WEBVTT - David Sirota & John Della Volpe 0:00:00.680 --> 0:00:04.160 Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics, 0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.160 where we discussed the top political headlines with some of 0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:11.320 today's best minds, and Gavin Newsom has called a special 0:00:11.440 --> 0:00:16.959 session to protect California's liberal policies. We have such a 0:00:16.960 --> 0:00:20.560 great show for you today. The levers Dave Siota looks 0:00:20.600 --> 0:00:24.520 back at the campaign and tries to parse the data 0:00:24.840 --> 0:00:27.159 and show us what he's learned. Then we'll talk to 0:00:27.400 --> 0:00:33.120 pollster John Delavolpi about the youth vote and how challenging 0:00:33.200 --> 0:00:34.920 it is to connect with young people. 0:00:35.240 --> 0:00:38.720 But first the news, So Malli, while don't we go 0:00:38.880 --> 0:00:42.560 over some of the things we're seeing with how the 0:00:42.600 --> 0:00:44.400 election is checking out? What are you seeing here? 0:00:44.640 --> 0:00:47.440 We're just going to sort of update because not everything 0:00:47.560 --> 0:00:50.680 is counted. California takes forever, but I just want to 0:00:50.800 --> 0:00:52.919 get you guys up to speed on the House. Right now, 0:00:52.960 --> 0:00:55.959 Republicans have won two hundred and five seats. Democrats have 0:00:56.000 --> 0:00:59.200 won one hundred and ninety one. There are thirty nine 0:00:59.280 --> 0:01:02.080 races under sided. A party needs to get to two 0:01:02.240 --> 0:01:04.440 eighteen seats to win the majority. 0:01:04.480 --> 0:01:06.360 This is like my math nightmare. 0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:09.840 So Republicans need only to win one third of the 0:01:09.920 --> 0:01:13.440 remaining thirteen races, Well, Democrats need to win two thirds. 0:01:13.480 --> 0:01:14.319 That's twenty six. 0:01:14.560 --> 0:01:17.120 Because a lot of these races are in California, there 0:01:17.280 --> 0:01:19.600 is a real chance that Democrats can win a lot 0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:19.920 of them. 0:01:20.040 --> 0:01:21.160 Whatever it looks like. 0:01:21.800 --> 0:01:25.640 Even if Democrats do win the House, which is possible 0:01:25.680 --> 0:01:28.280 but less and less likely by the day, it'll still 0:01:28.319 --> 0:01:32.400 be closed. And you'll remember that last session Republicans had 0:01:32.440 --> 0:01:36.880 the House but a very very slim, almost ungovernable majority, 0:01:36.959 --> 0:01:39.720 which ended up being quite good for Democrats and meant 0:01:39.720 --> 0:01:42.600 they were able to get very little done. So we'll 0:01:42.680 --> 0:01:46.160 keep following on that, and then I just want to 0:01:46.440 --> 0:01:49.440 do a few minutes on what we saw from the 0:01:49.480 --> 0:01:51.800 election and just so we can learn from it. 0:01:52.200 --> 0:01:56.560 So there's some dalysis here about the Latito vote, since 0:01:56.640 --> 0:01:58.360 a lot of people are very confused about that. 0:01:58.360 --> 0:01:59.240 What do you see here? 0:02:00.080 --> 0:02:02.960 Six percent is the percentage of Latino's that Trump won. 0:02:03.400 --> 0:02:06.120 That's according to recent exit polls. It's the highest number 0:02:06.120 --> 0:02:10.240 for Republican presidential candidate in at least fifty years. Think 0:02:10.280 --> 0:02:15.000 about that. It's eclipsing George W. Bush's forty four percent 0:02:15.160 --> 0:02:18.480 in two thousand and four. So Trump also won a 0:02:18.639 --> 0:02:22.880 majority fifty five percent of Latino men. I think it's 0:02:22.960 --> 0:02:27.240 important to learn from. So Trump did, in fact win 0:02:27.360 --> 0:02:30.600 Latino men by a large margin. He had a sixteen 0:02:30.680 --> 0:02:35.360 point margin of victory in Star County, Texas, the country's 0:02:35.360 --> 0:02:40.320 most heavily Latino county on the US Mexico border. He 0:02:40.480 --> 0:02:45.359 lost that same county in twenty sixteen by sixty points. 