Speaker 1: Good morning, peeps, and welcome to Look a f Daily
Speaker 1: with Meet your Girl Danielle Moody, Recording from the Home Bunker. Folks,
Speaker 1: I want to start off today by saying I'm really
Speaker 1: excited about the conversation that i had with Annette shankar Osario.
Speaker 1: She is the host of a brilliant podcast talking about
Speaker 1: the power of words, talking about the power of messaging.
Speaker 1: And if you have listened to my other podcasts, Democracy Ish,
Speaker 1: then you may be familiar with a Knot, but Anat
Speaker 1: shankar Osario is the host of Words to Win by
Speaker 1: and she'll tell us in this jam packed two part episode,
Speaker 1: because folks, you know that I talk about messaging all
Speaker 1: the time. I talk about how Democrats are fucking terrible
Speaker 1: at messaging. We are headed into the stretch for the
Speaker 1: midterm elections and with a handful of weeks to go.
Speaker 1: My conversation with a NOD is like, do we have
Speaker 1: what it takes to win? Do people understand the gravity
Speaker 1: of the situation that we're in. What works? We know
Speaker 1: that fear and lies work with the far right, but
Speaker 1: what works to get democrats, progressives and these quote unquote
Speaker 1: mythical unicorn independence to the polls right for midterms. She
Speaker 1: tells us that we will need historic turnout the way
Speaker 1: that we had for Biden. Well, we know that that
Speaker 1: ain't going to happen. Just historically speaking, midterm elections usually
Speaker 1: do not have the same type of turnout that a
Speaker 1: presidential election does. And so if we're hoping for those
Speaker 1: numbers in order to win, then have we already lost.
Speaker 1: So this conversation with a Not we went really deep
Speaker 1: and into the nitty gritty. So it is broken up
Speaker 1: into our first two part episode. So you will hear
Speaker 1: a piece of our conversation today and then you will
Speaker 1: hear the follow up to that conversation on Tuesday. Folks,
Speaker 1: what I want people to recognize is that the political
Speaker 1: climate that we're in and how people are feeling has
Speaker 1: so much to do with policy as it has to
Speaker 1: do with personality and what it has to do with psychology.
Speaker 1: You know, I often talk to you all about the
Speaker 1: fact that there are times there were days where I
Speaker 1: find myself in tears. Nothing anymore catastrophic will have happened
Speaker 1: that will signal this shift and emotion, but it is
Speaker 1: just this ever present feeling of overwhelm. I mentioned this
Speaker 1: because like me. You all have no doubt spent the
Speaker 1: last several days watching the news and seeing the catastrophic
Speaker 1: devastation that has happened in Florida because of Hurricane Ian. Well,
Speaker 1: I want to share with you one of the stories
Speaker 1: that I don't think gets enough attention. You see, what
Speaker 1: the networks do, dear friends, is that they will go
Speaker 1: and do the same storm coverage, look at the devastation.
Speaker 1: They'll talk to somebody, usually a white person, not usually
Speaker 1: ninety percent of the time, a white person that has
Speaker 1: lost everything, and you know, they're thanking God and we
Speaker 1: could have been worse. And meanwhile, you know they've lost
Speaker 1: their homes, they've lost you know, their livelihoods. Look, I'll
Speaker 1: be honest that a lot of the places in Florida
Speaker 1: are you know, you're showing us coral gables. Well, those
Speaker 1: are multimillion dollar homes, and those are not people's first
Speaker 1: homes right in a lot of ways. But there are
Speaker 1: a lot of folks in Florida who live in mobile homes,
Speaker 1: who are the actual working class. And you know, can't
Speaker 1: just chalk up their loss to you know, somebody's tax
Speaker 1: right off, right, But I then look at the coverage
Speaker 1: and again, we only empathize and are trained to empathize
Speaker 1: with white people and white grief. And I think to
Speaker 1: myself about the people of Puerto Rico, the island being
Speaker 1: devastated by a hurricane as well loss of power, you know, infrastructure. Again,
Speaker 1: we look at Puerto Rico and we're like, oh, well,
Speaker 1: that's a nice island. Do you know it's part of
Speaker 1: the United States? And why they don't have fucking infrastructure
Speaker 1: that allows them to be able to deal with the
Speaker 1: impacts and the increasing impacts of these hurricanes and are
Speaker 1: treated as second class citizens in more ways than one.
