← Next Up with Mark Halperin
Next Up with Mark Halperin
Trump Demolishes East Wing and His Critics’ Emotional Stability, Shutdown Latest, and Dems 2028 Strategy
01:10:51
Mark kicks off today’s episode with his new reported monologue on Washington’s latest drama: the controversy over Donald Trump’s White House ballroom. He unpacks how a simple construction project became the Left’s newest moral anguish—and what the frenzy reveals about the lingering Trump Derangement Syndrome that still defines so much of the left and political media. Mark separates legitimate critique from performative outrage, showing how the press continues to inflate Trump’s every move into a national crisis. Then Republican Whip Tom Emmer joins Mark to talk strategy, substance, and why Republicans believe they are winning the messaging battle over the current shutdown. Emmer argues that the GOP has stayed disciplined while Democrats spiral into emotional overreaction—and lays out why the East Wing “demolition” has become a perfect metaphor for Washington’s obsession with optics over outcomes. Finally, Democratic strategist Matt Bennett sits down with Mark to examine what the ...
Loading summary
Transcript187 lines
- [00:00]
A
A KFC tale in the pursuit of flavor. If the Colonel could read all your Internet comments over the last few years, he'd say, people sure love my sweet smoky KFC Original Honey Barbecue and it's time we bring it back so they can put that bold tangy sauce on their favorite orders. He'd also say, thanks for calling my chicken goaded bussin and low key fire, bro. The Colonel lived so we could chicken back because you begged for it. KFC Original Honey Barbecue.
- [00:28]
B
Prices and participation may vary while supplies last.
- [00:31]
C
It's Cybersecurity Awareness Month and Lifelock is here with tips to help protect your identity. Use strong passwords, set up multi factor authentication and report phishing scams. And for comprehensive identity protection, Lifelock is your best choice. Lifelock alerts you to suspicious uses of your personal information and also fixes identity theft. Guaranteed or your money back. Stay smart, stay safe and stay protected. With a 30 day free trial@lifelock.com specialoffer terms apply.
- [01:03]
B
Hey, welcome in Nexters. Thank you for joining.
- [01:05]
D
This is NextUp.
- [01:06]
B
I'm Mark Halperin, Editor in Chief of the interactive video platform Two Way. Delighted to have you here. Great show. Today we have Tom Emmer, the Republican Whip in the House, Congressman from Minnesota. We'll talk about the shutdown and Matt Bennett of the Third Way. Third Way is here. Democratic organization that's been around for a long time and you may have heard a little bit of something about the President wanting to build a ballroom at the White House. I'll give you my thoughts on that. All that coming up right here. Next up everybody. Now I want to tell you about a group, it's called Vapor Technology Association. It's an organization started nearly a decade ago to protect the rights of Americans who choose alternatives to smoking and about the small businesses who have made a living using this technology. They all support science based policies and the rights of adults to make healthier choices. Did you know that many family owned vape shots and manufacturers around the country are under attack thanks to what are considered outdated Biden era regulations that threaten to wipe out an entire American industry? The Vapor Technology association, also known as vta, says businesses are being destroyed and people are losing their jobs now. But the VTA says President Trump has a clear opportunity to change this and to protect Americans rights to make their own choices and to defend small businesses, restore a free and fair marketplace. Head over to VaporTechnology.org to learn more about the organization and why they are leading the charge to support American innovation and if their mission appeals to you, as you read about it, consider becoming a member when you get to the site. Again, that's VaporTechnology.org Tell them you heard about them on NextUp. First, my reported monologue on something that has confused me all week, which is this question of the president's desire to build a ballroom on the grounds of the White House. This is not a new thing. In fact, when I was doing reporting for a book years ago, both Donald Trump and David Axelrod, who worked for Barack Obama, told me a version of the same story, that when Barack Obama was president, Donald Trump went to David Axelrod and said, I'd like to build a ballroom at the White House and I'll pay for it, because America should have a ballroom. If you've ever been to the White House, you know it's not as big and grand as it might seem. The West Wing quarters are cramped across the street. The Old Executive Office Building is bigger, but it still tends to be smaller overall as a footprint and office space than people think it is. And the challenge that the president has seen, shared by many others, including some of his predecessors, is that there's no good way to entertain at the White House to have a big state dinner or other big events in a grand style befitting the greatest country on earth. What normally happens for a state dinner is they put a tent up on the White House grounds, and that means people are walking on mud. If it's rained and it's a tent, I mean, you can rent the nicest tent in the world. It's still a tent. So the president's idea, and he's talked about it for a long time, was to build a grand ballroom that would hold a lot of hundreds of people, maybe up to a thousand now on the White House grounds. And this has caused a huge kerfuffle. Donald Trump causes controversies, kertuffles, contretemps all the time that the Democrats and their allies in the media, they don't like. What's confusing to me about this one is the emotion around it. There are lots of legitimate questions, and I'll talk about some of them, about whether this should be happening and how it's happening. And even some conservatives have said, and I agree with this, the president and his team haven't done a good enough job explaining exactly what's going on. And some of the critics are making a big deal at the fact that the president previously had said this construction of a ballroom could happen without damaging or even altering the existing buildings. Well, that's changed. That's what Happens during construction projects. Things change, right? If you ever had renovations at your house, you know, it doesn't always go exactly the way it is initially intended. I get the complaints and the concerns, how much it's going to cost. Now the president's using private money. He can't win, really. If you use taxpayer money, people say you shouldn't be using taxpayer money. If you use private money, people say it's undue influence, special interest, pay to play. I get that. The question of exactly what's being changed on the grounds, initially it seemed like they were just going to change the East Wing a little bit. The East Wing is where the First Lady's offices are. It's where some. Some social spaces. Underneath the East Wing is a bunker that's used in case of emergencies.
- [05:43]
D
But it's not the most famous parts of the White House. There's the residence, the official residence, where not just where the first family lives.
- [05:50]
B
But where the East Room is and.
- [05:52]
D
That long hallway you see, and the map room, some of the other very historic spaces. And then next to that is the West Wing on the other side of the East Wing. And then the Old Executive Office Building. Those are the main buildings on the ground. The East Wing has is not the.
- [06:05]
B
Oldest part of the White House.
- [06:07]
D
Some people just object to any changes. And of course, some people object to Donald Trump's changes. Some people are saying we need to know more about what's being built, who's going to benefit from it. Some people are saying you should have told us in advance. Some people are saying you shouldn't be building a $300 ballroom. It started at 200, went up to 250. Now it's $3 million. During a government shutdown, when people are hurting, these are all valid things to raise. The president has not sought or received all the approvals that even the White House says he needs from various commissions and historical associations. But there are some critics who say he should be getting way more approvals than the White House says are required. All of these I get, and all of them are questions that should be asked. What's been confusing to this week, and I've been talking about it in my newsletter, I, I've been talking about it on with Megyn Kelly. I've been talking about it on, on two Way is people are really emotional about this and are and are imbuing this with a sense of a dread. One of my guests on two Way said it's about democracy dies in demolition. They're acting.
- [07:16]
B
This is a tweet that I put up that I think expresses my point of view pretty well.
- [07:21]
D
A two, please. They're acting like Donald Trump is doing something that goes beyond the other things that Democrats, the media have complained about.
- [07:31]
B
Here's what I wrote on Twitter.
