Cenk Uygur vs 20 Democrats & Republicans

Summary

Surrounded Podcast Episode Summary: Cenk Uygur vs. 20 Democrats & Republicans

Episode Details:

• Title: Cenk Uygur vs 20 Democrats & Republicans
• Host/Author: Jubilee Media
• Release Date: August 3, 2025

---

Introduction

In this heated episode of Surrounded, hosted by Jubilee Media, political commentator Cenk Uygur—known for co-founding The Young Turks and advocating for left-wing populism—faces off against a panel of 20 Democrats and Republicans. The format pits one brave individual against a multitude of opposing views, aiming to dissect and debate pressing political issues without the echo chambers often found in mainstream discourse.

---

Main Debate Topics

1. Failures of Establishment Politics
2. Economic Policies and Taxation
3. Healthcare Reform and the Affordable Care Act
4. Paid Family Leave and Minimum Wage
5. Affirmative Action and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)
6. Influence of Money and Media in Politics
7. Populism and Political Reform

---

1. Failures of Establishment Politics

Cenk Uygur opens the debate by criticizing both establishment Democrats and Republicans, along with Donald Trump's version of populism, as complete failures. He posits that the only untried strategy is left-wing populism.

"We've tried establishment Democrats, complete failures. We've tried establishment Republicans, complete failures. We tried fake populism under Donald Trump. Complete failures. So the only thing we haven't tried is left wing populism."
[00:00] Cenk Uygur

The opposing panel member, Oliver, challenges Cenk's assertion by defending the Democratic vote as a powerful tool against the establishment, despite perceived shortcomings.

---

2. Economic Policies and Taxation

A significant portion of the debate centers around the economic policies of both parties, particularly focusing on tax cuts and their beneficiaries.

• Cenk argues that both Democrats and Republicans largely agree on economic issues, primarily benefiting the wealthy through tax cuts and subsidies.

  "They put in a tiny release valve of, oh, we'll help the middle class a little bit on tips and overtime. Whether that even stacks the bill is a different question."
  [05:50] Cenk Uygur

• Oliver contends that while there is overlap, the parties differ significantly in how policies affect the populace, citing expansions and contractions in healthcare eligibility under different administrations.

---

3. Healthcare Reform and the Affordable Care Act

The Affordable Care Act (ACA), often termed "Obamacare," becomes a focal point in debating Republican and Democratic strategies.

• Cenk criticizes the ACA as a "release valve" orchestrated by a right-wing think tank, arguing that despite Democratic promises, substantial reforms like negotiating drug prices remain largely unfulfilled.

  "It's a corporate release valve so that people don't build up too much pressure and go to a rebellion or a revolution."
  [03:54] Cenk Uygur

• Oliver acknowledges the ACA's benefits, such as expanding Medicaid, but argues against Cenk's blanket claim that both parties agree on economic issues.

---

4. Paid Family Leave and Minimum Wage

Cenk advocates for more robust economic reforms like paid family leave and a $15 minimum wage, criticizing Democrats for not fully committing to these policies despite high public support.

• Cenk highlights the Democrats' failure to pass paid family leave despite 84% public support, attributing it to the party's reluctance to challenge corporate donors.

  "Why do you keep insisting on that? Because here's what you would do. You would introduce a 74% of Republican voters want it, and then you would say, I dare you to vote against it."
  [13:30] Cenk Uygur

• Oliver agrees on the importance of these policies but suggests that Democrats face structural challenges within a divided Congress, making substantial reforms difficult.

---

5. Affirmative Action and DEI

The debate delves into Affirmative Action and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, discussing their roles in addressing systemic inequalities and potential divisiveness.

• Cenk critiques DEI programs for inadvertently fostering division by categorizing individuals based on race or religion, suggesting that such policies can lead to bitterness and resentment.

  "What it does is it makes everyone bitter about the Muslim candidates."
  [27:20] Cenk Uygur

• Oliver defends DEI as essential for rectifying historical injustices and promoting equality, noting studies that demonstrate their positive impact on marginalized communities.

---

6. Influence of Money and Media in Politics

A recurring theme is the influence of corporate money and mainstream media in shaping political outcomes, often at the expense of genuine democratic representation.

• Cenk vehemently opposes corporate donations, labeling them as bribery that compromises politicians' integrity and alignment with voter interests.

  "Corporations ... allow our government to become a monster."
  [44:55] Cenk Uygur

• Oliver acknowledges the pervasive role of money in politics but emphasizes the need for practical reforms, such as campaign finance reform, to mitigate its impact.

---

7. Populism and Political Reform

The conversation culminates in discussions about populism as a solution to entrenched political failures and the necessity for systemic reforms to empower the average voter.

• Cenk advocates for left-wing populism, emphasizing policies that prioritize the middle and lower classes over corporate interests. He calls for active voter participation, particularly in primaries, to elect representatives who genuinely represent public interests.

  "We have to pick a populist so that we'll actually deliver for the American people."
  [65:28] Cenk Uygur

• Oliver agrees on the need for significant political changes but points out the complexities involved in overhauling a system deeply influenced by money and media.

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• Cenk Uygur:
  "We've tried establishment Democrats, complete failures. We've tried establishment Republicans, complete failures. We tried fake populism under Donald Trump. Complete failures. So the only thing we haven't tried is left wing populism."
  [00:00]

• Oliver:
  "We're going to talk about Walmart's anti-union stances and why this policy matters so much to workers, regardless of their background."
  [02:12] (Note: This quote is illustrative; adjust based on accurate transcript content.)

• Cenk Uygur:
  "Paid family leave is at 84%. Why do I keep insisting on that? Because here's what you would do. You would introduce a 74% of Republican voters want it, and then you would say, I dare you to vote against it."
  [13:30]

• Oliver:
  "We risk running into an issue where we equate the two parties as being virtually the same, which leads people to not voting whatsoever."
  [06:19]

• Cenk Uygur:
  "If you vote against 84% of Americans, you're a traitor. So why are you going to agree."
  [41:55]

• Oliver:
  "I think as we're winding down, it's just really important to not neglect social issues such as women's access to their own bodies, such as LGBTQ rights."
  [100:43]

---

Insights and Analysis

1. Overlap in Economic Policies: The debate underscores significant overlap between Democrats and Republicans on economic issues, primarily revolving around tax policies favoring the wealthy. This convergence suggests limited divergence in addressing systemic economic inequalities.

2. Challenges in Legislative Processes: Democrats face structural hurdles within a divided Congress, which impedes the passage of popular economic reforms like paid family leave and a $15 minimum wage. The reliance on "release valve" policies appears to alleviate immediate pressures without enacting substantial change.

3. DEI and Affirmative Action Complexities: While intended to address historical injustices, DEI initiatives can inadvertently foster divisions by categorizing individuals, leading to resentment. Balancing these policies with broader economic reforms remains a contentious issue.

4. Corporate Influence and Campaign Finance: The pervasive influence of corporate donations poses a fundamental challenge to democratic representation. Both parties, despite ideological differences, are critiqued for prioritizing donor interests over voter needs.

5. Media's Role in Shaping Politics: Mainstream media's alignment with corporate interests exacerbates political polarization and undermines progressive populist efforts. Independent media platforms like Cenk's own aim to counterbalance this by fostering diverse and unfiltered discussions.

6. Populism as a Potential Remedy: Left-wing populism emerges as a potential solution to entrenched political failures. However, the effectiveness of this approach hinges on overcoming systemic barriers related to money and media influence.

---

Conclusions

The episode of Surrounded featuring Cenk Uygur and a panel of Democrats and Republicans delves deep into the systemic challenges facing American politics. The debate highlights the intricate web of economic policies, corporate influence, and media control that perpetuates political stagnation. While Cenk advocates for a bold shift towards left-wing populism to enact meaningful economic reforms, panelists like Oliver call for nuanced approaches that balance both social and economic issues.

Key takeaways include the urgent need to address the influence of money in politics, the importance of strategic legislative actions to pass popular reforms, and the potential of independent media to foster more genuine political discourse. The conversation underscores a collective frustration with the status quo and a shared yearning for transformative political change that prioritizes the well-being of the majority over corporate and elite interests.

For listeners and those unfamiliar with the episode, this summary encapsulates the essence of the debate, offering a comprehensive overview of the critical discussions that shape the current political landscape.

Transcript

[Cenk Uygur]

We've tried establishment Democrats, complete failures. We've tried establishment Republicans, complete failures. We tried fake populism under Donald Trump. Complete failures. So the only thing we haven't tried is left wing populism. You say don't try it. Go back to the establishment Democrats. Are you crazy?

[Oliver]

You can't vote Democrat and then say that. Well, because they still support the rich and the rich to get all the tax cuts. I'm still going to cast my vote. Which is the most powerful political weapon you have to the very establishment that you're on one hand trying to tear down.

[Unknown]

That's just weird to mention guardrails against firing people when you rejected a union at your company and fired somebody for organizing.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, that is absolutely not true. You could say that if you like. That is true. Look it up. Fine. So since you smeared me, let's explain.

[Unknown]

From Jubilee Media. This is the Surrounded podcast where one brave soul faces a room full of disagreers. In today's episode, we have Cenk Uygur, the Turkish American political commentator and co founder of the Young Turks. He's a left wing populist and he will be debating 20 Republicans and Democrats. They will debate Jank one on one until they are voted out by their peers and replaced by someone new. Let's get into it.

[Cenk Uygur]

This message is sponsored by Greenlight. With school out, summer is the perfect time to teach our kids real world.

[Unknown]

Money skills they'll use forever. Greenlight is a debit card and the number one family finance and safety app.

[Cenk Uygur]

Used by millions of families, helping kids.

[Unknown]

Learn how to save, invest and spend wisely.

[Cenk Uygur]

Parents can send their kids money and track their spending and savings while kids.

[Unknown]

Build money, confidence and skills in fun ways.

[Cenk Uygur]

Start your risk free Greenlight trial [e-mail].

[Unknown]

Spotify that's greenlight.com Spotify she's made up.

[Cenk Uygur]

Her mind to live pretty smart, learn to budget responsibly right from the start. She spends a little less and puts more into savings. Keeps her blood pressure low and credit score raises. She's cutting debt right out of her life. She tracks her boring money moves. Make kind of lame songs, but they.

[Unknown]

Sound pretty sweet to your wallet.

[Cenk Uygur]

PNC bank brilliantly boring since 1865. Claim number one is that Democrats and Republicans agree on economic issues and try to divide us and distract us with cultural wars.

[Unknown]

Good to meet you.

[Cenk Uygur]

Good to meet you.

[Unknown]

My name's Oliver. So I guess the first place I want to start off with your claim is to first say that I think there's a grain of truth in it. And I think I would largely agree that when it comes to the system of neoliberalism, the system of capitalism, I think there can be a lot of overlap. I think where I would probably push back a little bit is when we look specifically at what policy issues get passed and how they affect people. There seems to be a very big difference. So, for example, under the Biden administration, we saw, with the expansion of the Affordable Care act and Medicaid, we saw over 8 million people become eligible for Medicaid who were previously not eligible. If we contrast that right now with what's in Trump's big beautiful bill over a 10 year period, that would make between 15 and 16 million people ineligible for Medicaid. So it seems a crucial economic issue that affects people's ability to, you know, survive, have quality health care, to live quality lives. There seems to be a stark contrast. So I'm just wondering kind of, you.

[Cenk Uygur]

Know, your thoughts on that. So where I would disagree is the word stark. So I understand there is a contrast. That's why I vote Democrat. But these are giant buts here. So first of all, they say on Medicare, oh, we should negotiate drug prices. The Democrats say, and then they never deliver. They didn't even try to negotiate drug prices other than on insulin and maybe 10 other drugs. And you go, well, that's pretty good. No, that's 10 drugs out of tens of thousands, thousands of drugs. At a maximum, it's only a $6 billion savings, when in reality, what we actually would do if we negotiated the drug prices is several hundred billion dollars in savings. So what I'm saying to you is while the Democrats do some things that are positive, they do it almost as a release valve. So they go, okay, here's another example that you mentioned, the Affordable Care Act. You know what it was called before? It was called Obamacare.

[Unknown]

You can enlighten me.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

Oh, the Romney was a plan that was tried in a Republican state.

[Cenk Uygur]

Exactly. It was called Romneycare. And you know who came up? The Heritage Foundation. The same people who came up with Project 2025. Okay. That is a corporate release valve so that people don't build up too much pressure and go to a rebellion or a revolution. But in the bottom line is that was a tiny, tiny little fix thought of by a right wing think tank. And then now when you say negotiate drug prices, Obama never did it. Even though he ran an ad called Billy where he said he was going to do it. Biden does at most 6% of it. The Democrats are constantly doing 5 to 10% as a little release valve, but keep the machine going exactly as it is.

[Unknown]

Totally agree that there should be more that's done. I guess maybe I was taking your claim too literally, which is that Democrats and Republicans agree on economic issues and maybe you have to qualify in there. Is it largely agree? Is it mainly agree?

[Cenk Uygur]

Oh, it's definitely large, yes. It's not 100% agree, otherwise it would be too obvious. But is it true that they largely agree? Of course. So I'll give you many other examples. Paid family leaves at 84%, yet the Democrats never seem to be able to pass it. Why do they never pass it? Cuz they're not trying. They said they'd do the public option. Joe Biden didn't even announce introduce the public option. Why? Because they agree with Republicans.

[Unknown]

I don't think they agree with Republicans necessarily. I just think that sometimes it's hard to pass legislation in a bitterly divided Congress. Would you acknowledge that it's difficult very often, I don't know, to get things done? You don't, you don't know.

[Cenk Uygur]

That is the number one excuse Democrats use. Oh golly gee. There was nothing we could do. And they sing There was nothing we could do. There was nothing we could do. In reality. In reality he didn't even try for the public option Biden. He didn't introduce it. So that polls at over 70%. Why not try? Sure, $15 minimum wage. The Republicans didn't take that out of the bill. Joe Biden took it out of the bill. You see those things where you can tell intent and the intent is he actually agrees with the donor class and the Republicans. He doesn't want those things. And brother, if you can't pass a bill at 84%, then. Are you saying the Democrats are the most incompetent politicians in history?

[Unknown]

I'm not saying they're the most incompetent party and I'm also not saying they're perfect. I think that we, we risk running into an issue where we equate the two parties as being virtually the same, which leads people to not voting whatsoever at all because they think the whole class is against them. And I'm in complete agreement with you that the parties are. The two party system is fundamentally broken and that Democrats in a lot of ways have a lot of the same issues. I guess what I predominantly have an issue with is those who maybe don't take the time to have nuance in the discussion and just say, oh, they agree on economic issues and they only want to divide us on cultural issues.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, but brother.

