Loading summary
Transcript117 lines
- [00:00]
A
I oftentimes compare American politics to professional wrestling. Trashy, loud, you got over the top characters that sometimes abuse spray tan. And you get this better than anyone being a senator from Connecticut. We're in beautiful Stamford, Connecticut. We are WWE Worldwide headquarters right here in Stanford, right down the street next to the train station. But you had to beat one of its founders and actual wrestler to win your senate seat. Is this correct?
- [00:30]
B
That's correct. Linda McMahon, the CEO of the Wrestling industry, who was a character who actually was in the ring for many, for many fights.
- [00:39]
A
Yes. And now there's gonna be a rematch between you and her. She is gonna be the Secretary of Education.
- [00:47]
B
Of Education.
- [00:48]
A
Yes.
- [00:49]
B
Right.
- [00:49]
A
Now, as you know, for years, Linda McMahon was this kind of pantsuit wearing killjoy. Now, whenever Vince McMahon wanted to do something fun and or shady, Linda would come in and go, right, you're probably.
- [01:02]
B
Not gonna like this either.
- [01:03]
A
But things changed around WrestleMania 17 because, as you know, Vince McMahon, during the Attitude era, started a huge love triangle with Trish Stratus. Was that real? Was it not? Who knows? Then Trish and Vince, as you know in that storyline, then drug Linda, putting her into a completely catatonic State. Then at WrestleMania 17, Vince McMahon and Shane McMahon, they faced off with each other. Meanwhile, Linda was completely catatonic in a wheelchair, until suddenly, as the match heated up, she gets up out of her vegetable like state and she kicks Vince in the nuts. Huge moment. Crowd goes mess my duels. Now, how do you think that type of deep experience will help Linda McMahon as the Secretary of Education here in America? Half the country wakes up every day with two questions. One, what the is happening? And two, what is the point of the Democratic Party? The Trump administration is literally looting the federal government and everyone is mad at the Democrats. And the Democrats are like, hey, what more do you want from us? We called the orange guy weird. At this point, the sole purpose of the Democratic Party is to basically just spam people with unhinged fundraising emails. They're kind of like a Filipino bot farm in the shape of Chuck Schumer. Gross. So I figured, you know what? No more complaining. Why don't I take my questions, complaints and critiques to my own representative, Chris Murphy, a senator from my home state, Connecticut. Senator Murphy has spent most of his career flying under the radar, cleverly disguising himself as a McKinsey consultant, just blending into congressional crowds of white men like an arctic fox. But after Donald Trump's reelection in November, he came out hot, going after his own party for being a bunch of out of touch, snobby elites.
- [03:00]
B
This is not a moment for small changes or reforms. This is a moment for a fundamental rebuild. We have to talk about power, who has it and who doesn't have it. I think we've got to engage in some much more robust economic populism. Democrats have to fight the fights. And frankly, Chris, I don't see that happening across the Capitol right now.
- [03:21]
A
Interesting. He has the talking points of Bernie Sanders with the face of someone who works for BlackRock. So I sat down with the senator to talk about how Democrats need to change, whether America is becoming more of a corrupt oligarchy or it's always been one. And exactly how broad do we want to make this Democratic party tent? Are we talking about all lives matter broad or. Let's bring back R. Kelly broad. Let's bring him back. This episode is brought to you by Vanta. Simplify compliance and get $1,000 off@vanta.com husan that's v a n t a dot com hasan for $1,000 off. So, Senator Murphy, I came across some some pretty disturbing stuff when I was prepping for this interview. According to your team, your go to foods are hot dogs and energy drinks.
- [04:25]
B
Yeah.
- [04:25]
A
Okay. Why do you have the diet of a 13 year old incel gamer?
- [04:30]
B
I think we all sort of are faced with kind of arbitrary and society imposed pressures. Right. As you get older in life to veer away from the foods that actually taste the best. Right.
- [04:46]
A
You're talking about Red Bull.
