I’m Isaac Saul, and this is Tangle: an independent, nonpartisan, subscriber-supported politics newsletter that summarizes the best arguments from across the political spectrum on the news of the day — then “my take.”
Are you new here? Get free emails to your inbox daily. Would you rather listen? You can find our podcast here.
Today's read: 11 minutes.
Correction.
Yesterday, we incorrectly identified Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR) as (D-WA). Ironically, this happened while testing a tool to help us catch these errors, but the error wasn’t corrected and made its way into the final product. Now we get a chance to get it right as Chavez-DeRemer is the subject of today’s edition, and our quest for a streak without errors begins again anew.
This is our 122nd correction in Tangle's 277-week history and our first correction since November 25. We track corrections and place them at the top of the newsletter in an effort to maximize transparency with readers.
A special week.
Heads up: As we head into Thanksgiving break, I’m giving the Tangle team off starting on Wednesday and going through Monday. It has been a long, grueling election season, and it will be better for our team — and probably for you all as news consumers — to take some time off and focus on family.
This week through Thanksgiving weekend, we are offering 25% off the first year of a Tangle subscription — the largest discount we've ever offered. Reminder: A Tangle membership gets you members-only Friday and Sunday editions, a discount code for the Tangle premium podcast, access to our comments section, and first look at new products. Plus, you get to support independent journalism. You can claim the deal here.
Quick hits.
- Judge Tanya Chutkan granted Special Counsel Jack Smith's request to drop all charges against President-elect Donald Trump in his 2020 election interference case. Additionally, Smith filed to dismiss his appeal in Trump's classified documents case in Florida. (The decision)
- The Israeli cabinet is close to approving a ceasefire deal with Hezbollah, according to a spokesperson for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. (The deal) Separately, the United Arab Emirates arrested three Uzbek nationals as suspects in the killing of a Jewish community leader, which Israel described as an “act of antisemitic terrorism.” (The arrests)
- President-elect Trump’s legal team has reportedly uncovered evidence that a top adviser, Boris Epshteyn, has been soliciting retainer fees from potential appointees to promote them for jobs in the new administration. (The report)
- In a post on Truth Social, President-elect Trump said he would sign an executive order imposing 25% tariffs on all products from Canada and Mexico on his first day in office. Trump added that the tariffs would remain in effect until the two countries took steps to stop the flow of drugs and unauthorized migrants into the United States. (The post)
- Calin Georgescu won the first round of voting in Romania’s presidential election in a surprise result. Georgescu, a far-right candidate who has criticized NATO and praised Russian President Vladimir Putin, now advances to a run-off against center-right candidate Elena Lasconi. (The election)
Today's topic.
Trump’s pick for Labor secretary. On Friday, President-elect Donald Trump named Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer (R-OR) as his nominee for Labor secretary. Chavez-DeRemer, who narrowly lost her bid for re-election to the House, is considered one of the most pro-union Republicans in Congress, and her nomination serves as another signal that the GOP’s historically adversarial stance toward unions may be changing.
Reminder: The Secretary of Labor leads the Department of Labor, which manages rules, regulations, and laws for wages, occupational safety, unionization, workers rights and unemployment benefits, among other things.
During her sole term in Congress, Chavez-DeRemer was one of just three Republicans to co-sponsor the Protecting the Right to Organize (Pro) Act, a top legislative priority for President Joe Biden. The bill would have weakened right-to-work laws (which generally exempt a worker from having to join a union that a majority of workers have voted to join) and made unionizing easier for workers. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced a companion bill to the Senate, but it was not passed.
Immediately after Chavez-DeRemer’s nomination was announced, some Republicans and business leaders expressed skepticism. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) said he needed "to get a better understanding of her support for Democrat legislation in Congress that would strip Louisiana’s ability to be a right to work state, and if that will be her position going forward."
Meanwhile, some Democrats and union leaders spoke out in support. Chavez-DeRemer has the backing of Teamsters President Sean O'Brien, one of the most powerful union leaders in the country. “Thank you @realDonaldTrump for putting American workers first by nominating Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer,” O’Brien said on X.
