The 2028 Invisible Primary, Economic Reality, and Booker’s Hamilton Audition with Meghan McCain

Summary

Podcast Summary: Next Up with Mark Halperin

Title: The 2028 Invisible Primary, Economic Reality, and Booker’s Hamilton Audition with Meghan McCain
Host: MK Media - Mark Halperin
Guest: Meghan McCain
Release Date: July 31, 2025

---

1. Introduction

In this episode of Next Up with Mark Halperin, host Mark Halperin delves into the intricate landscape of the upcoming 2028 Democratic presidential primary, explores current political celebrity relationships, scrutinizes controversial advertising campaigns, and dissects the complexities of the American economy with guest Megan McCain and economist David Bonson.

---

2. The 2028 Invisible Primary Rankings

Mark Halperin initiates the discussion with his exclusive analysis of the 2028 Democratic Invisible Primary Rankings, a framework he developed since the 2004 election cycle to predict potential presidential nominees based on various critical factors.

Key Factors and Top Contenders:

• Money:

  • Jay Pritzker, Governor of Illinois, leads primarily due to his billionaire status, allowing significant self-funding of his campaign ([00:15:45]).
  • Rahm Emanuel follows, renowned for his exceptional fundraising prowess and extensive network among wealthy Democratic donors ([00:16:10]).

• Record and Issues:

  • Josh Shapiro (Pennsylvania) and Andy Beshear (Kentucky) are highlighted for their effective governance records and policy achievements that resonate with voters ([00:18:05]).

• Visible Primary (Bio and Storytelling):

  • Wes Moore (Maryland) and Ro Khanna (California) stand out for their compelling personal narratives and ability to intertwine their life stories with their political agendas ([00:20:30]).

• Early States:

  • Wes Moore and Gavin Newsom (California) are poised to excel in early primary states through strategic campaigning and grassroots operations ([00:22:50]).

• Electability:

  • Josh Shapiro and Gina Raimondo (former Governor of Rhode Island) are favored for their proven track records in general elections and broad appeal across the electorate ([00:24:15]).

• Hang Test (Personal Appeal):

  • Pete Buttigieg and Josh Shapiro are praised for their likability and ability to connect with voters on a personal level, making them favorable candidates for voters seeking relatability ([00:25:50]).

• TV Presence and Media Savvy:

  • Gavin Newsom and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) excel due to their adeptness at navigating various media platforms and maintaining a positive public image ([00:27:10]).

• Commander in Chief Credentials:

  • Wes Moore and Mark Kelly are recognized for their military backgrounds, enhancing their qualifications for national leadership ([00:28:45]).

• Media Coverage and Buzz:

  • Gavin Newsom and Wes Moore dominate in garnering positive media attention and maintaining momentum through strategic public engagements ([00:30:00]).

• Digital Game:

  • AOC and Gavin Newsom are lauded for their sophisticated use of digital platforms to engage and mobilize voters effectively ([00:31:20]).

• Polling and Fire in the Belly:

  • Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg are noted for their passionate commitment to the presidency, driving their persistent campaigning efforts despite previous setbacks ([00:33:10]).

• Staff and Consultants:

  • Gavin Newsom and Rahm Emanuel are anticipated to assemble top-tier campaign teams, leveraging their extensive political networks and experienced advisors ([00:34:50]).

Mark emphasizes that these rankings consider past performance, current standings, and future potential, providing a comprehensive view of the Democratic nominee's landscape ([00:29:00]).

---

3. Conversation with Meghan McCain

Celebrity Relationships in Politics: Katy Perry and Justin Trudeau

Mark and Meghan discuss the unexpected rumored relationship between pop star Katy Perry and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Meghan shares her insights and personal connections, highlighting:

• Meghan's Perspective:
  "I love this pairing... he's looking at her like he's absolutely in love and smitten." ([31:16])

• Analysis:
  Both individuals experienced career slumps following Trump's rise, potentially fostering a unique bond over shared political frustrations.

Sydney Sweeney’s Advertising Controversy

The discussion shifts to the controversial advertisements featuring actress Sydney Sweeney, critiqued for their lack of originality and questionable messaging.

• Meghan's Critique:
  "I think they knew exactly what they were doing... Sydney Sweeney is in every ad ever." ([36:45])

Mark and Meghan express skepticism about the intentions behind the ads, discussing their potential impact on the brand and public perception.

Cory Booker’s Political Performance and Candidacy

Meghan offers a candid critique of Senator Cory Booker’s political demeanor and his chances in the 2028 primaries.

• Meghan's Opinion:
  "I found him dull and saccharine in a way... he's old news. I think he's boring." ([43:52])

• Mark's Defense:
  Despite Meghan’s view, Mark defends Booker’s influence and fundraising capabilities, questioning how he convinced prominent Democrats of his appeal despite personal impressions ([46:49]).

Tulsi Gabbard and the Jeffrey Epstein Matter

The conversation delves into Tulsi Gabbard’s recent activities and her alleged connections to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

• Meghan's Insight:
  "Tulsi is one of my closest friends... people underestimate her at their own risk." ([52:16])

Mark and Meghan discuss the unfolding allegations, expressing uncertainty while highlighting Tulsi’s resilience and potential presidential aspirations.

---

4. Economic Analysis with David Bonson

Mark transitions to an in-depth analysis of the American economy with guest David Bonson, Chief Investment Officer of the Bonson Group.

Current Economic State: Mixed Data

David outlines the conflicting economic indicators, emphasizing that while some data points are positive, others signal underlying weaknesses.

• David's Observation:
  "The economic data is more good than it is bad... but there's a heavy politicization of the way people are thinking about the economy." ([62:26])

GDP Discussion

They dissect the recent GDP figures, noting that headline growth masks muted underlying economic activity.

• David's Breakdown:
  "When you look under the hood... the GDP number doesn't measure confidence either. It measures actual activity." ([63:24])

Consumer Spending and Future Outlook

Mark and David examine consumer behavior, particularly the anticipation of increased spending during key periods like back-to-school and holidays.

• David's Insight:
  "The American consumer does not stop spending over animal spirits or over fear of a tax. They only stop spending when they run out of credit." ([70:04])

Housing and Education Costs

The discussion highlights major concerns for American families: the soaring costs of housing and education. David analyzes potential administrative actions to alleviate these burdens.

• David's Analysis:
  "Most of what you bring up on housing is really a state issue... the federal government can hope for, is to be lucky with the timing of some of these things improving." ([71:42])

Trump’s Economic Policies

David evaluates President Trump's economic strategies, particularly his trade and tariff policies, from a free-market perspective.

• David's Assessment:
  "I believe that his natural instinct is supply oriented, which is deregulation, energy independence and removing marginal tax burdens to incentivize production." ([72:45])

Fed Questions: Powell’s Term and Next Chair

In closing, they speculate on the future leadership of the Federal Reserve.

• David's Prediction:
  "The Chairman Powell will serve out the rest of his term and the next chairman of the Fed will be Kevin Warsh." ([72:52])

---

Key Takeaways:

• Invisible Primary: Mark Halperin presents a comprehensive framework for evaluating potential Democratic presidential candidates, stressing the importance of factors like fundraising, governance record, media presence, and personal appeal.

• Political Celebrity Dynamics: Meghan McCain provides a unique perspective on the intersection of celebrity relationships and politics, highlighting how personal ties can influence public narratives.

• Advertising Scrutiny: The controversial Sydney Sweeney ads serve as a case study for evaluating the effectiveness and authenticity of political advertising strategies.

• Economic Outlook: David Bonson offers a nuanced view of the American economy, acknowledging mixed indicators and the challenges posed by political decisions and global uncertainties.

---

Notable Quotes:

• "Money to me is most important as a badge to get that virtuous cycle going." — Mark Halperin ([00:16:50])

• "I found him dull and saccharine in a way. And keep in mind like the politicians I'm attracted to are very different than him." — Meghan McCain ([43:52])

• "The American consumer does not stop spending over animal spirits or over fear of a tax. They only stop spending when they run out of credit." — David Bonson ([70:04])

• "He's extremely savvy about how the press works. They talk regularly to reporters offline." — Mark Halperin on Gavin Newsom ([30:50])

---

Conclusion

This episode of Next Up with Mark Halperin offers a deep dive into the strategies and personalities shaping the 2028 Democratic presidential primary, alongside a critical examination of the current economic climate. Through insightful discussions with Meghan McCain and David Bonson, listeners gain a multifaceted understanding of the political and economic forces at play as the United States navigates towards the next presidential race.