- [04:47]
B
I'm talking about hot dogs and pizza and Red Bull and diet Mountain Dew.
- [04:53]
A
So Senator Murphy, you're telling me at age 51 sometimes you wake up in your beautiful house in Connecticut, not gonna say where and you go, you know what, I'm just parched for that rich liquid taste of what's probably the inside of a car battery.
- [05:10]
B
Yeah. I will occasionally have a diet Mountain Dew first thing in the morning. Listen, I'm not super proud of that, but I don't run away from it.
- [05:21]
A
Let's piggyback off of this energy drink addiction that you may have. You had a pretty intense manic episode after the election. It and you went on a pretty epic November tweet storm where you talked about the election and your thoughts. Now real quick, how many Red Bulls in were you before this tweet storm?
- [05:41]
B
Like one and a half.
- [05:42]
A
Okay, one and a half. Okay. So this is the tweet storm that I'm talking about.
- [05:45]
B
Yeah.
- [05:45]
A
I'm gonna do a quick recap for you. Okay. It was 10 major points but basically what you said is, you said the Democrats should turn up the volume by calling out billionaires and go all in on economic populism and then turn down the volume on stuff like guns, immigration, and the environment so that more people are comfortable coming into the Democratic Party tent. Am I roughly describing the summary of these 10 points?
- [06:12]
B
Yeah, yeah, I think that that's. There's obviously more to it, but, yes, I think that we should be leading with the issue of populist economics.
- [06:21]
A
Okay, so since Trump has been inaugurated, you've been going really hard on this economic populism idea, essentially saying that Trump is turning the United States of America into an oligarchy. I mean, here's my question. Hasn't it always been an oligarchy?
- [06:42]
B
I mean, I think, you know, because.
- [06:45]
A
I literally talked to Bernie Sanders this past year.
- [06:47]
B
Yeah.
- [06:48]
A
And he told me within two seconds, he was like, look, it's not complicated. It's money.
- [06:54]
B
Yeah. And this is why the country is in a revolutionary mood today, because they see that the whole game is rigged, that if you have money and power, you are in a position to just get more and more of it, and everybody else is left treading water. And yes, of course, the billionaire class, the corporate class, has had way too much influence on political life, both in the Democratic Party and in the Republican Party. But what Donald Trump is doing is fundamentally different. Right. Because this is a formal marriage of the White House and a specific handful, at least at the outset of Masters of the Universe, the people who control our information platforms. Because he knows that if he takes control one way or the other of information, then he can get away with anything. Then any favors that he hands out, whether it be to the tech companies or to the oil companies or to the Wall street banks, he can't be held accountable for it, because those information platforms are either being run by the White House or are so afraid of Donald Trump that they're going to tweak their algorithms or their editorial policy so that they don't tell the real story, so that they suppress dissent and that they elevate Trump's narrative.
- [08:11]
A
Okay, I agree that, and I'm following what you're putting down a little bit of. Hey, there has been some form of crony capitalism that's existed for a long time on both sides of the aisle. But I do think when it comes to capitalism, America is on the spectrum. So on one end of the spectrum, you have the healthy welfare state. I'm talking about Sweden, Denmark. You've heard of these countries. I call them Disney, frozen countries. It's all white people and there's no black or brown people. But you seem to be having a great time. Then you have old fashioned capitalism. That's kind of like Michael Douglas and Wall Street. Remember, there's that. Why'd you do it? Cause it had to be done.
- [08:54]
B
Greed is good.
- [08:55]
A
Yeah, greed is good. That whole thing. Okay, then you have crony capitalism, Dick Cheney, Right. George W. Bush, this is my guy. Government contracts, let's go to Iraq. Then you got plutocracy, Scrooge McDuck. Then you have oligarchy, Monopoly man, kleptocracy, Sith Lord. Then from what I understand is you just go off the edge and then it's just raw dog dictatorship. I'm talking Gaddafi, beret shades.
