WEBVTT - Chuck’s Commentary - Republicans Avoid Disaster In Tennessee, But The Midterms Look Great For Democrats + Top 5 Senate Seats A “Wave” Election Could Put In Play

0:00:00.400 --> 0:00:04.080
<v Speaker 1>Having good life insurance is incredibly important. I know from

0:00:04.080 --> 0:00:07.160
<v Speaker 1>personal experience. I was sixteen when my father passed away.

0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:09.600
<v Speaker 1>We didn't have any money. He didn't leave us in

0:00:09.640 --> 0:00:14.000
<v Speaker 1>the best shape. My mother single mother, now widow, myself

0:00:14.080 --> 0:00:15.880
<v Speaker 1>sixteen trying to figure out how am I going to

0:00:15.920 --> 0:00:19.079
<v Speaker 1>pay for college and lo and behold, my dad had

0:00:19.120 --> 0:00:22.320
<v Speaker 1>one life insurance policy that we found wasn't a lot,

0:00:22.640 --> 0:00:25.360
<v Speaker 1>but it was important at the time, and it's why

0:00:25.480 --> 0:00:28.720
<v Speaker 1>I was able to go to college. Little did he

0:00:28.800 --> 0:00:32.560
<v Speaker 1>know how important that would be in that moment. Well,

0:00:32.680 --> 0:00:34.760
<v Speaker 1>guess what. That's why I am here to tell you

0:00:34.800 --> 0:00:37.720
<v Speaker 1>about Etho's life. They can provide you with peace of

0:00:37.760 --> 0:00:41.159
<v Speaker 1>mind knowing your family is protected even if the worst

0:00:41.200 --> 0:00:44.160
<v Speaker 1>comes to pass. Ethos is an online platform that makes

0:00:44.200 --> 0:00:47.800
<v Speaker 1>getting life insurance fast and easy, all designed to protect

0:00:47.840 --> 0:00:51.400
<v Speaker 1>your family's future in minutes, not months. There's no complicated

0:00:51.440 --> 0:00:55.320
<v Speaker 1>process and it's one hundred percent online. There's no medical

0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:58.640
<v Speaker 1>exam require you just answer a few health questions online.

0:00:58.760 --> 0:01:00.640
<v Speaker 1>You can get a quote and it's a little ten minutes,

0:01:00.680 --> 0:01:03.760
<v Speaker 1>and you can get same day coverage without ever leaving

0:01:03.880 --> 0:01:06.759
<v Speaker 1>your home. You can get up to three million dollars

0:01:06.760 --> 0:01:08.920
<v Speaker 1>in coverage and some policies start as low as two

0:01:08.959 --> 0:01:12.120
<v Speaker 1>dollars a day that would be billed monthly. As of

0:01:12.120 --> 0:01:15.240
<v Speaker 1>March twenty twenty five, Business Insider named Ethos the number

0:01:15.319 --> 0:01:19.679
<v Speaker 1>one no medical exam instant life insurance provider. So protect

0:01:19.680 --> 0:01:23.080
<v Speaker 1>your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get your free

0:01:23.160 --> 0:01:27.440
<v Speaker 1>quoted Ethos dot com slash chuck. So again, that's Ethos

0:01:27.480 --> 0:01:32.080
<v Speaker 1>dot com slash chuck. Application times may vary and the

0:01:32.160 --> 0:01:35.319
<v Speaker 1>rates themselves may vary as well, but trust me, life

0:01:35.360 --> 0:01:38.080
<v Speaker 1>insurance is something you should really think about it, especially

0:01:38.440 --> 0:01:44.399
<v Speaker 1>if you've got a growing family. Hello, they're happy Wednesday,

0:01:44.440 --> 0:01:47.200
<v Speaker 1>and welcome to another episode of the Chuck Podcast. Well,

0:01:47.480 --> 0:01:48.960
<v Speaker 1>one of my favorite sayings used to be, if it

0:01:49.000 --> 0:01:52.040
<v Speaker 1>was Tuesday, somebody's voting somewhere, which means, if it's Wednesday,

0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:54.800
<v Speaker 1>we have some election results. And this happens to be

0:01:55.160 --> 0:01:58.160
<v Speaker 1>no ordinary Wednesday. It's a day after a special election.

0:01:58.240 --> 0:02:01.120
<v Speaker 1>I know the most devoted of your time podcast subscribers

0:02:01.120 --> 0:02:03.680
<v Speaker 1>and listeners caught our live stream or I hope caught

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:07.080
<v Speaker 1>our live stream election show and partnership with Decision Desk

0:02:07.400 --> 0:02:14.640
<v Speaker 1>HQ and Chris Solisa. We were essentially watching the returns

0:02:14.400 --> 0:02:17.240
<v Speaker 1>with those that chose to watch with us, and we

0:02:17.320 --> 0:02:21.760
<v Speaker 1>had another huge turnout. We are overwhelmed by the response

0:02:21.800 --> 0:02:25.320
<v Speaker 1>we've been getting for these election night specials. Let's just say,

0:02:25.320 --> 0:02:29.200
<v Speaker 1>you're you're only encouraging us to do this more and more.

0:02:30.800 --> 0:02:34.640
<v Speaker 1>But in some ways, this is one of those special

0:02:34.639 --> 0:02:38.360
<v Speaker 1>elections where both parties are going to take something away

0:02:38.360 --> 0:02:41.480
<v Speaker 1>that they feel better about. Both parties are going to

0:02:41.520 --> 0:02:43.920
<v Speaker 1>look at this and say what could have been for

0:02:44.000 --> 0:02:46.480
<v Speaker 1>different rays, And in another way you look at it

0:02:46.560 --> 0:02:49.000
<v Speaker 1>is in some ways it changes nothing. It taught us

0:02:49.080 --> 0:02:51.320
<v Speaker 1>nothing we didn't already know. So I'm gonna start with

0:02:51.360 --> 0:02:54.359
<v Speaker 1>that part right. In some ways, this special election went

0:02:54.680 --> 0:02:55.760
<v Speaker 1>as expected.

0:02:55.800 --> 0:02:56.640
<v Speaker 2>What do I mean by that?

0:02:56.680 --> 0:02:59.040
<v Speaker 1>Well, as Jeffrey Scaling said there at the end, it's

0:02:59.080 --> 0:03:02.280
<v Speaker 1>like the final margin of victory looks like to be

0:03:02.280 --> 0:03:06.000
<v Speaker 1>somewhere around, you know, somewhere between four and six percentage points,

0:03:06.000 --> 0:03:10.000
<v Speaker 1>which means you're looking at it at approximately a sixteen

0:03:10.040 --> 0:03:13.160
<v Speaker 1>to eighteen point Democratic over performance based on the twenty

0:03:13.200 --> 0:03:16.880
<v Speaker 1>twenty four results, which is exactly pretty much in line

0:03:16.919 --> 0:03:19.560
<v Speaker 1>with what we've seen with various special elections. We've had

0:03:20.040 --> 0:03:23.560
<v Speaker 1>some special congressional elections. Two that happened in Florida one

0:03:23.600 --> 0:03:27.160
<v Speaker 1>had a sixteen point over performance, another one actually had

0:03:27.160 --> 0:03:29.760
<v Speaker 1>a twenty three point over performance for Democrats. Both were

0:03:29.760 --> 0:03:32.400
<v Speaker 1>still Republican victories like this one, but there was this

0:03:32.480 --> 0:03:36.360
<v Speaker 1>over performance right super red districts that suddenly got much

0:03:36.400 --> 0:03:40.920
<v Speaker 1>closer in a special election. In some Democratic victories, their

0:03:41.080 --> 0:03:44.080
<v Speaker 1>over performance has been in the sixteen to eighteen point range.

0:03:44.160 --> 0:03:46.400
<v Speaker 1>Why do I keep using this number sixteen to eighteen

0:03:46.480 --> 0:03:49.880
<v Speaker 1>And no, I'm not saying six seven. I'm not participating

0:03:49.920 --> 0:03:52.760
<v Speaker 1>in that nonsense. But the importance of that sixteen to

0:03:52.800 --> 0:03:54.960
<v Speaker 1>eighteen point range is that it's about the same number

0:03:55.000 --> 0:03:58.000
<v Speaker 1>that we saw in twenty seventeen and twenty eighteen special

0:03:58.040 --> 0:04:02.800
<v Speaker 1>elections going into that mid cycle, where that over performance

0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:06.600
<v Speaker 1>did end up translating to a good Democratic Knight. But

0:04:06.680 --> 0:04:09.240
<v Speaker 1>of course the question is is twenty twenty six going

0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:11.600
<v Speaker 1>to be another twenty eighteen or it's twenty twenty six

0:04:11.680 --> 0:04:15.800
<v Speaker 1>going to be something bigger, something akin to what Republican

0:04:15.800 --> 0:04:18.680
<v Speaker 1>You know, Republicans nineteen ninety four they swept both the

0:04:18.680 --> 0:04:20.720
<v Speaker 1>House and the Senate, or Democrats two thousand and six,

0:04:20.760 --> 0:04:24.520
<v Speaker 1>where they swept both the House and the Senate. When

0:04:24.560 --> 0:04:27.600
<v Speaker 1>you have a to me at this point, a wave

0:04:27.760 --> 0:04:31.039
<v Speaker 1>is when you're the party out of power, you're not

0:04:31.200 --> 0:04:34.039
<v Speaker 1>holding either of the House and Senate, and after the

0:04:34.080 --> 0:04:36.440
<v Speaker 1>wave hits, you end up controlling both the House and

0:04:36.480 --> 0:04:39.240
<v Speaker 1>the Senate. And I think the question we're all looking

0:04:39.279 --> 0:04:43.039
<v Speaker 1>for is, is this in a political environment that is

0:04:43.080 --> 0:04:47.120
<v Speaker 1>developing into a wave for the Democrats right to You know,

0:04:47.160 --> 0:04:51.200
<v Speaker 1>we love our weather metaphors as political prognosticator types, and

0:04:51.600 --> 0:04:54.800
<v Speaker 1>there's clearly a storm brewing, and the question is is

0:04:54.800 --> 0:04:57.159
<v Speaker 1>this going to be you know, to use hurricane terms,

0:04:57.160 --> 0:04:59.400
<v Speaker 1>a Cat two, a Cat three, a Cat four, a

0:04:59.480 --> 0:05:03.080
<v Speaker 1>Cat five. Right, if it's a Cat one, Republicans probably

0:05:03.080 --> 0:05:05.320
<v Speaker 1>can hold both the House and the Senate. If it's

0:05:05.320 --> 0:05:07.680
<v Speaker 1>simply a Cat two or a Cat three type of storm,

0:05:07.720 --> 0:05:12.280
<v Speaker 1>where it's a bigger Democratic turnout than Republican turnout, more

0:05:12.360 --> 0:05:14.920
<v Speaker 1>enthusiasm on the left than the right, but the money's

0:05:15.000 --> 0:05:17.520
<v Speaker 1>kind of equal, the candidate performance is kind of equal.

0:05:18.240 --> 0:05:21.760
<v Speaker 1>You know, that's an environment that the Democrats probably wouldn't

0:05:21.760 --> 0:05:22.600
<v Speaker 1>control the House.

0:05:22.400 --> 0:05:24.120
<v Speaker 2>But come up short in the Senate.

0:05:25.600 --> 0:05:28.560
<v Speaker 1>This thing gets bigger than that and it becomes where

0:05:28.560 --> 0:05:31.040
<v Speaker 1>they can win both the House and the Senate, where

0:05:31.040 --> 0:05:34.520
<v Speaker 1>you start to have more retirements, and you have lopsided

0:05:34.560 --> 0:05:38.160
<v Speaker 1>candidate issues. And that's what we were watching for tonight, Right,

0:05:38.320 --> 0:05:40.719
<v Speaker 1>was the bottom going to fall out for Republicans. It's

0:05:40.720 --> 0:05:44.120
<v Speaker 1>been a rough couple of months for Republicans in general,

0:05:44.480 --> 0:05:45.840
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump specifically.

0:05:46.320 --> 0:05:49.039
<v Speaker 2>The narrative is not going well. The headlines aren't going well.

0:05:49.120 --> 0:05:51.080
<v Speaker 1>Right, you look at the MAGA coalition and there's been

0:05:51.120 --> 0:05:53.840
<v Speaker 1>a lot of cracks in that coalition. Marjorie Taylor Green.

0:05:53.960 --> 0:05:58.320
<v Speaker 1>The Jeffrey Epstein files created cracks. What's happening in Venezuela,

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:02.480
<v Speaker 1>in Israel, in Ukraine has created some cracks. And it's

0:06:02.560 --> 0:06:05.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, it's a reminder, you know, Trump Trump put

0:06:05.040 --> 0:06:09.800
<v Speaker 1>together this coalition that doesn't really share any sort of

0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:13.320
<v Speaker 1>ideological values other than they don't like the left right.

0:06:13.360 --> 0:06:17.640
<v Speaker 1>There's a cultural bind that keeps this coalition together, but

0:06:17.720 --> 0:06:21.839
<v Speaker 1>there's not really an issue bind that keeps this coalition together,

0:06:23.120 --> 0:06:27.719
<v Speaker 1>you know, And so if you start to see fracture,

0:06:27.760 --> 0:06:32.040
<v Speaker 1>it's fracture that may be really hard to put back together.

0:06:32.720 --> 0:06:36.320
<v Speaker 1>And I think the fear Republicans had about this special

0:06:36.360 --> 0:06:42.360
<v Speaker 1>election in Tennessee that a loss would essentially lead to

0:06:42.400 --> 0:06:44.359
<v Speaker 1>the bottom falling out. And what does the bottom falling

0:06:44.360 --> 0:06:48.000
<v Speaker 1>out look like for Republicans, another ten to fifteen House

0:06:48.040 --> 0:06:52.280
<v Speaker 1>members deciding to retire and not seek reelection, maybe a

0:06:52.320 --> 0:06:55.960
<v Speaker 1>senator or two. That you don't that Republicans thought we're

0:06:55.960 --> 0:06:58.560
<v Speaker 1>going to seek reelection. That says, you know what, I'm

0:06:58.600 --> 0:07:01.000
<v Speaker 1>out of here. I'm not going to do this. I'm gonna.

0:07:02.200 --> 0:07:02.880
<v Speaker 2>I don't want to.

0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:07.360
<v Speaker 1>Either be in the minority or worse risk losing my seat.

0:07:07.400 --> 0:07:09.920
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to go out that way. And a

0:07:10.080 --> 0:07:14.160
<v Speaker 1>loss in this special election would have been that, but

0:07:14.280 --> 0:07:16.480
<v Speaker 1>that didn't happen, right, So I think what we have

0:07:16.680 --> 0:07:20.200
<v Speaker 1>is you have Republicans feeling as if, Okay, there's a

0:07:20.240 --> 0:07:23.600
<v Speaker 1>way to survive these midterms. They can survive the storm

0:07:23.640 --> 0:07:26.480
<v Speaker 1>that's coming. It's not going to be pretty. They may

0:07:26.520 --> 0:07:29.679
<v Speaker 1>lose some windows, they may lose a piece of their roof.

0:07:30.720 --> 0:07:33.880
<v Speaker 1>That's the equivalent of losing House seats and losing control

0:07:33.920 --> 0:07:38.320
<v Speaker 1>of the House. Maybe the Senate goes from a three

0:07:38.360 --> 0:07:41.640
<v Speaker 1>seat advantage down to a one seat advantage, but they

0:07:41.680 --> 0:07:47.200
<v Speaker 1>hang on to some power in Congress, and it's not

0:07:47.320 --> 0:07:50.520
<v Speaker 1>a total loss if you're Donald Trump, and if you

0:07:50.560 --> 0:07:53.280
<v Speaker 1>look at and I think that that's what each party's

0:07:53.280 --> 0:07:54.720
<v Speaker 1>going to take away from this, right, I think the

0:07:54.760 --> 0:07:57.080
<v Speaker 1>Democrats are going to look and say, look, we got

0:07:57.120 --> 0:08:01.559
<v Speaker 1>an enthusiasm advantage. Voters are ready to walk on broken

0:08:01.560 --> 0:08:04.120
<v Speaker 1>glass to show up. The turnout in this special election

0:08:04.240 --> 0:08:08.400
<v Speaker 1>was was very high, but it also meant it engaged

0:08:08.440 --> 0:08:10.840
<v Speaker 1>the other side too. I think a lot of Democrats

0:08:10.880 --> 0:08:12.960
<v Speaker 1>are going to whisper today that hey there, you know,

0:08:13.040 --> 0:08:16.800
<v Speaker 1>imagine if they had a candidate that ideologically fit the

0:08:16.880 --> 0:08:20.520
<v Speaker 1>district better. Right this If you remember the famous Connor

0:08:20.600 --> 0:08:24.120
<v Speaker 1>Lamb special election of twenty seventeen and twenty eighteen, that

0:08:24.200 --> 0:08:26.920
<v Speaker 1>was sort of the first big, you know, sort of

0:08:27.400 --> 0:08:29.800
<v Speaker 1>tea leaf that when Connor Lamb won a district that

0:08:29.880 --> 0:08:32.400
<v Speaker 1>had been a double digit Republican district and he won

0:08:32.440 --> 0:08:35.680
<v Speaker 1>that special election, that was like whoa. And I remember

0:08:35.679 --> 0:08:38.800
<v Speaker 1>at the time Republicans were going, well, Democrats won't find

0:08:38.800 --> 0:08:41.679
<v Speaker 1>candidates like that in all these races. But it was

0:08:41.720 --> 0:08:44.320
<v Speaker 1>an acknowledgment that the Democrats had found almost the perfect

0:08:44.400 --> 0:08:50.880
<v Speaker 1>candidate to run in that district. That is not Aftenban, Right,

0:08:51.000 --> 0:08:53.840
<v Speaker 1>she was definitely the progressive in the primary. She was

0:08:53.880 --> 0:08:58.800
<v Speaker 1>outspent in the primary by more establishment candidates, and you know,

0:08:58.880 --> 0:09:03.839
<v Speaker 1>she was the more democratic socialist leaning candidate, if you will,

0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:06.120
<v Speaker 1>I think even you know had some kind things to

0:09:06.120 --> 0:09:08.080
<v Speaker 1>say about it. Let's just say anything she had said

0:09:09.320 --> 0:09:13.600
<v Speaker 1>positively about democratic socialism or progressive politics. Republicans found and

0:09:13.720 --> 0:09:17.000
<v Speaker 1>used it in their at and she ended up being,

0:09:17.160 --> 0:09:19.320
<v Speaker 1>in some ways the referendum in this race, right. It

0:09:19.360 --> 0:09:22.719
<v Speaker 1>was Republicans wanted this to be a referendum on her

0:09:23.280 --> 0:09:26.640
<v Speaker 1>and left wing politics. Democrats were hoping this would be

0:09:26.640 --> 0:09:30.440
<v Speaker 1>a referendum on prices, the economy, and Donald Trump. And

0:09:30.480 --> 0:09:32.360
<v Speaker 1>the fact of the matter is they both succeeded.

