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 majority of Americans have a
Speaker 1: negative view of billionaires spending more money to buy elections,
Speaker 1: according to a Washington Post IPSOS poll. We have such
Speaker 1: a great show for you today. Author of Evil Geniuses
Speaker 1: Kurt Anderson stops by to talk about Trump, saying the
Speaker 1: Democrats should be hung. Then we'll talk to Aten ben
Speaker 1: about her run for Congress in a swing district in Tennessee.
Speaker 1: But first, the news and disapproval of Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: now higher than in his first term. At the same time,
Speaker 1: we have such a great show for you today as
Speaker 1: the world churns Andy Levy stops by to talk about
Speaker 1: the fight inside Democratic leadership. Then we'll talk to Inside
Speaker 1: Elections Jacob Rubashkin about the Democratic chances of flipping the
Speaker 1: House and perhaps even the Senate. But first, the stories
Speaker 1: the media is not covering enough.
Speaker 2: So Lally, you're going to be shocked to hear this,
Speaker 2: But Lindsay Halligan totally really, really really messed up. I
Speaker 2: wanted to say something much more bad, but I know
Speaker 2: I caught myself and didn't say the same, and body
Speaker 2: vows to take this up to the top of the
Speaker 2: courts to get mister Kobe from mister Trump.
Speaker 3: But I don't know. This doesn't look good for them.
Speaker 1: Despite being a pageant Queen Lindsay Halligan Lindsay Michelle Halligan
Speaker 1: born in nineteen eighty nine in Portland, Maine. She is
Speaker 1: the interim US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Speaker 1: And here's the problem. Here is the problem is that
Speaker 1: she has no experience doing anything pretty much at all
Speaker 1: besides pageants and industrial law commercial properties. And then eventually
Speaker 1: she was an insurance lawyer and also pageant Queen Donald
Speaker 1: Trump's lawyer, and it turns out putting her as the
Speaker 1: US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, she should
Speaker 1: have maybe had a few jobs between insurance law.
Speaker 4: And that, and she didn't. And now you know who's
Speaker 4: benefiting from.
Speaker 3: That, mister James Kobe, who is not by.
Speaker 1: Hobie, mister James Comy, who is too dall and a
Speaker 1: terrible writer. But in this case, we want him to
Speaker 1: not go to jail for a trumped up crime. And
Speaker 1: so we will in fact say that this is actually good.
Speaker 1: Both cases, the Comy case the James case both dismissed
Speaker 1: because Judge Cameron Curry said the loyalist prosecutor and still
Speaker 1: by mister Trump to bring the cases was in her
Speaker 1: position unlawfully. And so it turns out you can be
Speaker 1: hot and still be very, very bad at your job.
Speaker 1: There you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Abby Law, the
Speaker 1: lawyer for missus James James, since there are only five
Speaker 1: people in the world, also was the lawyer for Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden Avilall said mister Trump went to extreme measures to
Speaker 1: substitute one of his allies to bring these base those
Speaker 1: charges after career prosecutors refused. This case was not about
Speaker 1: the justice owned law. It was about targeting Attorney James
Speaker 1: for what she stood for and who she challenged.
Speaker 4: Bill Baldy Yet again.
Speaker 3: That guy is battle average a good well.
Speaker 1: The fact that he is able to find mortgages at
Speaker 1: every point that Trump can then use to go against
Speaker 1: his enemies.
Speaker 4: And by the way, at every point this doesn't work.
Speaker 1: So Bill Poulti is being I don't know if they've
Speaker 1: quite opened a formal investigation, but expect to hear the
Speaker 1: name Bill Paultie again and again and again so.
Speaker 2: By Yesterday on Twitter Republican Propaganda News, I'm sorry, punch
Speaker 2: bowl News, Jake Sherman sent out a tweet saying that
Speaker 2: there are many Republicans were looking to exit just like
Speaker 2: Barjorie Taylor Greed, and that they're fed up with big
Speaker 2: props for mister Trump. Politico has a giant explator of
Speaker 2: what's going on today? Where do you see him?
Speaker 1: Okay, first of all, don't be me into Jake Sherman.
Speaker 1: He is got it.
Speaker 4: I'm serious.
Speaker 1: Covering Congress is a thankless job, and they do some
Speaker 1: really good reporting, and then I.
Speaker 3: Won't be saiding committee.
Speaker 5: Thank you.
Speaker 1: You can send him an edible arrangement. Mike Johnson, let's
Speaker 1: talk about this because it's interesting. House Republicans are really
Speaker 1: mad at Mike Johnson. Here's why they're mad at him,
Speaker 1: because he took advantage of what they let him do. Okay,
Speaker 1: Like this is an incredible bit of House Republicans, Like
Speaker 1: why did you let me hit me? You know, like
Speaker 1: just so bad? Okay, So Donald Trump's Republican Party goes
Speaker 1: in there when Donald Trump gets sworn in. We said
Speaker 1: this was coming, We told them it was coming, right,
Speaker 1: got Russ Vought, and the crew is like, you're not
Speaker 1: gonna have the power of the person anymore. Sorry, Congress,
Speaker 1: that's ours. Now. Congress rolls the fuck over with everything.
Speaker 1: They roll over on cabinet appointments, they roll over on spending.
Speaker 1: They let the Trump administration do this five billion dollar
Speaker 1: pocket recision which takes back all the foreign aid money.
Speaker 1: At every point, they just roll over. Now Republicans are mad.
Speaker 1: They don't like the job anymore because they have no power.
Speaker 1: They took this job for power. They give all their
Speaker 1: power to Trump, and now they're mad they have no power.
Speaker 4: Okay, I mean you didn't have to give.
Speaker 1: Trump all your power, So good news for Democrats. Mike
Speaker 1: Johnson is not good at his job. If you had
Speaker 1: a Tom Emmer in there, you had someone who had
Speaker 1: been doing the job for a while, they might be
Speaker 1: able to stop these discharge petitions. They might be able
Speaker 1: to whip votes. But luckily you don't. You have Mike
Speaker 1: Johnson in there. So Mike Johnson has Now there's another
Speaker 1: diste arch petition. These discharge petitions are ways to get
Speaker 1: around leadership, to find a piece of legislation, and to
Speaker 1: get around leadership by getting the two hundred and eighteen
Speaker 1: signatures you need to force a vote on legislation. This
Speaker 1: is something that does not usually happen because usually you
Speaker 1: have a Speaker of the House who has some control
Speaker 1: over their caucus. But Mike Johnson has no control over
Speaker 1: his caucus. And so we have a discharge petition palooza.
Speaker 4: And Republicans did this to themselves. You guys.
