Beep, beep, beep, beep, beep boxing actually has hidden health benefits. It can help strengthen and protect your voice from injury. See healthy living differently with manual life. Visit manualife.ca slash health.
It's here. The Ford is a big deal. Not yet. The Ford is a big deal.
Oh guys, just wait. The Ford is a big deal event is on. Really? Now.
Hurry into least a 2026 Maverick XLT hybrid all-wheel drive for 197 by weekly at 5.29% APR for 60 months with $29.95 down. That's like $99 a week. The Ford is a big deal event. Visit your Ontario Ford store or Ford.ca.
Welcome to Meet the Press. Now I'm Monica Alba in Washington, where the Trump administration is dealing with competing policy priorities. As the US military is pushing more weaponry into the Middle East, for possible strikes on Iran while his party and the voters who put him in office are looking to hear more from the president on domestic issues, like the economy and affordability heading into the midterm elections. Right now, President Trump is in battleground Georgia in the district previously held by Marjorie Taylor Greene.
He's expected to speak there shortly, touting his economic agenda and is a notable location, of course, because it's conservative voters in deep red districts like that who propelled President Trump to victory just 14 months ago, in part because of his America First policies and his pledge not to start any new foreign wars. But foreign policy was the focus of the first part of the president's day today, as he convened the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace, hosting representatives from more than 40 countries at the US Institute of Peace, which also now bears his name. That meeting today largely focused on the fragile ceasefire and rebuilding efforts in Gaza, but in his opening remarks, President Trump also addressed the current US talks with Iran and appeared to hint at a possible timeline for US military action. It's proven to be over the years not easy to make a meaningful deal with it, and we have to make a meaningful deal.
Otherwise, bad things happen, but we have to make a meaningful deal. So now we may have to take it a step further, or we may not be able to make a deal. You're going to be finding out over the next probably 10 days. They can't have nuclear weapons very simple.
They can't have peace in the Middle East as they have a nuclear weapon, and they can't have a nuclear weapon, and they've been told that very strongly. And while speaking to reporters on Air Force One in route to Georgia, President Trump expanded a bit on that timeline. What is the goal if there isn't US military? We're going to make a deal or we're going to get a deal one way or the other.
But we're going to make a series like it's a way out there. I'm not going to talk to you about that, but we're either going to get a deal or for them. So please, don't have a deadline, firms make a deal. I would think that would be enough time, 10, 15 days, pretty much maximum.
It echoes rhetoric in the weeks and months leading up to last year's strikes on Iran, and it all comes as Trump's top national security advisors huddled in the White House situation room yesterday to discuss Iran. After that, a senior administration official telling me that there were no final decisions that were made about potential military action on Iran, but they did note that all US military forces that would be required for possible action could be in place in the region by mid-March. During me now, NBC News National correspondent Aaron Gilchrist is in Georgia, ahead of the president's speech. With me on set is NBC News Chief Washington correspondent, and Chief Foreign Affairs correspondent Andrew Mitchell, and NBC News National International correspondent Matt Bradley is in Tel Aviv.
Aaron, what should we make of this 10-day timeline for possible action on Iran that the president laid out today? Well, Monica, I think just from the sound that you played, the first thing that we can take from this is that it's not a hard and fast timeline. The president this morning saying 10 days we could see some action in terms of decisions being made about next steps in this process with Iran, and then on Air Force One in route to Georgia here, the president said 10, 15 days. And so that would indicate that their president has indicated that there has been some progress in the talks with Iran.
We know that Steve Wickhoff is special envoy, and Derek Kushner's son-in-law were in Geneva having these talks with Iran, and both the president and the vice president have indicated that some progress had been made, but there were still real sticking points that needed to be worked out. And here you have the president seeming to indicate that in the next 10 days, maybe 15 days, if a deal was not reached, that there might be some action. He was asked specifically about military action on Air Force One, and said he wouldn't go into detail about that. But the reality is, Monica, we know that there have been military ships and personnel moving into that region, into the Middle East, and indicators are that they're making sure there's enough manpower and firepower in that region to take some sort of action if the president were to choose to do that.
And so there's still, I think, a lot of uncertainty about what the president's plans are as it relates to Iran. Plenty of uncertainty, Aaron. As we mentioned, the president is in Georgia today where you are. What can we expect to hear from him, and how much of this speech do you think will actually focus on the economy?
Yeah, we know that the president is on his way here. It's a little bit behind schedule, and we expect that he's going to address the economy. He's supposed to be talking about affordability. You may be able to see the sign over my shoulder here that says jobs, jobs, jobs.
The president is supposed to talk about that, and how his administration has invested in rural parts of Georgia, and invested in jobs, and in health care, and rural parts of the state in particular. And so that's the message that we anticipate we'll hear from the president today. But we have to point out the fact that we are in the middle of a special election in Georgia's 14 congressional district. This was the seat that was held by Marjorie Taylor Greene, who we know had a falling out with President Trump, and vacated that seat last month.
