Midterms mayhem: Simon Marks answers your questions

I think Ron DeSantis is kind of interesting to keep an eye on in the next few months. I think that's an absolutely magnificent question because the cohesion, Andy, of the Democrats is a big question. It's always about the economy, stupid, and it was here last night, but it was about more than the economy. It was also about corruption in government. What is your overall impression of what Donald Trump has said today? Because I don't know whether you agree with me that I expected him to come out fighting. Well, my overall impression of what Donald Trump has said today is that he's been delusional. I mean, the idea that the first public comments you would make on camera in the aftermath of this historic and it is seismic and it is a total drubbing, a complete rout, a total repudiation and rejection of everything that he. And his sycophants in his cabinet and his inner circle and Republicans up on Capitol Hill have been doing for the last two years. The idea that the first thing you would do is go off to your ballroom construction site and start talking about the joys of granite and limestone and the importance of steel beams is simply jaw-dropping and breathtaking. However, to get to the serious intent of your question, I do think it is notable. That President Trump, having indicated that there were all sorts of plans that were being laid potentially to disrupt the outcome of these elections by flooding the zone with legal action, he'd even taken. ...preemptive legal action in some places, including Alaska, where that Senate race is still one of the last two races for the Senate that are too close to call. And he may yet take some legal action there in a bid to head off the possibility of maybe 56 seats in the Senate going to the Democrats. They've got 54 at the moment. We're waiting on the outcome of Alaska and Mississippi. I mean, like, you can't find a redder state than Mississippi, And it's perfectly possible that The Democrats are going to steal that one away from the Republicans as well by the time all the votes are counted. I mean, you know, this was just too big a result in the Democrats' favor for him with any credibility to be able to say that the vote was rigged, the fix was in, the Democrats had proven that they simply couldn't be trusted to go through an election without messing with it. Calling into question once again, election integrity here in the United States. And Donald Trump was kind of hoisted on his own petard in the sense that back in 2024. When he found, of course, absolutely no issue with America's election integrity or the sanctity of American democracy, because he won that election, he said, well, it was too big for the Democrats to rig. Well, this win last night was arguably just as big, perhaps even bigger, because it wasn't only the traditional battleground swing states that the Democrats won. As I say, they ate deep into Republican territory. Thank you. Beginning in Texas, a state that Democrats have coveted flipping for decades. So like Viktor Orbán in Hungary, like Aleksandar Vučić last weekend in Serbia, there was no opportunity to kind of push back. And that's where he finds himself tonight, having to come to terms with this while people in his inner circle, including his own vice president, are beginning the process of breaking with him. Vice President J.D. Vance, as you know, saying on. On social media, very clearly that the reason we lost is the war. So it's a brand new day here in Washington, D.C. This does not mean, of course, that Donald Trump is totally neutered in office, nor does it mean that the Democrats have total power to do whatever they want next January. There's all sorts of nuance we can get into over the course of the next hour. But for Donald Trump and his Republican Party, I mean, he and they are surveying the rubble of comprehensive defeat here today. Well, Simon, let's go to our first caller. It is Rose in Tavistock. Hello, Rose. Oh, hello, Ian. Hi. Right. Well, it's funny that, Simon, you should say a new day because all this has made me want to hear Nina Simone singing Feeling Good. Would you like me to sing it for you, Rose? Oh, no, Corey's just told me I'm not allowed to. Is that Ian? No, certainly not. Simon, possibly, but... Oh, how rude. Sorry, sorry. Like, it just feels like... Or seems like. The gate has opened into another path in America than the one we all seemed trapped on forever, where the norm has been that leaders having no interest in people, just pleasure in power and cruelty, and now there seems a real shift in popular attitude with new voices voted in who want to do something other than fire people, shackle people and bomb people. So my question is, what chance that change really is going to come? And I'd vote John Ossoff for president. Now, Simon, just remind us who John Ossoff is. Well, so John Ossoff is the Democrat senator from Georgia who, of course, won massively last night over his Republican challenger. And John Ossoff has been a very effective, as senator, inquisitor up on Capitol Hill. He's hauled people like Pete Hegseth over the coals publicly when they've turned up to testify before congressional committees. And of course, now back in the Senate with the Democrats in the majority, John Ossoff is going to get more. more of an opportunity to do that, and by the way, I think the Democrats will change. The ludicrous rules that have been brought in by the Republicans in those Senate hearings where everybody only gets five