Transcript

[Mark Halperin]

Welcome in, everybody. Thank you for joining NextUp. I am your host, Mark Halperin, editor in chief of the live interactive video platform 2way, and your guide as always to everything that is coming. Next up, joining me in just a bit, one of my all time favorite people, Megan McCain, my colleague at Two Way. She'll be here. She's very fun to talk to. She knows about politics, celebrities and best of all, on any topic, Megan knows what's what. We'll talk about the news and also some relationship issues that I'm dying to hear. What Megan thinks. She's been talking on her own show about the Sydney Sweeney matter and I plan to hold her account for some of the things she said. Don't miss that. Then later in the program, we're going to talk about the topic that's always on everybody's minds, the US Economy. It's super confusing right now. It's a bit of a riddle wrapped in a mystery, wrapped in a riddle wrapped in some bacon. And for that conversation to try to figure out whether the economy is on the rise or dangerously imperiled, we'll be joined by the very brilliant David Bonson. David will be here to explain it and he's the exact person I'd want to talk to about all of that because David understands both economics and politics and what happens at the intersection of the two. So we'll have a conversation about fun stuff, serious stuff, interesting stuff and two of my favorite people. So stay tuned for that. But first, I now have something first for you exclusively as a premiere for you Nexters, which is my 2028 invisible primary rankings for the Democratic Party as they search for a presidential nominee. Not too soon to talk about it. There's lots of 2028 news swirling about this week. First of all, Kamala Harris decision to skip running for governor of California in theory opens the door for her to run for president. I'm still not sure she will. There's not much enthusiasm amongst people I talk to about her prospects of her running. But had she run for governor and lost, I think that would have shut the door on running for president. And if she'd run for governor and won, also probably shut the door. To think that she could turn right around and start a presidential campaign with the rigors of trying to govern a very large state seems impossible. So we'll see what happens with her. Politico had a story this week. Their reporter went to a governor's meeting governors around the country and talked to a lot of the Democrats about what they're Seeing. And Democratic governors, as often happens when the party has screwed up a presidential race and most Democrats think they screwed up in 2024, is they look to the governors. You want an outsider. You want someone with executive experience. You want someone who understands how to run and fight decisively. And the two governors that people were talking about at that meeting were the governor of Maryland, Westmore, the governor of Pennsylvania, Governor Shapiro. Those two guys, very accomplished. They have a lot to recommend them, which we'll talk about in a moment, but they're also well liked. And part of the game at this phase is to be well liked. And so people who are what are called the great mentioners will mention you. The person who at that meeting was not particularly well liked was the Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, because he does not play well with his fellow governors, at least not as well as Maury and Shapiro do. As I said, not too early to talk about this because people are gearing up to run. It's an open seat. And. And you've got a lot of democrats in their 40s and 50s and 60s who really want to run this time. There's no obvious front runner. And so one of the things that anyone serious about running for president has learned over the last few cycles is run when it's your moment. And the poster child for that amongst Democrats at least, is Barack Obama. Really no reason to think he would have run in 2008 was not, quote, unquote, his time or his turn, rather. But he became convinced in talking to some of his fellow senators that it was his time, if not his turn, and ran in a very tough field, not just Hillary Clinton, but John Edwards and Joe Biden and Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson. And he won the nomination. My first campaign that I covered was 1992. I was working in journalism in 88, but 92, I covered Bill Clinton. And he was not given that great a chance by some people to run. And after he did win, I started to think about, was that something we could predict? Could we predict that he'd be the Democratic nominee based not just on the kind of gauzy way people evaluate presidential candidates, but with a more rigorous style? I'm not good at very much, but here's three things I'm good at. Great at making bacon and pepperoni for my son, great at outfoxing the Delta frequent flyer program, and I think I'm pretty good at least at sizing up presidential candidates in both parties. Today we're going to talk about the Democrats, because I think the Republican side, although it's an open race, is going to be dominated by J.D. vance. But on the Democratic side, it's super interesting. And what I'm offering you today, classes in Session, is a free education for how you should actually think about who's got the best chance to be the nominee. We're not talking about winning a general election today. We're talking about who's going to be nominated by the Democrats. And the way to do that, in my experience, is through something I call the invisible primary rankings. This is super important. And I started in the 2004 cycle. I started in 2002. And it involves thinking about, looking at history and thinking about what are the areas, what are the individual categories that you need to excel in to win the nomination. Now, not all categories are created equal, and someone could be first and someone could be second, and the gap between them could be huge. And things can change over time. But what I do, starting now, and I'll do this throughout the cycle here with you, is I look at the categories I think matter most, and then I say who's ahead? And it's not just who's ahead right now, it's who's got a strong history in that area, who's ahead now, and then project forward a little bit. As I wrote back then, when I started this in 2002 for the 2004 cycle, it's how the candidate's doing currently, what potential they've shown, and based on everything we've seen so far, what are their prospects of excelling in the future. So these numbers, these rankings measure past, present, and future all at once. Now, the interesting thing when I look back at the first time I did this in 2002, is the categories can change, some stay the same. Raising money is always important, and yet raising money is different now than it was in 2002. 2002. For the 2004 cycle, you basically wanted to raise maximum checks, about a thousand bucks from rich people in big cities. That's where most of the money came from. What are the changes now? Well, of course, online fundraising. If you're not a great online fundraiser, you're unlikely to be a great fundraiser as a candidate. And super PACs play a huge role in presidential campaigns, which they didn't back then. Back then, in my first 2002 ratings of the Democratic Party rankings, the two top finishers in the various categories in the combined scores were John Kerry and John Edwards. They ended up finishing 1:2 in the process and, of course, forming a ticket. So I started off pretty well, and I Think this works again, Things change. In previous cycles, being really strong in Iowa to do well in the caucuses was amongst the most important. And yet now we're not even sure who will vote first in the primary category. So this process is one that has some things that carry over, some things that are very fluid. What I'm going to do for you today is not rank the whole field. We'll get to that eventually, I think. But just tell you who I think is one and two. Number one, top candidate, number two in what I think are the most important categories. And I'll say again, these things can change over time, but this is my projection of where we'll be. And of course, some of the people I talk about today will almost certainly not run for president in the end. And some of them, some people who might run aren't included here because they're not on my radar right now, or I don't think they will run. But I've included in here people who I think have a decent chance of making the race. And this is an interesting time to do this evaluation because no one's a declared candidate, no one's out there, but there is a lot of activity. You see people traveling to states where they think will be important on the calendar. You see people trying to meet with donors, doing media, developing policy ideas, and of course, trying to define themselves in the news as in juxtaposition to Donald Trump, even though he won't be the Republican candidate in 2028. I don't think, nonetheless, that's the contest right now to prove to Democrats that you're serious about running. So we'll run through what I consider to be some of the most important factors and would love to have you think about these ways, these prisms to evaluate. It makes me very frustrated when I hear people say, oh, such and such and so and so is such a strong candidate, or I really think this person's going to do well. And I always either ask them explicitly or just think in my thought bubble head, what are you basing that on? It's some sort of amorphous sense that they'll be strong. I prefer the rigor of thinking about the categories that matter most. If in presidential politics, regardless of party, there's something called the virtuous cycle. And the virtuous cycle is, if you look at history, the nominee generally dominates the virtuous cycle. What does it involve? It means you try to raise some money by going to people who support you even before you really have gotten in the race, and then Somebody will write a story about how much money you've raised, an impressive number, and that story will cause you to get more publicity and your poll numbers will go up. And when your poll numbers go up, then you go back to the donors and you say, hey, look at this new poll. Or you, or you email your list of people for grassroots fundraising and say, hey, I've risen from 2% to 6%, give me more money so we can continue the momentum. They give you more money. You spend that money on advertising or voter contact of some sort, your poll numbers go up again, you raise more money, you get better press coverage that that virtuous cycle, which is not linear, right? Because sometimes you can raise more money off of the poll, the polls, or the advertising, regardless of the press coverage. But that virtual cycle is what all these candidates need to get going. Now, some of them don't even know about it unless they listen to this show or they've thought of it on their own. But that's what's going on right now, is they're all trying to get the machinery moving. So let's talk about the factors that I think are most important now and who's doing well. And we start with money. Money is a funny thing in presidential politics because unlike in every other race, House, Senate, governor, money matters less because there's so much, what's called earned media, so much press coverage, podcast, TV, etc. That you don't need advertising. Voters get a very high percentage of their information both in the general election and the primary process, from media, not paid ads, but from media. And so the ads matter less. And yet fundraising is extremely important in presidential politics. First of all, you need a minimum amount of money to build a staff, hire people in the states and nationally and do some advertising. But money to me is most important as a badge to get that virtuous cycle going. So when you think about money, as I said, it's different than it was when I started this in 2002 for the 2004 cycle, and certainly different than 1992. The amounts of money that you need to raise are greater, much greater. Bill Clinton in 1992, his top fundraiser was a guy named Rahm Emanuel. And I think he raised like several million dollars in the beginning of the campaign. And that was considered, you know, miraculous and a sign of Clinton's support. So how do you raise money now? Three basic buckets. You have to have so called bundlers. So you call someone who's supporting you in New York or Atlanta and, and you say, have a fundraiser for me. And they got to call their Rolodex and everybody in their Rolodex, their contact list, has to call somebody else. And you try to raise as much as he can in maximum checks, about $2,000 a check. And maybe you say have your wife write a check or your husband, or have your kids write checks if they're, if they're, if they're over 18. That process, so called bundling, is a big way to get money. Second way is low dollar contributions on the Internet through email solicitations, texting, that's hugely important, costs virtually nothing to raise the money. It used to be done through the mail. You had to send people an actual letter with a stamp on it, and then they had to mail you back a check or their credit card information. Now, of course, just a couple of taps on a phone or on the Internet, that's an important way to raise money. And if you don't have the capacity to raise grassroots money, it says something about your appeal to the voters, right? About how much enthusiasm there is for you in a broad way. And of course, the other big thing about grassroots fundraising, if somebody gives you 100 bucks, they can keep giving you 100 bucks every month. You can keep going back to them until they reach that maximum of a couple thousand dollars. And Then lastly, super PACs, super PAC spending is not as efficient, but again, it's another sign to folks that you've got broad Support and super PACs can do things like run negative ads. So those are the three buckets. And I'd say right now, here are my two front runners. And the first one, the person who probably will have the most money is Jay Pritzker if he runs governor of Illinois. Now, that's not because he's a great fundraiser, it's because he's a billionaire. And if he does run, he'll put in his own money. Now that's not as good as the grassroots money because it doesn't demonstrate support. And the fact is, when you spend your own money on a campaign, it tends to deter people from giving you money. That's why Donald, one of the reasons, besides the fact that he doesn't like to spend money, that Donald Trump was reluctant to self fund his campaign. Because if you're a student of this, you know, if you're a millionaire or a billionaire and you start to fund the campaign yourself, it's very hard to get people to give money because they say, why should I give a billionaire or a billionaire money when they've got all the money they need. But if Pritzker runs, I think he'll. He'll raise some. He has a lot of rich friends. I don't know how good a grassroots fundraiser will be, but he'll raise a lot. Rahm Emanuel is number two on my list, also from Illinois. First of all, he's one of the best fundraisers in the history of Democratic politics, starting with that Bill Clinton campaign. But raising money for himself for the dccc, when he did that for raising money for House candidates, he knows almost every rich Democratic donor in the country in Hollywood, Silicon Valley, New York, Chicago, of course. So I think he'll, he'll be a big bundler. And then his brother, Hollywood super agent Ari Emanuel, I suspect will run a super pac, help to raise money for a super PAC for that campaign. Now, will he be a good grassroots fundraiser? I don't know, but I know he'll help. He'll try hard to do that. So those are my top two for money. Number two in the rankings is the question of the record and the issues. What have you done in office that you can take to the voters and say, here's how I can help you. Here's how I can make your education more affordable, housing more affordable. And the people who tend to do better in this category are governors or