CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday: Afghanistan's sudden collapse. Taliban fighters on the brink of total control of the country.
AFGHAN TRANSLATOR:
If they arrest us, they will kill us. Everyone, they will kill us.
CHUCK TODD:
And they have entered the capital city of Kabul, prompting the U.S. to increase the number of troops for the evacuation of the embassy, which has begun. President Biden though, standing firm on the U.S. withdrawal:
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
We're going to continue to keep our commitment, but I do not regret my decision.
CHUCK TODD:
I'll talk to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and to NBC News's Richard Engel who’s in Kabul. Also, the growing Covid crisis.
BO RYALL:
We're at an emergency situation here, no doubt about it.
CHUCK TODD:
Covid cases rising nationwide, overburdening hospitals --
MISSISSIPPI HEALTHCARE WORKER:
We're not machines. We can't continue to do this forever.
CHUCK TODD:
-- with children now caught in the middle over mask mandates in schools:
PARENT:
I have two, actually, in school and neither one of them will wear masks.
DR. MICHELLE TAYLOR:
Now we're seeing more kids who are symptomatic and more kids who are being hospitalized due to the Delta variant.
CHUCK TODD:
My guest this morning: epidemiologist Michael Osterholm of the University of Minnesota. And a changing country. The new Census report. Rural America shrinks as urban America grows. What that means for political power in the coming decade. Joining me for insight and analysis are Democratic pollster Cornell Belcher; Ann Gearan, White House correspondent for The Washington Post; Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson; and Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for The New York Times. Welcome to Sunday. It's Meet the Press.
ANNOUNCER:
From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history. This is Meet the Press with Chuck Todd.
CHUCK TODD:
Good Sunday morning. The scale of the developing disaster in Afghanistan has exceeded even the most pessimistic of predictions. Taliban forces seized control of the city of Jalalabad without a fight overnight. They’ve now entered the capital city of Kabul. They’re negotiating with the government to take over the city without bloodshed. They’re looking though, for unconditional surrender. President Biden yesterday increased the number of troops he's sending to Kabul right now to help evacuate Americans and our allies, and the U.S. embassy evacuation has now begun in full. In just the past week, the Taliban have overrun government forces, seizing control of roughly two dozen provincial capitals, often without a fight as the Afghan army simply melts away. The peril for President Biden is clear. He runs the risk of repeating the very Saigon-in-1975 image he had hoped to avoid. In a statement yesterday though, Mr. Biden said the troop withdrawal deal that President Trump struck last year was what tied his hands. Quote, "it left the Taliban in the strongest position militarily since 2001 and imposed a May 1, 2021 deadline on U.S. forces.” That said, the collapse we're witnessing is happening on President Biden's watch and the blame will inevitably fall to him if the fallout is as bad as some fear. Yes, Americans in both parties supported an end to this 20-year "forever war." But they also want security, and no one likes to see America humiliated. And the collapse of Afghanistan into the hands of the Taliban is likely to haunt Mr. Biden's legacy, especially if the country once again becomes a base for terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and there are renewed attacks on the U.S., and the West.
REPORTER:
Is Afghanistan lost?
CHUCK TODD:
The Taliban are sweeping across Afghanistan, taking control of at least 30 of its 34 provinces over the last 10 days and their provincial capitals, including Afghanistan's second and third largest cities. Now, they’re in Kabul. Just last month, President Biden promised:
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
There’s going to be no circumstance when you’re going to see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy.
CHUCK TODD:
But now, President Biden has ordered troops back into Afghanistan, raising the total to 5,000 to secure the evacuation of the U.S. embassy, which has now begun. The embassy staff have been instructed to shred sensitive documents and destroy computers. The airport is now the only safe way in or out of Afghanistan.
JOHN KIRBY:
That’s one of the reasons why we moved these forces -- or we are moving the forces into Kabul to assist with this particular mission because we know that time is a precious commodity here.
CHUCK TODD:
Just 1,200 Afghans who worked for the United States as interpreters and in other jobs have been evacuated to the United States. Roughly 88,000, including family members, could need to be evacuated, according to a non-profit advocacy group.
JOHN KIRBY:
We have a sacred, moral obligation to help those who have helped us, and we're not walking away from that.
CHUCK TODD:
And the United Nations is warning of a larger humanitarian disaster.
AFGHAN INTERPRETER:
If they arrest us, they will kill us. Everyone, they will kill us.
KELLY COBIELLA:
Given the situation right now, how do you see the future for women in Afghanistan?
AFGHAN WOMAN:
Taliban are not afraid of the world superpowers. They're not afraid of the B56 or B52. They're afraid of the women.
CHUCK TODD:
The top U.S. general in Afghanistan warned last month that a Taliban takeover could allow Al-Qaeda to rebuild.
GENERAL KENNETH McKENZIE:
If that pressure comes off, I believe they're going to regenerate. And I think it's only a matter of time before we see them assert themselves and begin to plan attacks against our homeland.
CHUCK TODD:
Now, as President Biden stands by his withdrawal strategy --
PRES. JOE BIDEN:
We're going to continue to keep our commitment. But I do not regret my decision.
CHUCK TODD:
-- he's likely to own Afghanistan's collapse.