minutes to ask questions and the whole thing becomes a complete choreographed drama. So you're going to be seeing a lot more of John Ossoff. He has said, I don't want to disappoint Rose this early, I don't want to take the Nina Simone soundtrack off for you, Rose, but John Ossoff has said he wants to serve a full six year term in the Senate. He has indicated that the... presidency is not top of mind for him. There will be many Democrats who hope that's not true, and there will be some Democrats who believe it not to be true. He's certainly one possible presidential aspirant for 2028. As to this question about the extent to which America really has turned a corner, look, I mean, two years is a long time in politics. And it's going to be two years more before we get to the next presidential election. And then, of course, the Democrats will have spent two years in positions of authority on Capitol Hill. And they will be judged on their record in office. So I think it's too early to say that absolutely, you know, this is the Democrats paving the way for a total seismic shift in politics here. But there are so many new faces coming to the fore. And I think what is most important about last night is that after two years in which this country's constitutional checks and balances have largely failed, Certainly been challenged in many areas, and some of them undoubtedly have sort of failed to be as consequential and as strong as the founders of this country and the framers of the Constitution would have envisaged. It is the public. That's issued the corrective. And, you know, there was one image that stuck with me. James Tallarico, the winner down in Texas, put a video out this week. He stopped at a truck stop in Texas on one of those big interstate highways there. And a woman came up to him and whispered in his ear, but he was wearing a microphone so you could just about pick the sound up. And she whispered to him and she said, as a recovering Republican, I want you to know I voted for you and the Democrats today. And it's the first time she's ever voted for Democrats. I think there are lots of people who did that all over the country last night because they have been. Just so appalled at the excesses of the Trump administration, at the president's own bizarre behavior on the campaign trail. Absolutely bizarre. He couldn't have done less to help Republican candidates win elections. I think people have just had enough with the with the Trump show, with the Trump shtick. They're ready to move on. There is going to be a big responsibility, though, on the Democrats, isn't there, over the next two years, not to play it very badly, by which I mean that come the next presidential election, they will want to have a record of achievement, not just blocking, not just trying to impeach. Because I think that won't go down particularly well with swing voters. They've got to show a degree of responsibility. Yeah, and that's going to be difficult because, of course, you know, they have certain powers. They have the power of the purse. But any piece of legislation that they pass, President Trump will still have the power to veto. He's got a presidential veto and he is not going to be afraid to use it, as he made clear last night. And so it would take a two thirds majority in Congress to override a presidential veto. Very unlikely that the Democrats will be able to muster that certainly on. many occasions, they've also got investigative powers. And as you point out, Ian, they will want to be careful about how they use those. Should they try and impeach Donald Trump again, given that they would almost certainly not be able to get the two thirds majority to convict him at trial in the Senate that they would need? I mean, we had earlier on LBC Republican lawyer and analyst Jenna Ellis. She was talking to Tom Swarbrick a few hours. saying that she thinks it's absolutely it's actually possible that the Democrats and she's a Republican, a Ron DeSantis aligned Republican, saying she thinks it is possible that the Democrats might be able to persuade some Republicans. To convict Donald Trump at an impeachment trial, and she was even suggesting that he may choose to leave office rather than undergo all of the investigations that he and his family members and members of his inner circle are now going to face. So it's going to be difficult because the Democrats come to power saying, right, we want Medicare for all. We want to lower grocery prices. We want to take control of tariff policy, which is supposed the unique preserve of Congress, not of the president, but the Republicans, of course, just let him do whatever he wants. They want to end the war in Iran. But in concrete practical terms. How do they do that while he is still president of the country? That's going to be a real conundrum. Ash has sent in a WhatsApp message saying, looking at the results from last night, will this have any impact on the Iran war at all? Trump has proved he's willing to ignore the House and Senate on foreign policy issues. So will any of this actually curtail his whims and urges? Well, I think it's a great question, Ash, and the answer is that it's very, very unclear that it will have much of an impact. I mean, there's no question that when the new Congress is sworn in on January the 3rd, One of the things Democrats will want to do very quickly is start passing bills that are aimed at tying Donald Trump up in knots in terms of his use of military force and making it absolutely clear that they want to deny him any