← Americast
Americast
Americanswers! Vance vs Rubio… who will take over from Trump in 2028?
00:37:48
And Democrats suffer a major blow ahead of the midterms
Loading summary
Transcript80 lines
- [00:00]
Justin Webb
This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.
- [00:06]
Anthony Zurcher
Yes you can. A five minute quick and easy calorie burning workout. Give it a try. Come join our sweat sesh on TikTok. Are you really buying a car online on Autotrader right now?
- [00:21]
Justin Webb
Really?
- [00:22]
Anthony Zurcher
At a playground?
- [00:23]
Justin Webb
Yeah, really? Look at these listings from dealers.
- [00:26]
Anthony Zurcher
Wow, your search can really get that specific.
- [00:28]
Justin Webb
Really?
- [00:29]
Anthony Zurcher
And you just put in your info and boom, car's in your budget.
- [00:32]
Justin Webb
Mom needs a second.
- [00:33]
Anthony Zurcher
Honey, you can really have it delivered.
- [00:35]
Justin Webb
Really? Or I can pick it up at the dealership. One sec, sweetie. Mommy's buying a car.
- [00:41]
Anthony Zurcher
Mommy, look. I think your kid is walking up the slide.
- [00:43]
Justin Webb
Kyle.
- [00:44]
Anthony Zurcher
Again? Really?
- [00:45]
Justin Webb
Auto trader.
- [00:46]
Anthony Zurcher
Buy your car online.
- [00:47]
Justin Webb
Really? Marco Rubio vs. J.D. vance, who is the current favorite between them to replace Donald Trump at the top of the Republican ticket in 2028? Well, there is news not only about the relative balance of those two, but also potentially questions about other people coming to the fore. So we're going to talk a bit about that. Plus, Democrats have suffered a really big blow in their hopes to regain control of Congress. It's because of a court ruling in Virginia. Why does it matter so much? We'll be talking about that too. Answering your questions, we'll. Welcome to America Answers
- [01:27]
Anthony Zurcher
AmericasT.
- [01:28]
Justin Webb
AmericasT from BBC News. You hear that sound? Oh, I think when I hear that
- [01:33]
Anthony Zurcher
sound, it reminds me of money.
- [01:35]
Justin Webb
We didn't start this war, but under President Trump, we are finishing it.
- [01:39]
Anthony Zurcher
This is a big cover up and this administration is engaged in it. This guy has Trump derangement syndrome. I have four words for you. Turn the volume up.
- [01:53]
Justin Webb
Hello, it's Justin in the worldwide headline quarters of AmericasT in London, England.
- [01:57]
Anthony Zurcher
And it's Anthony here in my home in Arlington, Virginia.
- [02:00]
Justin Webb
And we are not joined this time round by Matt Chorley, who's doing other things. So Anthony and I are going to answer your questions just between the two of us to the extent that we can, which means he will answer them very well. And I'll do my best. Anthony, let's start with this business of the Republican succession because it is something that is increasingly on people's minds. And we've had this question about 2028 and what happens. So Goric in Malaga in Spain says you guys are always on about possible Democratic candidates. What about the Republicans? Will it boil down to a contest between JG Vance and Marco Rubio? Will there be a strong candidate out of left field? Will Trump anoint anyone? And on a side note, Goric asks, how significant is it that both Vance and Rubio are practicing Catholics in a country which culturally seems predominantly Protestant. Thank you. He says. Before we get to that question, let's hear from both of them, from Rubio and from Vance, because they've both gone viral in the last week or so. Though Vance, not for very happy reasons. For him, Rubio, much the opposite. He was very much doing well. So let's hear JD Vance stumbling a bit. And then after him, Marco Rubio answering a question from the press in the White House. I see Iowa farmers who need to
- [03:16]
Anthony Zurcher
get that E15 to market. What is this? What is.
- [03:22]
Justin Webb
Zach, you're gonna have to help me
- [03:23]
Anthony Zurcher
out with her name here. I lost my page here.
- [03:26]
Justin Webb
Okay.
