Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

This Week: Can Dems Win Key Battle In Trump's Fight Over Maps?; Trump: Iran Violated Ceasefire In Strait Of Hormuz; Must-Win Michigan Senate Race Turns Messy For Democrats. Must-Win Michigan Senate Race Turns Messy for Democrats; Trump Promised a Shift on Marijuana but Why Hasn't It Happened yet. Aired 8-9a ET

Aired April 19, 2026 - 08:00   ET

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

[08:00:22]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(MUSIC)

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Strait talk.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's working out very well. They got a little cute, as they have been doing for 47 years.

RAJU: President Trump projects optimism as Iran fires back. With hours left, can they stave off a return to war?

Plus, drawing lines.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We didn't start this fight, but I'm saying to Virginia, we need to finish it.

RAJU: Heavy hitters hit the trail with the house hanging in the balance. Can Democrats hold off any last-minute redistricting upsets?

And Great Lakes stakes.

STATE REP. MALLORY MCMORROW (D), MICHIGAN: Donald Trump should not be the president.

REP. HALEY STEVENS (D-MI): This is about winning for Michigan.

RAJU: I traveled to Michigan, where Democrats are split in a contentious race.

Why make that choice to actively campaign with them?

Will it hurt their chances of taking back the Senate?

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's unprecedented mid-decade campaign to redraw house district lines, set off an arms race across the country. And now it comes to a head in Virginia on Tuesday.

Democrats want to gerrymander Virginia maps to help them pick up as many as four seats to help win back power in the House. But first, voters in the commonwealth have to approve Tuesday's ballot referendum nationwide, the House GOP now holds a three-seat advantage in the gerrymandering battle that Trump began in Texas last year, with Virginia and Florida waiting in the wings.

Now, ahead of Tuesday, big names from both parties have been on the trail in Virginia. And while President Trump has stayed away, former President Obama made a final appeal to voters despite his own past opposition to partisan gerrymandering.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: By voting yes, you can push back against the Republicans trying to give themselves an unfair advantage in the midterms. By voting yes, you can take a temporary step to level the playing field.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. Joining me now to unpack all of this, Hans Nichols with "Axios", Seung Min Kim with "The Associated Press", "Semafor's" David Weigel.

Good morning to you all.

HANS NICHOLS, POLITICAL REPORTER, AXIOS: Good morning.

RAJU: Mr. Weigel, you've been on the ground in Virginia. We've all been on the ground in Virginia. It's not so far from here.

(LAUGHTER)

DAVID WEIGEL, NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER, SEMAFOR: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

RAJU: A stone's throw away.

But you've been covering this race. I mean, the reason why this is so significant, not only is it the likely the adding four seats, which could determine control of the House, and this Tuesday referendum is so important. Just look at the -- just the split in the map. Six Democrats, five Republicans as the current Virginia delegation, it would go to 10 to 1. That is a very serious gerrymander in a state that Kamala Harris won by, what, five points back in 2024?

What are you hearing on the ground and the likelihood how this ultimately could turn out on Tuesday? WEIGEL: Well, I'm seeing on the ground the map that you've been

flashing on screen at that rally where you saw some footage of Glenn Youngkin, in a kind of unprecedented way, coming out and campaigning against his successor as a recent former governor, that that map was just displayed at the rally the entire time. Look at what they're trying to do to us.

So, Republicans have run a very effective campaign to turn this from a referendum on Trump, as every Democrat phrases it, to a referendum on Democrats. In fairness, hey, voters voted for this independent redistricting commission. It ended up being drawn by courts. Is it really fair for them to do this?

The Democratic argument is almost this is electoral chemotherapy. It's unpleasant. We don't have to do it. But when it's all over and you ring the bell, were going to beat Donald Trump. Isn't that what's important?

And so, their persuasion has been not just Democratic voters. The reason they've done so well in Virginia over the last 10 years is this reaction to Trump. They're convinced, trying to convince Republican -- people who are Republican not that long ago.

It's so dangerous. It's so important to get rid of Trump that you need to do something you don't want and disempower your old party for totally partisan reasons. But just for a couple of years.

RAJU: And the question that Democrats fear right now is that could they lose this? Because you look at the polls, it actually hasn't been a ton of polls. In fact, one recent one was at the end of march. That's really the one that were looking at right now is from "The Washington Post".

Five points, that's the advantage right now in that poll at the end of the month, there's early voting has happened since then or it happened during then and has happened since.

But then you look at who is absolutely certain to vote in this election. Republican leaning voters, according to this poll, more likely than Democrat voters by eight points.

NICHOLS: This is the first time we've seen a split where the enthusiasm is on the Republican side in really since the 2024 election.