0:02:45.680 --> 0:02:50.200 Trump surged in a heavily Latino county near the border. 0:02:50.480 --> 0:02:53.560 These are people, some of them probably will end up 0:02:53.600 --> 0:02:57.280 in deportation camps if these deportation camps happened, but they 0:02:57.400 --> 0:03:01.240 still voted for Trump. Another really interesting data point. These 0:03:01.280 --> 0:03:03.560 are all from the Washington Posts, and you should definitely 0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:09.079 check out this article from very smart data journalist Aaron Blake. 0:03:09.240 --> 0:03:15.320 But another really interesting statistic is that Vice President Harris 0:03:15.560 --> 0:03:21.480 had a forty seven percent favorability rating and exit polls 0:03:21.600 --> 0:03:25.480 versus Trump's forty six. She may have actually been more 0:03:25.800 --> 0:03:29.720 liked by voters, but these voters still decided to vote 0:03:29.760 --> 0:03:31.960 for Trump, So make it make sense. 0:03:32.000 --> 0:03:33.040 It doesn't make sense to me. 0:03:33.440 --> 0:03:37.360 And then Trump won the one in ten these sort 0:03:37.400 --> 0:03:40.680 of double haters, those are the voters who don't like 0:03:40.760 --> 0:03:45.320 either candidate. He won one in ten of those voters. 0:03:45.440 --> 0:03:47.960 It's the third time he's done that where he's won 0:03:48.000 --> 0:03:50.920 the double haters. He carried them by seventeen points in 0:03:50.960 --> 0:03:56.080 twenty sixteen, twenty seven points in twenty twenty, and it 0:03:56.120 --> 0:04:00.480 reinforces that they don't mind his character issues for what reason? 0:04:00.520 --> 0:04:03.160 It is not disqualifying to them. So now let's talk 0:04:03.160 --> 0:04:04.760 about undocumented immigrants. 0:04:05.000 --> 0:04:07.000 S numbers are pretty alarming. What are you seeing here? 0:04:07.520 --> 0:04:11.000 One of the things that is interesting is that in 0:04:11.080 --> 0:04:15.440 voc has, fifty two percent si undocumented immigrants should be 0:04:15.480 --> 0:04:18.159 offered a chance to apply for legal status, versus only 0:04:18.200 --> 0:04:20.560 forty seven percent who said they shouldn't be deported. But 0:04:20.880 --> 0:04:25.240 fully one in four of those who support legalization for 0:04:25.760 --> 0:04:29.640 immigrants voted for Trump anyway. So what this means is 0:04:29.640 --> 0:04:33.480 that a lot of people voted for Trump who may 0:04:33.600 --> 0:04:37.159 end up getting deported. It seems as if in exit poles, 0:04:37.440 --> 0:04:41.000 fifty four percent of voters agreed that Trump was too extreme, 0:04:41.320 --> 0:04:44.600 but one in nine who viewed Trump as too extreme 0:04:44.760 --> 0:04:48.960 still voted for him. Again, they thought he was too extreme, 0:04:49.240 --> 0:04:53.120 but they voted to make him president. So obviously we 0:04:53.200 --> 0:04:56.920 have a problem here. The math is bad, This is 0:04:57.000 --> 0:04:59.520 not good. A lot of people voted for a guy 0:04:59.680 --> 0:05:02.600 who's going to do some crazy stuff, and maybe they 0:05:02.640 --> 0:05:05.440 thought it wouldn't happen to them. I don't know, but 0:05:05.720 --> 0:05:10.200 I think that's a really important and also just insane 0:05:10.360 --> 0:05:13.680 and also, like you know, it cannot all fall to 0:05:13.800 --> 0:05:19.640 the mainstream media to explain Trump is, especially when Trump 0:05:19.800 --> 0:05:22.480 is such an effective messager on his own. 0:05:22.640 --> 0:05:24.360 I want to take another minute. 0:05:24.120 --> 0:05:26.240 To talk to everybody, because I feel like on the 0:05:26.320 --> 0:05:29.919 last episode, I talked to everyone about the things I 0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:32.640 got wrong and how I felt that I had really 0:05:32.720 --> 0:05:35.719 let people down and was way too rosy a picture, 0:05:35.800 --> 0:05:39.240 and perhaps that I was affected by my own media silas. 0:05:39.320 --> 0:05:41.480 I want to take a minute now to talk about 0:05:41.520 --> 0:05:43.960 the good stuff, because there's some actually good stuff. 