- [03:28]
Anthony Zurcher
All right. Okay. There we go. Sarah Trone Garriott.
- [03:31]
Justin Webb
There he is.
- [03:32]
Anthony Zurcher
I'm on the wrong page here.
- [03:34]
Justin Webb
I gotta ask you, what is your hope for America at a time such as this? Yeah, look, I mean, my hope for America is what it's always been. I think it's the hope I hope we all share. We want it to continue to be the place where anyone from anywhere can achieve anything, where you're not limited by the circumstances of your birth, by the color of your skin, by your ethnicity. But frankly, it's a place where you are able to overcome challenges and achieve your full potential. I think that should be the goal of every country in the world, frankly. But I think in the US we're not perfect. Our history is not one of perfection, but it's still better than anybody else's history. And ours is a story of perpetual improvement, each generation.
- [04:09]
Anthony Zurcher
So, you know, I was watching Rubio there. That was his press conference at the White House last week, his first one, filling in for Caroline Leavitt, the press secretary, who is on maternity leave now. And I remember seeing him answer that softball question from a Christian Broadcasting Network reporter and thinking, oh, my gosh, that sounds like a campaign stump speech. Well, I guess the Rubio people thought so, too, because just the next day, they put it out on social media with patriotic music in the background and clips of Donald Trump and Americans doing their everyday jobs. Very kind of rousing. It looked like the kind of thing that Rubio wants to put out if he is thinking about running for 2028. And then, of course, that clip of J.D. vance in Ohio sounding a little less ready for primetime, stumbling a bit. I think that's a reflection of the fact that Rubio, he ran for president in 2016. He's been around for a while. He's a polished politician. The thing we have to keep reminding ourselves about. J.D. vance is. He's only run for two offices, first for the Senate from Ohio, and then for Vice president. He doesn't have nearly the same amount of experience as Rubio.
- [05:23]
Justin Webb
Yeah. And on the Senate, he didn't actually do very well, did he? I mean, he got over the line, but he didn't do as well as he probably should have done in that Senate race. In other words, he does have some questions about his sort of political abilities. And obviously in the vice presidential race, well, he was on the Trump ticket, so he survived or failed by Trump and Rubio. My goodness. I mean, you mentioned he ran in 2016. He got pummeled in 2016, didn't he, by. By one Donald J. Trump. And I think at the time I certainly felt, whoa, that's the end of it for. For Rubio. He's incredibly resilient, isn't he? And, and you do wonder if actually he's a bit more resilient than. Than J.D. vance. He's a slightly softer character, slightly more amiable, perhaps in Persona, but actually he might be a bit tougher.
- [06:16]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, that press conference was really interesting, not just for that little snippet, but for the way he handled the questions from the White House press corps. He joked, he was friendly, he wasn't really confrontational. It was definitely a contrast to Caroline Levitt and also to J.D. vance, who always kind of picks a fight with the press when he's there. Same with Pete Hegseth when he's holding his press conferences at the Pentagon as Secretary of Defense. Rubio is a different sort of political animal, but he has skills. That 2016 campaign, yeah, it kind of went off the rails. You have to remember, going into it, he was considered kind of a dark horse favorite, someone who could appeal to Hispanic voters who would kind of straddle the line between the conservative grassroots folks and the Republican establishment. Then, of course, Donald Trump came in and blew it all up. And. And there was that famous debate in New Hampshire where Rubio just got got knifed in the back by Chris Christie, the former New Jersey governor, who said he was robotic and planned. And then Rubio proceeded to say things that were very robotic and pre planned, and it tanked his campaign. He has recovered from that. He has been a survivor, and he's been one of the few people, I think, who has really done a good job of pivoting from establishment, pre Donald Trump, darling, to someone who folks in Donald Trump's orbit, maybe they don't fully trust, but they seem to be warming to.