There are 18 candidates on the ballot for this special election. Most of them are Republicans, and a part of the state that is very Republican. But the president has endorsed one of them, Clay Fuller, former district attorney in this part of Georgia. But he also, we know a couple of days ago on Air Force One, seemed to indicate that there are lots of people who could be good candidates for that seat.
And so we'll see if he pushes Clay Fuller a little bit harder here. We know that this is a race where you have to win 50%, more than 50% of the vote. Otherwise, there's a runoff election here in Georgia. With 18 names on the ballot, Monica, it's going to be hard for any one candidate to get that many votes in this area.
But President Trump, we anticipate we'll put his finger on the scale here, at least a little bit more for this particular candidate. And Monica, I'll also be listening to hear how much the president has to say about Marjorie Taylor Greene while he's here today, and whether that becomes a bigger headline than what he might say about the economy. Aaron, thank you. We're going to dive deeper into that race just a little bit later in the show.
But Andrea, let's get back to Iran. What are you hearing from your sources? And how close could we be potentially to military conflict with Iran? Very hard to predict.
As you know, the military buildup is all but complete. They could do it with one carrier. They've got a lot in there. They've been sending chats in.
They've got air defense, Patriot missile batteries. But they're waiting for the second carrier, perhaps. One of the things to note is, last year, when they were about to strike, but they were negotiations planned for two days later, I was in Geneva doing the last interview after the Israeli 12-day war with the Iranian Foreign Minister Arachi. He was sending a message to President Trump.
They did want to talk. They expected the talks to begin in 48 hours. We didn't know he nor I that the B-52s were already in the air, heading to strike. So he could do anything on a moment's notice, and we would not know that.
We had no heads up, of course, nor would we, to the Venezuelan strike. That said, they have to decide, and there are some internal debates, we understand, what is the mission? Is this regime change? Is this taking out the ARGC?
Is this punishing the people that repressed savagely the protesters? He didn't act last month when he said help is on the way. That led to a lot of concern. And I was talking to a leader of one of the countries that was very much against this, just a few weeks ago, saying that they were concerned about missile strikes against them, and has now moderated that position somewhat.
But he was saying, look, he can't not do something now. He is way out there with these threats. And he will look very weak with all these military resources there if he stands down. The backdrop to all of this, that meeting today on the so-called Board of Peace, what stood out to you since you've been covering this so intensely, and are those commitments significant?
What might we see now toward the rebuilding and efforts there in Gaza? A lot of the people there were not just the Board of Peace foreign designates, but hedge fund people, people talking about the Gaza Riviera. There is so much needs to be done. The UN is talking about $50 billion.
The US is putting up five and potentially another 10. But the need is enormous. And they don't have the military commitments from enough countries yet. The Arab countries have said they won't participate.
Egypt and Jordan are participating, but only training. They don't want to have Arab troops going up against Palestinians. That would be very bad domestically for them. And meanwhile, this administration is turning a blind eye to what's happening in the West Bank.
We are right-wingers in the Netanyahu Cabinet, or basically fostering groups of civilians, so-called civilians, who are going out and attacking Palestinian farmers and olive grove minders, and people growing grapes. There has been very little Palestinian violence right now, but it is both basically right-wing, hard-right Jewish people aligned with the hard-right ministers in the Cabinet who are wiping out potential Palestinians to be in a Palestinian state. Inter you mentioned some of the countries in the representatives who were there, what stood out to you about who wasn't there in terms of some key U.S. allies.
Oh, European allies? I mean, Viktor Orban, we're, you know, hungry of Vladimir Putin and ally, who where Rubio went after the Munich Security Conference, which upset a lot of the European allies and NATO allies. There was a British representative, the ambassador here, but he was there as an observer, not as a member. They're not members of this.
They think it undercuts the United Nations. And we still don't have too many details about who is going to be governing in terms of that stabilization force. We know there are going to be thousands of personnel, in what countries and who's going to be a part of that? I mean, we think Kazakhstan and a few others, but Kosovo, Indonesia was mentioned potentially.
One thing we should mention about the Institute of Peace, that was a privately owned, privately owned building, a nonpartisan think tank across from the State Department. It was taken over by armed federal marshals, designated by Elon Musk, Doge, and the administration. And there's a lawsuit which hasn't gone anywhere. So he's just put his name on it.
It's not really the Trump Institute of Peace. It was prominently displayed there today for all of this. It's not a government building. Andrea, thank you so much, Matt.
