To pandemic, that there will be little room for a serious discussion either on Foreign Policy issues or domestic issues . That remains to be seen. But clearly back in the day, Foreign Policy matters a lot more than it does now. The republican landslide in 1920 was a direct result of the uncertainties and challenges in the wake of the first world war. Fdr broke the twoterm president in 1940, 1944, and gained enormous legitimacy in response to impending war and war as well. In 1952 korea was the dominant issue, the stevenson ike issue. In 68 lbj was literally drifen from the consequence of vietnam. In the election, vietnam did not play a singular role. Of course, 1980, you have the iranian hostage crisis and afghanistan. Increasingly, though, after the cold war, it seems that Foreign Policy had more or less dropped out of the president ial electoral cycle and the debates. You had the iraq war in 04 and 08 and figured prominently 9 11. August 20, just last month, registered voters on r12 issues americans said were very important to them, the economy polled in at 79 . Health care at 68 . Supreme Court Appointments at 64 . Covid, 62 . Violent crime, 59 . With climate and the abortion issue, interestingly enough, coming up at 42 and 40 respectively. And id be remiss if i didnt point out that like so many other issues confronting the republic today, we were a divided nation. So theres a lot to get through today and we have a number of questions that id like to pose before we start. Is Foreign Policy doomed to be a peripheral issue most of the time in shaping Voter Preferences . And is the lack of attention to Foreign Policy a result of the publics that either indifferent, not well versed in National Security, or to quote tip oneill, flows from the fact all politics are local. What would it take to get americans focused in an Election Year . And vents beyond the countrys borders. And, of course, how will the issue of National Security and Foreign Policy play in the debates and in tlelection . The issue of biden and trumps record is on the agenda and it may well come up. Finally, might any Foreign Policy issue prove consequential as we move toward november 3rd . Im glad i dont have to answer any of these questions, but to answer them, to unpack them, we have three we have an allstar panel. All of them are well known to you. Abbreviated bios should suffice. Amanda carpenter is a Political Columnist for the bulwark. Regular cnn contributor. Author of gaslighting america. Previously she served as a speechwriter to jim demint and Communications Director for ted cruz. Charlie cook, editor and publisher of the Cook Political Report and political analyst for the National Journal group. Charlies also a political analyst for nbc news. Jen psaki was the white house Communications Director in former president Barack Obamas administration from 2015 to 2017 and spokesperson at department of state under thensecretary of state john kerry from 2013 to 2015. And above all, i hope she doesnt mind, shes proudly the mother of two humans under the age of 5 which i think is the most extraordinary identifications ive heard in a bio. So, format, each will speak for roughly five minutes. Moderated round with me of annoying questions for about 20. And then q a with our twitterverse email, and whoever else is listening. So, jen, without further ado, let me turn it over to you. Well, thanks, aaron and charlie and amanda, its great to join you for this panel. Im sure ill learn a lot from both of you. You had a lot of questions in there to unpack. It made me think about back in 2007 and 2008 when i was working for thensenator brm brl and as charlie and amanda, probably you, too, aaron, will remember, part of the reason why he became the nominee is because of his opposition to the iraq war. Very much a Foreign Policy issue that was central in that president ial race and was central for in a different way in 2004 when i worked for john kerry. But by the end of the campaign, he won the election in part because of the financial crisis. And because he presented, you know, an option to the American People of somebody who they felt would be fighting for them. And i use that example because it may feel like people are starting to vote, of course, across the country, there are lines here in virginia almost every day where i live. But we have a lifetime before the actual election happens, even though people are voting, and all sorts of things can happen. So, i say that because Foreign Policy, as we all know, is a fickle guy, or gal, and events can happen that may impact how voters think. The later it is, the closer it is to november 3rd, obviously, many people have voted before then. I thing its important to keep that in mind. I think some of the polling you added there, aaron, vais really important to touch on. Charlie, obviously, follows this very closely and im sure hell have some interesting adds to make here, but Foreign Policy is something that americans say they care about. And i think they do care about. Its just where they care about it in the rank order of things. Right . Health care and the economy are consistently higher. Thats been the case for some time. It was certainly the case in 