WEBVTT - Jeet Heer, Dan Nathan & Jacob Rubashkin

0:00:00.680 --> 0:00:04.200
<v Speaker 1>Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:07.160
<v Speaker 1>where we discuss the top political headlines with some of

0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:11.119
<v Speaker 1>today's best minds. And the North Carolina Senate has banned

0:00:11.119 --> 0:00:14.400
<v Speaker 1>wearing masks in public places. We have such a great

0:00:14.400 --> 0:00:18.800
<v Speaker 1>show for you today. On the tape podcast, Dan Nathan

0:00:18.960 --> 0:00:22.360
<v Speaker 1>talks to us about the new economic numbers and what

0:00:22.400 --> 0:00:25.239
<v Speaker 1>we can expect from the US economy in the coming months.

0:00:25.320 --> 0:00:29.920
<v Speaker 1>Then we'll talk to Inside Elections Jacob Rubashkin about the

0:00:30.120 --> 0:00:33.879
<v Speaker 1>races that will determine what our government looks like in

0:00:33.920 --> 0:00:37.040
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty five. But first we have the host of

0:00:37.760 --> 0:00:43.360
<v Speaker 1>the Time of Monsters the Nations ged here. Welcome back

0:00:43.560 --> 0:00:46.000
<v Speaker 1>to Fast Politics, ged.

0:00:45.800 --> 0:00:47.800
<v Speaker 2>Here, and good to be back.

0:00:48.000 --> 0:00:52.920
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about it. It's Supreme Court season aka watching

0:00:53.000 --> 0:00:58.560
<v Speaker 1>six lunatics remake our federal government in the image of

0:00:58.640 --> 0:00:59.680
<v Speaker 1>the Koch Brothers.

0:01:00.000 --> 0:01:03.320
<v Speaker 2>Discuss actually like today, there was a little bit of

0:01:03.320 --> 0:01:05.560
<v Speaker 2>good news because there was the kind of fear that

0:01:05.560 --> 0:01:08.720
<v Speaker 2>the courts would follow the attempt of the Fifth Circuit

0:01:08.760 --> 0:01:11.600
<v Speaker 2>to basically run their like large price of the government

0:01:11.640 --> 0:01:16.360
<v Speaker 2>illegal and then return America the glory days of child labor.

0:01:16.640 --> 0:01:17.920
<v Speaker 1>That's still on the agenda.

0:01:18.040 --> 0:01:20.120
<v Speaker 2>But they decided today. It was out that day, So

0:01:20.360 --> 0:01:23.520
<v Speaker 2>what is grateful for whatever small verses by can offer us,

0:01:23.640 --> 0:01:27.080
<v Speaker 2>that's a more positive sign. What were the other cases?

0:01:27.200 --> 0:01:29.679
<v Speaker 1>There are more cases coming. I want you to sort

0:01:29.720 --> 0:01:34.760
<v Speaker 1>of talk us through. You wrote this piece about the

0:01:34.800 --> 0:01:38.559
<v Speaker 1>anti war movement needing to claim its victories, So talk

0:01:38.600 --> 0:01:41.440
<v Speaker 1>to us about what that means, because I do think

0:01:41.440 --> 0:01:44.759
<v Speaker 1>there's been a really interesting shift in American life when

0:01:44.800 --> 0:01:47.840
<v Speaker 1>it comes to being against foreign wars.

0:01:48.280 --> 0:01:50.960
<v Speaker 2>Well, yeah, that's actually absolutely a really good point. But

0:01:51.120 --> 0:01:53.400
<v Speaker 2>I think on the current stuff, a lot of people

0:01:53.400 --> 0:01:55.360
<v Speaker 2>are very mad at Biden, and I'm one of them.

0:01:55.520 --> 0:01:58.320
<v Speaker 2>Support of what ness Hiwu's governments has been doing has

0:01:58.320 --> 0:02:01.440
<v Speaker 2>been above and beyond is a con for like many months,

0:02:01.480 --> 0:02:03.840
<v Speaker 2>and he should have acted earlier, but it is all

0:02:03.880 --> 0:02:06.280
<v Speaker 2>the more striking considering who he is and his history

0:02:06.320 --> 0:02:08.760
<v Speaker 2>on this issue. He is taking steps that no previous

0:02:08.800 --> 0:02:12.480
<v Speaker 2>American president has in terms of cutting back on sending

0:02:12.520 --> 0:02:16.000
<v Speaker 2>weapons now, so leaving this ideal should have happened sooner.

0:02:16.240 --> 0:02:17.760
<v Speaker 2>It is happening, and I don't think it would have

0:02:17.800 --> 0:02:20.200
<v Speaker 2>happened if it weren't for you know, the protests that

0:02:20.200 --> 0:02:22.960
<v Speaker 2>we're seeing not just on campuses, but earlier the end

0:02:23.000 --> 0:02:26.919
<v Speaker 2>committed move in. So I think Biden realizes this coalition

0:02:27.000 --> 0:02:29.960
<v Speaker 2>isn't behind him on this. And the polling is quite striking.

0:02:30.000 --> 0:02:33.880
<v Speaker 2>I mean, this majority close to the Israeli war in Gaza,

0:02:33.960 --> 0:02:37.000
<v Speaker 2>but it's a super majority among Democrats. People voted for

0:02:37.040 --> 0:02:39.480
<v Speaker 2>Biden in twenty twenty. You're looking at like, you know,

0:02:39.600 --> 0:02:42.760
<v Speaker 2>depending on the poll, seventy seventy five percent of post

0:02:43.000 --> 0:02:46.040
<v Speaker 2>the anti war movement deserves credit and they should push on.

0:02:46.400 --> 0:02:48.160
<v Speaker 2>I think that what he want to hear is among

0:02:48.280 --> 0:02:52.480
<v Speaker 2>some people is almost self sabotage of like oh, you know,

0:02:52.639 --> 0:02:55.799
<v Speaker 2>like it's so tiny, he doesn't really read it. He's

0:02:55.800 --> 0:02:58.800
<v Speaker 2>going to reverse it. And the attitude, well it's too little,

0:02:58.800 --> 0:03:01.840
<v Speaker 2>too late, as he like an an ongoing political moment.

0:03:02.040 --> 0:03:03.920
<v Speaker 2>Like I think that's the wrong attitude. I think you

0:03:03.919 --> 0:03:06.120
<v Speaker 2>have to say, like, okay, this guy is starting to

0:03:06.160 --> 0:03:08.360
<v Speaker 2>listen to us, something that Donald Trump would never do.

0:03:08.400 --> 0:03:10.200
<v Speaker 2>By the way, and of course we got to push

0:03:10.280 --> 0:03:11.919
<v Speaker 2>him more. We've got to push him far there. We're

0:03:11.960 --> 0:03:15.280
<v Speaker 2>not gonna like relent on pushing him, but he has

0:03:15.320 --> 0:03:17.240
<v Speaker 2>moving forward, and we have to like, you know, create

0:03:17.280 --> 0:03:20.240
<v Speaker 2>an incentive structure so that Biden knows that you know,

0:03:20.320 --> 0:03:23.000
<v Speaker 2>if he wants to get the approval. He's getting some approval.

0:03:23.120 --> 0:03:25.120
<v Speaker 2>Now you'll get even more if he goes further. My

0:03:25.240 --> 0:03:27.960
<v Speaker 2>piece of really criticizing the sort of self sabotage of

0:03:28.080 --> 0:03:30.799
<v Speaker 2>people within the movement that are like trying to deny

0:03:30.840 --> 0:03:33.040
<v Speaker 2>the significance of what we're seeing, because I actually do

0:03:33.120 --> 0:03:36.440
<v Speaker 2>think it's it's pretty significant where Biden is going, and

0:03:36.560 --> 0:03:39.040
<v Speaker 2>I think we're probably gonna see more of that, and

0:03:39.080 --> 0:03:42.040
<v Speaker 2>I would have I think, you know, beyond Biden, like

0:03:42.120 --> 0:03:46.440
<v Speaker 2>there's a lot of indication that people in the broader administration,

0:03:46.640 --> 0:03:49.280
<v Speaker 2>include the State devironment, aren't very happy with what Israel

0:03:49.320 --> 0:03:51.440
<v Speaker 2>is doing. You know, I think what has to reach

0:03:51.480 --> 0:03:54.920
<v Speaker 2>out to those people and create conditions where they feel

0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:58.040
<v Speaker 2>emboldened to speak out it and they feel embolded.

0:03:57.640 --> 0:04:02.320
<v Speaker 1>That but there was a real aggressive when today on marijuana.

0:04:02.680 --> 0:04:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Will you talk a.

0:04:03.560 --> 0:04:06.720
<v Speaker 2>Little bit about that again, This is something actually somebody's

0:04:07.000 --> 0:04:10.000
<v Speaker 2>very related to, like Israel, in the sense of like,

0:04:10.080 --> 0:04:12.280
<v Speaker 2>you know, there's something that I might feel like, well,

0:04:12.320 --> 0:04:14.600
<v Speaker 2>Biden is done is a little bit earlier. There's a

0:04:14.600 --> 0:04:16.520
<v Speaker 2>little bit people have been pushing him to do for

0:04:16.800 --> 0:04:19.480
<v Speaker 2>like a long time. I think Biden's history and who

0:04:19.520 --> 0:04:22.240
<v Speaker 2>he is is maybe pertinent to this. It's maybe not

0:04:22.279 --> 0:04:25.839
<v Speaker 2>something that comes natural to him for like a bunch

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:29.080
<v Speaker 2>of reasons, including I think personal reasons. Having said that,

0:04:29.160 --> 0:04:31.520
<v Speaker 2>he is someone who can be pushed, he's something someone

0:04:31.520 --> 0:04:33.840
<v Speaker 2>who can be moved, And to me, like that's the

0:04:33.839 --> 0:04:36.719
<v Speaker 2>most pertinent political lesson to be learned from this.

0:04:37.120 --> 0:04:39.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think so too. And I actually think like

0:04:40.160 --> 0:04:43.120
<v Speaker 1>we've seen this with other things in Biden world, where

0:04:43.160 --> 0:04:46.960
<v Speaker 1>he sort of makes this choice to do the more

0:04:47.000 --> 0:04:50.640
<v Speaker 1>progressive thing, and it's quite cool. I mean with the

0:04:50.680 --> 0:04:55.160
<v Speaker 1>marijuana staff, that's something that pretty much across the board

0:04:55.760 --> 0:05:00.960
<v Speaker 1>people really support and could be meaningful in all sorts

0:05:00.960 --> 0:05:01.600
<v Speaker 1>of ways.

0:05:01.839 --> 0:05:04.960
<v Speaker 2>Oh no, absolutely no, it's gonna like materially make people's

0:05:05.000 --> 0:05:08.880
<v Speaker 2>lives better. It is something that has like super majority

0:05:08.880 --> 0:05:11.120
<v Speaker 2>of support. And I have to ask myself, you know

0:05:11.160 --> 0:05:13.800
<v Speaker 2>where the popular stat you know, like there's a whole

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:17.960
<v Speaker 2>wing of these sort of Savai political consultants and strategists.

0:05:17.960 --> 0:05:20.040
<v Speaker 2>He were saying, Yo, we have to do the popular thing.

0:05:20.360 --> 0:05:22.640
<v Speaker 2>This is like doing the popular thing, although they were

0:05:22.960 --> 0:05:26.120
<v Speaker 2>for some weird reason, they never foregrounded this issue as

0:05:26.120 --> 0:05:28.120
<v Speaker 2>one of the popular things to do. I will also

0:05:28.160 --> 0:05:30.440
<v Speaker 2>mention a lot of the student dead reliefs that we've

0:05:30.480 --> 0:05:32.719
<v Speaker 2>been seeing. The only thing I would maybe say is,

0:05:33.000 --> 0:05:34.800
<v Speaker 2>you know, I'd like to see the White House get

0:05:34.960 --> 0:05:36.920
<v Speaker 2>a little bit more on front on some of this stuff,

0:05:36.960 --> 0:05:39.560
<v Speaker 2>where to maybe call us this more into like a

0:05:39.640 --> 0:05:43.480
<v Speaker 2>message of like see what we're doing. And for whatever reason,

0:05:43.680 --> 0:05:46.840
<v Speaker 2>like that little bit is not quite coalescing, although that

0:05:46.880 --> 0:05:49.720
<v Speaker 2>could change, is you know, the election heats up here.

0:05:49.760 --> 0:05:54.080
<v Speaker 1>We are, we're ten thousand days from this election. We're

0:05:54.120 --> 0:05:59.080
<v Speaker 1>all gonna die. All anyone talks about is freaking out

0:05:59.560 --> 0:06:03.040
<v Speaker 1>about out this whole thing. Jesse just said, one hundred

0:06:03.080 --> 0:06:06.480
<v Speaker 1>and seventy three days. No, Jesse, it's ten thousand days.

0:06:06.760 --> 0:06:08.760
<v Speaker 1>Give us a little good news.

0:06:09.040 --> 0:06:11.240
<v Speaker 2>Well, actually, I think like even in some of the

0:06:11.279 --> 0:06:14.440
<v Speaker 2>bad news people are reporting, I think there is a

0:06:14.600 --> 0:06:17.520
<v Speaker 2>kind of good news because I noticed that, like all,

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:19.960
<v Speaker 2>you know, like there were some polls showing Biden is

0:06:19.960 --> 0:06:23.720
<v Speaker 2>behind in the swing stage, but those same polls show

0:06:23.800 --> 0:06:26.719
<v Speaker 2>that the actually Democratic candidates for the Senate in those

0:06:26.760 --> 0:06:30.680
<v Speaker 2>places are doing well and are overperforming Biden. Now, if

0:06:30.680 --> 0:06:33.000
<v Speaker 2>you think about it, like are there really people that

0:06:33.040 --> 0:06:35.960
<v Speaker 2>are going to in vast numbers vote for a Democratic

0:06:36.240 --> 0:06:37.680
<v Speaker 2>senatorial candidate and.