0:09:32.480 --> 0:09:32.680
<v Speaker 2>Right.

0:09:33.160 --> 0:09:36.240
<v Speaker 1>Democrats succeeded in getting a turnout that made this race

0:09:36.280 --> 0:09:41.520
<v Speaker 1>incredibly competitive, fairly close, probably as close as they realistically

0:09:41.559 --> 0:09:44.040
<v Speaker 1>could have gotten it given the makeup of this district.

0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:47.880
<v Speaker 1>But Republicans got the nominee they wanted, right, And I

0:09:47.880 --> 0:09:50.199
<v Speaker 1>think that's what Democrats are going to ask themselves the

0:09:50.280 --> 0:09:55.040
<v Speaker 1>special had they had a Jim Cooper like Democrat. And

0:09:55.080 --> 0:09:57.200
<v Speaker 1>for those of you who are familiar with old Tennessee politics,

0:09:57.280 --> 0:10:00.800
<v Speaker 1>Jim Cooper was sort of an old school blue dog Democrat,

0:10:00.840 --> 0:10:04.120
<v Speaker 1>which was code for more you know, he was closer

0:10:04.160 --> 0:10:08.040
<v Speaker 1>to Joe Manchin on the ideological scale than even say

0:10:08.160 --> 0:10:10.600
<v Speaker 1>Chuck Schumer. Okay, I'm not even saying, you know, going

0:10:10.600 --> 0:10:15.559
<v Speaker 1>to AOC definitely was more center left than just mainstream liberal.

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:19.800
<v Speaker 1>And I think that's going to be a fair, a

0:10:19.800 --> 0:10:21.760
<v Speaker 1>fair piece of analysis that you know, would that have

0:10:22.120 --> 0:10:24.080
<v Speaker 1>would that have been the difference? Right? A couple of

0:10:24.080 --> 0:10:26.679
<v Speaker 1>points been harder to paint, you know, somebody like a

0:10:26.760 --> 0:10:31.360
<v Speaker 1>Jim Cooper as a radical. But then you got to

0:10:31.360 --> 0:10:34.080
<v Speaker 1>ask yourself, if you're Republicans, can you do this in

0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:37.600
<v Speaker 1>forty races? Can you do this for thirty districts that

0:10:37.640 --> 0:10:41.040
<v Speaker 1>you've got to defend? Because it's going to be somewhere. Now,

0:10:41.120 --> 0:10:44.520
<v Speaker 1>you know, anything that is our anything that Donald Trump

0:10:44.559 --> 0:10:48.240
<v Speaker 1>won by say twelve to fifteen points, I think now

0:10:48.360 --> 0:10:50.840
<v Speaker 1>is a house seat. Realistically, the Democrats, that they find

0:10:50.880 --> 0:10:54.840
<v Speaker 1>the right candidate can potentially put in play. So, you know,

0:10:54.920 --> 0:10:58.280
<v Speaker 1>can they run the kind of camp essentially emergency triage

0:10:58.320 --> 0:11:00.760
<v Speaker 1>campaign that Republicans came in and ran. And by the way,

0:11:00.800 --> 0:11:04.160
<v Speaker 1>they deserve credit for this because you know, failing to

0:11:04.200 --> 0:11:06.880
<v Speaker 1>answer the bell on these warning signs and losing this

0:11:07.240 --> 0:11:10.360
<v Speaker 1>would have led to a total catastrophe. So doing the

0:11:10.440 --> 0:11:14.400
<v Speaker 1>triage sort of bought them some time and probably saved

0:11:14.400 --> 0:11:19.240
<v Speaker 1>a handful of retirements on this front, But can they

0:11:19.280 --> 0:11:21.720
<v Speaker 1>scale this right? You know, you might be able to

0:11:21.760 --> 0:11:24.760
<v Speaker 1>save a race here or a race there in this game,

0:11:25.160 --> 0:11:27.200
<v Speaker 1>but you're not going to be able to hope that

0:11:27.280 --> 0:11:31.200
<v Speaker 1>you get Democratic nominees that don't fit the district across

0:11:31.240 --> 0:11:36.800
<v Speaker 1>the country. Now, do I think Republicans are going to

0:11:36.120 --> 0:11:39.240
<v Speaker 1>get into the habit now of trying to actually play

0:11:39.280 --> 0:11:42.160
<v Speaker 1>in Democratic primaries, because that's been the biggest That's the

0:11:42.160 --> 0:11:46.240
<v Speaker 1>other difference between the twenty eighteen cycle and the twenty

0:11:46.280 --> 0:11:50.200
<v Speaker 1>twenty six cycle. In twenty eighteen, the Democratic leadership and

0:11:50.280 --> 0:11:53.199
<v Speaker 1>at that time, you know, and yes that included Schumer

0:11:53.280 --> 0:12:00.520
<v Speaker 1>and Pelosi, But back then they had a little more juice.

0:11:59.679 --> 0:12:03.360
<v Speaker 1>The Democratic Party had a little more credibility with its

0:12:03.360 --> 0:12:06.679
<v Speaker 1>own voters and donors that when they squeezed people out

0:12:06.679 --> 0:12:08.839
<v Speaker 1>of a primary, they listened and they said, hey, this

0:12:08.880 --> 0:12:11.679
<v Speaker 1>is who we were supporting, this is who the national

0:12:11.679 --> 0:12:14.800
<v Speaker 1>party wants. They could clear a primary field and they

0:12:14.800 --> 0:12:20.319
<v Speaker 1>could sort of minimize the number of nominees that we're

0:12:20.320 --> 0:12:21.679
<v Speaker 1>going to be too far to the left to win

0:12:21.720 --> 0:12:26.680
<v Speaker 1>general elections. They don't have that credibility this cycle. While

0:12:27.040 --> 0:12:30.600
<v Speaker 1>I think a bit more enthusiasm for Democrats. You also

0:12:30.760 --> 0:12:33.640
<v Speaker 1>have a national party that can't sit here and say

0:12:34.000 --> 0:12:36.240
<v Speaker 1>we're going to squeeze out this candidate, and the Michigan

0:12:36.320 --> 0:12:40.520
<v Speaker 1>Senate primary squeeze out and in some ways, an endorsement

0:12:40.559 --> 0:12:44.439
<v Speaker 1>from the national party for in certain primaries maybe a

0:12:44.480 --> 0:12:47.959
<v Speaker 1>kiss of death that it puts the scarlet e on

0:12:49.000 --> 0:12:52.160
<v Speaker 1>your coat for establishment right and in these days, being

0:12:52.280 --> 0:12:55.280
<v Speaker 1>part being seen as part of the political establishment, whether

0:12:55.320 --> 0:12:58.240
<v Speaker 1>you're on the left or the right, is not a

0:12:58.240 --> 0:12:59.439
<v Speaker 1>good place to be politically.

0:12:59.520 --> 0:13:01.720
<v Speaker 2>So, you know.

0:13:02.000 --> 0:13:04.439
<v Speaker 1>I think that the challenge the Democrats have is they

0:13:04.480 --> 0:13:06.559
<v Speaker 1>have a great environment building. In fact, if you look

0:13:06.559 --> 0:13:09.080
<v Speaker 1>at my latest substack, I kind of think we're I

0:13:09.080 --> 0:13:11.599
<v Speaker 1>think we're sort of underrating what is growing here. I

0:13:11.640 --> 0:13:14.199
<v Speaker 1>think this is when you look at it, Yes, things

0:13:14.240 --> 0:13:18.959
<v Speaker 1>look very similar as twenty eighteen, but I sense that

0:13:19.320 --> 0:13:22.199
<v Speaker 1>Trump's script on his own party is loosening a little bit.

0:13:22.679 --> 0:13:27.320
<v Speaker 1>And ask yourself over the next five months, what good

0:13:27.360 --> 0:13:29.599
<v Speaker 1>headlines are going to help a Republican that's going to

0:13:29.640 --> 0:13:31.400
<v Speaker 1>be on the ballot in twenty six Right, they're having

0:13:31.400 --> 0:13:35.120
<v Speaker 1>this argument over extending the Obamacare subsidies. In fact, I

0:13:37.240 --> 0:13:40.480
<v Speaker 1>believe that had Ashton Bain won this special had the

0:13:40.520 --> 0:13:43.400
<v Speaker 1>Democrat pulled the upset. I think you've seen those subsidy

0:13:43.400 --> 0:13:46.720
<v Speaker 1>extensions like happen within forty eight hours. I still think

0:13:46.720 --> 0:13:48.520
<v Speaker 1>they're going to happen because I think Trump is going

0:13:48.600 --> 0:13:52.520
<v Speaker 1>to flip a switch in his polster who's been warning

0:13:52.640 --> 0:13:56.360
<v Speaker 1>a lot of Republicans that healthcare could be the issue

0:13:56.400 --> 0:13:59.400
<v Speaker 1>that takes down the Republican majorities in both chambers. That

0:14:00.080 --> 0:14:02.439
<v Speaker 1>Trump will end up weighing in and doing a one

0:14:02.480 --> 0:14:05.400
<v Speaker 1>year or two year extension because he just wants to

0:14:05.400 --> 0:14:08.400
<v Speaker 1>get that. They want to mitigate the damage. Not extending

0:14:08.400 --> 0:14:14.280
<v Speaker 1>these healthcare subsidies would do so. But the point is

0:14:14.679 --> 0:14:17.360
<v Speaker 1>just that fight alone, there's not positive headlines being created.

0:14:17.360 --> 0:14:21.400
<v Speaker 1>Those are negative. That's defensive headlines. Then you've got we've

0:14:21.400 --> 0:14:23.640
<v Speaker 1>got a Terra ruling that's coming. Well, no matter what

0:14:23.720 --> 0:14:25.160
<v Speaker 1>the ruling is, it's a bad I think.

0:14:25.000 --> 0:14:26.560
<v Speaker 2>It's a bad headline for the Republicans.

0:14:26.640 --> 0:14:30.560
<v Speaker 1>Right if if the Supreme Court upholds Trump's authority, well,

0:14:30.560 --> 0:14:33.920
<v Speaker 1>the market's going to go haywire. It means these tariffs

0:14:33.960 --> 0:14:38.880
<v Speaker 1>stay in place and the uneven economy continues, right, and

0:14:38.920 --> 0:14:41.520
<v Speaker 1>we have prices continue to rise, We continue to have

0:14:41.560 --> 0:14:45.520
<v Speaker 1>inflationary pressures, and we've weakened the global economy. And when

0:14:45.520 --> 0:14:48.720
<v Speaker 1>the global economy gets weaker, our economy can't get as strong.

0:14:49.000 --> 0:14:51.920
<v Speaker 1>You know, we might you know, I saw somebody cheering

0:14:51.960 --> 0:14:54.320
<v Speaker 1>on that that we you know Japan, you know, the

0:14:54.400 --> 0:14:57.880
<v Speaker 1>tariffs have really slowed down Japan's economy. That's not good

0:14:57.880 --> 0:15:02.400
<v Speaker 1>for America. Of Japan's economy, it goes into recession. That's

0:15:02.400 --> 0:15:06.760
<v Speaker 1>not anything to cheer. That's only going to hurt our economy.

0:15:06.840 --> 0:15:10.120
<v Speaker 1>Economies are too interconnected. So this is the naivete of

0:15:10.200 --> 0:15:12.880
<v Speaker 1>this whole teriff regime. But the more nationalistic we go

0:15:12.920 --> 0:15:15.760
<v Speaker 1>with our economic policy, the more nationalistic everybody else is

0:15:15.800 --> 0:15:17.600
<v Speaker 1>going to go with their economic policy. And that is

0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:21.680
<v Speaker 1>bad for prices, and that is bad for GDP growth

0:15:21.720 --> 0:15:26.600
<v Speaker 1>around the world, And it doesn't solve the income inequality problem,

0:15:26.640 --> 0:15:29.520
<v Speaker 1>and it just puts a sort of a wet blanket

0:15:29.680 --> 0:15:33.280
<v Speaker 1>over any economic growth. But you still have inflationary pressures, right,

0:15:33.400 --> 0:15:36.960
<v Speaker 1>Costs still go up because of these consumer taxes. We

0:15:37.040 --> 0:15:40.720
<v Speaker 1>call them tariffs, but they're nothing more than an additional tax, essentially,

0:15:40.800 --> 0:15:44.120
<v Speaker 1>a form of almost like a vat tax that Trump

0:15:44.200 --> 0:15:47.120
<v Speaker 1>has tried to institute here. But that's not going to

0:15:47.120 --> 0:15:50.239
<v Speaker 1>be a great headline. You've got what's happening in Venezuela,

0:15:50.280 --> 0:15:55.360
<v Speaker 1>where where you know, is this war even legal? Have

0:15:55.560 --> 0:15:59.800
<v Speaker 1>any of the you know, it's possible. Nothing is legal here, right,

0:15:59.800 --> 0:16:05.320
<v Speaker 1>There's been no congressional authority that you know is clear

0:16:05.360 --> 0:16:08.640
<v Speaker 1>to me that has given the president the authority to

0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:12.480
<v Speaker 1>do this. This definition of narco terrorism to me, is

0:16:12.520 --> 0:16:15.920
<v Speaker 1>a It is not something that's been tested in the courts,

0:16:17.280 --> 0:16:21.200
<v Speaker 1>whether you can truly I go to war and if

0:16:21.200 --> 0:16:25.320
<v Speaker 1>this is you know, is this a regular crime or

0:16:25.400 --> 0:16:27.640
<v Speaker 1>is it a homicide or a war crime. But either way,

0:16:28.200 --> 0:16:32.640
<v Speaker 1>the second strike attacking those that survived the first strike

0:16:32.680 --> 0:16:38.480
<v Speaker 1>in that first attack on the alleged Venezuelan and cocaine traffickers,

0:16:39.720 --> 0:16:44.320
<v Speaker 1>either one creates a congressional inquiry that again, this is

0:16:44.360 --> 0:16:46.920
<v Speaker 1>not a positive headline for the Republican Party and anybody

0:16:47.000 --> 0:16:49.680
<v Speaker 1>running for office. It is a headline that puts you

0:16:49.760 --> 0:16:52.960
<v Speaker 1>on the defensive at best, and if anything, may put

0:16:53.000 --> 0:16:56.360
<v Speaker 1>some Republicans in a place where they feel like they've

0:16:56.400 --> 0:17:02.480
<v Speaker 1>got a distance themselves from Donald Trump. Do you hate hangovers?

0:17:02.520 --> 0:17:04.919
<v Speaker 1>We'll say goodbye to hangovers. Out of office gives you

0:17:04.960 --> 0:17:07.680
<v Speaker 1>the social buzz without the next day regret. Their best

0:17:07.720 --> 0:17:10.240
<v Speaker 1>selling out of office gummies were designed to provide a mild,

0:17:10.280 --> 0:17:14.080
<v Speaker 1>relaxing buzz, boost your mood, and enhance creativity and relaxation.

0:17:14.320 --> 0:17:16.679
<v Speaker 1>With five different strengths, you can tailor the dose to

0:17:16.720 --> 0:17:20.000
<v Speaker 1>fit your vibe, from a gentle one point five milligram

0:17:20.040 --> 0:17:24.000
<v Speaker 1>micro dose to their newest fifteen milligram gummy for a

0:17:24.000 --> 0:17:28.000
<v Speaker 1>more elevated experience. Their THHC beverages and gummies are a modern,

0:17:28.119 --> 0:17:31.399
<v Speaker 1>mindful alternative to a glass of wine or a cocktail.

0:17:31.440 --> 0:17:33.760
<v Speaker 1>And I'll tell you this, I've given up booze. I

0:17:33.880 --> 0:17:37.960
<v Speaker 1>don't like the hangovers. I prefer the gummy experience. Soul

0:17:38.080 --> 0:17:40.399
<v Speaker 1>is a wellness brand that believes feeling good should be

0:17:40.560 --> 0:17:44.240
<v Speaker 1>fun and easy. Soul specializes in delicious HEMP derived THHD

0:17:44.359 --> 0:17:47.320
<v Speaker 1>and CBD products, all designed to boost your mood and

0:17:47.680 --> 0:17:50.359
<v Speaker 1>simply help you unwine so if you struggle to switch

0:17:50.400 --> 0:17:52.760
<v Speaker 1>off at night, Soul also has a variety of products

0:17:52.800 --> 0:17:55.520
<v Speaker 1>specifically designed to just simply help you get a better

0:17:55.600 --> 0:17:58.879
<v Speaker 1>night's sleep, including their top selling sleepy gummies. It's a

0:17:58.880 --> 0:18:02.240
<v Speaker 1>fan favorite for d restorative sleep, So bring on the

0:18:02.240 --> 0:18:05.280
<v Speaker 1>good vibes and treat yourself to Soul today. Right now,

0:18:05.440 --> 0:18:09.320
<v Speaker 1>Soul is offering my audience thirty percent off your entire order.

0:18:09.560 --> 0:18:12.240
<v Speaker 1>So go to get sold dot com use the promo

0:18:12.320 --> 0:18:16.040
<v Speaker 1>code toodcast. Don't forget that code. That's get sold dot

0:18:16.040 --> 0:18:19.639
<v Speaker 1>Com promo code toodcast for thirty percent off.

0:18:23.560 --> 0:18:24.280
<v Speaker 2>You know, the more.

0:18:24.160 --> 0:18:27.160
<v Speaker 1>Unpopular Trump is growing and his approval rating, his disapproval

0:18:27.240 --> 0:18:31.320
<v Speaker 1>rating continues to rise, and his his approval ratings floating downward.

0:18:31.320 --> 0:18:33.520
<v Speaker 1>I wouldn't say it's diving downward, but it continues to

0:18:33.520 --> 0:18:39.280
<v Speaker 1>float downward. You put all that together and you're going

0:18:39.320 --> 0:18:43.200
<v Speaker 1>to have in comment Republicans looking for ways to subtly

0:18:43.240 --> 0:18:45.280
<v Speaker 1>distance themselves from Trump. In fact, we saw it in

0:18:45.320 --> 0:18:49.360
<v Speaker 1>the special election. The most remarkable thing about the Matt

0:18:49.440 --> 0:18:52.080
<v Speaker 1>Van epsads is that they didn't use Donald Trump. Yes,

0:18:52.119 --> 0:18:55.240
<v Speaker 1>he phoned into a rally, right you know, and the

0:18:55.320 --> 0:18:59.639
<v Speaker 1>national media covered that rally, but you know that was

0:19:00.080 --> 0:19:02.040
<v Speaker 1>they did not want a picture of Donald Trump with

0:19:02.119 --> 0:19:06.239
<v Speaker 1>this candidate. He never used Trump's name, you know. He

0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:09.040
<v Speaker 1>certainly said I will fight for America first, and used radicals,

0:19:09.280 --> 0:19:13.520
<v Speaker 1>used different buzzwords that are very familiar buzzwords in maga circles.

