Speaker 1: It's sponsorship time. But you know what, it's really great
Speaker 1: when you get a sponsor that you already use. And
Speaker 1: guess what. Quint's is something that in the Todd household
Speaker 1: we already go to. Why do we go to Quint's
Speaker 1: Because it's a place you go where you can get
Speaker 1: some really nice clothes without the really expensive prices. And
Speaker 1: one of the things I've been going through is I've
Speaker 1: transitioned from being mister cot and ty guy to wanting
Speaker 1: a little more casual but to look nice doing it.
Speaker 1: Is I've become mister quarter zip guy. Well guess what.
Speaker 1: Guess who's got amazing amounts of quarter zips? It is Quints.
Speaker 1: I have gotten quite a few already from there. The
Speaker 1: stuff's really nice. They have Mongolian cashmere sweaters for fifty dollars.
Speaker 1: I just know, hey, cashmere, that's pretty good. You don't
Speaker 1: normally get that for fifty bucks or less. Italian wool
Speaker 1: coats that look and feel like designer the stuff. I'll
Speaker 1: be honest, right, you look at it online, you think, okay,
Speaker 1: is this really as nice as it looks? Well, when
Speaker 1: I got it, I was like, oh, this is real quality.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I'm going to end up making sure I
Speaker 1: take it to my dry cleaner so I don't screw
Speaker 1: it up when I clean it. But I've been quite impressed.
Speaker 1: In Hey, it's holiday season. It is impossible to shop
Speaker 1: for us middle aged men. I know this well. Tell
Speaker 1: your kids, tell your spouses, tell your partners. Try Quints.
Speaker 1: Or if you're trying to figure out what to get
Speaker 1: your adult child, what to get your mom or dad,
Speaker 1: I'm telling you you're gonna find something that is going
Speaker 1: to be comfortable for them on Quints. So get your
Speaker 1: wardrobe sorted and your gift list handled with quints. Don't wait.
Speaker 1: Go to quins dot com slash chuck for free shipping
Speaker 1: on your order and three hundred and sixty five day
Speaker 1: returns now available in Canada as well. That's qui nce
Speaker 1: dot com, slash chuck, free shipping and three hundred and
Speaker 1: sixty five day returns quints dot com slash chuck. Use
Speaker 1: that code. Well, joining me now for a little end
Speaker 1: of the year. Where the hell is Congress headed? Next
Speaker 1: is a good conversation with my friendly and Caldwell. She's
Speaker 1: the chief should the correspondent for Puck, which is more
Speaker 1: and more becoming a must read these days, Puck one
Speaker 1: of my Yeah, it's one of my look in this
Speaker 1: day and age of independent you know, where we have
Speaker 1: a lot of people questioning corporate owned media, shareholder controlled media,
Speaker 1: all of that nonsense. Independent owned news operations, I think
Speaker 1: are should be having a moment, and let's just say
Speaker 1: Puck's having a moment. How do you enjoy it?
Speaker 2: I love it. It's great. Actually, it's a good place
Speaker 2: to work. I get to cover what I want to cover. No, yeah,
Speaker 2: it's it's great. It's I don't really.
Speaker 1: Have You've been at the Washington Post at NBC. Right,
Speaker 1: It doesn't get more mainstream media than that. You and
Speaker 1: I got to know each other at NBC.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I hired me at NBC.
Speaker 1: I hired Well. I wasn't going to be so presumptuous,
Speaker 1: but I'd like to think I had good judgment here.
Speaker 1: What how do you answer the question of, hey, what's
Speaker 1: the difference between LeAnn called Well the reporter for Puck
Speaker 1: and Leanne called Well, the reporter for NBC and the
Speaker 1: Washington Post. How do you answer that question?
Speaker 2: Oh, my gosh, that's that No one's actually asked me
Speaker 2: that question in that way. I would say, there is
Speaker 2: not actually a lot of difference in my and how
Speaker 2: I approach my job specifically. I am still covering the hill,
Speaker 2: still covering politics. I think what is different is that
Speaker 2: I have changed my focus completely away from the incremental
Speaker 2: and I now think more deeply about the impacts of
Speaker 2: what's happening on the hill. I think about the big
Speaker 2: picture a lot more, and I really get to lean
Speaker 2: into kind of the conversations that are happening behind the
Speaker 2: scenes instead of what everyone is just saying publicly. You know.
Speaker 2: So I think that rather than my approach, it's more
Speaker 2: kind of the angle that's different.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I sort of answer it very similarly. I'll say,
Speaker 1: you know, look it, I don't have to worry about
Speaker 1: the busy work of Washington reporting. And what do we
Speaker 1: mean by the busy work of art? Look what you
Speaker 1: just described as incrementalism, like what time is this brief
Speaker 1: and going to be? Is this going to happen the
Speaker 1: next tomorrow or the next day? All important information that
Speaker 1: major news organizations it might be planning planning specials around it,
Speaker 1: or planning coverage or trying to These are all important
Speaker 1: things that you know, people didn't really understand that part
Speaker 1: of our job is when I was Chief White House correspondent,
Speaker 1: I felt it a lot more there than I did
Speaker 1: obviously meet the press. But which was and you certainly understood,
Speaker 1: which was the amount of logistics an operational information we
Speaker 1: had to spend our time gathering in order to help
Speaker 1: and again all necessary for the larger organization. And I'm
Speaker 1: not you know, oh the president, you know, take the
Speaker 1: presidential address. Well, suddenly I would have been working with
Speaker 1: our executives. What what are they looking for? What time?
Speaker 1: How much are they asking for? And it's like suddenly
Speaker 1: half my day is being chewed up by this logistical thing.
Speaker 1: It's like it's like at home spending half your day
Speaker 1: on hold with the cable company while you're trying to
Speaker 1: figure out how you're getting, you know, how they're going
Speaker 1: to come over to fix something, to not have to
Speaker 1: you know that was there are times that that would
Speaker 1: be thirty percent of your job.
Speaker 2: Right absolutely, yes, yes, because you have to as you
Speaker 2: well know, there's this production element that you have to
Speaker 2: be that the network needs and so you know, and
Speaker 2: my job as a reporter, of.
Speaker 1: Course, you and I are a questioning do they need it?
Speaker 1: Like you know, the amount I mean, I think that's
Speaker 1: the thing, Like, I mean, I didn't mean to cut
Speaker 1: you off there, but it's like, yes, if you think
Speaker 1: through if you think about the network through the prism,
Speaker 1: the older prism, then yeah, it makes sense. When you
Speaker 1: think about how consumers get information, it made no sense.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I mean that's that's an absolutely great point.
Speaker 2: And also it's like, you know, from a reporter standpoint,
Speaker 2: it was a lot of making sure you had what
Speaker 2: someone else had, and so there was very little ability
Speaker 2: to do original thought because it was always making sure
Speaker 2: that everyone, every network or every outlet was in the
Speaker 2: same place jaistically with the content.
Speaker 1: And oh, well, that's an important it's an important point.
Speaker 1: Let me put a put a signpost on that wall.
Speaker 1: Street journal is reporting that there's going to be a
Speaker 1: vote tomorrow on the ACA subsidies. Hey, Leanne, can you
Speaker 1: go check that out? Is it tomorrow? Right?
Speaker 2: Like you're like, can you confirm that?
Speaker 1: Yes? And it's like yeah, and maybe in the maybe
Speaker 1: confirming that information might get you another piece of information
Speaker 1: that can't help your reporting. Don't get me wrong, Like
Speaker 1: doing that was a totally useless exercise, you know, because
Speaker 1: you were then suddenly all right, well maybe you know
Speaker 1: what else can you tell me? And then suddenly you're like, Okay,
Speaker 1: now I learned a little bit something else. But if
Speaker 1: people wonder why the mainstream media sounds like group think, well,
Speaker 1: it's because all of our bosses are constantly asking us
Speaker 1: could we're constantly asking us to confirm everybody else's stories
Speaker 1: and that it would be kind of a circle jerk sometime.
