Scott Rasmussen: The Elite 1% Has “Tremendous Control” Over America’s Narrative

Summary

Pod Force One – New York Post

Episode Summary: Scott Rasmussen – The Elite 1% Has “Tremendous Control” Over America’s Narrative

Release Date: June 12, 2026
Guest: Scott Rasmussen, Pollster & Author of Out of Touch
Interviewer: Lydia Moynihan
Host: Miranda Devine (intro/outro only)

---

Episode Overview

This bonus episode features a wide-ranging interview with renowned pollster and political analyst Scott Rasmussen, discussing his latest book, Out of Touch, which explores how a small segment of the American elite—what he calls the "elite 1%"—exerts outsized influence over the national conversation and policy, often in direct conflict with mainstream American values. Lydia Moynihan dives into Rasmussen's research, the historical and sociological roots of elite disconnect, the failings of political and media institutions, and reasons for optimism about the American people's enduring core values.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Who Are the "Elite 1%" and Why Are They Out of Touch?

• Definition & Characteristics:

  • Elite 1% are not merely the richest Americans, but a class of people with postgraduate degrees, high incomes, and residences in major urban centers.
  • “To say that their views are out of touch with most Americans is a gross understatement. And they have tremendous control over the political narrative.” (Scott Rasmussen, 01:31)

• Disconnection from Majority Values:

  • Cites consistent polling on issues like term limits (with ~80% popular support) where political action rarely follows public preference.
  • Suggests elite indifference, not ignorance, is the reason for this disconnect.

2. Startling Data on Elite Attitudes

• Examples from Rasmussen’s Research:

  • “69% of politically active elites say only college graduates should be allowed to vote.”
  • “16% of federal managers who voted for Harris said they would not follow a direct legal order from the President.” (Lydia Moynihan, 02:01)
  • Rasmussen interprets these as not just out-of-touch, but antithetical to the founding values of freedom, equality, and self-governance.

• Historical Roots of Technocratic Elitism:

  • Traces the roots to the Progressive movement, highlighting Woodrow Wilson’s belief that “experts” should run government (03:00–04:00).
  • Quote from Wilson: “The problem of most Americans is they've never gotten over the Declaration of Independence.”
  • Rasmussen: “Just for clarity, I’ve never gotten over it either. I still believe in those ideals.” (04:00)

3. Elites' Perception of the Public and the Problem with Polling

• Voter “Ignorance” or Rational Inattention:
  • Elites often see ordinary voters as ill-informed or “stupid” because they lack knowledge of political details.
  • Rasmussen’s counter: “Most people don’t have much of a choice as to who they vote for… They're focused on more important things in life. What scares me is… not what Americans don't know about politics. It's what people in the political bubble don't know about America.” (04:18–05:20)

4. Policy Gaps: Public Priorities vs. Elite Agendas

• Illustrative Issues:
  • Term Limits and Voting Laws:
    • “About 80 plus percent of voters consistently support photo ID requirements.” (05:45)
    • Majorities support citizenship checks and mail-in ballot rules unrecognized by the elite.
• Failure to Communicate:
  • Elites and leaders often fail to use clear, relatable language (06:20–07:40).
  • “If there is a failure to communicate, it is on the problem of the speaker, not the listener.” (Scott Rasmussen, 06:50)
  • Advice to elites: “Never talk to anybody in the real world the way you talk to each other in this room, because they're just in a different language.” (07:48)

5. The Media, the Narrative, and the Breaking of Gatekeeper Power

• Case Study: Scott Pelley’s Controversy

  • Uses broadcaster Scott Pelley as an archetype of media elite out of touch with public sentiment and criticism (10:14–11:21).
  • “There have been decades and decades of polling data showing declining trust in journalists and showing a belief in bias." (11:00)
  • Elites “are a little bit delusional” about Americans’ distrust in government and media (11:22).

• Changing Media Landscape:

  • "In 1978, when 60 Minutes topped the ratings for the first time, it attracted about 40 million viewers... and the 60 Minutes audience has fallen by 75%. Nobody controls the narrative anymore." (13:50–14:30)
  • Social media and podcasts allow new, decentralized voices to bypass traditional gatekeepers.