- [07:45]
Justin Webb
Yeah. J.D. vance, meanwhile, is in a difficult spot, isn't it? Because it's pretty obvious he doesn't really approve of the Iran war and he needs to make people aware of that. But at the same time, he needs to be loyal to the president that he's serving under, et cetera, et cetera, and what that does to his. Ultimately, one would assume that he would be the anointed one, although we might talk in a minute about who Trump might anoint, which was part of that very good question, wasn't it? But if he has assumed that he's been in that position, then the recent events are not doing him any favors, are they? For the same, for the thing we've talked about before, that he's in the Kamala Harris positions, you're very tightly aligned with someone who might be going downhill politically.
- [08:30]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah. The best thing that J.D. vance has going for him is that he's Donald Trump's vice president. That does kind of position him as the heir apparent once Donald Trump exits from the scene. And there's some perks with being vice president. We saw that with Kamala Harris. You can travel around the country, you can network, you can form links to the kind of local political figures that are necessary in order to run a national campaign. You can develop a national fundraising network. We heard that clip of him that was part of a three state swing that included Oklahoma, but also included Iowa, which is, as you know, a key early battleground in the presidential election nomination contest. Iowa caucuses, at least for Republicans, still help set the playing field. It's the first time voters have a chance to weigh in on who the presidential nominee is going to be. So he has that ability to set that groundwork. I think he clearly has presidential ambitions. But the downside, as you point out, is that if Donald Trump really goes down in flames, if this Iran war drags on, he becomes very unpopular, stays unpopular, and the Trump brand is damaged going into the 2028 nomination cycle. Vance will be in a, in a difficult spot. And you know, for that matter, Rubio could be at a difficult spot, too. He's not immune from being tainted by the Iran war and being associated with Donald Trump if things really get, get uglied in the next couple of years.
- [10:01]
Justin Webb
And the other part of the question about them both being Catholics, interesting that, isn't it, in a still largely Protestant country? I mean, there is this strand, isn't there, on the broader American right, where Catholicism is very much part of what is absolutely in fashion, if I put it like that. They're not out of the mainstream of right wing thinking, which is enormously associated with the Catholic Church, although it's worth saying, not necessarily with this particular Pope, but in the wider nation. Does it matter one way or the other, do you think? When it comes to either of them being the actual candidate, I think you're right.
- [10:46]
Anthony Zurcher
I think within the Republican Party circles, being a conservative Catholic, I think that helps. I think there are a lot of, a lot of more prominent Republican politicians who either born Catholic or converted like J.D. vance did, because they feel that Catholicism, at least in the United States, is inherently conservative. They like the traditions, the norms, the institutions of the Catholic Church. Compared to some Protestant churches which have been moving more progressively, although not the evangelical church that still is a big bedrock of the Republican Party. But conservative Catholicism has been gaining more prominence among politicians, but also among the U.S. supreme Court. It is noteworthy. I think it's not determinative, but it will be an interesting dynamic in that Republican presidential campaign.
- [11:39]
Justin Webb
Yeah. Is there a single WASP on the court? White Anglo Saxon, Protestant.
- [11:44]
Anthony Zurcher
You know, white Anglo Saxon Protestants used to dominate the US Supreme Court, but not anymore really. I guess the closest you could say is Neil Gorsuch, who is an Episcopalian, but he was born Catholic. Justin, there are six Catholics currently on the Supreme Court. Out of the nine, that's John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, who was raised Catholic, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Elena Kagan is Jewish and Ketanjay Brown Jackson is Protestant. So yeah, it is a Catholic dominated Supreme Court.
- [12:18]
Justin Webb
What about other people? Because that was also part of the question, wasn't it? The idea that it's not necessarily those two which of again we've discussed a little bit in the past. We're obviously going to turn to it much more in the future. But the questioner rightly saying we concentrate on quite a range of Democrats. We've only really talked about those two on the Republican side and there could well be others. Indeed. Actually, we've had a question from Hugh in Cheshire saying could figures such as Marjorie Taylor Greene be well positioned as a vice presidential candidate? She may be able to bridge the gap between die hard MAGA supporters and more moderate Republicans. She was, of course, who was a great Trump supporter supporter who then fell out of it and has now left Congress, is very virulently opposed to him and he is very virulently opposed to her. I mean, there will be other people, won't there?