- [07:33]
D
This is one of the most bewildering moments in the decade long reaction of the resistance to Donald Trump. They seem to look at the construction photos as if they show the wreckage of Trump purposely bombing an orphanage. There's so much reaction I could show you to illustrate how upset people are. And first let's look at the construction and S3, you've probably seen this online or on, on TV, but there's various photos. The Washington Post published the first photo showing the building partially taken down. Again, it's not destruction.
- [08:05]
B
This is what happens when you do.
- [08:06]
D
Construction of a building. But you can see in the video, it's just looks like a construction site. They're taking down the building. And it was announced in the middle of the week that, yeah, they're taking down the whole thing and they're going to replace it with this much larger building.
- [08:19]
B
Some are objecting to how big it.
- [08:21]
D
Is as compared to the rest of the White House. But the reaction, and I need to be careful because for a lot of the week I've been critical of the.
- [08:30]
B
People who are emotional about this.
- [08:32]
D
I really shouldn't be. I want to understand them and I want people on the right in the White House. I want them to understand why people are so upset. So although I've been mocking, I concede, probably shouldn't have been less than mocking. I want to explain, I want to try to understand. And so I've asked people all week what why are people so upset? Let me give you examples of some of some of the upset. Here is, here's Jim Acosta.
- [08:57]
B
You know Jim Acosta, former CNN resistance leader, now part of independent media. Here's Jim Acosta talking about how upset he is and why. This is S5, please.
- [09:08]
E
This is what Donald Trump is doing to the White House right now. He's tearing the shit out of the White House that belongs to you, the American people. Joe Biden didn't do this. Barack Obama didn't do this. Ronald Reagan didn't do this. George W. Bush didn't do this. Bill Clinton didn't do this. Donald Trump in his second term when he's totally unaccountable, ripping the shit out of the White House. We have an out of, out of control president who is acting like a crook. Remember when Richard Nixon said, I am not a crook. Donald Trump is telling us he is a crook, but you just can't do anything about it.
- [09:45]
B
All right, you get the point. He's very upset that he's ripping the shit out of the White House, according to Jim Acosta. Here's Karen Phinney, longtime Democratic strategist, CNN commentator. She's also very upset about it. And here's, here's how she expressed her upset. S1 Please I think it's even if.
- [10:01]
F
You believe that this was a good idea, I would say the timing is horrible. And look, personally, you know, it was a little shocking to see those images having worked in the White House. I mean, there's so much beauty and history in the East Wing. So it's sad to see that, you know, that huge hole there.
- [10:21]
B
Again, the White House has gone through changes. This is not the first president who's tried to make some changes. And what he's going to build hopefully will be very nice but upsetting to Karen Phinney. Here's some other people upset. Gavin Newsom A3 on Twitter Gavin Newsom doesn't like the looks of what's happening either. Here's his tweet. Donald Trump doesn't want you to see this picture. He's literally destroying the White House. Reports that the White House has limited the ability of people from the Treasury Department, which has the best view of the East Wing site from taking photos and video. Another person upset Hillary Clinton. She tweeted as well, some pushback from Republicans who said she didn't necessarily wasn't necessarily the best steward of the White House. She tweets about Donald Trump. It's not his house, it's your house and he's destroying it again. Yes, they're planning to take down a building, but they're not destroying the entire White House. New York Times, Washington Post similarly upset. Here's a headline from the New York Times. A6 they don't, they don't like it. It's clear from the coverage and there's been a lot of coverage of it. The White House wrecking ball. Donald Trump's demolition of the East Wing has struck a nerve in Washington and beyond. I'm not sure how they've measured that. There are upset people, but I'm not sure how they know it struck a nerve. Here's the Washington Post headline A7 can anyone stop Trump's teardown of the East Wing? Okay, a few more people upset David Axelrod. Okay. I mentioned earlier, David Axelrod talked to Donald Trump once turned down on Barack Obama's behalf the offer Donald Trump had during the Obama years to build it. Here's what David said. The scope of the demolition and Mr. Trump's repeated promises that the White House itself would not be affected by the work were in many ways symbolic of how he has conducted his presidency. On a variety of issues, Mr. Trump has blown past norms and traditions, norms and traditions, often moving so quickly that it could be too late for courts, Congress, or the public to catch up. Okay, so he's upset. He's upset. He says this image of the East Wing of the White House is a metaphor for a broader reckless destruction. The ballroom that will go up there will be a gaudy monument to vanity, corruption and excess for anyone who's worked at the White House or cares about its rich history. It's a gut punch. That's the sensibility I've heard from so many Democrats this week on two ways, seeing them on the media. It's a gut punch. It's a gut punch. Now, there's so many things Donald Trump has done that the Democrats have felt strongly about and they don't like. And a lot of them, I see their point clearly. But this is a gut punch. That's the part I've been trying to understand. So again, I've been doing a lot of reporting, asking Democrats, asking members of the two way community, explain this, why, why are people seeing this as a gut punch? So I got a lot of good replies and I'm going to share them with you. But first, let's, let's try to understand this again. The president and his experts, he's got an architect, a construction crew. At first they thought they'd be kind of working around the East Wing.
- [13:37]
D
And then they made the judgment, no.
- [13:40]
B
The East Wing is going to have to come down and those offices will be moved and they're going to build this big structure. So I said to people, again, why is it so? Here's some of the good explanations. I got some from some from MAGA people, some not. Here's, here's one from someone who's not.
- [13:56]
D
Maga, who does not like Donald Trump. Here's his explanation of why are people so emotional about these images of a construction site? Democrat emotion is over Trump building a new temple on the old Temple Mount. That he is doing this is sinking in on Democrats as they see pictures in disbelief. The emotional reaction sits on the truth.
- [14:16]
B
Behind what he is doing, even if.
- [14:18]
D
It is silly to say it will be a tipping point for the election. The emotion is on point. Trump is building his temple on the old temple.
- [14:26]
B
Make no mistake about it. His side, my side agree on that.
- [14:29]
D
Neer Tanden, long time very senior Democrat, center for American Progress, worked in the Clinton administration. Biden Obama.
- [14:36]
B
Here's what she tweeted. This is a one Neera thinks these images are so searing and so significant. She she believes I have a massive political impact. She says, I genuinely think the images of them destroying the East Wing of the White House could be a game changer in the elections. Kamiyah is a little skeptical on that, but other people who offered explanations said this to me. They said, I think that deep down in three years, the Democrats want to erase every last bit of Trump from their memories. They may even want to pretend that he never happened at all. So to see the new ballroom or whatever else he does in the east wing is a permanent reminder. They're screaming so loudly about it because it's sort of like having to permanently.
- [15:19]
D
Hang in your living room a portrait.
- [15:21]
B
Of your ex wife or ex husband who drains you financially and emotionally in a divorce. Is it literally a big deal? No, it's just a painting. But that reminder of the destroyed feelings would be there forever. Lastly or not lastly, second to last. Here's someone who is maga. A very similar explanation says those with Trump derangement syndrome think or hope that once Trump is gone he will be relegated to the dustbin of history and that this moment in time is just a blip. But the renovation and say ren of destruction, the renovation of the East Wing and building the ballroom represents a manifestation of its historical permanence. Most other things, policy statements, etc. Can be ignored or purposely forgotten, but this is literally a physical reminder of his influence on the country that kills them inside. That sounds like it could be right to me. Lastly, and this is on the optimistic side, this is from someone who describes himself as a woke California Democrat, never Trumper. Here's what he says. Optimistic rather than rather than despondent. I've never met any commercial real estate developer I trust in politics and I hate most things about Trump. But there is one thing I trust Trump to do. Build over the top nice things. His vanity and brand protection instincts will create a beautiful ballroom. Democrats should say this is the one thing Trump will get right. That seems like good advice. It suggests he can do it right now.
