Podcast Summary: The Gist — "Not Even Mad: Galen Druke and Josh Barrow"

Host: Mike Pesca
Guests: Galen Druke (GD Politics, former FiveThirtyEight), Josh Barrow (Very Serious Substack & Serious Trouble podcast)
Date: September 4, 2025

Episode Overview

This episode of The Gist, hosted by Mike Pesca, features a "Not Even Mad" roundtable with two sharp political analysts: Galen Druke and Josh Barrow. The trio unpacks the political climate under Donald Trump’s current presidency, focusing on the strategic deployment of issues like immigration, crime, and urban unrest. The discussion digs deep into polling, public opinion, midterms strategy, and the Democratic response to Republican positioning. The latter half pivots to the growing use—and sometimes overuse—of terms like "autocracy" to label Trump-era governance, critically examining political communication, democratic institutions, and how best to frame Democratic opposition.

Main Discussion Segments

1. The Politics of "Chaos": Crime, Immigration, and Trump’s Strategy

[09:48 – 17:01]

Key Points:

• Pesca lays out Trump's playbook: Trump seizes on public worries about safety, crime, and immigration, often leaning into media outrage as political fuel.
• Barrow’s take: Trump benefits politically when focusing on these issues, especially by emphasizing results (e.g., migration slowing under tougher border policies).
  • Immigration policies—though ethically contentious—have been “substantively effective at discouraging people from coming to the southern border” ([09:55], Barrow).
  • Trump’s interventions on crime haven’t hugely shifted political winds but help distract from weaker issues (like the economy).
• Druke’s analysis: Public support for Trump’s hardline immigration grew during the Biden-era migrant crisis but is now slipping.
  • "These mass deportations are no longer popular," notes Druke ([12:29]), referencing “thermostatic public opinion”—where public opinion swings back as policies go further than the public wanted.
  • For midterms, it's not a grateful electorate but an angry one that turns out: “Midterms are more of a fuck you electorate” ([14:33], Druke).
• Polling Nuances:
  • Barrow questions polling reliability on complex issues: “You can frame it...to get results that put the public on either side...” ([15:32]).
  • Druke responds: Even after backlash, the GOP retains trust on immigration—if the contest is Dem vs. GOP on the border, “Trump would win” ([17:01]).

Notable Quote:

“Midterms are more of a fuck you electorate...people turn out to say fuck you for all of the things you have or haven't done.”
— Galen Druke ([14:33])

2. Do Presidents Ever Get Credit for Fixing Problems?

[19:41 – 21:48]

Key Points:

• Pesca asks if improving issues (like immigration or crime) ever wins incumbents credit.
• Druke: “Politics is about trying to direct grease to the squeaky wheel, not celebrating the fact that you have three fully functioning wheels.” ([20:34])
• Barrow & Druke agree: Persistent global dissatisfaction is tied to post-COVID economic strain; voters’ top issues remain cost-of-living and the economy, not solved problems.

Notable Quote:

“Incumbents get walloped...in almost every election around the world...cost of living just really hasn’t been addressed anywhere.”
— Josh Barrow ([21:45])

3. Should Dems Lean Into Outrage Over Trump’s Immigration Tactics?

[21:48 – 26:35]

Key Points:

• Pesca asks if Trump is right to lean into policies that outrage liberals but rally his base.
• Barrow: Focusing on impacts to non-citizens is a political loser; Trump has “not paid a net price for that.”
• Druke: Dems don’t win on immigration; even if Trump’s methods are unpopular, GOP still holds the advantage. Winning issues are “cost of living, health care and the like.” ([24:06])
• Barrow notes some Democrats (e.g., Van Hollen) misjudge the politics by making individual deportation cases focal.