Speaker 2: Totally. That's exactly what I tell people, you know, when
Speaker 2: you they ask a different version of the question you
Speaker 2: asked me. No one at PUCK has ever said, can
Speaker 2: you can affirm this? Like not once it's been It's amazing.
Speaker 2: I have spent zero time confirming other people's reporting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, let's talk about Congress this year. There are days
Speaker 1: you think, oh my god, the sky is falling, and
Speaker 1: there are days you're like, yeah, this is just another
Speaker 1: day in the life at Congress, and you know this
Speaker 1: is is this your fifth year covering Capitol Hill?
Speaker 2: No? Oh my godcha longer than that.
Speaker 1: Everything, the time space time continuum is just done for me.
Speaker 2: With Covidney right the day after Trump got elected first term.
Speaker 2: So what's that?
Speaker 1: So it's almost about nine years, So you're nine years,
Speaker 1: nine years you've been covering the Hill nine years. I
Speaker 1: could sit here and say you've covered a more dysfunctional
Speaker 1: version of Congress than when I started covering Capitol Hill
Speaker 1: in nineteen ninety three and ninety four going through there.
Speaker 1: And yet there were veterans back then who'd say, oh,
Speaker 1: you have no idea, you're covering a very this Gingrich era,
Speaker 1: so dysfunctional. Da da da da da. Right, like every
Speaker 1: there's always I'm mindful of the following fact everybody thinks
Speaker 1: they're time covering Congress specifically is the there's never been
Speaker 1: a time like this, And there's truth to that, right
Speaker 1: that we are sort of increasingly like out each Congress
Speaker 1: outdues the previous one in its dysfunctionality. So you've done
Speaker 1: it nine years, So you walk me through your nine
Speaker 1: years of dysfunctionality.
Speaker 2: Well, let me just say I'm gonna expand that a
Speaker 2: little bit. A lot of people do blame the Gingrich
Speaker 2: years for like going off the cliff. So I guess
Speaker 2: you were there at the beginning of what people now
Speaker 2: maybe it's real.
Speaker 1: You know what the Gingrit's apologists would say, It started
Speaker 1: with Jim Wright, and it started with the Democrats in
Speaker 1: eighty six when they insisted on seating that's called it's
Speaker 1: this fight called the Bloody Eighth, Indiana's eighth congressional district.
Speaker 1: A recount indicated that the Republican won. The Democrats didn't
Speaker 1: accept the recount, and they literally seeded the Democrat even
Speaker 1: though the recount had So the point is is that
Speaker 1: it's just like the judiciary wars, Terry Read's fault, It's
Speaker 1: bitch mcconno's fault. Guess what, guys, you all, you all
Speaker 1: broke it and you all have to pay the pottery
Speaker 1: barn Bill.
Speaker 2: Yeah, totally. So the past nine years during Trump, I guess,
Speaker 2: you know, Trump and then Biden and then Trump again.
Speaker 2: Now it's just you know, first four years of Trump,
Speaker 2: the story was what everyone how every Republican secretly hates Trump.
Speaker 2: Like the story would always be, can you react to
Speaker 2: whatever Trump tweeted it was Twitter back then, or whatever
Speaker 2: he said, and people would start to say, oh, I
Speaker 2: didn't see it, you know, try to dodge, but it
Speaker 2: was there was so little respect for the man, and
Speaker 2: that was always the story. Now and this Trump era,
Speaker 2: I almost feel like what people say about Trump behind
Speaker 2: the scenes doesn't even matter because they are doing whatever
Speaker 2: he wants publicly, handing away you know, so much of
Speaker 2: their congressional authority to Trump. Even if they don't like
Speaker 2: it and they complain about it, they're doing it and
Speaker 2: that's what matters, you know. The the first Trump term,
Speaker 2: of course, we went through an impeachment, all the investigations
Speaker 2: January sixth, which I was there for. Uh, and it that,
Speaker 2: you know, all of that has changed Congress so much,
Speaker 2: the lack of trust between the part parties. People just
Speaker 2: really don't like each other, you know, of.
Speaker 1: Course, and it's no longer theater. It used to be theater. Yeah,
Speaker 1: behind the scenes. Boy, let me tell you Tom Cole
Speaker 1: he gets along with everybody, and he may still get
Speaker 1: along with everybody right by the way, for what he's
Speaker 1: probably right. Everybody loves Tom Cole. You know, he's too
Speaker 1: he doesn't know how to be mean, which you know,
Speaker 1: but for the most part, you would hear it seemed
Speaker 1: more theater than not. And now it seems real, like
Speaker 1: this stuff's personal.
Speaker 2: It feels well, yeah, it's it's very personal. And it's
Speaker 2: not just for the member level too. The staffs don't
Speaker 2: really like each other like and that's like another layer
Speaker 2: where the staffs. You know, everyone kind of got the joke.
Speaker 2: And now, for the most part, there are very few
Speaker 2: people who hang Republicans who hang out with Democrats and
Speaker 2: vice versa. Yes, there are some.
Speaker 1: Is that just is that a generational phenomenon. I've gotten
Speaker 1: a sense that the younger congressional staffers are a bit
Speaker 1: more are well, I mean they were, they were They've
Speaker 1: learned politics in the social media era, which is a
Speaker 1: very which is to me, a very awful way to
Speaker 1: have learned politics. But they they sort of believe that
Speaker 1: their counterparts are what the social media caricature has created
Speaker 1: of them.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, I think that. I think that there is
Speaker 2: a lot of generational component to that. The people who
Speaker 2: have been there for a very long time, you know.
Speaker 1: Still they know how to still like work with the
Speaker 1: other side, or at least at least they know somebody
Speaker 1: they can work with on the other side.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, totally. And there's like the appropriators, you know,
Speaker 2: they have to work with each other, et cetera. But
Speaker 2: it's just, you know, January sixth did a lot a
Speaker 2: lot of damage, and it took years for it to
Speaker 2: kind of get back to a base level. And then
Speaker 2: now It's just I think that the Congress story is,
Speaker 2: you know, how diminished of an institution will Congress be
Speaker 2: by the end of Trump's first term. You know, I
Speaker 2: always question what if Mike Johnson's legacy is, if that's
Speaker 2: what it's going to be, if he's just going to
Speaker 2: kind of hand over the keys to the capital to
Speaker 2: the president.
Speaker 1: Well, it was interesting. We were you know, we've gone
Speaker 1: through these fits and starts of strong speakers and week speakers.
Speaker 1: It was a strong speaker, Tom Foley was a week
Speaker 1: Jim Wright. Tom Jim Wright wanted to be a strong speaker.
Speaker 1: It sort of got him out, It sort of cost
Speaker 1: him the speakership. Fully was a week speaker. Gingrich was
Speaker 1: a strong speaker. Then we had hasted extraordinarily weak speaker.
Speaker 1: Very much more in the lines of the Mike Johnson right, Uh,
Speaker 1: Pelosi brought strength again to the speakership, and then it
Speaker 1: sort of was trying to encourage Bayner wanted to be
Speaker 1: a strong speaker. He got thrown out for being one. Right,
Speaker 1: Ryan wanted to try to you know, he was trying
Speaker 1: to it sort of re establish the speakership. It all,
Speaker 1: you know, it sort of arguably why he left slash
Speaker 1: cost him his role. So I agree with you on Johnson,
Speaker 1: but I don't know whether I mean, I think he's
Speaker 1: going to go down as probably an even weaker speaker
Speaker 1: than Dennis Aster. I think it's just saying something.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so. I mean, especially how this Congress,
Speaker 2: this session of this Congress ended up.
Speaker 1: We're not and we're not done, right, Like, I mean
Speaker 1: this Congress, you know, this.
Speaker 2: Year of this Sea Congress. Yeah, right, and the last
Speaker 2: week was tumultuous.
Speaker 1: Well, and it's been tumultuous arguably for the last two months. Right.
