S5 Ep16: Can You Say 'Oligarchy'? (with Faiz Shakir)

Summary

The Focus Group Podcast – Episode S5 Ep16: Can You Say 'Oligarchy'? (with Faz Shakir)

Introduction Timestamp: [01:37]

In this episode of The Focus Group Podcast, host Sarah Longwell delves into the dynamics of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party amidst the current political landscape. She is joined by Faz Shakir, the former campaign manager for Bernie Sanders' 2020 presidential campaign and founder of the media company More Perfect Union. Together, they explore the strategies, challenges, and future directions for progressive Democrats aiming to shift public opinion and counteract the rise of a more combative Republican Party.

More Perfect Union and Media Strategy Timestamp: [03:49] – [06:31]

Faz Shakir provides an overview of More Perfect Union, highlighting its mission to present economic stories from the perspective of America's working class. He criticizes mainstream media for focusing predominantly on the viewpoints of the business and investor classes, often neglecting the struggles and aspirations of workers.

"What do they think? What do they want? What do they need?"
– Faz Shakir [04:36]

Shakir emphasizes the effectiveness of YouTube as a platform to reach working-class Americans, noting the substantial viewership and engagement his content has garnered. He argues that video content, with its authentic portrayal of workers' experiences, is more impactful than print media in conveying the realities of economic justice.

Ideological Metaphors: Horseshoe vs. Pyramid Timestamp: [07:08] – [09:13]

The discussion shifts to the metaphorical representations of political ideologies. Sarah introduces the commonly used horseshoe theory, suggesting a more nuanced understanding. Shakir proposes a pyramid metaphor, positioning economic justice issues at the base and illustrating how various ideological factions intersect through these common concerns.

"If I go into a town hall... I would work you into solution orientations and I think I would get people who voted for Donald Trump, people voted for Bernie Sanders, people who voted for Kamala Harris and Joe Biden generally agreeing with me."
– Faz Shakir [08:55]

Impact of Bernie Sanders on the Democratic Party Timestamp: [12:45] – [14:43]

Sarah inquires about Bernie Sanders' influence on the Democratic Party. Shakir asserts that Sanders has positively impacted both policy discourse and political strategy, pushing the party towards economic justice issues. He believes Sanders would have won against Donald Trump in the 2016 election due to his genuine economic populism.

"Bernie would have given me the real version... We're battling oligarchy and a ruling class that deprivates people of power."
– Faz Shakir [07:58]

Shakir also critiques the Democratic Party's tendency to sideline progressive voices like Sanders, leading to internal friction and diminishing the party's ability to present a unified front against the GOP.

Voter Responses: Why They Become Democrats Timestamp: [15:31] – [23:40]

The podcast features recorded responses from progressive Democratic voters explaining their allegiance to the party. Common themes include a desire for inclusivity, social justice, and frustration with the Democratic establishment's perceived inaction.

Communication Strategies: Oligarchy vs. Democracy Timestamp: [41:27] – [45:32]

A central debate arises around the use of the term "oligarchy" versus "democracy" in political messaging. Shakir defends the use of "oligarchy," arguing that the average voter understands it as a system controlled by the wealthy elite, which effectively mobilizes support.

"Do the general public understand oligarchy as something that is involved with rule of the rich, the corruption of the political and economic elite, and something bad for our modern democracy? And the answer overwhelmingly is yes."
– Faz Shakir [43:12]

Sarah contends that terms like "democracy" have become too vague and polarized, while "oligarchy" provides a clearer, more specific critique of current power structures. She agrees that maintaining the use of "oligarchy" is essential for resonating with voters.

Communication Differential and Outreach Timestamp: [49:13] – [62:52]

Shakir and Sarah discuss the communication gap between Democrats and conservatives, particularly in leveraging modern media platforms. They highlight the success of Republican figures like Donald Trump and Joe Rogan in reaching and engaging audiences through non-traditional media.

Shakir emphasizes the need for Democrats to adopt more authentic and persuasive communication strategies, engaging directly with voters on platforms where they are most active. He criticizes the Democratic establishment for not matching the Republicans' adeptness at utilizing media to maintain influence.

Conclusions and Future Directions Timestamp: [65:06] – [Final]

As the conversation wraps up, Shakir reiterates the importance of economic justice as a unifying issue for Democrats. He calls for a "conviction orientation" within the party, urging leaders to stand firm on their principles and communicate them effectively to build trust and broaden the coalition.

"There is a difference between analysis... and I think that oligarchy is actually a pretty specific term that means a pretty specific thing."
– Faz Shakir [45:32]

Sarah echoes the necessity for authentic leadership, emphasizing that voters seek politicians with genuine convictions who can clearly articulate and defend their positions.

Notable Quotes

• Faz Shakir
  “What we want to hear from workers themselves. What do they think? What do they want? What do they need?”
  [04:36]

• Sarah Longwell
  “You have working class economic issues at the forefront... Here's the areas with which we all agree and I want to get something done for you to improve your standard of living.”
  [61:42]

• Voter 1
  “I want to stand up for people. I feel like Democrats historically have stood up for people who are underserved.”
  [16:23]

Key Takeaways

1. Economic Justice as Central: Shirin Shakir emphasizes that focusing on economic justice issues can unify diverse voter bases, including those who previously supported figures like Trump.

2. Effective Communication: Utilizing platforms like YouTube and adopting clear, resonant terminology (e.g., "oligarchy") can enhance Democratic outreach and mobilization.

3. Internal Party Dynamics: The Democratic Party must reconcile progressive voices with the broader party to present a cohesive and compelling alternative to the GOP.

4. Authenticity and Conviction: Voters are drawn to leaders who demonstrate genuine convictions and are willing to engage directly with their concerns without compromise.

5. Media Strategy: Progressives must leverage modern media effectively to compete with Republicans' adept use of communication channels to influence public opinion.

Conclusion Timestamp: [65:06] – [Final]

The episode concludes with a call for the Democratic Party to embrace a more economically focused and authentically communicative approach. Shakir and Longwell agree that fostering integrity, conviction, and a clear economic justice agenda is essential for revitalizing the party and broadening its appeal in a politically polarized environment.

---

Listen to the full episode here.

Transcript

[Parent Advocate]

Hey mama. You don't have time to be messing around endlessly scrolling to find a caregiver for your child. Let me clue you in to my trick to save time and my sanity when finding a sitter. Sittercity.com Sittercity knows what they're doing. They've been helping busy parents find the perfect sitter for over 20 years. While other sites overwhelm you by throwing hundreds of random profiles your way, sittercity matches you with caregivers who actually fit your needs. No endless scrolling, no guesswork. I love that all caregivers undergo ID verification. They have background checks, specialized qualifications, and real parent reviews to know if they showed up on time or really know how to handle my sassy toddler. And if I need help, I can talk to a real live human, not a robot with Citircity's delightful team. You know, my employer pays for me to get Citter City completely free as part of my benefits. Yours could too. Citr City is my go to for a smarter, simpler way to find reliable, trustworthy care. Don't wait. Go to cittercity.com xx and get the help you need.

[Sleep Number Representative]

Why Choose a Sleep Number Smart Bed.

[Parent Advocate]

Can I make my side softer?

[Faz Shakir]

Can I make my side firmer? Can we sleep cooler?

[Sleep Number Representative]

Sleep number does that cools up to eight times faster and lets you choose your ideal comfort on either side. Your Sleep number setting all Sleep number Smart beds offer temperature solutions for your best sleep and now get early access to Memorial day deals. Save 30% on our most popular smart bed i8 limited time exclusively at a Sleep Number store near you. Learn [e-mail] foreign.

