This is Wednesday, a rare and fiery rebuke of his own supporters. President Trump slams parts of his base for demanding more disclosures around Jeffrey Epstein, blaming them and Democrats for the conspiracy theories that he and his own administration officials had spread. Plus, President Trump is fed up with his Fed chair, but tells reporters he's unlikely to fire Jerome Powell, despite a senior White House official confirming the president privately told lawmakers the exact opposite just yesterday. And the administration's full-court press to focus attention back on their so-called big, beautiful bill as Vice President Vance hits Pennsylvania to tout the new law following the president's swing through the battleground yesterday.
Welcome to Meet the Press Now. I'm Gabe Gutierrez in Washington, where President Trump is lashing out at his own supporters as GOP lawmakers and MAGA influencers ramp up pressure on his administration to disclose more information about Jeffrey Epstein in the wake of a Justice Department decision not to release any more files tied to the convicted sex offender. The chorus of conservatives calling for more transparency has now grown to include the Speaker of the House and other reliable Trump allies. The president this morning on social media scolding his followers, saying, quote, My past supporters have bought into this BS, hook, line and sinker.
He also tried to baselessly pin the Epstein conspiracy theories, rather, that he and his team had amplified on Democrats and former FBI Director James Comey. The president then doubled down on his frustrations with his own supporters as he took questions from reporters in the Oval Office. It's all a big hoax. It's perpetrated by the Democrats and some stupid Republicans and foolish Republicans fall into the net.
And so they try and do the Democrats work. The Democrats are good for nothing other than these hoaxes. He's dead. He's gone.
And all it is is the Republicans. Certain Republicans got duped by the Democrats and they're following a Democrat playbook. I lost a lot of faith in certain people. Yeah, I lost because they got duped by the Democrats.
The Democrats are good for nothing. We should note Epstein was charged, arrested in prison and died by suicide while awaiting trial all during Trump's first term and all after James Comey was fired. The president defended his attorney general's handling of the Epstein fallout while also giving her the green light to release more information. Will you ask Attorney General Pam Bondi to release more documents to finally put this controversy to bed?
Whatever is credible, she can release it. If a document is credible, if a document is there that is credible, she can release. I think it's I think it's good. And Bondi, I really think that she's done very good.
She says, I gave you all the credible information. And if she finds any more credible information, she'll give that to what more can she do than that? I mean, honestly, what more can she do? As we noted, the conspiracy theory fueled headache that the White House is now dealing with comes as top congressional Republicans are calling for more files to be released.
It's a very delicate subject, but we should we should put everything out there and let the people decide it. I mean, the White House and the White House team are privy to facts that I don't know. I mean, this isn't my lane. I haven't been involved in that.
But but I agree with the sentiment that we need to we need to put it out there. Speaker Johnson is now claiming he has been misquoted or misrepresented in that interview and that he and the president are on the same page. Meanwhile, Democrats are trying to seize on the growing MAGA rift, seeing it as an opportunity to paint Trump and Republicans as untrustworthy. Option one, they lied for years.
Option two, they're engaging in a cover up. At this point, it seems reasonable. There can only be one of the two things. This is a case of the powerful protecting the powerful.
We need to have those files released. They're the same rich and well-connected elites that they're protecting by keeping the Epstein files under lock and key after campaigning to release them. And joining me now from the White House is Kelly O'Donnell, our chief justice and national affairs correspondent. And also with us, our chief Capitol Hill correspondent, Ryan Nobles.
Kelly, I want to start with you. The president is tackling the blowback over the Epstein files in typical Trumpian fashion. But this time it's his followers who are the target. Is there any concern that this could backfire?
Well, the big question would be, what is the president's what does he stand to lose? And he's not going to be on the ballot again. Could it affect his Republican colleagues in the midterms? We'll see.
