3/4/26: James Talarico Defeats Crockett, Dan Crenshaw Goes Down In Texas

Summary

---

Breaking Points with Krystal and Saagar

Episode: March 4, 2026 — James Talarico Defeats Crockett, Dan Crenshaw Goes Down in Texas

Guests/Panelists: Dave Weigel (Semafor), David Sirota (Lever News), Emily, Ryder Strong
Main Topics: Major primary election results in Texas, North Carolina, Arkansas; the anti-establishment surge; the evolving Democratic and Republican party coalitions; role of money and independent media in 2026’s political landscape.

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the key primary results from Texas, North Carolina, and Arkansas, focusing on how populist, anti-establishment, and anti-oligarch messages shook up both the Democratic and Republican primaries. The panel discusses the defeat of Dan Crenshaw, the upset victory of James Talarico over Jasmine Crockett, the role of money (including pro-Israel and AI industry funds) in House Democratic races, and what these developments signal about the future of American politics — particularly the growing significance of independent media, energized grassroots movements, and the shifting definitions of “moderate” and “left” in both parties.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Texas Democratic Primary: Talarico vs. Crockett

[03:01–14:34]

• Context:

  • Initially viewed as a non-ideological contest between two personalities or “vibes.”
  • Talarico leaned into a “top vs. bottom” populist, anti-billionaire, anti-corporate elite message. Crockett stuck with more establishment-friendly “MSNBC” messaging.

• Main Takeaway:

  • Talarico’s approach signifies how “anti-oligarch” populism has become the mainstream within the Democratic Party.
    • “Candidates who are winning these primaries have recognized ... there isn't really much of a debate at the voter level over anti-oligarch politics — that is now just sort of mainstream.” — David Sirota [04:33]

• Strategy & Messaging:

  • Talarico’s success attributed to clear targeting of corporate “villains,” echoing the rhetorical style of Bernie Sanders — “naming the enemy” became “code for authenticity.”
    • “It was about the enemy is these people at the top who are dividing us.” — Ryder Strong [07:00]
    • Crockett’s campaign was less clear, defaulting to Trump-centric attacks and influencer-based messaging, which failed to energize voters or offer policy clarity.

• Populism as a New Democratic Center:

  • Both policy and style now matter, but what resonates is “enemy-first” clarity and authenticity in addressing corporate power structures, more than old “left vs. moderate” labels.
    • “I don't think these terms mean anything anymore.” — David Sirota [09:41]

---

2. The Hispanic Vote and Texas Redistricting

[09:56–14:34]

• Unexpected Democratic Wins:

  • Despite redistricting to favor Republicans, Democratic primary turnout exceeded GOP turnout in several key districts, at times dramatically, indicating possible “own goal” by GOP.

• Hispanic/Latino Voters:

  • Noted increased Democratic performance in south Texas and Rio Grande Valley.
  • Talarico’s campaign drew support through “faith-forward” messaging and nuanced positions on border policy and immigration.
    • “They had not heard … a Democrat come here and quote the Bible.” — Ryder Strong [13:04]
    • However, there’s cultural complexity — religious Hispanic voters may not align fully on some social/cultural issues.

---

3. North Carolina: Money, AIPAC, and Progressive Primary Challenges

[16:04–26:58]

• Case Study: Valerie Foushee vs. Nida Allam

  • Foushee, an incumbent who previously received major funding from AIPAC and now from AI industry donors, survived a close primary challenge, winning by just over 1,000 votes.
  • The result was largely credited to a last-minute influx of over $2 million in outside spending.
    • “Absent this $2 million plus, she would have gone down.” — Dave Weigel [17:29]

• Implications for Democratic Incumbents:

  • There’s a new “primary anxiety”: large numbers of incumbents now face well-funded challenges, often from the left, and are forced to “work for” nominations after years of security.
    • “They’ve gotten so used to never having to fight at all for their party’s nomination.” — David Sirota [18:10]

• Evolving Relationship to Pro-Israel and Industry Money:

  • Candidates increasingly have to disavow direct AIPAC money or be performatively anti-war/anti-Israel to survive, showing shifting grassroots priorities, particularly in “permission structures” for criticizing Democratic establishment orthodoxy.
    • “To survive a primary by one point, she had to very performatively say, I’m against the war.” — Ryder Strong [23:00]
  • AI (and previously crypto) money is now a major factor, but organized voter opposition to industry money is not yet as robust as opposition to AIPAC funds.
    • “The money is organized on these issues, but the people aren’t — yet.” — David Sirota [26:08]

• Increased Democratic Turnout:

  • Texas Democratic turnout was double that of previous cycles, signaling a highly mobilized base and strengthening the notion of a shifting political landscape.

---

4. Republican Primaries: Dan Crenshaw & Establishment vs. MAGA

[31:50–49:47]

• Crenshaw’s Defeat:
  • Once hailed as a “new media, youth-outreach” Republican, Rep. Dan Crenshaw was crushed (55.8%-40.6%) in his own primary, despite major visibility and establishment credentials.
    • “He was out of touch with the base on foreign policy. He’s an insider trading maven... self-aggrandizing, anti-populist … made him a really bad guy.” — Emily [33:07]
  • Crenshaw’s “anti-populist” stances, regular criticism of MAGA and Tucker Carlson, and flashy personal branding alienated his base.
    • “It was a project for years to get rid of that guy... Eyepatch McCain.” — Ryder Strong [35:03]
  • The outcome highlights the Republican base’s shift toward hard-edged, Trump-aligned figures and rejection of “establishment conservatives” in Texas.

---

5. Senate, Runoffs: Paxton and Cornyn

[39:12–49:22]

• Runoff Set:

  • Attorney General Ken Paxton forced longtime Senator John Cornyn into a runoff, both backed by different establishment wings but lacking clear ideological splits.
  • Cornyn’s vulnerability stems from being seen as an “old-guard, country club Republican,” unfavorably compared to the more firebrand, MAGA Paxton.
    • “John Cornyn being the old establishment... can be portrayed as the country club Republican.” — David Sirota [49:03]

• Role of Money:

  • GOP donors spent huge sums trying to protect Cornyn; continued infighting may weaken their eventual nominee for the general.

