August 13, 2025 • 13 mins
Bo and Beth welcome Scott Huffmon to discuss the upcoming meeting between President Trump and President Putin as well as more potential changes to the Bureau of Labor Statistics after a change in leadership last week.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:06):
News Talk eleven ten, nine to nine to three WBT.
It is good morning BT with Bow and Beth and
that time of the week where we welcome to the
WBT Hotline from Winthrop University. Scott Huffman, Professor of Political Science.
Good to have you with us, sir, glad to be
with you. We've got a lot to talk about today,
(00:26):
and I want to start with what is looming nationally here,
And of course Friday is looming in Alaska with this
meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin. But today President
Trump and also the Vice President are going to take
part in a virtual meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski
and European allies. This is confirmed to ABC News and
(00:49):
several other outlets. So let me start there first, as
we get closer to the big meeting on Friday. What
about this idea of a virtual meeting between Trump and
Vance and Zelensky.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
Well, you know, it's sort of an attempt to appease
both sides, but it also reinforces the problem that a
lot of folks are having with Donald Trump's approach to this.
Europeans are saying, listen, you cannot have peace talks where
one of the belligerents, you know, one of the people
involved in the war isn't present. So having a virtual
(01:25):
meeting with the country that's being invaded and then having
a peace conference with the invading country doesn't cut it. However,
this has been Trump's kind of standard, you know, way
of operating it. He cuts deals, and he wants to
you know, cut a deal with Putin and present it
and have Zelensky be able to either accept it or
(01:47):
reject it, but obviously is going to pressure him to
accept it. Trump is approaching this as kind of a
real estate deal because what's going to be discussed is
whether or not Ukraine will give up territory. That is
definitely not want what the rest of Europe and our
European allies want, certainly not want Zolenski wants. It is
(02:09):
what Putin wants, but it's it's an interesting way to
go about this. It is not what our allies want,
but it is exactly in line with the way Trump
handles deals.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
What do you think the likelihood is that they're going
to come up with the deal Trump and Putin that
will not be accepted by the European Union, that will
not be accepted by Zolensky. And if that is the case,
then politically, what is the next step.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Well, you know, anything that gives up territory to Russia,
Zolensky is almost immediately going to say no. You know
what's going to happen is there's going to be continued
of fighting. You know, to talk over a ceasefire is
really not going to go anywhere. It's not going to
hold up as long as Ukraine is saying listen, we
(02:58):
won't fall into line with these doesn't know. Of course,
Russia invaded crimea very early. Ukraine says you have no
right to this. This is our peninsula, and that's going
to be one of the biggest sticking points. But you
also look at the other areas that Russia has come into.
They could back off and still have a third of
what used to be Ukraine. So our allies are going
(03:21):
to be highly divided with us over this. It could
put a lot of pressure on NATO and our alliances
in NATO, which has been kind of the greatest defense
against the Soviet Union and now Russia. That falls into
Putin's hands. But if Donald Trump can come out of
this and say I brokeer to peace. Then that will
(03:42):
make his supporters who did not want him or America
getting involved in foreign entanglements, that'll make them a lot
happier about it, but our allies less so.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Talking to Scott Hoffman, Winthrop University political science professor back
on the home front here, well, I mean technically that
is too because that's going to happen in Alaska. But
this is a domestic issue. President Trump's pick to lead
the Bureau of Labor Statistics is floating the idea of
suspending the monthly jobs reports in favor of less frequent
quarterly data published by the statistical agency. And of course,
(04:18):
the reason that the previous head there was ousted because
President Trump didn't like or believe that the numbers that
were released last time around were legit. This was Caroline Levitt.
She got a question during the White House Press briefing yesterday.
Speaker 4 (04:34):
Will the Bureau of Labor Statistics continue to put out
a monthly job sports?
Speaker 5 (04:38):
Well, look what I'll tell you about the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. I believe that is the plan and that's
the hope, and that these monthly reports will be data
that the American people can trust. As you know, the
Bureau of Labor Statistics has made massive revisions after the
last several points reports that they have put out, and
there has certainly been a decline in the quality and
(05:00):
the reliability of data coming from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
and there's been an increase in revisions. And this president
in the administration is finally tackling this problem that so
many have talked about and the President is actually doing
something about it. We need to restore new leadership that
we can trust. As you know, the President has appointed
someone new to take over the BLS, and so we
(05:20):
need to look at the means and the methods of
how the United States is acquiring this very important data.
