Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
US Election
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: A Quick Take to kick off your week. Everyone, of course, talking about the incoming Trump administration. What it's going to mean in terms of personnel and in terms of policy. The latter, more important, but informed very significantly by the former. Couple of things I would say.
First of all, on the personnel side, clearly most important point here and very different from the first administration is that loyalty matters immensely. Trump is angriest not at Democrats, angriest at people that used to work for him who have now flipped, who are calling him a fascist. Some of the worst things that have been said about Trump in the first administration came from senior people that he put in that weren't loyal. They may have been long-term establishment Republicans and adults, but now he couldn't be bothered with them in the slightest and wants them to know it.
And that's why nobody really expected, that was talking to the Trump team, that Pompeo or Haley were going to be appointed. But the fact that Trump came out immediately before even making other appointments to a cabinet and saying, "No, you two, thanks, but no thanks. You can go get on with the rest of your lives." Because he sees them as not loyal. Nikki said all sorts of horrible things about Trump, and Pompeo was feeling around with other candidates and didn't endorse until way too late. And Trump was angry about that at the time, and he holds that grudge.
So you're going to see a team that I think is much more consolidated around Trump. And that doesn't mean there won't be different constellations, groups of people that are more aligned with each other, but when Trump has something he wants done, everyone's going to run alongside him.
And I think that's true for JD Vance too. The idea that there's going to be a shadow cabinet that is run by Vance, and he's the Project 2025 guy. No, if that happens, Trump will be angry. If there's any large meeting internally, Trump wants to be the star. And he expects Vance to do his bidding and to be effective at it and to run other things that he doesn't care as much about. And that is, I think, the role that Vance will play.
Is it going to be more populist on some issues? Sure, but not necessarily on as many as you'd think. Why? Because there are going to be a lot of billionaires who are interested in their business interests, their investment interests around the Trump team. There will be CEOs. There'll be a lot of people that aren't globalists in name; they've been thoroughly repudiated, but globalists in more policy than you would think.
Now here, China policy is extremely interesting because on the one hand, Trump really wants to see higher tariffs on China and has talked about that. Robert Lighthizer, who was US trade rep for Trump last time around, very professional, very capable in that role, clearly playing a very significant role in running trade and maybe other things economically for Trump this time around. He is pushing for more jobs in the United States, more investment in the United States, decoupling from China. Very comfortable with a new Cold War between the US and China.
You know who isn't? Elon Musk. Has massive investments on the ground in China, wants a more comfortable relationship there, and has basically told the Chinese that he's very interested in helping to be an interlocutor. Kissinger is dead. And the one person who's out there that could be a conduit of information and potentially better relations between the two most powerful countries in the world is Elon. Will he be effective? A technology policy is kind of interesting because Trump first time around didn't do technology policy. Remember the CHIPS Act? That was Biden. Semiconductors, export controls, that was Biden. Wasn't something Trump was focused on. He was focused on trade, on the trade deficit, on tariffs, on those issues, intellectual property theft, those issues. Not as focused on technology. Elon will be, and he's going to want people he wants to be appointed in relevant positions in the Trump administration. So if that happens, maybe it's true that US-China relations become more functional than they otherwise might've been. But this is an untested proposition, something very interesting to watch.
A couple other places that are really important, Russia-Ukraine. Did Trump, did Trump not have a conversation already with Putin? Kremlin's saying no, that means absolutely nothing. But clearly he is very interested in pushing Zelensky, who is on the back foot militarily right now, to end this war. And the likelihood of a near-term ceasefire has gone way up because of Trump. Orbán of course, already been saying that from Hungary. Robert Fico from Slovakia wasn't saying that before Trump was elected. Now he is. Are we going to see that from Giorgia Meloni in Italy, for example, who's ideologically disposed to Trump, but has been much more anti-Russia in her policies? Watch that very, very carefully. Other countries that aren't on the front lines.
So it's going to be a lot of pressure on the Ukrainians, an opportunity for Putin, if he wants it, though he's doing well militarily, so he's going to probably drive a harder bargain on even a short-term ceasefire than he might have three months ago, six months ago. And he knows Trump wants to get this done. And then we need to see what the Europeans do. Do they hang together under a relatively strong and aligned European Union leadership, or do we start to see a real split among a whole bunch of European individual government leaders that are a lot weaker? Super interesting.
And then of course, you have the Middle East. And on the Middle East policies are even stronger than Biden's pro-Israel policies. And you've seen a lot of support for going after Iran. Might the Israelis now do that? Oil prices are low. China's not demanding much energy. Hitting the Iranians nuclear and energy capabilities wouldn't bring oil as high as they would've been 6 months ago, 12 months ago. Depends on what the Iranians do in response, how disruptive they want to be. But right now they're reaching out to everyone. The Europeans, the Iranians are reaching out to the Saudis. They just did some low level military exercises with the Saudis. This is a country that is basically saying, "We don't want a big fight. We know that we're going to lose if we have one." Easy time for Trump to press in the Middle East. Last time he was president, first place he went was Saudi Arabia, then Israel. Wouldn't surprise me at all if he does that again. Though he probably flips it this time around in terms of the order.
