Loading summary
Transcript38 lines
- [00:00]
Lauren Eagan
What's up, guys? It's Lauren Eagan here at the Bulwark. I have Rob Flaherty here with me today. He has a pretty long resume in Democratic politics, but you might know his name most recently because he was the digital director in the Biden White House before he moved over to the Biden campaign to be a deputy campaign manager. Of course, that turned into the Harris campaign. Rob, how's it going?
- [00:23]
Rob Flaherty
It's going great. Thanks for having me, Lauren. And hi.
- [00:26]
Lauren Eagan
Yeah, thanks for being here. So I asked you to come and chat with us because you have an op ed in the New York Times this week and it's titled if you're a voter reading this, this essay is not about you. So give us the quick summary of this piece and what you're trying to argue in here.
- [00:43]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, absolutely. So, you know, look, I think if you look at why Democrats lost the election in 2024, there was a split between voters who pay attention, who Democrats are really good at communicating with through the traditional institutions of media, through a battle over facts, through a style that takes into account the values of our institutions and democracy and all of those things, and voters who don't pay attention, who feel the system isn't working for them, who feel burned by politics and in a world of infinite media choices, don't need to hear the news, don't sort of need to hear about politics in their day to day. They aren't seeking it out. But, but that doesn't mean they're not getting information about politics. They're getting information from their friends, their family, from social media, from all the above. And so in order to successfully reach those voters, you know, we need to adapt to a whole new style of tactics. We need to adapt to a bunch of stuff that we tried in 24 but didn't do enough of things that the party has struggled with subsequently. But we also have to think about our style. I mean, at some fundamental level, these voters think we're full of shit and think that maybe we make a bunch of promises, but we never deliver, that the party is weak. And, and, and you know, the shortest way to do that is to pick fights, drive conflict, drive attention, drive reach, and then ultimately have that drive votes. And so, you know, in many ways this is less a conversation about, you know, what issue sets do you need to pick and more, how do you get in front of these voters? How do you show that you really believe what you are saying and how do you drive attention? Because that is ultimately the, the way that you reach these Folks who are not normally paying attention to us.
- [02:47]
Lauren Eagan
So I just want to start off by addressing a bit of the elephant in the room. I totally agree with a lot of what you're arguing and writing in this piece, but why wasn't that a lot that logic then applied to the Biden situation? Because I think everything that you write to me makes it even more apparent that like maybe Biden should have never run for reelection in the first place and that he wasn't the right candidate or the person for this moment.
- [03:11]
Rob Flaherty
Well, I think part of the challenge is it's, you know, it's, this is a struggle for pretty much any major Democratic candidate right now. I think this is like a stylistic adjustment that a lot of Democratic candidates need to make. And I think you're seeing a lot of folks try to get their reps in right now and do better in this sort of lane. But it's a challenge for a lot of people. In the case of the President, I think there's a lot of stuff that we had the president do to try to get in front of these voters, but it is sort of a fundamental challenge for him as it was for a lot of folks. Because, you know, I think the sort of style of politics of the whole party is sort of not oriented towards, you know, this, this sort of style of communicating. And so it's, you know, the, the other sort of part of this too is like, I think this is a thing that the campaign identified me at the beginning of the campaign. We maybe even talked about it of, you know, we called them persuade to participate voters at the time, which was the sort of fundamental challenge for the campaign, which was even at the beginning there was sort of, sort of a disaffected group of Democrats that both campaigns were going after. And so this is sort of a thing that we worked at, you know, all throughout. I think, you know, there were certainly things that the campaign should have done better on both in both the Biden era and the Harris era. And there were things the campaign did well in the Biden era and the Harris era to reach these folks. But, you know, this is like a party wide effort that, you know, I think is going to, you know, need to focus on reaching these folks.
- [04:53]
Lauren Eagan
There's a version of this where I think Democrats convince themselves that they can get their own version of these online platforms or someone who can communicate really well on these platforms and that that's like a silver bullet. But I think that there's another argument that could be made that Democrats don't just need a Pete Buttigieg who can, you know, go on a podcast and chat for three hours, but they need someone who can, you know, moderate on various issues that matter to voters, that has. Has credibility in that moderation on these issues. Do you think that the, like, moderation component is. Is part of this at all?
- [05:27]
Rob Flaherty
You know, to me, it's less about moderation or being progressive or any of that stuff, and it's more about sort of. Does it seem like you really believe what the heck you're saying? Right. And so, like, you know, I think.
- [05:42]
Lauren Eagan
Like, the authenticity thing. Yeah, yeah, we keep talking about. Yeah.