- [13:07]
Anthony Zurcher
There will be. Especially as we've said, if Donald Trump does not have the kind of influence that he has had in the Republican Party come just over a year and a half from now when this really gets going, you could see an outsider come in and lay claim to real Trumpism, real maga, independent of Donald Trump. Obviously a lot can happen between now and then. I think Marjorie Taylor Greene, because she has had such a visible break with Donald Trump, Donald Trump would have to be in political ruins for her to have the ability to step in at this point and lay claim to that mantle. I hear Tucker Carlson, the conservative commentator's name, come up a lot. Obviously he's had some, some disagreements with Donald Trump, but they always seem to put it behind them. In the end. He would be an interesting kind of an outsider candidate to swoop in. Brian Kemp, the governor of Georgia, also someone who has kind of an independent brand of conservatism and has stood up to Donald Trump, but hasn't been the direct target of his ire. You could see there's going to be a bunch of different senators running. Ted Cruz, he ran in 2016. I think he wants to, to run again. And then maybe there's someone totally out of left field, someone we're not expecting because, you know, come to think of it, Donald Trump surprised everyone in 2015 and they seem to. The Republican base seems to like outsiders, anti establishment candidates these days. Maybe Donald Trump Jr. Maybe someone else. It is, it is an open field. I think even if you look at polling right now shows that JD Vance has widespread support. 40% in opinion polls were among Republicans for who the nominee should be. Rubio falls down around the 20 range and then you have a lot of people in single digits.
- [14:55]
Justin Webb
Yeah, I mean, that's really interesting about Donald Trump Jr. Isn't it? So if it's him, we assume daddy supports him and the family and all the money goes, goes with him. There is really only room for one other lane, I would have thought, isn't there? And if you divide it into lanes where someone can run as the sort of coherent candidate that believes this set of principles are the future for the Republican Party, then you've got the, the Trumpian lane, which is the family lane. Have you then got, I would have thought that assists Brian Kemp in a funny kind of way, or someone who is outside who could then say, no, that's not the future. We've got to turn away from it.
- [15:35]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, there could be a non Trump lane in 2028, a non Trump tied lane. And that really does depend on the way things go in this country in the next year. Or so. But I think the one thing we could take from all of this is that Republicans will continue to look someone who embodies Trumpism, if not Trump himself. They like the anti establishment candidate. They like what Donald Trump has done to take it to institutions and elites in this country. And I don't think that is going away. I don't think what we're going to see is a return to the Mitt Romney, George W. Bush strain of Republicanism. I think that is dead and buried at this point.
- [16:19]
Justin Webb
Just a final thought on this before we get to other questions, Anthony. The other thing that Rubio did at that press conference, I mean, it in a sense is not impressive because it's a language that he knows. But he gave one answer, didn't he? Or part of one answer in Spanish. And I did wonder when he was doing that. If there's one constituency of people who were incredibly positive about Trump last time round, probably made the difference in a way to him winning, but have gone very, very cold on him in the period since they took him over the edge last time around. It's Hispanics and people who naturally then not necessarily would conduct their daily lives in Spanish, but they're certainly approachable in Spanish. And it's interesting that he, of course, was just reminding us that that's a language he can converse in.
- [17:09]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, that struck me as well. It was a Spanish language reporter who asked a question, English and Spanish, and then asked Rubio to respond and he said he would do it in both. And he speaks Spanish fluently. And that could be a secret weapon that Rubio has that he could use in a general election. It could help him in the primaries as well. Obviously, his base is Florida and Florida could be a key primary state. But being able to connect and activate Hispanic voters, Spanish speaking voters in a general election in 2028, after Donald Trump won them over, as you mentioned, a pivotal voting bloc in 2024 and then has lost them because of economic and immigration issues this time around. Republicans, if they're smart, if Republican voters, if they're smart, may be looking for someone who can, who can capitalize on that and reconnect in a way that maybe J.D. vance, who is an immigration hardliner, can't.