0:06:38.000 --> 0:06:39.840
<v Speaker 1>Leave the top of the ticket blank.

0:06:39.920 --> 0:06:42.440
<v Speaker 2>It seems crazy, Yeah, are going to vote for Biden?

0:06:43.000 --> 0:06:43.680
<v Speaker 3>I don't really know.

0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:45.679
<v Speaker 1>We want Trump, yeah exactly.

0:06:45.720 --> 0:06:49.120
<v Speaker 2>So I actually think that what those polling shows is

0:06:49.240 --> 0:06:52.359
<v Speaker 2>I think, like the Democratic agenda is popular. You know,

0:06:52.440 --> 0:06:54.599
<v Speaker 2>that's congruent with what we saw in the mid terms

0:06:54.640 --> 0:06:57.159
<v Speaker 2>and what we've seen in special elections, and that a

0:06:57.200 --> 0:07:00.400
<v Speaker 2>lot of the poor polling that Biden's having, it's just

0:07:00.400 --> 0:07:04.039
<v Speaker 2>people registering their dissatisfaction, Like they're gonna vote for Biden,

0:07:04.279 --> 0:07:06.400
<v Speaker 2>but they don't want to say so right now because

0:07:06.400 --> 0:07:09.120
<v Speaker 2>they're mad at him. We're disappointed them for various reasons.

0:07:09.120 --> 0:07:11.280
<v Speaker 2>So I actually think, if you know, if I don't

0:07:11.360 --> 0:07:13.480
<v Speaker 2>encourage anyone to be obsessed with the polls at all.

0:07:13.680 --> 0:07:16.840
<v Speaker 1>Especially one hundred and seventy three days aft.

0:07:17.200 --> 0:07:19.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, but if you are like actually like look at

0:07:19.680 --> 0:07:22.400
<v Speaker 2>the fact that, hey, you know, like the Democratic Party

0:07:22.480 --> 0:07:24.920
<v Speaker 2>is in good shape, and ask to yourself, if the

0:07:24.960 --> 0:07:27.640
<v Speaker 2>party is in good shape, what is the likely results

0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:30.480
<v Speaker 2>for the top figure. The other I think kind of

0:07:30.480 --> 0:07:32.720
<v Speaker 2>good news is like the debate stuff, which I thought

0:07:32.760 --> 0:07:34.240
<v Speaker 2>was a really smart move.

0:07:34.440 --> 0:07:36.440
<v Speaker 1>I hear you're free on Wednesdays.

0:07:37.560 --> 0:07:40.320
<v Speaker 2>You know, they're going to have fairly early debates. I think,

0:07:40.600 --> 0:07:43.880
<v Speaker 2>contrary to popular wisdom, Biden does well and then Trump

0:07:43.960 --> 0:07:46.640
<v Speaker 2>as he does poorly. And I actually think that fairly

0:07:46.800 --> 0:07:49.680
<v Speaker 2>early on the starkness of the choice between Biden and

0:07:49.680 --> 0:07:51.800
<v Speaker 2>Trump is going to become a parent and I think

0:07:51.800 --> 0:07:55.800
<v Speaker 2>that's actually going to start narrowing this thing and solidifying. You. Yeah,

0:07:55.960 --> 0:07:58.840
<v Speaker 2>I actually think like overall, you know, I don't. I

0:07:58.880 --> 0:08:01.480
<v Speaker 2>would not say people should be terrified. I think that

0:08:01.520 --> 0:08:03.680
<v Speaker 2>it's going to be like a tight election. People are

0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:04.920
<v Speaker 2>gonna have to pull things together.

0:08:05.160 --> 0:08:09.040
<v Speaker 1>You'd rather be the Dems than the Republicans, I think so. Yes,

0:08:09.200 --> 0:08:12.000
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump sits in a courthouse right now.

0:08:12.360 --> 0:08:14.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, well, I mean that's the other thing. But you know,

0:08:14.360 --> 0:08:16.920
<v Speaker 2>we've seen the Republicans embrace of Trump, and I think

0:08:16.960 --> 0:08:20.520
<v Speaker 2>that's come with some political costs. But like the extent

0:08:20.560 --> 0:08:23.040
<v Speaker 2>that they're embracing him now, not just that Trump's in

0:08:23.040 --> 0:08:26.120
<v Speaker 2>the courthouse, but like all these party leaders are joining

0:08:26.200 --> 0:08:28.640
<v Speaker 2>him the courthouse and are joining him to like insult

0:08:28.680 --> 0:08:29.280
<v Speaker 2>the judge.

0:08:29.360 --> 0:08:31.640
<v Speaker 1>I think that hurts him. I think it hurts the

0:08:31.680 --> 0:08:33.440
<v Speaker 1>party if you want to keep the House.

0:08:33.679 --> 0:08:36.520
<v Speaker 2>And yeah, ways, I don't think we can measure yet,

0:08:36.559 --> 0:08:38.760
<v Speaker 2>but I think that, you know, the full extent that

0:08:38.800 --> 0:08:42.160
<v Speaker 2>they've embraced not just Trump, but Trump's criminality, that's going

0:08:42.200 --> 0:08:44.280
<v Speaker 2>to have a lasting legacy. I mean I think, like,

0:08:44.360 --> 0:08:47.080
<v Speaker 2>you know, like January sixth had a lasting legacy, and

0:08:47.120 --> 0:08:50.240
<v Speaker 2>that's why the Dems overperformed in the rich terms. And

0:08:50.520 --> 0:08:52.280
<v Speaker 2>like this is like, you know, this is kind of

0:08:52.320 --> 0:08:55.120
<v Speaker 2>a variation on January sixth. It's an open defiance of

0:08:55.160 --> 0:08:57.600
<v Speaker 2>the rule of law. And I think there's a lot

0:08:57.640 --> 0:09:00.240
<v Speaker 2>of people, you know, might not agree with the Dems

0:09:00.520 --> 0:09:03.080
<v Speaker 2>on all political things, but they kind of understand the

0:09:03.120 --> 0:09:05.640
<v Speaker 2>United States has to be like a nation of laws,

0:09:05.679 --> 0:09:07.839
<v Speaker 2>and like what Trump is doing now it's like you're

0:09:07.840 --> 0:09:10.679
<v Speaker 2>staring into the abyss of being like, you know, like

0:09:10.800 --> 0:09:12.560
<v Speaker 2>let's go to court anarchy, you know.

0:09:12.760 --> 0:09:17.200
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk about Donald Trump in court. Right now,

0:09:17.520 --> 0:09:21.440
<v Speaker 1>his former lawyer is being cross examined by his current lawyer,

0:09:22.080 --> 0:09:25.560
<v Speaker 1>Todd Blande, who is a prosecutor. I mean, this is

0:09:25.600 --> 0:09:28.240
<v Speaker 1>this weird moment in Trump world where Trump has actually

0:09:28.360 --> 0:09:32.280
<v Speaker 1>gotten pretty good lawyers and now he's making them be

0:09:32.440 --> 0:09:34.400
<v Speaker 1>bad lawyers by bossing them around.

0:09:34.800 --> 0:09:37.199
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I do mean this is one reason why usually

0:09:37.280 --> 0:09:39.520
<v Speaker 2>he has bad lawyers because they're the ones that put

0:09:39.600 --> 0:09:41.840
<v Speaker 2>up with it. Oh, I mean it's interesting. I've thought

0:09:41.880 --> 0:09:44.080
<v Speaker 2>about this a little bit, Like it is interesting that

0:09:44.200 --> 0:09:46.400
<v Speaker 2>the one place you can get good lawyers is in

0:09:46.480 --> 0:09:50.280
<v Speaker 2>a kind of criminal case. That's maybe because he's more

0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:53.840
<v Speaker 2>used to like that kind of legal scenario than he

0:09:54.040 --> 0:09:57.800
<v Speaker 2>is with some of the more issues of constitutional law

0:09:58.080 --> 0:10:00.920
<v Speaker 2>or election law, that he's deafliped with this kind of

0:10:00.960 --> 0:10:04.680
<v Speaker 2>case involving you know, sort of mafio. So like kickbacks

0:10:04.679 --> 0:10:08.680
<v Speaker 2>and favors is Donald Trump's terrain. But having said that, like, yeah,

0:10:08.840 --> 0:10:11.600
<v Speaker 2>I'm not super optimistic about this as a legal case,

0:10:11.640 --> 0:10:14.560
<v Speaker 2>Like I think it's actually kind of hard to draw

0:10:14.640 --> 0:10:16.719
<v Speaker 2>these ways in which they can attack the witnesses.

0:10:16.960 --> 0:10:17.959
<v Speaker 1>It's a little hanky.

0:10:18.240 --> 0:10:18.440
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:10:18.520 --> 0:10:21.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. But having said that, I mean, like, you know,

0:10:21.840 --> 0:10:24.880
<v Speaker 2>if anyone's gonna sabotage a legal case.

0:10:24.720 --> 0:10:26.959
<v Speaker 1>It's going to be Donald Trump, right, It's true.

0:10:27.120 --> 0:10:29.440
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, yeah, no, I you know, his recording court

0:10:29.440 --> 0:10:31.480
<v Speaker 2>has left been that great. I mean you have, especially

0:10:31.480 --> 0:10:35.120
<v Speaker 2>what considers all the court cases that were brought coming

0:10:35.120 --> 0:10:37.559
<v Speaker 2>out of the twenty twenty election. So yeah, I actually

0:10:37.640 --> 0:10:41.080
<v Speaker 2>think it's kind of been fascinating to watch and maybe

0:10:41.160 --> 0:10:44.200
<v Speaker 2>the root of all this is that he's always felt

0:10:44.240 --> 0:10:47.160
<v Speaker 2>he's been about the law, and unfortunately for most of

0:10:47.200 --> 0:10:49.439
<v Speaker 2>his life he's been right. Like, how many things has

0:10:49.480 --> 0:10:52.480
<v Speaker 2>this guy done that are like, you know, borderline criminal

0:10:52.559 --> 0:10:55.240
<v Speaker 2>or criminal that we're never brought up, we'll never know.

0:10:55.559 --> 0:10:59.040
<v Speaker 2>It's a lot and this sense of impunity. I can

0:10:59.080 --> 0:11:01.400
<v Speaker 2>do what I want, I can the judges. That's really

0:11:01.400 --> 0:11:03.680
<v Speaker 2>a product of a lifetime. But have you said that.

0:11:03.800 --> 0:11:06.440
<v Speaker 2>I think very ordinary people watching this stuff, you know,

0:11:06.600 --> 0:11:08.600
<v Speaker 2>like I can't feel that they would be very sepulate

0:11:08.800 --> 0:11:10.720
<v Speaker 2>to Trump. And I think that, you know, there's like

0:11:10.760 --> 0:11:13.480
<v Speaker 2>this fundamental attack on the rule of law, not just

0:11:13.480 --> 0:11:15.719
<v Speaker 2>why what he did criminally, but by the attacks on

0:11:15.800 --> 0:11:18.880
<v Speaker 2>the judges and the political attacks. I think that's going

0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:19.439
<v Speaker 2>to resonate.

0:11:19.720 --> 0:11:24.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you know, I think so much about how he

0:11:24.120 --> 0:11:27.440
<v Speaker 1>thinks he's doing something brilliant here by making this case

0:11:27.880 --> 0:11:33.560
<v Speaker 1>about law and not about his criminality, and like it's

0:11:33.640 --> 0:11:36.640
<v Speaker 1>worked for him with the primary voters, who are so

0:11:36.720 --> 0:11:39.680
<v Speaker 1>predisposed to him that they'll pretty much go along with anything.

0:11:39.760 --> 0:11:43.079
<v Speaker 1>But I'm not convinced that you can win anyone else

0:11:43.160 --> 0:11:46.040
<v Speaker 1>who doesn't have total Trump derangement syndrome.

0:11:46.440 --> 0:11:48.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I know, I think that's right. I think that

0:11:48.520 --> 0:11:50.600
<v Speaker 2>he's decided to make it in a way that people

0:11:50.640 --> 0:11:53.240
<v Speaker 2>have to choose, like, you know, do they go into

0:11:53.280 --> 0:11:55.480
<v Speaker 2>the Trump culture or do they like go along with

0:11:55.559 --> 0:11:58.160
<v Speaker 2>the normal reality that they've lived in their own life.

0:11:58.240 --> 0:12:00.800
<v Speaker 2>That's helped win the primaries, is not people that were

0:12:00.800 --> 0:12:03.240
<v Speaker 2>already in the Trump call that if that's the choice,

0:12:03.240 --> 0:12:05.320
<v Speaker 2>then he wins. But like if you're putting into the

0:12:05.320 --> 0:12:08.080
<v Speaker 2>broader public, no, I don't think he wins. And in fact,

0:12:08.080 --> 0:12:10.480
<v Speaker 2>I think it will remind people why they don't like him,

0:12:10.640 --> 0:12:13.000
<v Speaker 2>which I think is actually very important. I think, like,

0:12:13.280 --> 0:12:15.200
<v Speaker 2>you know, he's been out of the spot like long

0:12:15.280 --> 0:12:18.080
<v Speaker 2>enough that some people have forgotten. Maybe it's start the

0:12:18.080 --> 0:12:20.600
<v Speaker 2>big takeaway of the court cases, Like it's a big

0:12:20.679 --> 0:12:23.160
<v Speaker 2>reminder of why you do not want this guy that

0:12:23.240 --> 0:12:25.600
<v Speaker 2>I does. You know, why he's a bad and dangerous fan.

