Speaker 1: Well, we're finally here. It's liberation Day? Or is it?
Speaker 1: In America? Is it recession Day? Is it tax Day?
Speaker 1: Is it liquidation Day? All the punditry out and the realities,
Speaker 1: the new realities of unprecedented tariffs, unprecedented tax increases in
Speaker 1: the United States of America, certainly in peacetime up to
Speaker 1: twenty three percent, tariffs all around the globe. Are we
Speaker 1: in a trade war? What does this mean in terms
Speaker 1: of you and your household and expenses? Are cars going
Speaker 1: to get cheaper? Or as Donald Trump says, it doesn't
Speaker 1: even matter. We're going to talk about all of those things,
Speaker 1: as well as what went right, what went wrong with
Speaker 1: the Harris campaign? What is the path back for the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party? With Anthony Scaramucci up next on This is
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom. This is Gavin Newsom, and this is Anthony Scaramuci.
Speaker 2: The governor knew some going for the silver Fox. Look, okay,
Speaker 2: this is this is Latin American dictator Brown governor.
Speaker 1: If you ever need it's called, it's called just for men, Anthony,
Speaker 1: That's what that's called.
Speaker 2: Well, I was using Cuban leader Black, but it looked
Speaker 2: terrible on TV.
Speaker 1: So I've likened noven do you have to do it?
Speaker 1: I don't even have the guts to try to turn orange.
Speaker 2: Well you don't. You definitely don't want to turn orange,
Speaker 2: especially these days. That would be a bad color for
Speaker 2: both of us.
Speaker 1: Speaking of of orange, I mean, uh, I mean we all,
Speaker 1: we all waited for this moment. Uh did you predict
Speaker 1: it be this volatile, this reckless? I knew it would
Speaker 1: be bad.
Speaker 2: I didn't. You know. The thing that you always prayed
Speaker 2: for is that he would have some people around him
Speaker 2: slow him down. You know, he if you talked to
Speaker 2: him in Uchin, or you talk to Gary Gary Cohen
Speaker 2: former Goldman Sachs President, chief operating officer, they slow he
Speaker 2: This was the potential implementation in twenty eighteen. They slowed
Speaker 2: that down. Kelly slowed it down. Minuchin. All of those
Speaker 2: guys did not want this, and so he wasn't able
Speaker 2: to do this. Now he has willing accomplices. Gap. You know,
Speaker 2: how do you want me to address you, governor of Gavin?
Speaker 1: How do you want Gavin works? I mean, I get
Speaker 1: you know, walk the streets with me. I'll get asshole,
Speaker 1: I'll get everything. So I'll take gavinbody.
Speaker 2: I've been called a lot worse than Mooch and Anthony.
Speaker 2: Trust me, you can't. You can't go into politics without
Speaker 2: getting some shit.
Speaker 1: But let me I'm curious. I mean it is interesting
Speaker 1: because Trump one point zero. I mean, obviously this fixation
Speaker 1: that he's had for decades. You've known Trump for quite
Speaker 1: literally decades, you know, on and off, and obviously worked
Speaker 1: briefly for him. But I mean, he's the one thing
Speaker 1: legitimately he has been consistent about as a former Democrat,
Speaker 1: pro choice Democrat. It's an interesting area of consistency. It's
Speaker 1: on the issues of tariffs. So to your point, this
Speaker 1: obviously must have been on the agenda at least internally
Speaker 1: in the first administration. But did you ever see it
Speaker 1: at this level? I mean, this is not even reciprocal tariffts.
Speaker 1: These are sort of seemed random, and they seem almost
Speaker 1: I mean it's like a that was a strange I mean,
Speaker 1: it's always a reality TV show. But you had to
Speaker 1: see that board yesterday and the nature of how they
Speaker 1: came up with the numerics and divide by two. I mean,
Speaker 1: that couldn't have been necessarily on the docket in the
Speaker 1: first term.
Speaker 2: Was it? No? I don't think it was this level
Speaker 2: of unseriousness. I think in the first administration it was
Speaker 2: he wanted to attack on across the board tariffs, and
Speaker 2: he wanted to put up a border, a financial border,
Speaker 2: if you will, around the United States. Remember, he wants
Speaker 2: to wall the United States off literally and physically from
Speaker 2: the rest of the world. The Trump doctrine and the
Speaker 2: reason why he goes back to McKinley. During President McKinley's administration,
Speaker 2: ninety seven percent of what we produced we consumed inside
Speaker 2: the country. And so Trump's attitude is that the world
Speaker 2: has free loaded off the US and that we need
Speaker 2: to wall ourselves off literally and physically from the rest
Speaker 2: of the world. Now that misunderstands how actually the world works,
Speaker 2: and this is the problem we're all having. We need
Speaker 2: somebody like you to organize the scent and explain to
Speaker 2: people that what Trump is doing is actually catastrophic for
Speaker 2: our economy. What he's doing would take us back to
Speaker 2: the nineteen thirties with the Smooth Hawley Act, which steepened
Speaker 2: a recession and turned it into a Great depression. Trump
Speaker 2: could touch off deflation, Governor Newsom. And if you touch
Speaker 2: off deflation in a society like ours, it's absolutely catastrophic
Speaker 2: because remember we're in a debt laiden society. So let
Speaker 2: me just give this example. If you have a two
Speaker 2: hundred and fifty thousand dollars mortgage and an eighty thousand
Speaker 2: dollars job in a deflationary society, your salary is going
Speaker 2: down alongside the goods and services, but your debt's not
Speaker 2: going down. You're forced to pay back the debt with
Speaker 2: dollars that are worth more than the dollars you borrow.
Speaker 2: In an inflationary situation, you can pay back the debt
Speaker 2: with dollars that are worth less. But if the counter
Speaker 2: should happen, it's absolutely devastating for the society. And so
Speaker 2: the FED is going to be forced now to cut
Speaker 2: rates because the FED fears deflation way more than inflation.
Speaker 2: So what he's doing is actually historically catastrophic. He's doing
Speaker 2: something that literally, if you said, governor, if I said
Speaker 2: to you, okay, let's get in a room, you and I,
Speaker 2: and let's dismantle the global trading system. Let's get every
Speaker 2: one of our allies sore at us, and let's give
Speaker 2: our adversaries a leg up. Let's give China an opportunity now,
Speaker 2: to re engage with Europe and become their number one
Speaker 2: trading partner. What should we do to do that in
Speaker 2: sixty five seventy days? And this is what you would do.
Speaker 2: Everything that he's implemented is doing that, and his unserious cabinet.
Speaker 2: They can't defend it. I mean Lutnix on TV tried
Speaker 2: to defend it. Cannot defend it. I feel bad for Scott,
Speaker 2: you know, the Secretary Treasury Bessent. It's like blink twice,
Speaker 2: we'll get steal Team six and they'll take you off
Speaker 2: to see and we'll take you off the CNN shout,
Speaker 2: you know. I mean, it's it's embarrassing. It's embarrassing for
Speaker 2: all of us because, Okay, there are this is the
Speaker 2: and this is the thing with Donald Trump. There are
Speaker 2: things about him that centrist wall Streeter centrists do like
Speaker 2: they want a stronger border. I think you've had several
Speaker 2: people on your show that have articulated that they want
Speaker 2: some banking deregulation, some positive crypto regulation. But with Donald
Speaker 2: Trump's or you go to the buffet table with your tray,
Speaker 2: you can't pick the things that you want. Alec cart
Speaker 2: he force feeds you everything you know, he force feed
Speaker 2: you the mean coin, He force feeds you the rhetoric
Speaker 2: on the fifty first state. He force feed you the
Speaker 2: nonsense about NATO and the and the UH. I mean,
Speaker 2: what the dressing down of Zelensky, what they did to Zelenski,
Speaker 2: to me is literally one of the most un American
Speaker 2: things that I've seen. So so we're in a situation
Speaker 2: now where even ram Paul, Sir, even ram Paul got
Speaker 2: to the airwaves last night and said that what he's
Speaker 2: proposing is absurd. And of course the markets are reacting
Speaker 2: with their signal, not noise signal, they're signaling how absurd
Speaker 2: this all is.
Speaker 1: So there's so much to unpacking what you said, and
Speaker 1: I want to I want to explore a number of
Speaker 1: the points you made, but let's just go back to
Speaker 1: a fundamental point. And it goes back to just you know,
Speaker 1: the person that is Donald Trump. He wants to be loved.
Speaker 1: The markets matter to him. It's it's the one sort
Speaker 1: of objective scorecard. He's got to see this kind of volatility.
Speaker 1: I mean, he sort of previewed a little bit of it.
Speaker 1: You've seen some of that volatility over the course of
Speaker 1: the last few months, and he pulled back on some
Speaker 1: of his assertions and some of his threats and promises.
Speaker 1: I mean, what happens you think in the next few
Speaker 1: days on the basis of this reaction, global reaction, but
Speaker 1: profound impacts in terms of the market volatility.
