Speaker 1: Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics,
Speaker 1: where we discussed the top political headlines with some of
Speaker 1: today's best minds, and a federal judge has ruled Tennessee's
Speaker 1: drag ban as unconstitutional. We have such a fabulous show
Speaker 1: for you today. Former Republican Congresswoman Barbara Comstock talks to
Speaker 1: us about the GOP field and the differences she sees
Speaker 1: in the candidates. Then we'll talk to Evil Geniuses author
Speaker 1: Kurt Anderson about the GOP's departure from reality. But first
Speaker 1: we have the Lincoln Projects read Galen. Welcome to Fast Politics.
Speaker 1: Read Galen, Thanks for having me today. We must congratulate
Speaker 1: ourselves for avoiding financial catastrophe.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, look, it's no small thing, right. We
Speaker 2: do this every well, I should say this, Republicans in
Speaker 2: Congress do this every ten years or so, just to
Speaker 2: remind us how insane they were.
Speaker 1: Right. It was just it's only happened once before. I mean,
Speaker 1: though it seems likely it will happen again.
Speaker 2: Right, Yeah, I mean I think that in you know,
Speaker 2: the good news is is that the deal that President
Speaker 2: Biden cutt buys us another two years.
Speaker 3: And well, that seems like a long time. It's not.
Speaker 2: But I will say this is that if we do
Speaker 2: what we need to do November of twenty four, you know,
Speaker 2: maybe it's a narrow, narrow house, narrow Senate, we could
Speaker 2: probably do some work. Look, Molly, there is work that
Speaker 2: needs to be done, right, I think we should note that.
Speaker 2: But it's not going to be done, you know, with
Speaker 2: a gun to the head or the sort of damicles
Speaker 2: hanging over you.
Speaker 1: Right. No, I mean, I think one of the comments
Speaker 1: that I heard a lot writing about this and talking
Speaker 1: to people was that this ended up being a normal
Speaker 1: budget negotiation, but done in a completely insane way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly. I mean the idea, well, remember that we
Speaker 2: haven't had quote unquote regular order in Congress in years, right,
Speaker 2: maybe couple of decades at this point, and so now
Speaker 2: this is how things get done in the context of yeah,
Speaker 2: a budget, a debt ceiling, you know, whatever else. And
Speaker 2: let's be clear, there's a very good chance that nothing
Speaker 2: else of real note comes out of this Congress before
Speaker 2: the next election, right right right, the Republican House, they
Speaker 2: passed a whole bunch of bs stuff that is obviously
Speaker 2: going to die on the vine. But they're all performative anyway,
Speaker 2: you could make an argument that there's really not going
Speaker 2: to be anything else that comes up between you know, now,
Speaker 2: in the next eighteen months.
Speaker 1: Yeah, true, But also like why the fuck are we
Speaker 1: paying them? Then? Well, I mean no, I mean I
Speaker 1: think that's right, and that's what most people are saying.
Speaker 1: But it is just still an incredible fact, right, Like
Speaker 1: imagine that you said, now we're done till twenty four.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean I think that it's really in the
Speaker 2: context of where we are nowadays, which is, you know,
Speaker 2: if these are the idiots in charge, you know, I'm
Speaker 2: sort of happy to have them do nothing for eighteen months.
Speaker 2: That is a good point, But your broader point is right,
Speaker 2: which is there are things that you know, we need
Speaker 2: to do, whether or not it's on social media, AI,
Speaker 2: the environment, Like, there are things that need to happen
Speaker 2: in this country from a broad based policy perspective, on
Speaker 2: behalf of individual Americans. Republicans, especially the one you know,
Speaker 2: the MAGA, the Taliban twenty the Magas, aren't you know,
Speaker 2: they don't care about any of that stuff. I would
Speaker 2: also say that in the context of what is already
Speaker 2: an election year, right, because look, we're already we have
Speaker 2: a Republican primary. If whether or not it means anything
Speaker 2: remains to be seen. But the truth is we're already
Speaker 2: back into another election cycle, and you know Trump will
Speaker 2: put enormous pressure on McCarthy and the rest of those
Speaker 2: people to make sure that they don't get anything done
Speaker 2: that he doesn't like. And you know the President will
Speaker 2: do what he can to look normal, which compared to
Speaker 2: them won't be hard, right.
Speaker 1: And that's what I want to get back to this
Speaker 1: Taliban twenty because this is a new phrase I've heard.
Speaker 1: I always cringe at the idea of comparing the American
Speaker 1: extism to extremism in Islam, because we are a country
Speaker 1: that has had a lot of dysfunction that it doesn't need.
Speaker 1: We don't need to bring other countries into it. But
Speaker 1: I'm curious to know who are these twenty.
Speaker 2: Well it look, I mean, it's you know, the top
Speaker 2: of the list is Marjorie Taylor Green right from Georgia,
Speaker 2: Matt Gates from Florida, Paul Gosar from Arizona. Even well,
Speaker 2: I would say normally Thomas Massey from Kentucky's on the list,
Speaker 2: but he actually voted for the debt ceiling bill.
Speaker 1: So Massi's on the rules committee. He is really I
Speaker 1: want to say he's a libertarian, but I don't know
Speaker 1: what's more libertarian than a libertarians. He really hates the government, right,
Speaker 1: he hates the federal government and wants to destroy it.
Speaker 2: He's like a Spanish anarchist circa like nineteen thirty seven.
Speaker 1: He is committed to that, but somehow McCarthy brings him
Speaker 1: into the inner circle, just like with Jim Jordan, just
Speaker 1: like with Marjorie Taylor Green, who says the bill is
Speaker 1: a shuld sandwich and the votes for an anyway. And
Speaker 1: these guys just show like they actually don't really believe
Speaker 1: in anything. They just want people to be nice to them.
Speaker 2: I mean, somebody made a deal with Massey somewhere right,
Speaker 2: will likely never hear about it. That's what he needed
Speaker 2: to do. But your larger point is right, they're all transactional.
Speaker 2: They're all transactional. I mean McCarthy is the most transactional
Speaker 2: of the bunch. I mean, remember that the only constituency
Speaker 2: he has are the uber wealthy in corporate America. Right.
Speaker 2: The people of Bakersfield don't think much about him and
Speaker 2: his own conference, whether or not it is these super
Speaker 2: magas or the run of the mills. You know, members
Speaker 2: of Congress they don't really like. And remember that McCarthy
Speaker 2: only ever rose into leadership because of his ability to
Speaker 2: raise money, right, you know he was when he was
Speaker 2: the whip, he was a terrible whip. He couldn't count votes,
Speaker 2: nor did I think he even really wanted to. When
Speaker 2: he was a majority leader, he could barely keep his
Speaker 2: own conference in line. And now he's gotten one thing
Speaker 2: done and you know, Molly, at.
Speaker 3: Least a fifty to fifty chance it's going to cost
Speaker 3: him his job.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, he definitely is not good at counting
Speaker 1: the votes. Like said, we've seen this again and again.