former governors because they've run something, they've had their own agendas. Harder to do this if you're a member of Congress. Not impossible. So my top two in this category are two guys who are in office now. Josh Shapiro, who's up for reelection in, in 2026. And in that campaign, we'll get a sense of his abilities in general, but also his ability to sell the Pennsylvania record. What is he going to talk about as he runs for election? That speaks to the question of will he be an effective messenger for the Pennsylvania miracle. That's when most governors who run call their state's performance and their policy positions. And then Andy Beshear, governor of Kentucky, Democrat in a red state. Shapiro governs in a purple state. Bashir is term limited. So he's not running for election. And he's got an opportunity to talk to people about what he's done in Kentucky. A lot of interest in his record in Kentucky in the abstract. Right. A Democrat who's done well in a state that's moved decisively red at the federal level and most of the state offices. So what was Sandy Beshear going to talk about? What's he going to sell? Right now he's selling more vagaries. What specifics will he talk about? Next category in the rankings, the visible primary. Here, the primary below the surface is the story, the bio. What do you say to people? You think about Bill Clinton, the man from Hope. You think about George Bush talking about giving up drinking on his 40th birthday and turning his life around. Barack Obama, grandparents from Kansas, growing up in Hawaii. These stories are important for the American people to get to know. You see you as a three dimensional person, but they're most effective when you can connect the story of what you've done, how you've lived your life, your bio before you ran for office with what you've done in elective office. And my top two here are two guys with incredible bios, incredible stories. It helps if your wife is involved too, or your spouse, I should say, to fill out your bio, maybe your kids as well. Wes Moore, governor of Maryland, has a great story, grew up on challenging circumstances in Maryland, in the military, worked in Robin Hood foundation, private sector, wrote an incredible book, and then is now in his first elective office. The governor of Maryland, Ro Khanna, congressman from California, originally from Pennsylvania, from a family with great immigrant stories on both his side and his wife's side, and a family that's got mixed political views and who understands the economy from the point of view of both Pennsylvania, which of course is Rust Belt and Silicon Valley that he represents. Now, I think both those guys have the ability, not just on paper, to have great bios, but they, they tell their stories well and they do a great job of integrating their personal histories with what they want to do for the country. All right, the next category is Early States. Here I got Wes Moore as number one, Gavin Newsom, California governor. Number two. What is it? It's about early states. We don't know what the calendar is. Back in 2002 and in the modern era, since President Reagan, the early states were clear. The early states were Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina. Then there's been a little bit of mix after that Super Tuesday got created. But the importance of those first few states is massive. And Joe Biden exploded that a little bit. He moved the calendar around and then he didn't do well in the early states, but he still became the nominee. Typically, though, you need to win one of the first two, maybe one of the first three at most of the early states to win a nomination. We don't know what the early states will be. So how can I rank Westmore 1 and Gavin Newsom 2? I can do it because they are active in the states that they think will be early, particularly South Carolina. And they have the kind of operations that have shown the ability to try to game this out and say, we don't know what will be the early states, but whatever they are, we understand the early state game. What's the early state game? Courting the local political reporters, courting the local, federal and state elected officials whose endorsements and political operations will matter. Spending time on the ground with grassroots. So watch those two guys. As the early state calendar develops and clarifies by the DNC process, where do they go? And am I right that they're the ones who are going to have the ability to get traction there? All right, next factor, electability. I got Josh Shapiro, number one, and then Gina Raimondo, number two, former governor of Rhode island and former commerce secretary for Joe Biden. Very popular with the business wing of the Democratic Party. Why do I put these two. Shapiro? 1 Raimondo 2 because they've got a history of getting elected in general elections. Shapiro in a purple state. Raimondo in a in a Republican in a Democratic state, but with a lot of business support. And as I talk to the kind of donors and politicians and some folks in the activist community who care about electability, they're not looking for someone they agree with on every issue. They're not looking for someone who has the ability to tug the heartstrings of the base of the party. They're looking for somebody who can win 270 electoral votes. Shapiro 1 Raimondo 2 are the are the people whose names I hear the most. Okay, next is the hang test. Who do you want to have a beer with? Or if the candidate doesn't drink, who do you just want to hang on the corner with? Maybe go to Disney World with number one. For hang test, I got Pete Buttigieg, number two, Josh Shapiro. These are two guys who are not afraid to go on conservative media, whether it's Fox or conservative podcasts. They're likable. They can talk like real people. And the hang test is key. If you look at people who who do well in politics, people want to be ability to think about somebody they like. At the same time, they do want the president up on a pedestal a little bit. So I I would see, based on what we've we've observed so far, that Buttigieg and Shapiro are going to be one and two and knowing how to appeal to people in kind of a personal and human way. All right, the next category made for tv Gavin Newsom, number one, Alexandria Ocasio, Cortez what's this about? This is just, can you go on different television programs or YouTube programs and do well? Do you handle yourself well? Fun questions, challenging questions, policy questions. Do you come across in that medium as likable? Now, again, TV means different things to different people these days. In this case, it means anything with video, right? Anything where you're, you're going to be interviewed or, or people are going to be asking you questions or giving a speech, whatever it is. Those are two, I think are the top red light performers when the camera's on. All right, next category. Commander in chief. President's different than anything else. It's an electability question. Republicans will come hard at any Democrat who doesn't seem qualified to make the tough calls as commander in chief. But also voters in general want somebody who can do that part of the job. It's unlike any other job. Wes Moore and Mark Kelly, 1 and 2. Wes Moore served the military as did Mark Kelly. They both understand the customs and policy issues related to national defense. So I make them one and two. And this issue receded a little bit after the Cold War when Bill Clinton was able to get elected even though his commander in chief credentials were pretty limited. We're in a different time now. It swung back a little bit because of Putin, because of Iran, because of North Korea. Commander in chief matters a lot to voters. Next, media coverage. Who can get good coverage? Number one, I have Gavin Newsom. Number two, Rona. Two Californians. Both those guys are extremely savvy about how the press works. They talk regularly to reporters offline. They know what shows they want to be on. They know they monitor their coverage closely. They both understand that earn media press coverage across the board. And again, this has changed. In the old days, that was, you know, Washington Post columnists and Des Moines registered news reporters and the major networks and news magazines. Now media coverage spans across lots of platforms, Digital platforms, linear platforms, offline, online. Both those guys are very savvy in that area. And both tend to get relatively positive coverage. Not uniform, but mostly. All right, next category in the rankings, Buzz and momentum. Who understands how to be the IT candidate? Who understands how to be considered hot with the capacity to say that person's on a roll? The virtual, the virtuous cycle is as much about anything is about momentum. Gavin Newsom and Westmore, number one. Number two, right now, both those guys, if you look at the press clippings, if you look at the coverage, both those guys seem very hot, very aware of the need to be seen as the IT Candidate and body, political body in motion tends to remain in motion. And I think because we're at a phase now where people aren't really going after other candidates, even below the radar, at least as far as I see it, they are still in motion. Both of those guys are doing very well. And success begets success. Once you get a good. A good set of coverage, once you have a good fundraising report, once you do something that gets attention, more people want to see a. More reporters want to interview you, more bookers want to book you, more folks want a piece of you. And those guys have done a good job of getting that process going. Okay, this is a category that didn't exist in 2004 when I started this, which is the digital game. It means a lot of things. And number one, I have AOC. Number two, Gavin Newsom. It means making your own TikTok videos. And it means knowing how to take someone's tweet attacking you and turn it around, it's something positive. If you ask all these folks and say, what kind of digital game do you have? Or maybe their staff, you know, you got to be on every platform. You can't just have a game on X. You got to have a TikTok game. You got to have an Instagram game. And you have to know what to do to make that your own. The New York running for mayor, he set the standard. But AOC and Gavin Newsom are both extremely savvy. AOC has just. Just owned a digital space ever since she got into politics. It's part of how she got elected originally. And Gavin Newsom wrote a book about this. He understands in this day and age, like, sure, go on Meet the Press, sure, but that's not what it's about. It's about creating digital content that captures the public imagination. People talk about stuff that goes viral, and of course they want to go viral, but they also want the capacity to consistently communicate with people. Not viral every time, but consistently use digital to communicate. All right, couple more categories. Polling, a name id. Extremely important. People don't want to give you money unless they know you are. Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom. Two Californians, California, of course, our biggest mega state. They're both well known. She was vice president, he's governor, and have frequently presence on tv. And that helps a lot. You'd be amazed at how people who've been governor or senator, how hard it is to get well known, particularly in the early states. People may be vaguely familiar with their names, but they don't know anything about them. Now, in the case of some candidates and Harrison Newsom, both have their detractors name ideas and necessarily all, all positive. But that's a key one. And those two, I think, are head and shoulders above, above the others. And. And that's partly why they do well in the polls. Okay, fire in the belly. Extremely important. Amy Klobuchar, number one, Pete Buttigieg, number two, both of whom ran in 2020, both of whom did very well and chose to get out of the race in 2020, even though they were doing quite well. And they might have been able to beat Joe Biden, but Barack Obama and others convinced him to step aside. And this isn't. This means you really want to be president and you really want to win the nomination. And if you decide to run, and I think, I think in the end they'll both run, would be my hunch. You got to wake up every morning and ask yourself, what are the 10 things I need to do to get elected president? And then you got to do them. You have to burn for it. And I can't tell you the number of presidential candidates in both parties I've covered over the years who. They're just not. They're just, they're ambivalent. Their family's not sure about it. They're not sure. They're not sure they can win. You need the eye of the tiger to do this. And both Klobuchar and Buttigieg have that. All right. Lastly, is staff and consultants. Candidates matter most. But I don't believe that Bill Clinton would have won necessarily without Carvin Bagala, George Bush without Karl Rove. Donald Trump's an exception. He had some good people around him, but he was his own consultant. David Axelrod, David Plouffeth, Obama, Barack Obama, extremely important to be able to hire great people. And a lot of the challenge now in this cycle is so many of the experienced people been there, done that. They're at an age and a point in their careers where they don't want to do it. So you're going to have to find amongst the few people with experience who do want to do another presidential the best people. And you need a combination of people you've worked with in the past who know you and are loyal to you, but also some new people. And I put Gavin Newsom, number one, Rahm Emanuel, number two. They both know who the right players are. They both know who to look for, who to hire. And I believe that if they run, they'll be able to have amongst the best consultants out there. All right. That's my first take on the invisible primary rankings. This is going to be something we revisit. I think if you go through that, you'll see there's a way to think about accumulating those results and say who the front runners are. Just at a glance, you'd say that Newsom and, and Westmore and Shapiro are the top three. And not by coincidence, those are the three who I think are the most likely to be the nominees if they do run. We'll see. Tell me what you think about today's monologue. You can email me atnextstoppalperinmail.com you can find this show always on x Instagram and TikTok. Go to NextUpalperin and of course, watch us on YouTube at YouTube.com@nextupply halperin. Listen to us, watch us, whatever you prefer. Next up here, my friend Megan McCain right after this. All right, let me ask you this non musical question. What if you could delay your next two mortgage payments? That's right. Imagine putting those two payments in your pocket and finally getting some breathing room. It's possible. When you call American Financing today if you're feeling stretched by those everyday expenses we all deal with, groceries, gas prices, bills piling up on the desk, you are not alone. Most Americans now are putting these expenses on credit cards and that leaves you with no way out. American Financing can show you how to use your home's equity to pay off that debt. You need to call American Financing today though, before you get to the point where you can't make those payments. Their salary based mortgage consultants are helping homeowners just like you to restructure their loans and consolidate their debt, all without paying any upfront fees. And their customers are saving an average of $800 a month. That's the equivalent of $10,000 in a raise. It's fast, it's simple and it could save your budget this summer. So call now before it's too late. Dial 866-886-2026 again, 866-88626 or on the interweb. You can visit American financing.net next. Next up, let's have some fun. My two way colleague Megan McCain of Citizen McCain is joining us now. Megan, welcome back.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah, thank you for having me. I'm so happy to come back. And I like that you introduced me. Let's have some fun. Yes.