[Sarah Longwell]

Hello everyone, and welcome to the Focus Group podcast. I'm Sarah Longwell, publisher of the Bulwark, and this week we're focusing on how the left flank of the Democratic Party is handling the current political moment. You know me, I'm one of those moderate former Republicans with Sometimes they call us Rhinos and we are generally unwelcome in today's Republican Party. That feeling is mutual. As a result, I'm not generally aligned with sort of the AOCs and the Bernies of the world, but they are doing something that is important and far too rare with the current Trump opposition, which is that they're doing something, anything for the love of Pete. So I'm interested in what progressive Democrats, both elected officials and voters are are up to right now. What they're thinking, how they're feeling and what we can learn from them and their passion to get out there and do something My guest today has long been ensconced in the progressive wing of the party. Faz Shakir, former campaign manager for Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign and founder of the media company More Perfect Union. Faz, thanks for being here.

[Faz Shakir]

Sarah, thanks for having me. Nice to see you.

[Sarah Longwell]

I am excited for this conversation because my favorite thing in the world is when we don't agree on stuff and we can like talk through and use the voters to really like dig through things. And it's sort of a weird turn of my life that you and I are now talking and I would say through this conversation trying to understand how the Democratic Party can be more effective at defeating electorally what has become a very dangerous version of the Republican Party. And the other thing I'm interested in, because both you and I do this is like we're YouTubers, we do a lot on YouTube and more Perfect Union is big on YouTube right now. And if you go there, you're going to find a lot of like short documentary style videos with titles like How Vale Resorts Destroyed Skiing and How Capital One is Robbing you or Trump says He Will Save American Jobs, John Deere is Calling his bluff. So I'm intrigued by the fire hose of content over there since we are also fire hosing content over here at the Bulwark. So what is More Perfect Union trying to accomplish and how does it fit into the broader effort to move public opinion in the Democrats direction?

[Faz Shakir]

Well, Sarah, when we launched in 2021, my diagnosis of one of many challenges in the media environment is that they often tell stories about the economy from the perspective of the business class, the CEO class, investor class. And that's fair, right? We want to hear from that perspective. But often what is neglected is what is the worker view. So if Amazon is organizing, we often hear how it might affect the stock price, how investors are concerned about it, how it might affect consumers, but about the perspective of the workers themselves. What do they think? What do they want? What do they need? I've had this issue with media coverage for a long period of time. It's like, well, why don't we just create it? Why don't we create an outlet that is trying to tell economic stories from the perspective of buying for America's working class? And that's the basis of what we do.

[Sarah Longwell]

And do you feel like you found an audience?

[Faz Shakir]

Well, we're 1 in 1.6, I think million on YouTube and it was a tough nut to crack. You've probably seen it yourself. It takes a little while to kind of grow And I feel like now we're up a few hundred million views just on YouTube alone this year. And I do believe that of all the platforms, YouTube is the 1 that gives us the opportunity to reach what I would deem to be regular working class Americans. If I go through an airport today and I wear a more Perfect Union shirt, somebody comes up to me and says, hey, you know, I've seen that stuff. Where have you seen it? It's most often the case they've seen it on YouTube and you've seen the explosion with YouTube and YouTube TV itself. So I do think it is working and there's an audience. And that's my criticism of like the know, CNBC and all the others in the world is that you could do this coverage and you could reach people, you just choose not to.

[Sarah Longwell]

Or even that there's an appetite for it.

[Faz Shakir]

Yes.

[Sarah Longwell]

I mean, part of what I've found interesting about the YouTube experiment for us is just how big an appetite there is for the video content. And it's funny because there was like a big video moment more than a decade ago where everyone was like, we're pivoting to video. Pivot, pivot. And then it kind of went bust. And now it feels like there's not nearly as much talk about the fact that video is kind of replacing cable. It's a supplement to podcasts for people who want to visually experience, like anybody who watches this, many people listen to it on audio, many people watch it on YouTube. And being multi platform now, I think is just a big way to reach people.

[Faz Shakir]

And the point I would add to that, everything agreeing with, is that when you tell economic stories, it's one thing to read a quote from a worker who works at Dollar General and tells you about their issues and their pain and their struggles of not getting any raise. It's a different thing to see them. It's a different thing to feel that emotion that comes from that lived experience and the authenticity that is also associated with it. So I do tend to believe that the video actually best captures the kind of journalism you want to tell about America's working class that just can't be captured in print.

[Sarah Longwell]

So tell me about your time with Bernie, and I'm going to preface this by asking it in a certain way. Fair or unfair? One of the things that comes up in the groups from a lot of Trump voters is that they were originally Bernie people. And so that sort of bottom of the horseshoe as we talk it, as opposed to this linear idea that there's a far right And a far left and then a center right and a center left. And I would like to live at the center, but instead it's a little bit more like a horseshoe or it's another way one could talk about it. But I'm interested in your story a little bit. Like why were you attracted to Bernie? What impact do you think he's had on politics? And then why do you think voters who like Bernie might also like Trump?

[Faz Shakir]

Great. Well, let's get into our first potential area of disagreement.

[Sarah Longwell]

Let's do it, man.

[Faz Shakir]

So like first area of disagreement is the horseshoe. I would suggest a different metaphor for you. Maybe not perfect. I've heard this horseshoe one before. I'm going to suggest to you a pyramid. And I would say that when you think of particularly economic justice class based issues in America, think of a pyramid. First off, in the center, this quote unquote center that we all love to talk about is up at the top, high in the sky, representing in my view, less numbers of people, but represents a top of the class if it were. As you go down this pyramid, you've got this base and you expand out and now you've got ideological left, ideological right, and everyone in the middle finding common agreement on core sets of economic justice related issues. If I go into a town hall, this is the question I often ask people who apply for jobs at More Perfect Union there and to candidates who I often have to interview about why they're running for office. So I asked the following question, like you're running for office. Okay, great, I blindfold you, I put you in a random town in America, let's call it Omaha for right now. There's 100 people in a room. I'm going to walk you into that room. And your job is to get them to agree with you, to have them nod their head yes in approval with you. What are you going to go talk about? That's the issue. And I would argue to you, and I'm interested in your thoughts here, Sarah, is that I'm going to go in there and talk about economic justice issues in America. I'm going to talk about how, how hard it is to be a working class person. Where's your pay, where's your health care, where's your retirement at? Often probably struggling. How hard is it to afford college? How hard is it to afford a home and a car right now to make it as a middle class person? Meanwhile, let me also tell you about the people who are not struggling to make it right now. They have so much power over the economy and politics that they are robbing us of economic freedom and liberty. I would tell you a story about that. I would work you into solution orientations and I think I would get people who voted for Donald Trump, people voted for Bernie Sanders, people who voted for Kamala Harris and Joe Biden generally agreeing with me.

[Sarah Longwell]

And are you asking me to come back with what I might say if it was just a game about how to get them to agree with you? I mean, I guess if I was in Omaha and I wanted to get maximum support, I might walk in there and I would start with, you don't want biological men playing in women's sports, do you? And also, don't you think the border needs to be secure? And we have people in this country who are committing crimes who shouldn't be here and aren't we tired of all the DEI and woke. And then at the end I would probably sprinkle in the protection of Medicare, Medicaid and maybe say, you know, some of these people are ripping you off and I'm going to help stop that. But I think I could get a lot of them to nod their heads without doing what you said. And then I would be some version of a Republican under Donald Trump.

[Faz Shakir]

Right. Are you telling me, sir, that that would be your approach? You would go into Omaha and you.

