They can no longer keep the story straight

Summary

The David Pakman Show – Episode Summary

Episode Title: They can no longer keep the story straight
Air Date: June 2, 2026
Host: David Pakman
Guest: Mike Nellis (Social Impact Entrepreneur, Former Senior Adviser to Kamala Harris)

---

Episode Overview

In this episode, David Pakman delivers a sharp analysis of the ongoing Iran nuclear deal saga under Donald Trump, exposes the administration's incoherence and shifting narratives, and explores the broader themes of political branding, voter disaffection, and the state of both Republican and Democratic messaging. Later, David and guest Mike Nellis dive into the pitfalls of monopoly power in the U.S. (with a focus on Ticketmaster), the current dysfunctions in party politics, candidate engagement with independent media, and the dynamics in crucial Senate races like Texas.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Never-Ending Iran 'Deal': Trump’s Incoherent Narrative

Timestamps: 00:06–07:39

• Repeated Claims of 'Almost Done':

  • Trump continually announces that an Iran deal is imminent, yet after 14 weeks (originally billed as a “three-week war”), nothing materializes.
  • “How many times is this deal supposedly been almost done?” (01:53)

• The Irrelevance of the Current Dispute:

  • Whether the deal’s draft mentions ‘nuclear’ is unimportant compared to the reality—there is no deal, and the process is endlessly stalled.

• Comparison to Obama’s Iran Deal:

  • Even if Trump gets an agreement, it would essentially resemble the Obama-era deal he previously denounced and exited, but potentially weaker.
  • “The deal that Obama had was supposedly so terrible that it was worth Trump getting out of it… now the best case scenario is that Trump gets something that kind of looks like the Obama deal, but probably isn't as strong…” (03:45)

• Consequences of Withdrawal and Delays:

  • Years of chaos, escalation, war, dead civilians, economic turmoil—all to possibly return to the previous framework.
  • “Why did we need to do all of these things to get back into what Trump got us out of?” (04:57)

• Memorable Moment:

  • “It's like the friend who texts you, ‘I'm running five minutes late, I'm five minutes away, I'm five minutes away...’ and they’re two hours late.” (01:53)

---

2. Cracks in Trump’s “Outsider” Image & Voter Disillusionment

Timestamps: 07:39–14:42

• A Changing Decade in American Politics:

  • Trump’s attraction was his image as a political outsider who “understood ordinary people,” but that image is collapsing, notably among former supporters.

• Trump’s Indifference to Economic Struggle:

  • Trump directly dismisses Americans’ financial trouble when questioned about Iran decisions:
    • Notable Quote:
      • “To what extent are Americans’ financial situations motivating you to make a deal?”
      • Trump: “Not even a little bit.” (09:51)
      • Disillusioned voter: “I voted for you and you don't care about me.” (09:55)

• Wider Voter Frustration:

  • “Trump seems to think the criticism is exactly what's in the deal... You’ve caused economic and bodily pain as a result, and now you’re trying to negotiate your way back into basically the same thing.” (06:11)

• Political Ramifications:

  • Loss of faith among core Trump voters is becoming apparent; Democrats see an opportunity to win these voters back by focusing on economic realities and welcoming those who feel “betrayed by Donald Trump.” (14:29)

---

3. Monopoly America: Ticketmaster and Beyond

Timestamps: 16:37–28:01

• Ticketmaster-Live Nation Monopoly:

  • Despite DOJ lawsuits and court rulings, monopolies like Ticketmaster persist due to under-enforcement of antitrust laws.
  • “Today, Ticketmaster holds over 80% of live event sales. One of the least liked consumer experiences... is buying tickets.” (18:01)

• Broader Monopoly Issues:

  • Google (internet search), Amazon (retail & cloud), Apple (App Store), Visa/MasterCard (card payments)—each exerts significant monopolistic control.
  • “We have the rules to regulate monopoly. Great. We're not doing it. It's just not being enforced. It's not a priority of the government.” (22:56)

• Erosion of Trust in Free Markets:

  • Non-enforcement leads even pro-capitalists to question the validity of American-style capitalism.

---

4. The DNC Autopsy & Problems in Democratic Party Structure

Timestamps: 28:40–39:51

• Ineffective Autopsy Report:

  • The document mildly criticizes Biden and the DNC but fails to address core issues or push for significant changes.

• Fragmented Party Authority:

  • The DNC has limited power; real change comes from the candidates themselves.
  • “The Democratic Party is just a loose collection of interests... everybody's got to be part of the solution, not just one group.” (30:05)

• Content Creators, Candidate Media Training:

  • Growing divide between authentic independent voices and ‘for hire’ creators. More candidates need to be ready for unpredictable media environments.

---

5. Messaging and the Left-Right Divide

Timestamps: 38:58–43:14

• Unified vs. Diverse Messaging:

  • The right excels at message discipline (example: “ballroom” narrative); the left’s diversity makes such coordination difficult, but sticking only to a single message risks the party’s distinctiveness.

• Coalition Dynamics:

  • Democrats must balance internal debate with the need to gain and wield power, rather than splinter over purity or grievances.

---

6. Texas Senate Race and Electoral Strategies

Timestamps: 46:17–50:21

• Texas as a Battleground:
  • Democratic candidate Talarico has rapidly risen as a serious challenger; the state mirrors Georgia’s shifts.
  • “I do think that Talarico can win… Paxton is such a damaged candidate.” (47:26)

---

7. Trump’s Medical Report & Cognitive Test Boasts

Timestamps: 52:08–56:41

• Trump’s Confusion Over Cognitive Tests:

  • Trump brags about perfect scores on tests meant to screen for impairment, not intelligence.
    • Notable Quote:
      • “I scored a perfect 30 out of 30 considered extreme intelligence…” (52:43)

• Misunderstanding/Propaganda:

  • The test only means absence of cognitive impairment, not exceptional intelligence. Trump's insistence on framing everything as a measure of personal superiority is symptomatic of broader branding obsessions.

---

8. Economic Pain & Administration Indifference

Timestamps: 59:11–66:37

• Credit Card Delinquencies & Economic Stress:

  • Delinquency rates are the highest since the financial crisis; administration surrogates focus on bank health rather than citizen well-being.
    • “Kevin, that's not why we're bringing it up. We know the credit card companies are going to be okay.” (61:43)

• Wages and Inflation:

  • Administration dismisses concerns about real wage decline as “technical matters.”

• Call to Action:

  • Pakman urges listeners to build a movement focused on basic American economic security: “If you work, you should be able to afford housing and the basics of living.” (66:12)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “It's like arguing with someone about the features of your car when you don’t even have the car at all.” – David Pakman, (00:24)

• “The friend who texts you, ‘I'm running five minutes late…’ and they're two hours late.” – David Pakman, (01:53)

• “You got us out of something you said was unacceptable, you've caused economic and bodily pain as a result, and now you're trying to negotiate your way back into basically the same thing.” – David Pakman, (06:11)

• “I voted for you and you don't care about me.” – Disillusioned Trump voter, (09:55)

• “Trump cares about Trump primarily. That's it.” – David Pakman, (10:23)

• “We need access to their audiences...If we don’t go talk to them, we’re going to lose.” – Mike Nellis, on Democrats engaging with right-leaning audiences, (37:45)

• “If you work, you should be able to afford housing and the basics of living.” – David Pakman, (66:12)

---

Important Segment Timestamps

• 00:06 — Iran Deal Meltdowns & Truth Social Rants
• 03:45 — Parallels to the Obama Iran Deal
• 09:48 — Trump Voter: Indifference to Economic Pain
• 16:37 — Ticketmaster & Monopoly Abuse
• 28:40 — DNC Autopsy and Party Structure
• 38:58 — Messaging in Modern Political Coalitions
• 46:17 — Texas Senate Race Deep Dive
• 52:08 — Trump’s Medical Report and Cognitive Testing
• 59:11 — Economic Pain, Credit Cards, and Wage Stagnation

---

Episode Tone & Style

• Direct, fact-based, incisive.
• David Pakman employs wit, clear analogies, and pointed criticism.
• Emphasizes accountability, practical economic concerns, and the need for genuine representation—both from politicians and media figures.