- [09:25]
B
Yep.
- [09:26]
A
And I hear that we're always on the verge of going in. Okay, but where are we on the spectrum? Are we talking Sith Lord with the monocle? Where in all of this harmony?
- [09:37]
B
I think it's some combination of Sith Lord and Dick Cheney. Right. It's a little bit of you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. I think increasingly government is just being used as a source of profit for the oligarch class. That's why they want to privatize Social Security. That's why they want the entire health care system, which is mostly paid for by government dollars, in the hands of the private sector. That's why they're trying now with Linda McMahon, to get the education system into the private sector. I think the oligarchs view the public sector as just a means for them to ultimately make money. The truth of the matter is real effective capitalism needs rules to make sure that if you work hard, you can still get ahead. That if you have a good idea, you can actually start a small business without it being SM overnight. And so we are fast becoming kind of anti capitalist in the sense that there's no room for actual hard work, ingenuity, innovation, to actually result in people doing well for themselves because the folks at the top have all the power and they essentially squash innovation and entrepreneurship before it gets the chance to be launched.
- [11:10]
A
As a startup founder, securing larger clients often hinges on meeting strict security compliance standards like SOC2 or ISO 27001. They can help, but they take a lot of time and effort pulling you away from your core work. That's where Vanta comes in. Vanta simplifies compliance by automating repetitive security tasks, helping you prepare for audits quickly and efficiently. And the platform also connects you with industry experts Auditors and key resources like penetration testing to ensure a smooth process. Join over 9,000 companies, including startups from Y Combinator and Techstars. Visit vanta.comhusn to claim $1,000 off. That's V A N T A dot com Hasan. We're talking about economic populism.
- [11:58]
B
Yep.
- [11:59]
A
And we're talking about how it has dramatically changed. This is a recent clip from George Carlin. That's 20 years old.
- [12:08]
B
Got it.
- [12:08]
A
Here we go.
- [12:09]
C
Forget the politicians. The politicians are put there to give you the idea, the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don't. You have no choice. You have owners. They own you. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They've long since bought and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls. They got the judges in their back pockets. And they own all the big media companies. So they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls.
- [12:40]
A
That's from 2005.
- [12:42]
B
Yeah.
- [12:42]
A
The only thing that's changed from that clip, in my opinion, is we have Netflix now.
- [12:50]
B
That is the illusion of choice.
- [12:52]
A
Yeah. What is your response to that?
- [12:54]
B
Right. But that's the reason why I've been in public life my entire adult life is because I can't stand to live in a world in which you have that much consolidated power and you let it go uncontested.
- [13:10]
A
By the way, you can push back on this. He's dead. He died.
- [13:15]
B
Yeah. I mean, Democrats and Republicans gave into this idea that was really in Vogue about 20 years ago, that markets could fix everything. Right. That if you sort of properly tweak markets, ultimately those markets will be able to deliver happiness. And more than just markets, global markets, that jobs will be moved overseas, but they'll be replaced by cheaper goods and different, better jobs that will eventually raise the standard of living. Democrats bought into that. Republicans bought into it. It was a fucking lie. It was a fucking lie that was perpetuated on us by these masters of the global economy. The only people who really benefited from being able to move capital seamlessly and goods from country to country. They made out great.
- [14:08]
A
You're talking about the C Suite class.
- [14:10]
B
Yeah. The better jobs never came to the United States. The prices did get lower, but that didn't make us feel any happier or better because our communities disintegrated in front of our eyes. Our kids got addicted to their phones. We lost connection with each other and we became more and more lonely. Life just started losing all of its kind of spirituality, all of its connection, and the prices being lower didn't really make us happier.
- [14:43]
A
I agree with that, by the way. I've said this all the time, that over the past, I would say 20 plus years of my adult life, you can get here in America a ton of dumb shit. Sneakers, clothes from Zara, video games, candy. You can get plenty of dumb shit, real shit. Education, health care, general civic and societal safety roads that. That don't have potholes in them. The real stuff that makes a robust society you can't really get.