6. The Double-Edged Sword of Decentralized Information

• Pros & Cons:

  • More voices means more freedom but also more confusion and “fringe theories.”
  • “There was an effort in colonial Virginia to ban the printing press because who knew what somebody might print?... It is always messy to have freedom... But it’s also far more dangerous to have one person or a very small group controlling the narrative.” (15:42–16:40)

• On Disinformation:

  • The public fears fake news, but fears government “truth policing” more:
    • “Letting the government decide what is disinformation is even more dangerous than the fake news itself.” (16:40)

7. Why Not a Major Third Party for the Disaffected Majority?

• Structural Barriers:
  • Election laws heavily advantage Republicans and Democrats, making meaningful third-party formation nearly impossible (16:56–18:00).
  • “There is no way to have an ideological third party in America... what we're seeing with President Trump and the Republican Party today. It's a different party than it was in 2010.” (17:20)

8. Immigration, Demographics, and Assimilation

• Public Attitudes:

  • Sharp distinction between legal (broadly supported) and illegal immigration (broadly opposed) (18:36–19:29).
  • “People think you should be required to speak English to become an American citizen. There should be a probationary period to make sure you're honoring our laws.” (18:56)

• On the ‘Hispanic Vote’:

  • Many classified as Hispanic by census see themselves as simply American or white, especially in second or third generations.
  • “Those immigrants... today are moving into the American mainstream. But that's from people who came here legally… That's not where I would have the concern.” (19:55–20:50)

9. Optimism About the American Future

• Why Rasmussen Is Hopeful:
  • “I believe the American people at 80% still believe in our founding ideals of freedom, equality and self governance. And I believe they will win for a number of reasons. One of them is we've been through this before.” (21:03–21:18)
  • The loss of elite narrative monopoly is ultimately positive, even if the current transition is turbulent.
  • “The elitist will be defeated, and our children and grandchildren will live better lives than we can ever imagine.” (21:40)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Elites’ Disdain for Voters:
  • “The reason that pollsters and others consider voters stupid is because they can do a poll... showing that on some detail that's really important to the Georgetown cocktail party, nobody else in America knows about. Or a lot of people don't know who their representative in Congress is.... They're focused on more important things in life.” (04:18–05:20)
• On Messaging Failure:
  • “It is your responsibility as a political leader... to convey things in terms your audience will understand.” (06:50)
• On Media Fragmentation:
  • “Nobody controls the narrative anymore. The fact that the New York Post can do things, the fact that podcasters can go on the air without getting permission from a gatekeeper drives the old school elitist crazy.” (14:30)
• On the Messiness of Freedom:
  • “It is always messy to have freedom. It is always messy to have more and more voices. But it’s also far more dangerous to have one person or a very small group controlling the narrative.” (16:00)
• On the Enduring American Spirit:
  • “I am confident that our system will survive with that. It may get worse before it gets better, but the American people will come out on top.” (21:30)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:25: Introduction of Scott Rasmussen and book premise
• 02:01: Shocking elite polling statistics
• 03:00: Historical/philosophical roots of elite disconnect (Woodrow Wilson)
• 04:18: Why elites think voters are “stupid”; real world priorities
• 05:45: Term limits, voting requirements, and issue of messaging
• 06:50: Leadership responsibility for communication
• 10:14: Media elites, Scott Pelley example, and public trust in media
• 13:50: Decline of legacy media and rise of new voices
• 15:42: Impact of fractured media landscape, disinformation
• 16:56: Barriers to third parties in U.S. politics
• 18:36: Immigration attitudes and assimilation
• 21:03: Rasmussen's optimism about America's future

---

Overall Tone & Takeaways

Scott Rasmussen combines data-driven analysis with historical perspective and a deep faith in the wisdom of ordinary Americans. He is critical of the insulated elite class but avoids partisan rancor, insisting that the path forward relies on restoring genuine self-governance and clear communication between leaders and the governed. Despite deep national divides and institutional challenges, he projects optimism that fundamental American values will prevail.

---

Recommended For:
Anyone interested in understanding the divide between America’s ruling class and the public, the dysfunctions of modern media and politics, and the prospects for democratic renewal.

Transcript

[A]

Hello, it's Miranda. This week I have a special bonus episode for you, an interview with a person who has quietly been working in the background of the political world for decades. Scott Rasmussen. One of my most talented colleagues at the New York Post, Lydia Moynihan, had a chance to sit down with him recently for podfors1, and I think you'll really enjoy it. Take a listen.

[B]

I. Alrighty. We are joined by Scott Rasmussen, founder and president of RMG Research, notable pollster, and now author of out of Touch, a new book on the elite and the battle for America's soul. So, Scott, I'm just curious, you know, what prompted you to write this book in this moment and what light you were hoping it will shed on the current political situation?

