Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Trump Lashes Out After Supreme Court Blocks Tariffs; Trump Considers Striking Iran; New: DHS Suspends TSA Precheck, Global Entry Amid Shutdown. 9 Days Away Crucial Primaries in Texas Senate Race; Book Tour to Presidential Run? Democrats Release Books Ahead of 2028; Will Democrats Disrupt Trump's State of the Union Address. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired February 22, 2026 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:24]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST (voice-over): Tariff turmoil. President Trump lashes out after the Supreme Court throws his economic policy into disarray.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They're very unpatriotic and disloyal to our Constitution. They also are a disgrace to our nation.

RAJU: Will his agenda collapse?

TRUMP: I've won affordability.

RAJU: And what will it mean for the midterm?

Plus, drums of war. Trump considers striking Iran as the two sides keep talking.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I think President Trump is looking for which line can catch the biggest fish.

RAJU: Will anything stop him? Democratic Senator Andy Kim joins me live.

And state of disunion. As heckling becomes the norm, what do Democrats have in store this year?

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

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

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

The Supreme Court's staggering blow to a centerpiece of Donald Trump's agenda has left the president enraged, railing against the justices he picked, lashing out at Republicans defying him, and now imposing a sweeping set of new tariffs that could once again roil the economic order. Just yesterday, raising his new global tariffs to 15 percent, meaning some countries like the U.K. and Australia would be slapped with even higher tariffs than before.

But the new authority he's using only last for 150 days. So once again, Trump's tariff policy creating major uncertainty across the globe and straining key alliances. Yet the decision by the court dramatically limits a power the president used to try to force his will on friends and foes alike, and is dividing his party as primary season in this year's midterms intensifies all of which has left the president fuming, leaving the most scathing attacks against the conservative justices he chose, Amy Coney Barrett and Neil Gorsuch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: They're just being fools and lapdogs for the RINOs and the radical left Democrats. The court has been swayed by foreign interests and a political movement that is far smaller than people would ever think its people are obnoxious ignorant, and loud they're very loud. And I think certain justices are afraid of that.

To show you how ridiculous the opinion is, however, the court said that I'm not allowed to charge even $1. I can't charge $1. Can't charge $1.

Wouldn't you think they would have put one sentence in there saying that keep the money or don't keep the money? Right? I guess it has to get litigated for the next two years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. A lot to break down over the fallout this morning with my excellent panel of reporters, CNN's Stephen Collinson, "NOTUS" White House correspondent Jasmine Wright, and "Axios" political reporter Hans Nichols.

Good morning to you all.

So, there is just so much to digest because Trump has just used tariffs as a means to achieve his foreign policy, his domestic policy agenda, all this money coming in to the government, and now his response to it all.

"The Wall Street Journal" called it the worst moment of his presidency, his response to this tariff defeat. Is it the worst moment of his presidency?

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: It's up there. The reason that he's so angry is this is more than about economic policy. This cuts to the heart of the way that Donald Trump likes to lead. As you said, he uses tariffs not just in economic policy but as

foreign policy leverage. He turns them up and down like a thermostat. Look at Brazil, for example. When his friend, former President Bolsonaro got into legal trouble, he slapped on a 50 percent tariff. He uses tariffs in domestic policy to create leverage over CEOs.

So, his whole concept of unfettered presidential power has now been challenged by the Supreme Court. And the other ways he can do this are more complex. He doesn't want to work with congress on tariffs. He doesn't want to work with Congress on anything. So, you know, it reshapes the way that he can run the country. And his perception of the president itself.

RAJU: Yeah. And the amount of money that has come in is significant from the tariffs that were imposed by the president in these emergency global tariffs. There are $134 billion that were raised. And now he can't use that same authority to raise that money.

So, what's going to happen to that money. This is how he had planned to use the proceeds just to the point that this is central to pretty much everything, a whole wide range of things that he had promised to do everything from a warrior dividends that he promised to give out, rebate checks to middle class Americans, enhanced child care, funding SNAP.

[08:05:15]

Yeah, obviously, none of that is going to happen. So how are they going to deal with the fact that they have all this money that they, according to the Supreme Court, they unlawfully got?