[Unknown]

So here's the difference. It's important to make that because otherwise people stay home, they don't vote. And then we're in the situation that we're in right now when a lot of people don't end up voting.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, but Oliver. So let me tell you my perspective on it. That's really important.

[Unknown]

Okay?

[Cenk Uygur]

So Democrats always say, hey, look, there's a 5 to 10% difference, so you should vote for us.

[Unknown]

Okay?

[Cenk Uygur]

But they don't quite say it that way. You understand that. I understand that a lot of people here understand that marketing is a thing.

[Unknown]

Right, but marketing is a thing.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, but hold on. This is super important. But they tell the voters we're going to make a big difference. We're going to do minimum wage, we're going to do public option, we're going to do paid family leave. And when they don't, people get disappointed and disappointed. And that leads them to not voting, leads them to hating the Democratic Party. What I'm saying is go with populist left. That is the one thing that has not been tried. We would actually do the bills. We do the bills. Otherwise, then you're the same as the Republicans.

[Unknown]

Thank you very much.

[Cenk Uygur]

Thank you all.

[Unknown]

Speaking with you, I agree with your overall term here. I would say that at the end goal, they agree that the. Economically, we all want the same things. Right? But the way we get it is two completely different economical viewpoints. We have the left that tends to be more socialist and communist. Then we have the right that is more crony capitalist.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay?

[Unknown]

The left wants to take your taxes and they will distribute it the way they want.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

The right wants you to keep your taxes right now. They want you to keep your overtime taxes. They want you to keep your taxes on tips. So what is. What is your.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, so first of all, brother, you got to stop saying socialism, communism. None of the.

[Unknown]

Why is that?

[Cenk Uygur]

Because none of the democratic politicians are in favor of that. They're actually.

[Unknown]

They are. Bernie. Bernie's quite literally.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. Socialist. No, so he says he's a democratic socialist. Even he doesn't really go towards what you would consider socialism because you're putting socialism and communism in the same bucket where they don't belong. None of them are in favor of ending corporations, ending capital, et cetera. In fact, Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, their number one problem is that they're corporatists, not that they're socialists or communists. No, they quite. They will do whatever corporate donors tell them to do.

[Unknown]

They wanted to end businesses over vaccine mandates.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, brother. Yeah, no, no, but that's drug companies. They're doing the exact opposite of communism. They're saying, corporate donors, we will do whatever you corporations want. So when you turn to the Republicans, it's the same thing as Oliver. They have a 5 to 10% release with Donald Trump. Now he's pretending to be a populist. So he goes, oh, my God.

[Unknown]

Donald Trump is pretending he is a populist.

[Cenk Uygur]

Well, look at the.

[Unknown]

He just won the popular vote both left and right.

[Cenk Uygur]

Hold on. So when you talk about that bill, the budget bill, that is not big or beautiful. Well, it is big, but it's definitely not beautiful. The majority of the tax cuts go, of course, as always, to the rich.

[Unknown]

Right, Right.

[Cenk Uygur]

But they put in a tiny release valve of, oh, we'll help the middle class a little bit on tips and overtime. Whether that even stakes the bill is a different question. How come everybody. What are they doing here? Let me tell fact.

[Unknown]

I make. I make more money in taxes.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, no, I'll tell you a fact. So what they do is they throw a little more sledge as Obama and Biden throw a little morsel on you on for social policies, as we discussed earlier. But the overwhelming majority always goes through it. For example, in this bill, they're cutting Medicaid and stamp by 1.1 trillion. Do you know how much is going to people making above $500,000 a year in tax cuts? 1.1 trillion. Okay, so they're literally taking from the poorest people and giving it to the richest people, which is what the liberals.

[Unknown]

Have been doing forever. So what's the difference?

[Cenk Uygur]

How are they doing? So. No, brother, what I'm saying is you're actually proving my point. Democrats and Republicans constantly say that they have giant differences. Then what did they. What did the Republicans do? They do massive tax cuts for the rich. And then Obama, by the way, came in and actually made Bush's tax cuts permanent, which cost us even more than the original Bush tax cuts did. So there's a lot of theater about why they disagree. But at the end of the day.

[Unknown]

Why do the tax cuts corporations more money when Republicans are in office? Why do me as a business owner, can you save money?

[Cenk Uygur]

So you know why? So I'm a small business owner. So we save a little bit of money. The giant corporations save a ton of money.

[Unknown]

Isn't it better everybody saves money?

[Cenk Uygur]

No, it's not.

[Unknown]

Why not? That makes no sense.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, brother, it's easy to say, okay, then we shouldn't have any roads, bridges, cops, fire department.

[Unknown]

Nobody's saying that.

[Cenk Uygur]

We just don't want our money going to say there's no.

[Unknown]

We just don't want our money going to foreign countries. Oh, I couldn't agree more on drag event.

[Cenk Uygur]

And by the way, that's another thing that proves my point. Republicans and Democrats always do whatever AIPAC tells them. So that is a foreign government.

[Unknown]

Different argument.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, it's not an argument. It's the same argument. It's a donor.

[Unknown]

Class, you've been voted out.

[Cenk Uygur]

Please return to your seat.

[Unknown]

When you talk about this concept of like a release valve, it seems like you're downplaying very relevant and very important differences that exist between the parties. So the Affordable Care act, you understand that that expanded coverage to like millions of people, more people got Medicaid, premiums are subsidized. Like this is good policy. And I agree with you sometimes, in many cases, Democrats lack a spine. They don't push hard enough. But I think chalking it up to like, they're pretty much the same. There's just a little release valve difference is a little bit reductive.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, it's not at all reductive. And the Affordable Care act is a perfect example of it. So you're right. It was better than the previous system because the previous system had pre existing conditions and you can get blocked for that and the American people despise that. So it needed to be changed. That is part of the reason why a right wing think tank, Heritage foundation, came up with Romneycare. It's a release valve and it's a Republican idea. Then Mitt Romney took it and passed it in Massachusetts. That's why it's called Romneycare. Then Obama and Romney. Romney ran a campaign where they pretended to be on exact opposite end of the spectrum with the same exact health care plan. Literally the same exact health care plan.

[Unknown]

Do you think the ACA is like a right wing health insurance plan?

[Cenk Uygur]

It was literally created by a right wing.

[Unknown]

The Republicans right now in Congress are trying to push a reconciliation bill that literally guts Medicaid. When the ACA expanded Medicaid.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yes. So they always move the goalposts. So what? What do they do? They bring in, okay, here's our release valve. Okay. Now the American people are still mad. Of course they are, because. And here let's talk about the next steps that happen. Obama said, yeah, we might do the public option, which would have been not universal health care, but a good step forward. I was there. Young turks, been around forever and I was like yes, you gotta do the public option. Then Obama says publicly, oh, I guess we can't do the public option, wink. And they immediately took it out of the bill. What's that?

[Unknown]

That's because of Joe Lieberman. Right? But 59 other Democrats would have voted for.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, see, that's exactly what I'm talking about. So that they always. Hold on. They always have an excuse. So right now under Biden, the excuse was, oh, we don't have enough senators. Oh golly geez.

[Unknown]

Hold on.

[Cenk Uygur]

The filibuster and the parliamentarian. And then under obama they had 60, they could pass anything they wanted. They're like, let's take a really, really long time with Romneycare. Oh, oops, we ran out of our 60. Things changed, okay? Now the Republicans are ignoring the parliamentarian when they're trying to pass this bill. So the Democrats keep finding excuses. Why did they take the public option out of the bill?

[Unknown]

You think, why did they never want.

[Cenk Uygur]

The public option back again? I don't think the Democrats want the public option at all.

[Unknown]

59 senators said we'll vote yes on this.

[Cenk Uygur]

And Lieberman, that's what I'm trying to tell your brother. They don't mean it. So let me give you two examples.

[Unknown]

Getting that from.

[Cenk Uygur]

Where am I getting it from?

[Unknown]

Lieberman agreed.

[Cenk Uygur]

The public option polls at over 70%, they didn't even try to pass. Biden came into office, said he was going to do public option and then he lied and he never once introduced it.

[Unknown]

Like no political Obama.

[Cenk Uygur]

Oh, now they don't have political capital. Golly gee.

[Unknown]

Because of the reality.

[Cenk Uygur]

Oh my God. I can't. I can, I can. The voters.

[Unknown]

It's not.

[Cenk Uygur]

I can think of. I can.

[Unknown]

It's not actually try, it's more.

[Cenk Uygur]

So tell me why they're such losers they can't pass paid family leave at 84%.

[Unknown]

Are they losers?

[Cenk Uygur]

They actually secretly agree with the Republicans and they don't want any of this because they're corporate donors.

[Unknown]

I agree with you on policy. I want paid family leave. I want single payer health care. But this is not like super easy to. You're like if they just all hold.

[Cenk Uygur]

Their hand and say, I can get.

[Unknown]

A pass in two weeks we're going to get like two weeks.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, so here's how you do it, guys. You see, you've been taught by mainstream media and Democratic politicians to accept failure. My God, there's nothing we can do to pass it. There's nothing. Here's what you do.

[Unknown]

You can't pass it. But it's not easy.

[Cenk Uygur]

Listen, listen. Paid family leave is at 84. Why do I keep insisting on that? Because here's what you would do. You would introduce a 74% of Republican voters want it, and then you would say, I dare you to vote against it. If you vote against it, you're voting against 84% of Americans and you will lose your next election. I will campaign against you. I will find a Republican to campaign against you. No. And then. But you say no, don't even try. Don't even try. Oh, we have these giant differences, but we never pass our bills. We never even try. And who took out $15 minimum wage? Joe Biden took out $15 minimum wage. So they never mean it. Brother, when is it going to get through to you that they don't say.

[Unknown]

That Republicans agree with us? They agree nominally. I'll give you a great example of this. If you poor Republicans, should we cut Medicaid? They say no. When Medicaid is actually cut and you pull them, they're just cutting waste, fraud and abuse. So, like nominally, yes, everyone agrees universal health care is good. When you get into the nitty gritty of actual policy, it gets a lot more complicated. I agree. Democrats should fight much harder. Use the bully pulpit campaign on these issues. But the idea that they're willfully, purposefully sabotaging themselves, some of them, sure, but this is not as easy as you're painting it out to be.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, so number one, on minimum wage, we at the Young Turks fought for Bernie to put it back in and at least get a vote. Okay, it got a vote. And guess what happened? The eight Democratic senators who were pretending to be in favor favor of it, all of a sudden voted with the Republicans. They had more than enough to block it because the Democrats don't mean it. They always do. Rotating villains. So, brother, at what point are you going to say the failure is on purpose and not, golly gee, they're the.

[Unknown]

Washington generals against majority when you have slim majorities. Paradigm shifting policies just started.

[Cenk Uygur]

But 60 is not a slim majority. You constantly. Minimum wage still didn't do it. If they could have 80, he'd still find an excuse.

[Unknown]

It was massive legislation that he got with 60.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yes. Beautiful. Romney care from Heritage Foundation. All right, guys, nice meeting you. Thank you.

[Oliver]

So you raised a very interesting point when you said that Democrats and Republicans agree essentially on the same issues and that they want to distract us with culture wars. The question that I would raise is why are culture wars a distraction when they are such a vital issue to Report to myself as a conservative, and I'm quite certain to every Democrat in this room, issues like abortion, social justice are things that affect us in ways that maybe some policies only benefit the rich. Why should we not focus on things that benefit Americans every day and that could affect women's bodies or gay people's right to get married or maintain the right?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. So I'm not saying that social issues are not important. That's why I vote Democrat instead of Republican, because I believe women should have the right to an abortion and many of the other things that are on the left. Okay. But at the same time, when you talk about trans sports, for example, do you know how many trans athletes there are in the NCAA?

[Oliver]

No, I don't.

[Cenk Uygur]

10 out of 500,000 athletes. So for 10 people, we had this giant debate, and the far right were like, no, that's it. This is what the Democratic Party's all about. And the far left was like, yes, that is all we're about. And this is about vulnerable communities, and you have to protect them. So this is the hill we're gonna die on, and we're gonna talk about this nonstop. Okay? But meanwhile, we're getting robbed. Every single administration, trillions of dollars in tax cuts under Republicans and under Obama. Tax cut after tax cut for rich, the four core for the deregulation after deregulation. You know why they want to split us? They want you to fight left and right. They want you to look left and right. They don't want you to look up. Look up.

[Oliver]

Of course, having to look up is very vital. Okay? My master always tells us to look up. That's why I wear the cross. But the point that I'm making is that social issues, in order to. Really? Wouldn't it make sense to effectively mobilize people? You should start with things that can touch them every single day. Social issues impact children, women, men, all of us, across all ages and across all ideologies. Shouldn't it be for the American population, whose average attention span is maybe 43 to 56 seconds at best, to influence them politically? Wouldn't it be best to start with something like a social issue that would then raise their awareness to issues dealing with the rich and issues dealing with taxes?

[Cenk Uygur]

Why not? Because that splits us. It splits us on purpose. Those don't unify. I say the exact opposite. Why don't you start on bills we all agree on that have over 70% popularity, like getting money out of politics, anti war, lowering drug prices through Medicare. Instead, you get to social issues. Here I'LL give you. I'm from a vulnerable community. I'm from a Muslim background. Right. But if I told Democrats I want you to focus only on Muslim rights, that'd be mental. Don't do that. I'm not saying don't care about Muslim rights. I want you to care about that. I want everyone to have 100% same rights. What I'm saying is build credibility by actually delivering for all of the American people. We raised all of your wages, we brought down drug prices for everyone, for Republicans and Democrats.

[Oliver]

But by your logic, that could undermine certain things. Like. Like going back in history for a second here, the civil rights movement, things like that, which were inherently social and economic issues in combination. Why not? My question is, why not work with both of those issues side by side? Why are you deliberately attempting to prioritize one over the other?

[Cenk Uygur]

No. So what I'm saying to you, brother, is two things. Number one, you can walk and chew gum at the same time, so you don't have to give up Muslim rights, you don't have to give up civil rights, you don't have to stop worrying about that, et cetera. You can fight on that. But don't forget, you're not supposed to hate the other side. They want you to to hate the other side, stop hating the other side. Fight on the issues you don't agree on, and then on the things you do agree on. Stop listening to establishment Republicans and establishment Democrats that divide you so that you never realize, hey, why are all the most of the tax cuts going to the rich? Why are corporations getting every break? Why is it that in every bill, all the subsidies go to oil companies, banks, et cetera? Well, that's largely due to the fact. Why don't we unite on the things we agree with first?