Speaker 2: Well, he has sent out his keyboard warriors this morning
Speaker 2: to say to people, come to the table. Eric Trump
Speaker 2: is out on X or whatever they call it now
Speaker 2: saying hey, come to the table and negotiate with my dad,
Speaker 2: or it's going to end badly for you. I've seen
Speaker 2: it my whole life, you know. And so they're nervous,
Speaker 2: you know, they're sending out signals to people that okay,
Speaker 2: we've obviously overstepped. Obviously this governor I call it the
Speaker 2: anti ten Commandments. It's like the Evil ten Commandments. He
Speaker 2: had this big tablet in his hand. We had orange
Speaker 2: Moses descending from Mount Evil with the you know, indiscernible tablet.
Speaker 2: But they now know that they've overstepped, and so they're nervous,
Speaker 2: and they're they're they're trying to tell leaders, now, come
Speaker 2: to the table, my father declare victory. You know, you know,
Speaker 2: Prime Minister Carney, come to the table. And then he'll
Speaker 2: put out on truth social I've lowered the terriffts for Canada.
Speaker 2: You know, this sort of thing, And it's actually it's
Speaker 2: actually embarrassing. You know, it's embarrassing because I can't speak
Speaker 2: for the school system in California, but I would imagine
Speaker 2: sometime in the first grade, like the school system here
Speaker 2: in New York, you read The Emperor has No Clothes.
Speaker 2: I was seven when I first read this brilliant piece
Speaker 2: of literature, and I remember remarking to myself at age seven, well,
Speaker 2: who would be stupid enough to tell an emperor that
Speaker 2: he has clothes on? When he has no clothes on?
Speaker 2: And of course, now here we are in twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: it's fifty four years after I read this beautiful piece
Speaker 2: of first grade literature, and I'm watching people in the
Speaker 2: President's court do things. I'm they're bobbleheads, Governor, you know,
Speaker 2: they're bobbling. They're their head saying yes, yes, yes, we're
Speaker 2: privately they're saying no, no, no, And so I do
Speaker 2: think there would be a breach. But I want to
Speaker 2: go back to your loved thing, because I think this
Speaker 2: is a forty year idea for Trump. He mentioned it
Speaker 2: to Oprah Winfrey in the mid eighties, and he wants
Speaker 2: to implement it and so if it causes hardship. In
Speaker 2: his perverse mind, he thinks that this is a solution
Speaker 2: for America. He thinks this is a reassuring solution for America.
Speaker 2: He thinks this is an end of the freeloading. You know,
Speaker 2: this is what his team says on signal. But of
Speaker 2: course you and I know that that's not the case.
Speaker 2: And I can prove to your viewers and listeners that
Speaker 2: this is not the case. America, by integrating with the
Speaker 2: rest of the world, created a bigger market for America,
Speaker 2: more prosperity for America. Is it perfect? No, Should our
Speaker 2: political leadership have checked some of the rights that the
Speaker 2: Chinese had wto as the Chinese economy grew? Yes, I
Speaker 2: accept that. Should we have checked some of the towers
Speaker 2: that could put on us, certainly, But the notion that
Speaker 2: America would integrate with the rest of the world and
Speaker 2: then generally provide a security umbrella for the free world
Speaker 2: has led to incredible amounts of peace and incredible amounts
Speaker 2: of prosperity here in America. And let me just point
Speaker 2: this out to you before you ask another question. In
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty two, we had approximately five percent of the
Speaker 2: world's population and twenty six percent of the world's output.
Speaker 2: It's the same number today. So think of the rising
Speaker 2: living standards around the world. I can prove to you
Speaker 2: prime a facia that the policies have generally worked. We
Speaker 2: just needed to have done a better job. We left
Speaker 2: a vacuum of advocacy your party, Frankly, my party, my
Speaker 2: old party. We left the vacuum of advocacy for white,
Speaker 2: middle class, blue collar workers. And I would suggest that
Speaker 2: we got to get back to that. You know, if
Speaker 2: you want to have the counter narrative to the nonsense
Speaker 2: that's going on those families, and this would be my
Speaker 2: own family. You know, they voted for the Franklin Roosevelt's,
Speaker 2: they voted for the Jack Kennedy's, they voted for the
Speaker 2: Lynda Johnson's. But it seems like we just lost our
Speaker 2: way and we left those people out of the American
Speaker 2: aspirational economy. You know, many of those people now so
Speaker 2: feel desperational.
Speaker 1: So and I appreciate that. I think it's what led
Speaker 1: you to appreciate Trump as a Republican. And you were
Speaker 1: out there campaigning for Jeb Bush and others. But I
Speaker 1: think you constantly.
Speaker 2: You're you're a Catholic? Is that right?
Speaker 1: Governor there, I'm right out of the old Irish Catholic.
Speaker 2: Because you know, I just could be a confessional for me.
Speaker 2: I won't have to go on Saturday. You know, I
Speaker 2: can confess all my sins. I can confess all my
Speaker 2: sins working for Donald Trump.
Speaker 3: No.
Speaker 1: But but but I'm going to compliment you a little
Speaker 1: bit because what you just expressed is what you also experienced.
Speaker 1: And you talk often about New Mexico when you're out there,
Speaker 1: and you saw him at least talking to those folks,
Speaker 1: not talking down to them, and acknowledging them. I see you,
Speaker 1: I care at least asserting that he cared. And you
Speaker 1: saw my party that seemed to be defending NAFTA, defending TPP,
Speaker 1: defending some of those trade deals, or at least struggling
Speaker 1: with them as it relates to an electoral strategy, not
Speaker 1: fully appreciating the magnitude of the displacement and the despair
Speaker 1: in the faces and the heart of so many, and
Speaker 1: so what you know, appreciating that and appreciating there were
Speaker 1: people there yesterday with President that you know, united, our
Speaker 1: workers and others that just feel like this is we
Speaker 1: are getting ripped off and you at least this gives
Speaker 1: us a shot again. I mean, what is there a
Speaker 1: case that you can make. Is there a case that
Speaker 1: Trump himself at this moment particularly he can defend or
Speaker 1: do you just think he went further than he realized
Speaker 1: he went? And this is completely reckless, not just taking
Speaker 1: the risk.
Speaker 2: So again, the case could have been made for or
Speaker 2: fifty years ago, but it can't be realistically made today.
Speaker 2: That's the problem because NAFTA caused a full integration of
Speaker 2: the Canadian and almost the full integration of the Mexican economy.
Speaker 2: So as an example, a Prime Minister Corney who's a
Speaker 2: personal friend of mine, I worked with mcgoldman thirty five
Speaker 2: years ago. He would tell you that autoparts are coming
Speaker 2: across the border back and forth at least six times
Speaker 2: before they get installed in the car, and you can't
Speaker 2: charge twenty five percent tariffs each time it moves across
Speaker 2: the border. And so we've integrated the economies. If you
Speaker 2: said to me we needed to right size elements of
Speaker 2: the tariff system to protect American working class families, I
Speaker 2: would say resoundingly yes. Have you said to me we
Speaker 2: need surgical tariffs where we need to go through the
Speaker 2: tariff system and say, okay, the Chinese are dumping this
Speaker 2: product into our market, they are subsidizing it with their
Speaker 2: government's help, and they're giving an artificial price of rosa.
Speaker 1: And we saw that of course with Biden. I mean
Speaker 1: he built off Trump's targeted tariffs, and Biden administration certainly
Speaker 1: had that meant yea, they.
Speaker 2: Went more delicately through the list. And this is the
Speaker 2: thing about Donald Trump that we have to acknowledge. There
Speaker 2: are kernels of truth in what he's saying. It's the
Speaker 2: implementation of the policy that's flawed. But if you're telling
Speaker 2: me we have a problem at the border, Milton Friedman
Speaker 2: would have said years ago, well, if you have a
Speaker 2: welfare state in the US does have one, you have
Speaker 2: to protect your border because free market forces dictate that
Speaker 2: people will cross the border. And so I think what
Speaker 2: happened is because of anti Trump sentiment, President Biden reversed
Speaker 2: all of that through executive action. It was more of
Speaker 2: an anti Trump statement than it was real thought out policy,
Speaker 2: and that hurt the Democrats. In twenty twenty four, but
Speaker 2: there was a kernel of truth of what Trump was saying.
Speaker 2: It's more about theventation and the heavy handedness. And again
Speaker 2: same thing with the tariffs. The President is correct that
Speaker 2: we need to bolster living standards in America for lower
Speaker 2: and middle income people. The President is correct that there
Speaker 2: have been elements of the trade system where we've been
Speaker 2: taking advantage of. You know, the World Trade Organization let
Speaker 2: China in with extraordinary emerging market latitude, extraordinary, and they
Speaker 2: never corrected it as China arose. And I'll say something,
Speaker 2: Governor does not reflect well on me, but I'll share
Speaker 2: it with you. At the age of twenty, at the
Speaker 2: age of thirty five, in nineteen ninety nine, the World
Speaker 2: Trade Organization, there were protests in Seattle. Do you remember these?
