WEBVTT - Interview Only w/ Mike Pesca - The Structural Reforms American Democracy Desperately Needs 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:02.040 This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you 0:00:02.080 --> 0:00:04.440 by Ethos and what Ethos does is it helps you 0:00:04.559 --> 0:00:06.880 find life insurance. Let me tell you why life insurance 0:00:07.000 --> 0:00:09.360 bailed me out. My father died when I was sixteen. 0:00:09.720 --> 0:00:11.680 We didn't have a lot of money when it happened, 0:00:11.800 --> 0:00:14.640 and we were in a pretty tough financial spot after 0:00:14.800 --> 0:00:18.520 it happened. I'm an only child. Suddenly my mother's single, 0:00:18.680 --> 0:00:21.360 single mother. She had a job, suddenly lost a job, 0:00:21.400 --> 0:00:23.799 looking for another job, and we were struggling. You know, 0:00:23.880 --> 0:00:26.720 my dad didn't leave us in the best financial situation, 0:00:27.040 --> 0:00:29.080 but he did make one purchase. He bought a life 0:00:29.120 --> 0:00:32.680 insurance policy. Wasn't a huge chunk of change, but it 0:00:32.760 --> 0:00:35.080 was enough when we found it. And when I say 0:00:35.120 --> 0:00:36.839 we found it, meaning we went through his desk and 0:00:36.840 --> 0:00:38.560 we found, oh, look at this, let's see if there's 0:00:38.600 --> 0:00:41.520 anything here. And it helped us out at a time 0:00:41.560 --> 0:00:43.720 that we really needed it. And that's why I think 0:00:43.720 --> 0:00:47.319 it's important that if you can, especially if you have 0:00:47.400 --> 0:00:50.000 young children, if you can get life insurance, you should 0:00:50.000 --> 0:00:54.400 get it. Life is full of unexpected emergencies, unexpected things happen. 0:00:55.080 --> 0:00:58.000 It is an extra bit of security, something you can 0:00:58.160 --> 0:01:01.240 leave and help out at a time when you're you're 0:01:01.280 --> 0:01:03.880 not there to help. So what does Ethos do well? 0:01:03.880 --> 0:01:07.000 Ethos makes getting life insurance fast and easy, and it's 0:01:07.000 --> 0:01:09.360 one hundred percent online. You can get a quote in seconds, 0:01:09.440 --> 0:01:11.319 you can apply in minutes, and you can get same 0:01:11.400 --> 0:01:14.160 day coverage. They will find you the right fit. There's 0:01:14.200 --> 0:01:16.480 no medical exam. You just answer a few simple health 0:01:16.520 --> 0:01:18.880 questions online. You can get up to three million dollars 0:01:18.920 --> 0:01:21.039 in coverage and some policies are as low as thirty 0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:23.880 dollars a month, and you'll get your lowest rate from 0:01:24.000 --> 0:01:27.440 their network of trusted carriers. So take ten minutes to 0:01:27.480 --> 0:01:31.000 get covered today with life insurance through Ethos. Get your 0:01:31.000 --> 0:01:34.760 free quote at ethos dot com slash chuck. That is 0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:41.080 ETOs dot com slash chuck. Application times may vary and 0:01:41.240 --> 0:01:42.680 rates may vary. 0:01:46.040 --> 0:01:46.280 Well. 0:01:46.360 --> 0:01:49.440 Coming back for a return engagement, as we'd like to 0:01:49.480 --> 0:01:52.080 do regularly, I think we're almost doing this quarterly. It's 0:01:52.120 --> 0:01:55.600 my my pal, Mike Pesca of the Just List and 0:01:55.920 --> 0:01:59.200 all sorts of his his world. We were just talking 0:01:59.240 --> 0:02:04.000 about each other's each other's digital world, and we like 0:02:04.040 --> 0:02:05.280 to have our worlds collide. 0:02:05.440 --> 0:02:06.440 Mike, it's good to see. 0:02:06.240 --> 0:02:08.960 You, Hey, thanks for having me. Speaking of quarterly what 0:02:09.040 --> 0:02:12.160 happened to the Trump proposal to do away with quarterly 0:02:12.200 --> 0:02:14.799 reports and only do by anyal I guess it would 0:02:14.840 --> 0:02:17.280 be Actually just so there's that's still moving its way. 0:02:17.160 --> 0:02:19.320 Through the SEC. I think I actually just saw an 0:02:19.360 --> 0:02:19.960 update on that. 0:02:20.360 --> 0:02:23.240 There is I think which I've talked. 