2018. Democrats won back the house. In part as a check on trump, but in part because people were afraid of having their health care taken away. Didnt mean there werent, as we all know, many, Many International and Foreign Policy events happening, but its all about how it how it impacts peop people. How do you meet people where they are. I think that is a lesson for a lot of bepeople who are trying communicate about how important Foreign Policy issues are and the differences. How are these issues impacting peoples daily lives . Ill take covid. I dont know how long ive been talking. Ill stop in a minute or two here. I want to hear what amanda and charlie have to say. Lots of questions. People dont think of covid as a Foreign Policy issue. It is absolutely a Foreign Policy issue, and when it is done effectively, when joe biden is president , i think i can be, you know it will be very much coordinated between the domestic and the National Security teams. Thats how it should be. And helping solve this crisis in the United States requires a strong Foreign Policy and National Security approach. People dont always see it that way and it doesnt you know, when youre sitting at home trying to do zoom school with your kids or trying to figure out when life will go back to normal, people dont think about it that way but it should be talked about in that way. Climate change is a Foreign Policy issue, very much so. You know, the United States obviously needs to do a lot to get our house in order, but needs to continue to lead on that front in order to address climate change. Its not just about whats happening in our streets and cities here in the United States. Thats part of it, but its very much an international issue. These are issues that impact people domestically and at home. You know, the last thing ill say is just that, you know, having served in a white house, what people dont always realize or digest is that Foreign Policy and National Security is one of the ways that any president can operate by this you know, through their own vision of what leadership should be. And what their own vision of what policy should be in a way that at many times is unchecked by congress, by the public, because theres so much power that every commander in chief has. So, it is an area where it should be a focus of the public because you are giving trust over to a president in a way about this scope of issues more than most others. But ill stop there. Whos next on the hot seat, aaron . Jen, thank you so much. Amanda. Yeah, well, i think whats really interesting is there a tendency to think that Foreign Policy doesnt matter because as jen pointed out, it describes, encapsulates, so many things. I mean, what is it, does it mean trade, does it mean cybersecurity, does it even mean immigration policy . I think in a post9 11 world, voters have basically boiled down Foreign Policy into thinking, are there bad guys coming to strike American Land again and who will stop it . I think its become solely a National Security and terrorism issue in the minds of voters, but, you know, that said, some of our most important political events during the Trump Presidency have been firmly in the Foreign Policy wheelhouse. I mean, lets not forget, he was impeached this year for inappropriate conversations with ukraine. Theres a yearslong investigation led by Robert Mueller based on inappropriate, undisclo closclosed contacts wi russia. Those are pretty major events in the Trump Presidency. I think we always end up asking, will it matter, will it move Republican Voters . Whats really interesting to me from my Vantage Point as a nevertrump republican is the only time that his supporters on capitol hill who are also responsive to constituents and voters, the only times they have really broken with him have been on Foreign Policy and election issues. I think people look past that because theres only one republican vote against impeachment, but look at the times theres been Senate Resolutions led by Senate Majority leader Mitch Mcconnell to draw a line in the sand. They had a Senate Resolution speaking out after that disastrous helsinki press conference. Saying that no, we will not we must refuse putins suggestion that well extradite u. S. Soldiers. They could have gone further, should have gone further. Senate democrats pushed that. That was a significant point which they said this is an intolerable line. They opposed his declaration of emergency to allow for the sale of billions of dollars to saudi arabia. He later overrode that senate vee y veto, that was still a significant point of Foreign Policy. The senate gop passed a resolution to get that whistleblower complaint in the fall of 2019 from the Intelligence Community which did provide the basis for impeachment. And then after he issued the drone strike in iran to kill the top military commander, there was also legislation to limit his war powers. And then just this Summer Senate republicans have spoken out pretty harshly against him when he talked about possibly delaying the election then once again, when he was talking about not having a peaceful transition of power. And so for this discussion and does it matter to voters, i think the intersection of Foreign