[Sarah Longwell]

Would start talking about approach? I'm just saying if you were playing your game and I had to do it and I'm saying knowing what I know about voters right now, I think I could maybe beat you with what Trump does. Trump leads with immigration and othering of people and that that has been very effective. And you're talking about a strictly economic populist agenda that I think though can be sometimes less potent. Though I agree with you that I think a majority of voters are there. But like he uses his feigned expertise as a businessman and as somebody who understands the system and therefore knows how to manipulate that system. Right. He's not just making a sort of class warfare argument the way I guess I would say Bernie did. So I'm not sure we're having an argument. I'm just saying a couple ways to skin that cat of getting voters with you. And Trump has won. Bernie has other and there's some overlap in people to whom that appeals, but it's, it's not everybody.

[Faz Shakir]

So I'm agreeing with you. And I'm also suggesting that when you do listen to hundreds of Donald Trump speeches, you also hear an economic conversation. In his mind, it was tariffs was a big part of that and tariffs for a long period of time until we lived. The reality of it was a kind of an indication that I am willing to fight. I am willing to take on multinational corporations. I'm willing to take on China. I'm willing to penalize them. I'm not just talking about getting you nice things in the world. He doesn't seem to believe in Medicaid, so it's not like he's trying to expand his social safety net and take care of people. He's saying, I'm going to go to war against people who are depriving you of economic freedom and liberty. That's the Donald Trump version. I'm going to drain the swamp. I'm going to do it my own way. And then Bernie Sanders different conception of this, which I happen to agree with, is a sense that, no, we're in a solidarity ethic of a community. We're going to take care of each other. And here's some basic standards of living that I want to see us work on to improve for everybody. I want to improve some baselines of giving everyone an opportunity to succeed. And I'm also in friction and fight with major powers to get those things done for you. So they're both indicating some degree of a fight. Where I tend to find the differences with my fellow Democrats sometimes is they would go into that town hall and they want to talk about costs and things are very hard for you. And you're like, yes, things are very hard. People got that. Are there people who are making it hard for you? Are you willing to talk about them explicitly and directly and suggest that you will be in a fight with them? Because ultimately, if I'm going to give you governing power, you're going to need to wield it against people who are depriving me of getting the fair chance to succeed.

[Sarah Longwell]

Do you think that Bernie's version of progressivism has been a net positive for the Democratic Party or a net negative?

[Faz Shakir]

I think it's absolutely driven both on policy discourse towards progressive economic justice issues and improved some policy outcomes on the margin. Not as much as I would like to see, but improve the policy discourse certainly under the Biden world. On politics, I would argue it's been giving us really the only solace of seeing a path forward of where you could find the 50 +1 majority nationally that you would need to keep the 10 together when Democrats have been at their best. And Biden, I think, was doing to some degree of this was to keep Bernie and the Bernie left together with him when we haven't seen it succeed. Well, and I think the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Kamala campaign, both of them just eschewing Bernie and the progressivism and kind of in friction with it, unnecessarily in fight with it, in tension with it, rather than inclusive of it. So I would say when he been at his best, when Democratic Party has been at its best, it is working together.

[Sarah Longwell]

If it had been Bernie versus Trump, say 2016, do you think Bernie would have beaten him?

[Faz Shakir]

Yeah, that's an easy one for me. I do believe he would have beaten him. You may disagree, and we could argue why, but I tend to think that the populism of Bernie. I've always thought of Donald Trump as a faux Bernie Sanders. He was saying, okay, I see you're draining the swamp. I see you taking on trade deals. I see you saying you want to take on pharma. Well, I'm going to give you the fake version. Well, Bernie would have given me the real version. And the other thing that we're also grappling with is grassroots ism within the Democratic Party. It is evaporated. It's sad. It's more than just giving a $25 contribution or $100 contribution. It needs to require something of them to participate in a Democratic Party. That certainly is true in the MAGA movement, less true in a Democratic Party, but certainly true now, as you're seeing with fighting oligarchy rallies, that we have a sense of a vision of people being involved in the struggle with us.

[Sarah Longwell]

All right, let's get into it. I want to start with something we do. At the start of a lot of the Democratic groups, I often ask why they're a Democrat, like, why did they become a Democrat? Why do they identify as a Democrat? Whereas with the other ones, it's more like, why'd you vote for Trump? Because now the Democrats are still a party. Republicans are just a Trump phenomenon. So all the voters you're going to hear today are Democrats who want the party to move in a more progressive direction. So people who listen to this podcast know we did an episode where we kind of broke down the difference between people who said they wanted the Democratic Party to be more moderate and people who wanted the Democratic Party to be more progressive. We've done several groups along these lines, and these are all people from the I want Democrats to be more progressive groups. So let's listen to what the pro progressive participants told us about why they became a Democrat.

[Sleep Number Representative]

I think that for me, the calls for expanding universal health care was really the biggest issue that I believed in and gave me a lot of optimism for the future and the kind of policies that we would see come to fruition. But at the same time as I was developing these ideas and you know, my alignment with the Democratic Party, they also started to simultaneously get very upset and frustrated with the silly ways in which the Democratic Party just sit to themselves. And the Republican Party, unfortunately, as we see, are running circles. And I think that a lot of the issues that we'll discuss are going to be rooted in a lack of action towards addressing things that working class Americans really needed and some of policies honestly that brought the Democrats to their power from FDR and the New Deal politics.

[Voter 1]

My mother worked for the Washington Teachers Union. She was the administrative assistant to the president of the Washington Teachers Union. So I was exposed very early to that type of environment. She took me to Martin Luther King's speech and there was a neo Nazi there, by the way, who pointed a gun at us. They didn't want a little white girl there and Secret Service pulled him away. I will never forget that I was little enough that my mother dragged me away by the hand. But it was that sort of thing that formed me. And they taught me to care about people, no matter who they were or what they looked like. And it just stuck with me. And then I just have a natural sense of right and wrong. I think I want to stand up for people. And I feel like Democrats historically anyway have stood up for people who are underserved. And so I remained a Democrat for that reason. But I just wish that they would remember, remember that's who they are and realize that they can't compromise right now such thing as compromising right now.

[Voter 2]

When I was a kid, very much working class city, my parents came from Iowa and Iowa Republicans and all that those bring. And my parents didn't agree with them and they left Iowa and saw that they were something beyond cornfields. And I was just raised to treat others well. You try to help your neighbors, things like that. And I never saw that with the Republican Party.

[Voter 3]

I think the last two elections I voted more to keep Donald Trump out of office than I did to put one of the two candidates in office. I think I ultimately identify as Democrat because I just can never get behind any of the, like identity politics stuff that that side represents the Republican. I can't get, you know, behind the divisiveness, the hatred, the like not being inclusive or anything like that. And not even like super big on the cultural stuff. I just couldn't say to myself, well, I Like this tax plan. But I'm going to ignore all this heinous stuff that they spout.

[Voter 4]

As a child of the 60s and early 70s, at the height of the civil rights movement in the south, grew up in Memphis, I saw the Democratic Party from the time of my elementary school learning as a party that would fight for people who looked like me. And so obviously I'm going to side with that group of people.

[Voter 5]

I was in middle school when Obama kind of hit the zeitgeist. And it's very interesting because I was thinking about what made me a Democrat. My mom was a Republican, my dad was a Democrat. We didn't really talk politics. And I kind of joined the Democratic Party for very similar reasons that I see young people today joining the Republican Party, which is, it was just cool. Like Obama was cooler than McCain. Like he was young, he was charismatic, he was an amazing speaker. And I didn't quite understand the politics of it.