[08:05:02]

So that's an interesting data point. Again, we just have to let voters vote here. I'm going to take Dave's chemotherapy analogy and take it one step further. And that mid-cycle redistricting is a lot like day drinking, right? You're not supposed to drink during the day.

RAJU: Says who?

(LAUGHTER)

NICHOLS: Yeah, exactly.

But you're really not supposed to like as long as you do it at the end of the decade, it's fine. As long as you have a drink at the end of the -- at the end of the day, the shoulder of the day, you're fine. But in the middle of the day, we all kind of look askance on that.

And what's happened here is that you've seen different electorates respond differently to this idea of day drinking. And so, in California, they're like fine, four seats, let's do it, right? Because Republicans went first. They're day drinking in Texas. Let's day drink in California.

It's really a question for Virginia if they want to go this this sort of intense extreme was the first word that came to my mind. But I feel like that's a little unfair. But like 10 to 1 in a state that's 55-45, that's a lot. How many seats they pick up? Four.

How many seats did Democrats pick up in California? Four. What's the big difference? California has 53 congressional districts. Virginia has 11. It's a much more aggressive take here in Virginia.

RAJU: And as you mentioned that and day drinking, that's a great analogy. I spoke to Don Beyer, who's a congressman from Virginia, and I asked him about the difference between California and Virginia and the concerns whether Democrats were concerned that they could blow this critical race.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Are you concerned that the Republicans may win this?

REP. DON BEYER (D-VA): Well, it's always going to be close. We never knew that. It was never going to be California. California -- the Republicans didn't fight back then. They were picking up five seats out of 47. We're picking up four out of 11.

So, it's an existential crisis for the Republicans here. It's an easy note for Republicans. Democrats have to put it in the context of stopping Donald Trump and that this is a reaction to a fight we didn't start.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Yeah. And, you know, there were now this California map is going to be heavily gerrymandered, of course. But as Hans was saying, there's so many more congressional districts in California.

What do you make of that? You know, he's saying that this is going to be close.

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: It's going to be close. And I think the Democrats, they're -- their most effective argument is what the congressman said, that this is about stopping Donald Trump. And I was really taken by President Obama in his ad when he said this was a temporary fix. And, you know, going back to Dave's analogy here, Democrats have always been the party where we support independent redistricting commissions. We support, you know, you know, stricter campaign finance laws. But when the rules of politics are what they are with Republicans, there are most Democrats were seeing are that we have to play by the rules as they are, not as they want them.

But there are a lot of swing voters in Virginia who I feel I don't think it's as easy as extrapolating. You know, for example, the 2025 gubernatorial results to this. I think there are a lot of swing voters who are willing to vote for Democratic candidates, but maybe not the process that Democrats are pushing.

RAJU: Yeah. Speaking of former presidents and current presidents is what, you know, as you mentioned, Democrats have been saying they're against gerrymandering. Barack Obama just from July 2020, for too long, gerrymandering has contributed to stalled progress in warped representative government. That's what he said then.

Now he's saying this is a temporary measure. The Democrats are saying they've got to respond to Trump. So that's their message kind of complicated, you would say.

And then there's the current president who's not spending really much money at all. He's a gigantic war chest, $312 million cash on hand in Trump's super PAC, MAGA Inc. And they have not made this a big focus. And perhaps they could use some of the money.

Look at the Virginia ad spending so far through Friday, $52 million bucks for the Democrats, and just $20 million for Republicans.

Why isn't Trump getting more involved here?

WEIGEL: That was the question you asked about California. And he's -- he's not as unpopular in California as he was in Virginia, but generally in lower turnout election. This might be a higher turnout than most referendums. You'd want the president to do this.

I've seen conservative commentators in Virginia ask if J.D. Vance could come and campaign for them. Republicans have taken the very cautious position. They've taken a lot of blue states, which is if he elevates it, it's just going to wake up more of their voters. He was in Charlottesville the time that Youngkin was -- the same day, I should say. Youngkin and Mike Johnson were rallying. And he had -- he's had nothing to say about it.

So, Republicans have not asked him to come. One thing -- one thing ill add, though, is that people like to be the fairness party. And when we were asking Republicans at this rally about the Republican response, one of them said, I think it was Rob Wittman. Well, they did the right thing in Indiana, so we should do the right thing here.

RAJU: Yeah.

WEIGEL: The Trump position is that they did not do the right thing in Indiana by not gerrymandering that state. And he has spent money to defeat Republicans who stopped him from drawing out two Democrats there. So, what would he say in Virginia that's consistent? It's hard to say. RAJU: It's really uncertain. I mean, look, how the House -- control

of the House could be at stake here. Why not dip in his money? These are the four Republicans who could lose their seats potentially if this does go through, you can see them on your screen.