0:19:13.920 --> 0:19:16.040
<v Speaker 1>But there was no use of Trump, and there are

0:19:16.040 --> 0:19:17.520
<v Speaker 1>going to be other Republicans are going to be looking

0:19:17.560 --> 0:19:20.159
<v Speaker 1>for specific places to start splitting from Trump. They may

0:19:20.200 --> 0:19:22.159
<v Speaker 1>do it on tariffs, they may do it on Venezuela,

0:19:23.440 --> 0:19:25.960
<v Speaker 1>they may do it on healthcare subsidies. But the point

0:19:26.040 --> 0:19:30.479
<v Speaker 1>is all of the near term events that are going

0:19:30.520 --> 0:19:33.879
<v Speaker 1>to impact this political environment, they all seem like negative

0:19:33.880 --> 0:19:36.919
<v Speaker 1>headlines right now for the Republicans. What is going to

0:19:36.920 --> 0:19:40.040
<v Speaker 1>be a positive headline that's coming up. Are we suddenly

0:19:40.080 --> 0:19:45.320
<v Speaker 1>going to see prices fall and saving these accounts grow

0:19:45.680 --> 0:19:49.760
<v Speaker 1>over the next six months. That doesn't seem likely. And

0:19:49.800 --> 0:19:54.120
<v Speaker 1>then there's the intangible here of Donald Trump and Trump fatigue.

0:19:56.240 --> 0:19:59.679
<v Speaker 1>Don't I think we underestimate the length of the you know,

0:20:00.080 --> 0:20:02.680
<v Speaker 1>of the hold he's had on our politics. Right it's

0:20:02.720 --> 0:20:07.240
<v Speaker 1>been now over ten years that he's essentially dominated politics.

0:20:07.240 --> 0:20:09.760
<v Speaker 1>His movements about ten years old. And if you look

0:20:09.800 --> 0:20:13.560
<v Speaker 1>at the history of modern political campaigns, at modern politics,

0:20:13.560 --> 0:20:17.920
<v Speaker 1>which I defined modern politics as essentially the end of

0:20:17.960 --> 0:20:22.280
<v Speaker 1>World War two to now, you know, these runs, these

0:20:22.320 --> 0:20:24.920
<v Speaker 1>sort of cult We've basically had a series of cult

0:20:24.920 --> 0:20:27.520
<v Speaker 1>to personalities. It's not that parties have have runs. It's

0:20:27.520 --> 0:20:31.640
<v Speaker 1>almost like political personalities have run, right. You know, Eisenhower

0:20:31.680 --> 0:20:34.240
<v Speaker 1>had himself of basically an eight to ten year run,

0:20:34.280 --> 0:20:38.800
<v Speaker 1>and Kennedy Johnson had eight to ten years, and Nixon

0:20:38.840 --> 0:20:41.600
<v Speaker 1>had his ten year period. You know, Carter was sort

0:20:41.640 --> 0:20:44.880
<v Speaker 1>of a four year interlude, and Reagan Bush dominated about

0:20:44.880 --> 0:20:46.800
<v Speaker 1>ten to twelve years, and Clinton had his eight to

0:20:46.880 --> 0:20:50.679
<v Speaker 1>ten years, and George W. Bush and then Barack Obama

0:20:50.800 --> 0:20:52.520
<v Speaker 1>and then we're in the air of Donald Trump. The

0:20:52.520 --> 0:20:55.880
<v Speaker 1>point is is that it's really hard to extend this

0:20:56.040 --> 0:21:01.680
<v Speaker 1>to eleven and twelve years successfully. Right by the ninety midterms,

0:21:01.880 --> 0:21:05.439
<v Speaker 1>everything was petering out for the Reagan coalition. By the

0:21:05.440 --> 0:21:09.159
<v Speaker 1>twenty oh two midterms, the Clinton or Clinton coalition was

0:21:09.200 --> 0:21:13.760
<v Speaker 1>completely gone. By twenty sixteen, we saw the Obama coalition

0:21:13.800 --> 0:21:17.720
<v Speaker 1>already fracturing. It kind of got put back together during

0:21:17.800 --> 0:21:20.520
<v Speaker 1>COVID for Biden, but that might have been a bit

0:21:20.520 --> 0:21:25.160
<v Speaker 1>of a COVID effect than anything else. So I don't

0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:27.400
<v Speaker 1>think we fully appreciate that we're at the end. We're

0:21:27.400 --> 0:21:30.679
<v Speaker 1>at the end stages here of the Trump era. Is

0:21:30.720 --> 0:21:32.240
<v Speaker 1>it going to go out with a whimper? Is it

0:21:32.240 --> 0:21:34.320
<v Speaker 1>going to go out with a bang? Is it going

0:21:34.400 --> 0:21:37.639
<v Speaker 1>to be escorted out by the voters or sort of

0:21:37.640 --> 0:21:42.720
<v Speaker 1>fade away. I think that's the only unknown here, right,

0:21:43.000 --> 0:21:46.560
<v Speaker 1>and it being escorted out by the voters is a

0:21:46.640 --> 0:21:47.240
<v Speaker 1>wipeout in.

0:21:47.240 --> 0:21:48.760
<v Speaker 2>The twenty twenty six midterms.

0:21:49.000 --> 0:21:52.480
<v Speaker 1>Fading away is you know, losing the House, holding the

0:21:52.520 --> 0:21:58.280
<v Speaker 1>Senate and staying competitive in twenty in twenty twenty eight

0:21:58.359 --> 0:22:03.120
<v Speaker 1>and so you know, I think that I am sort

0:22:03.160 --> 0:22:06.280
<v Speaker 1>of think I believe we're underestimating the sort of the

0:22:06.320 --> 0:22:08.959
<v Speaker 1>intangible Trump fatigue here. And the fact is, when this

0:22:09.080 --> 0:22:12.000
<v Speaker 1>economy sucks and the economy member did not suck in

0:22:12.040 --> 0:22:15.639
<v Speaker 1>twenty eighteen, that's a big difference between twenty eighteen and now.

0:22:16.000 --> 0:22:18.760
<v Speaker 1>You had a people felt pretty good about that economy

0:22:18.760 --> 0:22:21.320
<v Speaker 1>in twenty eighteen, and Democrats still won the House though

0:22:21.320 --> 0:22:24.840
<v Speaker 1>they lost two sentences. You're now going to have a

0:22:24.880 --> 0:22:29.240
<v Speaker 1>similar enthusiastic democratic environment, but with an economy that a

0:22:29.240 --> 0:22:32.120
<v Speaker 1>lot of people don't like. And I always say that

0:22:32.200 --> 0:22:35.919
<v Speaker 1>because you know, the stock market looks good, but the

0:22:35.920 --> 0:22:39.240
<v Speaker 1>real world looks uncomfortable and bad, right, And I think

0:22:39.240 --> 0:22:43.280
<v Speaker 1>it's because the issue of costs is really starting to pinch.

0:22:43.960 --> 0:22:45.120
<v Speaker 2>And you know, now you've.

0:22:45.000 --> 0:22:47.480
<v Speaker 1>Got the high cost of electric bills and that's starting

0:22:47.480 --> 0:22:49.920
<v Speaker 1>to hit and that's being connected to these a ideals.

0:22:50.320 --> 0:22:53.359
<v Speaker 1>And I just think that Trump Trump now instead of

0:22:53.359 --> 0:22:58.080
<v Speaker 1>being teflon don, he's now wearing some beltcrow and whether

0:22:58.160 --> 0:23:01.520
<v Speaker 1>it's his weekly pardons that become less and less defensible,

0:23:01.560 --> 0:23:05.800
<v Speaker 1>particularly this one of the former Honduran presidential cocaine trafficker.

0:23:05.840 --> 0:23:07.400
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you know, on.

0:23:07.200 --> 0:23:09.960
<v Speaker 1>One breath, Donald Trump is going after Venezuela because of

0:23:10.000 --> 0:23:13.720
<v Speaker 1>cocaine distribution, and in the next breath he's pardoning somebody

0:23:14.920 --> 0:23:18.240
<v Speaker 1>who's responsible for my massive cocaine distribution into this country.

0:23:19.480 --> 0:23:21.919
<v Speaker 1>Is the only difference that Roger Stone got paid for

0:23:21.960 --> 0:23:24.120
<v Speaker 1>one and didn't get paid for the other. I mean

0:23:24.160 --> 0:23:27.200
<v Speaker 1>that that is an uncomfortable thing. And there's not many

0:23:27.240 --> 0:23:29.679
<v Speaker 1>elected Republicans that want to have to defend that pardon.

0:23:30.560 --> 0:23:33.359
<v Speaker 1>And Trump's doing this almost on a weekly basis. Where

0:23:33.359 --> 0:23:36.359
<v Speaker 1>there's some pardon that you're like, oh, BOYD, does that stink?

0:23:36.480 --> 0:23:39.800
<v Speaker 1>That's impossible to defend. In a normal political environment, there

0:23:39.840 --> 0:23:42.760
<v Speaker 1>might be borderline impeachable offense. We're obviously not going to

0:23:43.680 --> 0:23:45.760
<v Speaker 1>head in that territory. But the point is is that

0:23:46.440 --> 0:23:51.479
<v Speaker 1>not only are the macro is the macro environment pretty

0:23:51.520 --> 0:23:54.840
<v Speaker 1>bleak right now? If you're an elected Republican and the

0:23:54.880 --> 0:23:57.520
<v Speaker 1>headlines that you know are coming, there's sort of the

0:23:58.280 --> 0:24:01.600
<v Speaker 1>what Trump is doing to you? And you know Trump

0:24:01.680 --> 0:24:04.320
<v Speaker 1>is not thinking about the Republican Party at all. Trump

0:24:04.400 --> 0:24:08.400
<v Speaker 1>never has right. It is about himself and whether it's

0:24:08.600 --> 0:24:11.919
<v Speaker 1>these pardons, whether it's these personal business deals that he

0:24:11.960 --> 0:24:15.760
<v Speaker 1>cuts on behalf of his son, the weird business relationships

0:24:15.800 --> 0:24:20.080
<v Speaker 1>that is chief envoy in these negotiations Steve Woodcoff is

0:24:20.160 --> 0:24:23.359
<v Speaker 1>involved with, and the mixing of all this, none of

0:24:23.359 --> 0:24:27.240
<v Speaker 1>that's defensible. And when people don't, if people are unhappy

0:24:27.280 --> 0:24:30.480
<v Speaker 1>about the economy, that stuff will then really irritate them.

0:24:30.640 --> 0:24:33.199
<v Speaker 1>They overlooked it the first four years. They overlooked it

0:24:34.119 --> 0:24:37.359
<v Speaker 1>maybe during the Biden presidency, but if they don't like

0:24:37.840 --> 0:24:41.000
<v Speaker 1>their current situation, they're really not going to like you

0:24:41.160 --> 0:24:45.280
<v Speaker 1>benefiting Donald Trump while they're in this tough situation. So

0:24:46.800 --> 0:24:51.760
<v Speaker 1>that's why I'm a bit more bearish on Republican chances

0:24:51.800 --> 0:24:55.679
<v Speaker 1>of holding each chamber. And I think that the for

0:24:55.760 --> 0:24:59.480
<v Speaker 1>those that follow these political prediction markets, I think everybody

0:24:59.520 --> 0:25:04.679
<v Speaker 1>is under under rating Democratic chances of winning the Senate.

0:25:04.960 --> 0:25:08.480
<v Speaker 1>There have been you know, since there have only been

0:25:08.560 --> 0:25:12.240
<v Speaker 1>six times six midterm elections, the first was eighteen ninety four,

0:25:12.240 --> 0:25:15.080
<v Speaker 1>but six midterm elections where the party not in power

0:25:15.080 --> 0:25:17.280
<v Speaker 1>in the White House won both the House and the

0:25:17.320 --> 0:25:21.479
<v Speaker 1>Senate in a midterm, It's only actually happened six times.

0:25:22.040 --> 0:25:25.400
<v Speaker 1>The last time was two thousand and six. On election day,

0:25:25.560 --> 0:25:28.320
<v Speaker 1>Republicans held both the House and Senate. By the time

0:25:28.680 --> 0:25:31.200
<v Speaker 1>all the votes are counted, Democrats had flipped both the

0:25:31.200 --> 0:25:33.880
<v Speaker 1>House and the Senate. The Republicans did flip them both

0:25:33.920 --> 0:25:37.040
<v Speaker 1>in ninety four. Then it happened again in the fifties,

0:25:37.119 --> 0:25:42.760
<v Speaker 1>and it happened again in the forties. The first time

0:25:42.800 --> 0:25:46.880
<v Speaker 1>it happened was eighteen ninety four, and it was Grover

0:25:47.200 --> 0:25:52.200
<v Speaker 1>Cleveland's second presidential term. In the midterm of that election,

0:25:52.920 --> 0:25:55.280
<v Speaker 1>and he was dealing with the depression of eighteen ninety three.

0:25:55.840 --> 0:25:59.320
<v Speaker 1>Republicans sweep the midterms in eighteen ninety four, and that

0:25:59.480 --> 0:26:03.919
<v Speaker 1>second non consecutive term. Is that familiar to anybody? Are

0:26:03.960 --> 0:26:07.720
<v Speaker 1>we dealing with a president in his second non consecutive term.

0:26:07.880 --> 0:26:10.680
<v Speaker 1>The out party sweeps in eighteen ninety four, and it

0:26:10.760 --> 0:26:14.240
<v Speaker 1>foreshadows a big Republican sweep in eighteen ninety six, which

0:26:14.320 --> 0:26:17.400
<v Speaker 1>leads to sixteen straight years of Republicans holding the presidency

0:26:17.480 --> 0:26:23.560
<v Speaker 1>until Woodrow Wilson's victory in nineteen twelve, so that's the

0:26:23.600 --> 0:26:26.400
<v Speaker 1>first time it happened. Here's what was interesting that we've

0:26:26.440 --> 0:26:31.119
<v Speaker 1>had thirty three midterm elections since eighteen ninety four, and

0:26:31.160 --> 0:26:33.240
<v Speaker 1>in twenty one of the thirty three the out party

0:26:33.240 --> 0:26:36.159
<v Speaker 1>picked up Senate seats, and in eighteen of those twenty

0:26:36.160 --> 0:26:40.800
<v Speaker 1>one instances the pickup was four or more Senate seats. Well,

0:26:40.840 --> 0:26:43.720
<v Speaker 1>Democrats only need four Senate seats to win control of

0:26:43.760 --> 0:26:45.760
<v Speaker 1>the Senate. I know the map's not great for them

0:26:46.520 --> 0:26:48.760
<v Speaker 1>when you're you know, and this is sometimes I question

0:26:48.800 --> 0:26:51.240
<v Speaker 1>whether Democrats are truly a national party because they don't.

0:26:51.480 --> 0:26:54.000
<v Speaker 1>They barely contest elections in a third of the states,

0:26:55.119 --> 0:26:58.160
<v Speaker 1>and I think that's why they may have a hard

0:26:58.200 --> 0:27:01.359
<v Speaker 1>time putting enough Senate seats in play with this particular

0:27:01.359 --> 0:27:04.720
<v Speaker 1>map that they have to run on. But if history

0:27:04.800 --> 0:27:07.360
<v Speaker 1>is any guide, the likelihood of them winning at least

0:27:07.359 --> 0:27:11.680
<v Speaker 1>four Senate seats is actually quite high. And so that's

0:27:11.720 --> 0:27:14.480
<v Speaker 1>why I think the bar I think people are underestimating

0:27:14.520 --> 0:27:17.080
<v Speaker 1>democratic chances here. Look, they still have a lot of

0:27:17.119 --> 0:27:19.840
<v Speaker 1>recruiting to do and finding a cannon in Kansas, finding

0:27:19.840 --> 0:27:23.080
<v Speaker 1>a ralling around a canad in Mississippi seeing if they

0:27:23.080 --> 0:27:29.280
<v Speaker 1>can target places like Kentucky or Alaska or Iowa. But

0:27:29.359 --> 0:27:31.560
<v Speaker 1>they've got to put a lot more races in play.

0:27:31.600 --> 0:27:34.120
<v Speaker 1>But history says they actually have a pretty good shot

0:27:34.119 --> 0:27:36.520
<v Speaker 1>at doing it, which leads me to the rest of

0:27:36.520 --> 0:27:38.400
<v Speaker 1>the rundown of this episode. I'm going to wrap things

0:27:38.480 --> 0:27:40.880
<v Speaker 1>up here in a second. Got a top five list

0:27:40.920 --> 0:27:44.040
<v Speaker 1>that actually goes well with what we're talking about tonight,

0:27:44.080 --> 0:27:47.560
<v Speaker 1>which is top five center races that Democrats if they

0:27:47.600 --> 0:27:51.120
<v Speaker 1>actually can put the Senate in play in twenty twenty six,

0:27:51.840 --> 0:27:55.399
<v Speaker 1>then of my top five list, one of them, at

0:27:55.480 --> 0:27:58.359
<v Speaker 1>least one of them has to be a single digit

0:27:58.440 --> 0:28:01.399
<v Speaker 1>race and very competitive by October if that's going to

0:28:01.400 --> 0:28:02.200
<v Speaker 1>become realistic.

0:28:02.480 --> 0:28:03.040
<v Speaker 2>I'll let you.

0:28:04.640 --> 0:28:06.880
<v Speaker 1>Get to the list before I tease which states are

0:28:07.560 --> 0:28:09.040
<v Speaker 1>in that. Of course, I have some Q and A,

0:28:09.160 --> 0:28:11.960
<v Speaker 1>so with that, Yes, I have a lot to say

0:28:12.000 --> 0:28:15.720
<v Speaker 1>about the College Football ESPN Invitational and all that nonsense,

0:28:16.080 --> 0:28:18.080
<v Speaker 1>but I'm going to save that for twenty four hours.

0:28:18.520 --> 0:28:21.320
<v Speaker 1>Get my thoughts together. I've poured my heart out about

0:28:21.320 --> 0:28:26.680
<v Speaker 1>all things Tennessee seven. I'd rather let that settle, let

0:28:26.720 --> 0:28:30.320
<v Speaker 1>that simmer, and I'll see in twenty four hours with

0:28:30.400 --> 0:28:33.240
<v Speaker 1>the hottest of hot takes, not just on the world

0:28:33.280 --> 0:28:37.679
<v Speaker 1>of politics, but on the ESPN Invitational and the.

0:28:39.840 --> 0:28:43.800
<v Speaker 2>Leadership or lack thereof, inside the ACC So go Caines.

0:28:44.120 --> 0:28:46.240
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for listening. Let's sneak in a break.

0:28:48.480 --> 0:28:50.640
<v Speaker 1>This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you

0:28:50.640 --> 0:28:54.960
<v Speaker 1>by Waldgrain. Waldgrain is the first Bake from Frozen subscription

0:28:55.120 --> 0:29:00.360
<v Speaker 1>box for arteasaal breads, seasonal pastries and fresh pastas, plus

0:29:00.400 --> 0:29:04.040
<v Speaker 1>all items conveniently bake in twenty five minutes or less.