0:02:23.800 --> 0:02:26.600 Oh, it's a good idea. I talked to you. 0:02:26.600 --> 0:02:30.280 You know, there was a so Jack Welch is considered 0:02:30.320 --> 0:02:33.800 the got the the sort of the godfather of that idea, right, 0:02:33.840 --> 0:02:37.040 the quarterly reports to goose stock prices. Back in his 0:02:37.080 --> 0:02:41.960 old ge days and towards the end of his life 0:02:42.040 --> 0:02:45.840 he started expressing like he admitted, I probably that the 0:02:45.919 --> 0:02:47.240 quarterly report idea. 0:02:47.040 --> 0:02:50.440 Was it is past. 0:02:50.680 --> 0:02:54.120 He wouldn't, you know, because no person of his ego 0:02:54.160 --> 0:02:56.959 will ever admit they were wrong. He just sort of 0:02:57.000 --> 0:02:59.720 admitted that they were. It was no longer useful and 0:02:59.800 --> 0:03:05.680 so was probably hurting companies. He was he was pre right, Yes, yeah, exactly, you. 0:03:05.600 --> 0:03:07.560 Know the way somebody with a huge ego like his. 0:03:08.040 --> 0:03:10.720 So the down yeah, the downside to that that I've 0:03:10.800 --> 0:03:15.240 heard is that back when Jack Welsh was pioneering that 0:03:15.680 --> 0:03:19.160 things were a little more stable and now quarterly reports 0:03:19.160 --> 0:03:23.480 at least give some visibility into possible meltdowns. But also 0:03:24.080 --> 0:03:26.880 the Ft. There's an FT podcast I know you like 0:03:26.919 --> 0:03:29.760 the Ft, and they were having a debate where I 0:03:29.760 --> 0:03:33.080 think they said, just financially good idea, but what you 0:03:33.160 --> 0:03:36.480 don't want to do is give Donald Trump any wins. Ever, 0:03:36.600 --> 0:03:39.240 and these were FT journalists right now, but they were 0:03:39.320 --> 0:03:43.040 embracing I guess their activism, which is once he comes 0:03:43.120 --> 0:03:45.880 up with a good idea, that's the most dangerous thing 0:03:45.920 --> 0:03:48.040 of all. And I was contrasting that. I did a 0:03:48.360 --> 0:03:51.520 thing on the Gist my show with The Dispatch where 0:03:51.760 --> 0:03:54.320 viewed Emily Auster, who was saying, you know, some of 0:03:54.360 --> 0:03:57.640 this MAGA stuff, not the vaccines, but the meat and 0:03:57.680 --> 0:03:59.760 the food pyramid, that is a good idea. And then 0:03:59.800 --> 0:04:02.120 she got blowback, how are you giving Trump credit? So 0:04:02.200 --> 0:04:05.760 even journalistically, it's interesting the Dispatch, you know, these former 0:04:05.840 --> 0:04:10.760 Republicans are maybe still identified conservatives. They're saying we have 0:04:10.800 --> 0:04:12.840 to be honest, that if we need to give Trump 0:04:12.840 --> 0:04:15.920 a win, we give them a win. And the Financial Times, 0:04:16.240 --> 0:04:20.880 which definitely sees themselves outside the activism continuum, said no, 0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:22.560 we can never give Donald Trump a win. 0:04:23.279 --> 0:04:23.600 No, this. 0:04:23.760 --> 0:04:26.600 Well, you know, this is at the core of the 0:04:26.640 --> 0:04:30.920 redistricting fight in Virginia. This is a bad idea, This 0:04:30.960 --> 0:04:35.440 is bad for democracy. But the but the counter argument 0:04:36.080 --> 0:04:38.279 from people that even admit, yeah, this is not a 0:04:38.279 --> 0:04:41.120 good idea long term, you got to fight fire with fire. 0:04:42.200 --> 0:04:45.640 And it's the whole, this whole mentality. And I just think, 0:04:45.680 --> 0:04:49.040 look what we've turned into is I think both parties 0:04:49.040 --> 0:04:53.480 have become reactionary parties. Right, they don't really right, they 0:04:53.920 --> 0:04:58.359 define themselves right own the Libs and Trump resistance is 0:04:58.400 --> 0:05:01.720 really the same ideology, don't you think. 