JASMINE WRIGHT, NOTUS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the president says that they're going to fight it. They're going to fight and end up in litigation with both foreign nations that may request a refund with individual companies that may request a refund. Individual people who had to pay tariffs say they got a car or something like that, that it's going to be in litigation for a long time. And that's kind of echoed when I talked to the president's allies.

I think, you know, when you heard from the president on Friday, I was in the briefing room. He was obviously incredibly frustrated. He tried to spin it and say that now he's actually more powerful than before. But when I've talked to some of his folks on the outside of the White House in the last few days, they disagree with that.

They say it's weakened him. They say, like you said, it's removed his leverage. And fundamentally, I think that the president is going to spend this 150 days trying to figure out a way to get around it. But if you read that Supreme Court decision both in favor and against it, it is kind of broad in which it has kind of foreshadow ways in which they could come back again and stop a different use of tariffs.

And so, the president's going to spend 150 days trying to look for a way around it.

RAJU: And if you're a Republican, how do you deal with this. Because the tariffs are not popular. Just look at this, this poll, 32 percent of Americans say that placing tariffs on products -- helps the U.S. economy, 58 percent say it hurts the U.S. economy. And this is just one poll. There are several polls that pretty much say the same thing, and it's one of Trump's worst issues when he -- when it's -- when it comes to how public opinion fares on Trump's handling of a wide range of things. Tariffs is at the top of the things that they are not happy about.

And then when Trump makes it very clear that if you defy him, he'll go after you

HANS NICHOLS, AXIOS POLITICAL REPORTER: Yeah. Well, he rescinded that primary endorsement that he had out there in Colorado.

RAJU: Yeah, Jeff Hurd. This is what Jeff Hurd said -- this is what he said about Jeff Hurd. He said that Congressman Jeff Hurd said, "Based on a lack of support, in particular of the unbelievably successful tariffs, I am hereby withdrawing my endorsement of RINO Congressman Jeff Hurd," who was one of six Republicans to vote to rescind those tariffs.

NICHOLS: Yeah, I mean, the six vote there, that was largely symbolic, right? I mean, you'd have to get through the Senate. The president could veto it. It had to be veto-proof.

The big issue with the tariffs going forward now is that the congressional votes will no longer just be symbolic. They could actually have some substance to them. And so, we're going to be waiting 150 days if he ends up going that route. And then congress will be on record.

And that's a vote. A lot of senators on the Republican side, even some Democrats, don't necessarily want to be on record where they're at, and they're going to be forced to.

Now, there will be other sort of creative ways, potentially, that they can get around this. Right? They can switch to the 301 tariffs when the 122 is expired. And if I got any of my numbers wrong, correct me, right? We've all suddenly become tariff experts.

But the big picture is that tariffs have always divided the Republican Party in the Trump era. Republicans the old school Republicans don't like them for the simple reason that they're taxed, and how are they tax? How do we know this? Look at the amount of revenue that's coming into the federal coffers. And it's not a small amount, over ten years, it's potentially $3 trillion. Earlier you asked, $3 trillion coming into the federal government. Earlier asked, where is that money going? It's going to deficit reduction. Yeah, because all the things that the president is talking about doing, he's going to need Congress for, and it's unclear that he can get it passed.

So, in a lot of ways, and you've seen this react in the bond market with like the 30 year yields are coming down a little bit because its the one bright sign that the U.S. is fiscal house is potentially in order because so much money is coming in. RAJU: And if you're a Republican, who do you choose, right? Do you

choose what Trump is demanding loyalty or what your constituents are saying? A lot of them are obviously very concerned, and they are getting hit by these tariffs.

This is what Jeff Hurd, that congressman who Trump rescinded his endorsement from who's in a district that Trump carried by about 10 points, not kind of a safe district, but maybe not in this midterm environment. This is what he told me in the aftermath of defying the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Are you worried about getting the wrath from the president?

REP. JEFF HURD (R-CO): We'll see.

RAJU: Are these tariffs hurting your constituents?

HURD: Yes, absolutely. I've heard clearly from small and large manufacturers as well as agricultural producers, that these tariffs are hurting them. And again, that certainly weighed in in in my vote on this.