I want to turn to you. What has the reaction been like in Israel to the possibility of U.S. strikes on Iran? And where does Israel stand on a possible nuclear deal between the U.S.
and Iran? Yeah, it's a great question because the Ayatollah has attacked Israel, threatened Israel directly, saying that they will attack here in Tel Aviv if the president strikes. Now, interestingly, about 59% of Israelis have said in a recent poll that was just published yesterday, that they would support Israel participating in strikes against the Iranians. Now, we haven't heard a whole lot from Israel's top brass, but the word we're getting, especially in the media, is that intelligence officials believe that unless Israel joins in in those attacks, that Iran probably won't poke the bear and attack Israel preemptively.
But Israel is very much already on a very high level of alert and has been for quite a while. There have been some concerns a little while ago that there might be a preemptive strike against Israel from Iran. But now it looks as though Israel is just prepared and bracing for strikes coming from Iran, as they did just a couple of months ago. So we've seen so much of this before.
Now, as for those negotiations, the Israelis have made clear that while they are in favor of some of these negotiations, they are very worried that the idea of ballistic missiles will be left out. And that was one of the things that Benjamin Netanyahu has been pressing the Americans about. He wants to see ballistic missiles. He wants to see Iranian-Iran's ballistic missile capability restrained so that they don't see the kind of strikes that hit here in Tel Aviv just a couple of months ago after Israel attacked Iran to begin with.
And Matt, remind us, what is the current status of the ceasefire in Gaza? And you mentioned the Prime Minister. Is he on board with phase two of the President's Peace Plan? There's a lot of hesitancy around this phase, too, mostly because it hasn't even really been defined.
And that was one of the things that we've been hearing from top-level officials here in Israel, is really, while they really are hoping to see this ceasefire last. They're not optimistic about the plans, the way they've been laid out. There's a lot of hesitancy about the 15 members of this Palestinian technocratic committee who don't necessarily have the blessing of the Israeli government. They're all members of the Palestinian Authority, that the Israeli government, particularly Netanyahu, and top officials have said would be excluded from any future governance of the Gaza Strip.
So, you know, there's a lot of friction around this. And the fact is, it all comes down to disarmament, despite the fact that we've been hearing from the Trump administration, that there's all these glossy plans to go ahead with Reconstruction, which is heard from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying that he got assurances from the U.S. that Reconstruction would not proceed until Hamas is completely disarmed. That could be quite an effort at Hamas has made it very clear that they are not going to be disarming anytime soon.
There's no real plan for how to break that impasse. Yeah, there's still so much to nail down here. Matt Bradley, thank you very much. And coming up, a royal crisis, the King expresses his deepest concerns after British authorities arrest former Prince Andrew over his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, were live outside Buckingham Palace with the very latest.
Plus, we'll take a deeper dive into the president's visit to Georgia, and his message to battleground voters on the most important midterm issue of them all, the economy. You're watching, meet the press now. That's like $99 a week. The Ford, it's a big deal event.
Visit your Ontario Ford store or Ford.ca. As a trade envoy, it follows other allegations, including of sexual misconduct, in relation to Epstein that are not related to this arrest, and the former Prince denies all allegations of wrongdoing. King Charles, releasing this statement, saying law enforcement has the royal family's quote, full and whole-hearted support and cooperation. Let me state clearly, he wrote, the law must take its course.
And the King meanwhile, continuing his royal duties today, but refusing to comment further on his brother's arrest. Listen to that. Good afternoon, your Majesty. Do you have any reactions to the rest of your brothers, sir?
You might just see how you're feeling after your brother's arrest. Joining me now is NBC News correspondent, Holler-Garoni outside Buckingham Palace, and senior Washington correspondent, Hallie Jackson, is here with me in studio. Hall, I want to start with you. British police have confirmed the former Prince has been released from that police station.
So what do we know about the arrest? And what happens now? Well, we know that he was arrested around 8 a.m. this morning at the Sandrigum estate.
That's the residence that he just returned to under an hour ago. We saw images snapped by photographers of him leaving the police station, Thames Valley Police confirming that, and of him returning to Sandrigum. Now we understand, according to police, that their search of that property is over, but that they are still conducting a search of another property, the one he occupied before he was moved, or asked to move to Sandrigum and stripped of his royal title, and that is the royal lodge in Windsor. What are police looking for?
Well, presumably they're looking at devices, perhaps even sort of hard copies of documents. And this is all, as you mentioned, related to the investigation into allegations of potential misconduct in public offices, as a very serious potential crime in this country. Now interestingly, Monica, the Thames Valley Police issued a statement confirming that the former Prince Andrew was released, but not naming him. Now this is standard practice.
If there are no criminal charges filed yet, that doesn't mean it won't happen in the future, but it seems to appear as though right now as things stand, have criminal charges been brought against the former Prince Andrew? It is an open question. It's not something that was mentioned in that statement. That was released by the police just a few minutes ago, Monica.