[Sleep Number Representative]

Right.

[Voter 5]

I didn't actually understand his policies at the border. I didn't actually understand how Joe Biden kind of forced his hand in terms of same sex marriage. But he to me represented something that I aspire to. And ever since 2008, I've kind of very slowly marched further and further left. And I think it was really solidified. So I live right outside of Charlottesville, Virginia and in 2016 and 2017 lived a couple blocks from Emancipation park and had plans members chilling on my street. And I think I was already pretty Democratic at that point. But going into school the next day and talking to my students, my immigrant students who were terrified and were like, hey, what's going to happen? Are they coming to my school? I realized that there was kind of no going back. There's never a chance that I'm going to vote for a Republican. Given my experience in this space working with these students, it's a big tent. And I think looking at my students and saying, well, this party would really accept all of you and thinking if I were a Republican, I'd look at my students, say, well, except all of you, but I don't know about your parents or, but when you turn 18, I'm not sure. And that rubs me really the wrong way.

[Sarah Longwell]

So the one thing that jumped out at me and specifically on this conversation we were just having about what voters say they want is that other than the first person who said expanding universal health care and sort of set a policy, the rest of them didn't really talk about economic policies or even policies, period. Right. It was just like a values based Thing which I gotta say is very consistent in the Democratic groups. I got to like if somebody said, well, what's the general thing you hear when you ask people why they're a Democrat? It's some version of I want to help people or like, I think we should be kind and inclusive to people. Like, that's basically why I'm a Democrat. Does that surprise you or does that sound right to you?

[Faz Shakir]

That sounds right to me. Make a few observations real quickly here. One is you can see the effect that Trump, having been the man in the arena for about 10 years of public life, now has an effect on Democratic values and brand. So he's been running for office and been in office, what, since 2015. Here we are in 2025. In those 10 years, certainly I think people self describe as Democrats. You can see almost every single one of them pushing off against the notion of what they are against. And a lot of what they are against is what Trump has come to personify. So that's number one. And then number two is the lack of identity of what it is to be a Democrat. So to the extent that there is a brand of it, you do hear a lot of identity conversation around it. And here now drives at Bernie, because here comes Bernie saying, I can help give us better strength by giving us better definition on a thing that I know that will expand our ranks to people who are not already with us. So if you aren't a self described Democrat, let's call yourself an independent or somebody who doesn't like to be affiliated with politics. His argument, and I would agree with it, would be that if we can own that this brand also has economic justice, class based issues at its forefront, we have a better chance of getting them back into our fold and maybe having them self describe as Democrats. Because right now self described Democratic brand is coming down when it should be going up.

[Sarah Longwell]

Well, let me ask you this, let me just. Because this is like a pushback that I think I would offer in general, which is just like, then why is he a self described socialist and not like a Democrat with those values?

[Faz Shakir]

Well, so this is a question for him, but I can explain how his origins came about, which was a concern of, you know, a modern Democratic Party party, at least at his time when he first started to arise, that he felt was less associated with social economic justice issues that defined him. And so for him, looking at Europeans and others in other parts of the country, a social Democrat in Europe did not exist in his mind here in America. So here in his version, a Democratic Socialist was a version of bringing a desire for social safety net, a fight against a billionaire class, people who want to fight against oligarchy. And we started using that term decades ago that he didn't see or feel or hear in a Democratic Party that had its lineages back to fdr. But that language of taking on or welcoming the hatred of a ruling class did not seem to be associated with the Democratic party in the 70s, 80s, 90s, and today.

[Sarah Longwell]

You know, with Donald Trump back in office, the constant churn of dispiriting news can make following politics more of a chore. I hear it from people all the time. Oh, I just have to tune out. It's too much. So we gotta have somebody who can make it easier on all of us. That's why the NPR Politics Podcast is where I go to decode what goes on in Washington and what every decision that comes out of this town might mean for me and for you. Every day, the NPR Politics team will focus on one thing and boil it down to 15 minutes or less. Good show, short show. Think of it as your political multivitamin. And don't we all love our multivitamins because they're quick and easy. I'm really trying hard to take a multivitamin right now. I love this show because the content is nice and tight and it helps me quickly brush up on all of my podcasts for the week. And fun fact, this was the first podcast I ever went and saw live in person was the NPR Politics Podcast. And I remember going and being like, why do people go to live podcast tapings? But I want to go see this. And now we do our own live show where you could come watch us tape. But I love the NPR Politics team. They're smart, they're fun, and they give it to you nice and quick. Listen now to the NPR Politics Podcast. Wherever you get your podcasts. Do you ever look at political headlines and go, huh?

[Parent Advocate]

Well, that's exactly why the NPR Politics Podcast exists.

[Sarah Longwell]

We're experts not just on politics, but in making politics make sense. Every, every episode, we decode everything that.

[Parent Advocate]

Happened in Washington and help you figure.

[Sarah Longwell]

Out what it all means. Give politics a chance with the NPR Politics Podcast available wherever you get your podcasts. So you ran for DNC chair a few months ago. What opportunities do you see in the sound we just heard? Given the Trump threat, what do you want to see the party do differently, especially from a communication standpoint, but just in general?

[Faz Shakir]

Well, so one is, I think, pick fights about the economy that are not solely based on Donald Trump. We are very clear about the fact that we are a party that is non Trump. And in trying to establish what we are for what is a brand that exists when Trump leaves the arena, and hopefully he does right, we're not dealing with this in 2028, but when we get to this place that Trump is no longer the person in the arena and we're dealing with what is the democratic brand at that point, the majoritarian views, the desire of the society is to say, help me understand that you will fight against injustice in our rigged economy, that you are going to deliver something to improve my life. And having lived through the tragedy of what will Trump will bring us, whether it be on the economic realms, the due process and authoritarian realms, all kinds of issues that I believe related to rule of law, can we deliver a brand that says, for your standard of living, for your desire for a government that works for all people, we here are going to bring you a few things that are important to you. For instance, one thing that pops in my mind, first off, Sarah, is like, you've got a bunch of people who increasingly in this economy, work at Amazon, Walmart, Dollar General, Uber. They are gig employees. They can work 50, 60 hours a week. They're not going to get any retirement. To the extent that they're going to survive in this next generation and have a decent fallback, we're going to have to create portable retirement plans for them. We're going to have to expand Social Security. We're going to do something so that we don't have this next generation falling into desperate poverty or really kind of generational decline. If you look at social mobility right now, could you grow up in the bottom 25% and leave it increasingly less and less? So that, to me, that's what I want a democratic brand to be associated with.

[Sarah Longwell]

So one of the themes that ran even more strongly through these groups than even other Democratic groups that we've talked to was that voters felt like the party has counted on their votes while not fighting hard enough for their priorities. I want to play the sound of what that sounded like and then we'll talk about it.

[Voter 1]

I feel like they're just run down. But I also think that there's a mentality of we gotta be fair. We have to be completely fair and compromise. And like I said before, you can't compromise right now. You're not dealing with rational things that are happening. It's not rational policies is what I'm trying to say. So how can you deal with it rationally? And I Don't know what the answer is. I don't know what they can do either. But it's their job to know what to do.

[Voter 3]

The Democrats have gotten complacent and just status quo for too many years. They figure there's going to be a certain base of people and groups in the nation and areas in the nation that are always going to vote for them no matter what, no matter what they do or don't do and sit idle by. And they just bank on that being a given. And I think people are getting tired of that. I think that showed this last election. I think they need to get the people to understand, like, hey, we're not worried about the circus over here. We want to fix these problems. Here's what we want to fix. And if you get enough people that can relate to those problems and have been struggling with those problems, I think you can win people over and you can win people back. I feel like the Democrats have done very little over the last few decades. Like I said, it's just been status quo for them. And you can see polls. It's like 27% approval rating for the party or something like that.

