Now, is this a real fundamental difference of opinion between the president, vice president, or is it a difference without much of a distinction?

Well, it's quite clear from the exit polls that Iran was an issue.

But the question is what you mean by that.

Right.

Was Iran the issue because it drove up gas prices? And if the president and strategy had been such that, hey, gas prices would have impacted the American people would have applauded the war in Iran.

Or do you say, hey, the Iran war was a problem because we shouldn't be engaged in another conflict in the Middle East? I think Vice President Vance is of the view, hey, let's keep out of the Middle East, whereas probably what's going on with the American people in this vote at the midterm elections was more, I just don't want to pay more of a price at the pump, but I'm fine with America taking on an enemy that's been killing Americans for 47 years.

That's the debate, and that might be what's Tehran-ing them apart.

I mean, and and that kind of took us on a road that we a negotiation road that we couldn't get off, even though we knew they were breaking the stuff that they had signed with us.

But do we remember that struggle? And when Reagan weighed in and said Bush is my guy?

Well.

Very different time, very different personality.

But I think H.W. Bush, President H.W. Bush was quite a different personality pedigree than President Reagan.

But I would be hard pressed to find any historian, scholar, person who lived through it to point to where Vice President Bush was saying he was going to go ahead in a different direction or criticize what President Reagan did in office.

I think that's what he did because he believed in the Reagan revolution.

He came to be a big proponent of it.

He couldn't have added that in the post?

What do you make of it? Where do you think the president's head is going to be?

Well, I don't think anything has happened since the end of Operation Epic Fury to suggest somehow there are people that the president can make a deal with.

I think the president knows that.

There are other reasons why the president has decided not to continue strikes.

He's told everybody, the Iranians and the rest of the world included, that he's going to wait till after the midterms.

That's the only thing that's really changing here.

And you're right.

But Roger, what is happening here?

Well, to me, the president is likes to deal with leaders who have ability to make a decisive decision, take a decision.

But the reality is, Larry, is that is increasingly President Zelensky.

Famously, President Trump told President Zelensky, you don't have the cards.

Well, in the years since he's developed the cards in the form of.

autonomy, drones, and other weapons they've developed out of Ukraine that are attacking the Russians.

That, of course, is what's created this spat because President Trump doesn't want him to target the energy targets within Russia.

I like that a whole lot better than I like Xi, Putin and Trump.

So do they have enough weaponry right now to be an enormous threat to Saudi Arabia?

Well, they have ballistic missiles.

They've shown that they have drone capabilities.

So they have used that.

And to great effect, as you just referenced, killing 13 people, including one American.

So that is something that the Saudis have not an answer for.

Saudis need Patriot batteries for air defenses.

Do we have as a nation that fortitude to go after the Houthis now?

So while we have an energy ceasefire, Putin hits their, uh, their energy, right into their energy, uh, ce- structure.

Uh, Brian, you, you hit on this on, on, on Fox and Friends over the weekend, I think very clearly, to the point, persuasively, uh, and it's only played out to reinforce the point.

You can't make a deal with Putin.

The past two days since the president's tal- spoken about this, there've been at least six strikes by Putin on Ukrainian energy sites.

And on their s- on the flip side, the Ukrainians have held off on targeting, uh, Russian energy sites.

The pathway to solving this conflict, the pathway to reducing the price, uh, energy prices in the United States, is not through Vladimir Putin.

We've seen this time and time and again.

Put Rubio in charge of this.

So what would be the objective, do you think, for another bombing campaign?

Well, I think it's really how do you collapse this regime? The president, through the blockade, through the success of getting oil out through this trade of Hormuz, as we're seeing now, I think has solved or is solving the Hormuz problem.

But just because you solve the Hormuz problem and we hope the price of gas will go down – it's gone down this week compared to last week, but certainly not where we were a year ago – Just because you're solving that problem doesn't mean you've solved the problem of this regime seeking a nuclear weapon.

And to realize that outcome, to make sure that the president achieves his objective of ensuring that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon, this regime has to go.

Now, it's possible it could collapse because of the strikes that already took place and the additional economic pressure.

But more than likely or not, it's going to require another strike to bring them down.

Is there a way just to get this Strait of Hormuz open, military or otherwise?

Well, the president's blockade has been very successful.

I don't get it.

Well, the U.N. General Assembly is coming up and the White House has shared that he will meet with Gulf leaders.

So perhaps that's part of what's driving the president's pronouncement there.

But I think the most important thing we're seeing here, Larry, from what the president said about this big decision, it's that it's his decision.

There are so many doomers out there saying that somehow this amazing military, this president, this commander in chief is constrained.

Bullocks.

That's not the case at all.

I mean, the place is just hopeless.

No, it's not going to be helpful for you to know what I thought about in 2022 if I want to win election in 2026.

This is the wink, wink, nod, nod.

I'm not a member of the DSA, but the DSA supports me.

I mean, he appeared six times at DSA events.

Spot on.

Right.