Speaker 2: I don't. I remember, of course, okay, And so Ralph
Speaker 2: Nader was up there. Working class families were up there.
Speaker 2: They said, please, please, do not let the Chinese into
Speaker 2: the WTO, and you'll cause a hollowing out of our manufacturing.
Speaker 2: You'll ruin our middle class aspirational jobs. Please don't. I
Speaker 2: was a young Wall Street person at the time, and
Speaker 2: I had bought into the Wall Street narrative that this
Speaker 2: was going to lower the cost of capital deployment, lower
Speaker 2: the cost of labor, and was going to be generally
Speaker 2: good for the economy, the stock market, and generally good
Speaker 2: for people. And it was an advancement. It was progress.
Speaker 2: But those workers were right, Governor Newsom, I got that
Speaker 2: wrong at age twenty nine, because the aftermath of what
Speaker 2: happened twenty five, twenty six years later is this dilemma,
Speaker 2: this systemic rise in populism. Moreover, when President Bush implemented
Speaker 2: the TARP money, he made a very big mistake, and
Speaker 2: I think he's willing to admit it today. He put
Speaker 2: a trillion into the banks. If he puts seven to
Speaker 2: fifty into the bank, sir, and maybe two point fifty
Speaker 2: into the lower and middle income people, you maybe wouldn't
Speaker 2: have had the Occupy Wall Street movement. Maybe it wouldn't
Speaker 2: have morphed into the Tea Party movement. You see, there
Speaker 2: was a there was an unfairness in the policy that
Speaker 2: created a prairie fire of popularism.
Speaker 3: The iHeart Radio Waango Tango presented by Fiji Airways, Pontington
Speaker 3: City bach Joja kat.
Speaker 2: When Stefani.
Speaker 1: David Ghetto.
Speaker 3: Mean trainer for early bird pricing and to qualify for
Speaker 3: access to the Ultimate FanPit by your tickets before April
Speaker 3: fifteenth at AXS dot com. For complete rules and alternate
Speaker 3: method of entry, you go to Wango Tango dot com.
Speaker 3: Wango Tango is produced by iHeartMedia, Los Angeles in partnership
Speaker 3: with Code four.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: No, I mean, I think you mark two profoundly consequential
Speaker 1: moments the WTO. It's interesting just even talking to members
Speaker 1: of the Clinton administration talking former President Clinton himself about WTO,
Speaker 1: and it's half math. I think there's there's not only
Speaker 1: a reckoning in terms of our politics today and direct
Speaker 1: connection in that respect, but I think there's a growing
Speaker 1: recognition of the outsized consequence of the WTO. But I
Speaker 1: also appreciate your point around the Wall Street relief and
Speaker 1: this sort of main street Wall Street frame and after
Speaker 1: the financial crisis, with you know, and obviously the biding
Speaker 1: excuse me, Obama administration inherited a lot of that and
Speaker 1: sort of maintained not totally dissimilar policies as it relates
Speaker 1: to that bailout and the consequences to the populism that
Speaker 1: we're experiencing today. Let me just back up, just talking
Speaker 1: about the challenges of today. I mean, how does knowing
Speaker 1: Donald Trump as the way you know him, how does
Speaker 1: he get out of this? Is it just you know,
Speaker 1: he's got sixty countries, he got sixty leaders come in
Speaker 1: one off, he starts negotiating bs deals that he claims
Speaker 1: credit for having quote unquote succeeded in level setting the
Speaker 1: playing field. Or is there going to be more sweeping
Speaker 1: across the board recalibration with the EU as an example
Speaker 1: or other allies. What's your over under in terms of
Speaker 1: the next days not just weeks?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I mean, I mean, anything is possible,
Speaker 2: Governor Newsom. But but I'm and I'm generally an optimist
Speaker 2: about life, but I'm pessimistic about this. And just hear
Speaker 2: me out for a second, and I'd love to get
Speaker 2: you to react to it. We've had a bipartisan commitment
Speaker 2: to this economic, geo political footprint. We've had a bipartisan
Speaker 2: commitment on containment, the NATO security umbrella, the free trading
Speaker 2: mechanisms around the world, America absorbing some of that because
Speaker 2: we're the richest nation. And he's ending all of that.
Speaker 2: He's ending all of that very abruptly, and he's doing
Speaker 2: it in a way that's raising risk premium around the world.
Speaker 2: So said differently, if I was a European leader, I'd
Speaker 2: be like, Okay, whoa, it's not just Donald Trump. Fifty
Speaker 2: percent of the people voted for him. There's something wrong
Speaker 2: in the body politic in the US now. That's going
Speaker 2: to make the US a little bit more arbitrary and
Speaker 2: a little bit more capricious. And it's decision making unless
Speaker 2: you're telling me we can find a transformative, postpartisan leader
Speaker 2: that can galvanize the Americans. Again. If I'm in Europe,
Speaker 2: I'm like, Okay, I got to have other options now.
Speaker 2: And I think the market is signaling even if Trump
Speaker 2: tomorrow says okay, EU, here's this deal, and China, here's
Speaker 2: that deal. And oh, by the way, I wave my
Speaker 2: beautiful magic wand here's the new tablet coming down from
Speaker 2: Mount stupidity, and here's what we're going to do now.
Speaker 2: I think he's upset the apple card enough where you're
Speaker 2: now creating different sets of outcomes and different sets of
Speaker 2: decision making from other responsible political leaders. Do you think
Speaker 2: I'm going too far and thinking that as a no?
Speaker 1: I mean, I think that course was set weeks and
Speaker 1: weeks prior to the tariffs, as it relates to the
Speaker 1: reorder in our alliances, and you know Jade Vance's speech
Speaker 1: in Munich, the security coffer talking down and past our allies,
Speaker 1: and as you said, the ambush in the Oval with Zelenski,
Speaker 1: and the messages that have been said, And I can
Speaker 1: just let me just reinforce that point of view on
Speaker 1: the basis of the kind of outreach that I've directly
Speaker 1: received as governor of a state that happens to be
Speaker 1: larger than twenty one state populations combined, the fifth largest
Speaker 1: economy in the world, where foreign leaders have reached directly
Speaker 1: out to California to express that anxiety and concern from
Speaker 1: a sub national level and look to engage us directly
Speaker 1: with all the volatility and the uncertainty again prior to
Speaker 1: this tariff announcement coming from the White House. So I
Speaker 1: think the consequences are off the charts and profound. And
Speaker 1: it begs then this question, Anthony. You look, we watched
Speaker 1: Project twenty twenty five. I felt some of us were
Speaker 1: accused of crying wolf on it. But this sort of
Speaker 1: shock in awe, this flood in the zone, as Bannon
Speaker 1: loves to say, as one speeds, you know, he puts
Speaker 1: his foot on the gas. There's no break with Trump.
Speaker 1: Has that even surprised you to the degree that he's
Speaker 1: moved this early?
Speaker 2: That didn't I think what has surprised me, frankly is
Speaker 2: the willing sick events, the willing enablers. There's usually people
Speaker 2: of conscience in the room that say, WHOA, that doesn't
Speaker 2: work for me, you know, John Kelly. John Kelly fired
Speaker 2: me Governor Newsom on the thirty first of July twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2: We've become very close friends, and you know, we socialize together,
Speaker 2: and my wife Deirdre and Karen and him hang out
Speaker 2: together and we talk about the dilemma of working with
Speaker 2: Donald Trump, you know, and this is a weirdness to him.
Speaker 2: There's like an anti there's a conflict of boys. I've
Speaker 2: been dying to ask you this question since I saw
Speaker 2: you at the night of the debate where you and
Speaker 2: I were in September together in Philadelphia. Both they are
Speaker 2: supporting Vice President Harris when he attacks you, the president
Speaker 2: President trum he attached you as a keyboard worrying bully.
Speaker 2: But then when he has to face you in person,
Speaker 2: and thank god, you're tall, sob because I'm not as
Speaker 2: tall as you. At least you can stand off to
Speaker 2: him face to face. He never attacks you face to face. Oh, Gavin,
Speaker 2: you're a great guy. You know this sort of stuff.
Speaker 2: What do you make of that, sir, if you don't mind, man,
Speaker 2: And I wink I was just with that question for
Speaker 2: six months.
Speaker 1: Anthony, I've had for me sort of a bookmark in history.
Speaker 1: Interesting experience. I was there near the end of the
Speaker 1: Biden administration in the Oval for about ninety minutes up
Speaker 1: in the residence with President Biden, and then invited back
Speaker 1: same guy, same state, same Democrat a few weeks later,
Speaker 1: and I think I was the first Democrat to sit
Speaker 1: down in the Oval with Donald Trump. And it was
Speaker 1: ninety plus minutes, and they kept trying to extract us
Speaker 1: from one another. And it was because it was deeply
Speaker 1: engaging and personal. He's incredibly charismatic, as you know.
Speaker 2: Well, look, he said, I hate to say this to people,
Speaker 2: but he's a very charming guy in that.
