Speaker 1: Good morning, peeps, and welcome to ookf Daily with Meet
Speaker 1: Your Girl. Daniel Moody recording from the Home Bunker. Folks,
Speaker 1: Oh my god, why can't JD. Vance just go away?
Speaker 1: Every time there is leaked audio of this man, we
Speaker 1: just learn what a fucking weirdo he is. And now
Speaker 1: he has turned his attention to childless women who happen
Speaker 1: to be teachers. He hates them just like he does
Speaker 1: all childless women, but has a particular disdain. It's wild.
Speaker 1: It's wild, and Donald Trump goes on doctor Phil and says, well,
Speaker 1: you only need to vote this once and then you
Speaker 1: never have to worry about voting again, continuing with his
Speaker 1: line around being a dictator. On day one, we know
Speaker 1: what the stakes are, we know what the narrative is
Speaker 1: that this party is offering. And I just pray each
Speaker 1: and every day that the excitement that we are seeing
Speaker 1: is going to translate into the votes that are needed
Speaker 1: in order to get Harris and Walls over the finish line.
Speaker 1: And I mean in an effing landslide, not just by
Speaker 1: the skin of our teeth. This needs to be a
Speaker 1: decisive victory, one that will be written in the history books,
Speaker 1: because I want like you all to be done with
Speaker 1: Donald Trump for once and for fucking all. Coming up
Speaker 1: today my conversation with our friend, our in house doctor,
Speaker 1: doctor Jonathan Metzil. You'll be surprised by this conversation today
Speaker 1: because Jonathan and I don't see eye to eye on
Speaker 1: our thoughts around how the Harris Walls team is expanding
Speaker 1: the Big Democratic tent. Jonathan offers some points as to
Speaker 1: think said he thinks could be done better, and we
Speaker 1: challenge each other on seeing the other side. So that
Speaker 1: conversation is coming up next. Folks. You know that whenever
Speaker 1: we have the opportunity to speak with our in house doctor,
Speaker 1: doctor Jonathan Metzil, we are always always pleased and happy.
Speaker 1: And Jonathan, oh, we even't spoken in over a week
Speaker 1: because I was at the DNC.
Speaker 2: We did your snazzy podcast last week.
Speaker 1: Oh we did. Yeah, we did the other one. We
Speaker 1: did the other one, the New Abnormal. So Jonathan, I
Speaker 1: want to get your thoughts even though we are now
Speaker 1: days removed from the DNC, But I thought about you
Speaker 1: while I was there because of the presentation around victims
Speaker 1: of gun violence that brought me to tears and a
Speaker 1: lot of people around me in the United Center to tears,
Speaker 1: and I just wanted to get your thoughts overall on
Speaker 1: how again we talked about this, how this campaign is
Speaker 1: dealing with the gun issue, how you thought that it
Speaker 1: was handled during convention and by the time that folks
Speaker 1: listen to this, we will be at less than seventy
Speaker 1: days until the election, which is just extraordinary, And how
Speaker 1: you're feeling.
Speaker 2: First, let me just say that I'm so honored to
Speaker 2: be speaking with you here today because you're a star
Speaker 2: of stage. On screen, You've been stripping it, spilling it
Speaker 2: across every outlet, Like every outlet, I'm like, oh, there's
Speaker 2: Danielle on TV is spreading the love on everything. So first,
Speaker 2: awesome job, and I will follow you anywhere whatever you
Speaker 2: tell me to do. I am sucking.
Speaker 1: I appreciate that.
Speaker 2: Now. I have to say, on one hand, of course,
Speaker 2: that moment with the guns was incredibly powerful and well
Speaker 2: it could have been totally cheesy, actually, but it wasn't.
Speaker 2: It felt very very powerful and very urgent, and so
Speaker 2: I thought it was handled very well at the convention,
Speaker 2: and I think that the message at that moment was
Speaker 2: spot on. But I think that there's two sides to
Speaker 2: this coin and I'm really struggling with this, which is
Speaker 2: that on one hand, I mean, I understand we're seventy
Speaker 2: days out and that's huge. Is the issue to rally
Speaker 2: our base? If the issue is to rally our base,
Speaker 2: then framing guns in that way is important with the
Speaker 2: historical caveat that I write about in my book, which
Speaker 2: is that Democrats will answer polls saying that they support
Speaker 2: gun safety laws, but they don't vote based on them.