• Potential General Election Dynamics:

  • Talarico’s win and energized Dem base set up a scenario where a weakened, establishment GOP incumbent (especially Cornyn) could be vulnerable to a well-run populist campaign.
  • “The presumption for so long has been that there won't be a challenge. The people who are in power are scandalized.” — David Sirota [20:29]

---

6. The Rise and Impact of Independent Media

[43:22–44:04]

• Narrative Shaping:
  • The hosts and guests repeatedly highlight that 2026 is “the independent media midterm cycle.” The way stories are told and momentum built — both for the left and the right — is changing due to grassroots, independent news, which is accelerating the anti-establishment trend and hurting party machines and incumbents.
    • “This is ... the independent media midterm cycle … are we past the point of critical mass on independent media changing these narratives?” — Emily [43:22]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “It's all vibes, right? I think Talarico clearly ... recognized that [anti-billionaire populism] is the normal middle center of the Democratic Party.”
  — David Sirota [03:53]

• “The people who don't want you to name villains are the donors. The money doesn't want you to name that.”
  — David Sirota [08:14]

• “Enemy first, which is ... obvious, but there have been lots of Democrats who never get there ... He did it all the time.”
  — Ryder Strong [07:00]

• “I don't think these terms [left, right, moderate] mean anything anymore.”
  — David Sirota [09:41]

• “It was a project for years to get rid of that guy. I don't know who first coined Eye-Patch McCain, but that’s the way he was seen.”
  — Ryder Strong [35:03]

• “Dan Crenshaw knows how to use new media and pop culture ... This is a really decisive refutation of that.”
  — Emily [37:42]

• “Every House Democrat is gonna look at [Foushee’s narrow win] and be like, I don't wanna have to run for just my party's nomination and have to deal with something like that.”
  — David Sirota [20:29]

• “The money is organized on these issues, but the people aren't.”
  — David Sirota [26:08]

• “If you have a progressive challenger, what do you say on Israel? ... The permission structure's been created for you to denounce [APAC/Israel’s war policy] ... and still get elected.”
  — Ryder Strong [23:00]

• "Crenshaw is self-aggrandizing, anti-populist in ways that were wildly out of touch with the moment."
  — Emily [33:52]

---

Important Timestamps

• 03:01 — Panel introduces Texas Democratic primary, Talarico's anti-billionaire messaging, Crockett's “MSNBC” style
• 07:00 — The importance of clearly defining “the enemy” in successful campaigns
• 09:41 — The changing meaninglessness of “left” and “moderate” in Democratic politics
• 13:04 — Talarico's strategic use of “faith-forward” appeals for Hispanic voters
• 16:04–26:58 — North Carolina race: influx of AI and AIPAC money, impact on Democratic primaries
• 31:50 — Republican results in Texas; Dan Crenshaw’s decisive loss
• 39:12 — Senate runoff: Cornyn vs Paxton, implications for GOP and general election
• 43:22 — “Independent media midterm” dynamic
• 47:37 — How negative campaigning may threaten general election turnout for GOP (Paxton's voters may “stay home” if Cornyn wins)
• 49:01 — How Cornyn’s “establishment” label helps Talarico run as ‘anti-system’ in the general
• 49:47 — Episode closes

---

Conclusion

This episode deftly traces seismic shifts on both sides of the electoral divide: populist, anti-corporate rhetoric has crossed from the party margins to the mainstream among Democrats, while Republican voters continue to drive out even high-profile or media-savvy “establishment” figures who appear out of touch with the MAGA base. Across both parties, huge outside spending is still determinant, but independent media and grassroots energy are shaping the new rules of engagement — and making even once-safe incumbents sweat every vote. The episode’s conversational, insight-rich style provides both sharp political analysis and a strong sense of how party coalitions, campaign tactics, and public expectations are all rapidly evolving in 2026.

---

Transcript

[Jill Wintersteen]

This is an I heart podcast, guaranteed human. Hi, it's Jill Interestine, host of the Spirit Daughter Podcast where we talk about astrology, natal charts, and how to step into your most vibrant life. And today I'm talking with my dear friend Krista Williams. It can change you in the best way possible.

[Emily]

Dance with the change.

[Jill Wintersteen]

Dance with the breakdowns. The embodiment of Pisces intuition with Capricorn power moves.

[Emily]

Just so. I'm like delusionally proud of my chart.

[Jill Wintersteen]

Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcast or wherever you listen to your podcast.

[Ryder Strong]

This is Ryder Strong and I have a new podcast called the red weather. In 1995, my neighbor Anna Trainor disappeared from a commune.

[David Sirota]

It was nature and trees and praying and drugs.

[Ryder Strong]

So, no, I am not your guru. And back then I lied to everybody. They have had this case for 30. I'm going back to my hometown to uncover the truth. Listen to the Red Weather on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[David Sirota]

This is the biggest night in podcasting.

[Dave Weigel]

The countdown is on to our 2026 iHeart Podcast Awards live from south by Southwest, March 16th. We'll honor the very best in podcasting

[Ryder Strong]

from the past year and celebrate the

[Dave Weigel]

most innovative, talented creators in the industry.

[Ryder Strong]

It's truly a who's who of the podcasting world. Creativity, knowledge and passion will all be on full display.

[Dave Weigel]

And the winner of the iheart podcast award is.

[Ryder Strong]

See all the nominees [e-mail] podcast awards.

[David Sirota]

Audible is a proud sponsor of the Audible Audio Pioneer Award. Explore the best selection of audiobooks, podcasts and originals all in one easy app. Audible. There's more to imagine when you listen. Sign up for a free [e-mail] hey

[Ryder Strong]

guys, Sagar and Krystal here.

[Jill Wintersteen]

Independent media just played a truly massive role in this election and we are so excited about what that means for the the future of this show.

[Ryder Strong]

This is the only place where you

[David Sirota]

can find honest perspectives from the left

[Ryder Strong]

and the right that simply does not exist anywhere else.

[Jill Wintersteen]

So if that is something that's important to you, Please go to BreakingPoints.com, become a member today and you'll get access to our full shows unedited ad, free and all put together for you every morning in your inbox.

[Ryder Strong]

We need your help to build the future of independent news media and we hope to see you@breaking points.com

[Dave Weigel]

Election results in North Carolina, Texas and Arkansas. Very bad news for Republicans. But for first of all very good news for you guys. We're doing one month free. Breaking Points, BP free 26. Go to breakingpoints.com, you get a month free of this program.

[Emily]

Sounds like we're trying to free the BP 26. We don't know who they are, but we want to free them.

[Dave Weigel]

If you are the Senate Republican Leadership Fund, you just burned through all of your money trying to keep Cornyn alive. So you really need this month free.

[Emily]

Get that corporate discount. We'll take it.

[Dave Weigel]

Exactly. All right, so to discuss all this, we're joined by Dave Weigel of semafor, David Sirota of Lever News. Thank you, David.

[David Sirota]

Thank you. Thanks for having me.

[Dave Weigel]

Appreciate you guys being here. So let's start with. And we're gonna do a second segment later on the Republican primary, but let's start with Tallarico and Crockett Sirota. So it seemed like this started out as a race that didn't have any kind of ideological content to it, that it was like different styles, like different MSNBC styles really that seemed to evolve as Talarico and Wyo. I want your take on this too, because having followed this closely as Talarico started embracing this top, bottom, like we're taking on the billionaires. They're your real problem. And Crockett's stuck with the whatever the MSNBC stuff is.