Other labor groups, like the AFL-CIO, responded to the pick with caution. “Donald Trump is the President-elect of the United States—not Rep. Chavez-DeRemer—and it remains to be seen what she will be permitted to do as Secretary of Labor in an administration with a dramatically anti-worker agenda,” AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler said.
Today, we're going to examine some reactions to Chavez-DeRemer's nomination from the left and right, then my take.
What the left is saying.
- The left suggests the pick will exacerbate tensions within the Republican Party.
- Some doubt that Chavez-DeRemer will be a true ally to workers under Trump.
- Others say Chavez-DeRemer should pursue an unabashed pro-worker agenda as Labor secretary.
In The New York Times, Farah Stockman wrote about the Republican “freak out” over Trump’s pick.
“It might be the most shocking news yet to come out of this roller-coaster of a transition: After weeks of choosing cabinet secretaries who seem determined to destroy the agencies they will lead, Donald Trump announced the choice of a secretary of labor whom many American workers actually like,” Stockman said. “Her nomination puts the economic populist wing of the Republican Party on a collision course with more traditional Republicans, who have always been on the side of company bosses. She embodies the contradiction that is the Trump coalition. It won political power with widespread support from blue-collar workers but has up until this point looked poised to hand the federal government over to business-friendly billionaires.”
“So why did Trump risk alienating the right wing by choosing Chavez-DeRemer? Maybe he felt the need to throw a bone to labor. President Biden, the most union-friendly president in living memory, is a tough act to follow,” Stockman wrote. “More likely, he wants to publicly reward the Teamsters president, Sean O’Brien, who is said to have pushed personally for Chavez-DeRemer’s nomination… If Trump wants to prove that he is really on the side of American workers, however, he’s going to have to do more than one cabinet nomination.”
In MSNBC, Zeeshan Aleem asked “is Trump’s surprising labor secretary pick good news for America?”
“Trump’s pick of Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, of Oregon, is in line with some of the GOP's recent rhetorical softening in its general hostility to organized labor. But other parts of the incoming administration have lined up behind many anti-labor policies, and it’s too early to tell if naming Chavez-DeRemer means anything more than projecting labor-friendly optics,” Aleem said. “While Chavez-DeRemer has supported some pro-union policies, she’s far from a leftist hiding in a Republican suit. The AFL-CIO gave Chavez-DeRemer a 10% score on her first (and only) term in Congress when assessing her voters ‘on issues important to working families.’”
“There is good reason to be skeptical that Chavez-DeRemer represents a major turn on labor for the GOP. Chavez-DeRemer’s ideological outlook matters, but ultimately she’ll be taking cues from Trump,” Aleem wrote. “Trump and MAGA politicians such as Vance have begun paying lip service to the idea that organized labor deserves some rhetorical support. But if they remain on the same anti-labor policy track that they always have been on — and I suspect for the most part they will — it’s best to understand it as a cynical plot to cleave the working class and drag them rightward.”
For the Economic Policy Institute, Celine McNicholas outlined “the policies that will determine whether Trump’s labor secretary pick supports workers.”
“Chavez-DeRemer has stated that ‘working-class Americans finally have a lifeline’ with President-elect Trump in the White House. If workers truly have an ally in Chavez-DeRemer, she will advance policies that improve workers’ lives. Here are a few policies that will reveal whether the second Trump administration will actually aid working-class Americans,” McNicholas said. “Win funding for the Department of Labor (DOL) that enables the agency to serve the U.S. workforce… Chavez-DeRemer should fight for and secure at least a $14 billion budget to ensure that U.S. workers have health and safety inspectors and wage and hour investigators on the job to enforce their rights.”
“Chavez-DeRemer should fight for workers’ right to overtime… She should not allow the Trump administration to, once again, institute a low salary threshold for overtime eligibility that leaves millions of workers without these protections,” McNicholas wrote. “Refuse to reinstitute the Payroll Audit Independent Determination program. This program was instituted during Trump’s first administration and essentially permits employers who have stolen workers’ wages to confess and get out of jail free… Chavez-DeRemer should make it harder for employers to steal workers’ wages, not easier.”
What the right is saying.
- The right is mixed on the pick, with many criticizing Chavez-DeRemer’s strong pro-union position.