Speaker 1: Interpersonal interaction, and there's no doesn't he doesn't want conflict.
Speaker 1: And I'll be candid with you. It surprised me on
Speaker 1: the Zelenski I call it an ambush. I saw that
Speaker 1: more as an ambush coming from JD. Mansh and the
Speaker 1: Vice President than even Trump, because it's not like Trump
Speaker 1: to do that in the old I was surprised because
Speaker 1: of the interpersonal because he tends to like that rapport
Speaker 1: one on one that said, others have different theories, but
Speaker 1: it's an interesting dynamic that people don't fully appreciate.
Speaker 2: But sir, when he goes off on you on truth
Speaker 2: social with the nonsense name calling, and then you see
Speaker 2: him like a week later or a day later in California,
Speaker 2: he acts like it didn't happen, right, of.
Speaker 1: Course no, and in fact gets a little uncomfortable when
Speaker 1: you say, hey, you know what happened in the new
Speaker 1: skum He's like okay, and he literally that's when he's
Speaker 1: sort of unmoored a little bit because he doesn't want
Speaker 1: to engage in that. And so look, and I think
Speaker 1: that's the difficult part, is figuring out what's real, what's not,
Speaker 1: what's performative, what's not. I mean, for him, it's about
Speaker 1: the crowds. I mean even made that point. He goes
Speaker 1: the crowd loves it, and so I'm like, okay, whatever
Speaker 1: your crowd needs The problem is I feel like it's
Speaker 1: you know, I'm watching Gladiator three, or at least the
Speaker 1: preview Glattery three with the thumbs up thumbs down. You
Speaker 1: don't know which help direction it's going to go based
Speaker 1: upon the crowd. And that again begs my concern now,
Speaker 1: you know, and not just concern, but consideration of a
Speaker 1: sort of reconsideration. How would this crowd in terms of
Speaker 1: the markets. You know, he dismissed his mother nature, but
Speaker 1: the markets can't be easily dismissed. People's four oh one k.
Speaker 1: You're even seeing it's not just Rampaul, there's some other
Speaker 1: Republicans that are marginally expressing concern around tariffs. You're seeing
Speaker 1: now layoffs. You're seeing announcements from these companies that we're
Speaker 1: supposed to be spending trillions of dollars coming in the
Speaker 1: United States now actually saying they're not going to invest
Speaker 1: in these factories in some of these world parts of
Speaker 1: the country. I mean, I've got to think, and I
Speaker 1: know you're sort of challenging that that he's got to
Speaker 1: reverse more quickly than perhaps even you think.
Speaker 2: No, yes, but I don't see how we get undamaged
Speaker 2: from this. You know, like you know. Here's the cruel admission.
Speaker 2: I knew how bad it was. I endorsed President Biden
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty. As you know, I helped on debate
Speaker 2: prep and tried to act as a surrogate for the
Speaker 2: Vice President Harris in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1: And you didn't try to act. You were a surrogate
Speaker 1: and an incredibly effective one.
Speaker 2: This is an existential crisis, or this is a postpartisan thing.
Speaker 2: What I My message to your party is open the door,
Speaker 2: expand the tent. Remember what Lyndon Johnson said, Let's get
Speaker 2: all the elephants in the tent pissing out. Let's not
Speaker 2: have elephants outside the tent pissing in. Make it a
Speaker 2: pro democracy movement, make it a pro America movement. Make
Speaker 2: it a postpartisan transfer so that we can beat the
Speaker 2: current Wig Party, which the Whig Party is the Maga party.
Speaker 2: It's at a step with America. They can beat us
Speaker 2: if we are dissembling, they can beat us if we're
Speaker 2: internescently fighting with each other. But if we expand the tent.
Speaker 2: And some of your friends on the liberal side don't
Speaker 2: like me because I was with Trump, I understand that,
Speaker 2: but hold your.
Speaker 1: Nose Okay, hold your nose like me, because I shook
Speaker 1: his hand at the tarmac. Yes, and and and return
Speaker 1: his phone calls. I mean, which you know, that's a
Speaker 1: deeper conversation, and so I appreciate it.
Speaker 2: I applaud you. Look, I don't like Steve Okay, you know,
Speaker 2: Bannon I think is a national disgrace. I'll just say that,
Speaker 2: Thank god he's so ugly frankly, Otherwise he could be
Speaker 2: like a more powerful figure. I think that was the
Speaker 2: Good Lord helping us. But I'm just saying to you,
Speaker 2: I admire you having a conversation with him, Charlie. I
Speaker 2: know forever I campaigned with Charlie in Pennsylvania. With Trump,
Speaker 2: he's a formidable young man. I think he's intellectually misguided,
Speaker 2: but I think it's important for you to speak with him.
Speaker 2: And the fact that your base or your coalition on
Speaker 2: the Democratic side would lambast you for that, they are
Speaker 2: making a mistake. If Churchill could hang with Attlee to
Speaker 2: beat Hitler. Okay, And I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler.
Speaker 2: I'm just saying we have an existential crisis going on.
Speaker 2: He is going down Project twenty twenty five. He wants
Speaker 2: to weekend. The legislative branch. He wants to disgrace the
Speaker 2: media week in it. He wants to weaken the judicial branch.
Speaker 2: He's going after our law firms in a way that
Speaker 2: I don't fully understand.
Speaker 1: And by the way, let me those and the law
Speaker 1: firms are quickly capitult.
Speaker 2: Yeahstated, he's going after our law firms in a way
Speaker 2: that even they don't understand the long term ramifications of it.
Speaker 2: There you go, and so guys, let's stop fighting with
Speaker 2: each other. Okay. We love our country. We love our system.
Speaker 2: We like the checks and balances, the decentralized nature of
Speaker 2: the country that have allowed our families, the Newsome family,
Speaker 2: the Karamuchi family to rise, Okay, from modest beginnings, whether
Speaker 2: they were in Ireland or they were in Italy. We
Speaker 2: came here for this great opportunity. We don't want authoritarianism
Speaker 2: to spoil it. He wants that. Okay, If you don't
Speaker 2: think he wants that, you're not paying close enough attention
Speaker 2: and you're not going down the list and somebody like you,
Speaker 2: I applaud you for bringing me on so that we
Speaker 2: can discuss this. I admire you for bringing these other
Speaker 2: guys on that I may disagree with but I admire
Speaker 2: you for it because open the tent, let's get the
Speaker 2: people in the tent. There's more of us that love
Speaker 2: the country, care about the country. I may not agree
Speaker 2: with you on certain pots policy, so what we care
Speaker 2: and believe in the system together And I think that's
Speaker 2: the resonating message that you're going for. And I applaud
Speaker 2: you for it.
Speaker 1: Now and I appreciate that, and I hope our parties
Speaker 1: listening to that because this no I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: this is about addition, not subtraction. We can't afford to
Speaker 1: lose any more folks. And I think the cornerstone of
Speaker 1: this conversation is the folks we are losing is a
Speaker 1: working class. Again. I keep going back to your story
Speaker 1: that was so resonant with you, at least as you
Speaker 1: continue to share it over the course of the years
Speaker 1: of being there on the campaign travel Donald Trump and
Speaker 1: giving voice to these folks. And Bernie Sanders in some
Speaker 1: respects does as well. There's sort of populism on both
Speaker 1: sides of the of the Aisle, but our party, for
Speaker 1: whatever reason, hasn't been able to connect in that respect.
Speaker 1: And to that point, I want to I want to
Speaker 1: ask you this why because I thought, and my not
Speaker 1: just think, I core believe that Joe Biden and his
Speaker 1: four years as president, was one of the most pro
Speaker 1: worker presidents in my lifetime. He had an industrial policy
Speaker 1: that was workers centered. I mean, hell, even walk the
Speaker 1: picket line, the IRA, the chips and science ac the
Speaker 1: bipartisan bills, I mean there were over four hundred five
Speaker 1: bartisan bills. But infrastructure, the fact we saw actual investments
Speaker 1: being made again, supporting workers, supporting the heartland, supporting the
Speaker 1: folks quote unquote that we lost in this election. Did
Speaker 1: I read that wrong? You were a supporter of Biden.
Speaker 1: I thought we were making that point, but it seems
Speaker 1: to have been lost, or at least wasn't inherited by Harris.
Speaker 2: I don't think you're reading that wrong. But what I
Speaker 2: think we have to acknowledge, unfortunately, is that the presidency itself,
Speaker 2: to quote Theodore Roosevelt, is a bully pulpit, and so
Speaker 2: one of the jobs of the president and he or
Speaker 2: she is to be the great salesman or saleswoman for
Speaker 2: the country. And the president put in the chip sacked
Speaker 2: very successful the Inflation Reduction Act, which had all that
Speaker 2: embedded infrastructure very successful. There was a lot of things
Speaker 2: that he did that were pro worker and pro union,
Speaker 2: very successful. But unfortunately the president was struggling verbally by
Speaker 2: the middle of his term and he was no longer
Speaker 2: able to passionately advocate for that. The sixty five year
Speaker 2: old Joe Biden, if I'm just being brutally honest, would
Speaker 2: have slayed Donald Trump stayed in the race, been able
Speaker 2: to make that argument and built on that legislative agenda.