[David Sirota]

Yeah. I'm not sure what she was really running on. I'm not. It's like a brand, like a vibe. I mean, look, it's all vibes, right? It's all vibes. I think Talarico clearly, as the campaign went on, recognized the, I guess we could call it proxy wise, like the Bernie vibe. Like if you call the anti billionaire stuff like the Bernie vibe. Right. Like, I think what I take away from this race is that people like him have realized that there is, that is the normal middle center of the Democratic Party.

[Dave Weigel]

Oh, by the way, if people are getting news from this show, he won.

[David Sirota]

Yes.

[Ryder Strong]

We should mention. Right.

[David Sirota]

Like I think we've seen in a series of races that these candidates who are winning these primaries have recognized that while there's this debate going on between, you know, Third Way and, you know, the so called left, et cetera, et cetera, that actually there isn't really much of a debate going on at the kind of voter level over anti oligarch politics that is now the just sort of mainstream normal of the Democratic Party, which I, you know, taking a long

[Emily]

view now because Crockett was running on that too.

[David Sirota]

Right.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah.

[David Sirota]

And like I just turned 50 recently and you're about as old as I am. Right. Okay. Like that may seem like a just like not all that interesting.

[Dave Weigel]

Right, of course.

[David Sirota]

But like that has not been the way it's been up until now. And so I look at that race and I say, wow, to think about how far we've come since like just Bernie 10 years ago, Bernie five years ago. That's my takeaway of a candidate who can kind of code moderate, you know, vibe wise. Code moderate, but be the anti billionaire candidate.

[Emily]

I want to run that past you, Dave, because one of the reasons I thought this was such an interesting primary is you have the stylistic. The stylistic hewing to norms from Talarigo, who's almost stylistically again, like a Biden candidate who says we're going to restore

[Dave Weigel]

decency to the judge of candidate.

[Ryder Strong]

A lot like that.

[Emily]

Exactly right. But then his policy prescription, he was trying to sell populism, really. Crockett was kind of the other way around. She had the style of post Trump politics, but the substance of almost corporate Dem politics. It's hard to say because they're both kind of mixed. And you were on the. You were on the trail, weren't you?

[Ryder Strong]

I was. I was last week. And David's right. And I would start with Talarico. Picked and polarized enemies. The enemies were corporations that were working with Donald Trump to impoverish you. The voter.

[Emily]

Granted, this is a man who took money from Miriam Adelson on a gambling.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, I asked him, I think the opening interview, I asked him about that and he had an answer. It was like, I'm not pure. That was a specific thing. I'm not gonna do that in this race. Crockett did not run a very tight campaign, did not use that as effectively. She could. She had lots of influencers online calling him corrupt. But they got really sidetracked into identity where his stump speech was. It's one of those, in a buttigieg way, stump speech. It's very memorable because it doesn't change very much. He would talk about inauguration day and the wealthy people sitting behind Donald Trump. Talk about Elon Musk. The impact of the Stephen Colbert thing was him talking about the Trump administration opening the door for his supporters to own corporate media and control what you see. He called it the ultimate corporate cancel culture is one thing he called it, but it was about the enemy is these people at the top who are dividing us. And it wasn't evading issues or pivoting. It was that she was less clear. She mentioned that A couple times when I was covering her, she had some big events, some big conversations, but a lot more of what Democrats have not had any success with, which is, how dare a felon, a 35 count felon, be allowed to serve in the government? This guy is corrupt. We was like, okay, well yeah, Trump's corrupt, sure, but who is behind him? And how are you being distracted? And every time you're watching a reaction to him, what are you missing? It's this, it's this policy, it's this diminution of Medicaid funding. It was that. But enemy first, which is, it's kind of obvious, but there have been lots of Democrats who never get there and they're very loose and they do not say, here's the bad guy, I will take on the bad guy. Your life's better for this reason. He did it all the time.

[David Sirota]

So when I was writing speeches for Bernie Sanders, some people would, well, one, I'd get razzed. How do you write a speech for Bernie Sanders? He says the same thing over and over. I mean, that's like a, that's where I got all my hair trying to, you know, put in new things. But the question of why do people show up to hear what they've already heard? It was like, I feel like they, a lot of people showed up on those campaigns because they liked hearing somebody recount and name the villains, the enemies, because it felt like no one else was naming them. And so when you say, you know, when you point out that Talarico is actually naming villains, naming the enemy, I feel like that's like become code for authenticity, code for like, I am willing to name villains. I am. The people who don't want you to name villains are the donors. Like, the money doesn't want you to name that. And I think this question about what is left and right, what is moderate, what is, you know, liberal, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, the third way conference this week, right, was all about how the Democrats need to be moderate. They need to like reject their left. I would ask a question, like in this race, who does the average voter think in the Texas primary was the candidate on the left or who was the moderate right? I think those terms, like, don't mean anything anymore. That's why I say, you know, when I'm referring to, you know, people ask where is my politics? I'm like, I'm not even sure the word left or right or moderate or like, I don't think these terms mean anything anymore.

[Dave Weigel]

Yeah, certainly not to regular People who are trying to follow this now, the Hispanic vote swung wildly to Democrats this time. Either one of you can take this, but Tom Bond, your Democratic data analyst, and we can put this up in post, he flagged that. He says Zapata county turnout in the primary there yesterday was 143% the total number of votes that Kamala Harris won in the general election. Republicans, lower Rio Grande Valley Republicans, very, in this high profile manner went and redistricted Texas to try to add a couple of members. And I want to get your take on this. It may end up being an incredible own goal, shoot yourself in the foot kind of moment. So he flags four of the districts, congressional districts, the 9th, 28th, 34th and 35th that were redistricted in order to be Republican districts. In each one of them, Democratic primary turnout was higher than GOP primary turnout in some cases by like 3 or 4000. In other cases by 20 to 30 to 40,000 more votes. So these are. In order to get more districts, get more seats, you have to take a, you know, a seat where you Normally win by 30 and you take it down to like 5 or 10 and then you take those voters and you spread them out. But if it's a wave, all of a sudden you've put all of these districts in in range of Democrats. Which one do you want to take

[Ryder Strong]

more in that direction than by?

[David Sirota]

Sure.

[Ryder Strong]

Back in napkin analysis been. If it's just like a 2020 Hispanic breakdown, then those seats are hard for Republicans to win. I've been to that region a lot. I'd say there was a long period where Democrats were just in denial that it could change because Donald Trump was the nominee. And listen to what he says and look at the numbers for Hillary Clinton. He got destroyed in that region. The Tallahassee campaign, I think everyone knows Chuck Rocha as one of the strategists, but he spent a lot of time in the district. He was very clear on ice and making the argument that again, Democrats, I think are mostly comfortable making even if they don't like saying abolish. Well, we agree with it that immigration enforcement is good. But why are they flagging down Hispanic people and seeing if they have papers? That's popular there. Border Patrol's very popular. If you've been to South Texas, people have. It's a big employer. Well, yeah, you know the blue lights, battery flag, you'll see a green line and a flag. That's the Border Patrol flag.