- [15:17]
B
So there's this longitudinal study of happiness that was done by a bunch of researchers, and they follow people through life, both folks of high income and low income. And they come to this very simple conclusion in the end that what makes for a happy, fulfilling life is not your career, is not how much money you made. It's whether you have relationships and connection, whether you feel a sense of belonging in your community. You know, we told Americans that if they just bought stuff, if they just were good consumers, if they got a little bit higher income, if they got on that career ladder, ultimately, you know, that was meaning, that was purpose, that was fulfillment, and it never, ever has been. Meanwhile, government was making it harder for you to find community. We were making it harder for your kids to find friends. We were doing all sorts of things to make it harder for you to access the parts of life that actually breed true happiness. We made an enormous mistake believing in what I guess is referred to as the neoliberal economic order. Markets will cure everything, and we're paying a huge price for that right now.
- [16:30]
A
Okay, this is number six in the tweetstorm. Okay? You wrote, when progressives like Bernie Sanders aggressively go after the elites that hold people down, they are shunned as dangerous populists. Why? Maybe because true economic populism is bad for our high income base. Now, what do you mean specifically by our high income base? Do you mean your voters, your donors, your supporters? Who are these people?
- [16:57]
B
Listen, the way we raise money, yes. Is and has a fundamentally corrupting influence on politicians. I remember when I first started out and I was calling people for money. And who do you call for money? You call people that are able to write you $1,000, not necessarily people who are able to write you $5. And those folks have just different interests than people who can donate $5. But if you spend four hours a day on the phone raising money, talking to people of wealth and means, then you are not hearing the actual concerns of the people you represent. Now I've finally gotten to the point in my career where, you know, I don't have to make those calls, that I've got a pretty good online small donor base, but for the folks that have to raise money that way, it's fundamentally corrupting. But here's the other thing. We are a party that claims we represent poor people, and yet poor people are not voting for us like they used to. Who do we rely on now in order to win majorities? We rely on higher income voters. And generally higher income voters are not interested in upsetting the economic status quo.
- [18:12]
A
Right.
- [18:13]
B
Ok. And so we've become a party that says we want to fundamentally change the economic order in order to benefit low income, middle income people. And yet our coalition is dependent on really, really rich people. And so I'm just raising the question is maybe why we are resistant as Democrats to being engaged in the pugilistic populism of somebody like Bernie Sanders, because unconsciously, maybe we realize that talking that way about upsetting the economic apple cart might not be that popular with the folks that are the core of our voting constituency.
- [18:49]
A
There's a lot of country club people and Volvo drivers that may revolt, that.
- [18:53]
B
Vote Democratic, but maybe are not totally, totally, but maybe are not interested in all of the monopolies being destroyed and for the minimum wage to go from $7 to $15.
- [19:04]
A
How else did you get that? Range Rover? Right. You're essentially saying that the party has been corrupted by money, but this is the Bernie argument. Yes.
- [19:15]
B
Yeah, listen, I think the entire American political system is corrupted by money. I don't think you can exempt Democrats from that. I think Democrats have been corrupted by money as well, much less than Republicans have been in a much less overt way. But I think it'd be silly to pretend as if Democrats, not everyone, but some Democrats, you know, ultimately are impacted by the fact that they're spending a lot of time with donors.
- [19:46]
A
But is that a real message? Hey, we're less corrupt than the other.
- [19:49]
B
No, you have to, you have to fix, you have to show how you're gonna fix the problem. So when I first got into politics 20 years ago, campaign finance reform was like a top three issue for Democrats. We talked a lot about the fact that you had to get private money out of politics. And we were going to make a decision, you know, maybe through a, you know, voluntary check off on your income tax form. We were going to publicly fund elections. We kind of stopped talking about that.
- [20:16]
A
Right.