0:29:04.200 --> 0:29:07.640
<v Speaker 1>Unlike many store bought options, Wild Grain uses simple ingredients

0:29:07.680 --> 0:29:11.719
<v Speaker 1>you can pronounce and a slow fermentation process that can

0:29:11.760 --> 0:29:15.520
<v Speaker 1>be easier on your belly and richer in nutrients and antioxidants.

0:29:15.560 --> 0:29:19.720
<v Speaker 1>Wild Grains boxes are fully customizable. They're constantly adding seasonal

0:29:19.760 --> 0:29:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and limited tibing products for you to enjoy. In addition

0:29:22.680 --> 0:29:25.120
<v Speaker 1>to their classic box, they now feature a gluten free

0:29:25.120 --> 0:29:26.920
<v Speaker 1>box and a plant based box.

0:29:27.200 --> 0:29:28.280
<v Speaker 2>I checked out the.

0:29:28.200 --> 0:29:30.400
<v Speaker 1>Gluten free box and let me tell you they have

0:29:30.440 --> 0:29:32.800
<v Speaker 1>a gluten free sour dough bread.

0:29:33.400 --> 0:29:33.800
<v Speaker 2>It is.

0:29:34.080 --> 0:29:36.080
<v Speaker 1>We got two loads of it and we've done one

0:29:36.120 --> 0:29:39.880
<v Speaker 1>loaf already. It's a cranberry and almond sour dough bread.

0:29:39.960 --> 0:29:42.600
<v Speaker 1>It's like the best raisin bread you've ever had, except

0:29:42.680 --> 0:29:43.560
<v Speaker 1>it's not raisin.

0:29:43.800 --> 0:29:45.840
<v Speaker 2>It's great. You're gonna love this.

0:29:46.840 --> 0:29:48.640
<v Speaker 1>You know it's in or miss if you mess around

0:29:48.680 --> 0:29:49.840
<v Speaker 1>in the gluten free bread world.

0:29:50.080 --> 0:29:50.800
<v Speaker 2>This is a hit.

0:29:51.280 --> 0:29:54.480
<v Speaker 1>Seriously, I was impressed. So look for a limited time,

0:29:54.600 --> 0:29:57.280
<v Speaker 1>Wild Grain is offering our listeners thirty dollars off your

0:29:57.280 --> 0:30:00.240
<v Speaker 1>first box plus free croissants in every box when you

0:30:00.280 --> 0:30:04.440
<v Speaker 1>go to wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription,

0:30:04.720 --> 0:30:07.960
<v Speaker 1>follow these instructions. Free croissants in every box, thirty dollars

0:30:08.000 --> 0:30:10.160
<v Speaker 1>off your first box when you go to wildgrain dot

0:30:10.200 --> 0:30:13.960
<v Speaker 1>com slash podcast. That's wild grain dot com slash podcast.

0:30:14.200 --> 0:30:18.600
<v Speaker 1>Or simply use the promo code podcast at checkout. Always

0:30:18.840 --> 0:30:20.240
<v Speaker 1>use the code, get the discount.

0:30:20.240 --> 0:30:23.120
<v Speaker 2>I'm telling you it's excellent, excellent bread.

0:30:27.440 --> 0:30:29.800
<v Speaker 1>So with that, I want to transition a bit. Look,

0:30:31.280 --> 0:30:33.960
<v Speaker 1>given what happened in Tennessee, I thought it would be

0:30:34.040 --> 0:30:38.120
<v Speaker 1>worth focusing my top five list before I get to

0:30:38.320 --> 0:30:42.080
<v Speaker 1>the ass check segment. I thought it would be worth

0:30:42.120 --> 0:30:44.960
<v Speaker 1>focusing the top five list this week on five Senate

0:30:45.040 --> 0:30:47.600
<v Speaker 1>races that are not competitive at the moment. They're Republican

0:30:47.600 --> 0:30:51.080
<v Speaker 1>health seats. But what I would call is blue WaveWatch

0:30:51.600 --> 0:31:00.840
<v Speaker 1>Senate seats top five, top top The five I'm going

0:31:00.920 --> 0:31:05.520
<v Speaker 1>to give you are or my five nominees for what

0:31:05.640 --> 0:31:09.240
<v Speaker 1>happens in an actual wave, is that a Senate race

0:31:09.280 --> 0:31:12.560
<v Speaker 1>that was not on the map a year out ends

0:31:12.640 --> 0:31:17.840
<v Speaker 1>up flipping. In two thousand and six, there were sort

0:31:17.880 --> 0:31:20.760
<v Speaker 1>of three candidates. There were arguably four candidates for that.

0:31:22.200 --> 0:31:27.360
<v Speaker 1>Three candidates really for that, For that idea, you had

0:31:28.160 --> 0:31:31.160
<v Speaker 1>Virginia Senate at the time, a Democrat had n't want to,

0:31:31.840 --> 0:31:34.120
<v Speaker 1>you know, had Chuck rob But it was the sense

0:31:34.160 --> 0:31:37.360
<v Speaker 1>that Virginia was still a Republican state. George Bush carried

0:31:37.560 --> 0:31:39.800
<v Speaker 1>Virginia in two thousand and four. Democrat had and carried

0:31:40.120 --> 0:31:42.720
<v Speaker 1>carried in a presidential race since Carter in seventy six.

0:31:43.240 --> 0:31:45.400
<v Speaker 1>So the perception of Virginia was that it was a

0:31:45.440 --> 0:31:48.160
<v Speaker 1>tough place. So and Jim Webb was an unusual candidate.

0:31:48.920 --> 0:31:53.200
<v Speaker 1>George Allen was a prospective presidential candidate. It was a

0:31:53.280 --> 0:31:55.840
<v Speaker 1>race that developed late and popped on the radar late,

0:31:55.920 --> 0:31:57.520
<v Speaker 1>and then it was a flip. And then it turned

0:31:57.520 --> 0:31:58.960
<v Speaker 1>out to be a canary in the coal mine. It

0:31:58.960 --> 0:32:02.520
<v Speaker 1>turned out to foreshadow it was a growing shift of

0:32:02.600 --> 0:32:07.320
<v Speaker 1>Virginia from light red to now light blue. But each

0:32:07.320 --> 0:32:10.880
<v Speaker 1>one of those cycles, there's always a seat or two

0:32:11.920 --> 0:32:14.160
<v Speaker 1>that you're like, well, how did that happen? Sometimes it's

0:32:14.160 --> 0:32:16.440
<v Speaker 1>a special election win in the Senate side. Scott Brown's

0:32:16.520 --> 0:32:18.520
<v Speaker 1>victory in Massachusetts, it was it a seat that could

0:32:18.640 --> 0:32:20.520
<v Speaker 1>hold on his own in twenty twelve. Nope, that's what

0:32:20.560 --> 0:32:25.600
<v Speaker 1>gave us Elizabeth Warren. But in that unique environment, in

0:32:25.680 --> 0:32:29.440
<v Speaker 1>that moment in time, that's how much the ground had

0:32:29.480 --> 0:32:33.160
<v Speaker 1>shifted underneath Democrats when it came to the issue of

0:32:33.200 --> 0:32:35.520
<v Speaker 1>health care, and it certainly foreshadowed what was not a

0:32:35.600 --> 0:32:39.400
<v Speaker 1>very good mid term. So, with that caveats out of

0:32:39.400 --> 0:32:42.120
<v Speaker 1>the side, here are my nominees of the five you know,

0:32:42.160 --> 0:32:44.040
<v Speaker 1>and like I believe, I think all five of these

0:32:44.360 --> 0:32:49.480
<v Speaker 1>Senate seats have a chance to become shockingly competitive, and

0:32:49.520 --> 0:32:53.360
<v Speaker 1>I'll explain the unique circumstance for each of them, but

0:32:53.440 --> 0:32:55.680
<v Speaker 1>they are ones that have been written off right, And

0:32:55.720 --> 0:32:58.320
<v Speaker 1>I'm not even talking about Alaska. Texas don't make this

0:32:58.400 --> 0:33:01.600
<v Speaker 1>list because or or even Nebraska, because they're already seen

0:33:01.640 --> 0:33:05.280
<v Speaker 1>as quasi competitive at the moment. Right Alaska, especially if

0:33:05.320 --> 0:33:08.200
<v Speaker 1>Democrats get Mary Patello, Texas looks like it's going to

0:33:08.200 --> 0:33:10.400
<v Speaker 1>be competitive, no matter what part of it is demographics.

0:33:10.400 --> 0:33:12.400
<v Speaker 1>Part of it is Explain to me how John Corny

0:33:12.440 --> 0:33:15.200
<v Speaker 1>gets out of that gets fifty percent plus one after

0:33:15.200 --> 0:33:17.880
<v Speaker 1>a runoff. Really hard to see that, and without him

0:33:17.880 --> 0:33:21.640
<v Speaker 1>as the nominee, suddenly that becomes a winnable race. Although

0:33:21.840 --> 0:33:24.600
<v Speaker 1>the Democratic primary is a mess there. It's a topic

0:33:24.920 --> 0:33:30.520
<v Speaker 1>for another day. But these don't count those races to me.

0:33:31.320 --> 0:33:33.880
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's the job of the Democratic Party to

0:33:34.040 --> 0:33:36.840
<v Speaker 1>put those races in play because they're competitive enough sort

0:33:36.880 --> 0:33:37.640
<v Speaker 1>of on paper.

0:33:38.040 --> 0:33:38.640
<v Speaker 2>Then then it.

0:33:38.520 --> 0:33:41.680
<v Speaker 1>Becomes, hey, you should be able to find candidates, you

0:33:41.720 --> 0:33:44.280
<v Speaker 1>should be able to target those races. The five states

0:33:44.320 --> 0:33:47.440
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to be emphasizing here are not obvious. A

0:33:47.480 --> 0:33:49.520
<v Speaker 1>couple of them would have been ten years ago, but

0:33:49.520 --> 0:33:53.000
<v Speaker 1>they're not obvious at all. And what I would theorize

0:33:53.040 --> 0:33:55.280
<v Speaker 1>for you is that if Democrats, you know, if I

0:33:55.280 --> 0:33:57.680
<v Speaker 1>go into a coma and I wake up the day

0:33:57.680 --> 0:33:59.720
<v Speaker 1>after the mid terms and you tell me Democrats flip

0:33:59.760 --> 0:34:03.600
<v Speaker 1>the send, I'm going to guess one of these five

0:34:03.720 --> 0:34:08.319
<v Speaker 1>races was either actually flipped or was one of the

0:34:08.360 --> 0:34:12.400
<v Speaker 1>final was one of the six or seven Senate races

0:34:12.400 --> 0:34:14.640
<v Speaker 1>in the country that was decided by five points or less.

0:34:15.280 --> 0:34:18.839
<v Speaker 1>So here are my candidates for that, and I'll put

0:34:18.840 --> 0:34:22.480
<v Speaker 1>in an order of least likely to end up on

0:34:22.560 --> 0:34:25.480
<v Speaker 1>that last minute competitive slate to most likely. So I'm

0:34:25.480 --> 0:34:28.239
<v Speaker 1>going to start with my home state of Florida. I

0:34:29.360 --> 0:34:31.880
<v Speaker 1>think there's still a competitive nature to the state of Florida.

0:34:32.120 --> 0:34:36.200
<v Speaker 1>I think there's definitely some sort of Republican fatigue in general.

0:34:36.560 --> 0:34:37.040
<v Speaker 2>I think the.

0:34:37.040 --> 0:34:39.839
<v Speaker 1>Governor's race still has a shot at getting competitive. There's

0:34:40.000 --> 0:34:42.839
<v Speaker 1>a couple of quality candidates on the Democratic side. We're

0:34:42.840 --> 0:34:45.480
<v Speaker 1>not seeing the same level of energy or interest on

0:34:45.520 --> 0:34:48.960
<v Speaker 1>the Democratic side on the Senate race as much. Ashley Moody,

0:34:49.040 --> 0:34:51.560
<v Speaker 1>of course, is running to fill out the rest of

0:34:51.680 --> 0:34:55.000
<v Speaker 1>Marco Rubio's term after he left to become Secretary of State,

0:34:55.080 --> 0:34:58.600
<v Speaker 1>National Security Advisor, Head of the Archives, etc. All the

0:34:58.640 --> 0:35:00.680
<v Speaker 1>different jobs that he still holds. So he does hold

0:35:00.719 --> 0:35:05.319
<v Speaker 1>all three of those that I just mentioned. And you know,

0:35:05.360 --> 0:35:08.240
<v Speaker 1>it just it's a very expensive state. So the work

0:35:08.480 --> 0:35:11.879
<v Speaker 1>and the Democratic Party nationally has done a terrible job

0:35:11.920 --> 0:35:14.040
<v Speaker 1>at incubating the state of Florida. They don't help the

0:35:14.080 --> 0:35:16.520
<v Speaker 1>state party. The state party doesn't help itself very well.

0:35:16.760 --> 0:35:19.120
<v Speaker 1>You know, there's a variety of reasons why Florida sort

0:35:19.160 --> 0:35:22.719
<v Speaker 1>of under punches. It's voters, right, This is a state

0:35:22.800 --> 0:35:25.439
<v Speaker 1>that you know is still probably a fifty three forty

0:35:25.440 --> 0:35:29.840
<v Speaker 1>seven state if both parties were equally funded. You know,

0:35:29.880 --> 0:35:32.640
<v Speaker 1>it's a leaner. I think I still think Florida's light red,

0:35:32.719 --> 0:35:38.000
<v Speaker 1>not dark red yet, but you know, the incompetence of

0:35:38.000 --> 0:35:42.080
<v Speaker 1>the state Democratic Party makes it seem like it's dark red.

0:35:42.200 --> 0:35:44.040
<v Speaker 1>So that's why I put it in the fifth slot here,

0:35:44.080 --> 0:35:47.239
<v Speaker 1>because I do think the political environment could shift in

0:35:47.280 --> 0:35:50.440
<v Speaker 1>such a way where we could see and Ashley Moody

0:35:50.520 --> 0:35:53.840
<v Speaker 1>is not a household name and it is an appointed senator.

0:35:54.400 --> 0:35:57.120
<v Speaker 1>If you told me in October fifteenth, twenty twenty six,

0:35:57.400 --> 0:35:59.800
<v Speaker 1>you had a poll showing that race forty five forty

0:36:00.400 --> 0:36:05.920
<v Speaker 1>with the Democratic nominee in Moody in a political environment

0:36:05.920 --> 0:36:08.360
<v Speaker 1>that looks like a growing blue wave, which at the

0:36:08.480 --> 0:36:11.120
<v Speaker 1>moment to me, it looks like that. That's what's happening.

0:36:12.200 --> 0:36:15.600
<v Speaker 1>Florida gets more competitive. It's just inevitable that you would

0:36:15.600 --> 0:36:18.160
<v Speaker 1>see that. So Florida's fifth on my list. But I'm

0:36:18.200 --> 0:36:20.200
<v Speaker 1>not yet impressed with the Canaid. I almost think it's

0:36:20.239 --> 0:36:23.160
<v Speaker 1>too expensive to put in this category. To actually take

0:36:23.200 --> 0:36:26.239
<v Speaker 1>it from from could we make it competitive to look,

0:36:26.280 --> 0:36:30.680
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of competitive to actually competitive. Fourth on the

0:36:30.719 --> 0:36:33.160
<v Speaker 1>list of Kentucky, it's an open seat. This is the

0:36:33.200 --> 0:36:37.800
<v Speaker 1>Mitch mcconnal'syat. There's actually we've interviewed one of the Kentucky candidates,

0:36:39.000 --> 0:36:40.440
<v Speaker 1>Amy McGrath is running again.

0:36:42.440 --> 0:36:44.480
<v Speaker 2>There is you know, the.

0:36:44.280 --> 0:36:47.520
<v Speaker 1>Republican Party in Kentucky is pretty divided, right because it's

0:36:47.719 --> 0:36:52.160
<v Speaker 1>there's some pretty strong anti Trump Republicans in the state

0:36:52.200 --> 0:36:56.680
<v Speaker 1>of Kentucky. The retiring Senator Mitch McConnell ran Paul Thomas Massey.

0:36:57.840 --> 0:37:02.440
<v Speaker 1>The potential for the Republican primer to turn into a

0:37:02.480 --> 0:37:06.759
<v Speaker 1>bloody mess, it's already kind of that way, right. Look,

0:37:06.800 --> 0:37:09.319
<v Speaker 1>I think Andy Barr if he's the nominee, it's very

0:37:09.320 --> 0:37:11.359
<v Speaker 1>difficult to be. But I also think Daniel Cameron would

0:37:11.360 --> 0:37:15.680
<v Speaker 1>be a pretty you know, a strong potential Senate nominee

0:37:15.680 --> 0:37:19.520
<v Speaker 1>as well. But what if one of them aren't the

0:37:19.560 --> 0:37:23.080
<v Speaker 1>nominee and it is, like I said, it is nasty.

0:37:23.480 --> 0:37:26.600
<v Speaker 1>The primary campaign is heated up. There is a sense

0:37:26.600 --> 0:37:29.800
<v Speaker 1>on the Republican side that it doesn't matter what happens,

0:37:30.120 --> 0:37:32.120
<v Speaker 1>it can be as bloody as you want. Sometimes that

0:37:32.239 --> 0:37:40.480
<v Speaker 1>mindset might leave a potential nominee weaker than they should be.

0:37:41.239 --> 0:37:44.000
<v Speaker 1>We saw that with Jade Vance out of his Ohio primary,

0:37:45.000 --> 0:37:47.600
<v Speaker 1>which was a bloody mess and ended up creating a

0:37:47.680 --> 0:37:51.040
<v Speaker 1>much more competitive general than was necessary. All the ingredients

0:37:51.080 --> 0:37:57.319
<v Speaker 1>are there in Kentucky for that. So it's I tell you,

0:37:58.680 --> 0:38:00.640
<v Speaker 1>this is one of those things that if there were

0:38:00.680 --> 0:38:04.440
<v Speaker 1>a more if the Democratic Party had a slightly better

0:38:04.480 --> 0:38:08.360
<v Speaker 1>brand and slightly better leadership, Andy Basheer would be the

0:38:08.400 --> 0:38:11.359
<v Speaker 1>Senate nominee in that campaign and we'd be talking about

0:38:11.400 --> 0:38:12.440
<v Speaker 1>Kentucky Senate.

0:38:12.200 --> 0:38:13.000
<v Speaker 2>A lot differently.

0:38:13.440 --> 0:38:15.400
<v Speaker 1>But the fact that that's not even on the table,

0:38:15.640 --> 0:38:18.120
<v Speaker 1>and there wasn't and there wasn't anybody with the heft

0:38:18.840 --> 0:38:21.440
<v Speaker 1>to go to Andy Basheer and sort of beg him

0:38:21.480 --> 0:38:23.600
<v Speaker 1>and twist his arm in a way that could talk

0:38:23.640 --> 0:38:25.400
<v Speaker 1>him into it. I think it just shows you how

0:38:25.400 --> 0:38:27.320
<v Speaker 1>weak the party is. And I think Andy Basheer certainly

0:38:27.360 --> 0:38:30.560
<v Speaker 1>has his eye. I think he thinks his skills translate

0:38:30.640 --> 0:38:34.400
<v Speaker 1>better to a potential presidential campaign. But again, all the

0:38:34.520 --> 0:38:39.920
<v Speaker 1>ingredients of there in Kentucky for something late to surge.