Speaker 2: And so if they think that there's a new entree
Speaker 2: into getting people to vote, to mobilize our people to
Speaker 2: vote based on background checks and red flag laws, it
Speaker 2: would just be honestly, for a presidential election, like people
Speaker 2: vote on a bunch of issues, but it's really Republicans
Speaker 2: that vote out of the fear that Democrats are going
Speaker 2: to have the government take away their guns. That will
Speaker 2: mobilize Republicans. And so it's a strategy. But my concern
Speaker 2: always is that we're using a very saturated playbook that
Speaker 2: in a way, if we're saying all these horrible things happened,
Speaker 2: which they did, just searing life changing, life ending, But
Speaker 2: if the only conversation we're having about guns is to
Speaker 2: talk about guns in relation to regulation, which is really
Speaker 2: where that conversation ends, or to highlight people I call converts,
Speaker 2: people who are like Tim Walls and other people like, Oh,
Speaker 2: I'm a gun owner, but I don't believe in the NRA.
Speaker 2: It's just that that's a very small sample of a
Speaker 2: much bigger fraction, which is all gun owners. And so
Speaker 2: the question is are the bigger group of gun owners
Speaker 2: going to be moved by this? And so again it's
Speaker 2: just a calculated decision that I, honestly, as I've said
Speaker 2: azillion times, have a tremendous amount of concern about because
Speaker 2: just from my research and everybody else has other thoughts,
Speaker 2: people who are going to vote based on guns are
Speaker 2: already voting for Democrats. It's not like you're going to
Speaker 2: bring new gun owners into the fold, because I mean,
Speaker 2: it was great in my book. I interviewed a guy
Speaker 2: and he said, people think, if you just say it differently,
Speaker 2: or message differently to me, or say it louder, I'm
Speaker 2: going to change my mind. But actually I know what
Speaker 2: the goddamn issue is, and I don't want government regulation
Speaker 2: of my guns. He's actually somebody who said I probably
Speaker 2: would vote for Democrats, but I don't want government regulating
Speaker 2: my guns, and so just saying we respect gun owners
Speaker 2: the converts are not representing those people, and so I
Speaker 2: don't know. I feel like i'm I know who's advising
Speaker 2: Harris on this issue. I know that they have a
Speaker 2: very particular agenda which is not mine. I hope they're right.
Speaker 2: I hope they're right and I'm wrong. I would welcome that,
Speaker 2: But I also think that there's another way to message, which,
Speaker 2: as we talked about last week, has to do with
Speaker 2: crime and the responsibilities of gun ownership and what it
Speaker 2: means to own a gun and the right to own
Speaker 2: a gun. That doesn't really change our platform at all,
Speaker 2: but it does speak to those crossover people. And I
Speaker 2: worry that if we're just doing every time for gun
Speaker 2: safety and background checks, we're not speaking to those people.
Speaker 2: And so the question is, will white voters who are
Speaker 2: swing state voters, like, is that an important enough demographic
Speaker 2: to speak to their concerns, because we're not doing it
Speaker 2: right now.
Speaker 1: I wondered too, about how you felt about the law
Speaker 1: enforcement officer who walked out on stage, gone on his
Speaker 1: hip in full uniform at convention and what you thought
Speaker 1: that kind of image was trying to convey as well.
Speaker 1: Was that them which was my assumption trying to take
Speaker 1: ownership of the law and order narrative as well.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's all about like permission structures. I mean,
Speaker 2: the question is what does that person represent, right, does
Speaker 2: that person represent the one cop who's willing to come
Speaker 2: to our side, the one cop who's ex sceptible to
Speaker 2: our side, or is it a sign of a bigger trend. Again,
Speaker 2: that's why I worry about, Like, I know, it's a
Speaker 2: big deal to have Republicans speak at the DNC. I
Speaker 2: get that, But you know, the question is just what
Speaker 2: bigger group do they represent? Is that a statistically significant
Speaker 2: representation of a bigger group of Trump supporters? And I
Speaker 2: just haven't quite seen that. And again, maybe that's not important.
