Democrats' Fury at Defecting Senators; BBC "in Crisis" as Top News Execs Leave Over Anti-Trump Bias

Summary

---

2WAY Morning Meeting

Episode: Democrats' Fury at Defecting Senators; BBC "in Crisis" as Top News Execs Leave Over Anti-Trump Bias

Date: November 11, 2025
Hosts: Mark Halperin (C), Sean Spicer (D), Dan Turrentine (B)

Overview

This episode of 2WAY’s “Morning Meeting” dives into two main storylines gripping the political and media landscape:

• The mounting Democratic anger and tumult after several Democratic senators defected from party ranks in a key vote—putting Majority Leader Chuck Schumer under immense internal pressure and fueling speculation about his future.
• The BBC’s escalating crisis over allegations of anti-Trump bias, culminating in the resignation of top news executives and raising pointed questions about partisan divides in global media.

Alongside the headline topics, the hosts parse themes about institutional change, political strategy, upcoming legislative battles, media evolution, Veterans Day’s new political overtones, and the precariousness of House control in 2025.

---

Key Discussion Points

1. Chuck Schumer’s Precarious Standing Among Senate Democrats

[01:49 – 06:41]

• Dan on Schumer’s Weakness:

  • Schumer is deemed an “inside man in an outside game now.” He lacks the agility and attention-getting tactics of politicians like Gavin Newsom.
  • “He just doesn't do it...He now looks like a dinosaur.” (B, 05:35)
  • Schumer’s base of support is tepid—colleagues may defend him privately, "but no one has your back publicly, that's a problem" (D, 04:43).

• Comparison to McConnell:

  • The hosts note McConnell survived similar outside-insider tension—but “Schumer would care” about being beloved on his exit, while McConnell would not. (C, 05:12)

• Ability to Rebound?

  • Unlikely, says Dan: “I don't know how he becomes a modern nimble leader. I just don’t.” (B, 06:19)
  • Only a major Democratic win in 2026 could stave off his exit.

2. The “Defector Eight” Senators: Fallout and Their Messaging

[06:41 – 10:25]

• John Fetterman Defends Crossing the Aisle:

  • “That was a red line for me...I can't cross as a Democrat. I think that's been described country over party.” (Fetterman, 07:05)

• Why the Eight Face Less Blowback:

  • Most are retiring or not up for re-election. Their calculated risk, plus local wins (e.g., saving state jobs, federal benefits), shields them from intra-party revolt.
  • “All politics is local.” (B, 09:09)
  • Booker is projected to avoid confrontation with NH senators at state party dinner.

---

3. Veterans Day’s Changing Political Role

[10:42 – 13:15]

• Discussed by Sean & Dan:
  • Once a “sacred” day, Veterans Day has become more “tribal” and less free from political controversy, reflecting how military and other institutions have been drawn into culture war skirmishes (D, 10:51; B, 11:47).
  • Question posed: “Does it help in Democratic primaries to be a veteran?” Consensus: Strength and service still matter in optics, but not serving is “no longer a liability.” (B, 12:57)

---

4. The Funding Shutdown, House & ACA: What Next?

[19:58 – 27:37]

• Government Funding Vote Expected:

  • “Assume it's going to pass the House ... Then what?” Mark asks. (C, 20:49)

• Expectations:

  • Senate to focus on health care policy, specifically ACA subsidies—sparking tension with House Republicans (D, 20:49).
  • “I think now you’re going to see the party try to move forward to make this about health care again…Show us Trumpcare.” (B, 22:27)

• Trump’s Policy Proposals:

  • Seen as vague, with little detail—“Kennedy’s floated this idea now of sending money directly to individuals, but...no details about how that would really work.” (B, 22:42)

• Supreme Court and Tariff Money:

  • There’s Supreme Court precedent looming: “If the court says you didn’t have the right [to tariff revenue], but we’re not giving it back, it kind of defeats the point of the case.” (D, 24:28)
  • Journal analysis gets cited for legal nuance. (C, 24:03)

• Affordability & Biden’s Messaging:

  • Trump’s “things are getting cheaper” claims vs. public frustration—“For most Americans, they just care about...am I paying more or less” (D, 25:46)
  • Preparations for State of the Union will center on affordability themes, though the administration “hasn’t leaked” hints about its proposals as previous presidents have. (C, 25:59)

• Primary Season Looms:

  • “Primary season starts in February...caucus will be consumed” (B, 26:48)
  • State of the Union timing is crucial—should be before funding fight, to avoid delivering amid another shutdown. (D, 27:24)

---

5. House Control, Redistricting, and “Dummy Mandarin”

[29:27 – 33:08]

• Dave Wasserman’s Latest Tallies:

  • After complex state redistricting and legal challenges, “Republicans ahead by just half a seat” (C, 29:28).
  • “Dummy mandering” may backfire in Texas.

• Field of Play:

  • Only “15 or 20” truly competitive seats— “the smallest playing field” in memory (B, 30:11).
  • “Whoever wins is probably looking at a super small majority.” (B, 30:38)

• Court Rulings Pending:

  • E.g., Utah’s new Democratic seat is being challenged. Florida expected to yield GOP gains.
  • Pending Supreme Court decisions, especially on voting rights, could sway outcome—“That case in South Carolina...are pointing to why the VRA is not applicable.” (D, 62:19)

---

6. The BBC Crisis: Anti-Trump Bias and Newsroom Turbulence

[35:07 – 42:36]

• BBC Executives Resign After Documentary Scandal:

  • The broadcaster is under fire for airing a misleading documentary splicing Trump’s January 6th statements:
    • “Of course it was misleading...But I don't really understand why this is like some bombshell report that's a surprise to anybody, you know what I'm saying?” (C, 39:39)
  • The scandal is seen as an outcome of mounting pressure on media institutions not to appear overtly anti-Trump.

• Media Landscape Shifts:

  • “The Washington Post and the New York Times in particular are becoming less and less relevant every day. To their own making.” (D, 37:23)
  • News virality now happens in “two alternate universes” for each party. (B, 37:32)

---

7. Audience Q&A: Health Care Policy, ACA, Shutdown, and SNAP

[46:33 – 56:59]

• Health Care Roundtable Needed:

  • Several callers urge the show to host substantive panels on health care policy, not just ACA subsidy debate—“Two way needs to bring in the people that have different views.” (G, 48:06)

• ACA and Cost Control:

  • Acknowledgment that ACA has not contained costs as promised—partly because Congress never implemented cost-control mechanisms (“death panels”). (C, 52:18)
  • Reality check: SNAP reaches one in eight households—a surprise to some listeners.
  • Trump’s $2,000 rebate proposal is critiqued as “highly inflationary.” (E, 54:08)

• Medicare, End-of-Life Costs:

  • Families struggle with impossible health costs, especially in the last weeks of life—“It’s a tough, tough issue. It’s brutal.” (B, 49:17)

---

8. Redistricting, Voting Rights, Race, and Representation

[60:15 – 62:42]

• Section 2 Voting Rights Act and South Carolina:
  • Debate on whether Tim Scott’s election shows black-majority districts are no longer warranted.
    • “Tim Scott only gets 8% of the black vote, so him being elected is totally irrelevant to whether black voters will be diluted.” (F, 61:02)
  • Pending Supreme Court cases may further reshape districting rules for 2026 races.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Schumer’s Dilemma:
  • “He got the old game better than anyone else. ... He now looks like a dinosaur.” – Dan Turrentine, 05:35
• On Democratic Defectors:
  • “You took one for the team, you jumped on the grenade. Thank you for doing it. Move on.” – Sean Spicer, 08:55
• On ACA’s Flawed Promises:
  • “At the time they passed it...they said, ‘we have to have this committee…to decide what things can cost’...but they never did it.” – Mark Halperin, 52:18
• On the Media’s Diminishing Clout:
  • “The Washington Post and the New York Times in particular are becoming less and less relevant every day. To their own making.” – Sean Spicer, 37:23
• On BBC Documentary Scandal:
  • “If it’s an outrage now, why wasn’t it an outrage right when they did it?” – Mark Halperin, 39:45

---

Timestamps to Key Segments

• Schumer’s Crisis and Democratic Defectors: [01:49–10:25]
• Veterans Day’s Political Overtones: [10:42–13:15]
• Shutdown, ACA, State of the Union Timing: [19:58–27:37]
• Redistricting Math and Its 2026 Effects: [29:27–33:08]
• Media, BBC Crisis, and Erosion of Mainstream Influence: [35:07–42:36]
• Health Care Debate and Listener Q&A: [46:33–56:59]
• Voting Rights and Race in Redistricting: [60:15–62:42]

---

Tone & Additional Insights

• The conversation blends inside-the-beltway analysis, conversational banter, and audience engagement. There is palpable concern about institutional flux—whether in the Senate, the mainstream media, or health care systems.
• The tone is alternately skeptical, rueful, and occasionally wry—the hosts pride themselves on “peace, love, and understanding,” but also on pulling no punches about public figures.
• Listeners are encouraged to engage and contribute their expertise, especially on thorny policy debates (like health care).

