I don't like foreign wars. I don't like excessive government spending, which we're also managing to do somehow.

Esther Moreno, Protester:

It's just pure frustration and need to express the injustices, and we need to gather together to create change and harness our energy.

Sara Carlson, Protester:

I'm tired. We're exhausted. This brings me hope. I have so much hope here. And we can change this. It's -- our government is not going to do it. It has to be we the people.

Amna Nawaz:

To discuss the protests and other political headlines, we turn now to our Politics Monday duo. That is Amy Walter of The Cook Political Report With Amy Walter and Tamara Keith of NPR.

Welcome to you both.

Amy Walter, The Cook Political Report:

Thank you.

Amna Nawaz:

Tam, I'm going to start with you.

These massive No Kings protests here and abroad, including one, we should point out, in a place that actually has a king, what do you take away from the scale of these protests and the message the protesters were delivering?

Tamara Keith, National Public Radio:

What we have seen in polling recently is that Democrats have a lot of enthusiasm. Democratic voters don't necessarily support their party's leadership or that direction, but they are very energized and that sort of energy is what you're seeing out on the streets with these No Kings protests.

And, similarly, back when President Trump was first in office the first time around, you had the Women's March, which led to -- sort of built energy among voters towards the midterms in 2018, which were very good for Democrats. This level of energy, if you see people out in the streets, if they're willing to do that, sometimes in cold weather, then they're probably going to be willing to vote.

Amna Nawaz:

Amy, is this a venting of frustrations or can it lead to real change in some way?

Amy Walter:

I mean, I do think this is as much about the person as it is about policy. While some of the folks there were talking about Iran or ICE, I think the central unifying figure is Donald Trump and the frustration with the way he runs his administration.

And Tam's right. It's a sign of just the significant enthusiasm advantage that those who don't support Donald Trump have. And we have seen it show up not just in the polls, but in these special elections where Democrats are flipping state legislative districts in areas that Trump once carried.

It's a sign that they're very interested and enthusiastic about voting. Republicans even concede that point as well, that Democrats are fired up. Their own base, while they still support the president, have not shown up with the same level of fervor in these specials.

Amna Nawaz:

Well, Amy, let me stick with you on this, because Tam mentioned there the women's March. We have seen big movements like this...

Amy Walter:

Right.

Amna Nawaz:

... really catch fire in the moment and then fizzle over time.

Amy Walter:

Right.

Amna Nawaz:

The women's March did sort of fizzle after a while. Occupy Wall Street also comes to mind. What's the difference between those that have staying power and those that don't?

Amy Walter:

Yes, I think it's a really great point.

And when a protest like this is really centered around one person, not around a policy, right -- so there are a bunch of people who probably have different opinions about what the top policy priority should be in this country. But what brings them together is they don't like Donald Trump and they don't like what he stands for and so they're unified there.

This is what's going to be a fascinating challenge in 2028, quite frankly, not just for the Democrats, but for Republicans as well. Our politics has been centered since 2015 around one person. And in '28, it is going to have to be broader than that. The two parties are going to figure out who they are and what they stand for when Donald Trump's not at the center of everything.

Amna Nawaz:

Tam, do you agree with that? Do you see a central policy message in these protests or something else?

Tamara Keith:

It is no kings. It is, President Trump is imposing his will on the country. His face and name are on coins and buildings and everything else.

So that is -- it is a Trump opposition movement. And, as Amy says, this is going to prove to be a really big challenge for Democrats. It might be -- Trump opposition might let them paper over the big issues about what the Democratic Party stands for and who their voters really are that came to light through 2024.

President Trump being in office is probably going to help them move past that. But it isn't necessarily going to answer that question of what they want to stand for beyond 2026.

Amna Nawaz:

Meanwhile, we still remain in a partial government shutdown, Amy. And it's a shutdown, we should remind folks, that Democrats started, right? They wanted to hold up DHS funding to get changes in ICE and immigration policies, but it really continues because Republican leadership in the House and the Senate and the White House have not been able to get on the same page about how to end it.

How do you look at where this is right now?

Amy Walter:

It is quite remarkable that the debate right now really is within the Republican Party about what they should be doing going forward, as opposed to it being about the policy itself, debating about that.

This really could be solved very quickly with the president, who considers himself the dealmaker in chief. But right now he does not seem particularly interested in making a deal within his own party to solve this problem. And so the fact that these TSA workers are now getting paid, I think, takes some pressure off of both sides, but certainly even within the Republican Party to come to some sort of agreement on what this policy should look like going forward.

But at some point, the president is going to have to weigh in and give a sign-off to his party about what is the acceptable route.

Amna Nawaz:

Tam, the president stepping in to order that TSA workers be paid, as we reported earlier just a few days ago, it takes away one of the biggest pressure points that was causing real harm in people's lives, right, travelers and certainly those TSA workers as well.

It does beg the question, why he couldn't have done that earlier as well though, right?

Tamara Keith:

It certainly does. But the experts that we have spoken to question just how legally clear this is and whether this really was or is something that the president has the power to do.

The funds are being moved around, but there are all kinds of rules about moving funds around and Congress is supposed to have the power of the purse. I think that the administration really thought that the lines at airports were going to put enough pressure on Democrats to get them to fold.

And, as Amy says, now it's about the president deciding what he wants and imposing his will on his party in Congress, because he has proven that he can get them to do what he wants them to do. But it's not clear what he wants them to do, and other than things that they have said they won't do, like overturn the filibuster and on the Senate side approve the SAVE America Act.

Amy Walter:

Right.

And that has been a consistent theme for this president. We know that. He ran on saying, I alone can fix this. He has bypassed Congress consistently, even though his party controls both bodies. He wants to be making things happen through executive authority. And he really enjoys having the fight over -- with Democrats about who's going to be on the right side of these things.

So getting him to figure out what that window is to win, that's where we're left.

Amna Nawaz:

So I will ask probably the most important question of this conversation.

Amy Walter:

Is it going to ever end?

(Crosstalk)

Amna Nawaz:

How do you see this ending?

Amy Walter:

Right.

At some point, either it becomes clear that this funding for TSA workers is either running out or there's some problem in continuing to pay workers like this and ultimately a deal has to be cut.

What it looks like at the end, we don't know. I would suspect that the president will find a way to weigh in at that moment.

Amna Nawaz:

Tam, you cover this president. Feels like we have had this conversation in some form before as well about when and how he chooses to insert himself into these kinds of negotiations. Give us your take. How do you see this ending?

Tamara Keith:

Yes, he tends to choose a clear win when he can see one. And at the moment, that isn't clear.

And I was pressing the White House actually on why, is he pushing for the SAVE Act? Why is he putting himself in this box canyon? And they insisted he can be very persuasive and they see a way. I think it's possible that some sort of reconciliation bill, which doesn't require 60 votes, might be how they get there.

Amy Walter:

And, by the way, a reconciliation bill is also going to be really tough to get through the Senate and the House, because folks are going to want to put a lot of other stuff in that bill, which is going to reopen the battle lines within the Republican Party.

Amna Nawaz:

We will welcome you both back for that conversation if and when that happens.

(Laughter)

Amy Walter:

We will have that conversation.

Amna Nawaz:

Amy Walter, Tamara Keith, always great to talk with you both. Thank you so much.

Amy Walter:

You're welcome.