And all of that is going to be done. And
the goal, of course is to provide honest and good
data for the American people to make very important economic decisions.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
On Doctor Hoffman. What about this idea of halting them at.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Least, Well, again, that's a good political idea, it's a
bad economic idea. There are a lot of businesses that
rely on these economic indicators monthly and so moving them
to quarterly would not be as useful for them. It
would cause our businesses to be less nimble. The data
(05:59):
has not been less accurate. That's that's not true. That's
a political statement. And it's very understandable. Our job numbers
have been yo yoing quite a bit because of you know,
I'm going to put a tear fin. I'm not going
to put a tariffin, So hiring has been questionable. But
you know, the economist running these things want to give
(06:20):
accurate data. That's what a lot of folks don't understand
when they claim this poll or that poll is by us.
This data, that data. The people who are doing this
want to be accurate. Now you may not like what
the numbers say, but they're doing their best to be accurate.
And the final thing on that is talking about changing
the metrics what they measure. Now, that may have been
(06:43):
sort of buried in her statement, but here's the thing.
If we have looked at the nature of jobs in
America for you know, years and years and years using
these metrics, and all of a sudden we use very
different measures, then it's no longer comparable. We don't know
whether we've improved or not, whether we've changed or not.
(07:04):
So this is a very political move. It's quite understandable
from Trump's position but changing the way it's measured and
moving to a quarterly rather than monthly would make US
business a little less nimble, but again, at this point
it's Trump's purview.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
This is Good Morning Beat with both Hubson and Beth
trout By rolling on on this Wednesday morning, August thirteenth,
Bowen Beth here talking to Scott Huffman from Winthrop University.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Thank you so much for staying with us for a
second segment, Scott, And before the break, we were talking
about the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the fact that
President Trump fired the previous commissioner and has now nominated
a new commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He
nominated a Heritage Foundation economist named E. J. Anthony, And
(07:58):
this is raising a lot of eyebrows and actually drawing
some criticism from some conservative economists. There's a negative consensus
among conservative economists who have said, and this is a quote,
that he is utterly unqualified. What do you make of
him as a selection?
Speaker 2 (08:18):
Well, you know, I obviously would would take the word
of the conservative economists. But the way to understand it
is to understand the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation is
a long time conservative think tank. In fact, one of
the former directors of my Survey Research Center actually ended
up becoming the head of the medium donor calling center
(08:41):
for all of the Heritage Foundations. She now runs a
statewide part of another conservative think tank. But they were
a conservative organization who just happened because they're conservative, to
be involved in partisan politics. When my former senator here
in talth Koline, Jim Dement, became head of the Heritage Foundation,
(09:03):
they flipped. They became an incredibly partisan organization that pushed
conservative ideas that matched with the partisanship of the time.
And I think people who have been Reagan conservatives honestly
fully recognized that being a Maga conservative is very different
than being a Reagan Conservative. So understanding the evolution of
(09:25):
the Heritage Foundation as a conservative think tank that ended
up pushing partisan ideas to a partisan think tank that
by default does a lot of conservative things kind of
helps understand why you have a little bit of pushback
when you probably wouldn't have had that before.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
Scott, I want to play you a piece of audio
as we go hyperlocal here and listening area. Edwin Peacock,
who's running for city council at Large. He's the interim
District six City council member who was appointed after Chark
McCary left. But but he Edwin is now running for
an at large position. He's the last Republican and Charlotte
(10:06):
to serve in that position many years ago. But he
was out on the campaign trail this weekend and posted
a video I want to play you just the beginning here.
Speaker 4 (10:15):
Hey, everybody had ed with Peacock. I'm here in Precinct
sixty seven landsdown, the neighborhood I grew up in. I'm
walking with my friend Oz Connor, my intern field director
and soon to be freshman at How you say.
Speaker 6 (10:27):
Yes, sir, i's going. Guys, we're out here wisconsinman Peacock,
first day of his reelection bid to at large, and
we're getting some good responses. But we're also getting, you know,
a lot of gardeness among our neighbors around here. You
want tell them about that?
Speaker 4 (10:40):
No, you tell them what do you see him?
