Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Outrage Grows After Partial Epstein File Release; New CNN Poll Reveals Who Americans Want To Run In 2028; Will GOP Face Fallout From Americans' Health Care Cliff? New Poll: Trump's Health Care Approval Rating at 37 percent; Left-Wing Primary Bids Surge with House Majority on the Line; Interview with Kiss Singer Gene Simmons. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired December 21, 2025 - 08:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[08:00:27]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST (voice-over): Redacted.

REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): This is absolutely breaking the law.

REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): It's a slap in the face of survivors.

RAJU: The Epstein file release ignites outrage as survivors seek justice. Can Trump weather the storm?

And 11 days. Congress flees as Americans face a health care cliff.

REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): This is absolute bull (EXPLETIVE DELETED).

RAJU: Will the GOP take the blame?

Plus, around the corner, we have a brand new CNN poll on voters' choices for 2028. And I have new reporting on liberals seizing on Zohran Mamdani's victory and upending the midterms.

And kiss and tell. Rock legend Gene Simmons on Trump, MAGA and more.

GENE SIMMONS, ROCK LEGEND: It's nobody's damn business who you support.

RAJU: INSIDE POLITICS, the best reporting from inside the corridors of power, starts now.

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (on camera): Good morning and welcome to INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. I'm Manu Raju.

President Trump is once again facing a storm over Jeffrey Epstein, this after the huge document dump on Friday and into Saturday, which was forced upon his administration after he was ruled by Congress amid a revolt in the GOP. But there are growing questions this morning about why this was only a partial release, with heavy redactions, despite the law requiring all files to be made public.

Congressman Thomas Massie, the Republican coauthor of this law, tells me this weekend that the administration is, quote, not even close to complying with the law. And now, Democrats are alleging a cover up after a previously released image containing a photo of Trump appears to have gone missing from the Justice Department's Epstein files website. And a new comment from the Justice Department overnight, raising even more questions.

Joining me now to break this all down, Astead Herndon with "Vox", Margaret Talev of "Axios", and CNN's Stephen Collinson.

Happy Sunday morning to you all. I'm in a great mood because the Bears' victory last night. But that's -- that's for a later discussion. But -- but this was a newsy weekend over the last 48 hours. And Trump's decision to the administration decision to put out these documents the way it did.

Look, I mean, they could have just ripped the band-aid off. We've been there have been so many demands for months and months and months to release these files. This law was passed by Congress. One person voted against this in the entire United States Congress.

They waited until the last minute to put this out. The deadline was December 19th. They're doing it piece by piece by piece. And now, this Trump photo was deleted for no apparent reason whatsoever.

You know, there's no -- no one saying that Trump did anything wrong criminally. He's denying anything. He's done anything wrong. There's no indication that he's done anything wrong here. But the way that they've released it is just going to feed more suspicions and perceptions that something is amiss.

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Of course, the disclosure so far are in no way according to the spirit or the actual written requirements.

MARGARET TALEV, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Law -- the law of the law.

COLLINSON: Right? So that's the start of it. The question becomes, is that political upsurge that we saw that got this discharge position up and running in the first place? These big votes in Congress? Is that going to be sufficient? Is it going to reemerge to do something about it, to compel the administration to follow the law?

This isn't going to go away for a couple of reasons, first of all, because it was already bound up in conspiracy theories. And for people of that cast of mind, the absence of proof only proves their conspiracy theory that something has been left out or has not been disclosed even if there's nothing there.

And secondly, it's just the way the administration does things. It doesn't get any credit from its critics because of its past behavior. And even if this is a logistical thing rather than a political thing, everybody is going to think the delay and the lack of full disclosure is a cover up, as you said.

TALEV: There was -- there was some really important polling that "Reuters" and Ipsos did together in the early days of December. So just a couple weeks ago, this was before the beginning of these disclosures. And what it found is that something like seven out of ten Americans think that the federal government is trying to cover something up here, and the federal government is currently the Trump administration, and that, maybe even more tellingly, more than half of Republicans think that the president and his team have mishandled this.

Now, Susie Wiles will say it's Pam Bondi.

[08:05:01]

Whatever. The buck stops at the top, as it does with every president. And so, either there's something that the administration doesn't want out because it implicates the president in some way, or there is not. And if there's not, this is totally unforced series of errors.