- [18:07]
Justin Webb
Yeah, let's turn to the Supreme Court decision in Virginia. So this is not the Supreme Court, the federal Supreme Court. This is the Virginia Supreme Court who have made a decision that I'm not sure we necessarily saw coming. And it's very bad news potentially for the Democrats, isn't it? And I'M going to defer to you, Anthony, to explain what it was that was happening and what it is that they've said.
- [18:28]
Anthony Zurcher
Well, so what the Virginia State Supreme Court did was essentially throw out the new maps that Virginia Democrats had drawn, giving their party a distinct advantage in the House delegation in Virginia. Right now, the Virginia delegation is six Democrats and five Republicans. These new maps are. Would have made it likely in November that 10 Democrats would win and only one Republican. All of this was done in response to a redistricting push that started in Texas with them redrawing their maps and giving Republicans an advantage there. Missouri had done it, of course. We talked about California, the Democrats there redrawing their maps to give Democrats more of an advantage. So Democrats did this in Virginia. They thought they had essentially fought Republicans to a draw for this redistricting battle which would determine who controls the House of Representatives in November. And the Virginia State Supreme Court by a narrow 4 to 3 majority, said no way. They threw it all out on a procedural issue. And so now we're back to Democrats probably only picking up maybe one or two seats here in Virginia if they have a good election and not the four that they were counting on.
- [19:36]
Justin Webb
But does that, what difference does that make nationally then, Anthony, are we saying now that they're, I don't know, less likely to take the House? Because you mentioned California. They've still got the California ones in the bag, haven't they? And the Republicans have got the Texas ones in the bag. How does it balance out?
- [19:53]
Anthony Zurcher
It did look like with Virginia it was gonna be a bit of a push, but a lot has changed in the last two weeks. And it wasn't just this decision in Virginia, which essentially wiped out a possible four seat gain for Democrats. But Florida since then has drawn their own line drawing, which could give Republicans another three or four seats. And then there was a Supreme Court decision just last week changing their interpretation of the Voting Rights act, allowing a bunch of Southern states conceivably to redraw their lines in order to carve out what had been majority black districts that were favoring Democrats and now make them all majority Republican districts. So Tennessee has already done it. That's one Democratic district around Memphis that is going to now be Republican. Louisiana, which was the center of the Supreme Court case, they're pushing to possibly erase two Democratic seats there. You could see South Carolina also do it. That's one seat there, maybe Alabama, another one. So all in all, at this point, you could see Republicans maybe net nine or 10 seats that they didn't have in the previous congressional elections now swing to them now nine or ten seats. When Republicans have a two seat majority right now, that could be a big shift. If Democrats do well and this is a wave election, none of that will matter. But if it's close like it has been in the past, this could be the difference between Democrats taking control of the chamber and stopping Donald Trump's legislative agenda and ramping up oversight, maybe even having impeachment proceedings or Republicans keeping control of the chamber and continuing to help Donald Trump, help protect Donald Trump and help enact his legislation.
- [21:38]
Justin Webb
Yeah. So on the subject of that second of these two decisions, so separate decisions, you've got the Virginia State Supreme Court and you've also got, you've just been telling us about the Supreme Court, the actual Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights act. And we've had an interesting question about that. Hi, this is Claire. I'm a longtime listener to the show and I've lived in Chicago for the past 12 years. I was hoping you could explain what impact the recent Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights act could mean for redistricting efforts and how it might change the course of the midterms. Thanks. And, Anthony, you've sort of partially answered it, but just tell us in a bit more detail what it is that states can now do, and particularly Republicans in states can now do that they weren't able to do. Right.
