Welcome to Party Politics.

I'm Jeronimo Cortina, where we prepare you for your next political conversation.

And I'm Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor here also at the University of Houston.

Thanks for hanging out and talking some politics with us.

It's going to be a big week, obviously.

Lots going on.

This is a good week to get ready for our like weekend dinner parties, Right.

Going to be ours, The Super Bowl, right?

Yeah.

Time for lots of chatter, because what goes better with football than politics, right?

Yes, absolutely.

But speaking of football, just the back and forth of it, the real like energy on the gridiron, the House is having serious problems getting it together.

Now.

We hope that our favorite Super Bowl teams don't have the same problems Rice has because it has been a real disaster going on there.

Mike Johnson's role as speaker, His ascendancy to speaker seemed implausible, but now governing is almost impossible.

They lost two consecutive votes now, and I say they I mean, the House Republicans who set up these votes lost two consecutive votes.

The one we talked about last week was the vote to impeach Alexander Mayorkas That obviously by one vote failed and that vote was a Republican, which obviously shouldn't happen.

The other was a massive $17 billion aid package for Israel.

Jeronimo, tell me what is going on?

Why can't the Republicans kind of get the caucus together and pass these things?

Governing is hard and welcome to governing and, you know, it has been one of the most or the least productive Congresses in modern history.

And this shows one extreme political polarization, not only between Democrats and Republicans, but also within the Republican Party and these slim majorities.

I don't think that they're going to go away.

Yeah, and that's the problem, is that they actually, just by a quirk of fate here, had several seats that are vacant right now.

So Kevin McCarthy seat, the former speaker of the House, his seat's vacant.

George Santos's seat is vacant.

Steve Scalise was actually sadly getting treatment for cancer, happily getting treatment for cancer, I guess we should say.

But obviously that meant that the math changed and you had to keep every Republican in the fold and they didn't.

What's going on?

How does this sort of tell us about the future of the Republican Party and their ability to be able to get things done, to brag about something in the 2024 election?

They can't.

Yeah, I mean, it's pretty thin.

It's pretty thin.

And I think that perhaps that's why they're putting all their eggs in the Trump basket, right?

Yeah, because they can ride those coattails just by the mere fact of, you know, trying to show the American public that, you know, they know how to govern.

But the fact is that, you know, when you're thinking about public policy, there's no real discussion of public policy.

We have seen it on immigration.

They wanted to offer border control.

Well, there you have it.

Well, then, no.

When Trump comes in and says, you know, you blow the song up.

And he was very vocal about this saying, like, you can blame me for this.

He thought it was a good thing.

But Joe Biden tweeted out like, yes, we're going to do exactly that.

So obviously, that's going to be a battle that comes up.

But there are other battles that are definitely taking place and that are related to this, where in things like national security issues.

Right.

Things like literally trying to manage like these conflicts around the country.

So the bill to aid Israel obviously went down, like we said to this has obvious implications to the national security issues and the kind of US's role as a superpower.

The fact that also they can't get the sort of aid package to Ukraine passed because again, that was partnered with the immigration bill means that really nothing big is getting done, small steps getting done.

But this, as you said, is one of the least productive Congresses.

And for Republicans, I think it's a double whammy because it makes it look like they can't govern.

So what's the sort of impetus what's the sort of rationale for trying to convince voters that you should be returned to the majority when you can't govern?

Right.

If it's just we're not going to do what Republicans or Democrats don't want, then all of a sudden that's probably not enough of a reason for people to say, Yeah, we're going to vote for you.

I think it's just Trump.

I mean, they're just going to go and jump in Trump train and that's it.

Because there's nothing.

Right.

I mean, as I said, they wanted immigration.

They got immigration.

And at the end they said no because Trump said no.

Any other major issues not working.

The economy is improving.

I'd and the economy perhaps the first or second most important issue among the American electorate.

And you know, on the immigration issue now, you know, the Democrats, I think they can make a very good case.

It's like we gave it to them.

They didn't want it.

We gave them want that, want it.

They don't want it.

So it's just an issue of trying to the flight.

And if the economy keeps improving till November, I think that we're going to have a very hard time for the Republican Party, especially at congressional elections.

Yeah, trying to make a case like, yeah, send me back because we passed public policy, everyone's going to say, like, what?

You guys know?

Yeah.

If Republicans were asking openly, like, why can't we give the American people what they want?

Like, this is what they want.

And here we've got, yeah, most of the votes.

