Speaker 1: If we're gonna talk politics with anybody, we like to
Speaker 1: talk to Lan Heat Chin. He's a candidate for California
Speaker 1: state controller, but he's also got all kinds of public
Speaker 1: policy experience. David and dyane stuffy, fellow in American Public
Speaker 1: Policy Studies at the Hoover Institution, director of domestic domestic
Speaker 1: policy studies at Stanford universities, has been involved in a
Speaker 1: Um attached to a bunch of different presidential campaigns. Lan
Speaker 1: He welcome back to the Armstrong and getty show. Great
Speaker 1: to do with you, Jack. Thank you. What do you
Speaker 1: think of this idea of the Republicans trying to focus
Speaker 1: on a few issues to make it clear to the
Speaker 1: American people this is what we'll do for you. I
Speaker 1: think it's a great idea. I think it's important to
Speaker 1: offer contrast and to offer ideas, as you know, not
Speaker 1: not just saying hey, we're not going to beat them,
Speaker 1: but to say, listen, what are what are some of
Speaker 1: the things that Republicans will do if they have the
Speaker 1: opportunity to be in the majority in the house? And
Speaker 1: it's very similar to what new gingridge did the contract
Speaker 1: with America, focusing in on a few really important issues
Speaker 1: like around the economy and how Republicans are gonna try
Speaker 1: and help to make things more affordable in our country
Speaker 1: after the decimation we've seen from inflation and now coming recession. Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, talking about health care and how to make
Speaker 1: healthcare more affordable and accessible to people. So I think
Speaker 1: it's great to have an agenda. I think the challenge
Speaker 1: obviously now is how much bandwidth and how much attention
Speaker 1: is it going to get in the closing weeks of
Speaker 1: a campaign, when when really substance tends to go out
Speaker 1: the door, unfortunately, and it's all about, you know, attacks
Speaker 1: in this and one way and the other. I do
Speaker 1: think it's a good idea to offer the alternative. I
Speaker 1: wish they've done it a little bit earlier, quickly. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's interesting. We're talking about that earlier. Just how and
Speaker 1: I'm sure both parties are trying to figure this out.
Speaker 1: In the modern world, people are starting to vote in
Speaker 1: certain areas of the country today. So when do you
Speaker 1: when do you announce your closing message? You know, gazillions
Speaker 1: of people, like myself, I'm still a show up at
Speaker 1: the polling place and vote on voting day. I just
Speaker 1: for some reason like doing it that way. But you
Speaker 1: know that's a shrinking group of people. So when do
Speaker 1: you when do you unleash your closing argument now? Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's interesting. The modern campaign has extended. Uh, you know
Speaker 1: very much so. I mean we already knew it was
Speaker 1: extending earlier, but when you talked about a closing message,
Speaker 1: it used to be the case that you would have
Speaker 1: a closing message in the last week of October and
Speaker 1: you'd run two weeks. I remember doing a bunch of
Speaker 1: different presidential campaigns over the years and we would sort
Speaker 1: of go into that closing argument, you know, right around
Speaker 1: Halloween and it gives herself usually a nice runway of
Speaker 1: about a week, a week and a half to really
Speaker 1: close strong. But to your point, I mean you look
Speaker 1: at the state of California as an example. Ballots will
Speaker 1: be in the mail October tent and it creates essentially
Speaker 1: a rolling for week ellection. In Pennsylvania, I understand someone
Speaker 1: told me that they've got ballots out already in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 1: You can already request an abstency ballot now. So it
Speaker 1: is an extended period of time and it changes the
Speaker 1: character of campaigns, changes the nature of what campaigns and
Speaker 1: candidates need to do and and it's it's almost like
Speaker 1: you've got to start building into your closing argument through
Speaker 1: the month of September and into October. And you know,
Speaker 1: as I think about my own handed to seeing what
Speaker 1: we're doing here in California, that that's how we're approaching it.
Speaker 1: We're approaching it as a a lengthy period of time
Speaker 1: over which you need to build your case, as opposed
Speaker 1: to what it used to because about, you know, ten
Speaker 1: days to two weeks. Do you think that's better? or
Speaker 1: or or not? I I feel like I understand the,
Speaker 1: you know, um of a democratic, small D democratic view
Speaker 1: of making sure everybody has plenty of time to vote,
Speaker 1: stretching out that sort of thing, but in terms of
Speaker 1: focusing the nation's attention on issues, to have a conversation
Speaker 1: about a debate about it, I think the longer period
Speaker 1: is not working. Yeah, let me tell you what it does,
Speaker 1: in my view, is it protects incumbents, because if you're
Speaker 1: if you're already in office, and people show up and
Speaker 1: they say, Oh, this guy is already a congressman or
Speaker 1: this gal is already a member of the state legislature,
Speaker 1: then you have a built in amount of name. I
Speaker 1: D or a built in amount of recognition that a
Speaker 1: challenger does not have. So when you lengthen the period
Speaker 1: of time over which they've got to compete, in my
Speaker 1: view what it does is it makes it easier for
Speaker 1: the incumbent too to hang on because because, quite frankly,
Speaker 1: you know, the incumbent is already going to have that
Speaker 1: and and it's just that's kind of my view, because
Speaker 1: I think what happens is the incumbent has all of
Speaker 1: the resources and all the ability to communicate over that
Speaker 1: period of time. The challenge is probably still raising money
Speaker 1: right the challenger is still trying to figure out how
Speaker 1: do I get my my name idea out there and
Speaker 1: people are already voting, so it's too late by the
Speaker 1: time that they actually get around the delivering a message.