[Voter 4]

I thought Kamala ran a great campaign. I like to say she ran a great campaign for smart people. I don't think she got to the visceral level. And that's part of the Democrats problem is a lot of Democrats are really, really smart people, highly educated people, and they don't try not to talk down to their constituencies. One of the things about Obama was that he energized people and he met us at a visceral level. And I think that we're stuck right now in this. This fear of being too scared to stand up and say, okay, if you are voting against your own self interest, tell me why.

[Sleep Number Representative]

I think that Democrats, at least what we call now the establishment Democrats in this circulating firing squad that's going on, I think that they have really purposely shied away from addressing policy because we have a campaign finance issue. Both parties are beholden to the same donor class, full stop.

[Sarah Longwell]

Yeah.

[Sleep Number Representative]

That is what really complicates things and why some Democrats are trepidatious about really going to address what working class people need if it hurts those that are wealthiest at the top.

[Voter 6]

I do feel like the Democratic Party shot themselves in the foot when they did not support Bernie for president. I feel like a lot of Democrats at that point felt like the party pulled the rug out from under them and left them hanging, and it really demotivated a lot of them. To want to vote at all. I don't think we had a very good turnout at that election because of that. And I think it also shows how the Democratic Party is continuously just going with a safe choice and supporting someone just because they think they'll get elected or they think they have enough clout. But they're not really listening to the people that make up the party that are actually supporting different options.

[Sleep Number Representative]

I am Latino, you know, I'm in a same sex relationship. And I hate when the party uses identity politics to really lean into that voting base. And I hate it as well when the Republican Party does it and we know how they do it. It is an economic message that needs to be stuck by it's money.

[Voter 2]

The Republicans are willing to spend billions of dollars to win races, to buy news stations, my newspapers, everything. They're willing to spend the money. If we got money out of politics, we'd have Democrats who are more outspoken. Because you notice the ones who are the most outspoken, the ones who we pay attention to, Jasmine Crockett, aoc, Ilhan Omar, all of these people, they do not accept large donations from corporations. So they're not afraid of pissing off their sugar daddies. They will come out and say it just like, you know, Jasmine Cracker said, fuck Musk. But with the money, we can't win them using their tactics. We keep trying to be Republican light, it doesn't work. They can out crazy us every time.

[Sarah Longwell]

I mean, I'm just going to let you. I'm going to put a quarter in the machine because these are your people. I have many bones to pick with some of the things that were just said, but you go, well, one thing.

[Faz Shakir]

That I react to here is we, the Democratic Party are the party of government, believe in government, increasingly feel like a party of lawyers. And I went to law school. I don't know if you did, Sarah, but when I think of lawyers, conflict avoidance, risk aversion, follow the rules, norms, ethics. And what you sense with Bernie and a desire for a lot of working class people is disruption. How are you going to change the status quo, the preservation of the status quo. There's this sense of muscularity that I come in as a government reformer because I believe in government. I want to challenge it and I want to make it work better. And it's not just in policy idea articulation. It really is in an ethos of wanting and embracing conflict, welcoming it. And I think that Mark Bernie for a long period of time, I think people associate that with him and they don't associate with a modern Democratic brand. And I do think that part of this is not to get wrapped up in policy conversations as much as just, are you someone who doesn't want to just be a lawyer all the time and a technocrat who wants to make tweaks on the margins, but understand that from a moral justice lens, there's power that is being deprived from people. And I'm going to utilize government that is supposed to work on behalf of everybody. I'm going to wield this for your benefit. And that's what, as a party of government, I do think we have to grab that mantle hard.

[Sarah Longwell]

So I guess I'm trying to decide whether I argue with you or whether I try to keep us on schedule and we get through this. I mean, I guess I'll just take one shot here. And actually I'm going to pick the fight a little bit with some of the voters who are in these groups. I mean, this idea of getting money out of politics, like increasingly the case of big money in politics is not the issue anymore. Like small dollar fundraising has become an essential way. And frankly, it powered Bernie's movement, powered Trump's movement, and it powers people like Marjorie Taylor Greene. Like, the big money is, like you said, people who are risk averse, people who are trying to keep the status quo or maybe get some things for themselves. But like, in general now you see people being more and more performative in politics in order to raise small dollar funds. And that has become a very viable political path. And I guess maybe I'll just ask you a second question rather than picking a fight. But this is where you and I really do come from different parts of things. When you say the Democratic Party is, you know, a party of lawyers, one of the things that the Democratic Party has had going for it is that a bunch of people who used to be Republicans, sort of, they voted for Mitt Romney, they voted for John McCain, they have politically realigned into the Democratic Party. And that has been a real boon for Democrats up until 2024. Right. Like they now own the suburbs. And I think that part of the fight right around 2024 and how it was conducted is like, do you appeal, try to appeal to more of these sort of, let's call them center right voters who do not like what Trump is doing and do not like the insanity of all of it and are willing to vote for responsible sort of more moderate Democrats. And if you look at any polling, it'll say, do you want the Republican Party to be more progressive or do you want it to be more moderate. And overwhelmingly people say more moderate. And the reason that they, I think they say more moderate is because they're, they feel like that is a better path to winning. But I think you would say more progressive. And I just wonder though I'm not sure these voters necessarily want the Democratic Party to be more progressive. I think they want it to be more aggressive. And I don't think those are the same things. You can be more aggressive and win more voters because they especially want people to be aggressive in this moment. But I'm not sure that progressive policy per se is a path toward a bigger, broader coalition for Democrats.

[Faz Shakir]

Great. Two points. So one on the money is that Elon Musk really purchased his role as the presiding co president of the United States.

[Sarah Longwell]

That's true.

[Faz Shakir]

Aipac, crypto, all playing huge roles both in primaries and general elections. Not just in the dollar contribution, but in the articulation of who has power to determine who's going to set the consulting class, who's going to staff certain campaigns, who's going to make decisions about what the policy platform should be. Increasingly smaller numbers of actors with well heeled money behind them are playing key roles. All right, so that would be my point number one on just money. Number two is I'm agreeing with you on some of this. But when you look at the Democratic Party decline over this period of time, you got, you know, as you mentioned, you know, some moderate Republicans moving over what has happened in the Democratic Party, we become more of a party of the college educated. And as that has happened, you see the decline in the losses in places like Ohio, in Montana, you may paint a picture of nationally that you can get to 50 plus one. And I'm not going to disagree with you that you could do this through the suburbs approach that you were just mentioning. But over the long haul what you're finding is the modern Democratic Party needs lower turnout elections in which more college educated people are likelier to vote into special elections election or in an off year election. But when we get into a mass voting scheme, right, many people vote 2024 and hopefully in 2026 and hopefully 2028. We're now worried are a lot of working class people going to show up, people without college degrees, people who have made under $100,000. Can we sustain a path of a party that is increasingly losing them, not just white, but black and Latino and a whole host of others around a class based lens that they're saying no, this isn't the party for me. And so My answer to that is not just Bernieism. And you mentioned the word progressive and that we get lost sometimes in this word progressive because it means different things to different people. But I'll move off Bernie for a second and say here's Dan Osborne. He runs for Senate in Nebraska. To my mind, he was the highest over performer in the last Senate election by the stats and the facts of. If you looked at Democrats and independents combine them over performing Harris the best and the most. And I call him progressive, but why would I call him progressive? The fight against economic oligarchy marked him. He was a guy who led his workers on strike at Kellogg's, proud pro union guy talking about taking on monopolists, proud to take on taxing the rich as a main part of his platform. You rightly pushed back to me say, well, did he find other ways to talk about immigration and safety issues that were accordant with what he viewed Nebraska to be like? Yes. But it satisfied me because I was looking for the class based prism in the Democratic Party and I find it in this guy running as an independent in Nebraska having that fight around class and economic justice issues.