But the cardinal rule in house governing is you don't put something on the floor unless you know you've got the votes.

And so it makes them look like the.

Same gang sign a notarized write.

You need to have the leadership team who's counting these votes.

You need to have the pressure to be able to maintain them in that position.

And the Johnson speakership is really unraveling here.

So obviously, this is going to be something that's going to make it hard for them to move forward.

And keep in mind, they've got to pass some big stuff, right?

They still are going to have to pass either a budget or a continuing resolution.

They've got a passive FAA bill.

They've got a lot going on.

yeah.

Your deep sighs shared very much by the Republican caucus.

But let's talk about what you just mentioned.

I think that's important.

That's Donald Trump, right.

Who is obviously the presumptive nominee.

And although I called it weeks ago, you were not sure.

But I'm going to ask you right now if you're sure, because he has won all of the delegates from Nevada.

It's a weird system in Nevada.

Basically, you've got a state run primary and you've got a party run caucus.

The party run caucus is the only way to get delegates.

Trump was the only name right in the system.

So obviously he's going to win.

Right?

So congratulations.

But in the state run primary, he wasn't a candidate because by law like you couldn't do.

But anyway, this is a long story.

But basically, Nikki Haley is in the primary, but she lost to like none of the above.

Right.

Her and Mike Pence and Tim Scott were the like candidates on the ballot and she lost like 60 to 40 on to sort of none of the above.

So are you prepared right now to say Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party?

I mean, they're still I mean, I like elections.

Just you're a like competition.

Just because you like elections, does it mean that we should keep voting?

Okay, fine.

And okay, maybe I thought you going to say South Carolina, which is coming up.

And so Nikki Haley is not dead in the water, but she is definitely taking it.

Right.

But I mean, it takes for Nikki Haley, it takes one victory.

And you think that's enough to kind of keep that moment?

yeah, one victory.

And then they're going to send the Trump campaign in complete disarray.

Okay.

Because once you are in the position that the Trump campaign is in the sense of like, we should call it, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

It's maybe you have to change your strategy.

And they're not that.

Good at that.

No change in strategy and then appeal to the others that the voters that Republican Party, primary voters that do not like Trump and see a glimmer of hope perhaps in Haley might turn out okay.

You know, so.

All right.

Yeah, I understand the argument that he has won so far these three races.

I also understand Nikki Haley's argument is like, well, this thing is not over yet.

Nikki Haley has money.

Yeah, Nikki Haley has support So, you know, we'll see.

I mean, the internal markets of the primary market competition suggest that Nikki Haley still has support from some.

You're such a political nerd.

I love it.

Thank you.

If you don't know about this, there are betting markets you.

yeah.

Basically and bet like pennies.

Yeah.

To see kind of who's going to win various races and so it has definitely predictive power.

I'm still of mind to say that you want to by Donald Trump and sell Nikki Haley in the language of markets.

Right.

But I think though you have a point, and that is that she's raised $16 million last month, which is tremendous.

Yeah, she's the only duck left standing.

And she definitely is in a position where she can be like the YOLO candidate.

Right?

Like, go all out.

You can say anything you want against Donald Trump.

It's literally the 11th hour.

So I think that there is some potential there.

But at the same time, she appeared on SNL, which is not always the recipe for like a where a winning candidate is right.

Oftentimes, candidates who are struggling try to go on Saturday Night Live and try to make at least some national profile.

What did you make of that?

Do you think she made a good case on Saturday Night Live?

I mean, she funded herself, which is always endearing.

But I mean, it was not as funny as I thought.

But, you know, it's hard to be funny, I guess.

Yeah, it's not easy.

We do it every week.

Yeah, exactly.

But I mean, he was, you know, a fake debate between or a town hall with former President Trump, and she asked a question then, you know, the whole banter he Johnson that he was the one portraying former President Trump just, you know, all the band nicknames, etc., etc.. Yeah.

I mean, I think it was it was fine and it was okay.

And also remember, I mean, you have open primaries, right?

And, you know, maybe.

Right.

I mean, it's not, you know, party crossover is very complicated.

You need a lot of people, a lot of numbers to have an impact.

But maybe she's also catering to another audience.

Who knows?

But, you know, we're going to.

Be I'm glad you brought it up in primaries because we are going to talk about this With respect to Texas.

This has become a hot political issue.

But let's continue talking about the 2024 election.

and that is we've got this whole Republican fight going on, right?

Nikki Haley and Trump still battling it out.