RAJU: Series, and it's been going on for months. And the questions about this, this photo, this Trump, this image containing Trump appears to have been removed from this Epstein lab. You can see that photo on your screen. It's an image of a desk with several framed photos as well as an open door with additional photos. That one appears to be a picture of Trump and the Epstein associate, Ghislaine Maxwell and others.

You know, the Justice Department has not even explained what's going on here. They put out this really vaguely worded tweet, tweet last night saying photos and other materials will continue being reviewed and redacted, consistent with the law, in an abundance of caution as we receive additional information. It's not clear if they're referring to the photo or what exactly, but that just speaks to how they've been handling this.

ASTEAD HERNDON, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: It speaks to how they've been handling it, which is haphazard, which is not obviously been in accordance with the spirit or letter of the law. But I think it's even more than that. This is a White House that is used to dictating its own narrative. It's used to being able to set the terms in which discussion happens around, and they're used to basically ensuring that their followers basically adopt that narrative.

That is not true with this Epstein case. This is a bottom-up grassroots issue that has pushed Republicans, has pushed Republicans in Congress and the White House past where they want to go, and they cannot keep the lid on this.

I mean, Margaret -- polling PBS has 75 percent of all Americans wanting files released, including 67 percent of all Republicans. That is a uniquely bipartisan issue at this point. And I do think there is some level to the conspiracy. I remember being with the Trump crowd that had morphed from pizzagate to QAnon, and now Epstein kind of wraps in all this together.

But I also think it is a legitimate kind of call from the American people who are seeking transparency, who are seeking justice. And I actually think reflects a kind of change in politics right now. This is a -- this is a bottom versus top situation, right? Like people think there is a cabal of elites who now Donald Trump is associated with.

And I think that's an important distinction. Donald Trump used to be someone who voters thought was against the rich elites, right? Who was using his kind of standing to push back against that crowd. This places him within that. And he has not behaved in the White House as if that is something that's not, earned.

RAJU: And Trump has not said anything about this, which is, you know, Trump comments about everything all the time, constantly.

TALEV: Yeah. Big rally in North Carolina.

RAJU: Big rally. Nothing. There was nothing. He didn't take questions during an oval office event on Friday about drug pricing, also very unusual for him. He talks at length, answers questions at length while he was going to and fro. North Carolina didn't address this at all, and at least what I'm looking to see if I have a notification from truth social if he posted on it, it doesn't appear that he has. He's been silent.

COLLINSON: Maybe that's a smart political move in some ways, because every time the president has tried to get himself out of this, he's made the situation worse with what he's said. And that's been a recurrent theme of this whole Epstein situation.

And I think you make a good point about this being a grassroots coming up thing. And that's relevant to the president's position, because in many ways, he's more effective when he's an opposition politician against the establishment here. In this case, he's part of the establishment that is viewed as covering something up. And that's a very uncomfortable position, which is and is not is effectively, politically, when he's in that space.

TALEV: I do think transparency is sort of what you're getting at. If you're on the outside shouting in, you can say, we need more transparency. But I think the bipartisan cry from the people for whom this is an animating issue that we hear again and again in focus groups, you know, for Democrats, Republicans, independents. Where are the Epstein files? Is a desire to feel that there is government transparency.

And when 16 photos disappear with no explanation, that's a lack of transparency. It would probably go a long way for someone in the administration to come out and say, we want to acknowledge that this -- this existed and now it doesn't. And the reason why is whatever the reason, why is maybe it's innocent. There were pending -- this deals with a pending investigation, or there were victims in some of the pictures or whatever, but say nothing and it looks like a lack of transparency. RAJU: Before you jump in --

HERNDON: Yeah.

RAJU: -- the question I have, too, is how many Republicans are going to join the people who are raising concerns, which is mostly from Democrats. But this is what Thomas Massie, who is, of course, a Republican who pushed this forward. He told me this yesterday. He said, not only they trying to create an exemption that doesn't exist in our law, they are expressly ignoring the requirement to provide those materials.

Now, if you're the White House, you ignore Thomas Massie.

TALEV: Right.

RAJU: You're trying to defeat him in his primary next year, but will other Republicans who voted for this, who demanded release, will they start to sound the alarm?