[Emily]

Mirafloro.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, exactly. And he was careful about that. But it was Spending time in that area and also talking about religion. I think there are gonna be a lot of criticisms of how he talks about religion.

[Emily]

Many from me.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, well, it's a little more like gnostic than most Hispanic Catholics are comfortable with when it comes to like divinity or God's gender, et cetera.

[Emily]

That's revolutionary, by the way. It's something that was hugely divisive in the Rio Grande Valley for Democrats. This question of like, what's moderate, what's not. I agree. The labels are really hard to say because it's like he runs as a kind of stylistic moder. Where is he on some of these cultural issues? Hispanic voters in the Rio Grande Valley, Independent type Hispanic voters. That might be an issue for them.

[Ryder Strong]

It was. And I did meet Hispanic voters who were saying their whole family was MAGA last election. Or they've got right wing Catholic family who share memes on Facebook and they can't believe they're a Democrat, but they can send them a Talarico video about something specific and say, well, this is what I believe. And it's not going down the litmus. The litmus test of a Catholic voter who's pro life. He's not going to match that gender critical person. He's not going to match that. But just talking about faith in the way he did, quoting the Book of Matthew, quoting the Sermon on the Mount, just doing that. Versus the secularism they were used to from other Democrats. Beto o' Rourke is not very comfortable doing that. A lot of Democrats are not. They don't go to church very much. They don't talk about it going to church. The fact that he was a seminarian and talked about God at all. I think I was maybe a little bit cynical about that. Cause it's going in before I went there. But just they had not heard that. They were hearing Democrats talk about shouting your abortion. And he would talk about Christian nationalism, which I think is more for the John Oliver audience. But the part they were hearing was, well, at least quoting the Bible. I haven't heard a Democrat come here and quote the Bible. Cause he's not like Henry Cuellar who knows the region. He's at least trying. And he made some inroads that way. But that plus the ICE thing, this is. And I've heard that from Arizona and from other places too, that look, they're not saying abolish ice. They're saying there has to be some Goldilocks bowl in the middle that is protecting the border and not chasing my friend down because he has A Mexican flag on his truck because he's fifth generation. He just has a Mexican flag.

[Emily]

Well, last point before we go to Neil Alam and you may have something to add, Sirota. It's just Crockett was flirting with just dragging this out last night. Was saying looks like there's cheating in Dallas county and this is what Republicans do. It was unclear what she totally meant by that just a half an hour ago. Yes. So she really was going full stop the steal last night. Pulled back from that. And so she has conceded as of this morning, but she was going in that direction. I don't know if anyone wants to jump.

[David Sirota]

Yeah. I just wonder if all of this is actually something like more simple in that it is an anti system vote. Yeah, right. Like that. I mean I'm just thinking through the last many elections. The last time the party that was perceived to be in power was reelected was 2012. Right. Like think about it like Obama winning reelection and then like every election seems like a referendum on who is perceived to be in power. And so I think, you know, when it comes to dicing different voting segments, I think the larger question is maybe it's as simple as the whoever is perceived to be the anti system candidate is going to be the one to get that swing. Like are swing voters Latino voters? Are they working class voters? Maybe the swing voter is like none of those categories. And it's the anti system voter who feels like they keep voting for change and not getting any change.

[Emily]

Right. Which is in all of those categories.

[Dave Weigel]

Keep voting for it. Yeah, exactly. So in Arkansas we don't even go deep into this, but they had a Supreme Court election. Kamala Harris lost Arkansas by 31 points. The Republican seems to have won it by about 10. So a 21 point swing in Arkansas, not great. Now a race that we covered a lot in North North Carolina. 4. This is Valerie Fuchi, elected in 2022 with an enormous amount of crypto money and APAC money. She evolved in 2026 to APAC money and AI money. So better or worse, quite a pack

[Emily]

wherever you can get it.

[Dave Weigel]

She vowed that she wouldn't take any APAC money. So it ended up getting rooted through this other pack. She raised very little herself and so two plus million dollars kind of rained down on her opponent Nita Alam in the last week and a half, two weeks of the race. We can put up the results there has not been called yet. Fushi is up by a thousand and twenty.20 votes or something like that. Little under 1, roughly 1% doesn't seem like there are enough votes for Niddalam to come back. But what it does suggest is that absent this 2 million plus dollars and Niddalam had her own kind of anti or pro Palestine super PAC that's linked to Bernie Hannah Furtick.

[Emily]

Bernie can't beat them, join them.

[Dave Weigel]

Yeah, it's kind of organized. Muslim money is finally kind of breaking onto the scene. So she had some support. Nothing approaching what Fushi had. It does seem like that was decisive. Like without that two plus million in the last couple weeks, she ends up, you know, this incumbent would have gone down. What was your raid on this race?

[David Sirota]

I mean, my question coming out of this race is how much is this going to change how all of the other House Democrats incumbents campaign?

[Dave Weigel]

Nobody wants to win by a thousand. You'd rather win by a thousand than lose by a thousand. But you don't like to win by a thousand.

[David Sirota]

You don't like to have to work that hard. Right. I mean, and there was that, I think there was an Axios piece earlier this week that was 30 House Democrats now have primary challengers who've raised more than $100,000. Now, $100,000 is not going to win you a Democratic primary. But it makes you nervous. Makes you nervous. Right? I mean, and I thought what was funny was it was like unnamed sources. The House Democratic leadership are like enraged that there's so much money being spent on. And my takeaway from it is they've gotten so used to never having to fight at all for their party's nomination. And again, I go back to dumb Tea Party. Exactly. And the thing is, I wrote a book back in 2007 saying, like, this was going to be a moment all the way back then. That's how old we all are now. Okay, President, we.

[Emily]

I was 14 surrounding.

[David Sirota]

There you go.

[Emily]

Okay.

[David Sirota]

That the rage of that moment was going to be channeled in one direction or the other. And I think what happened on the left end of that spectrum was it was channeled into the Democratic Party through the Hope and Change brand and it was on the right. It was channeled into the Tea Party. And I think now the difference in this moment is it's the same, if not more level of rage. But the polls that show that the Democratic base is annoyed and angry and frustrated with its own leadership was not a condition that existed back then. And so I think that is what the current Democratic Party leadership is just not used to and is sort of scandalized by. Right. Because on the right in the Republican Party, the idea of Republican primaries against incumbents that's become somewhat more normalized than in a. Like the idea that like a Democrat, like I live in Colorado. The idea that John Hickenlooper might have a. And he does have a primary challenge. Yeah, he's got a challenge. Right. The whole idea, like you talk to people in Democratic circles in Colorado, it's like no one could possibly. It's a blue state, no one's gonna primary a sitting senator. I'm not sure what's gonna happen in that race. But I guess the point is it's a long way of saying the presumption for so long has been that there will not be a challenge, that the people who are in power are scandalized. And I think to come back to this primary, I think every House Democrat is gonna look at that and be like, I don't wanna have to run for just my party's nomination and have to deal with something like that.