[Sarah Longwell]

All right, focus group listeners, have I got a podcast recommendation for you. In wild times like these, do you ever want to just break the rules? I do. It's important to rethink some of the dumb rules we follow for no good reason. Well, that's exactly what friend of the bulwark Glenn Galich gets into in his show Break Fake Rules. Here Glenn and guest dig into the self imposed rules that hold us back, particularly in the world of America's ultra wealthy philanthropists, to uncover which rules we should commit to breaking together for a better society. Just be sure to break rules in a cool way, not in like an Elon way or planning a drone strike over signal way. Those are bad rules to break anyway. Check out a recent episode of the podcast where Glenn and I sat down to talk about how philanthropists can use their FU money to defend democracy. Because what is the point of having F you money if you don't tell democracy's enemies F you. If you've ever wondered why we live by certain rules or dreamed of what becomes possible when we do things differently, tune in to Break Fake Rules wherever you get your podcasts. Let's keep going here because I want to talk about Bernie and aoc. They've been out on the trail and this is where you get an old Republican squish like me who when I thought it was going to be Bernie versus Trump in 2016, I was like, what am I going to do? Because I hated Trump with every fiber of my being, didn't want him to be nominated. But I was also like, bernie, that's a preposterous idea. This guy's a socialist. I have moved over the years not on policy, but on my desire to beat back this version of the Republican Party. And I want Democrats to win. And I'm not policy agnostic, but I am pretty open to, like, what is the best strategy for winning right now, even if I have to make some policy concessions of my own. Like, I think unions, for example, are like a relic of the past, that trying to sort of breathe new life into them in some way is not a viable political path forward. Though some of the economic populism that you talk about, like, having listened to voters now for the last almost decade, I'm much more willing to say, yeah, I think that could get you a long way. But AOC and Bernie, more than anything, they're out there at the Fighting Oligarchy tour. And there's been sort of a big kerfuffle between Bernie and Alyssa Slotkin, who's more of, like a spirit animal for me, over whether oligarchy is a good descriptor for the moment we're living in, or if it's too academic. And you've weighed in heavily on Bernie's side, and I'd like to have this conversation.

[Faz Shakir]

Great. So oligarchy. Listen, I've never met Senator Slotkin, and I have no personal animist towards her. I would just make this general observation. 30,000 in Folsom, California, 15,000 in Salt Lake, 12,000 like Boise, Idaho. They're showing up at the Fight Oligarchy rallies. Now, if her point, or anybody's point is, can we get an academic treatise as a lawyer to define oligarchy, I'm going to grant that maybe not everybody can do it. But I aggressively posit the following. Do the general public understand oligarchy as something that is involved with rule of the rich, the corruption of the political and economic elite, and something bad for our modern democracy? And the answer overwhelmingly is yes, and it mobilizes them. So for many people fighting oligarchy, now you've given it some definition. Who are you fighting? You're fighting powerful actors that be in a time when we are watching an oligarchic rule over our society from Musk and Trump. So I will fight on this one all day long that I know people have got it. You know, you don't have to debate whether, like, the particular Academic treatise. And what I get annoyed about is modern Democratic Party is like, there's a language of looking down or condescending to people. And it's like, are you going to test them on a test of whether they know the specific definitional terms? No. Do people know and understand what is going on with the powered elite? They do. Don't condescend to them, say, oh, oligarchy. Because all you're telling to them is that I am not interested in taking on specifically named power brokers because it's too hot for me. That's what I think people read if you are concerned about a term, and I doesn't want that to come across my modern Democratic Party.

[Sarah Longwell]

I was excited for this part to hear what you were going to say, because this is the part where I'm actually going to agree with you in a way that people might think Normally I would not agree because I talk a lot on this show about certain terms. For example, like democracy, which I think people have struggled with, the way that Democrats just say, well, we have to defend democracy. And I'll say, well, democracy means different things to different people. Democracy has become a polarized term. Words like authoritarian, you know, we have tested that word in focus groups all the time. People don't really know what it means. But here's the difference that I'll give you about what Bernie and AOC are doing and why I side with them on this. And actually, you and not with Alissa Slotkin. I understand where she's coming from. She's saying, listen. I listen to every expert, probably including people like me, say, voters don't understand these terms or don't talk in these terms, like, can you please just use normal language? That is true. But what is also true is that if you pick a message and you stick with it and you try to bring people in to it, because I think you're right. People understand it from context, nothing else. Like, they know what you mean in this case. And I actually don't think Senator Slotin is actually trying to say that, like, oh, I'm afraid of you going after money elites. I think she genuinely is worried that these are academic terms that maybe voters won't resonate with. But like, to your point, two things are true. One, it clearly is resonating. And two, there's a difference. And this is my key point. I really want to say this and I really want to step on it because it's important to me that people understand this distinction. There is a difference between analysis. Hey, my analysis is that Most people don't know what authoritarianism is versus there is a world though where we could teach them what it means or show them what it means or rail against it to such a degree that they know what it means. And I think that people are over learning the I think what was a failed experiment getting people to care about democracy because democracy could be a very non specific term and made a lot of different things to different people. Oligarchy is actually a pretty specific term that means a pretty specific thing. Much of it is just giving people like no, this is the term we're going to use and like you understand what it means. And so I think that that is what offense looks like.

[Faz Shakir]

Well, so one is when I think of Bernie, I do tend to think that one of the things going on here is you have people who don't want to necessarily associate politically with Bernie. So they kind of like find ways to create political space for themselves. And that's fine. You know, everybody run according to their own convictions and desires. Go for it. But then the fight that you want a faux pick over oligarchy is a foolish one to me. There's other areas you could just create political space for yourself. So fight Oligarchy does two things that are hurting within the modern Democratic Party. There's an indication of desire for conflict, a muscular desire for it and a willingness to name names and name people name and from a class based perspective powered elite that we want to take on. And I'm telling you that push against those two things will do us severe damage if we don't learn to grapple with it. You could come back to me and say I have a different way of framing up the fight and the name delete and here's how I'm going to do it. Great, go for it. I'm sure Pete Buttigieg and others, they could come up with compelling and interesting ways to do it in their own voice, in their own way in which I would agree with them. But when I see the push off and I sense that it's like I don't want to be in conflict. I don't want to talk in a class based lens. I don't want to take on the elite and the rich. That is what too many people perceive who would otherwise vote with us and we need to get them back. That's the working class people. We need them. And for senator from Michigan I challenged her and I believe it strongly. Go into any United Auto Workers union hall and use the term and tell me I'm wrong. Go in there and say, hey, I don't think you know oligarchy. I think you will quickly be proven incorrect.