authorization to engage in the further use of force against Iran without congressional approval. But the difficulty that they will run into is that the president will argue, as past presidents have all done. Not just Republicans, Democrats, too, that they don't need to operate within the War Powers Act, which does constrain their ability to continue waging war. I mean, because Donald Trump argues this isn't a war. He calls it a military operation. This is all semantic, of course, but it's an effort to evade any kind of congressional approval that the War Powers Act mandates. And so... I think to a large degree, he's going to have a free hand to continue waging that war with the caveat that to see his own vice president breaking with him on it today. And of course, you know, Vice President J.D. Vance always thought it was a terrible idea to go to war with Iran. He said right from the get go to Donald Trump, if you're going to do it, go heavy. Go quickly. And he's in a position to say Donald Trump didn't listen to my advice, even though he's obviously completely tarnished more broadly by his association with President Trump. I think the people in his. On the inside, Vice President J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio, some of the members of Congress from the Republican Party that have survived this midterm cull, and, of course, the mandate that Democrats have. I mean, all of that may play a role in slightly stalling President Trump's hand. The other huge issue is he's running out of weapons. I mean, they just don't have the stockpile of weapons anymore to continue lobbing stuff at Iran. without any consequential hope of it making a difference. I think one thing we've got to watch short term is whether Pete Hegseth survives at the Pentagon. Trump today indicated he might. But the Democrats will definitely be investigating and potentially impeaching Pete Hegseth. And I suspect that Mr Hegseth's garrulous and cocksure days, as the Pentagon chief may be numbered. This is interesting about sort of the powers of Congress to stop Trump doing things. But if Trump gave orders, this is from Al, if Trump ordered the military to dramatically escalate the attacks on Iran and Congress voted to forbid these attacks, would the military obey? I'm now getting the feeling I actually asked you this a couple of minutes ago. But I mean, what are the powers of Congress in this situation? Well, the powers of Congress in this situation are complicated because the War Powers Act says you're not allowed to wage war without specific congressional authorization. I think I'm right in saying that the last president who sought specific congressional authorization was George H.W. Bush when he went in to push back against the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. I think I'm right So, a long time ago, and... Uh, you know, if you are the president and you maintain it's not a war, it's just a military operation, which, by the way, has echoes of what Vladimir Putin says about what's going on in Ukraine. That's a special military operation. They use that phrase here. As an indicator that they're not going to be bound by the War Powers Act. And as I say, this is not uniquely a Donald Trump thing. Virtually every past president of the modern era has engaged in similar jiggery-pokery when they've been engaged in military action, including, of course, Barack Obama, who absolutely engaged in all sorts of extrajudicial war acts. to eliminate American opponents and people that he deemed to be terrorists without any congressional authorization to do that. So it's a really complicated thicket, but broadly, the president pretty much can get on and do whatever he wants to do. Donna says J.D. Vance already looks to be distancing himself from Trump and his decisions on X. How do you see that relationship playing out over the next two years? Look, I think it's going to get complicated. There's no question about that. J.D. Vance had indicated that he was going to wait until after the midterm elections to have a conversation with Donald Trump about 2028. We know J.D. Vance wants to run for the presidency. We absolutely know that Marco Rubio wants to run for the presidency. But for both of those men, the events of last night are now hugely problematic because they have got to try and find a way of distancing themselves in the public mind. from the president that they have loyally served for the last two years. And J.D. Vance is a heartbeat away from that president. So the amount of separation he can create between himself and Donald Trump is obviously complicated. There are other people out there. Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida, his dance card completely empty from January of 2027. Onwards, because he's leaving his post as governor of Florida, he's term limited there, so he has to leave power. He has really moved very quickly today. And actually, he did it even before the votes were finished being cast yesterday to criticize President Trump for denying the reality of soaring oil prices and petrol prices and the impact of that on American consumers. I think he's absolutely gargling in the wings, gearing up for a president. presidential campaign. And he's not in the same way tarnished by his association with Donald Trump that J.D. Vance and Marco Rubio are. There will be other candidates out there that come along. But I think for J.D. Vance, this is going to be very difficult unless, of course. And I don't rule this out as a possibility. We had one of our guests last night on our all night special, Dr. Lara Brown, political scientist here, raising this as a possibility. Jenna Ellis, as I say, the Republican lawyer and strategist, was saying this to Tom earlier today. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that Donald Trump decides to hang it up before. The end of 2028, that he might look at the situation he faces. And even though I don't think he's a quitter, he might look at the straits in which he finds himself. What he really wants to get on and do, as we saw today, is the renovations. It's the arc. It's the ballroom. It's all that stuff. And he might say, I'll I'll hand off things to J.D. Vance to give him a chance to try and build up a head of steam before the November the 2028 presidential election. But for all of them, this is now incredibly difficult. Let's go to Ranjit in Oldbury. Hello, Ranjit. Hiya, Ian. Hiya, Simon. Okay. Evening, Ranjit. My question, evening, how you doing? My question is, and it isn't a childish one, you know, even when the Democrats win, which vanity project do you think they'll dismantle first? I think it's a fantastic question. For those who are listening, not watching, Simon enjoyed that question. I think it's a fantastic question, Ranjit. You know, Hillary Clinton said a few weeks ago that this is going to be a monumental, pardon the pun, problem. For the next president of the United States, whoever that turns out to be. And she said, you know, she's making a list of all the stuff, including the monuments that need to be undone. I mean, I'm I'm broadcasting to you tonight from a building. I mean, our office here literally looks out over that the White House, which you can see right behind me just up on the roof. I can clamber up there anytime I like and go and look down at the White House. I cannot... overemphasize how enormous this quote unquote ballroom, it's not really a ballroom, it's a military bunker, is that Donald Trump is building. It is twice the size of the rest of the White House. And, you know, Democrats in January, never mind before 2029, when they might retake the presidency, they're going to want to come in and try and stop him from completing this thing. But, you know. Today, they just put the last steel beam in up on the top of the thing. I don't even begin to know how you would take it down now, much less, you know, rebuild the east wing of the White House, get the Rose Garden back into shape, get rid of the helipad that he's put in, redo the colonnade with all of those pictures of past presidents, except for the one of Joe Biden, where Joe Biden is represented by an auto pen. I mean, the one I think that they might really try and stop. is the arc, the arc to Trump, the triumphalist arch, because they haven't started work on that. I think that there's some bulldozers there and there may be the beginning of foundations, but they haven't really built anything. So that's one they might be able to do something about. The other place that I think is now safe. Today, at least or from January onwards, unless Donald Trump does something incredibly stupid between now and then, is the Kennedy Center. I mean, it was looking quite possible that he was simply going to start demolishing it. He threatened to do that because his name is being taken off it by the board of the Kennedy Center. So I think the Kennedy Center may be safe now. But I mean, the physical change to the skyline here and particularly to that White House complex, some of that stuff. ...is not going to be undone and is really symbolic of the broader changes that have taken place here, many of which Democrats will struggle to undo. And it's not just physical stuff, it's policy stuff as well. What was it like doing an all-nighter? Because you were doing 10 till 1, then the newsagents came on, and then you came back, I think, didn't you? I must admit, I wasn't awake at that point. I did come back. The newsagents, and I was up. I'm in and out of the Newsagent studio doing various updates throughout their time in the chair. Matt Fry wonderfully texted me because he just arrived in Washington from Austin in Texas and asked me if I was going back on air. And I said, yes, I am. I'm going back on air at 5 a.m. And he said, well, can I come in? Do you want me to come in and be on with you? So I said, yes, absolutely. So I grabbed on to my very good friend, Matt Fry. for decades. I grabbed onto him like a piece of driftwood and we did the 5 till 6 a.m. hour together, which was which was good fun. But look, I mean, it was an incredible night. It was it was an extraordinary privilege to be doing eight hours of live broadcasting on an evening of such gravity and such magnitude. And some of us were talking today and saying, you know, You know, in many ways, it felt like an even more. significant moment in history than when Donald Trump returned to power as a result of the November 2024 presidential election. I mean, that was also another remarkable evening of all night broadcasting. So, look, I'm incredibly privileged to be here doing this work whenever these things occur. And now we'll all gear up to see what happens next here. Well, the thing I love about Matt Fry, the thing I love about you, and the thing I love about myself, we're all of a vaguely similar age. I think I'm a bit older than both of you. But we're all just as enthusiastic about all of this sort of thing that we were like 30 years ago, aren't we? Because you just never know what's going to happen. And that's the great thing about politics. It's