---

End of Summary

Transcript

[Kevin Hassett]

Foreign.

[David Pakman]

We just got one of the most revealing truth social meltdowns that we have seen in a while. And the reason that it is revealing is less about what Trump says about Iran. It's that Trump is now arguing with reporters about the details of a deal

[Mike Nellis]

that may not exist.

[David Pakman]

It's like arguing with someone about the features of your car when you don't

[Mike Nellis]

even have the car at all.

[David Pakman]

Now here is what Donald Trump wrote, quote, fake news. CNN said today routinely that my Iran nuclear deal doesn't talk about nuclear, when actually it states very clearly that Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. It then goes on in very strong and lengthy detail to discuss various other aspects of nuclear. In fact, that's what most of the agreement is about. CNN and so many others in the fake news media is a low ratings disaster. Even with new ownership, it is unlikely

[Mike Nellis]

to ever get better.

[David Pakman]

Let's zoom out for a second. The specific dispute here is almost irrelevant, like whether CNN got a detail right or wrong. It barely matters whether the latest draft of the deal says this or that, whether there's language about enrichment or inspections or centrifuges or uranium stockpiles. None of that is the main story. The main story is we are now in week 14 of a three week war. Remember what Trump originally told us? He said three to four weeks, a deal is practically done and then it's practically done again and then it's close and it's almost done and it's almost done and we're about to get it. And Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud is very pleased with the direction and after all of the claims of progress and an announcement that's coming and we're basically there, it doesn't happen now. I was going to put up statements and clips, truth social posts of Trump claiming that we're close and then videos of Trump claiming it's a waste. You've seen them, you've heard them, you've read about them. The suggestion that this is nearly finalized and then it's nearly finalized again and again and now we're into week 14. That's really the topic here. How many times is this deal supposedly been almost done? Seven, eight times, maybe more, depending on how you count it. It's like the friend who texts you, I'm running five minutes late, I'm five minutes away, I'm five minutes away and they're two hours late. And you go, wait a second, it only takes 15 minutes to get here from your house.

[Mike Nellis]

That means you were still home at

[David Pakman]

a bunch of these points in time. That's a frustrating one. I don't know if you've ever experienced that one. The point is, at some point, the explanations kind of don't matter anymore. What matters is your friend is clearly not five minutes away. We clearly are not at the point of having a deal, and that's what's happening here. Every few days or weekly, we're told there's a breakthrough here. I can feel it. Success is imminent. It's basically done. The war is essentially over. And 14 weeks later, Trump's going. The negotiations really are going pretty well. We're arguing about language in the draft. We're talking about the framework. What might happen is nuclear part of it or isn't nuclear part of it? Now, let's skip to the next part, because I think that this is maybe the most important part of this. Imagine Trump gets some version of what he wants, right? Like, imagine he gets the strongest version of the deals he's teased over the last 14 weeks.

[Mike Nellis]

What does that probably look like?

[David Pakman]

It probably looks a lot like the Obama Iran nuclear deal, maybe with some slightly different provisions, maybe some different timelines, maybe there's slightly different inspection mechanisms, but fundamentally, it's an agreement where Iran limits aspects of the nuclear program in exchange for sanctions, being relieved, getting some of their held money, and normalization of relations globally. That's the basic architecture. Best case scenario, which gets us back to something I've been talking about since week five, which is the deal that Obama had was supposedly so terrible that it was worth Trump getting out of it. Bombing Iran in 2025 and going to war in 2026. If only Obama had done a better deal. But he didn't, according to Trump. And now the best case scenario is that Trump gets something that kind of looks like the Obama deal, but probably isn't as strong, which should make every single American furious.

[Mike Nellis]

Why did we need to do all

[David Pakman]

of these things to get back into what Trump got us out of? Why did we need to Spike gas prices 65% if we had that kind of thing? We're here because that wasn't good enough. Trump pulled out and said, we're going to get something better, tougher, stronger, all of that stuff.

[Mike Nellis]

And now it's years later.

[David Pakman]

Remember that it was in 2018 that Trump got out of the Obama deal. We've had chaos, escalation, tension, a war, gas prices, all of it.

[Mike Nellis]

People have died.

[David Pakman]

And Trump's like, I'm really getting close to putting the Obama deal back in place, except Obama's name won't be on It Barack Obama was right last week or the week before when he said what Trump really doesn't like about the Iran nuclear deal he got out of is that my name was on it. That's fundamentally what this is about. And so when Trump goes, well, Iran's not going to have a nuclear weapon or their uranium is going to have to be held by someone else. And what about the inspections? It doesn't really matter. Trump seems to think the criticism is exactly what's in the deal. Does it reference nuclear or doesn't it? The issue is that you got us out of something you said was unacceptable, you've caused economic and bodily pain as a result, and now you're trying to negotiate your way back into basically the same thing. Trump's arguing with the media about the details of an agreement that's not done after claiming it's almost been done eight times. Where the best case is we get back to a slightly weaker version of

[Mike Nellis]

the deal that he got us out of.

[David Pakman]

The truth social post misses the point entirely. And corporate media has got to do

[Mike Nellis]

a better job of this.

[David Pakman]

I am rarely hearing on corporate media that what Trump is driving towards and trying to reconstitute is basically the Iran nuclear deal. That's what it is. And if it wasn't good enough in 2018, why would it be good enough now? Only because Trump gets desperate. Only because Trump realizes this is the best I'm going to be able to do. I can't possibly do any better than this. And that should make every single voter ask themselves when they go to vote in November, was this worth it? Because even if I agreed that Trump was right, we have to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon. The deal Trump maybe will sign by November is similar to and probably weaker than the one Obama had in 2015 that Trump got us out of in 2018. How could that possibly be worth it?

[Mike Nellis]

We have more and more Trump voters furious with Trump, saying, I will never,

[David Pakman]

ever, ever support this again. It's happening when Trump can't be on the ballot again. But needless to say, I think this is important. I'm going to show you an example

[Mike Nellis]

video, and I think it's important to

[David Pakman]

kind of set the stage here that

[Mike Nellis]

this has been a different decade in American politics than many others, because Donald Trump cultivated an image around his political

[David Pakman]

career that is not like other presidents or presidential candidates. He wasn't just the president.

[Mike Nellis]

I would argue that he wasn't really

[David Pakman]

president in the sense of his focus was always other stuff.

[Mike Nellis]

His golf clubs, putting his name on things. He was not president in the sense

[David Pakman]

of this is someone who primarily cares about governance.

[Mike Nellis]

Of course he won twice and he was the president. I'm not calling that into question, I want to make that clear.

[David Pakman]

But he was the guy that transcended politics, pulled in people who never voted before because he understood ordinary people. That was the concept around Trump. The billionaire who despite being raised wealthy in Queens and Manhattan and kept isolated from the very people who became his

[Mike Nellis]

supporters, somehow understood them better than everybody else. He felt their pain. The politicians in Washington didn't.

[David Pakman]

He's an outsider businessman. He knows trade, he knows buildings, he knows windows, he knows onyx and marble

[Mike Nellis]

and all this crap.

[David Pakman]

And he is the person who is going to restore America to some prior glory.

[Mike Nellis]

And that image is to say it's cracked, it's been turned to dust at

[David Pakman]

this point in time. And the most dangerous part of it

[Mike Nellis]

for Trump is that a lot of this realization, Democrats and most independents have known it for a while. It's starting to come from Republicans. And I'm going to play a clip here of a former Trump voter who heard the comments from Trump about I

[David Pakman]

don't consider the financial situation of Americans

[Mike Nellis]

when I decide what to do with Iran.

[David Pakman]

And she is not pleased with it. Take a listen to this.

[Trump Voter]

I'm President Trump, I'm in charge. He doesn't care about us. Somebody asked him about a week ago, what about the American people and, and they're struggling right now.

[Interviewer/Host]

To what extent are Americans financial situations

[Mike Nellis]

motivating you to make a deal?

Not even a little bit.

[Trump Voter]

He did not care. I couldn't even watch that. I was angry after that. Like I voted for you and you don't care about me.