Helen, talk to us about the significance of this remarkable moment for the UK and for the royal family overall. Well, I'm here outside Buckingham Palace, and I'm not the only one practically every television news station in Britain seems to have taken up a position here outside of Buckingham Palace, because they're all asking the same questions about their royal family in this country, which is an institution that is endured for centuries, of course, that is a major draw for tourism. It is an institution that is synonymous with Britain, with the very fabric and identity of this country. And they are asking, is this an existential crisis for the royal family?
In modern history, this is the first time that a member of the royal family is arrested and investigated for a potential crime. So that is creating what has happened today, ripple effects across the country, and there is still a great sense of shock among the British public, Monica. And Halley, this morning you spoke to the family of Virginia Jufrey, who had alleged that she was trafficked by Epstein to Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. How are they reacting?
Yeah, this news. It's such a great question, Monica. He's long denied his allegations, but you heard Halley talk about how this is such a big moment for people in London, for the royal family. It is a huge moment for members of Jufrey's family.
She died by suicide last year. I spoke with them as the news truly was developing. They called it surreal. They said it was really just the first step in their view.
They said they were so proud of Virginia. She is one of the most prominent abstinent accusers she was. She has been somebody who coined the term survivor sister. She's been credited by other Epstein survivors as being the courageous voice who stepped forward to try to hold power to account here.
And I want you to listen to what her brother and sister-in-law told us today. It feels like this surreal moment, a piece of justice that Virginia has been fighting for this entire time. And I think we're just so proud. We're so proud.
We're so freaking proud of our sister right now. I think the first step here has been taken by the UK, which is amazing. I think there's so much more that needs to be done here. I'm hoping they conduct a full investigation and there's a conviction of some sort.
I think the thing that keeps resonating in my head is when my sister, she famously said, and I'm just going to paraphrase this now. But they know what happened. We know what happened. And only one of us is telling the truth.
And we know that's us. He also said, and I think this is interesting Monica, because I've seen, and Hala talked about this too, this is reverberating in a huge way in the UK. It's obviously a huge news in the United States. It is like a wall-to-wall overseas.
And so every comment from the family members, Mr. Bivers, is sort of looked at and scrutinized. There's two things that stood out to me that I think may have an impact overseas. One is what you just heard from Sky Roberts.
The idea of following this path, he wants prosecutors and police. Because I said, what do you want to see them do? What's your message to them? So I wanted them to follow this path, and if this leads to a conviction, and if this leads to prison time for Andrew, then so be it.
He also said that he commended King Charles. He said, I really, he praised the king for this moment that the family says must be difficult for a family member when you have a brother, a relative, obviously, in a position like this. And really kind of gave some kudos here to the royal family for the statement that we heard from King Charles and Hala laid out as well, Monica. A piece of justice, as they described it.
There's so much more that they're still looking for. But really quickly, Hala, I want to talk about the president's reaction to this. He was asked about this last hour specifically, and whether we could potentially see associates of Epstein arrested in the US as well. Let's play that really quick.
Well, you know, I'm the expert in our way because I've been totally exonerated. That's very nice. I can actually speak about it very nicely. I think it's a shame.
I think it's very sad. I think it's so bad for the royal family. It's a very, very sad to me. It's a very sad thing.
You talked about those revelations and the repercussions we've seen abroad, certainly from the latest release of the Epstein files in terms of potential criminal prosecutions. But here in the United States, it has been a little bit different. Certainly, there have been some resignations of high profile individuals named here, but we haven't seen the same level of accountability in a legal context. So what do you make of that?
I think you can put it in a couple of buckets. It's interesting. You know, President Trump talks about his words. He says I've been exonerated.
We should know that he has not been obviously charged with any wrongdoing related to Epstein or links to Epstein there regarding that relationship. Two ways that I think about it, Monica, first, it's the sort of criminal piece of it, right? You look at people that have been charged or investigated or under scrutiny from a police or criminal perspective. So that's obviously now former Prince Andrew.
You look at Norway where the former prime minister of Norway is obviously under scrutiny there. You've got others as well in Norway and in the UK who have gone up in that from a legal perspective. But then you have kind of the what I call the reputational damage quote unquote line. So these are people who have had to step down.
Somebody like Thomas Pritzker, who was the executive chairman of Hyatt who left his position this week, not accused or charged with wrongdoing. You look at somebody like Kathy Rumer, former White House counsel in the Obama administration, left her position as the top lawyer for Goldman Sachs. Again, not charged with wrongdoing, but said that the media attention on her has become a distraction. Holly Jackson, thank you for your tireless reporting on this topic.
And to Holly Garani, thank you both so much. And up next, it is now day 19. We'll have the very latest in the agonizing search for Nancy Guthrie as investigators come through thousands of tips. You're watching me the press now.
Welcome back. It's now been 19 days since Nancy Guthrie. The mother of her colleague today, co-host Savannah Guthrie, was taken from her home. Authorities say they're working on a number of leads, including continuing to analyze that unknown DNA found at Nancy Guthrie's property that they say could belong to the suspect.