Speaker 6 (10:42):
Yeah? So, honestly, some people who just do not even
come to the door. They acknowledge you, but they wave
you off. And it's it's certainly, certainly quite odd that
we have some people out here who don't you know,
to want to talk with their elected officials.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
So we got into a discussion about this a few
days ago. And you know, we live in the era
of the ring camera or the you know, people who
can who can see on their phone or a feed,
a video feed of someone's at their door. And the
point is is it's a different environment now to go
knock door to door as a as a as a
candidate that it used to be. And my question for you,
(11:15):
having played that, and you've been studying this for years
and and polling and all that, do you think that
that works anymore as a general rule if you're a candidate,
especially at the local level, knocking on doors and trying
to talk to people.
Speaker 2 (11:28):
It still works, but it's very, very much less effective
than it has been in the past. You're absolutely right
about the era of ring cameras. People can look and see,
you know, I don't I don't want this person. We've
also become much more of an insulated society. You know,
more than a decade ago, there's a book called Bowling
(11:49):
Alone that talked about how, you know, community organizations are
getting smaller. We are becoming sort of castles of our own.
We no longer know our neighbors. People are simply less
likely to open the door, and they will open the
door a little more often if they think, hey, this
is a normal campaign time. We're coming up on the
(12:10):
November election, and they're a little less likely to do
so coming up on a primary, and when they're not
familiar with elections that are going on. And I'm sorry,
the people who don't listen to your program, the people
who aren't well involved in politics, are not as familiar
with this, they're not going to open the door as much. So, yes,
(12:31):
that is correct. It is not as effective as it
used to be, but it's still relatively effective, especially when
you can make videos like this and get them out
to nich reporters. And again, most people are not watching
their local news anymore, I'm sad to say, but they
are watching YouTube channels and things like this where it
(12:53):
can pop up with very quick thirty second messages are smaller.
So again, it's creating a new strategy, not just knocking
on doors, but knocking on doors and getting a message
out in a twenty first century way.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
Founder and director of the Center for Public Opinion and
Policy Research, also longtime professor of political science, at Winthrop University.
Scott Huffman joins us once a week. We appreciate your time, sir.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Glad to be with you. Have a great day.
News Talk eleven ten, nine to nine to three WBT.
It is good morning BT with Bow and Beth and
that time of the week where we welcome to the
WBT Hotline from Winthrop University. Scott Huffman, Professor of Political Science.
Good to have you with us, sir, glad to be
with you. We've got a lot to talk about today,
(00:26):
and I want to start with what is looming nationally here,
And of course Friday is looming in Alaska with this
meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin. But today President
Trump and also the Vice President are going to take
part in a virtual meeting with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski
and European allies. This is confirmed to ABC News and
(00:49):
several other outlets. So let me start there first, as
we get closer to the big meeting on Friday. What
about this idea of a virtual meeting between Trump and
Vance and Zelensky.
Speaker 2 (01:02):
Well, you know, it's sort of an attempt to appease
both sides, but it also reinforces the problem that a
lot of folks are having with Donald Trump's approach to this.
Europeans are saying, listen, you cannot have peace talks where
one of the belligerents, you know, one of the people
involved in the war isn't present. So having a virtual
(01:25):
meeting with the country that's being invaded and then having
a peace conference with the invading country doesn't cut it. However,
this has been Trump's kind of standard, you know, way
of operating it. He cuts deals, and he wants to
you know, cut a deal with Putin and present it
and have Zelensky be able to either accept it or
(01:47):
reject it, but obviously is going to pressure him to
accept it. Trump is approaching this as kind of a
real estate deal because what's going to be discussed is
whether or not Ukraine will give up territory. That is
definitely not want what the rest of Europe and our
European allies want, certainly not want Zolenski wants. It is
(02:09):
what Putin wants, but it's it's an interesting way to
go about this. It is not what our allies want,
but it is exactly in line with the way Trump
handles deals.
Speaker 3 (02:20):
What do you think the likelihood is that they're going
to come up with the deal Trump and Putin that
will not be accepted by the European Union, that will
not be accepted by Zolensky. And if that is the case,
then politically, what is the next step.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
Well, you know, anything that gives up territory to Russia,
Zolensky is almost immediately going to say no. You know
what's going to happen is there's going to be continued
of fighting. You know, to talk over a ceasefire is
really not going to go anywhere. It's not going to
hold up as long as Ukraine is saying listen, we
(02:58):
won't fall into line with these doesn't know. Of course,
Russia invaded crimea very early. Ukraine says you have no
right to this. This is our peninsula, and that's going
to be one of the biggest sticking points. But you
also look at the other areas that Russia has come into.