---

Conclusion

This Morning Meeting delivers deep, unscripted insight into current political and media upheavals: Schumer’s struggle to stay relevant, the enduring resonance of "old school" leadership and the ascendancy of social-media-era political players, the precariousness of 2026 House control, and escalating scrutiny about media bias—both in the U.S. and abroad. The health care and redistricting segments offer a preview of what’s likely to dominate politics into the 2026 cycle. Audience participation underscores the appetite for real policy talk well beyond the day’s headlines.

---

This summary is intended for those who have not listened and want a comprehensive, honest, and chronological guide to the episode’s main content—skipping all ad reads, introductions, and outros.

Transcript

[A]

I'm James Patterson. I write way too many books. Welcome to Hungry Dogs. The title comes from my maternal grandmother, Isabel Zelvis Morris. Nan used to always say, hungry dogs run faster, James. And I've been running fast ever since. Here's what will be coming your way soon. And this is a really terrific list. I think you'll hear from some incredible people like Stacey Abrams. Yay. BJ Novak.

[B]

Yay.

[A]

Kathy Bates, Dolly Parton, Josh Gad. And Pope Leo. Okay, maybe not Pope Leo, but who knows? Maybe he'll show up. Hungry dogs run faster. Thank you, Grandma, for turning me into a hopeless, obsessive, compulsive. Listen to Hungry Dogs with James Patterson. That'd be me on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[C]

This is it.

[B]

The world as you know it is over. Completely done.

[D]

It's not about to be over.

[B]

It's over.

[D]

Some of the scientists who helped build AI are now sounding the alarm. I was selling AI as a great thing for decades and I was wrong.

[B]

I was wrong.

[D]

There is a longer term existential threat that will arise when we create digital.

[E]

Beings that are more intelligent than ourselves. We have no idea whether we can stay in control.

[D]

While others say that AI will usher in unfathomable abundance, I've always believed that it's going to be the most important invention that humanity will ever make.

[C]

This really will be a world of abundance.

[D]

And among these fears and these fantasies, we seek the story of our future. Listen to the last invention on Apple.

[C]

Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you get your podcasts. Good day, everybody. Welcome to the morning meeting for the second day row. I'm a victim of air travel inanity, so I'm on the move, gentlemen. Break format a little bit while I shuffle around. Let's just talk about Chuck Schumer right off the top. I don't mean to tell anybody about the show. Dan, if you were Chuck Schumer's political advisor, how would you be feeling two days into this calamity?

[B]

I mean, I would feel good in that you're not going to get dislodged in the next couple months. But I would feel bad because in the long run, you're an inside man in an outside game now. And if you just think about Chuck Schumer compared to Gavin Newsom or Mandani in terms of strategy, tactics, being able to get attention, get in the other side's face, kind of own them, he just doesn't do it. He's a cable news kind of beltway media guy. And I think the other problem he has is he's got the support of his colleagues enough, but the constellation of outside groups have it in for him. And this was McConnell's problem. You can only survive so long before you get squeezed out. So in the long run, it's a question of when. Not.

[D]

Let me just say, I think this.

[C]

Shout out to the McConnell comparison is be good. Well, just the McConnell comparison seems to me now to be increasingly apt.

[D]

Yes, I was going to say the, the difference or, or sort of the thing that I find fascinating about the way you framed it is one of the things that staff need to know. Their boss. Right. And so the question is if, if he's a cable news junkie fighting the narrative or is he like, I get it, I get it, this is the end. Right.

[C]

And.

[D]

And I'm just going to enjoy the ride. We all get the joke. Or is he looking at you as a staffer and saying, we've got to fix this, we've got to fix this. Everybody knows I didn't vote for it, and you're trying to swim against the tide. So I think the key thing for Schumer and his team right now is do they get what this is really about, or are they going to try to pretend that somehow he can win back the narrative and become the hero to the Democratic Party, which is never going to happen.

[B]

Well, he doesn't look like a leader. He looks like he's being led. And that's another huge problem for him right now, is he's lost control of everything. So it looks like he's reactionary. And I think the only way he survives is if they somehow win back the Senate or they pick up three seats and he can say, we're moving, but otherwise, I don't know any new member who's going to come in with a pledge to support him.

[D]

I mean, they can, even the current ones. At best, the responses are tepid, where they're like, you know, some of them.

[B]

Are the progressives are that the moderates don't comment because they, they like what he did.

[D]

Yeah. I mean, I guess the point, though, is that if no one has your back publicly, that's a problem. Even if they're behind the scenes giving you a wink and nod.

[C]

But nobody's running against them now. Right. And even, even if, even if they don't take the majority, I don't think anybody's running against him. I guess just, you know, McConnell, I don't think cares that his career is ending without adulation. From the base. I don't think he cares. Maybe I'm wrong, I just don't. But I think Schumer does. I think Schumer would care. So Dan, is there, is there, is there anything he can do to not. I mean, if on the current trajectory, whether he is primaried by AOC or, or decides not to run whatever, he's not going to end with the accolades he wants. He's going to end on a down beat as opposed to upbeat. Is there a way to turn that around? Like, Jeffries supported him. Like, who could support him?

[B]

I was actually very pleased to see Jeffries did that. I think it's the right thing to do. But I think the problem is look at how politics is, how you engage now. Think about how you fight Again. I go back to Newsom, Mandani, the candidates that get it, that are nimble, that, that, that. And then we all laugh at Schumer, right? He does these videos where he's just old, it's stilted, he's clearly reading something. There's no organic passion. So if you're trying to save yourself, it's like he was successful because he got the old game better than anyone else. He got cable tv. He understood kind of the politicos of the world how to feed the beast. He now looks like a dinosaur. So I don't know how he becomes a modern nimble leader. I just don't. Because Mark, it used to be that who cared about the noise? You could just own your caucus and you could be powerful in the beltway and that was a way to survive. Now it's all a national outside world and he's losing it.

[C]

Yeah, let's talk about.

[D]

He mastered by the way like weekend media better than anybody, but it moved.

[C]

The eight are getting far less pressure than Schumer, far less vitriol, although they're not getting none. Let's look at the only one who found out was out on morning TV. This is John Federman 110 on Fox and Friends.

[E]

I mean, I, I think, I think my party crossed a, a line of now putting 42American, excuse me, 42 million Americans with, with their SNAP benefits and making flying less safe and that kinds of chaos and not paying our military. I mean that, that was a red line for me that I can't cross as a Democrat. And I think that's been described country over the party and now that I think that's been the truth throughout it. And it's only wrong to shut our government down. And I'm relieved But the people now that are going to get paid and fed and millions, millions of American, they're going to be flying now. That's going to be made more safe and restored.

[C]

So unlike Schumer, I feel like the eight are doing pretty well defending their position. They seem pretty calm. Sean, if you were comms for one of those eight, would you feel they need to do something more different or not?

[D]

Well, look, each one of them is either retiring or not in cycle. So they have the beauty. I mean, that was kind of why. It was almost like that's why they were selected and chose to do this in the first place. They knew that it would be minimal blowback. I think each of them, with the exception of Durbin maybe, has a reputation of being a little less of the partisan progressive, the two New Hampshire senators, et cetera. So I think that they knew what they were doing. To the extent that they care, I'd say lean into this. But the problem is they also can't pick at the scab because they know that they're exposing not just their fellow Democratic senators, but their House members. And, you know, in the case of Jean, Jean, her daughter. And so I think you cast the vote and then you don't rub it in anyone's face. You took one for the team, you jumped on the grenade. Thank you for doing it. Move on.