0:05:02.000 --> 0:05:05.200 Yes, And all we're doing in Yvone, Levine writes about this, 0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:08.360 we're just in this era of going back and forth 0:05:08.400 --> 0:05:10.560 and to and fro, and I don't see how we 0:05:10.600 --> 0:05:13.160 get out of it now, as far as the redition, I. 0:05:13.120 --> 0:05:16.080 Do, but we got out of this before. I obsessed 0:05:16.080 --> 0:05:19.680 over this. This is actually the I'm going to pull 0:05:19.680 --> 0:05:23.800 a muscle padding my promoting something I'm doing here, but 0:05:23.920 --> 0:05:27.040 on my substack this week, I sort of go through 0:05:27.160 --> 0:05:31.039 I'm obsessed with the period between Jackson and Lincoln in 0:05:31.080 --> 0:05:35.520 American history because it was this we had technically eight 0:05:35.560 --> 0:05:37.840 presidents in twenty four years, because of deaths. 0:05:37.960 --> 0:05:39.479 But it was really seven. 0:05:39.240 --> 0:05:43.239 Presidencies in twenty four years because you had the thirty 0:05:43.279 --> 0:05:47.720 one day president and each one of them, and essentially 0:05:47.839 --> 0:05:53.280 it was like each president was elected claiming they were 0:05:53.279 --> 0:05:55.240 going to solve it, they were going to bring the 0:05:55.240 --> 0:05:58.240 country together, they were going to quote solve this problem, right, 0:05:58.400 --> 0:06:00.760 but not necessarily solve the problem, meaning. 0:06:00.600 --> 0:06:01.719 At that time it's slavery. 0:06:02.640 --> 0:06:05.600 But it would be all these papering over ideas, right, 0:06:05.640 --> 0:06:08.920 So you had whether it was the Democrats nominating a 0:06:08.960 --> 0:06:11.960 northern or at one point in Franklin Pierce, or the 0:06:12.560 --> 0:06:18.480 joint Tickets, which was Harrison and what's it the dough face, right, yeah, 0:06:18.640 --> 0:06:20.760 the few the signing of the Fugitive Slave Act that 0:06:20.880 --> 0:06:24.159 Millard Fillmore thought was going to finally, you know, to 0:06:24.200 --> 0:06:26.839 break some peace, right, it was, but it was a 0:06:27.120 --> 0:06:29.200 It was just a series of presidents that were trying 0:06:29.200 --> 0:06:32.480 to paper over, right. And then finally the Whigs were 0:06:32.560 --> 0:06:35.200 just too weak to deal with the issue. And then 0:06:35.240 --> 0:06:37.680 finally we got a new party in the Republican Party. 0:06:38.440 --> 0:06:40.320 So it led me to think, which party is going 0:06:40.360 --> 0:06:42.760 to be the Whigs, because I'm convinced one of them 0:06:42.839 --> 0:06:45.120 is going away in the next decade or so big 0:06:45.160 --> 0:06:48.279 out of frustration by there bye by like you can't, 0:06:48.320 --> 0:06:51.200 you're not you're not accomplishing. You know, there's going to 0:06:51.240 --> 0:06:52.720 be a moment, and I think, you know. 0:06:54.360 --> 0:06:54.880 Trump won. 0:06:54.920 --> 0:06:57.080 Everybody thought it'd be the Republicans. I'm not thinking, well, 0:06:57.080 --> 0:07:01.039 it could very easily be the Democrats, right, because they're 0:07:01.080 --> 0:07:03.480 in some ways performing like the Whigs. At the moment 0:07:03.640 --> 0:07:05.839 where there's a divide inside the party, do you go 0:07:05.960 --> 0:07:11.800 full resistance or do you try to persuade those, you know, 0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:13.880 a few more from the other side to try to 0:07:13.880 --> 0:07:18.440 have a more durable majoritarianism. And I think that, you know, 0:07:19.400 --> 0:07:21.520 bottom line is we're not We're not done yet with 0:07:21.600 --> 0:07:24.760 this back and forth we had. We went through six 0:07:24.880 --> 0:07:28.080 presidencies between Jackson and Lincoln. Nobody got re elected, no 0:07:28.120 --> 0:07:30.160 party got reelected. Right, it was just a series of 0:07:30.160 --> 0:07:33.800 this stuff. And we're we're in our third one right now, 0:07:34.240 --> 0:07:36.840 twenty eight yet going to resolve this. So I think 0:07:36.880 --> 0:07:39.080 we will eventually resolve it. The question is how many 0:07:39.120 --> 0:07:41.320 people have to get hurt before we sober up. 0:07:41.480 --> 0:07:43.440 That's exactly what I was saying. So all it will 0:07:43.440 --> 0:07:46.280 take is six hundred thousand dead, Although normed for the 0:07:46.320 --> 0:07:48.440 current population now would be like what two million? 