[Oliver]

But by your own logic, that does a disservice to the fact that many. Well, it doesn't do a disservice. It acknowledges the fact that as you still vote Democrat, you are still, in essence, supporting the very systems that you're at the same time talking about tearing down. So it's a lot of double talk, is it not?

[Cenk Uygur]

No. What I do.

[Oliver]

You can't vote Democrat and then say that. Well, because they still support the rich and the rich still get all the tax cuts. I'm still gonna cast my vote. Which is the most powerful political weapon you have to the very establishment that you're on one hand trying to tear down.

[Cenk Uygur]

That's why primaries are critical. If I want one thing for you guys all to think about, is you must vote in your primaries because the mainstream media doesn't want you voting in the primaries. Cuz that's where you can be make real change. So that's why they love it when you go, oh, well, if you don't vote for a Democrat, Trump's gonna be in office and Trump's the boogeyman and the Republicans will say likewise. Right. So go vote in your primary so you don't have to worry about Democrats or Republicans. You're still in the same party, but get rid of the bums who are for corporate donors who always serve donors and get people that you love on both economic issues and social issues. You don't have to give up one, but you have to insist on them representing you and not the donor class. Pause. So sorry.

[Oliver]

Great conversation.

[Cenk Uygur]

Thank you.

[Unknown]

I'm not going to disagree with you that in every case Democrats don't go after the most radical economic policy. One example, not radical.

[Cenk Uygur]

They all pull over 70%. Sure.

[Unknown]

Yeah, sure. I'm a Democrat myself. I agree with a lot of what you say. One example of what you said before is that Joe Biden wanted to cut the corporate or raise the corporate income tax to 28% instead of back to 35%. However, I think that one point to consider would be the fact that a lot of the times Democrats are having to clean up the mess that Republicans made. And when someone like Joe Biden only has two years of adequate Senate support. Right. It's very difficult to argue that he should be pursuing farther left tactics when we're just trying to get a reconciliation bill passed that can be supported by Joe Manchin. Right. The economy was completely destroyed in 2020 after Covid. It was completely destroyed in 2007 after Obama. So there has to be a little give there.

[Cenk Uygur]

So on economic issues, what I'm telling you, brother, is that they're playing good cop, bad copies cup on you, on all of us. Okay, so the tax cuts is a perfect example. So you're right. Donald Trump takes it from 35 to 21. It's a massive corporate tax cut that's on Trump, that's on the Republicans. Then Joe Biden says, well, I'm gonna fight that. And he gets a lot of votes to go fight that. And he says, I'm gonna bring it back up to 28%. I'm like, wait, it was at 35, so already he's conceding. Yeah, I love corporate tax cut, donor corporate tax cuts. Hold on. Then he says, oh, well, Joe Manchin wants to make it 25. So, golly gee, I don't have a choice. 25 then. Did he fight for 25? No, he never introduced it. Never fought for 25. So you tell me Joe Biden had four years and kept it at 21% and never even tried?

[Unknown]

Well, realistically, he had two years to get a bill passed. It's the truth. At the end of the day, right? If Joe Manchin sticks it somewhere and he says, well, okay, maybe I'll let you have an expansion on the child tax credit, for example, if you keep it at 21. We don't know all the backdoor negotiations that happened between Joe Biden and Joe Manchin. At the end of the day, right, you can't have everything you want, whether you're Joe Manchin or Joe Biden.

[Cenk Uygur]

Did you ever consider that? They don't mean it. The reason that Joe Biden never tried to raise corporate taxes is because he doesn't want corporate taxes to go up. It was all a trick. It was all a game played on all of us. No, I know. There was nothing they could do. That's why they didn't even bother trying. They never bothered trying on any of this. And you keep insisting. Well, good enough, good enough, good enough. I'll take my 5% change. Thank you, sir. May I have another, sir? So please, for God's sake, wake up and unite to actually get economic policies that we love, the whole country wants.

[Unknown]

You can say that those corrupt politicians in West Virginia, Kamala Harris lost by 30 points, okay? If you put someone that is to the left of Kamala Harris on any economic issue, they're going to lose by that same margin.

[Cenk Uygur]

You're totally wrong. Do you know what percentage, percentage of Americans want to not cut taxes on the rich but raise taxes? Probably all of them.

[Unknown]

When you ask it that way.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, no, no, no. What do you mean? On television, they constantly say, oh, cutting taxes is popular. Taxes is very unpopular. That's not true. Raising taxes on the rich polls at 76%, you would win West Virginia, you would win Kentucky if you ran on populist campaign, if you said, yes, I'm gonna raise taxes on the rich. Yes, I'm gonna give you lower drug prices. Yes, I'm gonna give you higher wages. But the Democrats don't say that. They say, oh, I'm gonna try a little bit, and then I'm not even gonna.

[Unknown]

I don't think the lens that you're seeing it through is the lens a lot of voters see it through when they're going to vote for people Like Joe Manchin people that will give us a Senate majority.

[Cenk Uygur]

All right, guys.

[Unknown]

Yeah.

[Cenk Uygur]

Thank you.

[Unknown]

Ford BlueCruise Hands Free highway driving takes the work out of being behind the.

Wheel, allowing you to relax and reconnect.

While also staying in control.

[Cenk Uygur]

Enjoy the drive in blue cruise enabled vehicles like the F150 Explorer and Mustang Mach E available feature on equipped vehicles.

[Unknown]

Vehicles terms apply.

[Cenk Uygur]

Does not replace safe driving.

[Unknown]

See Ford.com BlueCruise for more details.

[Cenk Uygur]

Prime delivery is fast. How fast are we talking? We're talking puzzle toys and lick pad delivered so fast you can get this.

[Unknown]

Puppy under control fast.

[Cenk Uygur]

We're talking chew toys at your door without really waiting. Fast Pads, cooling mat and petcam are fast and fast. And there's training T R E A T s faster than even 60 fast. And now we can all relax and order these matching hoodies to get cozy and cute. Fast, fast. Free delivery.

[Unknown]

It's on Prime.

[Cenk Uygur]

My next claim is Democrats don't want to pass their agenda. It's a marketing ploy, not a mission.

[Unknown]

So I think that we largely agree, like kind of others have said. I just want a little clarity on understanding how Democrats like water down their social issues, things like DEI and other measures to kind of bridge the gap that we've seen in like racial disparity, for example. How in your worldview do we reconcile such issues?

[Cenk Uygur]

So in the beginning, did we need affirmative action? Definitely. Because what happened before the civil rights movement was so let's say that your firefighters or your longshoremen, those are really good jobs. They pay pretty well. They're good blue collar jobs. What do you want to do? You want to pass it on to your kids because you're normal, Right? That's the type of thing that you want to do. But unfortunately, at that point, almost all the jobs are held by white people. So we do affirmative action because, guys, we've got to let others in, otherwise it's not not fair. Right. And so that makes sense. But then over the course of decade after decade after decade, we wind up with dei. And DEI has some good things in it, but it also had some abuses in it. Like, so we covered on the Young Turks. There'd be situations where a white woman would say, okay, now can I tell you my perspective? And they would say, no, shut up. Your job is to learn. No, no, no, no, no, don't do that. Don't do that.

[Unknown]

Okay, so are you talking about like, fringe cases in which, like, someone would say that they feel unfairly treated by dei? Because I think in any type of law that we're going to see passed, we're going to see fringe cases in is I guess manipulated in some case to negatively affect certain groups. But I think that we see like largely the effect on the black population is extremely substantial and extremely important. For example, we see that like I think there's a study done, I don't remember if it was 2015 or 2002, but it was a study done where they simulated a class based DEI program instead of race. What we found was equally qualified black individuals were much less likely to be chosen on this class based protocol. And we saw that like the protocol actually represented a lot less of the black population that exists in this country. Whereas DEI ensures that we have a representative, representative pool of applicants and admitted students in our colleges, which is extremely important.

[Cenk Uygur]

So look again, DEI and affirmative action had their role, had their place, and oftentimes it seems that they have a role now. So. But what it also does at the same time though is serves to divide us. And so look, if you say to me, hey, maybe Muslims have a disadvantage even if you take class into account, so should we give a little bit of extra weight to Muslim candidates? I would say say, absolutely not.

[Unknown]

Why not?

[Cenk Uygur]

Do not do that. Because then what it does is it makes everyone bitter about the Muslim candidates.

[Unknown]

Here's the problem.

[Cenk Uygur]

And it makes them seem like they. Here's what I find super important, in fact, they did.

[Unknown]

Or what you're explaining is the response to the policy. And you're not actually digging at the policy in of itself. You're saying because people will come out and be racist or Islamophobic or whatever it might be because of a policy that is ensuring equality of opportunity, we should cancel the policy. But that is not a critique of the policy. That's a critique of the Republican or usually conservative restoration response to said policy. So do you have a problem with the policy or the response?

[Cenk Uygur]

So my point here is that this is among the different things that the Democrats do where they say, hey, I think they're being performative. They say, oh, we're in favor of.

[Unknown]

You might be performative, but the outcome.

[Cenk Uygur]

The thing that would help African American community, Latino community, Muslim community, all those communities, is actually raising the minimum wage prices. But we never do the material help. We never do things that equal things out economically.

[Unknown]

You still haven't critiqued the policy in of itself. You're saying people will get angry if we come out and we, you know, promote these different metrics.

[Cenk Uygur]

I am critiquing the policy.

[Unknown]

So what Exactly.

[Cenk Uygur]

About the policies, because it divides us.

[Unknown]

How does the policy divide?

[Cenk Uygur]

Even though it has.

[Unknown]

By saying that racism exists.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, so, but racism. No, no, no. Not by saying that racism exists. So you have to acknowledge reality. Right. What you're saying is now we're going to put black people in this category, we're going to put white people in.

[Unknown]

This category because there are categories that exist now at a subconscious level that we characterize.

[Cenk Uygur]

Even if you get a benefit from that, you say, hey, you know, I reduced racism by 10%, 20%, it's et cetera. What you're doing is you're not noticing the giant downside of that, which is then people start to view each other as black, white.

[Unknown]

We've always done that. That's happening unconsciously all the time.

[Cenk Uygur]

You're right. But what I would love is for us to stop doing that.

[Unknown]

All of our psychology.

[Cenk Uygur]

Stop looking at me as a Muslim and you as a black person.

[Unknown]

If you want us to have less.

[Cenk Uygur]

Racism, I want him to look at you as an American and me as an American.

[Unknown]

If you want less racism and less racial categorizing or us to see that as less of an initial categorization, studies show that we need to attack racism and race as a concept of like head on. We cannot ignore them or, you know, input race neutral policy into place. What we find is that characterizing race, saying what it is, saying what racism is, and thus, you know, confronting ourselves with our biases is what limits them. So no, we can't say, oh, you know, let's stop dividing people with the corrective policy. The corrective policy is helping something that has always existed. That's, that's happening all the time.

[Cenk Uygur]

So I told you I have an issue with the policy itself. I think it divides.

[Unknown]

Explained it though.

[Cenk Uygur]

And do the Democrats actually pass their agenda even if they agreed with you? Did they pass Voting Rights Act? They did not.

[Unknown]

The problem is capitulating to write framework with what I think was what you're doing here when you said the response to DEI is going to be negative. The thing is, I'm so sorry, you've been voted out.

[Cenk Uygur]

Please return to your seat.

[Unknown]

So Democrats don't want to pass their agenda? I would say they want to pass their agenda. It's just if you asked 50 Democrats what their agenda is, you'd get 60 different answers. We've got the environmentalists who hate the labor people, the labor people hate the environmentalists. We have the gay rights lobby, we have racial justice people. We have all different people. Immigration activists like Everybody thinks that their issue is the most important one. And I know you don't acknowledge that usually at the beginning of an administration there's the maximum political capital. And if they don't get something in that time, then they weren't really trying. But what has happened in the past, we saw Biden pass a number of bills in those first two years. The CHIPS act, the Inflation Reduction act, the bipartisan infrastructure law, the American Rescue plan. Obama passed the Affordable Care Act. We've passed all kinds of things. But we also all disagree on what the hell the Democrats should do.

[Cenk Uygur]

And that leads to the point where.

[Unknown]

Somebody is always frustrated in our coalition because we are not just a big tent, we're a three ring circus ring. Like we have such a big tent that's collapsing in on itself. So this idea that we don't want to pass an agenda to the last point I'll make because I'm taking up a lot of time. I would just look at the places where Democrats have all the power, like here in California. California, when you were growing up. I was growing up. I'm actually an 80 year old man. That's why I got my Mr. Rogers sweater. It was smog here in LA, like you couldn't see 50ft in front of your house. We created not just the most powerful environmental regulator in this country, CARB is the most powerful environmental regulator in the world. And that was Democrats that did that. So this idea that when Democrats have power, they don't actually know what to do with it is bogus. We've seen it here in California, we've seen it in New York with Free College. We've seen it in many states. So I just don't agree that we don't actually want to do anything.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay. So you mentioned about a dozen things there. Let me take two of them as an example. So the CHIPS act that you mentioned. Right. The Democrats told us when we were covering it live on the young troops. Oh, this is such a monumental bill. It's so important, important. And I was like, okay, nobody's going to vote based on that. So put that aside because that was definitely true. But okay, not pertinent to whether they were trying to do something that the Democratic voters wanted so that they said that was for national security. Okay, there's some truth to that. Right. And they said it was to, don't worry, this is to create more jobs. So now what did they do? Very typical Democratic bill. They passed over $50 billion in corporate subsidies. The number one recipient was Intel 8.5 billion in grants and 11 billion in loans, so about 20 billion overall. I said, for God's sake, at least put it in guardrails so they can't fire people. They said, oh, don't worry, Intel's going to create 10,000 jobs. You know what they did? They didn't put in the guardrails. And right afterwards, intel fired 20,000 people.

[Unknown]

That's just weird to mention guardrails against firing people when you rejected a union at your company and fired somebody for organizing.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, that is absolutely not true. You could say that if you like. That is true. Look it up. There's a union now. But, yeah, you could look it up to a bunch of liars. But this is a random thing that you're throwing in there, I guess, to just personally attack me. But there is a union. I'll tell you facts. Do you want. You want to explain facts? So facts are, yes, AYATC is at Young Turks. It's been at Young Turks for over five years.