- [20:17]
B
You know, maybe a decade ago, we used to talk about ethics reform. Lobbying reform. Democrats sort of stopped talking aggressively about reforming government and getting money out of politics. The right and true message is that the billionaires have control of government and government is becoming fundamentally corrupt in an overt, transparent, on steroids way by Donald Trump. But Democrats won't be legitimate messengers about cleaning up government unless we actually have ideas that are like front and center about how we are going to clean up government. And so I worry that if we spend all our time, you know, talking about economic issues and reproductive rights issues and climate issues and gun issues, and don't spend any of our time talking about how we're going to actually fix government if we get control of just feeds this idea that we're not sincere and that we're attacking Trump's corruption because it's politically convenient. But if we get in power, we're actually not going to fix the underlying problem.
- [21:22]
A
One of the things that you talked about in the tweetstorm was broadening Democrats, broadening the tent, and avoiding kind of left wing, quote, purity tests that push certain people out. Explain.
- [21:33]
B
So what I'm saying is that we should build a party based around economic fairness and deconstructing destroying consolidated economic power. Okay, so if you want to be part of our club, then you have to believe in an increased minimum wage. You have to believe that the corporations have too much power. You need to believe in labor unions. But we're going to let into the tent people who believe in those things, but may not all agree with us on an issue like reproductive freedom or an issue like universal background checks on guns. And the reason I think that's smart is A, because that's actually how you win elections. And our coalition would still be majority pro choice, and it would still be majority pro background checks. So we could still legislate on those things, but we would win elections because we would bring in people who thought differently. But B, in today's world of these closed information ecosystems, I have no chance to convince somebody who doesn't agree with me on background checks if they're not in a room with me every now and again, if I never let them into the room.
- [22:52]
A
Got it.
- [22:53]
B
Then they just sort of sit and listen to Fox News and Breitbart all day, and I never get to change their mind. So I think if you want to sort of have more people who believe what we believe on gay and trans rights, for instance, we should say, hey, you want to raise the minimum wage, you want to break up, you know, the big companies, then come with us. And once you're in. We'll sort of talk about some of the misperceptions you may have about your gay neighbors.
- [23:19]
A
So a little bit of what you're saying is don't be such a nitpicker.
- [23:22]
B
Yeah, don't be so judgmental.
- [23:24]
A
Okay.
- [23:24]
B
I mean, I got it. I think. I mean, our party has moved rightfully pretty fast on issues of gay marriage and transgender rights, and I'm glad for that. But I don't necessarily think that we should be edge judgmental as we have been about people whose journey takes a little bit longer.
- [23:48]
A
You want a little no filter energy on Facebook, the way they're like, hey, we're changing our standards. White people, no N word. But we will let you say the R word type vibes.
- [24:01]
B
Maybe that's not the exact vibes I want, but I want a vibe that says, come talk to us and work with us on economic issues. And while you're here. Right. Let's try to correct. Let's try to have a conversation about some of the misinformation that you've heard, for instance, about what we're trying to do on guns.
- [24:21]
A
So you're basically saying the Burning man tent turned into a PTA meeting and it backfired.
- [24:25]
B
I would have to really think through that analogy. But I'm just saying bring more people in. Build a bigger coalition.
- [24:32]
A
By being less judgmental.
- [24:33]
B
By being less judgmental and being sort of willing to exist in a place with people that don't line up with you on every issue. That's what we were in the 1970s and 1980s when we had these giant majorities and we were actually passing progressive legislation on the environment, on labor rights. We were doing that with members of the Democratic Party that, you know, weren't all in agreement on civil rights or on guns. We had fights inside the coalition on those issues, but we were actually investing in and passing progressive policy notwithstanding those fights.
- [25:06]
A
Okay, so let's test your premise.
- [25:07]
B
Yeah.
- [25:07]
A
Okay. Let's do it reality show style, the way you do it in America. Okay. We're gonna play a game. It's called on the island or off the island. On the island or off the island. I'll describe some people, and you tell me, are they on the Democratic Party island or have they been voted off the island, according to you?