Investigators also continue to canvas retailers and gun stores who could provide some details about the clothing, backpack, and weapons seen on the suspect in this doorbell video. NBC News correspondent Jesse Kursh is on the ground and Tucson for us. And Jesse, since it has been several days since that DNA was found at Nancy Guthrie's home, when might we get answers about whether it is significant evidence or not? Yeah, Monica, the timeline on this is really unclear.
We were first informed several days ago now that authorities had found unknown DNA at Nancy Guthrie's property. But that's when they told us, right? So they may have found this hours after she first went missing. So the timeline on that, to begin with, is unclear.
What the sheriff tells us is that the DNA is mixed up with some other DNA. So you have to try to separate out that DNA. And then one expert, however, telling our team that it is somewhat hopeful that the DNA appears to be mixed with other DNA, because that could potentially suggest that it may have been a mixed with Nancy Guthrie's DNA, perhaps, in an altercation or something like that. But again, still a lot of questions around this sample.
And at this point, it's unclear what that timeline looks like. Well, something else that people have had questions about. Two officials briefed on the case telling BC News that there is no evidence that Nancy Guthrie was taken over the border into Mexico in response to some speculation over that. Can you help us understand what that means and what may have happened there?
Yeah, so our colleague Liz Corry has asked the sheriff about coordination with federal authorities at the border. And the sheriff was not giving a straightforward answer on that. Understandably, of course, we expect that that might be because they're protecting their investigation. But what we do know also from that reporting from our colleagues, you just referenced there, is that there has been outreach and coordination with Mexican authorities.
And that is something that has seen a standard procedure when you're dealing with a case like this. But again, that is another area of this investigation that remains at least somewhat opaque to us in the public here, because authorities, you can imagine, don't want to show their cards to someone who's out there that they're trying to track down. Jesse, thank you so much for staying on top of that. After the break, head itself.
President Trump just began speaking to voters in battleground Georgia as the White House tries to hone its messaging and energize the base heading into the midterm elections. You're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back. The president has started those remarks in Georgia.
But this event is supposed to be focused on his domestic agenda, attempting to do what he believes his party hasn't done, which is sell his accomplishments, particularly on the economy ahead of November's midterm elections. Here's a look at some of the president's past frustrations on that. I'm not blaming anybody. I think I blame ourselves.
I think we've done a much better job than we're able to promote. We're not promoting. We're doing a great job. And we're sort of letting the promotion take care of itself.
I think we do a phenomenal job, but I don't think we're good at public relations. What does that mean? You said that a couple of times now. What do you mean by that?
We don't sell the great job that we're doing. We have to get the word out, okay? If we can get the word out, we should win. And as we noted earlier, President Trump is in the state's 14th congressional district, which is formally represented by Marjorie Taylor Greene, who went from being one of the president's most strident supporters to one of his most vocal critics within the Republican party before she stepped down in January.
Now, early voting is underway. They're in a very crowded race to potentially replace her. And the president has thrown his support behind District Attorney Clayton Fuller, appearing with him just moments ago. NBC's Steve Cornaki has more on that race.
Behold, the ballot, Georgia's 14th congressional district special election, March 10th to fill Marjorie Taylor Greene's seat here. Now, look, you got to figure out who you want to vote for in this race. There's 22 candidates, your next challenge, your show up on election day, you got to find the name on this ballot, as I say, 22 candidates overall. And by the way, you have got Republicans, you've got Democrats, you've got independents, you've got libertarians on this ballot.
This is a free for all. Everybody who's interested in having this seat appears on the same ballot. If nobody gets an outright majority, 50% plus one in that March 10th preliminary, there's going to be a runoff in April, top two candidates regardless of party. It could be two Republicans, could be a Democrat and a Republican, whoever the top two are.
Now, for all the crowded nature of this primary, the expectation here is that this really may be between two candidates primarily. Clayton Fuller is one of them. If that name doesn't mean anything to you outside of the district, well, maybe this will. He's got the endorsement of Donald Trump.
And then Colton Moore is expected to be his main opponent here, more a former state legislator. He was at staunch ally of Trump, especially after the 2020 election, all of Trump's claims about Georgia. Moore is a very Trump-like candidate in terms of his positions, his rhetoric, but he doesn't have Trump's endorsement. So what is going to give there between the two?
Third name here, Sean Harris. He's a Democrat. He was the Democrat who ran in this district against Greene in 2024. If he could unite the Democratic votes in his district behind him in the preliminary, he certainly could make it into that runoff.
But could he actually win in a runoff in a district like this? Let me just put this in some perspective, what Georgia 14 is like. These are all the other special House elections that we've seen since Trump came back to the White House. We'll add Georgia 14 to the list right here.
And this is the column. What's the terrain like? What was the 2024 presidential result like in all these districts? Well, you could see what it was in all the other ones in Georgia 14.