0:07:48.600 --> 0:07:53.360 Great? I know we're not advocating civil war here, guys. No, 0:07:54.040 --> 0:07:54.560 the boat. 0:07:54.880 --> 0:07:57.080 We're actually hoping we can resolve it with it, you know, 0:07:57.200 --> 0:08:00.400 just short of that. Yeah, there are different parties, systems. 0:08:00.560 --> 0:08:04.400 I wanted I heard your commentary on Virginia. So you 0:08:04.640 --> 0:08:08.280 think that even without this redistricting, it would go from 0:08:08.400 --> 0:08:10.920 now it's six Democrats, five Republicans. 0:08:11.040 --> 0:08:12.520 You think we'd go to nine to two. 0:08:12.840 --> 0:08:15.600 Eight three without it? Eighty three without it? You got 0:08:15.680 --> 0:08:17.280 the first and the second man. 0:08:17.360 --> 0:08:19.520 You think, do you think ten to one with it 0:08:20.200 --> 0:08:22.000 or I don't know if they get the ten one 0:08:22.040 --> 0:08:24.640 ten one max. Yeah, but it could end up at 0:08:24.680 --> 0:08:26.240 nine to two. So if you end up at nine two, 0:08:27.840 --> 0:08:30.160 you basically did all this work. You sort of peed 0:08:30.240 --> 0:08:34.480 away political capital of Barack Obama and Abigail Spamberger for 0:08:34.640 --> 0:08:35.280 one seat. 0:08:35.720 --> 0:08:40.280 Right, But do you think as a general principal Democrats 0:08:40.320 --> 0:08:44.360 who have always said we are better than redistricting for 0:08:44.480 --> 0:08:47.720 political gain, do you think that's what they should say 0:08:47.800 --> 0:08:50.800 or they should be recognizing the moment right now where 0:08:50.880 --> 0:08:53.040 the headwinds are that we don't need to do it 0:08:53.120 --> 0:08:56.520 right now. Because as a principle. I do not believe 0:08:56.920 --> 0:08:59.719 in unilateral disarmament. 0:09:00.080 --> 0:09:01.679 Sure, I understand that concept. 0:09:01.800 --> 0:09:07.240 Yeah, I just think the problem is, I guess I'm 0:09:07.280 --> 0:09:11.040 even more Pollyannish about it. I think having more swing 0:09:11.280 --> 0:09:14.240 basically you're taking away swing districts. But if you actually 0:09:14.280 --> 0:09:19.000 have Republicans in light red districts, then you have more possibility. 0:09:19.520 --> 0:09:22.720 Would we be better off if a third of the 0:09:22.800 --> 0:09:27.320 Republican caucus were Don Bacon people? Or do you create 0:09:27.360 --> 0:09:30.720 a situation where no, you're just gonna have a whole. 0:09:30.520 --> 0:09:33.000 Bunch of James Comers. Is that what you want? 0:09:33.320 --> 0:09:36.920 And then then there's no ability to sort of bridge 0:09:36.920 --> 0:09:41.000 any divides, so that I actually think that that's the 0:09:41.080 --> 0:09:42.480 other part of this is that what do you what 0:09:42.520 --> 0:09:46.640 do you are we really gaining in this other than 0:09:46.679 --> 0:09:58.440 a fight just you know, a gavel And again I'm I'm. 0:09:55.880 --> 0:09:57.600 This, Look, we've gone through this. 0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:02.320 Anytime you want to temporarily suspend anything because you think no, no, no, 0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:06.600 First of all, how often have parties you know who 0:10:06.600 --> 0:10:08.440 said no, no, no, we'll come back to this have actually 0:10:08.440 --> 0:10:08.920 come back to this? 0:10:09.200 --> 0:10:09.440 Right? 