[David Pakman]

Okay, so. Oh well, that's just a silly purple

[Mike Nellis]

haired liberal activist or no, it's not.

[David Pakman]

Oh, it's an MSNBC segment. Nope. It's CNN fake news. No, it's somebody who voted for Trump. And now she's realizing something that should have been obvious from the beginning and she didn't get it.

[Interviewer/Host]

All right?

[David Pakman]

But she gets it now.

[Mike Nellis]

Trump cares about Trump primarily.

[David Pakman]

That's it. And what's fascinating is what triggered this

[Mike Nellis]

reaction because we've been asking ourselves the

[David Pakman]

question are these flippant comments from Trump

[Mike Nellis]

about I don't care about gas prices. I thought they would go up more

[David Pakman]

and I still did Iran. I, I thought the stock market would

[Mike Nellis]

go down more and I still did Iran.

[David Pakman]

I don't consider Americans financial situation. The gas price increase is peanuts is what he said that we wondered Would it make a difference to people?

[Mike Nellis]

And it is.

[David Pakman]

And it could have been immigration, it

[Mike Nellis]

could have been a culture war issue.

[David Pakman]

Men and women's sports, whatever it was, economics, the state of the economy, Trump's disregard for people's struggles with the economy, that is what seems to be making a difference. And it makes sense because most people do not experience trans sports on a

[Mike Nellis]

day to day basis.

[David Pakman]

It affects almost nobody.

[Mike Nellis]

When I say that, I'm not being dismissive of that. I care about people.

[David Pakman]

I'm just saying every single day you are faced with wages and the impact it has on you. Cost of living, housing, groceries, gas. If you have a gas powered vehicle

[Mike Nellis]

every day, people see that. How often do trans athletes affect you? Almost no one is affected by it because there are almost no trans athletes statistically. Okay, that's the point here. You get your credit card bill, you get your car payment. People are falling behind on car payments at record levels. Rent, mortgage, all of that people are

[David Pakman]

facing that day to day.

[Mike Nellis]

So when Trump goes, we're going to get men out of women's sports.

[David Pakman]

Maybe it sounds good, but you're not facing that daily.

[Mike Nellis]

Almost no one is. I don't care about gas prices.

[David Pakman]

Most Americans are facing that daily.

[Mike Nellis]

And Trump's priorities have nothing to do with the priorities of the people who elected him.

[David Pakman]

His priorities are the ballroom. What his priorities are Iran, he was going to be anti war, the UFC fight at the White House lawn. And at the same time you have all of these Americans struggling with affordability, debt and economic exhaustion and they look

[Mike Nellis]

and go, what the F is this guy talking about? He's not talking about wages, what, or

[David Pakman]

getting the cost of housing done, or

[Mike Nellis]

getting my medical bills down or doing something about credit card debt.

[David Pakman]

He's sitting down again. Well, we've got it with Lara Trump

[Mike Nellis]

for an interview that in a lot

[David Pakman]

of other countries, if you saw the President sitting down for an interview with

[Mike Nellis]

their daughter in law, you would go,

[David Pakman]

oh, this is a dictatorship.

[Mike Nellis]

This is what happens in dictatorships. That's what Trump is doing. Think about how bizarre this is. A voter saying, I can't afford my life anymore.

[David Pakman]

And Trump's ecosystem has essentially responded with, they crossed a red line in the Middle east and they were going to

[Mike Nellis]

get a nuclear weapon. But who the hell believes that? Because Trump decimated that in July, supposedly.

[David Pakman]

And now Trump has become what he said he would fight.

[Mike Nellis]

Think of that. He convinced people to vote for him.

[David Pakman]

With this whole the elites don't care about you.

[Mike Nellis]

There's a disconnect and I understand. And now he has become what he

[David Pakman]

claimed to fight against.

[Mike Nellis]

The wealthy political insider, surrounded by loyalists, completely insulated from what the average American deals with, and increasingly surrounded by friendly

[David Pakman]

media personalities and donors who say, what

[Mike Nellis]

you're doing is great and it's all fascinating.

[David Pakman]

So listen, the voter that now says she sees Trump for what he is, she's. She can't vote for Trump again anyway

[Mike Nellis]

because Trump's not going to be on the ballot.

But.

But we can win back people like

[David Pakman]

this and we can hopefully ensure that at least the House is taken from Republicans in November, maybe the Senate, that

[Mike Nellis]

in 2028, whoever is the next

[David Pakman]

Trump

[Mike Nellis]

3.0, 2.0 doesn't win. Maybe it's J.D. maybe it's Marco Rubio. Who the hell knows? These people are a mess.

[David Pakman]

But it's important to win these people back.

[Mike Nellis]

And we don't win them back by going.

[David Pakman]

Nobody could have guessed that this would have happened. We went back by saying, you're welcome

[Mike Nellis]

back here, but remember, we did warn about this. We've got to be ready for the next one because they. You could get tricked again. You were tricked once and you could get tricked again. I think that's the idea.

[David Pakman]

They betray.

[Mike Nellis]

They were betrayed by Donald Trump.

[David Pakman]

Remember that. When the next Trump like figure pops up in 2028 and says, come and

[Mike Nellis]

vote for me, I'll fight for you.

[David Pakman]

I understand.

[Mike Nellis]

Don't fall for it. Do not fall for it again.

[David Pakman]

Don't allow any number of slogans like Make America great again rallies like the ones that Trump did, or truth social posts to convince you of what your eyes and ears tell you isn't possibly true.

[Mike Nellis]

Very dangerous moment here for Republicans.

[David Pakman]

And this is why they are going

[Mike Nellis]

to have to now figure out how

[David Pakman]

do I place myself as being on the right but not with Trump so

[Mike Nellis]

that they can win reelection because Trump is dragging them down with record low approval.

[David Pakman]

Let's punish them politically for this. In November, we have an opportunity. A good hoodie matters more than people think, especially this time of year when you're reaching for the same layer every single day.

[Mike Nellis]

I've gone through a lot of hoodies that look fine at first, but they

[David Pakman]

just don't feel like something I'm going

[Mike Nellis]

to want to or even be able

[David Pakman]

to keep wearing season after season. And this is why I love our sponsor, American Giant. I've been wearing their classic full zip hoodie.

[Mike Nellis]

It just feels different.

[David Pakman]

The fleece is custom heavyweight.

[Mike Nellis]

The fit is comfortable without being sloppy.

[David Pakman]

The details stand out. The side panels give you mobility the

[Mike Nellis]

hood is double lined and the reinforced

[David Pakman]

elbows make it feel like something that is really built to last, not something

[Mike Nellis]

that'll last you one winter. American Giant is deeply committed to making

[David Pakman]

timeless staples entirely in the usa. From the cotton to the zipper, the attention to quality really shows. Slate magazine called American Giants Classic Full

[Mike Nellis]

Zip the greatest hoodie ever made. I've been wearing one and I understand

[David Pakman]

why this season save 20% on your first order when you go to american-giant.com and use code PACMAN. Again, that's 20% off your first order.

[Mike Nellis]

At american-giant.com use with code PACMAN.