[Mark Halperin]

All right. We're going to start, we're going to start with my, my favorite topic, which is the most undercovered story in North America. But first, tell everybody when your program's on two way.

[Megan McCain]

It's on two way on Mondays and Wednesdays at noon, live Eastern, and you can watch it on YouTube anytime you want. And it's really fun. I'm having a great time.

[Mark Halperin]

Yes, it's an awesome show. So please watch Megan show when she's not here. If you want more Megan, which you do. All right. I have not asked you about this, and perhaps you'll say you don't care. Have no opinion. But I'm kind of fascinated by Katy Perry and Justin Trudeau.

[Megan McCain]

I love these.

[Mark Halperin]

They seem to have gone on a date. I did not associate them with each other, and I don't know either of them, but I've studied them. I don't get this. So what's your view on whether this is real and if it's sustainable?

[Megan McCain]

So two things. I've met Katy Perry a few times because she used to be like a frequent guest on the View, and we were actually pregnant with our daughters at the same time. So we had, like, that connection. It was always a thing she wanted to talk about when she came on the show. And the thing about Katy Perry to know about her is her career took a real nosedive when, when Hillary lost because she was a huge surrogate for Hillary. She, like, went to Iowa, went on the road with her, and she has admitted she had a really hard time processing, like, Hillary's loss and Trump's win. And she, like, cut all her hair off and started doing, like, really weird publicity stunts. She did. She did, like a shaved, almost shaved head when she did it. So the thing I like about this pairing is that Justin Trudeau also had a career slump when Trump won as well. So their careers both peaked in, like 2013, 2015. And they're both deeply impacted by Trump and they're both very progressive. And I think Orlando Bloom, I never thought they were a good pair because I thought Orlando Bloom just wasn't up to the level that she is. And I actually love this pairing. And there's pictures that just came out last night from her concert, and he's looking at her like he's absolutely in love and smitten. So happy for them.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah. You know, I don't know that building relationship around Trump derangement syndrome is necessarily something you read about in the fairy tales, but it seems like you're right. They both, they both have the same orientation. And I, I love cross border romance, North American romance. Let's just, let's just go to brass tacks. Are they. Is one of them too good for the other one or you think like.

[Megan McCain]

No, I think they're pretty matched. I think it's like perfectly matched. And I also love political and, and entertainment pairings. I always think that's an interesting like RFK and Cheryl Hines like always think it's like an interesting crossover. But I root for Katy Perry. I hope she can make a comeback. She's been a real bad slump the past few years and she had, has.

[Mark Halperin]

She had new albums? I don't even know.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah. And it's really not great. Like really bad. And it was like universally panned. I'm not being a hater and I really like music. It was really bad. And her Vegas concert was like not great. And I've close friends who live in Vegas that were like it's not, it was not good. And she's made a lot of just like really dumb publicity moves. Obviously that into space was taking space. So hope that maybe this can help her make a comeback. But I think they're going to be a long term couple. I think they're like a couple. I do.

[Mark Halperin]

I do too. Like, I know like at first they were like, oh, we're just friends having dinner. But I looked at those photos from the dinner and the photos from the concert and I totally agree with you. Like I normally am skeptical of stuff like this and like there's so many things that go wrong. I'm like already like maneuvering to get invited to the wedding.