Speaker 2: Now he made that fatal Shakespearean mistake. He should have
Speaker 2: said in September of twenty three, here are the fifteen
Speaker 2: twenty things that I've done that very benefited the economy.
Speaker 2: Economies on the uptick, inflation is on the downtick. I
Speaker 2: heard the message. I got the message from the absenteeism
Speaker 2: of US meaning normal Democrats, absenteeism. You know, I got
Speaker 2: the Bernie Sanders Trump message. This is what I'm doing
Speaker 2: with policy to fill the space. But I'm too old
Speaker 2: for the job. And so it's September twenty twenty three.
Speaker 2: I'm going to open up the primary, okay, not having
Speaker 2: not having a Democratic New Hampshire primary in twenty twenty four. Again,
Speaker 2: if I'm being brutally honest, or it's shameful because you're
Speaker 2: attacking Trump for his anti democracy stance, but then you're saying, well,
Speaker 2: we're not going to have a primary. Well, you know what,
Speaker 2: even Jimmy Carter had that primary against Teddy Kennedy, and
Speaker 2: I think it's a I think it's a mistake, and
Speaker 2: so I don't want to go back and relitigate the
Speaker 2: whole thing. I respect the Biden family. I'm not trying
Speaker 2: to do that, but I'm saying going forward, you guys
Speaker 2: got to get it together, and you got to coalesce
Speaker 2: around a national figure that can offer the dissent, that
Speaker 2: can offer the opposition. Now he's blowing I'm looking over
Speaker 2: the camera here to see NBC. He's blown the doors
Speaker 2: off the global economy. He's blown the doors off the
Speaker 2: stock market. We're plus fifty percent now, greater likely to
Speaker 2: have a recession, the poly markets saying four rate cuts
Speaker 2: are so that's a first quarter twenty six recession. And
Speaker 2: so get it together, beat these guys in the midterms,
Speaker 2: get it together and put up a candidate to box
Speaker 2: these guys out in twenty eight so that the situation
Speaker 2: doesn't get worse.
Speaker 1: And Anthony, let me ask you a question. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's tactical, and I want to talk a little
Speaker 1: bit about your perspective on Harris and the outcome, because
Speaker 1: I think you were like me that we felt more
Speaker 1: confident than certainly the outcome. But in terms of the
Speaker 1: guy or gal in the white horse to come save today,
Speaker 1: I know, you know, parties tend to focus so much
Speaker 1: on that, and my party, Democratic Party seems disproportionately always
Speaker 1: focused on the person on the white horse to save us,
Speaker 1: seems to me. Over the years, Uh, the Republican Party
Speaker 1: has been a little bit more structurally focused on school
Speaker 1: boards and focusing on legislative races in states large and small,
Speaker 1: a bottom up frame, not necessarily a top.
Speaker 2: Generation operation, red maps or you know that. You know that,
Speaker 2: you know the coinage of that term, right. We they
Speaker 2: they said, Okay, we've got to get into those state legislatures.
Speaker 2: They'll help us jerry mander these districts and will even
Speaker 2: though we're a minority party in terms of registrations, let's
Speaker 2: organize and we'll beat these guys by using the tyranny
Speaker 2: of the minority right. The founders were worried about the
Speaker 2: tyranny of the majority, but the Republicans organize and assertive
Speaker 2: themselves using the tyranny of the minority. That's a fascinating
Speaker 2: point that you're bringing up.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and so it's interesting for me. It's both and
Speaker 1: and I one of the things that that I'm I
Speaker 1: caution my party about is if we're too fixated on
Speaker 1: a personality, uh, then we're miss an opportunity to sort
Speaker 1: of reimagine our party because there's bigger trend lines here
Speaker 1: that sort of predate COVID and even Trump as it
Speaker 1: relates to, you know, starting to lose this multi ethnic
Speaker 1: young men in particular across the spectrum. Some of that
Speaker 1: was arrested because of COVID and Trump, but that that
Speaker 1: trend lines now big headline and I'm curious, you know,
Speaker 1: your sort of reflection on that, but also reflection on
Speaker 1: where Harris may have struggled. Was it just one hundred
Speaker 1: and seven days. Was it the lack of an open primary.
Speaker 1: Was it the fact she didn't distinguish herself enough and
Speaker 1: separate herself enough from an incumbent. Was it the issue
Speaker 1: of incumbency? Was it inflation? Was it interest rates? Was
Speaker 1: it immigration? Was it wokeism broadly defined. Have you landed
Speaker 1: on any theory of the case. So what the hell
Speaker 1: happened in that election?
Speaker 2: So let me let me give you three things. Some
Speaker 2: of them are going to be controversial for your party,
Speaker 2: and so you know you're probably going to get some
Speaker 2: negative press me saying this on your air, and I
Speaker 2: apologize to you in advance, but I hope that people
Speaker 2: listening will be open minded because I want you to win.
Speaker 2: You have to slay this maga party. This is no
Speaker 2: longer the Republican party I lived in, sir. This has
Speaker 2: been decapitated. Hostile takeover, third party insurgency has has changed
Speaker 2: this into a Frankenstein monster, a Frankenstein monster of anti democracy.
Speaker 2: So we have to beat them. So if I would say,
Speaker 2: let's leave off the table of the open primary, it
Speaker 2: didn't happen. I think we would have liked to have
Speaker 2: seen that starting in September of twenty three, and that
Speaker 2: would have built up a case and somebody would have
Speaker 2: grabbed you got to the top of the pecking order.
Speaker 2: That would have fortified that candidate. But in the one
Speaker 2: hundred and seven days, I'll just make three very close observations.
Speaker 2: Number one, the vice president is a very competent, very
Speaker 2: capable leader. But she was not a great risk taker
Speaker 2: in that moment. Unfortunately, to rise to the presidency now
Speaker 2: it requires exogynous risks. If you've got a group of
Speaker 2: handlers around you say, don't go on Rogan, don't go
Speaker 2: on this person, don't go on that person. Fox News
Speaker 2: one time, not twenty five times. If I were her,
Speaker 2: I would have said, Hey, every morning to be on
Speaker 2: Fox News. I'm going to eventually chum up to those
Speaker 2: anchors that hate me, and I'm going to get some
Speaker 2: messaging out there where people will see that I'm not
Speaker 2: the demon that they're trying to present me. As you
Speaker 2: see what I mean. I would have said, Hey, Fox News,
Speaker 2: I want to be on every day. You know these
Speaker 2: podcasts that people are excoriating me, these Alpha bro podcasts
Speaker 2: at least once or twice a week. Okay, So she
Speaker 2: was not a risk taker. That's number one. Number two.
Speaker 2: Robert Carrow in his books on Lyndon Johnson, which I
Speaker 2: think are some of the best biography ever written, he
Speaker 2: describes Humphrey's situation with Johnson. He didn't break from Johnson.
Speaker 2: Johnson comes out of the race in sixty eight. Humphrey
Speaker 2: waits till October one to break from Johnson. He's not
Speaker 2: even willing to do with any such a gentleman. Johnson
Speaker 2: brings him into the Oval office and says, you gotta
Speaker 2: break from me. You want a blankety blank on me
Speaker 2: on the Vietnam War, blankety blank on this, blankety blank
Speaker 2: on that. You got to do it. And so he
Speaker 2: starts that process in October. It's too late, and unfortunately
Speaker 2: the Vice president's respect for Joe Biden, that infamous line
Speaker 2: that she says on the View, I can't think of
Speaker 2: anything I would have done differently, is harmful to her
Speaker 2: because we're in an anti incumbency moment and she needed
Speaker 2: to do what Johnson suggested to Humphrey. But in Humphrey's case,
Speaker 2: it was too late, sir. The polls were closing. He
Speaker 2: was catching Nixon when he made that break, but it
Speaker 2: was too late. And then the third thing, and I
Speaker 2: know this is really going to drive everybody crazy. So
Speaker 2: you have a fire extinguisher behind you in case your
Speaker 2: hair sets on fire, because the third thing is really bad.
Speaker 2: You're okay, you're a flame. You're in a flame retardan
Speaker 2: vest there let's do it. Let's hear it. The third
Speaker 2: thing is, how on God's earth do you let Bobby
Speaker 2: and Elon out of the party? And how do you guys? Interesting? Okay,
Speaker 2: I was expecting that.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, interesting, I wasn't expecting you to say that.
Speaker 2: Okay, But how do you guys do that? Okay? Bobby
Speaker 2: is a Kennedy whole families tied to the party. He
Speaker 2: actually wants to stay in the party. And I know
Speaker 2: this because he endorsed the back of my Bitcoin book. Okay,
Speaker 2: and I know Bobby forever from New York. How do
Speaker 2: you let Bobby out of the party? Okay? And even
Speaker 2: if you don't like Bobby or you think he's a
Speaker 2: kook with the vaccines, you get open the tent, keep
Speaker 2: them in the party because he's got that bro connectivity
Speaker 2: that costs you a few points where you don't want them.