Speaker 1: And you know, he was described by the New York
Speaker 1: Times is a golden retriever of a man. So you know,
Speaker 1: he is what he appears. But I'm just curious if we,
Speaker 1: you know, play the tape forward. What we saw here, right,
Speaker 1: was that you know, there was a debt debate about
Speaker 1: what the Republican Party believes. Right really here they are
Speaker 1: wanting to shrink the bloated spending. And then but on
Speaker 1: this list of things they believe is they want to
Speaker 1: make the Trump tax cuts permanent.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, because again that goes back to the idea
Speaker 2: of I mean, if you think back to what Trump accomplished,
Speaker 2: and I'm going to use that word relatively right for
Speaker 2: his plutocratic backers. He got massive tax cuts for corporate America,
Speaker 2: he got massive tax cuts for the evangelical community, he
Speaker 2: got all sorts of judges, including a six ' to
Speaker 2: three Supreme Court. And for the white Christian nationalist crowd,
Speaker 2: he brought them all the anger, poison, and ugliness he
Speaker 2: could find, so you could make an argument that he
Speaker 2: did for his people what he promised he would do. Now,
Speaker 2: Republicans have to continue this tax cut mania because it's
Speaker 2: really the only thing they have. It's always sounds good
Speaker 2: on paper, but the truth is, you know, it doesn't
Speaker 2: pencil out. You know, they want to make these things permanent.
Speaker 2: But that goes to this, you know, you called it libertarianism.
Speaker 2: I mean, we're really like in State inn rand Land,
Speaker 2: which is like, if I've got mine, good for me,
Speaker 2: and if you haven't got yours, too bad for you.
Speaker 1: You know, the only idea they have that's popular is
Speaker 1: cutting taxes. And so if all you have is a hammer,
Speaker 1: everything looks.
Speaker 2: Like now, well, yeah, does anyone on April fifteenth say,
Speaker 2: you know what, I feel so good about writing this
Speaker 2: check to the Treasury Department? Right, nobody does. You're not
Speaker 2: supposed to write. But that's part of being a democracy,
Speaker 2: which is we're all in this together. What the Republicans
Speaker 2: have done is let the wealthiest of the wealthy say, well,
Speaker 2: y'all are in this together.
Speaker 3: We're not.
Speaker 2: We do what we do. Good luck to the rest
Speaker 2: of you. And again, yet is it broadly popular. Yeah,
Speaker 2: because again it sort of scratches that itch. But to me,
Speaker 2: you know, the wealthy warning text cuts, I think is
Speaker 2: really just a is a smoke screen for I don't
Speaker 2: want anybody to ever tell me what to do with
Speaker 2: my life, my money, my business, whatever. I want to
Speaker 2: have a separate and a part thing for me and guys.
Speaker 2: Let guys, mostly guys like me and the rest of
Speaker 2: you are on your own. And if that's the way
Speaker 2: of the world, that's too bad for you. Publicans are
Speaker 2: they're nihilists for the most part, and they're either nihilists
Speaker 2: actively or they're passively okay with the nihilism that goes
Speaker 2: on around them.
Speaker 1: Yes, definitely interesting and not super surprising. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think of it as the burn it all down caucus, right,
Speaker 1: All they want is to burn it all down. So
Speaker 1: I want to ask you, now we go straight from
Speaker 1: the possibility of a catastrophic financial meltdown, which is now
Speaker 1: over two really good jobs numbers again the Biden economy, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is the thing. Even his fans are
Speaker 1: hesitant to support him for whatever reason. People are so
Speaker 1: negative on him, and yet he continues to have the
Speaker 1: kind of luck that you know, Barack Obama would have
Speaker 1: killed for.
Speaker 3: They are two different people in so many ways.
Speaker 2: Right. President Obama came to the White House, Remember, with
Speaker 2: very little legislative experience, right, two years in the State Senate,
Speaker 2: two years in the US Senate, and what he could
Speaker 2: arguably be thought of as having as a mandate. Remember
Speaker 2: this is a pretty at the time, right liberal Democrat
Speaker 2: who won the state of Indiana, in the state of
Speaker 2: North Carolina, right, I mean, so he was winning in
Speaker 2: places that no one expected a Democrat to ever win.
Speaker 2: But I think there was a stylistic difference too, which
Speaker 2: is he believed he had the mandate. He acted accordingly.
Speaker 2: But I think the thing that I'm moldy now just
Speaker 2: coming to realize was how much his election pissed off
Speaker 2: so many really very conservative white people. I mean, Mitch
Speaker 2: McConnell said it out loud, it's my job to make
Speaker 2: him a one term president, right. So it was a
Speaker 2: combination of I think inexperience and maybe a little bit
Speaker 2: of hubris on the part of the Obama white House
Speaker 2: mixed with a very you know, ugly and now we're
Speaker 2: seeing this, right, it's supercharged sort of the white nationalist
Speaker 2: ugliness that we're now experiencing today.
Speaker 1: But I also think Obama inherited really a lot of
Speaker 1: bad luck.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, I mean, he took over with the worst
Speaker 2: thing since the Great Depression.
Speaker 1: I've been very impressed with Biden. But these jobs numbers
Speaker 1: are a certain amount of luck too, I mean, because
Speaker 1: nobody is expecting this.
Speaker 2: Well yeah, but I mean, you know, I saw a
Speaker 2: New York Times headline that says, you know, jobs numbers
Speaker 2: outpace expectations. Again, well, how many months in a row
Speaker 2: do you have to have good jobs numbers before you say, well,
Speaker 2: maybe maybe the economy is doing okay. Because everybody we're
Speaker 2: you know, I mean, for the last twenty plus years, Molly,
Speaker 2: we're always expecting the next catastrophe, and the last twenty
Speaker 2: years have had in a pond full of what's supposed
Speaker 2: to be white swan it's just full of black sworms.
Speaker 2: Now it's like, okay, well, when's it going to end?
Speaker 2: When's the next shoe going to drop? And so when
Speaker 2: good things happen, it's always going to be Okay, Well
Speaker 2: we got lucky again, right, we got lucky again. Now,
Speaker 2: maybe we are. Where I live is a relatively small town,
Speaker 2: but there's not a restaurant or a store that doesn't
Speaker 2: have a help wanted sign on the window. There doesn't
Speaker 2: appear to be a shortage of work available. It seems
Speaker 2: like we're short of people to do it.
Speaker 1: Now. That brings us to another Republican fuck up, which
Speaker 1: is their complete and utter disinterest in fixing immigration. I mean,
Speaker 1: luckily they're passing child labor laws so we can have
Speaker 1: children working. That's my own irony. But I mean, just
Speaker 1: you know, they're really I mean, you see, Sarah Sanders,
Speaker 1: they have been reworking these child labor laws, obviously in
Speaker 1: the hopes of keeping these big companies from getting in trouble.
Speaker 1: But I think it is a really salient and worrying
Speaker 1: situation here.