[Megan McCain]

Me too. And he looks like he in these photos. Like I can't believe I'm like, yeah. And like, like honestly. So I love it. And he's, you know, I, of course I think of him what you think. I think of him because I'm conservative Republican and he's just like woke on acid. But I think that like, I don't know, I think maybe they could bring out the best in each other and help each other's careers and lives.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah. Leaving aside his politics, I kind of like, I like the cut of his jib. I think he's like kind of like, like he could be like a character in like Pride and Prejudice.

[Megan McCain]

Oh yeah. I mean like I like him not in a political space. I just think he's. But. And women find him attractive. He's not my type at all. My type is like ripped from Yellowstone. So like the total opposite. But women do find him very attractive and she's obviously stunning.

[Mark Halperin]

He's too like, he's too like intellectual and fae for you. Why don't you like him.

[Megan McCain]

I just always liked guys that look like lumberjacks. Look at my husband like a guy who can chop wood. And I think I would have to chop wood if I was dating Justin Trudeau.

[Mark Halperin]

So if. If you're. If your husband wrestle Justin Trudeau, I know who I bet on. Ben. Ben would whoop him. Just whoop him.

[Megan McCain]

Ben's an enormous man, though, too. Like, kill almost anyone. So.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, we'll keep tracking that. And. And I'm. I'm again, you and I, as our special project, we need to go to the wedding, and our spouses can stay home if we only get one invite. But I really want to go to that wedding. I just. Can you imagine the guest list for that wedding? Because they both are, like, super connected.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah. And, like, they. They're both icons in their own right for different reasons. But I'm glad you're as invested in this. And on some of my chat chains with my girlfriends, people are like, what do you think of this? And I was like, I love it. I actually think this is, like, fantastic for a lot of my.

[Mark Halperin]

My psychic connection to you. Such as. My third thought when I saw the photos of them at dinner was, I need to talk to Megan about this. So. And I'm so delighted we're on the same page. All right. We'll continue to obsessively check that. Let's talk now about this Sydney Sweeney thing. I heard you talk about it on. On Citizen McCain, and I didn't totally understand your position. And, of course, this story changes every second, so maybe you've got a new position. I think it's a. I think it's the most unoriginal ad ever. That's my biggest complaint about it. Like, the jeans. Jeans pun. It's been done, and it's not particularly clever. Interesting. What amazing to me is, as far as I know, the company. The. The jeans company hasn't said a word about it. So my question to you is, do you agree with those who say they knew exactly what they were doing, or this is stuck up on them and they had no idea?

[Megan McCain]

I believe they did come out with a statement, but correct me if I'm wrong, defending her and saying it's just like an online controversy and 72% of their. Their clientele, which, by the way, I'm their clientele. I love A and E clothes. Like, they're fantastic.

[Mark Halperin]

When did that. When did that come out last I looked at? Was that new? Or I missed.

[Megan McCain]

I mean, maybe it's fake news, but I saw it on Twitter 15 minutes ago. But.

[Mark Halperin]

Okay. All right, well, 15 minutes ago. It makes sense. I've been busy. That's okay. All right, But. But do you think they knew what they were doing? Like, like, when I go back and look at it, because it's so clumsy and over the top, I'm now suspicious that they. Of course they knew this was, like, a brilliant way to. To lure a bunch of attention to the company.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah, I think they knew what they were doing. You don't hire giant marketing companies who haven't researched things within an inch of their life. I just know from my work in corporate America, whenever there's an ad for anything. I remember I had to interview Chuck E. Cheese one time, and his middle name is. His real name is Chester Entertainment Cheese. And they were, like, very specific about how to interview Chuck E. Cheese. So, like. And that's just.

[Mark Halperin]

What show was that? What show was that for?

[Megan McCain]

They had, like. He had. They. Chuck E. Cheese had, like, sponsored. A show or something.

[Mark Halperin]

You had Chester right in the studio.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah, and I have a picture with him. And it was. It was great. It was like. Well, for it, like, now, was it.

[Mark Halperin]

The real Chester or just, like, there's seven guys who wear the costume?

[Megan McCain]

I think it's just someone in a costume. But I'm just saying that was. There was a lot of, like, instruction about, like, what you. And that's a small thing. So I think the advertising company knew exactly what they were doing. Sydney Sweeney is in every ad ever. She was like Baskin Robbins and Wearylane and all these, like, cosmetic ads. And then just. She did this, like, weird bath bomb where it's, like, bath water that she had been in. It sounds a little pervy. And then, like, people could buy it and, like, take a bath in her old bath water. It sounds kind of gross. So she's doing tons of ads. I like Sydney Sweeney. I think she's, like, a throwback to, like, a Pamela Anderson rock star. Girlfriend time. I didn't love the ad because I, too, thought it was unoriginal. And I also just don't, like. And this, like, surprises everyone. I don't like conversations about genetics. Like, I just think it's, like. It makes me. It's, like, icky for some reason. And, yes, like, women, of course. She's, like, stunningly gorgeous and whatever. But I don't know. I. As someone who, like.

[Mark Halperin]

But this is. Sorry to interrupt, but this is exactly what you said the other day that I didn't. I was surprised to hear you say it. It's not like some racial conversation. I mean, you know, let's just, let's just go. As your father would say to straight talk, you are, you are a, a gorgeous maverick. You had a parent, you had a parent, you have a parent who's gorgeous and you're. And your father was a maverick. Like, that's genetics. There's nothing, there's nothing wrong with that.

[Megan McCain]

But like, there's nothing wrong with that. And thank you, but I feel like a middle aged old. But thank you. My. I think it's just that, like, I'm also not a skinny woman and I've done a lot of work for everything that's ever written about me, it's always, oh, she's not skinny, she's not skinny. Since the beginning of my career and there was such a push for like, body inclusivity and I actually really liked it. Like, I like ads with different kinds of women everywhere. And in the ad she's saying like, my, my hair, my whatever. And I get it. Like, there's always going to be a space for like a blonde, buxom, like, hot lady. Always. It's like, American men love that. That's fine.

[Mark Halperin]

But Italian and German men love it too.

[Megan McCain]

And all men love men.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah.

[Megan McCain]

Everywhere. Love it. And it's great. But I just think, like, I don't know, you could have had some other women in the ad. But, uh, this didn't make me upset. I wasn't angry. Had someone not brought it to my attention, I wouldn't have cared. Had I watched the ad, and I wouldn't have cared. But like, if I'm having an opinion, I just don't love conversations about like, genetics in general.

[Mark Halperin]

But I, I still, I still don't understand. Why not? Like, are you going to keep your kids out of biology class?

[Megan McCain]

No, but like you said, you know, you're bringing up my parents, but I also have an adopted sister. And you know, she's. When we're talking about like genetics, she's like, exactly, like, fits into my family personality wise. And it's a great, like, nature, this nurture conversation.

[Mark Halperin]

100% there's. Nature versus nurture is one of the most fascinating things in the world. I couldn't agree more. But, but part of that is nature. I just, I don't want to, I don't want to. I don't want to spend our whole time on this, but I want to get you over, I want to get you over your aversion to genetics.

[Megan McCain]

No, it's just that they're saying the only ideal Beauty is Sydney Sweeney. And I think there's lots of beautiful.

[Mark Halperin]

Oh, I agree with that. But I don't think they were saying that. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Megan McCain]

All right, let's talk to me and be like, you're so woke, blah, blah, blah. I'm like, I'm not. I just, I also just like didn't like the ad. Like, I agree with you. Like, I just didn't like it. Like, had I been in charge, I would have been like, we have a lot more ways to make this. You want a sexy jeans ad, hire Mark and Megan.

[Mark Halperin]

I will, I will help you. And I, you and I. You and I wouldn't even need to use Chat GPT. We'd have Sexy 7 Sexy Jeans Ads way better than that. All right, let's talk about Cory Booker. Our long running lack of understanding of what the Democratic Party's doing. He was upset about some of his Democratic colleagues being too accommodating to other to President Trump's agenda. Here is Cory Booker, some would say losing his mind on the Senate floor. That's why I'm standing here. Don't question my integrity, don't question my motives. I'm standing for Jersey. I'm, I am standing for my police officers. I'm standing for the Constitution and I'm standing for what's right. And dear God, if you want to come at me that way, you're going to have to take it up with me because there's too much on the line right now in America as people's due process rights and freedom of the speech rights and secret police are running around this country picking people up off the streets who have a legal right to be here. There's too much going on now. He's run for president before. He's not talked about much. Earlier in the program I talked about my invisible primary rankings for potential 2028 candidates. And last night with Brett Baer, I suggested a potential motive for that performance. Mark, 10 seconds. Cory Booker seems like he's volume wise.

[David Bonson]

In the race, but there are others.

[Mark Halperin]

There are a lot of primaries within the primary to win the Democratic nomination. Cory Booker is the front runner for the MSNBC primary. I'm not sure that's the most, the most important one, but he did himself a lot of good there. There you go. All right. I like to quote myself, so the MSNBC primary, not nothing you used to use. You and I used to hang out at msnbc. What is Cory Booker up to?