Speaker 2: So maybe it's important for us to think that this
Speaker 2: is important. But I mean, the Liz Chaneys of the world,
Speaker 2: they're not seen as I mean, I just remember the
Speaker 2: last time Trump was up for election, number like two
Speaker 2: hundred foreign policy experts wrote this guy's a danger to
Speaker 2: national security and everybody said, look, these people are, you know,
Speaker 2: coming over to our side. Again, I think if we
Speaker 2: mobilize our base and broaden our base. To me, that's
Speaker 2: a viable goal, and so I support that, But I
Speaker 2: guess the question is does that represent a bigger cross
Speaker 2: section of law enforcement or Republicans or gun owners. And
Speaker 2: I just think we have to be realistic, Like the
Speaker 2: polls are very very tight right now, and so I
Speaker 2: advocate for reaching out to people on the other side,
Speaker 2: but maybe mobilizing our base is a better strategy.
Speaker 1: I feel like there was a both and that was happening,
Speaker 1: and I think that there is a both and that
Speaker 1: is happening with regard to you know, you have two
Speaker 1: hundred sam odd Republicans that have come out in a
Speaker 1: letter former Romney, McCain and Bush staff that are saying
Speaker 1: that they are voting for Kamala Harris, and they did
Speaker 1: so in an open letter in the New York Times.
Speaker 1: The New York Times will get to in a moment,
Speaker 1: because I have my issues with them, But you know,
Speaker 1: you have credible Republicans. And I use the word credible
Speaker 1: because I'm just that's the synonym for not crazy. Who
Speaker 1: were on stage at the DNC talking about their Republicanism,
Speaker 1: like they didn't switch parties, right, but they recognize that
Speaker 1: they want to put country over party and so like
Speaker 1: to me, I agree you to an extent with the
Speaker 1: strategy that you offer in your book what We've Become,
Speaker 1: And I agree with the fact that the old tactics
Speaker 1: are useful to a point, right, But I think that
Speaker 1: they are doing outreach in a different way. Maybe not
Speaker 1: on this issue in particular, but I do feel like
Speaker 1: they're doing Republican outreach and independent outreach that shows how
Speaker 1: big this tent is. And so the point of contention
Speaker 1: may be guns, but they are reaching out to Republicans
Speaker 1: on their belief in democracy, right, So like, how do
Speaker 1: you see that action, which is something that they've been
Speaker 1: doing since the beginning, since a month into the Harris
Speaker 1: Wall's campaign. Versus on this specific issue of.
Speaker 2: Guns, it's actually a symptom of a similar kind of issue,
Speaker 2: which is I hope we have the biggest geniuses in
Speaker 2: the world. I hope there is a strategy. I trust
Speaker 2: that there is a great strategy based on this. But
Speaker 2: I tell you the times that I get nervous, it's
Speaker 2: just we're too concrete and literal at times. And I mean,
Speaker 2: we like we maybe, but for example, I feel like
Speaker 2: the RFK going over to Trump is a really big
Speaker 2: deal a much bigger deal than people have talked about,
Speaker 2: not because of the actual people who were going to
Speaker 2: vote for RFK, but because RFK gives a permission structure
Speaker 2: for people who are very wary of the government, government intervention,
Speaker 2: government intrusion to vote for Trump even if they don't
Speaker 2: like Trump. And so for me, it's actually the downstream
Speaker 2: effects of RFK among people who are skeptical or wary
Speaker 2: of government because of COVID or because of guns or
Speaker 2: things like that. And so I just know from my
Speaker 2: own research that messaging about democracy saving democracy, if you're
Speaker 2: in that camp of people, you actually don't hear, oh
Speaker 2: my god, I'm going to save democracy. You hear these
Speaker 2: fuckers are going to come and make more big government
Speaker 2: and regulate my life. And so again the question, this
Speaker 2: is the new statistical question, is how important are those
Speaker 2: voters or can we overcome those voters. But I will
Speaker 2: say that I just feel like I see a lot
Speaker 2: of people underestimating the rfkju and your impact, in my opinion,
Speaker 2: because there are a lot of people who have become
Speaker 2: like deeply skeptical or deeply libertarian or deeply wary, and
Speaker 2: what they hear I think and I'm not trying to
Speaker 2: speak for anybody. I'm just going off of my interviews.
Speaker 2: But what they hear is Harris, everything she's doing me
Speaker 2: suggests building more government, more government for healthcare, more government
Speaker 2: for gun regulation, more government for everything else. And if
Speaker 2: you're in the camp of people who think that's a
Speaker 2: really good thing because we should be sharing our resources
Speaker 2: and supporting safety nets and you know, moral imperative in
Speaker 2: future of the country, that's amazing. And so I'm only
Speaker 2: speaking for the people that I research, and I will
Speaker 2: say that for the people I research, they don't think
Speaker 2: that more government is the answer to a lot of things.