Speaker 1: Why weren't they given wald to wall coverage. Why didn't
Speaker 1: we look at their suffering and their grief in the
Speaker 1: same way that we once again are treating Florida, will
Speaker 1: treat South Carolina and other places. I just don't understand
Speaker 1: why we can't have shared empathy for everyone, and why
Speaker 1: white people are the only people that the media wants
Speaker 1: to empathize with. Look, and guys, I'm asking this question.
Speaker 1: I know the answer. I know who's in the newsrooms,
Speaker 1: I know who's in the c suites, Right, I know
Speaker 1: the answer to these questions. But if we don't ask them,
Speaker 1: then we allow this just to continue to be normalized,
Speaker 1: and it shouldn't be. Why did we have Walde Wall
Speaker 1: coverage of the colonizer that died in the UK at
Speaker 1: the same time when brown people in Puerto Rico are
Speaker 1: desperate and like hanging on for dear life. Why was
Speaker 1: it okay that Donald Trump went there during Hurricane Maria
Speaker 1: and throughout fucking paper towels and that was acceptable and
Speaker 1: the media covered it as if it was a joke
Speaker 1: as opposed to it being fucking cruel. Words matter, And
Speaker 1: that's why we have this supersized two part episode with
Speaker 1: the Natschenko Osadio because I want us to understand that
Speaker 1: it isn't about just getting into the psychology again like
Speaker 1: the media loves to do with regard to white supremacy,
Speaker 1: and we need to understand white grievance. No, I actually
Speaker 1: don't give a fuck, but I do want to understand
Speaker 1: why these same people, what gets them to the poles
Speaker 1: and what doesn't, What has them wake up to the
Speaker 1: fact that climate change is a real thing, right is it?
Speaker 1: When the water is up to their necks? You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know, but what I will say and what
Speaker 1: I want to share with regard to the hurricanes. Is
Speaker 1: this pulled up This article in Axios says Hurricane end's
Speaker 1: climate warning, and this is what it says. And I
Speaker 1: want to read to you a piece of this, because again,
Speaker 1: the news is not covering this. What they are covering
Speaker 1: is the damage. What they are covering is how people
Speaker 1: are going to pick up their lives and then they
Speaker 1: will move on to the next story by the middle
Speaker 1: of this week. But what we're not talking about is
Speaker 1: why these storms are intensifying and how this storm jumped
Speaker 1: from you know, a category three to a category five.
Speaker 1: What we have all learned right in school in earth science.
Speaker 1: Who the fuck knows what they teach now is that
Speaker 1: when hurricanes hit land, or they hit certain areas, they
Speaker 1: lose strength. We're accustomed to hurricanes hitting certain areas losing
Speaker 1: strength than turning into tropical storms and then dissipating. This
Speaker 1: is not what's happening, and I will read you this.
Speaker 1: Hurricane forecaster's worst nightmare came true on Wednesday morning, when
Speaker 1: what had been a category three storm Tuesday night suddenly
Speaker 1: jumped to almost to a category five. Why it matters,
Speaker 1: It used to be rare for storms to keep strengthening
Speaker 1: until landfall, let alone do so rapidly. Now it is not,
Speaker 1: and studies show this is a dangerous sign of climate change.
