3527 - How Zohran Mamdani Won; GOP’s Cruel Medicaid Cuts w/ Ryan Grim, Dr. Adam Gaffney

Summary

Podcast Title: The Majority Report with Sam Seder
Host: Sam Seder
Episode: 3527 - How Zohran Mamdani Won; GOP’s Cruel Medicaid Cuts
Release Date: June 27, 2025

---

Overview

In Episode 3527 of The Majority Report with Sam Seder, host Sam Seder delves into two pivotal political narratives shaping the current landscape: the unexpected victory of Zohran Mamdani in the New York City mayoral race and the Republican Party's aggressive Medicaid cuts. The episode features insightful discussions with Ryan Grim, founder of Drop Site and co-host of Counterpoint, and Dr. Adam Gaffney, a pulmonary ICU doctor and healthcare researcher at the Cambridge Health Justice Lab. The episode combines in-depth political analysis with long-form interviews, maintaining the show's hallmark of independent and irreverent commentary.

---

1. Introduction and Context

[03:52] Sam Seder:
Sam introduces the episode from downtown Brooklyn, highlighting the live nature of the broadcast. He sets the stage by briefly mentioning recent Supreme Court rulings that limit nationwide injunctions and undermine birthright citizenship. Additionally, he touches upon scandals involving New York State Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and President Trump's Department of Justice pressuring the University of Virginia president over DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives.

Key Topics Introduced:

• Zohran Mamdani's victory in the NYC mayoral race.
• Republican Medicaid cuts and their implications.
• Recent Supreme Court decisions affecting national policies.
• Political controversies involving prominent figures like Kirsten Gillibrand and Donald Trump.

---

2. Zohran Mamdani's Mayoral Victory

[07:55] Ryan Grim:
Ryan Grim reflects on the intense four months leading up to Zohran Mamdani's surprising win over incumbent Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor. He emphasizes the grassroots movement and the significant volunteer base that propelled Mamdani's campaign.

[08:09] Sam Seder:
Sam discusses Cuomo's decision not to relinquish his ballot access, indicating a possible continued run despite the primary loss. This move has led to confusion and a scramble among the Democratic establishment to adjust their strategies.

Discussion Highlights:

• Volunteer Mobilization: The remarkable organization of over 50,000 volunteers under Mamdani's campaign.
• Fundraising Strategies: The balance between grassroots support ("people") and necessary funding ("money").
• Media Influence: The role of independent media outlets like The Majority Report and Breaking Points in galvanizing support.

Notable Quote:

Sam Seder [08:28]: "They have the machine. Cuomo knew from day one he was going to get his whatever 350,000 votes that are going to come from the machine that has been built."

---

3. Controversial Remarks by Kirsten Gillibrand

[15:13] Kristen Gillibrand:
Senator Gillibrand voices concerns over Zohran Mamdani's alleged attempts to target Jewish institutions and his supposed glorification of Hamas and historical terrorist acts. She questions how to protect Jewish nonprofits and hold Mamdani accountable.

[16:30] Sam Seder:
Sam critically analyzes Gillibrand's claims, highlighting inaccuracies and the potential exaggeration of Mamdani's positions. He points out that Gillibrand may be conflating her interactions with misleading interpretations.

Discussion Points:

• Accuracy of Claims: Gillibrand’s assertions about Mamdani's stance on global jihad and its impact on Jewish communities.
• Media Responsibility: The importance of accurately representing candidates’ positions and avoiding misinformation.
• Political Rivalries: The tension between progressive candidates and established Democratic figures.

Notable Interaction:

Christian Gillibrand [16:44]: "This is a very serious issue because people that glorify the slaughter of Jews create fear in our communities."

Sam Seder's Rebuttal:

Sam Seder [16:45]: "That's her first lie. He didn't say we should engage in global jihad."

---

4. The Role of Independent Media in Political Campaigns

[31:19] Sam Seder:
Sam engages with Ryan Grim regarding Grim's book, which chronicles Mamdani's campaign strategy focusing on grassroots mobilization over traditional fundraising.

[33:07] Emma Vigland:
Co-host Emma Vigland elaborates on the necessity of structured volunteer management and the interplay between volunteer enthusiasm and financial resources. She underscores the importance of paid staff in maintaining volunteer engagement and campaign efficacy.

Key Insights:

• Volunteer Management: The challenge of organizing 50,000+ volunteers without adequate paid staff, emphasizing the need for structure to sustain engagement.
• Fundraising Dynamics: While Mamdani's campaign thrived on volunteer support, balancing this with necessary funds remains critical for long-term success.
• Media Synergy: The collaboration between independent media channels helps in reaching and mobilizing politically engaged demographics.

Notable Quote:

Emma Vigland [31:08]: "You can't manage 50,000 volunteers unless you have some paid staff."

---

5. Impact of Republican Medicaid Cuts

[30:48] Sam Seder:
Transitioning to healthcare policy, Sam introduces Dr. Adam Gaffney to discuss the Republican-led Medicaid cuts and their projected consequences on public health.

[66:27] Dr. Adam Gaffney:
Dr. Gaffney outlines the significance of Medicaid in the American healthcare system, noting that over 70 million low-income Americans rely on it as their primary source of health coverage. He differentiates Medicaid from Medicare, highlighting state-level variations in program generosity and the historic expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

Key Discussion Points:

• Medicaid’s Role: Essential coverage for low-income individuals and as a critical funding source for hospitals, especially in disadvantaged communities.
• State vs. Federal Dynamics: Variation in Medicaid generosity across states and the challenges states face in mitigating federal cuts.
• Medicaid Work Requirements: These cuts are projected to disenroll nearly 5 million individuals, exacerbating the uninsured rate.

Notable Quote:

Dr. Adam Gaffney [80:10]: "They are eligible. Most of the people who will lose coverage are eligible should remain in the program and will fall through the cracks."

---

6. Consequences of Medicaid Cuts

[79:56] Dr. Adam Gaffney:
Dr. Gaffney emphasizes that the proposed Medicaid cuts will not only lead to significant uninsured rates but also endanger the financial stability of hospitals reliant on Medicaid funding. He cites examples from Arkansas and Georgia, where similar initiatives led to administrative chaos and minimal enrollment benefits.

Implications Discussed:

• Healthcare Infrastructure: Potential closure of up to 700 hospitals nationwide, with 200 particularly vulnerable rural hospitals facing existential threats.
• Patient Care: Millions losing access to essential health services, leading to increased medical debt, deferred care, and higher mortality rates.
• Economic Impact: Though intended to save federal Medicaid funds, the cuts are projected to cost lives and degrade overall public health.

Notable Statistics:

• Projected Deaths: Over 16,600 annual deaths due to Medicaid coverage loss.
• Uninsured Individuals: Approximately 7 million will become uninsured, a historic increase in coverage loss.

Dr. Gaffney’s Key Points:

Dr. Gaffney [83:21]: "Most of the people who are falling through the cracks should meet the requirements, but are not jumping through the hoops."

Dr. Gaffney [85:05]: "They actually do pay into these programs for a variety of reasons. And on average, they actually subsidize the US healthcare system."

---

7. Human and Economic Costs

[93:02] Sam Seder:
Sam probes deeper into the human cost associated with Medicaid cuts, questioning whether the study accounts for hospital closures and their ripple effects on communities.

[86:38] Dr. Adam Gaffney:
Dr. Gaffney discusses the multifaceted impacts, including increased mortality, loss of personal physicians, unmet medical needs, and the potential collapse of healthcare facilities in underserved areas.

Economic Considerations:

• Short-Term Savings vs. Long-Term Costs: While Medicaid cuts may reduce federal spending, the resulting increase in uninsured rates and hospital closures could lead to higher societal and economic burdens.
• Administrative Inefficiency: The implementation of work requirements is both administratively costly and ineffective, leading to increased expenses without achieving the intended reductions in Medicaid enrollment.

Notable Quote:

Sam Seder [95:10]: "It's not just hotels, it's not just about Social Security."

Dr. Gaffney [96:06]: "There is a lot of politically sensitive issues, but their plan to address it is utter bunk."

---

8. Conclusion and Call to Action

[97:29] Dr. Adam Gaffney:
Dr. Gaffney reiterates the dire consequences of the Medicaid cuts, emphasizing that they represent a trade-off between the healthcare of low-income individuals and tax cuts for the wealthy. He calls for a reevaluation of policy priorities to value human lives over fiscal austerity.

[97:46] Sam Seder:
In wrapping up the discussion, Sam encourages listeners to engage with the proposed policy changes critically and stay informed through independent media channels.

Final Remarks:

• Importance of Healthcare Policy: The episode underscores the critical role of Medicaid in safeguarding public health and the far-reaching impacts of policy changes.
• Empowerment through Information: Encouraging listeners to support independent media and stay engaged in political discourse to advocate for equitable healthcare policies.

---

Additional Highlights and Anecdotes

• Humorous Interlude: The episode features a light-hearted segment where Sam and guests engage in playful banter, maintaining the show's signature blend of serious analysis and irreverent humor.

• Listener Engagement: Sam mentions the show's Discord community and various platforms where listeners can further engage with the content and support the program.

[99:37] Sam Seder:

"It's just the week being weeded out... Libertarians. They're so stupid... we nailed him."

---

Final Thoughts

Episode 3527 of The Majority Report offers a comprehensive exploration of significant political developments, blending rigorous analysis with engaging conversation. Sam Seder and his guests provide listeners with a nuanced understanding of both the groundbreaking mayoral victory of Zohran Mamdani and the potentially devastating Medicaid cuts proposed by Republicans. The episode serves as a compelling call to action, highlighting the importance of informed activism and the role of independent media in shaping public discourse.

---

Links and Resources:

• Drop Site by Ryan Grim: Drop Site on Substack
• Cambridge Health Justice Lab: Cambridge Health Justice Lab
• The Majority Report: Majority.fm
• AmeriCommerce Discord: Club Link

Note: All timestamps correspond to the provided transcript and are approximate.