- Some question why Trump would choose someone with liberal views on labor issues for a position of such importance.
- Others say Trump is bolstering his bona fides as a pro-worker president.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board said Trump’s choice put “unions over workers.”
“Mr. Trump said [Chavez-DeRemer will] work toward ‘historic cooperation between Business and Labor.’ But Ms. Chavez-DeRemer has backed union giveaways like the Pro Act, which are not ‘cooperation.’ Hence the enthusiasm from the labor bosses,” the board wrote. “The Pro Act would effectively ban gig jobs and codify the Biden National Labor Relations Board’s joint-employer standard, which would upend the franchise business model and contracting arrangements to make it easier for unions to organize workers. The result would be less autonomy for franchisees and small businesses that contract with bigger firms.”
“Some Republicans think enhancing union power will help Republicans win more elections. Then why did Ms. Chavez-DeRemer lose her re-election? The reality is that the pro-labor agenda espoused by union honchos isn’t all that popular among working-class voters,” the board said. “Republicans can work with unions to improve workforce training and increase alternative education pathways like apprenticeships. But putting Ms. Chavez-DeRemer in charge of Labor will make labor bosses, not workers, more powerful again.”
In his newsletter, Erick-Woods Erickson argued the left’s reaction to the pick “should be a warning sign to Republicans.”
“Many Trump supporters have gone from ‘he’s playing 4D Chess’ to ‘these picks don’t really matter.’ But being in the line of presidential succession matters. More so, it was through the Labor Secretary that COVID vaccine mandates, employment shutdowns, etc. happened. The Labor Secretary is a vitally important role. Donald Trump’s Labor Secretary may be an attempt to shift labor votes to the GOP, but it is not a smart move,” Erickson wrote. Chavez-DeRemer “has supported amnesty in every way, shape, and form. She’ll have a great deal of personal say in regulations related to employment of illegal aliens and the inspection of businesses that are suspected of hiring illegal aliens.”
“She also supports expanded union participation of government workers. Chavez-DeRemer has repeatedly been the Republican vote for Democrats’ repeated attempts to force all government employees into government unions. She has even supported the right to strike as a government employee,” Erickson said. “Putting Chavez-DeRemer into the Department of Labor is causing Democrats to cheer and that should be a warning sign to Republicans. She’s a terrible pick and she is a pick that matters.”
In The American Compass, Batya Ungar-Sargon argued “Trump's nominee for Secretary of Labor puts meat on the bones for a working-class GOP.”
“President-elect Donald Trump has been steadily rolling out his picks for his cabinet in a made-for-TV nomination process that’s gripped the nation. That the same talking heads who helped the Democrats lose the working class are now losing their minds over his choices suggests that he’s right over the target. But a few of the picks are making Republican elites equally furious, including Trump’s choice for Secretary of Labor,” Ungar-Sargon wrote. “In the surest sign that her candidacy is a boon for workers, the big business lobby is already lining up against her.”
“Trump hasn’t been shy to adopt the best ideas from both sides—even from progressives. Recall that it was progressives who used to support tariffs, and progressives who used to support controlling the border and deporting illegal immigrants to protect wages,” Ungar-Sargon said. “That Trump has married his proposed tariffs and hawkish immigration policy with such an aggressively pro-labor secretary for the Department of Labor shows how serious he is about representing the working-class Americans who gave him his victory.”
My take.
Reminder: "My take" is a section where I give myself space to share my own personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, don't unsubscribe. Write in by replying to this email, or leave a comment.
- The Chavez-DeRemer pick shows that Trump is moving Republicans more towards union voters.
- This change could have big ripple effects both within the GOP and the Democratic Party.
- I expect this tension to play out over Trump’s next term, and I could see a world where both parties are genuinely competing for working-class voters.
Chavez-DeRemer is, by far, the most fascinating pick Trump has made for his cabinet.
A few things about this nomination stick out to me that I think are worth bookmarking. First, it's our billionth reminder that Trump is driven by relationships just as much as ideology. Teamsters President Sean O'Brien made a decision to pursue a relationship with Trump, and that Chavez-DeRemer was O'Brien's preferred pick for this role has been well reported. What goes on behind the scenes of any incoming administration is always a bit of a black box, but Democrats interested in influencing the Trump administration in its second term should take note: He's always open for business.