[Dave Weigel]

Yeah. And Dave, not every Democrat can get the kind of help that she got from, and particularly from Hakeem Jeffries. So yeah, he put her within days of this, within days of Nidalon launching her campaign. He put her on this three person Democratic task force to write AI policy. And what that is, is that is a giant signal to the AI industry that you need to shower money on this person. The others are Ted Lieu and Josh Gottheimer, like both voracious fundraisers Gottheimer in particular. And so they did. They came in. 1.6 million at last counting. I bet when we get the final numbers it'll be higher. It was Anthropic's coalition of AI. So it's the AI Safety people, the good guys. But so he did that. And then there was also this PAC that he's connected to that raised money from AIPAC and moved it through a separate PAC so that it could. It was called Article One Pack so that she could abide by her promise to not take any more AIPAC monies. But Jeffries can't do that for everybody. I mean, maybe he can, can he? So how are to Sirota's question, how are House Democrats responding to this? And do you have any other thoughts from covering this race?

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, I covered more close of the 2022 race when it was an open seat and at that point it was a more fair map. But anyway it was a safe Democratic seat. And in that race which you've been setting up, it was very clear that Fouche was the pro Israel candidate. She got the APEC support. It Just was not in the Democratic conversation. As a top issue. What did she do in advance of this race? She disclaimed the AIPAC money. Now it helped her in the end, but she made a very splashy at a town hall announcement that she was not going to take their support anymore. She co signed block the bombs. When the Iran war started, Nida was very quickly, she went to her, her house and cut an ad. While she was against the war, Fouche didn't do that, just a less energetic candidate in general. But she was opposed to the war too. So would she have won had she not done that? I don't think so. I don't think with that money, if she was running as Dan Goldman in that district, she would have lost. She needed to be critical of Israel.

[Dave Weigel]

So two things. She needed the pro Israel money and she needed to be anti Israel.

[Ryder Strong]

Some memorable, okay, well I'm voting for this person and she's moving in the right direction in 2022. And this is, I interviewed the then CEO of AIPAC in 2022 about how they, they run ads on what works. But in 2022 it was this is good politics, but maybe we're gonna do the issue that's better. We're not gonna say this is the best candle in Israel, we're gonna say something else. And now it's, they're giving them a little bit of a permission structure to denounce pro Israel politics just because maybe they'll get there and they don't want more voices in Congress that are criticizing them. So I think that is one lesson for all these candidates. And there's Illinois primaries in the next week. But for all these races, if you have a progressive challenger, what do you say on Israel? It's important that the permission structure's been created for you to denounce them three times and then get elected anyway. But what does that say about the power of their issue? We can look at the polling, but I think this is even more powerful to say that you cannot in order to survive a primary. By one point she had to very performatively say and also I'm against the, I don't think she said genocide by the end, but I'm against what Israel's doing, I'm against the war, et cetera, et cetera. You need $2 million in that.

[David Sirota]

That's new, I think. And just one other point, I think it's interesting to think about the AIPAC issue and the AI issue. The AIPAC issue for a long time had been an issue where There wasn't as organized and motivated an anti constituency. So the money could go to candidates and the candidates didn't have to worry about organized popular opposition in a Democratic primary.

[Ryder Strong]

They were kind of helping moderate. Oh, you're moderate and you're gonna get the APEC money, right? Don't worry about it.

[David Sirota]

And the voters don't really care now. The voters really care Where I think I'm terrified about, like, is the world gonna survive? Are we gonna go into like Skynet World? Is that the AI money assumes that there isn't a similarly organized voting bloc against them. In other words, the AI money presumes for now that we can give a lot of money to Democrats, get them to be pro AI because they don't have to worry that in taking the money and in being pro AI they're going to prompt an organized popular resistance with political consequences when they run for election. You see that with. You saw it with crypto too, right? And you think about these dynamics where, where you want a candidate to go out. If you're a progressive, maybe you want your candidate to go out there and say crypto's terrible or go out there and say AI is terrible. Why aren't they doing that? Well, the answer is because I think at a candidate by candidate level, they fear that if they speak up, even if they sort of in their heart agree with speaking up and against deregulation of the financial sector, AI et cetera, et cetera, that not enough voters will care and all it will do is prompt a flood of money again. They'll become the next Katie Porter in that.

[Ryder Strong]

Senator Brown.

[David Sirota]

Exactly.

[Ryder Strong]

They bragged about that. The NC bragged about that. That's our example. Here's Sherrod Brown's head. Do you want to be him?

[David Sirota]

Yeah. It's like the money is organized on those issues, but the people aren't. AIPAC was exploiting that in the sense of the money was organized, but the anti AIPAC people weren't organized. Now that's an organized constituency in a way that does. What happens.

[Ryder Strong]

One very small point is that Alam, and as I mentioned, she did try to tie that to Fuche by saying, and she's supported by the sort of AI companies that are giving intelligence that are helping prosecute this war and the ones that are building the data centers. And it was, I think maybe she was a couple weeks early for that or a couple. Who knows how long it is. She just started the mission argument, but it wasn't there yet. That's where she took it, I think that's where the people you're talking about will take it.

[David Sirota]

Yeah. And I think the data, the local data center stuff will. Has the chance to actually create organized political.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, it's already been happening.

[Dave Weigel]

Yeah.

[Ryder Strong]

I would have.

[Dave Weigel]

If I were her, I would have. Yeah. She said, you know, it's the AI used by ICE and used by. Right. For Venezuela and for that, and then Iran, later, Palantir. But yeah, I think, yes, it's the data in your district with the water

[David Sirota]

and the energy and my electricity bills.

[Dave Weigel]

I'm against it. And they're coming in.

[Emily]

Yeah.

[Dave Weigel]

Because otherwise it's like crypto and it's

[David Sirota]

like a bank shot.

[Dave Weigel]

It's a hard sell because a lot of people like crypto and.

[David Sirota]

Yes, yes.

[Emily]

And also we're looking at monster turnout in Texas, by the way. I think that's something worth adding. It looks like right now that it's roughly double what it was for Betos. Not a. Not a hugely contested primary. In Beto's case, I think he won with like 90% of the vote. So you can understand why you would have a higher turnout this time around. But that's a signal the Dem base is organized and energized and ready to go in November.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah. If you told somebody a month ago, Crockett's getting a million votes, they say, oh, she's going to win. Nobody gets a million votes in Texas Democratic primary.

[Emily]

That's usually the total. It's usually around a million. This looks like it's going to be north of 2 million.