Speaker 1: There was that day where you had a party on
Speaker 1: party crime, right, you had the Democrats trying to censure
Speaker 1: another Democrat. Republicans were met. I mean, it seemed I
Speaker 1: was talking with Mike Turner the day after it happened,
Speaker 1: and he goes, he said, the only thing missing were
Speaker 1: the canes, you know, where they were just going to
Speaker 1: start like actually physically assaulting each other. But that, I mean,
Speaker 1: the damage Johnson did to the Institution by keeping them
Speaker 1: away during the government shutdown, I mean that turned out
Speaker 1: to be just a massive miscalculation by his part, wasn't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he literally wrote the Institution irrelevance and it I
Speaker 2: was shocked at the number of Republicans who were okay
Speaker 2: with it, but it proved it. Yeah, it proved to
Speaker 2: be a massive mistake. They are going to come out
Speaker 2: as being extremely unproductive. They could have been working on
Speaker 2: other things. They're way behind, and it just broke a
Speaker 2: lot of trust within the party because one thing, a
Speaker 2: couple of Republicans actually during that process had said to
Speaker 2: me that one of the things that happens, especially like
Speaker 2: during a government shutdown, and you know, the leaders aren't
Speaker 2: talking to each other and everything stalemated, but then it's like,
Speaker 2: you know, all the rank and files they're bored, and
Speaker 2: so they start talking to each other and they're like,
Speaker 2: we're over this. Let's not that their bipartisan plans ever
Speaker 2: become reality, but they're talking. Starts to put pressure on leaders,
Speaker 2: and he completely eliminated that aspect of what legislators want
Speaker 2: to feel is like they are having some sort of
Speaker 2: input or say or impact, and he negated that entire
Speaker 2: underspoken element of what the shutdown and what just kind
Speaker 2: of like the day to day job is.
Speaker 1: So, why do I think we are underplaying the possibility
Speaker 1: of another shutdown? In January. Why do we assume there
Speaker 1: won't be one. It feels like to me all the
Speaker 1: ingredients are there for another shutdown in January.
Speaker 2: I think that based on my discussions with Democrats so far,
Speaker 2: very preliminary, but they feel like they came out so
Speaker 2: much on top of the last shutdown. They completely changed
Speaker 2: the narrative to healthcare, obviously an issue that they are
Speaker 2: very comfortable with, and Republicans, as we see, cannot just
Speaker 2: a mess, yeah, not deal with and so the risk
Speaker 2: of another shutdown the base might get mad, but the
Speaker 2: risk of another shutdown could absolutely like eliminate all of
Speaker 2: this goodwill with voters that they have built up by
Speaker 2: fighting quote fighting for health care.
Speaker 1: Having good life insurance is incredibly important. I know from
Speaker 1: personal experience. I was sixteen when my father passed away.
Speaker 1: We didn't have any money. He didn't leave us in
Speaker 1: the best shape. My mother, single mother, now widow, myself
Speaker 1: sixteen trying to figure out how am I going to
Speaker 1: pay for college and lo and behold, my dad had
Speaker 1: one life insurance policy that we found wasn't a lot,
Speaker 1: but it was important at the time, and it's why
Speaker 1: I was able to go to college. Little did he
Speaker 1: know how important that would be in that moment. Well,
Speaker 1: guess what. That's why I am here to tell you
Speaker 1: about Etho's life. They can provide you with peace of
Speaker 1: mind knowing your family is protected even if the worst
Speaker 1: comes to pass. Ethos is an online platform that makes
Speaker 1: getting life insurance fast and easy, all designed to protect
Speaker 1: your family's future in minutes, not months. There's no complicated process,
Speaker 1: and it's one hundred percent online. There's no medical exam
Speaker 1: require you just answer a few health questions online. You
Speaker 1: can get a quote in as little as ten minutes,
Speaker 1: and you can get same day coverage without ever leaving
Speaker 1: your home. You can get up to three million dollars
Speaker 1: in coverage, and some policies start as low as two
Speaker 1: dollars a day that would be billed monthly. As of
Speaker 1: March twenty twenty five, Business Insider named Ethos the number
Speaker 1: one no medical exam instant life insurance provider. So protect
Speaker 1: your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get your free
Speaker 1: quot at ethos dot com slash chuck. So again, that's
Speaker 1: Ethos dot com slash chuck. Application times may vary and
Speaker 1: the rates themselves may vary as well, but trust me
Speaker 1: life insurance is something you should really think about it,
Speaker 1: especially if you've got a growing family. Let me ask
Speaker 1: it this way, though, do they everything that they've gained
Speaker 1: by sounding the alarm about healthcare at the time? Right
Speaker 1: the whole? Though? You know, in theory, why did they
Speaker 1: Why did they instigate the shutdown to sound the alarm
Speaker 1: on healthcare subsidies? So if we still don't have if
Speaker 1: we have an alarming problem on healthcare premium skyrocketing, which
Speaker 1: they're going to be, and already being quoted on huge
Speaker 1: prices for people, how do you not do whatever it
Speaker 1: takes in January when there's an opportunity to essentially corner
Speaker 1: the Republican majority to get them you know, the point
Speaker 1: is do you just want the issue or do you
Speaker 1: want to put it, you know, force them to deal
Speaker 1: with this problem? Now?
Speaker 2: I mean, I think Democrats absolutely want the issue. It's
Speaker 2: good politics for them. You know, they would never say
Speaker 2: that or admit it, but they do know that the
Speaker 2: issue helps them. But there is actually some I think
Speaker 2: overly optimistic belief that there are some chances for some
Speaker 2: bipartisan agreement and anyway, I.
Speaker 1: Think something's coming. I do, well, this is a I
Speaker 1: think that is coming. But b I think you have
Speaker 1: to use the threat of a shutdown to get it done.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I think that they, you know, maybe they
Speaker 2: go there. Like I said, it's it's it's early. They
Speaker 2: definitely do not want people to start, any of their
Speaker 2: members to start threatening a shutdown right now, because then
Speaker 2: they look like arsonists and and so, you know, obviously
Speaker 2: it's very much it's very much a possibility. I personally,
Speaker 2: I don't think that they're going to do it. I
Speaker 2: think that they're too risk averse to do it.
Speaker 1: But I expected Trump to flip on this and he hasn't.
Speaker 1: He's digging in and he dug in again last night,
Speaker 1: and it's like I, I, you know, there's a part
Speaker 1: of me that's you know, it sits there and says, well, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'd love to you. I would beat up the insurance
Speaker 1: companies too, like why do we want to give more
Speaker 1: money that? But then my response, my follow up is
Speaker 1: what's the alternative system to insurance companies? Mister president? Right, Like,
Speaker 1: this is the problem the Republicans have, Well, we don't
Speaker 1: want to subsidize insurance companies. How else are we giving
Speaker 1: people healthcare?
Speaker 2: Yeah? No, you're going to give them money to the
Speaker 2: people instead, but you still have to pay the insurance company.
Speaker 1: Right like the people, right, not of it. Really, it
Speaker 1: feels like a great it feels good to say it.
Speaker 1: We're not going to give it directly to the insurance companies.
Speaker 1: We're going to give it to you to give directly
Speaker 1: to the insurance companies.
Speaker 2: I know. I was actually surprised too, because there's the
Speaker 2: populis strain in the Republican Party that Trump purportedly believes in,
Speaker 2: which we all know he doesn't.
Speaker 1: That.
Speaker 2: Thinks that these Obamacare subsidies need to be extended, at
Speaker 2: least for now, until there's another plan or whatever. You know.
Speaker 2: Josh Holly is one of those people who's really been
Speaker 2: pushing it, and I thought that he was going to
Speaker 2: give into but he did not, And I you know,
Speaker 2: and I'm.
Speaker 1: Just you know, it's his own polster telling everybody that
Speaker 1: this is a disaster in the making.
Speaker 2: Yah.
Speaker 1: It's Tony Fabrizio that has been sounding this alarm, which
Speaker 1: is why I expected him to flip.