Speaker 3: I think that's right.
Speaker 2: But it goes back to the idea of if there
Speaker 2: is a reasonable and humanitarian way to solve two issues,
Speaker 2: which is, we have people that want to come here,
Speaker 2: as we always have, and we have jobs available to them.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 2: Remember, if you are an upper middle class French person,
Speaker 2: you don't need to come to the United States if
Speaker 2: you live in Guatemala. Right, and the choices are really good.
Speaker 2: Chance that either me or a member of my family
Speaker 2: lives in abject poverty or experiences a violent death, or
Speaker 2: I can track the thousand miles north to the United
Speaker 2: States and try and make a better life, Like what
Speaker 2: are you going to do? And so we can solve
Speaker 2: two problems, which is give people a humanitarian outlet while
Speaker 2: providing people to do the jobs that frankly, in a
Speaker 2: post industrial country, most Americans aren't.
Speaker 3: Going to do.
Speaker 2: But this is the point, this is the ugliness of them,
Speaker 2: which is, you know what, can't find enough people to
Speaker 2: work at the port processing plant. Tell the fourteen year
Speaker 2: old go do it. You go hack up a bunch
Speaker 2: of you know, Boston pork butts eight hours a day.
Speaker 3: And if you lose a thumb, eh.
Speaker 1: Too bad, right right, right? No, I mean that I
Speaker 1: think that's ultimately what we're seeing. So my question is, now,
Speaker 1: on the trail we have Trump and then we have
Speaker 1: all of the people pretending to be Trump. Why is
Speaker 1: there really no one in the never Trump lane of
Speaker 1: this GOP primary challenge.
Speaker 2: I would say this because they're all afraid of it,
Speaker 2: most importantly, and none of them understand what it takes
Speaker 2: to beat him, which is, well, first of all, look,
Speaker 2: I've seen a bunch of stories, Molly, you know, oh well,
Speaker 2: you know, the broad the expanding primary field will make
Speaker 2: it easier for Trump to win. It could be one
Speaker 2: on one, it could be one verse ten. You know,
Speaker 2: he's going to I believe he's going to be the nominee.
Speaker 2: You know, if so long as he's got a solid
Speaker 2: forty to forty five percent of the primary electorate, it's
Speaker 2: really darn near impossible.
Speaker 3: To beat him. But well, let me say this.
Speaker 2: They've made a deal with the devil doctor Faustus, made
Speaker 2: his deal with mister Mephistopheles, and this is all coming
Speaker 2: home to roost, which is they know they can't win
Speaker 2: without the Trump be primary voters. They can't win a primary.
Speaker 2: But The problem is is if they were to beat him,
Speaker 2: thirty percent of the party stays home, right, and they
Speaker 2: lose in the general, And look, maybe that's the best
Speaker 2: outcome for everybody. Trump loses goes crazy. He says it
Speaker 2: was stolen from him. You've got the RNC and the
Speaker 2: GOP overlords such as they are in Washington. GC said, God,
Speaker 2: thank god, he's done. But you get crushed in thirty
Speaker 2: five states because every MAGA guy and gal in target
Speaker 2: states stays home, so they don't see any way to
Speaker 2: do it. The other part, too, is none of them
Speaker 2: understand that to beat him, you must be on him
Speaker 2: all day, every day. They must collectively do it. DeSantis
Speaker 2: does it. The problem is that you know he's willing
Speaker 2: to do it, but a he's no better as either
Speaker 2: a human being or a leader.
Speaker 1: I think he's much scarier.
Speaker 2: He is because he's been willing to do it. But
Speaker 2: he's also a terrible candidate. I mean, he is awful.
Speaker 1: That's the best thing about him.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean he is really.
Speaker 2: I mean, just as someone who's spent more time in
Speaker 2: like Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina and Nevada,
Speaker 2: you name.
Speaker 3: It, Like he is awful at this.
Speaker 2: As our friend Stuart Stevens likes to say, you know,
Speaker 2: running for president is a study in humiliation. This is
Speaker 2: a guy who does not like to be humiliated. He
Speaker 2: can't even pretend like he's having a good time.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, I also think that it's a question of, like,
Speaker 1: this guy is bad. I mean, I don't understand, but
Speaker 1: I mean he is also, like I think, a really
Speaker 1: scary authoritarian. Like if you were a country that was
Speaker 1: about to slip into authoritarianism, wouldn't you want the guy
Speaker 1: who can do Trumpism without Trump? Well?
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think this You're making a really good
Speaker 2: point here too, which is for all of those same
Speaker 2: plutocrats I was talking about earlier, or you know what
Speaker 2: passes for conservative intelligentsia now right the National Review people
Speaker 2: is they're happy to take what Trump represents so long
Speaker 2: as they can run it through the car wash and
Speaker 2: it comes out looking like Ronda Santis. And I think
Speaker 2: that's a really important thing for us to remember, is
Speaker 2: that Ronda Santis is no better. He is worse in
Speaker 2: some ways. You're absolutely right, But the normals, so to speak,
Speaker 2: the quote unquote normies are happy to take him because
Speaker 2: his name isn't Donald Trump?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 2: They could theoretically take him to the country club or
Speaker 2: the yacht club or out to a fancy restaurant and
Speaker 2: he won't embarrass them. Whereas you know, as well as
Speaker 2: I do, like Trump comes rolling in like a golden steamroller,
Speaker 2: an orange pancake steamroller, and is the center of everything,
Speaker 2: and everybody's got a smile and not and go. Can
Speaker 2: you believe he's really doing this and saying this? Whereas
Speaker 2: DeSantis might be weird, but at least you know he's
Speaker 2: got a pretty wife and a family and everything else,
Speaker 2: and you can polish him up long enough to get
Speaker 2: him through dinner without embarrassing you.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, though you can't. It turns out you can't.
Speaker 1: But yes, thank you so much. I hope you'll come back.
Speaker 3: Great, absolutely, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: Barbara Comstock is a former Republican congresswoman. Welcome to Fast Politics,
Speaker 1: Barbara Comstock.
Speaker 4: Great to be with you, Molly.
Speaker 1: Very excited to have you as actually right now, as
Speaker 1: we go right from debt ceiling drama to GOP primary drama,
Speaker 1: you were a member of this party or maybe still are,
Speaker 1: I mean, what is your take?
Speaker 4: It is distressing I take it individual by individual, you know,
Speaker 4: sort of. I guess I'm kind of a Liz Cheney
Speaker 4: Adam Kinsinger Republican. When you look at the presidential candidates,
Speaker 4: Asa Hutchinson is a friend, Kristin Huno is a friend.
Speaker 4: So you know, any of the Republicans polling under five
Speaker 4: percent after the presidential campaign, those those are those are
Speaker 4: my friends. Yeah, So it's it is distressing on that front.