0:38:40.600 --> 0:38:44.000
<v Speaker 1>If the Republican primaries as messy it is, again, I'm

0:38:44.080 --> 0:38:47.880
<v Speaker 1>assuming only if this environment continues to be as poor

0:38:48.040 --> 0:38:49.960
<v Speaker 1>as it appears to be for the party that's currently

0:38:50.000 --> 0:38:52.080
<v Speaker 1>in power. Number three on this list for me is

0:38:52.120 --> 0:38:54.960
<v Speaker 1>Lindsay Graham in South Carolina. I know we've been here

0:38:55.000 --> 0:38:59.680
<v Speaker 1>before them with the with Jamie Harrison and all that

0:38:59.719 --> 0:39:02.520
<v Speaker 1>waste money, just like with Amy McGrath and that wasted money.

0:39:02.520 --> 0:39:06.000
<v Speaker 1>But I would argue that six years ago the political

0:39:06.080 --> 0:39:08.359
<v Speaker 1>environment wasn't as weak for Republicans. It was a very

0:39:08.360 --> 0:39:12.239
<v Speaker 1>competitive environment. What does that Senate race look like in

0:39:12.400 --> 0:39:16.800
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty six without Trump on the ballot? Is Lindsay

0:39:16.880 --> 0:39:19.880
<v Speaker 1>Graham wearing out as welcome? Does the mess that is

0:39:20.440 --> 0:39:24.800
<v Speaker 1>the South Carolina Governor's race sort of put an entire

0:39:26.200 --> 0:39:32.880
<v Speaker 1>pall over the South Carolina Republican brand? Look, South Carolina

0:39:32.920 --> 0:39:35.279
<v Speaker 1>Democratic Party is very similar to the Florida Democratic Party.

0:39:35.320 --> 0:39:40.080
<v Speaker 1>They really underperformed their potential. You know, there is a

0:39:40.520 --> 0:39:43.680
<v Speaker 1>stronger floor in South Carolina.

0:39:43.719 --> 0:39:45.319
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you know, I'm sorry.

0:39:45.360 --> 0:39:48.200
<v Speaker 1>South Carolina is surrounded by competitive states Georgia to the south,

0:39:48.239 --> 0:39:51.520
<v Speaker 1>North Carolina to the north. They just had they've had

0:39:51.520 --> 0:39:55.600
<v Speaker 1>bad leadership in the state party week voter registration campaigns.

0:39:56.520 --> 0:39:58.920
<v Speaker 1>It is South Carolina and Mississippi are the two. And

0:39:58.960 --> 0:40:02.680
<v Speaker 1>I've just previewed the next Senate race on my list.

0:40:03.239 --> 0:40:06.120
<v Speaker 1>But these are two places where if the Democratic Party

0:40:06.239 --> 0:40:10.759
<v Speaker 1>invested serious resources and voter registration campaigns and sort of

0:40:10.800 --> 0:40:14.200
<v Speaker 1>had a better message for rural blacks in South Carolina

0:40:14.280 --> 0:40:17.520
<v Speaker 1>and Mississippi in general. But it's a problem they have

0:40:17.600 --> 0:40:21.759
<v Speaker 1>across the black belt in the South. Is Democrats underperform

0:40:22.680 --> 0:40:25.560
<v Speaker 1>among in all rural communities, not just rural white communities

0:40:25.680 --> 0:40:28.600
<v Speaker 1>and but a rural Latino communities and rural black communities.

0:40:29.719 --> 0:40:31.480
<v Speaker 1>It has been a it is it has been a

0:40:31.560 --> 0:40:34.600
<v Speaker 1>nagging problem for them, and they've done very little to

0:40:34.600 --> 0:40:37.040
<v Speaker 1>fix it, very little investment. And this gets it to,

0:40:37.520 --> 0:40:39.960
<v Speaker 1>you know, is the you know, does the party see

0:40:39.960 --> 0:40:42.799
<v Speaker 1>the opportunity that's staring them in the face or have

0:40:42.920 --> 0:40:46.200
<v Speaker 1>they Is it being run by a frankly, a bunch

0:40:46.200 --> 0:40:49.160
<v Speaker 1>of people who live on the coasts and and just

0:40:49.239 --> 0:40:51.560
<v Speaker 1>have written off and assume all rural America is white

0:40:52.000 --> 0:40:55.240
<v Speaker 1>when in the South, not all rural America is white.

0:40:55.440 --> 0:40:59.000
<v Speaker 1>And I think that's been a huge missed opportunity, uh

0:40:59.160 --> 0:41:03.000
<v Speaker 1>in states like North Carolina, South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia

0:41:04.000 --> 0:41:06.239
<v Speaker 1>in general, I mean, the only reason they throw money

0:41:06.239 --> 0:41:08.360
<v Speaker 1>at Georgia is do the Atlanta growth of the Atlanta suburbs.

0:41:08.360 --> 0:41:08.640
<v Speaker 2>They're not.

0:41:09.040 --> 0:41:10.840
<v Speaker 1>They're not doing as good of a job in the

0:41:10.920 --> 0:41:15.160
<v Speaker 1>rural black communities as they could be. So anyway, I again,

0:41:15.239 --> 0:41:18.799
<v Speaker 1>South Carolina's another one of those there's a mess. You know,

0:41:18.920 --> 0:41:20.799
<v Speaker 1>yes it's in the governor's race, but that it's just

0:41:20.880 --> 0:41:27.960
<v Speaker 1>creating a bad juju if you will. And you know,

0:41:28.040 --> 0:41:31.520
<v Speaker 1>Lindsay's his own worst enemy at times, and his mouth

0:41:31.719 --> 0:41:36.719
<v Speaker 1>can certainly inspire donors to give money to candidates in

0:41:36.800 --> 0:41:39.560
<v Speaker 1>ways that that that he may and he may have

0:41:39.600 --> 0:41:42.359
<v Speaker 1>tied himself too much to Trump in ways that are

0:41:42.400 --> 0:41:45.480
<v Speaker 1>not you know, you know, Lindsay's problem is is I

0:41:45.520 --> 0:41:48.120
<v Speaker 1>think that there are there is this center right voter

0:41:48.200 --> 0:41:50.879
<v Speaker 1>in South Carolina that assume Lindsay was one of them.

0:41:51.400 --> 0:41:53.399
<v Speaker 1>And I think they still think Lindsay is one of them.

0:41:54.120 --> 0:41:57.920
<v Speaker 1>But he's so desperate to stay in Trump's good graces

0:41:57.960 --> 0:42:01.000
<v Speaker 1>that he he sort of does some retort gymnastics that's

0:42:01.040 --> 0:42:05.440
<v Speaker 1>embarrassing to some voters. They just have not had the

0:42:05.520 --> 0:42:08.279
<v Speaker 1>right Democrat to to to sort of expose that side

0:42:08.320 --> 0:42:11.920
<v Speaker 1>of Lindsay. But you look this is a guy Lindsay

0:42:12.000 --> 0:42:15.440
<v Speaker 1>reminds me of Chuck Schumer in this respect. These are

0:42:15.480 --> 0:42:23.000
<v Speaker 1>two two politicians who've had a really impressive career who

0:42:23.040 --> 0:42:26.680
<v Speaker 1>are probably here a term too long. Had they left

0:42:26.719 --> 0:42:30.400
<v Speaker 1>a term sooner they'd be they'd have they'd have been lying.

0:42:30.440 --> 0:42:33.440
<v Speaker 1>They literally would have been treated as lions of the Senate,

0:42:34.000 --> 0:42:35.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, if they had left on their own terms.

0:42:35.680 --> 0:42:37.200
<v Speaker 1>And yes, you could say they're going to be leaving

0:42:37.200 --> 0:42:39.880
<v Speaker 1>on their own terms. But in some ways, you know,

0:42:39.960 --> 0:42:43.080
<v Speaker 1>it's it's they're they're they they're kind of here past

0:42:43.160 --> 0:42:45.880
<v Speaker 1>their cell by date, and the longer they're here, I

0:42:45.920 --> 0:42:49.440
<v Speaker 1>think the smaller they've become in some ways, And and

0:42:49.480 --> 0:42:53.799
<v Speaker 1>I think that's the danger here for Lindsay. Uh, on

0:42:53.840 --> 0:42:55.799
<v Speaker 1>this one. And that's why again I put it in here.

0:42:55.800 --> 0:42:59.440
<v Speaker 1>I think that it's it's another political environment, right, you know,

0:42:59.480 --> 0:43:03.000
<v Speaker 1>you me how South Carolina working class voters are going

0:43:03.080 --> 0:43:09.120
<v Speaker 1>to benefit from high tariffs and things like that. So, uh,

0:43:09.200 --> 0:43:13.200
<v Speaker 1>it's it's a it's it's again. I'm not saying it's

0:43:13.200 --> 0:43:15.960
<v Speaker 1>going to happen, but it's if if it does happen.

0:43:16.480 --> 0:43:18.160
<v Speaker 1>It's one of the five races I would put in there.

0:43:18.239 --> 0:43:20.960
<v Speaker 1>Number two on my list is Mississippi, as I previewed,

0:43:21.120 --> 0:43:26.520
<v Speaker 1>almost the identical situation uh as South Carolina. But you

0:43:26.560 --> 0:43:29.800
<v Speaker 1>also have an incumbent who's just not hasn't left a

0:43:29.840 --> 0:43:34.759
<v Speaker 1>heavy footprint yet in the state, Cindy Hyde Smith. You know,

0:43:35.120 --> 0:43:38.759
<v Speaker 1>Roger Wicker is definitely more of the senior senator and

0:43:38.800 --> 0:43:42.120
<v Speaker 1>he's on the higher profile committees. He's sort of involved

0:43:42.160 --> 0:43:45.640
<v Speaker 1>in the higher profile issues. I don't think Cindy Hyde

0:43:45.640 --> 0:43:49.279
<v Speaker 1>Smith has the same hold over over her voters or

0:43:49.280 --> 0:43:54.560
<v Speaker 1>her seat that are previous senators from Mississippi have have

0:43:54.640 --> 0:43:58.359
<v Speaker 1>had on their Senate seats. So look, she's you know

0:43:58.719 --> 0:44:01.800
<v Speaker 1>it is. This is actually her campaign for a second

0:44:01.800 --> 0:44:05.120
<v Speaker 1>full term. She got she got appointed there two years

0:44:05.160 --> 0:44:09.720
<v Speaker 1>and then second full term. So look that the Democrats

0:44:09.760 --> 0:44:15.239
<v Speaker 1>have an interesting candidate here in somebody that was put

0:44:15.320 --> 0:44:17.160
<v Speaker 1>up for a judicial nomination rejected.

0:44:20.239 --> 0:44:20.479
<v Speaker 2>Again.

0:44:20.520 --> 0:44:23.640
<v Speaker 1>Mississippi a state we've seen it in the governor's races.

0:44:24.719 --> 0:44:27.359
<v Speaker 1>It can be a competitive state. Takes a little bit

0:44:27.360 --> 0:44:30.920
<v Speaker 1>of work, but this is one of those where come October,

0:44:31.680 --> 0:44:34.680
<v Speaker 1>I fully expect a poll show in forty five forty

0:44:34.960 --> 0:44:38.160
<v Speaker 1>Sydney hind Smith and where there's a striking distance, where

0:44:38.200 --> 0:44:41.040
<v Speaker 1>there is a debate about whether how all in should

0:44:41.040 --> 0:44:44.319
<v Speaker 1>Democrats go on Mississippi Senate. And then number one on

0:44:44.360 --> 0:44:47.240
<v Speaker 1>my list of the of the five is actually Montana.

0:44:48.400 --> 0:44:53.319
<v Speaker 1>You know, Montana is an R plus ten state. It

0:44:53.440 --> 0:44:55.680
<v Speaker 1>is you know, in some ways not having a high

0:44:55.680 --> 0:44:58.600
<v Speaker 1>profile challenger this time like Steve Danes had the last time.

0:44:59.040 --> 0:45:01.000
<v Speaker 2>But the thing is, might might.

0:45:00.840 --> 0:45:04.120
<v Speaker 1>Be more beneficial right when when John Tester ran the

0:45:04.160 --> 0:45:06.000
<v Speaker 1>first time, he was kind of the outsider. When Brian

0:45:06.040 --> 0:45:10.799
<v Speaker 1>Schweitzer ran the first time, the outsider, Steve Bullock, you know,

0:45:10.960 --> 0:45:14.960
<v Speaker 1>was seen as as an outsider. So I think Dane's

0:45:15.000 --> 0:45:18.200
<v Speaker 1>a pretty savvy politician. So I don't think he's going

0:45:18.200 --> 0:45:20.560
<v Speaker 1>to get caught napping maybe the way some of these

0:45:20.560 --> 0:45:24.360
<v Speaker 1>other incumbents could get caught napping. But Montana's also not

0:45:24.400 --> 0:45:27.279
<v Speaker 1>a hard right state, and they're going to be pretty sensitive,

0:45:27.840 --> 0:45:32.520
<v Speaker 1>especially if corruption starts to pop. Montana voters are a

0:45:32.520 --> 0:45:37.000
<v Speaker 1>bit more sensitive to corruption issues I think in general,

0:45:37.040 --> 0:45:40.319
<v Speaker 1>and a bit less tolerant of it no matter whose

0:45:40.400 --> 0:45:44.360
<v Speaker 1>side is doing it. And if that becomes you know,

0:45:44.480 --> 0:45:48.239
<v Speaker 1>sort of gets into the ecosystem in the campaign ecosystem,

0:45:48.360 --> 0:45:50.960
<v Speaker 1>what Trump's been doing with pardons and the self enrichment

0:45:52.280 --> 0:45:54.320
<v Speaker 1>and all of that. You know, I think there's a reason.

0:45:54.360 --> 0:45:56.640
<v Speaker 1>If you've noticed Steve Danes keeps a pretty low profile,

0:45:57.360 --> 0:45:59.920
<v Speaker 1>he does not want to necessarily pop his head up

0:46:00.480 --> 0:46:04.080
<v Speaker 1>on this front. It is Look, Montana is a populist,

0:46:04.200 --> 0:46:06.799
<v Speaker 1>it's a right leaning state, but there's a it's a

0:46:06.840 --> 0:46:10.160
<v Speaker 1>populous state, and it is one of those you can

0:46:10.160 --> 0:46:11.880
<v Speaker 1>get on the wrong side, and the Democrats are well

0:46:11.960 --> 0:46:15.040
<v Speaker 1>organized in the state. So the point is is that

0:46:15.120 --> 0:46:17.400
<v Speaker 1>I think these are five races nobody's talking about at

0:46:17.400 --> 0:46:20.560
<v Speaker 1>the moment. Nobody believes are going to be competitive. Nobody

0:46:20.560 --> 0:46:23.120
<v Speaker 1>believes maybe nobody at the d SEC is even looking

0:46:23.160 --> 0:46:26.680
<v Speaker 1>at it. But I promise you, if this is as

0:46:27.440 --> 0:46:29.680
<v Speaker 1>as bad of a political environment as it looks like

0:46:29.760 --> 0:46:33.879
<v Speaker 1>it's growing into for Republicans, one of these five, if

0:46:33.880 --> 0:46:36.200
<v Speaker 1>not more of them, but one of those five Florida, Kentucky,

0:46:36.239 --> 0:46:40.399
<v Speaker 1>South Carolina, Mississippi, Montana will be a seriously targeted race

0:46:40.440 --> 0:46:43.759
<v Speaker 1>and might actually flip come election Day twenty twenty six.

0:46:43.840 --> 0:46:47.200
<v Speaker 1>If this trajectory of where the political environment is going

0:46:48.080 --> 0:46:52.799
<v Speaker 1>stays on the same trajectory, there's a reason results matter

0:46:52.880 --> 0:46:55.480
<v Speaker 1>more than promises, just like there's a reason Morgan and

0:46:55.560 --> 0:46:59.080
<v Speaker 1>Morgan is America's largest injury law firm. For the last

0:46:59.080 --> 0:47:02.319
<v Speaker 1>thirty five years, they've recovered twenty five billion dollars for

0:47:02.360 --> 0:47:05.600
<v Speaker 1>more than half a million clients. It includes cases where

0:47:05.640 --> 0:47:09.120
<v Speaker 1>insurance companies offered next to nothing, just hoping to get

0:47:09.160 --> 0:47:11.760
<v Speaker 1>away with paying as little as possible. Morgan and Morgan

0:47:11.760 --> 0:47:14.960
<v Speaker 1>fought back ended up winning millions. In fact, in Pennsylvania,

0:47:15.080 --> 0:47:18.239
<v Speaker 1>one client was awarded twenty six million dollars, which was

0:47:18.239 --> 0:47:21.720
<v Speaker 1>a staggering forty times the amount that the insurance company

0:47:21.719 --> 0:47:24.880
<v Speaker 1>originally offered. That original offer six hundred and fifty thousand

0:47:24.920 --> 0:47:27.800
<v Speaker 1>dollars twenty six million, six hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

0:47:27.800 --> 0:47:29.960
<v Speaker 1>So with more than one thousand lawyers across the country,

0:47:30.080 --> 0:47:32.720
<v Speaker 1>they know how to deliver for everyday people. If you're injured,

0:47:32.840 --> 0:47:35.399
<v Speaker 1>you need a lawyer, You need somebody to get your back.

0:47:35.800 --> 0:47:39.160
<v Speaker 1>Check out for Thepeople dot Com, Slash podcast, or dial

0:47:39.320 --> 0:47:44.720
<v Speaker 1>pound Law Pound five to nine law on your cell phone.

0:47:44.760 --> 0:47:46.920
<v Speaker 1>And remember all law firms are not the same, So

0:47:47.000 --> 0:47:48.040
<v Speaker 1>check out Morgan and Morgan.

0:47:48.120 --> 0:47:49.279
<v Speaker 2>Their fee is free.

0:47:49.280 --> 0:47:55.120
<v Speaker 1>Unless they win, all right, So with that, let's get

0:47:55.120 --> 0:48:01.120
<v Speaker 1>to semester as check. My first question comes.

0:48:00.920 --> 0:48:03.520
<v Speaker 2>From Nate Nate's in Yorkville, Illinois.

0:48:03.960 --> 0:48:07.040
<v Speaker 1>Nate confesses I almost skipped the Clay Travis episode, but

0:48:07.040 --> 0:48:08.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm glad I gave it a listen. It was a guest.