0:12:26.080 --> 0:12:29.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but it is interesting to see members of Congress,

0:12:29.520 --> 0:12:34.680
<v Speaker 1>the Speaker of the United States has representatives people for

0:12:34.880 --> 0:12:39.680
<v Speaker 1>whom they should know better up there being like this

0:12:39.720 --> 0:12:40.679
<v Speaker 1>is our guy.

0:12:40.920 --> 0:12:41.160
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:12:41.200 --> 0:12:43.199
<v Speaker 2>No, you know what it reminded me of, Like as

0:12:43.240 --> 0:12:48.199
<v Speaker 2>a New Yorker, you'll remember mister Gotti, well respected businessman,

0:12:48.280 --> 0:12:52.080
<v Speaker 2>a member of the community and was a very stricting thing.

0:12:52.160 --> 0:12:54.960
<v Speaker 2>That's like, you know, because he was a bobster with

0:12:55.040 --> 0:12:58.520
<v Speaker 2>as certain support in the community, there were people who

0:12:58.600 --> 0:13:01.840
<v Speaker 2>rallied to him. She's like, this is very similar, except that,

0:13:01.920 --> 0:13:04.640
<v Speaker 2>you know, like it's not just like a small community

0:13:04.640 --> 0:13:06.960
<v Speaker 2>in New York. It's like the weight of like, you know,

0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:09.920
<v Speaker 2>one of the two major political parties on one level. Like,

0:13:10.120 --> 0:13:12.480
<v Speaker 2>to me, this is the threat, right, the threat of

0:13:12.520 --> 0:13:17.079
<v Speaker 2>a trump pized Republican party that shares his contempt for law.

0:13:17.280 --> 0:13:20.319
<v Speaker 2>And that's a scary thing. But I think that's also

0:13:20.559 --> 0:13:23.959
<v Speaker 2>something Joe Biden can run on. Everything is already in

0:13:24.120 --> 0:13:27.000
<v Speaker 2>very stark relief, and one of the things Democrats have

0:13:27.040 --> 0:13:29.400
<v Speaker 2>to do is to just make sure everyone in America

0:13:29.720 --> 0:13:30.880
<v Speaker 2>knows this is the choice.

0:13:31.080 --> 0:13:34.720
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I agree, a really good point.

0:13:34.960 --> 0:13:39.080
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about Eric Adams for two minutes. Sure, he's

0:13:39.160 --> 0:13:43.280
<v Speaker 1>our mayor in New York whatever. He was recently in

0:13:43.440 --> 0:13:46.400
<v Speaker 1>Rome with the Pope. Can you just make it make sense?

0:13:47.720 --> 0:13:50.920
<v Speaker 2>Well, I guess Eric Addam likes to see himself as

0:13:50.920 --> 0:13:54.600
<v Speaker 2>an international figure. I mean it is a kind of

0:13:54.679 --> 0:13:58.240
<v Speaker 2>perhaps charming thing. I actually remember, like he's running for Rayre.

0:13:58.600 --> 0:14:01.200
<v Speaker 2>He said that he had wanted to be buried in Israel,

0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:03.559
<v Speaker 2>and people asked where, and he said the goal at Heights,

0:14:03.800 --> 0:14:08.480
<v Speaker 2>which is actually disputed territory, or is actually Syrian territory.

0:14:08.679 --> 0:14:12.280
<v Speaker 2>So I guess New York has a very international mayor.

0:14:12.760 --> 0:14:14.640
<v Speaker 2>But perhaps the other thing is, like, you know what,

0:14:14.760 --> 0:14:17.800
<v Speaker 2>you're as widely hated as Eric Adams is, having so

0:14:17.880 --> 0:14:21.520
<v Speaker 2>much trouble domestically, maybe you go abroad. That's what sort

0:14:21.560 --> 0:14:24.400
<v Speaker 2>of presidents who are trouble often do. It happens that

0:14:24.720 --> 0:14:26.320
<v Speaker 2>I guess if you're aware of New York, you can

0:14:26.400 --> 0:14:27.840
<v Speaker 2>do the same thing exactly.

0:14:28.160 --> 0:14:37.440
<v Speaker 1>Jesus Christ, Thank you jet here, thank you Spring is here.

0:14:37.480 --> 0:14:40.160
<v Speaker 1>And I bet you are trying to look fashionable, So

0:14:40.200 --> 0:14:45.440
<v Speaker 1>why not pick up some fashionable all new Fast Politics merchandise.

0:14:45.920 --> 0:14:48.800
<v Speaker 1>We just opened a news store with all new designs

0:14:49.080 --> 0:14:53.400
<v Speaker 1>just for you. Get t shirts, hoodies, hats, and top bags.

0:14:53.560 --> 0:14:58.280
<v Speaker 1>To grab some, head to Fastpolitics dot com. Dan Nathan

0:14:58.400 --> 0:15:01.280
<v Speaker 1>is the host of the On the Tape podcast and

0:15:01.360 --> 0:15:04.320
<v Speaker 1>a c NBC Fast Money contributor.

0:15:04.720 --> 0:15:07.440
<v Speaker 3>Dan Nathan my John Cast.

0:15:08.000 --> 0:15:10.800
<v Speaker 1>Welcome. I am so happy to have you here. You

0:15:10.840 --> 0:15:13.200
<v Speaker 1>know you're like one of my people.

0:15:13.760 --> 0:15:16.080
<v Speaker 4>Well you know you're one of my must listens to

0:15:16.280 --> 0:15:18.640
<v Speaker 4>three times a week on Fast Politics. So it is

0:15:18.720 --> 0:15:20.840
<v Speaker 4>my sincere pleasure to be on with you this week.

0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:25.840
<v Speaker 1>So let us talk about all of the economic news yesterday,

0:15:25.880 --> 0:15:29.720
<v Speaker 1>because there was a lot on Wednesday. We had like

0:15:29.880 --> 0:15:33.040
<v Speaker 1>a number of numbers. So explain to us what all

0:15:33.120 --> 0:15:35.880
<v Speaker 1>those numbers were, sort of break it down for us.

0:15:36.000 --> 0:15:37.640
<v Speaker 3>All right, let's do it, okay, So listen.

0:15:37.680 --> 0:15:39.840
<v Speaker 4>You know, I'm mostly focused on the markets, and a

0:15:39.840 --> 0:15:42.560
<v Speaker 4>lot of this economic data that comes out almost every

0:15:42.680 --> 0:15:45.880
<v Speaker 4>day is important to how investors perceive the health of

0:15:45.880 --> 0:15:48.760
<v Speaker 4>the economy, and thus they expressed those views in the markets,

0:15:48.760 --> 0:15:50.720
<v Speaker 4>whether it be the stock market, whether they be the

0:15:50.720 --> 0:15:53.600
<v Speaker 4>bond market, commodities and a like. So yesterday was the

0:15:53.680 --> 0:15:58.280
<v Speaker 4>April CPI reading, that's the main reading for inflation. It

0:15:58.320 --> 0:16:01.640
<v Speaker 4>came in slightly below expectations, but it's still up three

0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:05.000
<v Speaker 4>point four percent year over year, right, And you could say, well,

0:16:05.000 --> 0:16:06.840
<v Speaker 4>that's good, because I remember a year and a half

0:16:06.920 --> 0:16:10.440
<v Speaker 4>ago those inflation readings were coming in north of nine

0:16:10.520 --> 0:16:11.440
<v Speaker 4>percent or so.

0:16:11.640 --> 0:16:13.160
<v Speaker 3>But here's the problem. Disinflation.

0:16:13.360 --> 0:16:16.800
<v Speaker 4>While it's great for you know, most consumers, it's still

0:16:16.880 --> 0:16:19.240
<v Speaker 4>really bad for a lot of consumers. So at three

0:16:19.280 --> 0:16:22.480
<v Speaker 4>point four percent. That is up year over year, right,

0:16:22.560 --> 0:16:25.120
<v Speaker 4>so if you're spending on a whole host of things,

0:16:25.280 --> 0:16:27.600
<v Speaker 4>it's still up. It's down from the highs, you know,

0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:30.120
<v Speaker 4>almost two years ago, but it's still up. There was

0:16:30.160 --> 0:16:33.080
<v Speaker 4>also some data out there on retail sales which were

0:16:33.080 --> 0:16:36.280
<v Speaker 4>weaker than expected. So the longer that you have periods

0:16:36.280 --> 0:16:39.120
<v Speaker 4>of high inflation, right sooner or later, it's going to

0:16:39.160 --> 0:16:43.040
<v Speaker 4>weigh on consumer confidence and retail sales. And that's what

0:16:43.040 --> 0:16:45.120
<v Speaker 4>we're seeing here a little bit. And we also have

0:16:45.360 --> 0:16:48.240
<v Speaker 4>the Federal Reserve Chairman Powell was out earlier in the

0:16:48.280 --> 0:16:51.080
<v Speaker 4>week basically saying that interest rates are going to remain

0:16:51.360 --> 0:16:54.440
<v Speaker 4>higher for probably a little longer than they had expected

0:16:54.480 --> 0:16:57.840
<v Speaker 4>because they're still trying to battle high levels of inflation

0:16:58.320 --> 0:17:01.360
<v Speaker 4>with high interest rates, which is also weighing on a

0:17:01.400 --> 0:17:05.440
<v Speaker 4>certain set of consumers that use basically credit to finance

0:17:05.600 --> 0:17:07.080
<v Speaker 4>a whole host of different purchases.

0:17:07.160 --> 0:17:10.040
<v Speaker 1>And also people want to buy houses. I mean, the

0:17:10.359 --> 0:17:13.040
<v Speaker 1>fundamental problem here, I feel like is we're in a

0:17:13.160 --> 0:17:18.240
<v Speaker 1>kind of mobi a strip which is high inflation makes

0:17:18.720 --> 0:17:22.680
<v Speaker 1>interest rates higher. High interest rates makes it impossible to

0:17:22.720 --> 0:17:27.960
<v Speaker 1>buy a house. Air go, you have housing being more expensive.

0:17:28.280 --> 0:17:30.920
<v Speaker 1>The only way to get that number down is probably

0:17:30.960 --> 0:17:32.080
<v Speaker 1>to cut interest rates.

0:17:32.320 --> 0:17:34.600
<v Speaker 4>Well, yeah, and if they start to cut interest rates

0:17:34.600 --> 0:17:37.720
<v Speaker 4>too early, you run the risk of basically inflation heating

0:17:37.720 --> 0:17:39.359
<v Speaker 4>back up again. So it is a bit of a

0:17:39.359 --> 0:17:42.959
<v Speaker 4>conundrum that the Federal Reserve has right now. There are

0:17:43.119 --> 0:17:45.879
<v Speaker 4>massive political implications for this. You know, a lot of

0:17:45.880 --> 0:17:48.760
<v Speaker 4>folks think that if the Fed could just kind of

0:17:49.040 --> 0:17:51.720
<v Speaker 4>wave their wand in lower interest rates, that that's going

0:17:51.800 --> 0:17:54.840
<v Speaker 4>to help a certain sort of consumer here. But the

0:17:54.880 --> 0:17:58.200
<v Speaker 4>truth is it might cause oil to go back higher, right,

0:17:58.280 --> 0:18:00.879
<v Speaker 4>it might cause you know, some of these rents to

0:18:00.920 --> 0:18:02.640
<v Speaker 4>go back. I mean, there's a whole host of things here.

0:18:02.720 --> 0:18:05.520
<v Speaker 4>So that whole conundrum about being able to buy a

0:18:05.600 --> 0:18:09.120
<v Speaker 4>house because mortgage rates are so high, or a car,

0:18:09.440 --> 0:18:12.280
<v Speaker 4>you run the risk of okay, rent being higher than

0:18:12.800 --> 0:18:15.200
<v Speaker 4>you know, the cost of rent is greater right now,

0:18:15.200 --> 0:18:15.480
<v Speaker 4>for the.

0:18:15.400 --> 0:18:17.320
<v Speaker 3>First time in a very long time, than the cost

0:18:17.320 --> 0:18:18.000
<v Speaker 3>of buying.

0:18:17.760 --> 0:18:19.960
<v Speaker 4>A house, right So there's a whole host of things

0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:22.280
<v Speaker 4>that kind of play into this, and none of them

0:18:22.480 --> 0:18:25.880
<v Speaker 4>are playing particularly well for the Biden administration right now.

0:18:25.960 --> 0:18:27.840
<v Speaker 4>So that's one of the reasons why you don't hear

0:18:27.920 --> 0:18:30.320
<v Speaker 4>them talk a whole heck of a lot about their

0:18:30.680 --> 0:18:33.280
<v Speaker 4>kind of you know, inclination for lower interest rates. We

0:18:33.320 --> 0:18:36.439
<v Speaker 4>know that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren came out, i

0:18:36.440 --> 0:18:38.680
<v Speaker 4>want to say, a couple months ago with an open

0:18:38.760 --> 0:18:42.280
<v Speaker 4>letter to fed share Pal suggesting that they better lower

0:18:42.359 --> 0:18:44.640
<v Speaker 4>rates soon. I don't think those two know what they're

0:18:44.640 --> 0:18:46.960
<v Speaker 4>talking about at the moment right now, because the worst

0:18:46.960 --> 0:18:49.840
<v Speaker 4>thing that could happen for the Biden administration into the

0:18:49.880 --> 0:18:52.920
<v Speaker 4>November election is that you know, you see inflation picked

0:18:53.000 --> 0:18:55.760
<v Speaker 4>back up, and that really going to hurt a voting

0:18:55.800 --> 0:19:00.560
<v Speaker 4>block in Middle America or in certain social economic you

0:19:00.600 --> 0:19:02.800
<v Speaker 4>know what I mean sort of demos that they really

0:19:02.840 --> 0:19:05.920
<v Speaker 4>need to win the reelection here and again, So there's

0:19:05.960 --> 0:19:07.120
<v Speaker 4>no easy answer right now.