I asked Congresswoman Jen Kiggans about this on Thursday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JEN KIGGANS (R-VA): Right now, it's a -- it's an independent redistricting. And 92 percent of the commonwealth is -- one political party represents 92 percent.

[08:10:03]

That is not fair.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: I mean, look, the larger issue with redistricting here, which is why it shouldn't happen mid-decade. It typically happens at the beginning of the decade. It's because it's supposed to reflect the census. It's supposed to reflect where the population is in this country.

But now by this mid-decade fight, we're going to get gerrymandered district, gerrymandered district, meaning more partisan members and less incentive to work in a bipartisan fashion.

NICHOLS: This is the broader Obama point, right? You have highly partisan districts. That means all the energy is on who can win the primary, which is further fractures the parties, and you have less room for consensus in the middle.

I'll stop now with my PBS hour news take on this, and we can just get back to like, is this going to win or not?

And I like it just -- it's going to come down to how -- I mean, the idea that Trump is not going to be somehow involved in this just because he's not actually going there. He's still going to be part of the conversation. And that's what Democrats are using to motivate their people. So again, we'll let voters vote.

RAJU: Yeah. And they will on Tuesday. And we'll see because it will have huge ramifications for November.

All right. Still ahead, why are Republicans making Michigan their top target to flip a senate seat? Well, I just hit the trail there to dig into the battle consuming Democrats.

Plus, Trump just a couple days ago proclaimed the Strait of Hormuz is completely open. So why does that critical shipping lane seem to be largely shut down? What does that mean for the war?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:15:51]

RAJU: Breaking this morning, President Trump says Iran is in, quote, "total violation of our ceasefire agreement" and says, quote, "My representatives will be in Islamabad tomorrow evening."

Now, Trump had made a very loud declaration repeatedly on Friday that the Strait of Hormuz was, quote, "completely open and ready for business in full passage". But what a difference a couple of days make.

On Saturday, Iran announced it would close the strait, alleging breach of trust with the U.S. -- with breaches of trust with the U.S., given that Iranian gunboats even fired on a tanker trying to pass through the critical passageway and a second vessel was hit by a projectile.

Yesterday, at the White House, in days before the Wednesday ceasefire deadline, Trump was not nearly as effusive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: They got a little cute as they have been doing for 47 years. They wanted to close up the strait again, you know, as they've been doing for years, and they can't blackmail us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: All right. My panel is back with me now, including Seung Min Kim, who covers the White House.

Okay, so this is a pretty, pretty significant statement by the president saying total violation of our ceasefire agreement. Now he's saying that there will be negotiations tomorrow evening in Pakistan. This comes after what we saw this weekend.

What are you hearing? Obviously, this is just happening.

KIM: We just heard from the president.

RAJU: We heard from the president.

KIM: Yes.

RAJU: What does this mean? I mean, does this mean that we could see military campaign begin anew?

KIM: Well, he certainly threatening something major if they don't take that deal that the president wants regarding their nuclear initiatives. He's talking about in that same truth social post, knock out every single power plant. If they don't come to an agreement and he's putting really harsh rhetoric on, again, saying, "No more Mr. Nice Guy" when it comes to this.

We knew that there was something potentially afoot in Pakistan. My colleagues on the ground for "The Associated Press" reported that security officials were making preparations in Islamabad for potential high-level negotiations again. Now, we don't have confirmation that it's Vice President J.D. Vance, although he was the last person who went there.

But remember, you know, when he -- when he was there just over a week ago, what he talked for, you know, 20-some-odd hours. There was no progress being made. And it's unclear whether we will see anything in these next round of talks. Obviously, the ceasefire, the two-week ceasefire expires, you know, later this Wednesday. He's talking about, you know, that they've effectively violated now.

Now, Iran says they had effectively reclosed the strait because the president in his truth social post on Friday, says the naval blockade is still on. So, it's just a lot of -- lot of moving pieces, a lot of hostility there. And just -- again, that's why these talks will be really important to see what happens.

RAJU: Yeah. But I mean, this kind of follows a pattern of Trump talking, making these rosy projections about where things are going. I mean, Friday repeatedly saying, we're open for business. Everything is back to normal. He may even go to Islamabad on -- and ink the deal himself. And this is all over, but everything is much more complicated when it comes to war.

NICHOLS: Yeah, well, true. To me, the news here --

RAJU: And with Trump and the way he projects things.

NICHOLS: Yeah. And like, look, my read on this, take this tweet. Initially, this truth was that it was actually fairly subdued. It was almost diplomatic, dare I say, for Trump, right?

He wasn't talking about the end of civilization. There was no insult to religion, right?

RAJU: Fewer all caps.

NICHOLS: Yeah. And, and importantly, I mean, to me here, the news is that he that talks are restarting, the diplomatic talks are going to be taking place in Islamabad. That to me is the news.