a great thing about live radio, live television. You just never know what's around the corner, do you? Let's go to Andy in Romford. Hello, Andy. Hi. Hi, Simon. My question is, do you think the Democrats will be cohesive enough to be able to put enough popular bills in front of Trump to sign that when he vetoes them, they're going to put the Republicans under significant pressure to either support the American public or break with Trump in preparation for the 28th election? I think that's an absolutely magnificent question because the cohesion, Andy, of the Democrats is a big question. The Democrats are, as the Labour Party likes to say, a broad church and they're about to become even broader because if you take a look at some of the candidates who won last night, and these are not just candidates from the east and west coasts, they are candidates from the middle of the country. Many of them are supportive of the Democratic Socialists of America. So there's suddenly going to be a much bigger left-wing progressive caucus that is arriving and taking office as part of the entire Democrat... ...grouping on Capitol Hill. And look, there's going to be a battle royal behind the scenes. It's already started playing out. Senator Chuck Schumer, who is the Democrats' leader in the Senate, he wants to be the next majority leader. He is 75 years old. He has been at this a very long time. His approval rating, last time I checked... ...was lower than that of President Donald Trump's, and he is rejected by many of the left-wing progressives who are heading here, including Abdel El-Sayed, the candidate who romped to victory in Michigan, Susan Collins' opponent in Maine, who is heading here for the Democratic Party, Adam Hamilton down in... I'm now losing track of all the various states that have been voted on over the last few hours. But you get what I'm saying. Many of these Democrats say that they are coming here because they don't want. Yeah, Adam Hamilton was Kansas. They don't want Chuck Schumer to carry on being the Senate majority leader. They want a generational shift and many of them want a political shift. And so that is going to play out behind the scenes as various people within the Democratic Party decide who's going to be their choice to be the party's presidential candidate. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez definitely wants to run, I think, for the presidency. But so does Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris today was fundraising. I got an email from Kamala Harris in my box today fundraising off the back of the knife edge election result that is taking place in Mississippi. So she definitely has not got the message that her political career is at anything approximating an end. I think they'll pass various measures that Trump will refuse to sign. Uh, the... You know, the other half of your question is how loyal to Trump are the Republicans going to be? And that, I think, is a very, very big question. We will have to see how that plays out. But Trump is going to use that veto, Ben, again and again and again over the next two years. How strong will this left-wing caucus be within the Democratic Party? I mean, they're going to have, what, is it something like 250 members of the House of Representatives? How many of them will be allies of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? Well, I don't know the numbers yet because those are all still being determined, but it's going to be a significant chunk and exactly the same way as, for example, Mike Rogers, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and his predecessor, Kevin McCarthy, were bedevilled by right wingers, you know, far right. Figures and hard Conservatives within the Republican Party, there will be a risk that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, presumably Hakeem Jeffries, finds himself bedevilled by the left-wingers. But I think the size of the Democrats' majority in the House may mean that it's not going to be as complicated a path that he has to walk as his Republican... predecessors. But look, there's going to be a lot of jockeying for position because the left-wing populists in the party. are coming here saying, look, this is our party now. And they've got other standard bearers outside Congress, people like Zohran Mamdani, the mayor of New York City. I mean, the DSA grouping has made extraordinary advances, including, you know, Michigan. I mean, Abdul El-Sayed's victory in Michigan is seismic. It's staggering. And he absolutely comes from that wing of the Democratic Party. And as a result... As a result of that, I think they are going to lay claim to being the new kind of the new leaders of the Democratic Party. I mean, they are not going to tolerate Chuck Schumer. They're not going to tolerate Kamala Harris. The Biden's having any influence, you know, the ghosts of Nancy Pelosi and figures like that. She is just about to depart Congress. All of that's coming to an end, they hope. But equally, we heard John Podesta telling Andrew Marr earlier today, well, sure, a lot of left-wingers got elected today, but lots of centrists did as well. Down the road from us here in Washington, the governor of Virginia, Abigail Spanberger, a centrist, has said she never wants to hear any Democrat running for office using the words socialist or socialism in the United States. She said that. four or five years ago. Well, go tell that to all the winning candidates who describe themselves as socialists or democratic socialists in this midterm