They could back off and still have a third of
what used to be Ukraine. So our allies are going
(03:21):
to be highly divided with us over this. It could
put a lot of pressure on NATO and our alliances
in NATO, which has been kind of the greatest defense
against the Soviet Union and now Russia. That falls into
Putin's hands. But if Donald Trump can come out of
this and say I brokeer to peace. Then that will
(03:42):
make his supporters who did not want him or America
getting involved in foreign entanglements, that'll make them a lot
happier about it, but our allies less so.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
Talking to Scott Hoffman, Winthrop University political science professor back
on the home front here, well, I mean technically that
is too because that's going to happen in Alaska. But
this is a domestic issue. President Trump's pick to lead
the Bureau of Labor Statistics is floating the idea of
suspending the monthly jobs reports in favor of less frequent
quarterly data published by the statistical agency. And of course,
(04:18):
the reason that the previous head there was ousted because
President Trump didn't like or believe that the numbers that
were released last time around were legit. This was Caroline Levitt.
She got a question during the White House Press briefing yesterday.
Speaker 4 (04:34):
Will the Bureau of Labor Statistics continue to put out
a monthly job sports?
Speaker 5 (04:38):
Well, look what I'll tell you about the Bureau of
Labor Statistics. I believe that is the plan and that's
the hope, and that these monthly reports will be data
that the American people can trust. As you know, the
Bureau of Labor Statistics has made massive revisions after the
last several points reports that they have put out, and
there has certainly been a decline in the quality and
(05:00):
the reliability of data coming from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
and there's been an increase in revisions. And this president
in the administration is finally tackling this problem that so
many have talked about and the President is actually doing
something about it. We need to restore new leadership that
we can trust. As you know, the President has appointed
someone new to take over the BLS, and so we
(05:20):
need to look at the means and the methods of
how the United States is acquiring this very important data.
And all of that is going to be done. And
the goal, of course is to provide honest and good
data for the American people to make very important economic decisions.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
On Doctor Hoffman. What about this idea of halting them at.
Speaker 2 (05:38):
Least, Well, again, that's a good political idea, it's a
bad economic idea. There are a lot of businesses that
rely on these economic indicators monthly and so moving them
to quarterly would not be as useful for them. It
would cause our businesses to be less nimble. The data
(05:59):
has not been less accurate. That's that's not true. That's
a political statement. And it's very understandable. Our job numbers
have been yo yoing quite a bit because of you know,
I'm going to put a tear fin. I'm not going
to put a tariffin, So hiring has been questionable. But
you know, the economist running these things want to give
(06:20):
accurate data. That's what a lot of folks don't understand
when they claim this poll or that poll is by us.
This data, that data. The people who are doing this
want to be accurate. Now you may not like what
the numbers say, but they're doing their best to be accurate.
And the final thing on that is talking about changing
the metrics what they measure. Now, that may have been
(06:43):
sort of buried in her statement, but here's the thing.
If we have looked at the nature of jobs in
America for you know, years and years and years using
these metrics, and all of a sudden we use very
different measures, then it's no longer comparable. We don't know
whether we've improved or not, whether we've changed or not.
(07:04):
So this is a very political move. It's quite understandable
from Trump's position but changing the way it's measured and
moving to a quarterly rather than monthly would make US
business a little less nimble, but again, at this point
it's Trump's purview.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
This is Good Morning Beat with both Hubson and Beth
trout By rolling on on this Wednesday morning, August thirteenth,
Bowen Beth here talking to Scott Huffman from Winthrop University.
Speaker 3 (07:37):
Thank you so much for staying with us for a
second segment, Scott, And before the break, we were talking
about the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the fact that
President Trump fired the previous commissioner and has now nominated
a new commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He
nominated a Heritage Foundation economist named E. J. Anthony, And
(07:58):
this is raising a lot of eyebrows and actually drawing
some criticism from some conservative economists. There's a negative consensus
among conservative economists who have said, and this is a quote,
that he is utterly unqualified. What do you make of
him as a selection?