We'll talk about Trump and his electoral issues as well as legal issues in a second.

But issues as well as legal issues in a second.

But but Joe Biden has been kind of a wall and people started to really notice this.

And one of the things that really piqued people's interest is that the Super Bowl is this week.

But traditionally, presidents have a like post Super Bowl interview.

But this time he's not doing it.

Yeah, what gives is the Rose Garden strategy he's running going to work?

I don't know.

I mean, because it's perception.

Perception, perception.

Right.

So on the one hand, you have, you know, two presidents, staff or candidates, presumptive candidates are going to be 70 something.

Yeah, I'd you have one of them going up and down everywhere, right.

Yeah.

And then you have President Biden keeping to himself.

Yeah.

So you know people say, well, it's because of age, etc., etc..

But that opens the door for all these conspiracy theories.

One and number two is, you know, the perception that he's not out there.

And that's complicated.

I mean, there is no doubt that, you know, in terms of public policy, the Biden administration has had very important wins.

Right.

The the build back better feel the anti inflation reduction Act, so on and so forth.

Unemployment is going down where y down 4% right now.

More or less.

And according to economies, the fed is keeping tabs.

Interest rates have not gone down.

So that means that we're still going to hold these things right to a point that we're going to see it very, very clear.

Gas prices are not going to $11 a gallon.

So on and so.

Inflation's like relatively under control.

Yeah.

So, I mean, those are important wins, but he's not showing them.

Yeah.

And in this game, perception matters a lot.

And perception matters in the sense that I'm here.

The attacks, for example, that happen or the US attacks too.

Yes.

Militias, yes.

Are backed up by by Iran.

Yeah.

He didn't have a national address.

I mean.

That's a.

All these things matter.

Yeah, he kept it kind of quiet.

He said, Yeah, I've got a strategy, I'm going to do something.

He said, What are you going to do?

He said, I'm not going to tell you.

Right?

That's not the way presidents are able to kind of leverage the power of the presidency to endear themselves to the American people.

Right.

And although taking advantage of this tragedy isn't the way to do it, obviously presidents have to act presidential if they want to get reelected.

But you're exactly right.

I mean, some of this, you know, is all in their favor, right?

The economy's doing well relatively.

This is a sort of major boon for presidents.

You've also got, you know, president former President Trump, like in serious legal jeopardy.

Right.

Why is the president not capitalizing on that obvious vulnerabilities from the Republican Party in all kinds of things, including what we just talked about?

Right.

It happened just yesterday.

So, like, these are all these moments where the Democrats would like to see more offense.

And I think maybe we'll see that step up.

The only reason I can think they're not is that they want to have like the digital and sort of TV buy stuff, do all the heavy lifting they had 140,000,000 million.

And that's going to really kind of flood the airwaves pre summer.

That's going to help.

But I think they also need to have this momentum, right, Because Democrats are really anxious and worried, as we said a couple different times, that that frankly, the the campaign isn't going in the right direction.

And the worries that we have a candidate that's like too old is definitely for them like a big problem.

So and they have I mean, Biden has to go on the same plane level field that former President Trump's right and these attacks have to do on, as you said, with a tweet that he said, yeah, we're going to blame you for that because you are responsible.

Yeah.

So he has to go there.

Yeah.

And he cannot play, as you say, you know, above the fray.

You know, the.

Rose Garden strategy?

No, no.

1819.

I mean, yeah, Rose Garden strategy.

It works, but you have to take the roses out, right?

Take care of the of the leaves.

No, no, no.

Forget about land use of thorns.

Tried to get into these fight.

I mean.

Valentine's Day is coming up.

You get more flies with honey, right?

I think, you know.

I don't think that we are in the honey stage right.

Now.

This is not a nation that's going to be swayed by flowers.

Yeah, they like the thorn.

Yeah, that's a good point.

Maybe that should be the title of your of your next book.

I thank you.

I want I'm actually really interested in that.

But let's talk about one specific vulnerability for Donald Trump that the president hasn't been talking about, and that's his legal vulnerability.

So a D.C.

Circuit Court of Appeals this week ruled that the president, former president, has no blanket immunity from prosecution for crimes he's alleged to have committed while president.

This ruling was pretty airtight.

And it's interesting and I use that exact words, because this is the exact words that Al Haig, when he was the chief of staff for Richard Nixon, used when he was referencing what the court held in terms of whether or not the former president had to give over the tapes, which would eventually end Watergate and his presidency.