- [22:28]
Anthony Zurcher
The thing you need to know is that the Voting Rights act, which was passed during the civil rights movement of the 1960s, had been interpreted as requiring states to draw their congressional district lines to reflect the minority populations of their states. So in a place like Louisiana, if Louisiana is about 30% black, they should draw their district lines to enable black voters to elect or have their choice in about 30% of those congressional seats. It doesn't have to be precise, but it is something that all the states in the south and in other areas with a history of discrimination had to keep an eye on when they were drawing their lines. And what this most recent court decision said was that the states didn't have to do that. The only thing that the Voting Rights act required of the states was not to draw their lines with the intent to disenfranchise minority voters, they could draw lines that all they want to give themselves partisan advantage. If Republicans sit down in a state like Louisiana or Georgia or South Carolina and drew their lines to make sure that their congressional delegation was entirely Republicans, that's fine, even if it means that black Democrats would be able to elect their candidates as long as the intent among that state legislature wasn't to disadvantage black voters. So it has opened the door to a spate of redistricting, even though it's, it's may now a spate of line drawing where all of these Southern states are rushing to try to do away with their majority black Democratic districts and replace them with Republican ones.
- [24:03]
Justin Webb
Yeah. And that, I mean, you say they're rushing to do it. They're not really meant to do that, aren't they? Or the convention has always been. I can't remember. You'll know this. I can't remember what. There's a name for it, isn't there? There's a convention that exists whereby if there is a change like this, you're not meant to rush it during a kind of ongoing election, because you mentioned Louisiana. And they're actually going to get rid of, I mean, they've started voting, haven't they, in primaries there. They're just tearing the whole thing up.
- [24:30]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, they have suspended their House primaries, continuing on with other offices, but suspended that while they try to redraw these lines. Because right now there are two Democratic seats in Louisiana and they can redraw the lines to get rid of both of them. And so they have put that all on hold and are going to try to pass a new map that voters will have to vote in same. I mean, Tennessee just did this last week where they passed a new map. And there is a push in places like South Carolina and Alabama and Georgia to do a similar thing because the Supreme Court has given them the chance to rush and do it. Now, we've talked about this line drawing. What traditionally is done is that once every 10 years after the census, you redraw the maps. Every state redraws its map to reflect population shifts. But because there's been such a focus on how you can draw these lines to give your party an advantage in the state, there have been states that are doing it in the middle of the decade, like Texas just did and Virginia and California have done in the
- [25:35]
Justin Webb
middle of an election as well.
- [25:37]
Anthony Zurcher
In the middle of an election. Yeah. It is a no holds barred fight. Now, this is what Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, said is going to be a total war on redistricting because the stakes are that high.
- [25:55]
Justin Webb
We had a wider question, which I think is a really interesting one about all of this as well. It comes from Gareth Mottram. He's asked us this. Don't parties weaken their strongly held districts by slicing some of them away to their weaker districts, particularly dangerous for the Republicans. Now, Gareth says he would have thought so in a way, it's not such a blow for the Democrats. Plus, what's the alternative to gerrymandered districts? Do any states have kind of completely ungerrymandered districts? That first point is a really interesting one, isn't it, Anthony? Because if you think you've got a fantastically, I don't know, Trump +30 district, so you slice bits off and say that it's Trump +10 in three districts, and then Trump is very unpopular, you could end up, instead of keeping that one district, you lose all three.
- [26:48]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, yeah. There's a term for it, Justin, it's called a dummy mander, where you gerrymander so much you end up hurting your party. And there are some concerns. That was the reason why Indiana, the Republicans there decided not to redraw their lines and incurred the anger of Donald Trump, which we talked about, where several state senators were voted out because Trump backed their opponents. But even in places like Texas and Florida, there is a concern that you're carving the lines a little too fine. And if this is an election where Democrats are, say, plus 10 versus Republicans, a plus 10 election where they're outperforming by 10% over the last election, that would swamp a lot of these new seats that are being drawn. And Jim Clyburn, who is a Democrat in South Carolina, senior leader, who we talked about in the past in South Carolina, is an influential member of the Congressional Black Caucus. He has warned South Carolina Republicans that if they try to draw and redraw their lines to get him to ax his seat, what they could end up doing is letting him win and letting maybe another Democrat somewhere else in the state win. So that is a very real concern and I think Gareth is right to point it out.