Speaker 2: And so even the issue of democracy, when they hear democracy,
Speaker 2: they hear more government programs, more of my money going
Speaker 2: to people that I don't think are deserving, etc. Et cetera.
Speaker 2: And I just really trust in the smart people who
Speaker 2: are running that campaign to think we have a strategy
Speaker 2: for that, and hopefully we do.
Speaker 1: I think that, you know, Jonathan, what I will say
Speaker 1: here is that, like, there are people that are just
Speaker 1: not going to come over. Yeah, So I don't necessarily
Speaker 1: like I think that your gun strategy point makes sense
Speaker 1: in terms of people believe in regulation, but they also
Speaker 1: understand that crime is an issue, and so we want
Speaker 1: to be in a place where we can both. I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't personally and everybody knows that I don't want
Speaker 1: guns in this country at all, So I'm not interested.
Speaker 1: I personally am not. But if we are never going
Speaker 1: to overcome that place, then like I want us to
Speaker 1: live in a society where hunters in gun enthusiasts like
Speaker 1: understand their responsibility to protect those around them, and so
Speaker 1: believe in regulation and believe in the understanding that like
Speaker 1: their ability to do what it is that they love
Speaker 1: should not put communities at risk. That's my hope and feeling. However,
Speaker 1: these libertarians who like, in my opinion, if you were
Speaker 1: going to vote for RFK Junior, you're a nutjob. The
Speaker 1: man is anti vax he is anti education, he is
Speaker 1: like anti thought, and so I'm not interested in a
Speaker 1: Harris Walls campaign that is trying to get the RFK
Speaker 1: Junior people over to their side.
Speaker 2: Right. But let me say, I'm not actually talking about
Speaker 2: the RFK Junior people, because I think there aren't a
Speaker 2: huge number of them. I'm talking about potentially undecided voters
Speaker 2: in swing states, which is not RFK junior supporters. It's
Speaker 2: guys in rural Pennsylvania and their families, and guys in
Speaker 2: Georgia and their families, and so it's really and again
Speaker 2: I'm not saying we should shift our messaging, but I
Speaker 2: don't think what I'm suggesting is a huge shift. Like
Speaker 2: last week we talked about how I think we should
Speaker 2: talk about crime because red flag laws and background checks
Speaker 2: don't really dent crime. But if you talked about geop
Speaker 2: policies that are raising crime and were anti crime, that's
Speaker 2: a different way to talk about the same thing with
Speaker 2: the same thing. A lot of the economic stuff, I
Speaker 2: don't think it kills us to also talk about the
Speaker 2: importance of entrepreneurialism and capitalism in a way that says
Speaker 2: this is America, and we want people to be rich,
Speaker 2: and we want to help you, support you, all these
Speaker 2: kind of things like something like that. Because Trump is
Speaker 2: saying the government's I'm not going to take your money.
Speaker 2: And if your answer is only people with more than
Speaker 2: four hundred thousand dollars are going to blah blah blah,
Speaker 2: people just hear that as like, man, that's a negative
Speaker 2: incentive for me to get rich. And so Trump is
Speaker 2: kind of speaking to a thing. And so I'm just
Speaker 2: saying and again, I research like the very very very
Speaker 2: far right people don't talk to me, but the kind
Speaker 2: of like not crazy about one issue or something like that,
Speaker 2: who might come to our side. So that again and again,
Speaker 2: I hope I'm wrong and I'm just like wasting airtime
Speaker 2: right now. But if you're not going to speak to
Speaker 2: those people, which again is not a change in strategy,
Speaker 2: it's a change in frame, then you better make sure
Speaker 2: that like everybody in Michigan votes for Harris and everybody
Speaker 2: in everywhere else votes for Harris, because you're making a
Speaker 2: particular trade off. So do I sound crazy right now?
Speaker 2: I'm just right there.
Speaker 1: I don't think that you sound crazy. I think that
Speaker 1: you're basically saying that like not to leave anything on
Speaker 1: the field, and like, if there are people to convince,
Speaker 1: then think about the ways in which you can convince
Speaker 1: those people that Trump is not for them. I'm just
Speaker 1: not certain of the level of contortionism that this campaign
Speaker 1: has to do to convince people that haven't voted Democrat
Speaker 1: in the last fifty years, and I don't think that
Speaker 1: they're ever going to vote Democrat. So I would rather
Speaker 1: not waste energy on the white, rural male vote that
Speaker 1: statistically has not voted for a Democrat since like the
Speaker 1: nineteen fifties. And then instead of trying to get those
Speaker 1: who are aligned with Democratic values, making sure that you're
Speaker 1: getting out the vote and inspiring those people to the polls,
Speaker 1: that to me is an absolutely different strategy.