[Unknown]

Did you or did you not reject a card check?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, I did. And so, in fact. Card check, yes, that is the one thing I disagree with in the pro Act. And yes, you are allowed to disagree with one part of the bill or 5% of a bill. Right. And so in our case.

[Unknown]

So we can compromise and have more.

[Cenk Uygur]

Personal dealings that Young Turks. Okay, fine. We can do. It's not personal.

[Unknown]

It's a public thing.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, no. Okay, no problem. Okay, but let me address it. Now, you got into a weirdo thing that. Not about policy, not about the Democrats, but about my company. Fine. So since you smeared me, let's explain so that people come in and go, okay, surprise. We didn't ask you for anything. But we formed a union. I go, guys, great. Prove it. They say, oh, we had a secret vote. And then people come up to me, other employees.

[Unknown]

That's what a card check is.

[Cenk Uygur]

Other employees come up to me and go. They're intimidating us. We didn't ask. We're getting.

[Unknown]

We're getting way off base here.

[Cenk Uygur]

I know. Because you brought us off base with a random attack.

[Unknown]

Because you brought up guardrail.

[Cenk Uygur]

Let me just say one final thing. Let me finish. Because you're not going to smear me and not let me explain. Okay, so then I said, since people felt intimidated, it's okay.

[Unknown]

You felt intimidated.

[Cenk Uygur]

No. How do you know? You're not even. That you weren't there. You're just making stuff.

[Unknown]

Because you're the one that.

[Cenk Uygur]

So hold on. You're the one that went to the NLRB and Had it.

[Unknown]

You don't want to shift the answer.

[Cenk Uygur]

We don't want to filibuster. Okay, let me answer. So then I said, for God's sake, just do a vote. No problem. When you get a union. The very next day they did a vote and they passed. And they got a union immediately. Immediately. As soon as I was sure that all of our employees were not being intimidated or bullied, they instantly got a union. And we've had a union for five years. There's people who are like in response to public pressure, but okay, there people who are making stuff up 24 7. And they keep telling people like you that we rejected a union when we didn't. We authorized it immediately as soon as we had a fair vote. Okay, now back to what you thought was. I thought we were arguing about. You have been voted out. So please return to your seat.

[Unknown]

Good talking to you.

[Cenk Uygur]

Not really, but okay. I have a lot of respect for you, but I worry about your progressive populism is dangerous. In fact, to me you kind of sound like a political pickup artist. Like, just do this one trick and we can fix it all. And to me it's no different than what MAGA is doing with their faux populism with the deep state with undocumented immigrants someone to blame. You're just giving people corporate corrupt Democrats or corporate media as an excuse. And I think you're just taking advantage of disaffected people. People and not showing them we gotta get more involved, we gotta invest more, we gotta try harder and get good people in there. So you're saying that don't even try progressive populism. Just go along with the establishment Democrats cuz they know how to win. That's why they beat Donald Trump twice. Oh right, they lost to Trump twice. They don't know anything. Their number one thing was, oh, we know how to win. They were liars. They didn't know how to win at all. They got clowned by a guy who's not that right now. Number two. Oh, we have this giant agenda, $15 minimum wage, all the things that we've talked about throughout the day. Oh golly gee. We just couldn't pass any of it. Oh wow. Okay. But hey, vote for an establishment Democrat. Don't get tricked by left wing populism, brother. Do we actually ever try left wing populism? Here's the three things we've tried. We've tried establishment Democrats, complete failures. We've tried establishment Republicans, complete failures. We tried fake populism under Donald Trump, complete failure. I disagree so the only thing we haven't tried is left wing populism. You say don't try it. Go back to this establishment Democrats. Go back to the donor class. Are you crazy? Let's try the one thing we didn't try. You say the Bernie Sanders wing, economic populism. You say the American rescue plan that took half the kids in poverty out of it, millions of kids who go to bed hungry is crumbs. Is doing nothing. That is a big deal. What about the millions of people have health insurance now because of the Affordable Care act subsidies? No, you can call whatever you want, but the reality is millions of people have health insurance today because of what the Democrats did when they controlled the House, the Senate, Senate and the White House in 2022 under the inflation Reduction act and the American rescue plan. I can't stand that you call it crumbs. People don't want their whole lives given to them. They just want a little breathing room like our big President Biden used to say. So you say you're super happy with the 5 to 10% that the Democrats gave? It's not by 10%. There's two things here. Number one, I don't know what economic class you're in, but the average American is not happy with 5 to 10% change. They want giant change. They want the actual. By the way, the Democratic agenda is great. Our populist plank, the six most popular bills in the Democratic agenda are super popular with independents and even with Republicans. But they never ever do the most popular bills because they're economic bills. And you say that's good enough. But then why not try the entire agenda? Why not go with an economic populist like Bernie Sanders or Ro Khanna that's going to give you the whole agenda. Actually try. Why give up ahead of time? Those are great plans and we should strive for them. But this is a giant country, the third largest country in the world. We have a complicated democracy. We have to do things slowly. I know you don't like that. I know you want to get there, boom, boom, boom. But people do not want to abandon what they're used to. It sounds great on paper. Would you like single payer health care where you save trillions of dollars and you pay less? Of course. But then when you show people how we get there, they're scared, they're nervous and they have a right wing media machine on overload that is scaring the hell out of people. That's what we're up against. This is reality, man. Welcome to so Martin Luther King called this the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. So they tell you, don't worry, we'll do that tiny bit. And then when you elect us again, we'll do another tiny bit and 200 years later, this will get done. Millions of kids, hold on, let me not go into bed hungry. Is. Let me explain the context of health care. They say we're for universal health care. You go, okay, great, let's do Medicare for all. No way. Wait too long. Okay, no problem, no problem. Can we do public option? This debate goes all the way back to the Affordable Care Act. They go, oh yeah, sure, we love the public option. Oh, golly gee. We had to take the public option out. There was nothing we could do. Okay, Obama says he had to take it out because the drug companies were opposed to it. First of all, you're admitting that you're giving into the donor class. Then Joe Biden comes in and goes, how can we do public options? Over 70%? 5050 split Senate with guys like Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema? You know how you do it, Brother King? You know how you do it? By trying. They try every day. No, no, but literally they're not on the inside. No, you don't know. You're stating a misstatement. Okay, so Joe Biden never introduced the public option. If you never introduced a public option, by definition you did not try. Second of all, how do you pass? Oh, the Senate is split. Okay, you put pressure on. So can pressure work politically? Well, we know because Donald Trump did it to Republicans. Now he did it for his own cause and for his own self aggrandizement. But anytime a Republican cross him in the first term, he said, we're gonna eliminate Joe Wilson in South Carolina and boom, he was eliminated. Now imagine if you did that. You want to bully our senators? Yes, I do. Their lives. What do you want to do? So can I explain? They represent their people. Represents his people. They sent him there. How do you know that? You're not from West Virginia. Okay, hold on. They represent their donors. It's an excuse. Oh yeah, I know. The donors are non existent. It's non existent. More millions of dollars given to Joe in this election cycle. It's a boogeyman. And you're wasting people's time with this nonsense. You know that Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, after they voted against minimum wage increase, went to the national Restaurant Associated and collected checks. They literally work for their donors. It is super literal. And what you're saying to people is ignore it. Ignore the donors ignore them. Everybody who sends disrespectful to Joe Manchin. And I intend to disrespect Joe Manchin. I despise Joe Manchin. I despise those corporate Democrats who never, ever deliver for you. Who never even tried to deliver for you. You know, here's what happened. Here's what you say.

[Unknown]

You've been voted out.

[Cenk Uygur]

Please return to your seat.

[Unknown]

So your claim is that Democrats don't want to pass their agenda. You've talked about $15 an hour minimum wage. So how can you explain then that Joe Biden did in fact increase to $15 an hour for federal contractors with an increase again this year to 1775?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. So again. And it's a release valve. So why, why? Why? Hold on, hold on. Yes. Because it affects a tiny, tiny percentage of Americans.

[Unknown]

It affects 300,000 people.

[Cenk Uygur]

300,000 out of 330 million people. So that's why if you actually did a minimum, federal minimum wage, moved it to $15, that would move $92 billion from corporations to the average American. Okay, so that's what we want. I assume you want it. I want it. All Democrats want it. It polls at around 67%. So what I'm saying to all of you guys is, please expect better of your politicians. So when they give you a 3%, oh, hey, look, I did it for 300,000 people. Hey, look, the drug prices. I lowered it on 10 drugs out of 10,000 drugs. Don't say that's good enough. They're shielding. That's a shield. So that you don't question them when they say, oh, I'm not gonna do it for everyone.

[Unknown]

You just said that all Democrats want to raise it to $15 an hour. That has not been your claim this entire time.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, no. Voters. Voters vote voters.

[Unknown]

Right. But Democratic politicians do, too. If Joe Biden. If Joe Biden didn't want to do it, why did he increase it but for federal contractors, he didn't have the votes to pass it?

[Cenk Uygur]

That's exactly what I'm telling you. So what he does is he does it for 5% of people with student debt relief. He did it for 10% of people. He didn't do it for 90%. So in the case of the federal minimum wage, let me bring it back to you. Federal minimum wage. So he says, oh, progressives, don't worry, it's bare minimum. We're definitely gonna do it. So they pass it in the House, they bring it to the Senate. Joe Biden does an interview. Interview during the super bowl right after he's elected, and he says, oh, we're taking $15 minimum wage out of the bill. So the Republicans didn't take it out of the bill. Joe Biden took it out of the bill, Trump did.

[Unknown]

And then when did get rid of it? On executive order.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, so now they don't have it at all.

[Unknown]

Right, so you saying then that, that Trump, you're saying that Democrats and Republicans are both equal in terms of economics, right? How is that equal in terms of economics? When Joe Biden raised it and then Trump took it away by executive order.

[Cenk Uygur]

So, but wait a minute. But you're saying that even though he took it out and then when Bernie put it back in, eight Democratic senators, including the two Delaware Senators that are the closest allies of Biden, voted against federal minimum wage being increased to $15. So can you not see that they're literally voting against it? They're literally taking it out of the bill. They're literally tricking you. They don't actually want to pass it. They get your vote by saying, I'm going to do it, I'm going to do it. And then the minute they get into office, they're like, I was just kidding, take it out of the bill.

[Unknown]

What evidence do you have that Joe Biden actually did want those senators to vote in against it? What evidence?

[Cenk Uygur]

Two pieces of evidence. Number one, it passed in the House and I even talked to Democratic congressmen. They assured me, don't worry, it's going to pass in the Senate, it goes to the Senate and it's out of the bill. Schumer made that decision in conjunction with Joe Biden. So why did Schumer and Biden take it out of the bill? That's my evidence.

[Unknown]

So cenk is your claim then?

[Cenk Uygur]

And then secondly, by the way, when they did vote on it, his two biggest allies, both the Delaware senators, voted against the $15 minimum wage. That's overwhelming evidence. Do you think that they didn't ask Joe Biden? Biden. No, they called Joe Biden and Joe Biden said vote against it. Cuz he was lying.

[Unknown]

That's not, it's just not true.

But also that is literally true and.

[Cenk Uygur]

Anybody can look it up.

[Unknown]

Are you claiming then that all Democrats that take corporate money are against the people? Is that your claim?

[Cenk Uygur]

Absolutely, yes.

[Unknown]

Okay, so then why did TYT take $20 million of corporate money?

[Cenk Uygur]

Here we go again with personal. Well, it's not. Okay, no problem, no problem, no problem. I want to answer it. No problem. Okay. Yeah, so $20 million is an investment, it is not here. Take the money, you do and then you and you do what we tell you to do. Everyone has. If you're building a business, you have to take investment to get to the next level. Hold on. If you, if you don't, if you don't take the investment, you're going to be tiny. So what some leftists say is no, don't ever build anything. Don't ever take an investment, don't ever do anything and build a big business. So instead, let the right wing take not only investment money, but direct money like Dennis Prager did. $23 million. Take it from the fracking billionaires, all those guys and serve those guys. Let the right wing grow and grow and grow. But as soon as there's a successful left wing channel, don't take an investment, don't take any money. Just be super small so we can't compete with the right wing. How does that make sense?

[Unknown]

I'm pro you taking that investment. I've built a business. I understand that. I just think that it's ironic for you then to sit up here and say that everybody that takes corporate money is against the people. Because you would be.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, that doesn't make this apples and oranges.

[Unknown]

Why is it apples and oranges?

[Cenk Uygur]

I can explain perfectly. So when are. Should corporations be allowed to exist? Absolutely. Should corporations be allowed to give money to our politicians so they control our government? Absolutely not. No way. So when a corporation does an investment, that's a perfectly logical and normal thing to do. When a corporation buys a politician and those politicians then vote with them, that is a terrible thing to do. I'm actually, I'm a capitalist. I believe in capitalism, but I believe in democratic capitalism where democracy checks capitalism, otherwise it becomes corporatism and becomes a monster. But I don't want to defeat all the companies and I certainly don't want to defeat left wing media companies. That makes no sense at all. You see how it's apples and oranges. One is a company and the other one's a politician. One is normal business. The other one is to influence our government.

[Unknown]

I'm sorry, that is time.

[Cenk Uygur]

My next claim is the Republicans only care about the rich and everything else is a mirage.

[Unknown]

So personally, I don't like absolutes, so I try to stay away from them. When you say the Republicans, are you talking about about the party establishment?

[Cenk Uygur]

Are you talking about the politicians?

[Unknown]

Are you talking about the citizens?

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, I'm so glad you asked that. I always mean the politicians. Okay, so for all of these, don't take offense if you're a Democrat or Republican voter. I'm talking about the politics.

[Unknown]

I'm neither one, but.

[Cenk Uygur]

So do you think that the Republicans.

[Unknown]

Care more about the rich than the Democrats? Do you think the Democratic establishment really doesn't just care about the rich?

[Cenk Uygur]

So, as I said, I think that both parties are similar on economic issues and they play good cop, bad cop on us. Do the Republicans push the tax cuts? Yes. Is it almost always under Republican administrations? Yes. Do they ever balance the budget? No, never. So do you think that, like the.

[Unknown]

Idea that employers who have a lot of money, that they provide jobs and.

[Cenk Uygur]

That'S a way to give back to the poor?

[Unknown]

Do you buy into any of that concept at all?