- [28:05]
Justin Webb
Just a follow up on all of this before we go to other subjects. Anthony dale has emailed americastbc.co.uk saying, I've always been curious about the vast sum spent on even very minor elections in the states. I was mostly curious about what the money is spent on. What do they do with it? I think this is a fascinating question. It's one that I've asked you in the past because I just. Particularly in an era where people don't watch television and it's so easy, as Marianna always tells us, that things can go viral. You can get stuff out to people cheaply easily. What on earth is the money being spent on?
- [28:45]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, traditionally, television was a vast source of Campaign spending because it is expensive and because it's effective. As you point out, it's less effective now. But campaigns still are funneling a lot of money into television advertising, but that's also now going into online advertising, Facebook and YouTube and all the other ways of reaching voters that aren't through traditional linear TV channels. There's also direct mail, there's grassroots organizing, getting people to go knock on doors. There's phone and text message campaigns. There's an endless source of ways to spend money, but it's still television is the. The biggest source of campaign expenditures just because it is effective still for certain demographics, segments of the population, old folks who still watch television and old people tend to vote more in higher numbers. So that's still a good way of reaching them and it's still expensive.
- [29:50]
Justin Webb
Yeah. And the other point, I suppose is worth just mentioning, Anthony, is that it does make a big difference potentially to a local economy when an election happens, a big election, and a ton of money flows in.
- [30:05]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah. That's why you see states like Iowa and New Hampshire fight so hard to stay early in the presidential primary process, because it is a huge boost for their economies. People coming to the state, people spending money on television advertising, just all of the events and all of the on the ground kind of spending. It is hundreds of millions of dollars, if not upwards of a billion dollars now in political campaigns each cycle. It is a remarkable sum, although when you talk to people about it, it's like, well, they're still not spending as much advertising for political candidates as the United States spends in dog food advertising. So it's just, this is an expensive country and it is expensive to try to reach 360 million people.
- [30:54]
Justin Webb
But then that gets to the last bit of Dale's question, which is, is it really worth it? So with the dog food metrics, don't you. You can see how many tins of it you sell. How sure can you be that it's going to work? Because the answer is, you can't be, can you?
- [31:10]
Anthony Zurcher
You can't be. The number of people who have not made up their mind, as Dale said, is remarkably small, particularly in general elections where Republicans vote Republican and Democrats vote Democrat. And the number of independents, people who are truly up in the air is just a fraction of the population. But. But in a close election, that fraction could make all the difference in the world. And it's not just getting people to change their minds about which candidates to support in a general election. It's also about getting people to just come out and Vote. So being able to motivate people through advertising and campaign outreach, getting the turnout and cast their ballots, that is also a big battle. Yeah, they may like Democrats, but will they actually take the time to vote? I mean that is, that can be the difference between victory and defeat. Then when you get to the primary level, a lot of this name recognition, the money can be effective in raising people's visibility, getting them on their radar and getting people to consider voting for them because that tends to be. People have a slightly more open mind and it's much more of a kind of a situation that is unstable and can be shifted by effective advertising and voter outreach.
- [32:23]
Justin Webb
It can also. This is the other thing, Dale. It can also frighten off potential opponents, particularly at the primary level. I remember asking an incredibly naive question when I was first in D.C. and actually a friend of mine, someone I'd been at college with, was a congressman and I said to him, you know what, what are you upset by all the money raising side of it, etc. Etc. And, and he said, no, obviously not. Because if I raise a sizable chunk and it's publicly known that I've got X million in the bank, I will not be primaried because nobody will think they could outspend me. And for that reason I'm safe in my seat. And that really matters, doesn't it?
- [33:08]
Anthony Zurcher
It does matter. It shows that you're a serious candidate. It shows that you have the resources to fight to the finish. Traditionally, it has, as you mentioned, scared off primary challengers. It also has, if you're looking at a general election, may convince the opposing party to spend their resources somewhere else where they might have a better financial advantage. I mean, there are instances where no matter how much money, as you talked about with Jeb Bush, et cetera, where it doesn't make a difference. It doesn't dissuade a certain type of challenger who might sense a vulnerability, no matter how much money you have to be able to capitalize on discontent among the base. But yes, if it's one of these underdogs, less funded underdogs wins, that is going to distract a lot of resources from Republicans who are going to have to defend seats in Alaska and Iowa and Ohio and Maine and in North Carolina. So they're going to be stretched somewhat more thin. It's all part of the, the, the chess match that is national campaigns, national congressional campaigns. Where do you spend your resources? Where is it going to be most effective? Who do which candidates whom you may like but you let hang out to dry just because it's not worth it. You have higher priorities somewhere.