Speaker 2: And Elon, I don't care what the UAW saying or
Speaker 2: whoever told whoever told Biden to disinvite Elon from the
Speaker 2: Electric Vehicle summit. I don't know who it was, but
Speaker 2: President Biden shaid, look, man, I'm sorry. The guy's the
Speaker 2: richest guy in the country. He's got a forty four
Speaker 2: billion dollar bullhorn, and he's coming to the party.
Speaker 1: So he also created the space. You can't how the
Speaker 1: hell you have an electric vehicle.
Speaker 2: You don't have to sit next to the guy. And
Speaker 2: you may not like him because he doesn't have a
Speaker 2: union shop, but he's our guy, and we got we
Speaker 2: got to keep him in the party. And just so,
Speaker 2: those two guys, they hurt you in Pennsylvania. Elon hurts
Speaker 2: you in Pennsylvania. He hurts you in the Twitter verse
Speaker 2: or whatever you want to call it with the toxic algorithm,
Speaker 2: and Bobby hurts you. And I'm just submitting again this
Speaker 2: is the indictment of your party. If I could be
Speaker 2: bold enough to say this to you, respectfully, open the tent,
Speaker 2: hold your nose. If somebody like me wants to help you,
Speaker 2: invite me in. I will try to help you get
Speaker 2: those guys back in the party. I know you want
Speaker 2: to cancel them now, you want to blow up Tesla
Speaker 2: vehicles and so on and so forth. Yeah, get Elon back. Okay,
Speaker 2: calm down, calmed down. He's shooting rockets into space. He's
Speaker 2: got an environmentally friendly vehicle that he's made, which you
Speaker 2: guys used to buy in droves. Let's calm him down,
Speaker 2: Let's disengage him from where he is right now, get
Speaker 2: him back to neutral, because those three things hurt Harris.
Speaker 2: No risk taking, no break from Humphrey, And how to
Speaker 2: hell do you let Bobby and Elon out of that party.
Speaker 1: It's interesting and in the fact that you attached I mean,
Speaker 1: the first two I certainly appreciate, but it's interesting you
Speaker 1: thought it was that determinative these two individuals, these brands,
Speaker 1: and what they represent historically and iconically. Both interestingly, two
Speaker 1: people that are best known for their environmental stewardship.
Speaker 2: There were Democrats for decades, Governor Newsom, they were, By.
Speaker 1: The way, I can't tell you how many events I
Speaker 1: had with both of them in San Francisco as mayor
Speaker 1: of the city, talking about environmental stewardship, climate change, and
Speaker 1: issues related to low carbon, green growth and electric vehicle transition.
Speaker 2: What he did, Asolish was, you know, to quote him,
Speaker 2: because he says he's on the spectrum ofge It was
Speaker 2: on the spectrum beautiful. He got them all in vance.
Speaker 2: He told them that the unpasteurized milk that they were
Speaker 2: pumping out of their dairy farms was going to be destroyed.
Speaker 2: Misinformation that was, you know, he gets he gets a
Speaker 2: red red card for that. He says that Biden's going
Speaker 2: to come after them with that. And then he gets
Speaker 2: them in a van because it can only take the
Speaker 2: horse and buggy unless they're not driving, and he drives
Speaker 2: them over to the voting and there's ninety nine thousand
Speaker 2: of them vote for Trump. And I'm telling you, this
Speaker 2: is a game of inches. You know this. I know this.
Speaker 2: I've worked on six presidential campaigns in the last twenty
Speaker 2: four years. It is a game of inches. It's a
Speaker 2: game of risk taking. It's a game of calculated risk taking.
Speaker 2: But when you got guys on your team that you
Speaker 2: may not like, don't be so righteous. Bring them into
Speaker 2: the town. I was told that some of the campaign
Speaker 2: guys wanted me on the campaign plane, and there were
Speaker 2: hardcore lefties that were like, nfw with that guy. He
Speaker 2: wants to worked for Donald Trump. Guys, give give that up,
Speaker 2: release anger, and let's let's study the existential threat and
Speaker 2: work together.
Speaker 1: And that disappoints me to hear you say that, But
Speaker 1: it doesn't shock me. I mean and and disappoints me
Speaker 1: because I saw hard you worked for Biden, And then
Speaker 1: how hard and sincerely you worked for Harris and how
Speaker 1: you've been a pretty consistent and vocal opponent of Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: And with your insight.
Speaker 2: This is not it's not even republicanism, sir. It is
Speaker 2: a perverse form of populism. And I'm going to give
Speaker 2: you a new word, okay. And I didn't know the
Speaker 2: definition of this word, but I know it now. Do
Speaker 2: you know what the word autarchy means? A U t
Speaker 2: a rky. Do you know what that means?
Speaker 1: You got me stumped me?
Speaker 2: What is it? Okay? So I didn't know what it
Speaker 2: meant either. Okay, somebody had explained it to me. Au
Speaker 2: t aarky. It means an autonomous economic system. So Trump
Speaker 2: wants to create an American auetarchy. He wants to wall
Speaker 2: us off literally and physically from the rest of the world.
Speaker 2: He wants to disengage America. It would be as if
Speaker 2: Ui Long or Charles Lindbergh beat Franklin Roosevelt and created
Speaker 2: the America First Movement in the nineteen thirties. This is
Speaker 2: what this guy wants to do, Okay. And I'm telling
Speaker 2: you this is an existential threat to our children and
Speaker 2: our grandchildren. Put down the swords. Let's work together. Let's
Speaker 2: figure out how AOC and Bernie can build this coalition
Speaker 2: alongside of whatever you're representing, and frankly, alongside of whatever Christy,
Speaker 2: myself and Kissinger and Cheney are representing. And let's lock forces.
Speaker 2: Remember the Whigs got destroyed by a new party called
Speaker 2: the Republicans. They got destroyed by that party because they
Speaker 2: created a new party in eighteen fifty six. They went
Speaker 2: after the abolitionists that were Democrats, and they went after
Speaker 2: the Whigs that wanted abolition, and they created this new
Speaker 2: party and they got a guy named Abraham Lincoln elected
Speaker 2: the first Republican president. The new Whig party is the
Speaker 2: Maga Party, which has the Republican name in name only.
Speaker 2: They're the tru Rhinos Governor Newsom, They're Maga Republicans in
Speaker 2: name only. Let's team up and let's build a coalition
Speaker 2: that is a plurality, a majority to restore confidence in
Speaker 2: America globally, to restore confidence in America economically. And then
Speaker 2: let's once once we look at the burning of the House,
Speaker 2: let's fixed parts of the House with maybe some constitutional amendments,
Speaker 2: maybe some policies or laws that will benefit all of
Speaker 2: us and make us safer in sort of a new
Speaker 2: American social contract.
Speaker 1: Well, you're not going to get an argument from me,
Speaker 1: and you know, I'm not that old, but I'm old
Speaker 1: enough to remember that that's the Democratic party you were
Speaker 1: referencing that built the middle class, that that gave us
Speaker 1: the weekends, that gave us medicaid, gave us medicare.
Speaker 2: How about the gipill sir, thank you transformed everything that
Speaker 2: was a Democrat idea, and that GI bill took Jewish
Speaker 2: tailors from the Lower East Side and turned their children
Speaker 2: into doctors. They took Italian construction workers and turned their
Speaker 2: sons and daughters into accountants, lawyers, or doctors. We had
Speaker 2: an ethnic middle class movement, driven mostly by Democrat policy
Speaker 2: in the post World War two era that gave opportunity
Speaker 2: to people that didn't have it in the Old Country
Speaker 2: and didn't frankly have it in America prior to that.
Speaker 2: These are these that's the idealism of your party. That's
Speaker 2: the Jack Kennedy vision of your portom Amen.
Speaker 1: Look, let me ask you just in you know a
Speaker 1: couple of tactical points, and I appreciate the larger tent framework.
Speaker 1: I think this party needs a vision and needs an
Speaker 1: economic vision. H you know, I think if you're going
Speaker 1: to talk about Kennedy, you know, he was the last
Speaker 1: president to bring us on a journey together. We saw
Speaker 1: ourselves on that journey, and I think that's a big
Speaker 1: part of also what's missing. What's what's the positive alternative
Speaker 1: vision that can enlive in and excite people and people
Speaker 1: feel included at a time of such division and fear
Speaker 1: and anxiety. But there's also the fear and anxiety in
Speaker 1: the vision that comes from the information superiority on the
Speaker 1: other side, as well, the weaponization of grievance, the ability
Speaker 1: to surround sound, to dominate the narrative, to flood the zone.