0:10:10.480 --> 0:10:15.360 Yeah, I think that that's wise, but very specific to 0:10:15.400 --> 0:10:19.000 the moment, and I remember it was before we started 0:10:19.000 --> 0:10:21.960 seeing polls or knew much more than there's usually the 0:10:22.000 --> 0:10:25.320 swing back in the mid terms. But New York had 0:10:25.360 --> 0:10:28.400 the choice whether to really to throw out a fairly 0:10:28.520 --> 0:10:32.760 drawn electoral map, or the Democrats could try to force 0:10:32.800 --> 0:10:36.800 through their pro democratic map. And I remember thinking to myself, 0:10:37.280 --> 0:10:39.840 these are the Democrats right now kind of violating their 0:10:39.840 --> 0:10:42.120 own principles. And I don't know if they'll be punished 0:10:42.160 --> 0:10:44.640 by the voters for it, but they're showing themselves to 0:10:44.679 --> 0:10:48.199 be cynical, and it is I said, not a good look. Now, 0:10:48.200 --> 0:10:51.240 this was before I thought that they would win anyway, 0:10:51.280 --> 0:10:53.360 And in New York it doesn't really matter that My 0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:55.520 matter is a little bit. You know, Upstate New York 0:10:55.920 --> 0:10:57.840 elects repulsive valley. 0:10:57.920 --> 0:11:01.640 There's a whole bunch of places where right now New 0:11:01.720 --> 0:11:05.240 York is Ohio without the New York City mean. 0:11:06.080 --> 0:11:09.079 Well, Pennsylvania's Alabama with a tea in the middle. But 0:11:11.880 --> 0:11:14.480 as a principle, I don't think people really vote on it, 0:11:14.600 --> 0:11:16.880 especially because of the primacy of the primaries. And I 0:11:16.880 --> 0:11:19.520 think this is the biggest problem in American politics. You 0:11:19.559 --> 0:11:22.199 were talking about money. I think whatever can be done 0:11:22.480 --> 0:11:24.760 to make the because we're so polarized. I mean, if 0:11:24.760 --> 0:11:26.920 you want to go back to the EPI phenomenon, the 0:11:26.960 --> 0:11:29.920 primaries of the EPI phenomenon on, our polarization is the worst. 0:11:30.040 --> 0:11:31.280 And I have a friend and a guy I know, 0:11:31.400 --> 0:11:35.080 Bradley Tusk, and he's tried to get essentially app voting, 0:11:35.120 --> 0:11:37.040 and I think that would be a real game changer 0:11:37.080 --> 0:11:39.920 if it could be done successfully. And he's convinced me 0:11:39.960 --> 0:11:42.360 it can be done, so I don't want to you know, 0:11:42.800 --> 0:11:43.040 a lot. 0:11:43.640 --> 0:11:45.600 They're going to experiment in Alaska with this first. 0:11:45.559 --> 0:11:47.880 Alaska and it's done in West Virginia and it's been 0:11:47.920 --> 0:11:51.320 done successfully, and he specifically tried to bring it to 0:11:51.480 --> 0:11:53.920 non Blue states. He tried to bring it to places 0:11:54.040 --> 0:11:57.400 where they might be suspicious of this online voting app 0:11:57.400 --> 0:11:59.080 and think about all the things that we do that 0:11:59.160 --> 0:12:01.400 need to be secure on an app, from you know, 0:12:01.480 --> 0:12:05.000 registering for a citizenship or for our IDs and everything else. 0:12:05.160 --> 0:12:06.719 So it can be done. And once it's done, and 0:12:06.760 --> 0:12:10.040 once it's easy, it takes primaries from something with eleven 0:12:10.080 --> 0:12:12.760 percent participation, so you know, fifty And I think that's 0:12:12.760 --> 0:12:15.640 a huge game changer and it's the number one reform 0:12:15.679 --> 0:12:18.440 I think that really can change things look. 0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:21.160 And I actually think state I think I think we've 0:12:21.160 --> 0:12:26.840 had this conversation before. I think taxpayer funded partisan primaries 0:12:26.960 --> 0:12:31.520 I think are unconstitutional because you're telling me I have 0:12:31.600 --> 0:12:36.040 to join a private organization in order to participate in 0:12:36.080 --> 0:12:40.360 a taxpayer funded event. I think that's a violation of 0:12:40.360 --> 0:12:44.440 equal protection. And now that I don't think they're you know, 0:12:44.640 --> 0:12:50.920 I'm I am pretty I would just call it supportive 0:12:50.960 --> 0:12:53.880 of the folks over at open primaries. And I've like 0:12:54.000 --> 0:12:56.240 pushed this as as sort of I think there's a 0:12:56.320 --> 0:12:59.680 legal I think there's actually you can you can sue 0:12:59.679 --> 0:13:02.440 some of the states that had these that essentially bar 0:13:03.200 --> 0:13:08.240 independence and bar non registered voters from this. But looked 0:13:08.280 --> 0:13:11.200 all party primary, I mean, it is the better answer. 