AMB. RYAN CROCKER:
He owns this now completely. It isn't Donald Trump's Afghan policy, it's Joe Biden's.
REP. ADAM KINZINGER:
It's a tragedy and it's a tragedy that was entirely preventable.
CHUCK TODD:
Up until now, most Americans have supported the military withdrawal, which was initially announced last year by then-President Donald Trump. But some who served in America's longest war are asking what their sacrifices were for.
PAUL MILLER:
I lost friends there. It’s hard to understand what it was for. If this is how it ends, how do you tell veterans that it was worth it?
TOM AMENTA:
Why did we spend the past decade there? What was the purpose? What was the goal?
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now from Kabul, a place he's been many, many times, is my colleague Richard Engel. So Richard, I know you've been seeing a lot of helicopters. We're seeing the evacuation, I guess, begin. What is the sentiment like right now on the streets of Kabul?
RICHARD ENGEL:
I was just walking around Kabul, and I can tell you, the mood is changing. This was a city that felt different from the rest of Afghanistan. It was a cosmopolitan city that wanted to be an international hub. There was an optimism here, even in the worst days. Now there are a lot of hard stares. And people are preparing for the worst. They are thinking about where to move their families, and there are many people who don't know what to do because they worked for the U.S. military. Not only translators. You have contractors, subcontractors, cleaners, security guards, and they don't know what they're supposed to do. And this city's preparing for a Taliban takeover. I was filming, and if you'll excuse, there's a lot of noise because there is a constant stream of helicopters. There was a beauty salon that we used to film at because it was a great place to see modern women, this new face of Kabul. And out front on the glass front, they had a lot of pictures of women who had their hair done and their makeup done. They have now painted over all of that and torn down all of the posters because they know what the Taliban want. They know what the Taliban expect. And they know the Taliban are here. There's an increasing sense of lawlessness on the streets. It is intimidating. There has been some looting because you've seen a total collapse of the security forces down to local police officers. Some of them are changing out of their uniforms, wearing traditional dress. There have been looters pretending to be Taliban, just going up and ripping guns out of police officers' hands. So, so Afghans are worried about looting. They're worried about the Taliban's imminent arrival. They're already in parts, in pockets of the city. And they're, and they’re very angry. They're angry at the U.S. They're angry at everybody. They're angry at the government. And they're worried.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, Richard, Ryan Crocker, the long-time former ambassador to Afghanistan under the Obama administration, he said the Taliban are perhaps even meaner and more deadlier as a, whatever you want to call them, as a governing entity, than they were 20 years ago. Is that your observation as well?
RICHARD ENGEL:
Much so. A thousand percent. A thousand percent. They are much better fighters. They've been fighting against the best military in the world, the U.S. military, for 20 years. That's how guerrilla groups, insurgencies, get better. They sharpen their knives on the army of their adversaries. And that's what the Taliban has been doing for 20 years. And they are victorious. They can use this as a recruiting tool. They are now the champions of the Jihadi movement because they pushed out the United States. And they're going to be able to live on that for a long time and attract a lot of recruits. And will this country once again be a center of terrorism, a center of Al Qaeda? Already today, thousands of Al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners were freed from jail today.
CHUCK TODD:
Richard Engel in Kabul watching the withdrawal and the evacuation. Stay safe, my friend. Thanks very much.
CHUCK TODD:
And joining me now is the Secretary of State, Tony Blinken. Secretary Blinken, welcome back to Meet the Press, sir.
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Thanks for having me on, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
So what is happening right now in Kabul? We have reports that the Taliban and the Afghan government are in negotiations for what they -- what the Taliban is referring to as a potentially peaceful surrender. There are reports that we're going to close the American embassy perhaps as early as Monday. What can you tell us?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Well, it's a very fluid situation, but here's what I can tell you, Chuck. We are focused, and the president's focused, first and foremost, on the safety and security of our personnel. And so we are moving personnel to the airport, to a facility there. We've been focused all along on making sure that they're safe and secure. The president, as you know, has sent in a significant force to make sure that we can proceed with an orderly move and getting down to a core diplomatic presence in Kabul. And we are working that very, very assiduously right now. At the same time, yes, we've seen these reports of the Afghans and the Afghan government, the Taliban, talking about the way forward. We're going to work to support those efforts. We have a team in Doha to do that, working with the United Nations, working with other interested countries, including Qatar to see if there can be a peaceful resolution going forward, a peaceful settlement, a peaceful transfer of power. That would be good for the people of Afghanistan to avoid further bloodshed.
CHUCK TODD:
Have you sought assurances from the Taliban for safe passage of Americans out of Kabul?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Not a question of assurances. We've been very clear with the Taliban that any effort on their part to interrupt our operations, to attack our forces, to attack our personnel, would be met with a very strong, decisive response. And that's exactly why the president sent 5,000 forces in, to assure that we can proceed in a safe and orderly manner. And so far, that's what's happened.