election cycle. So it's going to be complicated. It certainly is. Andy, thank you for your call. 0345 6060 973. Simon has a question for Simon. With the Republicans having the executive branch and the Supreme Court and the Democrats having the Senate and the House, Can either side do anything at all? And if not, is that why the stock market is up today? Well, it's very interesting you made that point, Simon, because the stock market is indeed up today. I just saw a flash while we were in a break. Wall Street has had its best day in months as investors welcomed the midterm results, putting political uncertainty behind them. I mean, amusingly, President Trump took to social media to herald the rise in the stock market today without, of course, acknowledging that the stock market has risen because of the size of the Democrats' victory in the midterm elections and the end of the. uncertainty that investors believe that it has created. Watch the Supreme Court closely. Remember, the new Congress does not come into force until January. We're now going into a lame duck session in which the old Congress, with its Republican majority, is going to try and get as much done between now and the end of the year as possible. And one question here is whether Justice Samuel Alito might seek to retire from the court now, because if he doesn't retire from the court now, he's not going to retire for at least another two years, because there's no way that the president is going to get a Supreme Court justice of his choosing onto the court with the Democrats in the majority. So that could start getting very Interesting. Also, let's see, do the Democrats move forward and try and grant in from. From January onwards, Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico statehood, that would build in two more seats in Congress that would, for the long term, be likely to vote for the Democrats. Let's see if they seek to expand the Supreme Court beyond. The nine justices to try and overcome that built-in 6-3 majority that currently exists among Republican-appointed justices. I mean, there's going to be so much jockeying for position in terms of power and influence in all three branches of government, not just... The presidency and the legislative branch, Congress, but the judiciary as well. Dave says, have you seen the clip of the new senator-elect from Michigan talking to the UK Sky reporter? Interesting attitude. This is a confrontation between James Matthews, the Sky News US correspondent, and the new senator for Michigan. Simon, I think you've seen this. Just describe it in your own words. Well, I have seen it. And let me say, first of all, I am a huge admirer of James Matthews, who has been extraordinarily courageous and genuinely courageous as a foreign correspondent here in seeking to hold power. ...to account. This is not the first time that James Matthews has, as we always say, gone on the doorstep, you know, gone to try and get an interview with someone who doesn't necessarily want to be interviewed by them at that particular moment. He is a master of the craft. And he has done this in the past to the FBI director, Kash Patel, to other senior figures within the Trump administration, which is not a risk free approach to take if you are here on a foreign journalist's visa. So, look, I'm a huge admirer of James, have been for many, many years and an admirer of his work. If you've not seen this clip, he tries to ask Abdul El-Sayed, the now winning candidate in Michigan, the Senate elect in Michigan, having defeated former Congressman Mike Rogers in that race. He tries to ask him some questions and Abdul El-Sayed doesn't want to talk to him. And it gets quite feisty because Abdul El-Sayed says, I'm not interested in talking to anybody who's not. I'm here from Michigan, basically. I'm here to try and reach Michigan voters. Why would I talk to you? Where are you from? You're from the UK. There's no votes in the Michigan Senate race in the UK. And James does his best to make the case that, you know, people in the UK have interests in the election more broadly and in Abdul El-Sayed and his campaign more broadly. And it doesn't go well. I think it's fair to say for Abdul El-Sayed, but it doesn't go well for James either because he doesn't get very far in terms of securing any answers to the questions that he wants to ask. And the other point in the context. Sorry, Simon. The other point was that towards the end of this confrontation, Abdul El-Sayed puts his hands on James Matthews shoulders. And I mean, James Matthews, I think, exercised a huge amount of self-control there, because I think if you and I had been in that situation, we'd have both said, get your hands off me. Yes, I do think that. I think that my understanding is, having seen earlier clips from earlier in the week, that this was not the first time that James had tried to get El-Sayed to talk to him. On the record, I do not want to speak for James. I don't want to make any judgments about what had happened prior to that incident. Thank Look, I mean, El-Sayed must be exhausted. He's been campaigning relentlessly. He's not a man who is afraid to go and talk to anyone. you I mean, he's given numerous interviews to Fox News over the course of the last several weeks. very So, look, I think this was an unfortunate. exchange for him and let's see if at some point Abdul much. El-Sayed does agree to sit down and have a natter with James and answer some of those questions that on the night before the election I think it was or even