Speaker 4: But when you see the fireworks now going on between
Speaker 4: Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis, who you know, every time
Speaker 4: I see them kind of now going out each other,
Speaker 4: I am reminded of Logan Roy when he said it
Speaker 4: to his children, you aren't serious people. That can very
Speaker 4: easily be applied to Donald Trump and Ron desantists. And
Speaker 4: so I want to remain ever hopeful because I do
Speaker 4: think it's important that we have a two part of system.
Speaker 4: There might be a chance to have a Republican nominee
Speaker 4: who might be a serious person. Right now that doesn't
Speaker 4: look too promising, but I do think with the entrance
Speaker 4: of Chris Christy, who I think, you know is I
Speaker 4: think Peggy Noonon had a good column today talking about how,
Speaker 4: you know, his main mission is going to be to
Speaker 4: stop Donald Trump, and he kind of has the book
Speaker 4: on Trump and why he's unfit and can kind of
Speaker 4: go through that and take a pretty you know, as
Speaker 4: a prosecutor, kind of go through and really take it
Speaker 4: to him. Liz Cheney can do the same thing if
Speaker 4: she gets in, because she's got chapter and verse on
Speaker 4: the January sixth story and can be very precise on that.
Speaker 4: So if either, you know, either of them can do
Speaker 4: that then and then the indictments come that might take
Speaker 4: Trump down a notch. The fight between Trump and DeSantis
Speaker 4: will take both of them down. So then does that
Speaker 4: give an opening for a more serious person? So it
Speaker 4: might be in flux. I'd like to be hopeful that
Speaker 4: there might be a serious person, But you know, that's
Speaker 4: I think it's important that we have a two party system,
Speaker 4: but right now it doesn't look real promising on that.
Speaker 1: We have Desanta's running to the right of Trump, which
Speaker 1: is a very very very narrow lane.
Speaker 4: Yes, well, Trump is just about Trump, So when you
Speaker 4: really talk ideologically, it's hard to you really can't put
Speaker 4: him in a category because he's just about himself. Like
Speaker 4: when you saw him yesterday saying woke, woke, woke, you know,
Speaker 4: nobody knows what woke is. Well, of course Trump himself
Speaker 4: was out about woke. But now that that's you know
Speaker 4: that is, I mean, I think it's silly too. And
Speaker 4: it was funny just the other night I was at
Speaker 4: an event where a Republican, a local Republican who I
Speaker 4: do support because he's somebody here locally who doesn't talk
Speaker 4: like the silly desantisis and Donald Trump, and when he
Speaker 4: sends out a memo or a newsletter, he says, well,
Speaker 4: here's the problems going on in our communities. We've had
Speaker 4: break ins in these neighborhoods, We've had this type of crime,
Speaker 4: and here's what's going on, and here's what I'm doing
Speaker 4: about it. And he gives you chapter and verse of
Speaker 4: what he's doing. And he doesn't talk in these silly
Speaker 4: slogans and doesn't use the word woke, and doesn't you know,
Speaker 4: he's very practical. And so I just said, you know,
Speaker 4: thank you for not talking that silly lingo all the time.
Speaker 4: So when they heard what Donald Trump said, somebody sent
Speaker 4: me this email. Oh gee, Donald Trump now agrees with Barbara. No, no, no,
Speaker 4: it's just the broken clock happened to be.
Speaker 1: Right, I mean, like think of a Tim Scott. Tim
Speaker 1: Scott when he announced, there was a sense maybe that
Speaker 1: he would run as a sort of not Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: But as he's been in the race, and you saw
Speaker 1: so Nicky Haley too, they've I mean Nicky Haley. If
Speaker 1: you think about her before she became trumpy, you know,
Speaker 1: you would think like there's sort of more of a
Speaker 1: case for her when she runs as not trumpy. But
Speaker 1: what she and a bunch of these candidates have done
Speaker 1: is they've really just sort of become like lesser versions
Speaker 1: of Trump. And I just think it's infected the rest
Speaker 1: of the party.
Speaker 4: Yeah. No, and that's and that's what the big problem is.
Speaker 4: And I know recently I was talking an interview where
Speaker 4: I said, you know, if you're if you're not, if
Speaker 4: you're just going to be a cheerleader for Trump or
Speaker 4: many Trump, then don't run. Go be part of his
Speaker 4: you know, little cheerleader squad. If you're going to run,
Speaker 4: you know, you have to be your own person. You
Speaker 4: have to be out there telling your story and be
Speaker 4: a leader. How to follow and not has been the problem.
Speaker 4: And that is why you know, I do like somebody
Speaker 4: like a sat known him since he was in Congress.
Speaker 4: He's a serious lawyer. He headed up the DA, so
Speaker 4: he has serious ideas about, you know, how do you
Speaker 4: deal with fentanyl. You know, he's been down on the
Speaker 4: border talking about the border. He hasn't just been doing
Speaker 4: the reflexive Fox News attacks on the border. You know,
Speaker 4: he has some thoughtful ideas from when he was you know,
Speaker 4: at Homeland Security about what are some things you can do.
Speaker 4: Will Hurd, who may or may not. You know, he's
Speaker 4: been talking about maybe running for president. He had a
Speaker 4: border district so and he also supports immigration before him,
Speaker 4: so he has some serious ideas on that. So those
Speaker 4: are the type of people we need, you know, who
Speaker 4: want to be leaders, who you know, we need to run.
Speaker 4: Not people who think, well, oh the party is here,
Speaker 4: so that's what we need to do. We need to
Speaker 4: have leaders who maybe will bring the party another direction.
Speaker 4: And if the party doesn't go there, if you can't
Speaker 4: lead people, then you're not going to win anyway. Because
Speaker 4: I don't see Trump winning. I mean when you look
Speaker 4: at the swing states, so I mean if he gets
Speaker 4: the nomination, we just lose again. I mean only will
Speaker 4: be close. I know Democrats worry, but I think When
Speaker 4: you look at the swing states that Trump lost, they've
Speaker 4: moved more democratic direction eight Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin. You know,
Speaker 4: we all know that in you know, you have strong governors,
Speaker 4: democratic governors in those states now. And even you know
Speaker 4: in Arizona, where people thought, oh, no, you know, Carry
Speaker 4: Lake looked you know, I mean, it's amazing when you
Speaker 4: look at last year where even Democrats were worried that
Speaker 4: Carry Lake looked strong. I mean, dog Master never looked strong,
Speaker 4: but people thought, oh, but Carrie Lake. You know, she
Speaker 4: dressed nicely, she spoke, you know, more eloquently than a
Speaker 4: Doug Mastriano. But there are Republicans like me, they're independents
Speaker 4: who they're not going back for these authitarian people. If
Speaker 4: they dress them up nicely and they look attractive, we
Speaker 4: see through that, and I think people they're not going
Speaker 4: back there to that party. They're not going back to Trump.