[Megan McCain]

Job I ever had, by the way, which was short lived, but whatever is.

[Mark Halperin]

He is he just trying to get a better slot on Maddow or like what's that? What do you think's up with that?

[Megan McCain]

So I have, first and foremost I have a theory that I'm gonna stand with forever that there are too many failed actors and theater kids in politics in general, in political commentary, in politics everywhere. I hate it if you went to like Tisch School of the Arts and your dream was to be like a rock star or an actor. I hate that. Politics is your like second, you know, second choice and you like somehow made it. Cory Booker is always auditioning to be in Hamilton. Like he's always auditioning. He is like, he looks like he.

[Mark Halperin]

But then he should talk less and smile. Wants to be in Hamilton.

[Megan McCain]

Yes. And whatever. But I, I don't know if you've met Cory Booker. I met Cory Booker privately and professionally and respectfully. I have no idea how this man became senator. I have, I found him like dull and saccharine in a way. And keep in mind like the politicians I'm attracted to are very different than, than him. Like in, in a lot of ways. But I think that he's old news. I think he's boring. I think they is someone who has really like lost his moment and he's trying to regain it by pulling stunts. And like you say, it'll go great on Jen Psaki show but for normal voters who are like sitting, you know, at a town hall, they're probably like, why are you yelling? Like why are you like what is happening? And also this is very unpopular. Hot take. Okay, Mark, so but I can say this to you.

[Mark Halperin]

I'm braced, I'm braced for it.

[Megan McCain]

I'm not going to vote for someone who's single for president. You need to have a partner. I don't care if it's a husband or a wife or a long term person. You cannot be single. I need a lady. I need a man. You're an attractive senator. Figure it out.

[Mark Halperin]

Is he no longer dating that actress?

[Megan McCain]

No. And who doesn't make it work with Rosario Dawson again, one of the most gorgeous, intelligent.

[Mark Halperin]

I thought it was Rosario Dawson, but I want to say it and be wrong, but did they officially break up? Like I don't remember. I don't remember the breakup. What happened. How long ago did it happen?

[Megan McCain]

I think like right after he dropped out for president.

[Mark Halperin]

But I want, do you want to speculate as to the timing on that or.

[Megan McCain]

No, I, I believe it was like not that long after. And again, I only know what I like read and like, gossips, but, you know, she's like. I think when I, like, again, I've had the privilege of meeting her, and she's like, highly intelligent, gorgeous, like, yeah, like, she's not good enough. Like, he's gonna kill me.

[Mark Halperin]

Like, is she. Is she smarter than Katy Perry?

[Megan McCain]

I've never. I have not talked politics with Katy Perry, but I found Rosario, like most actors, I think, are, you know, pretty.

[Mark Halperin]

The thing, the thing about Cory Booker. I know, I know you think he's boring, and I secretly share your point of view, but I would never say that in public. The thing about Cory Booker is when he was the mayor, he was mayor of Newark, right? He's mayor in New Jersey of Newark. And. And. And he would come across the river and hang out with Democratic donors, and they loved him. He was touted the way Bill Clinton was, the way Barack Obama was the. They loved him. It was like, I've seen the future, not the future of the Democratic Party. I've seen the future of America. And it is Cory Booker. And I can't tell you the number of people who said, you must meet him, you must spend time with him. They raised money for him, including some independents and Republicans who thought he was incredible. And when I finally met him, and this was during his it candidate phase, I felt the same way you did. And again, I don't hate boring people. I don't feel negatively towards boring people, except if I have to have them be president or sit next to them at a dinner party. I don't get how he convinced them all that he was so fascinating.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah, I. And again, it's not. I'm being very hard on him, but I just think, like, I find him ridiculous for the clips you just show. Like, I just don't take that. That seriously. And I think, like you said, he's someone that, like, a donor would like. I think someone in Manhattan would like them. But we are in an era of really raw, uncensored politics. And the people who are getting attention and who have a huge following are people who are who they are, are, are. Have no problem, like, you know, saying things that are controversial, saying things that are unpopular. And to me, he just feels really focused, grouped, like he, like, like, like he probably, like, reads poetry in his spare time. Like, nothing about it is. Is, I think, the tone of where the country's at. And he, I'm sure, is smart enough to understand that as well. But I apologize, I really find him quite boring. And when. Unless he does things like this, and then, you know, we talk about it, but this is not. He clearly wants to run for president again, but what, to get, like, 2% in Iowa? Like, there's some people. I just don't understand why.

[Mark Halperin]

Can we give him points for passion? Can we give him points for saying, like, he's not just, you know, getting along to go along. Going along to get along. He's, he's out there saying, like, Trump's ruining America and I, Somebody needs to say it. Can we give him points for that or.

[Megan McCain]

No, because he rehearsed it in his bathroom mirror before. Like, it's authentic. It's not. I love passion. I love when people, I love when people pop off. I love when politicians break.

[Mark Halperin]

You just think this is all play acting.

[Megan McCain]

Yes. It seems like. Remember when he said, like, I am Spartacus before? And it was clearly. Also, he just, he, he seems uncomfortable in himself, I guess, if that makes sense. I don't know. But do you think that he has a chance of being president?

[Mark Halperin]

Not a very good one. I, I, you know, I, I'm a believer. And, and, and again, your, your dad was testament to this. You can run once and lose and run again and get the nomination and sometimes win the presidency. Like, that happens. But people, so people say, well, they ran one time, they lost, but they could come back. I think there's some people who can and some people who can't. In other words, some people's losses are so obviously a problem. Your dad lost a massive front runner, just like a battleship, and he almost beat him. And then he came back to be the nominee, and then, unfortunately, he had to run the general election against the sun rising.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah. The saint of all everything.

[Mark Halperin]

But, but, but also, in the interim, he was the most popular politician in America for eight years. Same same with Hillary Clinton. Same same with Bob Dole. Like, there are people who run and lose, and you see the reason why they could win. I don't see anything in his first effort that makes me think, yeah, he just kind of had some bad luck. He needs to learn some lessons. So I don't think so, but maybe. I don't know.

[Megan McCain]

I remember one of the questions I asked him when I interviewed him was, what does a vegan eat at the Iowa State Fair? And I don't even remember his answer because they.

[Mark Halperin]

Tofu on a stick.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah. Yeah. And again, I'm probably. He's just, I'm sure he's a nice man. I'm sure he's like, whatever. It's just not my kind of politics and not my kind of Politician at all.

[Mark Halperin]

All right. In my report of monologue I talked about my invisible primary rankings and about, you know, who seems to be doing good in certain ca. Doing well in certain categories in the current universe of people who seems to you to be doing well not to win the presidency necessarily, but to win the Democratic nomination, who's like right now you're thinking, yeah, that person's got it going on, if anybody, I mean they.

[Megan McCain]

Are all so, you know, so far. So like, I don't know, toothless people in my life that I really respect who are more moderate really are trying to push Andy Beshear on me saying like, you know, he's, he's a governor, the one Kentucky, whatever. But I think with the rise of Mamdani and the rise of this like extreme pro Palestine stance on the left, including like you see the Pod Save America bros saying this has to be the platform of the party. I genuinely don't know how the party reconciles that because there's still a lot of center left Democrats that are not going to be comfortable voting for a socialist, voting for anyone who's like flirting with socialism. But I don't think that a moderate candidate could get out of a primary. So I actually see if I had to predict today and granted many things can happen in the three years until this happens. I think they go with a wildly progressive candidate and then get their ass handed to them. That's what I think.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, what's going on? Switching topics now.

[Megan McCain]

You're a journalist. I'm just a hack commentator.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah, I mean I, I think it's a very weak field. I think it's a very weak field. And, and people, people who push somebody like Andy Beshear. When people say that to me, I say, tell me what you know about him that makes you think he can win 270 electoral votes. Just give me, give me the best stuff. And, and all they say is he's a Democrat who won in Kentucky, but that's not sufficient. You know, that's just not sufficient to me. So I think at a minimum they should learn more.

[Megan McCain]

Pete and I, I need people to stop saying that to me because you are not based in any kind of reality. If you're saying Mayor Pete's going to be president.

[Mark Halperin]

Well, different being president, I'm just focused on who the nominee is going to be and I think he could be the nominee.

[Megan McCain]

Mayor Pete.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah, it's a weak field.

[Megan McCain]

JD.

[Mark Halperin]

Again, that's a different question. Who's going to win the general, but it's A weak field. Somebody, someone has to win. It'd be like saying, you know, here's, here's a bunch of uncoordinated second grader, second graders having a foot race. Slow, uncoordinated second graders. Someone will win the race. May, may not be in a record time, but someone's going to win the race. All right, switching topics to your friend Tulsi Gabbard, much in the news these days. How's she doing? And do you understand what she's doing regarding Barack Obama? Do you have a good beat on that?