on the day before the election that he clearly didn't want to answer because he felt as though he had other better things to be doing with his time. Right let's go to Hassan in Battersea. Hello Hassan. Yeah. Hello, Ian. Hello, Simon. Nice to talk to you. I like you, both of you. Good journalistic quality all the time. Oh, you're very kind. Thank you for that. I really do listen to LBC and whenever any of you two is on. I just don't want to listen to anything else. Oh, enough of the flattery, Hassan, but we thank you for it. What would you like to ask? Right, okay. So, last night, when the elections, when we knew kind of where things were going, we were all happy to see that. Trump's power has been diminished or rather lowered so much that he won't be able to do things. But now, as it turns out, he has still almost all powers to do whatever he wants in foreign relations. That's number one. And number two, whatever the Democrats come up with, he will be able to veto. So my question is, what was the whole purpose of this election and what did we get out of it in terms of restraining Donald Trump himself. Simon. Well, I think it's a great question, Hassan. I mean, the purpose of the election, of course, was to reflect the current will of the American people versus the will that they had two years ago. It was a verdict on Donald Trump's presidency and it was an excoriation of President Trump's administration. So it gives Democrats a constitutional role to play. We have become so inured to Donald Trump not. Respecting Congress, not working with Congress, with the singular exception of getting his big, beautiful tax and spending bill passed last year. I mean, that's not normal. Congress is supposed to be a third, co-equal branch of government here, alongside the presidency and the judiciary. So what you get... ...is perhaps a return to some semblance of constitutional normalcy. And with regard to Donald Trump's ability to do whatever he wants on the world stage, yes, you are right, he will remain largely unconstrained. But I think if you listen to what the Prime Minister said today... I think that Andy Burnham today was not talking only as the British prime minister. He was talking as the man who next year is going to be the chair of the G20. And in December. Andy Burnham, Emmanuel Macron, all the other members of the G20 are going to descend on Florida, where Donald Trump is going to be hosting this year's G20 summit. And they are going to be finding a president who is much more vulnerable, much less powerful, much, I mean, politically neutered here as a result of last night's election. So I think, for example... On Iran or on Ukraine, it now becomes much easier for Andy Burnham and Ukraine's European allies, other countries whose economies have been battered by Trump's war on Iran, it becomes much easier for them to say to him, you need to listen to us and you need to take us seriously. And Andy Burnham's kind of in the catbird seat of that because... There's going to be a moment when Donald Trump has to pass him the G20 gavel so that he can bring all of those leaders to Manchester next year. And so I think that in that way. Our government's influence has kind of been reinforced a little bit. It also means that the ambassador here, the diplomats here, Ed Miliband, they're suddenly going to have from January a whole array of other elected representatives that they can reach out to in a bid to try and almost engage in a pincer movement between the government, Congress. And Donald Trump in the middle. So I think it changes the dynamic. Hassan, thank you very much for that. Let's finish off with Nick in Kings Lynn. Nick, it's been a long time. Oh, dear. Yeah, I always work when you're on. I'd just like to ask your commentator there, despite this bounce that the Democrats are going to experience, just like the burn and bounce here, aren't the Republicans in the next two years going to find somebody else to replace him. Because this is what American voters wish. It just exposed the fact that they were all very for Trump when it came to MAGA and ICE and everything else. But when it came to economic situations, like their standard of living, their energy prices and everything, they rejected him. So what does that really say about the consciousness of the American voter today? Well, it's a great question, Nick. It's always the economy stupid, as James Carville put it when Bill Clinton was running for the presidency back in the 90s. It's always about the economy stupid. And it was here last night. But it was about more than the economy. It was also about corruption in government, because in the last few weeks, that's been showing up as the number one issue of concern to American voters. So they definitely want a shift. In approach from what they've seen from Donald Trump, who really is the poster child for corruption in government here over the course of the last two years, of course, the Republicans are going to have to find a standard bearer for twenty twenty eight. But like the Democrats, they're going to have to sit down and decide who exactly they are. Is MAGA going to remain the dominant force within Republican politics? I think it's hard to imagine that Trumpism and MAGAism just dies and disappears because what are you left with? I mean, it would require all the major figures in the American government to literally disappear overnight and be replaced by what and by who. And that's why I think Ron DeSantis is kind of interesting to keep an eye on in the next few months.