Speaker 2: Sorry, yeah, no, I was gonna say. But I think
Speaker 2: that I'm only speculating here, But you know, I think
Speaker 2: that a lot of it has to do with the
Speaker 2: fact that it is Obama Care, that there is a
Speaker 2: lot of disdain for anything Biden. I mean, his whole
Speaker 2: presidency so far has been undoing what Biden did, and
Speaker 2: he obviously hates Barack Obama and so not wanting to
Speaker 2: prop up something that his predecessor did and like creating
Speaker 2: this healthcare system, and that that is a big that's
Speaker 2: a big issue on the Hill too. A lot of
Speaker 2: a reason I've been told by multiple Republicans that they
Speaker 2: were so resistant for extending these subsidies is because fifteen
Speaker 2: years ago they vowed to never do anything to support
Speaker 2: the Affordable Care Act, and that stance from you know,
Speaker 2: almost two decades ago is staying with them now. So
Speaker 2: you could say, regardless of what the Affordable Care Act
Speaker 2: issue is, so there's some Republicans who will not do anything.
Speaker 1: So basically, while Donald Trump thinks everybody's got Trump Arrangement syndrome,
Speaker 1: what you're saying is that there are a lot of
Speaker 1: Republicans who still have Obama derangement syndrome.
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 1: That ultimately is the virus that has not been cured.
Speaker 2: Yeah. No, I mean, and actually Josh Holly will say
Speaker 2: that on the record too. He'll say, look in these
Speaker 2: private meetings, the closed door meetings with Senate Republicans, there
Speaker 2: are just people who are so dug in on anything
Speaker 2: anti Obamacare that they just won't even consider it.
Speaker 1: It really is such an intell it's such an intellectual, intellectual,
Speaker 1: dishonest argument, right, because what Obamacare turned out to be
Speaker 1: was was essentially not government health care, but government support
Speaker 1: supporting a market based system that was essentially run by
Speaker 1: the private sector. Because what Democrats wanted to do they
Speaker 1: couldn't because the insurance companies made it clear that they
Speaker 1: were going to destroy any you know, they just you
Speaker 1: know what, Clinton tried to take the insurance companies out
Speaker 1: of this. Well, guess what, right it just they lost
Speaker 1: that argument. And the irony is that this was a
Speaker 1: this was a Heritage Foundation idea that Mitt Romney put
Speaker 1: in the Massachusetts that Bama Obama ends up implemating. I mean,
Speaker 1: the anger that these Republicans have had an idea that
Speaker 1: was originally incubated at the Heritage Foundation when it was
Speaker 1: an actual conservative think tank and not what it's turned
Speaker 1: into in the last year or two is is still
Speaker 1: like this this ironic pill that none of them seem
Speaker 1: to want to want to admit to.
Speaker 2: Take and admit yeah, because remember Obamacare, the compromise is
Speaker 2: what Democrats wanted was a single payer plan and this
Speaker 2: is the best that they could get. They literally, like
Speaker 2: you said, and.
Speaker 1: You know what Trump wants. What Trump has been advocating
Speaker 1: is a form of a single payer plan. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: he actually had. Anytime he talks about it, it's the
Speaker 1: closest you know, he comes to. You know, it is
Speaker 1: it is. It is amazing to me how often that
Speaker 1: they messed this up, right, Like, you know, look, Democrats
Speaker 1: seem to be allergic to border security. Right, there is
Speaker 1: just some right you see it. You know, sometimes you're like,
Speaker 1: how is it that you guys don't see that the
Speaker 1: public is pro immigration, legal immigration, but wants some border security.
Speaker 1: Like it's okay to lead with that. It's the same
Speaker 1: thing with Republicans and there it's there's something right, like
Speaker 1: both parties have this, and to me, these are the
Speaker 1: two issues that do the right where they don't think straight.
Speaker 1: They never think like the average person. They're so dug
Speaker 1: in on a specific piece of their you know, their
Speaker 1: rationale for obstructing on that issue that they can't acknowledge another.
Speaker 2: Part of this, you know, yeah, I mean it's a
Speaker 2: great This is an issue that is obviously confounded Republicans
Speaker 2: for decades. I mean, this is a hard issue. It
Speaker 2: took Democrats really, I mean, you know, Hillary Kinkin, like
Speaker 2: you said, had her plan that didn't go anywhere.
Speaker 1: If you if you're going to let the private sector
Speaker 1: deal with healthcare, there, you know the system is going
Speaker 1: to always look this gobbledly good. You know, we're allergic
Speaker 1: to government run stuff here, right, unless it's so security,
Speaker 1: unless it's better, you know, but it is, you know,
Speaker 1: they're all I am surprised that Trump didn't just expand
Speaker 1: Medicare and call it trump Care.
Speaker 2: I know.
Speaker 1: I mean he could have brought it down to fifty plus,
Speaker 1: said no to the subsidies, but brought that down to
Speaker 1: fifty plus, that letting people buy into Medicare at fifty
Speaker 1: years old, rather than the you know, you'd had Democrats
Speaker 1: supporting that idea. I mean, like there was a way
Speaker 1: for them to put their own Yeah, there's a way
Speaker 1: to put their own signature on this in a way
Speaker 1: that could you know, that would appease certain parts of
Speaker 1: the left, absolutely, but would also make up for a
Speaker 1: more sensible system that actually business wouldn't hate well.
Speaker 2: And also that's why during the government shutdown, Democrats I
Speaker 2: thought it was kind of lame at first or dumb
Speaker 2: at first that they were so focused on what Trump
Speaker 2: was saying and what Trump was going to do. But
Speaker 2: I came to realize towards the end that Republicans couldn't
Speaker 2: do anything without Trump, and so they put all of
Speaker 2: their focus on and well, what, you know, what is
Speaker 2: Trump gonna do? And when Trump, you know, didn't come
Speaker 2: out in support of, you know, the bipartisan efforts, then
Speaker 2: they knew it was just it was just it was
Speaker 2: just done. But you know, I think that this also
Speaker 2: gets into which I wrote about for Sunday, is how
Speaker 2: little Trump thinks about Congress in the sense of he
Speaker 2: doesn't think any more legislation needs to come through the Hill.
Speaker 2: He said in October that he's done with legislating. He
Speaker 2: said it again in December, He's done. They don't need
Speaker 2: another bill. And you know, Trump just thinks that he
Speaker 2: can do everything that matters through executive order. And the
Speaker 2: reality is that Republicans cannot get anything through Congress without Trump,
Speaker 2: and so they're in this position where they need the president,
Speaker 2: but the press resident is done with them. He got
Speaker 2: his tax extenders, he got his money for immigration enforcement,
Speaker 2: and he was able to reverse like all the clean
Speaker 2: clean energy stuff through the one big, beautiful bill. And
Speaker 2: so there's nothing else that he cares about on the Hill.
Speaker 1: So there's not going to be another reconciliation, huh.
Speaker 2: I mean members of Congres like Speaker Johnson says that
Speaker 2: there he's going to try. He wants one, other members
Speaker 2: of Congres, other Republicans want it, but if Trump's not involved,
Speaker 2: they can't get it. That's why healthcare fell apart, is
Speaker 2: because Trump completely absent.
Speaker 1: Well, it's because you know, I've been calling Mike Johnson
Speaker 1: a Spino speaker in name only.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yes, yes, you know.
Speaker 1: I keep I keep hoping this will, you know, the
Speaker 1: way Scotis and Potus takes off Rhino and Dino Spino
Speaker 1: right speaker, And I keep waiting for that to to
Speaker 1: get some traction. But it is, it's up to Trump
Speaker 1: and there so if Trump's got I mean, the only
Speaker 1: thing he wants from Congress, I'm guessing is him is
Speaker 1: a Congressional order changing the name of the Kennedy Senator
Speaker 1: to the Trump Kennedy Center, right, like that that that's
Speaker 1: about all he would care about getting out of Congress.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I mean look at the look at the
Speaker 2: military pay that he announced.
Speaker 1: That's money that was already appropriated to the Defense Department.
Speaker 1: And it's discretionary. It's essentially discretionary housing allowance, right.
Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely, And he is claiming that it's tariff revenue money.
Speaker 2: He's not even admitting that Congress passed this because like
Speaker 2: he just is not.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's not the first president to try to
Speaker 1: take something that was already done and put a new
Speaker 1: label on it and stamp it. Hey, look at I've done, right, Like,
Speaker 1: you know, oh, we're giving the military extra money. Well
Speaker 1: let's call it my pay raise, you know, or my bonus.