[C]

Well, part of it is I've been polling since the late 1980s, and throughout all that time, I've been really frustrated by the fact that there's a lot of things voters want that just don't happen. I began my polling work for the term limits movement, an 80% issue for everybody. Republicans like it, Democrats, young, old, white, non white. And yet back in those days, every time a reporter wrote about it, they said it was controversial. I thought they just didn't understand. What I eventually figured out was they didn't care. So I spent several decades trying to find this, and in the last couple of years, we identified a group that we call the elite 1%. Now, this is not the richest 1%, but these are people who have a postgraduate degree. They do make a lot of money, and they live in those densely populated urban areas like Manhattan. To say that their views are out of touch with most Americans is a gross understatement. And they have tremendous control over the political narrative. So that's. It's been that long journey. But ultimately, that research on the elite 1% that led to this book.

[B]

Yeah, I mean, I want to highlight some of the statistics that you point out are really shocking. 69% would want their team to cheat to win. 69% of politically active elites say only college graduates should be allowed to vote. 16% of federal managers who voted for Harris said they would follow a direct. They would not follow a direct legal order from the President. I mean, these are just insane numbers. Who are these people and what's driving them?

[C]

You're right, they are insane numbers. And by the way, this is why I call it a battle for America's soul. These are people who have rejected America's founding ideals of freedom, equality, and self governance. I mean, if you don't think people should be allowed to vote without a college degree. You don't really care what voters think. Same thing on if you think a regulator should decide whether they should follow an order from the elected president. The numbers go on and on. One of the most telling is that these politically active elites think the rest of us have too much individual freedom. Just about everybody in America thinks the opposite. The movement itself that led to this point, I trace all the way back to the 19th century, and I am a history geek as well as a numbers geek, so I apologize for that. But Woodrow Wilson wrote this very influential article on the study of administration back in 1887. He was part of a movement that was trying to move America away from those founding ideals. Wilson and his colleagues thought we should have a government more like Prussia, where experts made all the decisions. And you really tried to, you know, keep the people out of it as much as possible. One of my favorite Wilson quotes, he said, the problem of most Americans is they've never gotten over the Declaration of Independence. And just for clarity, I've never gotten over it either. I still believe in those ideals.

[B]

Yeah, it's interesting. You. You highlight some quotes where the perception of the average American people by pollsters and a lot of elites is that people are stupid. You clearly do not believe that. Why that kind of disconnect?

[C]

Well, the reason that pollsters and others consider voters stupid is because they can do a poll. I can do a poll tomorrow and show you that on some detail that's really important to the Georgetown cocktail party. Nobody else in America knows about, or a lot of people don't know who their Congress, their representative in Congress is. And my answer to that is, really, why should they? Most people don't have much of a choice as to who they vote for. There's. They don't expect their congressman to listen. What's going on, really, is that there's political gamesmanship, which is what drives the political discussion. We see it right now in the Scott Pelley debacle, where people are arguing about this, insiders are arguing about this, as if it's important. About three out of four Americans don't know who Scott Pelley is. So you can say they're stupid, or you can say, as I do, they're focused on more important things in life. What scares me is about America today is not what Americans don't know about politics. It's what people in the political bubble don't know about America.

[B]

You also note, you know, that elite opinion differs dramatically from public opinion. And we've talked about. Now, term limits is one issue that the American people care a lot about and that doesn't translate to the elites. What are other issues that you think best illustrate this gap today?

[C]

Well, you know, a great example both of the issue and the problems surrounding it are the SAVE act that's recently been creating. Quite a few are in the U.S. senate. It's absolutely true that about 80 plus percent of voters consistently support photo ID requirements. They think you should be required to prove your citizenship in order to register to vote. People overwhelmingly, by the way, think that all mail in ballots should be required, should be in by election day. So we don't have the California type situation we have right now.

[B]

Makes sense. These are pretty reasonable things.

[C]

Yeah, I know it's really crazy stuff, but one of the problems that happened in marketing the SAVE act is they called it the Save Act. People didn't know what that meant. We did a survey and the way we do this, we ask people if they know what these terms mean, and then if they say yes, we asked them to describe it. And only 23% of voters came even close to describing what the SAVE act was. It wasn't the Photo ID Requirements Act. It wasn't the only Citizens Vote Act. So in Washington, there was this great debate and they kept talking about how popular it was. And then when you went outside the Beltway, people were like, yeah, I'm not quite sure what it's all about. We've lost that ability to communicate. And very clearly, if there is a failure to communicate, it is on the problem of the speaker, not the listener. It is your responsibility as a political leader. It's your responsibility as a reporter to convey things in terms your audience will understand. And unfortunately, actually, I'll give a great example. When I go to give a speech to a political group about messaging, the first thing I say is, never talk to anybody in the real world the way you talk to each other in this room, because they're just in a different language.

[B]

Yeah, but. But it's interesting you believe it is incumbent upon people in this elite class to reach the average American. Not. Not the other way around.