[David Pakman]

The link is in the Description One

[Mike Nellis]

thing that drives me nuts about political media is how two outlets can cover the same story and make it feel like two different events took place. Not because any of the facts have changed, but because the emphasis of the stories is different. This is why I use Ground News, because Ground News pulls together reporting from across the political spectrum and and you can compare the headlines side by side and see how different outlets are framing the exact same issue. You can look at the bias distribution. You can look at factuality ratings. You can see who owns the outlets behind the reporting, which makes it easier to separate the substance from the spin. For example, Trump's EPA recently decided to remove limits on those forever chemicals in drinking water. Ground News shows how outlets like PBS and Raw Story are getting it right and right wing outlets put this anti Biden spin on it or they just stay very vague to avoid implicating Donald Trump. Ground News also has a blind spot feed. This is for stories that are underreported by one side and you can also get a personalized feed based on your interests. Go to Ground Dot News, slash Pacman or scan my QR code to get 40% off the ground News Vantage plan. The link is in the description if there is a law that is never enforced, do we really have a functioning law? It's sort of like if a tree falls in the woods and nobody's around to hear it. That kind of thing. I'm talking about Ticketmaster and Live Nation and I'm going to break that down first. I'm going to explain why this matters. And and there's the bigger story of the government not holding monopolies accountable. Now we hear all the time in the United States, oh, we don't need any new gun safety laws, for example. We've got a ton of gun safety laws on the books, but we often don't enforce them, is what we're told. Ticketmaster and Live Nation merged back in 2010. And it was controversial at the time. And just to get it done, Ticketmaster had to give up a subsidiary to appease the monopoly claims and be allowed to merge. And now they control this huge ecosystem. They control ticket sales, concert promotion, many venues are controlled by them, relationships directly controlled by them, and they have huge leverage over artists. Today, TicketMaster holds over 80%, 80% of live event sales. One of the least liked consumer experiences, along with going to a car dealership, is buying tickets for sporting events, music events, etc. Getting in these virtual queues, you end up without tickets. You're number 25,000 in the queue. You've got to end up buying them from scalpers or resellers, as they're more politically, correctly referred to on secondary markets. Increasingly, though, from Ticketmaster. So Ticketmaster sells the same ticket multiple times, makes money from fees each time it is sold. So this is a problem that ticket buyers really feel, but we wondered, is the government going to do anything about it? This is a problem that's been building for a long time. In 2024, the DOJ filed a lawsuit for monopoly against Ticketmaster. Great, we're finally going to get somewhere on this. They spent two years building a case, and then in 2026, suddenly, under Trump's DOJ, they offer Ticketmaster a beautiful sweetheart deal. I'll make you a deal you can't refuse. And the deal would have allowed him to keep functioning. But 33 states denied the deal and said, no, we'd rather pursue the lawsuit instead. And then just a few weeks later, Ticketmaster is ruled to be a monopoly. And after all of this, the central claim is validated. It is a monopoly. We suspected it all along. But the courts are still deciding if the monopoly should be forced to split up. Most people who keep getting caught doing the same thing over and over again have larger and larger penalties. We find, you know, three strike laws, habitual speeders. Eventually you lose your license temporarily, and then you lose it completely, and then you lose it permanently. This is like getting caught speeding for 30 years, buying the police department and then the attorney general helps you negotiate away the problems. It doesn't make any sense. So that's the disturbing and unfortunately common situation in the United States when it comes, when it comes to monopoly, where in theory we have laws and limitations on corporate power, but in practice, you look at monopoly enforcement, antitrust enforcement, often not enforced at all. Now this is even bigger than Ticketmaster. So Ticketmaster is the way a lot of us experience this on an ongoing basis. But this is a much bigger issue in the United States. Google has a monopoly in Internet search. It was ruled a monopoly in 2024. They're currently in the middle of appealing that ruling. Amazon arguably has a monopoly because it's acting simultaneously as the owner of the marketplace, the retailer, the logistics network, the ad platform, and the cloud infrastructure giant with US Amazon Web Services. So they can privilege their own products, they can pressure sellers, they can squeeze out independent retailers, they can use the platform data against competitors, but they control the infrastructure and they control the store. Apple's App Store is arguably a monopoly. Visa and MasterCard together dominate the American card payment processing system to such a degree that critics argue it is a durable monopoly with massive barriers to entry. And I believe that they are right. So why aren't they being limited? Any of the ones that I just mentioned? Because we have a law, right? We do, but the law isn't being enforced. Now, most modern antitrust enforcement against monopolies, especially since the 1980s, has shifted to what's called the consumer welfare standard. And what that means is that regulators, when they are considering doing something, they will ask, are prices obviously higher for consumers right now because of the overarching structure, because of the consolidation that has taken place? And even though the average person can see it's obvious that prices are higher. Like think about when comcast is the 1 Internet service provider available. We all know if there were four, prices would be lower unless they collude on pricing, which is against the law in and of itself. If there were competition for our business among four Internet service providers, isn't it obvious that the prices would be lower than they are than when Comcast is the only one? But that's not the issue. The issue is you've got to prove it legally. And that can be actually more difficult than it seems. This is a huge problem. And it gets so little attention relative to its overall impact on the economy. Now, one of the big issues, you know, you've got all issues, men and women's sports, as Trump says, abortion, foreign policy, the economy, within the economy. We talk about gas prices, we talk about jobs. All legitimate topics. They get attention. This issue of monopoly gets very little attention, very little attention compared to how much of an effect it has on how expensive stuff is for us. We have capitalism, okay? It should be regulated. Yes, got it. We have the. The rules to regulate it with regard to monopoly. Great. We're not doing it. It's just not being enforced. It's not a priority of the government. If a market is going to function. The public has to believe that the rules are real and that they are applied and applied to everybody. If giant corporations can violate antitrust principles for decades, absorb investigations, negotiate sweetheart settlements, and just keep operating basically without making any changes, people stop believing that markets are genuinely competitive. Even those who are in favor of capitalism start to realize, hey, this is not so good, because obviously markets are not genuinely competitive in so many of these areas. So you end up with a situation where, remember when the banks were too big to fail? The bigger you're able to get, the more immune you are to the rules and the bigger you can keep getting. So it's sort of like a flywheel effect. The faster you get the wheel going, the more momentum it has, the less likely it is that anybody's going to slow it down. So we started with ticket sales. We went to Ticketmaster, Live Nation. More broadly, we went even broader to Monopoly. Even the capitalists should want this dealt with because it will spill over into how people view capitalism overall and it will end up hurting the capitalists long term. If you don't even care about the morals of the ethics of it. If you're just let's have unbridled capitalism. If you don't deal with this, it will become a problem for capitalism itself. Most sweet snacks are either satisfying or sensible. Our sponsor, Magic Spoon, is both. Magic Spoon treats are crispy, airy snack bars with 12 grams of protein, 7 grams of fiber, 0 grams of added sugar and 2 to 3 grams of net carbs. They come in great flavors like marshmallow, chocolate, peanut butter and double chocolate.

[David Pakman]

My favorite.

[Mike Nellis]

A perfect sweet, light snack I can throw in the bag and take on the go. They remind me of cereal bars. Same texture and flavor, but without the carbs and without the sugar. Magic Spoon is easy to find. Just look for Magic Spoon at your local grocery store. They also rolled out treats nationwide at 7:11. And if you haven't tried them yet, check out Magic Spoon's new product, Protein Pastries. High protein, low sugar takes on the classic toaster pastries I grew up with. You can get $5 off your next order, including the protein pastries@magic spoon.com/pacman. The link is in the description. If you've been paying attention to recent events, you've seen how the line between church and state is is blurring how religion can be brought into public life in ways that raise real constitutional questions. That doesn't just affect one issue. It shapes policy. It shapes rights and how power operates broadly.

[David Pakman]

Our sponsor, the Freedom from Religion foundation works to protect separation of church and

[Mike Nellis]

state because it protects you and it protects me.

[David Pakman]

As we approach the 250th anniversary of the United States, the question isn't just what we celebrate, it's what do we defend?

[Mike Nellis]

Visit ffrf.us/david or text My Name, David to 511511 to learn more or to join. Because protecting that separation protects our rights.

[David Pakman]

The info is in the description text. Fees may apply.

[Mike Nellis]

Mike Nellis joins me today. Social impact entrepreneur, former senior adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris. His substack is Endless Urgency with Mike Nellis. Mike, I looked with great interest at the leaked autopsy report. Yeah. And you know, I guess in some sense I understand why Ken Martin and the DNC weren't super thrilled about this thing being published in full. Not, I believe that there were still some redactions from what was ultimately published. But I actually do think that it did address some of the main issues. It was more critical of Biden than maybe the DNC would have liked to see. It pointed out a lack of connection between voters and Biden and ultimately Harris on, on some particular issues. Like, overall, I thought there's good material here, but I just don't know if the DNC right now is in a position where they're going to take what they at least think is accurate from this thing and say changes need to be made. So question one is, do you believe the DNC wants to make changes? And number two, whose changes are these really to make? Because a lot of times it's just independent individual candidates that are deciding how they're going to run this their campaign. So how much power does the DNC have?