0:13:11.679 --> 0:13:12.559 There's no you know. 0:13:13.040 --> 0:13:16.400 The fact is, think about the office that is the 0:13:16.480 --> 0:13:19.960 least partisan in America these days, it's mayor. And a 0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:24.520 majority of mayors are elected in all party primaries, where 0:13:24.559 --> 0:13:26.920 the top two candidates usually they don't even put parties. 0:13:27.200 --> 0:13:29.440 A lot of them are none are you don't put 0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:31.920 your party label on the ballot. 0:13:32.559 --> 0:13:33.840 And top two play. 0:13:33.920 --> 0:13:36.240 I mean, And the thing is is that I love 0:13:36.280 --> 0:13:39.160 to use the example of a congressman and Carlos Sumenez. 0:13:39.880 --> 0:13:43.559 He's a Republican congressman from Miami. When he was mayor 0:13:43.600 --> 0:13:46.160 of Miami Dade, I had no idea he was a 0:13:46.160 --> 0:13:50.480 conservative Republican because he didn't govern that way. He governed 0:13:50.480 --> 0:13:53.680 the whole county. He was elected in a county wide vote. 0:13:54.160 --> 0:13:58.040 He never put his party. You knew he leaned, right, Okay, 0:13:58.559 --> 0:14:03.240 And let's say you governed based on how the votes 0:14:03.280 --> 0:14:05.200 that get you in office. And then, of course he 0:14:05.240 --> 0:14:08.440 got elected in a partisan Republican primary where the Republican 0:14:08.480 --> 0:14:10.880 primaries everything, and he's voted a lot more concern even 0:14:11.760 --> 0:14:15.800 challenged that the elect didn't certify in January sixth, right, 0:14:16.320 --> 0:14:18.559 And I remember being surprised that he didn't because I 0:14:18.640 --> 0:14:21.000 knew what kind of marry was. But I'd actually chalk 0:14:21.040 --> 0:14:23.520 it up to I always say this, Our issue is incentives. 0:14:23.840 --> 0:14:26.880 There are bad people can do good things with good incentives, 0:14:26.920 --> 0:14:29.400 and good people can do bad things with bad incentives. 0:14:29.760 --> 0:14:32.880 And our primary system is mostly a bad incentive. 0:14:33.120 --> 0:14:33.320 Right. 0:14:33.360 --> 0:14:36.440 And to be a mayor you have to deliver actual 0:14:36.680 --> 0:14:39.360 material benefits to your voters and you will be judged 0:14:39.400 --> 0:14:41.720 on that. And snow days matter, not in Miami, but 0:14:41.760 --> 0:14:43.880 definitely in the Northeast. And then when you were a 0:14:43.920 --> 0:14:49.479 part of an anonymous or by choice, a powerless organization 0:14:49.600 --> 0:14:52.400 like the House of Representatives, then your incentives are all 0:14:52.440 --> 0:14:55.120 to be either a free agent who is a burr 0:14:55.200 --> 0:14:57.120 in the side of your party, or you know, a 0:14:57.120 --> 0:15:01.120 party apparatic. Absolutely, what do you. 0:15:03.120 --> 0:15:06.360 What do you think of these independent candidacies and do 0:15:06.400 --> 0:15:08.240 you buy into them or are you one of those 0:15:08.280 --> 0:15:10.480 that just doesn't believe these are going to work? 0:15:11.040 --> 0:15:13.880 Duverger's law we only have two parties, babe? Do you 0:15:13.920 --> 0:15:15.840 remember that from your political science training? 0:15:15.880 --> 0:15:16.840 What was its law? 0:15:17.600 --> 0:15:20.320 Duverger? It might be Duvage. This was the idea that 0:15:20.400 --> 0:15:22.640 in a first past the post system such as ours, 0:15:22.680 --> 0:15:24.760 you only ever get two parties. But it was one 0:15:24.800 --> 0:15:26.840 of these laws with so many exceptions. I don't know 0:15:27.200 --> 0:15:29.680 that being like a Tammany Hall law. Like look at India. 