Speaker 1: By the way, Nashville, Tennessee, you have this special election,
Speaker 1: so and there are more special elections or two more
Speaker 1: special elections coming up, so one in Texas. Mike Johnson's
Speaker 1: his majority is getting thinner. So we'll see what happens.
Speaker 1: But it's nice to see these Republicans reap what they sew.
Speaker 2: So byie, mister Trump seek the writing on the wall
Speaker 2: of the affordability crisis. That might be because he just
Speaker 2: had his crush at the office or on Bob Dottie
Speaker 2: who talks about it extensively. Anyway, he's announce saying an
Speaker 2: extension of ACA tex credits for two years.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so this is Trump has decided he's going to
Speaker 1: solve healthcare. You'll remember that in Trump one point zero,
Speaker 1: which is the world we live in forever and ever,
Speaker 1: until we die. Trump said, he who knew healthcare could
Speaker 1: be so complicated?
Speaker 3: You remember that I do it, did lives rent free
Speaker 3: by Edge.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, it turns out is very complicated, and so
Speaker 1: in typical Donald Trump fashion, he's decided that he's just
Speaker 1: going to quick fix it. So he said on Monday
Speaker 1: he was going to announce a new like a Trump Care.
Speaker 1: It was the Monday before Thanksgiving, not a time that
Speaker 1: Congressional anyone want.
Speaker 4: To do anything.
Speaker 1: They want to go home for Thanksgiving because they're extremely
Speaker 1: hard working. Politicians basically ended the shutdown because they were
Speaker 1: worried about traveling home for the holidays. Okay, they ended
Speaker 1: the government shutdown because they were worried about holiday travel.
Speaker 1: This is a crew that takes holidays very serious. Anyways.
Speaker 1: So Donald Trump wanted to extend the ACA tax credits
Speaker 1: for two years. This is what Democrats wanted from the
Speaker 1: government shutdown. I am interested to see if this happens.
Speaker 1: If it happens, it's billions of dollars. It will increase
Speaker 1: the deficit. But you know, none of these Republicans particularly
Speaker 1: care about that. If it happens, it will be so
Speaker 1: interesting because it runs contrary to basically all of the
Speaker 1: Republican goals. So we'll see what happens. But I could
Speaker 1: see how Trump would want it, because they're going to
Speaker 1: get killed on these premiums. They're going up, up, up, abup.
Speaker 1: You have voters who are very mad by inflation, and
Speaker 1: now they're going to be even madter.
Speaker 4: So let's see what happens.
Speaker 2: Yes, so famously, Senator Jib Justice, very new to the Senate,
Speaker 2: former governor of West Virginia. He is not so into
Speaker 2: paying taxes. And we now see that his legal woes
Speaker 2: or even bigger because his wife's been sued for five
Speaker 2: million dollars in unpaid taxes from two thousand and nine.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so this is interesting. Jim Justice, my man, he
Speaker 1: flies back and forth to Congress on a private jet
Speaker 1: every week. So okay, that is insane. You can get
Speaker 1: an apartment at private jet, okay, to work. He does
Speaker 1: not have an apartment in DC. He takes a private
Speaker 1: jet there and back. Even for a rich person, that
Speaker 1: is wild. But he has a little bit of a
Speaker 1: tax problem. So the US government on Monday. Now, by
Speaker 1: the way, this is the Trump government. Okay, so think
Speaker 1: about just what had to happen here for the Trump
Speaker 1: government's irs to decide that they were going to sue
Speaker 1: a Republican senator from West Virginia. We're more than five
Speaker 1: million dollars in unpaid federal income taxes, penalties, and interest
Speaker 1: dating to the two thousand and nine tex following you.
Speaker 1: I think this is wild, and Jim Justice is supposed
Speaker 1: to have billions of dollars. We'll see where this lands,
Speaker 1: but this strikes me as wild.
Speaker 4: Andy Levy is the host.
Speaker 1: Of As the World churns Andy Levy.
Speaker 5: Hello, Molly john Fest.
Speaker 4: You know what the first rule of fight club is?
Speaker 5: I do what is it?
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 5: You know, even the fact that we are violating.
Speaker 1: It now.
Speaker 6: He's not great.
Speaker 5: But obviously the first and second rules of fight club
Speaker 5: are that you do not talk about fight club. So
Speaker 5: let's talk about that.
Speaker 4: Let's start fight club. Yeah, Tux Humor.
Speaker 1: And a woman you may know, Kristian Jili Brian. They're
Speaker 1: catching a little heat for their wildly unpopular senate picks,
Speaker 1: putting their hands on the scale for Haley Stevens. Gifted
Speaker 1: Orator Haley Stevens and the always young and refreshed seventy
Speaker 1: seven year old Janet Mills discuss.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you're referring, of course, to this group of is
Speaker 5: it six Democratic fake senators? Yeah, we're calling themselves the
Speaker 5: fight club, and yeah, they're not happy with Schumer and
Speaker 5: Joe Brand and look good for them, and they want
Speaker 5: to win. They want to win. And this is way overdue,
Speaker 5: but better late than never, and it would be nice if, yeah,
Speaker 5: if we could get different leadership. Molly, do we have
Speaker 5: to have this leadership? Is there? Is it a rule somewhere?
Speaker 5: Is it another rule of fight club that we have
Speaker 5: to not fight?
Speaker 1: So here's what I would say, Chuck Schumer does not
Speaker 1: need to be the leader of the Senate Democrats. In fact,
Speaker 1: Chuck Schumer is a choice. And I think that you know,
Speaker 1: Chris Murphy is available, Brian Schott is available. Even you
Speaker 1: know Tina Smith or your favorite from Minnesota, Clomentum. God,
Speaker 1: even those people are all available to be in leadership.
Speaker 4: And by the way, this is a job everyone wants.
Speaker 5: I understand why Schumer got the position. He you know,
Speaker 5: he's been working his whole life for it.
Speaker 7: And it was one of those things where you know,
Speaker 7: the Democrats are very big sometimes on sort of I
Speaker 7: don't know if coronation is the right word, but it's
Speaker 7: sort of you know, next in line, like you know, oh.
Speaker 5: Your suppers coronation is I think you it doesn't work.
Speaker 5: And all those people you named, with the possible exception
Speaker 5: of my not so favorite senator from Minnesota, would be
Speaker 5: much better than Chuck Schuman. None of them. It's going
Speaker 5: to be an imperfect person. We know that. And so
Speaker 5: the idea to me is get someone who's at least
Speaker 5: less imperfect than Chuck Schumer. And I know that sounds
Speaker 5: like damning with fate praise, but that's the way politics works.