But certainly there has been what appears to be a breach in what has been a remarkably enduring relationship between candidates and President Trump with his followers that have gone with him when he has taken other steps that they didn't necessarily like. But in this case, they really had strong feelings. And Broadway, we have seen that from the office holder to the voter to the conservative influencers saying they want more. And the president choosing to lash out and sort of distance himself from his own followers.
That is striking. It is different. We have not seen that before. And how enduring it will be is another question.
Will he kind of mend that in the days to come? And Kelly, could there be any real political consequences to ticking off his base, essentially? Well, that is going to be a test because he would not be on the midterm ballot. And typically when Trump is on the ballot, that's when his broadest, most fervent voters turn out.
So is there a cost there? In the short run, there does seem to be a sense of disillusionment among some in his base who voice that they expected that he would somehow be different, that he would make a promise and keep a promise. The administration will quickly point out many areas where on policy they have done that. And the president's frustrations come through.
He's pointed out that Epstein is now deceased. The case is over in his view and that it is old news, in effect. But the president has used the tactics he has often harnessed against his adversaries. And the unique thing today is sort of directing them at his own followers and supporters.
And Kelly, I know you were at the attorney general's press conference yesterday. The president hands largely stood behind Bondi, but he has seen to set her up to take the blame if this just doesn't go away. So how firm is his support of Bondi? Well, he does say that he believes she's been doing a good job and his support remains strong at this moment based on the different ways we've tried to assess that.
You're right that he has certainly pushed the responsibility onto her shoulders at the Department of Justice. I have reporting today that she was due to attend this White House event for an issue that means a lot to her dealing with fentanyl and increasing the penalties associated with fentanyl. In the end, I'm told that she had a schedule issue and was not able to attend. That may be what it is on its face or perhaps she just wanted to stay out of the glare today.
Interesting. She was not at that event. Kelly O'Donnell live for us outside the White House. Kelly, thank you.
I want to turn now to Ryan Nobles on the Hill. Ryan, Speaker Johnson appeared to call for the files to be released, though he's walking that back a bit. Are congressional Republicans in a tough position here, walking the line between appealing to their base versus maintaining their support for President Trump? I wouldn't say all congressional Republicans are, Gabe, because there is a significant block of congressional Republicans that just want the files out there, regardless of what the White House wants right now.
But Speaker Johnson is definitely in a tight spot. He very rarely ever tracks away from President Trump and his message. And he found himself in a position yesterday after this interview with Benny Johnson where they were saying two different things. He tried to clarify today to make the argument that they are on the same page.
This is what he had to say. I wasn't misquoted and misrepresented on all of that. But watch the interview with Benny Johnson. It's pretty clear.
I mean, we're for transparency. I'm saying the same thing. I mean, you need to have all of the credible information released to the American people to make their decision. We trust the American people.
And I know the president does as well. So I think the distinction right now that the speaker is trying to make, that the president is trying to make, is this new kind of definition of what they call credible information. Credible, I think, in many ways is in the eyes of the beholder. Those who have been asking for these Epstein files to be released for some time just want everything out there and want the ability to decide for themselves what is credible.
That's part of why these files haven't been released, because the Department of Justice doesn't just do that, just release a bunch of files that could then erroneously blame people for something that they're not guilty of. So this is the divide right now. And it's clear at this point that base isn't satisfied with what the White House is selling. Well, Ryan, I asked Kelly if there were going to be any political consequences for the White House in all this.
But for on your beat, could there be political consequences in the terms for some lawmakers running in MAGA-heavy districts who don't call for the release of these files? I think at the very least, Gabe, it puts them in a very difficult position, right? Because there's no doubt that in these very distinctly red districts that President Trump's loyalty, the loyalty to President Trump is usually unwavering. And you don't ever want to be outside of a box that Donald Trump is in.
But this Epstein controversy is its own animal. There are many people that came into the MAGA movement because of their concerns around the Epstein scandal. So it certainly complicates the issue. But what That is just starting to sound like noise for the market, and they're sort of tuning it out.