Speaker 1: So that's my sort of more cynical view. The reasons
Speaker 1: period getting ended is because incumbents can protect themselves. Sometimes
Speaker 1: cynical is just accurate. So the people that are already
Speaker 1: in charge made the rules easier to keep them in charge. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I look, I think you see it in
Speaker 1: a lot of different places right. I think you see
Speaker 1: it in different states. You know, certainly there is an
Speaker 1: effort underway to make sure that incumbents are, you know,
Speaker 1: more more, more closely enscons, more care lanscons in their positions,
Speaker 1: and I don't think that's necessarily a good thing, but
Speaker 1: I think that incumbents do write the rules and then
Speaker 1: they have the advantage. What's actually gonna be on the
Speaker 1: mind of most voters as they vote, whether they're voting
Speaker 1: today or the first week in November? NBC has done
Speaker 1: this thing with their polling where they break the economy
Speaker 1: into like three different topics, inflation, jobs and something else,
Speaker 1: so that that waters down those numbers and they can
Speaker 1: claim that abortions the number one issue when if you
Speaker 1: put all the economic stuff together, it is far and
Speaker 1: away the number one issue. So what, in your mind,
Speaker 1: is actually going to be the top of mind issues? Who?
Speaker 1: Who Was it that said it's the economy stupid? Was
Speaker 1: that James Carville, the political consultant for Bill Clinton? It
Speaker 1: is always, I think, predominantly, the the economy that drives
Speaker 1: voter decision making, and you know the economy can take
Speaker 1: lots of different forms. Right. I mean to your point.
Speaker 1: Is it that I'm paying a lot more for Gas
Speaker 1: and food? Is it that I feel like my job
Speaker 1: is at risk. Is it that I feel that the
Speaker 1: economic conditions in our country are generally unstable and unsteady?
Speaker 1: Those are all related. Yes, they're separate, specific concerns and
Speaker 1: if you ask someone to put their finger on it,
Speaker 1: is it inflation or is it it's very hard for
Speaker 1: folks to do that. But the reality is it is
Speaker 1: these kitchen table issues. I mean I see it every
Speaker 1: day campaigning all over the state of California. When I
Speaker 1: talk to people, predominantly, I will tell you, like nine
Speaker 1: times out of ten, the first thing someone will tell
Speaker 1: me is, you know what I'm I'm really frustrated with
Speaker 1: how much gas they'll call. I'm really frustrated. I'm really
Speaker 1: I'm really concerned about what's happening with our economy. I
Speaker 1: keep hearing it's slowing down, mortgage rates are soaring, it's
Speaker 1: making it harder for me to afford a house. All
Speaker 1: of these things, these are all related issues. So I
Speaker 1: think the economy, by and by and large, is going
Speaker 1: to be the major issue of this campaign. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think you're right. I I'm at that point in my
Speaker 1: life where I can, you know, afford to live, but
Speaker 1: I often think about what would I have done when
Speaker 1: I was twenty five. I'm not sure what I would
Speaker 1: have done. I couldna have filled up my car and
Speaker 1: gone to the grocery store. It's crazy. Yeah, well, and
Speaker 1: I think the other piece of it is that people
Speaker 1: look at Um the current conditions, and they just don't
Speaker 1: see him getting better. You know. That's the other thing
Speaker 1: is that it's not like there's a ton of hope
Speaker 1: out there that we're going to see a dramatic end
Speaker 1: to inflation or that interest rates are going to come
Speaker 1: back down, because they're not. I mean interest rates are
Speaker 1: headed in the in the other direction. Right I think
Speaker 1: we're seeing home loan rates for the thirty year. At
Speaker 1: least I heard it was up over six percent, which
Speaker 1: is remarkable and where it was just just, you know,
Speaker 1: twenty four months ago. So I think it's Um. It
Speaker 1: is not just the state of the economy but a
Speaker 1: sense that the people in charge, I don't know what
Speaker 1: they're doing, they're not they're not doing what it takes
Speaker 1: to improve the situation. That that gets me too. It
Speaker 1: is there gonna be a price paid for Joe Biden
Speaker 1: saying things like, you know, like you did on sixty minutes,
Speaker 1: and has in various other Um settings where he says, oh, look, look,
Speaker 1: it was zero, zero. Nobody's feeling like inflation is your own. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that the challenge politicians have, particularly people who
Speaker 1: are in office, is, you know, they risk looking like
Speaker 1: they are Um, under selling or under estimating what's happening
Speaker 1: in people's lives. And when you say, for example, I
Speaker 1: mean this whole crop about inflation being transitory, which I
Speaker 1: still I'm not sure who came up with that one,
Speaker 1: but this idea that you know, everything is fine, keep calm,
Speaker 1: the economy is doing fine. The economy is not doing fine.