The idea that the ceasefire is broken, that facts on the ground were sort of bearing that out, right? The ceasefire was broken. Now there aren't missiles flying bombs are not in the air.

But to me, this is Trump saying that there's another chance for diplomacy. We always knew that the Wednesday deadline was the real deadline when the ceasefire expires. And we'll see whether or not his Iranian interlocutors can actually respond the way he wants.

To me, one thing that's sort of underreported here is that there's clearly a divide within Iran, right, where the people he's negotiating with that are in parliament, in the government, the foreign minister, and then you have the IRGC who has actual control with facts on the ground.

[08:20:00]

And so, Trump needs to make sure that one part of the Iranian government controls the other, and they can actually get a deal. But look, the peace talks looks like they're back on.

RAJU: Yeah. We'll see. I mean, that's -- that's the --

NICHOLS: That's an optimistic view.

RAJU: And it could --

NICHOLS: It's terribly wrong.

RAJU: But you could also be right. And hopefully the world community probably hopes you are right as well. But I mean, does Trump have the stomach to continue with another bombing campaign against Iran? I mean we saw how bad it got in the last couple of months. We saw how his party started to fracture over this. The MAGA movement started to fracture gas prices skyrocketing. Does he really want to go through with this? Because the tea leaves suggested as of late last week, he didn't.

WEIGEL: No, he wants to declare victory, which is infectious for Republicans. I noticed on the trail that includes Virginia last week that Republicans are overly optimistic about whatever Trump is going to do, succeeding.

So last Saturday, one question for Republicans in Virginia was, is the presidents end this war in Iran hurting you? And the consensus from these four members of Congress who might lose their seats was, no, we have a Strait of Hormuz open again. And at that point, it wasn't open. And right now, it's not open. But they were talking like it was.

And I -- this is a president who has -- he's very aware that a lot of his appeal in 2024 was that he had not start a war in the first term. We all know that. But he is leaving his party, even if they support what he's doing adrift on what the end game is and why it should affect people.

We could also hear Republicans say Americans are willing to put up with some sacrifice if it means getting rid of the mullahs. Is that that clear? I don't find that on the trail that Americans are that engaged with this story. And what are they hearing from the president? We're about to win.

So, you're not seeing any kind of buildup of trust from Republicans who are not running for reelection. They needed the presidents support and or for the Republican base. They're just saying, wrap this up already. That seems to be where the presidents head is at as well.

KIM: Right. And we're talking about Wednesday being a really important date because that's when the two-week ceasefire ends. I know another date that you and I are watching is the 60 days under the War Powers Act, which is supposed to be later this month, that, and that's going to be the point for a lot of Republicans on capitol hill saying, we need authorization. We need a better plan. That's when for a lot of Republicans, their patients will probably run out.

WEIGEL: Yeah. And there's no question about it. All right. So meanwhile, while all this, of course, was happening and

part of the fight over the Iran war was this row with Pope Leo, of course, and Pope Leo had made his concerns known about the Iraq war. Trump went after Pope Leo, as we've seen repeatedly, this is one of his Truth Social posts from some recently calling him weak on crime, terrible for foreign policy. There was a whole back and forth that played out.

This is what Pope Leo said just yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

POPE LEO XIV, CATHOLIC CHURCH: The first day of the trip, president United States made some comments about myself. Much of what has been written since then has been more commentary on commentary, trying to interpret what has been said. It was looked at as if I was trying to debate again the president, which is not my interest at all.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Now, after J.D. Vance said on Tuesday, the pope should be careful when speaking about theology, Vance responded to the pope's comments on X, saying Pope Leo preaches the gospel as he should, and that will inevitably mean he offers his opinions on the moral issues of the day, the president and the entire administration work to apply these moral principles in a messy world. He went on to say he is grateful for Pope Leo for saying this. He claimed that this was just a media narrative, although he saw Trump played into that narrative by offering these attacks up himself.

But my question is, is J.D. Vance trying to tamp down this fight with him?

NICHOLS: Look, it seems like it's a clear effort to de-escalate, right? I mean, I just can't get over the pope -- a pope speaking with an American accent.

KIM: So -- yeah, that's jarring. Yes.

NICHOLS: And probably the first time someone from Chicago has deescalated from someone -- with someone from New York. Let's have that.

RAJU: That's right.

NICHOLS: Right? Look, Vance wants to tamp this down. They know how crucial it is to their base. I think you saw that there. And that was -- that was Vance's diplomatic effort.

RAJU: Yeah. And as someone from Chicago, I like to escalate things with people from New York. It happens. Bulls versus Knicks in the '90s. That's one -- one way to do this or that.