CHUCK TODD:
The fall of Kabul seems inevitable now. Do you concur with that?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Look, what, what we're focused on now is making sure that we can get our people to a safe and secure place, that we can do right by the people who stood with us in Afghanistan all these years, including Afghans who worked for the embassy, worked for our military. We have a massive effort underway to bring Afghans at risk out of the country if that's what they, that’s what they so desire. And ultimately, it's up to the Afghans themselves. It's up to the Afghan government, it's up to the Taliban to decide the way forward for the country, including Kabul.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to play something you said in June about the withdrawal and get you to respond to it on the other side. Here it is.
[START TAPE]
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
I don't think it's going to be something that happens from a Friday to a Monday. So I wouldn't necessarily equate the departure of our forces in July, August, or by early September with some kind of immediate deterioration in the situation.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
How did that assessment end up so wrong? Is that an intelligence assessment that went wrong? Is that a Pentagon assessment that went wrong, your own? How -- that has not aged well.
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Two things, Chuck. First, we've known all along that the Taliban was at its strongest position in terms of its strength since 2001. When we came to office, that was the fact. And we said all along, including back then, that there was a real chance that the Taliban would make significant gains throughout Afghanistan. But on the other hand, I have to tell you that the inability of Afghan security forces to defend their country has played a very powerful role in what we've seen over the last few weeks. The fact is, we invested, the international community invested over 20 years, billions of dollars in these forces, 300,000 of them, with an air force, something the Taliban didn't have, with the most modern, sophisticated equipment. And unfortunately, tragically, they have not been able to defend the country. And I think that explains why this has moved as quickly as it's moved.
CHUCK TODD:
Let me get you to respond to what retired General Douglas Lute is quoted in The Times today. He says this: "The puzzle for me is the absence of contingency planning. If everyone knew we were headed for the exits, why did we not have a plan over the past two years for making this work?" That -- you know, we can debate staying or going. And I know that that is something we're going to re-litigate perhaps for a decade. But we had two presidents that were pretty insistent we were going to get out. It does look like we were -- this looks like a chaotic withdrawal for something that, politically, seemed inevitably to the American people. What happened there?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
We've been working on this departure, this draw-down for months. We actually began an ordered departure from our embassy back at the end of April. And as facts have changed, we have adjusted to that. It's exactly why the president sent in forces that we had at our disposal, to make sure that we could do this in the safest, most orderly way possible. So all of those plans have been in place. It's also true that, in terms of refugees, in terms of bringing people out, the system that we inherited had been decimated. And so we've been working hard to rebuild that, as you know, we've been doing that in real-time. But, Chuck, you know, stepping back, and that's really important because I think it's vital that we put all this in context, here are the facts. As the president said, we went into Afghanistan 20 years ago for one mission, and that was to deal with the folks who attacked us on 9/11, to bring them to justice, and to make sure to the best of our ability that they would not be able to do that again from Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden was brought to justice a decade ago. Al Qaeda, the force that attacked us, has been vastly diminished. Its current capacity to attack us from Afghanistan is negligible. We have the capacity going forward to make sure that we have forces in the region and in place to deal with any reemergence of terrorism. That's why we went. We succeeded in achieving those fundamental objectives. And the idea that we would sign up for remaining there in the midst of a civil war for another five, ten, or 20 years was simply not in the national interest. That is the hard decision the president made.
CHUCK TODD:
I guess the question isn't about whether five or ten years. There’s a lot -- look, there's a lot of backseat driving on this. Why do this in the summer? Fighting in Afghanistan is seasonal. Why not delay the withdrawal to the winter and give the Afghan security forces a chance, when we know the Taliban retreats in the winter? Was there any -- you know, the idea that you accept this bad deal by Trump, but you'll turn back other bad deals by Trump, I mean, what was wrong with delaying six months?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Because we inherited a deadline, negotiated by the previous administration. That deadline was May 1st. And the idea that we could've maintained the status quo beyond May 1st if the president had decided to stay I think is a fiction. Here's what is likely to have happened, had the president decided to do that. During the time from when the agreement was reached to May 1st, the Taliban had stopped attacking our forces, stopped attacking NATO forces. It had not sought to take over the country, the entire country, by going at these major provincial capitals. Come May 2nd, If the president had decided to stay, all gloves would've been off. We would've been back at war with the Taliban attacking our forces. The offensive you've seen throughout the country almost certainly would've proceeded. We would've had about 2,500 forces in country, with air power. That would not have been sufficient to deal with the situation. And I would be on your show right now explaining why we were sending tens of thousands of forces back into Afghanistan to restart a war that we need to end.
CHUCK TODD:
Why are you convinced that we're not going to see, in the words of, reportedly of Secretary Austin, in a -- a report this morning that he was making the case for staying a little bit longer by noting what happened after we withdrew from Iraq and the rise of ISIS, why are you convinced we're not going to see a replay of that movie?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
So a few things, Chuck. First, we have and will maintain significant capacity to deal with any reemergence of a terrorist threat from Afghanistan. We do this, by the way, around the world in places where we don't have forces on the ground: in Yemen, in parts of Africa, in parts of Syria. And our capacity to do that is far different and far better than it was after -- before 9/11, for example. At the same time, the Taliban have a certain self-interest in this. They know what happened the last time they harbored a terrorist group that attacked the United States. It's not in their self-interest to allow a repeat of that.