Speaker 1: The problem with Schumer is not that he's not perfect.
Speaker 1: The problem with Schumer is that he's not a fighter.
Speaker 1: And this is again goes back to this adage from
Speaker 1: Pritzker's chief of staff. It's not left versus senator, it's
Speaker 1: fight versus cave. And with the fight club the six senators,
Speaker 1: what you see is they're not ideologically all the same.
Speaker 1: Maryland Senator Chris van Holland and Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy
Speaker 1: are not the same as Bernie Sanders of course, and
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Warren, but they are the same in the fact
Speaker 1: that they want to fight. Whereas the Gillibrands and the
Speaker 1: Schumers want to raise money and pick bad candidates.
Speaker 5: It's twentieth century politics versus twenty first century politics. And
Speaker 5: that's not even necessarily an age thing because you look
Speaker 5: at the people in that fight club. You've got Bernice Anders,
Speaker 5: You've got Liz Warren. You know, it's not like these
Speaker 5: are people in their forties or fifties or whatever. They
Speaker 5: are elder statespeople. But they at least recognize that it's
Speaker 5: not nineteen ninety six. This is not George H. W.
Speaker 5: Bush's Republican Party. I mean, let alone Mitt Romney's Republican Party.
Speaker 5: But they recognize that it's Donald Trump's Republican Party. And
Speaker 5: you can't sit there and do twentieth century politics in
Speaker 5: this environment. And Chuck Schumer does not and apparently never
Speaker 5: will understand that. I don't think Jilli brand does either.
Speaker 5: And look, Joe Biden was and should have been the
Speaker 5: last gasp of twentieth century politics for the Democrats. That
Speaker 5: caused a lot of problems his not being comfortable going
Speaker 5: after the jan six people. You know, So I'll let
Speaker 5: that be in the past. Let's move forward. That the Mark.
Speaker 4: Garland school of not doing anything.
Speaker 5: Exactly exactly, and that's the same school that Schumer and
Speaker 5: Julibrand are part of. And it just it has to
Speaker 5: it has to go. It has to die. That school
Speaker 5: of politics has to die.
Speaker 1: I think that what you're going to see is and
Speaker 1: this is not from the pundit class.
Speaker 4: This is from the base.
Speaker 1: The base is mad about Biden, the pundit class. And
Speaker 1: I was as skilty of this as anyone said, go
Speaker 1: along with Biden. He'll be good. Voters will like him.
Speaker 1: He's not too old. He's going to just do one term.
Speaker 1: He got in there, he was not going to do
Speaker 1: one term. Everything was exactly the worst case scenario, right,
Speaker 1: he was too old, he did this, he stayed in
Speaker 1: too long. They couldn't have a primary process at every point.
Speaker 1: It was just a disaster. And so you do not
Speaker 1: have the base's full faith and credit now like in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, Chuck Schumer could tweet Orange Man bad and
Speaker 1: raise ten million dollars. No no, no, no no. And we
Speaker 1: see this when we look at the DNC number, like
Speaker 1: they're taking out loans to pay for the DNC. Like
Speaker 1: voters are not happy. And even if they want Democrats
Speaker 1: to win more than they want Republicans to win, you
Speaker 1: don't have a blank check.
Speaker 5: No, but look, I think if they send me one
Speaker 5: more text that'll do it. You know, I just it's
Speaker 5: it's unreal. But you're absolutely right. Look the base and
Speaker 5: forget about the pundit class, forget about you know, well
Speaker 5: except for me, because I really am. I'm much more
Speaker 5: of a man of the people, a man of the
Speaker 5: base than I am.
Speaker 1: You were in the army, certainly more than many a
Speaker 1: NASCAR come on, yeah, but you're.
Speaker 5: Absolutely right when it comes to the base. And that
Speaker 5: gets back to what you were saying before from Pritzker's
Speaker 5: people about it's fighting versus not fighting, and everybody wants
Speaker 5: fighting now. And the thing is, Chuck Schumer will now
Speaker 5: get on Twitter, I suppose, and definitely on Blue Sky
Speaker 5: where I see it, and he'll post things that maybe
Speaker 5: ten years ago would have been effective or you would
Speaker 5: have said, all right, good for you, Chuck. Now what
Speaker 5: they look like, because it's what they are, is a
Speaker 5: guy who is trying desperately to catch up and to
Speaker 5: be someone he's absolutely not, and so it just comes
Speaker 5: across as completely performative when he sits there and goes,
Speaker 5: we will fight this, and we you know, we have
Speaker 5: to do this. It was like, you've been in power
Speaker 5: for a long time and you haven't done any of this,
Speaker 5: and so you get a lot You look at it
Speaker 5: and you see people applying saying, why are you telling
Speaker 5: us this, Why aren't you doing this? Because that's who
Speaker 5: Chuck Schumer is, so it all rings false when he
Speaker 5: tries to do it now and again it's, you know,
Speaker 5: twentieth century versus twenty first. The twentieth century politicians have
Speaker 5: got to, if not completely go they've got to step back.
Speaker 5: They've got to step back. We saw this when AOC
Speaker 5: wanted to be the I forget which committee it is now,
Speaker 5: and we went with the guy that oversight, guy that
Speaker 5: nally he died, who died in office, who you know,
Speaker 5: had cancer, and the.
Speaker 4: Democrats sex he was seventy six. It wasn't like he
Speaker 4: was a young guy.
Speaker 5: Right, and the Democratic leadership said, no, we need to
Speaker 5: give this position to him. It was not term exactly,
Speaker 5: and that shit has got to go away. And it's
Speaker 5: one of the biggest things I think holding back the
Speaker 5: Democratic Party right now is this sort of refusal to
Speaker 5: let the next generation, or at least the people you know, again,
Speaker 5: Liz Warren is not young. Bernie Sanders certainly isn't young.
Speaker 5: But they know what's going on and they always have
Speaker 5: because they've been those kinds of politicians in their whole
Speaker 5: lives where they do fight. You've got to start turning
Speaker 5: it over to the people who recognize the world in
Speaker 5: which we live in twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: Yeah, now I want to talk about where we are
Speaker 1: right now because Donald Trump he's going to bring peace
Speaker 1: to Russia Ukraine. Like, I feel like he's doing everything
Speaker 1: he can to distract from the Epstein files, right Like
Speaker 1: he's like hoping that if he just keeps going on
Speaker 1: with the news sources like that, how that the that
Speaker 1: Pam BONDI will never release any of the Epstein stuff,
Speaker 1: even though he had to file, he had to sign
Speaker 1: that discharge petition which says in his law that they're
Speaker 1: going to release it within thirty days.