Transcript

[Sam Cedar]

Hi folks, it's me. Today's episode is brought to you by sunsetlakesabade.com use the code left is best for 20% off. As you know, it's all one word. Incidentally, that left is best. I think you can see that. Sunsetlake sabade.com grows, harvests and ships all of its craft Saba Day products directly from its farm in Northern Vermont right near Burlington, straight to your door. Skip the lines and get your relief or your fun or your relaxation from sunsetlake sabade.com sunsetlake sabade.com is a vertically, vertically integrated farm that aims to provide affordable Saba Day products to everybody. These guys are movement partners. Their politics are great and it's reflected in the way they do business, in the way they sell their stuff. They cut out the middlemen. They ship your product, their products, directly from their farm to your door. They are your trusted one stop shop for all your hemp and Saba Day needs. They grow their own Sabaday, they provide third party testing. You get a full breakdown of everything that's in the product and with every order. Incidentally, they also take pride in its best in business customer service. If you have an issue, they want to know so you can make it right. They do not use AI or bots to steer you in circles. When you get in touch with Sunset Lake, you're going to be talking to a real life person. They're also going to be very friendly. Those guys up there, all of them are super cool. They got products, very weird. They got stuff that helps you sleep. Tinctures, gummies. They get focus gummies that focus you so much that Brian can't even take them. Too intense. He was too focused. Listen, if you're already Starting out of 10 on Focus, you don't want to take the focus gummies, but maybe you could take the relaxed gummies. They also have some with say and Delta Na. I can't say those words, not in this context. They've got topicals to help you with your sore muscles, help you with your eczema if you want to use it off label like I do. They got smokable hemp, they got keef and pre rolls, they have it all. They even have some tincture for your pets. If you order, if your order is over $75, Sunset Lake Sabade can ship your order for free. If you. And when you create an account at Sunset Lake Sabade's website, you can start earning rewards points and earn 10% back on all your purchases. You can refer your friends to Sunset Lake Sabade and send them a Coupon for their first order and you earn $10 store credit with every successful referral. Just honestly an all around great company. They're movement partners. They've donated tens of thousands of dollars through the years. Check them out. Sunsetlake sabade.com use the code left is best and get 20% off. Now time for the show the.

[Emma Vigland]

The Majority Report with Sam Cedar where every day is casual. Friday that means Monday is casual. Monday Tuesday casual Tuesday Wednesday casual Hump day, Thursday casual Thirs that's what we call it. And Friday casual Shabbat. The Majority Report with Sam CE.

[Sam Cedar]

It is Friday, June 27, 2025. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live steps from the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America, downtown Brooklyn, usa. On the program today, Ryan Grimm. What is it? What is oh yeah, drop site and counterpoints host and frequent guest on the show. He was live in the Mamdani election party. Also on the program today, Dr. Adam Gaffney, pulmonary ICU doctor, health care researcher at the Cambridge Health Justice Lab. They just released a study that shows the devastating impact on human life that this bill the Republicans are trying to pass will wreak. Meanwhile, speaking of reeking, Supreme Court dropped a couple of rulings today, in fact the last of their term. The two biggest they have limited nationwide injunctions and to undermine birthright citizenship. Another ruling also allows religion to supersede all other rights in many respects by allowing parents to withdraw children from classes that in any way include books that in any way mention anybody who's lesbian, gay, bi, trans, queer. Back in the Senate, the parliamentarian continues to strip from the Republican fat cat bill. The worst of it still remains. John Thune may have to keep Republican senators working over the weekend as they struggle to tear health care away from millions and give millions back to rich people. New York State Senator Christian Gillibrand goes full Islamophobe in wake of the Mamdani win. Trump's DOJ pressuring the UVA president to resign because of yes, dei. Bob Kennedy's anti vax board votes to remove the Marisol from the flu vaccine even though it's not in most of the flu vaccines in this country. But it will probably make that vaccine out of reach for some poor people. IDF soldiers tell Haaretz that they were ordered to shoot unarmed Palestinians waiting for Gaza food aid. US economy shrunk more in Q1 than previously announced as tariff evasion drove our GDP down. And finally, rest in peace. Bill Moyers, one of the truly great journalists of several eras, dies at age 91. All this and more on today's Majority Report. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. Thanks so much for joining us. Emma is still on her honeymoon.

[Ryan Grimm]

Crazy.

[Sam Cedar]

How long is this thing going to last? It's, it, I mean it's, it's been four days, right?

[Ryan Grimm]

What I mean in terms of news, which is how I measure things, it's been about four months actually.

[Sam Cedar]

No, I mean she couldn't have, it is, it is hard to imagine a week where there would have been more news. She, of course, is going to be gone for another week because, you know, it's her honeymoon. But even still, whatever. We have seen a wide array of, a wide array of responses to Zoran Mamdani really spanking Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary for mayor. Now, just an update. Cuomo has decided that there is not going to be, he is not going to give up his ballot access. The deadline passed, I think yesterday. That does not mean that he's going to run, but it does sound like he's going to see how much money he can get to run. They are scrambling big time. I'm sure you guys yesterday spoke about the Bill Ackerman Ackman.

[Ryan Grimm]

Yep.

[Sam Cedar]

Segment one insane rant on I, I've had, I, I've been getting up in the middle of night like a three and I know I shouldn't go on Twitter but like I still because of the whole Zoron thing, like I do and I saw him, he had tweeted at 1 in the morning and it was, it was literally something that he must have been writing all day. And it ended with we're going to do a writing candidate. And I, I will tell you the, the level of insanity associated with something like that is enormous. And just on top of the fact that like, dude, you're literally saying that you're going to try and buy this election. This is all stuff that you should never have written down for publishing. I mean, you should never do any of what you're talking about and you shouldn't be you. But I understand that you are. But you should not be tweeting that out like that. It is in the, your absolute worst interest, which allows me to believe that honestly, he's just, he's just crazy. We, I know you've gone over yesterday a wide array of the right wing bigotry that was unleashed and it's almost as if they, it is what I Call everything bagel bigotry, ism. And they don't know which, which element of the bagel, of the everything on the bagel that they want to focus in on. And I understand folks like Hakeem Jeffries and, and Chuck Schumer, you know, giving sort of half hearted, not so congratulations or you know, recognition. Because of course their donors are very concerned about Mamdani, probably more from a taxation standpoint. And also broadly speaking, they all know that things like this create broader implications in our body politic. It's not just New York City they're worried about. It's not just the added 2%. If I make over a million dollars, you know, the $20,000 for a millionaire is just, you know, people like $20,000 if you have a million dollars. But it's not, it's not that big of a deal. They, they are concerned about it spreading and it giving people hope. And they are, they, it's the precedent they're concerned about. But I have to say that with all of that, as jaded as I am, I was shocked to hear the audio of Christian Gillibrand on wnyc. And I'll tell you something, like, I heard about this seconds after it was on air from total normies who texted me and were like, you cannot believe all Jews incidentally too. I mean, yeah, actually I heard it from three people within like 10 minutes who listened to Brian Learned, which I now okay. Back in the day at Air America. At one point I was on against him, in which case it was not appropriate to listen. But they all texted me some variation of you cannot believe what Christian Gillibrand just did on Brian Lear show. It was bizarre, insane, bigoted nuts I think were the some variation of those here is now understand Brian Lear show. It's a local show, but it's New York City. So it's quite large, bigger than most probably national shows even maybe for some. He takes phone calls. When he has guests on. He takes phone calls and they ask the guest question. And you will always get a wide array of guests. So the issue here is not so much I'm not so surprised about the caller and I'm not so surprised about the caller, you know, sort of like presenting a series of lies or exaggerations or manipulations that Lear can't address. And to be clear, Lear was not a mom, Donnie guy in the run up to the election. But I don't know, I think he was almost worried about getting sued at this point. But listen to not just the caller. That's Almost less relevant. It is less relevant. Listen to Kristen Gillibrand. This is her speaking, incidentally, hot off the heels of her midwife in the genius act. I mean, she was. I don't know if she was the author, but she was certainly one of the co sponsors. The genius act is a crypto bill that is going to be, I guarantee you, I don't know that I'll still be around. Maybe I'll be down to one a week at that point, but in five, 10, 15 years, we're gonna have a financial meltdown and it's gonna be because of this, among other things, probably. But that genius bill. But this is just completely insane.

[Kristen Gillibrand]

Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my call. On question I wanted to ask two very pertinent questions about the threats facing the Jewish community. Unfortunately from Zorra Mamdani. There was a bill that I was reading about that unfortunately he wants to target synagogues and Jewish institutions which donate to nonprofits which are medical institutions like United Hatzalah and Magen Davod David Adam, which is like the Jewish Red Cross. So how do we make sure that Jewish institutions are protected from his plans to punish and fine our institutions which fundraise the medical nonprofits which do work both here in the United States and in Israel and other countries in the world? And also, how can we hold Mr. Mandani accountable for his glorifying association of Hamas and other terror bombings of the intifada in 1990s with over 1,000 Jewish Israelis were killed to his revisionist Holocaust knowledge to the Warsaw Ghetto uprising where Jews were mass exterminated and faced threats. He compared when Jews were killed to when Jews fought back against Nazis. It's quite despicable. I'm sorry, Gabe.

[Brian Lehrer]

Thank you for your call. There's a lot in there, Senator, some of which may be inaccurate. So I don't know. You know, I can't fact check everything in real time. But do you know any of that to be inaccurate or accurate, including the original premise that he would somehow target synagogues if they were contributing to groups like Hatzalah ambulance services in a way that he could hurt the synagogues? I just don't want to give out information that's false, but I also don't want to shrink from information that's true.

[Christian Gillibrand]

Well, the caller is exactly the New York constituents that I've spoken to that are alarmed. They are alarmed by past public statements. They are alarmed by past positions, particularly references to global jihad. This is a very serious issue because people that glorify the slaughter of Jews.

[Sam Cedar]

Pause it for a second.

[Christian Gillibrand]

Create fear.