Yeah, well, the first thing I want to say about the autopsy report is I think it's a poorly constructed document. Like, I think that's a big part of the reason that Ken didn't want to release it is because he hired somebody who didn't do a good job of it. Kind of doubled down on what to do. Like, I've read through most of it. I skimmed through some parts of it when it was pretty clear that it was reductive or like not well put together. But I think it could have been a lot stronger. And I think it doesn't really identify the, the real reasons that we lost. And I think in terms of who can actually make the changes, it's going to be Democratic Party candidates. Obviously, there's different classes of the Democratic Party, but there's this idea that the DNC has the power to control the Democratic Party. Same with the rnc. The RNC is not the Republican Party either. It is just one party committee that has a lot of responsibilities that are important, but its primary one is to elect a Democratic or Republican president, run that nominating process. There's other committees then below it, like the DCCC that's responsible for House races, the D sec, that's responsible for Senate races. It goes all the way down to Democratic municipal officers, dmo, who are responsible for, like, your city council members and aldermen and stuff like that. So it's just, I always say the Democratic Party is just a loose collection of interests, right? It's unions, it's activists, it's party officials, it's elected officials. So everybody's got to be part of the solution. Not just one group people. It's content creators like you and I, too, that are out there as part of, you know, this group of people. And I think there's reforms that content Creator World needs to be seriously considering about how we handled the last couple years. But ultimately it comes down to the economy. Like, I know that it's like a simplistic answer to give, but if people think their life is getting better, they're going to support the party in power. If they think it's getting worse, they're going to knock those people out of office. And on the economy, on inflation, on the border, on many issues, people were mad. People were pissed about Joe Biden's age and health and the way that that was handled. And I don't want to have to relitigate all of that. I know Jill Biden is back in the news, but I can't think of anything worse than spending my time with you talking about that again for a thousand times. But it's. I think everybody's got that responsibility. And really our elected officials are the ones who really have to step up because we have way too many Democratic candidates, in my experience, that don't really know what they believe, don't really have a north or a guiding star, and they're letting a lot of other people dictate what they're saying on any given day. We need more people to step up that actually have got something to say and got something to give to the American people. And that's true in the Republican Party as well. It's just a lot of drones. And I think that's the number one problem right now.

One of the things that's worrying me that we're seeing kind of a reversal to the mean is you and I have previously talked about how in the period after Kamala Harris lost, but while Biden was still president, I was invited with a group of creators to the White House, and we talked about our experiences having people on our show and the micromanagement and the, you've got seven minutes to talk. And then we want a list of topics ahead of time. And during 2025, I really saw a change in how a lot of the staffers for governors, members of the House, members of the Senate, were kind of dealing. I can speak personally with me. And it was much more of like a, hey, have 20, 25 minutes. We're not over managing. We're not doing the stuff that I was critical of in the last couple of months.

[David Pakman]

Mike.

[Mike Nellis]

We are again, experiencing staffers who want to get on the phone with my producer. They don't ask for a list of questions, but they would love one, but they definitely want a list of topics. My producer has started getting messages recently from staffers going, I didn't really like the way that interview went in terms of how much time David spent on X versus Y. And I've always told, you know, my team will say, listen, I give David seven to 10 ideas and research, but I'm not there feeding him questions. He's going to manage these conversations. I'm worried that we're going back already to a way of working with independent media that didn't really serve candidates well, for the most part.

Yeah, well. And again, I think that's about candidate recruitment because you need a group of candidates that you can drop into a room and who can actually talk about anything. And yes, I, I, I give, like, on my show, I get people who ask me, they're like, can you give me the specific questions? I say, no. Sometimes I don't even give them the specific topics because most of my show on Substack is just talking about current events. Like, whatever's going on that day is what you better be able to talk about. And it's frustrating. I've never gotten somebody who's called me and said that they didn't like a segment on my show, but my answer would be like, tough shit. Like here. I think it's just there's two categories of creators that I see right now, and it's, there is a group of people. I'm not going to name anybody because I don't want to shit on anybody or, like, get inside somebody's head that I don't understand. But it seems like there's a group of people that are sort of for hire that you can Go out there and if you pay them enough money and like Tom Stiers, well reported that he's paying a bunch of people. There were folks who got paid to attack Kat Abu Ghazala in the Illinois 9 race, which I was working in for another candidate but didn't pay anybody to attack her because I like Kat. But there's people that are just for hire and then there's people I think, like you and I who actually have something to say, who want to have a conversation and a dialogue. And those folks are growing more rapidly, in my opinion. I think there's better content with you, me, Adam Mockler, Jack Cocarella, a whole bunch of other people out there that are doing that work on a high level. I'm really frustrated with the, with the pay to play folks and a lot of the Democratic candidates that I work with, they want to talk to those folks because they're predictable, right? They're going to give more access to that folks. And so what they do with us is because I think we are not, we're not mainstream media, we're not corporate media. We don't have a bunch of people that are funneling money into us. We, we need the access, we need the opportunity to get them on the show. But they need us now more than we need them. I think, frankly. And I think we've got to kind of act like that. Like when I do cnn, like I was or I was on Ms. Now yesterday talking about the Texas race, I got like three bullet points of what we were talking about and that's it. And I just don't think. And they often ask me for my POV in response to that and I usually say no. I'm like, especially when I'm doing right wing media, I won't tell them what I plan to say because they're just

planning to oh, the pre interview of give me your thoughts on these five issues. That, that one. That's, I cannot stand that. Yeah, that's good. Good for you. That, that you say no to them. What do you think about the candidates that because you've got a couple different situations right now. There are more established elected officials who have young staffers who are doing a good job of explaining to them here's how this media ecosystem works. Just kind of show up and do your thing. When I had to sit down with Gavin Newsom not that long ago, there were no restrictions. There was no pre interview. There was no give us a list of topics. I thought that that was good and I think the conversation is better and it ends up reflecting the fact that it's not super tense. And so I think that that's a good thing. You also have something else now, which is the candidates themselves that are younger and that are from the next generation and they understand the media environment. And I am sort of optimistic that, because we're starting to see that come in. I don't know how you see it.

I mean, I do think we're getting a new generation of candidate and they're very different to work with than the ones I've worked with in the past. Like, I. I had Mallory McMarrow on my show. Mallory is a client of mine. I do digital fundraising and advertising work for her. But I still had her on. And just the fact that she even gets my stupid pop culture references is like such a difference in what you can get. But, like, when Mallory came in, I said, I'm going to ask you about these three things. I didn't give her the questions, but I said, I think it was like, we're going to talk about the Epstein files. We're going to talk about Trump tweeting overnight. Because it was the night that he tweeted like 56 times in the middle of night. They were crazy. I'm going to ask you about that. I'm going to ask you about this. And we're going to do. It's going to be 20 minutes, then we're out. And that was fine. And I think she can do that. But, like, I had Ro Khanna on the show after Ro Khanna and I had a fight on Twitter. Like, Ro Khanna said something I didn't like, I responded to it. He and I went back and forth. And then I maybe stupidly was like, you're free to come on the show anytime to debate this if you want. And immediately he DM'd me and had his team reach out and was like, let's do the show. So. And Ro Khan is not my favorite Democrat. There's things that he does that kind of rubs me the wrong way. And he and I have kind of a love hate relationship now. But, like, it's. And I have a lot of respect for what he's done on the Epstein Files, in particular him and Massie. But the fact that he'll go into a space where somebody that he knows isn't exactly a fan of his and talk to them. I need every single Democratic candidate, a member of Congress, to be able to do that, and they won't do it. I mean, like, for a longest time, Pete Buttigieg was the only Democrat that would go on Fox News and have a conversation with them. It can't be that way. And I think there's this concept that you run into that the old generation inside the Democratic Party has, but then a lot of staffers also have. It is I have to protect myself and I have to protect my talent and I can't put myself in a position where I'm going to get flayed or yelled at by Jesse Watters or whoever. And that just doesn't work. We need access to their audiences. Fox News has tens of millions of people in the country who listen to them. And 95% of them are going to hate my guts when I go on. I'm there for that 5% because if I can just move a small fraction of people to understand how they're getting screwed by this administration and that maybe the Democratic Party isn't a bunch of what they usually call us, which is like child mutilators and pedos and like all the crazy stuff they say about us, they need to see us. It's the same reason we need people that can go into rural communities, that can go into dead manufacturing towns, people where they haven't seen or heard from a Democrat in generations. Now they have a way of thinking about us because they don't know us. And so if we don't go talk to them, we're going to lose. That's why Trump runs up his numbers with like non college educated white people in the country.