The folks that I represent, they're the ones that vote for me. No one here in Washington, D.C. votes for me. It's the people back in Colorado's third congressional district.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: That's a tough position for most Republicans, because most of them are pro-free trade Republicans. But Trump has rewritten the rules of trade, and now he's demanding loyalty on an issue in which he's deeply unpopular over. And he's just been had this huge rebuke from the Supreme Court. It puts Republicans like that in a very difficult spot.

COLLINSON: Yeah. And so, if we move forward 150 days to when this vote would be, that's what July, August, three months before the midterm elections, if the big issue is affordability, still that's a gift to the Democrats, because they can argue the president wants you -- wants to make everything you buy more expensive three months before an election.

[08:10:14]

That's going to be a really tough vote. It's a tough vote now, but it's even tougher then.

NICHOLS: You're forgetting that we're probably going to have two Supreme Court nominees open, and we'll have a whole another thing to fight about, right? We could have a busy summer, and I'll be very clear, I don't have any inside information here.

But that's the other sort of behind-the-scenes conversation about what we could be spending the summer on as potential Supreme Court openings. So again, in the Trump era, everything all together at once. It seems like this. And this is just another example.

RAJU: Speaking of Supreme Court -- before the Supreme Court on Tuesday, the State of the Union Address, Trump will be in the House chamber. So will the Supreme Court justices, maybe the same ones that he just was berating, the ones he picked that voted to defy him on this major case?

Remember back in 2010, this moment, in which Barack Obama was talking about the Citizens United case and Justice Alito was not so happy?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: With all due deference to separation of powers, last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: There's Justice Alito shaking his head, saying "no". Do you think Trump is going to call out if he sees Neil Gorsuch there or Amy Coney Barrett?

WRIGHT: Yeah, I think that that has the potential to look very rosy when we -- when it happens Tuesday. I was talking to somebody who talks to Trump frequently and he says that now they are most looking forward to in that speech is how he addresses the justices. They don't expect him. They expect him to be professional. They expect him to be presidential, but they don't necessarily expect him to be kind.

And so I'm sure that folks are spending the weekend rewriting that portion of the script really making sure that they express his frustration with their ruling.

RAJU: Yeah, we will see how they respond or if they just sit on their hands. This should be interesting.

All right. Still ahead, big news overnight that could affect your travel on day nine of the partial government shutdown. I go one on one with a Democratic senator about the latest controversy, as well as Trump's threat to strike Iran.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:16:34]

RAJU: A new headache this morning at airports across the country. The Trump administration is halting TSA pre-check and Global Entry now the Department of Homeland Security has been shut down for nine days. Secretary Kristi Noem said last night that all travelers must go through airport security lines, claiming TSA staff cannot staff the expedited screenings because of the shutdown.

Joining me now is Democratic Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey.

Senator Kim, thank you so much for being here.

The shutdown is dragging on. Constituents are probably going to get angry about these airport security lines. Is this going to force Congress Democrats in particular your party, to change their approach?

SEN. ANDY KIM (D-NJ): Well, I know Kristi Noem wants to change the subject, and that's in part because she was -- you know, humiliated with her leadership in Minnesota, removed by the White House. And now she's trying to find other things to be able to make a stink about.

Look, right now, the American people are furious still about ICE, furious about what happened in Minnesota. And it's not just there. You know, I was just back in New Jersey. ICE is trying to open up a warehouse detention facility that is eight times larger than a football field.

This is something that's in a Republican town that voted for Trump. And they called me, brought me in and said, save our town. Help us save our town. They don't want this there. They are furious at the Trump administration.

RAJU: So, it sounds like no, it won't force -- it won't -- Democrats won't change their approach.

KIM: Well, because we need to be responsive to what the American people are concerned about. And right now, the Trump administration is hoping that the American people are going to move on from what happened in Minnesota not worry about that anymore. And they need to hear loud and clear that that is not happening, that the American people are still furious about the killing of American citizens in our streets.

RAJU: I mean, so, I mean, we've seen shutdowns drag out in the past oftentimes it's the travel nightmares that leads to change in congress. Is that going to happen this time?

KIM: Well, look --

RAJU: You're going to get -- you're going to get a lot of people calling burning up your lines, saying, Senator Kim, I waited two hours, I missed my flight.