0:19:07.440 --> 0:19:10.679
<v Speaker 1>The thing about the interest rates problem is, and I

0:19:10.720 --> 0:19:14.359
<v Speaker 1>think this is really what Chairman Powell is worried about,

0:19:14.480 --> 0:19:17.639
<v Speaker 1>is that if you cut interest rates too soon, you

0:19:17.760 --> 0:19:22.440
<v Speaker 1>really could end up just kicking inflation back. I mean,

0:19:22.920 --> 0:19:26.520
<v Speaker 1>even though people hate inflation and they're not happy with

0:19:26.600 --> 0:19:30.760
<v Speaker 1>it relatively speaking, and again, this doesn't make people who

0:19:31.080 --> 0:19:34.280
<v Speaker 1>can't buy a house feel better. It's been bad, but

0:19:34.320 --> 0:19:36.800
<v Speaker 1>it hasn't crashed us into a recession, which a lot

0:19:36.800 --> 0:19:38.160
<v Speaker 1>of people were worried it would.

0:19:38.240 --> 0:19:38.959
<v Speaker 3>No doubt about it.

0:19:39.000 --> 0:19:42.720
<v Speaker 4>But in certain swaths of the American public, they feel

0:19:42.720 --> 0:19:45.280
<v Speaker 4>like they're deeply in a recession. And all you have

0:19:45.320 --> 0:19:46.800
<v Speaker 4>to do is go back and look at some of

0:19:46.840 --> 0:19:51.320
<v Speaker 4>the comments that you heard from McDonald's, from Starbucks, from Disney.

0:19:51.400 --> 0:19:53.360
<v Speaker 4>I mean, the list goes on and on these consumer

0:19:53.400 --> 0:19:56.440
<v Speaker 4>oriented companies, and you could say, well, Disney is consumer discretionary.

0:19:56.480 --> 0:19:58.399
<v Speaker 4>If you're spending seven dollars for a latte on a

0:19:58.480 --> 0:20:00.960
<v Speaker 4>daily basis, you could trade down to the food truck

0:20:00.960 --> 0:20:01.240
<v Speaker 4>on the.

0:20:01.160 --> 0:20:02.119
<v Speaker 3>Corner at a dollar.

0:20:02.320 --> 0:20:06.680
<v Speaker 4>But when McDonald's talks about their consumers trading down from

0:20:06.840 --> 0:20:10.159
<v Speaker 4>five or six dollars, value meals where are they trading

0:20:10.200 --> 0:20:12.960
<v Speaker 4>down to, right, And so that is the consumer that

0:20:13.000 --> 0:20:16.040
<v Speaker 4>you're really worried about. So you know, lowering interest rates

0:20:16.080 --> 0:20:18.679
<v Speaker 4>right now probably doesn't do a whole heck of a

0:20:18.720 --> 0:20:20.720
<v Speaker 4>lot because you have to look at the rate that

0:20:20.880 --> 0:20:23.639
<v Speaker 4>basically Fed funds or the ten year rate where lots

0:20:23.720 --> 0:20:28.119
<v Speaker 4>of other instruments are priced off of, relative to inflation. Right,

0:20:28.200 --> 0:20:30.240
<v Speaker 4>So if the Fed funds rate it's at five and

0:20:30.280 --> 0:20:33.160
<v Speaker 4>a half percent and inflation still running at three point

0:20:33.160 --> 0:20:36.040
<v Speaker 4>four percent, the rate of two point one or whatever

0:20:36.359 --> 0:20:39.240
<v Speaker 4>is not that restrictive right now, So you think they

0:20:39.320 --> 0:20:42.000
<v Speaker 4>should I think they have to stay pat They are

0:20:42.040 --> 0:20:46.720
<v Speaker 4>worried about inflation becoming entrenched in the economy, and every

0:20:46.800 --> 0:20:49.399
<v Speaker 4>day is whether it's wages, whether it's you know, a

0:20:49.480 --> 0:20:52.439
<v Speaker 4>whole host of other input costs, you know, whether it

0:20:52.440 --> 0:20:55.720
<v Speaker 4>be shipping, whether it be energy, oil in the like here.

0:20:55.880 --> 0:20:58.320
<v Speaker 4>If it becomes entrenched in the economy the way it

0:20:58.359 --> 0:21:02.040
<v Speaker 4>did in the seventies, and you have lower than trend growth,

0:21:02.280 --> 0:21:04.600
<v Speaker 4>then you have something called stagflation, which you.

0:21:04.560 --> 0:21:06.280
<v Speaker 3>And I have not heard a whole heckle a lot

0:21:06.359 --> 0:21:07.560
<v Speaker 3>about stagflation.

0:21:07.760 --> 0:21:10.520
<v Speaker 1>Is the nightmare. Talk to us about stagflation.

0:21:10.400 --> 0:21:12.360
<v Speaker 4>Right, And really, what that would mean is that these

0:21:12.440 --> 0:21:16.160
<v Speaker 4>higher prices become entrench in the economy. Companies have to

0:21:16.200 --> 0:21:20.600
<v Speaker 4>try to pass through those higher costs to consumers. Consumers

0:21:20.680 --> 0:21:24.280
<v Speaker 4>pull back in their spending, causing less than expected growth.

0:21:24.359 --> 0:21:28.320
<v Speaker 4>But then ultimately the consumer hits a wall. Corporations hit

0:21:28.359 --> 0:21:31.400
<v Speaker 4>a wall. They can't pass through prices anymore to their customers.

0:21:31.480 --> 0:21:34.600
<v Speaker 4>They start laying people off. And just remember we have

0:21:34.720 --> 0:21:37.960
<v Speaker 4>unemployment rate below four percent, that's still at a fifty

0:21:38.040 --> 0:21:40.720
<v Speaker 4>or fifty five year low, right, So then all of

0:21:40.760 --> 0:21:43.960
<v Speaker 4>a sudden you have unemployment start to tick up, right,

0:21:44.040 --> 0:21:47.000
<v Speaker 4>and so all of this is really a very negative

0:21:47.080 --> 0:21:49.280
<v Speaker 4>sort of cycle that can happen in the economy.

0:21:49.400 --> 0:21:51.920
<v Speaker 3>Those are the sort of worst scenarios, and.

0:21:51.840 --> 0:21:53.280
<v Speaker 1>That's what killed Carter.

0:21:53.680 --> 0:21:53.960
<v Speaker 3>Correct.

0:21:53.960 --> 0:21:57.520
<v Speaker 1>Stagflation is what killed Jimmy Carter, among other things, and

0:21:57.600 --> 0:22:00.359
<v Speaker 1>it is the nightmare scenario that was very hard to

0:22:00.400 --> 0:22:03.280
<v Speaker 1>get out of. And it seems very likely that we

0:22:03.320 --> 0:22:05.879
<v Speaker 1>will not hit into stagflation at this point.

0:22:06.000 --> 0:22:07.959
<v Speaker 4>Well, I mean, who knows, you know, at this point.

0:22:08.000 --> 0:22:10.120
<v Speaker 4>And again, a lot of this might be messaging. If

0:22:10.119 --> 0:22:11.840
<v Speaker 4>you look at the way that Biden is polling on

0:22:11.880 --> 0:22:15.920
<v Speaker 4>the economy relative to a potential Trump administration, you know,

0:22:16.119 --> 0:22:19.040
<v Speaker 4>he's not doing particularly well despite the fact that they've

0:22:19.040 --> 0:22:22.800
<v Speaker 4>had a number of really you know, great legislative wins

0:22:22.880 --> 0:22:24.200
<v Speaker 4>as it relates to the economy.

0:22:24.240 --> 0:22:26.080
<v Speaker 3>Think about the Chip sack and the like.

0:22:26.280 --> 0:22:28.600
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but I want you to pause back and talk

0:22:28.600 --> 0:22:31.520
<v Speaker 1>about stagflation for a minute. You know, Yes, the Biden

0:22:31.520 --> 0:22:34.920
<v Speaker 1>administration is not breaking through on messaging when it comes

0:22:34.920 --> 0:22:37.800
<v Speaker 1>to the economy. But I feel like I'm more curious

0:22:37.920 --> 0:22:42.080
<v Speaker 1>about what you think the Fed should do to kind

0:22:42.160 --> 0:22:44.440
<v Speaker 1>of pull us out of this, or do you think

0:22:44.520 --> 0:22:45.560
<v Speaker 1>it's better just a way.

0:22:45.840 --> 0:22:47.680
<v Speaker 3>No, I think the Fed they're doing their job.

0:22:47.840 --> 0:22:50.520
<v Speaker 4>They did the right thing by raising interest rates right

0:22:50.560 --> 0:22:53.840
<v Speaker 4>relative to the pace of inflation. And I think the

0:22:53.880 --> 0:22:56.399
<v Speaker 4>fact that they are not willing to kind of drop

0:22:56.480 --> 0:22:59.119
<v Speaker 4>the mic and put up a mission impossible sort of

0:22:59.160 --> 0:23:01.960
<v Speaker 4>sign makes a lot of sense right here, because if

0:23:02.000 --> 0:23:04.440
<v Speaker 4>the first three months of this year were any indication

0:23:04.720 --> 0:23:08.919
<v Speaker 4>you know, about the potential for a reflation right and

0:23:09.000 --> 0:23:11.520
<v Speaker 4>the disinflation of inflation, I know there was a.

0:23:11.480 --> 0:23:14.160
<v Speaker 3>Lot there, Like that is what their big worry is.

0:23:14.240 --> 0:23:17.840
<v Speaker 4>And so to me, keeping the rate high right has

0:23:17.880 --> 0:23:20.680
<v Speaker 4>the potential of slowing down the economy, which is essentially

0:23:20.680 --> 0:23:22.679
<v Speaker 4>what they want to do, right. They want to slower

0:23:22.680 --> 0:23:25.000
<v Speaker 4>the pace of jobs growth, They're starting to do that.

0:23:25.040 --> 0:23:27.840
<v Speaker 4>They want to slower the pace of consumption, they're starting

0:23:27.880 --> 0:23:30.480
<v Speaker 4>to do that, right, And so the idea of taking

0:23:30.560 --> 0:23:32.880
<v Speaker 4>their foot off the pedal right now, then you run

0:23:32.920 --> 0:23:37.080
<v Speaker 4>the risk of basically lowering interest rates causing inflation to

0:23:37.119 --> 0:23:40.120
<v Speaker 4>get going again, making you know, just kind of financial

0:23:40.160 --> 0:23:42.320
<v Speaker 4>conditions that much easier. And then you run the risk

0:23:42.359 --> 0:23:45.639
<v Speaker 4>of basically inflating a bubble in risk assets too. And

0:23:45.680 --> 0:23:48.159
<v Speaker 4>don't think for a second that the stock market, the

0:23:48.200 --> 0:23:51.440
<v Speaker 4>housing market don't play into this because the wealth effect

0:23:51.440 --> 0:23:54.560
<v Speaker 4>that created by the stock market at all time highs

0:23:54.720 --> 0:23:58.480
<v Speaker 4>and housing market, you know, at unusually high levels, you know,

0:23:58.600 --> 0:24:01.960
<v Speaker 4>creates this situation where you know, no one can see

0:24:02.000 --> 0:24:05.119
<v Speaker 4>an end in sight to risk asset inflation, and then

0:24:05.160 --> 0:24:07.040
<v Speaker 4>you run the risk of it popping like we had

0:24:07.119 --> 0:24:09.320
<v Speaker 4>in twenty twenty two and a bear market.

0:24:09.480 --> 0:24:13.040
<v Speaker 1>So it really is a very delicate dance to try

0:24:13.080 --> 0:24:17.439
<v Speaker 1>to lower inflation for the consumer because you know, for

0:24:17.520 --> 0:24:19.720
<v Speaker 1>the people in the middle of the country, for whom

0:24:19.920 --> 0:24:24.720
<v Speaker 1>McDonald's is now, you know, twenty percent of the budget

0:24:24.840 --> 0:24:28.520
<v Speaker 1>as opposed to fifteen or whatever that looks like, and

0:24:28.760 --> 0:24:32.919
<v Speaker 1>not get into one of these really dangerous cycles. But

0:24:33.080 --> 0:24:35.960
<v Speaker 1>part of the fundamental problem with this economy is still

0:24:35.960 --> 0:24:36.920
<v Speaker 1>that it's too good.

0:24:37.520 --> 0:24:39.480
<v Speaker 4>Yeah well, I mean, listen, you're going to hear this

0:24:39.560 --> 0:24:42.879
<v Speaker 4>term all this time hot on Financial TV. That is

0:24:42.920 --> 0:24:45.720
<v Speaker 4>a sort of Goldilock situation in a way. I mean,

0:24:45.760 --> 0:24:49.000
<v Speaker 4>corporate profits are doing very well. The ability to pass

0:24:49.040 --> 0:24:51.760
<v Speaker 4>through these price increases has been good for their margins

0:24:51.800 --> 0:24:54.320
<v Speaker 4>and good for profitability. But you know, just this morning,

0:24:54.480 --> 0:24:57.320
<v Speaker 4>this is Thursday morning, as we're recording it, Walmart's earnings

0:24:57.359 --> 0:24:59.440
<v Speaker 4>are out. The stock is at a new all time

0:24:59.520 --> 0:25:03.520
<v Speaker 4>high nearly six percent. The headline is Walmart sales surge

0:25:03.840 --> 0:25:07.640
<v Speaker 4>as wealthy shoppers flock to retailers. So think about that.