Policy and elections is incredibly important because, remember, for this to matter, he only has to lose a small percentage of Republican Voters for this to be a landslide for joe biden. So thats extremely interesting and its not only contained within, you know, voters and on capitol hill, the most prominent members of his white house who have left to speak out against him represent the Foreign Policy community in voices like former defense secretary jim mattis, former department of Homeland Security secretary john kelly. Both retired fourstar generals. John bolton. The list goes on from other whistleblowers inside the department of Homeland Security. So i do think that does have an effect, even though it gets missed in this broader Foreign Policy discussion because we dont quite have the language to distill that down to voters. These are absolutely going to be voting issues for people on the fence. You know, amanda, thats an excellent point. I mean, it almost reaffirms something that ive felt very important for many years and that is that politic the on many issues, critical issues, to image of the nation, should, in fact, stop at the waters edge. You pointed out its a fascinating construct, the kind of backdoor analysis of why Foreign Policy actually does matter and could in reshaping Voter Attitudes and preferences. Fascinating point. Charlie. On to you. Great. Thank you, aaron. I want to thank you and bill burns for the invitation to be on such a Prestigious Panel with these other folks that are so much smarter and know so much more about this stuff than i do. So im just a political hack, but im going to put up a slightly different construct. St it its not disagreeing at all with anything amanda said. T to me, yowhen you have two peop running for Election Partnership and other things come into play. Thats a choice. When you have an incumbent president running, its a referendum. Its do you want to extend this present contract for another four years . Thats the fundamental question. You siay, okay, what feeds into that . Now, sadly, Foreign Policy, at least directly, because you guys have brought up ways, immigration, trade, these other things. Foreign policy, per se, its not i wish americans thought more about it. I wish you know, i wish every american read the economist cover to cover every week and, you know, read Foreign Policy and Foreign Affairs and go to watch carnegie but thats not where were living. Thats not what they how not a major ingredient when they decide who they want to extend this president s contract or not. So i dont think to the extent that it convinces people that this person is not cut out to be president , or this is someone theyre proud of or that they would like to continue with, thats thats where it comes into play. You know, thinking about, you know, in terms of Foreign Policy, in some ways, it comes down to a question of are there americans coming home killed or maimed or not . I mean, thats, like, the big thing. And it the threshold for other things influencing Public Opinion in a president ial election is pretty limited. And its a pretty esoteric group. But, you know, in an election where weve got its very, very stable. There are very few undecided voters. And this is an election like it always is, you know, do you want to renew President Trumps contract for another four years . Yes or no . And he its always like that with an incumbent, but with someone who is as polarizing as he is, with 75 of americans either strongly approving or strongly disapproving him, and that was pretty much true before he even took the oath of office. And theres just been very little change. So, the odds of something tonight or in the next debates related to Foreign Policy moving people because they agree or disagree with something said, i think thats really pretty unlikely. But does it feed into a is it something that for one of these 3 , 4 , 5 , thats really what were looking at here, that would tilt some of them toward that would resonate with them in a special, special way, and im count me as pretty skeptical that thats that thats going to happen. So, im a little im embarrassed when i meet with people from foreign governments, foreign, you know, foreign ministries, that sort of thing. I i always sort of have an apoll jea papoll apologetic thing. This preseeds presidecedes pres. Americans, its like were an island in the middle of the ocean with nothing else for 10,000 miles away. I know for people, like, in europe, for example, that border lots of countries, they just found this absolutely bizarre. Mindboggli mindboggling. But only having two borders with canada and mexico and not being an island and, but being so much larger than our two neighbors in terms of population, its a little inevitable, but we are, you know, we are pretty selffocused as a country and so i im a little skeptical about about how much it would affect unless it just said, this person is who i want to lead us or this person is absolutely unfit for the job, and anything outside of that paradigm related to Foreign Policy in these debates or anything else, i mean, i, frankly, dont think the New York Times story is going to affect i mean, President Trumps base, its 40 , 42