Well, the President also suggested today that the Fed chair is either under investigation, could be under investigation for fraud. What type of fraud is he even talking about? He's not talking about anything specifically. I guess if you read through the tea leaves on this, this expansion project obviously has gone way over budget.
What some of his officials have talked about has been less about the dollar issue here and more about the way Powell has represented this project to Congress, basically said that kind of going back and forth, this is included in the project, this isn't included in the project, kind of going back and forth. So I think that that might be the avenue where they pursue, where there's some type of misrepresentation about the actual scope of the project and then maybe digging down into the numbers of how that money is being spent or why it's being spent the way it's being spent, whether it's appropriate the way it's being spent. Yeah, the project being the renovation of a government building, essentially, that may have been... The President was talking about...
Jeff Cox from CNBC, we thank you very much. And coming up, Vice President J.D. Vance goes to bat for the President's so-called big beautiful bill in battleground Pennsylvania. The Vice President's message on new polls on where the public stands on Trump's sweeping domestic agenda.
Plus, Israel strikes Syria's capital city as top U.S. officials push to de-escalate the newest outbreak of tensions in the Mideast. We'll have the latest on the conflict and the White House's response. You're watching Meet the Press Now.
Stay with us. Hey, welcome back. We've got more now on the President's frustrations with his base's focus on the Epstein files. As he told reporters in the Oval Office today that their attention should be on other issues.
I call it the Epstein hoax. It takes a lot of time and effort. Instead of talking about the great achievements we've had, I'd rather talk about the success we have with the economy, the best we've ever had, and all of the things we've done, including in the Middle East. I mean, you see it.
Instead, they want to talk about the Epstein hoax. But those other issues he sees as achievements aren't breaking through with voters yet, as new polling suggests a stagnant job approval for the President. Well, joining me now on set is the panel, Tamara Keith, White House correspondent for National Public Radio, and the catcher for the Bad News Babes. Prestine, they will be on the field tonight against a team of bipartisan lawmakers in the Congressional Women's softball game.
And also with us, with no jersey, Cornell Belcher, Democratic pollster and NBC News political analyst, as well as Republican strategist Mark Bednar. Thank you all so much for joining us. Tamara, I want to start with you first of all. We're going to get me one of those beers.
You have to be a woman. I'm sorry, you're not qualified. Or you can coach. Maybe I could.
You would not want me as a coach. You would not do very well. But I do want to start with you talking with the President just said. Can you really call this a Democratic hoax?
No, he can't because it is not being driven by Democrats. However, Democrats are enjoying this, obviously, and they're trying to draw a lot of attention to the MAGA world strife. And they, I think, arguably do risk overplaying their hand and allowing him to turn it into a Democratic hoax. But right now, it is members.
It is people that elected him. It is his base that has been so fixated on this and is let down and frustrated by the lack of transparency that they think they're seeing from the White House. Now, this is the deepest fracture, is it not, so far that we've seen in MAGA world. There was a little bit earlier on, like Elon Musk, a little bit, but nothing quite like this.
But Mark, I want to play with some of Trump's fans on the outside are saying about all this and saying about the Epstein situation. Let's listen. They've got videotape and all of a sudden they don't. You know, you have the director of the FBI on the show saying there's no tape.
If there was, nothing you're looking for is on those tapes. Like, why? Why'd they say there was thousands of hours of tapes of people doing horrible. Why did they say that?
Right. Didn't Pam Bondi say that? It seems like you think your base is stupid. That's how I feel.
I feel like Trump thinks his base is stupid or, again, because I don't think he's pressing send on these messages. The people around him certainly think that Trump is stupid. Can any other politician but Trump get away with coming? Some of his biggest supporters essentially take a hike.
That's what he did this morning. Well, what we've seen in a couple instances, and we're just six months into this administration, that there have been several perceived instances of strife or splits within the MAGA movement within the party, whether it is the initial ICE engagements in Los Angeles or the Elon debacle or within one big beautiful bill. Time after time after time, there's this perception of a rift. But then ultimately, this comes back to President Trump being the leader of our party.