KIM: Well, what I'll tell you is they are, you know, certainly going to be affected by this one way or another, because this is what this administration is trying to push on. You know, we saw the news that Kristi Noem is also making changes at FEMA and trying to make it such that that's going to be more difficult when the disaster relief fund is still there with billions of dollars, FEMA should be able to do the work as needed.

And this is something where Kristi Noem, if we remember, she actually said she wants to eliminate FEMA, she wants to abolish FEMA. And now, she's pretending like she's been its biggest champion. So, this administration is trying to weaponize our government, trying to make things more difficult for the American people as political leverage. And the American people see that. RAJU: And you think -- so you think this is going to drag on for some

time?

KIM: Well, it's only going to drag on if the White House continues to hold back on engaging in negotiations. That was the whole purpose of this, was to have negotiations, serious negotiations and that is what the American people want to see. They want to see real change when it comes to ice on the streets. They don't want these roving patrols. They don't want to have to carry their passports around for fear of getting stopped.

RAJU: We know there have been some counteroffers and offers on both sides between the White House and the leadership. Doesn't seem like they're anywhere close to a deal.

I do want to move on to tariffs because in the aftermath of this big ruling on Friday, there's been a lot of questions about the $134 billion that the administration has taken in as a result of these tariffs.

[08:20:08]

What do you think the administration should do now that they have this money? But this ruling came down. What should they do with the $134 billion?

KIM: Oh, that's easy. I mean, this this administration took money out of the pockets of American families upwards of $1,700 per family. They should give it back. They should give it back.

RAJU: How?

KIM: We can have. And we're working on legislation that would be able to have this refund back to the American people.

RAJU: Like checks to Americans. Is that what you're suggesting?

KIM: The process that we're working through this. But that's exactly what we need to be pushing towards, is just getting this back to the American people who are struggling. You know, again, I was just at a town hall back in New Jersey this past week. And just affordability continues to be the top issue that they're worried about.

And it's not just the American families, the small businesses that have been hurt. You know, this is something where the American people see crystal clear the damage that Trump has done to them. And Democrats --

RAJU: Democrats are working on legislation to provide this money back to the American public in some fashion.

KIM: Yeah. That's right. And this is -- you know, this is a real breaking point for the Trump administration, this Supreme Court ruling. It wasn't just a ruling against their work on tariffs. This really was a ruling that stands against Trumpism as a whole. It really shows and pulls the rug out from underneath this president, showing just how hollow and damaging his policies are.

RAJU: Yeah, I want to move on to Iran, because you were at a town hall last week and you were talking to your voters about this issue, about the threat of striking Iran. This is one moment I want our viewers to watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KIM: Look, to this crowd right now -- raise your hand if you want to see our country go to war with Iran next week. Raise hand if you think that if a president is going to take military action, that they need to hear from the voice of the American people and be able to bring this before Congress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: So, what were the implications be, Senator, if the administration went ahead with this strike on Iran?

KIM: Well, first of all, it would be unconstitutional. It would be against what our Constitution lays out in terms of the powers that Congress has alone. But it is also something that fundamentally puts our nation -- puts our service members in particular, in harm's way. You know, I worked in national security. I served as a civilian embedded with the military in Afghanistan. I worked in Iraq.

I spent years trying to counter Iranian actions. So, I see the threats that they have but taking an action like this, what the president is ramping up towards, we have two aircraft carriers out in the region over 10 destroyers. I mean this, is a buildup unlike anything we've seen since the 2003 Iraq war. And he's doing this without having even consulted with congress, hasn't even made a case to the American people.

RAJU: Yeah.

KIM: Like a fundamental question, like what is his objective? What is he trying to achieve? He has yet to lay out anything, and that just puts our service members and I hear from their families, they're worried about their, you know, sons and daughters being put into the middle of a war in the Middle East without an understanding of what we're trying to achieve.

RAJU: But wasn't the attack? I mean the administration argues what happened last June when the U.S. attacked the three nuclear sites in Iran. They say they were successful. They set back the nuclear program of Iran. Was that a successful attack?

KIM: Well, look, they said that that was successful, set them back years and now what? We're right back in it a couple months later. They're thinking about something even more significant. A sustained military action.