[Sam Cedar]

That's her first lie. He didn't say we should engage in global jihad. Like you're a US Senator. And incidentally, this is obviously sped up a little bit. So, like, this wasn't, you know, she misspoke, I guess, being very fast and loose. Global jihad. Okay.

[Christian Gillibrand]

Past positions, particularly references to global jihad. This is a very serious issue because people that glorify the slaughter of Jews create fear in our communities.

[Sam Cedar]

The global ghost is people that glorify the slaughter of Jews create fear in our communities. Who is glorifying the slaughter of Jews? Who is that? She's talking. She's talking about Zoramdani. Is she claiming he's glorifying the slaughter of Jews? Maybe Christian Gillibrand should call Brad Lander. Maybe Christian. Is her name Christian Gillibrand? Or is it Kristen? I think it's Kristen. Maybe she should check in with a Jew before she starts claiming that Mamdani is glorifying the slaughter of Jews. Unbelievable.

[Christian Gillibrand]

This is a very serious issue because people that glorify the slaughter of Jews create fear in our communities. The global intifada is a statement that means destroy Israel and kill all the Jews.

[Sam Cedar]

Pause it for a second. That is also a lie. It doesn't matter. It doesn't mean either one of those things. Like, in no possible way does it mean kill all the Jews. It doesn't really mean destroy Israel either. But like, that's like. That's like three steps away. If you wanted to sort of like really, you know, fudge it a little bit, you could get to destroy Israel or destroy the ethno state as opposed to, you know, like a political revolution. But in no one's even fever dreams does it mean kill all the Jews or any Jews.

[Christian Gillibrand]

You know, the kind of things that if Mr. Mamdani is elected, our mayor will need to assure all New Yorkers that he will protect all Jews and protect houses of worship and protect funding for. Not for profits that meet the needs. Those are the things posit.

[Sam Cedar]

I don't. Maybe she doesn't get. Maybe she doesn't get over the air television. And maybe she hasn't heard of Colbert. But like, in addition to him doing this on the campaign over and over again, he was on with Brad Lander being extremely explicit about this. And Brad Lander saying, like, in fact, not only we're going to have, you know, to have a Jew and a Muslim going around campaigning together is as New York as it gets. And incidentally, those not for profits that meet the needs of these communities. The needs the community that she's referring to, maybe she doesn't know, are illegal settlements in the west bank that were illegal under Joe Biden. Now, Israel has said that they're legal. Now they're still illegal under what has been everybody's past policy, including Biden's, maybe short of Donald Trump's and certainly international law.

[Christian Gillibrand]

He'll have to do other mayor.

[Brian Lehrer]

He would certainly say that he has committed to protecting all Jews in New York. As mayor of New York. Do you dispute.

[Sam Cedar]

Do you Pause it for a second? Now, Lear says this in a sideways way. He should have. He said, well, he has committed. It's not that he would say that he has committed. Now, you may not believe him. He could be a secret sleeper cell. But he not only would say that, he said that. He has said that. Good.

[Brian Lehrer]

Do you, do you doubt that?

[Christian Gillibrand]

Well, one of the issues I did talk to him yesterday was exactly this issue. And he has agreed to work with me on this and to protect all residents.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay, pause. This is where Kristen Gillibrand seems to have a repeat offender, despicable problem. If you read the Jane Mayer story about Al Franken, she came out and called for his resignation when it was already clear that he was going to do that. And her coming out and saying like she's going to take credit for him to protect all. No, he's been saying that from day one. Go ahead.

[Christian Gillibrand]

This is something I care deeply about. And so I will be an advocate on these issues. These are things that I think are important to New Yorkers.

[Sam Cedar]

You know what else she was an advocate on, it seems to me, sexual harassment in the military. And I'm trying to think who it was that Zoran Mandani was running against. Yes. A serial sexual harasser. Go ahead.

[Christian Gillibrand]

On these issues. These are things that I think are important to New Yorkers. And I will work with him when he gets elected, if he gets elected, to make sure everyone is protected. I also, on a federal level, work to get resources for all our religious sites in the state and in the city.

[Emma Vigland]

City.

[Christian Gillibrand]

I lead the letter for funding for lead. I lead the letter for the funding to protect synagogues and churches and temples and places of worship across our city and state.

[Sam Cedar]

Wait a second. I'm trying to think of what are the three big religions in the state? Christianity. They go to churches and Jews go to temples, although sometimes you call it synagogues. Hindus go to temple. That about covers it. I feel like, oh, mosques.

[Ryan Grimm]

I have to look at that up in the Dictionary.

[Sam Cedar]

It's funny. It's funny how global jihad comes right to mind. But mosque, I forgot the name of it.

[Christian Gillibrand]

For the funding to protect synagogues and churches and temples and places of worship across our city and state. And these are things that he has assured me in, in my one conversation that he will protect everyone. But I understand why people are concerned because of past statements. And so this is just an issue that I will work with him on for sure.

[Brian Lehrer]

I just feel compelled to say we can find no evidence that he has supported Hamas or has supported violent jihad, as that caller was asserting. Can you.

[Christian Gillibrand]

Again, Brian, I don't have all the data, information, and I've never sat down with Mr. Mamdani, so I've asked to have that meeting. I'm going to have that meeting. We will talk through all these things. He can tell me his views of the world.

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, pause. I hope we can. Can we get a live stream of you asking him if he's in favor of Hamas and violent jihad? This is just unbelievable. I. If she doesn't get primaried, I will be shocked. If she isn't primaried, I may just spare my run against Schumer and run against her. Oh, did I say it?

[Ryan Grimm]

Get the Kirsten out.

[Sam Cedar]

Someone's gonna get Rejilla branded. I don't know. We got to work on the. Gotta work on the. On the slogan. We will win.

[Emma Vigland]

We will win.

[Sam Cedar]

It's unbelievable that. It's unbelievable. She needs to issue an apology. Multiple apologies.

[Ryan Grimm]

Her comms person said she misspoke. So not enough to apologize for it, but she misspoke.

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, I'm sorry. Was this. She misspoke? Was this.

[Adam Gaffney]

Was this.

[Sam Cedar]

Was this a special episode of the Brian Lear show? Not on in the late morning, but rather at like 3am on a Friday night? Folks, a while back, let's hear a word from our sponsor, shall we? A while back, I noticed I was a little thing on top of my head and I didn't want to take anything that was drug based. And we actually had neutrophil in the office, but subsequent to that, or I should say prior to that, no, we had neutral in the office because years ago they had tried to pitch us the sponsor and it didn't happen because nobody here felt like they needed to take it. I started taking it. And after that, or prior to that, I think it was both. Emma and someone else I know had told me stories of women they knew that had a great experience with neutrophil. So I figured, why not? It is a. It's a hair growth supplement. I'm sure you've wondered do they work? Fair question. Many hair supplements over promise and under deliver but Nutrafol is different. It's the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement. It's trusted by over 1.5 million people. It's clinically tested to deliver real results in just three to six months. And like I say, I know of two women firsthand who have had a great experience and I have also had a great experience thinning hair is different for men and women. It's a so one size fits all for the hair growth doesn't cut it. No pun intended. Neutrophil has multiple formulas for men and women that are tailored to fit different lifestyles and stages. I should say postpartum or menopause lifestyle factors like a plant based lifestyle so you can get what you need. Plus users of Neutrophil men reported no impact to sexual performance and I will also not report any impact to sexual performance. While many supplements rely solely on ingredient studies, Nutrafol actually test the full recipe essentially and they have very sophisticated metrics like hair counts and pull tests to track improvements in growth, quality, shedding and texture building hair growth routine is easy. Order online, you don't need a prescription. Enjoy free shipping, automated deliveries, 20% savings with a subscription. Plus you get free naturopathic doctor consults and a Headspace Media Media Meditation membership Because your brain is under your hair. Start your hair growth journey with Neutral for a limited time Neutral offering our listeners ten bucks off your first month subscription and free shipping. When you go to nutrifal.com enter the promo code TMR find out why Nutrafol is the best selling hair growth supplement [e-mail] spend nutrition r a f o l.com promo code tmr10 that's neutrophil.com promo code tmr and the number 10 we'll put a link in the podcast and YouTube description Quick break and Ryan Grim it We are back Sam Cedar on the Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome back to the program Ryan Grim, the founder and or co founder of the site Drop Site which you can find on Substack. We'll put a link to that and also the co host of Counterpoint on.

[Emma Vigland]

The Breaking Point for this exact reason we are actually like phasing out the name Counterpoints because it's just so confusing Counterpoints on the Breaking Points channel. So it's just all going to be Breaking Points now. So we'll just have four Co hosts of Breaking Points, but like two a day.

[Sam Cedar]

Interesting.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

All right, well.

[Emma Vigland]

We will win.

[Sam Cedar]

We just broke some news. Did we?

[Emma Vigland]

You did.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay, there we go. Emma Vigland on her honeymoon. It's already been four days. I don't know what she's doing, but there's a couple of stories I want to talk about. But let's obviously start with the big, big, big one. You literally wrote the book about winning a campaign when they have money, but we have people. The name of your book, I'm not sure if you recall the first one, was they have Money, we have people.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah, there you go. And underpinning that is that you also do need a little bit of money, not just people. And New York City's matching funds. I don't know if it necessarily made this possible, because as Mamdani was turning money away, but without the match getting him into the kind of credibility viability range, maybe he doesn't get that amount of small dollars because people don't want to just give to anybody. Who is going to get 3%.

[Sam Cedar]

Absolutely. And you can't manage 50,000 volunteers unless you have some paid staff.

[Emma Vigland]

Exactly. And you can't, like, organize that number of volunteers without some paid staff. And, like, they might show up once, and then it's a disastrous experience. You know, nobody's got a clipboard for you. They don't tell you what to do. It's hot out, and you're like, well, I tried, but. So to make it a fulfilling and enriching and useful experience for these volunteers, you have to have it well structured and organized to get them to not just come back, but then to recruit their friends. So, yeah, you do need money, too. And what she had.