Speaker 2: And again, I hope you're right now wrong, It's just
Speaker 2: like I look at the polls, even after all the enthusiasm,
Speaker 2: all the momentum the convention, North Carolina, toss up, Michigan,
Speaker 2: very very close, Georgia.
Speaker 1: But we're never going to see Jonathan. We're never going
Speaker 1: to see blowout polls Like that's just not the world
Speaker 1: that we live in. Like she's never going there's not
Speaker 1: going to be a Democrat that is going to be
Speaker 1: up like ten percentage point five percentage points. That's not
Speaker 1: the world that we live in. But the fact that
Speaker 1: those places that are notably read are now toss ups
Speaker 1: shows us that momentum is in fact building because in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, those places or blood red right. And so
Speaker 1: the fact is is that Biden turned some of those
Speaker 1: places purple by a little bit of a margin because
Speaker 1: of COVID and so many people dying. But the fact
Speaker 1: that Harris, four weeks into this campaign, with seventy days
Speaker 1: to go, that those red places are toss ups is
Speaker 1: a win for Democrats. And you know me, I don't
Speaker 1: love Poles. With a couple of minutes that we have left,
Speaker 1: I do want to switch gears and put on your
Speaker 1: psychiatrist's hat, because I want to talk about the joy
Speaker 1: effect and what it is that people who call themselves
Speaker 1: opinion writers in the New York Times are doing this
Speaker 1: week and what mainstream corporate media has been doing for
Speaker 1: the last several weeks, which is saying things to the
Speaker 1: effect of joy is not a strategy. Donald Trump can
Speaker 1: still win on character and attacking the joy angle, as
Speaker 1: if joy alone is not what the American people need
Speaker 1: according to Lindsay Graham, and Americans are not joyful according
Speaker 1: to Lindsay Graham, What do you make of the psychological
Speaker 1: impact of joy versus fear and how people have been
Speaker 1: reacting over the last month versus over the last eight
Speaker 1: years of trump Ism.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm all for joy, you know, bring on the joy.
Speaker 2: And I'm actually right now I don't want to see
Speaker 2: any media outlets close right now, because we need everybody
Speaker 2: on board to get the word out. I will say
Speaker 2: that what I think about is, on one hand, there
Speaker 2: is something very positive about feeling like you're on the
Speaker 2: winning team. You know, we see this in sports. People
Speaker 2: have fewer heart attacks after their teams win and stuff
Speaker 2: like that. And so, you know, we saw the Obama
Speaker 2: effect of the message of hope as a mobilizing strategy.
Speaker 2: The caveat, I'm like mister Caveat today anays is that
Speaker 2: we used to have this saying in psychiatry the negative
Speaker 2: affect gets the energy. And it's basically, if you have
Speaker 2: twenty happy people in a room and one discontent person
Speaker 2: in a room, and I know because I have dated
Speaker 2: these people, I just have a very powerful, painful breakup
Speaker 2: with somebody like this. But it's like if somebody's unhappy,
Speaker 2: it's our brain that works toward, oh, can we make
Speaker 2: that person happy. So if there's twenty people in a
Speaker 2: room at a party and one person comes in and
Speaker 2: is miserable, that person gets the attention. You never remember
Speaker 2: the twenty happy people in the room. And so there
Speaker 2: is something very powerful about constant grievance, which, as we
Speaker 2: know from Trump, it just mobilizes people to, as I've shown,
Speaker 2: act against their own self interests, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2: And so I hope that joy can carry the day.
Speaker 2: But I think the point that some people are making,
Speaker 2: which is joy as a general strategy is important, but
Speaker 2: it's probably going to be important to tie it to
Speaker 2: some very material gains for people or material realities. I think.
Speaker 2: I think the concern people have is, you joy is
Speaker 2: not sustainable in and of itself, but you know, you
Speaker 2: never know. I mean Obama showed differently, So I'm TBD
Speaker 2: on this. I will just say that when you start
Speaker 2: telling people they're being ripped off or taken advantage of,
Speaker 2: and you're there champion that, and you're creating the conditions
Speaker 2: of austerity where they actually feel they're being ripped off
Speaker 2: even though they're being ripped off by you. That's been
Speaker 2: Trump's game, and the question is can we overcome it?