Speaker 1: All right, the reality is, if you look at the
Speaker 1: economic indicators, there are some serious warning signs that we're
Speaker 1: seeing slowing if you look at a lot of different
Speaker 1: measures that economists used to evaluate whether we're headed toward recession,
Speaker 1: a lot of those things are flashing red right now.
Speaker 1: They're saying, listen, we're going to have a slowdown and
Speaker 1: and labor markets, uh, you know, are still relatively tight,
Speaker 1: but that you know, that could change. And so I
Speaker 1: think the reality is that we are headed for challenging
Speaker 1: economic times and politicians risk looking like they're out of
Speaker 1: touch if they don't acknowledge that. But but if they're
Speaker 1: gonna catch twenty two, Joe Biden's gonna catch twenty two
Speaker 1: because on the one hand he can't really afford to
Speaker 1: say what is the truth, which is that the economy
Speaker 1: is in trouble, because politically he's got to sound like
Speaker 1: a cheerleader. But if you're a cheerleader then you sound
Speaker 1: like you're out of touch. That that's a challenge. That's
Speaker 1: challenge he has. That's a good point. Is Joe Biden
Speaker 1: gonna run again? I don't know. I'm probably the last
Speaker 1: person to aspect because I just I don't I don't
Speaker 1: know enough about the uner workings of that White House
Speaker 1: or the party to know. But I will say this.
Speaker 1: I think there's a lot of people chomping at the
Speaker 1: bit to either to run against him or hoping he
Speaker 1: doesn't run so it opens a pathway. Um. But I
Speaker 1: you know, I mean I don't know. Like I I
Speaker 1: look at him sometimes and I think, Jeez, this is Um.
Speaker 1: Can he make you know, can he really be an
Speaker 1: effective campaigner for another presidential campaign? I mean these things
Speaker 1: are grueling. Yeah and well, and this is not gonna
Speaker 1: be one you can do from your home on zoom.
Speaker 1: Probably you'd actually have to track everything correct. You actually
Speaker 1: have to go out and meet people and you know,
Speaker 1: I think at one point in his career that was
Speaker 1: actually strange. Yeah, absolutely, to get out there and meet
Speaker 1: people and connect with people. I just think it's hard now,
Speaker 1: you know. I mean everybody reaches an age where it's
Speaker 1: it's just a more challenging and his problem is, frankly,
Speaker 1: it's less what Republican he's going to run against, is
Speaker 1: that there's a lot of ambitious Democrats who want to
Speaker 1: take him out, you know, and that's that's his bigger problem.
Speaker 1: Is Gavin gonna run? Boy, sure seems like it. I
Speaker 1: mean he's positioning himself that way and trying to imagine
Speaker 1: why you'd run ads in Florida like that, is the
Speaker 1: governor of California, if you're running for president. You know,
Speaker 1: there's this concept in politics, these politicians call it a
Speaker 1: free shot election, where basically you've got a job and
Speaker 1: so you go and run for something else because it's
Speaker 1: a free shot. And Gavin running for President in twenty
Speaker 1: four is a free shot because he's probably gonna get
Speaker 1: you reelected this fall. And if he gets re elected,
Speaker 1: then what is that mean he has four years right
Speaker 1: as governor, and so two thousand twenty four falls right
Speaker 1: in the middle of that. Why not? Right? It's like
Speaker 1: why not give it a shot? So, you know, I
Speaker 1: think he is in a similar position to others who
Speaker 1: would evaluate and look at it and if they don't
Speaker 1: feel like there's a political price to be paid for
Speaker 1: running against an incumbent president or, in the alternative of
Speaker 1: the incumbent president decides not to run, they may just say, hey,
Speaker 1: why not give it a shot, you know? So I
Speaker 1: don't know. Sometimes it's it's just a way of raising
Speaker 1: their profile nationally too. I'm real close to out of time.
Speaker 1: This is gonna have to be a short answer. Just
Speaker 1: trump run again? I you know, I it's hard for
Speaker 1: me to say. If you'd ask me a couple months ago,
Speaker 1: I would have said yeah, I think he will run.
Speaker 1: Now it's it's it's just a little bit more up
Speaker 1: in the air, but I think if you had to bet,
Speaker 1: I'd say yeah, I think he's gonna run. Interesting. So
Speaker 1: if you live in California, vote for Lawnie Chen for controller,
Speaker 1: because we need that. And if the only times thinks
Speaker 1: it's true, wow, it's really true. Thank you, Lonie. Appreciate
Speaker 1: your time today. Thanks Jack Barn strong and Jetty