[C]

Correct. They are supposedly there to be representing the public. They are supposedly there to be presenting their views, to gain consent of the governed. And look, we can't possibly be engaged in every aspect of every agency's decision making, but on big picture items, there should be a legitimate effort to convey what's going on and to seek that consent. That's basic to what America is all about. You know, I keep going back to the ideas of freedom, equality and self governance. Being part of freedom is who should decide what's going on. As much as possible, we want the individual to make their own choices. Sometimes it should be done in a community level or a state level. Too much right now gets caught up in these national debates and we lose sight of what's really important. But it is the people who are making the arguments who have the responsibility to communicate. Well, you know, if we if I were to say some things to you and you didn't understand my words, two things could happen. One, since you're a reporter, you would ask me to explain myself. At least that's what you shouldn't do, and you probably would. And if I couldn't explain it to you, well, then there's something wrong on my part. If you're trying to say things to voters and they're not getting it, think about what you're doing wrong.

[A]

Starting a business can seem like a daunting task unless you have a partner like Shopify. They have the tools you need to start and grow your business. From designing a website to marketing, to selling and beyond, Shopify can help with everything you need. There's a reason millions of companies like Mattel, Heinz and Allbirds continue to trust and use them. With Shopify on your side, turn your big business idea into Sign up for your $1 per month [e-mail] Specialoffer Ryan

[D]

Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. I don't know if you knew this, but anyone can get the same Premium Wireless for $15 a month plan that I've been enjoying. It's not just for celebrities. So do like I did and have one of your assistant's assistants switch you to Mint Mobile today. I'm told it's super easy to [e-mail]

[A]

Switch upfront payment of $45 for 3

[B]

month plan equivalent to $15 per month Required intro rate first 3 months only, then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra. See full [e-mail] you mentioned Scott Pelley as an example of the elite who's gone viral this week for saying that losing his job was like a spouse being murdered. Who else do you think is in that sort of elite class?

[C]

Well, there are a lot of people, but I, I want to go back to Scott Pelly for just a moment because one of the things he said is he didn't understand what Barry Weiss was asking about when she said, why do people think you're biased? How could he not know that there have been decades and decades of polling data showing declining trust in journalists and showing a belief in bias. In my book, I talk about how the elites, solid majority of them, believe that most Americans trust the government to do the right thing. Most of the time, that hasn't been true in more than 50 years. So when you begin.

[B]

Until he started his career.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, exactly. I mean, this is. There is. The people aren't. They're not paying attention. They're a little bit delusional. A lot of things that I talk about in the book are some of the views on climate change. So a lot of the climate change activists are presenting views that they think everybody supports them on. They think, for example, that most people would actually support rationing of key items. They think most people would support abandoned private air conditioning. Why? Because they're caught up in their own bubble. Now, to be clear, it's not just people on the far left. There are people on the right. We all have. We all live in our bubbles. But it's very diff. It's very important for a political leader to try and get outside of that.

[B]

Yeah, a lot of willful ignorance. You know, we are having sort of this populist movement over the last decade or so, seeing it here, seeing it across Europe, but in a lot of countries in South America. Do you think that the sort of stronghold that the elites have had is waning? Do you think they've lost a lot of that power?

[C]

Absolutely. They have lost a lot of power now in America. I trace the beginning of this movement back to the early 90s, when the first President Bush got elected by promising to read my lips, no new taxes. He broke that promise. And really, it was the only substantive promise of his campaign. And by doing that, he just tore apart the Reagan coalition and he created the movement, the populist movement that Donald Trump now leads. It had been growing for a very long time, but it was just based on frustration that people weren't listening. In 2016, one of my favorite polling stats is that only 38% of voters on election Day thought Donald Trump was qualified to be president, but 46% voted for him. What that means is about 11 million people who thought he was unqualified thought he was still a better choice than the political establishment. That's a big deal. The other thing that's been going on, and this ties into Scott Pelley as well, back in the 60s and 70s, you don't remember it, but I do, There were only three television networks. They controlled 94% of the primetime audience. They were three television shows about news each night, one on each network. They all said the same thing. It was a gatekeeper's elitist, gatekeeper's dream. They could decide what was news and how it should be covered. Then we started with the cable revolution in the late 70s and early 80s. People began to have choices, and people began to drift away from the networks. And then you went to the Internet and streaming platforms and smartphones. Those audiences that used to control the entire dialogue have faded. In 1978, when 60 Minutes topped the ratings for the first time, it attracted about 40 million viewers in a nation with only 78 million households. Since that time, America's adult population has just about doubled and the 60 Minutes audience has fallen by 75%. Nobody controls the narrative anymore. The fact that the New York Post can do things, the fact that podcasters can go on the air without getting permission from a gatekeeper drives the old school elitist crazy.