And the idea that we could get pulled into this, for what purpose are we looking to do? Or is it trying to do regime change, especially after what we saw with Maduro? But setting into motion that could very well take actions, for instance, like allowing the IRGC Quds force to then come into power and seize control of the country.

This is a situation where there are many possibilities that could be even worse than what we are experiencing now, and the signaling to these protesters, what if they go back into the street and likely get massacred again? What does that say about American credibility?

RAJU: Yeah.

KIM: We saw this in 1991 in Iraq, when the president back then you know encouraged some uprisings. This is something that isn't going to play out well, and its, again, going to put our service members in harm's way.

RAJU: I do want to ask about Tuesday, the State of the Union Address. There are a lot of Democrats skipping this address. Are you going to skip it?

KIM: I'm going to be there at the Capitol -- I'm going to -- you know, here's what I'll say --

RAJU: I just ask you before you say that, because we've seen theatrics, we've seen heckling, we've seen last year Al Green, the congressman from Texas, went down the aisle and was taunting Trump over Medicaid cuts. He was escorted out.

We've seen people -- Democrats last year, they had signs heckling Trump. Should Democrats do that this year, so they heckle him?

KIM: Well, what I -- what I hope to see is that Democrats, we know our power, right?

This is a president that is coming into a State of the Union at his weakest point in his presidency. He just suffered this major setback by the Supreme Court. The American people have turned against him so clearly after what happened in Minnesota.

This is a weakened president. This is going to be Donald Trump's final State of the Union before a Republican controlled Congress. I am certain of that. And we need to show and the Democratic Party that we understand what it means to be able to take control of power in Congress

RAJU: So -- so no outbursts, no outbursts?

KIM: I just want us to show the seriousness of what we're trying to do and not just what were opposed to with Trump but that we're going to have our own agenda, we're going to be positive in terms of what we're showing the American people, especially on the issues of affordability, which is top of mind. So whatever we do, I don't think everyone has to be at the Capitol as long as we are all using every tool in our toolbox to get the message out about the lies that he's going to say at the State of the Union, as well as what our message is and all the focus is on winning in November taking back control and having a very different State of the Union next year, that shows the Democratic Party moving forward against this dangers and damages of Trump. RAJU: Well, I appreciate you coming in. It sounds like you're not in

favor of those outbursts, the theatrics that we've seen. That was my takeaway from your response.

But, Senator Kim, thank you so much for talking to me this morning. We appreciate your time.

KIM: Thank you.

RAJU: All right the first big primaries of the 2026 cycle are just nine days away. Democrats a huge test in Texas where Stephen Colbert could have an impact on the outcome. That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:31:06]

MANU RAJU, CNN HOST AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Democrats have been in a drought in Texas with no one in their party winning statewide in more than three decades, 1994 the most recent victory. But this year Democrats see at least an outside chance of pulling off a huge upset, in no small part buoyed by a divisive GOP primary for Senator John Cornyn's seat.

Yet the Democrats have their own internal battle that will give us a glimpse into the party's internal debate in this era of Trump. With just nine days until the March 3rd primary, Congressman Jasmine Crockett and state representative James Talarico are barnstorming the state in a push for the Democratic nomination.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STATE REP. JAMES TALARICO (D-TX), SENATE CANDIDATE: We're going to every corner of the state. We're not writing off any voter. We're not writing off any community. We're talking to everyone and going everywhere because that is how we're going to flip this state in November of this year.

REP. JASMINE CROCKETT (D-TX), SENATE CANDIDATE: We are in the fight for our lives. people can take a chance on somebody that says that they will fight.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

CROCKETT: Or they can go with a proven fighter.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: My panel is back with me now. I mean this race got a lot more interesting after Stephen Colbert's whole episode last week in which he aired the interview on YouTube because he said the FCC was imposing its equal time rule. And Talarico raised $2.5 million in a single day.

And that was -- this poll was taken before that whole Colbert flap. Jasmine Crockett was up by eight points. But a lot of people were undecided. And this is a couple of weeks ago. This race is changing. How do you see it, Hans?

HANS NICHOLS, AXIOS POLITICAL RERPORTER: I see it's very expensive and that's like the only thing that I think we really can say at this point. Republicans are just pouring money into it, right.

What's great about the race is it's interesting on both sides, right. We have this Cornyn-Paxton showdown on the Republican side. Crockett- Talarico on the Democratic side.