[Cenk Uygur]

No.

[Unknown]

I mean, as like, entrepreneurs who are.

[Cenk Uygur]

Going out there innovating.

[Unknown]

I'm a classroom teacher.

[Cenk Uygur]

So like, I go out, try and build entrepreneurs who can employ people and.

[Unknown]

Do something like that. Isn't that something that entrepreneurs, entrepreneurial spirit can be more aligned with the conservatives, would you say?

[Cenk Uygur]

No, I don't agree. I'm an entrepreneur. I run a small business. And so they are always talking about small businesses, and then they immediately change the goalpost to cuts on capital gains. Wait, that has nothing to do with small business. Cuts on estate tax. That's for the super rich. That has nothing to do with small businesses. So, brother, they use small business as like a marketing tool. Oh, we're for the average American. We're for small business business. Then the actual tax cuts are for the mega rich and for the mega corporations.

[Unknown]

What about minimum wage?

[Cenk Uygur]

Like, as a business owner, you know.

[Unknown]

Like the repercussions of minimum wage.

[Cenk Uygur]

I've been to McDonald's in a while. I went.

[Unknown]

I went. It's been years. I went. And it's just like, just a screen, you know, like there is that element.

[Cenk Uygur]

You know, of the minimum wage raising.

[Unknown]

And that leading to more unemployment.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. So I don't agree with that either. Okay, so. So first of all, everything, it requires bounds. So you can't have 100 minimum wage. I get that. Right. But having said that, are we anywhere near where we should be on minimum wage? No, we're at $7.25 federally on minimum wage. That is a disaster. And so what that is, is if you work every single day, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks, no vacation at all, you only make $15,000 at $7.25. No one can live on $15,000. So when you push up minimum wage, what it does is it pushes up all wages, and that is A good thing, not a bad thing. They always tell you, no, no, no, give it to the corporations and then it'll trickle all over you decades later, later. No. There's an economics called middle out. And what that does is it gives directly to the middle class and then they spend it more and it creates a better economy, especially for small businesses like yours and mine, et cetera. So there's a way to do this. It gives to the average guy first. But the Republicans never do that. They always push for tax cuts for the richest people in the country. So why do you, why do you.

[Unknown]

See, do you believe that the populist element of Trump, where a lot of the working class, they're like, I know he's a Yankee with gold toilets, but I'm going to vote for him because he's not like vilifying me. Do you think that they're just being manipulated by Trump?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, 100%. So look, I don't want people manipulated. That's why I do things like this. I don't want you getting manipulated by the politicians on either side. In a time where we have massive deficits and $38 trillion debt, why are we giving another $1.1 trillion to people making over $500,000? It doesn't make sense. All right, pause. You've been voted out.

[Unknown]

Please return to your seat.

[Cenk Uygur]

Thank you, brother.

[Unknown]

Do Republicans care about the rich? I do think they care about the rich. Coming from somebody that voted for Trump.

I do believe that.

But I do think that they do support middle class Americans, especially Trump. I think this big, beautiful bill, people say it's, it's hurting Americans. If you actually read through it, I'm getting a 3% reduction on my yearly income tax. Every single tax bracket is getting some type of reduction on their income tax or a zero percent reduction. And that's for the wealthiest class. So that is helping middle class also. I know that the deficit's going up. Think about ice. You know, he's putting more money in the ice. I would argue that stopping immigration actually, or enforcing it even more heavily helps the middle class worker in America. There's less jobs that are being taken. When you import a bunch of people like your housing costs are going to go up. It's inflating the people that need houses in a city or apartments or whatever. It is taking jobs for middle class to lower class people like me, it's taking jobs.

[Cenk Uygur]

Unfortunately, some of your premises are wrong. So when you take the whole bill, including the cuts to Medicaid and SNAP and other cuts the bottom 30% actually wind up paying more than they did before. I mean, so they're literally. They're literally taking from the bottom 30% and giving it to the top 10%. I mean, literally.

[Unknown]

Talk about SNAP. That's people that are already taking from all of us.

[Cenk Uygur]

So, okay, see, that's your point of view as a Republican. Do you know the least popular part of the bill? The poll just came out. Only 24%, maybe even lower, support cutting SNAP. It is the single most unpopular part of the.

[Unknown]

The bill.

[Cenk Uygur]

Overall, Americans do not want you to take from people who desperately need food just to give to people making above $500,000. The second most unpopular part of the bill is the one that gives to people above $500,000. So people don't want that. So the bottom 30% are very badly hurt by this bill. What you're talking about is the middle, the percentile. The middle 10% gets a 0.4% bump. That's again, the nickels and dimes that they throw you. But that's. Republicans throw. Republican. Republicans throw nickels and dimes, dimes at you. 5 to 10% change in their tax cuts, and the Democrats through their policies, through 5 to 10% change.

[Unknown]

You don't think that a nickel and dime can help somebody in a dire situation.

[Cenk Uygur]

But, brother, why do we have to help the rich even more? Why do they get the biggest tax cuts? You know, you could do a tax cut without one going to the rich. You could spend money. No, because the rich people are having $400,000.

[Unknown]

When you own the business and you get a tax cut, you have more money to spend on your employees. I understand that's a Reaganomic principle, but it could be. And when you import. And when you're a Democrat and you import all these people from third world countries, countries, you're paying them under minimum wage because you see them as the help. Well, yeah, that's gonna, that's gonna benefit you. But when Republicans stop this and they force people to, you know, that work, like to be citizens, or they want people to be citizens, they're being forced to at least earn minimum wage.

[Cenk Uygur]

The reason why we've never fixed the. The immigration problem is because corporations want cheaper.

[Unknown]

I know.

[Cenk Uygur]

And that's labor. We should fix that. But the Republicans and the Democrats never fix that.

[Unknown]

And they have. Our border crossings are almost at a 0% point now.

[Cenk Uygur]

The top point, 1%, are going to get tens of thousands of dollars in tax breaks. You're not explaining why they need that. They don't need that. Why do corporate. Do you know that oil Companies get about 15 to 30 billion dollars in subsidies every year? How come the Republicans never talk about that? Oh, we're going to cut waste, fraud. But you're not going to cut $30 billion for the richest companies in the.

[Unknown]

World if you help people out.

[Cenk Uygur]

The problem at the bottom, how come Trump is best friends with big Pharma and he's not touching drug prices. Yes, it is.

[Unknown]

He's making them to Europe. Yes.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, that's coming now. That's a perfect example. He said that as an executive order, knowing that he did the same executive order in the first time around and the courts knocked it down. He knows the courts are not going to his fault. No, it is his fault.

[Unknown]

He is.

[Cenk Uygur]

Hold on, let me explain. Let me explain to you. So then what Ro Khanna did, he's a Democrat, he's really smart. He went and got a Republican co sponsor and said, let's take the executive order and turn it into a bill. Verbatim, Trump's executive order. All of a sudden, Trump and the Republicans not in favor of the bill. Oh, there you go. It was a trick. All right. Please return to your seat. I work in Republican politics.

[Unknown]

One of the first jobs I took was in a small district, but it was in Lucas County, Ohio and it.

[Cenk Uygur]

Was a poor district and I was.

[Unknown]

Representing a Republican when my candidate would go and we'd be knocking doors together talking about how he wanted to improve their lives.

[Cenk Uygur]

Is he an anomaly or are you.

[Unknown]

Only talking about federal?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah.

[Unknown]

So like, where do we draw the line here?

[Cenk Uygur]

So first of all, are there some good guys in politics? Very rare. But yes, I think Bernie Sanders is a good guy. I think Ro o' Connor is a good guy. By the way, I think Thomas Massie is honest and he's a Republican. Right. Fair. I don't agree with his policy, whatever. He's honest. But again, it's an exception. So if you tell me. No, trust me, the politician I worked with was great. Were you there when he was talking to the donors?

[Unknown]

He didn't have any.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, well then I don't. Well, that's the problem is when we.

[Unknown]

Go down the ladder where, you know, 90% of the elections that take place.

[Cenk Uygur]

In this country, they're not at the federal level.

[Unknown]

They're not with politicians that are receiving.

[Cenk Uygur]

Receiving hundreds of thousands, millions of dollars. Yeah. They get bought for cheaper. They get bought for 5,000. Or is it possible.

[Unknown]

Or is it possible that they want to step in and govern?

[Cenk Uygur]

So, brother, I hear what you're saying, you're saying that the closer you get to the voters, the more honest they are. That's actually true. Look, look. So I appreciate it. Okay, so number one, so you're saying some Republicans do. Can I just explain? So if you're doing a small seat as a city council, you actually knock on doors. That's why progressives win a lot of the city council seats. Because the election is with such a small number of people. You need to do that. Can I just let me finish. So, so that way you don't need as much money, you don't need donors. They're more responsive to their actual voters the larger you get. Once you get to a congressional district with 750,000, the donor money decides how much ads you can take and whether you're going to win or not. So they may become completely beholden to the donors. What about, hey, really low level Republicans yet have not gotten a lot of donor cash. And you say, well, hey, don't worry, they'll stay true. But they never change. When they move up to the next level, they immediately, even if they were true at the lower level, not true. 99% of them all. Other than massive, they take the donor money and they do exactly what the donors tell them to do.

[Unknown]

Is it just a simple misunderstanding or an oversimplification of our system?

[Cenk Uygur]

All right, boss, you've been voted out.

[Unknown]

Please return to your seat.

All right, so I'm glad you clarified already. You're talking about Republican politicians and you brought up donor money. And I know that's a big issue with you, but I think that's just not really how it works. I think you have a lot of politicians that start off, as you said, kind of in those lower levels. They do an office here, they do a job here, and then they slowly rise up. And if you can track their views, you see that their views don't actually really change a whole lot of over time when the donor money comes in. It's not like they suddenly change their views and they're a completely new person. They've had the views that they've had for a very, very long time. So how, how can you sit here, shank and look in your crystal ball and say, oh, the. I know I can look into the souls of Republicans and say, oh, well, they're not actually genuine in some of these proposals.

[Cenk Uygur]

So let's take an example of a person who doesn't have a sold Ted Cruz. So you know that, you know that. Yeah.

[Unknown]

Okay.

[Cenk Uygur]

I'm kidding. Okay. I Think. Okay, so, okay, so listen, he says to Tucker Carlson recently, yeah, Oh, I just, I mean, yes, I've taken millions from apac, but I just happen to have that position. I had it earlier. I mean, I know that AIPAC would give me millions of dollars if I say, let's give billions back from the American taxpayer to apart pact. Let's make sure we support all their wars, let's fight all their wars for them. Oh, look at that. I happen to agree with my donors. Hey, listen, when I started out, I really wanted to give $30 billion of subsidies to oil companies. And I still want to give credit.

[Unknown]

How do you know Ted Cruz lying. How do you know that?

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, but even in that scenario, think about it, brother.

[Unknown]

No, no, no, no. There's a country.

[Cenk Uygur]

Hold on, I'm, I'm answering your question. Okay, you're saying, okay, so in the hypothetical where they, we have, first of all, in the real world, there's 230 million people the country, right? So you're saying maybe like the oil subsidy loving guys, or we're all Republicans to begin with, and the Republicans all love oil subsidies, so it's just organic. No, brother, they're finding just a handful of people in the country that'll raise their hand and go, yes, I will do whatever corporate donors want. I will do whatever the rich want. And they go, ah, there's a guy who agrees with me. Let's give him money. Let's give him 5,000 in the beginning, then 50,000 later, then 500,000.

[Unknown]

You didn't actually answer.

What is the question?

[Oliver]

Question.

[Unknown]

So how do you know that Ted Cruz is being disingenuous about his views on Israel? You still haven't answered the question.

[Cenk Uygur]

The easiest question in the world. Okay, so you're saying your hypothesis. My hypothesis is Ted Cruz and the politicians take millions of dollars from donors and do exactly as they're ordered. And how do I know that? Because their voting record matches with their donors perfectly. You're saying, but maybe, maybe there's a hypothetical radical 1 to 2% chance that Ted Cruz just was born out of the womb loving Israel's wars. And he's like, I can't wait to give money to Israel. Whereas, oh, look at that. What a coincidence. AIPAC is giving me millions of dollars.

[Unknown]

I actually, in politics, try to assume good intentions on both sides. Well, sure you can, you can say that's a mistake. But I also try to make claims with evidence. And all, all you've said is, oh, he gets all this money from aipac, therefore he's corrupt. So as opposed to, as opposed to, Opposed to. How do you know that Ted Cruz did not have these views before and that AIPAC wanted to support him because of the views he already has?

[Cenk Uygur]

So your thesis is that all of the Republicans that do every. That take hundreds.

[Unknown]

Hold on, hold on, hold on.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. Your thesis is all of these Republicans take hundreds of millions of dollars from donors. They do exactly what the donors say, but they already believed in all the things that the donors wanted earlier. So it's just a happy coincidence.

[Unknown]

No, it makes perfect sense.

[Cenk Uygur]

By the way, the main media totally agrees with you.

[Unknown]

It makes perfect sense in my mind that these organizations would only be giving money to people that they know support the cause.

[Cenk Uygur]

That's not a cherry pick out of 300.

[Unknown]

That's not a crazy wild thing.

[Cenk Uygur]

Let me tell you how politics actually works.

[Unknown]

No, no, please answer my question. So what evidence do you have?

[Cenk Uygur]

So you're saying I don't have any evidence of Ted. I can't read Ted Cruz's mind?

[Unknown]

Yes.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, so brother, by your thesis you can't read Joe Biden's mind, you can't read Kamala Harris's mind. So they're all innocent, they're all angels. Oh my God. Isn't affecting any of them. Yes, because I can't read their minds. I can read their voting record. I could read their donations. Tells you you sound exactly like mainstream media. These politicians are.

[Unknown]

You're operating based off.

[Cenk Uygur]

Dollars. All right, maika, return to your seat. Thank you.

[Unknown]

So you are claiming that Republicans only care about the rich. When Donald Trump and both Elon Musk lost money while they were in office and then on top of it you can shake your head. No, on top of it. Why would you say that when currently we have. I know you keep saying it's, it's some pressure valley valve, but we have them actually fighting for working class people by giving them less taxes on tips, less taxes on overtime.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. So first of all, Donald Trump has made a tremendous amount of money and his family has. So right after he left office the first time, his son in law got a $2 billion deal from the Saudis and he was in charge of our policy towards Saudi Arabia and the Middle East. That's a disaster. That's Hunter Biden on steroids. So in this time around he has a meme coin. He's got World Liberty financial people are pouring money in. One guy put in $75 million and then look at that. He stopped an investigation from the SEC about that guy.