- [16:51]
D
The Trumps and the Trump White House.
- [16:54]
B
Clearly a little sensitive to criticism, uncharacteristically have accommodated a lot of the people asking questions put out a long statement explaining that there have been a lot of past renovations at The White House giving some details about what this one will look like. And then the explainer in chief himself held forth in the White House this week at some length, explaining the project. Here's the President of the United States talking through his, arguably his favorite topic, construction. S2, please.
- [17:22]
G
Two years. Many of you have gone to the events where they had, as an example, President Xi or they had, you know, a leader of one of the countries, including the king and the queen from your favorite country. Absolutely, frankly. But where they'd be honored and there'd be in a tent out on the lawn and it would rain and it was a disaster. Brian's shaking his head. You know what I'm talking about. And so I thought I'd bring this out because this is going to be probably the finest ballroom ever built. And we're doing it. No cost to the country. It's being put, the money's being put in by me and donors, very great patriots, actually. And the spirit on the building of it is amazing. We are using little sections of footings and various other things, but that's sort of irrelevant. In order to do it properly, we had to take down the existing structure. The way it was shown. It looked like we were touching the White House. We don't touch the White House.
- [18:20]
B
So it'd be. When he says not touch the White House, he means the residents. They are touching the East Wing. They're taking it down. Look, I would love, and I agree others have made this point, including some conservative commentators. I'd love if the president and maybe the architect and the construction leader, if they'd come in and given a full briefing to folks and said, here's why the president's goal is to have a ballroom that is secure and safe and nice, so that the president and his successors, who knows when it's going to be finished. By the way, I don't think he'll benefit from this as much as his successors. They can have that possibility of entertaining at a large dinner for a head of state not held in a tent. Seems, seems sensible. People in this country who are upset, the tens of millions who get upset about what Donald Trump does, they're really upset about this, many of them. And maybe the theory I read you is right. Maybe they don't want a monument to Trump. But by the way, you're going to see Republicans name in the next three years a bunch of maybe Dulles Airport after him. He's talking about building a big arc like the Arc de Triomphe in Washington. I predict that will be named after him. There's going to be some permanence to a guy who is a two term president and people are going to have to get used to that. Is it, is it upsetting to them that, that the ballroom that will be used by the next Democrat president, whoever that is, whenever that is, will have been built by Donald Trump, maybe named after Donald Trump? Yeah. It will be unlikely they'll knock it down. But wouldn't it be wonderful if using private money. No, taxpayer money, hopefully all fully disclosed if some of the donors are known. Wouldn't it be great if it's just. If it's wonderful. But I asked people on the right to understand. These images have really upset people. They don't want to see a construction site in the White House. Here's one person explaining why people are so upset. This is Donald J. Trump Jr. On Fox and Friends. This S4, please.
- [20:21]
H
Because they're insane, Lawrence. They have nothing else to talk about anymore. They've lost the plot. They've stopped making any kind of sense. They've had to resort to violence because everything else they've tried to do is failing. The great irony of my father actually improving the White House. A construction guy, a guy that's known for building and building luxury, is actually improving the White House with private funding, his own and other donors. It's costing the taxpayer nothing. It's making the White House more usable. The White House is a beautiful place. It's an incredible building with incredible history. But it's actually very small, Lawrence. To be able to host bigger state dinners, to be able to do the deals around the world that are needed to create more jobs and commerce and trade deals, you need something like this.
- [21:09]
B
Okay, so there's Don Jr. S perspective. And again, I think everybody should agree we do need something like this. Maybe they won't love the way it looks. Exactly. Look more like Mar a Lago than they'd like. But the country and the White House and presidents need it. I think that's a, it's at least an arguable position and I think they should explain it better. But I also think the people on the right should understand for whatever reasons this has been upsetting to much of America and I'd say to the people who are upset, see if you can't get over it. Don't look at those images as, as a, as a war zone or something evil or something destructive. Just look at it as a guy who got elected president, won the popular vote, won the electoral college as a builder and who has long talked of thinking we should build a big ballroom on the White House grounds. I look forward to seeing it. I hope it's not, you know, overly gaudy. I hope it doesn't ruin the grounds. I hope they get whatever the law requires in terms of permission. But I also hope that people who are unsettled by this maybe find something else to focus on. As much as you're upset by those photos. Find something else. Democracy does not die in demolition. Democracy can survive Donald Trump tearing down the East Wing. And I just, all I ask is for people to not let this the decision by the president to do something he long said he would do. I hope there aren't cost overruns and I hope there's a beautiful ballroom that the next Democratic president can enjoy. That's what I hope. And I'll continue to ask questions about this to people if people continue to be upset. Some people say, well, this is just like the fad of the week. But I say again, I'm so struck by how upset people are of pictures of a construction site. All right, that's my reported monologue for the week. Let me know what you think. Send me an email or give me other theories or maybe your thoughts just in general about what I said. Send an email to nextuppalperentmail.com we'd love to hear from you. You can always find our program wherever you want to hear the full show or clips from the program on X Instagram TikTok, our handle there, xuphalperin and of course, watch the program. If you don't want to listen to the podcast on YouTube, you can go to YouTube.com NextUp Halperin we'd love to enjoy and share the show wherever you enjoy audio video experiences. Next up here, the House Majority Whip, Representative Tom Emmer of Minnesota. He's next up. If you're 64 years of age or older, this is an important announcement. The Department of Justice recently sued three major Medicare brokers for claiming they were unbiased while they were allegedly pushing people into plans that got them some big kickbacks. It's true so many insurance agents cannot be trusted for the best and accurate information. But you can't rely on the government resources either. That's why I want to let you know about a group called Chapter. Chapter was started by people who went through this personally after their own parents were pushed into the wrong Medicare plan by an agent more focused on commissions than on the best care. Chapter's mission is very simple, to give every American the honest, straightforward Medicare advice they deserve and here's what makes them different from the others. They're the only Medicare advisor that compares every plan nationwide, not just a handful. That saves their clients an average of $1,100 a year. Yes, $1,100. There's no reason not to call. It's quick, it's easy, and they can review your options in under 20 minutes. If you're already in the right plan, they'll let you know that. But if there's a better plan for you, they'll help you make the switch. This could be the most important call you make this year. Dial £250 and say chapter Medicare to get the peace of mind you deserve. That's £250. Say the words chapter Medicare.
- [25:01]
I
All right.
- [25:02]
B
Joining us now and next up, the gentleman from Minnesota, the House Republican Majority Whip, Tom Emmer. Congressman, thank you for being here.
- [25:08]
J
Good to be with you, Mark.
- [25:10]
B
This is the ballroom episode. Did my whole monologue on it. And I'm asking everybody to start with, can you explain why people on the left feel so viscerally upset by a construction job being done at the White House?
- [25:22]
J
Trump derangement syndrome, Mark. That's all it is.
- [25:27]
B
Yeah.
- [25:28]
J
If it was anybody else, I mean, if it was their, their hero, the promised one, if it was Barack Obama, they'd be celebrating in the streets. Joe Biden would never be able to do a project like this. So, hey, it wouldn't have been him. But it's Donald Trump who is the best. This guy knows how to make a presentation, how to make a how. I love it when you talk to him. He goes, well, you know, I'm in construction. That's what I do.
- [26:01]
B
Yeah.
- [26:02]
J
And that is what he does.