The only reason why I guess El-Sayed cannot be a member of the Democratic Socialist America is because they want to abolish the Senate.

They said, how did it leak? So, Roger, what's your takeaway?

And what happens then? I mean, how far will this go in hurting world economy, or will it be so specific that maybe they won't blink?

Well, he's talked about 60 entities being sanctioned here.

Maybe we'll hear about it with the specifics.

I think even the repercussions of the announcement alone are going to push these people deeper into the shadows.

There's no question that the Secretary of Treasury is working here with the intelligence community to identify all the actors.

And they're on notice and they're going to have to kind of clean their their act up or go deeper into the shadows.

But they can't stand still because the Treasury Department's income after it's going to give the president what he wants, which is increased optionality.

But is it a fair analogy to make? I think it is, and

Yes.

We are putting the squeeze on this regime economically with Economic Fury, as you pointed out, and I would expect that our CIA director, Ratcliffe, probably is doing the same on the covert side.

And that would mean really empowering those resistance forces or those people who want to develop a resistance force to operate.

I mean, think about what we've achieved through our military operations, both Midnight Hammer and Epic Fury, Larry, is that the borders in Iran are porous.

We have complete, uh, sort of air superiority.

Mm.

So, I mean, that's the sort of thing you're not supposed to speak about.

I wouldn't expect the president or anybody else, but yeah, I tend to agree with Mark Levin and certainly General Keane that this is something that we should be, uh, looking into and developing, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's underway.

So who's right?

Well, David, great to be with you.

I think the question here is really less about who's in control.

I mean, we have our blockade in place.

The Iranians' military capability has been severely degraded.

The question is, what is the capacity of the Iranians to disrupt? And I think that's the key distinction.

General Keen has made this point earlier, and I think that is really the key military and frankly, economic challenge we face.

We've been putting them on the air, but it's, I mean, do you believe that it can be done, that we can take complete, take the Iranian threat off the table without boots on the ground?

Are you convinced that that's, that's a race that Republicans should win?

There's no question the Republicans should win that, Brian, but all the momentum, all the energy is coming from the Democratic socialists, and El-Sayed is probably the most capable political talent Democratic socialists have.

Regardless of how he identifies, his policies are just that.

And the reason why I think Mike Rogers should win, we're, you know, in addition to the merits and the policies, but the, the, the, the politics alone, is that there's a, that poll that you're referencing shows that 27%, I believe, of non-DSA Democrats are backing Mike Rogers.

So the more Republicans and Republican candidates come out and hold these candidates, these Democratic candidates accountable on where they stand vis-a-vis DSA policies, whether or not they say they're DSA-

What do you think s- with this personality, this streamer?

Well, I, I, to me, Piker and El-Sayed are one and the same, and the party leadership is, knows they're being overturned.

They know that, that the socialists are steamrolling through the party.

Are you convinced that that's, that's a race that Republicans should win?

There's no question the Republicans should win that, Brian.

But all the momentum, all the energy is coming from the Democratic socialists, and El-Sayed is probably the most capable political talent Democratic socialists have.

Regardless of how he identifies, his policies are just that.

And the reason why I think Mike Rogers should win, we're, you know, in addition to the merits and the policies, but the, the, the, the politics alone, is that there's a, that poll that you're referencing shows that 27%, I believe, of non-DSA Democrats are backing Mike Rogers.

So the more Republicans and Republican candidates come out and hold these candidates, these Democratic candidates accountable on where they stand vis-a-vis DSA policies, whether or not they say they're DSA-

What do you think s- with this personality, this streamer?

Well, I, I, to me, Piker and El-Sayed are one and the same

Absolutely.

It's really counter the popular narrative, as you point out in your riff.

I mean, you look in our own hemisphere, Argentina with Malay wants to start the Isaac Accords.

You have Bolivia there.

You have Colombia.

You have Chile.

These are governments that are embracing Israel.

How do you read this story?

But is it enough?

The answer is it's not enough, David.

And the president of the United States, as you know, wants a defense budget of $1.5 trillion.

Again, that wouldn't reach the heights of the Reagan budget, certainly over the course of eight years of his presidency, but actually would make a substantial down payment of what our military needs today.

And you got to think about it in two ways.

We need to fund the military to carry out The present day challenges we're facing.

Obviously, we're all focused on Iran and what's going on there right now.

Do you think if Ronald Reagan were still alive, what advice do you think he would say about the fact that the American public does seem to be getting weary of this

Do you believe that? Nobody should have a double-digit return on your investment.

You know what? I think people should have the opportunity to build, Brian.

And if you look at what just went through the US Congress, our friend, Friend Hill, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, they passed a housing bill.

And fundamental to that housing bill was to get after the problem by what? Increasing supply.

That's what the landlords actually can't do.

The reason why the prices are high, as you know, you live in that city, is because there's so much red tape, so many limitations on the ability to build.

And we gotta think about what policies actually drive more housing.

