Donald Trump’s primetime address this week was far less dramatic than advertised, but far more revealing than it looked at first glance. Stripped of the rumors and speculation, the speech functioned as a quiet reset on the issue that matters most to his presidency: the economy.

Going into the address, expectations were wildly inflated. Cable chatter and online speculation had convinced many people that Trump was preparing to announce military action in Venezuela or unveil a sweeping foreign policy shift. Instead, the speech clocked in at just under 20 minutes and stayed tightly focused on affordability, inflation, and household pressure. That choice alone tells you where the White House believes its real vulnerability lies.

Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Trump did something slightly out of character by acknowledging economic strain without declaring immediate victory. He framed the economy as a process rather than a finished product, arguing that recovery takes time and patience. That is a notable shift from his usual insistence that conditions are already excellent. It was not an apology, but it was an admission that voters are not wrong to feel squeezed.

Much of the address revolved around tariffs and tax policy, with Trump asking voters to accept short-term pain in exchange for long-term gain. He pitched tariffs as leverage that will eventually lower costs and increase domestic production, and he pointed to upcoming tax benefits tied to overtime, tips, and Social Security as proof that relief is coming. The problem is timing. Politically, promises that hinge on next year’s tax filings are hard to feel in the present, especially when prices remain high.

Trump’s instinct throughout the speech was still salesmanship. He moved quickly, spoke loudly, and leaned on confidence rather than detail. The strongest moments came when he attacked insurance companies and framed his agenda as a fight against corporate abuse. Those lines landed because they matched public frustration. The weaker moments were the familiar optimism that everything is already turning the corner. For voters who do not feel that turn yet, tone matters as much as substance.

This address was not about breaking news. It was about recalibration. Trump needed to re-anchor his presidency around the economy and away from foreign policy speculation, legal noise, and internal party drama. In that sense, the speech did its job. It lowered the temperature, narrowed the focus, and reminded supporters what they are supposed to be rooting for.

Still, a reset speech only works if reality cooperates. If affordability does not improve, no amount of rhetorical discipline will save the argument. This speech could have been shorter, and it certainly could have been written as a memo. But compared to the expectations of escalation and crisis, it was a deliberate attempt to sound grounded. Whether voters reward that restraint is the question that will define the year ahead.

Chapters

00:00:00 - Intro

00:02:34 - Trump’s Affordability Speech

00:12:23 - Brian Brushwood on Empathy

00:28:53 - Update

00:29:19 - Marijuana

00:33:07 - Appropriations Package

00:34:00 - DNC 2024 Report

00:38:10 - Brian Brushwood on Empathy, con’t

01:01:32 - Wrap-up

On Tuesday, a sprawling two-part Vanity Fair piece built from more than a dozen interviews with Susie Wiles, President Trump’s chief of staff, dropped online. It is, without exaggeration, one of the most revealing portraits of an active White House power broker I can remember. Wiles describes Trump as having an “alcoholic’s personality,” a striking characterization given his lifelong teetotalism. Trump, notably, did not dispute it. He later confirmed the description himself, calling it aggressive, possessive, and myopic.

Wiles also took shots across the bow at several major figures. She labeled Elon Musk an “odd duck,” dismissed his politics, and triggered a very public response that included Musk taking a drug test near my own neighborhood to rebut claims of ketamine use. She endorsed JD Vance as the likely Republican nominee in 2028 while simultaneously describing his MAGA conversion as politically convenient. On Epstein, she confirmed Trump’s name appears in the files, contradicted Trump’s claims about Bill Clinton, and slammed Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the document release as a total failure. These were not slips. They were deliberate disclosures from someone who understands power intimately.

Perhaps most telling was Wiles’s admission that some Trump-era prosecutions look vindictive and that Venezuelan boat strikes were intended to pressure Nicolás Maduro politically, not just disrupt drug trafficking. That level of candor is rare. It reframes policy decisions as leverage rather than law enforcement, and it explains why the article landed like a grenade inside Republican circles.

Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

A Cooling Jobs Market and a Complicated Economic Pitch

Away from the media drama, the November jobs report offered something for everyone but reassurance. Payrolls grew by 64,000 jobs, better than feared but far from robust. Unemployment climbed to 4.6 percent, the highest level in more than four years, signaling a labor market that is cooling but not collapsing. The Labor Department flagged unusual data uncertainty due to the government shutdown, muddying trend lines even further.

Supporters of the administration argue that private sector employment remains solid and that government job losses were inevitable given debt and deficits. Critics counter that Trump ran as the “economy man,” and this is not an economy that inspires confidence. Manufacturing and professional services continue to contract, while gains are concentrated in health care and education. The Fed’s recent rate cut looks justified, but the promised “golden age” is difficult to sell when affordability remains front and center for voters.

A Prime-Time Address and the Politics of the Moment

All of this sets the stage for Trump’s prime-time address from the White House, scheduled for Wednesday night. Officially, there is no news hook. Unofficially, this looks like a straight-to-camera year-in-review and year-ahead speech, a nakedly political address designed to reset the narrative as he approaches the midpoint of his second term. If there were a major announcement, such as a Russia-Ukraine breakthrough or a stimulus package, it would not stay secret. The absence of leaks suggests there is no surprise coming.

At the same time, Speaker Mike Johnson is facing an internal revolt over expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. Moderates in swing districts are desperate for a vote they can point to, even if it fails. Hardliners insist on abortion-related restrictions tied to the Hyde Amendment, and leadership is frozen. With discharge petitions circulating and Trump’s own political strength under scrutiny, Johnson’s power is only as strong as Trump’s grip on the conference. Right now, that grip looks uncertain.

Chapters

00:00:00 - Intro

00:01:23 - Susie Wiles in Vanity Fair

00:04:49 - Kirk Bado on Susie Wiles

00:35:30 - Update

00:37:14 - Jobs Report

00:39:43 - Trump’s Primetime Address Announcement

00:44:04 - Mike Johnson and the ACA

00:50:37 - Kirk Bado on Nuzzi/Lizza and More

01:13:57 - Wrap-up

The Senate’s vote to extend enhanced ACA subsidies was the clearest sign yet that congressional Republicans are fracturing as they head toward the midterms. Four GOP senators — Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Dan Sullivan, and Josh Hawley — joined Democrats to back a three-year extension. The measure failed, but the defectors matter. Two are facing reelection in 2026. All four have been pressured by constituents facing premium spikes. And every one of them knows that allowing subsidies to expire is a political nightmare.

The problem is that no Republican-sponsored alternatives have enough momentum to pass. Hardliners insist insurers are bluffing about catastrophic premium hikes and argue that federal subsidies can flow to abortion providers in violation of the Hyde Amendment. Leadership is frozen, moderates are restless, and none of the policy paths available appear functional. My read: the subsidies will expire. And the longer Republicans look divided on health care, the messier 2026 becomes.

Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Trump Loses Indiana — and a Bit of His Grip on the GOP

Trump’s aggressive mid-cycle redistricting push hit a brick wall in Indiana, where 21 Republican state senators joined Democrats to defeat a map designed to produce two more GOP-friendly House seats. The vote wasn’t close. This wasn’t quiet dissent. It was a collective “no.” And the reason is obvious: Republican lawmakers are terrified of a “dummymander,” a map that overreaches and accidentally creates more vulnerable districts in a bad year. If 2026 is shaping up to be a Democratic wave — and every special election suggests it might be — legislators don’t want to be caught holding the bag.

Trump’s allies threatened primaries. Outside groups ran ads. J.D. Vance weighed in personally. None of it mattered. If you want a temperature check on Trump’s leverage right now, this is it. He still commands loyalty, but not fear. And when Republicans stop fearing the leader of their own party, they start preparing for the next one. That’s how lame-duck dynamics begin — long before anyone says the words out loud.