[Sam Cedar]

All right, so let's. I mean, you know, track this for us. I know that you interviewed Mamdani, like, seven months, like, maybe around January. I think we just looked.

[Emma Vigland]

It was November. The first November.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

And what. Give me your sense of, like, how this tracked over the campaign. I mean, we interviewed him in January, and I noticed, like, about a month or two ago that the. The title was still like, is he going to beat Adams? And, you know, we're like, oh, we should change that now. Of course it's back in play because Adams had dropped out. But, like, what happened here? I mean, what do you attribute this to?

[Emma Vigland]

That's interesting. You know, he had to get past the threshold of support, which means he had to start raising enough money that he'd get. Start getting his name out there. And he did that very early and thanks to these matching funds, you know, up to $250. It's matched like six times or something. So he had, you know, by early January a significant amount of money to start spending on social media ads and to. And to put together a team that could then produce these really well done, you know, social videos that were getting out there. And he hit the podcast circuit pretty hard. So you can. You can reach kind of a threshold amount of people who are, like, very plugged because they're very plugged into politics. In fact, outside of the campaign headquarters, on Tuesday night, I met a woman who was going to an exercise class. She was wearing a Zoron shirt, and she said, hey, I love Breaking Points and I love the Majority Report. Like, I was. I was. Yes, she watched the Majority Report in that order. Well, Breaking Points is in the morning. Majority of portions.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay, that tracks.

[Emma Vigland]

That tracks, yes. And she said, like, you know, she was constantly wanted to watch these programs to get updates on Zoron and, like, but she'd been watching it for a long time. So that. That's the kind of person that's going to then volunteer for the campaign. So you can. So because of this independent media pipeline, you can actually reach them. And then at some point, I think the public woke up to the fact that Andrew Cuomo was seriously trying to have another act as mayor of New York City, so then needed to start paying attention to this election and to see who the viable opponents were. And by the time people were paying attention, Mamdani was viable and had a message that resonated with people, which is that the city's unaffordable. Like, you have. You have to make several million dollars a year. You tell me, in New York City for that not to resonate with you?

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, without a doubt. I mean, the city is incredibly expensive, and it does resonate across a very wide spectrum. Of what? You know, people would be surprised, I think, if you live in other, you know, in smaller cities, just like, how wide that that resonates. I mean, I. I had people the day after the election approach me about childcare, and they're like, you know, we're spending, you know, $40,000 a year on. On child care. And now, look, there's obviously cheaper childcare, but I don't know that you get it cheaper than, like, 15,000. I mean, I was in a co op 10 years, 12 years ago for. For. For nursing school, you know, and that was 12 years ago is around that amount of money. But you could say, you know, save money by co op, but this and that. But it helps just the idea of being seen in that way by a candidate, I think. But let's. I just want to. Like, this is what's fascinating to me is that it feels like the Cuomo campaign and the entire Democratic establishment that was so upset the day after, whether that was like in the CNBC crew. I mean, obviously, let's put the right to aside for a moment. It is amazing to me because we have seen, starting with the Howard Dean campaign, which was in 2004, that there's a shift in the dynamic of how campaigns are run. And the reason why the primary is in June in New York State is because it was a incumbent or a big name protection racket.

[Emma Vigland]

Right.

[Sam Cedar]

They have the machine. Cuomo Knew from day one he was going to get his whatever 350,000 votes that are going to come from the machine that has been built.

[Emma Vigland]

Right.

[Sam Cedar]

And they just assume nobody can get a higher number than that. So if we put it in the summer, you know, people won't come out. They don't realize that this alternative mechanism to at least get a jumpstart. I mean, look, Mamdani is a great candidate, you know, and not everybody could do that, but they don't realize there is a mechanism, there's a counter machine that exists now that didn't exist, let's say, 30 years ago.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah, AOC found that exact kind of crack because it was right around the exact same time that her primary was scheduled against Joe Crowley. 40,000 people voted in that primary. This is a district that represents roughly 700,000 people. So, you know, Zoran had, what, 50,000 volunteers. She needed like 16,000 votes total to knock off one of the most powerful Democrats in the entire country. It's sort of, yeah, it's like a Death Star situation where somebody, like, put a little, like, flaw in the blueprint that, okay, this will work unless you can excite people and get them out to the polls. And Democrats could not imagine a world in which voters could get excited to go to the polls and vote for somebody other than the party machine, PAC that was being put up. And that lack of imagination has now cost them across the board. Like DSA's like, elected a ton of people to the assembly, the Senate, you know, after 2018, Mamdani was elected in this 2020 wave. I actually met. Do you remember Adnan Gabor Gorges, who was the second running against Elliot Engel?

[Sam Cedar]

Yes, yes, I interviewed. I interviewed him as well at that time. And he dropped out in support of Jamal Bowman. Yeah.

[Emma Vigland]

And that was actually a crucial moment because he dropped out and endorsed Bowman. And then it was just a day or two later that Elliot Engel went to this Black Lives Matter rally.

[Sam Cedar]

I'm only here because I'm being contested. Yeah.

[Emma Vigland]

And he was only there, I think, because he now had only one opponent and thought he might lose. But anyway, Gabor Gorges was at Zoran's party. He organized the East African Voters for, for Mamdani. And he told me that when he was running in that 2020 race in September 2019, he went to the AOC Bernie Rally, which is right nearby in Astoria. You know, just canvassing, trying to, you know, raise money, get, get signatures, meet, meet boaters. And he said he saw this, this kid kind of hustling outside of the Bernie Sanders AOC rally. And the kid had some magnetism to him. So he went over and like, watched him for a while and watched him speak to people and he's like, he's like blown away. He's like, he's the only candidate I gave money to. Like, he came there to like get signatures, shake hands, make, raise money. He ended up giving this like 26 year old Zoran Momdani $5 for his, for his campaign and stayed in touch with him after that. And he, you know, Mamdani, that, that year knocked off a longtime assembly member. And Mamdani and the other DSA members, you know, formed this block in Albany which caused real problems for Cuomo. And I argued, like, helped kind of push him out. Like, he may have been able to withstand his, his different scandals if not for this genuinely oppositional bloc that was against him and in Albany. And so this has been building for a long time and the city just never, the city Democrats never moved the primary. You what you could, you could move them together, like have everything in September or you. Or you can have everything. And although, and you know, having it in September, you know, you know, really screwed them with Jorge Santos because they had all of these guys elected in like September, then they had no time to like, be like, oh, by the way, this, this one's a con artist.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah, I mean, that's the, it's a dilemma. And I should also say that this primary garnered, as far as I can tell, I don't know the exact numbers, but close to 20 to 25% more voters than the last mayoral primary.

[Emma Vigland]

It was well over a million.

[Sam Cedar]

And the other dynamic, I think, is that progressives were smarter about how you win. I mean, one of the stories was AOC they, you know, people were waiting on her endorsement. She ended up endorsing very, you know, in timing wise, almost the same time she had in the prior race. And from my perspective, I don't know if this is what their thinking was. It made a lot of sense because people don't know that this campaign is happening. You want to do it close so that it's like an action item, right? You don't want, like, hey, make sure you buy my book in six months when it comes out. Now you want people to be able to act. But one of the stories I read was that, like, her, she and her team wanted to see a coalition, you know, like some type of, like, cohesive strategy by all the progressives as to how you're going to be Cuomo. And I don't know. Do you know much about that story?

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah. Yes. And also. Yeah, yeah, that is, that is the case. And Brennan Mencia, who's a UAW official who organized the UAW's endorsement of both Mamdani and Lander, they came in very early and they, they pushed those two very hard. They said, look, you guys need to be together. Like, this needs to be. You need to cross endorse. Like, you're not getting, you're not going to be able to beat Cuomo alone. And AOC felt the same way. And I, you know, there's, who knows, counterfactuals, etc. But I think it's true. Like, I think Brad Lander's support for, you know, for Mom Donnie was, was essential to getting him to just fortifying him through some of the, the tough moments. But then also, Mamdani scene was telling me that their early polling had them winning something like 60, 40 of Landers voters after the endorsement. That moved up considerably to like, closer to 80, 20 or something, which is really unusual, which shows, like, because usually candidates can't actually move their own voters to somebody else. The voters like, yeah, I like you, but after, if you're not going to win, I'm going to choose for myself. It's rare, actually. And no AOC can do it. Bernie can do it. A few people can do it because they become a heuristic in people's minds, like, okay, Bernie supports this person, then I don't need to look into them. He's, he's looked into it. It's fine. But there's not a lot of people that can do that. But Lander, for his voters in New York, was able, was able to do that. And so that was really.

[Sam Cedar]

He created a Permission structure, I think, for a lot of Jewish support to.

[Emma Vigland]

Say, like, okay, I trust Elizabeth Warren level support. Like, yes, yes, college graduates.

[Sam Cedar]

Speaking of that, the Colbert or Late show thing, do you know anything about the sort of, like, what went into that interview? Because I was very surprised to see Stephen Colbert asked that question, particularly in the context of which he did. It was sort of like almost the first question. But it also struck me, like, that is a great question to ask, that it's not inconceivable that that was put on the agenda by the candidates because you are reaching exactly the demographic you want, that Cuomo has been reaching with relentless ads. If you want a chance to address that ad, that would have been the time and place to do it. And sitting next to Brad Lander would have been the way to do it.

[Emma Vigland]

I don't know enough to say whether or not that was. That was orchestrated or organized. I have heard that it was rocky like that there was that. There's more even to the story that behind the scenes, there was even some kind of aggression from around that. That whole situation.

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, wow.

[Emma Vigland]

Which I'm still trying to report out, so I don't have all the details yet. So I think that there. But I think there could be multiple things happening at the same time. I think there could be some kind of Colbert factions or whatever, you know, inside his staff or something that really wanted, like, an ambush type of like, we're going to nail this guy situation. But then you're right that actually it plays to, you know, Lander and mom Donnie's advantage because not only does it look weird, because it's like, aren't these guys running for mayor? Like, what is going on here? And then really, you're going to be attacking this guy when the two of them agree, for the most part about this issue and he supports him and vice versa, like, so it does really take the teeth out of. Out of.