CHUCK TODD:
That seems to be -- some people might say that's a bit of wishful thinking. I mean, the propaganda -- the propaganda opportunity that they may have, particularly coming up to the 20th anniversary of 9/11, that has got to scare some folks. I mean, ISIS, when they made their expanse, it ended up inspiring acolytes to do attacks on the west, attacks in this country. Are you at all concerned about the propaganda victory these extremists are about to have on the 20th anniversary of 9/11?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Chuck, what we are is extremely vigilant. And the president has instructed all of us, starting with the intelligence community, starting with the Pentagon, to make sure we're maintaining the vigilance and the capacity to see the reemergence of any terrorist threat and to be able to deal with it effectively and in real-time. And we have confidence that we can do that.
CHUCK TODD:
Are we definitely closing the embassy?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
We're moving people out of the embassy to a location at the airport. That's happening right now. My job, my number one priority, is the safety and security of our people. And we've adjusted along the way. As I said, we started an ordered departure from our embassy way back at the end of April. And we've done that systematically, progressively. And we've adjusted depending on what was actually happening on the ground. And that's exactly what we're doing now.
CHUCK TODD:
So if no American is in the embassy, we've essentially closed the embassy. It sounds like you don't want to say that?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
No -- we’re going to have a --
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah --
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
We're going have -- we’re going to have our core diplomatic presence --
CHUCK TODD:
We will?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
-- And in effect, an embassy at a location at the airport.
CHUCK TODD:
So the physical embassy is what's moving, but there will be American, diplomatic presence that will continue?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
That's correct.
CHUCK TODD:
What do you say to the many U.S. troops, veterans of the Afghanistan war, who are asking themselves this morning, you saw the Washington Post story, "Why did my friend get blown up? For what?" One former Army Ranger, "It makes me angry, really angry." Another Army veteran, "All the people who went and served are, like, "Why did my friend die?" And now one medic is quoted, "There's just nothing really to show for it. Why were we even there?" I understand that we were safe for 20 years. But they also thought they were trying to fight for something that would keep us safe for another 20 years. What do you say to them?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
The first thing I say to them is, "God bless you. God bless you for your service. God bless you for your sacrifice, for everything you've done for this country and for other people around the world." And the other thing I say to them is, "You succeeded in accomplishing the mission that was set out for you way back on 9/11, after 9/11.” And that is getting the folks who attacked us then -- bringing -- helping to bring Osama bin Laden to justice, and making sure, to the best of our ability, that Al Qaeda would not be in a position to attack us again from Afghanistan. And they largely succeeded in meeting those objectives. And so that's a very, very important, a very powerful thing. And I think they can take tremendous pride in what they've accomplished.
CHUCK TODD:
Is America safer today with the Taliban in charge of Afghanistan?
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
In terms of the threat posed to us before 9/11 that brought us into Afghanistan in the first place, we are in a much different and much better place than we were right before 9/11. The group that attacked us has been dramatically diminished. Its capacity to attack us again from Afghanistan, dramatically diminished. Our ability to see if it reemerges and our capacity to do something about that is very strong. And so in that sense, I think we're in a much better place than we were 20 years ago. But I want to emphasize one point, Chuck. You said I said 20 years. 20 years, $1 trillion, 2,300 Americans who lost their lives, a massive investment. And the president concluded that it was time to end this war. You know, in the 19th century, the British were there. We've now been there far longer than they have. In the 20th century, the Russians were there. We've now been there twice as long as they have. As a strategic matter, there is nothing that our strategic competitors would like more than to see us bogged down and mired in Afghanistan for another five, ten, 20 years. That is not in the national interest.
CHUCK TODD:
Secretary Blinken, I know it's been a long week, long weekend, and it may be a long week ahead. Thank you for spending a few minutes with us and sharing your perspective.
SEC. ANTONY BLINKEN:
Thanks for having me, Chuck. Appreciate it.
CHUCK TODD:
You got it. When we come back, we're going to turn to the growing Covid crisis in the United States and how children have become the new frontline in the battle over masking. Epidemiologist Michael Osterholm joins me next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Children have become the new battle line in the Covid pandemic, with cases among children still low, but rising. Seven states, all right now with Republican governors, are now banning mask mandates in schools. Some parents are cheering those bans, while others are suing entities to prevent those bans. At the same time, the CDC is now recommending a third dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine for some people with weakened immune systems. Nationwide, this highly transmissible Delta variant has cases rising in all 50 states. With only half the U.S. fully vaccinated, the seven-day average of new U.S. cases is now up to 129,000. That is the highest since early February, which is exactly the same thing I said last week, but the number's higher again. Joining me now is Dr. Michael Osterholm. He's the director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. Michael, I would say it's always good to have you on, but I have a feeling this is a very dire outlook that you have. So let me just start with that, sir. How much longer is this surge going to last? I guess this is the fourth wave since we began this conversation.
DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM:
Well, when you look inside this wave, it's actually a series of different events going on. First of all, we have the southern sunbelt states that we all know are basically at, well, really dramatic case increases. If you look at the state of Louisiana right now, they're tied with the country of Georgia for the highest rate of infections in the world. But what we're seeing happen right now is, while those states are starting to potentially level off a bit, we're now seeing in the southeast, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, southern Illinois all start to take off. We're seeing it in the northwest in states like Oregon and Washington. We're even seeing in the Midwest increases. So even if this increase that we're seeing in the southern sunbelt states, which has been dramatic, we're at 83,000 hospitalizations today. A month ago, we were at about 25,000. So it gives you a sense of what's happened just in the last month. And if these other states take off, then I think the surge could sustain itself for at least another four to six weeks.