[David Sirota]

Can I also say that as somebody who has worked on campaigns, I do appreciate that in broad strokes here, that Talarico seemed to run, as we were discussing before this run, a quote unquote, a real campaign. Like organizers, the ads had a message sort of much more of a grassroots footprint than Crockett. Crockett sort of, I think, basically ran as an influencer campaign, like a purely influencer campaign, not as much of a real campaign. And I think I worry about turning campaigns into just I am with my iPhone, you know, making TikTok videos, not really out in the community. And that being validated by voters. Like, I think there's something good about the person who was. Whose campaign was more grassroots, more in the community, more of a traditional campaign, was actually validated by voters and still

[Dave Weigel]

used TikTok and Instagram.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, for sure.

[Dave Weigel]

In the service of that rather than as a thing in itself.

[Emily]

Interestingly, he got more money from K Street. Politico had an analysis of that, but they both did

[Jill Wintersteen]

Hi, this is Jo Winterstein, host of the Spirit Daughter Podcast where we talk about astrology, natal charts and how to step into your most vibrant life. And I just sat down with a mini driver, The Irish traveler said when

[Ryder Strong]

I was 16, you're gonna have a terrible time with men.

[Jill Wintersteen]

Actor, storyteller and unapologetic Aquarian visionary Aquarius. All about freedom loving and different perspectives. And I find a lot of people with strong placements in Aquarius like are Misunderstood a Sun and Venus in Aquarius in her seventh house spark her unconventional approach to partnership.

[David Sirota]

He really has taught me to embrace

[Jill Wintersteen]

people sleeping in different rooms, on different houses, in different places, but just an embracing of the isness of it all. If you're navigating your own transformation or just want to chart the view into how a leading artist integrates astrology, creativity and real life, this episode is a must. Listen Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to your podcast.

[Ryder Strong]

This is Ryder Strong with a podcast called the red weather. In 1995, my neighbor Anna Trainor disappeared from a commune.

[Dave Weigel]

It was nature and trees and praying and drugs.

[Ryder Strong]

So no, I am not your guru. Back then I lied to everybody. They have had this case for 30 years. I'm going back to my hometown to uncover the truth. You can now binge all episodes of the Red weather on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Jill Wintersteen]

Ever feel like you're being chased by the marriage police? Welcome to Boys and Girls, the Podcast why Dating Isn't Dating. Arranged marriage is basically a reality show, except the contestants are strangers and your entire family is judging. You're sipping coffee with one, maybe grabbing dinner with another, and praying your karmic Ken or Barbie appears before your shelf life runs out. Trust me, I've been through this ancient and unshakable tradition. I jumped in hoping to find love the right way, and instead I found chaos, cringe and comedy. And now I'm looking for healing. Boys and Girls dives into every twist and turn of the arranged marriage carousel. The meet awkward, the near misses, the heartbreak. And let's not forget all the jokes. Listen to boys and Girls on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Dave Weigel]

Let's move to the Republican results in in Texas. We'll talk about Ken Paxton and Cornyn, who are going to go to a runoff in a moment, but let's start with Dan Crenshaw. So this is A very well known Republican. Emily, you might have thought about this. Very kind of reviled.

[Emily]

It's such a gift.

[Dave Weigel]

Why actually I want to ask Emily, why do people hate this? Yeah, why do you say that?

[Emily]

He got absolutely obliterated, by the way. It was 50 as of right now with 95% of the votes in. It's 55.8% to 40.6%. Crenshaw, I believe, got elected. I mean he got trounced.

[Dave Weigel]

And Emily's very happy. And we're like, he seems like the other Republicans have issue. Tell us later coming from Colorado where

[David Sirota]

we have like Lauren Boebert and that would never happen to Lauren Boebert.

[Dave Weigel]

I don't think inside of Ryan Crenshaw. Do they hate each other? What's their.

[Emily]

I'm sure they hate each other. He's, I mean he hates anybody who is aligned with Tucker Carlson. But he also very high profile, had picked high profile fights with Shawn Ryan, who is really popular with conservative like podcast listeners. But you know, just on a substantive level, he was out of touch with the base on foreign policy. He's an insider trading maven. He loves to trade on insider trading trades.

[Dave Weigel]

Now that he's losing access.

[Emily]

Well, he was a, he wouldn't call it, he wouldn't call it insider trading. But of course he's in Congress and he's training. He was prolific, which is actually, interestingly enough, one of the things that this White House has zeroed in on being an important part of the Trump agenda for the midterm cycle. That's what they were at Capitol Hill

[Dave Weigel]

Club talking about it.

[Emily]

That's what they're, they're saying that Trump is going to run Republican candidates in 2026 on stopping congressional insider trading.

[David Sirota]

So do it because the insider trading should happen only in the White House.

[Emily]

It only happens on, it's only in common markets.

[Dave Weigel]

Insider trading people named Wyckoff.

[Emily]

It is a sacred task. But anyway, so

[Ryder Strong]

think of these candidates creating their own coins and having people buy them for access.

[Emily]

Amaz. He's self aggrandized. Listen, he's just my perspective on him. He's self aggrandizing, anti populist in ways that were wildly out of touch with the moment and just made him a really bad guy. From my perspective. I think voters probably had a similar perspective. But Weigel, I think I've only ever talked to him once and in that conversation he was talking to me about Tucker Carlson unprompted.

[Ryder Strong]

So you set it up very well. The remap of the state Gave him areas he had not represented. They had not seen his campaign ads, and he stopped doing these. But are you aware of his action movie ads, the Michael Bay things where he would parachute into people's districts to save them? They hadn't seen those, but they had seen Tucker. Steve Toth, who won. Tucker had a long interview with him four months ago. Didn't make a lot of news because that's who outside of Southeast Texas knows who Steve Toth is. But everything you said, he was a interventionist, anti populist who believed that parts of the American First Movement, not all of it, was gonna wreck the Republican Party. And that if that is the people who are voting, they might take objection to that. It's really that simple. And I was a little surprised that you were saying you were surprised, but it wasn't on more people's radars because this is a project for years to get rid of that guy. I don't know who first coined Eyepatch McCain, but that was the way he was seen. This is a long run. It might have been probably him, yeah. But he did not cultivate support from people who didn't like him. In 2018, I was also struggling. Chip Roy, he was doing everyone in

[Emily]

the middle finger, basically.

[Ryder Strong]

He was doing that. And Chip Roy is running for ag. He had. I'll finally say Ted Cruz endorsed Toth, endorsed his opponent. A lot of Republicans wanted him gone, so part of it was personal. But it wouldn't have been possible if he wasn't so alienated from America first. If I was gonna say Chip Roy, running for AG came in second to a MAGA candidate, and that was more about Trump, but it was also sort of the heterodox. Can we trust this guy? His instincts are not the same as those of us who want to just keep resources in the country who have questions about the 2020 election. And these are both guys who I think had big profiles in D.C. because this is how media works. You're more interesting to the media if you'll criticize your party sometimes. No interest in that. In Texas, a lot of love and confidence that Donald Trump is doing the right thing. So if your brand is trashing not just Trump, but influential conservative thinkers and speakers, you've alienated more people than you alienate by going to the Rotary Club and insulting them. They hear about that and their media diet has changed in ways that clearly Crenshaw, who I think also has or had a podcast, he was trying to get in that debate, that that was not as popular in his district. As it was.