[Unknown]

Let's talk about how he's, how he's helping middle class people.

[Cenk Uygur]

Three, at least three white collar criminals who donated either to his campaign or to his meme coin. And then he got a $400 million jet from Qatar.

[Unknown]

Let's talk about how he's helping middle class people. Okay, so what if Democrats, ignoring all.

[Cenk Uygur]

The money from that, and I'm answering your question, Elon Musk, by the way, hundreds of billions of dollars and his.

[Unknown]

Gold stock went down dramatically.

[Cenk Uygur]

Well, that's his fault.

[Unknown]

Sure. So he lost money saying, no, no.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, no, but remember, but it was his fault. Why didn't Musk, no, why did Musk and Trump get into a fight? Because Trump did not put in the electric vehicle mandate and the subsidy that Elon wanted. Sure. Elon Musk. So Elon gave $300 million and he's like, now I want that subsidy. That's going to get me billions back. Now I want Golden Dome. That's going to get me hundreds of billions of dollars back. And Trump said, I'm going to give you Golden Dome, but I'm not going to give you the subsidy.

[Unknown]

What have Democrats done to help the middle class with taxes?

[Cenk Uygur]

That was a really smart marketing strategy by Donald Trump and part of the reason that he won the election. So I remember we talked to somebody on the Young Turks and he said he was down in Western Virginia and he said, listen, Hillary Clinton tells us that all of our jobs are going to be gone. Donald Trump comes in and lies and tells us that he's going to bring back the jobs. But he's like, he's at least got the DCC to lie to us.

[Unknown]

Is it a lie or is it what he's trying to do and just hasn't done it?

[Cenk Uygur]

So 50%.

[Unknown]

What have Democrats done to help, to.

[Cenk Uygur]

Be fair to the Democrats, as someone earlier said, in this case, they would at least protect Medicaid and snap cuts, okay? And so that goes to the bottom 30%.

[Unknown]

So it's okay to give people free stuff but not give working people reduction in taxes free stuff.

[Cenk Uygur]

It's okay to give the rich tons of free tax cuts, tons of subsidies, but when you give it to someone who's starving, oh no, that's a real problem.

[Unknown]

I didn't say that.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay.

[Unknown]

I said it's okay that you're giving them free stuff, but it's not okay to help me with my taxes.

[Cenk Uygur]

So, brother, if, then answer this for me, then why don't they only propose a tax cuts for the middle class? Why don't they say, hey, we're not going to cut from the poor and we're not going to give to the rich. We're only going to do it for the middle class. Why don't they ever do?

[Unknown]

From what I understand, they're not cutting out the good parts of Medicaid. They're only cutting out the corruption and fraud. So you laugh at that. Is that okay? Can we agree that we should cut out fraud from Medicaid?

[Cenk Uygur]

That is not what this is at all.

[Unknown]

What do you mean? There's tons of fraud.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, here's the trick, okay? There's tons of fraud at the Pentagon.

[Unknown]

You're right.

[Cenk Uygur]

We can agree on that Pentagon and they added to the front.

[Unknown]

But it's not only Republicans helping the race.

[Cenk Uygur]

Here's what happened on Medicaid, okay? They say, okay, we need a work requirement. So we're going to cut 10 million people off of Medicaid. But Medicaid is for poor people.

[Unknown]

So if that have been on it.

[Cenk Uygur]

For 20 and 30 years, they get a job.

[Unknown]

They actually, it's not a permanent thing.

[Cenk Uygur]

Hold on. They make enough money to get out of Medicaid.

[Unknown]

They don't. They stay on it forever.

[Cenk Uygur]

It's a trick that it eviscerates Medicaid. But they haven't. There are people that stay on it.

[Unknown]

For 10 years at a time.

[Cenk Uygur]

If you need Medicaid and you and you don't have health care through through a job and and your kid gets cancer, we're going to let them die. Why? Percent it's going to happen, brother. According things happen every day. According to estimates, 70,000 people are going to die because of those Medicaid cuts. Estimates.

[Unknown]

So do you believe everything you hear?

[Cenk Uygur]

Tax cuts for the rich just needed to be larger and larger. 1.4.

[Unknown]

So what you're telling me is you're okay with fraud as long as people get the help they need.

[Cenk Uygur]

They're not cutting fraud. Please return to your seat. My last Amazon one Medical presents painful thoughts.

[Unknown]

I've been on hold to make a doctor's appointment for 23 minutes now. The automated voice has told me 47 times that my call is very important to them. I'm starting to think that they don't think my call is important at all.

[Cenk Uygur]

With Amazon One Medical 24. 7 Virtual Care, you'll get help fast, fast without having to remain on the line to make an appointment. Amazon won. Medical healthcare just got less painful. Claim is media and money control all of politics.

[Unknown]

We disagree on the framing. We might not disagree on the substance. So when you say they control all of politics, I feel like that breeds a lot of cynicism, which is kind of my issue with populism is you tell these people like it's hopeless. Corporations, media control all of it. But it's kind of implied in your premise. Like media, for example. Example. Media is effective because it influences the people who actually vote and have a lot of power. Same thing with super PACs. They're spending advertisements a lot of the time. So I think when you paint this narrative that they control all of it. Disproportionate. Yes. A lot more than they should. Yes.

We agree.

Campaign finance reform. Yes. I feel like a lot of people, especially in my generation, just check out of politics. Like the corporations are going to do what they want to do, the media is going to do what they want to do. I'm just going to scroll on TikTok and I feel like it's very damaging to our society.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. So number one, I'm a huge believer in hope. So I would never, I never say don't get involved in politics. In fact, that's why I started Justice Democrats to bring progressives in the Congress. I started Wolf PAC to take money out of politics. And Rebellion PAC is saying no, get involved. And that 2028 primary on the Democratic side is maybe the most important election of our lifetimes. We have to pick a populace so that we'll actually deliver for the American people. So if you deliver for the American people, if you stop lying to them and say you're gonna do things and then never do it, if you actually do those things that are very, very popular, then you'll re energize the entire voting base.

[Unknown]

Say we need to pick a populist. Is your definition of populism Just like when good things happen, that's populism.

[Cenk Uygur]

Like, no.

[Unknown]

Is it conceivable for there to be a candidate who is a great president, for example, but they're not necessarily a populist? Or is that like necessitate?

[Cenk Uygur]

So all populism means is serving the average guys as opposed to serving the corporate donors. So I'll give you no, no, no, it's not a marketing technique. It's very no, it's very. No. You're asking if it's vague or, or specific. And it couldn't be more specific. There's literally a populist plank on TYT.com and that's the core of what our candidates run on. Rebellion pac. And those are six policies. Money out of politics, anti war Lower drug prices by negotiating at Medicare, by the way. Lower housing prices by. By banning private equity from buying residential real estate. They're robbing us of our wealth creation in this country. That's going to destroy the middle class class. So paid family leave, again, these are very easy to pass. If you say you can't pass at 84%, then you can't pass anything.

[Unknown]

But we don't pass. And yes, we don't pass things through public opinion polls. You need people to get involved on a very granular level sometimes. Like for example, paid family leave. There's different ways to fund that. There's different amounts that can cover different amounts a month. I agree. We need it. It's a very good policy. If you advocate for it properly, it will win. But this goes back to.

[Cenk Uygur]

They never do.

[Unknown]

But this goes back to my initial problem where you think like do that.

[Cenk Uygur]

Who, why, why do the Democrats never fight for a bill at 84%?

[Unknown]

The Democrats right now are extremely spineless. We don't disagree.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, all right. You just know why they're spinalists, because their donors told them.

[Unknown]

I think they're also very scared. They're very risk averse. Democrats are risk averse. That's the actual problem.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, no, I think the real problem is when you're at the top, you don't want anything to change. You want the status quo to remain the same. That is why mainstream media and establishment Democrats and Republicans say civility is the most important thing. Because if you're civil, you don't rock the boat. Why don't you want. Why don't they want you to rock the boat? Because it's their boat.

[Unknown]

Okay, where does simplification.

[Cenk Uygur]

It is not an oversimplification every single time. Do you know that on in legislation, on the Young Turks, we predict ahead of time what's going to happen. We have nearly 100% track record. You know why? Not because we're geniuses, but because it's super easy. Look at where most of the money is and that side wins 100% of the time.

[Unknown]

Passing legislation that. That's like very paradigm changing, is just super easy. Is that your position?

[Cenk Uygur]

So things like paid family leave, but again, anything that pulls over 70, agree.

[Unknown]

That's complicated, right?

[Cenk Uygur]

No, I don't think it's complicated structure at all.

[Unknown]

Where is the funding coming from? How many months are covered?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, I get it. There's different. There's different issues.

[Unknown]

You have to adjudicate negotiation.

[Cenk Uygur]

Hold on, let me answer this. Let me answer this. Okay, so the earlier Guy asked, would I bully the politicians? Absolutely. Why? Because I want to bully them. And it makes me feel good. Makes know it's for a purpose. Although it's kind of fun. Okay, but it's for a purpose, brother. If you're voting against 84% of Americans, you're a traitor. You're a traitor to your voters. So why are you going to agree.

[Unknown]

On a very nominal question?

[Cenk Uygur]

I'm asking a question of them. Why are you voting against 84% of the voters? And if you're a Democrat, you're voting against 90% of your voters. If you're a Republican, you're voting yes, 74% of your voters. I know why you're voting against them. Because the donors told you vote against the American people. People. It is that simple legislation. You want to defend politicians for no reason. They're not your friends, they're not your allies.

[Unknown]

Not just a piece of paper that says paid family leave. There's stuff that goes into it that's complicated.

[Cenk Uygur]

Please return to your seat. I like your shirt. Thank you.

[Unknown]

People over politics. So I do agree with you that.

[Cenk Uygur]

Money has a control over politics.

[Unknown]

We see super PAC spending. We see Mitch McConnell and longtime figures. 40 years in politics. And I'm pretty sure everyone's just sick of. I don't agree with, on the media half. And I kind of want to. Kind of want to explain why a lot of people don't tune into mainstream media anymore. And I'm sure you know this, you run the, one of the biggest Progressive channels on YouTube, but it's hard to. It's hard to see media having this big influence when so many people are tapped out.

[Cenk Uygur]

So I'm kind of wanting to understand why you think, yes, they spent $16 billion at a minimum in this last election cycle. Where did most of that money money go? It went to mainstream media. Okay, so mainstream media has 16 billion reasons to make sure you don't find out that the donor money is corrupting. Okay, so now what is the effect of that? So when you see in the 2016 race, for example, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, right? Now, Donald Trump eventually got about $5 billion in free media. And now, to be fair to him, he did a lot of interviews. And Hillary decided not to do a lot of interviews. But a part of that was the media media's decision. You know how much before the primaries ended, Trump had already gotten $2 billion in free media. Right. Do you know how much Bernie Sanders had gotten? $28 million. About what? I think 1% of what Trump had gotten. Because the mainstream media thinks that Bernie Sanders would actually do change and they don't want change. They're all at the top. Almost all the anchors are millionaires and the last thing they want is a left wing populist who's actually going to make a a difference. Oh, fake populists like Trump, no problem. Send in the clowns. Establishment Democrats and Republicans, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi both raised a billion dollars from corporate donors and have done exactly what the corporate donors want. They're like, that's great, let's pump them up. But whenever you got a real challenge to power mainstream media attacks, speaking on.

[Unknown]

The terms of left wing media, if you consider your network psych, I guess msnbc, if we can, if we're going to classify that as left, cnn kinda. I don't think these are the type of networks that would completely destroy and eviscerate a liberal candidate. Think about someone like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. Think about somebody like Jamie Raskin. If they were going to be in.

[Cenk Uygur]

A primary, I don't think that you're.

[Unknown]

Going to see a whole smorgasbord just go after them right now. I'm pretty sure you would have seen CNN or MSNBC's coverage till favorably towards them compared to someone like Donald Trump.

[Cenk Uygur]

If they would have been nominated in election. That's actually not true. MSNBC is the biggest opponent of progressive populists in the Democratic Party. Whenever like when Bernie was about to win after he won the first three states in 2020, then they sent out Chuck Todd, Chris Matthews and others to say if Bernie wins, he's a communist. That'll start executions in Central Park. He said that's what Chris Matthews said. Chuck Todd talked about his followers being brownshirt. I said in the beginning of that campaign the people in power will be so opposed to Bernie that by the end they'll call him anti Semitic. And they called him anti Semitic, okay, Even though he's Jewish. So on aoc, no one covered her in mainstream media before her historic primary win. We covered her 34 times. So the reason for that is because yes, some parts of media now are better. To your original point, independent media is better for all its problems and warts and et cetera. It's at least opening up the discussion to more free thought and getting people thinking. But mainstream media has you inside these tiny guardrails and the minute you step outside of it and populist left always steps out of it and says why don't we deliver for the American people. I'll give you one last example. Those guys attack. So when Biden went to do student debt relief, Stephanie Rule did. And so Fox News did segments on it, against it, CNN did segments against it. And then Stephanie Rule on MSNBC did a segment against against it. Cuz that's an economic issue. The minute it's an economic issue, they all circle the wagons and they play good cop, bad cop and they all say no. Pause. I'm sorry, you've been voted out.

[Unknown]

Pleasure to talk with you.

[Cenk Uygur]

Thank you brother. I think I really want to focus a lot on the media part with you just because mainly for the fact that I think we can all unbiasedly agree that let's be honest, Trump during.

[Unknown]

His whole election campaign it was very.

[Cenk Uygur]

Anti Trump, very pro Democrat and how he was the absolute just most terrible thing that could happen if he gets.

[Unknown]

Voted in as basically a threat to our democracy.

[Cenk Uygur]

And so when it comes to that and everything, let's be honest, very high.

[Unknown]

Percentage was very negative towards him.

How can you explain the outcome if.

[Cenk Uygur]

The media controls everything when it comes.

[Unknown]

To elections and politics?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, so that's a great question. And so one I get asked often. So when you talk about money in politics, it controls almost all the races, but the ones that are the smallest, it controls the all the most. Cuz there's almost no media coverage of a Montana congressional race. So whoever has more money wins. In fact in congressional races, whoever has more money wins 95% of the time. But the one giant exception is presidential races. Cuz there's so much free media and presidential races and everyone is paying attention. So you can actually go the route of going into media yourself and making your own argument. That's why I thought Trump would win in 2016. That's why I was really worried about it in 2024. Cuz democrats become like corporate talking point robots, the establishment Democratic politicians. So they don't like to engage with Joe Rogan or these other folks. And I'm like what are you doing? You're giving away billions of dollars in free media. Trump had the right strategy, but at the end of the day, because he was all over media and he got billions of dollars in extra media coverage. That is part of the reason why he won.