Speaker 2: Or right totally. But like, why don't you just say,
Speaker 2: look at what we passed or whatever, rather than say
Speaker 2: it's from tariff revenue, which actually is a I don't
Speaker 2: know why he would say it anyways, because then he'd
Speaker 2: have to take them, well, repay their tariff money if
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court rules.
Speaker 1: So this gets to a question about the next six months,
Speaker 1: because it's interesting, you don't think there's really much legislating
Speaker 1: that's going to happen other than what they have to
Speaker 1: the have to stuff that we're not going to see
Speaker 1: an a want twos. Okay, Well, one of the half
Speaker 1: twos that might come is if the Supreme Court rules
Speaker 1: the way most of us expect the Supreme Court rule
Speaker 1: on the president's tariff authority or lack thereof, and he
Speaker 1: will need you know, in theory, he has appliant appliant House,
Speaker 1: at least a House Republican conference that I think in
Speaker 1: probably he can get anything out of them. Senate's going
Speaker 1: to be a harder lift on tariffs. I mean, I
Speaker 1: think we all know that. Does that not change his
Speaker 1: tune about the necessity of and he would want reconciliation
Speaker 1: on terif authority because you know, he needs to afford
Speaker 1: to lose Republican votes on those.
Speaker 2: I mean, yes, So I had heard from you know,
Speaker 2: outside from lobbyists who say that they are already considering
Speaker 2: like how to go to Congress for for how to
Speaker 2: pass the tariffs. I you know, I don't even know
Speaker 2: if House Republicans will do it, though.
Speaker 1: Check.
Speaker 2: I think that as polling is continuing to as polling
Speaker 2: is suggesting that people are starting to tie tariffs with
Speaker 2: high costs. These Republicans who are facing voters in you know,
Speaker 2: a few months from whenever this tariff decision comes out,
Speaker 2: I just don't see them giving Trump like blanket authority
Speaker 2: to continue this tariff regime. Definitely in the Senate and
Speaker 2: even in the House, we'll see. But I just I
Speaker 2: really think that, you know, outside circumstances are going to
Speaker 2: dictate this, the play circumstances and the economic circumstances. But
Speaker 2: if things are how they are now, I'm not sure
Speaker 2: if even they'd be on board.
Speaker 1: Well, I do expect the White House to find other
Speaker 1: I mean even the President has sort of hinted, he goes, well,
Speaker 1: if they take it away, I've got other ways to
Speaker 1: do this. But it will be harder, and it will
Speaker 1: be more complicated, and it will get in the way
Speaker 1: of his so called deal making that he's done, that's
Speaker 1: for sure. So if if if there really isn't going
Speaker 1: to be much legislating, then how many more retirements are
Speaker 1: you know? I mean to me, that's the that's going
Speaker 1: to be the the the story of the next three weeks,
Speaker 1: right is how many members decide over the holidays. I'm out,
Speaker 1: I'm done.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know. So I wrote and reported a couple
Speaker 2: of weeks ago that people were Republicans were really bracing
Speaker 2: for a lot of retirements.
Speaker 1: What is a lot another dozen?
Speaker 2: Well, I was told at least twenty.
Speaker 1: Another twenty. We already are at a fairly Look this
Speaker 1: is we're in the higher end of the retirements. It's
Speaker 1: nowhere near the all time record, but we're at the
Speaker 1: higher end. Another twenty would put us in an all
Speaker 1: time situation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so we'll see if that plays out. I was
Speaker 2: told that obviously a lot of these people are still
Speaker 2: making their decisions but serving, you know. And the Republicans
Speaker 2: that some of the Republicans I talked to, they were like, look,
Speaker 2: don't don't don't make this a a that most of
Speaker 2: these people are from safe seats really or maybe that
Speaker 2: second or third tier competitive seat, but it is an
Speaker 2: indictment on what it's like to serve in Congress right now?
Speaker 2: Are you going to put up if you have any
Speaker 2: sort of familial strife or member is sick, or there's
Speaker 2: you know, things going on in your family that's not perfect,
Speaker 2: in your life that's not perfect, Why would you do
Speaker 2: this like in a when The job is fun when
Speaker 2: you're successful, when you're passing legislation, you can overcome that stuff.
Speaker 2: But then you're you start to weigh things differently, and
Speaker 2: you know, I'm told that like the Texas Republicans are,
Speaker 2: and of course the California Republicans are just pissed. They
Speaker 2: are mad about the redistricting effort.
Speaker 1: We're mad at the White House and Johnson. Right, they're
Speaker 1: somehow mad that Johnson can't tell the President no, that's
Speaker 1: I guess what they're mad at him at right.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, they are not standing up for them, especially
Speaker 2: on the redistricting effort. Even though some of these seats
Speaker 2: were made safer for Republicans. People don't like to.
Speaker 1: But they're new districts. You have to be.
Speaker 2: New with new lines and meet new people and fundraising.
Speaker 1: Now, this is one of those perfect storms. The times
Speaker 1: that we've had record breaking retirements are when we've had
Speaker 1: both an unpopp the majority party is in the White
Speaker 1: House and it's unpopular, coupled with a reapportionment. Right, it's
Speaker 1: a redistricting year. Nineteen ninety two is one of the
Speaker 1: ninety four cycle sort of was a big one on
Speaker 1: that both ninety two and ninety fourths or two cycles
Speaker 1: in a row, and here we are in a mid decade.
Speaker 1: But it's both an unpopular majority party that they're facing,
Speaker 1: which is sort of the typical six year itch type
Speaker 1: of mindset, and it happens to there's a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of redistricting that happened, and so you don't want to
Speaker 1: you already fighting an uphill battle, and you know, do
Speaker 1: I really I know I'm in a fifty nine percent district,
Speaker 1: but fifty nine percent districts might be swing districts. I
Speaker 1: don't want to have to raise ten million dollars.
Speaker 2: This cycle, right, totally, totally. And one member from a
Speaker 2: swing district, you know, said that they're going to have
Speaker 2: to raise tens of millions of dollars for you know,
Speaker 2: they're in a big media market whatever. But you know,
Speaker 2: they just said that they're race could be a sixty
Speaker 2: million dollar race for not you know, total, but for
Speaker 2: a district, which is which is mind boggling these days.
Speaker 1: And you know, you know, I've never been like a
Speaker 1: huge the whole money in politics thing like I've I've
Speaker 1: I've I empathized with those that fight, you know, that
Speaker 1: are in that advocacy world, and it's just like, hey man,
Speaker 1: money in politics, it's just you're never going to you know,
Speaker 1: get rid of it. But but you do. You're like, Okay,
Speaker 1: this is getting crazy because North Carolina Senate, it's probably
Speaker 1: going to be our first billion dollar centuri one billion
Speaker 1: with a B. Main's going to be six hundred million
Speaker 1: is an estimate. Maine, Okay, Like no, ma, right, and
Speaker 1: it like you're going to buy Boston to get the
Speaker 1: tiniest piece of like of the southern tier of Portland. Right,
Speaker 1: it is we are we have hit absurd levels on
Speaker 1: money where if you don't have access to rich people,
Speaker 1: you can't run for office. And that is where suddenly
Speaker 1: when Bernie Sanders runs around saying oligarchy, you're like, well,
Speaker 1: I how do you, holse? Do you what do you
Speaker 1: call it? Where everybody that runs for office has to
Speaker 1: have a rich person on their side in order to win.
Speaker 2: Yeah, or be rich. It's you know, I was talking
Speaker 2: to a couple members the other day and they said
Speaker 2: that now fifty percent of their time is spent fundraising.
Speaker 2: And you know, I mean, I don't even know how
Speaker 2: you find the time. You barely sleep, But that is
Speaker 2: just miserable to have to sit there and call people
Speaker 2: and call people, and you know, and there's a point
Speaker 2: of everyone admits that there's a point of diminishing returns,
Speaker 2: that too much money actually stops working, but you still
Speaker 2: have to raise it, and you still have to spend it.