Speaker 5: Yeah, but Molly, remember he instructed everyone to vote for
Speaker 5: that because he really wants it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, he did.
Speaker 1: He changed the very last minute when he saw he
Speaker 1: was going to lose. He was like, I think we
Speaker 1: want those, you want those?
Speaker 5: Yeah, And look at least he's not, you know, maybe
Speaker 5: starting a war in it with the South American country
Speaker 5: to distract from everything else.
Speaker 1: But look where your favorite of the way the ways
Speaker 1: in which Donald Trump is trying to distract is your
Speaker 1: favorite that he's starting a war, or is your favorite
Speaker 1: that he's trying to bring peace to Russia Ukraine.
Speaker 5: It's the war for me. It's always the war for me.
Speaker 5: I mean, if you're going to distract, you got to
Speaker 5: do it with a war, because that's when you get
Speaker 5: the CNNs of the world can prepare their their theme songs.
Speaker 4: Right and exactly, Caribbean.
Speaker 5: Caribbean freedom. You know, that's when you get all the
Speaker 5: all the newspapers and everyone's there, well, we have to
Speaker 5: support the president.
Speaker 3: We're at war.
Speaker 5: You get people saying this is the day Donald Trump
Speaker 5: became president. You can't beat a war if you're trying
Speaker 5: to take the focus off of something else. I mean,
Speaker 5: I'm fairly certain there was a whole movie that was
Speaker 5: kind of about that. Yes do yeah, that sort of
Speaker 5: gave us a praeze. So it's absolutely that for me.
Speaker 5: The the Ukraine Russia stuff is I mean, have you
Speaker 5: seen anything more incompetent than well, this is our plan. No,
Speaker 5: this isn't our plan. Marco Rubio have nothing that doesn't
Speaker 5: even know about this plan. Oh, Marco Rubier wrote this plan.
Speaker 5: It's unbelieve and beyond the incompetence, just the national security
Speaker 5: implications of having a plan out there. And we can't
Speaker 5: get a straight answer as to whether this plan is
Speaker 5: Russian talking points or whether it's from the administration because
Speaker 5: we can't tell the difference.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, you know, it's nuts, but it's part of
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's tri facta for trying to get the Nobel
Speaker 1: Peace Prize, which he has now missed the window on
Speaker 1: at least for twenty twenty five. But it is funny
Speaker 1: to me because it's like, you know, he does on
Speaker 1: some level like he kind of wants to do the
Speaker 1: stuff presidents do, but just not with any of the
Speaker 1: follow up for any of the you know, like he's
Speaker 1: like he's like, yeah, I'm gonna bring peace and I'm
Speaker 1: gonna do this. Like it's a very sort of distracted view,
Speaker 1: kind of you know, half hearted view on presidenting. But
Speaker 1: ultimately he's really just trying to make money.
Speaker 5: Well, he's just trying to make money, finds me of
Speaker 5: you know, there's a sort of a famous saying that
Speaker 5: writers have I love to have written, but I hate writing.
Speaker 4: Speak for yourself. I hate all of it.
Speaker 5: Right, But it's the same. That to me, that's Trump
Speaker 5: with presidenting. He doesn't like presidenting, you know. He doesn't
Speaker 5: like having to negotiate a peace treaty or doing any
Speaker 5: of the work. What he wants is the credit. And
Speaker 5: it's just that simple. That's all he wants is the credit.
Speaker 5: He's not interested in the work. He couldn't care less
Speaker 5: if there was peace between Russia and Ukraine. Obviously he'd
Speaker 5: probably just be happier if Russia had been able to
Speaker 5: swallow up Ukraine. Yeah, but he just ultimately doesn't care.
Speaker 5: He just wants the credit. He wants, like you said,
Speaker 5: he wants the Nobel Prize. He doesn't want to do
Speaker 5: the work that you would, you know, like to think
Speaker 5: is involved in getting a Nobel prize. He just wants
Speaker 5: the prize. He wants the trophy. And we see this
Speaker 5: when he goes to these events, the sporting events, and
Speaker 5: he leaves with the trophy that he was supposed to
Speaker 5: give the team, and we saw that happen. That's Donald
Speaker 5: Trump in a nutshell. He just wants the trophy.
Speaker 1: By the way, this week not didn't like make the
Speaker 1: top of the newsfeed, But I think it is important
Speaker 1: is that this week in Las Vegas, Ice Barbie and
Speaker 1: FBI Director Cash Battl went to some kind of grand.
Speaker 5: Praise Formula one.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and they had a great time on our tax paradigm.
Speaker 4: So I'm glad they're having fun.
Speaker 5: Look, you can't spend all of the FBI's travel budget
Speaker 5: on your girlfriend. You have to keep some for yourself.
Speaker 5: It's right, I mean, that's just that's just fair. That
Speaker 5: seems fair to me. So good for Cash, I say,
Speaker 5: for getting out of the office, you.
Speaker 4: Know, Cash Battel.
Speaker 1: Also this week we discovered the Cash Battel's girlfriend, twenty
Speaker 1: seven year old conservative influencer Slash Singer, is guarded by
Speaker 1: the Swat Team.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 5: The extent to which this entire administration is a grift,
Speaker 5: it's absolutely unreal, Like even I think, beyond the most
Speaker 5: cynical person's wildest dreams. Just every possible method or mode
Speaker 5: of grifting is being taken advantage of by just about
Speaker 5: every official in this administration. I mean, you know, you
Speaker 5: absolutely don't have to hand it to them, but it
Speaker 5: is truly remarkable. I mean, we've Obviously we've lived through
Speaker 5: both in the history of our country and even in
Speaker 5: you know, just the short history of my life and
Speaker 5: the longer history of your life. But we've lived through
Speaker 5: grifting administrations, unscrupulous administrations. But I think you could pretty
Speaker 5: much stack them all up, all the previous ones in
Speaker 5: one stack, and put the Trump grifts in another stack,
Speaker 5: and the Trump grifts would outweigh I think every single
Speaker 5: previous administration's grifts throughout the history of this country.
Speaker 1: We need a word, an expression for what the Teapot
Speaker 1: Dome scandal like with crypto and double dealing and insider
Speaker 1: trading and influence trading, and your son in law who's
Speaker 1: negotiating all these deals is also not in government, but
Speaker 1: he is also negotiating the Russian peace treaty and also
Speaker 1: in the Middle East, but he also takes money from
Speaker 1: a lot of Middle Eastern countries for his wealth fund.
Speaker 4: I mean, it's like, what is that.
Speaker 1: It feels like there's got to be a bigger word
Speaker 1: than cryptocracy.