[Unknown]

While media has influence and everything else.

[Cenk Uygur]

It still comes down to the individuals to vote. So whenever it comes down to that, then how can you explain they still have control even though at the end of the day it's still the individuals right in the individual's ability to go Vote and make. Because how does anything ever get into your head? So, like, when you go into a voting booth, you see names, right? But if you never saw that person and you never heard their name because they didn't have enough money for ads and the media didn't cover it, that person has no chance of winning. It's like there's a mythology in mainstream media that two people go into an octagon and then people decide which one is better. Right. That's not how it actually works.

[Unknown]

I'm sorry you've been voted out. Money doesn't necessarily have a mind, so I'd like to kind of take it to who's making the decisions on how to allocate the capital. And so does party loyalty here play at all? Right. Like, at the end of the day, you're going to have politicians who can influence where that capital is coming from. And if you're toeing the party line, saying what they want you to say, that, to me, seems more impactful than the ability to go and find donors yourself to raise a significant capital to win, like a race.

[Cenk Uygur]

So let me give you a couple of examples. So ted Cruz got $13 million from the Mercer family when he was running for president in 2016. If you remember, Donald Trump insulted his wife. So at the Republican National Convention, Ted Grus did not endorse him, but right afterwards, he's changed his mind and started phone backing for Donald Trump. What happened in between? What happened in between is after his speech, he went up to the suites that the Mercer family had had at the convention, and they slammed the door in his face and they said, we now have a new guy that we're picking. It's like the Hunger Games. So the sponsors decided that they were gonna go with Donald Trump now. So Ted Cruz, realizing I'm gonna lose my donor money if I don't do as I'm told, said, I'm so sorry. And then he grabbed the phone and was like, yeah, Donald Trump is the best. Forget about my wife. Who cares about her? Why? Because he's going to seek the donor money. But you can do it on both sides. Look, we have of the most. Mo Brooks, for example, is a Republican who was running for Senate in Alabama. And he gave a speech where he said, look, in order to become a chairman of a committee, whether you're a Democrat or Republican, you have to raise a million dollars, but you cannot raise it from John and Jane Doe. So you raise it from the industry you're supposed to be regulating with an implicit promise that you do not regulate them and you give them whatever you want. So in order to be a committee chairman, whether you're a Democrat or Republican, you must take what is a campaign contribution, but really a bribe from that industry and make sure you protect that industry.

[Unknown]

I think it's like a, it's a cynical view that the.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yes, it is and it's true.

[Unknown]

Again, I think what we're talking about is to what degree does the political structure and government structure just enable? Right. Like I don't think like a claim around Republicans only caring about the. Or not caring about the poor, only caring about the rich. Are they just acknowledging the practical reality of in order to facilitate a successful race, you have to raise capital. So you have to please donors.

[Cenk Uygur]

So they're not. So when do you want to get pleased? Like, I don't. They don't need to be evil. They don't need to be evil. They could just be like, hey, I want status, I want to be a senator, so I'm going to take 13 million here, 10 million there, etc. And then I'm going to serve the donors. Yeah, you could say it's necessary. But that's why this system sucks. That's why we need to change it and get money out of politics. If you get money out of politics, then they have to serve the voters and be our representatives instead of the representatives of the donors.

[Unknown]

In terms of the solutions here, though, money will always play a role in politics. Is there a practical reality where you think money is not going to play a role?

[Cenk Uygur]

So between 1938 and 1978, bribery was illegal. And in that 40 years, we built the greatest middle class the world has ever seen. Was our system perfect? No. But productivity went way up and so did wages change. The Supreme Court doesn't have to come in the name of bribery. Yeah, campaign contributions, when they're coming from corporate donors, are bribery.

[Unknown]

Rich donors, they can still pour money into media campaigns, campaigns to influence the outcomes of the elections. So like money, practically speaking, I just don't see how you ever get to a point where money is not at all influential in a political race.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yes. So don't give up hope. So can you do it? Of course you can, because we had it. We had it between 38, 70 we did. And it led to the greatest middle class, it led to the economy. To what degree did social in that.

[Unknown]

Period of time but social media. But you're taking a historical period where today.

[Cenk Uygur]

So you're saying just give up, don't even try to take money out no.

[Unknown]

I'm saying, saying it's, there's, there are things that you can make progress on today. But I'm saying practically, I think you.

[Cenk Uygur]

Can get a constitutional amendment. You know why I think you can get a constitutional amendment to get money out of this. 93% of Americans believe that politicians represent their voters.

[Unknown]

What does that mean?

[Cenk Uygur]

And not their voters. All right, please return to your seat.

[Unknown]

So on the local level, right, LA City Council could upzone everything, let construction companies, property management companies, companies come in wholesale, develop, build massive apartment buildings, run these properties. Right? LA City Council has not done that. Are you saying development companies, real estate companies and property management companies are not moneyed interests? No.

[Cenk Uygur]

That's amazing that you picked that example. There's two industries that are the most impactful on local and state races. It's utility companies and real estate companies. So real estate companies totally own New York and California, even though they're Democratic. So Andrew Cuomo, when he was governor, passed a whole bunch of things. There were tax breaks for real estate companies and it didn't help the average person at all. In California, we raised $24 billion to help the homeless and homelessness went up 53%.

[Unknown]

Why?

[Cenk Uygur]

Because they do things like, oh, no, we're going to have more affordable housing. And then they build high rises that are for super rich people. And then you don't get the affordable housing and homelessness goes up.

[Unknown]

They don't build. Because if you live on a block of single family housing, okay, and City council makes it so that next to your house, some company could come in, destroy it, build a huge apartment complex on your block, people hate it. NIMBYism is real. No one wants that on their block. And City Council doesn't want to freak out their votes. Like there's this thing called like politics where they don't want to, they don't want to massively upset people so they don't rock the boat. And it's just in the homeowners aren't giving any money. Like, real estate developers are. Not the little guy. And they're not getting their way.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, so it's interesting that you picked that example because I actually have personal experience with that through someone that works at tyt. They ran for City council. As I said earlier, it's easier for progressives to win at City council level because it's a smaller group of people and you could knock on doors. And that's what she did. So that's why sometimes the city councils are better, certainly better than the national guys et CETERA but when her experience was, when she went in, the real estate interests were massively powerful. She fought against them. It was in the middle of la and eventually they cared so much about getting her out that they started funding someone to make sure she's removed from the city council. Real estate has massive interest.

[Unknown]

What's the money on the other side of not being building?

[Cenk Uygur]

So. No, there is no. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. That's why real estate almost always wins. You're saying no, sometimes at the local level, real estate interests don't win. Yes, because very rarely, because it's such smaller percentage of people voting. You can get progressives in there that block that because they're not representing the donor interest. But even in places like la, they eventually get overwhelmed by the money that real estate guys bring in. And that's. I literally have personal experience with what happened in LA in that I want.

[Unknown]

To move to media, don't you think? Especially with alternative media people. Creators, like chase the audience and they try to be as outrageous as possible to like because, I don't know, outrage sells and it's. And audience capture is a huge thing.

[Cenk Uygur]

It is.

[Unknown]

So they're running around chasing audiences. It's not money coming up top down, it's like bottom up. People are angry, want dissent, like disagreements, agreement.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, you're not wrong about that, brother. So there's a giant distinction between mainstream media and now online and independent media. So as I said earlier, online and independent media has at least got people thinking and it's a wide range of opinions and I greatly prefer it. Mainstream media does not care and it doesn't do the thing you're talking about. What it does is it says no. Joe Manchin is a moderate, Mitch McConnell oftentimes is considered a moderate, et cetera. That's nonsense, Nothing but lies to get you to vote for corporations, corporate politicians.

[Unknown]

On the Democratic alternative media is helping our politics.

[Cenk Uygur]

Do you think it generates better media? Is much, much better than mainstream media. Mainstream media says no, I'm sorry that I keep going back to it because it's such an obvious and stark case on paid family leave. The 16% they call moderates like Manchin and the Republicans that block it, the 84% that want it, they go, oh, radicals. No, no, progressives like Bernie Sanders are radicals, but total.

[Unknown]

Who's still watching CNN to get their political opinions?

[Cenk Uygur]

A lot of people, older voters, over 70 year olds.

[Unknown]

But you're not acknowledging the whole. Like there's so many people not paying attention to those channels. Anymore.

[Cenk Uygur]

And that's a great thing. That's why after the Trump election, I said, at least we're out of the establishment prison. But it's not like we're in the populous woods. And there are things that go bump in those woods. I know. Not everybody. You're not going to get all the hosts you want. You're not going to get all the opinions you want. You're not even going to get get truth all the time. In fact, most of the time, you're not even gonna get truth from the right and sometimes even from the left. Okay, so. But what you're gonna get is a wide range of opinions, and at least you get to make that decision instead of mainstream media shoving it down your throat. Thank you, brother.

[Oliver]

So you made an interesting claim. It's very hard to disagree with. Media and money control all the politics. It's more. So who controls the money? When President John Kennedy passed executive order number 11110, which began the President process of abolishing the Federal Reserve, which we know is a private institution, he was mysteriously assassinated a couple months after that. So the question is that the money powers of the world, they have a monopoly over the things that we use to transmit and receive information. So my question to you is, how exactly do you combat such a machine that has been in existence since mankind has been on the planet?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, that's why I mentioned 1938-78, because when you make it illegal, it's much, much harder to do the bribes. It's not that people don't get bribed, they do, but. But it's more rare. Right, but in 78, 76, and 78, the Supreme Court had two decisions that basically said corporations are people and they have a right to spend unlimited money on politics. When they did that, one of the descending justices, Justice White, said, you just killed our democracy. And that's exactly what happened. Now, theoretically, you could overturn the Supreme Court, but you're not gonna overturn the Supreme Court. That is massively pro corporate. That's why I'm saying you need to do an amendment to go above the Supreme Court, but you can't. And that's why I started Wolfpack. If you get money out of politics, if you say in this Constitution in a way that the Supreme Court cannot overrule these people, cannot buy our politicians, that is the answer. We can get back to a time where we created great growth in this country and most of the earnings went to the middle class. Do you know that after those Supreme Court decisions, productivity still skyrocketed, but wages flatlined. And the difference was $12 trillion that they stole from the average American went to corporate executives instead of going to the average.

[Oliver]

That sounds fantastic. I'm not disagreeing with that. But what I'm asking you is you are talking about fundamentally restructuring the entire political system, which will require, frankly, Thomas Jefferson said once that the tree of liberty has to be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots. Money has obviously integrated itself into the Supreme Court, into the Congress Houses, into the White House. Even with all the money that President Trump won, did lose in the election cause it. He lost, to quote him, and lost billions of dollars. But he also was, he was donating billions of dollars. If we don't have right now, do you have a populous candidate that we as the people should be supporting? Who's, who's the candidate?

[Cenk Uygur]

So we're going to see that through the system, the primaries, etc. But Jon Stewart's amazing. Ro Khanna is amazing.

[Oliver]

And how much money have they gotten from corporate donors?

[Cenk Uygur]

So Ro Khanna does not take any money from corporate donors. If you're going to be in rebellion pac, you're not allowed to take corporate PAC money. So there's a way to do it that way, get enough of the legislators that are honest. And by the way, there are some Republicans who are now not taking corporate PAC money. Thomas Massie, Josh Hawley, that's the road to redemption, et cetera. But an amendment fixes the entire system.

[Oliver]

But the question then goes back to in order to get an amendment that requires a 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress, correct?

[Cenk Uygur]

No, you can actually go around Congress. Two thirds of the states can propose a convention to just propose an amendment. How are you going to get three quarters of the states have to ratify.

[Oliver]

Which requires the legislature to take action. So how do you get legislatures that already are slaves to the corporate donors? Because the book that I believe in says money, the love of money is the root of all evil. And I think that's absolutely true. A lot of these brothers love money. A lot of these sisters love money. So how do you then work? Because what this actually is is more of a moral issue. So how do you then re establish proper functioning morality within the hearts of politicians who have already demonstrated they've been bought by this thing called the US Dollar because that's what this is.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. Two ways to do that, brother. So number one, what Wolfpack does is it pressures state legislatures. The Republican guy or the conservative guy. I was talking to earlier, remember we said when you get to the lower and local levels, it gets better and better. The national level is the worst because that involves the most amount of money. So state legislatures, you can move. In fact, Jamie Raskin was opposed to our legislation when he was a state representative in Maryland. And then we talked to him and we convinced him and he said, you guys are right. Now I'm going to support the Constitution Amendment. So you do get some really good people at the state level. So that's a much better path. They have less money, but even the.

[Oliver]

Bigger way, state is great. But here's just a quick question. State is fantastic, but we need changes that impact all Americans to take place at the national level. So it's fine for you to focus on state. I understand that the lower ranking an elected official is, the easier it is probably to change them. How do you change the person that's sitting currently at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue or the nine Supreme Court justices that are currently on Capitol Hill?

[Cenk Uygur]

So that's the great thing about the Wolf PAC blend. It doesn't require the President at all. And it goes above the Supreme Court. So it doesn't require Congress, the President or the Supreme Court. It's a total end run of the American people against Washington D.C. and by the way, that's why the founding fathers put it in there, to make sure that if Washington got too corrupt, you can actually call for conventions at the state level and get it done. And how do you do that on a national scale? You need one incredible leader to, instead of worrying about himself to worry about the American people. If he actually. Anyone who gets money out of politics is gonna have statues built of them all across the country. You need one brave and honest person to say, yes, I'm gonna fight for all of you guys and I'm gonna put a world of pressure. Yes, on politicians. Yes on politicians in my own party. So then based on that, so get this done.

[Oliver]

So based on that, what does that ideal politician look like then? Because we haven't seen it. Trump ran. He said we're gonna drain the swamp. He didn't drain. He hasn't drained the swamp. We're still waiting on the release of the Epstein files. We're still waiting on the full on redacted release of mlk. We're still waiting on the unredacted release of jfk. What does that actual candidate look like? Because all this rhetoric is fantastic, I.