Let's talk a little bit now about messaging going into the election. It was quite notable after the White House correspondents dinner shooting that very quickly the right was on board instantly with this proves we need the ballroom. Now there were some people who thought that that proved that the thing was staged. I actually think quite the opposite. I think they are very opportunistic and they very quickly got on the message that like hey, here's an opportunity to say we really need the ballroom. And this proves it. So the point is they are very good at getting everybody on the same page with regard to talking points. They make sure that the elected officials and the commentators, they're all on the same message. My question to you is the left is different. The left by its nature is, I believe, more fractured in terms of people willing to espouse pretty different perspectives on what sorts of candidates and what are the top issues, etc.

Yeah.

Would it be to the benefit of of the left to try to do the same thing in terms of getting on message, for example, with the midterms coming up. The issue is affordability. That's it. It's not immigration. It's not foreign policy. The issue is affordability. That's what we're all going to be talking about. Or is that just antithetical to how the Democratic Party and the political left operates and it would be a mistake to try to have a one message approach?

Yeah, well, I think it is antithetical to how the Democratic Party operates to be that way, because we're such a diverse coalition of people that ranges all the way from at this moment, like Zoran Mandani to Joe Walsh. Right. Is a former Tea Party congressman. So it's a very weird coalition and moment in time that we're in. And I like both those guys, to be honest with you, which is sort of weird. I sit between the two of them because I'm kind of a Normie Dem. I'm not super progressive, but I'm certainly not anywhere near where Joe's at. But it's kind of odd. But I think we have to be careful, because while I want the Democratic Party to be more coordinated and I want the Democratic Party to be, like, tougher and, like, get in people's faces and, like, go have these conversations, I don't want us to become drones. And I think that's what the MAGA movement has largely become. Libs of TikTok is a shadow of what they used to be. Not that I ever liked their content, but there was something to admire about it at one time, given the relentlessness of the way that she put that together. There's other folks like Loomer who are out there, but if. If. If all they have, all they really have is a signal group. We know this because Ashley Sinclair has been basically exposing this. Dan Scavino runs a signal group, and the night of the White House Correspondents Dinner, like, within moments of that, he sent out a message that was like, push for the ballroom. We need the ballroom. This is the thing. And then a couple days later, every Republican member of Congress is talking about how we have to spend a billion dollars on the ballroom. If any Democratic member of Congress or a Democratic president asked me to sell something that's stupid, I would tell them no, because I just wouldn't do it. And I think there was some of that that happened in that month period after the Biden debate, before Kamala became the nominee, where it was like a lot of people were really selling that Joe Biden was okay, when I think we all kind of knew that this is not Something that was tolerable. The argument had, even if it was just a bad night, which I don't really buy the argument on that, but even if it just was like, the argument was lost to the American people at that point. It was just so bad. But there were a lot of people who, I think, damaged their credibility by continuing to argue for that, either because they were on the payroll or they wanted to keep their access. I just think we can't do that. I'd rather have, like, a big, messy coalition tent where we fight in the primaries. We argue about this stuff, but we all get on the same page in the general election and understand that's in that best interest. Why I like on the Hasan Piker stuff, Like, I think people spend way too much time obsessing on everything that Hasan Piker says. At the same time, it's frustrating to me when he continues to support the, like, uncommitted movement in the general election against Kamala. Like, that stuff rubs me in the wrong way. It also rubs me the wrong way when, because Andrew Cuomo's former chief of staff was on Fox News the other night saying that she wouldn't support Graham Platner versus Susan Collins. And I'm like, well, wait a minute. The moderate wing of the party can't tell the left to get in line when their candidates lose and then expect to. We did not do the same when their candidate wins. So it's just. It's really problematic to me, and I think we've just all got to get on the same page. But we should fight in between because those moments are important. And I don't want us to become a movement that's like maga, that is purely fueled by grievance. If we do that, we're never going to help anybody, because the Republican Party and the conservative movement, it's completely lost its way. There was a time where, even if I disagreed with it, they stood for something and they had a governing philosophy that made sense relative to their view of the world. That could have worked like some of the things they said were right or at least correct. But now there's no governing philosophy over there. Whatever the hell Trump wants, it can't work that way on the left.

Well, I agree with you that starting to be governed by grievance would be a very bad, bad direction. I do think, however, that if gaining power by winning elections were the primary goal, we would see a bit of a shift in some of those approaches from people who go, well, you know, given the option between these Democrats and Losing. I mean, I think that's kind of what you're getting to with the Platinum Collins kind of thing. I think that maybe the unifying approach is not everybody needs to be saying the same thing or on the same message, but it's like the number one thing needs to be to get into power. Because if you don't do that, then you don't have anything. And that's where I wonder, does everybody who claims to be on the side of the political left, not the Democratic Party, because a lot of these are people on the left who go, I don't care about the Democratic Party.

Right.

But do they actually want to get power or do they want to completely complain about how Democrats don't know how to get power and stay out of power? So they can keep complaining about that if my question is clear.

Right. Or they think that the Democratic Party has to be destroyed and that things have to get so bad for them to take power, which means a lot of people get hurt. And that is something that, like, again, I'll get yelled at in the comments, but, like, because I know he has a lot of fans, but Hassan Piker has said he doesn't care about the Democratic Party. And, like, that's where he loses me. Like, the rest of the rhetoric and stuff I don't really care about outside of a couple of stupid things that he said. But, like, and I just think it's overblown the way the third way has gone after him. But if you tell me you don't care about the Democratic Party, I'm sorry, you lose me on that. Like, I don't think the party's perfect either.

Well, I think it depends what you mean by not caring, though, because I've said before, like, I've never been a registered Democrat. I don't care about the Democratic Party as an institution, but I do care about looking at who's putting forward the better candidates and making sure we're on the same page about which are these better candidates. But. So I think the devil is in the details of what you mean by don't care. And I think what Hasan means and what I mean by it are two very different things.

That's totally fair. And the way I, like, probably if I stopped working in Democratic politics, like, I would become an independent. I don't think I'm, like, I would never vote for the Republicans. The current version of the Republican Party is crazy to me.

[David Pakman]

Yeah.

[Mike Nellis]

But I do think it's. It's the Democratic Party in this moment in time is the last Best hope for democracy and decency in this country, period. It is the only coalition of people left that give a shit about whether or not you can get a good paying job, take care of your family, retire with diggity, maybe take a vacation. That's it. Now we disagree about how to do that. On the edges of that we can argue about single payer health care, we can argue about tinkering with affordable care, whatever, but for the most part it's a bunch of people who actually give a damn about other human beings in this country. So I'm happy to be part of that coalition provided that that remains true. But I do think there are a lot of people, and by the way, you see this on the right as well because Nick Fuentes and his Griper movement, they're actively telling their people to vote Democrat because they want the Republican Party to get punished so that they can take over the Republican Party. I cover that a lot on my YouTube channel. It's a, it's SC stuff. And I do think there are folks inside our tent that would be happy to be pissing inside. Right. And that's a bit of an issue that I don't quite know how to solve. And some of them are people I like and respect. Like, you know, folks, the young turks like. I like them very much. I like Jake. I've known Cenk for 20 years. It's just, it's a hard coalition to build.

Last thing I want to talk about Texas. Yeah, here's my view on the Texas situation. If you just asked me straight up, who do I think ultimately wins? I think Paxton's favorite. I think we've done this routine before where it's like, it's close, we might do it and then it's like the Republican ends up eking it out. However. However, I think it's the best opportunity in a long time to put a Democrat back in the Senate representing Texas, number one. Number two, what's incredibly interesting is that Talarico has gone in a year from a guy who is barely known. Like he's this interesting state legislator in Texas, some people in the inside know, but he's not, like he's not well known to a guy that now Fox News is panicking about. They're doing the he's gay thing, they're doing the he's vegan thing. Millions or you'd know better than it. Could it be tens of millions of dollars that are spent trying to defeat Talarico? Like, I don't like playing this game of like just to be in the running is a victory. That's not what I mean. But the fact that in a year he's turned himself into someone that millions of dollars will be needed to defeat him in Texas, that's pretty remarkable by itself.