All right. Next, my reporting as I went to Michigan and interviewed the top Democratic candidates for Senate in a race that is roiling the party. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: Your vote is up for grabs.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It very much is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: There's perhaps no other election this year splitting Democrats as much as the race for Michigan's open Senate seat. It's as much a fight about the future of the party as it is about finding a candidate who can beat a well-funded Republican in November, with the majority at stake. I hit the trail this month and interviewed the three Democratic candidates, along with many voters and the party's divide over tactics and policy was striking.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU (voice-over): Democrats are growing more bullish about their chances of flipping the Senate, but in Michigan, a primary fight could douse those hopes.

MCMORROW: Donald Trump should not be the president.

STEVENS: I'm leading the articles of impeachment on RFK, Jr.

ABDUL EL-SAYED (D), MICHIGAN SENATE CANDIDATE: People love to say, well, it's because he's Arab and Muslim. No, it\s because I'm (EXPLETIVE DELETED) from Michigan.

RAJU (voice-over): What started as an intraparty feud now is a clash over the party's future. What it stands for in the Trump era, and just how far left they should go.

The battle includes former public health official Abdul El-Sayed, a 41-year-old who was backed by Bernie Sanders and is staking out the most progressive positions.

RAJU: This is about electability. Your party wants to hold on to this seat, of course.

EL-SAYED: There is this notion that electability is about being the least offensive. If that were true, why would Donald Trump have won the presidency twice?

And too often in the Democratic Party, we're willing to move on our positions because of what Republicans say about us. I don't back down to anyone on anything.

RAJU: The party establishment has its own favorite. Haley Stevens, a more moderate congresswoman from the Detroit suburbs.

REP. HALEY STEVENS (D-MI), SENATE CANDIDATE: Every single poll shows I'm the best person or the only person that can beat Mike Rogers. RAJU: And then there's a state senator, Mallory McMorrow, angling for

both wings of the party while offering this warning as the GOP unites behind Mike Rogers, a former congressman who narrowly lost a Senate bid in 2024 as they aim to make Michigan their firewall to prevent Democrats from netting the four seats they need to win back power.

MALLORY MCMORROW (D-MI), SENATE CANDIDATE: And if he wins this seat, if they are successful in trying to buy this seat, then there is no path at all for Democrats to take control of the U.S. Senate.

RAJU: Now a GOP outside group is preparing to spend a staggering $45 million in the final weeks of the midterms, more than any other pickup opportunity. All as Rogers now has a bigger war chest than any of his three would-be opponents has some Democrats struggling with a thorny question in the swing state that President Donald Trump narrowly won twice and lost once.

Should they nominate a firebrand to energize the base and take a harder line?

JEFF ALBRIGHT, MICHIGAN VOTER: Anybody committed to shutting down Trump and the MAGA movement, that's --

RAJU: Number one for you.

ALBRIGHT: -- that's number one.

RAJU: Or a more traditional Democrat or even a leadership ally who could appeal to swing voters like this one.

Your vote is up for grabs.

ASHLEY MALLIETT, MICHIGAN VOTER: It very much is.

RAJU: So it could be either Democrat or Republican.

MALLIETT: It could be.

RAJU: Speaking to CNN in his hometown of Ann Arbor, El-Sayed went further to the left than his foes on issues like abolishing ICE.

EL-SAYED: It's just the same lack of courage that Democrats deploy to argue as to why they should be taking money from corporations, or why they should be hedging their bets on clear, obvious policies like abolishing ICE or guaranteeing health care through Medicare for all.

And I think what you're seeing in this race right now is that people are sick and tired of the same old Democrats who lack courage.

RAJU: But a glaring divide is over Israel in a state with a huge Arab- American community in Dearborn and a big Jewish voting bloc in Oakland County.

Why are you supporting Abdul?

STEVE BRENNER, MICHIGAN VOTER: Because he's not taking any PAC money. NICK COFFIN-CALLIS, MICHIGAN VOTER: He's against the apartheid,

against sending tax money to fund a genocide in Israel.

RAJU: An independent U.N. inquiry concluded last year that Israel had committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, an accusation the Israeli government firmly rejects.

El-Sayed, a son of Egyptian immigrants who was born in Michigan and lost to Governor Gretchen Whitmer in a tense 2018 primary, was blunt on his views.

You said the Israeli government is evil. Do you think they're just as evil as Hamas?

EL-SAYED: Yes. Killing tens of thousands of people makes you pretty damn evil. It's not how evil is this one versus that one? Hamas, evil. Israeli government, evil. We can say both.

RAJU: Is Netanyahu in your view --

EL-SAYED: War criminal.

RAJU: He's a war criminal.

EL-SAYED: Absolutely. Do you not think he is? When you conduct a genocide, you're a war criminal.