Speaker 1: The big picture, such an intensity leap was made possible
Speaker 1: by warm ocean temperatures and abundant atmospheric moisture, both factors
Speaker 1: that climate change enhances. During the past several years, there
Speaker 1: have been multiple storms that rapidly intensified as they neared
Speaker 1: the Gulf Coast and did so through landfall. Previously, tropical
Speaker 1: storms and hurricanes tended to weaken as they neared the
Speaker 1: northern Gulf Coast, in particular, falling victim to cooler waters
Speaker 1: or stronger jet stream winds. But that did not happen
Speaker 1: with Hurricanes Laura or Ida in twenty twenty and in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, or with Hurricane Michael, which ramped up
Speaker 1: all the way up to a Category five storm in
Speaker 1: the Florida Panhandle in twenty eighteen. It's not just the
Speaker 1: United States that has been suffering the consequences from rapidly
Speaker 1: intensifying tropical cyclones. Consider an example from halfway around the world,
Speaker 1: which occurred just as Ian was spinning up in the
Speaker 1: Caribbean at the same time in the western tropical Pacific Ocean,
Speaker 1: a storm named Noru began swirling toward the Philippines. It
Speaker 1: took forecasters by surprise when it suddenly strengthened from a
Speaker 1: robust tropical storm with maximum sustained winds of sixty miles
Speaker 1: per hour to a category five super typhoon with one
Speaker 1: hundred and sixty mile per hour winds folks, in just
Speaker 1: twenty four hours. So if you are thinking about this
Speaker 1: right and news reports and alerts come on and they
Speaker 1: are warning people going to be having a tropical storm,
Speaker 1: it right now has these level winds. This is the
Speaker 1: difference between you deciding to evacuate and deciding that you
Speaker 1: can weather the storm. But if what is happening is
Speaker 1: the intensity is growing and forecaster is because of climate change,
Speaker 1: do not have the ability to provide the necessary in
Speaker 1: depth level of warning because the storm is changing so rapidly.
Speaker 1: What does that mean for people's ability to get to safety?
Speaker 1: News flash, they can't get to safety and fucking tie,
Speaker 1: so more people are going to die. So the threat level,
Speaker 1: according to Axios, the danger of a rapid intensification shortly
Speaker 1: before a landfall is that people will be caught off
Speaker 1: guard by the stronger storm and get stuck in a
Speaker 1: vulnerable spot for storm surge, flooding, damaging winds, or both.
Speaker 1: Emergency management officials designed their evacuation plans based on storm
Speaker 1: intensity and movement. Sudden shifts in either one can render
Speaker 1: their planning inadequate. A one hundred and fifty five mile
Speaker 1: per hour Category four storm, which Hurricane Ian became on
Speaker 1: Wednesday morning can push a far higher surge inland and
Speaker 1: bring a catastrophic swath of high winds inland compared to
Speaker 1: the one hundred and twenty mile per hour Category three
Speaker 1: storm that Eden was when most Fuloridians went to sleep
Speaker 1: Tuesday night. All landfalling storms now contain more dangerous coastal
Speaker 1: flooding in their arsenals due to human cause sea level rise,
Speaker 1: and they are urging you in this article to read
Speaker 1: between the fucking lines. The trend seen in the past
Speaker 1: several years, together with studies of how hurricanes are changing
Speaker 1: in a warming world, point to a key role for
Speaker 1: human caused climate change. We have made the planet unpredictable
Speaker 1: and unfucking safe. And right now you have a climate denier,
Speaker 1: authoritarian piece of trash in Ronda Santis as the governor
Speaker 1: of Florida, who is too busy walking the line between
Speaker 1: Republican dictator to recognize that their ignorance around climate change
Speaker 1: is no longer bliss. It is actually fucking catastrophic and
Speaker 1: it is up to the media to connect the dots
Speaker 1: for the people as to why these things are happening.