Speaker 2: And I'm curious to see how that plays out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm on the different side of the fence as
Speaker 1: somebody who has been living in existing in a place
Speaker 1: of darkness for a very long time and recognize that
Speaker 1: fear mongering, even if it is about let's say lifting
Speaker 1: up the horrors of Project twenty twenty five is not
Speaker 1: as palpable to people as them feeling possible about their lives. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And what I think is happening is that one, I
Speaker 1: think mainstream corporate media does not want people to be
Speaker 1: joyful because that does not drive clicks for them. And
Speaker 1: so I think that there is a coordinated strategy that
Speaker 1: is happening as a way to make it seem as
Speaker 1: if this campaign is somehow vapid in comparison to I
Speaker 1: don't know what the fuck Donald Trump is offering, and
Speaker 1: they don't know because they don't ever ask him any
Speaker 1: goddamn questions. But I also think that America has become
Speaker 1: quite numb to the grievance politics. And by numb, I
Speaker 1: mean like they're over it. It's been perpetuated over and
Speaker 1: over and over again. It's the same bullshit, and I
Speaker 1: feel like now the American people have got reached a
Speaker 1: place of exhaustion.
Speaker 2: Well, there two less things. I mean one about the media.
Speaker 2: Like for me, my critique of the media is a
Speaker 2: little different. I watch MSNBC all the time, and I
Speaker 2: don't get a picture of why non crazy Trump supporters
Speaker 2: support Trump. I would love to hear more from the
Speaker 2: other side in ways that it's not trying to talk
Speaker 2: anybody out of it or trying to talk to anybody
Speaker 2: on our But I found myself like watching Fox News
Speaker 2: every now and again just to see what the script
Speaker 2: other people are getting is, because I do think that
Speaker 2: there's a level of like stereotyping the other side, and
Speaker 2: so for me, the media quote unquote, it's falling into
Speaker 2: like simplistic positions on both sides. I would just love
Speaker 2: to understand, like why do you support Trump? And not
Speaker 2: in a way that I'm trying to talk you out
Speaker 2: of it, but just so I can understand what drives
Speaker 2: you in a way. And I don't feel like we're
Speaker 2: getting that story. It's kind of like, oh my god,
Speaker 2: you must be insane to vote for the other side.
Speaker 2: And so I think that for me is part of it.
Speaker 2: And I do think the point about joy is just that,
Speaker 2: I mean, we know what Trump's going to do. He's
Speaker 2: going to start hammering Harris about foreign policy Israel and Afghanistan,
Speaker 2: I think is going to be huge issue and put
Speaker 2: her on the defensive, and so I just think that
Speaker 2: you know, how we respond to that. I think the
Speaker 2: issue is Trump set the Afghanistan policy. He basically signed
Speaker 2: the country over to the Taliban.
Speaker 1: Correct, So I'm like, I'm confused about why she can
Speaker 1: be put on the defensive about the fact that he
Speaker 1: had five thousand Taliban members released that took the country back.
Speaker 2: I'm not telling you what I believe. I'm telling you
Speaker 2: what I think his strategy is going to be. Let's
Speaker 2: talk in a week and see if I'm right, But
Speaker 2: I think he's going to start hammering stuff like that.
Speaker 2: And so the question is how are you going to
Speaker 2: respond to that? And I just think that the retort
Speaker 2: for what's coming from Trump is either to get dragged
Speaker 2: down in the ditches or to take the high road.
Speaker 2: And I'm not sure which one is better. Obviously, I
Speaker 2: just said I think Trump created a nightmare in Afghanistan
Speaker 2: that we walked into. But that's different from how he's
Speaker 2: going to use it. And the question is how do
Speaker 2: you do you have to go down and have a
Speaker 2: street fight with him or do you want to stay
Speaker 2: at a higher level. And I don't know the answer.
Speaker 1: Well right now, he's too busy talking about how good
Speaker 1: looking he is on the campaign trail, So I don't
Speaker 1: think that he's going to get around to policy anytime soon.
Speaker 1: As always, my friend, doctor Jonathan Metzel, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for making the time for wokf We always appreciate
Speaker 1: your insight. That is it for me today. Dear friends
Speaker 1: on wok af as always power to the people and
Speaker 1: to all the people. Power, get woke and stay woke
Speaker 1: as fuck.