[B]

Right? And I mean, it's. It's an interesting moment, certainly, where there are so many ways to get information, and yet there is a cost to that because it's fractured not just public opinion, but what people can even agree upon as reality and as facts. So do you think that the stronghold of abc, cbs, NBC, breaking is positive, or are you also alarmed that now it seems like it's also led to a lot of fringe theories and conspiracy theories?

[C]

Yeah. Somebody once told me the change is good, but transitions are hell. And we're going through a transition in the media right now, and there are a lot of bad outputs, and there are a lot of crazy theories that go on that you see. But this has always been the case. There was an effort in colonial Virginia to ban the printing press because who knew what somebody might print? Then there were efforts by governments to control. You actually had to have a government license to get a book published or anything else because they wanted to control the opinion. It is always messy to have freedom. It is always messy to have more and more voices. But it's also far more dangerous to have one person or a very small group controlling the narrative. In our polling, we consistently show that people worry about disinformation. They worry about it a lot, but they recognize that letting the government decide what is disinformation is even more dangerous than the fake news itself.

[B]

I'm just curious. Why do you think we haven't seen a legitimate third party that's developed that does represent a majority Americans?

[C]

Well, that's easy, because the rules of elections are written by Republicans and Democrats. A Republican or a Democrat Automatically get on the district. Third parties have to go through a lot of work and little known detail in the election law. If you were to start a new party and you were to go in your first election and you get enough signatures to get on the ballot, great, you can decide who the nominees are for your party, you can decide what they're talking about. As soon as your party reaches 5% of the popular vote, you lose control of that ability. All of a sudden, anybody is eligible to run in your primary. So there is no way to have an ideological third party in America. The way third parties happen is what we're seeing with President Trump and the Republican Party today. It's a different party than it was in 2010. Don't know what it's going to look like after the President leaves office, but it is by shifting the coalitions within the two major parties. And ultimately that's been a fairly healthy system. It's just a little creaky right now.

[B]

One of the things that's been changing a lot over the last few decades and accelerated the last few years is just the massive amount of migration. Right now in New York, we have a mayor who wasn't even born here, who doesn't seem to have the American values that a lot of people do. How do you look at the changing demographics and what impact does that have on the way people are voting, on maintaining the system?

[C]

On the immigration issue overall, really important to make a distinction between legal immigration and illegal immigration voters for decades, and this is something that the political establishment didn't really acknowledge, but for decades, 80% of voters have opposed illegal immigration. That was the issue that put Donald Trump over the top in 2016. Without it, he would not have been elected. Legal immigration is something that about 80% of Americans support, but it's not just anybody who shows up. People think you should be required to speak English to become an American citizen. There should be a probationary period to make sure you're honoring our laws. There are a whole series of ideas. So people are very welcoming of immigrants from other countries.

[B]

But I mean, given the influx of a lot of illegal and legal immigrants the last few years, how does that change the polling in the future of the country?

[C]

Oh, well, look, the influx of illegal immigrant, of illegal immigrants has had a huge impact on our government, on our, on our budget crisis and lots of other areas. But those changes, I think the biggest problem with them is going to be how do we absorb all of these new people and what happens when they get into the political system in terms of the polling part of your question, the biggest thing, and this is something very few people think about. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic in a way that is different than most people would think of it. And it turns out that about half of the people who the Census Bureau decides are Hispanic don't see themselves that way. They tend to see themselves as white or American. It's generally second and third generations who feel that way. Those immigrants, the second and third generation, a lot of them today are moving into the American mainstream. But that's from people who came here legally, who got a job, who built a business and who did other things. That's not where I would have the concern.

[B]

You write very clearly that you're an optimist in this book. What makes you think that the 80% of Americans win?

[C]

I'm an optimist because I believe the American people at 80% still believes in our founding ideals of freedom, equality and self governance. And I believe they will win for a number of reasons. One of them is we've been through this before. One is they've lost control of the narrative as we talked earlier. All of a sudden they can't control what you see on the news. When more and more voices pop up. That's good, despite the inconveniences. And I am confident that our system will survive with that. It may get worse before it gets better, but the American people will come out on top. The elitist will be defeated, and our children and grandchildren will live better lives than we can ever imagine.

[B]

Scott, I love it. I love the optimism. Thank you so much for joining it. I really appreciate it.

[C]

Thank you.

[B]

Thank you for joining us. Miranda will be back on Monday with another minisode.