Speaker 1: This is not an act of God, It is an
Speaker 1: act of greed, folks. Coming up next, part one of
Speaker 1: my conversation with a Nat Schenker Asorio on how we
Speaker 1: win the messaging game. It's no secret that the news
Speaker 1: is horsepill hard to swallow. Thankfully, there's The Bituation Room
Speaker 1: podcast hosted by comedian and commentator Francesca free Erantini for
Speaker 1: a lighter take on the heavy stuff. Each week, the
Speaker 1: Bituation Room brings you progressive comedians, experts, and activists to
Speaker 1: break down the issues in a way that won't just
Speaker 1: leave you crying under a weighted blanket. Get The Bituation
Speaker 1: Room on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and streaming on YouTube
Speaker 1: and Twitch. Hey I'm David slates Political gab Fest. As
Speaker 1: another election season accelerates, it can be tricky to sort
Speaker 1: through all the noise and the news. Each week on
Speaker 1: The gap Fest, John Dickerson, Emily Bathlona and I decipher
Speaker 1: the headlines, break down the races, and tell you what
Speaker 1: issues really matter. We do not always agree, We definitely
Speaker 1: do not always agree, but we always deliver thoughtful debate
Speaker 1: and we always have a good time. So subscribe to
Speaker 1: Slates Political Gapfest New episodes every Thursday. Folks. I am
Speaker 1: very excited to welcome to woke f Daily for the
Speaker 1: first time, hopefully not the last time. Fellow podcaster and
Speaker 1: message maker An Shanker o Saudio, who hosts the show
Speaker 1: Words to win By and Folks, if you also happen
Speaker 1: to listen to my other podcasts with my friend washahat Ali,
Speaker 1: you might remember our conversation with a Knot because I said,
Speaker 1: can you just run everything? Because you make it seem
Speaker 1: so easy and you make it sound so clear what
Speaker 1: it is Democrats should be doing. But but first, before
Speaker 1: we talk about what they should be doing, I actually
Speaker 1: want to get your thoughts of Joe Biden's winning summer,
Speaker 1: the Biden administrations quote unquote winning summer. And you know
Speaker 1: we had passage of you know, major legislation Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: You know there were several things that were past. Some
Speaker 1: you know, have no teeth, but hey, we you know,
Speaker 1: we did it. Anyway. We got some debt relief for students,
Speaker 1: but I don't know if they'll actually see that because
Speaker 1: Republican governors are fighting against that in our suing the
Speaker 1: Biden administration to make sure that young people suffer. And
Speaker 1: then you had Joe Biden kind of cap off his
Speaker 1: winning with this Soul of the Nation speech that he
Speaker 1: gave with the backdrop of Philadelphia. And so I want
Speaker 1: to get your thoughts on how Democrats how the administration
Speaker 1: spoke about these wins, and then we can talk more
Speaker 1: in depth about your thoughts on the Soul of the
Speaker 1: Nation speech, which again I don't think was given enough
Speaker 1: air enough time in media and is worth delving into.
Speaker 1: Yeah for sure. Well, first, thank you for having me.
Speaker 1: It's hard to know where even to begin, but I'll
Speaker 1: start with the accomplishments. So what I will say is
Speaker 1: that it is general life advice, both in relationships and
Speaker 1: in politics, that you cannot argue with people's feelings, which
Speaker 1: is very frustrating if you are a person who watches
Speaker 1: focus groups, which unfortunately for me I am, so I'm
Speaker 1: part of a Giant Research collaborative where we do two
Speaker 1: to four focus groups a week and have done that
Speaker 1: every single week since twenty twenty, which means watching a
Speaker 1: whole lot of different kinds of person people, surge voters
Speaker 1: meaning folks who were new to us in eighteen or twenty,
Speaker 1: and we obviously we absolutely need returning out and then
Speaker 1: swing voters, the definition of which is probably pretty clear
Speaker 1: to most people what we mean by that. So what
Speaker 1: we see is that the quote Democrats delivered message A
Speaker 1: doesn't take us very far, and it doesn't actually matter
Speaker 1: what is true in the world. What matters to people
Speaker 1: is their own lived experience. And for the most part,
Speaker 1: speaking in broad strokes, people are feeling down and out.