Speaker 4: And you can't dress up candidates, no matter what they
Speaker 4: look like, to go back. So listen. I never was
Speaker 4: somebody who thought Biden was a good candidate all along
Speaker 4: the way. But if it's Trump versus Biden, I think
Speaker 4: there's going to be plenty of you know, enough Republicans
Speaker 4: and certainly enough independents who are Ford were pro democracy
Speaker 4: and that's what's last year, and that's where we're at,
Speaker 4: regardless of you, because this authoritarian bent with Trump, with DeSantis,
Speaker 4: this is for the country first and foremost, but it's
Speaker 4: also destructive for Republicans. And until that gets washed out
Speaker 4: of the party, there's a lot of Republicans who aren't
Speaker 4: going to be coming back. And it doesn't attract the
Speaker 4: independent it's either in these silly fights. I mean, you know,
Speaker 4: between DeSantis and Trump are just about who's more authoritarian.
Speaker 4: Santis the other day says, well, you know, we're sick
Speaker 4: of these people imposing their will on us. We will
Speaker 4: impose our will, sort of the libertarian bent of Republicans said,
Speaker 4: we want to be the you know, the leave us
Speaker 4: alone coalitionea of imposing our will. Is not the center
Speaker 4: right coalition that I was ever a part of. And
Speaker 4: that a lot. And when you hear DeSantis saying that,
Speaker 4: it just is cringe. He's just such a bad candidate anyway,
Speaker 4: the things that he says, when he's saying things like, oh,
Speaker 4: Trump didn't do a good job, or Trump's just you know,
Speaker 4: performance well so much of what he's done and has
Speaker 4: ended up in court, whether it's the Disney things or
Speaker 4: acts on social media companies which I work with, you know,
Speaker 4: tech companies and social media companies. But you know he's
Speaker 4: been suing them and he's not doing very well in court,
Speaker 4: and conservative lawyers have taken him to court because and
Speaker 4: he's not doing well. So plenty of his things have
Speaker 4: ended up in court, just like Donald Trump ended up
Speaker 4: in court. You know, his record is not so hot either.
Speaker 4: The idea that you know, in his whole attack on
Speaker 4: the federal workforce, which I live in Virginia, I represented
Speaker 4: that so it attack on the so called deep state
Speaker 4: is just as ridiculous as Donald Trump. So both of
Speaker 4: them just are kind of you know, different versions of
Speaker 4: you stick with my succession, Logan Roy, different versions of
Speaker 4: Kendall or Roman Roy. Right, you know, there's silly people
Speaker 4: who should not be in charge of things, and both
Speaker 4: of them have already demonstrated that in so many ways. Yeah,
Speaker 4: I think Chris Christy getting in and then I think
Speaker 4: when we get to debates also grown ups like you know,
Speaker 4: ASA being on stage, whether it's Kristan Unu or others
Speaker 4: who will hopefully be able to point it out, and
Speaker 4: I hope with Tim Scott and others who've been reluctant
Speaker 4: to take on Trump or Desantas, I well, actually, you know,
Speaker 4: Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Mike Pence, they have pointed out
Speaker 4: that the Disney thing is silly because why are Republicans
Speaker 4: attacking businesses? Why are we attacking the free market system.
Speaker 4: If you don't like what a company's doing, you don't
Speaker 4: have to, you know, take part in their business. But
Speaker 4: we aren't the people who were attacking businesses, you know.
Speaker 4: Now those people don't want to eat at Chick fil A.
Speaker 5: The left didn't like Chick fil A because they were
Speaker 5: right anti gay.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, it's just silly.
Speaker 1: But here's my question about this. So Trump is actually
Speaker 1: sort of even though he's very popular in the primary field,
Speaker 1: he's quite diminished in the regular field. And we've seen
Speaker 1: this again and again. He doesn't have the same power
Speaker 1: you know, he can like it used to be when
Speaker 1: he first came on the scene. You know, if he
Speaker 1: tweeted about you. I don't know if you ever had
Speaker 1: that experience, but you know you would see death threats,
Speaker 1: you would. I mean, it was really quite scary. And
Speaker 1: he has a base. They're crazy, but a lot of
Speaker 1: them going to jail may have heard their resolved. But
Speaker 1: I'm just curious, like, do you think some of the
Speaker 1: anxiety about criticizing Trump is sort of left over from
Speaker 1: when Trump.
Speaker 5: Used to be this all powerful People should not be
Speaker 5: afraid of criticizing him, I mean I from I mean,
Speaker 5: I didn't support him in twenty sixteen when I was
Speaker 5: on the Bautlet.
Speaker 4: With him, and I ended up out running him by
Speaker 4: twelve points in my district, and I did better in
Speaker 4: my district in every part of my district. I mean,
Speaker 4: when I lost in twenty eighteen, it was because people
Speaker 4: in my district didn't like Trump and they wanted Democrats
Speaker 4: to be in the majority and then they could impeach him,
Speaker 4: which supported support him in twenty twenty either, So you know,
Speaker 4: criticizing him, certainly when he was in office, it did
Speaker 4: get you attacked, obviously, you know, Janey Adam Ginsinger. Certainly
Speaker 4: it can get you a primary. That kind of thing
Speaker 4: can happen, but it's not as bad as people. I think.
Speaker 4: Actually having Tucker Carlson off the air right happened to Fox.
Speaker 4: I think that has lessened sort of the death threat things.
Speaker 4: I mean, I worked with, you know, helping you know,
Speaker 4: the cops you know who went through the January sixth
Speaker 4: night mire. They still do get threats when you know,
Speaker 4: like when Tucker Carlson put the January sixth stuff on air,
Speaker 4: there's two or three nights that he did it. You know,
Speaker 4: then people either show up at their house or send
Speaker 4: them messages. They'll happened then. But now that he's gone,
Speaker 4: the temperature has come down. So I think that has
Speaker 4: been a wonderful thing to have him gone. I think
Speaker 4: it also maybe taught the others a little bit of
Speaker 4: a lesson too. And Trump, look, he attacked Kaylee mcannaney
Speaker 4: and then some of these people saying, oh, don't attack Kaylee.
Speaker 4: January six didn't do it, But attacking the poor little
Speaker 4: blonde did. What does that say about you? More than
Speaker 4: you know? But he's still Trump still goes out and
Speaker 4: attacks the officer who shot Ashley Babbitt, who was trying,
Speaker 4: you know, to protect all of the members of risk
Speaker 4: and he's been totally exonerated, and that officer, you know,
Speaker 4: I don't know the nature of the threats that continue
Speaker 4: against him, but you know, those officers do continue to
Speaker 4: get threats, and Trump is still probably a daily threat
Speaker 4: to them, and that is horrendous and that enrages me
Speaker 4: to this day. Those threats still are there and they
Speaker 4: still need to be called out, but hopefully they are lessoned.
Speaker 1: People need to.
Speaker 4: I mean, the reason I continue to speak out against
Speaker 4: him is because I think those people shouldn't have to
Speaker 4: and those of us who have a voice who can
Speaker 4: do it and should do it so that they don't
Speaker 4: have to because it's harder for them to do it.
Speaker 4: They don't.
Speaker 6: I mean, I.