[C]

Then Thursday, I think it is later this week, there's this dinner in New Hampshire that Cory Booker's speaking at to all the activists in the party. How does that get navigated for the two New Hampshire senators?

[B]

Oh, I think he's going to just look forward. I mean, I don't think he's going to go there and go at them. That. That just would not be a very smart thing. I think all politics is local. I mean, you listen to Tim Kaine talking about the number of federal employees that he secured from the White House. I forget, what is it, a moratorium on mischief, that there'll be no more federal layoffs from now until January 30th? That's a win for him. It's all over the Washington Post. It's all over the local news. It's, you know, down in Richmond, down in Norfolk. So I think the Nevada crew, the New Hampshire crew, if you listen to what they're saying, it's all about their state, the jobs they save, the benefits that they've released, the airport lines that they've reopened. So I don't think they will pay a price. I think, you know, Booker, it would be, I think, suicide to go into New Hampshire and go to war with the two senators. I just think that's not what you want to do. There's a time and a place for that, and that's not it. Correct.

[D]

Yeah, I agree. And this is a much more collegial body than the House. I mean, they're not gonna.

[C]

I mean.

[D]

And I also think that New Hampshire in particular is a little different. I mean, it's. They have a familiarity with their elected officials that you go in there and start yelling at them. I think people would be like, hey, that's not how we do it here.

[B]

Yeah. And that would be the headline. No matter what else you say, the headline would be that you went at the two U.S. senators and criticized them. And I don't think that's what you want the headline to be. Correct.

[D]

Yeah. Not Union leaders.

[C]

One brief more interlude while I elevate her here. Sean, talk about Veterans Day, how it plays in our politics and in our country now.

[D]

Well, it's an interesting question you're asking because I. I would have assumed up until a few years ago that it was sort of one of those sacred days where people sort of put everything aside. I think to some extent, that still exists. But I think, as I mentioned, during that enlistment ceremony at Northwest Stadium, that it's becoming more tribal. We're talking about policies in the military and what's going on now versus then. So I think what has been sacred in the past is becoming less so, and we'll see how today plays out. The president's going to obviously be at Arlington. Do people make comments about him or some of the other stuff. But I don't know. It's unfortunate because this is a day when it's supposed to be about others, not politics and not one party or another. So I think time will tell at the end of the day whether or not we have any sense of that left or not.

[C]

Dan?

[B]

Yeah, I mean, I think the last 10 years, the military has become. It's become political. I mean, look at what's happening now, right? You're firing and cleaning out people because they supported DEI policies or things of that nature. And so I think the military, like the courts, like every other institution in this country, has not been able to escape politics. I wish that weren't so, but it just, I think, is the reality of the world, whether it was changing the names for all the bases and getting rid of confederate, you know, names and trying to, you know, scrub that out, or now kind of going in the other direction. But, you know, my Father served. He's. He's buried at Arlington National Cemetery. And I think we should just, you know, remember those who have served and be very grateful for it.

[C]

So we thank and honor all our veterans today. Ask you a political question. Does it help in winning the Democratic nomination to be a veteran? We have some people who are veterans who are thinking about running. Does that help in the politics of 2028 in the Democratic Party, Dan?

[B]

Yeah, it does, because at the end of the day, strength still matters. It just is an immediate image of strength and security. And so I think serving will be an asset, but I think not serving is no longer a liability.

[D]

Yeah, I think it also depends on how you play it and what the attacks are. Right. So one, if you're a Democrat, I assume it's a bonus because each party has strengths, inherent strengths, that national security, military are sort of the Republican ones, some social ones are Dems. And so if you can take a card off the table, you help, because then you can. You don't. It softens the blow. But as we saw in the case of, like, Virginia, you know, Winsome Sears, former Marine I don't think it did a huge help there. I think JD has played it well as a former Marine. He's played it up. So how you play it matters as well. But, you know, if you go back to John Kerry, it's still to me, like, unbelievable that his team allowed the guy to get, quote, unquote, swift boated. You can disagree with his service, but the fact of the matter is you shouldn't be on the flip side. I mean, even in the New Jersey race, you had Jack Cittarelli attacking Mikey Sherrill for her cheating scandal at the Academy. Bottom line is, though, she served. And I found it fascinating the way that they let that roll off, that attack just roll off, as opposed to answering it straight on. So, I mean, I guess the answer is I think it can help, but it's also how you use it, what you say about it or not. And at the end of the day, as we saw in New Jersey in particular, Cittarelli was talking about who had lived in New Jersey longer, who was an Original New Jerseyan vs and whether or not she, you know, was part of could marched in her. Her graduation ceremony or not from the Academy. I just think what. There are many times when there are bigger issues at play, and if you're not addressing them, then you're missing the boat. So as I said earlier, how you play it matters.

[C]

Very grateful to you all for your indulgence. While I maneuvered my way through the streets of Manhattan. Good morning. This is the morning meeting based on Network News Division's morning meetings. Dan, Sean and I are going to take you through the day and then we'd welcome your questions. If you're here on the two way platform, please raise your hand. Love to have your participation. If you're watching, say on YouTube, we're at no smack in the chat. We believe in peace, love and understanding here. Presumption of grace to all. And if you're a liberal Democrat and you hate Chuck Schumer, think about a knish, maybe distract yourself. This program's got a lot of great sponsors. Is is Jim Clyburn on MSNBC right now? Am I losing my mind? Is that live? I don't know if it is. Yeah. Let's take Jim Clyburn. I'll give me a moment to set up. Let's see what he's got to say.

[B]

People.

[F]

You got to try to bring people together. We have seven seats in South Carolina. I'm the only Democrat among the seven. Yet you've got a Republican congressman asking the president to put pressure on South Carolina's governor to eliminate my seat. Well, what he's talking about is reducing the number of African Americans in the district. I don't have a majority of black district. It's being reported all over the country. 47% of my restaurant district African American. Now, last time I checked, that means 53% or not. And so I don't win with only African Americans. I win by working on.

[C]

All right, we'll talk about redistricting because a lot's going on there. Anyway, a quick word from a sponsor and then onto the daybook. And then our conversation about a few more things sponsored this morning. One of our new ones, Chef iq. If you're planning to cook for Thanksgiving, no calamity is desired. Rather, just time with the family would be better. And let the cooking not take care of itself. But why not get help from the good folks at Chef IQ? Go to Chef IQ.com promo code is T2WMM two way morning meeting two WMM. And you can reduce your stress. Use Chef IQ sense. Turkey's got to hit 165 degrees Fahrenheit. And you can't do that with your eyes, ladies and gentlemen. I don't care. I don't care how magical you are. You want the perfect temperature every time. Use the the device Chef IQ to whether you're smoking it, whatever you're doing. Grilling, pan searing, roasting. Just use the app. Sit back and relax. Chef IQ sense will tell you when to flip stuff, when to take it off the heat, even how long to let it rest. It's basically like having your own personal chef again. It works with everything. Steaks, chicken, fish, whatever you're cooking. But most. Most on your mind right now might be the turkey. So order right now. It's the ultimate gift as well. Perfect for seasoned cooks, rookies, and everyone in between. 30 off. Go to chefiq.com use a promo code 2WMM and get 30 off again. Chefiq.com promo code TWMM. Tell them Dan. Turkey loving Dan sent you.

[B]

Oh, I love it. Wait, are you guys a.

[G]

If.

[B]

If you could only have one fried, smoked, or you got baked, what kind of turkey do you do?

[C]

Kung Pao baked like Kung Pao.

[D]

I do like the smoked. It just didn't. I didn't now I couldn't. I tried it. You know, I'd rather go fried. Deep fried. 100.

[B]

I don't like it. Yeah, I like. The smoked is amazing.

[D]

Oh, it's too.