He's the most popular politician in the country. And like what what he will end up saying with, well, his guiding light in this situation, if even if it gets a little bumpy, there's going to be some combination between disagreements here. And ultimately, I predict that the president is going to come out on top with all this. So it's pretty bumpy.
How does he fix this? How long do you think this drags on for? Well, there's a couple of instances where everyone should take a deep breath. We've already seen with this memo, for instance, that the leadership of the DOJ and the FBI, that they've actually come to an agreement about what they've seen and what there what there is and what there isn't in terms of remaining evidence or remaining information.
So it's going to be incumbent upon them to reach out with the potential skeptics to say, look, here's what we know. Here's what we don't know. Here's what we have revealed. Here's what we originally thought, but did not turn out to be the case.
But you can be honest and transparent about that. But that is more tactical. And that's just going to take a matter of time. Speaking of tactics, Cornell, is it worth it for the Democrats to get involved here?
Should they get down? Well, no, I don't think Democrats get involved here. But I also don't not surprised that the chickens are coming home to roost. Well, they are, though.
I mean, Huckin Jeffries is basically coming out and arguing that, you know, it means that Republicans lied before or that they're covering it up now. They could just let this go. But I think I think I think is not getting it. This is not something Democrats from week to week a week will be.
I mean, I'll be talking about the bill. One thing I don't know what measurement we're using to measure most popularity, but I'm gonna let that slide. Look, the chickens are coming home to roost. He's built his political fortune off of lies from the lie he told when he first came down and said Mexicans were rapists and gang members to the lie he told about the guy I used to work about not being a U.S.
citizen. So I'm not at all surprised by some point this is going to bite you. And I agree in the long run. Will his base leave him for this?
No, but it's not about that for the long run. We're looking at a midterm and midterms are determined by a lot about sort of energy and whose base turns out. And Republicans have had an advantage on always having their base energized. And they're older.
They're more conservative. They're more likely. They're more likely voters if they go into a midterm where history says they're going to have a tough time. Plus, their base is not energized.
It becomes really problematic. To that point, talking about the midterms, I want to put up some interesting reporting from Politico. Politico says that interviews with a dozen Democratic elected officials, strategists and aides cast the controversy as helpful, not only in dividing Trump's base, but also illustrating the president's flip-flopping tendencies. Even on his core campaign issues, Tamara, could there be a political impact here in twenty twenty-six?
I think that what Cornell talks about in terms of the energy of the base, the reality of the Republican base is that President Trump expanded it. He expanded it into voters that used to vote Democratic or used to not vote at all, including a lot of young men. The people that he expanded his base to are the ones who often have cared the most about this story, about this Epstein thing. So if he turns them off, you know, it doesn't take much to not vote in the midterms.
So that could be an implication. Also, though, I do have to remind all of us that basically every week there's a new thing that's consuming everything. And like three weeks ago, we were talking about Iran and whether his base was going to stick with him on the bombing in Iran. And I think it really was only about three weeks ago.
Yeah, it feels like at least three months ago. Right. Well, Cornell, I want to switch to something we talked about earlier in the program. Vice President Vance, he's hitting the road to sell the so-called one big beautiful bill.
New CNN poll numbers, though, show that more than 60 percent of respondents are opposed to the package. What's your take on that right now? Is that a better line of attack? Yes, it's a much better line of attack.
And that's the line of attack which 90 percent, by the way, of the population of Medicaid already work. So they'll see that a lot of the things that the claims made by the opposite side are simply not true, plus economic benefit. So you and other Republicans are focusing on the tax cuts here, also downplaying the changes to the social safety net, at least what critics have focused on. But Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley is out with new legislation to undo some of the Medicaid changes in this newly passed law.