- [25:29]
B
Okay, but can I reject the premise?
- [25:31]
A
What do you mean, reject the premise?
- [25:32]
B
Can I. You just not up to me. What I'm saying is that. Is that those people should be. Well, okay, let's listen to your hype.
- [25:41]
A
Here we go. Anti vaxxers.
- [25:44]
B
I mean if they want to vote for us because they believe in the same things we believe on economic issues, why wouldn't we want them to vote for us?
- [25:54]
A
Right. On the island. On the island. People who like Gutfeld on Fox.
- [25:59]
B
I mean he's not, he's not funny. They're out.
- [26:04]
A
Off the island.
- [26:04]
B
Yeah, off the island.
- [26:05]
A
Off the island.
- [26:07]
B
We shouldn't fight for their votes.
- [26:08]
A
Okay. I, I would. NRA members.
- [26:15]
B
Absolutely. We want to.
- [26:16]
A
On the island. Cybertruck owners.
- [26:20]
B
Some of them.
- [26:21]
A
Some of them. Someone who owns an All Lives Matter T shirt. Maybe, but the back of the shirt says but white lives kind of matter more.
- [26:34]
B
No OC Island.
- [26:36]
A
Okay. Someone who cheats on their spouse.
- [26:41]
B
If you believe on with us, if you agree with us on economic issues and the minimum wage, we want your.
- [26:47]
A
Vote in the Oval Office, then they're out. Olan R. Kelly.
- [26:55]
B
We don't need him.
- [26:56]
A
O.C.
- [26:57]
B
Island.
- [26:58]
A
Someone who calls China the orientation.
- [27:05]
B
There are a lot of people who say a lot of dumb things. I probably would not, I would probably not choose to swear them off as voters for us.
- [27:16]
A
Someone who owns a lot of Nazi memorabilia, but it's only because they're a history buff. They swear.
- [27:22]
B
Yeah, that's probably not believable.
- [27:26]
A
A January 6 rioter who chanted hang might pence but they support a progressive tax rate on unrealized capital gains.
- [27:36]
B
So I want to win elections. Like. Right. I get the premise. There are all sorts of people who have some ugly views, who have some backwards views. We just have to decide whether or not we want to win elections or not. And in order to win elections all across this country, you are going to have to build a coalition with some people who don't line up with us on a host of really important issues. We are in a world of politics in which the most important thing is to have power. And just because I have some people in the coalition who don't agree with me on guns or don't agree with me on every aspect of the kind of civil rights protections I want, doesn't mean that ultimately we won't have more success in passing either civil rights protections or tougher laws on guns in this nation. If we grow a bigger tent and a bigger coalition.
- [28:38]
A
Appreciate you being here, Senator Ron.
- [28:39]
B
Thanks man. Appreciate it.
- [28:40]
A
Thank you so much.
- [28:40]
B
Thank you.
- [28:41]
A
Anything else you didn't get in? Really? Alright, so you're a startup founder. Finding product market fit is probably your number one priority. But to land bigger customers, you also need security compliance and obtaining your SoC2 or ISO 27001 certification that can open those big doors. But they take time and energy pulling you away from building and shipping. And that is where Vanta comes in. Vanta is the all in one compliance solution, helping startups like yours get audit ready and build a strong security foundation quickly and painlessly. How, you ask? Well, Vanta automates the manual security tasks that slow you down, helping you streamline your audit. And the platform connects you with trusted experts to build your program, auditors to get you through audits quickly, and a marketplace for essentials like pen testing. So whether you're closing your first deal or gearing up for growth, Vanta makes compliance so Easy. Join over 9,000 companies, including many Y Combinator and TechStar startups who trust Vanta. Simplify compliance, and get $1,000 off right now at vanta.com Hussan that's V A N T A dot com Hussan for $1,000 off.