- [26:03]
B
He could talk to you about, for, for four hours about how he used to buy TVs for all his hotel rooms and where he'd buy them from and how he'd negotiate. He's a builder. I'm surprised he didn't do this stuff in the first. Or maybe it's a Russiagate investigation. Took up too much time, but he's making up for lost time.
- [26:19]
J
I think it's also the team, remember, if, if I, if the election would have been accurately dealt with back in 20 and Donald Trump was still in the office during those four years, I don't think he would have been near as good as he is right now. I think he took that experience in the first four years and the crookedness that he was dealing with from not only the left, but the swamp that he was the first one to ever really take on. I think he came up with a plan. He came up with a team starting with Susie Wiles. Right on down to all the cabinet members. It's been nothing short of spectacular. And I think that's what's driving the left even more. Crazy. Right. We've been doing this with Donald Trump for the last nine months. He's got win after win after win, domestic win, sealing the southern border, bringing prices down for eggs and gas. I mean, in my home state of Minnesota just two days ago, the average price per gallon was $2.84, a far cry from the $4.25 or 50 cents that it went up to under Joe Biden and Democrats. And then you look at what he's done on the national, on the world stage. He's just. He's. Well, it's Donald Trump.
- [27:40]
B
Yeah. Take off your Republican hat and put on your management consultant hat. Explain to people something you have never seen, reported, or talked about publicly. Why is Susie Wiles so effective in this job? She's universally given high marks. How is she doing the job? She talks to folks on the Hill all the time. So I know you've got insight into this. How is she doing this job that makes her such an effective manager for the President?
- [28:02]
J
Well, you know that great leadership is leaders that actually are the best teammates that you could possibly have. Right. And the president values honesty. He values directness, but he also values privacy. He wants those discussions. He wants the feedback, but he doesn't want to read about it outside of the White House. Susie Wiles is a trusted confidant. Susie Wiles is. Nobody's going to argue with her intelligence, her academic acumen, but then you kind of have the one other piece. She has the right temperament. Susie Wiles is always just like that. You know that old thing about a duck? On the surface, the duck looks calm and relaxed and under the water might be kicking like crazy. And she has just done a great job of assembling a winning team. I mean, you look at her legislative guys. James Blair, James Braid. These guys are whip smart, too. And it's. It's all about communication and temperament. Right.
- [29:17]
B
They.
- [29:17]
J
They just. They know they've got a job to do, and she just makes sure that all the trains run on time. And I have never been more impressed.
- [29:25]
B
Yeah, two things we have in common. We both check our Delta frequent flyer miles on a regular basis to see how many are in there. And second, we're both sick of being asked when the shutdown's gonna end. So I. I apologize for asking you. Because I'm sick of being asked. Because I get asked all the time too. When and how is this going to end?
- [29:40]
J
Well, Democrats should have read the book, read the book on shutdowns. It was written by Republicans. If they would have read the book, they might have understood that. One, you don't use a federal government shutdown to try and leverage your policy objectives. It doesn't work. It didn't work for Republicans, it's not going to work for Democrats. Two, if you're going to go into a shutdown, as I think Republicans learned before I got here back in 2013, maybe you need to have an exit strategy. You need to understand, one, what you're doing and why. And two, you've got to. It's almost like the lawyer that sits down with you and says, all right, if everything goes your way, A, this is what you can expect. By the way, everything doesn't always go your way. People are involved, human beings. Things can change on a second's notice. So it might be B, C or D, they didn't do that, Mark. Literally, they don't know why they're doing this. They try to tell everybody we're gonna make it about healthcare. This ain't about healthcare. If it was about healthcare, then who's the genius that filed that written counter proposal in the Senate that shows it's about healthcare, all right, it's about putting illegals back on taxpayer funded healthcare. And by the way, gutting 50 billion from Americans rural healthcare. These guys didn't have a plan.
- [31:05]
B
All right, so I take your points, or what am I called, talking points, but now tell me how it's going to end.
- [31:12]
J
Well, without a exit strategy, it's hard to say how it's going to end. So they were talking about the 18th. They were talking about the 18th because there was what the Democrats would call the no kings rally, what we call is the hate America rally. They were talking about that as being the date, the important date, because the concern was on their side. If you open the government before the rally, the rally becomes about you. So we got to get past the rally. Well, they got past the rally and that's why I bring up no exit strategy. Now. They really don't know what to do. Today they're going to vote on a bill that Ron Johnson is putting up and John Thune's putting it on the floor that would fund all essential workers during the shutdown. Mark, this should be right in their wheelhouse. They're going to vote down. We're being told apparently. And they're saying November 1st.
- [32:05]
B
So your answer is you don't know when it's gonna end either.
- [32:09]
J
I think it gets harder and harder. My answer is I think it gets harder and harder for them to reopen the government every day this goes on.
- [32:15]
B
Do folks in your district bring up the shutdown and having an adverse effect on them?
- [32:21]
J
They definitely are worried. I hear two things. I hear from those that are predisposed to be supportive of Donald and the administration and what we're doing. They say, don't cave on a regular basis. You know, this is the right thing to do. Just hang in there. I look at it this way. No one wins in a shutdown ultimately. And I am hearing from people, you're going to have 42 million people across the country. I think I've got over 100,000 in Minnesota, that their SNAP benefits are at risk. Right. They need that for survival. The WiC program that supplements the nutritional needs of women, infants and children. It's been funded for now, Mark, but, yeah, they're worried. People are worried. And then we're starting to hear more and more on the air traffic controller situation and flights. You know, you're moving into November, which is a big travel month in this country, and people whose flights are getting delayed. We had issues, I think, yesterday in Newark and Houston. You're probably gonna see more of that. Cause as Sean Duffy said this morning, the Secretary of Transportation, our number one priority is safety. And if we don't have the people that we need to make sure that you can get from here to there safely, well, you're going to experience delays and you could experience cancellations. So we're starting to hear that feedback.
- [33:51]
B
Speaker Johnson wanted to become Speaker. Some people expressed skepticism that he could survive in a job that the last two Republican speakers, maybe the last three, had a lot of trouble in. You wanted to be Speaker. A bunch of other people did. But Mike Johnson won. I'll be put myself first in line of saying how surprised I am about how good a job he's done. What's the story you would tell about how this guy, underestimated by many, has been so successful navigating the White House, navigating a relationship with John Thune, and dealing with the House conference?
- [34:23]
J
There's no question he's done a great job. Mike has been better than advertised. He's articulate. I mean, I think his greatest strength is being able to present the Republican position. And it just. It gets better every day when it comes to navigating this. He's Allowed it to be a team effort. I mean, you hear him talk about the leadership team leader, scalise, by Lisa McClain, others that are in our conference, he's allowed that to take place. And you can't have success. I mean, you got to educate some new members when they come in and they're firebomb guys that want to, you know, everything is a hill to die on. You have to explain to them, you realize that you are not going to get anything done around here unless you can build a team that supports what you're doing. That's what Mike Johnson, I think, has done best, which is allow the team to actually support the things that he needs to get this place moving and get things done. And the other thing, message, message. It's not all over the place. Republicans are great at telling you one thing, and then they wanna talk about something else. Mike Johnson has been about the one thing is the one thing. And right now, that one thing is we gave you a clean CR that you asked for. We passed it well in advance of this September 30th date, and then you suddenly changed course. And we're not going to negotiate because we got nothing to negotiate until you reopen the government. He's been consistent.