Trump won it by 37 points. So one of the stories we've been tracking in these special elections is that the Democrats have sort of been overperforming in all of them, relative to 2024. But they're doing 15 points better, maybe 20 points better than in the 2024 election. They would have to go 37 points better to have a shot in Georgia 14.
So maybe the Democrats could overperform here if they could get into that runoff against one of these Republicans. But I think realistically, you're looking at that race between the Trump ally who doesn't have Trump's endorsement and the candidate who does have Trump's endorsement. Let's see what happens between them. March 10th and then maybe on to an April runoff.
Let's see what happens, Steve. Thanks so much. Joining me now is our panel, Sabrina Rodriguez, political reporter for the Wall Street Journal, former New York Democratic Congressman Joe Crowley and Danielle Plakka, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and an NBC News contributor. So Sabrina, I want to start with you.
What are you expecting to hear from the president at this speech? He has really been criticizing his party for not being able to sell his administration's achievements. Do you think he's going to try to do that today himself? I mean, the message we're hearing from the White House is certainly that this is going to be one of many events he'll be doing this year focused on affordability, focusing on what he's doing to tackle people's economic concerns.
We see him poll after poll that that remains. Voters is number one concern as we head into them in terms. But this is President Trump we're talking about. And he has someone known for, you know, getting off script, particularly at rallies where he's with supporters, you know, he'll get colorful and talk about all these other issues.
Certainly the administration and Republicans would like to see him stay on message and focus on those issues voters want to hear about. But when we have headlines with what's happening with Iran, when we hear the president talking about what's happening in Cuba or Venezuela, even just earlier today, him, you know, convening the representatives from countries for the Board of Peace, it's hard to see that he will not also focus on all these other issues that he likes discussing. Yeah, it's hard for him to avoid doing that. I think you're right.
Daniel, I want to ask you, would it be better for the president to sort of stay out of this economic messaging? I mean, if you look at the polling, it does show that he is pretty underwater. When it comes to the economy, even as voters do still say that they trust the GOP, more than Democrats when it comes to their wallets. So if he's going to take the attack that the Biden administration took, don't believe you're lying eyes.
There's no inflation or you're not suffering at home. That's not going to work for him. But he is a good salesman. If he leads with empathy, if he wants to talk about this and talk about solutions that he's going to be delivering, that would be great.
But he doesn't have message discipline. And on top of everything else, he doesn't believe that his own tariff policies have been contributing to the hardship that normal Americans are experiencing at home. And so that's going to make the gap between the message he needs to deliver and the message he wants to deliver a rather large one. Congressman, jump in on that because Democrats have said that they do want to make this cycle all about affordability.
So do they need to speak tighter to that message when there is so much else to discuss too? I think probably Democrats were over the place as well from time to time. I do think what the president is suffering from is an under-reach and an overreach on two of his key issues. One is the economy that he got elected on, as the other is the border and immigration.
Underreaching on the economy and overreaching on the border and immigration. I think that's where the problem is. There's an awful lot going on. Americans are looking very kind of holistically at this as well.
So yeah, there's no question that this is a sensitive issue for him. We see how defensive he gets about this. I think Democrats will be wise to continue to move on that offensive and talk about affordability all the time because it's pocketbook. pocketbook is what drives people to the polls.
We just learned that Virginia Governor Abigail Spamburger is actually going to be giving the Democrats state of the union response coming up in a couple of days here. Affordability obviously seems to be again a major factor in her election. So is that sort of a hint at what we can expect? Yeah, I think that certainly will be.
I think also just the effect of Doge and the job loss in the capital region. I think that she benefited from as well. Look, it was her, Mikey, Cheryl, maybe as another opportunity. I'm not shocked that it's either one given that they're the new governors on the block.
And they've just off the hustings and successfully as well. I mean, I would even think that New Jersey was even a bigger hit because I think the New Jersey Republican candidate was a much better candidate. And she challenged them pretty heavily there. Abigail did a good job in Virginia as well.
Sabrina, since we talked a little bit about Georgia, I want to go back to some of the things that the former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene had to say about the president's focus because it does relate to what we're also talking about with Iran and some of these overseas entanglements, tickles into that. I want to see domestic policy be the priority that helps Americans afford life after four disastrous years of the Biden administration. My understanding of America first is strictly for the American people. Not for the big donors that donate to big politicians.
Not for the special interests that constantly roam the halls in Washington and not foreign countries that demand their priorities put first over Americans. So do you think MAGA voters do view that criticism as a genuine divide within their party? How concerned is the White House about that? I think there is a concern within the Republican Party and some acknowledgement within the White House of how to explain some of that.