Speaker 4: Don't have people protecting me either, but they shouldn't have
Speaker 4: to do it. They didn't sign up for this. You know,
Speaker 4: people who are in office are the ones or were
Speaker 4: in office, are the ones who signed up to do
Speaker 4: this and should be protecting people like that, not forcing
Speaker 4: them to have to be in that position. But I
Speaker 4: think you're right. I think it's lessened and I think
Speaker 4: people he's a lesser person. And when he was indicted
Speaker 4: and had to go in, you know, and Marjorie Green
Speaker 4: tried to get people riled up, they didn't get riled up.
Speaker 4: When they went and took the documents from mar A Lago,
Speaker 4: there was less of a you know, there wasn't much
Speaker 4: going on there. And I think when he is indicted,
Speaker 4: and I do think I'll be indicted again, I don't
Speaker 4: think you'll see that big of a response. And hopefully
Speaker 4: a lot of these Republicans will instead of being cheerleaders
Speaker 4: for him and saying, oh, poor Donald, it's unfair, they'll
Speaker 4: do what Asa Hutchison did as a former prosecutor. And
Speaker 4: I think Chris Christy will do this and say these
Speaker 4: are serious indictments. They should be respected. Now, they should
Speaker 4: go through the legal process and let the jury decide. Certainly,
Speaker 4: that's how you know, the Egene Carroll process should be respected.
Speaker 4: I would see some of these guys say, oh, that
Speaker 4: shouldn't be respected. Why not. That's a jury that looked
Speaker 4: at the facts. Donald Trump wouldn't even go in and
Speaker 4: face a jury. Trump always does poorly when he has
Speaker 4: to go into court put his hand up and the
Speaker 4: law in truth, you know, are what he has to
Speaker 4: count on. He never does well in that situation when
Speaker 4: he can't bs and you know, count on trying to
Speaker 4: fool the people, you know. So that's when it all
Speaker 4: comes crashing down on him. So I think, you know
Speaker 4: you're at least going to have two prosecutors on the
Speaker 4: stage against him, hopefully Asa and Chris Christy, And if
Speaker 4: Liz Cheney comes in, you're gonna have three prosecutors up
Speaker 4: there who really know how to tell the truth on him.
Speaker 1: Do you think Liz Cheney will come in.
Speaker 4: I'm not sure, but I'd love to see her do that.
Speaker 4: But I think she obviously is committed to you know,
Speaker 4: she put up that ad that went up in New
Speaker 4: Hampshire when he did that horrible CNN debate, I mean
Speaker 4: town Hall, and you know, she is committed to making
Speaker 4: sure he is never in office again. She will be
Speaker 4: engaged in that process, which is a good thing. And
Speaker 4: I think you know, she was willing to, you know,
Speaker 4: I mean she made a choice. Yeah, her own personal
Speaker 4: career was more important. The constitution and the role of
Speaker 4: law was more important than living a lie. And I
Speaker 4: think that was an easy choice for her to make,
Speaker 4: and for her and for Adam, you know, were I
Speaker 4: think they were frankly surprised that it wasn't easier for others.
Speaker 4: But I think she'll continue to do that. So I
Speaker 4: think that's good for the country, and I think that's
Speaker 4: one of the many reasons. It doesn't take that many
Speaker 4: people to do it to, you know, kind of pull
Speaker 4: down the emperor has no close And I think more
Speaker 4: and more people are seeing that, and that's why I mean,
Speaker 4: people forgot. People got very upset with that town hall.
Speaker 4: But people forgot. Donald Trump lost New Hampshire twice in
Speaker 4: the general election. Candidates all lost last year in New Hampshire.
Speaker 4: So that audience, which was a bunch of those people
Speaker 4: who supported the losers, basically, you know, so he was
Speaker 4: sitting there in front of people who voted for losers
Speaker 4: and voted for him, so you know, yeah, okay, these
Speaker 4: are the people who cheered the losers, picked the losers,
Speaker 4: and big surprise, they're sitting there once again bopping for losers.
Speaker 4: These people don't know how to pick winners so bad.
Speaker 4: But these are the people who may be probably even
Speaker 4: reluctantly voted for Kristinunu, who Trump would call a rhino.
Speaker 4: Yet here he is the most successful politician they have
Speaker 4: in New Hampshire. And a lot of those Trump people
Speaker 4: are like, oh yeah, well, Kristin n It's like, yeah,
Speaker 4: one of the most popular governors in the country and
Speaker 4: in New Hampshire, and the base of the party doesn't
Speaker 4: like him as much as Trump. And the reason in
Speaker 4: New Hampshire is a state that's in good shape, it
Speaker 4: is because of Christanoon.
Speaker 1: Barbara Comstot, thank you so much for joining us. I
Speaker 1: hope he'll come back.
Speaker 4: Oh great to be with you.
Speaker 6: Molly.
Speaker 1: Hi, it's Molly and I am wildly excited that for
Speaker 1: the first time, Fast Politics, the show you're listening to
Speaker 1: right now, is going to have merch for sale over
Speaker 1: at shop dot fastpoliticspod dot com. You can now buy hats, hoodies,
Speaker 1: and toe bags with our incredible designs. We've heard your
Speaker 1: cries to spread the word about our podcast and get
Speaker 1: a tow bag with my adorable Leo the Rescue Puppy
Speaker 1: on it. And now you can grab this merchandise only
Speaker 1: at shop dot fastpoliticspod dot com. Thanks for your support.
Speaker 1: Kurt Anderson is the author of Evil Geniuses. Welcome to
Speaker 1: Fast Politics, Kurt Anderson.
Speaker 6: I couldn't be happier to have returned.
Speaker 1: I'm so glad you're on today, and you're such a
Speaker 1: good writer. Let's just take a minute to talk about
Speaker 1: what a good writer you are.
Speaker 6: Why.
Speaker 1: Thanks, I'm super per snickitty, but I want to talk
Speaker 1: to you about this idea, because you've written a lot
Speaker 1: about this idea and I feel like you were at
Speaker 1: the beginning of it and it's gotten more true. Which
Speaker 1: is this idea of a fantasy land?
Speaker 6: Yeah, you know, it's his book. You know. I started
Speaker 6: working on it twoloy fourteen, before Donald Trump was around, really,
Speaker 6: and then it was finished. He had just as he
Speaker 6: was about to get the denomination, and it came out
Speaker 6: just after he became president. You know, it was a
Speaker 6: strange idea at the time, because I was saying what
Speaker 6: now people say every day all over the world and
Speaker 6: all over the media about the United States and the
Speaker 6: world and trump Ism and all the rest, which is that, well,
Speaker 6: if we don't agree on facts, and we have all
Speaker 6: these alternative facts, we can't have a country where this
Speaker 6: can't go on. Well, it's remarkable that only, you know,
Speaker 6: six years ago, this was a strange idea and this
Speaker 6: is going to be a strange little history book. But
Speaker 6: then Donald Trump came along and became its avatar and
Speaker 6: epitome and here we are, so yeah, there we are.