0:48:08.800 --> 0:48:11.040
<v Speaker 1>It was a great conversation. He came across as thoughtful

0:48:11.040 --> 0:48:14.040
<v Speaker 1>and engaging. Thanks for pushing us outside our bubbles and

0:48:14.080 --> 0:48:16.879
<v Speaker 1>featuring voices we might not normally hear. I also fully

0:48:16.880 --> 0:48:19.080
<v Speaker 1>agree with your Thanksgiving take best holiday by far and

0:48:19.120 --> 0:48:21.320
<v Speaker 1>your Turkey Day top five a spot on, especially the

0:48:21.400 --> 0:48:25.240
<v Speaker 1>pumpkin pie thoughts Nate podcast fan since the nineteen forty

0:48:25.280 --> 0:48:26.000
<v Speaker 1>seven days.

0:48:26.239 --> 0:48:27.839
<v Speaker 2>That's super old school. Appreciate it, Nate.

0:48:28.360 --> 0:48:30.759
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for saying that, Like, that's what I'm trying to do,

0:48:30.880 --> 0:48:33.359
<v Speaker 1>And in some ways, I hope Matt Higgins is a

0:48:33.400 --> 0:48:38.840
<v Speaker 1>similar type of conversation, trying to expose people, to expose lists,

0:48:38.840 --> 0:48:42.000
<v Speaker 1>expose you know that this is I just look at

0:48:42.000 --> 0:48:43.960
<v Speaker 1>it this way. These are people I'm trying to learn

0:48:44.000 --> 0:48:47.120
<v Speaker 1>something from, trying to understand better, and if it's helping

0:48:47.120 --> 0:48:49.400
<v Speaker 1>me understand something better, I'm assuming it's.

0:48:49.239 --> 0:48:50.839
<v Speaker 2>Going to help you understand something better.

0:48:50.920 --> 0:48:53.680
<v Speaker 1>So that's kind of the way I just view myself

0:48:53.719 --> 0:48:57.720
<v Speaker 1>as sort of what helps me sort of get smarter

0:48:58.160 --> 0:49:01.560
<v Speaker 1>about both sides of the aisle, understanding the as I

0:49:01.600 --> 0:49:06.360
<v Speaker 1>call myself a political anthropologist. You know, I want to

0:49:06.480 --> 0:49:12.120
<v Speaker 1>understand folks that live in a variety of bubbles, and

0:49:12.160 --> 0:49:14.000
<v Speaker 1>I don't. I'm not going to presume we just have

0:49:14.080 --> 0:49:16.640
<v Speaker 1>two bubbles in this country. I think we have quite

0:49:16.680 --> 0:49:20.160
<v Speaker 1>a few. So I appreciate that. And I left out,

0:49:20.360 --> 0:49:23.120
<v Speaker 1>by the way my numbers, I left out the single

0:49:23.160 --> 0:49:25.719
<v Speaker 1>most important thing I do every Thanksgiving, and that is

0:49:25.760 --> 0:49:31.120
<v Speaker 1>I make this turkey chili with the leftover turkey. And

0:49:32.920 --> 0:49:37.000
<v Speaker 1>the real question is how long? The question is how

0:49:37.040 --> 0:49:40.760
<v Speaker 1>long is it? Is it okay to keep around? Because

0:49:41.000 --> 0:49:43.040
<v Speaker 1>it is one of those chili's it gets better every

0:49:43.120 --> 0:49:45.680
<v Speaker 1>day for a period of time. Then there's the point

0:49:45.760 --> 0:49:48.160
<v Speaker 1>then everything starts to taste old, right, But there's something

0:49:48.200 --> 0:49:52.280
<v Speaker 1>about putting all the flavors together. You know. Today, certainly

0:49:52.320 --> 0:49:54.840
<v Speaker 1>I'm taping here on a Tuesday. I had it a

0:49:54.920 --> 0:49:57.840
<v Speaker 1>lunch again for lunch today. It's we're still in peak.

0:49:57.880 --> 0:50:00.879
<v Speaker 1>I think we're still in it's it's in peak mode.

0:50:00.920 --> 0:50:02.839
<v Speaker 1>But I'm probably now on the other side of the hill.

0:50:04.120 --> 0:50:07.920
<v Speaker 1>Is it worth freezing or not? Would you freeze leftover

0:50:07.920 --> 0:50:12.560
<v Speaker 1>at chilling? I am probably not going to do it,

0:50:13.120 --> 0:50:17.040
<v Speaker 1>but I'm contemplating it. So I would love I'd love

0:50:17.040 --> 0:50:18.320
<v Speaker 1>your thoughts on that, if any of you want to

0:50:18.400 --> 0:50:20.000
<v Speaker 1>chime in that. All right, next question comes from Dan.

0:50:20.080 --> 0:50:22.120
<v Speaker 1>He says, Hey, Chuck, what is the public to make

0:50:22.120 --> 0:50:24.719
<v Speaker 1>of all the recent attempted censures in the House of Representatives?

0:50:24.719 --> 0:50:27.120
<v Speaker 1>Some of it is dem on dem and GOP and gop.

0:50:27.360 --> 0:50:28.440
<v Speaker 2>Is it based in a.

0:50:28.400 --> 0:50:32.880
<v Speaker 1>Sense of morality, opportunistic acts, grinding or both? Dan, you know,

0:50:32.920 --> 0:50:35.400
<v Speaker 1>it's interesting, Dan. I talked to Mike Turner about this

0:50:35.480 --> 0:50:37.880
<v Speaker 1>on my new sphere show. He brought this up to

0:50:37.920 --> 0:50:40.760
<v Speaker 1>me as a Republican from Ohio. But he noted how

0:50:40.840 --> 0:50:42.600
<v Speaker 1>at the time of our interview, sort of this he

0:50:42.640 --> 0:50:46.719
<v Speaker 1>had was sort of almost a similar observation that you did,

0:50:46.760 --> 0:50:49.319
<v Speaker 1>which is like, what the hell is this? What is it?

0:50:49.360 --> 0:50:51.640
<v Speaker 1>I mean, you know where it is. But it was

0:50:51.719 --> 0:50:54.200
<v Speaker 1>his way of pointing out of what a terrible place

0:50:54.239 --> 0:50:55.239
<v Speaker 1>it is to work right now.

0:50:58.200 --> 0:50:59.160
<v Speaker 2>He chalked it up.

0:50:59.080 --> 0:51:01.919
<v Speaker 1>To being up away from Washington for over a month.

0:51:03.080 --> 0:51:07.439
<v Speaker 1>Mike Johnson's decision to keep the House out of DC

0:51:07.640 --> 0:51:11.640
<v Speaker 1>during the shutdown just drove members crazy, and so it

0:51:11.760 --> 0:51:13.960
<v Speaker 1>was like, you know, it's like you kink da hoose

0:51:14.440 --> 0:51:18.160
<v Speaker 1>and then young kinked it and whoom right, and when

0:51:18.200 --> 0:51:21.799
<v Speaker 1>people came back to Washington, they came back ready to go.

0:51:22.000 --> 0:51:22.160
<v Speaker 2>Right.

0:51:22.280 --> 0:51:25.000
<v Speaker 1>So you had Marie Glusen Camper's going, what the hell's

0:51:25.080 --> 0:51:28.399
<v Speaker 1>Chewy Garciado? Right? That was the dem On dem one

0:51:28.440 --> 0:51:31.279
<v Speaker 1>where she's like, that was an underhanded move. If we

0:51:31.320 --> 0:51:34.800
<v Speaker 1>think Trump's regging an election, that's no different. We should

0:51:34.800 --> 0:51:37.919
<v Speaker 1>denounce it. By the way, I think MGP is right,

0:51:38.640 --> 0:51:40.920
<v Speaker 1>I am. I think Marie Glusen camp Perez is one

0:51:40.960 --> 0:51:43.480
<v Speaker 1>of the If I would to say, who the if

0:51:43.480 --> 0:51:45.720
<v Speaker 1>I were to do my best Barbara Walters and who's

0:51:45.760 --> 0:51:48.520
<v Speaker 1>the five most interesting Democrats right now to talk to,

0:51:48.960 --> 0:51:51.840
<v Speaker 1>she'd be in my top five list on that one.

0:51:52.080 --> 0:51:54.600
<v Speaker 1>She's she's fascinating to me, and I think that there's

0:51:54.640 --> 0:51:59.680
<v Speaker 1>a there's a populist honesty to her that I think

0:51:59.760 --> 0:52:08.359
<v Speaker 1>is infectious and fascinating and you know, definitely worth Uh.

0:52:08.719 --> 0:52:11.279
<v Speaker 1>She's trust me. I'm trying to book her. I'm going

0:52:11.320 --> 0:52:13.080
<v Speaker 1>to bring her to you as soon as we can

0:52:13.080 --> 0:52:16.320
<v Speaker 1>get her to say, agree to agree to an interview.

0:52:16.800 --> 0:52:19.239
<v Speaker 1>So some of it is the members blame on that,

0:52:19.280 --> 0:52:20.719
<v Speaker 1>but I think some of it is just simply the

0:52:20.760 --> 0:52:25.239
<v Speaker 1>current political environment, right, think about it. The Democrats are

0:52:25.320 --> 0:52:28.600
<v Speaker 1>unhappy with their leadership, and they're unhappy with what they're

0:52:28.600 --> 0:52:30.520
<v Speaker 1>having to deal with Donald Trump, and they're really mad

0:52:30.520 --> 0:52:33.319
<v Speaker 1>about Joe Biden still, so it's just a cranky group

0:52:33.360 --> 0:52:38.360
<v Speaker 1>of Democrats. Republicans feel as if they've been pushed aside,

0:52:38.680 --> 0:52:41.600
<v Speaker 1>particularly after the shutdown. They feel as if they do

0:52:41.640 --> 0:52:44.600
<v Speaker 1>nothing but to you know, go back to Marjorie Taylor

0:52:44.640 --> 0:52:47.000
<v Speaker 1>Green statement, they feel as if they do nothing but

0:52:47.080 --> 0:52:50.640
<v Speaker 1>defend Trump and all they get is grief and return

0:52:51.880 --> 0:52:54.399
<v Speaker 1>or they get set aside, or they get dealt out.

0:52:55.200 --> 0:52:57.719
<v Speaker 1>So even though in some ways this is a Republican

0:52:57.840 --> 0:53:01.520
<v Speaker 1>governing renaissance, in theory could be right. You have controlled

0:53:01.560 --> 0:53:04.800
<v Speaker 1>the House, the Senate, and the presidency, and the president

0:53:04.840 --> 0:53:07.000
<v Speaker 1>has control of his party in a way that no

0:53:07.120 --> 0:53:12.680
<v Speaker 1>president has had. Frankly, you know, Obama didn't have a

0:53:12.680 --> 0:53:16.200
<v Speaker 1>grip like this under Democrats, and maybe for a temporary

0:53:16.239 --> 0:53:18.200
<v Speaker 1>period Bush had a grip on the Republicans like this

0:53:18.280 --> 0:53:23.720
<v Speaker 1>after nine to eleven, but not.

0:53:21.520 --> 0:53:22.080
<v Speaker 2>Not like this.

0:53:24.280 --> 0:53:27.680
<v Speaker 1>And so in theory it should be a golden age

0:53:27.880 --> 0:53:31.399
<v Speaker 1>for legislating, and yet it hasn't. Right, instead, Trump wants

0:53:31.440 --> 0:53:35.640
<v Speaker 1>to sign executive orders. He doesn't want to bother watching

0:53:35.960 --> 0:53:39.960
<v Speaker 1>letting the sausage be made. So I think it's that

0:53:40.160 --> 0:53:43.879
<v Speaker 1>nobody's happy, right. House Republicans aren't happy that they don't

0:53:43.920 --> 0:53:47.719
<v Speaker 1>get to govern, and House Democrats are unhappy at their

0:53:47.719 --> 0:53:49.880
<v Speaker 1>position and are pissed off at all their leaders for

0:53:50.120 --> 0:53:54.080
<v Speaker 1>they believe putting them in this place. So you put

0:53:54.080 --> 0:53:57.080
<v Speaker 1>it all together, and it's just think about your own

0:53:57.760 --> 0:54:00.479
<v Speaker 1>bad day. I think about this, and I I will

0:54:00.600 --> 0:54:03.920
<v Speaker 1>you know, I've been this way as a boss. I've

0:54:03.920 --> 0:54:05.799
<v Speaker 1>been this way as a parent. Right, you've had a

0:54:05.840 --> 0:54:10.520
<v Speaker 1>bad day and then somebody does something that's just slightly annoying,

0:54:11.280 --> 0:54:14.360
<v Speaker 1>might be an employee, might be a kid. Isn't worth

0:54:14.400 --> 0:54:17.560
<v Speaker 1>you losing your cool about, But you lose you're cool

0:54:17.600 --> 0:54:21.239
<v Speaker 1>because you're already upset about sixteen other things. That's the

0:54:21.239 --> 0:54:24.719
<v Speaker 1>equivalent of I think the situation that the House of

0:54:24.760 --> 0:54:27.719
<v Speaker 1>Representatives is feeling these days, And I just think that's

0:54:27.760 --> 0:54:31.080
<v Speaker 1>the way anybody in elective politics feels this way right now.

0:54:31.840 --> 0:54:34.200
<v Speaker 1>Everybody feels like they're all out, that they all are

0:54:34.840 --> 0:54:37.759
<v Speaker 1>out for themselves, not because they want to be, because

0:54:37.800 --> 0:54:39.839
<v Speaker 1>they don't think they have any other choice because they

0:54:39.880 --> 0:54:44.720
<v Speaker 1>really don't trust anybody else to look out for themselves.

0:54:45.880 --> 0:54:49.920
<v Speaker 1>Next question comes from Randall van der Vahal from Lighten, Netherlands.

0:54:50.280 --> 0:54:53.520
<v Speaker 1>I hope leading or lighten my apologies, he says, as

0:54:53.520 --> 0:54:55.600
<v Speaker 1>a listener from the Netherlands, I struggle to understand how

0:54:55.640 --> 0:54:59.640
<v Speaker 1>so many still support leaders who behave irresponsibly and unpredictably.

0:54:59.640 --> 0:55:01.560
<v Speaker 1>It feels like both Europe and the US are losing

0:55:01.560 --> 0:55:04.680
<v Speaker 1>a shared sense of purpose with real leadership and short supply.

0:55:04.680 --> 0:55:07.200
<v Speaker 1>I agree Europe should take more responsibility for its own security,

0:55:07.400 --> 0:55:09.319
<v Speaker 1>but we need leaders who think beyond themselves. How do

0:55:09.360 --> 0:55:12.759
<v Speaker 1>we get accountable, responsible leaders into power again? And what

0:55:12.880 --> 0:55:15.480
<v Speaker 1>needs to change in our democracies to make that possible.

0:55:16.239 --> 0:55:19.640
<v Speaker 1>So this is where I think populism and nationalism gets contagious,

0:55:19.680 --> 0:55:23.680
<v Speaker 1>and it's the wrong type of contagious. And as leader

0:55:23.680 --> 0:55:26.400
<v Speaker 1>of the free world the United States, how you know

0:55:26.440 --> 0:55:30.120
<v Speaker 1>we set an example right whatever whatever posture we take

0:55:30.640 --> 0:55:34.279
<v Speaker 1>are when we're leaning in as as leader of the

0:55:34.320 --> 0:55:39.680
<v Speaker 1>free world in a more internationalists posture, say in the

0:55:39.800 --> 0:55:45.520
<v Speaker 1>era of Frankly from Eisenhower to Obama, in general, right

0:55:45.560 --> 0:55:50.920
<v Speaker 1>we viewed we did every president between Eisenhower and Obama

0:55:52.960 --> 0:55:55.640
<v Speaker 1>came into office believing America was leader of the free world,

0:55:55.719 --> 0:56:00.560
<v Speaker 1>and we put that in quotes there. Free world, believe

0:56:00.640 --> 0:56:03.920
<v Speaker 1>that the relationship with Europe was second to none, that

0:56:04.000 --> 0:56:09.719
<v Speaker 1>it was the single most important relationship there was, and

0:56:11.719 --> 0:56:17.239
<v Speaker 1>that democracy was the ultimate goal. Freedom and democracy was

0:56:17.239 --> 0:56:17.920
<v Speaker 1>the ultimate goal.

0:56:18.000 --> 0:56:20.719
<v Speaker 2>The media that that was going to be.

0:56:20.760 --> 0:56:23.799
<v Speaker 1>Our number one export over time. But in many ways

0:56:24.200 --> 0:56:26.719
<v Speaker 1>we set an example. So how we behave is how

0:56:26.760 --> 0:56:29.920
<v Speaker 1>other countries think it's okay to behave. And as we

0:56:30.000 --> 0:56:34.200
<v Speaker 1>sort of became more nationalistic, other countries get more nationalistic.

0:56:34.600 --> 0:56:37.760
<v Speaker 1>When we decide to direct tariff barriers.

0:56:37.400 --> 0:56:39.840
<v Speaker 2>Other countries decide to erect tariff barriers.

0:56:40.120 --> 0:56:44.160
<v Speaker 1>And so you end up it. And so this is

0:56:44.160 --> 0:56:47.560
<v Speaker 1>a case where I think the United States and yeah,

0:56:47.600 --> 0:56:49.800
<v Speaker 1>you could say Brexit was sort of a sort of

0:56:49.840 --> 0:56:54.960
<v Speaker 1>a starting gun that was fired on this movement towards nationalism,

0:56:55.440 --> 0:56:58.719
<v Speaker 1>but that the collective move towards nationalism. And this is

0:56:58.760 --> 0:57:01.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, the last time we were in a position

0:57:01.360 --> 0:57:03.279
<v Speaker 1>like this. You know, we ended up in a couple

0:57:03.360 --> 0:57:07.920
<v Speaker 1>of world wars. You know, we had forms of nationalism, arguably,

0:57:08.920 --> 0:57:10.480
<v Speaker 1>or how we got into World War One, and certainly

0:57:10.480 --> 0:57:15.120
<v Speaker 1>how we got into World War two. So I think

0:57:15.160 --> 0:57:18.440
<v Speaker 1>that's I think that is at the root of all this.

0:57:19.200 --> 0:57:26.040
<v Speaker 1>Right the more when when America becomes more isolationists, more protectionists,

0:57:26.120 --> 0:57:29.080
<v Speaker 1>well so does everybody else, because it's you know, you're

0:57:29.160 --> 0:57:32.240
<v Speaker 1>you're going to behave like the you know, like the

0:57:32.240 --> 0:57:34.720
<v Speaker 1>big dog is going to behave And so I think

0:57:34.800 --> 0:57:36.440
<v Speaker 1>that has a huge part of it.

0:57:36.520 --> 0:57:37.160
<v Speaker 2>I think that.