A Hard Pivot on Venezuela

The administration also announced new sanctions on Nicolás Maduro’s inner circle, targeting his nephews, his wife, and a network of businessmen and shippers. This came just after the U.S. seized a tanker carrying Venezuelan crude. For now, this is a sanctions campaign — not military escalation — but it fits a familiar Trump-era pattern: push to the brink, stop just short, and ask adversaries whether they still want to keep playing.

With Iran, the strategy eventually led to direct strikes. With Venezuela, nobody knows yet. But every foreign-policy story pulling headlines away from domestic issues is a political risk for Trump. His base doesn’t want global adventurism. They want America First, not America Everywhere.

Chapters

00:00 - Intro

02:06 - Nuzzi/Lizza

10:46 - Update

11:01 - Obamacare

12:14 - Indiana Redistricting

15:53 - Venezuela Sanctions

18:35 - Matt Laslo on the WH Press Corps

54:10 - Wrap-up

I’ve long found the January 6 pipe bombs case particularly frustrating. Too serious to be forgotten, too mysterious to be ignored, we’ve had no answers for nearly five years. And now, at long last, we have an arrest.

The alleged bomber, Brian Cole Jr., faces federal explosive-device charges that could carry up to 20 years apiece. Court documents describe receipts, phone pings, and cameras placing him near the RNC and DNC buildings on January 5, 2021. All the evidence cited appears to have been in federal hands for some time, which naturally raises the question: why now? The government says enhanced forensic review — not new intelligence — finally broke the case open. But the timing will fuel speculation until prosecutors offer more transparency.

Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

For me, this case matters not only because it’s finally moving forward but because it was always part of the emotional experience of January 6, even if the public didn’t talk about it. Lawmakers were moved and evacuated not just because of the riot at the Capitol, but because of the pipe bombs. It shaped decisions, reactions, and rhetoric that day. The mystery left a vacuum. We’re finally filling it.

The week also brought new revelations about the Venezuelan drug-boat strike, which continues to create friction between congressional Republicans and the Trump administration. Admiral Frank Bradley told lawmakers he never received a “kill everybody” directive from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, directly contradicting a Washington Post story that ignited days of speculation. Bradley maintains he followed detailed written orders, not verbal instructions, and that subsequent strikes in similar encounters resulted in survivors being rescued, not targeted.

Republican lawmakers — many of them veterans themselves — are increasingly frustrated by the administration’s lack of clarity. They want the full video, the exact legal guidance, and the chain of command spelled out plainly. Their frustration isn’t ideological. It’s procedural. Military rules of engagement matter because credibility matters. When the administration’s communication is muddled, confidence erodes. And with foreign policy front and center again — from Gaza to Ukraine to Venezuela — credibility is the one currency Washington can’t afford to spend recklessly.

Chapters

00:00:00 - Intro

00:03:46 - Evan Scrimshaw on Recent News

00:26:48 - Update

00:27:20 - January 6th Pipe Bomb Arrest

00:34:18 - Venezuelan Drug Boats

00:37:15 - Gaza Peace Plan

00:39:27 - 2026 Primary Draft

01:31:20 - Wrap-up

The Tennessee 7th District special election is no ordinary off-calendar contest. It is a rare moment when a deeply red seat, long considered immovable, has become a stress test for the political environment itself. Before the results are spun beyond recognition, here is how I see the race and why its outcome — whatever it is — matters far more than who wins.

Tennessee’s 7th District is not supposed to be competitive. For years it has behaved like a Republican fortress: John McCain won it by 28 points, Mitt Romney by 24, and Donald Trump by anywhere from 21 to 34. Former Representative Mark Green consistently won with more than two-thirds of the vote. But those numbers mask reality. Trump has bled suburban support with each cycle, and while the district remains red, it has trended steadily closer to the center. That shift matters more in a special election, where turnout is low and national money is targeted at one race instead of dozens. In that kind of environment, even a heavily favored side can wobble.