- [36:02]
B
He's been following Haley Barber's dictum. Haley didn't make it up, but he's keeping the main thing. The main thing. The only thing about his judgment I question is he's so far refused to come on this program that does not. Does not speak well of his understanding of the media ecosystem.
- [36:17]
J
He's got a pretty heavy schedule. So I don't think it's about you.
- [36:21]
B
Lots of conversation about AI and if you look at the experience of your body at Congress overall trying to regulate social media, it's a mismatch. It's so complicated. Their lobbyists are so sophisticated. Just like there's such a consensus we need more, we need better treatment of kids as it relates to social media. Congress can't legislate you because they're just too incredible. AI. They're sophisticated and hide the ball. Same with AI. I'm wondering, how worried are you about government doing the right thing to make sure AI is a force for job creation and scientific advance rather than killing the human species or all the other negative things that people worry about and speculate about?
- [37:03]
J
Well, worry is a strong word. I've been involved in the digital asset space since long before anybody really around here cared. I've been doing that for almost 10 years. And really, it's. We've come to a place where not only has the has Main street caught up, but Main street starting to send members who are more, more fluent in these issues. AI? Yeah. I mean, I'm concerned, but no, I think AI is going to be used as a competitive advantage for every US manufacturing operation. I think it's going to be used in our education system. I think in the federal government. It's ultimately going to be the answer to really solving the waste, fraud and abuse issue. So I think it's exciting. I think it is. It's the future. And the future has arrived. Do we have to perhaps, as the deliberative body that we're supposed to be, do we have to be learning more and figuring out if we have to do a light regulation framework to protect people and protect the country itself? Yeah, we're going to keep doing that, but this wholesale, we're going to block it, we're going to stop it, we're going to try to control it. People said that about cryptocurrencies. We're just going to absorb them and wrap it. You know what? Those things are going to happen with or without us. We should be involved. We can be part of that solution.
- [38:36]
B
Give me an example of a recent use of AI in the Ammer household that made you say, wow, this thing is really extraordinary.
- [38:43]
J
Well, I would say my wife would be the better one to ask because she's been using this stuff for the thermostat, for the security system. I mean, she's got all these different things that she's doing. But this Emmer, the best one I've seen recently was a manufacturer that builds harnesses, wiring harnesses in Mankato, Minnesota, and how they have literally been able to make their workforce more efficient and keep the people that they had employed. Because you hear this whole thing about it's going to put people out of jobs. They've kept their employees and they've expanded exponentially, probably 3.4x. And their plan is to go even more because they've been able to incorporate AI solutions into their manufacturing process. I'm excited about this stuff.
- [39:34]
B
I love all the small business examples, so thank you for sharing that. But are you using it personally either in your work or, or in your, in your life? How are you using it?
- [39:41]
J
Yeah, when I, when I ask Grok a question or when I get on one of these things to see how it works, but not every day. No, not I'm in Congress, as you know, the technology here has a little updating that it needs.
- [39:55]
B
Yeah, well, you got your, your own Phone. Who's the most underrated member of the Bush of the Trump Cabinet?
- [40:01]
J
Scott Turner.
- [40:03]
B
Scott Turner, Good answer. Who's the most. Who's the MVP of the Cabinet? You can't say the Vice President or anybody in the White House.
- [40:09]
J
No, you got a whole bunch of them. I. You're, you know, that's like me telling my seven kids, each one of them, I used to say, you're my favorite. Don't tell any of the others. I'm not gonna let my help them bring me out.
- [40:19]
B
All right, you think, you think there. You think there's 50 co. MVPs?
- [40:22]
J
Let's put it this way. The one that's closest to me is the guy from Wisconsin, the transportation.
- [40:27]
B
Yeah.
- [40:28]
J
But I love Laurie Chavez. Darimer is a great friend. Howard Ludnick is awesome. I mean, you just. It's a great group of people. They've assembled a great team.
- [40:40]
B
Okay, who's the unsung hero of the House conference?
- [40:48]
J
Who's the unsung hero of the House conference? I would say it's the freshman class. Tell me why guys who have come in. Because, you know, there's been a lot of division over the years. We still have differences of opinion. And the freshman class is no different. This is a group of people that are the entire spectrum from hard right to centrist.
- [41:10]
B
How many. Sorry, but how many House Republican freshmen are there?
- [41:14]
J
There's close to 30, I think. Yeah, five, 30. And it's. But those are the guys, and I'll tell you why. Because they came here to govern. They're working from their value set and they're getting things done. And it's been very impressive.
- [41:29]
B
Does Marjorie Taylor Greene ever ask you for advice?
- [41:33]
J
I have spoken with Marjorie, yes.
- [41:35]
B
Okay. What's some advice you'd give her right here?
- [41:39]
J
Well, Marjorie is everyone. You put the whip on the spot. My job is not judge. And I'm not going to tell. This is like a small town law office. We don't talk about what they talk to us about. But what I would say to any member is if you want to change the direction of our party, of the government, of whatever, you could take a sledgehammer if you want, but you find out that it's really hard to do it alone. You need to build a group that literally supports you. Bring them along. We have an obligation, Right. To bring other members, for instance, along if we want to be successful in moving the ball. And I think, I think Marjorie has shown the ability to do that since she came here. I think right now Marjorie has some pretty strong opinions about some topics. And since the government is shut down, we don't have the ability to have that internal debate that we usually find so productive and helpful. So you're just getting it from out here.
- [42:49]
B
All right, a year from now, when we're on the eve of the midterms and you're trying to hold the majority, what will House Republican candidates and incumbents and challengers and folks in open seats, what will the message be? What will the midterm message be for House Republican candidates?
- [43:03]
J
Promises made, promises kept?
- [43:05]
B
I mean, literally, what will that, what will that include stuff you've already passed or stuff that you're still to come?
- [43:12]
J
The border has been closed, crisis has been brought under control. The economy is moving again the way it should move, not just for those that are already successful, but those that are trying to climb that ladder of prosperity and the other side of it be. You got a choice. You got a choice to continue to move forward and grow and prosper or chaos.
- [43:35]
B
And what's your best guess about what the Democratic midterm message will be for House candidates?
- [43:39]
J
They don't know yet. They're saying it's health care. They keep going back to the same playbook they've been trying to use since fdr. I mean, literally, it's going to be, they've lost the labor movement. Trump and Trump and J.D. vance literally are more in tune, aligned with labor than the Democrats. And right now, Mark, the problem with your question is they don't have a leader, they don't have a message. They just have a bunch of chaos that's going on. And what's their message going to be? Republicans bad. You need to vote for us. Republicans bad. They're going to run against Republicans. That's not a winning message.
- [44:21]
B
All right, lastly, who's the most politically talented member of the House Democratic Caucus?
- [44:28]
J
That's interesting. I would say Steny Hoyer.
- [44:33]
B
Old school.
- [44:34]
J
I, I do. I, I just, I think if Denny Hoyer had been their leader, I, it might have lasted a lot longer. Yeah, there's just a certain balance there. No offense to Nancy Pelosi. She was, they're going to write books about her, but at the end of her career, she let the crazy members lead her.
- [44:55]
B
Is, is there younger? Those two are legends. So, so I don't, I don't diminish your naming the two of them, but is there a younger House Democrat who you, who you've been impressed by in terms of their political talent?
- [45:07]
J
I've been impressed by a bunch I mean, we can go to the ones that you already know. The Josh gottheimers at all. But I'd go to Richie Torres.
- [45:13]
B
Yeah.