HERNDON: Well, they might, and I think its because of the legitimacy of the issue and the and the inability of the White House to again, put that lid back on there. This has turned Thomas Massie into a star. This turned Ro Khanna into a star.

And they -- I think with these articles of impeachment against Pam Bondi have a legitimate opportunity to go around the White House, to go around the party structure and really animate a base for which this is really a motivating issue.

[08:10:05]

I guess I run out of kind of good faith, patience for the White House on this front. This has been -- there's been -- this issue has been clear throughout the year, this summer. If there was no -- if there was, I think Donald Trump's silence on this should be taken as fear from his own base on an issue he cannot, in good faith, just put away.

RAJU: Yeah.

HERNDON: And so, the question is, why have we not seen that transparency? Why are we still at this point, they had 30 days in the law that they could have gotten to something that actually sufficed the public thirst for this. They knew that that box of redactions was not going to do it.

Their goal is to do the same thing they do on other issues, which is basically to talk people out of their concerns. Donald Trump is losing cultural narrative, setting power. He cannot do that on this.

RAJU: That's such a -- such an interesting point. But one thing they are talking about is Bill Clinton, because part of this release, there was a fair amount of photos involving Bill Clinton.

Now, again, Bill Clinton has also not been charged with doing anything wrong. He's not -- he's denied any wrongdoing. There's no indication that he's done anything wrong here.

But Karoline Leavitt quoted a tweet, a photo tweeted a photo of Bill Clinton that came out in this tweet. Was Bill Clinton in a hot tub with someone whose face is redacted, the White House press secretary saying, oh, my, even though we don't really -- we don't know who the person, the victim was or whether the person in the tub was. Was it a -- it was a victim or we only know that the photo was redacted. And of course, Clinton has never been charged with any crimes, but they were very quick to jump all over the Bill Clinton of it all here.

COLLINSON: Sure. And they're looking for any way to distract here. But I was talking to someone that was involved in the Clinton White House the other night, and we're just talking about how its 25 years since Bill Clinton left the White House. The value of him for the White House as a foil here, perhaps politically, is not that great.

RAJU: I mean, it doesn't look good for Bill Clinton either.

COLLINSON: Sure. Of course. And, you know, there's you know, everybody knows about the issues that Bill Clinton has had in the past. He's always been sort of shrouded by scandals leading to comebacks. But politically, there are probably people in the Democratic Party you know, who are not tied to Bill Clinton. And the Clintons aren't as powerful as they were before, that they're willing to let this happen if as collateral damage, if you like, if the target is Trump.

RAJU: Yeah. No question about it.

All right. As we can see, there's a lot more to discuss there and a lot more to discuss.

Coming up next, it's never too early to start talking about 2028, right? Well, we have brand new CNN polling out for the first time coming up in minutes, detailing who voters want to win in 2028. Both Democrat and Republican. And the very surprising traits they're looking for in a candidate.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:17:02]

RAJU: Yes, the 2028 presidential race is still a ways away, but it's on the minds of many voters. Just how many voters and what exactly do they want in their next president?

Brand new CNN polling out for the first time right now gives us an early glimpse of the election and what Americans are looking for in their potential candidates. Our poll found half of Americans have given some thought to the next presidential election, but about two thirds still don't have a possible candidate in mind yet. And who are the early frontrunners?

My panel is back with me now.

So, let's look at the early frontrunners, shall we? No one specific in mind. That's 64 percent. It shows you how wide open things are right now.

But of the people who are Republicans, these are Republican leaning, leaning voters. In our new poll, J.D. Vance is first, 22 percent, Marco Rubio at 4 percent, 2 percent, Ron DeSantis. All the other candidates did not register to 1 percent.

What's your takeaway?

HERNDON: Well, the takeaway for me is that, like you've seen the Republican establishment really coalesce around J.D. Vance 2028. If you talk to the White House, even Marco Rubio is in line with that. I saw I saw Erika Kirk talking about it over the weekend.

But in my opinion, like for someone who has been kind of anointed in a public way, I don't know if 22 percent is the number I would be thinking about. That 64 percent kind of jumps out to me.

RAJU: Yeah.

HERNDON: And most importantly, some of the discussions about J.D. Vance is like, like turn into insider, I think would worry me if I was him thinking about 2026 and 2028 going forward.