- [05:46]
Rob Flaherty
And, you know, I think a lot of these voters give Bernie Sanders a lot of credit for believing what he says, even if they disagree with him. And so, you know, like, famously, I worked for Hillary Clinton. You know what I mean? Like, I'm not. I am not a Bernie guy, but I think that is a thing that, like, people give him credit on. And so I think, you know, moderation, not moderation. I think ultimately the most important thing is, like, does it seem like you're real and that your beliefs are strongly held? You know, I think that the party overall needs to sort of look, we need more voters. That's the fundamental problem. And so, you know, however you sort of build a. A candidate, a campaign, a movement that invites more people in and has a bigger tent, that is. That is the most important thing. And I think there's a lot of different ways that you can. You can pull that off, you know, irrespective of your sort of positioning.
- [06:44]
Lauren Eagan
Yeah, and the bigger tent component is interesting because, you know, you talk about going on, you know, to more like, non traditional type platforms. And obviously, like, with Rogan, that was a big thing with Bernie going on there. And is that a place that Democrats should go, given things that he says about trans issues? Do you think it's like the whole party kind of needs to relearn how to operate in this media environment so that you don't have sort of, like, activists online, like, you know, coming at you for. For doing something going on a podcast like Rogan that might not sort of fit into this narrow box of how hardcore Democrats view themselves.
- [07:20]
Rob Flaherty
The fundamental thing is, you know, I always say there are no broadcasts anymore. There's just narrowcasts. And so you have to go around collecting narrowcasts. I mean, that's. That is the basic gist. And in the same way that, you know, campaigns traditionally go to different DMAs to reach folks in local media, we have to think about audiences that way, you know, a small media engagement that reaches a certain audience is a valuable use of a candidate's time. And, and there's a lot of audiences you need to talk to and places you need to go with people who may not agree with you on everything. I mean, that is just sort of the fundamental thing. And so, you know, to me, there's no voter that the party can afford to write off. You know, there's, there is. We are in a place where, you know, we are writing off states we used to win. I mean, that means we need to expand the tent. That means we need to expand the number of people we're talking to. And that does mean going to podcasts or media appearances or radio shows or town halls with organizations with people who might disagree with us. Because I think that the willingness to hear people out and engage with people we disagree with is how you win over people who don't agree with us. And in a world where there just aren't enough people to support a democratic coalition in a presidential. Right now, let's like, you need, we need to do that.
- [08:44]
Lauren Eagan
Yeah. That kind of reminds me a bit of the. Obviously we've been talking a lot about Elon Musk recently, but it reminds me of the White House event that I think was in the summer of 2021. It was the electrical electric vehicle event that Biden had at the White House where he invited a bunch of EV companies. Notoriously, you know, Elon Musk was not invited to this, which we know now from reporting, really offended him. He was pretty upset about it. Does that make you, this whole conversation, does that make you rethink the decision to not invite someone like Musk to the White House for that type of event? If you need a big tent, you know, the decision I think to not invite him was largely a disagree about Tesla's labor practices. But if you're trying to create a bigger tent, if you want to bring people like Musk or people that follow Musk and like Musk, those kinds of potential voters into the fold, then maybe don't stiff arm one of like the biggest social media posters in the world. Like, if you could do that over again, do you think you do invite someone like Musk to an event like that?
- [09:47]
Rob Flaherty
I don't know. I mean, I wasn't, you know, this wasn't, that wasn't my project. I don't know. I mean, I think there's a difference between going and reaching people and inviting a, you know, red pilled billionaire to the White House. You know, you know, he wasn't quite.
- [10:11]
Lauren Eagan
As red pilled at the time, I will say. But yes, it is, it has since escalated, as we've all seen.
- [10:17]
Rob Flaherty
I think we, I think we knew where Elon was going. So, you know, I don't necessarily draw an equivalent on that end. But you know, I think going to platforms and places where people, you know, have differing opinions is a good thing. But you know, highlighting people who, you know, whose views you don't agree with is not necessarily a thing you have to do.
- [10:42]
Lauren Eagan
So then what do you think of Gavin Newsom's podcast? And you know, I think he's highlighted some people that fall into the red pill musk category.
- [10:54]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, look, I, I, you know, I think it is, I don't know that I am very long on politicians having their own podcasts. I would say that I would generally advise that it is better to go to other people's platforms and have your own because the people who are going to go to yours are, are generally the people who are interested in hearing from you. Now that being said, more content is more content. That's a good thing. And, and however you're going to do it is good. You know, I don't really even take issue with having guests on that you disagree with. I mean, from both a, from both that how do you get people to listen to a podcast perspective? I mean, that's like one on one stuff. But, but like, you know, you do have to have those sort of conversations. You know, I will say you, like, you also probably should not be a pot. Like if you're, if you're a politician, not who's on a podcast. Your job is to be, to win the argument and not be sort of a passive podcast host. And that's sort of the trap that I think, you know, you sort of find yourself in if you're, you're in these positions. But you know, on balance, you know, it's, it's, you know, it's an interesting idea. But you know, I don't know that, I don't know that it's the tactic I would recommend.