[David Sirota]

I also wonder if in a race like this, how much somebody like Crenshaw is hurt by the fact that independent voters. In an open primary.

[Ryder Strong]

Yeah, you just pull a ballot.

[David Sirota]

Right. But you have to choose. In other words, how many independent voters were animated by voting for Talarico and didn't come into a race, couldn't pull a ballot, couldn't pull away for somebody like Crenshaw? In open primary states, you can be a candidate in a primary and think you're gonna be rescued by or helped by independent voters. But if there's a race higher on the ticket where most of the independent voters are gonna be voting, they can't come help you.

[Ryder Strong]

Right, Right.

[Dave Weigel]

You should be able to pick. I wanna vote race by race.

[David Sirota]

Yeah. That's not how it rolls.

[Emily]

Granted, this is a pretty decisive margin so far, but who knows where? Yeah, I think that is a great point.

[Ryder Strong]

Definitely bigger. The surprise is definitely, though. It was that big.

[David Sirota]

It was that big.

[Ryder Strong]

The Rogans, Texas, knew he was at risk, but not that he was just walking dead white.

[Emily]

100%. Yeah. And he's someone who came in with a lot of momentum because people might remember he got made fun of as looking like a porn star by Pete Davidson on snl. And everyone was like, he's a veteran. So they brought him back on SNL and he was on Weekend Update and everyone was like, this is the way Republicans will win. Young voters. Dan Crenshaw knows how to use new media and pop culture. So he had youth summits, Crenshaw youth summits of his own kids, where conservative organizations. He was trying to do like a mini CPAC for young people in Texas where conservative organizations would, like buy booths. And it never really got off the ground. But he saw himself as a light for the Republican Party. And this is a really decisive refutation of that. Let's talk about Ken Paxton. Ken Paxton, like Chip Roy, headed to a runoff with John Cornyn. We can put F3 up on the screen. This is the results. Very, very interesting results. In this race. Cornyn overperformed what a lot of people expected. He's not. Not quite a Crenshaw style figure. He's been around Texas for a long time. He's obviously a senator, so he has probably more built in goodwill, but is definitely friendly with leadership. He's a member of the GOP establishment. No question about that. Lots of people in Texas angry about that post Uvalde gun bill that Cornyn got behind. That's definitely been a problem for him. Wesley hunt pulls in 13.5% Senate Leadership Fund aligned with Cornyn, then lashes out at Wesley Hunt as he's defeated and is basically like, well, we could have avoided a runoff if you hadn't even gotten into this.

[Dave Weigel]

Those are not Cornyn votes. Leslie Hunt.

[Ryder Strong]

What do you think, Weigel, by the end? I don't think they are because the last two weeks in Texas, you'd see the ads. The last two weeks was SLF going after Hunt. They wanted this number. So what is their theory of this race? It is get Cornyn above Paxton by any margin at all. If it was like the polls were a month ago and it was Paxton 43, Cornyn 33, Hunt better than he did, then Trump would look at that and say, this guy's a loser. I'm not going to endorse him. They just want Trump to endorse John Cornyn. Forget any other issue in the race, just endorse him. And right now in other rooms, I'm sure they're saying, we got Talarico, not Crockett. There's no runoff on their side, so we're not sure Paxton can win. Texas Republicans are not that worried. I mean, they voted for. This was the story I covered in 2022. Running for AG after all of his indictments, George P. Bush was running as the savior who would save the AG seat, and Paxton was fine. So it's tough to convince Republican voters, The people in D.C. who make these donations were pretty well convinced that Paxton would blow it to Talarico. So they're gonna do that. Today. We're not talking about any ideological differences. There really weren't any. The campaign, the entire argument against Hunt was that he was a showboat who never showed up for votes. It was not he voted wrong on something. It was just that. And Paxton just kind of. He wasn't raising as much money, but he was kind of holding his powder because he knew he had this locked in. This is similar what he got, I think in his AG primary because he had two challengers, I think he did a little bit better. But that's the story. To the extent there is a big Republican establishment, this has been their thing for years. It's just we can't really make a positive argument for our guys individual record. We can say that Trump loves them. So let's just wait this out and see if we can get Trump in the race. And the Hunt theory was cordon's so weak that I can leapfrog in and I'd easily win. That's true. And if Republicans blow This. At some point, they'll say, why did we invest so much when we could have just easily held the seat with Wesley Hunt, who would not have had any problem, no scandals. That was kind of the premise of his campaign. I'm a family man. I'm a Christian, I'm a veteran. Look at this resume. It's incredible. I'll just hold the seat, no problem. You dance with them that brung you. And they knew Cornyn, they wanted him back. So it's almost depressing talking to these races with literally no ideological difference. It is just, we know this guy. Let's help him out. Screw this guy for opposing him.

[Dave Weigel]

Now, the Bannon wing will argue that that's not the case. They describe Cornyn as a rhino, a liberal.

[Emily]

Yeah.

[Ryder Strong]

I mean, how come he voted for that gun bill?

[David Sirota]

I mean, seriously.

[Emily]

Well, some of it is vibes, right. That he's friendly with McConnell World and Thune World, and that he'll, you know, throw Republicans under the bus if he has to at any point. Like, some of it's just like, this guy's been around.

[Dave Weigel]

They also point out that he's probably not running for reelection. He's like 77 or something.

[Ryder Strong]

So he'd be 80 at the end of this term.

[Dave Weigel]

So he would be beholden only to people who are going to pay for his retirement. Paxton was the first Republican AG to join Trump in trying to overturn the 2020 election. Paxton has gone after big tech all over the place

[Emily]

to the Supreme Court.

[Ryder Strong]

He's more of the magic type. He'll file these lawsuits on social issues that no other Republican. He'll get to the head of the pack. I think him and Andrew Bailey in Missouri will.

[Dave Weigel]

So that's an ideological.

[Ryder Strong]

But if you are a religious conservative, he is the one fighting for you. And what's Cornyn done on that?

[Emily]

Even though he's a adulterer and the like?

[Ryder Strong]

A lot of that going around, it's

[David Sirota]

almost like who these. It's always like, who these politicians think they owe. Right. I understand why Bannon and MAGA wants Paxton and not Cornyn, because it's not. I mean, you're right. Maybe you go down like bill by bill, issue by issue. It's pretty similar. But it's the perception of who they think they answer to.

[Dave Weigel]

Right.

[David Sirota]

And I think the perception probably among the MAGA folks is John Cornyn doesn't think he answers to us.