[Sam Cedar]

I think it was very helpful for Mom Donnie. I think it was very helpful if.

[Emma Vigland]

There were some Colbert staffers who thought that they were gonna, you know, hurt Mom Donnie with that. It shows that that's why they're in comedy, you know, and not.

[Sam Cedar]

Well, I mean, but Colbert, in my experience, and I haven't, you know, I haven't had a conversation with him probably in over, you know, probably 10 years. I was surprised by that question, just knowing, you know, what his politics were, at least I was rather surprised. But. All right, let's look down the road a little bit. We don't know who Mamdani is going to be running against. It could be like, you know, sort of the ghost of Andrew Cuomo because he's still going to stay on the ballot, which if I'm on Donnie, you know, and Cuomo still hemming and hawing, having his name on the ballot is not a bad thing. Because if he's not going to put any effort into it, which, you know, it sort of feels like that's only going to cut into Adams and it just makes it harder for, you know, Bill Ackerman to know who he's going to pay. I also think, you know, do you have a guess on who Ackman's candidate may be? Because I have one, and I'll say mine first just so that you don't trump me.

[Emma Vigland]

Okay.

[Sam Cedar]

Listen to the words I'm going to say. Mayor Seinfeld.

[Emma Vigland]

I almost tweeted that yesterday. I didn't want to tweet it into being, though. But now that you've done it, it's your fault. He did use the word young and maybe compared to Larry David, Seinfeld's young.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah.

[Emma Vigland]

Although Larry David's been old for like 55 years.

[Sam Cedar]

Yes, that's true. I don't know.

[Emma Vigland]

Now Larry David ran. Now he'd have to move from la, Right?

[Sam Cedar]

Right, right.

[Emma Vigland]

Now everybody loves Larry Davis. That's a real contest.

[Sam Cedar]

That's that guy Pete. What's his name? The guy from Saturday Night Live, Pete Davidson. I honestly think that's what he's thinking in his head, but I thought he.

[Emma Vigland]

Was thinking Richie Torres.

[Sam Cedar]

Yeah, it's true. He's not joking. Matt's laughing because it is that, like.

[Emma Vigland]

No, I genuinely think that's the name. Because also if you. If you think of what. Jerry. Jerry Seinfeld. I love it. If you. If you read his entire pitch, like that whole post is so worth reading. It's Ackman begging somebody to run and making the case for why you should run. And his arguments are so self. Just playing right to the person's self interest. It's a. It's like. It's a short campaign. It's not even that much of a lift. You don't even have to campaign that hard. You don't have to fundraise. I'm going to raise all the money for you. You're not expected to win. So if you don't, if you lose, it's not actually going to hurt you that much. And you're going to make connections to donors who are then going to be supportive of you for the rest of your Career.

[Sam Cedar]

Like, he.

[Emma Vigland]

He's just explicitly saying all this stuff, which is, like, nice of him to do in public, because you can imagine him sitting down in a boardroom somewhere and explaining all this to Richie Torres. But it's, like, nice to hear him just say it out loud. And then he says, I would say the person's name, but the fact that I'm a Trump supporter would then tarnish him. So if I just do this and recruit him publicly and then spend all of his money, then he somehow isn't tarnished. But, yeah, that's the case. That. And he's. So he's telling Richie Torres, what do you have to lose? It's four months of your life, and then you get connections with us billionaires for the rest of your life.

[Sam Cedar]

I didn't realize how insane Bill Ackman was. I mean, this is. I mean, he is a crazy person. It is.

[Emma Vigland]

I'm so glad that he's in public, though.

[Sam Cedar]

I think this is. I think this is publicly known. But in 04, I was writing a blog that was supposed to be a personal blog by a New York Times reporter, and it was back at the time where, you know, people of a certain age could get this wrong and think that the blog was only available to their friends because it was, like, locked to their friends. And so it was just all this sort of catty stuff. And it's like, does this guy think that nobody, like, was. Was he trying to sort of, like, get a huge thread of people going like, either, you know, Richie Torres should run, or, oh, that's a great idea. This. Brilliant. But, like, anybody with half a brain realizes you cannot do a writing candidacy to win a general mayor mayoral election in New York City.

[Emma Vigland]

Like, yeah. And is Richie. Does it have a T? R, I, T? Is it R, I, C? Like, is it Richard? Like, so, yeah, a lot. A lot of confusion there. But, yes, in that post, he said, then if you have names, please post them below, and then I'll create a poll so that my fingerprints are not on this.

[Sam Cedar]

We know it's him.

[Emma Vigland]

This is not a WhatsApp group, man.

[Sam Cedar]

That's what I'm saying.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

It's like he thought that he was just doing this on his own signal channel or something and nobody else was reading it and that he would not get a million responses that were all mocking him.

[Emma Vigland]

It reminds me of this great Saturday Night live skit in 2016 where Trump is like, I don't use insecure email. I use this private messaging app called Twitter. And the moderators Like Twitter. That's public. He's like, and I'm still in the election. That's public.

[Sam Cedar]

Somebody was also doing that. Like, was it that Chris Delilah thing where.

[Ryan Grimm]

Oh, yeah, Snapchat. They get access to.

[Sam Cedar]

You can take pictures. Wait, what? All right, last question on this. What happens with, like, we have. Mamdani needs to implement his stuff. He's going to need to win in Albany if he wins the mayoral mayorality. And they're going to fight. Not only are they going to fight to keep him from being mayor, but if he becomes mayor, they're going to try and make it the worst, you know, mayor mayorship in the history of New York. I mean, they're just going to tooth and nail. But it seems to me that Kathy Hogle has a problem because Anthony Antonio Delgado, her lieutenant governor, is already trying to run to her left. And she's been trying to sort of edge over there. And now, like, is she gonna wanna be seen as the one who's blocking Mamdani from achieving. Like, if I'm Mamdani on day one, I go up to Albany. Like, I say, thank you for inaugurating me, and then I just go up to Albany and start to do this. Cause I got about a year and a half to get this done, it seems to me. So aside from, like, all the implications that could be nationally of, like, where it's going to push Democrats, and maybe we can talk about that, you know, in later weeks. But for Hochul, this could really push Hochul to the left, because she could be looking at Lawler. You know, I mean, that's a general election question. But if she moves to the right, Delgado could. As she moves to the right, Delgado could end up being between her and Mamdani. And so this is a very tenuous place for her. And she has never struck me as that bright of a politician.

[Emma Vigland]

No. No. And also Mom, Danny and Delgado, both former rappers, right?

[Sam Cedar]

I mean, I don't know if there's a rapper, like Code or whatever.

[Emma Vigland]

More likely. No, but yeah, so what he does. So that's where his experience actually is helpful. Like, he does know Albany. If his movement can get primary challengers out in the field, like, starting immediately for this, for the next cycle. And you have, you know, and WFP out there as well, challenging 10 to 20 assembly members and, you know, five to 10 state senators who are wobbly on these questions. And Mom, Daniel doesn't endorse at first. You know, you hold that. You know, the endorsement is the bullet and the gun that you hold back. If the. If these state senators and assembly members pressure Hochul to let Mamdani just do the things he said he was going to do when he ran, like, which. Which is not a radical. Ask he rank.

[Sam Cedar]

The things that he wants to do are not as radical as people are making. Like, there are municipally owned grocery stores, there are free buses. There are, you know, rent control has been done before, you know, by multiple administrations. You know, none of this stuff is, you know, pie in the sky. It's, you know, this is not radicalism. This is New Deal democratism on some level, just.

[Emma Vigland]

And people voted for it. So, like, let them do it. And so. And then if Albany comes through, then, you know, Mamdani can disappoint all his supporters and not endorse the kind of challengers to these incumbents and even endorse the incumbents. If the incumbents allow him to execute on his agenda and Hochul, then the more pressure there is in Albany from the assembly and the Senate, the more pressure is on Hochul to do it as well, because then she really is the one standing in the way with Delgado over here, like you said, taking up that space. So it does seem like it's not insurmountable. Like, the New York Times is just like, oh, he can't do this. He requires Albany. And Hochul says, forget it. But it's not that simple.

[Sam Cedar]

No. And I think she's. She's doing a soft forget it. So that if there is a candidate to run against him in the, you know, the fall, that that's how they're going to run on. Like, he's. His program's already dead in the water. But her, she's going to be singing a different song. You know, we saw her on congestion pricing. She's not. She is not adept at this. Right. I mean, I don't know what else to say. She is not adept at this. All right, Ryan, I'm going to let you go because I know you got stuff here. But one final thing. There was a. There was a big investigative story in Haaretz. I mean, drop site news is. Has been incredibly not only consistent but relentless and insightful in its reporting on what's going on in Gaza. We had Jeremy Scahill on, I don't know, a couple of weeks ago, talking about the interviews that he had done with Hamas. And this story about. It's almost been. We've seen it, but we didn't see just how depraved it was that there were orders, standing orders to Shoot Palestinians coming for food aid.