To quote the judges, we cannot accept former President Trump's claim that a president has unbound authority to commit crimes that would neutralize most of the fundamental checks on executive power.

So they have rejected resoundingly the notion that presidents don't have to be prosecutor can't be prosecuted after they leave office.

Yep.

Obviously this opens up the door for President Trump to be prosecuted in sort of the current status, but it also has ramifications for future presidents.

So we can't sort of ignore the fact that, you know, there's a long arc of history here.

Yeah.

Countries longer than just sort of what is taking place in today's headlines and the fact that this is coming down.

What it is, obviously is a problem for Donald Trump.

But I think it's a good government ruling.

I think it upholds the rule of law in the separation of powers.

The most complicated, problematic thing about Watergate was that obviously President Nixon did wrong.

The best thing about Watergate was that every other institution in government stepped up.

That's the courts, of course, but it's also the DOJ, special prosecutors, even people in the president's party.

So we had that moment where the system worked properly and they were able to effectively oust a president who had done wrong.

I'm not sure where exactly they're right now, but this ruling, I think, kind of at least sort of tings that bell.

Well, I mean, to me, the most important thing about these is, well, you know, the first thing is that, you know, the court said is, you know, former occupants of the White House cannot be above the law, period.

And that's from now forever.

Right.

So that's a very clear message.

And on precedent.

Right, Right.

That one of the issues, if you compare Watergate to today, is that, you know, the party is basically reigned by Donald Trump.

Yeah.

And we had yesterday a couple this week, a couple of well, almost 6000 Republicans in Congress saying that he did not inside insurrection or anything like that with the resolution.

Right.

Complication.

Right.

But the most important, I think, issue right now for me, regardless of, you know, if Trump is prosecuted or not found guilty or not, I mean, whatever is the role of the Supreme Court.

Yeah, I think the Supreme Court is holding the board in these separation and balance of power.

And we should hasten to say that this is just a circuit ruling.

So this could go to the Supreme Court.

They don't have to take it.

The Court Let it stand, which would be pretty stunning in itself, but they could still take it.

And so we could see this reaffirmed or we could see it totally unravel.

I think I mean, if I was a Supreme Court justice.

Yes, I don't have a law degree, but, you know, now you don't you should just.

I think I think you should just do it.

Yeah.

yeah.

I mean, not that you need a like a no, no.

You you can still do it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Well, anyway, is your good sense that it's going to be perfect on the court now.

That's in common sense is the less common of the sentences.

Answer But the issue here is that if I were a Supreme Court justice, I would sell absolutely no like, you don't want like, you know, just.

No fingerprints on.

Yeah, we just want to.

Tell the clerk that someone messed up something and we never received anything.

Like play like, Yeah, like, play dumb.

like.

did you?

I'll let you look at my paper, like.

yeah, but still, it's still late.

Yeah, it would be very complicated for the Supreme Court.

And they have a very important role.

Yes.

And they have also other matters that involve President Trump.

Yeah.

On the docket.

I was going to say like going to be able to get your arguments this week on the momentous question about whether or not the former president can be disqualified from the ballot for engaging in an active insurrection.

Right.

As we've reported before, several states have kicked him off the ballot.

So they have to hear that case, which again, was a hard pill for them to swallow.

But again, they have to pick these tough fights.

That's part of what they do.

So we'll see how they handle this, because obviously it's politically pretty fraught.

But let's talk about Texas.

This is Party Politics.

I'm Brandon.

This is Jeronimo, the big sort of story of the week has been a controversy about Texas's open primaries versus closed primaries.

Now, the Texas primary is about one month away.

The last day to register to vote is February 5th.

So it's coming.

And the reason this is important is that we have open primaries, right?

Effectively in Texas, you can go vote in either primary.

You have to kind of more or less declare that you're of that party, but that doesn't follow you any place else.

Close primary states basically have to register as a partizan in that state, and then you can be allowed to vote Republicans in Republican primary Democrats and Democratic primary independents in either primary because you got to choose.

Whereas in Texas, you can basically choose to vote in either if you're independent.

The controversy has come up because, like Republicans have said, that there are Democrats voting in Republican primaries messing up, you know, who they get to nominate.

What do you think about this?

Pros and cons for open primary versus closed primaries.

Well, I mean, open primaries allows you to pick a party every two years in terms of deciding were you going to participate or not.

It's a contest.