[Ryder Strong]

Right?

[David Sirota]

Yeah, he answers to.

[Ryder Strong]

Right.

[David Sirota]

And Ken Paxton clearly does answer to us. Ken Paxton sees that his political formula is by aligning with us all the time. And that's what they want.

[Emily]

Well, last point that I was gonna make, so runoff May 26th. Got a couple months for that now. But also what the thread between our first segment on Dems and Republicans, I think that's interesting, is this is one of the first midterm cycles post 2024. It's the first midterm cycle post 2024, but it's also the independent media midterm cycle. Right. Like, are we past the point of critical mass on independent media? Changing these narratives in a way that does really hurt incumbents and hurts establishment candidates, where Anita Alam can make a race uncomfortable, where Dan Crenshaw can get trounced. And I mean, I don't know. I think that's that. And Talarico can run ads on top versus bottom. I don't know.

[Dave Weigel]

And it's up against huge money on the Republican side, if you count the uncounted, like C4 and C3 money. I'm curious if you would think this correct. I've seen the, like, Paxton crowd and Paxton supporters saying it probably approaches 100 million. That if you factor mail and everything in that we don't know about yet.

[Ryder Strong]

And they may buy the last quarter. Yeah, yeah. They bought every point.

[Emily]

Yeah.

[Dave Weigel]

And then. And behind Paxton, 4, 5, 6 million. Like a lot of money, but nowhere near $100 million. They're now looking at potentially, if Trump can't figure out a way to, like, nuke this primary, another 100 or 2 million spent over. Is it two months or three months? Is it June?

[Ryder Strong]

No, it's May.

[Dave Weigel]

May 26, almost three months. March, April, May. Of Republicans, like, savagely attacking each other. So to spend $100 million and to have a guy who's been in office for decades and before that was Attorney General of Texas. They know who this guy is and still he gets 41.9%. Is it crazy to think that if Cornyn spends another hundred million dollars the next three months against Paxton and Paxton beats him, that then he's wounded enough that it's actually a toss up in Texas? Or should we not pay attention to Texas because we've been fooled so many times? It's like Florida, right?

[Emily]

Come on.

[Dave Weigel]

No. And Tall Rico then loses by eight or something.

[Ryder Strong]

Well, and it would be unlike 2018 with Cruz. Cruz has his enemies in Texas, but better at raising money, has no scandal, whatever you think of him. Does not have any personal scandals. Family man. It would be a weaker candidate. They had in 2018 a stronger Democrat. No, not impossible. It's just what's happened. It's that Latino vote shift, if that's what Ken Paxton's betting on, that the Rio Grande Valley is going to lock in the race for him. No, it would be a tougher race. I don't think they're full of it when they say that Paxton makes them spend money and Cornyn doesn't. It would be a he's part of the establishment race, but it wouldn't be he would again have the money. And Paxton has not cultivated the sort of people who can just keep dipping in. There are a lot of them in Texas. And Pax was very successful in 2024 in getting rid of in primaries Republicans who voted to impeach him in the state legislature. But that's a smaller investment. That's $200,000. You can take a guy out. It's not. If Talarico becomes a phenom, as he already kind of is, and spends 100. Does Paxton have 100 from the NRC? No. And you've seen Turning Point in groups that are still angry that there wasn't that money for Blake Masters in Arizona, but there was money to save Lisa Murkowski in Alaska. It would be a continuing sore point for. Why should grassroots people give to it now? Senate leadership funds the opposite of grassroots. They don't care about that. But that is the sort of thing that Tellery can talk about. D.C. wants this to happen. We have some donors that are in D.C. sure, we all do. But this guy owes people and I don't the elements of an argument there. But yeah, Pax is just. I do think it's underage. He's the guy. If a social conservative wants to sue abortion clinics or to investigate clinics that do gender medicine for minors, he will do it. But Texas Republicans have not sent one of those guys to the Senate. They've sent more talented politicians who have some appeal beyond the conservative base. This would be new for them if they try Paxton.

[Dave Weigel]

Now. Everybody says Paxton is the more vulnerable candidate. The Paxton crowd that his defenders, they say the opposite. I'm curious for your take if this is Cope or if there's anything real to this. Their argument is Cornyn has spent $100 million attacking our boy. We love Ken Paxton. We are so mad that how vicious you have been to our guy that if Cornyn wins, eff it, we're staying home. And that a chunk of Paxton voters won't even vote at all.

[David Sirota]

I don't think I buy that. I think what I the one grain of truth I think is that there's an argument that John Cornyn being the nominee makes it easier for Talarico to be the anti system candidate.

[Ryder Strong]

Right, right.

[David Sirota]

They're in Washington and you can imagine Talaricoh.

[Ryder Strong]

He's been there.

[David Sirota]

Yeah, exactly. And Talarico can do the whole it's both parties in Washington. Like it's Washington is the problem, whether Republican or Democrat. And Paxton makes that harder.

[Emily]

Definitely.

[David Sirota]

Right, Paxton. I think then what Talarico probably has to do is it's more of an anti Trump campaign or an anti base of the like sort of the extremist base of the republic. That's how it would be portrayed of the Republican Party. Yeah, exactly.

[Ryder Strong]

They do want to run against Paxton. That's true.

[David Sirota]

Yeah. Right. But I do think that like Cornyn being the old establishment, I guess, which is kind of crazy, but can be portrayed as the like country club Republican. Right. Like, that's a whole different campaign that I'm not convinced is like, not effective.

[Dave Weigel]

Like, I think it can be next to a picture of Biden.

[David Sirota]

Exactly, exactly.

[Emily]

Oh, yeah. I did see Cornyn asleep on a plane recently with his mouth was open a little bit. So anyway, phone him out to sleep on a plane. Sleep on a plane. But it was. It was almost like Biden esque. Right. Except he was on a flight, so he should be sleeping on a flight. God bless anyone who could sleep on a plane. All right, we'll have to leave it there, everyone. Dave and Dave, thank you so much.

[Dave Weigel]

Thank you.

[Ryder Strong]

Thanks for having me.

[Emily]

This is a lot of fun. We appreciate it. Go check out obviously Semaphore and Lever News. That's going to do it for us today, Ryan.

[Dave Weigel]

Yeah. And so again, breakingpoints.com, we got that month free BP free 26.

[Emily]

Yes. BP free 26. Free the BP 3.

[Dave Weigel]

Don't share that with anybody else. That's just for people who watch this segment.

[Emily]

No, this is for everybody.

[Dave Weigel]

Share it with a friend, with your friends, but not just not like people that you don't like.

[Emily]

Do not share it with John Cornyn under any circumstances.

[Dave Weigel]

He just burned $100 million. Thanks, guys. Thank you.

[Emily]

Appreciate it.

[Jill Wintersteen]

This is an I heart podcast. Guaranteed human.