RAJU: What do you make of the fact that Haley Stevens is backed by AIPAC?

EL-SAYED: I find that disastrous for our politics. You should be more interested in what's happening in Michigan than you are interested in what's happening in Tel Aviv.

RAJU: But about 60 miles away in Lansing, one Stevens supporter touts the congresswoman's support for Israel.

ROBIN GILLIS, MICHIGAN VOTER: It's a normal position for normal Democrats to support and, you know, be allies with Israel. I'm a normal Democrat. I want to vote for a normal Democrat.

RAJU: The 42-year-old Stevens, who first won a battleground district in 2018, is running a middle-of-the-road campaign. It wants to stay focused on economic issues.

You have the support of AIPAC in this race. I'm wondering, do you embrace that support?

STEVENS: Well, look, I'm campaigning in a grassroots way alongside a ton of engaged Michiganders.

RAJU: But there's also talk about from some of your opponents here that Israel, in their view, committed genocide in Gaza. Do you agree with that?

STEVENS: I don't agree with that. And like, I you know, I've been very consistent on this issue, Manu. I just think we need to see long-term peace. We need to make --

RAJU: Is that position though going to hurt you in Dearborn where you need those Arab voters?

STEVENS: Look, I'm out here every single day hearing from Michiganders who are dealing with rising costs, who are worried about their jobs.

[08:34:49]

RAJU: McMorrow, the 39-year-old Democratic whip in the State Senate, goes further than Stevens.

Do you think that Benjamin Netanyahu has committed war crimes in Gaza?

MCMORROW: I do. You know, watching the devastation, I do believe the war crimes were committed.

RAJU: As she stumps in breweries, including one in the Detroit suburb of Canton.

JAN BROUGHAM, MICHIGAN VOTER: I like Mallory, she's a tough talker.

RAJU: McMorrow says Al-Sayed's rhetoric does not match reality.

MCMORROW: Rhetoric is nice, but results are better.

RAJU: Do you think that he is pretty much all rhetoric? His campaign?

MCMORROW: I think a lot of it is.

RAJU: Is the Democratic Party looking for someone, though, who really wants to shake things up?

MCMORROW: Absolutely. Just doing rallies and talking about issues and having rhetoric without knowing how to actually implement those things is not going to shake it up at all. That's just lobbing bombs from the outside.

RAJU: Yet McMorrow has drawn criticism from El-Sayed, shifting her stances on issues such as Israel and corporate PAC money.

EL-SAYED: It's not just your positions, it's about whether or not you truly and deeply hold on to them.

RAJU: But does it look like to you that McMorrow is shifting her position? She does not have the same deeply-held views as you.

EL-SAYED: I know where my positions are, and it's clear that she's moved on a lot of these questions.

RAJU: While Stevens accepts corporate PAC money, McMorrow says she now refuses it after accepting it in past campaigns.

EL-SAYED: That's a change. That's a flip.

RAJU: McMorrow defends her pivot. MCMORROW: Over the years, I learned that not only can we campaign

differently, but we can't be Republican-lite, and I am willing to be somebody who evolves.

RAJU: El-Sayed has accused McMorrow of co-opting his positions and copying his homework poorly.

MCMORROW: This is governing. It's not middle school.

RAJU: Yet it's El-Sayed who has generated the most headlines like when he barnstormed college campuses with widely-followed left-wing streamer Hasan Piker, who has a history of inflammatory comments including saying Hamas is a quote, "thousand times better than Israel" and this about the 9/11 attacks.

HASAN PIKER, LEFT WING STREAMER: America deserved 9/11, dude. (EXPLETIVE DELETED) it, I'm saying it.

RAJU: While Piker later walked back the remarks about 9/11, El-Sayed's opponents have seized on them.

Should he have brought him in to campaign with him?

MCMORROW: I wouldn't have.

STEVENS: Yes. Well, first of all, that's not someone I'd be campaigning with.

RAJU: Why not?

STEVENS: Because it's un-American. And we shouldn't say that America is, you know, deserved 9/11. This is about winning for Michigan.

RAJU: El-Sayed pushes back. What do you say?

EL-SAYED: My understanding of America is it's a place where we have freedom of speech. My understanding of America is it's a place where we're willing to have conversations with folks with whom we disagree.

I went on "Fox and Friends" this morning. Is it un-American to go and speak on "Fox and Friends"? Or are we drawing certain kinds of lines?

And it's that penchant for cancel culture that I think people hate about Democrats.

RAJU: But you're actively campaigning with them. This is a choice you're making.

EL-SAYED: For sure.

RAJU: So why make -- why make that choice to actively campaign with them?

EL-SAYED: Because I know that he's having a conversation with a number of folks who feel locked out.