Yeah. I mean, it's going to be the most expensive Senate race in the country. I'm almost certain of that at this point. I would liken this to Texas, is that Stacey Abrams ran for governor twice and did Georgia.

[David Pakman]

You mean Mike.

[Mike Nellis]

Sorry, did I. I meant to say Georgia. I'm sorry.

Yeah.

I want to talk about Georgia for a second because I think it's the best parallel here.

[David Pakman]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Mike Nellis]

Is Stacey Abrams ran for governor twice in Georgia, didn't win either time. Came close, I think the first time, less close the second time around, but laid the foundation for a lot of other people to win, including Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. Right. And by the way, Joe Biden in 2020 won Georgia as well and so had moved where that state was. Texas is going to require the same thing. Now, I do think that Talarico can win and I frame it to folks this way in the. In the Cook PVI. Texas is an R +5 state, so it's not as Republican as a state of you think of it has tremendous amount of independence. Now, those independents tend to lean more towards the MAGA movement than anywhere else. But Trump's numbers with independent voters are horrific Right now. Trump won the state by 14%. So let's use that as our baseline. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that Talarico is a unique candidate that people are attracted to. That's probably worth a couple of points in one direction. Let's call it two points. Right. Then Paxton is an especially bad candidate. And I'll remind people Paxton underperformed Governor Abbott in 2018 by 10 percentage points. That's how bad of a candidate that he is. And he had way more money in that race. And I think this will be closer to parody. So let's assume that's another couple of points. Let's say it's an r. It's an R&9 race right now. So the question is, is the national to be so bad for the Republicans that people are going to vote R +9, D +9, basically, and put this race in. In the win column for the Dems? I think it's very possible. Atlas, Intel, New York Times, Sienna, a bunch of others. I think we've had five or six polls just in the last two weeks showing Democrats with a double digit lead in the generic ballot. So I do think it's very possible. And Paxton is such a damaged candidate. Like for all the talk of Graham Platner's Nazi tattoo and his stupid Reddit comments, the stuff that, that Ken Paxton has done and said, protecting child sex abusers who are his friends and doing special deals for them, like Epstein, that stuff is so much worse than anything.

Their standards are so different. Their standard, the standards of Republicans in Texas are very different than Democrats or

Republicans in Maine, but not independent voters. That's the point I'm making is like, they're so like probably in Texas, I'm going to get this wrong and I would recommend talking like Mike Madrid or somebody that's done a little bit more work on this. But like, let's say Texas is 35% Republican and 30% Democrat. That leaves the remaining people as independents. If the independent voters turn against the Republican Party the way that the approval rating looks like right now. And Trump is underwater in Texas. The other thing to keep in mind is Beto O' Rourke only lost by about 2%. I was on Beto's race in the beginning in 2018. In his primary, Beto only lost by 2%. And Trump was slightly above water in Texas in that race. And the consumer sentiment in Texas and around the country was way better. So the economy's worse, the environment's worse, Trump's approval rating is worse. And I frankly think Talarico is a slightly, slightly better candidate than Beto, although I don't know that. It's like a huge difference. So I just think that there's, there's an opportunity here.

Without a doubt there is an opportunity and it's one of the most exciting and also important races. So I'm going to be very big on my audience getting involved in that one. We've been speaking with Mike Nellis. His sub stack is Endless Urgency with Mike Nellis. He's also on YouTube. We'll link to his YouTube channel. Mike, always good to talk to you.

Thanks, I appreciate it.

Some people assume focus is just about willpower. But if you've sat down to work and you're checking your switching tabs in your browser, getting pulled into distraction, you know, it's not that simple. I want to tell you about our sponsor, Brain fm. Brain FM is a music app designed to support focus. It's not the random playlists or ambient videos that people often will put on. It's music built from the ground up for cognitive performance. Brain FM works with musicians and neuroscientists to create music that will interact with your brain's natural rhythms. Their patented audio technology is designed to influence brain activity related to attention. This is why Brain FM is the only music app funded by the National Science Foundation. The app includes a number of modes depending on what you're doing. Deep work Creative Motivation There's a dedicated ADHD mode mode for people whose brains may benefit from extra support. There's also been peer reviewed research published showing that their music increased activity in attentional networks and also improved performance on attention based tasks. Try it yourself with 30 days free at Brain FM. Pacman the link is in the description

[David Pakman]

we finally got Donald Trump's medical report. The physical was Tuesday. They said the report would be out Wednesday. It came out at 11pm on Friday. When you bury news, you publish stuff at 11pm on Friday if you want to absolutely make sure nobody pays attention to it. But you know who did pay attention to it? Donald Trump. And you know who's really confused by his own medical report and specifically the cognitive tests? It is Donald Trump. Look at what Donald Trump posted to Truth Social about his cognitive tests. Quote, the results of my physical examination taken at Walter Reed Military Medical center and just released were extremely good. Unlike other US Presidents, none of whom have ever taken an approved, highly difficult cognitive test, I scored a perfect 30 out of 30 considered extreme intelligence. We're going to come back to that. Are the Democrats really surprised? In fact, this is my fourth such test. All perfect or 120 correct answers out of 120 questions asked. It is very rare that anyone gets a perfect score, especially when achieved four times in a row. All people running for president and Vice president should be forced to take high difficulty cognitive tests. Congress and the Democrats should demand it. President Donald J. Trump the part I want to focus on is where Trump talks about this as proof of extreme intelligence. But let me build to that. First of all, Trump has previously said he had aced three of these people realized that's not really adding up. So now he's saying he aced four of them.

[Trump Voter]

Them.

[David Pakman]

But he's claimed to have taken far more than four cognitive tests and aced all of them. But for some reason he's saying he aced four of them.

[Mike Nellis]

Whatever.

[David Pakman]

Maybe he failed some, maybe he didn't ace them. We don't know because it is completely impenetrable opacity. A lack of transparency is what we see. But here's the most important part. To me, Trump doesn't seem to understand what the test measures or even what the score means Trump says, this is very difficult. And the fact that I aced it proves that I am of extreme intelligence. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment doesn't measure that.

[Mike Nellis]

It's just.

[David Pakman]

It doesn't measure that. It's a screening tool meant to detect cognitive impairment if someone's had stroke, if you suspect someone has dementia, if there's a brain injury, you can assess very basic functioning with this test. Imagine bragging that you passed a hearing test. So you go, I'm like a concert pianist. I'm skilled like a concert pianist because I passed a hearing test. Now, the hearing test is which, by the way, they didn't give Trump a detailed hearing test. That's another story, which we talked about earlier. So Trump goes, Well, I got 30 out of 30. It's like a perfect score on the satisfaction means I'm in the top of intelligence and students. And it is not what the test is. Measuring a perfect score on the test means you're not demonstrating signs of cognitive impairment on the screening.

[Mike Nellis]

And I want to tell you, I

[David Pakman]

don't know that Trump has really aced this test every time, because now the number of times he claims to have taken it, it's very weird. The theme is that everything has to be transformed into an adjudication of Trump's intelligence, strength, value. He that that's everything to Trump. It's a competition. Everything is how do I measure up against other people, including these low iq, usually nonwhite women that he says aren't very smart. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Jasmine Crockett and others. And this post is the most perfect example of Trump's relationship with expertise. And he gets information from doctors, and he can't just accept it for what it is. He has to repackage it into how he's smarter than everybody else. Now, it's possible.

[Mike Nellis]

I don't want to rule out the

[David Pakman]

possibility that Trump has such sycophants around

[Mike Nellis]

him that they are telling him wrongly

[David Pakman]

that the test means he's super smart. I think it's about a 90% chance Trump's repackaging this stuff into what it means, and a 10% chance that Sean

[Mike Nellis]

Barbarella or whoever are coming to him

[David Pakman]

and going, sir, you're so smart. Look at this.