Speaker 1: In terms of communication, you've got sort of a gender bias,
Speaker 1: I would argue algorithms that skew as well. Online you
Speaker 1: got fourteen of the top fifteen cable shows are all
Speaker 1: Republican shows. Podcasts are dominated, as you say, you know,
Speaker 1: it's not just that manto spare of the bro culture,
Speaker 1: but sort of dominated by more moderate to conservative to
Speaker 1: ultra conservative voices. What do you make of that landscape
Speaker 1: and what's if you were going to just observe as
Speaker 1: a participant. You've got two podcasts, successful podcasts. You're out there.
Speaker 1: You've been in the media dominating for decades, back to
Speaker 1: your CNBC days, remember a few decades ago. I mean,
Speaker 1: what do you make of this environment and what do
Speaker 1: you make of how do we begin to sort of
Speaker 1: reconcile with that, and how do we sort of address
Speaker 1: the reckoning that is that asymmetry?
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, it's such a great question on so
Speaker 2: many levels and so many different layers. But I'll just
Speaker 2: add one thing to it. While the conservatives are dominating podcasting,
Speaker 2: and let's be honest, they are dominant cable news, mostly
Speaker 2: through Fox. They say the corrupt mainstream media is against us,
Speaker 2: you know, But in the meantime, the media it's almost
Speaker 2: like the typewriter business, right, the big media is dying, okay.
Speaker 2: And the reason why I applaud you starting this podcast
Speaker 2: is you're going to reach a lot of people because
Speaker 2: they can download you on their phone, they can go
Speaker 2: for a walk, they can hear what you're saying, and
Speaker 2: they'll say, Okay, I like that one, and then they
Speaker 2: forward it to five of their friends. It's like that
Speaker 2: old shampoo commercial and so what I would say to
Speaker 2: the Democrats start over. Okay, be the engineers, and you
Speaker 2: remember that movie Brian Grazer Ron Howard Apollo thirteen, Tom
Speaker 2: Hanks plays Jim Lovell. Be the engineers that go into
Speaker 2: the room and say, here's the tools on the table.
Speaker 2: We have to reinvent ourselves. Forget the mainstream media, forget
Speaker 2: the old totems. Let's be engineers. Let's be scientific, marketing engineers,
Speaker 2: media engineers. How would we reinvent ourselves today? And what
Speaker 2: will we do? What podcast would we have? What business
Speaker 2: podcast would we have? What messaging do we want out there?
Speaker 2: How do we stop attacking each other? The Republicans have
Speaker 2: done a very good job of not attacking each other. Okay.
Speaker 2: I find it curious that Bannon goes after Musk. Okay,
Speaker 2: because I know Bannon well. I work with Bannon on
Speaker 2: the twenty sixteen campaign. He's going after Musk for many
Speaker 2: different reasons. But he knows that Musk is not pure Maga.
Speaker 2: He knows this, Okay. He knows Musk is reacting to
Speaker 2: what happened to him in the world of the Blue world.
Speaker 2: He moved into the Red world or the dark Maga world.
Speaker 2: Whatever he calls it because of what happened to him
Speaker 2: in the blue world. So get to the table like
Speaker 2: the engineers on Apollo thirteen. Let's start from scratch. Let's
Speaker 2: have a summit. You call the summit. I'll be there,
Speaker 2: and let's part a laboratory of ideas to beat this back.
Speaker 2: Because the average American is kind, the average American does
Speaker 2: not want to play the victim. The average American is aspirational,
Speaker 2: and the average American believes in lifting the boats of others.
Speaker 2: You know, the martial law, the Marshall Plan. Excuse me past,
Speaker 2: because the average American looked at the landscape of the
Speaker 2: world and said, the world needs this, and if it's
Speaker 2: good for the world, it's going to be good for us.
Speaker 2: And you know, Governor Newsom, you're at your best when
Speaker 2: you're helping other people. Americans know this. Americans get their
Speaker 2: best feeling on the side of giving. Donald Trump has
Speaker 2: set up in America and I'm going to give you
Speaker 2: these two allegories. You have one blue collar family where
Speaker 2: the young man in the blue collar family rises the
Speaker 2: great success and he pays for some tuitions. Governor Newsham,
Speaker 2: he buys a car, He helps people with medical expenses
Speaker 2: because he's the one rich person in the otherwise blue
Speaker 2: collar family. Imagine the second family or the same thing happens,
Speaker 2: but the manner of the woman builds this beautiful swimming
Speaker 2: pool and this great mansion, and then they charge their
Speaker 2: family members to come into the swiming pool. Hey, gav
Speaker 2: you want to come to my swimming pool. It's twenty
Speaker 2: five bucks. Which family is going to do better? Which family? Yeah? Okay?
Speaker 2: And the Democrats know this. The Democrats know this in
Speaker 2: their bone marrow. Get back to the table. This is
Speaker 2: what we represent. This is the party that built the
Speaker 2: United Nations. This is the party that laid the framework
Speaker 2: at Bretton Woods for the IMF and the World Bank. Okay.
Speaker 2: And by the way, globalism, I maintain just has bad marketing. Okay,
Speaker 2: because the globalism has led to rising living standards here
Speaker 2: in the United States, elsewhere, better health standards, less pestilence.
Speaker 2: It is actually worked. We just got really bad marketing
Speaker 2: people involved with this. Get back to the table and
Speaker 2: and let's brush up on this. And I think the
Speaker 2: counter narrative would blow the doors off these people. They
Speaker 2: are in the minority.
Speaker 1: By the way, final question, just because I'm curious. I mean,
Speaker 1: when the dust settles on Trump, Trump is'm then is
Speaker 1: top of mind? And what's top of mind for a
Speaker 1: lot of folks out there that are whispering, is what's JD.
Speaker 2: Vance up to?
Speaker 1: You know, you talk about Elon Musk, you talk about
Speaker 1: others that really supported his nomination for vice president, members
Speaker 1: of Trump's own family, Peter Thiel types and others. You've
Speaker 1: got Bannon out there, either performatively or very seriously making
Speaker 1: the case twenty twenty eight Donald Trump extending term or
Speaker 1: it's Tran or it's Vance, and then he'll step aside
Speaker 1: and we'll continue MAGA for another four years. I mean,
Speaker 1: what do you make of the twenty twenty eight third term?
Speaker 1: What do you make of JD.
Speaker 3: Van?
Speaker 1: That's how serious and concerned are you about JD. Vance
Speaker 1: and what he represents and the people that are his
Speaker 1: close as confidence and allies.
Speaker 2: Well, I mean, so you know from California, these guys
Speaker 2: are Curtis Jorvin post the Democracy sort of people. They
Speaker 2: believe in a monarchical structure that would be Teel and Musk,
Speaker 2: and JD. Vance is an acolyte of that, which is
Speaker 2: why they put him in there. It's interesting. I really
Speaker 2: feel Trump made that decision distracted by a bullet that
Speaker 2: whizzed by his ear. He only had seventy two hours
Speaker 2: to compose himself prior to the convention, and I think
Speaker 2: he made that decision. I don't think he likes Vance.
Speaker 2: He's been pretty clear when he says is he my successor?
Speaker 2: He says no. He slammed Vance after the Margaret Brennan
Speaker 2: Sunday Morning Show where Vance said We're going to pardon
Speaker 2: the non violent Jay sixers. Trump got pissed at him
Speaker 2: and pardoned everybody. So you remember that scene in Fargo
Speaker 2: with the wood chipper. Vance is going into Donald trump
Speaker 2: woodchipper just matter of time because he's too close to power.
Speaker 2: Trump doesn't like anybody near his spotlight, as you know,
Speaker 2: and so he'll do to Dvance what he did to Pence.
Speaker 2: So I'm not as concerned about Vance as other people.
Speaker 2: The third term thing, I do believe people should take seriously.
Speaker 2: He's eighty two when he aspires to that third term.
Speaker 2: That's good for America that he's that old. But I
Speaker 2: think you have to take that seriously, and you have
Speaker 2: to take seriously that the stuff that he's doing to
Speaker 2: weak in America. You know, I'm in the category that
Speaker 2: you have to have at least a five percent probability
Speaker 2: that he tries to call off an election. Other people
Speaker 2: will find that incredulous, but I think you got to
Speaker 2: get it out there because there's a law of reflexivity, Gavin.
Speaker 2: If you get that out there, people will start socializing it,
Speaker 2: and then they'll plan themselves to attack that. If I
Speaker 2: talk to somebody and say, well, that's never going to happen,
Speaker 2: well then you don't know Donald Trump. So many things
Speaker 2: have happened in the last ten years that I literally
Speaker 2: looked right down the barrel of a camera and said
Speaker 2: that's never gonna happen, and then two months later it happens.
Speaker 2: So I've got five percent he's going for the third term, okay,
Speaker 2: and I've got, you know, some percentage that he could
Speaker 2: not even have try to pretend that he can't have
Speaker 2: an election. I do think the country's strong enough to
Speaker 2: stop that, but I have to throw that out there.
Speaker 2: But I do think Vance goes into the whip chipper.