Speaker 5: And honestly, I'm out a losstocracy because well, because everything
Speaker 5: you said is it's just I don't know, it's a
Speaker 5: trump oocracy, Like I don't know what else to call
Speaker 5: it like it's every single aspect of his presidency is
Speaker 5: to enrich him, to help him. And I mean, we've
Speaker 5: seen Richard Nixon and people like that before, but they
Speaker 5: are rank amateurs compared to the level of.
Speaker 3: What's going on now.
Speaker 5: It's absolutely unreal. You can't even say, like the teapot
Speaker 5: dome scandal is a perfect example, because it's the one
Speaker 5: thing we remember from that.
Speaker 4: You can't do that.
Speaker 5: Now there's a new teapot dome level scandal every damn day.
Speaker 1: Speak for yourself, man, I remember it all from the
Speaker 1: teapot Don't periods kidding? I was so mean will you
Speaker 1: never come back?
Speaker 5: Earlier when I said your longer history as opposed to
Speaker 5: my shorter history.
Speaker 4: Will you never come back?
Speaker 5: Can you always never come back?
Speaker 4: Don't? I would like to invite you not to come back.
Speaker 5: I will accept your non invitation to always come back.
Speaker 1: Actually, you can come back because I like you. Jacob
Speaker 1: rubash Kin is an analyst and reporter at Inside Elections.
Speaker 1: Jacob Rubashkin, Welcome back to Fast Politics.
Speaker 6: Always a pleasure, happy to be here.
Speaker 1: So you are here to be our election whisperer, and
Speaker 1: I'm going to make you start with an election you
Speaker 1: were not prepared to weigh in on. Because what we
Speaker 1: do at this podcast is we put people in very
Speaker 1: uncomfortable situations because.
Speaker 4: We don't tell them what we're going to ask them about.
Speaker 1: And we do that because it's a because of being
Speaker 1: very disorganized. So there is a special election in Tennessee.
Speaker 1: It is Mark Green's seat. It is a R plus
Speaker 1: twenty two. It is happening the Tuesday after Thanksgiving, and
Speaker 1: both Democrats and Republicans are just pouring money into it.
Speaker 8: Explain, yeah, this special election, like you said, it's Mark
Speaker 8: Green's seats. So Mark Green was a Republican congressman. He
Speaker 8: resigned over the summer. By all rights, this should be
Speaker 8: an incredibly Republican seat, an easy hold for the Republican Party.
Speaker 8: But there are two things going on here. The first
Speaker 8: is the shape of the district itself. Tennessee drew a
Speaker 8: pretty aggressive gerrymander following the twenty twenty census. There used
Speaker 8: to be two Democratic seats in Tennessee, one in Memphis
Speaker 8: and one in Nashville. And what they did was they
Speaker 8: left the Memphis one, but they cracked the Nashville one,
Speaker 8: and they distributed little pieces of Nashville across three different
Speaker 8: districts in Middle Tennessee, so that there was no concentration
Speaker 8: of Democratic votes. But what that means is that three
Speaker 8: districts in Middle Tennessee all have a piece of Nashville,
Speaker 8: and if turnout dynamics are such that Democratic voters are
Speaker 8: super fired up and Republican voters are not fired up
Speaker 8: and may not even know that there's an election going on,
Speaker 8: that little piece of Nashville can punch above its weight
Speaker 8: in those three districts. And that's exactly what's going on here,
Speaker 8: is that it is a Republican district under normal conditions.
Speaker 8: But the Democrats are hoping that the combination of the
Speaker 8: president's poor approval rating, some Democratic momentum, and the fact
Speaker 8: that this is a sleepy race the weekend after Thanksgiving
Speaker 8: will allow them to reshape the electorate in such a
Speaker 8: way that they can win what should be an unwinnable
Speaker 8: seat for them.
Speaker 1: And the candidate who is running for this seat is
Speaker 1: a woman called aften Bane. Aften Bane, Yeah, we interviewed
Speaker 1: her on this podcast and she is really interesting candidate,
Speaker 1: and I think she's a really good example of if
Speaker 1: you want to run a candidate in a place you
Speaker 1: can't necessarily win because she is both an activist, grassroots activist,
Speaker 1: so she has a lot of connections on the ground.
Speaker 1: It's not like she is parachuting in. And then she
Speaker 1: also is very beautiful and young and charismatic and out there. Right,
Speaker 1: I mean, all of these are pieces when you're running
Speaker 1: in anywhere, but especially when you're running in a very
Speaker 1: tough district.
Speaker 8: Right, yeah, no, I mean, look, it helps to look
Speaker 8: the part. It helps to you know, have a political base,
Speaker 8: as she does having served in the state legislature.
Speaker 6: These days, it helps to be young.
Speaker 8: Right, We're in a moment where after everything that went
Speaker 8: down last year. I think Biden voters voters place a
Speaker 8: premium on youth, or at least they place a whatever
Speaker 8: the opposite of a premium is on being older.
Speaker 1: And again, in voters defense, like they get fucked by
Speaker 1: electing someone really old. They were told to trust the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party that this candidate wasn't too old, and then
Speaker 1: exactly the worst case scenario unfolded.
Speaker 4: So they're right to be mad.
Speaker 8: Yeah, And so I you know, I think that she
Speaker 8: does bring a fair bit to the table. She's proved
Speaker 8: to be an able fundraiser. But like you said, she
Speaker 8: is very progressive. She is out there, and she's she's outspoken,
Speaker 8: and so the Republicans woman, and she's exactly And Republicans
Speaker 8: have amassed a whole treasure trove of clips of her
Speaker 8: over the past couple of years, saying all sorts of
Speaker 8: things that don't usually fly in particularly Republican areas, and
Speaker 8: they are in the last couple of weeks of this
Speaker 8: race putting all of that on TV an attempt to
Speaker 8: push back against whatever sort of momentum.
Speaker 6: She has going for her.
Speaker 8: But you know, all of the data that we have
Speaker 8: suggests that this race is closer than it has any
Speaker 8: right to be. I have not seen anything that convinces
Speaker 8: me that this is a race that often is going
Speaker 8: to win. But when we talk about a Trump plus
Speaker 8: twenty two district, I would not be surprised if this
Speaker 8: is a single digit outcome when all is said and done.
Speaker 6: So a significant shift.
Speaker 8: From where we were just a year ago in the
Speaker 8: twenty twenty four presidential election.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about the rest and landscape. Why I
Speaker 1: really brought you on here. I want you to talk
Speaker 1: us through the dummy mander again. I'm being overly optimistic
Speaker 1: because I'm a partisan hack. But I'm just going to
Speaker 1: paint this scene for you and let you go wherever
Speaker 1: you want with it. Trump went to the party and said,
Speaker 1: I need you to get me five seats to the
Speaker 1: Texas Republicans. They got in five seeds. Court said no.