- [45:14]
J
In New York. I mean, he's sharp, he's thoughtful, he's articulate. I don't agree with him on a lot of stuff, but there's the. And he's not the only one. But he's the example of that Democrat, the new Democrat that you can actually have these debates with and try to figure out how you can maintain your values. He can maintain his values and both can serve the constituents that hired them into office.
- [45:42]
B
Who's more likely to ever be president? Richie Torres or Ro Khanna?
- [45:48]
J
None of the above.
- [45:50]
B
None of the above. Who's more likely to ever be president? Marco Rubio or Scott Besant?
- [45:55]
J
I. Either one. I think Marco has really been stunningly good.
- [46:03]
B
Yeah. So either you think they both could someday be president?
- [46:06]
J
I think either one. But I. I don't know why you're not asking me about JD Because I think JD is in that too obvious.
- [46:13]
B
That's a. We call Vegas, call that immortal, call that a mortal lock. But I'm thinking 30. 30, 34 or 36 rather. I'm thinking people talk about Vance Rubio ticket, but now I'm hearing buzz about a Vance Besant ticket.
- [46:32]
G
Huh.
- [46:32]
B
What do you think of that?
- [46:34]
J
Tell you what, I'm always going to take the guy who broke the bank of England. I just think there's a.
- [46:40]
B
It's a good resume item.
- [46:42]
J
Oh, Scott is something else. But you're talking about three incredibly talented people. We are so fortunate on our side of the aisle for the intellectual, the academic ab of some of these men and women that are literally supporting our policies.
- [47:02]
B
Yeah. Congressman, when the shutdown ends, please come back, bring the speaker with you and let's do like a whole TikTok deconstruction about all the pizza and chicken wings and the decisive decisions and the pre games for all the daily 10am Press conferences. That would be a rich narrative.
- [47:16]
J
Look at you trying to use me to bring the speaker and I just always be booking.
- [47:21]
B
I want both of you. I want to see the by play, the interaction. If he can't come and you come back by yourself, that's fine. But I want at least two stories involving chicken wings. I want. I want chicken buckets of chicken wings in the corner and brilliant strategic decisions made by the whip.
- [47:36]
J
Well, just make sure. All you got to do is keep complimenting that. What's that? Louisiana football team. Oh, yeah, yeah. Alabama. No, the Tigers you just keep complimenting the.
- [47:50]
B
That's how to get the speaker on here. Do you know Hogan Gidley who works for the Speaker? You ever met that guy?
- [47:54]
J
Do you?
- [47:55]
B
Yeah. So that guy tells me he's super influential at the House conference, and yet I say, well, let's, let's, let's book the Speaker. And he, he says, let me call you back. So that's why I'm turned to you, because Hogan can't seem to book.
- [48:08]
J
Will tell Hogan that you said that.
- [48:10]
B
Yeah, please do. Hogan will not be surprised to hear me spending time with the House Majority Whip running down Hogan. He'll be. No, he'll. He'll say, yeah, that, that makes sense. That was a good use of the time. Congressman, very grateful to you for making time, even though you're just sitting around waiting for the Democrats to cave. So I'm not saying you're not busy, but I appreciate you making time amidst all this and grateful to you for joining us and look forward to having you back.
- [48:31]
J
Thanks for having me, Mark.
- [48:32]
B
All right, that was Tom Emmer. Next up, Matt Bennett, Democratic strategist with the group Third Way. Stay with us. That's next up. Attention, everybody. If you're a homeowner in America, you need to listen to this. The FBI has been warning about a type of real estate fraud on the rise. It's called title theft, and your equity is the target. Here's how it works. Criminals forge your signature on a single document, use a fake notary stamp and file it with the county. And just like that, on record, they own your home. Using your ownership, they can take out loans against your equity and even sell your property. And you won't know about it until foreclosure or collection notices show up in the mail. That's why I'm partnering with Home Title Lock, so you can protect your equity. And find out today if you're already a victim, use my promo code. It's Mark m a r kometitlelock.com and you'll get a free title history report and a free trial of their million dollar triple lock protection. That's 24,7 monitoring of your title records, urgent alerts to any changes that are made. And if fraud does occur, you get their US based restoration team who will spend up to $1 million to fix the situation. Don't be a victim. Protect your equity today. Again, that's home title lock.com promo code mark. Home title lock.com use the promo code, Mark. Joining me now, somebody who's both brilliant and exhibit A of how to have longevity in Washington, D.C. at very high level. The co founder of Third Way, Matt Ben Bennett, who has been a very influential thinker and talker and communicator and strategist within the Democratic Party now for decades. Despite his youthful appearance, this guy is a gray beard, a veteran. Matt Bennett, welcome. Thank you for being part of nextup today.
- [50:25]
I
Thanks for having me.
- [50:26]
B
I got to start by asking about the ballroom because. Because I really do want to understand the level of upset. So, first off, your own personal testimonial. When you look at the photos and video of the construction, demolishing the East Wing, taking it down to replace it, does that upset you? If so, why?
- [50:43]
I
Yeah, it upsets me on several levels. First, personally, you know, I served for four years in that building, not East Wing, but in the White House. And I cherish that building. I think all Americans should. It's a jewel. And, you know, he literally took a backhoe to this jewel of the American government. But I think much more important are two other things. One is he is paying for it, and it's now up to $300 million with money that, you know, companies are paying him as essentially bribes, $10 million from Lockheed. You know, this is not the way Americans should do business. And it's become very commonplace in the Trump era. But it's, I think, scary. The bigger problem, though, is building a Versailles style gold ballroom on the White House just gives you more evidence that Trump thinks about the presidency as a monarchy, not as the leader of the world's greatest and oldest democracy. I mean, that is just how he rolls generally, but it is also how he thinks about the kind of power that he's wielding. And I find that really scary.
- [51:59]
B
All right, I'm glad to hear your explanation. Very reasonable. And just, I don't want to spend our whole conversation on this. But first point is, it's a jewel. It's a, it's a building that people have emotional attachment to. But there have been changes at the White House in the history of the country. So you're not against any change. Right. If, for instance, they found asbestos in the East Wing and they had to tear it down, like the country will survive that. Second, about the private money. Better to use private money than taxpayer money. No, if it's all disclosed, we know who most of the donors are.
- [52:29]
I
Yeah, yes, better than taxpayer money, but. But not great because it's, you know, more evidence that people can buy access to Trump.
- [52:38]
B
Right? Yeah, but, but again, in the scheme of things, I'm not trying to criticize your point of view at all. I understand it. This wouldn't, to me, this wouldn't be in the top 200 of pay to play things. Right. So again, the emotion around this particular pay to play, he's not benefiting personally from it. We know who most of the donors are.
- [52:57]
I
But.
- [52:57]
B
But then lastly, like Versailles style, like Mar A Lago, is actually not that gaudy. It's pretty nice. But. But, I mean, we need a big ballroom. Other people have worked in other administrations have said having state dinners in a tent limited in the size is not great. So if Joe Biden or Barack Obama said they were going to build a big ballroom because we needed it, people on the left wouldn't object to that. Right. Just the concept. Forget whether it's gaudy in your sense of style. Building a big ballroom that can be secure for state dinners, that's probably a good thing, right? I don't know.
- [53:33]
I
I mean, look, it dwarfs the White House itself. It's way too big. But look, I'm not an architectural critic.
- [53:40]
B
I don't know.
- [53:40]
I
And maybe you're right. However, if you look at what he's done to the Oval Office and the Rose Garden, I don't have great hope for this new addition to the White House. I mean, it will be gilded in every possible way, and I've never been to Mar A Lago and I will never go. But I take your point that it's not as horrible as people like me imagine it to be. But the Oval looks pretty bad right now.