Speaker 2: By the way, he's unpopular, he looks terrible, and if
Speaker 2: he wants to out Trump, Trump, shave your beard buddy,
Speaker 2: because the beard looks terrible, and Trump doesn't like the beard.
Speaker 2: And I'm just letting you know, you're not going to
Speaker 2: Greenland like you did and going to Space Force. You
Speaker 2: really look like a dummy. So I'm not worried about him.
Speaker 2: What I'm worried about is that younger movement. I am
Speaker 2: worried about the Charlie Kirks. I am worried about the
Speaker 2: the podcasters that are out there that are strong, vigorous
Speaker 2: guys and girls that are incredibly smart, and you guys
Speaker 2: need a counterdough to that, and so let's ship to
Speaker 2: work on that.
Speaker 1: You know, No, that's why, that's one of the reasons.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's precisely why I'm trying to bte these
Speaker 1: folks in so we start to understand how how potent
Speaker 1: and powerful they've increasingly become. Final final over under Musk
Speaker 1: is gone in two months, Uh, Rubio two months? What
Speaker 1: I mean, what's what's your over under on some of
Speaker 1: the I mean, he can't keep players around.
Speaker 2: Now because remember they have to own the libs, right,
Speaker 2: so Walsh can get on signal. He's texting Jeff Goldberg
Speaker 2: like war plans, and then it turns out he's using
Speaker 2: Gmail for all of the other stuff. So you know
Speaker 2: they're upset with Hillary Clinton for some reason. But then
Speaker 2: they're doing worse than mine did. And so he can't
Speaker 2: fire Walsh because he can't Waltz, because he can't give
Speaker 2: a liberal a scalp. You know, we got to own
Speaker 2: the Libs. Remember, he is the Napoleon of the culture war,
Speaker 2: Donald Trump. Okay, so you guys have to find Wellington,
Speaker 2: but he's the Napoleon, so we can't. You know, we
Speaker 2: got to own the Libs first before we do anything else. Right,
Speaker 2: We've got to run the ads on the trans gender athletics,
Speaker 2: even though it's a small group of people to trigger everybody. Right,
Speaker 2: So that guy's not getting fired. Right. So what Trump
Speaker 2: is pushing and what you have to be worried about,
Speaker 2: in my opinion, is that persistent clure. You guys seem
Speaker 2: to be one step behind him in every culture war.
Speaker 2: You know, I mean Bill, Bill's going to have dinner
Speaker 2: with him. Okay, Bill's on your team. By the way,
Speaker 2: don't let Bill go the way of Elon Musk. And
Speaker 2: by yeah, Bill Maher, don't let him go the way
Speaker 2: of Elon Musk. By give them when you're done with
Speaker 2: me podcasting, pick up the phone, call Billy, dude, let's
Speaker 2: go have lunch. Calm down, okay, I'm I'm sure he
Speaker 2: had Wellington in the White House Trumps eat said every
Speaker 2: night for dinner. Calm down, okay, and come back to
Speaker 2: the fault here, Billy, because we need you and you
Speaker 2: need us. You don't you don't want to go down.
Speaker 1: I have to agree with that, right.
Speaker 2: And by the way, you did great on his show
Speaker 2: the other night. I mean, you're very realistic, you know.
Speaker 2: But I've been on a show many times. But but dude,
Speaker 2: you know, don't let them. Don't let them go that way. Man,
Speaker 2: hear what you're saying.
Speaker 1: I hear what you're saying. No, and well, and I
Speaker 1: lied about the final final. This is the final final
Speaker 1: because I want to pick what you just said is
Speaker 1: really important and looking for advice here because I'm a
Speaker 1: practitioner in this respect as governor of this state. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, every day my state of mind is want
Speaker 1: to sort of just overwhelm with all the incoming that
Speaker 1: the missives, the messages, the letters, the threats from members
Speaker 1: of his cabinet, agency directors, lawyers, constant back and forth
Speaker 1: as it relates to sort of this deconstructive state mindset
Speaker 1: that Trump has in what twenty twenty five represents. You know,
Speaker 1: from our perspective, it's difficult. You know, what do you
Speaker 1: what do you chase? Do you do you react to
Speaker 1: every little indiscretion? Or do you wait for the big things?
Speaker 2: You know?
Speaker 1: Is it a carville a notion? Just stand back and
Speaker 1: watch him and plode, watch what's happened in the markets.
Speaker 1: This is a proof point of Carville strategy. One carvill
Speaker 1: may argue, I don't know. I mean, what do you
Speaker 1: what do you do? Or do you do you flood
Speaker 1: his own back? Are you constantly in everybody's face and
Speaker 1: do what Charlie Kirk's doing every single day? I mean, what,
Speaker 1: what's where are you in calibras?
Speaker 2: I believe in the big story, Governor Newsom. I believe
Speaker 2: in the narrative. Okay, if you study Lincoln, you study
Speaker 2: Jack Kennedy, you study the Roosevelt Revolution when he beat
Speaker 2: Herbert Hoover. I believe in the narrative. And so you're
Speaker 2: not gonna beat him being a pig like him. If
Speaker 2: you call his hands little like Marco Rubio, you end
Speaker 2: up as like one of his knaves. Right, So you're
Speaker 2: not gonna You're not you know, like the farmer said
Speaker 2: about the pig, You're not a pig. The pig likes
Speaker 2: getting in the mud. Don't get in the mud with
Speaker 2: the pig. I don't believe in that. You have a
Speaker 2: super narrative. Okay, you can point out to people what
Speaker 2: they're trying to do to you, the the bureaucratic terrorism
Speaker 2: that they're trying to do to you with the federal
Speaker 2: government exerting power over you. You can do that, but it's
Speaker 2: subt it got to do it subtly. The big narrative
Speaker 2: has to be who are we as Americans? When you
Speaker 2: look in the mirror, do you see in America that's
Speaker 2: aggrieved and victimized? Or do you see in America in ascendency?
Speaker 2: We represent the Americans that are in ascendency. We are
Speaker 2: the side for good. We are the benevolent people. We're
Speaker 2: not locking the gate to the swimming pool to charge admission.
Speaker 2: We're going to teach other people how to build their
Speaker 2: own swimming pools. Okay, and we've made some mistakes. You know,
Speaker 2: maybe you've got to have less regulations so Bill can
Speaker 2: get his roof done. I'm not saying that the Democrats
Speaker 2: are perfect. They made some mistakes. You're working on reform
Speaker 2: to correct those mistakes. But mistakes that you've made have
Speaker 2: been from inclusivity. The mistakes that you've made, whether it's
Speaker 2: bail reform or things like that, have been mistakes related
Speaker 2: to frailty of human beings and our humanity. And so
Speaker 2: I wouldn't focus on Charlie Kirk's rat tat tat, flood
Speaker 2: the Zone or Steve Bannon stuff, because that's already old news.
Speaker 2: The new new news is what is the narrative, What
Speaker 2: is the compelling democratic narrative which allows Americans to look
Speaker 2: in the mira and say that's me. I'm strong, I'm aspirational,
Speaker 2: I'm kind, I'm benevolent, and I'm going to work alongside
Speaker 2: of my fellow Americans to put down the internescent warfare
Speaker 2: and the internescent tribal warfare. These guys want the tribal warfare,
Speaker 2: but the average American does not, And they're beating you
Speaker 2: on the tribal warfare and in the culture war. But
Speaker 2: you can flip the table on them by going in
Speaker 2: the direction that I'm describing.
Speaker 1: A great way to Anne Anthony. Thank you for the conversation,
Speaker 1: thank you for your insight, thank.
Speaker 2: You for it's it's a huge honor to be on
Speaker 2: with you, okay and me. And by the way, you
Speaker 2: got it. The hair, I mean hair is an asset
Speaker 2: for you. Okay, you got to you got to use
Speaker 2: the hair more man. Okay, it's the hair more Yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean California asset. You know.
Speaker 1: Jesus, here we go.
Speaker 2: Very cute.
Speaker 1: What a way to add buddy, Hey, pleasure, thanks for
Speaker 1: taking the time. I really appreciate it. By the way,
Speaker 1: thank you for being so good to staff. That's a man.
Speaker 1: That's your character, the way you treated everyone around me.
Speaker 1: They said, this guy is a gentleman. So I just
Speaker 1: want folks to know that.
Speaker 2: And I appreciate because my grandmother was a maid Governor Newsom,
Speaker 2: so trust me, it's very important to me that I
Speaker 2: treat everybody with great kindness because you know, and by
Speaker 2: the way, that is a non starter at Skybridge, and
Speaker 2: people are mean to people that are beneath them. It's
Speaker 2: literally like an evacuation, you know, God bless but thank
Speaker 2: you for that. And uh it not to be so,
Speaker 2: you know, if it's not an imposition. I would love
Speaker 2: to do this again in person. I think it'd be
Speaker 2: a lot more fun. That would be a lot of fun.
Speaker 2: Let's make that happen, all right, all the best of you,
Speaker 2: Thank you to see you