Okay, so much to talk about, so much to watch. I hope you find this interesting. We'll be on top of it and we'll talk to you all real soon.
Stephen Miller waves from the stage during a Trump campaign rally in Detroit, Michigan, on October 18, 2024.
If his expanding slew of cabinet picks tells us anything, President-elect Donald Trump will, as expected, take an ultra-hardline approach to immigration, security matters, and relations with the United Nations.
He is reportedly set to appointStephen Miller as his deputy chief of staff. Miller, a former Trump speechwriter and close adviser, is a stickler on immigration who helped formulate Trump’s proposals for the mass deportation of up to one million undocumented immigrants per year, as well as a review of current citizenship and naturalization policies.
In that capacity, Miller will work closely with Thomas D. Homan, whom Trump has tapped as his somewhat vaguely defined “border czar.” According to Trump, Homan will oversee border security and “be in charge of all Deportation of Illegal Aliens.” Homan, a former ICE official, oversaw record deportations under the Obama administration and helped design Trump 1.0’s controversial “family separation policy.”
Trump has also nominated New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik as US ambassador to the United Nations. Stefanik, a staunch Israel supporter and harsh critic of the UN, has called for defunding UNRWA, the organization’s humanitarian relief agency for Palestinian refugees, over allegations that it is infiltrated by Hamas. Stefanik has accepted the post, and as ambassador, she will carry Trump’s UN-skeptic, “America First” agenda right into the heart of the organization.
Trump has reportedly tapped Florida Rep. Michael Waltz, a retired Special Forces officer and China hawk, as his national security adviser. Former New York Rep. Lee Zeldin, meanwhile, has been appointed to run the Environmental Protection Agency, where Trump says Zeldin will “ensure fair and swift deregulatory decisions that will be enacted in a way to unleash the power of American businesses.” Sen. Marco Rubio is expected to bring harsh stances on Latin America -- notably Venezuela and Cuba -- and China and Russia to the position of secretary of state, and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem is set to become Trump's secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, according to reports.
Trump has already appointed his White House chief of staff, Susie Wiles, and she told GOP donors yesterday that Trump plans to hit the ground running by reinstating several executive orders from his first term on Day 1 of taking office — though she did not specify which ones. Wiles also told the group that Trump plans to revolutionize the government in two years, rather than four, in recognition that he could face harsh midterm elections.
On this episode of GZERO World, Ian Bremmer unpacks the implications of Donald Trump’s decisive election win, marking his historic return to office and the GOP's comprehensive control over government (assuming they hold onto the House). Despite polls suggesting a razor-close election, Trump won with strong support across critical swing states, including Pennsylvania, where voter shifts were significant even in traditionally Democratic strongholds like Philadelphia. Bremmer discusses Nov 5 and its wide range of implications with Vanderbilt historian Nicole Hemmer and Wall Street Journal correspondent Molly Ball. How did Trump’s return signal a change election? How much of it was driven by voters' discontent with inflation and immigration, and how much was simply the appeal of a populist alternative to the status quo.
The conversation highlights Trump’s longstanding opposition to globalism and his strategy to reshape America’s place on the world stage. With the GOP controlling the presidency, Senate, and likely the House, Trump's second term could bring sweeping policy changes, including a push to consolidate executive power and reduce judicial and institutional independence. Reflecting on the stakes, Molly Ball comments, “If there are not those barriers before him, what is he willing to do? What norms and traditions, not to say laws, is he willing to violate in order to pursue his goals?” Hemmer adds, “The erosion of representative democracy…has accelerated over the past 10 years,” emphasizing the risks of unchecked power. They also examine the Democratic Party’s struggle to resonate with working-class voters across racial lines and its internal debate over progressive versus centrist policies. With both parties facing pressure, there remains an enduring tension between America's democratic ideals and the growing appetite for anti-establishment reform.
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).
Listen: On the GZERO World podcast, Ian Bremmer dives into the far-reaching consequences of Donald Trump’s return to office as he becomes the first president since Grover Cleveland to serve non-consecutive terms. With strong wins across key swing states like Pennsylvania, Trump’s decisive victory reflects widespread voter frustration over issues like inflation and immigration and signals a major shift toward populism and anti-establishment sentiment. Historian Nicole Hemmer notes, “We’re witnessing the acceleration of democratic erosion, where checks and balances may no longer hold,” pointing to the dangers of unchecked power as Trump’s administration begins to take shape.