RAJU: Part of that conversation is whether the party should dump Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, whom Stevens has praised.

You had called Chuck Schumer a great leader. Do you stand by that?

STEVENS: Look, inside baseball -- look, you know what? That kind of stuff we'll deal with when I get there.

RAJU: But McMorrow says it's time for a change.

MCMORROW: We need new leadership in the Senate, you know.

RAJU: Haley Stevens told me that that's an inside baseball discussion.

MCMORROW; I can tell you what I hear on the ground, which is people want a better Democratic Party.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

RAJU: All right. Coming up, our expert panel here breaks down what we just heard and what it means for Democrats.

Plus, when are Democrats bringing in the big bucks? Our dive into the midterms.

[08:38:21]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: Michigan could very easily determine who controls the Senate. But as you just heard from my piece, that primary is anything but straightforward.

Let's turn back to my panel, including David Weigel, who's been covering this as well. And David, you had a tweet that kind of summed up basically the entire premise here. The entire primary basically.

El-Sayed, I'm taking the most maximal left-wing position.

McMorrow, I wouldn't go that far.

Stevens, oh golly. I love manufacturing.

It kind of speaks to what we're seeing in the party. How do you see this?

DAVID WEIGEL, SEMAFOR NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER: They like to be pithy.

RAJU: Yes.

WEIGEL: But that's been the dynamic for a year. El-Sayed got in a year ago and just put down his stakes as the Bernie candidate. Day one endorsement from Bernie Sanders, who's been more aggressive, I think, this cycle than in the past in saying, these are my candidates. You guys don't know how to win, I do.

One of the challenges in Michigan is Democrats do know how to win Michigan, not against Trump twice, but Michigan has a record of senators who are not that flashy, who do the work.

Debbie Stabenow and Gary Peters get reelected despite not being social media stars, and the offer that they have is from El-Sayed, a very aggressive progressive to the left-wing media star.

McMorrow has been -- there's a reason she was on stage as a state senator at the DNC in prime time. McMorrow's a communicator that Democrats feel very comfortable with.

Stevens is -- I was in Michigan when she won her 2022 member-on-member primary with the help of AIPAC. That and the idea that Chuck Schumer supports her are very unpopular when I find -- when I talk to Michigan Democratic voters, even moderate Democratic voters.

The fact that AIPAC was for her in 2022 was coming up a year ago. I think it's probably coming up much more now that she can't be trusted on not just the intricacies of Gaza, but that she is a D.C. establishment Democrat.

And even though we had those very recently, Michigan, maybe we need something completely different now.

[08:44:49]

RAJU: Yes. Which explains why she sidestepped those questions --

WEIGEL: Yes.

RAJU: -- when I asked her directly about AIPAC, Haley Stevens and do you embrace that support? She didn't say yes.

WEIGEL: Right.

RAJU: And I said, do you still think Chuck Schumer is a great leader? She didn't say yes.

SEUNG MIN KIM, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, she's like inside Washington's hug (ph). But what I find so interesting is the -- in 2020 in the presidential primaries, we saw a lot of Democratic primary voters voting strategically. They saw Joe Biden as the person who was best positioned to take on Trump.

And those are the arguments that you're seeing from Haley Stevens to Mallory McMorrow. And it will be -- my biggest question -- my big question is for the Democratic primaries, are we returning to a state where primary voters are voting with their heart, voting for who really gets them passionate and enthusiastic? If that's the case, then El-Sayed has a pretty decent shot in Michigan.

But our -- or you know, especially particularly in critical states like Michigan, are they going to vote strategically like voters did in 2020? If that's the case, it would seem to be --

RAJU: Yes.

KIM: Stevens. RAJU: That's such -- that's such a good point because it's like -- can

progressive candidates who are drawing these hard lines, can they win general elections? Is this election environment different than the past?

You're seeing Graham Platner in Maine. You're seeing Abdul El-Sayed, unabashedly progressive, drawing these firm lines. Can they win general elections?

They can win general elections IN progressive locations like we saw in New York, right?

HANS NICHOLS, AXIOS POLITICAL REPORTER: I'm going to take your 2020, and I'm going to raise you to 2004. This reminds me of the Democratic primary in 2004, where there are clear left-wing and more moderate candidates.

You had Wesley Clark running as a moderate. You had Howard Dean running as a progressive. Where does the party coalesce around John Kerry, who was a bit of a Goldilocks candidate?

So if voters are going to be strategic and we don't know if they are, if they're going to be strategic or emotional, but if voters are going to be strategic, they're going to end on the Goldilocks candidate. And that is Holly Stevens. She is in the middle.

So my only take on this piece is great piece. Now do Maine, right.

RAJU: I did Maine already.

NICHOLS: Yes. But I want to do it again.