Speaker 1: They are feeling despondent, they are feeling strapped, They're very
Speaker 1: very concerned financially, they have more month than check. I'm
Speaker 1: thinking of all the idiosyncratic ways people describe this to us,
Speaker 1: depending who they are and what focus group it is.
Speaker 1: And so when you try to sort of argue with
Speaker 1: people and say the economy is better than ever and
Speaker 1: things are going great, you know their response back is
Speaker 1: sort of what planet have you emerged from? And why
Speaker 1: are you talking to me. However, what I will say,
Speaker 1: and this is really really important, is that when we
Speaker 1: talk to our voters both surge and swing about the
Speaker 1: litany of accomplishments we pass. This, we passed, that, we
Speaker 1: passed this, and really vitally the fact that we held
Speaker 1: together and that Trump Republicans and I used that phrase
Speaker 1: very deliberately, Trump Republicans, Maga Republicans. I'm happy to say,
Speaker 1: why stood in your way at every turn. They wanted
Speaker 1: to block what our families need and Democrats brought it. Anyway,
Speaker 1: when we talk to our voters about the passage of
Speaker 1: the bills in the get what that does more than
Speaker 1: any one bill is it gets at this sort of
Speaker 1: root idea that voters have that Democrats are do nothing
Speaker 1: and so interestingly, it's more the act of you know,
Speaker 1: there's a canard, right, nothing succeeds like success, and so
Speaker 1: this idea that we can do things, we do do things,
Speaker 1: we do pass things, we keep moving the ball down
Speaker 1: the field. That is as important a part of the
Speaker 1: narrative to convey as any one of these specific policies.
Speaker 1: So I want to dig into one of the things
Speaker 1: that you just said. I want to ask about how
Speaker 1: Maga Republicans. Trump Republicans are playing right that phrasing, because
Speaker 1: for me, I will say that making that distinction just
Speaker 1: seems false because I don't know what the group of
Speaker 1: Republicans there are but Trump or Maga Republicans. I don't
Speaker 1: know what other group of Republicans there are other than
Speaker 1: the ones that are cheering the rise of fascism in
Speaker 1: Italy and you know, and and and and wanting to
Speaker 1: shake hands with authoritarians and dictators like Victor Orbon who's
Speaker 1: welcomed into Sepack and putin right. So I want to
Speaker 1: ask the question about the distinction and how that is
Speaker 1: playing uh in in these groups. And also, my god,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry you would send to people all all week long,
Speaker 1: all of these different groups, Mike, I hope you meditate, um,
Speaker 1: but uh the you know, the the other question is, too,
Speaker 1: does it play better to talk about how Republicans are
Speaker 1: blocking your ability, blocking Americans ability to make their checks
Speaker 1: go longer than the month too, in fact, act, you know,
Speaker 1: be able to keep their head literally above water. Does
Speaker 1: it help to have that narrative or is it we
Speaker 1: need that narrative about democrats doing and the narrative about
Speaker 1: why more can't get done. Yeah, so let me try
Speaker 1: to answer. I'll answer the second one first. So, the
Speaker 1: overarching narrative that we have found working, and this is
Speaker 1: on the basis not just of that aggregated qualitative research
Speaker 1: the focus groups I reference, but this is part of
Speaker 1: a giant ad and message testing project in which I've
Speaker 1: been engaged, where at this point we've tested over two
Speaker 1: hundred digital ads and randomized controlled trials over the summer
Speaker 1: to arrive at an overarching storyline. And that overarching storyline
Speaker 1: I can encapsulate in three words, it is protect our
Speaker 1: freedoms freedoms intentionally plural. And so what that does is
Speaker 1: we talk about Democrats as being here to protect our
Speaker 1: freedoms and Trump Republicans or mac Republicans, and I will
Speaker 1: explain why as taking away our freedoms from the freedom
Speaker 1: to decide whether and when we have kids, to our
Speaker 1: freedom from gun violence, to our freedom to earn enough
Speaker 1: and be able to provide for our families. Republicans want
Speaker 1: to take away Trump Republicans want to take away our freedoms.