Republicans have traditionally treated Texas like a giant ATM. They show up there and they raise money. This year, it's going to be a giant sinkhole. They're going to spend so much money there regardless of who comes through.

I think it will be really interesting the fingertip reporting coming out on the Democratic side, because the polls are pretty quirky. They're dated. It's not -- it's a tough -- it's an expensive state to poll.

So it's anyone's guess right now on the Democratic side and the Republican side. All the money that the Republican establishment is spending trying to take down Ken Paxton and his numbers have barely moved. And that tells us something.

RAJU: And the reason why this is so significant, too, is that the calendar, because this -- primaries on March 3rd, you need to have a majority of the vote in order to get the nomination. If you don't get a majority of the vote, then you go into a two-month runoff and May 26th is the runoff.

And the Republicans are destined -- now, it's a three-man race in that runoff, so they're destined to go to a runoff.

But the Democrats could get behind a nominee on Tuesday, giving them a two-month advantage. Who do you think has the advantage when it's Crockett or Talarico versus one of the Republicans?

JASMINE WRIGHT, NOTUS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think it's interesting because Jasmine Crockett has been running a very nontraditional campaign. My colleagues have done a lot of reporting on this. And before all of the Stephen Colbert stuff, she was basically being spent 19 to 1, according to my colleague Alex Roarty on political ads.

Just a few weeks ago, she ran her first political ad. Some Democrats were questioning who was running her campaign and how it was functioning. And so she had kind of some of these more problematic things going on with her campaign.

And yet she was still incredibly competitive against Talarico and still might even win this.

RAJU: Yes.

WRIGHT: And so I think that you're fundamentally seeing somebody who is really buoyant by name I.D. and by popularity which only increased after the Colbert episode versus kind of Talarico who's maybe known in the state but not so known nationally.

RAJU: Yes. And speaking of the money, we have the money figures here -- ad spending Team Talarico $11.4 million, compared to Jasmine Crockett's $2.7 million.

[08:34:51]

RAJU: So I was in Texas actually last week, and I'm doing this -- we have a story next Sunday on INSIDE POLITICS and the Republican primary.

I spoke to a number of Republicans about everything that was going on there, including one Congressman Goldman, Craig Goldman, from Texas, from the Fort Worth area, about how he views the Democratic primary and who he thinks would be a tougher candidate.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STATE REP. CRAIG GOLDMAN (R-TX): I served with James Talarico. He's a very good -- he was a very good member of the state house, and we've seen it on the campaign trail. He's run a picture-perfect campaign.

And he's a formidable opponent in November. And that's why we need John Cornyn to win the primary.

RAJU: What about Crockett, though? I mean, you could -- she may be the nominee.

GOLDMAN: Maybe. I doubt it.

RAJU: You think Talarico is the nominee?

GOLDMAN: No. Again, I a I'm a political science nerd and I follow these races very closely. I think Talarico is going to run away with the primary. He'd be a very tough opponent in November.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: You know, I spoke to a lot of Republicans who say that they think Talarico. They're more concerned about Talarico.

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Yes and ironically, I think a lot of Democrats outside Texas might actually agree with that Republican there because they believe that Talarico is the kind of candidate that Democrats need in red states, because going forward, not just now, but after the next census, Democrats are going to have to appeal to conservative voters if they're going to win majorities.

I think the Crockett campaign would argue that she's just as capable of winning the race, because she could get Democratic voters who are low propensity and don't often come out and get a bump of Democratic turnout. And she might therefore be a better anti-Trump candidate than Talarico. But this is where the Colbert thing was so important, because he was

almost running as the electability candidate. Then he got this extra exposure, and he can now run also as an anti-Trump candidate, and that might help him with some of the more core Democratic voters.

RAJU: So this comes as we're heading into primary season. Just look at the calendar on your screen. There's so many primaries coming up. March 3rd really kicks things off.

But there's one in Illinois that -- to look out for, too. That's a Democratic primary. Democrats are likely to hold the seat. One candidate there, Juliana Stratton, put out this ad to get some attention last week. Just watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) Trump. Vote Juliana.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) Trump. Vote Juliana.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) Trump. Vote Juliana.