[A]

I'm James Patterson. I write way too many books. Welcome to Hungry Dogs. The title comes from my maternal grandmother, Isabel Zelvis Morris. Nan used to always say, hungry dogs run faster, James. And I've been running fast ever since. Here's what will be coming your way soon. And this is a really terrific list. I think you'll hear from some incredible people like Stacey Abrams.

[C]

Yay.

[A]

BJ Novak.

[E]

Yay.

[A]

Kathy Bates, Dolly Parton, Josh Gad. And Pope Leo. Okay, maybe not Pope Leo, but who knows? Maybe he'll show up. Hungry dogs run faster. Thank you, Grandma, for turning me into a hopeless, obsessive, compulsive. Listen to Hungry Dogs with James Patterson. That'd be me on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[C]

All right, the President today not doing much of anything except the important remembrance of this important day. So he's going to Arlington at 10:35pm Eastern. AM Eastern, delivering remarks at 11 Eastern. Let's. Let's play the game, guys. Does that. Does MSNBC CNN carry that live in full his remarks slow news day.

[B]

Yep.

[D]

Yeah, I think so.

[C]

And then back to the White House. And as far as we know, nothing else, public don't know where the Vice President is. Perhaps he'll accompany the President. The Senate has adjourned. The House is not back yet. But the rules committee is supposed to meet this afternoon to start trying to cobble this together. Most people expect the vote will be tomorrow. And In Brazil, the COP30 climate conference is under way. All right. So as you said, not a particularly speedy news day. Let's go back to talking about the shutdown. And Sean, just, you know, we assume it's going to pass the House. I assume all of us do. What happens then, like, once the House passes it, where does the conversation go? Does it go to health care discussions? Does it go to whatever Donald Trump puts on? True social. Like, where is the Washington policy politics talk after House passage?

[D]

Yeah, well, first of all, I will say I'm going to keep my eye on C Span on that vote because remember, a lot of members are going to have interesting time getting back. You got a new member from Arizona being sworn in, meaning it's, it's a, you know, continues to be a very narrow majority for the House. So it's not just how many people he's got commitments from. And Johnson's done a great job of getting the Freedom Caucus guys in particular on board. But I'd be interested to see, you wouldn't believe the stuff that happens when you're hoping that everybody makes it back on time, not just travel wise, but health wise, family wise, et cetera. So that's number one. Number two is I think that this is going to be interesting because there's reports that the Senate's really looking at some health care policy and that's going to immediately send the House guys into, you know, freak out mode. What do we need to be doing? What is our answer? I do think that you're going to hear a little pop off about Epstein for a couple days because the discharge petition will get signed. So we'll spend 24, 48 hours pretending like that's going to matter. And I say that respectfully to people because it's not that the issue doesn't, but I'm talking about the legislative process. We've talked about this before. The Senate's not going to take it up. The president's never going to sign it. So the bottom line is this is a media exercise more than anything else. In terms of the discharge petition. I think Anna Paulina Luna got some assurances that the Stock act is going to go through regular order in the committee. So there's a possibility, again, I think you're going to get a little bit of a potpourri of issues as everybody tries to game, like how much attention can something get. But I do think you're going to get a little bit of health care discussion about what's next and what are we going to do on the ACA subsidies specifically, Dan, where do you think?

[B]

I think you're going to hear people talk about, you know, Trump last night said, I'd like Trump careful. And I think you're going to hear Democrats now lean into that saying, okay, where's Trumpcare? Show us trumpcare. Kennedy's kind of floated this idea now of sending money directly to individuals, but of course there's absolutely no details about how that would really work in theory and cost savings. And presumably then you turn around and they're going to route that money back to the insurance company. So you're spending money on moving it around. But I think now you're going to see the party try to move forward to make this about health care. Again, we're fairly united. Our position is extend the ACA subsidies. If you want to criticize them, fine. Show us Trumpcare.

[D]

Well, also to your point about these subsidies, I know the president, at least according to the Treasury Secretary's lack of awareness about the issue. No disrespect to Secretary Bessant, but it's clear that this was not a full on baked policy idea. And I think more people are going to get concerned. A you've got tariffs that you saw the truth social last night. I've said this for all along. This is, I just believe where the court's going to go on this. There's a good chance that I think you're going to lose that tariff money. So that's number one. Number two, even if you got to keep a chunk of it, I think we've got $38 trillion in debt and I get the president's desire to want to send everyone a check. But I just showed you guys a check last two weeks ago from Virginia. It doesn't, it doesn't. I think everyone has this false sense that you get a check from some politician and you're going to flip your vote for him.

[C]

Yeah, I know if I understood you the other day, you're skeptical of this, but the, the Wall Street Journal's very good Supreme Court reporter also floated this notion with citing some precedent. So this is less about trade law than Supreme Court precedent, that the court could say president violated his authority and we're laying down the marker going forward. But you can keep the money because we're not going to tell the executive branch, you know, we're not going to micromanage that.

[D]

Look, obviously I'm not. I mean, like, you know, I took one legal class ever and watch a lot of Law and Order. But, but from my understanding from precedent that the basis of the case is, hey, you didn't have a right to take this. So if the plaintiff is seeking relief and saying you didn't have the right and the court says you're right, you are absolutely right, but we're not giving it back, it kind of defeats the point of the case.

[C]

The Journal, the Journal, I agree with you in sort of like logic. But the Journal story cited at least one or two cases where they look.

[D]

They could do it and I'm sure they can.

[B]

I just, I also think the other interesting thing to watch here is this whole thing about affordability because Trump seems to be ping ponging around. Right. Immediately after last week you heard James Blair and others say we're going to focus on this, it's an important issue. And then you get Trump for the second time this week last night and Laura Ingraham saying it's fake news.

[D]

Yeah, this goes back to, this goes back to what I was saying before. I think where the disconnect in my opinion is I gave the example the other day. If it was, if prices were $3 when he left office, they went to 5 during Biden and they're now 4 in Trump's mind. Correctly. He's like, look, things are going down. The problem is for most Americans, they go yeah, but they're still a dollar more than they were. They don't really care whose watch it all happened on as much as I'm still paying more money for X.

[B]

Right.

[D]

So yes, he's right that a lot of things are getting cheaper. But for most Americans, they just care about the bottom line for their wallet, which is am I paying more or less regardless of which politician was there at, you know, during a certain period of time.

[C]

Yeah. And I will tell you the one thing I'll say about this is attention. I was in D.C. yesterday, talked to some folks. Attention is going to turn to the State of the Union and all the things that go into that on the inside. This administration historically has not leaked the way others have not leaked but spoon fed out little teases about it. I don't know why, but they haven't. So. But you'll see a lot of people in the administration being said, bring us your affordability ideas. But I think we'll see those in the State of the Union which could be January, could be February, but don't forget Halperin's rule of seven and five. Nothing happens in November, December to have seven, to have five months during the year where nothing happens. So they'll have to deal with the December vote, the January deadline. But I think you're going to see that you see the president's wacky musings about affordability, maybe tamp down a little bit as they look for actual ideas, Dan.

[B]

And don't forget, primary season starts in February. And at least on our side of the like, that is going to start to consume the caucus because if you get some big people knocked off early, that is going to start sending a message of are you next? Who else could go? What is the caucus going to look like? Is leadership safe? So we're not that far from votes being cast.

[D]

So let me just throw this out there to flip Mark's question. If you guys got to if the president said what date do I want to give my State of the Union, knowing that the current deal funds the government through January 30, do I want to give that speech before the funding fight starts again or after?

[C]

I would do before.

[D]

I would do before to dominate the.

[C]

Year and to try to frame that.

[D]

Well, not just that, but you can't. If you, let's say you picked February 7th and you go into another shutdown, are you going to give your State of the Union while the government shut down? I mean, that's just not a good look.

[C]

Yeah. And if even if you set it for February 20th, you still run the risk. All right. We'll see what they do. Quick word from the sponsor. We got a couple more topics to get to and then your question. So if you're here on the platform, want to ask one, please raise your hand. In DC yesterday and of course lots of people came up to me not to talk about the morning meeting or two way tonight or next up. But Cozy Earth wanted to tell me that they bought the pants and they love them. You too can own the Cozy Earth pants, towels, blankets, bubble cuddle blanket for 40 off, which is more of a discount than I've paid. Go to cozy earth.com use the promo code mark for 40 off. The whole site. It's early Black Friday on Tuesday. It's Black Friday on Tuesday. Right now you can stock up on anything you need and also buy your holiday gifts at Cozy earth. Go to cozyearth.com promo code mark for 40 off. It's it's on everything. The towels, which I now use regularly. I almost brought the towels with me on my trip to D.C. would that have been weird, staying in a hotel and just taking out?