[Emma Vigland]

Right, right. We've heard it from Palestinian witnesses. We've heard it from the medics and the doctors and the nurses at the hospitals who've treated the victims. We've seen videos of it. But what we hadn't gotten yet and what Haaretz delivered is inside reporting from, you know, the soldiers themselves who are participating in these massacres. And Israel is such a small country. You know, imagine, you know, it's a country the size of, say, Maryland. And so, you know, I grew up in Maryland. If Maryland was at war, like, I would know a whole bunch of the people who are at war. And so the journalists in Israel are better sourced than our kind of journalists because we've got a military of millions. So if a group of marines commits a massacre somewhere, like, chances that I'm going to know one of those marines is not very high. Whereas in Israel they're going to like, these people are friends, they're texting, they know each other and they're like, you have no idea what we're doing out here. Well, we do have some idea because we're hearing it from the doctors, we're hearing it from Palestinian witnesses what's going on. And the soldiers are telling them we're being ordered to shoot at civilians. I had, I had, when I first saw this, and I think I talked about this on Breaking Points, saying it looked like squid games, like an actual real life squid games. And to see in Haaretz the soldiers themselves call it the Israeli version of red light, green light, like it's depraved on just an utterly incomprehensible level. Every time that these massacres occur, almost every time the IDF says we're going to investigate this, we've we heard that their warning shots were fired. We're going to investigate this. They never investigated. What Haaretz shows is that if you do investigate even, even without the authorities that a military has to investigate itself, you can uncover what's going on here. And the ICC comes into play when a government refuses to prosecute war crimes. Like that's the condition under which the ICC has jurisdiction. And so the only argument in Israel has for prosecuting some soldiers during that, you know, for that rape in today Talon Prison that was caught on video. The argument was, if we don't do this, it gives the ICC jurisdiction. Even, even that argument is falling flat.

[Sam Cedar]

It seems, it, it, I mean, it just seems like they do not care. And you know, like there has been clear evidence of this, like you say, from the perspective of Palestinians and from doctors. And it's not like people in Israel and Israeli government or in the Israeli military don't see these things. It is a willful blindness.

[Emma Vigland]

It seems to me Mamdani shared that Haaretz article today.

[Sam Cedar]

Oh, he did? Well, that's part of the global jihad that Kristen Gillibrand was talking about spreading Haaretz articles.

[Emma Vigland]

That's right.

[Sam Cedar]

Somebody just corrected me on the it's like, do people not watch this show?

[Ryan Grimm]

He pronounced Ryan Grimm right today. So give him some credit.

[Sam Cedar]

I did. I was like, do we have Ryan grin on again? Ryan, thank you so much for joining us. I really wanted to talk to you because of all the reporting you did in your. And now you have like a trilogy.

[Emma Vigland]

I thought I was done with this.

[Sam Cedar]

Ryan has written two books that are sort of historical. Diptych.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah, There you go. Volume one and two.

[Sam Cedar]

Volume one and two. Having traced AOC's campaign and that concept, and this is a concept that is growing and like I say, you know, like, I think this is, we're seeing that this is the sort of like the, the you really can track it to the Dean campaign in terms of their ability traces it back there.

[Emma Vigland]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Sam Cedar]

Thanks so much for coming on. Really appreciate it. Know you're on vacation. That is a pleasure. How dedicated.

[Emma Vigland]

Look at that.

[Sam Cedar]

Thank you. I appreciate it. We will put those links in the YouTube and podcast description. All right. We're going to take a quick break and when we come back, we're going to be talking to Dr. Adam Gaffney. He is a pulmonary and ICU doctor. He is also a health care researcher at the Cambridge Health Justice Lab. They put out a report on the projected effects of the proposed cuts in federal Medicaid and essentially how it's going to kill people. And this is all in that supposed big beautiful bill. We'll be right back after this. It. We are back. Sam Cedar on the Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome to the program Dr. Adam Gaffney, pulmonary ICU doctor and IC doctor, I should say, and a healthcare researcher at the Cambridge Health Justice Lab of Harvard Medical School and one of the authors of a report on the cuts that are outlined in the House and presumably the Senate bill of Medicaid and its implications to people, essentially. Doctor, welcome to the program.

[Adam Gaffney]

Thanks so much for having me on.

[Sam Cedar]

Walk us through what there's a couple of different sort of provisions that will cut Medicaid. But and I want to get to that in a second. But just give us a sense of like how Much reliance is there on Medicaid for people to get health care and for hospitals to be able to provide health care.

[Adam Gaffney]

Yeah, so look, Medicaid was set up in 1965 and since then it has grown a huge amount. You know, it was set up as a program for low income Americans. Over time, or Affordable Care act, other provisions have expanded it. So Today more than 70 million low income Americans depend upon Medicaid as they are primary source of health coverage. So that's a huge number. And from the provider side, you know, I work in a safety net hospital, so many or maybe most of my patients rely on Medicaid. Many hospitals in, you know, that focus on disadvantaged communities that treat patients from lower income backgrounds rely hugely on Medicaid. It's, you know, given the lack of a universal healthcare system in our country, it's kind of like the foundation of the health care safety net. And so that's kind of the role it plays in our society.

[Sam Cedar]

Well, in terms of that growth, the ACA expanded eligibility to Medicaid up to, was it 130% or 140% of poverty? 138 in all. But I think at this point 11 states in the country, so that added millions to it. Again, if you're making 138% of poverty, you're not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. Also, the expansion of Medicaid became, was also a function of two thirds of our elderly being paid for their time in nursing homes by Medicaid where people have basically run out of their assets, may spend them down or you know, with home care or whatever it is and get in there. So there's a wide range of people who are reliant on, on this. Will you talk about the dynamic between Medicaid, like the federal government, the state government and maybe contrast that to Medicare?

[Adam Gaffney]

Yeah, I think that's a really important point. And I think, you know, despite the fact that these cuts are going to be devastating, it doesn't mean that things were, well in terms of the state, the status quo. But you know, both of these, Medicare and Medicaid were both passed during the civil rights era and Medicare had a little more of a traditional national health insurance model. It's a federal program. It applies similarly in all 50 states and it automatically, you know, is given to everyone 65 years of age and older, as well as some additional programs. Medicaid from its inception was a federal state program, meaning there are certain rules set at the federal level and there's federal contributions that go to state programs. So that they can, that they can run these programs, provide this coverage. Now, the problem with that is that historically, states have differed hugely in terms of the generosity of their Medicaid programs. You know, my state, Massachusetts, has pretty good program. Some states are pretty miserly and, you know, try to only cover the bare minimum now. And originally, it wasn't just enough to be poor. To get Medicaid, you had to be poor and fall into certain eligible categories, you know, people with disabilities or blind or with dependent children. So the big change, as you mentioned, was the Affordable Care act that allowed anyone below a certain income to qualify. And it was actually supposed to be for the whole country. But as you're aware, the Supreme Court ruled that it was. It had to be optional for states. And so most, but not all states have now implemented this, this Medicaid expansion. In 2017, Trump tried to really, you know, basically repeal the Affordable Care Act. And that effort sort of famously went down in defeat. There was a lot of opposition. There was divisions within the Republican ranks. I think what they're trying to do now is more similar to 2017, and people realize they're framing it not as an Affordable Care act repeal, they're framing it as sort of, you know, making the program last longer for those who are most eligible for it. It's all a lot of nonsense. It would do very. It would have similar impacts as that.

[Sam Cedar]

2017 repeal in terms of, like, kicking people off and how. And how that happens state to state, we don't really necessarily know. Right. Like, I mean, you people, different states will impose different sort of like, new eligibility requirements to fashion their program to fit the fewer dollars they have. So in some states, it theoretically could be okay. Like, I happen to know Massachusetts Medicaid in terms of nursing homes. I've had some, you know, I'm from Massachusetts. I've had some personal experience with this. You can't have more than $5,000 assets and, you know, in terms of, you know, and you can't have given away the money or anything like that for like, five years in advance or in, in the past before Medicaid comes in and starts provide, paying for nursing homes. Theoretically a state, I would imagine we won't see a lot of this, but theoretically, they could say, okay, you can. You can only have $250 worth of assets or something to that effect, so that they minimize the number of people who are eligible for nursing care. Or they could say, it used to be 140%, 138% of poverty. Now it's just going to be back down to 105% of poverty. I mean there's going to be a lot of people who are going to lose their eligibility because of the this.

[Adam Gaffney]

There is and I think and to answer your question about the role of states and sort of sort of modifying the impacts, I think that's true and also not true at the same time. So it's certainly true that if you just cut federal support for states in terms of the Medicaid dollars that flow from the federal government to the states, you're right, states will have leeway. How much do they want to pony up to make up for that shortfall? And the cbo, the Congressional Budget Office has traditionally projected that states might pony up as much as 50% of the offset of the decline, rather to offset that decline for certain kinds of cuts. Like if you were to eliminate the boosted federal support for the ACA Medicaid expansion population, that population gets extra support from the federal government compared to other population patient groups. But so, so, so yes, that is right. States might now I think states are more constrained than people realize and maybe even in the CBO has previously projected. You know, are taxpayers going to go for a tax site at the state level? Are states going to cut other services? Is it even feasible to generate that kind of money, that kind of tax revenue internally? In many cases, probably not. And the other point I would make, and this kind of brings us to the specific provisions of the bill. Some of the provisions and some of the cuts that will be realized are going to really be nationwide. It's not just here's less money, figure out what to do with it. It's actually, oh no, these are new rules and restrictions that will prevent people from actually being allowed to enroll in Medicaid regardless of what states want to do. And first and foremost in that list is are the Medicaid work requirements. Medicaid work requirements, which we, you know, worth talking about, are actually the single largest driver of uninsurance of loss of coverage in this bill. Nearly 5 million people would become uninsured due to Medicaid work requirements. And so that's going to play out everywhere. Now, yes, some states could be meaner and more miserly. They actually allow states to require beneficiaries to redemonstrate sort of compliance at even greater rates than what is required nationwide. But it's going to affect even Massachusetts and even other sort of more liberal states. So it's going to play out in many ways at once. States will have to make choices. But also they will be constrained in their ability to mitigate the impacts of this law just by what's in it.

[Sam Cedar]

Okay. And we have seen what work requirements do in terms of kicking people off and in terms of their, I guess, their efficacy. Georgia, Arkansas have implemented programs like this. They got a waiver from the Trump administration in the first term and they were disasters. They the, the mechanism that has to be instituted to assess whether people are working, both keeps people who are actually eligible out of getting Medicaid and just cost more. So as a savings mechanism it doesn't work and as a work incentive program it doesn't work. But give us a sense of who those 5 million people are projected to be. Are they just strapping young men who are just hanging out, who don't want to work, don't need the cash, but they feel very strongly about being on Medicaid?