0:57:39.360 --> 0:57:41.920
<v Speaker 1>We do. We are in the middle of an economic transition,

0:57:42.040 --> 0:57:45.040
<v Speaker 1>and this is a major one. We haven't had an

0:57:45.040 --> 0:57:47.440
<v Speaker 1>economic transition like this in over one hundred years, and

0:57:47.480 --> 0:57:49.400
<v Speaker 1>the last time we had it when we went from

0:57:49.400 --> 0:57:52.120
<v Speaker 1>an a grarian to industrial. Think about all the revolutions

0:57:52.120 --> 0:57:54.560
<v Speaker 1>that happened across the globe. Right, we had the Russian Revolution,

0:57:54.640 --> 0:57:56.320
<v Speaker 1>we had the fall of the Ottoman Empire, we had

0:57:56.440 --> 0:57:59.600
<v Speaker 1>the First World basically the First Great War we called it,

0:58:00.320 --> 0:58:02.720
<v Speaker 1>where it felt like the entire globe was fighting each other.

0:58:04.960 --> 0:58:07.800
<v Speaker 1>But in some ways that was due to fear of

0:58:07.880 --> 0:58:11.880
<v Speaker 1>what was coming next. Right, the Teutonic place were shifting

0:58:11.920 --> 0:58:16.360
<v Speaker 1>in geopolitics, the United States was becoming a world power,

0:58:17.600 --> 0:58:20.400
<v Speaker 1>and the powers that were the dominant powers of the

0:58:20.400 --> 0:58:24.680
<v Speaker 1>eighteenth and nineteenth century we're trying to hang onto power, right,

0:58:24.760 --> 0:58:28.640
<v Speaker 1>So we are in the middle, and I think we

0:58:28.680 --> 0:58:31.040
<v Speaker 1>can't underestimate we are in the middle of this great

0:58:31.080 --> 0:58:34.000
<v Speaker 1>transition from an industrial to whatever this new economy is

0:58:34.000 --> 0:58:37.840
<v Speaker 1>going to look like, this tech driven, service driven AI

0:58:37.960 --> 0:58:42.640
<v Speaker 1>driven Right, we know this is going to dramatically change

0:58:42.640 --> 0:58:48.200
<v Speaker 1>the nature of work, and ultimately, over time it's probably

0:58:48.240 --> 0:58:51.480
<v Speaker 1>going to be to the benefit of humanity. But the

0:58:51.520 --> 0:58:54.120
<v Speaker 1>transition is going to be awful, just like the Industrial

0:58:54.160 --> 0:58:56.880
<v Speaker 1>Revolution was to the overall benefit of humanity when you

0:58:56.880 --> 0:58:59.000
<v Speaker 1>look at it through one hundred year prism. But the

0:58:59.040 --> 0:59:01.320
<v Speaker 1>first twenty years of the end utual revolution was terrible

0:59:02.000 --> 0:59:05.240
<v Speaker 1>if you look at it in terms of livelihoods lost

0:59:05.320 --> 0:59:11.080
<v Speaker 1>and things like that. So this is where I play

0:59:11.160 --> 0:59:13.120
<v Speaker 1>sort of amateur historian, and I said, let's take a

0:59:13.120 --> 0:59:16.600
<v Speaker 1>step back and realize, this is a moment in time. Now,

0:59:16.680 --> 0:59:19.480
<v Speaker 1>why are we in this moment in time? I try

0:59:19.520 --> 0:59:22.600
<v Speaker 1>to comfort myself by sort of trying to at least

0:59:22.640 --> 0:59:25.800
<v Speaker 1>understand how we got here, and we kind of know

0:59:25.800 --> 0:59:28.000
<v Speaker 1>how we're going to get out. The question is can

0:59:28.040 --> 0:59:30.520
<v Speaker 1>we get out without a world war? Can we get

0:59:30.560 --> 0:59:37.680
<v Speaker 1>out without internal civil wars, without dramatic sort of ideological revolutions? Right,

0:59:38.440 --> 0:59:41.680
<v Speaker 1>will the transition be smoother than it was between the industry,

0:59:41.720 --> 0:59:45.160
<v Speaker 1>between the agrarian and the industrial. You know, that was

0:59:45.160 --> 0:59:49.560
<v Speaker 1>a very violent transition when when you look at it

0:59:49.600 --> 0:59:53.520
<v Speaker 1>in hindsight, we don't we don't necessarily always cover it

0:59:53.560 --> 0:59:55.680
<v Speaker 1>that way. We just sort of like, ah, and then

0:59:55.720 --> 0:59:58.080
<v Speaker 1>the industrial revolution began, and yeah, we had some child

0:59:58.160 --> 1:00:00.800
<v Speaker 1>labor laws, we had something to that, right. You know,

1:00:01.600 --> 1:00:03.680
<v Speaker 1>it is like when we were in the moment. I

1:00:03.680 --> 1:00:06.160
<v Speaker 1>don't think people felt like, oh, some man, this is

1:00:06.160 --> 1:00:08.800
<v Speaker 1>gonna be great. Everybody's gonna have electricity, and everybody's gonna

1:00:08.800 --> 1:00:11.400
<v Speaker 1>have We're all gonna someday just sit on couches and

1:00:11.440 --> 1:00:15.680
<v Speaker 1>watch stuff picture, moving pictures on video screens. Right. You know,

1:00:16.120 --> 1:00:17.760
<v Speaker 1>people didn't know what their lives were going to look

1:00:17.800 --> 1:00:20.120
<v Speaker 1>like thirty years later. Then they had no clue what

1:00:20.200 --> 1:00:21.919
<v Speaker 1>their life was going to be like thirty years later

1:00:22.360 --> 1:00:26.200
<v Speaker 1>because that unknown was because it was unknown, it was

1:00:26.240 --> 1:00:34.320
<v Speaker 1>all fear. So I think that here's here's why I

1:00:34.320 --> 1:00:37.080
<v Speaker 1>always say, trust the voters. The voters eventually figured out.

1:00:38.240 --> 1:00:40.200
<v Speaker 1>I think the voters are starting to figure it out

1:00:40.240 --> 1:00:43.160
<v Speaker 1>in Europe. I think the voters are figuring it will

1:00:43.280 --> 1:00:45.200
<v Speaker 1>continue to figure it out in this country.

1:00:46.960 --> 1:00:49.200
<v Speaker 2>And in stability.

1:00:49.320 --> 1:00:56.120
<v Speaker 1>You know, there's always a a bias towards stability, okay,

1:00:56.240 --> 1:00:59.720
<v Speaker 1>whatever that is. And at some point, you know, we're

1:00:59.720 --> 1:01:01.760
<v Speaker 1>gonna we're going to get there. But I think we're

1:01:01.800 --> 1:01:04.439
<v Speaker 1>in the middle of something that is just simply we're

1:01:04.480 --> 1:01:07.480
<v Speaker 1>in the middle of a rocking you know, vote and

1:01:07.560 --> 1:01:10.280
<v Speaker 1>choppy waters and it's just going to be a while

1:01:10.400 --> 1:01:15.040
<v Speaker 1>to the water settle. I know that wasn't the best answer,

1:01:16.000 --> 1:01:20.680
<v Speaker 1>but I think that that's the larger reason why we're here.

1:01:23.640 --> 1:01:26.640
<v Speaker 1>But I also think that, you know, ultimately, people vote

1:01:26.680 --> 1:01:31.040
<v Speaker 1>based on their own livelihoods, and there's been a lot

1:01:31.040 --> 1:01:33.480
<v Speaker 1>of promises made by many of these nationalists and many

1:01:33.520 --> 1:01:35.640
<v Speaker 1>of these popularis and they're not being able to fulfill them.

1:01:36.320 --> 1:01:38.640
<v Speaker 1>And I think and instead it looks like there's just

1:01:38.680 --> 1:01:42.360
<v Speaker 1>been nothing but grift and graft. I think that's going

1:01:42.400 --> 1:01:45.080
<v Speaker 1>to be how these movements end. That's usually how many

1:01:45.120 --> 1:01:48.360
<v Speaker 1>a political movement ends. It ends in corruption. That's what

1:01:48.400 --> 1:01:52.320
<v Speaker 1>this one feels like, at least in this country. Next question,

1:01:52.800 --> 1:01:56.840
<v Speaker 1>I love it you signed it your champ. It's pretty

1:01:56.880 --> 1:02:00.240
<v Speaker 1>neat to end up with the nickname champ. I hope

1:02:00.240 --> 1:02:02.520
<v Speaker 1>you're a champ in something. But anyway, this next question

1:02:02.640 --> 1:02:06.200
<v Speaker 1>is just from Champ, you better have won something that

1:02:06.240 --> 1:02:10.160
<v Speaker 1>got you the nickname, and I kind of think it's

1:02:10.160 --> 1:02:13.880
<v Speaker 1>got to be at least high school championship are above Like,

1:02:13.920 --> 1:02:16.280
<v Speaker 1>if you're gonna come at me with a middle school championship,

1:02:16.480 --> 1:02:19.120
<v Speaker 1>I don't know if that's worthy of the Champ nickname.

1:02:19.160 --> 1:02:20.000
<v Speaker 2>That's just my opinion.

1:02:21.040 --> 1:02:23.520
<v Speaker 1>But what am I doing insulting my listeners like this?

1:02:23.560 --> 1:02:27.040
<v Speaker 1>So no insult Champ. You know, I'm just let me

1:02:27.080 --> 1:02:27.760
<v Speaker 1>know what you want.

1:02:28.200 --> 1:02:28.560
<v Speaker 2>Hey check.

1:02:28.600 --> 1:02:30.560
<v Speaker 1>I'm curious about why President Biden seems to be facing

1:02:30.680 --> 1:02:34.360
<v Speaker 1>challenges with donor support first presidential library, especially compared to

1:02:34.360 --> 1:02:37.440
<v Speaker 1>past presidents like Clinton or Obama, who secured major deals

1:02:37.440 --> 1:02:40.400
<v Speaker 1>in funding post being in office. Reports suggests donors are

1:02:40.400 --> 1:02:43.160
<v Speaker 1>hesitant due to the twenty twenty four election outcome, concerns

1:02:43.160 --> 1:02:45.480
<v Speaker 1>over Biden's South, then fear of Trump error retaliation. Why

1:02:45.480 --> 1:02:48.560
<v Speaker 1>do you think these post presidency opportunities are so different

1:02:48.600 --> 1:02:50.880
<v Speaker 1>for Biden? And why might donors be so reluctant despite

1:02:50.880 --> 1:02:57.080
<v Speaker 1>having the right to support him. So, look, I think

1:02:57.080 --> 1:03:00.760
<v Speaker 1>it's just donor anger at the moment. And these weren't

1:03:00.760 --> 1:03:04.960
<v Speaker 1>Biden donors, right, These were Democratic Party donors who always

1:03:04.960 --> 1:03:08.200
<v Speaker 1>donated to who the Democratic nominee was, right, so they

1:03:08.200 --> 1:03:10.320
<v Speaker 1>were their loyalty was to the party before it was

1:03:10.360 --> 1:03:12.720
<v Speaker 1>loyalty to Biden. So I think there's a little bit

1:03:12.760 --> 1:03:14.640
<v Speaker 1>of that, and it goes back to this has been

1:03:14.640 --> 1:03:18.640
<v Speaker 1>a problem Biden's always had, right his his his loyal

1:03:18.720 --> 1:03:21.000
<v Speaker 1>set of supporters have been very small. It's always been

1:03:21.000 --> 1:03:23.720
<v Speaker 1>at small, tight circle. But there weren't you know, he

1:03:23.760 --> 1:03:26.600
<v Speaker 1>was never a prolific fundraiser before he became president, so

1:03:26.640 --> 1:03:31.520
<v Speaker 1>he didn't have like a donor network that akin to

1:03:31.640 --> 1:03:33.840
<v Speaker 1>what most presidents have. And when you have a donor

1:03:33.840 --> 1:03:35.840
<v Speaker 1>network like that, it's easy to tap into them for

1:03:35.880 --> 1:03:38.680
<v Speaker 1>the library. Obama had a devoted donor network that was

1:03:38.680 --> 1:03:41.200
<v Speaker 1>the Obama donor network. It wasn't one that belonged to

1:03:41.200 --> 1:03:43.959
<v Speaker 1>the Democratic Party more than it belonged to him.

1:03:44.560 --> 1:03:46.439
<v Speaker 2>This is also true of Trump. This is also true

1:03:46.440 --> 1:03:48.840
<v Speaker 2>of Bush. It's also true of Clinton. It's also true.

1:03:50.120 --> 1:03:52.400
<v Speaker 1>Both Bush, Bushes, Reagan. I can keep going on and on.

1:03:55.000 --> 1:03:58.080
<v Speaker 1>It is you know, even Carter had his set of

1:03:58.320 --> 1:04:01.560
<v Speaker 1>his set of donors. I'm surprised that Biden doesn't have

1:04:02.720 --> 1:04:05.919
<v Speaker 1>more folks in Delaware and in Philadelphia chipping in right,

1:04:05.960 --> 1:04:09.120
<v Speaker 1>that was always his sort of community was the Philadelphia

1:04:09.600 --> 1:04:12.840
<v Speaker 1>business community and the banking sort of the banking industry

1:04:13.320 --> 1:04:17.920
<v Speaker 1>of Delaware or you know, because of the incorporation rules

1:04:17.920 --> 1:04:20.000
<v Speaker 1>that they have in Delaware that there was certainly a

1:04:20.000 --> 1:04:24.480
<v Speaker 1>lot of He never had any trouble raising pac money

1:04:24.520 --> 1:04:26.440
<v Speaker 1>as a senator put it that way, but he was

1:04:26.440 --> 1:04:29.880
<v Speaker 1>never the most prolific. So but I think so, I

1:04:29.880 --> 1:04:33.000
<v Speaker 1>think you have the main you have Democratic donors who

1:04:33.080 --> 1:04:36.720
<v Speaker 1>donated to Biden but never considered themselves Biden donors, still

1:04:36.880 --> 1:04:40.919
<v Speaker 1>pretty angry at him, And so I don't think there's

1:04:41.200 --> 1:04:44.360
<v Speaker 1>so you have that issue. You know, he could use

1:04:44.360 --> 1:04:47.080
<v Speaker 1>a sugar daddy, like one big donor that might be,

1:04:47.360 --> 1:04:50.160
<v Speaker 1>you know that might really want to have a presidential

1:04:50.200 --> 1:04:52.720
<v Speaker 1>library at the University of Delaware, might really want to

1:04:52.880 --> 1:04:54.960
<v Speaker 1>see something like that, or if they wanted to see

1:04:54.960 --> 1:04:58.440
<v Speaker 1>it at Penn. Yeah, it's definitely supposed to be in Delaware.

1:04:58.480 --> 1:05:04.960
<v Speaker 1>He announced that in September. Here's my guess, and what

1:05:05.160 --> 1:05:12.240
<v Speaker 1>usually is the secret to finding presidential donors? Wealthy foreigners

1:05:14.800 --> 1:05:19.560
<v Speaker 1>and so uh in that sense, I do wonder if

1:05:19.680 --> 1:05:23.960
<v Speaker 1>Trump does scare off, if you know, if he's gonna

1:05:24.200 --> 1:05:27.560
<v Speaker 1>raise money anonymously but I don't think that's in Biden's nature,

1:05:27.560 --> 1:05:31.880
<v Speaker 1>and that would make people uncomfortable. I do think there

1:05:31.920 --> 1:05:35.040
<v Speaker 1>is some concern by some major donors that they don't

1:05:35.040 --> 1:05:38.400
<v Speaker 1>want to. They don't want to, they don't want to

1:05:38.640 --> 1:05:41.840
<v Speaker 1>that they they believe, but donating to Biden in a

1:05:41.880 --> 1:05:44.000
<v Speaker 1>public way in the Biden library would put a target

1:05:44.040 --> 1:05:47.040
<v Speaker 1>on their back for the Trump administration. I think that

1:05:47.160 --> 1:05:51.920
<v Speaker 1>fear is real, and I don't think it's unfounded in

1:05:51.920 --> 1:05:57.120
<v Speaker 1>in defense here, but I do think, uh, the biggest

1:05:57.160 --> 1:05:59.760
<v Speaker 1>reason why he's had so much trouble is.

1:06:01.400 --> 1:06:06.880
<v Speaker 2>His anger. All right. Next question comes from Adam Shlip.

1:06:07.360 --> 1:06:08.880
<v Speaker 2>I hope I pronounced that correctly.

1:06:09.200 --> 1:06:11.400
<v Speaker 1>Hey, listen to your episode on MTG, and Trump reminded

1:06:11.440 --> 1:06:13.520
<v Speaker 1>me of Benedict Arnold, specifically how he flipped not for

1:06:13.560 --> 1:06:16.680
<v Speaker 1>ideology but for vanity and money. Trump, like Arnold, seems

1:06:16.680 --> 1:06:18.680
<v Speaker 1>to have no real convictions, just a price. Even the

1:06:18.680 --> 1:06:21.800
<v Speaker 1>British Canadians eventually rejected Arnold because no one trusts someone

1:06:21.840 --> 1:06:24.760
<v Speaker 1>who sells out their own cause. Could Trump's legacy follow

1:06:24.840 --> 1:06:27.320
<v Speaker 1>a similar arc if the true believers eventually walk away?

1:06:28.840 --> 1:06:32.600
<v Speaker 1>You know, Adam, I think that's quite possible, right, you know,

1:06:32.960 --> 1:06:37.800
<v Speaker 1>I have said that, I think the biggest problem Republicans

1:06:37.920 --> 1:06:40.520
<v Speaker 1>face in general over the next two years is I

1:06:40.600 --> 1:06:42.560
<v Speaker 1>don't think Donald Trump cares about the future of the

1:06:42.560 --> 1:06:46.120
<v Speaker 1>Republican Party. He didn't care about the Republican Party before

1:06:46.760 --> 1:06:49.320
<v Speaker 1>he got into it. In fact, when he got there,

1:06:49.400 --> 1:06:52.040
<v Speaker 1>he said, you know, all he did was criticize the party.

1:06:52.280 --> 1:06:54.800
<v Speaker 1>All he said is what a terrible party it had been.

1:06:55.280 --> 1:06:58.920
<v Speaker 1>They'd had stupid ideas or stupid people, you know, the

1:06:58.960 --> 1:07:05.040
<v Speaker 1>typical Trump word and analysis. And if you told me

1:07:06.000 --> 1:07:11.200
<v Speaker 1>in ten years Republicans hadn't elected, hadn't gotten control of

1:07:11.240 --> 1:07:14.560
<v Speaker 1>the House, or the Senator, hadn't elected a president, whether

1:07:14.600 --> 1:07:17.400
<v Speaker 1>Trump would be happy or sad about that if it

1:07:17.440 --> 1:07:20.480
<v Speaker 1>were deemed that, you know, boy, only Trump seems to

1:07:20.480 --> 1:07:24.600
<v Speaker 1>be the only Republican that can win elections. That's the

1:07:24.680 --> 1:07:28.280
<v Speaker 1>legacy Trump would actually like the most, not that he helped.