[Megan McCain]

You know, we had dinner last week, and one of the things I think Tulsi and I bond over is when we're off, we just want to be off and don't talk about politics. So actually, we didn't talk about that. We talked about a lot of other things. And I just texted with her, actually, right before you came on. I think she's trying to expose the deep state. I think she's trying to expose corruption. When that report came out, I was actually wasn't shocked. But it's still really, you know, jarring to have things confirmed that you, you know, has sort of been like, theorized in the deep parts of the Internet. I think what's fascinating for me, and obviously I'm wildly biased on my dislike.

[Mark Halperin]

She's one of your closest friends. We make that clear.

[Megan McCain]

Oh, no, not just with her. I mean with her as well. She is one of my closest friends. But with President Obama seeing his downfall and Michelle Obama's downfall, at least not from, you know, there was a point in time when they were basically like saints, like, living us has been really fascinating, and I'm curious to see how they end up, like, handling all of this. And what's interesting, his statement, he didn't deny it. Like, he didn't deny the accusations. He just came out saying that, like, you know, these are things that have already been investigated.

[Mark Halperin]

Right.

[Megan McCain]

What's your.

[Mark Halperin]

Well, I, I don't know what to think about it. You know, I, I haven't talked much about it on two Way, and people have really criticized me for it, and they say you got to take this story more seriously. So I do take it seriously because I do believe in the deep state, maybe not defined exactly the way other people do. And I do think that some of the people who Tulsi Gabbard has identified as being part of an conspiracy have a history of misusing intelligence and telling lies about Donald Trump. So I don't think he can just dismiss out of hand that, that that, that they may have done more of that than we already know about, but I don't know what to make of it. I just want to ask you one more question about her again. She's your friend, so you can say pass if you don't want to answer. How would you. How would you appraise the accusation that she was on the outs with the president and she's doing this to get back in his good graces?

[Megan McCain]

It is such bullshit. And if you know her at all, she doesn't care about being popular. Like, it's one of the things that I. She and I really bonded over is, like, we don't. Neither of us need to be loved. Which is, like, I think kind of unusual for women in any position in politics or, like, media of any kind. And she doesn't care. And I think the idea. I also know that, like, and then again, I don't want to reveal, like, too much of our private conversations, but I know that there was actually never a rift with her and President Trump, and President Trump is actually very fond of her, both personally and professionally, and her husband. Um, so I never believed that. I actually think there's a bunch of people in D.C. who are extremely threatened by her power, by her ranking in the government right now, by how much influence she has, by the fact that, like, she could very well be a presidential candidate in 2028. I think there's a lot of people that really want to take her out and are gunning for her, and I think she's aware of that. And I think there was a lot of nasty press leaks that were pretty much baseless. And I thought that was an extremely out of line question that Kaitlan Collins asked. I thought was really disrespectful. And I made that very clear on social media. And people can continue to underestimate Tulsi at their own risk. I've been, like, friends with her for, like, it's like, God, eight to 10 years now. And I, like I said, I just had dinner with her and people go crazy for her. They. They are very excited to see her come up to her. Very emotional, very intense. It's not like, you know, I have other friends who are politicians, and respectfully, they just don't have the same kind of emotional reaction when people around them, like. And so I think people are underestimating her at their own risk.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah, she has the gas factor. I've not been around her, of course, nearly as much as you, but when people, like, stumble upon her, like in a restaurant, something they Gasp. And that's. You know, that's an unusual reaction. All right, lastly, because we're running down.

[Megan McCain]

She looks like she's an X Men with her.

[Mark Halperin]

Like, she's a badass.

[Megan McCain]

Yeah.

[Mark Halperin]

Lastly, if you could interview President Trump today and ask him one question about the Jeffrey Epstein matter, what would it be?

[Megan McCain]

Oh, my gosh. What? I asked President Trump about Jeffrey Epstein. Do you think he killed himself?

[Mark Halperin]

Interesting.

[Megan McCain]

And I would also, like, is there something that you could release that you haven't released? Like, because that's the thing I don't really understand, because they said that they were going to release files, and then. And then now they don't exist. Or it was overplayed. I find this whole story very confusing. Like, everything keeps changing. And then all this stuff with his press conference day before yesterday, where he was like, actually, Virginia Guthrie was an employee of mine. Like, I did not know that. I did not know that she worked at his spa. Like, it's very confusing. And anytime people bring up Epstein and Trump, which is, you know, that's fine. Every. Everyone has a right to do that. It's also interesting to me that, like, Gaslaine, or I always say her name wrong. Gaslene Maxwell was at Chelsea Clinton's wedding and is literally in the visible. In the photos when she's saying her vows with her husband. Like, respectfully. There's no one that came to my wedding that, like, in any way, I'm embarrassed of the world knowing about. And, like, I'm just fascinated that, like, the Clintons clearly had that intimate of a relationship with her and him. So I don't know. I don't know if we're ever gonna get to the answer of Epstein, but people are not letting it go.

[Mark Halperin]

Kind of an incredible story. So we started talking about weddings, at least a hypothetical wedding between Justin Trudeau and Katy Perry. And we end.

[Megan McCain]

They're gonna get married.

[Mark Halperin]

They're gonna get Chelsea's wedding. I think they're gonna get married, too. You think it'll be in the US Or Canada?

[Megan McCain]

No, it will not be in the US And I will not. No, I don't think. I think she's, like, over it. She's got a lot of bad press here, but I think they're gonna go the whole way. I really do. You and I were predicting at first. I think they're gonna go the distance.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah. Amazing. Well, I look forward to watching the relationship blossom and bloom, and I look forward to one of us getting a wedding invite and. And pinky promise that we'll go Together. Megan's program, Citizen McCain appears live. And you can participate in the two way conversation every Tuesday and Thursday at noon Eastern time. And then if you happen to miss it live, you can still watch it on demand on YouTube. Megan, thank you. Love having you on.

[Megan McCain]

I love talking to you, but when are you ever not on camera? Like, I can't imagine how much you, I was like, do you ever eat? Do you ever, like, take a break? You are always on it.

[Mark Halperin]

I've got, I've got an iv, a bacon IV drip product right into my veins.

[Megan McCain]

I saw you on last night and I was like, Mark is never taking a breath. He's just always on camera, you know.

[Mark Halperin]

Gotta, gotta, gotta, gotta get, gotta improve. And the only way to improve is to keep doing it. Megan, grateful to you. Thank you.

[Megan McCain]

Thank you, Mark. Thank you.

[Mark Halperin]

We'll see you soon.

[Megan McCain]

Thank you.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, next up, we're gonna check in with my friend David Bonson to figure out what's happening. Next up on the economy. Stay with us. Ever since Donald Trump was sworn in for this term, his administration has moved very fast and gotten quite a bit done. But while they're moving mountains for their cause, they can't manage your personal savings. That, of course, is up to you. One of the smartest ways to protect your financial future is through diversification, especially with gold from my trusted friends at Birch Gold Group. Take the last 12 months, gold's value has jumped 40%. Central banks are now buying it at record levels. Global instability is at its highest in decades, which makes Birch Gold and owning Birch Gold physical gold, incredibly easy and incredibly important. You can convert an existing IRA or a 401k into a tax sheltered IRA backed by physical gold. Your other option is simply to buy gold and store it securely in your home safe. So right now, just text next to the number 989-898 and Birch Gold will go ahead and send you a free info kit about gold. There's no obligation, just some useful information. They've got an A plus rating with the Better Business Bureau and tens of thousands of happy customers. You can join those folks and take control of your savings today. Again, text the word next to 98989. All right, next up, the mystery and riddle of the American economy. You look at all the public data, there's things that are good and things that are bad. You talk to experts, you'll hear people who are bullish and people who are bearish. And there's a lot of cross currents, a lot of confusion, in part because the unprecedented policies of this administration. Here's how the Wall Street Journal framed it on on Thursday. There are two economic worlds the U.S. could be living in right now and Fed officials might not know which one it is for months. In one economic weakness that's been lurking beneath reasonably solid headlines, headline numbers finally surface. In the other, artificial intelligence investment and buoyant household wealth power the economy, past trade war headwinds. Those are pretty big disparities. So to try to figure out which it is or which it may be eventually. Joining me now, my friend David Bonson, Chief Investment Officer of the Bonson Group. David, welcome in. Mark. So you and I talk about this stuff a fair amount. Just in general, which, which of the two camps do you lead to or is it impossible to say? Are things going really well or are we on the precipice of peril?

[David Bonson]

Yes, this is, this is the problem. And it's very often the case that there is mixed economic data as overall trend. The economic data is more good than it is bad. Now, of course, many people would say that's generally an argument to not be cutting rates, particularly when the call is for really severe and draconian rate cuts down to like a 1% fed funds rate. That's the type of thing you'd normally be doing in an extreme recession. And in fact, the only time we've ever done it was in the aftermath of COVID in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. So there is a little bit of disconnect not only in the data, not only in the media narratives that you're talking about. There's a heavy politicization of the way people are thinking about the economy and I try my best not to do that. But there's also a disconnect even in the internal administration message that all at once things are the best they've ever been and we desperately need recessionary level of rate cuts. And so there's a lot of of confusion out there.