0:05:43.960 --> 0:05:44.120 You know. 0:05:44.640 --> 0:05:47.800 It fucking sucks to have watched. 0:05:47.440 --> 0:05:51.520 Another female presidential candidate be defeated by someone who at 0:05:51.520 --> 0:05:54.640 this point now is a felon. But there are a 0:05:54.640 --> 0:05:57.039 few bright spots, and I want to share them with 0:05:57.120 --> 0:05:59.600 you guys so that we all don't go crazy. One 0:05:59.839 --> 0:06:03.640 of the bright spots is that Democrats held a lot 0:06:03.680 --> 0:06:07.719 of Senate seats and it was this very very bad 0:06:07.880 --> 0:06:12.880 Senate map for Democrats and they had to defend a 0:06:12.920 --> 0:06:15.760 lot of seats and they were able to do it. 0:06:15.960 --> 0:06:19.920 So some of the seats they defended, which is just great, 0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:23.760 are Jackie Rosen is going back to the Senate and 0:06:23.800 --> 0:06:27.479 that is incredible. She is from the state of Nevada. 0:06:27.920 --> 0:06:31.680 So you had Jackie Rosen and that is just great. 0:06:31.800 --> 0:06:36.560 And then you had Tammy Baldwin going back to the Senate, 0:06:36.680 --> 0:06:41.400 which is another really great seat that Democrats could have lost. 0:06:41.880 --> 0:06:46.560 So basically what it looks like is Laura Gillen, who 0:06:46.600 --> 0:06:49.160 has come on this podcast. She's a member of Congress. 0:06:49.240 --> 0:06:52.880 She has flipped a seat that belonged to d Esposito, 0:06:53.200 --> 0:06:57.680 so that's very good, and that's New York's fourth congressional district. 0:06:58.200 --> 0:07:03.160 Then also Jackie Roe will keep her seat in the Senate. 0:07:03.440 --> 0:07:08.640 Then the other Senate seats are there's also Josh Riley 0:07:08.880 --> 0:07:11.560 is going to he's a member of Congress and he's 0:07:11.840 --> 0:07:14.679 winning New York's nineteenth so that's also a flip. 0:07:15.200 --> 0:07:17.880 So there are some good things here. 0:07:17.880 --> 0:07:20.800 And you know, it's a bummer that Bob Casey is 0:07:20.840 --> 0:07:25.000 not coming back. And also Michigan Elisa Slotkin is going 0:07:25.040 --> 0:07:28.600 to the Senate and she is a Michigan Democrat, and 0:07:28.640 --> 0:07:33.280 that is really great. So there's a lot to feel 0:07:33.320 --> 0:07:37.240 good about in this map, and just go from there. 0:07:37.400 --> 0:07:40.000 I think everyone should not despair and we should all 0:07:40.040 --> 0:07:47.760 just keep going. Dave Serota is the founder of lever News, 0:07:48.040 --> 0:07:50.600 the creator of the podcast The master Plan, and the 0:07:50.640 --> 0:07:52.480 author of the screenplay Don't Look Up. 0:07:52.920 --> 0:07:55.760 Welcome back, Dave, Thank you, thanks for having me. 0:07:56.080 --> 0:07:59.920 Yeah. I took like two days of like not sleep, 0:08:00.080 --> 0:08:04.160 being on television but also not sleeping and being in 0:08:04.200 --> 0:08:07.920 that weird fugue state. And then I was like, who 0:08:08.000 --> 0:08:10.080 are the people I need to talk to right away? 0:08:10.320 --> 0:08:13.120 And you were high on my list. I want you 0:08:13.200 --> 0:08:15.680 to just talk about where you are right now after 0:08:15.760 --> 0:08:19.200 this twenty twenty four cycle, and you know wherever you 0:08:19.240 --> 0:08:19.880 want that to go. 0:08:20.200 --> 0:08:22.600 I feel like I've been here before. I feel like 0:08:22.640 --> 0:08:26.400 I was here twenty years ago after the John Kerry campaign. 0:08:27.240 --> 0:08:29.480 I actually went back and looked at the writing I 0:08:29.520 --> 0:08:31.760 did around the time. Back then, I had worked for 0:08:32.200 --> 0:08:35.040 a guy who was running in a red state, guy 0:08:35.080 --> 0:08:38.760 who was a farmer rancher, Brian Schweitzer, who became the 0:08:38.840 --> 0:08:43.240 Governor of Montana as a outsider candidate. On a night, 0:08:43.320 --> 0:08:45.720 an election night that was one of the worst election 0:08:45.880 --> 0:08:48.240 nights for the Democratic Party. That was the night that 0:08:48.520 --> 0:08:50.400 George Bush got reelected. And I went back and I 0:08:50.440 --> 0:08:52.640 looked at the exit polls, by the way, and Bush 0:08:52.720 --> 0:08:56.000 won voters below one hundred thousand dollars and above fifty 0:08:56.080 --> 0:08:59.240 thousand dollars. So there was a maybe not as abrupt, 0:08:59.280 --> 0:09:02.200 a class alignment back to the Republicans, a working class 0:09:02.400 --> 0:09:06.120 alignment to the Republicans. It was similar. And I bring 0:09:06.120 --> 0:09:08.679 this all up to say that we have been here before. 