CHUCK TODD:
Given what we saw happening in India as the Delta variant basically, you know, came from there, it now looks like the CDC's mask guidance back in May was a big mistake. Do you concur?
DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM:
At this point, we need to put everything we can towards controlling this virus. And one of the things, of course, is masks. But I want to qualify that by saying, and I think this has been a difficult message for many, is the nuanced message, is what kind of mask you're using. You know, I would tell you if the old car you have has a seatbelt in it and that's it, use it. But if you can get a modern car that has a seatbelt harness, a collapsible body frame, airbags, a computer system to reduce your speed with an impending crash and shard glass so you don't get cut, use that. And we've not paid any attention really to giving the public the message that you need much more effective masking, such as the N95 mask that we talk about or the KN95 for kids. So yes, I think masking is very important right now. Remember, while vaccination is still the number one, two, and three weapons we have, if even everyone got vaccinated today, this surge would go on as it is right now for the next four to six weeks because these people would not yet have immunity. So what they can do today though is mask. But get effective masks. And that's really important.
CHUCK TODD:
So are you saying -- I'm going to hold up my mask here that I wore this morning, this one here, which is know you know, a decent cloth mask that many of us buy on Amazon. Not good?
DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM:
Well, let's put it this way. If you were in a room with someone who was smoking, would you smell that smoke? That is an aerosol. And you know how they travel. You've walked down the street where, suddenly, you'll get the whiff of smoke and you'll see somebody 20 feet in front of you. And so that's the test we have. Now, a cloth mask surely can give you some protection. But it's not the kind of protection that you'll get when you use a much more effective mask. We have not talked about that nearly enough. The other thing, Chuck, we've been doing a study looking at the public use of masks. We find routinely 20 to 25% of the population will continue to wear the mask under their nose. That's nothing more than a diaper chin -- for your chin. And so I think that what we want to do is inform people, yes, mask. But most importantly, give them the information about how they can get the more effective masks and how they can use them.
CHUCK TODD:
There are a lot of people right now, when it comes to kids and the virus, that think back to the guidance last year when it was pretty clear that even if kids got the virus, they weren't serious outcomes. Is it changing with Delta? We're seeing more children in hospitals. Pediatric hospitals are starting to get overwhelmed. Is this just that's the largest group of unvaccinated Americans and that's why it's there, or do we need to rethink our virus guidance for kids under 12?
DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM:
Well, I do believe we need to rethink it. I've been promoting that for some time. The data we have used to come up with recommendations for opening our schools is really exactly, as you pointed out, from pre-Alpha, the previous variant, as well as now Delta. And this is a different virus in the sense that it's much more infectious. Now, remember, we still have 90 million Americans in this country that could be vaccinated that are not. And that alone serves as a source for infecting our kids who, as you know, under age 12 cannot be vaccinated yet. And so we do need to do more. And I would also point out the other thing that helps you understand the infectiousness of this virus is the fact that we're now seeing more and more events with outdoor air. You know, months ago we were saying if you're outdoors, you're pretty safe. We have had a number of events happening where, in fact, people crowded together outdoors get infected. Now, if that's happening outdoors, imagine what happens to our kids when they're closely together in schools. So I think that it is important that we recognize then, as you've seen in the first week of school in the South, we've had a number of outbreaks of cases. And so yeah, we do have to, at this point, recognize this Delta is basically a very, very bad virus in terms of transmission.
CHUCK TODD:
Yeah. Dr. Michael Osterholm, projecting that we may have another four to six weeks at a minimum of this current surge. Michael, like I said, it's good to see you, but I wish it, as always, were under better circumstances.
DR. MICHAEL OSTERHOLM:
Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
When we come back, the unfolding disaster in Afghanistan. How did it happen? What could be done now? What are the political consequences? The panel is next with that discussion.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. The panel is with us. Anne Gearan, White House correspondent for The Washington Post, who has done plenty of travel to Afghanistan; Democratic pollster Cornell Belcher; Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for The New York Times, the first American journalist in Afghanistan after 9/11; and Republican pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson. And I throw that out there for Peter and Anne, to put you guys on the spot here a little bit. Peter, 20 years later, we were there, you were there to tell us how we were going to fight this group called the Taliban. Twenty years later, I mean, it's pretty clear, I mean, Secretary Blinken all but acknowledged that the Taliban's in charge.
PETER BAKER:
Yeah. It's over basically, is essentially what Secretary Blinken said. You're right. Twenty years ago, I hitched a ride on an old Soviet helicopter with the Afghan rebels going in. The CIA hadn't gotten there yet. The Special Forces hadn't gotten there yet. And you could see what kind of country it was, right? You see a country that had been brutalized by this Taliban regime for years. It's basically a nation of battered spouses. And here we are, about to hit the twentieth anniversary of 9/11, and basically, they're going to be back. They're going to be back exactly the way they were before. And Secretary Blinken basically conceded that. We're only talking about whether there's a peaceful transfer of power.