Speaker 1: Do you hate hangovers, well, say goodbye to hangovers. Out
Speaker 1: of Office gives you the social bus uzz without the
Speaker 1: next day regret. Their best selling Out Office gummies were
Speaker 1: designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, boost your mood,
Speaker 1: and enhance creativity and relaxation. With five different strengths, you
Speaker 1: can tailor the dose to fit your vibe. From a
Speaker 1: gentle one point five milligram micro doose to their newest
Speaker 1: fifteen milligram gummy for a more elevated experience. Their THHC
Speaker 1: beverages and gummies are a modern, mindful alternative to a
Speaker 1: glass of wine or a cocktail. And I'll tell you this,
Speaker 1: I've given up booze. I don't like the hangovers. I
Speaker 1: prefer the gummy experience. Soul is a wellness brand that
Speaker 1: believes feeling good should be fun and easy. Soul specializes
Speaker 1: in delicious HEMP derived THHD and CBD products all designed
Speaker 1: to boost your mood and simply help you unwine. So
Speaker 1: if you struggle to switch off at night, SOL also
Speaker 1: has a variety of products specifically designed to just simply
Speaker 1: help you get a better night's sleep, including their top
Speaker 1: selling Sleepy Gummies. It's a fan favorite for deep restorative sleep.
Speaker 1: So bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to
Speaker 1: Soul today. Right now, SOL is offering my audience thirty
Speaker 1: percent off your entire order. So go to get sold
Speaker 1: dot Com use the promo code toodcast. Don't forget that code.
Speaker 1: That's get sold dot Com promo code toodcast for thirty
Speaker 1: percent off. And all those donors, you know, it's funny
Speaker 1: now the million dollar donor thinks, hey, I give a
Speaker 1: million dollars, I expect some I expect something I expect,
Speaker 1: you know, And the average member of Congress going, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I'll jump, I'll uh, I'll jump if you're
Speaker 1: a ten million dollar donor. But a million dollar donors,
Speaker 1: there's a get you know, I joke. I give a
Speaker 1: little bit of money to the nursery of Miami Athletic Department.
Speaker 1: I also give money to my alma Monter GW basketball.
Speaker 1: I give less GW basketball, but they're more grateful because
Speaker 1: I'm a It's a smaller pool, right when you're part
Speaker 1: of you think you think you're giving a lot of money,
Speaker 1: and you're like, yeah, there's there's fifty people ahead of
Speaker 1: you that give all the you know, and they going
Speaker 1: to get the priority, and they're going to get the
Speaker 1: attention and they're going to get the love and affection
Speaker 1: and all of that stuff. So a million dollars doesn't
Speaker 1: even buy what it used to buy anymore when it
Speaker 1: comes to donors, which is just perverted. I'm sorry, just
Speaker 1: perverting the system. The system's already a mess.
Speaker 2: Well, then Trump has, you know, a billion dollars of
Speaker 2: his own money that he could spend to help House
Speaker 2: Republicans keep the majority. He hasn't yet. He has said
Speaker 2: that he will help, but they have not yet gotten
Speaker 2: a commitment as to how much, how what that's going
Speaker 2: to look like. And I'm really interested. I don't know
Speaker 2: the answer to this yet, but I'm really interested, Like,
Speaker 2: is he going to spend a bunch of money to
Speaker 2: try to primary state senators who don't go along with redistricting,
Speaker 2: which will have no impact on control of the House.
Speaker 1: But no, you're probably just dividing your own party and
Speaker 1: just making it that much harder to have a good
Speaker 1: mature Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely. And you know, and getting back to the
Speaker 2: lack of legislating. Trump is so determined to keep control
Speaker 2: of the House that he unleashed this entire bloody redistricting
Speaker 2: war for what not to legislate because he does not
Speaker 2: want to get impeached again.
Speaker 1: Like, so, what's the likelihood of that? I mean, I
Speaker 1: find it.
Speaker 2: I think I think it's low.
Speaker 1: I don't think I think it's I can't think of
Speaker 1: a dumber idea for House Democrats in the seventh year
Speaker 1: of Trump being in president of the United States to
Speaker 1: impeach him. I mean, look, I'm not saying you might
Speaker 1: have grounds to do it. I'm not saying to me,
Speaker 1: if if the next group, if if people want to
Speaker 1: impeach him, let the Republicans impeach him.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no, I agree, And I think that it's I
Speaker 2: think that Democrats aren't going to do it. We'll see
Speaker 2: what Trump does. But yeah, so he's operating. Trump is
Speaker 2: operating out of this PTSD from his first term in
Speaker 2: these impeachments, and that's why he wants to prevent Democrats
Speaker 2: from winning the House has nothing to do with his
Speaker 2: agenda or his goals or what he wants to do
Speaker 2: for the country.
Speaker 1: All right, of the let's talk about the four leaders, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Johnson Jeffrey Schumer. Soon, let's start with who I think
Speaker 1: are the two most unpopular within their own party these
Speaker 1: days for a variety of reasons. Johnson on the Republican side,
Speaker 1: Schumer on the Democratic side. Who's more likely to return
Speaker 1: as leader of their of You know, in this case,
Speaker 1: Johnson might be the minority leader, but he would still
Speaker 1: be the leader if Republicans lose the House come January fourth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty seven. I mean, who's still going to be there,
Speaker 1: Schumer or Johnson?
Speaker 2: I think Schumer I don't think he'll be there, Yeah,
Speaker 2: and Johnson won't Yeah. I mean, of course, it all
Speaker 2: will depend on the outcome of the.
Speaker 1: Miss Johnson only come back if they somehow hold the House.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. If they lose the House, I think that
Speaker 2: there's going to be a huge shake up in leadership.
Speaker 1: On likelihood that Johnson seeks reelection, so.
Speaker 2: He'll serve you know for twenty eight you mean, no,
Speaker 2: I think for you think he definitely runs through re
Speaker 2: election this cycle, right, I think he definitely runs.
Speaker 1: Because that would send does he because remember Paul Ryan
Speaker 1: announced in April, right of eighteen he wasn't coming back. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you don't expect something like that from Johnson.
Speaker 2: I don't. Johnson thinks way too highly of himself and
Speaker 2: his ability to bow out. Now. Yeah, I think he's
Speaker 2: in it for this cycle. I think that if Republicans
Speaker 2: lose the House, you know, they lose that slot, and
Speaker 2: so there's not a spot for him unless he becomes
Speaker 2: leader minority leader. But then there's that's the person. I
Speaker 2: don't know if he's going to run for reelection as Scalise.
Speaker 2: I think he's a higher probability of not than Johnson.
Speaker 2: For sure.
Speaker 1: He's already found out he's never gonna be speaker, yea, right,
Speaker 1: he learned that the hard way in his was he
Speaker 1: six hours that he tried to get the votes. Was
Speaker 1: that what it was about, right, like, okay, go ahead,
Speaker 1: you get about six hours so you can get the
Speaker 1: votes and get the votes. Okay, let's move on.
Speaker 2: Yeah. No, yeah, he's not going to be speaker. He
Speaker 2: just hasn't. He doesn't have the allies among the conference
Speaker 2: that you need. He has made a lot of people angry.
Speaker 2: And then who does.
Speaker 1: Who would be Is there a committee chair? In fact,
Speaker 1: is there a committee chair that just gets shipped done
Speaker 1: on the Republican side that would be like like I
Speaker 1: remember one of the reasons, but Bob Livingston was supposed
Speaker 1: to be the person to replace kingrig and the reason
Speaker 1: was I think he was on ways and me just
Speaker 1: like you know, he gets stuff done, Like you know
Speaker 1: the idea that a committee chair that can get stuff done,
Speaker 1: especially in a tough committee like ways and Means or
Speaker 1: approbes or something like that, or even rules that it like, Okay,
Speaker 1: if you know how to do that, then maybe you've
Speaker 1: got the skill set to be to be Speaker or
Speaker 1: to be leader of the caucus. Who's the committee chair
Speaker 1: that knows what they're doing?
Speaker 2: Jim Jordan, He's He's he's the quiet, which is crazy
Speaker 2: that he's quiet if you know quiet, and that's why
Speaker 2: he is subtle.