Speaker 6: And then yes, and I have been seeing it continue
Speaker 6: and was interested in this new way of what's real
Speaker 6: what's fictional, how do they how do they intersect and
Speaker 6: pro creator whatever they do in art and things like succession,
Speaker 6: which I think it did masterfully and beautiful.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about that idea. It's both real and
Speaker 1: unreal and wrong that it's so real.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean it obviously inspired by the Murdochs and
Speaker 6: Fox News, right, but that doesn't mean it's not a
Speaker 6: bio pick. It's not really a Romano claim trying to
Speaker 6: go by the letter of oh, this is James murch,
Speaker 6: this is Lachlin m this is Rupert Murac, right, but
Speaker 6: there are resemblances, and that's interesting. Moreover, it's interesting as
Speaker 6: Fox News is doing what it's doing and being so
Speaker 6: central to the fuckinging of America as it has been
Speaker 6: and is, and so as the show went on and
Speaker 6: because of how the show was, Okay, it's like a
Speaker 6: season of episodes, nine or ten episodes and then a
Speaker 6: year off, and as we were dealing with Trump and
Speaker 6: the aftermath of Trump and all all that that meant,
Speaker 6: and Fox news Is involvement was it was extraordinary. Of course,
Speaker 6: let's stipulate. I believe it was an amazingly well written
Speaker 6: and well produced show as well doing this. It wasn't
Speaker 6: just flittering back and forth with what's real and what's not.
Speaker 6: For those of us who loved it, and I understand
Speaker 6: all the various reasons that people who didn't love it
Speaker 6: didn't love it, well there's no one to root for,
Speaker 6: or oh that's bad enough, I don't need to see
Speaker 6: versions of it on television, all those reasons, Okay, fine, whatever,
Speaker 6: But for those of us who loved it, it was,
Speaker 6: as I say in the piece, it was this uncanny
Speaker 6: valley unlike any I've ever been to of like this
Speaker 6: is very real in so many ways, and then you
Speaker 6: know that has its ups and downs, as we saw
Speaker 6: in the show is for me, one of the at
Speaker 6: least blips in the road or the bumps in the
Speaker 6: road or something. Was their election night show a few
Speaker 6: a couple or three weeks ago. It was extraordinary, and
Speaker 6: of course because it was about people who have a
Speaker 6: Fox News channel and who make movies and television, people
Speaker 6: who are in the business of simply getting people to
Speaker 6: watch their stuff, which is all that the media and
Speaker 6: entertainment business is about, at any cost and at any price,
Speaker 6: and damn the collateral damage. It was very complicated and
Speaker 6: I spent way too long trying to parse it out
Speaker 6: and write this piece about it.
Speaker 1: So Fox News probably one of the elements that has
Speaker 1: led to the precariousness in which we find ourselves an
Speaker 1: American democracy.
Speaker 6: In American democracy. And I don't want to use the
Speaker 6: word epistemology because people will even and I go, what
Speaker 6: does that mean? But like what is true and how
Speaker 6: you know something is true or real? There is no
Speaker 6: greater single entity responsible for this part of the problem,
Speaker 6: apart from just the specific freaks that it has empowered
Speaker 6: in our politics.
Speaker 1: I don't think you're going to have a Donald Trump
Speaker 1: presidency without the existence of the Fox News could be.
Speaker 6: When I wrote this book, Fantasy Land, Too, I went
Speaker 6: back and forth and as it came out, I thought like, Oh,
Speaker 6: did Trump cause this? No, not really, because you know,
Speaker 6: I had been writing about its imminence and kind of
Speaker 6: inevitable coming when Trump was niven around to strike the
Speaker 6: match and pour gas on the flames he did that
Speaker 6: would this had gone this way without him specifically? Probably,
Speaker 6: But it's a counterfactual. We can never test same with
Speaker 6: Fox News. But I think you're probably right, And I
Speaker 6: think a Fox News that was a normal conservative channel
Speaker 6: in the way that MSNBC is a normal liberal channel,
Speaker 6: wouldn't have done this. I don't think, you know, there
Speaker 6: still would have been this outpouring of rabble gone wild
Speaker 6: that are the magas for lots of reasons. Yeah, I
Speaker 6: don't think it would have gone as far as dangerously
Speaker 6: awry without maybe not without Trump too. I mean they
Speaker 6: were both kind of triggers or fuses on the pile
Speaker 6: of kindling that set it off.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've talked about this. Last time you were
Speaker 1: on the podcast, we talked about this, and I don't
Speaker 1: think we need to like go crazy on this, but
Speaker 1: it is. You do know Trump from the years in
Speaker 1: which he wanted something from you.
Speaker 6: I do, and actually I mean know him. I had
Speaker 6: correspondence with him. I never sat down and hung out
Speaker 6: with him. Yeah, I have a long history with him
Speaker 6: and then and most recently in the Eugene Carroll trial,
Speaker 6: I was reminded of some of the specifics of that
Speaker 6: history because Egene's main witness, my friend's a Burnbach. You know,
Speaker 6: I'd sent her down to do when I ran New
Speaker 6: York Magazine to do a piece about Trump and mar
Speaker 6: A Lago and stuff, and that became a small but
Speaker 6: not insignificant issue in the case, and so forth and
Speaker 6: so on. So yeah, I have been following him and
Speaker 6: his very uncertain grip on reality. And I may have
Speaker 6: mentioned this last time, but these correspondents I have with
Speaker 6: him about that piece that Lisa wrote about him and
Speaker 6: mar A Lago, which he wrote to me to complain about.
Speaker 6: And I said, but dude, it's just your words. It's
Speaker 6: just it's not there's an introduction and then it's just
Speaker 6: you talking. He said, yeah, I know, but it's still
Speaker 6: it's really unfair.
Speaker 1: How is it unfair if he said it.
Speaker 6: Well, because he is used to being He was certainly
Speaker 6: in nineteen ninety whatever that was six, still used to
Speaker 6: being portrayed by the press in some semi flattering way,
Speaker 6: rather than the letting his words hanging, which is what
Speaker 6: we did.
Speaker 1: I wonder. So there was a period. I always think
Speaker 1: about this, and you tell me if you think I'm crazy.
Speaker 1: There was a period in the nineties when magazines were really,
Speaker 1: really mean to celebrities, and then there was a period
Speaker 1: in the early two thousands this sort of InStyle magazine,
Speaker 1: the bloom of these like they're not quite pr pitches,
Speaker 1: but they almost are. And do you think that that,
Speaker 1: coupled with reality television created the world of unreality in
Speaker 1: a certain way? I mean, obviously the political elements, the
Speaker 1: kind of George Wallacy that stuff comes back to reconstruction,
Speaker 1: to the Civil War and even before that. And you know,
Speaker 1: racism has been alive in this country as long as
Speaker 1: there's been a country, and in the nineties that roared
Speaker 1: back and really did. But I'm just curious, do you
Speaker 1: think that in those twenty tens, this kind of glossy
Speaker 1: media plus reality television helped this fantasy land along?