0:25:07.800 --> 0:25:11.800
<v Speaker 4>There's a trade down in the wealth level of their shoppers.

0:25:11.800 --> 0:25:15.000
<v Speaker 4>So people are starting to feel it. They're looking for value,

0:25:15.119 --> 0:25:17.480
<v Speaker 4>and those sorts of things have the ability to kind

0:25:17.480 --> 0:25:19.879
<v Speaker 4>of creep up and then have an effect, you know

0:25:19.920 --> 0:25:21.800
<v Speaker 4>what I mean on the economy all at once. You

0:25:21.840 --> 0:25:25.520
<v Speaker 4>have two thirds of our economy the GDP comes from

0:25:25.520 --> 0:25:28.600
<v Speaker 4>the consumer. So the warning signs are there that the

0:25:28.640 --> 0:25:31.760
<v Speaker 4>consumer is slowing at a time where unemployment is still

0:25:31.840 --> 0:25:35.400
<v Speaker 4>really low, and that sort of ingredient with high inflation

0:25:35.840 --> 0:25:39.040
<v Speaker 4>and high interest rates have the potential to cause an

0:25:39.080 --> 0:25:40.080
<v Speaker 4>economic downturn.

0:25:40.119 --> 0:25:40.679
<v Speaker 3>You mentioned it.

0:25:40.720 --> 0:25:43.360
<v Speaker 4>A lot of folks coming into twenty twenty three were

0:25:43.440 --> 0:25:45.560
<v Speaker 4>convinced that we were going to have a recession. We

0:25:45.680 --> 0:25:49.879
<v Speaker 4>never did. The FED was getting ready to ease policy,

0:25:50.040 --> 0:25:52.320
<v Speaker 4>but then inflation picked back up. And you know, we

0:25:52.359 --> 0:25:55.199
<v Speaker 4>haven't even mentioned geopolitics. And one of the biggest kickers

0:25:55.200 --> 0:25:58.640
<v Speaker 4>back in early twenty twenty two was when Russia invaded.

0:25:58.280 --> 0:26:00.320
<v Speaker 1>Ukraine, right because of fuel.

0:26:00.359 --> 0:26:02.720
<v Speaker 4>Right, and so fuel costs went up dramatically, and so

0:26:02.800 --> 0:26:05.560
<v Speaker 4>it also disrupted supply chains. So when you think about this,

0:26:05.680 --> 0:26:07.600
<v Speaker 4>one of the reasons why a lot of folks that

0:26:07.640 --> 0:26:10.159
<v Speaker 4>look at markets and look at the economy are really

0:26:10.480 --> 0:26:14.360
<v Speaker 4>concerned about the situation with China and Taiwan is that

0:26:14.400 --> 0:26:17.840
<v Speaker 4>another disruption to supply chains like we saw in COVID.

0:26:18.119 --> 0:26:21.920
<v Speaker 4>The national security risks of all of this centralized manufacturing

0:26:22.119 --> 0:26:26.600
<v Speaker 4>and supply chains dependent on China has the potential to

0:26:26.640 --> 0:26:31.120
<v Speaker 4>cause massive inflationary pressures, especially as we reshore jobs, whether

0:26:31.160 --> 0:26:33.720
<v Speaker 4>it be in semiconductors or other parts of manufacturing. And

0:26:33.760 --> 0:26:36.159
<v Speaker 4>the last point I'll just say, and this is bipartisan

0:26:36.200 --> 0:26:38.800
<v Speaker 4>because the Trump administration started this back in early in

0:26:38.840 --> 0:26:42.399
<v Speaker 4>their administration, the tariffs and the trade war. You know,

0:26:42.440 --> 0:26:45.200
<v Speaker 4>the Biden administration has leaned into this. We're seeing lots

0:26:45.240 --> 0:26:49.760
<v Speaker 4>of teriffs being placed on that's also inflationary, So let's talk.

0:26:49.640 --> 0:26:51.880
<v Speaker 1>About the tariffs. This is one of the few times

0:26:51.920 --> 0:26:56.280
<v Speaker 1>ever that the Trump administration may have done something right,

0:26:56.880 --> 0:27:00.320
<v Speaker 1>which is baffling to me because of the more they

0:27:00.359 --> 0:27:02.800
<v Speaker 1>had running that hip and the advice they were taking

0:27:02.800 --> 0:27:05.560
<v Speaker 1>from people like Larry Goudlow, who is a lovely person

0:27:05.600 --> 0:27:08.840
<v Speaker 1>but is wrong about almost everything. So explain to us

0:27:09.240 --> 0:27:12.480
<v Speaker 1>why Trump World was right about tariffs when it comes

0:27:12.520 --> 0:27:16.800
<v Speaker 1>to China, and also just explain to me why inflationary

0:27:16.840 --> 0:27:18.720
<v Speaker 1>tariffs are somehow good now.

0:27:18.720 --> 0:27:19.880
<v Speaker 3>They're really not. I mean.

0:27:19.920 --> 0:27:22.320
<v Speaker 4>So the point is, I think a lot of it

0:27:22.359 --> 0:27:25.680
<v Speaker 4>has to do with diversification away from those supply chains

0:27:25.680 --> 0:27:27.920
<v Speaker 4>in China, and also the idea and we've been dealing

0:27:28.000 --> 0:27:30.639
<v Speaker 4>with this in the US as it relates to manufacturing

0:27:30.760 --> 0:27:33.920
<v Speaker 4>for fifty years. You know, Japan was the bugaboo back

0:27:33.920 --> 0:27:36.359
<v Speaker 4>in the eighties that they were going to dump cars

0:27:36.400 --> 0:27:39.360
<v Speaker 4>on us and destroy Detroit, and to some degree they

0:27:39.440 --> 0:27:42.560
<v Speaker 4>really did. Right now, as you think about the bideninistration

0:27:42.640 --> 0:27:44.560
<v Speaker 4>and what they're doing, I mean, they want to be

0:27:45.200 --> 0:27:49.280
<v Speaker 4>very pro Detroit auto manufacturing. And we saw that earlier

0:27:49.280 --> 0:27:52.160
<v Speaker 4>in the year with the UAW strikes when Biden went

0:27:52.560 --> 0:27:54.879
<v Speaker 4>and got on the picket line. Right now, that serves

0:27:54.960 --> 0:27:57.480
<v Speaker 4>him politically very well, right to have a very strong

0:27:57.480 --> 0:28:00.000
<v Speaker 4>message message in Michigan. It's one of the only battle

0:28:00.080 --> 0:28:03.800
<v Speaker 4>ground states that he's doing pretty decently. And so the

0:28:03.840 --> 0:28:06.800
<v Speaker 4>idea that the Chinese, which have gotten really good at

0:28:06.840 --> 0:28:11.159
<v Speaker 4>developing low cost electric vehicles, that they could be selling

0:28:11.200 --> 0:28:14.560
<v Speaker 4>them here in the US. It would absolutely sink Tesla,

0:28:14.720 --> 0:28:18.400
<v Speaker 4>which is the leader right now in high end electric vehicles.

0:28:18.440 --> 0:28:21.359
<v Speaker 4>Elon Musk has wind about it on many occasions that

0:28:21.400 --> 0:28:25.560
<v Speaker 4>the Chinese have the potential just to destroy USV manufacturing.

0:28:25.880 --> 0:28:27.360
<v Speaker 3>So he's right about that.

0:28:27.760 --> 0:28:30.760
<v Speaker 4>But really, if you think about the number of cars

0:28:30.760 --> 0:28:34.000
<v Speaker 4>that are coming out of Detroit that are fully electric,

0:28:34.080 --> 0:28:36.520
<v Speaker 4>I think it was basically one percent of the fifteen

0:28:36.520 --> 0:28:40.000
<v Speaker 4>million cars that were made and shipped in America last year,

0:28:40.040 --> 0:28:43.600
<v Speaker 4>one hundred and fifty thousand I think between Ford and GM.

0:28:43.720 --> 0:28:46.080
<v Speaker 3>So this is a very nascent industry here in the US.

0:28:46.160 --> 0:28:47.920
<v Speaker 4>I think a lot of folks who are really focused

0:28:47.960 --> 0:28:51.760
<v Speaker 4>on this from a environmental standpoint would like to see,

0:28:51.960 --> 0:28:56.600
<v Speaker 4>let's say, the Chinese innovation help basically spur competition here

0:28:56.640 --> 0:29:00.000
<v Speaker 4>in the US, which will give many, many more consumers

0:29:00.400 --> 0:29:03.160
<v Speaker 4>access to these vehicles. And if these ariffs at one

0:29:03.240 --> 0:29:06.520
<v Speaker 4>hundred percent coming in from China are basically going to

0:29:06.520 --> 0:29:09.800
<v Speaker 4>block US consumers from buying cheap Chinese EV's, but I

0:29:09.880 --> 0:29:11.920
<v Speaker 4>just don't think there's demand for cheap Chinese.

0:29:11.880 --> 0:29:12.840
<v Speaker 3>Evs anyway here.

0:29:12.880 --> 0:29:15.560
<v Speaker 4>But again that's the risk, and they're also putting them

0:29:15.560 --> 0:29:17.720
<v Speaker 4>on steel and a whole host of other things. And

0:29:17.760 --> 0:29:20.520
<v Speaker 4>again going back to the Trump administration, you know that

0:29:20.640 --> 0:29:23.240
<v Speaker 4>wasn't that popular if you think about it back at

0:29:23.240 --> 0:29:27.000
<v Speaker 4>the time on certain forms of manufacturing companies because they

0:29:27.040 --> 0:29:29.560
<v Speaker 4>rely on that cheap steel and they lost a lot

0:29:29.560 --> 0:29:32.880
<v Speaker 4>of jobs in the heartland because of those high terraffs.

0:29:33.200 --> 0:29:36.560
<v Speaker 1>Right. So, do you think ultimately the Trump world was

0:29:36.600 --> 0:29:38.240
<v Speaker 1>wrong and Biden world is wrong?

0:29:38.600 --> 0:29:40.200
<v Speaker 3>No, I think they were probably right.

0:29:40.240 --> 0:29:42.640
<v Speaker 4>If you think about this sort of deal that the

0:29:42.760 --> 0:29:47.080
<v Speaker 4>US manufacturing had made that benefited US consumers some fifty

0:29:47.120 --> 0:29:50.640
<v Speaker 4>years ago. You know, we got addicted to cheap manufactured

0:29:50.680 --> 0:29:53.960
<v Speaker 4>goods in China, but at the hollowing out of our

0:29:54.000 --> 0:29:58.239
<v Speaker 4>manufacturing capabilities has done a number on our economy if

0:29:58.280 --> 0:30:00.880
<v Speaker 4>you think about it, right, And so I think they

0:30:00.880 --> 0:30:04.000
<v Speaker 4>were probably right in some manners. I think the Biden

0:30:04.040 --> 0:30:07.480
<v Speaker 4>administration basically left all those tariffs in place, and now

0:30:07.480 --> 0:30:10.000
<v Speaker 4>we're getting a bit more aggressive. You know, again, a

0:30:10.000 --> 0:30:12.200
<v Speaker 4>lot of it is messaging, right, and how you want

0:30:12.240 --> 0:30:15.520
<v Speaker 4>to play in this global you know playing field. I mean,

0:30:15.520 --> 0:30:19.120
<v Speaker 4>the Trump administration they basically went after very hard, you know,

0:30:19.280 --> 0:30:22.040
<v Speaker 4>China and some other parts of the world, and that

0:30:22.240 --> 0:30:25.320
<v Speaker 4>was you know, basically one of their big economic messages,

0:30:25.480 --> 0:30:27.560
<v Speaker 4>and for many reasons it's right. But the other thing

0:30:27.600 --> 0:30:29.720
<v Speaker 4>I'll just say is that, you know, if you think

0:30:29.760 --> 0:30:33.480
<v Speaker 4>about twenty and sixteen to twenty and twenty four, what

0:30:33.680 --> 0:30:36.720
<v Speaker 4>is starting to become very apparent is China is much

0:30:36.760 --> 0:30:39.960
<v Speaker 4>weaker than we would have given them any credit for.

0:30:40.080 --> 0:30:41.120
<v Speaker 3>You know, than a few years ago.

0:30:41.120 --> 0:30:44.360
<v Speaker 4>They have a massive demographic problem, they have huge economic

0:30:44.400 --> 0:30:47.160
<v Speaker 4>problems that have not really made it to our shores

0:30:47.320 --> 0:30:49.640
<v Speaker 4>just yet, and so maybe they're not the sort of

0:30:50.200 --> 0:30:53.640
<v Speaker 4>you know adversary economically that we think they are. And therefore,

0:30:53.920 --> 0:30:56.600
<v Speaker 4>you know, the idea of kind of pressing their neck

0:30:56.680 --> 0:30:59.520
<v Speaker 4>right now may cause them to do something that we

0:30:59.600 --> 0:31:01.960
<v Speaker 4>don't want them to do on the geopolitical front, and

0:31:02.000 --> 0:31:05.600
<v Speaker 4>that is some sort of you know, embargo on Taiwan

0:31:05.720 --> 0:31:08.120
<v Speaker 4>or as trying to take Taiwan, because that would be

0:31:08.160 --> 0:31:10.680
<v Speaker 4>something that I think would be disasterus if you thought

0:31:10.760 --> 0:31:13.920
<v Speaker 4>the Ukraine invasion was bad for all the things we

0:31:14.040 --> 0:31:17.320
<v Speaker 4>just talked about, you know, cutting off access to chips

0:31:17.560 --> 0:31:21.040
<v Speaker 4>and by the way, Taiwan makes probably eighty five percent

0:31:21.120 --> 0:31:24.080
<v Speaker 4>of high end chips right now, they're distributed all over

0:31:24.080 --> 0:31:24.560
<v Speaker 4>the world.