Speaker 1: By joining together like we did in twenty twenty, we
Speaker 1: can protect our freedoms. So basically the polarity is actually
Speaker 1: number one. The topic is freedoms plural because when we
Speaker 1: use it in that plural form, it unconsciously activates and
Speaker 1: people are more progressive understanding of freedom, whereas the singular
Speaker 1: tips more into kind of your classic right wing guns
Speaker 1: right freedom of religion, which of course just means being
Speaker 1: able to shove a certain kind of patriarchal, evangelical white
Speaker 1: Christianity at you. So freedoms is a really really powerful
Speaker 1: and effective kind of overarching concept. And then what we're
Speaker 1: doing is we're saying that they are taking away your freedoms,
Speaker 1: because that activates something that we know in psychology called
Speaker 1: loss aversion. People are much more motivated to act on
Speaker 1: behalf of retaining something they perceive to have now versus
Speaker 1: acting on behalf of a predicted future gain. So all
Speaker 1: of that language taking away freedoms, etc. It's all super deliberate. Now,
Speaker 1: Trump Republicans are Maca Republicans. What you say is of
Speaker 1: course absolutely correct. But when we're thinking about the way
Speaker 1: that we label our opposition, we want to evaluate any message,
Speaker 1: any label, anything we're saying along a set of criteria.
Speaker 1: So the criteria are it feels credible to the voter.
Speaker 1: It feels true and accurate, It feels mobilizing to our base.
Speaker 1: It makes them want to take more action at a
Speaker 1: minimum voting and you know, GoldStar of volunteering, calling, participating, etcetera.
Speaker 1: All the things, all the things, and it is persuasive
Speaker 1: to the broadest number of voters that we can actually
Speaker 1: get recognizing that there are people we cannot and will
Speaker 1: not ever have on our side. And so what happens
Speaker 1: is if we say Republicans period, Republicans want to take
Speaker 1: away your freedoms, or Republicans are blocking XYZ, or Republicans
Speaker 1: are this or that for our base, and this includes
Speaker 1: I want to be very very clear and explicit Black voters,
Speaker 1: Latino voters, etc. Which are the predominant part of our base.
Speaker 1: What they hear in that is, oh, that's just politics
Speaker 1: as usual. That's where team blue shit talks Team read,
Speaker 1: Team Read does the opposite. There's a reason I don't
Speaker 1: want to listen to any of that, and I'm not
Speaker 1: interested in it because we have to remember that our
Speaker 1: task with our disaffected base meaning not activists, so not you, Danielle,
Speaker 1: not me, but people who if they would participate, if
Speaker 1: they would vote, would vote for us. It's just that
Speaker 1: they don't vote all the time, and so they are
Speaker 1: particularly repulsed by what they perceived to be politics as usual, bickering,
Speaker 1: the sort of animosity of it. And right now, especially
Speaker 1: in our battlegrounds. I just got told today by one
Speaker 1: of our media consultants that voters in Las Vegas, because Nevada,
Speaker 1: of course is a battleground state, are seeing eleven political
Speaker 1: ads an hour on average. So the voters in these
Speaker 1: battleground states, basically what our canvassers on the doors are
Speaker 1: telling us is people are like, I don't want to
Speaker 1: hear negative shit. I do not like, do not with that,
Speaker 1: I cannot with that. So what what calling out all
Speaker 1: Republicans does is it makes people think that we're doing
Speaker 1: it for the same reason that Domino says crappy things
Speaker 1: about Pizza Hut, like that's just your job, got it, Okay.