Is that something that you would support? Look, I think we struck the right balance here. And as I said, we protect the most vulnerable who the Medicaid program was intended for by rooting out, seriously rooting out the waste fraud and abuse. That's something that the American people actually do support.
And they'll see that. They will see in time that what people have claimed about this bill is simply not true and that the program will be preserved and strengthened as a result of the actions we have taken here. You know, I would actually, I haven't seen Mr. Hawley's bill.
I certainly would take a look at it to see the changes. But for New York, for example, we preserved fully the 50 percent match that New York receives for traditional Medicaid and the 90 percent match that they receive for the expansion Medicaid. That is significant. That was one of the biggest things that I fought to make sure that there were no cuts that would be detrimental.
Does this all mean that there will be some of your constituents who lose coverage? Do you consider them to be abusing the program? And when it comes to work requirements, how do you enforce that? Doesn't that create its own bureaucracy?
Again, we already know that 90 percent of the people on Medicaid already do work. So I'm not sure that making sure that the other 10 percent that could be eligible work is really going to be a problem here. What I what I would say again is that we had to take necessary measures. If anybody does a Google search and they look up Medicaid fraud in New York state, they will see example after example after example of the type of fraud that is within the system.
About a week ago, the attorney general issued indictments for transportation companies that were defrauding the taxpayers once again through Medicaid. And so this is something that the governor, the attorney general and the state controller have said is a rampant problem. Of course, they want to politicize the bill now and score points. But at the end of the day, people will see that the changes that we made were very reasonable and that the most vulnerable groups that I just laid out earlier, the seniors and the disabled and the others, they don't have to adhere to those work requirements.
We're talking simply about able bodied, mentally capable people of working age. And it's part time. So many Americans work diligently to receive their health care. Why wouldn't people on Medicaid be the same?
Well, Congresswoman, I do want to switch topics. There's a lot going on today. You know, President Trump and his allies, there's been a lot of talk about whether the president would remove the Fed chair, Jerome Powell today. He said that that was unlikely, but he hasn't ruled it out.
But Senator Tillis, for example, has said that firing the Fed chair would destroy the U.S.'s reputation as a safe haven for financial services. Are you comfortable with the president removing Jay Powell? I do believe that we should see a change at the Federal Reserve. I'll be honest with you, when these when these rate increases went into effect, it was because we had very high inflation, upwards of nine percent under President Joe Biden, and that inflation has now come down significantly.
It is dropped significantly under President Trump. And so these rates need to come down as well. We are paying a tremendous amount of money. It's costing the taxpayers a tremendous amount of money in interest because of these higher rates, the mortgage rates also.
Everything is costing Americans more because these rates have not come down as inflation has come down. Well, to be clear, the president has said that he does want Jerome Powell gone when his term is up next year, but he says he has no plans to fire him. Are you saying that the president should fire Jerome Powell now? I think, look, I trust the president to make what he thinks is the best decision.
I would like to see a change, quite frankly, if we need to wait until next year. That's OK, I guess. However, can the president do that, though? Can the president do that?
Can you believe that the president can remove him? I think the president does have the ability to remove him. Yes. Now, I trust the president to make that decision on what he thinks is best.
But what I will say is if we do not lower the interest rates, which Jerome Powell seems not inclined to do for some reason, even though inflation has come down from the nine percent it was under Joe Biden to where it is today, roughly what, two percent or so, we are not going to see savings for the American people in terms of loan rates, mortgage rates, interest rates and of course, some of the other other things that have been plagued by us, like the amount of debt that we have to pay because of these high interest rates. And Congresswoman, on another topic that's getting a lot of attention today, House Speaker Mike Johnson, yesterday he said that he wants to see transparency from this White House over the Jeffrey Epstein files. Do you agree with him? I do agree with the speaker.
I think we always should err on the side of transparency. And quite frankly, we've been pushing for transparency in all sorts of different measures. Why should this be any different? And so I think transparency is always a good thing.