0:09:08.840 --> 0:09:10.640 We were here in two thousand and four, we were 0:09:10.640 --> 0:09:14.000 here in twenty sixteen, we were actually almost here in 0:09:14.080 --> 0:09:16.760 twenty twenty, and we are now here in twenty twenty four. 0:09:16.880 --> 0:09:19.679 And I think there's a theme through all of this 0:09:20.240 --> 0:09:23.880 that at this point I'm like annoyed and angry that 0:09:23.960 --> 0:09:27.360 I feel like I'm saying the same thing for twenty years, right, 0:09:27.559 --> 0:09:29.280 because I went back and I looked at what I wrote, 0:09:29.280 --> 0:09:32.840 and it was all about how the arithmetic of democratic 0:09:32.880 --> 0:09:37.559 politics does not work in a unfortunately a downwardly mobile 0:09:37.679 --> 0:09:42.080 economy where the working class is getting bigger. The Democrats 0:09:42.160 --> 0:09:48.360 theory of the wine track of affluent suburbanites. 0:09:47.679 --> 0:09:49.240 Well, it's just not enough people. 0:09:49.480 --> 0:09:52.080 It's just not enough people. It's not enough, And so 0:09:52.559 --> 0:09:54.720 then you get to the question of, okay, well, why 0:09:54.840 --> 0:10:00.280 is the Democratic Party's formula upper middle class, affluent urban 0:10:00.360 --> 0:10:04.600 nights and people of color. Why does the Democratic Party 0:10:04.920 --> 0:10:08.439 want that to be its formula. Why does the Democratic 0:10:08.520 --> 0:10:14.360 Party see as the key swing demographic disaffected upper middle 0:10:14.360 --> 0:10:17.840 class Republicans. Why do they keep clinging that the quote 0:10:17.880 --> 0:10:20.640 from Chuck Schumer from twenty sixteen is the one that 0:10:20.920 --> 0:10:24.200 rings true in this election, which was Chuck Schumer said 0:10:24.200 --> 0:10:27.200 back then, Hey, I'm not worried about Western I'm paraphrasing here, 0:10:27.200 --> 0:10:29.360 I'm not worried about Western Pennsylvania. For every Democrat we 0:10:29.400 --> 0:10:32.280 lose in Western Pennsylvania will win two disaffected Republicans in 0:10:32.320 --> 0:10:35.200 the suburbs of Philadelphia and will replicate that across state 0:10:35.240 --> 0:10:38.480 after state after state. That's been the Democratic Party's formula. 0:10:38.559 --> 0:10:41.080 So you have to ask the question, Okay, why did 0:10:41.120 --> 0:10:44.680 the Democrats see as their key swing vote disaffected upper 0:10:44.720 --> 0:10:49.120 middle class Republicans and not the Western Pennsylvania blue collar 0:10:49.520 --> 0:10:54.560 Democratic archetype. And I think the answer is because if 0:10:54.640 --> 0:10:59.080 the Democratic Party leaders are constantly trying to appeal to 0:10:59.160 --> 0:11:03.760 some sort of voting electorate and also appease their billionaire 0:11:03.880 --> 0:11:10.320 and corporate elite donors. It's easier to make cultural appeals 0:11:10.720 --> 0:11:20.439 to country club Republicans on reproductive rights, LGBTQ, diversity, democracy norms. 