There's a lot of ways that the Republican base lives and dies on those outsider credentials, and I think that might be a bigger part of Trumpism than the ideology itself.

RAJU: Yeah.

HERNDON: And so, if you're an insider on Epstein, if you're an insider on tariffs, if the second Trump administration is not particularly beloved and J.D. Vance is the face of that, I think that that creates opportunities for folks on the outside.

RAJU: I think it's J.D. Vance lane to me, because, look, he's speaking at the Turning Point USA conference later today. He got endorsed by Erika Kirk, who's, of course, the widow of Charlie Kirk.

And is he running as a Trump third term? Is he running as his own person? Is he going to break from Trump in some way?

COLLINSON: He's in a strong position, but he's in a very vulnerable position. He's got a very complicated lane to follow, because a lot of its going to depend first on how Trump feels about him as they move towards the back end of this presidency. And it could also depend on how the Trump presidency itself is going. If, you know, as you were saying, the Trump presidency alienates itself from its own followers, that could be a problem for Vance.

He might go ahead and win the nomination. And if it all ends in a terrible way for the president, if his approval ratings get even lower than they are now, it might be a nomination that's a poisoned chalice. So yes, he's in a great position, but he's going to have to be an exceedingly smart politician to navigate this.

RAJU: Yeah. Let's look at the Democrats who this is. According to Democratic voters and Democratic leaners our poll asked, who would you like to run for president in 2028?

[08:20:06]

Sixty-four percent, no one specific in mind. Okay. So then if you have someone specific, who do you like? Gavin Newsom, 11 percent tops the pack. Kamala Harris is still up there, 5 percent. AOC, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 4 percent. Pete Buttigieg, 2 percent.

I mean, it just shows you that Newsom has taken advantage of this moment, cement himself in as a very, very, very, very, very, very, very early frontrunner.

TALEV: Yeah, it's really interesting because you see this basically two thirds in both of the parties, but for different reasons. In the Republican Party. It's like, you see that 64 percent because Trump's the person and Trump can't run again for another term.

And so, it's like, what if Trump's name was up there? It'd be a larger number than J.D. Vance's number, right?

RAJU: I mean, it shows how wide open really both fields are.

TALEV: Democrats are wide open for another reason, because nobody knows who's in charge of the Democratic Party. And I think you're right. Newsom by taking on this leading national role or, you know, fourth largest economy in the world or whatever, like he's made himself the frontrunner.

But 11 percent is not a frontrunner. It shows it's up for grabs. It shows that AOC is going to have a strong following behind her. I don't know what to make out of the Harris number. I think name recognition is something to think about in a case like that, but it shows.

It does show that that is a really wide-open race, whereas with Republicans, it may not be as wide. It's not going to be 17 candidate field, but it's more about enthusiasm and what is -- who is the right successor for Trump?

RAJU: I want you to look at this other really interesting part about the poll. Maybe the most interesting thing about this poll is about what people are looking for in a candidate here. This is among all adults, the important attributes -- be honest and truthful tops the list, 12 percent. Empathetic, be have empathy, nine percent. Help people, seven percent. Integrity and morals, six percent.

And then that is all those are above work on the economy and affordability. Yeah. So what does that tell you? I mean, they want someone who's honest, truthful, empathetic help people and integrity and morals. I mean -- I mean, some may say it's a reflection of what's happening right now.

HERNDON: I think they're looking at the current administration and kind of drawing up a person that might be the opposite. But I also think there's a sense among Democrats that particularly their national leaders were not truthful in the last election, did not -- do not go through the process in a way that listened to the voters. RAJU: It could be reflection of both Biden and Trump.

HERNDON: A hundred percent. And so, I don't think that it's just a Trump reflection. I hear that from Democrats, too, about wanting a different type of candidate that repositions where the party is. Gavin Newsom has done himself well among the hyper interested Democrats, right?

TALEV: Yes.

HERNDON: Like in this year, whether it's been the redistricting fight or his willingness to just take it to Donald Trump, he has certainly cut out a lane about himself. For someone who is, I would call the "No Kings" or Bluesky or your Democrats on fire, right? But I think that Kamala Harris number is really interesting because on one hand, that should be shocking as someone who was the nominee, was the party's vice president historic figure.