So is the notion that Partizanship is a dynamic attribution, that we all have something that we can change, it moves, etc., etc..

I mean, yeah, and that's it.

Yeah.

Close primary is you basically you know, have to declare yourself.

You can do whatever you want in the general election, right?

Barring the primary election, if you want to participate you can choose participate in one political party.

Yeah.

Which yeah.

And about a third of Texans identify as independent or non party related.

So that's a lot.

That would mean that none of them can participate in party primaries, which is I think a problem obviously disenfranchizes them.

Now party leaders like to have closed primaries because it gives them a stronger ability to absorb the nomination.

But that, of course, you know, doesn't give them just unanimity in terms of what the party bribes, but it gives them a lot more control over it.

But so I think that's the big drawback, is that independents kind of have nowhere to go, but it also potentially opens up like the the party to like extremism.

So if you have closed primaries and only those partizans can vote, you're going to have this kind of migration of ideology to the very extremes.

And that is true for both parties.

I'm not sure that isn't happening anyway.

That's the argument sort of against having, you know, open primaries.

No, Absolutely.

Absolutely.

But again, is the notion of what our democratic system is right?

Yeah.

Are we all allowed to participate?

How we see fit, then, you know, open if you want to have more control and have a more ideological battle control, how that ideology is going to be just by simply nominating people that feed your agenda if you're party leader or whatnot, And both political parties, you know that like your.

Right.

You know or not, in most of the world you have these primary elections in which you know, people choose to participate in one or the other political party.

And it's not only for register, you know, party members, Right?

Yeah.

So state has a variety of ways to do this.

Texas isn't alone in having open primaries, and most states use some kind of a closed ish system, I guess is the political science term for it, like how most people do it.

But there definitely is something that's come up.

But like the number of people who vote in the other party's primary is vanishingly small.

So that's not something that happens routinely and only a very rare occasions that happen.

So as a political problem, that's not something that comes up.

Yeah, the crossover is not significant.

There has to be, you know, a number of conditions said that is party rebels.

wow.

There you go.

A little like Ivy League level.

Just in our terminology, some Latin into the mix.

I always learn I love it.

Yeah, I he's always talking to you.

But I mean you need to have for example, if you're going to do crossover and have an impact on on the other primaries, you need to have every single the Democrat.

Right.

You're voting on the Republican Party for the candidate that you know, they are supporting.

Yeah, they have to go in huge numbers.

Yeah, they has to be as extreme polarization within the other political parties.

So there is a lot of conditions that need to be are placed in order to have a significant impact.

And that has not happened.

Yeah.

Well, let's talk about one political figure in particular, and that's Ted Cruz.

This week.

He proposed a bill, an amendment to a bill that would allow for members of Congress, federal judges and cabinet members to receive a security escort and private screenings at airports.

Obviously, this reminds us of the moment that Ted Cruz fled the state by saying winter storm Uri and a lot of people in airport law enforcement say it's like a real burden for them to do this.

Right.

My question to you again, as we've talked about before, is whether or not Ted Cruz cares, that we remember that he had this sort of little flip it this little fiasco.

I don't know.

I mean, politically, we said it probably hasn't that big a difference.

And if you look at his approval numbers, they haven't really changed much since basically 2020.

They have the same number of percentage of people at least supporting him as don't support him.

That's basically true for Republicans and Democrats, too.

So maybe it's a case like Trump's taking a lot of that heat.

Maybe the GOP leaders are taking a lot of that heat.

But he sends to have kind of move past this moment.

Now, pivot is going to be reminded of this, but I'm not sure it's going to be that big a difference.

But he doesn't seem to mind because like offering this amendment, like basically it reminds people of that moment.

Yeah.

It didn't seem to care.

Yeah.

No, absolutely.

There you have said it, right.

The impact that scandals have are have diminish over time.

So I'm looking forward to your new book.

Me too.

Yeah, I just finished writing it.

I need your help.

Yeah, okay.

But, you know, the issue is just basically if we care or not care, right?

And once again, it's a question of the use of money.

Right.

And if you're going to expect to have these problems due to polarization is, you know, perhaps we should be talking like maybe we should, you know, darlin, down a notch so we don't have these problems.

And people, you know, don't start yelling at elected officials somewhere else or worse.

Yeah, but that is an issue that as we plan our traveling vacations to spring break and whatnot, we're going to keep a very, very important eye on it.

I'm Jeronimo Cortina.

And I'm Brandon Rottinghaus.

The conversation keeps up next week.