Second, watching the evolution of the Republican Party take place right in front of us is incredible. Is this pick going to set up intraparty fights among labor and anti-labor advocates in the GOP? Yes. No political evolution happens without some tension. It is totally undeniable now that Republicans — led by Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance — are working to rebrand themselves as a conservative party that can be compatible with both business leaders and unions. I don't know of a single political scientist, pundit, or talking head who had this on their bingo card in 2015, yet here we are.
Third, Democrats are still being dragged down by decades-old issues like NAFTA and immigration, which Republicans have used to win back unionized, working-class voters. I really don't know what the play is for Democrats now. Biden was genuinely the most pro-union president we’ve seen in decades — winning union workers was supposed to be his bread and butter. He literally helped save the Teamsters' union pension plan with an infusion of federal funds, and the Teamsters followed that effort by declining to endorse a presidential candidate for the first time since 1996 (albeit after Harris had replaced Biden atop the ticket). Now, O'Brien seems embedded in Trump's orbit. Biden simply couldn't translate his support into legislation, or the good will he earned onto Vice President Kamala Harris (or the party writ large).
Looking ahead, Trump and Republicans have to quickly find a way to strike a balance between pushing the Republican ethos of a deregulated, unlocked economy while also courting workers and unions to their cause. Chavez-DeRemer is clearly part of that plan.
What happens next? I genuinely have no idea. I can't imagine anyone does. Chavez-DeRemer has backed legislation like the Pro Act that is simply incompatible with the worldviews of so many conservative interest groups and high-level Republicans — elsewhere in Trump’s cabinet and especially in the halls of Congress. If I had to guess, I’d say that we’re not too far from a genuine internal battle that pits these new GOP factions against each other; I expect that battle to play out not just in public-facing language and political posturing, but also with legislation introduced to Congress and regulatory changes throughout the executive branch agencies. We’re set up to watch the Republican elite and establishment face off against the new Trump right all over again, but this time with business leaders and rich executives on one side and unions and labor advocates on the other.
Think about what the butterfly effect of this kind of internal division could be. For instance, Democrats could recalibrate and try to start picking off free-market and disillusioned Republicans who view this as a step too far for the party — how far out of character would an institutionalist approach really be for the party that’s over 50% college graduates? Or, conversely, they could double down on competing for working class, unionized voters and other labor groups — that wouldn’t be too hard to imagine, either.
Optimistically, there is a world where the lower third of the income strata in the U.S. suddenly gets more attention and support from political parties over the next four years than it ever has. The giant question is what does the support look like? Will it be beefing up union protections and making it easier to organize? Will it be massive deregulatory efforts and tax cuts? Will it be healthcare expansions or immigration crackdowns or worker safety laws or child care funding or minimum wage increases? Again: I have no idea. I’m not sure Trump or the party does either.
But, for now, Chavez-DeRemer is a sign that change and disruption are coming — and that the political factions of 2025 won’t be the same ones we’ve gotten used to.
Take the survey: Which party do you think best represents the working class? Let us know!
Disagree? That's okay. My opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.
Help share Tangle.
I'm a firm believer that our politics would be a little bit better if everyone were reading balanced news that allows room for debate, disagreement, and multiple perspectives. If you can take 15 seconds to share Tangle with a few friends I'd really appreciate it — just click the button below and pick some people to email it to!
- Email Tangle to a friend by clicking here.
- Share Tangle on X/Twitter by clicking here.
- Share Tangle on Facebook by clicking here.
Your questions, answered.
Q: Please follow up on this take from last September following Ukraine’s Kursk offensive.
— Note to self, September 5
Tangle: From time to time, we like to make a “note to self” to follow up on issues that we cover that quickly fall out of the public eye, or to circle back on particularly strong takes to see how those situations have progressed. A couple months ago, when we were researching Ukraine’s Kursk offensive, we came across what we thought was a particularly bold take from Paul Schwennesen in Reason. Here’s what he wrote:
“Though it may seem astonishingly premature to say so, my impression after returning from the Russian front is that the war in Ukraine is over and that the powers that be haven't realized it yet. In the Kursk salient, at least, I can personally attest to the eerie, almost surreal inversion of spirits between the people of Ukraine and Russia. The moral scales have now firmly settled on the side of the Ukrainian defenders, and it is far likelier that Russia itself splinters into its constituent republics than that Ukraine falls to its erstwhile invaders.”