JULIANA STRATTON (D), ILLINOIS SENATE CANDIDATE: They said it not me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Effective?

NICHOLS: Well, yes.

(CROSSTALKING)

NICHOLS: Are you kidding me?

COLLINSON: We're playing it on air.

NICHOLS: Yes, yes, yes. We're playing it on air. And we're all smiling because we're all like oh the bleep out, right. So yes, effective. Yes.

I mean how you win a Democratic party is primary showing fight against Trump. And that's probably the clearest distillation of that. So yes. But I won't swear. Yes I was about to say bleep yes.

RAJU: Right. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Please don't, especially for your Sunday morning viewing audience.

All right. Not only are we just about a week out from the first primary for 2026, we're also starting to see some moves in the 2028 presidential election. Some big-name Democrats staying far away from the White House last night.

[08:37:56]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you running for president?

GOV. GRETCHER WHITMER (D-MI): No.

GOV. WES MOORE (D-MD): No, I'm not running for president.

GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): It's wildly premature. We'll see what happens in the future, and we'll play that out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Or so they say. The first president -- first primary in the 2028 presidential election is still two years away but that hasn't stopped a wide-open field of Democrats from testing the waters.

My panel is back.

This is the season for books. We're seeing one potential 2028 candidate after another with different memoirs. You know, Mark Kelly has a policy book -- policy proposal book about how to deal with A.I. in America. But this is their opportunity to get back on the trail.

What are you seeing from your watching these maneuverings, from these potential hopefuls?

WRIGHT: Yes. Well, as a former campaign embed, I have seen this story before. It is not new or it is not unique.

RAJU: You'll see the book -- you'll see the book rollout.

WRIGHT: You'll see the books. You'll see them going out and stumping in the midterms and saying that I'm just here to support Democrats. I'm not here to put forward any of my policy.

RAJU: Yes. Not in the swing state. I don't really care about my own interests.

WRIGHT: And then you'll get a little dipping of the toe come January, February, you know, those committees until we get into the full shake of it.

I think that these Democrats are using every opportunity that they can to not just try to define themselves, but also define themselves in the shadow of Donald Trump. How anti-Trump are they?

You've seen it last night when you saw a lot of Democrats not going to the White House for the meeting, obviously some of them were invited.

RAJU: National Governors Association.

WRIGHT: The National Governors Association, some of them elected not to go. You're going to see them continuously come out and talk about -- you're seeing Abigail Spanberger give the Democratic response of the State of the Union. So you're seeing all of these potential hopefuls come out and try to

really get their name out there, not just to be anti-Trump but to be more anti-Trump than their Democratic colleagues.

RAJU: Since this is INSIDE POLITICS and we like polls and it's never too early to do a poll. Maybe it is too early to do a poll but we'll still look at the poll as well.

Grain of salt, of course, because we are two years out, but this is how a recent poll -- Yahoo poll had about the Democratic nominee, the choice among Democratic voters. No clear leader.

[08:44:44]

RAJU: Gavin Newsom is at the top of the pack here, above Kamala Harris. A lot of this, of course, is name I.D. at this point, and this will undoubtedly change.

What's interesting is some of the steps that Newsom has taken. Just last week, he announced that he's supporting a ban, California legislation to ban social media for kids who are 16 and under --

NICHOLS: Yes.

RAJU: -- which is an interesting move.

NICHOLS: You're seeing all the candidates trying to create their own lanes. Newsom has done that on social media. Rahm Emanuel has been doing a version of that on social media on education. They all want to be have something that is clearly defined with them that resonates with voters, right.

And yes, the 19 percent that are for Newsom, that might be name I.D. I actually love polls this time of year. I don't like polls after Labor Day. After Labor Day polls, that it's like the sun don't look at them. Like, you know bad things happen. You just get too addicted to them.

Now they're somewhat useful because they're kind of telling us where people are and how things need to be sorted out, right.

So but yes you know, people are talking about this Munich Security Conference. That was the first primary state, Bavaria. I didn't have Bavaria on my dance card for being an early primary state.

But there will be other moments going forward where suddenly there will be something in the national headlines, candidates will be reacting, or they'll be trying to create their own news vortex. and it will become a primary and we'll talk about it.

RAJU: Yes.