That brings us to the candidates. Republican Matt Van Epps is the type of standard-issue conservative you’d expect to see in a district like this: a veteran, a conventional platform, and a campaign that’s been competent but unremarkable. He has not run toward Trump the way many Republicans in similarly structured districts once would have, an omission that speaks volumes about the nervousness inside the party. Democrats, meanwhile, are running Aftyn Behn, whose message is strong — focused on affordability and frustration with tariffs — but whose opposition research file is… extensive. Past tweets cheering the destruction of a police station and musing about abolishing the Nashville Police Department have given Republicans plenty of material. Not exactly what you want in Tennessee.

Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

I keep coming back to the same three scenarios. The first is the earthquake: Aftyn Behn flips the seat. If that happens, the panic inside the Republican conference becomes immediate and existential. This majority is already strained by retirements, factional fights, and Trump’s declining approval ratings. Losing Tennessee 7 would signal that no district is safe, and it would meaningfully raise the odds that Republicans lose the House outright — potentially even before the midterms if more members resign.

The second scenario is the reset: Matt Van Epps wins comfortably, by 10 to 15 points. Republicans would exhale. Leadership would declare this a reaffirmation that the party’s base remains intact. They would argue that a focused Democratic effort still couldn’t move the needle enough to threaten a core GOP district. It would be evidence that the sky is not falling — at least not everywhere, and not yet.

The third scenario is the most interesting: a narrow Van Epps win. A single-digit margin would function as a Democratic moral victory and a Republican warning klaxon. It would confirm that the party’s suburban erosion is accelerating, that Trump’s drift downward is shifting the map, and that a generic Republican — even in Tennessee — is not insulated from national sentiment. A Politico report suggested the GOP conference would become “unhinged” if the race lands here. Having watched the last month of Republican caucus behavior, I’m not inclined to disagree.

This isn’t just a regional contest. It’s a snapshot of a party that has been running on fumes — caught between a base powered by Trump and a national electorate increasingly uneasy about his second-term performance. It’s also a test for Democrats, who are experimenting with insurgent messaging in places they normally ignore. Aftyn Behn is trying to run as an outsider in a district where the outsider lane belongs to Republicans. Whether that gamble pays off will tell us something about how Democrats might approach similar red districts next year.

No matter which path emerges, the Tennessee special election is less about two candidates and more about the political weather. And for the first time in a while, Republicans can’t be sure the forecast is on their side.

Chapters

00:00 - Intro

03:11 - Tennessee Special Election Explainer

18:54 - Update

19:25 - Pete Hegseth

22:16 - Travel Ban

27:03 - Paul Finebaum

30:17 - Andrew Heaton on Congressional Dread

52:50 - Wrap-up

Donald Trump’s approval ratings have entered their roughest stretch of his second term, with three separate polls showing him hitting new lows after months of a seemingly bulletproof floor.

The pattern itself is not unusual. Presidents in their second term often experience a dip once the early burst of post-inaugural goodwill fades. But Trump’s decline is sharper than expected, sliding from the mid-forties into the high thirties. That puts him back in the territory he occupied for much of his first term, except this time he lacks the external crises that once helped explain his numbers. For better or for worse, he has defined the narrative of this second term so far, and voters are judging him on the results.

It’s no secret what the cause is for this drop: the economy. For months, Trump framed the United States as operating in a “golden age,” yet affordability remains a pain point. Tariffs have become an easy messaging target for Democrats, who argue that the disruptions fall hardest on consumers. Trump’s core Republican base hasn’t budged and Democrats remain consistently opposed, with the movement almost entirely coming from independents, many of whom appear to be remembering the volatility of Trump-era governance.

Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Whether this downturn is temporary or the beginning of a deeper slide will become clearer after the holidays. For now, the numbers are unambiguously weak. If Trump wants to regain altitude, he will need more than assurances about economic strength. He will need voters outside his base to believe it. Just ask Biden.

Chapters

00:00 - Intro

02:32 - Trump Approval Ratings

06:05 - The State of the Economy with JD Durkin

42:33 - Wrap-up