CHUCK TODD:
Anne, you know, it's interesting, in some ways, this story hasn't changed in ten years. We've been having the same debate, which is: when are we getting out? How do we get out? And can we get out? In some form of it.
ANNE GEARAN:
We have. And now President Biden has been on the same side of that debate throughout that entire time.
CHUCK TODD:
There is consistency with him, it's worth pointing out there.
ANNE GEARAN:
Yeah. I mean, the basic argument is: can nation building work? And if it can work, then how long do you give it? And his argument is that we've been giving it a year, and then six months, and then another year, and then five years, and it never works. So, that part of it I think, he's trying to bring to a close. But the basic argument of can Afghanistan succeed as a democratic experiment, I believe we have the full answer of today.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to show the political fallout. Both of you are pollsters, Kristen and Cornell. And we'll put up some numbers here. This is why perhaps both former President Trump and current President Biden felt very comfortable, essentially, disagreeing with the Pentagon, because we know both of them were getting arguments to stay longer. This was before all of the chaos we've been watching. But in the month of July, 70% support the decision. 77% among Democrats, nearly a little over 50% among Republicans, 56%. So Cornell, are these images going to change the politics of this?
CORNELL BELCHER:
You know, because I'm a presidential campaign dork, I remember '96, Senator Lugar talking about how, in his presidential campaign, how Americans' prosperity was connected to America's leadership in the world.
CHUCK TODD:
He may be right.
CORNELL BELCHER:
But his campaign didn't catch fire, right?
CHUCK TODD:
He won Vermont, actually.
CORNELL BELCHER:
Right. No. I mean, Americans' attention span is awfully short when it comes to foreign policy. We don't have elections that are about foreign policy. Now, you know, the war might've been a different thing. But typically, we don't have campaigns that are, you know, campaigns aren't spending money talking about foreign policy. If you've got a Congressional candidate who's spending their time and their resources talking about foreign policy, as opposed to talking about sort of the anxiousness that moms are having right now with their kids going back to school and the uncertainty of the economy, you're probably looking at a Congressional candidate who's going to lose.
CHUCK TODD:
Kristen, do you expect these numbers to change?
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
I do expect these numbers to change, I think in part because that 70-some-% of Americans who said they would support withdrawal from Afghanistan were not signing up for the failure of planning, intelligence, and imagination that we are seeing unfold on TV screens today. I think that, especially for those Republicans who, joining in with Democrats felt this fatigue, "We've been there for 20 years. Let's focus on America first," they're interested in their own country's interest. As Cornell wisely notes, voters vote on what's in their own interest. We have not had an American president in the last three administrations make a case for why an American presence in Afghanistan would matter. But I do think that, seeing consequences, if, for instance Al Qaeda is able to reestablish a base and launch attacks against the United States, suddenly issues like national security and terrorism go from being pretty low on the list to being top, A-number-one of the list for voters.
CHUCK TODD:
Peter, why do you think we didn't have somebody make the case that Bagram Air Base in Kabul was South Korea, was Japan, was Germany?
PETER BAKER:
Yeah, it's really remarkable because in some ways, there's a relatively minor investment of national resources in the last few years, right? By the time people wake up tomorrow, we will have more people die in America from Covid than we've had combat deaths in the last five years in Afghanistan --
CHUCK TODD:
In a week. In less than a week.
PETER BAKER:
Oh, in one day. In one day, we'll have six times as many people die of COVID in America as we've had combat casualties in five years. So we were not actually sustaining a big war effort. Very few troops there in the scheme of things. Much less than we have in South Korea, much less than we have in Germany for an outsized impact, right? We've had a stable, if not very satisfying, situation in Afghanistan. I think Anne's right. The conclusion is we can't make it better. But we now see in the last few days, we can make it worse. And the withdrawal of those troops, for a very small cost that we were paying, has had outsized impact on the ability and the willingness of the Afghan forces to defend their own government. And it's a dark day. It's a dark day for America. It's going to be the end of a 20-year experiment, 20 years of epic failure. And it's a dark day especially for the Afghan people, 38 million people who are now going to be returned to the tender mercies of the Taliban.
CORNELL BELCHER:
It is a dark day. But at the same time, look, it's interesting that we're having a debate about spending $1 trillion on infrastructure and NBC reporting this week. We spent over $1 trillion in Afghanistan, right? And for the American people, if you're balancing, "Should we spend $1 trillion on bridges and roads and fixing up our infrastructure in the United States, or nation building in Afghanistan," I think it's pretty clear cut where American people are going to fall.
CHUCK TODD:
Anne, what's the divide? There's clearly a divide between the Pentagon and the president on this one. And, you know, you're never going to find a military leader that doesn't want a few more troops and a little more time, okay? That is a fact on anything. Do you expect this to have long term fallout between the relationship between the White House and the Pentagon, because the Pentagon, they look like, "Why is this going so badly?" And I think the Pentagon's whispering, "We didn't want to do it."