0:11:20.800 --> 0:11:23.040 It's easier to make those appeals to those country club 0:11:23.080 --> 0:11:26.720 Republicans without having to fear that you're going to offend 0:11:27.160 --> 0:11:29.680 the donor class. If you don't want to offend the 0:11:29.760 --> 0:11:33.680 donor class, then you want to try to cobble together 0:11:33.800 --> 0:11:38.680 some coalition that means your electoral appeal isn't offensive to 0:11:38.760 --> 0:11:42.520 the donor class. And so country club Republicans aren't offended 0:11:42.559 --> 0:11:46.319 by cultural appeals. But the problem is, as we've just discussed, 0:11:46.320 --> 0:11:49.120 there's not enough voters there. So if you're going to 0:11:49.200 --> 0:11:52.959 make an economic populist case to the working class, like 0:11:53.000 --> 0:11:57.000 a real case, you're going to offend your donors, right, 0:11:57.040 --> 0:11:59.280 and so that's why the Democrats have been averse to 0:11:59.320 --> 0:11:59.760 doing it. 0:12:00.120 --> 0:12:02.760 So I want to pause for a second here because 0:12:02.840 --> 0:12:05.080 I think there's a lot of good stuff in what 0:12:05.120 --> 0:12:08.679 you're saying. Because everybody's a little fragile right now, or 0:12:08.720 --> 0:12:10.920 at least I'm a little fragile, I want to just 0:12:11.200 --> 0:12:13.400 say two things which I think are true, which is 0:12:13.559 --> 0:12:18.240 one Harris did an incredible job considering where she came in. 0:12:18.559 --> 0:12:21.800 She raised a billion dollars, she got voters excited, She 0:12:21.960 --> 0:12:25.640 did everything she could in a very tough situation. Certainly, 0:12:25.760 --> 0:12:28.480 in my mind, she really did. But I see what 0:12:28.480 --> 0:12:30.640 you're saying, and I think that it's really important. And 0:12:30.640 --> 0:12:32.760 the other thing I want you to want you to 0:12:32.800 --> 0:12:35.760 talk about, which is really I think the crux of 0:12:35.840 --> 0:12:40.280 all of this is that it's easier to motivate your base. 0:12:40.400 --> 0:12:43.320 And this is what Donald Trump discovered in twenty sixteen 0:12:43.440 --> 0:12:46.040 and then replicated in twenty twenty four is it's easier 0:12:46.040 --> 0:12:48.040 to motivate your base than it is to try to 0:12:48.080 --> 0:12:51.079 convince other people to go after Republicans. 0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:54.040 So can you explain to us a little bit about that. 0:12:54.600 --> 0:12:56.840 Well, I certainly agree that it's easier to motivate your 0:12:56.840 --> 0:12:59.320 base than it is to convert. 0:12:58.960 --> 0:13:00.560 People with chain. Yeah. 0:13:00.640 --> 0:13:04.560 Yeah, Look, I think Kamala Harris ran I don't even 0:13:04.600 --> 0:13:07.400 know how to characterize. I don't think she ran an 0:13:07.480 --> 0:13:10.880 awful campaign. I also think that she ran as a 0:13:10.960 --> 0:13:14.440 generic Democrat, So I think that was the strategy, just 0:13:14.679 --> 0:13:18.000 any generic Democrat that doesn't have a kind of unique 0:13:18.200 --> 0:13:19.520 problem like Biden. 0:13:19.760 --> 0:13:22.160 Right, But she came in so late and she inherited. 0:13:22.360 --> 0:13:24.640 Yeah, and so I see the threat. I would say 0:13:24.679 --> 0:13:27.880 this though, and look twenty twenty hindsight always, but I 0:13:27.920 --> 0:13:30.600 said this right when she was nominated, which is, you 0:13:30.600 --> 0:13:33.000 can try to run a risk averse campaign and just 0:13:33.160 --> 0:13:37.800 be the generic Democrat, but there is no risk of her. 0:13:37.800 --> 0:13:39.040 That's a risk on to itself. 0:13:39.400 --> 0:13:41.600 Right now. That is a very good point. You know, 0:13:41.920 --> 0:13:42.800 if you look at. 0:13:42.640 --> 0:13:46.640 The structural obstacles in this race for the incumbent party, inflation, 0:13:47.080 --> 0:13:49.120 people are unhappy. 0:13:48.840 --> 0:13:51.839 Low approval rating for Biden. 0:13:51.800 --> 0:13:54.199 Right like, whether that's her fault or not, those are 0:13:54.200 --> 0:13:58.240 just structural impediments that we know are impediments to every 0:13:58.280 --> 0:14:01.280 candidate running in this situation. So there's an argument that 0:14:01.400 --> 0:14:05.160 you have to risk aversion is just accepting those impediments 0:14:05.240 --> 0:14:07.599 and thinking somehow history is going to be different. I 0:14:07.640 --> 0:14:09.880 would argue again twenty twenty hindsight, but I argued it, 0:14:09.880 --> 0:14:13.040 then you have to make big risks in a situation 0:14:13.200 --> 0:14:15.679 like that, And what are those risks? I mean, what 0:14:15.720 --> 0:14:17.559 were the risks