- [54:02]
B
There are definitely some rooms in Mar? A Laco you wouldn't love. But overall, it's actually, I think, I think, pretty tasteful. But again, I take your point. I'm not. And not only do I take it sort of intellectually, I know there are millions of people who agree with you, but this is where my confusion is. Like, why is this a cause of so much upset? In terms of emotional upset, I get your points intellectually, but people seem to feel beaten down by this. Existentially upset about it. Nothing. I just. I don't see that we're all overdoing.
- [54:37]
I
It because in the greater scheme of things, is it way, way more important that, you know, we may be murdering people on the high seas, that people are about to lose their SNAP benefits, that insurance premiums are going to go up?
- [54:50]
B
Exactly. Exactly.
- [54:52]
I
And so we're overdoing it, to be sure. But it is to people in Washington and to many of us who have either served in the White House or spent time there, it does feel personal to see that, you know, that back end loader carrying down the East Wing. It just feels very much like an assault.
- [55:10]
B
Right, okay. Thank you for explaining that. So when I think about the status and future status of the Democratic Party, it seems like it revolves around right now four things. One is the fight over the shutdown and who can define victory and win a political victory for the American people on their behalf. Not pure politics. Two would be the elections coming up in, in, in a couple, in a week or so in New Jersey, New York, Virginia, then the midterms, and then, and then the presidential, and then obviously all the other legislative fights that will occur, although I don't think people see see much in that in terms of progress. Stepping aside from those four things, specifically, how would you appraise where the Democratic Party is right now? What are its strengths? What are its weaknesses? What do you worry about? What are you hopeful about?
- [55:58]
I
I mean, we're in terrible shape. Like, we just have to be very honest with ourselves. The Democratic Party is in really, really bad shape. The fact that our approval rating is, you know, depending on the poll, you believe somewhere in the 20s or the teens, while Donald Trump is busy kind of vandalizing the government, that ain't good. And I think there's many reasons for that which we can discuss, but we have not begun to address those problems. I do think we will not be able to fully address them until we have a leader, and that won't be for, like, three years when we nominate somebody for president. Because parties ultimately are defined by their leaders and defined by them almost entirely. I mean, you can think about what Republicans did after 2012, as, you know, they did big retrospective, the autopsy. They're like, we need to be nicer to immigrants. And then they nominate Trump and they go the opposite direction. So the nominees and the presidents make the party brand, and for the next few years, we won't have that. So it's going to be a tough couple of years deep in the wilderness for us. And I think there are some things we can do to set the table for the nominee. But right now, I don't feel like we're doing it.
- [57:13]
B
So you're more of a centrist, moderate Democrat. But one of the reasons I think you've done so well for so long is you have respect for the whole big tent of the party. You're not. You don't want to kick progressives out of the party. You just want to. You just want to figure out the right way the party can proceed together. One of the things that strikes me now, and I want to just know what you think of this theory is there's no intraparty debate about some of the issues that really seem to be a problem for the Biden Harris administration and for their reelection campaign. First Biden and then Harris. So you look at your nominees for governor in Virginia and in New Jersey. Both have been asked in debates and in interviews about trans athletes and the rights of parents of kids who relate to trans issues. And both of them had extraordinary trouble answering. It seemed pretty obvious to me. Their trouble is they don't want to be on the wrong side of the electorate, but they also don't want to be on the wrong side of the base. And so they say, hamana, Hamana, Hamana, Trans, immigration, some economic issues. You just don't see an intra party debate. So am I right that that's not happening? Am I right that it's a problem? And then I don't normally ask two part questions, let alone three part. But how can that debate happen if, if it should be happening? What's the forum? What's the, the venue where you and someone more on the left could, could have a way, a conversation, work towards a Democratic position that is okay with the base, but that can also win elections.
- [58:37]
I
So I agree that both of those candidates struggled with that answer. And that is indicative of exactly the problem that you articulated. I do think there is a discussion happening in the party about that. We and others have said that answer won't do and we're going to need to be much clearer about where we are. And it contributed. It wasn't the only thing that doomed Harris, but it definitely contributed to that. There are people in the party that are laying out much clearer points of view on this. I mean, Rahm Emanuel went on Meghan Kelly's podcast. Megan is totally obsessed with the trans issue. He knew he would be asked a whole bunch of questions about it. And he answered them very clearly and very forthrightly. And he did not hum and a hum and a hum. Like she asked him at the end, how many sexes are there? And he said, two. And she said, well, why don't Democrats say that? And he said, because I'm going to have to enter the witness protection program now. But you know, Rahm, Rahm did that very deliberately. So I do think there are people and groups like ours that are kind of laying out and articulating a clear vision that is different than what some of the activists want. That debate is important. And that's true, not just on trans, but on immigration, on crime, the things that have divided Democrats before. But I don't think we're going to get to resolution on any of this until we've got a leader. And you know, in our system you don't have a leader until you have a nominee.
- [60:01]
D
Right.
- [60:01]
B
So, okay, let's play through the ROM thing. It's one thing. And this goes back to Bill Clinton, who's the model for this. Right. He led a debate within the party, right to work, welfare reform, death penalty. He said, we're going to have this discussion, but you do it if you want to effect change and build consensus. Not on Megyn Kelly because that's. He's going to get a good reception with that answer. Right. Let me see, let me see him go on MSNBC and answer that question that way. Right. That's the way you start to have a conversation that doesn't need to be confrontational. Bill Clinton said, I'm a Democrat by birth, heritage and conviction. I think that's what he said. And talk to people on the left about these things. Not just about electability, not just saying we can't win this election unless we say there's two sexes. There's two sexes. We can't win this election unless we say trans athletes shouldn't be in girls and women's sports. But also it's the right thing. It's not just the right thing because it's popular 8020. It's the right thing because that's what I, you know, quote speaking now as Rahm or whoever, this is what I believe that's a much more full throated effort than, than Rahm going on mate with Megan and saying, yeah, I believe that isn't it. And again I say, where can that happen? Can it happen at a, at a DNC meeting? Can it happen within Congress? Where, where can that play?
- [61:18]
I
Yeah, that's a great question. Look, first of all, to defend Rahm, I think he truly does believe what he said on Megyn Kelly. I don't think he does anything for political.
- [61:29]
B
I don't disagree, but I just don't give him credit for saying it to.
- [61:33]
I
Well, but you know, if you say it to Megan, you say to everybody like that, you do. He can't back up now. If he goes on msnbc, he can't give a completely different response.
- [61:42]
B
I look forward to seeing his response on msnbc.
- [61:45]
I
Yeah, I mean, look, maybe I'm wrong, but Rahm is pretty tough and pretty inured to getting yelled at by the left and I think in fact, he thinks that that's the only lane for him. So, one I do think he believes in, and I think he would say it at any venue. But your question about where do we have this out? Is a really important one. And the problem is, like, there isn't an obvious place to do it that I don't think it's going to happen in Congress because when you're in the minority, like, you don't control the agenda. So I don't see members having fights about things that are not coming up before them. And I think it's probably going to happen in various media spaces. So Ron will go on MSNBC or on the Pod Save guys or whatever and have these kinds of conversations. And I think it happens in the kind of intellectual infrastructure that's around the party. So, for example, as you know, we put out a thing a couple of months ago or last month that lays out a bunch of phrases that Democrats use. Some of them involve the trans issue that they should stop using. And that generated a lot of conversation. So I think that's the kind of way that Democrats are going to hash this out in the next few years.