[B]

George Bush famously brought his own pillow pillows.

[C]

Yeah, well, I didn't. But I'm looking forward to Getting home tonight and maybe I'll take a. I don't want.

[D]

Listen, the last thing I want is, is to bring my anything pillow or towel into a hotel room. I'm like, leave it there.

[C]

Wrap the ones you love in luxury with cozy earth. Go to cozyearth.com use a promo code mark for 40% off. All right, redistricting, very interesting. Yesterday Utah gave Democrats a seat. So Dave Wasserman, who knows more about the House than anybody and I'll say again, everybody I Talked to in D.C. yesterday, everybody's consumed, both sides just consumed with House majority. Is it going to be, you know, the, the, the Republicans controlling everything for the last two years of the Trump term or is the last two years going to all be all about subpoenas and investigations and impeachment? Democrats, according to Dave Wasman. He does. He does. Not just whole seats, but half seats depending on whether a district is likely to flip or not. Because as we know. What's that? There's an expression where you redistrict stupidly. You know what I'm talking about?

[D]

Dummy Mandarin.

[C]

Dummy Mandarin. Dummy Mandarin. So there may be some dummy Mandarin, particularly in Texas, probably not in California, but here's how Dave tallies it up. California Dems 4 + 4.5, then Republicans + 1 in Missouri, + a half in North Carolina, + a half in Ohio, + 4 in Texas, although there may be some dummy mandering there. And then plus one in Utah and that leaves Republicans ahead by just half a seat with Florida, Indiana and Virginia the biggest remaining variables. Dan, this might all end up being a wash, which doesn't mean Republicans won't keep the majority. But certainly this, all the sound and fury might signify basically nothing when it comes to gaining an advantage.

[B]

Yeah, I'm actually surprised because I thought even after California they would still net seats. But after last Tuesday, now everyone is questioning, does the math work in all of these seats? Might it not be quite what it was? It's immensely fascinating. I don't think there's probably more than 15 or 20 seats at play. Like this is going to be the smallest playing field.

[C]

Everybody, everybody says that there's just no sign of any either side expanding the field.

[B]

Yeah. So I mean you accept? Yeah, so I mean whoever wins is probably looking at a super small majority. And I mean candidly, if I were J.D. vance, I'd want the Democrats to win a chamber. I think it's hard to keep straight party to control everything for a long period of time. At some point voters say we want a Little bit of a change here.

[C]

I don't think he's rooting for that. But I take your point there, Sean. What's happened with like, James Blair and the big vaunted political operation, like, were they obviously California. We talked about the fact they didn't try to raise money there. So a lot of effort in some, on some level, but they can't, they can't be happy that their scheme to, to sneak attack has been met by the Democrats and the courts to kind of neuter the whole thing, it appears.

[D]

Yeah. I mean, look, I think first of all, you're going to see a, a court challenge on, on Utah because there's, there was serious question about whether or not the, the, that court had the authority to do that. So I think you're going to see the Utah Supreme Court take that up. That was definitely a setback, but I actually think the bigger setback could have been potentially plus two on the Dem side. So walking away plus one is probably somewhat of a win. And then you've got a lot of TBDs. Florida, I think, is easily a plus three, and there's a couple more. So I think look to the broader point. Absolutely. We've gone through a lot for, for what, maybe four or five seats, but that may be the ball game. There's about 17 to 19 seats in play. So if you can pick up four or five at the end of the day, that's not a bad deal. And I think to your point about these halvesies, you're right. I mean, in Texas, there's definitely four. We're playing for the fifth, but that's whatever. But I also think there's people on our side that think that, like, you know, David Valadao could make a really good play for one of those seats in California. And so you could mute some potentially. I mean, look, so the bottom line is I think we probably end up plus five or six, but you do a lot for five. Or it's sort of like, is the juice worth the squeeze?

[C]

Yeah. And don't forget, we could still have a Supreme Court decision on the voting rights.

[D]

Voting rights.

[C]

That would open up a dot, I.

[B]

Think, and that would change everything.

[C]

It doesn't.

[D]

And that goes back to that Clyburn seat, by the way, because the one thing that's interesting about South Carolina is he actually undermines his own argument. You can't. If it's not a majority minority district, which he's clearly staying on that clip, that it wasn't, and they've elected a black senator on The Republican side, it's very hard to make the case that you need.

[B]

You know, I mean, I think it will get struck down. Yeah, yeah.

[D]

Oh, it's definitely going to get struck.

[C]

Just question this question of do they do it in time to affect this cycle. Right. They may not. I again, I recommend that Wall Street Journal story. It focuses on John Roberts and it's pegged to the tariff decision. But it talks about the fact that even though the court has, through orders, often unsigned orders, given the president a lot of leeway on executive power, they've not actually done a decision on that. And if they do, if they do strike down the tariffs in whole or in part, the authority the president's tried to use, it'll it some say it'll be a sign that Roberts is trying to lead the court towards restraining this president's extraordinary efforts to use executive power. And it could lead to a cascade of decisions on a bunch of stuff that would be a problem. And we don't know when that's coming. They could do it in a hyper expedited way. As you know, the Halperin urging is that the courts act like a co equal. If they want to be a co equal branch, they should operate on time that they wouldn't be writing these decisions with quill pens. But we don't know. It could happen two weeks, it could happen in three months. We don't know. But again, worth reading that Journal story if you haven't. All right, one more topic. A couple things on the media and then to your question. So again, if you want to get in the conversation, maybe you've never raised your hand before, but you feel like today be a good day to do it. Go ahead and do it. All right, Washington Post. I'm monitoring the Post closely for whether they're knowing what time it is, as the kids say, on liberal media bias. Because the people who are managing the paper really don't want the paper to be liberal. But they still have a bunch of legacy reporters there who don't know what time it is and think, you know, it's okay to be hostile to Donald Trump. So this piece caught my eye. This is number 107. The Post talked to a group of women around the country about how they feel about the Trump administration and about Donald Trump. And, and then they went back and talked to a bunch of them again. Here's the headline. How women feel about Trump's presidency. Colon, Heartbreak, fatigue, gratitude. So, Sean, just your thoughts as a student of media bias and of the Post specifically, is that Is that all right? Or do you find that to be annoying in some way?

[D]

It's annoying. It's literally them looking for, for issues to bring up. So I, again, and there several yesterday that blew my mind. They're, they're just so out to lunch. Yeah, I mean, I, they love to talk about democracy dying in darkness. They're doing everything to, to kill that paper in, in right and clear as day.

[C]

I, I do feel if you want to look for, you know, green shoots and signs of progress, I, I think five years ago they wouldn't have put gratitude in there. At least they, oh, well, it was.

[D]

Sort of like, hey, we'll find five people.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

Four of them will hate Trump and we'll find one that says he's not bad.

[C]

Yeah. But at least they put that in, Dan, both that story and then in general, as you read the Washington Post, obviously a key part of the media firmament. Do you think they're, they're being less anti Trump now than they were?

[B]

I mean, I think it's less anti Trump, but it's still on the whole, anti Trump. We were texting yesterday, all of us, about the poll of Republicans that, you know, Chris Cox was in there as a dark horse for 2028. We all just, you know, chuckled at that as like, you know, the Never Trumpers are going to resume and retake the party here in the next two and a half years. You know, I think there are little signs. Even the New York Times at times will mention, you know, why Democrats are struggling or talk about kind of Trump's strengths in some areas. But as a rule, it's the headlines say it all.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

So can I tell you this is the interesting thing to me, Mark, is that if I were late 90s or early 2000s, back in my old staff job on the Hill, and someone called from the Washington Post, it mattered because it was going to drive news the next day. It was going to be part of the cable news cycle of stories, et cetera, et cetera, on my side. Now, I don't think we care what the Washington Post. It's not irrelevant, but it's becoming more and more irrelevant in the ecosystem system. It's not like Fox is going to pick it up, that story or so. So, like, you can literally realize that, that people that you care about in your base are not seeing that anymore, whereas it used to be part of it just, it would get into the bloodstream. So the, the Washington Post and the New York Times in particular are becoming less and less relevant every day. To their own making.