Speaker 2 (08:18):
Well, you know, I obviously would would take the word
of the conservative economists. But the way to understand it
is to understand the Heritage Foundation. The Heritage Foundation is
a long time conservative think tank. In fact, one of
the former directors of my Survey Research Center actually ended
up becoming the head of the medium donor calling center
(08:41):
for all of the Heritage Foundations. She now runs a
statewide part of another conservative think tank. But they were
a conservative organization who just happened because they're conservative, to
be involved in partisan politics. When my former senator here
in talth Koline, Jim Dement, became head of the Heritage Foundation,
(09:03):
they flipped. They became an incredibly partisan organization that pushed
conservative ideas that matched with the partisanship of the time.
And I think people who have been Reagan conservatives honestly
fully recognized that being a Maga conservative is very different
than being a Reagan Conservative. So understanding the evolution of
(09:25):
the Heritage Foundation as a conservative think tank that ended
up pushing partisan ideas to a partisan think tank that
by default does a lot of conservative things kind of
helps understand why you have a little bit of pushback
when you probably wouldn't have had that before.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
Scott, I want to play you a piece of audio
as we go hyperlocal here and listening area. Edwin Peacock,
who's running for city council at Large. He's the interim
District six City council member who was appointed after Chark
McCary left. But but he Edwin is now running for
an at large position. He's the last Republican and Charlotte
(10:06):
to serve in that position many years ago. But he
was out on the campaign trail this weekend and posted
a video I want to play you just the beginning here.
Speaker 4 (10:15):
Hey, everybody had ed with Peacock. I'm here in Precinct
sixty seven landsdown, the neighborhood I grew up in. I'm
walking with my friend Oz Connor, my intern field director
and soon to be freshman at How you say.
Speaker 6 (10:27):
Yes, sir, i's going. Guys, we're out here wisconsinman Peacock,
first day of his reelection bid to at large, and
we're getting some good responses. But we're also getting, you know,
a lot of gardeness among our neighbors around here. You
want tell them about that?
Speaker 4 (10:40):
No, you tell them what do you see him?
Speaker 6 (10:42):
Yeah? So, honestly, some people who just do not even
come to the door. They acknowledge you, but they wave
you off. And it's it's certainly, certainly quite odd that
we have some people out here who don't you know,
to want to talk with their elected officials.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
So we got into a discussion about this a few
days ago. And you know, we live in the era
of the ring camera or the you know, people who
can who can see on their phone or a feed,
a video feed of someone's at their door. And the
point is is it's a different environment now to go
knock door to door as a as a as a
candidate that it used to be. And my question for you,
(11:15):
having played that, and you've been studying this for years
and and polling and all that, do you think that
that works anymore as a general rule if you're a candidate,
especially at the local level, knocking on doors and trying
to talk to people.
Speaker 2 (11:28):
It still works, but it's very, very much less effective
than it has been in the past. You're absolutely right
about the era of ring cameras. People can look and see,
you know, I don't I don't want this person. We've
also become much more of an insulated society. You know,
more than a decade ago, there's a book called Bowling
(11:49):
Alone that talked about how, you know, community organizations are
getting smaller. We are becoming sort of castles of our own.
We no longer know our neighbors. People are simply less
likely to open the door, and they will open the
door a little more often if they think, hey, this
is a normal campaign time. We're coming up on the
(12:10):
November election, and they're a little less likely to do
so coming up on a primary, and when they're not
familiar with elections that are going on. And I'm sorry,
the people who don't listen to your program, the people
who aren't well involved in politics, are not as familiar
with this, they're not going to open the door as much. So, yes,
(12:31):
that is correct. It is not as effective as it
used to be, but it's still relatively effective, especially when
you can make videos like this and get them out
to nich reporters. And again, most people are not watching
their local news anymore, I'm sad to say, but they
are watching YouTube channels and things like this where it
(12:53):
can pop up with very quick thirty second messages are smaller.
So again, it's creating a new strategy, not just knocking
on doors, but knocking on doors and getting a message
out in a twenty first century way.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
Founder and director of the Center for Public Opinion and
Policy Research, also longtime professor of political science, at Winthrop University.
Scott Huffman joins us once a week. We appreciate your time, sir.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
Glad to be with you. Have a great day.
Popular Podcasts
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!