Speaker 1: So when we say Trump Republicans or Magarepublicans, it increases
Speaker 1: the credibility, it increases the heat, and people don't feel
Speaker 1: like that's name calling from us. They feel like, well,
Speaker 1: that's an accurate label, that's something that they would say
Speaker 1: about themselves. With swing voters, what it does is it
Speaker 1: opens up what we call the permission architecture for people
Speaker 1: who have formerly voted Republican self identify even as Republican
Speaker 1: who voted for Joe Biden in twenty twenty, to be
Speaker 1: able to say I'm still a Republican because my grandpa was,
Speaker 1: or because you know some sort of whatever. I mean
Speaker 1: obviously to me total bullshit feeling about Ronald Reagan. But
Speaker 1: it's there, and I can still come with you and
Speaker 1: be in your coalition because you don't mean me. It
Speaker 1: gives people an now mm. So here's the thing that
Speaker 1: troubles me. It's the fact that we still need maybe
Speaker 1: because you know more than I, which is why I
Speaker 1: invited you on Who is this swing voter or not?
Speaker 1: Who is this mythical unicorn that still exists in the
Speaker 1: center that hasn't been pushed to one side by the insurrection,
Speaker 1: hasn't been pushed to one side, by the fact that
Speaker 1: one of the political parties you know, loves their white
Speaker 1: supremacist oath keeper three percent or Proud Boy Bass and
Speaker 1: doesn't say anything negatively against them, like who are those people? Yeah,
Speaker 1: So first I just want to say there aren't a
Speaker 1: lot of them. They are like they can't be. There
Speaker 1: are very very, very very few. But I want to
Speaker 1: remind folks that politics is a game of millimeters, not
Speaker 1: even inches. We won Wisconsin by point seven percent in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, and we lost it by about one percent
Speaker 1: in twenty sixteen. So basically, we can't afford to lose anyone.
Speaker 1: We need all of the people who voted for Joe
Speaker 1: Biden to come back out. And the thing about mid terms,
Speaker 1: and I promise I haven't forgotten your question, is that
Speaker 1: we need to remember there is a historical pattern at
Speaker 1: play here, and that pattern, with the exception of the
Speaker 1: election after nine to eleven, is that the incumbent party
Speaker 1: takes a shellacking because quite simply, the out of power party,
Speaker 1: their base voters are much more energized than our base.
Speaker 1: And yes, we are doing everything in our power, and
Speaker 1: I'm a there's no that this false diychotomy between are
Speaker 1: we doing turnout are we doing persuasion? That that is
Speaker 1: a bunch of nonsense. And by the way, just to
Speaker 1: dog whistle about do we give a shit about black
Speaker 1: voters and are we going to talk to them or
Speaker 1: will we put all our eggs in the white people basket.
Speaker 1: That's all that little conversation means. Unpacking the what the
Speaker 1: words mean. We have to get everybody back out, and
Speaker 1: we have to recognize that in states like Pennsylvania, like Wisconsin,
Speaker 1: like Arizona, like Georgia, like Texas, if we have a
Speaker 1: prayer there, it means we can't afford to lose any
Speaker 1: So now your question, there are not a lot of
Speaker 1: swing voters, but they live in super key places and
Speaker 1: who are they? They are people who either historically have
Speaker 1: identified as Republican because a lot of voting behavior, and
Speaker 1: in fact, the greatest predictor of adult voting behavior is
Speaker 1: parental voting behavior. So it's not unlike, you know why
Speaker 1: you have X y Z brand of yogurt in your face.
Speaker 1: It's likely because that's what your parents had. Right, So
Speaker 1: people's decision making about these things actually is imprinted upon
Speaker 1: us at a really, really really young age. That doesn't
Speaker 1: mean nobody changes, that doesn't mean persuasion is impossible. All
Speaker 1: of those things are also true. I'm speaking in the aggregate.