Joined by Vanderbilt historian Hemmer and Wall Street Journal reporter Molly Ball, Bremmer explores how Trump’s policies and approach could reshape American governance, especially with the GOP in control of the Executive, Senate, and likely the House. Ball highlights the risks involved, saying, “The real test will be whether the barriers that once existed to curb executive power still stand—or if they’re eroded by design.” They also reflect on the Democratic Party’s internal challenges, including how it must find ways to reconnect with working-class voters and navigate its ideological divide between progressive and centrist visions.
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.
Donald Trump’s 2024 election win gives him a powerful mandate from voters frustrated with government gridlock and bloated bureaucracy. That, along with the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on presidential power, means Trump will take office in January with unprecedented impunity to enact his agenda, radically remake the Federal government, and rewrite institutional norms. So what happens next? On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, Molly Ball, senior political reporter at The Wall Street Journal, and Nicole Hemmer, a political historian specializing in conservative media, discuss the implications of a second Trump presidency and how he plans to fulfill promises to voters frustrated with the status quo. Trump will be reined in by the Constitution, but beyond that, will face little accountability, giving him near-total power to enact sweeping changes to democratic institutions.
“I think a lot of people are frustrated with the feeling that our institutions are so calcified and bottle-necked that they don’t allow anything to get done,” Balls says, “So I think there is a mandate for Trump to actually execute on his agenda.”
“I think the idea that the president has free rein does have more popular support than I think many liberals and proponents of rule of law would hope,” Hemmer adds, “The idea that there are levers that can be pulled that will suddenly snap into place an accountability regime, those levers don't exist.”
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).
If I told you there was a state that, on Tuesday, voted strongly in favor of propositions to establish a $15 minimum wage, mandatory paid sick leave, and the right to have an abortion, what color would you picture for this state on the electoral map? Probably some shade of blue, right?
You’d be surprised to learn that on the same night that this state, Missouri, voted for all of those measures, which were supported by Kamala Harris, it voted for Donald Trump — by a margin of nearly 20 points.
Solving the conundrum of how a deep red state voted for blue proposals while electing a red president is one of the many questions Democrats need to answer as they try to plot their return – or, some say, rebuild – after losing to Trump in a landslide on Tuesday night.
Here are 3 things for Democrats to think about:
1. Trump – and Trumpism – are features, not flukes, of American society. After 2016, it was possible to believe that Trump, who lost the popular vote and seemed as surprised as anyone to have won the presidency, was an aberration, an accident who made it to the White House because of, say, “Russian meddling” or the quirks of the Electoral College. Then, after he lost in 2020 and the “red wave” failed to sweep through the 2022 midterms, it seemed even more like Trump’s moment might have passed.
But now, after winning not only the Electoral College but also the popular vote on a night when the GOP retook the Senate and possibly the House, it should be clear that Trump is no temp.
2. Know your audience. As the Missouri example shows, some aspects of progressive politics — in particular, the economic aspects of a stronger social safety net and better protections for workers — are popular among broad swaths of working-class and middle-class voters. Other aspects of progressive politics — namely social justice-oriented ideas about race and gender — seem less overtly popular outside of academia, activist circles, and liberal-oriented media.
Here’s where the Democrats, increasingly seen as a party of the educated elite rather than the broader working class, have a problem. How do you consistently win over — or keep from alienating — enough people who are more interested in finding jobs than exploring genders? Balancing the higher calling of social justice with the practical realities of electoral politics is perhaps the biggest challenge of all for the Democrats. It does no good to be on the “right side of history” if you are on the wrong side of elections.
3. Ethnic identity is not electoral destiny. For years, Democrats believed in the idea that as America got “browner,” the government would inevitably get “bluer.” That is, as the non-white population steadily grew, the Democrats’ structural advantages would deepen. So much for all of that.
To be clear, Democrats still won the largest minority votes — Blacks and Latinos — but by smaller margins than in any election in recent memory. The swing was particularly large among Black and Latino men, who were swayed rightward by concerns about the economy, undocumented immigration, and, it has to be said, Trump’s success in framing progressivism as something that emasculates men. MAGA, meanwhile, honors them.
There is, of course, nothing inevitable or permanent about the redward swing of some Black and brown voters. They could well be won over again in the next cycle, especially now that Latinos accounted for nearly half of all first-time voters in 2024, by 2028 there will be five million more. But that’s precisely the point: The shift rightward is by no means permanent, but the increasing independence of the Latino electorate most certainly is.
But take heart, power is fleeting these days. If there is one thing we know about contemporary politics in the world’s leading democracies, it’s that voters are fickle and incumbents rarely enjoy honeymoon periods for long. Yes, Trump cruised to victory by giving the finger to those in power, but soon enough, he will be in power and the fist will be raised in his direction.
But who will do the fist-shaking, and what will be their message? The midterms are just two years away, and the clock is ticking.
Let us know if and how you think Democrats should shake things up to be competitive in the next electoral cycle here. If you include your name and location, we may publish part of your response in an upcoming Daily.
Turnout in this US election fell. The world's leading expert on American democracy saw, first hand, why that was. #PUPPETREGIME