[C]

It's a, I think it's a totally important and sophisticated point. And I would say almost everyone I know in MAGA agrees with you, Sean. With one exception, the President.

[B]

Well, but I think the thing is, what's different now is both parties have a bloodstream and they're separate. So if you just, it's like two alternate universes at times on the same issue. So on our side, what the New York Times writes in the Washington Post gets on msnbc, it feeds Blue Sky. Like there's a whole ecosystem on your side. You're right. It's totally irregular. Fox is not pulling clips from it. And then all the right wing talkers are not, you know, picking up off of it, etc. Except to mock it to market. So I think that's the, the one, the one.

[C]

I agree with everything you say. With one exception, the Times. I think the Post less so. The Times still has the capacity to drive news if they've got a story that if it appeared someplace else, people.

[D]

If it's investigative general, as does the.

[B]

Post, by the way, if they have.

[C]

I feel, I feel, I feel less. I feel it's less.

[D]

I just don't know that they have investigative reporters at the Post anymore at the time still does. And they've got, you know, people look at campaign finance and things that like, like that.

[C]

Yeah. All right. The BBC thing is so interesting that two top people at the BBC, including Deborah Turnass, who used to run NBC, both resigned. What's confusing to me about this controversy where they, they aired a documentary last year that put, that put together Trump's comments from January six in which they made it seem like he basically said, everybody go up there and storm the Capitol by splicing together different parts. What's what. Here's the headline from the New York Times. And the American media is covering this obsessively. Why the BBC is facing its gravest crisis in decades. The British public service broadcaster apologized Monday for misleadingly edited documentary about President Trump. But the scandal has already claimed two of its top executives. Here's what's confusing to me, Dan, about this. The thing they put together. These were not some obscure Trump comments. These are like super famous Trump comments that have been analyzed and investigated and written about for, for years now. The notion that they needed some outside investigator to say, was this misleading? I mean, of course it was misleading, but on the face of it, and of course ridiculous that they did what they did. But I don't really understand why this is like some bombshell report that's a surprise to anybody, you know what I'm saying?

[B]

Like, yeah, no, I totally.

[C]

If it's an outrage. If it's an outrage now, why was it an outrage right when they did it?

[B]

Yeah. And I mean, first off, I just. That day speaks for itself. I don't know why they had to try to edit it to make it look worse than it was. Like, it's pretty obvious what happened. The only thing I've read that maybe answers the question is that there were other stories in which they were increasingly being accused of selective editing, of not telling the whole truth. And so it could be that somehow this got resurfaced. Trump has been suing people in the last, you know, in this year over stuff. It's. I'm curious. And why they took their reaction to this. The US President, I would think digging in against him would be good for them.

[C]

Sean, the president's threatening to sue them and he's asking for an apology and all this stuff. They've already taken the documentary in question off the website. But do you think the British. I mean, again, the BBC is quasi governmental. You think there, this is another case of they don't want to be on Donald Trump's bad side, and that's why this is happening.

[D]

Well, first, I mean, the Telegraph, which kind of has pushed this, did a great job of really analyzing the timeline and making it a big deal. And so there's a lot of fuel to this fire that's coming from other media sources looking to attack the BBC. I mean, that's part of this. And I think Deborah Turness is sort of pretending that this isn't a scandal. Was. Is sort of literally unbelievable. The way that they're like, we did nothing wrong and it's not up for debate. I mean, I find that whole fascinating. The other thing that I find fascinating is the BBC, in my experience, generally loves to very clearly compartmentalize their different news divisions. So they'll say, oh, that's the documentary team. They have nothing to do with news. And then you've got. And so the idea that the entire brand is coming down with this, to me, is a huge failure on their PR team's fault, because they are always good when people interact with them. There's a lot of folks in the White House and during the campaign that ban the BBC because of their bias coverage. And I think the BBC has always been very. Tried to be very clear about how to bifurcate the different sections. Oh, this isn't. We're not dealing with this anymore. This is a huge brand issue and I wouldn't be surprised if Starmer, the Prime Minister, gets involved in this for exactly the point that you raised. In the same way that Mark Carney in Canada was getting involved when Mayor Ford made the Ontario commercial.

[C]

Yeah. So a couple things our colleagues have shared with me. First of all, the documentary wasn't produced in house, but they did air it. And then some of the controversy over bias has to do with the executives not owning up on things like some trans coverage, some coverage of Israel. But it's still, it's still of a piece with the notion that Donald Trump is leading just as, as he's led on immigration, had an impact around the world, particularly in Europe, leading on this question of pushing back against liberal media bias. Okay, before we leave, the topic of the BBC, Dan, what's your number one desert island disc?

[B]

Desert island disc, what does that mean?

[C]

Oh, my goodness, Sean, do you know what I'm talking about? So there's some radio, famous radio show. I'm embarrassed. I don't know the full details. There's a show on BBC Radio where they ask celebrities like what, what if you were on a desert island and you can only bring one album, what would it be? So what's your number one desert island disc, Dan?

[B]

Oh, I'm a huge Beatles fan. So.

[C]

So sergeant Pepper the way.

[B]

Yeah, sure. Yep.

[C]

Take the white out because then you get two albums.

[B]

Good call.

[C]

Okay, Sean.

[D]

Should be a no brainer. Christopher Cross's Flamingo album, 1970 over greatest hits. Yeah, because that's, this is the OG this has got ride like the wind, sailing. I mean, you're getting everything.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Mark, are you Tay Tay, Is that.

[C]

No, no, no. Sinatra's greatest hits would be, would be mine just because, you know, that'll last forever. All right, quick word from a sponsor then to your questions. Another opportunity to buy stuff for yourself, but also holiday gifts from the good folks at Poncho. This falls. Poncho's got you covered with classics like denim and flannels. Also new styles like the western polo and the tough thread. Their clothes are comfortable, durable and versatile to whatever the season brings. Go to ponchooutdoors.com 2wmm Again, ponchooutdoors.com the number 2wmm that stands for two way morning meeting and buy to your heart's desire. 10 off your first order. Free shipping on denim jeans, flannels, western polos. The poncho promises is both simple and spectacular. Free shipping, free returns, free exchanges. If you don't like the size you got. Poncho stands by every shirt. They'll make it right. If you get something and you don't think it is your favorite Again, go to ponchooutdoors.com 2wmm Enter your email. You get $10 off your first order and shipping is free. And then when that little pop up comes up and they say, how did you learn about poncho outdoors? Say two way morning meeting sent you. It helps us like crazy, so please do that. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

[B]

Hey, new to TikTok, here's a gift just for you. Join TikTok today and claim your $20.

[C]

No minimum spend voucher. Completely, completely free.

[B]

Simply download the TikTok app, search for.

[C]

Get tick, that's G E T T I K and your voucher will be ready to use right away.

[B]

Spend it freely on TikTok shop, fashion, gadgets, beauty and more.

[C]

Don't wait.

[B]

Download TikTok today and grab your $20 voucher now.

[C]

All right, everybody, time for your questions.

[B]

By the way, Mark, Chad, apparently it's a news flash that we're old because our music tastes are horrifying to a significant number of people.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, we are old.

[B]

Like horrifying, but.

[C]

But like Taylor Swift likes Frank Sinatra.

[B]

So, you know, the white hair and receding hairline didn't give me away. With my age, I'm shocked.

[C]

Michael Flanagan, welcome in.

[G]

All right, I gotta start with Dire Straits making movies.

[C]

Good choice. Also good choice. It wouldn't be in my top 10, but it's a good choice. Thank you for sharing that. What's your mind, Mr. Flank and remind people where you live and share.

[G]

I'm in Randolph, New Jersey, which is northwest. And for and for Sean. I've been a patriot season ticket holder for 17 years. From here.

[C]

How many home games have you driving? How many home games have you been to? How many home games you've been to this year?