4. Autocracy or Just Politics As Usual? Debating the Labels

[26:58 – 39:34]

Key Points:

• Pesca references media warnings about rising autocracy under Trump, asking if the label is apt or alarmist.
• Druke: Important to separate “things liberals don’t like” from true autocracy. Key test: Has Trump exceeded lawful authority, and do courts/officials comply with rulings?
  • “So far...everyone's complying. Now, that's not to say that it will continue to be the case.” ([28:25])
• Barrow: The gray area isn’t just legality but enforceability—sometimes courts can’t act, so constitutional limits become moot ([32:14]).
• Pesca & Druke: Some “undemocratic” institutions protect from majority rule run amok (e.g., Fed independence)—but Trump is often seeking to “democratize” control in ways that can be destabilizing (e.g., over the Fed or science agencies).

Notable Quotes:

“Being like ‘we're in an autocratic America’ is not super productive.”
— Galen Druke ([30:38])

“Sometimes the things that the President is doing to bring more power to himself are making our system more democratic rather than less. Which isn’t to say that they’re good...”
— Josh Barrow ([33:20])

5. How Should Democrats Frame the Threat?

[39:34 – 45:36]

Key Points:

• Best strategy is to emphasize direct impacts on voters, not institutional or philosophical arguments.
  • Barrow: “Don’t talk about Lisa Cook and mortgage paperwork; talk about how the president’s seizure of the Fed could 'make everything you buy more expensive.'” ([40:49])
  • On vaccines, highlight access problems, not abstract regulatory fights.
• Druke: Democracy arguments alone rarely move votes (“...like 3% of Americans who are willing to change their vote [on norms alone]” [43:00]). But you can tap anti-institutionalism: portray Trump as “the establishment” threatening “your freedom.”
• Fear over democracy still activates base voters—even if not the median voter.

Notable Quotes:

“The lack of an independent Fed makes Americans poor...autocracy makes you poor, I think is a good one, is a solid one.”
— Galen Druke ([43:00])

Memorable Moments & Quotes

• On Overreliance on Outrage:

  “I get very nervous whenever I see Democrats talking about how, you know, the President is being mean to somebody who is not an American and that that's how we're gonna win the election.”
  — Josh Barrow ([22:50])

• On Thermostatic Public Opinion:

  “Once the public sort of gets what it wants...the executive overinterprets their mandate, there’s a backlash”
  — Galen Druke ([12:29])

• On Policy vs. Outcomes in Voter Persuasion:

  “You need to talk about how his actions directly affect people. It's not about institutional structures, it's about outcomes.”
  — Josh Barrow ([40:49])

Lighter Segment – Goat Grinders (Annoyances)

[45:36 – 51:36]

• Druke: Rails against the “quantified self” movement; says self-tracking undermines the experience of just living, despite value in aggregate data ([46:03]).

• Pesca: Fantasy football overanalysis and podcasts—data deluge with little incremental value ([47:54]).

• Barrow: August is the “stupidest” month in news cycle—corporate branding “controversies” fill the vacuum despite bigger issues ([49:40]).

Humorous Exchange:

• Discussing the breakdancing Olympic controversy, all agree it's the kind of outrage that only happens in slow news months ([51:01]).

Timestamps for Major Segments

• Intro, Guest Setup: [00:29 – 07:05]
• Trump’s Strategy on Issues: [09:48 – 17:01]
• Political Credit for Problem-solving: [19:41 – 21:48]
• Immigration & Outrage Politics: [21:48 – 26:35]
• Autocracy Discussion: [26:58 – 39:34]
• Democratic Branding Strategies: [39:34 – 45:36]
• Goat Grinders (Pet Peeves): [45:36 – 51:36]

Summary

This episode exemplifies The Gist’s “responsibly provocative” approach: rigorous, balanced, and playful. Pesca, Druke, and Barrow dissect how Trump leverages contentious topics—often to his advantage—and why outrage over policy cruelty can backfire for Democrats. They challenge assumptions about the efficacy of polling, voter credit for problem-solving, and the utility (or danger) of crying “autocracy.” Instead, the advice is for Democrats to focus their message on impacts voters directly feel, keeping “democracy” arguments grounded in everyday economic reality—and, above all, to avoid getting “mad” at the headlines, but drill deeper on substance.

Listeners searching for a thoughtful, data-driven, and candid take on U.S. politics will find this episode a model of big-picture analysis—laced with wit, skepticism, and clarity.