0:15:29.760 --> 0:15:32.040 They have first passed the post and they have vulgar parties. 0:15:32.040 --> 0:15:34.520 Of course it's India. So I think in some of 0:15:34.520 --> 0:15:38.800 the cases, you know Nebraska, it's an imperative. It's the 0:15:38.080 --> 0:15:41.560 only the In that case, the brand of the of 0:15:41.600 --> 0:15:44.640 the Democrats are so toxic that it makes sense to 0:15:44.800 --> 0:15:48.920 run as an independent say, with McMullen in Utah. Not 0:15:49.000 --> 0:15:51.240 that he could win, but it makes sense to win 0:15:51.920 --> 0:15:53.840 to run that way. And I also think on the 0:15:53.840 --> 0:15:57.880 presidential level there's a real chance at a breakthrough of 0:15:57.920 --> 0:16:00.800 a third party candidate. I think it's so much harder 0:16:00.840 --> 0:16:03.320 at the state level. I kind of support it. I 0:16:03.440 --> 0:16:07.880 like experimentation and mixing up, but you know, just because 0:16:07.920 --> 0:16:11.160 of all the incentives and all the everything that's in place, 0:16:11.200 --> 0:16:13.240 it makes it hard. It would be easier with that 0:16:13.360 --> 0:16:16.200 jungle primary. I think first past, not first past the post, 0:16:16.400 --> 0:16:18.800 but top two. Oh and one other thing I wanted 0:16:18.840 --> 0:16:22.000 to say, it's a light criticism. I think that the 0:16:22.320 --> 0:16:26.840 activists who were so behind ranked choice voting, they my 0:16:27.120 --> 0:16:30.320 rank choice of electoral reforms that would be way down 0:16:30.320 --> 0:16:32.960 the list. I'm more for it than against it, but 0:16:33.160 --> 0:16:36.240 ninety somethings percent of the time it doesn't have a 0:16:36.280 --> 0:16:39.120 real impact. There is a certain percentage of the time 0:16:39.120 --> 0:16:41.480 where you could plausibly argue is the are the will 0:16:41.480 --> 0:16:44.440 of the people really being reflected? And they did put 0:16:44.440 --> 0:16:47.800 a lot of effort into that, as opposed to jungle primaries, 0:16:47.880 --> 0:16:49.920 which I think would have helped things a lot more. 0:16:50.400 --> 0:16:50.680 Well. 0:16:50.680 --> 0:16:56.960 Look, the concept of top four then you know, sort 0:16:56.960 --> 0:16:59.360 of top four advanced. You know, the Alaska law is 0:17:00.000 --> 0:17:04.200 everybody's on the same ballot and top four advance, then 0:17:04.480 --> 0:17:08.239 it becomes ranked choice for the general. I'd prefer it, 0:17:08.320 --> 0:17:10.679 I'm with My issue with ranked choice goes back to 0:17:10.720 --> 0:17:14.040 my days explaining what was explaining the vote count as 0:17:14.040 --> 0:17:17.920 it was coming in on election nights, and nobody can 0:17:17.960 --> 0:17:20.480 explain the black box that is ranked choice voting. There 0:17:20.520 --> 0:17:22.280 is no way for me to be able to open 0:17:22.359 --> 0:17:26.040 up on election night. Okay, here's the initial run and 0:17:26.200 --> 0:17:28.560 you know, here's what we know about the second choices. 0:17:28.720 --> 0:17:31.800 There appears to be this Canada has more second choices 0:17:31.840 --> 0:17:34.359 off of this, And you know, do I think we 0:17:34.400 --> 0:17:38.440 could get there with states and local officials getting better 0:17:38.440 --> 0:17:40.400 at figuring out how to report these things out? 0:17:41.480 --> 0:17:42.000 Yeah? 0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:44.640 But are we better off not trying to have them 0:17:44.720 --> 0:17:47.159 do two or three different counts on election night and 0:17:47.200 --> 0:17:49.800 just focus on the main thing being the main thing, 0:17:50.000 --> 0:17:53.960 the actual the first count, and then you have a runoff, 0:17:54.440 --> 0:17:59.040 you know, I mean, look, I'm for Louisiana had the 0:17:59.400 --> 