- [12:13]
Lauren Eagan
Yeah, that's interesting because I think one of the questions or one of the things that I didn't understand about the Newsom question, and it kind of goes into this conversation too about like, should Democratic donors fund some more progressive media platforms if the whole goal is to reach apolitical voters or like what you're calling these opt out voters, is that really a good use of resources? Isn't it just that like Democrats need to show up to these spaces that like, aren't actually political places, like a Rogan, a Theo Vaughan, you know, those are the obvious examples that people keep using. But do you think it's a good sort of, how are you thinking about what donors should spend, spend money on in terms of creating different kinds of platforms? Is that really like a good use of, of resources or an effective use of resources?
- [12:58]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, look, I think there's like a couple of things here. I, it's, it's sort of like a two step which is, you know, the, the right has spent years and years and years building up a desire and appetite, a demand for alternative media, right? Because they don't, their voters, their audience don't trust the mainstream press. So they go, okay, well I want the Daily Wire and I want these sort of online publications because they can. And so the right sort of backed themselves into a position where they built this sort of thriving ecosystem in the space where a lot of voters who don't trust the system are now. And so, you know, to that end, you know, you are seeing a lot of, you know, there is a desire online for alternative center left and left media and sort of, you know, I don't know, resistance media. I mean, you know, the bulwark. Hello, we're here on the Bulwark YouTube.
- [13:59]
Lauren Eagan
Someone called us non, non cringe resistance media. So I'm, I'm going to go with that.
- [14:04]
Rob Flaherty
Take non cringe resistance. That's right. And so, you know, to me you kind of have to do both things. The advantage of what this is for the right is they've got this big ecosystem that then sort of pushes up against the other parts of the Internet and the other sort of parts, the other subcultures of the Internet. And then they've also gone through those places, right? They've done, you know, everybody talks about the manosphere, fine, but they're also doing health and wellness, they're doing parenting, they're in all these other sort of corners of the universe. And so if I'm a donor and I'm funding stuff, I think the most important thing is to fund both a healthy sort of anti Trump ecosystem, anti, you know, pro democracy, pro social trust, you know, sort of pro left, pro democrat, whatever media system ecosystem. But then you also have to think about how are we funding the pipelines into, you know, those other cultural spaces. You know, the reality is a lot of these folks need to like, we need to like, it's not currently super profitable to be a liberal on the Internet. And that is like a problem and. But there are. We need to give people the room to sort of experiment, to exist there, to try the stuff that's going to, you know, build an audience. And. And that's going to take some backing. And. And the right. You know, it's not like the right. This just happened. I mean, this was a. A funded, capitalized exercise that then became profitable over time. And so, you know, there's just gotta be. There's just gotta be more of that.
- [15:43]
Lauren Eagan
Yeah, I mean, this question about how Democrats regain cultural relevance is so interesting. And it's such a big question. Like, what does that even look like? Is that like, you know, building more relationships with influencers or does it have to be like, more organic than. Than that?
- [16:02]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, I mean, there's the technical stuff, right? There's, you know, you've got to, you know, reach people, show up in places, you know, be authentic, like, all the stuff, whatever. I do think there's, like, a fundamental problem about the fact that we became the staunch defenders of the institution versus the improvers of the institution, which, like, that's like, I'm not. Like, that's going to make you culturally co. Because that's like, kind of a wonky answer. But, like, so cool. Yeah, super cool. To be the. But like, there is this element of, like, it's become countercultural in a moment of counterculture to be conservative and like, in a moment where people hate institutions, where the. The traditional institutions of society are falling away and distrusted that the conservatism became the thing you are. That is rebellious and fun. And that is the thing that I think is really missing is, you know, sort of the party, the left. It became less fun, it became less interesting. And it was, you know, progressive without being inclusive in many ways. And. And so that, I think, is one of the big. Is the big sort of issue. You know, we need to seem like a movement that you want to be a part of, that wants you to be a part of it. And. And that takes, like, a level of irreverence, that takes a level of acknowledging where the system is failing people, you know, and not falling into the America is already great trap. All of those things, I think are, you know, it's a branding exercise as much as it is a technical exercise.
- [18:00]
Lauren Eagan
Make Democrats cool again. I guess that's the mission there will be.