[Adam Gaffney]

I mean it's such an offensive framing, this whole, as you said, able bodied man playing video games in their parents basement, you know, collecting Medicaid as if that's something that you can just like do and enjoy. Look, the end of the day banking.

[Sam Cedar]

All of my doctor visits and I am, you know, sort of just like I'm hoarding all of my doctor visits.

[Adam Gaffney]

Well, this obsession with health care is something that people just kind of want to collect because it's fun and, and, and, and interesting, you know, that you have to impose co pay. You know, it goes back to this moral hazard concept that you have to impose co pays and deductibles because it's almost like a free, you know, buffet. People will just stock up on, you know, more than they even want or need because it's free is obviously outlandish. I mean in the real world anyone who, I think this is common sense, but also we certainly see it on the health care provider side. And people avoid health care even when it is available because it's not fun. No one wants to take time out to go to the doctor. People don't like taking prescription drugs. No one wants to be hospitalized. Certainly no one wants to come to the intensive care, you know, where I work. Right. You really don't need to create barriers to sort of, to prevent that kind of, you know, freeloading. It's an offensive framing. At the end of the day, these are low income people who need health care. And when it, as you said, it was studied in Arkansas and Georgia, particularly in Arkansas, and there's a few findings that are worth pointing out. In Arkansas, one study found that 95% of the target population of Medicaid work requirements either was working or should have had an exemption from the requirements on the basis of being disabled, being in school, being a caretaker, one of these requirements. So if 95% met one of these either worked or met one of these requirements, why did 18,000 people in Arkansas lose health coverage? It doesn't make sense. That number is too high. Right? And the answer is very simple. Red tape keeps people from getting what they need. If you create red tape hoops and hurdles for people to jump through, setting up online accounts, documenting work requirements, you know, documenting hours, do this, do that, people fall through the cracks, right? I mean, I think it would probably happen to me and I am a health policy, you know, researcher and doctor and have all these advantages. Imagine if you're low income, you may have chronic illnesses, you may have multiple medical appointments, you may have a lot going on in your life. It can be really difficult to do this now. So, yes, most of the people who are falling through the cracks should meet the requirements, but are not jumping through the hoops. And two other points on this, number one is that as you alluded to, these are administratively wasteful programs in Georgia. They are spending millions and millions of dollars to corporate consultants to run these new IT systems to try to get people enrolled, and it's a dismal failure. They've enrolled in the first year of the program operating. They enrolled less than 2% of low income Georgians who potentially should have been able to get into Medicaid in Arkansas. It was also expensive. So we're actually working on an analysis that finds that, you know, nationwide these systems would require billions of dollars of expenditures.

[Sam Cedar]

Overall.

[Adam Gaffney]

They do save money in the sense that they kick people off Medicaid, but at what cost?

[Sam Cedar]

They kick people off Medicaid. They keep, they're barrier to Medicaid, to people who otherwise actually would are even eligible.

[Adam Gaffney]

They are eligible. Most of the people who will lose coverage are eligible should remain in the program and will fall through the cracks. And that is how this is designed, how this system is designed. And when they say, oh, no one would lose Medicaid because of this, if that were true, then how is it generating more than $300 billion in reduced federal Medicaid revenue? It has to be one or the other. Either it's kicking people out and saving and saving money, or it's not kicking people out. And it would have no impact on the, on the cost estimates of the bill. Obviously it does. And so you're really just trading the health care of low income people for tax cuts for the rich.

[Sam Cedar]

So how many? I mean so the word. So the work requirements are going to kick 5 million people off.

[Adam Gaffney]

That's 5 million and that's 5 out of 10 for the Medicaid. So just to run through the numbers real quick from the Congressional Budget office, more than 7 million people will lose, will become uninsured because of Medicaid. Not only lose Medicaid but not get alternative coverage. So 7 million Medicaid, about 4 million because of changes in Affordable Care act marketplace rules. And then another 4 million will become uninsured because of the expiration of enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care act marketplace plans. That will happen anyway without the bill being passed to be clear. But they're not going to try to lift a finger about that obviously. So if you total that up, we are talking about a historic increase in the number of people losing coverage in this country, maybe in American history that is coming down the pike.

[Sam Cedar]

And before we get to, I mean this is where your report comes in. Cuz it translates what the implications of that type of historic loss of, of, of health care is before we get there. The other myth I should say when they say, you know, when, when they know that they're you know, 5, 6 million people, 8 million people are going to lose their health insurance. I mean not just Medicare, Medicaid I should say. But like you say, they're not going to find another program in which to get on. There's only 3 million men in the country who are unemployed of working age. So like it's tough to them square this like are they all able bodied that are out there because they like to make it seem like it's just these guys like you say who are playing video games. But the other figure that we hear is there are 1.4 million undocumented immigrants who are on Medicaid. And that is absolutely, you know, fraud, waste and abuse. How many undocumented immigrants are eligible for Medicaid in this country? And honest?

[Adam Gaffney]

Yeah, I mean I don't have the number in front of me but it's very few for several reasons. First of all, no federal dollars can go towards the Medicaid care the Medicaid plans of undocumented immigrants. So insofar as medic there is Medicaid coverage of undocumented immigrants. It's states who choose to do it entirely through their own internal state funds. That's the first thing.

[Sam Cedar]

And so in some ways it's not even really Medicaid. It's like Kentucky running a program or.

[Adam Gaffney]

Whatever to Some undocumented people, it's not enough care and it's not good enough, but it's something. And the alternative is, let's just call a spade a spade. The alternative is letting these people die in the streets. Right? You can, you can talk around this all you want, but at the end of the day, it's not controversial that modern medical care saves lives. And when people say, well, if they go to the emergency room, no one's going to like, you know, kick them out, you know, of the front door. True. Although two important caveats. One is people who are uninsured avoid the hospital. They avoid the emergency room even in serious situations, okay? That's the reality. They don't want, they're scared and they don't want to get hit with a big bill or whatever the consequences. Two, most of the life saving benefit of healthcare comes from ongoing care of chronic conditions. So if you're not going to see the doctor regularly and so on and so forth, you're not really getting the most of the benefit that modern medical care has to offer. I just want to make one other point on the undocumented front. Work from some colleagues of mine have looked at the contributions that immigrants, both documented and undocumented, make into health care programs like Medicaid or Medicare or even private insurance premiums, and what they get out on average, immigrants, especially undocumented immigrants, use very little care. Some of that's because they're young and healthy relative to the rest of the population. Some of that is because of discrimination and lack of access. But either way, they don't get a lot of care out. They actually do pay into these programs for variety of reasons. And on average, they actually subsidize the US health care system. They put more in than they get.

[Sam Cedar]

Out in services and Social Security for that matter. I mean, it's all wage taxes, billions upon billions of dollars that go in. And because they're not citizens, they can't go and register to get the benefits of Social Security when they, if they're still here in the country when they retire or you know, become eligible for Medicare or go and sign up for Medicaid unless they're in one of 14 states around the country that have these auxiliary programs, you know, that are with state funds outside of federal Medicaid. So give us a sense of like, do you have a sense of like the cost? Well, because I would like to talk about like the human cost last, but the actual dollar cost that's associated because like you say, I'm not doing you know, I don't want to make it. You know, the best metaphor I can come up with is if I get an oil change every 3,000 miles, my engine is going to be much better shape than If I wait 25,000 miles and try and bring my engine in when there's no oil in it or the oil is all gummed up. It's going to cost me a lot more to replace that engine without ongoing care. And maybe people show up at the, the emergency room or they have then have an acute problem and theoretically become ineligible, you know, become eligible because they're no longer capable of working. What is the actual dollar cost associated with it? Do we have a sense of that? I mean, is that something that can be measured? Because I got to imagine for every dollar that you spend on ongoing sort of just whole health type of care, you're saving, you know, money down the road. Because as far As I know, 80% of our health care costs are born emanate from 20% of the people in our system. Because it's acute care.

[Adam Gaffney]

It's, it's. I wish I could give a straightforward answer. It is a little complicated and I'll tell you why. As much as I'd love to say if we just gave people really great care upfront, we'd save money in the long term, I can't frame it quite like that. You will save lives, you will improve length in lives, you will make people live longer. But what complicates it is that if you really just thinking this in very crude monetary ways, you know, there are ways like if people smoke, they may actually cost the health care system less because they die young. Right. That's a horrible thing. We don't want that. So it is, I, I'm hesitant to.

[Sam Cedar]

Say it's hard to measure because. Yes, yeah, I get it.

[Adam Gaffney]

But yes, I agree with you. It is, it is silly. What is absolutely silly and what is absolutely illogical is to only cover acute care and not cover ongoing outpatient care, which is more cost effective. Unquestionably, it's more cost effective to do primary care, to do ongoing care, to treat chronic illnesses, than to wait for the catastrophes only. And there's no question about that. But it also does go back to, like, what value do you place on a human life? You know, and I do think that if you incorporated everything in some very holistic society wide kind of analysis in terms of what you're talking about with disability and health harms and everything, yes, I do think it is highly cost effective to Provide care throughout the lifespan to everyone. But look, they want to scapegoat. This has been central to Trump's whole health care plan, has been scapegoating immigrants. On the campaign trail they said this and you know, this is, and Florida has been doing this before the election. They're requiring that, you know, patients report their documentation status, publishing reports that are very shoddy, alleging that X number of dollars is going towards undocumented immigrants. It's a very small proportion. They probably need better care. And at the end of the day, there's also public health justifications for caring for everyone. Right. We saw this certainly with COVID 19, that excluding people from care, you know, potentially for infectious diseases doesn't really make any sense whatsoever.

[Sam Cedar]

Talk about the implications of this bill on providers, because my understanding is we have about 700 hospitals around the country that are heavily reliant on Medicaid payments because of the nature of the patients that they serve. And that up to 200 of them, particularly rural hospitals, are in danger of just closing because of the amount of patients that they would essentially, of patients who could pay, essentially that they serve, they would just have to close.