Speaker 1: Justice Alito at the Supreme Court shockingly said yes, Republicans
Speaker 1: can have whatever they want. Now there are five seats
Speaker 1: coming from California. Unless the Supreme Court is able to
Speaker 1: do something, it will look real bad if they take
Speaker 1: the five seats away from cal but give the five
Speaker 1: seats to Texas. Though anything is possible. But the landscape
Speaker 1: is really all up in the air right now. So
Speaker 1: i'd love you to talk us through what it looks like.
Speaker 1: First with the eye to jerrymandering. And then there's also
Speaker 1: the question of Section two of the Voting Rights Act,
Speaker 1: and that decision will come down in June. My first
Speaker 1: question for you is, if that decision comes down in
Speaker 1: June and the Supreme Court says you don't have to
Speaker 1: have race negative jerrymandering or race sensitive jerrymandering, would that
Speaker 1: affect the twenty twenty six election. Would the South get
Speaker 1: more Republican seats in twenty twenty six.
Speaker 8: If that decision comes down in June, and that decision
Speaker 8: is a case about the Louisiana congressional map, which currently
Speaker 8: has two black opportunity districts. They had to redraw the
Speaker 8: map ahead of last year to take it from one
Speaker 8: to two, that decision does have the potential, like you said,
Speaker 8: to eviscerate a core component of the Voting Act as
Speaker 8: it pertains to redistricting. If it comes down in June,
Speaker 8: that is too late for anything to happen for the
Speaker 8: twenty twenty sixth election.
Speaker 4: But it will affect twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 6: Absolutely.
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 8: If the Supreme Court were to say states with significant
Speaker 8: minority populations and largely that means black populations don't have
Speaker 8: to create black opportunity districts, which is the term of art,
Speaker 8: then I would anticipate we will see at the least Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi,
Speaker 8: potentially South Carolina, and Tennessee at a minimum all attempt
Speaker 8: a redistrict ahead of twenty twenty eight, because all of
Speaker 8: those states have at least one seat that is a
Speaker 8: heavily democratic black majority or black plurality district.
Speaker 6: Because they're required to by law.
Speaker 8: And then there are additional opportunities potentially in states like
Speaker 8: Texas and Florida where obviously it's not just oh, there's
Speaker 8: one district where the legislature has drawn most of the
Speaker 8: black vote into you know, these are huge states that
Speaker 8: have different pockets of racial concentration throughout the state, some
Speaker 8: of which are protected by the VRA, some of which
Speaker 8: are not VRA. Jurisprudence is actually kind of in flux
Speaker 8: right now, and this is getting very in the weeds here,
Speaker 8: but the Fifth Circuit has said it has to be
Speaker 8: a single racial group to qualify as a VRA district.
Speaker 8: You can't say, well, this really diverse area, you know,
Speaker 8: has thirty percent Black voters and thirty percent Hispanic voters
Speaker 8: and twenty percent Asian voters. Therefore it deserves a district
Speaker 8: where those communities can elect a representative of their choosing.
Speaker 8: It says, if it's not you know, forty or more
Speaker 8: percent Black, or forty or more percent Asian, or forty
Speaker 8: or more percent Hispanic, it doesn't qualify. But that's only
Speaker 8: the Fifth Circuit, so like the Eleventh Circuit in Georgia
Speaker 8: hasn't said whether they agree with that. Yet there's a
Speaker 8: lot up in the air, as there always is with redistricting.
Speaker 8: And if the Supreme Court steps in and says we're
Speaker 8: going to undermine the last essentially thirty five years of
Speaker 8: VRA interpretation, which they might, which they might, they might not.
Speaker 8: I think that people are always get a little overconfident
Speaker 8: when they try and predict out what the Supreme Court
Speaker 8: is going to do. But there's a chance that the
Speaker 8: redistricting chaos we've seen this year is only multiplied in
Speaker 8: two years when the states are unfettered by the Voting
Speaker 8: Rights Act requirements.
Speaker 1: In June, when that comes down, no matter what the
Speaker 1: decision is, it'll be too soon for twenty twenty six.
Speaker 8: Yeah, yeah, I mean, look, Texas filing deadline is December eighth, right,
Speaker 8: Illinois filing deadline already passed. States filing deadlines are coming up.
Speaker 8: Primaries start in March the earliest. The earliest primaries begin
Speaker 8: in March. By the time June rolls around, it will
Speaker 8: be far too late for the train to be rewound
Speaker 8: on redistricting. So for the twenty twenty six cycle, I
Speaker 8: honestly think it's highly unlikely, no matter what the Court rules,
Speaker 8: that we'll see the dismantling of VRA districts in America.
Speaker 1: That means in twenty twenty six cycle we have a
Speaker 1: pretty good sense of what the jerry nander will look like.
Speaker 6: Well, not necessarily.
Speaker 4: Okay, so then tell us why.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 8: So the frustrating thing, of course, is that even the
Speaker 8: maps that have been passed this cycle, there's a tremendous
Speaker 8: amount of uncertainty. So you mentioned the Texas map that
Speaker 8: was struck down by a federal district court in al Paso.
Speaker 8: The Republicans appealed to the Supreme Court. Now, Justice Alito
Speaker 8: did implement a stay, but that's a very brief administrative
Speaker 8: stay that suggests that sometime in the next week, essentially
Speaker 8: the full Court will consider what to do on that front,
Speaker 8: and there's a chance that they will let that lower
Speaker 8: court ruling stand. I think most people still think they
Speaker 8: will keep the stay in place and do full arguments
Speaker 8: next year. Maybe, but the Texas map is currently in flux.
Speaker 8: You have a map in Missouri that was a gerrymander
Speaker 8: that Republicans drew earlier this year to draw out a
Speaker 8: Democratic representative in Kansas City, and that map could be
Speaker 8: blocked by a referendum, and you've got the potential for
Speaker 8: democratic redistricting in Virginia early next year and Republican redistricting
Speaker 8: in Florida early next year.
Speaker 4: In Florida redistrict, I thought they were pretty tight.
Speaker 6: They can try.
Speaker 8: They may run into some timeline challenges just because we're
Speaker 8: later in the game, but remember Florida's primary isn't until August,
Speaker 8: and so by virtue of their own calendar, they have
Speaker 8: a little bit more wiggle room. I don't know how
Speaker 8: aggressive they can get, but I think you could probably
Speaker 8: draw a map that gets Republicans in additional two seats
Speaker 8: at minimum out of Florida if they go down that path.