[Sarah Longwell]

Yeah. All right, guys, this show is sponsored by Quints. Mother's Day is coming up and if you have a chronic case of what am I gonna buy? Try Quints on for size like cashmere sweaters from $50, Italian leather bags, fragrances, and more. The best part, all Quint's Items are priced 50 to 80% less than similar brands. By partnering directly with top factories, Quince cuts out the cost of the middleman and passes the savings on to us. And Quince only works with factories that use safe, ethical and responsible manufacturing practices and premium fabrics and finishes. I love that. And I even got my favorite leather jacket from them before they were even sponsors of this show. And some of my friends have some of their cool stuff too, because Quince is great. Free, thoughtful, timeless and totally her Shop Mother's Day at Quince. Go to Quince.com the Focus Group for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's Q-U-I-N-C-E.com the Focus Group to get free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com the Focus Group. Go check it out. Their stuff is good. Okay, I actually have like a lot of questions. I would dig in with you, but I gotta stick with the voters here. When we asked the voters who they thought were meeting the moment right now, AOC Bernie and then Cory Booker was really the other name who's not necessarily, you know, a Bernie AOC tier progressive, he stood out in the answers like those three were the things that people named. But this might also be a feature of of the more progressive groups versus the moderate groups. While some are really into Booker's filibuster, others noticed that there's some difference between Talking even for 25 hours and winning the longer term fights ahead. The moderates, I think were more enamored of Booker than the majority of this group. But they were grappling with it. And let's listen to how they did that.

[Voter 1]

Look, Bernie Sanders and aoc, they're out. They're speaking their mind, they're being aggressive. Look at Cory Booker. He spent all that time not eating, not going to the bathroom. He stood up there. He was brave. We just need more energy, more energetic, brave people who are going to take the lead.

[Sarah Longwell]

We need more Democrats to hold up procedures and do even 12 hour standoffs like this to keep damaging legislation from being pushed through. They need to be more obstructive this is a wonderful way to do it and speak eloquently on a subject, even.

[Sleep Number Representative]

If only 10 people hear it. Chris Van Hollen understood it. He went to El Salvador and created a story and proved to everybody that this man was alive. Some of them are getting it, but others, you know, like Hakeem Jeffries, like Chuck Schumer, instead of doing that, they want to go and fly to their billionaire donors and tell them, hey, look, listen, come back to give us the money, because when we come back in power, will do better than the Republican Party. And I respectfully disagree just a little bit here on something that really does not impress me. With Senator Cory Booker, I watched his whole thing and I really admired for what he was doing. It was not a filibuster because this was not a proceed just to get in the procedural weeds of it. It wasn't really. He did a speech when everybody was long gone. Great. I love that he purged his body and stood up there and took the time to speak about the workers that have been fired. He took a time to really talk about the inequities historically that have been overcome. And I love that he overtook Strom Thurman's record. Absolutely. However, at the same time, while watching him speak and really being like, God, this is amazing. This man is doing this, he said something that stuck with me because immediately as I was looking to really love this moment, respect him for this, he said something that really, honestly threw the whole thing on the toilet for me. And it was that I hate that we are being pit against one another. I hate when Americans are against each other. It's not billionaires versus the rest of us. It's near. I'm going to curse a little bit, but for what the fuck are you doing here right now then if it isn't for a little billionaire named Elon Musk that is having you do this right now. So I just get a little bit inflamed with this because it is so symbolic of the entire issue that the Democratic Party has had.

[Voter 5]

It was like a cool moment and like, rest in piss. Strom Thurman, like, great. But Strom Thurman was. Was fighting against something. And, like, what he did was, like, horrific. Like, Cory Booker was just kind of there being like, well, I guess now that I have you here, something is being passed to the Senate and he stops everything and goes, all right, guys, like, now I'm gonna stand up and do this for 25 hours. Like, that's when I start to be a little Bit more like, okay, like, we're kind of gumming it up. Like, we're. We're grinding things to a halt. Chuck Schumer just sort of putting his hands up with the budget, like, and being like, well, we. Things to fight, like, bigger battles. The concern that I have is, like, Cory Booker is getting up there and he's doing his thing, and everyone's like, great job, dude. When Republicans are dominating the communication infrastructure around politics right now, and that's very dangerous. And I think I keep speaking from my lens as a teacher, but watching young men ages 14 through 25. You mentioned Rogan. Like, the manosphere is one of the most insidious forces right now in terms of infusing conservative politics into sports media, into just general lifestyle things, right? When a student has the audacity to mention Andrew Tate to me, like, that shouldn't be a political thing, but it is. He was brought back to the United States by our president. And so while standing up there in front of the Senate was a impressive moment, it is but a footnote around the tsunami of communication that is happening. We're talking in this ivory tower, right? I used the word zeitgeist earlier. Like, what conservatives gotten remarkably good at is not standing in the Senate and talking, but finding places to reach voters where they will be listening.

[Sarah Longwell]

Okay, One of those guys is like your guy, right? One of those guys who was saying, cory Booker's giving the speech, but he was like, don't hate billionaires. What are you doing? That guy. That was your guy.

[Faz Shakir]

That's my guy. My own impression of listening to folks is that they are asking and demanding of a Democratic Party. One is treat this moment as not normal. Don't come into your job and pretend like, hey, it's just a normal situation and we got to fight the opposition. Second, related to that is, I'm not a senator, I'm not a governor. I'm asking you, figure out what authorities are available to you. Own the job, come in every day, roll up your sleeves, figure out things. There's an impression and understanding of the public, and they are not wrong to, say, treat this time as not normal and figure out different and compelling ways to break through. Because I see Donald Trump finding interesting and compelling ways to take money away from universities and deport people for no good reason and all kinds of other heinous things. He's coming with some conviction, orientation on his own side and novelty of different ways he was going to go about his work. I don't see it matched. Even if you can't figure out. Show me. You're working at it. Show me. Like a passion of. I will try to figure out all the authorities that are available to me. Dear House member, Senator, Governor, whatever power you want to be elected leader right now, show me.

[Sarah Longwell]

Okay, as we wind down here, I do want to get into sort of what that last guy was talking about, which is the communications differential. Pete Buttigieg was recently on the podcast Flagrant, which was hosted by this guy Andrew Schultz, who I didn't know anything about, but who just was publicly justifying his vote for Trump in a very stupid way, I might add. But I wonder if the hubbub around the interview gave you flashbacks, because it's not dissimilar to when your team sent Bernie Sanders on a Joe Rogan show during the 2020 primary, and it caused a bit of a freakout in some. Some quarters. He also did a handful of the same podcasts, Trump throughout 2024. Right. He did Lex Friedman, he did Theo Vaughn. So, like, what did the Rogan interview teach you about how to reach into new audiences? And why have some been resistant to that over the last few years? Right? Like, how do you think about what the red lines are for, who to talk to, who not to talk to?

[Faz Shakir]

They twisted the knife in my soul here with reliving the painful moment. So, you know, obviously we do. Did Joe Rogan and the reason why we did it, this is 2020, maybe, I can't remember exactly, but it was right in that 2019, 2020 time frame. And he's already reaching millions and millions of people. And we saw as his core audience people who weren't traditional Democrats. And he'd indicated he liked Bernie Sanders. So we're like, hey, we'll go and talk on this show. And as a result, Sarah, we got screens from moveon.org and human rights Campaign, public statement saying that we were betraying the values of the Democratic Party and progressives by merely going onto the show to talk to people with whom we disagree. And my fight against them then and now was that we don't do any persuasion. If you don't go and try to talk to people with whom you disagree, that is a principle of politics. If you want to go join a club, you're not in politics. You're in something else, which is fine, you should go join a club. But if you're in politics, the goal is persuasion. Talk to people with whom you disagree and urge them to agree with you. And Bernie's always been, he's willing to go on Fox News. We did the first, I think Fox Town hall of the Democratic primary campaign. And to this day, when you looked at the reaction, you remember this. Well, the kind of chastisement of the Bernie Bros. The sense that Bernie has people who support him and they're ugly and they are nasty and they do these things. And I would argue for a long period of time that when you talk to working class people, they aren't cut and dry, perfect politicians. They come with their emotions, they come with their passions. And they may be uncouth to you, but they are coming with conviction, orientation around. They love Bernie Sanders, but when you push them off, you say, oh, they're terrible people. Guess where they go. And to your point, you were raising this question before, the Bernie Bros. Have now moved off and they are in a different party. And it pains me because I'm like, they were there. Joe Rogan was there. A lot of those people are still there for the taking for us, if we just showed a different willingness to do both persuasion and to hear them and not to treat them as they are dumb or idiots or heinous people.