I want 12 minutes on Maine, ok. I want --

RAJU: I had eight.

NICHOLS: Yes. Yes. Ok.

KIM: Well, you can have all the breweries in these states.

RAJU: This is like --

NICHOLS: It's like the Kissinger rule, right? They have a rule that like a PhD can't be more than a thousand pages because no one would read it.

So we're going to impose a Kissinger rule on your pieces here. It's ten minutes the cut off.

RAJU: I'll take that. I'll take that. I'll take that challenge.

But there were things that were not included in that piece, including their views on impeachment. And it really speaks to the hard line that Democrats believe they have to take against Trump.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) RAJU: Should they pursue impeachment?

MCMORROW; Everything needs to be on the table. Donald Trump should not be the president. He should not be in office. Whether it's the 25th amendment, whether it's impeachment.

EL-SAYED: I've seen enough that if I were in the House, I would vote to impeach.

RAJU: Is that a yes? You would support impeachment or are you still -- you would consent?

STEVENS: I have supported an inquiry. We've got to build a real case. Overall, we need to be standing up for our democracy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: I mean, Democratic leaders don't want to be talking about impeachment, but you sort of have to as a primary candidate.

WEIGEL: You have to. And the base is angry, but not -- but not irrational. They saw impeachment go against Donald Trump twice. They saw him get acquitted twice, not to bring in another messy Democrat primary in California. Tom Steyer led the impeachment charge in the first campaign. Doesn't talk about it that much.

And how much is that resonating with voters as an issue? One thing Haley Stevens has tried to do, I think she believes it, but also to get back out of the pack, is it -- articles impeachment against RFK Jr.?

She did that. Then she was --

RAJU: She touted that on the trail, which she showed in that piece, and they were cheering. That was a --

WEIGEL: They were cheering. But look at her fundraising. Look at the weather that's lit a fire under Democrats.

I do think they're talking impeachment, but then they're worried, well, you need to get the building blocks to get there. And they're not going to go for the -- for the single most progressive candidate.

That idea, though, the Democrats have been, I think, hobbled by Trump coming back despite that, that's giving them a totally different view, not just of how to fight Trump, but who can they trust? Who's a winner. That's good for El-Sayed and McMorrow. D.C. doesn't win. They lost to this guy already. Why are you using their tactics?

RAJU: Meantime were talking about fundraising. And we've seen in the first quarter fundraising reports that Democrats across the board for the most part, have significantly outraised Republicans.

Yes. In Michigan, you see the race, the some -- McMorrow has raised the most in the first quarter among the Democrats, even more than Mike Rogers. Rogers has more money on cash on hand. But you look at Texas, $27 million for James Talarico, the Democratic

candidate in one quarter here. What does that tell you.

KIM: I mean it clearly tells me the enthusiasm is on the Democratic side. You're seeing that with early turnout numbers. You're seeing that with campaign fundraising -- campaign fundraising.

But you know, were all old enough to know, remember when Jamie Harrison raised $50 million in 2020. Doesn't always mean everything.

RAJU: South Carolina did not go well for Democrats. Also, Beto O'Rourke had a lot of money in Texas, too.

All right. Coming up next. This weekend, the president took action on psychedelic drugs, but not marijuana despite his promises to do so months ago. Why the outlook on pot is so hazy. That's next.

[08:49:44]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

RAJU: It's been four months since President Trump signed an executive order to ease restrictions on marijuana. And ahead of 4/20 tomorrow, the unofficial pot holiday, weed enthusiasts are wondering if it's all gone up in smoke.

The grassroots movements, include Democratic Congressman Steve Cohen, who recently asked the administration what was taking so long to remove marijuana as a Schedule One substance, which includes drugs like heroin. Cohen's office tells CNN they have not heard back.

[08:54:50]

RAJU: And Trump's longtime ally and confidant, Roger Stone, asked last week on X, quote, "Who is holding up President Trump's order to reschedule marijuana as a Schedule 3 substance?"

Now, yesterday at the White House, Trump made some comments that had weed watchers wondering if he was offering blunt criticism of his Justice Department.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You're going to get the rescheduling done, right. Please get -- will you get the rescheduling done please. You know, they're -- Joe, they're slow walking me rescheduling. Ok. You're going to get it done right?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: It's unclear exactly what Trump was referring to and CNN has reached out to the White House for clarification.

Now Trump made those comments at an event to expand research into psychedelic drugs to help explore emerging mental health treatments. But some potheads may wonder if that's just a half-baked solution. That's it for INSIDE POLITICS SUNDAY.

Up next "STATE OF THE UNION WITH JAKE TAPPER AND DANA BASH. Jake's guests include Energy Secretary Chris Wright and New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik.

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

[08:55:54]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)