0:31:24.840 --> 0:31:27.160
<v Speaker 3>That would be a very bad thing for the global economy.

0:31:27.320 --> 0:31:31.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, these are all really really salient and important points.

0:31:31.160 --> 0:31:35.240
<v Speaker 1>And China is both not as strong as we worry

0:31:35.360 --> 0:31:39.680
<v Speaker 1>they are, but also way more dangerous than Russia ultimately

0:31:39.760 --> 0:31:42.440
<v Speaker 1>because they have money and they have real stuff. I

0:31:42.520 --> 0:31:45.920
<v Speaker 1>want you just for a second to talk about there

0:31:46.000 --> 0:31:48.920
<v Speaker 1>are people on the left. They're like the politicians that

0:31:49.000 --> 0:31:52.320
<v Speaker 1>my husband hates, but I like them ideologically, But he

0:31:52.400 --> 0:31:55.400
<v Speaker 1>hates them because he's a venture capitalist and he's the best,

0:31:55.400 --> 0:31:57.560
<v Speaker 1>but I think he's wrong on this. But they want

0:31:57.560 --> 0:32:02.400
<v Speaker 1>to push to lower gross prices. I'm talking about Elizabeth Warren,

0:32:02.480 --> 0:32:05.720
<v Speaker 1>I'm talking about Bernie Sanders. This is like capitalist creates

0:32:05.720 --> 0:32:08.040
<v Speaker 1>a lot of capitalist anxiety. I mean, is there a

0:32:08.120 --> 0:32:08.600
<v Speaker 1>place for.

0:32:08.600 --> 0:32:10.200
<v Speaker 3>That or now? Not really?

0:32:10.200 --> 0:32:11.920
<v Speaker 4>I mean, you know, when you think about it, past

0:32:11.960 --> 0:32:14.800
<v Speaker 4>administrations they've looked for different ways to kind of you know,

0:32:15.000 --> 0:32:17.760
<v Speaker 4>like through the social safety net to kind of, you know,

0:32:17.920 --> 0:32:20.480
<v Speaker 4>help reduce the cost of some of these things. But

0:32:20.600 --> 0:32:22.440
<v Speaker 4>at the end of the day, you know, we really

0:32:22.520 --> 0:32:25.120
<v Speaker 4>don't have mechanisms in our capitalistic kind of.

0:32:25.160 --> 0:32:27.240
<v Speaker 3>Way of life to do that, right.

0:32:27.280 --> 0:32:29.440
<v Speaker 4>And so again this comes down to the sort of

0:32:29.520 --> 0:32:32.040
<v Speaker 4>choices that you make and the parties that you align with,

0:32:32.080 --> 0:32:34.440
<v Speaker 4>and you know, the Democratic Party, whether it be the

0:32:34.480 --> 0:32:37.080
<v Speaker 4>far left coming up with these sorts of plans, it's

0:32:37.120 --> 0:32:39.120
<v Speaker 4>kind of helping move the center to the left, I

0:32:39.160 --> 0:32:41.200
<v Speaker 4>think a little bit if that makes some sense on

0:32:41.280 --> 0:32:43.400
<v Speaker 4>some of these issues that I know you and I

0:32:43.600 --> 0:32:46.120
<v Speaker 4>and your husband care deeply about. But the way in

0:32:46.160 --> 0:32:49.760
<v Speaker 4>which people want to institute these policies are very different. Right,

0:32:49.800 --> 0:32:51.800
<v Speaker 4>So when I think about this, one of the major

0:32:51.840 --> 0:32:54.400
<v Speaker 4>differences that I always consider when I think about some

0:32:54.480 --> 0:32:56.560
<v Speaker 4>of let's say, the economic policies on the right that

0:32:56.640 --> 0:32:58.840
<v Speaker 4>make some sense to me more so than say coming

0:32:58.880 --> 0:33:01.640
<v Speaker 4>out of Bernie and Elizabeth Warren. I mean, what I

0:33:01.760 --> 0:33:03.880
<v Speaker 4>care about is that our tax dollars go to the

0:33:03.960 --> 0:33:06.560
<v Speaker 4>most vulnerable in some ways, to some of the most

0:33:06.640 --> 0:33:09.680
<v Speaker 4>vulnerable citizens in our country. And I think on the

0:33:09.760 --> 0:33:12.400
<v Speaker 4>right they think of them as handouts, right, And so

0:33:12.520 --> 0:33:15.280
<v Speaker 4>to me, that's where just I just like draw the

0:33:15.320 --> 0:33:17.760
<v Speaker 4>line to some degree. So again, I don't agree with

0:33:17.800 --> 0:33:20.880
<v Speaker 4>Bernie and Elizabeth Warren, but I do believe that the

0:33:20.920 --> 0:33:23.400
<v Speaker 4>Democratic Party, and I think the things that they stand

0:33:23.440 --> 0:33:25.480
<v Speaker 4>for as it relates to the social safety that are

0:33:25.520 --> 0:33:26.160
<v Speaker 4>worth fighting for.

0:33:26.280 --> 0:33:27.200
<v Speaker 3>And that's where I stand.

0:33:27.320 --> 0:33:30.120
<v Speaker 1>Thank you, Dan, You're the best, all.

0:33:30.120 --> 0:33:32.440
<v Speaker 3>Right, Olli, John Fast, It's always a plusure.

0:33:34.360 --> 0:33:39.240
<v Speaker 1>Jacob Rubashkan is an analyst and reporter for Inside Elections.

0:33:39.440 --> 0:33:42.600
<v Speaker 1>Welcome back to Fast Politics, Jacob Rubashkan.

0:33:42.880 --> 0:33:44.000
<v Speaker 5>Thank you so much for having me.

0:33:44.360 --> 0:33:48.880
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk about what the landscape looks like in

0:33:48.920 --> 0:33:49.760
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty four.

0:33:50.200 --> 0:33:53.200
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, leak for Democrats on the Senate side at least.

0:33:53.560 --> 0:33:58.760
<v Speaker 1>First, let's talk about the Senate map. Primaries went basically

0:33:58.880 --> 0:34:02.040
<v Speaker 1>as good as they could for Democrats, right, Yeah.

0:34:02.120 --> 0:34:05.600
<v Speaker 5>I think in the places where Democrats needed wins, they

0:34:05.640 --> 0:34:08.160
<v Speaker 5>got them. They got the candidates they preferred and some

0:34:08.200 --> 0:34:11.440
<v Speaker 5>of the tougher races, and obviously Democrats one thing that

0:34:11.480 --> 0:34:13.120
<v Speaker 5>they have going for them is that they don't have

0:34:13.200 --> 0:34:16.280
<v Speaker 5>very many primaries themselves, right. I Mean, it's almost entirely

0:34:16.320 --> 0:34:20.360
<v Speaker 5>incumbents or people without primaries. Maryland was really kind of

0:34:20.400 --> 0:34:24.520
<v Speaker 5>the big competitive race that also had a competitive primary,

0:34:24.680 --> 0:34:26.560
<v Speaker 5>was a standout in that regard.

0:34:27.000 --> 0:34:29.959
<v Speaker 1>So let's talk about that. I feel like black women

0:34:30.040 --> 0:34:32.960
<v Speaker 1>candidates have kind of gotten screwed, especially when it comes

0:34:33.000 --> 0:34:36.160
<v Speaker 1>to Senate. We've only had three black women senators, which

0:34:36.200 --> 0:34:40.440
<v Speaker 1>is insanity. But it looks like that's possibly about to.

0:34:40.480 --> 0:34:43.600
<v Speaker 5>Change, right, Yeah, No, I think that it will most

0:34:43.719 --> 0:34:47.560
<v Speaker 5>likely change. There are two black women who are poised

0:34:47.640 --> 0:34:50.959
<v Speaker 5>to win their Senate races this cycle. I mean, Lisa

0:34:51.000 --> 0:34:54.000
<v Speaker 5>Blunt Rochester in Delaware is basically a shoe in. She

0:34:54.040 --> 0:34:56.719
<v Speaker 5>doesn't face any real opposition in her primary or in

0:34:56.760 --> 0:34:59.759
<v Speaker 5>the general election, so she's going to be there next year.

0:35:00.000 --> 0:35:02.560
<v Speaker 5>And Angela also Brooks in Maryland. I think we still

0:35:02.560 --> 0:35:05.759
<v Speaker 5>consider her the favorite to win the Maryland Senate race,

0:35:05.800 --> 0:35:08.520
<v Speaker 5>even against Larry Hogan. It'll be a tough contest, but

0:35:08.880 --> 0:35:11.560
<v Speaker 5>we see her favorite, and she would be of course,

0:35:11.640 --> 0:35:13.799
<v Speaker 5>the other black women in the Senate, they would go

0:35:13.840 --> 0:35:16.359
<v Speaker 5>from zero to two, and two is more than they've

0:35:16.360 --> 0:35:19.720
<v Speaker 5>ever had at the same time in the Senate in history.

0:35:20.080 --> 0:35:23.040
<v Speaker 1>We have a black woman senator from California right now,

0:35:23.080 --> 0:35:26.080
<v Speaker 1>but she's about to be replaced by a white man. Yes,

0:35:26.480 --> 0:35:30.160
<v Speaker 1>let's just game this out. There's a slate of really

0:35:30.160 --> 0:35:34.680
<v Speaker 1>bad polls that show a lot of stuff. But if

0:35:34.719 --> 0:35:37.880
<v Speaker 1>we were just to go on twenty twenty two, or

0:35:37.920 --> 0:35:41.400
<v Speaker 1>even twenty twenty three, or even twenty twenty all of

0:35:41.440 --> 0:35:44.400
<v Speaker 1>the elections where Democrats have overperformed, and you were to

0:35:44.440 --> 0:35:48.319
<v Speaker 1>be a little optimistic, what Senate seats. Do you think

0:35:48.400 --> 0:35:50.839
<v Speaker 1>Democrats can either keep or pick up.

0:35:51.080 --> 0:35:54.480
<v Speaker 5>Look, I think that in the best case scenario for Democrats,

0:35:54.719 --> 0:35:58.239
<v Speaker 5>they hold everything except West Virginia. I mean, West Virginia

0:35:58.000 --> 0:36:00.200
<v Speaker 5>is off the board. I don't even talk about it

0:36:00.320 --> 0:36:03.760
<v Speaker 5>anymore because it's so out of mind. Without Joe Manchin,

0:36:03.840 --> 0:36:06.080
<v Speaker 5>that seat is gone and that up ends the whole math.

0:36:06.160 --> 0:36:08.719
<v Speaker 5>But we'll leave that aside for a second. I think

0:36:08.719 --> 0:36:11.640
<v Speaker 5>there are paths to victory for both John Tester and

0:36:11.719 --> 0:36:14.680
<v Speaker 5>Montana and Sheared Brown in Ohio. Those are the two

0:36:14.719 --> 0:36:17.759
<v Speaker 5>most vulnerable seats, but it's not West Virginia territory. They're

0:36:17.800 --> 0:36:20.760
<v Speaker 5>not being triaged, they're not dead men walking.

0:36:20.600 --> 0:36:26.280
<v Speaker 1>And they are also amazing candidates that are pretty different.

0:36:26.640 --> 0:36:29.040
<v Speaker 1>You know, those candidates are amazing candidates.

0:36:29.120 --> 0:36:31.040
<v Speaker 5>And this is something that Democrats have going for them,

0:36:31.080 --> 0:36:33.480
<v Speaker 5>is though they brought back almost all of their incumbents,

0:36:33.520 --> 0:36:35.719
<v Speaker 5>and that really makes a difference. A lot of the

0:36:35.719 --> 0:36:40.279
<v Speaker 5>time when we see big swings in Senate composition, it

0:36:40.400 --> 0:36:44.520
<v Speaker 5>is because incumbents decide not to run for reelection. I mean,

0:36:44.560 --> 0:36:47.680
<v Speaker 5>think about twenty fourteen, which I think is still kind

0:36:47.719 --> 0:36:50.399
<v Speaker 5>of If you're trying to understand why Democrats have been

0:36:50.440 --> 0:36:52.520
<v Speaker 5>such a deep hole in the Senate for so long.

0:36:52.719 --> 0:36:54.719
<v Speaker 5>Twenty fourteen is the year that you have to look to.

0:36:55.200 --> 0:36:58.880
<v Speaker 5>Republicans flipped nine seats that year. It was a blood

0:36:58.960 --> 0:37:01.680
<v Speaker 5>bat and it was in part because they had they

0:37:01.760 --> 0:37:04.840
<v Speaker 5>want a bunch of really narrow victories in states against

0:37:04.840 --> 0:37:08.360
<v Speaker 5>incumbents like North Carolina and Alaska, but also because Parkin

0:37:08.480 --> 0:37:12.839
<v Speaker 5>retired in Iowa, and you had other Democratic senators in

0:37:13.200 --> 0:37:16.840
<v Speaker 5>Republican states who didn't even bother trying to win reelection.

0:37:17.040 --> 0:37:19.759
<v Speaker 5>They just hung up the cleats and went home. And

0:37:19.800 --> 0:37:22.839
<v Speaker 5>I think what is keeping Democratic hopes alive is that

0:37:23.040 --> 0:37:27.160
<v Speaker 5>neither John Tester nor Shared Brown made that calculation. This time,

0:37:27.239 --> 0:37:29.520
<v Speaker 5>they're giving the party a fighting chance in both of

0:37:29.560 --> 0:37:30.320
<v Speaker 5>those states.