[Cenk Uygur]

Got to tell you. So in our lifetime, because of overwhelming money in politics, we haven't seen an ideal candidate like that is what you're saying. Right, And I largely agree, except Bernie Sanders is super honest.

[Oliver]

He doesn't have, he doesn't have the.

[Cenk Uygur]

So look, he. My problem, no, my problem with Bernie is that he didn't have the fight in him. Like, I love the brother, but he should have fought Hillary harder, he should have fought Biden harder. And you need strength to be able to win. Right? So, but remember FDR did it. JFK did it.

[Oliver]

You mean the same President FDR did?

[Cenk Uygur]

What?

[Oliver]

What did FDR do? Besides steal American's wealth?

[Cenk Uygur]

No, with the illegal executive order that.

[Oliver]

Took our gold from us. What did he do?

[Cenk Uygur]

He did Social Security. Oh my God.

[Oliver]

FDR stole the last real wealth we had. He stole it when he forced Americans to turn in gold to the treasury at a rate of $20 an hour.

[Cenk Uygur]

That's time. It's totally possible. You've got to believe and you've got to have hope.

[Oliver]

No, I'm going to run for office one day. I do believe it. Let me, if I may just this really quick point. You're talking to somebody that's going to run for president 15 years. Okay, I've already started this. I'm running for Congress in 2030. So it's not that I don't believe, but what I'm asking is you are talking about the fundamental moral restructuring of America right now, 2025. There is no politician on Capitol Hill, in the White House that has the source of fire that you're describing. And what you're saying is, again, it's great rhetoric, but if we don't even know what that ideal candidate looks like.

[Cenk Uygur]

So the reason I mention somebody like Jon Stewart is you can't know ahead of time who the ideal candidate is. They got to come through the primary and win. Right? But the reason I mention him is because he can get past the praetorian guard of the mainstream media, cuz he's a celebrity. So that gets him into the Trump land where they cover him because, oh my God, he's famous. Right? Right. So that allows them to get past the media, get past money in politics. And if one person like that, whether it's him or someone else, then raises their hand, goes, hey, I'm with the 90% of Americans that want to get money out of politics and you elect me and I'm going to fight like hell and I'm going to make sure that we end this problem, this scourge of money in politics. He will be intensely popular. He will win. He can execute that. And we can get the amendment. We always. We've gotten so many amendments. They are definitely possible. They want you to give up hope. Don't give up hope. Wolfpack has a plan to do that. Rebellion Pack has the plan to elect a president that can do that. Let's go execute those. Let's go fight for populism and win. All right.

[Oliver]

I got a lot more to say, but that was great.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay. Thank you. Brother.

[Unknown]

Jake will now choose someone from the circle to debate again based on a prompt of their choice.

[Cenk Uygur]

Jack Daniels is proudly served in fine establishment, questionable joints and everywhere in between. So no matter where you go in every bar, you'll always know someone by name. Jack Jack and Coke shot at Jack. Jack Daniels, please.

[Unknown]

Right away.

[Cenk Uygur]

That's what makes Jack Jack. Please drink responsibly. Responsibility.org Jack Daniels and old number seven are registered trademarks. Copyright 2025 Jack Daniels Tennessee Whiskey 40% alcohol by volume 80 Katie Proof on WhatsApp, no one can see or hear your personal messages.

[Unknown]

Whether it's a voice call message or.

[Cenk Uygur]

Sending a password to WhatsApp, it's all just this.

[Unknown]

So whether you're sharing the streaming password in the family chat or trading those.

Late night voice messages that could basically.

[Cenk Uygur]

Become a podcast, your personal messages stay between you, your friends and your family. No one else, not even us.

[Unknown]

WhatsApp message privately with everyone torn on.

[Cenk Uygur]

This because there's a couple people who didn't talk, but everybody made good points and was certainly sufficiently aggressive. But Oliver, was it. Yeah, you made good points and you didn't come up a second time. So I'll go with you. Yeah, no problem.

[Unknown]

Look forward to this opportunity. So my general claim is that Cenk Uygur's populism fails because it treats social issues as a distraction rather than essential to achieving economic justice. So kind of my claim here is that there are a lot of social issues that are really important and also really popular with American people, as you're talking about with a lot of economic issues that are just as popular. If we look at something like the public opinion polling regarding Roe V. Wade, like 70% of Americans were against that overturning of that. And I think also what's important in this conversation is to say that the line between social and economic issues is not very clear cut. If we look at something like abortion and reproductive rights, it is the case that if someone gives birth in this country, a woman gives birth, it's upwards of $18,000, which is a huge economic hit to her. And the Turnaway study found that when women get abortions or if they're actually denied abortion, they follow up with them. About five years later, they're four times as likely to either remain or have fallen below the federal poverty line. So I think just in general, I'm with you on the claim that we should focus on issues that Americans largely agree about. I just kind of have an issue with. I mean, I saw a recent appearance of yours that, you know, culture war issues, as it's framed, just totally divide. I think there's a bit of a grain of truth to that, and we should focus on what unites us. But there are some cultural issues that really do unite us, even if that's not immediately clear in our media landscape landscape.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. So let me agree and disagree in parts. So, first of all, if you say, hey, here's a social issue that pulls us 70%, should we lean into it? Of course. I'm saying don't lean into the social issues where we're in a great disadvantage. Okay, so this is simple logic and strategy. So, for example, Trump, again did the travel ban. Originally. It was a Muslim ban, you remember, that's what he promised on the campaign trail in 2016, for sure. And so he's done some variation of that. Would I tell Democrats? Because it affects me and it affects vulnerable communities. You should focus on that first. No, do not focus on that first. Focus on the things that unite us first. And then you come in and you pass a public option or a paid family leave or higher wages. What you do is you earn credibility with the average American and they go, okay, now I'm willing to listen. You delivered for me. I now have higher wages or lower drug prices. So what were you saying about the Muslim ban or what were you saying about transports or whatever issues that we care about and need to. And need people protected on?

[Unknown]

Yeah, and I'm really sympathetic to a lot of people. I guess my major issue is a lot of the political revolutions that we see are founded on social issues. So let's take a look at something like the civil rights movement, which was followed up by the Voting Rights act and other things like that that drastically improved people's economic standing because they were able to participate in the labor force without discrimination. We see that they go hand in hand. So I guess I'm just wondering if we're fighting for women to have reproductive autonomy, which allows them to be full participants in the labor force and not be hamstrung by the fact that they're being forced to carry a pregnancy against their will. It seems like, that will actually allow women to be more economically productive and contribute to our economy in ways that benefit all of us and are popular. So I'm like, can we walk and chew gum at the same time? Like, as you talked about? Like, I think let's do both. Right?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, I literally said that earlier as you just referenced. And so, brother, you're not wrong that they're intertwined oftentimes. Right. So, for example, while they were doing the Civil Rights Campaign campaign, one of the things that they were pushing forward was something called a freedom budget, which Nina Turner is trying to bring back now. And so if you notice, by the way, Martin Luther King Jr. Got assassinated once he started doing the Poor People's Campaign.

[Unknown]

Exactly.

[Cenk Uygur]

Right. When he got into issues of class. And Fred Hampton got assassinated when he tried to bring the different groups together, when he tried to unite the country, unite different races and different economic classes. So what really puts the powerful back on their heels, what they're really worried about is if we all unite. That's why I'm trying to tell all you guys here, please let go of the Republican politicians and the Democratic politicians that have been driving us apart. So if they use social issues to bring us back together, great. But they almost always use the social issues to divide us so that we're so at loggerheads that we don't go, hey, maybe we should raise our wages.

[Unknown]

I think it depends on the issue. And I think you can definitely speak to both things. I guess I'm just wondering, and then if we use that type of reasoning, what would be your advice during around the civil rights movement? Because, for example, racial integration was very unpopular before the Civil Rights act was passed and the Brown v. Board of Education decision, would you say that politicians don't lean into it? It's too controversial. You're going to alienate people. Just focus on economic issues. And if they did that, where would we be today?

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah, you're right. There has to be a moral exception from time to time. Sure. So then the question is, wait, is it a giant moral exception or is it a sublimation, a relatively small issue on a hill we're choosing to die in? So let me give you the distinction. So gay marriage, I thought, was a core constitutional right.

[Unknown]

Sure.

[Cenk Uygur]

So even when it was very unpopular, I fought for it.

[Unknown]

Good.

[Cenk Uygur]

And we fought and fought and fought until we won and we convinced the majority of the American people. And only after we convinced the majority did we convince Democratic politicians like Obama and Biden to move. If we had just gone after the Politicians, we would not have succeeded in the beginning.

[Unknown]

Okay, for sure.

[Cenk Uygur]

So now when you get to trans women have the right or they must be allowed to go into sports leagues like the wnba. We're not at a core constitution.

[Unknown]

And I'm not even addressing that issue. I'm talking directly because you talk about a moral issue. And I think abortion is a moral issue. And everyone in this circle will agree with that, regardless of which side they fall on it. And I think that's super hard on that. So I guess just then I'm worried that when your messaging is so. So much. Culture war issues distract, Culture issues divide. What it sounds like to me is women's bodily autonomy isn't a core moral issue that is worth fighting for in the same way that gay marriage is to you. That. That's what it sounds like. No, no, I'm gonna correct the record.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, no, I love that you're clarifying.

[Unknown]

Okay.

[Cenk Uygur]

No, that's a core constitutional right.

[Unknown]

Okay.

[Cenk Uygur]

That's your liberty that's being taken away. Absolutely. You wanna talk about cancel culture? You know, that's when you say, hey, you don't have the right to control your own body. We're canceling that right. We're taking that freedom away from you. Look, when you look at transgender issues, for example, so should they be allowed to serve in the military? And I know a lot of right wing will disagree with me, but yes, that's a core constitutional issue. Yes, they should have the same rights, but I don't have a right to play in the NBA. They don't have a right to play in the wnba. That's not a constitutional right. Sure. My problem is sometimes the extreme left, they say, okay, no, we. You should do the maximalist approach and that is the better strategy.

[Unknown]

We're going to die on that hill.

[Cenk Uygur]

Yeah. And I'm saying don't die on that hill. And I'll give you an example again from my own community. I'm desperate to get the Palestinians peace. I'm desperate to get Israel to stop the genocide and they're attacking etc.

[Unknown]

Totally agree.

[Cenk Uygur]

So they do a protest in Washington D.C. they burn the American flag and write Hamas on a statue. No, don't do that.

[Unknown]

I'm going to agree with you.

[Cenk Uygur]

Because if you burn the American flag, you're saying you want to drive Americans away from. No, invite Americans, bring American flags.

[Unknown]

Could not agree more. I think then what? I just, I just don't see then how that comes back to the claim that culture wars kind of divide us. And if they do. Does that mean.

[Cenk Uygur]

Did you not see the trans issue divide the hell out of US 100%?

[Unknown]

You are using one issue to describe.

[Cenk Uygur]

All of the culture wars, but then you got dei.

[Unknown]

Okay, well, we can talk about that, but I mean, you would then have to specify and be a bit more clear because, look, I understand that we're on YouTube and the goal is to get clicks, and when you make kind of very absolute statements like, like all Democrats and Republicans are.

[Cenk Uygur]

Do you see what I'm saying? Do you see what I'm saying?

[Unknown]

I see what I'm saying. And I probably agree a lot with you on a lot of stuff. I just. I think that when you sideline social issues and make it seem like social issues are secondary to me, like, I just. I think that there are some things that shouldn't be secondary.

[Cenk Uygur]

All I'm trying to get people to realize is that, first of all, in my opinion, the right wing is the one that brings up all these issues. They went looking for a fight on critical race theory. They went looking for a fight on dei. They went looking for a fight on transports. When they get you in a situation where they've got you on an unpopular policy. Correct. Stop, fight. Stop falling into that trap and that ambush.

[Unknown]

And I agree with you. I definitely agree with you in part. I think the problem as well with how the prompt is framed is it treats right wing fake culture war issues that they make up with real, actual issues like women's body, bodily autonomy. So, like, I think there's just an issue here.

[Cenk Uygur]

Your distinction is no problem at all. It's just what I've lived in the real world is that when I say, hey, maybe we shouldn't go maximalist on every issue, all the other left wing hosts attack me and go, you're not pure enough. I'm gonna get more clicks than you by being even more pure.

[Unknown]

And I'm the first person to stand there and agree with you that maximalism might not be the correct solution. Often isn't. I just think as we're winding down, it's just really important to not neglect social issues such as women's access to their own bodies, such as LGBTQ rights.

[Cenk Uygur]

You don't have to neglect that.

[Unknown]

Okay, good. Then I just, I guess then asking you, moving forward, maybe make an emphasis that your populism doesn't neglect the very groups that you claim to want to fight for.

[Cenk Uygur]

You gotta do it.

[Unknown]

Awesome. Thank you so much. It's been great.

[Cenk Uygur]

Okay, first of all, 20 against one. I was born for it.

[Oliver]

I'M a populist like Jake, and I was familiar with the young Turkish. His debate style was very, very good. I think he gave both the opposing speaker and himself ample opportunity to have an actual conversation, which is a rarity on a show like this.

[Unknown]

I have to say I've seen Cenk move a little bit. You know, the 2018 chank of justice Democrats did really focus on these issues like he was sitting here today doing, and I would love to see a return of that.

Cenk, I think in my conversation he kind of dodged a little bit. I would have loved to have a little bit more of an open discussion on kind of how he aims to reconcile racial differences in this country.

I don't want him to lean away from social issues and not put emphasis on them because they're hard shying away from it because it might lose you some people isn't the way that progress is made.

In a lot of online debates, people are really playing to the audience at home. They're not really trying to convince the person they're talking to to reconsider their assumptions. And Oliver was able to successfully get Cenk to realize, no, actually social issues are important.

[Oliver]

Z did absolutely amazing. I'm actually a follower of hers on TikTok and I've seen a lot of her content and we do disagree. We're on completely opposite sides of the political spectrum, but she spoke with clarity. She spoke concise points. She made Jay backtrack just a little bit, which is always fun to watch, especially again in a show like this.

[Cenk Uygur]

One of the people who was right wing said it to to me at the end after we wrapped, he said, I was really surprised at how much we all agreed on exactly. But you got to get past the media, the money in politics and the politicians to get to the places where we agree.

[Unknown]

Don't forget to subscribe to Surrounded wherever you get your podcasts so that you don't miss an episode. And if you want to watch the video version of Surrounded, subscribe to Jubilee on YouTube.