[G]

I've been to one. My son's in Boston. He's been all the other ones when the kids were little. I drive up and back so I could make work on Monday.

[C]

Are the crafts? Are the crafts good owners?

[G]

The crafts always send you a great gift.

[C]

Yeah.

[G]

Like here we got a varsity jacket. Patriot varsity jacket, which was outstanding.

[C]

You got that? You got that handy. I'd like to see it. Is it?

[G]

I think I might have in the closet over here.

[C]

All right. Take a walk while you're walking. Tell us what's on your mind.

[G]

So, Mark, a request for you guys in two way the health care decision looks really tough, you know, to solve. And I really think we need two way to do some type of round table to get to the issues.

[C]

Policy, mean on.

[G]

On. On policy and anything, you know, like, I think only. The only thing Congress is going to do is just around the edges and it's not going to solve anything.

[C]

Yeah.

[G]

You know, like, if you look at health care, unless it's direct to consumer, it doesn't work. The only two procedures that have actually gone down in price or stayed below the late the rate of inflation is plastic surgery and Lasix. Eye surgery.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

Are you. Are you. Are you in. Are you in the industry? Are you just a well informed consumer?

[G]

I'm a well informed consumer. I'm the guy that's been to the doctor twice in the last five years, but pay 2,200amonth in premiums.

[C]

Yeah.

[G]

And then have a $5,000.

[C]

First of all, Michael, are you not getting. Are you not getting checkups?

[G]

No, I get my blood work taken myself through LabCorp like four times a year. If my numbers come back out of the scale, I talk to my doctor and I go and I see my doctor.

[C]

All right. I'm not sure I can endorse that, but. Do you want to ask a question or you want.

[D]

I think there's a broader point.

[C]

Do you want to talk about what you raised?

[G]

I think, I think the broader point is, you know, like you, I think two way needs to use the platform to bring in the people that have different views.

[C]

I agree.

[G]

In order to, you know, like, take the narrative beyond can we subsidize Obamacare and all that fun stuff.

[C]

I agree with a big aspiration to do policy, including health care policy. And I appreciate your endorsement of our aspiration. We just. As we grow as a company, we'll do more of it.

[G]

And I can't find the jacket. My wife hit it somewhere.

[C]

All right, when you come back and just hold it up. Michael, thank you. Appreciate it.

[D]

How do they know what size to send you, Michael?

[C]

Do they just guess I was. No, no.

[G]

They ask you your size, Sean, for everything they send you.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

I only say that because I'm still on the waiting list.

[C]

Yeah. Michael, thank you. I appreciate the recommendation. And again, I wasn't being flipped. We really do want to do that.

[D]

You know, one point about. About what Michael suggested, which I wholeheartedly endorse. I think that health care is like technology, which is you want these folks, you don't want the people that are supposed to address them in Congress. I have as much confidence in them being able to address AI and technology concerns as I do health care, which is not. Not a lot.

[B]

I'll actually disagree with you a little bit of that, Sean. There are some serious, serious experts, both on the member and staff level, who understand this. Well, the problem is the other 90% don't. The politics of this, when you get in, I mean, go back to the death panels, creating insurance pools to lower cost. How do you deal with drugs? How do you deal with, you know, my father's last week of life was half a million dollars. He had terminal cancer. He had multiple strokes. We knew what the outcome was, but you keep trying to keep them alive and do all these things to get through. In a. You know, in a lot of worlds, you'd look at that and say, what are we doing? You know? But as a family member, I was like, try everything you could. But it's. It's a tough, tough issue. It's brutal.

[C]

Yeah. Yes. Ever since Sarah Palin popularized the word, the phrase death panels, it's become hard to have a reasonable debate about the very high percentage of money we spend on healthcare for people in the last days of their lives. It's very tough issue. Wayne, welcome in. Tell folks where you are, what your Desert Ireland disc would be and what's on your mind.

[E]

Yeah.

[B]

Wayne Null.

[E]

I live in Southern Indiana, little town Cynthiana, which is north of Evansville. I'm a pastor of a small church here, and I really like Sean's suggestion about Christopher Cross. That was a great album. I had that one. And I was, I don't know, 15 or something like that. Had a lot of good songs on it.

[C]

You and Sean can share, then you just bring it back.

[E]

I don't really listen to albums anymore. I listen to a lot of Christian contemporary music, but it, you know, albums. I just don't think of it that way.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Stream it on your phone or do you stream it on a computer or my phone?

[E]

I've got. I've got hearing aids and so. And I've got it where I've actually connected to the hearing aids so I can listen to it.

[B]

Oh, wow.

[E]

Yeah.

[C]

Wayne, what's on your mind? What's on your mind besides music?

[E]

By the way, Sean, I read your book over the summer, and I really enjoyed it. Which one mentioned that? The one.

[D]

There's four.

[C]

Yeah.

[E]

Okay. I guess it was the first one, the briefing. It was very interesting hearing about your life.

[D]

Thank you.

[C]

Yeah.

[E]

Well, I just wanted to mention a couple of unintended consequences that I think of from the shutdown. And that's some light that's been shown on some things that maybe not everybody knew about. I, I consider myself to be fairly up on the news, but I didn't know that the ACA was being propped up with these subsidies.

[B]

And some of it is. Yeah.

[E]

So I, you know, that's. So I think about the debate back 15 years ago about the ACA and how that it was going to pay for itself and all this and it was going to drive down costs. And I mean, none of that has ended up being true. So I think, you know, or do we, we need to take a look at that part.

[C]

Part of why, part of why it's not true is because at the time they passed it and I was covering it, covering the White House at the time they said we have to have, I'll just use a shorthand here. Death panels. We have to have this committee that meets every year, I think, to decide what things can cost. And if we don't have that, they said if we don't have that, it won't work. Because some people tried to get it out. They said we have to have it, it's in the bill. But they never did it. So I mean, even by their own account of how the thing was going to work, it was doomed to fail in terms of controlling costs.

[E]

Yeah. I mean, I don't consider myself an Einstein, but I couldn't see how the thing could possibly work at the time. So the other, the other thing I wanted to mention was the fact that it's shown that I think it's like one out of eight households snap. That the government is paying for their food. Yeah, I don't think most people realize that. And I'm not against that. I mean, I'm not against, I have, I have a daughter that is in a wheelchair and she has spina bifida and it's a great help to her. She can't work that type of thing. That there's lots and lots of people that could be working. Just mention that. The other, the other thing I just wanted to mention was President Trump's and I'm a Trump supporter. I don't support every single thing he does. I voted for him three times. But the two thousand dollar rebate or whatever they're calling it, that seems to me like that would be highly inflationary. I think when they, when they gave the, started handing out money during the, during COVID I think that was a terrible thing. Whether, whether it was under Trump or under Obama. I mean, under Biden it ended up, I think it was one of the big drivers of inflation and nobody really talks about that much anymore.

[C]

Wayne, thank you for that. Two great points. Sean, comments on Wayne's second point.

[D]

Yeah, I agree. Look, I think between the inflationary potential that that would cause, it's bad. Two, I just think, you know, we're $38 trillion in debt. We need to be honest with where we are as a country and what's happening. And I agree with you on the health care thing, too. I think the previous person listed off Lasik. That's always, to me, sort of been the as a guy who got Lasik, that's the, I mean, cost got driven down. I get that you can't have entire market forces on everything, but there is an element that's missing and we as consumers don't have skin in the game. And that's the problem, right, is that until you go into the office and have to have and it could be $5 to 100, but it doesn't always have to be if you don't feel like there's a cost cost associated with, you know, there's some men that are like our previous guy who doesn't go for every five years and then there's some people who go every five minutes. So what's the There's a balance that I think is missing in health care in terms of a market force. And I'm not going to say I can solve it right now, but I think that that's the flip side from the entire takeover is how do you put some element in there?