You know, we saw in kind of late 2025 after Democrats had several wins and in November and then in special elections, there has been some recognition that some messaging needs to shift. And when it comes to kind of explaining that, you see some Republicans and particularly MAGA influencers trying to explain that, you know, what he's doing on Iran or what he's doing in Venezuela or what he's doing in Cuba, you can tie it to America first. Or it ultimately is about protecting the United States and the United States national security. But I think that is a tough sell for many voters and many in the Republican base who came out to vote for President Trump and ultimately care about those pocket but issues and say, yes, maybe I'm okay with some of this, but I want to hear you focus on improving my day-to-day life.
I think the polls back you up on that. I think there is today's my day to talk about the vast gulfs between MAGA self-appointed many of the MAGA influencers who claim that they know better than the President of the United States that coined that term, what MAGA really means and what America first really means and the American people. The Reagan Institute does outstanding polling of Republicans, including self-identified MAGA voters, and the numbers on things like Iran and Venezuela are regularly over 60, 70, 80% support. So average voters do support it.
Absolutely. They want to address pocketbook issues as well. But I don't think they think that one draws away from the other. What about independence?
Independence are going to be a problem. But you know, independence are going to be a problem for the President for the very obvious reason that they are, they always drift away from during a midterm election. There's just no question about that. But in addition, the President hasn't answered the mail on some of the issues that are extraordinarily important to them, the economy being one of the most important.
On the economy, the President and his top officials keep saying, telling voters, just hang on, just wait a little bit longer. You're going to see the benefits of our program soon. So is there a risk congressman for Democrats? If that really does come eventually in the 11th hour, and it does sweep the messaging potentially from under Democrats, what's their plan?
Sounds a bit like Bidenomics and the best Democrats have last time. Just so I'm not sure that that's where the President was going. Look, I mean, you know, you can't root against America. We can't be as a party hoping that we fail.
That's not going to win us anything. I think it's going to be hard to turn the ship around. I think that some of this is already embedded. We're getting closer and closer to the midterms.
Anything can happen. We know that. But I do think the level of unrest that we're seeing here, say one thing about Marjorie Tyler Green, say anything about it. She is consistent.
She's never, she's never, she's never changed. But you know what? She was created by this administration as well. So be careful what you create, be careful what you make, because it comes back to Biden, some respects as well.
I do think looking at what happened in Texas and special elections, you know, where Trump trounced, where Democrats have done incredibly well, these are things that people are looking at. Looking at, and we will be watching it all. Sabrina, Joe, and Danielle, thank you so much for being here. And still to come.
How battleground states are gearing up for the midterms amid the White House's push to overhaul voting in America. My interview with Michigan's top elections official is next. You're watching, meet the press now. Welcome back.
Ahead of the closely watched upcoming March 3rd primaries, early voting is off to a strong start in parts of Texas. Election officials in Collin County, outside of Dallas, say turn out on the first day of early voting more than doubled compared to the previous primary. This election also marks the county's first primary election, since returning to hand marked paper ballots. And officials say they've made some changes after voters saw long wait times in November.
Maria Guerrero from NBC5, our Dallas station, spoke to voters eager to cast their ballots. I came out to exercise my right to vote. I liked to vote early. Early voting is underway, and Collin County voters are putting pin to paper once again.
You're not real crazy about the paper ballot. Tell me about that. I'm a senior. It's, you know, I've heard people say in it, not with me.
But if you make a mistake, you have to go do a whole new ballot. And, you know, a small print. I just prefer the ballots with a used to be. The March primary is the county's second election using hand marked paper ballots.
The first, since November's lower turnout, linked to your constitutional amendment election, which resulted in longer wait times for some. We took what we learned from that election and tried to make things better. Collin County's new elections administrator Kayla Brose says they got their vendor to tackle challenges with printing ballots at polling places, in part by shortening each ballot by two inches to speed up printing. They even changed up the pins available to voters.
Because it's felt tip, it's just, it's easier to make a mark read it in a ballpoint pen. So it is just something as simple as just with a couple of strokes. I have a completed oval. Anytime we can shave off even mere seconds from a voter's experience, that can go a long way for somebody in our position.
With about 745,000 registered voters and a limited window to work with. Brose advice, vote early, come prepared, and keep this in mind when marking your choices. If they vote and maybe are too aggressive on the way they bubble in their oval and it bleeds through, it's actually bleeding through maybe on ballot text, but not necessarily filling in an oval for a different candidate on the other side. The paper ballot was fine for people that need to see a little bit larger print.
I recommend reading your readers. Other than that, it took a few minutes longer, but it was fine. The learning curve continues ahead of Colin Counties' biggest test yet, come November. Our thanks to NBC5 and Dallas for that report.
And as primary season kicks off, state election officials around the country are navigating an unusual political landscape ahead of November's midterms, with a chance that an election bill making its way through Congress could overhaul the country's voting laws and a president who's calling for more federal control over voting, and continues to make false claims about the election he lost in 2020. Joining me now is Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson. She is also a Democratic candidate for governor. Secretary Benson, I do want to start with the overall landscape heading into the midterm elections.