[Adam Gaffney]

Yeah, I mean, it's not complicated. Right. If you poor patients use Medicaid, hospitals that take care of poor patients rely on Medicaid as their funding stream. These patients aren't going. We know what hospitalizations cost. Forget about it. So, yeah, I mean, safety in hospitals and there's been a lot of emphasis on rural areas. But I want to emphasize it's not only rural areas. There's safety in hospitals and urban and suburban areas that are equally at risk. And yes, this will pull the rug out from under them if all of a sudden, you know, a significant proportion of their, of their, of their patients become uninsured. Right. We said about 10 million. So you know, 7 million patients, people may become uninsured who have Medicaid. That's about 10% of all patients, all people with Medicaid. That's a huge hit to hospitals, bottom lines. And that's not going to only impact, impact those patients. Those hospitals will have to make hard choices. They can cut staff, they can cut services, they can provide less, less care. They can close in a worst case scenario. And you've probably heard the Senate talking about some sort of kind of rural hospital bailout fund that would somehow address this issue because it's very, it's very politically sensitive, including for Republicans. I mean, just to give an example, there was a recent Kaiser Family foundation poll that found that about 64% of the American public is against the big beautiful bill. Right. And then when you tell those, those people while conducting the poll, are you aware this will decrease funding for local hospitals? The percentage who are opposed or viewed unfavorably rises from 64% to 79%. And in fact, you even convert Republican support, a lot of Republican supporters of the bill to the opposition when you just say that. Right. So it's very politically sensitive, but their plan to address it is utter bunk. First of all, the amount of the money in this fund is going to be nowhere near the amount of reduced federal Medicaid expecting. So it's just a bad, a band aid on a big gaping wound that's caused by the, by the cuts. Second of all, it doesn't do anything for the patients. Right. Okay, so the hospital's still there, but I can't go there because I'm uninsured and I'm going to wait until my condition gets worse and not take medications I need. So I think it's really just about optics and is going to have very, very little real world impact. Although the details of whatever it is are not yet clear. It may not amount, you know, what we have to say.

[Sam Cedar]

So one of the fundamental aspects of your study is what's it going to cost in terms of lives, these cuts? Did you tell us what that figure is?

[Adam Gaffney]

Yeah. So, you know, basically our study builds off estimates of coverage losses and that have been provided by the Congressional Budget Office and it combines those estimates with a variety of studies that have been done over decades that really quantify the relationship between coverage and health outcomes. So we look at both lives, but also sort of other kinds of health outcomes. Things like, did you get a mammogram within the past 12 months? Have you, do you have a personal physician? Do you take all the medications you need? You know, did you go into medical debt? So, you know, let's jump to the deaths for a minute. You know, we have a range of estimates, but our mid range estimate for the big Beautiful Bill act would be more than 16,600 deaths annually. That would be stemming from the loss of coverage, only from the Medicaid losses. So it would actually be higher if you incorporate marketplace people with marketplace plans. We also estimate in terms of sort of other impacts that, you know, you. About 1.9 million people would lose their personal physician, 1.3 million would not get their needed drugs, 380,000 would go without a mammogram, 1.2 million would go into medical debt, 246,000 would be refused treatment because of their medical debt. So those are a few figures. And, you know, there often isn't enough emphasis on these health impacts. We spend, you know, the national discussion around health care focuses a lot on dollars and cents and that's important. But we do need to keep in mind what the whole point is of this health care system. And that's to help people live longer and better lives.

[Sam Cedar]

It's not to profit from.

[Adam Gaffney]

Well, it depends on who you ask, I suppose.

[Sam Cedar]

Does, does your study take into account to the potential of these hospital closures? Because I got to, I mean, it's, I've got to imagine that's going to add. It's very hard to predict. Right. Because it depends on which hospitals. And when we say, you know, 10% patients, we're talking about hospitals where the percentage of patients that are on Medicaid, you know, are over 50% in some instances. And so it's, it's very difficult at that point to calculate like what happens if my hospital suddenly is no longer 20 minutes away, but rather two and a half hours away. Will I go in for my regular checkup? Will I, how many acute situations will, you know, will take place in a particular population?

[Adam Gaffney]

So it's not just hospitals too, because we know that when a hospital closes, doctors leave because they rely on the hospital for various things. So you're talking about an exodus of health care infrastructure and health care personnel and that's right. In many of these places, there's only one show, there's only, there's only one game in town. Right. Which is one of the reasons why health care has never been thought. It doesn't function as in a market way. Well, because a lot of times you only need one hospital. It's a small community. Right. You can't, you don't need competition, you don't want competition. But yes, that's exactly right. There will be other impacts that we did not model, you know, a, as you said, hospital closures. Also, what happens if states do, you know, cut funding to other programs in order to try to, you know, cover some of those holes. Right. Then other, there could be other downstream consequences that, you know, we're not even looking at. And then there are other health related provisions in this bill beyond Medicaid, you know, I don't know, billions of dollars in taking away food aid for poor people. That's going to have health impacts as well.

[Sam Cedar]

Yep. Dr. Adam Gaffney, we will put a link to your study on the projected effects of proposed cuts in federal Medicaid expenditures on Medicaid enrollment, uninsurements, health care and health. Thanks so much for your time today. Really appreciate it.

[Adam Gaffney]

Great. Thanks for having me. Take care.

[Sam Cedar]

All right. All right, folks, we're gonna take a break, head into a shorter fun half.

[Ryan Grimm]

Today and actually 50 minute fun half.

[Sam Cedar]

Yes. Getting back to the original vision of the show, 2013 again on mission creep. This show is just keeps growing and growing. Just a reminder, it's your support that makes this show possible. You can become a member by going to join the Majority Report.com when you do, you not only get the fun half, but you get the free show free of commercials. Check out our discord. If you got questions, if you want to organize, if you want to look for other people in your IRL community or an online community or, you know, you want to talk about movies or whatever it is. We have over 15,000 people in our [e-mail] that's crazy.

[Ryan Grimm]

It's the same population as my hometown.

[Sam Cedar]

There you go. It's almost as many who went to my daughter's high school. No, I mean it wasn't quite that big. But also we've got merch shop. Majorityreportradio.com we oh, and the AM Quickie. AM quickie.com we got two great writers there. Corey Pine is there writing up a storm and Whitney Wimbush who has been writing all sorts of great stuff for the American Prospect. She's delivering the news half the time and Corey does it the other half time. You can find [e-mail] and lastly, just coffee, co op, fair trade coffee, hot chocolate. Use the coupon code. Majority get 10% off. Matt left reckoning.

[Ryan Grimm]

David Griscom and I will have a Sunday show for folks watching some fun clips and talking about the news. Patreon.com left reckoning that's out on Sunday.

[Sam Cedar]

See you in the fun half.

[Ryan Grimm]

One second.

[Sam Cedar]

Three months from now, six months from now, nine months from now. And I don't think it's going to be the same as it looks like in six months from now. And I don't know if it's necessarily going to be better six months from now than it is three months from now. But I think around 18 months out, we're going to look back and go like, wow, what, what is that going on? It's nuts. Wait a second. Hold on. Hold on for a second. Emma, welcome to the program. Matt Hat.

[Adam Gaffney]

What is up, everyone? Fun hat.

[Sam Cedar]

No, me.

[Emma Vigland]

You did it.

[Sam Cedar]

Fun hat.

[Emma Vigland]

Let's go.

[Adam Gaffney]

Brandon let's go.

[Emma Vigland]

Brandon.

[Sam Cedar]

Fun hat. Bradley, you want to say hello? Sorry to disappoint everyone. I'm just a random guy. It's all the boys today.

[Christian Gillibrand]

Fundamentally false.

[Adam Gaffney]

No.

[Sam Cedar]

I'm sorry. Women. Stop talking for a second. Let me finish.

[Adam Gaffney]

Where is this coming from?

[Emma Vigland]

Dude?

[Sam Cedar]

But. Dude, you want to smoke this? 7A. Yes. Hi. Me is me. Yes. Is this me?

[Emma Vigland]

Is it me?

[Sam Cedar]

It is you. Is this me?

[Emma Vigland]

Hello?

[Sam Cedar]

Is this me? I think it is you. Who is you? No sound. Every single freaking day. What's on your mind?

[Adam Gaffney]

We can discuss free markets. And we can discuss capitalism.

[Christian Gillibrand]

I'm gonna go smart.

[Sam Cedar]

Libertarians. They're so stupid. Though common sense says of course. Gobbledygook. We nailed him. So what's 79 plus 21? Challenge. Man, I'm positively quivering. I believe 96. I want to say 8, 5, 7, 2, 1, 0, 35, 500. One, one half.

[Ryan Grimm]

Three, eight, nine, 11.

[Sam Cedar]

For instance. $3,400. $1,900. Five, four. $3 trillion. Sold. It's a zero sum game.

[Emma Vigland]

Actually.

[Sam Cedar]

You're making me think less. But let me say this poop, you call it satire.

[Adam Gaffney]

Sam goes satire on top of it all.

[Sam Cedar]

My favorite part about you is just like every day, all day, like everything you do. Without a doubt. Hey, buddy. What we see you. All right, folks, folks, folks.

[Adam Gaffney]

It's just the week being weeded out.

[Sam Cedar]

Obviously. Yeah. Sun's out, guns out. I, I, I don't know. But you should know, people just don't.

[Ryan Grimm]

Like to entertain ideas anymore.

[Sam Cedar]

I have a question. Who cares?

[Ryan Grimm]

Our chat is enabled, folks.

[Sam Cedar]

I love it.

[Emma Vigland]

I do love that.

[Sam Cedar]

Gotta jump. I gotta be quick. I gotta jump.

[Emma Vigland]

I'm losing it, bro.

[Sam Cedar]

2 o' clock, we're already late and the guy's being a dick. So screw him. Sent to a gulag.

[Emma Vigland]

Outrageous.

[Sam Cedar]

Like, what is wrong with you? Love you. Bye. Love you.

[Kristen Gillibrand]

Bye.

[Sam Cedar]

Bye.