Speaker 1: He's very He's going to give this one more college
Speaker 1: tries to be leader of the House Republicans.
Speaker 2: In Yeah, So I think it's Jim Jordan. I think
Speaker 2: that Tom Emmer he has some enemies too, But he
Speaker 2: really has a good relationship with the Freedom Caucus, and
Speaker 2: so I think he could have a shot. He has
Speaker 2: built he's like worked really hard to build that relationship
Speaker 2: with Trump and so those are this just.
Speaker 1: Still shaky, though, isn't it.
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, I think it's gotten a lot
Speaker 2: better this year, especially with he's the guy who kind
Speaker 2: of has to clean up Johnson's mess a lot, or
Speaker 2: try to. And Richard Hudson, Yeah, you know Richard Hudson.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's the one that I get, like, I hear good,
Speaker 1: I hear people don't have bad words to say about him,
Speaker 1: whether they're mega or non mega.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and everyone like really likes him. He's like a
Speaker 2: fun person. I don't want the job, but but yeah,
Speaker 2: you know, I forgot about him actually, but yeah, he's
Speaker 2: someone that you can keep in mind. But as far
Speaker 2: as like Schumer is concerned, you know Schumer, I do
Speaker 2: not think he's running for reelection. No one on the hill,
Speaker 2: no Democrat thinks he's running for reelection.
Speaker 1: I can't imagine him doing it. Nobody have talked to
Speaker 1: New York. I think people would be shocked if he did.
Speaker 1: And I assume the only way he does is if
Speaker 1: somehow Democrats get the Senate and he's a majority leader again,
Speaker 1: then you might not want to give it up.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I think that's a possibility. But I
Speaker 2: think that he's just like too damaged within the party,
Speaker 2: I think. But I think the reason he's going to
Speaker 2: be leader after twenty six, you know, if they win
Speaker 2: the majority, then absolutely. If they don't, I think he'll
Speaker 2: still be leader kind of let them.
Speaker 1: But there might be a real challenge if they don't, right,
Speaker 1: especially if like that, Let's say Democrats win forty seats
Speaker 1: again in the House. Yeah, right, it's a forty seat
Speaker 1: pickup in the House, thirty to forty. The new forty
Speaker 1: would be thirty. So let's say it's thirty, right, twenty
Speaker 1: five to thirty, which I think is the highest end
Speaker 1: it could be, and Democrats only pick up two sentences, right,
Speaker 1: And you know, I imagine there's a little bit of do
Speaker 1: you guys know what you're doing, you know, with when
Speaker 1: it comes to Senate races, et cetera, et cetera.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean there's already that people are mad about
Speaker 2: the primaries and the heavy handed of like Grandpaton, you know,
Speaker 2: but there's.
Speaker 1: So what's about it is that where they're heavy handed
Speaker 1: is stupid, and where they're not heavy handed, it's stupid,
Speaker 1: Like like Texas, how did you let that happen? And
Speaker 1: then you tried to get involved in Iowa and Maine,
Speaker 1: Like it makes no sense to have gotten involved in
Speaker 1: Iowa in particular, you know, I with Maine. I kind
Speaker 1: of get it now. How they how they how they
Speaker 1: leak that. I just think the way they handled the
Speaker 1: OPO on Platner was just stupid. They were like, look
Speaker 1: at all the fluff we got, you actually turned ament.
Speaker 1: You wasted all of that ammunition, just completely just absolute
Speaker 1: political research practice. It was stupid. I don't know who
Speaker 1: made that decision. Was that a d SEC decision or
Speaker 1: a Janet Mills campaign decision? It was just stupid.
Speaker 2: I heard it was a DS decision. I don't I
Speaker 2: you know again, I'm just every but I was I
Speaker 2: was told that, like the Janet Mills operation, like they're
Speaker 2: I mean, they're good, you won governor, but they're not
Speaker 2: like they're not DS material.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it really is DS is DS material. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: what proof has the DS been anything? Some of those
Speaker 1: guys I love over there, and they've been good sources
Speaker 1: for me for decades. But that's the problem. I think
Speaker 1: that they still think everything looks like two thousand and
Speaker 1: six or twenty twelve. I just think that they've lost
Speaker 1: I think they've lost touch on where today's Democratic Party
Speaker 1: and today's swing voter is. And then there's conceding defeat
Speaker 1: in all of these light red states. They just are
Speaker 1: conceding defeat. Where are they in Kansas? Where are they
Speaker 1: in Florida? Where are they in some of these states
Speaker 1: that they've got to put on the map even if
Speaker 1: they don't get to fifty.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, there's obviously, I mean, you are just expressing
Speaker 2: the frustration with a Democratic caucus who was thinking the
Speaker 2: exact same thing. But Jillibrand is an ally of Schumer.
Speaker 2: She's a loyal soldier, and it's really Schumer who's running it. Obviously.
Speaker 1: Well, the fact that you don't see jail Brand ever
Speaker 1: speak about Center racist publicly, I mean she keeps a
Speaker 1: very low profile. Yeah, it has always been right. It's
Speaker 1: it's interesting how low of a profile she's kept on this.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it actually is. I hadn't even thought about that,
Speaker 2: but it is, I think because my brain just always
Speaker 2: goes to Schumer. I don't even didn't even realize it.
Speaker 1: Which is what makes the which was what made that decision.
Speaker 1: I would semi surprise that the rest of the Senate
Speaker 1: Democrats wanted to concentrate all of that with the two
Speaker 1: New Yorkers.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they didn't.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about Jeffries. He's going to get a shot
Speaker 1: at being speaker, it seems like. But there I feel
Speaker 1: like there's creeping doubts about whether he's got it, But
Speaker 1: nobody's going to challenge him per se if it's stepped
Speaker 1: in front of him, unless they somehow didn't win the House, right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that he is being given a very
Speaker 2: long runway. But I will also say I feel like
Speaker 2: last week, with the whole health care debacle in on
Speaker 2: the Republican side, that Democrats that that could be the
Speaker 2: week that Haakim Jeffries became Speaker of the House. Like
Speaker 2: I think that maybe you can point and you know,
Speaker 2: we'll obviously see that happens in the next ten months.
Speaker 2: But I feel like that was a really critical week
Speaker 2: for Jeffries. It his long shot messaging bill of a
Speaker 2: three year extension of the Obamacare subsidies, which no one
Speaker 2: had thought had any chance now has support from Republicans
Speaker 2: because the Republicans messed it up so much. And you know,
Speaker 2: throughout this process, some Democrats were telling me outside Democrats
Speaker 2: were telling me that Jeffries had not been given enough
Speaker 2: credit for the strategy. And I feel like they or
Speaker 2: they feel like they are validated now. You know, Jeffries
Speaker 2: has a lot of challenges.
Speaker 1: I don't envy. I think he's got the toughest job
Speaker 1: of anybody right now in leadership outside of Johnson. Johnson's
Speaker 1: got his own, but he sort of he's he allows
Speaker 1: himself to be put in a box. Jeffries has got.
Speaker 1: You know. Look, I think Jeffries and Schumer should take
Speaker 1: more incoming for for mismanaging the New York City mayors race,
Speaker 1: like just completely screwing up the Cuomo thing. You know
Speaker 1: how they mismanage that is to me on the two
Speaker 1: leaders of the Democratic Party both are from New York City,
Speaker 1: and they buried their head in the sand when Andy
Speaker 1: Cuomo decided that he was going to run. What the
Speaker 1: f were they thinking? Right? Like, they just didn't It's
Speaker 1: not about mom, Donnie, Mam Donnie. To me, is a
Speaker 1: symptom of the mismanagement of the Cuomo situation.
Speaker 2: Well also totally. I mean, and the funny thing is
Speaker 2: is that Schumer and Cuomo have a horrific relationship. Schumer
Speaker 2: like Yo Cuomo, and and the fact that yeah, and
Speaker 2: then they still didn't do more. So it was really
Speaker 2: really mystifying I and that you never really got a
Speaker 2: good answer about it. I will say that in my reporting,
Speaker 2: New Yorkers didn't really care about what Humor did. It's
Speaker 2: just like whatever, No.