ANNE GEARAN:
Yeah. They definitely didn't want to do it. I mean, the relationship wasn't fantastic to begin with. I mean, Biden took office very skeptical of the generals, as he likes to call them. And for exactly the point you make. He thinks that Obama got "jammed," that's his word, during the surge. And he was determined not to be jammed himself. So when you have that as the predicate, I think the argument that they then had about whether or not to keep a teeny, tiny, little force at Kabul and at Bagram as a preventative and basically as spies to keep an eye on counterterror operations, keep an eye on Iran, keep an eye on Pakistan, that was the military argument for leaving a small, residual force behind. And, you know, I think that then you had the president say, "No." When Donald Trump said we're getting out completely, that means that, once we leave anybody there, they become targets. And I also think he saw the possibility and the opportunity to do what no other president had been able to do before, and end it. And that was more important to him than any of the arguments about why a very small force might be cost effective in the long run.
CHUCK TODD:
Kristen, Mitch McConnell was on one side of this inside the Republican coalition and Donald Trump was on the other. It's pretty clear this probably would've been just as bad, if not worse, under what Trump wanted to do. He wanted to pull everybody out by Christmas. And if he had won reelection, perhaps he might've done that. Is this a big blow for the isolationist wing of the GOP? Will this weaken Trump's hold over time, or no?
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
I would expect you'd begin to see a resurgence of this kind of Reagan, peace-through-strength approach within the Republican Party if they view this as a sign that, by pulling back our deterrents, suddenly the bad guys around the world feel like they have more of a free hand to operate. And whether that expresses itself as Republicans being even more hawkish in places like Iran, wanting to be more deterrent there, be more deterrent in terms of North Korea, be more deterrent in terms of China, making sure that they don't decide to cause mischief around Taiwan. I would expect that Republican foreign policy is going to begin being more focused on projecting strength around the world, not less.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. I'm going to pause the conversation here. When we come back, the census week. Changing America. For a data nerd like me, it was a huge week, manna from heaven with data. And guess what? We learned a lot about what some of our political assumptions are. But maybe, not so fast. We'll have more on that.
CHUCK TODD:
And we are back, Data Download time. In a week, that's ten years in the making, results of the 2020 census are officially out. Let's look at the big top line numbers. The big stuff is, for the first time, the white, non-Hispanic population fell below 60%. The big jumps -- Hispanic population now, nearly one in five Americans. Asian population has nearly doubled over the last 20 years, 6% of the country. And while the African American population technically down, the raw numbers were up, just by percentage down. But the big changes really were geographically. Huge surges of population gains in the large metro areas, both in the suburbs and even in the medium size towns and small suburbs. Really to me, the big political story is the depopulation, if you will, of rural America. It's going to have huge political consequences. Look, I can just show you through three swing states we talk about a lot. In Florida, this is about the only place where I think the population growth helped Republicans, around The Villages, for instance, population gains in Central Florida, a lot of Republican voters moving there. But still, places like Osceola, outside of Jacksonville, those could be very helpful to Democrats. You look in Atlanta and, again, the Atlanta suburbs, they're getting bigger. It's happening, what happened in Virginia, Northern Virginia kept getting bigger, while the Atlanta suburbs keep getting bigger, Forsyth County being one of the fastest growing counties. We're seeing it in Texas, these smaller counties around Dallas, Austin, San Antonio, Houston, all growing, all growing in the direction, if you will, of the Democratic coalition. And that’s what’s so, when you look at this, mapmakers, particularly in Texas, their rural base has gotten smaller. The suburban areas have gotten bigger. Can they even draw districts that definitely favor the Republican side? That's going to be a real challenge, and why long term, this census may be a harbinger for more Democratic power, even if in the short term, Republicans gain in '22. When we come back, the fight over who decides whether children should wear masks in school.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Schools are coming back in. Covid politics is, is, is all the rage. Kristen, there's an interesting pattern, right? Governor DeSantis was going to take a very strong stand against these mask mandates. And then, a couple of counties pushed back. And then he realized he didn't have the legal authority to do what he did. They've surrendered without claiming it, but so have a bunch of other southern governors. It does seem as if this Delta variant has actually gotten -- that there seems to be some nervousness among the no mandate crowd that maybe they'd better be careful there.
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
The numbers are really scary. What we’re seeing -- and this is not just a red state or blue state thing, as your guest earlier in the show noted. The northwestern United States is starting to have outbreaks. You've got states like Nevada where you've got a Democratic governor who voted for Biden, but they're still experiencing some pretty scary numbers. And I think you're seeing that Covid doesn't care about your politics. Covid cares about how many people in your state are unvaccinated and being pushed inside into poorly ventilated spaces. In the sunbelt right now, it's very hot. So you're seeing a lot of the southern United States experience what they experienced last summer. And I think it’s going to cause a lot of these governors -- you've seen in Arkansas, for instance, Governor Hutchinson --
CHUCK TODD:
He's regretting.
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
-- sort of regretting some of his policies. And even in a place like Arkansas, Sarah Huckabee Sanders a couple weeks ago, coming out with a big op-ed saying, "I want everyone to get vaccinated." I do think the politics of Covid are a little more complicated within the Republican Party than most are willing to acknowledge.