that you could have taken. I mean 0:14:17.600 --> 0:14:19.480 I had suggested as an example. I don't think this 0:14:19.480 --> 0:14:21.080 would have won the race for her, but you know, 0:14:21.400 --> 0:14:24.920 put out there a specific proposal, don't You don't have 0:14:25.000 --> 0:14:28.000 to put out twenty eight thousand proposals campaign on two 0:14:28.280 --> 0:14:31.600 or three things that are so crystal clear in how 0:14:31.640 --> 0:14:35.360 they will benefit the working class and then run around 0:14:35.360 --> 0:14:37.640 and just only talk about that. And I had suggested 0:14:37.640 --> 0:14:40.080 at the time paid family leave, right like Tim Waltz 0:14:40.120 --> 0:14:42.160 said that should be the top priority of the Democratic 0:14:42.200 --> 0:14:45.200 Party right before he was nominated. You could just like, hey, 0:14:45.400 --> 0:14:47.640 vote for me, you get paid family of That's it, right, 0:14:47.760 --> 0:14:50.600 Like that, Like it's very I don't think anybody can answer. 0:14:50.600 --> 0:14:54.240 Could have answered, Hey, if Kamala Harris wins the app time, 0:14:54.240 --> 0:14:56.240 at the average voter, what does it mean for me? 0:14:56.480 --> 0:14:58.560 I get like it's not Donald Trump, and like there's 0:14:58.600 --> 0:15:02.840 this thing called democracy, but like what do I actually 0:15:03.000 --> 0:15:05.800 get directly? And I don't think that question was answered. 0:15:05.840 --> 0:15:08.000 I don't even think the campaign really made an effort 0:15:08.160 --> 0:15:11.160 to really seriously answer that. I know they had TV 0:15:11.280 --> 0:15:13.840 ads on about price gouging. I know they had TV 0:15:13.960 --> 0:15:17.040 ads about some basic economic stuff. You know, there's two 0:15:17.120 --> 0:15:19.480 media worlds that the voter is immersed in. There's the 0:15:19.800 --> 0:15:22.600 paid television ads, then there's the what is the campaign 0:15:22.720 --> 0:15:24.800 doing the candidate doing on the campaign trail. So you 0:15:24.840 --> 0:15:28.720 had these anti price gouging ads on TV and reproductive 0:15:28.760 --> 0:15:30.960 rights ads, and then you had like the candidate running 0:15:31.000 --> 0:15:33.960 around with Liz Cheney, and you had the face of 0:15:33.960 --> 0:15:37.040 the Democratic Party on cable TV being a billionaire Mark Cuban, 0:15:37.320 --> 0:15:40.200 and you had a Democratic convention in which you had 0:15:40.240 --> 0:15:43.520 a billionaire governor bragging about being a billionaire. The average 0:15:43.600 --> 0:15:45.200 voter probably walks away from this being like, I don't 0:15:45.200 --> 0:15:48.000 even know what the hell that is? What is this picture? Right? 0:15:48.000 --> 0:15:51.080 At least with Trump, he's telling a story. He's telling 0:15:51.120 --> 0:15:54.560 a clear, crystal clear. I mean, he's incoherent, but like 0:15:54.760 --> 0:15:58.080 his story is basically, you know, a story of grievance, 0:15:58.360 --> 0:16:00.720 a story of the government getting in the way the economy, 0:16:00.880 --> 0:16:03.600 government run by elites who don't care about you, right, Like, 0:16:03.680 --> 0:16:06.640 it's at least a story. And so you know, I'm 0:16:06.640 --> 0:16:09.720 not try to say this was an easily winnable race. 0:16:10.080 --> 0:16:13.720 It was not. But I think this Democrats having a 0:16:13.800 --> 0:16:16.760 problem connecting with the working class. I go back to, like, 0:16:16.960 --> 0:16:19.040 this is what I've been talking about and a lot 0:16:19.120 --> 0:16:21.880 of us have been talking about for twenty years, and 0:16:21.960 --> 0:16:24.880 I'm burying the lead here because I think the thing 0:16:25.160 --> 0:16:27.680 that we have to wrestle with is if you look 0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:30.720 at the exit polling, who do the Democrats do worsd 0:16:30.760 --> 0:16:36.240 with overall working class voters? Obviously men and Latinos. The 0:16:36.320 --> 0:16:41.760 Democrats had within its midst a movement that almost won 0:16:41.920 --> 0:16:48.120 its nomination, a movement that was strongest among those demographics 0:16:48.600 --> 0:16:51.200 Bernie Sanders when he ran in twenty sixteen and twenty twenty. 