But in a post today and in the Oval Office today, the president called the situation involving the Epstein files a scam and a hoax. Do you agree with the president? Well, look, I think that maybe there is much being said about nothing here, but the way to find out is whether there is some type of release of information. And hopefully we'll see a little more transparency.
Congresswoman Malitakis, thank you so much for your time. Thank you. And now for the view from the other side of the aisle, I'm joined now by a Democrat from Washington, Congresswoman Kim Schreier. Congresswoman, thank you so much for joining us here on Meet the Press Now.
Thank you. Happy to be here. So even with public opinion on your side, how do you make sure that the Democratic Party has a clear message about the president's domestic agenda bill, especially when some provisions like the Medicaid work requirement won't even go into effect until after the midterms? Well, I just listened to my colleague.
And, you know, the expression is when you're explaining, you're losing. And what I just heard was a whole bunch of spin. I will tell you the message has already gotten out to my district. I've been doing so many town halls and the biggest questions I get are what is happening with Medicaid?
What is happening with food stamps? And they understand that this administration and a very obedient Republican Congress is taking food benefits and health care away from the neediest in this country and transferring those savings to a gigantic tax cut for the wealthiest people in this country. The American people understand it and they're about to see their insurance rates go up. They're going to see long waits in the emergency department.
And we're going to see one out of four rural hospitals closed because of this ugly bill. And Congresswoman, will Democrats only message against this legislation that was passed? Or will you also try to work with some across the aisle to try and undo some of the provisions? For example, would you support Senator Hawley's legislation to undo some of the Medicaid cuts?
Well, I will tell you that I will fight for whatever benefits my district. And reversing some of these very dangerous, very hurtful cuts is the right thing to do for my district. In fact, in our subcommittee hearing today, I saw the Republican, my Republican colleagues bring up a bill to protect rural hospitals, to increase the pipeline, to get more physicians in rural areas to help with underserved populations. They know this is a bad bill and they are now trying to fix it.
And of course, I will join them in trying to fix this because that is the right thing to do for the people I represent. Right. So to be clear, you would or you would not support Hawley's bill? Well, I'm in the House.
He's in the Senate, but I will support legislation that would remove these draconian cuts to Medicaid. I also want to be really clear that my colleague, I mean, she said the quiet part out loud. Well north of 90 percent of people who are able bodied and can work are working. And what we have seen in other states and states that have tried this exact technique is that people who do qualify, who are working, who are taking care of dependents, who meet exemptions, they're getting kicked off of Medicaid simply because of paperwork errors or paperwork delays.
And that is why these numbers that we are hearing is that 17 million Americans are going to lose health coverage. And in my state of Washington, hundreds of thousands. And it adds up to about half the population of Seattle is going to lose their health care coverage. Congresswoman, Republican strategists have been advising lawmakers to rebrand the legislation to focus on the tax cuts.
So let me play some of what the vice president said today while he was in Pennsylvania. We worked so hard to get this legislation passed to cut your taxes, to prevent big tax increases, to make it easier to save and invest right here in this great country that all of us love. Would you believe that the Democrats, they are attacking us every single day. And you know what their big line of attack is?
Their big line of attack is that Donald Trump dares to put tariffs on foreign countries who try Parties involved for the clashes in Syria. We've agreed on specific steps that will bring this troubling and horrifying situation to an end tonight. Now, this comes after we heard from the Syrian government, as you mentioned, that there was going to be a ceasefire. We also heard that from one of the Druze leaders in Sweida, which is where a lot of the Druze in southwestern Syria are concentrated.
And he said that there was going to be a ceasefire as well. But we also heard from one of his rival Druze leaders within that same community who said that there isn't a ceasefire, that he's determined to fight until the Syrian regime is expelled from Sweida, expelled from southwestern Syria. So it's unclear whether or not the ceasefire, as it's being called by Marco Rubio, by these Druze leaders, by the Syrian government, whether or not this is going to stand without all of the Druze factions totally in line. You know, Matt, explain this to our viewers.