[Sarah Longwell]

You know, I'm just in rooms all the time where people are like, we need a left wing Joe Rogan. And I'm like, oh, do you know who the left wing Joe Rogan is? It was Joe Rogan. Like, that's, that's who the left wing Joe Rogan was. Like, you did have him. And this is where I guess I hear your point about you don't like the horseshoe thing. But I always make this point to people when they're like, you know, talking about right wing politics and everything. And I'm like, look, what do Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Joe Rogan, rfk, Tulsi Gabbard, what do they all have in common? They were all Democrats a decade ago. This is why when people talk about the center, I'm like, the center's sort of a temperament as opposed to like some matchup of policy prescriptions. Which is why Dan Osborne, who you brought up earlier, is a very interesting type person, because actually he's sort of a social moderate, but an economic progressive where it's something I've been thinking about a lot because I have my own sense of, like, what the larger coalition looks like. But I'm not sure that there's not room to play with what you're talking about, especially when it comes to, like, how do you build the biggest coalition possible? How do you bring some of these people back from Trump? But I watched the Democratic Party and I actually think some of the things that take the center right people that I want actually also sends out or repels those working class voters that you need to bring in. It is the immigration issue. It's some of the excesses on the social issues. And I'm not sure that those things actually have to be an inherent conflict. Like there is a world in which they could work together under a certain kind of leadership or somebody who was good at explaining them or talking about them. And I wonder first I. I'm happy to have you react to what I said, but also if you see leaders like that out there that you would point to in this moment besides aoc.

[Faz Shakir]

Yeah. So exactly to your point, when I think of economic primacy, the issues of working class economic issues as being at the forefront, the thing that I prioritize while giving lenience to say, hey, find your, with your convictions, your own racial social justice standing on things that have to be true to you. When I look at that prism, I say I find commonality with people like Marie Glush and Camp Perez, who represents a purple district in Washington, or Jared golden in the state of Maine, Chris D'Aluzio from Pennsylvania. You think of a whole series of candidates that span ideological spectrums that I think if you take Sherrod Brown and John Tester, people who I like, those were in my view associated with working class economic justice issues. That's what bonds that whole crew. And they may come to different positions and postures because one represents Montana and another represents Maine and another represents Washington State, that they may come to different places on social justice issues. My view on a lot of the social justice is you got to come to it with a place of conviction. My concern with Kamala Harris is that when you run a campaign, people expect that you're going to own the position that you held. And if you want to change it, help me understand why you changed it. But what they don't reward is the conviction orientation leaves you. You can't talk about it. You sense like I'm afraid to talk about it. It. I actually think she wouldn't have been penalized if she could just own. This is what I believe on these social justice and give allowance for. While you may disagree with me, this is an area that I happen to hold and for these follow reasons as long as again, from my viewpoint, economic justice primacy comes first and foremost. Here's the areas with which we all agree and I want to get something done for you to improve your standard of living.

[Sarah Longwell]

I agree with that part Pretty vehemently that the problem for her was that when people say they didn't know her, part of what they meant was we didn't really know where she stood, because we know she said all this other stuff before, and now she's saying this stuff. And this is where actually I think the argument over was she progressive or moderate, and she ran this way, and whatever is like ends up being stupid, because that's really, like, what they did was they. They worked in concert to make people distrustful of her. And so, like, neither of them was believed as authentically her. Which is more important. That authenticity is more important than just about anything else.

[Faz Shakir]

And it gives you a sense of the assumptions I'm making. And it's interesting to hear that you may agree with them, which is that I think people's ideology is not very simple to just put on a left to right spectrum. They are all over the place. And even when they are all over the place on a mix of issues, they give allowance. I mean, I take the issue of Donald Trump on the 2020 election was rigged, right? He said it so aggressively. I mean, if you polled that and you know this well, that's what's 30%. How many people actually agree that the 2020 election was rigged? But they are saying, well, he seems to believe it. He says it all the time. That's not the thing that I'm gonna. At least 50 plus 1% of this country is not gonna hold against him. I disagree with him on that. But then on these other sets of issues, he's speaking to me on things that I agree with. I take that lesson and say it can apply to a lot of different things. As long as you are coming to it from your own place of conviction orientation, you want to. Want to stand on that hill and defend and explain it and give allowance. Okay. You know, you may disagree, but this is where I stand. I tend to think that people will reward you, not penalize you. And sadly, we never got to see it play out where Harris would have done that. And just say, own some of these positions and say, what do you believe? Why do you believe it?

[Sarah Longwell]

You know, yeah, if you changed your mind, just like, walk us through the evolution, like, we're here to listen. This is the communications world we live in now, which is that voters want to hear a lot from. You cannot put out press releases. You cannot do carefully crafted speeches. That's a little bit part of the job, but it is not the whole job anymore. And I feel like this is where Democrats are not catching up communications wise. Like, they thought if they hid her maybe a little bit like they hid Joe Biden, it would be like the bounce off of Trump. Like, they hated Trump enough, but that's not good enough. Like, people want to know you. They want. They're going to have a parasocial relationship with you. Like, like, as a podcaster, I know how much that is a thing now. Trump changed what it means to be a politician now. Like, like it or not, people got used to hearing from him all the time, better or worse. And so they felt like, at least, I don't know, I could follow what he's saying because he says it all the time and I hear it all the time.

[Faz Shakir]

And as I travel around with Bernie to all these events around the country, I'll say the most common thing I hear from people expressing why they're there, because there's all these people who voted for Hillary to say it says a version of, of what you said earlier, which is like, I, it wasn't my cup of tea, but I actually really appreciate him now. And I say, why? And the word that often comes up or version of it is like, integrity. This is not a place of convenience or sticking his finger in the wind. This is a place that he owns with a degree of confidence in a conviction orientation. I want to hear that. I want to feel that. I want to see somebody see things through a moral justice lens. A right and a wrong and a willingness to call a spade a spade, you know, And I think people searching for less lessons, right? And I think we're just talking about the lessons of 2024, the shortcomings of that Harris campaign. We're also seeing that the upswing of, in my view, one of the lessons of Bernie and AOC running around is, damn, that is refreshing to see integrity of conviction. And I hope that more people, wherever you might be, even I might disagree with you ideologically and policies come at it with conviction. Ask the question, Harry Reid used to do this when I worked for him. We get in a room, one of the few politicians heard this from all the time is like, well, any question that come up, well, what's the right thing to do? And you're like, right, exactly. Start with that. Put aside the gamesmanship and what might be the right answer, what might be the wrong answer? Start with yourself for saying, what is the right thing to do in your mind? And let's do politics off of that.

[Sarah Longwell]

Faz, good to talk to you, man. This was enjoyable. My producer told me I was going to like it. And I did like was really fun FAS here. Thanks so much for doing this and thanks to all of you for listening to another episode of the focus group podcast. We'll be back next week, but in the meantime, remember to rate and review us on Apple Podcast, subscribe to The Bulwark on YouTube and become a Bulwark plus member at the Bulwark.com we will see you next week.