[Mike Nellis]

30 out of 30.

[David Pakman]

I'm going to go even a step further. Do we know that Trump doesn't sometimes get an imperfect score on the cognitive test, but the doctor still says you aced it? I'm not trying to be conspiratorial. What I'm explaining is we don't have any of the underlying information, but we have a decade now of propaganda, deception and lies around Trump's medical status. So my, my first stop on the dishonesty train is it's Trump who is either lying or misunderstands. But I wouldn't completely rule out that the people around Trump are either lying to him or even potentially cooking the books. The point is we have no clue. We simply have no idea. Now, Trump's proposal for mandatory cognitive tests for every candidate because he believes he found a metric on which he can claim superiority is also fascinating. If the next test measured, you know, constitutional knowledge and economics and history and foreign policy, I don't think Trump would be as enthusiastic about forcing everybody to take it. But he has identified something which he believes he can score well on. The irony is that the post isn't evidence of cognitive decline. The fact that Trump is confused about the cognitive decline test doesn't prove that he's in cognitive decline. It proves that he has this lifelong tendency to exaggerate, to self aggrandize, and to turn every objective measurement into a branding exercise. I'm the guy who aces the cognitive test. So I don't think that the deepest story here is the score. It's Trump can't just go, hey, you know, my doctor says I'm pretty healthy for my age. I'm doing well. For an obese, nearly 80 year old, that's not enough for Trump. He's got to be the greatest, the tallest, the strongest, the smartest, the best, best golfer, unprecedented in presidential history. That should concern us because people with that sort of outlook and tendency rarely are introspective and in the way that I believe a president needs to be. And it won't shock you to hear that Donald Trump has presented no evidence at all that he's capable of introspection. You've got to see this. The level of sophistication at which Trump's economic advisers are operating is so low that it makes you wonder, how did these people get their jobs? And then you remember, all right, they

[Mike Nellis]

got their jobs because they pledged that

[David Pakman]

they would be unendingly loyal to Donald Trump. Donald Trump. Let me talk to you about what's going on.

[Mike Nellis]

It has to do with credit card companies.

[David Pakman]

Now, we've been looking at warning signs about this economy. One of the warning signs is people are later and later on their car loans. Another warning sign is people are starting to fall a little bit behind on mortgages, although not very much. But one of the big warning signs in this economy is people are becoming delinquent on their credit card payments. Now understand the difference between delinquent and simply paying the minimum. If you get a bill for $1,000 and you say, I'm going to make the minimum payment and you pay 20 bucks, you are not delinquent.

[Mike Nellis]

You've paid $20.

[David Pakman]

The other 980 carries forward and you start paying interest on it, it's not great. It's not great to pay high, high interest rates, but you're not delinquent. If you get a bill for $1,000 and you pay nothing, and then the next month you get the bill for the thousand plus the interest you owe and you pay nothing, that is going to put your credit card into delinquent status. That is the difference between paying the

[Mike Nellis]

minimum and being delinquent.

[David Pakman]

Kevin Hassett was brought on to FOX News and he's asked about this. It's great that he's asked about this. This is an important topic. The economy is shaky. People are becoming delinquent on credit cards. And Kevin Hassett goes, you know what? I think the credit card companies are going to be okay. Kevin, that's not why we're bringing it up. We know the credit card companies are going to be okay. Take a look at what he had to say here.

[Kevin Hassett]

Okay, let's start credit card debt, though, because that's another issue. Wall Street Journal says in the first quarter of this year, the percentage of credit card balances that were at least 90 days delinquent rose to 13.12%, according to data released in May by the Federal Reserve bank of New York. That's the highest level in 15 years and the most since the period following the 2008 financial crisis. People say they're using those cards to get through necessities because they can't afford what's going on. So your message to them, right?

[Interviewer/Host]

Well, we Talk to the CEOs of the credit card companies all the time and we do see some increased stress like the numbers that the Wall Street Journal quote quotes. But for the most part, the delinquency is different from default and there's not any kind of threat, the financial threat to the credit card companies that they don't feel like they're heading towards default scenarios. It's just that people are taking a little bit longer.

[David Pakman]

It is absolutely stunning and also not at all stunning that when they are pressed against a corner, they can no longer deny that indeed, people are getting later and later on their credit cards. So what does he do? He goes, well, Delinquency and default are two different things. Defaults worse. But Shannon, I don't think that the credit card companies are really facing a financial threat from this. People are just taking a little bit longer. We were never worried about the credit card companies, Kevin. And by the way, it should be mentioned that we all kind of know, we kind of remember if it got

[Mike Nellis]

to the point where the credit card

[David Pakman]

companies were really in danger, Trump would

[Mike Nellis]

probably bail them out because that's what he does.

[David Pakman]

He bails out those who least need bailouts and then he crushes the farmers and begrudgingly goes, all right, I guess we'll do a little something for them. What is going on in your mind when your first concern when credit card delinquencies are brought up is to go,

[Mike Nellis]

well, at least they're not defaults.

[David Pakman]

And I think the credit card companies are going to do okay in the end. This is what the administration cares about. If you put all of the pieces together, they don't give a damn about the average person. Well, we went into Iran and gas blew up 65%.

[Mike Nellis]

I don't think about that.

[David Pakman]

Well, the additional inflation since you took office is making it so people have to charge more on their credit cards and then they can't pay the full bill off every month. I think the credit card companies are going to be okay. We know that's not why we're asking. They do not care about the average American. Here's a bonus from Kevin Hassett, Shannon Bream. Bream brings up, you know, inflation is now outpacing wage growth. Wages are going up more slowly than inflation. In other words, people's real purchasing power is diminishing. Kevin Hassett goes, that's kind of a technical matter.

[Mike Nellis]

It's a technicality.

[David Pakman]

Take a look first.

[Interviewer/Host]

For manufacturing workers, for mining workers, some the numbers are really astonishing. For mining workers, their real incomes this year up $7,000 per year.

[Kevin Hassett]

Okay, so you talk about growing wages, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics, according to their data, inflation is now outpacing wage growth. So if people are making more money but things are costing more, how do you answer that question and that concern earn?

[Interviewer/Host]

That's a technical matter. That it's the personal income report that came out last week that said that it was slightly negative. But personal income includes lots of things like transfers and food stamps and things that we are have been reducing as part, as part of our effort to make government leaner and leaner. And so the best measure right now is to look at the wage data that's by far the best measure. And the real wage data are showing big income increases right now.

[Kevin Hassett]

Okay?

[David Pakman]

So we have to remember that when it was Joe Biden and inflation was high because of COVID at the beginning of Biden's term, they weren't saying, you got to remember that personal income includes transfers and food stamps and a lot of that. No, no, no, no, no. It was inflation under Biden is really high now. Of course, it was high everywhere because of COVID And then it came down under Biden and it came down more quickly under Biden than in other countries

[Mike Nellis]

at roughly our level of development. Forget about all that stuff.

[David Pakman]

Now it's hey listen, you guys promised energy was going to be down 50%, gas prices were going to be down 50%. What's going on? And he goes, well, it's a technical matter. A lot of that inflation wasn't real. When we kicked millions of people off of food stamps, which they love bragging about out it was a really great thing. And it actually is a technical matter. If anybody thought for any period of time that these were really the people who were going to be stewards of an economy that worked for the average person that has gone completely in the toilet. And Listen, next Tuesday, June 9th, we're doing a one day membership drive. Part of the reason we're doing it is we need, it's not even just a pro democracy independent movement. We need a movement that just has very basic principles. If you work, you should be able to afford housing and the basics of living. We believe that we need more people understanding that that's a basic principle. That's not a luxury. This administration doesn't believe it. So we are going to be discounting yearly memberships next Tuesday, Tuesday only, huge discount to build this movement that is just a base. It's like a new New deal is the way that I see a lot

[Mike Nellis]

of the things we're advocating for. I would love for you to be

[David Pakman]

a part of it.

[Mike Nellis]

If you'd like to be notified when

[David Pakman]

this discount is available, just get on my newsletter@david pakman.com substack.