Speaker 8: And that's you know, that's twenty eight districts. Virginia is
Speaker 8: another dozen districts. Texas obviously thirty eight. So we still
Speaker 8: have seventy five congressional districts that are somewhat up in
Speaker 8: the air as we know close out twenty twenty five.
Speaker 4: Those five seats in California, though, are set now.
Speaker 8: Yeah, so the California map, I think most of the
Speaker 8: people that I talked to in both parties are pretty
Speaker 8: or that the California map is going to be in
Speaker 8: place that the Republicans have been unsuccessful in all of
Speaker 8: their court challenges.
Speaker 6: You know, the DOJ, the Trump DOJ just filed a
Speaker 6: suit against.
Speaker 8: The California map, but I don't think anyone is particularly
Speaker 8: confident that suit will prevail. So, yes, the Prop fifty
Speaker 8: map that was designed to improve democratic odds in five seats,
Speaker 8: five Republican health seats, will be the map almost certainly
Speaker 8: for the twenty twenty six mid terms.
Speaker 1: That means Democrats definitely have a five seat advantage at
Speaker 1: least for that jerrymandering that Republicans have done Texas. What
Speaker 1: else They couldn't get Indiana though they've been trying.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so Republicans got Texas, they got North.
Speaker 1: Carolina, right, and that was one seat. That was one seat,
Speaker 1: and that's because they have a super majority in the House.
Speaker 8: Correct, and redistricting in North Carolina does not require the
Speaker 8: governor's signature.
Speaker 1: Because North Carolina had Democratic governors and super powerful state
Speaker 1: legislatures that have been working hard to screw over those
Speaker 1: governors for a couple of years.
Speaker 8: Right, the North Carolina legislature has taken a lot of
Speaker 8: powers away from the governors. As like you said, North Carolina,
Speaker 8: of course, used to be solid Democratic at all levels,
Speaker 8: but over the last twenty years they keep electing Democrats governor.
Speaker 8: But the state legislature is pretty consistently Republican and so
Speaker 8: they've taken a lot of powers away from the governor.
Speaker 8: So they got that. You know, Ohio, It kind of
Speaker 8: depends how you do the math. In Ohio. You can
Speaker 8: either give Republicans a seat or not, or a half
Speaker 8: a seat if you want to hedge. But the Marcy
Speaker 8: Captor seat does get a little bit worse for her,
Speaker 8: and it was already pretty bad for her.
Speaker 6: So that is another one. Missouri.
Speaker 8: You know, will see what happens, but that one you
Speaker 8: have to put in the Republican column until if and
Speaker 8: until it's paused or rolled back. So you know, five
Speaker 8: in Texas, one in North Carolina, one in Missouri. That
Speaker 8: that gets you to seven and then you know, depending
Speaker 8: on how you want to count Ohio. But the number
Speaker 8: is is smaller than Republicans would have liked. I think
Speaker 8: when Trump first set down this path in the summer, right,
Speaker 8: he wanted five in Texas. He wanted not just your
Speaker 8: one in Missouri and one in North Carolina, but he
Speaker 8: wanted two in Indiana, he wanted one in Kansas, he
Speaker 8: wanted one in Nebraska, probably wanted four in Florida, and
Speaker 8: he didn't even think that Democrats might get five to
Speaker 8: counterbalance in Texas. So the math has shifted considerably over
Speaker 8: the last couple months. And to your point, I think
Speaker 8: there's ultimately an outcome here where Democrats end up with
Speaker 8: more favorable districts across the country when all is said
Speaker 8: and done, than they had at the outset, which would
Speaker 8: be a pretty significant turn of events. And underline how
Speaker 8: in that scenario, how that push would backfire on Trump.
Speaker 1: And we're going to turn our eye now to the
Speaker 1: Senate math because there's a sense and again we just
Speaker 1: know the twenty five cycle and the polls, and we
Speaker 1: can use that information to extrapolate what we can. But
Speaker 1: there's a feeling that Democrats are in a much better
Speaker 1: position than they have been. But this Senate map is
Speaker 1: still a real cluster fox. So let's just go Maine
Speaker 1: across the country. So start with Maine.
Speaker 8: Yeah, so your word mind, But I would say that
Speaker 8: the Senate map is a very difficult one for Democrats,
Speaker 8: even in a favorable political environment.
Speaker 6: So you've got Maine.
Speaker 8: Maine is the only seat on the Senate map held
Speaker 8: by a Republican, but one by Vice President Harris, one
Speaker 8: by Joe Biden, and in twenty twenty one by Hillary
Speaker 8: Clinton in twenty sixteen. By rights, that should make it
Speaker 8: the top target for Democrats in twenty twenty six The
Speaker 8: only reason why it's arguably not the top target is
Speaker 8: because Susan Collins is there, and she has proven to
Speaker 8: be an incredibly difficult out. She has beaten back challenger
Speaker 8: after challenger. She's beaten back some really heavy hitters on
Speaker 8: the Democratic side, people with a ton of money, people
Speaker 8: with a ton of electoral experience, and main voters just
Speaker 8: keep on sending her back. Now, that's no reason to
Speaker 8: believe that she can't lose this time, because everybody wins
Speaker 8: up until the moment that they lose. But it does
Speaker 8: mean that it's no sure thing to beat her, even
Speaker 8: in a state that Kamala Harris carried by six seven
Speaker 8: points at the top of the ticket. So that's the
Speaker 8: first seat. You know, there are two seats Democrats absolutely
Speaker 8: have to win in order to take back the Senate,
Speaker 8: and one of those is Main where they've got themselves
Speaker 8: a real headache of a primary and then a real
Speaker 8: stalwart in Susan Collins waiting on the other side. And
Speaker 8: the other is North Carolina, which is a perennial battleground.
Speaker 8: Democrats haven't won a Senate race here since two thousand
Speaker 8: and eight and kay Hagen, but they get really really
Speaker 8: close every time, and they've got a great recruit there
Speaker 8: and former Governor Roy Cooper, he won four terms as
Speaker 8: state attorney general. He won two terms as governor even
Speaker 8: as the state was voting Republican for many other offices.
Speaker 8: And he's got a good match up there against Michael Wattley, Yes.
Speaker 4: Who's an R and C guy.