0:37:30.640 --> 0:37:34.600
<v Speaker 1>Let's talk about here's one that because I'm still very

0:37:34.640 --> 0:37:42.720
<v Speaker 1>salty from twenty twenty two and the fucking Wisconsin Senate

0:37:43.280 --> 0:37:47.920
<v Speaker 1>where Ron Annon was polling nine points ahead and won

0:37:48.239 --> 0:37:51.919
<v Speaker 1>against Mandela Barns by one point. If you were looking

0:37:51.920 --> 0:37:53.640
<v Speaker 1>at this map, what would be that seed?

0:37:53.960 --> 0:37:57.040
<v Speaker 5>So this one we actually see in a better position

0:37:57.160 --> 0:38:02.320
<v Speaker 5>for Democrats than most of their other vulnerable seats.

0:38:02.560 --> 0:38:05.759
<v Speaker 1>What are we we're talking about Tavy Baldwin in Wisconsin. Yeah, yeah,

0:38:05.760 --> 0:38:10.360
<v Speaker 1>she's gonna win. That guy's an asshole, sorry, Eric Coovey,

0:38:10.480 --> 0:38:13.560
<v Speaker 1>and who comes from California owns a bank.

0:38:13.880 --> 0:38:17.360
<v Speaker 5>The matchup there, I think generally plays well to Senator

0:38:17.400 --> 0:38:19.920
<v Speaker 5>Baldwin's strength. Huv D Eric hove.

0:38:19.840 --> 0:38:22.160
<v Speaker 1>D with a ridiculous little mustache.

0:38:22.920 --> 0:38:25.799
<v Speaker 5>He ran for senate in twenty twelve Sands mustache didn't

0:38:25.800 --> 0:38:28.520
<v Speaker 5>even win the primary, so the mustache at least has

0:38:28.520 --> 0:38:31.839
<v Speaker 5>helped him clear the primary field this time, right or Ormon.

0:38:32.120 --> 0:38:34.920
<v Speaker 5>What he has going for him is he is really

0:38:34.960 --> 0:38:39.040
<v Speaker 5>really rich, and he unlike some really rich guys who

0:38:39.160 --> 0:38:42.760
<v Speaker 5>run for office and don't spend any money or spend

0:38:42.840 --> 0:38:45.320
<v Speaker 5>a little bit of money, he really is is opening

0:38:45.400 --> 0:38:49.160
<v Speaker 5>up his checkbook and has already been able to go

0:38:49.360 --> 0:38:54.520
<v Speaker 5>up on TV and prosecute a message against Senator Baldwin.

0:38:54.760 --> 0:38:57.160
<v Speaker 5>But you know, he's got the baggage too, He's got

0:38:57.280 --> 0:39:01.440
<v Speaker 5>the California stuff. He has a pension for speaking his

0:39:01.560 --> 0:39:04.880
<v Speaker 5>mind in somewhat blunt ways that doesn't sit well with voters.

0:39:04.920 --> 0:39:07.040
<v Speaker 5>I mean, he made those comments about how people in

0:39:07.160 --> 0:39:09.960
<v Speaker 5>nursing homes might not you know, have the faculties to

0:39:10.000 --> 0:39:10.880
<v Speaker 5>be able to vote.

0:39:10.960 --> 0:39:13.719
<v Speaker 1>Insulting old people is always a good way when you're

0:39:13.760 --> 0:39:15.480
<v Speaker 1>running for office, always a good moment.

0:39:15.520 --> 0:39:18.359
<v Speaker 5>And you know, in Wisconsin, he made a comment if

0:39:18.360 --> 0:39:20.279
<v Speaker 5>I had to start all over, I would say we

0:39:20.320 --> 0:39:24.560
<v Speaker 5>shouldn't have legal alcohol sales. He presents some opportunities to

0:39:25.239 --> 0:39:27.120
<v Speaker 5>Democrats to paint him as kind of an out of

0:39:27.160 --> 0:39:30.280
<v Speaker 5>touch rich guy who's not in it or the people

0:39:30.280 --> 0:39:33.239
<v Speaker 5>of Wisconsin. And that's why, you know, I think that

0:39:33.320 --> 0:39:36.880
<v Speaker 5>we see Senator Baldwin in a stronger position than either

0:39:37.080 --> 0:39:40.160
<v Speaker 5>Shared Brown or John Tester, but also Jackie Rosen in

0:39:40.160 --> 0:39:43.239
<v Speaker 5>Nevada and Bob Casey and Pennsylvania and some of these

0:39:43.280 --> 0:39:46.000
<v Speaker 5>other candidates as well. You know, Wisconsin I think is

0:39:46.320 --> 0:39:48.960
<v Speaker 5>in a better spot for Democrats than a lot of

0:39:48.960 --> 0:39:51.040
<v Speaker 5>these other highly competitive Senate races.

0:39:51.360 --> 0:39:54.840
<v Speaker 1>Talk to me about the Senate race that's not on

0:39:54.880 --> 0:39:56.120
<v Speaker 1>the map but maybe should be.

0:39:56.560 --> 0:40:00.200
<v Speaker 5>I mean, I think both parties have arguments to make

0:40:00.440 --> 0:40:03.000
<v Speaker 5>for one or two states that we don't currently see

0:40:03.040 --> 0:40:06.600
<v Speaker 5>as super competitive. On the Democratic side, I think Florida

0:40:06.719 --> 0:40:10.440
<v Speaker 5>is the obvious candidate here at the moment, we have

0:40:10.480 --> 0:40:14.120
<v Speaker 5>Florida rated solid Republican because it's just not clear that

0:40:14.480 --> 0:40:17.960
<v Speaker 5>the likely nominee there. Former Congresswoman w macarstole Powell is

0:40:18.000 --> 0:40:20.560
<v Speaker 5>going to be able to stand up the kind of

0:40:20.600 --> 0:40:24.160
<v Speaker 5>operation needed to run in the third largest state in

0:40:24.200 --> 0:40:27.120
<v Speaker 5>the Union. I mean, Florida is incredibly expensive and she

0:40:27.920 --> 0:40:30.960
<v Speaker 5>is not such an incredible fundraiser compared to some of

0:40:30.960 --> 0:40:31.960
<v Speaker 5>these other Democrats.

0:40:32.200 --> 0:40:34.640
<v Speaker 1>And he's got a gazillion dollars.

0:40:34.360 --> 0:40:36.799
<v Speaker 5>And he's got a gazillion dollars and he will spend it.

0:40:36.840 --> 0:40:39.480
<v Speaker 5>I mean, he spent sixty million on his run in

0:40:39.520 --> 0:40:43.360
<v Speaker 5>twenty eighteen. Money is no problem for him. And because

0:40:43.680 --> 0:40:48.080
<v Speaker 5>the Biden campaign probably isn't going to invest heavily in Florida,

0:40:48.400 --> 0:40:49.799
<v Speaker 5>she's going to have to do it on her own.

0:40:49.800 --> 0:40:52.480
<v Speaker 5>And we just at the moment, it doesn't seem like

0:40:52.960 --> 0:40:55.880
<v Speaker 5>that is going to happen. It's not going to all

0:40:55.880 --> 0:40:58.400
<v Speaker 5>come together for her. And you know, the Florida Democratic

0:40:58.440 --> 0:41:01.680
<v Speaker 5>Party has really been struggled in recent years to build

0:41:01.760 --> 0:41:04.080
<v Speaker 5>up any kind of infrastructure at a state level, and

0:41:04.120 --> 0:41:07.160
<v Speaker 5>so it's difficult. But if things really get better for Biden,

0:41:07.239 --> 0:41:10.080
<v Speaker 5>if all of a sudden he's competitive in Florida and

0:41:10.120 --> 0:41:12.640
<v Speaker 5>she's able to really kick her fundraising into high gear,

0:41:12.960 --> 0:41:14.960
<v Speaker 5>then yeah, Rick Scott has never won a race by

0:41:15.000 --> 0:41:17.480
<v Speaker 5>more than one percentage point in the decade he's been

0:41:17.480 --> 0:41:20.919
<v Speaker 5>in politics. On paper, this is a seat that could

0:41:20.920 --> 0:41:24.239
<v Speaker 5>come online for Democrats on the Republican side. The one

0:41:24.320 --> 0:41:26.640
<v Speaker 5>or two that I think they would probably want to

0:41:26.640 --> 0:41:29.279
<v Speaker 5>make a run at, or New Mexico or Virginia. I'd

0:41:29.280 --> 0:41:32.480
<v Speaker 5>probably place New Mexico above that, just because you know,

0:41:32.560 --> 0:41:35.359
<v Speaker 5>this is a state that used to be.

0:41:34.760 --> 0:41:38.240
<v Speaker 1>Because of the Hispanic poll and vote at the polls.

0:41:38.520 --> 0:41:41.480
<v Speaker 5>So New Mexico has the highest Hispanic population I believe

0:41:41.520 --> 0:41:44.600
<v Speaker 5>of any state in the country. Republicans have a recruit

0:41:44.640 --> 0:41:47.200
<v Speaker 5>in that state that they like, Nela Dimnici. She's the

0:41:47.280 --> 0:41:50.160
<v Speaker 5>daughter of former Senator Pete Domenici, so she's got some

0:41:50.200 --> 0:41:52.520
<v Speaker 5>built in name id. She is wealthy, and so she

0:41:52.600 --> 0:41:56.280
<v Speaker 5>has some self funding capacity. And Martin Heinrich, the incumbent Democrat,

0:41:56.680 --> 0:41:59.920
<v Speaker 5>is not a particularly flashy member. He's not on TV

0:42:00.040 --> 0:42:02.080
<v Speaker 5>all the time. He's not kind of a high profile

0:42:02.120 --> 0:42:04.520
<v Speaker 5>member of the caucus, which can cut both ways. But

0:42:04.920 --> 0:42:08.440
<v Speaker 5>I think it might give Republicans an opportunity to define

0:42:08.520 --> 0:42:11.280
<v Speaker 5>him a little bit in voters' minds. But New Mexico

0:42:11.360 --> 0:42:13.640
<v Speaker 5>is not going to be a competitive presidential state unless

0:42:13.640 --> 0:42:15.960
<v Speaker 5>the bottom falls out for Biden, right, So like you

0:42:16.040 --> 0:42:19.080
<v Speaker 5>kind of have these extremes on either side. Depending on

0:42:19.120 --> 0:42:22.160
<v Speaker 5>where the presidential race goes, we could see one or

0:42:22.200 --> 0:42:23.560
<v Speaker 5>the other be competitive.

0:42:23.960 --> 0:42:27.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, seems unlikely. So talk to me about the House.

0:42:28.040 --> 0:42:32.200
<v Speaker 5>So the House is definitely a more positive territory for

0:42:32.280 --> 0:42:34.840
<v Speaker 5>Democrats than the Senate is. I mean, the Senate is

0:42:34.840 --> 0:42:38.279
<v Speaker 5>truly almost entirely defense. That's not a comfortable position to

0:42:38.320 --> 0:42:40.839
<v Speaker 5>be the House. Of course, they're in the minority right now,

0:42:40.880 --> 0:42:43.560
<v Speaker 5>so by definition they have more room to grow, and

0:42:43.600 --> 0:42:47.879
<v Speaker 5>they have room to grow in Democratic leaning territory. There

0:42:47.880 --> 0:42:50.399
<v Speaker 5>are a handful of seats in California and New York

0:42:50.400 --> 0:42:53.360
<v Speaker 5>that Biden would have carried by double digits last cycle

0:42:53.640 --> 0:42:56.160
<v Speaker 5>that Democrats absolutely have to win back if they want

0:42:56.200 --> 0:42:59.040
<v Speaker 5>to flip control of the House. I mean, that is

0:42:59.520 --> 0:43:02.200
<v Speaker 5>the main path to the majority, and then kind of

0:43:02.280 --> 0:43:04.400
<v Speaker 5>everything else. The other seats out there, and there are

0:43:04.440 --> 0:43:09.320
<v Speaker 5>probably another fifteen seats that are conceivably targetable on Democratic

0:43:09.400 --> 0:43:12.200
<v Speaker 5>side and on Republican side. That'll determine how big the

0:43:12.239 --> 0:43:15.359
<v Speaker 5>majority is for either party. But it's going to come

0:43:15.440 --> 0:43:18.840
<v Speaker 5>down to those seats in the middle. If Democrats want

0:43:18.880 --> 0:43:23.840
<v Speaker 5>to retake control redistricting, there were a couple of states

0:43:23.880 --> 0:43:27.000
<v Speaker 5>that redrew their maps. Ultimately, it looks like pretty much

0:43:27.000 --> 0:43:29.240
<v Speaker 5>a wash. Republicans are going to pick up a couple

0:43:29.280 --> 0:43:32.120
<v Speaker 5>seats out of North Carolina, but Democrats are going to

0:43:32.120 --> 0:43:34.640
<v Speaker 5>pick up a seat in Alabama and a seat in Louisiana.

0:43:35.080 --> 0:43:38.200
<v Speaker 5>So you know, call it R plus one. But you

0:43:38.239 --> 0:43:40.200
<v Speaker 5>know that's the kind of number that comes out in

0:43:40.200 --> 0:43:44.080
<v Speaker 5>the wash. It's not really a major upending of the

0:43:44.080 --> 0:43:46.800
<v Speaker 5>congressional map from last year to this year at least.

0:43:47.280 --> 0:43:51.880
<v Speaker 1>So what seats are you in the House? What do

0:43:51.920 --> 0:43:54.640
<v Speaker 1>you think has promised for Democrats? Where do you think

0:43:54.719 --> 0:43:55.359
<v Speaker 1>they can flow?