[B]

Dan, I think the thing about Obamacare is you got to go back to when they were doing it. They spent the first half of 2009 working with Republicans trying to find a way to get a bipartisan deal. And then Chuck Grassley famously says, like, there's nothing you can give me. You can give me everything and I won't vote for it. So then they cut bait. They're trying to figure out what this looks like. The politics change. Scott Brown wins. They know they're gonna get drubbed. The feeling was, get this on the books, it's going to cover millions of people. It's got lots of problems, but we'll fix it. With tens of millions of people insured, the ACA subsidies, this is like there's a fact politically, Republican states, because it was popular, Tea Party era, don't accept Medicaid expansion, right? You lose your primary. But P.S. we really want health care for our people. How can we backdoor this so it doesn't look like we accepted the Obamacare because we'd lose a primary and cover people. It's not illegal immigrants that are getting this. It's millions of people in red states that did not expand Medicaid. That's why the White House knows they got a problem. It's their people, quote unquote. You're pulling health insurance from. So that's why you have people like Tom Cotton, even Lindsey Graham talking about how well we got to have some fixed folks. So the problem with health care is it is such a complicated, messy, expensive issue dealing with life and death and health that if it were easy, would have been done. But I think the Obama people did the right thing, get it on the books. Millions of people have health insurance even if it's expensive and messy because of him. And he and Nancy Pelosi deserve, I think, a tremendous amount of credit.

[C]

Wayne, thank you. Grateful to you for coming on. Quick word from a sponsor. Take Lean food fad diet of health care. Yeah. Fad diets. Juice cleanses, cabbage soup diet. Imagine somebody doing a cabbage food diet.

[D]

I've done it when I had to make weight as like 10 years ago. Yeah, Cabbage soup. That'll average. That'll get you going.

[C]

Average person by the time they hit 60, they've lost and regained several hundred pounds, which does huge damage to you. It's called weight cycling. Horrible idea. And weight cycling happens if you try to lose weight without proper guidance. Most people need help to stop weight cycling and to lose weight. Here's a great way to do it. The non prescription Lean created by doctors. It's not. It's an oral supplement, not one of those GLP1 injectables. And the science behind it allows you to maintain healthy blood sugar, control appetite and cravings and help burn fat by converting it to energy. Right now you want to try their products and get 20% off. Go to takelean.com use the promo code again 2wmm two way morning meaning takelean.com 20% off. Go to takeLean.com again the promo code is 2wmm. Thank you for the attention. That's matter. And guys, I couldn't help but notice you're both wearing very handsome morning meeting gear from our friends at Fairway and Green. We had somebody on two way tonight last night, young lady who came on and said she loves her golf stuff, she's a golfer and she's ready to start sleeping in it because it's as comfortable as pajamas and people have been coming on lately and Saying. I don't mean to sound like everybody else, but yeah, it's so. It's so comfortable. Sean, are you. What is that? Is that. Is that his vest? What do you got on? That's a vest? Yeah.

[D]

By the way, you can probably tell I'm out on the west coast, traveled out here and when I flew out, I literally had the polo with the quarter zip and the vest. I was full fairway and green the whole flight.

[C]

Was the person sitting next to you on the flight touching your clothes?

[D]

I will tell you that the person behind me may have done a little touching. It was a very interesting flight. I will say that in terms of who was on there, there interesting. Some very interesting people in the media.

[C]

Instagram.

[D]

Well, I. It was inappropriate to take photos, but I will just say this.

[C]

Well, all right. Anyway, if you want to dress like Dan and Sean, throw your Botany 500 stuff out in the trash and go to Two Way TV Fairway. The 25 sale still on 25 discount.

[D]

Take advantage of that shopping this morning.

[C]

Election 20 election 25. You can get the stuff with our logos, our catchphrases. Catchphrases such as no smack in the chat or peace, love and understanding or conversations. All available to you. Or you can just get the unadorned regular merch. All extremely nice. Again, 25 off. And. And Thursday night, please save time with me at seven Eastern time right after two way. Tonight we're gonna have a special opportunity for members of the two way community to shop till you drop of fairway and green products. So 7pm Thursday, please. Eastern, please.

[B]

Cyber Thursday.

[C]

Exactly. It's going to be a cyber ish Thursday. Chris, we have almost no time. But we haven't seen you in so long.

[D]

He missed.

[B]

Canary in the coal mine.

[C]

I yield to the gentleman of Georgia with the admonition and warning that I will mute you and one minute whether you're done or not. So the floor is yours. Chris, welcome back.

[F]

I want to commend Dan on his defense of Obama's efforts on health care.

[C]

Yes, sir.

[F]

I want to remind all of you that Dan Olivo told you months ago that the ICE race were going to cost the Republicans, the Latinos, and look what happened. And then I want to challenge Sean's assertion that somehow I think I heard you basically saying that the fact that Tim Scott is elected in South Carolina aids the support for why we don't need black districts. Was that your point?

[D]

No, it is not my point. It is being brought up as one of the reasons.

[F]

Okay, good. It's A weak point because the Section 2 of the Voting Rights act supported those black districts for reasons that blacks vote similarly and white majority votes defeat black preferences. Tim Scott only gets 8% of the black vote. So him being elected is totally irrelevant to whether black voters will be diluted by. Not by being spread across white districts where they'll be outvoted. So whoever's. Whoever's pushing that, give my phone number, please. I got something.

[C]

All right, Chris, stand by.

[D]

Sean, again, Chris has got a good point, as he always does. You know, to me, this is. There's a case that's going against South Carolina, in particular Mr. Clyburn's district. As Mr. Clyburn said on Morning Joe, because it's a 47% black district, it is technically doesn't qualify as a majority minority district. The other thing that people in South Carolina are pointing to is that, you know, part of the Tim Scott election statewide shows that you don't need the Voting Rights act to do it. So I. My point broadly is that there's a lot of people in that. That case in South Carolina that are pointing to why the VRA is not applicable.

[C]

Yeah, Chris, I'll yield 15 more seconds if you want to share your desert island disc with us.

[F]

I just want to say to all the people in the chat who always say I only bring up race. Yeah, I talked about tariffs and Kamala and a bunch of other stuff, but the reason I have to bring up race is because too many of some other folk want to pretend doesn't exist.

[C]

Then why don't you say your favorite desert island just to be Donnie? Donnie and Marie? I'd screw everybody's up.

[F]

I don't use my time for peripheral points.

[C]

Okay. All right. Good to see you. Thank you for coming on. Appreciate it. All right, John, what do you have tonight?

[D]

Well, tonight, just on a personal level, I'm out here in L. A. It's the 20th anniversary dancing with the Stars.

[F]

So.

[D]

Donny Osmond, you just brought him up. He was one of the first contestants I'm going to. Who knows? Maybe he'll be here tonight as well.

[C]

Is that a live show?

[D]

The show is live as it is every Monday, 8pm Eastern.

[C]

Will you be a little nervous?

[D]

No, I've gotten over that. Plus, I got a hamstring that's pulled. Yeah. So it's interesting that we spent the whole time talking, a lot of time talking about redistricting tonight, if people remember my road to 270 show, we're gonna go state by state. Literally all the red states, all the blue states, every state, Utah, Virginia, with Adam Kincaid. He is the president of the National Republican Redistricting Trust. And just talk about what, what each party hopes to get out of each state and where we'll be at the end. So if you're a political, you know, dork, geek, whatever, like, want to see every single state, what is possible? This is what we're doing tonight.

[C]

All right. Later on, a new episode of Next up drops amongst my guests, Megan Kelly and my reported monologue on why both parties have a problem with anti Semitism. Two WAY Tonight, taping early tonight, five Eastern. Two spectacular guests. If you're a fan of two WAY tonight, you've seen them both, you know their work. Hogan Gidley and Steve Elmendorf will join me to talk about all the news of the day. And then it will stream live or stream at 6 o' clock normally on YouTube and on X. And then Michael Moynihan. Moynihan report at seven o'. Clock. So two two WAYS to come. Again, note the special time for two WAY tonight, five Eastern. And thanks to all of you who wrote in, either asking about sponsorships or investment opportunities with two way. Grateful to you. Again, please don't be alarmed or hurt if we don't get right back to you, particularly on the investment side because the series B is not till next year. But we're collecting everybody's name. It's in contact and we will be back in touch. Thank you all for watching. Thank you for being part of two way. Went a little bit over, so apologies to the affiliates for that. And we'll see you all tomorrow morning, 9am Eastern Time for the morning meeting. Have a great day.