Speaker 8: Yeah, he's the Trump pick and that's why he gets
Speaker 8: to be the nominee. But realistically, I talked to Republicans
Speaker 8: all the time, you know, I think everyone understands that, well,
Speaker 8: North Carolina is always going to be really close, It's
Speaker 8: always going to be really competitive. On the surface, the
Speaker 8: matchup of popular former governor, former state attorney general, well known,
Speaker 8: well liked in the state, versus former chairman of the
Speaker 8: RNC and chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party who's
Speaker 8: never held office before and who nobody really knows is
Speaker 8: not naturally the best contrast for Republicans. So that doesn't
Speaker 8: mean this race mole costs half a billion dollars and
Speaker 8: you know, end up in a two point margin one
Speaker 8: way or the other.
Speaker 6: But I think Democrats are most excited. I would say.
Speaker 8: About about Roy Cooper in North Carolina, but that only
Speaker 8: gets you to two right, and Democrats have to flip
Speaker 8: four seats in order to win back the majority there
Speaker 8: at forty seven.
Speaker 6: They need to get to fifty one.
Speaker 8: So then you have to look at this map and say,
Speaker 8: all right, well, where can we find our two other seats?
Speaker 8: And the reality is you got us start. You've got
Speaker 8: to start digging a little deeper. And what you come
Speaker 8: up with are you've got Ohio, where former Senator Shared
Speaker 8: Brown is attempting to come back after he lost by
Speaker 8: a couple points last cycle.
Speaker 1: That's kind of a special election because it's to fill
Speaker 1: the JD.
Speaker 6: Van seat.
Speaker 8: Yes, so John Hustad is the incumbent Republican. He was
Speaker 8: appointed to that seat. He's the former lieutenant governor. He
Speaker 8: has been elected statewide before, but not to that Senate seat,
Speaker 8: and he's new in the chamber. Shared Brown, of course,
Speaker 8: heavily recruited by Democrats to run this time around and
Speaker 8: avoids a primary and all that stuff, So he's one potential.
Speaker 8: Then you've got Iowa, where you have an open seat.
Speaker 8: Senator Joni Ernst isn't seeking a third term. Democrats have
Speaker 8: a primary there essentially a three person primary between state
Speaker 8: Representative Josh Turik, State Senator Zach Walls, and veteran Nathan Sage.
Speaker 8: Republicans have all lined up behind Congresswoman Ashley Hinson.
Speaker 4: Iowa was a what and R plus Trump wonted.
Speaker 8: By like twelve last time he went it by ten
Speaker 8: or nine in twenty twenty and twenty sixteen. It's gotten
Speaker 8: pretty republican. But here's what I'll say about Iowa and
Speaker 8: the reason why I think that Iowa, of all of
Speaker 8: these states that I'm mentioning here kind of in this
Speaker 8: second and third tier, Iowa is the most intriguing to
Speaker 8: me is for two reasons. Firstly, there's clearly something in
Speaker 8: the water there if you look at special election results
Speaker 8: at the state legislative level. Since the beginning of the year,
Speaker 8: Iowa has been the location of the greatest Democratic overperformance
Speaker 8: relative to twenty twenty four. We've had now half a
Speaker 8: dozen state Senate and state House races in Iowa over
Speaker 8: the last twelve months, and Democrats have I believe in
Speaker 8: almost perhaps every single one of them overperformed well into
Speaker 8: the double digits. They had some big wins, flipping state
Speaker 8: Senate districts. They are breaking the Republican super majority. So
Speaker 8: I think that there is an element of democratic energy
Speaker 8: in Iowa.
Speaker 6: Arguably, Iowa is.
Speaker 8: In a bit of a localized recession right now due
Speaker 8: to the outsize impact of the tariffs, of the soybean policy,
Speaker 8: of the beef policy.
Speaker 6: You know, you have a reason why.
Speaker 8: You know, Chuck Grassley is very vocally pushing back against
Speaker 8: Trump on tariffs, and that's because I think Iowa is
Speaker 8: uniquely vulnerable to those challenges. So I think that there's
Speaker 8: a possibility for Democrats to put up a real fight there. Plus,
Speaker 8: you've got Rob sand running for governor who's going to
Speaker 8: spend a ton of money and run a very good
Speaker 8: campaign at the top of the ticket. So that's always
Speaker 8: helpful for every other Democrat in the state. After Iowa,
Speaker 8: you got to look to Texas, where Democrats have tried
Speaker 8: and failed to make something happen for the last twenty
Speaker 8: five years, not since Anne Richards has a Democrat won
Speaker 8: statewide in Texas, so it's been quite a long time.
Speaker 8: They've got a primary amongst themselves Colin Allread and James Tallerico.
Speaker 8: But the real drama here is the Republican primary.
Speaker 1: Yes, which we will continue on next time you come back.
Speaker 1: Will you please come back? This was like one of
Speaker 1: the I just I'm like obsessed with this interview.
Speaker 4: I am a huge fan and also I've just learned
Speaker 4: a lot of new stuff. So thanks.
Speaker 8: Yeah, no, absolutely, there's We've got a full year to
Speaker 8: digest all this, so there's a lot to talk about.
Speaker 3: No more.
Speaker 4: Pet Jesse Cannon BII. Mister Trump, Yes, I've heard about him.
Speaker 2: He really loved the socialists Zorad, you know, the TikTok Bolshevik,
Speaker 2: and he's showing it.
Speaker 3: He's socializing fucking everything.
Speaker 1: Yes, so this should be a shmongous scandal, a huge
Speaker 1: mangus scandal. So Trump administration is buying parts of companies
Speaker 1: now in itself.
Speaker 4: Who doesn't love socialism? We love it.
Speaker 1: And look, the American government has done this before, and
Speaker 1: the thinking behind it is maybe not so insane. The
Speaker 1: problem is because of Trump, He's done a lot of
Speaker 1: crypt shit. Also, we don't know how he's vetting these companies.
Speaker 1: But what you have to realize is, okay, so a
Speaker 1: few things. There's no real strategy here. Some of it
Speaker 1: is Trump wanting to, like king make or you know,
Speaker 1: make over chores towards people he likes.
Speaker 4: So that is for sure true.
Speaker 3: Picked up winners and losers, pretty capitalism.
Speaker 1: There's no strategy. It's a lot of cronyism one of
Speaker 1: these situations. Then he went and bought oh in Intel,
Speaker 1: I think he went and bought three million dollars of debt,
Speaker 1: so personally I think it was Intel.
Speaker 4: But you know, so there's real, like real.
Speaker 1: Corruption level corruption here, which I think is also worth noting.
Speaker 4: That's it for this episode of Fast Politics.
Speaker 1: Tune in every Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday to hear
Speaker 1: the best minds and politics make sense of all this chaos.
Speaker 1: If you enjoy this podcast, please send it to a
Speaker 1: friend and keep the conversation going.
Speaker 4: Thanks for listening.