But there's a lot of signs that she still remains a lot of support among that kind of black southern base among, you know, her book has sold really well there. That's where she's done the entirety of her book tour. And that remains the kind of sticky population that has determined the last two Democratic primaries. I don't know if that's necessarily enough to make her the nominee, but that's enough to make her a nuisance for someone like Gavin Newsom.

RAJU: Or enough for her to think, hey, maybe I should do this.

HERNDON: Or maybe I should jump back in.

RAJU: And we'll see how Democrats react if she decides to do just that.

All right. Coming up, a MAGA warrior drops out of her race for New York governor. The unusual case of Elise Stefanik.

And next, the issue that is making many Republicans very nervous about the midterms.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. RICHARD HUDSON (R-NC): We don't have a policy problem. We have a messaging problem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:28:17]

RAJU: Swing district Republicans have been growing quite anxious as millions of Americans are set to see their health care premiums rise, particularly as subsidies under the Affordable Care Act that were beefed up during the pandemic expire on January 1st, all causing major tension in the ranks. Rank and file House Republicans to force a vote on a Democratic plan to extend those subsidies for three years. But there won't be a vote in the house until January, and Senate GOP leaders are firmly opposed.

So, what will be the fallout?

My panel is back.

So, the polling is not good for Trump and the GOP on this issue. Fox News poll just came out saying that just 25 percent of independents, the key voting bloc, of course, approve of the way Trump has been handling this issue.

And okay, so then how does the issue -- how impactful could that issue be come the midterms? Look at this same poll. Extremely concerned about health care prices, 57 percent of independents are extremely concerned. Even 43 percent of Republicans are extremely concerned, which is why swing district Republicans are extremely concerned.

TALEV: Yeah, because health care has been the one lifeline for the Democratic Party in the last few election cycles. And look, as we just saw in that, there's no clear leader of the Democratic Party. Americans feelings about the Democratic Party are in a very bad place, which minimizes their ability to take advantage of President Trump's weaknesses. But on health care, that is their strength. Americans trust Democrats more than Republicans on the health care issue, and Americans want health care subsidies and/or affordable insurance.

And, you can have an argument about whether this is propping up Democrats plans or propping up, you know, insurers. But let's not rewrite history here. The reason that the Affordable Care Act worked with insurers in the first place is because it would have been politically unviable because of the Republicans, to minimize the role of health insurers in the process.

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST: Yes.

TALEV: And so now you've got a situation where Republicans spent many, many years trying to appeal, repeal Obamacare and realize their constituents wanted the benefits of the Affordable Care Act.

And so I think the reason Republicans in swing districts are worried about this is because health care consumers in every district in the United States of America, red or blue, are having a really hard time affording health insurance.

RAJU: And the Speaker tried to deflect those concerns or change the perception of those concerns by putting his own bill on the House floor. Last week, Democrats voted against it and Republicans voted for it.

It's a narrow plan. It does not extend the Affordable Care Act subsidies. He argues that it would lower premiums for all Americans, not just a subset who relies on those subsidies.

But do all Republicans agree with them? And what do they think the fallout would be? I asked a bunch of them last week

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R-AK): It's when people feel that they have counted on or waited for their congress to act on an issue that they feel is a huge priority, and they see no action. There's consequence to that.

I do think that there are ramifications if we fail to act on this.

REP. RICHARD HUDSON (R-NC): Well, I think, you know, Republicans need to do a better job of communicating on health care. We don't have a policy problem. We have a messaging problem.

REP. KEVIN KILEY (R-CA): All of us have constituents who are going to suffer. And I think people will, you know, see it as yet another example of Congress failing and the American people suffering as a result.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: I mean, one of the things that is interesting that I found is that Richard Hudson, who's the chairman of the House GOP Campaign Arm, he says we have a messaging problem. He thinks they don't have a policy problem, but we have a messaging problem.

But that's a problem if you have a messaging problem and you're the leader of your party trying to keep your leader of the effort to try to keep the House.

ASTEAD HERNDON, VOX HOST AND EDITORIAL DIRECTOR: Yes, yes, yes. Messaging problem, policy problem. It's a problem. It's a problem. A problem is a problem.

That's been clear. And I think Democrats have kind of skillfully elevated this issue. The government shutdown worked in terms of making clear to, I think, the American people the priority of health care subsidies. And to the point there may not have been trusted leadership or kind of trust in party vision overall.