- [34:28]
Justin Webb
Yeah. And of course, a lot of this money, to find a thought on the money, a lot of the money comes from the sources that are impervious to entirely knowing where they are, isn't it, or what the originator was. And a lot of it's very wealthy people and billionaires who fund themselves sometimes, but also fund other people when they want those people to win. And there's an awful lot of that. But there's also. And this is such a cultural difference between you and us. I mean, you probably know people, Anthony, who give to political parties and politicians or individual politicians when they want them to win, when they think they're. And give relatively small amounts. I don't think I know anyone. I think I've met anyone in Britain who's ever given money to a political party. And I don't. That's. I don't think I'm unusual in that. And it's a big difference, isn't it?
- [35:16]
Anthony Zurcher
Yeah, it is. And, and yes, I know tons of people who have given money to candidates, and it's because they identify with the candidates. They identify with the cause. They want to feel like they're making a difference. And one of the big changes, I think, and in the past 20 years or so, is the number of small donors powering candidates who otherwise wouldn't have been able to fund their campaigns in the day when there were only a smaller group of people with disposable income who could give sizable amounts of money. And that's a reflection of the Internet and being able to campaign online and being able to cast a much wider net. If everyone gives $5, like in a Bernie Sanders campaign, if they give $10, but you get 10 million people doing that, that is enough money to launch a very serious presidential campaign. And that's where we are now. I guess it's a different way of looking at how you can influence policy and how you could be part of something bigger than yourself.
- [36:18]
Justin Webb
Well, on that telling note, it's probably time for us to finish. But before we do this,
- [36:29]
Anthony Zurcher
I pledge allegiance to the United States of Americas.
- [36:38]
Justin Webb
Do you want to be part of the United States of Americas? Because you have a chance. This is it. We're building this map of, well, everyone, really, all our listeners, state by state. We want to hear from all 50 states, from Montana to Delaware to Arizona, everywhere in between, to tell us not only what's going on in your state, although that could be part of it, but also what matters to you on the ground. Maybe it's a fun fact about a state, something we don't know. You don't have to live in the state if you've got a connection with the state, however tenuous it is you are in. Perhaps you've visited, perhaps you've got family there. Perhaps you Perhaps it's just a wish list state. Perhaps it's just somewhere you've always been interested in. So this is our invitation to you on that broadcast vista of possible connections that you will have. Don't stay silent. Get in Touch Whether you're a first time emailer or Indeed a regular AmeriCaster, you can email us at americastbc.co.uk or the WhatsApp 033-01-239480 be part of the United States of AmeriCast.
- [37:41]
Anthony Zurcher
Bye bye.
- [37:45]
Justin Webb
If you've liked what you've heard today, please do consider subscribing to AmericasT. That way, of course, you'll never miss an episode and you can do this wherever you get your podcasts. If you want to get in touch, we read every single message that we get. You can send us an email americastbc.co.uk the WhatsApp is 443-301-239480 and you can get involved as well in the AmericasT Discord server. The link to that is in the description. Until next time.
- [38:14]
Anthony Zurcher
Bye.
- [38:40]
Justin Webb
I'm Kai Wright. I'm Carter Sherman.
- [38:42]
Anthony Zurcher
Welcome to Stateside with Kai and Carter. We're a new show from the Guardian.
- [38:45]
Justin Webb
We're talking to big thinkers and the best journalists just trying to understand the world through smart conversation and honest reporting. We don't have billionaires telling us what to say. Stateside with Kyan Carter will come out three times a week, Monday, Wednesday and Friday starting May 13.
- [39:00]
Anthony Zurcher
Subscribe on YouTube or wherever you get your podcast cast.