Speaker 6: Oh? I yes, all those things you mentioned are part
Speaker 6: of it, you know, speaking of kiddling and fuses and
Speaker 6: gas and the fire and how it was created. What
Speaker 6: I will take issue with is the media were mean
Speaker 6: to famous people. Nah. I mean I ran one that was,
Speaker 6: but by and large not so much.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Yes, in the nineties, certainly the in style I mean
Speaker 6: began was part of this period of like, let's just
Speaker 6: make it a big advertorial where you can buy the
Speaker 6: makeup and the underwear that these stars talk about wearing,
Speaker 6: and it'll be love letters to them and you can
Speaker 6: live in this. You can pretend you know them and then,
Speaker 6: of course, and reality TV absolutely a giant part of this.
Speaker 6: You know, what's real, what's true, what's fiction, what's scripted?
Speaker 6: We don't know, it's all a jumble. Happened of course
Speaker 6: in the nineties and odds as well. And what else
Speaker 6: was happening right then, Well, the Internet, you know, and
Speaker 6: so suddenly you could have people, for instance, who said
Speaker 6: that vaccines cause autism, have a means to make that
Speaker 6: a big deal and spread it around and en lists
Speaker 6: believers and so on and so forth for the next
Speaker 6: you know, for the twenty five years since. So yeah,
Speaker 6: that was all part of the media soup, the poison
Speaker 6: to this media soup that led us to where we are.
Speaker 1: So magazines basically, and I mean I say this is
Speaker 1: someone who loves magazines works for magazines. Magazines basically they're
Speaker 1: sort of a ghost of their former selves, and those
Speaker 1: ad dollars have really gone to like Instagram and tech
Speaker 1: companies largely. Do you think there's a world where these
Speaker 1: things switch back, or do you think there's a world
Speaker 1: where content is embraced by I mean, I feel like
Speaker 1: the biggest mistake any of us did was calling it content.
Speaker 6: Well I never did call it content. I still haven't.
Speaker 6: I hated it.
Speaker 3: I can't.
Speaker 6: I won't say that except in scare quotes. I'll say
Speaker 6: it sometimes.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 6: The thing about magazines and newspapers and good ones I
Speaker 6: mean is that, well, the New York Times still exists
Speaker 6: as the New York Times to kind of in a way,
Speaker 6: a more thunderingly important central extent. I mean, it was
Speaker 6: that way, and then it became less that way. But
Speaker 6: I would say in the current day it's still a
Speaker 6: big thing. Also with magazine, right, I mean, no, magazines
Speaker 6: don't exist in a thing you buy once a week
Speaker 6: or once a month, and it has a sensibility and
Speaker 6: a curatorial thing that oh, here's the stories that these
Speaker 6: editors wanted you to read. No One, I mean very
Speaker 6: fewer and fewer people read magazines in that sense. However,
Speaker 6: the good magazines, The Atlantic, the New Yorker, many more
Speaker 6: we could name, still spend money on good journalism and
Speaker 6: publish it. Now those don't. People don't consume them in
Speaker 6: that package anymore. They go and read this one online
Speaker 6: from Vanity Fair, and this one online from Scientific America,
Speaker 6: and this one online.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 6: So, even though yes, the magazine era died as soon
Speaker 6: as I left it. Good journalism and long form journalism
Speaker 6: still exists, I don't know, maybe as healthily a quantity
Speaker 6: as it did, you know, twenty years ago. Even though
Speaker 6: you no longer buy magazine X, Y or Z once
Speaker 6: a month or a week to get your fill of
Speaker 6: it there in the same way that one did, the
Speaker 6: way we consume it has changed. I'm not sure that
Speaker 6: yet that kind of good long form journalism has gone
Speaker 6: to hell. But you know, it's easy for me to
Speaker 6: say that as an old person who doesn't any longer
Speaker 6: make their living from writing or editing magazines.
Speaker 1: But you know, I want to know what you think
Speaker 1: if there's a world in which America becomes sane again.
Speaker 6: Oh, as Hemingway said, it's pretty to think. So No,
Speaker 6: not really. And people have asked me that, really, since
Speaker 6: you know, in all kinds of fora public and otherwise,
Speaker 6: since I published Fantasy Line almost six years ago, And
Speaker 6: I have the same answer that I had then, which
Speaker 6: is I can see it going no further. I mean,
Speaker 6: of course, and hasn't gone further in these six years
Speaker 6: in some ways, but in terms of the number of
Speaker 6: toxic nuts and freaks who don't believe in facts in
Speaker 6: dangerous ways. We can hold the tide. We can build
Speaker 6: the dams and the dykes and the whatever and hold
Speaker 6: those horrible waters back. Or maybe you know, whatever, have
Speaker 6: the national divorce one day and they can just live
Speaker 6: in their squalid places by themselves. But I don't think
Speaker 6: it's like suddenly all the citizens have picked your place,
Speaker 6: are going to wake up and say, yeah, we were
Speaker 6: very badly mistaken about this whole thing, the of the
Speaker 6: teens and twenties, you know, I know, I just don't.
Speaker 6: I don't think so. I think for all a variety
Speaker 6: of reasons that I wrote about in that book and
Speaker 6: have happened. Since we are what we are, I mean,
Speaker 6: we can, as I say, serve to rolling over us
Speaker 6: and destroying us completely. I hope still we can limit its,
Speaker 6: you know, hope that our institutions and norms and majorities
Speaker 6: of good saying decent Americans, which I absolutely think we have,
Speaker 6: can prevent the minority of nihilists and monsters from doing
Speaker 6: us in. But you know it's a struggle.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's true, Kurt Anderson. I hope you'll come back.
Speaker 6: Always, anytime, no moment.
Speaker 7: Jesse Cannon, Mai Jong Fest, Jack Dorsey, A man who
Speaker 7: if you read Nick Bilton's fantastic catching Twitter book, you
Speaker 7: know has had some questionable views throughout time, but he
Speaker 7: really came out of the closet with the doozy today.
Speaker 1: Yes, Jack Dorsey has sort of almost endorsed RFK Junior.
Speaker 1: You may remember r f K Junior as the Yeah
Speaker 1: he's Connor Roy, the eldest character from Succession. You know,
Speaker 1: RFK Junior is a known anti vax or complete lunatic.
Speaker 1: The chances of him getting more than about one percent
Speaker 1: of the vote are less than zero. And for that,
Speaker 1: and for Jack Dorsey's propping him up, just as he
Speaker 1: propped up Tulca Gabber, he becomes our moment of fuck Roy.
Speaker 1: That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in
Speaker 1: every Monday, Wednesday and Friday to hear the best minds
Speaker 1: in politics makes sense of all this chaos. If you
Speaker 1: enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to a friend
Speaker 1: and keep the conversation going. And again, thanks for listening.