Speaker 1: I get that, but it's not about the public perception.
Speaker 1: It's about you want to be a leader of your party. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're you're you should have jumped in front of the
Speaker 1: freight train. That was Andy Quaman, say sorry, buddy, no
Speaker 1: and found a found a candidate and got behind somebody
Speaker 1: else or done something differently maybe, you know, you could say.
Speaker 1: But the the way they they behaved as if they
Speaker 1: were paralyzed by the situation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was. It was very very odd. And it
Speaker 2: was the donors. It came down to the donors.
Speaker 1: And I guess, yeah, you know, you're right, Well that
Speaker 1: tells you, right, And they sau out that Cuomo's the
Speaker 1: only one that could be pro Israel anyway. I just
Speaker 1: the whole thing is just sort of bizarre to me.
Speaker 1: Let me get you out of here on this is
Speaker 1: John Thune the tallest little person? Or does he really
Speaker 1: has he actually started to develop a power base and
Speaker 1: a power structure, I asked, because I've heard crankiness about Thune,
Speaker 1: meaning that they wish Thune. Would they miss Mitch McConnell
Speaker 1: protecting them from tough volts and John. One thing John
Speaker 1: Thune won't do is sorry, guys, I'm not standing in
Speaker 1: the way of this vote that Trump wants, you know,
Speaker 1: but the but he did shut down the the filibuster
Speaker 1: talk right getting of the filibuster, so that I assume
Speaker 1: won him some plaudits. But where's the how would you
Speaker 1: assess Thunes? Uh hold on his position right now?
Speaker 2: Good? I think that that's why you see the least
Speaker 2: amount written about Thune is because it's hard to come
Speaker 2: up with like a good story about Thune. People generally
Speaker 2: like him. The filibuster was a huge test, will continue
Speaker 2: to be a huge test. The blue slips, I know
Speaker 2: Grassley is kind of leading that, but you know, some
Speaker 2: other kind of disinstitutional stuff and also how the NRSC,
Speaker 2: like how these primaries go there's some frustration that the
Speaker 2: NRSC vis a vi fune is also not being tough
Speaker 2: enough in some of these primaries, like in Texas.
Speaker 1: No I could I could hear an argument. You know,
Speaker 1: I didn't think Cornyn was going to file because I
Speaker 1: thought he would feel pressure not to file. Yeah, because
Speaker 1: Pax didn't be in the nominee is a huge problem.
Speaker 2: Yes, it's an absolutely huge problem. But he filed and
Speaker 2: they yeah, they've really mismanaged that and they were unable
Speaker 2: to keep Wesley Hunt out of the out of the race,
Speaker 2: and so, you know, it is it's a big test
Speaker 2: for thoone. It's interesting because McConnell in twelve and fourteen,
Speaker 2: after fourteen, I think it was that's when he really
Speaker 2: became involved in primaries and in the Purpople operation because
Speaker 2: he was screwed so badly in the primaries and John
Speaker 2: Cornyn ironically was the NRSC chair in twelve and fourteen
Speaker 2: having to deal with, you know, taking a back seat
Speaker 2: in these crazy primaries, and then McConnell stepped in after
Speaker 2: that and is like, no, I'm running this operation. So
Speaker 2: Dune hasn't seemed to do that yet, and people are
Speaker 2: kind of wanting him to put a little muscle. But
Speaker 2: that's really the biggest complaint I've heard.
Speaker 1: Interesting, Well, it's the best beat in Washington, still, isn't it?
Speaker 2: Leantes It is, Yes, it is.
Speaker 1: You know, It's always been my mantra. It's the best
Speaker 1: beat in Washington, don't you know. Don't try to go
Speaker 1: cover the White House. It sucks covered. The White House
Speaker 1: is born. Yeah, the Hill is awesome.
Speaker 2: Now the White House is more prestigious, but the Hill
Speaker 2: is the best.
Speaker 1: That's where you actually find news. Let me get you
Speaker 1: out of here on this. How do you describe when
Speaker 1: you have to tell people what Puck is that aren't
Speaker 1: familiar with it, how do you describe it?
Speaker 2: I describe it as an email subscription newsletter. That the
Speaker 2: easiest way to describe it, I tell say is it's
Speaker 2: like a newer vanity fair, like a new version of vanity.
Speaker 1: Interesting because because there's you know, there's some culture, there's business,
Speaker 1: there's there's there's even sports now, right, It's it's sort
Speaker 1: of the the look I like the idea of the
Speaker 1: four Corners, Silicon Valley, New York, Washington, LA. Right, like
Speaker 1: all of the cultural touchstones of America. That's sort of
Speaker 1: make us, you know, uh, make things run. But it's
Speaker 1: a I get it, but I imagine it is sometimes
Speaker 1: hard to.
Speaker 2: Describe, right, Yeah, And that's why I say that because
Speaker 2: also the writing, you know, the writing matters. They really
Speaker 2: take a lot of we will take a lot of
Speaker 2: pride in in the presentation. And I feel like I'm
Speaker 2: writing a mini magazine piece every time I write. And
Speaker 2: so it just you know, our editors, you know John
Speaker 2: Kelly who started it, the top editor. They both came
Speaker 2: from Vanity Fair, like so many people grew up in
Speaker 2: that Vanity Fair heyday world, and so it's like a
Speaker 2: modern version of that.
Speaker 1: Well it's funny you say Vanity Fair even though Vanity
Speaker 1: Fair was was a monthly and so didn't you know,
Speaker 1: I would argue what you what you guys, because I
Speaker 1: agree it's that it reminds me more of the weekly
Speaker 1: pieces that Time and Newsweek used to produce, that were
Speaker 1: filled with because Time and Newsweek didn't have to worry
Speaker 1: about the day to day Manu Shaw, they got to
Speaker 1: take a step back and sort of have that. And
Speaker 1: so to me, you most emulate Howard Feinneman from the nineties,
Speaker 1: oh where, because Howard Fineman was the chief political correspondent
Speaker 1: for Newsweek, and he always sort of authored the big picture.
Speaker 1: Nancy Gibbs was the person that Time magazine, you know,
Speaker 1: and she eventually became editor of Time, but she also
Speaker 1: was you know, there were these who could write it,
Speaker 1: and it's tremendous skill and it is what I think smart,
Speaker 1: the way smart people want to consume this information.
Speaker 2: So well, thanks. Yeah, I think that it's like a
Speaker 2: great niche and I think it was missing, especially in
Speaker 2: this like you know, cable news, yeah, and punch Bowl
Speaker 2: News of like every minute this is happening.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to bring up the there's two news
Speaker 1: organizations that should have been filling this vacuum and chose
Speaker 1: not to, and you used to work on one of them.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we'll leave it there, Leah Caldwell, always a pressure.
Speaker 1: Enjoy the holidays, enjoy your break.
Speaker 2: Thanks you seek deck.
Speaker 1: There's a reason results matter more than promises, just like
Speaker 1: there's a reason. Morgan and Morgan is America's largest injury
Speaker 1: law firm. For the last thirty five years, they've recovered
Speaker 1: twenty five billion dollars for more than half a million clients.
Speaker 1: It includes cases where insurance companies offered next to nothing,
Speaker 1: just hoping to get away with paying as little as possible.
Speaker 1: Morgan and Morgan fought back ended up winning millions. In fact,
Speaker 1: in Pennsylvania, one client was awarded twenty six million dollars,
Speaker 1: which was a staggering forty times the amount that the
Speaker 1: insurance company originally offered. That original offer six hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars twenty six million, six hundred fifty thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: So with more than one thousand lawyers across the country,
Speaker 1: they know how to deliver for everyday people. If you're injured,
Speaker 1: you need a lawyer. You need somebody to get your back.
Speaker 1: Check out for the People dot com, Slash podcast or
Speaker 1: dial pound law Pound five two nine law on your
Speaker 1: cell phone. And remember all law firms are not the same,
Speaker 1: So check out Morgan and Morgan. Their fee is free
Speaker 1: unless they win