0:16:51.240 --> 0:16:52.560 And I'm not saying, like, you know, he should have 0:16:52.640 --> 0:16:54.080 run in twenty twenty, I'm not saying any of that. 0:16:54.240 --> 0:16:57.280 What I'm saying is is that the Democratic Party, it 0:16:57.320 --> 0:17:02.120 has ostracized Bernie Sanders. It is ostracized the people who 0:17:02.200 --> 0:17:06.280 ran Bernie Sanders campaigns. It has ostracized the Bernie bros. 0:17:06.320 --> 0:17:08.919 I'm putting that in quotes. I mean literally, they genderized 0:17:09.240 --> 0:17:13.360 the establishment of the Democratic Party, genderized Bernie supporters by 0:17:13.359 --> 0:17:15.720 calling them Bernie brose. And then they wake up in 0:17:15.760 --> 0:17:17.639 twenty twenty four wondering, hey, why do we not do 0:17:17.680 --> 0:17:19.760 so well among working class male voters. 0:17:20.040 --> 0:17:24.200 You did this, yes, but our listeners are not necessarily 0:17:24.280 --> 0:17:24.800 those people. 0:17:24.920 --> 0:17:27.080 They are for sure, No, No, I'm right, for sure. 0:17:27.000 --> 0:17:29.320 Wanting to catch up on What's happening. But I do 0:17:29.359 --> 0:17:34.520 think those are really good points. And the democratic establishment 0:17:35.040 --> 0:17:36.919 one of the things when you look at Harris, she 0:17:37.119 --> 0:17:42.720 lost that vote. Right, These young men, the Joe Rogan crowd, 0:17:43.480 --> 0:17:46.720 were very winnable for Bernie, And in fact, Bernie went 0:17:46.840 --> 0:17:50.240 on the Joe Rogan podcast and Joe Rogan sort of 0:17:50.480 --> 0:17:51.960 semi endorsed him. 0:17:52.080 --> 0:17:54.600 Right, Yep, that's exactly right. And by the way, there 0:17:54.640 --> 0:17:58.119 was controversy about Bernie going on Joe Rogan. There was 0:17:58.160 --> 0:18:01.000 controversy about Bernie going on Fox News, the Fox Newstown. 0:18:01.080 --> 0:18:03.479 Oh he can't. One of the lessons here is you 0:18:03.520 --> 0:18:04.720 go where the voters are. 0:18:05.000 --> 0:18:05.480 Yeah. 0:18:05.520 --> 0:18:09.240 Absolutely, that's the candidate's responsibility. This idea that you know, 0:18:09.240 --> 0:18:11.760 we're expressing our values by going on Joe Rogan and 0:18:11.800 --> 0:18:14.520 saying therefore Joe Rogan is No, that's not how this works. 0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:15.040 Right. 0:18:15.560 --> 0:18:18.280 The people who listen to Joe Rogan are not going 0:18:18.320 --> 0:18:20.800 to listen to CNN. Right, that's a choice. If you 0:18:20.840 --> 0:18:22.359 want to get in front of those voters, you go 0:18:22.440 --> 0:18:23.159 on Joe Rogan. 0:18:23.320 --> 0:18:25.840 That's exactly right. And I would say there's a bigger 0:18:26.119 --> 0:18:28.840 issue here we're talking about media, which is I think 0:18:28.960 --> 0:18:32.240 that the Democratic Party, Democratic elected officials, the sort of 0:18:32.280 --> 0:18:36.919 the infrastructure of the Democratic Party is obsessed with getting 0:18:36.960 --> 0:18:44.480 onto and building out its communications strategy through traditional communications platforms, 0:18:44.600 --> 0:18:50.439 cable TV, news, newspapers. They're obsessed with talking on platforms 0:18:50.600 --> 0:18:54.280 and through conduits that are only talking to the voters that, 0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:56.520 by the way, the Democrats are winning sort of upper 0:18:56.560 --> 0:19:02.919 middle class, affluent, educated, highly informed voters, and they're not 0:19:03.119 --> 0:19:05.879 all that interested. They haven't been all that interested in 0:19:06.080 --> 0:19:11.280 engaging with independent media, alternate platforms, and that's a huge 0:19:11.280 --> 0:19:15.399 disadvantage right clearly. And the Republicans, they've spent years cultivating 0:19:15.400 --> 0:19:17.600 and building out that infrastructure exactly. 0:19:17.800 --> 0:19:19.200 And if you look at this campaign. 