Speaker 1: So those swing voters have some of them have some
Speaker 1: sort of affiliation or identity as Republicans, but are turned
Speaker 1: off by and find Trump Republicanism, magaism to be repugnant,
Speaker 1: and so now they're in this totally conflicted place. And
Speaker 1: that place of conflict is this is my identity, this
Speaker 1: is sort of what my parents told me was good
Speaker 1: and right, this is what my church says, this is
Speaker 1: what my community believes. But I disagree with those terrible
Speaker 1: things happening. And so the valuation that they're making in
Speaker 1: this midterm is is there such a thing as voting
Speaker 1: for a Republican that is not a vote for maga,
Speaker 1: that is not a vote for Trump. And so we're
Speaker 1: making the case to them that you just made Danielle. No,
Speaker 1: there's no daylight between the person running the person running,
Speaker 1: even if it's Brian Camp who wants kudos and plaudits
Speaker 1: for like nominally, you know, for not being willing to
Speaker 1: like completely and totally destroy the law and finding votes
Speaker 1: that didn't existed, like congratulations. The bar is so low
Speaker 1: you've hit your head on it. I wish you would
Speaker 1: pass out, but that doesn't seem to happen. So those
Speaker 1: swing voters are either folks who are sort of reckoning
Speaker 1: with their own sense of identity, and we're trying to
Speaker 1: both make that case that the congressional Republican or the
Speaker 1: person running for school board, because remember, local races matter two,
Speaker 1: they matter a lot. And so the person running for
Speaker 1: school board obviously, the person running for Secretary of State
Speaker 1: unbelievably important. That the people who actually oversee our elections,
Speaker 1: the person running for county commissioner. We want you to
Speaker 1: understand that, like they're all beyond the pale. So that's
Speaker 1: one thing that we're trying to do with that voter.
Speaker 1: And then the other thing that we're trying to do
Speaker 1: with that voter is recognize that people make midterm decisions
Speaker 1: on the basis of enthusiasm and on the basis historically
Speaker 1: of how they feel about their pocketbooks. And right now,
Speaker 1: despite the fact that inflation is obviously a global phenomenon
Speaker 1: and is occurring and existing across the world in super
Speaker 1: right wing run states, government countries in left wing we're
Speaker 1: on states like you know, Joe Biden is not in
Speaker 1: charge of the global economy, newsflash. So people don't understand that,
Speaker 1: and all they know is that they're having struggles, and
Speaker 1: so they're thinking, I'm having struggles. I voted this way
Speaker 1: last time, or Team Blue is in power and I'm
Speaker 1: not feeling great about my life. I'm gonna Gopher team
Speaker 1: read got it, And so our fundamental task is to
Speaker 1: change the terms of the election itself away from being
Speaker 1: a referendum on the party in power, which is normally
Speaker 1: what a midterm election is, to being an actual choice election,
Speaker 1: a choice between Trump Republicans who want to take away
Speaker 1: your freedoms, including your freedom to retire in dignity by
Speaker 1: stealing your Social Security and Medicare from you, your freedom
Speaker 1: to decide for yourself who governs in your name, by
Speaker 1: taking away your freedom to vote, your freedom to know
Speaker 1: that when your kids go off to school in the morning,
Speaker 1: you're going to see them home at the end of
Speaker 1: the day because some maniac is not going to have
Speaker 1: massacred them because you're handing out military grade weapons like
Speaker 1: kanzi bars. So they need to understand this as a
Speaker 1: choice election and not a referendum on the incumbent party.
Speaker 1: That's it for part one of my conversation with the
Speaker 1: fabulous and brilliantly verbos Anat Schenker oh Saudio. We will
Speaker 1: be back tomorrow with part two of words that we
Speaker 1: actually need to win by with our friend Anat. That
Speaker 1: is it for me, Today, dear friends on Woke a
Speaker 1: f as always, Power to the people and to all
Speaker 1: the people power, get woke and stay woke as fuck.