- [18:05]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, nothing says. Nothing says we're cool. Then I had.
- [18:08]
Lauren Eagan
Nothing says I'm so cool than saying make Democrats cool again. Yeah, that'll be a real wedding message for you guys. I'm curious Then, you know, your experience working for Biden and just everything that happened over the past 18 months, if that's influenced how important you feel like it is for Democrats to be effective communicators and sort of like whoever emerges from this moment, whoever kind of is the nominee in 2028, whatever that looks like, that like fundamentally one of the most important things to prioritize is this authenticity and this ability to communicate in all different spaces. Because I don't think that's a skill that like every Democratic leader that's out there right now actually really has. So how are you thinking about the need to prioritize that?
- [18:55]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, I mean, look, I think, I think it is a skill issue and a prioritization issue. I think that we have an issue across the board. Where was that of an issue across the board? I guess it's more that, I think one of the. I always say, it's like, you know, objects in the mirror are closer than they appear. I think everyone has sort of a warp perception of the way the world consumes information because everything is hyper personalized. Right. And so everyone lives in their own little media bubbles. And so because of that, it's really easy to think that what you are seeing on the Internet is what everyone else is seeing, what you are seeing on tv, how you are consuming media. I do think there is a fundamental thing that leaders who don't live in it cannot really understand it. Right. You can't teach YouTube to someone who doesn't watch YouTube. You can't teach TikTok to people who don't watch TikTok. And so I do think there's like an element of, you know, like political leaders being native to this stuff being really, really important.
- [20:07]
Lauren Eagan
So that sounds like it's an age thing in a way.
- [20:09]
Rob Flaherty
Well, I think it's a generational thing, but it's also like a style. Like, you know, there are older politicians who are good at this. It's just sort of like it is an adaptable thing. You can learn it. But, but yeah, I mean, like there is an element of, of if it's not, if it's not a thing that you are constantly living in, you're never going to prioritize it in the same way. And so that is just a fundamental challenge. And then, you know, I do think there's sort of like a. The way we have drilled political figures for a really long time is, you know, run out the clock, give your talking points, repeat your points, go back to your base, answer all that stuff. And like there is just a, that that doesn't work in, in these kinds of formats. You have to be able to have like a real conversation and like engage with questions on the substance and the merits. That is like a whole, that is like a different kind of media training, that is like a completely different kind of existence for a lot of these folks. And so I think in some ways there's like a generational thing where, you know, we definitely, you know, this calls for a series of folks who are more versed in the media of the moment to be given positions of authority in both staff level and principal level. But then also we've got to like, you know, sort of put our, sort of retrain, rethink the way that we put our political figures out there and how do we get them ready for this?
- [21:37]
Lauren Eagan
It seems like there's been a bit of a reemergence of Biden Harris world folks in the past few days. You're not the only Biden alum that's written in New York Times op ed recently. Biden wrote something for USA Today this week about the Pope. Why do you think we're, we're starting to hear from more Biden folks now and do you think that, you know, there's sort of going to be a bit of a reemergence from some of the folks from this last election in the coming days?
- [22:04]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, I can't speak for other folks. You know, I, this is sort of a thing I've been thinking about for a while and I've been working with the Times on it for, for a little bit. And you know, the timing was now, you know, I think there's a lot of important lessons that we learned in this election that are worth sharing out and worth having a conversation about. So, you know, I think, you know, that's why, why I wrote it and you know, let other folks speak for themselves.
- [22:41]
Lauren Eagan
You are going to absolutely hate that. I'm bringing up this email that you wrote during the campaign, but you sent out a fundraising email poking fun at some self important podcasters and you know, hindsight's 20 20. Now that we know what we know about the media landscape, I'm curious if you regret using any of those words in that email.
- [23:02]
Rob Flaherty
Well, I think, look, tensions were high.
- [23:07]
Lauren Eagan
At the time, I'll give you that. It was right after the debate.
- [23:10]
Rob Flaherty
Yeah, look, at the end of the day it was a strongly worded email. But the broader point was at the time the pathway forward was to rally our base and rally our people. And that's what we were trying to do at the moment. I have lots of respect for those self important podcasters.
- [23:34]
Lauren Eagan
Thank you. We appreciate your respect for the podcast industry here at the Bulwark. Thank you. Well Rob, this was a super, super interesting op ed. I really encourage our listeners to go and give it a read and I hope you come back because I know you've got lots of thoughts about the future of the Democratic Party and how you all navigate this brave new world of online media. So thanks for doing this and come back anytime.
- [24:03]
Rob Flaherty
Awesome. Thanks for having me. Lauren.