How's Michigan preparing for the primaries in August and the general election in November? Well, we've been through this rodeo before in 2028, 22, 24. So we've got a well-oiled machine here in Michigan. Our elections are safe and secure.
We've had back-to-back-to-back the highest turnout elections in our state's history over the last several cycles. We have 1,500 local clerks who show up to work every day. They are professional. They are bipartisan.
And they are ready to ensure our elections are smooth. And that's why it's so important that elections are run by the states and at the local level, because we know best what our voters need to ensure their voices are heard, no matter who they may vote for. And I'm really proud of Michigan. We've got a record of high turnout, secure elections, and with the results are an accurate reflection of the will of the people.
Well, MEC has reported that the FBI has actually invited state election officials to discuss those preparations ahead of them in terms of sources called the invitation a bit unusual and unexpected. So have you received that invitation or have other officials in the state? And if so, what can you tell us about it and whether you will take them up on it? We have.
I mean, to a certain extent, working with federal enforcement officials is somewhat routine when ensuring our elections are secure, making sure we have support from federal officials. If we need additional monitoring, cybersecurity protections and all like, that's all been routine and really helpful for the last several cycles. What feels different about this invitation is that it feels more like we're being investigated or that there's this presumption of impropriety that isn't based on any facts. It's just based on sort of falsehoods and suspicions.
And so I think why people are a little bit on edge and suspicious of this invitation is that it's not then extended as a helping hand, but more as a sort of almost investigatory approach. Of course, what happened in Fulton County, Georgia recently just underscores that sentiment. So for us, we welcome support from the federal government, but we also know how to do our jobs and we expect respect and to a certain extent deference so that the professionals at the local level are able to do the jobs they signed up to do. Well, you've said that state election officials are really the only guardrails left when it comes to election security.
So tell me more about that and how you think about this idea of putting election guardrails around someone and an administration to those really demonstrated a willingness to test them. Yeah, it's very clear. And it has been really since we endured and prevailed in the 2020 elections in ensuring our democracy held that this administration is willing to use every tool at their disposal to try to create chaos and confusion about the sanctity and the security of the elections process. But just as this president doesn't get to decide who wins elections, he also doesn't get to decide who runs them.
The law dictates that and the law has in a very effective way enabled us to protect the sanctity of our elections at the local level when it's enforced. And so that's why those state officials are so critical because we follow the law, we follow the Constitution, we follow the rules, and we make sure that no matter who someone votes for, they can cast their ballot freely and fairly and have confidence that the results are an accurate reflection of their will. That's our duty, that's our oath of office that we take and our job unfortunately in this moment often means guarding that reality, that those protections are guarding our citizens and the safety of our elections against a real overreach and even abuse of authority at times at the federal government. Well, I want to ask you more about that.
How seriously do you take those recent comments from the president about nationalizing voting or having more federal control over elections? We take them as seriously as we've taken every other seed that he has planted to suggest any element falsely of impropriety or problems with our elections. We know in Michigan as in other states our elections are secure, we have post-election audits that reaffirm their accuracy. We have, as I said, a well-oiled machine and for the president to joke about the nationalization of elections, what it does, even though he has no authority to cancel elections, to change who runs them, it does create a sense of fear and uncertainty among citizens.
At a time when we at the state level are working to give them the confidence and clarity they need that our elections world will be held and that they can hold their leaders accountable, which is also what this is all about, trying to, at a time when, at least in Michigan opinion polls show the president is not very popular, trying to create confusion about our ability of citizens to hold him accountable with a ballot box this fall is of course on America and it is on Democratic, but it is not going to change our focus on making sure our elections are held safely, securely, freely this fall so that citizens can choose their leaders and hold those that they oppose accountable. And logistically, when we're talking about the Save America Act, what would it mean if it passed before November? Would you even have time and the resources to implement those provisions around voter registration and photo ID requirements without potentially disenfranchising eligible voters? Would that be feasible?
No, it would not be feasible and unless the federal government wants to, as we've asked for, give us a significant amount of money to help us continue to administer our elections securely and safely, it is untenable to add these additional mandates and requirements that no one is asking for that are unnecessary for securing our elections, but that would create a lot of challenges in making sure our elections go smoothly. So we are prepared and the secretaries of state around the nation are talking about how to handle the potential for this legislation to pass, but it is simply untenable and unworkable to expect any state to be able to administer these additional changes to the law in time for the midterm elections, and so what you'd likely see is simply a lot of states not being able to feasibly comply elections going smoothly and as planned, and likely there will be some legal action if this were to pass to at least prevent it from being in effect this fall, so that we have the protection of the courts in our ability to ensure our elections go smoothly. A lot to watch for their Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, thanks for your time. Thank you, thanks for having me.