0:18:02.439 of all the jump primary systems, it was Louisiana was 0:18:02.440 --> 0:18:06.879 my favorite jungle system because they did it where the 0:18:06.920 --> 0:18:10.800 all party primary actually was like in October or September, 0:18:10.920 --> 0:18:14.360 was late, and then top if nobody got fifty, top 0:18:14.400 --> 0:18:18.200 two met in the general election itself. So that way 0:18:18.240 --> 0:18:19.960 you had because the fear is that if you have 0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:22.880 a runoff after the general election, you get fewer, lesser turnout, 0:18:22.880 --> 0:18:25.840 and it's less will of the people. That's why the 0:18:25.880 --> 0:18:29.680 timing of the of the Louisiana system made the most 0:18:29.720 --> 0:18:31.560 sense of how he did it. And then you don't 0:18:31.560 --> 0:18:33.800 have to worry about rank choice voting, but you get 0:18:33.840 --> 0:18:37.240 all the but you get the you get exactly what 0:18:37.400 --> 0:18:38.919 rank choice voting wants to deliver. 0:18:40.000 --> 0:18:42.640 Yes, And I think that I still think it's true 0:18:42.640 --> 0:18:45.000 that ninety something percent of the vote would be the same, 0:18:45.040 --> 0:18:47.240 and that's why these other reforms I think would deliver. 0:18:47.560 --> 0:18:51.080 I think that Louisiana system has the potential to deliver 0:18:51.280 --> 0:18:54.240 vastly different and more in line with the will of 0:18:54.240 --> 0:18:56.120 the people results unlike astall. 0:18:56.160 --> 0:18:58.000 Look, I think that by the way, look at the 0:18:58.080 --> 0:19:02.200 last you know, Louisiana's basically created a Republican primary system 0:19:02.280 --> 0:19:04.639 for this cycle just to beat Bill Cassidy. Right, it 0:19:04.680 --> 0:19:06.840 became a but they got there getting rid of their 0:19:06.840 --> 0:19:09.160 they got rid of the system just to defeat Bill Cassidy, 0:19:09.280 --> 0:19:09.600 because in. 0:19:09.640 --> 0:19:11.000 The old system, Cassidy would have won. 0:19:11.480 --> 0:19:12.640 Yeah. 0:19:12.680 --> 0:19:15.200 And the point being, if you actually look at Louisiana 0:19:15.320 --> 0:19:18.040 election results over the past twenty five years, before you know, 0:19:18.040 --> 0:19:22.160 they put this system in, you had a competitive two 0:19:22.200 --> 0:19:26.159 party system. You had, Yeah, the land Drew dynasty was 0:19:26.240 --> 0:19:29.240 that's right. And you also had you know, John Bell Edwards. 0:19:29.359 --> 0:19:32.800 By the way, Washington State, which has a version of 0:19:32.840 --> 0:19:36.000 this system too, also has had even though it's a 0:19:36.080 --> 0:19:40.400 very blue state, it's been a very competitive Republican party 0:19:40.480 --> 0:19:43.960 for some time up there because of this system. And 0:19:44.040 --> 0:19:47.480 so I just think it actually gives minority voices more 0:19:47.520 --> 0:19:49.000 of an opportunity. 0:19:48.359 --> 0:19:51.320 To have to get their say. 0:19:52.320 --> 0:19:55.080 And I look at Washington, Louisiana, who have Now you know, 0:19:55.080 --> 0:19:57.960 again we're in this era where each party feels like 0:19:58.000 --> 0:20:02.359 they have to do everything they can to maximize their 0:20:02.359 --> 0:20:05.600 ability to win. In fact, so a buddy of mine 0:20:05.600 --> 0:20:10.640 who's a big consultant in California, I asked him, so, 0:20:10.680 --> 0:20:14.040 what happens if the two Republicans end up in the 0:20:14.080 --> 0:20:16.920 top two and that's the general election, right, Steve Hilton 0:20:17.880 --> 0:20:22.399 and Bianca? And he said Hilton would win and in 0:20:22.480 --> 0:20:26.000 less than a year there'd be a recall, right, and 0:20:26.520 --> 0:20:29.119 the top two and then the legislature would he and 0:20:29.160 --> 0:20:32.359 then there'd be a ballot prop to get rid of 0:20:32.400 --> 0:20:36.840 the all party primaries and California would return to this 0:20:37.080 --> 0:20:41.919