0:43:56.040 --> 0:44:00.239
<v Speaker 5>So, look, there are two seats on Long Island that

0:44:01.000 --> 0:44:04.680
<v Speaker 5>Democrats are interested in, the first district in the fourth district.

0:44:04.760 --> 0:44:07.080
<v Speaker 5>I think the fourth district is that one of the

0:44:07.160 --> 0:44:10.080
<v Speaker 5>number one pick up opportunities. Maybe number one would have

0:44:10.160 --> 0:44:10.880
<v Speaker 5>voted for Biden.

0:44:11.160 --> 0:44:12.120
<v Speaker 1>Who is that?

0:44:12.120 --> 0:44:14.200
<v Speaker 5>That's Congressman Anthony des Posito.

0:44:14.480 --> 0:44:17.440
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, yeah, that's the one that John Avlon is

0:44:17.520 --> 0:44:17.920
<v Speaker 1>running for.

0:44:18.120 --> 0:44:21.160
<v Speaker 5>Right, No, So he's running in the first district, which

0:44:21.200 --> 0:44:23.120
<v Speaker 5>is Nick Loloda.

0:44:22.840 --> 0:44:24.520
<v Speaker 1>Who's ds Posito running in.

0:44:24.680 --> 0:44:27.719
<v Speaker 5>So d s Posito is running against Laura Gillen, who

0:44:27.800 --> 0:44:31.160
<v Speaker 5>is the former Hempstead Town Supervisor. She ran against him

0:44:31.480 --> 0:44:34.840
<v Speaker 5>last cycle two and lost by like two points or

0:44:34.880 --> 0:44:37.640
<v Speaker 5>something like that, and she's back for the rematch. And

0:44:37.760 --> 0:44:40.960
<v Speaker 5>so that you know, that district voted for Biden by

0:44:40.960 --> 0:44:43.799
<v Speaker 5>a greater margin than any other seat currently held by

0:44:43.800 --> 0:44:47.040
<v Speaker 5>a Republican. So that's certainly top of the list. And

0:44:47.080 --> 0:44:49.520
<v Speaker 5>then you kind of go up through the Hudson Valley

0:44:49.760 --> 0:44:54.040
<v Speaker 5>New York seventeen with Mike Lawler running against Mandair Jones.

0:44:54.640 --> 0:44:56.279
<v Speaker 5>That's going to be a big race. And then the

0:44:56.320 --> 0:44:59.800
<v Speaker 5>twenty second district, I think is actually probably a Democrat's

0:44:59.800 --> 0:45:01.960
<v Speaker 5>best shot anywhere of flipping a seat.

0:45:02.080 --> 0:45:02.560
<v Speaker 2>What is that?

0:45:02.800 --> 0:45:06.000
<v Speaker 5>So that's Brandon Williams is the Republican. He's a freshman.

0:45:06.239 --> 0:45:10.000
<v Speaker 5>It's kind of a Syracuse based on Indaga County district.

0:45:10.160 --> 0:45:13.640
<v Speaker 5>There's a Democratic primary there currently going on for the

0:45:13.719 --> 0:45:16.080
<v Speaker 5>next couple of weeks. They've got to sort that out.

0:45:16.120 --> 0:45:20.359
<v Speaker 5>But then Williams is very vulnerable. He is more conservative

0:45:20.440 --> 0:45:24.279
<v Speaker 5>than the district typically goes for, so we actually see

0:45:24.320 --> 0:45:27.200
<v Speaker 5>him as like the most vulnerable Republican in the country

0:45:27.280 --> 0:45:27.760
<v Speaker 5>right now.

0:45:28.000 --> 0:45:30.359
<v Speaker 1>Oh wow, And then what about on this now it's

0:45:30.400 --> 0:45:31.040
<v Speaker 1>in California.

0:45:31.239 --> 0:45:33.120
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, so there are a couple of seats in kind

0:45:33.120 --> 0:45:36.040
<v Speaker 5>of the La Orange County area that are going to

0:45:36.040 --> 0:45:40.680
<v Speaker 5>be very crucial. So Mike Garcia in California's twenty seventh district.

0:45:40.840 --> 0:45:43.759
<v Speaker 5>This is kind of Antelope Valley. It's on the other

0:45:43.880 --> 0:45:47.560
<v Speaker 5>side of LA from the Palm Springs District. There is

0:45:47.600 --> 0:45:50.279
<v Speaker 5>a Palm Springs district as well that's going to be competitive.

0:45:50.320 --> 0:45:52.080
<v Speaker 5>Will Rollins is the Democrat there.

0:45:52.400 --> 0:45:54.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, we've had him on a number of times.

0:45:54.160 --> 0:45:57.319
<v Speaker 5>Yeah, running against Ken Calvert, So that's going to be

0:45:57.840 --> 0:46:01.480
<v Speaker 5>a tough race. Rollins isn't very strong fundraiser. I think

0:46:01.520 --> 0:46:03.719
<v Speaker 5>he's probably one of the best fundraisers that Democrats have

0:46:03.840 --> 0:46:07.359
<v Speaker 5>on the challenger side this cycle. But you know those

0:46:07.400 --> 0:46:11.320
<v Speaker 5>two races, there's the Michelle Steele seat, which is California's

0:46:11.400 --> 0:46:15.359
<v Speaker 5>forty fifth district, is going to be competitive, and then

0:46:15.480 --> 0:46:19.000
<v Speaker 5>there are two seats in the Central Valley. Adam Gray

0:46:19.520 --> 0:46:23.080
<v Speaker 5>is running against Congressman John Duarti in the thirteenth district,

0:46:23.480 --> 0:46:26.200
<v Speaker 5>and that was a race that both of those guys

0:46:26.280 --> 0:46:29.319
<v Speaker 5>ran last time. Duarte beat him, but I want to say,

0:46:29.360 --> 0:46:31.440
<v Speaker 5>like five hundred votes. It was very narrow.

0:46:31.560 --> 0:46:32.000
<v Speaker 3>It was like this.

0:46:32.120 --> 0:46:35.520
<v Speaker 5>It was the second narrowest after Adam Frisch. It was

0:46:35.560 --> 0:46:38.720
<v Speaker 5>the second narrowest race in the country. And then David

0:46:38.760 --> 0:46:42.120
<v Speaker 5>Valdeo is also in that area, another seat that would

0:46:42.160 --> 0:46:45.240
<v Speaker 5>have voted for Biden by a lot and is represented

0:46:45.239 --> 0:46:47.480
<v Speaker 5>by a Republican, and he's also in a rematch against

0:46:47.560 --> 0:46:50.879
<v Speaker 5>Rudy Sallis, who's a former state assembly man who's back

0:46:50.960 --> 0:46:53.680
<v Speaker 5>for another shot at the seat. So a number of

0:46:54.160 --> 0:46:59.160
<v Speaker 5>rematches in California and other highly competitive races that will

0:46:59.200 --> 0:47:02.759
<v Speaker 5>also determine and whether Democrats can win back these seats.

0:47:02.800 --> 0:47:04.960
<v Speaker 5>I mean, if they're not able to win back seats

0:47:05.360 --> 0:47:08.600
<v Speaker 5>that Biden was carrying by ten plus points.

0:47:08.360 --> 0:47:11.799
<v Speaker 1>Right right, right, that's real weird. So let me ask you,

0:47:12.280 --> 0:47:14.160
<v Speaker 1>is Lauren Bobert safe?

0:47:14.200 --> 0:47:14.520
<v Speaker 2>Now?

0:47:14.800 --> 0:47:18.120
<v Speaker 1>Talk to us about the sort of crazies like the

0:47:18.320 --> 0:47:23.160
<v Speaker 1>Matt Gates, the Anna Paulina Luna bad Crow, the Arson s.

0:47:23.560 --> 0:47:25.880
<v Speaker 5>Lauren Bobert is an interesting one because she made that

0:47:25.960 --> 0:47:28.960
<v Speaker 5>district jump. Right, if she had remained in her current district,

0:47:29.160 --> 0:47:31.640
<v Speaker 5>she'd be very vulnerable. I think she knew that. That's

0:47:31.640 --> 0:47:34.520
<v Speaker 5>why she drove across the state. Right we were talking

0:47:34.600 --> 0:47:37.840
<v Speaker 5>hundreds of miles from the third district to the fourth

0:47:37.880 --> 0:47:40.560
<v Speaker 5>district to try and run in a very crowded Republican

0:47:40.600 --> 0:47:43.080
<v Speaker 5>primary in a safe seat. Now she's got to win

0:47:43.080 --> 0:47:45.799
<v Speaker 5>her primary, which is going to be tough. When is

0:47:45.800 --> 0:47:48.040
<v Speaker 5>the primary it's coming up? I want to say June

0:47:48.080 --> 0:47:52.160
<v Speaker 5>twenty fifth is the Colorado primary, and you know, if

0:47:52.200 --> 0:47:55.719
<v Speaker 5>she can win her primary, then she'll be set, you know,

0:47:55.800 --> 0:47:58.160
<v Speaker 5>for however long she wants, until you know, if they

0:47:58.160 --> 0:48:00.600
<v Speaker 5>redraw the district in a decade or whatever. But that's

0:48:00.640 --> 0:48:05.120
<v Speaker 5>a very solid Republican district. Matt Gates similar story. I mean,

0:48:05.160 --> 0:48:08.520
<v Speaker 5>that's the Florida Panhandle is among the most Republican places

0:48:08.520 --> 0:48:12.080
<v Speaker 5>in the country at this point. Marjorie Taylor Green Northeast

0:48:12.120 --> 0:48:15.840
<v Speaker 5>Northwest Georgia is you know, that's Republican country. And a

0:48:15.920 --> 0:48:18.440
<v Speaker 5>Paulina Luna is an interesting one because that district on

0:48:18.560 --> 0:48:21.520
<v Speaker 5>paper is a little swing yer kind of that Saint

0:48:21.560 --> 0:48:25.600
<v Speaker 5>Petersburg Tampa Bay area. Charlie crist held that seat for

0:48:25.640 --> 0:48:29.200
<v Speaker 5>a while. There is a crowded Democratic primary there, which

0:48:29.440 --> 0:48:31.520
<v Speaker 5>I'm kind of surprised by because it's not a top

0:48:31.560 --> 0:48:35.840
<v Speaker 5>tier opportunity, but you've got four or five Democrats running

0:48:36.160 --> 0:48:39.360
<v Speaker 5>credible campaigns trying to get the nomination there. I think

0:48:39.440 --> 0:48:42.239
<v Speaker 5>that if we see some sort of snap back for

0:48:42.320 --> 0:48:45.279
<v Speaker 5>Democrats in Florida. That's the one seat that could be

0:48:45.320 --> 0:48:47.960
<v Speaker 5>competitive in the entire state. You know, pretty incredible. Almost

0:48:48.000 --> 0:48:51.040
<v Speaker 5>thirty congressional districts in this state, and at most one

0:48:51.120 --> 0:48:53.960
<v Speaker 5>or two of them would conceivably flip. They did a

0:48:54.040 --> 0:48:57.200
<v Speaker 5>very good job of gerrymandering that state when they redraw

0:48:57.280 --> 0:49:00.719
<v Speaker 5>the maps last cycle. But she's a kind of that

0:49:00.840 --> 0:49:04.360
<v Speaker 5>caucus that Austin Kevin McCarthy and has been causing so

0:49:04.480 --> 0:49:08.960
<v Speaker 5>much trouble for Republican leadership. She's the one who comes

0:49:08.960 --> 0:49:10.760
<v Speaker 5>from the swingiest district by far.

0:49:11.120 --> 0:49:15.959
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's so interesting. Thank you so much. Jacob Robashkan, Yeah,

0:49:16.000 --> 0:49:23.359
<v Speaker 1>powis a pleasure. No sick, Jesse Cannon.

0:49:23.920 --> 0:49:27.560
<v Speaker 6>My junk fast. You know, we all know that Trump

0:49:27.640 --> 0:49:30.239
<v Speaker 6>gets compared to a mob boss a lot, but trickling

0:49:30.280 --> 0:49:33.000
<v Speaker 6>down what all the people below him should say really

0:49:33.440 --> 0:49:34.840
<v Speaker 6>puts a fine note on it.

0:49:35.200 --> 0:49:39.520
<v Speaker 1>New York Magazine journalist Andrew Rice said he saw as

0:49:39.560 --> 0:49:42.640
<v Speaker 1>he was sitting in the courtroom, Donald Trump editing what

0:49:42.840 --> 0:49:47.120
<v Speaker 1>he was going to have his surrogate say, getting around

0:49:47.280 --> 0:49:51.520
<v Speaker 1>the gag order, having them malign the judge and his

0:49:51.719 --> 0:49:57.520
<v Speaker 1>daughter during his criminal trial while his former lawyer and fixer,

0:49:57.560 --> 0:50:02.960
<v Speaker 1>Michael Cohen testifies about his hush money payments to an

0:50:03.000 --> 0:50:07.560
<v Speaker 1>adult film star. That, my friends, is our moment of U.

0:50:07.800 --> 0:50:07.960
<v Speaker 3>Right.

0:50:09.120 --> 0:50:12.480
<v Speaker 1>That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in

0:50:12.520 --> 0:50:15.760
<v Speaker 1>every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to hear the best minds

0:50:15.760 --> 0:50:19.000
<v Speaker 1>in politics makes sense of all this chaos. If you

0:50:19.120 --> 0:50:21.800
<v Speaker 1>enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to a friend

0:50:21.840 --> 0:50:25.400
<v Speaker 1>and keep the conversation going. And again, thanks for listening.