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah, and well said. And of course, highlighting the administration's point of view, you wouldn't be celebrating rapid economic growth and calling for a rate cut unless you had a different economic textbook than the ones we grew up with. Let's talk about the GDP number because it's a great example. The headline number was very good. But it didn't take a PhD in economics to look under the hood and see that the reason that the growth was 3% was because of other data that's not positive. What's that data and how troubling is the other data?

[David Bonson]

Yeah, it's amazing. How easy it would have been to unpack the data even if there was no such thing as Chat GPT. The old days of google.com would have worked just fine to show that essentially there are four ingredients marked to the GDP formula. Always and forever consumption. And I'll simplify the labels. Consumption, production, inventory, government spending and trade. The trade.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, that sounded like five.

[David Bonson]

Well, I'm including the inventory and net exports as together there's a sort of subcategory. The supply siders like myself are ones who believe economic growth starts with production. And so that's generally in the gdp. GDP formula it's referred to as non residential fixed investment. It's business investment. And that is the category I care about most. But the entire formula is capturing the ability to measure total goods and services in the economy.

[Mark Halperin]

Right. So, but let's talk about, let's talk about that one for a second. Sorry to interrupt. So there's, there's the economic conditions in a country that, about that, that including interest rates that say how likely is it for people to make new investments? Right. Then there's the psychology, there's the animal spirits. And so people look to Washington and they say are taxes going to go down? Is there going to be stability in international trade? They did cut taxes, but obviously instability may be holding people back in general under Donald Trump. So far, not just this one quarter. How are people feeling about new investment? Are people feeling conditions are good for new investment or they feel they need to hold back because of uncertainty or, or other elements in the economy?

[David Bonson]

Well, in Trump 1.0 in the first term they were very, very high. It was the only period that we got above trend line growth since financial crisis. And I believe that that was directly related to the 2017 tax cut, the significant lowering of the corporate tax rate, other deregulation and energy endeavors. There was some high correlation relation to Trump policy. Then a lot of that reversed in some of the trade volatility of 2018 and, and 2019 was a very strong year. But then 2020 changes things because of COVID and the recovery from COVID changed things thereafter after the first term ended. The issue now to answer your question is that when he was elected, small business confidence and CEO confidence explained exploded and then they have since dramatically declined. But I'm not one who believes confidence is what ultimately drives things. And the GDP number doesn't measure confidence either. It measures actual activity. And that's where it's a lot harder to kind of fudge the numbers on real life investment, real life activity that shows in the metrics. The, the thing that is skewed the numbers here, a negative 0.5% in Q1 and that's annualized, and a 3% for Q2, which is annualized. So these blend together year to date, our annualized economic growth number is 1.25%. It's very muted, very muted.

[Mark Halperin]

But just go back to the conditions, all the things you listed. Trying to lower energy prices, improve exploration and distribution and export, lower regulation, lower taxes, all those things are for Scott Bessett and the President, they're front and center still. That's at least their goal, to have those things contribute to the ability of American investors to invest and for big companies, small companies, to feel confident. Clearly that's being offset now for some by the tariff uncertainty and perhaps by things like the Russia, Ukraine conflict in general. Would you, projecting forward through Q3 and 4, do you think the people, despite the uncertainty from tariffs, are ready to invest robustly?

[David Bonson]

Not robustly, but I believe that we're getting to a point of much more clarity and that even if there are going to be certain headwinds around the real cost of certain tariffs, those that find themselves in the unlucky position of not getting waivers, exemptions and being in a certain sector or geography that really, really is hit harder than others, I still think they're better off with clarity. Even if it's clarity of bad news than confusion around potential good news. No news makes it very difficult to do economic calculation.

[Mark Halperin]

Is anything but the tariffs causing that uncertainty?

[David Bonson]

Tariff adjacent issues like then what total trade will end up being and what it will do to industrial production, to durable goods or orders, and then ultimately to the total level of trade affects, total level of capital flows. And this, this is a significant issue that won't be visible in the next Q3, Q4. I'm really looking out, Mark, a whole year because I think that you're going to get a much better indicator of where some of the bad things did or didn't happen and some of the good things did or didn't happen. But if you have a significant drop in foreign investment, then that becomes a different sort of problem. But this is, I think the most important thing I'll probably say here in our limited time is that the best priority or agenda around their tariff and trade policy is a totally different list than the prior list, which was, I'm calling the Navarro list. President Trump has his fingerprints on both lists, obviously, but what they're not talking about as much as now is the desperate need to lower the trade deficit, which I think is a fictitious economic goal, and the, and protectionist oriented things to try to go lend a boost to one sector over another. That's still going to be out there politically. But what you, what you see now is Besson talking about opening up new markets and foreign investment. So those are two new things that could be bullish.

[Mark Halperin]

Right. So it's a, it's a, it's a trade agenda associated with tariffs, but it's much more palatable and encouraging to the business community than the prior orientation. Right.

[David Bonson]

Much more. And for good reason. For good reason, yeah.

[Mark Halperin]

Okay, let's talk about consumers. We've got four big spending moments coming up in the balance of 2025. Back to school. We're right on the doorstep of that Halloween, Thanksgiving and Christmas. Are you bullish on those four moments for consumer spending?

[David Bonson]

Well, I assume you mean bullish as I would believe consumer spending is supposed to always be a really good thing.

[Mark Halperin]

Well, enough. We need, we need at least some of it.

[David Bonson]

Yeah. My answer right now is yes. My answer in a month will be yes. And my answer in any period for the rest of our lives where Americans have not lost credit, the answer is yes. The American consumer does not stop spending over animal spirits or over fear of a tax. They only stop spending when they run out of credit.

[Mark Halperin]

Right. Okay. The Trump administration cannot be considered an economic success in my view, unless they find a way to address two big areas of concern for America's families. One is the cost of housing and other is the cost of education and college. What is the administration doing that you see that at least potentially could address those things by the end of this term.

[David Bonson]

You know, it's really, it's really a great question because I would have said to you that there is very little the federal government can do other than try to jawbone the Fed for a lower fed funds rate, which even that doesn't do a lot for the longer term mortgage rates which are much more tethered to the 10 year and the 30 year than the overnight lending rate. But you know, when President Trump starts talking about getting rid of capital gain on primary residents, you know, there are, or adjusting for inflation, some of the capital gain burdens. There are things on the margin. The privatization of Fannie and Freddie could be a huge thing and people say no, it could take away credit. I vehemently disagree. I think that there is a huge opportunity in capital markets to get Fannie Freddie out of this insane stewardship that it's now been in for seven years.

[Mark Halperin]

But they're not, they're not going to do that before the midterms.

[David Bonson]

Not the midterms. It would be second half of the term, right?

[Mark Halperin]

Yeah.

[David Bonson]

But I think, I think that most of what you bring up on housing is really a state issue. And that's probably the best that the federal government and the Trump administration can hope for, is to be lucky with the timing of some of these things improving. But they can, they can try to use bully pulpit to demand more zoning relief and more deregulation that will promote the supply of new housing stock.

[Mark Halperin]

Okay, just a couple minutes left. You're more of a free market, traditional conservative economic orientation than the president has, certainly on tariffs, with the exception of tariffs for people. From your classical economic point of view, from the center right, is Donald Trump a good president in this term, taking the tariffs aside?

[David Bonson]

Certainly, because his instinct, when you take the tariff and trade issue aside, which comes from a very authentic impulse he has, that America is constantly getting taken advantage of if you put that issue aside. I'm firm, firmly convinced that his natural instinct is supply side oriented. I don't think it's from reading volumes of Robert Mundell or Art Laffer. I think his instinct is supply oriented, which is deregulation, energy independence and removing marginal tax burdens to incentivize production. So I believe that the president in that sense is very Reaganite. And the trade and tariff issue is where there's sort of a good cop, bad cop on other each each of his shoulders from the vantage point of this traditional conservative.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, lastly, two Fed questions just for the fun of it. Will Chairman Powell serve out his full term and who will be the next chair of the Fed?

[David Bonson]

The Chairman Powell will serve out the rest of his term and the next chairman of the Fed will be Kevin Warsh. But I wouldn't even put 50% odds on that. There's three or four people that I think are all between 20 and 40% each of odds. And the president does not know who he will appoint right now.

[Mark Halperin]

It's one of those questions I love when people ask me who will be chosen or what will happen. And I say Donald Trump doesn't know, so how could I be expected to know?

[David Bonson]

That's right.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, David Bonson, Chief Investment Officer of the Bonson Group. David, always love talking to economy with you. Thank you for joining.

[David Bonson]

Thank you, Mark.

[Mark Halperin]

All right, that's it for today's program. We'll be back on Tuesday with a brand new summary episode. Make sure, if you haven't already, subscribe and download all our episodes. Next up, wherever you get your podcast or watch us on YouTube, if you stay in touch with us, you will always know what's next up.