- [63:04]
B
So that was a brilliant thing. You and I talked about it, and you didn't say, this is a cure for everything. You didn't say, we don't respect people in the trans community. To the contrary, you just said, first step, baby step, important baby step. We have to use different language. How did people on the left react to that?
- [63:23]
I
So very tremendously. People like Sarah McBride, who was, of course, the only trans member of Congress, really liked it, and she very much agreed with it. And her view, and I don't want to speak for her, but my sense of her view is that trans people have very, very serious challenges right now with Trump kind of attacking them constantly and having fights about language is not the place where we should be putting our energies. But a whole bunch of people on the left really hated the memo. Some of them said, we are abandoning our principles if we ever had any. Some said, well, did you poll these things to know whether you should be doing them? To which our response is, if you need a poll to tell you whether it's better to say inseminated person or pregnant woman, you might not be very good at politics. And, you know. And others said, well, this is no longer a problem. And that was our favorite response because literally one day after our thing came out was the DNC meeting that became kind of infamous last month. They opened with a, you know, with land acknowledgment and it just kind of went on from there with the same kind of language that has been alienating voters now for, for like almost a decade.
- [64:41]
B
When you think about the people who are talked about to be the leader of the party who may run for president, governors, some members of Congress, are any of them talking about ideas that you think could be popular and they could be third way type ideas, but also have appeal to the base? Can you give me an example of anybody who's talking about a specific idea? Now I'm tempted to say don't name something from either Ro Khan or Rahm Emanuel, because I think those two guys are doing it, so leave them aside. Anybody else? Just name one person, one idea that you find appealing from a substantive point of view and a political point of view.
- [65:13]
I
Yeah, so I think both Josh Shapiro and Wes Moore are talking about the need to be able to do things, to build things and repair things quickly. And both of them have really interesting stories to tell about that. I mean, Shapiro got the i95 brake, you know, fixed in like two days. And West Moore got the bridge in the Baltimore harbor fixed very quickly as well. And they did that by basically saying to the bureaucracies, I don't care about the rules, I don't care about all the hoops you're supposed to jump through. I want this thing fixed immediately. And he got it done. That, I think is at least adjacent to the kind of discussion on abundance.
- [65:56]
B
Yeah, it is adjacent. You know what Michael Dukakis would say about those examples? They're about competence, not ideology. Right. You're right that those are appealing things. They certainly rebrand the party as anti bureaucrat in some cases, not anti union, but not letting unions dictate how quickly something happens. But, but those aren't policy ideas. Right? Those aren't innovations. They're just competence, which I'm not. I'm not minimizing. Is there any. Forget if anybody's talking about what's an idea you have or you or third way has or you've seen from Brookings or any place, what's an idea that you say this is something we should be talking about, about health care or jobs or manufacturing or anything.
- [66:34]
I
So there's a whole bunch of things that we're putting out that are, you know, think tanky stuff that I think could be turned into things that people want to talk about. One is like a health care bill of rights that allows that makes clear exactly what patients can expect in terms of billing and in terms of debt, et cetera. But I think going back to your question about who's saying interesting things, I do think that there are some of these guys that are going to run are starting to articulate a vision with policy behind it. So, for example, the very first thing Shapiro did when he took office was he got rid of the requirement of having a college degree to work in government. That is a policy idea. That is also a deeply resonant political idea as well. I think for our entire careers, Democrats have put way too much emphasis on everyone going to college, and that turned out to be a catastrophic error both subserviently and politically. So I think de emphasizing college in government hiring is really smart.
- [67:37]
B
Yeah. Okay. I trust your judgment and instincts about the people's presidential campaign prospects literally as much as anyone I know in either party. So going to give you some names. You say for as a general election candidate in 28. Formidable. Not formidable. Too soon to say. Ready.
- [67:53]
I
Okay.
- [67:54]
B
Formidable. Not formidable. Too soon to say. General election. Don't have to win the nomination in this game. Gavin Newsom.
- [68:03]
I
Not for too soon to say. Between too soon to say and not formidable.
- [68:08]
B
Good answer. I like that. I like that. I like that. They split the difference. That's good. Kamala Harris.
- [68:13]
I
Not.
- [68:14]
B
Not for Wes Moore.
- [68:17]
I
Formidable.
- [68:18]
B
Formidable. Okay. Shapiro.
- [68:20]
I
Definitely Formidable.
- [68:22]
B
Definitely. Shapiro Pritzker.
- [68:25]
I
Too soon to say.
- [68:26]
B
Too soon to say. J.D. vance.
- [68:30]
I
Formidable.
- [68:31]
B
Formidable. Tell me why I'm kind of obsessed with Democrats view of this. Because your answer surprises me in the sense that most Democrats at least pretend to think he's not formidable. Tell me why you think he'd be formidable.
- [68:42]
I
I think that's insane. Look, if he wins the nomination, he will have the Trump blessing. Look, he is not as nearly as charismatic as Trump, but you can learn on the job. I watched Al Gore get at least a little bit better learning on the job, and he wasn't great by the time he ran, but he wasn't nearly as bad as he was when he first ran in 88. So he'll have spent four years watching a real political talent manage his coalition. And if Trump kind of lays hands on him and hands over the party to him, he is formidable, no matter how kind of awkward he can be in certain situations.
- [69:25]
B
Do you agree with me that he could enter the general election with $2 billion in the bank and hard money and super PAC money 100%?
- [69:31]
I
I mean, Elon Musk has $500 million. Write him a check for $2 billion.
- [69:36]
B
Yeah. All right. Glad to hear you say that. Why? How has Third Way, this organization that you. You co founded and you help run. How has it maintained its influence for such a long period of time?
- [69:50]
I
Well, thank you for that premise. I mean, we, we have staked out a position on the center left which is not very crowded. There are a whole bunch of groups on the, on the farther left that kind of jockey for position. But the center left isn't, there isn't much else here. There is the remnants of the DLC called ppi. There are some small groups like the welcome Party. There's a new think tank called Searchlight, but there really isn't all that much. And the interesting thing about Democratic politics is that despite the fact that the brand of the party is kind of being defined by the far left in ways I think are very unhelpful, our voters have nominated moderates basically every cycle since 1992. I mean, we could quibble about John Kerry, but every other nominee since 1992 has been center left. And so there is real appetite. I mean, there's more than 100 members of the House, New Democrats. There are a bunch of moderates in the Democratic caucus of the Senate. So we have a lot of customers, including almost every time the nominees, and they're looking for the kinds of ideas, both political and substantive, that we generate.
- [71:03]
B
Yeah. I think you can say since 88 Dukakis was center left, he wasn't.
- [71:06]
I
Yeah, yeah. Crazy, right? That's true. He was a little more beholden to labor unions and others than.
- [71:14]
B
Yeah.
- [71:15]
I
And Clinton kind of defined what it meant to be a moderate in a new way.
- [71:21]
B
Yeah. That's fair. Matt Bennett, one of the founders and leading figures at the organization the Third Way, very grateful to you for coming in. Thank you.
- [71:28]
I
Anytime. Thanks for having me.
- [71:30]
B
All right, that's it for today's program. We're going to be back on Tuesday on a brand new episode. Looking forward to seeing you then between now and then, tell all your friends. Subscribe Download to nextup Wherever you get your podcasts, you can also Watch us on YouTube. YouTube, like subscribe. Etc, etc, etc there. Join us every Tuesday and Thursday so you always know what's coming next up.