1:07:29.520 --> 1:07:34.360
<v Speaker 1>You know, if there were four straight presidents under the

1:07:34.440 --> 1:07:39.600
<v Speaker 1>umbrella of MAGA post Trump, would that make them happy

1:07:39.840 --> 1:07:41.920
<v Speaker 1>or would it make them happier if nobody could win

1:07:42.400 --> 1:07:44.680
<v Speaker 1>that didn't have the last name of Trump? Right, I

1:07:44.680 --> 1:07:49.040
<v Speaker 1>think we all know the answer to this, and I

1:07:49.080 --> 1:07:52.000
<v Speaker 1>think deep down most Republicans know this too. He does

1:07:52.040 --> 1:07:54.680
<v Speaker 1>not care about the future of the party. He cares

1:07:54.720 --> 1:07:58.320
<v Speaker 1>about him, and that's the stuff in the last two

1:07:58.400 --> 1:08:01.920
<v Speaker 1>years of a presidency and why these midterms, and this

1:08:02.000 --> 1:08:04.480
<v Speaker 1>is why I think that some people are really hesitant

1:08:04.520 --> 1:08:09.080
<v Speaker 1>about this redistricting gambit because they're trying This is all

1:08:09.160 --> 1:08:13.600
<v Speaker 1>about Trump staving off lame ducks status for about six months,

1:08:13.640 --> 1:08:15.560
<v Speaker 1>which is all it would do if he somehow holds

1:08:15.560 --> 1:08:19.240
<v Speaker 1>the House. But he's just trying to preserve his own

1:08:19.280 --> 1:08:23.559
<v Speaker 1>status at the expense perhaps of making Republicans more vulnerable

1:08:23.560 --> 1:08:28.040
<v Speaker 1>in the long term. I think that's why you're seeing

1:08:28.680 --> 1:08:32.080
<v Speaker 1>pushback in the places that I would expect it. Indiana

1:08:32.120 --> 1:08:34.760
<v Speaker 1>is one of those kind of states that they're Republicans

1:08:34.800 --> 1:08:38.320
<v Speaker 1>before they're Trump people. And you know, Utah's another one,

1:08:38.640 --> 1:08:41.160
<v Speaker 1>but it's a It's certainly a place that I would

1:08:42.880 --> 1:08:44.880
<v Speaker 1>and I'm not surprised to see this. But I also

1:08:44.920 --> 1:08:50.240
<v Speaker 1>think that there's there's a little bit the I think

1:08:50.240 --> 1:08:53.880
<v Speaker 1>there's the average Indiana Republican I think thinks that there's

1:08:54.560 --> 1:08:58.639
<v Speaker 1>thinks about the world beyond Trump, and I think that

1:08:58.640 --> 1:09:02.519
<v Speaker 1>that's that's what you be seeing this. I you know,

1:09:04.080 --> 1:09:08.640
<v Speaker 1>I happen to think that the I will go this

1:09:08.680 --> 1:09:11.880
<v Speaker 1>way as One of my favorite movie lines to use

1:09:12.000 --> 1:09:15.640
<v Speaker 1>when talking about the industry of television is from the

1:09:15.640 --> 1:09:18.080
<v Speaker 1>movie Cocktail. Everything else, everything ends badly, or else it

1:09:18.080 --> 1:09:21.000
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't end. It's kind of how I feel about the Trump,

1:09:21.320 --> 1:09:22.840
<v Speaker 1>how Trump's ten ure is going to end. And by

1:09:22.840 --> 1:09:26.880
<v Speaker 1>the way, this is you know his you know, he

1:09:26.960 --> 1:09:30.960
<v Speaker 1>was a disaster for Atlantic City. He eventually had his

1:09:31.040 --> 1:09:35.479
<v Speaker 1>TV show canceled due to low ratings. Right, everything in

1:09:35.520 --> 1:09:39.120
<v Speaker 1>Trump's life, every sort of six or seven year cycle

1:09:39.600 --> 1:09:43.240
<v Speaker 1>has ended badly or else it wouldn't have ended. I

1:09:43.280 --> 1:09:48.519
<v Speaker 1>suspect his political career is it's hard to imagine that's

1:09:48.520 --> 1:09:51.080
<v Speaker 1>a legacy that's going to get better rather than worse.

1:09:51.600 --> 1:09:54.200
<v Speaker 1>All right, last question for this episode. It comes from

1:09:54.200 --> 1:09:56.920
<v Speaker 1>Andy from Indy speaking of Indiana. Hey, Chuck, as a

1:09:56.920 --> 1:09:59.000
<v Speaker 1>millennial ouf and here from my peers that the political

1:09:59.000 --> 1:10:02.120
<v Speaker 1>system feels broken and any honest critique tends to spiral

1:10:02.160 --> 1:10:05.120
<v Speaker 1>into both parties are bad. The constant partisan battling has

1:10:05.200 --> 1:10:08.360
<v Speaker 1>left many of us exhausted in dissillusion. While a viable

1:10:08.400 --> 1:10:10.439
<v Speaker 1>third party seems unlikely anytime soon, do you think we

1:10:10.439 --> 1:10:12.839
<v Speaker 1>could see a mixed party presidential ticket, say a Democrat

1:10:12.840 --> 1:10:15.280
<v Speaker 1>with a Republican VP. Would love to hear your take

1:10:15.320 --> 1:10:17.840
<v Speaker 1>on any combos you think could actually work. Andy from Indy.

1:10:19.200 --> 1:10:22.360
<v Speaker 1>You know, look my old mentor, the late Doug Bailey,

1:10:24.040 --> 1:10:25.840
<v Speaker 1>he had a vision in two thousand and eight. He

1:10:25.920 --> 1:10:32.040
<v Speaker 1>thought he feared that a presidential election between which if

1:10:32.840 --> 1:10:34.920
<v Speaker 1>starting in two thousand and five, the two front runners

1:10:35.200 --> 1:10:38.800
<v Speaker 1>were loosely Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton. Right, this is

1:10:39.920 --> 1:10:43.920
<v Speaker 1>before McCain didn't seem like as where the Republicans were

1:10:43.920 --> 1:10:47.880
<v Speaker 1>going to go, and he thought that was going to

1:10:47.880 --> 1:10:56.320
<v Speaker 1>be an opportunity for a bipartisan ticket, that Rudy v. Hillary,

1:10:57.600 --> 1:11:01.640
<v Speaker 1>that Rudy v. Hillary would be so divisive that it

1:11:01.680 --> 1:11:02.800
<v Speaker 1>would open the door for.

1:11:02.760 --> 1:11:04.080
<v Speaker 2>A potential unity ticket.

1:11:04.200 --> 1:11:07.560
<v Speaker 1>You know, think boy in two thousand and eight, I

1:11:07.600 --> 1:11:09.960
<v Speaker 1>think I think he had a vision. He hoped it

1:11:10.000 --> 1:11:12.720
<v Speaker 1>would be an Obama McCain or McCain Obama right like

1:11:12.840 --> 1:11:18.479
<v Speaker 1>type of mindset. Or I think John Huntsman as sort

1:11:18.479 --> 1:11:24.599
<v Speaker 1>of a Republican on one end, or a I'm trying

1:11:24.640 --> 1:11:27.439
<v Speaker 1>to think of another Democrat at the time, maybe Mark Pryor,

1:11:27.880 --> 1:11:32.240
<v Speaker 1>who was a conservative Democrat from from from Arkansas, but

1:11:32.400 --> 1:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>something under that category. You know, I think the only

1:11:38.800 --> 1:11:41.080
<v Speaker 1>here's where I think that you know, I look at

1:11:42.320 --> 1:11:46.320
<v Speaker 1>we've had three major our three major third party candidates

1:11:46.320 --> 1:11:52.920
<v Speaker 1>for president in the last say one hundred and twenty years. Right,

1:11:52.960 --> 1:11:55.960
<v Speaker 1>one was Teddy Roosevelt in nineteen twelve, one was George

1:11:55.960 --> 1:11:59.320
<v Speaker 1>Wallace nineteen sixty eight, and one was Ross pro.

1:12:00.720 --> 1:12:01.639
<v Speaker 2>In nineteen ninety two.

1:12:02.600 --> 1:12:06.680
<v Speaker 1>And they did sort of help tip the election right,

1:12:06.720 --> 1:12:13.519
<v Speaker 1>and they certainly influenced right Wallace's success, which nearly handed

1:12:13.520 --> 1:12:16.160
<v Speaker 1>the election to Humphrey even though he was winning some

1:12:16.240 --> 1:12:21.760
<v Speaker 1>of these But it certainly motivated Nixon to pursue a

1:12:21.880 --> 1:12:24.439
<v Speaker 1>Southern strategy for the Republican Party and led to the

1:12:24.439 --> 1:12:29.800
<v Speaker 1>eventual sort of Republicanization of the South. It sort of

1:12:30.880 --> 1:12:34.800
<v Speaker 1>convinced Nixon to shift the Republican Party to the South

1:12:34.840 --> 1:12:42.519
<v Speaker 1>for the future. Obviously, Teddy Roosevelt handing the presidency to

1:12:42.560 --> 1:12:45.719
<v Speaker 1>the Democrats led to a different outcome on a variety

1:12:45.720 --> 1:12:48.000
<v Speaker 1>of things, but sort of was an attempt to sort

1:12:48.040 --> 1:12:50.240
<v Speaker 1>of reform both parties. I don't know if it fully did,

1:12:50.280 --> 1:12:53.639
<v Speaker 1>to be honest, because a very corrupt Republican Party followed

1:12:53.680 --> 1:12:57.439
<v Speaker 1>Wilson in the twenties, and so in some ways Teddy

1:12:57.720 --> 1:12:59.800
<v Speaker 1>failed to do what he was trying to do, which

1:13:00.120 --> 1:13:02.720
<v Speaker 1>form the Republican Party. We didn't get that version of

1:13:02.760 --> 1:13:07.200
<v Speaker 1>the Republican Party really until Eisenhower. And I would argue

1:13:07.200 --> 1:13:10.680
<v Speaker 1>that Perode had an impact on both parties fairly positively, right,

1:13:10.760 --> 1:13:14.559
<v Speaker 1>got Republicans not being so reflexively free trade, and got

1:13:14.560 --> 1:13:18.360
<v Speaker 1>Democrats to be a bit more concerned about the debt

1:13:18.360 --> 1:13:21.519
<v Speaker 1>and deficit and more into fiscally responsible things.

1:13:22.000 --> 1:13:23.120
<v Speaker 2>So I could picture eate.

1:13:24.400 --> 1:13:27.000
<v Speaker 1>You know, we have sort of we have a trust

1:13:27.720 --> 1:13:30.439
<v Speaker 1>deficit in this country, and that's where a bipartisan ticket

1:13:30.479 --> 1:13:33.120
<v Speaker 1>could help restore that. If we're trying to restore trust

1:13:33.160 --> 1:13:37.599
<v Speaker 1>in some institutions, if we're trying to reform institutions, doing

1:13:37.680 --> 1:13:40.320
<v Speaker 1>it on a bipartisan level is about the only way

1:13:40.360 --> 1:13:43.559
<v Speaker 1>you're going to get collected buy in. And if you know,

1:13:44.000 --> 1:13:45.960
<v Speaker 1>if we feel as it, you know, to me, if

1:13:46.000 --> 1:13:48.320
<v Speaker 1>the country, I think we need.

1:13:49.960 --> 1:13:52.240
<v Speaker 2>By something like this, some.

1:13:52.080 --> 1:13:55.320
<v Speaker 1>Sort of third party or to sort of to sort

1:13:55.360 --> 1:13:58.599
<v Speaker 1>of force both parties to think of themselves in broader terms.

1:13:58.640 --> 1:13:59.799
<v Speaker 2>Right, I don't think either party.

1:14:00.240 --> 1:14:02.599
<v Speaker 1>I feel like they're both in retreat as far as

1:14:02.680 --> 1:14:05.840
<v Speaker 1>they're you know, not thinking about creating broad majorities. But

1:14:05.960 --> 1:14:10.920
<v Speaker 1>thinking about creating deep majority deep majorities, but more.

1:14:10.840 --> 1:14:12.840
<v Speaker 2>Narrow and.

1:14:14.479 --> 1:14:18.000
<v Speaker 1>So you know, you look out there. I will tell

1:14:18.040 --> 1:14:22.799
<v Speaker 1>you this if you you know Wes Moore, uh, Spencer

1:14:22.880 --> 1:14:25.360
<v Speaker 1>Cox right, And I don't care what order you.

1:14:25.320 --> 1:14:25.840
<v Speaker 2>Give it to me.

1:14:26.400 --> 1:14:31.160
<v Speaker 1>If we're looking for a pair of leaders, a bipartisan

1:14:31.240 --> 1:14:37.040
<v Speaker 1>set of leaders who who who singular goal was to

1:14:37.040 --> 1:14:42.280
<v Speaker 1>be pastors for patriotism, to sort of restore the idea

1:14:42.720 --> 1:14:46.880
<v Speaker 1>of America before country before party, I think that would

1:14:46.920 --> 1:14:49.360
<v Speaker 1>be your best ticket. And I don't care which order

1:14:49.400 --> 1:14:52.519
<v Speaker 1>you put it in, but I think I think both

1:14:52.560 --> 1:14:58.280
<v Speaker 1>of those gentlemen do govern thinking about their state before

1:14:58.320 --> 1:15:01.439
<v Speaker 1>thinking about their party. And you know, I don't know

1:15:01.479 --> 1:15:04.840
<v Speaker 1>how many I don't know how many elected officials i'd

1:15:04.840 --> 1:15:09.519
<v Speaker 1>put in that category, but they're you know, they're two people,

1:15:11.680 --> 1:15:16.160
<v Speaker 1>Mark Kelly, John Curtis, another Utah politician, John Curtis as

1:15:16.200 --> 1:15:21.200
<v Speaker 1>a senator, you know Rafael Warnock and James Langford, the

1:15:21.240 --> 1:15:24.960
<v Speaker 1>two ordained pastors in the Senate. That would be an

1:15:24.960 --> 1:15:27.519
<v Speaker 1>interesting pairing to me. It's all about what moment are

1:15:27.560 --> 1:15:30.400
<v Speaker 1>we trying to meet right at the time that you're

1:15:30.400 --> 1:15:34.120
<v Speaker 1>trying to put this together. Is it to restore trust

1:15:34.120 --> 1:15:38.799
<v Speaker 1>in government. Is it to restore faith in the country,

1:15:38.840 --> 1:15:40.639
<v Speaker 1>is it to heal the country? Is it to try

1:15:40.640 --> 1:15:43.320
<v Speaker 1>to unify the country? Right, I think it there's you know,

1:15:43.360 --> 1:15:45.599
<v Speaker 1>I think there's different skill sets. But when I start

1:15:45.640 --> 1:15:47.360
<v Speaker 1>to think about certain people who I think have the

1:15:47.400 --> 1:15:53.439
<v Speaker 1>ability to because it would in order to work, in

1:15:53.520 --> 1:15:55.040
<v Speaker 1>order to pair up with somebody on the other side

1:15:55.040 --> 1:15:57.280
<v Speaker 1>of that, you got to leave your party. So who

1:15:57.439 --> 1:16:00.840
<v Speaker 1>who could I picture being comfortable leaving their party under

1:16:00.840 --> 1:16:05.400
<v Speaker 1>a circumstance like that. And you know, look, I could

1:16:05.479 --> 1:16:08.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, I'll give you another odd pair that you

1:16:08.080 --> 1:16:10.160
<v Speaker 1>would say, what are you talking about? But you know,

1:16:11.080 --> 1:16:13.920
<v Speaker 1>I could see Ran Paul and a John Tester, you know,

1:16:14.080 --> 1:16:18.160
<v Speaker 1>type of type of pairing when you're looking for bipartisan

1:16:18.200 --> 1:16:21.200
<v Speaker 1>pairs that I think could work together again depending on

1:16:21.479 --> 1:16:24.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, if they were depending on what problem you

1:16:24.600 --> 1:16:27.479
<v Speaker 1>were trying to solve. But I you know, Mark Kelly

1:16:27.520 --> 1:16:32.200
<v Speaker 1>is in that category, John Curtis, Lisa Rakowski, I'd probably

1:16:32.320 --> 1:16:38.679
<v Speaker 1>put I'd have put a John Cornyn in that category.

1:16:38.680 --> 1:16:40.760
<v Speaker 1>I had to put a Build Cassidy. We know Builcassidy

1:16:40.800 --> 1:16:45.080
<v Speaker 1>actually showed some interest in the no labels. In the

1:16:45.120 --> 1:16:47.559
<v Speaker 1>no label situation when no Labels was seeing if they

1:16:47.560 --> 1:16:49.759
<v Speaker 1>could recruit a bipartisan ticket.

1:16:49.840 --> 1:16:50.719
<v Speaker 2>You know, I think they.

1:16:51.120 --> 1:16:53.679
<v Speaker 1>They were dreaming of a of a mansion Hogan ticket,

1:16:53.760 --> 1:16:57.640
<v Speaker 1>Joe Manchin and Larry Hogan. So you know, look, I

1:16:57.680 --> 1:17:00.360
<v Speaker 1>love these fantasy conversations, but I am am de size

1:17:00.400 --> 1:17:01.160
<v Speaker 1>the word fantasy.

1:17:01.680 --> 1:17:02.360
<v Speaker 2>A lot of times.

1:17:02.360 --> 1:17:04.360
<v Speaker 1>It's very hard for these guys to leave their party.

1:17:04.600 --> 1:17:07.200
<v Speaker 1>It's so hard for them to leave their party. They

1:17:07.240 --> 1:17:09.479
<v Speaker 1>have a hard time doing it. And you have to

1:17:09.560 --> 1:17:12.519
<v Speaker 1>leave your party to do something like this, you have

1:17:12.560 --> 1:17:18.120
<v Speaker 1>to be done, and it's so you know, and for

1:17:18.160 --> 1:17:22.280
<v Speaker 1>this to succeed, it requires both parties going to their extremes,

1:17:22.880 --> 1:17:25.200
<v Speaker 1>and usually we don't have that right. When one party

1:17:25.240 --> 1:17:28.599
<v Speaker 1>goes too far one way, usually the other party then

1:17:28.680 --> 1:17:32.000
<v Speaker 1>tries to become the party for the center right, tries

1:17:32.080 --> 1:17:34.640
<v Speaker 1>to absorb the center and so which is Frankly, I

1:17:34.680 --> 1:17:36.519
<v Speaker 1>think it been a very effective way to create a

1:17:36.600 --> 1:17:38.719
<v Speaker 1>check and balance in our country between the two parties.

1:17:39.280 --> 1:17:42.479
<v Speaker 1>It's when it's in those weird moments when both parties

1:17:42.479 --> 1:17:46.800
<v Speaker 1>split apart. Maybe we're oncoming to one of those moments,

1:17:47.000 --> 1:17:49.960
<v Speaker 1>and if we do, then perhaps there is room for

1:17:50.040 --> 1:17:55.280
<v Speaker 1>this yere. But I ultimately don't think we're going to

1:17:55.320 --> 1:18:00.639
<v Speaker 1>be there, and obviously my dog Kelly, she is ready

1:18:01.680 --> 1:18:05.599
<v Speaker 1>for this podcast to end. So with that, I will

1:18:05.760 --> 1:18:06.800
<v Speaker 1>see you in twenty four hours