NICHOLS: So there'll be something in the future and you'll have dozens of these before they actually have a primary.

RAJU: Speaking of the Munich Security Conference, Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez had a -- quite a viral moment, shall we say, after she was asked about how the U.S. should respond if China were to invade Taiwan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would and should the U.S. actually commit U.S. troops to defend Taiwan if China were to move?

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ: You know, I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is a -- this is, of course, a very longstanding policy of the United States. And I think what we --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: So how bad will this be for her? Is it lasting? Is it a fleeting moment? What's your sense of the impact on her -- in her ambitions?

COLLINSON: I think it was obviously pretty painful and it's going to be brought up over and over again because it plays into a perception that some have that Ocasio-Cortez is not particularly expert on foreign policy.

And if you go to Munich of all places, you ought to get your sort of basic answers on foreign policy down.

That said, in the era after Trump, are we going to judge candidates by exactly the same criteria as they used to be judged? I mean, the president says all sorts of outrageous things about foreign policy every day. It's interesting. Are we going to go back to that?

So, you know in the end, foreign policy probably isn't going to decide the election.

RAJU: Yes.

COLLINSON: I remember 2008, Barack Obama got into a spat on the second day of his first campaign trip in Iowa with Australia over Afghanistan policy. Nobody remembers that now.

RAJU: Yes.

COLLINSON: So it is very early and people can change the perception.

RAJU: And AOC took a swipe a bit and a little bit of herself and a JD Vance she said in a post about responding to JD Vance's response to something, she said. "The only thing longer than my pause to think was their silence to his joke", referring to JD Vance's comments.

All right. Coming up, President Trump's State of the Union address is now just two days away. Remember when these speeches used to be civil? Well, not so much anymore.

A glimpse at the Democrats' plans for Tuesday and the wild moments in recent history.

That's next.

[08:48:25] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: Remember when State Of the Union addresses were relatively civil? Yes, the president would make political points. His side of the aisle would hoot and holler. His opponents would sit on their hands. But there was relatively little, if any, heckling.

Those days are long gone. Just as President Trump is set to deliver his annual speech on Tuesday.

Now, it's quite common for loud outbursts from the president's adversaries. Some of this can be traced back to 2009, when then- President Barack Obama addressed a joint session of Congress to make a pitch on his signature health care legislation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

REP. JOE WILSON (R-SC): You lie.

OBAMA: It's not true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Republican Congressman Joe Wilson later apologized to Obama. But since then the heckling is relatively normal and the hecklers have been unapologetic and oftentimes defiant.

When President Biden addressed members in the packed House chamber, he faced pointed heckling from several Republicans like Congresswomen Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene during a number of his speeches.

And in 2024, I got the chance to catch up with GOP Congressman Derrick Van Orden after his outburst at Biden, where he accused him of lying.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: You're obviously a member of the house. Is it appropriate for you to yell out lies when the president is addressing you, guys?

REP. DERRICK VAN ORDEN (R-WI): Is it appropriate to tell the truth?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Democrats have had their share of outbursts as well, and have taken their protests to a whole new level breaking with tradition last year and refusing to escort Trump into the chamber. And during Trump's speech, Congressman Al Green, a Democrat of Texas, stood up and yelled at Trump over Medicaid and was escorted out of the chamber and later censured by the House.

[08:54:53] RAJU: Other Democrats walked out in the middle of the speech by Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury, who was waving a sign that said, quote "This is not normal", which was ripped away by a Republican member.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: I saw you get up and walk out. Why?

REP. MELANIE STANSBURY (D-NM): Because we're not going to normalize this.

RAJU: Democratic leaders didn't want you guys to do this but you did anyways.

STANSBURY: You know what? I can't speak for what leadership's expectations were, but I do think that it was important for the American people to see that we have their backs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: This year, at least a dozen Democrats plan to boycott the address and attend a rally dubbed "The People's State of the Union" on the National Mall.

But in the House chamber, where I'll be on Tuesday, it very well could be another raucous affair. And even after the speech wraps, well, there could be theatrics like when then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi infamously tore apart Trump's 2020 address. And those moments, of course, could steal the show.

That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY.

Up next, "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH". Dana's guests include Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and California Governor Gavin Newsom.

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

[08:56:05]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)