CORNELL BELCHER:
I think, yeah, you're absolutely right that Covid doesn't care about the politics. But, but the politics of this have been really interesting. And it has been, if you look at sort of what Republican governors across the country have been doing, you know, on this, they have been working sort of the Trump side of this because they're looking at trends because they all think they can be president. And they know that, from a Republican standpoint, you've got to have that Trump base. And there's a cultivated ignorance here, a cultivated aggressive ignorance here that is about sort of meeting someone else's political, political ends. You know, DeSantis is changing his tune now. Also, at the same time, DeSantis' job approval numbers are dropping as these moms look at what's happening and sending their kids back to school.
CHUCK TODD:
I was just going to say, you know, Anne, it does feel as if -- you know, it’s funny. I’ve, I think all of the, I don’t want to say that -- Biden, his numbers have fallen a little bit. I think it's all Covid related. Yes, there's other stuff going on. But it's sort of, like, as Covid goes, everything else looks worse if Covid's not going well.
ANNE GEARAN:
Well, right. I mean, that was his bet from the beginning. You know, "I will have a successful presidency and, you know, redeem the vote that Americans placed in me, the faith Americans placed in me, if I can get ahead of the virus and roll out the vaccines effectively, and fix the economy that Covid destroyed." That was it. And that's all they did for three months. And they really thought they were on top of it. So the fact that this, you know, whole resurgence is coming, not only that it's coming at all, but that it is coming at exactly the moment when his legislative agenda, which they deferred waiting to get Covid out of the way, is now actually finally rolling through, and obviously, this much closer to the midterms, was a blow beyond anything that they really had planned for.
PETER BAKER:
Yeah, this was supposed to be his big, you know, crowning week of success on infrastructure in the Senate and the next bill of spending --
CHUCK TODD:
By the way, well, I’m sorry, Mitch McConnell and 18 other Republicans supported his plan.
PETER BAKER:
It was a big deal.
CHUCK TODD:
I'm sorry, who would've taken that bet?
PETER BAKER:
That's right. And yet, that isn't the biggest news of the week. And part of it is Afghanistan, but part of it is Covid. I think there is exhaustion. Now, there's a glimmer of hope, which is that you saw vaccinations starting to go up again, right? I think the number was about a million at the most, you know, a single day --
CHUCK TODD:
991,000--
PETER BAKER:
Very close to a million. Highest in I think a two-month period. So if people are beginning to get scared, hopefully, they begin to get the vaccine --
CHUCK TODD:
And vaccine mandates are more popular than the politicians make them out to be in polling, right, Kristen?
KRISTEN SOLTIS ANDERSON:
They generally are. And I think the point that you make, Peter, is so important because I think that there's this characterization of folks who don’t, haven't gotten vaccinated yet as being sort of ignorant or as having, you know, been fed misinformation. And there are a lot of people who just, their personal cost benefit analysis was, "I don't think Covid's that big a deal. My neighbor seemed like they had a lot of side effects." And now suddenly, that cost benefit analysis changes a lot under Delta. So in a way, that's the one silver lining of this horrible outbreak we're seeing, is it's waking a lot of people up to the importance of vaccination.
CHUCK TODD:
Alright, I want to close with the other, there was like a bunch of big stories this week, right? We had the census, we had Afghanistan, we've had Covid. And we had the resignation of one of the most famous names in American politics: Andrew Cuomo. But the most astonishing thing to me is that the last word wasn't his resignation, Cornell. I've got to read for you this quote, the interview he gave to New York Magazine where he claimed the following: "I'm not going to drag the state through the mud, through a three-month, four-month impeachment, and then win, and have made the state legislature and the state government look like a ship of fools when everything I've done all my life was for the exact opposite." Wow. That's quite the, quite the statement there.
CORNELL BELCHER:
You know, our politics is going to be a lot better when women are running more of our government and there are more women governors, more women senators and more women congressmen.
CHUCK TODD:
You're going to be popular at home later today.
CORNELL BELCHER:
But it's true. I mean, the arrogance of, of, of man has run its course in politics. And women are saying, "time's up." I feel like I should be letting you two talk about this. But our time is up here, and that sort of the arrogant statement that he made is unacceptable.
CHUCK TODD:
Anne?
ANNE GEARAN:
Well, I mean, as a New Yorker, the demise of the Cuomo dynasty is, is really spectacular. I'm not at all surprised by his hubris in saying that he thinks he could, he would've beaten this. But I don't know. It seems unlikely.
CHUCK TODD:
Peter, I don't think the chances are zero that he files for an election in 2022.
PETER BAKER:
I don't think it's zero. He's got a lot of money though.
PETER BAKER:
He does have --
CORNELL BELCHER
A lot of money.
PETER BAKER:
-- have a lot of money, and that raises a lot of speculation about what he might do. Clearly, you give an interview to New York Magazine because you don't want to just crawl away --
CHUCK TODD:
No.
PETER BAKER:
-- and hide. But, you know, does that mean he has an opportunity there? Doesn't seem like it.
CORNELL BELCHER:
He can't win a primary. He can't win a Democratic primary in New York.
CHUCK TODD:
Not a one-on-one. That's all we have for today. Thanks for watching. We'll be back next week. If you haven't gotten vaccinated, please do, because if it's Sunday, it’s Meet the Press.