We had read a lot of editorials about the Kursk offensive that we thought were overly optimistic about Ukraine potentially turning the tide of the war, and even among those we thought Schwennesen stood out. He didn’t completely miss the mark — he’s right that Ukraine’s military is nowhere near its breaking point — but, frankly, this take was just wrong.
It doesn’t look like an end to the war without Ukrainian territorial concessions is anywhere on the horizon at the moment, let alone Russia splintering into constituent republics.
Now, I don’t want to just dunk on Schwennesen here. He’s been reporting from the front lines, which takes incredible courage, and he’s reporting what he sees accurately; he’s just interpreting it through a lens of bias that we all have. If I were embedded with Ukrainian forces on a surprise offensive over enemy lines, I’m sure that’d skew my point of view, too.
Schwennesen has been writing from the front every couple of months, and I’m eager to read what he has to say next. But looking back on this writing now, I think it’s clear he went way too far in predicting where things were headed.
Want to have a question answered in the newsletter? You can reply to this email (it goes straight to our inbox) or fill out this form.
Under the radar.
The cost of a typical Thanksgiving dinner is down from 2023 but remains far higher than it was in 2019. The American Farm Bureau Federation's annual survey, which tracks nationwide prices for a basket of Thanksgiving staples, found that a Thanksgiving dinner for 10 will cost about $58 this year — a 5% decrease from last year but a roughly 20% increase from pre-pandemic prices (not adjusted for inflation). When adjusting for inflation, though, this year’s basket is one of the cheapest in decades. Still, 44% of Thanksgiving hosts say they are concerned about the cost of their dinner this year. Axios has the story.
Numbers.
- 20.1%. The percentage of American workers who were represented by a union in 1983, according to Pew Research.
- 10.0%. The percentage of American workers who were represented by a union in 2023.
- 70%. The percentage of Americans who approved of labor unions in August 2024, according to Gallup.
- 56%. The percentage of Americans who approved of labor unions in August 2016.
- +7%. The increase in the percentage of Americans who would like to see labor unions have more influence from 2016 to 2023.
- +9%. The increase in the percentage of Americans who think labor unions mostly help the U.S. economy from 2016 to 2023.
- 62% and 27%. The percentage of Americans who think the Democratic and Republican parties, respectively, best serve the interests of labor union members.
- 18%. The estimated percentage of voters in the 2024 election from union households, according to data from AP VoteCast.
The extras.
- One year ago today we were on Thanksgiving break, but were about to publish a piece on George Santos.
- The most clicked link in yesterday’s newsletter was the link to our editorial policy on gender and pronouns.
- Nothing to do with politics: Another great divide in labor: standers v. sitters.
- Yesterday’s survey: 4,301 readers responded to our survey on bathroom bills with 68% opposed. “If you actually have the surgery to transition to the opposite sex, then I don't see a problem with using facilities for the sex transitioned to. If you just say you are the opposite sex of what you are biologically, then no,” one respondent said.
Have a nice day.
Michele Kang, owner of the Washington Spirit soccer team, says that “women's sports have been undervalued and overlooked for far too long.” So, she’s committed $30 million to U.S. Soccer to increase competitive opportunities for female players and to support female coaches and referees. The contribution is the largest ever directed towards girls and women’s programs. “Michele Kang's gift will transform soccer for women and girls in the United States,” U.S. Soccer President Cindy Parlow Cone said. ESPN has the story.
Don't forget...
📣 Share Tangle on Twitter here, Facebook here, or LinkedIn here.
🎧 We have a podcast you can listen to here.
🎥 Follow us on Instagram here or subscribe to our YouTube channel here
💵 If you like our newsletter, drop some love in our tip jar.
🎉 Want to reach 275,000+ people? Fill out this form to advertise with us.
📫 Forward this to a friend and tell them to subscribe (hint: it's here).
🛍 Love clothes, stickers and mugs? Go to our merch store!