And lastly, Roger, do you think there should be an open primary in '28, or we should just, uh, better off rallying behind JD Vance?

Has the president given that order and how difficult might that be?

Well, it's a challenging military operation, but one that our Navy is certainly capable of.

Project Freedom cleared lanes for shipping to continue.

It appears now the president has given CENTCOM the opportunity to actually open up the straits by degrading Iranian capability on the coast.

So that, I think, is the meaningful difference between what we saw previously and now.

The president has done over the past year, effectively, a year plus, four freedoms.

He's freeing us from the threat of the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

So what do you make of F-35s in the hands of Erdoğan?

Turkey, and Erdoğan in particular, is a deeply flawed NATO ally.

They, as you pointed out, flirt, support Hamas, actively work against our interests in the Middle East.

It's realpolitik, geopolitics that keeps them in NATO.

But the F-35 is actually a story, Mark, of why Turkey is a flawed ally and why Israel, according to our Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, is a model ally.

Whereas Turkey wanted the F-35, as you pointed out, they bought the S-400 from Russia, our deep adversary in Europe and across the world, who works with the People's Republic of China and Iran, as we know.

The S-400 is designed to undermine the F-35.

Isn't that part of the problem?

Your thought?

Well, I agree with General Kellogg.

I think that's where we're going to land.

When you look at the MOE, you're right.

It was fundamentally about opening the straits.

I think, first and foremost, the president wanted to bring the price of gas down.

He's done that.

How about it, Roger? Let's control Greenland.

... let me just give you the opportunity to, to, to hit sort of the main findings from the data and tell people a, a little bit about what the survey is too.

Yeah, you, you bet.

Uh, Seth, thanks so much for this opportunity.

I love the work that you and your colleagues do at CSIS, real leaders on, on defense.

And, uh, no matter where you are in the partisan spectrum, everybody can turn to CSIS for objective, uh, analysis.

Uh, so credit to you and, and thanks for giving me a chance to talk about our Reagan Institute Summer Survey.

We do two surveys a year, uh, that are national surveys of the views of the American people, not just voters.

So where do you see the data, Roger, sitting, particularly between Democrats and Republicans, on support for aiding Ukraine, for example?

Um, I'm especially interested in what you found as it r- pertains to Americans' views, um, and opinions toward NATO.

Yeah, so on, on NATO, we see, again, broadly speaking, uh, support for NATO, uh, north of 60%.

Uh, Republicans are down on those numbers, uh, and that is to ex- be explained by, uh, President Trump and the Trump administration's confrontational a- approach to NATO really driving, uh, more NATO, uh, investment in their own defense, you know, addressing the so-called free rider problem.

Uh, and then Democrats bringing that up.

Overall, Americans believe that NATO is important and matters to US security and prosperity.

One footnote on that, if you look at young MAGA, 'cause we also look at that demographic, the under 30 demographic of those who identify of MAGA supporters, they support NATO up to 70%.

So one of the interesting elements of this survey is that it's counter to the popular narrative, uh, in a number of directions.

Um, I'm especially interested in what you found as it re- pertains to Americans' views, um, and opinions toward NATO.

I just want you to download what you found and then spend some time on NATO with me, which is the most alarming stat in this year's report.

Yeah, well, thanks for that.

I think overall the headline is this.

The American people overwhelmingly want to see the U.S. engaged in the world.

So this notion that, particularly on the Republican side, that we have turned isolationist inward looking is incorrect.

And we've been showing that since 2023, and it continues to be the case today.

Super majorities, over 60 percent of Americans take this point of view.

Where does the narrative come from when the data doesn't support it?

Drag this thing out, make him pay the price on the midterm elections.

Well, you've been very clear out about this from the outset and, and I agree with your outlook here.

Starting with the great accomplishment of the president and our military with Midnight Hammer and Epic Fury, you can never get the discussion about comparisons between President Trump to Jimmy Carter or to Barack Obama because he took on the regime.

President Reagan struggled with this regime.

We had pr- we had a peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, you'll recall [laughs] in 1983, and that was undermined by Hezbollah.

We had that.

It was the first time we heard about Hezbollah with the Marine barracks bombing, with attack on our embassy, and we never got after it.

Uh, but what do you say to people who say give up on Israel, should give up on an alliance from America?

What are you looking at as the biggest dangers that President Reagan would have looked at?

Well, you know, he faced these challenges when he was in office.

Actually, prior to him coming into office as president, you know, he served as governor during the 60s where he faced a spate of young people who were anti-war and were promoting this socialist outlook, some of which we're seeing play out again.

In this respect, history is rhyming a little bit.

Of course, we've seen this convergence in New York City with socialism, Marxism, and Islamism, and that's unique and different than what we've seen in this country before.

I do think Reagan always had a dose of optimism, even when we were facing these challenges to our democratic republic.

And I think it's important, John, we keep that in mind as we are on the cusp of celebrating our 250th birthday.

And do you see the American people nationally? Because you're dealing on a national basis that they're realizing what is happening.