But there is trust in them as better stewards on this issue. I think if we think about the affordability banner, that's become kind very popular this year, I would say housing costs are a big part of that, and then health care costs are maybe even a bigger part of that.

And so for Republicans to kind of see that issue has really, I think, created optimism for Democrats in the midterms.

Think back to that first Trump midterms in 2018. You know -- you know, there was a cloud of impeachment and all that stuff in the air, Russia. But the real driver of Democratic wins was health care.

And I think that that is what they see as the playbook for going forward in these midterms. And its driving Democratic confidence and Republican fear.

RAJU: Yes, no question about it. And that mash up of members is interesting because you had some moderate members like Lisa Murkowski who's been pushing to extend those subsidies. She said, we're in charge here. We're going to get blamed if even though, you know, we're, you know, we need to do something, otherwise we will -- we're the party in power.

You have also people who are in swing districts like Kevin Kiley saying it's as another example of Congress failing. The American public would see it that way.

And then when I put the question to the Speaker himself, I said, will you -- do you have any concerns that this issue will cost you any seats in the midterms? He said, absolutely not. He is convinced that this will not hurt Republicans in the midterms.

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: This issue perfectly encapsulates the splits in the Republican Party between its you know, it's hostage to its own base. You can't have a lot of lawmakers in their own very red districts vote to save Obamacare.

Yet at the same time, they need to save Obamacare for their moderate members that will decide whether they get a majority. I think the absence of the president on this issue has been very important because --

RAJU: Yes. He hasn't -- he hasn't put out a plan.

COLLINSON: He was strong enough to get this issue elevated. He could have used it as a shield against Democratic claims that Republicans, Democrats -- Republicans don't care about health care in the midterm elections. He's just not so good at details and putting forward a plan.

But I think that's a missed opportunity for the White House.

RAJU: And he was concerned about blowback from within his own party if he sided with Democrats in pushing for this extension of these subsidies, which is why they pulled back on that initial plan, the White House did.

[08:34:46]

RAJU: And now there's no White House plan. And the Republicans are divided about the way forward. We'll see how it ultimately plays out.

Still ahead, why did Gene Simmons of the band Kiss stop by Capitol Hill. My one-on-one with the legendary rock star?

Plus, I've got some new reporting. Are Democrats worried the emboldened Mamdani wing of their party could cost them the House majority?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIMMY GOMEZ (D-CA): A lot of voters want change.

RAJU: A lot of voters want change.

GOMEZ: They want change, but they also want voters -- voters want to see people, members fight.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[08:35:18]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: It's quote, "really dumb". That's how one House Democrat is describing a recent surge of left-wing primary challengers. All of this with the House majority on the line.

My new reporting this morning with my colleague Sarah Ferris, highlights the tension inside the Democratic Party ahead of the 2026 midterms and how liberals are feeling emboldened after Zohran Mamdani's win last month.

Just take a look at your screen. These are just some of the primaries where the left flank is looking to oust incumbents, risking diverting critical resources away from swing districts.

So I asked the chair of the House Democratic campaign arm if she's concerned.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. SUZAN DELBENE (D-WA): Other Democrats may be involved in this, but our focus has been on the purple districts.

RAJU: So you're not going to worry about some of these bluer districts where there are primaries.

DELBENE: Our focus is on those purple districts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. My panel is back.

So should Democrats be worried about this? Look, these are mostly, and as you said, blue districts. They're focusing on Republican districts to take back the House.

But they're going to spend money into some of these, say like in New York and Goldman, New York Democrat is facing this insurgency from a Mamdani-inspired candidate.

HERNDON: There's certainly going to have to spend some resources, but I guess I would posit, like, if that is enough to kind of divert Democrats from their -- from their focus in the general election, they got larger problems.

I mean, I think that there is even more than an ideological push from a Mamdani wing. There's a generational push from younger voters. There's a sense that they want people who are willing to exercise their power in Congress.

RAJU: They want change. HERNDON: They want change. They want fighters. And so if you're an

incumbent who is facing someone who's kind of putting that focus on you, the burden on you is to prove that you meet that standard of fighter I think even more so than it is about left, right and center.