0:19:19.359 --> 0:19:22.720 He went on Theovon, he went on Joe Rogan, he 0:19:22.880 --> 0:19:28.520 went on all of these podcasters who speak to this group, 0:19:28.720 --> 0:19:31.240 which Harris lost. I want to go back to this 0:19:31.320 --> 0:19:34.680 idea we talked about before, because there's so much of 0:19:34.920 --> 0:19:38.080 the Democratic idea and I think it may have worked 0:19:38.400 --> 0:19:42.400 to some in twenty twenty, was to reach across the 0:19:42.440 --> 0:19:48.000 aisle to these disaffected Republicans. But now the disaffected Republicans 0:19:48.080 --> 0:19:51.879 are by de facto either don't vote or vote for Democrats, 0:19:52.040 --> 0:19:55.120 and the Republican party itself is now maga. 0:19:55.200 --> 0:19:59.520 Yeah, this question of who the real swing voters are 0:19:59.640 --> 0:20:03.600 is the central question here moving forward. This, I hope, 0:20:03.800 --> 0:20:07.919 is the end of a Democratic party that sees the 0:20:08.000 --> 0:20:12.919 primary target swing voters as country club Republicans. The primary 0:20:13.280 --> 0:20:18.120 swing voter in America are working class people generally, that is, the. 0:20:18.320 --> 0:20:21.000 Who were already Democrats, who are not showing up. 0:20:21.160 --> 0:20:24.159 Yes, who are either not showing up or voted for 0:20:24.240 --> 0:20:27.320 Trump but have voted before for the Democrats. We did 0:20:27.400 --> 0:20:29.960 learn this lesson in twenty sixteen, right all the counties 0:20:30.200 --> 0:20:34.040 that voted twice for Obama and then voted for Donald Trump. 0:20:34.400 --> 0:20:37.960 These were a lot of them were working class locales 0:20:37.960 --> 0:20:40.280 in the country that had been hit really hard in 0:20:40.320 --> 0:20:44.439 the financial crisis and in the recession that followed. Those 0:20:44.640 --> 0:20:48.240 are the target swing voters, and the Democrats need to 0:20:48.320 --> 0:20:52.960 reorient their party to be talking to those voters. And 0:20:53.000 --> 0:20:55.960 I think it's also worth saying this is worth asking 0:20:56.000 --> 0:20:59.320 some difficult questions about what those swing voters see when 0:20:59.359 --> 0:21:02.840 they see Democrats. And my view is is what they see, 0:21:03.520 --> 0:21:06.200 let's talk a little bit about you can tell what 0:21:06.280 --> 0:21:09.720 the Republicans are trying to make them see. In Donald 0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:14.439 Trump's ads, for instance, during NFL games. Right, Donald Trump 0:21:14.480 --> 0:21:16.840 is trying to talk to working class voters when he's 0:21:16.880 --> 0:21:20.840 advertising in NFL games. My belief is this all of 0:21:20.880 --> 0:21:24.760 the anti trans ads, the weirder the ad got right, 0:21:24.840 --> 0:21:27.680 Like she wants to give sex change operations to people 0:21:27.720 --> 0:21:30.200 who are in prisoners. What is that really saying? 0:21:30.320 --> 0:21:32.680 I mean, people are getting your free stuff. 0:21:33.160 --> 0:21:35.920 I think it's deeper. Actually, I think it's obviously at 0:21:35.920 --> 0:21:39.040 one level, it's a dog whistle to sort of bigots, right, 0:21:39.080 --> 0:21:41.720 people who just you know, sort of the maga bass, 0:21:41.760 --> 0:21:45.240 the real base. But I think it's also this, it's 0:21:45.280 --> 0:21:47.800 also saying to people who are not bigots or who 0:21:47.800 --> 0:21:51.359 don't think much about any of that stuff. Hey, the 0:21:51.440 --> 0:21:58.280 Democrats are so obsessed with specific demographic groups. They don't 0:21:58.320 --> 0:22:02.120 care about you. They don't see you as anything other 0:22:02.240 --> 0:22:06.119 than you know, whatever demographic group you can check on 0:22:06.160 --> 0:22:09.680 a piece of paper. We the Republicans look at you 0:22:10.080 --> 0:22:13.239 as you know, there are people, everyone's everybody. And what 0:22:13.280 --> 0:22:16.880 they're saying is the Democrats is a party of small, 0:22:17.200 --> 0:22:22.720 niche groups, and they don't see you, the regular average American, 0:22:22.760 --> 0:22:25.400