Just how did this situation in Syria intensify so quickly in the last few days? Well, we've been seeing this actually over the past couple of weeks, this intensifying Bedouin harassment of the Druze minority in southwestern Syria. It culminated just before the weekend. We saw over the weekend, we saw that there was a Bedouin attack that badly injured a young Druze man around that area in Sweida.
This created back and forth reprisals. The military from the regime in Damascus was sent in by Ahmad al-Shaher, the leader of Syria Now, after he overthrew Bashar al-Assad late last year, to try to subdue, to try to calm this conflict. The Israelis and some of the Druze factions saw that as an attack on the Druze. The Israelis started firing at the regime forces in southwest Syria.
And that's where we are now, escalating all the way to Syria's capital in Damascus, where the Israelis are now attacking a military installation, even striking near the presidential palace. Did you get the sense today that the U.S. may have been a little annoyed here? That's a good question, because the fact of the matter is, is that this does buck up against one of the major initiatives by the Trump administration in the Middle East.
Donald Trump has tried to try and reinvigorate the leader of Syria. Matt Bradley, live first in Tel Aviv. Matt, thank you. And up next, we will have the results from yesterday's special election, Democratic, the Democratic primary in Arizona, and what it says about the future of the Democratic Party.
You're watching Meet the Press Now. Welcome back. If it's Wednesday, we have election results. Arizona Democrat Adalida Grijalva won a special election primary for the House seat that was held by her late father for more than 20 years.
Grijalva, who had the backing of top Arizona Democrats and progressive heavyweights like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, beat activists and social media influencer Deja Foxx by more than 40 points. NBC's Vaughn Hilliard has the latest from Arizona. All of that is right. These results say so much.
And chief among them is that in the case of Deja Foxx at 25 years old, she leaned into her age and her social media presence. And it's clear that the voters here in southern Arizona said that that was not good enough to ultimately earn a vote over somebody who had deep, deep roots in this community, had served them in public office for more than 20 years, and whose family was very much of a known entity. This is for Adalida Grijalva, who pulled off that massive victory last night. This was a message that here in the greater Tucson area across southern Arizona, that her father, Raul Grijalva, who in conversation with her yesterday, she made clear to me that he won 11 terms in a row for a reason.
And that was because he was a proven progressive who was willing to go and fight in Washington, D.C. on behalf of the people of this greater community. And ultimately, it was that message that rang through. Deja Foxx would have been the youngest woman ever to serve in Congress, the second Gen Z candidate.
She had amassed a massive social media following, but ultimately that national recognition was not enough to sway voters in this community that she should go serve them in Washington, D.C. And undoubtedly, there was a lot of attention. We should be clear on this race because of Deja Foxx and her social media presence. And she was a reproductive rights advocate.
She made clear that she was able to reach a mass of people to get her message out. But ultimately here in the year of 2025, that may not be good enough. Right. Zoron Mandani, who is 33 years old, he really rose through social media in New York City.
But there were folks last night to me at the Adalida Grijalva watch victory party who were saying to me, look, Zoron Mandani is different. He was a fixture in his community for a long time. He was serving in the state assembly and that that his case does not apply necessarily to this one. So I think that these results last night will send a message that still that grassroots organizing and deep experience in history really do mean something in our politics today.
Thanks a lot for that report. Thank you for watching. I'm Dave Gutierrez. We're back tomorrow with more meet the press.
Now the news continues with Hallie Jackson. As the day wraps up, get the scoop on what's been happening with Here's the Scoop, the new podcast from NBC News, with me, your host, Gavin Vasuya. We'll take a deep dive into the day's top stories with NBC News' trusted journalists. It's a fresh take that's sharp, thoughtful and informative, bringing you closer to the headlines and conversations that are shaping our world.
From the front page to the zeitgeist. Here's the Scoop from NBC News. Listen daily on Amazon Music.