The funny part I would also say is that Mamdani has not actually embraced a bunch of incumbent, challenger -- a bunch of challengers against incumbents in New York. He's actually made a lot of the DSA wing upset by his willingness to side with a lot of the incumbents who backed him in the end, even if it was just a day or two before the general election.

RAJU: Yes. That's the Democratic Socialists.

HERNDON: Yes. And so I'm saying it's an interesting tension because actually, as he's gotten into office, he stepped away maybe from some of that movement pushing. But that has not stopped those challengers not from emerging because there's room for it from the ground up.

RAJU: It's so interesting. And I asked Hakeem Jeffries about this, the Democratic leader, if he's concerned about these primaries. He downplayed it. He said, look, primaries are a way of life in the House of Representatives. And so the reality is, whether it's a primary against me or somebody else, our members are going to make the case to voters and come back to office.

And look, he is focusing on a number of swing districts that they -- these are some Democratic targets from California all the way down to Texas that they believe will expand the battlefield here.

But, you know, that makes an interesting point. It is a generational fight. It is a fight within the party that wants more progressive. It's an ideological fight -- generational and ideological.

TALEV: Actually, I think the generational part is a bigger part of it. And I do think the challenge for moderates in some of these races where a more liberal or progressive wing has a real pull, is going to be how to make the message to a more progressive base about electability in a general election, because that's what it comes down to.

If you're a moderate candidate and you make it through the primary, you still have to get liberals and progressives to turn out for you, you know. It's -- that's sizable, you know, contingent inside your base.

And so if you're looking at stuff like the governors' race in Virginia or New Jersey, you see a very strong case for moderate candidates, relatively moderate candidates inside the Democratic Party.

Whereas if you're looking in more liberal districts or not statewide, and then, you know, perhaps there's more room for progressive candidates.

So I actually think all of this for moderates in the Democratic Party is about how do you inspire progressives or liberals to get behind you?

RAJU: It's always a challenge -- energy, especially as we head into the midterms.

Ok. I want to turn to the curious case involving Elise Stefanik. She was seen as the frontrunner for the New York governor's race on the Republican side for the -- she was running there and she's had this arc.

She's, of course, the congressman woman from New York. She was a rank- and-file congresswoman, of course, for 2015.

She helped push out Liz Cheney as the number three House Republican in 2021. She later became seen as on the short list as a potential VP candidate in 2024.

Trump named her as U.N. ambassador nominee. He had to withdraw her nomination amid concerns it could heighten the already very tight House Republican majority. She rejoined House Republican leadership, decided the same year to run for New York governor, and then decided abruptly Friday night, she's no longer a candidate and is not going to run for reelection in the House, right?

COLLINSON: I think one of the things that shows us is that loyalty for Donald Trump, often only flows one way. Elise Stefanik has done absolutely everything she can a, to be loyal to the president and b, to hitch her political star to MAGA-ism. And --

[08:44:53]

RAJU: Yes, because she was a pretty moderate member at the beginning of her career.

COLLINSON: Right.

RAJU: Then she became a full blown MAGA all the way.

COLLINSON: And it's, you know, this is how it's all ended up. Everyone is expendable to the president politically in many ways.

And I think that is one of the hazards of being part of a party, which basically, you know, turns on the personality and the power of one dominant figure.

RAJU: Yes. And she had a -- she's the primary. Bruce Blakeman is now the presumptive nominee. He was her primary challenger.

And very quickly, Trump didn't endorse her despite all the things that Stephen was talking about.

COLLINSON: Yes.

HERNDON: Donald Trump dealt a fatal blow to this campaign in that Oval Office when he said Mamdani was not a jihadist, but a nice guy --

RAJU: Which is opposite. HERNDON: -- opposite of what Stefanik said. That was the moment that

really killed her campaign. And I think we should see this endorsement as a -- as a double blow. This is someone who has not returned the loyalty she's given to him.

RAJU: Yes.

All right. Ok. Up next for us, rock idol Gene Simmons of the band Kiss was just on Capitol Hill. What he told me about his conversation with President Trump, the MAGA movement, and why the legendary band wore that iconic makeup.

[08:45:58]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: The legendary rocker Gene Simmons has had quite a month. First, the Kiss singer was honored at the Kennedy Center by President Trump. And then he made the rounds on Capitol Hill, where he testified in support of a bill that would put more money into musicians' pockets by requiring radio stations to pay them royalties.

But that effort has encountered stiff resistance, with even the number two Senate Republican warning that, quote, "Imposing new fees or taxes on local broadcast radio would jeopardize stations enjoyed by millions."

Simmons joined INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY to talk about all this and weigh in on the state of politics.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: You testified today in the Senate. I was -- I was wondering if you were going to come in with the full white makeup. You decided not to do that.

GENE SIMMONS, KISS BAND SINGER: Manu, you don't have enough money.

RAJU: You'd have to -- you would charge for that.

SIMMONS: I'd charged for everything. Even God passes the hat.

RAJU: Yes, indeed.

Let's talk about what you were here actually testifying for bipartisan support, the American Fairness Music Act. But there was also bipartisan opposition to it.

SIMMONS: That's true.

RAJU: What do you say to the critics of this bill?

SIMMONS: Radio stations last year made something like $14 billion, as well they should. Artists who you heard on the radio stations made zero. Your favorite artists, whether it's a classic artist or a new artist, made zero. And that is inexcusable. It's un-American. RAJU: But isn't there a promotional value to it? I mean, that's what

people would say.

SIMMONS: But that's not up for you to decide, number one. But without the music, without the performers, the radio stations that have nothing to play. Don't worry about promoting us, we can promote ourselves.

You're making money by selling advertising on our name. How about a slice?

RAJU: They're saying it could put these out -- these radio stations out.

SIMMONS: Me thinks they doth protest too much. At $14 billion, I'm sure you could find some dollars to pay Elvis.

RAJU: Tell me about your meetings today on the Hill. And did you talk to people in the leadership? And --

SIMMONS: Yes.

RAJU: -- were people.

SIMMONS: Had some face time with Senator Tillis and Blackburn and met Mr. Schiff and so on. But the telling moment was after we all got our Kennedy Center awards is I had some face time alone with the president.

And I actually met the president and on and off for years and years, decades before he entered politics. And the conversation was what human beings do. How's the family? How are the kids? And, you know, all that stuff. It's not always about politics.

RAJU: And did you bring up this bill when you spoke to the president?

SIMMONS: I would like to not bring up that subject.

RAJU: Why is that?

SIMMONS: Out of respect to -- there is such a thing as certain private conversations that should be private.

RAJU: You said you had a relationship with him before --

SIMMONS: Yes.

RAJU: -- this. And how would you characterize your relationship with him now?

SIMMONS: Terrific. I don't really care what people say. Life has always been like that. Not everybody loves Jesus but you can -- you can certainly say the following. He was a duly elected president of these United States. Perhaps overwhelmingly by the popular vote, as well as the electoral college. End of story. It is nobody's business who you support. Nowadays, people engage in,

so are you pro or -- and my first question is, who the (EXPLETIVE DELETED) are you? Who are you? Since when does who I support or not support is the business of anyone except my conscience.

RAJU: So I suppose you wouldn't answer that question if I asked you.

SIMMONS: The question is, who are you to ask that question?

RAJU: What do you think of the MAGA wing of the Republican Party?

SIMMONS: Some of it makes sense and some not. So again, why anybody cares what the hell a guy does for a living who sticks his tongue out has to say about politics is insanity. I mean --

(CROSSTALKING)

RAJU: I'm interested in it.

[08:54:48]

SIMMONS: I would stick my tongue out now, but the floor is dirty and I don't want to upset all the mommies out there. That's just too much to take.

But literally have a sense of humor. Take a pill, shut up and stop worrying what your next-door neighbor believes or doesn't believe. It's their America too.

RAJU: How did you get the idea to wear -- dress up in black costume? Have the big tongue, white makeup?

SIMMONS: I wanted to become rich and famous and get chicks.

RAJU: It's that simple.

SIMMONS: Anything else would be a lie.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: All right.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY. You can follow me on X @mkraju. Follow the show @INSIDE POLITICS. You can follow me on TikTok and on Instagram.

And remember in the United States, you can now stream INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY live or catch up later on the CNN app or just visit CNN.com/watch for more.

Kasie Hunt is anchoring "THE STATE OF THE UNION", which is up next. Her guests include Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin and Oklahoma Senator James Lankford.

Thanks again for sharing your Sunday morning with us. We'll see you next time.

[08:55:52]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)